text
stringlengths 8
1.32M
⌀ |
|---|
arXiv:physics/9910004v1 [physics.comp-ph] 4 Oct 1999UTHEP-99-10-01
Foam: Multi-dimensional General Purpose Monte Carlo
Generator With Self-adapting Symplectic Grid†
S. Jadach
Department of Physics and Astronomy,
The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996-1 200,
DESY, Theory Group, Notkestrasse 85, D-22603 Hamburg, Germ any
and
Institute of Nuclear Physics, ul. Kawiory 26a, Krak´ ow, Pol and
Abstract
A new general purpose Monte Carlo event generator with self- adapting grid con-
sisting of simplices is described. In the process of initial ization, the simplex-shaped
cells divide into daughter subcells in such a way that: (a) ce ll density is biggest
in areas where integrand is peaked, (b) cells elongate thems elves along hyperspaces
where integrand is enhanced/singular. The grid is anisotro pic, i.e. memory of the
axes directions of the primary reference frame is lost. In pa rticular, the algorithm
is capable of dealing with distributions featuring strong c orrelation among variables
(like ridge along diagonal). The presented algorithm is com plementary to others
known and commonly used in the Monte Carlo event generators. It is, in principle,
more effective then any other one for distributions with very complicated patterns
of singularities – the price to pay is that it is memory-hungr y. It is therefore aimed
at a small number of integration dimensions ( <10). It should be combined with
other methods for higher dimension. The source code in Fortr an77 is available from
http://home.cern.ch/ ∼jadach.
To be submitted to Comput. Phys. Commun.
†Work supported in part by Polish Government grants KBN 2P03B 08414, KBN 2P03B14715, the
US DoE contracts DE-FG05-91ER40627 and DE-AC03-76SF00515 , the Maria Sk/suppress lodowska-Curie
Joint Fund II PAA/DOE-97-316, and the Polish-French Collab oration within IN2P3 through LAPP
Annecy.
UTHEP-99-10-01
October 19991 Introduction
Generation of artificial random events within multidimensi onal (phase) space according
to a positive probability distribution defined by a theoreti cal model is a standard exercise
in the particle physics, and in may areas of research. The abo ve is usually called “Monte
Carlo simulation” or generation of unweighted (weight equa l one) events, while more
modest task of calculating the integral only, using weighte d events is usually termed
“Monte Carlo integration”. In this work, primary interest i s in the Monte Carlo (MC)
simulation, which is a more difficult problem than MC integrat ion. A computer MC
program doing this is usually called a “MC event generator”.
With the advent of ever faster computers, one is able to perfo rm Monte Carlo simula-
tion or integration in more dimensions and for more and more c omplicated distributions.
All MC methods/algorithms for the efficient, i.e. fast, MC sim ulation/integration can be
reduced to a surprisingly small number of the basic methods, see e.g. ref. [1,2], that is
to mapping variables into more natural ones, weighting/rej ecting and splitting the prob-
ability distribution into sum of simpler ones (branching). For MC event generators which
are used widely it is worth the effort to develop very efficient a lgorithm of MC genera-
tion, custom-made for the individual problem. There is no be tter guide for constructing
an efficient custom-made MC generation algorithm than insigh t into the physics of the
process to be simulated. There are many examples of very effici ent MC event generators
of the custom-made type.
On the other hand, it is often necessary to perform quickly “b rute force” MC integra-
tion or generate events according to a probability density w ith strong peaks (singularities)
spanned along complicated hyperspaces of not very well know n shape, or in the case when
the change of input data induces not very well controlled var iations in the structure of
the singularities. In all such cases it would be highly desir able to have at our disposal a
numerical tool (program) with a MC generation algorithm fea turing built-in capability of
adjusting automatically the generation procedure to an arb itrary pattern of singularities
in the probability distribution. Such a general-purpose to ol was always a dream of people
using MC methods. This is an utopian dream in the sense that we shall never get an
ideal tool of this kind, i.e. working for an arbitrary distri bution. Nevertheless, we may
hope to develop a MC tool with an algorithm which is fairly effic ient for a relatively wide
range of multidimensional probability distributions. In r eality, for each such method it is
possible to find a distribution for which the particular gene ral-purpose MC method (tool)
fails badly. A similar situation exists for the problem of fin ding the absolute minimum of
a multi-parameter function or in many other numerical probl ems.
The best known and widely used general-purpose algorithm fo r the Monte Carlo in-
tegration of an arbitrary density function in n-dimensions is probably that of Lepage
described in ref. [3], and embodied in the widely used Fortra n code VEGAS. In this
classical algorithm, the integrand function in ndimensions is assumed to be fairly well
approximated by a product of functions, each one depending j ust on one variable. The in-
tegration range of each variable is divided into kbins of unequal width, with binning (bin
sizes) different for each variable. The entire integration d omain, that is an n-dimensional
1rectangle, is divided into knsub-rectangles. The whole structure is explored by means of
the MC generation of random points within each sub-rectangl e, with a uniform distribu-
tion. The result of repeated MC exploration runs is used to im prove the binning. The
binning is adjusted iteratively, such that the minimum valu e of the ratio of the dispersion
to the average weight is achieved. In this way VEGAS is able to do MC integration quite
efficiently. The original VEGAS was not really aimed for MC generation , but with a little
bit off effort, it can be adapted to MC generation, as seen below .
As we see, the generation technique of VEGAS is essentially a n example of a multi-
branching method with each branch corresponding to one of knrectangles. In many
practical applications (maybe even a majority) the assumpt ion of factorizability of the
integrand function is not violated too strongly and the VEGA S algorithm works fine. As
expected, it fails when singularities tend to follow diagon al of the rectangle, i.e. variables
are strongly correlated, also on the case of big voids, singu larities on thin hyperspaces
etc. In such cases VEGAS algorithm fails badly, and increasi ng the number of bins k, or
number of iterations, does not help to reduce weight dispers ionσat all. The only method
to improve the integration precision is the brute force meth od of increasing the number
of MC points N, leading to a slow decrease of statistical error ∼σ/√
N, or changing
analytically integration variables (mapping).
As already stressed, our primarily interest is in MC simulat ion. The VEGAS algorithm
with almost no modification can produce MC weighted events. A little bit more effort
is required to produce constant weight events, by means of ad ditional rejection, knowing
the maximum weight. This can be done by recording during the l ast iteration, for each
integration variable, a maximum weight in each of the nbins. The multichannel generation
of the sub-rectangles is then done using not the probability related to the average weight
or its dispersion but instead using the maximum weight (prod uct of them). This simple
recipe works fairly well for an almost factorizable distrib ution. It fails really very badly
for an integrand departing from the factorizability assump tion, much worse then for the
task of the MC integration only. Essentially, the VEGAS algo rithm has no means to
reduce the ratio of the maximum weight to average weight belo w a certain value, for a
given integrand. The only way out is then to apply mapping fro m the actual variables to
new ones, in which the integrand hopefully factorizes much b etter. This requires detailed
knowledge of the integrand distribution – it means going bac k to a labor-hungry custom-
made MC.
There were several efforts to improve on the shortcomings of t he VEGAS method, still
assuming no detailed knowledge about the structure of singu larities in the integrand. For
example, in ref. [4], several improvements are done. The mos t important one is adding
the possibility of treating a subgroup of variables (wild) w hich cause strong variation in
the integrand, while the other ones (mild) are “averaged ove r”. This is particularly useful
for problems with many variables ∼100, of which only some are “trouble-makers” and
require special treatment.
Another improvement is described in ref. [5], where the VEGA S algorithm is up-
graded with the possibility of approximating the wild integ rand not with one product of
nfunctions, each for one dimension, but with a sum of such prod ucts, with automatic
2adjustments of the relative importance of the component pro ducts. It is essentially an
application of the ideas of ref. [6] to the VEGAS algorithm. T he modified algorithm
should be efficient for a wider class of probability distribut ions.
In this note, I describe an independent effort which is not roo ted in VEGAS algorithm,
but rather in the algorithm used in subprogram VESKO2 of MC ge nerator LESKOF for
deep inelastic scattering published in ref. [7] (in fact it w as already used in the much older
LESKOC MC). In VESKO2 the 2-dimensional integration area is divided into rectangular
cells which gradually were subdivided by half along xorydirection (the choice of the
division direction was random). The division was always per formed for the cell which
contained the biggest value of the integrand. Note that this algorithm does not require
factorizability of the integrand – it is not very efficient, bu t numerically rather stable.
Obviously, the rule of division by half is rather primitive, one could do it better. The
random (or arbitrary) choice of division line (along xory) could be replaced by a better
rule of dividing along the maximum gradient of the function. However, from inspection
of the way the grid of cells evolves, it was obvious that this a lgorithm has the following
intrinsic problem, even if such improvements were implemen ted: the edges of the cells
are always parallel to the axes. Consider, for instance, a na rrow diagonal “ridge” along
x=yline. Of course, the algorithm of VESKO2 is obviously superi or to VEGAS, because
cells multiply and concentrate along the diagonal. However , the adjustment of the cells
would be much faster if cells could turn themselves to be para llel to the “ridge”. The
self-suggesting solution is the replacement of rectangula r cells with the triangular ones.
Then, hopefully in the process of subdivision, the cells cou ld align along singular lines,
if the division rule was defined in an intelligent way. In n-dimensions the generalization
of triangular plaquette is simplex-shaped cell. In the foll owing, I shall present certain
variant of such a method to which we refer as a “Foam” algorith m.
After completing the essential part of this work, I have foun d in ref. [8] a description
of a similar algorithm1; see last section for more comments.
The outline of the paper is the following: Section 1 describe s the Foam algorithm,
Section 2 its implementation, Section 4 the usage of the prog ram, and Section 5 presents
results of numerical tests.
2 The Foam algorithm
Let me define the aims which I have in mind with the new Foam algo rithm:
•The algorithm is thought to be in the future a part of a bigger a lgorithm and it
is supposed to take care of several ( <10) “wildest variables”, i.e. variables with
the strongest singularities, while the other variables I im agine are dealt with the
VEGAS method, or are “averaged over” like in BASES of ref. [4]
•I assume that the integrand is completely arbitrary, in part icular singularities may
lie on arbitrarily shaped hyperspaces. (For extremely narr ow peaks, it always make
1I would like to thank Viacheslav Ilyin for bringing my attent ion to this work.
3sense to map variables.) In particular the algorithm should be able to deal with sin-
gularity along diagonals, with big voids and along “thin” hy persurfaces like surfaces
of the cube, sphere etc.
•I imagine that in the algorithm a grid of vertices forming a “f oam of cells” is built,
which adapts automatically to the integrand in such a way tha t the resulting ratio
of average weight to maximum weight, i.e. efficiency, is arbitrarily good. In the
subsequent MC generation the foam of cells is used to generat e one cell and a point
within this cell.
•For strong peaks the foam of cells may develop into a wrong dir ection, not knowing
at the early stage of the development the positions of the sha rp peaks containing
most of the integral. I therefore require that the algorithm has a built-in capacity
to “collapse” (recess) i.e. possibility of removing a part o f the foam (returning
to a coarser granularity in some region). The iterative succ ession of “grow” and
“collapse” should be available as an option, in order to stab ilize the final optimal
foam of cells.
•The integrand should be positive and integrable. Weak integ rable singularities of
the type√xor ln(1 /x) are allowed. Such singularities are typically on the edges of
the integration domain – so there should be an option to inclu de or not the vertices
at the corners of the simplex cell in the evaluation of the int egral over the cell.
2.1 Data structures
The basic data structure is the foambeing a linked list of cells. A simplex cell is defined
by its vertices . Each cell has also many other attributes such as pointers to parent and
daughter cells, its volume, an estimate of the integral over the cell which I call the proper
integral , average weight, maximum weight etc. Cells actually contai n only pointers to
vertices, while n-component vectors defining vertices are in a separate list o f all vertices.
This organization is well justified, because one vertex may e nter into several cells. The
foam is in fact a hierarchical list of cells organized into on e big tree. There are two kinds
of of cells, inactive cells which underwent division and got split into daughter cells a nd
active cells (with no daughter). Active cells actually cover the entire i ntegration area.
In the MC simulation one active cell is chosen randomly accor ding to its crude integral
which is usually bigger then its proper integral. For the rel ation between crude and proper
integral see below. Each inactive cell knows the sum of crude integrals of all active cells
it contains (all its daughter and granddaughter cells). It i s done in such a way in order to
make generation of the active cell as natural and simple as po ssible. In fact, generation
starts with inactive rootcell at the top of the tree – one of the daughter cells is chosen
randomly according to its crude integral. This process cont inues down the tree until an
active cell (with no daughters) is randomly chosen. The root cell is the entire integration
region, being a cube of unit size. In present algorithm, the r oot cell is the only one which
4has more than 2 daughters. It splits into n! simplices2.
2.2 Initialization: growth and collapse of the foam
The foam structure described in previous section is constru cted during the initialization
phase. It consists of subsequent growths andcollapses of the foam. Let me first describe
the phase of the growth. The initial cube is divided into n! equal simplices, daughter
cells, and each daughter cell immediately subjected to an MC exploration procedure, eg.
a certain number of MC events is generated within the cell in o rder to calculate the average
weight, dispersion, maximum weight, minimum weight, prope r integral (MC estimator)
and more. In the rest of the growth phase each cell has a chance to get divided into 2
daughters. In present version of the program two options of c hoosing cell for division
are implemented: In the first method, the active cell picked u p for division is always
this one which actually contains the biggest crude integral . In the second method, the
choice of the (active) cell for division is done randomly, wi th probability proportional to
its crude integral. The user may check empirically which opt ion fits better his integrand.
This division process continues until the memory buffer rese rved for the foam fills up3.
The active cell chosen for division, is tagged as inactive an d divided into 2 daughter cells
(active) and each daughter cell undergoes MC exploration. T he recipe for the cell division
is the most important part of the algorithm; see below for its detailed description. The
division of a cell into two daughter cells involves a creatin g new vertex. The new vertex
is added to the list of vertices. The sum of crude integrals ca lculated for the new two
daughters is not necessarily equal to the crude of the parent – in order to maintain our
algorithm of picking randomly the active cell following the tree, the crude integral of the
divided cell and of all parent cells is corrected up to the roo t cell, in such a way that the
crude integral of parent is always equal to sum of crude integ rals of the daughters. In
particular the root cell contains always the crude integral s of all active cells, i.e. the total
crude integral.
As already indicated, in the case of a strongly peaked distri bution, growth may go
into a “wrong area”, so one is interested in a possibility of t rimming/downsizing the
foam, which is termed the collapse of the foam. The algorithm of the collapse is very
simple and intuitively understandable. When growth is stop ped by the buffer limits, the
maximum value IC
maxof the crude in all active cells is determined. Next, all inactive cells
are checked, starting from the top cell, looking for cells wh ich have crude integral smaller
thanIC
maxtimes some adjustable factor close to one (default is one, th e user may reset
it easily). Every such inactive cell is reset as active and all its daughters, down to the
bottom of the tree, are tagged for removal. Finally, the remo val of the tagged cells is
done, releasing free space in the buffer. All vertices are als o checked, to see if they are
2This already shows why we are limited to n <10. N.B. I do not favour the other possible solution in
which the unit cube is mapped into single simplex, because su ch a transformation is “singular” at certain
vertices.
3In fact, the user may only request for a maximum number of cell s in the foam smaller than the total
length of the entire buffer. For the moment, there is no dynami cal memory allocation in the program.
5members of any cell, and the orphan vertices are also removed . In this way, the entire
“un-successful” branches are eliminated from the tree of ce lls, or, in other words, several
cells which are product of the division get replaced by the si ngle (parent) cell, just like in
the real foam! Typically, about half of the cells are elimina ted in this way, and one may
start another phase of the growth. Note that after reviving a n inactive cell, one needs to
attribute to it the original (uncorrected) crude integral. This original crude integral from
first exploration is memorized as one of attributes of the cel l, and is therefore available. In
tests I have found out that the collapse and subsequent growt h usually leads to the same or
very similar foam. The above option is useful only for very sh arply peaked distributions.
It is switched on only on explicit request of the user.
2.3 Division of the cell
Each newly created cell undergoes exploration, just after i ts creation, in order to determine
its proper crude integral and the other weight parameters. T he division of the symplectic
cell is the essence of the algorithm. Let me therefore descri be it in a more detail. The
division procedure is defined in a maximally simple way. A sim plex of n+ 1 vertices
x1, x2, ..., x n, xn+1hasn(n+ 1)/2 edge lines joining every possible pair of vertices of a
given cell. In our division algorithm, one such edge between xiandxjis chosen and a
new vertex Yis put somewhere on the line
Y=λxi+ (1−λ)xj
where 0 < λ < 1. The two daughter simplices are defined with two new list of v ertices:
(x1, x2, ..., x i−1, Y, x i+1, ..., x j−1, xj, xj+1, ..., x n, xn+1),
(x1, x2, ..., x i−1, xi, xi+1, ..., x j−1, Y, x j+1, ..., x n, xn+1).
At this stage, it has do be determined which ( i, j) pair and which value of λto choose.
The aim is generally to make this choice in such a way that the f unction varies the most
strongly in the direction of the edge defined by the ( i, j) pair of vertices. How to find
it out? To this end, the information from the relatively shor t sample of the MC events
(100-1000) generated inside the cell, during its MC explora tion is exploited. First of all,
from geometrical considerations which I omit, one is able to “project” each MC point X
into a point Yon a given edge ( i, j), i/negationslash=j:
Y=λijxi+ (1−λij)xj
where
λij(X) =|Deti|
|Deti|+|Detj|,
Deti= Det( r1, ..., r i−1, ri+1, ...r n, rn+1),
Detj= Det( r1, ..., r j−1, rj+1, ...r n, rn+1),
rk=xk−X,
6and Det( x1, x2, ..., x n) is the standard determinant. The condition 0 < λ i,j(X)<1 is
obviously fulfilled. With help of the MC series of vectors X(from MC exploration of the
cell) we determine for each edge ( i, j) the MC distribution of the variable < λ i,j>, the
average < λ i,j>, its variance σ(λi,j) etc. For the division procedure I am looking for
an edge ( i, j) along which the integrand is varying most rapidly. How do I q uantify the
the “rapidness” of the distribution of λi,jwithin its domain (0,1)? For instance, I could
use the ratio of the dispersion to the average σ/ < w > ofλi,j. This would work if the
distribution of λi,jhad a single maximum, in the middle of the (0,1) interval, or a t one of
its ends λi,j= 0,1. This criterium of the “rapidness” of the distribution of λi,jwould fail,
however, if the distribution of λi,jhad two or more maxima within (0,1) interval. It would
be an annoying failure in many practical cases like a double r idge or closed hyperspaces
(like sphere). A more sophisticated measure of the “rapidne ss” of the distribution of λi,j
is therefore used in the algorithm. For each ( i, j) the full distribution dN/dλ is recorded
(histogrammed) and the value of the integral
Ri,j=/integraldisplay/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingledN
dλi,j−N/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingledλi,j
is calculated. The edge ( i, j) with the biggest Ri,jis chosen for the cell division. As easily
seen, the Ri,jis close to zero for flat (uniform) dN/dλ i,jand has high value, ∼N, if
dN/dλ i,jhas one or multiple narrow peaks. As a value λfor the division λ=< λi,j>is
taken. In this way one makes attempt to divide the cell in such a way that two daughters
cells contain roughly half of the parent integral (as in VESK O2). In the MC exploration of
the new cell, the index of the (optimal) edge ( i, j) and its < λi,j>are readily determined
and memorized for future use – when later on, an active cell is picked up for division, the
division direction ( i, j) and its ratio < λi,j>is already predetermined.
Let me finally comment on the weight normalization, and the re lated question of
reduction of the variance and/or maximum weight. Before I en ter details it is very im-
portant to remember that my final aim and highest priority is t o generate events with the
weight equal one i.e. unweighted events. This is a much harde r task than generate the
variable weight events. As usual, one may produce variable w eight events and turn them
into unweighted events by means of rejection. However, one c annot do it efficiently if one
does not control very strictly the maximum weight for weight ed events. Weighted events
(without strict control of maximum weight) are good enough f or evaluating the value of
the integral. In this less interesting case, the appropriat e choice of the foam of cells, can
minimize the variance of the weight. Our primary aim is, howe ver, to construct the foam
of cells which will allow us to control the maximum of the weig ht, while decent variance
of the weight is of secondary importance.
In the initialization phase, the basic weight is defined w=f(x)VCartwhere fis
integrand function, and VCartis Cartesian volume of the cell. The above weight is therefor e
normalized such that the proper integral is equal the averag e weight, i.e., for infinite
number of MC events < w > is just equal to the integral over the cell.
In order to gain good control over the maximum of the weight (a nd/or its variance) I
introduce the crude integral of the cell, which is typically an overestimated integral ov er
7the cell. In the subsequent MC generation, the MC weight wMCwill compensate for the
fact that crude integral is not equal the true value of the integral over the cell. Sinc e the
control of the maximum weight is our main priority, in the default case, the crude integral
of the cell is chosen
Icrude=wmax=VCartMax Xf(X),
i.e. it is equal the maximum value of the integrand function t imes the volume of the
cell. Of course, the true maximum of the integrand function i s not know, and instead,
one employs its estimate obtained in the course of the MC expl oration of the cell. This
above choice ensures that the condition wMC≤1, essential for turning weighted events
intowMC= 1 events by means of the rejection, will not be violated too o ften.
Note that if one is interested only in the variable weight eve nts, for instance for calcu-
lating the integral, then a more economical choice of the cru de integral of the cell would
be
Icrude=√
< w >2+σ2=√
< w2>,
i.e. this quantity is either the average weight < w > or its variance σ, depending which one
is bigger, see also discussion in refs. [3,6]. This would pro vide a reasonable reduction of the
variance by populating more densely cells which have bigger ratio of the proper variance
to proper average weight σ(w)/ < w > , and therefore reducing the overall σ(w)/ < w > .
The above choice of the crude integral is also optionally ava ilable in the program.
In any case, the compensating weight for the MC generation is always the same:
wMC=f(x)VCart/Icrude.
3 Program structure
The program consists of one source file and one header file. It i s written in Fortran77
with the popular extensions like long variable names, long s ource lines, etc., which are
available on all platforms. In the makefile there is a collections of f77 compilation flags,
for Linux, AIX HPUX and ALPHA compilers which should be used t o activate these
extensions. The program is written in such a way that its tran slation to c++ or Java
should be not too difficult. In fact the program has structure o f the c++ class as much
as it is possible to do it within f77. Below I characterize the rules according to which
program was written. Variables obey the following rules:
•There is only one common block /cFoamA/ which contains all class member vari-
ables, which is placed in the header file FoamA.h . Each subroutine in FoamA.f
source file includes an INCLUDE ’FoamA.h’ statement. The outside programs
should never include directly /cFoamA/ . All input/output communication is done
with the help of dedicated, easy to use, subroutines.
8•Variables in /cFoamA/ areclass members and all have special prefix “ m” in their
name, for example mIterat is number of iterations.
•User has access to some class members through “getters” and “ setters”; see below.
•Strong typing is imposed with help of IMPLICIT NONE .
Subprograms in the class are loosely organized in several ca tegories:
•Constructor with name FoamAPreInitialize which pre-sets default values of many
variables, including input variables. It is invoked automa tically.
•Initializator with name FoamAInitialize , which performs initialization of the foam
grid.
•Finalizator with name FoamAFinalize , which summarizes the whole run, sets out-
put values in /cFoamA/ , prints output etc.
•Maker with the name FoamAMakeSomething or similar a one, which does the essen-
tial part of job, in our case a maker FoamAMakeEvent generates single MC event.
•Setter with the name FoamASetVariable , is called from the outside world to set
mVariable in/cFoamA/ . For example CALL FoamA SetIterat( 5) sets variable
mIterat=5 . Only certain privileged variables have a right to be served by their own
setter, the other ones are in principle “private”. Most of se tters should be called
before initialization.
•Getter with the name FoamASetVariable , is called from the outside world to get
mVariable from/cFoamA/ . It is a preferred way of sending output information to
outside world. For example, with CALL FoamA GetMCwt(MCwt) one gets MC weight
MCwtin the user program.
The full list of class member variables in /cFoamA/ is shown in the Appendix A. Addi-
tional information on all subprograms of the Foam package ca n be found in Tables 1 and
2, where I list all subprograms with short descriptions of th eir role.
9Subprogram description
Initialization of the foam grid
FoamA PreInitialize Pre-initialization, set all default values (constructor)
FoamA Initialize(FunW) Initialization of the grid etc.
FoamA InitVertices Initializes first vertices of the basic cube
FoamA InitCells Initializes first n-factorial cells inside original cube
FoamA DefCell Creates new (daughter) cell and append at end of the
buffer
FoamA SetVertex(iVe,k1,k2,k3) Helps to define vertex
FoamA Explore(iCell,funW) Short MC sampling in iCell, determine < wt > ,wtmax
etc.
FoamA RanDiscr(Crud,nTot,Pow,iRnd) Random choice of cell division direction
FoamA MakeLambda(Lambda) Auxiliary procedure for FoamA Explore
FoamA Determinant(R,Det) Determinant of matrix R
FoamA Det2Lapl(R,i1,i2) Laplace formula for 2-dim. determinant
FoamA Det3Lapl(R,i1,i2,i3) Laplace formula for 3-dim. determinant
FoamA Det4Lapl(R,i1,i2,i3,i4) Laplace formula for 4-dim. determinant
FoamA Det5Lapl(R,i1,i2,i3,i4,i5) Laplace formula for 5-dim. determinant
FoamA Grow(funW) Grow cells until buffer is full
FoamA PeekMax(iCell) Choose randomly one cell, used also in MC generation
FoamA Peek(iCell) Generates randomly pointer iCell of (active) cell
FoamA Divide(iCell,funW,RC) Divide iCell into two daughters; iCell tagged as inac-
tive
FoamA Collapse Finds and removes some cells, revives some nonactive
cells
Generation
FoamA MakeEvent(funW) Generates point/vector Xrand with the weight MCwt
FoamA GetMCvector(MCvector) Provides point/vector MCvector generated by Ma-
keEvent
FoamA GetMCwt(MCwt) Provides MC weight MCwt calculated by MakeEvent
FoamA MCgenerate(funW,X,MCwt) Alternative entry, Generates point X with the weight
MCwt
Finalization
FoamA Finalize(MCresult,MCerror) Calculates integral and its error after MC run
FoamA GetIntegral(MCresult,MCerror) Integral estimate from MC generation
Table 1: List of all subprograms with short description.
10Subprogram description
Other Getters and Setters
FoamA GetCrude(Crude) Provides Crude used in MC generation
FoamA SetNdim(Ndim) Sets Ndim= no. of dimensions (called before Initialize)
FoamA GetNdim(Ndim) Provides Ndim, miscellaneous, for tests
FoamA SetnBuf(nBuf) Sets nBuf, length of working area in the buffer
FoamA SetIterat(Iterat) Sets Iterat= no. of iterations (called before Initialize)
FoamA SetOut(Out) Sets output unit number
FoamA SetChat(Chat) Sets chat level Chat=0,1,2 in the output, Chat=1 normal
FoamA SetnSampl(nSampl) Sets nSampl; No of MC sampling before dividing cell
FoamA SetOptCrude(OptCrude) Sets OptCrude; type of Crude =0,1,2.
FoamA SetOptBeta(OptBeta) Sets type of method in cell division
FoamA SetOptPeek Sets type of method in cell division
FoamA SetOptEdge(OptEdge) Sets OptEdge; (inclusion of vertices in the cell exploratio n)
FoamA SetKillFac(KillFac) Sets KillFac; threshold factor for collapse procedure
Debugging and miscellaneous
FoamA Check(mout,level) Checks all pointers (after compression) debugging!
FoamA ActUpda Miscellaneous, Creates list of active cells (pointers)
FoamA BufPrint(mout) Prints all cells, debugging
FoamA BufActPrint(mout) Prints all active cells, debugging
FoamA VertPrint(mout) Prints all vertices, debugging
FoamA PltBegin Plotting 2-dim. cells and vertices
FoamA PltVert(mout) Plotting 2-dim. cells and vertices
FoamA PltCell(mout) Plotting 2-dim. cells and vertices
FoamA PltEnd Plotting 2-dim. cells and vertices
Table 2: List of all subprograms with short description, continuati on.
11Parameter Meaning
mnDim Number of dimensions.
mnBuf Actual dynamic length of the buffer m nBuf<mnBufMax. Larger
mnBuf has to be used for higher dimensions and for strongly sin gu-
lar integrand. For larger m nBuf the CPU time of the initialisation will
increase but the total CPU time of the event generation will b e shorter
because the acceptance rate < w > /w maxwill improve. Default is
mnBuf=1000.
mnSampl Number of MC sampling per cell in the MC exploration of the new cell
daughter cell. The MC efficiency < w > /w maxseems to depend weakly
on m nSampl. However, if one cannot increase m nBuf any more then
enlarging m nSampl may still help a little bit. Default is m nSampl=200.
mIterat No of iterations in the initialization of the grid, m Iterat=0 is the lowest
possible value. In most cases it is enough. Each iteration co nsists of the
grow and collapse of the grid. Several iterations are recomm ended for
very strongly peaked distributions.
mKillFac threshold factor for reviving inactive cells in the “collap se” procedure
of the iteration. Its change seems to be without much effect. M ay be
in some rare cases the user will find profitable to readjust it. Default is
mKillFac=1.
mOptCrude Type of the crude integral used for the MC generation of the ac tive cell.
For OptCrude=0 estimator of the “true” integral in the cell i s take as
crude, for OptCrude=1 the value of√
< w2>and for OptCrude=2 the
maximum weight wmax. Default is m OptCrude=2.
mOptEdge Option parameter deciding whether vertices are included in the MC ex-
ploration of the cell. For m OptEdge=0 they are not included and for
mOptEdge=1 they are included. Generally it is good to include ver-
tices, but if there are some weak singularities or numerical instabilities
of the integrand close to boundary of the integration domain , then it
better to set m OptEdge=0. Default is m OptEdge=1.
mOptPeek Option parameter deciding method of selecting the cell for d ivision. Opt-
Peek=0 cell with maximum crude (default), OptPeek=1 random ly.
mOptBeta Type of choice of the edge in the division of the cell, Default OptBeta=0
described in the text, OptBeta=1, OptBeta=2 for tests.
mOut Output unit number. For redirecting output from Foam to sepa rate disk
file. Default is m Out=6.
mChat Chat=0,1,2 increasing chat level in the output unit, Chat=1 is the de-
fault normal level
Table 3: Important input parameters of the Foam. They are listed in th e order of their
importance.
124 Program usage, input parameters
Basic input variables are listed in in Table (3) together wit h their explanation. Typical
user program using Foam package may look as follows:
*-------------------------------------------------- ----------------------
DOUBLE PRECISION Density
EXTERNAL Density
CALL FoamA_SetNdim( 3) ! number of dimensions
CALL FoamA_SetnBuf( 2000) ! length of buffer
CALL FoamA_SetIterat( 1) ! number of iterations
CALL FoamA_SetnSampl( 500) ! no. of MC events/cell (initial ization)
CALL FoamA_SetOptCrude( 2) ! type of crude, =2 is default any way
CALL FoamA_SetOptEdge( 1) ! edge point are included, (=0 exc luded)
CALL FoamA_SetChat( 1) ! printout level
CALL FoamA_Initialize(Density) ! initialize foam grid
DO loop = 1, 200000
CALL FoamA_MakeEvent(Density) ! generate MC event
CALL FoamA_GetMCvector(MCvector) ! get MC event, vector
CALL FoamA_GetMCwt(MCwt) ! get MC weight
CALL GLK_Fil1(1000, MCwt,1d0) ! users histogramming
ENDDO
CALL FoamA_Finalize(MCresult,MCerror) ! printouts, get i ntegral & error
CALL FindWtLimit(1000) ! users routine, check on MC efficie ncy
*-------------------------------------------------- ----------------------
In fact user has to set only the number of dimensions Ndim. The other input variables
nBuf, Iterat, nSampl, OptCrude, OptEdge, Chat are already preset for the user thus
calling setters for them is optional. User needs to provide h is own integrand function which
in the example is Density . Below is an example of a simple integrand function (3-dim.
sphere).
*-------------------------------------------------- ----------------------
DOUBLE PRECISION FUNCTION Density(X)
*////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////
*// 3-dimensional testing function, Thin sphere centred at (A1,A2,A3) //
*// with Radius and Thickness defined below //
*////////////////////////////////////////////////// //////////////////////
IMPLICIT NONE
DOUBLE PRECISION X(*)
DOUBLE PRECISION Radius,Thickness,A1,A2,A3,R
DATA A1,A2,A3 / 0.25, 0.40, 0.50 / ! centre of sphere
DATA Radius / 0.35 / ! radius of sphere
DATA Thickness / 0.020 / ! thickness of sphere
*-------------------------------------------------- ----------------------
R = SQRT( (x(1)-A1)**2 +(x(2)-A2)**2 +(x(3)-A3)**2 )
Density = Thickness/( (R-Radius)**2 + Thickness**2)
END
*-------------------------------------------------- ----------------------
135 Numerical tests
A minimum of testing was done. It is even more important that t he program was already tested
in areal practical application . The present version of Foam is implemented as a part of KK
Monte Carlo event generator [9] for the up to 3-dimensional p roblem of the simulation of the
initial state photon radiation (ISR) and beamstrahlung for future Linear Colliders4.
In the following I present the comparisons of the Foam progra m with VEGAS [3] for n= 2,3.
Forn= 2 I use three testing functions:
fa(x1,x2) = 1−Θ(0.5− |x1−0.5| −γ) Θ(0.5− |x1−0.5−γ|), γ= 0.05,
fb(x1,x2) = 1/4πR2 γ
π[(R−/radicalbig
(x1−0.25)2+ (x2−0.40)2)2+γ2)], γ= 0.02,R= 0.35
fc(x1,x2) =γ
π[(x1+x2)2+γ2)], γ= 0.02.(1)
All above functions are defined within unit square 0 ≤xi≤1. The first density function is
peaked along one of diagonals of the square, the second one is peaked along a 2% wide ring
centered at (0.25,0.40) of radius 0.25, and the last one repr esents 5% wide band along four edges
of the square.
In Fig. 1 the resulting 2-dimensional foam of cells is plotte d. In each case, the foam consists
of about 75 active cells and the exploration of the single cel l in the initialization was based on
1000 MC events per cell. Only active cells are plotted. As exp ected, cells of the foam concentrate
in the areas of the enhancement of the integrand functions. T hey clearly try tend to elongate
along the lines of the “ridges” in the integrand functions.
Functions Foam VEGAS
fa(x1,x2) (diagonal ridge) 0.94 0.05
fb(x1,x2) (circular ridge) 0.83 0.15
fc(x1,x2) (edge of square) 0.57 0.53
Table 4: Efficiency wε
max, forε= 10−4, of Foam and VEGAS for 3 examples of the 2-
dimensional integrand function defined in eq. (1). After ini tialization, efficiency was determined
from sample of 106MC events. Results from Foam are for 5000 cells (about 2500 ac tive cells)
and cell exploration was based on 200 MC events per cell.
The three test functions of eq. (1) are intended to be of the “n on-factorizable” type, such
that Foam should be more efficient than VEGAS. I definitely want to adjusted the concept of
“efficiency” of the MC to the task of MC generation of weight one events. (It should not be
confused with the statistical error of the integral.) Gener ally, I define efficiency as the ratio of
the average weight to maximum weight < w > /w max, such that it is equal to the rejection
rate in the process of turning variable-weight events into w= 1 events. In practice, however,
wmaxhas to be defined unambiguously and in a numerically stable wa y. The straightforward
definition of wmaxas a maximum weight determined empirically in the MC test run , or during
the initialization of the grid, can be prone to large fluctuat ion. For practical reasons I do not
want to exclude from our considerations the case of the weak i ntegrable singularities in the
4It this practical application Foam is more efficient than VEGA S by factor of order 100.
14(a)
(b) (c)✉1⋆2⋆3✉4
⋆5
⋆6⋆7
⋆8
⋆9⋆10⋆11
⋆12⋆13
⋆14
⋆15
⋆16⋆17
⋆18⋆19
⋆20⋆21
⋆22⋆23⋆24
⋆25⋆26
⋆27
⋆28
⋆29⋆30
⋆31
⋆32⋆33
⋆34⋆35⋆36⋆37
⋆38⋆39✉40
✉41⋆42
⋆43⋆44⋆45
✉46
⋆47✉48✉49
✉50
✉51✉52
✉53✉54
✉55
✉56✉57
✉58
✉59✉60
✉61✉62
✉63
✉64✉65
✉66
✉67✉68✉69
✉70✉71
✉72✉73
✉74✉75
✉76
✉77❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙❙ ❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
❅
|
POSSIBLE MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION OF LIQUIDITY PREFERENCE THEORY
ALEXANDER MOROZOVSKY
Bridge, 57/58 Floors, 2 World Trade Center,
New York, NY 10048
ABSTRACT
New mathematical formulation of liquidity preference theory is suggested. On the base of comparison between suggested
model and real prices paradoxical conclusion could be derived. The whole yield curve could be described only on the base
of liquidity preference theory without any consideration of risk-neutral models.
Keywords: Liquidity preference; Portfolio theory; Yield curve.
One of the existing problems in the theory of mathematical finance is the calculation of term
structure of interest rates. The term structure of interest rates is determined by the dependence of the yield
of the discount instruments from maturity.
There are many different models explaining the relationship between long- and short-term interest
rates [1]. One of the most popular is the liquidity preference theory. This theory states that forward ratesshould be higher than future spot rates. This means that long-term buyers of bonds require additional
return. Let’s rephrase our statements in such a way so that it would be similar to concepts from portfolio
theory (return connected with risk). So, we could assume that holders of long-term securities receiveadditional return compared with holders of short-term securities because of the additional risk associated
with long-term securities. Because of the resemblance of this statement to the portfolio theory, we could try
to apply powerful mechanisms of portfolio analysis in order to calculate the yield curve.
We could formulate again that the purpose of this paper is the mathematical formulation of
liquidity preference theory on the base of similarity of concepts, underlying this theory with portfolio
analysis.
In order to write an equation for yield calculation we will apply the following important
theoretical concepts:
1. Markowitz portfolio theory for connection between risk and return [2].
2. Value-at-risk concept for measuring risk [3].
3. Creation of riskless portfolio as a tool for obtaining riskless return [1].
The simplest reformulation of liquidity preference theory is: additional risk requires additional
return, or Additional Return = α * Additional Risk (1)
Now we will try to elaborate our statement on the base of concepts from the modern theory of
finance, mentioned above. The remaining part article consists of the following parts:1. How we are going to calculate additional return.
2. What is the reason for additional risk and how are we going to calculate it.
3. Final form of the basic equation and its solution.
4. Comparison of empirical prices with obtained equation.
5. Correspondence between suggested approach and portfolio theory.
6. Conclusion.
1. How we are going to calculate additional return.
We will define additional return as the difference between the market price of bond(P
r) and the price of
the bond, calculated from riskless approach(E):
Additional return = E - rP, (2)
(E - rP , not rP- E). The following order becomes clearer if we write down an additional return as
difference between the return for a real bond and return in the risk-neutral world:
Additional return = Return for bond - Return for bond in risk-neutral world. (3)
Consider I as the value of all cash flows, connected with the bond at the time of maturity, we
could define the terms in (3) as:
Return for bond = I – P r,
(4)
Return for bond in risk-neutral world = I - E,
Because of (3) and (4) additional return could be written as:
Additional return = ( I - P r) – (I - E), (5)
and we could immediately see that (2) and (5) are the same equations. The calculation of additional risk,
however, is much more difficult.2. What is the reason for additional risk and how we are going to calculate it.
It’s possible to suggest many reasons for risks, existing even if we use the usual risk - neutral
framework. First of all, it could be transaction costs (or more general - market could be incomplete). Then,it could be imprecision of used risk-neutral models or the existence of many of them. And, of course, itcould be the usual arguments for liquidity preference theory. In this explanation, additional risk depends
not only on volatility
σ, but also on time to maturity. We need some additional quantitative concept for
measuring this additional risk. All of the following reasons could lead to deviation from the risk-neutral
approach and to the existence of additional risk.
In order to estimate an additional risk we will use Value-at-Risk concept developed at J. P.
Morgan ([3]). According to this concept, Value-at-Risk (VaR) is equal to the difference between average
expected price at time T (time of maturity) and price of instrument that differentiate probability space in aspecial way(such that, the integral probability to be below the average expected price of this instrumentwould be n%, where n=1,2,3). Now, we will specify equation for interest-rate security
Fdz Fdt dFF Fσµ+= (6)
where F - the value of security, z - Wiener’s process, and Fµ, Fσ are generally speaking - functions
from F and T.
Now, we will apply usual formula for VaR for security, described by (6) and measure additional
risk as quantity proportional to VaR:
) 1( *t t
re ee eP Risk Additional∆− ∆− ≈βσ µ,( 7 )
Whereeµ, eσ - some functional from Fµ and Fσ correspondingly. It's possible to consider different
approaches for eµ and eσcalculating. We will consider formula (7) when instead of eµ and eσ we
will use averages in time:
dttFe
∆= µ µ1(7-1),
anddttFe
∆=2 2 1σ σ (7-2)
where (7-1) and (7-2) are the simplest average characteristics for Fµ and Fσ .
We should outline that instead of using VaR ideas for Additional Risk (7) it is possible to suggest different
definitions for Additional Risk.
The simplest forms of dependence of eσfrom t∆ would be:
0σσ≈e(8)
and
te∆≈1σσ (9)
when the volatility Fσ(8) or its derivative (9) is constant.
3. Final form of basic equation (connection between additional risk and additional return and its
solution).
There is, however, one small problem, that needs to be solved in order to write final version of
equation (1) (connection between additional risk and additional return). The problem is the following:payoff for additional risk happened immediately at time t = 0(additional return), but this risk is calculated at
time of maturity( at t = T, Fig.1):
Fig.1 Time diagram for additional risk and additional return.
Additional Risk at t=TAdditional Return at t=0We need to find way to determine additional risk and additional return at the same time. In order to do this
we need to find way to discount additional risk from time t= T to time t=0. Because the value of additionalrisk is money, we could suggest two discount procedures:
1. Additional Risk(t=0) =
−rdte Additional Risk(t = T)
(10)
2. Additional Risk ( t = 0) = IPr Additional Risk(t = T)
The first statement from (10) corresponds to usual risk-neutral approach and the second to the self-
agreeable discount procedure( if the value of I (at time at present time costs Pr, then the value of additional
risk at present time costs (Pr/ I)*Additional Risk ( t = T) ). From this point on we will consider only the
second approach. Finally, equation (1) could be rewritten as:
) 1(2
t t r
re ee eIPPE∆− ∆− =−βσ µα (11)
Equation (11) is the simplest square equation and because of this we could immediately write down its
solution:
) 1( ) 1( 2 ) 1( 22
2,1 t t t t t tr e e e e e ee eEI
e eI
e eIP∆− ∆ ∆− ∆ ∆− ∆−+/Gf6
/Ge7/Ge7
/Ge8/Ge6
−±
−−=βσ µ βσ µ βσ µα α α (12)
Because Pr supposed to be positive, we will consider only (+) in (12).
We could simplify (12) for 2 different cases: big and small t:
1. small ∆t
a>>b, where (13)
) 1(,
) 1( 22
t t t te e e ee eEIb
e eIa
∆− ∆ ∆− ∆−=/Gf6
/Ge7/Ge7
/Ge8/Ge6
−=
βσ µ βσ µα α(14)
2. and for big t- opposite inequality:
a << b (15)
To simplify discussion for P let's write down dependence of from t (8, 9) in general form:
()γσσ te∆= (16)
Where γ=0, if eσ= constant, and γ= 1, if ∆≈eσ t.
On the base of this equation we could get simplified expression for price of security Pr in the case of (13)
and (14):Small ∆t:
) 1(21 2 +
∆−∆
− −=γ
βσµαtt
r eIeEE Pe
(17)
or :
21 2+∆ −=γβσαt
IEEPr(18)
Now we could write equation for y (yield) using the yield definitions:
ty
rIeP∆−= (19)
and
tyIeE∆−=0, (20)
where y 0 – yield for risk – neutral valuation.
From (18), (19) and (20) we immediately could obtain:
21
0+∆+∆=∆γαβσ t tyty , (21)
where we left only two first powers of t∆ in (18). For forward rate we could obtain from (21) dependence
on t∆, similar to formulas suggested in articles [4,5].
In particularly, we could obtain forward rate proportional to t∆.
In the case of big t∆ (15) we could rewrite (12) as:
) 1(t tr e ee eEIP∆− ∆−=βσ µα(22)
or
21
21
2 ) 1(0−−∆−∆+−∆−− = αβσµ
tty
tyee
e e e (23)
Finally, y t∆:
2ln
2 20 α µβσ
+ −∆+=∆∆− t eeetyty (24)
( because we consider tee∆−βσ as small term).
Equations (12), (18), (22), and derived from them equations (21) and (24) allow us to compare this model
with existing financial data. We will use data from Federal Reserve Statistical Release [6] from 04/12/99for U.S. treasury constant maturities.
The data (yields) in percents per annum are presented in table 1.Table 1. Dependence of yields from maturity
Time to maturity Yields in percent
per annum
3m 4.326m 4.51y 4.66
2y 4.93
3y 4.955y 4.987y 5.17
10y 5.06
20y 5.7230y 5.45
4. Possible strong hypothesis about relationship between observed and risk-neutral interest rates
and comparison with existing financial data.
In order to compare obtained result with financial data we need model for calculating y (t) and
another parameters from (12). One of the most extreme hypothesis could suggest that
y
0(t) = constant = y 0 (25)
Because of it we will be able to try to compare obtained time dependencies (21) and (24) with yields,obtaining from bond prices.
To do this, we compare data from table (1) and suggested dependencies (21) – for small times and (24) –
for big times.Let’s first of all discuss comparison between suggested financial data and formula (21): If we
choose γ in (21) equal to 1, than formula (21) could be rewritten as:
t yy ∆+=αβσ0(26)
In order to compare suggested function with financial data we will build chart of dependence y from t∆
(Fig.2).
It’s clear from this dependence that there is a reasonably good agreement between suggested formula (26)
and actual dependence y(t). From this graphic (Fig.2) we could determine coefficients in formula (26): y 0
and αβσ :
y0 = 0.004, and αβσ = 0.66*10-2 (27)
Now we could try to compare (24) with data from table 1. In order to do it we will introduce some
additional assumptions: conste=µ , and 0ye=µ - there is only one rate of return and this rate is equal
to y 0.Fig.2 Dependence of yield from time to maturity
0.040.050.06
0123
Square root of t(t - time to maturity in years)YieldNow, assuming that tee∆−βσ is small enough for last 2 existing values( 20 years and 30 years)
we could simplify (24) and write it as:
2ln
0α+∆=∆ tyty (28)
Using values of y for these two times to maturity (20 and 30 years), and knowing that y 0 = 0.004, we could
determine(Fig.3) :
α = 1.18 (29)
Then, from (24) we could receive the following formula:
t tytye∆−=++∆+∆− βσα2ln)2lnln(0(30)
Now, because we know α ( 1.18 ) and αβσ ( 0.66*10-2 ), it's possible to compare coefficients βσ
from (28) with coefficients βσ, obtained from (27) and (29) (eβσ = t∆βσ ) :
ααβσβσe
e= ( 31 )
Here, also we present data, calculated using equation (12) for different parameters α (α = 1.18 and
α=2.05 - tables 2 and figures 4, 5 correspondingly):Fig.3 Simple parameter determination
0.050.0550.06
0 0.02 0.04 0.06
1/time to maturityYieldIt’s clear from these data that difference between existing price and price, calculated on the base of
suggested model is no more than 5%. Even additional precision in parameters’ estimation could decrease
this difference. In addition, for better correspondence between observed data and suggested model, it’s
possible to relax the following assumptions: .1, , ,0 0 = == = γ µ µ const yy conste e
Table2. Prices of treasury securities and calculated prices ( for α = 1.18 and α=2.05).
Time to maturity Price of treasury Calculated price Calculated price
(years) security of treasury security 1 of treasury security 2
0.25 0.9893 0.9892 0.9892
0.5 0.9778 0.9779 0.9779
1 0.9545 0.9545 0.9545
2 0.9061 0.9066 0.9066
3 0.8620 0.8588 0.85865 0.7796 0.7673 0.76677 0.6964 0.6839 0.6826
10 0.6029 0.5757 0.5731
20 0.3185 0.3340 0.327230 0.1950 0.2036 0.1949
Fig.4 Dependence of treasuries prices from time
00.51
01 0 2 0 3 0
Time to maturity, yearsPrice of securityPrice of treasuries
Calculated Price of treasuriesCalculated price of treasury security 1 corresponds to α = 1.18 and
calculated price of treasury security 2 corresponds to α = 2.05.
5. Portfolio theory, risk - neutral model and interest - rate models.
Here we will show relationship between existing financial models and suggested way for mathematical
formulation of liquidity preference theory.
Let's point out again, that choosing of VaR as risk measure, allow us to evaluate risk for differentmaturities.
Additional return could be calculated as difference between risk - neutral price ( price, calculated
on the base of risk - neutral model and market price). To connect return and risk for different maturities we
will use relationship between risk and return, similar to portfolio theory. Finally, we will express suggestedformalism, using graphical view:Fig.5 Dependence of treasuries prices from time
00.51
01 0 2 0 3 0
Time to maturity, yearsPrice of securityPrice of treasuries
Calculated Price of treasuries, Formula connected with portfolio theory =
(Formula, connected with risk - neutral valuation) /
(Formula, connected with VaR);
6. Conclusion.
New mathematical formulation of liquidity preference theory is suggested. On the base of comparison
between suggested model and real prices paradoxical conclusion could be derived. All yield curve could be
described only on the base of liquidity preference theory without any consideration of risk-neutral models.References.
1. J. C. Hull, Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives, Prentice Hall, NJ (1997).
2. E. J. Elton and M. J. Gruber, Modern Portfolio Theory and Investment Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, New York
(1981).
3. Risk Metrics, J. P. Morgan, New York (1996).
4. Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, Nicolas Sagna, Rama Cont, Nicole El-Karoui and Marc Potters, Phenomenology of the
interest rate curve, cond-mat/9712164.
5. Andrew Matacz and Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, An Empirical Investigation of the Forward Interest Rate Term
Structure, cond-mat/9907297.
6. Federal Reserve Statistical Release H.15 Historical Data ( http://www.bog.frb.fed.us/releases/H15/data.htm). |
arXiv:physics/9910007v1 [physics.atom-ph] 6 Oct 1999Three-photon detachment of electrons from the
fluorine negative ion
G F Gribakin †, V K Ivanov ‡, A V Korol §and M Yu Kuchiev † /bardbl
†School of Physics, The University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia
‡Department of Experimental Physics, St Petersburg State Te chnical University,
Polytekhnicheskaya 29, St Petersburg 195251, Russia
§Physics Department, Russian Maritime Technical Universit y, Leninskii prospect 101,
St Petersburg 198262, Russia
Abstract. Absolute three-photon detachment cross sections are calcu lated for the
fluorine negative ion within the lowest-order perturbation theory. The Dyson equation
of the atomic many-body theory is used to obtain the ground-s tate 2 pwavefunction
with correct asymptotic behaviour, corresponding to the tr ue (experimental) binding
energy. We show that in accordance with the adiabatic theory (Gribakin and Kuchiev
1997Phys. Rev. A 553760) this is crucial for obtaining absolute values of the
multiphoton cross sections. Comparisons with other calcul ations and experimental
data are presented.
PACS numbers: 32.80.Gc, 32.80.Rm
Short title: Three-photon detachment from F−
February 2, 2008
/bardblE-mails: gribakin@newt.phys.unsw.edu.au, ivanov@tuexp h.stu.neva.ru, Korol@rpro.ioffe.rssi.ru,
kmy@newt.phys.unsw.edu.au2
1. Introduction
Starting from the pioneering works of Hall et al (1965) and Robinson and Geltman
(1967) the behaviour of negative ions in laser fields has been the subject of numerous
studies for over thirty years. Nevertheless, up to now there are very few firmly
established results on the absolute values of the cross sect ions and photoelectron angular
distributions in multiphoton processes.
This is true even for the simplest two-photon detachment pro cesses. For example,
the results of a number of experimental and theoretical work s on the cross sections and
photoelectron angular distributions in the negative halog en ions (see, e.g., van der Hart
1996, Gribakin et al1999 and references therein) differ significantly each from o ther.
A number of experimental works reported the cross sections a nd angular asymmetry
parameters of the two-photon detachment from the halogen ne gative ions at selected
photon energies (Trainham et al 1987, Blondel et al 1989a, 1992, Kwon et al 1989,
Davidson et al1992, Sturrus et al1992, Blondel and Delsart 1993). These measurements
were performed at the end of 80’s – beginning of 90’s, and to th e best of our knowledge
no new experimental data on multiphoton detachment from the negative halogens have
been published since.
On the theoretical side, a recent development in the study of multiphoton
detachment from negative ions has been done within the adiab atic approach (Gribakin
and Kuchiev 1997a,b). It has established that the electron e scape from an atomic system
in a low-frequency laser field takes place at large electron- atom separations,
r∼1/√ω∼√
2n/κ≫1, (1)
where ωis the photon frequency, κis related to the initial bound-state energy, E0=
−κ2/2, and nis the number of quanta absorbed (atomic units are used throu ghout).
Therefore, the asymptotic behaviour of the bound-state wav efunction R(r)≃Ar−1e−κr
is crucial for obtaining correct absolute values of the prob abilities of multiphoton
processes. Direct calculations of two-photon detachment f rom halogen negative ions
within the lowest-order perturbation theory (Gribakin et al1998, 1999) with both the
Hartree-Fock (HF) and the asymptotically correct valence npwavefunctions confirm
this understanding. The point is that the HF wave functions a re characterised by
κvalues generally exceeding the true experimental ones. As a result, when we use
asymptotically correct wave functions the cross sections a re significantly higher than
those obtained within other methods which rely on the HF or si milar ground-state
wavefunctions (Crance 1987, 1988, Jiang and Starace 1988, P anet al1990, van der Hart
1996). Moreover, the use of the ground-state wavefunctions with correct asymptotic
behaviour in multiphoton detachment calculations is often more important than other
effects of electron correlations. Note that the analytic adi abatic theory (Gribakin and
Kuchiev 1997a,b) which is valid for n≫1 gives reasonable estimates of the cross sections3
even for n= 2 when correct asymptotic parameters are used.
As far as three-photon detachment from negative ions is conc erned, the experimental
and theoretical results are more scarce than those on the two -photon detachment.
Thus, there have been only two experimental measurements of the cross section for
F−at a single photon energy performed by Blondel et al (1989b) and Kwon et al
(1989), and a few theoretical values obtained in the early ca lculations by Crance (1987,
1988). Recently van der Hart (1996) applied an R-matrix Floquet approach to study
the photodetachment from F−and Cl−forn= 1, 2 and 3.
The aim of this work is to perform direct numerical calculati ons of the three-photon
detachment cross section for the negative fluorine ion using an asymptotically correct
ground-state wavefunction and compare the results with the available theoretical and
experimental data. As in our previous two-photon calculati ons (Gribakin et al1999)
the correct 2 pwavefunction is obtained within the many-body Dyson equati on method.
Section 2 outlines briefly the method of calculation. A discu ssion of our results and
comparisons with other calculations and experimental data are presented in Section 3.
2. Three-photon detachment cross section
The total cross section of three-photon detachment of the n0l0electron from an atomic
system by a linearly polarized light of frequency ωcan be written as
σ(ω) =/summationdisplay
lf,LσlfL=32π4ω3
c3/summationdisplay
lf,L/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleB(L)
l0,lf(ω)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2. (2)
In this sum above the partial cross sections σlfLare characterised by the orbital
momentum lfof the final-state photoelectron coupled with the atomic res idue into the
total orbital momentum L. The second equality assumes that the continuous-spectrum
wavefunction of the photoelectron in the matrix element B(L)
l0lf(ω) is normalized to the
δ-function of energy. After absorption of three dipole photo ns by an outer npelectron
in a halogen negative ion np6 1S, the final state photoelectron can leave the system in
thes-,d- org-waves. So, the possible final states are: lf= 0 (1P),lf= 2 (1Pand1F)
andlf= 4 (1F).
In the lowest perturbation-theory order the three-photon a mplitude B(L)
l0lf(ω) is
characterised by the following sequence of electronic stat es,n0l0(L0)→n1l1(L1)→
n2l2(L2)→Eflf(L), produced by successive absorption of three photons. This
amplitude may be presented as
B(L)
l0lf=/summationdisplay
L2l2/radicalBig
(2L2+ 1)(2 L+ 1)/parenleftBigg
1L L 2
0 0 0/parenrightBigg/braceleftBigg
1L L 2
l0l2lf/bracerightBigg
×/summationdisplay
E2/angbracketleftBig
εflf/vextenddouble/vextenddouble/vextenddoubleˆd/vextenddouble/vextenddouble/vextenddoublen2l2/angbracketrightBig
AL2
l0l2(ω, E 0, E2)
2ω−E2+E0+iδ, (3)4
where n2l2is the intermediate electron state after the absorption of t he second photon,
l2is the electron’s orbital momentum and L2is the total orbital momentum of the
system in the intermediate state. For a halogen negative ion l2= 1 with L2= 0,2 and
l2= 3 with L2= 2. In equation (3) and below E0,E1,E2, and Efare energies of
the corresponding electron states. The amplitude AL2
l0l2(ω, E 0, E2) in equation (3) is the
two-photon amplitude (cf. Pan et al1990, Gribakin et al1999),
AL2
l0l2(ω, E 0, E2) =/radicalBig
2L2+ 1/parenleftBigg
1L21
0 0 0/parenrightBigg/summationdisplay
l1(−1)l1/braceleftBigg
1 1 L2
l2l0l1/bracerightBigg
ML2
l0l1l2(ω, E 0, E2),(4)
where the two-photon radial matrix element ML2
l0l1l2(ω, E 0, E2) is given by
ML2
l0l1l2(ω, E 0, E2) =/summationdisplay
E1/an}bracketle{tn2l2/bardblˆd/bardbln1l1/an}bracketri}ht/an}bracketle{tn1l1/bardblˆd/bardbln0l0/an}bracketri}ht
ω+E0−E1+ iδ. (5)
The sums in equations (4) and (5) run over the intermediate el ectron states n1l1
populated after the absorption of the first photon ( l1= 0,2 with L1= 1 for the halogen
negative ions). The reduced dipole matrix elements are defin ed in the usual way, e.g.,
in the length form,
/an}bracketle{tnl/bardblˆd/bardbln0l0/an}bracketri}ht= (−1)l>/radicalBig
l>/integraldisplay
Pnl(r)Pn0l0(r)rdr, (6)
where l>= max {l, l0}andP’s are the radial wave functions.
If one describes the initial state n0l0in the HF approximation, the asymptotic
behaviour of the corresponding radial wavefunction is inco rrect. Namely, it is
characterized by κcorresponding to the HF binding energy, rather than the exac t
(experimental) one. Thus, in F−the HF value is κ= 0.6, whereas the true one is
κ= 0.5. As we showed for the two-photon detachment (Gribakin et al 1998, 1999),
it is very important to use asymptotically correct bound-st ate wavefunctions. In the
present work we refine the bound-state wavefunction using th e Dyson equation method
in the same way as it was done in our two-photon calculations ( Gribakin et al1999).
This enables us to obtain the 2 pwavefunction of F−with the correct binding energy
|E2p|= 0.250 Ryd, equal to the electron affinity of fluorine (Hotop and Li neberger 1985).
The wavefunctions of the intermediate ( n1l1, n2l2) and final ( Eflf) states of the
photoelectron are calculated in the HF field of the frozen neu tral F-atom residue 2 p5.
The photoelectron is coupled to the atomic residue to form th e total spin S= 0 and the
angular momenta L1= 1 for the first intermediate sanddstates ( l1= 0,2),L2= 0,2
for the second intermediate p-wave state ( l2= 1), and L2= 2 for the second intermediate
f-wave state ( lf= 3). In the final state the photoelectron is coupled to the cor e with
Lf= 1 for the s- andd-wave, and Lf= 3 for the d- andg-wave. The intermediate state
continua are discretized and represented by a 70-state phot oelectron momentum mesh
with constant spacing ∆ k.5
Note that the importance of large distances in multiphoton p roblems speaks in
favour of the length form of the photon dipole operator (Grib akin and Kuchiev 1997a,b).
This is in agreement with the results of Pan et al (1990) who showed that the two-
photon detachment cross sections obtained with the dipole o perator in the velocity form
are much more sensitive to the shift of the photodetachment t hreshold and correlation
corrections. On the other hand, electron correlations have a much weaker effect on the
calculations with the length form, and the corresponding re sults are more robust, and
hence, more reliable.
The two-photon AL2
l0l2(ω, E 0, E2) (4) and three-photon B(L)
l0lf(ω) (3) amplitudes are
calculated by direct summation over the intermediate state s. This method involves
accurate evaluation of the free-free dipole matrix element s, and special attention is paid
to pole- and δ-type singularities of the integrand (Korol 1994, 1997).
3. Results
In the present work we demonstrate the effect of the asymptoti c behaviour of the bound-
state wavefunction by presenting the results obtained with the HF 2 pwavefunction
(EHF
2p=−0.362 Ryd), and with the 2 pwavefunction which possesses a correct
experimental energy Eexp
2p=−0.250 Ryd. The latter is obtained within the Dyson
equation approach (Gribakin et al1999). It is quite close to the HF wavefunction inside
the atom, whereas for r >2 au it has larger values than the HF solution, due to a
smaller binding energy and κ. The asymptotic behaviour of the Dyson 2 porbital is
characterized by κ= 0.5 and A= 0.64. For comparison we also calculate the cross
sections within the plane-wave approximation and using the analytic adiabatic theory
formula (Gribakin and Kuchiev 1997a,b).
In figure 1 we present three-photon detachment cross section s calculated for F−using
various approaches for the whole energy range studied. Figu re 2 shows a comparison
between our results and other theoretical and experimental results. In general, all
calculations reveal the small near-threshold maximum due t o the contribution of the
final photoelectron s-wave, and a broad maximum at larger energies due to the d-wave
contribution.
When we use the experimental threshold energy together with the HF 2 p
wavefunction (double-dot-dash curve in figure 1), the overa ll magnitude of the cross
section remains close to that obtained with the HF threshold and wave function. On
the other hand, when we use the 2 pDyson orbital (solid line) the cross section becomes
substantially higher. This clearly demonstrates the effect of the asymptotic behaviour
of the bound-state wavefunction. Moreover, the difference b etween the three-photon
cross sections obtained with the HF and Dyson 2 pwavefunctions is greater than that
between the corresponding two-photon cross sections (Grib akinet al. 1999). This can6
be related to the fact that with the increase of nthe range of important distances (1)
increases, and the difference between the two bound-state wa vefunctions becomes more
significant.
The cross section obtained using the HF 2 porbital together with the experimental 2 p
energy (double-dot-dash line in figures) shows a maximum of σ= 12.5 au at ω= 0.125
Ryd, near the two-photon detachment threshold. The HF resul ts of Crance (1987) below
the two-photon detachment threshold (solid squares in figur e 2) are close to ours. The
cross section of van der Hart (1996) obtained within the R-matrix Floquet approach is
20–30% higher (dashed line in figure 2) with a maximum of σ= 14.5 au at ω= 0.111
Ryd. Note that a similar difference between the HF calculatio ns with the experimental
energy and the R-matrix Floquet approach was found for the two-photon detac hment
cross sections of F−and Cl−(Gribakin et al 1999). It may be due to the fact that
some correlations are included in the R-matrix Floquet ground-state wavefunction (see
discussion at the end of this section). The experimental res ults are shown in figure 2
by open symbols. Blondel et al(1989b) and Kwon et al(1989) have obtained the cross
section values of σ= 4.75(+2.02
−1.40) au and σ= 6.15(+5.14
−2.80) au, respectively, at ω= 0.0856
Ryd. Taken with the error bars, the latter value is consisten t with the HF and R-matrix
Floquet calculation.
However, the best results of the present paper, shown by a sol id curve in figure 2,
indicate that the cross section is substantially larger. Le t us repeat once more that
this increase of the cross section is due to the events which h appen at large separations,
where all correlation corrections are controlled very well . Henceforth we believe that our
calculations (solid curve) give the most accurate values fo r the cross section. Our cross
section substantially, by a factor of 2, exceeds the HF resul ts as well as the R-matrix
Floquet result. It has a maximum of σ= 27 au at ω≈0.114 Ryd. As is seen from figure
1, the difference between the cross sections obtained with th e Dyson and HF orbitals
decreases towards the one-photon detachment threshold ( ω= 0.25 Ryd). Indeed, with
the increase of ωand the energy of the photoelectron, smaller distances beco me more
important, see (1), and at these distances the two bound-sta te wavefunctions are quite
close.
As noted above, the strong enhancement of the three-photon c ross section due to a
changed asymptotic behaviour of the wavefunction is in a agr eement with the two-photon
calculations (Gribakin et al 1998, 1999) and with the conclusions of the analytical
adiabatic theory (Gribakin and Kuchiev 1997a,b). To make a d irect comparison with
this theory we calculate the cross section given by equation (5) of Gribakin and Kuchiev
(1997b). The short-dash curve (figure 1) is obtained using Aandκvalues of the HF
2porbital. The corresponding cross section is rather close to the HF result (dashed
curve) shifted to the HF threshold. When we use Aandκfrom the Dyson orbital, dot-
dash curves in figures 1 and 2, the cross section becomes much h igher. It is about 30%7
greater than our direct perturbation-theory calculation w ith the Dyson orbital, which
is a good accuracy for a simple analytical formula. If we desc ribe the photoelectron
in the intermediate and final states using plane waves use pla ne-waves instead of the
HF wavefunctions the direct calculation (dotted line in figu re1) is very close to the
adiabatic theory result. Therefore, we can attribute the di screpancy between the
adiabatic theory and numerical calculations to the use of fr ee-electron Volkov states
in the theory. However, this discrepancy is not large, and it gets smaller with the
increase of n.
We see that the use of the asymptotically correct 2 pwavefunction changes the
three-photon detachment cross section by a factor of two or m ore. This is similar to
the two-photon detachment process, where the effect describ ed above is greater than
other correlation effects (Pan et al 1990, Gribakin et al 1999). There is no reason
to expect that the role of such correlations in three-photon detachment is stronger
than in two-photon detachment. Thus, we conclude that in multiphoton processes
the error introduced by using a bound-state wavefunction wi th incorrect asymptotic
behaviour could be much greater then the effects of electron c orrelations. For the sake
of pure terminology we should mention that the correct descr iption of the asymptotic
behaviour of a ground-state wave function needs inclusion o f many-electron correlations,
see the Dyson equation discussed above. However, these corr elations are very particular,
their manifestation can be described as a simple shift of the single-electron energy. In
contrast, conventionally the term ’many-electron correla tions’ includes also processes
which cannot be described in the single-electron picture. The later ones areless
important in the problem considered.
4. Concluding remarks
In the present paper we have performed direct numerical calc ulations of the three-
photon detachment from the fluorine negative ion, and paid sp ecial attention to a proper
description of the initial ground-state wavefunction. We e nsured that it has correct
asymptotic behaviour by calculating the outer 2 porbital of the negative ion from the
many-body theory Dyson equation with the non-local correla tion potential adjusted to
reproduce experimental binding energies. Our calculation s demonstrate explicitly that
the use of asymptotically correct initial state wavefuncti ons is very important for finding
absolute values of multiphoton detachment cross sections. This confirms the conclusion
of the adiabatic theory (Gribakin and Kuchiev 1997a,b, Grib akinet al1999) about the
significance of large electron-atom separations in multiph oton processes.8
5. Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the Australian Research Council. One of us (VKI) would
like to acknowledge the hospitality extended to him at the Sc hool of Physics at the
University of New South Wales where this work was fulfilled.
References
Blondel C, Cacciani P, Delsart C and Trainham R 1989a Phys. Rev. A 403698
Blondel C, Champeau M J, Crance M, Grubellier A, Delsart C and Marinescu D 1989b J. Phys. B:
At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 221335
Blondel C, Crance M, Delsart C and Giraud A 1992 J. Physique II 2839
Blondel C and Delsart C 1993 Nucl. Instrum. Methods B 79156
Crance M 1987 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 206553-62
Crance M 1988 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 213559
Davidson M D, Broers B, Muller H G and van Linden van den Heuvel l 1992 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys.
253093
Gribakin G F and Kuchiev M Yu 1997a Phys. Rev. A 553760
Gribakin G F and Kuchiev M Yu 1997b J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 30L657
Gribakin G F, Ivanov V K, Korol A V and Kuchiev M Yu 1998 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 31
L589
Gribakin G F, Ivanov V K, Korol A V and Kuchiev M Yu 1999 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.
submitted for publication
Hall G L, Robinson E J and Branscomb L M 1965 Phys.Rev.Lett. 141013
Hotop H and Lineberger W C 1985 J. Phys. Chem Ref. Data 14731
Jiang T-F and Starace A F 1988 Phys. Rev. A 382347-55
Korol A V 1994 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 27155
Korol A V 1997 unpublished
Kwon N, Armstrong P S, Olsson T, Trainham R and Larson D J 1989 Phys. Rev. A 40676
Pan C, Gao B and Starace A F 1990 Phys. Rev. A 416271
Robinson E J and Geltman S 1967 Phys. Rev. 1534
Sturrus W J, Ratliff L and Larson D J 1992 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 25L359
Trainham R, Fletcher G D and Larson D J 1987 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 20L777
van der Hart H W 1996 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Phys. 293059-749
Figure captions
0,100,120,140,160,180,200,220,2405101520253035Cross section, a.u.
Photon energy, Ryd
Figure 1. Three-photon detachment cross sections of F−. Present calculations:
- - - -, and — ·—, adiabatic theory, equation (5) of Gribakin and Kuchiev (1 997b),
with parameters corresponding to the HF 2 pwavefunction and to the corrected 2 p
wavefunction, respectively; — · ·—, direct calculation using the HF wavefunctions of
the 2p, intermediate and final states and experimental 2 p-energy; ——, same with the
2pwavefunction from the Dyson equation; · · · · · · , 2pwavefunction from the Dyson
equation and plane waves for the intermediate and final state s. Vertical line shows the
position of the two-photon detachment threshold.10
0,0850,0900,0950,1000,1050,1100,1150,1200,1250,13005101520253035Cross section, a.u.
Photon energy, Ryd
Figure 2. Three-photon detachment cross sections of F−from different calculations
and experiment. Present calculations: — ·—, analytical adiabatic theory (Gribakin
and Kuchiev 1997a,b) with parameters corresponding to the c orrected 2 pwavefunction;
—· ·—, direct calculation using the HF wavefunctions of the 2 p, intermediate and
final states and experimental 2 p-energy; ——, same with the 2 pwavefunction from the
Dyson equation. Other results: , HF calculation of Crance (1987); - - - -, R-matrix
Floquet approach (van der Hart 1996); 2, and △experiment Blondel et al(1989b)
and Kwon et al(1989), respectively. Vertical line shows the position of t he two-photon
detachment threshold. |
arXiv:physics/9910008v1 [physics.bio-ph] 8 Oct 1999Metastability of life
V.I. Marchenko
P.L. Kapitza Institute for Physical Problems, RAS, 117334, Kosygin str. 2, Moscow, Russia
Permanent address. e-mail: mar@kapitza.ras.ru
Institut f¨ ur Festk¨ orperforschung, Forschungszentrum J ¨ ulich, D-52425 J¨ ulich, Germany
The physical idea of the natural origin of diseases and death s has been presented. The fundamental
microscopical reason is the destruction of any metastable s tate by thermal activation of a nucleus
of a nonreversable change. On the basis of this idea the quant itative theory of age dependence
of death probability has been constructed. The obtained sim ple Death Laws are very accurately
fulfilled almost for all known diseases.
PACS numbers:87.90.+y, 89.90.+n
All of us will die, as well as all other living organisms
and plants. Each and every machine or construction will
breaks. Mountains will fall down or earthquakes will hap-
pen.
Why? Physics gives the general answer - all of these
systems are not in a full equilibrium. All the systems are
metastable, it means: 1) they are stable against small
external influences, but 2) each of them, as the worst
ones, as well as the best ones, has a finite probability
to be spontaneously destroyed without any external in-
fluence even in the ideal environment and at the perfect
conditions. According to Gibbs [1] the fundamental rea-
son of the destruction is the thermal activation of critical
nucleus of nonreversable change in the system.
Let us consider a simple example - a stretched ideal
monocrystal string. If we wait sufficiently long time the
temperature fluctuations will produce a critical Griffith’s
crack [2] at some place and the string will break. It is
possible that the critical crack will appear earlier if ther e
are some defects in the crystal. Such a nucleation pro-
cess occurs in different ways for different cases (activation
of point defects in the crystals, condensation in a super
saturated solution, nucleation of a new phase in a first or-
der phase transition) and it is well studied in condensed
matter physics.
Any living organism is a much more complicated sys-
tem, but the described phenomena should occur in it also.
The thermal activation of critical nucleus is the last and
unremovable killer. Last - if we exclude all other origins
of diseases and deaths. Unremovable, but, one can hope
- not untreatable.
I want to stress here that the known qualitative and
quantitative facts about majority of diseases can be un-
derstood from the point of view of theoretical physics in
terms of metastability and activation of critical nucleus.
So, I do think that the thermodynamic killer works, and
it is the main killer.
Gompertz [3] discovered that a probability D(x) to die
at the age xin the time interval dtexponentially increases
with age
D∝exp/parenleftBigx
a/parenrightBig
. (1)According to modern mortal statistics Gompertz law is
valid at the age range 30 ÷70 years, and even more strong
increase appears at older ages. Exponential age depen-
dence of D, from my point of view, is the most crucial
sign on the nature of micro origin of diseases leading to
death.
I have no answer for many questions one can ask about
details of the relationship between a given disease and the
proposed idea of their natural micro origin. Only I can do
for the moment is to present a theory of age dependence
of probability of arising of the nucleus.
On a molecular (and macromolecular) level there are
few reasons of arising of almost non removable point
defects, for example, due to the process of oxidation
[4]. Thermal fluctuations should produce configurational
transformations of individual molecules [5]. The same
effect can be caused also by some external agents (pho-
tons, impurity atoms or molecules, elementary particles).
If a concentration of those point defects is small, then
the probability of arising of new defects does not depend
upon the interaction between them. It means that the
concentration of point defects should be simply propor-
tional to the age x. This linear law is known in an abso-
lutely analogies situation, Zeldovich stage of nucleation in
I order phase transition [6]. It is quite natural to assume,
that at any age the dimensionless molecular concentra-
tion of the point defects remains small, so at any age this
law is valid.
Growing concentration of the point defects gives rise to
small changes of physical parameters of body structures
on a macroscopic scale (membranes, cells, as well as on
a higher levels). One can imagine that some functionally
significant defects are thermally activated on this scale
(example, arising of Griffith-like critical crack in a micro
cappilary, periodically stressed by oscillating blood pre s-
sure) or point defects tend to precipitate into a condensed
state (as it is in supersaturated solutions), or even some
type of a structural phase transition occurs at some criti-
cal value of the defect concentration. Some of such types
of spontaneous changing in the body can have serious
functional consequences leading to diseases, and death.
The probability Wof arising of such micro damages is
1governed by Gibbs law
W∝exp/parenleftbigg
−U
T/parenrightbigg
, (2)
where Uis the minimum energetic barrier of the unre-
versible change (critical nucleus), and Tis the tempera-
ture. Usually it is possible to expand energy of critical
nucleus in the small concentration, or equivalently in age:
U=U0+U′x, and if U′is negative, the barrier dimin-
ishes with the age, we obtain the exponential law, Eq.(1).
IfU′is positive, one has the growth of the barrier, and
the stability of the body increases. It is possible that the
age decreasing of the infant mortality is partly related to
this circumstance.
The expansion of Uin concentration is impossible in
the case of condensation in a supersaturated gas with
small concentration (as well as in the vicinity of I order
phase transition). In a two-dimensional condensation of
supersaturated gas the energy of the critical nucleus is in-
versely proportional to the concentration, or in our case
U∼x−1, corresponding to the second exponential law
W∝exp/parenleftbigg
−b
x/parenrightbigg
. (3)
In a three-dimensional condensation there should be U∼
x−2, and the third exponential law is
W∝exp/parenleftBig
−c
x2/parenrightBig
. (4)
Let us consider the US-97 death statistics specified by
selected causes [7]. If one plots ln(Di) v.s. x, or, v.s.
1/x, and 1 /x2it is easy to find that almost all cases
have a clearly distinguishable age behaviors: 20 cases of
Gompertz exponential law, Eq.(1); 14 cases of second ex-
ponential law (3); 4 cases with more complicated behav-
ior, but the laws (1) or (3) are valid there in a wide age
range, and some strange crossover occurs to some other
behavior; 24 cases are not related with aging. Only in 3
cases statistics does not permit to make a definite con-
clusion on the type of the age dependence. Examples of
the clearly detactable exponential age behavior of death
rate presented in Fig.1-4.
Death rate here is the number of 1997 year deaths per
100.000 population of specified age groups 0-5, 5-14, ...
75-84, 85 years and over. There are a lot of intriguing
coincidences of parameters ( a, b) for different diseases.
It possibly means, that a number of discussed different
micro origins is substantially smaller than a number of
diseases. Some of diseases arise presumably as a com-
bined effect of two different micro origins. This analysis
is in progress.50100150
20406080(038)
exp(-3.9+x/10)
FIG. 1. Septicemia (038). Death rate
150300450
20406080(150-159)
exp(9.7-310/x)
FIG. 2. Malignant neoplasms of digestive organs and peri-
tonium (150-159). Death rate.
306090
20406080(188-189)
exp(8.5-350/x)
FIG. 3. Malignant neoplasms of urinary organs (188-189).
Death rate.
250010001500
20406080(410)
exp(-0.51+x/11.7)
FIG. 4. Acute myocardial infarction (410). Death rate.
The characteristic magnitude of function D in cases
with Gompertz law (1) at x= 0 is exp(−13÷ −22) per
year, or exp(−30÷ −39) per second. Let us compare
this value with Eq.(2). One should introduce some pre-
exponent value. Its most simple estimate is the charac-
teristic frequency of oscillations of atoms in condensed
matter ω∼kθ/¯h, where θ∼102Kis a Debye tem-
perature, k- Boltzmann’s constant, ¯ h- Planck’s con-
stant. One should introduce an additional factor, an ef-
fective number N of possible places where the given crit-
ical nucleus can arise. The temperature of the body is
T= 273+ 36 .6≈310K. The comparison gives a reason-
able estimation of barriers U∼(1.2÷1.4)∗104K+TlnN ,
orU∼1.1÷1.3eVifN∼1, and only U∼3eVeven if
N is equals to total amount of molecules in a body, this
effective number is of course unrealistic, and I want just
to note here that in any case the barrier estimation gives
value usual in condensed matter physics.
In order to estimate the age change of barriers one
does need not to know the pre-exponent factor in the
expression (2). Typical 90 years increasing factor ofDiisexp(8). It corresponds to diminishing of barriers
δU∼8T, this value is also reasonable δU∼0.2eV≪U.
Two parameters, the small one δU/U≪1, and the big
oneU/T≫1, are the main parameters of the theory.
In the framework of presented picture the small dif-
ference in barriers of the order of 0 .02eVfor male and
female corresponds to known ratio Dm/Df∼2, and
can be directly related to the difference 1/23 in chro-
mosome compositions. The variation of parameters on
time, and specific groups of population, countries, races,
etc., should be of the same order of magnitude. The sit-
uation is similar to the usual one in condensed matter
physics, where experimental data are observably depen-
dent on sample preparation conditions.
Note, that there is no real contradiction between pre-
sented idea and the fact that there is a lot of diseases
cased by viruses and bacteria. The age dependence of
those diseases should be related to some micro origin of
the destruction of the immune system.
I think also, that discussed thermal activations should
play not the last role in a generation of congenital anoma-
lies.
[1] L.D. Landau, E.M. Lifshitz, Statistical Physics, Perga -
mon, New York (1980)
[2] A.A. Grifith, Phylos.Trans.R.Soc. London A 221, 163
(1920)
[3] B. Gompertz, Phil.Trans.R.Soc. London A 115, 513 (1825)
[4] T. Lindahl, Nature 362, 709-715 (1993)
[5] E. Shredinger, What is Life? Piper. Munchen (1989)
[6] E.M. Lifshitz, L.P. Pitaevskii, Physical Kinetics, Per ga-
mon, New York (1981)
[7] D.H. Hoyert, et al., NVSR 47, 19 (1999). Web site:
www.cdc.gov/nchswww
3 |
arXiv:physics/9910009v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 8 Oct 1999Variational Density Matrix Method for Warm Condensed Matte r and
Application to Dense Hydrogen
Burkhard Militzera)and E. L. Pollockb)
a)Department of Physics
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illin ois 61801
b)Physics Department,
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,
University of California, Livermore, California 94550
(January 19, 2014)
A new variational principle for optimizing thermal density matrices is intro-
duced. As a first application, the variational many body dens ity matrix is written
as a determinant of one body density matrices, which are appr oximated by Gaus-
sians with the mean, width and amplitude as variational para meters. The method
is illustrated for the particle in an external field problem, the hydrogen molecule
and dense hydrogen where the molecular, the dissociated and the plasma regime
are described. Structural and thermodynamic properties (e nergy, equation of state
and shock Hugoniot) are presented.
I. INTRODUCTION
Considerable effort has been devoted to systems where finite t emperature ions (treated either
classically or quantum mechanically by path integral metho ds) are coupled to degenerate electrons
on the Born-Oppenheimer surface. In contrast, the theory fo r similar systems with non-degenerate
electrons (Ta significant fraction of TFermi) is relatively underdeveloped except at the extreme high
Tlimit where Thomas-Fermi and similar theories apply. In thi s paper we present a computational
approach for systems with non-degenerate electrons analog ous to the methods used for ground
state many body computations.
Although an oversimplification, we may usefully view the gro und state computations as
consisting of three levels of increasing accuracy [1]. At th e first level, the ground state wave
function consists of determinants, for both spin species, o f single particle orbitals often taken from
local density functional theory
ΨGS(R) =/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleΦ1(r1)...ΦN(r1)
... ... ...
Φ1(rN)...ΦN(rN)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle. (1)
The majority of ground state condensed matter calculations stop at this level.
If desired, additional correlations may be included by mult iplying the above wave function by
a Jastrow factor,/producttext
i,jf(rij), where the fwill also depend on the type of pair (electron-electron,
electron-ion). Computing expectations exactly (within st atistical uncertainty), with this type of
wave function now requires Monte Carlo methods.
Finally diffusion Monte Carlo [2,3] methods using the nodes o f this wave function to avoid
the Fermion problem may be used to calculate the exact correl ations consistent with the nodal
structure.
The finite temperature theory proceeds similarly. Rather th an the ground state wave function
a thermal density matrix
ρ(R,R′;β) =/angbracketleftbig
R|e−βH|R′/angbracketrightbig
=/summationdisplay
se−βEsΨs(R)Ψs(R′) (2)
is needed to compute the thermal averages of operators
1/an}b∇acketle{tO/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=Tr[Oρ]
Tr[ρ]. (3)
At the first level, this many body density matrix may be approx imated by determinants of
one-body density matrices, for both spin types, as well as th e ions
ρ(R,R′;β) =/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleρ1(r1,r′
1;β)... ρ 1(rN,r′
1;β)
... ... ...
ρ1(r1,r′
N;β)... ρ 1(rN,r′
N;β)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle(4)
The Jastrow factor can be extended to finite temperature and t he above density matrix
multiplied by/producttext
i,jf(rij,r′
ij;β). In particular, the high temperature density matrix used i n path
integral computations has this form.
Finally, the nodal structure from this variational density matrix (VDM) may be used in
restricted path integral Monte Carlo (RPIMC) [4–8]. This me thod has been extensively applied
using the free particle nodes. One aim of the present work is t o provide more realistic nodal
structures as input to RPIMC.
This paper considers the first level in this approach. The nex t section is devoted to a general
variational principle which will be used to determine the ma ny body density matrix. The principle
is then applied to the problem of a single particle in an exter nal potential and compared to exact
results for the hydrogen atom density matrix. After a discus sion of some general properties,
many body applications are considered starting with a hydro gen molecule and then proceeding to
warm, dense hydrogen. It is shown that the method and the ansa tz considered can describe dense
hydrogen in the molecular, the dissociated and the plasma re gime. Structural and thermodynamic
properties for this system over a range of temperatures (T= 5 000 to 250 000 K) and densities
(electron sphere radius rs= 1.75 to 4.0) are presented.
II. VARIATIONAL PRINCIPLE FOR THE MANY BODY DENSITY MATRIX
The Gibbs-Delbruck variational principle for the free ener gy based on a trial density matrix
F≤Tr[˜ρH] +kTTr[˜ρln ˜ρ] (5)
where
˜ρ=ρ/Tr[ρ] (6)
is well known and convenient for discrete systems (e.g. Hubb ard models) but the logarithmic
entropy term makes it difficult to apply to continuous systems . Here, we propose a simpler
variational principle patterned after the Dirac-Frenkel- McLachlan variational principle used in
the time dependent quantum problem [9]. Consider the quanti ty
I/parenleftbigg∂ρ
∂β/parenrightbigg
= Tr/parenleftbigg∂ρ
∂β+Hρ/parenrightbigg2
(7)
as a functional of
Θ≡∂ρ
∂β(8)
I(Θ) = Tr(Θ + Hρ)2(9)
withρfixed.I(Θ) = 0 when Θ satisfies the Bloch equation, Θ = −Hρ, and is otherwise positive.
VaryingIwith Θ gives the minimum condition
2Tr [δΘ (Θ + Hρ)] = 0. (10)
This may be written in a real space basis as
/integraldisplay /integraldisplay
δΘ(R′,R;β)[Θ(R,R′;β) +Hρ(R,R′;β)]dRdR′= 0 (11)
or, using the symmetry of the density matrix in RandR′,
/integraldisplay /integraldisplay
δΘ(R,R′;β)[Θ(R,R′;β) +Hρ(R,R′;β)]dRdR′= 0. (12)
Finally, we may consider a variation at some arbitrary, fixed R′to get
/integraldisplay
δΘ(R,R′;β)[Θ(R,R′;β) +Hρ(R,R′;β)]dR= 0∀R′. (13)
It should be noted that in going from Eq. 11 to Eq. 12 a density m atrix symmetric in Rand
R′is assumed, which is a property of the exact density matrix. I f the variational ansatz does not
manifestly have this invariance Eq. 13 minimizes the quanti ty,
/integraldisplay
[Θ(R,R′;β) +Hρ(R,R′;β)]2dR= 0. (14)
We propose solving this equation by parameterizing the dens ity matrix with a set of parameters
qidepending on imaginary time βandR′,
ρ(R,R′;β) =ρ(R,q1,...,q m) whereqi(R′;β) (15)
so
Θ(R,R′;β) =m/summationdisplay
i=1∂qi(R′;β)
∂β∂ρ(R,q)
∂qi=m/summationdisplay
i=1˙qi∂ρ
∂qi. (16)
In the imaginary time derivative Θ only variations in ˙ qand notqare considered since ρis fixed so,
δΘ(R,R′;β) =m/summationdisplay
i=1δ˙qi(R′;β)∂ρ(R,q)
∂qi. (17)
Using this in equation 13 gives for each variational paramet er, since these are independent,
/integraldisplay∂ρ
∂qj(Θ +Hρ)dR= 0. (18)
This reveals the imaginary-time equivalent to the approach of Singer and Smith [10] for
an approximate solution of the time dependent Sch¨ odinger e quation using wave packets (see
section III). Introducing the notation
pi≡∂(lnρ)
∂qi(19)
and using Eq. 16, the fundamental set of first order differenti al equations for the dynamics of the
variation parameters in imaginary time follows from Eq.. 18 as,
/integraldisplay
pjρHρdR+m/summationdisplay
i=1˙qi/integraldisplay
pjpiρ2dR= 0 (20)
3or in matrix form
1
2∂H
∂/vector q+↔
N˙/vector q= 0 (21)
where
H≡/integraldisplay
ρHρdR (22)
and the norm matrix
Nij≡/integraldisplay
pipjρ2dR= lim
q′→q∂2N
∂qi∂q′
j(23)
with
N≡/integraldisplay
ρ(R,/vector q;β)ρ(R,/vector q′;β)dR. (24)
The initial conditions follow from the free particle limit o f the density matrix at high temperature,
β→0,
ρ(R,R′;β)→exp/bracketleftbig
−(R−R′)2/4λβ/bracketrightbig
/(4πλβ)3N/2whereλ= ¯h2/2m . (25)
Various ansatz forms for ρmay now be used with this approach. After considering the ana logy to
real time wave packet molecular dynamics, the principle is fi rst applied to the problem of a particle
in an external field.
III. ANALOGY TO REAL-TIME WAVE PACKET MOLECULAR DYNAMICS
Wave packet molecular dynamics (WPMD) was first used by Helle r [11] and later applied to
scattering processes in nuclear physics [12] and plasma phy sics [13,14]. An ansatz for the wave
functionψ(qν) is made and the equation of motions for the parameters qνin real time can be
derived from the principle of stationary action [12],
δ/integraldisplay
dtL= 0, L(qν(t),˙qν(t)) =/an}b∇acketle{tψ|i∂t− H|ψ/an}b∇acket∇i}ht (26)
This leads to a set of first order equations, which provides an approximate solution of the
Schr¨ odinger equation. However, this principle cannot be d irectly applied to the Bloch equation
because there is no imaginary part in the density matrix. For this reason, we followed in our
derivation in section II the principle of Dirac, Frenkel and McLachlan [9], which minimizes the
quantity
/integraldisplay
|Hψ−i¯hθ|2dt, θ =∂ψ
∂t. (27)
This method was employed in [10] to obtain the dynamical equa tions in real time.
The VDM approach and WPMD method share the zero temperate lim it, which is given by
the Rayleigh-Ritz principle (see section VA). At high tempe rature, the width of wave packets
in WPMD grows without limits, which is a known problem of this method [15,16]. In the VDM
approach, the correct high temperature limit of free partic les is included. The average width shown
in Fig. 10 can be used to verify the attempts to correct the dyn amics of the real time wave packets
in [16].
4IV. EXAMPLE: PARTICLE IN AN EXTERNAL FIELD
As a first example, we apply this method to the problem of one pa rticle in an external potential
H=−λ∇2+V(r). (28)
The one-particle density matrix will be approximated as a Ga ussian with the mean m, widthw
and amplitude factor D,
ρ1(r,r′,β) = (πw)−3/2exp/braceleftbigg
−1
w(r−m)2+D/bracerightbigg
(29)
as variational parameters. The initial conditions at β−→0 arew= 4λβ,m=r′andD= 0 in
order to regain the correct free particle limit, Eq. 25. For t his ansatzH, defined in Eq. 22 as
H≡/integraldisplay
ρHρdr=/parenleftbigg3λ
w+V[0]/parenrightbigge2D
(2πw)3/2(30)
where
V[n]≡(2
πw)3/2/integraldisplay
(r−m)nV(r)e−2(r−m)2/wdr (31)
and
N≡/integraldisplay
ρρ′dr= [π(w+w′)]−3/2exp/braceleftbig
−(m−m′)2/(w+w′)/bracerightbig
exp(D+D′). (32)
From Eq. 21, the equations for the variational parameters ar e,
˙w= 4λ+ 2wV[0]−8
3V[2](33)
˙m=−2V[1](34)
˙D=1
2V[0]−2
wV[2]. (35)
In absence of a potential, the exact free particle density ma trix is recovered. The harmonic oscillator
case is also correct since the Gaussian approximation is exa ct there. For a hydrogen atom, λ= 1/2,
V(r) =−1/rand
V[0]=−1
merf/parenleftBig
m/radicalbig
2/w/parenrightBig
(36)
V[1]=m
m3w
4/bracketleftBigg
erf/parenleftBig
m/radicalbig
2/w/parenrightBig
−/radicalbigg
8
πwe−2m2/w/bracketrightBigg
(37)
V[2]=/radicalbiggw
2πe−2m2/w+3w
4V[0]. (38)
At low temperature, the density matrix as a function of rgoes to the ground state wave function as
discussed in more detail in the next section. One expects thi s to be a fixed point of the dynamics
of the parameters mandwdetermined by ˙m= 0 and ˙w= 0 while ˙D=−E0. Theβ→ ∞ fixed
point: m= 0,w= 9π/8,˙D= 4/3π(atomic units) corresponds to the well known Rayleigh-Ritz
variational result for a Gaussian trial wave function
Ψ0(r) =/parenleftbigg4
3π/parenrightbigg3/2
exp(−8r2/9π). (39)
5In ground state variational studies, addition of two more Ga ussians brings the ground state energy
to within 0.6% of exact and similar improvement would be obtained here.
Results at finite βrequire a numerical solution, which is illustrated in the fig ure below
comparing the Gaussian variational density matrix with the exact [17] and the free particle density
matrix at several temperatures for the initial condition r′= 1. At high temperatures ( β=.05 and
β=.25) the Gaussian approximation correctly reproduces the li miting free particle density matrix.
At lower temperatures, the cusp in the exact density matrix d ue to the Coulombic singularity at
the proton becomes evident and the peak shifts to the origin s omewhat faster than the Gaussian
variational approximation. As βincreases the exact result grows faster than the variationa l since
the correct energy, -0.5, is lower than −4/3πbut the Gaussian variational approximation remains
rather accurate for r>1. The free particle density matrix remains centered at r= 1 and beyond
β= 0.5 (T= 54.4 eV) bears little resemblance to the correct result.
−2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
r/a000.20.40.600.20.40.60246
−2 −1 0 1 2 3 4
r/a000.20.40.600.20.40.600.20.40.6
β=0.05
β=0.25
β=0.5β=1.0
β=2.0
β=3.0
FIG. 1. Comparison of the Gaussian variational approximati on (circles) with the exact density matrix
ρ(r,r′;β) (solid line) for a hydrogen atom. The free particle density matrix (dashed line) is also shown.
The plotted ris along the line from the proton at the origin (marked by the v ertical bar) through the
initial electron position r′= 1.
V. VARIATIONAL DENSITY MATRIX PROPERTIES
A. Zero Temperature Limit
In the preceding section, it was shown that for the hydrogen a tom the Gaussian variational
density matrix, as a function of Rconverges at low temperature to the Gaussian ground state wa ve
function given by the Rayleigh-Ritz variational principle . It is generally true that the Rayleigh-Ritz
ground state corresponds to a β→ ∞ of the variational density matrix as we now show.
6The Rayleigh-Ritz principle states that for any real parame terized wave function
Ψ(R,q1,...,q m) the variational energy
E({q}) =/integraltext
ψ(R)Hψ(R)dR/integraltextψ(R)2dR(40)
is greater than or equal to the true ground state energy even a t the minimum determined by
∂
∂qkE({q}) = 0 ∀k. (41)
For the VDM ansatz, an amplitude parameter Dis assumed such that
ρ(R,R′;β) =eD(R′;β)˜ρ(R,{q(R′;β)}). (42)
As in the one particle example, it is expected that at low temp erature,β→ ∞, the other ˙ qk→0
while ˙D→constant. From this assumption, Eq. 21 implies that as β→ ∞
∂H
∂qk+˙D∂N
∂qk= 0 (43)
for all variational parameters, where we have defined H≡/integraltext
ρHρ dRandN≡/integraltext
ρ2dR. Since
∂H/∂D = 2Hand∂N/∂D = 2N, Eq. 43 for qk=Dimplies ˙D=−H/N≡ −E0so Eq. 43 may
be rewritten as
∂
∂qk/parenleftbiggH
N/parenrightbigg
= 0 (44)
at theβ→ ∞ fixed point. With the correspondence
ρ(R,{q(R′,β)})→eD(R′;β)ψ(R,{q}), (45)
this is equivalent to Eq. 41 and thus the Rayleigh-Ritz groun d state corresponds to a zero
temperature fixed point in the dynamics of the parameters.
Dis a function of R′andβ, which is calculated by integrating from β= 0 with Eq. 25 as
initial conditions. The zero temperature limit of ˙Dis a constant, −E0, which means in the low
temperature limit Dcan written as
D(R′;β) =−βE0+f(R′). (46)
The function f(R′) can be rewritten as,
f(R′) = ln {ψ0(R′)[ 1 +δ(R′)]}, (47)
where the function δ(R′) is introduced to describe the variational error in the solu tion of the Bloch
equation. It is identical to zero if the variational ansatz i ncludes the exact solution. It leads to
loss of symmetry in RandR′, which will discussed in the next section. Eq. 45 now reads,
ρ(R,R′,β→ ∞) =e−βE0ψ0(R)ψ0(R′)[1 +δ(R′)] (48)
For certain potentials, several fixed points of the dynamics can exist. From Eq. 48, it follows
that only the lowest energy state contributes to physical ob servables calculated from Eq. 3. This
completes the argument that the zero temperature limit of th e VDM correspond to the Rayleigh-
Ritz ground state.
In case of an anti-symmetrized ansatz for the density matrix , one can show that the fixed
point of the dynamics in imaginary time corresponds to the Ra yleigh-Ritz ground state for an
anti-symmetrized wave function.
7B. Loss of Symmetry
The exact density matrix is symmetric under R↔R′. Since we have singled out R′as the
initial point for the imaginary time dynamics, it is not clea r that the approximation given in Eq. 29
automatically satisfies this condition. For the free partic le limit and the harmonic oscillator, where
the Gaussian is the exact solution, it obviously does but in g eneral it does not.
As a specific example, consider again the ground state limit o f the hydrogen atom where the
Gaussian VDM approximation. Eq. 29 then reads,
lim
β→∞ρ(r,r′;β) =eD(r′;β)(8/9π2)3/2e−8r2/9π. (49)
For this to be symmetric under r↔r′, we must have
lim
β→∞D(r′;β) =−8r′2/9π+c(β) (50)
and from the result for ˙D, lim β→∞c(β) = 4β/3π+c1.
Figure 2 compares the D(r,β) from the Gaussian VDM with Eq. 50 using
c(β) = 4β/3π+ 3/2 ln2.
0 5 10 1514151617181920
r2d(r,β)β=40.0
FIG. 2. D(r, β) from the Gaussian approximation in the ground state limit ( solid line) of the hydrogen
atom. Deviations of this function from linearity indicate a breakdown of symmetry in the Gaussian
approximation for ρ(r,r′;β). The dashed line is −8r2/9π+4β/3π+3/2 ln2 expected from the Rayleigh-Ritz
ground state Eq. 39.
There are several consequences of this small violation of R↔R′symmetry. As shown generally
in the section above, in the β→ ∞ limit−˙Dis the Rayleigh-Ritz variational ground state energy
for a Gaussian wave function, which for the hydrogen atom is E0=−4/3π=−0.4244. Because of
the loss of symmetry this is not the same as the energy given by the estimator
/an}b∇acketle{tE/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/an}b∇acketle{tH/an}b∇acket∇i}ht ≡Tr[Hρ]
Tr[ρ](51)
in theβ→ ∞ limit, which for the hydrogen atom gives the more accurate re sult/an}b∇acketle{tE/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=−0.4709.
This will be seen again below for the hydrogen molecule where Eq. 51 also gives more accurate
8ground state energies. Other consequences are less pleasan t. Although the energy is more accurate
the virial theorem, /an}b∇acketle{tK/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=− /an}b∇acketle{tU/an}b∇acket∇i}ht/2, between the kinetic and potential energy is violated by ab out
3% (while both are more accurate than the usual ground state v ariational Gaussian result). This
has consequences for calculating the equation of state part icularly at low density. Slightly more
complicated, explicitly symmetric forms for the VDM could b e used but in this paper we will
continue to explore the basic Gaussian approximation.
C. Thermodynamic Estimators
Since the VDM, except in the simplest cases, is not exact vari ous estimators for the same
quantity will differ. For example the variational principle introduced in section II consists
essentially in globally minimizing the squared difference b etween∂ρ/∂β andHρ, either of which
can be used in estimating the energy. As mentioned above the e nergy estimator Eq. 51 and its
kinetic and potential energy pieces do not automatically sa tisfy the virial theorem for Coulomb
systems at low density. As an alternative to Eq. 51, one can us e the thermodynamic estimators,
/an}b∇acketle{tE/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=−/angbracketleftbigg∂
∂βlnρ/angbracketrightbigg
, (52)
/an}b∇acketle{tT/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=−λ
β/angbracketleftbigg∂
∂λlnρ/angbracketrightbigg
, (53)
/an}b∇acketle{tV/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=−e2
β/angbracketleftbigg∂
∂e2lnρ/angbracketrightbigg
(54)
for the total, kinetic and potential energy. These estimato rs satisfy
/an}b∇acketle{tE/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/an}b∇acketle{tT/an}b∇acket∇i}ht+/an}b∇acketle{tV/an}b∇acket∇i}ht (55)
by the following argument. Any function f=f(βλ,βe2) satisfies
β∂f
∂β=λ∂f
∂λ+e2∂f
∂e2. (56)
From Eq. 21 it follows that all parameters qi=qi(R′;β,λ,e2) have this property and therefore so
does the variational density matrix.
In the zero temperature limit, the thermodynamic estimator s satisfy the virial theorem, which
is also satisfied by any exact and any variational Rayleigh-R itz ground state. From the zero
temperature limit of the VDM given by Eq. 48 and the 1 /βfactor in Eqs. 53 and 54, it is seen
that the symmetry error δ(R′) is unimportant in this limit. It should be noted that calcul ating
the derivatives for /an}b∇acketle{tT/an}b∇acket∇i}htand/an}b∇acketle{tV/an}b∇acket∇i}htincreases the numerical work. The pressure is estimated fro m
3/an}b∇acketle{tP/an}b∇acket∇i}htv= 2/an}b∇acketle{tK/an}b∇acket∇i}ht+/an}b∇acketle{tV/an}b∇acket∇i}ht. (57)
VI. MANY PARTICLE DENSITY MATRIX
We represent the many particle density matrix by a determina nt of one-particle density matrices
(Eq. 4). It can written as,
ρ(R,R′,β) =/summationdisplay
PǫP/productdisplay
kρ1(rk,r′
Pk,β) =/summationdisplay
PǫPeD/productdisplay
k(πwPk)−3/2exp/braceleftbigg
−1
wPk(rk−mPk)2/bracerightbigg
.
(58)
9The permutation sum is over all permutations of identical pa rticles (e.g. same spin electrons) and
the permutation signature ǫP=±1. The initial conditions for Eq. 21 are wk= 0,mk=r′
k, and
D= 0. For this ansatz the generator of the norm matrix, Eq. 24,
N= exp(D+D′)/summationdisplay
PǫP/productdisplay
k[π(wk+w′
Pk)]−3/2exp/braceleftbig
−(mk−m′
Pk)2/(wk+w′
Pk)/bracerightbig
. (59)
For a periodic system the above equation is also summed over a ll periodic simulation cell vectors,
L, with mk−mPk→mk−mPk+L. If only the identity permutation is considered the norm
matrix is easily inverted so that Eq. 21 gives
˙wk=−2wkHD−8
3w2
kHwk (60)
˙mk=−wkHmk (61)
˙D=−/parenleftbigg3
2n+ 1/parenrightbigg
HD−2n/summationdisplay
i=1wiHwi, (62)
whereHqk=1
2∂H
∂qk. (63)
For systems of electrons and ions the full expression for Hqkand the norm matrix are derived in
Appendix A.
0 2 4 6
R/a01234w/a02−4−2024m/a0
0 2 4 6
R/a0−4−2024E/eV
FIG. 3. Gaussian approximation for the ground state of a hydr ogen molecule for bond length R. The
top left panel shows the Gaussian mean parameter mfor the two electrons. These stay in the center of
the bond ( m= 0) until about R= 2a0and then attach themselves to the separating protons ( ±R/2).
The width parameter, displayed in the lower left panel, make s the transition from the optimal value for
a helium atom, R= 0, to the hydrogen atom result w= 9π/8a2
0at large R. The right panel shows the
dissociation energy for the singlet state computed from Eq. 51 (open circles with error bars) and the
thermodynamic estimator ( −dD/dβ ) (dashed line) compared to the results of Kolos and Roothan ( solid
line).
Application to an isolated hydrogen molecule at low tempera ture is shown in Figure 3. This
is for the singlet state (anti-parallel electron spins). Th e triplet state is considered later after
a discussion of how to treat permutation terms in the paramet er equations. The bond length
at minimum energy is 1.47 a 0, compared with the experimental value of 1.40 a 0. The direct
10energy estimator Eq. 51 gives a dissociation energy of 4.50 e V at the minimum compared to the
experimental value of 4.75 eV. Beyond R= 2, the energy rises quickly toward the value given by
the Rayleigh-Ritz estimator −dD/dβ .
VII. ANTISYMMETRY IN THE PARAMETER EQUATIONS
The determinantal form for the VDM, Eq. 58, is correctly anti symmetric under exchange of
identical particles. Since ion exchange effects are negligi ble at the temperatures considered here
these are ignored.
The determinantal form leads to N! terms in the equations of motion for the variational
parameters presented in appendix A. It was originally hoped that exchange effects could be ignored
in these equations while retaining the full determinantal f orm for the VDM but this leads to an
instability in fermionic systems, e.g. it results in an unph ysical strong attraction between two
hydrogen molecules.
A practical means of treating all exchange terms, in particu lar terms involving the potential
energy, in the variational parameter equations was not foun d. Instead it was necessary to use
an approximation similar to that used in the real time comput ations [13,16]: only pair exchanges
in the kinetic energy terms were retained. This will be illus trated for the hydrogen molecule
after first giving the explicit form for this correction. It i s stressed that, unlike the real time
computations, once the variational parameters are determi ned the full determinantal form is then
used in calculating the various averages.
For two particles with parallel spin, the correction term to the kinetic energy is given by,
∆T=NI
NAS/integraldisplay
dRρASˆT ρAS−/integraldisplay
dRρIˆT ρI (64)
ρAS=ρ1(r1)ρ2(r2)−ρ2(r1)ρ1(r2), ρ I=ρ1(r1)ρ2(r2) (65)
NAS=/integraldisplay
dRρ2
AS, N I=/integraldisplay
dRρ2
I (66)
For the Gaussian ansatz in Eq. 58 it becomes,
∆T=−4λNI
wNQ/bracketleftbig
3/parenleftbig
1−˜w2/parenrightbig
−Q2/bracketrightbig
, (67)
w=w1+w2,˜w=w
2√w1w2, Q2=2
w(m1−m2)2, N Q= ˜w3eQ2−1.(68)
The corrections to the norm matrix Nare neglected in order to keep its analytically invertible
form. The corrections to Hqkin Eq. 63 are given by
∆Tqk=1
2NI∂
∂qk∆T (69)
The correction to dynamics of the parameters follow from Eq. 60 to 62,
∆ ˙w1=−2w1/parenleftbigg
∆TD+4
3w1∆Tw1/parenrightbigg
(70)
∆˙m1=−w1∆Tm1 (71)
∆˙D=−2 (∆TD+w1∆Tw1+w2∆Tw2). (72)
These equations lead to an effective repulsion between the Ga ussians for two electrons with parallel
spin if there is significant overlap. As a example of this effec t the variational parameters for the
singlet and triplet states of the hydrogen molecule are comp ared in Fig. 4. For the triplet state
parameters the solution including full exchange effects (lo ng dashed line) are compared with those
11obtained in the kinetic pair exchange approximation (dot-d ashed line). The approximation now
prevents the Gaussian means for the same spin electrons from collapsing to the bond center at
lower temperature and is numerically close to the solution f or full exchange.
0 1 2 3 410−210−1100101102103
triplet
singlet
−1 0 1 2
w mβ
FIG. 4. Effect of antisymmetry on the density matrix paramete rs, width and mean, for a hydrogen
molecule. The protons (large black dots along x axis) are sep arated by 1 .8a0and the initial electron
positions re(β= 0) = ±1.5a0along the molecular axis. The solid line for the singlet stat e (electron spins
anti-parallel) shows both electrons centered in the molecu lar bond at low temperatures (large β). For
the triplet state (parallel electron spins), long dashed li ne the electrons are centered close to the protons.
The approximation of including only kinetic pair exchanges (dot-dashed line) gives a similar result for the
mean, with the electrons centered slightly inside the proto ns but overestimates the Gaussian width (left
panel). At high temperature ( β≤4) exchange is unimportant and the parameters are nearly the same for
all cases.
Even at the lowest temperature considered here in the dense h ydrogen simulations (5000 K)
exchange effects between same spin electrons are negligible beyond a few angstroms, i.e. one or
perhaps two nearest neighbors. Fig. 4 for the triplet state t hus overestimates the effect likely in
dense hydrogen. The main effect of including exchange in the p arameter equations is probably to
prevent the instability mentioned above.
Fig. 5 shows an energy comparison for the triplet ground stat e of the hydrogen molecule.
First, we compare the Gaussian approximation using only the kinetic exchange term in the
parameter equations. For the direct estimator, Eq. 51, one fi nds fairly good agreement with the
quantum chemistry result [18]. The thermodynamic estimato r gives a somewhat more repulsive
triplet interaction for R >2a0. Considering also the Coulomb exchange terms in the Gaussia n
approximation leads to the dot-dashed line for the thermody namic estimator. We conclude that
leaving out the Coulomb exchange terms in the parameter equa tions for efficiency reasons is a
reasonable approximation in many particle simulations.
120 2 4 6
R/a0−1012345E/eV
FIG. 5. Energy of repulsion for the triplet ground state of th e hydrogen molecule for bond length
R. The thermodynamic (dashed line) and the direct estimator, Eq. 51, (circles with error bars) for the
Gaussian approximation using the kinetic exchange term in t he parameter equations are compared with
the Kolos and Roothan results (solid line). The thermodynam ic estimator for the Gaussian approximation
with all exchange terms is shown by the dot-dashed line.
VIII. RESULTS FROM MANY PARTICLE SIMULATIONS
In this section, we report results from VDM Monte Carlo simul ation with 32 pairs of protons
and electrons in the temperature and density range of 5 000 K ≤T≤250 000 K and 1 .75≤rs≤4.0.
Although the Gaussian ansatz VDM will be seen to provide a rea sonable model for hydrogen over
the full density and temperature regime, a large purpose in p resenting these results is to serve as
a base for documenting future improvements from better VDMs and the application of RPIMC.
130 2 4
r/a00510155000K024610000K012315625K012331250K012362500K0123125000K0123250000Krs=4.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=3.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=2.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=1.86
0 2 4
r/a0rs=1.75
FIG. 6. Proton-proton pair correlation function from VDM (s olid line) and RPIMC (dashed lines at
rs=1.75, 2.0, and 4.0 for T≤125 000 K).
The proton-proton pair correlation functions are shown in F ig. 6. For temperatures below
20 000 K, a peak emerges near 1 .4a0that demonstrates clearly the formation of molecules. The
comparison with RPIMC simulations [8,19] at low density sho ws that the peak positions agree well
but RPIMC predicts a significantly bigger height indicating a larger number of molecules. This
could be explained by the missing correlations in the VDM ans atz.
At a density of rs= 2.0, proton-proton pair correlation functions from RPIMC and VDM are
almost identical. The area under the peak multiplied by the d ensity gives an estimate for the
molecular fraction. By comparing the estimate for different densities one finds that the molecular
fraction is diminished when the density is lowered below rs= 2.0. This effect is well-known and is
a result of the increased entropy of dissociated molecules.
14Considerable differences between the proton-proton pair co rrelation functions are found at
rs= 1.75 belowT= 20 000Kwhere VDM shows still a fair number of molecules while RPIMC
predicts a metallic fluid where all bonds are broken as a resul t of pressure dissociation [8,20]. This
effect has to be verified by RPIMC simulations with VDM nodes be cause free particle nodes could
enhance the transition to a metallic state.
The peak positions shifts from 1 .45a0at a low density of rs= 4.0 to 1.3a0atrs= 1.75. The
same trend has been found in the RPIMC simulations [8] but the opposite was reported in [21,22].
0 2 4
r/a0024685000K0246810000K0246815625K0246831250K0246862500K02468125000K02468250000Krs=4.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=3.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=2.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=1.86
0 2 4 6
r/a0rs=1.75
FIG. 7. Proton-electron pair correlation functions from VD M (solid line) and RPIMC (dashed lines at
rs=1.75, 2.0, and 4.0 for T≤125 000 K).
In the proton-electron pair correlation functions shown in Fig. 7, one finds a strong attraction
15present even at high temperatures such as 250 000 K. At low tem peratures, the electrons are bound
in atoms and molecules. This pair correlation function does not show a clear distinction between
the two cases. From studying the height of the peak at the orig in multiplied by the density, one
can estimate the number of bound states at low temperature. S imilar to the molecular fraction
one finds a reduction of bound electrons with decreasing dens ity belowrs= 2.0. The comparison
with PIMC shows that VDM underestimates the height of the pea k. This is probably a result of
the Gaussian ansatz, which does not satisfy the cusp conditi on at the proton.
0 2 4
r/a0015000K0110000K0115625K0131250K0162500K01125000K01250000Krs=4.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=3.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=2.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=1.86
0 2 4 6
r/a0rs=1.75
FIG. 8. Electron-electron pair correlation function for el ectron with parallel spin from VDM (solid
line) and RPIMC (dashed lines at rs=1.75, 2.0, and 4.0 for T≤125 000 K).
160 2 4
r/a005105000K012310000K012315625K012331250K012362500K0123125000K0123250000Krs=4.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=3.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=2.0
0 2 4
r/a0rs=1.86
0 2 4
r/a0rs=1.75
FIG. 9. Electron-electron pair correlation function for el ectron with anti-parallel spin from VDM (solid
line) and RPIMC (dashed lines at rs=1.75, 2.0, and 4.0 for T≤125 000 K). Note the change in scale in
the last row.
Fig. 8 shows the effect of the Pauli exclusion principle leadi ng the a strong repulsion for
electrons in the same spin state. This effect is not present in the interaction of electrons with
anti-parallel spin (Fig. 9). At high temperature, one obser ves the effect of the Coulomb repulsion.
At low temperature, one finds a peak at the origin that is a resu lt of the formation of molecule,
in which two electrons of opposite spin are localized along t he bond. The differences to the PIMC
graphs can be interpreted as a consequence of different molec ular fractions, which has also been
observed in Fig. 6.
170 100000 200000 300000
T/K234567w/a02free particle width
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.86
1.75
FIG. 10. Average width of the Gaussian single particle densi ty matrices as a function of temperature
for different densities
The average width wof the Gaussian is shown in Fig. 10 as a function temperature a nd
density. At high temperature and low density, one finds only s mall deviations from the free particle
limit. These become more significant with increasing densit y and decreasing temperature. At low
temperature, the attraction to the protons dominates, whic h leads to a decreasing average width.
Finally bound states form and the width approaches a finite li mit. At low densities, this is close
to the ground state width of the isolated molecule 3 .138a2
0.
180 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000
T/K−0.5−0.4−0.3−0.2−0.10.0E/Ha0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
T/K−0.500.511.522.5E/Hars=2.0 thermod. est.
rs=2.0 direct est.
rs=4.0 thermod. est.
rs=4.0 direct est.
PIMC rs=2.0
PIMC rs=4.0
FIG. 11. Internal energy per atom versus temperature
In Fig. 11, we compare the internal energy from the thermodyn amic estimator in Eq. 52 and
the direct estimator 51. Both agree fairly well at low densit y. Differences build up with increasing
density and decreasing temperature. Comparing with RPIMC s imulations, one finds that the VDM
energies are generally too high. The magnitude of this discr epancy shows the same dependence on
density and temperature like the difference between the two V DM estimators. The difference to
the RPIMC results could be explained by the missing correlat ion effects in the VDM method.
At high temperature, the thermodynamic estimator always gi ves lower energies than the direct
estimator. Below T= 25 000 K, the ordering is reversed. This is consistent with t he results from
the isolated atom and molecule. The consequence is that the d irect estimator is actually closer to
the value expected from RPIMC simulations. However, it shou ld be noted that this estimator is
not thermodynamically consistent (see section VB).
190 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000
T/K05101520P/Mbarrs=1.75 direct est.
rs=1.75 thermod. est.
rs=2.0 direct est.
rs=2.0 thermod. est.
rs=4.0 direct est.
rs=4.0 thermod. est.
PIMC rs=2.0
PIMC rs=4.0
0 10000 20000 30000
T/K00.511.52P/Mbar
FIG. 12. Pressure versus temperature in high and low tempera ture range. VDM pressure is calculated
from virial relation using both the direct and thermodynami c estimators for kinetic and potential energy.
In Fig. 12, we compare pressure as a function of temperature a nd density from the two
VDM estimators with RPIMC results. At low density, the agree ment is remarkably good. With
increasing density and decreasing temperature, the differe nce grows. For densities over rs= 2.0
below 10 000 K, one finds a significant drop in the direct estima tor for the pressure. We interpret
this effect as a result of the thermodynamic inconsistency.
200.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25
ρ/gcm−301234P/MbarExperiment ’97
Experiment ’98
Linear mixing
Tight binding MD
PACH
Sesame
limit ρ=4ρ0
RPIMC
VDM thermod. est.
VDM direct est.
FIG. 13. Comparison of experimental and several theoretica l Hugoniot functions
Fig. 13, compares the Hugoniot from Laser shock wave experim ents [23,24] with results
from several theoretical approaches (Sesame data base by Ke rley [25] (thin solid line), linear
mixing model by Ross (dashed line) [26], tight-binding mole cular dynamics by Lenosky et.al.
[27] (dash-dotted line), Pad´ e approximation in the chemic al picture by Ebeling et.al. [28] (dotted
line), RPIMC simulations [29] (triangles), VDM direct esti mator (full diamonds) and VDM
thermodynamic estimator (full circles)). The long dashed l ine indicates the theoretical high
pressure limit ρ= 4ρ0of the fully dissociated non-interacting plasma. In the exp eriments, a
shock wave propagates through a sample of precompressed liq uid deuterium characterized by its
initial state, ( E0,V0,p0). Assuming an ideal shock front, the variables of the shocke d material
(E,V,p) satisfy the Hugoniot relation [30],
H=E−E0+1
2(V−V0)(p+p0) = 0. (73)
The initial conditions in the experiment were T= 19.6 K andρ= 0.171 g/cm3. We setV0= 39.1˚A3
andp0≈0. We show two VDM curves based on the thermodynamic and direc t estimators.
ForE0, we use the corresponding value of the ground state of the iso lated hydrogen molecule,
Eth
0=−0.955 Ha and Edir
0=−1.124 Ha.
We expect the difference of the two estimators to give a rough e stimate of the accuracy of the
VDM approach. At high temperature, the difference is relativ ely small and agreement with RPIMC
simulations is reasonable. Both VDM estimators indicate th at there is maximal compressibility
around 1.5 Mbar. However, in this regime of high density and r elatively low temperature a more
careful study seems unavoidable. We suggest RPIMC simulati ons using the VDM nodal surface to
restrict the paths.
21IX. CONCLUSIONS
The VDM approach provides a way to systematically improve th e many particle density matrix.
Already the simplest ansatz using one Gaussian to describe t he single particle density matrices gives
a good description of hydrogen in the discussed range of temp erature and density. The method
includes the correct high temperature behavior and shows th e expected formation of atoms and
molecules. The thermodynamic variables are in reasonable a greement with RPIMC simulations.
The presented Gaussian ansatz can be improved in several way s. One could use a sum of Gaussians,
add underestimated correlation effects by including a Jastr ow factor in the ansatz or use a two-step
path integral. Further one can use this essentially analyti c density matrix to furnish the nodal
surface in RPIMC simulations, replacing the free particle n odes by a density matrix that already
includes the principle physical effects. This level of accur acy seems to be required to determine a
Hugoniot function that is very sensitive to the different lev el of approximations made by various
theories.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank David Ceperley for useful dis cussions. This work was partially
supported by the CSAR program and performed under the auspic es of the U.S. Department of
Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under con tract No. W-7405-Eng-48.
APPENDIX A: GAUSSIAN APPROXIMATION INTERACTION TERMS
The general equations for the variational parameters qin a parameterized density matrix, from
Eq. 21, are
1
2∂H
∂/vector q+↔
N˙/vector q= 0 (A1)
where
H≡/integraldisplay
ρHρdR=/integraldisplay
ρHρIdR (A2)
and the norm matrix
Nji≡/integraldisplay
pjpiρ2dR= lim
q′→q∂2N
∂qj∂q′
i(A3)
with
N≡/integraldisplay
ρ(R,/vector q;β)ρ(R,/vector q′;β)dR. (A4)
The subscript Iin Eq. A2 indicates that only one ρneeds to be antisymmetric and the identity
permutation can be used in the other. (We are also dropping 1 /N! prefactors which are the same
for the norm matrix and thus cancel out.) This appendix conta ins the detailed formulae for these
equations for a parameterized Gaussian density matrix appl ied to a Coulomb system.
Repeating Eq. 58 the parameterized variational density mat rix is an anti-symmetrized product
of one-particle density matrices,
ρ(R,R′,β) =/summationdisplay
PǫP/productdisplay
kρ1(rk,r′
Pk,β) =/summationdisplay
PǫPeD/productdisplay
k(πwPk)−3/2exp/braceleftbigg
−1
wPk(rk−mPk)2/bracerightbigg
(A5)
22where the amplitude Dand the widths wkand means mkare the variational parameters. The
permutation sum is over all permutations of identical parti cles (e.g. same spin electrons) and
ǫP=±1is the permutation signature. The initial conditions are wk= 0,mk=r′
k, andD= 0.
For this ansatz the generator of the norm matrix,
N=/summationdisplay
PǫP/productdisplay
k[π(wk+w′
Pk)]−3/2exp/braceleftbig
−(mk−m′
Pk)2/(wk+w′
Pk)/bracerightbig
exp(D+D′). (A6)
For a periodic system the above equation also is summed over a ll periodic simulation cell vectors,
L, with mk−m′
Pk→mk−m′
Pk+L. Using this the components of the norm matrix are then:
NDD=/summationdisplay
PǫPNP (A7)
NmiD=/summationdisplay
PǫP/bracketleftbigg−2(mi−mPi)
wi+wPi/bracketrightbigg
NP (A8)
NwiD=/summationdisplay
PǫP/parenleftbigg−1
wi+wPi/parenrightbigg/bracketleftbigg3
2−(mi−mPi)2
wi+wPi/bracketrightbigg
NP (A9)
Nmimj=/summationdisplay
PǫP
2δj,Pi↔
I
wi+wj+ 4(mi−mPi)
(wi+wPi)(mj−mP−1
j)
(wj+wP−1
j)
NP (A10)
Nmiwj=/summationdisplay
PǫP/bracketleftBigg
δj,Pi
wi+wj+1
(wj+wP−1
j)/parenleftBigg
3
2−(mj−mP−1
j)2
(wj+wP−1
j)/parenrightBigg/bracketrightBigg/bracketleftbigg2(mi−mPi)
wi+wPi/bracketrightbigg
NP(A11)
Nwiwj=/summationdisplay
PǫP/braceleftbiggδj,Pi
(wi+wPi)2/bracketleftbigg3
2−2(mi−mPi)2
wj+wPj/bracketrightbigg
+1
(wi+wPi)(wj+wP−1
j)
/bracketleftbigg3
2−(mi−mPi)2
wi+wPi/bracketrightbigg/bracketleftBigg
3
2−(mj−mP−1
j)2
wj+wP−1
j/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
NP (A12)
where
NP=e2D/productdisplay
jexp/braceleftbigg
−(mj−mPj)2
(wj+wPj)/bracerightbigg
(π(wj+wPj))3/2=NP−1. (A13)
The Hamiltonian for a periodic system of electrons and ions
H=−1
2Ne/summationdisplay
i=1∇2
i+/summationdisplay/summationdisplay
i<jψ(rij)−/summationdisplay
i/summationdisplay
IZIψ(riI) +/summationdisplay
iUMad+Uions (A14)
where the purely ionic terms
Uions=/summationdisplay/summationdisplay
I<I′ZIZI′ψ(rII′) +/summationdisplay
IZ2
IUMad. (A15)
The Ewald potential, ψ(r), which includes interactions with periodic images and inc orporates
charge neutrality,
ψ(r) =/summationdisplay
Lerfc(G|r+L|)
|r+L|+/summationdisplay
k/negationslash=04π
Ωk2exp(−k2/4G2)−π
G2Ω=/summationdisplay
k/negationslash=04π
Ωk2exp(ik·r) (A16)
where Ω is the periodic cell volume and Gan arbitrary constant. The Madelung term in His
the interaction energy of an electron with it’s periodic ima ges and neutralizing background (e.g.
23UMad=−1.41865/Lfor a simple cubic simulation cell, the usual case). To do the integrals we
represent the Gaussians by their Fourier series
(2
πw)3/2/summationdisplay
Le−2
w(r−m−L)2=/summationdisplay
k1
Ωe−k2w/8eik·(r−m)(A17)
and in the interaction terms use the Fourier representation forψ(r). This finally gives
H=/summationdisplay
PǫP{KP+UP}NP (A18)
with
KP=/summationdisplay
i/bracketleftbigg3
wi+wPi−2(mi−mPi)2
(wi+wPi)2/bracketrightbigg
(A19)
UP=/summationdisplay/summationdisplay
i<jW(˜mi−˜mj,˜wi+ ˜wj)−/summationdisplay
i/summationdisplay
IZIW(˜mi−RI,˜wi) +/summationdisplay
iUMad+Uions (A20)
where ˜wi≡wiwPi/(wi+wPi) and ˜mi≡(miwPi+mPiwi)/(wi+wPi) . The interaction integral
W(r,w)≡/summationdisplay
k/negationslash=04π
Ωk2e−k2w
4eik·r(A21)
Wis symmetric in rwhen the periodic cell has inversion symmetry. Continuing, the left hand side
of Eq. A1 is
HD≡1
2∂H
∂D=H (A22)
Hwi≡1
2∂H
∂wi=1
2/summationdisplay
PǫP/braceleftbigg
(∂KP
∂wi+∂UP
∂wi)NP+ (KP+UP)∂NP
∂wi/bracerightbigg
(A23)
Hmi≡1
2∂H
∂mi=1
2/summationdisplay
PǫP/braceleftbigg
(∂KP
∂mi+∂UP
∂mi)NP+ (KP+UP)∂NP
∂mi/bracerightbigg
(A24)
with
∂NP
∂wi=/bracketleftbigg
−3
wi+wPi+ 2(mi−mPi)2
(wi+wPi)2/bracketrightbigg
NP (A25)
∂NP
∂mi=/bracketleftbigg
−4(mi−mPi)
wi+wPi/bracketrightbigg
NP (A26)
∂KP
∂wi=/bracketleftbigg
−6
(wi+wPi)2+ 8(mi−mPi)2
(wi+wPi)3/bracketrightbigg
(A27)
∂KP
∂mi=/bracketleftbigg
−8(mi−mPi)
(wi+wPi)2/bracketrightbigg
. (A28)
where we have used the fact that terms in PiandP−1igive the same contribution under the
permutation sum and so combined them. The derivatives of the interaction integral are,
∂UP
∂mi=2wPi
wi+wPi
/summationdisplay
j/negationslash=iW[1]( ˜mi−˜mj,˜wi+ ˜wj)−/summationdisplay
IZIW[1]( ˜mi−RI,˜wi)
(A29)
∂UP
∂wi=2wPi
(wi+wPi)2
wPi
/summationdisplay
j/negationslash=iW[2]( ˜mi−˜mj,˜wi+ ˜wj)−/summationdisplay
IZIW[2]( ˜mi−RI,˜wi)
+ (mPi−mi)·
/summationdisplay
j/negationslash=iW[1]( ˜mi−˜mj,˜wi+ ˜wj)−/summationdisplay
IZIW[1]( ˜mi−RI,˜wi)
(A30)
24whereW[1]andW[2]denote the derivatives of Wwith the first and second argument. Comparing
equation A21 and Eq. A16 the interaction integral may be writ ten as
W(r,w) =ψ(r)−/summationdisplay
Lerfc/bracketleftBig
|r+L|√w/bracketrightBig
|r+L|+πw
Ω(A31)
and its derivatives as:
W[1](r,w) =∇ψ(r) +/summationdisplay
Lr+L
|r+L|3/parenleftbigg
erfc/bracketleftbigg|r+L|√w/bracketrightbigg
+2|r+L|√πwexp(−|r+L|2/w)/parenrightbigg
(A32)
W[2](r,w) =−/summationdisplay
Lexp(−|r+L|2/w)
w3/2√π+π
Ω(A33)
For an isolated system ( L→ ∞) and these would simplify to,
W(r,w) =erf [r/√w]
r(A34)
W[1](r,w) =−r
r3/parenleftbigg
erf [r/√w]−2r√πwe−r2/w/parenrightbigg
(A35)
W[2](r,w) =−1
w√πwe−r2/w(A36)
Atβ= 0 the initial derivatives for the variational parameters r educe to
˙wi= 2 (A37)
˙mi= 0 (A38)
˙D=−UI (A39)
For large numbers of electrons it is not possible to treat all permutations. Here the
approximation discussed in section VII is used where the kin etic pair exchange corrections given
there are added to the identity permutation term derived her e.
[1] B.L. Hammond, W. A. Lester, and P. J. Reynolds. Monte Carlo Methods in Ab Initio Quantum
Chemistry . World Scientific, Singapore, 1994.
[2] D. M. Ceperley and L. Mitas. Adv. Chem. Phys. , 93:1, 1996.
[3] W. M. Foulkes, L. Mitas, R. J. Needs, and G. Rajagopal. submitted to Rev. Mod. Phys. , 1999.
[4] D. M. Ceperley. Fermion nodes. J. Stat. Phys. , 63:1237, 1991.
[5] C. Pierleoni, D.M. Ceperley, B. Bernu, and W.R. Magro. Phys. Rev. Lett. ,73:2145, 1994.
[6] D. M. Ceperley. Rev. Mod. Phys. , 67:279, 1995.
[7] D. M. Ceperley. Monte carlo and molecular dynamics of con densed matter systems. Editrice
Compositori, Bologna, Italy, 1996.
[8] W. R. Magro, D. M. Ceperley, C. Pierleoni, and B. Bernu. Phys. Rev. Lett. ,76:1240, 1996.
[9] A. D. McLachlan. Mol. Phys. ,8:39, 1964.
[10] K. Singer and W. Smith. Mol. Phys. ,57(4):761–775, 1986.
[11] E.J. Heller. J. Chem. Phys. ,62:1544, 1975.
[12] H. Feldmeier. Nucl. Phys. A ,515:147, 1990.
[13] D. Klakow, C. Toepffer, and P.-G. Reinhard. J. Chem. Phys. ,101:10766, 1994.
[14] W. Ebeling and B. Militzer. Phys. lett. A ,226:298, 1997.
25[15] B. Militzer. Quanten-Molekular-Dynamik von Coulomb-Systemen . Logos publishing company, Berlin,
1996.
[16] M. Knaup, P.-G. Reinhard, and C. Toepffer. Contrib. Plasma Phys. ,391-2:57, 1999.
[17] E. L. Pollock. Comp. Phys. Comm. ,52:49, 1988.
[18] W. Kolos and C. C. J. Roothan. Rev. Mod. Phys. , 32:219, 1969.
[19] B. Militzer and D. M. Ceperley. to be published .
[20] B. Militzer, W. Magro, and D. Ceperley. Contr. Plasma Physics ,391-2:152, 1999.
[21] G. Galli, R.Q. Hood, A.U. Hazi, and F. Gygi. submitted to Phys. Rev. B , , 1999.
[22] T. N. Rescigno. submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett. , , 1999.
[23] I. B. Da Silva et. al. Phys. Rev. Lett. ,78:783, 1997.
[24] G. W. Collins et. al. Science ,281:1178, 1998.
[25] G. I. Kerley. Molecular based study of fluids. page 107. A CS, Washington DC, 1983.
[26] M. Ross. Phys. Rev. B ,58:669, 1998.
[27] T. J. Lenosky, J. D. Kress, and L. A. Collins. Phys. Rev. B ,56:5164, 1997.
[28] W. Ebeling, W.D. Kraeft, and D. Kremp. Theory of Bound States and Ionisation Equilibrium in
Plasma and Solids . Ergebnisse der Plasmaphysik und der Gaselektronik, Band 5 . Akademie-Verlag,
Berlin, 1976.
[29] B. Militzer, W. Magro, and D. Ceperley. Strongly couple d coulomb systems. Plenum Press, New York
NY, 1998.
[30] Y. B. Zeldovich and Y. P. Raizer. Physics of Shock Waves and High-Temperature Hydrodynamic
Phenomena . Academic Press, New York, 1966.
26 |
arXiv:physics/9910010v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 8 Oct 1999Contrib. Plasma Phys. 39(1999) , 151-154
Characterization of the State of Hydrogen at High
Temperature and Density
Burkhard Militzer(a), William Magro(b), David Ceperley(a )
(a) National Center for Supercomputing Applications, Depa rtment of Physics, Univer-
sity of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801
(b) William Magro, Kuck & Associates, Inc., Champaign, IL 61 820
Abstract
Fermionic path integral Monte Carlo simulations have been a pplied to study the equilibrium properties of the
hydrogen and deuterium in the density and temperature range of 1.6< rs<14.0 and 5000 K < T < 167000 K.
We use this technique to determine the phase diagram by ident ifying the plasma, the molecular, atomic and
metallic regime. We explain how one can identify the phases i n the path integral formalism and discuss the
state of hydrogen for 5 points in the temperature-density pl ane. Further we will provide arguments for the
nature of the transitions between the regimes.
1 Introduction
The phase diagram of hydrogen has been studied intensively w ith different theoretical ap-
proaches [1],[2], simulation techniques [3],[4] and exper iments [5],[6]. From theory, the prin-
cipal effects at low densities are well-known. On the other ha nd, the properties at inter-
mediate density are not yet well understood, and the phase di agram is not yet accurately
determined. In particular, the nature of the transition to a metallic state is still an open
question.
In this article, we would like to show how these questions can be addressed by path
integral Monte Carlo (PIMC) simulations. Using this approa ch, we derived the phase dia-
gram in Fig.1 where we distinguish between molecular, atomi c, metallic and plasma regimes.
We will demonstrate how these different states can be identifi ed from PIMC simulations.
The imaginary-time path integral formalism [7] is based on t he position-space density ma-
trixρ(R,R′,β), which can be used to determine the equilibrium expectatio n value of any
operator ˆO,
/angbracketleftˆO/angbracketright=TrˆOρ
Trρ=/integraltext
dRdR′ρ(R,R′,β)/angbracketleftR|ˆO|R′/angbracketright/integraltext
dRρ(R,R,β)(1)
where Rrepresents the coordinates of all particles. The low temper ature density matrix
ρ(R,R′,β) =/angbracketleftR|e−βH|R′/angbracketrightcan be expressed as product of high temperature density matr ices
ρ(R,R,τ) with the time step τ=β/M. In position space, this is a convolution,
ρ(R0,RM;β) =/integraldisplay
· · ·/integraldisplay
dR1dR2· · ·dRM−1ρ(R0,R1;τ)ρ(R1,R2;τ)· · ·ρ(RM−1,RM;τ).
(2)
This high dimensional integral can be integrated using Mont e Carlo methods. Each particle
is represented by a closed path in imaginary time. Fermi stat istics is taken into account by
considering the fermion density matrix, which can be expres sed by considering all permu-102 Contrib. Plasma Phys. 39(1999)
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
ρ/gcm−350001000020000500001000002000001.6 1.75 2.0 2.6 4.0rs
Metallic FluidPlasma
Molecular Fluid2 Mbar1 Mbar0.1Mbar
0.5 Mbar
T/K
Atomic Fluid
Figure 1: The computed phase diagram of deuterium is shown in the temperature-density
plane. ( ×,⋄,△) indicate our PIMC simulations and distinguish between diff erent degrees of
degeneracy of the electrons ( ×less than 10% exchanges, ⋄more 10% and △over 80%). The
four main regimes, molecular, atomic and metallic fluid as we ll as the plasma are shown.
The thick solid line specifies the plasma phase transition pr edicted in [9]. The thin solid
lines specify the approximate location of isobars.
tations Pof identical particles,
ρF(R,R′;β) =Aρ(R,R′;β) =1
N!/summationdisplay
P(−1)Pρ(R,PR′;β), (3)
where Ais the antisymmetrization projection operator. Cancellat ion of positive and neg-
ative contributions leads to the fermion sign problem , which is solved approximately by
restricting the paths within a nodal surface derived from th e free-particle density matrix
[8].
2 Phase diagram of hydrogen and deuterium
We used PIMC simulation with 32 protons and 32 electrons and a time step τ= 1/106K
to generate the phase diagram shown in Fig. 1. In the low densi ty and low temperature
regime, we find a molecular fluid. In the proton-proton correl ation function shown in Fig. 2,
one finds a clear peak at the bond length of 0 .75˚A. We determine the number of molecules
as well as other compound particles by a cluster analysis bas ed on the distances. Using
this approach we can estimate the number of bound states (see [10]). We can also estimateB. Militzer, W. Magro, D. Ceperley, Characterization of the State of Hydrogen 103
0 0.5 1ν01020Pe(ν)dν0 1 2 3 4
r/A04812gee,|| \ (r)0.00.51.0gee,||(r)−0.008−0.0040.0000.0040.008[gpe(r)−1]r20.00.40.8gpp(r)T=125000K
rs=4.0
0 0.5 1ν0 1 2 3 4
r/AT=20000K
rs=4.0
0 0.5 1ν0 1 2 3 4
r/AT=5000K
rs=4.0
0 0.5 1ν0 1 2 3 4
r/AT=5000K
rs=1.86
0 0.5 1ν0 1 2 3 4
r/AT=5000K
rs=1.6
Figure 2: Distribution functions for a selection of 5 simula tion of hydrogen at different tem-
peratures and densities, one in each column: 1) a plasma, 2) a atomic fluid, 3) a molecular
fluid, 4) a molecular fluid with metallic properties, and 5) a m etallic fluid. The rows show
the following: (1) proton-proton correlation function gpp(r) multiplied by the density, which
means the area under the peak at the bond length of r= 0.75˚A indicates the number of
molecules, (2) [ gpe(r)−1]r2, where the first peak hints to the existence of bound electron s in
the ground state, (3) pair correlation function for electro ns with parallel spins demonstrat-
ing the Pauli exclusion principle, (4) pair correlation fun ction for electrons with anti-parallel
spins, where the peak is caused by a localization of wave func tion along the molecular bond,
and (5) distribution of the fraction νof electrons involved in a permutation. A peak near
ν= 0 represent a small degree of degeneracy of the electrons, w hile one near ν= 1 implies
a highly degenerate electron gas.104 Contrib. Plasma Phys. 39(1999)
the fraction of molecules and atoms to determine the regime b oundaries. However at high
density, a clear definition of those species is difficult to giv e.
Starting in the molecular regime, one finds that increasing t emperature at constant
density leads to gradual dissociation of molecules followe d by a regime, with a majority of
atoms. The atoms are then gradually ionized at even higher te mperatures. Lowering the
density at constant temperature leads to a decrease in the nu mber of molecules, or atoms
respectively, due to entropy effects.
If the density is increased at constant temperature, pressu re dissociation diminishes
the molecular fraction. This transition was described by Ma gro et. al. [9]. Its precise
nature is still a topic of our current research. Using PIMC si mulations, one finds it occurs
within a small density interval and we predict that it is conn ected with both the molecular-
atomic and insulator-metal transition. We determine the fr action of electrons involved in a
permutation as an indication of electronic delocalization . Permuting electron are required
to form a Fermi surface, which means that a high number of perm utations indicate a high
degree of degeneracy of the electrons. Permuting electrons form long chains of paths and
therefore occupy delocalized states. This delocalization destabilizes the hydrogen molecules.
Before all bonds are broken, one finds a molecular fluid with so me permuting electrons, which
could indicate the existence of a molecular fluid with metall ic properties.
The boundaries of the metallic regime are determined by two e ffects. With increasing
temperature, the degree of degeneracy of the electrons is si mply reduced. If the temperature
is lowered, the attraction to the protons becomes more relev ant, which localizes the electron
wave function and decreases the degree of degeneracy also (s ee Fig. 1).
Acknowledgements
Support from CSAR program and computer facilities at NCSA an d Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
References
[1] W. Ebeling, W. D. Kraeft and D. Kremp, “Theory of bound sta tes and ionisation equilibrium in plasma
and solids”, inErgebnisse der Plasmaphysik und der Gaselektronik, volume 5, Akademie-Verlag, Berlin
(1976).
[2] D. Saumon and G. Chabrier, Phys. Rev. A 46(1992)2054
[3] T. J. Lenosky, J. D. Kress and L. A. Collins, Phys. Rev. B 56(1997)5164.
[4] S. Nagel, R. Redmer, G. R¨ opke, M. Knaup and C. Toepffer, Ph ys. Rev. E 57(1998)5572
[5] I. B. Da Silva, P. Celliers, G. W. Collins, K. S. Budil, N. C . Holmes, W.T. Jr. Barbee, B. A. Hammel,
J. D. Kilkenny, R. J. Wallace, M. Ross, R. Cauble, A. Ng and G. C hiu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78(1997)483
[6] S. T. Weir, A. C. Mitchell, and W. J. Nellis, Phys. Rev. Let t.76(1996)1860
[7] D. M. Ceperley, Rev. Mod. Phys. 67(1995)279
[8] D. M. Ceperley, “Path integral Monte Carlo methods for fe rmions”, inMonte Carlo and Molecular
Dynamics of Condensed Matter Systems, Ed. K. Binder and G. Ci ccotti, Bologna, Italy (1996).
[9] W. R. Magro, D. M. Ceperley , C. Pierleoni, and B. Bernu, Ph ys. Rev. Lett. 76(1996)1240
[10] B. Militzer, W. Magro, and D. Ceperley, “Restricted Pat h Integral Monte Carlo Calculations of Hot,
Dense Hydrogen”, inProceedings of the International Conference on Strongly Co upled Coulomb Sys-
tems, Boston (1997).
Received October 1, 1998 |
arXiv:physics/9910011v1 [physics.ins-det] 8 Oct 1999A Compact3H(p,γ)4He 19.8-MeV
Gamma-Ray Source for Energy Calibration at
the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory
A.W.P. Poon,1,2R.J. Komar, C.E. Waltham
Department of Physics and Astronomy, The University of Brit ish Columbia,
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 1Z1
M.C. Browne,3,4R.G.H. Robertson
Nuclear Physics Laboratory, University of Washington, Sea ttle, WA 98195, USA
N.P. Kherani
Ontario Hydro Technologies, 800 Kipling Avenue, Toronto, O N, Canada M8Z 5S4
H.B. Mak
Department of Physics, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, C anada K7L 3N6
Abstract
The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) is a new 1000-tonne D 2OˇCerenkov
solar neutrino detector. A high energy gamma-ray source is n eeded to calibrate
SNO beyond the8B solar neutrino endpoint of 15 MeV. This paper describes the
design and construction of a source that generates 19.8-MeV gamma rays using
the3H(p,γ)4He reaction (“ pT”), and demonstrates that the source meets all the
physical, operational and lifetime requirements for calib rating SNO. An ion source
was built into this unit to generate and to accelerate proton s up to 30 keV, and a high
purity scandium tritide target with a scandium-tritium ato mic ratio of 1:2.0 ±0.2
was included. This pTsource is the first self-contained, compact, and portable hi gh
energy gamma-ray source ( Eγ>10 MeV).
Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 21 April 20111 Introduction
The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) [1] is a new heavy wat er (D 2O)
ˇCerenkov solar neutrino detector. The detector is unique in its use of 1000
tonnes of D 2O as target, which allows the detection of electron neutrino s and
neutrinos of all active flavours through the following chann els:
νe+d→p+p+e−−1.44 MeV (1)
νx+d→p+n+νx−2.22 MeV (2)
νx+e−→νx+e−(3)
This ability to measure the total flux of all active flavours of neutrinos origi-
nating from the Sun will allow SNO to make a model-independen t test of the
neutrino oscillation hypothesis.
The SNO collaboration needs a high energy calibration point beyond the8B
solar neutrino energy endpoint of ∼15 MeV. This calibration point is very
important in understanding the detector’s energy response because ˇCerenkov
light production is not exactly linear in energy (e.g. energ y loss to low energy
electrons below the Cˇ erenkov threshold). As the energy inc reases, the proba-
bility that a photomultiplier tube would get hit by more than oneˇCerenkov
photon increases. Therefore, a calibration point beyond th e solar neutrino
energy endpoint will provide vital information on this mult iple hit effect at
energies beyond the solar neutrino endpoint.
In the arsenal of calibration sources at SNO, the “ pT” source, which employs
the3H(p, γ)4He reaction to generate 19.8-MeV gamma rays, has the highest
energy. This pTsource is the first self-contained, compact, and portable hi gh
energy gamma-ray source ( Eγ>10 MeV).
In this paper various aspects of the construction and operat ion of the pTsource
are described. In Section 2 the design criteria for a high ene rgy gamma-ray
calibration source at SNO are outlined. Attributes of the3H(p, γ)4He reaction
1Also affiliated with Nuclear Physics Laboratory, University of Washington, Seat-
tle, WA 98195, USA
2Present and Corresponding address: Institute for Nuclear a nd Particle Astro-
physics, Nuclear Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley Nati onal Laboratory, Mail
Stop 50-208, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. Tel.: (510) 495-2467; Fax: (510) 486-4738;
E-mail: AWPoon@lbl.gov.
3Also affiliated with Department of Physics, North Carolina St ate University,
Raleigh, NC 27695, USA
4Present address: NIS-5, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Lo s Alamos, NM 87545,
USA
2are discussed in Section 3. In Section 4, the design of the pTsource is de-
scribed. Details involving the fabrication of the scandium tritide target and
the assembly of the pTsource are summarized in Section 5. The experimental
setups used in measuring the neutron and the gamma-ray outpu t of the pT
source are described in Section 6. The results of these measu rements can be
found in Section 7, followed by the conclusions in Section 8.
2 Design Criteria for a High Energy Gamma-Ray Source
One way to calibrate the high-energy response (10 < E < 20 MeV) of a large
water ˇCerenkov detector like SNO is to use high-energy gamma rays g enerated
from radiative-capture reactions in an ion source. The devi ces that provide
these high-energy gamma rays must be compact enough to be man euvered to
different regions in the D 2O volume using the SNO calibration source manip-
ulator system. The largest insertion port for calibration d evices at SNO can
accommodate devices up to about 30 cm in diameter and 75 cm in l ength.
This physical constraint limits the actual size of such cali bration devices.
Because the SNO detector is essentially a 100% efficient, 4 πdetector to gamma
rays, one does not need to design a high-energy source with a h igh gamma-ray
production rate. The centroid of the photopeak can be measur ed to better
than 1% in less than an hour with a gamma-ray yield of 0.2 s−1.
SNO is designed to run with MgCl 2loaded in the heavy water to detect the
free neutron in Reaction (2). The high energy gamma-ray sour ce is required to
have a low neutron production rate. This will minimize the si gnal interference
of the gamma rays resulting from thermal neutron capture by35Cl in D 2O in
the “salt” running scenario and the dead time in the data acqu isition system.
A neutron production of less than 104s−1is needed for the design goal of
>0.2γs−1.
ThepTsource must be available to calibrate the SNO detector whene ver there
is a change to the detector configuration, or when a high energ y calibration is
called for. An operational lifetime of >60 hours for the pTsource will be more
than enough to calibrate the SNO detector during its anticip ated life span.
Electromagnetic interference between this high energy cal ibration source and
the photomultiplier tube array must be minimal. For this rea son, accelerator
sources like the pTsource have to be run in direct current mode, instead of
pulsed mode, to eliminate possible electromagnetic pickup by the photomul-
tiplier tube array.
33 Attributes of a3H(p,γ)4He Source
The3H(p,γ)4He reaction has a Q-value of 19.8 MeV. Since4He does not have a
bound excited state, the gamma ray emitted in this reaction i s monoenergetic.
Building a compact gamma-ray calibration source using this reaction is an
attractive proposal for several reasons.
First of all, the projectile and the target have unit charge. Therefore, the
effect of Coulomb suppression on the cross section for this re action is less
than reactions with other combinations of incoming charged projectiles and
targets. Hence, the beam energy and power can be minimised. T his allows the
beam to be run in a d.c. mode without incorporating a complica ted cooling
system for the target.
As the Q-value of3H(p,n)3He is -0.763 MeV, the pTsource is essentially
neutron-free if the proton energy is below this threshold. H owever, isotopic
impurities and the isotopic exchange between the beam and th e target will
give rise to undesirable neutrons through the2H(t,n)4He,3H(d,n)4He, and
3H(t,nn)4He reactions. In principle, one can eliminate this neutron p roduction
problem by mass analyzing the beam. However, this option is n ot possible in
thepTsource given the physical size constraint mentioned in the l ast section.
A monoenergetic calibration source like the pTsource is better than sources
with multiple energy lines in calibrating water ˇCerenkov detectors which gen-
erally have poor energy resolution.
4 Design of the pTSource
In order to keep the system as clean as possible, the pTsource was built
with ultra-high vacuum (UHV) hardware. A cross sectional dr awing of the pT
source can be found in Figures 1. The source can essentially b e divided into
three sections: the gas-discharge line, the ion accelerati on line and the target
chamber. In the following, the design of these three section s is discussed.
The gas-discharge line is a cold-cathode Penning ion source , which runs in d.c.
mode with a very modest power consumption. The outer housing of the gas-
discharge line consists of two glass-to-stainless-steel a dapters5. Each of these
adapters is 7.62 cm in length with a piece of 1.27-cm long Pyre x glass to isolate
the two ends. The electrodes E1, E2 and E3 are welded to these a dapters. The
use of these glass-to-stainless-steel adapters provides c onvenient high voltage
isolation between the anode and the cathodes. The placement of the various
5Manufactured by Larson Electronic Glass, Redwood City, CA, USA
4electrodes in the gas-discharge line was designed using the simulation program
MacSimion [3]. In the design, efforts were made to minimise io n loss to the
electrode walls; hence, a higher beam current can be attaine d for a given
discharge current. The beam was spread over the target; this reduces the areal
power density and improves the target’s longevity. Under th e normal running
scenario, the cathodes (E1 and E3) are kept at ground, whilst the anode (E2)
is maintained at +2 kV d.c.
A SAES St-172 getter (model LHI/4-7/200) is used as the hydro gen dis-
charge gas reservoir for the ion source. The getter has 360 mg of a zirconium-
vanadium-iron alloy active material, and is mounted to the B NC connector
next to E1 in Figure 1.
The axial magnetic field required in the discharge is provide d by a cylindrical
magnet composed of seven 13.34 cm (outer diameter) by 5.88 cm (inner diam-
eter) by 1.91 cm (thick) barium ferrite feroxdur ceramic rin gs. The maximum
magnetic field inside the central bore of the magnet is about 0 .06 T.
The ion acceleration line is a double-ended glass adapter6, with one end at-
tached to the gas-discharge line and the other connected to t he target chamber
which is biased at a negative high voltage. In this scheme, th e construction
of complicated accelerating and focusing electrodes is avo ided, and the length
can also be kept to a minimum. When the ions exit this accelera tion line and
enter the target chamber, they have acquired an energy equiv alent to the tar-
get bias voltage, in addition to their ejection energy from t he ion discharge
region.
At the end of the ion acceleration line in the pTsource is the target mount
flange. The target is secured to a copper heat sink, as shown pr otruding from
the flange in Figure 1, by a stainless steel screw-on cap. This mounting mech-
anism is designed to allow efficient target mounting in the tri tium glovebox in
which this operation is to be performed.
The total length of the pTsource is only 50 cm. For deployment in SNO, it
will be housed inside a 25.4-cm diameter by 60-cm long stainl ess steel cylin-
drical deployment capsule. The dimensions of this capsule a re well within the
physical limits imposed by the SNO calibration-source-dep loyment hardware.
The expected yield of the pTsource was calculated. Because the cross section
of the3H(p, γ)4He reaction below 50 keV is not well known, the cross section
at the operating voltage of the pTsource had to be extrapolated from existing
data. Details of this extrapolation can be found in [4]. The s topping power
required in the yield calculation was calculated using the p rogram SRIM [5].
6Manufactured by MDC Vacuum Products Corp., Hayward, CA, USA . (part num-
ber DEG-150).
5Figure 2 shows the estimated gamma-ray yield as a function of the the mass-1
content in a 50- µA, 27-keV beam in the constructed pTsource. This calcula-
tion assumed a total mixing of hydrogen isotopes between the beam and the
target.
The ion beam current was measured in situ by a calorimetric method and
by a Faraday cup fitted with a secondary electron suppression scheme. These
measurements were made with extra hardware installed in the target chamber
of an untritiated model pTsource. Beam current measured by both methods
agreed with each other. The pTsource is capable of generating at least 50 µA
of total (atomic and molecular) beam current at a beam energy of 20 keV.
The mass composition of the beam was also measured in situ by lengthen-
ing the target chamber and installing a home-built mass spec trometer in the
model source. The mass-1 composition was determined to be (0 .63±0.09) in
the H 2partial pressure range of 0.3 ×10−3to 0.6×10−3mbar, which is a factor
of∼5 lower than the normal operating pressure of the pTsource. The normal
operating pressure of the source was chosen by considering t he beam stability
and longevity running in a continuous mode. The mass composi tion measure-
ment could not be made at the normal operating H 2pressure of the source
due to increased beam scattering in the lengthened target ch amber and the
inadequate resolution of the spectrometer.
5 Construction of the pTSource
5.1 Fabrication of the Scandium Tritide Target
Molybdenum was chosen as the substrate for the scandium film b ecause of
the strong adhesion between the two materials [6]. To ensure high adhesion
strength of the scandium film to the molybdenum substrate, it was prepared
by going through a series of mechanical and chemical treatme nts prior to film
deposition.
A substrate disc of diameter 2.86 cm was first cut out from a 1-m m thick sheet
of 99.95% pure molybdenum using the electro-discharge mach ining (EDM)
technique. This was to minimise the use of machining oil on th e substrate.
The substrate was then sandblasted by fine glass beads in orde r to increase its
effective surface area and enhance the film adhesion strength . The scandium
film would peel off much more easily from a non-roughened subst rate surface.
The substrate was then treated chemically in a multi-stage p rocess. It was
first cleansed in acetone in an ultrasonic bath for half an hou r. The substrate
was subsequently ultrasonically cleansed in ethanol, then deionised water, for
6half an hour in each solvent. This sequence of chemical clean sing ensured that
hydrocarbons that might have deposited on the substrate dur ing the EDM
process to be removed. The substrate surface was then etched in a 3 M nitric
acid bath for 30 seconds. The whole chemical cleansing proce ss was completed
by a 30-minute deionised water wash in an ultrasonic bath.
Once the substrate had gone through this series of preparati on processes, it
was mounted to a copper holder in which a 110-W coil heater was embedded
and placed inside the ultra-high vacuum (UHV) evaporation s ystem which
is described below. This heater block was outfitted with ther mocouples for
monitoring its temperature. The substrate was baked at 400◦C in the evapo-
ration system for about four days, then at 250◦C for about a week to reduce
outgassing from its surface.
Fabrication of the scandium tritide target, and the subsequ ent assembly of the
pTsource were performed at the tritium laboratory at Ontario H ydro Tech-
nologies (OHT) in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The schematic o f the vacuum
system is shown in Figure 3. To ensure that a high vacuum could be achieved
in this tritium run, oil-free vacuum pumps and UHV hardware w ere used in
this system. The evaporation chamber is a UHV six-way cross w ith an outer
flange diameter of 15.24 cm. The tritium-compatible glovebo x is continuously
purged with dry nitrogen. The moisture level in the glovebox is typically 30 to
50 ppm by volume. The nitrogen purge gas is routed through a Zr 2Fe tritium
trap in order to remove its tritium content before venting [7 ]. The exhaust of
the vacuum system is also routed through a Zr 2Fe trap before venting.
Two high-current feedthroughs were connected to the evapor ation chamber.
A 5-coil conical tungsten evaporation basket7was mounted between these
feedthroughs. A (26 ±1)-mg lump of 99.99% pure, sublimed dendritic scan-
dium was placed inside this basket, and positioned directly above the molyb-
denum substrate in the heater block. The separation between the bottom of
the tungsten basket and the molybdenum substrate was (14 ±2) mm. A stain-
less steel shroud was positioned around the feedthrough-ba sket assembly to
prevent deposition on the viewport in the evaporation chamb er and to reflect
radiation back to the coil to enhance heating efficiency. This arrangement is
shown in Figure 4.
A quartz oscillator is installed at the end of an evaporator b ellows as shown
in the setup in Figure 3. When the deposition assembly is inse rted into the
evaporation chamber, the oscillator can be lowered to the ba ck side of the
assembly through an aperture in the main shroud and used to mo nitor the
deposition rate of scandium. The distance between the scand ium source (in
the tungsten evaporation basket) and the oscillator was 27 c m.
7R.D. Mathis Company, Part Number B12B-3x.025W
7As shown in Figure 3, there are two main gas lines connected to the evapo-
ration chamber in the vacuum system of the setup. One of these branches is
connected to a 5-g depleted uranium bed. This uranium bed is u sed to store
tritium which can be readily desorbed by raising it to sufficie ntly high tem-
perature [8,9]. In Table 1, the isotopic purity of the tritiu m gas in this bed is
shown.
Prior to film evaporation, the whole apparatus was baked for o ver a week
at∼150-200◦C to reduce the outgassing rate of the evaporation system. Th e
tungsten evaporation coil was also baked by running a 10 A cur rent through it.
The base pressure of the system was ∼6×10−7mbar during the bakeout. After
the baking, the evaporation system reached a base pressure o f 5.8×10−8mbar.
After bakeout, the deposition assembly (i.e. the high curre nt feedthrough-
evaporation basket assembly) was delivered into the evapor ation chamber by
winding in the linear translation stage to which the deposit ion assembly flange
was connected. The tungsten evaporation basket was positio ned directly above
the centre of the molybdenum substrate.
The current fed to the tungsten basket was raised at a rate of a bout 1 A min−1
during the first thirty minutes of the experiment. This rate w as then decreased
to 0.2 A min−1to lower the outgassing rate of the evaporation hardware. Th e
basket current was raised up to 46 A, at which point the coil te mperature was
∼1900◦C. This was to ensure that all the scandium, whose melting poi nt is
1539◦C, was evaporated. The evaporated scandium film has a thickne ss of
(1.1±0.3) mg cm−2.
Immediately after the scandium deposition, the deposition assembly was re-
moved from the evaporation chamber by winding out the linear translation
stage and closing a gate valve (V2 in Figure 3). Before tritiu m was let into
the evaporation chamber, the evaporation chamber was isola ted by closing the
remaining gate valves (V1 and V3 in Figure 3) connected to it. The molyb-
denum substrate temperature was subsequently raised to 400◦C to enhance
tritium sorption by the scandium film later on.
The uranium tritide bed was first heated to 135◦C to drive out the3He from
tritium decay in the bed. At this temperature, tritium is sti ll “locked” inside
the bed. The released3He was first pumped out of the system before the
uranium bed temperature was raised to 220-240◦C at which temperature the
tritium is desorbed. In order to measure the amount of tritiu m sorbed by the
scandium film, the tritium gas released from the uranium bed w as first trapped
in the small volume between valves V6 and V10 (see Figure 3) be fore releasing
to the isolated evaporation chamber. This trap has a volume o f (31.9 ±2.2) cm3.
With the tritium pressure measured by the pressure transduc er connected to
this volume, the amount of tritium used could then be determi ned. A total of
8(8.19±0.57) Ci of tritium was injected in 13 different doses into the chamber.
In Figure 5 the pressure inside the evaporation chamber is pl otted against
the time after Doses 1, 7, 9 and 13 were injected. It is clear fr om the figure
that the sorbing capacity of the scandium film decreased as th e tritium con-
centration in the film increased. By integrating the tritium absorption curves
for all the doses and correcting for the solid angle subtende d by the target
in the evaporation system, the tritium activity on the targe t was found to be
(3.3±0.8) Ci. The3H/Sc atomic ratio of the target is (2.0 ±0.2).
5.2 Assembly of the pTSource
The ion source must be cleansed before it could accept the tri tiated target. If
the outgassing rate of the ion source is too high, the getter w ould lose most
of its capacity on pumping the residual gas in the source, rat her than serving
its purpose as the hydrogen discharge gas reservoir.
The ion source was cleansed chemically and mounted to a triti um-free bakeout
system whose schematic is shown in Figure 6. The ion source wa s baked at
150◦C for about two weeks. The bakeout vacuum system was flushed wi th
argon for approximately 5 to 10 minutes daily during this bak eout period. This
flushing procedure did improve the overall cleanliness of th e vacuum system.
After the target fabrication, the ion source was removed fro m the bakeout
system and wrapped in layers of ParafilmTMwhich is a flexible, thermoplastic
material. It was used to minimise tritiated particles depos iting on the outer
surface of the ion source once it was taken into the glovebox w here the target
evaporation system was set up. The tritiated target was remo ved from the
evaporation system and mounted to the pTsource. The ion source was then
connected to the vacuum system as indicated in Figure 3.
After the system had reached its base pressure, H 2was let into the system, and
an ion beam was allowed to strike and to bombard the target for 5 minutes.
During this time, the beam energy was gradually increased fr om 0 to 25 keV.
This procedure was necessary to cleanse the Penning electro des by electro-
discharge. Contamination on the target, which might have de posited on the
target surface during the target mounting process, would al so be removed by
this brief beam bombardment. It was found that if this step we re not carried
out, the getter in the source would not be able to handle the re sidual gas load
in the source once sealed.
The St-172 getter had to be activated before loading hydroge n to it. To activate
the getter, it was heated for 10 minutes at 800◦C by passing a 4.5 A current
through it. Once activated, the getter current was lowered t o about 1.6 A in
9order to maintain a temperature of 200◦C. The getter was then loaded with
hydrogen by allowing an ambient H 2pressure of 3.3 ×10−4mbar into the ion
source. After 30 minutes, ∼200 cm3mbar of H 2would have been absorbed by
the 360 mg of active material in the getter. The getter loadin g procedure was
completed by turning off the getter current, and by pumping ou t the residual
H2gas in the ion source. After the base pressure was reached, th e source
was isolated and detached from the rest of the vacuum system b y closing the
metal-seal valve on the source. The source was subsequently removed from the
glove box, and its outer surface was de-contaminated.
6 Experimental Setup for Measuring the Neutron and Gamma-
Ray Yields of the pTSource
6.1 Gamma-Ray Detection Systems
After the pTsource was constructed at OHT, a quality assurance test was fi rst
performed at Queen’s University at Kingston, ON, Canada. Th e source was
subsequently transported to the University of Washington f or a measurement
of the gamma-ray angular distribution in the3H(p, γ)4He reaction [4]. In the
quality assurance test, a 12.7-cm diameter by 7.6-cm long bi smuth germanate
(Bi4Ge3O12, or BGO) crystal was used as the gamma-ray detector [10]. In t he
angular distribution measurement, three 14.5-diameter by 17.5 cm cylindrical
barium fluoride (BaF 2) crystals were used. In Figures 7 and 8 the orientations
of the pTsource with respect to the detectors in the two different test systems
are shown.
In Figure 9 the energy spectrum from the quality assurance te st at Queen’s is
shown with the cosmic ray background subtracted.
6.2 Neutron Detection System
Because of beam-target mixing, fast neutrons are generated through the2H(t,n)4He,
3H(d,n)4He, and3H(t,nn)4He reactions. The neutron output of the pTsource
during its lifetime was monitored by neutron-proton elasti c scattering in or-
ganic scintillators. The neutron detector was a 12.7-cm dia meter by 5.1-cm
thick Bicron BC 501 liquid scintillator, which was opticall y coupled to a Hama-
matsu R1250 photomultiplier tube (PMT).
A Piel 112 pulse shape discriminator (PSD) [11] was used to pe rform pulse
shape discrimination on gammas and fast neutrons generated by the pTsource.
10The neutron-gamma separation ability in the neutron detect ion system is
demonstrated in Figure 10.
7 Gamma-Ray and Neutron Yields of the Source
The gamma-ray and neutron production rates by the pTsource are sum-
marised in this section. The pTsource was operated in the quality assurance
test as described in the last section. It was also used in a mea surement to
determine the gamma-ray angular distribution in the pTreaction. During the
98.8 hours of operational lifetime of the pTsource, we took data at beam
energies of 22, 27 and 29 keV.
7.1 Gamma-Ray Yields
The gamma-ray detectors were energy calibrated by a variety of sealed sources:
137Cs(0.662 MeV),207Bi(1.063 MeV),12C∗(4.44 MeV), and16O∗(6.13 MeV).
Without a readily available energy source with an energy clo se to 19.8 MeV,
Monte Carlo simulation using GEANT [12] was relied upon to ca lculate the
response of the detectors. The simulation program was check ed against the
data taken with a strength calibrated13C(α,n)16O∗source.
Energy spectra were taken with this source placed at the cent re of the de-
tector system. At the time of this experiment, this source ha d a strength of
(4.1±0.1)×103γs−1. Because of its high neutron output, energy spectra were
taken with a 2.5-cm thick slab of lead placed between the sour ce and the detec-
tors to extract the neutron induced spectra. By comparing th ese two types of
spectra, the gamma-ray line shape could then be extracted fo r each detector. In
Figure 11, the GEANT generated line shape is compared to an ex perimentally
determined spectrum. After correcting for the effects of lea d absorption, neu-
tron induced background and dead-time, the number of detect ed gamma rays
and efficiency ( εexp) were extracted. The average ratio between εexpand the
GEANT calculated efficiency ( εMC),εexp/εMC, was found to be (1.01 ±0.04).
The gamma-ray penetration function ηγ(θ) was measured for the 6.13-MeV
gamma-ray line in the three BaF 2detectors. This source was positioned inside
an untritiated model pTsource, the mechanical construction of which was
identical to the real pTsource, at the location where the tritiated target would
be mounted. The gamma-ray detection rate was then measured e xperimentally
in a procedure similar to the efficiency measurement above. By comparing
this detection rate and the one without the presence of the mo del source, the
average penetration factor over the solid angle subtended b y the detectors
11/angbracketleftηγ(θ)/angbracketrightΩdetwas then extracted. The average percentage difference betwe en the
measured values and the simulated ones is ∼ ±3%.
To extract the gamma-ray yield of the pTsource, the calibrated “beam-on”
data were fitted to a composition of a cosmic-ray background a nd the 19.8-
MeV line shape for an isotropic source located at the target s urface in the
pTsource as generated by GEANT simulation. Because the emitte d gamma
rays in the3H(p, γ)4He reaction have a predominant sin2θangular distribu-
tion [4,13,14], the extracted gamma-ray amplitude from the fit was corrected
for this distribution.
The average gamma-ray production rate at Ep=27 keV during the quality
assurance run in the first 20.9 hours of the source’s lifetime was found to
be (0.67 ±0.11) s−1. The rate at Ep=29 keV during the gamma-ray angu-
lar distribution measurement in the last 47.2 hours of the so urce’s lifetime
was (0.36 ±0.03) s−1. In Figure 12, the gamma-ray production rate was renor-
malised to that for a 29-keV atomic beam. It is clear that the g amma-ray yield
decreased over time and is due to beam-target mixing and targ et sputtering
in the source. This point will be discussed after evaluating the neutron yields
in the next section.
7.2 Neutron Yields
In the pTsource most of the neutrons are generated through the3H+3H in-
teraction. Although the discharge gas stored into the hydro gen reservoir in
thepTsource was initially free of any tritium, tritium would get i nto the
discharge gas through beam-target exchange after a period o f beam bombard-
ment. Moreover, deuterium present in the discharge gas (at a 1.5×10−4level)
and in the target (at a 1.2 ×10−3level) would also enhance neutron production
by the source through the3H(d,n)4He reaction. In the following the results of
this neutron production measurement are presented.
The fast neutron detection efficiency of the liquid scintilla tor was calibrated
using an241Am-9Be source which generates neutrons through9Be(α,n)12C.
This source has a calibrated neutron strength of (7.1 ±0.7)×103n s−1and
was placed on the axis of the detector with a separation of 20. 6 cm, the
same distance between the tritiated target and the neutron d etector in the
gamma-ray angular distribution runs. Gamma rays and neutro ns generated
by the source could be cleanly separated by pulse shape discr imination. The
net neutron count rate was extracted after the correction of a (7.1 ±0.1)%
dead time and the subtraction of a background rate of 0.7 s−1. The detection
efficiency ( ε∆Ω/4π) was found to be (3 .6±0.4)×10−3.
Neutrons generated by the pTsource would inevitably be scattered or ab-
12sorbed by its construction material. Hence the detected neu tron rate ( Rdet)
would be less than the actual pT-source generated rate ( Rgen) by a reduction
factor ηn. To measure this reduction coefficient, the241Am-9Be source was
placed on the target mount inside the untritiated model sour ce. This model
source was then placed in the same orientation to the liquid s cintillator as in
the gamma-ray angular distribution runs. After correcting for the dead time
and background, and comparing the neutron detection rate to that in the cal-
ibration runs without the presence of this model source, it w as found that the
pTsource hardware absorbed or scattered (38 ±6) % of the neutrons that are
generated inside the source.
Because there was a variation in beam intensity on target fro m run to run,
the neutron production rate was normalised to the current dr awn from the
target bias supply in order to provide a fair comparison. Thi s current was a
combination of the actual ion current on target and the contr ibution from sec-
ondary electron emission. The pTsource does not have any internal secondary
electron suppression scheme because of physical constrain ts imposed by the
SNO calibration hardware.
Two assumptions were made in extracting this neutron genera tion rate by the
pTsource:
(1) the neutrons generated by the pTsource have the same energy spectrum
as fast neutron spectrum from the241Am-9Be calibration source;
(2) the angular distribution of neutrons generated by the pTsource is isotropic
as in the241Am-9Be case.
Neutrons are produced predominantly by the3H+3H interaction in the pT
source. The reactions that are energetically possible in th is system are:
3H(t, nn)4He (4)
3H(t, n1)5He∗(n)4He (5)
3H(t, n0)5He(n)4He. (6)
In a measurement at a triton energy Et=500 keV, the branching ratio for
these reactions was found to be 70%:20%:10% (in the same orde r as they
appear above) [15]. The neutron energy spectrum for each of t hese reactions
is somewhat different. Without any final-state effect, the dir ect three-body
breakup reaction in reaction (4) would yield neutrons at an a verage energy
of∼1
2·5
6Q. With a Q-value of 11.3 MeV, the neutron energy spectrum from
reaction (4) would be a broad peak centered at about 4.7 MeV. T his shape is
indeed very similar to the neutron spectrum from9Be(α,n) sources [16].
The ground state transition (6) yields a 10.4-MeV neutron n0, followed by
13a 0.9-MeV secondary neutron. The neutron detection efficienc y for the liq-
uid scintillator is almost null at 0.9 MeV. Reaction (5) is a s equential decay
proceeding through a broad5He excited state at about 2 MeV. Because of
the small branching ratio for this excited state transition , it would not con-
tribute much to the uncertainty in the extracted neutron gen eration rate by
thepTsource. The uncertainty in the extracted pT-source neutron rate due to
the secondary neutrons is at most 15% if one assumes none of th e secondary
neutrons from (5) and (6) were detected. The uncertainty in t he extracted pT-
source neutron rate due to n0and the 14 MeV monoenergetic neutron from
3H(d,n)4He was estimated to be 9% at Ep=29 keV.
Although the neutron detector was placed in different orient ations to the pT
source in the quality assurance runs and in the gamma-ray ang ular distribu-
tion measurement, continuous beam-target exchange render ed it impossible
to extract the neutron angular distribution without the pre sence of a second
neutron detector for normalisation purposes. Wong et al. [15] measured the
angular distribution for the3H+3H system at Et=500 keV. They found that
the ground state transition neutron group is isotropic to wi thin an accuracy
of±10%. They also found that in the neutron energy range of 2 to 7. 5 MeV,
the continuum neutron group is also isotropic to within an ac curacy of ±20%
in the laboratory angle range of 4 to 100◦. For the3H(d,n)4He reaction, the
angular distribution is isotropic at and below the resonanc e [17]. Given these
facts, the assumption that the neutrons emitted by the pTsource are isotropic
was made in the yield evaluation.
In order to look at the time variation of the neutron producti on rate by the
pTsource more closely, the neutron production rates for all th e runs were
renormalised to the same atomic beam energy at 29 keV. In othe r words, the
rate in all of the Ep=22 keV and 27 keV runs were scaled up by a factor
corresponding to the difference in cross section at that atom ic beam energy
to that at 29 keV. The resulting plot is shown in Figure 12.
In Figure 12, it is clear how the neutron production rate in th epTsource varied
over time. The neutron production rate was gradually increa sing initially. This
is a clear indication of beam-target exchange, as tritium in the target gets into
the discharge gas stream. The neutron production rate then b egan to decrease.
This can be explained by the fact that the rate of hydrogen iso tope exchange
was reaching an equilibrium, and sputtering of the target be came the dominant
process. The target sputtering effect had caused the build-u p of a thin film on
the high voltage insulator in the acceleration section of th e source. Under the
normal operating condition, one end of this insulator is gro unded whilst the
other end is biased at ∼-30 kV. With a thin conductive film build-up, a leakage
current flowed across the insulator and caused a high voltage breakdown. This
build-up limited the lifetime of the pTsource to 98.8 hours.
14The neutron production rate of the pTsource during calibration in the SNO
detector was estimated. Using the highest data point in Figu re 12, the maxi-
mum neutron generation rate was estimated to be less than (2. 5±0.4)×103n s−1.
The uncertainty here does not include the monoenergetic neu tron and the sec-
ondary neutron contributions discussed above. However, th e estimated rate
quoted above should be seen as the upper limit of neutron prod uction as it
was estimated using the highest data point in the data. In Fig ure 13, the re-
sults of a Monte Carlo simulation of the SNO detector respons e to neutrons
and gamma rays generated by the pTsource are shown. This simulation was
performed using the SNO Monte Carlo and analysis program SNO MAN [18].
In this simulation, fast neutrons generated by the pTsource were assumed
to be monoenergetic at 4.7 MeV. Full pTsource and deployment capsule ge-
ometries were employed in this simulation, but neutron abso rbers inside the
source’s stainless steel deployment housing were not. This is equivalent to as-
suming the worst possible neutron leakage into the heavy wat er. A neutron
production rate of 2,500 s−1and a gamma-ray production rate of 0.6 s−1were
assumed. The spectra in the figure represent about 3 hours of r un time in the
SNO detector. From these figures, it is clear that the neutron production rate
of the pTsource is low enough for an accurate measurement of the 19.8- MeV
photopeak.
8 Conclusions
A functional 19.8-MeV gamma-ray source using the3H(p, γ)4He reaction was
built. This pTsource met all the physical and operational requirements fo r
calibrating the SNO detector. This is the first self-contain ed, compact and
portable high energy ( Eγ>10 MeV) gamma-ray source of this type.
Techniques to fabricate high-quality scandium deuteride a nd tritide targets
were developed. The tritiated target had a Sc:3H atomic ratio of 1:2.0 ±0.2.
In the testing of the pTsource, 19.8-MeV gamma rays from the pTreaction
were observed and found to be sufficient for calibrating the SN O detector. The
neutron production rate by the pTsource is also low enough that the neutron
background would not mask the gamma-ray signal during calib ration.
The operational lifetime of the pTsource was 98.8 hours. Operation was ter-
minated by a thin conducting layer deposited on the high volt age insulator in
the ion acceleration line, which caused a high voltage break down across the
insulator. The origin of this layer was scandium sputtering off the target sur-
face. A second pTsource has been constructed with minor engineering changes
to reduce this deposition effect.
15Calibration of large water ˇCerenkov detectors at energies near the solar neu-
trino endpoint has been a difficult problem. This proof-of-pr inciple experiment
of the pTsource opens a window for more convenient calibration stand ards
in the future. One area in which the pTsource can be improved is to imple-
ment a beam analyser to reduce the beam power on the target, an d to reduce
the neutron output of the pTsource. This feature was not instrumented in
this project because of stringent constraints on the physic al size of calibration
sources that can be deployed in the SNO detector.
Acknowledgements
We thank Mel Anaya, Tom Burritt, Mark Hooper, Clive Morton, H ank Simons,
and Doug Will for their technical support at various stage of this project. We
thank David Sinclair for his careful reading of the manuscip t and his valuable
comments. One of us (AWPP) would like to thank the University of British
Columbia for a University Graduate Fellowship. This work wa s supported by
the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Ca nada, and by
the US Department of Energy under Grant Number DE-FG06-90ER 40537.
References
[1] The SNO Collaboration, “The Sudbury Neutrino Observato ry”, to be submitted
to Nucl. Instr. Meth. (1999).
[2] The Super-Kamiokande Collaboration, Nucl. Instr. Meth . A421 (1999) 113.
[3] Donald C. McGilvery and Richard J.S. Morrison, Departme nt of Chemistry,
Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia (1988).
[4] A.W.P. Poon, Energy Calibration of the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory Usi ng
Monoenergetic Gamma-Ray Sources , Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of
British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada (1998).
[5] J.F. Ziegler, The Stopping and Range of Ions in Matter version 96.01 , IBM
Research, 1996; J.P. Biersack and J.F. Ziegler, TRIM , IBM Research, 1989
(unpublished).
[6] M. Frisch, IBM Research, private communication (1994).
[7] N.P. Kherani, Ontario Hydro Technologies test plan TL2. 400.036 (1989,
unpublished);
M. Hooper, N.P. Kherani, and A.W.P. Poon, Ontario Hydro Tech nologies test
plan TL2.400.036 amendment (1996, unpublished).
16[8] N.P. Kherani and W.T. Shmayda, Bulk Getters for Tritium Storage inProc.
Can. Nucl. Soc. 7thAnnual Conference , Toronto (1986) 232.
[9] N.P. Kherani, W.T. Shmayda and A.G. Heics, Z. Phys. Chem. 164(1989) 1421.
[10] R.J. Komar, Ph.D. thesis, Queen’s University at Kingst on, Canada (1992).
[11] S. Pai, W.F. Piel, D.B. Fossan, and M.R. Maier, Nucl. Ins tr. and Meth. A278
(1989) 749.
[12]GEANT , CERN program library long writeup W5013 (1994, unpublishe d).
[13] J.E. Perry, Jr., and S.J. Bame, Jr., Phys. Rev. 99(1955) 1368.
[14] W. Del Bianco and G. Kajrys, Can. J. Phys. 58(1980) 1496.
[15] C. Wong, J.D. Anderson and J.W. McClure, Nucl. Phys. 71(1965) 106.
[16] M.E. Anderson and R.A. Neff, Nucl. Instr. and Meth., 99(1972) 231.
[17] T. Lauritsen and F. Ajzenberg-Selove, Nucl. Phys. 78(1966) 1 .
[18] The SNOMAN authors, The SNOMAN User’s Manual, Version 3.01 (1998,
unpublished).
17Table 1
Isotopic composition of the tritium gas used in the target.
Isotope Composition
1H (0.79±0.04)%
2H (0.12±0.01)%
3H (99.09 ±0.05)%
18/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZrElectrode E1
Electrode E2
Electrode E3
Target Mount
Getter Shroud
Getter Current Feedthrough
Discharge Magnet Pyrex-Stainless Steel Coupling
2-3/4" CF
Pyrex-Stainless Steel
Glass Couping
Mini-CF UHV Valve
50cm0 5 cm
Fig. 1. Cross sectional drawing of the pTsource.
190.010.1110Estimated γ yield [s-1]
1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0
Fraction of mass-1 in beam (f1)pT
Fig. 2. Estimated gamma-ray yield from the pTsource. The yield is plotted against
the mass-1 fraction f1in a 50 µA, 27-keV beam. Hydrogen isotopes in the beam and
the target were assumed to be completely mixed. The yield sho wn here should be
treated as the upper limit because target degradation was no t taken into account
in the calculation. The dotted lines are the calculated unce rtainties based on the
uncertainties in the physical parameters of the constructe dpTsource and the cross
section ([4]).
20Substrate
Heater
ThermocouplesSubstrate
HolderViewing
WindowAProbe
Bayard-Alpert
Gauge
Quadrupole Mass
Spectrometer
Turbomolecular pump
0 to 1000 torr
Pressure
Transducer
Tritium
Trap
System Isolation Valve
Molecular Drag
Pump
Diaphragm Pump
Low Level Tritium Monitor
StackH
Ar25g Uranium BedFilm Thickness Monitor
0 to 1000 torr
Pressure TransducerHigh Pressure Ionisation GaugeEvaporator
High Voltage Standoff
SNO pT Source
Legend
Six Way Cross
Manual Gate Valve
Pneumatic Gate Valve
Manual Metal Bellows Valve
Pneumatic Metal Bellows Valve
Metering Valve
Bellows Manipulator AssemblyAINERT ENVIRONMENT GLOVEBOX
V3V4
V2
V1 V7V6
V10
V11
V8
V9 V12
V13V18
V14V15
V16
V17
Fig. 3. Schematic of the scandium tritide target evaporatio n vacuum system. Most
of the setup is enclosed in a dry nitrogen environment inside a glovebox (from [7]).
21High current
feedthroughShroud
Scandium
lump
Heater
BlockMolybdenum
substrate
Evaporation
support
platformTungsten
coil
Support
pins
Fig. 4. End-view of the evaporation basket and substrate con figuration. The scan-
dium lump was evaporated by heating up the tungsten basket. T he heater block
rested on the evaporation support platform through the supp ort pins. Support pins
were used to reduce heat transfer between the heater block an d the support plat-
form.
2210-410-310-210-1Chamber Pressure (corrected for H2) [mbar]
140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
Time [sec]Dose 1Dose 5 Dose 9 Dose 13
Fig. 5. Tritium pumping by the scandium film. The pumping curv e for Doses 1, 5,
9 and 13 are shown here.
23pT sourceAr bottle
0 to 1000 Torr
transducerRegulator Leak valve NuPro Valve
Bayard Alpert
gauge LN2 trapTurbomolecular
pump
Rotary backing
pump
Fig. 6. Schematic of the vacuum system that was used to pump do wn the pTsource.
The ion source was baked in this system prior to target mounti ng. This vacuum
system was purged with argon for approximately 5 to 10 minute s daily during this
bakeout period of approximately two weeks.
24/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr /BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZrplastic scintillator
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
aluminium
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZrlight pipe
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr lead
PMTBGO/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
PMT
LS
20cm 010/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
pT SourceNeutron Detector
Gamma-Ray Detector/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZrsteel19.05 cm
6.35 cm
target
Fig. 7. Top view of the BGO detector setup for the quality assu rance testing of the
pTsource. The separation between the liquid scintillator (LS ) and the target of the
pTsource is about 36 cm.
25BaF crystal
Plastic scintillator
Lead shielding2
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr/BnZr
Liquid scintillator45Neutron detectorpT sourcetarget
beam
45 deg
45 deg45 deg
D
90D135D
Fig. 8. Schematic of the BaF 2detector system. The three BaF 2detectors were
oriented at 45◦(D45), 90◦(D90), and 135◦(D135) to the beam direction, whilst the
neutron detector was oriented at 2◦to the beam direction. The separation between
the centre of the target and the front face of the BaF 2crystals was 35.6 cm for D 90,
and 25.4 cm for D 45and D 135. The neutron detector was located at 20.6 cm from
the centre of the target.
2650
40
30
20
10
0
-10Counts/200 keV bin
30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16
Energy (MeV)Quality Assurance Run
∆ t=14.4 hours, Ep=27 keV
Fig. 9. Background-subtracted BGO energy spectrum in the qu ality assurance run at
Queen’s University. The data points constitute the backgro und-subtracted energy
spectrum. The histogram shown is a fit using a response functi on for the BGO
spectrometer generated by GEANT. The measured yield of the pTsource during
this run is (0.67 ±0.11) s−1.
271400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0Counts
1200 800 400
TAC output (channel)241Am-Be Source
γ
n
Fig. 10. Timing distribution of liquid scintillator pulses generated by neutrons and
gamma rays in a9Be(α,n)12C∗source. Neutrons are cleanly separated from the
gamma-rays using the pulse shape discrimination scheme out lined in the text.
280.6
0.4
0.2
0.0Counts (arbitrary scale)
8 7 6 5 4
Energy (MeV)
Fig. 11. Comparing GEANT generated gamma-ray line shape to m easurement. The
data points correspond to the 6.13-MeV line from a calibrate d16O∗de-excitation
source. The solid histogram is the GEANT generated line shap e.
292000
1500
1000
500
0Scaled number of generated neutrons/mA/s
100 80 60 40 20 0
Accumulated beam time (hour)1.0
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0Scaled number of generated gamma rays/sNeutron & Gamma-Ray Generation
(Rate scaled to E p=29 keV equivalent)
Neutron data: Gamma-ray data:
Ep=22 keV
Ep=27 keV Ep=27 keV
Ep=29 keV Ep=29 keV
Fig. 12. Scaled neutron and gamma-ray production by the pTsource at Ep=29 keV.
The rates were normalised to the current drawn from the targe t power supply during
the runs. Also, the production rates for the Ep=22 keV and 27 keV runs have been
scaled to the Ep=29 keV level. The scaling was done by assuming a pure atomic
beam of protons or tritons since the contribution to the sign als from molecular
ions are much smaller. The “error bars” on the accumulated be am time for the
gamma-ray results represent the time intervals in which the mean production rates
were calculated.
30Fig. 13. Monte Carlo simulated SNO photomultiplier tube arr ay response to neu-
trons and gamma rays that are generated by the pTsource. The abscissa value,
Nhits, is the number of photomultiplier tube hits in the SNO detect or. The
Nhits-to-energy calibration in this Monte Carlo represents our b est estimate, but
not the calibrated response of the SNO detector. In the pure D 2O running sce-
nario (top panel), the peak centering at Nhits∼50 is the 6.25 MeV photopeak from
2H(n,γ)3H. In the salt running scenario, neutron capture on35Cl generates a gamma
cascade with a total energy of 8.6 MeV. This is the reason for t he broader neutron
capture peak in the bottom panel. In these figures, a neutron p roduction rate of
2,500 s−1and a gamma-ray production rate of 0.6 s−1were assumed. The sharp
“peak” in the bottom panel arises from scaling of the Monte Ca rlo spectrum to cor-
respond to the neutron production rate above. The spectra re present about 3 hours
of run time in the SNO detector.
31 |
arXiv:physics/9910012v1 [physics.atom-ph] 11 Oct 1999Coordinate-space Faddeev-Hahn-type approach to three-bo dy
charge transfer reactions involving exotic particles
Renat A. Sultanov and Sadhan K. Adhikari
Instituto de F´ ısica Te´ orica, Universidade Estadual Paul ista,
01405-900 S˜ ao Paulo, S˜ ao Paulo, Brazil
Abstract
Low-energy muon-transfer cross sections and rates in colli sions of muonic
atoms with hydrogen isotopes are calculated using a six-sta te close-coupling
approximation to coordinate-space Faddeev-Hahn-type equ ations. In the
muonic case satisfactory results are obtained for all hydro gen isotopes and
the experimentaly observed strong isotopic dependence of t ransfer rates is
also reproduced. A comparison with results of other theoret ical and available
experimental works is presented. The present model also lea ds to good trans-
fer cross sections in the well-understood problem of antihy drogen formation
in antiproton-positronium collision.
PACS number(s): 34.70.+e, 36.10.Dr
Typeset using REVT EX
1I. INTRODUCTION
Charge-transfer reactions involving few particles in atom ic physics are very challenging
and interesting from both theoretical and experimental poi nts of view and we study here the
problem of charge transfer in some atomic reactions involvi ng exotic particles. Specifically,
we study muon transfer in D −Hµ, T−Hµ, and T −Dµsystems where the suffix µdenotes
a muonic atom with the electron replaced by a muon ( µ−). We also study the problem of
antihydrohen ( ¯H) formation in antiproton-positronium collision with the positronium (Ps)
in an initial 1s state.
On the theoretical side, in these transfer reactions one nee ds to consider rearrangement
of a charged particle. Because of the Coulomb interaction on e needs a careful treatment
of the dynamics for a correct description. If one can identif y the basic dynamical ingredi-
ents necessary for a satisfactory description of these proc esses involving a small number of
particles, such a study will help us to formulate models in mo re complex situations. On
the experimental side, the present study involving muon and positron transfer is of current
interest in the muon-catalyzed fusion cycle [1–6] and in the formation and study of the
antihydrogen atom [7,8].
Although there are some experimental measurements and seve ral theoretical investiga-
tions on these processes, there still remain discrepancies among various studies. Here we use
a different theoretical approach based on a detailed few-bod y dynamical consideration for a
careful reinvestigation of these three-body charge-trans fer reactions. Traditionaly, such prob-
lems are investigated by a tractable approximation scheme i n the Schr¨ odinger framework,
without explicitly considering a few-body dynamical equat ion. In addition to variational
calculations, these schemes include close-coupling, hype rspherical, and adiabatic approxi-
mations. Here we would like to point out that the processes of muonic transfer reactions
and antihydrogen formation are three-body Coulombic rearr angement collisions. Conse-
quently, it seems reasonable that in addition to approximat ions based on the Schr¨ odinger
equation, a detailed few-body consideration is useful. In w hat follows we develop a method,
2which is based on detailed few-body equations rather than th e effective potential treatment
employed in alternative investigations.
For the three-charged particle system, say TD µ, only two asymptotic configurations are
possible, i.e. (D µ) T and (T µ) D. This suggests to write down a set of two coupled equations
for components Ψ 1and Ψ 2of the wave function Ψ = Ψ 1+ Ψ2[9,10] with each component
carrying the asymptotic boundary condition for a specific co nfiguration. One such equation
with two components for the three-particle system was first w ritten by Hahn [9] following
the most general decomposition of the three-body wave funct ion into three components
suggested by Faddeev [11] and is usually referred to as the Fa ddeev-Hahn equation [12]. We
solve the integro-differential form of this equation by a six -state close-coupling approximation
scheme which consists in expanding the wave function compon ents Ψ 1and Ψ 2in terms of
eigenfunctions of subsystem Hamiltonians in initial and fin al channels, respectively. The
resultant coupled equation is then projected on the expansi on functions. After a partial-
wave projection this leads to a set of one-dimensional coupl ed equations for the expansion
coefficients, which is solved numerically.
Recently, there have been considerable theoretical and exp erimental interests in the study
of the muon-transfer reactions between hydrogen isotopes i n the muon catalyzed fusion cycle
D + H µ→Dµ+ H,
T + H µ→Tµ+ H,
T + D µ→Tµ+ D.(1)
The measurements for the transfer rates
λtr=σtrvN0, (2)
withσtrbeing the transfer cross section, vthe relative velocity of the incident particles and
N0= 4.25×1022cm−3the liquid hydrogen density, are listed in Table I together w ith recent
theoretical calculations. One can see differences between d ifferent experimental data [13–19]
and theoretical results [20–25].
3One of the most attractive reactions for ¯H formation is the three-body positron-transfer
process
¯ p + Ps →¯H + e−. (3)
Although no experimental cross sections are available, thi s process is being used at CERN
for the production and study of antihydrogen. A number of cal culations have recently been
carried out to calculate the cross section of reaction (3) as a function of the incident Ps
energy. The calculations were performed by different method s, for instance, with hyper-
spherical coupled-channel expansions [26] and close coupl ing approximations (CCA) [27].
As an additional test of the present method, calculations fo r the S −wave antihydrogen
formation (3) at low energies are also performed.
In Sec. II we develop the formalism. The results obtained for reactions (1) and (3) are
given in Sec. III. Finally, we present some concluding remar ks in Sec. IV.
II. THEORETICAL FORMULATION
Let us take the system of units to be e= ¯h=mµ= 1 and denote, say T by 1, D by 2
and muon by 3. Below the three-body breakup threshold, following two-cl uster asymptotic
configurations are possible in the system ( 123): (23)−1and (13)−2. These configurations,
denoted simply by 1 and 2, respectively, are determined by th e Jacobi coordinates ( /vector rj3, /vector ρk)
/vector rj3=/vector r3−/vector rj, /vector ρ k= (/vector r3+mj/vector rj)/(1 +mj)−/vector rk, j/ne}ationslash=k= 1,2, (4)
/vector rj,mjare coordinates and masses of the particles j= 1,2,3,respectively.
Let us introduce the total three-body wave function as a sum o f two components
Ψ(/vector r1,/vector r2,/vector r3) = Ψ 1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1) + Ψ 2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2), (5)
where Ψ 1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1) is quadratically integrable over the variable /vector r23, and Ψ 2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2) over the
variable /vector r13. To define Ψ l(l= 1,2) a set of two coupled equations can be written down
4(E−H0−V23)Ψ1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1) = (V23+V12)Ψ2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2)
(E−H0−V13)Ψ2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2) = (V13+V12)Ψ1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1),(6)
where Eis the center-of-mass energy, H0is the total kinetic energy operator, and Vij(rij)
are pair-interaction potentials ( i/ne}ationslash=j= 1,2,3). Equations (6) satisfy the Schr¨ odinger
equation exactly and for energies below the three-body brea kup threshold they possess the
same advantages as the Faddeev equations, since they are for mulated for the wave function
components with correct physical asymptotes.
In the general case a component of the three-body wave functi on has the asymptotic form
which includes all open channels: elastic/inelastic, tran sfer and breakup. In this case each
component of the total wave function carries a specific asymt otic behavior. The component
Ψ1carries the asymptotic behavior in elastic and inelastic ch annels:
Ψ1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1)∼
ρ1→+∞eik(1)
1zϕ1(/vector r23) +/summationdisplay
nAel/in
n(Ωρ1)eik(1)
nρ1/ρ1ϕn(/vector r23). (7)
The component Ψ 2carries the asymptotic behavior in the transfer channels:
Ψ2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2)∼
ρ2→+∞/summationdisplay
mAtr
m(Ωρ2)eik(2)
mρ2/ρ2ϕm(/vector r13), (8)
where eik(1)
1zϕ1(/vector r23) is the incident wave, ϕn(/vector rj3) then-th excited bound-state wave function
of pair ( j3),k(i)
n=/radicalBig
2Mi(E−E(j)
n) with M−1
i=m−1
i+(1+ mj)−1. Here E(j)
nis the binding
energy of ( j3),i/ne}ationslash=j= 1,2,Ael/in(Ωρ1) and Atr(Ωρ2) are the scattering amplitudes in the
elastic/inelastic and transfer channels. This approach si mplifies the solution procedure and
simultaneously provide a correct asymptotic behaviour of t he solution below the 3-body
breakup threshold.
Let us write down Eqs. (6) in terms of the adopted notations
/bracketleftBigg
E+∇2
/vector ρk
2Mk+∇2
/vector rj3
2µj−Vj3/bracketrightBigg
Ψk(/vector rj3, /vector ρk) = ( Vj3+Vjk)Ψj(/vector rk3, /vector ρj), (9)
herej/ne}ationslash=k= 1,2 and M−1
k=m−1
k+ (1 + mj)−1, µ−1
j= 1 + m−1
j.
5For solving Eq. (9) we expand the wave function components in terms of bound states in
initial and final channels, and project this equation on thes e bound states. This prescription
is similar to that adopted in the close-coupling approximat ion. Specifically, we use the
following partial-wave expansion
Ψk(/vector rj3, /vector ρk) =/summationdisplay
LMλlΦ(k)
LMλl(ρk, rj3){Yλ(ˆρk)⊗Yl(ˆrj3)}LM, (10)
{Yλ(ˆρk)⊗Yl(ˆrj3)}LM=/summationdisplay
m′mCLM
λm′lmYλm′(ˆρk)Ylm(ˆrj3), (11)
where C’s are the Clebsch-Gordon coefficients, and Y’s are the usual spherical harmonics,
andL, λ, l andM, m′, mare the appropriate angular momenta variables and their pro jec-
tions. Next we make the following close-coupling-type appr oximation for the radial part in
terms of the bound-state wave functions in the initial and fin al channels:
Φ(k)
LMλl(ρk, rj3)≈1
ρk/summationdisplay
nf(k)LM
nlλ(ρk)R(k)
nl(rj3), (12)
where radial components of the bound-state wave functions R(k)
nl(rj3) satisfy
/braceleftBigg
E(k)
n+1
2µjr2
j3/bracketleftBigg∂
∂rj3(r2
j3∂
∂rj3)−l(l+ 1)/bracketrightBigg
−Vj3/bracerightBigg
R(k)
nl(rj3) = 0. (13)
Then we substitute Eqs. (10)-(12) into Eq. (9), multiply the resultant equation by
the appropriate biharmonic functions and the correspondin g radial functions R(k)
nl(rj3), and
integrate over the corresponding angular coordinates of th e vectors /vector rj3and/vector ρk. Then we
obtain a set of integral differential equations for the unkno wn functions f(k)
nlλ(ρk)
2Mk(E−E(j)
n)f(k)
α(ρk) +/braceleftBigg∂2
∂ρ2
k−λ(λ+ 1)
ρ2
k/bracerightBigg
f(k)
α(ρk) = 2 Mk/summationdisplay
α′/integraldisplay∞
0drj3r2
j3
/integraldisplay
dˆrj3/integraldisplay
dˆρkρk
ρjR(k)
nl(rj3){Yλ(ˆρk)⊗Yl(ˆrj3)}∗
LM(Vj3+Vjk){Yλ′(ˆρj)⊗Yl′(ˆrk3)}LM
R(j)
n′l′(rk3)f(j)
α′(ρj).(14)
For brevity we have defined α≡nlλandα′≡n′l′λ′, and omit the conserved total angular
momentum label LM. The functions f(k)
α(ρk) depend on the scalar argument, but Eq. (14)
is not yet one-dimensional. We are using the Jacobi coordina tes
6/vector ρj=/vector rj3−βk/vector rk3, /vector r j3=1
γ(βk/vector ρk+/vector ρj), /vector r jk=1
γ(σj/vector ρj−σk/vector ρk), (15)
with
βk=mk
1 +mk, σ k= 1−βk, γ= 1−βkβj, j/ne}ationslash=k= 1,2. (16)
This shows that modulus of /vector ρjdepend on two vectors: /vector ρj=γ/vector rj3−βk/vector ρk. The integration in
the right-hand side of Eq. (14) is done over these two vectors .
To obtain one-dimensional integral differential equations , corresponding to Eq. (14), we
proceed with the integration over variables {/vector ρj, /vector ρk}, rather than {/vector rj3, /vector ρk}. The Jacobian of
this transformation is γ−3. Thus, we come to a set of one-dimensional integral different ial
equations
2Mk(E−E(j)
n)f(k)
α(ρk) +/braceleftBigg∂2
∂ρ2
k−λ(λ+ 1)
ρ2
k/bracerightBigg
f(k)
α(ρk) =
Mk
γ3/summationdisplay
α′/integraldisplay∞
0dρjS(kj)
αα′(ρk, ρj)f(j)
α′(ρj), (17)
where functions S(kj)
αα′(ρk, ρj) are defined as follows
S(kj)
αα′(ρk, ρj) = 2ρkρj/integraldisplay
dˆρj/integraldisplay
dˆρkR(k)
nl(rj3){Yλ(ˆρk)⊗Yl(ˆrj3)}∗
LM(Vj3+Vjk)
×{Yλ′(ˆρj)⊗Yl′(ˆrk3)}LMR(j)
n′l′(rk3). (18)
The fourfold multiple integration in equations (18) leads t o a singlefold integral and the
expression (18) for any value orbital momentum Lbecomes
S(kj)
αα′(ρk, ρj) =4π
2L+ 1[(2λ+ 1)(2 λ′+ 1)]1
2ρkρj/integraldisplayπ
0dωsinωR(k)
nl(rj3)(Vj3(rj3) +Vjk(rjk))
R(j)
n′l′(rk3)/summationdisplay
mm′DL
mm′(0, ω,0)CLm
λ0lmCLm′
λ′0l′m′Ylm(νj, π)Y∗
l′m′(νk, π),(19)
where DL
mm′(0, ω,0) are Wigner functions, ωis angle between /vector ρjand/vector ρk,νjbetween /vector rk3and
/vector ρj,νkbetween /vector rj3and/vector ρk.
Finally, the set of integro-differential equations for the u nknown functions f(k)
nlλ(ρk) can
be written as
7/bracketleftBigg
(k(i)
n)2+∂2
∂ρ2
i−λ(λ+ 1)
ρ2
i/bracketrightBigg
f(i)
α(ρi) =gi/summationdisplay
α′/radicalBig
(2λ+ 1)(2 λ′+ 1)
2L+ 1
/integraldisplay∞
0dρi′f(i′)
α′(ρi′)/integraldisplayπ
0dωsinωR(i)
nl(|/vector ri′3|)/bracketleftBigg
−1
|/vector ri′3|+1
|/vector rii′|/bracketrightBigg
R(i′)
n′l′(|/vector ri3|)
ρiρi′/summationdisplay
mm′DL
mm′(0, ω,0)CLm
λ0lmCLm′
λ′0l′m′Y∗
lm(νi, π)Yl′m′(νi′, π). (20)
Herei/ne}ationslash=i′= 1,2,gi= 4πMi/γ3,k(i)
n=/radicalBig
2Mi(E−E(i′)
n),ωis angle between the Jacobi
coordinates /vector ρiand/vector ρi′,νiis the angle between /vector ri′3and/vector ρi,νi′is angle between /vector ri3and/vector ρi′
with
sinνi=ρi′
γri′3sinω and cos νi=1
γri′3(βiρi+ρi′cosω). (21)
To find unique solution to system (20), appropriate boundary conditions are to be con-
sidered. First we impose f(i)
nl(0) = 0. For the present scattering problem with 1 + (23)
as the initial state, in the asymptotic region two solutions to Eq.(20) satisfy the following
boundary conditions
f(1)
1s(ρ1)∼
ρ1→+∞sin(k(1)
1ρ1) +K11cos(k(1)
1ρ1),
f(2)
1s(ρ2)∼
ρ2→+∞/radicalBig
v1/v2K12cos(k(2)
1ρ2),(22)
where 1 refer to channel 1+ (23), 2 to channel 2+ (13) and Kdenotes the corresponding
on-shell K-matrix [28]. For scattering with 2+(13) as the initial state, we have the following
conditions
f(1)
1s(ρ1)∼
ρ1→+∞/radicalBig
v2/v1K21cos(k(1)
1ρ1),
f(2)
1s(ρ2)∼
ρ2→+∞sin(k(2)
1ρ2) +K22cos(k(2)
1ρ2).(23)
where vi,i= 1,2 are velocities in channel i. With the following change of variables in
Eqs.(20)
f(1)
1s(ρ1) =f(1)
1s(ρ1)−sin(k(1)
1ρ1) and f(2)
1s(ρ2) =f(2)
1s(ρ2)−sin(k(2)
1ρ2), (24)
we can obtain two sets of inhomogeneous equations which are s olved numerically. The cross
sections are given by
8σij=4π
k(i)2
1/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleK
1−iK/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
=4π
k(i)2
1δijD2+K2
ij
(D−1)2+ (K11+K22)2, (25)
where i=j= 1,2 refer to the two channels and
D= detK=K11K22−K12K21. (26)
When k(1)
1→0:K12=K21∼k(1)
1,K11∼k(1)
1, in this case σtr≡σ12∼1/k(1)
1,and
σel=σ11∼const. For comparison with experimental low-energy data it is very useful to
calculate the transfer rates (2) because λtr(k(1)
1→0)∼const.
III. NUMERICAL RESULTS
To solve the integro-differential equation, one has to calcu late the angle integrals in Eq.
(20) which are independent of the energy E. One needs to calculate them only once and
store on hard disk for the calculation of other observables, for instance, the cross sections
at different energies. Subintegrals in Eq. (20) have strong d ependence on ρiandρi′(i/ne}ationslash=
i′= 1,2). To calculate S(ii′)
αα′(ρi, ρi′) at different coordinates an adaptable algorithm has been
used. In this case using the relation
cosω=x2−β2
iρ2
i−ρ2
i′
2βiρiρi′(27)
the angle dependent part of Eq. (20) can be written as the foll owing integral
S(ii′)
αα′(ρi, ρi′) =4π
βi[(2λ+ 1)(2 λ′+ 1)]1
2
2L+ 1/integraldisplayβiρi+ρi′
|βiρi−ρi′|dxR(i)
nl(x)/bracketleftBigg
−1 +x
rii′(x)/bracketrightBigg
R(i′)
n′l′(ri3(x))/summationdisplay
mm′DL
mm′(0, ω(x),0)CLm
λ0lmCLm′
λ′0l′m′Y∗
lm(νi(x), π)Yl′m′(νi′(x), π). (28)
Note that the expression (28) differs from zero only in a narro w strip when ρi≈ρi′.
We employ muonic atomic unit: distances are measured in unit s ofaµ, where aµis
the radius of muonic hydrogen atom. The integro-differentia l equations were solved by
usual numerical procedure by discretizing them into a linea r system of equations, which are
subsequently solved by Gauss elimination method. In solvin g these equations distances upto
950aµwere considered and 400 −600 points were used in the discretization. The following
mass values are used in the unit of electron mass: mH= 1836.152, mD= 3670.481, mT=
5496.918 and the muon mass is mµ= 206.769.
Tables II, III, and IV include our results for the muonic tran sfer cross sections and rates
for all hydrogen isotopes (1) using different approximation schemes. We present results for
two-, four-, and six-state approximation where we include 1 s, 1s+2s and 1s+2s+2p states
of the muonic atoms in the initial and final channels, respect ively. In solving the equations
we employed only the lowest partial wave, e.g., L= 0. As we shall mainly be concerned
with the experimental muon transfer rates at very low energi es, the higher partial waves are
expected to have negligible contribution. The 2p states are found to contribute significantly
in T-D µ, moderately in D-H µ, and little in T-H µsystems. This is in agreement with similar
conclusion of Ref. [24] in the T-D µsystem. This could be understood qualitatively from the
following consideration. At zero incident energy the relat ive velocity in the final state after
muon transfer is the highest in the case of T-H µ, lowest in the case of T-D µand intermediate
in the case of D-H µ. It is expected that the polarization potential arising out of a 1s+2s+2p
calculation will have the largest effect on convergence when the final-state velocity is the
lowest. Hence the necessity of the higher-order states is mo re pronounced in the case of
T-D µand less pronounced in the case of T-H µ. We also find that as energy decreases the
transfer cross sections increase and the transfer rates att ain a constant value. These transfer
rates are essentially constant below 0.1 eV and are also meas ured experimentally, so that
we can compare our rates with other experimental and theoret ical results.
For the D-H µsystem the present low-energy muon transfer rate of 133 ×108s−1is in
agreement with both experiments [13,14]. The present rate i s slightly smaller than the
theoretical studies of Refs. [20], [21] and this makes the ag reement with experiment better.
For the T-H µsystem again the present result 61 ×108s−1is in better agreement with the
experiment [16] than the other theoretical studies. In case of T-D µ, the present result
2.3×108s−1is also in very good agreement with experiment.
Within the six-state approximation our cross sections for l ow energy elastic scattering
10in case T-D µsystem are presented in Table V together with other theoreti cal results. The
present cross sections attain a constant value at low energi es and is in fairly good agreement
with results of other studies.
As a futher test of the present few-body approach, we have als o calculated S-wave cross
sections of antihydrogen formation in antiproton-positro nium low energy collisions (3). In
Table VI our results within the six state approximation (Ps[ 1s+2s+2p], ¯H[1s+2s+2p]) are
compared with calculations based on hyperspherical couple d-channel method [26]. Consid-
ering that the present calculation is limited to only the low est partial wave ( L= 0) and
to a truncated basis set (1s+2s+2p), the agreement is reason able for energies below 1 eV.
However, at 2 eV the agreement is not so good. The reason for th is is not clear at present.
Further theoretical investigation including higher parti al waves with an extended basis set
could reveal the trend of the converged cross sections.
IV. CONCLUSION
The study of three-body Coulombic systems have been the subj ect of this work. We have
formulated a method for a few-body description of the rearra ngement scattering problem by
solving the Faddeev-Hahn-type equations in coordinate spa ce. It is shown that within this
formalism, the application of a close-coupling-type ansat z leads to satisfactory results al-
ready in low-order approximations for (i) muon-transfer re actions between hydrogen isotopes
and (ii) antihydrogen formation in antiproton-positroniu m collision. Because of computa-
tion difficulties, in this preliminary application we have co nsidered up to six states in the
expansion scheme (1s+2s+2p on each center), which may not al ways be adequate. Further
calculations with larger basis sets are needed to obtain the converged results.
The present model leads to a reduction of the usual technical effort and is definitely
worth using for investigations of larger systems. It seems r easonable to suppose that the
method should be an effective tool for the description of othe r muonic and atomic few-
body collisions. For instance, one could study using the pre sent approach the following
11muon-transfer reactions to elements with Z≥2
(Hµ)1s+ XZ→XZ
µ+ H, (29)
where the cross section depends in a complicated manner on th e charge Z[5].
Theoretically, the reaction (29) is of much interest as an ex ample of low-energy rear-
rangement scattering in a system of three charged particles with Coulomb repulsion in the
final state. Evidently it makes additional difficulties for co rrect theoretical description of
Eq. (29) [12]. The Faddeev-Hahn-type approach seems to be su itable for the study of such
reactions and would be a topic of future investigation. We ar e presently in the process of
studying reaction (29) with the present method for Z= 2 and 3. We also plan to employ
an extended basis set with more basis functions in the future . Also, the excited state muon-
transfer reactions of recent experimantal and theoretical interest [29,30] could be studied
with the present model.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We acknowledge the support from FAPESP (Funda¸ c˜ ao de Ampar o ˜ a Pesquisa do Estado
de S˜ ao Paulo) of Brazil. The numerical calculations have be en performed on the IBM SP2
Supercomputer of the Departamento de F´ ısica - IBILCE - UNES P, S˜ ao Jos´ e do Rio Preto,
Brazil.
12REFERENCES
[1] S. Tresch, F. Mulhauser, C. Piller, L. A. Schaller, L. Sch ellenberg, H. Schneuwly, Y. A.
Thalmann, A. Werthmuller, P. Ackerbauer, W. H. Breunlich, M . Cargnelli, B. Gartner,
R. King, B. Lauss, J. Marton, W. Prymas, J. Zmeskal, C. Petitj ean, M. Augsburger, D.
Chatellard, J. P. Egger, E. Jeannet, T. von Egidy, F. J. Hartm ann, M. Muhlbauer, and
W. Schott, Phys. Rev. A 58, 3528 (1998).
[2] S. Tresch, R. Jacot-Guillarmod, F. Mulhauser, C. Piller , L. A. Schaller, L. Schellenberg,
H. Schneuwly, Y. A. Thalmann, A. Werthmuller, P. Ackerbauer , W. H. Breunlich,
M. Cargnelli, B. Gartner, R. King, B. Lauss, J. Marton, W. Pry mas, J. Zmeskal, C.
Petitjean, D. Chatellard, J. P. Egger, E. Jeannet, F. J. Hart mann, and M. Muhlbauer,
Phys. Rev. A 57, 2496 (1998).
[3] Y.-A. Thalmann, R. Jacot-Guillarmod, F. Mulhauser, L. A . Schaller, L. Schellenberg,
H. Schneuwly, S. Tresch, and A. Wertm¨ uller, Phys. Rev. A 57, 1713 (1998).
[4] S. Tresch, R. Jacot-Guillarmod, F. Mulhauser, L. A. Scha ller, L. Schellenberg, H.
Schneuwly, Y.-A. Thalmann, and A. Werthm¨ uller, Euro. Phys . J. D2, 93 (1998).
[5] F. Mulhauser and H. Schneuwly, J. Phys. B 26, 4307 (1993); L. Schellenberg, Hyperf.
Interact. 82, 513 (1993).
[6] W. H. Breunlich, P. Kammel, J.S. Cohen, and M. Leon, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.
39, 311 (1989).
[7] M. H. Holzscheiter, G. Bendiscioli, A. Bertin, G. Bollen , M. Bruschi, C. Cesar, M.
Charlton, M. Corradini, D. DePedis, M. Doser, J. Eades, R. Fe dele, X. Feng, F. Gal-
luccio, T. Goldman, J. S. Hangst, R. Hayano, D. Horv´ ath, R. J . Hughes, N. S. P. King,
K. Kirsebom, H. Knudsen, V. Lagomarsino, R. Landua, G. Laric chia, R. A. Lewis, E.
LodiRizzini, M. Macri, G. Manuzio, U. Marconi, M. R. Masullo , J. P. Merrison, S. P.
Moller, G. L. Morgan, M. M. Nieto, M. Piccinini, R. Poggiani, A. Rotondi, G. Rouleau,
13P. Salvini, N. Semprini, N. Cesari, G. A. Smith, C. M. Surko, G . Testera, G. Torelli,
E. Uggerhoj, V. G. Vaccaro, L. Venturelli, A. Vitale, E. Widm ann, T. Yamazaki, Y.
Yamazaki, D. Zanello, and A. Zoccoli, Hyperfine Interact. 109, 1 (1997).
[8] J. Eades and F. J. Hartmann, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 373 (1999); M. Charlton, J. Eades,
D. Horv´ ath, R. J. Hughes, and C. Zimmerman, Phys. Rep. 241, 65 (1994).
[9] Y. Hahn, Phys. Rev. 169, 794 (1968).
[10] Y. Hahn and K. M. Watson, Phys. Rev. A 5, 1718 (1972).
[11] L. D. Faddeev, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 39, 1459 (1960) [Sov. Phys. −JETP12, 1014 (1961)].
[12] R. A. Sultanov, W. Sandhas, and V. B. Belyaev, Euro. Phys . J. D5, 33 (1999).
[13] V. P. Dzhelepov, P.F. Ermolov, E. A. Kushnirenko, V. I. M oskalev, and S. S. Gershtein,
Zh. Eksp. Theor. Fiz. 42, 439 (1962) [Sov. Phys. −JETP 15, 306 (1962)].
[14] E. J. Bleser, E. W. Anderson, L. M. Lederman, S. L. Meyer, J. L. Rosen, J. E. Rothberg,
and I-T. Wang, Phys. Rev. 132, 2679 (1963).
[15] A. Bertin, M. Bruno, V. Vitale, A. Placci, and E. Zavatti ni, Nuovo Cimento Lett. 4,
449 (1972).
[16] F. Mulhauser, J. L. Beveridge, G. M. Marshall, J. M. Bail ey, G. A. Beer, P. E. Knowles,
G. R. Mason, A. Olin, M. C. Fujiwara, T. M. Huber, R. Jacot-Gui llarmod, P. Kammel,
J. Zmeskal, S. K. Kim, A. R. Kunselman, V. E. Markushin, C. J. M artoff, and C.
Petitjean, Phys. Rev. A 53, 3069 (1996).
[17] V. M. Bystritsky, V. P. Dzhelepov, Z. V. Yershova, V. G. Z inov, V. K. Kapyshev, S. S.
Mukhametgaleyeva, V. S. Nadezhdin, L. A. Rivkis, A. I. Ruden ko, V. I. Satarov, N. V.
Sergeyeva, L. N. Somov, V. A. Stolupin, and V. V. Filchenkov, Zh. Eksp.Teor. Fiz. 80,
1700 (1980) [Sov. Phys. −JETP 53, 877 (1981)].
[18] S. E. Jones, A. N. Anderson, A. J. Caffrey, J. B. Walter, K. D. Watts, J. N. Bradbury,
14M. Leon, H. R. Maltrud, and M. A. Paciotti, Phys. Rev. Lett. 51, 1757 (1983).
[19] W. H. Breunlich, M. Cargnelli, P. Kammel, J, Marton, N. N aegele, P. Pawlek, A. Scrinzi,
J. Werner, J. Zmeskal, J. Bistirlich, K. M. Crowe, M. Justice , J. Kurck, C. Petitjean,
R. H. Sherman, H. Bossy, H. Daniel, F. J. Hartmann, W. Neumann , and G. Schmidt,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 329 (1987).
[20] J. S. Cohen and M. C. Struensee, Phys. Rev. A 43, 3460 (1991).
[21] A. Adamczak, C. Chiccoli, V. I. Korobov, V. S. Melezhik, P. Pasini, L. I. Ponomarev,
and J. Wozniak, Phys. Lett. B 285, 319 (1992).
[22] H. Fukuda, T. Ishihara, and S. Hara, Phys. Rev. A 41, 145 (1990).
[23] Y. Kino and M. Kamimura, Hyperfine Interact. 82, 45 (1993).
[24] A. Igarashi, N. Toshima, and T. Shirai, Phys. Rev. A 50, 4951 (1994).
[25] A. Boukour, R. N. Hewitt, and Ch. Leclercq-Willain, J. P hys. B 29, 4309 (1996).
[26] A. Igarashi, N. Toshima, and T. Shirai, J. Phys. B 27, L497 (1994).
[27] J. Mitroy and G. Ryzhikh, J. Phys. B 30, L371 (1997).
[28] N. F. Mott and H. S. W. Massey, The theory of atomic collisions (Clarendon, London,
1965).
[29] B. Lauss, P. Ackerbauer, W. H. Breunlich, B. Gartner, M. Jeitler, P. Kammel, J. Marton,
W. Prymas, J. Zmeskal, D. Chatellard, J. P. Egger, E. Jeannet , H. Daniel, A. Kosak,
F. J. Hartmann, and C. Petitjean, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 4693 (1996).
[30] A. V. Kravtsov and A. I. Mikhailov, Phys. Rev. A 58, 4426 (1998).
15TABLES
TABLE I. Experimental and theoretical results for the muoni c transfer rates λtr/108s−1given
for low energies ( E <0.1 eV); * −present results;♯−rates reproduced from cross sections.
Reaction Experiment Theory
D + H µ→Dµ+ H 95 ±34 [13] 140 [20] 159 [21]
143±13 [14] 133 [*]
84±13 [15]
T + H µ→Tµ+ H 58.6 ±10 [16] 55 [20] 71.7 [21]
61 [*]
T + D µ→Tµ+ D 2.9 ±0.4 [17] 3.5 [20] 2.26 [21]
2.8±0.3 [18] 1.5♯[22] 2.8 [23]
2.8±0.5 [19] 2.39♯[24] 0.93♯[25]
3.5±0.5 [19] 2.3 [*]
TABLE II. Cross sections σ(D-H µ) =σtr/10−20cm2and rates λ(D-H µ) =λtr/1010s−1for
µ-transfer reaction D + H µ→Dµ+ H, at different energies.
E(eV) σ(D-H µ)λ(D-H µ) σ(D-H µ)λ(D-H µ) σ(D-H µ)λ(D-H µ)
1s 1s+2s 1s+2s+2p
0.001 292.6 0.64 412.8 0.91 604.8 1.33
0.01 92.3 0.64 130.0 0.90 190.0 1.32
0.04 46.0 0.64 64.7 0.90 94.3 1.31
0.1 29.0 0.64 40.8 0.90 59.4 1.31
1.0 9.0 0.63 12.8 0.90 19.4 1.30
16TABLE III. Cross sections σ(T-H µ) =σtr/10−20cm2and rates λ(T-H µ) =λtr/1010s−1for
µ-transfer reaction T + H µ→Tµ+ H, at different energies.
E(eV) σ(T-H µ)λ(T-H µ) σ(T-H µ)λ(T-H µ) σ(T-H µ)λ(T-H µ)
1s 1s+2s 1s+2s+2p
0.001 204.2 0.42 249.4 0.52 294.4 0.61
0.01 64.3 0.42 78.5 0.51 92.6 0.60
0.04 31.9 0.42 38.9 0.51 45.8 0.60
0.1 19.9 0.41 24.3 0.50 28.6 0.60
1.0 5.50 0.36 6.70 0.44 8.0 0.52
TABLE IV. Cross sections σ(T-D µ) =σtr/10−20cm2and rates λ(T-D µ) =λtr/108s−1for
µ-transfer reaction T + D µ→Tµ+ D, at different energies.
E(eV) σ(T-D µ)λ(T-D µ) σ(T-D µ)λ(T-D µ) σ(T-D µ)λ(T-D µ)
1s 1s+2s 1s+2s+2p
0.001 4.58 0.77 5.05 0.84 13.7 2.3
0.01 1.44 0.76 1.60 0.84 4.3 2.3
0.04 0.71 0.75 0.78 0.83 2.14 2.26
0.1 0.44 0.73 0.48 0.81 1.32 2.21
1.0 0.1 0.44 0.1 0.5 0.3 1.5
17TABLE V. Elastic cross sections for T-D µcollision in units of 10−20cm2at different energies.
E(eV) Present results [22] [24] [25]
1s+2s+2p
0.001 1.2 1.7 1.63 2.014
0.01 1.3 2.3 2.15 3.605
TABLE VI. Cross sections in unit πa2
0for positron transfer reaction ¯ p + Ps →¯H + e−;†−
the cross sections estimated from Figure 1 of Ref. [26].
E(eV) Present results [26] E(eV) Present results [26]
1s+2s+2p 1s+2s+2p
0.1 1.5 2.3†1.0 3.2 3.5†
0.5 2.0 2.6†2.0 1.7 3.7†
18 |
arXiv:physics/9910013v1 [physics.atom-ph] 11 Oct 1999Low-energy three-body charge transfer reactions with Coul omb
interaction in the final state∗
Renat A. Sultanov and Sadhan K. Adhikari
Instituto de F´ ısica Te´ orica, Universidade Estadual Paul ista,
01405-900 S˜ ao Paulo, S˜ ao Paulo, Brazil
Abstract
Three-body charge transfer reactions with Coulomb interac tion in the final
state are considered in the framework of coordinate-space i ntegro-differential
Faddeev-Hahn-type equations within two- and six-state clo se coupling approx-
imations. The method is employed to study direct muon transf er in low-energy
collisions of the muonic hydrogen H µby helium (He++) and lithium (Li+++)
nuclei. The experimentally observed isotopic dependence i s reproduced.
PACS number(s): 36.10.Dr
Typeset using REVT EX
∗To appear in Journal of Physics B
1I. INTRODUCTION
Experimental investigations of the low-energy muon-trans fer reactions in collisions of
muonic hydrogen H µ(bound state of a hydrogen isotope and muon µ−) with nuclei of
charge Z1>1 are of importance for muon catalyzed fusion cycle [1]. The s tudy of such
collisions involving three charged particles is also very i nteresting from a theoretical point of
view as an example of rearrangement scattering with Coulomb interaction in the final state.
Such reactions with post-collision Coulomb interaction be tween clusters appear frequently in
atomic and molecular physics [2]. In the following we develo p a general formalism for dealing
with such reactions and as an example apply it to study some mu on-transfer processes.
Recently, there has been considerable experimental intere st in the study of the muon-
transfer reaction in collision of the muonic atoms with He++[3,4] and also with charges
Z1>3 [5–9], e.g. oxygen (O8), neon (Ne10), argon (Ar18) etc. It was found that contrary
to the smooth Z-dependence expected from the semiclassical Landau-Zener formula [10] the
experimental muon transfer rates for reactions like
(Hµ)1s+ XZ→XZ
µ+ H (1)
depend in a complicated manner on the charge Z[9]. Here H stands for the hydrogen isotopes
1H or2H and XZstands for the target nuclei. Another phenomenon which has n ot yet found
a satisfactory theoretical explanation is the measured iso tope effect, e.g. the trend of the
direct transition rates of reactions (1) for XZ= O8[8], Ne10[9], Ar18[6], and Xe54[11]. In
cases of O8, Ar18and Xe54the direct transfer rate decreases with increasing the mass of the H
isotope. Theoretical analyses [12] also support this trend . The experimental results for Ne10
[9] and sulphur dioxide [8] differ considerably from the theo retical predictions. Moreover,
several experiments performed in recent years have put into evidence the complex structure
of the time distributions of the X-rays following transfer f rom muonic hydrogen isotopes to
heavier elements [13].
The proper theoretical analysis of charge transfer reactio n (1) becomes extremely compli-
cated numerically as the charge Zincreases because of the presence of the strong Coulomb
2interaction in the final state. Traditionally, in theoretic al studies, such Coulombic systems
with two heavy (nuclei) and one light (muon) particles are co nsidered within the framework
of the two-state molecular Born-Oppenheimer approximatio n [14,15]. In another study, a
semiclassical model based on Faddeev-type scattering equa tions has been used [16]. It would
be of interest to perform a full quantum mechanical consider ation in view of the fact that the
muon is not so light compared to the nucleon and compare with t he approximate calculations
mentioned above.
Here we develop a quantum mechanical approach based on Fadde ev-Hahn-type equations
for a careful reinvestigation of these three-body direct ch arge-transfer reactions with strong
Coulomb repulsion in the final state. As a first step towards a m odel solution of this
complicated problem, we apply this detailed few-body metho d to the study of direct muon-
transfer reaction (1) for XZ=3He++,4He++,6Li+++and7Li+++. This study with lighter
nuclei is expected to lead to faster numerical convergence t han the heavier targets. However,
our approach is equally applicable for heavier targets with higher charges, although the
convergence could be slow in these cases. These studies with heavier targets would be
interesting future works.
For the three-charged-particle system, say (7Li2Hµ), only two asymptotic two-cluster
configurations are possible, i.e. (2Hµ)−7Li and (7Liµ)−2H. For the theoretical treatment
of such a three-body rearrangement process, Faddeev-type e quations [17], especially the
modified version proposed by Hahn [18], appear to be very suit able. The two possible
asymptotic configurations of the above rearrangement probl em are conveniently tackled by
a set of two coupled Faddeev-Hahn-type equations for compon ents Ψ 1and Ψ 2of the wave
function Ψ = Ψ 1+ Ψ 2, where each component carrys the asymptotic boundary condi tion
for a specific configuration [19,20]. These equations are ver y useful to incorporate distortion
potentials for specific initial and final asymptotic states [ 21]. It is possible to include the final-
state Coulomb interaction explicitly in these equations, s o that a low-order approximation
to these equations produces the correct asymptotic behavio r [21].
We solve the integro-differential form of the Faddeev-Hahn e quation by the close-coupling
approximation scheme involving up to six states. This proce dure consists in expanding the
3wave function components Ψ 1and Ψ 2in terms of eigenfunctions of subsystem Hamiltoni-
ans in initial and final channels, respectively. Although, t hese subsystem eigenfunctions are
not orthogonal to each other, the components Ψ 1and Ψ 2satisfy a coupled set of equa-
tions incorporating the correct asymptotic behavior of the wave function. Consequently,
there is no problem of overcompleteness as encountered in si milar expansion approaches for
rearrangement reactions based on the Schr¨ odinger equatio n. The resultant coupled Faddeev-
Hahn-type equations are then projected on the expansion fun ctions. After a partial-wave
projection this leads to a set of one-dimensional coupled in tegro-differential equations for
the expansion coefficients, which is solved numerically.
In Sec. II we develop the formalism. We have calculated trans fer rates for reaction
(1) for H =1H or2H and XZ=3He++,4He++,6Li+++or7Li+++using a two-state close-
coupling approximation, and for H =2H and XZ=3He++,6Li+++or7Li+++using six-state
close-coupling approximations. Our results obtained for m uon-transfer rates from hydrogen
to helium and lithium are given in Sec. III and compared with t hose of other investigations.
We also present a summary and outlook in the concluding part o f this section.
II. THEORETICAL FORMULATION
Let us take the system of units to be e= ¯h=mµ= 1, where mµ(e) is the muonic mass
(charge), and denote, the heavy nuclei (3He,4He,6Li, etc.) by 1, the hydrogen isotopes
(1H,2H or3H) by 2and muon by 3. Below the three-body breakup threshold, following
two-cluster asymptotic configurations are possible in the s ystem 123: (23)−1and (13)−2.
These two configurations correspond to two distinct physica l channels, also denoted by 1
and 2. These configurations are determined by the Jacobi coor dinates ( /vector rj3, /vector ρk)
/vector rj3=/vector r3−/vector rj, /vector ρ k= (/vector r3+mj/vector rj)/(1 +mj)−/vector rk, j/ne}ationslash=k= 1,2, (2)
/vector ri,miare coordinates and masses of the particles i= 1,2,3,respectively.
Let us introduce the total three-body wave function as a sum o f two components
Ψ(/vector r1,/vector r2,/vector r3) = Ψ 1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1) + Ψ 2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2), (3)
4where Ψ 1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1) is quadratically integrable over the variable /vector r23, and Ψ 2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2) over the
variable /vector r13. The components Ψ 1and Ψ 2carry the asymptotic boundary condition for
channels 1 and 2, respectively. The second component is resp onsible for pure Coulomb
interaction in the final state. These components satisfy the following set of two coupled
equations
(E−H0−V23)Ψ1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1) = (V23+V12−UC)Ψ2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2)
(E−H0−V13−UC)Ψ2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2) = (V13+V12)Ψ1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1),(4)
where Eis the center-of-mass energy, H0is the total kinetic energy operator, and Vij(rij) are
pair-interaction potentials ( i/ne}ationslash=j= 1,2,3), and UCis a distortion interaction, e.g. Coulomb
repulsion in the final state between clusters (3He, µ) and2H in the case of3He2Hµsystem
UC=(Z1−1)Z2
ρ2. (5)
HereZ1is the charge of3He and Z2(= 1) is the charge of the hydrogen isotope. By adding
the two equations (4) we find that they are equivalent to the Sc hr¨ odinger equation. For
energies below the three-body breakup threshold they posse ss the same advantages as the
Faddeev equations, since they are formulated for the wave fu nction components with correct
physical asymptotic behavior.
The component Ψ 1carries the asymptotic behavior in elastic and inelastic ch annels:
Ψ1(/vector r23, /vector ρ1)∼
ρ1→+∞eik(1)
1zϕ1(/vector r23) +/summationdisplay
nAel/in
n(Ωρ1)eik(1)
nρ1ϕn(/vector r23)/ρ1. (6)
The component Ψ 2carries the Coulomb asymptotic behavior in the transfer cha nnels:
Ψ2(/vector r13, /vector ρ2)∼
ρ2→+∞/summationdisplay
mlAtr
ml(Ωρ2)ei(k(2)
mρ2−πl/2+τl−η/2k(2)
mln 2k(2)
mρ2)ϕm(/vector r13)/ρ2, (7)
where eik(1)
1zϕ1(/vector r23) is the incident wave, ϕn(/vector rj3) then-th excited bound-state wave function
of pair ( j3),k(i)
n=/radicalBig
2Mi(E−E(j)
n), with M−1
i=m−1
i+(1+ mj)−1. Here E(j)
nis the binding
energy of ( j3),i/ne}ationslash=j= 1,2,Ael/in(Ωρ1) and Atr(Ωρ2) are the scattering amplitudes in the
elastic/inelastic and transfer channels. The Coulomb para meters in the second transfer
channel are [22]
5τl= argΓ( l+ 1 + iη/2k(2)
m) and η= 2M2(Z1−1)/k(2)
n. (8)
This approach simplifies the solution procedure and provide s the correct asymptotic behavior
of the solution below the 3-body breakup threshold.
Let us write down (4) in terms of the adopted notations
/bracketleftBigg
E+∇2
/vector ρk
2Mk+∇2
/vector rj3
2µj−Vj3−UCδk2/bracketrightBigg
Ψk(/vector rj3, /vector ρk) = ( Vj3+Vjk−UCδj2)Ψj(/vector rk3, /vector ρj),(9)
herej/ne}ationslash=k= 1,2,M−1
k=m−1
k+ (1 + mj)−1andµ−1
j= 1 + m−1
j.We are using the Jacobi
coordinates
/vector ρj=/vector rj3−βk/vector rk3, /vector r j3=1
γ(βk/vector ρk+/vector ρj) and /vector rjk=1
γ(σj/vector ρj−σk/vector ρk), (10)
with
βk=mk
1 +mk, σ k= 1−βkand γ= 1−βkβj. (11)
For solving (9) we expand the wave function components in ter ms of bound states in initial
and final channels, and project this equation on these bound s tates. The expansion of the
wave function is given by
Ψk(/vector rj3, /vector ρk)≈/summationdisplay
LMλl/summationdisplay
n1
ρkf(k)LM
nlλ(ρk)R(k)
nl(rj3){Yλ(ˆρk)⊗Yl(ˆrj3)}LM, (12)
where ( nlλ)≡αare quantum numbers of a three-body state and Lis the total angular
momentum of the three-body system obtained by coupling landλ,Ylm’s are the spher-
ical harmonics, R(k)
nl(rj3) the radial part of the hydrogen-like bound-state wave func tion,
f(k)LM
nlλ(ρk) are the unknown expansion coefficients. This prescription i s similar to that
adopted in the close-coupling approximation. After a prope r angular momentum projec-
tion, the set of integro-differential equations for the unkn own expansion functions f(k)
α(ρk)
can be written as
/bracketleftBigg
(k(1)
n)2+∂2
∂ρ2
1−λ(λ+ 1)
ρ2
1/bracketrightBigg
f(1)
α(ρ1) =g1/summationdisplay
α′/radicalBig
(2λ+ 1)(2 λ′+ 1)
2L+ 1
/integraldisplay∞
0dρ2f(2)
α′(ρ2)/integraldisplayπ
0dωsinωR(1)
nl(|/vector r23|)/bracketleftBigg
−1
|/vector r23|+Z1
|/vector r12|−UC/bracketrightBigg
R(2)
n′l′(|/vector r13|)
ρ1ρ2/summationdisplay
mm′DL
mm′(0, ω,0)CLm
λ0lmCLm′
λ′0l′m′Y∗
lm(ν1, π)Yl′m′(ν2, π), (13)
6/bracketleftBigg
(k(2)
n)2+∂2
∂ρ2
2−λ(λ+ 1)
ρ2
2−UC/bracketrightBigg
f(2)
α(ρ2) =g2/summationdisplay
α′/radicalBig
(2λ+ 1)(2 λ′+ 1)
2L+ 1
/integraldisplay∞
0dρ1f(1)
α′(ρ1)/integraldisplayπ
0dωsinωR(2)
nl(|/vector r13|)/bracketleftBigg
−Z1
|/vector r13|+Z1
|/vector r12|/bracketrightBigg
R(1)
n′l′(|/vector r23|)
ρ2ρ1/summationdisplay
mm′DL
mm′(0, ω,0)CLm
λ0lmCLm′
λ′0l′m′Y∗
lm(ν2, π)Yl′m′(ν1, π). (14)
Heregk= 4πMk/γ3,γ= 1−mkmj/((1 + mk)(1 + mj)),α′≡(n′l′λ′),DL
mm′(0, ω,0) the
Wigner function, CLm
λ0lmthe Clebsh-Gordon coefficient, ωis the angle between the Jacobi
coordinates /vector ρiand/vector ρi′,νiis the angle between /vector ri′3and/vector ρi,νi′is the angle between /vector ri3and
/vector ρi′. The following relations are useful for numerical treatmen t
sinνi=ρi′
γri′3sinωand cos νi=1
γri′3(βiρi+ρi′cosω) (i/ne}ationslash=i′= 1,2). (15)
To find unique solution to (13) −(14), appropriate boundary conditions are to be con-
sidered. First we impose f(i)
nl(0)=0. For the present scattering problem with 1 + (23) as
the initial state, in the asymptotic region, two solutions t o (13)−(14) satisfy the following
boundary conditions
f(1)
1s(ρ1)∼
ρ1→+∞sin(k(1)
1ρ1) +K11cos(k(1)
1ρ1),
f(2)
1s(ρ2)∼
ρ2→+∞/radicalBig
v1/v2K12cos(k(2)
1ρ2−η/2k(2)
1ln2k(2)
1ρ2),(16)
where Kijare the appropriate coefficients. For scattering with 2+ (13) as the initial state,
we have the following conditions
f(1)
1s(ρ1)∼
ρ1→+∞/radicalBig
v2/v1K21cos(k(1)
1ρ1),
f(2)
1s(ρ2)∼ρ2→+∞sin(k(2)
1ρ2−η/2k(2)
1ln 2k(2)
1ρ2) +K22cos(k(2)
1ρ2−
η/2k(2)
1ln 2k(2)
1ρ2),
where vi(i= 1,2) are velocities in channel i. In the absence of Coulomb interaction UCin
the final channel, Kijare the components of the on-shell K-matrix [22]. With the following
change of variables in (13) −(14)
f(1)
1s(ρ1) =f(1)
1s(ρ1)−sin(k(1)
1ρ1),
f(2)
1s(ρ2) =f(2)
1s(ρ2)−sin(k(2)
1ρ2−η/2k(2)
1ln 2k(2)
1ρ2),(17)
7we obtain two sets of inhomogeneous equations which are solv ed numerically. The coefficients
Kijare obtained from the numerical solution of the Faddeev-Hah n-type equations. The cross
sections are given by
σij=4π
k(i)2
1δijD2+K2
ij
(D−1)2+ (K11+K22)2, (18)
where i, j= 1,2 refer to the two channels and D=K11K22−K12K21. When k(1)
1→0:
σtr≡σ12∼1/k(1)
1. For comparison with experimental low-energy data it is ver y useful to
calculate the transfer rates
λtr=σtrvN0, (19)
withvbeing the relative velocity of the incident fragments and N0the liquid-hydrogen
density chosen here as 4 .25×1022cm−3, because λtr(k(1)
1→0)∼const.
III. NUMERICAL RESULTS
We employ muonic atomic unit: distances are measured in unit s ofaµ, where aµis
the radius of muonic hydrogen atom. The integro-differentia l equations were solved by
discretizing them into a linear system of equations. The int egrals in Eqs. (13) and (14)
are discretized using the trapezoidal rule and the partial d erivatives are discretized using a
three-point rule [23]. The discretized equation is subsequ ently solved by Gauss elimination
method. As we are concerned with the low-energy limit only th e total angular momentum
L= 0 is taken into account. Even at zero incident energy, the tr ansfer channels are open
and their wave functions are rapidly oscillating Coulomb wa ves. In order to get a converged
solution we needed a large number of discretization points ( up to 900) adequately distributed
between 0 to 40 aµ. More points are taken near the origin where the interaction potentials are
large; a smaller number of points are needed at large distanc es. For example, near the origin
we took up to 40 equally spaced points per an unit length inter valaµ, in the intermediate
region ( ρ= 10−20aµ) we took up to 25 equally spaced points per unit length interv alaµ,
and in the asymptotic region ( ρ= 20−40aµ) we took up to 15 equally spaced points per
8unit length interval aµ. The following mass values are used in the unit of electron ma ss:
m(1H) = 1836.152, m(2H) = 3670.481, m(3He) = 5495.882, m(4He) = 7294.295, m(6Li)
= 10961.892, m(7Li) = 12786.385 and the muon mass is mµ= 206.769.
We present muon-transfer rates λtrcalculated using the formulation of last section for
processes (1). First, we restrict ourselves to a two-level a pproximation by choosing in the
relevant close-coupling expansion the hydrogen-like grou nd states (H µ)1sand (XZ
µ)1s, where
H =1H and2H, and XZ=3He++,4He++,6Li+++and7Li+++. Numerically stable and
converged results were obtained in these cases. The rates λtr/106sec−1at low energies are
presented in table 1 together with the results of [14–16]. Th e results in this case converged
to the precision shown in this table, except in the case of2Hµ+4He++, where it was difficult
to get converged result. The present results are consistent with the experimentally observed
isotope effect [6,9,11], e.g., the rate decreases from1H to2H.
In table 2 we present our results for transition rate of react ion (1) to (3He++
µ)1s, (6Li++
µ)1s
and (7Li++
µ)1sfrom (2Hµ)1susing the six-state close-coupling model. The six states ar e
Hµ(1s,2s,2p) and XZ
µ(1s,2s,2p). The results so obtained are consistent with the measured
isotope effect. The effect of including the (2s,2p) states in t he calculational scheme is also
explicit there.
The results reported in table 1 and 2 demonstrate the efficienc y of the present few-
body model in describing muon transfer from H isotopes to nuc lei of charge Z1= 2. Its
application to nuclei involving higher charges, therefore , is also expected to be justified.
The present calculation with6Li+++or7Li+++represents the first examples for such a full
quantum-mechanical extension within the six-state close- coupling model.
The study of three-body charge transfer reactions with Coul omb repulsion in the final
state has been the subject of this work. We have studied such r eactions employing a detailed
few-body description of the rearrangement scattering prob lem by solving the Faddeev-Hahn-
type equations in coordinate space. To provide correct asym ptotic form in the final state
the pure Coulomb interaction has been incorporated directl y into the equations. It is shown
that within this formalism, the application of a close-coup ling-type ansatz leads to satisfac-
tory results already in low-order approximations for direc t muon-transfer reactions between
9hydrogen isotopes and light nuclei He++and Li+++. Because of computational difficulties,
in this preliminary application we have considered up to six states in the expansion scheme
(1s,2s,2p on each center −(Hµ) and XZ
µ), which may not always be adequate. Further calcu-
lations with larger basis sets are needed to obtain accurate converged results. However, the
inclusion of three basis states on each center is expected to build in a satisfactory account of
the polarization potential in the model. It has been observe d [24] in studies of positron and
positronium scattering using close-coupling type approac h that once the 1s,2s,2p states of
positronium and target states are included, a good account o f scattering including transfer
reaction is obtained (estimated error of 10 −20%). However, the inclusion of only the 1s
basis functions do not lead to the converged results. A simil ar conclusion can be obtained
from tables 1 and 2. In view of the results of ref. [24] we do not believe the results of table
2 to be very different from the converged ones, although we can not provide a quantitative
measure of convergence. If the above conclusion based on the works of ref. [24] hold in this
case we expect a maximum error of 20% in table 2.
Because of the present promising results for the muon-trans fer rates of (1) for Z1<4, it
seems useful to make future applications of the present form ulation for larger targets with
Z1≥4. Such calculations involving nuclei of higher charge are i n progress. The present
approach should also be useful in rearrangement collision i nvolving electron, e.g., such as in
H(1s) + He++→H++ He+(1s), considered in [25].
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We acknowledge the support from FAPESP (Funda¸ c˜ ao de Ampar o ˜ a Pesquisa do Estado
de S˜ ao Paulo) of Brazil. The numerical calculations have be en performed on the IBM SP2
Supercomputer of the Departamento de F´ ısica - IBILCE - UNES P, S˜ ao Jos´ e do Rio Preto,
Brazil.
10REFERENCES
[1] Rafelski H E, Harley D, Shin G R and Rafelski J 1991 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys.
241469
[2] Hayaishi T, Tanaka T, Yoshii H, Murakami E, Shigemasa E, Y agishita A, Koike F and
Morioka Y 1999 J.Phys.B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 321507
[3] Tresch S, Jacot-Guillarmod R, Mulhauser F, Schaller L A, Schellenberg L, Schneuwly
H, Thalmann Y -A and Werthm¨ uller A 1998 Euro. Phys. J. D 293
[4] Tresch S, Jacot-Guillarmod R, Mulhauser F, Piller C, Sch aller L A, Schellenberg L,
Schneuwly H, Thalmann Y A, Werthm¨ uller A, Ackerbauer P, Bre unlich W H, Cargnelli
M, Gartner B, King R, Lauss B, Marton J, Prymas W, Zmeskal J, Pe titjean C, Chatel-
lard D, Egger J P, Jeannet E, Hartmann F J and Muhlbauer M 1998 P hys. Rev. A 57
2496
[5] Wertm¨ uller A, Adamczak A, Jacot-Guillarmod R, Mulhaus er F, Schaller L A, Schellen-
berg L, Schneuwly H, Thalmann Y A, Trecsh S 1998 Hyperf. Inter act.1161
[6] Jacot-Guillarmod R, Mulhauser F, Piller C, Schaller L A, Schellenberg L, Schneuwly H,
Thalmann Y A, Tresch S, Werthm¨ uller A and Adamczak A 1997 Phy s. Rev. A 553447
[7] Thalmann Y -A, Jacot-Guillarmod R, Mulhauser F, Schalle r L A, Schellenberg L,
Schneuwly H, Tresch S and Wertm¨ uller A 1998 Phys. Rev. A 571713
[8] Mulhauser F and Schneuwly H 1993 J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. P hys.264307
[9] Schellenberg L 1993 Hyperf. Interact. 82513
[10] Landau L D 1932 Z. Phys. Sow. Un. 246; Zener C 1932 Proc. Roy. Soc. A 137696
[11] Bertin A, Bruno M, Vitale A, Placci A and Zavattini E 1973 Phys. Rev. A 7462
[12] Haff P K, Rodrigo E and Tombrello T A 1977 Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 104363
[13] Schellenberg L, Adamczak A, Jacot-Guillarmod R, Mulha user F, Piller C, Schaller L A,
11Schneuwly H, Thalmann Y A, Trecsh S and Wertm¨ uller A 1996 Hyp erf. Interact. 102
215
[14] Matveenko A V and Ponomarev L I 1972 Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 6348 (1973 Sov. Phys.
JETP 3624)
[15] Czaplinski W and Mikhailov A I 1992 Phys. Lett. A 169181
[16] Sultanov R A, Sandhas W and Belyaev V B 1999 Euro. Phys. J. D533
[17] Faddeev L D 1960 Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 391459 (1961 Sov. Phys. −JETP 121014)
[18] Hahn Y 1968 Phys. Rev. 169794
[19] Sultanov R A 1999 Few Body Syst. Suppl. 10281
[20] Sultanov R A 1998 Innovative Computational Methods in Nuclear Many-Body Pro blems
ed H Horiuchi, Y Fujiwara, M Matsuo, M Kamimua, H Toki and Y Sak uragi (Singapore:
World Scinetific) p 131
[21] Hahn Y and Watson K M 1972 Phys. Rev. A 51718
[22] Mott N F and H. S. W. Massey H S W 1965 The theory of atomic collisions (London:
Clarendon)
[23] Abramowitz M and Stegun I A 1968 Handbook of Mathematical Functions , (New York:
Dover Publications), page 884, eq. (25.3.23), and page 885, eq, (25.4.1)
[24] Mitroy J and Stelbovics A T 1994 J. Phys. B 273257
Mitroy J and Stelbovics A T 1994 J. Phys. B 27L79
Mitroy J and Stelbovics A T 1994 Phys. Rev. Lett. 723495
Chaudhuri P and Adhikari S K 1998 J. Phys. B 313057
Chaudhuri P and Adhikari S K 1998 Phys. Rev. A 57984
[25] Hose G 1997 Phys. Rev. A 561364
12TABLES
Table 1. Low energy muon transfer rates λtr/106sec−1from proton (1Hµ)1sand deuteron
(2Hµ)1sto hydrogen-like ground state (3He+
µ)1s, (4He+
µ)1s, (6Li++
µ)1sand (7Li++
µ)1swithin
two-state close-coupling model.
System Energy Present Results [16] [15] [14]
(eV) H µ(1s),XZ
µ(1s)
1Hµ+3He++≤0.04 8.4 7.25 10.9 6.3
0.1 8.3
1.0 8.1
1Hµ+4He++≤0.04 6.8 6.65 10.7 5.5
2Hµ+3He++≤0.04 5.2 4.77 9.6 1.3
0.1 5.1
1.0 4.7
2Hµ+4He++≤0.04 5 .0±0.3 4.17 9.6 1.0
2Hµ+6Li+++≤0.04 1.2 1.01
0.1 1.2
1.0 1.1
2Hµ+7Li+++≤0.04 1.12 0.96
0.1 1.12
1.0 1.06
13Table 2. Low energy muon transfer rates λtr/106sec−1from (2Hµ)1sto hydrogen-like ground
state (3He+
µ)1s, (6Li++
µ)1sand (7Li++
µ)1swithin six-state close-coupling model.
System Energy Present Results
(eV) H µ(1s,2s,2p) ,XZ
µ(1s,2s,2p)
2Hµ+3He++≤0.04 9.0 ±0.2
0.1 8.8 ±0.2
1.0 5.0 ±0.2
2Hµ+6Li+++≤0.04 1.9 ±0.1
0.1 1.9 ±0.1
1.0 1.2 ±0.1
2Hµ+7Li+++≤0.04 1.6 ±0.1
0.1 1.6 ±0.1
1.0 1.2 ±0.1
14 |
arXiv:physics/9910014v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 12 Oct 1999Kinetic model of three component, weakly ionized, collisio nal plasma with a beam of
neutral particles
David Tsiklauri
Physics Department, Tbilisi State University, 3 Chavchava dze Ave., Tbilisi 380028, Georgia; email: dtsiklau@usa.ne t
Kinetic model of three component, weakly ionized, collisio nal plasma with a beam of neutral
particles is developed. New dispersion relations for linea r perturbations are derived and analyzed in
various limiting cases.
52.25.D, 52.35, 52.40.M, 52.35.Q, 52.50.G
I. INTRODUCTION
It is well-known that neutral beam injection is one of the fun damental fusion plasma heating methods. In general,
a particle accelerator is used to create fast ion beams (the p article energies are on the order of 100 keV); the ion beam
is then passed through a neutral gas region, where the ions ne utralize via charge-exchange reactions with the neutral
gas. The neutralized beam is then injected into a magnetical ly confined plasma. Of course, the neutral atoms are
unaffected (not confined) by the magnetic field, but ionize as t hey penetrate into the plasma. Then the high-energy
ions transfer fraction of their energy to the plasma particl es in repeated collisions, and heat the plasma [1–6].
In this paper we develop a kinetic model of three component, w eakly ionized, collisional plasma with a beam of
neutral particles. We employ a kinetic equation for the char ged particles of αsort in the weakly ionized plasma with
the Batnagar-Gross-Krook (BGK) model collisional term. Si milar model has been developed previously by others [7].
In this book authors do not take into account possibility of e xistence of regular velocity of the neutral particles [7]. I n
the light of the possible relevance of our model for the heati ng of plasma by neutral beam injection, we set out with
the aim to generalize results of Ref. [7] by allowing neutral particles to have regular velocity and seek for possible
novelties brought about by this effect. Indeed, the dispersi on relations for linear perturbations obtained in this pape r
differ substantially from those of Ref. [7].
In section II we formulate our model and obtain general dispe rsion relation. In section III we analyze various
limiting cases of the dispersion relation and discuss the re sults.
II. THE MODEL
We start analysis of the dielectric permittivity (DP) of a co llosional plasma with weakly ionzed, non-degenerate
plasma when the integral of elastic collisions in the kineti c equation for the charged particles can be apporximated
by the BGK term, while it is possible to neglect the collision s between the chaged particles themselvs. Analysis of
this relatively simple model will be useful for further more complicated case of fully ionized plasma (which, in fact, is
more relevant for the fusion plasma). The latter is beyond th e scope of present paper and the separate analysis needs
to be done.
The kinetic equation for the charged particles of αsort in the weakly ionized plasma with the BGK model collisio nal
term can be written as following [7]:
∂fα
∂t+/vector v·∂fα
∂/vector r+eα{/vectorE+/vector v×/vectorB}∂fα
∂/vector p=−ναn(fα−NαΦαn). (1)
Here, ναndenotes collision frequency of charged particles with the n eutrals, which in this model is assumed being
constant, whereas
Nα≡/integraldisplay
d/vector pfα,
and
Φαn≡1
(2πmαTαn)3/2exp/bracketleftBig
−mα(/vector v−/vectorV0)2/(2Tαn)/bracketrightBig
, T αn≡mαTn+MnTα
mα+Mn. (2)
1Index α(α=e, i) refers to charged particles (electrons and ions), whereas n— to neutrals. /vectorV0denotes regular,
uniform velocity of the neutral particles. Finally, Tαis defined by following expression:
Tα=mα
2Nα/integraldisplay
d/vector p(/vector v−/vectorVα)2fα
The specific form of the BGK integral used here is derived from its more general form [7]
/parenleftbigg∂fα
∂t/parenrightbiggαβ
BGK=−ναβ(fα−NαΦαβ), (3)
where ναβis some constant which has meaning of effective collision fre quency between particles of αandβsort, i.e.
it characterizes time of momentum relaxation of αsort particles as a result of their collision with particles ofβsort.
Function Φ αβis determined by following expression:
Φαβ≡1
(2πmαTαβ)3/2exp/bracketleftBig
−mα(/vector v−/vectorVβ)2/(2Tαβ)/bracketrightBig
, (4)
hereVβ= (1/Nβ)/integraltext
d/vector p/vector vf β.
It should be emphasized that the BGK collisonal integral des cribes accurately collisions only particles of different
sort. Therefore, it can be used to describe collisions of cha rged paricles with the neutrals in weakly ionized plasma,
when the scatteing of charged particles on the neutrals is a d ominant process. In the case of fully ionized plasma, in
spite of its relative simplicity, use of BGK integral is not j ustified [7].
In what follows, we consider isothermal models of the BGK int egral, i.e. we neglect change in temperature of
charged particles with chage in their corresponding distri bution functions. We ought to mention that the results
obtained here will be qualitatively the same for the non-iso thermal model of BGK integral. We further assume that
the masses and the temperatures of the ions and neutrals do co incide, i.e. mi=Mn≡MandTi=Tn. In this case
to the order of ∼me/Mterms we have Ten=Te. Thus, in the Eq.(2), under these simplifying assumptions w e can
setTαn=Tαand
Φαn=1
(2πmαTα)3/2exp/bracketleftBig
−mα(/vector v−/vectorV0)2/(2Tα)/bracketrightBig
(5)
which, in fact, coincides with the Maxwellian distribution function (with the beam having velocity /vectorV0) normalized to
unity.
In the static equilibrium state, with the external fields abs ent, Eq.(1) allows for the only solution f0α=N0αΦ0n.
In what follows subscript 0 will denote unperturbed and δperturbation of the physical quantities.
Let us consider small perturbation of the distribution func tionδfαwhich is caused by appearance of small fields /vectorE
and/vectorB. After usual linearization of the Eq.(1) we obtain
∂δfα
∂t+/vector v·∂δfα
∂/vector r+eα/vectorE·∂f0α
∂/vector p=−ναn(δfα−/integraldisplay
d/vector pδf αΦαn). (6)
The solution of the latter equation for the plane monochroma tic waves (i.e. /vectorE, δf α∼exp/bracketleftBig
−iωt+i/vectork·/vector r/bracketrightBig
) can be
written as
δfα=ieα
Tαf0α/bracketleftBig
/vector v·/vectorE−/vectorV0·/vectorE/bracketrightBig
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v+iναnηαf0α
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v, (7)
where ηα= (1/N0α)/integraltext
d/vector pδf α, which is perturbation of the particle number density norma lized to equilibrium value of
the number dinsity. ηαcan be calculated either by integration of the Eq.(7) over mo mentum or by using the continuity
equation for the particles of αsort:
ηα=/vectork·/vectorjα
eαN0αω,
/vectorjα=eα/integraldisplay
d/vector p/vector vδf α, (8)
2here,/vectorjαdenotes charge current of particles of αsort.
It is known that the complex tensor of DP can be written as
εij(ω,/vectork) =δij+i
ε0ωσij(ω,/vectork) (9)
where δijis usual Kroneker tensor and σij(ω,/vectork) is the conductivity tensor defined by
ji=/summationdisplay
αjiα=σij(ω,/vectork)Ej. (10)
In general when εijtensor is of the type εij=δij+AiAj−AiBj, then defining quantities εlandεtras
εl=kikj
k2εij= 1 +(/vectork·/vectorA)2
k2−(/vectork·/vectorA)(/vectork·/vectorB)
k2(11)
and
εtr=1
2/parenleftbigg
δij−kikj
k2/parenrightbigg
εij= 1 +(/vectork×/vectorA)2
2k2−(/vectork×/vectorA)(/vectork×/vectorB)
2k2(12)
respectively, we can split tensor from Eq.(9) in the longitu dinal and transverse (with respect to wave-vector /vectork) parts
as following:
εij(ω,/vectork) =/parenleftbigg
δij−kikj
k2/parenrightbigg
εtr(ω, k) +kikj
k2εl(ω, k) (13)
Now, inserting expression for δfαfrom the Eq.(7) into Eq.(8) and using Eqs.(10)-(12) we obtai n following expessions
forεlandεtr:
εl= 1−/summationdisplay
αω2
Lα
k2ω1
(2π)3/21
V5
Tα/bracketleftBigg/integraldisplay
d/vector v(/vectork·/vector v)2e−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v−/integraldisplay
d/vector v(/vectork·/vector v)(/vectork·/vectorV0)e−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v/bracketrightBigg
×
/bracketleftBigg
1−iναnki
ω1
(2π)3/2V3
Tα/integraldisplay
d/vector vvie−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v/bracketrightBigg−1
, (14)
εtr= 1−/summationdisplay
αω2
Lα
2k2ω1
(2π)3/21
V5
Tα/bracketleftBigg/integraldisplay
d/vector v(/vectork×/vector v)2e−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v−/integraldisplay
d/vector v(/vectork×/vector v)(/vectork×/vectorV0)e−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v/bracketrightBigg
. (15)
Here, ωLα=/radicalbig
(e2Nα)/(ε0mα) and VTα=/radicalbig
Tα/mα. The integrals in the Eqs.(14) and (15) may be evaluated by
choosing the z-axis along /vectork. The integration over vxandvyis elementary. Whereas, vzintegral may be expressed
in terms of a single transcendental function, which called t he plasma dispersion function. There are several different
definitions of this function used in the literature. We use th e one given by Melrose [8]:
¯φ(z) =−z√π/integraldisplay+∞
−∞dte−t2
t−z. (16)
Using Eq.(16) and following intermediate results of integr ation
/integraldisplay
d/vector v(/vectork·/vector v)2e−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v=−√πz[¯φ(z)−1], (17)
/integraldisplay
d/vector v(/vectork·/vector v)(/vectork·/vectorV0)e−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v= (2π)3/2V3
Tα(/vectork·/vectorV0)[¯φ(z)−1], (18)
3iναnki
ω1
(2π)3/2V3
Tα/integraldisplay
d/vector vvie−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v=iναn
ω[¯φ(z)−1], (19)
/integraldisplay
d/vector v(/vectork×/vector v)2e−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v=√π
zk¯φ(z), (20)
/integraldisplay
d/vector v(/vectork×/vector v)(/vectork×/vectorV0)e−v2/(2V2
T α)
ω+iναn−/vectork·/vector v= 0, (21)
where, z= (ω+iναn)/(√
2kVTα), we obtain
εl= 1 +/summationdisplay
αω2
Lα
k2V2
Tα[1−¯φ(z)][1−(/vectork·/vectorV0)/(ω+iναn)]
1−[(iναn)/(ω+iναn)]¯φ(z), (22)
εtr= 1−/summationdisplay
αω2
Lα
ω(ω+iναn)¯φ(z). (23)
Note, that conventinal kinetic model of three component, we akly ionized, collisional plasma [7] is significantly modifi ed
by taking into account possible existence of a beam of neutra l particles. Namely, the expression for the εlis modified
by additional factor [1 −(/vectork·/vectorV0)/(ω+iναn)]. While the form of the εtris not changed by the presence of the beem.
III. DISCUSSION
Let us start analysis of the obtained results from longitudi nal waves as we have seen that transverse waves do not
incur any modification by the presence of the beem of neutral p articles. The dispersion relation for the longitudinal
waves reads as following:
εl= 1 +/summationdisplay
αω2
Lα
k2V2
Tα[1−¯φ(z)][1−(/vectork·/vectorV0)/(ω+iναn)]
1−[(iναn)/(ω+iναn)]¯φ(z)= 0 (24)
The latter equation is a transcendental one, thus, in genera l case, it has many complex solutions ω(k). Let us consider
the most interesting ones which correspond to weakly damped oscillations.
Let us consider, first, high frequency waves, i.e. when ω≫kvTα, ναn. Using asymptotic expansion for ¯φ(z) [8]
¯φ(z) = 1 +1
2z2+3
4z4+...−i√πze−z2,when |z| ≫1 (25)
we obtain following dispersion relation for the weakly damp ed waves (Re ω≫Imω)
εl= 1−/bracketleftbiggω2
Le
ω2/parenleftbigg
1 +3k2V2
Te
ω2/parenrightbigg
−i/braceleftbigg/radicalbiggπ
2ωω2
Le
k3V3
Teexp/bracketleftbigg
−ω2
2k2V2
Te/bracketrightbigg
+ω2
Leνen
ω3/bracerightbigg/bracketrightbigg/bracketleftBigg
1−/vectork·/vectorV0
ω/bracketrightBigg
= 0. (26)
Here, we neglect the contribution from ions, because it is si gnificant when Ti≥Te(M/m e)2, i.e. when the temperature
of ions is greater than the temperature of electrons by more t han six orders of magnitude. It is unlikely that such
differences in the temperatures actually do realize in the na ture [7]. Therefore, in the frequency domain concerned,
the plasma can be considered as a purely electronic, i.e. the role of the ions is reduced only to neutralize the charge
of electrons. The dispersion relation (26) has to imaginary terms. The first one describes collisionless Cherenkov
absorption of the plasma waves. Whereas, the second one has p urely collisional nature and describes dissipation of
the fields energy in via collisions (electronic friction) [7 ]. The difference induced by the presence of the beam of neutra l
particles is presented by a factor (see, Ref. [7] for compari son)
/bracketleftBigg
1−/vectork·/vectorV0
ω/bracketrightBigg
. (27)
4In addition to the high frequency longitudinal oscillation s in isotropic collsionless plasma there also exist low
frequency oscillations, so called, Ion-acoustic waves. Th ey exist in highly non-isotermal plasma, where Te≫Ti.
Phase velocity of these waves lies in the VTi≪ω/k≪VTedomain. It is obvious, that such waves should also
exist in collisional plasma if the collisions are sufficientl y rare. Thus, when ω≪νinand|ω+iνen| ≪kVTein the
VTi≪ω/k≪VTephase velocity domain we obtain following dispersion relat ion
εl= 1 +/bracketleftbiggω2
Le
k2V2
Te/parenleftbigg
1 +i/radicalbiggπ
2ω
kVTe/parenrightbigg
−
ω2
Li
ω2/parenleftbigg
1 +3k2V2
Ti
ω2/parenrightbigg
+i/braceleftbigg/radicalbiggπ
2ωω2
Li
k3V3
Tiexp/bracketleftbigg
−ω2
2k2V2
Ti/bracketrightbigg
+ω2
Liνin
ω3/bracerightbigg/bracketrightbigg/bracketleftBigg
1−/vectork·/vectorV0
ω/bracketrightBigg
= 0. (28)
In the latter equation we have used also following asymptoti c expansion
¯φ(z) = 2z2−4
3z4+...−i√πze−z2,when |z| ≪1 (29)
to the first order.
Again, we note that the difference induced by the presence of t he beam of neutral particles is presented by a factor
given by factor Eq.(27) (see, Ref. [7] for comparison).
This concludes presentaion of the kinetic model of three com ponent, weakly ionized, collisional plasma with a beam
of neutral particles. We have generalized the results of Ref . [7] by allowing neutral particles to have regular velocity
(i.e. by allowing for the existence of a beam of neutrals). We have shown that the novel, generalized dispersion
relations for linear perturbations obtained in this paper d iffer substantially from those of Ref. [7]. Finally, we would
like to conclude outlining, once again, the possible releva nce of our model for the better understanding of the plasma
heating process by a neutral beam injection.
[1] M. Murakami, R. C. Isler, J. F. Lyon et al., Phys. Rev. Lett .39, 615 (1977).
[2] H. Eubank, R. Goldston, V. Arunasalam et al., Phys. Rev. L ett.43, 270 (1979).
[3] J.D. Callen and J.A.Rome, Nuclear Fusion 20, 501 (1980).
[4] M. Olsson, P. Vanbelle, S. Conroy, T. Elevant, and G. Sadl er, Plasma Phys. Control. Fusion 35, 179 (1993).
[5] G. Taylor, B. Leblanc, M. Murakami et al., Plasma Phys. Co ntrol. Fusion 38, 723 (1996).
[6] P. G. Carolan, N. J. Conway, M. R. Tournianski, M. P. S. Nig htingale, and M.J. Walsh, Plasma Phys. Rep. 24, 206, (1998).
[7] A.F. Alexandrov, L.S. Bogdankevich, A.A. Rukhadze (198 8),Foundations of Plasma Electrodynamics , Vis’shaya Shkola
Press, Moscow (in Russian, English translation exists).
[8] D.B. Melrose (1986), Instabilities in Space and Laboratory Plasmas , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
5 |
arXiv:physics/9910015v1 [physics.pop-ph] 12 Oct 1999Physics World vol. 12 (October 1999) 21-22
Los Alamos electronic archives: physics/99100nn
fc 1999 H.C. Rosu
BLIND SPOT MAY REVEAL VACUUM RADIATION
from HARET ROSU
in the Instituto de F´ ısica at the Universidad de Guanajuato , Apdo Postal E-143, 37150 Le´ on, Gto, Mexico
Back in the 1970s Stephen Hawking of Cambridge University in the UK made the
theoretical discovery that small black holes are not “compl etely black”. Instead,
a black hole emits radiation with a well-defined temperature that is proportional
to the gravitational force at its surface. The finding uncove red a deep connection
between gravity, quantum mechanics and thermodynamics. An d later, Bill Unruh
of the University of British Columbia in Canada proposed tha t quantum particles
should emit thermal radiation in a similar way when they are a ccelerated. Accord-
ing to Unruh, a particle undergoing a constant acceleration would be embedded in
a “heat bath” at temperature T=¯h
2πck·a ,where ¯ his the Planck constant divided
by 2π,ais the acceleration, cis the speed of light and kis the Boltzmann con-
stant. But is it really possible to detect such radiation? Re cently, Pisin Chen of the
Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and Toshi Tajima of the U niversity of Texas at
Austin in the US have suggested that it should be possible to d etect the Unruh radi-
ation emitted by electrons that are accelerated by high inte nsity lasers (1999 Phys.
Rev. Lett. 83 256). The difficulty with detecting Unruh radiat ion is that enormous
accelerations are required to produce a measurable effect. F or instance, we would
have to accelerate a particle to over 1020m/s2to generate a temperature of 1 K.
Recent advances in laser research mean that lasers can now de liver subpicosecond
pulses with petawatts of power. These could produce acceler ations that are 1025
times greater than the acceleration due to gravity at the Ear th’s surface, and two
orders of magnitude larger than previous experimental prop osals. At the quantum
level, the vacuum is full of particles and antiparticles tha t constantly appear and
disappear. The Heisenberg uncertainty principle allows th ese “virtual” particles to
exist for a very brief moment of time before they recombine an d disappear into
the vacuum again. According to Hawking if a particle and anti particle are created
close to the surface of a black hole, the strong gravitationa l force will pull one of
the particles into the hole while the other escapes. Thus the black hole can pro-
duce “radiation from nothing”. Similarly, Unruh radiation comes from the quantum
vacuum. The curious feature about Hawking radiation is that the temperature is
inversely proportional to the mass of the emitting source. T he only black holes that
may be detectable are “miniholes” that may have been formed s hortly after the Big
Bang. Such black holes would have a mass of 1015grammes and would be smaller
than a single atom. The Unruh effect is considered slightly le ss esoteric, and in the1980s several groups proposed experiments to detect the rad iation. Unruh himself
suggested that sound waves would propagate in a supersonic fl uid flow in the same
way that quantum fields propagate in the vicinity of a black ho le. And shortly
afterwards the late John Bell and Jon Leinaas of the Universi ty of Oslo in Norway
suggested that the Unruh effect would alter the motion of part icles at high-energy
accelerators. A more realistic experiment was suggested by Joseph Rogers, now at
Cornell University in the US, in which an electron confined by electric and magnetic
fields in a so-called Penning trap would give a signal. Meanwh ile Eli Yablonovitch,
now at the University of California at Los Angeles proposed t hat Unruh radiation
would be produced when a gas is suddenly ionized and turns int o a plasma. And
Simon Darbinyan of the Yerevan Physics Institute in Armenia and co-workers sug-
gested that Unruh radiation could be produced by a beam of par ticles propagating
through channels in a crystal lattice. In all of these experi ments, however, the Un-
ruh signal would be buried beneath a much larger background s ignal, a problem
that Chen and Tajima have managed to circumvent. Moreover, i n their scheme
an electron can be instantly accelerated and decelerated in every laser cycle. Chen
and Tajima present simple calculations for the acceleratio n produced by a standing
wave produced by two counter-propagating, ultra-intense l aser pulses. They pro-
pose to detect the Unruh radiation from a minute change to the classical Larmor
radiation emitted when an electron is accelerated. Despite the high acceleration
produced in a petawatt laser, the power of the emitted Unruh r adiation is several
orders of magnitude smaller than the power of the Larmor radi ation. However,
Chen and Tajima calculated the angular distribution of both types of radiation and
found a “blind spot” where the Unruh signal would dominate ov er the Larmor ra-
diation (see figure). Although appealing, the proposal of Ch en and Tajima is based
on several assumptions that may not actually be true. For exa mple, they assume
that the electron has a well-defined acceleration, velocity and trajectory. Moreover,
in 1988 Alexander Nikishov and Vladimir Ritus of the Lebedev Physical Institute
in Moscow suggested that the Unruh heat-bath concept could n ot be tested using
charged particles in an electric field. They argued that the p article and antiparticle
pairs created from the vacuum would encounter a varying acce leration field over a
short timescale, whereas Unruh radiation is related to cons tant accelerations only.
And at a recent workshop on the quantum aspects of beam physic s, John Jackson
from the University of California at Berkeley warned agains t trying to interpret
conventional phenomena in terms of Unruh radiation. Nevert heless it is challenging
to look for new ways to test quantum field theory that may give a n insight into the
physical origin of Hawking radiation.
2Figure: The angular distributions of the Larmor (top) and Un ruh radiation
(bottom) emitted by an accelerated electron. In general the power of the background
Larmor radiation is much greater than the Unruh signal, but t here is a small “blind
spot” where the Unruh radiation dominates.
3 |
arXiv:physics/9910016v1 [physics.atom-ph] 12 Oct 1999Binding Energies and Scattering Observables in the4He3Atomic System
A. K. Motovilov∗, W. Sandhas
Physikalisches Institut der Universit¨ at Bonn, Endeniche r Allee 11-13, D-53115 Bonn, Germany
S. A. Sofianos
Physics Department, University of South Africa, P.O.Box 39 2, Pretoria 0003, South Africa
E. A. Kolganova
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, 141980, Russi a
(September 30, 1999)
The4He3bound states and the scattering of a4He atom off a4He dimer at ultra-low energies
are investigated using a hard-core version of the Faddeev di fferential equations. Various realistic
4He–4He interactions were employed, amomg them the LM2M2 potenti al by Aziz and Slaman and
the recent TTY potential by Tang, Toennies and Yiu. The groun d state and the excited (Efimov)
state obtained are compared with other results. The scatter ing lengths and the atom-diatom phase
shifts were calculated for center of mass energies up to 2 .45 mK. It was found that the LM2M2 and
TTY potentials, although of quite different structure, give practically the same bound-state and
scattering results.
PACS numbers: 02.60.Nm, 21.45.+v, 34.40.-m, 36.40.+d
I. INTRODUCTION
Small4He clusters (in particular dimers and trimers) are of fundam ental interest in various fields
of physical chemistry and molecular physics. Studies of the se clusters represent an important step
towards understanding the properties of helium liquid drop s, super-fluidity in4He films, the Bose-
Einstein condensation etc.(see, for instance, Refs. [1–4]). Besides, the helium trime r is probably a
unique molecular system where a direct manifestation of the Efimov effect [5] can be observed since
the binding energy ǫdof the4He dimer is extremely small.
The4He trimer belongs to the three–body systems whose theoretic al treatment is quite difficult,
first, due to its Efimov nature and, second, because of the hard -core properties of the inter-atomic
He–He interaction [6–9]. At the same time the problem of thre e helium atoms can be considered as
an example of an ideal three–body quantum problem since4He atoms are identical neutral bosons
and, thus, their handling is not complicated by spin, isospi n, or Coulomb considerations.
There is a great number of experimental and theoretical stud ies of4He clusters. However, most
of the theoretical investigations consist merely in comput ing the ground-state energy and are based
on variational methods [10–15], on Hyperspherical Harmoni cs expansion methods in configuration
space [16,17], and on integral equations in momentum space [ 18,19]. We further note that the results
of Ref. [20] were based on a direct solution of the two-dimens ional Faddeev differential equations
in configuration space, while recent binding-energy result s of [21] were obtained using the three-
dimensional Faddeev differential equations in the total-an gular-momentum representation.
In Refs. [15,16,19,22] it was pointed out that the excited st ate of the4He trimer is an Efimov state
[5]. In these works the HFDHE2 [6], HFD-B [7], and LM2M2 [8] ve rsions of the4He–4He potentials
by Aziz and co-workers were employed. The essential propert y of this state is that it disappears
when the inter-atomic potential is increased by a factor λ∼1.2. And vice versa, when λslightly
decreases (no more than 2%), a second excited state appears i n the trimer [16,19]. It is just such
∗On leave of absence from the Joint Institute for Nuclear Rese arch, Dubna, 141980, Russia
1a non-standard behavior of the excited-state energies whic h points at their Efimov nature. The
resonance mechanism of formation and disappearance of the E fimov levels in the4He trimer has
been studied in Refs. [23,24].
The general atom-diatom collision problem has been address ed by various authors, and we refer
the interested reader to the review articles [25] and [26]. T he collision dynamics at thermal energies
of the H+H 2system and the existence of resonances were discussed in [27 ] using the Faddeev integral
equations in momentum space. Finally, the problem of existe nce of4Hen-mers and their relation to
the Bose-Einstein condensation in He IIwas discussed in Refs. [28,29]. From the experimental studi es
we mention those of Refs. [30–35] where molecular clusters, consisting of a small number of noble
gas atoms, were investigated.
In contrast to the bulk of theoretical investigations devot ed to the binding energies of the4He
trimer, scattering processes found comparatively little a ttention. In Ref. [18] the characteristics of
the He–He 2scattering at zero energy were studied, while the recombina tion rate of the reaction
(1+1+1 →2+1) was estimated in [36]. Recently, the phase shifts of the He–He 2elastic scattering
and breakup amplitudes at ultra-low energies have also been calculated [22,37,38].
The difficulty in computing excited states and scattering obs ervables in the4He3system is mainly
due to two reasons. First, the low energy ǫdof the dimer makes it necessary to consider very
large domains in configuration space with a characteristic s ize of hundreds of ˚Angstroems. Second,
the strong repulsion of the He–He interaction at short dista nces produces large numerical errors.
In the present paper, which is an extension of our studies for4He3[22–24,37,38], we employed
the mathematically rigorous three-body Boundary Conditio n Model (BCM) of Refs. [39,40] to the
above-mentioned problems.
As compared to [22–24,37,38] we employ, in the present work, the refined He–He interatomic
potentials LM2M2 by Aziz and Slaman [8], and TTY by Tang, Toen nies and Yiu [9]. Our numerical
methods have been substantially improved, and this allowed us to use considerably larger grids
achieving, thus, a better accuracy. Furthermore, due to muc h better computing facilities more
partial waves could be taken into account.
This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II we review the th ree-body bound and scattering state
formalism for hard-core interactions. In Sec. III we descri be its application to the system of three
4He atoms and present our numerical results. Our conclusions are summarized in Sec. IV. Finally
in the Appendix we give details of the potentials used.
II. FORMALISM
A detailed analysis of the general boundary-value problem, the derivation of the asymptotic bound-
ary conditions for scattering states and other boundary-va lue formulations, can be found in Refs.
[41,42]. In this work we employ a hard-core version of the BCM [40,43] developed in [39,44] (for
details see Ref. [22]). Therefore, in what follows we shall o nly outline the formalism and present its
main characteristics.
In describing the three-body system we use the standard Jaco bi coordinates xα,yα,α= 1,2,3,
expressed in terms of the position vectors of the particles riand their masses m i,
xα=/bracketleftbigg2mβmγ
mβ+ m γ/bracketrightbigg1/2
(rβ−rγ)
yα=/bracketleftbigg2mα(mβ+ m γ)
mα+ m β+ m γ/bracketrightbigg1/2/parenleftbigg
rα−mβrβ+ m γrγ
mβ+ m γ/parenrightbigg
2where (α,β,γ ) stands for a cyclic permutation of the indices (1 ,2,3).
In the so-called hard-core potential model one requires tha t the wave function vanishes when
the particles approach each other at a certain distance r=c. This requirement is equivalent to
the introduction of an infinitely strong repulsion between t he particles at distances r≤c. Such a
replacement of the repulsive short-range part of the potent ial by a hard-core interaction turns out
to be a very efficient way to suppress inaccuracies at short dis tances. One can then show that the
Faddeev components satisfy the following system of differen tial equations
(−∆X+Vα−E)Φα(X) =−Vα/summationdisplay
β/negationslash=αΦβ(X),|xα|>cα,
(−∆X−E)Φα(X) = 0, |xα|<cα.(1)
whereX≡(xα,yα),α= 1,2,3 andcαis the hard-core radius in the channel α.
Outside the core the components Φ αstill provide the total wave function Ψ,
Ψ(X) =3/summationdisplay
β=1Φβ(X),
while in the interior region we have
3/summationdisplay
β=1Φβ(X)≡0.
In practice, one can replace the latter strong condition by a more weak one [39,44],
3/summationdisplay
β=1Φβ(X)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
|xα|=cα= 0, α = 1,2,3, (2)
which requires the sum of Φ α(X) to be zero only at the radius cα.
The numerical advantage of our approach is already obvious f rom the structure of Eqs. (1). When
a potential with a strong repulsive core is replaced by the ha rd-core model, one approximates inside
the core domains only the Laplacian ∆ Xinstead of the sum of the Laplacian and the huge repulsive
term. In this way a much better numerical approximation can b e achieved.
In the present investigation we apply the formalism to the4He three-atomic system with total
angular momentum L= 0. The partial-wave version of the equations (1) for a syste m of three
identical bosons with L= 0 reads [45,46]
/bracketleftbigg
−∂2
∂x2−∂2
∂y2+l(l+ 1)/parenleftbigg1
x2+1
y2/parenrightbigg
−E/bracketrightbigg
Φl(x,y) =/braceleftbigg
−V(x)Ψl(x,y), x>c
0, x<c.(3)
Here,x,yare the absolute values of the Jacobi variables and cis the core size which is the same for
all three two-body subsystems. The angular momentum lcorresponds to a dimer subsystem and a
complementary atom. For a three-boson system in an S-statelcan only be even, l= 0,2,4,... . The
potentialV(x) is assumed to be central and the same for all partial waves l. The function Ψ l(x,y)
is related to the partial-wave Faddeev components Φ l(x,y) by
Ψl(x,y) = Φ l(x,y) +/summationdisplay
l′/integraldisplay+1
−1dηhll′(x,y,η ) Φl′(x′,y′) (4)
3where
x′=/radicalBigg
1
4x2+3
4y2−√
3
2xyη, y′=/radicalBigg
3
4x2+1
4y2+√
3
2xyη,
withη=ˆx·ˆy. Expressions for the kernels hll′can be found in [22,45,46]. It should be noted that
these kernels depend only on the hyperangles
θ= arctany
xandθ′= arctany′
x′
and not on the hyperradius
ρ=/radicalbig
x2+y2=/radicalbig
x′2+y′2.
The functions Φ l(x,y) satisfy the boundary conditions
Φl(x,y)|x=0= Φ l(x,y)|y=0= 0. (5)
The partial-wave version of the hard-core boundary conditi on (2) reads
Φl(c,y) +/summationdisplay
l′/integraldisplay+1
−1dηhll′(c,y,η) Φl′(x′,y′) = 0 (6)
requiring the wave function Ψ l(x,y) to be zero at the core boundary x=c. Furthermore, one can
show that, in general, the condition (6), like the condition (2), causes also the wave functions (4) to
vanish inside the core domains. For the bound-state problem one requires that the functions Φ l(x,y)
are square integrable in the quadrant x≥0,y≥0.
The asymptotic condition for the helium trimer scattering s tates reads
Φl(x,y) =δl0ψd(x) exp(i√Et−ǫdy)/bracketleftbig
a0+o/parenleftbig
y−1/2/parenrightbig/bracketrightbig
+exp(i√Etρ)√ρ/bracketleftbig
Al(θ) +o/parenleftbig
ρ−1/2/parenrightbig/bracketrightbig (7)
asρ→ ∞ and/ory→ ∞. Here we use the fact that the helium dimer bound state exists only for
l= 0.ǫdstands for the dimer energy while ψd(x) denotes the dimer wave function which is assumed
to be zero within the core, i.e., ψd(x)≡0 forx≤c.
The coefficients a 0andAl(θ) describe the contributions of the (2 + 1) and (1 + 1 + 1) channe ls to
Φl, respectively. Both the trimer binding energy Etand the difference Et−ǫdin (7) are negative
which means that for any θthe function Φ l(x,y) decreases exponentially as ρ→ ∞ .
The asymptotic boundary condition for the partial-wave Fad deev components of the (2 + 1 →
2 + 1 ; 1 + 1 + 1) scattering wave function reads, as ρ→ ∞ and/ory→ ∞,
Φl(x,y;p) =δl0ψd(x)/braceleftbig
sin(py) + exp(ipy)/bracketleftbig
a0(p) +o/parenleftbig
y−1/2/parenrightbig/bracketrightbig/bracerightbig
+exp(i√
Eρ)√ρ/bracketleftbig
Al(E,θ) +o/parenleftbig
ρ−1/2/parenrightbig/bracketrightbig (8)
wherepis the relative momentum conjugate to the variable y,Eis the scattering energy given by
E=ǫd+p2, and a 0(p) is the elastic scattering amplitude. The functions Al(E,θ) provide us for
E >0 with the corresponding partial-wave breakup amplitudes.
4The helium-atom helium-dimer scattering length ℓscis given by
ℓsc=−√
3
2lim
p→0a0(p)
p
while theS-state elastic scattering phase shifts δ0(p) are given by
δ0(p) =1
2Im ln S 0(p) (9)
where S 0(p) = 1 + 2ia0(p) is the (2 + 1 →2 + 1) partial-wave component of the scattering matrix.
III. RESULTS
We employed the Faddeev equations (3) and the hard-core boun dary condition (6) to calculate
the binding energies of the helium trimer and the ultra-low e nergy phase shifts of the helium atom
scattered off the helium diatomic molecule. As He-He interac tion we used three versions of the
semi-empirical potentials of Aziz and collaborators, name ly HFDHE2 [6], HFD-B [7], and the newer
version LM2M2 [8]. Further, we employed the latest theoreti cal He–He potential TTY of Tang
et al. [9]. These potentials are given in the Appendix. In our calculations we used the value
/planckover2pi12/m = 12.12K˚A2. All the potentials considered produce a weakly bound dimer state. The energy
ǫdof this state together with the He–He atomic scattering leng thℓ(2)
scare given in Table I. It is
interesting to note that the latest potentials LM2M2 and TTY give practically the same scattering
lengthℓscand dimer energy ǫd.
A detailed description of our numerical method has been give n in Ref. [22]. Therefore, we outline
here only the main steps of the computational scheme employe d to solve the boundary-value problems
(3), (5), (6) and (7) or (8). First, we note that the grid for th e finite-difference approximation of
the polar coordinates ρandθis chosen such that the points of intersection of the arcs ρ=ρi,
i= 1,2,...,N ρand the rays θ=θj,j= 1,2,...,N θwith the core boundary x=cconstitute
the knots. The value of cwas fixed to be such that any further decrease of it did not appr eciably
influence the dimer binding energy ǫdand the energy of the trimer ground state E(0)
t. In our previous
work [22,37,38] cwas chosen as 0.7 ˚A. In the present work, however, we choose c= 1.0˚A. This value
ofcprovides a dimer bound state ǫdwhich is stable within six figures and a trimer ground-state
energyE(0)
tstable within three figures. The ρiare chosen according to the formulas
ρi=i
N(ρ)
c+ 1c, i = 1,2,...,N(ρ)
c,
ρi+N(ρ)
c=/radicalBig
c2+y2
i, i = 1,2,...,N ρ−N(ρ)
c,
whereN(ρ)
cstands for the number of arcs inside the domain ρ<c and
yi=f(τi)/radicalBig
ρ2
Nρ−c2, τ i=i
Nρ−N(ρ)
c.
The nonlinear monotonously increasing function f(τ), 0≤τ≤1, satisfying the conditions f(0) = 0
andf(1) = 1, is chosen according to
f(τ) =/braceleftbigg
α0τ , τ ∈[0,τ0]
α1τ+τν, τ∈(τ0,1].
5The values of α0,α0≥0,andα1,α1≥0,are determined via τ0andνfrom the continuity condition
forf(τ) and its derivative at the point τ0. In the present investigation we took values of τ0within
0.15 and 0.2. The value of the power νdepends on the cutoff radius ρmax=ρNρ= 200–1000 ˚A, its
range being within 3.4 and 4 in the present calculations.
The knotsθjatj= 1,2,...,N ρ−N(ρ)
care taken according to θj= arctg(yj/c) with the remaining
knotsθj,j=Nρ−N(ρ)
c+1,...,N θ,being chosen equidistantly. Such a choice is tequired by the need
of having a higher density of points in the domain where the fu nctions Φ l(x,y;z) change most rapidly,
i.e. for small values of ρand/orx. In this work, we used grids of the dimension Nθ=Nρ=500–800
while the above number N(ρ)
cand the number Nθ−(Nρ−N(ρ)
c) of knots in θlying in the last arc
inside the core domain was chosen equal to 2–5.
Since we consider identical bosons only the components Φ lcorresponding to even ldiffer from
zero. Thus, the number of equations to be solved is Ne=lmax/2 + 1 where lmaxis the maximal even
partial wave. The finite-difference approximation of the Neequations (3) reduces the problem to a
system ofNeNθNρlinear algebraic equations. The finite-difference equation s corresponding to the
arci=Nρinclude initially the values of the unknown functions Φ l(x,y;z) from the arc i=Nρ+ 1.
To eliminate them, we express these values through the value s of Φ l(x,y;z) on the arcs i=Nρand
i=Nρ−1 by using the asymptotic formulas (7) or (8) in the manner des cribed in the final part
of Appendix A of Ref. [22]. In [22], however, this approach wa s used for computing the binding
energies only while in the present work this method is extend ed also to the scattering problem. The
matrix of the resulting system of equations has a block three -diagonal form. Every block has the
dimensionNeNθ×NeNθand consists of the coefficients standing at unknown values of the Faddeev
components in the grid knots belonging to a certain arc ρ=ρi. The main diagonal of the matrix
consists ofNρsuch blocks.
In this work we solve the block three-diagonal algebraic sys tem on the basis of the matrix sweep
method [47]. The use of this method makes it possible to avoid writing the matrix on the hard drive
of the computer. Besides, the matrix sweep method reduces th e computer time required by almost
one order of magnitude as compared to [22,37,38].
Our results for the trimer ground-state energy E(0)
tas well as the results obtained by other authors
are presented in Table II. It should be noted that most of the c ontribution to the ground-state energy
stems from the l= 0 andl= 2 partial components, the latter being slightly more than 3 0%, and is
approximately the same for all potentials used. The contrib ution from the l= 4 partial wave is of
the order of 3-4% (cf. [20]).
It is well known that the excited state of the4He trimer is an Efimov state [16,19,22–24]. The
results obtained for this trimer excited-state energy E(1)
t, as well as the results found in the literature,
are presented in Table III. To illustrate the convergence of our results we show in Table IV the
dependence of the energy E(1)
ton the grid parameters using the TTY potential. It is seen tha t the
l= 0 partial component contributes about 71% to the excited-s tate binding energy. The contribution
toE(1)
tfrom thel= 2 component is about 25–26% and from l= 4 within 3–4%. These values are
similar to the ones for the ground state.
Apart from the binding energy calculations, we also perform ed calculations for a helium atom
scattered off a helium dimer for L= 0. For this we used the asymptotic boundary conditions (8).
The results of the scattering length of the collision of the H e atom on the He dimer obtained for the
HFD-B, LM2M2 and TTY potentials are presented in Table V. As c ompared to [22] the present
calcualtion is essentially improved (the result ℓsc= 145±5˚A for HFD-B with lmax= 2 was obtained
in [22] with a much smaller grid). Within the accuracy of our c alculations, the scattering lengths
provided by the LM2M2 and TTY potentials, like the energies o f the excited state, are exactly the
6same. This comes as no surprise as the two potentials produce practically the same two-body binding
energies and scattering lengths.
The phase shifts results obtained for the HFD-B, LM2M2 and TT Y potentials are given in Tables
VI, VII, and VIII. For the HFD-B and TTY potentials they are pl otted in Fig. 1. Note that for the
phase shifts we use the normalization required by the Levins on theorem [48], δL(0)−δL(∞) =nπ,
wherenis the number of the trimer bound states.
The incident energies considered were below as well as above the breakup threshold, i.e., for the
(2+1−→2+1) and the (2+1 −→1+1+1) processes. It was found that after transformation to the
laboratory system the phases δ(lmax)
0for the potentials HFD-B, LM2M2 and TTY for different values
oflmaxare practically the same, especially those for LM2M2 and TTY . The difference between the
phase shifts δ(2)
0andδ(4)
0is only about 0.5%.
It is interesting to compare the values obtained for the He–H e2scattering lengths ℓscwith the
corresponding inverse wave numbers κ−1for the trimer excited-state energies. The values of κ,
κ= 2/radicalBig
(ǫd−E(1)
t)/3,where both the E(1)
tandǫdare given in ˚A−2, are also presented in Table
V. It is seen that the values of κare about 1.3–1.7 times smaller than the respective4He-atom
4He-dimer scattering lengths. The situation differs complet ely from the4He two-atomic scattering
problem where the inverse wave numbers ( κ(2))−1=|ǫd|−1/2are in a rather good agreement with
the4He–4He scattering lengths (see Table I). Such significant differe nces between ℓscandκ−1in the
case of the4He three-atomic system can be attributed to the Efimov nature of the excited state of
the trimer which implies that the effective range r0for the interaction between the4He atom and
the4He dimer is very large as compared to the4He diatomic problem.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
In this work we employed a formalism which is suitable for thr ee–body calculations with hard–core
potentials. The approach is a hard-core variant of the BCM an d, unlike some competing methods,
is exact and ideally suited for three-body calculations wit h two–body interactions with a highly
repulsive core. Furthermore, the method is feasible not onl y for bound–states but also for scattering
processes. There is, however, a price to be paied for the exac t treatment of the system. The inclusion
of higher partial waves, beyond lmax= 4, is hard to be implemented within the computing facilitie s
we have at our disposal.
The results of the ground-state energy of the4He trimer obtained for all four realistic4He–4He
potentials compare favorably with alternative results in t he literature. Furthermore, the successful
location of the excited state, interpreted as an Efimov state , clearly demonstrates the reliability of
our method in three-body bound state calculations with hard -core potentials. In addition to binding
energy calculations, the formalism has been successfully u sed to calculate scattering lengths and
ultra-low-energy phase shifts of the4He atom scattered off the4He dimer.
In general the hard-core inter-atomic potential together w ith other characteristics of the system,
makes calculations extremely tedious and numerically unst able. This is not the case in our formalism
where the hard core is taken into account from the very beginn ing in a mathematically rigorous way.
Thus, the formalism paves the way to study various ultra–col d three-atomic systems, and to calculate
important quantities such as the cross-sections, recombin ation rates, etc.
7ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors are grateful to Prof. V.B.Belyaev and Prof. H.To ki for help and assistance in per-
forming the calculations at the supercomputer of the Resear ch Center for Nuclear Physics of the
Osaka University, Japan. The authors also would like to than k J.P.Toennies for very interesting dis-
cussions stimulating this investigation. Financial suppo rt by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft,
the Russian Foundation for Basic Research, and the National Research Foundation of South Africa,
is gratefully acknowledged.
APPENDIX: THE POTENTIALS USED
The general structure of the realistic semi-empirical pote ntials HFDHE2 [6] and HFD-B [7] devel-
oped by Aziz and co-workers is
V(x) =εVb(ζ) (A1)
whereζ=x/rmand the term Vb(ζ) reads
Vb(ζ) =Aexp(−αζ+βζ2)−/bracketleftbiggC6
ζ6+C8
ζ8+C10
ζ10/bracketrightbigg
F(ζ),
xis expressed in the same length units as rm(˚A in the present case). The function F(ζ) is given by
F(ζ) =/braceleftbigg
exp [−(D/ζ−1)]2,ifζ≤D
1, ifζ >D .
In addition to the term Vb(ζ) the LM2M2 potential [8] includes the “add on” term Va(ζ),
V(r) =ε{Vb(ζ) +Va(ζ)}, (A2)
having the following form:
Va(ζ) =
Aa/braceleftbigg
sin/bracketleftbigg2π(ζ−ζ1)
ζ2−ζ1−π
2/bracketrightbigg
+ 1/bracerightbigg
, ζ 1≤ζ≤ζ2
0, ζ /ne}ationslash∈[ζ1,ζ2].
The parameters for the HFDHE2, HFD-B and LM2M2 potentials ar e given in Table IX.
The form of the theoretical He–He potential TTY is taken from [9]. This potential reads
V(x) =A[Vex(x) +Vdisp(x)]
wherexstands for the distance between4He atoms given in atomic length units. (Following [9] in
converting the length units we used the factor 1a.u.= 0 .52917 ˚A.) The function Vexhas the form
Vex(x) =Dxpexp(−2βx)
withp=7
2β−1 , while the function Vdispreads
Vdisp(x) =−N/summationdisplay
n=3C2nf2n(x)x−2n.
8The coefficients C2nare calculated via the recurrency relation
C2n=/parenleftbiggC2n−2
C2n−4/parenrightbigg3
C2n−6.
At the same time the functions f2nare given by
f2n(x) = 1−exp(−bx)2n/summationdisplay
k=0(bx)k
k!
where
b(x) = 2β−/bracketleftbigg7
2β−1/bracketrightbigg1
x.
The parameters of the TTY potential are given in Table X.
[1] J. P. Toennies and K. Winkelmann, J. Chem. Phys. 66, 3965 (1977).
[2] M. V. Rama Krishna and K. B. Whaley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 1126 (1990).
[3] K. K. Lehman and G. Scoles, Science 279, 2065 (1998).
[4] S. Grebenev, J. P. Toennies, and A. F. Vilesov, Science 279, 2083 (1998).
[5] V. Efimov, Nucl. Phys. A 210, 157 (1973).
[6] R. A. Aziz, V. P. S. Nain, J. S. Carley, W. L. Taylor, and G. T . McConville, J. Chem. Phys. 79, 4330 (1979).
[7] R. A. Aziz, F. R. W. McCourt, and C. C. K. Wong, Mol. Phys. 61, 1487 (1987).
[8] R. A. Aziz and M. J. Slaman, J. Chem. Phys. 94, 8047 (1991).
[9] K. T. Tang, J. P. Toennies, and C. L. Yiu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 1546 (1995).
[10] S. W. Rick, D. L. Lynch, and J. D. Doll, J. Chem. Phys. 95, 3506 (1991).
[11] V. R. Pandharipande, J. G. Zabolitzky, S. C. Pieper, R. B . Wiringa, and U. Helmbrecht, Phys. Rev. Lett., 50, 1676 (1983).
[12] R. N. Barnett and K. B. Whaley, Phys. Rev. A 47, 4082 (1993).
[13] M. Lewerenz, J. Chem. Phys. 106, 4596 (1997).
[14] R. Guardiola, M. Portesi, and J. Navarro, “High-qualit y variational wave functions for small4He clusters”, LANL E-print
physics/9904037.
[15] T. Gonz´ alez-Lezana, J. Rubayo-Soneira, S. Miret-Art ´ es, F. A. Gianturco, G. Delgado-Barrio, and P. Villareal, P hys. Rev.
Lett.82, 1648 (1999).
[16] B. D. Esry, C. D. Lin, and C. H. Greene, Phys. Rev. A 54, 394 (1996).
[17] E. Nielsen, D. V. Fedorov, and A. S. Jensen, J. Phys. B 31, 4085 (1998).
[18] S. Nakaichi-Maeda and T. K. Lim, Phys. Rev A 28, 692 (1983).
[19] Th. Cornelius and W. Gl¨ ockle, J. Chem. Phys. 85, 3906 (1986).
[20] J. Carbonell, C. Gignoux, and S. P. Merkuriev, Few–Body Systems 15, 15 (1993).
[21] V. Roudnev and S. Yakovlev, private communication.
[22] E. A. Kolganova, A. K. Motovilov, and S. A. Sofianos, J. Ph ys. B.31, 1279 (1998).
[23] A. K. Motovilov and E. A. Kolganova, Few–Body Systems Su ppl.10, 75 (1999).
[24] E. A. Kolganova and A. K. Motovilov, Phys. Atom. Nucl. 62No.7, 1179 (1999) (LANL E-print physics/9808027 ).
[25] D. A. Micha, Nucl. Phys. A 353, 309 (1981).
[26] A. Kuppermann, Nucl. Phys. A 353, 287 (1981).
[27] Z. C. Kuruoglu and D. A. Micha, J. Chem. Phys. 80, 4262 (1980).
[28] H. B. Ghassib and G. V. Chester, J. Chem. Phys. 82, 585 (1984).
[29] N. H. March, J. Chem. Phys. 82, 587 (1984).
[30] F. Luo, G. C. McBane, G. Kim, C. F. Giese, and W. R. Gentry, J. Chem. Phys. 98, 3564 (1993).
[31] F. Luo, C. F. Giese, and W. R. Gentry, J. Chem. Phys. 104, 1151 (1996).
[32] W. Sch¨ ollkopf and J. P. Toennies, Science 266, 1345 (1994).
[33] U. Buck and H. Meyer, J. Chem. Phys. 84, 4854 (1986).
[34] O. Echt, K. Sattler, and E. Recknagel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 47, 1121 (1981).
9[35] W. Sch¨ ollkopf and J. P. Toennies, J. Chem. Phys. 104, 1155 (1996).
[36] P. O. Fedichev, M. W. Reynolds, and G. V. Shlyapnikov, Ph ys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2921 (1996).
[37] E. A. Kolganova, A. K. Motovilov and S. A. Sofianos, Phys. Rev. A. 56, R1686 (1997).
[38] A. K. Motovilov, S. A. Sofianos, and E. A. Kolganova, Chem . Phys. Lett. 275, 168 (1997).
[39] S. P. Merkuriev and A. K. Motovilov, Lett. Math. Phys. 7, 497 (1983).
[40] S. P. Merkuriev, A. K. Motovilov, and S. L. Yakovlev, The or. Math. Phys. 94, 306 (1993).
[41] A. K. Motovilov, Three-body quantum problem in the boundary-condition mode l(PhD thesis (in Russian), Leningrad State
University, Leningrad, 1984).
[42] A. A. Kvitsinsky, Yu. A. Kuperin, S. P. Merkuriev, A. K. M otovilov, and S. L. Yakovlev, Sov. J. Part. Nucl. 17, 113
(1986).
[43] V. N. Efimov and H. Schulz, Sov. J. Part. Nucl. 7, 349 ( 1976).
[44] A. K. Motovilov, Vestnik Leningradskogo Universiteta ,22, 76 (1983).
[45] L. D. Faddeev and S. P. Merkuriev, Quantum scattering theory for several particle systems (Doderecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers, 1993).
[46] S. P. Merkuriev, C. Gignoux, and A. Laverne, Ann. Phys. ( N.Y.)99, 30 (1976).
[47] A. A. Samarsky: Theory of difference schemes (in Russian) (Nauka, Moscow, 1977).
[48] N. Levinson, K. Dan. Vidensk. Selsk. Mat. Fys. Medd. 25, 9 (1949).
10TABLE I. Dimer energies ǫd, inverse wave lengths 1 /κ(2), and4He−4He scattering lengths ℓ(2)
scfor the potentials used.
Potential Ed(mK) 1 /κ(2)(˚A) ℓ(2)
sc(˚A) Potential Ed(mK) 1 /κ(2)(˚A) ℓ(2)
sc(˚A)
HFDHE2 −0.83012 120.83 124 .65 LM2M2 1.30348 96.43 100.23
HFD-B −1.68541 84.80 88 .50 TTY 1.30962 96.20 100.01
TABLE II. Ground state energy E(0)
tresults for the helium trimer. The (absolute) values of E(0)
tare given in K. The grid
parameters used were: Nθ=Nρ= 555, τ0= 0.2,ν= 3.6, and ρmax= 250 ˚A.
Faddeev Variational Adiabatic
equations methods approaches
Potential lmax This work [20] [19] [18] [21] [11] [10] [12] [13] [14] [16] [17]
0 0 .084a)0.0823 0 .082 0 .092 0.098
HFDHE2 2 0 .114a)0.1124 0 .107 0 .11
4 0 .1167 0.1171 0.1173
0 0 .096a)0.0942 0 .096
HFD-B 2 0 .131a)0.1277 0 .130
4 0 .1325 0.1330 0.1193 0 .133 0 .131 0.129
0 0 .0891 0.106
LM2M2 2 0 .1213
4 0 .1259 0.126 0.1252
0 0 .0890
TTY 2 0 .1212
4 0 .1258 0.126
a)Results from [22] for a grid with Nθ=Nρ= 275 and ρmax= 60˚A.
TABLE III. Excited state energy E(1)
tresults for the helium trimer. The (absolute) values of E(1)
tare given in mK. The grid
parameters used were: Nθ=Nρ= 805, τ0= 0.2,ν0= 3.6, and ρmax= 300 ˚A.
Potential lmax This work [19] [18] [21] [16] [17]
0 1 .5a)1.46 1 .46 1 .04 1 .517
HFDHE2 2 1 .7a)1.65 1 .6
4 1 .67 1.67
0 2 .5a)2.45
HFD-B 2 2 .8a)2.71
4 2 .74 2.75
0 2 .02 2.118
LM2M2 2 2 .25
4 2 .28 2.27 2.269
0 2 .02
TTY 2 2 .25
4 2 .28
a)Results from [22] for a grid with Nθ=Nρ= 252 and ρmax= 250 ˚A.
11TABLE IV. Trimer excited-state energy E(1)
t(mK) obtained with the TTY potential for various grids.
Nθ=Nρ= 252 Nθ=Nρ= 502 Nθ=Nρ= 652 Nθ=Nρ= 805 Nθ=Nρ= 1005
lmax ρmax= 250˙ ˚A ρmax= 300 ˚A ρmax= 300 ˚A ρmax= 300 ˚A ρmax= 300 ˚A
0 −2.108 −2.039 −2.029 −2.024 −2.021
2 −2.348 −2.273 −2.258 −2.253 −2.248
TABLE V. Estimations for4He atom –4He dimer scattering lengths ℓscand inverse wave numbers κ−1corresponding to the
excited-state energy E(1)
tfor the HFD-B, LM2M2 and TTY potentials. The accuracy for the scattering lengths is within ±5˚A.
The grid parameters used for the calculation of ℓscare:Nθ=Nρ= 502, τ0= 0.18,ν= 3.45 and ρmax= 460 ˚A.
Potential lmax ℓsc(˚A) κ−1(˚A) Potential lmax ℓsc(˚A) κ−1(˚A)
0 170a)168 109 0 168 113
HFD-B 2 145a)138 94 LM2M2/TTY 2 134 98
4 135 93 4 131 96
a)Results from [22] for a grid with Nθ=Nρ= 320 and ρmax= 400 ˚A.
TABLE VI. Phase shift δ(lmax)
0 results (in degrees) for the HFD-B potential for various c.m . energies E(in mK). The grid
parameters used are: Nθ=Nρ= 502, τ0= 0.18,ν= 3.45, and ρmax=460˚A.
E δ(0)
0 δ(2)
0 δ(4)
0 E δ(0)
0 δ(2)
0 δ(4)
0 E δ(0)
0 δ(2)
0 δ(4)
0
−1.68541 359.9 359.9 359.9 −1.05 299.1 308.2 309.2 0.95 262.4 272.1 273.7
−1.68 352.6 353.9 354.1 −0.8 290.8 300.4 301.5 1.2 260.0 269.6 270.7
−1.65 341.7 345.0 345.4 −0.55 284.4 294.2 295.4 1.45 257.8 267.3 268.4
−1.60 330.8 337.7 338.2 −0.3 279.3 289.3 290.4 1.7 255.9 265.2 266.3
−1.55 326.9 332.8 333.5 −0.05 275.1 285.2 286.3 1.95 254.1 263.4 264.5
−1.50 322.4 329.0 329.8 0.2 271.4 281.3 282.5 2.2 252.5 261.7 262.7
−1.40 315.4 323.0 323.9 0.45 268.1 277.9 279.0 2.45 251.0 260.1 261.1
−1.30 309.9 318.1 319.1 0.7 265.1 274.8 276.0
TABLE VII. Phase shift δ(lmax)
0 results for the LM2M2 potential. The units and grid paramete rs used are the same as in
Table VI.
E δ(0)
0 δ(2)
0 E δ(0)
0 δ(2)
0 E δ(0)
0 δ(2)
0
−1.30348 359.8 359.9 −0.8 304.6 313.8 0.95 267.0 276.2
−1.3 354.1 355.3 −0.55 295.2 304.8 1.2 264.1 273.2
−1.25 337.9 342.3 −0.3 287.9 297.7 1.45 261.5 270.6
−1.20 330.5 336.3 −0.05 282.3 292.2 1.7 259.2 268.1
−1.15 325.2 332.0 0.2 277.7 287.4 1.95 257.1 266.0
−1.10 321.1 328.5 0.45 273.7 283.2 2.2 255.3 264.0
−1.05 317.6 325.5 0.7 270.1 279.5 2.45 253.6 262.3
12TABLE VIII. Phase shift δ(lmax)
0 results for the TTY potential. The units and grid parameters used are the same as in Table
VI.
E δ(0)
0 δ(2)
0 δ(4)
0 E δ(0)
0 δ(2)
0 δ(4)
0 E δ(0)
0 δ(2)
0 δ(4)
0
−1.30961 359.7 359.8 359.8 −0.8 304.3 313.5 314.6 0.95 266.8 276.1 277.2
−1.308 355.9 356.8 356.9 −0.55 295.0 304.6 305.7 1.2 264.0 273.1 274.2
−1.3 350.2 352.1 352.4 −0.3 287.7 297.5 298.7 1.45 261.4 270.5 271.5
−1.25 336.8 341.4 341.9 −0.05 282.0 292.0 293.2 1.7 259.1 268.1 269.1
−1.2 329.7 335.7 336.4 0.2 277.5 287.3 288.4 1.95 257.0 265.9 266.9
−1.10 320.5 328.1 329.0 0.45 273.5 283.1 284.2 2.2 255.0 263.9 265.0
−1.05 317.1 325.1 326.1 0.7 270.0 279.4 280.5 2.45 253.5 262.2 263.2
TABLE IX. The parameters for the4He−4He Aziz and co-workers potentials used.
Parameter HFDHE2 [6] HFD-B [7] LM2M2 [8]
ε(K) 10.8 10.948 10.97
rm(˚A) 2.9673 2.963 2.9695
A 544850.4 184431.01 189635.353
α 13.353384 10.43329537 10.70203539
β 0 −2.27965105 -1.90740649
C6 1.3732412 1.36745214 1.34687065
C8 0.4253785 0.42123807 0.41308398
C10 0.178100 0.17473318 0.17060159
D 1.241314 1.4826 1.4088
Aa − − 0.0026
ζ1 − − 1.003535949
ζ2 − − 1.454790369
TABLE X. The parameters for the4He−4He TTY potential used.
A(K) 315766 .2067a)C6 1.461
β/parenleftBig
(a.u.)−1/parenrightBig
1.3443 C8 14.11
D 7.449 C10 183.5
N 12
a)The value of Awas obtained from the data presented in [9] using, for conver ting the energy units, the factor 1K= 3 .1669 ×10−6a.u.
13260280300320340360
0 1 2 3 4 5TTY
HFD-B
//0
/, degreesElab
/, mK
FIG. 1. S-wave helium atom – helium dimer scattering phase sh iftsδ0(Elab),Elab=3
2(E+|ǫd|), for the HFD-B and TTY
4He–4He potentials. The lower curve corresponds to the case where lmax= 0 while for the upper lmax= 2.
14 |
arXiv:physics/9910017v1 [physics.atom-ph] 13 Oct 1999Ground states of the atoms H, He,. . ., Ne and their singly posi tive ions in
strong magnetic fields: The high field regime
M. V. Ivanov †and P. Schmelcher
Theoretische Chemie, Physikalisch–Chemisches Institut, Universit¨ at Heidelberg, INF 229, D-69120 Heidelberg,
Federal Republic of Germany
†Permanent address: Institute of Precambrian Geology and Ge ochronology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Nab.
Makarova 2, St. Petersburg 199034, Russia
(February 2, 2008)
The electronic structure of the ground and some excited stat es of neutral atoms with
the nuclear charge numbers 1 ≤Z≤10 and their single positive ions are investigated by
means of our 2D mesh Hartree-Fock method for strong magnetic fields 0 .5≤γ≤10000.
Forγ= 10000 the ground state configurations of all the atoms and io ns considered
are given by fully spin-polarized configurations of single- electron orbitals with magnetic
quantum numbers ranging from m= 0 to m=−N+ 1 where Nis the number of the
electrons. Focusing on the fully spin polarized situation w e provide critical values of the
magnetic field strength for which crossovers with respect to the spatial symmetries of the
ground state take place. It is found that the neutral atoms an d singly charged positive
ions with 2 ≤Z≤5 have one fully spin-polarized ground state configuration w hereas
for 6 ≤Z≤10 one intermediate fully spin-polarized configuration wit h an orbital of 2 p0
type occurs.
I. INTRODUCTION
The behavior and properties of atoms in strong magnetic field s is a subject which has attracted the
interest of many researchers. Partially this interest is mo tivated by the astrophysical discovery of strong
fields on white dwarfs and neutron stars [1–3]. On the other ha nd, the competition of the diamagnetic and
Coulomb interaction, characteristic for atoms in strong ma gnetic fields, causes a rich variety of complex
properties which are of interest on their own.
Investigations on the electronic structure in the presence of a magnetic field appear to be quite com-
plicated due to the intricate geometry of these quantum prob lems. Most of the investigations in the
literature focus on the hydrogen atom (for a list of referenc es see, for example, [4–7]). These studies
provided us with a detailed understanding of the electronic structure of the hydrogen atom in magnetic
fields of arbitrary strengths. As a result the absorption fea tures of certain magnetic white dwarfs could
be explained and this allowed for a modeling of their atmosph eres (see ref. [8] for a comprehensive review
of atoms in strong magnetic fields and their astrophysical ap plications up to 1994 and ref. [9] for a more
recent review on atoms and molecules in external fields). On t he other hand there are a number of mag-
netic white dwarfs whose spectra remain unexplained and can not be interpreted in terms of magnetized
atomic hydrogen. Furthermore new magnetic objects are disc overed (see, for example, Reimers et al [10]
in the course of the Hamburg ESO survey) whose spectra await t o be explained. Very recently significant
progress has been achieved with respect to the interpretati on of the observed spectrum of the prominent
white dwarf GD229 which shows a rich spectrum ranging from th e UV to the near IR. Extensive and
precise calculations on the helium atom provided data for ma ny excited states in a broad range of field
strengths [11]. The comparison of the stationary transitio ns of the atom with the positions of the absorp-
1tion edges of the observed spectrum yielded strong evidence for the existence of helium in the atmosphere
of GD229 [12].
For atoms with several electrons there are two decisive fact ors which enrich the possible changes in
the electronic structure with varying field strength compar ed to the one-electron system. First we have a
third competing interaction which is the electron-electro n repulsion and second the different electrons feel
very different Coulomb forces, i.e. possess different one par ticle energies, and consequently the regime
of the intermediate field strengths appears to be the sum of th e intermediate regimes for the separate
electrons.
There exist a number of investigations on two-electron atom s in the literature (see ref. [11] and references
therein). Focusing on systems with more than two electrons h owever the number of investigations is very
scarce [13–19]. Some of them use the adiabatic approximatio n in order to investigate the very high field
regime. These works contain a number of important results on the properties and structure of several
multielectron atoms. Being very useful for high fields the ad iabatic approach does hardly allow to describe
the electronic structure with decreasing field strength: pa rticularly the core electrons of multi-electron
atoms feel a strong nuclear attraction which can be dominate d by the external field only for very high field
strengths. In view of this there is a need for further quantum mechanical investigations on multi-electron
atoms, particularly in the intermediate to high-field regim e.
The ground states of atoms in strong magnetic fields have diffe rent spatial and spin symmetries in
the different regions of the field strengths. We encounter, th erefore, a series of changes i.e. crossovers
with respect to their symmetries with varying field stength. The simplest case is the helium atom which
possesses two ground state configurations: the singlet zero - and low-field ground state 1 s2and the fully
spin-polarized high-field ground state 1 s2p−1. In the Hartree-Fock approximation the transition point
between these configurations is given by the field strength γ= 0.711. (If not indicated otherwise we use
in the following atomic units for all quantities. In particu lar, the magnetic field γ=B/B 0is measured
in unitsB0= ¯hc/ea2
0= 2.3505·105T = 2.3505·109G.) In previous works we have investigated the series
of transitions of the ground state configurations for the com plete range of field strengths for the lithium
[18] and carbon [19] atoms as well as the ion Li+[18]. The evolution and appearence of these crossovers
and the involved configurations become more and more intrica te with increasing number of electrons of
the atom. Currently the most complicated atomic system with a completely known sequence of ground
state electronic configurations for the whole range of magne tic field strengths is the neutral carbon atom
[19]. Its ground state experiences six crossovers involvin g seven different electronic configurations which
belong to three groups of different spin projections Sz=−1,−2,−3 onto the magnetic field. This series
of ground state configurations was extracted from results of numerical calculations for more than twenty
electronic configurations selected via a detailed analysis on the basis of general energetical arguments.
The picture of these transitions is especially complicated at relatively weak and intermediate fields. Due
to this circumstance the comprehensive investigation of th e structure of ground states of atoms is a
complex problem which has to be solved for each atom separate ly. On the other hand, the geometry of
the atomic wave functions is simplified for sufficiently high m agnetic fields: Beyond some critical field
strength the global ground state is given by a fully spin pola rized configuration. This allows us to push
the current state of the art and to study the ground states of t he full series of neutral atoms and singly
charged positive ions with Z≤10, i.e. the sequence H, He, Li, Be, B, C, N, O, F, Ne, in the doma in
of high magnetic fields. For the purpose of this investigatio n we define the high field domain as the
one, where the ground state electronic configurations are fu lly spin polarized (Fully Spin Polarized (FSP)
regime). The latter fact supplies an additional advantage f or calculations performed in the Hartree-Fock
2approach, because our one-determinantal wave functions ar e eigenfunctions of the total spin operator S2.
Starting from the high-field limit we will investigate the el ectronic structure and properties of the ground
states with decreasing field strength until we reach the first crossover to a partially spin polarized (PSP)
configuration, i.e. we focus on the regime of field strengths f or which fully spin polarized configurations
represent the ground state.
II. METHOD
The numerical approach applied in the present work coincide s with that of our previous investigations
[17–19]. Refs. [7,17,18,20] contain some more details of th e mesh techniques. We solve the electronic
Schr¨ odinger equation for the atoms in a magnetic field under the assumption of an infinitely heavy
nucleus (see below for comments on finite nuclear mass correc tions) in the (unrestricted) Hartree-Fock
approximation. The solution is established in cylindrical coordinates ( ρ,φ,z ) with the z-axis oriented
along the magnetic field. We prescribe to each electron a defin ite value of the magnetic quantum number
mµ. Each one-electron wave function Ψ µdepends on the variables φand (ρ,z) as follows
Ψµ(ρ,φ,z ) = (2π)−1/2e−imµφψµ(z,ρ) (1)
whereµindicates the numbering of the electrons. The resulting par tial differential equations for ψµ(z,ρ)
and the formulae for the Coulomb and exchange potentials hav e been presented in ref. [20].
The one-particle equations for the wave functions ψµ(z,ρ) are solved by means of the fully numerical
mesh method described in refs. [7,20]. The feature which dis tinguishes the present calculations from
those described in ref. [20] is the method for the calculatio n of the Coulomb and exchange integrals. In
the present work as well as in ref. [17–19] we obtain these pot entials as solutions of the corresponding
Poisson equation.
Our mesh approach is flexible enough to yield precise results for arbitrary field strengths. Some
minor decrease of the precision appears in very strong magne tic fields. With respect to the electronic
configurations possessing high absolute values of magnetic quantum numbers of outer electrons some
minor computational problems arose also at lower field stren gths. Both these phenomena are due to a
big difference with respect to the binding energies ǫBµof one electron wave functions belonging to the
same electronic configuration
ǫBµ= (mµ+|mµ|+ 2szµ+ 1)γ/2−ǫµ (2)
whereǫµis the one electron energy and szµis the spinz-projection. The precision of our results depends,
of course, also on the number of the mesh nodes and can be impro ved in calculations with denser meshes.
Most of the present calculations are carried out on sequence s of meshes with the maximal number of
nodes being 65 ×65.
III. RELEVANT PROPERTIES IN THE HIGH FIELD REGIME
In this section we provide some qualitative considerations on the problem of the ground states of multi-
electron atoms in the high field limit. These considerations present a starting point for the combined
qualitative and numerical considerations given in the foll owing section. At very high field strengths the
nuclear attraction energies and HF potentials (which deter mine the motion along the zaxis) are small
3compared to the interaction energies with the magnetic field (which determines the motion perpendicular
to the magnetic field and is responsible for the Landau zonal s tructure of the spectrum). Thus in the limit
(γ→ ∞), all the one-electron wave functions of the ground state be long to the lowest Landau zones, i.e.
mµ≤0 for all the electrons, and the system must be fully spin-pol arized, i.e.szµ=−1
2. For the Coulomb
central field the one electron levels form quasi 1D Coulomb se ries with the binding energy EB=1
2n2
zfor
nz>0, whereas EB(γ→ ∞)→ ∞ fornz= 0, where nzis the number of nodal surfaces of the wave
function crossing the zaxis. In the limit γ→ ∞ the ground state wave function must be formed of the
tightly bound single-electron functions with nz= 0. The binding energies of these functions decrease as
|m|increases and, thus, the electrons must occupy orbitals wit h increasing |m|starting with m= 0.
In the language of the Hartree-Fock approximation the groun d state wave function of an atom in the
high-field limit is a fully spin-polarized set of single-ele ctron orbitals with no nodal surfaces crossing the
zaxis and with non-positive magnetic quantum numbers decrea sing fromm= 0 tom=−N+ 1, where
Nis the number of electrons. For the carbon atom, mentioned ab ove, this Hartree-Fock configuration
is 1s2p−13d−24f−35g−46h−5withSz=−3. For the sake of brevity we shall in the following refer to
these ground state configurations in the high-field limit, i. e. the configuration generated by the tightly
bound hydrogenic orbitals 1 s,2p−1,3d−2,4f−3,..., as|0N/angbracketright. The states |0N/angbracketrightpossess the complete spin
polarization Sz=−N/2. Decreasing the magnetic field strength, we can encounter a series of crossovers
of the ground state configuration associated with transitio ns of one or several electrons from orbitals
with the maximal values for |m|to other orbitals with a different spatial geometry of the wav e function
but the same spin polarization. This means the first few cross overs can take place within the space of
fully spin polarized configurations. We shall refer to these configurations by mentioning, i.e. noting,
only the difference with respect to the state |0N/angbracketright. This notation can, of course, also be extended to
non-fully spin polarized configurations. For instance the s tate 1s22p−13d−24f−35g−4withSz=−2 of
the carbon atom will be briefly refered to as/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
, since the default is the occupation of the hydrogenic
series 1s,2p−1,3d−2,...and only deviations from it are recorded by our notation.
In the following considerations we shall often refer to subs ets of electronic states which possess different
spin polarizations. As indicated above we will denote the se t of electronic states with Sz=−N/2 as the
FSP subset. Along with the global ground state it is expedien t to consider also what we call local ground
states which are the energetically lowest states with some d efinite degree of the spin polarization. For
the purpose of the present work we need to know the local groun d state of the subset of electronic states
withSz=−N/2+1 (which is the only partially spin polarized subset consi dered in this paper and which
is refered to as subset PSP) in the high-field regime. This kno wledge is necessary for the evaluation of
the point of the crossover between the FSP and PSP ground stat es, i.e. for the determination of the
critical field strengths at which the global ground state cha nges its spin polarization from Sz=−N/2 to
Sz=−N/2 + 1. For sufficiently high fields the/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
state is the local ground state of the PSP subset of
electronic states.
IV. GROUND STATE ELECTRONIC CONFIGURATIONS IN THE HIGH-FIE LD REGIME
Let us start with the high field limit and the state |0N/angbracketrightand subsequently consider possible ground
state crossovers which occur with decreasing magnetic field strength . In the high-field regime we have per
definition only crossovers due to changes of the spatial orbi tals and no spin-flip crossovers. According to
the goals of the present work we investigate the possible glo bal ground state configurations belonging to
4the subset FSP and determine the transition points to the sub set PSP. Since the detailed study of the
latter subset of states for arbitrary field strengths goes be yond the scope of the present work we consider
first only the/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
state of this subset which is the local ground state of the sub set PSP for sufficiently
strong fields. Then we investigate the FSP ground states with decreasing field strength until we reach
the point of crossover with the energy of the configuration/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
. Subsequently we need to consider other
electronic configurations of the PSP set in order to determin e the complete picture of the energy levels
as a function of the field strength near the spin-flip crossove r and, possibly, to correct the position of this
point (the latter is necessary if the state/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
is not the lowest one of the subset PSP at the spin-flip
point).
Let us consider the ground state transitions within the subs et FSP with decreasing field strength.
The first of these transitions occurs when the binding energy associated with the outermost orbital
(mN=−N+ 1) becomes less than the binding energy of one of the orbital s withnz>0. Due to
the circumstance, that all the orbitals with nz>0 are not occupied in the high-field ground state
configuration, it is reasonable to expect the transition of t he outermost electron to one of the orbitals
withm= 0 and either nz= 1 (i.e. 2 p0orbital) or nz= 2 (i.e. 2 sorbital). The decision between
these two possibilities cannot be taken on the basis of quali tative arguments. For the hydrogen atom or
hydrogen-like ions in a magnetic field the 2 p0orbital is more strongly bound than the 2 sorbital for any
field strength. On the other hand, owing to the electronic scr eening of the nuclear charge in multi-electron
atoms in field-free space the 2 sorbital tends to be more tightly bound than the 2 p0orbital. Thus, we
have two competing mechanisms and numerical calculations a re required for the decision between the
possible |0N/angbracketright−|2p0/angbracketrightand|0N/angbracketright−|2s/angbracketrightcrossovers to a new local FSP ground state. Our calculations for the
|2s/angbracketrightstate presented below in table VI for neutral atoms and in tab le X for positive ions show that the
state |2s/angbracketrightbecomes more tightly bound than the |2p0/angbracketrightstate only for rather weak field strengths, where
this state cannot pretend to be the ground state of the corres ponding atom or ion due to the presence
of more tightly bound non-fully spin polarized states. In re sult the first intermediate ground state of
the subset FSP, i.e. the state beside the |0N/angbracketrightstate which might be involved in the first crossover of
the ground state with decreasing field strength, is the |2p0/angbracketrightstate. Calculations for the subset PSP (see
below) show indeed, that this state is the global ground stat e in a certain regime of field strengths for the
neutral atoms with Z≥6, i.e. C, N, O, F and Ne, as well as their positive ions C+, N+, O+, F+, Ne+.
For the atoms He, Li, Be and B ( Z≤5) as well as for the ions Li+, Be+and B+the state/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
becomes
more tightly bound than |0N/angbracketrightfor fields stronger that those associated with the |0N/angbracketright−|2p0/angbracketrightcrossover and
the|2p0/angbracketrightnever becomes the global ground state of these atoms and ions . Thus, both neutral atoms and
positive ions A+withZ≤5 have only one fully spin polarized ground state configurati on|0N/angbracketright, which
represents the global ground state above some critical field strength.
The question about a possible second intermediate fully spi n polarized ground state occurring with
further decreasing field strength arises for neutral atoms a nd positive ions with Z≥6 which possess
the intermediate fully spin polarized ground state |2p0/angbracketright. This state could be either a state, containing
an additional orbital with nz= 1 which would result in the |2p03d−1/angbracketrightconfiguration, or a state with an
additionals-type orbital, i.e. |2s2p0/angbracketright. The third possibility of the simultaneous transition of th e electron
with the magnetic quantum number mN−1=−N+2 to the 3d−1orbital and the electron in the 2 p0orbital
to the 2sorbital, which gives the |2s3d−1/angbracketrightconfiguration, can be excluded from the list of possible grou nd
state configurations without a numerical investigation. Th e reason herefore is that the 3 d−1orbital is
for any field strength more weakly bound than the 2 p0orbital and thus the |2s2p0/angbracketrightconfiguration possess
a lower energy than the |2s3d−1/angbracketrightconfiguration for arbitrary magnetic field strengths. When c omparing
5the configurations |2s2p0/angbracketrightand|2p03d−1/angbracketrightwe can make use of what we have learned (see above) from
the competing |2p0/angbracketrightand|2s/angbracketrightconfigurations for higher field strengths: The 2 sorbital is energetically
preferable at weak magnetic fields whereas the 3 d−1orbital yields energetically lower configurations in
the strong field regime. Thus, we perform calculations for th e|2p03d−1/angbracketrightconfiguration for many field
strengths and then perform at much fewer field strengths calc ulations to check the energy of the |2s2p0/angbracketright
configuration in order to obtain the correct lowest energy an d state of the set FSP.
The behavior of the energy levels described in the previous p aragraph is illustrated in Figure 1. In
this figure the energy curves for four possible fully spin pol arized electronic configurations and two
energy curves for the PSP subset of the neon ( Z= 10) atom are presented. This figure shows, in
particular, the energy curve of the high field ground state |0N/angbracketrightwhich intersects with the curve E|2p0/angbracketright(γ)
atγ= 159.138. The latter energy remains the lowest in the FSP subset un til the intersection of this curve
withE|2p03d−1/angbracketright(γ) atγ= 40.537. This intersection occurs at higher field strength than t he intersection
of the curves E|2p0/angbracketright(γ) andE|1s2/angbracketright(γ) which is at γ= 38.060. On the other hand, the control calculations
for the state |2s2p0/angbracketright, not presented in Figure 1, show that its total energy for γ= 38.060 is larger than
the energy E|2p03d−1/angbracketright. According to the previous argumentation this means that th e state |2s2p0/angbracketrightis not
the global ground state of the Ne atom for any magnetic field st rengths. Furthermore the state |2p03d−1/angbracketright
is a candidate for becoming the global ground state of the neo n atom in some bounded regime of the
field strength. However, we have not yet performed (see below ) a detailed investigation of the lowest
energy curves of the PSP subset which is essential to take a de finite decision on the global ground state
configurations. For neutral atoms with 6 ≤Z≤9 and positive ions A+with 6 ≤Z≤10 the energies
of the states |2p03d−1/angbracketrightand|2s2p0/angbracketrightat the points of intersections of the curves E|2p0/angbracketright(γ) andE|1s2/angbracketright(γ)
are higher than the energies of the states |2p0/angbracketrightand/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
. This leads to the conjecture that no neutral
atoms with Z <10 and positive ions with Z≤10 can possess more than two different fully spin polarized
ground state configurations in the complete range of field str engths.
The above concludes our considerations of the fully spin pol arized ground state configurations. To
prove or refute the above conjecture we have to address the qu estion of the lower boundary of the fully
spin polarized domain, i.e. the lowest field strength, at whi ch a fully spin-polarized state represents the
ground state of the atom considered. It is evident that this b oundary value of the field strength is given
by the crossover from a fully spin polarized to a non-fully sp in polarized ground state with decreasing
field strength.
First of all we have to check if the state/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
has the lowest energy of all the states of subset PSP at
the point of intersection of the curve E|1s2/angbracketright(γ) with the corresponding energy curve for the local ground
state configuration of subset FSP. Following our considerat ions for the fully spin polarized case we can
conclude that calculations have to be performed first of all f or the states/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
and/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22s/angbracketrightbig
.
The numerical calculations show, that for atoms with Z≤6 and ions with Z≤7, the state/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
becomes the ground state while lowering the spin polarizati on from the maximal absolute value Sz=
−N/2 toSz=−N/2 + 1. For heavier atoms and ions we first remark that the state/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
is not the
energetically lowest one in the PSP subset at magnetic fields at which its energy becomes equal to the
energy of the lowest FSP state. For these atoms and ions the st ate/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
lies lower than/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
at these
field strengths. One can see this behavior for the neon atom in Figure 1. The second possible PSP local
ground state/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22s/angbracketrightbig
(not presented in Figure 1) proves to be less tightly bound at these fields. These
facts allow in the following a definite clarification of the pi cture of the global ground state configuration
in the high field regime. For atoms with Z≥7 and positive ions with Z≥8 the intersection points
between the state/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
and the energetically lowest state in the FSP subspace have t o be calculated.
6In result, the spin-flip crossover occurs at higher fields tha n this would be in the case of/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
being the
lowest state in the PSP subspace. In particular, the spin-fli p crossover for the neon atom is found to
be slightly higher than the point of the crossover |2p0/angbracketright − |2p03d−1/angbracketright, and, therefore, this atom has in the
framework of the Hartree-Fock approximation only two fully spin polarized configurations likewise other
neutral atoms and positive ions with 6 ≤Z≤10. The above conjecture is therefore refuted and the FSP
|2p03d−1/angbracketrightrepresents never the global ground state configuration in th e high field regime for all neutral
atoms and positive ions with Z≤10. It should be noted that the situation with the neon atom ca n
be regarded as a transient one due to closeness of the interse ction |2p0/angbracketright − |2p03d−1/angbracketrightto the intersection
|2p0/angbracketright −/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
. This means that we can expect the configuration |2p03d−1/angbracketrightto be the global ground
state for the sodium atom ( Z= 11). In addition an investigation of the neon atom carried o ut on a more
precise level than the Hartree-Fock method could also intro duce some corrections to the picture described
above.
After obtaining the new spin flip points for atoms with 7 ≤Z≤10 and ions with 8 ≤Z≤10 (which are
transition points between the |2p0/angbracketrightand/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
states) one has to check them with respect to the next
(in the order of decreasing field strengths) possible PSP loc al ground state configurations. Analogously
to the FSP subset these configurations are/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p03d−1/angbracketrightbig
and/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22s2p0/angbracketrightbig
. The numerical calculations
show, that their energies lie higher than the energy of the/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
configuration at the spin flip points
and they are therefore excluded from the list of the global gr ound states considered here.
The final picture of the crossovers of the global ground state configurations is presented in tables I
(for the neutral atoms) and II (for the positive ions A+). The corresponding values of the field strengths
belonging to the point of crossover are underlined in these t ables. The field strengths for other closelying
crossovers which actually do not affect the scenario of the ch anges of the global ground state are also
presented in these tables. In a graphical form these results are illustrated in Figures 2 (neutral atoms) and
3 (ions). Shown are the critical field strengths belonging to the crossovers of selected states of the atoms
(ions) as functions of the nuclear charge. The filled symbols mark the crossovers of the energy levels
which correspond to the actual transitions of the ground sta te configurations, whereas the analogous
non-filled symbols correspond to magnetic field strengths of the crossovers not associated with changes in
the ground state but excited states. One can see in these figur es the dependencies of the field strengths
for various types of crossovers on the charge of the nucleus. In particular, one can see many significant
crossovers for Z= 10 lying very close from each other on the γaxis. This peculiarity in combination with
the behavior of the curve γ(Z) for the |2p0/angbracketright − |2p03d−1/angbracketrightcrossover allows one to expect the configuration
|2p03d−1/angbracketrightto become a ground state configuration for Z >10.
Some summarizing remarks with respect to the global ground s tate configurations in the high field
regime are in order. The atoms and positive ions with Z≤5 have one ground state configuration |0N/angbracketright.
The atoms and ions with 6 ≤Z≤10 possess two high field configurations. The C atom ( Z= 6) plays an
exceptional role in the sense that it is the only atom which sh ows the ground state crossover |2p0/angbracketright−/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
involving the/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
state as a global ground state.
V. NUMERICAL RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The tables III–X contain numerical values of the total energ ies of the neutral atoms and positive ions
obtained in our Hartree-Fock calculations. Tables III, IV, V and VI contain the energies of the neutral
atoms in the states |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
and|2s/angbracketright, respectively. The analogous results for the ions A+are
7presented in tables VII, VIII, IX and X (the results are for th e states |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
and|2s/angbracketright). The
energies associated with the points of crossover for the glo bal ground state both in neutral atoms and in
their singly positive ions are presented in table XI. These e nergy values provide us with the ionization
energies at the transition points. Being combined with the d ata of the previous tables they provide the
behavior of the ionization energies of the atoms and the tota l energies of the atoms and positive ions in
the complete high-field region.
In Figure 4 we present the ionization energies of neutral ato ms divided by the ionization energy of the
hydrogen atom as a function of the magnetic field strength. Al l the curves for multi-electron atoms at
γ <600 lie lower than the curve for hydrogen at the correspondin g field strengths. But for γ >1500
the ionization energies of all atoms exceed the ionization e nergy for the hydrogen atom. Moreover,
with growing nuclear charge we observe a stronger increase o f the ionization energy for stronger fields
accompanied by a shift of the starting point for the growth to the regime of stronger magnetic fields. This
strengthening of the binding of the multi-electron atoms at strong magnetic fields may be considered as
a hint for increasingly favorable conditions for the format ion of the corresponding negative ions.
Figure 5 presents the ionization energies for the |0N/angbracketrightstates for various field strengths depending on
the nuclear charge Z, i.e. for all atoms H, He,. . . , Ne. All the field strengths pres ented in this figure
are above the first crossover to another global ground state c onfiguration. Thus, the ionization energies
in this figure represent the differences between the energies of the high-field ground states of the neutral
atoms and the corresponding singly charged positive ions. T he curve for γ= 2000 can be considered as
the prototype example for the general properties of the depe ndenciesEIon(Z). For small values of Zthis
curve shows increasing values for EIonwith increasing Z, then it has a maximum at Z= 5 and for Z >5
it decreases with increasing Z. Analogous curves for lower field strengths have their maxim a at lower
values ofZ. Atγ= 1000 the ionization energy shows its maximal value at Z= 2, whereas the ionization
energies for γ= 500 and γ= 200 decrease monotonically with increasing Z. On the other hand, for
γ= 5000 and γ= 10000 we obtain a monotonically increasing behavior of the ionization energy for the
whole range 1 ≤Z≤10 of nuclear charges investigated in the present work. The b ehavior described
above results from a competition of two different physical me chanisms which impact the binding energy
of the outermost electron in the high-field ground state Hart ree-Fock configuration. The first mechanism
is the lowering of the binding energy of the outermost electr on with increasing absolute value of its
magnetic quantum number |m|provided that this electron feels a constant nuclear charge . The latter
assumption is a rough approximation to the case of relativel y weak fields when the inner Z−1 electrons
screen more or less effectively the Coulomb field of the nucleu s. The second and opposite tendency is
associated with the decrease of the efficiency of this screeni ng in extremely strong magnetic fields due to
the fact that the geometry of the wave functions tends to be on e-dimensional in these fields. In result the
effect of increasing effective nuclear charge exceeds the effe ct of the growth of |m|with increasing Zfor
the high-field ground state configurations. Continuing this qualitative consideration we point out that
at each fixed γthe influence of the magnetic field on the inner electrons beco me less and less significant
asZincreases which is due to the dominance of the Coulomb attrac tion potential of the nucleus over
the magnetic field interaction. This has to result in a signifi cant screening of the nuclear charge by these
electrons. In result the functions EIon(Z) for strong fields defined on the whole interval 1 ≤Z <+∞
have maxima at some values for Zand decrease for sufficiently large values of Z.
Next we provide a comparison of the present results with adia batic HF calculations which were carried
out for multi-electron atoms in refs. [13,16]. We compare ou r results on the Hartree-Fock electronic
structure of atoms in strong magnetic fields with results obt ained by Neuhauser et al [13] via a one-
8dimensional adiabatic Hartree-Fock approximation. The calculations in this work were carried out for
the four field strengths γ= 42.544,γ= 212.72,γ= 425.44 andγ= 2127.2. ForZ≤9 and all these field
strengths and for Z= 10 at the three larger values of these fields the Hartree-Foc k wave functions of the
ground states are reported to be fully spin polarized with no nodes crossing the zaxis. This conclusion
differs from our result for γ= 42.544. According to our calculations at γ= 42.544 the wave functions
without nodes crossing the zaxis represent the ground states of atoms with Z≤7 (i.e. H, He, Li, Be, B, C
and N) whereas for the atoms with 8 ≤Z≤10 (i.e. O, F and Ne) the wave functions of the ground states
are fully spin polarized with one nodal surface crossing the zaxis. A numerical comparison of our results
with those of refs. [13,16] is shown in table XII. All our valu es lie lower than the values of these adiabatic
calculations. Since our total energies are upper bonds to th e exact values we consider our HF results
as being closer to the exact values compared to the results of the adiabatic HF calculations. Therefore,
on the basis of our calculations combined with the results of [13,16] we can obtain an idea of the degree
of the applicability of the adiabatic approximation for mul ti-electron atoms for different field strengths
and nuclear charges. It is well known, that the precision of t he adiabatic approximation decreases with
decreasing field strength. The increase of the relative erro rs with decreasing field strength is clearly visible
in the table. On the other hand, the relative errors of the adi abatic approximation possess the tendency
to increase with growing Z, which is manifested by the scaling transformation E(Z,γ) =Z2E(1,γ/Z2)
(e.g. [8,20]) well known for hydrogen-like ions. The behavi or of the inner electrons is to some extent
similar to the behavior of the electrons in the correspondin g hydrogen-like ions. Therefore their behavior
is to lowest order similar to the behavior of the electron in t he hydrogen atom at magnetic field strength
γ/Z2i.e. this behavior can be less accurately described by the ad iabatic approximation at large Zvalues.
The absolute values of the errors in the total energy associa ted with the adiabatic approximation are in
many cases larger than the corresponding values of the ioniz ation energies.
To conclude this section we discuss briefly three issues, whi ch could affect the precision of the results
presented above. These issues are electron correlations, e ffects due to the finite nuclear mass and rel-
ativistic corrections. For all these effects we have to disti nguish between their influence on the total
energy and on other quantities like the ionization energy an d the field strength for the crossover of the
energy levels. In most cases their influence on the latter val ues is much smaller due to the fact that they
involve differences of total energies for quantum states pos sessing a similar atomic core. Let us start by
addressing the problem of the electronic correlations whic h is the critical problem for the precision of
the Hartree-Fock calculations. The final evaluation of the c orrelation effects is possible only on the basis
of exact calculations going beyond the Hartree-Fock approx imation. Therefore we can give here only
qualitative arguments based on the geometry of the wave func tion and on existing calculations for less
complicated systems. The dependence of the ratio of the corr elation energy and the total binding energy
for the two ground state configurations of the helium atom has been investigated in ref. [21]. This ratio
for the 1s2state decreases with growing γfrom 1.4% atγ= 0 to about 0 .6% atγ= 100. The same
ratio for the 1 s2p−1state (high field ground state configuration) increases with growingγ. It remains
however for all the field strengths considered essentially s maller the values for the 1 s2state. This result
for the helium atom in strong magnetic fields allows us to spec ulate that for the field strengths considered
here the correlation energy for atoms and positive ions heav ier than helium atom does not exceed their
corresponding values without fields. Due to the similar geom etry of the inner shells in the participating
electronic configurations we do not expect a major influence o f the correlation effects both on the field
strengths of the crossovers of the ground state configuratio ns within the subsets FSP or PSP and on the
ionization energies if the states of a neutral atom and the po sitive ion belong to the same subset. On
9the other hand, the properties associated with configuratio ns from different subsets (for instance values
of the spin-flip crossover field strengths) can be affected mor e strongly by correlation effects.
Our second issue is the influence of the finite nuclear mass on t he results presented above. A discussion
of this problem is provided in ref. [11] and references there in. Importantly there exists a well-defined
procedure which tells us how to relate the energies for infini te nuclear mass to those with a finite nuclear
mass. The corresponding equations are exact for hydrogen-l ike systems and provide the lowest order
mass corrections O/parenleftbigm
M/parenrightbig
(mandMare the electron and total mass, respectively) for general a toms/ions.
Essentially they consist of a redefinition of the energy scal e (atomic units − →reduced atomic units, due
to the introduction of the reduced mass) and an additional en ergy shift −(1/M0)γ(M+Sz) whereM0is
the nuclear mass. The first effect can simply be ’included’ in o ur results by taking the energies in reduced
a.u. instead of a.u. The mentioned shift can become relevant for high fields. However, it can easily be
included in the total energies presented here. We emphasize that it plays a minor role in the region of
the crossovers of the ground state configurations and decrea ses significantly with increasing mass of the
atom (nucleus).
Relativistic calculations for the hydrogen atom and hydrog en-like ions were performed by Lind-
gren and Virtamo [22] and Chen and Goldman [23]. Our consider ations are based on the work
by Chen and Goldman [23] which contains results for the 1 sand 2p−1states for a broad range of
magnetic field strengths. Interpolating their results for t he 1sstate and using well known scaling
transformations we can conclude that in the least favorable case ofZ= 10 relativistic corrections
δE= (Erelativistic−Enon−relativistic)/|Enon−relativistic|have to be of the order 4 ·10−4forγ= 200
and 2 ·10−4forγ= 104. The relativistic corrections for the 2 p−1state at relatively strong fields ap-
pear to be of the same order of magnitude or smaller than for th e 1sstate. Thus, making a reasonable
assumption that relativistic corrections for both inner an d outer electrons are similar to those in the
hydrogen-like ions with a properly scaled nuclear charge we can evaluate |δE| ≤4·10−4forZ= 10 and
lesser for lower Zvalues. The same relative correction can be expected also fo r the ionization energies
and energy values used for the determination of the crossove rs of the electronic configurations.
VI. SUMMARY
In the present work we have applied our 2D Hartree-Fock metho d to the magnetized neutral atoms H,
He, Li, Be, B, C, N, O, F and Ne in the high field regime which is ch aracterized by fully spin-polarized
electronic shells. Additionally we have studied the crosso ver from fully spin polarized to partially spin
polarized global ground state configurations. The highest fi eld strength investigated was γ= 10000. Our
single-determinant Hartree-Fock approach supplies us wit h exact upper bounds for the total energy. A
comparison with adiabatic calculations in the literature s hows the decrease of the precision of the latter
with growing Z.
The investigation of the geometry of the spatial part of the e lectronic wave function demonstrates that
in the high-field limit this wave function is a composition of the lowest Landau orbitals with absolute
values of the magnetic quantum number growing from |m|= 0 up to |m|=N−1, whereNis the number
of the electrons: i.e. we have the series 1 s, 2p−1, 3d−2,. . . For atoms with 2 ≤Z≤5 these states of type
1s2p−13d−2...represent the complete set of the fully spin-polarized grou nd state configurations. Heavier
atoms 6 ≤Z≤10 have one intermediate ground state configuration associa ted with the low-field end of
the fully spin polarized region. This state contains one 2 p0type orbital (i.e. the orbital with a negative
10zparity and |m|= 0) instead of the orbital with the positive zparity and the maximal value of |m|.
Extrapolating our data as a function of the nuclear charge Zwe expect that a third fully spin polarized
ground state configuration occurs first for Z= 11, i.e. the sodium atom. The third configuration
is suggested to be the |2p03d−1/angbracketrightstate. The critical field strength which provides the crosso ver from
the partially spin polarized to the fully spin polarized reg ime depends sensitively on the changes of
the geometry of the wave functions. Indeed a number of differe nt configurations have been selected as
candidates for ground states in the crossover regime and onl y concrete calculations could provide us with
a final decision on the energetically lowest state of the non- fully spin polarized electronic states. Generally
speaking all the spin-flip crossovers mentioned above invol ve a pairing of the 1 selectrons, i.e. the pair of
orbitals 1s2. The carbon atom ( Z= 6) plays an exceptional role since it is the only neutral ato m which
possesses two fully spin polarized configurations and the/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
as a global non-fully spin polarized ground
state configuration. The spin-flip crossover of the carbon at om preserves the total magnetic quantum
number. All other atoms N, O, F and Ne (7 ≤Z≤10) possess instead the/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
configuration as
a non-fully spin polarized ground state for strong fields. We have determined the positions, i.e. field
strengths, of the crossovers of the ground states. Beyond th is total energies have been provided for many
field strengths for several low-lying excited states.
An analogous investigation has been carried out for singly c harged positive ions 2 ≤Z≤10. The
structure of the fully spin polarized ground state configura tions for these ions is the following: The ions
with 3 ≤Z≤5 have one fully spin polarized ground state configuration an alogous to the high-field
limit of the neutral atoms. For 6 ≤Z≤10, analogously to the neutral atoms, there exist two fully
spin polarized ground state configurations. Depending on th e values of the nuclear charge number Zthe
spin-flip transitions associated with the lowering of the sp in polarization with decreasing field strength
lead also to wave functions of different spatial symmetries. These data being combined with the data for
neutral atoms allow us to obtain the ionization energies of t he atoms. The dependencies of the ionization
energies on the nuclear charge at fixed field strength general ly exhibit maxima at certain values of Z.
The positions of these maxima shift to larger values of Zwith increasing field strength. We provide
some qualitative arguments explaining this behavior of EIon(Z). Finally we have given some remarks on
the interactions going beyond the present level of investig ation, i.e. correlations and finite nuclear mass
effects as well as relativistic corrections.
Acknowledgments
Financial support by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft is gratefully acknowledged.
11[1] J. P. Ostriker and F. D. A. Hartwick, Astrophys. J. 153 (1968) 797.
[2] J. Tr¨ umper, W. Pietsch, C. Reppin, W. Voges, R. Stauben, and E. Kendziorra, Astrophys. J. 219 (1978)
L105.
[3] J. D. Landstreet, in Cosmical Magnetism , edited by D. Lynden-Bell (Kluwer, Boston, 1994), p.55.
[4] W. R¨ osner, G. Wunner, H. Herold, and H. Ruder, J. Phys. B 17 (1984) 29.
[5] H. Friedrich and D. Wintgen, Phys.Rep. 183 (1989) 37.
[6] Yu.P. Kravchenko, M.A. Liberman and B. Johansson, Phys.Rev.Lett. 77 (1996) 619.
[7] M. V. Ivanov, J. Phys. B 21 (1988) 447.
[8] H. Ruder, G. Wunner, H. Herold and F. Geyer, Atoms in Strong Magnetic Fields , Springer-Verlag 1994.
[9]Atoms and Molecules in Strong External Fields , edited by P. Schmelcher and W. Schweizer, Plenum Press
New York and London (1998)
[10] D. Reimers, S. Jordan, V. Beckmann, N. Christlieb, L. Wi sotzki, Astr.& Astrophys. 337 (1998) L13
[11] W. Becken, P. Schmelcher and F.K. Diakonos, J. Phys. B 32 (1999) 1557.
[12] S. Jordan, P. Schmelcher, W. Becken, and W. Schweizer, Astr.&Astrophys. 336 (1998) 33.
[13] D. Neuhauser, S. E. Koonin, and K. Langanke, Phys. Rev. A 33 (1986) 2084; 36 (1987) 4163.
[14] M. D. Jones, G. Ortiz, and D. M. Ceperley, Phys. Rev. A. 54 (1996) 219.
[15] E. M¨ uller, Astron. & Astrophys. 130 (1984) 415
[16] M. Demeur, P.-H. Heenen, and M. Godefroid, Phys. Rev. A 49 (1994) 176.
[17] M. V. Ivanov, Phys. Lett. A 239 (1998) 72.
[18] M.V. Ivanov, P. Schmelcher, Phys. Rev. A 57 (1998) 3793.
[19] M.V. Ivanov, P. Schmelcher, acc. f. publ. in Phys. Rev. A
[20] M. V. Ivanov, Optics and Spectroscopy 70 (1991) 148; J. Phys. B 27 (1994) 4513.
[21] P.Schmelcher, M.V.Ivanov and W.Becken, Phys.Rev.A 59 (1999) 3424.
[22] K. A. U. Lindgren and J. T. Virtamo, J. Phys. B 12 (1979) 3465; J. T. Virtamo and K. A. U. Lindgren,
Phys. Lett. A 71 (1979) 329.
[23] Z. Chen and S. P. Goldman, Phys.Rev.A 45 (1999) 1722.
12Figure Captions
Figure 1. The total energies (in atomic units) of the relevant states o f the neon atom under consid-
eration for the determination of the ground state electroni c configurations for the high field regime.
Figure 2. The magnetic field strengths (a.u.) corresponding to crosso vers of energy levels in neutral
atoms as functions of the nuclear charge. The filled symbols m ark crossovers between global ground state
configurations.
Figure 3. Same as Figure 2 but for the singly positive ions.
Figure 4. Ionization energies of neutral atoms divided by the ionizat ion energy of the hydrogen atom
as a function of the magnetic field strength (a.u.).
Figure 5. Ionization energies of the states |0N/angbracketrightof the neutral atoms (1 ≤Z≤10) for different
magnetic field strengths.
13TABLE I. Magnetic field strengths γ(a.u.) for energy level crossovers in neutral atoms. Ground state crossovers
are underlined.
Z |0N/angbracketright −/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
|0N/angbracketright − |2p0/angbracketright |2p0/angbracketright −/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
|2p0/angbracketright −/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
|2p0/angbracketright − |2p03d−1/angbracketright |2p03d−1/angbracketright −/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
2 0.711
3 2.153
4 4.567 2.529 4.765451
5 8.0251 7.923 8.0325
6 12 .577 18.664 12.216
7 36.849 17.318 17.398
8 64.720 23.3408 23.985
9 104.650 30.285 31.735 22.744 30 .6125
10 159.138 38.151 40.672 40.537 38.060
TABLE II. Magnetic field strengths γ(a.u.) for energy level crossovers in positive ions A+. Ground state
crossovers are underlined.
Z |0N/angbracketright −/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
|0N/angbracketright − |2p0/angbracketright | 2p0/angbracketright −/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
|2p0/angbracketright −/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
|2p0/angbracketright − |2p03d−1/angbracketright
3 2.0718
4 4.501 1.464
5 7.957 5.575
6 12 .506 14.536 12.351
7 30.509 17.429
8 55.747 23.434 23.849
9 92.624 30.364 31.612
10 143.604 38.220 40.559 33.353
14TABLE III. Total energies (a.u.) of the high-field ground sta tes|0N/angbracketrightof neutral atoms in strong magnetic fields.
Z γ = 0.5 γ= 1 γ= 2 γ= 5 γ= 10 γ= 20 γ= 50
1−0.69721056 −0.83116892 −1.0222139 −1.38039889 −1.74779718 −2.21539853 −3.01786074
2−2.615551 −2.959690 −3.502051 −4.617251 −5.829513 −7.427704 −10.264493
3−5.97052 −6.57080 −7.520029 −9.576936 −11.939018 −15.1626119 −21.05055
4−10.80902 −11.72880 −13.16961 −16.30690 −20.01753 −25.232499 −35.00768
5−17.1771 −18.45812 −20.46843 −24.83956 −30.06363 −37.55469 −51.91499
6−25.1007 −26.7843 −29.4282 −35.18153 −42.07989 −52.08903 −71.6285
7−34.5971 −36.7230 −40.0600 −47.3314 −56.06309 −68.81304 −94.0501
8−45.6798 −48.2846 −52.3718 −61.2866 −72.005397 −87.7104 −119.112
9−58.3588 −61.4777 −66.3692 −77.0449 −89.89720 −108.7661 −146.7620
10 −94.60624 −109.7289 −131.9650 −176.964
Z γ = 100 γ= 200 γ= 500 γ= 1000 γ= 2000 γ= 5000 γ= 10000
1−3.7898043 −4.7271451 −6.257088 −7.6624234 −9.3047652 −11.873419 −14.14097
2−13.07665 −16.57908 −22.46665 −28.03209 −34.6989 −45.4246 −55.1514
3−27.01927 −34.58499 −47.55830 −60.05892 −75.282411 −100.2482 −123.313
4−45.10519 −58.08264 −80.67357 −102.75480 −129.9790 −175.2704 −217.695
5−66.99699 −86.60738 −121.16488 −155.3296 −197.8655 −269.440 −337.230
6−92.4552 −119.8127 −168.5248 −217.1413 −278.1612 −381.8097 −480.875
7−121.3027 −157.4300 −222.3434 −287.65764 −370.2004 −511.536 −647.685
8−153.405 −199.2455 −282.28330 −366.430 −473.413 −657.871 −836.767
9−188.657 −245.085 −348.0593 −453.0748 −587.294 −820.140 −1047.3242
10 −226.976 −294.807 −419.430 −547.259 −711.4106 −997.7478 −1278.622
TABLE IV. Total energies (a.u.) of neutral atoms in strong ma gnetic fields in the fully spin polarized states
|2p0/angbracketright.
Z γ= 0.5 γ= 1 γ= 2 γ= 5 γ= 10 γ= 20 γ= 50 γ= 100 γ= 200
1−0.224760 −0.260007 −0.297711 −0.347618 −0.382650 −0.413378 −0.445685 −0.463618 −0.476532
2−2.477333 −2.730171 −3.130766 −3.953993 −4.842630 −6.00481 −8.05248 −10.072 −12.588
3−5.969573 −6.492478 −7.324937 −9.125540 −11.17884 −13.96583 −19.0436 −24.1951 −30.734
4−11.06254 −11.89891 −13.22133 −16.10812 −19.51207 −24.27725 −33.2000 −42.4440 −54.368
5 −19.05098 −20.92634 −25.03513 −29.94166 −36.95414 −50.377973 −64.5298 −83.031
6 −28.0195 −30.4938 −35.96012 −42.52774 −52.02820 −70.51870 −90.275 −116.4070
7 −38.8370 −41.9590 −48.9040 −57.29256 −69.5147 −93.6004 −119.5977 −154.272
8 −51.5182 −55.3413 −63.877 −74.2380 −89.4093 −119.592 −152.453 −196.522
9 −66.0734 −70.6514 −80.8826 −93.3580 −111.6968 −148.4508 −188.7802 −243.1024
10 −82.5108 −87.8960 −99.9271 −114.64655 −136.36054 −180.1312 −228.500 −293.944
15TABLE V. Total energies (a.u.) of neutral atoms in strong mag netic fields in the states/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
.
Z γ= 0.5 γ= 1 γ= 2 γ= 5 γ= 10 γ= 20 γ= 50 γ= 100 γ= 200
2−2.8144511 −2.688885 −2.289145 −0.532445 +3 .110634 +11 .319608 +38 .14390 +85 .00416 +181 .10639
3−7.58789 −7.666532 −7.662455 −6.942304 −4.617769 +1 .705656 +24 .97942 +68 .17347 +159 .57479
4−14.82273 −15.16179 −15.57496 −15.91027 −15.04644 −10.97100 +7 .83395 +46 .25962 +131 .4188
5−24.5395 −25.20257 −26.11859 −27.59737 −28.27946 −26.68603 −13.06555 +19 .65113 +97 .1970
6−36.7864 −37.8130 −39.3061 −42.06081 −44.38721 −45.44649 −37.57176 −11.36933 +57 .3384
7−51.5899 −53.0202 −55.1513 −59.3169 −63.4083 −67.27185 −65.5935 −46.5970 +12 .1743
8−68.967 −70.8400 −73.6672 −79.3704 −85.3599 −92.1817 −97.0777 −85.8840 −38.0379
9−88.930 −91.2830 −94.8623 −102.2227 −110.2464 −120.1897 −131.9955 −129.1244 −93.0956
10−111.491 −114.3575 −118.7427 −127.8738 −138.0661 −151.3018 −170.3322 −176.2422 −152.8395
TABLE VI. Total energies (a.u.) of neutral atoms in strong ma gnetic fields in the states |2s/angbracketright.
Z γ = 0.5 γ= 1 γ= 2 γ= 5 γ= 10 γ= 20 γ= 50 γ= 100
2−2.452834 −2.649185 −2.998243 −3.76667 −4.62593 −5.7711 −7.8134 −9.8438
3−6.047868 −6.480293 −7.188888 −8.88983 −10.91060 −13.69420 −18.8014 −23.9861
4−11.23262 −11.99646 −13.14233 −15.78294 −19.12479 −23.89990 −32.9045 −42.2253
5−18.1278 −19.24491 −20.95537 −24.62942 −38.19566 −36.35453 −49.9355 −64.243
6 −35.57332 −41.68450 −51.0639 −69.770585 −89.815
7 −48.6234 −56.2802 −68.08282 −92.3323 −118.778
8 −63.7371 −73.2021 −87.5117 −117.5887 −151.001
9 −80.8912 −92.4162 −109.4449 −145.5587 −186.4023
10 −100.0783 −113.8625 −133.92080 −176.2966 −224.937
16TABLE VII. Total energies (a.u.) of the high-field ground sta tes|0N/angbracketrightof positive ions A+in strong magnetic
fields.
Z γ = 0.5 γ= 1 γ= 2 γ= 5 γ= 10 γ= 20 γ= 50
2−2.2346282 −2.4409898 −2.7888422 −3.5438677 −4.3901481 −5.5215956 −7.5463093
3−5.640062 −6.114623 −6.894080 −8.629427 −10.651315 −13.4297434 −18.525475
4−10.51258 −11.31312 −12.59206 −15.42817 −18.820184 −23.612005 −32.61959
5−16.9017 −18.07243 −19.93091 −24.01520 −28.93504 −36.02020 −49.63544
6−24.8433 −26.4227 −28.9235 −34.40433 −41.01061 −50.62785 −69.44195
7−34.3550 −36.3826 −39.5839 −46.5957 −55.04672 −67.41737 −91.94699
8 −47.9633 −51.9215 −60.5880 −71.0369 −86.37441 −117.08457
9 −65.9423 −76.3802 −88.9723 −107.4850 −144.8061
10 −81.6509 −93.9710 −108.8443 −130.7348 −175.0743
Z γ = 100 γ= 200 γ= 500 γ= 1000 γ= 2000 γ= 5000 γ= 10000
2−9.5605466 −12.071443 −16.2898727 −20.2706955 −25.028351 −32.65713 −39.548989
3−23.699944 −30.260769 −41.50393 −52.323018 −65.47657 −86.9940 −106.8134
4−41.93414 −53.90638 −74.73619 −95.07513 −120.11947 −161.7052 −200.5709
5−63.947265 −82.55711 −115.33672 −147.71743 −187.99221 −255.6619 −319.6394
6−89.51120 −115.87500 −162.80039 −209.6030 −268.2990 −367.8817 −462.931
7−118.45429 −153.5960 −216.7194 −280.1976 −360.3670 −497.502 −629.454
8−150.6447 −195.5087 −276.7565 −359.0516 −463.6191 −643.7651 −818.311
9−185.9795 −241.4411 −342.6284 −445.780 −577.553 −805.9918 −1028.687
10 −224.3773 −291.251 −414.09358 −540.0501 −701.7295 −983.5779 −1259.8444
TABLE VIII. Total energies (a.u.) of positive ions A+in strong magnetic fields in the fully spin polarized
states |2p0/angbracketright.
Z γ= 0.5γ= 1 γ= 2 γ= 5 γ= 10 γ= 20 γ= 50 γ= 100 γ= 200
3−5.450607 −5.790277 −6.354440 −7.6155748 −9.07498561 −11.052577 −14.60723 −18.1514 −22.5884
4−10.71847 −11.39964 −12.50590 −14.969431 −17.896267 −21.986880 −29.579033 −37.35540 −47.2987
5−17.58187 −18.62668 −20.31984 −24.06890 −28.57270 −35.01093 −47.26504 −60.06278 −76.6646
6−26.2094 −27.6300 −29.9454 −35.09561 −41.30920 −50.308209 −67.773425 −86.30316 −110.6170
7−36.6424 −38.4731 −41.4488 −48.10689 −56.17490 −67.94617 −91.12203 −116.03024 −149.0175
8 −54.8620 −63.1295 −73.19399 −87.94947 −117.30577 −149.19626 −191.75146
9 −80.1774 −92.3729 −110.32119 −146.3062 −185.7521 −238.7295
10 −99.2581 −113.7112 −135.0539 −178.0971 −225.6432 −289.8700
17TABLE IX. Total energies (a.u.) of positive ions A+in strong magnetic fields in the states/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
.
Z γ= 0.5 γ= 1 γ= 2 γ= 5 γ= 10 γ= 20 γ= 50 γ= 100 γ= 200
3−7.217983 −7.164014 −6.962999 −5.850510 −3.110916 +3 .748961 +27 .964647 +72 .09337 +164 .66867
4−14.49163 −14.70591 −14.95181 −14.96820 −13.75773 −9.217910 +10 .42836 +49 .70820 +135 .95916
5−24.2429 −24.78674 −25.54108 −26.71999 −27.08417 −25.06410 −10.65835 +22 .86883 +101 .46468
6−36.5110 −37.4273 −38.7685 −41.23663 −43.25931 −43.91255 −35.28670 −8.30098 +61 .43184
7−51.3324 −52.6586 −54.6467 −58.5397 −62.33918 −65.81095 −63.40519 −43.64463 +16 .13450
8−68.725 −70.500 −73.1912 −78.6347 −84.3435 −90.78611 −94.97381 −83.03149 −34.19097
9 −90.962 −94.412 −101.5242 −109.2779 −118.8537 −129.9684 −126.3622 −89.3511
10 −114.054 −118.316 −127.2092 −137.1413 −150.0207 −168.3763 −173.5637 −149.190
TABLE X. Total energies (a.u.) of the positive ions A+in strong magnetic fields in the states |2s/angbracketright.
Z γ = 0.5 γ= 1 γ= 2 γ= 5 γ= 10 γ= 20 γ= 50 γ= 100
3−5.482414 −5.725577 −6.125201 −7.168333 −8.489089 −10.34858 −13.7869 −17.2792
4−10.88665 −11.48854 −12.39822 −14.49715 −17.22586 −21.18159 −28.68072 −36.4493
5−17.83551 −18.82816 −20.35231 −23.60163 −27.76915 −34.02228 −46.19941 −59.0447
6 −27.9171 −30.0961 −34.69799 −40.35174 −49.03420 −66.40440 −85.0457
7 −47.83068 −55.11866 −66.30856 −89.28664 −114.3624
8 −62.9964 −72.1475 −85.93862 −114.84057 −146.90998
9 −80.1907 −91.4315 −108.01546 −143.08156 −182.6254
10 −99.4125 −112.9303 −132.5918 −174.0451 −221.4723
18TABLE XI. Total energies (a.u.) of the neutral atoms and ions A+at the crossover points of the ground state
configurations.
Z γ Atomic state(s) −E(Atomic) Ionic state(s) −E(A+)
2 0.711 |0N/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
2.76940 |0N/angbracketright 2.32488
3 2.153 |0N/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
7.64785 |0N/angbracketright 7.00057
2.0718/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
7.65600 |0N/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
6.94440
4 4.567 |0N/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
15.9166 |0N/angbracketright 15.07309
4.501/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
15.91625 |0N/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
15.01775
5 8.0251 |0N/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
28.18667 |0N/angbracketright 27.16436
7.957/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
28.17996 |0N/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
27.10004
6 18.664 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 50.9257 |0N/angbracketright 49.50893
14.536 |2p0/angbracketright 47.23836 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 45.77150
12.351 |2p0/angbracketright 45.07386 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
43.72095
12.216 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
44.9341/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
43.70075
7 36.849 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 84.4186 |0N/angbracketright 82.58182
30.509 |2p0/angbracketright 79.34493 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 77.41246
17.429 |2p0/angbracketright 66.72786 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
65.26170
17.398 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
66.69306/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s2/angbracketrightbig
65.25362
8 64.720 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 130.6806 |0N/angbracketright 128.4054
55.747 |2p0/angbracketright 124.1125 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 121.69825
23.985 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
94.3773 |2p0/angbracketright 92.78308
23.849/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
94.3336 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
92.62502
9 104.650 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 191.8770 |0N/angbracketright 189.1446
92.624 |2p0/angbracketright 183.6944 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 180.7819
31.735 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
128.1605 |2p0/angbracketright 126.4414
31.612/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
128.1125 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
126.2897
10 159.138 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 270.220 |0N/angbracketright 267.0112
143.604 |2p0/angbracketright 260.2740 |0N/angbracketright,|2p0/angbracketright 256.8459
40.672 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
168.4734 |2p0/angbracketright 166.6327
40.559/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
168.4217 |2p0/angbracketright,/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1s22p0/angbracketrightbig
166.4863
19TABLE XII. Absolute values of the total energies (keV) of the high-field ground states of neutral atoms in
strong magnetic fields compared with the literature. B12=B/(1012G).
B12= 0.1 B12= 0.5 B12= 1 B12= 2.3505 ( γ= 1000) B12= 5
ZIS (|2p0/angbracketright) IS NKL IS NKL IS NKL IS DHG IS NKL
1 0.07781 0.0761 0.13114 0.130 0.16222 0.161 0.20851 0.206 0 .25750 0.2550
2 0.26387 0.255 0.46063 0.454 0.57999 0.574 0.76279 0.754 0. 96191 0.9580
3 0.54042 0.516 0.96180 0.944 1.22443 1.209 1.63429 1.611 2. 08931 2.0760
4 0.89833 0.846 1.61624 1.580 2.07309 2.042 2.79610 2.746 3. 61033 3.5840
5 1.33229 1.238 2.41101 2.347 3.10924 3.054 4.22674 4.139 5. 49950 5.4560
6 1.83895 1.678 3.33639 3.22 4.31991 4.20 5.90872 5.773 7.73 528 7.60
7 2.41607 2.17 4.38483 4.22 5.69465 5.54 7.82757 10.29919 10 .20
8 3.08253 3.06214 2.71 5.55032 5.32 7.22492 7.02 9.97107 13. 17543 13.00
9 3.82966 3.77607 3.36 6.82794 6.51 8.90360 8.63 12.32880 16 .34997 16.10
10 4.65087 4.55698 8.21365 7.819 10.72452 10.39 14.89168 19 .81072 19.57
IS – present work
NKL – results by Neuhauser, Koonin and Langanke [13]
DHG – results by Demeur, Heenen and Godefroid [16]
|2p0/angbracketright– results for states |2p0/angbracketrightat the points where they are the ground states
2020 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 150 200γ−300−280−260−240−220−200−180−160−140−120E (a.u.)Figure 1.
|0N>
|2p0>
|1s2>
|2s>
|2p03d−1>
|1s22p0>2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Z10−1100101102103γFigure 2
|0N>−|2p0>
|2p0>−|1s2>
|2p0>−|2p03d−1>
|0N>−|1s2>
|2p03d−1>−|1s2>
|2p0>−|1s22p0>2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Z10−1100101102103γFigure 3
|0N>−|2p0>
|2p0>−|1s2>
|2p0>−|2p03d−1>
|0N>−|1s2>
|2p0>−|1s22p0>100101102103104
γ0.60.70.80.911.11.21.3EIon(Z)/EIon(Z=1)Figure 4
Z=1
Z=2
Z=3
Z=4
Z=5
Z=6
Z=7
Z=8
Z=9
Z=101 2 3 4 5 678 10
Z3456789101520EIon (a.u.)Figure 5
γ=200γ=500γ=1000γ=2000γ=5000γ=10000 |
arXiv:physics/9910018v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 13 Oct 1999Generalized action invariants for drift
waves-zonal flow systems
A. I. Smolyakov1and P.H. Diamond2
1Department of Physics and Engineering Physics, University of
Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, S7N5E2 Canada,
2Department of Physics, University of California at San-Die go
La Jolla, CA 92093, USA
February 2, 2008
Abstract
Generalized action invariants are identified for various mo dels of
drift wave turbulence in the presence of the mean shear flow. I t is
shown that the wave kinetic equation describing the interac tion of
the small scale turbulence and large scale shear flow can be na turally
writen in terms of these invariants. Unlike the wave energy, which is
conserved as a sum of small- and large- scale components, the gener-
alized action invariant is shown to correspond to a quantity which is
conserved for the small scale component alone. This invaria nt can be
used to construct canonical variables leading to a different definition
of the wave action ( as compared to the case without shear flow) . It
is suggested that these new canonical action variables form a natu-
1ral basis for the description of the drift wave turbulence wi th a mean
shear flow.
The dynamics of the small scale turbulence in the presence of a mean
shear flow is a problem of a great interest for plasmas and geos trophic fluids.
It is believed that the nonlinear energy transfer from small to large length
scale component (inverse cascade [1]) is a cause of a spontan eous generation
and sustainment of coherent large structures, e.g. zonal flo ws in atmospheres,
ocean and plasmas [2]. In the few past years it has been sugges ted [3, 4, 5,
6, 7, 8, 9, 10] that the large scale flow band structures (zonal flows) play
an important role in regulating and suppressing the anomalo us transport in
magnetic confinement systems.
In the simplest form, the generation of plasma flow by turbule nce can be
described by the energy conservation relation (Poynting th eorem) averaged
over small scale fluctuations [9]. A generalization of this a pproach is a WKB
type wave kinetic equation for the quanta density of small sc ale fluctuations
that is conserved along the rays. This method was originally proposed in
Ref. 11 to describe the interaction of high frequency plasmo ns (Langmuir
waves) with low frequency ion sound perturbations. It is wid ely used also in
general fluid dynamics [12].
In studies of drift wave dynamics, it has been naturally assu med [13, 14]
that the relevant quantity that is conserved in the presence of slow variations
is the drift-wave action density. It is well known [15], that the standard wave
2action variables Ckassociated with the number of wave quanta nk,nk=
|Ck|2=Ek/ωk, where Ekis the wave energy, and ωkis the wave frequency,
is a basis for Hamiltonian form of the wave-wave interaction equations. It
has been noted in Refs. 16,17 that the normal variables used t o describe
self-interaction between small scale fluctuations without the shear flow are
modified by the flow and may not be suitable for a system with a me an
flow. Thus, in the presence of a shear flow a new form of canonica l variables
and associated action invariant have to be identified. On oth er hand, it has
been pointed[18] that the conserved action-like quantity ( pseudo-action) is
different from the usual definition of the wave action defined a s the ratio
of the wave energy to the wave frequency. The latter definitio n is also fails
when there are no oscillating eigenmodes such as in ideal flui d, so that an
alternative definition of the action-like integral is requi red[19].
It is important to realize that the natural form of the three- wave in-
teraction equations for the drift-waves does not have Hamil tonian structure
[20].These equations can be transformed, however, to a Hami ltonian form
via an asymptotic variable transformation. Such a tranform ation yielding a
Hamiltonian form for the drift and Rossby waves has been foun d in Refs.
20,21. There are several possible forms for such a transform ation. In Refs.
17,20,21 it is based on the conserved energy integral that le ads to the stan-
dard definition of the wave action. For drift-wave+zonal flow systems small
scales are modulated by larger scale shear flows so that energ y in the small
3scale component is not conserved. Thus, the canonical Hamil tonian variables
constructed from energy conservation are not suitable for d escription of the
drift waves in the presence of a mean flow.
In this paper, we derive the WKB type wave kinetic equation th at de-
scribes the conservation (along the rays) of an action like i nvariant of the drift
wave turbulence with slowly varying parameters due to the me an sheared
flow. We demonstrate that the relevant action-like integral corresponds to
the quantity conserved for the small scale component alone. We show that
the structure of the action integral is determined by the str ucture of the
matrix element describing the interaction of the small scal e and large scale
component. We discuss how the canonical variables correspo nding to such a
pseudo-action invariant can be constructed.
The scale separation between the small scale turbulence and the large
scale motions is an essential property of drift-wave+zonal flow systems that
is commonly used [12, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23] to simplify the an alysis. Though,
the scale separation is often observed experimentally and i n computer sim-
ulation, it may be less pronounced in other cases[24]. In our present paper,
we substantially rely on the multiscale expansion, so our re sults are valid,
strictly speaking, only in the case when there is such a scale separation. More
general approach avoiding the scale separation assumption , namely the renor-
malization group, is possible [25], but it is beyond the scop e of the present
paper.
4We consider a generic case of the drift wave equation in the fo rm
∂φk
∂t+iωkφk+/integraldisplay
d2pLp,k−pφpφk−p= 0, (1)
where ωk=ω(k) is the frequency of the linear mode with a wavector k, and
may include an imaginary part corresponding to the wave grow and decay.
In the spirit of the scale separation we represent the field in to the large-
scaleφ<
kand small-scale φ>
kcomponents; φ<
k= 0 outside a shell |k|< ε≪1,
φ>
k= 0 for |k|< ε.
Assuming that the self-interaction of small-scale fields is small compared
to the interaction with the mean flow[17] we write from (1) the following
equation for the small-scale fluctuations
∂φ>
k
∂t+iωkφ>
k+/integraldisplay
d2pLp,k−pφ<
pφ>
k−p= 0. (2)
To derive the equation for the evolution of the wave spectrum we multiply
equation (2) by φ>
k′and then add it with a similar equation obtained by
reversing kandk′, yielding
∂
∂t/parenleftBig
φ>
kφ>
k′/parenrightBig
+i(ωk+ωk′)φ>
kφ>
k′+φ>
k′/integraldisplay
d2pLp,k−pφ<
pφ>
k−p+φ>
k/integraldisplay
d2pLp,k′−pφ<
pφ>
k′−p= 0.
(3)
The small-scale turbulence is described by the spectral fun ction (Wigner
function) Ik(x, t),defined as follows
/integraldisplay
d2q/angbracketleftBig
φ>
−k+qφ>
k/angbracketrightBig
exp(iq·x) =Ik(x, t). (4)
5The slow time and spatial dependence in Ik(x, t) corresponds to modu-
lations with a “slow” wavevector, q≪k. Angle brackets in (4) stand for
ensemble average, which is equivalent to a time average with appropriate
ergodic assumptions.
The equation for Ik(x, t) is derived from (3) by averaging it over fast
scales and by taking the Fourier transform over the slow vari ablex. Setting
k′=−k+qand applying the operator/integraltextd2qexp(iq·x) we obtain
∂
∂tIk(x, t) +i/integraldisplay
d2qexp(iq·x) (ωk+ω−k+q)/angbracketleftBig
φ>
kφ>
−k+q/angbracketrightBig
+S1+S2= 0,(5)
S1=/integraldisplay /integraldisplay
d2pd2qexp(iq·x)/angbracketleftBig
φ>
−k+qφ>
k−p/angbracketrightBig
Lp,k−pφ<
p, (6)
S2=/integraldisplay /integraldisplay
d2pd2qexp(iq·x)/angbracketleftBig
φ>
−k+q−pφ>
k/angbracketrightBig
Lp,−k+q−pφ<
p. (7)
The second term in (3) gives
i/integraldisplay
d2qexp(iq·x) (ωk+ω−k+q)/angbracketleftBig
φ>
kφ>
−k+q/angbracketrightBig
=∂ωk
∂k·∂
∂xIk(x, t)−2γkIk,(8)
where γkis the linear growth rate, and only the real part of the freque ncy is
presumed for ωkon the right hand side of this equation.
The ensemble average in S1can be transformed by using the inverse of
(4)
/angbracketleftBig
φ>
−k+qφ>
k−p/angbracketrightBig
=/angbracketleftBig
φ>
k−pφ>
−(k−p)+q−p/angbracketrightBig
=/integraldisplay
d2x′Ik−p(x′) exp(−i(q−p)·x′).(9)
6By using (9) and expanding in p≪kthe expression for S1is transformed
to
S1=/integraldisplay
d2pexp(ip·x)Lp,k−p/parenleftBigg
Ik(x)−p·∂Ik(x)
∂k/parenrightBigg
φ<
p. (10)
Similarly, by using the identity analogous to (9) and expand ing the interac-
tion coefficient Lp,k−pinp≪k,we transform S2to the form
S2=/integraldisplay /integraldisplay
d2pd2qexp(iq·x)/parenleftBigg
Lp,−k+ (q−p)·∂Lp,−k
∂(−k)/parenrightBigg
φ<
p
×/integraldisplay
d2x′exp(−i(q−p)·x′)Ik(x′)
=Ik(x)/integraldisplay
d2pexp(ip·x)Lp,−kφ<
p−i/integraldisplay
d2pexp(ip·x)∂Lp,−k
∂(−k)·∂Ik
∂xφ<
p.(11)
Equations (5-11) define a particular form of the transport eq uation for
Ik(x, t) for a given interaction coefficient Lk,k′.
In this paper, we consider two different models for drift wave s in a magne-
tized plasma: the standard Hasegawa-Mima equation and a sla b-like model
for drift waves in a sheared magnetic field. The latter is simi lar to the stan-
dard Hasegawa-Mima equation with a modified plasma response to the slow
modulations of the electrostatic potential. Such slow mode s correspond to
k/bardbl→0, so that the slow part of the potential does not follow Boltz mann
distribution. [Note that zonal flows[10] ( m=n= 0) are such slow modes
withk/bardbl= 0.] As a result, the convective term appears in the lowest or der,
contrary to the case of the Hasegawa-Mima equation where suc h term is due
to the polarization drift. Appropriate equation for the dri ft wave dynamics
7in presence of a mean flow (neglecting the self-interaction) has the form [13]
/parenleftBigg∂
∂t+V0· ∇/parenrightBigge/tildewideφ
Te+V∗· ∇e/tildewideφ
Te−ρ2
s/parenleftBigg∂
∂t+V0· ∇/parenrightBigg
∇2
⊥e/tildewideφ
Te= 0.(12)
where V0=cb×∇φ/B 0is the mean flow velocity. This equation can be
written in the form (2) with ωk=k·V∗/(1 +k2ρ2
s) and
Lk1,k2=−c
B0b·k1×k2
1 + (k1+k2)2ρ2
s/parenleftBig
1 +k2
2ρ2
s/parenrightBig
. (13)
From (5-11) and (13) we obtain
∂
∂tIk(x, t)+∂
∂k(ωk+k·V0)·∂Ik
∂x−∂
∂x/parenleftBiggk·V0
(1 +k2ρ2
s)2/parenrightBigg
·∂
∂kIk(1+k2ρ2)2= 0.
(14)
This equation can be written in the form of a conservation law for the in-
variant Nk=Ik(1 +k2ρ2)2,
∂
∂tNk(x, t) +∂
∂k(ωk+k·V0)·∂Nk
∂x−∂
∂x(k·V0)·∂
∂kNk= 0.(15)
By direct evaluation from (12), it can be easily shown that th e quantity
N=/integraldisplay
d2k/parenleftBig/tildewideφ2+ 2ρ2
s(∇⊥/tildewideφ)2+ρ4
s(∇2
⊥/tildewideφ)2/parenrightBig
, (16)
corresponding to Nkin (17), is conserved as an integral over the small-scale
part of the spectrum. In (16)/tildewideφis the normalized potential of the small scale
fluctuations. This property distinguishes Nkfrom any other combination of
the energy and enstrophy which are conserved only as a sum of c ontributions
from the small and long scale parts of the spectrum[22].
8A different expression for the action-like invariant is obta ined for the
standard Hasegawa-Mima (H.M.) model with a mean flow
∂
∂t/parenleftBigge/tildewideφ
Te−ρ2
s∇2
⊥e/tildewideφ
Te/parenrightBigg
+V∗· ∇e/tildewideφ
Te−ρ2
s(V0· ∇)∇2
⊥e/tildewideφ
Te= 0. (17)
The appropriate interaction coefficient is
Lk1,k2=−c
2B0ρ2
sb·k1×k2
1 + (k1+k2)2ρ2s/parenleftBig
k2
2−k2
1/parenrightBig
. (18)
In this case, from (5-11) and (18) the transport equation for Iktakes the
form
∂
∂tIk+∂
∂k/parenleftBigg
ωk+k·V0
1 +k2ρ2sk2ρ2
s/parenrightBigg
·∂
∂xIk
−∂
∂x/parenleftBiggk·V0
(1 +k2ρ2s)2/parenrightBigg
·∂
∂kk2ρ2
s(1 +k2ρ2
s)Ik= 0. (19)
Obviously, this equation can be written in the form of the con servation law
for the invariant Nk=Ikk2ρ2
s(1 +k2ρ2
s),[18, 22, 23]
∂
∂tNk+∂
∂k/parenleftBigg
ωk+k·V0
1 +k2ρ2sk2ρ2/parenrightBigg
·∂
∂xNk−∂
∂x/parenleftBiggk·V0
(1 +k2ρ2s)k2ρ2
s/parenrightBigg
·∂
∂kNk= 0.
(20)
Similarly to the previous case, the invariant Nkcorresponds to the integral
of (17) conserved for the small scale component alone
N=/integraldisplay
d2k ρ2
s/parenleftBig
(∇⊥/tildewideφ)2+ρ2
s(∇2
⊥/tildewideφ)2/parenrightBig
, (21)
Note that both invariants (16) and (21) are different from sta ndard definition
of the wave action [13, 14]. The difference between two forms o f the action-
like invariant (Eq. (16) and (21)) is due to a different form of the coupling
9matrix (Eq. (13) and Eq.(18)) describing interaction of the small and large
scale components.
The procedure that we have described above can also be used to derive
the action-like invariant for the two-dimensional motion o f an incompressible
fluid. In the latter case, there are no oscillating modes so th at the standard
definition of the action as a ratio of the wave energy to wave fr equency is not
applicable. The 2-D Euler equation has a form
∂∇2
⊥φ+V0· ∇∇2
⊥φ= 0, (22)
whereV0is the velocity due to the mean flow. This equation can be writt en
in the form (1) with ωk= 0 and the interaction coefficient
Lk1,k2=−b·k1×k2
(k1+k2)2k2
2. (23)
Using equations (5-11) and (23) we obtain the wave kinetic eq uation
∂
∂tNk(x, t) +∂
∂k(k·V0)·∂Nk
∂x−∂
∂x(k·V0)·∂
∂kNk= 0,(24)
where the wave-action Nk=k4Ik[19].
We summarize generalized wave action integrals for differen t models in
the Table I. Note that the standard expression for the drift w ave action
defined as the ratio of the wave energy to the wave frequency is [13, 14]
nk=|ak|2=(1 +ρ2
sk2
⊥)2
ω∗|φk|2=Ek
ωk, (25)
where ω∗=kθV∗. Expression (25) should be compared with the first two
lines in the Table. It is interesting to note that generalize d action invariant
10given by Eq. (16) coincides with the standard definition of th e wave action
(25) for the poloidally symmetric case when the poloidal wav e vector kθis
constant ( kθ=const).
Next we consider the self-interaction between small scales in the presence
of the shear flow and outline how the pseudo-action invariant s can be used
to construct the canonical variables for the latter case. Fo r illustration, we
consider the case of Hasegawa-Mima equation (17). We restor e the self-
interaction term given by Wk,k1,k2
∂φk
∂t+iωkφk=/integraldisplay
d2k1d2k2Wk,k1,k2δ(k−k1−k2)φk1φk2, (26)
Wk,k1,k2=−c
2B0ρ2
sb·k1×k2
1 +k2ρ2s/parenleftBig
k2
2−k2
1/parenrightBig
. (27)
This natural form of the three-wave interaction does not hav e standard
Hamiltonian structure. This is reflected in the interaction coefficients Wk,k1,k2
which do not have the required symmetry properties [15]. The only symme-
tries in Wk,k1,k2are of the type W∗
−k,−k1,−k2=Wk,k1,k2=W−k,k1,k2.Transfor-
mation of (26) to normal canonical variables akwas given in Refs. 19,20 (see
also Ref. 16). It has the form [17]
ak=gkφk+/integraldisplay
d2k1d2k2Gk,k1,k2δ(k−k1−k2)φk1φk2. (28)
In new variables the interaction coefficients Vk,k1,k2are
Vk,k1,k2=1
3gk1gk2gk/parenleftBig
|gk|2Wk,k1,k2+|gk1|2Wk1,k,k2+|gk2|2Wk2,k1,k/parenrightBig
(29)
11These interaction coefficients Vk,k1,k2now have all symmetries required for
Hamiltonian systems. The function gkcan be chosen in a variety of ways. The
standard approach [17, 20, 21] is to chose gkso that the energy in canonical
variables takes the form E=/integraltextd2kωkaka−k.Comparing it with the energy
integral E=/integraltextd2k/parenleftBig/tildewideφ2+ρ2
s(∇⊥/tildewideφ)2)/parenrightBig
,we find [17] gk= (1 + ρ2
sk2
⊥)/(ky)1/2.
This gives a standard expression for the wave action (25).
As discussed above, for the drift waves-zonal flow system the energy in
the small scale component is not conserved, bur rather the to tal energy of
drift waves + large scale zonal flows is constant. For this rea son, the energy
integral of the small scale component can not be used for intr oduction of
canonical variables for self interaction of the small scale fluctuations. Con-
trary to the energy, the integrals Nkare conserved for small scale component.
Choosing the function gksuch as that the invariants (16) or (21) are in the
formNk=/integraltextd2kaka−k,we obtain Nkas canonical variables for drift waves in
the presence of the mean shear flow. This automatically means that these
invariants have a meaning of the generalized wave action inv ariant. Then,
to account for the self-interactions in the presence of the b ackground shear
flow, the wave kinetic equation (Eq. (15) or (20)) should be mo dified with a
source term Jkin the standard form[15]
Jk= 4π/integraldisplay
d2k1d2k2× |Vk,k1,k2|2(Nk1Nk2−NkNk1−NkNk)δ(k−k1−k2).
(30)
We have formulated a wave kinetic equation and determined a s tructure of
12an appropriate adiabatic invariant for small scale turbule nce in the presence
of a mean flow. We have shown that the form of the matrix coefficie nt for
the nonlocal coupling of the small scale fluctuations to the m ean flow is
crucial for the form of the adiabatic invariant. We have obta ined adiabatic
invariant Nk=Ikk2ρ2
s(1 +k2ρ2
s) for the drift wave turbulence described by
the Hasegawa-Mima equation and isomorphic Charney-Obukho v equation for
Rossby waves; and the invariant Nk=Ik(1 +k2ρ2
s)2for the drift wave type
turbulence in tokamaks such as TITG driven modes. [Note that the latter
invariant reduces to the standard form [13, 14] for kθ=const.] The pseudo-
action invariants appear in the wave kinetic equation and co rrespond to the
quantities that are conserved as integrals over the small sc ale part of the
spectrum alone. This specific conservation property makes t hem suitable as
canonical Hamiltonian variables for small scale turbulenc e in the presence of
the shear flow. The wave action invariants and the kinetic equ ation derived
here can be used to investigate nonlinear dynamics of drift w aves and zonal
flow in a tokamak. The method used in our work can be applied to d erive
generalized invariants for other models including the Ross by type waves in
geostrophic fluids [12].
This research was supported by Natural Sciences and Enginee ring Re-
search of Canada and U.S. Department of Energy Grant No. FG03 -88ER53275.
P.D. would like to thank V.B. Lebedev, M.N. Rosenbluth and F. L. Hinton
for helpful discussions.
13References
[1] A. Hasegawa, M. Wakatani, Phys Rev. Lett. 59, 1581 (1987).
[2] F.H. Busse, Chaos 4, 123 (1994).
[3] M.N. Rosenbluth, F.L. Hinton, Phys Rev. Lett. 80, 724 (1998).
[4] R.D. Sydora, V.K. Decyk, and J. M. Dawson, Plasma Phys Con tr. Fu-
sion38, A281 (1996).
[5] Z. Lin, T.S. Hahm, W.W. Lee, W.M. Tang and R.B. White, Scie nce
281, 1835 (1998).
[6] G. Hammet, M. Beer, W. Dorland, S.C. Cowley, S.A. Smith, P lasma
Phys Contr. Fusion 35, 973 (1993)
[7] A.M. Dimits, J. A. Byers, T.J. Williams et al., in Plasma Physics
and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Research, (International Atomics Energy
Agency, Vienna, 1994), Vol. III, p. 457.
[8] R. Waltz, G. Kerbel, J. Milovich, Phys. Plasmas 1, 2229 (1994).
[9] P.H. Diamond and Y.-B. Kim, Phys. Fluids B 3, 1626 (1991).
[10] P.H. Diamond, M.N. Rosenbluth, F.L. Hinton, M. Malkov, J. Fleischer,
A. Smolyakov, in Plasma Physics and Controlled Nuclear Fusion Re-
search, 18th IAEA Fusion Energy Conference, Yokohama, Japan, 1998
14(International Atomics Energy Agency, Vienna, 1998), p. IA EA-CN-
69/TH3/1.
[11] A.A. Vedenov, A.V. Gordeev and L.I. Rudakov, Plasma Phy sics,9, 719
(1972).
[12] D.G. Andrews,M.E. McIntryre, J. Fluid Mech. 89, 609 (1978) and 89,
647 (1978); M.E. McIntyre, T.G.Shepperd, J. Fluid Mech. 181, 527
(1987); F.S. Henyey, D.B. Creamer, et. al., J. Fluid Mech. 189, 443
(1988).
[13] N. Mattor and P.H. Diamond, Phys. Plasmas 1, 4002 (1994).
[14] A.J. Brizard, Phys. Plasmas 3, 744 (1996).
[15] A.V. Galeev and R.Z. Sagdeev, in Reviews of Plasma Physics , V. 7, ed.
by M.A. Leontovich (Consultants Bureau, New York) 1966.
[16] D.Yu. Manin and S.V. Nazarenko, Phys. Fluids 6, 1158 (1994).
[17] A.M. Balk, S.V. Nazarenko, V.E. Zakharov, Sov. Phys. JE TP71, 249
(1990).
[18] V.B. Lebedev, P.H. Diamond, V.D. Shapiro, G.I. Solovie v, Phys. Plas-
mas2, 4420 (1995).
[19] B. Dubrulle and S.V. Nazarenko, Physica D 110, 123 (1997).
[20] V.E. Zakharov and L.I. Piterbarg, Sov. Phys Dokl. 32, 560 (1987).
15[21] A.S. Monin and L.I. Piterbarg, Sov. Phys Dokl. 32, 622 (1987).
[22] A. Muhm, A.M. Pukhov, K.H. Spatchek, V.N. Tsytovich, Ph ys. Fluids
B2, 336 (1992).
[23] A.I. Dyachenko, S.V. Nazarenko, and V.E. Zakharov, Phy s Lett. A 165,
330 (1995).
[24] T.S.Hahm, M. A. Beer, Z. Lin, G. W. Hammett, W. W. Lee, and W.
M. Tang, Phys Plasmas, 6, 922 (1999).
[25] A. ´Alvarez, E.Hern´ andes-Garc ´ia, J. Tintor´ e, Phys. Rev E 58,7279
(1998).
16Table I: Generalized action invariants for different models
Model Expression for the wave action
Drift waves in a sheared field, Eq.(12) Ik(1 +k2ρ2
s)2
Standard drift wave model, Eq.(17) Ikk2ρ2
s(1 +k2ρ2
s)
2D Euler equation, Eq. (22) Ikk4
17 |
arXiv:physics/9910019v1 [physics.class-ph] 13 Oct 19991
rel1, Oct., 13, 1999
Radiation from a Charge in a Gravitational Field
Amos Harpaz & Noam Soker
Department of Physics, University of Haifa at Oranim, Tivon 36006, ISRAEL
phr89ah@vmsa.technion.ac.il
soker@physics.technion.ac.il
ABASTRACT
When an electric charge is supported at rest in a static gravi tational field, its
electric field is not supported with the charge, and it falls f reely in the gravitational
field. Drawing the electric field lines continuously in time, we find that they always
emerge from the charge, but the electric field is curved and th ere is a stress force
between the freely falling (curved) field and the static char ge. The charge radiates
and the work done by the gravitational field to overcome the st ress force is the
source for the energy radiated by the supported (static) cha rge.A static charge
in a gravitational field radiates, as predicted by the princi ple of equivalence . This
mechanism is similar to the one applied to an electric charge accelerated in a free
space. In this case, the electric field is not accelerated wit h the charge. The electric
field is curved, and there is a stress force between the charge and its field. The
work done in overcoming the stress force is the source of the e nergy radiated by the
accelerated charge.
key words: Principle of Equivalence, Curved Electric Field2
1. Introduction
The validity of the principle of equivalence (POE) to the cas e of radiation from
an electric charge in a gravitational field (GF) is a long-sta nding problem (refs.
[1], [2], and references cited therein). Specifically it is d iscussed in connection with
two cases: (1) Does an electric charge, freely falling in a gr avitational field radiate?
(2) Does a charge supported at rest in a gravitational field ra diate? Using plainly
the POE one may conclude that a freely falling charge in a GF wi ll not radiate
because its situation is equivalent to that of a free charge i n empty space, and a
charge supported at rest in a GF (chracterized by an accelera tion,g), will radiate
because its situation is equivalent to that of a charge accel erated in free space with
an acceleration g. The common approach in the physical society is the opposite one
- it is believed that a static observer in a gravitational fiel d will find that a freely
falling charge in a GF does radiate, while a charge supported at rest in a GF does
not radiate [1]. It is also concluded that the validity of the POE is limited, and it
is not a general principle.
However, this approach led to several contradictions, whic h in turn, led people to
conclude that the ability to observe a radiation depends on t he relative accelration
between the charge and the observer: an observer falling fre ely in parallel to a freely
falling charge will not observe radiation, while a static ob server in the same field
will observe radiation. In the same way, a static observer lo cated in a lab where a
charge is supported at rest in a GF will not observe radiation , while a freely falling
observer, passing by the same charge, will observe radiatio n (ref [1], pp 218).
The electromagnetic radiation is defined as a relative pheno menon, that depends
on the relative acceleration between the observer and the ch arge. In the following,
we analyze the process that leads to the creation of radiatio n. We demand that
radiation as a process of energy transfer is a physical event (which is an objective
phenomenon), and we come to the conclusion that a freely fall ing charge does not
radiate, and a charge supported at rest in a GF does radiate. T hese conclusions are
in accord with the POE.
In§2 we present the problems concerned with the energy carried b y the radiation
and the non-existence of the radiation reaction force in cer tain cases. In §3 we
present a freely falling system of reference as the preferre d system to work in, and
in§4 we calculate the energy carried by the radiation from the su pported charge in
a GF, using the work done to overcome the stress force of the fie ld. We conclude in
§5.
2. The Problem
Treating radiation as a relative phenomenon leads to contra dictions, because
radiation transffers energy from one system to another. If th e energy carried by
the radiation is absorbed in some system and causes there a ce rtain change, like3
an excitation of a higher energy level, this absorption must be observed by any
observer, even if he does not have the means to observe direct ly the flow of the
energy. If a static observer observes radiation from a freel y falling charge, he also
must be able to identify the source of the energy for this radi ation. An observer
falling freely in parallel to the charge, must observe this s ource of energy, even if he
cannot observe directly the radiation that carries the ener gy. Similar contradictions
arise for the case of a charge supported at rest in a GF, where a static observer
does not observe the radiation, and a freely falling observe r does. We find that
treating radiation as a relative phenomenon leads to contra dictions concerning both
the source of the energy carried by the radiation, and the phe nomena that may be
caused in absorbing the radiation. The emmitance of radiati on is a physical event
that cannot be transformed away by a coordinate transformat ion (see [3]).
There is another difficulty with the common approach - it is gen erally believed
that when radiation is created by an accelration, a radiatio n reaction force is created,
which contradicts the force that creates the acceleration. The work done by the
external force to overcome the reaction force, is considere d as the source of the energy
carried by the radiation. However, when the velocity of the c harge is low ( v≪c),
the radiation is emitted mainly in a plane which is perpendic ular to the direction of
motion ([4] pp. 663 and [7]). No momentum is imparted to the ac celerated charge
by the radiation, and no radiation reaction force exists [6] . The source of the energy
carried by the radiation should be looked for elsewhere.
3. A Freely Falling System of Reference
According to Jackson [4], a radiation exists whenever an ele ctric charge is ac-
celerated. However, a question should be raised to what syst em of reference this
acceleration is related. Without stating it explicitly, Ja ckson refers to an inertial
system of reference. Ordinarily, when general relativity i s considered, the inertial
system of reference should be replaced by a freely falling sy stem of reference, charac-
terized by a set of geodesics that covers this system. The “ab solute acceleration” of
a charge supported at rest in a gravitational field does not va nish, where absolute ac-
celeration is the covariant time derivative of the four velo city of the charged particle.
A general relativistic criterion for the existence of radia tion, is the non-vanishing of
the absolute acceleration. A regular acceleration is relat ed to the system of geodesics
that covers the local space. The preferred system of referen ce to work in is the sys-
tem characterized by local geodesics, and freely falling ob jects - particles and fields
- follow these geodesics. The electric field of a charge is an i ndependent physical
entity. Once it is induced on space, its behaviour is determi ned by the properties
of space. When the charge is accelerated by an external (non- gravitational) force,
the electric field of the charge is not accelerated, and a rela tive acceleration exists
between the charge and its field. As was shown by Fulton and Roh rlich [6], the4
electric field of the charge is curved. There is a stress force between the charge and
its curved field, and, as shown in [5], this force gives rise to radiation.
A neutral particle and a similar charged particle will fall w ith the same accel-
eration. It was shown that the key feature for the creation of radiation is not the
relative acceleration between the charge and the observer, but rather the relative
acceleration between the charge and its own electric field.
A freely falling charge in a uniform GF follows a geodetic lin e in this system, and
it is not subject to any external force. The electric field of t he charge follows similar
geodesics. The charge and its field both are located in the sam e frame of reference,
and in that frame their relative situation is similar to the o ne existing between a
static charge and its field in a free space. No relative accele ration exists between
the charge and its electric field, and we conclude that a freel y falling charge does
not radiate.
The creation of radiation by a uniformly accelrated charge w as analyzed ([5],[7]),
and it was shown that the electric field of the accelrated char ge is curved, and there
exists a stress force between the charge and its (curved) fiel d. The stress force Fs,
is given by: Fs=E2/4πRc, where Rcis the radius of curvature, whose value close
to the point charge is: Rc=c2/(asinθ), where ais the acceleration, and θis the
angle between the direction of the acceleration and the init ial direction of the field.
By calculating the stress force and the work performed to ove rcome this force, it is
shown that for a uniformly accelerated charge and for very lo w velocities, the power
supplied by the accelerating (external) force to overcome t he the stress force, equals
the power radiated by the accelerated charge according to La rmor formula [5]. It
is concluded that the work done in overcoming the stress forc e is the source of the
energy carried by the radiation, and this work is done by the e xternal force that
imparts the acceleration to the charge, in addition to the wo rk it does in creating
the kinetic energy of the charge.
4. A Charge Supported in a Homogenous Gravitaional Field
The electric field of a charge supported at rest in the lab agai nst GF seems
static, but it is not. The electric field, which is an independ ent physical entity, is
not supported with the charge, and it falls freely in the grav itaional field. There is
a relative acceleration between the charge and its electric field, the field is curved
(both in the lab system and in the freely falling system), and a stress force exists
between the charge and its field. The (freely falling) electr ic field follows the system
of refernec characterized by the geodesics. To calculate th e fields of the supported
charge in the freely falling geodetic system, we adopt the re sults given by Rohrlich
[8]. Let us assign primes to the variables calculated in the f reely falling system, S′.
According to Rohrlich, the field equations of the supported c harge, in S′are:5
E′
ρ=8eα2ρ′z′
ξ′3(1)
E′
z=−4eα2
ξ′3[z′2
p+ρ′2−z′2] (2)
B′
φ=8eα2ρ′ct′
ξ′3(3)
E′
φ=B′
ρ=B′
z= 0 (4)
where
ξ′2= [z′2
p−ρ′2−z′2]2+ (2αρ′)2(5)
where we used for the particle location: z′2
p=α2+(ct′)2, andα=c2/gis the particle
location at t′= 0. Certainly, the Poynting vector does not vanish in this sy stem.
Using transformations given by Rohrlich [8] we can calculat e the electromagnetic
fields in the lab system. It follows (as can be expected), that the magnetic filed
vanishes in this system, and the Poynting vector vanishes as well. This led Rohrlich
to conclude that a charge supported at rest in a gravitationa l field does not radiate.
However, we know that a Poynting vector is not an invariant [9 ], and we demand
that the existence of radiation must be represented by a non- vanishing Poynting
vector in the frame of reference characterized by the local g eodesics, S′, andin this
system the Poynting vector does not vanish .
The situation is not static, and the electric field exists in a steady state. The
pattern of the electric field remains constant, but the field i tself does not. As we em-
phasized earlier, the electric field is a property of the spac e on which it was induced,
and its behaviour is determined by this space. The electric fi eld is detached from the
supported charge, and it is not supported against gravity as the charge is. Hence the
electric field falls in a free fall, and it has an acceleration grelative to the supported
charge. In the freely falling system, which also has an accel eration grelative to the
supported charge, the charge is accelerated upward with an a cceleration g.
It was also shown by Rohrlich [8], that in the system characte rized by the
geodesics, a magnetic field does exist, and it comes out that t he Poynting vec-
tor does not vanish. We conclude that a charge supported at re st in a gravitational
field does radiate. In Figure 1 we present the curved elcetric field lines calculated
for an electric charge supported at rest in a uniform homogen ous GF, characterized
by an acceleration g. The field is similar to the one calculated by Singal [10], for a
uniformly accelerated charge.
The curved electric field gives rise to a stress force, and we c alculate the work
done in overcoming this force in a way similar to that used in [ 5] for the uniformly6
Figure 1: A curved electric field of a charge supported in a uni form homogenous
gravitational field.
accelerated charge, where the calculations are carried now in the (flat) freely falling
system of reference.
For the sake of convenience we ommit now the primes. We shall s um over the
stress force of the field, fs, and calculate the work done against this force. In order to
sum over fs, we have to integrate over a sphere whose center is located on the charge.
Naturally, such an integration involves a divergence (at th e center). To avoid such
a divergence, we take as the lower limit of the integration a s mall distance from the
center, r=c∆t, (where ∆ tis infinitsimal), and later we demand that ∆ t→0. We
calculate the work done by the stress force in the volume defin ed by c∆t < r < r up,
where c2/g≫rup≫c∆t. These calculations are performed in the geodetic system
(the system of reference defined by the geodesics), which mom entarily coincides with
the frame of reference of the charge at the charge location, a t time t= 0.
The force per unit volume due to the electric stress is fs=E2/(4πRc), where E
is the electric field, and Rcis the radius of curvature of the field lines. The radius
of curvature is: Rc≃c2/(gsinθ), where θis the angle between the initial direction
of the electric field line and the direction of the accelerati ongof the charge, as seen
in the geodetic system. The force per unit volume due to the el ectric stress is
fs(r) =E2(r)
4πRc=gsinθ
c2e2
4πr4, (6)
where in the second equality we have substituted for the elec tric field E=e/r2,
which is a good approximation in weak graviatational fields [ 8]. The stress force is
perpendicular to the direction of the field lines, so that the component of the stress7
force along the acceleration gis−fs(r) sinφ, where φis the angle between the local
field line and the acceleration. For very short intervals (wh ere the direction of the
field lines did not change much from their original direction )φ∼θ, and we can
write:−fs(r) sinφ≃ −fs(r) sinθ=−gsin2θ
c2e2
4πr4. The dependence of this force on θ
is similar to the dependence of the radiation distribution o f an accelerated charge
at zero velocity on θ. Integration of this force over a spherical shell extending from
r=c∆ttorup(where c2/g≫rup≫c∆t), yields the total force due to the stress
Fs(t) = 2π/integraldisplayrup
c∆tr2dr/integraldisplayπ
0sinθdθ[−fs(r) sinθ] =−2
3g
c2e2
c∆t/parenleftBigg
1−c∆t
rup/parenrightBigg
.(7)
Clearly the second term in the parenthesis can be neglected. The power created
in overcoming the electric stress force is:
Ps=−Fsv=−Fsg∆t, (8)
where we substituted v=g∆t, and vis the charge velocity in the geodetic system,
at time t= ∆t. Substituting for Fswe obtain (at the limit ∆ t→0):
Ps(t) =2
3g2e2
c3(9)
which is equivalent to the power radiated by an accelerated c harged particle (Larmor
formula), where the acceleration is replaced by g. Thus we find that the work done
against the stress force, supplies the energy carried by the radiation.
Who is performing this work or, what is the source of the energ y of the radiation?
The charge is supported by a solid object, which is static in t he GF. This solid
objet must be rigidly connected to the source of the GF. Other wise, it will fall in the
GF, together with the ”supported” charge. This means that ac tually, the supporting
object is part of the object that creates the GF.
As we already mentioned, the charge is static and no work is do ne by the GF
that acts on the charge. However, the electric field of the cha rge is not static, and
it falls in a free fall in the GF. If there was no interaction be tween the electric field
and the charge that induced the field, the field would have foll ow a geodetic line and
no work would have been needed to keep it following the geodet ic line. But the field
is curved, and a stress force is implied. The interaction bet ween the curved field
and the supported charge creates a force that contradicts th e free fall. In order to
overcome this force and cause the electric field to follow the geodetic lines, a work
should be done on the electric field, and this work is done by th e GF. This work
is the source of the energy carried by the radiation. It comes out that the energy
carried away by the radiation is supplied by the GF, that lose s this energy.
5. Conclusions8
It is found that the “naive” conclusion from the principle of equivalence - that
a freely falling charge does not radiate, and a charge suppor ted at rest in a gravi-
tational field does radiate - is a correct conclusion, and one should look for rdiation
whenever a relative acceleration exists between an electri c charge and its electric
field. The electric field which falls freely in the gravitatio nal field is accelerated
relative to the static charge. The field is curved, and the wor k done in overcoming
the stress force created in the curved field, is the source of t he energy carried by the
radiation. This work is done by the gravitational field on the electric field, and the
energy carried by the radiation is created in the expence of t he gravitational energy
of the system.
Motz [11] suggested that the huge radiation emerging from qu asars may be cre-
ated by charges located in the strong gravitational fields cl ose to the surface of the
quasars. Although the current expalnation for this phenome non is different, radia-
tion from charges located in strong gravitational fields can still play a role in certain
cosmological phenomena.
We conclude that we find both the mechanism that creates the ra diation emitted
by a charge supported in a GF, and the source of the energy carr ied by this radiation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We acknowledge useful discussions on this topic with Amos Or i from the Tech-
nion.9
references:
[1] Rohrlich, F. 1965, in Classical Charged Particles , Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., MA.
[2] Boulware, D. G. 1980, Annals of Physics, 124, 169.
[3] Matsas, G.E.A., 1994, Gen. Rel. Grav., 26, 1165.
[4] Jackson, J. D. 1975, Classical Electrodynamics , Second Edition, John Wiley &
Sons (New York).
[5] Harpaz, A., Soker, N., 1998, Gen. Rel. Grav., 30, 1217.
[6] Fulton, T., Rohrlich, F., 1960, Annals of Physics, 9, 499 .
[7] Harpaz, A., Soker, N., 1999, in Proceedings of the 4thFreedmann Int. Seminar on
Gravitation and Cosmology , edts., Yu.N. Gnedin, A.A. Gribs, V.M. Mostepanenko,
W. Rodrigues Jr., UNICAMP (Br), and Friedmann Lab. Pub. (St. Petersburgh).
[8] Rohrlich, F., 1963, Annals of Physics, 22, 169.
[9] Parrot, S., 1997, paper 9303025, archive gr-qc@xxx.lan l.gov.
[10] Singal, A.K., 1997, Gen. Rel. Grav., 29, 1371.
[11] Motz, L.A. 1972, Nuovo Cimento, 9B, 77. |
arXiv:physics/9910020v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 13 Oct 19991
A MODEL FOR GENERATING RELATIVISTIC
ELECTRONS IN THE EARTH’S INNER
MAGNETOSPHERE BASED ON GYRORESONANT
WAVE-PARTICLE INTERACTIONS
Danny Summers and Chun-yu Ma1
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Memorial Univer sity of Newfoundland,
St. John’s, Newfoundland, A1C 5S7, Canada
Short title: RELATIVISTIC ELECTRONS IN THE INNER MAGNETOSPHERE2
Abstract. During the recovery phase of a magnetic storm, fluxes of relat ivistic
(>1 MeV) electrons in the inner magnetosphere (3 ≤L≤6) increase to beyond
pre-storm levels, reaching a peak about 4 days after the init iation of the storm. In order
to account for the generation of these “killer electrons”, a model is presented primarily
based on stochastic acceleration of electrons by enhanced w histler-mode chorus. In
terms of a quasi-linear formulation, a kinetic (Fokker-Pla nck) equation for the electron
energy distribution is derived, comprising an energy diffus ion coefficient based on
gyroresonant electron-whistler-mode wave interaction an d parallel wave propagation; a
source term representing substorm-produced (lower energy ) seed electrons; and a loss
term representing electron precipitation due to pitch-ang le scattering by whistler-mode
waves and EMIC waves. Steady-state solutions for the electr on energy distribution are
constructed, and fitted to an empirically-derived relativi stic Maxwellian distribution
for the high energy “hard” electron population at geosynchr onous orbit. If the average
whistler amplitude is sufficiently large, for instance 75 pT – 400 pT, dependent on the
values of the other model parameters, and assuming a backgro und plasma density of
N0= 10 cm−3outside the plasmasphere, then a good fit to the empirical dis tribution
is obtained, and corresponds to a timescale for the formatio n of the high-energy steady
state distribution of 3 – 5 days. For a lower representative v alue of the background
plasma density, N0= 1 cm−3, smaller whistler amplitudes, in the range 13 – 72 pT,
can produce the high-energy distribution in the required ti me frame of several days. It
is concluded from the model calculations that the process of stochastic acceleration by
gyroresonant electron-whistler-mode wave interaction, i n conjunction with pitch-angle
scattering by EMIC waves, constitutes a viable mechanism fo r generating “killer
electrons” during geomagnetic storms. The mechanism is exp ected to be particularly
effective for the class of small and moderate storms possessi ng a long-lasting recovery
phase during which many substorms occur.3
1. INTRODUCTION
It is well known that variations in the fluxes of relativistic electrons, of kinetic
energies >1 MeV, in the inner magnetosphere (3 ≤L≤6) are related to disturbed
magnetospheric conditions commonly called “magnetic stor ms”. Typically, for many
storms the electron fluxes diminish rapidly during the main p hase of the storm . The
main phase depletion of relativistic electrons occurs in as sociation with large negative
values of the interplanetary magnetic field Bzand large sudden increases in the solar
wind density and pressure [ Paulikas and Blake , 1979; Blake et al., 1997]. Subsequently,
during the recovery phase of the storm, fluxes increase to bey ond pre-storm levels and
peak about 4 days after the initiation of the storm [ Paulikas and Blake , 1979; Baker
et al., 1986, 1994a, 1997; Nagai, 1988;Li et al., 1997a; Reeves et al., 1998]. These
enhancements in fluxes of relativistic electrons, which are colloquially referred to as
“killer electrons”, have become the subject of considerabl e attention by magnetospheric
physicists. Not only do the enhancements constitute an intr insically interesting physics
problem in the near-Earth space, but they constitute a poten tially serious hazard to
satellites, space stations, and, conceivably, humans in sp ace. In fact, satellite disfunctions
(“anomalies”) have been linked to the effects of relativisti c electron increases [ Baker et
al.,1994b, 1997], and the state of the radiation belt environmen t has become a major
concern in space weather forecasting [e.g., Baker , 1998; Reeves , 1998a]. The region near
geosynchronous (or geostationary) orbit, L≃6.6, in the geographic equatorial plane,
is of particular interest because it is the operating zone of many orbiting satellites.
Reeves [1998b] has recently examined the relationship between rel ativistic electron
enhancements at geosynchronous orbit and magnetic storms a s measured by the Dst
index. In particular, the 30 most intense relativistic elec tron events during 1992-1995
were examined, and it was found that every relativistic elec tron event was associated
with a magnetic storm as indicated by the Dstindex, though a small fraction (about
10%) of magnetic storms did occur with no increase in relativ istic electron fluxes. Thus,4
one conclusion from Reeves’ [1998b] analysis is that intense solar wind conditions are
necessary to generate strong relativistic electron enhanc ements. Nevertheless, despite the
accumulated magnetic storm data from satellites over many y ears, including coordinated
observations from the International Solar-Terrestrial Ph ysics (ISTP) constellation of
spacecraft and other multi-satellite missions [e.g., Baker et al. , 1997; Reeves et al.,
1998], there is, as yet, no accepted explanation for the gene ration of the relativistic
electrons. Specifically, it is not known exactly how, where, or when the electrons are
accelerated. Various energization mechanisms have been pr oposed, and most of these
are reviewed by Li et al. [1997a]. It appears easier to explain the main phase depleti on
of energetic electrons than their subsequent recovery and e nhancement. The drop in
relativistic electron fluxes near geosynchronous orbit is p artly due to adiabatic responses
(conserving all three adiabatic invariants) to magnetic fie ld decreases, as reflected in
the reduction in Dstindex [e.g., Kim and Chan , 1997]. Nevertheless, Li et al. [1997a]
show that other physical mechanisms, including precipitat ion, must also contribute to
the depletion. It has been suggested that radial diffusion [ Schulz and Lanzerotti, 1974],
invoked to explain the existence of the outer electron radia tion belt itself, could also
generate electrons of MeV energies in the inner magnetosphe re. This mechanism, which
involves inwardly transporting energetic electrons from a presumed source in the outer
magnetosphere (in the tail), can produce such energies duri ng relatively quiet periods
[e.g.,Selesnick and Blake , 1997a], although the process is too slow during active time s
[Li et al., 1997a; Blake et al., 1998]. Certain global recirculation processes, involving
radial diffusion, have also been proposed to generate relati vistic electrons [e.g., Baker et
al., 1986, 1989; Fujimoto and Nishida , 1990], though these have proved inadequate, as
the transport rates are too slow. Sheldon et al. [1998] have recently identified the outer
polar cusp region as a potential acceleration region of the m agnetosphere and possible
source of energetic electrons for the outer radiation belt, though further calculations
are needed to evaluate the significance of the study. In anoth er mechanism still to5
be fully evaluated, Rostoker et al. [1998] and Liu et al. [1999] make the case that
large-amplitude ULF pulsations have the potential to suppl y the energy necessary to
create the enhanced relativistic electron fluxes. In a 3D glo bal MHD simulation of the
rapid rise of relativistic electron fluxes during the Januar y 1997 magnetic cloud event,
Hudson et al. [1999a, b] also found that ULF oscillations may play a role in energizing
relativistic electrons, via a mechanism involving drift-r esonant acceleration and radial
transport.
It is becoming increasingly apparent that electrons are acc elerated to relativistic ( >
1 MeV) energies in situ in the inner magnetosphere [e.g., Blake et al. , 1998]. Significant
evidence in support of this conclusion is the observation by Selesnick and Blake [1997b]
that the phase space density of electrons of greater than MeV energies peaks near L=4
to L=5 during storms. As a result of substorm activity, elect rons with energies up to
∼300 keV are injected near geosynchronous orbit [ Cayton et al., 1989;Baker et al.,
1989, 1998]. These electrons appear to form the source popul ation for the relativistic
electrons of greater than MeV energies that are subsequentl y observed. Summers et al.
[1998, 1999] have shown that whistler-mode waves could prov ide an effective mechanism
for accelerating electrons from energies near 100 keV to abo ve 1 MeV in the region
outside the plasmapause during the storm recovery phase. In a survey of potential
wave modes for electron scattering and stochastic accelera tion to relativistic energies
during magnetic storms, Horne and Thorne [1998] concluded, in particular, that in
low density regions of the magnetosphere where the electron gyrofrequency exceeds
the electron plasma frequency, there are four potential wav e modes that can resonate
with electrons in the energy range 100 keV to a few MeV: the whi stler, LO, RX, and Z
modes. The concept of stochastic acceleration of electrons by whistler-mode waves in
the magnetosphere has also been discussed by Temerin et al. [1994], Li et al. [1997a],
Temerin [1998], and Roth et al. [1999]. It is the purpose of present paper to quantify the
model presented qualitatively in Section 8 of Summers et al. [1998] for the stochastic6
acceleration of relativistic electrons during geomagneti c storms. Essential ingredients
in the model are the spatial regions within the inner magneto sphere 3 ≤L≤9 where
enhanced whistler-mode chorus [ Tsurutani and Smith, 1974, 1977; Koons and Roeder,
1990;Parrot and Gaye , 1994] and enhanced electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EMIC or
L-mode) waves occur [ Cornwall et al., 1970;Perraut et al. , 1976; Jordanova et al.,
1997;Kozyra et al., 1997]; see Figure 1. The aforementioned substorm-produced seed
population of electrons in the energy range 100 keV to 300 keV have approximately
circular drift paths within the region 3 ≤L≤9, and consequently will traverse the
regions of enhanced whistler-mode chorus and enhanced EMIC waves. Specifically,
in this paper we shall model the acceleration of electrons du ring the storm recovery
phase by means of second-order Fermi (or stochastic gyrores onant) acceleration by weak
whistler-mode turbulence. In a standard quasi-linear form ulation, we construct a kinetic
equation for the evolution of the electron energy distribut ion function. The equation
contains an energy diffusion coefficient due to resonant whist ler-mode wave/electron
interaction, and an electron loss term due to pitch-angle sc attering by both the
whistler-mode and EMIC waves. We should point out here that t he data from the Solar,
Anomalous, and Magnetospheric Particle Explorer (SAMPEX) satellite [ Nakamura et
al.,1995;Li et al., 1997a; Nakamura, 1998] show that bursty electron precipitation
occurs as the electron flux increases during the storm recove ry phase. Such precipitation,
together with the existence of an abundant supply of storm-p roduced lower-energy seed
electrons [ Li et al., 1997a; Baker et al., 1998] are supportive of the model constructed
in this paper. The model is presented in detail in Section 2, a nd numerical solutions are
presented in Section 3. The solutions are compared with data on the electron energy
distribution of high energy (300 – 2000 keV) electrons at geo synchronous orbit. We find
that stochastic gyroresonant acceleration by whistler-mo de waves can indeed accelerate
substorm-produced seed electrons in the inner magnetosphe re to generate high-energy
electron spectra of the type observed, following continuou s injection of seed electrons7
over a timescale of several days. Specific predictions of the model depend, of course, on
the values taken for the model parameters. In Section 4 we bri efly assess our findings
and state our conclusions.
2. MODEL
The region to which the model constructed in this paper appli es is that part of
the inner magnetosphere during storm-time that is illustra ted in the idealized Figure
1, for 3 ≤L≤9. This region contains an extensive subregion of whistler- mode Figure 1
chorus, a smaller but intense region of EMIC waves, and also c ontains the important
geosynchronous-orbit region near L=6.6. Figure 1 is a simpl ified version of Figure 7
ofSummers et al. [1998], which itself was constructed on the basis of observa tions
and relevant theory [ Cornwall et al., 1970;Perraut et al. , 1976; Koons and Roeder,
1990; Parrot and Gaye , 1994; Tsurutani and Smith, 1974, 1977; Kozyra et al.,
1997;Jordanova et al., 1997]. We assume that geomagnetic storm activity produces a
seed population of electrons of energy ≈100 keV as a source for the region specified
in Figure 1. We are not concerned in this paper with the precis e means (transport,
original source location, etc.) by which the source is suppl ied. According to standard
particle drift theory [e.g., Wolf, 1995], the drift motion of “hot” (e.g., 100 keV) electrons
close to the Earth is dominated by gradient drift, with the re sult that electrons
execute approximately circular drift trajectories eastwa rd about the Earth. Thus, the
storm-supplied source electrons constitute a quasi-trapp ed population traversing the
whistler-mode and EMIC wave subregions illustrated in Figu re 1. While executing the
eastward drift, the electrons gyrate about the field lines an d ‘bounce’ between mirror
points, during which time they also undergo both energy and p itch-angle diffusion, as
a result of their interaction with the whistler-mode chorus and EMIC waves. We shall
assume that the pitch-angle scattering rate is much greater than the energy diffusion
rate (see Appendix A), so that the electron distribution wil l be nearly isotropic. Further,8
we shall take account of pitch-angle diffusion of electrons i nto the loss-cone and their
subsequent precipitation into the atmosphere, by characte rizing their loss from the
system by an escape time Tesc. The kinetic or Fokker-Planck equation describing the
evolution in time tof the electron energy distribution function f(E, t) can be written as
∂f
∂t=∂2
∂E2(D(E)f)−∂
∂E/bracketleftBig/parenleftBig
A(E)− |˙EL|/parenrightBig
f/bracketrightBig
−f
Tesc+S(E, t), (1)
where E=Ek/(mec2) =γ−1 is the particle kinetic energy in units of the rest mass
energy, γ= (1−v2/c2)−1/2is the Lorentz factor, vis the particle speed, meis the
electron rest mass, and c is the speed of light; f(E, t)dEis the number of particles per
unit volume in the interval dE;D(E) is the energy diffusion coefficient due to resonant
interaction of the electrons with whistler-mode turbulenc e;A(E) is the systematic
acceleration rate due to the whistler-mode turbulence; |˙EL|is the energy loss rate
due to processes not directly related to stochastic acceler ation, namely, here assumed
to be Coulomb collisions and synchrotron radiation; Tescis the mean escape time of
particles out of the system due to pitch-angle scattering by both whistler-mode and
EMIC waves; and the source term S(E, t) represents the rate of particle injection into
the inner magnetospheric region specified in Figure 1, as a re sult of storm activity.
Equation (1) is not the standard form of Fokker-Planck equat ion employed in space
physics, and so we give a brief account of its derivation in th e Appendix. Detailed data
on the whistler-mode chorus during storm-time are unfortun ately not available. In fact,
insufficient information is known about the energy spectrum o f the turbulence in many
space physics situations. While whistler-mode chorus emis sions are normally considered
to be discrete during geomagnetically quiet times [ Anderson and Kurth, 1989], it is
here assumed that during geomagnetic storms the concomitan t, enhanced whistler-mode
turbulence can be considered quasi-continuous. Specifical ly, a simplifying assumption is
made that the whistler-mode turbulence is isotropic, homog eneous, stationary, and has
a power-law spectral energy density distribution in wavenu mber k, with spectral index9
q; specifically, the spectral energy density is assumed to tak e the form,
W(k) =q−1
kmin/parenleftBiggkmin
k/parenrightBiggq
Wtot, W tot=/integraldisplay∞
kminW(k)dk, (2)
for wavenumbers greater than kmin, to be specified below. In accordance with the
quasi-linear diffusion formulation adopted in this paper, t he whistler-mode turbulence
is weak, i.e., comprises small-amplitude magnetic and elec tric wave fields. Momentum
diffusion coefficients corresponding to whistler-mode waves have been obtained by
various authors. We calculate the Fokker-Planck coefficient sD(E) and A(E) from (A8)
using the whistler-mode diffusion coefficients Dpderived by Hamilton and Petrosian
[1992] (for 2 < q≤4), and Schlickeiser [1997] (for 1 < q < 2) for parallel wave
propagation. The results are
D(E) =D0[E(E+ 2)](q−1)/2(E+ 1)−1, (3)
A(E) =D0q[E(E+ 2)](q−3)/2, (4)
where
D0=π(q−1)2
q2(q2−4)/parenleftBiggckmin
Ωe/parenrightBiggq−1
α2RΩe, (5)
for 2< q≤4;
D(E) =D0[E(E+ 2)]1/2(E+ 1)−1, (6)
A(E) = 2D0[E(E+ 2)]−1/2, (7)
where
D0=π(q−1)
8/parenleftBiggckmin
Ωe/parenrightBiggq−1/parenleftBiggme
mp/parenrightBigg(2−q)/2
α(2+q)/2JWRΩe, (8)
for 1< q < 2.
In (3) – (8), the two dimensionless parameters Randαare introduced; Ris the ratio of
turbulent energy Wtotto magnetic field energy,
R= 8πWtot/B2
0= (∆B/B 0)2, (9)10
and
α= Ω2
e/ω2
pe= (mp/me)β2
A, (10)
where Ω e=eB0/(mec) is the electron gyrofrequency, with B0the ambient magnetic
field strength and ethe electron charge; ∆ Bis the average whistler-mode wave
amplitude; ωpe= (4πN0e2/me)1/2is the electron plasma frequency, with N0the
particle number density; JWis a weakly varying function of E; and βA=vA/cwhere
vA=B0/(4πN0mp)1/2is the Alfv´ en speed, with mpthe proton rest mass. The parameter
αdefined in (10) is identical to the parameter αused by Summers et al. [1998]. We
note, in particular, as should indeed be the case, that since the kinetic energy variable
Eis dimensionless, the dimension of the diffusion coefficient Dequals the dimension of
the parameter D0(orD0) equals [time]−1. For definiteness, in (5) and (8) we set
kmin= Ω p/(cβA), (11)
[e.g.,Hamilton and Petrosian , 1992], where Ω p=eB0/(mpc) is the proton gyrofrequency.
The energy loss term |˙EL|, in which we include losses due to Coulomb collisions
and synchrotron radiation, can be expressed in the form
|˙EL|= 6×10−13N0(E+ 1)[E(E+ 2)]−1/2+ 1.32×10−9B2
0E(E+ 2).(12)
The first term on the right-hand side of the equation (12) is th e energy loss rate due
to Coulomb collisions, given by Melrose [1980], and the second term the energy loss
rate due to synchrotron radiation, given by Blumenthal and Gould [1970]. In (12), the
particle number density N0is in cm−3, the magnetic field strength B0is in gauss, and
|˙EL|is in sec−1.
We note that there are potentially four influential paramete rs in the model: the
parameter αdefined by (10), the spectral index q, the turbulent wave power parameter
R, and the mean particle escape-time Tesc. The value of the parameter αdepends on
the values taken for the particle density N0and the ambient magnetic field strength11
B0. We shall discuss Tesc, which we regard as an adjustable parameter, and the particl e
source function Sbelow. The diffusion parameters D0andD0occurring in expressions
(3) and (6) for the diffusion coefficient Dare measures of the rate of energy diffusion,
andD−1
0,D−1
0are measures of the time scale for particle acceleration. Su bstituting the
result (11) for kmininto equations (5) and (8), we find that D0andD0are given by
D0=π(q−1)2
q2(q2−4)/parenleftBiggme
mp/parenrightBiggq−3
ΩeRβ5−q
A=π(q−1)2
q2(q2−4)/parenleftBiggme
mp/parenrightBigg(q−1)/2
ΩeRα(5−q)/2,(13)
for 2< q≤4;
D0=π(q−1)
8/parenleftbiggmp
me/parenrightbigg
JWΩeRβ3
A=π(q−1)
8/parenleftBiggme
mp/parenrightBigg1/2
JWΩeRα3/2, (14)
for 1< q < 2.
Corresponding to the Kolmogorov turbulent spectrum ( q= 5/3), the function JWis of
order unity. As an idealized assumption, we regard the Kolmo gorov spectrum as the
representative spectrum over the range 1 < q < 2, and we henceforth set q= 5/3 and
JW= 1 in (14).
Since, from (10), the parameter αis inversely proportional to the particle number
density N0, it follows from (13) and (14) that D0andD0increase as N0decreases. This
agrees with the conclusions of Summers et al. [1998] who found by constructing resonant
diffusion curves in velocity space that energy diffusion beco mes more pronounced with
increasing α(or decreasing N0). As expected, the values of D0andD0also increase as
the turbulent spectral energy density ratio Rincreases. Specifically, we find from (13)
and (14) that D0andD0depend on the plasma parameters N0andB0, and the wave
amplitude ∆ Bas follows:
D0∝B(4−q)
0(∆B)2/N(5−q)/2
0 (15)
for 2< q≤4;
D0∝B2
0(∆B)2/N3/2
0 (16)12
for 1< q < 2.
In this paper, we set N0= 10 cm−3as the particle number density representative
of the inner magnetosphere (3 ≤L≤9) outside the plasmasphere. It could be argued
that such a value may be too high for the background plasma out side the plasmasphere.
However, since from (15) and (16) it is clear that the acceler ation process becomes
more efficient as N0decreases, we find it useful to adopt N0= 10 cm−3as a generic
conservative value. We comment further on this assumption b elow. We use the
equatorial (dipole) magnetic field value B0= 3.12×10−5/L3T. Corresponding values
ofB0and the above-defined parameters αandβAat the locations L= 3,4,···, 9 are
given in Table 1. In Figure 2, we plot the energy diffusion para meter D0(sec−1) as a Figure 2
function of the spectral index qin the range 2 < q < 4 at each of the locations L= 3, 4,
5. At each L-value, we calculate D0for the specified wave amplitudes ∆ B= 75 pT, 100
pT, 300 pT, and 1 nT ( which correspond to the indicated values ofRin the diagrams).
Lines indicating the time scales D−1
0for particle acceleration corresponding to 1 hour,
1/2 day, and 1 day are shown in each diagram. As can be observed from the curves in
Figure 2, the value of D0is particularly sensitive to the value of qasqapproaches 2.
In fact, formally from (13) we have the result D0→ ∞, asq→2, which is obviously
undesirable physically, but which is a consequence of the qu asi-linear diffusion formalism
we have adopted in this paper. It is evident from Figure 2 that , at any given L-value, as
the value of qdecreases, the value of D0increases, and hence the time scale for particle
acceleration decreases. In addition, it can be observed tha t for a given value of q, as
Ldecreases, the value of D0likewise increases; this property also follows from relati on
(15). Thus, for qin the range 2 < q < 4, shorter acceleration times are favoured by
smaller value of q, small values of L, and (of course) larger values of the wave amplitude
∆B. Corresponding to the Kolmogorov spectrum ( q= 5/3), we show in Figure 3 the Figure 3
diffusion parameter D0(sec−1) as a function of ∆ B(pT) at the locations L= 3, 4, 5.
Again, it is clear from the figure that shorter acceleration t imes are favoured by smaller13
values of Land larger values of ∆ B; this property similarly follows from (16).
In Figure 4, we plot the diffusion coefficient D(sec−1) as a function of the particle Figure 4
kinetic energy E(MeV), as given by (3), (6), (13) and (14), for the fixed wave am plitude
∆B= 1 nT, and N0= 10 cm−3. The curves are constructed for values of the spectral
index q= 5/3, 2.5, 3, 3.5, and 4, at each of the locations, L= 3, 4, 5. The diffusion
coefficient Dis clearly an increasing function of energy E. In general, for a given value
ofE, though not at all values, Dcan also be seen to increase as qdecreases.
According to the standard quasi-linear theory of resonant i nteraction of electrons
with whistler-mode turbulence [e.g., Melrose , 1986], in order for electrons to resonate
with whistlers, the condition,
γβ≥(mp/me)1/2βA (17)
must be satisfied; β=v/cwhere vis the particle speed, cis the speed of light, γis the
Lorentz factor, and βA=vA/cis the Alfv´ en speed parameter defined above. Making use
of relativistic relations given in (A6), we find that (17) can be expressed in the form
E(E+ 2)≥(mp/me)β2
A (18)
which, in turn, by using the parameter αdefined in (10), can be reduced to
E≥Ec, (19)
where Ecis the critical energy given by
Ec= (1 + α)1/2−1. (20)
The value of the parameter αdepends on the values of the particle number density
N0and magnetic field B0. Values of the critical energy Ecare given in Table 1 at the Table 1
locations L= 3, 4, ···, 9, for N0= 10 cm−3; the values for L= 3, 4, 5 correspond
respectively to the energy cut-off values in the upper, middl e, and lower diagrams in
Figure 4.14
3. NUMERICAL RESULTS
Prior to consideration of the solution of the kinetic equati on (1) for the electron
energy distribution function f(E, t), we must specify the source function S(E, t) which
represents storm-produced seed electrons. We shall assume that the source function can
be represented by a standard relativistic Maxwellian distr ibution, namely,
S=S0[µ/K 2(µ)](E+ 1)[E(E+ 2)]1/2e−µ(E+1)(21)
where
µ=mec2/(kBTs) (22)
andTsrepresents the temperature of the distribution; K2(µ) is a modified Bessel
function of the second kind of argument µ, and kBis Boltzmann’s constant. It can be
shown that/integraltextSdE=S0,so that the parameter S0represents the total number of source
electrons per unit volume per unit time.
It is clearly important both to calibrate and test our model, as far as is possible
at the present time, by making use of available observationa l data. The study by
Cayton et al. [1989] appears best-suited to these purposes. Cayton et al. [1989] derived
energy distribution functions from energetic (30 – 2000 keV ) electron fluxes observed
simultaneously by three satellites in geosynchronous orbi t throughout the year 1986.
It was found that the energetic electron population can be re solved into two distinct
relativistic Maxwellian components, each parameterized b y a temperature and a density:
a lower energy (30 – 300 keV) “soft” electron distribution wi th temperature Ts≈25
keV and number density Ns≈5×10−3cm−3; and a higher energy (300 – 2000 keV)
“hard” electron distribution with temperature Th≈200 keV and number density
Nh≈10−4cm−3. The “soft” component is charaterized by intense substorm- related
injections and by strong temporal variations. Accordingly , and in agreement with a
suggested interpretation by Cayton et al. [1989], we shall regard this “soft” component
as comprising the electron seed population. Thus, we shall i dentify the temperature Ts15
associated with the Maxwellian source distribution (21) – ( 22) as the aforementioned
temperature of the “soft” electron component. Cayton et al. [1989] found that the value
ofThshows little change on the substorm (hourly) time scale, whi leNhdecreases during
substorms. We shall regard the “hard” electron distributio n as precisely the highly
energetic (“killer”) electron distribution that we are try ing to model as a (steady-state)
solution of the kinetic equation (1) with the steady Maxwell ian source (21) – (22).
We solve equation (1) for the energetic electron distributi onf(E, t) by the Crank-
Nicholson implicit differencing scheme. The method is well s uited to time-dependent
Fokker-Planck equations, and we refer the reader to Hamilton et al. [1990] and Park
and Petrosian [1996] for full details. Since we are concerned with the gene ration of
a highly-energetic electron distribution, we assume that t here are no such energetic
particles initially, i.e.,
f(E,0) = 0 , E > E s, (23)
where Es= 1/µis the thermal energy associated with the source distributi on (21) –
(22). We further assume that, subject to continuous injecti on of the seed electrons
(given by (21) – (22)), the evolving distribution maintains a maximum at E=Esfor all
time, i.e., we take the inner boundary condition as
∂f(E, t)
∂E= 0, E =Es. (24)
Finally, for the outer boundary condition we require that th e distribution function tend
to zero for large values of Efor all time, so we set
f(E, t) = 0, E > E 0 (25)
where E0is a specified upper value of E(in practice, we fix E0= 2×104MeV).
Having constructed the evolving electron distribution sub ject to the above conditions, we
thereby obtain the resulting steady-state distribution f(E) which we fit to a relativistic16
Maxwellian distribution, i.e., we carry out the linear fit,
log10/bracketleftBig
f(E)/{(E+ 1)[E(E+ 2)]1/2}/bracketrightBig
≡a+bE, (26)
with
a= log10/bracketleftBig
Nhλe−λ/K2(λ)/bracketrightBig
, b =−λlog10e, (27)
and
λ=mec2/(kBTh), (28)
where ThandNhrepresent respectively the temperature and number density of the
steady-state distribution (to be compared with the above va lues associated with the
“hard” electron distribution); and K2(λ) is a modified Bessel function of the second kind
of argument λ. For a given steady-state solution, the parameters aandbare determined
by a linear regression comprising a minimization of a chi-sq uare goodness-of-fit merit
function [ Press et al. , 1992]. Having thus obtained values for aandb, we then calculate
ThandNhfrom (27) and (28).
Representative numerical solutions of the model presented in this paper are shown
in Figures 5, 6, and 7, with corresponding results given resp ectively in Tables 2, 3, Figures 5, 6
7
Tables 2, 3and 4. In all cases we set the background number density N0= 10 cm−3, and the
4source electron temperature Ts= 25 keV (giving µ= 20.44 from (22)), the latter value
being equal to the estimate by Cayton et al. [1989] for the temperature of the “soft”
electron distribution. The scheme and rationale for settin g the remaining parameters
is as follows. Firstly, we set L, which fixes the value of the background magnetic
fieldB0. Secondly, we set the average wave-amplitude ∆ Band the spectral index q;
these values are chosen to yield a value of the diffusion param eterD0(orD0) that is
expected to produce a steady-state (equilibrium) distribu tion function after several
days of source injection. Whistler-mode “chorus” wave ampl itudes have been reported
in the range 1 – 100 pT [ Burtis and Helliwell, 1975], with Parrot and Gaye [1994]
finding that during more intense periods of magnetic activit y wave amplitudes can17
approach ∆ B= 1 nT. Amplitudes of whistlers associated mainly with hiss, with values
of 100 pT or more, have also been reported by Smith et al. [1974] during a typical
storm recovery phase. In Table 1, corresponding to a backgro und number density of
N0= 10 cm−3, we present the wave amplitudes ∆ B(pT) expected to yield a high
energy “hard” electron distribution after a few days of seed electron injection as a result
of substorm activity. These required amplitudes depend on t he value of Landq(as well
asN0). For q= 5/3, and for the inner region 3 ≤L≤5, the values of ∆ Bare in the
range 75 – 400 pT, which are realistic though in the higher ran ge of observations. As
pointed out in Section 2, the process of gyroresonant stocha stic acceleration becomes
more efficient with decreasing background plasma density. Wh ileN0= 10 cm−3can
be regarded as a representative value for the background pla sma density outside the
plasmasphere in certain conditions, it is also true that at o ther times N0= 1 cm−3is a
more representative value. Using (15), we calculate that if we set N0= 1 cm−3, then,
for 3≤L≤5, the required ∆ B-values are in the range 13 – 72 pT, if q= 5/3, and in
the range 35 – 316 pT, if 2 .5≤q≤3. Having set values for N0, Ts, L, q, and ∆ B, we
next specify the mean particle escape time Tesc. In fact, since a value for Tescis not
precisely known, we treat Tescas an adjustable parameter and run the cases 1 /(D0Tesc)
(or 1/(D0Tesc)) = 0 ,1,2,5,10. In Figure 5 (left) we show steady-state solutions for
the electron energy distribution function f(E) for the case L= 3,q= 5/3, ∆B= 75
pT. The source strength S0has been chosen so as to produce a model solution that
best agrees with the “hard” electron distribution of Cayton et al. [1989]. In order to
achieve this, for each steady-state solution the linear fit ( 26) – (28) to a relativistic
Maxwellian distribution is carried out. The corresponding results are shown in Figure
5 (right) and Table 2. It is found that the temperature Thassociated with a particular
steady-state solution, as given by the parameter b(or the slope of the constructed line),
is largely determined by the value of Tesc, while the number density Nh, which is then
given by the parameter a(or the vertical intercept of the line) is largely determine d by18
the value of S0. The results in Table 2, for which S0= 1.5×10−6cm−3sec−1, indicate
a best agreement with the empirically-derived values of Nh≈10−4cm−3andTh= 200
keV, when Tesc≈1/2 day, the corresponding time for the formation of the steady -state
solution being TEQ≈4 days. A precise, physically representative value for the m ean
particle escape time Tescis difficult to determine a priori sinceTescrelates to scattering
losses of electrons due to both whistler-mode and EMIC waves . However, on the basis
of estimates of timescales for strong diffusion scattering l oss, it appears that Tescis of
the order of hours and so Tesc≈1/2 day is not an unreasonable value. We relate TEQto
the time taken after the initiation of a storm for fluxes of rel ativistic electrons to peak
(see Section 1), which is observed to be several days. Thus, w e favour solutions of the
present model for which TEQ= 1 – 5 days, with TEQ≈4 days possibly the optimal
value.
In Figure 6 and Table 3 we show the corresponding results for t he case N0= 10
cm−3,L= 6.6,q= 2.5, ∆B= 800 pT, while in Figure 7 and Table 4 we show the results
for the case N0= 10 cm−3,L= 5,q= 3, ∆ B= 1 nT. As can be seen from the tables,
for both these cases best agreement between the solutions an d the “hard” electron
distribution of Cayton et al. [1989] occurs when Tesc≈1/2 day, and corresponds to a
formation time TEQ= 3 – 5 days. If the background number density is taken to be
N0= 1 cm−3, the cases shown in Figures 6 and 7 correspond respectively t o values for
the wave amplitude ∆ Bof 190 pT and 316 pT. Figures 6 and 7 correspond to cases of
intense substorm activity during the storm recovery phase.
Taking into account the value of the wave amplitudes given in Table 2 corresponding
toN0= 10 cm−3, and their converted values for the case N0= 1 cm−3, we re-iterate
that the model solutions imply in particular that for a Kolmo gorov turbulent wave
spectrum, sustained whistler amplitudes in the physically realistic range 13 – 72 pT can
generate a typical high energy “hard” electron distributio n in the inner magnetosphere
3≤L≤5 within one or two days. It should also be noted that the model calculations19
show that the acceleration mechanism considered in this pap er is not effective in the
region 7 ≤L≤9 since the necessary values of the whistler amplitude would be too
high (typically in excess of 1 nT). Thus, the model formulate d herein has been shown
to be a viable mechanism for accelerating electrons exactly in the inner region of the
magnetosphere where the peak in electron phase space densit y of the highly energetic
electrons is observed to occur [e.g., Selesnick and Blake , 1997b].
A requirement of the model presented here is enhanced whistl er-mode chorus
lasting for a period of at least one or two days. Geomagnetic c onditions during which
such a requirement is particularly well satisfied occur duri ng the descending phase of the
solar cycle when the Earth’s magnetosphere can be impacted b y a high-speed solar wind
stream following a magnetic field build-up known as a Corotat ing Interaction Region
(CIR). CIRs cause small and moderate magnetic storms, but no t major storms. Since
the Earth can be embedded in the associated high-speed strea m for days to weeks there
are substorms for days to weeks [ Tsurutani et al. , 1995; Kamide et al. , 1998]. Thus,
during this long-lasting recovery phase of the magnetic sto rm, there will be continuously
enhanced wave activity, in the form of both whistler-mode ch orus and EMIC waves,
to drive the acceleration mechanism presented herein to gen erate the high energy ( >1
MeV) electrons.
4. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, by means of quasi-linear theory and a test-par ticle approach, we have
formulated the model kinetic equation (1) in which the accel eration mechanism is due to
gyroresonant interaction between electrons and whistler- mode turbulence, corresponding
to parallel wave propagation. The essential purpose of the s tudy has been to apply
equation (1) to the Earth’s inner magnetosphere in order to t est the hypothesis that
storm-enhanced whistler-mode chorus can accelerate lower -energy substorm-produced
seed electrons to relativistic ( >1 MeV) energies over a period of a few days. Our20
conclusions are as follows:
1. Based on the model calculations in this paper, it is entire ly possible for enhanced
whistler-mode chorus to generate the observed increases in relativistic ( >1
MeV) “killer” electrons during the storm recovery after a pe riod of several days,
so long as the waves are sufficiently strong. If N0= 10 cm−3is taken to be
the background plasma number density outside the plasmasph ere, the typical
average wave-amplitudes required for a Kolmogorov spectru m are in the range
∆B= 75 – 400 pT, dependent on the location L. IfN0= 1 cm−3, the required
wave-amplitudes are in range 13 - 72 pT.
2. Energetic electron spectra of the model solutions do not f ollow a simple power law
in energy. For certain sets of parameters, we find that soluti ons can be well fitted
to the relativistic Maxwellian distribution empirically c onstructed by Cayton et
al.[1989] to represent the higher energy (300 keV – 2 MeV) “hard” electron
population at geosynchronous orbit. We note the recent anal ysis by Freeman et al.
[1998] of the November 3 – 4, 1993 storm, in which electrons fr om about 100 keV to
1.5 MeV were characterized by a power law spectrum. Evidentl y, optimal fitting of
empirical electron spectra to power-law, Maxwellian, or ot her types of distribution
can depend on the energy range prescribed and the event under consideration. In
connection with electron power-law energy spectra, Ma and Summers [1998] have
shown that such spectra can be produced by whistler-mode tur bulence, although
it is questionable whether the necessary conditions establ ished in their theoretical
study can be satisfied in the Earth’s magnetosphere.
3. It is unlikely that any single physical mechanism of elect ron acceleration can
fully account for relativistic electron enhancements occu rring during the recovery
phase of magnetic storms, not least because various types of energetic electron
event have been observed [e.g., Baker et al. , 1997, 1998; Reeves , 1998b; Reeves et21
al., 1998]. Rapid energetic electron flux enhancements taking p lace over minutes
have been associated with inductive electric fields [e.g., Li et al. , 1993], while
enhancements occurring over tens of minutes or a few hours ha ve been linked
to ULF pulsations [e.g., Rostoker et al. , 1998; Liu et al. , 1999]. The gradual
acceleration process (occurring over a few days) formulate d in this paper is not
intended to apply to such energetic electron events which ty pically result from
major storms. However, small and moderate magnetic storms a ssociated with
Corotating Interaction Regions (CIRs) characteristicall y have long recovery phases
and attendant substorms for days to weeks [ Tsurutani et al. , 1995; Kamide et al. ,
1998]. Since these substorms produce enhanced whistler-mo de chorus (and EMIC
waves) over (at least) several days, the necessary conditio ns for the effectiveness
of the mechanism presented in this paper are satisfied. Hence , for these types of
storm, and possibly others, when average wave-amplitudes a re sufficiently large,
the present study shows that, in conjunction with pitch-ang le scattering by EMIC
waves, the mechanism of stochastic acceleration by whistle r-mode turbulence is a
serious candidate for explaining the generation of “killer electrons”.
Appendix A: Derivation of the Fokker-Planck equation (1)
We consider energetic charged particles in a uniform magnet ic field, with
superimposed small-amplitude plasma waves of a given mode. The equation for the
evolution of the particle distribution function φ(p, t, µ) due to gyroresonant interactions
with the waves is
∂φ
∂t=1
p2∂
∂p/parenleftBigg
p2Dpp∂φ
∂p/parenrightBigg
+1
p2∂
∂p/parenleftBigg
p2Dpµ∂φ
∂µ/parenrightBigg
+∂
∂µ/parenleftBigg
Dµp∂φ
∂p/parenrightBigg
+∂
∂µ/parenleftBigg
Dµµ∂φ
∂µ/parenrightBigg
+1
p2∂
∂p/parenleftBig
p2˙ELφ/parenrightBig
+Q(p, t). (A1)
Equation (A1), called a kinetic or diffusion or Fokker-Planc k equation, is derived by
expanding a collisionless Boltzmann equation for the parti cle distribution function22
to second order in perturbed quantities, and ensemble-aver aging over the statistical
properties of the plasma waves in accordance with quasi-lin ear theory. Among the
early authors to carry out this procedure were Kennel and Engelmann [1966], Hall and
Sturrock [1967], and Lerche [1968]; see also Melrose [1980], Schlickeiser [1989], and
Steinacker and Miller [1992], and references therein. In (A1), pis the relativistic unit
momentum given by p=γv/c, where vis the particle speed, and γ= (1−v2/c2)−1/2is
the Lorentz factor, with cthe speed of light; tis time; µis the cosine of the pitch angle;
˙ELis an energy loss term due to processes not directly associat ed with gyro-resonant
wave-particle interactions; and Q(p, t) is a source term. The Fokker-Planck or diffusion
coefficients Dpp, Dpµ, Dµp, and Dµµdepend on the properties of the wave turbulence,
viz., the wave mode and polarization, the angle of wave propa gation to the ambient
magnetic field, and the power spectrum, including the ratio o f the turbulent wave
energy to the background magnetic energy. These coefficients have been given both
in general form, and specific form, for various particular wa ve modes, by a number
of authors, e.g., Melrose [1980], Schlickeiser [1989], Steinacker and Miller [1992], and
Hamilton and Petrosian [1992]. It is not necessary here to derive equation (A1), whi ch
requires considerable algebra, or to provide general expre ssions for the coefficients
Dpp, Dpµ=Dµp, and Dµµ. We shall assume that the rate of pitch-angle scattering is
much larger than the rate of energy diffusion (and the rate of t he particle escape from
the system). Such an assumption is reasonable based on an ana lysis of time scales
associated with resonant interaction of electrons with whi stler-mode waves, e.g., see
Melrose [1980] and the discussion by Hamilton and Petrosian [1992]. Equivalently,
defining the time scales Tµµ=D−1
µµ,Tµp=pD−1
µp,Tpp=p2D−1
pp, and the escape time Tesc,
we assume that Tµµ≪Tpp,Tµµ≪Tµp, and Tµµ≪Tesc. Then the particle distribution
function can be assumed to be isotropic, and the pitch angle c an be eliminated from the
problem by integrating (A1) with respect to µ[e.g., see Schlickeiser , 1989; Steinacker23
and Miller , 1992]. Writing
F(p, t) =/integraldisplay1
−1φ(p, t, µ)dµ, (A2)
and representing the scattering loss of particles by pitch a ngle diffusion by means of a
loss term −F(p, t)/Tesc, the equation (A1) thus becomes
∂F(p, t)
∂t=1
p2∂
∂p/parenleftBigg
p2Dp(p)∂F(p, t)
∂p/parenrightBigg
+1
p2∂
∂p/parenleftBig
p2˙EL(p)F(p, t)/parenrightBig
−F(p, t)
Tesc+1
2Q(p, t), (A3)
where the momentum diffusion coefficient Dp(p) has been formed by averaging with
respect to µ.
We now change the momentum variable pto the kinetic energy variable E=γ−1
in equation (A3). We write
f(E, t)dE= 4πp2F(p, t)dp, (A4)
∂
∂p=dE
dp∂
∂E, (A5)
and make note of the following simple relativistic relation s:
p=γβ, β =v/c, p2=E(E+ 2), γ= (1 + p2)1/2,
pdp= (E+ 1)dE, βdp =dE, β = [E(E+ 2)]1/2(E+ 1)−1. (A6)
Then, after straightforward manipulation, equation (A3) c an be expressed in the form,
∂
∂t(f(E, t)) =∂2
∂E2[D(E)f(E, t)]−∂
∂E/bracketleftBig/parenleftBig
A(E)− |˙EL|/parenrightBig
f(E, t)/bracketrightBig
−f(E, t)
Tesc+S(E, t),
(A7)
where
D(E) = β2Dp(p),
A(E) =1
p2d
dp/parenleftBig
p2βDp(p)/parenrightBig
,
|˙EL|=β˙EL(p),24
S(E, t) =2πp2
βQ(p, t). (A8)
The form of equation (A7) is actually the Fokker-Planck form of equation for a particle
distribution function as originally presented by Chandrasekhar [1943] for particles in
stochastic motion. Stochastic acceleration of electrons i n solar flares has been treated
using different versions of (A7), e.g., see Ramaty [1979], Petrosian [1994], and Park et
al.[1997].
Acknowledgments.
This work is supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineeri ng Research Council of
Canada under Grant A-0621. Additional support is acknowled ged from the Dean of Science,
Memorial University of Newfoundland, as well as NSF Grant AT M 97 29021 and NASA Grant
NAG5 4680. Part of this paper was written when D. Summers was V isiting Professor at the
Radio Atmospheric Science Center, Kyoto University, Japan . It is a pleasure to acknowledge
H. Matsumoto of Kyoto University for his generous hospitali ty and stimulating scientific
discussions. We are also grateful to R. B. Horne and B. T. Tsur utani for helpful comments.25
References
Anderson, R. R., and W. S. Kurth, Discrete electromagnetic e missions in planetary
magnetospheres, Plasma Waves and Instabilities at Comets and in Magnetosphe res,
Geophys. Monog. 53 , edited by B. T. Tsurutani and H. Oya, p. 81, A.G.U., Washingt on,
D.C., 1989.
Baker, D. N., J. B. Blake, R. W. Klebesadel, and P. R. Higbie, H ighly relativistic electrons
in the Earth’s outer magnetosphere, I. Lifetimes and tempor al history 1979-1984, J.
Geophys. Res., 91 , 4265, 1986.
Baker, D. N., J. B. Blake, L. B. Callis, R. Belian, and T. E. Cay ton, Relativistic electrons near
geostationary orbit: Evidence for internal magnetospheri c acceleration, Geophys. Res.
Lett., 16 , 559, 1989.
Baker, D. N., J. B. Blake, L. B. Callis, J. R. Cummings, D. Hove stadt, S. Kanekal, B. Blecker,
R. A. Mewaldt, and R. D. Zwickl, Relativistic electron accel eration and decay time
scales in the inner and outer radiation belts: SAMPEX, Geophys. Res. Lett., 21 , 409,
1994a.
Baker, D. N., S. Kanekal, J. B. Blake, B. Klecker, and G. Rosto ker, Satellite anomalies linked
to electron increase in the magnetosphere, Eos, Trans., AGU, 75 , 402, 1994b.
Baker, D. N., X. Li, N. Turner, J. H. Allen, L. F. Bargatze, J. B . Blake, R. B. Sheldon, H.
E. Spence, R. D. Belian, G. D. Reeves, S. G. Kanekal, B. Klecke r, R. P. Lepping,
K. Ogilvie, R. A. Mewaldt, T. Onsager, H. J. Singer, and G. Ros toker, Recurrent
geomagnetic storms and relativistic electron enhancement s in the outer magnetosphere:
ISTP coordinated measurements, J. Geophys. Res., 102 , 14141, 1997.
Baker, D. N., Radiation belt models and forecasts, Eos, Trans., AGU, 79 , W93, 1998.
Baker, D. N., T. I. Pulkkinen, X. Li, S. G. Kanekal, J. B. Blake , R. S. Selesnick, M. G.
Henderson, G. D. Reeves, H. E. Spence, and G. Rostoker, Coron al mass ejections,
magnetic clouds, and relativistic electron events: ISTP, J. Geophys. Res., 103 , 17279,
1998.26
Blake, J. B., D. N. Baker, N. Turner, K. W. Ogilvie, and R. P. Le pping, Correlation of
changes in the outer-zone relativistic-electron populati on with upstream solar wind and
magnetic field measurements, Geophys. Res. Lett., 24 , 927, 1997.
Blake, J. B., R. S. Selesnick, J. F. Fennell, M. Grande, and C. H. Perry, A comparison of
the injection parameters of relativistic electrons and rin g current ions as observed by
CRRES, Eos, Trans., AGU, 79 , W99, 1998.
Blumenthal, G. R., and R. J. Gould, Bremsstrahlung, synchro tron radiation, and Compton
scattering of high-energy electrons traversing dilute gas es,Rev. Mod. Phys., 42 , 237,
1970.
Burtis, W. J., and R. A. Helliwell, Magnetospheric chorus: a mplitude and growth rate, J.
Geophys. Res., 80 , 3265, 1975.
Cayton, T. E., R. D. Belian, S. P. Gary, T. A. Fritz, and D. N. Ba ker, Energetic electron
components at geosynchronous orbit, Geophys. Res. Lett., 16, 147, 1989.
Chandrasekhar, S., Stochastic problems in physics and astr onomy, Rev. Mod. Phys., 15 , 1,
1943.
Cornwall, J. M., F. V. Coroniti, and R. M. Thorne, Turbulent l oss of ring current protons, J.
Geophys. Res., ,75, 4699, 1970.
Freeman, J. W., T. P. O’Brien, A. A. Chan, and R. A. Wolf, Energ etic electrons at
geostationary orbit during the November 3 – 4, 1993 storm: Sp atial/temporal
morphology, characterization by a power law spectrum, and r epresentation by an
artificial neural network, J. Geophys. Res., 103 , 26251, 1998.
Fujimoto, M. and A. Nishida, Energization and anisotropiza tion if energetic electrons in the
Earth’s radiation belt by the recirculation process, J. Geophys. Res., 95 , 4265, 1990.
Hall, D. E., and P. A. Sturrock, Diffusion, scattering, and ac celeration of particles by stochastic
electromagnetic fields, Phys. Fluids, 10 , 2620, 1967.
Hamilton, R. J., E. T. Lu, and V. Petrosian, Numerical soluti on of the time-dependent kinetic
equation for electrons in magnetized plasma, Astrophys. J., 354 , 726, 1990.27
Hamilton, R. J., and V. Petrosian, Stochastic acceleration of electrons. I. Effects of collisions
in solar flares, Astrophys. J., 398 , 350, 1992.
Horne, R. B., and R. M. Thorne, Potential wave modes for elect ron scattering and stochastic
acceleration to relativistic energies during magnetic sto rms,Geophys. Res. Lett., 25 ,
3011, 1998.
Hudson, M. K., S. R. Elkington, J. G. Lyon, and C. C. Goodrich, Increase in relativistic
electron flux in the inner magnetosphere: ULF wave mode struc ture,Adv. Space Res. ,
in press, 1999a.
Hudson, M. K., S. R. Elkington, J. G. Lyon, C. C. Goodrich, and T. J. Rosenberg, Simulation
of radiation belt dynamics driven by solar wind variations, Sun-Earth Plasma
Connections, Geophys. Monog. 109, edited by J. L. Burch, S. K. Antiochos, R. L.
Carovillano, p. 171, A.G.U., Washington, 1999b.
Jordanova, V. K., J. U. Kozyra, A. F. Nagy, and G. V. Khazanov, Kinetic model of the ring
current-atmosphere interactions, J. Geophys. Res., 102 , 14279, 1997.
Kamide, Y., W. Baumjohann, I. A. Daglis, W. D. Gonzalez, M. Gr ande, J. A. Joselyn, R. L.
McPherron, J. L. Phillips, E. G. D. Reeves, G. Rostoker, A. S. Sharma, H. J. Singer,
B. T. Tsurutani, and V. M. Vasyliunas, Current understandin g of magnetic storms:
Storm-substorm relationships, J. Geophys. Res., 103 , 17705, 1998.
Kennel, C. F., and F. Engelmann, Velocity space diffusion fro m weak plasma turbulence in a
magnetic field, Phys. Fluids, 9 , 2377, 1966.
Kim, H.-J., and A. A. Chan, Fully adiabatic changes in storm t ime relativistic electron fluxes,
J. Geophys. Res., 102 , 22107, 1997.
Koons, H. C., and J. L. Roeder, A survey of equatorial magneto spheric wave activity between
5 and 8 RE,Planet. Space Sci., 38 , 1335, 1990.
Kozyra, J. U., V. K. Jordanova, R. B. Horne, and R. M. Thorne, M odeling of the contribution
of electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EMIC) waves to stormtime ring current erosion,28
Magnetic Storms. Geophys. Monog. 98 , edited by B. T. Tsurutani et al., p. 187, A.G.U.,
Washington, D.C., 1997.
Lerche, I., Quasilinear theory of resonant diffusion in a mag neto-active relativistic plasma,
Phys. Fluids, 11 , 1720, 1968.
Li, X., I. Roth, M. Temerin, J. R. Wygant, M. K. Hudson, and J. B . Blake, Simulation of the
prompt energization and transport of radiation belt partic les during the March 24 ,
1991 SSC, Geophys. Res. Lett., 20 , 2423, 1993.
Li, X., D. N. Baker, M. Temerin, T. E. Cayton, E. G. D. Reeves, R . A. Christensen, J. B.
Blake, M. D. Looper, R. Nakamura, and S. G. Kanekal, Multi-sa tellite observations of
the outer zone electron variation during the November 3-4, 1 993, magnetic storm, J.
Geophys. Res., 102 , 14123, 1997a.
Li, X., D. N. Baker, M. Temerin, D. Larson, R. P. Lin, G. D. Reev es, M. D. Looper, S. G.
Kanekal, and R. A. Mewadt, Are energetic electrons in the sol ar wind the source of the
outer radiation belt? Geophys. Res. Lett., 24 , 923, 1997b.
Liu, W. W., G. Rostoker, and D. N. Baker, Internal accelerati on of relativistic electrons by
large-amplitude ULF pulsations, J. Geophys. Res., 104 , 17391, 1999.
Ma, C.-Y., and D. Summers, Formation of power-law energy spe ctra in space plasmas by
stochastic acceleration due to whistler-mode waves, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25 , 4099, 1998.
Melrose, D. B., Plasma Astrophysics, Vol. II: Nonthermal Processes in Diffu se Magnetized
Plasmas , Gordon and Breach, New York, 1980.
Melrose, D. B., Instabilities in Space and Laboratory Plasmas , Cambridge University Press,
New York, 1986.
Nagai, T., Space weather forecast: Prediction of relativis tic electron intensity at synchronous
orbit, Geophys. Res. Lett., 15 , 425, 1988.
Nakamura, R., D. N. Baker, J. B. Blake, S. Kanekal, B. Klecker , and D. Hovestadt, Relativistic
electron precipitation enhancements near the outer edge of the radiation belt, Geophys.
Res. Lett., 22 , 1129, 1995.29
Nakamura, R., Precipitation of electrons of the outer radia tion belt during geomagnetic storm,
Eos, Trans., AGU, 79 , W100, 1998.
Park, B. T., and V. Petrosian, Fokker-Planck equations of st ochastic acceleration: a study of
numerical methods, Astrophys. J. (Supp.), 103 , 255, 1996.
Park, B. T., V. Petrosian, and R. A. Schwartz, Stochastic acc eleration and photon emission in
electron-dominated solar flares, Astrophys. J., 489 , 358, 1997.
Parrot, M., and C. A. Gaye, A statistical survey of ELF waves i n a geostationary orbit,
Geophys. Res. Lett., 21 , 2463, 1994.
Paulikas, G. A., and J. B. Blake, Effects of the solar wind on ma gnetospheric dynamics:
Energetic electrons at the synchronous orbit, in Quantitative Modeling of magnetospheric
Processes, Geophys. Monog. 21 , edited by W. P. Olsen, p. 180, A.G.U., Washington,
D.C., 1979.
Perraut, S., R. Gendrin, and A. Roux, Amplification of ion-cy clotron waves for various typical
radial profiles of magnetospheric parameters, J. Atmos. Terr. Phys., 38 , 1191, 1976.
Petrosian, V., Acceleration of electrons in solar flares, in High-energy Solar Phenomena, AIP
Conf. Proc. 294 , edited by J.M. Ryan, and W.T. Vestrand, p. 162, AIP, New York ,
1994.
Press, W. H., B. P. Flannery, S. A. Teukolsky, and W. T. Vetter ling,Numerical Recipes in C:
The Art of Scientific Computing , Cambridge University Press, New York, 1992.
Ramaty, R., Energetic particles in solar flares, in Particle Acceleration Mechanisms in
Astrophysics , edited by J. Arons, C. Max, and C. Mckee, p. 135, AIP Conf. Pro c. 56,
New York, 1979.
Reeves, G. D., Relativistic electrons, space weather, and t he next solar maximum, Eos, Trans.,
AGU, 79 , W93, 1998a.
Reeves, G. D., Relativistic electrons and magnetic storms: 1992-1995, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25 ,
1817, 1998b.30
Reeves, G. D., R. H. W. Friedel, R. D. Belian, M. M. Meier, M. G. Henderson, T. Onsager,
H. J. Singer, D. N. Baker, X. Li, and J. B. Blake, The relativis tic electron response at
geosynchronous orbit during the January 1997 magnetic stor m,J. Geophys. Res., 103 ,
17559, 1998.
Rostoker, G., S. Skone, and D. N. Baker, On the origin of relat ivistic electrons in the
magnetosphere associated with some geomagnetic storms, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25 ,
3701, 1998.
Roth, I., M. Temerin, and M. K. Hudson, Resonant enhancement of relativistic electron fluxes
during geomagnetically active periods, Ann. Geophysicae, 17 , 631, 1999.
Schlickeiser, R., Cosmic-ray transport and acceleration. I. Derivation of the kinetic equation
and application to cosmic rays in static cold media, Astrophys. J., 336 , 243, 1989.
Schlickeiser, R., γ-ray evidence for galactic in-situ electron acceleration, Astron. Astrophys. ,
319, L5, 1997.
Schulz, M., and L. Lanzerotti, Particle Diffusion in the Radiation Belts , Springer, New York,
1974.
Selesnick, R. S., and J. B. Blake, Dynamics of the outer radia tion belt, Geophys. Res. Lett.,
24, 1347, 1997a.
Selesnick, R. S., and J. B. Blake, Observations of relativis tic electron acceleration in the outer
radiation belt, Eos, Trans., AGU, SM31E-10, Dec., 1997b.
Sheldon, R. B., H. E. Spence, J. D. Sullivan, T. A. Fritz, and J . Chen, The discovery of
trapped energetic electrons in the outer cusp, Geophys. Res. Lett., 25 , 1825, 1998.
Smith, E. J., A. M. A. Frandsen, B. T. Tsurutani, R. M. Thorne, and K. W. Chan,
Plasmaspheric hiss intensity variations during magnetic s torms, J. Geophys. Res., 79 ,
2507, 1974.
Steinacker, J., and J. A. Miller, Stochastic gyroresonant e lectron acceleration in a low-beta
plasma. I. Interaction with parallel transverse cold plasm a waves, Astrophys. J., 393 ,
764, 1992.31
Summers, D., R. M. Thorne, and F. Xiao, Relativistic theory o f wave-particle resonant
diffusion with application to electron acceleration in the m agnetosphere, J. Geophys.
Res., 103 , 20487, 1998.
Summers, D., R. M. Thorne, and F. Xiao, A model for stochastic acceleration of electrons
during geomagnetic storms, Adv. Space Res. , in press, 1999.
Temerin, M., I. Roth, M. K. Hudson, and J. R. Wygant, New parad igm for the transport and
energization of radiation belt particles, Eos, Trans., AGU, 75 , 538, 1994.
Temerin, M. A., Heating of radiation belt electrons by whist ler waves, Eos, Trans., AGU, 79 ,
W100, 1998.
Tsurutani, B. T., and E. J. Smith, Postmidnight chorus: A sub storm phenomenon, J. Geophys.
Res., 79 , 118, 1974.
Tsurutani, B. T., and E. J. Smith, Two types of magnetospheri c ELF chorus and their
substorm dependences, J. Geophys. Res., 82 , 5112, 1977.
Tsurutani, B. T., W. D. Gonzalez, A. L. C. Gonzalez, F. Tang, J . K. Arballo, and M. Okada,
Interplanetary origin of geomagnetic activity in the decli ning phase of the solar cycle,
J. Geophys. Res., 100 , 21717, 1995.
Walt, M., Introduction to Geomagnetically Trapped Radiation , Cambridge University Press,
New York, 1994.
Wolf, R. A., Magnetospheric configuration, in Introduction to Space Physics , M. K. Kivelson
and C. T. Russell, Cambridge University Press, New York, p. 3 17, 1995.
Danny Summers and Chun-yu Ma, Department of Mathematics and Statistics,
Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John’s, Newfound land, A1C 5S7, Canada
(e-mail: dsummers@math.mun.ca, cyma@math.mun.ca)
Received ??? ??, 1999; revised ??? ??, 1999; accepted ??? ??, 1999.
1On leave from Purple Mountain Observatory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing, P.R.
China.32
Submitted to Journal of Geophysical Research , 1999.33
Figure 1. (Left) Schematic view in the magnetic equatorial plane of th e approximately
circular (projected) drift path of relativistic electrons in the inner magnetosphere. During
storms these energetic electrons drift (eastward) through regions of enhanced whistler-
mode chorus and enhanced electromagnetic ion cyclotron (EM IC) waves. (Right) Repre-
sentation of the gyration about magnetic field lines and the b ounce motion of energetic
electrons as they execute the approximately circular drift path shown in (a).
Figure 2. Diffusion coefficient D0given by (13) as a function of the turbulence spectral
index q, for 2 < q < 4. The upper, middle, and lower diagrams correspond respect ively to
the locations L= 3,4,5. The background particle number density N0= 10 cm−3. In each
diagram, curves are shown corresponding to the four indicat ed values of the wave power
R(given by (9)) which correspond to the respective average wa ve amplitudes ∆ B=75
pT, 100 pT, 300 pT, 1 nT.
Figure 3. Diffusion coefficient D0given by (14) as a function of the average wave
amplitude ∆ B(pT), at each of the locations L= 3,4,5. The turbulence spectral index
q= 5/3, the parameter JW= 1, and the background particle number density N0= 10
cm−3.
Figure 4. Diffusion coefficient Dgiven by (3), (6), (13), (14) as a function of the particle
kinetic energy E, for the average wave amplitude ∆ B= 1 nT, and the indicated values
of the spectral index q. The upper, middle, and lower diagrams correspond respecti vely
to the locations L= 3, 4, 5. The background particle number density N0= 10 cm−3.34
Figure 5. (Left) Steady state solutions f(E) to the kinetic equation (1) for the electron
energy distribution function, for the indicated values of 1 /(D0Tesc), corresponding to
different mean particle escape times. The diffusion coefficien t and systematic acceleration
rate are given by (6) and (7), with the diffusion parameter D0defined by (14); q= 5/3,
JW= 1,L= 3, ∆ B= 75 pT, N0= 10 cm−3, andD0= 7.8×10−6sec−1. The particle
source function is given by (21), with S0= 1.5×10−6cm−3sec−1andµ= 20.44. (Right)
Corresponding re-scaled plots of the solution curves on the left, for comparison with
relativistic Maxwellian energy distribution functions. T he dashed lines represent best
fits with Maxwellian distributions in accordance with the re sults given in Table 2.
Figure 6. (Left) Steady state solutions f(E) to the kinetic equation (1) for the electron
energy distribution function, for the indicated values of 1 /(D0Tesc), corresponding to
different mean particle escape times. The diffusion coefficien t and systematic acceleration
rate are given by (3) and (4), with the diffusion parameter D0defined by (13); q= 2.5,
L= 6.6, ∆B= 800 pT, N0= 10 cm−3, and D0= 7.2×10−6sec−1. The particle source
function is given by (21), with S0= 1.4×10−9cm−3sec−1andµ= 20.44. (Right)
Corresponding re-scaled plots of the solution curves on the left, for comparison with
relativistic Maxwellian energy distribution functions. T he dashed lines represent best
fits with Maxwellian distributions in accordance with the re sults given in Table 3.
Figure 7. (Left) As in Figure 6 (Left), but for the parameters q= 3,L= 5, ∆ B= 1
nT,N0= 10 cm−3, and D0= 6.5×10−6sec−1. The particle source function is given by
(21), with S0= 1.9×10−8cm−3sec−1andµ= 20.44. (Right) Corresponding re-scaled
plots of the solution curves on the left, for comparison with relativistic Maxwellian energy
distribution functions. The dashed lines represent best fit s with Maxwellian distributions
in accordance with the results given in Table 4.35
Table 1. Values of the magnetic field B0(10−7T), the parameters
αandβAgiven by (10), and the critical energy Ec(keV) given by
(20), corresponding to the locations L= 3, 4, ···, 9; the background
particle number density is N0= 10 cm−3. Also given, corresponding
to the indicated values of the spectral index q, are typical values of
the average wave amplitude ∆ B(pT) and the associated values of the
diffusion parameters D0andD0in sec−1(×10−6) required to produce a
high energy “hard” electron distribution after several day s of sub-storm
particle injection.
q= 5/3 q= 2.5 q= 3.0
L B 0 α β A Ec∆BD0∆B D 0∆B D 0
3 11.6 1.31 0.027 267 75 7.8 150 8.6 500 7.6
4 4.85 0.23 0.011 57 200 9.8 300 9.3 700 6.2
5 2.50 0.061 0.006 15 400 10 400 6.1 1000 6.5
6 1.44 0.019 0.0032 4.8 600 7.3 600 5.7 1200 5.3
7 0.91 0.0081 0.0021 2.1 900 7.0 800 5.4 1500 5.4
8 0.61 0.0036 0.0014 0.9 1400 7.5 1200 6.6 1800 5.1
9 0.43 0.0018 0.001 0.5 2000 7.6 1500 6.1 2200 5.436
Table 2. Results associated with the steady-state solutions shown i n Figure 5. Each line of
the table corresponds to the particular value of Tesc(the mean particle escape time) indicated.
Each solution is fitted to a relativistic Maxwellian distrib ution by means of the linear fit (26) in
which the parameters aandbyield values for the number density Nhand temperature Thof the
distribution; χ2measures the goodness-of-fit. The time taken for the steady- state (equilibrium)
distribution to form is TEQ.
1/(D0Tesc)Tesc(day) a b (×10−3)χ2Nh(×10−4) cm−3Th(keV) TEQ(day)
0 ∞ -2.25 -1.01 3.95 160 430 10
1 1.5 -3.41 -1.11 0.30 8.9 390 8
2 0.75 -3.76 -1.40 0.32 2.4 310 5
5 0.3 -3.88 -2.17 0.11 0.8 190 3
10 0.15 -3.85 -3.08 0.046 0.4 140 137
Table 3. As for Table 2, except the results are associated with the ste ady-state solutions in
Figure 6.
1/(D0Tesc)Tesc(day) a b (×10−3)χ2Nh(×10−4) cm−3Th(keV) TEQ(day)
0 ∞ -3.47 -0.58 0.77 3.8 750 11
1 1.6 -3.56 -1.5 0.052 3.2 280 8
2 0.8 -3.74 -2.0 0.034 1.2 220 5
5 0.4 -4.00 -2.9 0.010 0.32 150 3
10 0.2 -4.17 -3.9 0.034 0.13 110 138
Table 4. As for Table 2, except the results are associated with the ste ady-state solutions in
Figure 7.
1/(D0Tesc)Tesc(day) a b (×10−3)χ2Nh(×10−4) cm−3Th(keV) TEQ(day)
0 ∞ -4.00 -0.22 21 140 2000 12
1 1.8 -3.90 -1.1 1.8 3.3 410 9
2 0.9 -4.02 -1.5 0.88 1.2 290 5
5 0.45 -4.19 -2.3 0.31 0.32 190 3
10 0.2 -4.30 -3.3 0.12 0.12 130 1L=3EMIC
WAVESWHISTLER
–□MODE
CHORUS
L=9
GEOSYNCHRONOUS
ORBITDRIFT□PATH□OF
RELATIVISTIC
ELECTRONS/BD/BC
/A0 /BI
/BD/BC
/A0 /BH
/BD/BC
/A0 /BG
/BD/BC
/A0 /BF/C4/BP/BF/BD /CW/D3/D9/D6/BD/BB/BE /CS/CP /DD/BD /CS/CP /DD/BJ /BM /BG /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BJ
/BD /D2/CC/BI /BM /BJ /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BK
/BF/BC/BC /D4/CC/BJ /BM /BG /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BL
/BD/BC/BC /D4/CC/CA /BP /BG /BM /BE /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BL
/A1 /BU /BP /BJ/BH /D4/CC
/B9/B9/B9/BD/BC
/A0 /BI
/BD/BC
/A0 /BH
/BD/BC
/A0 /BG
/BD/BC
/A0 /BF/BW
/BC/B4/D7/CT
/A0 /BD
/B5
/C4/BP/BG/BD /CW/D3/D9/D6/BD/BB/BE /CS/CP /DD/BD /CS/CP /DD/CA /BP /BG /BM /BE /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BI
/A1 /BU /BP /BD /D2/CC/BF /BM /BJ /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BJ
/BF/BC/BC /D4/CC/BG /BM /BE /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BK
/BD/BC/BC /D4/CC/BE /BM /BF /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BK
/BJ/BH /D4/CC
/B9/B9/B9/BD/BC
/A0 /BI
/BD/BC
/A0 /BH
/BD/BC
/A0 /BG
/BD/BC
/A0 /BF/BE/BA/BC /BE/BA/BE /BE/BA/BG /BE/BA/BI /BE/BA/BK /BF/BA/BC /BF/BA/BE /BF/BA/BG /BF/BA/BI /BF/BA/BK /BG/BA/BC/D5
/C4/BP/BH/BD /CW/D3/D9/D6/BD/BB/BE /CS/CP /DD/BD /CS/CP /DD/CA /BP /BD /BM /BI /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BH
/A1 /BU /BP /BD /D2/CC/BD /BM /BG/BG /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BI
/BF/BC/BC /D4/CC/BD /BM /BI /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BJ
/BD/BC/BC /D4/CC
/BL /A2 /BD/BC
/A0 /BK
/BJ/BH /D4/CC
/B9/B9/B9/AF/1/0
/BnZr /8
/1/0
/BnZr /7
/1/0
/BnZr /6
/1/0
/BnZr /5
/1/0
/BnZr /4
/1/0
/BnZr /3/1/0 /1/0/0 /1/0/0/0D
/0/(sec/BnZr /1
/)/ B /(pT/)
/1 hour/1///2 da y/1 da yL/=/3 L/=/4 L/=/5
////BD/BC
/A0 /BK
/BD/BC
/A0 /BJ
/BD/BC
/A0 /BI
/BD/BC
/A0 /BH
/BD/BC
/A0 /BG
/BD/BC
/A0 /BF
/BD/BC
/A0 /BE/C4 /BP /BF/D5 /BP /BH /BP /BF/BE /BM /BH/BF /BM /BC/BF /BM /BH/BG /BM /BC/BD/BC
/A0 /BK
/BD/BC
/A0 /BJ
/BD/BC
/A0 /BI
/BD/BC
/A0 /BH
/BD/BC
/A0 /BG
/BD/BC
/A0 /BF
/BD/BC
/A0 /BE/BW /B4 /BX /B5 /B4/D7/CT
/A0 /BD
/B5
/C4 /BP /BG/BD/BC
/A0 /BK
/BD/BC
/A0 /BJ
/BD/BC
/A0 /BI
/BD/BC
/A0 /BH
/BD/BC
/A0 /BG
/BD/BC
/A0 /BF
/BD/BC
/A0 /BE/BC /BM /BC/BD /BC /BM /BD /BD /BD/BC/BX /B4/C5/CT/CE/B5
/C4 /BP /BH |
arXiv:physics/9910022v1 [physics.gen-ph] 16 Oct 1999A charged space as the origin of sources, fields and
potentials
Koen J. van Vlaenderen
The Institute for Basic Research
email: nlx6461@nl.ibm.com
February 9, 2008
Abstract
The wave function ψis interpreted as charge den-
sity, or charge distribution, at each point in space.
This is a physical interpretation of ψ. The notion of
speed can be associated with ψ, which leads to the
concept of conduction currents and (displacement)
convection currents. The charge distribution is the
origin of electrical and mechanical sources, poten-
tials and fields. The notion of self potential is es-
sential for defining electrical or mechanical sources.
Maxwell’s equations are derived from the condi-
tion of charge conservation and mass conservation.
There are two methods of modelling the mass of a
charge:
1. The mass of a charge is its electrostatic energy.
2. The mass of a charge is the energy of the Zero
Point Field (ZPF) that interacts with the point
charge.
It is shown that the two models are related by a
simple energy equation for a particle at rest.
1 Introduction
An alternative study of microphysics [1], called Ma-
terial Wave Theory (MTW), shows that the inter-
pretation of ψas a physical wave is more realis-
tic and more simple than the non-physical Copen-
hagen interpretation of ψrepresenting only statis-
tical qualities. The central conjecture of MTW is
the notion of intrinsic potential energy of a parti-
cle. This intrinsic potential energy turns out to be
electromagnetic field energy. Therefore, the wavenature of matter is closely related to electromag-
netic energy. There are several other theories that
attribute even more importance to electromagnetic
phenomena.
Stochastic Electro-dynamics (SED) [2] [3] ex-
plains the statistical nature of micro-physics by a
physical mechanism: quantum-like fluctuations of
a random perturbing Zero Point Field. The inertia
of a particle is described as a reaction force that is
a consequence of the anisotropy of the ZPF in an
accelerating frame of reference. This means that
inertia and also gravity are secondary electromag-
netic phenomena. The ZPF energy is described for
the first time as an extra term in the Planck (or
blackbody) function.
In [4] the mass of a charge is considered equal
to the electrostatic energy of the charge. An ac-
celerating charge gives rise to a self force (New-
ton’s reaction force), because the speed of light is
anisotropic [5] around the accelerating charge. A
local anisotropy of light speed is exactly a field of
gravity.
In [6] the linear momentum of a charged parti-
cle is described as a self induced magnetic potential
that acts on the charge, and also rest-mass is con-
sidered here as the electrostatic energy.
Although these views have much in common
(electrodynamics is essential in order to explain the
wave nature of matter, or to explain inertia and
gravity), it is not obvious how to integrate these
theories into one consistent theory. First, the elec-
trodynamics of electrons within MWT is further
explored.
12 Classical Electrodynamics
in MWT
Hofers central conjecture within MWT [1] is: the
intrinsic energy of a particle consists of kinetic and
potential energy. Quantum Physics states that the
intrinsic energy of a particle is solely kinetic. This is
not based on experiment, and the reasoning about
the intrinsic nature of particles within the frame-
work of Quantum Physics boils down to a logical
circle [1] :
If a particles intrinsic energy is solely kinetic,
the phase velocity of a de Broglie wave is not equal
to the mechanical velocity of a particle. If phase
velocity does not equal mechanical velocity, a free
particle can not exist of a single wave of specific
frequency and it must be formalized as a Fourier
integral over infinitely many partial waves. In this
case any partial wave can not be interpreted as a
physical wave. Then the wave features of a partial
wave can not be related to physical qualities. If
they cannot be related to physical qualities, then
internal processes must remain unconsidered. And
if internal processes remain unconsidered, then
the intrinsic energy of a particle is solely kinetic
energy.
Hofers conjecture is more simple and forces to de-
scribe the wave nature of particles in terms of phys-
ical qualities, in stead of adopting the non-physical
Hilbert space.
2.1 The de Brogly wave
First, the wave function ψis treated as a real func-
tion, in stead of a complex function, and with phys-
ical meaning:
ψ(/vector r,t) =ψ0sin(/vectork·/vector r−ωt) (2.1)
̺(/vector r,t) =Cψ2
0sin2(/vectork·/vector r−ωt) (2.2)
The function ̺is the de Brogly wavefunction with
dimension of mass-density. A de Brogly wave is a
mass oscillation . The periodic change of kinetic en-
ergy requires the existence of an intrinsic potential
energy with a density of φ. The particle velocity
equals the phase velocity. By using an undefined
constant C, it is avoided to define the dimension ofψ. In this paper, C=1, and ψhas the dimension
of square root of mass-density. These definitions
define mechanical properties of ψ.
It is assumed that speed,/vector u, can be associated
withψen̺:/vector p=̺/vector uis the impulse density and
wkin=1
2̺u2is the kinetic energy density ( u=
|/vector u|). A material wave is a periodic transformation
of intrinsic kinetic energy and intrinsic potential
energy, such that the sum of both intrinsic energy
densities is constant:
1
2̺u2+φ=φ0=constant (2.3)
2.2 Electric and Magnetic Potentials
In Material Wave theory it is shown that the intrin-
sic potential is electromagnetic in nature. The def-
initions of the electric field and the magnetic field,
in terms of the intrinsic moment and intrinsic po-
tential, are as follows:
/vectorE=−∇1
¯ρφ+1
2¯ρ∂/vector p
∂t(2.4)
/vectorB=−1
2¯ρ∇ ×/vector p (2.5)
where ¯ρis a constant with the dimension of charge
density to guarantee compatibility with electro-
magnetic units. By substituting φ=φ0−1
2̺u2
and/vector p=̺/vector u, the equations 2.4 and 2.5 become:
/vectorE=∇1
2¯ρ̺u2+1
2¯ρ∂(̺/vector u)
∂t(2.6)
/vectorB=−1
2¯ρ∇ ×(̺/vector u) (2.7)
If an electric potential and magnetic potential are
defined as follows:
Φ =−̺
2¯ρu2/vectorA=−̺
2¯ρ/vector u (2.8)
then it is obvious that the fields can be expressed
in terms of the potentials in the usual way. The
sourcesρsand/vectorJscan be expressed also in terms of
the potentials Φ and /vectorA.
/vectorE=−∇Φ−∂/vectorA
∂t(2.9)
2/vectorB=∇ ×/vectorA (2.10)
ρs=ǫ/parenleftbigg
µǫ∂2Φ
∂t2− ∇2Φ/parenrightbigg
(2.11)
/vectorJs=1
µ/parenleftBigg
µǫ∂2/vectorA
∂t2− ∇2/vectorA/parenrightBigg
(2.12)
2.3 Maxwell’s equations
If mass is conserved and ǫµ=1
u2=constant
then Maxwell’s equations are valid in MWT. Proof:
starting with the mass continuity equation, the
Lorentz gauge can be derived:
0 =∇·(̺ /vector u) +∂̺
∂t
=∇·(−̺
2¯ρ/vector u) +µǫ∂/parenleftbigg
−̺
2¯ρu2/parenrightbigg
∂t
=∇·/vectorA+µǫ∂Φ
∂t(2.13)
Maxwell’s equations follow from the definitions of
fields and sources and the Lorentz gauge:
∇ ×/vectorE=∇ ×/parenleftBigg
−∇Φ−∂/vectorA
∂t/parenrightBigg
=−∂/parenleftBig
∇ ×/vectorA/parenrightBig
∂t=−∂/vectorB
∂t(2.14)
∇ ·/vectorE=∇ ×/parenleftBigg
−∇Φ−∂/vectorA
∂t/parenrightBigg
=−∇2Φ−∂
∂t∇ ·/vectorA
=−∇2Φ +µǫ∂2Φ
∂t2=ρs
ǫ(2.15)∇ ×/vectorB=∇ × ∇ ×/vectorA
=∇(∇ ·/vectorA)− ∇2/vectorA
=−∇/parenleftbigg
µǫ∂Φ
∂t/parenrightbigg
− ∇2/vectorA
=µǫ∂
∂t/parenleftBigg
/vectorE+∂/vectorA
∂t/parenrightBigg
− ∇2/vectorA
=µǫ∂/vectorE
∂t+/parenleftBigg
µǫ∂2/vectorA
∂t2− ∇2/vectorA/parenrightBigg
=µǫ∂/vectorE
∂t+µ/vectorJs(2.16)
∇ ·/vectorB=∇ · ∇ ×/vectorA= 0 (2.17)
If/vector u=constant then/vectorE⊥/vector u,/vectorB⊥/vector uand/vectorE⊥/vectorB.
Proof: leta=−̺
2¯ρand let/vector g=∇a;ais conserved,
because̺is conserved and ¯ ρis a constant.
/vectorB=∇ ×/vectorA=∇ ×(a/vector u) = (∇a)×/vector u
=/vector g×/vector u(2.18)
/vectorE=−∇Φ−∂/vectorA
∂t=−u2∇a−∂a
∂t/vector u
=−u2/vector g+∇ ·(a/vector u)/vector u
=−(/vector u·/vector u)/vector g+ (/vector g·/vector u)/vector u
= (/vector g×/vector u)×/vector u=/vectorB×/vector u(2.19)
2.4 Field energy and Pointing vector
In case of/vector u=constant the expressions of field en-
ergy and pointing flow, in terms of /vector gand/vector u, become:
µ
2H2=µ
2/parenleftBigg/vectorB
µ·/vectorB
µ/parenrightBigg
=1
2µ(/vector g×/vector u)·(/vector g×/vector u)
=1
2µ|/vector g×/vector u|2(2.20)
ǫ
2E2=ǫ
2(/vectorB×/vector u)·(/vectorB×/vector u)
=ǫ
2u2(/vectorB·/vectorB) =1
2µ|/vector g×/vector u|2(2.21)
3/vectorE×/vectorH=1
µ(/vectorE×/vectorB) =1
µ(/vectorB×/vector u)×/vectorB
=1
µB2/vector u−1
µ(/vectorB·/vector u)×/vectorB
=1
µ|/vector g×/vector u|2/vector u=/parenleftBigµ
2H2+ǫ
2E2/parenrightBig
/vector u
(2.22)
Equation 2.22 is Pointing’s Theorem in Material
Wave Theory. Notice that if /vector g×/vector u= 0 then the field
energies are zero, and also the energy flow is zero.
The mass gradient of the matter wave must have
a non-zero component that is perpendicular to the
direction of motion. Otherwise there is no intrin-
sic potential energy. Therefore the monochromatic
plane particle wave (see equation 2.2) cannot be
an adequate description of a matter wave with in-
trinsic kinetic energy and intrinsic electro-magnetic
(potential) energy, because in this case /vector g×/vector u=/vector0 !
3 Self induced potentials
At this point it is worthwhile to make a compar-
ison with the notion of the self-induced magnetic
potential of a charge [6]:
m/vector u=q/vectorA⇒/vectorA=m
q/vector u=̺
ρ/vector u (3.1)
This equation is the result of combining Newton’s
laws with Maxwell’s equations, as follows: an ap-
plied force causes an elementary particle, with mass
mand charge q, to accelerate.
/vectorF=m/vector a=∂(m/vector v)
∂t(3.2)
The term −∂/vectorA
∂tin equation 2.9 is caused by the
applied force. If the particle is not accelerated then
this term is zero. Therefore, −q∂/vectorA
∂t, which is an
extra Coulomb force, is also Newton’s reaction force
F′.
F=−F′⇒∂(m/vector v)
∂t=∂(q/vectorA)
∂t⇒
m/vector v=q/vectorA(3.3)
A similar equation exists for the electric potential:
mc2=qΦ⇒Φ =m
qc2=̺
ρc2(3.4)meaning the total energy of a charge is electrostatic .
In equation 2.8, ¯ ρis a constant, which is not the
case in equation 3.1, where ρis ascalar function . It
is not clear why ¯ ρis defined a constant, except for
compatibility between units for mechanical quanti-
ties and variables for electromagnetical quantities.
The simplest view is to consider the self-induced
potentials and the intrinsic potentials of MWT as
equal, and to be called self potentials . This means
that we have to replace the constant ¯ ρfor the scalar
−1
2ρ.
3.1 The electromagnetic self poten-
tials
Sinceψhas real physical interpretation, the follow-
ing question comes to mind: is ρa function of ψ?
If, for instance, ρ=ψ, then space is filled with
”charge”, or even consists of ”charge”. This model
is in agreement with notions like displacements cur-
rentsorconvection displacement currents [7]. Such
a current has to exist beside conduction currents
in order to solve a paradox in the Faraday-Maxwell
theory. The definitions of the electric and magnetic
potentials (in case −1
2¯ρ=ρ=ψ) becomes:
Φ =̺
ρu2=ψ2
ψu2=ψu2(3.5)
/vectorA=̺
ρ/vector u=ψ2
ψ/vector u=ψ/vector u (3.6)
The definitions of electromagnetic sources and
fields now become:
/vectorE=−∇ψu2−∂(ψ/vector u)
∂t(3.7)
/vectorB=∇ ×(ψ/vector u) (3.8)
ρs=ǫ/parenleftbigg
µǫ∂2(ψu2)
∂t2− ∇2(ψu2)/parenrightbigg
(3.9)
/vectorJs=1
µ/parenleftbigg
µǫ∂2(ψ/vector u)
∂t2− ∇2(ψ/vector u)/parenrightbigg
(3.10)
It would be unnatural to distinguish between ρs
andρ(=ψ):
ψ=ǫ/parenleftbigg
µǫ∂2(ψu2)
∂t2− ∇2(ψu2)/parenrightbigg
(3.11)
4ψ/vector u=1
µ/parenleftbigg
µǫ∂2(ψ/vector u)
∂t2− ∇2(ψ/vector u)/parenrightbigg
(3.12)
Ifψsatisfies equations 3.11 and 3.12 at some point
in space, then ψis asource at that particular point.
Equations 3.11 and 3.12 are called the self-potential
equations . They can be reformulated in terms of
the potentials:
Φ =1
µ/parenleftbigg
µǫ∂2Φ
∂t2− ∇2Φ/parenrightbigg
(3.13)
/vectorA=1
µ/parenleftBigg
µǫ∂2/vectorA
∂t2− ∇2/vectorA/parenrightBigg
(3.14)
If charge is conserved and µǫ=1
u2=constant ,
then Maxwell’s equations are valid. The proof
is similar to the proof in section 2.3. First, the
Lorentz gauge is derived from the charge continu-
ity equation:
0 =∇·(ψ /vector u) +∂ψ
∂t(3.15)
(Etc...). Substitute /vector g=∇ψand take/vector u=constant ,
then the EM fields are perpendicular to each other
(see section 2.3). Also the same expressions for the
energy densities and Pointing vector can be derived
by substituting /vector g=∇ψ(see section 2.4).
Equation 2.3 (1
2̺u2+φ=φ0=constant ), can be
rewritten in terms of electric energy density, mag-
netic energy density and static electric energy den-
sity (which is the total energy):
1
2̺u2+ǫ
2E2+µ
2H2=ρΦ (3.16)
3.2 The mechanical self potentials
In analogy with electromagnetic sources, fields and
potentials, one can define mechanical sources, fields
and potentials, simply by substituting ψ2forψ:
w=ψ2u2/vector p=ψ2/vector u (3.17)
/vectorf=∇w+∂/vector p
∂t(3.18)
/vector s=∇ ×/vector p (3.19)̺s=ǫm/parenleftbigg
µmǫm∂2w
∂t2− ∇2w/parenrightbigg
(3.20)
/vector ps=1
µm/parenleftbigg
µmǫm∂2/vector p
∂t2− ∇2/vector p/parenrightbigg
(3.21)
wand/vector pare the potential energy density and po-
tential momentum density. The vector fields /vectorfand
/vector sare the force density field and angular momen-
tum density field. An intrinsic angular momentum
is also called spin, and therefore the symbol sis
used. The constants ǫmandµmare the mechanical
analogies of ǫandµ. The force density is zero if
energy-momentum is conserved.
In caseǫmµm=1
u2=constant then also for the
mechanical fields the Maxwell’s equations apply:
∇ ×/vectorf=∂/vector s
∂t(3.22)
∇ ·/vectorf=−̺s
ǫm(3.23)
∇ ×/vector s=−ǫmµm∂/vectorf
∂t+µm/vector ps (3.24)
∇ ·/vector s= 0 (3.25)
Equation 3.22 expresses that the spin increases or
decreases in case the rotation of force density is
not zero. Equation 3.23 is the law of gravity in
differential form. Equation 3.24 is the mechanical
equivalent of Amp` ere’s law.
Next, it is unnatural to distinguish between ̺s
and̺=ψ2and therefore we can speak also of the
mechanical self potentials :
w=1
µm/parenleftbigg
µmǫm∂2w
∂t2− ∇2w/parenrightbigg
(3.26)
/vector p=1
µm/parenleftbigg
µmǫm∂2/vector p
∂t2− ∇2/vector p/parenrightbigg
(3.27)
Surprisingly, equation 3.16 can be derived by using
the definition of the mechanical self potential:
5(ǫm=ǫ, µ m=µ, ǫµ =1
u2, /vector u=constant )
1
2̺su2=1
2w=1
2µ/parenleftbigg
ǫµ∂2w
∂t2− ∇2w/parenrightbigg
=1
2µ/bracketleftBigg
ǫµ2u2/parenleftbigg∂ψ
∂t/parenrightbigg2
+ǫµ2ψ∂2(ψu2)
∂t2/bracketrightBigg
+
1
2µ/bracketleftbig
−2u2(∇ψ)2−2ψ∇2(ψu2)/bracketrightbig
=1
µ/bracketleftbig
(∇ ·(ψ/vector u))2−u2(∇ψ)2/bracketrightbig
+
ψ
µ/bracketleftbigg
ǫµ∂2(ψu2)
∂t2− ∇2(ψu2)/bracketrightbigg
=1
µ[(∇ψ·/vector u)2−(∇ψ)2u2] +ψΦ
=−1
µ|∇ψ×/vector u|2+ψΦ
=−µ
2H2−ǫ
2E2+ψΦ
(3.28)
The self potentials are defined such that the energy
density equation 3.16 is fulfilled. If we substitute
̺=ψ2and Φ =ψu2then we get:
1
2ψ2u2=µ
2H2+ǫ
2E2(3.29)
4 Physical Units
Sinceψ=q
Vandψ2=m
V, the unit Amp` ere is no
longer free for definition:
/bracketleftbiggCoulomb
m3/bracketrightbigg2
=/bracketleftbiggKg
m3/bracketrightbigg
⇒
[Coulomb ] = [/radicalbig
Kg m3](4.1)
[Amp`ere] =/bracketleftBigg/radicalbig
Kg m3
s/bracketrightBigg
(4.2)
[ǫ] = [s2] [µ] = [m−2] (4.3)
Other units (expressed in mechanical base units)
are:
[Volt] =/bracketleftbigg√Kg m
s2/bracketrightbigg
, [Ω] = [m−1s−1]
[Farad ] = [s2m],[Henry ] = [m−1].Especially, the definition of Coulomb is interest-
ing. It seems that the spatial dimension of a charge
is3
2. This is a fractal dimension. One might inter-
pret a charge as a point-like particle (without mass)
that follows a trajectory with a fractal dimension
of3
2, within a closed volume.
5 Discussion
Equations 2.18 to 2.22 can be derived also from
the the weaker pre-condition of ∇ ×/vector u=/vector0 and
∇ ·/vector u= 0, in stead of /vector u=constant . A fractal tra-
jectory within a closed volume is an example of
/vector u/negationslash=constant, ∇ ×/vector u=/vector0,∇ ·/vector u= 0. A tra-
jectory with a fractal dimension is in agreement
with Stochastic Electro Dynamics, because SED as-
sumes a massless parton to interact with the ZPF
that has a broad spectrum.
Suppose, the massless parton has a speed |/vector u|=c,
then equation 3.16 becomes:
1
2̺c2+ǫ
2E2+µ
2H2=ρΦ (5.1)
Its total energy density is ̺c2=ρΦ. This can only
be understood by the notion of (intrinsic) self po-
tentials , as introduced in this paper. If the closed
and finite volume that confines the parton’s trajec-
tory is motionless, then one speaks of rest-energy
or rest-mass. This combines the different models,
as described in the introduction, such that it yields
one theory.
The charged field ψdoes not show Coulomb in-
teraction or gravity interaction between every two
points. In other words: not all points in space are
sources . Only those points in space that satisfy the
self potential equations can show Coulomb interac-
tion or gravity interaction. Thus, the charged space
ψis the origin of sources and (self) potentials.
References
[1] W.A. Hofer, Beyond Uncertainty: the inter-
nal structure of electrons and photons. Internet
publication: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/quant-
ph/9611009
[2] B. Haisch, A. Rueda and H.E. Puthoff. Phys.
Rev. A 49, 678 (1994).
6[3] B. Haisch and A. Rueda, Inertia as reac-
tion of the vacuum to accelerated motion.
Internet publication: http://xxx.lanl.gov/
abs/physics/9802031
[4] V. Petkov, Physics Letters A, submitted.
Internet publication: http://xxx.lanl.gov/
abs/physics/9909019
[5] V. Petkov, Anisotropic velocity of light in non-
inertial reference frames. Internet publication:
http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/gr-qc/9909081
[6] R. L. Collins, A Vector Potential descrip-
tion of Linear Momentum, and consequences.
Internet publication: http://publish.aps.org/
eprint/gateway/eplist/aps1997feb28 006
[7] A. E. Chubykalo and R. Smirnov-Rueda, Con-
vection Displacement Current and alterna-
tive form of Maxwell-Lorentz equations . Inter-
net publication: http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-
th/9608038
7 |
arXiv:physics/9910023v1 [physics.atom-ph] 17 Oct 1999Preprint 0 (2008) ?–? 1
Muonium Spectroscopy
Klaus P. Jungmann
Physikalisches Institut, Universit¨ at Heidelberg, D-691 20 Heidelberg
E-mail: jungmann@physi.uni-heidelberg.de
The electromagnetic interactions of electrons and muons ca n be described to
very high accuracy within the framework of standard theory, in particular within
the hydrogen-like muonium atom. Therefore precision measu rements allow to test
basic interactions in physics and to search for yet unknown f orces. Accurate values
for fundamental constants can be obtained. Results from exp eriments on the ground
state hyperfine structure and the 1s-2s intervals in muonium are described together
with their relations to a new measurement of the muon magneti c anomaly.
AMS Subject classification: 13.40.Em,36.10.dr
1. Introduction
To present knowledge leptons have dimensions of less than 10−18mand may
therefore be regarded as point-like objects. The muonium at om (M=µ+e−) is
the hydrogen-like bound state of leptons from two different p article generations,
an antimuon( µ+) and an electron( e−) [1,2]. The dominant interaction within
the M atom is electromagnetic and level energies can be calcu lated in bound
state Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) to sufficiently high acc uracy for modern
high precision spectroscopic experiments. There are also c ontributions from weak
interactions arising from Z0-boson exchange and from strong interactions due to
vacuum polarization loops containing hadrons. They both ca n be obtained to the
required level of precision using standard theory. In contr ast to natural atoms
and ions as well as artificial atomic systems, which contain h adrons, M has the
advantage that there are no complications arising from the fi nite size and the
internal structure of any of its constituents. Precision ex periments in M can
therefore provide sensitive tests of the standard theory an d searches for new and
yet unknown forces in nature. Parameters of speculative the ories, which try to
expand the standard model in order to gain deeper insight int o some of its not2 Klaus P. Jungmann / Muonium Spectroscopy
well understood features, can be restricted. In addition, f undamental constants
like the muon mass mµ, its magnetic moment µµand anomaly aµand the fine
structure constant αcan be obtained.
All high precision experiments in M up to date atom have invol ved the
1s ground state (see Fig.1), in which the atoms can be produce d in sufficient
quantities [2]. The most efficient mechanism is e−capture after stopping µ+
in a suitable noble gas, where yields of 80(10)% were achieve d for Kr gas [1].
This technique was used in the most recent precision measure ments of the atom’s
ground state hyperfine structure splitting ∆ νHFSandµµat the Los Alamos
Meson Physics Facility (LAMPF) in Los Alamos, USA [3]. Muoni um at thermal
velocities in vacuum can be obtained by stopping µ+close to the surface of a SiO 2
powder target, where the atoms are formed through e−capture and some of which
diffuse through the target surface into the surrounding vacu um. This process has
an efficiency of a few % and was an essential prerequisite for Do ppler-free two-
photon laser spectroscopy of the 12S1/2-22S1/2interval ∆ ν1s2sat the Rutherford
Appleton Laboratory (RAL) in Chilton, United Kingdom [4], w hich yields an
accurate value for mµ. Electromagnetic transitions in excited states, particul arly
the 22S1/2-22P1/2classical Lamb shift and 22S1/2-22P3/2fine structure splitting
could be induced by microwave spectroscopy. However, becau se only moderate
numbers of atoms in the metastable 2s state can be produced wi th a beam foil
technique, the experimental accuracy is now the 1.5 % level [ 5,6], which represents
not yet a severe test of theory.
2. Ground State Hyperfine Structure
The most recent experiment at LAMPF used a Kr gas target insid e of a mi-
crowave cavity at typically atmospheric density and in a hom ogeneous magnetic
field of 1.7 Tesla. Microwave transitions between the two ene rgetically highest
respectively two lowest Zeeman sublevels of the n=1 state at the frequencies ν12
andν34(Fig.1) involve a muon spin flip. They were detected through a change
in the spatial distribution of e+fromµ+decays, since due to parity violation
in the µ+decay the e+are preferentially emitted in the mu+spin direction.
As a consequence of the Breit-Rabi equation, which describe s the behaviour of
the levels in a magnetic field, the sum of these frequencies eq uals at any field
value the splitting in zero field ∆ νHFSand their difference yields in a known
fieldµµ. The experiment utilized the technique of ”old muonium”, wh ich al-Klaus P. Jungmann / Muonium Spectroscopy 32 S2
1/2
1S2
1/2F = 1
F = 0F = 1
F = 0F = 1558 MHz
l = 244 nml = 244 nm22P3/2
2 P1/22F = 2
1047 MHz
F = 1
F = 074 MHz
187 MHz9875 MHz
Dn = 4463 MHzHFSDn = 2455 THz1s2s-10-8-6-4-20246810
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Magnetic Field [ T ]Energy / h [ DnHFS ]
( F , MF )
(1, 1)
(1, 0)
(1,-1)
(0, 0)( MJ , Mm )(1/2, 1/2)
(1/2,-1/2)
(-1/2,-1/2)
(-1/2, 1/2)1
2
3
4n12
n34
Figure 1. Left: Muonium n=1 and n=2 states. All indicated tra nsitions could be induced to
date. Right: Ground state Zeeman levels in an external magne tic field.
lowed to reduce the linewidth of the signals below half of the ”natural” linewidth
δνnat= (π·τµ)−1=145kHz, where τµis the muon lifetime of 2.2 µ(Fig.2). For
this purpose an essentially continuous muon beam was choppe d by an electro-
static kicking device into 4 µs long pulses with 14 µs separation. Only atoms
which were interacting coherently with the microwave field f or periods longer
than several muon lifetimes were detected [7].
The results are mainly statistics limited and improve the kn owledge of both
∆νHFSandµµby a factor of three [3] over previous measurements [8]. The z ero
field splitting is determined to ∆ νHFS=ν12+ν34= 4 463 302 765(53) Hz (12
ppb) which agrees well with the theoretical prediction of ∆ νtheory= 4 463 302
563(520)(34)( ≤100) Hz (120 ppb) [10]. Here the first quoted uncertainty is du e
to the accuracy to which the muon-electron mass ratio mµ/meis known, the sec-
ond error is from the knowledge of αas obtained in electron g-2 measurements,
and the third value corresponds to estimates of uncalculate d higher order terms.
The strong interaction contributes 250 Hz and a parity conse rving weak inter-
action amounts to -65 Hz. Among the possible exotic interact ions which could
contribute to ∆ νHFSis the conversion of muonium to antimuonium, which is
in the lepton sector an analogous process to the well known K 0-K0oscillations
in the quark sector. From a recent direct search at the Paul Sc herrer Insti-
tute (PSI) in Villigen, Switzerland, which itself could sig nificantly restrict several4 Klaus P. Jungmann / Muonium Spectroscopy
speculative models, an upper limit of 9 Hz can be concluded fo r an expected
line splitting [9,2]. Recently generic extensions of the st andard model in which
both Lorentz invariance and CPT invariance are not assumed h ave attracted
widespread attention in physics [11]. Such models suggest d iurnal variations of
the ratio (∆ ν12−∆ν34)/(∆ν12+ ∆ν34) [12] which are being searched for [13].
Figure 2. Samples of conventional and ‘old’ M resonances at f requency ν12. The narrow ‘old’
lines are also higher. The lines in right column were recorde d using a sweep of the magnetic
field, which was measured in units of the proton NMR frequency νP. The lines to the left were
obtained using microwave frequency scans.
The magnetic moment results from the measurements as µµ/µp= 3.183 345
24(37) (120 ppb) which translates into mµ/me= 206.768 277(24) (120 ppb). The
hyperfine splitting is proportional to α2R∞, with the very precisely known Ryd-
berg constant R∞. Comparing experiment and theory yields α−1
2= 137.035 996
3(80) (58 ppb) [3]. If R∞is decomposed into even more fundamental constants,
one finds ∆ νHFSto be proportional to α4me/h¯ . Using the value h¯/meas deter-
mined in measurements of the neutron de Broglie wavelength [ 14] gives α−1
4=
137.036 004 7(48) (35 ppb). In the near future a small improve ment in α−1
4can
be expected from ongoing determinations of h¯/mein measurements of the photon
recoil in Cs atom spectroscopy and a Cs atomic mass measureme nt. The present
limitation for accuracy of α−1
4arises mainly from the muon mass uncertainty.
Therefore any better determination of the muon mass, e.g. th rough a preciseKlaus P. Jungmann / Muonium Spectroscopy 5
measurement of the reduced mass shift in ∆ ν1s2s, will result in an improvement
ofα−1
4. At present the good agreement within two standard deviatio ns between
the fine structure constant determined from M hyperfine struc ture and the one
from the electron magnetic anomaly is generally considered the best test of in-
ternal consistency of QED, as one case involves bound state Q ED and the other
one QED of free particles.
3. 1s-2s Energy Interval
Doppler-free excitation of the 1s-2s transition has been ac hieved in the past
at KEK in Tsukuba, Japan, [15] and at RAL [16]. The accuracy of the latter
measurement was limited by ac Stark effect and a frequency chi rp caused by rapid
changes of the index of refraction in the dye solutions of the amplifier stages in
the employed high power laser system. A new measurement has b een performed
very recently at the worlds brightest pulsed surface muon so urce at RAL [4].
244 nm
m+Alexandrite
LaserAr+ LaserFibres
Vacuum
ApparatusTi:sapphire
LaserAOMsHeterodyne
TriplerFast Beam
Diagnostics Lock
Electronics
Wavemeter
+
InterferometersFM Saturation
Spectrometer
Cavity Control
Electronics
MCP732 nm
732 n m 244 nm
00.511.522.5
640 660 680 700 720
nLaser-nIodine [MHz]Events per Laser Pulse [10-4]
Muonium
F=1 → F=1Signal
Theory
Figure 3. Left: Pulsed laser system in the M 1s-2s experiment . Right: Muonium 1s-2s signal.
The frequency corresponds to the offset of the Ti:sapphire la ser from the iodine reference line.
The open circles are the observed signal, the solid squares r epresent the theoretical expectation
based on measured laser beam parameters and a line shape mode l [17].
The 12S1/2(F=1) →22S1/2(F=1) transition was induced when thermal muo-
nium atoms interacted with the light field of two counter-pro pagating laser beams
of wavelength 244 nm. The two-photon excitation was detecte d by photoiniza-
tion of the 2s state in the same light field. The muons released thereby were
identified and counted. Their number as a function of laser fr equency represents
the experimental signal (Fig.3). The necessary high power U V laser light was6 Klaus P. Jungmann / Muonium Spectroscopy
generated by frequency tripling the output of an alexandrit e ring laser amplifier
in crystals of LBO and BBO. The alexandrite laser was seeded w ith light from a
continuous wave Ar ion laser pumped Ti:sapphire laser at 732 nm. Fluctuations
of the optical phase during the laser pulse (chirping) were c ompensated with two
electro-optic devices in the resonator of the ring amplifier to give a swing of the
laser lights frequency chirping of less than about 5 MHz. The fundamental op-
tical frequency was calibrated by frequency modulation sat uration spectroscopy
of the a 15hyperfine component of the 5-13 R(26) line in thermally excit ed127I2
vapour which lies about 700 MHz lower than 1/6 of the M transit ion frequency.
It has been calibrated to 0.4 MHz [18]. The cw light was freque ncy up-shifted by
passing through two acousto-optic modulators (AOM’s).
The experiment yields ∆ ν1s2s(expt.) = 2455 528 941.0(9.8) MHz in good
agreement with a theoretical value of ∆ ν1s2s(theory) = 2455 528 935.4(1.4) MHz
[19]. From these values the muon-electron mass ratio is foun d to be mµ+/me−
= 206.768 38(17). Alternatively, using mµ+/me−extracted from the M hyperfine
structure experiment a comparison of ∆ ν1s2s(expt.) and ∆ ν1s2s(theory) yields
theµ+-e−charge ratio as Z=qµ+/qe−=−1−1.1(2.1)·10−9. This is the
best verification of charge equality in the first two generati ons of particles. The
existence of one single universal quantized unit of charge i s solely an experimental
fact for which no associated underlying symmetry has yet bee n revealed. Gauge
invariance assures charge quantization only within one gen eration of particles.
4. Muon Magnetic Anomaly
The muon magnetic anomaly aµis given, like in case of the electron, mostly
by photon and by electron-positron fields. However, the effec ts of heavier particles
is enhanced by the square of the mass ratio mµ/me≈4·104. The contributions
of the strong interaction, which can be determined from a dis persion relation
with the input from experimental data on e+-e−annihilation into hadrons and
hadronic τ-decays, amounts to 58 ppm. The weak interaction adds 1.3 ppm .
At present standard theory yields aµto 0.66 ppm. Contributions from physics
beyond the standard model may be as large as a few ppm. Such cou ld arise from,
e.g., supersymmetry, compositeness of fundamental fermio ns and bosons, CPT
violation and many others.
A new determination of aµ[20] is presently carried out in a superferric
magnetic storage Ring [21] at the Brookhaven National Labor atory (BNL) inKlaus P. Jungmann / Muonium Spectroscopy 7
Upton, USA. It is a g-2 experiment in which the difference of th e spin precession
and the cyclotron frequencies is measured. In a first startup run, approximately
the same level of accuracy for µ+could be reached as the final result for this
particle in a preceding experiment at CERN [22]. Several tec hnical improvements
were installed since, the most significant of which is a magne tic kicker, which
allows to inject muons directly into the storage ring. This e nhances the number
of stored particles by almost two orders of magnitude compar ed to the early
stages of the experiment when the stored muons were born in th e decays of
injected pions. Data have been taken which are expected to yi eldaµto 1 ppm.
The data analyzed so far have give the value with 5 ppm uncerta inty. The value
agrees with the prediction of standard theory. The experime nt aims for a final
precision of 0.35 ppm. To be able to reach this goal, it is esse ntial to have µµto
the 0.1 ppm level from muonium spectroscopy, since this quan tity is important
in the extraction of the experimental result.
The experiment is planed for both µ+andµ−as a test of CPT invariance.
This is of particular interest in view of the suggestion by Bl uhm et al. [11] and
Dehmelt et al. [23] to compare tests of CPT invariance in diffe rent systems on
a common basis, i.e. the energies of the involved states. For measurements of
magnetic anomalies this means that the energies of particle s with spin down in
an external field need to be compared to the energies of antipa rticles with spin
up. The nature of g-2 experiments is such that they provide a fi gure of merit
r=|a−−a+| ·h¯ωc
m·c2for a CPT test, where a−anda+are the positive and
negative particles magnetic anomalies, ωcis the cyclotron frequency used in the
measurement and mis the particle mass. For the past electron and positron
measurements one has re= 1.2·10−21[23] which is a much tighter test than
in the case of the neutral kaon system, were the mass differenc es between K0
andK0yield rK= 1·10−18. An even more stringent CPT test arises from
the past muon magnetic anomaly measurements were rµ= 3.5·10−24, which
may therefore already be viewed as the presently best known C PT test based
on system energies. With improvement expected in the BNL g-2 experiment one
can look forward to a 20 times more precise test of this fundam ental symmetry.
5. Future possibilities
All precision M experiments are now limited by statistics. T herefore sig-
nificant improvements can be expected from either more efficie nt M formation,8 Klaus P. Jungmann / Muonium Spectroscopy
Table 1
Muon fluxes of some existing and future facilities, Rutherfo rd Appleton Laboratory (RAL),
Japanese Hadron Facility (JHF), a new Neutron Spallation So urce (NSS), Muon collider (MC).
RAL( µ+) PSI( µ+) PSI( µ−) JHF( µ+)†NSS(µ+) MC ( µ+,µ−)
Intensity ( µ/s) 3×1063×1081×1084.5×10114.5×1077.5×1013
Momentum bite
∆ pm/p[%] 10 10 10 10 10 5-10
Spot size
(cm×cm) 1.2×2.0 3.3×2.0 3.3×2.0 1.5×2.0 1.5×2.0 few×few
Pulse structure 82 ns 50 MHz 50 MHz 300 ns 300 ns 50 ps
50 Hz contin. contin. 50 Hz 50 Hz 15 Hz
which might in principle be possible to a small extent in the c ase of thermal M
in vacuum. The best solution, however, would be muon sources of higher intensi-
ties. Such may become available in the intermediate future t he Japanese Hadron
Facility (JHF), or the Oak Ridge (or a possible European) Spa llation Neutron
Source (NSS) Also the discussed Oak Ridge neutron spallatio n source. The most
promising facility is, however, a muon collider [24]; its fr ont end will provide
muon rates 5-6 orders of magnitude higher than present beams (Table 4).
At such facilities there is in addition to more precise measu rements in M
a variety of experiments on artificial atoms and ions like muo nic hydrogen and
muonic helium which will allow to extract important paramet ers describing the
hadronic particles within these systems or fundamental int eractions, which could
in no physical experiment thus far be accessed with sufficien t precision for atomic,
nuclear and particle theory [25,26]. It should be noted that new experimental
approaches [9,27] would also become feasible which might be neficially take ad-
vantage of, e.g., the time evolution of the atomic systems.
6. Conclusions
Although the nature of the muon - the reason for its existence - still re-
mains a mystery, both the theoretical and experimental work in fundamental
muon physics, have contributed to an improved understandin g of basic particle
interactions and symmetries in physics. Particularly muon ium spectroscopy has
verified the nature of the muon as a point-like heavy lepton wh ich differs only in
its mass related parameters from the others. This fact is fun damentally assumed
in every precision calculation within standard theory. In a ddition, the measure-Klaus P. Jungmann / Muonium Spectroscopy 9
ments provide accurate values of fundamental constants.
7. Acknowledgments
The author wishes to acknowledge the work of the members of th e different
collaborations which produced the reported results. This w ork was supported by
The German BMBF, the German DAAD and a NATO research grant.
References
[1] V.W. Hughes and G. zu Putlitz, in: Quantum Electrodynamics , ed. T. Kinoshita, (World
Scientific, 1990) p. 822
[2] K. Jungmann, in: Muon Science , eds. S.L. Lee, S.H. Kilcoyne and R. Cywinsky (Inst. of
Physics Publ., 1999) p. 405
[3] W. Liu et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 711
[4] V. Meyer et al., submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett. and hep-ex/ 9907013; V. Meyer et al., this
volume
[5] C.J. Oram et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 (1984) 910
[6] A. Badertscher et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 52 (1984) 914 and P hys. Rev. A 41 (1990) 93
[7] M.G. Boshier et al., Phys. Rev. A 52 (1995) 1948
[8] F.G. Mariam et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 49 (1982) 993
[9] L. Willmann et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 49; L. Willm ann and K. Jungmann, in:
Lecture Notes in Physics 499 (Springer, 1997) p. 43
[10] T, Kinoshita and M. Nio, in: Frontier Tests of QED and the Physics of the Vacuum , eds.
E. Zavattini, D. Bakalov and C. Rizzo (Heron Press, 1998) p. 1 51 and references therein;
T. Kinoshita, preprint hep-ph/9808351 (1998)
[11] R. Bluhm, V.A. Kostelecky and N. Russel, Phys. Rev. D 57 ( 1998) 3932
[12] A. Kostelecky, priv. com. (1999)
[13] K. Jungmann, D. Kawall, M. Grosse-Perdekamp and V.W. Hu ghes, priv. com. (1999);
[14] E. Kr¨ uger, W. Nistler, W. Weirauch, IEEE Trans. Instr. Meas. 46 (1997) 101
[15] Steven Chu et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 (1988) 101; see als o: K. Danzmann et al., Phys.
Rev. A 39 (1989) 6072
[16] F. Maas et al., Phys. Lett. A 187 (1994) 247; W. Schwarz et al., IEEE Trans.Instr.Meas.
44 (1995) 505; K. Jungmann et al., Z.Phys.D 21 (1991) 241
[17] V. Yakhontov and K. Jungmann, Z. Phys. D 38 (1996) 141; an d V. Yakhontov, R. Santra
and K. Jungmann, J. Phys. B 32 (1999) 1615
[18] S.L. Cornish et al., submitted for publcation (1999)
[19] K. Pachucki et al., J. Phys. B 29 (1996) 177; S. Karshenbo im, Z. Phys. D 39 (1997) 109
and Can. J. Phys. 77 (1999) 241; K. Pachucki and S. Karshenboi m, priv. com. (1999)
[20] R.M. Carey et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82 (1999) 163210 Klaus P. Jungmann / Muonium Spectroscopy
[21] K. Jungmann, Hyperfine Interactions 114 (1998) 115
[22] J. Baily et al., Nucl. Phys. B 150 (1979) 1
[23] H. Dehmelt et al., hep-ex/9906262
[24] R.B. Palmer et al., physics/9807006
[25] M.G. Boshier, et al. Comm. At. Mol. Phys. 33 (1996) 17
[26] D. Kawall et al., in: Proceedings of the Workshop at the First Muon Collider and th e Front
End of a Muon Collider , eds. S. Geer and R. Raja (AIP, 1998) p.486
[27] K. Jungmann et al., Appl. Phys. B 60 (1995) S159 |
physics/9910024 18 Oct 1999
/G0B0/G0A /G0AE/G0C
E/G0A /G0Am/G0C
m/G0A /G0Adx/G0C
dx/G0A /G0Adt/G0C
dt
m/G0Cv0
c/G0A /G0A1
c2E/G0C2/G09E2/G0A /G0Adx/G0Cv0
c/G27dydz/G0A /G0Adtxv0
c/G08 /G08dtxv0
c(/G0B0/G091)c/G27dydz,1
(1)On the Origin of Time
Ernst Karl Kunst
Herein it is shown that mass and time in the rest frame as well as relativistically
enlarged mass and dilated time in the moving frame are of like origin. This
implies that the former are generated by the movement of a fourth spatial
dimension of matter relative to a four-dimensional manifold.
Key words: Special relativity - equivalence of mass and time - fundamental length -
quantum of time - fourth dimension
In the previous work on quantization of velocity, length and time it has been proven
that among others Einstein’s “relativity of simultaneity” [1] rests on a misinterpretation
of the principle of relativity and the correct interpretation of the Lorentz transformation
to predict an expansion dx’ = dx/G0B of the dimension (dx) parallel to the velocity-vector0
of moving bodies - where /G0B is the Lorentz factor based on quantized velocity v -0 0
rather than the so called FitzGerald-Lorentz contraction [2]. Furthermore, this
relativistic expansion of dx has been shown to imply that /G27' = /G27 - density of mass in the
moving frame and in the rest frame, respectively - and, thus, to be the cause of the
relativistic rise of energy or mass m = dt'v/c = dt/G0Bv/c, where m is mass due to timetx0 x00 t
dilation and dt = dx/c. In connection with the definition of action as the product ofx
energy and time the result also has been derived that a smallest or fundamental length
/G1B = /G08h and a quantum of time /G2D = /G08h/c exists and that apart from a numerical factor0 0
in the case of the hydrogen (H-) atom must be valid /G1B/c = /G2D = m, where m is rest mass0 0
of the atom.
The following investigates whether those results in connection with relativistic time
dilation allow any conclusion as to the very cause of time in the rest frame.
Suppose a H-atom moving inertially at velocity v relative to an identical atom at rest so0
that
is valid, where E means rest energy, dx and dt the geometrical dimension parallel to
the velocity vector and time in the rest frame, respectively and the dashed values
denote the respective ones of the moving atom. If dt = dx/c the relativistic rise of massx
can be written as dt/G0Cv0
c/G0A /G0Adt/G0C2/G09dt2/G0A /G0Adtv0
c/G08 /G08dtv0
c(/G0B0/G091).
m/G0C/G0A /G0A/G2D/G0C
0/G0A /G0A/G2D2
0/G08 /G08dtxv0
c/G08 /G08dtxv0
c(/G0B0/G091)c/G27dydz2
.
2/G1B1/G0A /G0A/G1B0/G0A /G0Ah
/G2D1/G0A /G0A/G1B1
c/G0A /G0A/G1B0
2c/G0A /G0Ah
2c.2
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)whereas the dilation of time attains the form
Clearly (2) coincides with (1) - apart from the constant (invariant) factor "c/G27dydz" in (1).
This implies relativistic mass and time to be equivalent and generated in the volume
V' = dx'dy'dz' = dx'dydz by the movement of the latter at velocity v in the (arbitrary) x-0
direction of three-dimensional space - as has been shown before in [2].
On the other hand, according to the principle of relativity for any observer based at the
dashed system (considered moving), the rest mass of the H-atom and the quantum of
time would be m' = /G1B'/c = /G2D'. Thus, as observed from the resting system, according to0 0
(1) /G2D' must be composite: 0
This implies also rest mass and relativistic mass and, therewith, time in the rest frame
and dilated time, respectively, to be equivalent that means of like origin. In other
words: analogously to the generation of relativistic mass and dilated time, rest mass
and time in the rest frame must be generated by the movement of a - for any observer
- hidden spatial dimension of the H-atom. This leaves the only conclusion that /G1B is a0
fourth geometrical dimension of the H-atom and physical time (quantum of time) in the
rest frame as well as rest mass to result from the motion of /G1B - the latter being0
orthogonal to three-dimensional space - relative to a four-dimensional manifold.
Given that the fundamental length in R is /G1B, then the hypotenuse of the smallest1
1
possible Pythagorean triangle in the respective manifold is altogether the fundamental
length in the latter, namely
/G082 × /G1B in R,12
/G083 × /G1B in R,13
2 × /G1B in R.14
In the previous work [2] for /G1B the value /G1B = mc = /G08h has been derived, ignoring its0 0
four-dimensional nature. But from the foregoing is clear that the fundamental length in
R is 2/G1B and that this fact has to be taken into consideration yet. Hence, it must be4
1
valid
and for the quantum of timeT
/G2D0/G0A /G0Ah
/G2D0/G0A/G0A /G0An,(n/G0A /G0A1,2,...)
T
/G2D1/G0A /G0A2T
/G2D0/G0A /G0A2h
/G2D0/G0A/G0A /G0A2×n(n/G0A /G0A1,2,...),3
(6)
(7)Thus, the real value of the quantum of time derived from the fundamental length in R4
is only half the one previously predicted in [2] so that the ratio
of the mean life-times of short-lived particle resonances and of the time quant given
there has to be corrected to
whereT¯ means life-time and /G0A full width. This implies that all life-times in units of the
time quant computed (in [2]) according to (6) must be doubled in accordance with (7).
Thus, all ratios (6), which delivered (nearly) integers plus a half, become - after
doubling - integers now and the life-times of the top quark (/G0A /G11 1.55 GeV) and of the
1370 MeV meson (/G0A /G11 385 MeV) found at Brookhaven [3] are 2/G2D and 8 /G2D (instead of /G2D1 1 0
and 4 /G2D), respectively.0
The result that all ratios (7) are (nearly) full integers strongly supports the conclusion as
to the fourth-dimensional nature of rest mass and time. If the theory is correct it follows,
time to be linked to matter, and to space only to the extent as the latter possesses
mass or energy, furthermore, that no particle resonances with life-times < /G2D =1
1.357628 × 10 s in nature exist.-24
References
[1] Einstein, A., Ann. d. Phys. 17, 895 - 897, (1905)
[2] Kunst, E. K.: Is the Kinematics of Special Reativity incomplete?, physics/9909059
[3] Thompson, D. R. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 1630 - 1633, (1997)
|
arXiv:physics/9910025v1 [physics.bio-ph] 18 Oct 1999FRACTAL FEATURES OF DARK, MAINTAINED,
AND DRIVEN NEURAL DISCHARGES
IN THE CAT VISUAL SYSTEM
Steven B. Lowen
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering
Boston University
8 Saint Mary’s St., Boston, MA 02215
Email: lowen@bu.edu
Tsuyoshi Ozaki
The Rockefeller University
1230 York Ave., New York, NY 10021
Email: yoshi@camelot.mssm.edu
Ehud Kaplan
Department of Ophthalmology
Mt. Sinai School of Medicine
One Gustave Levy Pl., New York, NY 10029
Email: kaplane@rockvax.rockefeller.edu
Bahaa E. A. Saleh
Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering
Boston University
8 Saint Mary’s St., Boston, MA 02215
Email: besaleh@bu.edu
Malvin C. Teich*
Departments of Electrical & Computer Engineering, and Biom edical Engineering
Boston University
8 Saint Mary’s St., Boston, MA 02215
Email: teich@bu.edu
*Corresponding author
(617) 353-1236 (telephone)
(617) 353-6440 (fax)
Running title: Fractal features of visual-system action po tentials
11 Abstract
We employ a number of statistical measures to characterize n eural discharge activity in cat
retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) and in their target lateral ge niculate nucleus (LGN) neurons
under various stimulus conditions, and we develop a new meas ure to examine correlations
in fractal activity between spike-train pairs. In the absen ce of stimulation (i.e., in the dark),
RGC and LGN discharges exhibit similar properties. The pres entation of a constant, uniform
luminance to the eye reduces the fractal fluctuations in the R GC maintained discharge
but enhances them in the target LGN discharge, so that neural activity in the pair no
longer mirror each other. A drifting-grating stimulus yiel ds RGC and LGN driven spike
trains similar in character to those observed in the maintai ned discharge, with two notable
distinctions: action potentials are reorganized along the time axis so that they occur only
during certain phases of the stimulus waveform, and fractal activity is suppressed. Under
both uniform-luminance and drifting-grating stimulus con ditions (but not in the dark), the
discharges of pairs of LGN cells are highly correlated over l ong time scales; in contrast
discharges of RGCs are nearly uncorrelated with each other. This indicates that action-
potential activity at the LGN is subject to a common fractal m odulation to which the RGCs
are not subjected.
2 Introduction
The sequence of action potentials recorded from cat retinal ganglion cells (RGCs) and lateral-
geniculate-nucleus (LGN) cells is always irregular. This i s true whether the retina is in the
dark [1, 2], or whether it is adapted to a stimulus of fixed lumi nance [3, 4, 5, 6]. It is
also true for time-varying visual stimuli such as drifting g ratings. With few exceptions,
the statistical properties of these spike trains have been i nvestigated from the point-of-view
of the interevent-interval histogram [3], which provides a measure of the relative frequency
of intervals of different durations. The mathematical model most widely used to describe
the interevent-interval histogram under all of these stimu lus conditions derives from the
gamma renewal process [7], though point processes incorpor ating refractoriness have also
been investigated [3, 8, 9].
However, there are properties of a sequence of action potent ials, such as long-duration
correlation or memory, that cannot generally be inferred fr om measures that reset at short
times such as the interevent-interval histogram [6, 10]. Th e ability to uncover features such
as these demands the use of measures such as the Allan factor, the periodogram, or rescaled
range analysis (R/S), which can extend over time (or frequen cy) scales that span many
events. RGC and LGN spike trains exhibit variability and cor relation properties over a
broad range of time scales, and the analysis of these dischar ges reveals that the spike rates
exhibit fractal properties.
Fractals are objects which possess a form of self-similarit y: parts of the whole can be
made to fit to the whole by shifting and stretching. The hallma rk of fractal behavior is power-
law dependence in one or more statistical measures, over a su bstantial range of the time or
frequency scale at which the measurement is conducted [11]. Fractal behavior represents
a form of memory because the occurrence of an event at a partic ular time increases the
2likelihood of another event occurring at some time later, wi th this likelihood decaying in
power-law fashion. Fractal signals are also said to be self- similar or self-affine.
This fractal behavior is most readily illustrated by plotti ng the estimated firing rate of
a sequence of action potentials for a range of averaging time s. This is illustrated in Fig. 1A
for the maintained discharge of a cat RGC. The rate estimates are formed by dividing the
number of spikes in successive counting windows of duration Tby the counting time T.
The rate estimates of the shuffled (randomly reordered) versi on of the data are presented in
Fig. 1B. This surrogate data set maintains the same relative frequency of interevent-interval
durations as the original data, but destroys any long-term c orrelations (and therefore fractal
behavior) arising from other sources, such as the relative o rdering of the intervals.
Comparing Figs. 1A and B, it is apparent that the magnitude of the rate fluctuations
decreases more slowly with increasing counting time for the original data than for the shuffled
version. Fractal processes exhibit slow power-law converg ence: the standard deviation of the
rate decreases more slowly than 1 /T1/2as the averaging time increases. Nonfractal signals,
such as the shuffled RGC spike train, on the other hand, exhibit fluctuations that decrease
precisely as 1 /T1/2. The data presented in Fig. 1 are typical of all RGC and LGN spi ke
trains.
3 Analysis Techniques
3.1 Point Processes
The statistical behavior of a neural spike train can be studi ed by replacing the complex
waveforms of each individual electrically recorded action potential (Fig. 2, top) by a single
point event corresponding to the time of the peak (or other de signator) of the action po-
tential (Fig. 2, middle). In mathematical terms, the neural spike train is then viewed as an
unmarked point process. This simplification greatly reduce s the computational complexity
of the problem and permits use of the substantial methodolog y previously developed for
stochastic point processes [6, 10, 11].
The occurrence of a neural spike at time tnis therefore simply represented by an impulse
δ(t−tn) at that time, so that the sequence of action potentials is re presented by
s(t) =/summationdisplay
nδ(t−tn)
A realization of a point process is specified by the set of occu rrence times of the events, or
equivalently, of the times {τn}between adjacent events, where τn=tn+1−tn. A single real-
ization of the data is generally all that is available to the o bserver, so that the identification
of the point process, and elucidation of the mechanisms that underlie it, must be gleaned
from this one realization.
One way in which the information in an experimental sequence of events can be made
more digestible is to reduce the data into a statistic that em phasizes a particular aspect of
the data, at the expense of other features. These statistics fall into two broad classes which
have their origins, respectively, in the sequence of intere vent intervals {τn}illustrated at the
lower left of Fig. 2, or in the sequence of counts {Zn}shown at the lower right of Fig. 2.
33.1.1 Examples of Point Processes
The homogeneous Poisson point process, which is the simples t of all stochastic point pro-
cesses, is described by a single parameter, the rate λ. This point process is memoryless: the
occurrence of an event at any time t0is independent of the presence (or absence) of events
at other times t/ne}ationslash=t0. Because of this property, both the intervals {τn}and counts {Zn}
form sequences of independent, identically distributed (i id) random variables. The homoge-
neous Poisson point process is therefore completely charac terized by the interevent-interval
distribution (which is exponential) or the event-number di stribution (which is Poisson) to-
gether with the iid property. This process serves as a benchm ark against which other point
processes are measured; it therefore plays the role that the white Gaussian process enjoys in
the realm of continuous-time stochastic processes.
A related point process is the nonparalyzable fixed-dead-ti me-modified Poisson point
process, a close cousin of the homogeneous Poisson point pro cess that differs only by the
imposition of a dead-time (refractory) interval after the o ccurrence of each event, during
which other events are prohibited from occurring [9]. Anoth er cousin is the gamma- rre-
newal process which, for integer r, is generated from an homogeneous Poisson point process
by permitting every rth event to survive while deleting all intermediate events [ 6]. Both
the dead-time-modified Poisson point process and the gamma r enewal process require two
parameters for their description. All the examples of point process presented above belong
to the class of renewal point processes, which will be defined in Sec. 3.2.1.
However, spike trains in the visual system cannot be adequat ely described by renewal
point processes; rather, nonrenewal processes are require d [6]. Of particular interest are
fractal-rate stochastic point processes, in which one or mo re statistics exhibit power-law
behavior in time or frequency [11]. One feature of such proce sses is the relatively slow
power-law convergence of the rate standard deviation, as il lustrated in Fig. 1A. We have
previously shown that a fractal, doubly stochastic point pr ocess that imparts multiscale
fluctuations to the gamma- rrenewal process provides a reasonable description of the RG C
and LGN maintained discharges [6].
3.2 Interevent-Interval Measures of a Point Process
Two statistical measures are often used to characterize the discrete-time stochastic process
{τn}illustrated in the lower left corner of Fig. 2. These are the i nterevent-interval histogram
(IIH) and rescaled range analysis (R/S).
3.2.1 Interevent-Interval Histogram
The interevent-interval histogram (often referred to as th e interspike-interval histogram or
ISIH in the physiology literature) displays the relative fr equency of occurrence pτ(τ) of
an interval of size τ; it is an estimate of the probability density function of int erevent-
interval magnitude (see Fig. 2, lower left). It is, perhaps, the most commonly used of all
statistical measures of point processes in the life science s. The interevent-interval histogram
provides information about the underlying process over tim e scales that are of the order of
the interevent intervals. Its construction involves the lo ss of interval ordering, and therefore
4dependencies among intervals; a reordering of the sequence does not alter the interevent-
interval histogram since the order plays no role in the relat ive frequency of occurrence.
Some point processes exhibit no dependencies among their in terevent intervals at the
outset, in which case the sequence of interevent intervals f orms a sequence of iid random
variables and the point process is completely specified by it s interevent-interval histogram.
Such a process is called a renewal process, a definition motiv ated by the replacement of
failed parts (such as light bulbs), each replacement of whic h forms a renewal of the point
process. The homogeneous Poisson point process, dead-time -modified Poisson point process,
and gamma renewal process are all renewal processes, but exp erimental RGC and LGN spike
trains are not.
3.2.2 Rescaled Range (R/S) Analysis
Rescaled range (R/S) analysis provides information about c orrelations among blocks of in-
terevent intervals. For a block of kinterevent intervals, the difference between each interval
and the mean interevent interval is obtained and successive ly added to a cumulative sum.
The normalized range R(k) is the difference between the maximum and minimum values tha t
the cumulative sum attains, divided by the standard deviati on of the interval size. R(k) is
plotted against k. Information about the nature and the degree of correlation in the process
is obtained by fitting R(k) to the function kH, where His the so-called Hurst exponent [12].
ForH >0.5 positive correlation exists among the intervals, whereas H <0.5 indicates the
presence of negative correlation; H= 0.5 obtains for intervals with no correlation. Renewal
processes yield H= 0.5. For negatively correlated intervals, an interval that is larger than
the mean tends, on average, to be preceded or followed by one s maller than the mean.
This widely used measure is generally assumed to be well suit ed to processes that exhibit
long-term correlation or have a large variance [12, 13, 14, 1 5], but it appears not to be very
robust since it exhibits large systematic errors and highly variable estimates of the Hurst
coefficient for some fractal sequences [16, 17]. Nevertheles s, it provides a useful indication
of correlation in a point process arising from the ordering o f the interevent intervals alone.
3.3 Event-Number Measures of a Point Process
It is advantageous to study some characteristics of a point p rocess in terms of the sequence
of event numbers (counts) {Zn}rather than via the sequence of intervals {τn}.
Figure 2 illustrates how the sequence is obtained. The time a xis is divided into equally
spaced, contiguous time windows (center), each of duration Tsec, and the (integer) number
of events in the nth window is counted and denoted Zn. This sequence {Zn}forms a random
counting process of nonnegative integers (lower right). Cl osely related to the sequence of
counts is the sequence of rates (events/sec) λn, which is obtained by dividing each count Zn
by the counting time T. This is the measure used in Fig. 1.
We describe several statistical measures useful for charac terizing the counting process
{Zn}: the Fano factor, the Allan factor, and the event-number-ba sed power spectral density
estimate (periodogram).
53.3.1 Fano Factor
The Fano factor is defined as the event-number variance divid ed by the event-number mean,
which is a function of the counting time T:
F(T)≡Var[Zn(T)]
E [Zn(T)].
This quantity provides an abbreviated way of describing cor relation in a sequence of events.
It indicates the degree of event clustering or anticlusteri ng in a point process relative to the
benchmark homogeneous Poisson point process, for which F(T) = 1 for all T.
The Fano factor must approach unity at sufficiently small valu es of the counting time T
for any regular point process [6, 11]. In general, a Fano fact or less than unity indicates that a
point process is more orderly than the homogeneous Poisson p oint process at the particular
time scale T, whereas an excess over unity indicates increased clusteri ng at the given time
scale. This measure is sometimes called the index of dispers ion; it was first used by Fano in
1947 [18] for characterizing the statistical fluctuations o f the number of ions generated by
individual fast charged particles. For a fractal-rate stoc hastic point process the Fano factor
assumes the power-law form TαF(0< α F<1) for large T. The parameter αFis defined as
an estimate of the fractal exponent (or scaling exponent) αof the point-process rate.
Though the Fano factor can detect the presence of self-simil arity even when it cannot
be discerned in a visual representation of a sequence of even ts, mathematical constraints
prevent it from increasing with counting time faster than ∼T1[19]. It therefore proves
to be unsuitable as a measure for fractal exponents α >1; it also suffers from bias for
finite-length data sets [20]. For these reasons we employ oth er count-based measures.
3.3.2 Allan Factor
The reliable estimation of a fractal exponent that may assum e a value greater than unity
requires the use of a measure whose increase is not constrain ed as it is for the Fano factor,
and which remains free of bias. In this section we present a me asure we first defined in 1996
[19], and called the Allan factor. The Allan factor is the rat io of the event-number Allan
variance to twice the mean:
A(T)≡E/braceleftBig
[Zn(T)−Zn+1(T)]2/bracerightBig
2E [Zn(T)].
The Allan variance was first introduced in connection with th e stability of atomic-based
clocks [21]. It is defined in terms of the variability of differ ences of successive counts; as
such it is a measure based on the Haar wavelet. Because the All an factor functions as a
derivative, it has the salutary effect of mitigating linear a gainst nonstationarities. More
complex wavelet Allan factors can be constructed to elimina te polynomial trends [22, 23].
Like the Fano factor, the Allan factor is also a useful measur e of the degree of event
clustering (or anticlustering) in a point process relative to the benchmark homogeneous
Poisson point process, for which A(T) = 1 for all T. In fact, for any point process, the Allan
factor is simply related to the Fano factor by
A(T) = 2F(T)−F(2T)
6so that, in general, both quantities vary with the counting t imeT. In particular, for a regular
point process the Allan factor also approaches unity as Tapproaches zero. For a fractal-
rate stochastic point process and sufficiently large T, the Allan factor exhibits a power-law
dependence that varies with the counting time TasA(T)∼TαA(0< α A<3); it can rise
as fast as ∼T3and can therefore be used to estimate fractal exponents over the expanded
range 0 < α A<3.
3.3.3 Periodogram
Fourier-transform methods provide another avenue for quan tifying correlation in a point
process. The periodogram is an estimate of the power spectra l density of a point process,
revealing how the power is concentrated across frequency. T he count-based periodogram is
obtained by dividing a data set into contiguous segments of e qual length T. Within each
segment, a discrete-index sequence {Wm}is formed by further dividing TintoMequal bins,
and then counting the number of events within each bin. A peri odogram is then formed for
each of the segments according to
SW(f) =1
M/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/tildewiderW(f)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2,
where/tildewiderW(f) is the discrete Fourier transform of the sequence {Wm}andMis the length
of the transform. All of the segment periodograms are averag ed together to form the final
averaged periodogram S(f), which estimates the power spectral density in the frequen cy
range from 1 /TtoM/2THz. The periodogram S(f) can also be smoothed by using a
suitable windowing function [24].
The count-based periodogram, as opposed to the interval-ba sed periodogram (formed
by Fourier transforming the interevent intervals directly ), provides direct undistorted infor-
mation about the time correlation of the underlying point pr ocess because the count index
increases by unity every T/Mseconds, in proportion to the real time of the point process.
In the special case when the bin width T/Mis short in comparison with most interevent
intervals τ, the count-based periodogram essentially reduces to the pe riodogram of the point
process itself, since the bins reproduce the original point process to a good approximation.
For a fractal-rate stochastic point process, the periodogr am exhibits a power-law depen-
dence that varies with the frequency fasS(f)∼f−αS; unlike the Fano and Allan factor
exponents, however, αScan assume any value. Thus in theory the periodogram can be us ed
to estimate any value of fractal exponent, although in pract ice fractal exponents αrarely
exceed a value of 3. Compared with estimated based on the Alla n factor, periodogram-based
estimates of the fractal exponent αSsuffer from increased bias and variance [11]. Other
methods also exist for investigating the spectrum of a point process, some of which highlight
fluctuations about the mean rate [25].
3.3.4 Relationship Among Fractal Exponents
For a fractal-rate stochastic point process with 0 < α < 1, the theoretical Fano factor, Allan
factor, and periodogram curves all follow power-law forms w ith respect to their arguments,
and in fact we obtain αF=αA=αS=α. For 1 ≤α <3, the theoretical Fano factor
7curves saturate, but the relation αA=αS=αstill obtains. The fractal exponent αis
ambiguously related to the Hurst exponent H, since some authors have used the quantity H
to index fractal Gaussian noise whereas others have used the same value of Hto index the
integral of fractal Gaussian noise (which is fractional Bro wnian motion). The relationship
between the quantities is α= 2H−1 for fractal Gaussian noise and α= 2H+ 1 for fractal
Brownian motion. In the context of this paper, the former rel ationship holds, and we can
define another estimate of the fractal exponent, αR= 2HR−1, where HRis the estimate
of the Hurst exponent Hobtained from the data at hand. In general, αRdepends on the
theoretical value of α, as well as on the probability distribution of the intereven t intervals.
The distributions of the data analyzed in this paper, howeve r, prove simple enough so that
the approximate theoretical relation αR=αwill hold in the case of large amounts of data.
3.4 Correlation Measures for Pairs of Point Processes
Second-order methods prove useful in revealing correlatio ns between sequences of events,
which indicate how information is shared between pairs of sp ike trains. Such methods may
not detect subtle forms of interdependence to which informa tion-theoretic approaches are
sensitive [26], but the latter methods suffer from limitatio ns due to the finite size of the
data sets used. We consider two second-order methods here: t he normalized wavelet cross-
correlation function (NWCCF) and the cross periodogram.
3.4.1 Normalized Wavelet Cross-Correlation Function
We define the normalized wavelet cross-correlation functio nA2(T) as a generalization of the
Allan factor (see Sec. 3.3.2). It is a Haar-wavelet-based ve rsion of the correlation function
and is therefore insensitive to linear trends. It can be read ily generalized by using other
wavelets and can thereby be rendered insensitive to polynom ial trends. To compute the
normalized wavelet cross-correlation function at a partic ular counting time T, the two spike
trains first are divided into contiguous counting windows T. The number of spikes Z1,n
falling within the nth window is registered for all indices ncorresponding to windows lying
entirely within the first spike-train data set, much as in the procedure to estimate the Allan
factor. This process is repeated for the second spike train, yielding Z2,n. The difference
between the count numbers in a given window in the first spike t rain (Z1,n) and the one after
it (Z1,n+1) is then computed for all n, with a similar procedure followed for the second spike
train. Paralleling the definition of the Allan factor, the no rmalized wavelet cross-correlation
function is defined as:
A2(T)≡E{[Z1,n(T)−Z1,n+1(T)][Z2,n(T)−Z2,n+1(T)]}
2{E [Z1,n(T)]E [Z2,n(T)]}1/2.
The normalization has two salutary properties: 1) it is symm etric in the two spike trains,
and 2) when the same homogeneous Poisson point process is use d for both spike trains the
normalized wavelet cross-correlation function assumes a v alue of unity for all counting times
T, again in analogy with the Allan factor. To determine the sig nificance of a particular value
for the normalized wavelet cross-correlation function, we make use of two surrogate data sets:
a shuffled version of the original data sets (same interevent i ntervals but in a random order),
8and homogeneous Poisson point processes with the same mean r ate. Comparison between
the value of the normalized wavelet cross-correlation func tion obtained from the data at a
particular counting time Ton the one hand, and from the surrogates at that time Ton the
other hand, indicates the significance of that particular va lue.
3.4.2 Cross Periodogram
The cross periodogram [27] is a generalization of the period ogram for individual spike trains
(see Sec. 3.3.3), in much the same manner as the normalized wa velet cross-correlation func-
tion derives from the Allan factor. Two data sets are divided into contiguous segments of
equal length T, with discrete-index sequences {W1,m}and{W2,m}formed by further di-
viding each segment of both data sets into Mequal bins, and then counting the number
of events within each bin. With the M-point discrete Fourier transform of the sequence
{W1,m}denoted by/tildewidestW1(f) (and similarly for the second sequence), we define the segme nt
cross periodograms as
S2,W(f)≡1
2M/bracketleftBig/tildewidestW1∗(f)/tildewidestW2(f) +/tildewidestW1(f)/tildewidestW2∗(f)/bracketrightBig
=1
MRe/bracketleftBig/tildewidestW1∗(f)/tildewidestW2(f)/bracketrightBig
,
where∗represents complex conjugation and Re( ·) represents the real part of the argument.
As with the ordinary periodogram, all of the segment cross pe riodograms are averaged to-
gether to form the final averaged cross periodogram, S2(f), and the result can be smoothed.
This form is chosen to be symmetric in the two spike trains, an d to yield a real (although
possibly negative) result. In the case of independent spike trains, the expected value of the
cross periodogram is zero. We again employ the same two surro gate data sets (shuffled and
Poisson) to provide significance information about cross-p eriodogram values for actual data
sets.
The cross periodogram and normalized wavelet cross-correl ation function will have dif-
ferent immunity to nonstationarities and will exhibit diffe rent bias-variance tradeoffs, much
as their single-dimensional counterparts do [11].
4 Results for RGC and LGN Action-Potential
Sequences
We have carried out a series of experiments to determine the s tatistical characteristics of the
dark, maintained, and driven neural discharge in cat RGC and LGN cells. Using the analysis
techniques presented in Sec. 3, we compare and contrast the n eural activity for these three
different stimulus modalities, devoting particular attent ion to their fractal features. The
results we present all derive from on-center X-type cells.
4.1 Experimental Methods
The experimental methods are similar to those used by Kaplan and Shapley [28] and Teich
et al. [6]. Experiments were carried out on adult cats. Anesthesia was induced by intramus-
cular injection of xylazine (Rompun 2 mg/kg), followed 10 mi nutes later by intramuscular
9injection of ketamine HCl (Ketaset 10 mg/kg). Anesthesia wa s maintained during surgery
with intravenous injections of thiamylal (Surital 2.5%) or thiopental (Pentothal 2.5%). Dur-
ing recording, anesthesia was maintained with Pentothal (2 .5%, 2–6 (mg/kg)/hr). The local
anesthetic Novocain was administered, as required, during the surgical procedures. Penicillin
(750,000 units intramuscular) was also administered to pre vent infection, as was dexametha-
sone (Decadron, 6 mg intravenous) to forestall cerebral ede ma. Muscular paralysis was
induced and maintained with gallium triethiodide (Flaxedi l, 5–15 (mg/kg)/hr) or vecuro-
nium bromide (Norcuron, 0.25 (mg/kg)/hr). Infusions of Rin ger’s saline with 5% dextrose
at 3–4 (ml/kg)/hr were also administered.
The two femoral veins and a femoral artery were cannulated fo r intravenous drug infu-
sions. Heart rate and blood pressure, along with expired CO 2, were continuously monitored
and maintained in physiological ranges. For male cats, the b ladder was also cannulated to
monitor fluid outflow. Core body temperature was maintained a t 37.5◦C throughout the
experiment by wrapping the animal’s torso in a DC heating pad controlled by feedback from
a subscapular temperature probe. The cat’s head was fixed in a stereotaxic apparatus. The
trachea was cannulated to allow for artificial respiration. To minimize respiratory artifacts,
the animal’s body was suspended from a vertebral clamp and a p neumothorax was performed
when needed.
Eyedrops of 10% phenylephrine hydrochloride (Neo-synephr ine) and 1% atropine were
applied to dilate the pupils and retract the nictitating mem branes. Gas-permeable hard
contact lenses protected the corneas from drying. Artificia l pupils of 3-mm diameter were
placed in front of the contact lenses to maintain fixed retina l illumination. The optical
quality of the animal’s eyes was regularly examined by ophth almoscopy. The optic discs were
mapped onto a tangent screen, by back-projection, for use as a positional reference. The
animal viewed a CRT screen (Tektronix 608, 270 frames/sec; o r CONRAC, 135 frames/sec)
that, depending on the stimulus condition, was either dark, uniformly illuminated with a
fixed luminance level, or displayed a moving grating.
A craniotomy was performed over the LGN (center located 6.5 m m anterior to the earbars
and 9 mm lateral to the midline of the skull), and the dura mate r was resected. A tungsten-
in-glass microelectrode (5–10- µm tip length) [29] was lowered until spikes from a single LGN
neuron were isolated. The microelectrode simultaneously r ecorded RGC activity, in the
form of S potentials, and LGN spikes, with a timing accuracy o f 0.1 msec. The output was
amplified and monitored using conventional techniques. A ce ll was classified as Y-type if it
exhibited strong frequency doubling in response to contras t-reversing high-spatial-frequency
gratings, and X-type otherwise [30, 31].
The experimental protocol was approved by the Animal Care an d Use Committee of
Rockefeller University, and was in accord with the National Institutes of Health guidelines
for the use of higher mammals in neuroscience experiments.
4.2 RGC and LGN Dark Discharge
Results for simultaneously recorded RGC and target LGN spik e trains of 4000-sec duration
are presented in Fig. 3, when the retina is thoroughly adapte d to the dark (this is referred to
as the “dark discharge”). The normalized rate functions (A) for both the RGC (solid curve)
and LGN (dashed curve) recordings exhibit large fluctuation s over the course of the recording;
10each window corresponds to a counting time of T= 100 sec. Such large, slow fluctuations
often indicate fractal rates [6, 11]. The two recordings bea r a substantial resemblance to each
other, suggesting that the fractal components of the rate flu ctuations either have a common
origin or pass from one of the cells to the other.
The normalized interevent-interval histogram (B) of the RG C data follows a straight-line
trend on a semi-logarithmic plot, indicating that the inter event-interval probability density
function is close to an exponential form. The LGN data, howev er, yields a nonmonotonic
(bimodal) interevent-interval histogram. This distribut ion favors longer and shorter inter-
vals at the expense of those near half the mean interval, refle cting clustering in the event
occurrences over the short term. Various kinds of unusual cl ustering behavior have been
previously observed in LGN discharges [2, 32].
R/S plots (C) for both the RGC and LGN recordings follow the k0.5line for sums less than
1000 intervals, but rise sharply thereafter in a roughly pow er-law fashion as kHR=k(αR+1)/2,
suggesting that the neural firing pattern exhibits fractal a ctivity for times greater than about
1000 intervals (about 120 sec for these two recordings).
Both smoothed periodograms (D) decay with frequency as f−αSfor small frequencies,
and the Allan factors (E) increase with time as TαAfor large counting times, confirming the
fractal behavior. The 0.3-Hz component evident in the perio dograms of both recordings is
an artifact of the artificial respiration; it does not affect t he fractal analysis. As shown in
Table 1, the fractal exponents calculated from the various m easures bear rough similarity to
each other, as expected [11]; further, the onset times also a gree reasonably well, being in the
neighborhood of 100 sec. The coherence among these statisti cs leaves little doubt that these
RGC and LGN recordings exhibit fractal features with estima ted fractal exponents of 1 .9±0.1
and 1.8±0.1 (mean ±standard deviation of the three estimated exponents), resp ectively.
Moreover, the close numerical agreement of the RGC and LGN es timated fractal exponents
suggests a close connection between the fractal activity in the two spike trains under dark
conditions [6]. Curves such as those presented in Fig. 3 are r eadily simulated by using a
fractal-rate stochastic point process, as described in [6] .
With the exception of the interevent-interval distributio n, it is apparent from Fig. 3 that
the statistical properties of the dark discharges generate d by the RGC and its target LGN
cell prove to be remarkably similar.
4.3 RGC and LGN Maintained Discharge
Figure 4 presents analogous statistical results for simult aneously recorded maintained-dis/-
charge RGC and target-LGN spike trains of 7000-sec duration when the stimulus presented
by the CRT screen was a 50 cd/m2uniform luminance. The cell pair from which these
recordings were obtained is different from the pair whose sta tistics are shown in Fig. 3.
As is evident from Table 1, the imposition of a stimulus incre ases the RGC firing rate,
though not that of the LGN. In contrast to the results for the d ark discharge, the RGC and
LGN action-potential sequences differ from each other in sig nificant ways under maintained-
discharge conditions. We previously investigated some of t hese statistical measures, and
their roles in revealing fractal features, for maintained d ischarge [6].
The rate fluctuations (A) of the RGC and the LGN no longer resem ble each other. At
these counting times, the normalized RGC rate fluctuations a re suppressed, whereas those
11of the LGN are enhanced, relative to the dark discharge shown in Fig. 3. Significant long-
duration fluctuations are apparently imparted to the RGC S-p otential sequence at the LGN,
through the process of selective clustered passage [26]. Sp ike clustering is also imparted
at the LGN over short time scales; the RGC maintained dischar ge exhibits a coefficient of
variation (CV) much less than unity, whereas that of the LGN s ignificantly exceeds unity
(see Table 1).
The normalized interevent-interval histogram (B) of the RG C data resembles that of a
dead-time-modified Poisson point process (fit not shown), co nsistent with the presence of
relative refractoriness which becomes more important at hi gher rates [9]. Dead-time effects
in the LGN are secondary to the clustering that it imparts to t he RGC S-potentials, in part
because of its lower rate.
The R/S (C), periodogram (D), and Allan factor (E) plots yiel d results that are consistent
with, but different from, those revealed by the dark discharg e shown in Fig. 3. Although
both the RGC and LGN recordings exhibit evidence of fractal b ehavior, the two spike trains
now behave quite differently in the presence of a steady-lumi nance stimulus. For the RGC
recording, all three measures are consistent with a fractal onset time of about 1 sec, and a
relatively small fractal exponent (0 .7±0.3). For the LGN, the fractal behavior again appears
in all three statistics, but begins at a larger onset time (ro ughly 20 sec) and exhibits a larger
fractal exponent (1 .4±0.6). Again, all measures presented in Fig. 4 are well describe d by a
pair of fractal-rate stochastic point processes [6].
4.4 RGC and LGN Driven Discharge
Figure 5 presents these same statistical measures for simul taneously recorded 7000-sec du-
ration RGC and LGN spike trains in response to a sinusoidal st imulus (drifting grating)
at 4.2 Hz frequency, 40% contrast, and 50 cd/m2mean luminance. The RGC/LGN cell
pair from which these recordings were obtained is the same as the pair illustrated in Fig. 4.
The results for this stimulus resemble those for the maintai ned discharge, but with added
sinusoidal components associated with the restricted phas es of the stimulus during which
action potentials occur. Using terminology from auditory n europhysiology, these spikes are
said to be “phase locked” to the periodicity provided by the d rifting-grating stimulus. The
firing rate is greater than that observed with a steady-lumin ance stimulus, particularly for
the LGN (see Table 1).
Again, the RGC and LGN spike trains exhibit different behavio r. The rate fluctuations
(A) of the LGN still exceeds those of the RGC, but not to as grea t an extent as in Fig. 4.
Both action-potential sequences exhibit normalized inter event-interval histograms (B) with
multiple maxima, but the form of the histogram is now dominat ed by the modulation imposed
by the oscillatory stimulus.
Over long times and small frequencies, the R/S (C), periodog ram (D), and Allan factor
(E) plots again yield results in rough agreement with each ot her, and also with the results
presented in Fig. 4. The most obvious differences arise from t he phase locking induced by
the sinusoidal stimulus, which appears directly in the peri odogram as a large spike at 4.2
Hz, and in the Allan factor as local minima near multiples of ( 4.2 Hz)−1= 0.24 sec.
The RGC results prove consistent with a fractal onset time of about 3 sec, and a relatively
small fractal exponent (0 .7±0.1), whereas for the LGN the onset time is about 20 sec and the
12fractal exponent is 1 .7±0.4. For both spike trains fractal behavior persists in the pre sence
of the oscillatory stimulus, though its magnitude is slight ly attenuated.
4.5 Correlation in the Discharges of Pairs of RGC and LGN Cell s
We previously examined information exchange among pairs of RGC and LGN spike trains
using information-theoretic measures [26]. While these ap proaches are very general, finite
data length renders them incapable of revealing relationsh ips between spike trains over time
scales longer than about 1 sec. We now proceed to investigate various RGC and LGN spike-
train pairs in terms of the correlation measures for pairs of point processes developed in
Sec. 3.4.
Pairs of RGC discharges are only weakly correlated over long counting times. This is
readily illustrated in terms of normalized rate functions s uch as those presented in Fig. 6A,
in which the rate functions of two RGCs are computed over a cou nting time T= 100 sec.
Calculation of the correlation coefficient ( ρ= +0.27) shows that the fluctuations are only
mildly correlated.
Unexpectedly, however, significant correlation turns out t o be present in pairs of LGN
discharges over long counting times. This is evident in Fig. 6B, where the correlation coef-
ficient ρ= +0.98 (p <10−16) for the rates of two LGN discharges computed over the same
counting time T= 100 sec.
For shorter counting times, there is little cross correlati on for either pairs of RGC or of
LGN spike trains (not shown). However, strong correlations are present in the spike rates of
an RGC and its target LGN cell as long as the rate is computed ov er times shorter than 15
sec for this particular cell pair.
The cross correlation can be quantified at all time and freque ncy scales by the nor-
malized wavelet cross-correlation function (see Sec. 3.4. 1) and the cross periodogram (see
Sec. 3.4.2), respectively. Figure 6C shows the normalized w avelet cross-correlation function,
as a function of the duration of the counting window, between an RGC/LGN spike-train
pair recorded under maintained-discharge conditions, as w ell as for two surrogate data sets
(shuffled and Poisson). For this spike-train pair, it is evide nt that significant correlation ex-
ists over time scales less than 15 seconds. The constant magn itude of the normalized wavelet
cross-correlation function for T <15 sec is likely associated with the selective transmission
properties of the LGN [26]. Figure 6D presents the normalize d wavelet cross-correlation func-
tion for the same RGC/LGN spike-train pair shown in Fig. 6C (s olid curve), together with
that between two RGC action-potential sequences (long-das hed curve), and between their
two associated LGN spike trains (short-dashed curve). Also shown is a dotted line repre-
senting the aggregate behavior of the normalized wavelet cr oss-correlation function absolute
magnitude for all surrogate data sets, which resemble each o ther.
While the two RGC spike trains exhibit a normalized wavelet c ross-correlation function
value which remains below 7, the two LGN action-potential se quences yield a curve that
steadily grows with increasing counting window T, attaining a value in excess of 1000.
Indeed, a logarithmic scale was chosen for the ordinate to fa cilitate the display of this wide
range of values. It is of interest to note that the LGN/LGN cur ve begins its steep ascent just
as the RGC/LGN curve abruptly descends. Further, the normal ized wavelet cross-correlation
function between the two LGN recordings closely follows a po wer-law form, indicating that
13the two LGN action-potential rates are co-fractal. One poss ible origin of this phenomenon
is a fractal form of correlated modulation of the random-tra nsmission processes in the LGN
that results in the two LGN spike trains. Some evidence exist s that global modulation of
the LGN might originate in the parabrachial nucleus of the br ain stem; the results presented
here are consistent with such a conclusion.
Analogous results for the cross-periodograms, which are sh own in Figs. 6E and F, provide
results that corroborate, but are not as definitive as, those obtained with the normalized
wavelet cross-correlation function.
The behavior of the normalized wavelet cross-correlation f unctions for pairs of driven
spike trains, shown in Fig. 7, closely follow those for pairs of maintained discharges, shown
in Fig. 6, except for the presence of structure at the stimulu s period imposed by the drifting
grating.
5 Discussion
The presence of a stimulus alters the manner in which spike tr ains in the visual system
exhibit fractal behavior. In the absence of a stimulus, RGC a nd LGN dark discharges display
similar fractal activity (see Fig. 3). The normalized rate f unctions of the two recordings,
when computed for long counting times, follow similar paths . The R/S, Allan factor, and
periodogram quantify this relationship, and these three me asures yield values of the fractal
exponents for the two spike trains that correspond reasonab ly well (see Table 1). The
normalized interevent-interval histogram, a measure whic h operates only over relatively short
time scales, shows a significant difference between the RGC an d LGN responses. Such short-
time behavior, however, does not affect the fractal activity , which manifests itself largely
over longer time scales.
The presence of a stimulus, either a constant luminance (Fig . 4), or a drifting grating
(Fig. 5), causes the close linkage between the statistical c haracter of the RGC and LGN
discharges over long times to dissipate. The normalized rat e functions of the LGN spike trains
display large fluctuations about their mean, especially for the maintained discharge, while
the RGC rate functions exhibit much smaller fluctuations tha t are minimally correlated with
those of the LGN. Again, the R/S, Allan factor, and periodogr am quantify this difference,
indicating that fractal activity in the RGC consistently ex hibits a smaller fractal exponent
(see also Table 1), and also a smaller fractal onset time (hig her onset frequency). Both the
R/S and Allan-factor measures indicate that the LGN exhibit s more fluctuations than the
RGC at all scales; the periodogram does not, apparently beca use it is the only one of the
three constructed without normalization.
In the driven case (Fig. 5), the oscillatory nature of the sti mulus phase-locks the RGC
and LGN spike trains to each other at shorter time scales. The periodogram displays a peak
at 4.2 Hz, and the Allan factor exhibits minima at multiples o f (4.2 Hz)−1= 0.24 sec, for
both action-potential sequences. The normalized intereve nt-interval histogram also suggests
a relationship between the two recordings mediated by the ti me-varying stimulus; both RGC
and LGN histograms achieve a number of maxima. Although obsc ured by the normalization,
the peaks do indeed coincide for an unnormalized plot (not sh own).
In the presence of a stimulus, RGCs are not correlated with th eir target LGN cells
14over the long time scales at which fractal behavior becomes m ost important, but significant
correlation does indeed exist between pairs of LGN spike tra ins for both the maintained and
driven discharges (see Figs. 6 and 7, respectively). These p airs of LGN discharges, exhibiting
linked fractal behavior, may be called co-fractal. The norm alized wavelet cross-correlation
function and cross periodogram plots between RGC 1 and LGN 1 r emain significantly above
the surrogates for small times (Figs. 6C and 6E). The results for the two RGCs suggest
some degree of co-fractal behavior, but no significant corre lation over short time scales for
the maintained discharge (Figs. 6D and 6F). Since the two cor responding RGC spike trains
do not appear co-fractal nearly to the degree shown by the LGN recordings, the co-fractal
component must be imparted at the LGN itself. This suggests t hat the LGN discharges may
experience a common fractal modulation, perhaps provided f rom the parabrachial nucleus
in the brain stem, which engenders co-fractal behavior in th e LGN spike trains. Although
similar data for the dark discharge are not available, the ti ght linkage between RGC and
LGN firing patterns in that case (Fig. 3) suggests that a commo n fractal modulation may not
be present in the absence of a stimulus, and therefore that di scharges from nearby LGN cells
would in fact not be co-fractal; this remains to be experimen tally demonstrated. Correlations
in the spike trains of relatively distant pairs of cat LGN cel ls have been previously observed
in the short term for drifting-grating stimuli [33]; these c orrelations have been ascribed to
low-threshold calcium channels and dual excitatory/inhib itory action in the corticogeniculate
pathway [34].
In the context of information transmission, the LGN may modu late the fractal character
of the spike trains according to the nature of the stimulus pr esent. Under dark conditions,
with no signal to be transmitted, the LGN appears to pass the f ractal character of the
individual RGCs on to more central stages of visual processi ng, which could serve to keep
them alert and responsive to all possible input time scales. If, as appears to be the case, the
responses from different RGCs do not exhibit significant corr elation with each other, then the
LGN spike trains also will not, and the ensemble average, com prising a collection of LGN
spike trains, will display only small fluctuations. In the pr esence of a constant stimulus,
however, the LGN spike trains develop significant degrees of co-fractal behavior, so that
the ensemble average will exhibit large fluctuations [20]. S uch correlated fractal behavior
might serve to indicate the presence of correlation at the vi sual input, while still maintaining
fluctuations over all time scales to ready neurons in later st ages of visual processing for any
stimulus changes that might arrive. Finally, a similar beha vior obtains for a drifting-grating
stimulus, but with somewhat reduced fractal fluctuations; p erhaps the stimulus itself, though
fairly simple, serves to keep more central processing stage s alert.
5.1 Prevalence and Significance of Fractal and Co-Fractal
Behavior
Fractal behavior is present in all 50 of the RGC and LGN neural spike-train pairs that we
have examined, under dark, maintained-discharge, and drif ting-grating stimulus conditions,
provided they are of sufficient length to manifest this behavi or.
Indeed, fractal behavior is ubiquitous in sensory systems. Its presence has been observed
in cat striate-cortex neural spike trains [35]; and in the sp ike train of a locust visual in-
15terneuron, the descending contralateral movement detecto r [36]. It is present in the auditory
system [37] of a number of species; primary auditory (VIII-n erve) nerve fibers in the cat
[19, 38], chinchilla, and chicken [39] all exhibit fractal b ehavior. It is exhibited at many
biological levels, from the microscopic to the macroscopic ; examples include ion-channel be-
havior [40, 41, 42, 43], neurotransmitter exocytosis at the synapse [44], and spike trains
in rabbit somatosensory-cortex neurons [45] and mesenceph alic reticular-formation neurons
[46]. In almost all cases, the upper limit of the observed tim e over which fractal correlations
exist is imposed by the duration of the recording.
The significance of the fractal behavior is not fully underst ood. Its presence may serve
as a stimulus to keep more central stages of the sensory syste m alert and responsive to all
possible time scales, awaiting the arrival of a time-varyin g stimulus whose time scale is a
priori unknown. It is also possible that fractal activity in spike t rains provides an advantage
in terms of matching the detection system to the expected sig nal [37] since natural scenes
have fractal spatial and temporal noise [47, 48].
6 Conclusion
Using a variety of statistical measures, we have shown that f ractal activity in LGN spike
trains remains closely correlated with that of their exciti ng RGC action-potential sequences
under dark conditions, but not with stimuli present. The pre sence of a visual stimulus serves
to increase long-duration fluctuations in LGN spike trains i n a coordinated fashion, so that
pairs of LGN spike trains exhibit co-fractal behavior large ly uncorrelated with activity in
their associated RGCs. Such large correlations are not pres ent in pairs of RGC spike trains.
A drifting-grating stimulus yields similar results, but wi th fractal activity in both recordings
somewhat suppressed. Co-fractal behavior in LGN discharge s under constant luminance
and drifting-grating stimulus conditions suggests that a c ommon fractal modulation may be
imparted at the LGN in the presence of a visual stimulus.
7 Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the U.S. Office of Naval Research und er grants N00014-92-J-1251
and N0014-93-12079, by the National Institute for Mental He alth under grant MH5066, by
the National Eye Institute under grants EY4888 and EY11276, and by the Whitaker Foun-
dation under grant RG-96-0411. E. Kaplan is Jules and Doris S tein Research-to-Prevent-
Blindness Professor at Mt. Sinai School of Medicine.
References
[1] Mastronarde, D. N. (1983) J. Neurophysiol. 49, 303–324.
[2] Bishop, P. O., Levick, W. R., and Williams, W. O. (1964) J. Physiol. (London) 170,
598–612.
[3] Kuffler, S. W., FitzHugh, R., and Barlow, H. B. (1957) J. Gen. Physiol. 40, 683–702.
16[4] Levine, M. W., and Troy, J. B. (1986) J. Physiol. (London) 375, 339–359.
[5] Troy, J. B., and Robson, J. G. (1992) Vis. Neurosci. 9, 535–553.
[6] Teich, M. C., Heneghan, C., Lowen, S. B., Ozaki, T., and Ka plan, E. (1997) J. Opt.
Soc. Am. A 14, 529–546.
[7] Robson, J. G., and Troy, J. B. (1987) J. Opt. Soc. Am. A 4, 2301–2307.
[8] Levick, W. R. (1973) inHandbook of Sensory Physiology, VII/3 , Central Processing of
Visual Information, Part A (Jung, R., Ed.), pp. 575–598, Spr inger-Verlag, New York.
[9] Teich, M. C., Matin, L., and Cantor, B. (1978) J. Opt. Soc. Am. 68, 386–402.
[10] Teich, M. C., and Khanna, S. M. (1985) J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 77, 1110–1128.
[11] Thurner, S., Lowen, S. B., Heneghan, C., Feurstein, M. C ., Feichtinger, H. G., and
Teich, M. C. (1997) Fractals 5, 565–595.
[12] Hurst, H. E. (1951) Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 116, 770–808.
[13] Feller, W. (1951) Ann. Math. Stat. 22, 427–432.
[14] Mandelbrot, B. B. (1983) The Fractal Geometry of Nature , Freeman, New York.
[15] Schepers, H. E., van Beek, J. H. G. M., and Bassingthwaig hte, J. B. (1992) IEEE Eng.
Med. Biol. Mag. 11, 57–71.
[16] Beran, J. (1994) Statistics for Long-Memory Processes , Chapman and Hall, New York.
[17] Bassingthwaighte, J. B., and Raymond, G. M. (1994) Ann. Biomed. Eng. 22, 432–444.
[18] Fano, U. (1947) Phys. Rev. 72, 26–29.
[19] Lowen, S. B., and Teich, M. C. (1996) J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 99, 3585–3591.
[20] Lowen, S. B., and Teich, M. C. (1995) Fractals 3, 183–210.
[21] Allan, D. W. (1966) Proc. IEEE 54, 221–230.
[22] Teich, M. C., Heneghan, C., Lowen, S. B., and Turcott, R. G. (1996) inWavelets in
Medicine and Biology (Aldroubi, A., and Unser, M., Eds.), pp . 383–412, CRC Press,
Boca Raton, FL.
[23] Abry, P. and Flandrin, P (1996) inWavelets in Medicine and Biology (Aldroubi, A.,
and Unser, M., Eds.), pp. 413–437, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
[24] Oppenheim, A. V., and Schafer, R. W. (1975) Digital Sign al Processing, Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
[25] Lange, G. D., and Hartline, P. H. (1979) Biol. Cybern. 34, 31–34.
17[26] Lowen, S. B., Ozaki, T, Kaplan, E, and Teich, M. C. (1998) inComputational Neu-
roscience: Trends in Research, 1998 (Bower, J. M., Ed.), pp. 491–496, Plenum, New
York.
[27] Tuckwell, H. C. (1989) Stochastic Processes in the Neur osciences, Society for Industrial
and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia.
[28] Kaplan, E., and Shapley, R. M. (1982) J. Physiol. (London) 330, 125–143.
[29] Merrill, E. G., and Ainsworth, A. (1972) Med. Biol. Eng. 10, 662–672.
[30] Hochstein, S., and Shapley, R. M. (1976) J. Physiol. (London) 262, 237–264.
[31] Shapley, R. M., and Hochstein, S. (1975) Nature (London) 256, 411–413.
[32] Funke, K., and W¨ org¨ otter, F. (1997) Prog. Neurobiol. 53, 67–119.
[33] Sillito, A. M., Jones, H. E., Gerstein, G. L., and West, D . C. (1994) Nature (London)
369, 479–482.
[34] Kirkland, K. L., and Gerstein, G. L. (1998) Vision Res. 38, 2007–2022.
[35] Teich, M. C., Turcott, R. G., and Siegel, R. M. (1996) IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag. 15
(#5), 79–87.
[36] Turcott, R. G., Barker, P. D. R., and Teich, M. C. (1995) J. Statist. Comput. Simul.
52, 253–271.
[37] Teich, M. C. (1989) IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 36, 150–160.
[38] Kelly, O. E., Johnson, D. H., Delgutte, B., and Cariani, P. (1996) J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
99, 2210–2220.
[39] Powers, N. L., Salvi, R. J. (1992) inAbstracts of the Fifteenth Midwinter Research
Meeting of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology ( Lim, D. J., Ed.), abstract
292, p. 101, Association for Research in Otolaryngology, De s Moines, IA.
[40] L¨ auger, P. (1988) Biophys. J. 53, 877–884.
[41] Millhauser, G. L., Salpeter, E. E., and Oswald, R. E. (19 88)Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
(USA) 85, 1503–1507.
[42] Liebovitch, L. S., and T. I. T´ oth (1990) Ann. Biomed. Eng. 18, 177–194.
[43] Lowen, S. B., and Teich, M. C. (1993) inNoise in Physical Systems and 1 /fFluctua-
tions, AIP Conference Proceedings 285(Handel, P. H., and Chung, A. L., Eds.), pp.
745–748, American Institute of Physics, New York.
[44] Lowen, S. B., Cash, S. C., Poo, M.-m., and Teich, M. C. (19 97)J. Neurosci. 17, 5666–
5677.
18[45] Wise, M. E. (1981) inStatistical Distributions in Scientific Work 6(Taillie, C. E. A.,
Ed.), pp. 211–231, Reidel, Boston.
[46] Gr¨ uneis, F., Nakao, M., Mizutani, Y., Yamamoto, M., Me esmann, M., and Musha, T.
(1993) Biol. Cybern. 68, 193–198.
[47] Olshausen, B. A., and Field, D. J. (1996) Network 7, 333–339.
[48] Dan, Y., Atick, J. J., and Reid, R. C. (1996) J. Neurosci. 16, 3351–3362.
8 Table
Moments Fractal Exponents
Stimulus Cell Mean CV αRαSαA
Dark RGC 112 msec 1.54 1.71 1.89 1.96
LGN 152 msec 1.62 1.66 1.75 1.85
Maintained RGC 32 msec 0.52 0.53 0.58 0.99
LGN 284 msec 1.63 0.89 2.01 1.41
Driven RGC 27 msec 1.21 0.79 0.54 0.74
LGN 77 msec 1.15 1.35 2.10 1.76
Neural-discharge statistics for cat retinal ganglion cell s (RGCs) and their associated
lateral geniculate nucleus (LGN) cells, under three stimul us conditions: dark discharge in
the absence of stimulation (data duration L= 4000 sec); maintained discharge in response
to a uniform luminance of 50 cd/m2(data duration L= 7000 sec); and driven discharge in
response to a drifting grating (4.2 Hz frequency, 40% contra st, and 50 cd/m2mean luminance;
data duration L= 7000 sec). All cells are on-center X-type. The maintained a nd driven
data sets were recorded from the same RGC/LGN cell pair, wher eas the dark discharge
derived from a different cell pair. Statistics, from left to r ight, are mean interevent interval,
interevent-interval coefficient of variation (CV = standard deviation divided by mean), and
fractal exponents estimated by least-squares fits on doubly logarithmic plots of 1) the rescaled
range (R/S) statistic for k >1000, which yields an estimate of the Hurst exponent HR,
and of αR, in turn, through the relation αR= 2HR−1; 2) the count-based periodogram
for frequencies between 0.001 and 0.01 Hz which yields αS; and 3) of the Allan factor for
counting times between L/100 and L/10 where Lis the duration of the recording, which
yields αA.
9 Figure Captions
Figure 1 : Rate estimates formed by dividing the number of events in su ccessive counting
windows by the counting time T. The stimulus was a uniformly illuminated screen (with no
temporal or spatial modulation) of luminance 50 cd/m2.A)Rate estimate for a cat RGC
generated using three different counting times ( T= 1, 10, and 100 sec). The fluctuations in
the rate estimates converge relatively slowly as the counti ng time is increased. This is char-
acteristic of fractal-rate processes. The convergence pro perties are quantified by measures
19such as the Allan factor and periodogram. B)Rate estimates from the same recording after
the intervals are randomly reordered (shuffled). This mainta ins the same relative frequency
of interval sizes but destroys the original relative orderi ng of the intervals, and therefore any
correlations or dependencies among them. For such nonfract al signals, the rate estimate
converges more quickly as the counting time Tis increased. The data presented here are
typical of the 50 data sets examined.
Figure 2 : A sequence of action potentials (top) is reduced to a set of e vents (repre-
sented by arrows, middle) that form a point process. A sequen ce of interevent intervals
{τn}is formed from the times between successive events, resulti ng in a discrete-time, pos-
itive, real-valued stochastic process (lower left). All in formation contained in the original
point process remains in this representation, but the discr ete-time axis of the sequence of
interevent intervals is distorted relative to the real-tim e axis of the point process. The se-
quence of counts {Zn}, a discrete-time, nonnegative, integer-valued stochasti c process, is
formed from the point process by recording the numbers of eve nts in successive counting
windows of duration T(lower right). This process of mapping the point process to t he se-
quence {Zn}results in a loss of information, but the amount lost can be ma de arbitrarily
small by reducing T. An advantage of this representation is that no distortion o f the time
axis occurs.
Figure 3 : Statistical measures of the dark discharge from a cat on-ce nter X-type retinal
ganglion cell (RGC) and its associated lateral geniculate n ucleus (LGN) cell, for data of
duration L= 4000 sec. RGC results appear as solid curves, whereas LGN re sults are
dashed. A)Normalized rate function constructed by counting the numbe r of neural spikes
occurring in adjacent 100-sec counting windows, and then di viding by 100 sec and by the
average rate. B)Normalized interevent-interval histogram (IIH) vsnormalized interevent
interval constructed by dividing the interevent intervals for each spike train by the mean, and
then obtaining the histogram. C)Normalized range of sums R(k)vsnumber of interevent
intervals k(see Sec. 3.2.2). D)Periodogram S(f)vsfrequency f(see Sec. 3.3.3). E)Allan
factor A(T)vscounting time T(see Sec. 3.3.2).
Figure 4 : Statistical measures of the maintained discharge from a ca t on-center X-type
RGC and its associated LGN cell, at a steady luminance of 50 cd /m2, for data of duration
L= 7000 sec. This cell pair is different from the one illustrate d in Fig. 3. The results for the
RGC discharge appear as solid curves, whereas those for the L GN are presented as dashed
curves. Panels A)–E) as in Fig. 3.
Figure 5 : Statistical measures of the driven discharge from a cat on- center X-type RGC
and its associated LGN cell, for a drifting-grating stimulu s with mean luminance 50 cd/m2,
4.2 Hz frequency, and 40% contrast, for data of duration L= 7000 sec. This cell pair is
the same as the one illustrated in Fig. 4. The results for the R GC discharge appear as solid
curves, whereas those for the LGN are presented as dashed cur ves. Panels A)–E) as in
Figs. 3 and 4.
Figure 6 : Statistical measures of the maintained discharge from pai rs of cat on-center X-
type RGCs and their associated LGN cells, stimulated by a uni form luminance of 50 cd/m2,
for data of duration L= 7000 sec. RGC and LGN spike trains denoted “1” are those that
have been presented in Figs. 4 and 5, while those denoted “0” a re another simultaneously
recorded pair. A)Normalized rate functions constructed by counting the numb er of neural
spikes occurring in adjacent 100-sec counting windows, and then dividing by 100 sec and
20by the average rate, for RGC 1 and RGC 0. Note that the ordinate scale differs from that
in (A). B)Normalized rate functions for the two corresponding target LGN cells, LGN
1 and LGN 0. C)Normalized wavelet cross-correlation function (NWCCF) be tween the
RGC 1 and LGN 1 recordings (solid curve), shuffled surrogates o f these two data sets (long-
dashed curve), and Poisson surrogates (short-dashed curve ). Unlike the Allan factor A(T),
the normalized wavelet cross-correlation function can ass ume negative values and need not
approach unity in certain limits. Negative normalized wave let cross-correlation function
values for the data or the surrogates are not printed on this d oubly logarithmic plot, nor are
they printed in panel (D). Comparison between the value of th e normalized wavelet cross-
correlation function obtained from the data at a particular counting time Ton the one hand,
and from the surrogates at that time Ton the other hand, indicates the significance of that
particular value. D)Normalized wavelet cross-correlation functions between R GC 1 and
LGN 1 (solid curve, repeated from panel (C), the two RGC spike trains (long-dashed curve),
and the two LGN spike trains (short-dashed curve). Also incl uded is the aggregate behavior
of both types of surrogates for all three combinations of rec ordings listed above (dotted line).
E)Cross periodograms of the data sets displayed in panel (C). F)Cross periodograms of
the data sets displayed in panel (D).
Figure 7 : Statistical measures of the driven discharge from pairs of cat on-center X-
type RGCs and their associated LGN cells, stimulated by a dri fting grating with a mean
luminance of 50 cd/m2, 4.2 Hz frequency, and 40% contrast, for data of duration L= 7000
sec. RGC and LGN spike trains denoted “1” are recorded from th e same cell pair that have
been presented in Figs. 4–6, while those denoted “0” are reco rded simultaneously from the
other cell pair, that was presented in Fig. 6 only. Panels A)–F) as in Fig. 6.
21RA TE FUNCTIONS /nT /= /1 sec
A/) ORIGINAL D A T A/4/0/3/0/2/0
T /= /1 sec
B/) SHUFFLED/4/0/3/0/2/0T /= /1/0 sec
/4/0/3/0/2/0
T /= /1/0 sec
/4/0/3/0/2/0T /= /1/0/0 sec/5/0 /4/0 /3/0 /2/0 /1/0 /0
/4/0/3/0/2/0
T /= /1/0/0 sec/5/0 /4/0 /3/0 /2/0 /1/0 /0
/4/0/3/0/2/0WINDO W NUMBER n /(eac h of duration T sec/)
Lowen, Fig. 1
22Lowen, Fig. 2
23LGN
R GC
A/) NORM/. RA TE FUNCTION /n
/= E/[ / /]WINDO W NUMBER n /( T /= /1/0/0 sec/)
/5/0 /4/0 /3/0 /2/0 /1/0 /0
/3/2/1/0
LGN
R GC
B/) NORMALIZED I IH p /( / /= E/[ / /]/)NORM/. INTEREVENT INTER V AL / /= E/[ / /]
/6 /5 /4 /3 /2 /1 /0
/1/0/1/0/./1/0/./0/1/0/./0/0/1k
/0 /: /5
LGN
R GC
C/) NORM/. RANGE OF SUMS R /( k /)NUMBER OF INTER V ALS k
/1/0/0/0/0/0 /1/0/0/0/0 /1/0/0/0 /1/0/0 /1/0 /1
/1/0/0/0/1/0/0/1/0/1
LGN
R GC
D/) PERIODOGRAM S /( f /)FREQUENCY f /(Hz/)
/1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0/0/0/1/0/0/1/0LGN
R GC
E/) ALLAN F A CTOR A /( T /)COUNTING TIME T /(sec/)
/1/0/0 /1/0 /1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0/0/0/1/0/0/1/0/1/0/./1
Lowen, Fig. 3
24LGN
R GC
A/) NORM/. RA TE FUNCTION /n
/= E/[ / /]WINDO W NUMBER n /( T /= /1/0/0 sec/)
/5/0 /4/0 /3/0 /2/0 /1/0 /0
/3/2/1/0
LGN
R GC
B/) NORMALIZED I IH p /( / /= E/[ / /]/)NORM/. INTEREVENT INTER V AL / /= E/[ / /]
/6 /5 /4 /3 /2 /1 /0
/1/0/1/0/./1/0/./0/1/0/./0/0/1k
/0 /: /5
LGN
R GC
C/) NORM/. RANGE OF SUMS R /( k /)NUMBER OF INTER V ALS k
/1/0/0/0/0/0 /1/0/0/0/0 /1/0/0/0 /1/0/0 /1/0 /1
/1/0/0/0/1/0/0/1/0/1
LGN
R GC
D/) PERIODOGRAM S /( f /)FREQUENCY f /(Hz/)
/1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0/0/0/1/0/0/1/0LGN
R GC
E/) ALLAN F A CTOR A /( T /)COUNTING TIME T /(sec/)
/1/0/0 /1/0 /1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0/0/0/1/0/0/1/0/1/0/./1
Lowen, Fig. 4
25LGN
R GC
A/) NORM/. RA TE FUNCTION /n
/= E/[ / /]WINDO W NUMBER n /( T /= /1/0/0 sec/)
/5/0 /4/0 /3/0 /2/0 /1/0 /0
/3/2/1/0
LGN
R GC
B/) NORMALIZED I IH p /( / /= E/[ / /]/)NORM/. INTEREVENT INTER V AL / /= E/[ / /]
/6 /5 /4 /3 /2 /1 /0
/1/0/1/0/./1/0/./0/1/0/./0/0/1k
/0 /: /5
LGN
R GC
C/) NORM/. RANGE OF SUMS R /( k /)NUMBER OF INTER V ALS k
/1/0/0/0/0/0 /1/0/0/0/0 /1/0/0/0 /1/0/0 /1/0 /1
/1/0/0/0/1/0/0/1/0/1
LGN
R GC
D/) PERIODOGRAM S /( f /)FREQUENCY f /(Hz/)
/1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0/0/0/1/0/0/1/0LGN
R GC
E/) ALLAN F A CTOR A /( T /)COUNTING TIME T /(sec/)
/1/0/0 /1/0 /1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0/0/0/1/0/0/1/0/1/0/./1
Lowen, Fig. 5
26R GC /0
R GC /1
A/) NORM/. R GC RA TE F CN/. /n
/= E/[ / /]WINDO W NUMBER n /( T /= /1/0/0 sec/)
/5/0 /4/0 /3/0 /2/0 /1/0 /0
/1/./1/1/0/./9
LGN /0
LGN /1
B/) NORM/. LGN RA TE F CN/. /n
/= E/[ / /]WINDO W NUMBER n /( T /= /1/0/0 sec/)
/5/0 /4/0 /3/0 /2/0 /1/0 /0
/3/2/1/0POISSON
SHUFFLED
D A T A
C/) NW CCF/: R GC /1 /- LGN /1COUNTING WINDO W T /(sec/)
/1/0/0 /1/0 /1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0
/3/1/0
/1/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /3
SURR OGA TES
LGN /0 /- LGN /1
R GC /0 /- R GC /1
R GC /1 /- LGN /1
D/) NW CCFCOUNTING WINDO W T /(sec/)
/1/0/0 /1/0 /1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0
/3/1/0
/1/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /3POISSON
SHUFFLED
D A T A
E/) CPG/: R GC /1 /- LGN /1FREQUENCY f /(Hz/)
/1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0
/7/1/0
/6/1/0
/5/1/0
/4/1/0
/3
SURR OGA TES
LGN /0 /- LGN /1
R GC /0 /- R GC /1
R GC /1 /- LGN /1
F/) CPGFREQUENCY f /(Hz/)
/1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0
/7/1/0
/6/1/0
/5/1/0
/4/1/0
/3
Lowen, Fig. 6
27R GC /0
R GC /1
A/) NORM/. R GC RA TE F CN/. /n
/= E/[ / /]WINDO W NUMBER n /( T /= /1/0/0 sec/)
/5/0 /4/0 /3/0 /2/0 /1/0 /0
/1/./1/1/0/./9
LGN /0
LGN /1
B/) NORM/. LGN RA TE F CN/. /n
/= E/[ / /]WINDO W NUMBER n /( T /= /1/0/0 sec/)
/5/0 /4/0 /3/0 /2/0 /1/0 /0
/3/2/1/0POISSON
SHUFFLED
D A T A
C/) NW CCF/: R GC /1 /- LGN /1COUNTING WINDO W T /(sec/)
/1/0/0 /1/0 /1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0
/3/1/0
/1/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /3
SURR OGA TES
LGN /0 /- LGN /1
R GC /0 /- R GC /1
R GC /1 /- LGN /1
D/) NW CCFCOUNTING WINDO W T /(sec/)
/1/0/0 /1/0 /1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0
/3/1/0
/1/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /3POISSON
SHUFFLED
D A T A
E/) CPG/: R GC /1 /- LGN /1FREQUENCY f /(Hz/)
/1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0
/7/1/0
/6/1/0
/5/1/0
/4/1/0
/3
SURR OGA TES
LGN /0 /- LGN /1
R GC /0 /- R GC /1
R GC /1 /- LGN /1
F/) CPGFREQUENCY f /(Hz/)
/1 /0/./1 /0/./0/1 /0/./0/0/1
/1/0
/7/1/0
/6/1/0
/5/1/0
/4/1/0
/3
Lowen, Fig. 7
28 |
arXiv:physics/9910026v1 [physics.acc-ph] 18 Oct 1999Quantum-like approach to the transversal
and longitudinal beam dynamics. The halo
problem
Sameen Ahmed KHAN
Dipartimento di Fisica Galileo Galilei Universit` a di Pado va
Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN) Sezione di Pad ova
Via Marzolo 8 Padova 35131 ITALY
E-mail: khan@pd.infn.it, http://www.pd.infn.it/ ∼khan/
Modesto PUSTERLA
Dipartimento di Fisica Galileo Galilei Universit` a di Pado va
Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN) Sezione di Pad ova
Via Marzolo 8 Padova 35131 ITALY
E-mail: pusterla@pd.infn.it, http://www.pd.infn.it/ ∼pusterla/
Abstract
An interpretation of the formation of halo in accelerators b ased on quantum-
like theory by a diffraction model is given in terms of the tran sversal beam
motion. Physical implications of the longitudinal dynamic s are also examined.
Keywords: Beam Physics, Quantum-like, Halo, Beam Losses, Protons, Io ns.
I. INTRODUCTION
Recently the description of the dynamical evolution of high density beams by using the
collective models, has become more and more popular. A way of developing this point of
view is the quantum-like approach [1] where one considers a t ime-dependent Schr¨ odinger
equation, in both the usual linear and the less usual nonline ar form, as a fluid equation
for the whole beam. In this case the squared modulus of the wav e function (named beam
wave function) gives the distribution function of the parti cles in space at a certain time [2].
The Schr¨ odinger equation may be taken in one or more spatial dimensions according to the
particular physical problem; furthermore the motion of the particles in the configuration
space can be considered as a Madelung fluid if one chooses the e quation in its linear version.
Although the validity of the model relies only on experiment s and on the new predictions
which must be verified experimentally, we like to invoke here a theoretical argument that
could justify the Schr¨ odinger quantum-like approach. Let us think of particles in motion
within a bunch in such a way that the single particle moves und er an average force field
1due to the presence of all others and collides with the neighb ouring ones in a complicated
manner. It is obviously impossible to follow and describe al l the forces deterministically. One
then faces a situation where the classical motion determine d by the force-field is perturbed
continuously by a random term, and one finds immediately a con nection with a stochastic
process. If one assumes that the process is Markovian and Bro wnian, one easily arrives at
a modification of the equations of motion in such a manner that would be synthesized by
a linear Schr¨ odinger equation depending on a physical para meter that has the dimension of
action [3,4]. Wave quantum mechanics follows if this parame ter coincides with the Planck’s
constant ¯h, whereas the quantum-like theory of beams is obtained if one chooses it as the
normalized emittance ǫ[1]. In both cases, the evolution of the system is expressed i n terms
of a continuous field ψwhich defines the so-called Madelung fluid. We may notice that the
normalized emittance ǫwith the dimension of an action is the natural choice in the qu antum-
like theory, that finds the analogue in the Planck’s constant ¯hbecause it reproduces the
corresponding area in the phase-space of the particle.
We here point out that, after linearizing the Schr¨ odinger- like equation, for beams in
an accelerator, one can use the whole apparatus of quantum me chanics, keeping in mind
a new interpretation of the basic parameters (for instance t he Planck’s constant ¯ h−→ǫ
whereǫis the normalized beam emittance). In particular one introd uces the propagator
K(xf,tf|xi,ti) of the Feynman theory for both longitudinal and transversa l motion. A
procedure of this sort seems effective for a global descripti on of several phenomena such as
intrabeam scattering, space-charge, particle focusing, t hat cannot be treated easily in detail
by “classical mechanics”. One consequence of this procedur e is to obtain information on
the creation of the Haloaround the main beam line by the losses of particles due to the
transversal collective motion.
II. TRANSVERSAL MOTION
Let us indeed consider the Schr¨ odinger like equation for th e beam wave function
iǫ∂tψ=−ǫ2
2m∂2
xψ+U(x,t)ψ (1)
in the linearized case U(x,t) does not depend on the density |ψ|2.ǫhere is the normalized
transversal beam emittance defined as follows:
ǫ=m0cγβ˜ǫ, (2)
˜ǫbeing the emittance usually considered, (we may also introd uce the analogue of the de
Broglie wavelength as λ=ǫ/p). Let us now focus our attention on the one dimensional
transversal motion along the x-axis of the beam particles belonging to a single bunch and
assume a Gaussian transversal profile for particles injecte d into a circular machine. We want
to try a description of interactions that cannot be treated i n detail, as a diffraction through
a slit that becomes a phenomenological boundary in each segm ent of the particle trajectory.
This condition should be applied to both beam wave function a nd beam propagator K. The
result is a multiple integral that determines the actual pro pagator between the initial and
final states in terms of the space-time intervals due to the in termediate segments.
2K(x+x0,T+τ|x′,0) =/integraldisplay+b
−bK(x+x0,τ|x0+yn,T+ (n−1)τ′)
×K(x+yn,T+ (n−1)τ′|x0+yn−1,T+ (n−2)τ′)
×···K(x+y1,T|x′,0)dy1dy2···dyn (3)
whereτ=nτ′is the total time spent by the beam in the accelerator (total t ime of revolutions
in circular machines), Tis the time necessary to insert the bunch (practically the ti me
between two successive bunches) and ( −b,+b) the space interval defining the boundary
mentioned above. Obviously bandTare phenomenological parameters which vary from a
machine to another and must also have a strict correction wit h the geometry of the vacuum
tube where the particles circulate.
We may consider the two simplest possible approximations fo rK(n|n−1)≡
K(x0+yn,T+ (n−1)τ′|x0+yn−1+ (n−2)τ′):
1. We substitute the correct Kwith the free particle K0assuming that in the τ′interval
(τ′≪τ) the motion is practically a free particle motion between th e boundaries
(−b,+b).
2. We substitute it with the harmonic oscillator Kω(n|n−1) considering the betatron
and the synchrotron oscillations with frequency ω/2π
III. FREE PARTICLE CASE
We may notice that the convolution property (3) of the Feynma n propagator allows us
to substitute the multiple integral (that becomes a functio nal integral for n−→ ∞ and
τ′−→0) with the single integral
K(x+x0,T+τ|x′,0) =/integraldisplay+b
−bdyK(x+x0,T+τ|x0+y,T)K(x0+y,T|x′,0)dy (4)
After introducing the Gaussian slit exp/bracketleftBig
−y2
2b2/bracketrightBig
instead of the segment ( −b,+b) we have
K(x+x0,T+τ|x′,0)
=/integraldisplay+∞
−∞dyexp/bracketleftBigg
−y2
2b2/bracketrightBigg/braceleftBigg2πi¯hτ
m2πi¯hT
m/bracerightBigg−1
2
exp/bracketleftbiggim
2¯hτ(x−y)2/bracketrightbigg
exp/bracketleftbiggim
2¯hT(x0+y−x′)2/bracketrightbigg
=/radicalbiggm
2πi¯h/parenleftBigg
T+τ+Tτi¯h
mb2/parenrightBigg−1
2
exp
im
2¯h/parenleftBigg
v2
0T+x2
τ/parenrightBigg
+/parenleftBig
m2/2¯h2τ2/parenrightBig
(x−v0τ)2
im
¯h/parenleftBig
1
T+1
τ/parenrightBig
−1
b2
(5)
wherev0=x0−x′
Tandx0is the initial central point of the beam at injection and can b e
chosen as the origin ( x0= 0) of the transverse motion of the reference trajectory in t he
frame of the particle. ¯ hmust be interpreted as the normalized beam emittance in
the quantum-like approach .
With an initial Gaussian profile (at t= 0), the beam wave function (normalized to 1) is
f(x) =/braceleftbiggα
π/bracerightbigg1
4exp/bracketleftbigg
−α
2x′2/bracketrightbigg
(6)
3/radicalBig
1
αbeing the r.m.s transversal spot size of the beam; the final be am wave function is:
φ(x) =/integraldisplay+∞
−∞dx′/parenleftbiggα
π/parenrightbigg1
4e[−α
2x′2]K(x,T+τ;x′,0) =Bexp/bracketleftBig
Cx2/bracketrightBig
(7)
with
B=/radicalbiggm
2πi¯h/braceleftBigg
T+τ+Tτi¯h
mb2/bracerightBigg−1
2/braceleftbiggα
π/bracerightbigg1
4/radicaltp/radicalvertex/radicalvertex/radicalvertex/radicalbtπ/parenleftbigg
α
2−im
2¯hT−m2/2¯h2T2
im
¯h(1
T+1
τ)−1
b2/parenrightbigg
C=im
2¯hτ+m2/2¯h2T2
im
¯h/parenleftBig
1
T+1
τ/parenrightBig
−1
b2+τ2
T2/braceleftbigg
m2/2¯h2T2
im
¯h(1
T+1
τ)−1
b2/bracerightbigg2
/parenleftbigg
α
2−im
2¯hT−m2/2¯h2T2
im
¯h(1
T+1
τ)−1
b2/parenrightbigg (8)
The final local distribution of the beam that undergoes the di ffraction is therefore
ρ(x) =|φ(x)|2=BB∗exp/bracketleftBig
−˜αx2/bracketrightBig
(9)
where ˜α=−(C+C∗) and the total probability per particle is given by
P=/integraldisplay+∞
−∞dxρ(x) =BB∗/radicalbiggπ
˜α(10)
Under certain physical conditions (such as the LHC transver sal, Table–I), P≈1√αmb
¯hT.
IV. OSCILLATOR CASE
Similarly we may consider the harmonic oscillator case (bet atronic oscillations and syn-
chrotronic oscillations) to compute the diffraction probab ility of the single particle from the
beam wave function and evaluate the probability of beam loss es per particle. The propagator
Kω(x,T+τ|y,T) in the later case is:
K(x,T+τ|x′,0)
=/integraldisplay+∞
−∞dyexp/bracketleftBigg
−y2
2b2/bracketrightBigg
Kω(x,T+τ|y,T)Kω(y,T|x′,0)
=/integraldisplay+∞
−∞dyexp/bracketleftBigg
−y2
2b2/bracketrightBigg/braceleftBiggmω
2πi¯hsin(ωτ)/bracerightBigg1
2
exp/bracketleftBiggimω
2¯hsin(ωτ)/braceleftBig/parenleftBig
x2+y2/parenrightBig
cosωτ−2xy/bracerightBig/bracketrightBigg
×/braceleftBiggmω
2πi¯hsin(ωT)/bracerightBigg1
2
exp/bracketleftBiggimω
2¯hsin(ωT)/braceleftBig/parenleftBig
y2+x′2/parenrightBig
cosωT−2x′y/bracerightBig/bracketrightBigg
=/braceleftbigg1
2π˜C/bracerightbigg1
2
exp/bracketleftBig˜Ax2+˜Bx′2+˜Cxx′/bracketrightBig
(11)
where
4˜A= imω
2¯hcos (ωτ)
sin (ωτ)−/parenleftbiggmω
2¯h/parenrightbigg21
sin2(ωτ)1
D, ˜B= imω
2¯hcos (ωT)
sin (ωT)−/parenleftbiggmω
2¯h/parenrightbigg21
sin2(ωT)1
D
˜C=−/parenleftbiggmω
2¯h/parenrightbigg22
sin (ωτ) sin (ωT)1
D, D =1
2b2−imω
2¯h/parenleftBiggcos (ωτ)
sin (ωτ)+cos (ωT)
sin (ωT)/parenrightBigg
(12)
φω(x) =/integraldisplay+∞
−∞dx′/parenleftbiggα
π/parenrightbigg1
4exp/bracketleftbigg
−α
2x′2/bracketrightbigg
Kω(x,T+τ;x′,0) =Nexp/bracketleftBig
Mx2/bracketrightBig
(13)
where
N=/parenleftbiggα
π/parenrightbigg1
4
˜C/parenleftBig
α−2˜B/parenrightBig
1
2
, M =˜A+˜C2
2/parenleftBig
α−2˜B/parenrightBig (14)
ρω(x) =|φω(x)|2=N∗Nexp/bracketleftBig
−(M∗+M)x2/bracketrightBig
(15)
Pω=/integraldisplay+∞
−∞dxρ(x) =N∗N/radicalBiggπ
(M∗+M)(16)
Under some physical situations (such as the LHC transversal case) we have, Pω≈
1√αmb
¯hω
sin(ωT). In the approximate formulae for PandPω, when applicable, the parameter τ
does not play a significant role.
V. LONGITUDINAL MOTION
As far as the longitudinal motion is concerned the quantum-l ike approach appears to
be quite appropriate to obtain information on the modified le ngth (and consequently the
stability) of the bunches both in the linear and circular acc elerators.. To be more specific it
describes a large number of important nonlinear phenomena t hat are present in RF particle
accelerators (with residual addition of longitudinal coup ling impedance) as well as in cold
plasmas [8].
We introduce the Gaussian parameter b, as we did with the Gaussian slit e−x2/2b2in the
transversal motion and look for a phenomenological solutio n of the equation for the beam
wave function ψ
iǫN∂tψ=−ǫ2
N
2γ3m0∂2
xψ+1
2m0ω2x2ψ+ Λ|ψ|2(17)
whereωis the synchrotron frequency, Λ represents the coupling wit h non-linear terms and
xis the longitudinal particle displacement with respect to t he synchrotronous one.
The Feynman propagator is given by Eq. (11) and the initial wa ve function can be again
assumed as a Gaussian wave packet. The main difference with th e transversal case stays in
the numerical values of the parameters that exhibit a differe nt physical situation and require
a different physical interpretation.
5VI. PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES
Examples of the numerical calculations for two projects (LH C for ions and HIDIF for
heavy ions) with very different physical characteristics ar e reproduced in the following tables.
TABLE-I: Circular Machines: Transversal Case
Parameters LHC (at injection) HIDIF (storage ring)
Normalized Transverse Emittance 3 .75 mm mrad 13 .5 mm mrad
Total Energy, E 450 GeV 5 Gev
1√α1.2 mm 1 .0 mm
T 25 nano sec. 100 nano sec.
τ 88 sec. 4 .66 sec.
b 1.2 mm 1 .0 mm
1√
˜α1.41×109m 1 .96×107m
P 3.39×10−52.37×10−3
ω 4.44×106Hz 1 .15×107Hz
1√˜αω1.03×102m 2 .07×10−1m
Pω 3.40×10−53.00×10−3
TABLE-II: Circular Machines: Longitudinal Case
Parameters LHC (at injection)
Normalized Longitudinal Emittance 1 .00 eV sec.
Total Energy, E 450 GeV
1√α7.7 cm
T 25 nano sec.
τ 88 sec.
b 7.7 m
ω 4.23×102Hz
1√˜αω1.14×106m
Pω 0.575
TABLE-III: RF Main LINAC of HIDIF
Parameters
Normalized Longitudinal Emittance 0 .7 keV nano sec.
Total Final Energy, E 5 Gev
1√α15 cm
T 75 micro sec.
τ 4.9×10−4sec.
b 15 m
ω 4.13×105Hz
1√˜αω6.72×10−2m
Pω 0.707
6The machine parameters of tables I, II and III are derived fro m [6], [7]. In particular ωof
Table-III is calculated on the basis of the “Main LINAC” Tabl e (page 198 of [7]) with the
standard formula:
ω2=−eEω RFsin (φs)
mβ3c3(18)
where the symbols have the usual meaning.
VII. COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS
Transversal Motion : This use of a quantum-like approach appears a simple powerf ul tool
for the analysis of the evolution of a beam in linear and circu lar accelerators and storage
rings.
Indeed the introduction of a very limited number of phenomen ological parameters (in
our simplified model the only parameter b) in the beam quantum-like equations and the use
of the Schr¨ odinger-type solutions allow us to calculate ho w the bunches evolve and modify
owing to the forces (linear and non-linear) acting on the par ticles.
As far as the betatronic oscillations are concerned the mech anism of the diffraction
through a slit appears a very adequate phenomenological app roach. Indeed we can interpret
the probability (local and total) for a particle leaving its position as the mechanism of
creating a haloaround the main flux.
The values of τ,ωare strictly connected with the characteristic parameters of the designs
of the accelerators (in our example LHC and HIDIF)
The phenomenological parameter brepresents several fundamental processes that are
present in the beam bunches (and play a determinant role in th e creation of the halo) such
as intrabeam scattering, beamstrahlung, space-charge and imperfections in the magnets of
the lattice that could cause non-linear perturbative effect s.
We like to recall here the analogy with the diffraction throug h a slit in optics where it
represents a much more complicated physical phenomenon bas ed on the scattering of light
against atomic electrons.
τis the total time spent in the accelerator by a single bunch, Tmay coincide with
the average time interval between two successive injection s andωis the betatronic average
frequency given by 2 πQf r,frbeing the revolution frequency.
The fact that a small number of parameters can take into accou nt many physical processes
is a very nice feature of the quantum-like diffraction approa ch. However the deep connection
between this method and the actual physical process as well a s the nonlinear dynamical
classical theory is necessary to be understood.
We remark now the following points
1. The total probability (per particle) calculated from the free particle propagator ( P)
and from the harmonic oscillator one ( Pω) appear very near for the two different
circular systems, LHC and HIDIF.
2. The local distribution between the two however looks quit e different for the free and
harmonic oscillator case, thus giving us a profile of the halo which appears particularly
interesting in the HIDIF case (final Gaussian width ∼1√
˜α∼2.07×10−1m)
73. The HIDIF scenario, as we expect because of the higher inte nsity, exhibits a total
loss of particles (and beam power) which is at least 103times higher than LHC. The
picture we have obtained for the transversal motion in the tw o analyzed examples (on
the basis of the parameters provided by the latest designs) i s encouraging because the
halo losses are under control. In both cases the estimated lo sses of the beam power
appear much smaller than the permissible 1 Watt/m.
Longitudinal motion The formulae (7) and (13) can be used for calculating the moti on
of the length of the bunch related to the synchrotron oscilla tions in both linear and circular
machines. In this case we must consider only the propagator o f the harmonic oscillator
which is the simplest linear version of the classical dynami cal motion for the two canonical
conjugate variables that express the deviations of an arbit rary particle from the synchronous
one namely the RF phase difference ∆ φ=φ−φsand the energy difference ∆ E=E−Es.
Our examples are again the LHC synchrotron oscillations and the ones of the main LINAC
in the HIDIF project. The phenomenological Gaussian functi one−x2/2b2acquires a different
meaning from the one it had in the transversal motion. Our ana lysis deals with a Gaussian
longitudinal profile and predicts a coasting beam in LHC and a quite stable bunch in the
main LINAC of HIDIF.
We may therefore conclude that our approach although prelim inary is interesting and
particular attention is required in treating the longitudi nal motion where the nonlinear
space-charge forces are very important. So the quantum-lik e method appears promising for
the future simulations in beam physics.
8REFERENCES
[1] See R. Fedele and G. Miele, Il Nuovo Cimento D13, 1527 (1991); R. Fedele, F. Gal-
lucio, V. I. Man’ko and G. Miele, Phys. Lett. A209, 263 (1995); Ed. R. Fedele and
P.K. Shukla Quantum-Like Models and Coherent Effects , Proc. of the 27th Workshop of
the INFN Eloisatron Project Erice, Italy 13-20 June 1994 (Wo rld Scientific, 1995); R.
Fedele, “Quantum-like aspects of particle beam dynamics”, in:Proceedings of the 15th
Advanced ICFA Beam Dynamics Workshop on Quantum Aspects of b eam Physics ,Ed.
P. Chen, (World Scientific, Singapore, 1999).
See also: N. C. Petroni, S. De Martino, S. De Siena, and F. Illu minati, A stochastic
model for the semiclassical collective dynamics of charged beams in particle accelerators,
in:Proceedings of the 15th Advanced ICFA Beam Dynamics Worksho p on Quantum
Aspects of beam Physics ,Ed.P. Chen, (World Scientific, Singapore, 1999).
[2] Sameen A. Khan and Modesto Pusterla,
Quantum mechanical aspects of the halo puzzle ,
in: Proceedings of the 1999 Particle Accelerator Conference PAC99
(29 March - 02 April 1999, New York City, NY) Editors A. Luccio and W. MacKay,
(IEEE Catalogue Number: 99CH36366) pp. 3280-3281
physics/9904064.
Sameen A. Khan and Modesto Pusterla,
Quantum-like approaches to the beam halo problem ,
To appear in : Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Squeezed States and
Uncertainty Relations ICSSUR’99 , (24 - 29 May 1999, Napoli, Italy) (NASA Conference
Publication Series).
physics/9905034.
[3] E. Nelson, Phys. Rev. 501079 (1966); Dynamical theories of Brownian motion (Prince ton
University Press, Princeton 1967)
[4] Francesco Guerra, Phys. Rep. 77263-312 (1981).
[5] Formulae (3-33) inR. P. Feynman and A. R. Hibbs, Quantum Mechanics and Path
Integrals, (McGraw-Hill, New York).
[6]Ed.P. Lef` evre and T. Pettersson, Large Hadron Collider (LHC) C onceptual Design
CERN/AC/95-05(LHC) (October 1995).
[7]Ed.I. Hofmann and G. Plass, Heavy Ion Driven Inertial Fusion (HI DIF) Study GSI-98-06
Report (August 1998).
[8] R. Fedele and V. G. Vaccaro, Physica Scripta T5236-39 (1994).
9 |
1 An Open Letter to NASA Scientists Concerning
"The Apparent Anomalous, Weak, Long-Range
Accelerati on of [the spacecraft] Pioneer 10 and 11"
A weak long-range acceleration towards the Sun has been observed in the Pioneer 10 and 11
satellites for which no satisfactory explanation has been obtained in spite of diligent efforts by a numberof parties over an extended period of time.
[1] , [2]
An analytical explanation that correlates precisely with the observed data [unlike the numerous
failed explanations so far offered] has been proposed [by direct personal e-mail, by procedurally correcttechnical paper submissions, and by e-print publication] to the involved NASA scientists, to the principalphysics journals of the world, and to the physics community in general.
[3]
That offered solution has been consistently rejected / neglected out-of-hand. Not one scientist has
actually logically examined the hypothesis. A quite simple and direct pair of experiments that wouldvalidate or invalidate the hypothesis have been proposed without the slightest responsive interest.
[4] Why
is that so ?
Quoting [2], which quotes Dr. N... of NASA "'Either gravity is different than we think it is or time
is messed up somehow.' Those prospects are exactly what the physics community is resisting." Theresemblance of the "physics community ... resisting" to the Church suppression of Galileo is notcoincidental.
Dr. N...'s comment about "gravity is different than we think it is" is also rather strange in that the
physics community still has not the least idea of how and why gravity operates -- so much so that theprincipal authority for the values of the fundamental constants, CODATA
[5], is unable to include the
universal gravitation constant, G, in the least squares adjustment of the other fundamental constants
because the physics community does not know how gravitation relates to the rest of physics.
How long can rational, truth-seeking scientists ignore an explanation that validly resolves the
"mystery" and opens up a vastness of opportunity for advance in physics understanding ?Roger EllmanThe-Origin Foundation, Inc.PO Box 34933, Bethesda, MD 20827-0933RogerEllman@The-Origin.org[1] J. D. Anderson, P. A. Laing, E. L. Lau, A. S. Liu, M. M. Nieto, and S. G. Turyshev, Indication, from
Pioneer 10/11, Galileo, and Ulysses Data, of an Apparent Anomalous, Weak, Long-RangeAcceleration , Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 2858 (1998), gr-qc/9808081, and by the same authors, The
Apparent Anomalous, Weak, Long-Range Acceleration of Pioneer 10 and 11 , gr-qc/9903024.
[2] Newsweek magazine, October 4, 1999, "A Space Mystery", pp. 60-61.
[3] R. Ellman, Exponential Decay of the Overall Universe is the Cause of "The Apparent Anomalous,
Weak, Long-Range Acceleration of [the spacecraft] Pioneer 10 and 11" , American Physical Society
aps1999jun16_003 and xxx.lanl.gov physics/9906031.
[4] R. Ellman, The Origin and Its Meaning , The-Origin Foundation, Inc, 1997, Section 21, pp. 465-471
and A Conjecture Concerning Red Shifts , American Physical Society aps1998aug08_002 and
xxx.lanl.gov physics/9808051.
[5] International Council of Scientific Unions, CODATA, Committee on Data for Science and
Technology, the CODATA Task Group on Fundamental Constants. |
arXiv:physics/9910028v1 [physics.atom-ph] 19 Oct 1999The use of relativistic action in strong-field nonlinear pho toionization
J. Ortnera)and V. M. Rylyukb)
a)Institut f¨ ur Physik,Humboldt Universit¨ at zu Berlin, Inv alidenstr. 110, 10115 Berlin, Germany
b)Department of Theoretical Physics, University of Odessa, D vorjanskaja 2, 270100, Odessa, Ukraine
(submitted to Phys. Rev. A)
Nonlinear relativistic ionization phenomena induced by a s trong linearly polarized laser field
are considered. The starting point is the classical relativ istic action for a free electron moving in
the electromagnetic field created by a strong laser beam. Thi s action has been used to calculate
semiclassical transition rates. Simple analytical expres sions for the ionization rate, the photoelectron
emission velocity and for the drift momentum distribution o f the photoelectron have been found.
The analytical formulas apply to nonrelativistic bound sys tems as well as to initial states with an
energy corresponding to the upper boundary of the lower cont inuum and to the tunnel as well as the
multiphoton regime. In the case of a nonrelativistic bound s ystem we recover the Keldysh formula
for the ionization rate. Relativistic effects in the initial state lead to a weak enhancement of the
rate of sub-barrier ionization and to the appearance of a non zero photoelectron leaving velocity.
PACS numbers:32.80.Rm, 32.90.+a, 42.50.Hz, 03.30.+p
I. INTRODUCTION
Relativistic ionization phenomena induced by strong laser light has become a topic of current interest [1–7]. In the
nonrelativistic theory it is assumed that the electron velo city in the initial bound state as well as in the final state is
small compared with the speed of light. However, the electro ns may be accelerated up to relativistic velocities in an
intense electromagnetic field produced by modern laser devi ces. If the ponderomotive energy of the electron is of the
order of the rest energy a relativistic consideration is req uired. Relativistic effects in the final states become import ant
for an infrared laser at intensities of some 1016W cm−2. The minimal intensity required for relativistic effects in creases
by two orders of magnitude for wavelength corresponding to v isible light. The main relativistic effects in the final
state are [1,4–7]: (i) the relativistic energy distributio n and (ii) the shift of the angular distribution of the emitte d
electrons towards the direction of propagation of incident laser beam. Relativistic effects have also to be taken into
account if the binding energy Ebin the initial state is comparable with the electron rest ene rgy [2]. A relativistic
formulation is necessary for the ionization of heavy atoms o r singly or multiply charged ions from the inner shells.
This paper is aimed to consider the relativistic effects conn ected with relativistic final states velocities and/or low
lying initial states from a unique point of view.
Let us start with the classical relativistic action for an el ectron of charge emoving in the field of an electromagnetic
plane wave with the vector potential A(t−x/c). Here and below Adenotes a two-dimensional vector in the y-z plane.
The action may be found as a solution of the Hamilton-Jacobi e quation and reads [8]
Sf(ξ;ξ0) =mc2/braceleftBigg
f·r
c−αx
c−1 +α2+f2
2α(ξ−ξ0) +e
mc2αf/integraldisplayξ
ξ0Adξ−e2
2m2c4α/integraldisplayξ
ξ0A2dξ/bracerightBigg
, (1)
where αandf= (a1, a2) are constants, r= (y, z); further is ξ=t−x/c,ξ0is the initial value. By applying the usual
Hamilton-Jacobi method we take the derivative of the action Sfwith respect to the constants a1, a2andαand set
the result equal to new constants β1, β2andβ3in order to obtain the electron trajectory under the influenc e of the
wave field. Assuming a harmonic plane wave of linear polariza tion with the electric field E=Feycosωξwe obtain
that the electron motion in the field and in the laboratory coo rdinate system is given by
α2(t+x/c)−β2ξ+2ǫ
ωa1cosωξ+1
4ωǫ2sin 2ωξ=β3, v x=cf(ξ)−1
f(ξ) + 1,
y=β1+ca1
αξ−cǫ
αωcosωξ , v y=2c
α(1 +f(ξ)){a1+ǫsinωξ},
z=β2+ca2
αξ , v z=2c
α(1 +f(ξ))a2,
f(ξ) =δ2
α2+2ǫ
α2a1sinωξ+1
α2ǫ2sin2ωξ, (2)
1where β1, β2andβ3together with a1, a2andαhave to be determined from the initial conditions for positi on and
velocity. Further we have introduced the notations β2= 1 + a2
1+a2
2+ǫ2/2,δ2= 1 + a2
1+a2
2and the parameter
ǫ=eF/ωmc characterizing the strength of relativistic effects.
Consider now the process of nonlinear ionization of a strong ly bound electron with a binding energy Ebcomparable
with the rest energy. Recently the ionization process in sta tic crossed electric and magnetic fields has been considered
[2,3]. The results of this paper may be applied to the ionizat ion in laser fields only for the case of very strong fields
ǫ≫1. With an increasing frequency of the laser light (especial ly for a tentative x-ray laser) very high laser intensities
are required to satisfy this condition. Therefore it is nece ssary to generalize the result of [2,3] to the case of nonzero
frequencies. We consider the sub-barrier ionization. The c ondition to be satisfied is the opposite to the case of pure
classical ionization, F≪FB, in addition we have the quasiclassical condition ¯ hω≪Eb. No restrictions are applied
to the parameter ǫ. Thus we will cover both the regime of relativistic tunnel an d multiphoton ionization.
We employ the relativistic version of the Landau-Dykhne for mula [2,4]. The ionization probability in quasiclassical
approximation and with exponential accuracy reads
W∝exp/braceleftbigg
−2
¯hIm (Sf(0;t0) +Si(t0))/bracerightbigg
, (3)
where Si=E0t0is the initial part of the action, Sfis given by Eq. (1). The complex initial time t0has to be
determined from the classical turning point in the complex h alf-plane [2,4]:
Ef(t0) =mc2/braceleftBigg
1 +α2+f2
2α−e
mc2αfA(t0)+e2
2m2c4αA2(t0)/bracerightBigg
=E0=mc2−Eb. (4)
The minimization of the imaginary part of the action leads to the following boundary conditions [11]
(x,r)(t0) = 0,Im (x,r)(t= 0) = 0 . (5)
In order to obtain simple analytical results we consider the case of linearly polarized laser light. Then by minimizing
the action we obtain from Eqs. (4) and (5) that f= 0. Further we obtain a system of nonlinear equations for the
determination of complex initial time t0and constant α,
t0=iτ0=−i
ωarsinh/parenleftBig
η/radicalbig
1 +α2−2αε0/parenrightBig
,
α2= 1 +1
2η2/bracketleftBigg
1−η√1 +α2−2αε0
arsinh/parenleftbig
η√
1 +α2−2αε0/parenrightbig/radicalbig
1 +η2(1 +α2−2αε0)/bracketrightBigg
, (6)
with the dimensionless initial energy εo=E0/mc2and the relativistic adiabatic parameter η=ǫ−1=ωmc/eF .
Substituting the values t0andαinto the final state action we obtain the probability of relat ivistic quasiclassical
ionization in the field of linearly polarized laser light. Wi thin exponential accuracy we get
W∝exp/braceleftBigg
−2Eb
¯hω/bracketleftbigg/parenleftbigg
1 +1
2γ2α+mc2
Eb(1−α)2
2α/parenrightbigg
arsinh γ(α)−1
2γ2αγ(α)/radicalbig
1 +γ2(α)/bracketrightbigg/bracerightBigg
(7)
where αhas to be taken as the solution of Eqs. (6). Further γ=√2mEbω/eF is the common adiabatic Keldysh
parameter from nonrelativistic theory [4] and γ(α) =η√1 +α2−2αε0is anα-depending adiabatic parameter. Equa-
tion (7) is the most general expression for the relativistic ionization rate in the quasiclassical regime and for field
strength smaller than the above-barrier threshold. It desc ribes both the tunnel as well as the multiphoton ionization.
It is the relativistic generalization of the famous Keldysh result [12].
Consider now some limiting cases. In the limit of tunnel ioni zation η≪1 we reproduce the static result of Refs.
[2,3] and obtain the first frequency correction
W∝exp/braceleftbigg
−FS
FΦ/bracerightbigg
,
Φ =2√
3(1−α2
0)3/2
α0−3√
3(1−α2
0)5/2
5α0η2+O(η4), (8)
where Fs=m2c3/e¯h= 1.32·1016V/cm is the Schwinger field of quantum electrodynamics [13] and α0= (ε0+/radicalbig
ε2
0+ 8)/4. In the nonrelativistic regime, εb=Eb/mc2≪1, the parameter α0= 1−εb/3+ε2
b/27 and the probability
of nonrelativistic tunnel ionization including the first re lativistic and frequency corrections reads
2W∝exp/braceleftBigg
−4
3√
2mE3/2
b
e¯hF/bracketleftbigg
1−γ2
10−Eb
12mc2/parenleftbigg
1−13
30γ2/parenrightbigg/bracketrightbigg/bracerightBigg
. (9)
Here the first two terms in the brackets describe the familiar nonrelativistic ionization rate including the first freque ncy
correction [4], the next two terms are the first relativistic corrections. It follows from Eq.(8) that the account of
relativistic effects increases the ionization rate in compa rison with the nonrelativistic rate. However, even for bind ing
energies of the order of the electron rest energy the relativ istic correction in the exponent is quite small. In the
“vacuum” limit Eq. (9) results into W∝exp{−9FS/2F(1−9/40η2)}. We find a maximal deviation of about 18%
in the argument of the exponential from the Keldysh formula. Here the “vacuum” limit shall not be confused with
the pair creation from the vacuum. It is known that there a no n onlinear vacuum phenomena for a plane wave [13].
In contrast to that we deal here with the ionization of an atom being in rest in the laboratory system of coordinates.
We also mention that we employ the single particle picture. T herefore the pair production processes are beyond the
scope of the present paper.
Consider now the multiphoton limit η≫1. In this case the parameter α= 1−εb/2 ln2γand the ionization
probability in the relativistic multiphoton limit reads
W∝exp/braceleftBigg
−2Eb
¯hω/bracketleftbigg
ln 2γ−1
2−Eb
8mc2ln 2γ/bracketrightbigg/bracerightBigg
. (10)
Again the first two terms in the brackets reflect the nonrelati vistic result [12], the relativistic effects which lead to an
enhancement of the ionization probability are condensed in the third term.
It has been shown that there is an enhancement of ionization r ate in the relativistic theory for both large and small
η. This should be compared with the results found by Crawford a nd Reiss. In their numerical calculations they also
found an enhancement of relativistic ionization rate for a c ircularly polarized field and for η≫1, but for η≪1
their results suggest a strong reduction of the ionization p robability [1]. For the case of linearly polarized light the
ionization rate is found to be reduced by relativistic effect s [6]. However, Crawford and Reiss studied the above-barrie r
ionization of hydrogen atom within the strong-field approxi mation. In contrast to that we have investigated the sub-
barrier ionization from a strongly bound electron level, wh ich yields an enhancement of the ionization rate. This
enhancement is connected with a smaller initial time t0. As a result the under barrier complex trajectory becomes
shorter and the ionization rate increases in comparison wit h the nonrelativistic theory. Figure 1 shows the relativist ic
ionization rate Eq. (7) and the nonrelativistic Keldysh for mula as a function of the binding energy eb. The figure
should be considered only as an illustration of the enhancem ent effect. The frequency and intensity parameters used
for the calculations are still not available for the experim entalists.
The switch from the multiphoton to the tunnel regime with inc reasing field strength may be studied in the nonrel-
ativistic limit εb≪1. Here within first order of εb, with α= 1−(εb/2γ2)[(γ/arsinh γ)/radicalbig
1 +γ2−1], the ionization
probability is found to be
W∝exp/braceleftBigg
−2Eb
¯hωf(γ)/bracerightBigg
,
f(γ) = arsinh γ+1
2γ2/bracketleftBig
arsinh γ−γ/radicalbig
1 +γ2/bracketrightBig
−εbγ4+γ2−2γ/radicalbig
1 +γ2arsinh γ+ arsinh2γ
8γ4arsinh γ. (11)
The terms in f(γ) which do not vanish as εb→0 represent the nonrelativistic quasiclassical ionizatio n rate found by
Keldysh [12]; the terms proportional to εbare the first relativistic correction to the Keldysh formula . Equation (11)
is valid in the whole γ-domain, i.e., in the multiphoton regime γ <1 as well as in the tunnel limit γ >1. For small
adiabatic parameters, i.e., γ→0, it coincides with Eq. (9); in the case of large γ→ ∞ it transforms to Eq.(10). We
mention that Eq. (11) reproduces the full relativistic form ula Eq. (7) with very high accuracy for Eb< mc2.
Consider now the modifications of the energy spectrum induce d by relativistic effects. In the nonrelativistic theory
and in the case of linear polarization the most probable valu e for the electron momentum at the time of emission,
t= 0, is zero. The electrons are preferably emitted in the dire ction of the polarization of the laser beam. In the
relativistic theory employed in this paper we may set the con stants a1=a2= 0 in Eqs. (2). Then we obtain for the
most probable emission velocity in the laboratory system of coordinates
vx=c1−α2
1 +α2, vy=vz= 0, (12)
where αhas to be taken as the solution of the second equation of Eqs. ( 6). In the static limit ω→0 we reproduce the
results of Mur et al.[3]. It follows from these equations that a strongly bounded electron is emitted in the direction of
3the laser beam propagation, i.e., perpendicular to the dire ction of the laser beam polarization. For a nonrelativistic
initial state, εb≪1, the mean emission velocity along the beam propagation vx=c eb/3 is small. Nevertheless,
the mean emission velocity seems to be the most sensitive mea sure of the appearance of relativistic effects in the
initial states. In Fig. 2 the x-component of the leaving velocity is plotted versus the bin ding energy of the initial
state. Though we have choosen the same parameters of the lase r beam as in Fig. 1 it should be mentioned that
the dependence of the emission velocity x-component on the laser parameters is rather weak. The main p arameter
determining the leaving velocity along the propagation of t he laser beam is the binding energy of the atom.
The electron energy spectrum is also influenced by relativis tic final states effects. We put a1=py,0/mc,a2=pz,0/mc
andα= (−px,0+/radicalBig
1 +p2
x,0+p2
y,0+p2
z,0)/mc. The calculations will be restricted to the tunnel regime γ≪1.
Assuming weak relativistic effects in the initial and final st ates,εb≪1 and py,0, pz,0≪mcone obtains
Wp=Wexp/bracketleftBigg
−(px,0−< px,0>)2
mγ
¯hω−p2
z,0
mγ
¯hω/bracketrightBigg
exp/bracketleftBigg
−p2
y,0
3mγ3
¯hω−p4
y,0
4m3c2γ
¯hω/bracketrightBigg
, (13)
where Wis the total ionization rate Eq. (9) in the weak relativistic tunnel regime. The first exponent in Eq.(13)
describes the momentum distribution in the plane perpendic ular to the polarization axis. There is only one relativisti c
effect in the weak relativistic regime considered here - the a ppearance of the mean momentum at the emission time
< px,0>=Eb/3c. The nonzero mean emission velocity along the propagation v ector destroys the symmetry in the
(x,z)-plane that exists in non-relativistic theory. The fir st term in the second exponent of Eq.(13) determines the
nonrelativistic energy spectrum for the low energetic elec trons moving along the polarization axis p2
y,0<4γ2m2c2/3,
whereas the second, relativistic term becomes important fo r the high energy tail p2
y,0>4γ2m2c2/3. It is only in the
case of small adiabatic parameter γ≤0.1, that the high energy condition does not contradict the con dition py,0< mc.
We mention that the second term in the second exponent agrees with a corresponding term of Krainov [5,4].
In conclusion, the expressions obtained in this paper withi n exponential accuracy may be improved by taking into
account the Coulomb interaction through the perturbation t heory. The results of this paper may be also used in
nuclear physics and quantum chromodynamics.
This research was partially supported by the Deutsche Forsc hungsgemeinschaft (Germany).
[1] D. P. Crawford and H. R. Reiss, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1844 (1994).
[2] V. S. Popov, V. D. Mur and B. M. Karnakov, Pis’ma Zh. Eksp. T eor. Fiz. 66, 213 (1997) [JETP Lett. (USA), 66229
(1997)].
[3] V. D. Mur, B. M. Karnakov and V. S. Popov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fi z.114, 798 (1998) [J. Exp. Theor. Phys. 87, 433 (1998)].
[4] N. B. Delone and V. P. Krainov, Uzp. Fiz. Nauk 168, 531 (1998).
[5] V. P. Krainov, Opt. Express 2, 268 (1998).
[6] D. P. Crawford and H. R. Reiss, Opt. Express 2, 289 (1998).
[7] V. P. Krainov, J. Phys. B 32, 1607 (1999).
[8] L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, The classical theory of fields (Pergamon, Oxford, 1977).
[9] V. B. Beresteskii, E. M. Lifshitz and L. P. Pitaevskii, Relativistic quantum theory (Pergamon, Oxford, 1958).
[10] P. B. Corkum, N. H. Burnett, and F. Brunel, in Atoms in Intense Laser Fields , edited by M. Gavrila (Academic Press,
New York, 1992), p. 109.
[11] V. S. Popov, V. P. Kuznezov and A. M. Perelomov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 53, 331 (1967).
[12] L. V. Keldysh, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 47, 1945 (1964) [Sov. Phys. JETP 20, 1307 (1965)].
[13] J. Schwinger, Phys. Rev. 82, 664 (1951).
4FIGURE CAPTIONS
(Figure 1) Absolute value of the logarithm of the ionization rate −lnWversus the binding energy of initial level
eb=Eb/mc2. The solid line shows the relativistic rate Eq.(7), the dash ed line is the nonrelativistic Keldysh
formula (Eq. (11) without the relativistic correction term ). The curves are shown for a frequency ω= 100 and
an intensity I= 8.5·107(in a.u.).
(Figure 2) Thex-component of the emission velocity vx/cversus the binding energy of initial level eb=Eb/mc2.
The emission velocity in the nonrelativistic theory is zero . The curve is shown for a frequency ω= 100 and an
intensity I= 8.5·107(in a.u.).
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
eb0.0200.0400.0600.0800.01000.0− ln W
FIG. 1.
50.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00
E b /mc 20.000.200.400.600.80v x /c
FIG. 2.
6 |
arXiv:physics/9910029v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 19 Oct 1999Parametric Excitation of Alfv´ en Waves by Gravitational Ra diation
M. Servin, G.Brodin and M. Bradley
Department of Plasma Physics, Ume˚ a University, S-901 87 Um e˚ a, Sweden
We consider the parametric excitation of Alfv´ en waves by gr avitational radiation propagating on
a Minkowski background, parallel to an external magnetic fie ld. As a starting point, standard
ideal MHD equations incorporating the curvature of space ti me has been derived. The growth
rate of the Alfv´ en waves has been calculated, using the norm al mode approach. It turns out that
generally the coupling coefficients of the wave modes does not satisfy the Manley-Rowe relations.
As a consequence, we may have a positive growth rate even if on e of the decay waves have a higher
frequency than the gravitational pump wave. Finally we disc uss various astrophysical applications
of our investigation.
I. INTRODUCTION
Interaction of electromagnetic fields with gravitational
radiation has been studied by several authors [1-19]. Be-
sides a purely theoretical interest in such phenomena,
there is a number of different applications. For example
in astrophysics [1-5], in cosmology [6] and under labora-
tory conditions [7-10], where - in the later case - the goal
is to find suitable mechanisms to detect gravitational ra-
diation. Furthermore, there are many examples of gravi-
tational wave interaction that may take place in plasmas.
This has been studied during the eighties by a group at
the Kazan School of gravitation (see for example [1,10,11]
and references therein) and more recently by Refs. 4, 12,
13 and 14.
In Ref. 12 it was shown that parametric excitation of
high frequency plasma waves by gravitational radiation
may take place. Due to the frequency matching condi-
tions, however, the plasma must be very thin for that pro-
cess to be possible, and the amount of energy transfer is
therefore limited. In the present paper we will thus con-
sider parametric excitation of low frequency MHD waves
by gravitational waves, which - in contrast - may take
place in a comparatively dense plasma. The relevance of
this problem for the conversion of gravitational wave en-
ergy to the plasma inside supernovas has previously been
discussed by Ref. 14. However, due to the complexity of
the physical situation, a highly idealized model will be
studied, where a one dimensional monochromatic gravi-
tational wave - superimposed on a flat background met-
ric - propagates through a homogeneous two component
plasma.
The organization of the paper is as follows: In section
II idealized MHD-equations incorporating the effects of
the gravitational wave are derived, starting from covari-
ant two fluid equations. In section III parametric exci-
tation of shear Alfv´ en and magnetosonic waves are con-
sidered, the three wave coupling coefficients are derived
and the growth rate is found. By adding a phenomeno-
logical resistivity to the equations, the threshold value o f
the gravitational amplitude is also calculated. Finally,in section IV, our results are summarized and theoretical
considerations like the (non-) fulfillment of Manley-Rowe
relations as well as possible applications are discussed.
II. RELATIVISTIC MHD-EQUATIONS
In order to obtain general relativistic fluid equations
governing a plasma we begin by considering a system con-
sisting of a charged perfect fluid and an electromagnetic
field [20]. Introducing the restframe scalar quantities:
mass density (or rather energy density times 1 /c2)ρ(m),
charge density ρ(q), pressure pand the 4-velocity field
(or fluid velocity) uµ≡dxµ/dτand 4-current density
jµ≡ρ(q)uµ, where τis the proper time and xµcoor-
dinates in the lab frame, this system is characterized by
having the energy-momentum tensor Tµν=Tµν
(fl)+Tµν
(em),
where
Tµν
(fl)≡/parenleftig
ρ(m)+p
c2/parenrightig
uµuν−pgµν
Tµν
(em)≡1
µ0/parenleftbigg
FµτFν
τ−1
4gµνFτσFστ/parenrightbigg
and where Fµνis the electromagnetic field tensor satis-
fying Maxwell’s equations
Fµν
;ν=−µ0jµ(1)
Fµν;σ+Fνσ;µ+Fσµ;ν= 0 (2)
We have adopted the convention that Greek suffixes
µ, ν, .. have the range 0 ,1,2,3 and i, j, .. have the range
1,2,3 and metric tensor gµνhas the signature (+ - - - ).
The conservation laws of the system follows from that
the 4-divergence of the energy-momentum tensor van-
ishes, i.e. Tµν
;µ= 0, and with the use of Maxwell’s equa-
tions one gets
(ρ(m)uµ);µ+p
c2uµ
;µ= 0 (3)
(ρ(m)+p
c2)uµuν
;µ= (gµν−1
c2uµuν)p,µ+Fν
µjµ(4)
1where eq.(3) is obtained by projection along the 4-
velocity uµ. This equation is identified as energy balance
in the rest-frame of matter and gives the equation of con-
tinuity (mass conservation) in the non relativistic limit.
Equation (4) gives for ν= 0 the energy balance (modulo
the content of (3), i.e., energy balance in the non rela-
tivistic limit) and for ν= 1,2,3 momentum balance.
Under the conditions of low internal energy the fluid
description of a plasma can be simplified by putting, for
each particle species of the plasma, ρ(m)=mnwhere nis
the restframe particle density and mis the particle mass.
Also without these restrictions we may put ρ(q)=qn
where qis the particle charge. Suppose we have a plasma
consisting of two species of particles oppositely charged
(i.e.q1/q2=−1), but, in general, with distinct masses.
For each species we assign a fluid satisfying the equations
(3) and (4). The fluids are assumed interpenetrating and
interacting through the electromagnetic field and, in gen-
eral, the gravitational field. We neglect the effect of par-
ticle collisions. If we assume non-relativistic pressure, i.e.
such that mn≫p/c2, and non-relativistic fluid veloci-
ties - in the sense that we may neglect quadratic terms
in 1/cin the ν∝ne}ationslash= 0 components of eq.(4) - then we have,
for each of the two fluids, equations for conservation of
particles (or mass) and momentum in the form
(nuµ);µ= 0
mnuµui
;µ=gijp,j+Fi
µqnuµ
Maxwell’s equations remain the same if we let jµbe the
total current density.
Under the conditions that for both species ∂t∼ω≪ωc
andCA≪c,this two-fluid description can be cast into
a set of single-fluid equations. By ∂t∼ωwe mean
that a characteristic frequency, ω, can be assigned to
the time variations in the dynamical quantities [21].
We use ωc≡ |q|B/m for the cyclotron frequency, B
is the magnetic field intensity (which can be obtained
from the Lorentz frame components of the electromag-
netic field tensor) and CAis the Alfv´ en velocity, de-
fined by C2
A=B2/µ0n. Under the above conditions it
follows that the two fluid velocities are approximately
equal and that the particle densities may be regarded
as exactly equal. Furthermore, we let the equation of
state be the one of isothermal compression and assume
|uµui
;µ| ≪ | Fi
0qnu0|/mn∝ |Fi
jqnuj|/mn (meaning
that the electric and magnetic forces approximately bal-
ance each other). In light of this, we obtain the following
set of single fluid equations (MHD-equations)
(nuµ);µ= 0 (5)
(m(1)+m(2))nuµui
;µ=gijp,j+Fi
µjµ(6)
Fi
µuµ=−1
nq(1)gij/parenleftbiggm(2)p(1),j−m(1)p(2),j
m(1)+m(2)/parenrightbigg
(7)p,i=kBTn,i (8)
Equation (5) and (6) are obtained by adding the two
particle conservation equations and the two equations of
momentum balance, respectively, and setting the veloc-
ities equal (when added), letting jbe the total current
density, pthe total pressure and T≡T(1)+T(2).The suf-
fixes (1)and(2)refers to the two distinct particle species.
By subtracting the two equations of momentum conser-
vation, where the terms uµui
;µhave been neglected, one
finds eq. (7), which we refer to as the generalized Ohm’s
law.
Note that if the right hand side of eq. (7) is negligi-
ble as compared to Fı
0u0andFı
jujthis equation simply
reads Fi
µuµ= 0 and we can then refer to the single-
fluid equations as the ideal MHD-equations. In the fol-
lowing we limit ourselves to this case. Note that the
MHD-equations are not independent of Maxwell’s and
Einstein’s field equations, since we used Maxwell’s equa-
tions and Tµν
;µ= 0, that follows from Einstein’s equa-
tions, in deriving them.
We now consider gravitational radiation on a
Minkowski background treating the plasma as a testfluid.
Thus, the plasma back scattering effect on the gravita-
tional field is lost. The gravitational radiation is chosen
to be weak gravitational waves in the transverse traceless
(TT) gauge propagating in the x3-direction. This plane
wave solution of the linearized Einstein field equations
can be written
ds2=c2dt2−(1 +h+)dx2−(1−h+)dy2
−2h×dxdy−dz2
where h≡˜heikµxµ+ c.c.and|˜h| ≪1 with the wave
vector [ kµ] = (ω/c,0,0, k) satisfying the dispersion re-
lation kµkµ= 0. In all the following calculations we
neglect terms that are quadratic in ˜hor higher. The
metric tensor can thus be written as gµν=ηµν+hµν
where ηµνis the metric tensor of Minkowski space and
hµνrepresents the small, |hµν| ≪1, fluctuation in the
gravitational field.
The nonzero Christoffel symbols are then calculated to
Γ1
01=−Γ2
02= Γ0
11=−Γ0
22=−Γ1
13
= Γ2
23= Γ3
11=−Γ3
22=1
2˙h+
Γ1
02= Γ2
01=−Γ1
23=−Γ2
13= Γ3
12= Γ0
12=1
2˙h×
where ˙h≡∂h/∂ξ andξ≡x3−x0.
By expanding the covariant derivative, eq.(5 ) becomes
(nuµ),µ= 0 as a result of Γµ
νµuν= 0 and - noting that
gµν=ηµν−hµνto first order, such that gij=−δij−hij
- eq.(6) reads
mnuµui
,µ+Gi=−δijp,j−hijp,j+Fi
µjµ(9)
2where we have introduced the gravitational force-like
term Gi≡mnΓi
νµuνuµ, whose components are given
explicitly in the end of this section, and we denote
m=m(1)+m(2).
Next, we perform the same expansion in Maxwell’s
equations and rewrite them in terms of the electromag-
netic field tensor in the form Fµ
ν. The idea is to express
all field tensor terms in the same form, preferably the one
that gives the most simple expressions. We can separate
Fµν
;ν=−µ0jµinto two equations. Setting µ= 0 we
obtain a Poisson-like equation which we discard - since
in the MHD-regime j0≈0. Setting µ=iwe read off
”Ampere’s law“,
δjkFi
k,j=µ0ji−(hjνFi
ν),j+ Γi
τjgjνFτ
ν+ Γj
τjgτνFi
ν
(10)
From eq.(2), which by symmetry in Fµνis equivalent to
Fµν,σ+Fνσ,µ+Fσµ,ν= 0, we obtain a number of trivial
identities, a generalized equation for ∇·Band ”Faraday’s
law“:
F0
2,1−F0
1,2=−F1
2,0+ (h+F1
2),0
−F0
3,1+F0
1,3=−F3
1,0+ (−h×F2
3+h+F3
1),0
F0
3,2−F0
2,3=−F2
3,0−(h×F3
1+h+F2
3),0
For notational purposes it is convenient to introduce an
abstract basis {ˆx,ˆy,ˆz}. The one-fluid equations and the
Maxwell’s equations above can then be written in a vec-
tor representation with an algebraic structure identical
to the Euclidean. We define
x≡xˆx+yˆy+zˆz≡x1ˆx+x2ˆy+x3ˆz
v≡vxˆx+vyˆy+vzˆz≡u1ˆx+u2ˆy+u3ˆz
j≡jxˆx+jyˆy+jzˆz≡j1ˆx+j2ˆy+j3ˆz
E≡Exˆx+Eyˆy+Ezˆz≡cF0
1ˆx+cF0
2ˆy+cF0
3ˆz
B≡Bxˆx+Byˆy+Bzˆz≡F2
3ˆx+F3
1ˆy+F1
2ˆz
∇ ≡∂xˆx+∂yˆy+∂zˆz≡∂
∂x1ˆx+∂
∂x2ˆy+∂
∂x3ˆz
(Note that these quantities differ to first order in ˜hfrom
what an observer in the lab system would measure.) One
then obtains the following set of equations governing the
plasma
mn(∂tv+ (v· ∇)v) =j×B− ∇p−∂hp−G (11)
E+v×B= 0 (12)
∂tn+∇ ·(nv) = 0 (13)
∇p=kBT∇n (14)
∇ ×B=µ0j+ (Γ−∂h1)B (15)
∇ ×E=−∂tB+∂h2B (16)
where∂hp≡(h+∂xp+h×∂yp, h×∂xp−h+∂yp,0)
G≡mn((u3−u0)(˙h+u1+˙h×u2),
(u3−u0)(˙h×u1−˙h+u2),
1
2(γabuaub˙h+−2u1u2˙h×))
ΓB≡1
2c(−˙h+Ex−˙h×Ey,−˙h×Ex+˙h+Ey,0)
∂h1B≡(−∂x(h×Bz) +∂y(h+Bz),
∂x(h+Bz) +∂y(h×Bz),
∂x(h×Bx−h+By)−∂y(h+Bx+h×By))
∂h2B≡(−∂t(h+Bx+h×By), ∂t(−h×Bx+h+By),
∂t(h+Bz))
and
[γab]≡/parenleftbigg
1 0
0−1/parenrightbigg
, a, b= 1,2.
In addition to eqs. (11)-(16) Maxwell’s equations pro-
duce constraints (e.g. for ∇ ·B), however it is easy to
verify that these constraints are propagated by the equa-
tions of time evolution, (11), (13) and (16).
III. WAVE-WAVE INTERACTIONS
In the absence of any waves we assume to have the
configuration of a static homogeneous, n=n(0), magne-
tized,B=B(0),plasma in Minkowski space. Cartesian
coordinates are chosen ([ xµ] = (ct, x, y, z )) for a frame
in which the velocity field (and the current density field)
vanishes. The gravitational waves are then inferred as
small perturbations to the Minkowski background, as in
the previous section, and the MHD-waves as the existence
of the small fluctuations: n(1),v(1),j(1),E(1),B(1). Fur-
thermore, in order to simplify the algebra, we make the
assumptions that the direction of B(0)is everywhere par-
allel to the direction of propagation of the gravitational
waves, i.e. B(0)=B(0)ˆ z, and that the gravitational ra-
diation is polarized such that h+= 0.
A. Linear Calculations
It is instructive to first investigate the linearized the-
ory in some detail. Linearizing the equations (11)-(16) in
the variables h×, n(1),v(1),j(1),E(1),B(1)we find that the
gravitational waves do not drive plasma perturbations
linearly. This is a consequence of the direction of prop-
agation of the gravitational wave (parallel to the mag-
netic field) that was chosen. Similarly the linear plasma
perturbations are the ordinary MHD-modes. Fourier an-
alyzing we obtain the dispersion relations for the shear
Alfv´ en wave
3DA≡ω2−C2
Ak2
z= 0 (17)
and for the fast and slow magnetosonic wave
Dm≡ω4−ω2k2(C2
S+C2
A) +k2
zk2C2
SC2
A= 0.(18)
The constants introduced are the Alfv´ en velocity C2
A≡
B(0)2/mn(0)µ0,the thermal velocity C2
S≡kBT/m, and
we have used the notation k=kx/hatwidex+kz/hatwideztogether with
k=|k|. In the next subsection we will consider superpo-
sition of MHD-waves, and by expressing all variables in
terms of the fluid velocity we can represent the solution
as a sum of eigenvectors
n(1)
v(1)
j(1)
E(1)
B(1)
=/summationdisplay
α
χαn(0)
v(1)
α
iχα
µ0kα×B(0)−iσα
µ0kα×v(1)
α
B(0)×v(1)
α
χαB(0)−σαv(1)
α
(19)
where χα≡kα·v(1)
α/ωα,σα≡kαzB(0)/ωαandαis a
wave-mode index.
As we intend to study nonlinear wave coupling it is con-
venient to adopt the normal mode method of approach
[22], which typically simplifies the algebra in the nonlin-
ear stage of the calculations. We define a normal mode
as a linear combination, aα, of the dynamical quantities
that to linear order satisfies
∂taα+iωαaα= 0 (20)
The dynamical quantities are now only assumed to have
harmonic spatial dependence, i.e. ∇=ikα. From eq.
(20) the proper linear combinations are
aA=v(1)
y−ωA
kAzB(0)B(1)
y (21)
for the Alfv´ en mode, and
am=n(1)+κv(1)
x+n(0)kmz
ωmv(1)
z
−kmzC2
Aκ
B(0)ωmB(1)
x+kmxC2
Aκ
B(0)ωmB(1)
z (22)
for the magnetosonic modes, with the frequency-wave
number pairs ( ωA,kA) and ( ωm,km) satisfying the dis-
persion relations DA= 0 and Dm= 0, respectively. The
constant κis defined as κ≡n0(ω2
m−C2
Skm2
z)/C2
Skmxωm.
With aid of the corresponding eigenvectors and the rela-
tionv(1)
z=v(1)
xC2
Skmxkmz/(ω2
m−C2
Sk2
mx) we can, after
some algebraic manipulations, write the normal modes
as
aA= 2v(1)
y=1
ωA∂DA
∂ωAv(1)
y (23)
am=n(0)
ω2mC2
Sk2mx∂Dm
∂ωmv(1)
x. (24)For the nonlinear calculation we need the eigenvectors
expressed in terms of the normal modes, and the final
linear results are
n(1)
v(1)
j(1)
E(1)
B(1)
A=aA
0
(0,1
2,0)
(−iB(0)k2
Az
2ωAµ0,0,iB(0)kAxkAz
2ωAµ0)
(−B(0)
2,0,0)
(0,−B(0)kAz
2ωA,0)
(25)
and
n(1)
v(1)
j(1)
E(1)
B(1)
m=amcm
1 +C2
Sk2
mz
ω2m−C2
Sk2mz
(ζ,0, ζC2
Skmxkmz
ω2m−C2
Sk2mz)
(0,−iB(0)k2
m
n(0)kmxµ0,0)
(0,ωmB(0)
n(0)kmx,0)
(−kmzB(0)
n(0)kmx,0,B(0)
n(0))
(26)
where cm≡ω2
mC2
Sk2
mx/2(ω4
m−k2
mk2
mzC2
AC2
S) and ζ≡
ωm/n(0)kmx
B. Nonlinear Calculations
The aim of this section is to investigate the second
order nonlinear influence of the gravitational radiation
on the MHD modes described above. In particular we
are interested in the threshold value (for parametric ex-
citation) of the gravitational amplitude, and the growth
rates of the excited MHD waves. We will again assume
that the wave vectors lies in xz-plane, i.e. k=kxˆ x+kzˆ z
for the MHD-waves, but in contrast to the case of linear
wave modes this is a restriction made in order to simplify
the algebra [23].
We consider coherent three-wave interactions, the
three waves being one gravitational wave and two MHD-
waves, with the matching conditions
ωg=ωI+ωII (27)
kg=kI+kII (28)
where IandIIare indexing the MHD-waves. In the
nonlinear regime the normal modes does no longer satisfy
eq.(20), but rather
∂taα+iωαaα= ([∂taα]n.l.)kα
where n .l.denotes (first order) nonlinear terms and the
suffixkαindicates that terms not oscillating as eik·xvan-
ishes due to rapid oscillations. Explicit forms for the righ t
hand side is found by using the original expressions for
the normal modes - eqs. (21) or (22) - together with eqs.
(11)-(16).
4We let index Idenote the magnetosonic wave pertur-
bation, index IIthe Alfv´ en wave perturbation and we
use a complex representation (i.e. letting f→f+f∗for
all variables, where the star denotes complex conjugate).
Making use of the linear eigenvectors (25) and (26) as ap-
proximations in the nonlinear right hand sides, we obtain
the coupled mode equations
∂taI+iωIaI=CIa∗
IIh× (29)
∂taII+iωIIaII=CIIa∗
Ih× (30)
after lengthy but straightforward algebra, where the cou-
pling coefficients are
CI=in0(ω2
I−C2
Sk2
Iz)
2C2
SkIxωI/parenleftbigg
ωg+kIzkIIzC2
A
ωII/parenrightbigg
(31)
CII=i
2n0/parenleftbiggω2
IC2
Sk2
Ix
ω4
I−k2
Ik2
IzC2
AC2
S/parenrightbigg
/parenleftbiggωgωI
kIx+ω2
IkIxC2
S
ω2
I−C2
Sk2
Iz+ω2
IIkIz
kIxkIIz/parenrightbigg
(32)
From eq. (31) one may get the incorrect impression that
the coupling strength diverges in the limit C2
S→0. Thus
in order to shed some light on our formulas in the cold
limit, we first renormalize our normal mode amplitudes
aI→C2
SaI
aII→aII/C2
S
which leads to renormalized coupling coefficients
CI→C2
SCI
CII→CII/C2
S
and then take the limit C2
S→0. The corresponding
coupling coefficients then becomes
CI=in(0)
2ωI
kIx/parenleftbigg
ωg+kIz
kIIzωII/parenrightbigg
(33)
and
CII=i
2n(0)kIx
ω2
I(ωgωI−ω2
II) (34)
Another special case of particular interest is the limit
of parallel propagation, in which the fast magnetosonic
wave becomes identical to a shear Alfv´ en wave, but per-
pendicularly polarized to wave II. Again the general
coupling coefficient (31) seem to diverge. However, by
using another renormalization
aI→aI/κ
which gives
CI→CI/κ
CII→κCIIand taking the limit kIx, kIIx→0, we obtain
CI=i
2ωII (35)
and
CII=i
2ωI (36)
Since dissipation of the waves have not been included
in our model, the instability threshold value of the grav-
itational amplitude found from (29) and (30) is so far
zero. However, since only weak dissipation is of interest
we can take such effects into account by simply substi-
tuting ∂taα→(∂t+γα)aαin the coupled mode equations
[24], where γαis the linear damping rate of the mode α.
The most common damping mechanism of MHD waves
is that due to finite resistivity.. Calculating the linear
damping by replacing (12) with E+v×B=ηj, where
ηis the resistivity, we find γα=ηk2
α/µ0. Next we intro-
duce the (weakly time dependent) normal mode ampli-
tudes, Aα, defined by aα=Aαe−iωαt, where α=I, II.
Substituting these expressions into (29) and (30) tak-
ing the damping into account, we find the general form
for the condition of parametric growth of waves |/tildewideh×|>
hthr≡(γIγII/CIC∗
II)1/2[22], where /tildewideh×is the amplitude
of the gravitational wave and hthris the threshold value
for parametric excitation. In the limit of parallel prop-
agation we find from (35) and (36) that the threshold
value hthrreduces to
|/tildewideh×|> hthr≈4γI,II
ωg=ηωg
µ0C2
A(37)
Furthermore, if the gravitational amplitude is well above
threshold ( |/tildewideh×| ≫hthr) the general expression for the
parametric growth rate Γ from (29) and (30) is Γ ≈/radicalbig
CIC∗
II|/tildewideh×|[22], and the result for the special case of
parallel propagation is
Γ≈ωg
4|/tildewideh×| (38)
It should be pointed out that in addition to the wave
interactions considered above, we have found zero cou-
pling coefficients for a number of cases. To be specific:
For the same polarization of the gravitational pump wave
(h+= 0), and propagation parallel to the external mag-
netic field, the following combinations of MHD-waves
cannot be excited in the resonant three wave approxima-
tion, since the coupling coefficient then becomes zero: 1)
Two ion-acoustic (or slow magnetosonic) modes. 2) One
ion-acoustic and one Alfv´ en wave. 3) Two Alfv´ en waves
with the same linear polarization (Note that for the case
considered above, the Alfv´ en waves have perpendicular
polarizations in the parallel limit).
5IV. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
We have considered parametric excitation of Alfv´ en
waves by gravitational radiation propagating parallel to
the external magnetic field. As a starting point, standard
ideal MHD equations (i.e. without special relativistic ef-
fects) incorporating the curvature of space time has been
derived. It should be pointed out that the system of equa-
tions (5) -(8) in principle can be used in situations where
we have strong deviation from Minkowski space time, al-
though the condition of non-relativistic fluid velocities
then limits the applicability. Focusing on the case where
the metric is that of a small amplitude monochromatic
gravitational wave superimposed on flat space-time, the
growth rate for nonlinearly coupled shear Alfv´ en and fast
magnetosonic waves have been found, for non-parallel
as well as parallel propagation to the external magnetic
field.
An interesting results is that in general the coupling
coefficients CIandCIIof eqs. (31) and (32) does not
satisfy the Manley-Rowe relations [22]. Generally such
relations follow from an underlaying Hamiltonian struc-
ture of the governing equations, and assures that each of
the decay products takes energy from the pump wave in
direct proportion to their respective frequencies. Thus
fulfillment of the Manley–Rowe relation means that the
parametric process can be interpreted quantum mechan-
ically - i.e. for matching conditions ω0=ω1+ω2we can
think of a three wave process as the decay of a pump wave
quanta with energy /planckover2pi1ω0into wave quantas with energy
/planckover2pi1ω1and/planckover2pi1ω2respectively. An interesting consequence is
that generally a lot of three wave decay processes are for-
bidden from the start by the Manley–Rowe relations (for
example the decay of a plasmon into two photons), since
they imply that we only get a positive growth rate when
the pump wave has the highest frequency, in consistence
with the quantum picture [25]. However, in our case it is
easy to verify that the coupling coefficients in (33)-(34)
may result in a positive growth rate (i.e. CICII>0) even
ifωg< ωI. Specifically we can choose ωI> ωg>0> ωII
in which case CICII>0 for ωI/ωg/lessorsimilar2.6. If violation
of the Manley–Rowe relations is a general feature when
starting from a curved space time, this opens up the pos-
sibility for parametric instabilities which one normally
would consider to be impossible, where one or both of
the decay products have higher frequency than the pump
wave. This is of particular importance since gravitational
radiation generally has a low frequency as compared to
most plasma waves.
In our calculations we have considered a monochro-
matic gravitational pump wave, which could be produced
by binary systems. As seen from (38) (or more generally
from and (31) and (32)), the growth rate roughly is of
the order γ∼h×ωg. Thus the plasma parameters n0,
B0andTdo not significantly influence the growth rate,at least as long as the assumptions of the derivation is ful-
filled. In comparison, Ref. 12 considered the parametric
decay of a gravitational wave into a Langmuir wave and
a high-frequency electromagnetic wave, and presented an
example of a possible astrophysical source of radiation (a
black hole pair). Also in their case the growth rate ful-
filled γ∼h×ωg, and the growth rate was found to be
γ∼10−2s−1at a distance of 1/60 au from the source,
where a process at a closer distance were ruled out by the
frequency matching conditions combined with the linear
dispersion relations. In our case the linear dispersion re-
lations and matching conditions allow a parametric pro-
cess closer to the source, and thereby opens up the pos-
sibility for a higher growth rate, although too close to
the source the background plasma may be too inhomo-
geneous and too far from steady state for our calculations
to be applicable.
Furthermore, excitation of MHD waves may take place
in a dense plasma, and therefore processes such as super-
novas are of interest, where gravitational wave absorption
may take place inside the exploding star. In a discussion
of possible mechanisms of absorbing gravitational wave
energy in supernovas Ref. 14 has written ”Since the ef-
fect of acceleration by gravitational waves is independent
of mass of the charge, both the ions and the electron re-
spond in an identical manner, which is not the case for
electromagnetic waves. This means that waves such as
Alfv´ en waves which describe oscillation of charge neu-
tral plasma are ideal. The coupling, however, is weak.”
At the present stage of understanding it is too early to
deduce whether significant gravitational wave absorption
by MHD waves may occur. Calculations taking into ac-
count the effects of a broad band gravitational spectrum,
plasma inhomogeneities, etc., must first be performed.
In particular inhomogeneity scale lengths with a scale
length significantly shorter than the wavelength of the
gravitational mode - such as at the plasma boundary
of the supernova - may lead to excitation of MHD sur-
face waves with a significantly enhanced growth rate as
compared to the present homogeneous plasma coupling
mechanism. This is in analogy with parametric excita-
tion scenarios for high frequency plasma surface waves
[26], where the surface waves may have a considerably
higher growth rate than the corresponding bulk waves,
provided the inhomogeneity scale length is considerably
shorter than the wave length of the pump wave. Such a
problem, however, is a project for future work.
[1] Yu. G. Ignat’ev, Phys. Lett. A 230,171 (1997).
[2] V. I. Denisov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 74, 401 (1978). [Sov.
Phys.- JETP 42, 209 (1978)].
6[3] M. Demia´ nski, Relativistic Astrophysics , pp 256 -257
(Pergamon Press, 1985).
[4] M. Marklund, G. Brodin and P. K. S. Dunsby, Submitted
to Astrophys. Journal.
[5] U. N. Gerlach, Phys. Rev. Lett. 32, 1023 (1974).
[6] M. Marklund, P. K. S. Dunsby and G. Brodin, In prepa-
ration.
[7] G. A. Lupanov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 52, 118 (1967).[Sov.
Phys.- JETP 25, 76 (1967)].
[8] V. B. Braginski˘ ı, L. P. Grishchuk, A. G. Doroshkevich,
Ya. B. Zel’dovich, I. D. Novikov and M. V. Sazhin, Zh.
Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 65, 1729, (1973).[ Sov. Phys.-JETP 38,
865 (1974)].
[9] L. P. Grishchuk and M. V. Sazhin, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.
68, 1569 (1975).[Sov. Phys.- JETP 41, 787 (1976)].
[10] A. B. Balakin and Yu. G. Ignat’ev, Phys. Lett. A 96, 10
(1983).
[11] Yu. G. Ignat’ev, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 81, 3 (1981) [Sov.
Phys. JETP 54, 1 (1981)].
[12] G. Brodin and M. Marklund, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 3012
(1999).
[13] Mendon¸ ca, J. T., Shukla, P. K. and Bingham, R., Phys.
Lett. A 250, 144 (1998).
[14] R. Bingham et al. Phys. Scripta, T75, 61 (1998).
[15] F. I. Cooperstock, Ann. Phys. 47, 173 (1968).
[16] Ya. B. Zeldovich, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 65, 1311 (1973).[
Sov. Phys.-JETP 38, 652 (1974)]
[17] L. P. Grishchuk and A. G. Polnarev, Gravitational waves
and their interaction with matter and fields, in General
Relativity and Gravitation (Vol 2) , ed. A. Held (Plenum
Press, 1980).
[18] A. M. Anile, J. K. Hunter and B. Truong, J. Math. Phys.
40, 4474 (1999).
[19] A. Greco, and L. Seta, J. Class. Ouantum Grav. 15, 3655
(1998).
[20] We could also have started from previous general rel-
ativistic MHD-equations - see e.g. A. M. Anile, Rela-
tivistic fluids and magneto-fluids (Cambridge University
Press 1989) - but the present derivation has a value as
a guide for future generalizations to the case of general
relativistic two-fluid equations.
[21] Naturally the condition ∂/∂t≪ωccannot hold in arbi-
trary reference frames. We assume it to be true in the
restframe of the fluid, but due the condition of non-
relativistic fluid velocities it also holds in all frames of
relevance.
[22] J. Weiland and H. Wilhelmsson, Coherent Nonlinear In-
teraction of Waves in Plasmas , (Pergamon press 1977).
[23] This is an additional restriction as compared to the gen -
eral case, since the choice of gravitational polarization
(i.e. letting h+= 0) makes the x- and y-axis non equiv-
alent.
[24] We assume that terms that are both nonlinear and pro-
portional to the small dissipation parameter is negligible .
[25] Note that the even in standard plasma problems where
the Manley-Rowe relations are fulfilled, the quantum pic-
ture should not be taken too literally, since the process
is indeed nonlinear, and the interaction of single wave
quantas thus is negligible.
[26] G. Brodin and J. Lundberg, J. Plasma Phys., 46, 299
(1991).
7 |
arXiv:physics/9910030v1 [physics.chem-ph] 20 Oct 1999Investigation of4He3trimer on the base of
Faddeev equations in configuration space.
V.Roudnev∗, S.Yakovlev
Institute for Physics,
St.Petersburg State University,
Russia
Abstract
Precise numerical calculations of bound states of three-at omic He-
lium cluster are performed. The modern techniques of soluti on of Fad-
deev equations are combined to obtain an efficient numerical s cheme.
Binding energies and other observables for ground and excit ed states
are calculated. Geometric properties of the clusters are di scussed.
1 Introduction
Small clusters of Helium attract the attention of specialis ts in different fields
of physics. Fine experimental techniques are developed to o bserve these
clusters [1, 2, 3]. Different quantum chemistry approaches a re used to pro-
duce numerous potential models of He-He interaction [17, 18 , 19, 20, 21, 22].
Model-free Monte-Carlo calculations were performed to che ck the accuracy
of the models [23]. The special attention is payed to three-b ody Helium
clusters [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11] because of their possible near -Efimov behavior
[4]. Complicated shape of the model potentials also makes He lium trimer a
perfect touchstone for the computational methods of three- body bound state
calculations [13].
∗e-mail: roudnev@cph10.phys.spbu.ru
1Although the investigation of He 3lasts already more than 20 years [5],
some important physical questions has not received definite answer yet. One
of the questions is dealt with speculations on Efimov-like na ture of the He 3
bound states: how many excited states are supported by the be st known
model interactions? Can one estimate any differences in the n umber of bound
states varying the model potentials being limited by the acc uracy of contem-
porary models? Another important question is dealt with the characteristics
of He 3bound states. Can He 3trimers influence the results of experimental
measurement of He 2dimer characteristics? To answer these questions one
should know such important characteristics of the He 3cluster as the mean
square radius of different states of the trimer and its geomet ric shape.
In this paper we investigate the4He trimer performing direct calculations
of4He3bound states with different He-He model potentials. We base o ur
calculations on Faddeev equations in configuration space be cause of simplic-
ity of numerical approximation of Faddeev components in com parison with
a wave function. In the case of Faddeev equations the boundar y conditions
are also much simpler.
In the following sections the equations we have solved numer ically are
described, some observables for different states of He 3and for He 2are pre-
sented.
2 Faddeev equations for bound states
According to the Faddeev formalism [14] the wave function of three particles
is expressed in terms of Faddeev components Φ
Ψ(x1,y1) = Φ 1(x1,y1) + Φ 2(x2,y2) + Φ 3(x3,y3), (1)
where xαandyαare Jackobi coordinates corresponding to the fixed pair α
xα= (2mβmγ
mβ+mγ)1
2(rβ−rγ),
yα= (2mα(mβ+mγ)
mα+mβ+mγ)1
2(rα−mβrβ+mγrγ
mβ+mγ).(2)
2Hererαare the positions of the particles in the center-of-mass fra me. The
Faddeev components obey the set of three equations
(−∆x−∆y+Vα(xα)−E)Φα(xα,yα) =−Vα(xα)/summationdisplay
β/negationslash=αΦβ(xβ,yβ)
α= 1,2,3,(3)
whereVα(xα) stands for pairwise potential. To make this system of equa-
tions suitable for numerical calculations one should take i nto account the
symmetries of the physical system. Exploiting the identity of Helium atoms
in the trimer one can reduce the equations (3) to one equation [14]. Since
all the model potentials are central it is possible to factor out the degrees
of freedom corresponding to the rotations of the whole clust er [15]. For the
case of zero total angular momentum the reduced Faddeev equa tion reads
(−∂2
∂x2−∂2
∂y2−(1
x2+1
y2)∂
∂z(1−z2)1
2∂
∂z+
+xyV(x)(1 +C++C−)1
xy−E)Φ(x,y,z ) = 0.(4)
Here
x=|x|,
y=|y|,
z=(x,y)
xy,(5)
C+andC−are cyclic and anticyclic permutation operators acting on t he
coordinates x,yandzas follows
C±x= (x2
4+3y2
4∓√
3
2xyz)1/2,
C±y= (3x2
4+y2
4±√
3
2xyz)1/2,
C±z=±√
3x2
4∓√
3y2
4−1
2xyz
C±xC±y.
The asymptotic boundary condition for bound states consist s of two terms
[14]
Φ(x,y,z )∼φ2(x)e−kyy+A(x
y,z)e−k3(x2+y2)1
2
(x2+y2)1
4,
3whereφ2(x) is the two-body bound state wave function, ky=√E2−E3,
k3=√−E3,E2is the energy of the two-body bound state and E3is the
energy of the three-body system. The second term correspond ing to virtual
decay of three body bound state into three single particles d ecreases much
faster than the first one which corresponds to virtual decay i nto a particle
and two-body cluster. In our calculations we neglect the sec ond term in the
asymptotics introducing the following approximate bounda ry conditions for
the Faddeev component at sufficiently large distances RxandRy
∂xΦ(x,y,z )⌊x=Rx
Φ(x,y,z )⌊x=Rx=k2≡i/radicalBig
E2,
∂yΦ(x,y,z )⌊y=Ry
Φ(x,y,z )⌊y=Ry=ky.(6)
To calculate the bound state energy and the corresponding Fa ddeev com-
ponent one has to solve the equation (4) with the approximate boundary
condition (6). The numerical scheme we have chosen to perfor m the calcula-
tions is based on tensor-trick algorithm [16]. In this paper we do not describe
the realization of the numerical methods exploited but only underline some
essential features of our approach. They are
1. total angular momentum representation [15],
2. tensor-trick algorithm [16],
3. Cartesian coordinates [10].
The total angular momentum representation itself is a stron g method of par-
tial analysis allowing to take into account contribution of all the angular
momentum states of two-body subsystems at once [15]. Tensor -trick algo-
rithm [16] is known to be a powerful method of solution of Fadd eev equations
for bound states. Being applied to the equations in total ang ular momentum
representation it leads to effective computational scheme w hich makes pos-
sible to use all the advantages of Cartesian coordinates. In particular using
Cartesian coordinates [10] one can obtain a criterion to sel ect the optimal
grid in the coordinate x. This criterion comes from the asymptotic behavior
of Faddeev component
Φ(x,y,z )∼ϕ2(x)e−kyy,
4whereϕ2(x) is the two-body bound state wave function. That is why the
properly chosen grid in xshould support the correct two-body wave func-
tion. Comparing the binding energy of two-body subsystem ca lculated on the
”three-body” grid with the exact results one can estimate th e lower bound
for a numerical error of a three-body calculation.
Thus the usage of total angular momentum representation has allowed
us to construct an efficient numerical scheme combining the mo st advanced
methods proposed during the last decade.
3 Results of calculations
Having the equation (4) solved numerically one has the value of the en-
ergy of 3-body state E3and the corresponding Faddeev component Φ( x,y,z )
for a particular model potential. Comparing the observable s calculated for
different potential models one can estimate the bounds limit ing the values
of these observables for the real system. Eight different pot ential models
were used in our calculations: HFD-HE2 [18], HFD-B(He) [19] , LM2M1 [20],
LM2M2 [20], HFDID [20], LM2M1 and LM2M2 without add-on corre ction
term [20], TTYPT [22]. In the Tab. 1 we give the values of trime r energies
for ground and excited states. To confirm the accuracy of our c alculation
we also present the values of dimer binding energy calculate d on the grid
used in three-body calculations ˜E2and the exact results E2. The difference
between these values can be regarded as the lower bound for th e error of
our approach. In the Tabs. 2 and 3 we demonstrate the converge nce of the
calculated energies with respect to the number of grid point s used in the
calculations. The results of other authors for the most know n potentials are
given in the Tab. 7. The best agreement is observed with the re sults of [8]
and [11]. In the ref. [8] no angular momentum cut-off is made, t hat makes it
the closest one to our approach. In all other papers some kind of partial wave
decomposition is performed and finite number of angular basi c functions is
taken into account. The most complete basis is used in the ref . [11]. The
agreement between our calculations and the result of [11] fo r the excited state
is impressive, but the ground state energy of [11] is about on e percent less
than our result. Consideration of the geometric properties of Helium trimer
can clarify the possible nature of this difference.
Since the Faddeev component is calculated, the wave functio n can be
5recovered as follows
ψ(x,y,z ) = Φ(x,y,z ) +xy(Φ(x+,y+,z+)
x+y++Φ(x−,y−,z−)
x−y−),
wherex±=C±xandy±=C±y. Having the wave function recovered one
can investigate the shape properties of the system. The most intuitive way
to visualize the results of the calculations is to draw a one- particle density
function defined as
ρ(r1) =/integraldisplay
dr2dr3|Ψ(r1,r2,r3)|2,
where
Ψ(r1,r2,r3) =ψ(x(r1,r2,r3),y(r1,r2,r3),z(r1,r2,r3))
4π3x(r1,r2,r3)y(r1,r2,r3),
the functions x(r1,r2,r3),y(r1,r2,r3) andz(r1,r2,r3) are defined according
to (2) and (5), the function ψ(x,y,z ) is normalized to unit. Due to the
symmetry of the system the one-particle density function is a function of the
r1=|r1|coordinate only. Taking into account the relation r1=√
3y1we
get
ρ(r) =√
3/integraldisplay
dxdz |ψ(x,r√
3,z)|2.
Omitting the integration over zwe define a conditional density function
ρ(r,z) that presents a spatial distribution for the particle 1 whe n the other
two particles are located along the fixed axis. It is useful to plot this func-
tion in coordinates ( rl,ra) such that rl=rzis a projection of the particle 1
position to the axis connecting the other particles and ra=z
|z|r(1−z2)1
2is
a projection to the orthogonal axis. Three-dimensional plo ts of the function
ρ((r2
l+r2
a)1/2,cos arctanrl
ra) corresponding to the ground and excited states
of the trimer calculated with LM2M2 potential are presented on the Fig. 1
and Fig. 2. The conditional density function of the ground st ate decreases
democratically in all the directions. The density function of the excited state
has two distinguishable maximums demonstrating the linear structure of the
cluster. This structure has a simple physical explanation. The most probable
positions of a particle in the excited state lie around two ot her particles. At
the distances where two particles are well separated the thi rd one forms a
dimer-like bound state with each of them. This interpretati on agrees with
6the clusterisation coefficients presented in the Tab. 4. Thes e coefficients are
calculated as a norm of the function fcdefined as follows
fc(y) =/integraldisplay
dxdzΦ(x,y,z )φ2(x),
whereφ2(x) is the dimer wave function. The values of /⌊ard⌊lfc(y)/⌊ard⌊l2shown in the
Tab. 5 demonstrate the dominating role of a two-body contrib ution to the
trimer excited state whereas in the ground state this contri bution is rather
small. We could suppose that this dominating contribution o f the cluster
wave in the excited state has ensured fast convergence of the hyperspherical
adiabatic expansion in the paper [11] to the correct value, b ut to get the
same order of accuracy for the ground state possibly more bas ic functions
should be taken into account.
Very demonstrative example of the advantage of Faddeev equa tions over
the Schroedinger one in bound-state calculations is given i n the Tabs. 8 and 9.
Here we present the contribution of different angular states to the Faddeev
component and to the wave function calculated as
Cn=/⌊ard⌊lfn(x,y)/⌊ard⌊l2
fn(x,y) =/integraldisplay1
−1dzF(x,y,z )Pn(z),
wherePn(z) are the normalized Legendre polynomials, F(x,y,z ) is the Fad-
deev component or the wave function, n= 0,2,4. The angular coefficients
for the Faddeev component decrease much faster than the wave function co-
efficients. The Tab. 8 also demonstrates that more angular fun ctions should
be taken into account in the ground state calculations.
4 Conclusions
The high accuracy calculations of He 3bound states were performed on the
base of the most advanced few-body calculations techniques . Eight different
potential models were used. For every potential model, eith er more (LM2M2,
TTYPT) or less realistic one (LM2M2a, HFD-ID), two and only t wo bound
states are found. The properties of these states are very diff erent. The
ground state is strongly bound, whereas the binding energy o f the excited
state is comparable with the binding energy of dimer. The siz es of these two
7states also differs much. The characteristic size of the grou nd state either
estimated by /ang⌊racketleftr/ang⌊racketrightor/ang⌊racketleftr2/ang⌊racketright1/2(Tabs. 5 and 6) is approximately 10 times less
than the size of dimer molecule, but the size of the excited st ate has the
same order of magnitude with the dimer’s one. This estimatio n shows the
necessity to check for the absence of trimers in the experime ntal media during
the measurement of dimer properties and vice versa.
Acknowledgements
One of the authors (VR) is grateful to the Leonhard Euler Prog ram for
financial support. The authors are thankful to Freie Univers it¨ at Berlin where
the final stage of this work was performed. We are also thankfu l to Robert
Schrader for his warm hospitality during our visit to Berlin .
References
[1] W.Sch¨ ollkopf and J.P.Toennies J. Chem. Phys. 104(3), 1155, (1996)
[2] F. Luo, C. F. Giese and W. R. Gentry J. Chem. Phys. 104(3), 1151,
(1996)
[3] J. C. Mester, E. S.Meyer, M. W. Reynolds, T.E. Huber, Z. Zh ao, B.
Freedman, J. Kim and I.F.Silvera Phys. Rev.Lett. 71(9), 1343, (1993)
[4] V. Efimov, Phys.Lett. B 33, 563 (1970)
[5] T. K. Lim and M.A.Zuniga J. Chem. Phys. 63(5), 2245, (1974)
[6] T. K. Lim, S.K. Duffy and W.C.Damert Phys. Rev.Lett. 38(7), 341,
(1977)
[7] Th. Cornelius, W. Gl¨ ockle, J. Chem. Phys., 85, 3906 (1986)
[8] V. R. Pandharipande, J. G. Zabolitzky, S. C. Pieper, R. B. Wiringa, and
U. Helmbrecht, Phys. Rev. Lett., 50, 1676 (1983).
[9] E. A. Kolganova, A. K. Motovilov, S.A. Sofianos LANL E-pri nt chem-
ph/9612012
8[10] J. Carbonell, C. Gignoux, S. P. Merkuriev, Few–Body Sys tems15, 15
(1993).
[11] E. Nielsen, D. V. Fedorov and A. S. Jensen, LANL e-print
physics/9806020
[12] T. Gonzalez-Lezana, J.Rubayo-Soneira, S.Miret-arte s, F.A. Gianturco,
G. Delgado-Barrio and P.Villarreal, Phys.Rev.Lett, 82(8) , 1648, (1999)
[13] V. Roudnev and S. Yakovlev, Proceedings of the first international con-
ference Modern Trends in Computetional Physics, (1998), to be published
in Comp. Phys. Comm.
[14] L. D. Faddeev, S. P. Merkuriev, Quantum scattering theory for several
particle systems (Doderecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, (1993)).
[15] V. V. Kostrykin, A. A. Kvitsinsky,S. P. Merkuriev Few-B ody Systems,
6, 97, (1989)
[16] N. W. Schellingerhout, L. P. Kok, G. D. Bosveld Phys. Rev . A40,
5568-5576, (1989)
[17] B. Liu and A. D. McLean, J. Chem. Phys. 91(4), 2348 (1989)
[18] R. A. Aziz, V. P. S. Nain, J. S. Carley, W. L. Taylor, and G. T. Mc-
Conville, J. Chem. Phys. 70, 4330 (1979).
[19] R. A. Aziz, F. R. W. McCourt, and C. C. K. Wong, Mol. Phys. 61, 1487
(1987).
[20] R. A. Aziz and M. J. Slaman, J. Chem. Phys. 94, 8047 (1991).
[21] T. van Mourik and J. H. van Lenthe, J. Chem. Phys. 102(19), 7479
(1995)
[22] K.T.Tang, J. P. Toennis and C. L. Yiu Phys. Rev.Lett. 74(9), 1546,
(1995)
[23] J. B. Anderson, C.A. Traynor and B. M. Boghosian, J. Chem . Phys.
99(1),345 (1993)
9List of tables
1. The energy of the He 2and He 3bound states
2. Convergence of the He 3excited state energy with respect to the number
of gridpoints
3. Convergence of the He 3ground state energy with respect to the number
of gridpoints
4. Contribution of cluster wave to the Faddeev component
5. The mean square radius of Helium molecules
6. The mean radius of Helium molecules
7. Comparison with the results of other authors
8. Contribution of different two-body angular states to the F addeev com-
ponent
9. Contribution of different two-body angular states to the w ave function
List of figures
1. Conditional one-particle density function of the He 3ground state
2. Conditional one-particle density function of the He 3excited state
3. He 3ground state density function
4. He 3excited state density function
5. He 2density function
10Table 1: The energy of the He 2and He 3bound states
Potential E2,mK/tildewiderE2, mKE3, KE∗
3, mK
HFD-A -0.830124 -0.8305 0.11713 1.665
HFD-B -1.685419 -1.68540 0.13298 2.734
HFD-ID -0.40229 -0.4024 0.10612 1.06
LM2M1 -1.20909 -1.212 0.12465 2.155
LM2M2 -1.303482 -1.304 0.12641 2.271
LM2M1a -1.52590 -1.527 0.13024 2.543
LM2M2a -1.798436 -1.795 0.13471 2.868
TTY -1.312262 -1.3121 0.12640 2.280
Table 2: Convergence of the He 3excited state energy with respect to the
number of gridpoints
Grid E∗
3,˚A−2×10−5E2,˚A−2×10−5
45×45×9 -22.819 -14.123
60×60×9 -22.568 -13.913
60×60×15 -22.570 -13.913
75×75×9 -22.561 -13.907
75×75×15 -22.563 -13.907
90×75×9 -22.567 -13.912
105×75×9 22.555 -13.902
Table 3: Convergence of the He 3ground state energy with respect to the
number of gridpoints
Grid E3,˚A−2×10−5E2,˚A−2×10−5
45×45×15 -1096.35 -13.839
60×60×9 -1096.72 -13.894
60×60×15 -1097.11 -13.894
60×60×21 -1097.11 -13.894
105×60×18 -1097.19 -13.9062
105×75×15 -1097.25 -13.9062
11Table 4: Contribution of cluster wave to the Faddeev compone nt
Potential /⌊ard⌊lfc/⌊ard⌊l2/⌊ard⌊lf∗
c/⌊ard⌊l2
HFD-A 0.2094 0.9077
HFD-B 0.2717 0.9432
HFD-ID 0.1555 0.8537
LM2M1 0.2412 0.9283
LM2M2 0.2479 0.9319
LM2M1a 0.2624 0.9390
LM2M2a 0.2780 0.9458
TTY 0.2487 0.9323
Table 5: The mean square radius of Helium molecules, ˚A
Potential Ground state of He 3Excited state of He 3He2
HFD-A 6.46 66.25 88.18
HFD-B 6.23 57.89 62.71
HFD-ID 6.64 75.38 126.73
LM2M1 6.35 61.74 73.54
LM2M2 6.32 60.85 70.93
LM2M1a 6.27 59.03 65.76
LM2M2a 6.21 57.17 60.79
TTYPT 6.33 60.81 70.70
12Table 6: The mean radius of Helium molecules, ˚A
Potential Ground state of He 3Excited state of He 3He2
HFD-A 5.65 55.26 64.21
HFD-B 5.48 48.33 46.18
HFD-ID 5.80 62.75 91.50
LM2M1 5.57 51.53 53.85
LM2M2 5.55 50.79 52.00
LM2M1a 5.51 49.28 48.34
LM2M2a 5.46 47.72 44.82
TTYPT 5.55 50.76 51.84
Table 7: Comparison with the results of other authors
Observable This work [8] [9] [7] [10]
HFD-A(He)
E3, K -0.1171 -0.117 -0.114 -0.11 -0.107
E∗
3, mK -1.665 -1.74 -1.6
HFD-B(He)
E3, K -0.1330 -0.132 -0.130
E∗
3, mK -2.734 -2.83
LM2M2
Observable This work [11] [12]
E3, K -0.1264 -0.1252 -0.219
E∗
3, mK -2.271 -2.269 -1.73
<r2>1/2,˚A 6.32 6.24 7.4
<r2
∗>1/2,˚A 60.85 60.86 50.3
13Table 8: Contribution of different two-body angular states t o the Faddeev
component
Ground state Excited state
Potential S D G S D G
HFD-A 0.9991043 0.0008859 0.0000095 0.9999964 0.0000035 0.0000000
HFD-B 0.9990000 0.0009890 0.0000107 0.9999952 0.0000048 0.0000001
HFD-ID 0.9991709 0.0008200 0.0000088 0.9999972 0.0000028 0.0000000
LM2M1 0.9990505 0.0009390 0.0000101 0.9999958 0.0000042 0.0000000
LM2M2 0.9990393 0.0009500 0.0000103 0.9999957 0.0000043 0.0000000
LM2M1a 0.9990129 0.0009762 0.0000105 0.9999954 0.0000046 0.0000001
LM2M2a 0.9989834 0.0010053 0.0000109 0.9999950 0.0000049 0.0000001
TTY 0.9990332 0.0009561 0.0000104 0.9999956 0.0000043 0.0000000
Table 9: Contribution of different two-body angular states t o the wave func-
tion
Ground state Excited state
Potential S D G S D G
HFD-A 0.95416 0.03198 0.00877 0.90957 0.07543 0.01331
HFD-B 0.95193 0.03365 0.00947 0.89710 0.08546 0.01546
HFD-ID 0.95493 0.03116 0.00905 0.91919 0.06763 0.01170
LM2M1 0.95323 0.03277 0.00891 0.90337 0.08043 0.01437
LM2M2 0.95303 0.03294 0.00893 0.90201 0.08152 0.01460
LM2M1a 0.95259 0.03332 0.00899 0.89904 0.08391 0.01512
LM2M2a 0.95210 0.03374 0.00906 0.89574 0.08654 0.01569
TTY 0.95245 0.03318 0.00941 0.90186 0.08164 0.01463
14-40
-20
0
20
40ra
-40-200
20
40rl00.0250.050.0750.1-40
-20
0
20
4000.0250.050.075
Figure 1: Conditional one-particle density function of the He3ground state,
rl,rain˚A
15-100
0
100ra
-100
0
100
rl00.0050.010.0150.02-100
0
10000.0050.010.015
Figure 2: Conditional one-particle density function of the He3excited state,
rl,rain˚A
5 10 15 20 25r0.0250.050.0750.10.1250.150.175Rho
Figure 3: He 3ground state density function, rin˚A
1650 100 150 200 250r0.00250.0050.00750.010.01250.0150.0175Rho
Figure 4: He 3excited state density function, rin˚A
50 100 150 200 250r0.00250.0050.00750.010.01250.0150.0175Rho
Figure 5: He 2dimer density function, rin˚A
17 |
arXiv:physics/9910031v1 [physics.class-ph] 21 Oct 1999Renormalization Group Studies of Vertex Models
Saibal Mitra
Supervisor: Prof. Dr. H van Beijeren
ITF-UU-99/04
20th February 2014Contents
1 Introduction 3
1.1 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2 Definition of the staggered F-model 5
2.1 The six-vertex model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2 Six-vertex models and SOS models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3 Roughening transition in the F model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3 Renormalization group equations for sine-Gordon type mod els 8
3.1 Effective Hamiltonians for the staggered F-model . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2 The renormalization group transformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3 Renormalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.4 Cumulant expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.5 Diagrammatic expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.6 Evaluation of diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4 Applications of the renormalization group equations 20
4.1 The case of the staggered F-model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.2 Singular part of the free energy of the staggered F-model . . . . 22
4.3 The case βǫ≤1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
5 Expansions about free fermion models 28
5.1 Definition of free fermion models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5.2 Baxter’s solution of the staggered F-model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5.3 The Pfaffian method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5.4 Calculation of the free energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.5 Singular part of the free energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
5.6 Perturbation theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5.7 First order computation for the staggered F-model . . . . . . . . 36
5.8 Singular behavior in the vicinity of the free fermion lin e . . . . . 39
5.9 Linked cluster expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
A Notations and conventions 46
A.1 Vectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
A.2 Summation convention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
A.3 Multi-indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
A.4 Derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
A.5 Distributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
1B Gaussian correlations 48
B.1 Correlation function for h(2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
B.2 The height-height correlation function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
C Calculation of/angbracketleftbig
eıTh/angbracketrightbig
50
2Chapter 1
Introduction
In this thesis we use renormalization group methods to study the critical be-
haviour of the staggered F-model. The staggered F-model, de fined in chapter
2, can be used as a model of a facet of a BCC crystal in the (100) d irection.
We first use known exact results to map the staggered F-model t o a sine-
Gordon type model (defined in section 3.1), and study the reno rmalization group
equations for this model using momentum shell integration t echniques. The map
to the sine-Gordon model is constructed using an exact resul t on the long range
part of the height-height correlation function of the F-mod el (i.e. the staggered
F-model at zero staggered field) [40]. The results we obtain a re the phase
diagram of the staggered F-model and the leading singularit y in the free energy.
To get more results, e.g. the next to leading singularity in t he free energy, we
need a larger source of information than is available in the f orm of the long range
part of the height-height correlation function. It turns ou t that the free fermion
method, upon which Baxter’s original solution is based, is fl exible enough to
admit a perturbative expansion about the free fermion line. By calculating the
singular part of the free energy perturbatively about the fr ee fermion line, one
can construct a map from the staggered F-model to the sine-Go rdon model
by demanding that it correctly reproduces the singular part of the free energy.
The idea thus is to use the mapping to the sine-Gordon type mod el as an
extrapolation technique. To make this approach practical w e:
1. Develop in chapter 3 a simple diagrammatic method to find th e renormal-
ization group equations for a given sine-Gordon type model. This method
is based on a combination of functional Feynman rules and the operator
product expansion.
2. Rewrite in section 5.9 the perturbative expansion about t he free fermion
line as a linked cluster expansion.
Although these two results make it possible to construct a ma p to a sine-Gordon
type model in a systematic way, the actual construction of th is map is beyond
the scope of this thesis. We do, however, explicitly calcula te the first order
correction to Baxter’s result. This allows us to verify resu lts which previously
could only be obtained using renormalization group argumen ts.
31.1 Summary
In chapter 2 we introduce the staggered F-model and discuss t he equivalence
with the BCSOS model.
In chapter 3 a systematic renormalization group method is de rived. In this
chapter we also discuss the application of the renormalizat ion group in
the calculation of critical exponents.
In chapter 4 we obtain the phase diagram of the staggered F-mo del and cal-
culate the leading singularity in the free energy by using th e information
present in the form of the asymptotic form of the height-heig ht correlation
function
In chapter 5 we first present a derivation of Baxter’s exact so lution. We then
perturbatively lift the free fermion condition. This allow s one to write the
free energy of the staggered F-model as a perturbative expan sion about
the free fermion line. Baxter’s exact solution can thus be se en as the zeroth
order term in this expansion. We explicitely calculate the fi rst order term.
To facilitate the computation of the higher order terms we de rive a linked
cluster method in section 5.9.
4Chapter 2
Definition of the staggered
F-model
In this chapter we shall introduce the six-vertex model, of w hich the staggered
F-model is a special case. Some known results are discussed.
2.1 The six-vertex model
The six-vertex model can be defined as follows: place arrows o n the bonds of
a square lattice so that there are two arrows pointing into ea ch vertex. Six
types of vertices can arise (hence the name of the model). The se vertices are
shown in fig. 2.1. By giving each vertex-type a (position-dep endent) energy
the model is defined. These models were first introduced to stu dy ferroelectric
systems. Later it was shown that six-vertex models can be map ped to solid-on-
solid (SOS) models [6]. Only a few of these models can be solve d exactly. These
include the free fermion models [8,39] and models that can ca n be solved using
a (generalized) Bethe Ansatz [4,5,21–23]. To define the stag gered F-model, we
divide the lattice into two sublattices A and B, such that the nearest neighbor
of an A vertex is a B vertex. The vertex energies are chosen as i ndicated in
fig. 2.1. When the the staggered field ( s) vanishes the model reduces to the
F-model, which has been solved by Lieb [22]. For nonzero stag gered field the
model can be solved when βǫ=1
2ln (2) [3].
✲✲
✻✻
1
ǫ✛✛❄
❄
2
ǫ✲✲❄
❄
3
ǫ✛✛
✻✻
4
ǫ✛✲✻
❄
5
±s✛✲❄
✻
6
∓s
Figure 2.1: The six vertices and their energies. The upper and lower sign s correspond
to the two sublattices.
5❄
✻✛ ✲✻
❄✲✛❄
✻✛ ✲❄
❄✲ ✲✻
❄✲✛
✻
❄✲✛❄
✻✛ ✲❄
❄✲ ✲❄
❄✲ ✲❄
❄✛ ✛
❄
❄✛ ✛❄
❄✲ ✲❄
❄✲ ✲✻
❄✲✛❄
✻✛ ✲
❄
❄✛ ✛❄
❄✲ ✲❄
❄✲ ✲❄
❄✛ ✛✻
❄✲✛
✻
✻✛ ✛✻
✻✲ ✲✻
✻✲ ✲✻
✻✛ ✛✻
✻✛ ✛
343432
434323
343212
232121
121012
232123
Figure 2.2: An arrow configuration together with the corresponding heig ht function.
2.2 Six-vertex models and SOS models
We now proceed to show how six-vertex models are related to SO S models.
First we introduce a dual lattice. Each bond of the dual latti ce now crosses an
arrow placed on one of the bonds of the original lattice. By ro tating this arrow
90◦clockwise and placing it on the corresponding bond of the dua l lattice, we
obtain an arrow configuration on the dual lattice. A height fu nction ( h) is now
defined by demanding that h(x) =h(y) + 1 if an arrow points from ytox.
By fixing the height at one particular point, the height at eac h point of the
dual lattice is defined unambiguously. See [6] for more detai ls. The fact that
the height difference between nearest neighbors is always ±1 makes six-vertex
models ideal models for crystal surfaces of BCC crystals in t he (100) direction.
The class of SOS models to which six-vertex models are mapped is also known
as body centered solid on solid models (BCSOS models). In fig. 2.2 an arrow
configuration on a lattice together with the corresponding h eight function on
the dual lattice is shown.
62.3 Roughening transition in the F model
According to [22] a phase transition of Kosterlitz-Thoules s type takes place in
the F model at inverse temperature βǫ= ln (2). If βǫ >ln (2) the crystal surface
as described by the F model is smooth. In this case the height- height correla-
tion function G(r) =/angbracketleftBig
(h(r)−h(0))2/angbracketrightBig
decays exponentially with increasing r.
When one takes βǫ < ln (2), the surface is in a rough phase. It can be shown
that [40]
G(r) =2
πarccos/parenleftbig
1−1
2exp(2 βǫ)/parenrightbigln (r) (2.1)
The logarithmic divergence of the correlation function at l arge distances is
caused by thermal fluctuations in the local height of the surf ace with arbitrary
long wavelengths. Note that for ǫ >0 the F model has a twofold degenerate
ground state consisting of vertex 5 on one sublattice and ver tex 6 on the other
sublattice. By introducing a staggered field this degenerac y is lifted. It has
been shown [27] that in a nonzero staggered field the F model is in a smooth
phase for positive ǫ.
7Chapter 3
Renormalization group
equations for sine-Gordon
type models
In this chapter we will introduce the sine-Gordon type Hamil tonian and then
show how renormalization group equations can be obtained fo r such models.
First a cut-off procedure will be introduced to define the theo ry. Renormaliza-
tion is carried out by first integrating over some of the degre es of freedom of
the model. The model, when formulated in terms of the remaini ng degrees of
freedom, will look like the original model with a lower cut-o ff. Finally a scale
transformation will restore the original cut-off.
3.1 Effective Hamiltonians for the staggered F-
model
Since the staggered F-model can be interpreted as a solid-on -solid model (see
section 2.2), it is natural to introduce a field h, that describes the height of a
surface. The Hamiltonian density of this field must possess t he same symmetries
as the staggered F-model. In particular we must have:
F(h+ 1, βs) = F(h,−βs) (3.1)
F(h) = F(−h) (3.2)
Heresis the staggered field, and we have assumed that the ground sta te of
the staggered F-model (for βǫ > 0 and βs/ne}ationslash= 0) corresponds to h= 0 in the
sine-Gordon model. From (3.1) it follows that
F(h+ 2, βs) =F(h, βs) (3.3)
(3.2) and (3.3) lead us to the Hamiltonian density:
F(h, ∂ih, ∂ijh, . . . , βǫ, βs ) =∞/summationdisplay
n=0Dn(∂ih, ∂ijh, . . . , βǫ, βs ) cos(nπh)
(3.4)
8HereDnis an unknown function of its arguments. According to (3.1) w e have
Dn(∂ih, ∂ijh, . . . , βǫ, −βs) = (−1)nDn(∂ih, ∂ijh, . . . , βǫ, βs )
(3.5)
3.2 The renormalization group transformation
We will rewrite the Hamiltonian (3.4) as
H=∞/summationdisplay
−∞/integraldisplayd2x
a2exp(inπh)Dn/parenleftbig
a∂ih, a2∂ijh, a3∂ijkh, . . ./parenrightbig
(3.6)
We can think of the constant aas the “lattice constant” of the original micro-
scopic Hamiltonian. In this original model1
a2would be the density of degrees
of freedom. The effective Hamiltonian (3.6) should have the s ame density of de-
grees of freedom. The constant aappears in the Hamiltonian as a consequence
of replacing summations by integrals and finite differences b y partial derivatives.
We will define the Fourier transform of the field h(x) as
ˆh(k) =1√
V/integraldisplay
d2xh(x)exp ( −ık·x) (3.7)
HereVis the volume of the system. h(x) can then be written as
h(x) =1√
V/summationdisplay
kˆh(k)exp( ık·x) (3.8)
We now define a cut-off by introducing a set ( S) of allowed k-values. We assume
that the set Shas the property:
k∈S⇒ −k∈S (3.9)
The density of k-values is written asV
(2π)2P(k). The function P(k) will be
called a cut-off function. We shall assume that the cut-off is c hosen such that
P(0) = 1 and all derivatives of P(k) are zero at k= 0. If the volume Vis
chosen large enough, a summation over Scan be replaced by an integral:
/summationdisplay
k∈SF(k) =V/integraldisplayd2k
(2π)2P(k)F(k) (3.10)
provided that the function Fdoes not correlate with the characteristic function
ofS. In case such correlations do exist we have to replace P(k) by the char-
acteristic function of the set S, which we denote as Pc(k). In general we thus
have
/summationdisplay
k∈SF(k) =V/integraldisplayd2k
(2π)2Pc(k)F(k) (3.11)
The value of anow follows by requiring1
a2to be the number of degrees of
freedom per unit volume:
1
a2=/integraldisplayd2k
(2π)2P(k) (3.12)
9We will denote the set of all allowed functions by ˆS.ˆSis the set of all finite linear
combinations of the functions eık·xwithk∈S. Note that we have ˆh(k) = 0 if
h∈ˆSandk/ne}ationslash∈S.
We now define the partition function as:
Z=/integraldisplay
DheH(3.13)
Where the measure DhonˆSis defined as:
Dh≡/productdisplay
k∈Sdˆh(k)
aR(k) (3.14)
The function R(k) which occurs in the definition of the measure has to be chosen
such that the free energy of the exactly soluble Gaussian mod el is consistent with
the renormalization group equation for the free energy. Alt hough the correct
choice of R(k) is important for a consistent description of the theory, it turns
out that its effect is equivalent to adding a constant term ind ependent of any
couplings to the Hamiltonian and hence doesn’t influence the dependence of the
free energy on the couplings.
3.3 Renormalization
The renormalized Hamiltonian is obtained from (3.6) by usin g the Wilson-Kogut
momentum shell integration technique [29, 37]. We will inte grate (3.13) over
some of the degrees of freedom, leaving us with an effective Ha miltonian ( ˜H)
with a lower cut-off. Next a scale transformation will restor e the original cut-off
and yield the renormalized Hamiltonian ( HR).
We must now specify precisely the degrees of freedom we have t o integrate
over. Since the renormalized Hamiltonian ( HR) has the same cut-off function
P(k) as the original Hamiltonian ( H), and since it is obtained from the effective
Hamiltonian ( ˜H) after a scale transformation, ˜Hhas to have a cut-off function
of the form P(lk). In terms of lthe scale transformation becomes x→l−1x. We
thus have to construct a set S(1)of allowed k-values for ˜H, such that S(1)⊂S
andS(1)corresponds to the cut-off function P(lk). The complement of S(1)in
S, denoted as S(2), contains the degrees of freedom we have to integrate over.
We thus have to split the set Sofk-values into two disjoint sets S(1)andS(2).
This can be done as follows: We decide to put the points k∈Sand−k∈S
inS(1)with probabilityP(lk)
P(k).S(2)is defined as S(2)=S−S(1). The cut-off
function for S(2)will be denoted as P(2), is thus given by
P(2)=P(k)−P(lk) (3.15)
We now construct the spaces ˆS(1)andˆS(2)analogous to ˆS:ˆS(i)is defined as
the set of all finite linear combinations of the functions eık·xwithk∈S(i). We
now have
ˆS=ˆS(1)⊕ˆS(2)(3.16)
The projection of a h∈ˆSonˆS(1)andˆS(2)will be denoted by h(1)respectively
h(2). The first step in the Wilson-Kogut renormalization scheme i s to integrate
10over the field h(2). After this integration one obtains an effective Hamiltonia n
˜Hwhich depends on h(1). The final step is to restore the original cut-off by a
length rescaling:
x′=l−1x (3.17)
The renormalized field hRis defined as:
hR(x′) =h(1)(x) (3.18)
and the renormalized Hamiltonian HRis defined as:
HR/parenleftbig
hR/parenrightbig
=˜H/parenleftBig
h(1)/parenrightBig
(3.19)
3.4 Cumulant expansion
The integration over the field h(2)is performed after an expansion about the
Gaussian model. We rewrite our Hamiltonian (3.6) as
H=Hg+X (3.20)
where Hgis a Gaussian interaction and Xis a perturbation. Hgmay be split
into a Gaussian interaction for h(1)andh(2), denoted as H(1)respectively H(2)
Hg= −j
2/integraltext
(∇h)2d2x=−j
2/summationtext
k∈Sk2|h(k)|2
=−j
2/summationtext
k∈S(1)k2|h(k)|2−j
2/summationtext
k∈S(2)k2|h(k)|2
= −j
2/integraltext/parenleftbig
∇h(1)/parenrightbig2d2x−j
2/integraltext/parenleftbig
∇h(2)/parenrightbig2d2x
= H(1)+H(2)(3.21)
Note that for a given Hamiltonian the representation (3.20) is not unique be-
cause one may choose to include a Gaussian term in the perturb ationXas well.
Such a freedom of choice can sometimes be exploited in first or der calculations
to improve the accuracy of calculations (see [33]).
We define the measure Dh(2)by
/integraldisplay
Dh(2)F(h)≡/integraltext
h∈ˆS(2)DhF(h)/integraltext
h∈ˆS(2)DheH(2)=/integraltext/producttext
k∈S(2)dˆh(k)F(h)/integraltext/producttext
k∈S(2)dˆh(k)exp/parenleftbig
H(2)/parenleftbig
h(2)/parenrightbig/parenrightbig
(3.22)
where F(h) is an arbitrary function of h. The Gaussian average of a function
Fover the field h(2)can now be written as
/an}b∇acketle{tF(h)/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/integraldisplay
Dh(2)F(h)exp/parenleftBig
H(2)/parenleftBig
h(2)/parenrightBig/parenrightBig
(3.23)
We now define the effective Hamiltonian ˜H/parenleftbig
h(1)/parenrightbig
as follows:
exp/parenleftBig
˜H/parenleftBig
h(1)/parenrightBig/parenrightBig
=K/integraldisplay
Dh(2)exp (H) (3.24)
HereKis a constant. To determine HRone simply has to rescale ˜H(see (3.17),
(3.18) and (3.19)). To fix the constant K, one has to express HRandHin the
11same functional form and then require the constant terms to b e equal. From
(3.20), (3.21), (3.23) and (3.24) it follows
˜H= ln (K) +H(1)+ ln/an}b∇acketle{texp(X)/an}b∇acket∇i}ht (3.25)
To second order in X, (3.25) can be written as
˜H= ln (K) +H(1)+/an}b∇acketle{tX/an}b∇acket∇i}ht+1
2/angbracketleftBig
(X− /an}b∇acketle{tX/an}b∇acket∇i}ht)2/angbracketrightBig
+. . . (3.26)
This expansion is known as the cumulant expansion. For the ge neral form of
this expansion, see [14].
3.5 Diagrammatic expansion
It turns out that the terms in the cumulant expansion can be re presented as
amplitudes of Feynman-diagrams. In these diagrams the corr elation function of
the field h(2)plays the role of the propagator. In section B.1 we show that i t
takes the form:
G(x) =1
jV/summationdisplay
k∈S(2)exp(ık·x)
k2=1
j/integraldisplayd2k
(2π)2P(2)
c(k)exp (ık·x)
k2
(3.27)
where P(2)
cis the characteristic function of the set S(2). The amplitudes of
Feynman-diagrams we will encounter later can be expressed a s integrals of prod-
ucts of propagators. We have to be carefull with replacing P(2)
cbyP(2)in such
cases. E.g. we have
/integraldisplay
d2x{G(x)}2=1
j2/integraldisplayd2k
(2π)2P(2)(k)
k4(3.28)
It is not difficult to see that G(0) is universal:
G(0) =1
2πjln (l) (3.29)
We now consider the case of an infinitesimal cut-off change:
l−1= 1−ǫ (3.30)
(3.17) becomes
x′= (1−ǫ)x (3.31)
We now associate ǫwith an infinitesimal increase in a rescaling parameter t. The
renormalization process then generates one parameter fami lies of Hamiltonians
H(t). The renormalization group equations can then be written a s
dH
dt= coefficient of ǫinHR (3.32)
The parameter tis related to a length transformation:
x(t) =e−tx(0) (3.33)
12Instead of the Hamiltonian it is often more convenient to wri te the renormal-
ization group equations in terms of the Hamiltonian density . We shall denote
the effective Hamiltonian density corresponding to the effec tive Hamiltonian ˜H
as˜F:
˜H/parenleftBig
h(1)/parenrightBig
=/integraldisplay
d2x˜F/parenleftBig
h(1), ∂ih(1)/parenrightBig
(3.34)
The renormalized Hamiltonian density, denoted as ˜F, can thus be expressed in
terms of ˜Fby rewriting (3.34) in terms of hR:
HR/parenleftbig
hR/parenrightbig
≡˜H/parenleftbig
h(1)/parenrightbig
=/integraltext
d2x˜F/parenleftbig
h(1), ∂ih(1)/parenrightbig
=/integraltext
d2x′(1 + 2 ǫ)˜F/parenleftbig
hR,(1−ǫ)∂ihR···/parenrightbig
(3.35)
where in the last line we used the transformation x′= (1−ǫ)xandhR(x′) =
h(1)(x). The renormalized Hamiltonian density ( FR) can thus be expressed as
FR/parenleftbig
hR/parenrightbig
= (1 + 2 ǫ)˜F/parenleftbig
hR,(1−ǫ)∂ihR···/parenrightbig
(3.36)
The renormalization group equations can thus be expressed a s
dF
dt= coefficient of ǫinFR (3.37)
We now proceed with the derivation of the Feynman-rules for t he cumulant
expansion (3.26). It is convenient to derive these rules firs t for the term/angbracketleftbig
eX/angbracketrightbig
.
We shall see that ln/angbracketleftbig
eX/angbracketrightbig
is obtained by summing over connected diagrams only.
LetF(h, ∂ih, ∂ijh, . . .) be the non-Gaussian part of the Hamiltonian density in
(3.6). We can then write:
1
n!/an}b∇acketle{tXn/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=1
n!/integraldisplayn/productdisplay
k=1d2xk/angbracketleftBiggn/productdisplay
k=1F/parenleftBig
h(xk), ∂ih|xk, ∂ijh|xk, . . ./parenrightBig/angbracketrightBigg
(3.38)
We can evaluate (3.38) by writing F, considered as a function of the field hand
its derivatives, as a Fourier integral. We will define a Fouri er transform of Fas
follows:
ˆF(γ, γi, γij, . . .) =/integraltextdh
2π/integraltext/producttext
id∂ih
2π/integraltext/producttext
ijd∂ijh
2π. . .
F(h, ∂ih, ∂ijh, . . .)e−ı[γh+γi∂ih+γij∂ijh...](3.39)
The integrals in (3.39) are from −∞to∞.Fcan now be written as
F(h, ∂ih, ∂ijh, . . .) =/integraltext
dγ/integraltext/producttext
idγi/integraltext/producttext
ijdγij. . .
ˆF(γ, γi, γij, . . .)eı[γh+γi∂ih+γij∂ijh...](3.40)
The next step is to substitute the representation (3.40) for the Hamiltonian
density in (3.38). To facilitate this, it is convenient to in troduce multi-indices.
The term in the exponent in (3.40) can be written as
γh+∞/summationdisplay
k=1γi1,... ,i k∂i1,... ,i kh (3.41)
13A tuple of kindices, as in the summation in (3.41), can be treated as a sin gle
index. Such an index is called a multi-index. A tuple of kindices will be written
as (k). We can thus rewrite (3.41) as
∞/summationdisplay
k=0γ(k)∂(k)h (3.42)
Note that repeated multi-indices are only summed over while keeping the num-
ber of indices contained in the multi-index constant. See se ction A.3 for all the
conventions on multi-indices. Inserting (3.40) in (3.38) g ives
1
n!/an}b∇acketle{tXn/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=1
n!/integraldisplay
n/productdisplay
j=1d2xjd/braceleftBig
γ(j)/bracerightBig
n/productdisplay
j=1ˆF/parenleftBig/braceleftBig
γ(j)/bracerightBig/parenrightBig
/angbracketleftbigg
eı/summationtextn
j=1γ(j)
(k)∂(k)h(xj)/angbracketrightbigg
(3.43)
Note that the term in the exponent in (3.43) can be interprete d as the action of a
distribution (i.e. a linear functional) on the field h. The action of a distribution
Ton a function his denoted as Th. See section A.5 of the appendix for a precise
definition of distributions. The problem is thus to evaluate
/angbracketleftbig
eıTh/angbracketrightbig
(3.44)
for a general distribution T. In chapter C of the appendix it is shown that
/angbracketleftbig
eıTh/angbracketrightbig
=e−1
2TxTyG(x−y)eıTh(1)(3.45)
HereTdenotes a distribution, TxandTyact as TonG(x−y) considered as a
function of xrespectively y(xandyare thus “dummy”-variables).
We now have to expand (3.45) in powers of the propagator, and s ubstitute
the result in (3.43). The distribution Tin (3.45) is defined as follows: First we
define the distribution T(j)as
T(j)h=∞/summationdisplay
k=0γ(j)
(k)∂(k)h(xj) (3.46)
The distribution Tis then defined as
T=n/summationdisplay
j=1T(j)(3.47)
TheLthorder term in the propagator in the integrand of (3.43) becom es
1
n!(−1)L
2LL![TxTyG(x−y)]L
n/productdisplay
j=1ˆF/parenleftBig/braceleftBig
γ(j)/bracerightBig/parenrightBig
eıTh(1)(3.48)
Each term in the expansion of [ TxTyG(x−y)]Lcan be represented diagram-
matically. We first perform a trivial step:
[TxTyG(x−y)]L=L/productdisplay
p=1TxTyG(x−y) (3.49)
14Each term in the expansion of the product can be represented d iagrammatically
as follows. Draw the Npoints xj. If we choose from the pthterm in the product
the term γ(r)
(m)∂(xr)
(m)fromTxand the term γ(s)
(n)∂(xs)
(n)fromTy, we draw an oriented
line from xrtoxs, we label the line with the value of p, and at the points xr
andxswe put the labels ( m) respectively ( n) on the line. We repeat this for
all values of p. There is now a one to one correspondence between the set of al l
possible terms in the expansion of the product and the set of l abelled diagrams.
The amplitude of a labelled diagram is obtained by inserting the appropriate
product of the γ’s and the derivatives of the propagators in (3.48). We see th at
the integrals over the γ’s result in a factor
1
ır∂rF
∂/parenleftbig
∂(m1)h/parenrightbig
···∂/parenleftbig
∂(mr)h/parenrightbig/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
h=h(1)(3.50)
for each vertex where rlines, labelled by ( m1). . .(mr), come together. The
product of the factors1
ırat each vertex will precisely cancel the factor ( −1)L
in (3.48), because each propagator gives rise to two factors1
ıand there are L
propagators. We can simplify matters further by omitting al l labels, except the
multi-indices at both ends of each propagator, in a labelled diagram. The am-
plitude of such a Feynman diagram is given by the sum of all the corresponding
labelled diagrams. It is convenient to define a propagator G(n),(m)(p−q) as
G(n),(m)(p−q)≡∂(p)
(n),x∂(q)
(m),yG(x−y) (3.51)
Since all labelled diagrams corresponding to a nonvanishin g Feynman diagram
make identical contributions, we simply have to multiply th e amplitude of one
diagram by the number of ways of labeling a Feynman diagram, t o obtain its
amplitude (relabeling the vertices will change the amplitu de of a diagram, but
when integrated over all positions of the vertices, all diag rams obtained from
each other by a relabeling of the vertices will, of course, ma ke identical contribu-
tions). This amplitude then has to be integrated over all the xj. We shall denote
the number of ways of orienting the propagators, labeling th e propagators and
the vertices by respectively N1,N2andN3. Since the multi-indices have to be
summed over, two labelings of the propagators will not be con sidered distinct
if the only difference is a permutation of the multi-indices. Two labelings of
the vertices are considered distinct if it is not possible to transform one labeling
into the other by a relabeling of the propagators. We then hav e
N1= 2L−k(3.52)
where kis the number of lines that have both there ends connected to t he same
vertex,
N2=L!/producttext
rkr!(3.53)
where the product is over all ordered pairs of vertices, and krdenotes the number
of propagators connecting the pair rand
N3=n!
S(3.54)
15where Sis the order of the symmetry group of the Feynman diagram. Usi ng
(3.48), (3.50), (3.51), (3.52), (3.53) and (3.54), we see th at the Feynman rules
for/angbracketleftbig
eX/angbracketrightbig
are as follows:
1. To compute the contribution that is nthorder in XandLthorder in
1
j, draw all topological distinct Feynman diagrams with nvertices and L
lines.
2. Label both ends of each line by arbitrary multi-indices.
3. For each vertex there is a term:
∂rF
∂/parenleftbig
∂(m1)h/parenrightbig
···∂/parenleftbig
∂(mr)h/parenrightbig/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
h=h(1)(3.55)
where the ( mi) are the multi-indices on the lines at the vertex and the
derivative is evaluated at the coordinates of the vertex.
4. Each line labelled with the multi-indices ( m) and ( n) corresponds to the
propagator G(n),(m)(p−q):
G(n),(m)(p−q) =∂(p)
(n),x∂(q)
(m),yG(x−y) (3.56)
where pandqare the coordinates of the vertices connected by the line.
5. For each line that has both its ends connected to the same po int there is
a factor1
2.
6. For each pair of vertices connected by klines there is a factor1
k!.
7. There is a factor1
S, where Sis the order of the symmetry group acting
on the vertices of the diagram.
8. Integrate over all coordinates of the vertices, and sum ov er all multi-
indices.
We will now show that ln/angbracketleftbig
eX/angbracketrightbig
is precisely the sum of all connected diagrams.
We assume that all connected diagrams are enumerated in some arbitrary order.
LetCibe the amplitude of the ithconnected diagram. Using the above Feynman
rules, we can write:
/an}b∇acketle{texp (X)/an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/summationdisplay
{ni}∞/productdisplay
i=1Cni
i
ni!=∞/productdisplay
i=1∞/summationdisplay
n=0Cn
i
n!= exp/parenleftBigg∞/summationdisplay
i=1Ci/parenrightBigg
(3.57)
3.6 Evaluation of diagrams
There are two diagrams, see fig. 3.1, contributing to the first order cumulant.
Using the Feynman rules derived above it is a simple matter to evaluate the
amplitude of these diagrams. In the case of a Hamiltonian den sityF(h, ∂ih···)
one obtains to first order the effective Hamiltonian density ˜F
˜F/parenleftBig
h(1), ∂ih(1)···/parenrightBig
=F/parenleftBig
h(1), ∂ih(1)···/parenrightBig
+1
2/summationdisplay
l,m∂2F
∂(k)h∂(l)h/bracketrightbigg
h=h(1)G(l),(m)(0)
(3.58)
16• ✫✪✬✩
•
Figure 3.1: The two Feynman diagrams corresponding to the first order cum ulant.
where the sum over landmis from 0 to ∞. To obtain the renormalization
group equation for the Hamiltonian density from this, we hav e to perform a
rescaling x→(1−ǫ)x(see (3.36)) and use (3.37). These equations yield the
first order renormalization group equation for the Hamilton ian density:
dF
dt= 2F−∞/summationdisplay
k=1k∂F
∂/parenleftbig
∂(k)h/parenrightbig∂(k)h+1
2/summationdisplay
k,l∂2F
∂/parenleftbig
∂(k)h/parenrightbig
∂/parenleftbig
∂(k)h/parenrightbigG(k),(l)
ǫ(3.59)
The sum over kandlis again from 0 to ∞. The quantity G(k),(l)(0) is universal
(i.e. independent of the form of the cut-off function P(k)) when k=l= 0 or
k+l= 2. It is not difficult to derive the result:
G(l),(m)(0) = ( −1)l−m
21
2πj1
2l+m
2/parenleftbigl+m
2/parenrightbig
!Al+mC(l),(m) (3.60)
HereAnis zero if nis odd, else we have
An=/integraldisplay∞
0d|k||k|n−1(P(|k|)−P(|(1 +ǫ)k|)) (3.61)
In particular we have:
A0=ǫ
A2=4π
a2ǫ(3.62)
The tensor C(l),(m)is a contraction operator. For an arbitrary tensor T(l),(m),
T(l),(m)C(l),(m)is the sum of all contractions of the indices contained in ( l) and
(m) We can write C(l),(m)explicitly as a sum of products of Kronecker delta’s:
C(l),(m)=/summationdisplay
π′δπ(i1),π(i2)···δπ(il+m−1),π(il+m) (3.63)
The sum is over all nonequivalent permutations of the indice si1···il+m. There
are thus(l+m)!
2l+m
2(l+m
2)!terms in the sum.
We now proceed with the evaluation of the higher order cumula nts. Ac-
cording to the Feynman rules the nthorder contribution to the renormalized
Hamiltonian is an n-fold integral over the volume of a product of propagators
and functions of the field h(1). We want to replace such an expression by a sin-
gle integral over the volume, thus obtaining a contribution to the Hamiltonian
density. We write the amplitude Aof a diagram as
A=/integraldisplay
d2x1···d2xnP(x1···xn)D/parenleftBig
h(1)(x1)···h(1)(xn)/parenrightBig
(3.64)
17Eigenoperator Scale dimension
1 0
cos(πh)π
4j
a2(∇h)2−1
j2/parenleftBig
a2(∇h)2−1
j/parenrightBig
cos(πh)π
4j+ 2
cos(2πh)π
j
Table 3.1: Some eigenoperators and their scale dimensions relative to the Gaussian
Hamiltonian Hg=−j
2/integraltext
d2x(∇h)2.
HereP(x1···xn) is the product of propagators and D/parenleftbig
h(1)(x1)···h(1)(xn)/parenrightbig
denotes the product of derivatives of Hamiltonian densitie s. It is now tempt-
ing to perform n−1 of the nintegrations in (3.64) by Taylor-expanding the
field about one of the points x1. . . x n(it doesn’t matter which integrations are
performed because different choices are related by a partial integration). The
problem with this approach is that it assumes that the field h(1)is analytic.
In reality one should expect a Taylor-expansion of the field t o converge only
in a region the size of a(3.12), because ais the distance between independent
degrees of freedom of the field.
A better way to proceed is to use the so-called operator produ ct expansion.
Before we explain how this works we will first introduce some n ew terminology.
A local operator is a term in the Hamiltonian that depends onl y on the field in
one point. The Hamiltonian density evaluated at a certain po int is an example
of a local operator. The first order renormalization group eq uations for local
operators is almost identical to that of the Hamiltonian den sity. If O(h(x)) is
a local operator then
dO
dt=−∞/summationdisplay
k=1k∂O
∂/parenleftbig
∂(k)h/parenrightbig∂(k)h+1
2/summationdisplay
k,l∂2O
∂/parenleftbig
∂(k)h/parenrightbig
∂/parenleftbig
∂(k)h/parenrightbigG(k),(l)
ǫ(3.65)
The only difference with (3.59) is that the term 2 Odoesn’t appear on the r.h.s.
of this equation. Eigenoperators are local operators that r enormalize as
dO
dt=−λO (3.66)
λis called the scale dimension of the operator O. In table 3.1 we have listed a
few eigenoperators with their scale dimensions. By solving (3.66) for all eigen-
operators one obtains a complete set of operators. All eigen operators can be
written as a multinomial of derivatives of the field hmultiplied by cos( nπh)
withnan integer. We shall call an operator even (odd) if nis even (odd). We
can now expand any local operator in this set of eigenoperato rs. A product of
operators localized at different points can be considered to be local if the points
lie close to each other. This product can then be expanded in e igenoperators
localized at one point. It is clear that this expansion, know n as the operator
product expansion, can be used to replace D/parenleftbig
h(1)(x1)···h(1)(xn)/parenrightbig
in (3.64) by
a sum of operators localized at the point x1. Suppose all eigenoperators are
enumerated by an index n. The scale dimension of the nthoperator will be
18denoted as λn. We can thus put
D(h(x1)···h(xn))≡/summationdisplay
kck(x1···xn)Ok(h(x1)) (3.67)
Note that we have replaced the field h(1)byh. To apply (3.67) to (3.64) a rescal-
ing must thus be performed first. It is important to note that ( 3.67) is an identity
in the sense that the Hamiltonian to which the l.h.s. is added may be identified
with the Hamiltonian to which the r.h.s. is added. Since D(h(x1)···h(xn))
is a sum of products of eigenoperators located at the points x1···xn, all we
need to know are the functions ci1···in(x1···xn) (operator product expansion
coefficients ) in the expansion
Oi1(h(x1))···Oin(h(xn))≡/summationdisplay
kci1···in,k(x1···xn)Ok(h(x1))
(3.68)
The operator product expansion coefficients can be determine d as follows. One
demands that the replacement of the product of eigenoperato rs according to
(3.68) commutes with a renormalization. One then obtains an equation relating
ci1···in,k(x1···xn) toci1···in,k/parenleftbigx1
l···xn
l/parenrightbig
. with lthe rescaling factor involved in
the renormalization. Now, when one takes x1=x2=···=xnthe operator
product expansion is trivial. The functions ci1···in,k(x1···xn) can thus be de-
termined by taking the limit l→ ∞. Note that that since the renormalization
has to be carried out perturbatively one obtains the operato r product expan-
sion coefficients as an expansion in the non-Gaussian couplin gs. It is thus very
straightforward to find the operator product expansion coeffi cients to zeroth or-
der. Higher order contributions to the operator product exp ansion coefficients
will again involve nontrivial integrations over Feynman-d iagrams. These dia-
grams must again be evaluated using the operator product exp ansion. E.g. to
find the renormalization group equations to second order one has to deal with
expressions as in (3.64) with n= 2. Since the function Dis already of second
order one only has to work out the operator product expansion to zeroth order,
which is straightforward. To third order one has to calculat e the operator prod-
uct expansion coefficients in (3.68) with n= 3 to zeroth order and the operator
product expansion coefficients with n= 2 to first order. The latter ones involve
Feynman-diagrams in which the two operators are connected t o one of the other
operators in the Hamiltonian. These diagrams can be evaluat ed by again using
the operator product expansion (3.68), but now with n= 3 and only to zeroth
order. It is clear that repeated use of the operator product e xpansion allows
one to obtain the renormalization group equations to any ord er.
in the next chapter, we are going to apply the theory to find the phase
diagram of the staggered F-model.
19Chapter 4
Applications of the
renormalization group
equations
Once the renormalization group equations are known it is a si mple matter to
obtain the singular part of the free energy. In this section w e shall first derive
the renormalization group equation for the free energy and t hen proceed to show
how the singular part of the free energy is obtained from it.
It is convenient to rewrite the Hamiltonian as
H=−j
2/integraldisplay
d2x(∇h)2+∞/summationdisplay
n=1yn/integraldisplayd2x
a2On(h(x)) (4.1)
Here the Onare the eigenoperators defined by equations (3.65) and (3.66 ). We
write the renormalization group equations as
dyi
dt= (2−λi)yi+∞/summationdisplay
k=2/summationdisplay
i1···ikλi,i1···ikyi1···yik (4.2)
Note that the λiare the scale dimensions of the operators. Also note that
the Gaussian coupling is kept constant under renormalizati on. This is possible
because a2(∇h)2−1
jis an eigenoperator. To find out how the singularity in the
free energy is related to the λ’s in this equation, we must first find the relation
between the free energy of the original and the renormalized system. Note that
the renormalized Hamiltonian satisfies the relation
exp (HR)
ZR=/integraldisplay
h∈ˆS(2)exp (H)
ZDh (4.3)
where ZRandZare the partition functions for the renormalized respectiv ely
the original system. Combining (3.22) with (3.24) and (4.3) we get:
ZR
Z=K
Zg(4.4)
20HereZgis the partition function of the Gaussian model:
Zg=/integraldisplay
h∈ˆS(2)exp/parenleftBig
H(2)/parenrightBig
Dh (4.5)
LetUbe the constant contribution to HRfrom ln /an}b∇acketle{texp(X)/an}b∇acket∇i}ht. Since the total
constant contribution to HRis zero, it follows from (3.25) that ln ( K) =−U.
(4.4) can then be written
F= (1−2ǫ)FR+U
V+1
Vln (Zg) (4.6)
where FandFRare the free energy densities times −βfor the original respec-
tively renormalized system.
dF
dt−2F+c+c′= 0 (4.7)
Herecis the coefficient of ǫinU
Vandc′is the coefficient of ǫin1
Vln (Zg). Since
c′only depends on j, which is kept constant under renormalization, the effect of
this term is to shift the free energy by a constant amount. We a re thus allowed
to ignore this term.
4.1 The case of the staggered F-model
When βs= 0 and βǫ <ln (2), it is known that the F-model renormalizes to the
Gaussian model [12,16,17]. For the latter we have
H=−j
2/integraldisplay
d2x(∇h)2(4.8)
The Gaussian coupling jis a known function of the temperature of the F-model:
j=1
2arccos/parenleftbigg
1−1
2e2βǫ/parenrightbigg
(4.9)
(4.9) is valid when βǫ < ln (2) and is obtained as follows: The long range
part of the height-height correlation function R(r)≡/angbracketleftBig
(h(r)−h(0))2/angbracketrightBig
of both
models show a logarithmic behaviour, and is thus invariant u nder horizontal
scaling. This means that the amplitude of the height-height correlation function
is invariant under a renormalization. For the F-model one fin ds [40]
R(r)∼2
πarccos/parenleftbig
1−1
2exp (2 βǫ)/parenrightbigln (r) (4.10)
In case of the Gaussian model one finds (see section B.2)
R(r)∼1
πjln (r) (4.11)
Equating the amplitudes of both correlation functions then leads to the identi-
fication (4.9).
21We expect that when βs≈0, we may replace (3.4) by a Hamiltonian of the
form (4.1). Then because of (3.5) the ynmultiplying even (odd) operators will
be even (odd) functions of βs. We now assume that the ynin (4.1) are analytic
in some neighborhood of βs= 0. This implies that the yncorresponding to odd
operators are O(βs). Of all operators, the operator O1(h) = cos( πh) has the
lowest scale dimension:
λ1=π
4j(4.12)
Between j=π
8andj=π
2this is the only relevant operator (i.e. an initially
infinitesimal y1increases exponentially under renormalization). Below j=π
8
there are no relevant operators and above j=π
2the operator cos(2 πh) also
becomes relevant. Because the coupling y1becomes proportional to βsin the
limitβs→0, we expect the staggered F-model with an infinitesimal stag gered
field to be in a different phase than at zero staggered field for t hose values for βǫ
that correspond to a value for jbetween j=π
8andj=π
2. According to (4.9)
this is for βǫin the interval1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
< βǫ < ln (2). Note that at the lower
boundary βǫis negative:1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
≈ −0.2674 At zero staggered field the
logarithmic behaviour of the height-height correlation fu nction indicates that
the surface is in a rough phase. If the staggered field is turne d on the model no
longer renormalizes to a Gaussian model. If the staggered fie ld is chosen small
enough we expect that under a renormalization the model will renormalize first
to a model of the form
H=/integraldisplay
d2x/bracketleftbigg−j
2(∇h)2+y1
a2cos(πh)/bracketrightbigg
(4.13)
with a small value for y1, but as we renormalize further the coupling y1will
increase. Since the effect of the operator cos( πh) in the Hamiltonian is to favour
even values of h, we expect to be in a smooth phase. Below βǫ=1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
we still expect that the model will renormalize to (3.4) but a s we renormalize
further y1will renormalize to zero. We are then left with a purely Gauss ian
Hamiltonian which describes a rough surface.
Above βǫ= ln (2) the operator cos(2 πh) becomes relevant. Since this is an
even operator its coupling is nonzero at zero staggered field . This causes the
model to no longer renormalize to the Gaussian model (as a con sequence (4.9)
is not valid in this region). If βǫ >ln (2) the surface is thus in a smooth phase
even if βs= 0. To complete the phase diagram we must find the behaviour
of the model for finite values of the staggered field below βǫ=1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
.
Before we do that we shall first calculate the singular part of the free energy
above βǫ=1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
atβs= 0.
4.2 Singular part of the free energy of the stag-
gered F-model
We shall assume that the staggered F-model can be mapped to a m odel of the
form (4.1) such that the couplings ynare analytical as a function of βsin a
neighborhood of βs= 0. If the free energy Fof the model (4.1) is written as
F=Fs+Fr (4.14)
22withFsthe singular part of the free energy and Frthe regular part of the
free energy, Fswill satisfy the homogeneous part of (4.7) and Frwill be a full
solution of (4.7). Exceptions to this rule may arise when a cr itical exponent
associated with the singular behaviour of the free energy is an even integer as
we shall see later. Ignoring these exceptions for the moment , we see that Fs
satisfies the equation:
Fs(y1(t), y2(t). . .) =e2tFs(y1(0), y2(0). . .) (4.15)
In order to see how irrelevant operators modify the singular behaviour, it is
enough to keep just one irrelevant coupling. The generaliza tion to more irrele-
vant couplings is trivial. Suppose that for βs≈0 the staggered F-model model
is mapped to a model (4.1) with y1(0) the coupling of the relevant operator
cos(πh) and y2(0) the coupling of an irrelevant even operator. The mapping to
the model (4.1) can then be written
y1(0) = R1βs+O/parenleftBig
(βs)3/parenrightBig
yn(0) = Rn+O/parenleftBig
(βs)2/parenrightBig (4.16)
The renormalization group equations (4.2) can be rewritten as
dyi
dt=aiyi (4.17)
With a1= 2−π
4j>0 and an<0. Higher order terms in the renormalization
group equations have been ignored. From (4.15) and (4.17) it then follows that
Fs(y1(0), y2(0)) = e−2tFs/parenleftbig
y1(0)ea1t, y2(0)ea2t/parenrightbig
(4.18)
Now choose tsuch that
y1(0)ea1t=c (4.19)
withca constant /ne}ationslash= 0. we can then rewrite (4.18) as
Fs(y1(0), y2(0)) =/parenleftbiggy1(0)
c/parenrightbigg2
a1
Fs/parenleftBigg
c, y2(0)/parenleftBigy1
c/parenrightBig−a2
a1/parenrightBigg
(4.20)
Since we expect Fsto be analytical as a function of y2(0) as long as y1(0)/ne}ationslash= 0,
we can expand:
Fs/parenleftBigg
c, y2(0)/parenleftBigy1
c/parenrightBig−a2
a1/parenrightBigg
=A+By2(0)/parenleftBigy1
c/parenrightBig−a2
a1+. . . (4.21)
Inserting this into (4.20) and using (4.16) yields for the le ading singularity in
the free energy ( F1(βs)):
F1(βs)∼ |βs|2
a1 (4.22)
while the irrelevant operator contributes a singularity ( F2(βs)) of the form
F2(βs)∼F1(βs)|βs|−a2
a1 (4.23)
23Note that a1= 2−π
4j, and jis given by (4.9). As βǫapproaches1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
from above a1tends to zero, and the singularity in the free energy becomes
weaker and weaker. What happens at βǫ=1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
and below is the
subject of section 4.3 The above argument can easily be gener alised to take
account of the presence of more irrelevant operators and hig her order terms
in the identification (4.16), the renormalization group equ ations (4.17) and the
expansion (4.21). By applying a general result [36] to this c ase, we find that the
free energy contains singularities of the form
Fs(βs)∼ |βs|n0+2
a1−/summationtext∞
k=2nkak
a1 (4.24)
where the niare positive integers. If the exponent becomes an even integ er we
have to multiply the r.h.s. of (4.24) with ln |βs|. We can demonstrate this in the
case of the leading singularity as follows: According to (4. 7) the renormalization
group equation for the free energy is given by
dF
dt−2F=−c(y1) (4.25)
cis an even analytical function of y1, because cos( πh) is an odd operator while
the constant operator is even. We are now assuming that2
a1= 2nwhere nis
an integer. (4.17) gives
y1(t) =y1(0)ea1t(4.26)
If−ccontains a term Ky2n
1, (4.25) can be rewritten as
dF
dt−2F=K(y1(0))2ne2t(4.27)
From this equation it follows that
F(y(t)) =K(y1(0))2nte2t+F(y(0)) (4.28)
Using (4.16) and (4.26) it then follows that
Fs∼βs2nln|βs| (4.29)
It is interesting to see what happens if we let2
a1approach the value 2 n. If
we put2
a1= 2n−ǫfor small ǫ, we can rewrite (4.27) as:
dF
dt−2F=K(y1(0))2ne(2+ǫa1)t(4.30)
expanding the r.h.s. of this equation in powers of ǫgives
dF
dt−2F=K(y1(0))2ne2t[1 +ǫa1t+. . .] (4.31)
And the singularity in the free energy can be written as
Fs(βs)∼βs2n/bracketleftBig
ln|βs|+ǫ
2ln2|βs|+. . ./bracketrightBig
(4.32)
244.3 The case βǫ≤1
2ln/parenleftBig
2−√
2/parenrightBig
To complete the phase diagram we must obtain the behaviour of the model at
finite values for the staggered field. This requires us to stud y the effects of
higher order terms in the renormalization group equations. To find the most
important higher order terms we look for terms that are secon d order in y1.
These terms are involved in the generation of operators. The most important of
these terms is the one involved in the generation of the most r elevant operator.
We also look for the lowest order term in the generation of y1arising from
interactions with operators which have as low an scale dimen sion as possible.
To second order in y1only even operators are generated and the most relevant
of these is the operator O2(h) =a2(∇h)2−1
j. It is also this operator which
through interaction with the operator O1contributes to the generation of O1,
which is also a second order effect. Since O2is Gaussian we can calculate this
effect simply by perturbing the Gaussian interaction j. Denoting the coupling
ofO1byyand the coupling of O2by−j′
2, we can write
dj′
dt=A(j+j′)y2
dy
dt=/parenleftBig
2−π
4(j+j′)/parenrightBig
y(4.33)
Although the function A(j) can be calculated using the methods developed
in the previous chapter, for our purpose we can afford to leave this function
undetermined. At j=π
8, which corresponds to βǫ≤1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
, the operator
O1is marginal (i.e. right on the boundary between relevant and irrelevant). To
investigate the phase diagram around this point, we put j=π
8in (4.33) and
expand in powers of j′. To leading order we find
dj′
dt=Ay2
dy
dt=16
πj′y(4.34)
where A≡A/parenleftbigπ
8/parenrightbig
. Note that these renormalization group equations are simil ar
to those for the XY model (see [18, 19]). To be able to construc t the phase
diagram, we must know how to relate j′andyto the model parameters βǫand
βsof the staggered F-model in a nonzero staggered field. Accord ing to (4.16)
we can put
y(0) = R(βǫ)βs+O/parenleftBig
(βs)3/parenrightBig
j′(0) = R′(βǫ) +O/parenleftBig
(βs)2/parenrightBig (4.35)
where we have used the fact that O2is an even operator. The function R′(βǫ)
can be calculated by using the fact that at zero staggered fiel d the model renor-
malizes to a Gaussian model with coupling jgiven by (4.9). We thus find that
R′(βǫ) =1
2arccos/parenleftbigg
1−1
2e2βǫ/parenrightbigg
−π
8(4.36)
We now put βǫ=1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
−uin (4.16) and expand to leading order. We
find
y(0) = Rβs
j′(0) = −/parenleftbig√
2−1/parenrightbig
u(4.37)
25where R≡R/parenleftbig
βǫ=1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig/parenrightbig
. According to (4.34) it follows that K(t),
defined as
K(t) =y(t)2−16
πAj′(t)2(4.38)
is a conserved quantity under renormalization. Above j′= 0 all flow lines,
irrespective of the value of K, renormalize to infinity. Below j′= 0 the situation
is different. Flow lines with negative Kend up on the Gaussian line, while flow
lines with positive Krenormalize toward infinity. The flow lines with K= 0
thus mark the boundary between the rough phase and the smooth phase below
j′= 0. Using (4.37) and (4.38), we see that the lines
βs=±4
R√
πA/parenleftBig√
2−1/parenrightBig
u (4.39)
withu≥0 are the critical lines of the staggered F-model. Points cho sen between
these lines renormalize toward the Gaussian line, points ou tside this region will
not.
We now proceed with a derivation the singular part of the free energy. As the
critical line is approached from the smooth side, we expect s ingular behaviour
of the free energy (note that points on the critical lines its elf renormalize to
the point j′= 0 on the Gaussian line, there is thus no singularity when the
critical line is approached from the rough side). Since all p oints on the critical
lines of the staggered F-model flow toward the same point on th e Gaussian line,
critical behaviour is the same all along the critical lines. We can thus content
ourselves with a calculation of the singular behaviour of th e free energy at βǫ=
1
2ln/parenleftbig
2−√
2/parenrightbig
as we let βsapproach zero. In this case we are again in the area
where the identification (4.37) and the renormalization gro up equations (4.34)
are valid. The initial values are thus j′(0) = 0 and y(0) = Rβs. According to
(4.38) we find that K=R2(βs)2for the streamline that passes through this
point. Eliminating y(t) in favour of j′(t) and using (4.34) gives us the equation
dj′
dt=AK+16
πj′2(4.40)
This differential equation is easily integrated:
t=π
4√
AπKarctan/parenleftbigg4√
AπKj′(t)/parenrightbigg
(4.41)
Using (4.39) and the fact that K=R2(βs)2, we can rewrite (4.41) as
t=π/parenleftbig
1 +√
2/parenrightbig
tan(θ)
16|βs|arctan/parenleftBigg/parenleftbig
1 +√
2/parenrightbig
tan (θ)
|βs|j′(t)/parenrightBigg
(4.42)
where θis the angle at which the critical line intersects the line βs= 0. Applying
(4.18) to our case yields the leading singularity in the free energy Fs:
Fs(βs)∼e−π2(1+√
2)tan( θ)
16|βs| (4.43)
The singularity is clearly of infinite order, characteristi c of the Kosterlitz-Thouless
transition. Numerical studies using transfer matrix techn iques have yielded sim-
ilar results on the phase diagram of the staggered F-model [2 4].
26Note that all results have been obtained by using the informa tion present
in the behaviour of the height-height correlation function of the F-model. To
obtain more results we clearly need more information. In the next chapter we
shall discuss a simple method that allows one to expand the fr ee energy about
the line βǫ=1
2ln (2). This expansion can be used to generate more informati on
about the mapping of the staggered F-model to Gaussian model s.
27Chapter 5
Expansions about free
fermion models
In this final chapter we will first present Baxters solution of the staggered F-
model on the free fermion line (i.e. the line βǫ=1
2ln (2)). Then we proceed
by expanding the free energy of the staggered F-model about t he free fermion
line. We shall obtain an explicit expression for the free ene rgy to first order.
By comparing the singular behaviour of this expression to th at obtained from
renormalization group arguments, we are able to verify the k nown behaviour
of the Gaussian coupling to first order about βǫ=1
2ln (2). To simplify the
computations of the higher order terms we derive a linked clu ster method.
5.1 Definition of free fermion models
Baxter has solved the staggered F-model at the temperature βǫ=1
2ln(2) [3].
Later it was found that this solution could be generalized to other models if
a certain condition concerning the vertex weights is met. Th is condition is
called the free fermion condition because for eight-vertex models satisfying this
condition the problem leads to a problem of noninteracting f ermions in the S-
matrix formulation. Let wibe the vertex weight for a vertex of type i(see fig.
5.1), then the free fermion condition for six-vertex models is:
w1w2+w3w4−w5w6= 0 (5.1)
The weights wimay be chosen inhomogeneous. We now proceed by presenting
a simplified version of Baxter’s solution of the staggered F- model.
5.2 Baxter’s solution of the staggered F-model
Divide the lattice into two sublattices A and B. Choose the ve rtex energies
as indicated in fig. 5.1. Consider the ground state in which al l A vertices are
vertices of type 6, and all B-vertices are of type 5. Any state can now be
represented by drawing lines on the lattice where the arrows point oppositely
to the ground state configuration. In terms of these lines the six vertices are
represented by vertices with either no lines, two lines at ri ght angles, or four
28✲✲
✻✻
1
ǫ✛✛❄
❄
2
ǫ✲✲❄
❄
3
ǫ✛✛
✻✻
4
ǫ✛✲✻
❄
5
±s✛✲❄
✻
6
∓s
Figure 5.1: The six vertices and their energies. The upper and lower sign s correspond
to sublattice A respectively B.
lines. The energies of these vertices are respectively −s,ǫands. The next
step is to replace the original lattice by a decorated lattic e by replacing each
original vertex by a “city” of four internally connected poi nts (see fig. 5.2). The
lines on the original lattice are regarded as dimers on the ex ternal bonds of the
decorated lattice. For any configuration on the original lat tice, it is possible to
place dimers on the internal bonds of the decorated lattice, so that the lattice
becomes completely covered. Now associate to each dimer a we ight as indicated
in fig. 5.2. We now have to choose these weights such that a clos e-packed
dimer problem formulated on the decorated lattice is equiva lent to our original
problem. It is a simple matter to see that for this to be the cas e, we have to
have:
C=D=E=F=e−1
2βs(5.2)
u=1
2√
2e1
2βs(5.3)
βǫ=1
2ln (2) (5.4)
Note that (5.4) is indeed consistent with the free fermion co ndition (5.1).
5.3 The Pfaffian method
To solve the close-packed dimer problem, we use the Pfaffian me thod [10,13,26].
This method is applicable whenever the lattice is planar, an d works by express-
ing the partition function of the problem as the square root o f the determinant
of an antisymmetric matrix (a Pfaffian).
A contribution to Z2can be written as the product of two dimer coverings
CandC′. IfCconnects a point iwith a point j, we write
C(i) =j (5.5)
It is clear that this defines a bijective map on the lattice. CandC′divide the
lattice into disjoint loops and pairs of neighboring points (bonds) as follows: If
C(i1) = i2
C′(i2) = i3
C(i3) = i4
C′(i4) = i5
C(i5) = i6
...
C(in−1) = in
C′(in) = i1(5.6)
29then the points i1. . . inform a loop. If n= 2, we don’t get a loop but instead
a single bond. Note that nis always even (even on lattice types on which loops
containing an odd number of points exist, the loops generate d byCandC′
always contain an even number of points). Since for each loop one has two
choices to define the actions of CandC′within the loop, a given partition of
the lattice in loops and bonds is consistent with many differe nt configurations
CandC′.Z2can thus be calculated by summing over all partitions of the
lattice in loops and bonds. The contribution a partition mak es is given by the
appropriate product of the weights of dimers, multiplied by a factor 2L, where L
is the number of loops in the partition. If we orient each loop , and sum over all
oriented loops, the factor two for each loop can be ommitted. Now a partition
of the lattice in oriented loops and bonds defines a permutati on of the lattice
points. For arbitrary points iandjon the lattice, we define Wi,jas
Wi,j= 0 (5.7)
ifiandjare not connected,
Wi,j= weight of the dimer connecting iandj (5.8)
In terms of the matrix W, we can write:
Z2=/summationdisplay
π′/productdisplay
jWj,π(j) (5.9)
where the sum is over all permutations that contain only cycl es of even lengths
(this restriction is denoted by the prime) and the product is over all lattice
points. Note that the restriction on the summation is only ne cessary for lattices
where loops of odd lengths exist. We now want to rewrite the r. h.s. of (5.9) as
the determinant of a matrix. This is possible if the lattice i s planar, and works
as follows: One tries to factorize the missing sign of the per mutation π(s(π))
in the sum in (5.9), so that we have
s(π) =/productdisplay
jsj,π(j) (5.10)
with the si,jdepending only on iandj, and si,j=±1 (we only need to define
thesi,jwhen iandjare connected). We shall see that a proper choice of the
si,jallows one to lift the constraint in the summation in ( 5.9). A nticipating
this result we can write:
Z2= det R (5.11)
where
Ri,j=si,jWi,j (5.12)
Thesi,jhave to be chosen such that (5.10) is valid for all permutatio ns making
a nonzero contribution to (5.9). The cycles of such a permuta tion are precisely
the oriented loops of even length and bonds, and they all have a sign of −1. We
thus try to define the si,jsuch that for a closed loop of even length or a bond
consisting of the points i1. . .inwe have
n/productdisplay
k=1sik,ik+1=−1 (5.13)
30where in+1≡i1. The case n= 2 yields
si,j=−sj,i (5.14)
so that Ris antisymmetric. We can now see that permutations containi ng cycles
of odd lengths make no net contribution to det Rbecause reversing such a cycle
changes the sign of the contribution. A permutation that con tains a cycle with
an odd number of points in its interior also makes no net contr ibution, because,
the lattice being planar, these points are permuted amongst themselves, so
that the permutation contains at least one cycle of odd lengt h. We thus have
to satisfy (5.13) only for loops with an even number of points in its interior.
This is fortunate, because it is impossible to choose the si,jsuch that (5.13) is
satisfied for all loops of even lengths. The si,jcan, however, be chosen to satisfy
the condition:
n/productdisplay
k=1sik,ik+1= (−1)r+1(5.15)
where ris the number of points inside the loop. It is clear that if the si,jsatisfy
(5.15) for all loops we indeed have Z2= det R. We now specialize to the case of
the staggered F-model. In this case we are dealing with the la ttice shown in fig.
5.2. Choosing the si,jamounts to giving each bond an orientation so that si,jis
positive if ipoints to j. The arrows drawn on the bonds in fig. 5.2 represent such
an orientation. We will now proof that this choice of the orie ntations satisfies
the condition (5.15). The proof proceeds by induction, and d epends on the
fact that loops sharing part of their boundaries may be combi ned to produce
larger loops. Note that a loop can be broken down into smaller loops if and
only if the loop has bonds in its interior. On the lattice (5.2 ), there are two
types of loops that cannot be broken down. These are the loops formed by four
internal bonds of a city, and loops connecting four cities fo rmed by four external
bonds and four internal bonds. For these loops it is easily ve rified that (5.15)
is true. Since any loop can be broken down into loops of the abo ve type, we
have to proof that if (5.15) holds for two arbitrary loops sha ring part of their
boundaries, it also holds for the combined loop. To see this, suppose that there
are two loops ( L1andL2) with respectively r1andr2interior points, with a
continuous common boundary consisting of qpoints. The combined loop ( L3)
will then have r3=r1+r2+q−2 interior points. The product in (5.15) for a
loopLiwill be denoted as s(Li). We then have
s(L1)s(L2) =s(L3)(−1)q−1(5.16)
because if we travers L1andL2in the same direction, we travers all the bonds
ofL3, while the q−1 bonds on the common boundary are all traversed from
both directions. Assuming (5.15) holds for L1andL2, it follows from (5.16):
s(L3) = (−1)r1+r2+q−1= (−1)r3+1(5.17)
5.4 Calculation of the free energy
We have seen that solving the staggered F-model at βǫ=1
2ln (2) reduces to the
evaluation of the determinant of the matrix R. To set up a perturbation theory
31✲✒
|
Diversity Assessment Based on a Higher Similarity-Higher Entropy Relation
after Rejection of Gibbs Paradox
Shu-Kun Lin
Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI), Saengergasse 25, CH-4054 Basel,
Switzerland
Tel: +41 79 3223379, Fax +41 61 3028918
E-mail: Lin@mdpi.org, URL: http://www.mdpi.org/lin.htm
21 October 1999
Abstract. The diversity of the symbols of the information source is calculated following the
definition that entropy is the information loss and following a new entropy-symbol similarity
relation after the rejection of the Gibbs paradox statement. Diversity in a range of 0 to 1, an index
similar to Shannon's redundancy, decreases with the increase in the species similarities. A pairwise
similarity formula has been defined and used to demonstrated that the diversity expression gives the
expected diversity. The higher entropy-higher similarity relation leads to the higher information-
higher diversity relation.
Keywords: Species diversity, entropy, information loss, similarity, diversity calculation.
1. Introduction
Biodiversity assessment has been a hot topic of practical importance for preservation of existing
biological species in a rational way. With the development of high throughput screening technology
(a very fast way of testing if a molecule is active as a drug) in the pharmaceutical industry in recent
years, the acquisition of molecular samples by collection and combinatorial or parallel, automatic
synthesis has now become the bottleneck in the process of new drug discovery. The molecular
diversity assessment also became an urgent topic [1,2].
There are many methods of calculating diversity of species (either biological or chemical species).
Natually the best approach should be the information theoretical method, using information
theoretical concepts [3]. We tried to set up a new method of diversity calculation [1]. It is based on
a clear definition that entropy is the information loss [4] and a new relation of entropy-similarity2
(Figure 1c) [5-7] constructed after rejection of the Gibbs paradox statement (Figure 1a) [8]. In
information theory discussed in communication, all the symbols used for encoding are assumed to
be distinguishable. However, we discuss the species diversity of these symbols (individual
molecules in molecular diversity and animals in biodiversity considerations). Therefore, it is the
similarity of these symbols and their relation to entropy that are of particular interest to us, and we
must adapt the formulas used by Shannon to the situation concerned here. Furthermore, the
consideration of the diversity and the similarity of these "symbols" (molecules or other individules)
at the "information source" (the considered system) are very significant in the studies of the
structural stabilities in physics, chemistry and biology.
In this paper, simple examples and a pairwise similarity formula suitable for assessing molecular
diversity has been presented and used for species diversity calculation.
2. Entropy-information loss and entropy-similarity
The choice of the definition that entropy is information loss [4] is convenient because it is at least
already widely accepted by biologists and chemists. Entropy is defined here as a concept equivalent
to Shannon's uncertainty.
Another reason of using "entropy is information loss" definition is that there are only two kinds of
information losses: one is due to dynamic motion which is illustrated in Figure 2; the other is due to
intrinsic similarity of the symbols or the physical or conceptual entities (biological or chemical
species, or 1 and 0 used for a binary system). Both information losses can happen actually in
examples of communication (see the following).
Shannon defined entropy ( H) as a measures of information, choice and uncertainty. Entropy,
denoted here as S, is given by the familiar expression (the positive coefficient is taken as 1):
Sppii
iw
=−∑ln
=1 (1)
where p i is the probability of the ith microstate with the property that
pi
iw
=11∑=
(2)3
Hrere we use a microstate as a symbol defined in Shannon's information source (Sometimes we will
also use microstate as a message, which is made out of symbols. A microstate can be regarded as a
composite symbols. An example of the composite symbol is the edcoding of A, B, C, D, etc by
binary symbols 0 and 1. An "A" can be represented by a long composite symbol, a longer sequence
of 0 and 1). Information loss due to dynamic motion is simple. If a set of all possible symbols all
appears simultaneously with the identical probabilities, the situation is most chaotic (figure 2).
Consequently there is no actual message selected. This is due to the similarity of the probability
values of all the possible messages. If these probability values are the most similar (or the same),
we have the highest entropy ( maxS=Sln w=) following the well-known inequality
− ≤ ∑(lnln ppww
i
i=1i) (3)
Then, the information has the minimum value (zero, I=0, see the following section).
Even though it has not been discussed in Shannon's classical paper [3], the information loss due to
the intrinsic similarity of symbols (and consider if these symbols belong to a set of distinguishable
species by comparison, or consider directly the similarity of the species themselves) at the
information source seems also clear. If all the fonts used in "I love her" are extremely similar (or
the same) and this font is represented by @, we will have a sentence reads "@ @@@@ @@@"
(Figure 3). If a typewriter has all keys actually extremely similar, to say all actually like "@". A
discrete source using these extremely similar w microstates (symbols) actually cannot generate any
information. If you send a telegraph by using this set of 26 symbols instead of the distinguishable
26-symbol "alphabet" (the 26 letters), of course the information loss will be obvious. Actually these
26 symbols are all @. Applying quations 1 and 2 will give the maximum entropy (Expression 3).
Therefore, both cases satisfy the general relation of higher similarity-higher entropy (or higher
information loss) (Figure 1c).
Incidentally it should be pointed out that the higher entropy-higher similarity relation Figure 1c)
holds universally true, where the mathematical proof is simply rooted at the well-known inequality
(3) where the right side is the maximum entropy because all the w microstates or symbols are
extremely similar or the same. This is summarized as the similarity principle: If all the other
conditions remain constant, the higher the similarity among the components is, the higher value of4
entropy of the mixing (for fluid phases), the assembling (for solid phases) or any other analogous
processes (of assemblage formation, such as quantum states in quantum mechanics) will be, the
more spontaneous the processes will be, and the more stable the mixture and the assemblage will
be. Practically this conforms to and explained all the related experimental facts, e.g., phase
separation. Different substances do not mix but spontaneously separate because the
indistinguishable substances are the most spontaneously miscible ones. In other words, as a
consequence of the most spontaneously mixing of the most similar (indistinguishable) substances,
different substances separate. Theoretically this is also conforms to, and can be used to prove
Curie's symmetry principle (the effects are more symmetric than the causes) following a "higher
similarity-higher symmetry-higher entropy-higher stability" relation. After the proof of the
symmetry principle, and after the the connection of the symmetry principle and the second law
being established, many outstanding phase transition problems (symmetry breaking probems) can
be elegantly solved also [5,6].
It should be emphasized that a clear definition that entropy is information loss should be both very
convenient and very necessary for further development in information theory towards its
application in structural stability and process spontaneity characterization in physics, chemistry and
biology.
3. The formula
We define diversity on a relative scale [1]. The diversity index ( D) defined here is equivalent to
Shannon's definition of redundancy. It is defined as the ratio of the information ( I) and the
maximum information ( Imax),
DI
I=
max(4)
Entropy is unambiguously defined as information loss by the following relation:
ISS=−max (5)
In this equation, entropy is given by the familiar expression (euqtion 1), where p i is the probability
of the ith microstate with the property that
pi
iw
=11∑=
5
while the maximum entropy is Swmaxln=, where w is the indistinguishability number which is the
number of microstates (or symbols) of indistinguishable property [1]. Because both information
and entropy are logarethmic functions, both are never negative. Their minimum values are both
zero. Their maximum values are the same value also ( maxmaxln ISw== ).
The apparent indistinguishability number of microstates (or symbols) is defined as
w p pw
a i i
i=1=−∑exp( ln) (6)
and equation 1 becomes
Sw=lna (7)
which is the logarithmic relation of entropy and indistinguishability. Now the number of the
indistinguishable symbols is aw.
Practically, in order to record information at the information source, a system composed of N “unit
devices” is used. In computer science or in our daily information recording as well, these “unit
devices” are N symbols assembled on a media such as a piece of paper. These symbols appear as M
attributes, based upon which it is said that the system has M species, such as the two species 0 and 1
in the binary system [3].
Because the assessment of diversity of N symbols (molecules or chemical samples for molecular
diversity and a plant or an animal for biodiversity) is our only concern [4], the number of symbols
(N) and the maximum species number ( M) are designated as the same: NM=. This can be
envisaged as N holes in microplates used for bioactivity screening containing N compound samples.
Normally N can be either greater or smaller than M. For example, a harddisk of N bits has N
symbols with M equals 2. Normally if one puts 200 Chinese characters in a typical page of paper
written in Chinese where N equals 200 and (here the species number M is the total number of
different Chinese characters normally used which is 10000).
If these N symbols are all distinguishable, they can be used to record the maximum information as
given by equation 8.
()max,lnlnlnNINNwNNN === (8)6
For instance, if red ink is used to represent 0 and blue ink 1, and two bottles of these different inks
are used, 2 bits of information can be recorded if the number of symbol ( N) is 2. There will be 4
(w==242) distinguishable microstates, see Figure 4). It is said that this is the maximum
information (equation 8) because one can still intentionally use only a small part of the available
species to record only smaller amount of information. In equation 8, w is the number of
distinguishable microstates:
wNN= (9)
From equation 5, the corresponding entropy has the minimum value which is zero:
() S NN min,ln==10 (10)
This extreme case is illustrated in Figure 4 ( N=2, w=4) and Figure 5 ( N=3, w=27) [8].
Let all the N samples in the N bottles are the samples of extremely similar (or the same) property.
Then there will be still wNN= microstates (or NN assemblages) constructed by the NN times of
different combinatorial sequences of assembling to form solid structures. However, because they
are all virtually indistinguishable microstates, there is always the minimum information and the
maximum entropy (eqs 11 and 12):
() INN min,ln==10 (11)
() S NN w N N NN
max,lnln ln == = (12)
For example, suppose you have accidentally installed two bottles of red ink for a printer. Even
though exactly the same amount of effort is taken to prepare the 4 microstates, i.e., the four
microstates are prepared in a same way as that of Figure 4 by using inks from the two individual
bottles, there will be 4 ( w==242) indistinguishable microstates (see Figure 6). Similarly, whether
we factually take the same sample from one sample bottle or different sample bottles in bioactivity
test laboratory, we always have w indistinguishable microstates, if they are virtually the same
compound in all the N bottles; see Figure 6 ( N=2, w=4, if all species are factually 0) and Figure 7
(N=3, w=27, if all species are B). The maximum microstate indistinguishability number is therefore
wNN= (13)7
These two extreme sets of distinguishable and indistinguishable microstates, which give the
minimum (zero) entropy and the maximum entropy values, respectively (equations 10 and 12),
already illustrated our unique approach based on our similarity-entropy relation (see also Figure
1c).
Generally, suppose the N symbols used to construct NNmicrostates are only mutually similar to
certain extent among them and they are neither distinguishable (equations 8 and 10) nor
indistinguishable (equations 11 and 12). Instead of using equation 1 directly, eq 14 is used to
calculate entropy.
()SNN p pij
iN
ij
jN
, (ln =−∑∑==)
11 (14)
The N2 pairwise similarities rij in the table
rr r
rr r
rr r11 12 1
21 22 2
1 2......
......
...............
...............
......N
N
N N NN(15)
have values limited between 0 and 1 and are given by pairwise comparison among the N symbols
according to one and only one systematically followed standard of comparison for all the values pij
(iNjN = = 1 1 ,,;,, L L ). A normalization factor c is required also:
c
ij
iN=
∑1
1r
= (16)
It follows that
pcijij=r (17)
Then equation 14 will give the same results as given by eqs 10 and 12 directly and respectively
under the two extreme conditions.
In principle, the general equation (equation 4) should be directly used, where w is simply replaced
by NN. The obvious disadvantage of using equation 4 directly is that the sum runs all over the
NNmicrostates (see Figures 4-7). The calculation of these terms of enormous number NN, which8
can be an astronomical figure, is impractical. Normally N is 100000, the size of a compound sample
library or sublibrary. In equation 14, the number is substantially reduced to totally N2 terms of
ppij ijln .
Secondly, we may not be really interested in using the chemical samples or individual molecule to
record information by taking the sample bottles as "unit devices". Therefore, we will not perform
experiment or calculation to characterize the chemical structural and other physicochemical
properties of all these NN microstates (combinatorial assemblings). Instead, we measure (or
calculate from the known structures) the properties of the N individuals , based on which the
pairwise similarities between any two compounds are to be relatively much easily calculated. This
means that, instead of considering similarities and probabilities among NNmicrostates , only N2
probabilities pAA, pAB, pAC, etc., calculated from the pairwise similarities among the N individuals
A, B, C, ..., etc., will be considered.
The first column of Table 1 showed several sets of three imaginary compound samples or symbols
(A, B and C) on a uniform property scale as used by Agrafiotis [10]. If the properties of the
samples are the same, the points will coincide and these three samples all will be regarded as the
same samples. If their distances are very short and they are very close, they are regarded as very
similar.
The probability pij calculated from equation 17 means the probability of finding the jth symbol as
the ith species, or the jth sample as the ith chemical species.
The diversity of these symbols is yet to be assessed and unknown; they are presumably similar to
each other to certain extent among them [1]. Therefore, the comparisons are not performed between
the N individuals and a set of a priori known set of distinguishable prototypes; the comparisons are
performed among the N individuals themselves directly. The normalization factor c is required
because these values are subject to the constraint:
pijiN
=11 ∑= (18)
Using of the logarithmic expression of entropy
SwN ==ln lna as (19)9
we define the apparent species indistinguishability number sa. For the examples shown in Figures
6 and 7, sa=N. Generally,
sa=eS N(20)
Easily, the apparent species number Ma can be calculated.
M NNp p
Nij ij
iN
jN
a
=
a = +
=∑∑=expln ln1
11
s(21)
Using this method properly, the molecular diversity as expressed by the diversity index D and
several related parameters can be calculated. For instance, to compare the diversity of several
selections of a sublibrary of compounds (molecules) from all available chemical sources, and to
acquire the same number of samples of the highest diversity for many different screening purposes,
the sublibrary of minimized entropy S and the maximized information I is desirable.
4. Pairwise Similarity Definition and Calculation
Before calculating the biodiversity or molecular diversity of N individuals (symbols), the
similarities for all the mutual pairwise comparisons among all the N individuals should be clearly
defined. Whether it is a proper definition of pairwise similarities can be quickly checked first by the
following criteria of the two extreme cases: (a) If N symbols are all distinguishable, the entropy of
this system is the minimum which is zero (equation 10). (b) If N species are all indistinguishable,
the entropy of this system is the maximum (equation 12).
If the pairwise similarities are estimated directly by either
rij ijd = −1 (22)
or
rij
ijd=+1
1(23)
which might be suitable for other methods [10], the maximum number of distinguishable species is
only 2, located at the two ends of the property scale, 0.00 and 1.00, respectively. The distance dij10
between these two least similar species is 1.00. This does not conform with the first simple
criterion (equation 10).
Note, equation (23) does not conform with the second criterion either: The minimum similarity
value is 0.5, instead of zero, which is normally the minimum value of a properly defined similarity
scale [11]. The minimum value corresponds to the largest distance, which is 1 in Agrafiotis'
definition [10].
We propose that, instead of equation 22, the following formula of pairwise similarity, which clearly
conforms with the two simple criteria, is adopted:
rijdij N
dijN dij N=≥−
− − <−
01
1
1 11
1,
(), if
if (24)
In this formula, the shortest distance, which defines that certain two species are distinguishable, is
dijN=−1
1(25)
provided that the property scale range is [0, 1]. Again, remember that "distinguishability" means
the least similarity. If the distance is shorter than 1/(1)N− (equation 25), the two considered
samples are similar. If they coincide, they are indistinguishable samples or the same samples. If dij
is no less than 1/(1)N−, ijr is zero and i and j are distinguishable.
According to equation 24, it is easily verified that the individuals most uniformly distributed on the
property scale have the highest diversity (the first row in Table 1, MNa==3, sa=1 and S=0),
where all species are distinguishable, in contrast to a collection of samples as shown in the last row
in Table 1, which has the lowest diversity and the highest indistinguishability ( Ma=1, sa==N3
and S=329.). For the latter case (the last row in Table 1), because the locations on the property
scale of these three individuals are the same, they are the same species and all can be represented by
one same symbol, to say B; the 27 indistinguishable microstates are those listed in Figure 5.
The calculation results of several representative sets of samples by using eq 24 for pairwise
similarity calculation are listed in Table 1.11
Table 1. Calculation of diversity based on the similarity formula eq. 24. Eqs 14, 19, 20, 21, 5 and 4
are used for calculating entropy ( S), apparent indistinguishability number of microstates ( wa),
apparent indistinguishability number of species or apparent indistinguishability number of symbols
(sa), the apparent number of species ( Ma), information ( I) and diversity index ( D), respectively.
Sample
PropertiesPairwise
Similarity TableProbability
TableSwasaMaID
0.00 0.50 1.00A B C100
010
001100
010
0010.001.001.003.003.301.00
0.00 0.50 1.00A BC100
011
011100
00505
00505..
..1.394.001.591.891.910.58
0.00 0.50 1.00A BC100
011
011100
00505
00505..
..1.394.001.591.891.910.58
0.00 0.50 1.00A BC1005
0105
05051.
.
..0670033
0067033
025025050. .
..
...2.3110.12.161.390.990.30
0.00 0.50 1.00ABC 111
111
111131313
131313
131313///
///
///3.3027.03.001.000.000.0012
5. Concluding Remarks
Traditionally the statistical mechanics concepts (e.g, Shannon's entropy [3] and the parameter of E.
T. Jaynes [12] which is similar to temperature) and statistical mechanics expressions were
introduced to information theory. This paper has described an application of information theory
concepts in diversity assessment by introducing a new relation of entropy-similarity, based on the
rejection of Gibes paradox statement, after the new relation of entropy-similarity having been used
in many areas of physics and chemistry for structural stability and process spontaneity
characterization [5-7]. We can see clearly that the similarity ( Z) of the species in a system ( fauna and
flora in an ecosystem or a mixture of molecules in a chemical reaction container) [1]
1ZD=− (26)
increases with the decrease in diversity ( D). The diversity defined here, even though only a relative
scale, is useful for comparison, for monitoring the trend of the evolution and for the decision
making. Similarity ( Z), called relative entropy by Shannon, is defined as
maxSZS= (26)
which depends directly on the pair-wise similarities.
In contrast to the using of statistical mechanics concepts to information theory, which seems
successful so far, the application of information theory to statistical mechanics has been
unsuccessful. For instance, Jaynes' theory [12] has only been used to pure data reduction. In order
to do this, it is necessary to define clearly the basic concepts. We have demonstrated that it is
possible to avoid the widespread and continuous conceptual confusion between the information loss
of dynamic mixing and the information loss in static assembling and to recognize that both satisfy
the definition of entropy is information loss (Equation 5).
The application of statistical mechanics already has some foundamental problems. An obvious
problem is the Gibbs paradox, which is closely related to information theory [8]. The new relation
(higher entropy-higher similarity relation, Figure 1c) contrasting to the so far widely accepted
relations (Figure 1a or 1b), must have theoretical consequences in many areas. Therefore, the
establishment of this new entropy-similarity relation, which is true in both dynamic and static cases,13
will be a significant step towards the direct application of some methods of information theory in
statistical mechanics and thermodynamics. In a following paper, we will use this entropy-
information loss definition and the new, higher entropy-higher similarity relation to discuss the
symmetry problem [13,14]. A system of very high symmetry must have high entropy value and less
information than a less symmetric system. A system of high diversity, which has been discussed
here, must appear less symmetric.
References and Notes
1.Lin, S. -K. Molecular diversity assessment: Logarithmic relations of information and species
diversity and logarithmic relations of entropy and indistinguishability after rejection of Gibbs
paradox of entropy of mixing. Molecules 1996, 1, 57-67. (The electronic version of reprint of
this published paper can be downloaded from http://www.mdpi.org/lin.htm).
2. (a) Lin, S. -K. Chemical information. Chem. Eng. News May 26, 1997 , 4.
(b) Lin, S. -K. Molecular diversity preservation strategies: The MDPI project , paper presented
at the 36th IUPAC Congress, Geneva, Switzerland, August 17 - 22, 1997. Lin, S. -K. Chimia
1997, 51, 544.
3. C. E. Shannon, ''A mathematical theory of communication,'' Bell System Technical Journal,
vol. 27, pp. 379-423 and 623-656, July and October, 1948.
4. L. Brillouin, Science and Information Theory , 2nd Ed., Academic Press, New York, 1962.
5. Lin, S. -K. Understanding structural stability and process spontaneity based on the rejection of
the Gibbs paradox of entropy of mixing. J. Mol. Struct. Theochem 1997, 398, 145-153.
(Downloadable at http://www.mdpi.org/lin/lin-rpu.htm) .
6. 6. Lin, S. -K. Correlation of entropy with similarity and symmetry. J. Chem. Inf. Comput. Sci .
1996, 36, 367-376. (Downloadable at http://www.mdpi.org/lin/lin-rpu.htm).
(http://www.mdpi.org/lin/uglysym1.htm) .14
7. Lin, S. -K. Gibbs paradox of entropy of mixing: experimental facts, its rejection and the
theoretical consequences. J. Theor. Chem. 1996, 1, 135-150. (The electronic version of reprint
of this published paper can be downloaded from http://www.mdpi.org/lin.htm) .
8. Jaynes, E. T. The Gibbs Paradox, In Maximum Entropy and Bayesian Methods; Smith, C. R.;
Erickson, G. J.; Neudorfer, P. O., Eds.; Kluwer Academic: Dordrecht, 1992, p.1-22.
(http://bayes.wustl.edu/etj/articles/cgibbs.pdf)
9. (a) Neumann, J. von. Mathematical Foundations of Quantum Mechanics. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 1955. (b) Dieks, D.; van Dijk, V. Another look at the quantum
mechanical entropy of mixing. Am. J. Phys. 1988, 56, 430-434.
10. Agrafiotis, D. K. On the use of information theory for assessing molecular diversity. J. Chem.
Inf. Comput. Sci . 1997, 37, 576-580.
11. Johnson, M. A.; Maggiora, G. M. eds. Concepts and Applications of Molecular Similarity, New
York: Wiley-Interscience Publication, 1990.
12. Jaynes, E. T. Where Do We Stand on Maximum Entropy, in: The Maximum Entropy
Formalism, Eds. R. P. Levine and M. Tribus, The MIT Press, Cambridge, 1978, pp.15-118.
13. Lin, S. -K. Symmetry breaking problem resolved . Paper presented at the American Physical
Society 1997 March Meeting, Kansas City, MO, March 17-21, 1997. Lin, S. -K. Symmetry
breaking problem resolved. Bull. Am. Phys. Soc. 1997, 42, 679.
14. Lin, S. -K. Ugly Symmetry. Invited lecture at The 218th ACS national meeting in New
Orleans, Louisiana, August 22-26, 1999.15
Entropy
SimilarityS=0
Z=0 Z=1SmaxEntropy
SimilarityS=0
Z=0 Z=1SmaxEntropy
SimilarityS=0
Z=0 Z=1Smax
(a): Gibbs (b) Revised (c) Lin
Figure 1. Correlation of entropy of mixing (fluid phase) or assembling (static or solid phase) with
similarity. Entropy decreases discontinuously with the similarits of the components (Figure a) [8];
decreases continuously (Figure b) [9]; increase continuously (Figure c) [5-7].16
ABC
(a)
ABCBCACAB(b)
Figure 2. Schematic representation of information loss due to dynamic motion. The pictures on the
three positions are the same, hence they are symmetric. All the three letters appear at any position
the same probability at Figure 2b.
ABC(a)
DDD(b)
Figure 3. Schematic representation of information loss due to inherent similarities. If all the three
letters used for information registration are actually look the same (have same properties as D), we
have information loss due to the reduced number of species used for information recording or due
to the reduction of diversity [1]. Any system of high diversity must have low similarity [1].17
00 11
01 10
Figure 4. A binary system of distinguishable species ( Ma=2) with N=2 which gives 4
distinguishable microstates.
AAA
AAB
AAC
ABA
ABB
ACA
ACC
ABC
ACBBBB
BAB
BAA
BBA
BBC
BCB
BCC
BAC
BCACCC
CAA
CAC
CBB
CBC
CCA
CCB
CBA
CAB
Figure 5. A trinary system of distinguishable species ( M=3) with ( N=3, M=3) which gives 27
distinguishable microstates.18
00 00
00 00
Figure 6. A binary system with N=2 which gives 4 indistinguishable microstates with the highest
species indistinguishability ( sa=2).
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBBBBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBBBBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
BBB
Figure 7. A trinary system with ( N=3) which gives 27 indistinguishable microstates because of the
highest species indistinguishability ( sa=3). An example is shown in Figure 6e, where the property
is represented by the symbol "B". |
physics/9910033 22 Oct 1999
1/G43/G76/G74/G75/G3/G51/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G44/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G38/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G53/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G44/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76 /G87/G92/G3/G48/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G82/G73
/G54/G92/G81/G70/G75/G85/G82/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3/G53/G68/G71/G76/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81
/G54/G17/G49/G17/G3/G36/G75/G80/G72/G71/G13/G15/G3/G43/G17/G16/G45/G17/G3/G37/G72/G86/G70/G75/c87/G15/G3/G36/G17/G43/G17/G3/G58/G68/G79/G72/G81/G87/G68/c87/G15/G3/G49/G17/G3/G51/G68/G89/G72/G79/c87/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G58/G17/G3/G54/G70/G75/G72/G81/G78/c87
/G13/G48/G51/G44/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G51/G75/G92/G86/G76/G70/G86/G15/G3/G48/G88/G81/G76/G70/G75/G15/G3/G42/G72/G85/G80/G68/G81/G92 /G17/G3/c87/G51/G75/G92/G86/G76/G70/G86/G3/G39/G72/G83/G87/G17/G15/G3/G54/G76/G72/G74/G72/G81/G3/G56/G81/G76/G89/G72/G85/G86/G76/G87/G92/G15/G3/G42/G72/G85/G80/G68/G81/G92/G17
/G36/G69/G86/G87/G85/G68/G70/G87
/G36/G3 /G86/G76/G81/G74/G79/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G81/G81/G72/G79/G15/G3 /G75/G76/G74/G75/G3 /G83/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G75/G68/G86/G3 /G69/G72/G72/G81/G3 /G69/G88/G76/G79/G87/G3 /G73/G82/G85/G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G85/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3/G68/G69/G82/G89/G72/G3/G24/G3/G78/G72 /G57/G17/G3/G44/G87/G3/G70/G68/G81/G3/G69/G72/G3/G88/G86/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G15
/G86/G88/G70/G75/G3/G68/G86/G3/G40/G59/G36/G41/G54/G15/G3/G90/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G86/G76/G80/G88/G79/G87/G68/G81/G72/G82/G88/G86/G3/G75/G76/G74/G75/G3/G83/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82 /G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3/G71/G88/G85/G76/G81/G74
/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G68/G70/G87/G88/G68/G79/G3 /G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G85/G72/G84/G88/G76/G85/G72/G71/G17/G3 /G44/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G83/G68/G83/G72/G85/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G86/G87 /G85/G88/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G76/G87/G86
/G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3/G71/G88/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G3/G87/G72/G86/G87/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G81/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G87/G88/G69/G72/G3/G68/G85/G72 /G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G72/G71/G17
/G20/G17/G3/G44/G81/G87/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81
/G44/G81/G3 /G80/G68/G81/G92/G3 /G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G86/G92/G81/G70/G75/G85/G82/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3 /G85/G68/G71/G76/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3 /G86/G88/G70/G75/G3 /G68/G86/G3 /G40/G59/G36/G41/G54/G15/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3 /G82/G73
/G76/G81/G70/G82/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80/G3 /G80/G88/G86/G87/G3 /G69/G72/G3 /G86/G76/G80/G88/G79/G87/G68/G81/G72/G82/G88/G86/G79/G92/G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G72/G71/G3 /G69/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G69/G72 /G68/G80/G3 /G83/G68/G86/G86/G72/G86
/G87/G75/G85/G82/G88/G74/G75/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G68/G80/G83/G79/G72/c20/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G68/G70/G70/G88/G85/G68/G70/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G76/G86/G3/G68/G3/G70/G85/G76/G87/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G83/G68/G85/G68 /G80/G72/G87/G72/G85
/G76/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G86/G72/G81/G86/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G68/G87/G3 /G76/G87/G3 /G76/G81/G73/G79/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3 /G69/G72 /G76/G81/G74/G3 /G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G17/G3 /G3 /G54/G88/G70/G75
/G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G70/G68/G81/G3/G69/G72/G3/G86/G88/G69/G86/G87/G68/G81/G87/G76/G68/G79/G79/G92/G3/G76/G80/G83/G85/G82/G89/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G75/G68/G89/G76/G81/G74/G3/G3/G68/G3/G75/G76/G74/G75/G3/G85/G72 /G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G68/G70/G70/G88/G85/G68/G70/G92/G3/G82/G73
/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80/G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G20/G19/c16/c23/G3 /G15/G3 /G90/G75/G76/G79/G72/G3 /G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G68/G87/G87/G72/G81/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G79
/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3 /G75/G68/G86/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G69/G72/G3 /G86/G88/G73/G73/G76/G70/G76/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3 /G90/G72/G68/G78/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3 /G81/G82/G87/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G71/G76/G86/G87/G88/G85/G69/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G69/G72/G76/G81/G74
/G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3/G87/G90/G82/G3/G70/G82/G81/G73/G79/G76/G70/G87/G76/G81/G74/G3/G85/G72/G84/G88/G76/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G80/G68/G78/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G71/G72/G86/G76/G74 /G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G88/G70/G75/G3/G68/G3/G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80
/G71/G76/G73/G73/G76/G70/G88/G79/G87/G15/G3/G72/G86/G83/G72/G70/G76/G68/G79/G79/G92/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G79/G82/G90/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G11/G68/G85/G82/G88/G81/G71/G3/G24/G78/G72/G57/G12/G3 /G90/G75/G76/G70/G75/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G3/G72/G68/G86/G76/G79/G92
/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G82/G81/G79/G92/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G80/G72/G71/G76/G88/G80/G3/G90/G75/G76/G70/G75/G3/G70/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G69/G72/G3/G88/G86/G72 /G71/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G79/G82/G90/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86
/G76/G86/G3/G74/G68/G86/G3/G69/G72/G70/G68/G88/G86/G72/G3/G86/G82/G79/G76/G71/G3/G80/G68/G87/G72/G85/G76/G68/G79/G86/G3/G68/G87/G87/G72/G81/G88/G68/G87/G72/G3/G86/G88/G70/G75/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G81/G3 /G88/G81/G68/G70/G70/G72/G83/G87/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3/G79/G72/G89/G72/G79/G17
/G54/G88/G70/G75/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G71/G72/G85/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3 /G79/G72/G71/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G71/G72/G89/G72/G79/G82/G83/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G68/G81/G3 /G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G70/G75 /G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G73/G82/G85
/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G92/G81/G70/G75/G85/G82/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3/G79/G76/G74/G75/G87/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G87/G90/G82/G3/G70 /G82/G80/G83/G72/G87/G76/G81/G74/G3/G83/G68/G85/G68/G80/G72/G87/G72/G85/G86
/G80/G72/G81/G87/G76/G82/G81/G72/G71/G3/G68/G69/G82/G89/G72/G3/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G69/G72/G72/G81/G3/G82/G83/G87/G76/G80/G76/G93/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G82/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3/G76/G81 /G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G85/G68/G81/G74/G72
/G68/G69/G82/G89/G72/G3/G24/G78/G72/G57/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G75/G68/G86/G3/G69/G72/G72/G81/G3/G69/G88/G76/G79/G87/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G72/G86/G87/G72/G71/G3/G88/G86/G76/G81/G74/G3/G68 /G3/G21/G78/G58/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G87/G88/G69/G72/G3/G75/G68/G89/G76/G81/G74
/G80/G82/G79/G92/G69/G71/G72/G81/G88/G80/G3/G68/G81/G82/G71/G72/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G70/G75/G68/G85/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G86/G87/G76/G70/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G26/G17/G23/G23/G78/G72/G57/G17/G3/G55/G75 /G76/G86/G3/G83/G68/G83/G72/G85/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G68
/G69/G85/G76/G72/G73/G3 /G71/G72/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G71/G72/G87/G72/G70/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G71/G72/G86/G76/G74/G81/G15/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G86/G87/G85/G88/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G68 /G81/G68/G79/G92/G86/G76/G86/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G72/G86/G87
/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G17
/G21/G17/G3/G38/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G39/G72/G86/G76/G74/G81
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G80/G72/G70/G75/G68/G81/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G71/G72/G86/G76/G74/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G86/G76/G81/G74/G79/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G81/G81/G72/G79/G3/G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G70 /G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G76/G86/G3/G86/G75/G82/G90/G81/G3/G76/G81/G3/G73/G76/G74/G17/G20/G17
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G86/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G89/G82/G79/G88/G80/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G86/G87/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G90/G82/G3/G27/G80/G80/G3/G87/G75/G76/G70 /G78/G3/G85/G72/G74/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G86/G72/G83/G68/G85/G68/G87/G72/G71
/G69/G92/G3/G68/G3/G70/G72/G81/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G85/G72/G68/G71/G82/G88/G87/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G3/G75/G68/G89/G76/G81/G74/G3/G26/G80/G80/G3/G71/G76/G68/G80/G72/G87/G72/G85/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G69/G82/G88/G81/G71 /G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G87/G90/G82/G3/G73/G76/G72/G79/G71
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G17/G3 /G44/G81/G3 /G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G86/G80/G82/G82/G87/G75/G72/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G73/G76/G72/G79/G71/G3 /G68/G87/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G72/G71/G74/G72/G86/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G70/G76/G85/G70/G88/G79/G68/G85
/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G15/G3/G87/G90/G82/G3/G73/G76/G72/G79/G71/G3/G85/G76/G81/G74/G86/G3/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G69/G72/G72/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G89/G76/G71/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G72/G68/G70/G75/G3/G85/G72/G74/G76/G82 /G81/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3/G85/G76/G81/G74/G86/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G78/G72/G83/G87
/G68/G87/G3/G75/G68/G79/G73/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G82/G87/G72/G81/G87/G76/G68/G79/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G73/G76/G72/G79/G71/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72 /G3/G90/G75/G82/G79/G72/G3/G86/G72/G87/G88/G83/G3/G76/G86/G3/G78/G72/G83/G87/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G81
/G68/G79/G88/G80/G76/G81/G88/G80/G3/G70/G92/G79/G76/G81/G71/G85/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G89/G72/G86/G86/G72/G79/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G72/G81/G71/G3/G74/G68/G83/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G27/G80/G80/G3/G82/G81/G3/G72/G68/G70 /G75/G3/G86/G76/G71/G72/G17/G3/G36/G79/G79/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86
/G68/G81/G71/G3 /G90/G76/G81/G71/G82/G90/G86/G3 /G68/G85/G72/G3 /G80/G68/G71/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G25 µ/G80/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G70/G78/G3 /G80/G92/G79/G68/G85/G3 /G73/G82/G76/G79/G3 /G80/G72/G87/G68/G79/G79/G76/G93/G72/G71/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G19/G17/G22 µ/G80/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G70/G78
/G68/G79/G88/G80/G76/G81/G88/G80/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G73/G82/G76/G79/G86/G3/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G69/G72/G72/G81/G3/G86/G87/G85/G72/G87/G70/G75/G72/G71/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G74/G79/G88/G72/G71/G3/G82/G81/G3/G68/G79/G88/G80/G76 /G81/G88/G80/G3/G85/G76/G81/G74/G86/G3/G90/G75/G76/G70/G75/G3/G68/G85/G72
/G87/G75/G72/G81/G3/G3/G80/G82/G88/G81/G87/G72/G71/G3/G3/G87/G82/G3/G3/G82/G81/G72/G3/G3/G82/G73/G3/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G3/G79/G76/G71/G86/G3/G3/G82/G73/G3/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G89/G72/G86/G86/G72/G79/G3/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75 /G3/G86/G70/G85/G72/G90/G86/G17/G3/G36/G3/G86/G87/G72/G68/G71/G92/G3/G74/G68/G86/G3/G73/G79/G82/G90/G3/G76/G81
/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G72/G81/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3 /G87/G75/G85/G82/G88/G74/G75/G3 /G75/G82/G79/G72/G86/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G85/G76/G81/G74/G17/G3 /G36/G3 /G80/G72/G87/G68/G79/G76/G93/G72/G71 /G3 /G79/G68/G92/G72/G85/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G68/G79/G88/G80/G76/G81/G88/G802/G68/G85/G82/G88/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G72/G81/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G3/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G86/G3/G68/G86/G3/G74/G88/G68/G85/G71/G3/G85/G76/G81/G74/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G70 /G82/G81/G81/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G3 /G75/G68/G89/G72/G3 /G69/G72/G72/G81/G3 /G80/G68/G71/G72/G3 /G88/G86/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G74/G79/G88/G72/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G71/G88/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3 /G86/G76/G79/G89/G72/G85/G3 /G83/G68 /G76/G81/G87/G17/G3 /G36/G3 /G83/G85/G76/G81/G87/G72/G71
/G70/G76/G85/G70/G88/G76/G87/G3/G69/G82/G68/G85/G71/G3/G75/G68/G86/G3/G69/G72/G72/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G89/G76/G71/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G73/G68/G70/G76/G79/G76/G87/G68/G87/G72/G3/G70/G82/G81/G81/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75 /G3/G85/G72/G68/G71/G82/G88/G87/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G76/G70/G86
/G68/G81/G71/G3/G43/G57/G3/G86/G88/G83/G83/G79/G92/G17
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G71/G76/G86/G87/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G78/G72/G83/G87/G3/G86/G80/G68/G79/G79/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G71/G76/G68/G80/G72/G87/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G17/G3 /G55/G82/G74/G72/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G73/G76/G72/G79/G71/G3 /G85/G76/G81/G74/G86/G3 /G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3 /G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G15/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G72/G81/G86/G88/G85/G72/G86/G3 /G83/G68/G85/G68/G79/G79/G72/G79
/G73/G76/G72/G79/G71/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G83/G68/G85/G87/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G76/G86/G3/G81/G72 /G70/G72/G86/G86/G68/G85/G92/G3/G87/G82/G3/G70/G82/G79/G79/G72/G70/G87/G3/G72/G73/G73/G76/G70/G76/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G68/G79/G79
/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G16/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G83/G68/G76/G85/G86/G3 /G74/G72/G81/G72/G85/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G68/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3 /G85/G72/G74/G76/G82/G81/G86/G17/G3 /G3 /G55/G75/G72/G3 /G43/G57/G3 /G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G3 /G68/G85/G72
/G83/G79/G68/G70/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G3/G83/G82/G86/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G3/G72/G84/G88/G76/G79/G76/G69/G85/G76/G88/G80/G3/G82/G73/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G86/G87/G68/G87/G76/G70/G3/G73/G82/G85/G70 /G72/G3/G76/G81/G3/G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G89/G82/G76/G71/G3/G89/G82/G79/G87/G68/G74/G72
/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G71/G72/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G76/G81/G68/G70/G70/G88/G85/G68/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G17
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G89/G72/G86/G86/G72/G79/G3/G76/G86/G3/G86/G72/G68/G79/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G50/G16/G85/G76/G81/G74/G86/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G74/G68/G86/G3/G76/G81/G79/G72/G87/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G82/G88/G87/G79/G72/G87/G3 /G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G69/G72/G72/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G89/G76/G71/G72/G71/G3/G82/G81/G3/G87/G82/G83
/G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G89/G72/G86/G86/G72/G79/G17/G3 /G55/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G82/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G72/G86/G3 /G68/G87/G3 /G68/G87/G80/G82/G86/G83/G75/G72/G85/G76/G70/G3 /G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G80/G68/G76 /G81/G79/G92/G3 /G69/G72/G70/G68/G88/G86/G72/G3 /G82/G73
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G89/G72/G85/G92/G3/G87/G75/G76/G81/G3/G90/G76/G81/G71/G82/G90/G86/G3/G90/G75/G76/G70/G75/G3/G70/G68/G81/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G3/G82/G81/G79/G92/G3/G89/G72/G85/G92/G3/G79/G82/G90/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G3/G74 /G85/G68/G71/G76/G72/G81/G87/G86/G17
/G22/G17/G3/G38/G75/G82/G76/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G74/G68/G86
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G73/G76/G79/G79/G76/G81/G74/G3/G74/G68/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G86/G75/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G69/G72/G3/G70/G68/G83/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G74/G72 /G81/G72/G85/G68/G87/G76/G81/G74/G3/G68/G3/G86/G88/G73/G73/G76/G70/G76/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G79/G68/G85/G74/G72
/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G16/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G83/G68/G76/G85/G86/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G72/G81/G86/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G74/G82/G82/G71/G3 /G86/G76/G74/G81/G68/G79 /G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G81/G82/G76/G86/G72/G3 /G85/G68/G87/G76/G82/G17/G3 /G36/G87/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G86/G68/G80/G72/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G86/G75/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G81/G82/G87/G3/G69/G72/G3/G68/G87/G87/G72/G81/G88/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G81/G3/G88/G81/G71/G72/G86/G76/G85/G68/G69/G79/G72 /G3/G79/G72/G89/G72/G79/G17/G3/G44/G81/G3/G74/G72/G81/G72/G85/G68/G79
/G68/G81/G3 /G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G24/G16/G21/G19/G8/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G79/G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G71/G72/G85/G72/G71/G3 /G68/G70/G70/G72/G83/G87/G68/G69/G79/G72/G17/G3 /G41/G82/G85/G3 /G68
/G83/G68/G85/G87/G76/G70/G88/G79/G68/G85/G3 /G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G15/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G82/G76/G70/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G74/G68/G86/G3 /G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G86/G3 /G82/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G85/G72/G84/G88 /G76/G85/G72/G71/G3 /G85/G72/G86/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G68/G81/G71
/G68/G70/G70/G72/G83/G87/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3 /G68/G87/G87/G72/G81/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80/G17/G3 /G41/G82/G85/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G90/G82/G85/G78/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G90/G68/G86 /G3 /G87/G72/G86/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G74/G68/G86
/G80/G76/G91/G87/G88/G85/G72/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G28/G24/G8/G36/G85/G14/G24/G8/G38/G50/c21/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G28/G19/G8/G36/G85/G14/G20/G19/G8/G38/G43/c23/G175.2cmwindow window
G a s in
G a s o u t-H V -H V F ie ld r ing s
γ
Signale n d
g a pe n d
g a p
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G20/G29/G3 /G54/G70/G75/G72/G80/G68/G87/G76/G70/G3/G82/G73/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3/G11/G72/G91/G83/G68/G81/G71/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81
/G75/G82/G85/G76/G93/G82/G81/G87/G68/G79/G3/G71/G76/G85/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86/G75/G82/G90/G3/G71/G72/G87/G68/G76/G79/G86/G12/G17/G3/G36/G79/G79/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G73/G82/G88/G85/G3/G85/G72/G74/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G72/G84/G88/G68/G79/G79/G92/G3/G86/G83/G68/G70/G72/G71/G3/G11/G27/G80/G80/G12/G3/G76/G81
/G75/G82/G85/G76/G93/G82/G81/G87/G68/G79/G3/G71/G76/G85/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G73/G76/G72/G79/G71/G3/G85/G76/G81/G74/G86/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G78/G72/G83/G87
/G72/G91/G68/G70/G87/G79/G92/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G76/G71/G71/G79/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G72/G81/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G82/G88/G87/G72/G85
/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G1710mm 7mm
10cm3/G23/G17/G3/G40/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G76/G70/G86
/G55/G75/G72/G3 /G85/G72/G68/G71/G82/G88/G87/G3 /G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G76/G70/G86/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G76/G81/G3 /G11/G86/G72/G72/G3 /G73/G76/G74/G17/G21/G12/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G86/G87/G86/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G68/G3 /G75 /G76/G74/G75/G3 /G83/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G76/G81/G74
/G68/G80/G83/G79/G76/G73/G76/G72/G85/G3 /G44/G57/G38/G20/G19/G21/c21/G15/G3 /G68/G3 /G20/G25/G3 /G69/G76/G87/G3 /G20/G19/G19/G78/G43/G93/G3 /G68/G81/G68/G79/G82/G74/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G71/G76/G74/G76/G87/G68/G79/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G89/G72/G85/G87/G72/G85/G3 /G36/G39/G54/G26/G27/G19/G24/c22/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G68
/G83/G72/G85/G86/G82/G81/G68/G79/G3 /G70/G82/G80/G83/G88/G87/G72/G85/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G86/G88/G76/G87/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G73/G68/G70/G72/G3 /G70/G68/G85/G71/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G85/G72/G68/G71/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G71/G76/G74/G76/G87/G76 /G93/G72/G71/G3 /G71/G68/G87/G68/G17/G3 /G55/G82
/G83/G85/G82/G89/G76/G71/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G81/G72/G70/G72/G86/G86/G68/G85/G92/G3 /G86/G90/G76/G87/G70/G75/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G71/G76/G74/G76/G87/G68/G79/G3 /G86/G76/G74/G81/G68/G79/G86/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G71/G85/G76/G89/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G72 /G74/G85/G68/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G36/G39/G38/G15/G3 /G68
/G88/G81/G76/G89/G72/G85/G86/G68/G79/G3/G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G82/G79/G79/G72/G85/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G88/G86/G72/G71/G17
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G82/G79/G79/G72/G85/G3/G82/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G72/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G3/G20/G48/G43/G93/G3/G70/G85/G92/G86/G87/G68/G79/G3/G82/G86/G70/G76/G79/G79/G68/G87/G82/G85/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G76/G86/G3 /G83/G85/G82/G74/G85/G68/G80/G80/G68/G69/G79/G72/G17/G3/G41/G82/G85/G3/G87/G72/G86/G87
/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G86/G72/G87/G3/G87/G82/G3/G20/G80/G54/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G81/G82/G76/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72 /G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G82/G85/c21/G3/G68/G86
/G74/G76/G89/G72/G81/G3 /G69/G92/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G86/G88/G83/G83/G79/G76/G72/G85/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G23/G19 µ/G57/G3 /G73/G82/G85/G3 /G68/G81/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G70/G68/G83/G68/G70/G76/G87/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G20/G19/G19/G83/G41/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G71/G76/G74/G76/G87/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G72/G85/G85/G82/G85/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G36/G39/G38/c22/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G21/G25/G17/G23µ/G57/G17/G3 /G55/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G70/G82/G85/G85/G72/G86/G83/G82/G81/G71/G86/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G68/G81/G3 /G72/G85/G85/G82/G85/G3 /G72/G84/G88/G76/G89/G68/G79/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G82/G73
/G22/G24/G17/G28/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G20/G80/G54/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G17/G3/G38/G82/G81/G86/G76/G71/G72/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G3/G51/G82/G76/G86 /G86/G82/G81/G3/G86/G87/G68/G87/G76/G86/G87/G76/G70/G86/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G76/G86
/G68/G71/G72/G84/G88/G68/G87/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G68/G3/G83/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G82/G88/G87/G3/G19/G17/G20/G8/G3/G82/G85/G3/G69/G72/G87/G87/G72/G85/G17
/G24/G17/G3/G40/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G68/G79/G3/G86/G72/G87/G88/G83/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G72/G86/G87/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86
/G55/G75/G72/G3 /G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G68/G79/G3 /G86/G72/G87/G88/G83/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G86/G75/G82/G90/G81/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G73/G76/G74/G17/G22/G17/G3 /G36/G3 /G21/G78/G58/G3 /G70/G85/G92/G86/G87/G68/G79/G79/G82/G74/G85/G68/G83 /G75/G76/G70/G3 /G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3 /G87/G88/G69/G72/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G68
/G80/G82/G79/G92/G69/G71/G72/G81/G88/G80/G3 /G68/G81/G82/G71/G72/G15/G3 /G90/G75/G76/G70/G75/G3 /G75/G68/G86/G3 /G68/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G85/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G86/G87/G76/G70/G3 /G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G20 /G26/G17/G23/G23/G78/G72/G57/G15/G3 /G75/G68/G86/G3 /G69/G72/G72/G81
/G88/G86/G72/G71/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G87/G72/G86/G87/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G70/G82/G79/G79/G76/G80/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75 /G3/G68/G3/G89/G72/G85/G92/G3/G81/G68/G85/G85/G82/G90/G3/G79/G72/G68/G71
/G70/G82/G79/G79/G76/G80/G68/G87/G82/G85/G17/G3 /G55/G75/G72/G3 /G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G86/G3 /G70/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3 /G69/G72/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G82/G79 /G79/G72/G71/G3 /G69/G92/G3 /G87/G88/G69/G72/G3 /G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87
/G69/G72/G70/G68/G88/G86/G72/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G83/G85/G72/G89/G76/G82/G88/G86/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G72/G81/G70/G72/c23/G3/G76/G87/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G78/G81/G82/G90/G81/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G15/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G68/G85/G87/G76/G70/G88/G79/G68/G85/G3/G87/G88/G69/G72/G3/G88/G86/G72/G71/G15
/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G71/G76/G85/G72/G70/G87/G79/G92/G3 /G83/G85/G82/G83/G82/G85/G87/G76/G82/G81/G68/G79/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G87/G88/G69/G72/G3 /G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87/G17/G3 /G55/G90/G82/G3 /G71/G76/G73 /G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G74/G68/G86/G3 /G80/G76/G91/G87/G88/G85/G72/G86/G15
/G28/G24/G8/G36/G85/G14/G24/G8/G38/G50/c21/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G28/G19/G8/G36/G85/G14/G20/G19/G8/G38/G43/c23/G15/G3 /G68/G87/G3 /G68/G87/G80/G82/G86/G83/G75/G72/G85/G76/G70/G3 /G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G90/G72/G85/G72/G3 /G88/G86/G72/G71/G3 /G73/G82/G85/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G87/G72/G86/G87/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G17re s e th o ld
c o n v e rtd ig ita l c o n t ro lle r
-
+1 0 0 p F
integrator1 6 b it
A D CP CIc
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G21/G29/G3/G53/G72/G68/G71/G82/G88/G87/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G76/G70/G864/G25/G17/G3/G53/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86
/G25/G17/G20/G17/G3/G44/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G38/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G51/G79/G68/G87/G72/G68/G88
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G23/G3 /G86/G75/G82/G90/G86/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G83/G79/G68/G87/G72/G68/G88/G86/G3 /G73/G82/G85/G3 /G71/G76/G73/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G59/G16 /G85/G68/G92/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G72/G86/G17/G3 /G38/G68/G85/G72/G73/G88/G79
/G71/G72/G86/G76/G74/G81/G76/G81/G74/G15/G3 /G83/G82/G86/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G80/G82/G88/G81/G87/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G71/G72/G86/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G70/G75/G68 /G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G89/G72/G85/G92/G3 /G73/G79/G68/G87
/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G83/G79/G68/G87/G72/G68/G88/G86/G3 /G68/G87/G3 /G71/G76/G73/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G3 /G73/G79/G88/G91/G72/G86/G3 /G83/G85/G82/G89/G76/G71/G72/G71/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G85/G76/G74/G75/G87/G3 /G74/G68 /G86/G3 /G80/G76/G91/G87/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G76/G86
/G70/G75/G82/G86/G72/G81/G17/G3 /G39/G88/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G90/G82/G85/G78/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G90/G68/G86/G3 /G82/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G87/G90/G82/G3 /G71/G76/G73/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G74/G68/G86
/G80/G76/G91/G87/G88/G85/G72/G86/G17/G3/G36/G3/G80/G76/G91/G87/G88/G85/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G28/G19/G8/G36/G85/G14/G20/G19/G8/G38/G43/c23/G3/G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G83/G79/G68/G87/G72/G68/G88/G3/G86/G79/G82/G83/G72/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G79/G72/G86/G86/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G21/G8/G3/G83/G72/G85
/G20/G19/G19/G19/G3 /G89/G82/G79/G87/G86/G3 /G90/G75/G76/G79/G72/G3 /G68/G3 /G80/G76/G91/G87/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G28/G24/G8/G36/G85/G14/G24/G8/G38/G50/c21/G3 /G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G72/G71/G3 /G86/G79/G82/G83/G72/G86/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G85/G82/G88/G74/G75/G79/G92/G3 /G22/G8/G3 /G83/G72/G85
/G20/G19/G19/G19/G3/G89/G82/G79/G87/G86/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G80/G72/G68/G81/G86/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G89/G82/G79/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G3/G89/G82/G79/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G75/G68/G86/G3/G87/G82/G3/G69/G72/G3/G78/G72/G83/G87/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G86/G87/G68/G81/G87/G3/G68/G87/G3/G79/G72/G89/G72/G79
/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G73/G72/G90/G3/G57/G82/G79/G87/G86/G3/G87/G82/G3/G72/G81/G86/G88/G85/G72/G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G68/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G19/c3/c178/c23/G3/G17X-ray s
C o llim ato rBeammonitor
in teg rato r AD C P C
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G22/G29/G3/G40/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G68/G79/G3/G86/G72/G87/G88/G83
0 50 100 150 200 250024681012
Itube=30mA
Itube=15mA
Itube=5mA90% Ar + 10% CH4I (nA )
High voltage (volts)
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G23/G29/G3/G44/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G83/G79/G68/G87/G72/G68/G88/G86/G3/G68/G87
/G71/G76/G73/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G72/G865/G25/G17/G21/G17/G3/G47/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G76/G87/G92
/G41/G82/G85/G3/G68/G3/G83/G85/G82/G83/G72/G85/G3/G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G70/G87/G82/G85/G3/G86/G76/G74/G81/G68/G79/G3/G80/G88/G86/G87/G3/G71 /G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92
/G82/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G70/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G3 /G73/G79/G88/G91/G17/G3 /G55/G82/G3 /G70/G75/G72/G70/G78/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G76/G87/G92/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G71/G72/G87/G72/G70/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G85/G72/G86/G83/G82/G81/G86/G72/G15/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G71/G76/G74/G76/G87/G76/G93/G72/G71/G3/G89/G82/G79/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G86/G76/G74/G81/G68/G79/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G70/G87/G82/G85/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3/G68/G86/G3/G68/G3/G73 /G88/G81/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92
/G87/G88/G69/G72/G3/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87/G17
/G36/G87/G3 /G72/G68/G70/G75/G3 /G86/G87/G72/G83/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3 /G87/G88/G69/G72/G3 /G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87/G15/G3 /G20/G19/G21/G23/G3 /G89/G82/G79/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3 /G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72 /G81/G87/G86/G3 /G90/G72/G85/G72
/G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G17/G3 /G55/G75/G72/G3 /G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3 /G90/G68/G86/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G81/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G89/G72/G85/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G82/G3 /G72/G84/G88/G76/G89/G68/G79 /G72/G81/G87/G3 /G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72
/G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3/G31/G44/c76/c82/c81/G33/G3/G88/G86/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G78/G81/G82/G90/G81/G3/G70/G82/G81/G89/G72/G85/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G73/G68/G70/G87/G82/G85/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G36/G39/G38/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G44/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G82/G85/G17
/G41/G82/G85/G3/G68/G79/G79/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G69/G76/G68/G86/G72/G71/G3/G68/G87/G3/G21/G19/G19/G3/G57/G3/G88/G86/G76/G81/G74 /G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3/G75/G76/G74/G75/G3/G89/G82/G79/G87/G68/G74/G72
/G86/G88/G83/G83/G79/G92/G17/G3/G41/G76/G74/G17/G24/G3/G86/G75/G82/G90/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G79/G82/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G31/G44/c76/c82/c81/G33/G3/G89/G72/G85/G86/G88/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G87/G88/G69/G72/G17/G3/G36/G3/G84/G88/G68/G71/G85/G68/G87/G76/G70/G3/G73/G76/G87
/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G68/G79/G3/G89/G68/G79/G88/G72/G86/G3/G74/G68/G89/G72/G3/G68/G3/G80/G68/G91/G76/G80/G88/G80/G3/G84/G88/G68/G71/G85/G68/G87/G76/G70/G3/G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76 /G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G17/G21/G8/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G3/G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G46/G72/G72/G83/G76/G81/G74/G3/G76/G81/G3/G89/G76/G72/G90/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G80/G68/G79/G79/G3/G81/G82/G81/G16/G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G76/G87/G92 /G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G87/G88/G69/G72/G3/G76/G87/G86/G72/G79/G73/G15/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86
/G76/G86/G3 /G81/G72/G74/G79/G76/G74/G76/G69/G79/G92/G3 /G86/G80/G68/G79/G79/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G85/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G3 /G70/G68/G81/G3 /G69/G72/G3 /G86/G68/G76/G71 /G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G69/G72/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3 /G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75
/G85/G72/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G3/G87/G82/G3/G76/G81/G70/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G81/G72/G88/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3/G73/G79/G88/G91/G17
/G25/G17/G22/G17/G3σ/c21/G16/G49/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G70/G72
/G36/G3/G86/G72/G85/G76/G72/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G70/G75/G72/G70/G78/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G81/G82/G76/G86/G72/G3/G69/G72 /G75/G68/G89/G76/G82/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G90/G75/G82/G79/G72
/G71/G72/G87/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G85/G72/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G3/G87/G82/G3/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G17/G3 /G44/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G82/G73
/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G72/G71/G3 /G80/G68/G76/G81/G79/G92/G3 /G69/G92/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G51/G82/G76/G86/G86/G82/G81/G3 /G86/G87/G68/G87/G76/G86/G87/G76/G70/G86 /G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71
/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G81/G15/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G68/G3/G68/G83/G83/G85/G82/G91/G76/G80/G68/G87/G72/G79/G92/G3/G80/G82/G81/G82/G70/G75/G85/G82/G80/G68/G87/G76/G70/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G82/G73/G3/G76/G81 /G70/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G15/G3/G82/G81/G72
/G90/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G70/G87/G3/G68/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86 /G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G85/G72/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87
/G87/G82/G3/G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72/G3/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G15/G3/G76/G17/G72/G17/G155 10 15 20 25 30 35024681012
90% Ar + 10% CH4I (n A)
X-ray tube current (mA)
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G24/G29/G3/G55/G72/G86/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G76/G87/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G30
/G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3/G68/G86/G3/G68/G3/G73/G88/G81/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G87/G88/G69/G72/G3/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87/G176/G43/G72/G85/G72/G3/G49/c68/c69/c86/G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3 /G40/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3σ/c68/c69/c86/G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71
/G71/G72/G89/G76/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G86/G76/G80/G83/G79/G72/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G75/G82/G79/G71/G86 /G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G81/G68/G79/G92/G86/G76/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3 /G69/G72/G70/G68/G88/G86/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G76/G82/G81/G3 /G83/G68/G76 /G85/G86/G3 /G83/G72/G85/G3 /G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G3 /G76/G86
/G79/G68/G85/G74/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G76/G85/G3/G73/G79/G88/G70/G87/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G73/G88/G85/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G41/G68/G81/G82/G3/G73/G68/G70/G87/G82/G85/G17
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G87/G88/G69/G72/G3/G88/G86/G72/G71/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G87/G72/G86/G87/G86/G3/G75/G68/G86/G15/G3/G75/G82/G90/G72/G89/G72/G85/G15/G3/G76/G86/G3/G81/G82/G87/G3/G80/G82/G81/G82/G70/G75/G85/G82 /G80/G68/G87/G76/G70/G17/G3/G3/G55/G75/G88/G86/G3/G82/G81/G72/G3/G75/G68/G86
/G87/G82/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G68/G70/G72/G3/G40γ/c21/G3/G69/G92/G3/G31/G3/G40γ/c21/G33/G3/G17
/G41/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G83/G85/G72/G68/G71/G3/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G85/G88/G80/G15/G3/G3 σ/c21/G3/G32/G3/G31/G40/c21/G33/G3/G16/G3/G31/G40/G33/c21/G15/G3/G82/G81/G72/G3/G82/G69/G87/G68/G76/G81/G86/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3/G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3 σ/c21
/c68/c69/c86/G3/G32/G3/G3/G31/G40/c21/G33/G3/G49/c68/c69/c86/G3/G3/G32/G3/G31/G40/G33/c21/G3/G3/G49/c68/c69/c86/G3/G11/G20/G3/G14/G3σ/c21/G18/G31/G40/G33/c21/G12
/G54/G83/G85/G72/G68/G71/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G80/G72/G68/G81/G3 /G89/G68/G79/G88/G72/G3 /G75/G68/G89/G72/G3 /G69/G72/G72/G81/G3 /G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G72/G71/G3 /G73/G85/G82/G80/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80 /G72/G81/G87/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G85/G88/G80/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G86/G82/G88/G85/G70/G72/G17
/G44/G81/G3/G68/G71/G71/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G51/G82/G76/G86/G86/G82/G81/G3/G73/G79/G88/G70/G87/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G15/G3/G87/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G3/G82/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3/G68/G71/G71/G76/G87/G76 /G89/G72/G3/G81/G82/G76/G86/G72/G3/G86/G82/G88/G85/G70/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G15/G3/G72/G17/G74/G17/G15/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G76/G70/G86/G3/G81/G82/G76/G86/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G71/G76/G74/G76/G87/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G72/G85/G85/G82/G85/G17/G3/G54/G76/G81/G70/G72/G3/G87/G75 /G72/G86/G72/G3/G81/G82/G76/G86/G72/G3/G3/G86/G82/G88/G85/G70/G72/G86/G3/G68/G85/G72
/G86/G87/G68/G87/G76/G86/G87/G76/G70/G68/G79/G79/G92/G3 /G76/G81/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G15/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G87/G82/G87/G68/G79/G3 /G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3 /G70/G82 /G88/G81/G87/G86/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G74/G76/G89/G72/G81/G3 /G69/G92
/G68/G71/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G85/G85/G72/G86/G83/G82/G81/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G84/G88/G68/G71/G85/G68/G87/G88/G85/G72/G17
/G55/G75/G88/G86/G3/G83/G79/G82/G87/G87/G76/G81/G74/G3/G3 σ/c21
/c80/G3/G3/G3/G89/G72/G85/G86/G88/G86/G3/G3/G49/c68/c69/c86/G3/G86/G75/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G74/G76/G89/G72/G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G85/G68/G76/G74/G75/G87/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G3/G92/G16/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G70/G72/G83/G87/G3/G69/G72/G76/G81/G74
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3/G81/G82/G76/G86/G72/G3/G86/G82/G88/G85/G70/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G17/G3/G41/G85/G82/G80/G3/G3/G3/G87/G75/G72 /G3/G86/G79/G82/G83/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72
/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G70/G68/G81/G3/G69/G72/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G72/G71/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G86/G79/G82/G83/G72/G3/G82/G73 /G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G69/G82/G89/G72/G3/G72/G84/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81
/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G86/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82/G3/G82/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G83/G85/G72/G68/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G85/G88/G80/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75 /G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G85/G88/G80/G3/G82/G73
/G76/G81/G70/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3 /G90/G68/G86/G3 /G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G72/G71/G3 /G69/G92/G3 /G68/G3 /G83/G85/G82/G83/G82/G85/G87/G76/G82/G81/G68/G79/G3 /G70/G82/G88/G81/G87/G72/G85/G3 /G68/G81/G71 /G3 /G73/G85/G82/G80/G3 /G87/G75/G68/G87/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G85/G88/G80/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3 /G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3 /G90/G68/G86/G3 /G70/G68/G79/G70/G88/G79/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G88/G86/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G80/G68/G86/G86/G3 /G68 /G69/G86/G82/G85/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81
/G70/G82/G72/G73/G73/G76/G70/G76/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G74/G68/G86/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80/G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G17/G3 /G55/G75/G72/G3 /G86/G83/G85/G72/G68/G71/G3 /G76 /G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G85/G88/G80/G3 /G82/G73
/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3 /G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3 /G90/G68/G86/G3 /G73/G82/G88/G81/G71/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G69/G72/G3 /G22/G17/G25/G24/G78/G72/G57/G17/G3 /G55/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G90/G68/G86/G3 /G88/G86/G72 /G71/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G90/G75/G76/G70/G75/G3/G87/G88/G85/G81/G72/G71/G3/G82/G88/G87/G3/G87/G82/G3/G69/G72/G3/G20 /G21/G17/G23/G25/G78/G72/G57/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G89/G68/G79/G88/G72
/G90/G75/G76/G70/G75/G3/G76/G86/G3/G86/G82/G80/G72/G90/G75/G68/G87/G3/G79/G82/G90/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G76/G81/G70/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G83 /G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G11/G20/G24/G3/G78/G72/G57/G12/G3/G70/G68/G81
/G69/G72/G3/G88/G81/G71/G72/G85/G86/G87/G82/G82/G71/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G85/G82/G81/G74/G72/G85/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G79/G82/G90/G72/G85/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G83/G75 /G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72
/G89/G82/G79/G88/G80/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G68/G86/G3 /G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G85/G72/G71/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G75/G76/G74/G75/G72/G85/G3 /G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3 /G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G17 /G3 /G55/G75/G72/G3 /G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72
/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82/G3/G70/G68/G79/G70/G88/G79/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G72/G68 /G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G85/G88/G80/G3/G82/G73
><+⋅⋅>< +=22
2 2 21
γγσσσEN EE
abs add mabs abs NE⋅=2 2
γσ7/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G17/G3/G44/G87/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G73/G82/G88/G81/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G69/G72/G3/G20/G21/G17/G21/G24/G78/G72/G57/G3/G74/G76/G89/G76/G81/G74/G3/G68/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76 /G89/G72/G3/G71/G76/G73/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G82/G88/G87
/G21/G8/G3/G68/G86/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G85/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3/G89/G68/G79/G88/G72/G17
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G25/G3/G86/G75/G82/G90/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G11 σ/c21/G12/G3/G68/G86/G3/G68/G3/G73/G88/G81/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G3/G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72
/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3 /G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3 /G70/G68/G79/G70/G88/G79/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G88/G86/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G68/G69/G82/G89/G72/G3 /G87/G90/G82/G3 /G85/G72 /G79/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G17/G3 /G36
/G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G20/G19/G19/G3/G43/G93/G3/G85/G76/G83/G83/G79/G72/G3/G82/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G76/G74/G81/G68/G79/G15/G3/G90/G75/G76/G70/G75/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G70/G68 /G88/G86/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G83/G82/G90/G72/G85/G3/G86/G88/G83/G83/G79/G92/G3/G82/G73
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G87/G88/G69/G72/G15/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G73/G76/G79/G87/G72/G85/G72/G71/G3/G82/G88/G87/G3/G71/G88/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G82/G73/G73/G79/G76/G81/G72/G3/G71/G68/G87/G68/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G87/G76 /G82/G81/G3/G69/G92/G3/G41/G82/G88/G85/G76/G72/G85/G3/G73/G76/G79/G87/G72/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G76/G81
/G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3 /G81/G82/G87/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G73/G68/G79/G86/G76/G73/G92/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G17/G3 /G44/G87/G3 /G86/G75/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3 /G69/G72/G3 /G81/G82/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G87/G75/G68/G87/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G89/G68/G79 /G88/G72/G86/G3 /G85/G72/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G20/G80/G54/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G17
/G40/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G68/G79/G79/G92/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3 σ/c21
/c49/c70/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3 /G89/G82/G79/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G36/G39/G38/G3 /G88/G81/G76/G87/G86/G3 /G76/G86
/G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G72/G71/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G19/G21/G23/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G70/G88/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3 /G88/G81/G71/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G68/G80/G72
/G70/G82/G81/G71/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G89/G68/G79/G88/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3 σ/c21/G3/G82/G73/G3/G49/c68/c69/c86/G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G81/G3/G74/G76/G89/G72/G81/G3/G69/G92/G29
/G90/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G3/G58/G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72/G3/G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G72/G81/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70 /G87/G85/G82/G81/G16/G76/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G76/G85/G15/G3/G72/G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3/G70/G75/G68/G85/G74/G72/G3/G76/G81/G3/G38/G82/G88/G79/G82/G80/G69/G15/G3/G69/G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G81/G89/G72/G85/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G73/G68/G70/G87/G82/G85/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G36/G39/G38/G3 /G88/G81/G76/G87/G86/G3/G76/G81/G87/G82/G3/G3/G57/G82/G79/G87/G86/G15/G3/G38/G3/G76/G86
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G70/G68/G83/G68/G70/G76/G87/G92/G3/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3 τ /G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G17
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G68/G71/G71/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G68/G79/G3/G81/G82/G76/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G3/G68/G86/G3/G70/G68/G79/G70/G88/G79/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G83/G85/G72/G89/G76/G82/G88/G86/G79/G92 /G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G92/G16/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G70/G72/G83/G87/G3/G82/G73
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G85/G68/G76/G74/G75/G87/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G76/G86/G3/G72/G84/G88/G76/G89/G68/G79/G72/G81/G87/G3/G87/G82/G3/G22/G27/G17/G23 ±/G21/G20/G17/G20/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G69/G72/G76/G81/G74/G3/G90/G72/G79/G79/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G87/G76/G69/G79/G72/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G76/G812
2 2
,
⋅⋅⋅ ⋅⋅=τσσ
γ
absN NEeCbW
c abs0 4 8 12 1605101520
σ0=39.3 photonsσ2, photons2 (X104)
<Nabs>, photons (X104)
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G25/G29/G3/G39/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86
/G82/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72/G3/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71
/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G85/G68/G76/G74/G75/G87/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G71/G68/G87/G68/G178/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G87/G76/G86/G87/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G72/G85/G85/G82/G85/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G70/G87/G72/G71/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G76/G70/G86/G3/G81/G82/G76/G86/G72/G3/G3/G72/G84/G88/G76/G89/G68/G79/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G82/G73/G3/G22/G24/G17/G28/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71
/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G17
/G44/G81/G3/G80/G82/G86/G87/G3/G70/G68/G86/G72/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3/G76/G86/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G89/G68/G79/G86/G3/G82 /G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G86/G72/G70/G82/G81/G71/G15
/G87/G75/G88/G86/G3/G87/G68/G78/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72/G3/G31/G49/c68/c69/c86/G33/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G19/G19/G19/G3/G86/G76/G81/G74/G79/G72/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G72/G85/G85/G82/G85/G3/G82/G73
/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G72/G3 /G31/G49/c68/c69/c86/G33/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G86/G75/G82/G90/G81/G3 /G3 /G68/G86/G3 /G68/G3 /G73/G88/G81/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G3 /G49/c68/c69/c86/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G73/G76/G74/G17/G3 /G26/G15/G3 /G87/G82/G74/G72/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G72/G85/G85/G82/G85/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G70/G87/G72/G71/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G51/G82/G76/G86/G86/G82/G81/G3/G73/G79/G88/G70/G87/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G82/G81/G79/G92/G3/G11/G86/G82/G79/G76/G71/G3/G79 /G76/G81/G72/G12/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G71/G72/G80/G82/G81/G86/G87/G85/G68/G87/G72/G86
/G68/G74/G68/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3/G82/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G72/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G79/G76/G80/G76/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G84/G88/G68/G81/G87/G88/G80/G3/G73/G79 /G88/G70/G87/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87
/G68/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G68/G70/G70/G88/G85/G68/G70/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G19/c16/c23/c3/G3/G70/G68/G81/G3/G69/G72/G3/G68/G70/G75/G76/G72/G89/G72/G71/G17/G3/G36/G87/G3/G79/G82/G90/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G72/G86
/G68/G89/G72/G85/G68/G74/G76/G81/G74/G3/G82/G89/G72/G85/G3/G80/G82/G85/G72/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G68/G3/G86/G72/G70/G82/G81/G71/G3/G90/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G69/G72/G3/G81/G72/G70/G72/G86/G86/G68/G85/G92/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G86/G68/G80/G72/G3/G68/G70/G70/G88/G85/G68/G70/G92/G15
/G90/G75/G76/G79/G72/G3/G68/G87/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G72/G86/G3/G79/G68/G85/G74/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G68/G69/G82/G88/G87/G3/G20/G19/c20/c20/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G18/G86/G72/G70/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G80/G86
/G68/G85/G72/G3/G86/G88/G73/G73/G76/G70/G76/G72/G81/G87/G17
/G25/G17/G23/G17/G3/G54/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G68/G87/G76/G70/G3/G88/G81/G70/G72/G85/G87/G68/G76/G81/G87/G76/G72/G86
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G88/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3/G68/G87/G3/G68/G3/G86/G92/G81/G70/G75/G85/G82/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3/G79/G76/G74/G75/G87/G3/G86/G82/G88/G85/G70/G72/G3/G80/G76 /G74/G75/G87/G3/G74/G76/G89/G72/G3/G85/G76/G86/G72/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86/G82/G80/G72
/G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G68/G87/G76/G70/G3/G88/G81/G70/G72/G85/G87/G68/G76/G81/G87/G76/G72/G86/G3/G69/G72/G70/G68/G88/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G89/G68/G76/G79/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3/G75/G76/G74/G75/G72/G85/G3/G73/G79/G88 /G91/G3/G82/G73/G3/G76/G81/G70/G82/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G17
/G55/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3/G76/G81/G70/G79/G88/G71/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G86/G3/G71/G88/G72/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G70/G70/G88/G80/G88/G79/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G83/G68/G70/G72/G3/G70/G75 /G68/G85/G74/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G70/G75/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G81/G68/G79/G3/G82/G85/G3/G72/G91/G87/G72/G85/G81/G68/G79/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G83/G68/G70/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G85/G74/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G83/G68/G85/G87/G76/G70/G88/G79/G68/G85/G3/G74/G72/G82/G80/G72/G87/G85/G92
/G75/G68/G86/G3/G69/G72/G72/G81/G3/G68/G81/G68/G79/G92/G87/G76/G70/G68/G79/G79/G92/G3/G90/G82/G85/G78/G72/G71/G3/G82/G88/G87/G3/G11/G86/G72/G72/G3/G85/G72/G73/G17/G62/G25/G64/G12/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86 /G88/G79/G87/G3/G76/G86/G3/G86/G75/G82/G90/G81/G3/G76/G81/G3/G73/G76/G74/G17/G27/G17/G3/G44/G87/G3/G70/G68/G81
/G69/G72/G3 /G86/G72/G72/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G68/G87/G3 /G88/G83/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G20/G19/c20/c19/G3 /G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G18/G86/G72/G70/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G86/G83/G68/G70/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G85/G74/G72/G3 /G71/G82/G72/G86/G3 /G81/G82/G87/G3 /G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G76/G82/G85/G68/G87/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G76/G70/G3/G73/G76/G72/G79/G71/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3/G76/G81/G86/G76/G71/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G89/G82/G79/G88/G80/G72/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G71/G72/G85/G68/G69 /G79/G92/G15/G3/G76/G17/G72/G17/G15/G3/G76/G87/G3/G85/G72/G80/G68/G76/G81/G86/G3/G88/G81/G76/G73/G82/G85/G80
/G87/G82/G3 /G68/G3 /G74/G82/G82/G71/G3 /G72/G91/G87/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G85/G74/G72/G3 /G70/G82/G79/G79/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G72/G73/G73/G76/G70/G76/G72/G81/G70/G92/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72 /G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G81/G82/G87
/G71/G72/G74/G85/G68/G71/G72/G71/G17/G3 /G43/G82/G90/G72/G89/G72/G85/G3 /G68/G69/G82/G89/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G89/G68/G79/G88/G72/G15/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G3 /G69/G72/G70/G82/G80/G72/G86/G3 /G86/G76/G93/G68/G69 /G79/G72/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G86/G82/G80/G72
/G86/G82/G73/G87/G90/G68/G85/G72/G3 /G73/G76/G79/G87/G72/G85/G3 /G86/G70/G75/G72/G80/G72/G3 /G90/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3 /G69/G72/G3 /G81/G72/G72/G71/G72/G71/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G80/G68/G78/G72/G3 /G85/G72/G79/G76/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3 /G68 /G81/G68/G79/G92/G86/G76/G86/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G174 6 8 10 12 14 16810121416
: only Poisson fluctuations
: calculated from datarel. error (X10-5)
<Nγ,abs>, photons (X104)
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G26/G29/G3/G53/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G72/G85/G85/G82/G85/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G80/G72/G68/G81/G3/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85
/G82/G73/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G69/G72/G71/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G179/G55/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G86/G76/G71/G72/G3 /G82/G85/G3 /G82/G88/G87/G86/G76/G71/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80/G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G90 /G82/G88/G79/G71/G3 /G68/G79/G86/G82/G3 /G68/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G3 /G76/G87/G86
/G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G81/G70/G72/G17/G3 /G55/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3 /G69/G68/G85/G82/G80/G72/G87/G85/G76/G70/G3 /G86/G75/G76/G73/G87/G86/G3 /G70/G68/G81/G3 /G68/G85/G76/G86/G72/G3 /G73/G85/G82/G80/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G68/G87/G80/G82/G86/G83/G75/G72/G85/G76/G70
/G87/G72/G80/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G88/G85/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G80/G76/G70/G85/G82/G83/G75/G82/G81/G92/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G81/G89/G76/G85/G82/G81/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G82/G85/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G74/G68/G86
/G73/G79/G82/G90/G3 /G76/G81/G86/G76/G71/G72/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G17/G3 /G44/G81/G3 /G85/G72/G73/G17/G62/G25/G64/G15/G3 /G68/G81/G68/G79/G92/G87/G76/G70/G3 /G70/G68/G79/G70/G88/G79/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81 /G86/G3 /G75/G68/G89/G72/G3 /G69/G72/G72/G81/G3 /G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3 /G87/G82
/G72/G86/G87/G76/G80/G68/G87/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G68/G74/G81/G76/G87/G88/G71/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G88/G81/G70/G72/G85/G87/G68/G76/G81/G87/G92/G3/G71/G88/G72/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86/G88/G70/G75/G3/G69/G68/G85/G82/G80/G72/G87/G85/G76/G70/G3/G86/G75/G76 /G73/G87/G86/G17/G3/G3/G44/G87/G3/G87/G88/G85/G81/G72/G71/G3/G82/G88/G87
/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3 /G68/G87/G3 /G86/G80/G68/G79/G79/G3 /G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G81/G74/G72/G86/G15/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G81/G82/G87/G3 /G89/G72/G85/G92/G3 /G86/G76/G74/G81/G76/G73/G76/G70 /G68/G81/G87/G29/G3 /G76/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G76/G86
/G69/G72/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G82/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G68/G87/G3 /G20/G3 /G69/G68/G85/G15/G3 /G73/G76/G79/G79/G72/G71/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G20/G19/G19/G8/G3 /G36/G85/G74/G82/G81/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G72/G91/G83/G82/G86/G72/G71 /G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G68/G3 /G73/G79/G88/G91/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G20/G19/c20/c19
/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G18/G86/G72/G70/G15/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G81/G3 /G68/G3 /G70/G75/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G21/G3 /G80/G69/G68/G85/G3 /G90/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3 /G68 /G83/G83/G72/G68/G85/G3 /G68/G86/G3 /G68/G3 /G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72
/G70/G75/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G97/G20/G59/G20/G19/c16/c22/G3/G76/G81/G3/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3/G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G87/G17/G3/G43/G82/G90/G72/G89/G72/G85/G3/G76/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G81/G74 /G72/G86
/G69/G92/G3 /G68/G86/G3 /G80/G88/G70/G75/G3 /G68/G86/G3 /G20/G19/G80/G69/G68/G85/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G72/G85/G85/G82/G85/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3 /G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G70/G88/G85/G85/G72 /G81/G87/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G68/G69/G82/G88/G87/G3 /G68/G81
/G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G80/G68/G74/G81/G76/G87/G88/G71/G72/G3/G75/G76/G74/G75/G72/G85/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G85/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3/G70/G68/G85/G72/G3/G90/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G69/G72/G3/G81/G72/G70/G72/G86 /G86/G68/G85/G92/G3/G87/G82/G3/G78/G72/G72/G83/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G74/G68/G86
/G73/G79/G82/G90/G3/G85/G68/G87/G72/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G87/G68/G81/G87/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G87/G80/G82/G86/G83/G75/G72/G85/G76/G70/G3/G70/G82/G81/G71/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G71/G88/G85/G76/G81/G74 /G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3/G68/G86
/G90/G72/G79/G79/G17
/G26/G17/G3/G38/G82/G81/G70/G79/G88/G86/G76/G82/G81/G86
/G36/G3 /G75/G76/G74/G75/G3 /G83/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80/G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G73/G82/G85/G3 /G68/G83/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G86/G92 /G81/G70/G75/G85/G82/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3 /G85/G68/G71/G76/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81
/G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3 /G90/G68/G86/G3 /G69/G88/G76/G79/G87/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3 /G87/G72/G86/G87/G86/G3 /G68/G87/G3 /G3 /G68/G3 /G59/G3 /G85/G68/G92/G3 /G87/G88/G69/G72/G3 /G75/G68/G89/G72
/G69/G72/G72/G81/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G72/G71/G17
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3/G76/G86/G3/G68/G3/G3/G86/G76/G81/G74/G79/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G81/G81/G72/G79/G3/G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G90/G82/G85/G78/G76/G81/G74/G3/G68/G87/G3/G81/G82/G85/G80/G68/G79/G3/G74/G68/G86
/G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G17/G3 /G44/G87/G3 /G76/G86/G3 /G71/G72/G86/G76/G74/G81/G72/G71/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G82/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G72/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G72/G81/G72/G85/G74/G92/G3 /G85/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G24/G16 /G21/G19/G3 /G78/G72/G57/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75/G82/G88/G87/G3 /G68
/G86/G76/G74/G81/G76/G73/G76/G70/G68/G81/G87/G3/G68/G87/G87/G72/G81/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G79/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G76/G87/G92/G3 /G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85
/G86/G76/G74/G81/G68/G79/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G86/G75/G82/G90/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G79/G82/G83/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G79/G68/G87/G72/G68/G88/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G73/G82/G88/G81/G71/G3 /G87/G82/G3/G69/G72/G3/G79/G72/G86/G86/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G21/G8/G3/G83/G72/G85
/G20/G19/G19/G19/G3/G57/G170 2 4 6 8200220240260280300 109 photons/S
1010 photons/S
1011 photons/SE, volts/cm
x, cm (X0.1)
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G27/G17/G3/G39/G76/G86/G87/G82/G85/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G76/G70/G3/G73/G76/G72/G79/G71/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G68/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G89/G82/G79/G88/G80/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3/G71/G88/G72/G3/G87/G82
/G68/G70/G70/G88/G80/G88/G79/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G83/G68/G70/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G85/G74/G72/G3/G11/G85/G72/G73/G17/G62/G25/G64/G12/G1710/G55/G75/G72/G3 /G87/G72/G86/G87/G86/G3 /G75/G68/G89/G72/G3 /G71/G72/G80/G82/G81/G86/G87/G85/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G87/G75/G68/G87/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80/G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G82/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G72/G86/G3 /G68/G87/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3 /G79 /G76/G80/G76/G87/G3 /G82/G73
/G84/G88/G68/G81/G87/G88/G80/G3/G73/G79/G88/G70/G87/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G17/G3/G3/G39/G88/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G87/G72/G86/G87/G86/G3/G68/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G68/G70/G70/G88/G85/G68/G70/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G3 /G22/G91/G20/G19/c16/c23/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G44/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92
/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G70/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3 /G69/G72/G3 /G68/G70/G75/G76/G72/G89/G72/G71/G17/G3 /G3 /G40/G91/G87/G85/G68/G83/G82/G79/G68/G87/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G3 /G87/G82/G3 /G75/G76/G74 /G75/G72/G85/G3 /G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80
/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G72/G86/G3 /G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G72/G71/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G86/G92/G81/G70/G75/G85/G82/G87/G85/G82/G81/G86/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G76/G80/G83/G79/G76/G72/G86/G3 /G87/G75/G68/G87/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G87/G75/G76/G86/G3 /G68/G83/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G68/G3 /G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72
/G83/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G69/G72/G68/G80/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G19/c16/c23/G3/G76/G86/G3/G90/G72/G79/G79/G3/G68/G70/G75/G76/G72/G89/G68/G69/G79/G72/G17
/G54/G83/G68/G70/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G85/G74/G72/G3/G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G86/G3/G86/G75/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G81/G82/G87/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G76/G82/G85/G68/G87/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G70/G70/G88/G85/G68/G70/G92/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G3/G79 /G72/G89/G72/G79/G3/G82/G73/G3/G80/G82/G85/G72/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81
/G20/G19/c16/c23/G3/G90/G75/G72/G81/G3/G72/G91/G83/G82/G86/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G3/G73/G79/G88/G91/G3/G88/G83/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G19/c20/c19/G3/G83/G75/G82/G87/G82/G81/G86/G18/G86/G72/G70/G17/G3/G58/G75/G72/G81/G3/G88/G86/G76/G81/G74
/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G3 /G69/G72/G68/G80/G3 /G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G68/G79/G3 /G72/G81/G89/G76/G85/G82/G81/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3 /G80/G88/G70/G75/G3 /G70/G68/G85/G72/G3 /G75/G68/G86/G3 /G87/G82 /G3 /G69/G72/G3 /G87/G68/G78/G72/G81/G3 /G87/G82
/G68/G89/G82/G76/G71/G3/G88/G81/G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G82/G79/G79/G72/G71/G3/G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G76/G81/G81/G72/G85/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G82/G88/G87/G72/G85/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G86/G88/G85/G72/G17
/G36/G70/G78/G81/G82/G90/G79/G72/G71/G74/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86
/G58/G72/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G78/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G72/G70/G75/G68/G81/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G90/G82/G85/G78/G86/G75/G82/G83/G3/G82/G73/G3/G54/G76/G72/G74/G72/G81/G3/G56/G81/G76/G89/G72/G85/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G69/G88/G76 /G79/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G72/G70/G75/G68/G81/G76/G70/G86
/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G79/G92/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G70/G68/G85/G72/G73/G88/G79/G79/G92/G17/G3/G54/G83/G72/G70/G76/G68/G79/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G78/G86/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G71/G88/G72/G3 /G87/G82/G3/G48/G85/G17/G3/G42/G17/G3/G44/G78/G86/G68/G79/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G75/G76/G86
/G89/G68/G79/G88/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3/G86/G88/G83/G83/G82/G85/G87/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G71/G72/G86/G76/G74/G81/G76/G81/G74/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G85/G72/G68/G79/G76/G93/G76/G81/G74/G3/G68/G3/G83/G68/G85/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72 /G79/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G81/G76/G70/G86/G3/G70/G75/G68/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G17
/G53/G72/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86
/G11/G20/G12 /G45/G17/G3/G42/G82/G88/G79/G82/G81/G15/G3/G180/G39/G72/G87/G72/G70/G87/G82/G85/G86/G3/G82/G83/G87/G76/G80/G76/G93/G72/G71/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G68/G69/G86/G82/G85/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G85/G82/G86/G70 /G82/G83/G92/G181/G15/G3/G51/G85/G82/G70/G72/G72/G71/G76/G81/G74/G86
/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G40/G88/G85/G82/G83/G72/G68/G81/G3/G58/G82/G85/G78/G86/G75/G82/G83/G3/G82/G81/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G39/G72/G87/G72/G70/G87/G82/G85/G86/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G54/G92/G81/G70/G75/G85/G82/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3/G53/G68/G71/G76/G68 /G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G54/G82/G88/G85/G70/G72/G86/G181/G15
/G41/G85/G68/G81/G70/G72/G15/G3/G20/G28/G28/G20
/G11/G21/G12 /G180/G51/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G86/G90/G76/G87/G70/G75/G72/G71/G3 /G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G82/G85/G3 /G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G76/G80/G83/G72/G71/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3 /G68/G80/G83/G79/G76/G73/G76/G72/G85/G181/G15/G3 /G71/G68/G87/G68/G3 /G86/G75/G72/G72/G87/G15/G3 /G37/G56/G53/G53
/G37/G53/G50/G58/G49/G15/G3/G56/G54/G36/G15/G3/G20/G28/G28/G25/G17
/G11/G22/G12 /G180/G20/G25/G16/G37/G76/G87/G3 /G20/G19 µ/G86/G3 /G86/G68/G80/G83/G79/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G38/G48/G50/G54/G3 /G68/G81/G68/G79/G82/G74/G16/G87/G82/G16/G71/G76/G74/G76/G87/G68/G79/G3 /G70/G82/G81/G89/G72/G85/G87/G72/G85/G181/G15/G3 /G71/G68/G87/G68/G3 /G86/G75/G72/G72/G87/G15/G3 /G37/G56/G53/G53
/G37/G53/G50/G58/G49/G15/G3/G56/G54/G36/G15/G3/G20/G28/G28/G25/G17
/G11/G23/G12 /G57/G17/G46/G17/G3/G48/G92/G68/G79/G76/G87/G86/G76/G81/G15/G3/G43/G17/G16/G45/G17/G3/G37/G72/G86/G70/G75/G15/G3/G43/G17/G58/G17/G3/G54/G70/G75/G72/G81/G78/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G36/G17/G43/G17/G3/G58/G68/G79/G72/G81 /G87/G68/G15/G3/G36/G3/G80/G88/G79/G76/G87/G70/G75/G68/G81/G81/G72/G79/G3/G83/G82/G86/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81
/G86/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G76/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G70/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G59/G16/G85/G68/G92/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G76/G81/G74/G15/G3 /G49/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G85/G3/G44/G81/G86/G87/G85/G88/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G9
/G48/G72/G87/G75/G82/G71/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G51/G75/G92/G86/G76/G70/G86/G3/G53/G72/G86/G72/G68/G85/G70/G75/G3/G36/G22/G21/G22/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G21/G12/G3/G83/G17/G3/G28/G26/G16/G20/G19/G22/G17
/G11/G24/G12 /G54/G17/G49/G17/G3/G36/G75/G80/G72/G71/G15/G3/G43/G17/G16/G45/G17/G3/G37/G72/G86/G70/G75/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G36/G17/G43/G17/G3/G58/G68/G79/G72/G81/G87/G68/G15/G3/G43/G76/G74/G75/G3/G83/G85/G72/G70/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G69 /G72/G68/G80/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3/G80/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85
/G73/G82/G85/G3/G86/G92/G81/G70/G75/G85/G82/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3/G85/G68/G71/G76/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G85/G76/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G15/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G86/G83/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G80/G72/G72/G87/G76/G81/G74 /G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G42/G72/G85/G80/G68/G81
/G51/G75/G92/G86/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G54/G82/G70/G76/G72/G87/G92/G3/G76/G81/G3/G41/G85/G72/G76/G69/G88/G85/G74/G15/G3/G42/G72/G85/G80/G68/G81/G92/G15/G3/G20/G28/G28/G27/G17
/G11/G25/G12 /G54/G17/G49/G17/G3 /G36/G75/G80/G72/G71/G15/G3 /G52/G88/G68/G81/G87/G88/G80/G3 /G41/G79/G88/G70/G87/G88/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3 /G76/G81/G3 /G68/G3 /G54/G72/G74/G80/G72/G81/G87/G72/G71/G3 /G44/G82/G81/G76/G93/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G38/G75/G68/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3 /G73/G82/G85
/G44/G81/G87/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G92/G3 /G48/G82/G81/G76/G87/G82/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G82/G73/G3 /G54/G92/G81/G70/G75/G85/G82/G87/G85/G82/G81/G3 /G53/G68/G71/G76/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3 /G51/G75/G39/G3 /G55/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G15/G3 /G54/G76/G72 /G74/G72/G81/G3 /G56/G81/G76/G89/G72/G85/G86/G76/G87/G92/G15
/G42/G72/G85/G80/G68/G81/G92/G15/G3/G20/G28/G28/G27/G17/G3/G75/G87/G87/G83/G29/G18/G18/G90/G90/G90/G17/G88/G69/G17/G88/G81/G76/G16/G86/G76/G72/G74/G72/G81/G17/G71/G72/G18/G72/G83/G88/G69/G18/G71/G76/G86/G86/G18/G68/G75/G80/G72 /G71/G17/G75/G87/G80 |
arXiv:physics/9910034v1 [physics.class-ph] 22 Oct 1999On the form of Lorentz-Stern-Gerlach force
Sameen Ahmed KHAN∗
Modesto PUSTERLA†
Dipartimento di Fisica Galileo Galilei Universit` a di Pado va
Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN) Sezione di Pad ova
Via Marzolo 8 Padova 35131 ITALY
Abstract
In recent times there has been a renewed interest in the force experienced by a
charged-particle with anomalous magnetic moment in the pre sence of external
fields. In this paper we address the basic question of the forc e experienced by
a spin-1
2point-like charged-particle with magnetic and electric mo ments in the
presence of space-and time-dependent external electromag netic fields, when
derived from the Dirac equation viathe Foldy-Wouthuysen transformation
technique. It is interesting to note that the force thus deri ved differs from the
ones obtained by various other prescriptions.
I. INTRODUCTION
We present a derivation of the force experienced by a spin-1
2point-like charged-particle
with anomalous magnetic and anomalous electric moments in t he presence of space-and
time-dependent external electromagnetic fields, based ab initio on the Dirac equation via
the Foldy-Wouthuysen (FW) transformation technique. In th e present derivation we neglect
the radiation reaction and the electromagnetic fields are tr eated as classical.
In absence of spin the force experienced by a point-like char ged-particle is completely
described by the Lorentz force law ( FL=q(E+v×B)). In the regime where the spin
and the magnetic moment are to be taken into account the quest ion of the form of the
force obtained from the relativistic quantum theory is stil l unresolved to this day, though
extensive studies, using diverse approaches have been done since the discovery of quantum
mechanics. This is evident from the numerous approaches/pr escriptions which have been
tried to address this basic question and are still being trie d. Before proceeding further we
note that the expression quoted above constitutes the Loren tz force. The total force which
∗khan@pd.infn.it, http://www.pd.infn.it/ ∼khan/
†pusterla@pd.infn.it, http://www.pd.infn.it/ ∼pusterla/
1we call as the Lorentz-Stern-Gerlach (LSG) force includes t he Lorentz force as the basic
constituent and all the other contributions coming from the spin, anomalous magnetic and
electric moments etc,. The reason for this nomenclature will be clear as we proceed .
Here we quote a few approaches which have been used to address the question of the force
and acceleration experienced by a charged-particle. A Lagr angian formalism based on the
action principle has been suggested [1]- [3]. A Hamiltonian formalism is considered in [4]–
[5]. In the case of slowly varying electromagnetic fields an a pproach based on the Dirac
equation viathe WKB approximation scheme has been presented [6]. In the c ontext of the
Aharonov-Bohm and Aharonov-Casher effects [7]- [8], the question as to whether neutron
acceleration can occur in uniform electromagnetic fields is also raised [9]- [11]. In the very
recent work of Chaichian [4] it has been rightly pointed out t hat in the nonrelativistic limit
the results of the above approaches do not coincide. This mot ivates us to examine the
form of the force derived from the Dirac equation using the FW -transformation [13]- [14]
scheme; note that the FW-transformation technique is the on ly one in which we can take
the meaningful nonrelativistic limit of the Dirac equation [15]. The FW-approach gives the
expression for the force in the presence of external time-de pendent fields, the nonrelativistic
limit and a systematic procedure to obtain the relativistic corrections to a desired degree of
accuracy. In such a derivation we also take into account the a nomalous electric moment. We
compare the results of our derivation with other approaches mentioned above. One should
also note that a novel approach for producing polarized beam s has been suggested using the
Stern-Gerlach forces [16]- [17].
II. SECTION
Let us consider the Dirac particle of rest mass m0, chargeq, anomalous magnetic moment
µaand anomalous electric moment ǫa. In presence of the external electromagnetic fields,
the Dirac equation is
i¯h∂
∂t|ΨD/an}bracketri}ht=ˆHD|ΨD/an}bracketri}ht (1)
and the Dirac Hamiltonian H D, including the contributions of the anomalous magnetic
moment and anomalous electric moment is given by [18]:
ˆHD=βm0c2+ˆE+ˆO (2)
ˆE= +qφ(r)I−µaβΣ·B+ǫaβΣ·E (3)
ˆO=cα·(−i¯h∇−qA) + iµaβα·E+ iǫaβα·B
β=/parenleftBigg
1 l0
0−1 l/parenrightBigg
,α=/parenleftBigg
0σ
σ0/parenrightBigg
,Σ=/parenleftBigg
σ0
0σ/parenrightBigg
, (4)
where σis the triplet of Pauli matrices.
In the nonrelativistic situation the upper pair of componen ts of the Dirac spinor Ψ Dare
large compared to the lower pair of components. The operator ˆEwhich does not couple
the large and small components of Ψ Dis called as evenandˆOis called as an oddoperator
which couples the large to small components. Note that βˆO=−ˆOβandβˆE=ˆEβ. This
motivates us to look for a transformation which will elimina te the odd-part completely from
2the Dirac Hamiltonian. Such a transformation is available i n the case of the free-particle.
In the very general case of time-dependent fields such a trans formation is not known to
exist. Therefore, one has to be content with an approximatio n procedure which reduces the
strength of the odd-part to a desired degree of accuracy in po wers of1
m0c2. We shall follow
the Foldy-Wouthuysen [13]- [14] transformation technique to take the nonrelativistic limit
of the Dirac Hamiltonian in (4) to reduce the strength of the o dd-part in power series in
1
m0c2. The result to the leading order, that is to order1
m0c2is formally given by
i¯h∂
∂t|ψ/an}bracketri}ht=ˆH(2)|ψ/an}bracketri}ht,
ˆH(2)=m0c2β+ˆE+1
2m0c2βˆO2(5)
and to next higher, order1
(m0c2)3is given by
i¯h∂
∂t|ψ/an}bracketri}ht=ˆH(4)|ψ/an}bracketri}ht,
ˆH(4)=m0c2β+ˆE+1
2m0c2βˆO2
−1
8m2
0c4/bracketleftBigg
ˆO,/parenleftBigg/bracketleftBigˆO,ˆE/bracketrightBig
+ i¯h∂
∂tˆO/parenrightBigg/bracketrightBigg
−1
(2m0c2)3βˆO4. (6)
A detailed discussion of the FW-transformation and the deri vation of the above Hamiltonians
can be found in many places (for instance the book by Bjorken a nd Drell in [14]).
As a first step we consider the case of a charged particle negle cting the anomalous
moments. In this case the Hamiltonian (6) works out to
ˆH(4)=m0c2+qφ+1
2m0/parenleftBig
ˆπ2−q¯hσ·B/parenrightBig
+1
8m2
0c2¯hqσ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π)
−1
8m3
0c2/braceleftBig
ˆπ4+ ¯h2q2B2−¯hq/parenleftBig
ˆπ2(σ·B) + (σ·B) ˆπ2/parenrightBig/bracerightBig
(7)
A detailed formula including the µacontibutions is given by (A1) in the appendix.
III. SECTION
Now we use the Hamiltonian derived in (7) to compute the accel eration, aexperienced
by the particle using the Heisenberg representation,
d
dt/angbracketleftBigˆO/angbracketrightBig
=i
¯h/angbracketleftBig/bracketleftBigˆH,ˆO/bracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
+/angbracketleftBigg∂
∂tˆO/angbracketrightBigg
. (8)
and we omit the brackets /an}bracketle{t· · ·/an}bracketri}ht. Then we obtain,
3m0˙r=m0d
dtr=m0i
¯h/bracketleftBigˆH,r/bracketrightBig
=ˆπ−1
4m2
0c2/parenleftBig
ˆπ2ˆπ+ˆπˆπ2/parenrightBig
−¯hq
4m0c2(σ×E) +¯hq
4m2
0c2(ˆπ(σ·B) + (σ·B)ˆπ) (9)
Using the above expression for ˙rwe compute the acceleration
m0a=m0d
dt˙r=m0¨r
=qE−q
4m2
0c2/parenleftBig
ˆπ2E+Eˆπ2/parenrightBig
−q
2m0(ˆπ×B−B׈π)
−q
4m3
0c2/parenleftBig
ˆπ2(ˆπ×B−B׈π) + (ˆπ×B−B׈π) ˆπ2/parenrightBig
−q
4m2
0c2{(ˆπ·E+E·ˆπ)ˆπ+ˆπ(ˆπ·E+E·ˆπ)}
+¯hq
2m0∇(σ·B)−¯hq
8m3
0c2/parenleftBig
ˆπ2∇(σ·B) +∇(σ·B) ˆπ2/parenrightBig
+¯hq2
4m2
0c2(E(σ·B) + (σ·B)E)−¯hq
8m2
0c2∇(σ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π))
+¯hq2
8m3
0c2{(ˆπ×B−B׈π)(σ·B) + (σ·B)(ˆπ×B−B׈π)}
+¯h2q2
8m3
0c2∇/parenleftBig
B2/parenrightBig
+¯hq2
4m2
0c2E(σ×B)
−¯hq
4m0c2∂
∂t(σ×B) +¯hq
4m2
0c2/parenleftBigg
ˆπ∂
∂t(σ·B) +∂
∂t(σ·B)ˆπ/parenrightBigg
+R (10)
where therk-th component of Ris
(R)rk=−¯hq
8m2
0c2/braceleftBig
ˆπ·∇/parenleftBig
(σ×E)rk/parenrightBig
+∇/parenleftBig
(σ×E)rk/parenrightBig
·ˆπ/bracerightBig
rk=x,y,z, k = 1,2,3. (11)
The above expression for the acceleration can be related to t he classical expression when
we make the substitutionˆπ
m0− →vwhere vis the velocity of the particle. With such a
substitution and with β=|v|
cwe get,
a=/parenleftbigg
1−1
2β2/parenrightbiggq
m0(E+v×B)−q
m0v
c2(v·E)
/parenleftbigg
1−1
2β2/parenrightbigg¯hq
2m0∇(σ·B)−¯hq
4m0c2∇(σ·(v×E))
1
m0c2{q(E+v×B)}¯hq
2m0(σ·B)
+· · · (12)
4The above derivation is consistent with the result [19] of cl assical electrodynamics
a=q
m0/radicalBig
1−β2/braceleftbigg
E+v×B−v
c2(v·E)/bracerightbigg
(13)
In the nonrelativistic limit the force Fis well-approximated by the expression F=m0a.
So we can use the expression for the acceleration, aderived using the Foldy-Wouthuysen
technique to express the force experienced by the charged pa rticle.
The leading order Foldy-Wouthuysen Hamiltonian, when we ta ke the anomalous mag-
netic moment and anomalous electric moment into account is g iven by
ˆH(2)=m0c2−µaσ·B+ǫaσ·E+qφ
+1
2m0c2/braceleftBigg
c2/parenleftBig
ˆπ2−q¯hσ·B/parenrightBig
+ (µaE+ǫaB)2
+µacσ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π) +ǫacσ·(ˆπ×B−B׈π)/bracerightBigg
(14)
Next, to leading order Hamiltonian is given in (A1) of the app endix.
Now we use the above derived Hamiltonians in (14) to compute t he Lorentz-Stern-Gerlach
force and we get
˙r=d
dtr=1
m0/braceleftbigg
ˆπ−/parenleftbiggµa
c(σ×E) +ǫa
c(σ×B)/parenrightbigg/bracerightbigg
=1
m0ˆ/producttext(15)
Where ˆ/producttextis thekinetic momentum . The Lorentz-Stern-Gerlach force in the absence of ǫais:
F=d
dtˆ/producttext=i
¯h/bracketleftBigˆH,ˆ/producttext/bracketrightBig
+∂
∂tˆ/producttext
=q/braceleftbigg
E+1
2m0(ˆπ×B−B׈π)/bracerightbigg
+/parenleftBigg
µa+q¯h
2m0/parenrightBigg
∇(σ·B)−µa
c∂
∂t(σ×E)
−µa
2m0c∇(σ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π))
+2µa
¯hc/parenleftBigg
µa+¯hq
2m0/parenrightBigg
E×(σ×B)−1
2m0c2∇/parenleftBig
µ2
aE2/parenrightBig
+iµ2
a
2m0c2¯h((ˆπ×E)×E−E×(E׈π))
+µ2
a
2m0c2¯h{(σ×(ˆπ×E−E׈π))×E−E×(σ×(ˆπ×E−E׈π))}
+R (16)
where therk-th component of Ris
5(R)rk=−µa
2m0c/braceleftBig
ˆπ·∇/parenleftBig
(σ×E)rk/parenrightBig
+∇/parenleftBig
(σ×E)rk/parenrightBig
·ˆπ/bracerightBig
rk=x,y,z, k = 1,2,3. (17)
For simplicity we first consider the the acceleration (or equ ivalently the force) experienced
by a neutron
Fneutron = +µa∇(σ·B)−µa
c∂
∂t(σ×E)
−µa
2m0c∇(σ·(ˆp×E−E׈p))
+2µ2
a
¯hcE×(σ×B)−1
2m0c2∇/parenleftBig
µ2
aE2/parenrightBig
+iµ2
a
2m0c2¯h((ˆp×E)×E−E×(E׈p))
+µ2
a
2m0c2¯h{(σ×(ˆp×E−E׈p))×E−E×(σ×(ˆp×E−E׈p))}
+· · ·
+O/parenleftBig
µ3
a/parenrightBig
(18)
In the above expression in (18) the leading terms have been re tained and the “ · · ·” indicates
the higher order terms. The complete expression is given in ( A2) in the appendix. The
detailed formulae shall be given in an appendix at the end. Th is is the case where ever
the “· · ·” appear in the expressions.
From the expression (18) we conclude that the leading order ( linear inµa) contributions
to the neutron acceleration come through the gradients and t he time derivatives of the
electromagnetic fields. Such contributions disappear in th e case of uniform and constant
fields respectively. The next-to-leading order contributi ons come from the terms of the type
µ2
aE×(σ×B). Such contributions do not vanish and hence we have neutron acceleration
even in the presense of uniform fields. Such accelerations ar e quadratic (and higher powers)
inµaand hence are very small.
In the expression (16) for the Lorentz-Stern-Gerlach force if we substitute µa=g¯h|q|
4m0andq=−ewe get the often mentioned term, + g(g−2)E×(σ×B) in [6].
In the presence of the anomalous electric moment ǫathe Lorentz-Stern-Gerlach force is:
F=q/braceleftbigg
E+1
2m0(ˆπ×B−B׈π)/bracerightbigg
+/parenleftBigg
µa+q¯h
2m/parenrightBigg
∇(σ·B)−ǫa∇(σ·E)
−1
c∂
∂t(µa(σ×E) +ǫa(σ×B))
−µa
2m0c∇(σ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π))−ǫa
2m0c∇(σ·(ˆπ×B−B׈π))
· · · (19)
6IV. CONCLUSIONS AND SUMMARY
As can be seen above we get a variety of terms contributing to t he Lorentz-Stern-Gerlach
force.
The nonrelativistic static limit coincides with the usual “ classical” formula if Bis time-
independent, inhomogeneous and Eis absent in the lab system. Otherwise there are differ-
ences even at low non-relativistic velocities. In particul ar one may consider the force terms
µa
2m0c∇(σ·(v×E)) and1
2m0c2∇/parenleftBig
µ2
aE2/parenrightBig
that are present whenever a spin-1
2particle with
charge enters into an inhomogeneous static electric field (i n absence of B).
Another relevant point to be noted is the force experienced b y a neutron (more generally
by an electrically neutral particle). In this case we find con tributions even when the fields
are homogeneous and static.
The LSG force derived using the FW-tchnique differs from the o ther approaches which
use a “classical” or “semiclassical” treatment of the relat ivistic Stern-Gerlach force [5].
Only experiments with very high precision can conclude abou t the finer differences in
the various expressions for the force.
Acknowledgement
The authors are very greatful to Prof. R. Jagannathan (Insti tute of Mathematical Science,
Madras, India) for very useful discussions on the subjects d ealt in this paper.
APPENDIX
For the general case including, the contributions of the ano malous magnetic moment,
the Hamiltonian (in 6) works out to
ˆH(4)=m0c2+qφ+1
2m0ˆπ2
−/parenleftBigg¯hq
2m0+µa/parenrightBigg
(σ·B) +µa
2m0cσ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π) +µ2
a
2m0c2E2
+1
8m2
0c4/braceleftBig
+¯hqc2σ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π) + 2µa¯hqcE2
−µ2
a((σ·ˆπ)(ˆπ·B+B·ˆπ) + (ˆπ·B+B·ˆπ)(σ·ˆπ))
−µ2
a¯hcσ·(∇(E·B+B·E)) + 4µ3
a(σ·E) (E·B)/bracerightBig
−1
(2m0c2)3/braceleftBig
c4/parenleftBig
ˆπ4+ ¯h2q2B2−¯hq/parenleftBig
ˆπ2(σ·B) + (σ·B) ˆπ2/parenrightBig/parenrightBig
+µac3/parenleftBig
ˆπ2σ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π) +σ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π) ˆπ2/parenrightBig
−µac¯hq(B·(ˆπ×E−E׈π) + (ˆπ×E−E׈π)·B)
−iµac¯hqσ·(B×(ˆπ×E−E׈π) + (ˆπ×E−E׈π)×B)
+µ2
ac2/parenleftBig/parenleftBig
ˆπ2E2+E2ˆπ2/parenrightBig
+ (ˆπ×E−E׈π)2/parenrightBig
+iµ2
ac2σ·((ˆπ×E−E׈π)×(ˆπ×E−E׈π))
−µ2
ac2¯hq/parenleftBig
E2(σ·B) + (σ·B)E2/parenrightBig
7+µ3
ac/parenleftBig
E2σ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π) +σ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π)E2/parenrightBig
+µ4
aE4/bracerightBig
. (A1)
The total acceleration (or equivalently the force) experie nced by a neutron when both µa
andǫaare taken into account is:
F=µa∇(σ·B)−ǫa∇(σ·E)
−1
c∂
∂t(µa(σ×E) +ǫa(σ×B))
−µa
2m0c∇(σ·(ˆp×E−E׈p))−ǫa
2m0c∇(σ·(ˆp×B−B׈p))
−1
2m0c2∇/braceleftBig
µ2
aE2+ǫ2
aB2+µaǫa(E·B+B·E)/bracerightBig
−2µ2
a
¯hc(σ×B)×E−2ǫ2
a
¯hc(σ×E)×B
+2µaǫa
¯hc((σ×E)×E−(σ×B)×B)
−iµ2
a
2m0c2¯h((ˆp×E)×E−E×(E׈p))
−iǫ2
a
2m0c2¯h((ˆp×B)×B−B×(B׈p))
+µ2
a
2m0c2¯h{(σ×(ˆp×E−E׈p))×E−E×(σ×(ˆp×E−E׈p))}
+ǫ2
a
2m0c2¯h{(σ×(ˆp×B−B׈p))×B−B×(σ×(ˆp×B−B׈p))}
−iµaǫa
2m0c2¯h/braceleftBigg
(ˆp×B−B׈p)×E+E×(ˆp×B−B׈p)
+ (ˆp×E−E׈p)×B+B×(ˆp×E−E׈p)/bracerightBigg
+µaǫa
2m0c2¯h/braceleftbigg
(σ×(ˆp×B−B׈p))×E−E×(σ×(ˆp×B−B׈p))
+ (σ×(ˆp×E−E׈p))×B−B×(σ×(ˆp×E−E׈p))/bracerightBigg
+R
(A2)
where therk-th component of Ris
(R)rk=−µa
2m0c/braceleftBig
ˆp·∇/parenleftBig
(σ×E)rk/parenrightBig
+∇/parenleftBig
(σ×E)rk/parenrightBig
·ˆp/bracerightBig
−ǫa
2m0c/braceleftBig
ˆp·∇/parenleftBig
(σ×B)rk/parenrightBig
+∇/parenleftBig
(σ×B)rk/parenrightBig
·ˆp/bracerightBig
rk=x,y,z, k = 1,2,3. (A3)
In the presence of the anomalous electric moment ǫathe Lorentz-Stern-Gerlach force is:
8F=q/braceleftbigg
E+1
2m0(ˆπ×B−B׈π)/bracerightbigg
+/parenleftBigg
µa+q¯h
2m/parenrightBigg
∇(σ·B)−ǫa∇(σ·E)
−1
c∂
∂t(µa(σ×E) +ǫa(σ×B))
−µa
2m0c∇(σ·(ˆπ×E−E׈π))−ǫa
2m0c∇(σ·(ˆπ×B−B׈π))
−1
2m0c2∇/braceleftBig
µ2
aE2+ǫ2
aB2+µaǫa(E·B+B·E)/bracerightBig
+µaq
m0c((σ×E)×B−(σ×B)×E)
−2µ2
a
¯hc(σ×B)×E−2ǫ2
a
¯hc(σ×E)×B
+2µaǫa
¯hc((σ×E)×E−(σ×B)×B)
−iµ2
a
2m0c2¯h((ˆπ×E)×E−E×(E׈π))
−iǫ2
a
2m0c2¯h((ˆπ×B)×B−B×(B׈π))
+µ2
a
2m0c2¯h{(σ×(ˆπ×E−E׈π))×E−E×(σ×(ˆπ×E−E׈π))}
+ǫ2
a
2m0c2¯h{(σ×(ˆπ×B−B׈π))×B−B×(σ×(ˆπ×B−B׈π))}
−iµaǫa
2m0c2¯h/braceleftBigg
(ˆπ×B−B׈π)×E+E×(ˆπ×B−B׈π)
+ (ˆπ×E−E׈π)×B+B×(ˆπ×E−E׈π)/bracerightBigg
+µaǫa
2m0c2¯h/braceleftbigg
(σ×(ˆπ×B−B׈π))×E−E×(σ×(ˆπ×B−B׈π))
+ (σ×(ˆπ×E−E׈π))×B−B×(σ×(ˆπ×E−E׈π))/bracerightBigg
+R (A4)
where therk-th component of Ris
(R)rk=−µa
2m0c/braceleftBig
ˆπ·∇/parenleftBig
(σ×E)rk/parenrightBig
+∇/parenleftBig
(σ×E)rk/parenrightBig
·ˆπ/bracerightBig
−ǫa
2m0c/braceleftBig
ˆπ·∇/parenleftBig
(σ×B)rk/parenrightBig
+∇/parenleftBig
(σ×B)rk/parenrightBig
·ˆπ/bracerightBig
rk=x,y,z, k = 1,2,3. (A5)
As can be seen above we get a variety of terms contributing to t he Lorentz-Stern-Gerlach
force.
9REFERENCES
[1] Patrick L. Nash, A Lagrangian theory of the classical spi nning electron, J. Math. Phys.
25(6) (1984) 2104-2108.
[2] Patrick L. Nash, Order ¯ hcorrections to the classical dynamics of a particle with int rinsic
spin moving in a constant magnetic field, acc-phys/9411002 ( 19 November 1994) pp. 15.
[3] J. P. Costella and Bruce H. J. McKellar, Electromagnetic deflection of spinning particle,
Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 9 (1994) 461-473. Also in: hep-ph/931225 6 (10 December 1993)
pp. 18.
[4] M. Chaichian, R. Gonz´ alez Felipe, D. Lois Martinez, Spi nning relativistic particle in
an external electromagnetic field, Phys. Lett. A 236 (1997) 1 88-192. Also in: hep-
th/9601119 (23 January 1996) pp. 10.
[5] K. Heinemann, On Stern-Gerlach forces allowed by specia l relativity and the special case
of the classical spinning particle of Derbenev-Kondratenk o,e-print : physics/9611001.
Barber, D.P., Heinemann, K. and Ripken, G. Z. Phys. C ,64, 117 (1994). Barber, D.P.,
Heinemann, K. and Ripken, G. (1994). Z. Phys. C ,64, 143 (1994).
[6] J. Anandan, Electromagnetic effects in the quantum inter ference of dipole, Phys. Lett.
A138(8) (1989) 347-352; ERRATA Phys. Lett. A 152(9) (1991) 504.
[7] Timothy H. Boyer, Proposed Aharonov-Casher effect: Anot her example of an Aharonov-
Bohm effect arising from a classical lag, Phys. Rev. A 36(10) (1987) 5083-5086.
[8] Y. Aharonov, P. Pearle and L. Vaidman, Comments on “Propo sed Aharonov-Casher
effect: Another example of an Aharonov-Bohm effect arising fr om a classical lag”, Phys.
Rev. A 37(10) (1988) 4052-4055.
[9] Russell C. Casella and Samuel A. Werner, Electromagneti c acceleration of neutrons
Phys. Rev Lett. 69(11) (1992) 1625-1628.
[10] Y. Aharonov and A Casher, Topological quantum effects fo r neutral particles, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 53(4) (1984) 319-321.
[11] J. Anandan and C. R. Hagen, Neutron acceleration in unif orm electromagnetic fields,
Phys. Rev. A 50(4) (1994) 2860-2864. Also in: hep-th/9301110 (26 January 1 993) pp.
11.
[12] Jeeva S. Anandan, The secret life of the dipole, Nature 387(1997) 558-559.
[13] Leslie L. Foldy and S. A. Wouthuysen, On the Dirac theory of spin 1/2 particles and
its non-relativistic limit, Phys. Rev. 78(1950) 29-36.
[14] J. D. Bjorken and S. D. Drell, Relativistic Quantum Mechanics (McGraw-Hill, New
York, San Francisco, 1964).
[15] John P. Costella and Bruce H. J. McKellar, The Foldy-Wou thuysen transformation, Am
J. Phys. 63(12) (1995) 1119-1121. Also in: hep-ph/9503416.
[16] M. Conte, A. Penzo and M. Pusterla, Spin splitting due to longitudinal Stern-Gerlach
kicks, Il Nuovo Cimento A 108(1995) 127-136.
[17] M. Conte, R. Jagannathan, S. A. Khan and M. Pusterla, Bea m optics of the Dirac
particle with anomalous magnetic moment, Particle Accelerators 56(1996) 99-126.
[18] B. Thaller, The Dirac Equation (Springer Berlin 1992).
[19] Section 17 in, L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, The Classical theory of Fields (Pergamon
Press 1962).
10 |
arXiv:physics/9910035v1 [physics.data-an] 25 Oct 1999Analyzing symmetry breaking within a chaotic quantum syste m via Bayesian inference
C. I. Barbosa and H. L. Harney
Max-Planck-Institut f¨ ur Kernphysik, D-69029 Heidelberg , Germany
(November 3, 2013)
Bayesian inference is applied to the level fluctuations of tw o coupled microwave billiards in order
to extract the coupling strength. The coupled resonators pr ovide a model of a chaotic quantum
system containing two coupled symmetry classes of levels. T he number variance is used to quantify
the level fluctuations as a function of the coupling and to con struct the conditional probability
distribution of the data. The prior distribution of the coup ling parameter is obtained from an
invariance argument on the entropy of the posterior distrib ution.
PACS number(s): 02.50.Wp, 05.45.+b, 11.30.Er
I. INTRODUCTION
The subject of the present paper is Bayesian inference
as applied to the experiment of Ref. [1] in order to extract
the mean square matrix element coupling two chaotic
classes of quantum states. The Bayesian procedure de-
scribed below does not contain any arbitrary element:
The prior distribution — sometimes left to the educated
guess of the analyst [2] — is determined by an invariance
argument on the entropy of the posterior distribution.
The present article is organized as follows. In Sec. II,
we briefly describe the experiment with superconducting
microwave resonators that has provided the data for the
present analysis. The random matrix model for the cou-
pling of two symmetry classes of chaotic states is defined
in Sec. III. It yields — in analytic form — the depen-
dence of the observable on the coupling strength which is
to be determined. Bayesian inference, especially the def-
inition of the prior distribution, is discussed in Sec. IV.
The conditional probability distribution of the data is
defined in Sec. V. The results are given in Sec. VI. A
discussion in Sec. VII concludes the paper.
II. THE EXPERIMENT WITH COUPLED
MICROWAVE RESONATORS
Billiards provide models of classical and quantum me-
chanical chaos. They have been studied extensively, see
the review article [3]. Quantum mechanical billiards can
be simulated by flat microwave resonators [4–7]. One
class of these “quantum” billiards are the Bunimovich
stadium billiards [8] experimentally investigated in Refs .
[1,7,9–12].
These investigations show that the fluctuation prop-
erties of the quantum chaotic systems with well defined
symmetries are described by Dyson’s matrix ensembles
[3]. In the case of the stadium billiards, the correct de-
scription is provided by the Gaussian Orthogonal En-
semble (GOE). This means, e.g., that the fluctuations
of the positions of the eigenmodes — shortly the level
fluctuations — are the same as the fluctuations of theeigenvalues of random matrices drawn from the GOE. In
order to assess these fluctuations, various statistics have
been defined — such as the distance of neighboring levels
or the variance of the number of levels in a given inter-
val. The expectation values of these statistics have been
worked out [13,14] for comparison with data such as the
present ones.
In the previous work [1], the level positions of a system
have been measured that consisted of two (quarters of)
stadium billiards coupled electromagnetically. See Fig. 1 .
The technical realization of the coupling has been de-
scribed in Ref. [1]. In the frequency range of 0 to 16
GHz, the complete spectra of the two stadia displayed
608 and 883 resonances in the ( γ= 1) stadium and the
(γ= 1.8) stadium, respectively. The mean level spacing
isD= 10.7 MHz.
In Fig. 2, small pieces of spectra are shown for three
different couplings. The arrows shall help to recognize
that — due to the coupling — the resonances are shifted
by statistically varying amounts.
This system simulates two symmetry classes of levels
coupled by a symmetry breaking interaction. Each class
of levels — represented by each of the uncoupled stadia
— can be identified with a chaotic system of well defined
symmetry having the properties of the GOE. The entire
system of the coupled stadia no longer has the universal
properties of the GOE. Its properties are a function of a
suitably defined coupling parameter Λ.
FIG. 1. Shapes of the two coupled stadium billiards. The
circles inside the squares indicate the positions of the ant en-
nas used to scatter microwave power through the system in
order to find the eigenfrequencies of the entire system. The
parameter γis the ratio between the length of the rectangular
part and the radius of the circular part of the resonator. The
vertical heights of the stadia are given in Sec. VI.
1FIG. 2. Three spectra — within a small range of frequen-
cies — taken at different couplings between the two res-
onators. The coupling increases from top to bottom. Its
notation ( x, y) is explained in Sec. VI. The arrows shall help
to recognize the shifts of a few resonances.
The investigation of symmetry breaking in chaotic
quantum systems is not a recent challenge to physicists
[15]. Good examples of the experimental and theoretical
efforts already invested into this problem, are the cases
of isospin mixing [16–18], of parity violation in heavy
nuclei [19], of the breaking of certain atomic and molecu-
lar symmetries [15,20]. The experiment performed in [1]
provides a general model for these case studies.
In the present paper, we do not describe any one of
the specific case studies; we shall not even describe in
more detail the model experiment of Ref. [1]. We rather
describe — in the next section — the model experiment
[1] in an abstract mathematical form and then turn to
its analysis in Secs. IV-VII.
III. THE MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF
SYMMETRY BREAKING IN A CHAOTIC
QUANTUM SYSTEM
In the absence of coupling each eigenstate of the system
of Fig. 1 can be characterized as belonging to either res-
onator 1 or resonator 2. This is equivalent to the assign-
ment of a quantum number γ. The spectrum of states of
eachγhas the statistical properties of the eigenvalues of
matrices drawn from the GOE. The superposition of the
two spectra displays what we shall call 2 GOE behavior.
It can be described by a block-diagonal Hamilton oper-ator where each block is an element of the GOE, hence,
by the first term of the Hamiltonian
H=/parenleftBigg
GOE 0
0GOE/parenrightBigg
+α/parenleftBigg
0V
V+0/parenrightBigg
. (1)
Forα/negationslash= 0, the off-diagonal matrix Vin the second term
on the r.h.s. provides the coupling between both sym-
metry classes. It has Gaussian random elements — as
the GOE blocks. If the two GOE blocks have the same
dimension then their elements as well as the elements of
Vshall all have the same rms value. Then α= 1 turns
Has a whole into a GOE matrix [21]. The resulting
spectrum displays what we call 1 GOE behavior. If the
two GOE blocks have different dimensions, then the rms
values must be chosen such that their spectra have the
same length. The details are given in [14]. This model
is a special case of the model by Rosenzweig and Porter
[15].
The parameter that governs the level statistics is αv/D
rather than α. Here, Dis the mean level distance of H.
See Refs. [14,18]. In the sequel, the coupling parameter
Λ =/parenleftBigαv
D/parenrightBig2
(2)
will be used. Often the coupling strength is also
parametrized in terms of the spreading width
Γ↓= 2π(αv)2
D
= 2πΛD. (3)
The statistic used in the present paper in order to
characterize the behavior of the data, is the so-called Σ2
statistic or number variance. It is the variance z(L) of
the number n(L) of levels found in an interval of length
LD, i.e.
z(L) =/angbracketleft(n(L)−L)2/angbracketright. (4)
Here, the angular brackets /angbracketleft/angbracketrightdenote the average over
all pieces of spectra of length Lthat have been cut out
of the entire experimental spectrum. The procedure is
described in Sec. V.
The expectation value z(L) with respect to the statis-
tical ensemble defined by Eq. (1) is called Σ2(L,Λ). This
function has been calculated by French et al. [13] and by
Leitner et al. [14]. According to [14], it is
Σ2(L,Λ) =z(L)
= Σ2(L,∞) +1
π2ln/parenleftbigg
1 +π2L2
4(τ+π2Λ)2/parenrightbigg
.(5)
Here, Σ2(L,∞) is the expression
Σ2(L,∞) =2
π2/braceleftbigg
ln(2πL) +γE+ 1 +1
2[Si(πL)]2
−π
2Si(πL)−cos(2πL)−Ci(2πL)
+π2L/bracketleftbigg
1−2
πSi(2πL)/bracketrightbigg/bracerightbigg
. (6)
2It describes the 1 GOE behavior. The second term on
the r.h.s. of Eq. (5) obviously vanishes for Λ → ∞.
In Eq. (6), γEis Euler’s constant and Si, Ci are the
sine and cosine integrals defined e.g. in paragraph 8.23 of
[22]. The parameter τis a function of the ratio between
the dimensions of the two GOE blocks in the first term
of Eq. (1). In the present situation, it is equal to 0.74.
The function Σ2depends on the coupling parameter
Λ — as is illustrated by Fig. 3. Therefore Λ can be in-
ferred from the experimental number variance z(L) . The
principle of this inference is described in the next section .
FIG. 3. The expectation value Σ2(L,Λ) of the number vari-
ancez(L) as a function of Lfor various coupling strengths Λ
— ranging from 2 GOE to 1 GOE behavior. The abscissa has
been limited to L≤5 because the data analyzed below are in
the range of 1 ≤L≤5.
IV. BAYESIAN INFERENCE
Suppose that a set of experimental data zk,k= 1...M,
is given which depends on a parameter Λ in the sense
that the probability distribution wkof the event zkis
conditioned by the hypothesis Λ,
wk=wk(zk|Λ). (7)
The events zkshall be statistically independent of each
other. The joint distribution Wof the zk,k= 1...M, is
then
W(z|Λ) =M/productdisplay
k=1wk(zk|Λ). (8)
From this follows the distribution P(Λ|z) of Λ under the
condition that the data zare given via Bayes’ theoremP(Λ|z) =W(z|Λ)µ(Λ)
m(z). (9)
Here, µ(Λ) is the so-called prior distribution. It is the
measure of integration in the space of Λ. One must de-
fine it such that it represents ignorance on Λ — in a sense
described below. The function m(z) is the prior distri-
bution of z. It is not independent of µ; it is given by the
normalizing integral
m(z) =/integraldisplay
dΛW(z|Λ)µ(Λ). (10)
In the framework of the logic underlying Eq. (9), a prob-
ability distribution of — say — Λ is considered to rep-
resent the available knowledge on Λ and the prior distri-
bution corresponds to “ignorance about Λ”.
The definition of µ(Λ) deserves a detailed comment.
First of all, the natural choice of µ(Λ) is not the con-
stant function because a reparametrization Λ →λ(Λ)
will transform µ(Λ) into
µT(λ) =µ(Λ)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingledΛ
dλ/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle. (11)
Unless the transformation is linear, it turns a uniform
distribution into a non-uniform one.
We define µ(Λ) such that the entropy of P(Λ|z) does
not depend on the true value ˆΛ that governs the distri-
bution of the data z= (z1...zM). The data follow the
distribution W(z|ˆΛ). Although ˆΛ is not known, it is sup-
posed to be a well defined number. If it is shifted to
another value ˆΛ′and one takes new data z′and con-
structs the posterior distribution P′=P(Λ|z′) from the
new data, then one can expect P′to be shifted with re-
spect to P. The distribution P′will be centered in the
vicinity of ˆΛ′rather than ˆΛ. However, we want to make
sure that the “spread” of P′is the same as that of P;
that is, the entropy of PandP′shall be the same — for
a given number of data M. In this sense, no value of Λ
is a priori preferred over any other one.
The definition of the entropy requires some attention.
The usual formula −/integraltext
dΛPlnPfor the entropy is of
too restricted validity in the present context, because
this expression is not invariant under a reparametriza-
tion Λ →λ(Λ). The general expression for the entropy
is
H=−/integraldisplay
dΛP(Λ|z) lnP(Λ|z)
µ(Λ)(12)
which is independent of a reparametrization [23,24], be-
cause the transformations of both distributions, Pandµ,
are performed according to (11). Therefore the deriva-
tive|dΛ/dλ|drops out of the argument of the logarithm
and expression (12) is left unchanged by the substitution
Λ→λ.
3It is possible to define µsuch that His independent of
the true value ˆΛ, ifWpossesses the property introduced
in [24–26] called form invariance. It states that there is a
group of transformations Gρsuch that the simultaneous
transformation of zand Λ leaves Winvariant, i.e.
W(Gρz|GρΛ)dGρz=W(z|Λ)dz. (13)
The group parameter ρmust have the same domain of
definition as the hypothesis Λ. If one chooses µ(Λ) to be
the invariant measure of the group then it is not difficult
to show that the posterior distribution Palso possesses
the invariance (13). This entails that His invariant un-
der any transformation z→ G ρzof the data. However,
by Eq. (13) this is just what happens to a given data set
if the true value ˆΛ is shifted to ˆΛ′=G−1
ρˆΛ.
There is a handy formula that yields the invariant mea-
sure without any study of the structure of the group. It
is
µ(Λ) =/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleM−1/integraldisplay
dMz W(z|Λ)∂2
∂Λ2lnW(z|Λ)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1/2
(14)
and was proposed by Jeffreys [27] even before form in-
variance was discussed.
Not every conditional distribution Wpossesses a sym-
metry (13). Even if this is not the case, expression (14)
ensures that His approximately independent of the true
value of Λ. This holds in the following sense: For every ˆΛ
one can replace the correct distribution W(z|Λ) by an
approximation Wapp(z|Λ) which is form invariant. The
approximate and the correct distributions agree within
the fourth order of Λ −ˆΛ. Equation (14) yields the in-
variant measure of the approximation to within the third
order of Λ −ˆΛ [28].
In summary: expression (14) ensures that no value of
Λ is a priori preferred over any other one if the form
invariance (13) exists. If there is no form invariance, ex-
pression (14) approximately ensures this. Therefore (14)
is the best recommendation in any case.
Neither the group theoretic argument nor Jeffreys’ rule
nor information theoretic arguments are new in the dis-
cussion of the Bayesian prior. However, the way in which
they are related justifies the present digression on a fun-
damental issue. We omit to show how and why the
present arguments are related to the geometric consid-
erations which were introduced by Amari [29] and are
currently put forward by Rodriguez [30]. These authors
agree on the result (14).
The posterior distribution Pis used to construct an
interval of error often called a confidence interval. It is
the shortest interval that contains Λ with probability K.
The usual error is defined with the confidence K= 0.68.
The posterior distribution Papproaches a Gaussian
forM→ ∞ provided that the true value of Λ is not on
the border of the domain of definition of Λ. One can
prove that the variance of the Gaussian is proportional
toM−1. Hence, with increasing Mthe posterior distri-
bution Pwill become so narrow that µchanges very littlein the domain where Pis essentially different from zero.
Note that µdoes not depend on M. Then µdrops out
of expression (9). If this happens, the present Bayesian
analysis becomes equivalent to a χ2fit of Σ2(L,Λ) to the
experimental points z(L). The standard procedure of the
χ2fit can e.g. be found in [31]. It does not require a prior
distribution.
IfPis not Gaussian, the χ2fit yields meaningless con-
fidence intervals. Then Bayesian inference cannot be by-
passed. In the example presented below this happens
in the limit of small coupling between the resonators:
Eventually, the posterior distribution Pdecreases mono-
tonically. The experiment is then compatible with zero
coupling because the shortest confidence interval contains
the point Λ = 0 for any K. The point of zero coupling is
on the border of the domain of definition of Λ.
V. THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE DATA
Spectral fluctuation properties can only be studied af-
ter secular variations of the level density have been re-
moved, i.e. after the frequency scale has been transformed
such that the level density becomes unity within the in-
terval covered by the experiment. This procedure — of-
ten called “unfolding” the spectrum — is a standard one
[32] and has been applied.
After this we defined — for a given interval of length L
—NLadjacent intervals. The intervals did not overlap
and no space was left in between them. This means
NL=/bracketleftbigglength of spectrum
L/bracketrightbigg
, (15)
where the square brackets designate the largest integer
contained in the fraction. For each interval, the num-
bern(L) of levels occuring within it was counted and
the squared difference ( n(L)−L)2was averaged over the
NLintervals. This defines the average /angbracketleft/angbracketrightintroduced in
Eq. (4) and, hence, the “event” z(L). This procedure was
repeated for a set of values Lk,k= 1...M, to be defined
below. In this way, Mevents
zk≡z(Lk) (16)
were obtained.
The Bayesian procedure outlined in the previous sec-
tion requires that one assigns a probability distribution
wk(zk|Λ) to each event. The zkare statistical quanti-
ties in the following sense: If another spectrum would be
provided that had the same statistical properties as the
measured one and the data zkwould be constructed in
the same way as above, they would of course not coincide
with the data obtained from the actually measured spec-
trum — precisely because the levels are subject to statis-
tical fluctuations. If one could go through the ensemble
of spectra in this way, one would obtain an ensemble of
4datazk. We are looking for the distribution wkof this en-
semble. Since there is only the single measured spectrum
and since no theory yielding wkis available, we have gen-
erated the distribution of zkby Efron’s bootstrap method
[33]. This method generates the distribution numerically
by drawing at random and independently a new set of
NLkintervals from the NLkoriginal intervals. A new zk
is produced from this new set of intervals. Repeating
this many times, a distribution of zkis generated which
is identified with the distribution wkof the zk. Note that
NLkis always large, namely NLk>∼300.
ForLk≥1, the distribution wkwas in this way found
to be a χ2distribution with NLkdegrees of freedom —
which intuitively seems reasonable. They are close to
Gaussians with variance 2 /NLkAs mentioned above in
Sec. III, the mean value of this distribution is
zk=/integraldisplay
dz z w k(z|Λ)
= Σ2(Lk,Λ). (17)
Since Σ2depends on Λ — see Eq. (5) — the distribution
wkdepends on Λ.
We have restricted the analysis to Lk≥1. In the do-
main of Lk<1, the number variance so weakly depends
on the parameter Λ that one does not give away much
information by this restriction.
In order to avoid an unnecessarily complicated distri-
bution of the zk, we want to be sure that there are no
correlations between zkandzk′, fork/negationslash=k′. It was there-
fore necessary to determine the minimum ǫof the dis-
tance |Lk−Lk′|that would still allow for statistically
independent zk,zk′. Indeed if |Lk−Lk′|is very small
then most of the intervals associated with Lkwill almost
coincide with an interval associated with Lk′. As a conse-
quence, many of the numbers n(Lk) found in the intervals
associated with Lkwill occur also in the intervals asso-
ciated with Lk′. Hence, zkwill not be independent from
zk′. In order to determine ǫ, we have calculated z(L) as
a function of Lin steps of 0.001. For a small range of
L, the result is given in Fig. 4. Indeed over a distance
of a few times this step width, z(L) changes little. If
|L−L′|is many times this step width, then z(L) and
z(L′) show independent fluctuations. In principle, one
can study the decay of the correlations as a function of
|L−L′|by constructing the autocorrelation function of
z(L). We have contented ourselves to inspect Fig. 4 and
similar plots for different domains of L. It seems obvious
from Fig. 4 that the typical width of the structures is less
than 0.025. This justifies to set
ǫ= 0.025, (18)
to define
Lk= 1 + ( k−1)ǫ, k = 1,2, ...M , (19)
and to assume that zkis statistically independent of zk′
fork/negationslash=k′.FIG. 4. The experimental estimate z(L) of the number
variance — see Eq. (4) — as a function of Lcalculated in
steps of ∆ L= 0.001. The typical width of the structures in
this fluctuating function determines the range ǫover which
z(L) and z(L+ǫ) may be correlated. Conversely, it serves
to estimate the minimum distance ǫbetween LandL′which
must be respected if z(L) shall not be correlated with z(L′).
There is an upper limit LmaxofLthat one must be
aware of: The spectral fluctuations of levels from billiards
agree with those of random matrices — i.e. they are uni-
versal — within intervals of a maximum length which is
inversely proportional to the length of the shortest peri-
odic orbit in the billiard [34,35]. This requires Lmax= 5
here.
Hence, data z(L) for 1 ≤L≤5 were used to obtain the
results presented below. This means that by Eqs. (18,19)
the number of statistically independent data points is
M= 161.
Let us note that one can devise definitions of the set of
intervals with given length Lother than adjacent inter-
vals — as was done here. One can admit a certain overlap
between them as suggested in [36] or one can place them
at random [37]. We have tried these alternatives and
have made sure that they do not significantly change the
results presented below.
VI. RESULTS
The data z(Lk),k= 1, ...,161, are given on Fig. 5 for
the six different couplings that were experimentally in-
vestigated. The coupling strength increases from top to
bottom on Fig. 5. Its experimental realization is indi-
cated by the two numbers ( x1, x2) in brackets that label
the six parts of the figure. They are explained as follows:
5The billiards were positioned with their flat sides against
each other. Holes were drilled through the walls of the
resonators such that a niobium pin could be inserted per-
pendicularly to the plane of the billiards through the
(γ= 1.8) stadium into the ( γ= 1) stadium. The cou-
pling strength is determined by the depths x1andx2by
which the niobium pin penetrates into the ( γ= 1) and
the (γ= 1.8) stadium, respectively. These depths are
given by ( x1, x2) in mm. The net height of the ( γ= 1)
stadium was 7 mm and that of the ( γ= 1.8) stadium
was 8 mm. For the strongest coupling — i.e. the bottom
part of the figure — a second niobium pin, penetrating
all the way through both resonators, was added. The
coupling (0,8) — i.e. the top part of the figure — is the
case, where the billiards should be decoupled.
FIG. 5. The number variance z(L) (crosses) and its ex-
pectation value Σ2(L,Λ) (full lines) for various experimental
couplings ( x1, x2). The dashed lines display the 2 GOE behav-
ior, i.e. Σ2(L,0). The dotted lines give the 1 GOE behavior,
i.e. Σ2(L,∞).
The dashed lines on Fig. 5 illustrate the limiting case of
2 GOE behavior, i.e. expression (5) with Λ = 0. The dot-
ted lines show the limit of 1 GOE behavior, i.e. expression
(6). Obviously, all six cases are not easily distinguished
from the 2 GOE behavior, i.e. Λ = 0.Prior to the analysis it was therefore not clear whether
the six experimental cases would yield distinguishable
coupling parameters Λ and whether these would even be
distinguishable from zero. The latter question means ac-
cording to Sec. IV: It was not clear whether a χ2fit would
be appropriate. Therefore the whole analysis was based
on Bayesian inference. The prior distribution was calcu-
lated from (14). The probability distribution wk(zk|Λ)
of the data has been defined in Sec. V. Whether form
invariance exists has not been investigated. The scat-
ter of the data is quite large — especially for Lclose
to 5. These fluctuations are assessed by the distribution
wk(zk|Λ). The fluctuations increase with increasing L.
This is reflected by the fact that wkwas found to be a
χ2distribution with NLkdegrees of freedom. Its rela-
tive rms deviation is/radicalbig
2/NLkandNLkdecreases with
increasing Lk, see Eq. (15). Despite the scatter of the
data the coupling parameter is so well determined that
the analysis distinguishes the six experimental cases from
each other — because the number of data points is large
enough.
For all cases except coupling (0,8), the posterior distri-
bution (9) turned out to be Gaussian. This is illustrated
on Fig. 6 for the coupling (5,3). In the case of coupling
(0,8) — which is expected to show 2 GOE behavior —
the posterior distribution of Λ is the monotonically de-
creasing function of Fig. 7. This is reasonable because
the shortest confidence interval on Λ will — for any con-
fidence — include the possibility of Λ = 0. Hence, the
distribution of Fig. 7 allows to state only an upper limit
for Λ.
FIG. 6. Posterior distribution for the coupling (5,3), i.e. the
second case on Fig. 5 and in Table I. The center Λ 0and the
rms deviation of the Gaussian are specified.
6TABLE I. Parameters found for six different experimental cou plings. The results have been obtained via Bayesian inferen ce
as outlined in Sec. IV. The column headings are explained in t he text.
Exp. coupling Λ Γ↓/D αv/D αv χ2Λfit
(0,8) ≤0.00085 ≤0.005 ≤0.029 ≤0.31 1.14 -
(5,3) 0.011±0.002 0 .07±0.01 0 .105±0.008 1 .12±0.09 0.90 0 .013±0.002
(4,4) 0.017±0.002 0 .11±0.01 0 .130±0.007 1 .39±0.07 1.04 0 .019±0.002
(5,8) 0.030±0.002 0 .19±0.01 0 .173±0.006 1 .85±0.06 1.11 0 .033±0.002
(6,8) 0.032±0.002 0 .20±0.01 0 .180±0.006 1 .93±0.06 1.47 0 .037±0.003
(6,8)+(7,8) 0.040±0.002 0 .25±0.01 0 .200±0.006 2 .14±0.06 1.24 0 .044±0.002
The results of the Bayesian analysis are summarized in
the first five columns of Table I. The first column char-
acterizes the experimental realization of the coupling as
explained above. In the second column, the coupling pa-
rameter Λ is given. It can also be expressed (in the third
column) by the ratio Γ↓/D, see Eq. (3). Alternatively
— see Eq. (2) — the combination αv/D of parameters
of the model of Eq. (1) is given in the fourth column.
By putting Dequal to the mean level distance D= 10.7
MHz of the experiment, one obtains in the fifth column
the rms coupling matrix element αvin MHz.
In the case of coupling (0,8), where only an upper limit
for the coupling can be given, we have done so — for the
confidence of 68%. In all other cases the center Λ 0of the
Gaussian posterior is given together with the rms devia-
tion; this defines a 68% confidence interval.
FIG. 7. Posterior distribution for the coupling (0,8), i.e. the
case where the coupling is expected to be zero. The probabil-
ity integrated from Λ = 0 to 0.00085 (marked by an arrow) is
68% .
According to Sec. IV, Gaussian posteriors suggest that
one may replace Bayesian inference by a χ2fit which
is simpler. A χ2fit has been performed in all cases
and the results are given in the last two columns ofthe table. The sixth column displays the normalized χ2
value. For a reasonable fit, it should lie between 0.84
and 1.16. This follows from the fact that the distribu-
tion of χ2is here approximately Gaussian with rms value
(2/(number of degrees of freedom))1/2= (2/160)1/2≈
0.16. The seventh column gives the coupling parameters
Λ which the fit has found. They are compatible with the
Bayesian results except for the first entry (0,8). Here the
fit puts out a negative value, i.e. it does not produce a
meaningful result. This was expected from the discussion
in Sec. IV.
VII. DISCUSSION
The emphasis of the present paper is on the Bayesian
analysis of the data. Although Bayes’ theorem provides a
clear and simple prescription of how to draw conclusions
from data about a hypothesis conditioning the data, its
use was hampered for a long time by the difficulty to de-
fine the prior distribution µof the hypothesis. Equation
(14) is a very general definition of µ. It applies even to
cases, where the variable zof the events is discrete (the
integral in (14) then means a sum). The prior distri-
bution (14) ensures that the amount of information one
gets on the hypothesis Λ is — at least approximately —
independent of the true value of Λ.
Supplemented by Eq. (14), Bayes’ theorem provides
the generalization of all methods of inference that rely
on Gaussian approximations. The method of the least
squares e.g. belongs to them. It does not require a prior
distribution of the parameter to be determined. In the
present paper the relation between Bayesian inference
andχ2fit has been discussed. A criterion has been given
under which Bayesian inference is approximately equiva-
lent to the simpler fit procedure. This criterion has been
substantiated numerically.
The present formalism especially provides the correct
treatment of null-experiments, i.e. of experiments that
yield only an upper limit for the parameter of interest.
An example for this situation has been presented. By
the same token, the formalism of Sec. IV provides the
decision whether the parameter is compatible with zero.
The physical results of the present analysis show that
the strongest coupling realized in the microwave experi-
ment [1] has about the same size as the coupling found
in [18] to occur between states of different isospin in
726Al. The strongest coupling treated in the present pa-
per causes about 25% mixing between the two classes of
levels, i.e. a state which can be approximately assigned
to the ( γ= 1) stadium contains about 25% strength from
the configurations of the ( γ= 1.8) stadium — and vice
versa. This is the interpretation of the value of Γ↓/Din
Table I. Data that are as numerous and precise as those
of Ref. [1] allow to detect Γ↓/Dten times smaller than
the result of [18] — according to the present analysis.
Nuclear data — which never provide as large a sample
of states as the experiment [1] — would not allow to de-
tect Γ↓/D= 0.07 (the smallest detected mixing in Table
I) from the level fluctuations. The precision obtained in
this experiment has allowed to detect the subtle depen-
dence of the level fluctuations on the breaking of a sym-
metry which is predicted by the random matrix model
[18,13,14].
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank Dr. T. Guhr for helpful discus-
sions. They thank Prof. H. A. Weidenm¨ uller for his sup-
port and advice.They are indebted to Prof. A. Richter
and the members of the “chaos group” of the Institut f¨ ur
Kernphysik at Darmstadt, H. Alt, H.-D. Gr¨ af, R. Hoffer-
bert, and H. Rehfeld, for their help and encouragement.
One of the authors (C.I.B.) acknowledges the financial
support granted by the Fritz Thyssen Stiftung and the
CNPq (Brazil).
[1] H. Alt, C.I. Barbosa, H.-D. Gr¨ af, T. Guhr, H.L. Harney,
R. Hofferbert, H. Rehfeld, and A. Richter , Phys. Rev.
Lett.81, 4847 (1998).
[2] G. D’Agostini, in Probability and Measurement Un-
certainty in Physics - a Bayesian Primer , hep-
ph/9512295v2, 14 Dec 1995.
[3] T. Guhr, A. M¨ uller-Groeling, and H.A. Weidenm¨ uller,
Phys. Rep. 299, 189 (1998).
[4] H.-J. St¨ ockmann and J. Stein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2215
(1990).
[5] E. Doron, U. Smilansky, and A. Frenkel, Phys. Rev. Lett.
65, 3072 (1990).
[6] S. Sridhar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 785 (1991).
[7] H.-D. Gr¨ af, H.L. Harney, H. Lengeler, C.H. Lewenkopf,
C. Rangacharyulu, A. Richter, P. Schardt, and H.A. Wei-
denm¨ uler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 1296 (1992).
[8] L.A. Bunimovich, Sov. Phys. JETP 62, 842 (1985);
Comm. Math. Phys. 65, 295 (1979).
[9] H.-J. St¨ ockmann and J. Stein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2215
(1990).
[10] S. Sridhar, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 785 (1991).
[11] H. Alt, P. von Brentano, H.-D. Gr¨ af, R.-D. Herzberg, M.
Philipp, A. Richter, and P. Schardt, Nucl. Phys. A 560,
293 (1993).
[12] H. Alt, H.-D. Gr¨ af, H.L. Harney, R. Hofferbert, H.
Lengeler, C. Rangacharyulu, A. Richter, and P. Schardt,
Phys. Rev. E 50, R1 (1994).[13] J.B. French, V.K.B. Kota, A. Pandey, and S. Tomsovic,
Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 181, 198 (1988).
[14] D.M. Leitner, Phys. Rev. E 48, 2536 (1993); D.M. Leit-
ner, H. K¨ oppel, and L.S. Cederbaum, Phys. Rev. Lett.
73, 2970 (1994).
[15] N. Rosenzweig and C.E. Porter, Phys. Rev. 120, 1698
(1960).
[16] H.L. Harney, A. Richter, and H.A. Weidenm¨ uller, Rev.
Mod. Phys. 58, 607 (1986).
[17] G.E. Mitchell, E.G. Bilpuch, P.M. Endt, and J.F.
Shriner, Jr., Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 1473 (1988).
[18] T. Guhr and H.A. Weidenm¨ uller, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 199,
412 (1990).
[19] J.D. Bowman, G.T. Garvey, M.B. Johnson, and G.E.
Mitchell, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 43, 829 (1993).
[20] E. Haller, H. K¨ oppel, and L.S. Cederbaum, Chem. Phys.
Lett.101, 215 (1983).
[21] Note that there is a lack of precision in the text of [1]
below its Eq. (1). The condition of equal dimensions of
the GOE blocks is missing.
[22] I.S. Gradshteyn and I.M. Ryzhik, Table of Integrals, Se-
ries and Products (Academic Press, New York, 1980).
[23] E.T. Jaynes, Information Theory and Statistical Mechan-
ics, inStatistical Physics , vol.3, edited by K. W. Ford
(W.A. Benjamin, New York, 1963), p. 182.
[24] E.T. Jaynes, IEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cyb. SSC-4 , 224
(1968).
[25] J. Hartigan, Ann. Math. Statist. 35, 836 (1964).
[26] C. Stein, in Bernoulli, Bayes, Laplace ,Proceedings of an
International Research Seminar, Statistical Laboratory,
University of California at Berkeley, 1963 , edited by J.
Neyman and M. Lecan (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1965),
p. 217.
[27] H. Jeffreys, Theory of Probability (Clarendon Press, Ox-
ford, 1948), 2nded., Chap. III.
[28] H.L. Harney (to be published).
[29] S. Amari, Differential-Geometrical Methods in Statistics ,
Lecture Notes in Statistics 28(Springer-Verlag, Berlin,
1985).
[30] C.C. Rodriguez, in Maximum Entropy and Bayesian
Methods , edited by P. F. Foug` ere (Kluwer Academic,
Dordrecht, 1990), p. 31.
[31] W.H. Press, S.A. Teukolsky, W.T. Vetterling, and B.P.
Flannery, Numerical Recipes in Fortran - The Art of
Scientific Computing (Cambridge University Press, New
York, 1992), p. 680.
[32] O. Bohigas, Random Matrix Theories and Chaotic Dy-
namics , inProceedings of the Les Houches Summer
School, Session LII, 1989 , edited by M.-J. Giannoni, A.
Voros and J. Zinn-Justin (Elsevier Science Publischers,
Amsterdam, 1991), p.89.
[33] B. Efron and R.J. Tibshirani, An Introduction to the
Bootstrap , (Chapman and Hall, New York, 1993).
[34] M.V. Berry, Proc. R. Soc. London A400 , 229 (1985).
[35] A. Delon, R. Jost, and M. Lombardi, J. Chem. Phys. 95,
5701 (1991).
[36] O. Bohigas, M.J. Giannoni, and C. Schmit, Phys. Rev.
Lett.52, 1 (1984).
[37] R. Hofferbert (private communication).
8 |
arXiv:physics/9910036v1 [physics.optics] 26 Oct 1999HeXLN: A 2-Dimensional nonlinear photonic crystal
N. G. R. Broderick, G. W. Ross, H. L. Offerhaus, D. J. Richardso n and D. C. Hanna
Optoelectronics Research Centre, University of Southampt on, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK.
Phone: +44 (0)1703 593144, Fax: +44 (0)1703 593142, email: n gb@orc.soton.ac.uk
(February 2, 2008)
We report on the fabrication of what we believe is the first exa mple of a two dimensional
nonlinear periodic crystal [1], where the refractive index is constant but in which the 2nd order
nonlinear susceptibility is spatially periodic. Such a cry stal allows for efficient quasi-phase matched
2nd harmonic generation using multiple reciprocal lattice vectors of the crystal lattice. External 2nd
harmonic conversion efficiencies >60% were measured with picosecond pulses. The 2nd harmonic
light can be simultaneously phase matched by multiple recip rocal lattice vectors, resulting in the
generation of multiple coherent beams. The fabrication tec hnique is extremely versatile and allows
for the fabrication of a broad range of 2-D crystals includin g quasi-crystals.
42.65.K,42.65.-k, 42.70.Qs,42.70.M
The interaction of light with periodic media is an area of int ense interest both theoretically and experimentally.
A central theme of this work is the idea of a linear photonic cr ystal [2] in which the linear susceptibility is spatially
periodic. Photonic crystals can have a complete photonic ba ndgap over some frequency range and this bandgap can
be exploited for a wide variety of processes such as zero thre shold lasers, inhibited spontaneous emission, or novel
waveguiding schemes such as photonic bandgap fibres [3]. In o ne dimension photonic crystals, or Bragg gratings, have
been well studied for many years. In three dimensions a compl ete photonic bandgap at long wavelengths has already
been demonstrated and work on extending this to the visible r egion is rapidly progressing [2].
Recently V. Berger proposed extending the idea of photonic c rystals to include nonlinear photonic crystals [1]. In
a nonlinear photonic crystal (NPC) there is a periodic spati al variation of a nonlinear susceptibility tensor while the
refractive index is constant. This is in contrast with other work done on nonlinear interactions in photonic crystals
[4,5] where the nonlinearity is assumed constant throughou t the material and the photonic properties derive from
the variation of the linear susceptibility. The simplest ty pe of NPCs are the 1-D quasi-phase-matched materials,
first proposed by Armstrong et al. [6] in which the second orde r susceptibility undergoes a periodic change of sign.
This type of 1-D structure has attracted much interest since the successful development of periodically-poled lithium
niobate based devices. Generalisation to two and three dime nsions in analogy with linear photonic crystals, was
recently proposed by Berger and here we report its experimen tal realisation as a 2-D periodic structure with hexagonal
symmetry in lithium niobate (HeXLN).
First we briefly summarise the well known 1-D quasi-phase mat ching (QPM) concept before treating the 2-D case.
To this end consider the case of 2nd harmonic generation in a χ(2)material where light at a frequency ωis converted
to a signal at 2 ω. In general the refractive index at ωand 2ωare different and hence after a length Lc(the coherence
length) the fundamental and the generated 2nd harmonic will beπout of phase. Then in the next coherence length
all of the 2nd harmonic is back-converted to the fundamental - resulting in poor overall conversion efficiency. The idea
of quasi-phase matching is to change the sign of the nonlinea rity periodically with a period of Lc, thus periodically
reversing the phase of the generated 2nd harmonic. This ensu res that the 2nd harmonic continues to add up in phase
along the entire length of the crystal, resulting in a large o verall conversion efficiency.
An alternative way to understand the physics of quasi-phase matching is through conservation of momentum. 2nd
harmonic generation is a three photon process in which two ph otons with momentum /planckover2pi1kωare converted in a photon
of momentum /planckover2pi1k2ωand if k2ω= 2kω(ideal phase matching) then the momentum is conserved and th e interaction
is efficient. However in general due to dispersion ideal phase matching is not possible and different techniques must
be used to insure conservation of momentum. In the quasi-pha se matched case conservation of momentum becomes
k2ω= 2kω+G,where Gis the crystal momentum corresponding to one of the reciproc al lattice vectors (RLV) [7] of
the macroscopic periodic structure of the NPC. Clearly this technique allows one to phase-match any desired nonlinear
interaction, assuming that one can fabricate an appropriat e NPC. In 1-D quasi-phase matching can occur in either
the co- or counter-propagating direction. For a strictly pe riodic lattice quasi-phase matching can only occur over
limited wavelength ranges since the RLVs are discrete and pe riodically spaced in momentum space. In order to obtain
broader bandwidths one approach is to use aperiodic structu res which have densely spaced RLVs. An alternative
approach which is taken here is to move to a two dimensional NP C which brings added functionality compared to a
1-D crystal.
Clearly in a 2-D NPC the possibility of non-collinear phase m atching exists due to the structure of the reciprocal
lattice. Once again we restrict ourselves to the case of 2nd h armonic generation and linearly polarised light such that
we can use the scalar wave equation. Then making the usual slo wly varying envelope approximation and assuming
1a plane wave fundamental incident upon the crystal, the evol ution equation for the 2nd harmonic in the undepleted
pump regime can be written as [1]:
k2ω· ∇E2ω(r) =−2iω2
c2χ(2)(r)(Eω)2e(i(k2ω−2kω)·r). (1)
Since χ(2)is periodic we can write it as a Fourier series using the RLVs Gn,m
χ(2)(r) =/summationdisplay
n,mκn,meiGn,m·r, n, m ∈Z. (2)
The phase matching condition,
k2ω−2kω−Gn,m= 0, (3)
arises from requiring that the exponent in Eq. (1) be set equa l to zero ensuring growth of the 2nd harmonic along the
entire length of the crystal. Eq. (3) is a statement of conser vation of momentum as discussed earlier. For each RLV
Gn,mand a prescribed kωthere is at most a unique angle of propagation for the 2nd harm onic such that Eq. (3)
is satisfied. The coupling strength of a phase matching proce ss using Gn,mis proportional to κn,m. If a particular
Fourier coefficient is zero then no 2nd harmonic generation wi ll be observed in the corresponding direction.
In order to demonstrate the idea of a 2-D NPC we poled a wafer of lithium niobate with a hexagonal pattern.
Fig. 1 shows an expanded view of the resulting structure, whi ch was revealed by lightly etching the sample in acid.
Each hexagon is a region of domain inverted material - the tot al inverted area comprises ∼30% of the overall sample
area. The fabrication procedure was as follows. A thin layer of photoresist was first deposited onto the -z face of a
0.3mm thick, z-cut wafer, of LiNbO 3, and then photolithographically patterned with the hexago nal array. The x-y
orientation of the hexagonal structure was carefully align ed to coincide with the crystal’s natural preferred domain
wall orientation : LiNbO 3itself has triagonal atomic symmetry (crystal class 3m) and shows a tendency for domain
walls to form parallel to the y-axis and at ±60◦as seen in Fig. 1. Poling was accomplished by applying an elec tric
field via liquid electrodes on the +/-z faces at room temperat ure [8]. Our HeXLN crystal has a period of 18 .05µm:
suitable for non-collinear frequency doubling of 1536nm at 150◦C (an elevated temperature was chosen to eliminate
photorefractive effects). The hexagonal pattern was found t o be uniform across the sample dimensions of 14 ×7mm
(x-y) and was faithfully reproduced on the +z face. Lastly we polished the ±x-faces of the HeXLN crystal allowing
a propagation length of 14mm through the crystal in the ΓK dir ection (see Fig. 1).
In Fig. 2 we show the reciprocal lattice (RL) for our HeXLN cry stal. In contrast with the 1-D case there are RLVs
at numerous angles, each of which allows phase matching in a d ifferent direction (given by Eq. 3). Note that for a
real space lattice period of dthe RL has a period of 4 π/(√
3d) as compared with 2 π/dfor a 1-D crystal [9] allowing us
to compensate for a greater phase mismatch in a 2-D geometry t han in a 1-D geometry with the same spatial period.
From Eq. (3) and using simple trigonometry it is possible to s how that [1]
λ2ω
n2ω=2π
|G|/radicalBigg/parenleftbigg
1−nω
n2ω/parenrightbigg2
+ 4nω
n2ωsin2θ (4)
where λ2ωis the vacuum wavelength of the second harmonic and 2 θis the walk off angle between the fundamental
and 2nd harmonic wavevectors.
To investigate the properties of the HeXLN crystal we procee ded as follows. The HeXLN crystal was placed in an
oven and mounted on a rotation stage which could be rotated by ±15◦around the z-axis while still allowing light to
enter through the + xface of the crystal. The fundamental consisted of 4ps, 300kW pulses obtained from a high power
all-fibre chirped pulse amplification system (CPA) [10] oper ating at a pulse repetition rate of 20kHz. The output from
the CPA system was focussed into the HeXLN crystal using a 10c m focal length lens giving a focal spot diameter
of 150 µm and a corresponding peak intensity of ∼1.8GW/cm2. The initial experiments were done at zero angle of
incidence corresponding to propagation in the ΓK direction . At low input intensities ( ∼0.2GW/cm2) the output was
as shown in Fig. 2(b) and consisted of multiple output beams o f different colours emerging from the crystal at different
angles. In particular two 2nd harmonic beams emerged from th e crystal at symmetrical angles of ±(1.1±0.1)◦from
the remaining undeflected fundamental. At slightly wider an gles were two green beams (third harmonic of the pump)
and at even wider angles were two blue beams (the fourth harmo nic, not shown here). There was also a third green
beam copropagating with the fundamental. The output was sym metrical since the input direction corresponded to
a symmetry axis of the NPC. As the input power increased the 2n d harmonic spots remained in the same positions
while the green light appeared to be emitted over an almost co ntinuous range of angles rather than the discrete angles
2observed at low powers. The two 2nd harmonic beams can be unde rstood by referring to the reciprocal lattice of our
structure (Fig. 2). From Fig. 2 it can be seen that for propaga tion in the Γ Kdirection the closest RLVs are in the
ΓMdirections and it is these RLVs that account for the 2nd harmo nic light [1].
After filtering out the other wavelengths the 2nd harmonic (f rom both beams) was directed onto a power meter and
the efficiency and temperature tuning characteristics for ze ro input angle were measured. These results are shown in
Fig. 3 and Fig. 5. Note that the maximum external conversion e fficiency is greater than 60% and this is constant over
a wide range of input powers. Taking into account the Fresnel reflections from the front and rear faces of the crystal
this implies a maximum internal conversion efficiency of 82% – ∼41% in each beam. As the 2nd harmonic power
increases the amount of back conversion increases which we b elieve is the main reason for the observed limiting of the
conversion efficiency at high powers.
Evidence of the strong back conversion can be seen in Fig. 4 wh ich shows the spectrum of the remaining fundamental
for both vertically (dashed) i.e. in the z-direction and hor izontally (solid line) polarised input light. As the phase
matching only works for vertically polarised light the hori zontally polarised spectrum is identical to that of the inpu t
beam and when compared with the other trace (dashed line) sho ws the effect of pump depletion and back-conversion.
Note that for vertically polarised light the amount of back- converted light is significant compared to the residual
pump which is as expected given the large conversion efficienc y. Fig. 4 shows ∼8dB (85%) of pump depletion which
agrees well with the measured value for the internal efficienc y calculated using the average power.
In the 1-D case, for an undepleted pump, the temperature tuni ng curve of a 14mm long length of periodically poled
material is expected to have a sinc2(T) shape and to be quite narrow – 4 .7◦C for a 1-D PPLN crystal with the same
length and period as the HeXLN crystal used here. However, as can be seen from Fig. 5, the temperature tuning curve
(obtained in a similar manner to the power characteristic) i s much broader with a FWHM of ∼25◦C, and it exhibits
considerable structure. The input power was 300kW. We belie ve that the increased temperature bandwidth may be
due to the multiple reciprocal lattice vectors that are avai lable for quasi-phase matching with each RLV producing
a beam in a slightly different direction. Thus the angle of emi ssion of the 2nd harmonic should vary slightly with
temperature if this is the case. Due to the limitations of the oven we were not able to raise the temperature above
205◦C and hence could not completely measure the high temperatur e tail of the temperature tuning curve. Note that
temperature tuning is equivalent to wavelength tuning of th e pump pulse and hence it should be possible to obtain
efficient phase-matching over a wide wavelength range at a fixe d temperature.
After the properties of the HeXLN crystal at normal incidenc e we next measured the angular dependance of the 2nd
harmonic beams. As the crystal was rotated phase-matching v ia different RLVs could be observed. For a particular
input angle (which determined the angle between the fundame ntal and the RLVs) quasi-phase matched 2nd harmonic
generation occurred, via a RLV, and produced a 2nd harmonic b eam in a direction given by Eq. (4). These results
are shown in Fig. 6 where the solid circles indicate the measu red angles of emission for 2nd harmonic while the open
squares are the predicted values. In the figure zero degrees c orresponds to propagation in the Γ Kdirection. Also
indicated on the figure are the RLVs used for phase-matching, where [ n, m] refers to the RLV Gn,m. Note that there
is good overall agreement between the theoretical and exper imental results even for higher order Fourier coefficients
which indicates the high quality of the crystal. The inversi on symmetry of Fig. 6 results from the hexagonal symmetry
of the crystal. To further highlight this symmetry we have la beled the negative output angles with the corresponding
positive RLVs. The only obvious discrepancy comes from the [ 1,1] RLVs where two closely separated spots are
observed rather than a single one. This may be due to a small am ount of linear diffraction from the periodic array.
At the domain boundaries of the HeXLN crystal there are likel y to be small stress-induced refractive index changes
giving a periodic variation in the refractive index. If this indeed proves to be the case then it should be possible to
eliminate this by annealing the crystal at high temperature s.
For applications where collinear propagation of the fundam ental and 2nd harmonic is desirable propagation along
the ΓMaxis of the HeXLN crystal could be used (since the smallest RL V is in that direction). For the parameters of
our crystal collinear 2nd harmonic generation of 1 .446µm in the Γ Mdirection is expected.
Visually the output of the HeXLN crystal is quite striking wi th different colours (red, green and blue) being emitted
in different directions (see Fig. 7). For a range of input angl es and low powers distinct green and red spots can been
seen each emitted in a different direction, often with the gre en light emitted at a wider angle than the 2nd harmonic.
The presence of the green light implies sum frequency genera tion between the fundamental and the 2nd harmonic. For
this to occur efficiently it must also be quasi-phase-matched using a RLV of the lattice. In certain regimes (of angle
and temperature) simultaneous quasi-phase-matching of bo th 2nd harmonic generation and sum frequency mixing
occurs with as much as 20% of the 2nd harmonic, converted to th e green (in multiple beams). As mentioned earlier
at higher powers the green light appears to be emitted over a c ontinuous range of angles. We believe that this might
be due to an effect similar to that observed in fibres where phas e-matching becomes less critical at high intensities
[11]. If this were the case then the green light would have a br oader spectrum in the non-phase-matched case than for
the quasi-phase-matched case but we have not yet been able to verify this. Lastly we believe that the 4th harmonic
results from quasi-phase matching of two 2nd harmonic photo ns by a higher order RLV since it is observed at quite
3wide angles.
It should be noted that although lithium niobate preferenti ally forms domains walls along the yaxis and at ±60◦
we are not limited to hexagonal lattices. In fact essentiall y any two dimensional lattice can be fabricated, however
the patterned region of the unit cell will always consist of e ither a hexagon or a triangle. The shape of the poled
region will determine the strength of each of the Fourier coe fficients for the RLVs while the lattice structure will
determine their position. One can envisage creating more co mplicated structures such as a 2-D quasi-crystal in which
a small poled hexagon is situated at every vertex. Such a 2-D q uasi-crystal could give improved performance for
simultaneously phase matching multiple nonlinear process es, as demonstrated recently with a 1-D poled quasi-crystal
[12]. Alternatively a HeXLN crystal could be used as an efficie nt monolithic optical parametric oscillator [1]. Lastly
we note that NPCs are a specific example of more general nonlin ear holographs which would convert a beam profile
at one wavelength to an arbitrary profile at a second profile [1 3]. For example Imeshevx et al. converted a gaussian
profile beam at the fundamental to a square top 2nd harmonic us ing tranversely patterned periodically poled lithium
niobate [14].
In conclusion we have fabricated what we believe to be the firs t example of a two dimensional nonlinear photonic
crystal in Lithium Niobate. Due to the periodic structure of the crystal, quasi-phase matching is obtained for
multiple directions of propagation with internal conversi on efficiencies of >80%. Such HeXLN crystals could find
many applications in optics where simultaneous conversion of multiple wavelengths is required.
[1] V. Berger, “Nonlinear Photonic Crystals,” Phys. Rev. Le tt.81,4136–4139 (1998).
[2] J. D. Joannopoulos, R. D. Meade, and J. N. Winn, Photonic Crystals (Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey,
1995).
[3] R. F. Cregan, B. J. Mangan, J. C. Knight, T. A. Birks, P. S. R ussell, P. J. Roberts, and D. C. Allan, “Single-mode photoni c
band gap guidance of light in air,” Science 285,1537–1539 (1999).
[4] S. John and N. Akozbek, “Nonlinear Optical Solitary Wave s in a Photonic Band Gap,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 71,1168–1171
(1993).
[5] M. J. Steel and C. M. de Sterke, “Second harmonic generati on in second harmonic fiber gratings,” Appl. Opt. 35,3211
(1995).
[6] J. A. Armstrong et al., Phys. Rev. 127,1918 (1962).
[7] C. Kittel, Introduction to Solid State Physics , 3rd ed. (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1953). Note that in bo th Ref[1]
and Ref[2] the period of reciprocal lattice is incorrectly s tated as 2 π/d.
[8] M. Yamada, N. Nada, M. Saitoh, and K. Watanabe, “1st-orde r Quasi-phase matched LINBO3 wave-guide periodically
poled by applying an external-field for efficient blue 2nd-har monic generation,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 62,435–436 (1993).
[9] C. Kittel, Introduction to Solid State Physics , 3rd ed. (John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1953).
[10] N. G. R. Broderick, D. J. Richardson, D. Taverner, and M. Ibsen, “High power chirped pulse all-fibre amplification sys tem
based on large mode area fibre components,” Opt. Lett 24,566–568 (1999).
[11] S. Trillo, G. Millot, E. Seve, and S. Wabnitz, “Failure o f phase-matching concept in large-signal parametric frequ ency
conversion,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 72,150–152 (1998).
[12] Shi- ning Zhu, Yong-yuan Zhu, Yi-qiang Qin, Hai-feng We ng, Chuan-zhen Ge, and Nai-ben Ming, “Experimental Real-
ization of Second Harmonic Generation in a Fibonacci Optica l Superlattice of LiTa O3,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 78,2752–2755
(1997).
[13] V. Berger, in Confined Photon Systems: Fundamentals and Applications , H. Benisty, J. M. Gerard, R. Houdie, J. Rarity,
and C. Weisbuch, eds., (Springer, Heidelberg, 1999), Vol. L ecture Notes in Physics vol. 531, Chap. Photonic Crystals fo r
Nonlinear Optical Frequency Conversion.
[14] G. Imeshev, M. Proctor, and M. M. Fejer, “Lateral patter ning of nonlinear frequency conversion with transversely v arying
quasi-phase-matching gratings,” Opt. Lett. 23,673–675 (1998).
FIG. 1. Picture of the HeXLN crystal and the first Brillouin zo ne. The period of the crystal is 18.05 µm and is uniform over
the whole sample. In our experiments propagation was in the Γ Kdirection.
FIG. 2. Reciprocal Lattice for the hexagonal lattice shown i n Fig. 1. The general reciprocal lattice vector Gn,m=ne1+me2
wheree1,2are the basis vectors for the reciprocal lattice. Also indic ated is the first Brillouin zone showing the main symmetry
directions. In addition two examples of non-collinear QPM a re shown using the [1 ,0] and the [1 ,1] RLVs. On the right is a
picture of the low power output of the crystal. Note that ther e are two 2nd harmonic spots and three 3rd harmonic spots.
4FIG. 3. 2nd harmonic efficiency of the HeXLN crystal against in put peak power. Note that the maximum efficiency is
>60% and is limited principally by parametric back conversio n.
FIG. 4. Output spectra at 1533nm for both horizontally (soli d line) and vertically (dashed line) polarised light. Note
the large amount of pump depletion which can clearly be seen a long with the back-conversion. The incident peak power was
300kW.
FIG. 5. Temperature tuning of the HeXLN crystal taken at an in cident peak power of 300kW. The temperature tuning
curve is much broader than a comparable 1-D PPLN crystal and p osses multiple features has to the large number of reciproca l
lattice vectors available.
FIG. 6. Graph of the experimental (circles) and theoretical (squares) output angles for the 2nd harmonic as an function
of the external input angle, where 0◦indicates propagation in the ΓK direction. The maximum inte rnal angle between the
fundamental and 2nd harmonic was ∼8◦(the refractive index of lithium niobate is ∼2.2).
FIG. 7. Output of the HeXLN crystal at high powers and a variet y of input angles.
56ωkω
k2ωkωk2ω34
dπ
k2
[1,0]
[1,1]
Γ511nm
511nm766nm
511nm766nm
MKe1
e
789101112This figure "hexln3.jpg" is available in "jpg"
format from:
http://arXiv.org/ps/physics/9910036v1 |
arXiv:physics/9910037v1 [physics.gen-ph] 26 Oct 1999Interaction of the Pastof parallel universes
Alexander K. Guts
Department of Mathematics, Omsk State University
644077 Omsk-77 RUSSIA
E-mail: guts@univer.omsk.su
October 26, 1999
ABSTRACT
We constructed a model of five-dimensional Lorentz manifold with foliation of
codimension 1 the leaves of which are four-dimensional spac e-times. The Past of
these space-times can interact in macroscopic scale by mean s of large quantum
fluctuations. Hence, it is possible that our Human History co nsists of ”somebody
else’s” (alien) events.In this article the possibility of interaction of the Past (o r Future) in macroscopic
scales of space and time of two different universes is analyse d. Each universe is
considered as four-dimensional space-time V4, moreover they are imbedded in five-
dimensional Lorentz manifold V5, which shall below name Hyperspace. The space-
timeV4is absolute world of events. Consequently, from formal stan dpoints any
point-event of this manifold V4, regardless of that we refer it to Past, Present or
Future of some observer, is equally available to operate with her . In other words,
modern theory of space-time, rising to Minkowsky, postulat es absolute eternity of
the World of events in the sense that all events exist always. Hence, it is possible
interaction of Present with Past and Future as well as Past ca n interact with Future.
Question is only in that as this is realized. The numerous art icles about time machine
show that our statement on the interaction of Present with Pa st is not fantasy, but
is subject of the scientific study. In articles [1, 2, 3] we use d theory of foliations for
construction one of the possible ways of travel to the Past (F uture). Exactly this
theory seems to be useful for decision of problem on interact ions ”nearby” universes.
So, it is assumed that manifold V5has foliation Fof codimension 1, but our
Universe is a leaf F4
0in him. Other leaves represent different universes.
Consider five-dimensional manifold that is got by multiplyi ng on IR3of axial
section of foliation of Reb in the torus S1×D2([4, 468], refer to Pic.1).
Pic. 1.
Model Hyperspace of Reb with interacting Past
1Our Universe and we as its Observers are not single in this mat hematical theory
of Time. In Hyperspace other worlds are also situated. Fix ce rtain spatial section X
in leaf F4
0. It represents ”Present”. Similar ”Present” we will fix in ot her leaves, for
example, section Yin leaf F4
1which is near to leaf F4
0(see Pic.1). We shall consider
only those universes, i.e. leaves, which are situated in cer tain neighborhood of
our Universe and, accordingly, Present of ”somebody else’s ” (alien) universes are
situated in sufficiently small neighborhood of ”Present” of o ur Universe.
For this model of five-dimensional Reb Hyperspace it is disti nctive that Past of
our Universe and Past of ”someone else” (alien) universe are approached that more
strong, than further from Present will run away past epoches . On Pic. 1 ring is
image of Hyperspace, curly lines are universes, each with it s Observers. One line
is our four-dimensional Universe F4
0, we are its Observers. Beside we see ”someone
else” (alien) four-dimensional universe F4
1with its own observers. Our Present is
point X, Present of ”someone else” universe is a point Y. If we begin a trip to the
Past against of the streem of time, we shall move in our World a gainst the arrow
on line 1 (point X) and coil all more and more on the circle S1. Similarly, travel in
the Past in nearby universe F4
1or line 2 (point Y) is a coiling motion around the
circle S1along line 2 against the arrow of time. Past of two worlds are a pproached
in topology of Hyperspace. That can one occur?
For the answer to this question we will use geometrodynamics ideas of Wheeler
which we shall apply to five-dimensional theory of gravitati on. Amplitude of prob-
ability of transition from Universe F4
0to universe F4
1will represent by means of
Feynman integral over 5-geometries:
< F4
0|F4
1>=F4
1/integraldisplay
F4
0Dg(5)exp/bracketleftbigg
−iS
¯h/bracketrightbigg
, (1)
where
S=c3
8πGT/integraldisplay
R(5)/radicalBig
−g(5)d5x (2)
is action in five-dimensional Lorentz geometry [6, p.52] wit h metrics g(5)
AB, moreover T
is a constant with dimensionality [cm], connected with 5-th coordinate (for instance,
it characterizes cyclicity on the fifth coordinate in the Kal uza-Klein theories). From
(1), (2) it follows [5] that (1) is not changed under quantum fl uctuations of five-
dimensional geometries g(5)
AB(A,B= 1,...,5):
∆g(5)∼L∗
L/radicalBigg
T
L0, (3)
2where L∗∼10−33cmis constant of Plank, but L4×L0is a size of 5-region of
fluctuations.
Formula (3) means that as soon as Past of universes F4
0andF4
12 are approached
”sufficiently close”, quantum fluctuations of metrics begin t o change topology and
geometry of two universes; they begin to stick together by me ans of wormholes; one
will appear the tunnel transition between worlds. This mean s that at least on the
microscopic scale the Past of these two worlds are indisting uishable.
Formula (3) is not contradictory with classical four-dimen sional formula for quan-
tum fluctuations
∆g(4)∼L∗
L, (4)
because it was got under assumption/radicalBig
det g(4)∼1 [7].
But fluctuations are significant on the macroscopic scale too . In fact, suppose
thatL∼1km. This corresponds the time interval ∼3·10−6sec. Then, as it
follows from (3), quantum fluctuation of 5-metrics ∆ g(5)∼1, ifL0∼10−76T. In
other words, to begin the Past of our Universe and universe F4
1to interact by means
of formation of wormholes between them in considered model o f Reb Hyperspace,
it is necessary that it was sufficiently removed from Present. Otherwise, to interact
leaves F4
0andF4
1must powerfully draw together. Herewith one interact spati al
regions of size 1 km, and time of interaction is 10−6sec. For more extensive spatial
regions time of interactions increases. In principle it bec ome possible a transition
between universes meaning exchange of the Past. Past our Uni verse can contain
events which are not belonging to our History.
Note that large quantum fluctuation, i.e. those that could ar ise at large spatial
scale, are essential detail of four-dimensional quantum th eory [7]. In five-dimensional
theory one can be found an universe Fwhich is contained in sufficiently thin neigh-
borhood of our Universe. It follows from (3) that there exist large quantum fluctu-
ations which are the interactions between Present of our Uni verse and ”Present” of
universe F. The existence of such interactions is very serious questio n. It possible
that such interaction at scale L0< T0,O < T 0< Tin fifth dimension are suppressed
by, for example, scale-dependent cosmological term Λ( L,L0) or some external field
[7].
Hyperspace of Reb can be a subject of compression of part of ri ng one border of
which is cylinder S1and other is cylinder S2labeled on Pic.1 by means of dotted
line (Pic.1). If S2tends to points X,Y, then interacting Past will all closer to the
current epoch.
Hyperspace of Reb can be a subject of local compression (Pic. 2). Then we shall
have a model of periodic ”strong” interactions of chosen epo ches of the Past.
3Pic. 2.
Model of hyperspace with interacting nearby Past
Wholly it can turn out to be that principal details of explore d model situation
will found in the Reality and this has direct relations to the problems in the historic
science, which were open N.A.Morozov, A.T.Fomenko and his c o-authors [8]. His-
torical text-books are contradictory, and this is objectiv e Law of Nature [9]. Human
History contains many different variants of events. Maybe, o ne is openned prospect
of building of Multivariant World History of Human Civiliza tion which can conciliate
supporters of traditional and new chronology [10].
References
[1] Guts, A.K. Many-dimensional gravitation and time machi ne // Izvestiya VUZov.
Physics. 1996, N 2. P.14-19. (Russian).
[2] Guts, A.K. Time Machine as a result of rolling ups of space -time in the spring //
Theoretical and experimental problems an . Thesises of repo rts IX Russian gravitational
conferences. Part I. – Novgorod, June 24-30, 1996. – Moscow, 1996. (Russian).
[3] Guts, A.K. Time machine and foliations // Proceeding of t he The Eighth Marcel Gross-
mann Meeting on General Relativity. – Singapore: World Scie ntific Publ., 1999. Part
A.
[4] Fomenko, A.T., Fuks, D.B. Course of homotopic topology. – Moscow.: Nauka Publ.,
1989. (Russian)
4[5] Wheeler, J. Ann. of Phys. 1957. V.2. P.604-614, or in book : Wheeler J.Gravitation,
neutrino and Universe. – Moscow: Foreign Lit. Publ, 1962. P. 336.
[6] Vladimirov, Yu.S. Dimension of physical space-time and union of interactions. –
Moscow: Moscow State Univ. Publ., 1987. (Russian)
[7] Modanese, G. Virtual dipoles and large fluctuations in qu antum gravity // Phys. Lett.
1999. V.B460. P.276-280.
[8] Nosovsky, G.V., Fomenko, A.T. Empire. – Moscow.: Factor ial, 1996. (Russian)
[9] Guts, A. K. Restoration of the Past and three Principle of Time. – Los Alamos E-
Preprint physics/9705014. – http://xxx.lanl.gov /abs/ph ysics/9705014
[10] Guts, A.K. True History of Russia. – Omsk: Omsk State Uni v. Publ., 1999. 192 p.
(Russian)
5 |
arXiv:physics/9910038v1 [physics.gen-ph] 26 Oct 1999Crater Property in Two-Particle Bound States: When and Why
Chi–Keung Chow
Department of Physics, University of Maryland, College Par k, 20742-4111.
(January 13, 2014)
Crater has shown that, for two particles (with masses m1andm2) in a Coulombic bound state,
the charge distribution is equal to the sum of the two charge d istributions obtained by taking
m1→ ∞ andm2→ ∞ respectively, while keeping the same Coulombic potential. We provide a
simple scaling criterion to determine whether an arbitrary Hamiltonian possesses this property. In
particular we show that, for a Coulombic system, fine structu re corrections preserve this Crater
property while two-particle relativistic corrections and /or hyperfine corrections may destroy it.
Recently, in an interesting paper in this journal [1], Crate r discussed an unusual feature of charge densities for
two-particle Coulombic bound states. Let ρ(R;m1,m2) be the charge density of a two-particle bound state in a give n
potentialV(r)≡V(r1−r2) in the center-of-mass coordinate system. Then Crater obse rved that, for a Coulombic
potential the charge density satisfies the following relati on:
ρ(R;m1,m2) = lim
m2→∞ρ(R;m1,m2) + lim
m1→∞ρ(R;m1,m2), (1)
or, in Crater’s own words, one can picture ρ(R;m1,m2) “as equivalent to that produced by a particle of mass m1and
chargee1, bound to a fixedcenter with charge e2plus that produced by a particle of mass m2and charge e2, bound
to afixedcenter with charge e1,” with the fixed center being the center of mass. Here and afte r this property will be
referred to as the Crater property. Crater has shown in Ref. [ 1] that the Crater property holds for Coulombic potentials
but not for generic potentials. In the real world, however, C oulombic potentials are often corrected by perturbations
like fine/hyperfine structures and relativistic effects. It w ould be of interest to know what kind of corrections can be
added to the Coulombic potential without destroying the Cra ter property. More generally, we would like to have a
criterion to determine whether a given potential has the Cra ter property without explicitly solving the Schr¨ odinger
equation. The purpose of this paper is to provide answers to t hese questions.
Let us consider an eigenfunction ψ(r;m1,m2) to the Schr¨ odinger equation (in units ¯ h= 1):
H(m1,m2)ψ(r;m1,m2)≡/bracketleftbigg−1
2µ∂2
∂r2
i+V(r;m1,m2)/bracketrightbigg
ψ(r;m1,m2) =E(m1,m2)ψ(r;m1,m2), (2)
withµ=m1m2/MandM=m1+m2. The charge density operator ˆ ρ(R) is defined as [1]
ˆρ(R) =e1δ3(R−r1) +e2δ3(R−r2), (3)
and the charge density ρ(R;m1,m2) is its expectation value, which can easily be shown to be
ρ(R;m1,m2) =/integraldisplay
d3r|ψ(r;m1,m2)|2ˆρ(R)
=e1/parenleftbiggM
m2/parenrightbigg3/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleψ/parenleftbiggM
m2R;m1,m2/parenrightbigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
+e2/parenleftbiggM
m1/parenrightbigg3/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleψ/parenleftbiggM
m1R;m1,m2/parenrightbigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
=e1/parenleftbiggm1
µ/parenrightbigg3/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleψ/parenleftbiggm1
µR;m1,m2/parenrightbigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
+e2/parenleftbiggm2
µ/parenrightbigg3/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleψ/parenleftbiggm2
µR;m1,m2/parenrightbigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
. (4)
Since the eigenfunction ψ, satisfying the normalization condition/integraltext
d3r|ψ|2= 1, carries scaling dimension
[length]−3/2= [momentum]3/2= [mass]3/2(with units ¯ h=c= 1), it is always possible to rewrite ψ(r;m1,m2)
as
ψ(r;m1,m2) =µ3/2˜ψ(r;m1,m2), (5)
where the rescaled eigenfunction ˜ψ(r;m1,m2) is a dimensionless function. Now consider the case when ˜ψ(r;m1,m2)
has the following form:
˜ψ(r;m1,m2)≡˜ψ(µr), (6)
1which states that the dependences of ˜ψon the location rand the masses m1,2always come through the combination
µr=m1m2r/(m1+m2). Thenψ(r;m1,m2) =µ3/2˜ψ(µr) and the charge density ρ(R;m1,m2) in Eq. (4) becomes
ρ(R;m1,m2) =e1/parenleftbiggm1
µ/parenrightbigg3/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleµ3/2˜ψ/parenleftbiggm1
µµR/parenrightbigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
+e2/parenleftbiggm2
µ/parenrightbigg3/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleµ3/2˜ψ/parenleftbiggm2
µµR/parenrightbigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
=e1m3
1/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle˜ψ(m1R)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
+e2m3
2/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle˜ψ(m2R)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
= lim
m2→∞ρ(R;m1,m2) + lim
m1→∞ρ(R;m1,m2), (7)
which is exactly the expression for the Crater property. In o ther words, the charge density exhibits the Crater property
whenever the eigenfunction can be written as µ3/2˜ψ(µr).
It is easy to translate the above scaling condition on the eig enfunction to a corresponding scaling condition on
the Hamiltonian. Since the Hamiltonian H(m1,m2) carries scaling dimension [mass]1, it can always be rewritten as
µ˜H(m1,m2), where ˜His a dimensionless function of m1,2, as well as the relative coordinates rand the canonical
momenta −i∂/∂r . It is straightforward to see that ˜ψis a function of solely µrif and only if
˜H(m1,m2) =˜H/parenleftbigg
µr,−i∂
∂(µr)/parenrightbigg
+˜V0, (8)
such that, up to an additive constant, the masses enter the Ha miltonian only through combinations µrand
−i(∂/∂(µr)). The dimensionless constant ˜V0, which may have arbitrary dependences on m1,2, may shift the eigenvalues
but does not affect the eigenfunctions.
We have shown that the charge density of an eigenfunction exh ibits the Crater property if and only if the Hamiltonian
can be written as
H=µ/bracketleftbigg
˜H/parenleftbigg
µr,−i∂
∂(µr)/parenrightbigg
+˜V0/bracketrightbigg
, (9)
which will be referred to as the scaling criterion. With this criterion one can easily determine if a particular potentia l
exhibits the Crater property. For spinless Schr¨ odinger sy stems, the kinetic term always satisfies the scaling criteri on.
−1
2µ∂2
∂r2
i=µ−1
2∂2
∂(µri)2. (10)
On the other hand, for analytic V(r)’s one can expand them in Laurent series and the scaling crit erion is satisfied if
and only if
V(r) =+∞/summationdisplay
k=−∞akµk+1rk+˜V0, (11)
whereakare mass independent coefficients. Of special interest is the case where the only non-vanishing akare those
withk=−1 and −2:
V(r) =a−1
r+a−2
µr2, (12)
which describes a Coulombic potential in three dimensions w itha−1=e1e2anda−2=ℓ(ℓ+1)/2,i.e., the case studied
in Ref. [1]. Another interesting case is the “two-dimension al Coulombic potential”, i.e., the logarithmic potential:
V(r) =e1e2ln(r/r0) =e1e2[ln(µr)−ln(µr0)], (13)
which can be seen to satisfy the scaling criterion by identif ying the second term as ˜V0.
As pointed out in Ref. [1], the Crater property is nota feature of potentials of generic rand mass dependences.
Crater illustrated this point by studying the eigenfunctio ns of a simple harmonic potential and showed explicitly that
ρ(R;m1,m2), given by Eq. (4), is notthe sum of lim m2→∞ρ(R;m1,m2) and lim m1→∞ρ(R;m1,m2),i.e., the simple
harmonic potential does not exhibit the Crater property. On the other hand, we can reproduce the same conclusion
by just studying the scaling behavior of the simple harmonic potential:
V(r) =1
2µω2r2, (14)
2which cannot be recast in a form conforming to criterion (9). As a result, the Crater property is not exhibited in
simple harmonic potentials.
It is of interest to note that, for any potential V(r) =µ˜V(µr) satisfying the scaling criterion, including the fine
structure corrections does not destroy the Crater property .
Hmv=−1
8µ3c2/parenleftbigg∂2
∂r2
i/parenrightbigg2
=µ−1
8c2/parenleftbigg∂2
∂(µri)2/parenrightbigg2
, (15)
HSO=1
µ2c21
rdV(r)
drL·S=µ1
c21
µrd˜V(µr)
d(µr)L·S, (16)
HD=1
8µ2c2d2V(r)
dr2
i=µ1
8c2d2˜V(r)
d(µri)2, (17)
whereHmv,HSO, andHDstand for the relativistic mass variation term, the spin-or bit coupling term and the Darwin
term, respectively. This may look miraculous but is actuall y nothing but a consequence of the fact that all these fine
structure corrections come from the leading order expansio n in the fine structure constant of the one-particle Dirac
Hamiltonian with the same potential V(r).
H=−iα·∂
∂r+βµ+V(r) =µ/bracketleftbigg
−iα·∂
∂(µr)+β+˜V(µr)/bracketrightbigg
, (18)
whereαandβare the Dirac matrices. Since this one-particle Dirac Hamil tonian also satisfies the scaling criterion,
the Crater property is preserved.
However, it is important to bear in mind that it is an approxim ation to describe a two-particle bound state by a
one-particle Schr¨ odinger or Dirac equation. Take, for exa mple, the hyperfine correction, which for a Coulombic bound
state is
Hhf=g1g2e1e2
3m1m2S1·S2δ3(r) =µ/bracketleftBigµ
M/bracketrightBigg1g2e1e2
3S1·S2δ3(µr), (19)
and the scaling criterion is violated by the outstanding fac tor ofµ/M, whereM=m1+m2is the total mass.
Violations of the scaling criterion may also be due to two-pa rticle relativistic effects. In the non-relativistic theor y
a two-particle problem can always be reduced to an effective o ne-particle problem in the relative coordinates, which
decouple with the center-of-mass coordinates in the kineti c term:
1
2m1∂2
∂r2
1+1
2m2∂2
∂r2
2=1
2M∂2
∂R2+1
2µ∂2
∂r2, (20)
whereRis the center of mass position m1r1+m2r2, andris the relative position r1−r2. For a relativistic theory
in general no such decomposition is possible, and the descri ption of a two-particle problem by a one-particle equation
is a good approximation only when one particle is much heavie r than the other. Such treatments do not capture
genuine two-particle effects, like the two-particle relati vistic corrections and hyperfine corrections. These correc tions
in general do not satisfy the scaling criterion and one expec ts the Crater property to be violated by these corrections.
In passing, we note that the notion of Crater property can be g eneralized in a straightforward manner to any
operator of the following form:
O(R) =aδ3(R−r1) +bδ3(R−r2), (21)
whereaandbare arbitrary coefficients. This operator ( R) may correspond to physically interesting objects for
particular choices of aandb; it is the charge density when ( a,b) = (e1,e2), the probability density of particle
1 and 2 when ( a,b) = (1,0) and (0,1), respectively, and the mass density when ( a,b) = (m1,m2). Then the
Hamiltonian or potential is said to exhibit the Crater prope rty of charge/probability/mass distribution if and only if
the charge/probability/mass distribution in the bound sta te of particle mass m1andm2is equivalent to the sum of
the charge/probability/mass distributions produced in th e limitsm1→ ∞ andm2→ ∞. As before, all these Crater
properties are guaranteed by the same scaling criterion (9) .
In conclusion, we have provided a simple criterion to determ ine if the eigenfunctions of a given Hamiltonian have
the Crater property. In particular, we have shown that neith er the inclusions of fine structure corrections nor the
switching from Schr¨ odinger to Dirac formalism will destro y the Crater property. The author believes Crater must have
foreseen the essential points of this paper — as in the conclu sion of Ref. [1] he stated that “in general, the appearance
of parameters in the potentials that are not dimensionless ( in natural units) and do not depend on the reduced mass
would not be of the correct type.” As a consequence, this pape r may be regarded as a concrete realization of this
observation.
3ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy grant DE-FG02-93ER-40762.
[1] Horace W. Crater, “An Unusual Feature of Charge Densities for Two-Particle Bo und States” , Am. J. Phys. 67739 (1999).
4 |
arXiv:physics/9910039v1 [physics.bio-ph] 27 Oct 1999Rescaled range and transition matrix analysis
of DNA sequences
Zu-Guo Yu1,2,3and Guo-Yi Chen2
1Department of Mathematics, Xiangtan University, Hunan 411 105, P.R. China∗.
2Institute of Theoretical Physics, Chinese Academy of Scien ces,
P.O. Box 2735, Beijing 100080, P. R. China.
3CCAST( World Laboratory), P.O. Box 8370, Beijing 100080, P. R. China.
Abstract
In this paper we treat some fractal and statistical features of the DNA sequences. First, a fractal
record model of DNA sequence is proposed by mapping DNA seque nces to integer sequences, followed
byR/Sanalysis of the model and computation of the Hurst exponents . Second, we consider transition
between the four kinds of bases within DNA. The transition ma trix analysis of DNA sequences shows that
some measures of complexity based on transition proportion matrix are of interest. The main results are:
1)Hexon> Hintronfor virus. But Hintron> Hexonfor the species which have the shape of cell except
for drosophila. 2) For Virus, E. coli, yeast, drosophila, mo use and human, measures Hof transition
proportion matrix of exon is larger than that of intron, and m easures λ,D,C,/tildewideDand/tildewideCof transition
proportion matrix of intron are larger than that of exon. 3) R egarding the evolution, we find that when
the species goes higher in grade, the measures D,C,/tildewideDand/tildewideCof exon become larger, the measure Hof
exon becomes lesser except for yeast. Hence for species of hi gher grade, the transition rate among the
four kinds of bases goes further from the equilibrium.
Key words : DNA sequence, functional region, R/Sanalysis, transition proportion matrix, measure of
complexity.
PACS numbers: 87.10 +e
1 Introduction
In the past decade or so there has been a ground swell of intere st in unraveling the mysteries of DNA.
In order to distinguish coding regions from non-coding ones , many approaches have been proposed. First,
investigation into nucleotide correlation is of special im portance. In recent years many authors have discussed
the correlation properties of nucleotides in DNA sequences[1−9]. C.K. Peng et al[4], using the one-dimensional
DNA walk model found that there exists long-range correlati on in non-coding regions but not in coding
regions. Second, the linguistic approach. DNA sequence can be regarded, at a number of levels, as analogous
to mechanisms of processing other kind of languages, such as natural languages and computer languages[10].
R.N. Mantegna et alalso studied the linguistic feature of non-coding DNA seque nces[11]. Third, the nonlinear
scaling method, such as complexity[12]and fractal analysis[13−17]. Recently, we investigated the correlation
* This is the corresponding address of the first author, Email : yuzg@itp.ac.cn
1dimension and Kolmogorov entropy of DNA sequences using tim e series model[18]. Our goal is to search for
a good measure of complexity which can be used to clearly dist inguish different functional regions of DNA
sequences and to describe the evolution of species.
In this paper, we first map DNA sequence to sequence of integer numbers, and treat it like a fractal record
in time, then apply R/Sanalysis to calculate its Hurst exponent. Second. We analyz e DNA sequences with
the transition matrix method and calculate some measures of complexity based on their transition proportion
matrices.
2R/Sanalysis
A DNA sequence may also be regarded as a sequence over the alph abet{A,C,G,T }, which represents the
set of the four bases from which DNA is assembled, namely aden ine, cytosine, guanine and thymine. For
any DNA sequence s=s1s2···sN, we define a map f:s/mapsto→x={x1,x2,···,xN}, where for any 1 ≤k≤N,
xk=
−2,ifsk=A,
−1,ifsk=C,
1, ifsk=G,
2, ifsk=T.(1)
According to the definition of f, the four bases {A,C,G,T }are mapped to four distinct value. One can
also use {−2,−1,1,2}to replace {A,G,C,T }or other orders of A,G,C,T . our main aim is distinguish A
andGfrom purine, CandTfrom pyrimidine. We expect it to reveal more information tha n one dimensional
DNA walk[4].
Remark: William Y. C. Chen and J. D. Louck[19]also use the {−2,−1,1,2}alphabet for the DNA
sequence, instead of {A,C,G,T }.
Thus we obtain a number sequence x={xk}N
k=1, where xk∈ {−2,−1,1,2}. This sequence can be
treated as a fractal records in time. To study such sequences , Hurst[20]invented a new statistical method
—the rescaled range analysis (R/Sanalysis), then B. B. Mandelbrot[21]and J. Feder[22]introduced R/S
analysis of fractal records in time into fractal analysis. F or any fractal records in time x={xk}N
k=1and any
2≤n≤N, one can define
< x > n=1
nn/summationdisplay
i=1xi (2)
X(i,n) =i/summationdisplay
u=1[xu−< x > n] (3)
R(n) = max
1≤i≤nX(i,n)−min
1≤i≤nX(i,n) (4)
S(n) = [1
nn/summationdisplay
i=1(xi−< x > n)2]1/2. (5)
Hurst found that
R(n)/S(n)∼(n
2)H. (6)
200.511.522.533.544.5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7ln(R/S)
ln(n)H=0.673099
Figure 1: An example of R/Sanalysis of DNA sequence
His called Hurst exponent .
Asnchanges from 2 to N, we obtain N−1 points in ln( n) v.s. ln( R(n)/S(n)) plane. Then we can
calculate Hurst exponent Hof DNA sequence susing the least-square linear fit. As an example, we plot
the graph of R/Sanalysis of an exon segment sof mouse’ DNA sequence (bp 1730– bp 2650 of the record
with Accession AF033620 in Genbank) in Figure 1.
The Hurst exponent is usually used as a measure of complexity . From Page 149 of Ref.[22], the trajectory
of the record is a curve with a fractal dimension D= 2−H. Hence a smaller Hmeans a more complex
system. When applied to fractional Brownian motion, if H >1/2, the system is said to be persistent , which
means that if for a given time period t, the motion is along one direction, then in the succeeding ttime, it’s
more likely that the motion will follow the same direction. W hile for system with H <1/2, the opposite
holds, that is, antipersistent . But when H= 1/2, the system is Brown motion, and is random.
We randomly choose 17 exons and 34 introns from Virus’ genome ; 8 exons and 9 introns from E. coli’s;
22 exons and 22 introns from yeast’s; 30 exons and 24 introns f rom drosophila’s; 37 exons and 31 introns
from mouse’s; 78 exons and 27 introns from Human’s( all data f rom Genbank). The Hurst exponent Hs are
calculated for each sequence and averaged according to both species category and function, their relative
standard deviations are also calculated. We list the result s in Table 1 (we briefly write “relative standard
deviation” as “RSD” in the following tables).
3 Transition Matrix analysis
Readers can see the concept of Transition Matrix of a data seq uence in the book of J.C.Davis[23]. Here
we use this method to study DNA sequences, mainly on the natur e of transitions from one kind of base to
3Table 1: Average and relative standard deviation of H
virus E. coli yeast drosophila mouse human
Average exon 0.6017 0.5991 0.6117 0.6135 0.5746 0.5967
intron 0.5536 0.6482 0.6268 0.6003 0.6017 0.6000
RSD exon 0.1510 0.0790 0.1442 0.1653 0.1446 0.1471
intron 0.2114 0.1265 0.1558 0.1629 0.1795 0.1526
another, which presents useful information of the sequence .
For a given DNA sequence s=s1s2···sN, we can construct a 4 ×4 matrix A= (tij), where tijmeans the
number of times a given kind of base being succeeded by anothe r in the sequence. Ais called the transition
frequency matrix ofs, which is a concise way of expressing the incidence of one kin d of base following another.
For example, for s=ATAGCGCATGTACGCGTAGATCATGCTAGCA , the transition frequency matrix
is shown below:
To
A T G C
FromA
T
G
C
0 4 3 1
4 0 2 1
1 2 0 5
3 1 2 0
.
The tendency for one kind of bases to succeed another can be em phasized by converting the frequency
matrix to decimal fractions or percentages. Therefore, we c an construct a matrix P= (Pij) by dividing
each element by the grand total of all entries in A. Such a matrix represents the relative frequency of all
the possible types of transitions, and is called the transition proportion matrix ofs. For the above example,
the transition proportion matrix is:
To
A T G C
FromA
T
G
C
0 0 .03 0.10 0.03
0.03 0 0 .07 0.03
0.03 0.07 0 0 .17
0.10 0.03 0.10 0
.
First, We calculate the maximum real eigenvalue λof the transition proportion matrix Pof the DNA
sequence. It is natural that such a parameter is relevant to t he system’s complexity.
Second, Since/summationtext4
i,j=1Pij= 1, 0 ≤Pij≤1, we can view Pijas the probability of one kind of base to
succeed another. If we denote # {Pij:Pij/ne}ationslash= 0}=Mbe the number of probabilities which is not zero, and
rewrite {Pij:Pij/ne}ationslash= 0}as{Pi}M
i=1. Then Shannon’s[24]definition of information entropy applies
H=−M/summationdisplay
i=1PilnPi. (7)
4Table 2: Average of the maximum real eigenvalue λ
virus E. coli yeast drosophila mouse human
exon 0.2564 0.2616 0.2663 0.2648 0.2596 0.2711
intron 0.2913 0.28835 0.2980 0.2839 0.2752 0.2720
Table 3: Average and relative standard deviation of informa tion entropy H
virus E. coli yeast drosophila mouse human
Average exon 2.6646 2.6636 2.6282 2.6620 2.6471 2.5954
intron 2.5566 2.5513 2.5241 2.5840 2.5834 2.5884
RSD exon 0.0352 0.0212 0.0248 0.0258 0.0215 0.0311
intron 0.0770 0.0268 0.0401 0.0398 0.0372 0.0339
When Pi= 1/M,i = 1,2,···,M, i.e. the case of equilibrium state, the function H(P1,···,PM) reaches
its maximum value. When Pi= 1 for some iandPj= 0 for j/ne}ationslash=i, we have H(P1,···,PM) = 0.
There is also a definition of disequilibrium D[25], used as a measure of ”complexity” in M-system.
D=M/summationdisplay
i=1(Pi−1
M)2. (8)
When Pi= 1/M,i = 1,2,···,M, i.e. the case of equilibrium state, the function D= 0. When Pi= 1
for some iandPj= 0 for j/ne}ationslash=i,Dgets its maximum value.
R. Lope-Ruiz et al[26]proposed another statistical measure of complexity C, which is defined as
C=H × D . (9)
NowC= 0 for both the equilibrium state and the case of Pi= 1 for some iandPj= 0 for j/ne}ationslash=i.
We also define two more measures of complexity as follows:
/tildewideD= [D/(1
MM/summationdisplay
i=1P2
i)]1/2(10)
/tildewideC=H ×/tildewideD. (11)
/tildewideDmeans the relative disequilibrium. They are inspired by DandC, but exhibit better behavior in the
computation.
For DNA sequences chosen in the previous section, The measur esλ,H,D,C,/tildewideDand/tildewideCof complexity are
calculated for each sequence and averaged according to both biological category of species and the function.
In addition, the relative standard deviations of H,D,C,/tildewideDand/tildewideCare also calculated. The results are listed
in Table 2-7.
5Table 4: Average and relative standard deviation of D
virus E. coli yeast drosophila mouse human
Average exon 0.0121 0.0123 0.0172 0.0137 0.0146 0.0211
intron 0.0317 0.0275 0.0331 0.0250 0.0242 0.0234
RSD exon 0.5986 0.4197 0.4086 0.5277 0.4082 0.4260
intron 0.7604 0.2823 0.4501 0.5147 0.5236 0.5005
Table 5: Average and relative standard deviation of C
virus E. coli yeast drosophila mouse human
Average exon 0.0313 0.0325 0.0448 0.0360 0.0382 0.0540
intron 0.0739 0.0697 0.0820 0.0631 0.0612 0.0595
RSD exon 0.5614 0.4038 0.3912 0.5078 0.3846 0.3862
intron 0.7203 0.2660 0.4102 0.4915 0.4883 0.4629
Table 6: Average and relative standard deviation of/tildewideD
virus E. coli yeast drosophila mouse human
Average exon 0.3767 0.3925 0.4492 0.4008 0.4226 0.4871
intron 0.4852 0.5434 0.5679 0.4999 0.4996 0.5000
RSD exon 0.2545 0.1919 0.1832 0.2434 0.1654 0.1579
intron 0.3416 0.1210 0.1469 0.2428 0.2105 0.1775
Table 7: Average and relative standard deviation of/tildewideC
virus E. coli yeast drosophila mouse human
Average exon 0.9949 1.0413 1.1754 1.0603 1.1149 1.2584
intron 1.2070 1.3821 1.4254 1.2794 1.2809 1.2865
RSD exon 0.2160 0.1721 0.1613 0.2190 0.1439 0.1286
intron 0.2722 0.1002 0.1105 0.2122 0.1774 0.1435
64 Conclusions
Virus is species which has not the shape of cell. E. coli belon gs to prokaryote and has the shape of cell.
Yeast, drosophila, mouse and human belong to eukaryote and a lso have the shape of cell. From the point
of view of evolution, virus has lower grade than E. coli; E. co li has lower grade than that of yeast which has
lower grade than that of drosophila; drosophila has lower gr ade than that of mouse which has lower grade
than that of human. We use Hexonto denote the Hurst exponent of exon, and similarly for other measures
of complexity and functional regions of DNA.
1.From Table 1, we can see that Hexon > Hintronholds for virus, but Hintron> Hexon for the
species which have the shape of cell except for drosophila. T he latter means that exons are more complex
than introns. This result coincides with the conclusion of R ef.[12, 14,18]. From Table 1 we also find that
the Hurst exponent of DNA sequence is generally larger than1
2. This means that when we use fractional
Brownian motion model to describe DNA sequences, we can say i t is a persistent system. In particular,
we can see Hexons are different from 1/2 explicitly. It indicates that coding regions of DNA is far from
random. This is different from the result of Ref.[4] and coinc ides with the results of Ref.[14]. But we can
not find any trend that coincides with the evolution in Table 1 .
When we consider the transition of bases in DNA sequence, the n
2. For Virus, E. coli, yeast, drosophila, mouse and human, fro m Table 3, we can conclude that measure
Hof transition proportion matrix of exon is larger than that o f intron, and measures λ,D,C,/tildewideDand/tildewideCof
transition proportion matrix of intron are larger than that of exon.
3.Regarding the evolution, we find that as the grade goes higher , measures D,C,/tildewideDand/tildewideCof exon
become larger, the measure Hof exon becomes lesser except for yeast. Hence for exon of spe cies of higher
grade, the transition statistics of the four kinds of bases g oes further from equilibrium.
From the above tables, one can find the information entropy Hhas the less relative standard deviation
than other measures of complexity.
4.From the previous discussions, we find that measure His a good measure of complexity which can
be used to clearly distinguish different functional regions of DNA sequences and to describe the evolution
of species.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to express their gratitude toward Pro f. Bai-lin Hao for introduction into this
field, useful discussions and encouragement. And to Prof. We i-Mou Zheng, Dr. Zuo-Bing Wu and Yang
Zhang for many helpful discussions. This project was partia lly supported by China postdoctoral Science
Fundation No. 98B632.
References
[1] W. Li and K. Kaneko, Europhys. Lett. 17(1992) 655.
[2] A. Grosberg, Y. Rabin, S. Havlin, and A. Neer, Europhys. Lett. 23(1993) 373.
[3] (a) R. Voss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68(1992) 3805; (b) Fractals 2(1994) 1.
[4] C.K. Peng, S. Buldyrev, A.L.Goldberg, S. Havlin, F. Scio rtino, M. Simons, and H.E. Stanley, Nature 356(1992)
168.
[5] H.E. Stanley, S.V. Buldyrev, A.L. Goldberg, Z.D. Goldbe rg, S. Havlin, R.N. Mantegna, S.M. Ossadnik, C.K.
Peng, and M. Simons, Physica A 205(1994) 214.
7[6] H.Herzel, W. Ebeling, and A.O. Schmitt, Phys. Rev. E 50(1994) 5061.
[7] P. Allegrini, M. Barbi, P. Grigolini, and B.J. West, Phys. Rev. E 52(1995) 5281.
[8] S.V. Buldyrev, N.V. Dokholyan, A.L. Goldberger, S. Havl in, C.-K. Peng, H.E. Stanley and G.M. Visvanathan,
Physica A 249(1998) 430-438.
[9] Liaofu Luo, Weijiang Lee, Lijun Jia, Fengmin Ji and Lu Tsa i,Phys. Rev. E 58(1) (1998) 861-871.
[10] D.B. Searls, CABIOS 13(1997) 333-344.
[11] R.N. Mantegna, S.V. Buldgrev, A.L. Goldberger, S. Havl in, C.-K. Peng, M. Simons and H.E. Stanley, Phys. Rev.
Lett.73(23) (1994) 3169-3172.
[12] Ruqun Shen, Rensheng Chen, Lunjiang Lin, Jian Sun, Yi Xi ao, and Jun Xu, Chinese Science Bulletin (in
Chinese) 38(1993) 1995-1997.
[13] L.F. Luo and L. Tsai, Chin. Phys. Lett. 5(1988) 421-424.
[14] Liaofu Luo and Lu Tsai, DNA walk and fractal analysis of n ucleotide sequence, to appear in Phys. Rev. E .
[15] C.L. Berthelsen, J.A. Glazier and M.H. Skolnick, Phys. Rev. A 45(1992) 8902.
[16] C.L. Berthelsen, J.A. Glazier and S. Raghavachari, Phys. Rev. E 49(1994) 1860.
[17] P. Bernaola-Galvan, R. Roman-Roldan and J. L. Oliver, Phys. Rev. E 53(1996) 5181.
[18] Zu-Guo Yu, Correlation dimension and Kolmogorov entro py of DNA sequence, submitted to Chinese Science
Bulletin .
[19] William Y. C. Chen and James D. Louck “Necklaces, MSS Seq uences, DNA Sequences” Adv. in Appl. Math.
18(1) (1997) 18-32.
[20] H.E. Hurst, Long-term storage capacity of reservoirs, Trans. Amer. Soc. Civ. Eng. 116(1951) 770-808.
[21] B.B. Mandelbrot, The Fractal Geometry of Nature , W. H. Freeman, New York, 1982.
[22] J. Feder, Fractals , Plenum Press, New York, London, 1988.
[23] J.C. Davis, Statistics and Data Analysis in Geology , John & sons, INC, New York, London, Sydney, Toronto,
1973.
[24] C.E. Shannon and W. Weaver, The Mathematical Theory of Communication , University of Illinois Press, Urbana,
IL, 1949.
[25] G. NiE. colis and I. Prigogine, Self-organisation in Nonequilibrium Systems , Wiley, New York, 1977.
[26] R. Lopez-Ruiz, H.L. Mancini, X. Calbet, Phys. Lett. A 209(1995) 321-326.
8 |
arXiv:physics/9910040v1 [physics.bio-ph] 27 Oct 1999Dimensions of fractals related to languages defined by tagge d
strings in complete genomes∗
Zu-Guo Yu1,2, Bai-lin Hao2, Hui-min Xie3,2and Guo-Yi Chen2
1Department of Mathematics, Xiangtan University, Hunan 411 105, P.R. China.
2Institute of Theoretical Physics, Academia Sinica ,
P.O. Box 2735, Beijing 100080, P.R. China.
3Department of Mathematics, Suzhou University, Jiangsu 215 006, P.R. China.
Abstract
A representation of frequency of strings of length Kin complete genomes of many organisms
in a square has led to seemingly self-similar patterns when Kincreases. These patterns are
caused by under-represented strings with a certain “tag”-s tring and they define some fractals in
theK→ ∞ limit. The Box and Hausdorff dimensions of the limit set are di scussed. Although
the method proposed by Mauldin and Williams to calculate Box and Hausdorff dimension is
valid in our case, a different and sampler method is proposed i n this paper.
Keywords: Fractal dimensions, Languages, comeplete genomes.
1 Introduction
In the past decade or so there has been a ground swell of intere st in unraveling the mysteries
of DNA. The heredity information of organisms (except for so -called RNA-viruses) is encoded in
their DNA sequence which is a one-dimensional unbranched po lymer made of four different kinds
of monomers (nucleotides): adenine ( a), cytosine ( c), guanine ( g), and thymine ( t). As long as the
encoded information is concerned we can ignore the fact that DNA exists as a double helix of two
“conjugated” strands and only treat it as a one-dimensional symbolic sequence made of the four
letters from the alphabet Σ ={a,c,g,t }. Since the first complete genome of a free-living bacterium
Mycoplasma genitalium was sequenced in 1995[3], an ever-growing number of complete genomes has
been deposited in public databases. The availability of com plete genomes opens the possibility to
ask some global questions on these sequences. One of the simp lest conceivable questions consists in
checking whether there are short strings of letters that are absent or under-represented in a complete
genome. The answer is in the affirmative and the fact may have so me biological meaning[5].
The reason why we are interested in absent or under-represen ted strings is twofold. First of all,
this is a question that can be asked only nowadays when comple te genomes are at our disposal.
∗This work was partially supported by Chinese Natural Scienc e Foundation and Chinese Postdoctoral Science
Foundation.
1Second, the question makes sense as one can derive a factorizable language from a complete genome
which would be entirely defined by the set of forbidden words.
We start by considering how to visualize the avoided and unde r-represented strings in a bacterial
genome whose length is usually the order of a million letters .
Bai-lin Hao[5]et al. proposed a simple visualization method based on counting a nd coase-
graining the frequency of appearance of strings of a given le ngth. When applying the method to
all known complete genomes, fractal-like patterns emerge. The fractal dimensions are basic and
important quantities to characterize the fractal. One will naturally ask the question: what are the
fractal dimensions of the fractals rerlated to languages de fined by tagged strings? In this paper we
will answer the question.
2 Graphical representation of counters
We call any string made of Kletters from the set {g,c,a,t }aK-string. For a given Kthere are
in total 4Kdifferent K-strings. In order to count the number of each kind of K-strings in a given
DNA sequence 4Kcounters are needed. These counters may be arranged as a 2K×2Ksquare, as
shown in Fig. 1 for K= 1 to 3.
K=1g c
a t
K=2aaaggagg
atacgtgc
tatgcacg
tttcctcc
K=3aag
aaaaac
aatagg
agaagc
agtgag
gaagac
gatggg
ggaggc
ggt
atg
ataatc
attacg
acaacc
actgtg
gtagtc
gttgcg
gcagcc
gct
taq
taatac
tattgg
tgatgc
tgtcag
caacac
catcgg
cgacgc
cgt
ttg
ttattc
ttttcg
tcatcc
tctctg
ctactc
cttccg
ccaccc
cct
Figure 1: The arrangement of string counters for K= 1 to 3 in squares of the same size.
In fact, for a given Kthe corresponding square may be represented as a direct prod uct of K
copies of identical matrices:
M(K)=M⊗M⊗ ··· ⊗ M,
where each Mis a 2 ×2 matrix:
M=/bracketleftBigg
g c
a t/bracketrightBigg
,
which represents the K= 1 square in Fig. 1. For convenience of programming, we use bi nary digits
0 and 1 as subscripts for the matrix elements, i.e., let M00=g,M01=c,M10=a, and M11=t.
The subscripts of a general element of the 2K×2Kdirect product matrix M(K),
M(K)
I,J=Mi1j1Mi2j2···MiKjK
2are given by I=i1i2···iKandJ=j1j2···jK. These may be easily calculated from an input DNA
sequence
s1s2s3···sKsK+1···,
where si∈ {g,c,a,t }. We call this 2K×2Ksquare a K-frame. Put in a frame of fixed Kand
described by a color code biased towards small counts, each b acterial genome shows a distinctive
pattern which indicates on absent or under-represented str ings of certain types[5]. For example,
many bacteria avoid strings containing the string ctag. Any string that contains ctagas a substring
will be called a ctag-tagged string. If we mark all ctag-tagged strings in frames of different K, we
get pictures as shown in Fig. 2. The large scale structure of t hese pictures persists but more details
appear with growing K. Excluding the area occupied by these tagged strings, one ge ts a fractal F
in the K→ ∞ limit. It is natural to ask what are the fractal dimensions of Ffor a given tag.
K=6 K=7
K=8 K=9
Figure 2: ctag-tagged strings in K= 6 to 9 frames.
In fact, this is the dimension of the complementary set of the tagged strings. The simplest case
is that of g-tagged strings. As the pattern has an apparently self-simi lar structure the dimension
3is easily calculated to be
dimH(F) = dim B(F) =log 3
log 2,
where dim H(F) and dim B(F) are the Hausdorff and Box dimensions[2]ofF.
In formal language theory, we starts with alphabet Σ = {a,c,g,t }. Let Σ∗denotes the collection
of all possible strings made of letters from Σ, including the empty string ǫ. We call any subset
L⊂Σ∗alanguage over the alphabet Σ. Any string over Σ is called a word. If we denote the given
tag as w0, for our case,
L={word which does not contain w0as factor }.
Fis called the fractal related to language L.
3 Box dimension of fractals
When we discuss the Box dimension, we can consider more gener al case, i.e. the case of more
than one tag. We denote the set of tags as B, and assume that there has not one element being
factor of any other element in B. We define
L1={word which does not contain any of element of Bas factor }
Now let aKbe the number of all strings of length Kthat belong to language L1. As the linear
sizeδKin the K-frame is 1 /2K, the Box dimension of Fmay be calculated as:
dimB(F) = lim
K→∞logaK
−logδK= lim
K→∞logaK1/K
log 2. (1)
Now we define the generating function of aKas
f(s) =∞/summationdisplay
K=0aKsK,
where sis a complex variable.
FirstL1is a dynamic language, form Theorem 2.5.2 of ref.[10], we hav e
lim
K→∞a1/K
K exists, we denote it as l. (2)
From (1), we have
dimB(F) =logl
log 2. (3)
For any word w=w1w2... w n,wi∈Σ for i= 1,... ,n , we denote
Head(w) = {w1, w1w2, w1w2w3, ... , w 1w2... w n−1},
Tail(w) = {wn, wn−1wn, wn−2wn−1wn, ... , w 2w3... w n}.
4For given two words uandv, we denote overlap (u,v) =Tail(u)∩Head(v). Ifx∈Head(v), then
we can write v=xx′. We denote x′=v/xand define
u:v=/summationdisplay
x∈overlap (u,v)s|v/x|,
where |v/x|is the length of word v/x. From Golden-Jackson Cluster method[8], we can know that
f(s) =1
1−4s−weight (C),
where weight (C) =/summationtext
v∈Bweight (C[v]) and weight (C[v]) (v∈B) are solutions of the linear equa-
tions:
weight (C[v]) =−s|v|−(v:v)weight (C[v])−/summationdisplay
u∈B
u/negationslash=v(u:v)weight (C[u]).
It is easy to see that f(s) is a rational function. Its maximal analytic disc at center 0 has radius
|s0|, where s0is the minimal module zero point of f−1(s). On the other hand, according to the
Cauchy criterion of convergence we have 1 /lis the radius of convergence of series expansion of f(s).
Hence |s0|= 1/l. From (3), we obtain the following result.
Theorem 3.1 The Box dimension of Fis
dimB(F) =−log|s0|
log 2,
where s0is the minimal module zero point of 1/f(s)andf(s)is the generating function of language
L1.
In particular, the case of a single tag — Bcontains only one word — is easily treated and some
of the results are shown in Table 1.
Tag f(s) D Tag f(s) D
g1
1−3slog3
log2ggg1+s+s2
1−3s−3s2−3s31.98235
gc1
1−4s+s21.89997 ctag1
1−4s+s4 1.99429
gg1+s
1−3s−3s21.92269 ggcg1+s3
1−4s+s3−3s4 1.99438
gct1
1−4s+s31.97652 gcgc1+s2
1−4s+s2−4s3+s41.99463
gcg1+s2
1−4s+s2−3s31.978 gggg1+s+s2+s3
1−3s−3s2−3s3−3s41.99572
Table 1: Generating function and dimension for some single t ags.
54 Hausdorff dimension of fractals
We obtained the Box dimension of Fin the previous section. Now one will naturally ask whether
the Hausdorff dimension of Fequals to the Box dimension of it. In this section we will disc uss the
Hausdorff dimension of F. Now we only discuss the case of Bcontains only one word w0. From
theK-frames ( K=|w0|,|w0|+ 1,...), we can find:
Proposition 4.1
log 3
log 2≤dimH(F)≤dimB(F)≤log(4|w0|−1)
log 2<2.
Now we denote α=−log|s0|
log 2andαK=loga1/K
K
log 2.
For any word w=w1w2... w K, we denote Fw1w2...wKthe corresponding close square in K-frame
and denote
FK=∩w=w1w2...wK∈LFw1w2...wK,
thenF= lim K→∞FK.
We first prove dim H(F) = dim B(F) under a condition using elementary method.
Lemma 4.1 : Suppose E⊂R2with|E|<1/2, let
B1={w=w1w2... w K∈L:|Fw1w2...wK|<|E| ≤ |Fw1w2...wK−1|
andE∩Fw1w2...wK/ne}ationslash=∅},
then#B1≤2π.
Proof. Note that for each w=w1w2... w K∈B1
|E|
|Fw1w2...wK|≤|Fw1w2...wK−1|
|Fw1w2...wK|=1
2,
then|E| ≤1
2|Fw1w2...wK|. The interiors of Fw1w2...wKwithw=w1w2... w K∈B1are non-
overlapping and all lie in a disc with radius 2 |E|, and all Fw1w2...wKare squares, hence
(2|E|)2π≥(1√
2|Fw1w2...wK|)2#B1≥1
2(2|E|)2#B1,
hence # B1≤2π.
✷
For any w=w1... w |w|,r∈Σ, we denote w∗r=w1... w |w|rand define νw=νw1νw2... ν w|w|,
where
νwj=/braceleftBigg
2α/4,if #{r∈Σ :w1w2... w j−1r∈L}= 4,
2α/3,if #{r∈Σ :w1w2... w j−1r∈L}= 3.
We assume
(C1)νw=νw1νw2... ν w|w|< M(a constant) for any w∈L.
Now we have:
6Theorem 4.1 Under condition (C1), we have
dimH(F) = dim B(F) =αand 0<Hα(F)<∞,
where Hα(F)is the Hausdorff measure of F.
Proof. We first prove that
Hα(F)<∞, (4)
Since αK→αasK→ ∞, for any small ε >0, there exists a integer N >0 such that for any
K > N , we have α > α K−ε. Hence
/summationdisplay
w=w1w2...wK∈L|Fw1w2...wK|α=aK(1
2)Kα< aK(1
2)K(αK−ε)
= (1
2)−Kε≤(1
2)−(N+1)ε<∞.
Hence Hα(F)<∞.
Now we want to prove Hα(F)>0. We denote
Σ∞={τ=τ1τ2...:|τ|=∞andτ1... τK∈LforK= 1,2,...}
For any τ=τ1τ2...∈Σ∞, we denote τ|K=τ1τ2... τK, and define a probability measure /tildewideµon
Σ∞by
/tildewideµ([w]) = (1
2)|w|ανw,where [ w] ={τ∈Σ∞:τ||w|=w}.
We can see
/summationdisplay
w∗r∈L,r∈Σ/tildewideµ([w∗r]) =/summationdisplay
w∗r∈L,r∈Σ(1
2)(|w|+1)ανw∗r
= (1
2)|w|ανw/summationdisplay
w∗r∈L,r∈Σ(1
2)ανr= (1
2)|w|ανw=/tildewideµ([w]).
There exists a natural continuous map ffrom Σ∞toF. Now we transfer /tildewideµto a probability
measure on F, letµ=/tildewideµ◦f−1. We will show that there is some constant M1>0 such that if E
is a Borel subset of R2with|E|<1/2, then µ(E)≤M1|E|α. Of course, this inequality implies
Hα(F)≥1/M1>0.
Set
B1={w=w1w2... w K∈L:|Fw1w2...wK|<|E| ≤ |Fw1w2...wK−1|
andE∩Fw1w2...wK/ne}ationslash=∅}.
Then
µ(E)≤/summationdisplay
w∈B1/tildewideµ([w])≤#B1|Fw1w2...wK|ανw
≤#B1|E|ανw≤2πM|E|α=M1|E|α.
✷
7Theorem 4.2 If the length of tag |w0| ≥3and for any w∈L,νwhas the form
νw= (2α
3)(2α
4)i1(2α
3)(2α
4)i2(2α
3)···
or
νw= (2α
4)i1(2α
3)(2α
4)i2(2α
3)(2α
4)i3···
where i1,i2andi3are positive integers, then dimH(F) = dim B(F) =αand0<Hα(F)<∞.
Proof. Since |w0| ≥3, we have α >log12
2log 2, hence
(2α
3)(2α
4)>1.
Form the other condition, we know that there exists M1= max {(2α
3),1}such that νw≤M1for
anyw∈L. Then from Theorem 4.1, we can obtain our result of this theor em.
✷
Examples :w0=ctgorw0=ctag, the result dim H(F) = dim B(F) holds.
If we do not have condition ( C1), in the following we still can obtain dim H(F) = dim B(F).
We define B2={u∈Σ∗| |u|=|w0|,u/ne}ationslash=w0}. One can know the set B2contains N1= 4|w0|−1
elements, hence we can write B2={u1,u2,... ,u N1}. Now we can define a N1×N1matrix Aby
A= [ti,j]i,j≤N1,
where ti,j= (1/2)βifui=r1xanduj=xr2with|x|=|w0| −1,r1,r2∈Σ, and ti,j= 0 otherwise,
and where βsatisfies Φ( β) = 1 with Φ( β) being the largest nonnegative eigenvalue of A. Then
from the results of ref.[7], we have
Theorem 4.3 IfB={w0}, then
dimH(F) = dim B(F) =βand 0<Hα(F)<∞.
From Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 4.1, we have
Corollary 4.1 IfB={w0}, then
β= dim H(F) = dim B(F) =α.
Remark : When Bcontains more than one word, we can also construct a matrix Asimilarly,
then from the results of ref.[7], we can obtain the same concl usions of Theorem 4.3 and Corollary
4.1 for this case. From Corollary 4.1, we have two methods to c alculate the Hausdorff and Box
dimensions of F, i.e. calculate αandβrespectively.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The first author would like to express his thanks to Prof. Zhi- Ying Wen for encouragement, and
to Dr. Hui Rao and De-Jun Feng for many usful discussions.
8References
[1] G. Deckert et al., The complete genome of the hyperthermophilic bacterium Aquifex aeolicus ,
Nature ,392(1998) 353-358.
[2] K. J. Falconer, Fractal geometry: Mathematics foundati ons and applications, John wiley &
sons Ltd , 1990.
[3] C. M. Fraser et al., The minimal gene complement of Mycoplasma genitalium, Science ,270
(1995) 397.
[4] I. Goulden, and D. M. Jackson, An inversion theorem for cl uster decomposition of sequences
with distinguished subsequences, J. London Math. Soc. 20(1979) 567-576.
[5] Bai-lin Hao, Hoong-Chien Lee, and Shu-yu Zhang, Fractal s related to long DNA sequences
and complete genomes, Chaos, Solitons and Fractals , to appear (1999).
[6] Bai-lin Hao, and Wei-mou Zheng, Applied Symbolic Dynamics and Chaos , World Scientific,
Singapore, 1998.
[7] R.D. Mauldin and S.C. Williams, Hausdorff dimension in gr aph directed constructions, Tran.
of Amer. Math. Soc. 309(1988) 811-829.
[8] J. Noonan, and D. Zeilberger, The Goulden-Jackson clust er method: extensions, applications
and implementations, downloadable from
http://www.math.temple.edu/ ˜zeilberg
[9] S. Wolfram, Computation theory of cellular automata, Commun. Math. Phys. 96(1984)
15-57.
[10] Hui-min Xie, Grammatical Complexity and One-Dimensional Dynamical Sys tems, World
Scientific, Singapore, 1996.
9 |
arXiv:physics/9910041v1 [physics.ed-ph] 27 Oct 1999Regional Centres for Space Science and Technology Ed-
ucation (Affiliated to the United Nations)
Hans J. Haubold
Programme on Space Applications
Office for Outer Space Affairs
United Nations
Vienna International Centre
P.O. Box 500
A-1400 Vienna, Austria
Email: haubold@kph.tuwien.ac.at
Abstract
Education is a prerequisite to master the challenges of spac e science and
technology. Efforts to understand and control space science and technology
are necessarily intertwined with social expressions in the cultures where sci-
ence and technology is carried out (Pyenson [1]). The United Nations is
leading an effort to establish regional Centres for Space Sci ence and Technol-
ogy Education in major regions on Earth. The status of the est ablishment
of such institutions in Asia and the Pacific, Africa, Latin Am erica and the
Caribbean, Western Asia, and Eastern Europe is briefly descr ibed in this
article.
1. United Nations Programme on Space Applications
The United Nations Programme on Space Applications was esta blished in
1971 on the recommendation of the first United Nations Confer ence on the
Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNISPACE I)[2 ] and the Pro-
gramme was expanded and its mandate broadened in UNISPACE II (1982)
[3] and the recently concluded UNISPACE III [4] Conferences . Fulfilling one
element of the Programme’s mandate, more than 150 workshops with ap-
proximately 8000 participants have been organized since it s establishment.
Following the need of developing countries and taking into a ccount the space-
related agenda of the Programme, the majority of workshops f ocussed on
core disciplines: remote sensing and geographic informati on system, satellite
communications and geo-positioning system, satellite met eorology and global
climate, and space and atmospheric sciences [5]. Despite th e success of these
workshops in the initiation of regional and international c ooperation and thedevelopment of space science and technology, particularly for the benefit of
developing countries, in the 1980’s the limitations of shor t-term activities
were recognized and called for the need of building long-ter m regional capac-
ity in space science and technology and its applications [6] . Subsequently,
in 1988, under the auspices of the Programme, a project to est ablish centres
for space science and technology education at the regional l evel was initiated
[7]. A unique element of this project was that the Centres wer e envisaged to
be established in developing countries for the benefit of reg ional cooperation,
particularly between the developing countries.
2. United Nations General Assembly Resolutions
The General Assembly of the United Nations, in its resolutio n 45/72 of 11
December 1990, endorsed the recommendation of the Working G roup of the
Whole of the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee, as appro ved by the
Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) [8], t hat: “...
the United Nations should lead, with the active support of it s specialized
agencies and other international organizations, an intern ational effort to es-
tablish regional centres for space science and technology e ducation in existing
national/regional educational institutions in the develo ping countries” [9].
Subsequently, the General Assembly, in its resolution 50/2 7 of 6 December
1995, also endorsed the recommendation of COPUOS that “thes e centres
be established on the basis of affiliation to the United Nation s as early as
possible and that such affiliation would provide the centres w ith the necessary
recognition and would strengthen the possibilities of attr acting donors and
of establishing academic relationships with national and i nternational space-
related institutions” [10].
3. Status of Establishing and Operating the Regional Centre s
At the occasion of the UNISPACE III Conference (19-30 July 19 99, Vienna,
Austria), the status of the operation and establishment of t he regional Cen-
tres was reviewed as part of the intergovernmental meetings and the technical
forum of this Conference [4].
Since its inauguration in India in 1995, the regional Centre for Space Science
and Technology Education in Asia and the Pacific has successf ully conducted
four post-graduate courses on remote sensing and geographi c information
system; two courses on satellite communications; and a cour se each on the
following topics: satellite meteorology and global climat e; and space science.Each of the courses was inaugurated through a research level workshop on
the respective topic supported through regular activities of the United Na-
tions Programme on Space Applications. Upon completion of t he nine-month
course in each activity, the scholars have carried out a one- year applica-
tions/research project in their home countries. In agreeme nt with resolution
45/72, this Centre takes advantage of the intellectual reso urces and facilities
of three renowned space-related institutions: (i) the Indi an Institute of Re-
mote Sensing, Dehradun, (ii) the Space Applications Centre , Ahmedabad,
and (iii) the Physical Research Laboratory, Ahmedabad [15] .
The regional Centre for Space Science and Technology - in Fre nch Language
- in Africa was inaugurated on 24 October 1998 in Casablanca, Morocco, and
is located at the Ecole Mohammadia d’Ingenieurs in Rabat.
The regional Centre for Space Science and Technology Educat ion - in English
Language - in Africa was inaugurated on 24 November 1998 in Ab uja, Nigeria,
and is located at Obafemi Awolowo University in Ile-Ife [16] .
The inauguration of the regional Centre for Space Science an d Technology
Education in Latin America and the Caribbean is expected to o ccur in 2000
in Brazil and Mexico. In preparation for the operation of the campus of the
Centre in Brazil, the Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espac iais (INPE) is
already very active in carrying out a number of workshops for the benefit of
States in the region.
An evaluation mission to Jordan and the Syrian Arab Republic was con-
ducted in 1998. The reports of the mission have been finalized in consulta-
tion with the Governments of Jordan and the Syrian Arab Repub lic, with a
view to selecting a host country for a regional Centre in West ern Asia, which
is expected to occur shortly after the UNISPACE III Conferen ce.
In 1995, the Network of Space Science and Technology Educati on and Re-
search Institutions for States of Central-Eastern and Sout h-Eastern Europe
was established [11]. A technical study mission to Bulgaria , Greece, Hun-
gary, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, and Turkey was carried out in 1998. The
mission undertook a technical study and provided an informa tive report that
will be used in determining, in each country visited, an agre ed framework
for the operation of such a Network. Each country designated space science
and technology related core and associated institutions, a ll of them with a
long and successful history in research and applications of space science and
technology, which are being part of this Network.4. Governing Boards and Advisory Committees of the Centres
Each Centre shall aspire to be a highly reputable regional in stitution, which,
as the needs arise, and as directed by the Centre’s Governing Board, may
grow into a network of specialized and internationally accl aimed affiliate
nodes. Because resolution 45/72 specifically limits the rol e of the United Na-
tions to “lead, ..., an international effort to establish reg ional centres”, it is
apparent that once a Centre is inaugurated, its Governing Bo ard will assume
all decision-making and policy-formulating responsibili ties for the Centre.
The Governing Board is the overall policy making body of each Centre and
consists of member States (within the region where the Centr e is located),
that have agreed, through their endorsement of the Centre’s agreement, to
the goals and objectives of the Centre. The agreement of the C entre calls
for the establishment of an Advisory Committee that provide s advise to the
Governing Board on all scientific and technical matters, par ticularly on the
Centre’s education curricula, and consists of experts in th e field of space
science and technology [12]. The United Nations serves the C entre and its
Governing Board and Advisory Committee in an advisory capac ity. Gov-
erning Boards were established for the Centres in Asia and th e Pacific and
Africa. To date the Advisory Committee has been set up for the Centre in
Asia and the Pacific.
5. Next Steps to Be Taken
During the deliberations of the UNISPACE III Conference, me etings were
held and presentations were delivered to chart the course fo r future measures
to continue furthering the regional Centres. In a meeting be tween represen-
tatives of the Centres in Asia and the Pacific, Africa, and Lat in America
and the Caribbean, the opinion was emphasized, that as a foll ow-up of the
Conference, closer and lively cooperation between the regi onal Centres needs
to be established already at this point of time. Particularl y, the rich ex-
perience gained in the successful operation of the Centre in Asia and the
Pacific as centre of excellence shall be made available to the Centres in all
other regions. It was further felt that all Centres, through the support of
the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs and its Progra mme on
Space Applications, should urgently establish cooperatio n with international
organizations and institutions (among them COSPAR, IAU, IC TP, ISPRS,
ISU, TWAS), specialized agencies of the United Nations syst em (among them
FAO, IAEA, UNESCO, UNU, WHO, WMO), and the Economic and Socia lCommissions of the respective region. The International As tronomical Union
(IAU) has undetaken first steps in this direction [13]. The st rong participa-
tion of developing countries in the technical forum activit ies of UNISPACE
III also brought to the attention of the Office for Outer Space A ffairs that
the Centre’s education curricula [12] may have to be supplem ented with non-
core discipline elements focussing on space biology/medic ine, devising small
satellite projects, microgravity, and other space-relate d topics.
6. UN/ESA Workshops on Basic Space Science
The establishment of the regional Centres is the sole projec t of the Pro-
gramme on Space Applications leading to “institutionaliza tion” in the field
of space science and technology. The operation of the Centre s can be sup-
ported by the Programme in organizing some of its regular act ivities in close
cooperation with the Centres. In this connection it shall be recalled that it
was India in 1991, hosting the first United Nations/European Space Agency
Workshop on Basic Space Science for the benefit of Asia and the Pacific at
ISRO in Bangalore, that inaugurated a series of worldwide wo rkshops. Since
then such workshops were organized in Latin America and the C aribbean
(Costa Rica and Colombia 1992, Honduras 1997), Africa (Nige ria 1993),
Western Asia (Egypt 1994, Jordan 1999), Europe (Germany 199 6, France
2000), and again in Asia and the Pacific (Sri Lanka 1995) [14]. This series of
workshops led to the establishment of several education and research oriented
astronomical telescope facilities with a view to link them t o the respective
regional Centres in the future. Already such a series of work shops, organized
in the field of space science and technology, can lead to an app reciable ex-
pansion of cooperation between countries of a region and its regional Centre.
7. Contact Adresses for More Details on the Regional Centres and
Their Education Programmes
Asia and the Pacific Region
Prof. B. Deekshatulu
Centre for Space Science and Technology Education in Asia an d the Pacific
Indian Institute of Remote Sensing Campus
4 Kalidas Road
Dehra Dun - 248 001
India
Tel.: (+91)-135-740-737
Fax : (+91)-135-740-785Email: deekshatulu@hotmail.com
Africa Region
Prof. E.E. Balogun
Centre for Space Science and Technology Education - in Engli sh Language -
in Africa Department of Physics
Obafemi Awolowo University
Ile-Ife
Nigeria
Tel.: (234)-36-230-454
Fax : (234)-36-233-973
Email: ebalogun@oauife.edu.ng
Africa Region
Prof. A. Touzani
Centre Regional Africain des Sciences et Technologie de l’E space Langue
Francaise Sis a l’Ecole Mohammadia d’Ingenieurs
Avenue Ibn Sina
B.P. 765, Agdal
Rabat
Maroc
Tel.: (212)-7-681824
Fax : (212)-7-681826
Email: craste@emi.ac.ma
Latin America and the Caribbean Region
Dr. T.M. Sausen
Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas Espaciais
Divisao de Sensoriamento Remoto
Av. dos Astronautas, 1758
Cx.P. 515
CEP 12201-970 Sao Jose dos Campos, SP
Brazil
Tel.: (+55)-12-325-6862
Fax : (+55)-12-325-6870
Email: tania@ltid.inpe.br
Western Asia Region
To be made available shortlyAcknowledgements
The cooperation with Dr. W. Steinborn (German Space Agency, DLR) dur-
ing the evaluation mission through Africa, Drs. G. Arrigo an d B. Negri (Ital-
ian Space Agency, ASI) during the technical study mission th rough Central-
Eastern and South-Eastern Europe, and Prof. F.R. Querci (Fr ench Space
Agency, CNES) during the evaluation mission through the Mid dle East, is
greatly acknowledged.
References
Note: The author is writing in his personal capacity and the v iews expressed
in this paper are those of the author and not necessarily of th e United Na-
tions.
[1] L. Pyenson and S. Sheets-Pyenson, Servants of Nature: A H istory of Sci-
entific Institutions, Enterprises, and Sensibilities, W.W . Norton & Company,
New York, 1999, pp. XV+496.
[2] United Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peacef ul Uses of Outer
Space, Vienna, 14-27 August 1968, United Nations, New York, 1968, Docu-
ment E.68.I.11, pp. 59.
[3] United Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peacef ul Uses of Outer
Space, Vienna, Austria, 9-21 August 1982, United Nations, N ew York, 1982,
Document A/CONF.101/10, pp. 167; R. Chipman (Ed.), The Worl d in
Space: A Survey of Space Activities and Issues Prepared for U NISPACE 82,
Prentice-Hall, 1982, pp. 689.
[4] United Nations Conference on the Exploration and Peacef ul Uses of Outer
Space, Vienna, Austria, 19-30 July 1999, United Nations, Vi enna, 1999, Doc-
ument A/CONF.184/6; http://www.un.or.at/OOSA/.
[5] Space for Development: The United Nations Programme on S pace Ap-
plications, United Nations, Vienna, 1999, Document V.98-5 7085, pp. 23;
http://www.un.or.at/OOSA/.
[6] Report on the UN Workshop on Space Science and Technology and its
Applications within the Framework of Educational Systems, 4-8 November
1985, Ahmedabad, India, Document A/AC.105/365, (27 Decemb er 1985) pp.
24; Report of the UN Meeting of Experts on Space Science and Te chnology
and its Applications within the Framework of Educational Sy stems, 13-17
October 1986, Mexico, D.F., Document A/AC.105/378, (23 Dec ember 1986)pp. 25; Report on the UN Meeting of Experts on Space Science an d Technol-
ogy and its Applications within the Framework of Educationa l Systems, 27
April - 1 May 1987, Lagos, Nigeria, Document A/AC.105/390, ( 18 Novem-
ber 1987) pp. 23; Report on the UN International Meeting of Ex perts on
the Development of Remote-Sensing Skills and Knowledge, 26 -30 June 1989,
Dundee, United Kingdom, (3 January 1990) pp. 21.
[7] Centre for Space Science and Technology Education, Unit ed Nations, New
York, 1990, Documents SAP/90/001 to 003, pp. 24; Centres for Space science
and Technology Education: A Progress Report, Document A/AC .105/498,
(12 March 1990) pp. 28; Centres for Space Science and Technol ogy Edu-
cation: Updated Project Document, Document A/AC.105/534, (7 January
1993) pp. 56; Regional Centres for Space Science and Technol ogy Education
(Affiliated to the United Nations), Document A/AC.105/703, ( 16 June 1998)
pp. 12.
[8] M. Benkoe and K.-U. Schrogl, International Space Law in t he Making:
Current Issues in the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Out er Space,
Editions Frontiers, Gif-sur-Yvette, 1993, pp. XXIII+275.
[9] Report of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Spac e, Gen-
eral Assembly, Official Records: Forty-Fifth Session, Suppl ement No. 20
(A/45/20), United Nations, New York, 1990; Report of the Sci entific and
Technical Sub-Committee on the Work of its Twenty-Seventh S ession, Doc-
ument A/AC.105/456, (12 March 1990) pp. 37.
[10] Report of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Spa ce, General
Assembly, Official Records: Fiftieth Session, Supplement No . 20 (A/50/20),
United Nations, New York, 1995.
[11] M.-I. Piso, in Proceedings of the UNISPACE III Regional Preparatory
Conference for Eastern Europe, Bucharest, Romania, 25-29 J anuary 1999,
published by the Romanian Space Agency under the auspices of the United
Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs, Bucharest, Romania, 19 99, pp. 185-
198.
[12] Centres for Space Science and Technology Education: Ed ucation Curric-
ula, United Nations, Vienna, 1996, Document A/Ac.105/649, 23 pp.; Report
on the UN/ESA/COSPAR Workshop on Data Analysis Techniques, 10-14
November 1997, Sao Jose dos Campos, Brazil, (19 December 199 7) pp. 10.
[13] Conclusions and Proposals of the IAU/COSPAR/UN Specia l Workshopon Education in Astronomy and Basic Space Science, 20-23 Jul y 1999, UNIS-
PACE III Conference, Document A/CONF.184/C.1/L.8, (23 Jul y 1999) pp.
2; see also [4].
[14] H.J. Haubold and W. Wamsteker, Space Technology 18(199 8)No. 4-6,
pp. 149-156; H.J. Haubold, Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage
1(1998) No. 2, pp. 105-121; http://www.seas.columbia.edu /∼ah297/un-
esa/.
[15] Centre for Space Science and Technology Education (Affil iated to the
United Nations) in Asia and the Pacific, Brochure issued by th e Centre,
Dehra Dun, India, 1995, pp. 6.
[16] Centre for Space Science and Technology Education (Affil iated to the
United Nations) in Africa, Brochure issued by the Centre, Il e-Ife, Nigeria,
1998, pp. 14. |
arXiv:physics/9910042v1 [physics.space-ph] 27 Oct 1999UN/ESA Workshops on Basic Space Science: An Up-
date on Their Achievements
Hans J. Haubold
Programme on Space Applications
Office for Outer Space Affairs
United Nations
Vienna International Centre
P.O. Box 500
A-1400 Vienna, Austria
Email: haubold@kph.tuwien.ac.at
Abstract
During the second half of the twentieth century, expensive o bservatories are
being erected at La Silla (Chile), Mauna Kea (Hawai), Las Pal mas (Canary
Island), and Calar Alto (Spain), to name a view. In 1990, at th e beginning of
The Decade of Discovery in Astronomy and Astrophysics (Bahc all [2]), the
UN/ESA Workshops on Basic Space Science initiated the estab lishment of
small astronomical telescope facilities, among them many p articularly sup-
ported by Japan, in developing countries in Asia and the Paci fic (Sri Lanka,
Philippines), Latin America and the Caribbean (Colombia, C osta Rica, Hon-
duras, Paraguay), and Western Asia (Egypt, Jordan, Morocco ). The annual
UN/ESA Workshops continue to pursue an agenda to network the se small ob-
servatory facilities through similar research and educati on programmes and
at the same time encourage the incorporation of cultural ele ments predomi-
nant in the respective cultures. Cross-cultural integrati on and multi-lingual
scientific cooperation may well be a dominant theme in the new millennium
(Pyenson [20]). This trend is supported by the notion that as tronomy has
deep roots in virtually every human culture, that it helps to understand hu-
manity’s place in the vast scale of the Universe, and that it i ncreases the
knowledge of humanity about its origins and evolution. Two o f these Work-
shops have been organized in Europe (Germany 1996 and France 2000) to
strengthen cooperation between developing and industrial ized countries.
1. Introduction
Answering questions about the Universe challenges astrono mers, fascinates
a broad national audience and inspires young people to pursu e careers inengineering, mathematics, and science. Basic space scienc e research assists
nations, directly and indirectly, in achieving societal go als. For example,
studies of the Sun, the planets, and the stars have led to expe rimental tech-
niques for the investigation of the Earth’s environment and to a broader
perspective from which to consider terrestrial environmen tal concerns such
as ozone depletion and the greenhouse effect [1].
Basic space science makes humanistic, educational and tech nical contribu-
tions to society. The most fundamental contribution of basi c space science is
that it provides modern answers to questions about humanity ’s place in the
Universe. Quantitative answers can now be found to question s about which
ancient philosophers could only speculate. In addition to s atisfying curiosity
about the Universe, basic space science nourishes a scienti fic outlook in soci-
ety at large. Society invests in basic space science researc h and receives an im-
portant dividend in the form of education, both formally thr ough instruction
in schools, colleges and universities, and more informally through television
programmes, popular books and magazines, and planetarium p resentations.
Basic space science introduces young people to quantitativ e reasoning and
also contributes to areas of more immediate practicality, i ncluding industry,
medicine and the understanding of the Earth’s environment [ 2].
The international basic space science community has long sh own leadership
in initiating international collaboration and cooperatio n. Forums have been
established on a regular basis in which the basic space scien ce community
has publicized its scientific achievements and the internat ional character of
astronomical and space science studies. The most recent suc h initiatives
were the International Space Year (1992), with its elements Mission to Planet
Earth and Mission to the Universe, and the Third United Natio ns Conference
on the Exploration and Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (UNISPAC E III), held
from 19-30 July 1999 at the United Nations Office Vienna, Austr ia [21].
Despite the considerable progress made in the development o f astronomy and
basic space science, the observation has been made that of th e 188 countries
that are Member States of the United Nations, nearly 100 have professional
or amateur astronomical organizations. Only about 60 of the se countries,
however, are sufficiently involved in astronomy to belong to t he Interna-
tional Astronomical Union. Only about 20 countries, repres enting 15% of
the world’s population, have access to the full range of astr onomical facili-
ties and information. This does not include most of the Easte rn European,Baltic, and former countries of the Soviet Union, whose frag ile economies
keep them from achieving their full potential, despite the e xcellence of their
astronomical heritage and education [3].
2. First Cycle of Workshops: Regional Observations and Reco m-
mendations
In 1991, the United Nations, through its Programme on Space A pplications
of the UN Office for Outer Space Affairs, in cooperation with the European
Space Agency, held its first Workshop on Basic Space Science i n India for Asia
and the Pacific region [4]. Since then, such workshops have be en held annu-
ally in the different regions around the world to make a unique contribution
to the worldwide development of astronomy and space science , particularly in
developing countries. Workshops were held in 1992 in Costa R ica and Colom-
bia for Latin America and the Caribbean, in 1993 in Nigeria fo r Africa, and
in 1994 in Egypt for Western Asia. Additionally to the direct benefits of a
common research workshop, a vital part of each of the worksho ps were daily
working group sessions, which provided participants a foru m in which obser-
vations and recommendations for developing basic space sci ence in all its as-
pects, through regional and international cooperation, ha ve been made. The
deliberations of these sessions and the observations and re commendations
that emanated from them, region by region, are published as U N General
Assembly documents that can be used to lobby governments and funding
agencies to implement prospective follow-up projects of th e workshops [5].
3. Second Cycle of Workshops: Implementing Follow-up Proje cts
Among the most important results emanating from the worksho p series,
starting with the first workshop in India in 1991, is that for e ach of the
regions a number of follow-up projects were identified, main ly the establish-
ment and operation of small astronomical telescope facilit ies, which have
been gradually implemented over the course of the workshops . Examples of
them are briefly listed below.
The Galactic Emission Mapping (GEM) project of researchers from Brazil,
Colombia, Italy, Spain, and the United States, devised to ob tain a full sky,
multi-frequency, and high sensitivity survey of the galact ic radio emission,
lead to the operation of the GEM radio telescope at an equator ial site in
Colombia in 1995. Subsequently, in order to cover the northe rn and southern
latitudes not visible from this equatorial site, the radio t elescope was movedto Spain (IAC at Tenerife) and to Brazil (INPE at Sao Jose dos C ampos) to
continue radio frequency observations. Since 1995, the res ults obtained with
GEM are
(i) a galactic radio emission database in the frequencies 40 8, 2300, and 5000
MHz;
(ii) an estimate of the sky temperature and spectral indices within that fre-
quency range; and
(iii) an estimate of the galactic emission profile and quadru pole component
[6].
In 1995, the workshop was held in Sri Lanka to inaugurate an as tronomical
telescope facility, based on a donation of an astronomical t elescope (45-cm
GOTO) from Japan to Sri Lanka, at the Arthur C. Clarke Institu te for Mod-
ern Technologies. The telescope is equipped with a photoele ctric photometer,
spectrograph, and an ordinary camera for imaging (recently , a CCD camera
was installed), and necessary computer equipment. Young as tronomers are
being trained and educated for the operation of the telescop e facility through
comprehensive programmes at Bisei Observatory, Japan. Sin ce 1995, the
ACCIMT serves as the national centre for research, educatio n, and popular-
ization of astronomy in Sri Lanka [7].
In 1997, the workshop inaugurated the Central American Astr onomical Ob-
servatory (utilizing a 40-cm Maede telescope) at the Nation al Autonomous
University of Honduras, Tegucigalpa, Honduras, with the de dication of the
Telescopio Rene Sagastume Castillo at the Suyapa Observato ry for Cen-
tral American countries (Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemal a, Honduras,
Nicaragua, Panama) [8].
Following the recommendation of the workshop in Egypt in 199 4, the long
awaited refurbishment and modernization of the 74” Kottami a telescope at
Helwan, Egypt, will be finalized in 1999. This telescope, equ ipped with
Cassegrain and Coude spectrographs, saw first light in 1964 a nd is still the
largest telescope in the region of Western Asia and will be ma de available
for regional and international cooperation in the near futu re. The agree-
ment between the National Research Institute of Astronomy a nd Geophysics
(NRIAG) and the Government of Egypt lead to the replacement o f the pri-
mary and secondary mirrors of the telescope by new mirrors of Zerodur glass
ceramics. To improve the optical performance of the telesco pe system, a
more efficient supporting system was also developed for the pr imary mirror[9].
The most recent UN/ESA Workshop on Basic Space Science: Scie ntific Ex-
ploration from Space, was hosted by the Institute of Astrono my and Space
Sciences at Al al-Bayt University from 13 to 17 March 1999 in M afraq, Jor-
dan. The major result of the working group sessions was the ur gent recom-
mendation to make the small astronomical telescope facilit y (40-cm Maede
telescope) on campus of Al al-Bayt University operational a nd to encourage
the project of the construction of the 32-m Baquaa radio tele scope at the
University of Jordan, Amman [10].
4. Third Cycle of Workshops: Networking Telescopes and Beyo nd
Based on the request from the United Nations, the Foreign Offic e of the
Government of Germany, through the German Space Agency (DLR ), made
it possible to hold a UN/ESA Workshop on Basic Space Science a t the Max-
Planck-Institute for Radioastronomy (MPIfR), Bonn, Germa ny, in 1996, for
the benefit of Europe. This workshop analyzed the results of a ll previous
Workshops on Basic Space Science, particularly the follow- up projects that
emanated from the second workshop cycle and charted the cour se to be fol-
lowed in the future [6-10]. Additional to this objective, th e workshop ad-
dressed scientific topics at the forefront of research in suc h diverse fields as
photon, neutrino, gravitational waves, and cosmic rays ast ronomy, respec-
tively. Taking into account that the past workshops did not l ead yet to
the establishment of an astronomical facility in African co untries under con-
sideration for such an effort, this workshop prepared the pub lication, on a
regular basis, of an urgently needed bilingual newsletter ( African Skies/Cieux
Africains) for the space science community in Africa, a coll aborative effort
of astronomers from France and South Africa [11].
The forthcoming Ninth UN/ESA Workshop on Basic Space Scienc e: Satel-
lites and Networks of Telescopes as Tools for Global Partici pation in the
Studies of the Universe, will be held at Toulouse, France, in June 2000. The
organizers of the series of workshops have agreed, based on o bservations and
recommendations of the past workshops, that the agenda of th is workshop
will focus on the following topics:
(i) Feasibility of the establishment of a World Space Observ atory (WSO)
[12].
(ii) Network of Oriental Robotic Telescopes (NORT) [13].(iii) Networking of small astronomical telescopes to be pre ferentially utilized
for observation of variable stars. The establishment of sma ll astronomical
telescope facilities with the sponsorship of Japan in Parag uay and the Philip-
pines. Cooperation between small astronomical telescope f acilities in terms
of education and research programmes [14, 19] .
(iv) Research with astronomical data bases [15] and the util ization of astro-
physics data systems [16].
5. Results That Supplemented the Workshop Series
1992 had been designated as International Space Year (ISY) b y a wide va-
riety of national and international space organizations, i ncluding the United
Nations. To help generate interest and support for planetar iums as centres of
culture and education, the United Nations in cooperation wi th the Interna-
tional Planetarium Society, as part of its International Sp ace Year activities,
published a guidebook on the Planetarium: A Challenge for Ed ucators [17].
Subsequently, this booklet was translated by national plan etarium associa-
tions from English into Japanese, Slovakian, and Spanish, a nd is still available
from the United Nations.
In 1993, the European Space Agency, through the United Natio ns, donated
30 personal computer systems for use at universities and res earch institutions
in Cuba, Ghana, Honduras, Nigeria, Peru, and Sri Lanka.
In 1995, scientists from around the world gathered at the Uni ted Nations
Headquarters in New York to discuss a broad range of scientifi c issues associ-
ated with near-Earth objects (NEOs). This gathering became known as the
first United Nations International Conference on Near-Eart h Objects [18].
Subsequently, the European Space Agency sponsored a study o f a global
network for research on near-Earth objects with the purpose to design and
implement a worldwide information and data exchange centre called Space-
guard Central Node (SCN) in order to support follow-up activ ities after the
detection of NEOs [19].
Acknowledgement
The author is deeply indebted to Dr. W. Wamsteker (European S pace
Agency) for his continual support and commitment in organiz ing the Work-
shops. The author would like to thank Prof. M. Kitamura (Nati onal As-
tronomical Observatory Tokyo), Dr. K.-U. Schrogl (German S pace Agency
Cologne), Dr. J. Andersen (International Astronomical Uni on Paris), andProf. A.M. Mathai (McGill University Montreal) for their su pport of the
Workshops.
References
Note: The author is writing in his personal capacity and the v iews expressed
in this paper are those of the author and not necessarily thos e of the United
Nations.
[1] For a comprehensive review of social and economic dimens ions of science
as a collaborative effort see C.H. Lai (editor), Ideals and Re alities: Selected
Essays of Abdus Salam, 2nd edition (Singapore: World Scient ific, 1987) and,
focusing on the historic dimension of such endeavors, see [1 9].
[2] See J.N. Bahcall, The Decade of Discovery in Astronomy an d Astrophysics
(Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1991). For the i nterplay on
how technology of astronomical instruments, astrophysics , and mathematics
produce the remarkable picture of the Universe, in the cours e of history
of humankind, see R. Osserman, Poetry of the Universe: A Math ematical
Exploration of the Cosmos (New York: Doubleday, 1995).
[3] See J.R. Percy and A.H. Batten, ”Chasing the dream”, Merc ury, 1995,
24(2):15-18. For an elaboration on the United Nations contr ibutions see H.J.
Haubold and W. Wamsteker, ”Worldwide Development of Astron omy: The
Story of a Decade of UN/ESA Workshops on Basic Space Science” , Space
Technology, 1998, 18(4-6):149-156, and H.J. Haubold, ”UN/ ESA Workshops
on Basic Space Science: an initiative in the world-wide deve lopment of as-
tronomy”, Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage, 19 98, 1(2):105-121.
[4] Subsequently, these workshops were co-organized by the Austrian Space
Agency (ASA), French Space Agency (CNES), German Space Agen cy (DLR),
European Space Agency (ESA), International Astronomical U nion (IAU), In-
ternational Centre for Theoretical Physics Trieste (ICTP) , Institute of Space
and Astronautical Science of Japan (ISAS), National Aerona utics and Space
Administration of the United States (NASA), The Planetary S ociety (TPS),
and the United Nations (UN).
[5] A month-to-month update on results and new developments related to the
UN/ESA Workshops on Basic Space Science is made available at the Work-
shop’s World-Wide-Web site at http://www.seas.columbia. edu/∼ah297/un-
esa/. The Proceedings of the workshops were published in: (I ) ConferenceProceedings of the American Institute of Physics Vol. 245, A merican Insti-
tute of Physics, New York, 1992, pp. 350; (II) Earth, Moon, an d Planets
63, No. 2 (1993)93-170; (III) Astrophysics and Space Scienc e 214, Nos. 1-
2 (1994)1-260; (IV) Conference Proceedings of the American Institute of
Physics Vol. 320, American Institute of Physics, New York, 1 994, 320pp.;
(V) Earth, Moon, and Planets 70, Nos. 1-3 (1995)1-233; (VI) A strophysics
and Space Science 228, Nos. 1-2 (1995)1-405; and (VII) Astro physics and
Space Science 258, Nos. 1-2 (1998)1-394.
[6] For a detailed report on the development of the GEM projec t, its scientific
results, impacts on university education and research in Co lombia, and refer-
ences to the literature see S. Torres, “The UN/ESA Workshop o n Basic Space
Science in Colombia, 1992: What has been achieved since then ?”, COSPAR
Information Bulletin, 1999, No. 144, pp. 13-15. The World-W ide-Web site
of GEM can be accessed at http://aether.lbl.gov/www/proje cts/GEM.
[7] S. Gunasekara and P. de Alwis, ”The astronomy promotiona l programme
at ACCIMT”, in Conference on Space Sciences and Technology A pplication
for National Development: Proceedings, held at Colombo, Sr i Lanka, 21-22
January 1999, Ministry of Science and Technology of Sri Lank a, pp. 143-146.
The World-Wide-Web site of ACCIMT at http://www.slt.lk/ac cimt/page5.html
is gradually incorporating results obtained with the teles cope facility. See
also the papers of Kitamura and Kogure, respectively, in [14 ].
[8] The Observatory and its educational and scientific activ ities is part of
the World-Wide-Web site at http://www.unah.hondunet.net /unah.html. A
recent photograph of the Observatory building is available at
http://www.laprensahn.com/natarc/9812/n23001.htm.
[9] S.M. Hasan, “Upgrading the 1.9-m Kottamia telescope”, A frican Skies,
1998, No. 2, pp. 16-17.
[10] For all workshops, United Nations Reports on the organi zation of the
respective Workshop have been published as UN General Assem bly docu-
ments, see Report on the Eighth United Nations/European Spa ce Agency
Workshop on Basic Space Science: Scientific Exploration fro m Space, hosted
by the Institute of Astronomy and Space Sciences at Al al-Bay t Univer-
sity on behalf of the Government of Jordan, A/AC.105/723, 18 May 1999,
8pp. A special World-Wide-Web site was developed for this wo rkshop at
http://www.planetary.org/news/Events/unispace.html.
[11] The World-Wide-Web site of the Working Group for Space S ciencein Africa is http://da.saao.ac.za:80/ ∼wgssa/. In this connection, see, for
a detailed review of the workshop in Nigeria, held in 1994, L. I. Onuora,
“The UN/ESA Workshop on Basic Space Science in Nigeria: Look ing back”,
COSPAR Information Bulletin, 1999, No. 144, pp. 15-16.
[12] W. Wamsteker and R. Gonzales Riestra (editors), Ultrav iolet astro-
physics beyond the IUE final archive: Proceedings of the conf erence, held
at Sevilla, Spain, 11-14 November 1997, European Space Agen cy SP-413,
pp. 849-855. H. Gavaghan, “U.N. plans its future in space”, S cience, 1999,
285, p. 819. See also Report on the Eighth United Nations/Eur opean Space
Agency Workshop on Basic Space Science: Scientific Explorat ion from Space,
hosted by the Institute of Astronomy and Space Sciences at Al al-Bayt Uni-
versity on behalf of the Government of Jordan, A/AC.105/723 , 18 May 1999,
8pp.
[13] F.R. Querci and M. Querci, “The network of oriental robo tic telescopes”,
African Skies, 1998, No. 2, pp. 18-21.
[14] H. Gavaghan, “U.N. plans its future in space”, Science, 1999, 285, p. 819.
M. Kitamura, “Provision of astronomical instruments to dev eloping countries
by Japanese ODA with emphasis on research observations by th e donated
45-cm reflectors in Asia”, in Conference on Space Sciences an d Technol-
ogy Application for National Development: Proceedings, he ld at Colombo,
Sri Lanka, 21-22 January 1999, Ministry of Science and Techn ology of Sri
Lanka, pp. 147-152. T. Kogure, ”Stellar activity and needs f or multi-site
observations”, in Conference on Space Sciences and Technol ogy Application
for National Development: Proceedings, held at Colombo, Sr i Lanka, 21-22
January 1999, Ministry of Science and Technology of Sri Lank a, pp. 124-131.
[15] E.g., IUE Newly Extracted Spectra (INES), World-Wide- Web site at
http://ines.vilspa.esa.es, which is a complete astronomi cal archive and data
distribution system, representing the final activity of ESA in the context of
the International Ultraviolet Explorer project.
[16] E.g., the NASA Astrophysics Data System (ADS), World-W ide-Web site
at http://adswww.harvard.edu, whose main resource is an ab stract service
which includes four sets of abstracts: (i) astronomy and ast rophysics, (ii)
instrumentation, (iii) physics and geophysics, and (iv) Lo s Alamos preprint
server.
[17] See World-Wide-Web site at http://www.seas.columbia .edu/∼ah297/un-
esa/planetarium.html.[18] See World-Wide-Web site at http://www.seas.columbia .edu/∼ah297/un-
esa/neo.html.
[19] See World-Wide-Web site at http://spaceguard.ias.rm .cnr.it
[20] L. Pyenson and S. Sheets-Pyenson, Servants of Nature: A History of Sci-
entific Institutions, Enterprises, and Sensibilities, W.W . Norton & Company,
New York, 1999, pp. XV+496.
[21] The report on this UNISPACE III Conference is available electronically
at http://www.un.or.at/OOSA; as part of the Technical Foru m of UNIS-
PACE III, comprising 38 scientific activities, an IAU/COSPA R/UN Special
Workshop on Education in Astronomy and Basic Space Science w as held
leading to conclusions and proposals contained in UN Docume nt
A/CONF.184/C.1/L.8. |
arXiv:physics/9910043v1 [physics.atom-ph] 27 Oct 1999Atomic dynamics in evaporative cooling of
trapped alkali atoms in strong magnetic fields
O. H. Pakarinen and K.-A. Suominen
Helsinki Institute of Physics, PL 9, FIN-00014 Helsingin yl iopisto, Finland
(December 3, 2013)
We investigate how the nonlinearity of the Zeeman shift for
strong magnetic fields affects the dynamics of rf field induced
evaporative cooling in magnetic traps. We demonstrate for
the87Rb and23NaF= 2 trapping states with wave packet
simulations how the cooling stops when the rf field frequency
goes below a certain limit (for the85RbF= 2 trapping state
the problem does not appear). We examine the applicability
of semiclassical models for the strong field case as an extens ion
of our previous work [Phys. Rev. A 58, 3983 (1998)]. Our
results verify many of the aspects observed in a recent87Rb
experiment [Phys. Rev. A 60, R1759 (1999)].
32.60.+i, 32.80.Pj, 03.65.-w
I. INTRODUCTION
Bose-Einstein condensation of alkali atoms in magnetic
traps was first observed in 1995 [1], and since then the de-
velopment in related research has been been very swift.
Typically the hyperfine state used in the alkali exper-
iments is the F= 1 state, although condensation has
been demonstrated for the87RbF= 2 case as well [2].
The trapping of atoms is based on moderate, spatially in-
homogeneous magnetic fields, which create a parabolic,
spin-state dependent potential for spin-polarised atoms,
as shown in Fig. 1(a). For slowly moving atoms the trap-
ping potential depends on the strength of the magnetic
fieldBbut not on its direction [3]. In practice the field
is dominated by a constant bias field /vectorBbias, which elimi-
nates the Majorana spin flips at the center of the trap.
In evaporative cooling the hottest atoms are removed
from the trap and the remaining ones thermalise by in-
elastic collisions. This leads to a decrease in temperature
of the atoms remaining in the trap [4–6]. Continuous
evaporative cooling requires adjustable separation into
cold and hot atoms. This is achieved by inducing spin
flips with an oscillating (radiofrequency) magnetic field,
which rotates preferably in the plane perpendicular to the
bias field [6,7]. In the limit of linear (weak) Zeeman ef-
fect the rf field couples the adjacent magnetic states MF
resonantly at the spatial location determined by the field
frequency [Fig. 1(a)]. Hot atoms oscillating in the trap
can reach the resonance point and exit the trap after a
spin flip to a nontrapping state. Using the rotating wave
approximation we can eliminate the rf field oscillations,
and obtain the curve crossing description of resonances
[Fig. 1(b)].
FIG. 1. The magnetic trap potentials for spin-polarised
87Rb (F= 2). (a) The spin flips that lead to evaporation are
achieved by an rf field induced multistate transition at a spe -
cific spatial distance from the trap center. Here B0= 0.0001
T. (b) In the curve crossing description the resonances appe ar
as degeneracies. Here B0= 0.0001 T. (c) For strong fields the
multistate crossing transforms into a sequence on two-stat e
crossings between adjacent MFstates. Here B0= 0.0020 T.
The circles mark those crossings where the involved adjacen t
MFstates are also coupled. In (b) and (c) we have νrf= 0.25
MHz+ ν0.
The dynamics of atoms as they move past the reso-
nance point can be described with a simple semiclassical
model [8], which has been shown to agree very well with
fully quantum wave packet calculations [3]. The model,
however, can be applied only if the resonances between
adjacent MFstates occur at the exactly same distance
from the trap center. When the nonlinear terms domi-
nate the Zeeman shifts, the situation changes, as shown
in Fig. 1(c). The adjacent resonances become separated
and one expects to treat the evaporation as a sequence
of independent Landau-Zener crossings as suggested by
Desruelle et al. in connection with their recent87Rb ex-
periment [9]. We show that there is an intermediate re-
gion where off-resonant two-photon transitions from the
MF= 2 state to the MF= 0 state, demonstrated in
Fig. 2, play a relevant role.
In general there is a competition between the adiabatic
1FIG. 2. The adiabatic potentials (solid lines) and bare MF
states (dotted lines) for23Na at B0= 0.0010 T, with rf field
coupling Ω = (2 π)20 kHz. The arrow indicates the semia-
diabatic process for transfer from the MF= 2 state to the
MF= 0 state. Alternatively one can describe the process as
an off-resonant two-photon transition.
following of the eigenstates (solid lines in Fig. 2), which
leads to evaporation, and nonadiabatic transitions which
force the atoms to stay in the trapping states. In23Na
the nonadiabatic transitions can lead to highly inelastic
collisions [3].
In the experiment by Desruelle et al. it was found that
for a strong bias field the nonlinear Zeeman shifts remove
some resonances completely, thus making it impossible to
make a spin flip to a nontrapping state. Our calculations
confirm this observation. We also show that although
evaporation could continue via off-resonant multiphoton
processes, such a process is not practical. The stopping
of evaporation at some finite temperature occurs for the
87Rb and23NaF= 2 trapping states, but not e.g. for
the85RbF= 2 trapping state.
In Sec. II we write down the formalism for the Zee-
man shifts and show the basic properties of the field-
dependent trapping potentials. We describe the fully
quantum wave packet approach and corresponding semi-
classical theories in Sec. III, present and discuss the re-
sults in Sec. IV, and summarize our work in Sec. V.
II. THE ZEEMAN STRUCTURE
A.23Na and87Rb
The Zeeman shifts can not be derived properly in
the basis of the hyperfine states (labelled by Fand
MF) [10–12]. We need to consider the atom-field Hamil-
tonian in the ( I, J) basis:H=A/vectorI·/vectorJ+CJz+DIz, (1)
where /vectorIand/vectorJare the operators for the nuclear and to-
tal electronic angular momentum, respectively. The first
term describes the hyperfine coupling; Ehf=hνhf= 2A,
where Ehfis the hyperfine splitting between the F= 1
andF= 2 states. Here νhf= 1772 MHz for23Na and
νhf= 6835 MHz for87Rb.
The magnetic field dependence arises from the two
other terms, with C=gJµBBandD=−αµNB, where
the Bohr magneton is µB=e¯h/2me, the nuclear mag-
neton is µN=e¯h/2mp, and the Lande factor is gJ= 2.
Hereα= 2.218 for23Na and α= 2.751 for87Rb. But
µB/µN∼1000, and in fact we can omit the third term
in Eq. (1).
For23Na and87Rb we have I= 3/2 and J= 1/2 (lead-
ing to F= 1 or F= 2 with /vectorF=/vectorI+/vectorJ). Our state basis
is formed by the angular momentum states labelled with
the magnetic quantum number pairs ( MI, MJ). When
we evaluate the matrix elements of H[using the relation
/vectorI·/vectorJ=IzJz+1
2(I+J−+I−J+)], the states that correspond
to the same value of MF=MI+MJform subsets of mu-
tually coupled states. By diagonalising the Hamiltonian
we obtain its eigenstates. The states which correspond
to the F= 2 state in the B→0 limit (labelled with MF)
have the energies EMF:
E+2=1
2C,
E+1=1
2/radicalbig
4A2+ 2AC+C2−A,
E0=1
2/radicalbig
4A2+C2−A, (2)
E−1=1
2/radicalbig
4A2−2AC+C2−A,
E−2=−1
2C.
These energies have been normalised to the energy of the
F= 2 state for B= 0. In Fig. 3(a) and (b) we show the
Zeeman shifts for all hyperfine ground states of23Na and
87Rb, but normalised to the ground state energy in the
absence of hyperfine structure. For small magnetic fields
(B≪1 T) we get
EMF≃Ehf[εMF+ (4−M2
F)ε2], (3)
where ε=µBB/(2Ehf). In terms of FandMFthe
linear Zeeman shift is EMF=gFµBBM F=EhfεMFas
the hyperfine Lande factor is gF= 1/2.
The necessary condition for evaporation is that the rf
field induces a resonance between the states MF= 2 and
MF= 1. The location of this resonance defines the divi-
sion between the hot and cold atoms. By decreasing the
rf field frequency νrfwe both move the resonance point
closer to the trap center as well as allow more atoms to
escape the trap. For small Bfields all adjacent states are
resonant at the same location for any νrf. But in case of
2FIG. 3. The Zeeman shifts for the ground state hyperfine
states of (a)23Na, (b)87Rb and (c)85Rb. Note that the situ-
ations considered in this paper take place in a region locate d
very close to B= 0 in the scale of these pictures.
strong magnetic fields, typically larger than about 0.0002
T, due to the nonlinear Zeeman shifts the resonances
separate. Furthermore, the other resonances than the
MF= 2−MF= 1 one in fact move towards the trap
center faster, and reach it while the MF= 2−MF= 1
resonance still corresponds to some finite temperature.
When νrfis lowered further, the other resonances begin
to disappear. At strong Bfields the MF= 0 state is
also a trapping state, as shown in Fig. 4, so for effective
evaporation one really needs to reach the MF=−1 state.
-0.4-0.3-0.2-0.100.10.20.30.4
0100 200 300 400 500 600E (MHz)
x (µm)MF=2MF=0MF=1
MF=-1MF=-2
FIG. 4. The MF= 0 state becomes a trapping state very
quickly as Bincreases. Here we show as an example the situa-
tion for23Na when B0= 0.0010 T. The oscillation frequency
for this state is naturally much smaller than for the other
trapping states.
At the critical frequency νcrthe crossing between the
states MF=−1 and MF= 0 disappears. Alternatively,
for a fixed frequency νrfwe have a critical value Bcrfor
theBfield; the resonances disappear when B>∼Bcr(forpractical reasons we have chosen to modify Brather than
νrfin our wave packet studies). In Fig. 5(a) we show
the potential configuration when νrfis slightly below νcr.
Since νcrcorresponds to the state separation at the center
of the trap, it is independent of the trap parameters such
as the trap frequency.
For a specific trap configuration νcrcan be converted
into a minimum kinetic energy required for reaching the
resonance between the states MF= 2 and MF= 1. In
Fig. 5(b) we show this minimum kinetic energy in units of
temperature as a function of magnetic field strength for
23Na and87Rb, and for the trap configuration used both
in our simulations and in the experiment by Desruelle et
al. [9].
FIG. 5. (a) For B= 0.00155 T and νrf=0.25 MHz+ ν0
the resonance between the MF= 0 and MF=−1 states for
23Na can not be achieved ( Bcr= 0.00152 T). The possibil-
ity for a tunnelling-like transfer (which could also be call ed
off-resonant process via power broadening) exists, though. (b)
The lowest energy (in temperature units) for which evapora-
tion is allowed as a function of trap center field B0for87Rb
and23Na with the trap parameters used in this paper.
In the intermediate region 0 ≪B<∼Bcr, where the
3necessary crossings exist but are separated, the processes
take place via two possible routes. We can have off-
resonant multiphoton processes, that e.g. lead to adia-
batic transfer from the MF= 2 state to the MF= 0
state. This example is demonstrated in Fig. 2 where we
show also the eigenstates of the system, i.e., the field-
dressed potentials. When the relevant resonances are
well separated, the evaporation takes place via a com-
plicated sequence of crossings, as indicated in Fig. 1(c).
This will be demonstrated with wave packet simulations
in Sec. IV.
B.85Rb
For the isotope85Rb we have I= 5/2 and J= 1/2, so
the ground state hyperfine states are F= 2 and F= 3,
as shown in Fig. 3(c). Now the F= 2 trapping state is
the lower hyperfine ground state. Thus the behavior of
theMFstates is different from the87Rb and23Na case.
TheBfield dependence of the states related to F= 2 is
now
E+2=3A
2−1
2/radicalbig
9A2+ 4AC+C2,
E+1=3A
2−1
2/radicalbig
9A2+ 2AC+C2,
E0=3A
2−1
2/radicalbig
9A2+C2, (4)
E−1=3A
2−1
2/radicalbig
9A2−2AC+C2,
E−2=3A
2−1
2/radicalbig
9A2−4AC+C2,
where now Ehf= 3A. For85Rb we have νhf= 3036
MHz. Here the trapping states are now F= 2, M=−2
andF= 2, M=−1. If we now define ˜ ε= (2/3)ε=
µBB/(3Ehf) we get approximatively
EMF≃ −Ehf[˜εMF+ (9−M2
F)˜ε2]. (5)
AsgF=−1/3, this agrees with the linear expression
EMF=gFµBBM F=−Ehf˜εMF.
The change of order in the MFstate energy ladder
means that with increasing Bfield one never loses the
crossing points between the adjacent states. In other
words, if we use an rf field that can couple the states
MF=−2 and MF=−1 resonantly at some location xC,
then we always couple the rest of the states resonantly
as well at distances larger than xC. In Fig. 6 we see how
this leads to a sequence of crossings that allows hot atoms
to leave the trap without the need for sloshing. One
must, however, take into account that the kinetic energy
required to leave the trap is now set by the difference
between the energy of the MF=−2 state at the center
of the trap, and the energy of the M= 0 (or MF=−1)
state at the point where the states MF= 0 and MF=−1
are in resonance. In other words, atoms need a kinetic-2-1.5-1-0.500.51
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
x (µm)E (MHz)
12 3
4MF=-2MF=-1MF=0MF=1MF=2
FIG. 6. The effect of nonlinear Zeeman shifts on the evap-
oration from the85RbF= 2 state. The circles indicate for
which crossing points the couplings are nonzero. The num-
bers indicate the order in which an atom moving out of the
trap traverses the crossings. The kinetic energy required t o
leave the trap is now determined by the difference between
the trap center and the second crossing. Here B0= 0.0050 T
andνrf=0.25 MHz+ ν0, with ν0= (E−2−E−1)/h.
energy equal or larger to the energy difference between
the trap center and the second crossing in Fig. 6.
In this paper we limit our discussion on the F= 2 case
only, but it is obvious that for the85RbF= 3 trapping
states we face the same problem as in the F= 2 case for
87Rb and23Na. In general for the alkali atoms we can
expect that the problem will arise whenever we use the
upper ground state hyperfine state as the trapping state
at strong Bfields.
C. Trap configuration
For simplicity we have assumed in our studies the same
spatially inhomogeneous magnetic field as in the experi-
ment by Desruelle et al. [9], except that we have added
a spatially homogeneous compensation field. This allows
us to change the general field magnitude (depends on the
bias field) while keeping the trap shape almost unchanged
(depends also on the bias field). Thus we set [9]
B=B0+/parenleftbiggB′2
2Bbias−B′′
2/parenrightbigg
(x2+y2) +B′′z2,(6)
where B′= 9 T/m, B′′/Bbias= 104m−2, and the trap
center field is defined as B0≡Bbias−Bcomp. The actual
trap is cigar-shaped, which is a typical feature in many
experiments. We have selected the xdirection as the
basis for our wave packet studies. We set Bbias= 0.0150
T and use Bcompas a parameter to change B0. Using
4C=gJµBBwith Eqs. (2) and (6) we get the spatially
dependent trapping potentials.
III. QUANTUM AND SEMICLASSICAL MODELS
A. Wave packet simulations
For our wave packet studies we fix the rf field frequency
to the value νrf=ν0+ 0.25 MHz, where ν0= [E+2(x=
0)−E+1(x= 0)]/h. With this setting the atoms need
typically a kinetic energy about Ekin/kB≃24µK in or-
der to reach the crossing between the states MF= 2 and
MF= 1. With our special definition of νrfthe differ-
ences between23Na and87Rb appear mainly in the time
scale of atomic motion (Na atoms are lighter and thus
move faster), and in scaling of B. For our selected νrf
we have Bcr= 0.00297 T for87Rb and Bcr= 0.00152 T
for23Na. We have used the rf field strength Ω = (2 π)2.0
kHz), where the rf field induced coupling term is [3,8]
H= ¯h
0 Ω 0 0 0
Ω 0/radicalig
3
2Ω 0 0
0/radicalig
3
2Ω 0/radicalig
3
2Ω 0
0 0/radicalig
3
2Ω 0 Ω
0 0 0 Ω 0
|2,−2/angbracketright
|2,−1/angbracketright
|2,0/angbracketright
|2,1/angbracketright
|2,2/angbracketright,(7)
in the |F, M F/angbracketrightbasis as indicated.
The wave packet simulations were performed in the
same manner as in the previous study [3]. Our initial
wave packet has a Gaussian shape, with a width of 10 µm.
For all practical purposes this wave packet is very narrow
both in position and momentum, and the spreading due
to its natural dispersion is not an important factor. We
identify the mean momentum of the wave packet with the
atomic kinetic energy Ekin, and set Ekin/kB= 30 µK.
In the experiment by Desruelle et al. one had typically
B0=Bbias= 0.0150 T, which sets the kinetic energy for
reaching the resonance points (for any practical value of
νrf) too large for realistic numerical simulations. Thus we
have introduced the compensation field and limit B0to
values below 0 .0050 T. But the main conclusions from our
study apply to larger values of B0andEkin, and many of
the results can be scaled to other parameter regions with
the semiclassical models.
Another simplification is that we consider only one
spatial dimension. This is necessary simply because we
have chosen to work with relatively large energies, such as
30µK. Numerical wave packet calculations at the corre-
sponding velocities require on the order of 100 000 points
for both the spatial and temporal dimensions. As dis-
cussed in Ref. [3], however, this is not a crucial simplifi-
cation.
Basically, we solve the five-component Schr¨ odinger
equationi¯h∂Ψ(x, t)
∂t=H(x)Ψ(x, t), (8)
The components of the state vector Ψ( x, t) stand for the
time dependent probability distributions for each MF
state. The off-diagonal part of the Hamiltonian His
given Eq. (7). The diagonal terms are
−¯h2
2m∂2
∂x2+UMF(x)−MFhνrf, (9)
where mis the atomic mass and UMF(x) are the trap
potentials as in Fig. 1(a). For states MF=−2 and
MF=−1 we use absorbing boundaries, and reflecting
ones for the others. The numerical solution method is the
split operator method, with the kinetic term evaluated by
the Crank-Nicholson approach [13,14].
B. Semiclassical models
For small magnetic fields the rf field induced reso-
nances between adjacent states occur at the same po-
sition, x=xC. In this situation the spin-change proba-
bility for atoms which traverse the resonance is given by
the multistate extension [8,15] of the two-state Landau-
Zener model [16]. We have earlier shown that for the
evaporation in23NaF= 2 state at Ekin/kB= 5µK and
small Bthis model predicts the wave packet results very
well [3].
The solution for the multistate problem can be ex-
pressed with the solutions to the two-state Landau-Zener
(LZ) model, so we shall begin by discussing the two-
state case first. Let us consider two potentials, U1and
U2, which intersect at x=xCand are coupled by V.
For strong B, when the crossings are well separated in
our alkali F= 2 system, Vis equal to ¯ hΩ or/radicalbig
3/2¯hΩ,
depending which pair of adjacent states is involved [see
Eq. (7)].
In addition to the coupling V, the relevant factors are
the speed vCof the wave packet and the slopes of the
trapping potentials UMF(x) at the crossing. We define
α= ¯h/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingled(U2−U1)
dx/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
x=xC. (10)
The speed of the wave packet enters the problem as we
describe the traversing of the crossing with a simple clas-
sical trajectory, x=vC(t−t0) +x0. This allows us
to enter the purely time-dependent description where
the population transfer is given by the two-component
Schr¨ odinger equation
i¯h∂
∂t/parenleftbigg
Ψ1(t)
Ψ2(t)/parenrightbigg
=/parenleftbigg
0V
V αv Ct/parenrightbigg /parenleftbigg
Ψ1(t)
Ψ2(t)/parenrightbigg
.(11)
This is the original Landau-Zener theory. In this form it
is fully quantum and we can obtain an analytic expression
5for state populations P1andP2after the crossing. If state
1 was the initial state, then
P1= 1−exp(−πΛ)
P2= exp( −πΛ),Λ =2V2
¯hαvC. (12)
Obviously, the Landau-Zener model is only applicable
when the total energy is higher than the bare-state energy
at the resonance point. For more details about applying
LZ theory to wave packet dynamics see Refs. [14,17,18].
And now we return to the original multistate problem.
According to the five-state case of the multistate model
(see e.g. Ref. [8]) the populations PMFfor the untrapped
states after one traversal of the crossing are
P2=p4,
P1= 4(1 −p)p3,
P0= 6(1 −p)2p2, (13)
P−1= 4(1 −p)3p,
P−2= (1−p)4,
where p= exp( −πΛ), and Λ is defined by setting V=
¯hΩ/2. This assumes that we were intially on state MF=
2. We can see that the final population of the initial
state, P2, is equal to exp[ −π¯hΩ2/(2αvC)] for both the
two-state and the multistate model if Hamiltonian (7) is
used.
IV. RESULTS
Typical examples of the atomic wave packet evolu-
tion for the three trapping states are shown in Figs. 7
and 8. They demonstrate the sloshing discussed e.g. in
Refs. [3,6,9]. The amplitudes of the components de-
crease as population is partly transferred to another
state. Similarly new wave packet components can ap-
pear at crossings. As a wave packet component reaches
a turning point it sharpens strongly. In Fig. 7 we have
B0= 0.0018 T, which means that there is no crossing be-
tween states MF= 0 and MF=−1. Population transfer
from the state MF= 1 to MF= 0 is weak. The MF= 0
wave packet component has turning points beyond the
integration space.
As sloshing continues St¨ uckelberg oscillations could
take place as split wave packet components merge again
at crossings and interfere (for further discussion, see
Refs. [14,19]). However, the wave packet contains sev-
eral momentum components and thus such oscillations
are not likely observed, because they are very sensitive
to phase differences. In our simulations we saw no major
indication of inteferences.
In Fig. 9 we track the trap state populations and their
sum as the wave packet sloshes in the trap and traverses
several crossings. The magnetic field values are strong
enough to ensure that the crossings are well separated.
We can identify when the various crossings take place al-
though some of them happen simultaneously. The filledsymbols indicate the corresponding Landau-Zener pre-
dictions, and we find that the agreement is excellent.
Some oscillations appear for the23Na case [Fig. 7(a)]
at times between 3.5 ms and 4.5 ms. These may arise
from St¨ uckelberg oscillations, but they do not affect the
final transition probabilities, supporting our assumption
that in the end such oscillations average out. Note that
for23Na there is no resonance between states MF= 0
andMF=−1, but for87Rb there is and it is seen as
a stepwise reduction of PS≡P(MF= 2) + P(MF=
1) +P(MF= 0).
Near the critical field Bcrthe probability to leave the
trap via states MF=−2 and MF=−1 varies strongly
withB0. When B0< Bcrthe wave packet meets two
crossings between the states MF=−1 and MF= 0 as it
traverses the region around the trap center x= 0 on state
MF= 0. At both crossings some population leaks into
the state MF=−1, as seen in Fig. 10 for B0= 0.0028 T.
AsB0increases, the two crossing points, on opposite
sides of x= 0, begin to merge, until they disappear at
x= 0 when B=Bcr. Then the transfer between the
two states becomes off-resonant (or tunnelling), and its
probability decreases exponentially as a function of some
ratio of Ω and the energy difference between the states
MF=−1 and MF= 0 at x= 0. This situation cor-
responds to the parabolic level crossing model [20]. But
the main point is that the off-resonant process is unlikely
to play any major role.
Finally, in Fig. 11 we show how the transfer probabil-
ity between the trap states at the first crossing changes
as a function of B0. The multistate process transforms
smoothly into a two-state process between the states
MF= 2 and MF= 1. The transition zone is rather large,
though, with B0ranging from 0 to 0.0010 T. The transfer
process in this zone is the off-resonant two-photon trans-
fer demonstrated in Fig. 2. An analogous process can
occur in atoms interacting with chirped pulses [21].
An interesting point is that the population of the initial
state is not affected by the fact how the transferred pop-
ulation is distributed to the other involved states. This
seems to be typical for the Landau-Zener crossings [22].
The solid lines indicate the predictions of the two-state
model, and the dotted lines the multistate model. They
change with B0because the location of the first crossing
point and thus the wave packet speed vCat this point
change slightly with B0.
V. CONCLUSIONS
Our results show that in general the semiclassical level
crossing models offer a clear understanding of the single
atomic dynamics during the evaporation process. Also,
we have verified with wave packet calculations that the
interpretations presented by Desruelle et al. for their
87Rb experiment [9] are correct. The simple picture of
evaporation at near-zero magnetic fields transforms into a
6complex sequence of two-state crossings at field strengths
above about 0.0010 T. For all alkali systems where F= 2
is the upper hyperfine ground state the evaporation will
stop before condensation as the necessary resonances dis-
appear too soon as a function of the rf field frequency.
We have shown that tunnelling does not really play a role
once the resonances have been lost. Further complica-
tions arise from the fact that the MF= 0 state becomes
a trapping state.
In experiments, as suggested by Desruelle et al., one
could avoid the problem by coupling the F= 2, MF= 2
trapping state to the F= 1, MF= 1 nontrapping state,
or by using several rf fields of different frequencies within
theF= 2 hyperfine manifold. Although for87Rb one
has observed a long-lasting coexistence of F= 1 and
F= 2 condensates, theoretical studies [23] predict this
difficult for23Na due to destructive collisions. Thus the
first approach may apply better for87Rb than for23Na.
We have calculated earlier [3] that for23Na the colli-
sions between atoms in the MF= 0 and MF= 2 states
are very destructive, with a rate coefficient on the order
of 10−11cm3/s. For practical bias field strengths the MF
state is also a trapping state. Thus the efficiency of evap-
oration is reduced, and the time the atoms spend on the
MF= 0 state increase, making it more likely to have a de-
structive, energy releasing collision. So far condensatio n
on the F= 2 state for Na has not been achieved. Even
in the weak Bfield case evaporation can produce atoms
onMF= 0 state via nonadiabatic transitions. Thus the
role of inelastic collisions is expected to be enhanced for
the field strengths considered here.
Once condensation is reached, however, the nonlinear-
ity of the Zeeman shifts can be an asset rather than a
nuisance. For instance, one could create a new type of
binary condensates by making a selective transfer of part
of the condensate from the F= 2, MF= 2 state to the
F= 2, MF= 1 state, either by using resonant or chirped
rf field pulses. Alternatively, two rf pulses of different
frequencies or perhaps a single chirped pulse might allow
one to transfer the condenstate from the F= 2, MF= 2
state to the F= 2, MF= 0 state and let it expand nor-
mally, without the need to switch the magnetic fields off.
Of course, this would work only when Bis so small that
the trapping nature of the MFstate is not too strong.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research has been supported by the Academy of
Finland. We thank A. Aspect and S. Murdoch for valu-
able discussions and information.[1] M. H. Anderson, J. R. Ensher, M. R. Matthews, C. E.
Wieman, and E. A. Cornell, Science 269, 198 (1995); C.
C. Bradley, C. A. Sackett, J. J. Tollett, and R. G. Hulet,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1687 (1995); K. B. Davis, M.-O.
Mewes, M. R. Andrews, N. J. van Druten, D. S. Durfee,
D. M. Kurn, and W. Ketterle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3969
(1995).
[2] C. J. Myatt, E. A. Burt, R. W. Ghrist, E. A. Cornell,
and C. E. Wieman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 586 (1997).
[3] K.-A. Suominen, E. Tiesinga, and P. S. Julienne, Phys.
Rev. A 58, 3983 (1998).
[4] H. F. Hess, Phys. Rev. A 34, 3476 (1986).
[5] T. Tommila, Europhys. Lett. 2, 789 (1986).
[6] W. Ketterle and N. J. van Druten, Adv. At. Mol. Opt.
Phys.37, 181 (1996).
[7] D. E. Pritchard, K. Helmerson, and A. G. Martin, At.
Phys.11, 179 (1988).
[8] N. V. Vitanov and K.-A. Suominen, Phys. Rev. A 56,
R4377 (1997).
[9] B. Desruelle, V. Boyer, S. G. Murdoch, G. Delannoy, P.
Bouyer, A. Aspect, and M. L´ ecrivain, Phys. Rev. A 60,
R1759 (1999).
[10] B. H. Bransden and C. J. Joachain, Physics of atoms and
molecules (Addison-Wesley, Harlow, 1983).
[11] M. E. Rose, Elementary theory of angular momentum
(Dover, New York, 1995).
[12] C. J. Pethick and H. Smith, Bose-Einstein condensation
in dilute gases (HCØTryk, Copenhagen, 1997).
[13] K.-A. Suominen, B. M. Garraway, and S. Stenholm,
Phys. Rev. A 45, 3060 (1992).
[14] B. M. Garraway and K.-A. Suominen, Rep. Prog. Phys.
58, 365 (1995).
[15] A. K. Kazansky and V. N. Ostrovsky, J. Phys. B 29, L855
(1996); V. N. Ostrovsky and H. Nakamura, J. Phys. A
30, 6939 (1997).
[16] C. Zener, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A 137, 696 (1932);
K.-A. Suominen, B. M. Garraway, and S. Stenholm, Opt.
Commun. 82, 260 (1991); N. V. Vitanov and B. M. Gar-
raway, Phys. Rev. A 53, 4288 (1996).
[17] K.-A. Suominen and B. M. Garraway, Phys. Rev. A 48,
3811 (1993).
[18] K.-A. Suominen, M. J. Holland, K. Burnett, and P. S.
Julienne, Phys. Rev. A 49, 3897 (1994); K.-A. Suominen,
J. Phys. B 29, 5981 (1996).
[19] B. M. Garraway and S. Stenholm, Phys. Rev. A 46, 1413
(1992).
[20] K.-A. Suominen, Opt. Commun. 93, 126 (1992).
[21] D. J. Maas, C. W. Rella, P. Antoine, E. S. Toma, and L.
D. Noordam, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1374 (1999).
[22] V. M. Akulin and W. Schleich, Phys. Rev. A 46, 4110
(1992).
[23] P. S. Julienne, F. H. Mies, E. Tiesinga, and C. J.
Williams, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1880 (1997).
7FIG. 7. The evolution of the wave packet components
|ΨMF(x,t)|2for23Na at B0= 0.0018 T and Ω = (2 π)2 kHz.
(a)MF= 2, (b) MF= 1, and (c) MF= 0.
FIG. 8. The evolution of the wave packet components
|ΨMF(x, t)|2for87Rb at B0= 0.0028 T and Ω = (2 π)2 kHz.
(a)MF= 2, (b) MF= 1, and (c) MF= 0.
8FIG. 9. The time evolution of the trap state populations.
0.50.60.70.80.91
0.005 0.006 0.007 0.008 0.009Pevap
t (s)B0=0.0032 T
B0=0.0030 T
B0=0.0028 T
87Rb
FIG. 10. The time evolution of the trapped population for
87Rb near the critical field strength Bcr.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.7
0 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004P(MF=2)
P(MF=1)
P(MF=0)P(MF)
B0 (T)
FIG. 11. The population transfer after the first crossing for
87Rb as a function of B0. The solid lines are the semiclassical
two-state predictions, and the dotted ones are the multista te
model predictions. The symbols represent the wave packet
results.
9 |
arXiv:physics/9910044v1 [physics.ins-det] 28 Oct 1999Test of CsI(T ℓ) crystals for the Dark Matter
Search
H.J.Kim,1,2H.J.Ahn, S.K.Kim, E.Won,3T.Y.Kim
Department of Physics, Seoul National University, Seoul 15 1-742, Korea
Y.D.Kim
Department of Physics, Sejong University, Seoul 143-747, K orea
M.H.Lee
KEK, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0801, Japan
J.S.Chai, J.H.Ha4
Korea Cancer Center Hospital, Seoul, Korea
Abstract
Searches for weakly interacting massive particles(WIMP) c an be based on the de-
tection of nuclear recoil energy in CsI(T ℓ) crystals. We demonstrate that low energy
gamma rays down to few keV is detected with CsI(T ℓ) crystal detector. A clear peak
at 6 keV is observed using X-ray source. Good energy resoluti on and linearity have
been achieved down to X-ray region. In addition, we also show that alpha particles
and gamma rays can be clearly separated using the different ti me characteristics of
the crystal.
Key words: Dark Matter, CsI(T ℓ), PSD, Linearity, Resolution
PACS: 95.35.+d, 29.40.Mc
1Corresponding author; E-mail: hjkim@hep1.snu.ac.kr; Tel : +82 2 876 2801; FAX:
+82 2 875 4719
2Also affiliated with Department of Physics and Astronomy, Lou isiana State Uni-
versity, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
3Also affiliated with KEK, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0801, Japan
4Present address: Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, T aejon, 305-600, Korea
Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 29 July 20111 Introduction
Several evidences from a variety of sources indicate that th e universe con-
tains a large amount of dark matter [1]. The most strong evide nce for the
existence of dark matter comes from the galactic dynamics. T here is simply
not enough luminous matter observed in spiral galaxies to ac count for the ob-
served rotational curves [2]. Among several dark matter can didates, one of the
most prominent candidate is the weakly-interacting massiv e particles(WIMP).
The leading WIMP candidate is perhaps the neutralino, the li ghtest super-
symmetric particles such as photinos, Higgsinos and Z-inos [3]. These particles
typically have masses between 10 GeV and a few TeV and couple t o ordinary
matter only with weak interactions. The elastic scattering of WIMP with tar-
get nuclei could be detected by measuring the recoil energy o f the nucleus,
which is up to several tens of keV [4]. Recently, a great deal o f attention has
been drawn to crystal detectors since the detection techniq ue is already devel-
oped and radioactive background from the crystal is under co ntrol. Especially,
the most stringent limit for the direct detection of WIMP has been established
using the NaI(Tl) crystal detector [5]. They achieved as low threshold as 6 keV
and relatively good separation between the recoiling event s and the ionizing
events by background γ’s using the difference of the scintillation decay time.
Recently, positive signal of annual modulation has been rep orted by DAMA
group [6]. Looking at the similar sensitivity region with ot her experiments
which involves different systematics is absolutely necessa ry to confirm their
results. It has been noted by several authors that CsI(T ℓ) crystal may give
better performance for the separation between recoiling ev ents and the ionizing
events by background γ[7]. Although the light yield of CsI(T ℓ) crystal is
slightly lower than NaI(Tl) crystal, better particle separ ation can be more
advantageous for WIMP search. Also CsI(T ℓ) has much less hygroscopicity
than NaI(Tl), and has higher density (see Table I). The spin- independent
cross section of WIMP is larger for CsI(T ℓ) than NaI(Tl) because CsI(T ℓ) has
a compound with two similar heavy mass nuclei while spin-dep endent cross
section will be comparable. Moreover hundreds of tons of CsI (Tℓ) crystals are
already being used for several detectors in high energy expe riment [8]. Thus
fabricating large amount of crystals is quite feasible. In t his report, we have
studied the characteristics of CsI(T ℓ) crystal for the possibility of dark matter
search experiment [9].
2 Experimental Setup
We prepared a 3cm ×3cm×3cm CsI(T ℓ) crystal with all surfaces polished.
Photo-multiplier tubes of 2 inch diameter(Hamamtsu H1161) are directly at-
2tached on two opposite end surfaces. The cathode planes of PM T cover all
the area of the crystal surfaces attached. The other sides ar e wrapped with
1.5µm thick aluminized foil window or Teflon tapes followed by bla ck tapes.
It is necessary to use only very thin foil for the side where X- ray sources are
attached that low energy X-rays are not blocked. For the alph a source, ad-
ditional aluminum foil is located between the aluminized fo il and the source
to reduce the αenergy. Signals from both PMTs are then amplified using a
home-made AMP( ×8) with low noise and high slew rate. Another signals are
amplified with ORTEC AMP( ×200) to make the trigger logic. Discriminator
thresholds are set at the level of single photoelectron sign al. By using LED,
we confirmed that the single photoelectron signal is well abo ve the electronic
noise. In order to suppress the accidental triggers from dar k currents, we de-
lay the signal by 100 ns and then formed a self coincidence for each PMT
signal, which require that at least two photoelectrons occu r within 200 ns.
Then coincidence of both PMT signals are made for the final tri gger decision.
In this way the trigger caused by the accidental noises are su ppressed by a
great amount. With this condition the effective threshold is four photoelec-
trons, which roughly corresponds to 40 photons produced. Us ing the widely
accepted light yield of CsI(T ℓ),∼50,000 photons/MeV, our threshold can be
interpreted as 2 keV. The crystal and PMTs are located inside the of 5 cm
thick lead blocks in order to stop the environmental backgro und. A digital
oscilloscope is used for the data taking with GPIB interface to a PC with
LINUX system. We developed DAQ system with GPIB and CAMAC int er-
face based on the ROOT package [10] and entire analysis was pe rformed with
the ROOT package too. The schematics of the experimental set up and the
trigger elements are shown in Figure 1 a) and b). The digital o scilloscope we
used for our experiment samples the signal at 1 Gs/sec with 8 b it pulse height
information and two channels are read out simultaneously. F ull pulse shape
informations are saved for the further analysis.
3 Calibration
We have performed measurements of X-rays, γ-rays, and alpha particles using
various radioactive sources with the setup described in the previous section.
The energy spectra of X-rays and γrays from the57Co source is given in
Fig. 2. The highest peak is from the gamma ray of 122 keV. Shown in left side
of broad distribution of pulses are the Compton edge. The ene rgy resolution at
122 keV is about 7%. Also, the X-ray peak at 6.4 and 14.4 keV are clearly seen
with energy resolution of 30 and 20%, respectively. This res olution is not much
worse than that of NaI(Tl) crystal [5]. Many calibration sou rces such as57Co,
109Cd,137Cs,54Mn and60Co are used for the determination of linearity and
resolution. Fig. 3 shows the energy resolution of CsI(T ℓ) crystal with PMT on
3each side. The best fit of the resolution with following the pa rameterization is
σ
E(MeV)=0.03/radicalBig
E(MeV)⊕0.01, (1)
and it becomes
σ
E(MeV)=0.02/radicalBig
E(MeV)⊕0.01 (2)
, when we add PMT signals from both sides.
The pulse shape is quite linear at high energy as shown in Fig. 4 but there
is some deviation at low energy as shown in Fig. 5. The pulse he ight of the
662 keV γ-ray line from137Cs is defined as unity for the linearity plot. It
turns out that the variation in the response function near th e L-, K-shell of
Cs and I causes nonlinearity at X-ray region within 30% [11]. This is because
photoelectrons ejected by incident gamma rays just above th e K-shell energy
have very little kinetic energy so that the response drops. J ust below this
energy, however, K-shell ionization is not possible and L-s hell ionization takes
place. Since the binding energy is lower, the photoelectron s ejected at this
point are more energetic which causes a rise in the response. The pulse shape
is linear within 10 % up to low energy X-ray region if these effe cts are corrected.
4 Pulse Shape Analysis
In many scintillating crystals, electrons and holes produc ed by ionization are
captured to form certain meta-stable states and produce slo w timing com-
ponent. On the other hand, a larger stopping power from recoi ling nucleus
produces a higher density of free electrons and holes which f avors their recom-
bination into loosely bound systems and results in fast timi ng component. By
using this characteristic, we may be able to separate X-ray b ackgrounds from
the high ionization loss produced by WIMP. To demonstrate th is difference,
we measured signals produced by alpha particles using241Am source. Kinetic
energy of the alpha particle is 5.5 MeV and the incident energ y was controlled
by the thickness of thin aluminum foil in front of the crystal . Although al-
pha particle at this energy stops in the crystal, the visible energy seen by the
PMT is about 75% of the energy. This is due to the quenching fac tor for alpha
particles and agrees with what were observed by the other exp eriments [12].
We show the two dimensional histogram of mean time vs. integr ated charge
4in Fig. 6. The mean time is the pulse height weighted time aver age, defined as
< t >=/summationtextti×qi/summationtextqi, (3)
where qiis the amplitude of the pulse at the channel time tiup to 4 µs. It is
practically the same as the decay time of the crystal. Two cle ar bands in the
Fig. 6 indicate that we can make good separation between the a lpha particle
and X-ray. The low energy of X-ray from the241Am source is 60 keV. In Fig. 7,
we projected signals near 60 keV region to the mean time axis a nd it shows
that the decay time for alpha particles is ∼700 ns while for X-rays ∼1100 ns.
Two peaks are well separated by more than 3 sigma in this energ y region.
5 Conclusion
We demonstrated that CsI(T ℓ) crystal can be used to measure low energy
gamma rays down to few keV. Linearity within 10% and good ener gy resolution
have been obtained down to 6 keV X-ray region. In addition, a g ood separation
of alpha particles from gamma rays has been achieved by using mean time
difference. If recoiled ions in the crystal behave similar to alpha particles,
the mean time difference would be very useful to differentiate WIMP signals
from backgrounds. The background study and neutron respons e on CsI(T ℓ)
study are underway. If this study is successful, a pilot expe riment with a large
amount crystals will be launched in near future.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by Korean Ministry of Education under the grant
number BSRI 1998-015-D00078. Y.D. Kim wishes to acknowledg e the financial
support of the Korean Research Foundation made in the progra m year of 1998.
References
[1] G.G. Raffelt, hep-ph/9712538, Dec 1997.
[2] K.G. Begeman, A.H. Broeils, and R.H. Sanders, Mon. Not. R. Astr. Soc. 249,
523 (1991).
[3] H.P. Nilles, Phys. Rep. 110, 1 (1984), H.E. Haber and G.L. Kane, Phys. Rep.
117, 75 (1985).
5[4] M.W. Goodman, E.Witten, Phys. Rev. D31, 3059 (1985).
[5] P.F. Smith et al.,Phys. Lett. B379, 299 (1996), R. Bernabei et al.,Phys. Lett.
B389, 757 (1996).
[6] R. Bernabei et al.,Phys. Lett. B424, 195 (1998), R. Bernabei et al.,Phys. Lett.
B450, 448 (1999),
[7] J.B. Birks, Theory and practice of scintillation counter , (Pergamnon press,
Oxford, 1964).
[8] E. Blucher et al. (CLEO), Nucl. Instrum. Methods A235 , 319 (1985),
M.T.Cheng et al. (BELLE), Technical Design Report , KEK Report 95-1, 1995.
[9] H.J.Kim et al., Proceeding of the 29th International Conference on High En ergy
Physics, Vancouver, (1998), E.Won et al., submitted to the Nuclear Physics B(
Proceedings Supplements), (1998).
[10] R. Brun and F. Rademakers, ROOT - An Object Oriented Data Analysis
Framework ,Proceedings AIHENP’96 Workshop , Lausanne, Sep. 1996, Nucl.
Instrum. Methods A389 , (1997).
[11] D. Aitken, B.L. Leron, G. Yenicay, H.R. Zulliger, Trans. Nucl. Sci. NS-14 ,No.
2, 468 (1967).
[12] Y.K. Akimov, Phys. Part. Nucl. 25, 92, 1994, W.R. Leo, Techniques for Nuclear
and Particle Physics Experiments , (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1993).
6Table 1
Comparison of CsI(T ℓ) and NaI(Tl) characteristics.
Property CsI(T ℓ)NaI(Tl)
Density(g/cm3) 4.53 3.67
Decay constant(ns) ∼1000 ∼250
Peak emission(nm) 550 415
Light yield(relative) 85 100
Hygroscopicity slight strong
7PMT PMTCsI
CsI(Tl)
Aluminized foil
1.5 micronAluminum Foil
source
(a)
Anode
AnodeOrtec AMP Disc.GDD2fold
AND
Home-made
Fast AMPDigital Osc.
GPIBPCTrigger 4fold
(b)Pb 5cm
Fig. 1. (a) Schematic drawing of the experimental setup and ( b) the trigger logic.
8500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 400005001000150020002500122 keV
Arbitrary UnitNumber of events500 600 700 800 900 1000 110002040608010012014016018014.4 keV 6.4 keV
Fig. 2. Pulse height spectrum of CsI(T ℓ) for57Co source. The left top plot is zoomed
pulse height spectrum of the low energy X-ray.
910-210-110.050.10.150.20.250.30.350.40.45
E(MeV)s/Es/E = 0.03/ √E + 0.01
Fig. 3. The energy resolution of CsI(T ℓ) with one-side PMT. The solid curve shows
the best fit to data.
100 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 14000246810121416
E(keV)Arbitrary unit
Fig. 4. Linearity distribution of CsI(T ℓ) crystal with several different photon
sources. The solid line shows the linear fit to data.
111 10 1021030.80.911.11.21.31.4 Source gain/Cs(137) gain
E(keV)
Fig. 5. Response of CsI(T ℓ) crystal relative to the pulse height of 662 keV gamma
ray line from137Cs. The filled circles are our data and the open circle with sol id
lines are the scanned data of 1/8 inch crystal taken from Ref. [11].
120.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.412345678910
241Am137Cs
57Co
241Am
<t>(ms)Arbitrary energy unit
Fig. 6. Energy vs. mean time distribution of CsI(T ℓ) c rystal with241Am and γ
sources.
130.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.405101520253035
<t>(ms)∼60 KeV g
∼60KeV aNumber of events
Fig. 7. Distribution of the decay time, <t>, of the CsI(T ℓ) crystal with241Am
sources when signals near 60 keV are projected. The solid cur ve shows double
Gaussian fit. The dashed Gaussian curve is the decay time of th e alpha particle
and dotted-dash curve is the decay time of the gamma with the s ample pulse height
normalized as the alpha’s.
14 |
arXiv:physics/9910045v1 [physics.bio-ph] 28 Oct 1999IPT: October, 1999/ Abstract for APS Meeting/
A biological junction with quantum-like characteristics
Alex A. Samoletov
NASU - Institute for Physics and Technology
72 Luxembourg Str., 340114 Donetsk, Ukraine
samolet@kinetic.ac.donetsk.ua
A model of chemical synapse as an electric junction is propos ed. Estimations and anal-
ysis of the model show that the junction has unique physical c haracteristics reminding
the Josephson junction. The basic assumption is made that th e electric coupling across
the synaptic gap is indirectly provided by means of approxim ately quantized portions of
a chemical mediator, each the portion is content of a synapti c bubble. We suppose that
effective quantum of charge is q,|q| ≫ |e|. The synapse characteristics are dominated by
electrostatic energy, Q2/2C,Q=qN,N= 0,1,2...; whereCis electric capacity of mem-
brane. Estimations show that the integer-valued character ofNmust be explicitly taken
into account. The consistent theory of the junction is const ructed on the basis of operator
realization of number-phase canonical pair in the Hardy spa ce. The charge passing from one
side of the junction to other is described by the Toeplitz ope rators. The synapse state space
is constructed explicitly. The unique physics of the model i s investigated in detail. We do
not exclude the possibility that the model is prototype of a m olecular electronics device.
1IPT: March, 1999/ Conference Paper/ ICSSUR’99/
A model of mesoscopic junction:
The benefits of number-phase operators
(application in biophysics)
Alex A. Samoletov
NASU – Institute for Physics and Technology
72 Luxembourg Str., 340114 Donetsk, Ukraine
samolet@kinetic.ac.donetsk.ua
In this talk we present a primary approach to the physical mod eling of a chemical
synapse as the quantum-like junction in a nearly closed loop of a self-synapsing neu-
ron. We consider such kind of biological systems as a candida te for detecting and
processsing of microwave radiation. Explicit realization of the state space and the
junction Hamiltonian operator are constructed consistent ly.
The influence of electromagnetic waves, especially of micro wave radiation, on biological
systems has attracted much interest for a long time. In parti cular, active areas of research
have been the study of the results of radio- and microwave rad iation effect in biological
populations, or the possible influence of usual household el ectrical appliances of the new
generation on humans and others living systems, or an accide nt prevention in industry.
These investigations are of interest mainly from a phenomen ological viewpoint since the
works on cellular or molecular level are rare up to now. They a re also of interest from
the point of view of understanding how the electromagnetic w aves of different frequency
and power affect biological systems. By the way, there were th e rumors that in the former
USSR the building of the USA Embassy in Moscow has been expose d to low-level microwave
radiation during of many years. On the other hand, it seems th at the interest of physicists in
this subject is concentrated also in the field of macroscopic electrodynamics phenomenology,
being quite less rich that electrodynamics of complex noneq uilibrium cellular- and molecular-
level biological systems.
At the present time, at least in Donetsk, Ukraine, there is th e official medical institution
for therapy and research, Hospital ”Sitko”– MRT (microwave therapy), where treat patients
with extremely low-level microwave radiation by the specia l procedures. Thus, some aspects
of the microwave therapy are clinically tested.
The present work was originally motivated by the desire to un derstand a possible mech-
anism of the effect of a low-level microwave radiation on biol ogical objects such as humans
(or rats, for example),– and on a cellular level, beyond the p henomenology. It is in con-
nection with the microwave therapy. On the other hand, the de sire was inspired by the
recent works in the field of neurophysiology. Namely, our mod el accepts a hypothesis which
is based on the existence of in a sense mesoscopic self-synap sing neurons, neurological loops
with chemical synapses. The experimental evidence that suc h the loops are really existing
has been recently reported [1] (concerning young rats).
2In the present talk, we set up the physical model and the basic theoretical framework
we shall need for the study of detection and processing of ext remely low-level microwave
radiation by the biological systems on the cellular level. T he results we present here will be
used in the following works.
Before starting to work out the physical model and its relati ons with the biological
system, it may be worth getting some idea of what it is about, i n particular what is a
synapse and what is a junction. Of course, in a schematic, wit hout any details, way.
Above all, let us to give some preliminary idea about the neur ological system under
consideration. A typical neuron has about 103÷104synapses. Self-synapsing neuron is a
nearly closed, circular loop of electrically excitable (ne uron membrane) conducting material,
the biological loop of axon and its dendrite, of in a sense mes oscopic size (to be defined
below). The thickness of a neuron membrane is about 50 ˚A and the electric capacity of
membrane is about 1 µF/cm2. The loop contains a gap. It is the gap of a synapse (usually
∼102˚A). We suppose that it is a chemical synapse. It means that the electrical coupling
across the synaptic gap is indirectly provided by means of qu antized portions of chemical
mediator. Each the portion, the content of a synaptic bubble , contains about 103molecules
of a chemical mediator. We suppose that an effective ”quantum ” of charge in synapse is
about 103e. For further relevant and more detailed information concer ning neurons, synapses
and all that we refer the reader to [2].
Then, the notion ’mesoscopic junction’ is generic for a wide class of the physical systems.
The tunnel junction is a prototype the junction class, of cou rse the last has the matter
far beyond this, that illustrates the relevant physical phe nomena and the corresponding
theoretical prolegomena. Physical systems like mesoscopi c junctions are widely established
in current physical literature.
Here, beginning with the simple physical model of a complex b iological junction, we
construct the consistent quantum-like theory of mesoscopi c junctions including the explicit
realizations of the model state space and the Hamiltonian op erator as an operator in this
space, and in what follows we describe in this frame the corre sponding dominant physical
effects together with application to the biological system, such as a self-synapsing neuron,
which is treated as a candidate on the role of detector and pro cessor of microwave radiation
in biological systems.
The physical model consists in the following. A self-synaps ing neuron system is idealized
as a circular loop of electrically conducting material. The synaptic gap in this loop is
modeled as a junction of relatively small capacity C. Really it is a system of two membrane
capacities connected by physiological solvent; however, i t is easy to find the arguments
that we can replace this system by single effective capacity ( e.g., the resistance across a
synapse is dominated by the membranes). But, on the other han d, the charge carriers in
this junction are ”quantized” due to chemical nature of the s ynapse. It means that an
effective elementary charge Qmay be considerably greater then the charge of electron and
every additional charge Qwill change electrostatic energy on the junction substanti ally.
Under the such conditions the role of charge energy on the jun ction increase and we must to
take the quantum-like nature of the effective charge into acc ount. All that is the first part
of the system mesoscopicity condition mentioned above. The second one is the geometric
size (radius) of the loop. This second aspect is connected wi th the fact that magnetic fields
3penetrate biological tissue much more effectively then elec tric fields and thus the geometric
size of the loop is directly connected with magnetic flux thro ugh the loop, and will dominate
in detection and processing of microwave radiation, for exa mple, by means of a depolarization
of the membrane and an induced exit of a mediator into the syna ptic gap. But it is the
topic of another paper.
In order that the model be more mathematically formulated, i t is sufficiently to define the
character of relevant macrovariables. We set the number NofQcarriers as the characteristic
macrovariable. Further, we assume that in respect of the cha racteristic macrovariable an
homogeneous state on the junction is realized. And also we ta ke into account the discreteness
(”quantization” by Q) of a charge magnitude on the junction explicitly. This impl ies that
the relevant is setting as fundamental the canonical pair of the action-angle (number-phase)
operators realized on a proper state space; we realize the st ate space as the Hardy space H2
(e.g., [3]).
In this point the principal from the theoretical point of vie w and crucial for the theory
question is arising: How much a wealth of material can be extr acted from the model to be
restricted to the fact of discreteness of a charge carriers a nd under conditions of a system
mesoscopicity (e.g., concerning electric capacity, induc tance or geometric size)? The answer
to this question give us the key to a lot of the problems.
Then, there are usual arguments that after a coarse-grainin g procedure a quantum-like
energy operator, the Hamiltonian operator H,is a function of the variable Nonly. By the
way, it is in perfect harmony with Ginzbirg–Landau phenomen ology. Indeed, if the canonical
pair of operators ( N,Φ),[Φ,N] =i,is defined in the Hardy space H2(it is reasonable way)
then using isometry H2→ L2and the Wigner phase-space representation together with th e
corresponding formula:
Tr exp ( −βH) =/integraldisplay
d2ψexp (−βF(ψ)),
exp (−βF(ψ))≡2 [exp ( −βH)]W(ψ), ψ∈C1,
where [ · · ·]Wdenotes the Wigner–Weyl symbol of the corresponding operat or (in L2),– and
with identifying F(ψ) as the Ginzbirg–Landau free energy, we obtain F(ψ) =F0+A|ψ|2+
1
2B|ψ|4+···,whereF0,A,B,... are explicitly given if there is given the operator H. Inversely,
by a given free energy F(ψ) we obtain H=H(N) =H0−β−1/summationtext
(n)((−1)n/n!)KnNn,
where the coefficients are explicitly given if there is given t he function F(ψ);{Kn}have the
structure of cumulants. Note, that evaluation procedure of this point is of interest in its
own right.
Let us now return back to model of the biological junction tog ether with the number of
Qcarriers as the distinctive variable, and start from the pro blem of two sides, 1 and 2, of
a synapse coupled by this junction. Firstly, if we neglect th e coupling between sides 1 and
2, the Hamiltonian operator breaks into two parts H1+H2. Further, if no external voltage
is applied on the junction, the chemical potential on the sid es 1 and 2 are equal. It means
that between the states ( N1,N2) and (N1−ν,N2+ν),ν∈Z, no difference.
Let us now allow a coupling between 1 and 2. It can be splited in to two parts: (1) elec-
trostatic, with a capacity C; (2) a charge passing from one side to other with the extracti ng,
for example, of Qin 1 and bringing it in 2 .
4Let us now realize the state spaces of 1 and 2 as the Hardy space sH2and define in
these spaces the pairs of the number-phase operators ( N1,Φ1) and (N2,Φ2) , [Φ k,Nl] =iδkl,
k,l= 1,2; together with the Toeplitz partially isometric one-side d translation operators T1
+
−,
T2
+
−. And let/braceleftBig
e(1)
n/bracerightBig
and/braceleftBig
e(2)
n/bracerightBig
are the standard basis in H2
1andH2
2correspondingly. In this
case we can construct the state space as H=H2
1⊗H2
2, and define the following operators
N0=N1⊗1 + 1⊗N2, N =N1⊗1−1⊗N2,
Φ =1
2(Φ1⊗1−1⊗Φ2),
with the commutation relations
[Φ,N0] = 0,[Φ,N] =i,
on a dense domain in H. We suppose also that N0is fixed. The pair ( N,Φ) is principal
set of operators. It is easy to see that it is convenient to tak eH2
−instead of H2
2, where
H2
−is the subspace of L2=L2(C1,dϕ/2π) spanned on {e−n}∞
0. It implies some evident
overdetermination.
At a given N0,Ncan takes (2 N0+ 1) values. Under this condition we can explicitly
realize Has the subspace of the Laurent space L2. In this way we will be prepared to take
down a junction Hamiltonian explicitly:
H=H0+1
2CN2+T,
whereCis electric capacity and Tis operator of extracting a charge in 1 and bringing it in
2:T=t1(T++T−) +t2/parenleftBig
T2
++T2
−/parenrightBig
+..., – most probably
T=t(T++T−),
and we can choose treal.
As first test of the model presented we can make passage to “cla ssical” limit of the
corresponding equations of motion. Note, that using the Wig ner phase-space representation
as well as the coherent states representation we obtain the e quations are analogous to known
Josephson equations.
In conclusion, we hope that the model has enough wealth of det ail relevant to biological
insight as well as interesting physics. But that is all for th is primary presentation.
Acknowledgments This work was supported in part by National Foundation for Ba sic
Research (Grant No. F4/310-97).
————————————————————
[1]J. Lubke and oths, J. of Neuroscience 16, 3209 (1996).
[2]G.M. Sheppard, Neurobiology (Oxford Univ. Press, New York, 1983).
[3]K. Hoffman, Banach Spaces of Analytical Functions (Prentice -Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1962).
5 |
arXiv:physics/9910046v1 [physics.atom-ph] 29 Oct 1999Antiproton transfer from antiprotonic He to noble gas conta minants
G.V.Margagliotti, G.Pauli, L.Santi, S.Tessaro, A. Voroni n, E.Zavattini
The state dependent quenching mechanism of metastable anti protonic He atoms by contaminants
is suggested to explain existing experimental data. The effe ct of antiproton transfer from the an-
tiprotonic He to noble gas contaminants is shown to play a sig nificant role. Preliminary estimations
have been done in the framework of the coupled channels model . The obtained results support the
idea of strong dependence of quenching cross-sections on th e antiprotonic states quantum numbers
and enable to explain qualitatively existing discrepancie s between experimental results, obtained for
different contaminant densities. New observable effects are predicted.
I. INTRODUCTION.
Recent intensive studies [1–6] of the antiproton ( p) delayed annihilation in Helium allowed the discovery of un ique
features of antiprotonic He systems. Theoretical explanat ion of abnormal lifetime ( τ∼10−6s) of certain antiproton
fraction in He requires the existence of antiprotonic He sys tems which have radiative and Auger de-excitation lifetime
of the order of 10−6s and are very stable with respect to the thermal collisions w ith surrounding He atoms.
It was first suggested by Condo [7] and validated by further de tailed studies [8–13] that highly excited circular
(or near circular) states of antiprotonic He atoms (He+p)N,L(here N is principal quantum number and L is the
angular momentum quantum number of the antiprotonic state) should have extremely small (in atomic scale) Auger
de-excitation rates ( λA≪106s−1forN, L> 36). The lifetime of such highly excited antiprotonic atoms , if they are
isolated from collisions with surrounding medium, is deter mined by the radiative transitions and is of the order of 10−6
s. This fact motivates for treating antiprotonic He atom as a system responsible for delayed annihilation. Meanwhile,
the complete understanding of the problem can be obtained on ly carefully analyzing the effects of the collisions of
such a system with surrounding medium [15–17].
It has been shown in [17] that different states of metastable a ntiprotonic atoms could be affected by several colli-
sional quenching mechanisms, which are Stark transitions t o nonstable states, collisionally induced Auger decay and
rearrangement processes, like short living molecular ion f ormation.
In this paper we analyze those rearrangement collisions whi ch result in the antiproton transfer from high metastable
states of the antiprotonic He (with principal quantum numbe rN≥40) to noble gas contaminant atoms. Some
remarkable features enable to distinguish this process amo ng others. First, one can expect that such transfer of
antiproton to nonhelium atom will result in the fast Auger de -excitation [13] and following annihilation of antiproton
on the contaminant nucleus, which can be checked experiment ally. Second, it is reasonable to expect classical characte r
of antiprotonic transfer, thus the corresponding reaction cross-sections should be of the order of geometrical atomic
cross-sections at least for certain states of antiprotonic He. We will show that taking into account antiproton transfe r
mechanism, it is possible to obtain qualitative explanatio n of existing experimental data on contaminant quenching, i n
particular about the apparent discrepancy between experim ental results on noble gas contaminant quenching obtained
by different experimental groups.
II. EXPERIMENTAL OVERVIEW.
Existing experimental results on quenching of antiprotoni c atom metastable states by noble gas contaminants were
obtained by OBELIX collaboration (PS 201) [3] and CERN group (PS205) [4]. The averaged over different metastable
states quenching cross-sections obtained by the two groups are shown in Table 1, with their corresponding ratios.
Contaminant σ1
quench σ2
quench σ1
quench /σ2
quench
Ne 2*10−17cm210−20cm22*103
Ar 7*10−17cm24*10−20cm21.7*103
Xe 2*10−16cm23*10−18cm20.6*102
Table I . Quenching cross-section for different contaminants obtai ned by OBELIX (1) and PS205 (2) groups.
A dramatic difference between the results of the two groups ca n be seen, specially for Ne and Ar. We must notice
that the mentioned experiments have been done under differen t conditions, among which we outline the different
contaminant concentration. In OBELIX experiment the same q uenching rate was observed with concentrations of
1noble gas contaminant several orders of magnitude less than in PS205 experiment. Unfortunately, there are no data
obtained in the overlapping ranges of contaminant densitie s.
Such a discrepancy suggests the idea that quenching effects a re very different for different metastable antiprotonic
states in the sense that the lifetime of certain metastable s tates is measurable for small contaminant concentrations
only, while for big enough concentrations it becomes too sho rt to be distinguished from the prompt peak. Thus the
averaged over antiprotonic states quenching cross-sectio n becomes a function of contaminant density.
We will show that estimation of the antiproton transfer rate s supports for such an explanation of the difference in
extracted quenching cross-section values.
III. REARRANGEMENT COLLISIONS.
The correct description of inelastic collisions of an antip rotonic atom with medium atoms requires taking into
account simultaneously all possible reaction channels. We will show, however, that it is meaningful to distinguish
the antiproton transfer mechanism among other processes an d treat it separately. Let us first make some qualitative
remarks. We will be interested in the reaction:
(He+p)N,L+ A−→/bracketleftbig
He+epA+/bracketrightbig
−→/bracketleftbig
He(A++p)N′,L′/bracketrightbig
+e (1)
where A reads essentially for a contaminant atom present in t he surrounding medium.
In this reaction the exchange of electron and antiproton bet ween He and contaminant atom A takes place, which
results in a virtual formation of the molecular system [ He+epA+]. The energy excess is then transferred to an Auger
electron of the contaminant atom, while the molecular ion [ He(A++p)N′,L′] is formed in the final state. We notice
that the more simple reaction:
(He+p)N,L+ A−→He+ (A+p)N′,L′ (2)
occurs with significant probability only in the resonance ca se, i.e. when bounding energy of ( He+p)N,Lis equal to
that of (A+p)N′,L′. In nonresonance case an energy excess (which characterist ic value in mentioned reactions is about
0.1 eV) is transferred to atomic nuclei relative motion and n o term crossing takes place in this case. Thus reaction
probability turns to be exponentially small. An obvious exc eption is antiprotonic Helium collision with He atoms of
surrounding medium:
(He+p)N,L+He−→He+ (He+p)N,L (3)
As it follows from our calculations, reaction (3) takes plac e for antiprotonic states with principal quantum number
N >42. Such states are already quenched within short time by Sta rk de-excitation collisions [16,17] and can not be
observed within the delayed component. In the same time we wi ll show that reaction (1) for Ne and Ar contaminants
affect certain states belonging to the observed delayed frac tion.
The amplitude of reaction (1) is determined by the overlappi ng of the antiprotonic wave function of ( He+p)N,Land
the antiprotonic wave function of (A++p)N′,L′. We will show later, that there is a repulsive barrier in the e ffective
interaction of antiprotonic He and noble gas atom, which pre vents close collisions. Clearly antiproton transfer has
a chance only if the interatomic separation becomes small en ough during the collision, to ensure overlapping of the
wave function of antiproton centered on He, and that of mediu m atoms. This last condition determines the reaction
probability dependence on antiprotonic quantum numbers. W e will show that for the interaction of antiprotonic He
with Ne and Ar, antiproton transfer takes place for states wi thN≥40.
A. Formalism.
We search the wave function of the system ( He+p)N,L+ A in the form:
Φ =/summationdisplay
αβγχp
γ/hatwideP/bracketleftbig
ϕe
αΨe
β/bracketrightbig
F{αβγ}
+/summationdisplay
αβγδ/tildewideχp
γ/hatwideP/bracketleftBig
ge
{αβγδ}ϕe
α/tildewideΨ+e
β/bracketrightBig
Yδ (4)
2The functions ϕe
α, Ψe
β,χp
γare the eigenfunctions of the electron in the field of He nucle i, contaminant atom electron
wave function, and pwave function in the field of He nuclei, screened by electron i n the ground state respectively. The
functions /tildewideΨ+e
β,/tildewideχp
γ,Yδare the electron wave function of contaminant ion (with char ge +1), the pwave function centered
on contaminant nuclei, the wave function of the nuclei relat ive motion in bound (molecular) state respectively. /hatwidePis
the permutation operator, which antisymmetrizes the total electronic wave function. The expansion coefficient F{αβγ}
has the sense of the nuclei relative motion wave function in t he scattering state, while ge
{αβγδ}can be interpreted as
Auger electron wave function. F{αβγ}andge
{αβγδ}include reaction amplitudes to be find.
The mentioned form of the wave function enables to take into a ccount physically important effects of exchange of
the electrons and antiproton between nuclei, as well as the a ntisymmetrization of the electronic wave-function. We
obtain the coupled equations system for functions F{αβγ},ge
{αβγδ}by substituting expansions (4) in the Shrodinger
equation for the interacting systems.
For the purpose of qualitative estimations of the rate of the exchange mechanism, we have truncated the mentioned
equation system to only few coupled equations.
B. Interaction potential.
The coupled equation system for F{αβγ},ge
{αβγδ}can be transformed into the one-channel Shrodinger equatio n for
the relative nucleus motion in the elastic channel F{α0β0γ0}≡F{ξ0}:
/parenleftBig
/hatwideTA+/hatwideV{ξ0}
AHe−i/hatwiderW{ξ0}
AHe−E{ξ0}/parenrightBig
F{ξ0}= 0 (5)
Such an equation includes a complex nonlocal interaction te rm/hatwideV{ξ0}
AHe−i/hatwiderW{ξ0}
AHe. This interaction describes elastic
scattering and absorption into inelastic channels and depe nds on quantum numbers {ξ0}. It turns out that leading
terms of the real part /hatwideV{ξ0}
AHeof such effective interaction have local form and can be inter preted as antiprotonic atom-
media atom potential in given state. We should mention that b oth local and nonlocal terms in /hatwideV{ξ0}
AHe−i/hatwiderW{ξ0}
AHeare
important for reaction rates calculation, nevertheless th e analysis of local real terms alone turns to be very useful
. Such a potential for (He+p)N,L−He interaction is shown on Fig.1. Important features of this potential are the
following:
1. There is a repulsive barrier between ( He+p)N,Land He at internuclear distance 3 au < R < 5.5 au (Fig.1). The
height of this barrier strongly depends on N,L (see also [15] ). Its height is about 0.2 eV for N=38, L=37 and is
negligible for N >42. Such a barrier appears as a result of antisymmetrization of 3-electron wave function of
interacting ( He+p)N,L−He atoms and represents an effect of Pauli repulsion. The mini mum classically allowed
interatomic separation distance, which is determined by th is repulsive part of effective interaction, plays an
important role for determination of quenching reaction rat es. For the antiprotonic state with N=39 it was
found to be Rc= 5.3 au. The repulsive barrier appears also in ( He+p)N,L−Ne and ( He+p)N,L−Ar effective
interaction. As it follows from our calculations Ne and Ar ca n penetrate to short enough distances during the
collision with antiprotonic He and this is a crucial point fo r estimation of antiprotonic transfer reactions.
2. At the internuclear distances Rfrom 1 au. to 3 au., the ( He+p)N,L−He potential is attractive. This attraction
is mainly due to the pexchange between the two nuclei. The range of the attractive part is determined by the
overlapping of antiprotonic states, centered on the two nuc lei; it vanishes rapidly as soon as the internuclear
distance becomes grater than two mean radii of antiprotonic state with quantum numbers N and L. This part
of interaction is important for antiprotonic transfer reac tions.
3. At large internuclear distances there is a weak polarizat ion attraction between ( He+p)N,Land contaminant
atom A:
/hatwideV{ξ0}
AHe→ −C{ξ0}
AHe
R6
This long range attractive interaction radically enhances inelastic cross-sections, specially in case of low tempera tures
(T<300K). The constant C{ξ0}
AHedepends on contaminant. This last statement is important fo r understanding the
difference in quenching effect of noble gas contaminants.
3We should mention that imaginary part /hatwiderW{ξ0}
AHeof the effective interaction is localized mainly at internuc lear distances
R≤3 au. Thus the repulsive barrier between ( He+p)N,Land He for N <42 prevents close collisions, which may
result in intensive inelastic transitions and quenching of metastable antiprotonic states.
C. Quenching cross-sections.
In this subsection we present the estimation of the antiprot on transfer cross-sections for different states of
(He+p)N,L.
We found strong dependence of quenching cross-sections on t he principal quantum number of the antiprotonic
atoms. In particular, the corresponding cross-sections of antiproton transfer for the states with 40 ≤N <42 are:
σNe,Ar
40≤N<42≈10−17cm2
Mentioned states become short-living ( τ≈10−7s) in the presence of noble gas contaminants with density ρ≈1018
cm−3.
In the same time the antiproton transfer probability for sta tes with N≤39 is negligible(see Fig.2). Such a
”threshold” behavior of the transfer cross-section as a fun ction of principal quantum number is clear from the followin g
qualitative argument. As it follows from the properties of e ffective interatomic interaction, the less is N of given
antiprotonic state the higher is the repulsive barrier and t he bigger is interatomic separation during the collision. O n
the other hand the less is N, the less is the overlapping of the antiprotonic functions centered on He and contaminant
atom, respectively for given interatomic separation. We ha ve found that N=40 plays a role of critical number for
antiproton transfer from He to Ne and Ar.
D. Experimental check.
The existing experimental data on noble gas contaminant que nching can now be explained in terms of state depen-
dent quenching mechanism.
The antiprotonic transfer reactions affect the population o f the states with 40 ≤N <42. These states are long
living in the absence of contaminants. Rather small concent ration of contaminant gases, like those used by OBELIX
(ρ≈1017cm−3), can produce measurable effects ( λquench ≈106s−1). The averaged over states quenching cross-section,
derived from OBELIX data, correspond to the antiproton tran sfer reaction cross-sections.
Much higher concentration of contaminant Ne or Ar( ρ≈1020cm−3), used in PS205 experiment, produce quenching
ratesλquench ≈108s−1, which make impossible to distinguish such states from the p rompt peak. On the other hand the
states with N <40 are not quenched by antiproton transfer reactions. The ma in contaminant quenching mechanism
for these states is induced Auger de-excitation [16,17] (se e Fig.2). The corresponding quenching cross-sections are
[17]:
σNe,Ar
N<40≈10−19cm2
The concentration of noble gas contaminants required to pro duce measurable quenching of these states is ρ≈
1020cm−3, corresponding to those used in PS205 experiment. Thus it ma y be expected that the results obtained by
PS205 experiment refer to the quenching of states with N <40. This fact enables to understand qualitatively the
discrepancy between the results of the two experimental gro ups (OBELIX and PS205) for Ne and Ar contaminant
quenching [3,4]. The difference in the contaminant densitie s (ρ≈1017cm−3for PS205, and ρ≈1020cm−3for
OBELIX) correspond to the difference between the extracted v alues of the average quenching cross-sections.
Some experiments can be suggested to clarify the situation.
First it seems reasonable to obtain results for the whole ran ge of contaminant densities to check if asymptotic
behaviors of quenching rates, which are different in the two e xperiments, match at the intermediate densities.
The direct check of the antiproton transfer reactions could be the observation of heavy fragments produced by
antiproton annihilation on contaminant nuclei among the de layed events.
The laser spectroscopy methods, similar to those applied fo r observing H2assisted resonances [5], seem to be also
useful to study noble gas contaminant quenching. In fact, in ducing laser transition from state with N=39 to states
withN≥40 in the presence of Ne or Ar at densities ρ≈1018cm−3, one should observe resonance in annihilation
events having width proportional to the contaminant concen tration.
4IV. CONCLUSION.
We have found that the approach, in which the state dependenc e of quenching rates is taken into account, enables
to explain existing experimental data. The mentioned above antiproton transfer reaction rates indeed have very sharp
dependence on antiprotonic Helium state quantum numbers. T he theoretical model suggested here, is based on the
following statements.
1. For the states with N <42 and Auger transition multipolarity ∆ l >3 there is a repulsive barrier which prevents
from close collisions in ”antiprotonic atom-medium atoms” interaction and therefore plays a stabilizing role. The
physical reason of such barrier is Pauli repulsion of the sat urated electronic shell of noble gases and the electron
of antiprotonic He. The mentioned barrier determines the mi nimum separation between atoms during collision,
on which quenching reaction rates critically depend.
2. The leading contaminant quenching mechanism of metastab le antiprotonic He states with 40 ≤N < 42 is
antiproton transfer reaction, followed by fast antiproton annihilation on the contaminant nucleus. The cross-
section of this type of reactions is estimated to be:
σNe,Ar
40≤N<42≈10−17cm2
In the same time the noble gas contaminant quenching of state s with N <40 is two orders of magnitude less.
3. The evolution of the antiprotonic atoms passes through th e stage of molecular ion formation, especially in the
presence of noble gas contaminant. This fact was first pointe d out by E. Zavattini [14]. In the present work we
studied short living antiprotonic molecular ion formation . In the same time the problem of possible existence
of long living states of antiprotonic molecular ion remains an open question.
Experimental test of the above presented theoretical resul ts may include direct observation of heavy fragments
among the delayed annihilation events, produced by antipro ton annihilation on contaminant nuclei as well as laser
induced transitions from states with N <40 to states with N≥40 in the presence of Ne or Ar at concentrations
ρ≈1018cm−3.
V. ACKNOWLEDGMENT.
One of the authors (AV) would like to thank P. Valiron, J. Carb onell and G. Korenman for useful discussions and
express his special acknowledgment to Italian Istituto Naz ionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN) for financial support.
[1] M.Iwasaki et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 (1991) 1246
[2] T.Yamazaki et al., Nature 361 (1993) 238; T.Yamazaki et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 63 (1989) 1590
[3] A. Bertin et al., Il Nuovo Cimento A 110 (1997) 419
[4] E. Widmann et al., Phys. Rev. A 49 (1995) 2870
[5] B.Ketzer et al., J.Chem. Phys 109 (1998) 424
[6] J. Eades et al., Hyperfine Interactions 103 (1996) 329
[7] G.T. Condo, Phys. Lett. 9 (1964) 65
[8] J.E. Russel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 23 (1969) 63; Phys. Rev. 188 (1969) 187; Phys. Rev. A 1 (1970) 721; A 1 (1970) 735; A 1
(1970) 742
[9] I. Shimamura , Phys. Rev. A 46 (1992) 3776
[10] T.Yamazaki and K.Ohtsuki, Phys. Rev. A 45 (1992) 6202
[11] N.Morita et al., Nucl. Instr. meth. A 330 (1992) 439
[12] V.I. Korobov and D.D. Bakalov, Phys. Rev. A 57 (1998) 1662
[13] O.D. Dalkarov, A.Yu. Voronin, Sov. Pisma JETP 60 (1994) 158
[14] L. Bracci and E. Zavatini, Phys. Rev. A 41 (1990) 2352
[15] P. Valiron, S. Sauge, J.Carbonell, ”Collisional stabi lity of antiprotonic helium atomcules” Talk on MESH worksho p, Udine,
Italy 1996
5[16] G. Ya. Korenman ”Effects of collisions on antiprotonic h elium metastable states”, INP MSU Preprint 97-I/452 (1997)
[17] A.Yu.Voronin, O.D. Dalkarov”Collisional dynamics of metastable antiprotonic atoms in He” Talk on MESH workshop,
Udine, Italy 1996
[18] B. Ketzer et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 1671
6/G32/G2c/G35 /G33/G2c/G30 /G33/G2c/G35 /G34/G2c/G30 /G34/G2c/G35 /G35/G2c/G30 /G35/G2c/G35/G2d/G38/G2d/G36/G2d/G34/G2d/G32/G30/G32/G34
/G28/G4e/G2c/G4c/G29/G3d/G28/G34/G31/G2c/G34/G30/G29/G28/G4e/G2c/G4c/G2c/G29/G3d/G28/G33/G38/G2c/G33/G37/G29/G56/G20/G28/G31/G30/G2d/G33/G20/G61/G2e/G75/G2e/G29
/G52/G28/G61/G2e/G75/G2e/G29
FIG. 1. State dependent antiprotonic atom-media He atom rep ulsive barrier
736 37 38 39 40 41 42-23-22-21-20-19-18-17-16Log σ (cm2)N
NStark transitionsMolecular ion formation
Induced Auger decay
FIG. 2. Ne contaminant quenching cross-sections as a functi on of antiprotonic atom state principal quantum number
8 |
Abstract
The presence of skew quadrupole fields will linearly
couple the x and y motions. The x and y motions can then be
written as the sum of two normal modes . This paper presents
analytical perturbation theory results for the tunes of the
normal modes. The results for the normal mode tunes are first
found correct to lowest order in the skew quadrupole fields.
The results are then carried one step further to include the
next higher order terms in the skew quadrupole fields. These
analytical results show that for the higher order shift in the
tune , the important harmonics of the skew quadrupole field
are the harmonics near the sum of the tunes. However the
harmonics closest to the sum of the tunes do not contribute to
the higher order tune splitting, the seperation of the tunes, as
they shift the two tunes about equally.This results in a lack of a
dominant harmonic for the higher order part of the tune
splitting, which complicates the understanding and correction
of the higher order part of the tune splitting. |
arXiv:physics/9910048v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 29 Oct 1999Wild cables and survivability of macroscopic
molecular structures in hot tokamak plasmas
A.B. Kukushkin, V.A. Rantsev-Kartinov
INF RRC “Kurchatov Institute”, Moscow, 123182, Russia
kuka@qq.nfi.kiae.su, rank@qq.nfi.kiae.su
Wild cables and survivability of macroscopic molecular str uctures in hot tokamak
plasmas
The evidences for tubular rigid-body structures are found i n tokamak plasmas,
which are similar to long-living filaments observed in a Z-pi nch ([1] Kukushkin,
Rantsev-Kartinov, Proc. 26-th EPS conf., http://epsppd.e pfl.ch/cross/p2087.htm).
These structures are suggested to be a ”wild cables” produce d by the channelling
of EM energy pumped from the external electric circuit and pr opagated to the
plasma core in the form of the high frequency EM waves along hy pothetical (carbon)
microsolid skeletons [1] which are assembled during electr ic breakdown. It is shown
that such skeletons may be protected from the high-temperat ure ambient plasma by
the TEM waves produced thanks to the presence of microsolid s keletons.
PACS: 52.55.Fa
1. Introduction .
Recently the anomalously high survivability of some filamen ts in laboratory plas-
mas was illustrated [1(a)] with tracing the history of the ty pical long rectilinear
rigid-body block in a Z-pinch. The pictures were taken in vis ible light at different
time moments from different positions, during about half a mi crosecond, that is
comparable with the entire duration of the Z-pinch discharg e (see Fig. 1 in [1(a)]).
The original images were processed with the help of the metho d [2(a,b)] of multilevel
dynamical contrasting (MDC) of the images.
The phenomenon of long-living filaments (LLFs) [1,2] in vari ous laboratory plas-
mas (gaseous Z-pinches [2(a,c)), plasma foci [2(e)], and to kamaks [2(d)]) has lead us
to a conclusion [1(a)] (see also references therein) that on ly the quantum (molecular)
long-range bonds inside LLFs may be responsible for their ob served survivability,
rather than the mechanisms of a classical particles plasma. Specifically, the carbon
nanotubes have been proposed to be the major microscopic bui lding blocks of the
respective microsolid component of LLFs because such nanot ubes may be produced
in various electric discharges (see, e.g., [3]).
2. Rigid-body structures in tokamak plasmas.
An analysis of available databases carried out with the help of the MDC method
[2(a,b)], shows the presence of tubular structures. The typ ical examples for tokamaks
TM-2, T-4, T-6 and T-10 (major radius R= 0.4,0.9,0.7,1.5m, minor radius
a= 8,20,20,33cm, toroidal field BT= 2,4.5,0.9,3T, total current Ip∼
25,200,100,300kA, electron temperature Te(0)∼0.6,3,0.4,2keV, electron
density ne(0)∼(2,3,2,3)×1013cm−3, respectively) are given in [4]. The figures
presented there are taken in visible light with the help of a s trick camera and high-
1speed camera. The effective time exposure is about 10 µsec. The major features of
the structuring are as follows:
(a) the length scale of the rigid-body tubular structuring v aries in a broad range,
from comparable with the minor radius of a tokamak to less tha n millimeter scale;
(b) the typical tubule seems to be a cage assembled from the (m uch) thinner,
long rectilinear rigid-body structures which look like a so lid thin-walled cylinders;
(c) the (almost rectilinear) tubules form a network which st arts at the farthest
periphery and is assembled by the tubules of various directi ons;
(d) a radial sectioning of the above network is resolved whic h looks like a distinct
heterogeneity at a certain magnetic flux surface(s) (such a s ectioning was suggested
[1(b),2(d)] to cause the observed internal transport barri ers in tokamaks).
The pictures include, in particular, the periphery of the to kamak T-10 plasma
illuminated by the carbon pellet emission (the pellet track is outside the picture).
The system of concentric circles and the inner almost rectil inear tubule located
approximately on the axis of these circles form together a so rt of the squirrel’s wheel.
Major axis of this system is directed nearly orthogonal to to roidal magnetic field.
The system is 5 cm long and of 4 ÷4.5cmdiameter. The central and boundary
vertical tubules are of 4 mmdiameter. Similar structures appear to form in all
tokamaks, i.e. with no regard to pellet injection.
3. Probable mechanism of formation and survivability of mic rosolid
skeletons in tokamak plasmas.
(i) A deposit of carbon nanotubes, of the relevant quantity, is produced at the in-
ner surface of the chamber during discharge training, from e ither graphite-containing
construction elements (like, e.g. limiters or walls) or car bon films produced by the
deposition of the organic oils normally used in the vacuum pu mping systems (the
nanotubes may form due to rolling up of monolayers ablated fr om solid surfaces or
thin films).
(ii) Electrical breakdown occurs along chamber’s surface ( or its part, namely, the
inner side of the torus) and is based on the substantially enh anced rate of (cold)
autoemission and thermoelectric emission of electrons by t he nanotube (as compared
to macroscopic needles).
(iii) The microsolid skeletons are assembled from individu al nanotubes which
are attracted and welded to each other by the passing electri c current to produce
self-similar tubules [1(a)] of macroscopic size, of centim eter length scale and larger
(this electric current is produced by the poloidal magnetic fieldBpolpumped from
the external circuit into the chamber).
(iv) Once the skeleton (or its relevant portion) is assemble d, the substantial
part of the incoming Bpolbrakes at it and produces a cold heterogeneous electric
current sheath made of conventional plasma. A part of Bpolnear the skeleton is
bouncing along its every rectilinear section (i.e. between the closest points of the
deviation, even small enough, from rectilinearity). This p roduces a high-frequency
EM wave which, in turn, produces, by the force of the high-fre quency (HF) pressure
[5] (sometimes called in literature the Miller force), the c ylindrical cavities of a
2depleted electron density (primary channels) around the sk eletons.
(v) At the skeleton’s (and plasma column) edge the bouncing b oundary of the
cavity from the scrape-off layer side produces a HF valve for t he incoming Bpol,
because of the node of the standing wave at the edge. This work s as a HF convertor
of a part of the incoming Bpolwhich is transported then along the skeleton in the form
of EM waves. (Besides, a part of Bpolwhich reaches the cavity in the conventional
regime of the diffusion of Bpol, is transformed into a HF field by the oscillating
boundary of the cavity). The EM waves sustain the cavity and p rotect the skeletons
from direct access of thermal plasma particles. Therefore t he skeleton appears to
be an inner wire of the cable network (a wild cable network) in which the role of a
screening conductor is played by the ambient plasma.
In this paper, we restrict ourselves to quantifying the abov e picture in its quasi-
stationary stage of energy inflow through the wild cable netw ork.
For the frequency ωcof the major harmonic of EM oscillations trapped in ra-
dial direction in a cylindrical almost-vacuum cavity of effe ctive radius rcaround
microsolid tubule of length Lc, one has ( ωpeis plasma frequency, c, the speed of
light):
ωc≃πc/L c≤ωpe. (1)
For tokamak geometry, one has the following chain of transfo rmations of EM waves.
The cavities at plasma edge (they normally possess some decl ination with respect
to the boundary magnetic surface) allows the field lines of Bpolto move directly
inside the cavity and thus produce the magnetic (H) wave. For the strongest EM
wave among H waves, H11wave, one has: λ≃2Lc≥λcrit∼αrc, where λcritis
the critical wavelength for free propagation of the respect ive EM wave in the cable
(αH11≈π). Therefore, the trapping of H11wave in the edge cavity leads to the
wiring of magnetic field lines round the inner wire that produ ces TEM and electric
(E) waves propagating in both directions (the strongest wav e among E-waves will be
E01wave). However, the E01wave will also be trapped in the cavity ( αE01≈2.6), in
contrast to TEM wave ( λTEM
crit=∞). Also, the H and E-waves, in contrast to TEM
wave, are detached from the wall (in radial direction, these waves are the standing
ones) so that only the TEM wave can actually maintain the boun dary of the cavity.
Thus, the edge cable converts a part of Bpolinto HF TEM wave propagating inward.
The signs of this HF field of which a small part is reflected outw ard may be found
in the measurements of EM fields outside plasma column (see be low).
It is assumed also that the presence of an external stationar y strong magnetic
field doesn’t influence substantially the form of the cavity, because even for ωc≪ωHe
(ωHeis electron gyrofrequency) the amplitude /vectorE0of the HF electric field may have
a non-zero component parallel to magnetic field (in that case we will assign /vectorE0to
the respective component of the amplitude).
The distribution of plasma density around the inner wire can be described by
a set of equations for the two-temperature quasi-hydrodyna mics of a plasma in a
HF EM field [6]. Under condition lE≫rD, where lEis the characteristic length
of spatial profile of E0(/vector r) and rDis Debye radius, one can neglect the deviation
3from quasi-neutrality and arrive at quasi-Boltzmann distr ibution (see e.g. [6(b)]):
ne=ne0exp(−Ψ/(Te+Ti)), where Ψ = e2E2
0/(4meω2
c), ne0is background density
of plasma electrons. The condition for plasma detachment fr om the inner wire reads:
eU0≥2π(rc/Lc)/radicalBig
Amec2(Te+Ti), A∼(r2
w/r2
c)ln(ne0/nemin), (2)
where U0is the effective voltage bias of the TEM wave in the cable ( E0(r)∼U0/r;
ris the radial coordinate in a circular cylindrical cable, rw, radius of inner wire),
neminis the minimal density permitted, at a temperature Te, for the inner wire to
be not destroyed by the plasma impact. For tokamak case ( ne0∼1013cm−3), we
takeA∼5.
Equation (3) is to be coupled to the condition of the applicab ility of the concept
of the ( −∇Ψ) force, ρ≪lE(ρis the amplitude of electron’s oscillations in the HF
electric field). For our estimates, this limitation, howeve r, may be weakened and
takes the form:
eU0≤π2mec2rc(rc−rw)/L2
c, (3)
And finally, the HF electric field in the cables may be related t o the observable
turbulent electric fields because wild cables are the strong sources of electrostatic
oscillations in plasma. As far as there should be a sort of the feedback between
plasma and cavity, one may consider the cable’s cavity as a so liton with such a
strong reduction of the eigenfrequency (a redshift) that so liton’s velocity becomes
independent from dispersion. For W/nT ≤1 (W≡E2
0/16π) this gives rough
estimate:
W/nT∼(1−(ωc/ωpe)). (4)
At the quasi-stationary stage of discharge, one may evaluat e the spatial distribution
of the amplitude Eturbof the turbulent electric field, regardless of its spectral d istri-
bution, as being described, in radial direction with respec t to the individual cable,
by the scaling law of the TEM wave. For the contribution of a si ngle cable, one has:
Eturb(r)∼U0/r. (5)
Equations (1), (2) and (3), along with rough estimates of Eqs .(4) and (5), estab-
lish a set of equations that enable one to evaluate the plausi bility of the presence of
wild cables in tokamak plasmas, using available data on meas uring the values of ωc
[7] (and/or Lc) and Eturb[8].
Now we can test the problem for typical data from the peripher y of the T-10
tokamak, keeping in mind the closeness of T-10 regimes analy zed in [7,8] and those
for Figure 4. First, the spectra of the HF EM field in the gap bet ween the plasma
column and the chamber measured in the GHz frequency range re vealed [7] a distinct
bump at νc∼(4÷5)×109Hz, of the width ∼2×109Hz, which always exists in
ohmic heating regimes and increases with electron cyclotro n heating (this bump
is a stable formation and it moves to the lower frequencies an d turns into a peak
only under condition of strong instabilities, especially d isruption instability). This
4givesLc≈3cm. Note that this is in reasonable agreement with the data from the
high-speed camera picture for T-10 plasma periphery where Lc≈4÷5cm.
Second, the analysis of observations of Stark broadening of deuterium spectral
lines (and their polarization state) at the periphery of the T-10 tokamak in the
region of Te∼100eV, allowed [8] to estimate the spectral range of HF electric
fields ( ω≈ωpe∼1011Hz), their amplitude ( E∼10÷20kV/cm ) and angular
distribution.
ForLc= 3cm, T e=Ti= 100 eV, Eqs. (2) and (3) give a constraint S≡
(rc−rw)/Lc≥0.03 . For ( rc−rw)∼rc, from Eq. (2), one can find the absolute
minimum of voltage bias: ( U0)min≈5kV. For S= 0.03, Eqs. (2) and (3) give
U0≈5kV, while for S= 0.1 one has 15 ≤U0(kV)≤50. Further, Eq. (4) gives
E0(rc)≥50kV/cm , while, for rc∼1÷2mmand< r >∼1÷3cm(< r > is the
average distance between individual cables in the region of observation), Eq. (5)
gives the estimate E0(rc)≥102kV/cm , orU0≥10kV. The results of numerical
solution of the Poisson equation [6] show that, e.g., for U0= 30kVat the distances
r∼2÷3mmthe plasma density falls down, with respect to its backgroun d value,
by the seven-eight orders of magnitude.
4. Conclusions
The experimental data of Sec. 2 and the model of Sec. 3 support the hypothesis
[1] that plasmas with long-living filaments is such a form of t he fourth state of matter,
which is an intricate mixture of three other states (gaseous , liquid and solid). The
presence of the inner wire (namely, electrically conductin g microsolid skeleton) in the
wild cable is responsible not only for the observed anomalou s mechanical stability of
this structure but also for the formation of TEM waves in the c avity that is critical
for the self-sustainment of the cavity and for the transport of EM energy to plasma
core.
It follows that observed structuring could be:
(i) a strong candidate for the nonlocal (non-difusion) comp onent of heat trans-
port (and observed phenomena of fast nonlocal responses) in tokamaks;
(ii) a powerful source of non-linear waves and (strong) turb ulence throughout
plasma volume;
(iii) a low-dissipation waveguide responsible for the spat ial profile of poloidal
magnetic field in tokamaks, rather than total resistance of p lasma (in agreement
with the observed applicability of Spitzer, or close, resis tivity to describing the
ohmic heat release in plasma);
(iv) a universal phenomenon in well-done laboratory plasma s and space; in par-
ticular, similar wild cables may form in gaseous and wire-ar ray Z-pinches and be
responsible for the fast nonlocal transport of EM energy tow ard Z-pinch axis.
Acknowledgments.
The authors are indebted to V.M. Leonov, S.V. Mirnov and I.B. Semenov, K.A.
Razumova, and V.Yu. Sergeev for presenting the originals of the data from tokamaks
T-6, T-4, TM-2, and T-10, respectively. The authors appreci ate discussions of
the paper with V.V. Alikaev, V.I. Poznyak and V.L. Vdovin, an d participants of
5seminars in the Institute of Nuclear Fusion. Our special tha nks to V.I. Kogan for
his interest and support, and V.D. Shafranov, for valuable d iscussion of the paper.
REFERENCES
[1] Kukushkin A.B., Rantsev-Kartinov V.A., Proc. 26-th Eur . Phys. Soc. conf.
on Plasma Phys. and Contr. Fusion, Maastricht, Netherlands , June 1999, (a) p.
873 (http://epsppd.epfl.ch/cross/p2087.htm); (b) p. 1737 (p4096.htm).
[2] Kukushkin A.B., Rantsev-Kartinov V.A., (a) Laser and Pa rt. Beams, 16,
445 (1998); (b) Rev. Sci. Instrum., 70, 1387 (1999); (c) Ibid, p. 1421; (d) Ibid.,
p. 1392; (e) Kukushkin A.B., et. al., Fusion Technology, 32, 83 (1997). [3] Eletskii
A.V., Physics-Uspekhi, 167, 945 (1997). [4] Kukushkin A.B., Rantsev-Kartinov
V.A., Preprint of the RRC Kurchatov Institute, IAE-6157/6, Moscow, October 1999
(submitted to JETP Lett.).
[5] Gaponov A.V., Miller M.A., Zh. Exp. Teor. Fiz. (Sov. Phys . JETP),
34, 242 (1958); Volkov T.F., In: Plasma Physics and the Problem of Controlled
Thermonuclear Reaction, Ed. M.A.Leontovich, [In Rus.], US SR Acad.Sci., 1958,
Vol. 3, p. 336, Vol. 4, p. 98; Sagdeev R.Z., Ibid., Vol.3, p. 34 6.
[6] (a) Gorbunov L.M., Uspekhi Fiz. Nauk (Sov. Phys. Uspekhi ),109, 631
(1973); (b) Litvak A.G., In: Voprosy Teorii Plazmy (Reviews of Plasma Phys.),
Eds. M.A.Leontovich and B.B.Kadomtsev, [In Rus.], vol. 10, p. 164.
[7] Poznyak V.I., et. al. Proc. 1998 ICPP and 25-th Eur. Phys. Soc. Conf. on
Plasma Phys. and Contr. Fusion, 1998, Prague, ECA Vol. 22C (1 998) p. 607.
[8] Rantsev-Kartinov V.A., Fizika Plazmy (Sov. J. Plasma Ph ys),14, 387 (1987);
Gavrilenko V.P., Oks E.A., Rantsev-Kartinov V.A., Pis’ma Z h. Exp. Teor. Fiz.
(JETP Lett.), 44, 315 (1987).
6 |
arXiv:physics/9910049v1 [physics.class-ph] 29 Oct 1999Possible Self-Organised Criticality and Dynamical Cluste ring of Traffic flow in Open
Systems
M. E. L´ arraga, J. A. del R´ ıo
Centro de Investigaci´ on en Energ´ ıa,
Universidad Nacional Aut´ onoma de M´ exico,
A.P.34, 62580 Temixco, Mor. M´ exico
email: antonio@servidor.unam.mx
Anita Mehta∗
Oxford Physics, Clarendon Laboratory,
Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PU, U.K.
email: a.mehta@physics.ox.ac.uk
We focus in this work on the study of traffic in opensystems using a modified version of an existing
cellular automaton model. We demonstrate that the open syst em is rather different from the closed
system in its ’choice’ of a unique steady-state density and velocity distribution, in dependently of the
initial conditions , reminiscent of self-organised criticality. Quantities o f interest such as average
densities and velocities of cars, exhibit phase transition s between free flow and the jammed state, as
a function of the braking probability Rin a way that is very different from closed systems. Velocity
correlation functions show that the concept of a dynamical cluster , introduced earlier in the context
of granular flow is also relevant for traffic flow models.
I. INTRODUCTION
The flow of traffic in congested urban conditions is a subject of burgeoning interest in many disciplines at the
present time; on the one hand traffic scientists [1], [2] are co ncerned with the formulation of models which could
study and with luck, ease, congestion problems in the real wo rld, while physicists see the subject as an interesting
paradigm for complex systems [3]. Typically such studies ha ve considered the behaviour of closed systems, that is,
systems with periodic boundary conditions which are isolat ed in the sense that the number of cars is conserved. Here
by contrast we focus on the study of open systems where nonequ ilibrium conditions greatly modify the underlying
physics, via the introduction and disappearance of cars at t he two ends. Even in the steady state, we find that the
construction of the phase diagram is totally different, invo lving as it does an expansion of the phase space, from the
socalled ’fundamental’ diagram obtained for the closed ver sion [1].
The present study is based in the context of the extensively s tudied model of Nagel and Schreckenberg [1], [4];
this involves four cell-updating steps involving braking, stochastic driver reaction, and car movement/acceleratio n.
Most studies including stochasticity, as in the above model s, have been for closed systems with periodic boundary
conditions, with open systems studied mainly [5] in determi nistic models.
Here we study the effect of open boundary conditions (as occur s in actual traffic flow) on a modified Nagel-
Schreckenberg model. The modification involves stochastic changes to the car occurring before the braking step, to
model the behaviour of an ’anticipatory’ driver. Our result s include i) a qualitative change of the phase diagram, with
aunique steady state for a given braking parameter R, reached from a variety of initial conditions. This is remin iscent
of ideas of self-organised criticality (SOC) [6], introduc ed earlier in the context of sandpiles. ii) the manifestatio n of
a peak in velocity correlation functions, at specific values ofR, reminiscent of the dynamical clustering that has been
observed in granular media [7].
The NS model has also been developed recently [8] to show meta stable states [9] of very high flow. However we have
focused on (a modified verions of) the simpler, classic NS mod el to show, in a well-studied context, that open boundary
conditions induce qualitatively new SOC-like behaviour, a s well as interesting aspects of dynamical clustering. Thes e
could, in principle, be of conceptually useful relevance to more complex models of traffic flow.
This paper is organised as follows. In the first section we pre sent our model. In the next section we present the
results concerning the steady-state regime in the open syst ems under study. Lastly we discuss our results and compare
our predictions with observations on real traffic.
∗Present and permanent address: S N Bose National Centre for B asic Sciences, Block JD, Sector III, Salt Lake, Calcutta 700
091, INDIA, email: anita@boson.bose.res.in
1II. THE MODEL
In the real world, traffic flow always occurs in open systems, i. e. those where cars are always interchanged between
some local environment and its surroundings; thus for examp le, the number of cars is notconserved in general in any
section of a highway. However most studies involving cellul ar automata modelling of such systems have sought to
focus on the evolution of traffic in closed systems subjected t o periodic boundary conditions. In this study we seek
to model more closely some situations in traffic flow by looking at systems with openboundaries where, as in reality,
the number of cars is not conserved.
We base our model on the Nagel-Schreckenberg [4] cellular au tomaton model, but with the addition of an important
modification involving the order of the operators. Before di scussing this, we define the model in its conventional form:
The model consists of a one-dimensional array of cells each o f which can be occupied by a car with velocity v
between vminandvmax,withvmin= 1 and vmax∈ {1, ..,5}. Subject to the non-overlapping of cars, the rules for traffic
flow are formulated as follows (we assume that the updating ti met= 1 ):
P.Proximity step
For cars i,i−1, ifvi+xi≤vi−1+xi−1, then v′
i−1→vi+xi−xi−1−1; else v′
i−1→vi−1, where the primes represent
the updated velocities. In words, this implies that the driv er of a car brakes if the car in front is close enough to
cause a collision, but not otherwise. Put another way, the dr iver would like to be at the maximal possible velocity
consistent with the avoidance of collisions.
N.Noise step
This reflects the stochastic element which, in the original m odel, allows for the random deceleration of a fraction
Rof the cars by one unit of velocity. Thus for example in the cas e of the ithcar, the velocity vimay either stay the
same or, if it is part of the randomly selected fraction Rof cars, decrease its velocity by one unit; thus, v′
i→vi−1
(except if vi=vmin).
M.Movement step
This updates in parallel the positions of the cars; once agai n for the ithcar, say, this implies x′
i→vi+xi.
A.Acceleration step
This updates in parallel the velocities of the cars by one uni t: thus, v′
i→vi+ 1 (except if vi=vmax).
We emphasise that the above represents the original form of t he model in [1], [4], and now proceed to discuss our
modification to it, which involves the order of the operators . Our initial investigations indicated that the order of
rulesPNMA led to several unphysical configurations, whereas the order NPMA did not. The reason for this is that
with the noise being applied afterthe proximity step, cars are unable to adjust to the noise-re duced velocities of the
traffic in front. This could lead to an artificial jam, arising from the order of the rules rather than from the r eal
dynamics of the system. Also, importantly, our choice of rul es could be said to model the behaviour of anticipatory
drivers rather than, as in the case of the PNMA ordering, reactive drivers.
III. THE STEADY STATE IN AN OPEN SYSTEM: RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
In this section we describe both qualitative and quantitati ve features of our results for the steady state of traffic
flow in an open system, as described by the model in the precedi ng section. First of all, we chose the system size
L, randomly generated an initial distribution of car positio ns and velocities, and then introduced a car with velocity
v= 5 at the origin at every time step. Next we updated the indivi dual car velocities and positions in accord with
the rules of the above model and waited for the system to asymp tote to its steady-state density (where we used the
χ- squared rule to ensure that this limit was obtained). Final ly we recorded the densities and velocities of cars at
different positions for use in our later analysis. We mention below some of the specific features of our procedure to
ensure convergence to the steady state:
•We chose system sizes Lfrom 200 to 10 ,000 units, and found that although the time required to reach the
steady state was enormous as the system size was increased, t he steady-state densities or velocities so obtained
did not vary appreciably. In fact we found that for the really large system sizes of say 10 ,000 units, most of
the cars after a distance of ∼400 units showed the behaviour trivially to be expected of th at value of R, i.e.
they were either jammed or free-flowing, and thus no longer im pacted by the initial car. We thus present in this
paper only data obtained for L= 200 ,400.
•We varied the rules governing the introduction of the initia l car, for example, choosing to introduce such a car
at alternate rather than consecutive timesteps, and found t hat this made no significant difference to our results.
2•Lastly we varied the ’seed’ configurations to do with initial densities and velocities on the line, and found that
this made absolutely no difference to our results. The result s presented in this work involve averages over 1000
realisations of the experiment.
A. Qualitative results
Our first step is to compare the spacetime diagrams for the cas e of closed boundary conditions and open ones, on
the former of which one of us has carried out extensive invest igations [10]. We present below the spacetime diagrams
for an open system with R= 0.7 in Fig. 1 and a system with periodic boundary conditions wit h the same Rin Fig.
2. We note that while the specification of an initial density b y definition determines the final density in the closed
system (since cars cannot be ’lost’ in the presence of closed boundaries) it does no such thing in the case of the open
system, where, in the example shown in Fig. 1, the system evol ves from an initially low-density configuration to a
jammed state. In some sense we see already the signs that the o pen system ’chooses’ its own final density, while the
closed system simply maintains its initially chosen one.
Next we examine the profile of the velocity distribution in th e open (Fig. 3a) and closed (Fig. 3b) systems for
thesame initial density and value of Rin both cases. For the closed system, we find a relatively larg er proportion
of high-velocity cars persisting even after a long time has e lapsed, compared to the open system, where the number
of cars with velocities greater than 1 decays to zero after an initial transient. (It is important to emphasise that the
value of the ’most probable’ velocity in each case will depen d onR). Additionally, while there is a kind of periodicity
that is evident in the case of the closed system, with ’waves’ of cars of a given velocity appearing and disappearing,
separated by local ’spurts’ in their value, no such phenomen on is observed in the open system, where the number
of cars with velocity 1 gradually increases with time to span the system (although there is an interesting rise in the
number of cars with velocity 2, till its decay to zero at t≈500). We emphasise once again that these examples are
chosen only to bring out the differences between the closed an d open systems, and that for example a different value
ofRwould result in qualitatively similar but quantitatively d ifferent conclusions.
Next, in Figs. 4 and 5, we show that for the open system, initia l conditions involving different densities and different
randomly generated configurations, all converge to the unique densities and velocities characterising the steady state
forR= 0.3 and 0 .7 respectively. We note that the time required by the open sys tem to converge to the steady state is
about 10 ×L, where Lis the system size [11], with the exception of the region arou nd the jamming transition, where
the transient time can be about 100 ×L. We show, for comparison, the situation for the closed syste m in Figure 6;
here the initial densities are maintained, and the value of t he steady-state velocity depends strongly on the value of
the density, unlike the case of the open system . Also, in comparison with the open system, the convergence t imes are
virtually instantaneous.
We see thus that in the open system, arbitrary initial densities and velocity distributions evolve towards a unique
steady state for a given Rcharacterised by a final mean density and velocity distribut ion. The consequences of this
apparently simple statement are profound; for example the f undamental flux vs. density diagram obtained in the case
of the closed system [12] for a given value of Rcollapses to a point in the open system, since there is only one possible
value of density ρand velocity vin the latter case.
We discuss this unique ’selection’ by the open system of stea dy-state densities and velocities later, but for the
present, simply assert that this convergence enables us to w ork with average densities and velocities (obtained by
averaging over time, in the steady state, as well as space, an d finally over different initial configurations and noise
realisations of the system) in the next subsection.
B. Densities, velocities and correlation functions: a quan titative analysis
We next present and interpret quantitative results on avera ge velocities and densities of cars in the steady state,
in addition to examining their fluctuations via correlation functions. In Fig. 7a, the mean density and velocity for
systems of size L= 200, 400 are plotted as a function of R. As is evident, the curves are coincident, reflecting our
contention that the steady state obtained in our work is not s ystem-size dependent beyond about L= 200. We see
strong evidence of a phase transition which arises around Rc∼0.55,ρc∼0.55. (These numbers are obtained from an
analysis ofdρ
dRvsR, which is shown in Fig. 7b ; we will have more to say about the la tter graph and its implications
later on).
We notice that the density curve is a smooth S-shaped functio n while that for the velocity is a smooth inverse
S-shaped function. Their intersection indicates the likel y neighbourhood of the phase transition observed between
regions of low ρand high v(’freely flowing traffic’) on the one hand, and regions of high ρand low v(’congested’
3or ’jammed’ traffic) on the other. Earlier work on closed syste ms seems to categorise phase transitions in traffic flow
as being of first order [12] but we are unable to state this defin itively in the context of our finite-size investigations
on open systems. In particular the ’selection’ by the system of steady state densities and velocities for a given value
ofRis rather reminiscent of the phenomenon of self-organised c riticality, [6], where the system organises itself into
a unique state for a given value of a parameter. On this basis Rwould seem to be analogous to a temperature-like
variable which then determines the density ρ, whose thermodynamic analogue is the system energy.
However, a deeper examination of this issue is relegated to f uture work, as for example the shape ofdρ
dRvsR
(analogous to the temperature dependence of the specific hea t of a thermodynamic system) depicted in Fig. 7b,
could equally well represent a second-order transition for a finite system, or for example a kind of lambda transition,
reminiscent of the first-order transition in glassy systems [13].
We now turn to the discussion of fluctuations via the analysis of correlation functions. Clearly the < ρxρx′>
correlation function is not very informative at least in its ’bare’ version (i.e. where its value is either 0 or 1 at a site) ;
on the other hand, the < vxvx′>correlation function is meaningful. (Since we look only at t he steady state behaviour
here, time correlation functions such as < vtvt′>are likewise not meaningful). In Fig. 8 we present the behavi our
of this as a function of position, for different values of R. We note that the behaviour is generic, with well- defined
first and second neighbour ’shells’, particularly for value s ofRwell away from the transition point. Additionally, we
remark on the specific meaning of such dynamical correlations; in analogy with earlier work on granular flow [ 7], we
define a dynamical cluster for a given Ras being the number of sites which are within the first shell of the velocity
correlation function . The physical import of a dynamical cluster is that it reflects the range over which cars are
correlated in their velocities; we observe that the size of a dynamical cluster increases as Rdecreases . In other words,
as fewer cars face random obstacles, more and more of them dev elop velocity correlations, i.e. they begin to ’move
together’ in clumps. Returning to the analogy with granular flow, this mirrors the situation found in earlier work [7]
where a decrease in external perturbations applied to a gran ular system causes an increase in the size of a typical
dynamical cluster of grains.
IV. DISCUSSION
We have examined traffic flow in open systems, and found that the nature of the phase diagram is completely
altered with respect to the more usual case of periodic bound ary conditions. In particular, the fundamental diagram
of flux versus density as a function of the parameter Rpresented recently for closed systems by Eisenblatter et al [12]
collapses to a point in the case of an open system; thus, at a gi venR, traffic flow in an open system is characterised
by aunique density and velocity distribution, independently o f initial conditions .
This unusual and very robust feature leads us to suggest some thermodynamic analogies for the key quantities
in traffic flow in open systems: thus, for example the thermodynamic analogues of density ρand braking probability
Rare respectively energy and temperature . Following this line of reasoning, we speculate that traffic fl ow in open
systems could either be a paradigm of self-organised critic ality, or on the other hand be representative of a first-order
phase transition in a finite system. The transition in questi on, that between jammed and free flow, appears to be
characterised by a discontinuity in the analogue of the spec ific heat as a function of R, i.e.dρ
dRplotted vs Rshows a
lambda-transition which could be characteristic either of glassy behaviour of indeed of self-organised criticality.
Various special cases of traffic flow modelled by cellular auto mata have been examined and found to exhibit self-
organised criticality [11]; for example, the case of the out flow region of a big traffic jam under cruise control conditions
[14] was found to exhibit this. However, we reiterate that ou r work is to our knowledge the first to investigate the
specific issue of the phase diagram as a function of the brakin g probability Runder the most general conditions . Our
striking findings regarding the selection by the system of a unique density and velocity d istribution for arbitrary initial
conditions suggest that it may well be a rather general parad igm of self-organised criticality, though future work is in
progress to investigate this.
Lastly, we mention that in recent experimental work [9] ther e has been a suggestion that in addition to the transition
between jammed and free flow, there could be a transition to ’s ynchronised’ flow where cars neither move freely, nor
stay jammed, but continue moving by synchronising their vel ocities. Our findings with regard to the dynamical cluster
mentioned in the earlier section appear to be in accord with t his, in that dynamical clusters, as discussed earlier in
the context of granular flow [7], are clusters whose constitu ents are strongly correlated in their velocities. We hope
to explore some of these issues elsewhere.
4V. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
AM acknowledges the generous hospitality, over many visits , to the Centro de Investigaci´ on en Energ ´ia in Temixco,
where a large portion of this work was carried out. This work w as partially supported by DGAPA-UNAM under
project IN117798. We are very grateful to Subodh Shenoy for a careful reading of the manuscript.
[1] K. Nagel and M. Schreckenberg, J. Phys. I (France) I2, 2221 (1992).
[2]Traffic and Granular Flow , eds. D.E. Wolf, M. Schreckenberg, and A. Bachem (World Scie ntific, Singapore, 1996).
[3] see for example papers on the asymmetric exclusion proce ss (ASEP), such as C. Godreche, J.M. Luck, M. E. Evans, D.
Mukamel, S. Sandow and E. R. Speer, J. Phys. A 28, 6039 (1995).
[4] A. Schadschneider and M. Schreckenberg, J. Phys. A 26, L679 (1993).
[5] B. S. Kerner and W. Konhauser, Phys. Rev. E 50, 50 (1994).
[6] P. Bak, C. Tang and K. Wiesenfeld Phys. Rev. A 38, 368 (1988).
[7] G. C. Barker and Anita Mehta, Phys. Rev. A 45, 3435 (1992); Anita Mehta and G. C. Barker Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 394
(1991); Granular Matter: An Interdisciplinary Approach , ed. Anita Mehta (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1994).
[8] R. Barlovic, L. Santen, A. Schadschneider and M. Schreck enberg, Eur. Phys. J. B 5, 793 (1998).
[9] B.S. Kerner and H. Rehborn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 4030 (1997).
[10] M. E. L´ arraga, ” Simulaci´ on del Transito Vehicular en Carreteras Usando Au t´ omatas Celulares ”, Thesis Benemerita Uni-
versidad de Puebla (M´ exico, 1997).
[11] T. Nagatani, J. Phys. A 28, L119 (1995).
[12] L. Eisenbl¨ atter, L. Santen, A Schadschneider and M. Sc hreckenberg, Phys. Rev. E 57, 1309 (1998).
[13] G.S. Grest and S.R. Nagel, J. Phys. Chem. 91, 4916 (1987); R.M. Ernst, S. R. Nagel and G.S. Grest, Phys. Re v. B43,
8070 (1991).
[14] K. Nagel and M. Paczuski, Phys. Rev. E 51, 2909 (1995).
VI. FIGURE CAPTIONS
Figure 1. Spacetime diagram for traffic flow in an open system co rresponding to a braking probability R= 0.7,
and starting with an initial density ρi= 0.2.
Figure 2. Spacetime diagram for traffic flow in a closed system c orresponding to a braking probability R= 0.7, and
a density ρ= 0.2.
Figure 3. Profile of the velocity distribution for traffic flow i n a) an open system and b) a closed system corresponding
to a braking probability R= 0.7, and starting with an initial density ρi= 0.2.
Figure 4. Plots of the time evolution of the a) density and b) a verage velocity of traffic in an open system for two
initial densities ρi= 0.2 and ρi= 0.7, and braking probability R= 0.7. Both initial conditions evolve to a single
density characteristic of the jammed state.
Figure 5. Same as Figures 4 but with braking probability R= 0.3; the final state is, as expected, characteristic of
free flow in this case.
Figure 6. Evolution of the time dependent averaged velocity for closed systems with two initial densities ρ= 0.2
andρ= 0.7, and braking probability R= 0.3. In this case we notice that the final state depends strongly on the
(initial) values of the density.
Figure 7. a) The ’fundamental diagram’ of traffic flow in open sy stems; the free-flow to jamming transition occurs
in the vicinity of the intersection of the density and veloci ty curves as a function of braking probability R. b) plot of
dρ
dRvsR; note the strong resemblance to the lambda transition in gla ssy systems. Triangles indicate the results for a
system of length L= 200 while open circles indicate the data for a system size L= 400.
Figure 8. Velocity-velocity correlation functions < vxvx′>corresponding to a range of different values of the
braking probability R.
5 |
1
The speed of gravity revisited
Michael Ibison, Harold E. Puthoff, Scott R. Little
Institute for Advanced Studies at Austin
4030 Braker Lane West, Suite 300, Austin, TX 78759, USA
ibison@ntr.net , puthoff@aol.com , little@eden.com
Abstract
Recently Van Flandern concluded from astrophysical data that gravity propagates faster than light. We demonstrate that the data can be explained by current theory that does not permit superluminal speeds. We explain the origin of apparently instantaneous connections, first within EM, and then within strong-field GR.
Introduction
Van Flandern [1] draws attention to astrophysical data that apparently support the conclusion that gravitational influences propagate at superluminal speeds. His main argument, in general terms, is that light propagation from a
star is not collinear with its gravitational force. He correctly infers that this is because light suffers aberration,
whereas gravity does not. The absence of the latter motivates his conclusion. In the first section we discuss the related example of the electric field of a uniformly moving charge source. We show how this field, though composed of entirely retarded influences obeying Maxwell’s equations, will accelerate a remote test charge towards the instantaneous position of the source. In the second section we discuss the analogous
problem in GR. On the basis of the similarities between EM and GR, we argue that a similar result can be
anticipated, for which the detailed calculation is given in an appendix. That section is concluded with an illustration of the application of the theory to astrophysical data offered by Van Flandern.
Electromagnetism
Electric field of a uniformly moving charge
Figure 1
Quantities used to analyze a uniformly moving
charge source.
With reference to Fig. 1, let a source charge be in uniform motion traveling with velocity cββββ, and initially at the
origin. It generates an electric field at x (see for example [2]):
()()()
()()()ret ret
32
ret ret,ts tte
st tγ−=
−s βEx
s β!, (1)
s(t) is the vector from the current position of the source to the test charge at x:
()tc t=−sx β. (2)
The subscript ret in the above indicates that the electric field depends on the retarded position of the source, with tret
given by the solution of retctβ
ctβorigin path of source x()ts
ret()tsobservation point
φ2
() ( )ret retst ct t=− . (3)
That is, the current field at time t depends on the position of the source at a previous time, where the delay is equal
to the time it takes light to traverse that distance (from the historical position of the source). We draw attention
especially to the presence of two retarded terms in the numerator, giving rise to the interpretation of the final field as the result of two different, retarded, fields, E(x,t) = E
1(x,t) + E2(x,t):
()()
()()()
()()
()()()ret
1 32
ret ret
ret
2 32
ret ret,
,tte
st t
stte
st tγ
γ=
−
=−
−sEx
s β
βEx
s β!
!. (4)
If only E1(x,t) is retained, it is easy to see that the electric force on a test charge would be oriented towards the
historical position of the source. I.E. it would be aberrated. One might then be able to take the view that the force is due to a flux of particles emitted at the speed of light, exchanging momentum with the test charge.
Apparent cancellation of retarded effects
Since
β < 1, the second term may be regarded as a correction to the first. As pointed out in [2], [3], and [4], its
magnitude and direction are exactly that required to cancel the aberration as we now show. Combining Eqs. (2) and
(3), the numerator of Eq. (1) can be written:
()() ( ) ( )ret ret ret retts t c tc t t c t t−− − = s βx ββ x βs =− = −=− = −=− = −=− = − (5)
which is sufficient to prove the claim. Note that this result depends on the fact that the source is in uniform motion.
To complete the transformation we will also compute the denominator in the new co-ordinates. Using Eq. (5), we
have
()() ()()( ) ( ) () () ( )22
ret ret ret 11 c o s st t st t st ββ ρ β φ −= − − = − −s β sβ !! (6)
where φ is the angle between the trajectory of the source and the instantaneous line of sight (see Fig. 1), and we have
defined ρ ≡ s(tret)/s(t). This may also be computed from Eq. (5) after re-arranging and squaring:
() ( )()()
() ()
() () ()22
22
22 212 c o s 1 0
1c o s 1 s i nret retst t s t
βρ ρ β φ
βρβ φ β φ−
⇒− − − =
⇒− = +−s β ====
(7)
(since by definition ρ must always be positive, the positive root is required). Substitution of this result into Eq. (6)
gives
()() ( ) ( )22
ret ret 1s i n st t st βφ −= −s.ββββ . (8)
Therefore, using Eqs. (5) and (8), the electric field Eq. (1) in the unretarded coordinates is
()()
()()()2
23 222ˆ 1,
1s i ntte
stβ
βφ
−=×
−sEx (9)
This result proves the claim above that the electric field from a uniformly moving source is not aberrated. The
force on a test charge is directed towards the instantaneous – not the retarded - position of the source. The factor in braces affects the magnitude, but not the direction, of the field. When the source is viewed from a line of sight
perpendicular to its trajectory, then the amplitude of the field is greater than that of the static charge by a factor
γ.
But viewed from a line of sight along the trajectory, the amplitude is reduced by a factor γ-2. The effects of both non-
retardation and the angular dependence of the strength of the force due to a moving source are illustrated in Fig. 2.
Therein, the density of the field lines signifies the strength of the field, and the direction of the field lines is that of the force experienced by a stationary test charge. 3
Figure 2
Field lines of a uniformly moving charge source.
The fact that there are two mathematical presentations of the same result, Eqs. (1) and (9), can give rise to two different interpretations of the same phenomenon. But since they are built upon the same theory, these two interpretations are not experimentally distinguishable. Motivated by Eq. (1), one can insist that all influences travel at light speed, and that the final direction of the force toward the unretarded position is the result of a fortuitous cancellation between the two retarded influences identified in Eq. (4). Alternatively, Eq. (9) may be used to justify
the viewpoint that there is no propagation, since nowhere do retarded co-ordinates appear, and that the result is a
manifestation of an important principle, and presumably could therefore have been derived more directly [5].
Propagation
When the charge source is accelerated, Eq. (2) does not hold, invalidating the steps leading to Eq. (9). Further,
the electric field acquires additional terms that depend on the acceleration directly. Altogether, this means that the
force on a test charge is not, in general, directed toward an accelerating source, and the effects of retardation are then readily apparent.
Figure 3
Propagation of a disturbance to the field
lines when a uniformly moving charge is
abruptly brought to rest.
Observable propagation delays are illustrated by the example in Fig. 3 wherein a charge initially in uniform motion is abruptly brought to rest. Notice that the field lines are updated by a shockwave traveling at speed c.
Within a radius r < ct, the charge sprouts new field lines. Beyond that radius ( r > ct), the field lines appear to
emanate from a source location that the charge does not occupy. The shockwave at r = ct carries energy and
momentum, and is a manifestation of radiation. More generally: curved field lines and radiation are generated and propagate whenever there is a departure from uniform motion (of either source or observer). Otherwise, if the v = 0.8c
ct
where the charge would be
if it had not stopped moving.previous charge
motion at v = 0.8c4
motion has been uniform for some period τ, say, then the field lines within the radius r < cτ are straight and
terminate on the instantaneous position of the source.
Role of the potentials in the cancellation of retarded effects
There is nothing in GR that corresponds exactly to the electric field of EM. But there is a close correspondence
between the scalar potentials of both theories [6]. Therefore, to determine the degree to which the non-propagating
aspect of EM applies to GR, we need to determine the relative importance of the scalar potential - versus the vector potential - in establishing this result. In terms of the potentials, the electric field is
()1,tctφ∂=− ∇ −∂AEx . (10)
Recalling the decomposition of the electric field as expressed in Eq. (4), one could be forgiven for thinking that
perhaps E1(x,t) and E2(x,t) correspond respectively to - ∇φ and –(1/ c)∂A/∂t. However, this turns out not to be the
case as can be seen from the following argument. For a point source, the Liénard-Wiechert potentials are
{}{}1,,eφσ=βA , (11)
where the dependence of the denominator on x and the present time can be found from Eq. (8):
()() ( ) ( ) () ( ) () ( )22 2 22 2
ret ret 1s i n st t st s t c tσβ φ≡− = − = − × = − − × s. βsx ββ x ββββ . (12)
Given the co-occurrence of β with ct in this expression, and the dependence of A on ββββ as given in Eq. (11), it is
readily deduced that the contribution to the electric field from the time derivative of the vector potential is of order
β2 or higher and cannot therefore play a role at low velocities. It follows that the gradient of the scalar potential
alone gives the correct electric field up to and including terms of order ββββ. This means that, to that order, the direction
of the electric force towards the instantaneous position of the source may be regarded entirely as a property of the
form of the scalar potential. I.E. from Eq. (12), to order ββββ: σ = s(t), and so φ = - e/|x – ctββββ| + O(β2). Thus, to this
order, one finds that the Coulomb potential is as if not retarded, and
() ()()
()()22
2ˆ 1,tte ect stββ = − ∇+=+−sEx O Ox β. (13)
Hence, a shorthand description valid only to order ββββ is that the Coulomb potential is not retarded, from which it
follows that the force is directed towards the instantaneous position of the source. The more accurate description, as
shown in detail above, is that the scalar potential computed from solving Maxwell’s equations is retarded. But it
does not have the form one might naively expect; it is not a retarded version of the Coulomb potential. I.E.
φ ≠ -e/|x - ctretββββ|, since this is not a solution of Maxwell’s equations. Instead, φ = -e/|x - ctββββ| + O(β2) is the solution
of Maxwell’s equations. Comparing Eqs. (9) and (13), it follows that at low velocities, the vector potential plays no
role in establishing the non-propagating electric force.
5
Gravitation
Acceleration due to a moving source mass
A form analogous to Eq. (10) can be found for the proper acceleration attributable to gravity [7]. Unlike the EM
case however, there is no exact cancellation of the effects of retardation to all orders of β, but only cancellation up to
terms linear in ββββ. In the linearized weak-field limit, cancellation to this order can be anticipated from the EM case on
the basis of the correspondence between the gravitational and electromagnetic scalar potentials. Both obey wave
equations, and under the circumstances of interest here, the sources of both may be idealized as structureless points. Hence both gravitational and electromagnetic scalar potentials fall off as 1/ r when the sources are static. But the
correspondence cannot be perfect because mass-energy – unlike charge – is not independent of velocity. This causes
the two theories to diverge at the order of
β2. From these observations, one can infer that GR should be in agreement
with EM at least up to terms linear in ββββ, and, with reference to the above discussion of Eq. (13), that this
correspondence can be established solely from consideration of the gravitational scalar potential. In other words, without any analysis, one can anticipate that Newton’s law of gravity - unretarded – is accurate up to terms linear in
β.β.β.β. The details are worked out in the appendix, where it is established that the proper acceleration in the weak field
limit is
()
()()2
0 2
22ˆ GM t d
ds tβ
τ≈− +s xO . (A18)
It turns out that not only the linearized weak field limit, but also the full moving Schwarzschild solution to the
Einstein equations gives an acceleration towards the instantaneous position of the source (mass M0), correct to order
ββββ. From the appendix, the result is
()
() ()()()2
0 2
25
2 00
22ˆ
11
22GM t d
dGM GMst
cst cstβ
τ=− +
−+ s xO . (A17)
The steps leading to these solutions involve computing derivatives of time-retarded potentials, just as for the EM
case. Yet the result to this order is the same: the r/r3 force law remains unchanged and unretarded if the source is
moving.
6
Solar Eclipse
Van Flandern offers several astrophysical situations in support of his conclusion that the speed of gravity >> c.
Rather than attempt to address all of them in this letter, we have chosen to discuss just one in detail. Hopefully it
will be clear how the analysis can be extended to cover his other examples.
Figure 4a
Situation at the time of solar eclipse in
earth-centered coordinates.
Figure 4b
Situation at the time of conjunction of sun,
moon, and earth, in earth-centered
coordinates.
The situation during a solar eclipse is depicted in Fig. 4, wherein all motion is relative to the earth. Van
Flandern points out that there are two events that happen around the same time. The first event is when the moon crosses the path of radiation from the sun to the earth, as depicted in Fig. 4a. This is the time that the sun is eclipsed as seen from the earth. But the line of sight of the sun is not the same as the line from the earth to the current
position of the sun because of the time delay of light propagation. The angle
α between the two - the aberration
angle - is approximately given by the ratio vc tω⊕→ ⊕=!! where t→⊕! = 499 seconds is the light-time from sun to
earth, and 2ωπ=! (years)-1 is the angular frequency attributable to the sun in an earth-centered coordinate system.
Sometime ∆t later the sun, moon and earth line up (conjunct), as depicted in Fig. 4b. The time of this second event
can be calculated by noting that the time it takes for the moon to traverse the angle an angle α + δ is equal to the
time it takes the sun to traverse δ :
tδα δ
ωω+∆= =
!" (14) apparent (aberrated)
direction of sunlight
v⊕αv"
v⊕α
v"δ7
This gives () δα ω ω ω=−!"! and therefore that
1ttα
ωω ω ω→⊕∆= =−−!
"! " !. (15)
Using the ratio of the two frequencies = 13.4 (the number of lunar months per year), the time interval between the
two events is 40.2 seconds. Van Flandern points out that observations indicate that the acceleration of the earth toward the sun is maximal at around 40 seconds after the sun is eclipsed and therefore this is the time of maximal gravitational attraction. From this he infers that the speed of gravity must be much faster than light.
The theoretical explanation of this observation is as follows. Sunlight is electromagnetic radiation due
(classically) to the acceleration of charges in the sun. Such radiation suffers a propagation delay as illustrated in Fig. 3, and is therefore aberrated. By contrast, gravitational radiation due to the earth’s acceleration is negligible,
leaving only the linear aspect of the relative sun-earth motion to consider. Since v
⊕/c << 1, the results of the
previous section apply, and one concludes that the gravitational force on the earth is directed towards the
instantaneous position of the sun; i.e. is not aberrated.
Generalization
From this example we can draw a more general conclusion that applies to Van Flandern’s other data. Noticing
that separated aggregates of matter tend to be electrically neutral, one concludes that the predominant electromagnetic force in astrophysics will be due to radiation (in the far-field) - the non-radiative (near-field) force between charged bodies predominates only at a very small scale. In contrast, because gravity is always attractive, the non-radiative force does not disappear between aggregates of matter. The force of gravitational radiation is
comparatively negligible, and therefore the predominant gravitational force in astrophysics will be non-radiative
(near-field). Hence, though the qualities of propagation and non-propagation of the far and near fields respectively are the same for both EM and GR, the dominance of radiative EM interactions and non-radiative GR interactions explains the asymmetry of influences in this and other examples.
Conclusion
Van Flandern is correct in his observation that gravitational attraction is directed towards the instantaneous
(unretarded) position of a moving body. We have shown that this fact can be explained without a revision of physics
to include superluminal propagation.
8
Appendix
Gravitational force on a static test particle due to a moving source
This appendix is in two sections. In the first section a 3-vector form of the geodesic equation is presented for a
test mass initially at rest and solely under the influence of a gravitational field via the metric. In the second section the problem is solved for a gravitational field of arbitrary strength using the Schwarzschild metric for a moving source.
3-vector form of geodesic equation
The general equation of motion for an infinitesimally-sized, infinitesimally-massive (test) particle with only
gravitational forces acting is
1
2g dd x d x d xgdd d d xββ γβγ
αβ αττ τ τ∂
= ∂ . (A1)
Going to 3D notation, let
11 12 13 10
21 22 23 20
31 32 33 30,ggg g
ggg g
ggg g
== Gg (A2)
and let the velocity of the test particle, d x/dt, be zero. Then the 3-vector part of Eq. (A1) gives
22
002dd ccgddττΓ Γ+ = ∇xgG , (A3)
where, when the velocity of the test mass is zero, the coordinate time is related to the proper time by
00 1 dt d gτΓ≡ = − . With this substitution, Eq. (A3) may be written
2 2
1 0
00 0 2
00 001 mc dmgct dg gτ− ∂ =− ∇ − + ∂ −−xgG . (A4)
Expressed in this way, the geodesic equation takes on the appearance of Newton’s second law, where the expression
on the right-hand side is a driving force attributable to the gravitational field. Møller [7] noted the similarity between this expression for the force, and that of the electric component of the Lorentz force,
i.e. 1eectφ∂=− ∇ +∂ AE (A5)
and accordingly defined a gravitational scalar and vector potential. Forward [8] subsequently pursued this idea by
identifying a magnetic-like component of force on a moving test body. However, as admitted by Forward, the
correspondence between GR and EM is only approximate. In EM, conservation of electric charge, expressed as a
vanishing 4-divergence in the source densities, 0 jµ
µ∂= , may be translated into a vanishing 4-divergence of the
potentials 0 Aµ
µ∂= By contrast, in GR, the vanishing 4-divergence in the source densities, 0 Tµ
µν∂= , does not
translate into a GR equivalent of (A5), and therefore
00
0010g
ct g∂−∇+ ≠∂ −g. (A6)
Consequently care should be exercised in attempting to draw EM-inspired conclusions from Eq. (A4), even when
the test body is static. For this reason, we do the analysis, rather than assume that the electromagnetic result (that the
force on a uniformly moving test body points to the instantaneous position of the source) applies to gravity.
Schwarzschild metric
The full metric corresponding to the Schwarzschild solution for a moving mass has been given by [9]. The
result is 9
()()()2
4 111Xgx X u u u uXαβ µ αβ α β α β η−=+ + − + (A7)
where
0
2;
2GMX
cλλγσ== (A8)
where M0 is the rest mass of the actively gravitating body, and σ is given by Eq. (12). One may easily extract g00, g,
and G from gαβ:
()2
4 22
00111XgXXγβ−=− − ++ (A9)
and
()2
4 2 111XXXγ−=+ − +g β (A10)
and
()()
()2
4 2
6111
1TXX
Xγ− =+ +−+GI ββ . (A11)
These expressions may be inserted into the right hand side of Eq. (A4) to obtain an exact closed form expression for
the force. However, we already know in advance that since the weak field force is not directed towards the source (if
terms beyond those linear in β2 are significant) then under the same conditions the exact (strong field) solution
cannot be directed towards the source either. The only remaining interest then is to determine if the force is directed
toward the source for all strengths of field up to and including linear terms in ββββ. Rewriting the equation of motion
(A4) as
()22
1
00 00 2
002log2dcgggc t c t dτ− ∂∂ =− ∇ − + −∂∂ xg gG (A12)
it is easy to show that the second two terms are of order β2. First note that Xxλ==β0 and therefore that
0 Xt=∂∂ =β0which immediately gives (from(A10)) that t∂∂g must be at least second order in β. Similarly, it
follows that 00gt∂∂ must be at least first order in β, from which it follows (again using (A10)) that
() 00 log gct∂−∂g must be at least second order. Further, since G = (1+ X)4I + O(β2), then G-1 = (1+ X)-4I + O(β2).
Therefore, the equation of motion Eq. (A12) is
()()()22
2
00 24log
21dcg
d Xβ
τ=− ∇ +
+xO , (A13)
i.e., for small velocities, the force depends only on the (gradient of the) scalar gravitational potential, and not on the
‘gravitational vector potential’. To compute the gradient of g00, first note that
()2
2
001
1XgXβ−=− ++O (A14)
and also σ = s(t) to order ββββ, so X = λ/s(t) + O(β2). Then
()
()()() ( )
() ( )()() ( )
() ( )()22 2
00 33 2 3 34 1 41 41
11 1XX Xs t X tg
XX s t X s tλλββ β−∇ −∇ −∇= + = − + = − +
++ +sOO O (A15)
hence 10
()()
()()()()
()()()22
00 3 22 2ˆ 44log
1ttg
st Xs tλλββ
λ∇= + = +
− −ssOO . (A16)
Inserting Eqs. (A16) into (A13) gives
()
() ()()()2
0 2
25
2 00
22ˆ
11
22GM t d
dGM GMst
cst cstβ
τ=− +
−+ s xO . (A17)
In the weak field limit, the proper acceleration becomes
()
()()2
0 2
22ˆ GM t d
ds tβ
τ→− +s xO (A18)
which – as expected – has the same form as the EM result for a uniformly moving charge, Eq. (13). Note that the
directions of the ordinary and the proper acceleration are the same since d x/dt = 0.
References
[1] T. Van Flandern, The speed of gravity – what the experiments say, Phys. Lett. A 250 (1998) 1.
[2] J.D. Jackson, Classical electrodynamics, 2nd edition, (John Wiley & sons, New York, 1975) chapter 14.
[3] R.P. Feynman, R.B. Leighton, M. Sands, The Feynman lectures on physics Vol. II, (Addison Wesley,
Reading, MA, 1965) chapter 21.
[4] E.M. Purcell, Electricity and magnetism, Berkeley physics course - volume 2 (McGraw Hill, New York,
1965) chapter 5.
[5] One can argue in favor of this finding solely on the basis of time symmetry as follows. Maxwell’s
equations alone are time symmetric. The Newton-Lorentz equation of motion for a classical massive charge
under the influence of Maxwell fields becomes the Lorentz-Dirac equation upon addition of the
phenomenologically-motivated radiation-reaction term, which destroys the time symmetry. But this term is non-zero only when there are accelerations (jerk ultimately demands that an acceleration is also present). When the velocity is constant, there is no radiation, no radiation reaction, and time-symmetry is then present both in the Maxwell equations for the fields, and the Lorentz-Dirac equation for the sources. In that
case, the motion must be time reversible. It follows immediately that the force cannot preferentially point
toward an historical (i.e.: retarded) as opposed to future (i.e.: advanced) position.
[6] B. Haisch – private communication - independently realized that the correspondence between EM and GR
scalar potentials is a sufficient basis to refute Van Flandern’s thesis.
[7] C. Møller, The theory of relativity, 2nd edition, (Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, 1972) p. 279.
[8] R.L. Forward, General relativity for the experimentalist, Proc. IRE, 49 (1961) 892.
[9] J. Kim, Gravitational field of a moving point particle, Journal of the Korean Physical Society, 27 (1994)
484. |
arXiv:physics/9910051v1 [physics.atom-ph] 1 Nov 1999Multiphoton Radiative Recombination of Electron
Assisted by Laser Field
M. Yu. Kuchiev and V. N. Ostrovsky∗
School of Physics, University of New South Wales Sydney 2052 , Australia
Abstract
In the presence of an intensive laser field the radiative reco mbination of the
continuum electron into an atomic bound state generally is a ccompanied by
absorption or emission of several laser quanta. The spectru m of emitted pho-
tons represents an equidistant pattern with the spacing equ al to the laser
frequency. The distribution of intensities in this spectru m is studied employ-
ing the Keldysh-type approximation, i.e. neglecting inter action of the impact
electron with the atomic core in the initial continuum state . Within the adi-
abatic approximation the scale of emitted photon frequenci es is subdivided
into classically allowed and classically forbidden domain s. The highest in-
tensities correspond to emission frequencies close to the e dges of classically
allowed domain. The total cross section of electron recombi nation summed
over all emitted photon channels exhibits negligible depen dence on the laser
field intensity.
PACS numbers: 32.80.Wr, 34.80.Lx, 34.50.Rk
Typeset using REVT EX
1I. INTRODUCTION
It is well known that the laser plasma emits photons with freq uencies which are different
from the frequency of the incident laser beam. For a number of applications an emission
of high energy photons is the most interesting phenomenon. T he known mechanisms which
can be responsible for the high energy photo-production cou ld be identified as the following
three ones: the high harmonic generation, laser stimulated bremsstrahlung and laser assisted
recombination. These processes differ by the initial and fina l states of the active electron. In
the harmonic generation the initial state electron occupie s a (laser-dressed) atomic bound
state, usually it is the ground atomic state. In the final stat e of this reaction the electron
can occupy either the same bound state, or some excited or eve n ionized state. The laser
stimulated bremsstrahlung is a free-free transition durin g which the electron is scattered by
an atom in the laser field. During the scattering the electron emits a high-energy quantum.
In the laser assisted recombination (LAR) the electron star ts in the laser-dressed continuum,
but ends up in the bound state. The process of harmonic genera tion is currently studied
very actively with important advancements both in theory an d experiment (for reviews see
Refs. [1,2]). The laser stimulated bremsstrahlung plays th e very important role in plasma
physics, see recent experimental [3,4] and theoretical [5, 6] works.
The subject of the present study is the LAR process. As far as w e know, it has not
yet received a proper attention in the literature, although its importance for kinetics of
laser plasma and its emission spectrum was indicated before [7]. From the point of view
of the high-energy photo-production the LAR possesses an ad vantage over the stimulated
bremsstrahlung because in LAR the electron impact energy is totally transferred to the high
energy quanta.
The conventional (laser-field free) radiative recombinati on of the continuum electron to
the bound state is a well studied process which is inverse to t he photoionization. The
frequency of the emitted photon is uniquely defined by the ene rgy conservation law. When
a similar process occurs in the presence of an intensive lase r field the radiation spectrum
becomes much more richer since the recombination may be acco mpanied by absorption or
emission of laser quanta. Therefore the emitted photon spec trum represents a sequence of
equidistant lines separated by the laser frequency ω. The recent review by Hahn [8] on
the electron recombination mentions only one, very special version of LAR process, namely
one–photon LAR when the laser is tuned in resonance with the energy of fre e-bound electron
transition, and only emission of photons with this particul ar energy is considered. The study
of this special case was initiated quite long ago [9–13] and r emains active in connection with
the processes in the storage rings [14–20], formation of pos itronium [9] and antihydrogen
[21–23] and even with possible cosmological manifestation s [24]. In all these theoretical
studies the laser field was presumed to be weak and its influenc e on an initial and/or final
electron states was neglected, except Refs. [7,23] which ar e commented below.
For production of high-energy photons it is very interestin g to extend the mentioned
above studies allowing for the multiphoton absorption duri ng LAR. Obviously the multi-
photon processes can happen with high probability only in a s trong laser field. From this
point of view there arises a necessary to fulfill a systematic study of LAR in a strong laser
field in multiphoton regime. This paper makes a first step in th is direction.
An additional, and rather unexpected inspiration for the pr esent study arises from the
2fact that LAR comprises one of the steps in the three-step qua ntum scheme of high harmonic
generation. This scheme has recently been firmly establishe d, see Ref. [25] and bibliography
therein. The major statement of [25] is that the high harmoni c generation can be described
as the multiphoton ionization of an atomic electron which is followed by the LAR of this
electron with the parent atomic particle. From this point of view the LAR plays a role of
’a part’ of the problem of the high harmonic generation, whic h is important not only for
the dense laser plasma, but also for photo-production from i ndividual atoms in strong laser
fields, where the harmonic generation is the major source for high energy photons.
The present study is devoted mostly to the patterns of intens ities in the emitted photon
spectrum depending on the laser field strength. We comment al so on the influence of laser
field on the total recombination cross section. Here, as well as in other applications, the
laser field is intensive and LAR proceeds in substantially multiphoton regime.
Consider an electron in the laser-dressed continuum state Φ p(t) with the translational
momentum p. Its recombination to the bound state generally results in t he emission of
photons with the frequencies ˜ΩMdefined from
˜ΩM=1
2p2+F2
4ω2−εa+Mω , (1.1)
where εais the quasienergy of the field-dressed bound state Φ a(t),Fis the amplitude of the
electric field strength in the laser wave, F2/(4ω2) is the electron quiver energy in the laser
field,Mis an integer. Hereafter we use atomic system of units unless stated otherwise. In
the zero-laser-field limit ( F→0) only emission of the photon with the frequency
ΩF→0=1
2p2+|Ea| (1.2)
is allowed with Eabeing the bound state energy. The presence of an intensive la ser field
makes possible multiphoton processes when laser quanta are absorbed from the field or
transmitted to it, with the amplitude
CM(p) =1
TT/integraldisplay
0dt/an}b∇acketle{tΦa(t)|exp(i˜ΩMt)ˆdǫ|Φp(t)/an}b∇acket∇i}ht, ˆdǫ=ǫ·r, (1.3)
where T= 2π/ωis the laser field period, and in the dipole momentum operator ˆdǫthe unit
vector ǫselects polarization of emitted radiation. The LAR cross se ction is
σM(p) =4
3p/parenleftBig˜ΩM/parenrightBig3
c3|CM(p)|2, (1.4)
where cis the velocity of light. The cross section (1.4) refers to th e process of spontaneous
LAR, since it is presumed that incident electromagnetic field with the frequency ˜ΩMis
absent. In case if such a probe field is present, generally it w ould be amplified in course of
propagation through the medium containing free electrons. There is a number of theoretical
works devoted to calculation of related gain in case of one-p hoton LAR. A recent paper by
Zaretskii and Nersesov [7] explores the amplification in cas e of multiphoton LAR. Generally
these studies imply some assumptions regarding the medium p roperties and result in the
3expressions for the rate of stimulated transitions via that of spontaneous transitions and
some characteristics of laser beam and the experimental arr angement [10–12,7]. The present
paper provides analysis of spontaneous LAR whereas issues o f radiation amplification are
beyond its scope.
II. KELDYSH-TYPE APPROXIMATION
We develop the Keldysh-type approximation where the intera ction of the continuum
electron with the atomic core is neglected, i.e. the laser-d ressed electron continuum state
Φpis approximated by the well-known Volkov state. The laser wa ve is assumed to be linear
polarized with the electric field strength F(t) =Fcosωt. Explicit expression for the Volkov
functions is conveniently cast as
Φp(r, t) =χp(r, t) exp/parenleftBig
−i¯Ept/parenrightBig
, (2.1)
χp(r, t) = exp/braceleftBigg
i/bracketleftBigg
(p+kt)r−/integraldisplayt
0/parenleftBig
Ep(τ)−¯Ep/parenrightBig
dτ+pF
ω2/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
, (2.2)
where the factor χp(r, t) is time-periodic with the period T,
kt=F
ωsinωt , (2.3)
Ep(t) =1
2(p+kt)2, (2.4)
¯Ep=1
T/integraldisplayT
0Ep(τ)dτ=1
2p2+F2
4ω2. (2.5)
For the final bound state the field-free expression is employe d
Φa(r, t) =ϕa(r) exp( −iEat), (2.6)
Haϕa(r) =Eaϕa(r), (2.7)
where Hais the effective atomic Hamiltonian in the single active elec tron approximation.
The final bound state (2.6) is always available if electron co llides with a positive ion. In case
of collision with a neutral atom we assume existence of a stab le negative ion. By substituting
formulae (2.1)–(2.6) into (1.3) one can see that the integra nd is a periodic function of time
provided the emitted photon frequency ˜ΩMsatisfies (1.1) with integer Mandεasubstituted
byEa. The lowest possible frequency of the emitted photon is ηω, where
η=1
ω/parenleftBigg1
2p2−Ea+F2
4ω2/parenrightBigg
−Ent/bracketleftBigg1
ω/parenleftBigg1
2p2−Ea+F2
4ω2/parenrightBigg/bracketrightBigg
(2.8)
with Ent( x) being an integer part of x(0≤η <1). In the subsequent development we
redefine labeling of emitted photon channels and instead of ˜ΩM(1.1) employ the notation
Ωm= (m+η)ω (m≥0). (2.9)
4The new label mdiffers from the old one Mby an additive integer. We find the labeling
bymmore convenient since it is rigidly related to the low-frequ ency edge of the emitted
photon spectrum: m= 0 corresponds to the lowest photon frequency ηω.
By using the Fourier transformation formula (1.3) is rewrit ten as
Cm(p) =−1
TT/integraldisplay
0dtexp{i[(m+η)ωt−S(t)]}˜ϕ(ǫ)
a(−p−kt), (2.10)
where S(t) is the classical action
S(t) =1
2/integraldisplayt
dτ(p+kτ)2−Eat . (2.11)
The function ˜ ϕ(ǫ)
a(q) is defined as
˜ϕ(ǫ)
a(q) =i(ǫ· ∇q) ˜ϕa(q). (2.12)
where ˜ ϕa(q) is the Fourier transform of the bound state wave function φa(r):
˜ϕa(q) =/integraldisplay
d3rexp(−iqr)φa(r). (2.13)
For the bound state wave function we use an asymptotic expres sion
φa(r)≈Aarν−1exp(−κr)Ylm(ˆr) ( r≫1/κ), (2.14)
where κ=/radicalBig
2|Ea|,ν=Z/κ,Zis the charge of the atomic residual core ( ν=Z= 0 for a
negative ion), lis the active electron orbital momentum in the initial state andˆris the unit
vector. The coefficients Aaare tabulated for many negative ions [26]. The Fourier trans form
˜ϕa(q) (2.13) is singular at q2=κ2with the asymptotic behavior for q→ ±iκdefined by the
long-range asymptote (2.14) in the coordinate space
˜ϕa(q) = 4πAa(±1)lYlm(ˆq)(2κ)νΓ(ν+ 1)
(q2+κ2)ν+1, (2.15)
where ( ±1)lcorresponds to q→ ±iκ. In particular, for a negative ion ( ν= 0) with the
active electron in an sstate ( l= 0) we have from (2.15)
˜ϕa(q) =√
4πAa1
(q2+κ2), (2.16)
˜ϕ(ǫ)
a(q) =−i(ǫ·ˆq)√
4πAa2q
(q2+κ2)2(2.17)
(ˆq≡q/qis unit vector).
5III. ADIABATIC APPROACH TO STIMULATED RECOMBINATION
The time integral in (2.10) can be evaluated using the saddle point method. This amounts
to the adiabatic approximation when the phase ( m+η)ωt−S(t) in (2.10) is assumed to be
large. The position of saddle points in the complex t-plane is governed by equation
S′(tmµ)−Ωm= 0, (3.1)
or, more explicitly,
1
2/parenleftBig
p+ktmµ/parenrightBig2=Ea+ (m+η)ω . (3.2)
It is convenient to single out in the electron momentum vecto rp=p/bardbl+p⊥components
parallel ( p/bardbl) and perpendicular ( p⊥) to the electric field vector F. Then Eq.(3.2) is rewritten
as
1
2/parenleftBig
p/bardbl+ktmµ/parenrightBig2=Ea−1
2p2
⊥+ (m+η)ω . (3.3)
For each value of mthis equation has a number of solutions tmµdistinguished by the extra
subscripts µ. In the saddle point approximation the time integration in f ormula (1.3) is cast
as
Cm(p) =−1
T/summationdisplay
µ/radicalBigg
2π
iS′′(tmµ)exp{i[Ωmtmµ−S(tmµ)]}˜ϕ(ǫ)
a/parenleftBig
−p−ktmµ/parenrightBig
, (3.4)
where summation is to be taken over the saddle points tmµoperative in the contour integra-
tion/bracketleftBig
ktmµ= (F/ω) sinωtmµ/bracketrightBig
).
The saddle points are found from Eq.(3.3) as
sinωtmµ=ω
F/parenleftbigg
−p/bardbl±/radicalBig
2(m+η)ω−κ2−p2
⊥/parenrightbigg
. (3.5)
The subscript µlabels solutions differing by the choice of the sign in (3.5) a nd sign in
cosωtm µ=±/radicalBig
1−sin2ωtmµ. There are four solutions per the laser field cycle (i.e for
0≤Retmµ< T).
In order to elucidate the meaning of the saddle point equatio n (3.3) we rewrite it as
Ep(tmµ)−Ea= Ω m. (3.6)
It shows that the photons are preferentially emitted at the m oment of time when instanta-
neous continuum electron energy Ep(t) (2.4) is separated from the bound state energy Ea
by the energy of the emitted photon ( m+η)ω. The LAR process is most effective when this
occurs at some real moment of time, i.e. the saddle points tmµare real-valued. This regime
corresponds to the classically allowed radiation . It can happen only for some part of the
emitted photon spectrum, i.e. only in some domain of m. Outside it, when tmµpossesses
an imaginary part, the emission is strongly suppressed. Rem arkably, within the classically
allowed domain the intensity of emitted lines could vary ver y significantly as detailed below.
6The necessary condition of classically allowed radiation,
Ωm>|Ea|+1
2p2
⊥, (3.7)
makes real the right hand side of formula (3.5). Details of cl assically allowed emission
depend on the relation between the electron translational m omentum component p/bardbland
the momentum F/ωacquired by the electron in its quiver motion in the laser fiel d. In the
fast electron regime, p/bardbl> F/ω , the term1
2(p/bardbl+kt)2never passes zero as time tvaries.
As a result, the saddle point equation (3.2) has two or zero re al-valued solutions per field
cycle (in the classically allowed and forbidden domains res pectively, see Fig. 1a). In the
slow electron case, p/bardbl< F/ω , the1
2(p/bardbl+kt)2passes via zero. Due to this circumstance, as
seen from Fig. 1b, for some interval of photon frequencies Ω mthe equation (3.2) has four
real-valued solutions whereas for higher Ω monly two solutions exist. Consequently, in this
case the classically allowed domain is subdivided in two par ts. The related LAR regimes are
discussed below in more detail.
A. Fast electron regime: p/bardbl> F/ω
Here one has to choose the upper sign in formula (3.5) in order to get a real-valued saddle
point. The condition |sinωtmµ| ≤1 is straightforwardly reduced to
1
2/parenleftbigg
p/bardbl−F
ω/parenrightbigg2
+|Ea|+1
2p2
⊥≤Ωm≤1
2/parenleftbigg
p/bardbl+F
ω/parenrightbigg2
+|Ea|+1
2p2
⊥. (3.8)
In this photon frequency interval only one pair of real saddl e points tmµexists per field
cycle, see Fig 1. These two saddle points are to be included in to summation over µin (3.4).
The phase difference between the two terms in (3.4) varies wit hm. As a result |Cm(p)|2
oscillates between zero and some envelope function Ξ( m) defined as
Ξ(m) =8π
T2S′′/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle˜ϕ(ǫ)
a/parenleftBig
−p−ktmµ/parenrightBig/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2, (3.9)
/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle˜ϕ(ǫ)
a/parenleftBig
−p−ktmµ/parenrightBig/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2=πA2
a2(m+ν)ω−κ2−p2
⊥
(m+ν)4ω4, (3.10)
S′′=F/radicalBig
2(m+ν)ω−κ2−p2
⊥/radicalBigg
1−ω2
F2/parenleftbigg
p/bardbl−/radicalBig
2(m+ν)ω−κ2−p2
⊥/parenrightbigg2
. (3.11)
As could be anticipated, the function Ξ( m) has weak singularities at the boundaries of the
classically allowed region. The extension of the classical ly allowed region on the photon
frequency scale is 2 p/bardblF/ωwith its center located at Ω c=1
2p2+|Ea|+F2/(2ω2). For
vanishing laser field Ω ctends to the limit (1.2) and the classically allowed domain s hrinks
to the single line. The condition that a single line dominate s in the photon spectrum could
be formulated as 2 p/bardblF/ω2∼1.
Fig. 2 illustrates evolution of the spectrum pattern with th e laser intensity I. We consider
electrons with the energy Eel=1
2p2equal to 1 eV ( p= 0.271) in the laser field with the
frequency ω= 0.0043 and different intensities. The electron momentum pis directed along
the laser field strength F(p⊥= 0). The electron recombines to the bound state of H−ion
7(κ= 0.2354, Aa= 0.75 [26]). The emission amplitudes are obtained by numerical evaluation
of the time integral in (2.10). The laser field intensities I= 1011,1010,109,108,107W/cm2
corresponds to the values of parameter 2 pF/ω2respectively 49 .4,15.6,4.94,1.56,0.494.
For the weakest field considered ( I= 107W/cm2) the intensity of the principal line in the
spectrum ( m= 14) exceeds more than 50 times these of adjacent satellites . For I= 108
W/cm2this ratio is substantially smaller ( ∼5). When laser field is increased by an order
of magnitude, the dip in the emitted photon spectrum appears atm= 15. This is the
first manifestation of the oscillatory structure in the spec trum due to interference of two
contributions in (3.4). For I= 1010W/cm2the structure becomes well manifested. At last,
forI= 1011W/cm2the structure becomes well developed and extended. In the la tter case,
in fact, the situation is beyond the fast electron regime; it will be discussed in the next
subsection.
The semiclassical formula (3.4) is applicable when the clas sically allowed domain is suf-
ficiently broad on the frequency scale. Fig. 3 shows the photo n spectrum in the well
manifested semiclassical regime ( Eel= 10 eV, I= 1011W/cm2,p= 0.857,F/ω= 0.392).
In the classically allowed domain (31 ≤m≤187) the quantities |Cm(p)|2obtained by nu-
merical evaluation of the integral (2.10) over time (circle s) oscillate violently due to the
interference effects. Outside this region |Cm(p)|2decrease very rapidly. Note that the most
efficient emission occurs at the edges of the classically allo wed interval. This effect is com-
pletely analogous to enhancement of the probability densit y near the turning points for the
quantum particle moving in the potential well. The envelope function (3.9) (solid curve)
reproduces well this overall behavior. The saddle point app roximation (3.4) allows us to
reproduce well the oscillatory structure (squares in Fig. 3 ). Within the classically-allowed
domain the summation in this formula runs over two real-valu ed saddle points tmµ. Asm
varies approaching the domain border, two saddle points lyi ng at the real- taxis approach
each other and eventually merge at the boundary. After that t hey separate again moving
perpendicular to the real axis in the complex t-plane. The latter situation corresponds
to the classically forbidden, or tunneling regime where onl y one saddle point is to be in-
cluded in the summation over µin (3.5) (namely, that which ensures exponential decrease o f
|Cm(p)|2outside the classically-allowed domain). The transition b etween two regimes could
be described by the Airy function. We do not pursue here the de tailed description of this,
rather standard situation. In particular, Fig. 3, the resul ts shown by squares in Fig. 3 are
obtained using the plain semiclassical formula (3.4) with t wo or one saddle points included
as discussed above; the deviations from the numerical resul ts are seen to be essential only
in a very narrow transitions region. Since the numerical eva luation of integral (2.10) over
time is not difficult, we employ the adiabatic approach in orde r to obtain better insight into
the pattern of emitted radiation spectrum, but not for produ cing an alternative method to
evaluate the amplitudes.
B. Slow electron regime: p/bardbl< F/ω
In this case the real-valued result for tmµis provided by both upper and lower sign in
the expression (3.5). It is easy to see from Fig. 1b that the cl assically allowed region of
photon frequencies is subdivided in two domains. The first of them, with one pair of real-
valued saddle points tmµ, corresponds to Ω mlying in the interval (3.8). At smaller photon
8frequencies, another subdomain is defined by the condition
|Ea|+1
2p2
⊥≤Ωm≤1
2/parenleftbigg
p/bardbl−F
ω/parenrightbigg2
+|Ea|+1
2p2
⊥. (3.12)
Heretwo pairs of real saddle points tmµexist. The spectrum for this situation is illustrated
by Fig. 4 ( Eel= 0.1 eV,I= 1011W/cm2,p= 0.0857, F/ω= 0.392). The classically allowed
domain lies in the interval 7 ≤m≤32, with the four-saddle-point regime being operative
for 7≤m≤17, and the two-saddle point regime for 18 ≤m≤32. The results of numerical
calculations shown by circles suggest that the oscillation s in|Cm(p)|2orσm(p) proceed with
two different frequencies, the higher frequency being chara cteristic for the four-saddle-point
domain. The plain semiclassical formula (3.4) (squares) es sentially reproduces this structure.
Of course, it is not designed for accurate description of a tr ansition between the two-saddle-
point and four-saddle-point regimes where the deviations a re seen to be larger. A special,
more sophisticated treatment is required here, but such com plications are not pursued in
the present study as argued above. The non-standard situati on emerges also at the left edge
of the classically allowed interval where all saddle points simultaneously move from the real
axis into the complex tplane. This transition region could not be described by a sim ple
Airy-type pattern that is known to give a monotonous decreas e in the classically forbidden
domain; on the contrary, the numerical results reveal some s tructure in this region, see Fig.
4. Bearing all this in mind it is not unexpected that the plain semiclassical approximation
(3.4) essentially fails near the left border of the classica lly allowed domain.
It is worthwhile to mention also another region where the sta ndard semiclassical approx-
imation fails. Namely, for Ω = 0 the saddle point positions co incide with the poles of the
function ˜ ϕ(ǫ)
a. The situation when an exact coincidence occurs is tractabl e rather easily [27].
Somewhat more effort is required to obtain uniform descripti on of a transition between this
case and a situation when the saddle point and the pole are wel l separated, as presumed in
simple formula (3.4). Again, such sophistication are beyon d the scope of the present study.
At last, Fig. 5 shows a transient situation between the fast a nd slow electron regimes
(Eel= 1 eV, I= 1011W/cm2,p= 0.271,F/ω= 0.392). Here only two harmonics ( m= 7,8)
correspond to the four-saddle-point regime. The remaining part of the classically-allowed
domain, 9 ≤m≤56 corresponds to two-saddle-point regime. Most of the spec trum is
well described by the plain saddle-point approximation (3. 4) and covered by the envelope
function (3.9), albeit the highest peak at m= 9 exceeds it, as being in the region of the
transition between the two and four-saddle point regimes. Q uite paradoxically, the low-
frequency classically forbidden region with well manifest ed structure exhibits much higher
emission intensities as compared with the large-frequency edge of the classically allowed
domain.
IV. CONCLUSION
As discussed in the Introduction, the LAR is one of the proces ses responsible for emission
of high energy photons by the laser plasma. Surprisingly, it has not yet received attention
of researchers. This is particularly unsatisfactory since the other processes leading to high
energy photons (harmonic generation and laser stimulated b remsstrahlung) are currently
under active scrutiny. The present paper could be considere d as a first step to start filling
9this gap. The theory in many aspects is parallel to the treatm ent of multiphoton ionization
(MPI) where the Keldysh approximation is known to provide an important insight and
quantitatively reliable results. The origin of differences between MPI and LAR lies in the
kinematics: in MPI process the allowed electron energy in th e continuum are robustly defined
by the parameters of the system (initial electron binding en ergy, laser field frequency and
strength), whereas in the LAR the continuum electron energy is arbitrary. This rather trivial
observation results in important consequences of physical character. They are particularly
lucid in the adiabatic regime when laser frequency is sufficie ntly small. The ionization is a
tunneling process for all above-threshold channels. On the contrary, in the LAR there is a
domain of photon frequencies for which emission is allowed classically .
The Keldysh-type approximation allowed us to describe evol ution of the LAR spectrum
as the laser field varies, from the single line with only weak s atellites in the low-field limit
to the broad pattern of equidistantly spaced harmonics in th e strong field case. In the
adiabatic approximation (i.e. the saddle point method) the photon spectrum is subdivided
into classically allowed and classically forbidden domain s, with the line intensities being
highest at the boundaries of the former region. Concerning t he quantitative side of the
problem, the adiabatic approach is less efficient for the LAR p rocess as compared with
the treatment of above threshold ionization (ATI). The reas on is that in the latter case the
saddle point method is well applicable in its most simple for m, whereas for LAR process some
technical complications emerge. The difference stems from t he fact that ATI process always
effectively occurs at complex-valued moments of time, where as for LAR this is generally
not the case, and several regimes could be operative with the transition regions between
them. Albeit not drastic, these complications to our opinio n hardly warrant necessary
cumbersome analytical involvements, bearing in mind that t he numerical calculations are
quite simple and straightforward. Nevertheless the saddle point method remains very useful
for understanding the intensity patterns in the emitted pho ton spectrum.
An additional assumption of the present study, that in princ iple could be easily aban-
doned, is the use of asymptotic expression (2.14) for the fina l bound state wave function.
Again, in the LAR process the situation is less favorable for this approximation as compared
with the ATI process. This is because, as discussed in detail earlier [27], the long-range
asymptote of the bound state wave function governs ATI ampli tudes, whereas LAR process
is more sensitive to the wave function behavior in the entire coordinate space.
As is pictured by Fig. 2, the amount of noticeable lines in the photon spectrum increases
with the laser field strength, but the intensity of each indiv idual line decreases in average.
The cross section of the electron transition into the bound s tate summed over all emitted
photon channels is σtot(p) =/summationtext
m>0σm(p). It exhibits only very weak dependence on the
laser filed intensity I[28]. For instance, in the particular case of Fig. 2 we obtain for
σtot(p) the values 3 .85·10−6, 3.85·10−6, 3.89·10−6, 3.64·10−6, 3.4·10−6for the laser field
intensities I= 1011,1010,109,108,107W/cm2. Recent calculations [23] of the laser-assisted
antihydrogen formation in positron-antiproton collision s employed Coulomb-Volkov wave
function for the initial electron continuum state Φ pand the laser-perturbed wave function
for the bound state. The authors considered only one-photon LAR process and concluded
that the LAR cross section decreases for the stronger laser fi elds. The present results indicate
that if the multiphoton processes are included, then the tot al LAR cross section is essentially
independent on laser field intensity.
10Thus the effect of a laser on the recombination process looks v ery straightforward. The
total cross section of recombination essentially is not cha nged by a laser field, but is re-
distributed over equidistant pattern in photon spectrum th at becomes broader as the laser
intensity increases.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work has been supported by the Australian Research Coun cil. V. N. O. acknowl-
edges the hospitality of the staff of the School of Physics of U NSW where this work has been
carried out.
11REFERENCES
∗Permanent address: Institute of Physics, The University of St Petersburg, 198904 St
Petersburg, Russia; E-mail: Valentin.Ostrovsky@pobox.s pbu.ru
[1] M. Protopapas, C. H. Keitel, and P. L. Knight, Rep. Progr. Phys.60, 389 (1997).
[2] V. T. Platonenko and V. V. Strelkov, Kvantovaya Elektron ika25, 582 (1998) [Quantum
Electronics 28, 584 (1998)].
[3] Y. Ueshima, Y. Kishimoto, A. Sasaki, T. Tajima, Laser Par t. Beams. 17, 45 (1999).
[4] P. A. Norreys M. Santala, E. Clark, M. Zepf, I. Watts. F. N. Beg, K. Krushel-
nick, M. Tatarakis, A. E. Dangor, X. Fang, P. Graham, T. McCan ny, R. P. Singhal,
K. W. D. Ledingham, A. Creswell, D. C. W. Sanderson, J. Magill , A. Machacek,
J. S. Wark, R. Allott, B. Kennedy, D. Neely. Phys. Plasmas. 62150 (1999).
[5] V. P. Silin, Izv. Akad. Nauk Ser. Fiz. 63, 707 (1999).
[6] V. A. Astapenko, Laser Phys. 8, 1066 (1998).
[7] D. F. Zaretskii and E. A. Nersesov, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 109, 1994 (1996) [JETP 82,
1073 (1996)].
[8] Y. Hahn, Rep. Progr. Phys. 60, 691 (1997).
[9] L. A. Rivlin, Kvantovaya Elektronika 6, 594 (1979) [Sov. J. Quant. Electron 9, 353
(1979)].
[10] F. H. M. Faisal, A. Lami, and N.K.Rahman, J. Phys. B 14, L569 (1981); A. Lami,
N.K.Rahman, and F. H. M. Faisal, Phys. Rev. A 30, 2433 (1984).
[11] R. Neumann, H. Poth, A. Winnacker, and A. Wolf, Z. Phys. A 313, 253 (1983).
[12] B. Ritchie, Phys. Rev. A 30, 1849 (1984).
[13] E. F. Fill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 1687 (1986).
[14] U. Schramm, J. Berger, M. Grieser, D. Habs, E. Jaeschke, G. Kilgus, D. Schwalm, and
A. Wolf, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 22 (1991).
[15] F. B. Yousif, P. Van der Donk, Z. Kucherovsky, J. Reiss, E . Brannen, J. B. A. Mitchell,
and T. J. Morgan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 26 (1991).
[16] U. Schramm, T. Schl¨ ussler, D. Habs, D. Schwalm, and A. W olf, Hyperfine Interactions
99, 309 (1996).
[17] S. Pastuszka, U. Schramm, M. Grieser, C. Broude, R. Grim m, D. Habs, J. Kenntner,
H.-J. Miesner, T. Sch¨ ussler, D. Schwalm, and A. Wolf, Nucl. Inst. Meth. A 369, 11
(1996).
[18] S. Asp, R. Schuch, D. R. DeWitt, C. Biedermann, H. Gao, W. Zong, G. Andler, E. Jus-
tiniano, Nucl. Inst. Meth. B 117, 31 (1996).
[19] M. L. Rogelstad, F. B. Yousif, T. J. Morgan, and J. B. A. Mi tchell, J. Phys. B 30, 3913
(1997)
[20] E. Justiniano, G.Andler, S. Asp, D. R. DeWitt, and R.Sch uch, Hyperfine Interactions
108, 283 (1997).
[21] R. Neumann, H. Poth, A. Winnacker, and A. Wolf, Z. Phys. A 313, 253 (1983).
[22] A. M¨ uller and A. Wolf, Hyperfine Interactions 109, 233 (1997).
[23] S.-M. Li, Y.-G. Miao, Z.-F. Zhou, J. Chen and Y.-Y. Liu, P hys. Rev. A 58, 2615 (1998).
[24] W. Klemperer, X.-C. Luo, R. Rosner, and D. N. Schramm, Pr oc. Nat Ac. Sci. USA 92,
6166 (1995).
[25] M. Yu. Kuchiev and V. N. Ostrovsky, J.Phys.B 32, L189 (1999); Phys. Rev. A (accepted
for publication).
12[26] A. A. Radzig and B. M. Smirnov Reference Data on Atoms, Molecules and Ions (Berlin:
Springer, 1985). Unfortunately the numerical value of the a symptotic parameter Afor
H−ion is absent in the standard reference book [A. A. Radzig and B. M. Smirnov, Refer-
ence Data on Atoms, Molecules and Ions (Berlin: Springer, 1985)]. In our calculations,
as previously [27] [25], we assume A= 0.75 as given by V. M. Galitzkii, E. E. Nikitin,
and B. M. Smirnov, Teoriya Stolknovenii Atomnykh Chastitz (In Russian: Theory of
Atomic Particle Collisions ) (Moscow: Nauka, 1981).
[27] G. F. Gribakin and M. Yu. Kuchiev, Phys. Rev. A 55, 3760 (1997); J. Phys. B 30, L657
(1997); 31, 3087 (1998); M. Yu. Kuchiev and V. N. Ostrovsky, J. Phys. B 31, 2525
(1998).
[28] Unfortunately currently we did not succeed in analytic al derivation of this result.
13FIGURES
FIG. 1. Regimes of fast ( p/bardbl> F/ω ) and slow ( p/bardbl< F/ω ) electron in the laser-assisted
recombination process. For each regime the schematic plots show electron momentum with account
for the quiver motion in laser field Π( t)/bardbl≡p/bardbl+(F/ω)sinωtand the effective instantaneous kinetic
energy1
2Π(t)/bardbl. As time tvaries, the function1
2Π(t)/bardbloscillates in the interval that covers the emitted
photon energies Ω mallowed for population classically. Outside this interval only non-classical
(tunneling) population is possible. Fig. 1a shows that in th e classically allowed domain each
value of the photon energy Ω is passed twice during the laser fi eld period Tif the electron is fast
(p/bardbl> F/ω ). In the slow electron regime ( p/bardbl< F/ω ) the classically allowed domain of Ω mis
subdivided into two regions, as seen from Fig. 1. The photons with higher Ω mare again emitted
in the double-passage mode, whereas the lower values of Ω mare passed four times per the laser
field cycle.
FIG. 2. Factor |Cm(p)|2and cross section σm(p) for laser-assisted recombination of the electron
with the energy Eel= 1 eV to the bound state in H−ion. The results of numerical integration in
Eq.(2.10) are shown for the laser field with the frequency ω= 0.0043 and the intensities I= 107
W/cm2(crosses); 108W/cm2(triangles); 109W/cm2(diamonds); 1010W/cm2(squares) and 1011
W/cm2(circles). The symbols are joined by lines to help the eye.
FIG. 3. Same as in Fig. 2, but for the electron energy Eel= 10 eV and the laser field intensity
I= 1011W/cm2. The results of numerical calculations and plain semiclass ical formula (3.4) are
shown respectively by circles and squares. The semiclassic al envelope function (3.9) is given by
solid line. In the zero-laser-field limit the spectrum shrin ks to the single line with the position
indicated by vertical arrow.
FIG. 4. Same as in Fig. 3, but for the electron energy Eel= 0.1 eV and the laser field intensity
I= 1011W/cm2.
FIG. 5. Same as in Fig. 3, but for the electron energy Eel= 1 eV and the laser field intensity
I= 1011W/cm2.
14 |
arXiv:physics/9911001v1 [physics.optics] 2 Nov 19991
Spatial resolution of near-field scanning optical microsco py with
sub-wavelength aperture
Hiroaki Nakamura∗, Keiji Sawada1, Hirotomo Kambe1,
Toshiharu Saiki2and Tetsuya Sato
National Institute for Fusion Science
1Department of Applied Physics, Faculty of Engineering, Shi nshu University
2Nano-Optical Dynamics Project, Kanagawa Academy of Scienc e and Technology
(Received )
The finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method is employed to solve the three dimen-
sional Maxwell equation for the situation of near-field micr oscopy using a sub-wavelength
aperture. Experimental result on unexpected high spatial r esolution is reproduced by our
computer simulation.
§1. Introduction
Near-field scanning optical microscopy (NSOM)1),2)is a powerful tool for the
study of nanometer features with spatial resolution of 50-1 00 nm. The heart of
NSOM is a near-field probe, which is a metal-coated optical fib er tapered to sub-
wavelength aperture. When the probe end approaches a sample surface, the object
is illuminated and the reemitted light is collected in the ne ar-field region of the aper-
ture, whose diameter determines the spatial resolution of N SOM. Optical imaging
beyond the diffraction limit is carried out by scanning the pr obe on the surface. In
addition to this fundamental principle, the resolution of N SOM is also subject to the
tapered structure of the probe. Such a behavior has been demo nstrated through our
NSOM spectroscopy of single quantum dots.3),4)
Numerical analysis of electromagnetic field in the vicinity of the aperture and
propagation property of light in the tapered waveguide is qu ite advantageous for
the understanding of experimental results. We employ the fin ite-difference time-
domain (FDTD) method5)in the Mur absorbing boundary condition6)to solve
the three-dimensional Maxwell equation for the same situat ion as the experimental
configuration and discuss the validity of simulation result s.
§2. Calculations
Figures 1 and 2 show the geometries of the problem. A near-fiel d fiber probe
with a double tapered structure collects luminescence ( λ= 1µm) from a quantum
dot buried λ/10 beneath the semiconductor surface. We assume the source f or
luminescence is a point-like dipole current linearly polar ized along the xdirection.
The radiation caught by λ/2 aperture is transported to the tapered region clad with
∗E-mail address: fdtd@harima.tcsc.nifs.ac.jp2 H. Nakamura, K. Sawada, H. Kambe, T. Saiki and T. Sato
perfect conducting metal and then coupled to the ordinary wa veguide (optical fiber).
We run the simulation with time steps of c∆ t=λ/(40√
3) until the signal intensity
(|Ex|2+|Ey|2+|Ez|2) , which is evaluated at (0 ,0,3.25λ),reaches steady state.
§3. Results
Figure 3 shows the calculated signal intensity as a function
of the displacement of the probe from the origin. For both sca ns
along xandydirections, the full width at half maximum of the
signal (spatial resolution of NSOM) is estimated to be aroun d
0.25λ,which is much smaller than the aperture diameter of λ/2.
This performance is beyond the fundamental principle of NSO M
and in good agreement with the experimental result. Throughxyz
o
Fig. 1. Schematic
picture of simula-
tion for NSOM.
this preliminary calculation, we demonstrate that FDTD sim ulation is quite useful to
understand the behavior of light in the near-field probe and t o optimize its structure
for advanced measurements.
□Q
□□□□
/
2 □□
/
2
2□□
2
□□
3
.
7
5□□□□
/
2
□¢
x
=
□¢
y
=
□¢
z
=
□□
/
2
0
□□
=
1
□˚
mC
o
r
e
n
=
1
.
4
8
7
S
e
m
i
c
o
n
d
u
c
t
o
r
n
=
3
.
5P
e
r
f
e
c
t
E
l
e
c
t
r
i
c
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
o
r
□□
/
1
0d
i
p
o
l
e
c
u
r
r
e
n
tC
l
a
d
d
i
n
g
n
=
1
.
4
5
0
V
a
c
u
u
m□□
0
.
2
5
□□
Fig. 2. Cross section diagram ( xz-plane at
y= 0) of the geometry in our 3D com-
puter simulations for the double tapered
fiber probe.0.00.20.40.60.81.01.2
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3x-scan
y-scanIntensity (arbitrary unit)
Displacement ( × λ )
Fig. 3. Intensity vs. displacement from
the origin oin Fig. 1. Closed circles and
squares denote the total electric field inten-
sity along xandydirection, respectively.
This work was supported in part by the Grant-in-Aid for Scien ce Research from
the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture. It was carried out by
the Advanced Computing System for Complexity Simulation (N EC SX-4/64M2) at
National Institute for Fusion Science.
References
[1] E. Betzig and J. K. Trautman, Science 257( 1992), 189.
[2] M. Ohtsu, ed., Near-Field Nano/Atom Optics and Technology (Springer-Verlag, Tokyo,
1998).
[3] T. Saiki, K. Nishi and M. Ohtsu, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 37( 1998), 1638.
[4] T. Saiki and K. Matsuda, Appl. Phys. Lett. 74( 1999), 2773.
[5] K. S. Yee, IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. AP-14 ( 1966), 302.
[6] G. Mur, IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat. EMC-23 ( 1981), 377. |
arXiv:physics/9911002v1 [physics.flu-dyn] 2 Nov 1999A Phase Transition in the Water Coupled to a Local
External Perturbation
Dmitri Volchenkov and Ricardo Lima
CNRS, Centre de Physique Theorique, Luminy Case 907,
13288 Marseille Cedex 09, France
E-mail volchen@cpt.univ-mrs.fr, lima@cpt.univ-mrs.fr
February 2, 2008
Abstract
A flux of ideal fluid coupled to perturbation is investigated b y nonperturbative
methods of the quantum field theory. Asymptotic behavior of t he flux coupled to
perturbation turns out to be similar to that of superfluids.
PACS numbers:03.40 G, 47.55
1 Introduction
The concept of spontaneous symmetry breaking is an importan t one in modern theoretical
physics. It is known in statistical physics, condensed matt er, and nuclear physics, as well
as in relativistic field theory. An example of model subject t o such a phase transition is
given by an ideal fluid coupled to local external perturbatio n, [1]. For example, one may
consider a pressure pulse localized in space of inviscid inc ompressible unbounded fluid
which rises a fluid current with a net momentum flux P.Then Pplays the role of an
order parameter, and the symmetry is spontaneously broken w henP /negationslash= 0.
Statistical properties of the symmetrical phase of water response for the local external
perturbation were discussed in [1] in details. As an example of such a behavior one
imagines an eddy risen around a point wise distinct pressure perturbation. It was shown
that the energy of hydrodynamic perturbation is confined wit hin the eddy formed around
the pulse region and demonstrates a power like decay ∼r−4outside this region, [1].A Phase Transition in ... 2
In the present paper we consider the water response in the cas e of symmetry broken,
i.e.,whenP /negationslash= 0. Since the symmetry breaking does not affect the scaling pr operties of the
theory, the universal quantities for the long-range asympt otic behavior of the correlation
functions are the same as in the symmetrical phase. We demons trate that if P /negationslash= 0
the leading order of long-range water response for perturba tion is not determined by
the scaling degrees of freedom, but by the anomalies risen du e to an explicit symmetry
breaking. The results achieved would give a key for better un derstanding of various
aspects in the studies of the ocean surface. For example, one can consider the problem
of generating of circulation motions (meanders) close to oc ean currents. The grown up
meanders is about to separate from the main current forming t he stable closed rings
(which averaged lifetime is about 2-3 years) of hundreds of k ilometers in diameter drifting
slowly along the main current (with an averaged speed of 2-10 cm/s), [3]-[4].
The leading order of correlation functions stationary spec tra in the fully developed
turbulence theory of Kolmogorov [5] as well as in the statist ical theory of waves based on
the Zakharov’s kinetic equations [3] can be found from pure p henomenology in principle.
However, that is not the case for the water coupled to perturb ation. The matter is
of presence of redundant degrees of freedom connected to per turbation as well as to
hydrodynamic equations themselves. To get rid of these degr ees of freedom we propose a
physically relevant hypothesis on the mechanism coupling w ater to perturbation.
In [1] we used the renormalization group (RG) technique to ju stify such an additional
assumption for the case of O(3)−symmetrical perturbation. In the framework of RG
method the physical degrees of freedom are to be replaced by t he scaling degrees which
are related to the physical degrees through the RG transform ations of fields and param-
eters of the theory. Since the properties of scaling degrees of freedom are governed by a
group structure (the renormalization group) one investiga tes them much easier then those
of the origin problem. The results obtained from RG-analysi s are considered as somewhat
statistical steady state limit of the physical system. The r enormalized correlation func-
tions are distinguished from their physical analogies only by normalization conditions, so
that they can be also used for the analysis of asymptotic beha vior of the physical system.
The investigation of the relevant scaling degrees of freedo m which has been brought about
in [1] demonstrates that the asymptotic behavior r >> l p(lpis the perturbation scale)
of water response can be determined unambiguously if one sup poses a coupling between
translation and rotation components of the velocity of fluid .
The stationary spectra can have place for those scale interv als which are transparent
for currents of conserved quantities. The conserved energy current from the large-scale
region of pumping into the small-scale range of viscous diss ipation allows one to adjustA Phase Transition in ... 3
the well known Kolmogorov’s spectrum in the fully developed turbulence (the Five Thirds
Law). However, the inertial range of Kolmogorov lies apart from the scale spectrum of
our interest. The transparency interval related to the enst rophy current (the squared
averaged vorticity) Eis exactly the scale of the problem considered, though the en strophy
current gives us the spectrum of vorticial component of the v elocity field only,
E1/2k≃A(k), (1)
where Ais the vector velocity potential:
v(x,t) =−grad φ(x,t) +rot A (x,t), (2)
andφis the scalar velocity potential. However, the spectrum for φ(k) is still unknown
from these phenomenological considerations.
In language of the critical phenomena theory the spectrum (1 ) determines the crit-
ical dimension ∆[A] of the field A, ∆[A] = 1 .The use of critical dimension allows
to compute the spectrum of any correlation function of the fie ldAby simple dimen-
sional counting. For example, for the pair correlation func tion in Fourier representation
DA(k)≡ /angb∇acketleftA(k)A(−k)/angb∇acket∇ight,one has the asymptotics
DA(k)∼k∆[A],∆[DA] = 2∆[ A]−d, (3)
where dis the dimension of space.
Further phenomenological considerations allow to determi ne the spectra of quantities
which can be measured in experiments, for example, for the en ergy as a function of
distance apart from the perturbation point, E(r),one can obtain:
Er−4∼E(r). (4)
These results were derived in [1] for the case of O(3)−symmetrical perturbation and
justified within the framework of RG-approach. Formally, th ey are still valid for the case
of symmetry broken, P /negationslash= 0.
The assumption on the mechanism coupling water to perturbat ion proposed in [1]
allows to fix the spectrum for φin the form
φ(k)∼k7/12. (5)
The confinement of energy within the region of O(3)−symmetrical perturbation could be
interpreted as a kind of short-range order (in analogy with infinite ferromagnets), but
thelong-range order is suppressed. In case of symmetry broken spontaneous ly there isA Phase Transition in ... 4
a nontrivial expectation value for /angb∇acketleftφ/angb∇acket∇ight=α(x) (in analogy to the arising of spontaneous
magnetization in ferromagnets) engaged in long-range orde r with large-scale current mo-
tion.
In a regular way α(x) is to be determined from the equation of state
(α−α0) =f(j), (6)
with some function f(j) calculating usually in the framework of Feynman graph expa n-
sion, [6]. However, the power-like asymptotic solution for (6) can be derived readily
from phenomenology: considering Pas a new dimensional parameter of the theory with
symmetry broken, one obtains the spectrum α(k) in the form
α(k)∼k. (7)
Continuing the analogy with ferromagnets, one can conclude that the ordered phase (of
broken symmetry) water response can be described by a quanti ty analogous to the longi-
tudinal susceptibility
χL=∂α
∂j, (8)
determined by
χL≡/integraldisplay
dx/angb∇acketleft[φ(x)−α(x)][φ(0)−α(0)]/angb∇acket∇ight. (9)
By the way, from the critical phenomena theory point of view t he main problems of the
theory in the non-symmetrical phase are to determine an expl icit form for the function
f(j) in (6) and to justify the phenomenological result (7).
The plan of the paper follows: First, in the second section, f or the convenience of
readers we briefly reproduce the main result of [1] on model of ideal unbounded fluid
coupled to perturbation concluding the section by a discuss ion on the explicit symmetry
breaking. The statistical properties of hydrodynamical sy stem can be described by a
partition function of statistical mechanics with a classic al euclidean action. As a result
we derive the classical action functional designed to descr ibe the long-range asymptotic
behavior of the water coupled to perturbation. The relevant functional turns out to be
analogous to that one of the abelian Higgs model well-known in relativistic field theory
and superconductivity.
In the next section we observe the basic properties of the the ory in case of an explicit
U(1)−symmetry breaking and consider the physical consequences f or the asymptotic be-
havior of the model. These properties are dramatically diffe rent from those demonstrated
by the model in the symmetrical case discussed in [1]. In the l atter phase scaling degrees
of freedom were completely determined by the vector velocit y potential A,though inA Phase Transition in ... 5
presence of comparably strong fluid flow the vector velocity c omponents are confined in
the flux and their contributions are irrelevant for the asymp totic behavior of the system.
Looking for the stable stationary solutions, we obtain an in finite countable set of such
solutions distinguished one from the other by energy gaps. I n particular, a ”ground state”
solution can be interpreted as a pure laminar flow ( A≡0).
In the fourth section we consider the asymptotic for α(r) in case of the laminar flow;
it is provided by a Goldstone asymptotics arising by an expli citU(1)−symmetry breaking
which has place in the real physical system.
To account the contributions of eddies into flux for ”excited states” we construct an
instanton solution for the theory of water coupled to pertur bation and find the interval
of validity for the phenomenological result (7) in the fifth s ection.
In the Section 6, we discuss the results obtained from the poi nt of view of dynamical
systems theory. We conclude in the last section.
2 The Model of Ideal Unbounded Fluid Coupled to
Perturbation
In [1] it was shown that after elimination of all redundant de grees of freedom the problem
considered possesses the entire U(1)−gauge symmetry [8]. In case of j/negationslash= 0 this symmetry
turns out to be hidden by an explicit symmetry breaking term a ppearing in the effective
action functional. To reveal the hidden symmetry of hydrody namics of ideal fluid we first
suppose j= 0. Then the equation of hydrodynamics takes the form
div v (x,t) =0,p(x,t) =/integraldisplay
dy∂ivj(y,t)∂jvi(y,t)
|x−y|. (10)
Herev(x,t) is the velocity of fluid and p(x,t) is the pressure distribution. The trivial
boundary conditions for the fields at infinity are implied.
The equations (10) do not lead to a hamiltonian in the usual wa y, since it is not
possible to define the conjugated moments. Nevertheless, th ese equations can be derived
from the classical Lagrangian L(ϕ) formulated in favor of the scalar and vector velocity
potentials, [1]:
L(φ, A i, p) =1
2/integraldisplay
dx/bracketleftbigg
(∂p)2+ (∂φ)2+1
2F2+p∂ivj∂jvi+JiAi/bracketrightbigg
, (11)
where we have introduced the eddy component of velocity field as agauge invariant tensor
Fk= (rot A )k=∂iAj−∂jAi, Ji=∂jFk−∂kFj(i/negationslash=k/negationslash=j) is the vorticity conserved for
ideal fluid, and the tensor vivj≡(∂iφ)(∂jφ) +FiFj−∂iφFj−∂jφFi(the last two terms
are vanished when integrated over xwith trivial boundary conditions).A Phase Transition in ... 6
With no coupling to pressure field ( p= 0) (11) is invariant under the following trans-
formations of fields
Ai(x)→Ai(x)−∂iΛ(x),
φ(x)→φ(x)eiuΛ(x),(12)
where uΛ(x) is an arbitrary continuous, differentiable phase function . The relations (12)
express the U(1)−gauge symmetry of the functional (11) ( U(1) is the group of multipli-
cation by complex numbers). In accordance to the Noether’s t heorem (12) relates to two
conserved currents, vorticity, defined above,
∂iJi= 0, (13)
and a current related to rotations in the complex plain U(1):
Ii=φ∗∂iφ−φ∂iφ∗, ∂ iIi= 0. (14)
The statistical properties of mechanical system of an infini te number of degrees of freedom
can be derived from the partition function of statistical me chanics Z=Tr(e−S) with
somewhat classical euclidean action functional,
S(φ, A i, p) =1
2/integraldisplay/bracketleftbigg
(∂p)2+ (∂φ)2+1
2F2+p∂ivj∂jvi/bracketrightbigg
(15)
The last term in (15) does not meet the entire symmetry (12), s ince the pressure field as it
is included in the action functional contains somewhat redu ndant degrees of freedom, we
therefore can integrate it over in the partition function Z. The result of functional integra-
tion does not depend on p(x,t). This procedure is reduced to elimination of the quadratic
term proportional to ( ∂p)2from (15) and the replacement of the U(1)−symmetry breaking
term by
1
2/integraldisplay
dx∂ivj(x,t)∂jvi(x,t)/integraldisplay
Vpdy∂ivj(y,t)∂jvi(y,t)
|x−y|, (16)
which relates the fluctuations of velocity fields risen by the perturbative pulse in the
perturbed region Vpto those fluctuations apart from Vp.
In [1] we investigated possible contributions of (16) into t he action functional con-
sidering the insertions of various power like composite ope rators. It was shown that the
only component which is important from the RG point of view ha ve to be U(1)-gauge
symmetrical, i.e.,
m2φ2(17)
in the first order, where m2is somewhat mass parameter (the coefficient of the rele-
vant RG-invariant composite operator). The use of Ward iden tities which express the
U(1)−gauge invariancy of the theory allows to demonstrate that al l other combinationsA Phase Transition in ... 7
of quadratic operators are ultra-violet (UV) finite, i.e.,the relevant correlation functions
do not have UV-divergencies, and then they do not participat e in scaling degrees of free-
dom.
Instantly close to the region of perturbation the pressure p ulse rises the wave motions
with eigenmodes k > k 0≃V−1/3
p.Due to strong nonlinearity of interaction in hydrody-
namical equations the eigenmodes of oscillations spread ve ry fast from a band of order
V−1/3
pover the whole spectrum, and various multipole oscillation s of any type are arisen
with time. Clearly, the long-range fluid behavior will depen d to some extent on the sta-
tistical properties of wave mode coupling. Following [1] we suppose the simplest model
for the coupling mechanism by inclusion of the ϕ4-type interaction term into (15) with a
wave modes coupling constant g >0. In accordance with the general critical phenomena
approach we note that the accounting of highest oscillation harmonics, i.e.,ϕ6,ϕ8,and so
on cannot alter the large-distance asymptotic behavior of w ater response if g/negationslash= 0.Again,
since we are interested in U(1)−gauge symmetrical term the only amendments into action
functional have to be of the form, ∼gφ4.
As a resulting hypothesis we obtain the effective action func tional to be:
S(φ, A i) =1
2/integraldisplay
dx/bracketleftbigg
(∂φ)2+1
2F2+m2φ2+1
3gφ4/bracketrightbigg
(18)
which is designed to describe the asymptotic properties of w ater response.
The action (18) has some redundant degrees of freedom, the ga uge degrees, with
unknown dynamics. As a consequence it is not renormalizable , and it has no solutions
in the massless limit m2= 0,[6]. To construct a renormalizable theory we introduce an
abelian gauge geometrical structure:
(i)φ(x) and φ∗(x) are vectors for U(1) transformations,
(ii) The derivative ∂iis replaced by the covariant derivative ∇i:
∇i=∂i+iu0Ai, (19)
where u0is the coupling constant of interaction between the scalar a nd rotational compo-
nents of the velocity potential ϕ(analogous to the electron charge ein electrodynamics).
(iii) It follows that the curvature tensor is iu0Fij:
iu0Fij= [∇i,∇j] =iu0(∂iAj−∂jAi).
(iv) Since the U(1)-gauge group is abelian ( A(x,t) is a translation invariant), one can
write the parallel transporter U(C) along any continuous contour Cwhich is an element
ofU(1).In terms of a line integral:
U(C) = exp/bracketleftbigg
−iu0/contintegraldisplay
CAi(s)dsi/bracketrightbigg
(20)A Phase Transition in ... 8
as a consequence of vorticity conservation for ideal fluid. T hus, the rotational component
of velocity potential just carries on the fluctuations of the scalar potential field φ(x).
By the way, two solutions for different points φ(x, t) and φ(y, t) are related through the
parallel transporter (20), where Cis an integration path connecting the points xandy,
[8].
Now, the gauge degrees of freedom (correspondent to invaria ncy of velocity with re-
spect to the ∂iΛ-shifts of vector potential Ai) can be taken into account by the usual
procedure analogous to the Faddeev-Popov quantization [6] . In particular, it leads to
inclusion of a gauge dependent term into the action function al,
S(Ai, φ) =1
2/integraldisplay
dx/bracketleftbigg
|∇iφ|2+1
2F2
ij+ζ−1(∂iAi)2+m2φ2+1
3gφ4/bracketrightbigg
, (21)
where ζis an arbitrary valued ( ζ∈[0,∞)) auxiliary gauge parameter of the theory. The
model (21) demonstrates the existence of a statistically st eady state independently of the
details of velocity evolution.
In [1] the model (21) has been investigated in the symmetrica l phase, m2>0. The
crucial distinction between symmetry implementation in th e cases of positive and negative
signs for m2lies though in the structure of the ”ground state” ( i.e.,the expectation value
of velocity potential).
Suppose, first, that A=0in (21), then one has the standard model of a scalar
unharmonic oscillator. For m= 0 the oscillator is subject to a phase transition. At
the classical level in the symmetrical phase ( m2>0) the oscillator model describes the
fluctuations having the trivial expectation value of the fiel d,/angb∇acketleftφ/angb∇acket∇ight= 0 (see Fig. 1.a). If
m2<0, the system allows an infinite number of possible expectati on values related to
each other by the unitary transformation group U(1).In particular, if one fixes a phase
parameter of the group U(1) under certain physical conditions, then for the field φthere
are two possible mean values (see Fig. 1.b)
α(x)≡ /angb∇acketleftφ/angb∇acket∇ight=±/radicalBig
m2/g=α0(x). (22)
The latter situation is usually referred to as spontaneousl y broken symmetry. Rise of a
net fluid current from the region of initial perturbation int o outside (see Fig.2) one can
treat as a result of spontaneously symmetry breaking which c an be described by (21) with
m2<0.
If we held A=0,the lagrangian is still invariant under the set of U(1)-transformations
with no gauge section. When j= 0, the Goldstone theorem predicts the appearance of a
massless degree of freedom corresponding to unphysical ”an gular motion” for which there
is no restoring force. The physical interpretation of such a degree of freedom would beA Phase Transition in ... 9
the following: the quantity (8) diverges as j→0,i.e.,an infinitely small initial fluid flow
jrisen by perturbation generates the nontrivial expectatio n value for vector potential,
α/negationslash= 0.
If we assume that j/negationslash= 0,then the action (21) has the U(1)-symmetry breaking explic-
itly by the new term
−/integraldisplay
dx j(x)Re[φ(x,t)], (23)
where Re[φ(x,t)] is the real part of the complex valued field φ. This symmetry breaking
term gives in the first order in ja mass proportional to j1/2∂iIi(the axial current Iiis no
more conserved) to the unphysical angular degree of freedom correspondent to rotations
in the complex plain ( i.e.,(8) has no more divergent).
The situation is though to be changed dramatically if one inc ludes the vorticial velocity
component into consideration ( A/negationslash=0). Due to so called Higgs mechanism the angular
degree of freedom does not produce divergences in (8) even in the zero order in j, and the
gauge field Aiacquires a mass without spoiling the gauge invariance and re normalizability
of the theory, [8]-[9]. These ideas which are quite familiar in the weak interactions theory
and superconductivity allow an heuristic interpretation a lso in hydrodynamics: In the
symmetrical phase ( j= 0)Aplays the purely transporting role for scalar velocity pote ntial
fluctuations from one point to another in accordance with (20 ). When the symmetry is
broken spontaneously, Aacquires the longitudinal polarization degree of freedom g iving
it a mass; as a direct consequence a vector potential field can penetrate only exponentially
into the fluid flow with a range proportional to the inverse of t he acquired mass. Like
a superconductor expels a magnetic field from its interior, e xcept for a thin layer at
the surface over which the field decreases exponentially, th e fluid flow ousts the eddies
from its interior onto the periphery. The microscopic origi n of the Higgs phenomenon
in hydrodynamics lies in screening currents of fluid compens ating the external velocity
rotational component (see Fig.3).
In [1] it was shown that the scaling degrees of freedom propor tional to gare vanished
from the asymptotic behavior of fluid involved into eddy moti on. By the way, considering
j= 0 (say, on the periphery skin of a large-scale current), one can omit the term gφ4
from (21) to obtain the relevant effective action functional . However, if j/negationslash= 0 (within the
current), from the heuristic point of view it is obvious that the statistical steady state
should be free of coupling to the vector potential A, and the solution for α(x) (i.e.,(7))
is to be determined by a Goldstone asymptotics, [11].A Phase Transition in ... 10
3 The Gauge-Invariant U(1)Theory of the Water Cou-
pled to Perturbation
In the present section we develop the heuristic ideas of the p receding one. We derive the
action functional for the theory in case of symmetry spontan eously broken and investigate
its properties.
Implementing the local transformation
φ(x)→[α(x) +φ(x)]eiuΛ(x)/α(x),
Ai(x)→Ai(x)−u
α(x)∂iΛ(x)(24)
to the model action functional relevant to the system of equa tions (10), we fix the gauge
in such a way that
uΛ(x) =2πnα(x),n∈Z. (25)
The parameter uwhich characterize the coupling strength of vorticial and t ranslational
velocity components in this gauge is related to a circulation, Γ,
Γn≡/contintegraldisplay
A dx =2nπ
u. (26)
Physical degrees of freedom are become clear now (since Λ( x) is gauged away from the
theory):
S(Ai, φ) =1
2/integraltextd x/bracketleftBig
|∇iφ|2+1
2F2
ij+ζ−1(∂iAi+√
2uα·Im[φ])2+m2
φφ2+
+m2
AA2+1
3gφ4+u2
1φA2+4
3g1φ3−jφ+S(α)/bracketrightBig
,(27)
where we have denoted u2
1=u2α,g1=gα, m2
A≡2αu,m2
φ= 2gα2−m2,andIm[φ] is
an imaginary part of φ. Comparing (27) and (21), one can see that the vector field A
obtains the longitudinal polarization degree of freedom fo r which is expressed in (27) as
the new mass term m2
AA2. The longitudinal components of the vector fields AiandIm[φ]
are ghosts, which both cancel against the Faddeev-Popov gho st [12] all having the same
massmA.
The behavior of (27) is in a way very different from (21): the un physical imaginary
part of the scalar velocity potential φdisappears and the vector field Aobtains a mass
so that the vorticial velocity component is short-range onl y,i.e.,it is repelled completely
from the flux.
The standard way to illustrate the last sentence is to demons trate that the response of
the flux for an elementary vortex immersed in is equal to zero [ 14]. Consider the constant
shift transformation (a purely vorticial constant velocit y component)
Fij→Fij+fij (28)A Phase Transition in ... 11
for the gauge section Fijin the disordered theory (21). Then the partition function Z[fij]
is invariant under gauge transformations:
fij→fij+∂iλj−∂jλi, (29)
since it can be compensated by the appropriate change Ai→Ai+λi.Therefore, in a
gauge-invariant theory (21) one has
Z[Fij+fij] =Z[Fij]; (30)
furthermore, one notes that the constant fijcan be removed from (21) by the transfor-
mation:
Ai→Ai+xjfij. (31)
In the phase with long-range correlations (21), the change ( 31) is equivalent to somewhat
change of trivial boundary conditions for the equations (10 ) at infinity. In particular, this
yields the new term into the partition function
Z[fij]−Z[0] =εA
u2/integraldisplay
dx f2
ij, (32)
where εA(the Lagrange multiplier) would be some function which has a natural interpre-
tation as an amplitude of the response of the flux for an elemen tary vortex. Obviously,
if the circulation Γ <Γ0,where Γ 0is some critical value correspondent to the phase
transition point, the vector potential becomes short-rang e correlated, and the partition
function Zshould not depend on fij.ThusεA= 0 in the theory (27).
In case of the vector velocity potential Ais strong enough then, because of circulation
conservation, it can be allowed in the fluid flow in the form of n arrow flux tubes. The
relation (26) in this context means that there are always an i nteger number nof such
vorticial tubes in the flow, i.e.,that each of them have a source and a sink (see Fig.4).
Varying (27) with respect to Aiandφ∗φwith the boundary condition (26) ( i.e.,fixing
the circulation u−1to be constant in ideal fluid), one can easily estimate the ene rgy of a
flux with length lfas
E∼u2m2
Alf, (33)
which demonstrates the property inherent to a confinement ph enomenon. Note, that (33)
could be derived rigorously by considering of a Wilson’s loo p operator for a point-wise
vorticial current,
Ji(x) =−iu/contintegraldisplay
δ(x−y)dy, (34)
for (27) (see, for example [7]).A Phase Transition in ... 12
This situation is analogous to that of superconductors [13] : if electrically charged
bosons (Cooper’s bound state of an electron pair) Bose-cond ensed then there the electric
fields become short-range, and the magnetic fields are ousted from the interior. If finally
a magnetic field is admitted inside a superconductor it can on ly come in some multiple
vortices, never spread out because of Meissner effect. Follo wing the analogy with super-
conductors, one can say that the source and the sink vortices confined in the fluid flow
are kept together in a potential well, and the potential is be ing linearly proportional to
their separation.
As it well known, [9]-[10], the hidden symmetry begets the hi dden renormalizability:
the divergence structure of renormalizable theory (21) is u naffected by spontaneous sym-
metry breaking, and the counterterms needed in (27) remain t hose of the symmetrical
theory (21). Consequently, the critical dimensions calcul ated in [1] for the quantities in
(21) are still valid formally also for (27).
4 Goldstone Asymptotics of the Water Flux Cou-
pled to Perturbation
In the present section we construct (6) explicitly and justi fy the phenomenological result
(7). We shall consider the theory in the ordered phase assumi ng that the velocity field
has no vorticial components ( i.e.,the flux contains no vorticial pairs, n= 0 in (25)).
Therefore, to describe the statistical properties of the sy stem we can integrate the partition
function Z[φ,A] over Aeliminating the vector field Afrom the theory. The resulting
partition function will depend solely on the scalar velocit y potential, Z[φ],and the relevant
action functional will be identical to those of scalar φ4−theory in the ordered phase
(nonlinear σ−model):
S=−1
2/integraldisplay
dx/bracketleftbigg
(∂φ)2+τφ2+g
3!(φ2)2−j Re[φ]/bracketrightbigg
. (35)
The distinguishing feature of (35) is the presence of Goldst one singularities which arise
due to an explicit U(1)−symmetry breaking. The physical origin of these singularit ies
is following, [14]: the scalar velocity potentials with diff erent orientation in the complex
plane, however, correspond to the same fluid velocity and tho ugh to the same energy. The
relevant conserved current meets the Ward identity in the mo mentum representation:
ki/angb∇acketleftIi(k)φ(−k)/angb∇acket∇ight=/angb∇acketleftφ(0)/angb∇acket∇ight. (36)
Taking k→0, one concludes that /angb∇acketleftIi(k)φ(−k)/angb∇acket∇ightmust be singular in this limit:
/angb∇acketleftIi(k)φ(−k)/angb∇acket∇ightk→0=/angb∇acketleftφ(0)/angb∇acket∇ightki
k2+. . . (37)A Phase Transition in ... 13
The general solution for Goldstone asymptotics in (35) was g iven in [11] for the unbounded
theory and then generalized in [15] to the theory in a half-sp ace. In particular, the
hypothesis [16] was proven in [11] for any order of ǫ−expansion (2 ǫ= 4−d) with j, k→0 :
the equation of state (6) has the form
(α−α0) =aj1−ǫ+bj+. . ., (38)
and the longitudinal susceptibility (8) is to be
χL=a1j−ǫ+b1+. . ., (39)
the numerical coefficients a, b, a 1, b1are specified in [11]. For the transversal susceptibility,
χT∼j−1as it follows from the Goldstone theorem. Following the disc ussion in [17],
formulae (38) and (39) can be interpreted as a Goldstone scal ing (by analogy to critical
scaling) for which jandk∼1/rplay the role of significant parameters. The certain
Goldstone dimensions ∆Gbelong to k,j, and α(x)|j=0:
∆G[k] = 1,∆G[j] = 2,∆G[α] =d−2. (40)
In contrast with critical dimensions (40) are known precise ly as well as the normalized
scaling functions of the simplest correlation functions [1 7]. The last relation in (40)
justifies the result (7): performing the inverse Fourier tra nsformation, one obtains at
three dimensions
α(r)∼1
r2. (41)
5 The Instanton Solutions for the Theory of Water
Coupled to Perturbation
In the previous sections we have considered the stationary ( with no time dependence)
stable solutions of (27) which correspond to the saddle poin ts (solutions of the hydrody-
namical equations). However, in the case discussed, j/negationslash= 0,the actual hydrodynamical
equations, posses the non-constant solutions also.
In the previous sections we have shown that there is a countab le set of possible stable
stationary solutions (enumerated by an integer number n) for the system of flux coupled
to perturbation distinguished one from the other by the ener gy gaps (33). Obviously,
the non-constant statistically steady solutions are relat ed to a specific mechanism of gap
generation (the generation of new pairs of eddies in the flux) ,i.e.,they describe possible
transitions between constant solutions with different Γ n(26).A Phase Transition in ... 14
Another interpretation can be used: since the source and sin k eddies are confined
together in the potential well in the fluid flux, one can consid er a tunneling process of
the eddy pair into another potential well. This tunneling pr ocess can be provided by an
instanton solution [14]. The contribution of instantons into the corr espondent partition
functional Zis indeed irrelevant if we are interested in relatively shor t periods of time
t < t 0,where t0is a ”tunnelling time”. However, for t > t 0,it becomes very large.
Consider the action (35) in case of the symmetry broken spont aneously. Classical
minima of this action defined from the equation:
∆φa−m2φa+g
2/parenleftBigg2/summationdisplay
1φ2
b/parenrightBigg
φa=j, (42)
where φ1,2are the real and imaginary parts of the field φ,φ= (φ1+φ2)/√
2. We use the
anzatz
φ=µ(r)eiΛ
α, (43)
which gives the equation for µ(r) in the form,
µ′′−m2µ−2
r2µ+gµ3=j. (44)
There exists a solution to (44) with the properties:
µ(r→0)→0, µ(r→ ∞)→α0. (45)
The problem of existence and stability of the solution of (44 ) with (45) were discussed in
[14]. The effective asymptotical solution is given in the pre ceding section by the Goldstone
asymptotics. Suppose now that one has introduced a set of vor tices, placed at the points
xawith circulations Γ ainto the flux (35). The partition function of statistical mec hanics
Zis then to be presented in the form (in case of α0≫u2)
Z=Z0Zinst, (46)
where Z0is the standard partition function of the theory (35) and
Zinst=Tr
exp
α0
2u2/integraldisplay
dx/summationdisplay
a/negationslash=b2πΓaΓbL
|xa−xb|+C/summationdisplay
aΓ2
a
(47)
(Lbeing the size of the flux pattern considered; the second term is the vortex self-
energy). One can see that in case of large fluid flux α0and, consequently, strong confining
property the vortices revolving alternatively are combine d into pairs. Such pairs have
very small influence on the correlation functions and are irr elevant in case of large α0.
The asymptotics provided by the instanton solutions is just the same as (41).A Phase Transition in ... 15
6 Discussion from the Point of View of Dynamical
Systems Theory
The Navier-Stockes equation for an ideal fluid can be replace d by the relation for the
pressure field, and the Galilean invariance of hydrodynamic al equations is manifested as
aU(1)−gauge invariance (12).
We shall concern with the phase space (of infinite dimensiona lity) relevant to the
dynamical system of water coupled to perturbation and limit ourselves to a qualitative
consideration. Picturing the instant states of the system i n the phase space, we obtain its
phase diagram. The stable stationary solutions discussed i n [1] and in the present paper
can be interpreted as the attraction regions or fixed points o f trajectories of the system
in the phase space.
Consider the manifold of initial conditions correspondent to the only solution of dis-
ordered phase ( P= 0). In [1] we have shown that it can be realized exceptionall y as an
eddy risen around a point-wise distinct perturbation. One c an imagine this manifold as
a torus covered by the trajectories tending to some stable cy cle (see Fig.5).
If we chose a point apart from the torus as the initial conditi on (for example, the points
AorBon the diagram Fig. 5), the system will leave the vicinity of t he torus and tends
to some region of attraction which is closed in a sense that th ere are no trajectories going
out of it. This behavior represents a phase transition in the language of statistical theory.
Within the attraction region the trajectory passes consequ ently through an infinite set of
fixed points distinguishing by the Γ nvalues (12). Most of these points are hetreoclinic ,
and so that they are unstable in a sense that the smallest devi ation from the certain set
of initial conditions will make the system trajectory to jum p to some other point. These
processes, in principle, are to be described by the instanto n solutions (see Sec. 5).
This technique would provide us with information on the tran sition probabilities be-
tween the particular heteroclinic fixed points. Such a quantity could be naturally in-
terpreted within the context of the dynamical systems theor y. Let us surround each
heteroclinic fixed point by a ball of radius εand consider a fixed point n0which cor-
responds to the solution with Γ n0(see Fig. 5). Taking εto be small enough, we can
make the volume of each ball to be finite. Denote the volume of a ball sector starting
from which the trajectory of the system drops into the ε-vicinity of the other point, ni,
asVε(n0→ni). Then, one can introduce the quantity
P(n0→ni) =Vε(n0→ni)
/summationtext
k,k/negationslash=0Vε(n0→nk)(48)
which is analogous to a transition probability defined in the statistical theory. If theA Phase Transition in ... 16
point which we have chosen is a homoclinic attractive fixed point, the probability (48)
then tends to zero. 0 < P < 1 forheteroclinic points, and P= 1 for a repelling point.
We do not know a priori whether there are some homoclinic attractive fixed points in
the region of attraction (see Fig. 5) or there are only the heteroclinic points. We expect
though that in case of α≫uthere is a degeneracy of solutions in a sense that they are
predicted by the Goldstone asymptotics.
7 Conclusion
In a conclusion one can say that the flux of ideal fluid coupled t o local external pertur-
bation in the region r > l pdemonstrates asymptotically some properties similar to th ose
of superfluids. In [1] and in the present paper we have conside red the statistically steady
asymptotic solutions of the model by various nonperturbati ve techniques of the quan-
tum field theory. The results on RG-analysis, Goldstone asym ptotics, and instanton-type
solutions are, by the way, exact, and they demonstrate that t he long-standing hydrody-
namical problem of water coupled to perturbation, in princi ple, can be treated as a critical
phenomenon.
The relevant physical system contains too many redundant de grees of freedom. To fix
the statistically stable behavior in the system one needs to add some extra assumptions
on the character of perturbation as well as on the character o f wave modes coupling. The
model describing such a behavior is subject to a phase transi tion managed basically by
the perturbation symmetry. Roughly speaking, the symmetry properties of the initial
perturbation define whether the vorticial or translational fluid velocity components is the
most important one for the long-range asymptotic fluid respo nse.
References
[1] Preprint CPT-98/P3712 , D. Volchenkov, R. Lima, Critical Behavior of the Water
Coupled to a Local External Perturbation
[2] V. P. Krasitskii, J. Fluid Mech. 272, 1-20 (1994)
[3] A.S. Monin, V.P. Krasitskii Phenomena on the Ocean Surface , Gidrometeoizdat,
St.-Peterburg, 1985 (in Russian)
[4] Kamenkovich V.M., Koshlyakov M.N., Monin A.S. Synoptic Eddies in Oceans ,
Gidrometeoizdat, St.-Peterburg, 1982. (in Russian)A Phase Transition in ... 17
[5] A.S. Monin, A.M. Yaglom, Statistical Fluid Mechanics (MIT Press, Cambridge,
Mass., 1975), Vol. 2.
[6] E. Brezin, D.J. Wallace, K.G. Wilson, Phys. Rev. B, 7, 1, 232 (1973)
[7] J. Zinn-Justin Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena (Clarendon, Oxford,
1990)
[8] M. Guirdy, Gauge Field Theories (J. Wiley & Sons, NY, 1991)
[9] E. Leader, E. Predazzi An Introduction to gauge theory and modern particle physics
(Cambridge, 1996)
[10] S. Coleman, in Laws of Hadronic Matter (ed. by A. Zichichi; Academic Press, 1975)
[11] Nalimov M. Yu., Theor. and Math. Phys., 80, 2, 212 (1989).
[12] B.S. de Witt, Phys. Rev. 162, p. 1195-1239 (1967)
[13] G.’t Hooft, Vol. 19 in Advanced Series in Mathematical Physics , World Scientific,
1994.
[14] A. M. Polyakov Vol 3, Gauge Fields and Strings inContemporary Concepts in
Physics , Harwood Acad. Publ., 1987.
[15] M. Yu. Nalimov, Theor. and Math. Phys., 102, 2, 163 (1995)
[16] A. Z. Patashinsky, V. L. Pokrovsky, JTPH 64, 4, 1445 (1973)
[17] Vasil’ev A.N. Functional Methods in the Quantum Field Theory and Statphys ics(to
be published) (in Russian) (1998)A Phase Transition in ... 18
CAPTIONS FOR FIGURES
FIGURE 1.
a.) At the classical level in the symmetrical phase ( m2>0) the oscillator model
describes the fluctuations having the trivial expectation v alue of the field, /angb∇acketleftφ/angb∇acket∇ight= 0.
b.) If m2<0, the system allows an infinite number of possible expectati on values
related to each other by the unitary transformation group U(1).In particular, if one fixes
a phase parameter of the group U(1) under certain physical conditions, then for the field
φthere are two possible mean values.
FIGURE 2.
Rise of a net fluid current from the region of initial perturba tion into outside.
FIGURE 3.
To a Higgs phenomenon in hydrodynamics. When the symmetry is broken sponta-
neously, Aacquires the longitudinal polarization degree of freedom g iving it a mass mA.
The fluid flow ousts the eddies from its interior onto the perip hery.
FIGURE 4.
The kink-type solutions for fluid flow. The source and the sink vortices confined in
the fluid flow are kept together in a potential well, and the pot ential is being linearly
proportional to their separation.
FIGURE 5.
a) The manifold of initial conditions correspondent to the o nly solution of disordered
phase ( P= 0). If we chose a point apart from the torus as an initial cond ition (for
example, the points AorB), the system will leave the vicinity of the torus and tends to
some region of attraction which is closed in a sense that ther e are no trajectories going
out of it. This tendency represents a phase transition in a la nguage of statistical theory.
b) Surround each heteroclinic fixed point by a ball of radius εand consider a fixed
point n0which corresponds to the solution with Γ n0. |
arXiv:physics/9911003v1 [physics.flu-dyn] 2 Nov 1999Critical Behavior of the Water Coupled to a Local
External Perturbation
Dmitri Volchenkov and Ricardo Lima
CNRS, Centre de Physique Theorique, Luminy Case 907,
13288 Marseille Cedex 09, France
E-mail volchen@cpt.univ-mrs.fr, lima@cpt.univ-mrs.fr
February 2, 2008
Abstract
The response of inviscid incompressible unbounded fluid sub ject to a localized
external perturbation is studied. The physically relevant hypotheses on the mode
coupling mechanisms is justified by renormalization-group method. The scaling laws
for the scalar and vector velocity potentials are derived. T he spectrum of energy of
perturbed fluid versus the distance apart from perturbation is computed.
PACS number(s): 03.40 G, 47.55, 47.10. +g, 05.40. +j, 42.27. Gs
1 Introduction
The excitation of wave motion in a fluid by various perturbati ve factors is a long-standing
problem in hydrodynamics. Particularly, the wave generati on on the water surface by
turbulent air flow over the surface and the rising of tsunamy- like waves excited by bottom
earthquakes are of current interest of modern ocean studies . The physical mechanisms
coupling the perturbation and water must be understood in or der to describe the wave
motions on the ocean surface. In spite of great success in the description of statistical
properties of water waves which have been achieved recently in the framework of so-called
Zakharov formalism (see, for example [1] and references the rein) many phenomena on the
ocean surface remain unclear. The great advances in study of surface phenomena were
achieved in the modern critical phenomena theory recently [ 2]. They are due to employ
of quantum field theory methods and quantum field renormaliza tion group method (RG)Critical Behavior... 2
[3] in particular which are designed to describe systems wit h an infinite number of degrees
of freedom. The results indicate convincingly that the anal ogous approach would also be
of great advantage in the explanation of ocean surface pheno mena. We intend to propose
the statistical description of ocean surface phenomena wit hin the framework of modern
critical phenomena theory [4]. In the present paper we consi der a simple physical model
coupling water to perturbation which can be adopted for the u se of RG method. Our
aim is to outline the basic properties of such a model for what purpose we now limit
our consideration to the case of inviscid incompressible un bounded fluid. The work is
concerned with the large-distance and long-time asymptoti c behavior of water response
for an external localized perturbation risen by a pressure fi eld pulse; it is imposed that
the scale of perturbation lpis much less than the main scale of the problem r≫lp.
The duration τof energy input provided by the pressure pulse determines th e scale of
perturbed region
lp=cτ, (1)
where cis a speed of perturbation spread in fluid. We are interested i n the statistical
properties of water response in the range r≫lpandt≫τ. The crucial importance
for the what following is that the time derivative can be elim inated from hydrodynamic
equations,
div v (x,t) =0,∆p(x,t) =−∂ivj(x,t)∂jvi(x,t), (2)
where v(x,t) is the velocity of fluid, p(x,t) is the field of pressure, and ∆ is the Laplace
differential operator. We have taken in (2) the constant fluid density to be ρ0= 1.
Summation over successive indices will be implied. x Then fr om (2) one obtains an
expression for the pressure p(x,t) :
p(x,t) =−/integraldisplay
Vpdy∂ivj(y,t)∂jvi(y,t)
|x−y|, (3)
where the integration is brought about over the perturbed re gionVp.It is essential that
(2) is invariant with respect to an arbitrary time-dependen t velocity shift:
va(x,t)→v(x+s,t)−a(t),p(x,t)→p(x+s,t) (4)
wherea(t) is an arbitrary function of time decreasing at t→ −∞ ,ands(t) =/integraltextt
−∞a(t′)dt′.
This property expresses the Galilean invariancy of hydrody namic equations. The conti-
nuity equation in (2) shows that the velocity field v(x,t) can be presented as a sum of
two terms
v(x,t) =−grad φ(x,t) +rot A (x,t), (5)Critical Behavior... 3
where φ(x,t) andA(x,t) are the scalar and vector potentials consequently. The for mu-
lation of hydrodynamic equations in favor of the potentials ϕ={φ, A i}elucidates the
invariancy of the equations with respect to the shift of the v ector potential Ai,
Ai(x)/mapsto−→Ai(x)−∂iΛ(x) (6)
in which Λ( x) is an arbitrary scalar function. This invariancy expresse s thegauge symme-
try of hydrodynamic equations. In the present paper we shall consider the consequences
of this invariancy for the hydrodynamic equations (2) for th e inviscid unbounded in-
compressible fluid. Significant results on stationary spect ra of the fully developed water
response for the perturbative pulse may be derived phenomen ologically in analogy with
the fully developed turbulence theory [5] and the statistic al theory of waves based on the
Zakharov’s kinetic equations [6]. This approach is related to some conserved quantities,
i.e.,the wave action, energy, or momentum and to the idea of locali zation of pumping and
dissipation ranges in separated parts of scale spectrum. By the way, a stationary spec-
trum can have place for some scale interval which is transpar ent for the current of some
quantity. For example, one can point out the well-known inertial range of Kolmogorov in
the theory of fully developed turbulence which is transpare nt for the energy current from
the large-scale region of energy pumping to the small-scale range of viscous dissipation. In
the Kolmogorov’s inertial range the energy distribution ve rsus wave-numbers is described
by the Five Thirds Kolmogorov’s Law. In case of the fully deve loped turbulence the Law
of Five Thirds describes the only possible spectrum since th e three-dimensional isotropic
movements of the inviscid incompressible fluid preserve the only integral quantity, i.e.,the
energy. However, in the problem discussed there are variety of spectra to be realized, since
in the process of perturbation spread there are two more cons erved integral quantities:
the net momentum of fluid and the enstrophy . In case of an isotropic, O(3)-symmetrical,
perturbation the net momentum of fluid is equal to zero, howev er, even in this case there
are two different spectra which are determined by the energy W−and the enstrophy
E−currents. The velocity spectrum which is determined by the e nergy current from the
pumping region kp= 0 into the dissipation region kd=∞is the well-known spectrum of
the fully developed turbulence theory,
W1/3k−1/3≃v(k). (7)
However, in the case considered kp> k0≃1/lp/ne}ationslash= 0 and kd≫k0, so that the relevant
inertial range lies apart from the scale spectrum k0> k≃1/r, and (7) cannot have
place in the problem considered. The enstrophy current (the squared averaged vorticity)
determines the spectrum for the vector potential field Ain the form
E1/2k≃A(k) (8)Critical Behavior... 4
which transparency interval is exactly the interval in ques tion. In language of the critical
phenomena theory the spectrum (8) determines the critical dimension ∆[A] of the field
A, ∆[A] = 1. The use of critical dimension allows to compute the spec trum of any
correlation function of the field Aby simple dimensional counting. For example, for the
pair correlation function in Fourier representation DA(k)≡ /an}b∇acketle{tA(k)A(−k)/an}b∇acket∇i}ht,one obtains
an asymptotics:
DA(k)∼k∆[DA],∆[DA] = 2∆[ A]−d, (9)
where dis the dimension of space. For practical purposes, however, it is important to
discuss not the correlation function (9) but a one-dimensio nal spectrum
ˆDA=Sd
2(2π)dkd−1DA(k) (10)
in which Sd≡2πd/2/Γ(d/2) is the square of surface of the unit sphere in d−dimensional
space. For (10) one obtains from (9):
ˆDA∼k. (11)
Furthermore, the phenomenological considerations analog ous to (8) readily allows to de-
termine the spectra of some quantities which can be measured in experiments, for example,
for the energy as a function of distance from the perturbatio n point, E(r),we obtain
Er−4≃E(r). (12)
From phenomenology, however, it is not possible to fix the spe ctra of all quantities si-
multaneously. For example, one has nothing to say about the s calar potential spectrum
φ(k). To determine it one can add some extra assumptions on the ch aracter of coupling
mechanisms between different modes of fluid motions. Actuall y, the formulation of such a
hypotheses is the crucial point of the problem of coupling wa ter to perturbations. Clearly,
these additional assumptions will sufficiently depend on the geometry of perturbation. As
we have seen above, in some cases the perturbation pulse can r ise a fluid current, then
the net momentum of fluid Pwill be nontrivial. The new quantity conserved in the scale
interval of the problem will leads to another possible spect rum. In the present paper we
discuss the case of O(3)−symmetrical perturbation; we consider the case with a curre nt
aligned in the fluid in the forthcoming paper. Even for the sim plest case of P= 0 the
formulation of physically relevant hypotheses on coupling water to perturbation is a non-
trivial problem due to an infinite number of degrees of freedo m. To solve it we apply the
RG approach under the following reason: In the framework of R G method the physical
degrees of freedom are to be replaced by the scaling degrees w hich are related to the phys-
ical degrees through the RG transformations of fields and par ameters of the theory. SinceCritical Behavior... 5
the properties of scaling degrees of freedom possess a group structure (the renormalization
group) one investigates them much easier then those of the or igin problem. The results
obtained from RG-analysis are considered as somewhat stati stical steady state limit of
the physical system. The renormalized correlation functio ns are distinguished from their
physical analogies only by normalization conditions, so th at they can be also used for the
analysis of asymptotic properties of the physical system. T he plan of the paper follows:
In the Section 2 we consider the direct consequences of the sy mmetry (6) for the hydrody-
namic equations (2). As a result we derive an effective action functional which allows to
understand the water response on the local perturbation as a critical phenomenon. The
action functional presented has the most general form and th en needs to be supplied by an
assumption on the coupling mechanism. To formulate the phys ically relevant hypotheses
we develop the RG-analysis in the Sections 3, 4, and 5 consequ ently. We show that in the
symmetrical case considered ( P= 0) the statistical properties of water response are man-
aged by the dynamics of vector potential A.This conclusion instantly fixes the spectra
of all quantities of the theory. In the Sections 6 and 7 we disc uss the various composite
operators of the theory which are responsible for the amendm ents to critical scaling and
for the spectra of some quantities which can be measured expe rimentally. In particular,
in the Section 7 we compute the one-dimensional energy spect rumE(r) as a function of
distance from the point of perturbation. The results obtain ed for the spectra of the pair
correlation function DAand the energy Emeet the phenomenological relations (11) and
(12). We believe that the obtained results would give a key fo r better understanding of
the origin of a numerous ocean phenomena such as Lengmuir cir culations, spin-off eddies,
and so on which theoretical justification have not given by th is time.
2 The Description of Model and the Effective Action
Functional
In this section we formulate a real time classical field theor y of equations (2) in the
Lagrange formalism and a model of nonlinear coupling mechan ism between different wave
modes. As a result we derive the effective action functional o fabelian gauge-invariant
field theory which describes the statistical properties of l ong-range water response on the
external perturbation. We consider now the basic propertie s of the theory following from
the symmetry (6).
(i) First, the eddy component of velocity field is expressed b y agauge invariant tensor,
Fk= (rot A )k=∂iAj−∂jAi. (13)Critical Behavior... 6
(ii) Second, in accordance to the Noether’s theorem the symm etry (6) relates to a
conserved current, vorticity ,
∂iJi= 0, ∂ tJi= 0, (14)
where Ji=∂jFk−∂kFj, (i/ne}ationslash=k/ne}ationslash=j).
(iii) Third, the classical equations (2) do not lead to a hami ltonian in the usual way:
as a direct consequence of gauge invariance, the equations ( 2) do not depend on time
derivative. It is therefore impossible to define the conjuga ted momenta, [4]. Nevertheless,
(2) are just the field equations which can be derived from the c lassical lagrangian L(ϕ, p) :
L(ϕ, p) =1
2/integraldisplay
dx/bracketleftbigg
(∂p)2+ (∂φ)2+1
2F2+p∂ivj∂jvi+JiAi/bracketrightbigg
, (15)
where we have introduced the tensor vivj≡(∂iφ)(∂jφ) +FiFj−∂iφFj−∂jφFi.The
statistical properties of mechanical system can be derived from the partition function of
statistical mechanics Z=Tr(e−S) with somewhat classical dimensionless action S. In
case of an infinite number of degrees of freedom one can write d own the partition function
in functional integral representation:
Z(Ji) =/integraldisplay
[dϕ][dp] exp/bracketleftbigg
−S(ϕ, p) +/integraldisplay
dx dtJ i(x,t)Ai(x,t)/bracketrightbigg
, (16)
in which the euclidean static action S(Ai, φ) has the form
S(ϕ, p) =1
2/integraldisplay
dx/bracketleftbigg
(∂p)2+ (∂φ)2+1
2F2
ij+p∂ivj∂jvi/bracketrightbigg
. (17)
Here we note that the quadratic part of the action functional (17) which is relevant to a
free theory, i.e.,with no coupling between water and perturbation is not symme trical with
respect to Galilean transformation (4) but is symmetrical w ith respect to the following
transformations
Ai(x)/mapsto−→Ai(x)−∂iΛ(x),
φ(x)/mapsto−→φ(x)eiu0Λ(x),(18)
where Λ( x) as usual is an arbitrary scalar function, and u0is a potential coupling constant.
These transformations expresses the so-called U(1)−gauge symmetry (U(1) is the group
of multiplication by complex numbers). The last term in (17) does not meet the entire
symmetry (18) but preserves the simple gauge symmetry (6). T his symmetry breaking
shows that the pressure field as it is included in the action fu nctional contains somewhat
redundant degrees of freedom.
Instantly close to the region of perturbation the pressure p ulse rises the wave motions
with eigenmodes k > k 0≃1/lp.Due to strong nonlinearity of the interaction in the
Navier-Stockes equation the eigenmodes of oscillations sp read very fast from a band ofCritical Behavior... 7
order l−1
pover the whole spectrum, and various multipole oscillation s of any type are
arisen with time. One can say that after a short period of time motions of any modes are
present in the water. Clearly, the long-distance fluid behav ior will depend to some extent
on the statistical properties of wave mode coupling.
Assuming an effective action functional to be
(i)localin space and time, i.e.,it depends only on the fields A(x) and φ(x) and their
partial derivatives (and not on products of fields and their d erivatives at different points),
(ii)invariant under space and time translations, i.e.,space and time coordinates do
not appear explicitly in the action, we now suppose the simpl est model for the coupling
mechanism by inclusion of the ϕ4-type interaction term into (17):
S(ϕ, p) =1
2/integraldisplay
dx/bracketleftbigg
(∂p)2+ (∂φ)2+1
2F2
ij+p∂ivj∂jvi+1
3gϕ4/bracketrightbigg
, (19)
with a wave modes coupling constant g. In accordance with the general critical phenomena
approach we note that the accounting of highest oscillation harmonics, i.e.,ϕ6,ϕ8and
so on cannot alter the large-distance asymptotic behavior o f water response for localized
pressure pulse if g/ne}ationslash= 0 [7].
Since the pressure pulse is localized in the scale l < l p,and the locality postulated for
the action functional requires redundant degrees of freedo m for the fluctuating pressure
fieldp(x,t), we therefore can integrate it over in the partition functi on (16). The result of
functional integration does not depend on p(x,t).Due to (3) this procedure is of perfect
clarity and is reduced technically to elimination of the qua dratic term proportional to
(∂p)2from (19) and to replacement of the pressure field p(x, t) in the U(1)−breaking
termp∂ivj∂jviby (3). In particular, it leads to a new term in (19) of the form
1
2/integraldisplay
dx∂ivj(x,t)∂jvi(x,t)/integraldisplay
Vpdy∂ivj(y,t)∂jvi(y,t)
|x−y|, (20)
which relates the fluctuations of velocity fields risen by the perturbation pulse in Vpto
the fluctuations apart from the perturbed region. We note tha t (20) preserves the entire
U(1)−gauge symmetry (18).
Performing the integration over Vpand moving the derivatives onto the result of inte-
gration, one can rearrange (20) to the form
1
2/integraldisplay
dxKij(x)Qij(ϕ,x,t), (21)
where Qijis a quadratic form of potentials φandAi,andKijis a source kernel. To explain
the meaning of (21) we adduce some arguments from renormaliz ation group analysis which
we are going to apply to the theory discussed in the forthcomi ng sections. For the future
purposes of RG analysis we need only insertions at zero momen tum and we could, inCritical Behavior... 8
principle, restrict ourselves to constant sources Kij,since the renormalized action which
we derive for the case in question is obtained by setting Kij(x) as constant, [4].
Another important feature of (21) stems from the fact that th e RG transformations
generate all possible linearly independent quadratic term s inQij,i.e.,φ2(x,t), φA i(x,t),
andAiAj(x,t).However, some certain linear combinations of quadratic ope rators in Qij
only are relevant to scaling degrees of freedom and possess, by the way, the definite
physical meaning. We compute all such linear combinations i n the Section 6. Nevertheless,
one can see before calculations that the linear combination s of quadratic operators which
are of importance for the RG analysis have to be U(1)−gauge symmetrical. There is only
one such a combination, i.e.,
m2φ2(x) (22)
in which m2is somewhat mass parameter (the coefficient of the relevant RG -invariant
operator). The use of Ward identities which express the U(1)−gauge invariancy of the
theory allows to show that all other combinations of quadrat ic operators are ultra-violet
(UV) finite, i.e.,the relevant correlation functions do not have UV divergenc es. Thus, with
no loss of generality we can omit all combinations except for (22) from the consideration.
It leads to the action functional which follows
S(ϕ) =1
2/integraldisplay
dx/bracketleftbigg
(∂φ)2+1
2F2
ij+m2φ2+1
3gϕ4/bracketrightbigg
. (23)
The effective action functional (23) which is arranged to des cribe the asymptotic properties
of water response is not renormalizable, and it has no soluti ons in the massless limit, when
m2= 0,[4]. Again, the reason is that it still has some redundant degrees of freedom, the
gauge degrees, with unknown dynamics.
To construct a renormalizable theory we are led to introduce an abelian gauge geo-
metrical structure. By the way,
(i)φ(x) and φ∗(x) are vectors for U(1) transformations,
(ii) the derivative ∂iis replaced by the covariant derivative ∇i:
∇i=∂i+iu0Ai, (24)
where u0is the coupling constant of interaction between the scalar a nd rotational compo-
nents of the velocity potential ϕ(analogous to the electron charge ein electrodynamics).
(iii) It follows that the curvature tensor is iu0Fij:
iu0Fij= [∇i,∇j] =iu0(∂iAj−∂jAi).
(iv) Since the U(1)-gauge group is abelian ( A(x,t) is a translation invariant), one can
write the parallel transporter U(C) along any continuous contour Cwhich is an elementCritical Behavior... 9
ofU(1).In terms of a line integral:
U(C) = exp/bracketleftbigg
−iu0/contintegraldisplay
CAi(s)dsi/bracketrightbigg
(25)
as a consequence of vorticity conservation. Thus, the rotat ional component of velocity
potential just carries on the fluctuations of the scalar pote ntial field φ(x). By the way, two
solutions for different points φ(x, t) andφ(y, t) are related through the parallel transporter
(25), where Cis an integration path connecting the points xandy, [4].
The form of the action functional (23) which meets the geomet rical structure (i)-(iv)
follows
S(ϕ) =1
2/integraldisplay
dx/bracketleftbigg
(∂p)2|∇iφ|2+1
2F2
ij+m2φ2+1
3gφ4/bracketrightbigg
. (26)
The problem of the gauge invariant theory is that the local ga uge invariant action does
not provide a dynamics to the gauge degrees of freedom. We tak e them into account,
performing the standard procedure analogous to the Fadeev- Popov quantization [4]. Let
us write the gauge field Aiin terms of a gauge field Biprojection of Aion some gauge
section, i.e.,satisfying some gauge condition, and a gauge transformatio n:
Ai=Bi+∂iΛ. (27)
We assume that this decomposition is unique. For Λ( x) one imposes:
∂2Λ(x) +∂iBi(x) =h(x), (28)
in which h(x) is a stochastic field for which a probability distribution i s given. We do
not include a term proportional to φ(x)eiΛ(x)in the condition (28) omitting the U(1)
gauge degrees of freedom to simplify the model and to avoid th e appearance of Fadeev-
Popov ghost fields. Including the equation (28) in the functi onal integral for the partition
function, one can see that since the result does not depend on the dynamics of Λ( x) and
on the field h(x) either, one can integrate over h(x) with the gaussian measure:
[dρ(h)] = [dh] exp/bracketleftBigg
−1
2ζ/integraldisplay
d xh2(x)/bracketrightBigg
(29)
in which ζis an arbitrary valued ( ζ∈[0,∞)) auxiliary gauge parameter of the theory.
The resulting effective action of the model has the form:
S(Ai, φ) =1
2/integraldisplay
d x/bracketleftbigg
|∇iφ|2+1
2F2
ij+ζ−1(∂iAi)2+m2φ2+1
3gφ4/bracketrightbigg
. (30)
In the forthcoming sections we show that the model (30) demon strates the existence of a
statistically steady state independently of the details of velocity evolution. The functionalCritical Behavior... 10
(30) is analogous to a U(1)−invariant action for a charged scalar field with a |φ|4self-
interaction (so called Abelian Higgs Model , [9]). This theory allows the multiplicative
renormalization, [10] and for some values of the parameters {m0, g0, u0}the corresponding
physical system tends to a steady state in a large-distance l imit and demonstrates a
universal behavior. In language of the critical phenomena t heory, there is a nontrivial
IR-stable fixed point which determines the critical asympto tics of correlation functions of
the fields φ(x) andA(x). The relevant critical index for Ameets the phenomenological
result (8).
We conclude this section by an explanation of physical meani ng of solutions for differ-
ent signatures of the mass parameter m2.In case of A= 0 in (30), one has the standard
model of a scalar unharmonic oscillator. This model is, may b e, the most popular and
well-investigated action of the modern theoretical physic s. For m= 0 the oscillator is
subject to a phase transition. At the classical level in the s ymmetrical case ( m2>0)
the oscillator model describes the fluctuations having the t rivial expectation value of the
field,/an}b∇acketle{tφ/an}b∇acket∇i}ht0= 0 (see Fig. 1.a). If m2<0, the system allows two possible expectation values
for the field /an}b∇acketle{tφ/an}b∇acket∇i}ht0=±/radicalBig
m2/g(see Fig. 1.b). The latter situation is usually referred to a s
spontaneously broken symmetry.
The physical consequences for the model considered can be re adily understood. The
signature of integral operator kernel Kij(x,t) depends on the certain physical conditions
and on the geometry of perturbation, and it is determined dir ectly by the signature of
operator ∂ivj∂jvi.This signature does not depend neither on the certain value o f velocity
nor its evolution, but it depends on the topological propert ies of fluid flow risen by the
perturbation.
The case of symmetrical perturbation, when the net momentum of fluid is equal to
zero (for example, on the surface of a large scale eddy, see Fi g.2. a) can be described by
the model (30) with m2>0.In the vicinity of saddle points, ∂ivj∂jvi<0,i.e.,when there
is a net fluid current from the region of initial perturbation into outside (see Fig.2.b), and
the net fluid momentum P/ne}ationslash= 0,one can use (30) with m2<0.
In the what following sections of the present paper we shall c onsider the case of sym-
metrical perturbation, m2>0, (Fig.2. a). The presence of the gauge field Aaffects
sufficiently the behavior of the system due to the transportin g role of the field A. We
demonstrate below that the ordinary infrared (IR)-stable fi xed point of RG transforma-
tions which is responsible for self-similar behavior in the standard φ4-theory turns out to
be unstable, however, the new fixed point acquires stability for the real value ǫr= 1/2 of
the parameter 2 ǫ= 4−d.We shall derive formulae for universal scaling profiles to th e
first order in ǫ.The profiles has a power-law behavior for the large distances r≫lp.Critical Behavior... 11
3 Infrared Singularities of Perturbation Theory Dia-
grams
In the present Section we develop the diagram technique rele vant to the theory (30)
and discuss the large-distance ( k→0,in momentum representation) singularities of
perturbation theory diagrams.
The model (30) can be considered in the d-dimensional space xwith UV-cut off Λ ≡
k0≃1/lp. Each quantity in (30) corresponds to one (momentum) canoni cal dimensionality
df, which is completely determined by the space dimensionalit yd.
In the critical phenomena theory one seeks the asymptotic fo r correlation functions in
the region k,m≪Λ for which one considers g0≃u2
0≃const Λ4−dwithconst≤1.From
now on we supply all the parameters in (30) by the lower index ” 0” to distinguish them
from those in renormalized action forthcoming. In order to b e specific we consider the
pair correlation functions of the potentials Dφ(r) =/an}b∇acketle{tφ(x)φ(y)/an}b∇acket∇i}htandDA(r) =/an}b∇acketle{tA(x)A(y)/an}b∇acket∇i}ht
in which r=|x−y|.
In momentum representation these correlation functions ar e found from the Dyson
equations ( pis the external momentum)
D−1
φ=p2+m2
0−Σφ(p), D−1
A=p2+iε−ΣA(p), (31)
where Σ φ(p) and Σ A(p) are the infinite sums of all 1-irreducible Feynman diagrams (see
Fig.3) whose vertices correspond to the multipliers g0andu2
0
g0× u2
0×
and whose lines correspond to the bare propagatorsCritical Behavior... 12
Ai(k) Ai(−k)
≡Pij(ζ, k)(k2+iε)−1,
φ(k) φ(−k)
≡(k2+m2
0)−1,
where Pij(ζ, k)δij+ (ζ−1)kikj/k2is the gauge dependent projector, and εis a reg-
ularization parameter for k= 0.We investigate the theory in d= 4−2ǫdimensions
considering ǫas a small parameter of a regular expansion which has 2 ǫr= 1 as an actual
value. For 0 <2ǫ <1 the diagrams in Fig.3, independent of pandm0, have the algebraic
UV-divergent terms ∼Λ2−2nǫ(where nis the order of perturbation theory) corresponding
to the simple shift of m2
0which does not alter the signature of m2
0. If we consider the
value of m2
0to be known exactly, it is necessary to discard all such terms . As usual [3],
this is implemented by subtracting their values for p=m0= 0 from all graphs of Fig.3.
After these subtractions the integrals for 0 <2ǫ <1 become UV-convergent, the cut off
Λ can be eliminated (taken as ∞,i.e.,the initial perturbation scale lpis taken as zero),
and the series Fig.3 takes the form
D−1= (p2+m2
0)
1 +∞/summationdisplay
n,l=1(gn
0u2l
0p−2ǫ)n+lcn,l(m0/p, ǫ)
. (32)
Forp∼m0≪Λ and ǫ >0 the dimensionless parameter of the expansion g0p−2ǫ∼
(Λp−1)2ǫin (32) is not small, and it is necessary to sum the series. Thi s problem is solved
by the RG method.
In a clearer formulation this problem reduces to a determina tion of the asymptotic
value of the propagator Dχ=D(χp, χm 0) forχ→0 (everything is fixed except for χ).
This procedure is nontrivial for ǫ >0 due to presence in the cn,lof poles in ǫand leads to
the equations of RG which we shall consider in the next Sectio n.
Another problem, which is occurred in the region m0≪p,is connected with sin-
gularities of the coefficient cn,lin (32) for m0/p→0 and cannot be handled by RG.
This problem originates from the finiteness of the physical v alue of ǫ. After removing of
UV divergences from diagrams of Fig.3 there are still diagra ms diverging for m→0 for
anyǫ >0.This problem had been discussed in the critical phenomena th eory where the
method of short distance expansion (SDE) was employed, [3]- [4]. We shall apply SDE toCritical Behavior... 13
compute the leading amendments to critical scaling of (30) w ithm2>0 in the Section 6.
Finally, we make a note on the particular features of perturb ation series Fig.3 for
the gauge invariant theory. Some diagrams in Fig.3 have ζ−dependent poles which are
unphysical, since they have been introduced to make the theo ry renormalizable. The
renormalization constants of the gauge invariant theory as we shall define them later on
are gauge independent, therefore we can fix the value of the ga uge parameter ζin certain
calculations. In particular, we use the Landau gauge ( ζ= 0), so that the gauge field
propagator is simply proportional to the transversal proje ctorPij.
4 Renormalization-Group Equations. Scaling Degrees
of Freedom
Now we discuss the renormalization procedure for the model ( 30) and produce the renor-
malized action functional, then we derive the RG equations f or renormalized correlation
functions. Renormalizability of the theory (30) (the Abeli an Higgs Model) for any value
of the gauge parameter ζ <∞,is proven (see for example [10]), and we do not discuss it
in details. The UV-divergences (in our case the poles in ǫin diagrams) of the model con-
sidered are removed by the multiplicative renormalization procedure. It amounts to the
following: the initial action is referred to as nonrenormal ized, its parameters and coupling
constants are referred to as bare; these are considered as so me functions (remaining to be
determined) of new renormalized parameters and coupling co nstants. The renormalized
action functional
SR(µ, g, u, ζ ) =1
2/integraltextdx/bracketleftBig
Z1((∂φ)2+µ2ǫu2φ2A2) +1
2Z2F2+
+ζ−1(∂A)2+Z3m2φ2+1
3Z4µ2ǫgφ4/bracketrightBig
,(33)
is a function of renormalized coupling constants and parame ters:
g0=µ2ǫgZg, u2
0=µ2ǫu2Zu, m2
0=m2Zm,
φ2=Zφφ2
R, A2=ZAA2
R, ζ 0=ZζζR,(34)
where all renormalization constants Zaare the functions of four independent quantities
Z1−4:
Z1=Zφ, Z u=Zζ=Z−1
A=Z−1
2, Z mZφ=Z3, Z 4=ZgZ2
φ, (35)
which can be calculated within the framework of diagram tech nique. We chose the simplest
form of subtraction scheme, where the divergences are prese nted as the bare poles in ǫ(so
called ”minimal subtraction scheme”); µ≃1/lpis the renormalization mass parameter,
g, ζ, m anduare renormalized analogies of the bare parameters g0, ζ0, m0andu0, Za=Critical Behavior... 14
Za(g, ǫ, u, d ) are the renormalization constants. Due to gauge invarianc e of the theory
the terms breaking the gauge symmetry are not renormalized, and they do not require
counterterms, [4]. The renormalized correlation function sWRmeet the relation
WR(g, u, µ )ZNφ
φZNA
A=W(g0, u0) (36)
in which WRare UV-finite functions (they are finite in the limits ǫ→0) for fixed param-
etersa.
The RG equations are written for the functions WRwhich differ from the initial W
only by normalization and then can be used equally validly fo r critical scaling analysis. To
derive these equations one notes that the requirement of eli minating singularities does not
determine the functions e0=e0(e, ǫ), e={g, u, m },uniquely because of the value of µ
is not fixed by any physical condition. Variation of µfor fixed values of bare parameters
e0leads to variations of eand renormalization constants (35). Following the standar d
notation, we denote by Dµthe differential operator µDµfor fixed e0. Applying it on both
sides of (32) leads to the basic RG equation, [8]:
[Dµ+βg∂g+βu∂u−γmDm2]WR= 0, (37)
where we have used Dx≡x∂xfor any parameters of the renormalized theory; for any Zi
γi≡DµlnZi, β α≡Dµα, α ≡ {g, u,}, i≡ {g, u, ζ, m, φ, A }. (38)
These identities determine the β-functions of the theory considered,
βg=−g[2ǫ+γg], β u=−u2/bracketleftbigg
2ǫ+1
2γu/bracketrightbigg
(39)
and the anomalous dimensionalities γi.One calculates the renormalization constants Z1−4
from the diagrams of perturbation theory (these calculatio ns are completely analogous to
the relevant computations in f4-theory of the critical phenomena theory, [4]) and then,
using (38), γi−andβα-functions. By the way, all γ−andβ−functions are constructed
as series in gandu,and the functions γido not depend on ǫ.Furthermore, the relations
between renormalization constants (35) lead to analogous r elations for γα:
γg=γ4−2γ1, γ u=−γ2. (40)
We have computed the relevant renormalization constants up to the second order diagrams
of perturbation theory. These computations are pretty stan dard, so that we just bring
about the results for γifor the three dimensions,
γ1=1
6g′2+u′2, γ 2= 6u′2, γ 3=g′2+ 6u′2, γ 4= 6g′2+7
3g′+ 4u′, (41)Critical Behavior... 15
where g′=g/16π2andu′=u2/16π2.From (41) one obtains the explicit expressions for
theγ-functions of fields and the mass:
γφ=1
6g2+u′2, γ A= 6u′2, γ m=−g′−2
3u′+5
6g′2+ 5u′2. (42)
Substituting (41) into (40) and (39), we obtains the express ions for the β−functions:
βu=−u′/bracketleftBig
2ǫ−6u′2/bracketrightBig
, β g=−g′/bracketleftbigg
2ǫ+7
3g′+ 4u′+17
3g′2−2u′2/bracketrightbigg
. (43)
Eight fixed points of the RG transformation are determined by the system of equations
βα(g′∗, u′∗) = 0. A fixed point is stable with respect to large-distance as ymptotics if the
matrix ωij≡∂iβjis a positively defined matrix at the fixed point. Fixed points and their
stability regions with respect to the large-distance asymp totics are collected in the Tab.
1.
The fixed point N4 corresponds to the asymptotic behavior of the scalar φ4model
of critical phenomena, [7]. In the model discussed it is unst able due to scalar potential
coupling to the vector potential field A. For the ”physical” value of the parameter 2 ǫ=
4−dthe point N3 is the only stable fixed point. The fixed point N7 would be stable close
to the four dimensions also. The large-distance asymptotic behavior of water response
in three dimensions is then governed by the fixed point N3. The inequality 0 < ǫ < 3
determines the relevant basin of attraction in space dimens ionality.
In the framework of RG-approach the physical degrees of free dom are replaced by the
scaling degrees including anomalies. In particular, the sc aling functions are obtained in
the form of the power series in gandu. Asymptotically, these coupling constants are
replaced by their values in fixed points of RG-transformatio n. The critical indices in the
4−2ǫexpansion are obtained from the γ−functions (42) with replacement of ganduby
g∗andu∗also. By the way, the properties of scaling degrees of freedo m (see Tab.1) yield
some qualitative conclusions on the physical properties of the model.
From the data of Tab.1 it follows that for N3 the scaling degrees of freedom related
to the φ4−coupling vanish ( g∗= 0) in three dimensions. Thus, all diagrams proportional
togare vanished in the symmetrical phase of (30), however, no on e correlation function
becomes trivial. Considering the theory in three dimension s, one can eliminate the scalar
wave mode coupling term gφ4from the action (30), since in case of m2>0 it does not
contribute to the large-distance asymptotics of water resp onse. One can say that three
dimensional dynamics of an inviscid incompressible fluid in volved in eddy motion has
somewhat short of physical degrees of freedom to allow the co upling between the different
scalar wave modes. N7 in Tab.1 gives us an evidence that the both coupling mechani sm
introduced in (30) are of equal importance in four dimension s.Critical Behavior... 16
Choosing the certain fixed point of RG-transformation ( i.e.,N3), we neglect all cou-
plings between various wave modes in benefit for the certain o ne which is responsible
for vorticity conservation (25) in the large-distance limi t. This conclusion expresses ex-
actly that additional assertion which we have needed to comp lete the phenomenological
description of the problem of coupling water to the O(3)−symmetrical perturbation.
5 Solution of RG-Equations. Critical Scaling and
Asymptotics for Pair Correlation Functions
In the present Section we derive the solutions of RG different ial equations (37) for Dφ
andDA. The use of standard dimensional counting supplied by (35) a nd (42) leads to the
following expressions for the one-dimensional spectra of t he theory:
Dφ(s)≃s→0s2−d+ηφfφ(s, g, u2, z), D A(s)≃s→0s2−d+ηAfA(s, g, u2, z). (44)
The functions fφandfAof dimensionless arguments: s=klp, z≡m2r1/ν, ηφ=d−2+γφ
=d−2 +ǫ/3, ηA=d−2 +γA=d−2 + 2ǫ,and 1/ν= 2 + γm= 2−2ǫmeet the
RG-equations of the type (37) which allow to find out their sca ling asymptotics ( s→0).
Here we note that for ǫr= 1/2 the asymptotics (44) for DAmeets the phenomenological
result (11). The spectrum for Dφcannot be predicted from the bare dimensional counting
and is justified within the framework of developed RG method. We have pictured these
spectrum out in Fig. 4.
Being the solutions of RG-equations, the functions fφandfAare to be the arbitrary
functions of the first integrals of (37). The number of first in tegrals is one less than the
number of arguments of fin (44), and they can be founded from the system of equations
ds
s=d¯g
βg(¯g,¯u)=d¯u
βu(¯g,¯u), (45)
supplied by some normalization conditions for ¯ gand ¯u.We use the standard one,
¯g(s= 1, g, u) =g,¯u(s= 1, g, u) =u. (46)
At the fixed point N3 from (45) and (46) one obtains the asymptotic solutions for
fφ(s, g, u2, z) and fA(s, g, u2, m2r1/ν):
fφ(s, g, u) =/parenleftBiggs2ǫ¯u2
u2/parenrightBiggηφ
Fφ(1,¯u2,¯z), (47)
and
fφ(s, g, u) =/parenleftBiggs2ǫ¯u2
u2/parenrightBiggηA
FA(1,¯u2,¯z), (48)
the scaling functions FφandFAare not fixed by the RG-equations and calculated usually
in the framework of diagram technique.Critical Behavior... 17
6 Short Distance Expansion. On the Possible Cor-
rections to Critical Spectra in the region mr→0
Generally speaking, the existence of fixed points of RG-tran sformation does not guarantee
that the critical asymptotics (44) do have place in the real s ystem. As we have mentioned
above, there would be another IR-divergences in the scaling functions FφandFAwhich
are not handled by RG and, in principle, can modify the large- distance asymptotics close
to the region m0≪k. By the way, for m0/k→0,the critical dimensions are not sufficient
to derive a conclusion on the long-range asymptotic behavio r. To investigate the model
(30) with m2>0 in the region m0≪kin details we use a Short Distance Expansion
method following [8].
The short distance expansions of scaling functions FφandFAin (47) and (48) provides
us by an asymptotic relation of the form
F(1, mr) = 1 +/summationdisplay
ici(r)m∆[Oi], (49)
where ∆[ Oi] are the critical dimensions of all possible statistical mo menta (the arbitrary
products of fields and their derivatives averaged with respe ct to one point) of various
quantities of the theory (30). In language of the modern crit ical phenomena theory
such statistical momenta is called as composite operators i n analogy with the well-known
objects in quantum-field physics.
It is obvious that the RG-predicted spectra (44) are still se cure if for all operators
∆[Oi]>0. The most important contributions into (49) for mr→0 are those of the
smallest ∆[ O]. In the framework of ǫ-expansion ∆[ O] =dO+O(ǫ),where dOis the
canonical dimension of O,therefore, if ǫis small, the canonical dimension dOprovides the
major contribution to ∆[ O]. That is why, in principle, to justify the scaling laws (44) ,
one can limit the checking of critical dimensions by the set o f operators with minimal
canonical dimension d0.At the leading order we consider the critical dimensions of t he
set of scalar quadratic operators with dO= 1:O1=φ2(x) and O2=A2(x).
The certain critical dimensions are assigned to some linear combinations of the opera-
torsO1andO2which still invariant in process of renormalization. The ba sis of renormal-
ized composite operators are related to that one of non-reno rmalized operators through
the renormalization matrix Ziksuch that Fi=ZikFR
k, [7]. In principle, the calculation of
matrix elements requires the analysis of diverging part of p erturbation theory diagrams,
however, the use of gauge symmetry consequences facilitate s computations of the elements
Ziksubstantially. Since O1is a gauge invariant operator, but O2is not, the relevant Ward
identities [4] prove the triangle structure for Zik:Z22= 1, Z21= 0.One can say thatCritical Behavior... 18
the non-invariant operator O2does not contribute into scaling degrees of freedom of the
gauge invariant theory, as well as it does not admix to the gau ge invariant operator O1in
process of renormalization.
Furthermore, we need not compute diagrams to determine the e lement Z11.Acting by
the differential operation ∂m2onto the partition functional of renormalized theory (whic h
is, obviously, finite with respect to the limit ǫ→0), we obtain the following finite object
/an}b∇acketle{tZ3φ2/an}b∇acket∇i}ht(x), (50)
the finiteness of (50) leads to the relation Z11=Z−1
3Zm=Zφ.
In principle, (50) give us enough information to compute the complete set of critical
dimensions of the considered statistical momenta. Since Zikpossesses a triangle structure,
exactly the diagonal elements Zkkgive the relevant anomalous correction:
γ11=γφ=ǫ
3, γ 22= 0. (51)
Both linear combinations of O1andO2which have the definite scaling dimensions are
also found unambiguously:
C1=O1,∆[O1] = 1 +ǫ
3,
C2=O1+aO2,∆[O2] =dO= 1.(52)
The only reason that we need to compute diagrams of perturbat ion theory for the element
Z12is to determine the value of a; this calculation gives a= 2 (this result is exact, i.e.,it
still valid for any value of ǫ)
Forǫ >0 the most important contribution to (49) is provided by C2:∼m, and as it is
obvious, this contribution does not alter the scaling laws ( 44). The result (52) means that
in the region mr→0 the scaling laws (44) are still secure as the universal char acteristics
of the theory.
7 Spectrum of Energy
The proposed model provides a broad spectrum of practical re sults which can be com-
pared with experimental data. We now compute the one-dimens ional spectrum of energy
of the fluid, E(r/lp),versus the dimensionless distance apart from the point of lo cal per-
turbation. As we have shown in the Introduction, the result o n this spectrum, in principle,
can be derived from phenomenology, (12). However, the quest ion on justification of the
phenomenological result (12) still remains, since the ener gy of perturbed fluid has two
components,
E(r/lp)≡1
2/an}b∇acketle{t(∂φ)2/an}b∇acket∇i}ht(r/lp) +1
2/an}b∇acketle{tF2/an}b∇acket∇i}ht(r/lp), (53)Critical Behavior... 19
which would have dramatically different asymptotic behavio r in the large-distance limit.
By the way, (53) would provide us an example of description of a conserved integral
quantity in terms of scaling degrees of freedom. The spectru m (53) is governed by the
statistical momenta Eφ≡1
2/an}b∇acketle{t(∂φ)2/an}b∇acket∇i}ht(r/lp) and EA≡1
2/an}b∇acketle{tF2/an}b∇acket∇i}ht(r/lp) of the canonical dimen-
siondE=d.To determine the relevant critical indices we apply the tric k which we have
employed in the previous Section: Acting by the differential operations m2∂m2, g∂g, and
u∂uonto the partition functional of renormalized theory we obt ain the following finite
objects at the limit ǫ→0:
/an}b∇acketle{tZ3m2φ2/an}b∇acket∇i}ht(r/lp),
/an}b∇acketle{t[g∂gZ3]m2φ2+ [g∂gZ1] (Eφ+u2φ2A2) +1
3[4+g∂gZ4]gφ4/an}b∇acket∇i}ht(r/lp),
/an}b∇acketle{t[u∂uZ3]m2φ2+ [u∂uZ1]Eφ+1
3[u∂uZ4]gφ4+1
2[u∂uZ2]EA+
+ [2Z1−u∂uZ2]u2φ2A2/an}b∇acket∇i}ht(r/lp).(54)
Any linear combination of (54) is again finite at the limit ǫ→0,so that by means of
simple arithmetic operations one can derive from (54) the st atements on finiteness for
various linear combinations of statistical momenta includ ingEφandEA.
Taking into account that the scaling degrees of freedom rele vant to scalar wave modes
coupling are vanished in the large-distance limit ( i.e.,assuming g= 0 in (54)), we obtain
from (54) the combination containing EφandEA:
/an}b∇acketle{tX1Eφ+1
2X2EA/an}b∇acket∇i}ht(r/lp), (55)
where we have introduced X1≡[u∂uZ1] and X2≡1
2[u∂uZ2]. In the framework of
perturbation theory each of the coefficients Xi,as well as the momenta EφandEAhave
poles in ǫ, and consequently each term in (55) separately is divergent ifǫ→0. The
meaning of (55) is that all the poles in ǫare subtracted out in such a way that the linear
combination in (55) has a definite limit for ǫ→0.
The linear form (55) has two eigenvectors,
V1=Eφ+X−1
1X2EA, V 2=EA+1
2X−1
2X1Eφ, (56)
such that the poles in ǫofV1are subtracted out by those of X1, and the poles in ǫofV2
are eliminated completely by those in X2. By the way, γV1=−Dµln(u∂uZ1) =−ǫ/3 and
γV2=−Dµln (u∂uZ2) =−2ǫ.
For the real value ǫr= 1/2 the major contribution to the energy spectrum for the
large-distance asymptotics, r/lp≫1,is provided by the combination from (56) of minimal
critical dimension, i.e.,V2with
∆[V2] =d+γV2=d−1. (57)Critical Behavior... 20
Note, that ∆[ V1] =d+γV1=d−1/6.Furthermore, for ǫr= 1/2X−1
2X1= 2, and we
have an explicit form for V1=Eφ+EA.The last step of the computation is to perform
a Fourier transformation of the momentum asymptotics with t he index (57) into the real
space{rl−1
p}. Bringing it about, we, finally, obtain a decaying profile (se e Fig.5),
E(r/lp)∼/parenleftBigglp
r/parenrightBigg4
(58)
which meets the phenomenological result presented in the In troduction.
8 Conclusion
The final conclusion is that in contrast with either the stati stical theory of waves (Za-
kharov) or the theory of fully developed turbulence (Kolmog orov) the problem of coupling
water to perturbation cannot be solved from phenomenology i n principle. The matter is
that the relevant physical system contains too many redunda nt degrees of freedom. That
is why to fix the statistically stable behavior in the system o ne needs to add some extra
assumptions on the character of perturbation as well as on th e character of wave modes
coupling.
The problem of formulation of physically relevant hypothes es on wave modes coupling
mechanism can be successfully solved by the use of various qu antum field theory techniques
and RG method in particular. This approach allows, first, to i ntegrate over the redundant
physical degrees of freedom, and, second, to investigate th e asymptotic properties of
physical systems by means of analysis of their scaling degre es of freedom.
As a result we have formulated the effective action functiona l which allows to un-
derstand the water response for a local external perturbati on as a critical phenomenon.
The critical system of water coupled to perturbation is subj ect to a ”phase transition”
depending on the certain physical properties of perturbati on pulse.
The results on the asymptotic behavior derived from the RG-a nalysis meet those of
partial results which can be derived from phenomenology.
9 Acknowledgments
One of the authors (D.V.) is grateful to L. Volchenkova for fr uitful discussions and checking
of particular computations.
ReferencesCritical Behavior... 21
[1] V. P. Krasitskii, J. Fluid Mech. 272, 1-20 (1994)
[2] W. Diehl, S. Dietrich, Z. Phys. B ,42, 65 (1981);
E. Br´ezin, S. Leibler, Phys. Rev. B ,27, 595 (1983);
M. Yu. Nalimov, Teor. Mat. Phys. ,102, 163 (1995)
[3] J. Collins, Renormalization (Cambridge, 1992)
[4] J. Zinn-Justin Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena (Clarendon, Oxford,
1990)
[5] A.S. Monin, A.M. Yaglom, Statistical Fluid Mechanics (MIT Press, Cambridge,
Mass., 1975), Vol. 2.
[6] A.S. Monin, V. P. Krasitskii Phenomena on the Ocean Surface , Saint-Petersburg,
Gidrometeoizdat, 1985 (in Russian)
[7] A.N. Vasil’ev Quantum Field Theory and Critical Phenomena (in press)
[8] E. Br´ ezin, J.C. Le Guillou, and J. Zinn-Justin, in Phase Transitions and Critical
Phenomena , edited by C. Domb amd M.S. Green (Academic, London, 1976), 6
[9] M. Guidry Gauge Field Theories (John Willey, New York, 1991)
[10] E. Leader, E. Predazzi An Introduction to gauge theory and modern particle physics
(Cambridge, 1996)
[11] L.Ts Adzhemyan, A.N. Vasil’ev, M. Yu. Pis’mak, Theor. and Math. Phys. ,57, 2, p.
268 (1983)Critical Behavior... 22
Table 1. The fixed points of the model
NCoordinates {g′∗, u′∗} The stability region
1{0,0} ǫ <0
2/braceleftBig
0,/radicalBig
ǫ/3/bracerightBig
unstable
3/braceleftBig
0,−/radicalBig
ǫ/3/bracerightBig
0< ǫ < 3
4/braceleftBig
2ǫ/3 + (2 ǫ)217
81,0/bracerightBig
unstable
5/braceleftbigg
−7
34/parenleftbigg
1 +/radicalbigg
1−816
49/parenleftBig
ǫ/3 +/radicalBig
ǫ/3/parenrightBig/parenrightbigg
,/radicalBig
ǫ/3/bracerightbigg
unstable
6/braceleftbigg
−7
34/parenleftbigg
1 +/radicalbigg
1−816
49/parenleftBig
ǫ/3−/radicalBig
ǫ/3/parenrightBig/parenrightbigg
,−/radicalBig
ǫ/3/bracerightbigg
unstable
7/braceleftbigg
−7
34/parenleftbigg
1−/radicalbigg
1−816
49/parenleftBig
ǫ/3 +/radicalBig
ǫ/3/parenrightBig/parenrightbigg
,/radicalBig
ǫ/3/bracerightbigg
0< ǫ≤0.01
8/braceleftbigg
−7
34/parenleftbigg
1−/radicalbigg
1−816
49/parenleftBig
ǫ/3−/radicalBig
ǫ/3/parenrightBig/parenrightbigg
,−/radicalBig
ǫ/3/bracerightbigg
3< ǫ≤3.35Critical Behavior... 23
CAPTIONS FOR FIGURES
FIGURE 1.
The potential energy U(f) versus f.a.) For the case of m2>0 the large-distance
expectation value of fis trivial; b.) In the asymmetric case m2<0 the classical minimum
is degenerate. There are two (in principle, an infinite numbe r of) possible expectation
values for f,±/radicalbigg
|m2|
gStarting from a given minimum, it is possible to describe all other
minima by acting on the fwith the U(1) symmetry group.
FIGURE 2.
Symmetrical and asymmetric phases of the model with no coupl ing to vector potential
A; a.) m2>0. The net large-scale momentum of the fluid outside the eddy w hich is
formed around the perturbation region is equal to zero; b.) m2<0. The pressure pulse
rises the net fluid current into outside. P/ne}ationslash= 0.
FIGURE 3.
The diagram series of functions Σ( p) in the f4-model in the critical phenomena theory.
FIGURE 4.
The one-dimensional spectra for the pair correlation funct ions of the theory versus the
dimensionless wave number.
FIGURE 5.
The one dimensional energy spectrum E(r/lp) versus the dimensionless distance apart
from the perturbation point. |
arXiv:physics/9911004v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 3 Nov 1999Experimental Investigation of New Method of
Energy Generation in Plasma Devices caused by
Existence of Physical Space Global Anisotropy.
Yu.A.Baurov1, G.A.Beda, I.P.Danilenko , V.P.Ignatko.
Central Research Institute of Machine Building
141070, Korolyov, Moscow Region, Russia.
ABSTRACT
An experimental investigation of a new interaction connect ed with the existence of the cosmological
vectorial potential, has been carried out. On its basis, a ne w method of energy generation with
the use of a plasma generator, has been studied. The experime ntal results are presented.
1. Introduction
In Refs. [1-8], a new interaction of the objects in nature, di fferent from four
known interactions (the strong, weak, electromagnetic, an d gravitational ones), has
been predicted. The new force is caused by the existence of th e cosmological vectorial
potential Ag, a new fundamental vectorial constant appearing in the defin ition of
byuons, new discrete objects (physical dimension of byuons are as of the electrical
charge, magnetic flux, Dirac’s monopole - the same in CGSE sys tem). According
to the hypothesis suggested in Refs. [1,7,8], in minimizati on of the potential energy
of interaction between the byuons in the one-dimensional sp ace formed by them,
the observable physical space as well as the world of element ary particles together
with their properties, are arising. In this model, the masse s of the particles are
proportional to the modulus of the summary potential AΣ, consisting of Agand
the vectorial potentials of various magnetic sources as of n atural origin (the Earth’s
and Sun’s potentials, etc.) so artificial ones (for example, the vectorial potentials
A of magnetic fields of solenoids, plasma generators, etc.). The magnitude |AΣ|is
always lesser then |Ag| ≈1.95×1011Gs·cm[1-8].
In distinction to the gauge theory (for example, the classic and quantum field
theory), in the model of Refs. [1,7,8] the values of potentia ls acquire a physical
meaning in tune with the known Aharonov’s-Bohm’s effect [9,1 0] being a special
case of the space quantum properties described in Ref. [8].
The magnitude of the new force is F∼∆A∂∆A
∂x, where ∆ Ais the difference
in changes of AΣbetween the points at which the sensor and test body are place d
[1,7,8], xis the coordinate in space. According to the ground-based ex periments
with high-current magnets [2-5], with a gravimeter and a mag net attached to it
[11,12], the experiments on investigating the changes in β-decay rate of radioactive
1baurov@www.com
1elements [13,14], and the astrophysical observations [15- 17],Aghas the following
estimated coordinates in the second equatorial system: the right ascension α≈270◦,
the declination δ≈34◦.
The new force ejects any substance from the region of diminis hed|AΣ|mainly in
direction of Ag. The most effective angle between the vector A of a current sys tem
and the vector Agis 150 ÷140◦[8].
In the investigations with high-current magnets (magnetic flux density up to
15T), the magnitude of the new force was equal to ∼(0.01÷0.08)gat the 30 gmass
of the test body. It was shown in experiments with rotating ma gnetic discs and
an engine-generator [18-20] that the magnitude of the force Fcan be considerably
increased when to phase the motion of the body with the proces s of formation of the
physical space from the byuons (i.e. the working body is boun d to change AΣby
its potential Aand move in the direction of the vector Ag. Therewith its particles
are to rotate in the proper side). In this case the energy will be extracted from the
physical space through the elementary particles of the work ing body. The low of
energy conservation in the system ”working body-physical s pace” will be obeyed. It
is known that the main part ( ∼98%) of energy in the Universe is determined by the
”dark” (virtual) matter [21]. The model of Refs. [1,7,8] des cribes the phenomenon
of the ”dark matter” quite satisfactorily.
2. The experimental installation and technique.
To test the above said, a special stationary plasma generato r with linear discharge
(see Fig.1) has been manufactured at the Central Research In stitute of Machinery.
The plasma generator (1) (power ∼60kW, current I∼300A, voltage U∼220V)
is arranged on a rotatable base and can be turned together wit h the whole instru-
mentation through 320 degrees around the vertical axis (2) a nd through 90◦around
horizontal axis. The plasma generator is water-cooled (3). As a working medium
air (4) admixed with argon ( ∼1%) was used. A measuring tube from copper (6) of
internal diameter 0 .8cmwas fastened to the plasma generator by means of a holder
(5) at 8 cmfrom the nozzle exit section. The temperature of water drawi ng through
the tube was ∼16◦C. The arrangement of the measuring tube relative to the plume
(7) of the plasma generator is shown in Fig.1. In the center of the section of the
measuring tube at the inlet and outlet of water, the junction s of Chromel-Alumel
thermocouples (8) 0 .2mmin diameter were mounted. The percent change in tem-
perature of junctions of thermocouples ∆ Twas fixed by a recorder with the accuracy
class∼0.4%. The tape advance of 25 cmcorresponded to 1 mVof thermoelectrical
voltage, i.e. to ∆ T≈25◦.
The plasma generator current and voltage were read with an ac curacy of 1 .5% of
the limiting values for the instruments used (750 Aand 500 V, respectively). The flow
rate of water through the cooled measuring tube was fixed to wi thin 3% ( ∼60g/s).
The mass velocity Vof particles in the plasma generator jet was equal to 120 m/s.
The ionization coefficient in the jet was ∼0.1%. The initial experiments were
2performed in the following manner. First, a point in time was chosen at which
the vector Agwas close to the horizontal plane. Further, the starting dir ection of
plasma generator jet was set up at an arbitrary angle to the pr esumed direction of
Ag. When the plasma generator was in the operating conditions a nd the readings
from the thermocouples corresponded to a stationary regime (∆T=Const ), one
began to turn the plasma generator in the horizontal plane to gether with the whole
instruments around the vertical axis at ∼5◦a second. At this instant, the recorder
fixed the value of the angle and the corresponding ∆ T.
3. The results of experiments.
In Figs. 2 and 3 the results of two experiments carried out in F ebruary 10,1998,
at 950, and in March 20, 1998, at 745(Moscow time), are shown. In the first of them
the plasma generator was turned counterclockwise from some arbitrary angle. As
is seen from Fig.2, a considerable increase in ∆ Treaching 40% of the stationary
condition was observed close to an angle of 225◦. In Fig.3 we also see a substantial
rise in ∆ T(∼20%) nearby 120◦÷150◦when turning the plasma generator clockwise
beginning from another arbitrary angle. In the first experim ent, the turn angle of
the plasma generator equal to 225◦corresponded to the angle α∼340◦of the
maximum action of the new force. In the second experiment thi s maximum action
corresponded to the average value α∼260◦. Because the angles of maximum action
of the new force lie on the left and on the right of the vector Ag, and the force along
the direction of Agitself is zero [8], the initial experiments have given the di rection
ofAΣwith the coordinates α∼300◦, δ∼34◦(the vectors AgandAΣare almost
parallel). Therewith the angle between the vector Aof the current in the plasma
generator discharge and the vector Agfor maximum action of the new force was
140◦for the first and 130◦for the second experiments, respectively.
3In the second run of experiments carried out by day since June 29, till July
02,1998, the optimum angle βthe jet made to the horizontal plane, was sought
because at that period the vector Agwas nearly horizontal only by nights. At
β= 0 and when turning the plasma generator around the vertical axis through
320◦, the new force did not manifest itself at all. As the angle βwas spaced at 15◦
intervals, at β= 30◦the maximum inflection of the ∆ T- curve during rotation of
the plasma generator around the vertical line was observed. In various experiments
these inflections corresponded to the following coordinate s of the maximum action
of the new force: α≈255◦,α≈340◦, and β≈30◦. That is, the coordinates of the
vector Agpractically had not changed and were equal to α≈297◦andβ≈30◦.
Altogether there were carried out more than 20 experiments i n 1998. All of them
revealed (with an accuracy of ∼20◦) only two directions in space relative to the
vector Agcorresponding to maximum ∆ T(see above). The summary statistic error
including also random non-controllable processes (in the d ischarge of the plasma
generator, in the flow of water nearly the thermocouples in th e measuring tube etc.)
was equal to ∼15% in each individual experiment on determining ∆ T. The latter
is clearly seen in Fig.2. It is necessary to note that this res ult was obtained not
only in the experiments with rotation of the plasma generato r from an arbitrary
angle but five months later as well (when the Earth turned thro ugh∼150◦about
the Sun). In the course of the experiments, the bendings of wa ter and gas hoses
4were insignificant and did not influence the experimental res ult. The action of the
Coriolis force was unimportant, too. It is interesting to no te that the results of
experiments carried out in February 1998 and 1999 at the same days and hours,
are qualitatively coincident (with an accuracy of ∼20% and with some common
turn of the whole field of directions of the new force through ∼20◦). As in 1998,
in 1999 also two directions of this force with a difference in α- coordinate equal
to∼90◦, were prominent. For the experiments of February 1999, the c oordinates
of the vector Agcalculated by the same procedure are α≈280◦andβ≈30◦. It
should be pointed out that the manifestation of the new force on the left or the right
ofAgwas accidental, i.e. we could not precisely predict when thi s force will be fixed
by us in the process of turning the plasma generator: before o r after the passage
of jet direction through the presumed direction of Ag. In roughly 30 experiments
performed by us the force manifested itself after that passa ge approximately twice
as frequently as before.
In Fig.4 shown are (in the projection onto the plane of celest ial equator, δ= 0)
the direction of action of the new force Fand that of the vector Ag, determined
from ∆ Tchange in the plasma generator jet, for typical experiments performed in
various day times and months of the year (the direction of the new force for other
experiments are within the range of its direction shown in Fi g. 4). As is seen, the
new force directions in space are obviously not accidental, two of them (indicated
above) are prominent.
564. Addendum
In the Central Research Institute of Machinery, the thermop hysical properties
of constructional materials in the jet of a plasma generator with linear discharge
1MW in power, were investigated for more than ten years. In some i nstances,
while estimating the heat content of the jet with the aid of a l ocal calorimeter, a
considerable excess of energy released in the jet above the e nergy taken from the
power source, was observed at fixed operating parameters of t he plasma generator
(I= (500 ÷1800)A;V= (3000 ÷3500)m/s). The results of estimation of the total
energy at the output of the plasma generator were obtained by way of computations.
In three last experiments (two of them were carried out in Oct . 22, 1992, at
1430,1500, and one was in Apr. 22, 1994, at 1500), integral calorimetric measurements
in the jet of the 1 MWplasma generator were fulfilled by means of a non-stationary
calorimeter crossing the jet in a matter of 0.2 second. The du ration of stationary
operation of the plasma generator was equal to 30 −40s, the error of measurements
was∼ ±20%. The ratio of energy output W1to input W0equaled ∼1 in the
experiments of 1992 but the measurements in 1994 have given W1/W0≈2 which
was much more than the error of the experimental technique us ed. The latter fact
also lent an impetus to conducting the above described exper iments with plasma
generator. An analysis of spatial arrangement of the axis of plasma generator relative
to the vector Aghas shown that in the experiments of 1992, the effect of increa sing
energy in the jet was to be totally absent but in the experimen t carried out in 1994,
by contrast, the plasma generator jet was just at the most effic ient angle ( ∼30◦)
toAg. Therewith the angle between the vector A of the current of th e plasma
generator and the vector Agwas equal to ∼150◦.
Since 1976 till 1982 in the Research Center of High-Voltage E quipment (Moscow),
a run of experiments was performed by V.P.Ignatko and others on investigation of
alternating high current electric arc in the closed volume o f transformer oil in a
unique experimental set-up having no analogues in the world . The root-mean-square
current was varied through a range of 20 −130kAwith the amplitude values no more
than 200 kA. The period of current oscillations was equal to 0 .02s, the duration
of arc discharge was ∼1s. The electric set-up was made up of two shock-exited
electric machine oscillators of TI-100-2 type in a double transformation circuit,
and delivered up to 12 kVof r.m.s. no-load voltage. The oil of volume (0 .6÷1)m3
was inclosed in a vertical cylindric tank from steel ∼3min height and ∼1min
diameter weighing about 7 t. The arc burned in oil between hemispheric copper
electrodes 7 cmin diameter initially placed (0 .5÷5)cmapart in the middle plane of
the cylinder between its bottom and cover. The current, volt age, power and energy
of the arc, pressure at various points of the experimental mo del, and deformations of
the whole construction investigated, were measured. The pr ocess was filmed. More
than 100 experiments were carried out. In some of them ( ∼8) anomal phenomena
were observed - a tendency to current suppression without ap parent reasons for that.
So, in an experiment in Oct. 7, 1976, at 2200, the current at its third and fifth half-
7periods decreased from 186 kAto 8.7kAand 3.3kA(i.e. tens times) until the arc
decayed 0.05 second after. In a time of 0 .05s, 5.55MJof energy were transferred
to the arc. That experiment was finished by an accident. Uncon trollable energy
release in the arc took place, and the pressure in the vertica l direction was built
up to 120 atmwhich terminated in deflection of the cover of the cylinder (8 cmin
thickness) by 1cm and emergence of a crack of width up to 0 .2cm. An analysis
of the process have shown that the energy released in the arc t urned out to be
about an order higher than the expenditure of energy. The exp eriment performed
in June 10, 1982, at 2035, in which the arc current equaled 38 .5kA, the energy
imparted accounted for 31 .2MJ, the initial gap between the electrodes was equal to
∼2cm(these are common, far from limiting parameters for the set u p in question),
led to an explosion. The seven-tonne cylinder broke away fro m screw anchors and
rose up having destroyed the ceiling. Examination of deform ations occurred and
estimation, on their basis, of arc energy by a joint commissi on have shown that
there were released in the arc 10-100 times more energy than w as communicated to
it. The government commission could not find reasons for the a ccident in the limits
of existing physical and chemical knowledge. Analysis of sp atial arrangement of the
center line of the set-up electrodes has led to a conclusion t hat in the latter case it
made the most efficient angle with the vector Ag(for the action of the new force),
and in the experiments of 07.10.76 the angle between that lin e andAgwas very close
to the most efficient. The above mentioned phenomenon of abnor mal suppression of
current, inexplicable on the basis of the existing electric al engineering and physics,
also can be explained by the action of the new force.
Thus the material of the present paper and the whole complex o f investigations
of properties and characteristics of the new force as well as of the global anisotropy
of space due to existence of the vector Ag, testify that we have detected a new source
of energy connected to the energy of the physical space. This energy can be used
with the aid of various current-carrying systems acting by p otentials on elementary
particles through which the energy comes to us.
Acknowledgments
The authors are sincerely grateful to the academicians A.M. Prokhorov,
S.T.Belyaev, V.F.Utkin, N.A.Anfimov, G.E.Losino-Losinsk y for support of the work
and useful discussions, as well as to A.A.Rukhadze, I.B.Tim ofeev, V.B.Fyodorov,
Yu.L.Sokolov and many other participants of scientific semi nars at the Institute of
General Physics of RAS, Moscow State University and Scienti fic Center ”Kurcha-
tovsky Institute” for fruitful discussions and useful advi ces.
References
[1] Yu.A.Baurov, in coll. work ”Plasma physics and some ques tions of the
General Physics”, Central Research Institute of Machinery , Moscow region,
Kaliningrad, 1990, 71,84 (in Russian).
8[2] Yu.A.Baurov, E.Yu.Klimenko, and S.I.Novikov, Dokl.Ak ad.Nauk (DAN),
315, 5, (1990), 1116.
[3] Yu.A.Baurov, E.Yu.Klimenko, S.I.Novikov, Phys. Lett. ,A162 , (1992), 32.
[4] Yu.A.Baurov, P.M.Ryabov, DAN, 326, 1, (1992), 73.
[5] Yu.A.Baurov, Phys.Lett., A181 , (1993), 283.
[6] Yu.A.Baurov, B.M.Seryogin, and A.V.Chernikov, Fizich eskaya Mysl Rossii
(FMR), 1, (1994), 1.
[7] Yu.A.Baurov, FMR, 1, (1994), 18.
[8] Yu.A.Baurov, The structure of physical space and a new me thod extraction
of energy (theory, experiment, applications), Moscow, Rus sian Engineering
Academia, Krechet, 1998 (in Russian).
[9] Y.Aharonov, D.Bohm, Phys.Rev., 115, (1959), 485.
[10] Y.Aharonov, D.Bohm, Phys.Rev., 123, (1961), 1511.
[11] Yu.A.Baurov, A.V.Kopayev, FMR, 2, (1996), 1.
[12] Yu.A.Baurov, A.V.Kopaev, Experimental Investigatio ns of New Interac-
tion by Use of Stationary High-accuracy Quartz Gravimeter, LANL E-print
archive hep-ph/9701369 .
[13] Yu.A.Baurov, V.L.Shutov, Prikladnaya Fizika, 1, (1995), 40 (in Russian).
[14] Yu.A.Baurov, A.A.Konradov, V.F.Kushniruk, Yu.G.Sob olev, Scientific Re-
port 1995-1996, ”Heavy ion Physics”, E7-97-206 , 354, Dubna;
Yu.A.Baurov, A.A.Konradov, V.F.Kushniruk, Yu.G.Sobolev , Global
Anisotropy of Space and Experimental Investigation of Chan ges in β-decay
count rate of radioactive elements, E-print hep-ex/9809014 ;
Yu.A.Baurov, Structure of Physical Space and New Interacti on in Nature
(theory and experiments), E-print hep-ph/9907239 ;
Yu.A.Baurov, Yu.G.Sobolev, V.F.Kushniruk, E.A.Kuznetso v, A.A.Konra-
dov, Experimental Investigation of Changes in β-decay count rate of ra-
dioactive elements, E-print hep-ex/9907008 .
[15] Yu.A.Baurov, A.A.Efimov, A.A.Shpitalnaya, FMR, 3, (1995), 10.
[16] Yu.A.Baurov, A.A.Efimov, A.A.Shpitalnaya, FMR, 1, (1997), 1.
[17] Yu.A.Baurov, A.A.Efimov, A.A.Shpitalnaya, Anisotrop y of Fast-going Pro-
cesses in the Sun and New Interaction in Nature, E-print gr-gc/9606033 .
9[18] Yu.A.Baurov, V.G.Verszikovsky, FMR, 2, (1995), 21.
[19] Yu.A.Baurov, A.V.Chernikov, FMR, 1, (1996), 1.
[20] Yu.A.Baurov, A.V.Chernikov, Experimental Investiga tions of Demonstra-
tional Model of Generator Using, Presumable, Energy of Phys ical Vacuum,
E-print gr-gc/9607002 .
[21] A.G.Doroshkevich, The Physical Encyclopaedia, v. 4, e dit by acad.
A.M.Prokhorov, M., The Big Russian Encyclopaedia, 1994.
10 |
arXiv:physics/9911005v1 [physics.chem-ph] 3 Nov 1999Optimizationofquantum Monte Carlowavefunctions using an alyticalenergy derivatives
Xi Lin,HongkaiZhangandAndrewM.Rappe
Department of Chemistryand Laboratory for Research onthe S tructure of Matter, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelp hia, PA19104
(November 6, 2012)
An algorithm is proposed to optimize quantum Monte Carlo (QM C) wave functions based on Newton’s
method and analytical computation of the first and second der ivatives of the variational energy. This direct
application of the variational principle yields significan tly lower energy than variance minimization methods
when applied to the same trial wave function. Quadratic conv ergence to the local minimum of the variational
parameters is achieved. A general theorem is presented, whi ch substantially simplifies the analytic expressions
of derivatives in the case of wave function optimization. To demonstrate the method, the ground state energies
of the first-rowelements are calculated.
I. INTRODUCTION
Quantum Monte Carlo is a powerful method of solving the Schr¨ odinger equation. QMC treats many-bodycorrelation in an
efficientandflexibleway,enablinghighlyaccuratestudies ofatoms,small moleculesandclusters.1–3A high-qualitytrial wave
function is crucial to the calculation, since the trial func tion determines the ultimate accuracy one can achieve in var iational
Monte Carlo (VMC) and fixed-node diffusion Monte Carlo, and t rial function quality dramatically affects the efficiency o f the
computation.
Analgorithmwhichefficientlyandreliablyoptimizeswavef unctionsisacriticaltoolforVMCcalculations. Onestraig htfor-
ward approach for improving the VMC wave function is to perfo rm energy minimization, in which the variational parameter s
are altered with the goal of loweringthe expectationvalue o f the energy. This approachis complicatedin VMC because of t he
uncertaintiesassociated with stochastic sampling. In ord er to determinewhether a new set of parametersyields a lower energy
than the currentset, one needsto sample a large numberof con figurationsto ensure that the energydifferencebetween the two
setsofparametersisactuallylargerthantheenergyerrorb ars. Correlatedsamplingmethodsarefrequentlyperformed toimprove
theefficiencyofenergyminimization. Typically,the energ yiscalculatedusingidenticalsamplingpointsin configura tionspace
fortwotrialwavefunctionswhichdifferbyasingleparamet er. Theprocessisrepeatedforeachparameter,andsteepest -descent
techniques are commonly used for parameter updating.4This correlated sampling approach requires a significant am ount of
memory (to store data for every sampling point) and the numer ical differentiation ∆E/∆crequires many extra evaluations of
the local energy. For systems with a large number of paramete rs, numerical evaluation of the required derivatives becom es
computationallyintractable. Analyticalenergyderivati vetechniquesareveryseldomusedincurrentVMCcalculatio ns. Wewill
concentrateonthisinthefollowingsections.
A successful alternative approach has been developed which focuses on lowering the variance of the local energy, /hatwideHΨ/Ψ.5
If the wave function Ψwere the exact ground eigenstate, the local energy would be a constant with a variance of zero. A
majorstrengthofthevarianceminimizationapproachistha tthequantitytobeminimizedhasaminimumvaluewhichiskno wn
a priori(unlike energy minimization). This idea has been implement ed in various ways and has recently become a nearly
universalapproachin VMC wave functionoptimizations. Typ ically,one calculatesfirst derivativesof the local energy variance
analytically. Steepest-descent techniques6,7or a combination of analytic first derivatives with approxim ate expressions for the
secondderivativesarethenusedforwavefunctionvariance reduction(aleast-squaresfit).8–10Althoughvariancemethodshave
the remarkable strength of an a prioriminimum value of zero, it is much harder to compute the first an d second derivatives
of the variance analytically comparedto variational energ y methods. Therefore, approximate analytical derivatives beyond the
first-orderareusedinrealcalculations,andtoourknowled gethevalidityoftheseapproximationshasnotbeendiscuss edwithin
thescopeofVMCwavefunctionoptimization. Itisimportant topointoutthatthe“directionsets”minimum-searchingme thods,
such as steepest-descent and conjugate gradient are not effi cient for wave function optimization in VMC, because these l ine-
minimization techniques require at least one order of magni tude more evaluations of local energy along the search direc tions.
Moreover, variance minimization is actually an indirect me thod, since a smaller variance does not necessarily corresp ond to a
lowerenergy,andthemaingoalofvariationalmethodssucha sVMCisthelowest possibleupperboundtotheenergy.
Correlatedsamplingcanbe used(insteadofanalyticderiva tives)tolowerthevarianceofthelocalenergy. Oneexcelle ntver-
sionofthisideaisknownasthefixed-samplemethod.11Inthisapproach,thesamplingpointsfortheobjectivefunc tion(variance
of the local energyin this case) are fixed duringthe optimiza tionprocedure,which makesit possible to reducestochasti c noise
during the optimization. In addition, it has been observed f rom a few preliminary calculations that the number of configu ra-
tions sufficient for parameter updating does not increase ra pidly with system size.11The use of very complex trial correlation
1functions has yielded highly accurate energies for a few firs t-row atoms.11,12However, this fixed-sample procedure can have
problems if the variational parameters affect the nodes, si nce the density ratio of the current and initial trial wave fu nctions
divergesfrequentlyintheareaaroundthenodesofthetrial wavefunction. Evenworse,thisdensityratioincreasesexp onentially
with the size of the system.13Although manually setting an upper bound for the weights or i ntroducing a nodeless sampling
probability density function can overcome the singulariti es in the fixed distribution14, a general and appropriate form for the
positivedefinitefunctionsisstill unavailable. Inadditi on,thevariationalenergyfromfixed-samplecalculationsc anbesensitive
tothe choiceofreferenceenergy,samplesize, andconverge ncecriteria.15
Themethodwepresentinvolvesupdatingthevariationalpar ameterstolowertheenergyexpectationvalue,guidedbythe force
vectors and Hessian matrix of the variational energy with re spect to variational parameters. Generally it converges qu adrat-
ically, making it more efficient than the steepest-descent o r quasi-Newton techniques employed in the variance minimiz ation
procedure.6,8Inmost cases,the bestset ofparameterscanbeobtainedafte ronlyoneortwoiterations. Beginningwithan iden-
ticaltrialwavefunctionandthesamevariationalparamete rs,thecorrelationenergiesobtainedfromourmethodaresi gnificantly
betterthanresultsintheliterature.9Withthisapproach,wealsodemonstratetheabilitytooptim izeawavefunctionwithalarge
numberofparameters. All ofthedataarecollectedandcompa redin SectionIV.
II. VMCAND OPTIMIZATIONALGORITHM
Variational Monte Carlo allows us to take our physical insig hts and construct a trial wave function ΨTcontaining a set of
variational parameters {cm}. The parameters are varied with the goal of reducing the ener gy expectation value. In VMC, the
truegroundstate energyisgivenbytheRaleigh-Ritzquotie nt:
E0≤ET({cm}) =/integraltext
Ψ∗
T({cm})/hatwideHΨT({cm})dτ/integraltext
Ψ∗
T({cm})ΨT({cm})dτ
= lim
N→∞1
NN/summationdisplay
α=1(EL)α,
where EL≡/hatwideHΨT/ΨTis called the local energyand αis a configuration-spacepoint, visited with relative proba bilityΨ∗
TΨT,
thedensityofthetrialwave functionat α.
Ina boundmolecularsystemwithfixednuclei,the non-relati visticHamiltonian
/hatwideH=−1
2/summationdisplay
i∇2
i−/summationdisplay
i,IZI
riI+/summationdisplay
i<j1
rij.
has inversionsymmetry. (Note that capital letter subscrip ts refer to nuclei and lower–case letters refer to electrons .) Therefore,
thetrueground-statewavefunctionofthisclassofHamilto niancangenerallybeconstructedwithoutanimaginarypart ,i.e.,
Ψ∗
T({cm}) = Ψ T({cm}).
In this case, the expectation value of the energy and the first derivative of energy with respect to a variational paramete r can
bewrittenas
E=/integraltext
Ψ/hatwideHΨdτ/integraltextΨ2dτ,
∂E
∂cm=1/integraltext
Ψ2dτ/parenleftbigg/integraldisplay∂Ψ
∂cm/hatwideHΨdτ+/integraldisplay
Ψ/hatwideH∂Ψ
∂cmdτ/parenrightbigg
−1
/parenleftbig/integraltext
Ψ2dτ/parenrightbig2/integraldisplay
Ψ/hatwideHΨdτ/integraldisplay
2Ψ∂Ψ
∂cmdτ. (1)
Because
/integraldisplay∂Ψ
∂cm/hatwideHΨdτ=/integraldisplay
Ψ/hatwideH∂Ψ
∂cmdτ,
forrealwavefunctions,we simplifyEq. (1)andobtain
2∂E
∂cm=2/integraltext
Ψ2dτ/integraldisplay
Ψ2/parenleftBigg/hatwideHΨ
Ψ/parenrightBigg/parenleftBigg∂Ψ
∂cm
Ψ/parenrightBigg
dτ
−2
/parenleftbig/integraltext
Ψ2dτ/parenrightbig2/integraldisplay
Ψ2/hatwideHΨ
Ψdτ/integraldisplay
Ψ2∂Ψ
∂cm
Ψdτ
= lim
N→∞2
NN/summationdisplay
α=1/braceleftBig/parenleftBig
EL×Ψ′
ln,m/parenrightBig
α−E×/parenleftBig
Ψ′
ln,m/parenrightBig
α/bracerightBig
, (2)
wherewedefine
Ψ′
ln,m≡∂ln Ψ
∂cm=∂Ψ
∂cm
Ψ
We notice that the finite sum for differenttermsperformedin the same configurationsamplingsin the formulaabovecan mak e
moreefficientcomputationandreducethefluctuationsinthe senseofcorrelatedsampling.
Similarly,onecancomputethesecondderivativesofvariat ionalenergywith respecttovariationalparametersas
∂2E
∂cm∂cn
= lim
N→∞2
NN/summationdisplay
α=1/braceleftBig/parenleftBig
EL×Ψ′′
ln,m,n/parenrightBig
α−E×/parenleftBig
Ψ′′
ln,m,n/parenrightBig
α
+2/bracketleftBig/parenleftBig
EL×Ψ′
ln,m×Ψ′
ln,n/parenrightBig
α−E×/parenleftBig
Ψ′
ln,m×Ψ′
ln,n/parenrightBig
α/bracketrightBig
−/parenleftbigg
Ψ′
ln,m×∂E
∂cn/parenrightbigg
α−/parenleftbigg
Ψ′
ln,n×∂E
∂cm/parenrightbigg
α
+/parenleftBig
Ψ′
ln,m×E′
L,n/parenrightBig
α/bracerightBig
,
where
Ψ′′
ln,m,n=∂2ln Ψ
∂cm∂cn,
and
E′
L,n=∂EL
∂cn
We perform a standard Metropolis walk with importance sampl ing for E and its first and second derivatives. This gives
numericalvaluesfortheforcevector bandHessian matrix H,whicharedefinedas
b=/parenleftbigg∂E
∂cm/parenrightbigg
and
H=/parenleftbigg∂2E
∂cm∂cn/parenrightbigg
.
Theparametersarethenupdatedaccordingto
cnext=ccur−H−1·b
untilconverged. Here ccurandcnextstandforthe currentandnextvaluesofthetrial parameters et respectively.
3III. THEOREMOFLOCALOBSERVABLEQUANTITYDERIVATIVE
We now demonstrate that the expectation value of the first der ivative of the local value OL≡/hatwideOΨ/Ψof any Hermitian
operator/hatwideOwithrespecttoanyrealparameter cinanyrealwavefunction Ψisalwayszero,i.e.,
lim
N→∞1
NN/summationdisplay
α=1/parenleftbigg∂OL
∂c/parenrightbigg
α≡0. (3)
Explicitly,thelefthandside ofEq. (3)is
lim
N→∞1
NN/summationdisplay
α=1
∂/parenleftBig/hatwideOΨ
Ψ/parenrightBig
∂c
α=1/integraltext
Ψ2dτ/integraldisplay
Ψ2∂/parenleftBig/hatwideOΨ
Ψ/parenrightBig
∂cdτ
=1/integraltext
Ψ2dτ/integraldisplay/bracketleftbigg
Ψ/hatwideO∂Ψ
∂c−∂Ψ
∂c/hatwideOΨ/bracketrightbigg
dτ
= 0
This theorem explains the simplicity of Eq. (2): the first-or der change of expectation value with respect to a change of
parameter comes only from the change of wave function and the Metropolis sampling weights, not from the change of the
quantity(e.g. thelocal energy).
IV.APPLICATIONSAND DISCUSSION
Totesttheperformanceofthisnewanalyticenergyminimiza tionscheme,awell-knowntrialwavefunction,16,9isusedinthe
calculations. Explicitly,thetrialwave functionisexpre ssedas
ΨT=D↑D↓F
F= exp
/summationdisplay
I,i<jUIij
,
UIij=NI/summationdisplay
kckI/parenleftBig
rmkI
iIrnkI
jI+rmkI
jIrnkI
iI/parenrightBig
rokI
ij,
riI=bIriI
1 +bIriI,
rij=dIrij
1 +dIrij,
where D↑andD↓are the Hartree-Fockup-spin and down-spin Slater determin antsin a convergedSTO basis set,17andFis a
positive correlation wave function. The mkI, nkIandokIare taken to be integers. All of the parameters ckI, bIanddIcan be
optimizedtoobtainthe lowestenergy.
Withourmethod,aconfigurationsizeconsistingof200,000s amplingpointsisnormallyenoughforsatisfactoryoptimiz ation
forthefirst rowatoms. Typically,oneortwoiterationsare s ufficientforconvergence,requiringaboutfifty CPU hourson aSGI
90 MHz R8000 processor. Electronsare movedone by one with a t ime step chosen to maintain an acceptance ratio of 80%. In
ordertogenerateone independent samplepoint,ablocksize oftwentysequentialstepsisused .
To make a comparison with the variance minimization method, we choose the same set of nine parameters as Schmidt and
Moskowitz9with all zeroes as initial values. We also obey their constra ints, enforcing the unlike-spin electron-electron cusp
condition and setting bIanddIto unity. The optimized wave functionand energy are shown in Tables I and II. The calculated
results with our method are noticeably better for all first-r ow elements, especially for the so-called 2s−2pnear-degeneracy
atoms9,18Be, BandC. Approximately10%morecorrelationenergyisrec overedbyouranalyticenergyderivativemethod.
To demonstratethe powerofouranalyticenergyminimizatio napproachmorefully,we optimizea forty-twoparameterwav e
function, starting from the nine-parameter trial function discussed above. We use all terms with m+n≤4combined with
o≤3,m=n= 0witho= 4, and all terms with m+n >4andm≤4,n≤4witho= 0. The same cusp, bIanddI
constraintswere obeyed.
4TABLE I. Optimizedground state wave function andvariation al energy(witherrorbar andcorrelationenergy percentage ) for atoms He to
C.
m n o He Li Be B C
0 0 1 0.2500000 0.2500000 0.2500000 0.2500000 0.2500000
0 0 2 -0.0094564 0.0143877 0.1977687 0.0594379 -0.1413218
0 0 3 0.1214671 0.2761786 -0.8396261 -0.6320118 -0.1285105
0 0 4 -0.1399809 -0.5225103 0.0634756 0.0444298 -0.2202719
2 0 0 0.2569693 -0.0625743 -0.3428204 -0.2402583 -0.126957 9
3 0 0 -0.1316968 0.1942677 1.3266686 1.0019282 0.5326180
4 0 0 -0.8487197 -0.5490759 -2.1688741 -1.8251190 -1.25662 10
2 2 0 -1.2608994 -0.5235010 -1.1187348 -1.0333565 -0.89187 71
2 0 2 0.8683429 0.6336047 2.1862056 1.9776332 1.6388292
Energy (Ha) -2.90322(3) -7.47498(5) -14.6413(2) -24.6206 (3) -37.8054(3)
Correlation (%) 99 93 72 73 75
Energy(Ref9) (Ha) -2.9029(1) -7.4731(6) -14.6332(8) -24.6113(8) -37. 7956(7)
Correlation(Ref9) (%) 98 89 64 66 68
Energy-42 (Ha) -2.903717(8) -7.47722(4) -14.6475(1) -24. 6257(1) -37.8116(2)
Correlation-42 (%) 100 98 79 77 79
TABLE II. Optimizedground statewave functionand variatio nal energy(withanerror bar andcorrelationenergy percent age) foratoms N
toNe.
m n o N O F Ne
0 0 1 0.2500000 0.2500000 0.2500000 0.2500000
0 0 2 -0.2657443 -0.3727767 -0.4141830 -0.4715589
0 0 3 0.1906864 0.4670193 0.5988020 0.7230792
0 0 4 -0.4252186 -0.6653063 -0.7861718 -0.8802268
2 0 0 -0.0314994 0.0354552 0.0879260 0.0690328
3 0 0 0.2343842 0.1581261 -0.0123869 0.0270636
4 0 0 -0.9314224 -0.8723734 -0.6392097 -0.6689391
2 2 0 -0.9111045 -1.0736302 -1.1368462 -1.1774526
2 0 2 1.5219105 1.5985734 1.5418886 1.5606005
Energy (Ha) -54.5477(3) -75.0168(1) -99.6792(2) -128.883 2(1)
Correlation (%) 78 80 84 86
Energy(Ref9) (Ha) -54.5390(6) -75.0109(4) -99.6685(5) -128.8771(5)
Correlation(Ref9) (%) 73 78 80 85
Energy-42 (Ha) -54.5563(2) -75.0270(1) -99.6912(2) -128. 8910(2)
Correlation-42 (%) 82 84 88 88
ItisalsointerestingtonotethatinarecentVMCcalculatio nforatomsBe,BandC,18theuseofadditionalSlaterdeterminants
enabledtheauthorstorecoveranamountofcorrelationener gysimilartoours. Ourcurrentworkdemonstratesthatthis 2s−2p
near-degeneracyeffectforthe first-rowatomsaccountsfor lessthan25%ofthecorrelationenergy.
In a typicaloptimizationprocedurewith thisenergyderiva tivemethod,the energyvalueandits associatederrorbarde crease
with the first (and possibly second) parameter moves. After t hat, the forcesare much smaller than their error bars, indic ating a
localminimum. TableIIIshowsanexampleofthe carbonatom.
However, rather than taking all zeroes as initial guess for v ariation parameters, if we start from Schmidt and Moskowitz ’s
optimizedwavefunction,asmallerbutstillsharpdecrease occursatthefirstiteration. TakingtheatomB,forexample, afterone
iteration,we obtainedabout7%morecorrelationenergy.
As one can see fromFigs. 1-3,the energyderivativesare much smootherthan the energyitself. As a result, it is much easie r
tofindtheparametervaluewhichgives dE/dc = 0thantolocatetheminimumfromenergydataalone. Asdiscuss edinSection
III, the general theorem of the local value derivatives perm its reduction of noise associated with the energy derivativ es for a
muchmoreefficientandreliablewavefunctionoptimization inVMC.
Aftertheoptimization,theHessianmatrixisdiagonalized tocheckthepositivityoftheeigenvalues. Alloftheeigenv aluesare
positiveorsmallnegativenumbers. ApositivedefiniteHess ianguaranteesalldownhillmovementtoreachareallocalmi nimum.
Thenegativevaluesaremuchsmallerthantheirerrorbars,i ndicatingsearchdirectionswithtinypositivecurvature.
5TABLE III. Anoptimization procedure for atom C,withinitia lparameters as zeroes.
Iteration Energy Error bar
0 -37.68745 0.00039
1 -37.80080 0.00013
2 -37.80945 0.00012
3 -37.80901 0.00011
4 -37.80918 0.00011
TABLE IV. Anoptimizationprocedure foratom B,withoptimiz ed initialvalues from Ref9.
Iteration Energy Error bar
0 -24.61109 0.00027
1 -24.62044 0.00028
2 -24.62058 0.00029
3 -24.62043 0.00028
4 -24.62083 0.00028
V.CONCLUSIONS
We have explored a new method to optimize wave functions in VM C calculations. This method is a direct application of
energyminimization. It is very efficient, givingquadratic convergence,and it is straightforwardlyapplicableto sys tems having
alargenumberofparameters. Indirectcomparisonsusingid enticaltrialwavefunctions,thecurrentmethodyieldssig nificantly
lowerenergyexpectationvaluesthanareachievedwith vari anceminimizationforallfirst-rowatoms.
1B.L.Hammond, W.A.Lester,Jr.and P.J.Reynolds, Monte CarloMethods inAbInitioQuantum Chemistry (WorldScientific,Singapore,
1994).
2K.Raghavachari, and J.B.Anderson, J. Phys.,Chem. 100, 12960, (1996).
3D.M.Ceperley,andL.Mitas,in AdvancesinChemicalPhysicsVol.XCIII ,editedbyI.PrigogineandS.A.Rice(JohnWiley&Sons,1996 )
4S.Huang, Z.Sun, and W.A.Lester,Jr., J. Chem.Phys. 92, 597 (1990).
5J.H. Barlett, Phys. Rev. 98, 1067 (1955).
6H.Huang, andZ.Cao, J. Chem.Phys. 104, 200(1996).
7H.Huang, Q.Xie,Z.Cao, Z.Li,Z.Yue andL.Ming, J.Chem. Phys. 110, 3703 (1999).
8H.Bueckert, S.M.Rothsteinand J.Brbik, Can. J. Chem. 70, 366 (1992).
9K.E.Schmidt and J.W.Moskowitz, J. Chem.Phys. 93, 4172 (1990).
10A.L¨ uchow, andJ. B.Anderson, J.Chem. Phys. 105, 7573 (1996).
11C.J. Umrigar,K.G.Wilson, andJ. W.Wilkins, Phys.Rev. Lett. 60, 1719 (1988).
12C.J.Umrigar,K.G.Wilson,andJ.W.Wilkins,in ComputerSimulationStudiesinCondensedMatterPhysics: R ecentDevelopments, edited
byD. P.Landau and H.B.Schluttler(Springer, New York, 1988 )
13P.R.C.Kent, R.J.Needs, and G.Rajagopal, Phys.Rev. B 59, 12344 (1999).
14R.N.Barnett, Z.Sun,and W.A.Lester,Jr., Chem. Phys. Lett. 273, 321(1997).
15Z.Sun, S.Huang, R.N. Barnett,andW.A. Lester,Jr., J.Chem. Phys. 93, 3326 (1990).
16S.F.Boys and N.C.Handy, Proc.R.Soc. London Ser.A 310, 63(1969).
17E.Clementi andC.Roetti, At.DataNucl. DataTables 14, 177 (1974).
18A.Sarsa,F.J. Galvez and E.Buendia, J. Chem.Phys. 109, 3346 (1998).
6-14.642-14.641-14.640-14.639-14.638-14.637-14.636-14.635-14.634-14.633
-2.4-2.35 -2.3-2.25 -2.2-2.15 -2.1-2.05 -2-1.95 -1.9Energy (Hartree)
c4,0,0
FIG. 1. Energyminimization : energies and errorbars forthe Be atom, as parameter for m= 4,n= 0,o= 0, isvaried.
-0.10-0.08-0.06-0.04-0.020.000.020.040.060.080.10
-2.4-2.35 -2.3-2.25 -2.2-2.15 -2.1-2.05 -2-1.95 -1.9dE
dc4,0,0
c4,0,0
FIG. 2. Energyminimization: first-derivative of the energy withrespect tothe same parameter as Fig. 1.
0.500.520.540.560.580.600.620.640.660.68
-2.4 -2.3 -2.2 -2.1 -2 -1.9c4,0,0d2E
dc4,0,02
FIG. 3. Energyminimization: second-derivative of the ener gy withrespect tothe same parameter as Fig. 1.
7TABLE V. Optimized ground state wave function andvariation al energy(withanerror bar and correlationenergy percenta ge) for atoms N
toNe.
m n o N O F Ne
0 0 1 0.2500000 0.2500000 0.2500000 0.2500000
0 0 2 -0.2657443 -0.3727767 -0.4141830 -0.4715589
0 0 3 0.1906864 0.4670193 0.5988020 0.7230792
0 0 4 -0.4252186 -0.6653063 -0.7861718 -0.8802268
2 0 0 -0.0314994 0.0354552 0.0879260 0.0690328
3 0 0 0.2343842 0.1581261 -0.0123869 0.0270636
4 0 0 -0.9314224 -0.8723734 -0.6392097 -0.6689391
2 2 0 -0.9111045 -1.0736302 -1.1368462 -1.1774526
2 0 2 1.5219105 1.5985734 1.5418886 1.5606005
Energy (Ha) -54.5477(3) -75.0168(1) -99.6792(2) -128.883 2(1)
Correlation (%) 78 80 84 86
Energy(Ref9) (Ha) -54.5390(6) -75.0109(4) -99.6685(5) -128.8771(5)
Correlation(Ref9) (%) 73 78 80 85
Energy-42 (Ha) -54.5563(2) -75.0270(1) -99.6912(2) -128. 8910(2)
Correlation-42 (%) 82 84 88 88
TABLE VI. Anoptimization procedure for atom C,withinitial parameters as zeroes.
Iteration Energy Error bar
0 -37.68745 0.00039
1 -37.80080 0.00013
2 -37.80945 0.00012
3 -37.80901 0.00011
4 -37.80918 0.00011
TABLE VII. Anoptimization procedure for atom B,withoptimi zedinitialvalues from Ref9.
Iteration Energy Error bar
0 -24.61109 0.00027
1 -24.62044 0.00028
2 -24.62058 0.00029
3 -24.62043 0.00028
4 -24.62083 0.00028
8-0.10-0.08-0.06-0.04-0.020.000.020.040.060.080.10
-2.4-2.35 -2.3-2.25 -2.2-2.15 -2.1-2.05 -2-1.95 -1.9dE
dc4,0,0
c4,0,0
FIG. 4. Energyminimization: first-derivative of the energy withrespect tothe same parameter as Fig. 1.
0.500.520.540.560.580.600.620.640.660.68
-2.4 -2.3 -2.2 -2.1 -2 -1.9c4,0,0d2E
dc4,0,02
FIG. 5. Energyminimization: second-derivative of the ener gy withrespect tothe same parameter as Fig. 1.
9 |
arXiv:physics/9911006v1 [physics.bio-ph] 4 Nov 1999Genetic Algorithms in Time-Dependent Environments
Christopher Ronnewinkel,
temporary address:
Institut f¨ ur Neuroinformatik,
Ruhr-Universit¨ at Bochum,
D-44780 Bochum, GermanyClaus O. Wilke and Thomas Martinetz
Institut f¨ ur Neuro- und Bioinformatik,
Universit¨ at L¨ ubeck,
Ratzeburger Allee 160,
D-23538 L¨ ubeck, Germany
Contact: ronne@neuroinformatik.ruhr-uni-bochum.de
(to be published in the Proceedings of the 2nd EvoNet Summerschool ,
Natural Computing Series, Springer)
November 2, 1999
Abstract
The influence of time-dependent fitnesses on the infinite popu lation dynamics
of simple genetic algorithms (without crossover) is analyz ed. Based on general
arguments, a schematic phase diagram is constructed that al lows one to charac-
terize the asymptotic states in dependence on the mutation r ate and the time
scale of changes. Furthermore, the notion of regular changes is raised for which
the population can be shown to converge towards a generalized quasispecies.
Based on this, error thresholds and an optimal mutation rate are approximately
calculated for a generational genetic algorithm with a movi ng needle-in-the-
haystack landscape. The so found phase diagram is fully cons istent with our
general considerations.
Genetic algorithms ( GAs) as special instances of evolutionary algorithms have bee n
established during the last three decades as optimization p rocedures, but mostly for
static problems (see [1] for an overview and [2] for an in-dep th presentation of the field).
In view of real-world applications, such as routing in data- nets, scheduling, robotics
etc., which include essentially dynamic optimization prob lems, there are two alterna-
tive optimization strategies. On the one hand, one can take s napshots of the system
and search “offline” for the optimal solutions of the static si tuation represented by each
of these snapshots. In this approach, the algorithm is resta rted for every snapshot and
solves the new problem from scratch. On the other hand, the op timization algorithm
might reevaluate the real, current situation in order to reu se information gained in the
past. In this case, the algorithm works “online”. As can be ar gued from the analo-
gies to natural evolution, evolutionary algorithms seem to be promising candidates for
“online” optimization [1, 3]. The reevaluation of the situa tion or environment then
introduces a time-dependency of the fitness landscape. This time-dependency occurs
as external to the algorithm’s population and does not emerg e from coevolutive inter-
actions. Coevolutive interactions as an alternative sourc e of time dependency in the
fitness landscape are not within the scope of this work.
1In the last years, many different methods and extensions of st andard evolutionary
algorithms for the case of time-dependent fitnesses have bee n analyzed on the basis of
experiments (see [3] for a review) but only seldom on the basi s oftheoretical arguments
(see [4, 5]). To take a step into the direction of a better theo retical understanding of
“online” evolutionary algorithms, we will study the effects of simple time dependencies
of the fitness landscape on the dynamics of GAs (without crossover), or more generally
saying, of populations under mutation and probabilistic se lection. As we will see, it is
possible to characterize the asymptotic states of such a sys tem for a particular class
of dynamic fitness landscapes that is introduced below. The a symptotic state forms
the basis on which it can be decided whether the population is able to adapt to, or
track, the changes in the fitness landscape. Our mathematica l formalism applies to
GAs as well as to biological self-replicating systems, since t he analyzed GAmodel and
Eigen’s quasispecies model [6, 7, 8] in the molecular evolut ion theory (see [9] for a
recent review) are very similar. Hence, all introduced conc epts for GAs are valid and
relevant in analogous form for molecular evolutionary syst ems.
In the following section, we will introduce the model to be an alyzed and show the
correspondence to the quasispecies model. Then, we will int roduce the mathematical
framework, based on which we will formally characterize the asymptotic state as fixed
point. After presenting the main concepts, we will proceed w ith the construction of a
phase diagram that allows to characterize the order found in the asymptotic state for
different parameter settings. Finally, a moving needle-in- the-haystack ( NiH) landscape
is analyzed and its phase diagram, including the optimal mut ation rate, is calculated.
1 Mathematical Framework
In order to study the influence of a time-dependent fitness lan dscape on the dynamics of
a genetic algorithm ( GA), we consider GAs to be discrete dynamical systems. A detailed
introduction to the resulting dynamical systems model is gi ven by Rowe [10] (in this
book). Here, we will only shortly introduce the basic concep ts and the notations we
use within the present work.
TheGAis represented as a generation operator G(m)
tacting on the space Λ mof
all populations of size mfor some given encoding of the population members. If we
choose the members ito be encoded as bit-strings of length l, this state space is given
by
Λm={(n0, . . . , n 2l−1)/m|/summationtext
ini=m, n i∈ /C60},
where nidenotes the number of bit-strings in the population, which a re equal to the
binary representation of i∈ {0, . . . ,2l−1}.
The generation operator maps the present population onto th e next generation,
x(t+ 1) = G(m)
t[x(t)].
This is achieved by applying a sampling procedure that draws the members of the next
generation’s population x(t+1) according to their expected concentrations /an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tx(t+1)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht ∈
Λ∞which are defined by the mixing [10, 11] and the selection sche me. For an infinite
population size, the sampling acts like the identity result ing in
G(∞)
tx(t) =x(t+ 1) = /an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tx(t+ 1)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht.
2Hence, Gt:=G(∞)
trepresents in fact the mixing and selection scheme. For finit e
population size, /an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tx(t+ 1)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht ∈Λ∞is approximated by using the sampling process to
obtain x(t+ 1)∈Λm. The deviations thereby possible become larger with decrea sing
mand distort the finite population dynamics as compared to the infinite population
case. This results in fluctuations and epoch formation as sho wn in [10, 11, 12]. In
the following, we will consider the infinite population limi t, because it reflects the
exact flow of probabilities for a particular fitness landscap e. In a second step, the
fluctuations and epoch formation introduced by the finitenes s of a real population can
be studied on the basis of that underlying probability flow.
The generation operator is assumed to decompose into a separ ate mutation and a
separate selection operator, like
Gt=M·S(t), (1)
where the selection operator S(t) contains the time dependency of the fitness land-
scape. Crossover is not considered in this work.
Inspired by molecular evolution, and also by common usage, w e assume that the
mutation acts like flipping each bit with probability µ. If we set the duration of one
generation to 1, µequals to the mutation rate. The mutation operator then take s on
the form
M=/parenleftbigg1−µ µ
µ1−µ/parenrightbigg⊗l
, i. e. Mij=µdH(i,j)(1−µ)l−dH(i,j),
where ⊗denotes the Kronecker (or canonical tensor) product and dH(i, j) denotes the
Hamming distance of iandj.
To keep the description analytically tractable, we will foc us on fitness-proportionate
selection,
S(t)·x=F(t)·x/slashbig
/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf(t)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htx,where F(t) = diag/parenleftbig
f0(t), . . . , f 2l−1(t)/parenrightbig
and/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf(t)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htx=/summationtext
ifi(t)xi=/⌊ard⌊lF(t)·x/⌊ard⌊l1.
This will already provide us with some insight into the gener al behavior of a GAin
time-dependent fitness landscapes.
Since the GAcorresponding to Eq. 1 applies mutation to the current popul ation and
selects the new population with complete replacement of the current one, it is called
agenerational GA(genGA ). In addition to genGA s,steady-state GAs (ssGAs) with a
two step reproduction process are also in common use: First, a small fraction γof
the current population is chosen to produce mγmutants according to some heuristics.
Second, another fraction γof the current population is chosen to get replaced by those
mutants according to some other heuristics (see [14, 15, 16] and references therein). We
can include ssGAs into our description in an approximate fashion by simply by passing a
fraction (1 −γ) of the population into the selection process without mutat ion, whereas
the remaining fraction γgets mutated before it enters the selection process. The
generation operator then reads
Gt= [(1−γ) /BD+γM]S(t). (2)
By varying γwithin the interval ]0 ,1], we can interpolate between steady-state be-
havior ( ssGA) forγ≪1 and generational behavior ( genGA ) forγ= 1. Equation 2 is
3only an approximation of the true generation operator for ssGAs because the heuristics
involved in the choice of the mutated and replaced members ar e neglected. But in the
next section, the heuristics are expected to play a minor rol e for our general conclusion
on an inertia of ssGAs against time-variations.
At this point, we want to review shortly the correspondence o f ourGAmodel with
the quasispecies model, extensively studied by Eigen and co workers [6, 7, 8] in the
context of molecular evolution theory (see also [13] in this book). The quasispecies
model describes a system of self-replicating entities i(e. g. RNA-, DNA-strands) with
replication rates fiand an imperfect copying procedure such that mutations occu r.
For simplicity reasons, the overall concentration of molec ules in the system is held
constant by an excess flow Φ( t). In the above notation, the continuous model reads
˙x(t) = [M·F(t)−Φ(t)]x(t), (3)
where the flux needs to equal the average replication, Φ( t) =/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf(t)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htx(t), in order to
keep the concentration vector x(t) normalized. This model might then be discretized
viat→t/δt, which unveils the similarity to a ssGA:
x(t+ 1) =/bracketleftbig
(1−δt/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf(t)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htx(t)) /BD+δt M·F(t)/bracketrightbig
x(t) for δt≪1. (4)
By comparison with Eq. 2, we can easily read off that γ=δt/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf(t)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htx(t)=:γx(t). This
means a low (resp. high) average fitness leads to a small (resp . large) replacement – a
property that is not wanted in the context of optimization pr oblems, which GAs are
usually used for, because one does not want to remain in a regi on of low fitness for a
long time. Another difference to ssGAs is the fact that in the continuous Eigen model,
selection acts only on the mutated fraction of the populatio n – although this leads
only to subtle differences in the dynamics of ssGAs and the Eigen model.
Equation 3 is commonly referred to as ‘continuous Eigen mode l’ in the literature,
because of the continuous time, and Eq. 4 is simply its discre tized form which can
be used for numerical calculations. Nonetheless, the notio n ‘discrete Eigen model’ is
seldom used for Eq. 4 but it is often used for the genGA ,
x(t+ 1) = [ M·S(t)]x(t), (5)
in the literature. This stems from the identical asymptotic behavior of Eqs. 4 and 5
for static fitness landscapes. However, there are difference s for time-dependent fitness
landscapes, as we will see in the following two sections.
2 Regular Changes and Generalized Quasispecies
In the case of a static landscape, the fixed points of the gener ation operator, which
are in fact stationary states of the evolving system (if cont ained within Λ m, see [10]),
can be found by solving an eigenvalue problem, because of
x=Gx⇐⇒ MFx=/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htxx. (6)
Letλiandvidenote the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of MFwith descending order
λ0≥ · · · ≥ λ2l−1and/⌊ard⌊lvi/⌊ard⌊l1= 1. For µ/ne}ationslash= 0,1 the Perron-Frobenius theorem assures
4the non-degeneracy of the eigenvector v0to the largest eigenvalue and moreover it
assures v0∈Λ∞. Often, v0is called Perron vector. After a transformation to the
basis of the eigenvectors {vi}it can be straightforwardly shown that x(t) converges
tov0fort→ ∞. The population represented by v0was called the ‘quasispecies’ by
Eigen, because this population does not consist of only a sin gle dominant genotype,
or string, but it consists of a particular stable mixture of d ifferent genotypes.
Let us now consider time-dependent landscapes. If the time d ependency is intro-
duced simply by a single scalar factor, like
F(t) =F ρ(t) with ρ(t)≥0 for all t,
it immediately drops out of the selection operator for GAs. For the continuous Eigen
model, we note that the eigenvectors of F(t) and Fare the same and that λi(t) =
λiρ(t). Since ρ(t)≥0, which is necessary to keep the fitness values positive, the
order of the eigenvalues remains, such that MF(t) will show the same quasispecies
v0asMF. Contrasting to that special case, a general, individual ti me dependency
of the string’s fitnesses does indeed change the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of MF(t)
compared to MF. For an arbitrary time dependency the Perron vector is const antly
changing, and therefore, we cannot even define a unique asymp totic state. However,
this problem disappears for what we call regular changes. After having established a
theory for such changes, we can then take into account more an d more non-regular
ingredients. What do we mean by “ regular change”? We define it heuristically in the
following way: a regular change is a change that happens with fixed duration τand
obeys some deterministic rule that is the same for all change cycles. Let us express the
latter more formally and make it more clear what we mean by “sa me rule of change”.
Within a change cycle, we allow for an arbitrary time depende ncy of the fitness, up to
the restriction that two different change cycles must be conn ected by a permutation
of the sequence space. Thus, if the time dependency is chosen for one change cycle, e.
g. the first change cycle starting at t= 0, it is already fixed for all other cycles, apart
from the permutations. We will represent permutations πfrom the permutation group
S2lof the sequence space as matrices
(Pπ)ij=δπ(i),jfori, j∈ {0, . . . ,2l−1}.
The permutations of vectors xand matrices Aare obtained by
(Pπx)i=xπ(i)and ( PπAPT
π)i,j=Aπ(i),π(j),
where PT
πdenotes the transpose of Pπwith the property PT
π=Pπ−1=P−1
π.
In reference to the first change cycle, we define the fitness lan dscape F(t) as being
single-time-dependent , if and only if for each change cycle n∈ /C60there exists a
permutation πn∈S2l, such that for all cycle phases ϕ∈ {0, . . ., τ −1}
PnF(ϕ+nτ)PT
n=F(ϕ) (abbreviatory Pn:=Pπn).
We will call each permutation Pnajump-rule , or simply rule, which connects F(ϕ+nτ)
andF(ϕ). To make predictions about the asymptotic state of the syst em, we need
to relate the generation operators of different change cycle s to each other. This is
5readily achieved if the permutations Pncommute with the mutation operator M. The
condition for this being the case is that for all i, j,
Mij=Mπn(i),πn(j)or equivalently dH(i, j) =dH/parenleftbig
πn(i), πn(j)/parenrightbig
.
Thus, the Hamming distances dH(i, j) need to be invariant under the permutations
Pn. Geometrically this means that the fitness landscape gets “t ranslated” or “rotated”
by those permutations without changing the neighborhood re lations. Then, we find
for arbitrary n∈ /C6andϕ∈ {0, . . . , τ −1},
Gϕ+nτ=PT
nGϕPn. (7)
To study the asymptotic behavior of the system, it is useful t o accumulate the time
dependency of a change cycle by introducing the τ-generation operators,
Γn:=Gτ−1+nτ· · ·Gnτfor all n∈ /C60.
Because of Eq. 7, all these operators are related to Γ 0by
Γn=PT
nΓ0Pn,
This property allows us to write the time evolution of the sys tem in the form
x(ϕ+nτ) =PT
n−1Γ0Pn−1· · ·PT
1Γ0P1Γ0x(ϕ), (8)
where ϕ∈ {0, . . . , τ −1}denotes in the following always the phase within a cycle.
Let us consider the special case of a single rule Pbeing applied at the end of each
change cycle, which results in Pn= (P)n, e. g. imagine a fitness peak that moves at a
constant “velocity” through the string space. We will see be low that for those cases
it is possible to identify the asymptotic state with a quasis pecies in analogy to static
fitness landscapes. Because of that, we can now define the noti on ofregularity of a
fitness landscape formally in the following manner:
A time-dependent fitness landscape F(t) isregular , if and only if: (i) the fitness
landscape is single-time-dependent , (ii) there exists some rule P∈S2lwhich is applied
at the end of each cycle such that Pn= (P)n, and (iii) the rule Pcommutes with the
mutation operator M.
In this case, we get with PPT= /BDthe time evolution
x(ϕ+nτ) =/parenleftbig
PT/parenrightbign/parenleftbig
PΓ0/parenrightbignx(ϕ). (9)
To proceed, it is useful to permute the concentrations compa tible to the rule of the
fitness landscape. By this, concentrations are measured in r eference to the fitness
landscape structure of the start cycle n= 0. We will denote those concentrations by
x′(t) and they are related to the concentrations x(t) by
x′(ϕ+nτ) = (P)nx(ϕ+nτ)
= (PΓ0)nx(ϕ) and x′(ϕ) =x(ϕ).(10)
For example, if there is no time-dependency within the cycle s, some x′
iwill for all
cycles measure the concentration of the highest fitness stri ng, independent of its current
6position in string space. Thus, x′(t) evolves in a fitness landscape with periodic change,
which can also be seen from the second line of Eq. 10. In analog y to the static case
Eq. 6, the calculation of fixed points of x′(t) is equivalent to an eigenvalue problem,
x′(t+τ) =x′(t)⇐⇒ P/tildewideΓ0x′(t) =/⌊ard⌊lP/tildewideΓ0x′(t)/⌊ard⌊l1x′(t),
where /tildewideΓ0is the unnormalized τ-generation operator obtained from the accumulation
of the unnormalized generation operators /tildewideGϕ=MF(ϕ).
The corresponding periodic quasispecies v0can be calculated for all phases ϕof
the change cycle from the Perron vector v0ofPΓ0in the following way,
x′(ϕ+nτ)n→∞− − − →v0(ϕ) =Gϕ−1· · ·G0v0forϕ∈ {0, . . . , τ −1}. (11)
To find the asymptotic states of the concentrations x(t), we simply need to invert Eq.
10,
x(ϕ+ντ) =/parenleftbig
PT/parenrightbigνx′(ϕ+ντ) for ν∈ {0, . . . , η −1}, (12)
where η:= ord Pis the order of the group element P∈S2l.
The essential reason for the existence of asymptotic states forx(t) lies in the
finiteness of the permutation group S2l. Because of Pη= /BD, we find directly from Eq.
9 the asymptotic state
x(ϕ+ ˜nη τ) = (PΓ0)η˜nx(t)˜n→∞− − − →v0(ϕ),
where v0(ϕ) is the same as in Eq. 11, because ( PΓ0)ηandPΓ0have the same eigen-
vectors, in particular the same Perron vector. Moreover, we get
x/parenleftbig
ϕ+ (ν+ ˜nη)τ/parenrightbig˜n→∞− − − →/parenleftbig
PT/parenrightbigνv0(ϕ) for ν∈ {0, . . . , η −1}, (13)
which is the same result as Eqs. 11 and 12 yield. In the limit of long strings l→ ∞,
ordPis not necessarily finite anymore. If ord Pl→∞− − − →∞ , then the asymptotic states
Eq. 13 for x(t) do not exist, but Eq. 11 still holds. Hence, a quasispecies e xists even
in the limit l→ ∞ if measured in reference to the structure of the fitness lands cape.
In conclusion, Eqs. 11 and 13 represent the generalized quasispecies for the class
ofregular fitness landscapes which includes as special cases static an d periodic fitness
landscapes. In fact, the simplest case of a regular change is a periodic variation of
the fitness values fi(t) =fi(t+τ) because nopermutations are involved ( P= /BD) and
hencex′(t) =x(t) for all t. The quasispecies was generalized for this case already in
[17] and – using a slightly different formalism – in [4]. In Sec tion 4, we will study a
more complicated example.
3 Schematic Phase Diagram
To get an intuitive feeling for the typical behavior of ssGAs and genGA s, let us consider
some special lines in the plane spanned by the mutation rate µand the time scale for
changes τ, as shown in Fig. 1. The mutation operator represents only fo rµ <1/2 a
copying procedure with occurring errors, whereas for µ >1/2 it systematically tends
to invert strings, i. e. it resembles an inverter with occurr ing errors. Since mutation
should introduce weakmodifications to the strings, we will consider only µ≤1/2.
7ssGAtime-averagedisordered phase∼1/γ
0.5mutation-rate µ
time-average
time-scale for changes τdisorder line
error-threshold
0
quasi-static
Figure 1: Schematic phase diagram: time-average regions due to low mu tation (dark gray)
and large inertia (light gray, left), quasi-static region f or slow changes (light gray,
right).
Disorder line: Forµ= 1/2, the Perron vector of MF(t) is always vT
0= (1, . . . ,1)/2l.
The population will therefore converge towards the disorde red state. Because of
the continuity of Minµ, we already enter a disordered phase for µ≈1/2.
Time-average region: Forµ= 0, the mutation operator is the identity. We find as
time evolution simply the product average over the fitness of the evolved time
steps:
x(t+τ) =/bracketleftBiggt+τ−1/productdisplay
ϕ=tS(ϕ)/bracketrightBigg
x(t)
=˜F(t+τ, t)x(t)/slashbig
/⌊ard⌊l. . ./⌊ard⌊l1with ˜F(t+τ, t) =/producttextt+τ−1
ϕ=tF(ϕ).
Since diagonal operators commute, the order in which the F(ϕ) get multiplicated
does not make any difference. For the case of a τ-periodic landscape, ˜F=
˜F(t+τ, t) =˜F(τ,0) isindependent oft. The quasispecies is then a linear
superposition of the eigenvectors of the largest eigenvalu e of the product averaged
fitness landscape ˜F– there might be more then one such eigenvector, since
˜Fis diagonal and the Perron-Frobenius theorem does not apply . Because of
the continuity of Minµthe dynamics are governed already for 0 < µ≪1
by the product average ˜F. Analogous conclusions apply to those non-periodic
landscapes for which by choosing a suitable time scale τa meaningful average
˜F(t+τ, t) can be defined.
8disorderedorderederror rate µ
temporarily
oscillation period τ0.5
µ∗
avf
genotypeτ
genotype
disorderedf
0.5
orderedorderederror rate µ
cycle length τdisorderedgenotypef f
genotypeτ
Figure 2: Phase diagrams for (left): needle-in-the-haystack with oscillating height at fre-
quency ω= 2π/τ,(right) : needle-in-the-haystack that jumps after τtime steps
to a randomly chosen nearest neighbor.
ForssGAs,γis small and we find to first order in τγ:
x(t+τ) = (1 −τγ)˜F(t+τ, t)
+τγ/parenleftbigg1
ττ−1/summationdisplay
ϕ=0S(t+τ)· · ·M/bracehtipupleft/bracehtipdownright/bracehtipdownleft/bracehtipupright
ϕth factor from left· · ·S(t)/parenrightbigg
+O/parenleftbig
(τγ)2/parenrightbig
.
Ifτγ≪1 holds, the time evolution is governed by ˜F(t, t+τ). For changes on
a time scale τ, we find time-averaged behavior if τ≪1/γ. Thus, the width of
the time-average region is proportional to 1 /γ. A detailed analysis of the effect
of the different positions of the mutation operator Mwithin the τγ-term, which
is otherwise an arithmetic time-average, has not yet been ca rried out.
Quasi-static region: If the changes happen on a time scale τvery large compared
to the average relaxation time ( ∼1//an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tλ0−λ1/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht) the quasispecies grows nearly
without noticing the changes. Thus, in the quasi-static reg ion all quasispecies
that might be expected from the static landscapes ˜F=F(t) will occur at some
time during one cycle τ.
Wilke et al. raise in [18] the schematic phase diagram of the continuous E igen
model, which exhibits the same time-average phases as that f orssGAs. Their result is
in perfect agreement with two recently, explicitly studied time-dependent landscapes.
First, Wilke et al. studied in [17] a needle-in-the-haystack ( NiH) landscape with oscil-
lating, τ-periodic fitness of the needle, i. e.
f0(t)> f1=· · ·=f2l−1= 1 and f0(t) =σexp{εsin(2π t/τ)}.
The continuous model was represented for δt→0 as Eq. 4 and the periodic quasispecies
Eq. 11 was calculated. Figure 2 (left) shows the resulting phase diagram. For small τ,
9f
genotype
00 01 11 10 000001111000
lower bitshigher bits11
01 0010
Figure 3: A regularly moving needle-in-the-haystack for string leng thl= 4. In (left),
the solid arrow represents the next jump to happen, whereas t he gray and solid
arrows all together represent the jumps that happen one afte r the other under
the rule Pof rotating the two lower bits as shown in (right) with rotation angle
π/2 at every jump.
the error threshold is given by the one of the time-averaged l andscape, whereas for large
τ, the error threshold oscillates between minimum and maximu m values corresponding
to min tf0(t) and max tf0(t), as expected in the quasi-static regime. Second, Nilsson
and Snoad studied in [19] a moving NiHthat jumps randomly to one of its nearest
neighbor strings every τtime steps. The time-average of this landscape over many
jump cycles is a totally flat or neutral landscape, which expl ains the extension of the
disordered phase to small µand small τas it is shown in Fig. 2 (right) . In the quasi-
static region, order is expected because the needle stays lo ng enough at each position
for a quasispecies to grow. Hence, we can understand the exis tence of the observed
and calculated phase diagrams in Fig. 2 from simple argument s. In fact, they are
special instances of the general schematic phase diagram de picted in Fig. 1.
In the following, we will consider regularly moving NiHs and derive the infinite
population behavior of a genGA in such landscapes. This is interesting, since genGA s
should be considered to adapt faster to changes compared to ssGAs, as the missing
time-average region of genGA s for small τsuggests. To clarify whether a different
phase diagram compared to Fig. 2 (right) emerges for genGA s with moving NiH, we
will calculate the phase diagram including the optimal muta tion rate that maximizes
a lower bound for the concentration of the needle string in th e population.
4 Generational GAand a moving NiH
In this section, we want to analyze quantitatively the asymp totic behavior of a genGA
withNiHthat moves regularly in the sense of Section 2 to one of its lnearest neighbors
every τtime steps. At the end, we will also be able to comment on the ca se of a NiH
that jumps randomly to one of its nearest neighbors.
A simple example of a NiHthat moves regularly to nearest neighbors is shown
in Fig. 3 (left). Each jump corresponds to a π/2-rotation of the four-dimensional
hypercube {0,1}4along the 1100 axis, i. e. the lower two bits are rotated as sho wn
in Fig. 3 (right) . We will call the set of strings {Pni|n∈ /C6}which is obtained by
10100110 111
101
011
001010
000P≪
000→000111→111
001→010011→110
010→100110→101
100→001101→011
Figure 4: The equivalence of a 2 π/3-rotation along the 1 ···1 axis and a cyclic 1-bit left-
shift, denoted by P≪, for string length l= 3.
applying the same rule P∈S2lover and over to some initial string i∈ {0,1}l, the
orbit of iunder P. The period length 4 of the orbit shown in Fig. 3 (left) originates
from the rotation angle π/2 and hence is independent of the string length l. The orbits
of such rotations will always be restricted to only four diffe rent strings. For reasons
that will become clear below, we are looking for regular movements of the needle that
arenotrestricted to such a small subspace of the string space. Inst ead, the needle
is supposed to move ‘straight away’ from previous positions in string space. Since a
complete classification and analysis of all possible regular movements for given string
length land jump distance dis out of the scope of this work, we will simply give an
example of a rule P∈S2lthat generates such movements: the composition of a cyclic
1-bit left-shift, which we denote by P≪, and an exclusive-or with 0 · · ·01, which we
denote by P⊕. For string length l≤3,P≪corresponds to a 2 π/lrotation along the
1· · ·1 axis as can be seen in Fig. 4. Moreover, the orbit of 0 · · ·0 under P⊕≪=P⊕◦P≪
is shown in Fig. 5 also for l= 3. For arbitrary string length l, it is more difficult to
visualize the action of P≪and hence of P⊕≪. But, it is easily verified that starting
from all zeros 0 · · ·0, the string with n≤lones 0 · · ·01· · ·1 will be reached after
exactly njumps. Moreover, the orbit of 0 · · ·0 under P⊕≪has the period length 2 l.
In the limit of long strings l→ ∞, this periodicity is broken because the needle never
(i. e. after ∞many jumps) returns to all zeros 0 · · ·0, but – as we have shown in Eq.
11 using Eq. 10 – there still exists an asymptotic quasispeci es.
How does our simple GAbehave with a NiHthat moves according to P⊕≪? In Fig. 6,
two typical runs of a genGA with a NiHlike that are depicted. The setting ( m, l, f 0, τ)
was kept fixed but two different mutation rates µwere chosen. In the case of Fig.
6(right) , the mutation rate is ‘too high’ to allow the population to tr ack the movement.
The concentration of the future needle string (solid line) c annot grow much within one
jump cycle resulting in a decreasing initial condition (bul let) for the growth of the
needle concentration (dotted line) in the next cycle. The po pulation looses the peak
– in this case after ≈90 generations. It might happen that the population finds the
needle again by chance (or better saying the moving needle ju mps into the population),
but the population will not be able to stably track the moveme nt. Contrasting to that,
the mutation rate was chosen to maximize the concentration o f the future needle string
at the end of each jump cycle (bullets) in Fig. 6 (left). Since in that case, the best
achievable initial condition is given to each jump cycle, th e movement of the needle
11100110 111
101
011
001010
000
(1) (2)(3)(4)(5)
(6) P⊕≪
(1) 000 →001(4) 111 →110
(2) 001 →011(5) 110 →100
(3) 011 →111(6) 100 →000
010→101 101→010
Figure 5: The orbit of 0 ···0 under P⊕≪(black dots) for string length l= 3. The numbers
(1),... ,(6) show the order in which the strings are visited by the need le, starting
from 000.concentration
number of generations number of generationsxfix(4)xfix(∞)
xfix(∞)
0 20 40 60 80 1000.025
0.02
00.0050.010.0150.020.025
0 20 40 60 80 1000.015
0.01
0.005
0
Figure 6: Run of a genGA withregularly moving needle-in-the-haystack. The parameter
setting was m= 1000000 ,l= 20,f0= 5,τ= 4,(left): µ= 0.022,(right):
µ= 0.055. In both cases the system evolved for 100 generations (no t shown)
without any occurring jumps in order to let a typical quasisp ecies grow around
the initial needle string. In generation 20 the first jump hap pened and afterwards
every τ= 4 generations. solid line: x1(n,t), dotted line: x0(n,t), bullet: jump –
x0(n+ 1,0) =x1(n,τ).
12f0= 10, l= 20, τ= 4, µ=µopt
initial condition x0(n,0) =x1(n−1, τ)fixed point xfix=xfix(∞, l, f0, τ, µ)outcome x1(n, τ) =x0(n+ 1,0)0.02
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.030.015
0.01
0.005
0
Figure 7: The fixed point which is reached by an infinite population for n→ ∞.
is tracked with the highest possible stability for the given setting ( m, l, f 0, τ). As can
be expected from Fig. 6 and is affirmed by further experiments, the bullets keep on
fluctuating around an average value for n→ ∞ which is for the infinite population
given by the quasispecies Eq. 11. In the following, we are goi ng to model that system
with some idealizations and we will calculate a lower bounda ry for this average value.
We adopt the viewpoint of permuting the concentration vecto r compatible to the
movement of the needle as we have done implicitly in Fig. 6 and formally in the
definition of x′(t) in Eq. 10, but we drop the primes henceforth. The concentrat ion
of the needle string within jump cycle nis denoted by x0(n, ϕ) and the concentration
of the string the needle will move to with the ( n+ 1)th jump (i. e. the future needle
string in jump cycle n) is denoted by x1(n, ϕ). The initial cycle prior to which no
jump has occurred is n= 0. Within a cycle, the time or generation is counted as
phase ϕ∈ {0, . . . , τ }. Two succeeding cycles are connected by the (approximated)
rule of change
x0(n+ 1,0) =x1(n, τ) and x1(n+ 1,0)≈0. (14)
The second relation is an approximation which is made to simp lify the coming calcu-
lations, but it holds only if the needle jumps onto a string wh ich has not been close to
one of the previous needle positions. Otherwise, the future needle string could already
be present with a concentration significantly larger than 1 /2l≈0. In Fig. 6, we have
chosen the rule P⊕≪to get experimental data for a case in which this assumption i s
fulfilled. Later on we will see that we can still make useful co mments about cases in
which that approximation is partly broken.
If we plot x0(n+ 1,0) =x1(n, τ) against x0(n,0), we get an intuitive picture for
the system’s evolution towards the quasispecies. The conce ntration x0(n,0) converges
13forn→ ∞ towards a fixed point,
xfix:= lim
n→∞x0(n,0),
as shown in Fig. 7 for a finite value of xfix. Obviously, this fixed point depends on the
full setting xfix=xfix(m, l, f 0, τ, µ). Since we are especially interested in the effects
of various cycle lengths τand mutation rates µ, we keep ( m, l, f 0) fixed, such that
xfix=xfix(τ, µ).
In the remaining of this section, we will calculate x0(n+ 1,0) =x1(n, τ) in depen-
dence on x0(n,0), which is the solid curve in Fig. 7, for arbitrary paramete r settings.
From this knowledge, we will construct the phase diagram. Si nce we stay within one
jump cycle, we drop nto take off some notational load.
4.1 Derivation of the Fixed Point Concentrations
To calculate x1(τ), it is sufficient to take only x0andx1into account, because the
assumed initial condition is x1(0)≈0, such that the main growth of x1is produced
by the mutational flow from the needle. Moreover, we assume µto be small enough
such that terms proportional to µ2can be neglected. This means we restrict ourselves
to the case in which the system is mainly driven by one-bit mut ations. Without
normalization, the evolution equations then read
y0(t+ 1) = (1 −µ)lf0y0(t) +/braceleftbig
µ(1−µ)l−1y1(t)/bracerightbig
,
y1(t+ 1) = µ(1−µ)l−1f0y0(t) + (1 −µ)ly1(t),(15)
where yidenote unnormalized concentrations in contrast to the norm alized concentra-
tionsxi.
Forf0(1−µ)≫µ, which is always the case for large enough f0, we can further ne-
glect the back-flow {· · ·} from the future needle string compared to the self-replicat ion
of the current needle string. The solution of Eq. 15 is then gi ven by
y0(t) =/bracketleftbig
(1−µ)lf0/bracketrightbigty0(0),
y1(t) =κt(µ)y0(0) + (1 −µ)lty1(0),
with/braceleftBiggκt(µ) =µ(1−µ)lt−1αt
αt=/summationtextt
ν=1fν
0=f0ft
0−1
f0−1.
The coefficient κt(µ) measures the growth of y1(t) starting from the initial condition
y1(0)≈0, y0(0)/ne}ationslash= 0. As long as y0(t)+y1(t)≪1, this gives already a good approxima-
tion for the concentrations x0(t) and x1(t). But in general, this approximation breaks
down for large t, because of the exponential growth of y0(t). We need to normalize
our solution, which can be done by
x(t) =y(t)/slashbig
/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht0· · ·/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htt−1,where /an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htt= (f0−1)x0(t) + 1. (16)
By expressing the fitness averages in terms of y0(t), we find, after solving a simple
14mutation rate µf0= 2= 20
= 5 = 10concentration xfixO(µ2) analyticO(µ2) numericalexact numerical
(l= 20 for all curves)
0.1 0.12 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 00.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
Figure 8: Comparison of the exact numerical and the O(µ2) calculation for different values
of the needle fitness f0.
recursion,
/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht0· · ·/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tf/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htt−1= 1 + ( f0−1)/bracketleftbig/summationtextt−1
ν=0(1−µ)lνfν
0/bracketrightbig
x0(0)
= 1 + ( f0−1)βt(µ)x0(0),
where βt(µ) =˜ft−1
˜f−1and˜f= (1−µ)lf0.
Finally, we arrive at the normalized concentrations
x0(t) =/bracketleftbig
(1−µ)lf0/bracketrightbigtx0(0)/slashBig
[1 + (f0−1)βt(µ)x0(0)],
x1(t) =/bracketleftbig
κt(µ)x0(0) + (1 −µ)ltx1(0)/bracketrightbig/slashBig
[1 + (f0−1)βt(µ)x0(0)].
The asymptotic state can now be calculated by using the initi al condition x1(0)≈
0, x0(0)/ne}ationslash= 0 and demanding x1(τ) =x0(0). It is easily verified that for the fixed point
follows
xfix(τ, µ) =κτ(µ)−1
(f0−1)βτ(µ). (17)
4.2 Consistency in the Quasi-Static Limit
How can we test the quality of the approximate result Eq. 17? F or large cycle lengths
τ, we enter the quasi-static regime, where we can approximate the population at the
end of each cycle by the quasispecies of the corresponding st atic landscape. Figure 8
shows a comparison of the exact numerical calculations of th e quasispecies ( τ→ ∞)
and the O(µ2) calculations ( τ= 100). In the numerical O(µ2) calculation, the back-
flow from the first error class to the needle string is included . Overall, we find the error
15τ= 3 → ∞ = 5 = 4
τ= 2
mutation rate µconcentration xfixl= 20
f0= 100.018
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.120.016
0.014
0.012
0.01
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
0
Figure 9: Fixed point concentration xfix(τ,µ) for different values of τ. For faster changes,
the fixed point concentration rapidly drops down.
threshold and the maximum of the fixed point concentration we ll represented. This
also suggests that the deviation of the O(µ2) approximation from the exact values
should be small for smaller τ, because those deviations add up for τ→ ∞ by the
iterative procedure.
How do the calculated fixed point concentrations compare to s imulations with
(large) finite population? In Fig. 6, the values of xfix(∞, µ) and xfix(4, µ) are shown.
Forτ→ ∞, the deviation from the average /an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tx1(n, ϕ)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht(in generations 0 −20) is in
fact the same as what can be read off in Fig. 8. The deviation of xfix(4, µ) from the
average value /an}⌊ra⌋ketle{tx0(n,0)/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htin generations 24 ,28, . . . ,100 is significantly larger. This is
caused by the neglect of all other strings’ contributions ap art from the current needle
string’s contribution to the flow onto the future needle stri ng. These neglected contri-
butions increase the average fixed point concentration meas ured in the experiment in
comparison to the calculated value xfix(τ, µ). But even though there are deviations,
we conclude that the approximately calculated value is alwa ys a lower bound for the
exact value. In the next section, we will use this observatio n to derive an expression
for the mutation rate that maximizes the average fixed point c oncentration.
4.3 Phase Diagram
In Fig. 9, the fixed point values xfix(τ, µ) are shown for small cycle lengths τ. For the
shown parameter setting, the region with xfix(2, µ)>0 is extremely small. We notice
that there are two error thresholds, one for ‘too low’ mutati on rates, µth<, and one
for ‘too high’ mutation rates, µth>. The intuition behind that was already given in
Section 3. For too low mutation rates the population becomes slow and evolves in the
averaged, flat landscape, whereas for too high mutation rate s the usual transition to
the disordered phase takes place. In the following we will ca lculate the phase diagram
starting from Eq. 17.
16Error Thresholds: The error thresholds are given by
xfix(τ, µ) = 0 ⇐⇒ κτ(µ) = 1. (18)
This is the same condition as one would get using only unnorma lized concentrations
yi(t). Since yi(t)≈0 near the error thresholds, the neglect of the normalizatio n is not
critical for the calculation of the error thresholds themse lves, whereas it is important
for the optimal mutation rate and of course for the fixed point concentration. Since Eq.
18 cannot be solved for µin closed form, we write down the corresponding recursion
relation that converges, for a suitable starting value of µ, to the solution of Eq. 18 in
the limit k→ ∞,
µ(k)
th<= 1/slashBig
ατ/parenleftBig
1−µ(k−1)
th</parenrightBig
, µ(0)
th<= 0,
µ(k)
th>= 1−/parenleftBig
1/slashBig
ατµ(k−1)
th>/parenrightBig1/(lτ−1)
, µ(0)
th>= 1−f−1/l
0=:µ∞
th.
Forµth<, a good starting value is 0, since µth<≈0 anyway. For µth>, the approximate
value for the error threshold of the static (i. e. τ→ ∞) landscape µ∞
thcan be chosen,
which is obtained by calculating the fixed point [using Eq. 15 and 16],
x0(t+ 1) = x0(t)⇐⇒ x∞
fix=(1−µ)lf0−1
f0−1,
setting it to zero and solving for µ.
Optimal Mutation Rate: In order to track changes with the best achievable sta-
bility for a given setting ( m, l, f 0, τ), the lowest possible concentration (infimum of)
x0(n, ϕ) needs to be maximized, because a low concentration might re sult in the loss
of the needle string in a finite population. Since for infinite populations x0(n, ϕ) is
monotonously increasing with ϕit is sufficient to maximize x0(n,0). Moreover, we
derived above that x0(n,0) approaches the fixed point value xfix(τ, µ) forn→ ∞. For
finite populations, we expect similar behavior but the stric t monotony of x0(x, ϕ) in
ϕwill be destroyed by fluctuations and also the fixed point valu e itself will fluctuate
around some average value /an}⌊ra⌋ketle{txfix/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}htas can be seen in Fig. 6. However, the safest way to
avoid any loss of the needle string is still to maximize the av erage fixed point value
/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{txfix/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht. In this sense, we define the optimal mutation rate µoptas the one that maximizes
/an}⌊ra⌋ketle{txfix/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht. In the previous Section 4.2, we noted that our approximated infinite population
valuexfix(τ, µ) represents a lower bound for /an}⌊ra⌋ketle{txfix/an}⌊ra⌋ketri}ht, where the maxima of the two curves
are expected to coincide for fixed τ. Thus, µoptcan be obtained by maximization of
xfix(τ, µ).
We can derive an expression for the optimal mutation rate µoptfrom
∂xfix
∂µ(τ, µopt) = 0
If we neglect the µdependence of βτ(µ) in Eq. 17, which corresponds to the approach
in [19], we simply find µNS
opt(τ, l) = 1/lτ. Because of µNS
optτ→∞− − − → 0, this result is inconsis-
tent with the quasi-static limit, because µoptshould approach the value for which the
17f0= 2,5,10,15,20= 20
mutation rate µconcentration ˜ xfix= 10 l= 30
τ= 1000.350.4
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.120.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Figure 10: The optimal mutation rate µ∞
opt(f0,l) from Eq. 19 in dependence on needle
height f0and string length l.
concentration of 1-mutants in the quasispecies of the corre sponding static NiHland-
scape is maximized. We conclude that the µdependence of βτ(µ) cannot be neglected
for the correct optimal mutation rate, which we are now going to calculate.
Forατ≫1, which is the case for τ≫1 and f0>1, orτ≈1 and f0≫1, we
can neglect the −1 in the numerator of xfix(τ, µ) and take only ατinto account for the
calculation of ∂xfix/∂µ. After some algebra, we find
µopt=(˜fτ−1)(˜f−1)
l(˜fτ+1−(τ+ 1)˜f+τ),where ˜f=f0(1−µopt)l.
Since ˜f=˜f(µopt), this equation cannot be solved in a closed form for µopt. However,
forτ→ ∞ the equation simplifies to
µ∞
opt=/braceleftBigg
(˜f−1)/l˜f:˜f >1
0 : ˜f≤1.
In the case ˜f >1, we find
(1−lµ∞
opt)(1−µ∞
opt)l= 1/slashbig
f0.
By approximating (1 −µ)l≈(1−lµ)2, we get a cubic equation. The real root of that
equation is approximately [20] given by (see also Fig. 10)
µ∞
opt(f0, l)≈µ+/bracketleftbigg
1 +(l−1)µ+(1−lµ+)
3l(l−1)µ2
+−2µ+(3l−1) + 4/bracketrightbigg
withµ+=1
l/bracketleftBig
1 +f−1/2
0/bracketrightBig
. (19)
1810 f0= 2 ,
µthµ∞
th
µ∞
opt
µ∞
th
µ∞
optmutation rate µ
cycle length τµopt
l= 20
100 10 10.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
Figure 11: The calculated phase diagram for a genGA with stochastically moving needle-
in-the-haystack; two settings are shown: f0= 2,10, for both l= 20.
Resulting Phase Diagram: From the above, we are able to plot the phase diagram
for our model as shown in Fig. 11. Two settings are plotted. Fo rf0= 2 (resp. 10) the
diamonds (resp. circles) are the numerically obtained erro r thresholds. The solid and
dash-dotted lines are µ(5)
th<andµ(5)
th>. To show the convergence property of µ(k)
th<,>,µ(0)
th<,>
are plotted for f0= 10 as dashed lines. Obviously, the needed corrections to th e chosen
starting values increase for smaller τ, such that more iterations are needed to describe
the error thresholds correctly for small τ. The expressions µ(5)
th<,>are already a good
approximation for the given settings. Representing the qua si-static limit, µ∞
this plotted
as dotted line and gets consistently approached by µth>(τ) forτ→ ∞. Furthermore,
µ∞
optis plotted as dash-dot-dotted line. The numerically measur ed values for µopt(τ)
are shown for f0= 2 (resp. 10) as triangle (resp. squares). They approach µ∞
optvery
quickly already for τ≈20 (resp. 10).
We conclude that the above quantitative description is in go od agreement with
the numerical observations and approaches the quasi-stati c region in a consistent way.
Moreover, the phase diagram fits well into the general one rai sed in Section 3. Even
in the considered case of a genGA , we find – depending on the parameter setting – a
time-averaged phase for very small τ. The time-averaged phase broadens for small f0.
4.4 Stochastically moving NiH
Up to now, we analyzed a regularly moving NiH, for example with the rule P⊕≪. What
happens if the NiHis allowed to move to a randomly picked nearest neighbor, as it is
shown in Fig. 12 for l= 4? Two typical runs of a genGA with this fitness landscape are
depicted in Fig. 13. The setting ( m, l, f 0, τ) was chosen the same as in Fig. 6 which
allows for a direct comparison of the GA’s behavior for regularly and stochastically
moving NiHs. The overall behavior is similar. For large mutation rates , the population
looses the needle string, whereas the moving needle is track ed stably for mutation rates
close to the above defined optimal mutation rate. In addition , strong fluctuations in
19f
genotype
00 01 11 10 000001111000
lower bitshigher bits
Figure 12: Astochastically moving needle-in-the-haystack for string length l= 4. The
needle is allowed to jump to one of its nearest neighbors whic h is chosen at
random.
xfix(∞)
xfix(4)xfix(∞)concentration
number of generations number of generations0 20 40 60 80 10000.0050.010.0150.020.025
0 20 40 60 80 1000.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
Figure 13: Run of a genGA withstochastically moving needle-in-the-haystack. The param-
eter setting in (left) and(right) were the same as in Fig. 6 (left) and(right) .
20the values of x1(n,0) (lower ends of solid lines) as well as x0(n+ 1,0) = x1(n, τ)
(bullets) occur in the stochastic case. These result from back-jumps . If, at the end of
the current cycle, the needle jumps back to the string it has b een to in the previous
cycle, then x1(n,0) =x0(n−1, τ) is significantly larger than zero. This can be seen in
Fig. 13 (right) at generations 36 ,40 and 64 and also in Fig. 13 (left) at generations 72
and 88 (the gaps in Fig. 13 (left) correspond to x1, x0being much larger than 0 .025).
If no back-jumps occur, as in generations 24 −72 in Fig. 13 (left), the system with
stochastic NiHbehaves nearly indistinguishable from the one with regular ly moving
NiH. Since back-jumps always increase the concentrations of th e needle string in the
very next occurring jumps, the above calculated fixed point xfix(τ, µ) is still a lower
bound. Thus, our previous notion of optimal mutation rate re mains applicable to the
stochastically moving NiHalthough the assumption x1(n,0)≈0 from Eq. 14 is not
always fulfilled.
Nilsson and Snoad [19] did their analysis of the continuous E igen model Eq. 3 with
stochastic NiHin a similar way as we did above. In analogy to their calculati on for the
continuous Eigen model, we find for a genGA the optimal mutation rate µNS
opt(τ, l) =
1/lτwhich is inconsistent with the quasi-static limit (see Sect ion 4.3). The reason is
the missing normalization in the work of Nilsson and Snoad. F urthermore, they could
not derive an expression for the fixed point concentration xfix(τ, µ) because of that
same reason.
4.5 Jumps of larger Distance
To conclude this section about the behavior of genGA s with different kinds of NiHs that
move to nearest neighbors, let us shortly discuss jumps of Hamming distance dlarger
than one. Obviously, the analytical calculations get more c omplicated, because the
O(µ2)-approximation is not sufficient anymore as it connects only nearest neighbors.
To describe jumps of a larger distance, the concentrations o f some intermediate se-
quences need to be taken into account, so that we have to solve a time evolution much
more complicated than Eq. 15. Hence, we cannot make simple st atements for finite τ.
On the other hand, the system approaches the quasi-static re gion for large τand it is
characterized by µ∞
th<,>andµ∞
optas we have seen in Fig. 11. The exact quasispecies for
τ→ ∞ is shown in Fig. 14. The plotted values are error class concen trations, in order
to make the higher error classes visible at all. Each k-mutant has a concentration of
˜xk//parenleftbigl
k/parenrightbig
in the quasispecies state, because for a NiHthe mutant’s fitness depends only
on its Hamming distance to the needle and therefore all/parenleftbigl
k/parenrightbig
k-mutants have the same
concentration in the quasispecies. For finite populations, this is only true on average,
because the asymptotic state is distorted by fluctuations. B ut in the following, we
assume that the quasispecies is still representative for th e average distribution of the
population in the asymptotic state. Then, the optimal mutat ion rate in the sense of
Section 4.3 for jumps of distance dis by definition the position of the maximum of ˜ xd.
Ford≥l/2, optimal mutation rate and error threshold become identic al. Although ˜ xd
is maximized for mutation rates close to the error threshold it amounts, as do all other
concentrations to only ≈1/2l, which leads to an approximately random drift for finite
populations. On the other hand, the chance of tracking the ne edle decreases even fur-
ther for small mutation rates because then the concentratio n ˜xdbecomes even smaller.
In this sense, the quasispecies distribution, which is cent ered on the needle string, is
21concentrations ˜ xiµ∞
opt,2 µ∞
opt,4 µ∞
opt,3 µ∞
opt,1
f0= 10
l= 20
mutation rate µ0.80.91
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.120.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Figure 14: The quasispecies for the static NiHin dependence on the mutation rate µ. The
concentrations ˜ xiof the ith error class for i∈ {0,... ,⌊l/2⌋}are depicted. The
optimal mutation rates for jumps of Hamming distance d= 1,2,3,4 are shown
as dotted lines.
useless for tracking the next jump if d≥l/2. This also suggests – in agreement with
the experimental findings of Rowe [13] (in this book) – that fin ite populations are for
low mutation rates unable to track large jumps – in particula r in the extreme case
d=l. Only for jumps of d < l/ 2 the corresponding error class concentration ˜ xdshows
a concentration maximum significantly above 1 /2l. From the heights of the concen-
tration maxima, we see that the difficulty of tracking the chan ges increases with the
Hamming distance dof the jumps. Vice versa, the advantage a population gets aft er
a jump from its structure prior to the jump decreases with inc reasing jump distance
d. In addition, a mutation rate which is simultaneously optim al for more than one
distance cannot be found.
5 Conclusions and Future Work
On the basis of general arguments, the phase diagrams of popu lation-based mutation
and probabilistic selection systems like the above genGA ,ssGA and Eigen model in
time-dependent fitness landscape can be easily understood. The notion of regular
changes allows for an exact calculation of the asymptotic st ate in the sense of a gen-
eralized, time-dependent quasispecies. For a genGA withNiHthat moves regularly to
nearest neighbors, the quasispecies can be straightforwar dly calculated under simpli-
fying assumptions. The result is a lower bound for the exact q uasispecies. With that
lower bound, we have constructed the phase diagram in the infi nite population limit.
This phase diagram is in agreement with the one raised from ge neral arguments.
In order to improve our analysis, we need to weaken our assump tions. In particu-
lar, we have to overcome the restriction of taking into accou nt only the flow from the
current towards the future needle string. The presence of ot her contributions to the
22flow has to be modeled in some way. Another future step could be an investigation
of the fluctuations that are introduced by the finiteness of re alistic populations (dis-
creteness of Λ m) around the quasispecies. This would lead to a lower boundar y for the
population size above which the needle string is not lost due to those fluctuations.
An extension of our analysis to non-regularities like the oc currence of more than
a single jump rule, can be achieved by averaging the time evol ution Eq. 8 for n→ ∞
according to each rule’s probability of being applied. A sim ilar averaging procedure
will be necessary if fluctuations of the cycle length τare present. Finally, an extension
of the description to broader, more realistic peaks, as well asGAmodels including
crossover and other selection schemes, are important topic s for future work.
References
[1] T. B¨ ack, U. Hammel and H.-P. Schwefel. Evolutionary Computation: Comments
on the History and Current State . IEEE Transactions on Evol. Comp. 1(1), p. 3,
1997.
[2] T. B¨ ack, D. B. Fogel and Z. Michalewicz, editors. Handbook of Evolutionary
Computation . IOP Publishing, Bristol, 1997.
[3] J. Branke. Evolutionary Algorithms for Dynamic Optimization Problem s, A
Survey . Technical Report 387, AIFB University Karlsruhe, 1999.
[4] J. E. Rowe. Finding attractors for periodic fitness functions . In W. Banzhaf
et al., editors, Proceedings to GECCO 1999 , Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo,
p. 557, 1999.
[5] L. M. Schmitt, C. L. Nehaniv and R. H. Fujii. Linear analysis of genetic algo-
rithms . Theoretical Computer Science 200, p. 101, 1998.
[6] M. Eigen. Selforganization of matter and the evolution of biological macro-
molecules . Naturwissenschaften 58, p. 465, 1971.
[7] M. Eigen and P. Schuster. The Hypercycle – A Principle of Natural Self-
Organization . Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1979.
[8] M. Eigen, J. McCaskill and P. Schuster. The molecular quasispecies . Adv. Chem.
Phys. 75, p. 149, 1989.
[9] E. Baake and W. Gabriel. Biological evolution through mutation, selection, and
drift: An introductory review . Ann. Rev. Comp. Phys. 7, in press, 1999.
[10] J. E. Rowe. The dynamical systems model of the simple Genetic Algorithm . this
issue, p. XXX, 1999.
[11] M. D. Vose. The simple Genetic Algorithm – Foundations and Theory . MIT
Press, Cambridge, 1999.
[12] E. van Nimwegen, J. P. Crutchfield and M. Mitchell. Statistical Dynamics of the
Royal-Road genetic algorithms . Theoretical Computer Science, special issue on
Evolutionary Computation, A. Eiben, G. Rudolph, editors, i n press, 1998.
23[13] J. E. Rowe. Cyclic Attractors and Quasispecies Adaptability . this issue, p. XXX,
1999.
[14] K. DeJong and J. Sarma. Generation Gaps Revisited . In L. D. Whitley, editor,
Foundations of Genetic Algorithms 2 , Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, p. 19,
1993.
[15] A. Rogers and A. Pr¨ ugel-Bennett. Modeling the Dynamics of a Steady State Ge-
netic Algorithm . In W. Banzhaf and C. Reeves, editors, Foundations of Genetic
Algorithms 5 , Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, p. 57, 1998.
[16] J. Branke, M. Cutaia and H. Dold. Reducing Genetic Drift in Steady State
Evolutionary Algorithms . In W. Banzhaf et al., editors, Proceedings to GECCO
1999, Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, p. 68, 1999.
[17] C. O. Wilke, C. Ronnewinkel and T. Martinetz. Molecular Evolution in time-
dependent Environments . In D. Floreano, J.-D. Nicoud and F. Mondada, editors,
Proceedings to European Conference on Artificial Life 1999 , Springer, Berlin,
p. 417, 1999.
[18] C. O. Wilke and C. Ronnewinkel. Dynamic Fitness landscapes in the Quasispe-
cies model . in preparation.
[19] M. Nilsson and N. Snoad. Error Thresholds on dynamic Fitness-Landscapes .
Working Paper 99-04-030, Santa Fe Institute, 1999.
[20] A more detailed explanation and analysis of the used app roximation will be
presented elsewhere.
24 |
physics/9911007 4 Nov 1999 Do Gravitational Fields Have Mass ?
Or on the Nature of Dark Matter
Ernst Karl Kunst
As has been shown before (a brief comment will be given in the text), relativistic
mass and relativistic time dilation of moving bodies are equivalent as well as
time and mass in the rest frame. This implies that the time dilation due to the
gravitational field is combined with inertial and gravitational mass as well and
permits the computation of the gravitational action of the vacuum constituting
the gravitational field in any distance from the source of the field. Theoretical
predictions are compared with experimental results and it is shown that many
known astrophysical and gravitational phenomena, especially the so-called dark
or missing matter, owe their existence to the gravitational effects of the mass of
the field-vacuum.
Key words: Equivalence of mass, energy and dilated time of moving bodies - mass of
the gravitational field
Introduction
Apparent deviations from the Einstein-Newtonian law of gravitation both on laboratory
and astronomical scale have been known long since. Those partly controversially
discussed gravitational phenomena are:
1) Constantly high velocities of individual galaxies within clusters and
groups of galaxies, departing strongly from the velocities on the strength
of the virial law and constantly high orbital velocities in the vicinity of the
Milky Way, other galaxies and galaxy pairs, which deviate strongly from
a Keplerian velocity distribution. Both phenomena have led to the
currently accepted concept of non-luminous, non-baryonic material in the
vicinity of large systems on a cosmic scale, the so-called "halo of dark
unseen matter" [1], [2];
2) An apparent increase of the universal gravitational constant G with
growing radial distance of test masses measured with the torsion
pendulum in the laboratory [3];
3) A systematic increase of the gravitional acceleration g as one
descends into deep mineshafts or boreholes [4], [5], [6], or decrease as
one ascends towers [7];
4) A systematic linear deviation of the acceleration of two test masses at
the ends of the torsion pendu lum in the gravitational field of Earth in
proportion to the difference in baryon density (protons plus neutrons per
unit mass), which was found by analytical replication of the original
Eötvös data and led to the suggestion of a composition-dependen t finite
range repulsive ( fifth ) force [8];
5) A systematic decrease of the velocity of space-probes on their track V
/G0C/G0C
/G0A /G0A/G0Cx/G0C/G0Cy/G0C/G0Cz/G0C/G0A /G0A/G0Cx/G0B0/G0Cy/G0Cz/G0A /G0AV/G0B0,
dt
/G0C/G0C
cv0/G0A /G0AEt/G0A /G0Amtc2,
mt/G0A /G0AEt
c2/G0A /G0Adt
/G0C/G0C
v0
c/G0A /G0Adx
/G0C/G0C
c,
2/G1B1
c/G0A /G0Ah
c/G0A /G0Am,2
(1)
(2) outbound of the solar system as e. g. Pioneer 10 and 11 [9].
In the following we will show that all these experimentally found though - as already
stated - partly controversially discussed phenomena are due to the gravitational effects
of the mass of the gravitational field.
Connection between Relativistic Mass and Dilated Time of Moving Bodies
Main results of the modified theory of relativistic kinematics among others are inertial
motion (velocity) always to be symmetrically composite and the Lorentz transformation
not to predict the Fitzgerald-Lorentz contraction of the dimension (/G0Cx) parallel to the
velocity vector, as invented by Fitzgerald and Lorentz to account for the null-result of
the Michelson-Morley experiment on moving Earth, but rather an expansion of /G0Cx [10].
Accordingly the volume V’ of an inertially moving body will any observer resting in a
frame considered at rest seem enhanced by the factor
where V means volume and /G0BtheLorentz factor based on the composite velocity v.0 0
Among others it has been demonstrated this expansion of /G0Cx (or V) to be the cause of
the experimentally found increase of the interaction radius respectively cross section
of elementary particles with rising energy (velocity), as determined in collider
experiments and as is known from studies of cosmic radiation. From m’ = V’/G27’ = m/G0B =0
V/G27/G0B in connection with (1) follows /G27’ = /G27 and, therewith, the fraction v/c of the0 0
relativistically dilated time to be the very cause of the relativistic increase of mass:
where "/G27" means density of mass, “E” energy of the product dt’cv of a movingt 0
material body and “m” mass induced by time dilation. Furthermore has beent
demonstrated mass of the hydrogen (H-) atom and quantum of time 2/G1B/c in the rest1
frame be equivalent and generated by the movement of a fourth spatial dimension of
the atom
where "2/G1B" is the fundamental length in R, "h" Planck's constant and "m" mass of the14
smallest elctrically neutral and stable piece of matter, presumedly of the H-atom [11].
Analogous to the equivalence of mass and time in the rest frame as well as in the
moving one gravitational fields have to be considered to be spaces with relativistic
mass, because of the time dilation due to the gravitational field. Thus, we can expectEV/G0A /G0AmVc2/G0A /G0Adt/G0Ccv0×cdydz/G0A /G0AV
/G0C/G0C
cv0,
EV/G0A /G0AmVc2/G0A /G0AVcv0
r3/G0A /G0A6M
/G4C/G27c2/G0A /G0AK3/G4E3,
K/G0A /G0Ar
/G4E/G11v0
c/G112GM
c2R1
MVc2/G0A /G0AV/G4E/G4E
x
/G4E/G4E
y
/G4E/G4E
zcK3/G0A /G0A/G4E3cK3/G0A /G0A/G4E3c2GM
c2R13
,3
(3)
(4)the potential differences in gravitational fields in dependen ce on the distance from the
source of the field to be perceptible as physically measurable masses. To compute
those masses basically two possibilities exist.
Global Estimate of the Mass of the Gravitational Field
We refer to the classical definition of mass as the product of volume and den sity and
then in accord with (2) can write
wherefrom follows
if v « c and dt/dt’ /G11 1, where E means energy and m mass of volume of space0 V V
(vacuum), respectively. Of course, (3) is valid in the case of moving bodies only, with
one velocity vector.
Suppose we have a spherically symmetric gravitational field in the form of a
Schwarzschild-vacuole in the Friedmann cosmos
where "r" means the coordinate radius of the vacuole and "/G4E" the "radius", "K" means
curvature, "M" the mass of the central body under consideration [12]. In this case the
product of each of the three dimensions of the vacuole and the velocity vector or (in
Newtonian approximation) scalar of curvature
will contribute to the global energy of the vacuole so that according to (3) the energy
content of the space of the vacuole - as seen from "outside" - can be written as
whereby "G" is the Newton's gravitational constant and "R" the radius of the mass of1
the central body, distributed in the vacuole. Here we had to consider that each of the
three geometric dimensions of the gravitational field must be multiplied by the scalar
of curvature or (in approximation) vector of velocity, according to the principle of
equivalence. On the grounds of the ratio /G270/G0A /G0Amass in the cosmos
volume of the cosmos/G11mass (of the body) in the vacuole
volume of the field (vacuole)
MV/G0A /G0A/G4E3
c2GM
c2R13
/G11M
/G270c2GM
c2R13
.
Mtotal
M/G0A /G0AM/G08 /G08MV
M/G0A /G0A1/G08 /G081
/G270c2GM
c2R3
.
g44/G0A /G0A/G091/G08 /G082GM
c2,GM/G0A /G0A/G09/G4Cc2
8/G25/G50T44d3x
x/G05/G09x/G09 /G05.4
- whereby /G27 means cosmic density of mass - we eventually can approximate the total0
mass of the gravitational field of the vacuole with the expression
Accordingly the ratio of the "total mass of the gravitational system" (field + visible
mass) to the "visible mass" is
Applying the corresponding values for galaxies and galaxy clusters, roughly the right
amount of masses results i.e. greater than the visible masses which were introduced
by astronomers as the so called "dark or missing matter", to explain the dynamics of
large complexes of gravitational systems. The uncertainties in the determination of the
cosmic density /G27 and especially of R (boundary between the external and internal0 1
Schwarzschild metric) in extended gravitational systems e.g. galaxies and clusters of
galaxies allow but only very global estimates.
The Mass of the Gravitational Field in Dependence on the Distance from
the Source of Gravitation
More exact results can be derived if, starting at the bounda ry between the external and
internal Schwarzschild metric of a spherical distribution of mass (source of the external
field or radius of the mass in Euclidian coordinates), the infinitesimal small distances
respectively multiplied by the time dilation at the point of the coordinate in radial
direction are summed. Consider the center of gravity of the field-producing mass to be
at rest, with T being the essential component of the energy momentum tensor T so44 ik
that in a first approximation is valid
Furthermore, the vacuum of the external Schwarzschild metric is considered to consist
of thin concentric shells of the thickness dR, where “R” is the distance from the center
of gravity. According to (4) the mass of each infinitesimal thin concentric shell
measured from the point R radially "within" the field must be proportional to the1
infinitesimal small distance dR:dMVR/G0A /G0Av0dR
3c/G0A /G0Aconstant.
v0/G0A /G0Av0RR/G0A /G0Aconstant
v0R/G0A /G0A1/G092GM
R/G091
2/G091/G11GM
R,
dMVR/G0A /G0Av0RRdR
3c/G0A /G0AGMdR
3cR.
MVR/G0A /G0A/G50R
R1GMdR
3cR/G0A /G0A2GM(R/G09R1)
3c/G08 /G08/G1A,5
(5)The volume of each successive shell increases as the square of the radius. On the
other hand the velocity v decreases inversely proportional to the radius, i.e. the cube0
of the velocity v with increasing radius, as 1/R . As a result, the product of each03 2
successive shell by the cube of the respective velocity remains constant. Thus, the
mass of the vacuum of each successive shell of the gravitational field remains constant
for all R. Because
for all R - where v means velocity at the point R - and0R
the proportion of mass of the infinitesimal part dR of the radius R of the gravitational
field amounts to
Integration results in the mass of the field vacuum within the radius R
measured within the field. R means the radius of the internal Schwarzschild metric1
("radius" of the mass), R the radial distance from the center of gravity of the field
producing mass, measured in Euclidean coordinates. The constant /G1A is the mass of
the macroscopic groundstate of vacuo (not disturbed by gravitational fields), which is
null, and M the mass of the vacuum of the gravitational field in the distance R fromVR
the center of gravity which together with the field-producing mass M or the energy
momentum tensor T, respectively, determines completely the behaviour of test bodiesi k
of the mass m.
In principle this result is also valid for the internal Schwarzschild metric, because the
space inside a gravitational body contributes to the total mass of the body or density of
energy T in the distance R from the center of gravity (in approximation):ik 1MVR1/G0A /G0A2GMR1
3c.
Mtotal/G0A /G0AM/G08 /G08MVR/G0A /G0AM/G08 /G082GM(R/G09R1)
3c,
Mtotal
M/G0A /G0AM/G08 /G08MVR
M/G0A /G0A1/G082G(R/G09R1)
3c.
v0R/G0A /G0AGM
R1/G08 /G082G(R/G09R1)
3c.6
(6)
(7)
(8)Thus, if R < R the mass of the gravitational field inside the mass also amounts to the1
value (5), measured from the point R in negative radial direction or toward the center1
of gravity.
Comparison of Theoretical Predictions with Experiment
1) According to (5) the total mass of a gravitational system in the radial distance R from
the center of gravity of the field producing mass M amounts to
or after division by M the quotient is given by
From (6) the orbital Kepler velocity of a body of negligible mass as a function of R, R1
and the central mass M is derived:
Computation results in the flat non-Keplerian rotation curves of galaxies and pairs of
galaxies established by astronomical observations, whereby the morphology of the
curve strongly depends on R. Calculation of (7) results directly in the ratio of the total1
perceptible mass within the distance R of the gravitational field - baryonic plus field - to
the amount of the luminous matter, which agrees well with astronomical
measurements. In the following we compare theoretically derived values of M/Mtotal
according to (7) with some experimental results for the outer regions of the Milky Way
[1]:
M/M (7)ExperimentR (kpc)R (kpc) "m"total 1
2.6 /G113.0 18 10 carbon monoxide
clouds
11.0 /G119.0 60 10 clouds of Magellan
13.6 /G1112.0 75 10 satellite galaxies/G0Ca/G0A /G0A/G0Cf
m/G0A /G0A/G0CG/G0A /G0A2G(R/G09R1)
3c,
GR/G0A /G0AG/G08 /G08/G0CG/G0A /G0AG1/G08 /G082(R/G09R1)
3c.
GR/G11G[1/G08 /G080.002 ln (R)]7
(9)
(9a)R = 10 kpc is the mean distance of the sun from the galactic center, because1
astronomical measurements are grounded on the validity of the Newton-Keplerian law
within the orbit of the sun (see also 5) below).
Equation (7) results also convincingly in the linear increase of M/M with growing Rtotal
in vast cosmic systems as measured by astronomers [1], [2]:
M/M (7)ExperimentR R "M"total 1
10 /G1110 100 kpc0 galaxies
25 /G1125 100 kpc0 pairs of galaxies
430 >400 32 mpc0 Coma cluster
650 >600 70 mpc0 local supercluster
2) From the preceding is evident that measurements of the R-dependen ce of the
acceleration in local fields of gravitation must yield apparent discrepancies to Einstein-
Newtonian gravity, which usually are interpreted either as a modification of the
gravitational constant G or as the effect of an additional (fifth) force of nature. A direct
measurement of the gravitational force f, which a unit of mass M = 1 exerts on a test
mass m in the distance R from the center of gravity results according to (5) in an
additional acceleration:
Evidently G expresses an apparent alteration of G due to the gravitational effect of theR
field vacuum.
In 1976 Lon g compared older measurements at various ranges of R with the results of
his own torsion pendu lum experiments at R = 4.5 cm and 30 cm and found
on laboratory scale [3]. For an overview we compare theoretical and experimental
results :/G0Cg/G0A /G0A2G2ME(RE/G09R1)
3cRE,
G(ME
/G08/G08MV)/G0A /G0AG1/G08 /G08R2
E
GME2G2ME(RE/G09RE/G09R1)
3cRE
/G0A /G0AG1/G08 /G08RE2RE(RE/G09RE/G09R1)
3cME,8
(10) Theory Experiment R R
/G0CG = G - G (9) /G0CG /G11 G - G (9a)cmR R1
0.0135 0.0077 10 0
0.0235 0.0223 30 0
0.0303 0.0291 50 0
0.0358 0.0336 70 0
where G = 6.656 × 10gs according to Long.-8 -1 -2
3) The influence of the mass of vacuo constituting the gravitational field of Earth on the
gravitational acceleration g results according to (8) in:
or as an apparent alteration of the gravitational constant of the amount G = (ME + MV)
G + /G0CG, where M means mass and R radius of Earth, respectively - R is here theE E 1
negative radial direction toward the center of Earth measured from the point R.E
Consistently higher values of G from measurements of g in boreholes and mines for
some time have been known to point to a deviation from the 1/R-law of the gravitational
potential. Therefore, a direct comparison of this theory with experimental results is
possible. In the following we compare some results of Stacey [4], Holding [5] and Hsui
[6] from measurements in boreholes and mines with calculations according to (10):
Theory Experiment R
G (10) 10 cm g s cm(ME + MV)-83-1-21
6.674 6.724 ± 0.014 2 × 104/G271/G0A /G0A1, R/G271/G0A /G0A3/G271, R/G09R/G271/G0A /G0A0,
MV(R1/G09R)/G0A /G0A2GM
3c1/G091
6/G27.
f/G0A /G0Ag(M/G08 /G08MV(R1/G09R))/G0A /G0AM(g/G08 /G08/G0Cg)/G0A /G0AgM1/G08 /G082G
3c1/G091
6/G27,9
(11) 6.722 6.734 ± 0.002 1 × 105
6.727 6.700 ± 0.065 1.2 × 105
6.772 6.810 ± 0.070 4 × 105
where G = 6.672 × 10cmg s, M = 5.97 × 10 g, R = 6.4 × 10 cm.-8 3 -1-2 27 8
E
Eckhardt measured in a tower experiment at R /G11 6 × 10 cm above the ground a14
deviation of g of 500 ± 35 µGal [7], whereas our formula delivers 400 µGal, where g =
981 cm s. -2
Of course, in the case of the tower experiment ( R - R ) in (10) must be replaced byE11/2
( R + R ). The coincidence of theory and experiment does not look very impressive -E11/2
which easily is explained by the tremendous uncertainties on the experimental side -,
but nevertheless, a systematic trend clearly shows up.
4) A look at (10) shows that the apparent alteration of G due to the mass of the
gravitational field should not only be dependen t on the distance R, but also on the
composition of the material of the attracted mass. The reason is that if R = constant,
then the fraction R/R, and thereby the difference (/G08R - /G08R), differs with the density /G271 1
of the material. The density /G27 is the determining parameter and it is clear that /G27 is
appproximately related to the difference in baryonic density. In other words, we
assume the mass of the field vacuum also to play a passive role as attracted mass. For
convenience we choose
constituting the density of HO as the reference value. Because stock density varies2
inversely to the volume per unit mass, relative to HO the radius R of the unit mass of2 1
all materials other than HO varies as 1//G08/G27 so that (5) attains the form: 23
As compared with the mass of the gravitational field of an unit mass HO, which we2
arbitrarily set zero, the mass of the field of the unit mass of a material other than HO2
varies as (1 - 1//G08/G27). Correspondingly, the gravitational force acting upon a test mass6
in a locally (almost) homogeneous field, particularly that of Earth, must vary
proportional to the density of the test body as:
which means: Bodies of equal mass but different density (baryonic density) experience
an apparent composition - dependen t relative gravitational acceleration,which is due
to small differences of the integrated masses of the respective gravitational fields.MVR/G0A /G0A2GM/GA2(R/G09R1)
3c.
GMVR
R2/G0A /G0A2G2M/GA2(R/G09R1)
3cR2.10
(12)Fischbach's analysis of the old Eötvös data includes among others three pairs of
sample material: HO-Cu, asbestos-Cu and Pt-Cu [8]. The experimental results for2
these pairs are very convenient for a comparison with theory. Computation of (11) and
comparison with the results of Fischbach-Eötvös in g(g) × 10 results in (experiment in9
brackets):
HO - asbestos = 6.67 (/G117±2)2
HO - Pt = 16.93 (/G1114±2),2
whereby /G27 = 2.8 and /G27 = 21.45; /G27 means density.asbestos Pt
5) The mass of the field vacuum surrounding the sun amounts in any distance R (from
the sun) acording to (5) to
Thus, the gravitational pull of the mass M in the distance R from the sun must beV
Pioneer 10 is currently 71 times as far from the sun as Earth is. According to (12) the
gravitational pull of the field vacuum of the sun in this distance R /G11 1.06216 × 10 cm15
onto the spacecraft must be GM/R = 10.51 × 10 cm s - where M = 2 × 10 g andV /GA22 -8 -2 33
R = 1.428 × 10 cm, the mean distance of Saturn from the sun -, whereas Anderson114
reported an experimentally found acceleration of /G11 8.5 × 10 cm s toward the sun [9].-8 -2
To choose the proper value of R in (12) it had to be considered that analogous to the1
case of the Milky Way astronomical measurements are grounded on the validity of the
Newton-Keplerian law within the orbit of Saturn, or with other words: in all computations
on the grounds of Einstein-Newtonian gravitation the mass of the field vacuum of the
sun (and of the planets) is at least till the orbit of Saturn included in the mass of the
sun. If R = 2.872 × 10 cm - the mean distance of Uranus - (12) yields 7.97 × 10 cm114 -8
s. Besides we have to expect that the straightforward application of (12) to the-2
gravitational field of the sun is restricted for the following reasons:
If the mean distances between the planets are listed in A. U. according to the Titius-
Bode law (which with the exception of Pluto correspond roughly to the observed
distances) the following ratios result:
Mercury - Venus: Venus- Earth = 0.3:0.3= 1 : 1,
Mercury - Earth: Earth - Mars = 0.6:0.6= 1 : 1,
Mercury - Mars: Mars- Ast = 1.2:1.2= 1 : 1,
Mercury - Ast : Ast - Jupiter= 2.4:2.4= 1 : 1,
Mercury - Jupiter : Jupiter - Saturn= 4.8:4.8= 1 : 1,
Mercury - Saturn : Saturn- Uranus = 9.6:9.6= 1 : 1,
Mercury - Uranus : Uranus- Neptune = 19.2: 19.2= 1 : 1,
Mercury - Neptune: Neptune- Pluto = 38.4:38.4= 1 : 1.rn/G08/G081/G0A /G0A2n /G092(1/G09r1)/G08 /G08r1,11
(13)Because - as shown before - the mass of each successive shell (being proportional to
the distances between the planets or the "thickness" of the shells) of the gravitational
field of the sun remains constant, the above ratios seem to indicate that in the
protoplanetary disk and later the planets positioned more or less exactly between field
shells of equal mass. This can be described as
where n = 1, 2, 3,...n and r = 1. Inserting r = 0.4 in (13) delivers again the Titius-Bode3 1
law 2 × 0.3 + 0.4. It s clear that all r > r depend on the value of r, which againn - 2
1 1
cannot be derived from (13). Obviously is the simple rule of balance of field mass
shells, developed abo ve, not straightforwardly applicable to the three innermost solar
planets. But if our hypothesis is correct, must their distances from the sun also depend
on the balance of the field masses. Hence they should tend to take positions between
three shells of equal mass at (in arbitrary units) r = 0.33, r = 0.66 and r = 1. On the1 2 3
other hand there must exist a tendency to form three shells at r = 0.5, r = 0.75 and1 2
again r = 1 to reach a balance 0.5 : 0.5. As a consequence the planets tend to take3
position between r = 0.33 and 0.5, which results in r = 0.41, and r = 0.66 respectively1 1 2
0.75, which results in r = 0.71.2
Thus, if this hypothesis is correct, it must be valid for any system, where at least three
objects (with a similiar genesis as the planets of the sun) orbit a central mass. If always
r = 1 (in the case of Saturn the mean distance of Tethys to Calypso) we find for the3
two innermost objects e. g. in the system of the sun r = 0.39 and r = 0.72, Jupiter r1 2 1
= 0.39 and r = 0.63, Saturn r = 0.49 (mean distance of Atlas to Epimetheus) and r =2 1 2
0.72 (mean distance of Mimas and Enceladus), Uranus r = 0.48 and r = 0.72, the1 2
pulsar PSR 1257 + 12 r = 0.4 and r = 0.77, and the pulsar PSR 1828 - 11 r = 0.44,1 2 1
and r = 0.63, respectively. 2References
[1] Rubin, Vera C., Scientific American 248, 96-97 (1983)
[2] Thuan, T. X. & Montmer, T., La Recherche 13, 1448 (1982)
[3] Long, D.R., Nature 260, 417 (1976)
[4] Stacey, F.D. & Tuck, G.J., Nature 292, 230-232 (1981)
[5] Holding, S.C. & Tuck, G.J., Nature 307, 714-716 (1984)
[6] Hsui, A.T., Science 237, 881-882 (1987)
[7] Eckhardt, D.H. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 2567-2570 (1988)
[8] Fischbach, E. et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 3 (1986)
[9] Anderson, J. D. et al.: Indication, from Pioneer 10/11, Galileo, and Ulysses Data,
of an Apparent Anomalous, Weak, Long-Range Acceleration, gr-qc/9808081
[10] Kunst, E. K.: Is the Kinematics of Special Relativity incomplete?, physics/9909059
[11] Kunst, E. K.: On the Origin of Time, physics/9910024
[12] Stephani, H., Allgemeine Relativitätstheorie, 2nd ed., Deutscher Verlag der
Wissenschaften, Berlin 1980, p. 253 - 256 |
arXiv:physics/9911008v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 5 Nov 1999Stationary Velocity and Charge Distributions of Grains in D usty
Plasmas
A.G. Zagorodny, P.P.J.M. Schram∗, S.A. Trigger∗∗,
Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics, National Ac ademy of Sciences of Ukraine
14 B, Metrolohichna Str., Kiev 252143, Ukraine
∗Eindhoven University of Technology
P.O. Box 513, MB 5600 Eindhoven, The Netherlands
∗∗Institute for High Temperatures, Russian Academy of Scienc es
13/19, Izhorskaya Str., Moscow 127412, Russia
Within the kinetic approach velocity and charge distributi ons of grains in stationary dusty plasmas
are calculated and the relations between the effective tempe ratures of such distributions and plasma
parameters are established. It is found that the effective te mperature which determines the velocity
grain distribution could be anomalously large due to the act ion of accelerating ionic bombarding force.
The possibility to apply the results obtained to the explana tion of the increasing grain temperature
in the course of the Coulomb-crystal melting by reduction of the gas pressure is discussed.
This paper was received by Phys.Rev.Lett. on 11 August 1999. As potential referees the authors of-
fered to Editor the following persons: V.N.Tsytovich, Russ ia; R.Bingham, UK; D.Resendes, Portugal;
G.Morfill, P.Shukla, Y.M.Yu., Germany.
Recently much attention has been payed to theoretical studi es of various problems of dusty
plasma physics associated with grain dynamics and grain cha rging (formation and melting of
dusty crystals, influence of charging on effective grain inte raction, dust-acoustic wave excitation,
effect of grain charging on fluctuations and electromagnetic wave scattering in dusty plasmas,
etc.). In such studies it is convenient to treat the grain cha rge as a new variable (as was done
for the first time in Ref. [1]). This makes it possible to stati stically describe the grain charge
distribution on equal footing with the spatial and velocity grain distributions. Obviously, it
is very important to know what are the stationary (quasiequi librium) grain distributions and
what is the relation of these distributions to plasma parame ters. In spite of the fact that
statistical descriptions of dusty plasmas have been alread y used in many papers, as far as
the authors of this letter know neither grain charge, nor vel ocity distributions for grains were
studied within a consistent kinetic approach. Usually, the problem is avoided by neglecting
the thermal dispersion of grain velocity and charge. In many cases this is a rather reasonable
approximation, but it could not be valid when the properties of the grain subsystem and its
dynamics are concerned.
The purpose of the present paper is to describe stationary ve locity and charge distributions
of grains in dusty plasmas in the case of grain charging by pla sma currents and to determine
the dependences of effective temperatures on plasma paramet ers. We study dusty plasma
consisting of electrons, ions, neutral molecules and monod ispersed dust particles (grains) as-
suming that every grain absorbs all encountered electrons a nd ions. Such collisions we define
as charging collisions . Collisions in which plasma particles do not touch the grain surface we
call Coulomb elastic collisions . Notice that the cross-sections of charging collisions are also
determined by the Coulomb forces along with the geometrical size of grains.
Using the microscopic equations for dusty plasmas and the re levant BBGKY-hierarchy [2]
it is possible to show that in the case of dominant influence of charging collisions the kinetic
equation for the grain distribution function fg(X, t)≡fg(r,v, q, t) (qis the charge of the grain)
1can be written as
/braceleftBigg∂
∂t+v·∂
∂r+q
mgE·∂
∂v/bracerightBigg
fg(X, t) =−/summationdisplay
σ=e,i/integraldisplay
dv′[σgσ(q,v−v′)|v−v′|fg(X, t)
−σgσ(q−eσ,v−v′−δvσ)|v−v′−δvσ|fg(r,v−δvσ, q−eσ, t)]fσ(r,v′, t), (1)
where σgσ(q,v) is the cross-section for charging:
σg,σ(q,v) =πa2/parenleftbigg
1−2eσq
mσv2a/parenrightbigg
θ/parenleftbigg
1−2eσq
mσv2a/parenrightbigg
, (2)
θ(x) is the Heaviside step function, ais the grain radius, fσ(r,v, t) is the plasma particle
distribution function normalized by the particle density nσ,δvσ≡(mσ/mg)v′is the grain
velocity change due to the collision with a plasma particle, subscript σlabels plasma particle
species, the rest of the notations is traditional. Eq. (1) co uld be introduced also on the basis of
physical arguments as was done in Refs. [3,4]. In fact, the ri ght-hand part of Eq. (1) describes
the balance between the grains outcoming from the phase volu me element and those incoming
to the same element due to charging collisions.
Taking into account the smallness of eσandδvσit is possible to expand the right-hand part
of Eq. (1) into a power series of these quantities. With the ac curacy up to the second order
Eq. (1) in the stationary isotropic and homogeneous case is r educed to
∂
∂v/bracketleftBigg∂
∂v/parenleftBig
D/bardblfg(v, q)/parenrightBig
+βvfg(v, q) +∂
∂q(qγvfg(v, q))/bracketrightBigg
+∂
∂q/bracketleftBigg∂
∂q(Qf(v, q))−Ifg(v, q)/bracketrightBigg
= 0, (3)
where D/bardbl,β,Q,γandIare the Fokker-Planck kinetic coefficients generated by char ging
collisions and given by
D/bardbl≡/summationdisplay
σ1
2/parenleftBiggmσ
mg/parenrightBigg2/integraldisplay
dv′(v·v′)2
v2|v−v′|σgσ(q,v−v′)fσ(r,v′)
β≡β(q, v) =−/summationdisplay
σmσ
mg/integraldisplay
dv′v·v′
v2|v−v′|σgσ(q,v−v′)fσ(rv′)
γ≡γ(q, v) =/summationdisplay
σmσ
mgeσ
q/integraldisplay
dv′v·v′
v2|v−v′|σgσ(q,v−v′)fσ(r,v′)
Q≡Q(q, v) =/summationdisplay
σe2
σ
2/integraldisplay
dv′|v−v′|σgσ(q,v−v′)fσ(r,v′)
I≡I(q, v) =/summationdisplay
σeσ/integraldisplay
dv′|v−v′|σgσ(q,v−v′)fσ(r,v′). (4)
The quantities D/bardbl(q, v) and Q(q,v) characterize the grain diffusion in the velocity and charge
space, respectively, β(q,v) and γ(q,v) are the friction coefficients which determine the bom-
bardment force Fb(q,v) =−mgβ(q,v)vassociated with charging collisions and the correction
to this force δFb(q,v) =−mgγ(q,v)vdue to the mutual influence of the charge and velocity
grain distributions, Iis the grain charging current. Deriving the relation for β(q,v) we omit
the terms of higher order in ( mσ/mg) associated with the tensor nature of the diffusion coef-
ficient in velocity space (contribution of the transverse di ffusion coefficient). With regard for
2the fact that |I(q, v)/Q(q,v)| → ∞ ateσ→0 and|β(q,v)/D/bardbl(q,v)| → ∞ at (mσ/mg)→0, it
is possible to show that the asymptotical solution of Eq. (3) can be written as
fg(v, q) =n0gZ−1Q−1(q,v)e−W(q,v)+λv2D−1
/bardbl(q,v)e−V(q,v)+εδq(v), (5)
where
W(q, v) =−q/integraldisplay
0dq/I(q′, v)
Q(q′, v)
V(q, v) =v/integraldisplay
0dv′v′
D/bardbl(q, v′)/braceleftBigg
β(q, v′) +∂
∂q(qγ(q, v′))−qγ(q, v′)/bracketleftBigg∂W(q, v′)
∂q+
+Q−1(q, v′)∂Q(q, v′)
∂q/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
δq(v) =q−q(v), (6)
q(v) is the stationary charge of the grain moving with the veloci tyv, given by the equation
I(q(v), v) = 0, (7)
Zis a normalization constant, εandλare small functions. Substitution of Eq. (5) into Eq. (4)
leads to
ε=1
D/bardbl(q, v)∂D /bardbl(q, v)
∂q+∂V(q, v)
∂q
λ=1
2v/braceleftBigg1
Q(q, v)∂Q(q, v)
∂v+∂W(q, v)
∂v+ε∂q(v)
∂v/bracerightBigg
. (8)
Eqs. (5)–(8) give the asymptotically exact solution of Eq. ( 3) at ( mgeσ/mσq)→ ∞. Further
estimates require the explicit form of the kinetic coefficien ts. Assuming that plasma parti-
cle distributions are Maxwellian, one obtains the followin g stationary grain distribution with
accuracy up to the zeroth order in ( qmi/eemg):
fg(v, q) =n0gZ−1D−1
/bardbl(q, v)e−mgv2
2Teff(q)Q−1(q, v)e−(q−q0)2
2a/tildewideTeff, (9)
where
Teff(q) =2Ti(t+z)
t−z+(q−q0)
q0z[1 +t−z
t+z(1 +2Zi
1+Zi(1 +t+z))](10)
/tildewideTeff=2
1 +Zi1 +t+z
t+zTe, (11)
and
D/bardbl(q, v)≃D0/bracketleftBigg
1 +q−q0
q0z
t+z/bracketrightBigg/parenleftbigg
1 +z
t/parenrightbigg
Q(q, v) =Q0/bracketleftBigg
1−q−q0
q0z(t+z−Zi)
(t+z)(1 +Zi)/bracketrightBigg
(t+z)(1 +Zi)
D0=4
3√
2π/parenleftBiggmi
mg/parenrightBigg/parenleftBiggTi
mg/parenrightBigg
a2niSi
Q0=√
2π/parenleftbiggTe
Ti/parenrightbigg
e2
ia2niSi, (12)
3n0gis the averaged number density of grains. Here, we use the not ation
z=e2
eZg
aTe, t=Ti
ZiTe, S2
i=Ti
mi, Z g=q0
ee, Z i=|ei
ee|.
The quantity q0is the equilibrium grain charge of stationary particles sat isfying the equation
I(q0,0) = 2√
2πa2e2
iniSi
1 +z
t−/parenleftbiggmi
me/parenrightbigg1/2/parenleftBiggTe!
Ti/parenrightBigg1/2ne
Zinie−z
= 0. (13)
For typical values of plasma parameters in dusty plasma expe riments ( t+z >1) and Zi= 1
we have:
/tildewideTeff≃Te.
In such case the thermal variation of the grain charge |q−q0|2is of the order of aTeand
|q−q0|z∼q0/radicalBig
e2e/aTe. This means that at weak plasma coupling defined with the grai n size
(e2
e/aTe≪1) the effective temperature of the grain thermal motion Teff(q)≡Teffreduces to
Teff≃2Tit+z
t−z(14)
and
D(q,v)≃D0/parenleftbigg
1 +z
t/parenrightbigg
, Q (q, v)≃Q0(t+z)(1 +Zi).
Thus, in such case
fg(v, q) =n0g/radicalBig
2πa/tildewideTeffe−(q−q0)2
2a/tildewideTeff/parenleftbiggmg
2πTeff/parenrightbigg3/2
e−mgv2
2Teff. (15)
This distribution describes the equilibrium Maxwellian ve locity distribution and the Gibbs
grain charge distribution with the temperatures Teffand/tildewideTeffrespectively. In fact, the electric
energy of charge variations of the electric capacity ais equal to ( q−q0)2/2aand thus, the
charge distribution described by Eq. (15) can be interprete d as an equilibrium distribution with
effective temperature/tildewideTeff. Att <1,z <1 the effective/tildewideTeffexceeds the electron temperature.
The resulting velocity distribution is described by the effe ctive temperature Teff. Even in the
case of neutral grains ( z= 0) this temperature is equal to 2 Ti. The presence of the factor 2 is
associated with plasma particle absorption by grains.
Charging collisions are inelastic and a part of the kinetic e nergy of the ions is transformed
into additional kinetic energy of the grains. This is the diff erence between the case under
consideration and conventional Brownian motion where the v elocity distribution is described by
the temperature of the bombarding light particles. Eq. (14) shows that the effective temperature
of thermal grain motion could be anomalously high at z→t. Physically it can be explained
by the decrease of the friction coefficient with increase of gr ain charge
β(q, v)≃2
3√
2π/parenleftBiggmσ
mg/parenrightBigg
a2niSi/parenleftbigg
1−z
t/parenrightbigg
=β0/parenleftbigg
1−z
t/parenrightbigg
The reason is that the difference between the fluxes of ions bom barding the grain surface
antiparallel to the grain motion and parallel decreases wit h the charge increase due to the
4specific properties of the ionic charging cross-section, wh ich charge-dependent part is larger for
ions moving with smaller relative velocities (i.e. in paral lel direction). The condition z=t
corresponds to the zero value of the friction force.
Eq. (3) and its solutions (5), (9), (15) were obtained under t he assumption that the Coulomb
elastic collisions could be neglected. In order to take elas tic collisions into consideration Eqs. (1),
(3) should be supplemented by the appropriate collision ter ms, for example, by the Landau, or
Balescu-Lenard collision integrals. We use the Balescu-Le nard collision integral in the Fokker-
Planck form which in the case under consideration (isotropi c spatially homogeneous stationary
distribution) can be written as
/parenleftBigg∂fg
∂t/parenrightBiggC
=∂
∂v·/bracketleftBigg∂
∂v(D/bardblC(q,v)fg(v, q)) +vβC(q,v)fg(q, v)/bracketrightBigg
, (16)
where D/bardblC(q,v) and βC(q,v) are the Fokker-Planck coefficients related to Coulomb elast ic
collisions (see, for example, [5], Chapter 8). With the accu racy up to the dominant logarithmic
terms (in this approximation Eq. (16) is reduced to the Landa u collision term) such coefficients
can be reduced to
D/bardblC(q,v)≃4
3√
2πq2
m2g/summationdisplay
σ=e,inσe2
σ
Sσln Λ σ/parenleftBigg
1−v2
5S2σ/parenrightBigg
βC(q,v)≃4
3√
2πq2
mg/summationdisplay
!σ=e,inσe2
σ
S3σmσln Λ σ/parenleftBigg
1−v2
5S2σ/parenrightBigg
, S σ=/parenleftbiggTσ
mσ/parenrightbigg1/2
. (17)
In Eqs. (16), (17) we again neglect the contribution of the tr ansverse part of the diffusion coeffi-
cient which gives a correction to βC(q, v) of higher order in ( mσ/mg) and we disregard the grain-
grain Coulomb collisions, assuming the grain density to be s mall (ng< ni(Zi/Zg)2(Sg/Si)1/2(Tg/Ti)).
We introduced also the Coulomb logarithms ln Λ σfor each particle species. Usually these quan-
tities are estimated as ln Λ σ= ln(kmax/kD), where kD=r−1
D= (/summationtext(4πe2
σnσ/Tσ)1/2andkmaxis
the inverse distance of closest approach between colliding particles,
kmaxσ∼mσv2
|ǫσq|∼3Tσ
|ǫσq|=r−1
Lσ (18)
(rLσis Landau length). However, in the case of plasma particle co llisions with finite-size
grains this estimate could be invalid, since at rLσ< athe Coulomb logarithm will include the
contribution of collisions with particles reaching the gra in surface, i.e. charging collisions.
An approximate modification of Λ σis achieved by treating ln Λ σas a logarithmic factor
appearing in the momentum transfer cross-section for Coulo mb collisions. In the case of finite
size grains one obtains the following logarithmic factor
ln Λ σ= ln/parenleftbigg
sinχmaxσ
2/sinχminσ
2/parenrightbigg
,
where χmaxσandχminσare the scattering angles related to the minimal and maximal impact
parameters bminσandbmaxσby the Rutherford formula. Obviously, bminσshould be determined
from the condition that the distance of closest approach is e qual to aimplying
bminσ=a/radicalBigg
1−2eσq
mσv2aθ(1−2eσq
mσv2a). (19)
5Concerning the quantity bmaxσ, it is reasonable to put bmaxσ=rD+ainstead of bmaxσ=rD,
since in the case of a finite size grain its screened potential is given by the DLVO-potential
Φ(r) =q
r(1 +a
rD)−1e−(r−a)/rD,
rather than the Debye potential.
As a result we have
ln Λ i=1
2ln(rD+a)2+r2
Li
(rLi+a)2
ln Λ e=1
2
ln(rD+a)2+r2
Le
(a−rLe)2a >2rLe
ln(rD+a)2+r2
Le
r2
Lea <2rLe(20)
As is seen, at rLi≫rDthe ionic Coulomb logarithm can be a small quantity in contra st to the
case of ideal plasmas.
Comparing Eqs. (3) and (16) it is easy to see that in order to ta ke elastic Coulomb collisions
into account it is sufficient to make the following replacemen ts in the obtained solutions
D/bardbl(q, v)→/tildewiderD/bardbl(q, v) =D/bardbl(q, v) +D/bardblC(q, v)
β(q, v)→/tildewideβ(q, v) =β(q, v) +βC(q, v). (21)
In the case of weak plasma coupling ( e2
e/aTe≪1)
/tildewiderD/bardbl(q, v)≃D0/parenleftBigg
1 +z
t+z2
t2ln Λ i/parenrightBigg
/tildewideβ(q, v)≃β0/parenleftBigg
1−z
t+ 2z2
t2ln Λ i/parenrightBigg
, (22)
Thus, the correction produced by the elastic collisions cou ld be of the same order as that due
to charging collisions. The condition for dominant influenc e of charging collisions is
/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle1−z
t/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle>2z2
t2ln Λ i,
which can be realized at small values of z/t, or at z|t≫r2
D/a2(rLi≫r2
D/a).
Rigorously speaking Eq. (16) and thus Eq. (22) are definitely valid in the case of weak
coupling plasmas ( rLi≪rD) since this is the condition of the derivation of the Balescu -Lenard
(or, Landau) collision term. However, it is possible to expe ct that actually the domain of
validity of Eqs. (16), (22) is not too strongly restricted by such condition. This assumption is
in agreement with the direct calculations of the friction co efficient (Coulomb collision frequency)
in terms of the binary collision cross-sections. Beside tha t, as it was shown in Ref. [6], in the
case of strong grain-plasma coupling the influence of the Cou lomb collision is also small and the
kinetic equation is reduced again to Vlasov equation. This m eans that fluctuation evolution
equations, which solutions determine the explicit form of t he Balescu-Lenard collision term, are
the same as in the case of weakly coupled plasmas and thus Eq. ( 16) continues to be valid.
6The new kinetic coefficients give the following effective temp erature for thermal grain motion
Teff=Ti2/parenleftBig
1 +z
t+z2
t2ln Λ i/parenrightBig
1−z
t+ 2z2
t2ln Λ i, (23)
i.e. elastic collisions can produce a saturation of the grai n temperature. However, in the case
of dominant influence of charging collision Teffcan be still anomalously large. This fact can be
used for a qualitative explanation of the experimentally ob served grain temperatures which are
usually much higher than the ion temperature, Tg≫Ti(see, for example [7,8], Ti∼0.1 eV,
Tg∼4÷40 eV). Finally, we point out that the obtained results can be modified also for the case
of a plasma with a neutral component. It is possible to introd uce an additional collision term
along with the term (16). Since the collision integral descr ibing elastic collisions of neutrals
with grains also can be represented in the Fokker-Planck for m (it follows from the Boltzmann
collision integral) the presence of neutrals results in new additions to/tildewiderD/bardbland/tildewideβ, namely
/tildewiderD/bardbl(q, v) =D0/parenleftBigg
1 +z
t+z2
t2lnΛi+nn
ni/parenleftbiggmn
mi/parenrightbigg1/2/parenleftbiggTn
Ti/parenrightbigg3/2/parenrightBigg
/tildewideβ(q, v) =β0/parenleftBigg
1−z
t+ 2z2
t2ln Λ i+ 2nn
ni/parenleftbiggmn
mi/parenrightbigg1/2/parenleftbiggTn
Ti/parenrightbigg1/2/parenrightBigg
. (24)
As a result the effective temperature is modified into
Teff= 2Ti/parenleftbigg
1 +z
t+z2
t2ln Λ i+nn
ni/parenleftBig
mn
mi/parenrightBig1/2/parenleftBig
Tn
Ti/parenrightBig3/2/parenrightbigg
/parenleftbigg
1−z
t+ 2z2
t2ln Λ i+ 2nn
ni/parenleftBig
mn
mi/parenrightBig1/2/parenleftBig
Tn
Ti/parenrightBig1/2/parenrightbigg. (25)
According to Eq. (25) the effective temperature increases wi th decreasing neutral density. The
influence of neutral density changes on the effective tempera ture would be especially important
at 1−z
t+ 2z2
t2ln Λ i<∼0. In such a case a decrease of the neutral gas pressure can pro duce an
anomalous growth of Teff. That is in qualitative agreement with the experimental obs ervation
of melting of dusty crystals by reduction of the gas pressure [7,8].
The obtained results show that stationary velocity and char ge grain distributions are de-
scribed by effective temperatures different from those of the plasma subsystem. These effective
temperatures are determined by the competitive mechanics o f collisions: grain-neutral colli-
sions and elastic Coulomb collisions result in the equaliza tion of the effective temperature to
the temperature of neutrals, or ions, respectively, while c harging collisions can produce anoma-
lous temperature growth. That could be one of the main mechan isms of grain heating.
This work was partially supported by the Netherlands Organi zation of Scientific Research
(NWO) and by the INTAS (grant 9600617). One of the authors (A. Z.) acknowledges support
by NWO for his visit to Eindhoven University of Technology.
[1] V.N. Tsytovich, O. Havnes, Comments Plasma Phys. Contro l. Fusion 15, 267 (1995).
[2] A.G. Zagorodny, P.P.J.M. Schram. S.A. Trigger, to be pub lished.
[3] A.M. Ignatov, J. Physique IV, C4, 215 (1997).
[4] S.A. Trigger, P.P.J.M. Schram, J. Phys. D.: Appl. Phys. 32, 234 (1999).
[5] S. Ichimaru, Statistical Plasma Physics, Addison-Wesl ey, (1992).
7[6] X. Wang, A. Bhattacharjee, Phys. Plasmas 3, 1189 (1996).
[7] A. Melzer, A. Homan, A. Piel, Phys. Rev. E 53, 3137 (1996).
[8] G.E. Morfil, H.M. Thomas, U. Konopka, M. Zuzic, Phys. Plas mas5, 1 (1999).
8 |
arXiv:physics/9911009v1 [physics.acc-ph] 6 Nov 1999Expression of Interest for R&D towards
A Neutrino Factory Based on a Storage Ring
and
a Muon Collider
Submitted to the National Science Foundation by
The Neutrino Factory and Muon Collider Collaboration
Edited by K.T. McDonald for the Collaboration
(November 7, 1999)
Proton Driver
Target
Phase Rotate #1 (≈50 m rf)
Mini Cooling (≈3 m H 2)
Drift (≈150 m)
Phase Rotate #2 (≈10 m rf)
Cooling (≈100 m)
Linac (2 GeV)
Recirc. Linac #1 (2-8 GeV)
Recirc. Linac #2 (8-50 GeV)
Storage Ring (50 GeV, ≈1 km circ.)
Neutrino Beam
Collaboration Home Page: http://www.cap.bnl.gov/mumu/
This document resides at http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mu mu/NSFLetter/nsfmain.psExecutive Summary
Recent evidence from atmospheric, solar, and accelerator n eutrinos sug-
gests that neutrinos have mass, and mix among the flavors νe,νµandντ.
Neutrino mass is evidence for physics beyond the Standard Mo del, and has
cosmological implications.
Because neutrinos interact so weakly, unusual efforts are re quired to de-
tect them. Although many of the recent, exciting results in n eutrino physics
have been obtained by non-accelerator techniques, the neut rino mass and
mixing parameters appear to be such that a new generation of a ccelerator
experiments with long baseline distance to the detectors ca n perform de-
tailed measurements. For this, a new source of well-charact erized neutrinos
is needed.
We are exploring the feasibility of a neutrino factory based on a muon
storage ring. In this, beams of νµandνearise from the decay of µ−particles
(or alternatively, νµandνefromµ+). The muons come from the decay
of low-energy pions produced by a megawatt proton beam incid ent on a
nuclear target. The muons are captured into a magnetic chann el, “cooled”
by ionization in liquid hydrogen, accelerated to energy of o rder 50 GeV, and
injected into a storage ring. A nonhorizontal ring can deliv er neutrino beams
to an on-site detector, as well as to two off-site detectors se parated by global
distances.
Such a neutrino factory is a challenging extension of presen t accelerator
technology. It is also a natural path to a muon collider, in th at both facilities
share many common elements upstream of their storage rings. Prior to a
formal design study, R&D must be performed in several keys ar eas, such
detailed simulations and actual targetry and cooling exper iments. This in
an excellent opportunity to advance the field of accelerator physics both at
national laboratories and at universities.The Neutrino Factory and Muon Collider Collaboration
D. Ayres,1M. Goodman,1A. Hassanein, T. Joffe-Minor,1D. Krakauer,1J.H. Norem,
C.B. Reed, P. Schoessow,1D. Smith, R. Talaga,1J. Thron,1L.C. Teng, C. Wagner,1
C.-X. Wang,1ANL
S. Berg, E.B. Blum,1M. Blaskiewicz,1R.C. Fernow, W. Fischer,1J.C. Gallardo,
W.S. Graves,1R. Hackenburg,1H. Huang,1S.A. Kahn, J. Keane,1B.J. King, H.G. Kirk,
D. Lissauer, L.S. Littenberg, V. Lodestro, D. Lowenstein,1W. Morse, R.B. Palmer,2
Z. Parsa, F. Pilat,1P. Pile,1S. Protopopescu,1P. Rehak, J. Rose, T. Roser, A. Ruggiero,1
N.P. Samios, Y. Semertzidis,1I. Stumer, M.J. Tannenbaum,1V. Tcherniatine, D. Trbojevic,
H. Wang, R. Weggel, J. Wei,1W.-T. Weng, E.H. Willen, S.Y. Zhang,1Y. Zhao, BNL
G.I. Silvestrov, A.N. Skrinsky, T.A. Vsevolozhskaya, Budker Inst. Nuclear Physics
E.-S. Kim, G. Penn, J. Wurtele, UC Berkeley
J.F. Gunion, UC Davis
D.B. Cline, Y. Fukui, A.A. Garren, K. Lee, Y. Pischalnikov, UCLA
K. Gounder,1UC Riverside
K.-J. Kim, R. Winston,1U. Chicago
A. Caldwell, J. Conrad, M. Shaevitz, F. Sciulli, W.J. Willis ,Columbia U.
M. Tigner, Cornell U.
A. Badertscher,1A. Bueno,1M. Campanelli,1C. Carpanese,1J. Rico,1A. Rubbia,1
N. Sinanis,1ETH Zurich
D.R. Winn, Fairfield U.
C.M. Ankenbrandt, M. Atac, V.I. Balbekov, R. Bernstein,1D. Boehnlein,1
E. Buckley-Geer, M. Carena,1W. Chou, F. deJongh, H.T. Diehl, A. Drozhdin, D.A. Finley,
S.H. Geer, D.A. Harris,1N. Holtkamp, C. Johnstone, P. Lebrun, J.D. Lykken, F.E. Mill s,
N.V. Mokhov, J. Monroe, A. Moretti, D.V. Neuffer, K.-Y. Ng, R. J. Noble, M. Popovic,
Z. Qian, R. Raja, A. Sery, P. Spentzouris, R. Stefanski, S. St riganov, A.V. Tollestrup,3
A. Van Ginneken, S. Vejic, W. Wan, R.M. Yamamoto, J. Yu,1Fermilab
M.S. Berger, G.G. Hanson, P. Schwandt, Indiana U.
E.L. Black, D.M. Kaplan, IIT
Y. Onel, U. Iowa
S.A. Bogacz, Q.-S. Shu, Jefferson Lab
T. Bolton, Kansas State U.
R. Rossmanith, Research Center Karlsruhe
Y. Kuno, Y. Mori, T. Yokoi, KEK
S. Caspi, S. Chattopadhyay,1J. Corlett, M.A. Furman, M.A. Green, R. Gupta, C.H. Kim,
D. Li, A.D. McInturff, R.M. Scanlan, A.M. Sessler,4W.C. Turner, M. Zisman,
M.S. Zolorotorev, LBL
I.F. Ginzburg, Inst. of Math., Novosibirsk
M. Berz, R. York, A. Zeller, Michigan State U.
J.K. Nelson,1E. Peterson,1U. Minnesota
1Adjunct Member
2Spokesperson
3Associate Spokesperson
4Associate and Acting SpokespersonL. Cremaldi, D. Summers, U. Mississippi
J.H. Miller, S. Prestemon, J. Van Sciver, Nat. High Magnetic Field Laboratory
G. Blazey, M.A. Cummings, D. Hedin, Northern Illinois U.
C.K. Jung,1R. Shrock,1Y. Torun, SUNY Stony Brook
H. Schellman, Northwestern U.
T. Gabriel, J. Haines, R. Taleyarkhan, ORNL
J. Cobb,1Oxford U.
A. Bazarko,1C. Lu, K.T. McDonald, P.D. Meyers,1E.J. Prebys, Princeton U.
R. Bennett,1R. Edgecock,1D. Petyt,1RAL
A. Bodek,1K.S. McFarland,1U. Rochester
G. Apollinari,1E.J.N. Wilson, Rockefeller U.
O. Benary, Tel-Aviv U.
W.R. Leeson,1A. Mahmood,1U. Texas Pan American
T. Patzak,1Tufts U.
R.V. Kowalewski,1U. Victoria
V.D. Barger, T. Han, U. Wisconsin
Industrial Partners:
R. Meinke, M.W. Senti, Advanced Magnetic Laboratory
D. Howard, LDH Business Systems
R. True, Litton Systems, Electron Devices Division
J.-P. Ichac, J. McVea, Thomson Tubes Electroniques
W. Wang, Wang MagneticsContents
1 Introduction 1
2 Neutrino Oscillations 2
2.1 Interpretations of the Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2 The Next Generation of Neutrino Experiments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3 The Opportunity for a Neutrino Factory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3.1 Measurements of Masses and Mixing Angles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.2 Measurement of CP Violation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.3 Detector Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Precision High-Rate Neutrino Physics 10
4 A Neutrino Factory 10
4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2 Proton Driver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2
4.3 Target and Capture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.4 Phase Rotation #1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 4
4.5 Mini Cooling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.6 Phase Rotation #2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 5
4.7 Cooling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.8 Acceleration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4.9 Storage Ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4.10 A First Look at Event Rates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
5 Muon Colliders 24
6 Research and Development 28
6.1 Historical Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
6.2 R&D Needs for a Neutrino Factory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
6.3 The Potential of Muon-Beam-Based Particle Physics and t he NSF-Supported
Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
6.4 European R&D Activities on Muon Storage Rings and Neutri no Factories . . 34
7 Acknowledgements 35
8 References 36
iList of Figures
1 Sensitivity reach in the (sin2θ13,∆m2
23) plane. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 CP violation signal over statistical uncertainties versu s distance. . . . . . . 8
3 Overview of a neutrino factory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4 Targetry, pion capture, and beginning of phase rotation. . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5 The muon bunch at the end of the first phase rotation. . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6 The muon bunch after mini cooling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7 The muon bunch before and after the induction linac. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
8 The muon polarization after the induction linac. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9 The muon polarization vs.proton bunch length. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
10 A cell of the cooling stage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
11 Cooling performance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
12 Global view of neutrino beam options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
13 Storage ring geometries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
14 Various proposed high energy colliders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
15 Plan of a 0.1-TeV-CoM muon collider. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
16 Plan of a 3-TeV-CoM muon collider. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
17 Precision physics at a First Muon Collider. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
List of Tables
1 Numbers of surviving muons. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2 Neutrino interaction rates at a neutrino factory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3 Comparison of neutrino interaction rates with Minos and NG S. . . . . . . . 24
ii1 Introduction
There is accumulating evidence for massive neutrinos that m ix among flavors. The strongest
indication is the atmospheric neutrino anomaly first observ ed by the Kamiokande [1] and
IMB [2] detectors, confirmed by the Soudan-2 [3] and MACRO [4] detectors, and recently
measured with high statistics by the Super-Kamiokande dete ctor [5]. In addition, the long-
standing deficiency of the solar neutrino flux measured by the Homestake chlorine experiment
[6] is now supported by data from the Kamiokande [7], Super-K amiokande [8], GALLEX [9],
and SAGE [10] detectors. These data suggest neutrino masses in the range <∼0.1 eV for the
mass eigenstates νi,i= 1,2,3 whose linear combinations comprise the neutrinos νe,νµ, and
ντ. Such neutrinos would not be a significant part of the dark mat ter of the universe,
The LSND experiment at Los Alamos has reported evidence of νµ−νeoscillations [11],
although so far this has not been confirmed by a similar experi ment, KARMEN, at Ruther-
ford [12]. If confirmed, this results appears to require the e xistence of one or more light,
sterile neutrinos which could be an important component of h ot, dark matter.
The issue of neutrino mass has spawned a new “industry” [13], resulting in about three
new preprints per day [14], among other activities. Excitem ent is high in the accelerator
physics community because the physics implied by the atmosp heric-neutrino results is ac-
cessible to long-baseline accelerator experiments such as K2K [15], Minos [16] and NGS [17].
Of course, the LSND experiment was conducted at a short-base line accelerator facility, and
can be confirmed by future accelerator experiments such as Mi niBooNE [18], ORLanD [19],
and CERN P311 [20]. Moreover, even the physics associated wi th many of the interpreta-
tions of the solar-neutrino deficit is accessible to study in accelerator-based experiments if
neutrino-beam fluxes can be improved by 1-2 orders of magnitu de.
To obtain a factor of 100 improvement in neutrino flux in a cost -effect manner, a new
approach is called for. The best prospect appears to be neutr ino beams derived from a muon
storage ring, rather than from pion and kaon decay, although the concept of muon-based
neutrino beams needs considerable development before it ca n be realized in the laboratory.
Muon storage rings have been discussed since at least 1960 [2 1], and their possible ap-
plication to neutrino physics was considered as early as 198 0 [22]. However, storage rings
with enough circulating muons to provide more high-energy n eutrinos than from horn beams
have been only recently been considered in the context of muo n colliders [23]. Enthusiasm
for muon-based neutrino beams has been fostered by a series o f workshops and studies at
Fermilab [24], BNL [25], and CERN [26], resulting in a conver gence of international interest
at the NuFact’99 Workshop [27, 28].
The neutrino fluxes from these proposed muon-based beams are higher than ever achieved
before, with a better-understood flavor composition, and, s ince the neutrino beams from this
source would be secondary beams rather than tertiary beams, they are more collimated than
ever previously imaginable. Distances between production and detection can now span the
globe, and using the known flavor composition of the beam, one can map out a plan to
measure the neutrino oscillation mixing matrix including C P violating effects, much like
that now underway to study the CKM quark mixing matrix.
We present a brief review of the physics of neutrino oscillat ions in sec. 2, also including
detector issues most critical for neutrino oscillation mea surements. As an example of how
diverse a neutrino program at a storage ring could be, highli ghts of possible nucleon structure
1and other near-detector measurements are given in sec. 3. Th e machine itself is discussed
in sec. 4, and its possible extension to a muon collider is con sidered in sec. 5. The active
theme of this document, research and development towards th e design of a neutrino factory,
is discussed in sec. 6.
2 Neutrino Oscillations
2.1 Interpretations of the Data
The concept of neutrino oscillation was introduced in 1957 [ 29] and has been extensively
discussed in the literature [30] and now on the internet [31] . In the example of only two
massive neutrinos, with mass eigenstates ν1andν2with mass difference ∆ mand mixing
angle θ, the flavor eigenstates are
νa
νb
=
cosθsinθ
−sinθcosθ
ν1
ν2
. (1)
The probability that a neutrino of flavor νaand energy Eappears as flavor νbafter traversing
distance Lin vacuum is
P(νa→νb) = sin22θsin2/parenleftigg1.27∆m2[eV2]L[km]
E[GeV]/parenrightigg
. (2)
As the atmospheric neutrino data involves GeV muon neutrino s with distance scales of
the Earth’s diameter, this suggests ∆ m2of order 10−3(eV)2for sin22θ≈1 [32]. The solar
neutrino data involves MeV electron neutrinos and distance scales of the radius of the Earth’s
orbit, suggesting ∆ m2of order 10−10(eV)2with sin22θ≈1 for vacuum oscillations [33]. The
LSND result involves 30-MeV muon antineutrino and a distanc e scale of 30 m, suggesting
∆m2of order 1 (eV)2; large mixing angles are excluded by reactor data [34], so si n22θcan
only be of order 10−2in this case.
Clearly, four different massive neutrinos are required to ac commodate all three results,
given their disparate scales of ∆ m2. The Standard Model presently includes only three
neutrinos with standard electroweak couplings and mν< m Z/2, so a “sterile” neutrino is
required if all the data are correct [35]. Even discarding th e LSND result, three massive
neutrinos are required with a corresponding 3 ×3 mixing matrix (MNS matrix) [36], one of
whose representations is, where c 12= cos θ12,etc.,
νe
νµ
ντ
=
c12c13 s12c13 s13e−iδ
−s12c23−c12s13s23eiδc12c23−s12s13s23eiδc13s23
s12s23−c12s13c23eiδ−c12s23−s12s13c23eiδc13c23
ν1
ν2
ν3
.(3)
In the model of three massive neutrinos, the neutrino oscill ation probabilities of interest
depend on six measurable parameters: three mixing angles ( θ12,θ13,θ23), and a phase δre-
lated to CP violation as indicated in eq. (3); and two differen ces of the squares of the neutrino
2masses (∆ m2
12and ∆ m2
23for instance). The interpretation of the solar and atmosphe ric neu-
trino data in terms of the three-neutrino oscillation hypot hesis suggests |∆m2
12| ≪ |∆m2
23|,
with ∆ m2
12and ∆ m2
23being responsible for the transitions and/or oscillations of the solar
and atmospheric neutrinos, respectively. Then, |∆m2
13| ≈ |∆m2
23|.
The description of the atmospheric neutrino data requires ∆ m2
23≈(2−6)×10−3eV2
and large mixing angle θ23: sin22θ23≈(0.9−1.0). For |∆m2
12| ≪ |∆m2
23|and with ∆ m2
23
having a value in the above range, the nonobservation of osci llations of the reactor electron
antineutrinos in the CHOOZ experiment [38] implies a limit o n the angle θ13: sin2θ13<
0.05. Given these constraints, the transitions/oscillation s of the solar neutrinos in the three-
neutrino mixing scheme under discussion depend largely on j ust two parameters: ∆ m2
12and
sin22θ12.
The presence of matter can strongly modify the oscillations of electron neutrinos due to
their charged-current interaction (MSW effect [37]): in par ticular, the oscillations can be
resonantly enhanced by the matter effects even when the oscil lation probabilities are small
in vacuum. This leads to additional interpretations of the s olar neutrino data in which ∆ m2
12
can be of order 10−5(eV)2[39]. Indeed, there are four presently viable interpretati ons of the
solar neutrino data:
•Vacuum oscillation (VO) solution with ∆ m2
12≈(0.5−5.0)×10−10eV2and sin22θ12≈
(0.7−1.0),
•Low MSW solution corresponding to ∆ m2
12≈(0.5−2.0)×10−7eV2and sin22θ12≈
(0.9−1.0),
•Small mixing angle (SMA) MSW solution with ∆ m2
12≈(4.0−9.0)×10−6eV2and
sin22θ12≈(0.001−0.01),
•Large mixing angle (LMA) MSW solution, ∆ m2
12≈(0.2−2.0)×10−4eV2and sin2θ12≈
(0.65−0.96).
For the VO, Low, and SMA MSW solutions, the expressions for th e various transition/oscillation
probabilities at distances which can be reached on earth sim plify: they reduce essentially to
the two-neutrino mixing expressions. Neglecting the possi ble matter effects for simplicity,
we can write them in the form
P(νe→νµ) = sin2(2θ13) sin2(θ23) sin2/parenleftigg1.27∆m2
23L
Eν/parenrightigg
, (4)
P(νe→ντ) = sin2(2θ13) cos2(θ23) sin2/parenleftigg1.27∆m2
23L
Eν/parenrightigg
, (5)
P(νµ→ντ) = cos4(θ13) sin2(2θ23) sin2/parenleftigg1.27∆m2
23L
Eν/parenrightigg
. (6)
In the case of the large-mixing-angle (LMA) MSW solution the re is a known small but
non-negligible correction in the above expressions due to t he ∆m2
12.
3Another type of interpretation is often made of these data, i n which the mass mof a light
neutrino is related to an intermediate mass scale mIand an heavy mass scale mHaccording
to the “seesaw” mechanism [40] which predicts
m=m2
I
mH. (7)
There remains considerable flexibility in the choice of thes e mass scales, but a particularly
suggestive version [41] invokes the vacuum expectation val ue, 250 GeV, of the Higgs field as
the intermediate mass, so that estimating m≈/radicalig
∆m2(atmospheric) ≈0.06 eV yields mH≈
5×1015GeV. This scale is commonly associated with the supersymmet ric unification scale in
SO(10) models. Hence, there is optimism that neutrino mass i s evidence that supersymmetry
exists at the GUT scale. Only a small additional dose of optim ism is required to expect that
the supersymmetric partners of known particles have masses near the intermediate scale,
mI≈250 GeV, and will be found during the next decade.
2.2 The Next Generation of Neutrino Experiments
With four interpretations of the solar neutrino data, and th e two interpretations of the LSND
data as either right or wrong, there are a total of eight scena rios for explanations of the data.
The experimental challenge is to reduce these to a unique sce nario, and to make accurate
measurements of the parameters of that scenario.
It is likely that the next generation of short-baseline acce lerator neutrino experiments
mentioned previously [18, 19, 20] will clarify the status of the LSND result within 5 years.
Continued operation of Super-Kamiokande, plus the new long -baseline mentioned previ-
ously [15, 16, 17] will firm up the physics closely associated with the atmospheric neutrino
anomaly over the next decade, but will have limited ability t o explore more than a two-
neutrino interpretation.
The solar neutrino spectrum is complex, and all interpretat ions of the solar neutrino
deficit invoke fortuitous energy dependence in the models. T his should permit new critical
tests of these models as new detectors come into operation wi th different energy sensitivities.
Super-Kamiokande and the SNO experiment [42] (which has jus t started operation) have
good sensitivity to higher-energy solar neutrinos, whose fl ux is predicted to rise with energy
in the “just-so” models. However, precise interpretation m ay be elusive here even with
improved statistics, due to uncertainties in the productio n rate of hepneutrinos in the Sun.
These high-statistics experiments will also provide more- significant tests of the depen-
dence of oscillation rates on varying path length (seasonal variation) implied in the “just-so”
models, and on traversal of varying amounts of matter (day/n ight effect) which affect some
of the MSW solutions.
At the other end of the energy spectrum, the BOREXino liquid s cintillator experiment
[43] should be sensitive to the 0.8-MeV7B neutrinos.
Even more ambitious projects, HELLAZ [45] and HERON [44], pl an to use cryogenic
techniques to lower their sensitivities to below the 0.4-Me V maximum of the ppneutrinos
whose numbers dominate the solar neutrino spectrum.
A qualitatively different phenomenon accessible to the SNO e xperiment is the comparison
of the rates of the reactions ν+2H→p+p+eandν+2H→p+n+ν. The first reaction
4can only proceed via an electron neutrino, while any neutrin o flavor can initiate the second.
Hence, if solar electron neutrinos have indeed transformed to other flavors, the ratio of
reaction rates will be less than one. Such a result will be una mbiguous evidence for neutrino
oscillations by itself.
This extensive program of solar neutrino experiments will c ertainly greatly constrain the
four present interpretations of the solar neutrino data ove r the next decade, although one
cannot predict with certainty that only a single interpreta tion will then remain.
None of the experiments discussed thus far addresses the lon g-standing question of
whether neutrinos, if massive, are Dirac neutrinos (with pa rticles and antiparticles being
different: ν∝negationslash=ν) or Majorana neutrinos (with particles and antiparticles t he same, as for
photons: ν=ν) [46]. Theoretically, Majorana neutrinos are more “natura l”, but the ques-
tion should be settled experimentally. This is extremely di fficult because neutrinos are always
(thus far) produced in weak interactions with a unique helic ity, which provides a practical
distinction between neutrino and antineutrino even if ther e is none in principle. Instead,
experimental resolution of the question is based on the sear ch for neutrinoless double beta
decay, (A,Z →(A,Z + 2) + 2 e−, which can proceed via annihilation of virtual νeandνeas
permitted for Majorana, but not for Dirac, neutrinos. The pr esent (model dependent) limit
based on nonobservation of such a decay of76Ge is that m <0.1 eV for Majorana neutrinos.
This limit may be pushed as low as 0.001 eV in the next decade.
2.3 The Opportunity for a Neutrino Factory
Now that there are rough experimental guidelines as to the pa rameters of neutrino masses
and mixings, one can begin to plan for more extensive studies than those described in the
previous section. Two prominent features of such a plan are t he need for more neutrinos,
and that accelerator experiments with GeV-energy neutrino s can probe a large fraction of
the relevant parameter space.
The need for more GeV-energy neutrinos leads to a need for GeV proton sources in
the megawatt power range. Such power sources, when availabl e, could be used to produce
neutrinos via horn beams in the conventional manner. Howeve r, an option has emerged with
greater physics flexibility while maintaining a comparable or even larger ν/pratio than that
from horn beams. Namely, neutrino beams derived from the dec ay of muons in a storage
ring. Technical aspects of muon-based neutrino beams are di scussed in sec. 4. Here, we
review the physics opportunities with such beams.
Both µ−andµ+can be stored in the ring, but only one sign will be used at a tim e.
When, say, µ−are stored their decay,
µ−→e−νµνe, (8)
leads to beams that contain nearly equal numbers of νµandνewith spectra that are extremely
well known.
At the detectors, the neutrino and the antineutrino may or ma y not have changed their
flavor, leading to the appearance of a different flavor or the di sappearance of the initial
flavor, respectively. When detected by a charged-current in teraction, there are 6 classes of
signatures in a three-neutrino model:
νµ→νe→e−(appearance) , (9)
5νµ→νµ→µ−(disappearance) , (10)
νµ→ντ→τ−(appearance) , (11)
νe→νe→e+(disappearance) , (12)
νe→νµ→µ+(appearance) , (13)
νe→ντ→τ+(appearance) . (14)
A similar list of processes can be written for operation with positive muons.
Of special interest is process (13) where a muon of sign differ ent from the parent muon
appears. This is a unique feature of the neutrino factories b ased on muon beams since they
are the only sources of intense high energy electron (anti)n eutrino beams.
The cases (11) and (14) of τappearance are only practical for neutrino beams with 10’s
of GeV energy.
2.3.1 Measurements of Masses and Mixing Angles
First, the high flux of neutrinos coming from the decay ring is ideal to measure precisely
the various neutrino cross sections and to explore scenario s with more than three massive
neutrinos, using a compact detector located at a short dista nce.
By the time a muon storage ring would be built it is expected th at two angles θ23and
θ12, and the magnitudes of two mass squared differences ∆ m2
23and ∆ m2
12would be known.
This knowledge would come from the solar and atmospheric neu trino measurements which
would have been verified by long baseline and reactor experim ents, for example, MINOS
and KamLAND. The remaining pieces of the puzzle would be θ13, the CP-violating phase
δand the signs of the ∆ m2
ij. In addition, the indicated long-baseline experiments wil l not
be sensitive to the matter effects in neutrino oscillations b ecause the distances between the
sources and detectors are not sufficiently large. It would be o f fundamental importance to
verify experimentally the existence of matter effects in neu trino oscillations by observing
directly the modification of the neutrino oscillation proba bilities by these effects.
The third mixing angle θ13can be measured in several channels at a neutrino factory
[47], as can be seen from the expressions (4)-(6) for various transition probabilities. The
detector must be far to avoid background but not too far ( <1000 km) so that the effects of
∆m2
12remain negligible and thus δcan formally be set to zero. Figure 1 shows the achievable
sensitivity to the yet-unknown value of θ13.
2.3.2 Measurement of CP Violation
The measurement of δin a three-neutrino scenario [48] relies either on CP violat ion through
the expression
ACP=P(νe→νµ)−P(νe→νµ)
P(νe→νµ) +P(νe→νµ), (15)
or on time-reversal violation using
AT=P(νe→νµ)−P(νµ→νe)
P(νe→νµ) +P(νµ→νe). (16)
6Figure 1: Sensitivity reach in the (sin2θ13,∆m2
23) plane for a 10 kton detector
and a neutrino beam from 2 ×1020decays of 20 GeV muons in a storage ring
at distance 732 km. The appearance process νe→νµ→µ+, shown by the
lines on the left, has much greater sensitivity than the disa ppearance process
νµ→νµ→µ−, shown by the lines on the right. The interior of the box is the
approximate region allowed by Super-Kamiokande data (hep- ph/9811390).
The asymmetry (15) can be measured using wrong-sign muons an d the two polarities of the
muon beam. However, the genuine CP violating contribution t o (15) due to a nonvanishing
phase δcompetes with terms related to matter effects, i.e., to the different rates of scattering
ofνeandνebetween source and detector. The relative strength of the ma tter-induced
asymmetry increases quadratically with distance, and dilu tes the signal of CP violation in a
far detector.
If the solution of the solar neutrinos problem is that involv ing large mixing angles and
matter enhancement (LMA MSW, sin22θ12≈sin22θ23≈1), then there is a possibility of
measuring the CP violating asymmetry (15), whose value is th en
ACP≈/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2 sinδ
sin 2θ13sin/parenleftigg1.27∆m2
12L
E/parenrightigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle, (17)
provided the detector is located sufficiently far and high sta tistics ( >1021muons per year) are
available. For all the other solar neutrino solutions ACPis extremely small, being suppressed
by a factor of either sin22θ12or ∆m2
12. Figure 2 illustrates the experimental sensitivity to
in a large angle MSW scenario.
7Figure 2: The CP violating asymmetry (15) divided by statist ical uncer-
tainties vs.distance Lfor a 10 kton detector in a beam from 2 ×1021muon
decays. A large angle MSW scenario is supposed, with ∆ m2
12= 10−4eV2,
∆m2
23= 2.8×10−3eV2,θ12= 22.5◦,θ13= 13◦,θ23= 45◦, and δ=−90◦
(corresponding to maximal CP violation). The dashed curves ignore matter
effects, while the solid curves include them; the matter effec ts dominate the
asymmetry for distances beyond 1000 km. The lower (upper) cu rves are for
Eµ= 20 (50) GeV. From hep-ph/9909254.
The asymmetry (16) is not sensitive to matter effects, but rel ies on distinguishing the
process νµ→νe→e−fromνe→νe→e+. It will be very difficult to distinguish electrons
from positrons in the detector, but the relative νµandνefluxes can be varied by varying the
polarization of the muons in the storage ring [49].
If future experiments confirm the interpretation of the LSND data that more than three
massive neutrinos exist, then the use of the flavor-rich beam s of a neutrino factory is even
more of an imperative because the parameter space for CP/T vi olating effects is considerably
enlarged and can be successfully explored in experiments wi th such beams [50].
2.3.3 Detector Issues
In view of the various experimental signatures (9)-(14), an ideal detector would provide
identification of both flavor and charge of all three leptons e,µ, and τ. Muons are the
easiest to identify, τ’s are the next easiest if only because of their decay to muons , and finally
electrons are the most difficult. Fortunately, there is a very rich program for detectors that
only measure the charge of muons, and hence the oscillation p rocesses (10) and (13) and
their conjugates.
8Baseline Detector Capability
A magnetized steel/scintillator sampling calorimeter wou ld be one of the far detectors at a
muon storage ring experiment. It could have a hadron energy r esolution of 0 .76//radicalig
Ehad[GeV],
a hadron angular resolution of 17 //radicalig
Ehad[GeV]+12 /Ehad[GeV], and much better muon energy
and angular resolution.
The largest forseeable background in such a detector is char m production. The appear-
ance signal for process (13) is a “wrong-sign” muon. However , if there is enough energy for
charm production in process (10), the charmed particle prod uced will decay 10% of the time
to a wrong-sign muon in the final state. There is a chance that t he associated muon from
the neutrino interaction vertex is low energy and/or undete cted. With kinematic cuts on the
muon momentum and its component transverse to the hadronic s hower, the signal efficiency
would be reduced by 25 to 30%, but the backgrounds would be red uced by a factor of 10−5
to 10−6depending on the neutrino energy. The rejection rate improv es faster with energy
than does the background, favoring the use of higher energy m uons in the storage ring.
Thus, such a baseline detector would be sufficient for measure ments of θ13via process
(13), and the CP-violating phase δvia the asymmetry (15), both of which are unlikely to be
measured elsewhere and would contribute enormously to the fi eld.
Measurement of the T-violating asymmetry (16) requires sep aration of process (9) from
(12), ideally performed by measuring the sign of the electro n, and both of these from neutral-
current scattering off electrons. Depending on the transver se and longitudinal segmentation
of the scintillator, electron identification is possible, a lthough not on an event-by-event ba-
sis. Electron-neutrino charged-current interactions wou ld be distinguished on average by
an energy deposition that was much closer to the neutrino int eraction vertex, and at an
angle with respect to the outgoing hadronic shower. Charge i dentification would not be
possible, although from varying the polarization of the muo n beam one could see how many
electron-like events were from νe’s, and how many were from νµ’s [49].
Since a muon-based neutrino factory is a pulsed device with a small duty factor, cosmic-
ray backgrounds will be relatively unimportant. Hence, the re is the option to locate the
detectors at the surface of the Earth, where available infra structure is more favorable for
very large devices.
Finally, such a baseline detector would have modest detecti on efficiency for τ’s via their
decay to µ’s, permitting study of process (11) and (14) if sufficiently l arge numbers of
neutrinos are available.
Beyond the Baseline Detector
Additional technologies must be employed to achieve electr on and τidentification and
charge measurement on an event-by-event basis.
One category of new detectors uses thin ( ∼100µm) sheets of emulsion combined with
thin (∼300µm) lead or steel spacers to measure kinks that occur when a τdecays. MINOS
is studying the performance of this geometry combined with s teel for τappearance mea-
surements and is likely to install such a device if they do see oscillations. By comparing the
change in slope between a few hundred of these sheets, one cou ld make a 4- σevent-by-event
measurement on electron or τcharge. This technique is practical only in relatively smal l
volumes, and is perhaps best suited for the near detector, or for the extraordinarily well
9collimated neutrino beams from a TeV muon collider.
Detectors which have slightly more promise for use on the 10- kton scale identify τ→µ
decays by their difference in kinematics, although they don’ t see the kink from the decay
itself. ICARUS, which uses a Liquid Argon TPC detector, has t he necessary charged track
resolution to measure the acoplanarity of an event and deter mine the likelihood of its being
aτcandidate.
3 Precision High-Rate Neutrino Physics
The advent of a muon storage ring would not only bring about ne w neutrino oscillation
measurements, but would also usher in a new era for high-prec ision neutrino scattering
experiments [51]. For example, with a detector located 30 m f rom a 150 m straight section
of a 50-GeV, 1021-µ/yr muon storage ring, the event rate is 40 million events per kilogram
per year over a 10 cm radius.
To assist in the interpretation of oscillation-related mea surements, precision measure-
ments would be made of the total neutrino and antineutrino cr oss sections, as well as of the
beam divergence.
The neutrinos would also be used as precision probes of nucle ar and nucleon structure,
providing additional information to that obtained in relat ed study using charged lepton
beams. As is well known, neutrino scattering allows a clean s eparation of the valence and
sea quark distributions, and use of a polarized target permi ts characterization of the spin
dependence of these distributions. The near detector is thu s the natural successor to nu-
cleon structure measurements now underway at HERA, HERMES, Jefferson Lab, RHIC and
elsewhere.
Combined analysis of the scattering of the four neutrino typ esνµ,νµ,νe, and νeoff
electrons should permit measurement of the Weinberg angle t en times better than presently
known.
A high-flux multi-GeV neutrino beam is also a charm factory, i n which a νµbeam leads
only to cquarks that are tagged by a final-state µ−(νµd→µ−c), while νµbeam leads only
to tagged cquarks. For the beam parameters described above, there woul d be 107leptonic
tagged charm decays in only 40 kg-years (not kton-years!), p ermitting measurements of Vcd
to fraction of a percent, and perhaps even direct observatio n ofD0−D0mixing.
4 A Neutrino Factory
Relatively complete sketches of a neutrino factory based on a muon storage ring have emerged
only recently via a convergence of earlier visions during th e NuFact’99 workshop [27, 28].
Here, we present recent scenarios that consider BNL and FNAL sites as examples [52], but
note that the conceptual details of a neutrino factory are ev olving rapidly.
4.1 Introduction
Conventional neutrino beams employ a proton beam on a target to generate pions, which
are focused and allowed to decay into neutrinos and, inciden tally, muons [53]. The muons
10are discarded (stopped in shielding) and the neutrinos ( νµ) are directed to the detector. In
a neutrino factory, pions are made the same way and allowed to decay, but it is the decay
muons that are captured and used. The initial neutrinos from pion decay are discarded, or
used in a parasitic low-energy neutrino experiment. The muo ns are accelerated and allowed
to decay in a storage ring with long straight sections. It is t he neutrinos from the decaying
muons (both νµandνe) that are directed to the detectors.
Proton Driver
Target
Phase Rotate #1 (≈50 m rf)
Mini Cooling (≈3 m H 2)
Drift (≈150 m)
Phase Rotate #2 (≈10 m rf)
Cooling (≈100 m)
Linac (2 GeV)
Recirc. Linac #1 (2-8 GeV)
Recirc. Linac #2 (8-50 GeV)
Storage Ring (50 GeV, ≈1 km circ.)
Neutrino Beam
Figure 3: Overview of a neutrino factory based on a muon stora ge ring.
The main components of the scenario described here are shown in Fig. 3, and are:
•A proton driver of moderate energy ( <50 GeV) and high average power (1-4 MW)
similar to that needed for a muon collider, but with less stri ngent requirements on the
charge per bunch and somewhat less need for power.
•A target and pion capture system that can be identical to that for a muon collider.
•Reduction of the muon energy spread at the expense of spreadi ng them out over a
longer time interval (longitudinal phase rotation). The sy stem can be designed to
correlate the muon polarization with time, allowing contro l of the relative intensity of
νµandνein a forward beam. All this could probably be identical to tha t for a muon
collider.
•A limited amount of cooling: about a factor of 50 in six phase- space dimensions,
compared with the factor of 106needed for a muon collider.
•Fast muon acceleration to 50 GeV in a system of an induction li nac and two recircu-
lating linear accelerators (RLA’s). This could probably be identical to that for a muon
collider designed for Higgs production (Higgs Factory).
11•A collider ring with long straight sections that could point to one or more distant
neutrino detectors for oscillation studies, and to one or mo re near detectors for high
intensity studies. This ring is rather different from one tha t maximizes luminosity of
muon-muon collisions.
Advantages of a neutrino factory are:
•The spectrum of the neutrinos from muon decay are very well de fined, particularly
compared to conventional neutrino beams from pion decay whe re proton beam size
and position, horn current and timing, and the condition of t he target and horn can
all affect the fluxes and backgrounds.
•There are almost equal electron and muon neutrino types made , and both neutrinos
and antineutrinos can be obtained. In beams from pion decay, only 6muon neutrinos
are available with small backgrounds of the other types.
•The numbers of neutrinos per initial proton are comparable i n the two schemes, and
for low energy neutrinos there is no flux advantage in the fact ory. But for high energy
neutrinos, the conventional approach requires high energy protons, of which, for a
given power, there will be fewer. The neutrino factory can, i n principle, use the same
relatively low energy protons to produce the same number of n eutrinos at any energy
independent of the neutrino energies, and the number can rem ain high. For 50 GeV
neutrinos, the gain is between one and two orders of magnitud e over conventional
beams.
•The intensities are sufficiently high that one can use oscilla tion baselines of the order
of the Earth’s diameter. One could build a neutrino factory i n the US and detect
neutrino oscillations in the Gran Sasso detector in Italy, o r build the factory in Europe
and direct a beam to the US. Such intensities and distances al so allow the study of
the neutrino-matter interaction (MSW effect). Measurement s at multiple distances
would, in principle, allow the complete determination of th e neutrino mass matrix (the
equivalent of the CKM matrix), including CP violations, whi le also addressing the
possible existence of sterile neutrinos.
•A neutrino factory is also a first step towards a muon collider . It would be simpler
build than a muon collider, would demonstrate most of the com ponents of a collider,
and might be upgradable to a collider.
In the remainder of this section, we discuss the various comp onents of a neutrino factory
in greater detail.
4.2 Proton Driver
The number of pions per proton produced with an optimized sys tem varies linearly with the
proton energy [54]. Thus, the number of pions, and the number of muons into which they
decay, is proportional to the proton beam power. This might s uggest that the proton energy
could be selected arbitrarily, but the situation is more com plicated.
12The total six-dimensional emittance of the produced muons d epends on, among other
things, the pion bunch length, and thus on the rms proton bunc h length σpif that length is
longer than a length c τdecaythat is characteristic to the decay process:
τdecay=(mπ−mµ)
mπ1
γ2
πτπ, (18)
where τπis the pion lifetime and γπmπis the pion energy. The pion yield peaks at Eπ≈300
MeV, which gives τdecay≈1 nsec. This, if the proton energy is low, can imply a large tun e
shift in the proton ring prior to extraction:
∆ν∝npC
σtǫ⊥γ2
p∝np
∝angbracketleftB∝angbracketrightσtǫ⊥γp, (19)
where npis the number of protons in a bunch, Cis the circumference of the proton driver,
∝angbracketleftB∝angbracketrightis the average bending field, and ǫ⊥is the transverse emittance of the protons. The
above dependency favors a higher proton energy.
It also favors a high repetition rate with relatively fewer p rotons per bunch, but once
again the situation is complicated. The total six-dimensio nal emittance of the produced
pions depends also on the number of proton bunches employed t o fill the storage ring. This
favors a small number of large proton bunches in the driver, a nd thus a larger tune shift.
However, a high driver repetition rate with smaller numbers of protons per fill would not
increase the emittance per fill and would still reduce the tun e shift. The difficulty with this
approach is that the higher repetition rate increases the wa ll power required for the pulsed
rf needed for acceleration and cooling.
These considerations favor a proton driver of 15-25 GeV ener gy, 1-4 MW power, with a
ring cycling at 5-15 Hz, and a bunch length of order 1 nsec. Eac h cycle accelerates about
1014protons in 4-6 bunches space about 150 m apart. Such a proton d river has significantly
higher power than any in present use in the high energy commun ity, and is comparable to
those under design for neutron spallation sources.
4.3 Target and Capture
To maximize the muon yield from pion decay, pions are capture d from the peak of their
production spectrum at around 300 MeV/ clongitudinal momentum. The corresponding
transverse momenta extend to beyond 200 MeV/ c, so a rather diffuse cloud of pions must be
captured. This is best done with a solenoidal magnetic field, whose acceptance of particles
at large angles is much superior to that of a sequence of quadr upoles. Indeed, solenoid
magnets must be used to contain the pion/muon beam over much o f its length. The target
is surrounded by a 20-T hybrid solenoid magnet [55], followe d by an adiabatic transition to
the 1-T field of the decay and phase rotation channel.
The large pulse of energy deposited by the 1-4 MW proton beam i n the target on nsec
time scales lead to transient pressure waves that are proble matic for the long-term survival
of solid targets. Therefore, a target based on a free mercury jet is under serious study [54],
with a moving belt target as a backup concept [56]. At lower be am powers, a radiatively
cooled carbon target may be viable. However, the yield of pio ns per proton is higher for a
high-Ztarget material.
13The target and proton beam are at an angle to the axis of the cap ture system to minimize
re-absorption of the spiralling pions in the target, and to p ermit dumping of the proton beam
to the side of the system, perhaps in a pool of mercury. Figure 4 sketches the main features
of the target and capture apparatus, along with the beginnin g of the phase rotation channel.
The capture system is very similar to that considered for a mu on collider source [23].
Figure 4: Targetry, pion capture, and beginning of phase rot ation.
4.4 Phase Rotation #1
An early, high-gradient phase rotation is required if muon p olarization is to be selected
without particle loss. Forward decays, having one polariza tion, yield higher energy muons
than backward decays, which have the other. If full phase rot ation occurred before decay,
then polarization and final energy are fully correlated, but significant correlation is obtained
even with partial rotation before decay. The essential requ irement is that significant energy
changes occur before the decay. Phase rotation after decay c annot distinguish energy changes
due to decay kinematics from the energy spread of the initial pions, so there is no way to
separate the different polarizations.
The first phase rotation is accomplished by a sequence of low- frequency rf cavities that
reside inside a solenoid magnet which contains the beam tran sversely. The first cells of this
are sketched in Fig. 4. At the end of this first phase rotation s tage, the bunch length has
increased by a factor of 6 and the energy spread has decreased by the same amount. Figure 5
shows a simulation of the bunch at the end of the first phase rot ation.
Alternative scenarios without this first stage of phase rota tion are under study [58],
always with the result that the polarization separation wil l be lost.
14E(GeV)
ct (m)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.00.00.10.20.3
◦+
−+
−−+
−+
◦◦◦+++
−+
+◦
◦◦++
◦ ◦
−+ ◦
++
+◦
−◦
−−+
−
+◦++
−+
◦
−++
◦
−◦ ◦ ◦ ◦ ◦+
◦◦+
◦ ◦+
+++
−+◦+
+−+◦++
+◦◦
◦−+◦
+
−◦
◦
−+
−+
−+◦◦
−− ◦
−+
−+
◦+
−++
−+
◦++ ◦+
◦−+−+◦ ++
+
−◦
++
+−
−◦+
◦++
+−++
−◦+
◦
−−+◦+
++
++
+
◦ −
−−+
◦
◦ ++
−++ ++
−++◦+ ◦◦
−◦◦++◦+
◦+++
−+
−
◦◦+
−+
−−
+++
++
−−++++ +
++ ++ +
+−++
++
−
++◦−
−− +−+−◦+
−−◦ ◦
◦+ ◦ +
−−++
◦ −+
++
+++
+−+
−+
−
◦−
+ ++
+ ++
++
+◦−+
◦+
+
◦+−◦+
++
◦
◦◦+◦
−
−−+
++
◦+ +
◦+
+
−+
+−
+++
−
−+
◦
−
−++
++
−
−−◦
+◦◦
−++◦
◦◦
◦◦
−◦
−+
++
+−+
◦◦ ++
−+
+◦ ◦ −++
◦◦
−
−◦◦++
+
◦−+
◦+
◦++
−
◦◦
◦◦
+−+
−
◦
−−−+◦
−−−
−++
+−
−◦ −++
+ +++
+
−◦
++
◦+
−◦◦◦+
◦◦− + − ◦ +++
◦
+◦
◦
◦◦◦+
◦ ◦◦◦++++
−−−+
+◦◦−+
◦++ −
◦−◦+◦+
+
◦+++
−++
−◦◦ −+
+−++
+
◦+
+◦
◦−
−−
+
◦+
−−+
◦+
◦+
+
+
−−
−
−+ ◦
−+
◦+−
+++
+
◦+
◦+
◦+
◦◦
+
◦◦◦◦+◦
−◦
+
++++
◦+ ◦◦+ ◦
−+
+ +
++◦+
◦+
◦
◦++◦+
−++
+
+ ◦+
+◦+
◦+++
−−◦
+
+◦
−
− ◦+◦
◦◦−◦
+◦
−−◦++
++++
◦++◦
−◦
−−◦
++◦
+◦◦++
−◦+++−+
− + ◦+
◦+ − ++
+◦+−+
++
+
−−++
++ ◦
◦◦
◦◦+
◦ ◦◦
−+
◦
−◦
+◦−
−
−−
+ ◦++
◦◦◦◦+◦◦− ◦
−+++
◦++
◦−+− −+−
◦◦ +++
+◦+
+
◦+ ++
◦+
+++
+−◦+◦
◦+
+++◦
+
− −◦+
−−+ ++−++
++
++
◦+
−◦
−◦◦
−+
−++
◦+
+
−+++
+−
++
◦+++
−+
−+◦
◦+
◦◦◦+
◦
◦+
−+
−++
+
++◦ ◦ ◦+
◦
◦++
+−+
++−
−
−+++
+
−+
−
++
−+++ +−+++
◦◦−
◦
−−
−+ ++
++◦
+−− +++ ◦
◦−++
−− ++ ++
◦−++
◦+
+ ++
◦+ +
◦+
+
−◦
−+++++
++
◦+
−+ ◦
−◦◦
+−◦++
−++
++
++
++ ++◦
−++◦◦
◦◦
+++
◦◦++
◦+
+
++++◦ +
−+
◦+◦◦+
++
−−+◦
+
+−
+
−◦+
++
++
◦ ++ +
++
+
−++
++
−+
−
◦ ◦ −+
−+
−◦+◦+ ◦+
◦++
−◦+
−++
+++
−++
+◦
◦+
−+
−−
−+
+++
−−+
+
+
◦◦◦
◦ ◦++◦
++
◦
−◦+
◦ ◦◦+
++
−+
◦◦ +
− −++
◦◦
++
−+
◦+
−++
◦◦−−++
++
◦◦ ++
+
◦+
−++
−+ ◦
◦◦
−++
◦
+++−◦+
◦+
+ ◦◦+
◦+◦+◦
−+
++−
−◦
◦+ ++
+++ ◦+
−++
◦
−+
◦◦
++
◦◦
− ++
+++
++
◦−◦
◦◦+
◦+
−++
◦◦+
+ ◦◦◦+
◦
−++++
−+++
+ +−++
−+
◦+
◦+
−−−+
+−
−+◦ +
−++
+◦◦◦ −+
+ +◦++
◦+◦ ◦ ++++++
+◦−+
−+◦ ++
◦−+
◦ ++
+◦◦+−+++
+◦ −
◦◦◦ +− +
++
++
+−+
++◦
+
−+++
−−
◦+
−+◦
−+
◦++
◦++
◦++
◦+
◦+
+
◦+
◦−◦+
◦+
◦−+ + +
−◦+
◦+ ++
◦◦ ++
+
+++
◦ ++
◦
−+−◦ −◦
◦
−+
◦+◦+ +
−+
−◦+
++
−− ◦◦ ◦
Figure 5: The longitudinal-phase-space distribution of th e muon bunch at
the end of the first phase rotation. Color and symbols indicat e polarization
P: + (red): P >0.3, o (green): 0 .3> P > −0.3,−(black): −0.3< P.
4.5 Mini Cooling
Reduction of the phase volume of the muon beam must be accompl ished before the muons
decay, which limits the applicability of stochastic coolin g and electron cooling. Rather,
we propose to use the technique of ionization cooling [59] in which the muons lose both
transverse and longitudinal momentum while passing throug h bulk matter, and only longi-
tudinal momentum is restored via rf acceleration. This tech nique is uniquely applicable to
muons because of their minimal interaction with matter, and can be performed in less than
a microsecond.
The first stage of cooling at a neutrino factory, called mini c ooling, consists simply of
a hydrogen absorber in a solenoidal field, and serves two purp oses. It reduces the muon
energies so that the subsequent drift length for a second pha se rotation could be kept short.
It also lowers the transverse emittance by almost a factor of two.
In a current simulation [52], the mini cooling was done in a si ngle hydrogen absorber
placed in a fixed magnetic field of 1.25 T, with simulated resul ts as shown in Fig. 6. Such
cooling introduces canonical angular momentum and it will p robably be desirable to do the
mini cooling in two stages with a field reversal between them.
4.6 Phase Rotation #2
The purpose of phase rotation is to minimize the muon momentu m spread, which can be
done at the expense of lengthening the bunch up to a distance a pproaching the initial proton
bunch spacing ( ≈150 m in the example discussed here). The very long resulting bunch is
then rebunched at a higher frequency ( ≈175 MHz), yielding a train of about 30 individual
muon bunches for every initial proton one.
In addition, this phase rotation results in the polarizatio n being correlated with time, i.e.,
bunch number, instead of energy. This correlation can, in pr inciple, be preserved thereafter.
15E(GeV)
ct (m)0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.00.00.10.20.3
+
+−++
◦
◦++
+−+
+◦
++
◦◦◦
+◦+
+++◦
−◦−−+
−
+ ◦++
+
−+
◦++
+
◦◦ ◦◦◦◦+
◦+
◦+
◦◦+
+ ++
−+◦+
+−+
◦+
+
+
◦◦
◦−+◦
+
◦ −◦◦++
+◦◦−◦
−+
++
−++
−+
◦ ++
◦+
◦
−+ −+
◦−
++
+◦
++
+−
−◦+
◦++
+
−++
−
◦+
◦+
−+◦+−
+
++
+
◦
−+
−+◦◦+
−+
++
++
−++◦+◦◦◦+
◦++
◦+
◦+ ++
+
−−
◦
◦+
−+
−+++
++
−++++
+
+++ +
+ −++◦
++
−+◦−
−
−+ −+
−◦+
−◦ ◦
◦+◦ +
−−
++++
+++
−+
−+
−−
++
+++
++
+◦
−+
◦+
+
◦+−◦+
+++
◦
◦◦+◦
−−+
++
◦+
+◦+
++
+−+++−+
◦
−++
++
−◦
+◦◦
−++◦
◦◦ ◦◦
−◦+
++
+ −+
◦◦+++
+◦◦
−+
++
◦◦
− ◦◦ ++
+++
◦++
−
◦◦
◦◦
+−+
−
◦
−−−
+◦◦
++
+−
−◦−
− ++
++++
+
−◦++
−−
◦◦◦+
◦
◦ −+−◦
◦+++◦
+◦
◦
◦◦+
◦◦
◦◦+
+++
−+◦◦
−+ ++ −
◦−
◦+◦+
++++
−
++
◦−+
+−++
++
+◦
−−+
◦
◦+
◦
−−+
◦+
◦+
+
+−
−+ ◦
−+
◦+−
+
+++
◦+◦+◦+
◦◦
+
◦◦◦◦+ ◦◦+
++++◦
◦+◦
−++
++
++
++◦+
◦+
◦
◦++◦+
−++
+
◦+
+
◦+
◦
++ +
− −◦+
+
+◦
−+
◦◦−◦
◦−◦ +
++++
◦
++◦
−◦+
−◦
+◦+
◦◦+ +◦+++
−+−
+
◦+
◦
+−++
+
+◦
+−+
++
+++++
◦◦
◦◦◦+
◦+
◦◦
−◦+
◦◦
+◦−
−
−−+
+ ◦++
◦◦◦+◦◦
−◦
−+++
◦+ +
◦−+
−−+
−
◦◦
++ +
+◦+
+
◦◦
++
+
◦+
+ ++
+
−◦+◦
◦+
+ ++◦
+
−−◦+
−−+++−
−+++
++◦
+◦
◦◦◦
−+++◦+
++++
+−
++
◦+ ++
−+
−+◦
◦+◦++
−+
◦+
+
++◦◦◦+
◦+
◦++
+
−+
++−
−++++
−+−+
−+ +++−++◦ −◦◦
−
−+++
++◦
+ −−+++ ◦
◦−++
−−+◦
+++
◦ −++◦+
◦+
+
++
◦+
+
◦+
+
−
◦++ +++
++
◦++◦
◦◦
+
−◦++
−++
++
+++
+ ++
◦− ++
◦◦
◦◦ +++
◦◦++
◦+
+++
+
◦ +++◦◦+
++
+◦
+−
+
◦+++
++
◦ +++
++ + +
++
−+
−
◦◦−+
+
−◦+◦+◦+
◦
+++
−+
+
+++ −◦
++
+◦
◦++−
++
−+
+
+◦ ◦
◦◦++ ◦
++
◦◦+
+
◦ ◦
◦+
++
−+◦
◦+
+
−−++
◦◦
++
−+
◦+
−+
+
◦−
−++
++◦◦++
++
◦+
− ++
−+◦
◦++
◦ ++−◦+◦
+
+
◦◦+
◦+◦+◦+
+ +−◦◦++
+
+++◦+
++
◦+
◦◦
++
◦◦
−++
++
+++◦
◦◦◦
+
◦
◦+
−++
◦◦−
+
+ ◦ ◦◦+
◦++++
−+++
++
−++
−+
◦+
◦++
+−
−+
◦+
−+++◦
◦−+
+◦
++
◦+ ◦ ◦ ++++
++
+◦−+
− +◦++
◦−+
◦+ +
◦◦+
−+++
+
◦−◦+−
+
+++
+−+
++◦
+
+ ++
−−+
−+◦
−+
◦ ++
◦++
◦++
◦+
◦+
+
◦+
◦
◦++
+++
−◦+++
◦◦ ++
+
+++
+
◦ ++
◦+−◦
−◦
◦+
+◦++
−+
−◦+
+ +
−
−◦◦◦
Figure 6: The longitudinal-phase-space distribution of th e muon bunch after
the mini cooling by liquid hydrogen. Color and symbols indic ate polarization
P: + (red): P >0.3, o (green): 0 .3> P > −0.3,−(black): −0.3< P.
The second phase rotation is performed by a drift ( ≈150 m), followed by energy correc-
tion, followed by bunching.
In the present example, an induction linac ( ≈100 MeV acceleration) is used in which
the pulse shape is tailored to correct the time-energy corre lation generated by the drift.
The induction linac must supply a rapid train of acceleratio ns, spaced by the proton bunch
spacing, and equal in number to the number of proton bunches.
Figure 7 shows the simulated energy vs.time distributions after the drift, and and after
the energy correction in the induction linac. The simulated final polarizations vs.bunch po-
sition are shown in Fig. 8. The maximum muon polarization is a rapid function of the initial
proton bunch length, as shown in Fig. 9. In the simulation, th e average muon polarization
at the end of the induction linac is 0.37, and the momentum spr ead is dp/p≈2 %. If only
20% of the muons are kept, the polarization could be 0.6.
Bunching can be done either before or after the energy correc tion. The bunching fre-
quency considered here is a multiple of 350 MHZ, the frequenc y of the superconducting
cavities that are assumed to be used in the later acceleratio n.
More efficient bunching may be possible if the initial energy i s lower and the bunching is
done together with acceleration [58]. This suggests that a s econd mini cooling with about
1 m of hydrogen could be used to lower the muon energies to abou t 25 MeV, followed by the
bunching and acceleration back to 100 MeV. The addition of th e second mini cooling would
further reduce the required conventional cooling to follow [60].
4.7 Cooling
A simple comparison of the total produced six-dimensional e mittance and the total accep-
tance of a plausible storage ring indicates that cooling sho uld not be needed. But without
cooling, the muon accelerator would have to have a transvers e rms acceptance of ≈20π
mm-rad (full acceptance ≈0.2πm-rad). This we have shown is possible with large-aperture
16E(GeV)
ct (m)0 25 50 75 1000.000.050.100.150.20
+
◦
◦−−+
+
+◦+
◦+
◦+◦
++
−
++
◦++
◦−
◦+
+◦+◦◦
−
+++++
+−++
+
++
−+
◦◦
+−
+
++
−−+++◦
◦+
◦+
+
+◦◦+
◦++
+◦
◦
−+−++
−++
−◦
◦+++
+++
++
+
+
◦◦
◦◦++
−−++◦
+++
◦+
◦◦
+◦
+
+
◦+−◦++
+
+++
+++◦++++
++
+−
◦+
+++
◦+
++◦
−◦
−−−
−+
+◦
++
++
++++
+−
◦◦+
◦◦
++
−+
++
◦◦+
+◦
◦+
++
++◦−
−+
−++◦
+−+++
−◦◦+
◦◦
+
◦++
+◦
+◦◦−+◦
−+−
◦+
+
+
−−+++++
◦+
◦◦
◦◦
+◦◦++
+++
+
+
+◦−
++
++
+◦+
◦
++
−+
◦+
−◦+
+
++−◦
◦++
−
−−++
++
+◦+
+
+
−+++
◦+
++
++
+◦◦
◦+◦+
−
−◦++
++
◦
++
−−−+
◦+
+◦+
++++
◦◦+
+++
+
◦
−◦++−−
++
+◦◦
+◦◦
++
++
◦
◦−+◦+
++
◦
+◦◦
+++
+
+◦++
◦
++◦
++++
◦+
◦++++
+
+◦
◦−
◦+◦◦ ◦−++
−◦++
−◦◦−−◦+
+++◦−
◦
−+−
−+
◦++
−◦+
+◦
+
−−+
−++
◦
◦++−
◦++
+
+◦+
++
++
++
+
+
◦++
◦+
−−◦
−−+
++
◦
+◦
◦+
++−
◦++
++++
◦+
◦++−
◦+◦−
+
++
+◦
++
++◦++
◦
◦◦++−++
++
−++
+
◦+
◦+++
◦+
++
++
−◦
++++
◦◦
◦+◦+++
++
+
−◦
◦
◦+−
◦◦+
−
+++++
+
−+
++−
−+
++
−++
+◦
−◦
◦+
◦◦
◦++
◦+◦
++◦◦◦
◦++◦+
+
−+
++
◦◦
+◦
++
◦+
+++
+◦
−+
++
−++
◦+
◦+
+
◦−+
◦◦
+++
+++
◦+
−◦
◦+
−+
◦+
+◦
◦−++
◦+−+◦
+ ++
◦+
+
◦+−◦−
−◦+
+
++++
◦
−+
−−
+◦−◦
+
◦◦◦
+++
++++
◦+
◦−
◦+◦+
++
−++++
◦◦
◦+
+
+
++
++
+−
++−
+◦+
++
+
◦+
◦
−+
◦+
◦−
−−+
◦++
++
◦+
+
−++
−+◦
◦++
−◦
◦−−+
−+
−+++
−
+
◦+
++◦+
◦◦
◦◦+
◦
+◦
+◦++◦
++
++
+++
+−++
◦+
−◦+−
++
◦+−+
−+
◦++◦++
◦◦◦
++
◦
−◦
◦+
◦++
◦
◦+
+◦
++
+
++
+
◦−
+
◦
−+
++
◦+
+◦++
−
◦
After Acc to 100 MeVE(GeV)
ct (m)0 25 50 75 1000.000.050.100.150.20
+
◦ ◦−
−+
+ + ◦+◦ ++++− ++
◦ ++
◦−
◦++◦+◦◦
− + ++++ +−+++++−+
◦◦
+−+ ++ −+ +◦◦+
◦+
+ +◦◦+
◦+++◦ ◦ − +− ++
−++ −◦◦+++
++
+ +◦◦
◦◦++−−++◦+++◦ +◦◦ +◦
+ + ◦−◦++
++++++◦+ +++
++− ◦ + +++
+++◦
−◦
−−− −+ + ◦++ + +++++
+− ◦◦+
◦◦+++ + + ◦ ++ ◦ +++
+ +◦−−++ +◦ + −++ + ◦◦+◦◦ +◦ ++ + ◦ +◦◦−+◦ +−
◦+++ −+++++ ◦ +◦◦
◦ ◦◦◦+ ++++++−++++ ◦+
◦ ++ −+
◦−◦+
+ ++−◦
◦++
−−++ ++
+ ◦+++ − +++◦+
++
+++◦◦
◦ ◦+− −◦++++◦+ + −−+ ◦++◦++ ++ ◦◦+
+ ++ +◦
−◦ ++− − ++ +◦◦ +◦◦+++ + ◦
◦+◦ + ++◦+◦◦+ + ++ +◦++◦++◦ ++++◦+
◦++++++ ◦
◦−◦+◦◦◦−+ + −◦++−◦◦−−◦+++◦−
◦ − + −+
◦++−◦+
+◦+ −−+−+ + ◦
◦++− ◦ +++ +◦++++
++
+◦++ ◦ + −−◦ − −+ ++
+ ◦+◦
◦+ ++− ◦ ++
+ +++ ◦ + ◦ + +−◦ +◦−
++ + + ◦ ++ ++◦++
◦◦◦++−+ ++
++
+ ◦+ ◦+ ++ ◦ +++
++−◦++++ ◦◦
◦+◦+++ + + − ◦◦+ ◦◦+
+++++−+++− + ++ +◦ − ◦ ◦+ ◦ ◦ ◦++
◦ +◦++◦◦ ◦ ◦++◦+ +−+
++◦ ◦ +◦+◦ + +++
+◦ −+
++
−+ + ◦ + ◦ + +◦ −+ ◦◦+ ++ + ++
◦ + − ◦ ◦+ + ◦++ ◦ −+ +◦+−+++
◦++ ◦ +−◦−
−◦++++◦ + −−
+◦−◦ +◦◦◦+ ++
+++◦+
◦ − ◦+◦+ + +− ++++ ◦◦◦++++++ +−
+ +−+◦+++◦+
◦− + ◦ +− − + ◦++
++ ◦ ++−++ − +◦◦++ −◦ −−−++++
− +
◦+
+◦ +◦◦◦ +◦+ ◦ +◦++◦
++++ ++ +− ++
+◦+++
+ −+
+◦++◦ ++◦◦ + + ◦ − ◦ ◦ + ◦ ++◦◦+ +++++
◦−
+◦ − ++ + ◦ + +◦++
−
Figure 7: The longitudinal-phase-space distribution of th e muon bunch after
the second phase rotation (top), and after the induction lin ac (bottom). Color
and symbols indicate polarization P: + (red): P >0.3, o (green): 0 .3> P >
−0.3,−(black): −0.3< P.
solenoid focusing and low-frequency rf, but would be expens ive.
A more reasonable acceleration scheme considers an rms tran sverse acceptance of ≈1.5π
mm-radians. A cooling scenario based on the so-called super -FOFO [61] lattice of confining
magnets (Fig. 10) is under study. The current simulation, us ing a fixed lattice and operating
at a central momentum of 185 MeV/ ccools to below 3 πmm-radians, as shown in Fig. 11.
It does not achieve the required 1.5 πmm-radians because of Coulomb scattering at the
end. Other lattices, with stronger fields easily reach the re quired final emittance, but do not
accept the full initial emittance. More work is needed here.
In a bunched beam, particles with large transverse amplitud e must have higher total
velocity (higher energy) so that their longitudinal veloci ty,vz, remains matched to that of
17Polarization
Bunch Position (m)25 50 75 100-1.0-0.50.00.51.0
Ave Pol.Polarization
Intensity
Figure 8: The muon polarization and intensity as a function o f position in
the bunch train after the induction linac.
PolarizationPeak Polarization
0 1 2 3 40.30.40.50.60.7
Bunch Sigma (nsec)dE/E
Figure 9: The muon polarization after the induction linac as a function of
the proton driver bunch length.
the bunch. This is not practical for relativistic beams, but can be arranged for nonrelativistic
beams such as considered here.
If the phase-rotation drift and buncher have a lattice with t he same amplitude- vzprop-
erties as the cooling lattice, then the correlation is autom atically generated. Remember:
the drift sorts particles by vz, not energy. After the drift, their longitudinal position i s a
function of that vzwhich is the required correlated combination of energy and a mplitude.
The bunching, done in the same lattice (or one with the same pr operties) is also a bunching
byvz, not energy, so the correlation is preserved. And so into the cooling.
Note that a simple solenoid will NOT do for the drift or bunchi ng, since vzis a function
not only of amplitude, but also of angular momentum. A soleno id of one sign gives a higher
vzfor one angular momentum sign than the other. Both drift and b unching must done with
alternating fields of some kind that maintain the canonical a ngular momentum near zero.
The super-FOFO lattice satisfies this requirement.
18length (m)0 1 2 3 4 5050100
88 -38 88 -88 38 -88
len (m)axial and dipole B (T)
0 1 2 3 4 5-5.0-2.50.02.55.0
Figure 10: Top: half section through a super-FOFO cell of the cooling appara-
tus, showing the coil configurations, rf cells, and hydrogen absorbers. Bottom:
the axial magnetic field vs.position.
Distance (m)ǫ⊥(πmm mrad, rms)
0 25 50 75025005000750010000
•• •••• •••••• •• •••• •••• •••••• •• •• •••• •••• •••• •• •• •• •• •• •• •• ••◦◦◦◦◦◦◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦◦◦◦◦ ◦◦◦◦◦◦◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦ ◦◦
ǫ/bardbl(πmm, rms)
Distance (m)0 25 50 750.0 1001.0 1042.0 1043.0 104
•••• •••• •••• •••• •••• • ••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •• •• •••• •••••••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• •••• ••• • ••••ǫ6(10−12(πm)3)
Distance (m)0 25 50 750.0 1005.0 1051.0 1061.5 1062.0 106
•••••••• •••• •••• ••• • •••••••• •••••••• •••• •••• •••• •••• ••• • •••• •••• •••• •••• •• •• • •• • •••• •••• •••• •••• • ••• ••• • • ••• ••• • • ••• • •••
Loss (%)
Distance (m)0 25 50 75012345
Figure 11: Transverse emittance (top left), longitudinal e mittance (top right),
6-d emittance (bottom left), and particle loss (bottom righ t)vs.position during
cooling.
194.8 Acceleration
Acceleration of the cooled muon beam from 185 MeV/ c(≈100 MeV) to 50 GeV is achieved
by a linac followed by two recirculating linear accelerator s (RLA’s).
The present assumption is that the larger second (and possib ly also the first) recirculating
accelerator uses LEP superconducting cavities, or cavitie s with the same parameters and
dimensions. The use of these cavities sets constraints on th e minimum energy for which
the required emittance can be transported. If the full ( ≈10 m long) cryostats, containing
four cavities, are used as is, then this minimum energy is app roximately 8 GeV. This is
taken as the approximate injection energy into the second RL A. If the cavities are rehoused
individually in new cryostats, then the minimum energy is ap proximately 2 GeV. This is
used as the approximate injection energy the first RLA.
More detailed considerations of the RLA’s, and of the storag e ring lattice, are given in
[62].
4.9 Storage Ring
Geometries
The geometry of the storage ring is site specific, being a func tion of both the ring and
detector locations. Figure 12 shows directions and direct d istances from rings at BNL or
FNAL to Gran Sasso, Soudan, and SLAC. The circumference of su ch rings for 50 GeV muons
must be of order 1 km, even using bend magnets of several Tesla , so that a large fraction of
the length can be in neutrino-beam-producing straight sect ions.
Figure 12: Neutrino beam paths between various possible sit es for source and
detectors.
For physics reasons (to separate MSW from vacuum oscillatio ns), two differing ring to
detector distances are required. If the two detectors lie in approximately opposite directions
from the ring then it seems reasonable to design the ring with long sides that point to the
20two detectors, adding, if needed, a third straight to close t he ring. Two geometries are of
particular interest (Fig. 13):
•A triangular geometry lying in a tilted plane. This minimize s the amount of bending
required and maximizes the total straight for a given circum ference. But, the lengths
of the straights pointing at the two distant detectors is NOT maximized.
•A “bowtie”, or figure-of-eight geometry, also lying in a tilt ed plane. This geometry
uses more total bending, but does maximize the important str aights. It also has the
interesting feature of not precessing the muon spins. A vari ant of the bowtie looks
much the same but does not lie in a plane, so that there is a sign ificant separation of
the beams where they cross. In this case there is a slow preces sion of spin.
The bowtie can be made asymmetric so as to maximize the length of the upward
straight.
lengths (m)-200 0 200
Figure 13: Possible bowtie and triangular geometries for a m uon storage ring
designed to deliver neutrino beams to two distant detectors .
To send a neutrino beam to a detector on another continent, a s traight section in the
storage ring must have angle at least 30◦to the horizontal. The resulting vertical extent of
the storage ring is at least 100 m. If the ring is below the surf ace, various geological issues
must be addressed. It may be more practical to build the ring a bove ground and bury it
under an artificial hill.
Lattice
The emittance that the storage ring must accept is estimated by supposing there is 20%
emittance growth in the accelerator in each of three directi ons. We require an acceptance of
3σin each of the 6 dimensions. If the bunch spacing is 1.7 m (corr esponding to the 175 MHz
bunching used here), then a reasonable maximum rms bunch len gth in the collider would be
6 cm. Thus the minimum momentum spread in this case would be σp= 0.1%.
21The rms beam divergence in the straight sections should be ≈0.1/γin order a) to maxi-
mize the dependence of the νµtoνeratio on the polarization; and b) to assure that the flux ob-
served is not significantly affected by the exact magnitude of this divergence. To achieve this
low divergence, the required beta function in the major stra ights is βmajor straights ≥75 m.
For the up-going straight, aimed at a near detector on the sur face, there is probably not
such a stringent requirement on the beam divergence. If the d ivergence here is required to
be below 1/3 of 1 /γ, then βupgoing straight ≥8 m.
4.10 A First Look at Event Rates
The numbers of surviving muons, per incident proton, at vari ous stages of the accelerator
complex are summarized in Table 1.
Table 1: The numbers of surviving muons after various stages in the acceler-
ator complex.
pdriver energy (GeV) 24 16
Factor µ/p µ/p
Pions after Match ( <1 GeV, forward) 0.66 0.44
After Phase Rotation #1 (selected) 0.45 0.3 .2
After Phase Rotation #2 (selected) 0.7 0.21 .14
After RF Capture 0.7 0.15 .1
After Cooling 0.9 0.13 .09
After Acceleration 0.7 0.092 .061
nµ/(npEp) (GeV−1) .0038 .0038
The number of neutrino interactions per unit mass of a detect or at distance Lfrom a
muon storage ring operating at energy Eµscales as
Nevents∝NµE3
µL−2. (20)
For a proton power of 1.5 MW, and the muon survival efficiencies given in Table 1, we
would, in a year of 107s of operation, obtain 4 ×1020muons decaying in the storage ring.
If we take the fraction of the ring pointing to a given detecto r to be 0.25 (approximately as
in the bowtie geometry), then the number of decays pointing t o the given detector will be
approximately 1020.
Table 2 gives charged current neutrino interaction rates pe r kton-year as a function of
baseline length Lfor an Eµ= 50 GeV muon storage ring in which there are 1 ×1020
unpolarized muon decays per year within a neutrino beam-for ming straight section [63].
The rates are listed for
(a)νe→νµoscillations with ∆ m2
23= 3.5×10−3eV2/c4and sin22θ23= 0.1,
22(b)νe→νµoscillations with ∆ m2
23= 1×10−4eV2/c4and sin22θ23= 1,
(c)νe→ντoscillations with ∆ m2
23= 3.5×10−3eV2/c4and sin22θ23= 0.1,
(d)νµ→ντoscillations with ∆ m2
23= 3.5×10−3eV2/c4and sin22θ23= 1.
Also listed are the rates for the unoscillated neutrino inte ractions, the corresponding statis-
tical significance of the disappearance signal (numbers in p arentheses), and the rates for the
antineutrino interactions.
Table 2: Neutrino interaction rates per kton-year at a neutr ino factory for
four cases of neutrino-mass parameters as given in the text.
Source BNL BNL BNL FNAL FNAL FNAL
Detector G. Sasso SLAC Soudan G. Sasso SLAC Soudan
L(km) 6528 4139 1712 7332 2899 732
Case Mode
µ+(a) νe→νµ 90 160 190 63 180 200
νe→νe1400 3600 16000 1100 8000 1 .2×105
(2.4σ) (2 .7σ) (1 .5σ) (1.9σ) (2 .0σ) (0 .6σ)
νµ→νµ 890 2200 9300 700 4800 7 .0×104
µ+(b) νe→νµ5×10−20.86 1.5 3×10−51.3 1.6
νe→νe1500 3800 16000 1200 8200 1 .2×105
(2.4σ) (2 .7σ) (1 .5σ) (1.9σ) (2 .0σ) (0 .6σ)
νµ→νµ 890 2200 9400 700 4800 7 .0×104
µ+(c) νe→ντ 31 60 70 20 67 73
νe→νe1400 3700 1 .6×1041100 8000 1 .2×105
(2.4σ) (2 .7σ) (1 .5σ) (1.9σ) (2 .0σ) (0 .6σ)
νµ→νµ 890 2200 9400 700 4800 7 .0×104
µ−(d) νµ→ντ 450 570 650 410 620 680
νµ→νµ 760 3100 1 .7×104490 8000 1 .4×105
(35σ) (23 σ) (12 σ) (40σ) (16 σ) (4 .6σ)
νe→νe 770 1900 8100 600 4100 6 .1×104
For comparison, the approximate numbers of events in the pro posed CERN - Gran Sasso
experiment (NGS) [17], and Minos [16] experiments, are give n in Table 3. It is seen that
the numbers of events with the 1.5-MW neutrino factory, in a d etector at the same 730 km,
is approximately 100 times that in the NGS, or about 40 times t he highest energy Minos
example.
23Table 3: Comparison of neutrino interaction rates per kton- year with Minos
and NGS for beam conditions and neutrino mixing parameters a s in Table 2.
νFactory CERN-NGS FNAL Minos
∝angbracketleftEν∝angbracketright(GeV) 40 26 3 6 12
L(km) 730 730 730
νµ→ντ→τ 680 ≈7 ≈0 ≈30 ≈40
νµ→νµ 140k 1.5k 0.46k 1.4k 3.2k
5 Muon Colliders
A neutrino factory based on a muon storage ring is a possible fi rst step towards a muon
collider [23]. This section briefly reviews the motivation f or muon colliders, and sketches a
sequence of such colliders.
The Standard Model of electroweak and strong interactions h as passed precision exper-
imental tests at the highest energy scale accessible today. Theoretical arguments indicate
that new physics beyond the Standard Model associated with the electroweak gauge symme-
try breaking and fermion mass generation will emerge in part on collisions at or approaching
the TeV energy scale. It is likely that both hadron-hadron an d lepton-antilepton colliders
will be required to discover and make precision measurement s of the new phenomena.
The next big step forward in advancing the hadron-hadron col lider energy frontier will
be provided by the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC), a proton -proton collider with a
center-of-mass (CoM) energy of 14 TeV which is due to come int o operation in the latter
half of the next decade.
The route towards TeV-scale lepton-antilepton colliders i s less clear. The lepton-antilepton
colliders built so far have been e+e−colliders, such as the Large Electron Positron collider
(LEP) at CERN and the Stanford Linear Collider (SLC) at SLAC. In a circular ring such as
LEP the energy lost per revolution in keV is 88 .5×E4/ρ,where the electron energy Eis in
GeV, and the radius of the orbit ρis in meters. Hence, the energy loss grows rapidly as E
increases. This limits the center-of-mass energy that woul d be achievable in a LEP-like col-
lider. The problem can be avoided by building a linear machin e (the SLC is partially linear),
but with current technologies, such a machine must be very lo ng (30-40 km) to attain the
TeV energy scale. Even so, radiation during the beam-beam in teraction (beamstrahlung)
limits the precision of the CoM energy [64].
For a lepton with mass mthe radiative energy losses are inversely proportional to m4.
Hence, the energy-loss problem can be solved by using heavy l eptons. In practice this means
using muons, which have a mass ≈207 times that of an electron. The resulting reduction in
radiative losses enables higher energies to be reached and s maller collider rings to be used
[70]. Estimated sizes of the accelerator complexes require d for 0.1-TeV, 0.5-TeV and 3-TeV
muon colliders [23, 66] are compared with the sizes of other p ossible future colliders, and
24Figure 14: Various proposed high energy colliders compared with the FNAL
and BNL sites. The energies in parentheses give for lepton co lliders their
CoM energies and for hadron colliders the approximate range of CoM energies
attainable for hard parton-parton collisions.
with the FNAL and BNL sites in Fig. 14. Note that muon collider s with CoM energies up to
≈4 TeV would fit on these existing laboratory sites. Figs. 15 an d 16 show possible outlines
of the 0.1 TeV and 3 TeV machines. Parameters for 10 to 100 TeV c olliders have also been
discussed [65].
Muon colliders offer significant physics advantages. The sma ll radiative losses permit
very small beam-energy spreads to be achieved. For example, momentum spreads as low as
∆P/P= 0.003% are believed to be possible for a low-energy collider. B y measuring the time-
dependent decay asymmetry resulting from the naturally pol arized muons, the beam energy
could be determined with a precision of ∆ E/E= 10−6[67]. The small beam-energy spread,
together with the precise energy determination, would faci litate measurements of the masses
and widths of any new resonant states scanned by the collider . In addition, since the cross-
section for producing a Higgs-like scalar particle in the s- channel (direct lepton-antilepton
annihilation) is proportional to m2, this extremely important process could be studied only
at a muon collider and not at an e+e−collider [68]. And, of course, the decaying muons will
produce copious quantities of neutrinos. Even short straig ht sections in a muon-collider ring
25Figure 15: Plan of a 0.1-TeV-CoM muon collider.
Figure 16: Plan of a 3-TeV-CoM muon collider shown on the Ferm i National
Laboratory site as an example.
26will result in neutrino beams several orders of magnitude hi gher in intensity than presently
available, excellent for nonoscillation neutrino physics in a near detector.
The First Muon Collider will be a unique facility for neutral Higgs boson (or techni-
resonance) studies through s-channel resonance production, as illustrated in Fig. 17. M ea-
surements can also be made of the threshold cross sections fo r production of W+W−,t¯t,
Zh, and pairs of supersymmetry particles – χ+
1χ−
1,χ0
2χ0
1,˜ℓ+˜ℓ−and ˜ν¯˜ν– that will determine
the corresponding masses to high precision. A µ+µ−→Z0factory, utilizing the partial
polarization of the muons, could allow significant improvem ents in sin2θwprecision and in
B-mixing and CP-violating studies.
H0
Figure 17: Left: effective s-channel Higgs cross section ¯ σhobtained by con-
voluting the Breit-Wigner resonance formula with a Gaussia n distribution for
resolution R. The mass of a light Higgs boson could be determined to 1 MeV at
a First Muon Collider. Right: separation of A0andH0signals for tan β= 10.
From Ref. [69].
The Next Muon Collider will be particularly valuable for rec onstructing supersymmetric
particles of high mass from their complex cascade decay chai ns. Also, any Z′resonances
within the kinematic reach of the machine would give enormou s event rates. The effects of
virtual Z′states would be detectable to high mass. If no Higgs bosons ex ist below ∼1 TeV,
then the NMC would be the ideal machine for the study of strong WW scattering at TeV
energies.
The cost of building a muon collider is not yet known. However , since muon colliders are
relatively small, they may be significantly less expensive t han alternative machines.
The front end of a muon collider is very similar to that of a neu trino factory, with the
important difference that the muon phase volume must be coole d by a factor of 106rather
than≈100. During this larger cooling, the longitudinal phase vol ume must shrink along
with the transverse. Since ionization cooling as proposed h ere directly cools only transverse
space, a muon collider must include an exchange between long itudinal and transverse phase
volumes so that cooling of the latter effectively results in c ooling of the former as well.
Another difference between the two machines is that a muon col lider must provide muon
27bunches of both signs simultaneously, while in a neutrino fa ctory only one sign of muons is
utilized at any given time. Further, a storage ring with long straight sections optimized for
neutrino beams is not ideal for high-luminosity muon-muon c ollisions, particularly at lower
energies.
6 Research and Development
6.1 Historical Introduction
The interest of the present proponents has evolved from our i nvestigations of muon colliders,
the concept of which was introduced by Budker [70], and devel oped further by Skrinsky et
al.[71], and by Neuffer [72]. This work pointed out the significan t challenges in designing
an accelerator complex that can make, accelerate, and colli deµ+andµ−bunches all within
the muon lifetime of 2 .2µs (cτ= 659 m), and provided preliminary sketches of technical
solutions.
A concerted study of a muon collider design has been underway since 1992 [73]. By the
Sausalito workshop [74] in 1995 it was realized that with new ideas and modern technology,
it may be feasible to make muon bunches containing a few times 1012muons, compress
their phase space and accelerate them up to the multi-TeV ene rgy scale before more than
about 3/4 of them have decayed. With careful design of the col lider ring and shielding it
appears possible to reduce to acceptable levels the backgro unds within the detector that arise
from the very large flux of electrons produced in muon decays. These realizations led to an
intense activity, which resulted in the muon-collider feas ibility study report [75] prepared for
the 1996 DPF/DPB Summer Study on High-Energy Physics (the Sn owmass’96 workshop).
Encouraged by further progress in developing the muon-coll ider concept, together with
the growing interest and involvement of the high-energy-ph ysics community, the Muon Col-
lider Collaboration became a formal entity in May of 1997 [76 , 77]. An overview of the
activities and plans of the Muon Collider Collaboration is g iven in [23].
That a neutrino factory would be a good first step towards a muo n collider has been
explored in two Collaboration workshops [24, 25] as well as b y ECFA/ICFA study groups
[26, 78]. The NuFact’99 Workshop [27] in June 1999 provided a focus for international
interest in neutrino factories, motivated by the outstandi ng physics prospects plus the need
for truly global facilities for long baseline neutrino phys ics.
Accordingly, the Muon Collider Collaboration has recently changed its name to the Neu-
trino Factory and Muon Collider Collaboration, and is redir ecting its efforts towards an early
realization of a neutrino factory. A Muon Steering Group [79 ] has been formed in Europe to
coordinate efforts there towards the same goal. These two str uctures are formally distinct,
but there is excellent communication among members of the tw o groups.
The Muon Collider Collaboration has proposed an R&D program that features hardware
studies of two key aspects of a muon collider:
•Targetry, capture and phase rotation at a muon source [80],
•Final-stage ionization cooling at a muon collider [81],
28in addition to an ongoing program of machine theory and simul ation. There has been one
outside review of the R&D program [82], conducted in July, 19 99 by the Muon Technical
Advisory Committee (MUTAC) of the Muon Collider Oversight G roup (MCOG). The MU-
TAC report [83] and the MCOG report [84] following this revie w emphasized that the R&D
program should be conducted in the context of “a more formal, long range, R&D plan” with
a “focus on one object for a complete, detailed study”. They n oted that “a neutrino source
appears as the most likely possibility” for that study.
Consistent with the emerging emphasis on a neutrino factory , the Collaboration is re-
examining its R&D priorities, as well as seeking broader sup port for these activities.
6.2 R&D Needs for a Neutrino Factory
The overall path of an R&D program involves conceptual desig n, demonstration of feasibility
of novel components, followed by cost optimization. A neutr ino factory based on a muon
storage ring is still very much in the early phases of concept ual design, with some items
identified as needing verification as to their feasibility. N onetheless, there are some pressures
to concern ourselves with cost issues already at this early s tage [85].
The prominent R&D issues for a neutrino factory are listed be low, following the sequence
of components in the accelerator complex.
1.Coherent design concept of an entire neutrino factory.
2.Proton driver : 1-4 MW, 5-15 Hz, ≈5×1013protons per bunch, 1 ns bunch length .
The critical issue of short bunch length in a proton synchrot ron is under study by an
ANL-BNL-FNAL-KEK-LANL collaboration [86, 87, 88, 89].
3.Pion yields from proton-nucleus collisions . A neutrino factory would collect very
low energy pions, for which the rate is maximal. Such pions ar e partially absorbed in
the targets of most prior production experiments, so the dat a are questionable. A
recent measurement by members of the Collaboration should i mprove our knowledge
from proton beams of 6-24 GeV [90]. An experiment to study yie lds from 2-GeV
protons is being considered at CERN (sec. 6.4) in the context of the option for a
proton driver linac.
4.Production target . Proton pulses of 70-280 kJ energy and 1 ns length are inciden t
on the target, leading to substantial issues of “shock” dama ge, cooling and materials
survivability in a high radiation environment. While it is n atural to consider solid
targets, their viability is considered marginal, and liqui d targets are the alternative.
For maximal pion production, a free liquid jet target is to be preferred in principle.
There is no example of such a target.
5.Capture solenoid . Optimal pion yields are obtained when the target is surroun ding
by a solenoid of field ≈20 T, followed by an adiabatic transition to a solenoidal cha nnel
of a few T. Such a magnet would be a superconducting hybrid wit h a resistive insert
[55]. A key question is the effect of radiation damage on such a device.
296.Beam dump . The 1-4 MW proton beam is dumped inside the target/solenoid system.
A flowing liquid dump may be more appropriate than a solid dump .
7.First Phase Rotation . If polarized muon beams are to be obtained, the production
target must be quickly followed by a high-gradient, low-fre quency rf system, combined
with a solenoid channel, to bunch the pion/muon beam. Little is known about the
viability of such a system near an intense radiation source.
8.Mini Cooling . The use of a passive liquid hydrogen absorber to provide ini tial trans-
verse cooling of the muon beam by a factor of two is well unders tood in principle,
although it never has been demonstrated.
9.Second Phase Rotation . For the second step in the bunching process, the muons
must be accelerated by 80-100 MeV to restore the energy lost i n the mini cooling.
A large acceptance induction linac with a programmed wavefo rm is required. The
parameters of the linac are somewhat beyond those presently demonstrated.
10.Bunching to ≈400MHz . This is believed to be relatively straightforward.
11.Ionization Cooling . The challenges of further acceleration and storage of the m uon
beam will be substantially easier if the transverse phase ar ea of the beam can be
reduced by an additional factor of 10. This cannot be accompl ished in a single step of
ionization cooling, but must involve alternating ionizati on cooling and rf acceleration,
all in a magnetic channel. This is a key area for study, and a ha rdware demonstration
is very appropriate.
12.Acceleration . The acceleration from ≈100 MeV to ≈50 GeV is best accomplished
in recirculating linacs with superconducting rf cavities. Rather large acceptances are
required, and the machine parameters are again somewhat bey ond those presently
demonstrated.
13.Muon Storage Ring . The desire for multiply directed neutrino beams with very
small angular divergence leads to novel designs for the stor age ring, whose plane is
far from horizontal. Besides issues of lattice design, ther e will be considerable civil
engineering challenges in building such a ring.
The R&D needs for a muon collider are very similar, but with ad ditional challenges in
cooling and storage ring design. At least four orders of magn itude more cooling (including
continual exchange between transverse and longitudinal em ittance) are required for a muon
collider than a neutrino factory, and a rather different ring is needed to maximize collider
luminosity than simply to hold the muons while they decay.
A sense of the Collaboration’s views as to the relative urgen cy of addressing the above
issues is given by the following ranking. Given in parenthes es are the institutions presently
involved in R&D into these topics.
1. Coherent design study (the Collaboration as a whole).
2. Target, dump, phase rotation (ANL, BNL, UCLA, CERN, LBNL, ORNL, Princeton).
303. Ionization cooling (ANL, BNL, Budker Inst., UC Berkeley, UCLA, FNAL, IIT, Indiana
U., LBNL, NHMFL, Northern Illinois U., Princeton).
4. Induction linac (LBNL).
5. Recirculating linacs, superconducting rf (Jefferson Lab ).
6. Storage ring design (BNL, CERN, FNAL, LBNL).
7. RF power sources (BNL, CERN, FNAL, LBL + industry).
8. Effects of radiation on superconducting magnets (MSU).
9. Fabrication of superconducting magnets (LBNL, NHMFL + in dustry).
10. RF bunching.
11. Engineering of a tilted ring.
12. Engineering of “conventional” facilities (FNAL, ORNL) .
Proton driver issues are very site specific, and have been lef t off the second list as being
somewhat outside the scope of the Neutrino Factory and Muon C ollider Collaboration. Pion
production cross sections were also left off the second list a s being adequately addressed by
efforts largely outside the Collaboration.
The strategy for pursuit of the R&D topics listed above is an i nteresting challenge in
itself. The variety of questions is large, and several go bey ond the scope high-energy ac-
celerator experience. A neutrino factory is still too novel a concept to be sponsored as a
well-defined program at a single accelerator laboratory. Th e cooperative efforts of people
at many institutions is needed to bring the concept of a neutr ino factory to the stage of a
formal Conceptual Design.
The Neutrino Factory and Muon Collider Collaboration has ta ken responsibility for the
coordination of multi-institutional R&D efforts on the non- site-specific aspects of a neutrino
factory. While the topic of research is largely accelerator physics, the operation of the
Collaboration is more similar to that of a large experimenta l physics group proposing a novel
detector than to that of past accelerator projects. The Coll aboration has been successful in
providing a means of groups of people working together, as fa cilitated by numerous workshops
[91], video conferences [92], web sites (see links at the pri mary site [76], and an archive of
technical documents [93]. Additional efforts are needed to e nhance the coherence of this
work, an important step of which will be the appointment of an R&D Coordinator. There
remains the issue of the response of the Collaboration to the advice of the MUTAC that
“the first round of Design and Simulation activities may requ ires 10-15 accelerator experts
for 1-1/2 to 3 years. The coherence required for success in th is activity demands full-time
workers in close communication.”
To carry out the R&D program sketched above, the Collaborati on seeks additional re-
sources in two categories:
311. Support for a core group of physicists, most of whom are in r esidence at a single site,
likely a national laboratory. Support is sought for both sta ff positions, and for visitors
who would locate at the core site for at least several months a t a time.
2. Support for the various particular R&D topics listed abov e, which work may well be
effectively pursued at diverse labs and universities.
Partial support for Collaboration efforts in both categorie s of work is presently available via
direct funds from the Advanced Technology R&D Program (and t o a much smaller extent
from the Physics Research Program) of the U.S. Department of Energy, as well as from
discretionary funds at the major U.S. national laboratorie s. The state of Illinois has made a
commitment to a university consortium heading by IIT for fun ding beginning in year 2000.
CERN is starting an R&D program, (sec. 6.4), with initial fun ding in the present fiscal year.
We have previously estimated that a robust R&D program for mu on colliders would
require about $15M/year. A very similar figure is appropriat e for neutrino factory R&D,
as this is effectively a transformed muon collider R&D progra m. Our present funding is
approximately 1/2 of this amount.
The favorable outcome of our R&D program is, of course, the co nstruction of a neutrino
factory. Prior to this, we anticipate the elevation of effort to that of a major project at at least
one national laboratory. The role of the Collaboration will no doubt evolve significantly in
such case, but it can and should continue to play a key role in h arnessing the diverse resources
needed to design a neutrino factory. The original role of the Collaboration as a vehicle for
broad-based efforts towards a muon collider will again be imp ortant as a neutrino factory
becomes associated with a particular site.
6.3 The Potential of Muon-Beam-Based Particle Physics and t he
NSF-Supported Community
Just 20 years ago the DoE assembled a HEPAP Subpanel on Accele rator R and D. In the
letter conveying their report to HEPAP the Subpanel Chair wr ote: “You will note that in
the 50 odd years of American accelerator science associated with particle physics research,
enormous strides in increasing particle beam energies and i n decreasing unit costs have
been and are being made. ... Our primary conclusion is that, d espite the spectacular past
and present accomplishments of the field, we must redouble ou r efforts to improve the cost
effectiveness of our accelerators if the needs of US particle physics are to be met in the
resource-limited situation in which we find ourselves...”
Unfortunately, as recent history and current events show, t his observation is even more
apt today than it was those 20 years ago. This is not for want of zeal and good ideas. In
the intervening years considerable progress in understand ing the fundamentals of “classical”
accelerator science and improving classical accelerator t echnology has been made. There
have also been some advances based on technologies not previ ously used in elementary-
particle-physics accelerator work, e.g., laser and plasma technology. It is, however, a fact
that none of these efforts, to date, have qualitatively chang ed the cost of providing significant
luminosity at what is now the energy frontier. Consequently , it is not an exaggeration to say
that today we are in danger of pricing ourselves out of the mar ket.
32In recent years, as accelerator science and technology have become more and more so-
phisticated and thus more specialized, the task of developi ng the accelerators needed for
the future has more and more been left to experts – specialist s in accelerators. They have
done an excellent job indeed. The capabilities of today’s ac celerators would have even been
unthinkable 20 years ago.
Nevertheless, we find ourselves in the unenviable position t hat each new energy-frontier
facility being discussed turns out to be in the multi-billio n dollar class. This difficulty might
find a direct political solution from time to time as history u nfolds and the competitive juices
flow strongly again. However, if this had been the path follow ed in the past, elementary
particle physics would not be able to ask the compelling ques tions that it can ask today.
Thus, the direct approach of tackling the problem scientific ally and technologically is likely
to be more dependable – no guarantees. One obvious avenue is t o broaden the scientific
and technical idea base which might support significant impr ovements in accelerator cost
effectiveness. This implies that the problem, OUR problem, n eeds to be brought more
directly and effectively to the stakeholders in elementary p article physics, that is to say, to
the university and laboratory community of experimental an d theoretical physicists who now
concern themselves primarily with the particle physics and detector instrumentation. This
has been tried to some degree in the past, with only modest suc cess. Today the need is more
apparent and, in addition, we now have a made-to-order chall enge that needs all the new
and non expert ideas that it can get - the possibility of doing elementary particle physics
with high energy muon beams through muon acceleration and st orage for intense neutrino
production, and later directly for µ-µcollisions.
Many aspects of this concept are new enough that even the expe rts have to start from
scratch. This stems from the unusual requirement that the jo b has to be done quickly owing
to the finite life of the beam and, perhaps more importantly, t hat an enormous spread in
beam momenta and angle must be accommodated if the required c apture efficiency is to
be met. The situation is somewhat analogous to the situation in accelerator science forty-
odd years ago when folks tracked particles through magnetic fields using the Runge-Kutta
method with a Marchant calculator. All of that calculation w ith the attendant trial and error
struggle to find workable system designs was made obsolete wi th the elegant theoretical work
of Courant, Livingston and Snyder and many others. They disc overed powerful methods for
dealing with paraxial ray beams of relatively narrow energy spread. These methods are
of limited use in studying the optics of a muon-based neutrin o source or collider where
nonlinearities are controlling rather than perturbations . Not only that, but the main optical
components will probably have to be solenoids, a device whic h has heretofore not been used
for the principal focusing and bending elements in high ener gy machines. Trying to master
all this puts everyone more or less on the same footing and beg s for some new tactics from
the classical mechanics buffs among us. Latter day Courants, Livingstons and Snyders are
sorely needed.
There are yet other unprecedented challenges. The science a nd technology of quickly
reducing the phase space volume of the beam needs developing before muon beams of the
required brightness can be produced. While basic ideas for a ccomplishing this via ionization
cooling have been around for years, the practical problem of realization is also new to the
experts and involves very fundamental physics, some of whic h is not yet known with the
depth required to support the needed technology.
33Considerable attention has been focused on the potential ph ysics opportunities for muon-
based neutrino science and on possible means for attacking i t. A Neutrino Factory and Muon
Collider Collaboration (NFMCC), formed of members from the DoE supported Labs, Budker
Institute for Nuclear Physics and some universities, has be en formed and has been at work
for some time. An idea of the progress that has been made is pre sented in secs. 1-5 of this
document, which makes clear that a resolution of the basic pa rticle and accelerator physics
issues remains in the future and that more ideas, more work an d much R&D lie ahead even
in evaluating whether our community can and should propose s uch a facility.
Taking into account the fact that there is a great deal of tale nt, knowledge and expertise
in the university community – both DoE and NSF supported – not now engaged in addressing
the pressing accelerator issues, it would seem most appropr iate to try to tap that pool. To
make this possible, two things at least are needed. First, th ey have to be made aware of
the possibilities and challenges. This the world community in general and the NFMCC in
particular are doing. The NFMCC will be emphasizing this asp ect more in the coming
year. Second, modest start-up resources are necessary for p reliminary engagement with the
accelerator challenges, resources such as funding for post docs, some computing and modest
beginnings of technical R&D. It is with respect to these need ed monetary resources that we
are addressing this 1999 MRE Panel.
Within one to two years it may well become apparent that large R&D expenditures,
i.e., 10’s of M$, by NSF-supported university groups working on t he accelerator aspects
of muon-beam elementary particle physics, will be appropri ate. This would require a joint
application for MRE funding. The effort required to plan and j ustify such an application
for review by the physics community, being an unusual enterp rise, needs unusual support.
Our hope is that this MRE Panel will appreciate this special n eed and recommend to the
NSF that, where possible, they provide start up resources fo r currently supported university
particle physics groups to become so engaged in the knowledg e that this work may well lead
to an MRE proposal in the not too distant future.
6.4 European R&D Activities on Muon Storage Rings and Neu-
trino Factories
There is growing interest in Europe for muon storage rings an d particularly neutrino factories.
Several working groups have been set up to study:
1. The accelerator aspects of a neutrino factory at CERN;
2. The physics of neutrino oscillations;
3. The opportunities offered by high-intensity neutrino muo n and hadron beams;
4. The physics opportunities of the extension of a neutrino f actory to a precision muon
collider [78].
Discussions with physicists and accelerator engineers fro m European institutes and lab-
oratories, and from CERN, have focused on identifying impor tant missing elements in the
currently debated designs of muon storage rings, with a view to avoiding duplication of
efforts while contributing significantly towards the design of a neutrino factory.
34The European community is considering the following R&D pro jects:
1.A hadron production experiment at the CERN-PS . The aim is to measure
charged pion production by 2-16 GeV protons, data that are ne eded for a quantitative
design of pion capture and phase rotation. The very same expe riment can be extended
to hadron production by pions, so as to deliver the entire set of data that is needed for
a reliable calculation of the atmospheric neutrino flux.
2.A large-angle muon scattering experiment. This experiment would measure with
high precision the large-angle scattering of muons with mom entum of a few hundred
MeV/ cin various materials including liquid hydrogen, as theoret ical calculations are
not reliable enough to assess the performance of ionization cooling of muons.
3.Exposure of an rf cavity to radiation and a magnetic field. One of the big
unknowns is the reliability of operation of the rf cavities w hich are currently discussed
for pion capture and phase rotation, and which will have to op erate in a high-radiation
field and possibly in strong solenoidal magnetic fields. Expe riments with pulsing rf
cavities would also be performed with a view to achieving hig her gradients.
4.High-power target tests. Current design work is focussed on targets which with-
stand a beam power of 4 MW or even larger. While not considered impossible, this
is a daring goal for which, however, considerable know-how i s available in Europe
(CERN, GSI, KFA Julich, PSI, RAL), which can and should be cha nneled towards an
interesting and forward-looking challenge.
This proposed program of experimental R&D work in Europe is b y and large comple-
mentary to the R&D activities planned or under way in the USA. This experimental work is
augmented by theoretical studies, both in the area of physic s and detectors, and in the area
of accelerator design (proton linac, fast-cycling synchro tron, muon recirculators).
7 Acknowledgements
This document was largely assembled from existing sources, which have been cited among
the references. Here we would like to identify and thank thos e individuals who contributed
paragraphs or more of the text. Section 1 is based in part on no tes by R. Shrock. Sections 2
and 3 are adapted from [28], which was edited by B. Autin from c ontributions by A. Donini,
M.B. Gavela, P. Hern´ andez, S. Rigolin, and S. Petcov (secs. 2.1 and 2.2), D.A. Harris (sec.
2.3), and K.S. McFarland (sec. 3), among others. Section 4 is from R.B. Palmer with
additional material from S. Geer (sec. 4.10) as well as C. Joh nson and E. Keil. Sections
5 and 6.1 are adapted from the Muon Collider Status Report [23 ] which was edited by
J.C. Gallardo; the pieces used here are from V. Barger, S. Gee r, J. Gunion, and R.B. Palmer.
Section 6.2 is adapted from notes by A. Sessler. Section 6.3 i s by M. Tigner. Section 6.4 is by
the Steering Group of European Studies on Muon Storage Rings [79], chaired by A. Blondel.
We especially thank those contributors who are not members o f the Neutrino Factory
and Muon Collider Collaboration.
358 References
[1] K.S. Hirata et al., Phys. Lett. B205 , 416 (1988);
ibid.B280 , 146 (1992);
Y. Fukuda et al.,ibid.B335 , 237 (1994);
S. Hatakeyama et al.,Measurement of the Flux and Zenith-Angle Distribution of Up ward Through-
Going Muons in Kamiokande II + III , Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 2016 (1998), hep-ex/9806038;
[2] D. Casper et al.,Measurement of atmospheric neutrino composition with the I MB-3 detector , Phys.
Rev. Lett. 66, 2561 (1991);
R. Becker-Szendy et al.,Electron- and muon-neutrino content of the atmospheric flux , Phys. Rev. D
46, 3720 (1992);
Search for Muon Neutrino Oscillations with the Irvine-Mich igan-Brookhaven Detector , Phys. Rev.
Lett.69, 1010 (1992);
Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 38, 331 (1995).
[3] T. Kafka, Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 35, 427, (1994);
M. Goodman, ibid.38, 337, (1995);
E. Peterson, Atmospheric Neutrino Studies in Soudan 2 ,ibid.77, 111, (1999);
W.W.M. Allison et al.,The Atmospheric Neutrino Flavor Ratio from a 3.9 Fiducial Ki loton-Year
Exposure of Soudan 2 , Phys. Lett. B449 , 137 (1999).
[4] F. Ronga, Atmospheric neutrino induced muons in the MACRO detector , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.)
77, 117, (1999).
[5] The Super-Kamiokande home page: http://www-sk.icrr.u -tokyo.ac.jp/doc/sk/
Y. Fukuda et al.,Measurement of a small atmospheric νµ/νeratio, Phys. Lett. B433 , 9 (1998), hep-
ex/9803006;
Study of the atmospheric neutrino flux in the multi-GeV energ y range ,ibid.B436 , 33 (1998), hep-
ex/9805006;
Y. Fukuda et al.,Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos , Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1562 (1998),
hep-ex/9807003;
T. Kajita, Atmospheric neutrino results from Super-Kamiokande and Ka miokande – Evidence for µµ
oscillation , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 77, 123, (1999);
Y. Fukuda et al.,Measurement of the flux and zenith-angle distribution of upw ard through-going
muons by Super-Kamiokande , Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2644 (1999), hep-ex/9812014;
T. Futagami et al.,Observation of the East-West Anisotropy of the Atmospheric Neutrino Flux ,ibid.
82, 5194 (1999), astro-ph/9901139;
Y. Fukuda et al.,Neutrino induced upward-going muons in Super-Kamiokande , hep-ex/9908049.
[6] R. Davis, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 32, 13 (1994);
K. Lande et al.,The Homestake Solar Neutrino Program , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 77, 13, (1999).
[7] K.S. Hirata et al., Phys. Lett. B205 , 416 (1988);
Results from One Thousand Days of Real-Time, Directional So lar-Neutrino Data , Phys. Rev. Lett.
65, 1297 (1990);
Constraints on Neutrino-Oscillation Parameters from Kami okande-II Solar-Neutrino Data ,ibid.65,
1301 (1990);
Search for Day-Night and Semiannual Variations in the Solar Neutrino Flux Observed in the
Kamiokande-II Detector ,ibid.66, 9 (1991);
Real-time, directional measurement of8B solar neutrinos in the Kamiokande II detector , Phys. Rev.
D44, 2241 (1991);
Phys. Lett. B280 , 146 (1992);
Y. Fukuda et al., Phys. Lett. B335 , 237 (1994);
Solar Neutrino Data Covering Solar Cycle 22 , Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1683 (1996).
36[8] Y. Suzuki, Solar Neutrino Results from Super-Kamiokande , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 77, 35,
(1999);
Measurement of the Solar Neutrino Flux from Super-Kamiokan de’s First 300 Days , Phys. Rev. Lett.
81, 1158 (1998) [erratum, ibid.81, 4279 (1998), hep-ex/9805021];
Constraints on neutrino oscillation parameters from measu rement of day-night solar neutrino fluxes
at Super-Kamiokande ,ibid.82, 1810 (1999), hep-ex/9812009;
Measurement of the solar neutrino energy spectrum using neu trino-electron scattering ,ibid.82, 2430
(1999), hep-ex/9812011.
[9] P. Anselmann et al., Phys. Lett. B285 , 376 (1992);
ibid.B285 , 376, 390 (1992);
ibid.B314 , 445 (1993);
ibid.B327 , 377 (1994);
ibid.B342 , 440 (1995);
ibid.B357 , 237 (1995);
W. Hampel et al.,ibid.B388 , 384 (1996);
T. Kirsten, Gallex solar neutrino results , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 77, 26, (1999).
[10] A.I. Abazonv et al.,Search for neutrinos from the Sun using the reaction71Ga(νe, e−)71Ge, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 67, 3332 (1991);
J.N. Abdurashitov et al., Phys. Lett. B338 , 234 (1994);
The Russian-American gallium experiment (SAGE) Cr neutrin o source measurement , Phys. Rev.
Lett.77, 4708 (1996);
V.N. Gavrin et al.,Solar neutrino results from SAGE , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 77, 20, (1999).
[11] The LSND homepage: http://www.neutrino.lanl.gov/LS ND
C. Athanassopoulos et al.,Candidate Events in a Search for νµ→νeOscillations , Phys. Rev. Lett.
77, 2650 (1995);
Evidence for νµ→νeOscillations from the LSND Experiment at the Los Alamos Meso n Physics
Facility ,ibid.77, 3082 (1996);
Evidence for νµ→νeOscillations from Pion Decay in Flight Neutrinos , Phys. Rev. C 58, 2489 (1998),
nucl-ex/9706006;
Results on νµ→νeNeutrino Oscillations from the LSND Experiment , Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1774
(1998);
D.H. White, Neutrino Oscillation Results from LSND , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 77, 207, (1999).
[12] The KARMEN homepage: http://www-ik1.fzk.de/www/kar men/karmen e.html
K. Eitel, B. Zeitnitz, The Search for Neutrino Oscillations νµ→νewith Karmen , Nucl. Phys. B
(Proc. Suppl.) 77, 225, (1999).
[13] The Neutrino Oscillation Industry: http://www.hep.a nl.gov/ndk/hypertext/nu industry.html
[14] A partial compilation of neutrino physics references c an be viewed at
http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mumu/nuphys/
[15] The K2K experiment home page: http://neutrino.kek.jp /˜melissa/K2K/K2K2./html
The KamLAND home page: http://www.awa.tohoku.ac.jp/html /KamLAND/
[16] The Minos Project at NuMI: http://www.hep.anl.gov/ND K/Hypertext/numi.html
[17] The CERN Neutrino Beam to Gran Sasso Project: http://ww w.cern.ch/NGS/
The ICANOE experiment home page: http://www.1.na.infn.it /wsubnucl/accel/noe/noe.html
The OPERA experiment home page:
http://www1.na.infn.it//wsubnucl/accel/neutrino/ope ra.html
[18] The MiniBooNE project: http://www.neutrino.lanl.go v/BooNE
37[19] The Oak Ridge Large Neutrino Detector: http://www.ora u.org/orland/
[20]Search for νµ→νeOscillations at CERN PS , http://chorus01.cern.ch/˜pzucchel/loi/
[21] A.C. Melissinos, unpublished note (1960),
http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mumu/physics/meliss1/1. html
[22] D. Cline and D. Neuffer, A Muon Storage Ring for Neutrino Oscillation Experiments , AIP Conf. Proc.
68, 846 (1980); reproduced in AIP Conf. Proc. 352, 10 (1996);
[23] C.M. Ankenbrandt et al.,Status of muon collider research and development and future plans, Phys.
Rev. ST Accel. Beams 2, 081001 (1999), http://prst-ab.aps.org/przv02i08tc.ht ml
http://www.cap.bnl.gov/mumu/status report.html
[24] S. Geer and R. Raja (eds.), Workshop on Physics at the First Muon Collider and at the Fron t End
of the Muon Collider , (Fermilab, Nov. 1997), AIP Conf. Proc. 435(1998),
http://www.fnal.gov/projects/muon collider/physics/talks.html
[25]Workshop on the Potential for Neutrino Physics at Future Muo n Colliders (BNL, Aug. 1998).
[26] B. Autin, A. Blondel, J. Ellis, eds., Prospective Study of Muon Storage Rings at CERN ,
http://preprints.cern.ch/cgi-bin/setlink?base=cernr ep&categ=Yellow Report&id=99-02
[27] The NuFact’99 Home Page: http://lyoninfo.in2p3.fr/n ufact99/
[28] B. Autin, ed., Neutrino factories based on muon decay rings ,
http://nicewww.cern.ch/˜autin/nufact99/whitepap.ps
[29] B. Pontecorvo, Mesonium and Antimesonium , J. Expt. Theor. Phys. 33, 549 (1957);
Inverse Beta Process and Nonconservation of Lepton Charge ,ibid.34, 247 (1958).
[30] For reviews, see, e.g., F. Boehm and P. Vogel, Physics of Massive Neutrinos (Cambridge U. Press,
Cambridge, 1987);
S.M. Bilenky and S.T. Petcov, Rev. Mod. Phys. 59, 671 (1987);
B. Kayser, F. Gibrat-Debu, and F. Perrier, The Physics of Massive Neutrinos (World Scientific, Sin-
gapore, 1989);
C.W. Kim and A. Pevsner, Neutrinos in Physics and Astrophysics (Harwood, Langhorne, 1993).
R.N. Mohapatra and P.B. Pal, Massive Neutrinos in Physics and Astrophysics , 2nd ed. (World Sci-
entific, Singapore, 1998).
A.Y. Smirnov, Reconstructing Neutrino Mass Spectrum , hep-ph/9901208;
P. Fischer, B. Kayser, and K.S. McFarland, Neutrino Mass and Oscillation , hep-ph/9906244;
J.M. Conrad, Recent Results on Neutrino Oscillations , hep-ex/9811009;
S. Bilenky, C. Giunti, and W. Grimus, Phenomenology of Neutrino Oscillations , hep-ph/9812360;
G. Altarelli and F. Ferulgio, Neutrino Masses and Mixings: a Theoretical Perspective , hep-
ph/9905536;
R.D. Peccei, Neutrino Physics , hep-ph/9906509;
J. Ellis, Neutrino Physics: Theory and Phenomenology , hep-ph/9907458;
R.N. Mohapatra, Theories of Neutrino Masses and Mixings , hep-ph/991036;
W. Grimus, Phenomenology of Neutrino Masses and Mixing , hep-ph/9910340;
M.C. Gonzalez-Garcia, Solutions to the Atmospheric Neutrino Problem , hep-ph/9910494.
[31] Excellent neutrino physics internet sites include [13 ] and:
J.N. Bahcall’s neutrino page: http://www.sns.ias.edu/˜j nb/
N. Hata and P. Langacker’s neutrino page: http://dept.phys .upenn.edu/˜www/neutrino/solar.html/
The Ultimate Neutrino Page , http://cupp.oulu.fi/neutrino/
38[32] In addition to [30], see, for example:
G.L. Fogli, E. Lisi, A. Marrone, and G. Scioscia, Super-Kamiokande atmospheric neutrino oscilla-
tion data, zenith distributions, and three flavor oscillati ons, Phys. Rev. D 59, 033001 (1999), hep-
ph/9808205;
J.N. Bahcall, P.I. Krastev, and A.Y. Smirnov, Is a large mixing angle MSW effect the solution of the
solar neutrino problem? , Phys. Rev. D 60, 093001 (1999), hep-ph/9905220.
[33] In addition to [30], see, for example:
S.L. Glashow and L.M. Krauss, Phys. Lett. B190 , 199 (1987);
S.P. Mikheyev and A.Y. Smirnov, Vacuum oscillations of solar neutrinos: correlation betwe en spec-
trum distortion and seasonal variation , Phys. Lett. B429 , 343 (1998);
V. Barger and K. Whisnant, Global three-neutrino vacuum oscillation fits to the solar a nd atmo-
spheric neutrino anomalies , Phys. Rev. D 59, 093007 (1999), hep-ph/9812273;
M. Maris and S.T. Petcov, Enhancing the seasonal variation effect in the case of the vac uum oscilla-
tion solution of the solar neutrino problem , Phys. Lett. B457 , 319 (1999);
V. Berezinsky, G. Fiorentini, and M. Lissia, Vacuum oscillations and excess of high energy solar neu-
trino events observed in Super-Kamiokande , hep-ph/9904225;
S. Goswami, D. Majumdar, and A. Raychaudhuri, Vacuum Oscillation Solutions of the Solar Neutrino
Problem: A Status Report , hep-ph/9909453.
[34] G.S. Vidaykin et al., JETP Lett. 59, 390 (1994);
B. Achkar et al., Nucl. Phys. B434 , 503 (1995).
[35] In addition to [30], see, for example:
A. Zee, Phys. Lett. B93, 389 (1980);
V. Barger, P. Langacker, J. Leveille, and S. Pakvasa, Phys. R ev. Lett. 45, 692 (1980); among the
many recent discussions are: V. Barger, S. Pakvasa, T.J. Wei ler, and K. Whisnant, Variations on
four-neutrino oscillations Phys. Rev. D 58, 093016 (1998);
S.M. Bilenky, G. Giunti, Sterile neutrinos? , hep-ph/9905246.
[36] Z. Maki, M. Nakagawa, and S. Sakata, Remarks on the Unified Model of Elementary Particles , Prog.
Theor. Phys. 28, 970 (1962).
A historical survey of the development of the 3 ×3 “MNS” matrix of neutrino mixing (which pre-
dates the CKM quark mixing matrix) is given by M. Nakagawa, Birth of Neutrino Oscillation , hep-
ph/9811358.
[37] L. Wolfenstein, Phys. Rev. D 17, 2369 (1978);
S.P. Mikheyev and A.Y. Smirnov, Sov. J. Nuc. Phys. 42, 913 (1986).
[38] A CHOOZ page: http://www.hep.anl.gov/ndk/hypertext /chooz.html
C. Bemporad, Results from CHOOZ , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 77, 159 (1999);
M Apollonio et al.,Initial Results from the CHOOZ Long Baseline Reactor Neutri no Oscillation
Experiment , Phys. Lett. B420 , 397 (1998).
[39] In addition to [30], see, for example:
N. Hata and P. Langacker, Solutions to Solar Neutrino Anomaly , Phys. Rev. D 56, 6107 (1997),
hep-ph/9705339;
J.N Bahcall, P.I. Krastev, and A.Y. Smirnov, Where do we stand with solar neutrino oscillations ,
Phys. Rev. D 58, 096016 (1998), hep-ph/9807216.
J.N. Bahcall, Standard Solar Models , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 77, 64, (1999);
A.Y. Smirnov, Towards the Solution of the Solar Neutrino Problem ,ibid., p. 98;
P. Langacker, Implications of Solar and Atmospheric Neutrinos ,ibid., p. 241.
For a fit including hep neutrino contributions, see J. Bahcal l and P. Krastev, Do hep neutrinos affect
the solar neutrino energy spectrum? , Phys. Lett. B436 , 243 (1998), hep-ph/9807525.
39[40] M. Gell-Mann, R. Slansky, and P. Ramond, in Supergravity (North-Holland, 1979), p. 315;
T. Yanagida, in Proceedings of the Workshop on Unified Theory and Baryon Numb er in the Universe
(KEK, Japan, 1979);
R. Mohapatra and G. Senjanovic, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 912 (1980); Phys. Rev. D 23, 165 (1981).
[41] See, for example, P. Ramond, Neutrinos: A Glimpse Beyond the Standard Model , Nucl. Phys. B
(Proc. Suppl.) 77, 3, (1999), hep-ph/9809401;
F. Wilczek, Beyond the Standard Model: This Time for Real ,ibid.p. 511, hep-ph/9809509.
[42] The SNO experiment homepage: http://www.sno.phy.que ensu.ca/
[43] The BOREXino experiment home page: http://almimi.mi. infn.it/
[44] The HERON experiment home page: http://www.physics.b rown.edu/research/heron/
[45] The HELLAZ experiment home page: http://sg1.hep.fsu. edu/hellaz/
[46] In addition to [30], see, for example, M. Czakon, M. Zral ek, and J. Gluza, Are Neutrinos Dirac or
Majorana Particles? , hep-ph/9910357;
H.V. Klapdor-Kleingrothaus, Perspectives of Double Beta and Dark Matter Search as Window s to
New Physics , hep-ex/9907040.
[47] S. Geer, Neutrino beams from muon storage rings: Characteristics an d physics potential , Phys. Rev.
D57, 6989 (1998), hep-ph/9712290;
A. Buena, M. Campanelli, and A. Rubbia, Long-baseline neutrino oscillation disappearance search
using a νbeam from muon decay , hep-ph/9808485;
A. Buena, M. Campanelli, and A. Rubbia, A medium baseline search for νµ→νeat aνbeam from
muon decays , hep-ph/9809252;
A. De Rujula, M.B. Gavela, and P. Hernandez, Neutrino oscillation physics with a neutrino factory ,
Nucl. Phys. B547 , 21 (1999), hep-ph/9811390;
S. Geer, C. Johnstone, and D. Neuffer, Muon Storage Ring Neutrino Source: The Path to a Muon
Collider? , http://fnalpubs.fnal.gov/archive/1999/tm/TM-2073.h tml
M. Campanelli, A. Buena, and A. Rubbia, Three-family oscillations using neutrinos from muon beams
at a very long baseline , hep-ph/9905420;
V. Barger, S. Geer, and K. Whisnant, Long baseline physics with a muon storage ring neutrino sour ce,
hep-ph/9906487;
O. Yasuda, Three Flavor Neutrino Oscillations and Applicat ion to Long Baseline Experiments, hep-
ph/9910428;
I. Mocioiu and R. Shrock, Matter Effects on Long Baseline Neutrino Oscillation Experi ments , hep-
ph/9910554.
[48] M. Tanimoto, Prediction on CP violation in Long Baseline Neutrino Oscill ation Experiments , Prog.
Theor. Phys. 97, 9091 (1997), hep-ph/9612444;
J. Arafune, M. Koike, and J. Sato, CP Violation and Matter Effect in Long Baseline Neutrino Osci l-
lation Experiments , Phys. Rev. D 56, 3093 (1997), hep-ph/9703351;
S.M. Bilenky, C. Giunti, and W. Grimus, Constrains on long-baseline neutrino oscillation probabi lities
and CP asymmetries from neutrino oscillation data , hep-ph/9705300;
H. Minakata and H. Nunokawa, How to Measure CP Violation in Neutrino Oscillation Experim ents?,
Phys. Lett. B413 , 369 (1997), hep-ph/9706281;
H. Minakata and H. Nunokawa, CP Violating vs.Matter Effect in Long-Baseline Neutrino Oscillation
Experiments , Phys. Rev. D 57, 4403 (1998), hep-ph/9705208;
S.M. Bilenky, C. Giunti, and W. Grimus, Long-baseline neutrino oscillation experiments and CP vi-
olation in the lepton sector , Phys. Rev. D 58, 033001 (1998), hep-ph/9712537;
M. Tanimoto, Indirect Search for CP Violation in Neutrino Oscillation , hep-ph/9906375;
K.R. Schubert, May We Expect CP- and T-Violating Effects in Neutrino Oscilla tions? , hep-
ph/9902215;
40K. Dick, M. Freund, M. Lindner, and A. Romanino, CP-Violation in Neutrino Oscillations , hep-
ph/9903308;
J. Bernabeu, CP-T Violation in Neutrino Oscillations , hep-ph/9904474;
M. Tanimoto, Search for CP Violation with a Neutrino Factory , hep-ph/9906516;
A. Donini, M.B. Gavela, P. Hernandez, and S. Rigolin, Neutrino Mixing and CP Violation , hep-
ph/9909254;
H. Fritzsch and Z.-Z. Xiang, Maximal Neutrino Mixing and Maximal CP Violation , hep-ph/9909304;
A. Romanino, Measuring CP Violation with a neutrino factory , hep-ph/9909425;
M. Koike and J. Sato, CP and T violatin in long baseline experiments with low energ y neutrinos from
muon storage ring , hep-ph/9909469;
J. Sato, CP and T violation in (long)long baseline neutrino oscillat ion experiments , hep-ph/9910442.
[49] A. Blondel, Muon polarisation in the neutrino factory ;
http://alephwww.cern.ch/˜bdl/muon/nufacpol.ps
[50] V. Barger, Y.-B. Dai, K. Whisnant and B.-L. Young, Neutrino Mixing, CP/T Violation and Textures
in Four-Neutrino Models , Phys. Rev. D 59, 113010 (1999), hep-ph/9901388;
A. Kalliomaki, J. Mallampi, and M. Tanimoto, Search for CP Violation at a Neutrino Factory in a
Four-Neutrino Model , hep-ph/9909301;
A. Donini, M.B. Gavela, P. Hernandez, and S. Rigolin, Four species neutrino oscillations at ν-Factory:
sensitivity and CP Violation , hep-ph/9910516.
[51] See, for example, B.J. King, Neutrino Physics at a Muon Collider , AIP Conf. Proc. 435, 334 (1998),
http://pubweb.bnl.gov/people/bking/nufnal97.ps
D.A. Harris and K.S. McFarland, A Small Target Neutrino Deep-Inelastic Scattering Experim ent at
the First Muon Collider ,ibid.p. 505;
B.J. King, High Rate Physics at Neutrino Factories , http://pubweb.bnl.gov/people/bking/jh99 cap.ps
[52] R.B. Palmer, Draft Parameters of a Neutrino Factory , MUC0046 (updated Oct. 14, 1999),
http://pubweb.bnl.gov/people/palmer/nu/params.ps
[53] See, for example, sec. 3.4 of the MINOS Technical Design Report,
http://www.hep.anl.gov/NDK/Hypertext/minos tdr.html
or Appendix C of the Addendum to the NGS Technical Design Repo rt,
http://www.cern.ch/NGS/ngs99.pdf
[54] N. Mokhov, π/µYield and Power Dissipation for Carbon and Mercury Targets i n 20-T Solenoid with
Matching , MUC0061 (Oct. 14, 1999), http://www-mucool.fnal.gov/mc notes/muc0061.ps
[55] For a 45-T hybrid magnet, see http://www.magnet.fsu.e du/science/magtech/lhfs/
[56] B.J. King, S.S. Moser, R.J. Weggel, N.V. Mokhov, A Cupronickel Rotating Band Pion Production
Target for Muon Colliders (Apr. 1, 1999), http://pubweb/bnl.gov/people/bking/tar getpac99.ps
[57] J.R.J. Bennett, A High Power, Radiation Cooled Rotating Toroidal Target for Neutrino Production ,
(Sept. 20, 1999), http://muonstoragerings.cern.ch/Welc ome.html/Events/200999/Bennett.pdf
[58] D. Neuffer, Simulation of the pre-cooling stages of the neutrino factor y, MUC0052 (Sep. 1999),
http://www-mucool.fnal.gov/mcnotes/muc0052.pdf
V. Balbekov and N. Holtkamp, Phase Rotation of Muons Using an Induction Linac , MUC0059 (Oct.
11, 1999), http://www-mucool.fnal.gov/mcnotes/muc0059 .pdf
[59] G.K. O’Neill, Storage-Ring Synchrotron: Device for High-Energy Physics Research , Phys. Rev. 102,
1418 (1956);
D.B. Lichtenberg, P. Stehle and K.R. Symon, Modification of Liouville’s Theorem Required by the
Presence of Dissipative Forces , MURA Report 126 (July 12, 1956),
41http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mumu/physics/symon/1.ht ml
A.A. Kolomensky, On the Oscillation Decrements in Accelerators in the Presen ce of Arbitrary Energy
Losses , Sov. Atomic Energy 19, 1511 (1965),
http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mumu/physics/kolomensky /1.html
G.I. Budker, An Effective Method of Damping Particle Oscillations in Prot on and Antiproton Storage
Rings, Sov. Atomic Energy 22, 438 (1967),
http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mumu/physics/budker/1.h tml
Yu.M. Ado and V. I. Balbekov, Use of Ionization Friction in the Storage of Heavy Particles , Sov.
Atomic Energy 31, 731 (1971), http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mumu/physics /ado/1.html
V.I. Balbekov, Achievable Transverse Emittance of Beam in Muon Collider , AIP Conf. Proc. 372,
140 (1996), ftp://ftp.mumu.bnl.gov/pub/documents/balb ekov.ps
[60] Y. Fukui, Simulation of the pre-cooling stages of the neutrino factor y, MUC0055 (Oct. 5, 1999),
http://www-mucool.fnal.gov/mcnotes/muc0055.ps
[61] E.-S. Kim et al.,LBNL progress report on simulation and theoretical studies of muon ionization
cooling , MUC0036 (July 30,, 1999), http://www-mucool.fnal.gov/m cnotes/muc0036.ps
E.-S. Kim ICOOL Simulation of Muon Ionization Cooling , MUC0044 (Aug. 18, 1999),
http://www-mucool.fnal.gov/mcnotes/muc0044.ps
E.-S. Kim Cooling for a Neutrino Factory , MUC0050 (Sep. 13, 1999),
http://www-mucool.fnal.gov/mcnotes/muc0050.ps
[62] R.B. Palmer, C. Johnson, E Keil, A Cost-Effective Design for a Neutrino Factory ,
http://wwwslap.cern.ch ∼keil/MuMu/Doc/PJK/pjk.ps
[63] S. Geer, Neutrino Oscillation Rates at a Neutrino Factory , MUC0051 (Sep. 13, 1999);
http://www-mucool.fnal.gov/mcnotes/muc0051.ps
[64] M. Tigner, Imperatives for Future High Energy Accelerators , AIP Conf. Proc. 279, 1 (1993).
[65] A.N. Skrinsky, Towards Ultimate Luminosity Polarized Muon Collider (Prob lems and Prospects) ,
AIP Conf. Proc. 441, p. 249 (1998);
B.J. King, Discussion on Muon Collider Parameters at Center of Mass Ene rgies from 0.1 TeV to
100 TeV , http://www.cern.ch/accelconf/e98/PAPERS/WEP05G.PDF
Workshop on Studies on Colliders and Collider Physics at the Highest Ene rgies: Muon Colliders at
10 TeV and 100 TeV (Montauk, NY, Sept. 27-Oct. 1, 1999),
http://pubweb.bnl/gov/people/bking/heshop/
[66] R.B. Palmer et al.,Muon Collider Design , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 51A, 61 (1996);
Muon Colliders , AIP Conf. Proc. 372, 3 (1996), acc-phys/960201;
R.B. Palmer and J.C. Gallardo, Muon-Muon and Other High Energy Colliders , inTechniques and
Concepts of High Energy Physics IX , ed. by T. Ferbel (Plenum Press, New York, 1997), p. 183,
ftp://ftp.mumu.bnl.gov/pub/documents/master stcroix.ps
High Energy Colliders , inCritical Problems in Physics , ed. by V.L. Fitch, D.R. Marlow, M.A.E. De-
menti (Princeton U. Press, Princeton, NJ, 1997), p. 247, phy sics/9702016;
R.B. Palmer, Progress on µ+µ−Colliders , Proc. PAC97 (Vancouver, 1997),
http://www.triumf.ca/pac97/papers/pdf/6B002.PDF
Muon Collider: Introduction and Status , physics/9802005;
Muon Collider Design , physics/9802002;
R.B. Palmer, A. Sessler, A. Tollestrup and J. Gallardo, Muon Collider Overview: Progress and
Future Plans , http://www.cern.ch/accelconf/e98/PAPERS/WEP03G.PDF
[67] R. Raja and A. Tollestrup, Calibrating the energy of a 50×50GeV Muon Collider using g−2spin
precession , Phys. Rev. D 58, 013005 (1998), hep-ex/9801004.
42[68] D. Neuffer, Multi-TeV Muon Colliders , AIP Conf. Proc. 156, 201 (1987),
http://www-ppd.fnal.gov/muscan/munotes/mc-006.pdf
[69] V. Barger, M. Berger, J. Gunion and T. Han, Higgs Boson Physics in the s-Channel at µ+µ−Colliders ,
Phys. Rep. 286, 1 (1997), hep-ph/9602397.
[70] G. I. Budker, Accelerators and Colliding Beams (in Russian), in Proc. 7thInt. Conf. on High Energy
Accel. (Yerevan, 1969), p. 33; extract: AIP Conf. Proc. 352, 4 (1996);
Int. High Energy Conf. (Kiev, 1970), unpublished; extract: AIP Conf. Proc. 352, 4 (1996).
[71] A. N. Skrinsky, Intersecting Storage Rings at Novosibirsk , Proc. Int. Seminar on Prospects of High-
Energy Physics (Morges, Mar. 1971), unpublished; extract: AIP Conf. Proc. 352, 6 (1996);
G. I. Budker and A. N. Skrinsky, Electron cooling and new possibilities in elementary parti cle physics ,
Sov. Phys. Usp. 21, 277 (1978);
A. N. Skrinsky, Acceleration and Instrumentation Prospects of Elementary Particle Physics , AIP
Conf. Proc. 68, 1056 (1980);
A. N. Skrinsky and V. V. Parkhomchuk, Methods of cooling beams of charged particles , Sov. J. Part.
Nucl.12, 223 (1981);
A. N. Skrinsky, Accelerator and detector prospects of elementary particle physics , Sov. Phys. Usp.
25, 639 (1982), sec. 3n;
V. V. Parkhomchuk and A. N. Skrinsky, Ionization Cooling: Physics and Applications , inProc. 12th
Int. Conf. on High Energy Accel. , ed. by F. T. Cole and R. Donaldson (Fermilab, 1983), p. 485;
http://www-ppd.fnal.gov/muscan/munotes/mc-003.pdf
A. N. Skrinsky, Ionization Cooling and Muon Collider , AIP Conf. Proc. 372, 133 (1996);
A. N. Skrinsky, Polarized Muons Beams for Muon Collider , Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 51A, 201
(1996).
[72] D. Neuffer, Colliding Muons Beams at 90 GeV , Fermilab report FN-319 (July 1979);
http://www-ppd.fnal.gov/muscan/munotes/mc-001.pdf
Principles and Applications of Muon Cooling , inProc. 12thInt. Conf. on High Energy Accel. , ed. by
F. T. Cole and R. Donaldson (Fermilab, 1983), p. 481; Part. Ac c.14, 75 (1983); reproduced in AIP
Conf. Proc. 353, 12 (1996);
µ+µ−colliders: possibilities and challenges , Nucl. Instr. & Meth. A350 , 27 (1994).
[73] J. Wurtele (ed.), Advanced Accelerator Concepts (Port Jefferson, NY, June 14-20, 1992), AIP Conf.
Proc.279(1993); see P. Chen and K. T. McDonald, Summary of the Physics Opportunities Working
Group , p. 853;
D.B. Cline (ed.), Proc. of the Mini-Workshop on µ+µ−Colliders (Napa, CA, Dec. 1992), Nucl. Instr.
& Meth. A350 , 24-56 (1994);
H.A. Thiessen (ed.), Proceedings of the Muon Collider Workshop , Los Alamos National Laboratory
Report LA-UR-93-866 (Feb. 1993);
P. Schoessow (ed.), Advanced Accelerator Concepts (Fontana, WI, 1994), AIP Conf. Proc. 335(1995);
see R.B. Palmer and D. Neuffer, A Practical High-energy High-Luminosity µ+µ−Collider , p. 635;
D.B. Cline (ed.), Physics Potential and Development of µ+µ−Colliders (Sausalito, CA, Nov. 1994),
AIP Conf. Proc. 352(1996);
T. Tajima (ed.), The Future of Accelerator Physics , Proc. of the Tamura Symposium (Austin, TX,
Nov. 1994), AIP Conf. Proc. 356(1996); see D. V. Neuffer and R. B. Palmer, Progress Toward a
High-Energy, High-Luminosity µ+µ−Collider , p. 344;
J. Gallardo (ed.), Transparencies presented at the 2+2 TeV µ+µ−Collider Collaboration Meeting ,
(BNL, Feb. 6-8, 1995);
R. Noble (ed.), Transparencies presented at the 2+2 TeV µ+µ−Collider Collaboration Meeting ,
(Fermilab, July 11-13, 1995)
J.C. Gallardo (ed.), Beam Dynamics and Technology Issues for µ+µ−Colliders , 9thAdvanced ICFA
Beam Dynamics Workshop (Montauk, NY, Oct. 15-20, 1995), AIP Conf. Proc. 372(1996); also
Transparencies from the Workshop;
43D. B. Cline (ed.), Transparency Book, 3rdInt. Conf. on Physics Potential and Development of µ+µ−
Colliders , (San Francisco, CA, Dec. 13-15, 1995);
J. Gallardo (ed.), Transparencies presented at the 2+2 TeV µ+µ−Collider Collaboration Meeting ,
(BNL, Jan. 31-Feb. 2, 1995);
R. Noble (ed.), Transparencies presented at the 2+2 TeV µ+µ−Collider Collaboration Meeting ,
(Fermilab, April 1-3, 1996);
D. G. Cassel, L. T. Gennari, R. H. Siemann (eds.), New Directions for High-Energy Physics , Proc.
of the 1996 DPF/DPB Summer Study on High-Energy Physics, (St anford Linear Accelerator Center,
Menlo Park, CA, 1997);
Z. Parsa (ed.), Future High Energy Colliders (Santa Barbara, CA, Oct. 1996), AIP Conf. Proc. 397
(1997); see D. B. Cline, The Problems and Physics Prospects for a µ+µ−Collider , p. 203;
Transparency book: Workshop on the Proton Driver for the Muon Collider , (Argonne Lab, Nov.
14-15, 1996);
D. Summers and M. Taylor (eds.), Transparencies Presented at the Muon Collider Workshop (Oxford,
MS, Jan. 17-18, 1997);
Workshop on Muon Colliders (LBNL, Feb. 1997);
R. C. Fernow (ed.), Transparencies Presented at the µ+µ−Collider Ionization Cooling Meeting (BNL,
Apr. 7-8, 1997);
J. Wurtele (ed.), Transparencies of the Muon Collider Workshop (Eastsound, Orcas Island, WA, May
17-20, 1997);
Proc. 1997 Part. Accel. Conf. (PAC97) (Vancouver, 1997);
http://www.triumf.ca/pac97/papers/
D. B. Cline, A. Garren and K. Lee (eds.), Transparency Book from Higgs Factory µ+µ−Collider
Mini Workshop (UCLA, July 1-3, 1997);
Mini-Workshop on the Muon Collider Lattice (BNL, 1997);
Mini-Workshop on Ionization Cooling (Fermilab, Oct. 1997) ;
Proc. 4thInt. Conf. on the Physics Potential & Development of µ+µ−Colliders (San Francisco, CA,
Dec. 10-12, 1997), to be published; also Transparency Book ;
M. Atac, D. Cline, A. Garren and K. Lee (eds.), Transparency Book for the 2ndMini-Workshop on
Higgs Factory: Lattice and Detector (UCLA, Feb. 12-13, 1998);
Muon Collider Collaboration meeting (Gulf Shores, AL, Mar. 1998);
Mini-Workshop on Ionization Cooling (BNL, 1998).
[74] D. B. Cline (ed.), Physics Potential and Development of µ+µ−Colliders (Sausalito, CA, Nov. 1994),
AIP Conf. Proc. 352(1996).
[75] The µ+µ−Collider Collaboration, µ+µ−Collider Feasibility Study , BNL-52503, FERMILAB-Conf-
96/092, LBNL-38946 (July 1996); http://www.cap.bnl.gov/ mumu/book.html
[76] The Neutrino Factory and Muon Collider Collaboration h ome page:
http://www.cap.bnl.gov/mumu/mu home page.html
[77] The Collaboration Charter is at http://www.cap.bnl.g ov/mumu/charter.ps
[78] The Muon Storage Rings at CERN home page: http://muonst oragerings.cern.ch/Welcome.html/
[79] MUon steering Group (MUG) home page:
http://alephwww.cern.ch/˜bdl/muon/MUG/welcome.html
[80] J. Alessi et al.,An R&D Program for Targetry and Capture at a Muon-Collider So urce, BNL-AGS-
E951 (Sept. 30, 1998), http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mumu /target/targetprop.ps
[81] C.N. Ankenbrandt et al.,Ionization Cooling Research and Development Program for a H igh Lumi-
nosity Muon Collider , FNAL-P904 (April 15, 1998), http://www.fnal.gov/projec ts/muon collider/
44[82] Presentation to the MUTAC review, July 21-23, 1999 can b e viewed at
http://pubweb.bnl.gov/users/gallardo/www/mutac/
[83] The MUTAC summary report can be viewed at
http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mumu/MUTAC 082799.txt
[84] The MCOG summary report can be viewed at
http://puhep1.princeton.edu/mumu/MCOG 100199.txt
[85]Neutrino Factory Feasibility Studies at Fermilab :
http://www.fnal.gov/projects/muon collider/nu factory/
[86] C.N. Ankenbrandt et al.,Bunching Near Transition in the AGS , Phys. Rev. ST Accel. Beams 1,
030101 (1998); http://www-lib.fnal.gov/archive/1998/p ub/Pub-98-006.html
[87] J.H. Norem et al.,An AGS experiment to test bunching for the proton driver of th e muon collider ,
ANL-HEP-CP-98-32 (May 1998).
[88] K. Koba et al., private communication (1997).
[89] J. E. Griffin, K. Y. Ng, Z. B. Qian and D. Wildman, Experimental Study of Passive Compensation
of Space Charge Potential Well Distortion at the Los Alamos N ational Laboratory Proton Storage
Ring, http://www-lib.fnal.gov/archive/1997/fn/FN-661.htm l
[90] Experiment E-910 at BNL-AGS; http://www.nevis.colum bia.edu/heavyion/e910/
[91] For scheduled workshops, see http://www.cap.bnl.gov /mumu/table workshop.html
[92] For scheduled video conferences, see http://www.cap. bnl.gov/mumu/video conf.html
[93] The index of Muon Collaboration notes is at: http://www -mucool.fnal.govhtbin/mcnote1LinePrint
45 |
arXiv:physics/9911010v1 [physics.atom-ph] 8 Nov 1999Coherent Backscattering of Light by Cold Atoms
G. Labeyrie∗, F. de Tomasi†, J.-C. Bernard∗, C. A. M¨ uller∗, C. Miniatura∗and R. Kaiser∗
* Institut Non Lin´ eaire de Nice, UMR 6618, 1361 route des Luc ioles, F-06560 Valbonne.
†now at Dipartimento di Fisica, Universita di Lecce, via Arne sano.
(February 2, 2008)
Light propagating in an optically thick sample experiences
multiple scattering. It is now known that interferences al-
ter this propagation, leading to an enhanced backscatterin g,
a manifestation of weak localization of light in such diffuse
samples. This phenomenon has been extensively studied with
classical scatterers. In this letter we report the first expe ri-
mental evidence for coherent backscattering of light in a la ser-
cooled gas of Rubidium atoms.
Transport of waves in strongly scattering disordered
media has received much attention during the past years
when it was realized that interference can dramatically
alter the normal diffusion process [1–3]. In a sample of
randomly distributed scatterers, the initial direction of
the wave is fully randomized by scattering and a diffusion
picture seems an appropriate description of propagation
when the sample thickness is larger than the scattering
mean free path [4]. This model neglects all interference
phenomena and predicts a transmission of the medium
inversely proportional to sample thickness. This is the
familiar Ohm’s law. However, interferences may have
dramatic consequences such as a vanishing diffusion con-
stant [5]. In this situation, the medium behaves like an
insulator (strong localization). Such a disorder induced
transition has been reported for microwaves and for light
[6]. In fact, even far from this insulating regime, in-
terferences already hamper the diffusion process (weak
localization). This has been demonstrated in coherent
backscattering (CBS) experiments. Upon coherent illu-
mination of a static sample, a random speckle pattern
is generated. This pattern is washed out by configura-
tion averaging except in a small angular range around the
backscattering direction where constructive interferenc es
originating from reciprocal light paths enhance diffuse
reflection from the sample [7]. This effect has been ob-
served for light in a variety of different media such as
suspensions of powder samples, biological tissues or Sat-
urn’s rings [8], as well as for acoustic waves [9]. Among
other interesting features such as universal conductance
fluctuations [10] or lasing in random media [11], CBS is
a hallmark of coherent multiple scattering.
Atoms as scatterers of light offer new perspectives. The
achievements of laser cooling techniques [12,13] in the
last decade now allow to manipulate and control samples
of quantum scatterers. Cold atoms are unique candi-dates to move the field of coherent multiple scattering
to a fully quantum regime (quantum internal structure,
wave-particle duality, quantum statistical aspects). For
instance, the coupling to vacuum fluctuations (sponta-
neous emission) is responsible for some unusual proper-
ties of the scattered light (elastic and inelastic spectra
[14,15]). Also, information encoding in atomic internal
states can erase interference fringes like in some ”which-
path” experiments [16]. Furthermore, it is now possible
to implement situations where the wave nature of the
atomic motion is essential [12,13].
In our experiment, the scattering medium is a laser-
cooled gas of Rubidium atoms which constitutes a per-
fect monodisperse sample of strongly resonant scatter-
ers of light. The quality factor of the transition used
in our experiment is Q=νat/∆νat≈108(D2 line at
λ=c/νat= 780 nm, intrinsic resonance width ∆ νat=
Γ/2π= 6 MHz). The scattering cross section can thus
be changed by orders of magnitude by a slight detun-
ing of the laser frequency νL. This is a new situation
compared to the usual coherent multiple scattering ex-
periments where resonant effects, if any, are washed out
by the sample polydispersity. Moreover in our sample
the duration τD(delay time) of a single scattering event
largely dominates over the free propagation time between
two successive scattering events : for on-resonant excita-
tion ( δ=νL−νat= 0), this delay is of the order of
τD≈2/Γ = 50 ns corresponding to free propagation of
light over 15 m in vacuum. In such a situation, particular
care must be taken to observe a CBS effect. Indeed, when
atoms move, additional phaseshifts are involved. Config-
uration averaging will only preserve constructive inter-
ference between reciprocal waves if the motion-induced
optical path change ∆ xdoes not exceed one wavelength
[17]. A rough estimate is ∆ x=vrmsτD< λ, a cri-
terium which can be written in the more appealing form
kvrms<Γ. Thus, for resonant excitation, the Doppler
shift must be small compared to the width of the res-
onance. For Rubidium atoms illuminated by resonant
light, one finds vrms<4.6 m/s corresponding to a tem-
perature T= 200 mK. Much lower temperatures are eas-
ily achieved by laser cooling thus allowing observation
of interference features in multiple scattering. However,
up to now, only incoherent effects in multiple scatter-
ing, like radiation trapping [18], have been investigated
in cold atomic vapors [19].
We prepare our atomic sample by loading a magneto-
optical trap (MOT) from a dilute vapor of Rubidium 85
1atoms [12] (magnetic gradient ∇B≈7 G/cm, loading
timetload≈0.7 sec). Six independent trapping beams
are obtained by splitting an initial laser beam slightly
detuned to the red of the trapping transition (power per
beam 30 mW, FWHM diameter 2 .8 cm, Rubidium sat-
uration intensity Isat≈1.6 mW/cm2,δ≈ −3Γ). The
repumper is obtained by two counterpropagating beams
from a free running diode laser tuned to the F= 3→
F′= 3 transition of the D2 line. Fluorescence measure-
ments yield N≈109atoms corresponding to a spatial
density nat≈2×109cm−3at the center of the cloud
(gaussian profile, FWHM diameter ≈7 mm). The veloc-
ity distribution of the atoms in the trap has been mea-
sured by a time-of-flight technique to be vrms≈10 cm/s,
well below the limit imposed by the above velocity cri-
terium. To observe coherent backscattering (CBS) of
light, we alternate a CBS measurement phase with a
MOT preparation phase. During the CBS phase, the
magnetic gradient and trapping beams of the MOT are
switched off (residual power per beam 0 .2µW). The CBS
probe beam (FWHM ≈6 mm, spectral width ∆ νL≈1
MHz) is resonant with the closed trapping transition of
the D2 line : F= 3→F′= 4. A weak probe is used to
avoid saturation effects (power 80 µW, on-resonant sat-
uration s= 0.1). The optical thickness of the sample,
measured by transmission, is η≈4 and remains con-
stant, within a few percent, during the whole duration of
the CBS measurement phase (2 .5 ms). The correspond-
ing extinction mean free path ℓ≈2 mm is consistent
with an estimation deduced from our fluorescence mea-
surements, taking a scattering cross-section at resonance
σres= 3λ2/2π.
/X43/X4F/X4C/X44/X20/X41/X54/X4F/X4D/X49/X43
/X43/X4C/X4F/X55/X44/X6C/X2F/X34 /X43/X43/X44/X42/X53
/X4C/X50/X32
/X50/X31
/X50/X52/X4F/X42/X45/X20/X4C/X41/X53/X45/X52
FIG. 1. The CBS detection scheme. P1, P2 : polarizers;
λ/4 : quarter-wave plate; BS : beam-splitter (T = 90%); L :
analysis lens ( f= 500 mm).
The CBS detection setup is shown in Fig.1. It involves
a cooled CCD camera in the focal plane of a converg-
ing lens ( f= 500 mm). A polarization sensitive detec-
tion scheme, generally allowing to eliminate the single
scattering contribution [20], is used for signal recording
in various polarization channels. For a linear incident
polarization, we record the scattered light with (linear)polarization parallel (”parallel” channel) or orthogonal
(”orthogonal” channel) to the incident one. We also use
a circular incident polarization by inserting a quarter-
wave plate between the beam-splitter and the sample. In
the ”helicity preserving” channel the detected polariza-
tion is circular with the same helicity (sign of rotation
of the electric field referenced to the wave propagation
direction) as the incident one : as an example, no light is
detected in this channel in the case of the back-reflection
by a mirror. This is the channel mostly used in pre-
vious studies, because it allows to eliminate the single
scattering contribution (for dipole-type scatterers). Th e
”helicity non-preserving” channel is obtained for a de-
tected circular polarization orthogonal to the previous
one. Teflon or dilute milk samples were used to find the
exact backward direction, to cross-check the polarization
channels and to test the angular resolution of our set-up.
During the MOT phase (duration 10 ms), probe beam
and detection scheme are switched off while the MOT
is switched on again to recapture the atoms. After this
phase a new atomic sample is reproduced. The whole se-
quence is repeated for a typical duration of 1 min with a
detected flux typically about 1800 photons/pixel/sec. A
”background” image, representing less than 10% of the
full signal level (due mainly to scattering from the re-
pumper by hot atoms in the cell), is substracted from
the ”CBS” image to suppress stray light contributions.
FIG. 2.
Fig. 2 (color image in appendice) shows the CBS im-
ages obtained from our laser-cooled Rubidium vapor in
the various polarization channels. We clearly observe en-
hanced backscattering in all four polarization channels
whereas for a thick teflon sample we only found pro-
nounced cones in the polarization preserving channels.
This enforces the idea that low scattering orders are dom-
inant in our experiment [21] which is not surprising con-
sidering the relatively small optical thickness of our sam-
ple. The intensity enhancement factors, defined as the
ratio between the averaged intensity scattered in exactly
backward direction and the large angle background are
1.11, 1.06,1.08 and 1.09 for the helicity preserving, he-
licity non-preserving, orthogonal and parallel channels
respectively. The detected light intensities in these chan -
nels, normalized to that of the linear parallel channel,
are 0.76, 0.77, 0.54 and 1. A closer look at Fig.2d re-
veals that the cone exhibits a marked anisotropy in the
(linear) parallel polarization channel: the cone is found
to broader in the (angular) direction parallel to the inci-
dent polarization. This effect has already been observed
in classical scattering samples and is also a signature of
low scattering orders [21] .
For a more quantitative analysis of the CBS cone,
we report in Fig.3 a section of image 2a (helicity non-
preserving channel), taken after an angular average was
2performed on the data (this procedure is justified when
the cone is isotropic, as in Fig.2a). The measured cone
width ∆ θis about 0 .57 mrad, nearly six times larger than
our experimental resolution of 0 .1 mrad. Taking into ac-
count the experimental resolution, we compared our data
to a calculation (dotted line) involving only double scat-
tering [7]. The experimental value ℓ≈2 mm for the
mean free path was used in the calculation, leaving the
enhancement factor as free parameter. Even though the
assumptions underlying this theoretical model (isotropic
double scattering, semi-infinite medium) are rather crude
in our case, the shape of the CBS cone is nicely repro-
duced. We plan, in further studies, to investigate in more
details the contributions of different scattering orders by
carefully analyzing the CBS cone shape.
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 31,001,051,10scaled intensity
q (mrad)
FIG. 3. Atomic CBS cone in the helicity non-preserving
channel. The experimental profile (solid line) is a section o f
the 2D image of Fig. 2a (after angular averaging). The dashed
curve is a fit by a model assuming only double scattering,
with the mean free path determined experimentally and the
enhancement factor the only adjustable parameter.
One important aspect in CBS studies has always been
the enhancement factor in the backscattering direction,
due to the constructive interferences between reciprocal
paths. In the helicity preserving channel, this enhance-
ment factor is known to be 2 for independent scatter-
ing by classical scatterers [8], as single scattering can be
ruled out in that polarization channel. In our experiment
with cold atoms however, we measure a backscattered en-
hancement of 1.06, clearly less than 2 ! This reduction
cannot be attributed to the experimental resolution, as
we have measured enhancement factors on milk (using a
dilution giving the same cone width as the atomic one) of
1.8. However, in our situation several processes could re-
duce the cone contrast. The first one is single scattering,
which does not contribute to CBS. Due to the presence of
several Zeeman sublevels in the groundstate of Rubidiumatoms, Raman processes, i.e. light scattering with change
of the atomic internal sublevel, have to be considered. In
such events, the polarization of the scattered light dif-
fers from the incident polarization and single scattering
is not eliminated even in the helicity preserving channel.
Another consequence of the atom’s internal structure is a
possible imbalance between the amplitudes of the recip-
rocal waves : atoms in different internal states can have
different scattering cross sections (resulting from differ-
ent Clebsch-Gordan coefficients). They can thus be seen
as partial polarizers which can imbalance the amplitude
of the paths which interfere for CBS. Furthermore finite-
size effects should also be taken into account. Indeed our
sample does not have the standard slab geometry and the
gaussian shape of the probe beam is known to reduce the
enhancement factor. We are currently investigating these
effects to determine their respective magnitudes for our
situation. Also, some more subtle phenomena might play
an additional role in the cone reduction. For instance,
with classical scatterers, the radiated and the incident
light have identical frequencies (elastic scattering). Th is
is no longer true for atoms for which the resonant fluores-
cence spectrum displays inelastic structures in addition
to the usual elastic component [14,15]. Because of Ra-
man scattering, even in the weak saturation limit (weak
probe intensity), atoms have a non-negligible probabil-
ity to undergo inelastic scattering [15]. The role of these
rather complex spectral properties in coherent backscat-
tering has yet to be studied both theoretically and ex-
perimentally.
In summary we have reported the first observation
of coherent backscattering of light by a sample of laser
cooled atoms. These first results indicate that in our sys-
tem low scattering orders are dominant, as expected from
optical thickness measurements. The exact value of the
enhancement factor and the precise shape of the cone is
not yet fully understood and requires more experimen-
tal and theoretical investigations. Further experiments
will include studies of the effect of the probe beam in-
tensity (which determines the amount of inelastic scat-
tering) and detuning. Detuning the laser frequency from
the atomic resonance leads to an increased mean free
pathℓ= 1/natσ. Indeed, we already observed that the
measured width ∆ θof the coherent backscattering cone
decreases when the probe frequency is detuned from res-
onance, as expected from the scaling ∆ θ∝λ/ℓ[7]. It
would be very interesting to extend these experiments to
new regimes. Weak and strong localization of light in
gaseous Bose-Einstein condensates and of atomic matter
waves in random optical potentials certainly present a
great challenge for the near future.
We would like to thank the CNRS and to the PACA
Region for financial support. We also thank the POAN
Research Group. Finally, we would like to deeply thank
D. Delande, B. van Tiggelen and D.Wiersma for many
stimulating discussions.
3[1] Sharvin, D.Yu., & Sharvin,Yu.V., JETP Lett. 34, 272-
275 (1981).
[2] Scattering and Localization of Classical Waves in Ran-
dom Media, P. Sheng, Eds. (World Scientific, Singapore,
1990).
[3] Mesoscopic Quantum Physics, E. Akkermans, G. Mon-
tambaux, J.-L. Pichard & J. Zinn-Justin, Eds., Elsevier
Science B.V. (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1995).
[4] Chandrasekhar, S., Radiative transfer (Dover, New York ,
1960).
[5] Anderson, P.W., Phys. Rev. 109, 1492-1505 (1958).
[6] Wiersma, D.S., Bartolini, P., Lagendijk, A. & Righini, R .
Nature 390, 671-673 (1997); Gresillon, S., et al., Phys.
Rev. Lett. 82, 4520-4523 (1999); Genack, A.Z. & Garcia,
N., Phys. Rev. Lett. 66, 2064-2067 (1991).
[7] van Tiggelen, B.A., Lagendijk, A. & Tip, A., J. Phys.:
Condens. Matter 2, 7653-7677 (1990).
[8] Wiersma, D.S., van Albada, M.P., van Tiggelen, B.A.
& Lagendijk, A., Phy. Rev. Lett. 74, 4193-4196 (1995);
Yoo, K.M., Tang, G.C. & Alfano, R.R., Appl. Opt. 29,
3237-3239 (1990); Mishchenko, M.I., Astrophys. J. 411,
351-361 (1993).
[9] Tourin, A., Derode, A., Roux, P., van Tigelen, B.A. &
Fink, M., Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3637-3639 (1997).
[10] Scheffold, F. & Maret, G. Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5800-5803
(1998).
[11] Cao, H., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2278-2281 (1999).
[12] Laser Manipulation of Atoms and Ions, E. Arimondo,
W.D. Phillips & F. Strumia, Eds. (North Holland, Ams-
terdam, 1992).
[13] Anderson, M.H., Ensher, J.R., Matthews, M.R., Wie-
man, C.E. & Cornell, E.A., Science 269, 198-201 (1995).
Davis, K.B., et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3969-3973 (1995).
[14] Mollow, B.R., Phys. Rev. 188, 1969-1975 (1969).
[15] Gao, B., Phys. Rev. A 50, 4139-4156 (1994).
[16] Itano, W.M., et al., Phys. Rev. A 57, 4176-4187 (1998).
[17] Golubentsev, A.A., Sov. Phys. JETP 59, 26-34 (1984).
[18] Holstein, T., Phys. Rev. 72, 1212-1233 (1947).
[19] Fioretti, A., Molisch, A.F., Muller, J.H., Verkerk, P. &
Allegrini, M., Optics Comm. 149, 415-422 (1998).
[20] van Albada, M.P. & Lagendijk, A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 55,
2692-2695 (1985); Wolf, P.-E. & Maret, G., Phys. Rev.
Lett.55, 2696-2699 (1985).
[21] van Albada, M.P., van der Mark, M. & Lagendijk, A.,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 361-364 (1987).
4This figure "fig2.gif" is available in "gif"
format from:
http://arXiv.org/ps/physics/9911010v1 |
arXiv:physics/9911012v1 [physics.atom-ph] 10 Nov 1999LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Calculation of the free-free transitions in the
electron-hydrogen scattering S-wave model
Chris Plottke and Igor Bray ‡
Electronic Structure of Materials Centre, The Flinders Uni versity of South Australia,
G.P.O. Box 2100, Adelaide 5001, Australia
Abstract. The S-wave model of electron-hydrogen scattering is evalua ted using the
convergent close-coupling method with an emphasis on scatt ering from excited states
including an initial state from the target continuum. Conve rgence is found for discrete
excitations and the elastic free-free transition. The latt er is particularly interesting
given the corresponding potential matrix elements are dive rgent.
PACS numbers: 34.80.Bm, 34.80.Dp
‡electronic address: I.Bray@flinders.edu.auLetter to the Editor 2
The convergent close-coupling (CCC) method has had many suc cesses in the field
of electron-impact excitation and ionization of atoms and i ons. In this method the
total wave function is expanded using Nsquare-integrable states and the close-coupling
equations are solved in the form of coupled Lippmann-Schwin ger equations for the
T-matrix elements (Bray and Stelbovics 1992 a). The Nstates are obtained from a
truncated orthogonal Laguerre basis, and thus in the limit a sNgoes to infinity, the
states span the entire Hilbert space. The CCC method was test ed by Bray and Stelbovics
(1992b) on the Temkin-Poet (Temkin 1962, Poet 1978) (S-wave) model of electron-
hydrogen scattering, where only states of zero orbital angu lar momentum are retained.
The total cross sections for elastic, inelastic and ionizat ion collisions converged, with
increasing N, for all projectile energies and agreed with the expected S- wave model
solutions, where available.
The success of the method for the S-wave model allowed applic ation to many
real electron-atom scattering problems. However, applica tion to ionization processes
revealed some fundamental difficulties (Bray and Fursa 1996, R¨ oder et al 1997),
which have been subsequently best illustrated by returning back to the S-wave model
(Bray 1997). Though the total ionization cross section (TIC S) was found to be
convergent, the underlying singly differential cross secti on (SDCS) was not necessarily
so. The triplet SDCS showed rapid convergence, but the singl et SDCS showed
unphysical N-dependent resonances. Furthermore, the SDCS were not foun d to be
symmetric about E/2, where Eis the total (excess) energy, even though antisymmetry
of the total wave function has been ensured explicitly. It wa s suggested that for both
total spin cases the CCC( N) amplitudes should converge (as N→ ∞) to a step function,
being identically zero past E/2 (Bray 1997). The step function model was attacked by
Bencze and Chandler (1999) who claimed to have proved (see th eir Eq.(20)) that the
CCC-calculated amplitudes should converge to the true ampl itudes as N→ ∞, and
hence yield symmetric SDCS. This claim was rebutted (Bray 19 99d) and a number of
counterexamples given (Bray 1999 a, Bray 1999 b).
Unfortunately, a proof for the step function idea has not bee n given, only suggestive
numerical evidence provided. This has encouraged others to study the problem more
closely. Baertschy et al(1999) obtained benchmark SDCS using an external complex
scaling technique (McCurdy et al1997) that does not require the knowledge of three-
body boundary conditions. These were found to be in consiste nt agreement with the
CCC results. Furthermore, Rescigno et al(1999) showed how step functions may arise
when discretization with short-ranged potentials is used.
To our mind the closest to a proof of the step function idea has been given by
Stelbovics (1999). He showed that the close-coupling equat ions, obtained by using
exact target eigenstates to expand the total wave function, have unitarity satisfied
with the secondary energy integration ending at E/2. This implies a step function
in the underlying amplitudes since the coupled equations ar e formally written with
this integration ending at E. Given that the CCC square-integrable target states form
an equivalent quadrature rule for the infinite summation ove r the true target discreteLetter to the Editor 3
eigenstates simultaneously with an integration over the tr ue target continuum it is
tempting to conclude that for infinite Nthe CCC equations converge to those obtained
using exact target eigenstates, and hence the CCC ionizatio n amplitudes should display
a step function behaviour. Furthermore, by comparison with the known SDCS at E/2,
he observed that the CCC-calculated singlet SDCS appeared t o converge to 1 /4 the
value of the true result, and suggested that the CCC equation s appeared to behave like
Fourier expansions of the underlying amplitudes. A Fourier expansion of a step function
converges to the midpoint of the step height. Therefore, the CCC amplitude at equal
energy sharing converges to 1 /2 of the step height, and hence the SDCS to 1 /4 of the
true height.
This interpretation is very exciting because it explains th e apparent convergence of
the SDCS at E/2, even when convergence is lacking at unequal energy-shari ng, and how
it may be related to the true result. A detailed set of applica tions to the calculation of
equal-energy-sharing fully differential electron-impact ionization of the atomic hydrogen
ground state has been given (Bray 1999 c). Here we examine convergence for scattering
from the excited states, and particularly of the free-free t ransitions. The latter are
interesting because it is the free-free V-matrix elements that are responsible for the
failure to date of solving the close-coupling equations inv olving pure atomic (discrete
and continuous) eigenstates, and thereby requiring the int roduction of a pseudostate
approach. Free-free one-electron transitions have been lo oked at before, see Chrysos
and Fumeron (1999) for example. Here, for the first time to the best of our knowledge,
free-free transitions involving two electrons are shown to be calculable.
Since we shall only concern ourselves with the S-wave model, momenta will be
written as scalars in what follows. The traditional close co upling equations arise upon
expanding the total wave function over the complete set of ta rget eigenstates φnof
energy ǫn. Though we use a discrete notation, this involves an infinite sum of the bound
states φn(ǫn) and an integral ( dǫ) over the continuum states φ(ǫ). The close-coupling
equations may be written as coupled Lippmann-Schwinger equ ations for the T-matrix
(Bray and Stelbovics 1992 a)
/angbracketleftkfφf|TS|φiki/angbracketright=/angbracketleftkfφf|VS|φiki/angbracketright
+/summationdisplay/integraldisplay
ndǫn/integraldisplay
dk/angbracketleftkfφf|VS|φnk/angbracketright/angbracketleftkφn|TS|φiki/angbracketright
E+i0−ǫn−k2/2. (1)
These equations are yet to be solved directly due to the non-e xistence of the free-
free matrix elements /angbracketleftk′φ(ǫ′′)|VS|φ(ǫ)k/angbracketright. We write the cross sections for the discrete
transition i→fas
σ(S)
fi=kf
ki|/angbracketleftkfφf|TS|φiki/angbracketright|2, (2)
and for an ionization process as
σ(S)
i(ǫ) =k√
2ǫki|/angbracketleftkφ(ǫ)|TS|φiki/angbracketright|2. (3)Letter to the Editor 4
Then the total cross section σ(S), at energies above the ionization threshold ( E >0),
for scattering from some initial state iis
σ(S)
i=∞/summationdisplay
f=1σ(S)
fi+/integraldisplayE
0σ(S)
i(ǫ)dǫ. (4)
The continuum integration ending at E comes from the fact tha t in (1) on the
energy shell ǫn≤E. From (4) we see immediately the fundamental problem of the
close-coupling equations. Since antisymmetry is explicit ly included in the VS(Bray
and Stelbovics 1992 a) there appears to be a double-counting problem as the energy
integration ends at Eand not E/2. However, as mentioned above, Stelbovics (1999)
has shown that there is no contribution to the total cross sec tion from /angbracketleftkφ(ǫ)|TS|φiki/angbracketright
forǫ > k2/2 thereby reducing the integration endpoint to E/2 and bringing about
consistency with formal ionization theory (Rudge 1968).
In order to solve (1) the CCC method uses Ndiscrete states φ(N)
n, with energies
ǫ(N)
n, obtained by diagonalising the target Hamiltonian in an ort hogonal Laguerre basis
(Bray and Stelbovics 1992 a). The coupled Lippmann-Schwinger equations then take
the form
/angbracketleftkfφ(N)
f|T(N)
S|φ(N)
iki/angbracketright=/angbracketleftkfφ(N)
f|V(N)
S|φ(N)
iki/angbracketright
+N/summationdisplay
n=1/integraldisplay
dk/angbracketleftkfφ(N)
f|V(N)
S|φ(N)
nk/angbracketright/angbracketleftkφ(N)
n|T(N)
S|φ(N)
iki/angbracketright
E+i0−ǫ(N)
n−k2/2. (5)
Using the relation
|φ(ǫf)/angbracketright= lim
N→∞|φ(N)
f/angbracketright/angbracketleftφ(N)
f|φ(ǫf)/angbracketright, (6)
where ǫ(N)
f=ǫf, the total cross section corresponding to (4) becomes
σ(SN)
i=/summationdisplay
f:ǫ(N)
f<0σ(SN)
fi+/integraldisplayE
0σ(SN)
i(ǫ)dǫ, (7)
where
σ(SN)
i(ǫf) =kf√2ǫfki|/angbracketleftφ(ǫf)|φ(N)
f/angbracketright/angbracketleftkfφ(N)
f|T(N)
S|φ(N)
iki/angbracketright|2(8)
is the SDCS. For infinite N(7) goes to (4) and hence a step function, with the integratio n
ending effectively at E/2.
Similarly, we can write down the relationship between the fr ee-free matrix elements
occurring in both (1) and (5). For example,
/angbracketleftkfφ(ǫf)|VS|φ(ǫi)ki/angbracketright= lim
N→∞/angbracketleftφ(ǫf)|φ(N)
f/angbracketright/angbracketleftkfφ(N)
f|V(N)
S|φ(N)
iki/angbracketright/angbracketleftφ(ǫi)|φ(N)
i/angbracketright. (9)
Thus, the non-existence of free-free VSmatrix elements in (1) has not been eliminated,
and becomes evident with increasing N. However, numerical solutions of (5) have shown
good convergence for the TSmatrix elements, at least for excitation of the ground state
(Bray and Stelbovics 1992 b). Here we check for convergence in the case of excited initia l
states including a free-free transition.Letter to the Editor 5
The numerical investigation is performed for the total ener gyE= 3 Ry. The results
of three calculations, N=23, 26 and 29, are presented. The states were chosen in such a
way so that there was always a state of 1.5 Ry. This way all thre e calculations contain
the matrix elements of the free-free transition correspond ing to two 1.5 Ry electrons
elastically scattering on a proton. In figure 1 we present the discrete excitation cross
sections and the SDCS, evaluated according to (8), for the si nglet case. The value ǫiis
the initial energy of the bound electron when negative, or ot herwise the energy of an
incident electron.
We begin the discussion of the cross sections for the negativ e-energy states. Good
convergence is seen for the first five states for all four initi al states, with elastic scattering
being the most dominant. For the higher ( n >5) lying discrete states the bigger
calculations yield the smaller cross sections, but in all ca ses the cross sections for the
last negative-energy states rise. This is not an indication of divergence from the expected
n−3scaling rule, but shows how the least negative-energy state s take into account the
remaining full infinite discrete spectrum.
Turning our attention to the SDCS from the ground state, for e nergies less than E/2
we observe that there are substantial N-dependent oscillations about the exact result,
calculated using the finite difference method (FDM) by Jones a nd Stelbovics (1999). At
E/2 the three CCC calculations show convergence to approximat ely a quarter of the
FDM result, as expected.
The SDCS from the 2S and 3S initial states show less oscillati on than for the ground
state owing to the SDCS at E/2 being of relatively small magnitude. Thus, within the
same calculations the CCC method is able to obtain SDCS more a ccurately, over the
energy range [0 , E/2], from excited states than from the ground state.
Finally, we consider the free-free transitions for the case where the two electrons
are both incident at 1.5 Ry. It is seen that the functional for m of the SDCS changes
as compared to the discrete initial states. Oscillations ar e very large, but convergence
atE/2 is evident, and presumably to one quarter of the true value. This suggests that
the elastic scattering is the most dominant, which explains the functional form change,
and is consistent with the elastic scattering from the prese nted discrete states being the
most dominant of the discrete transitions. It is truly remar kable to see convergence at
E/2 as the corresponding VSmatrix elements are an order of magnitude greater than
theTSmatrix elements and continue to increase with N.
For completeness, in figure 2 we present the cross sections fo r the triplet case. Here
the initial state with two 1.5 Ry electrons is forbidden and s o is not presented. All
convergence considerations for the discrete excitations a pply equally here as in the case
of singlet scattering. The SDCS are all free from oscillatio ns owing to the zero cross
section at E/2, and good agreement is found with the FDM-calculated SDCS a vailable
only for the ground state (Jones and Stelbovics 1999).
In summary, the recent work of Stelbovics (1999) has shown th at the CCC theory
yields convergent ionization scattering amplitudes at equ al energy-sharing that are
simply a factor of two less than the true amplitudes. Thus, th e CCC theory may claimLetter to the Editor 6/1/0
/BnZr /2/1/0
/BnZr /3/1/0
/BnZr /4/1/0
/+/0/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /2/1/0
/BnZr /3/1/0
/+/0/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /2/1/0
/BnZr /3cross section /( a/2
/0/)/BnZr /1 /BnZr /0/./1 /BnZr /0/./0/1
/1/0
/+/0/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /2/1/0
/BnZr /3/1/0
/BnZr /4
CCC/(/2/9/)CCC/(/2/6/)CCC/(/2/3/)/i
/= /1 /: /5 Ry
/2/./5/0/2/./0/0/1/./5/0/1/./0/0/0/./5/0/0/./0/0CCC/(/2/9/)CCC/(/2/6/)CCC/(/2/3/)/i
/= /BnZr /0 /: /1/1 Ry
/0/./1/2/0/./1/0/0/./0/8/0/./0/6/0/./0/4/0/./0/2/0/./0/0CCC/(/2/9/)CCC/(/2/6/)CCC/(/2/3/)/i
/= /BnZr /0 /: /2/5 Ry
/0/./0/8/0/./0/6/0/./0/4/0/./0/2/0/./0/0FDMCCC/(/2/9/)CCC/(/2/6/)CCC/(/2/3/)/i
/= /BnZr /1 /: /0/0 Ryenergy /(Ry/)
cross section /( a/2
/0//Ry/)/0/./0/4/0/./0/3/0/./0/2/0/./0/1/0/./0/0/3/./0 /2/./5 /2/./0 /1/./5 /1/./0 /0/./5 /0/./0
Figure 1. The singlet cross sections arising upon solution of the elec tron-hydrogen
S-wave model at the total energy of 3 Ry for the lowest three di screte (1S, 2S and
3S) initial state, and the ǫi= 1.5 Ry state from the target continuum. The present
CCC( N) calculations are described in the text. The SDCS calculate d by the finite-
difference method of Jones and Stelbovics (1999) is denoted b y FDM.Letter to the Editor 7/1/0
/+/1/1/0
/+/0/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /2/1/0
/BnZr /3/1/0
/+/1/1/0
/+/0/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /2/1/0
/BnZr /3cross section /( a/2
/0/)/BnZr /1 /BnZr /0/./1 /BnZr /0/./0/1
/1/0
/+/1/1/0
/+/0/1/0
/BnZr /1/1/0
/BnZr /2/1/0
/BnZr /3/1/0
/BnZr /4
CCC/(/2/9/)CCC/(/2/6/)CCC/(/2/3/)/i
/= /BnZr /0 /: /1/1 Ry/0/./3/0/0/./2/0/0/./1/0/0/./0/0CCC/(/2/9/)CCC/(/2/6/)CCC/(/2/3/)/i
/= /BnZr /0 /: /2/5 Ry
/0/./2/0/0/./1/5/0/./1/0/0/./0/5/0/./0/0FDMCCC/(/2/9/)CCC/(/2/6/)CCC/(/2/3/)/i
/= /BnZr /1 /: /0/0 Ryenergy /(Ry/)
cross section /( a/2
/0//Ry/)/0/./0/2/0/./0/1/0/./0/0/3/./0 /2/./5 /2/./0 /1/./5 /1/./0 /0/./5 /0/./0
Figure 2. Same as for figure 1 except for the triplet case. No result for s cattering
from the ǫi= 1.5 Ry state is given owing to the Pauli Principle ensuring that such
cross sections are zero.
to yield these amplitudes accurately for any initial state, and not only for the S-wave
model considered here. We have seen convergence in the model for the elastic free-free
transition which corresponds to the real experimental case of equal energy (2e,2e) on a
proton. Whereas such processes are yet to be experimentally observed the CCC (e,2e)
calculations include such processes as an intermediate ste p and these may be extracted
as convergent cross sections. This is particularly pleasin g since the introduction of the
L2technique in solving the close-coupling equations does not eliminate the divergence
of the underlying free-free potential matrix elements, but masks it with a dependence
onN. Finally, though Stelbovics (1999) does not claim this, we s uggest that his work
implies a step function of the underlying amplitudes in form ing (4) and hence the CCC-
calculated amplitudes used in (7), supporting our initial h ypothesis (Bray 1997).
The authors thank Andris Stelbovics for many discussions an d communication ofLetter to the Editor 8
results prior to publication. The support of the Australian Research Council and the
Flinders University is acknowledged.
References
Baertschy M, Rescigno T N, Isaacs W A and McCurdy C W 1999 Phys. Rev. A 60, R13–R16
Bencze G and Chandler C 1999 Phys. Rev. A 59, 3129–3132
Bray I 1997 Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 4721–4724
Bray I 1999 a Phys. Rev. A 60, Dec
Bray I 1999 b http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/9906008, submitted to Aust. J. Phys.
Bray I 1999 csubmitted to J. Phys. B
Bray I 1999 d Phys. Rev. A 59, 3133–3135
Bray I and Fursa D V 1996 Phys. Rev. A 54, 2991–3004
Bray I and Stelbovics A T 1992 a Phys. Rev. A 46, 6995–7011
Bray I and Stelbovics A T 1992 b Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 53–56
Chrysos M and Fumeron M 1999 J. Phys. B 32, 3117–3134
Jones S and Stelbovics A T 1999 http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/physics/9906009, submitted to Phys. Rev.
Lett.
McCurdy C W, Rescigno T N and Byrum D 1997 Phys. Rev. A 56, 1958–1969
Poet R 1978 J. Phys. B 11, 3081–3094
Rescigno T N, McCurdy C W, Isaacs W A and Baertschy M 1999 Phys. Rev. A 60, 3740–3749
R¨ oder J, Ehrhardt H, Bray I and Fursa D V 1997 J. Phys. B 30, 1309–1322
Rudge M R H 1968 Reviews of Modern Physics 40, 564–590
Stelbovics A T 1999 Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1570–1573
Temkin A 1962 Phys. Rev. 126, 130–142 |
- 1 -On the Conservation of Physical Quantities
DOUGLAS M. S NYDER
ABSTRACT
Certain transformations of isolated physical systems underlying various
conservation laws in physics are noted. As regards each of these
transformations, there is a theoretical action that is equivalent to a matched
physical action on the system. Evidence supporting this thesis is found in
experimental psychological research where results of various experiments allowthat the imagined rotation of an object is analogous to a physical rotation. The
conservation laws based on the transformations noted are theoretical or mental
in nature to the same extent that they are physical. When one of the
conservation principles noted is tested by carrying out the relevant
transformation on the system, this test is essentially one of the influence of
mental activity on physical reality.
T
EXT
A conservation law in physics, i.e., a law noting a zero rate of change
over time for some physical quantity, reflects an underlying invariance of
physical law under some transformation of an isolated physical system.
Perhaps the most important conservation law is that concerning energy; this lawreflects the invariance of an isolated physical system with regard to time. Theconservation of linear momentum reflects the invariance for such a system with
regard to spatial displacement. The invariance with regard to spatial rotation ofan isolated physical system is the foundation for the conservation of angular
momentum. E ach of the spatial or temporal transformations underlying the
conservation laws of energy, linear momentum, and angular momentum
possesses a special nature given the relative character of physical events. There
is no absolute origin for either space or time but only a chosen relative origin.
Maintaining a set of axes while carrying out a physical action to transform the
system is equivalent to transforming the axes while leaving the system
untouched. For example, the act of moving a physical system along an axis x
representing a linear spatial direction from x
1 to x2 (x2 > x1) is equivalent to
leaving the system untouched and linearly moving the axis such that the
coordinate of the system along this axis changes from x1 to x2.. The movement
of this axis is essentially a theoretical, or mental, action. Moving a measuringdevice representing the axis such that the system's coordinate changes from x
1On the Conservation
- 2 -to x2 is equivalent to adding x2 - x1 to all points on the axis and leaving the
measuring device untouched. For each of the transformations noted, there is a
theoretical action that is equivalent to a matched physical action on the system.
The conservation laws based on these transformations are theoretical or mental
in nature to the same extent that they are physical. The intrinsic relationship
between mental activity and physical reality has also been discussed (2, 3).
Evidence supporting this thesis is found in experimental psychological
research (1). They reported the results of various experiments, concluding that
the imagined rotation of an object is analogous to a physical rotation. In one ofCooper's experiments, for example, subjects were asked to identify whether a
figure in a particular spatially rotated orientation (without having witnessed the
possible rotation of the figure) was the identical figure initially presented or a
reflected (mirror image) version of this figure. The results indicated a linear
dependence between the angle of rotation from the original position and the timesubjects took to indicate that the figures were the same. For the reflected
figures, a constant time factor was added to the time for identification of the
figure; the linear dependence was preserved. This linear dependence is
consistent with the time taken by subjects to engage in the proposed imagined
rotation. Cooper and Shepard (1) maintained that imagined spatial rotations areinternal representations developed as a result of their evolutionary adaptive
significance in coping with the external physical world in which actual spatial
rotations occur. But, as discussed, there is no basis for discriminating between
the imagined rotation and the actual rotation in the formulation of the
conservation of angular momentum. Mentally rotating a set of coordinate axes
applied to a physical system is essentially an imagined physical rotation of the
system. When one of the conservation principles noted is tested by carrying
out the relevant transformation on the system, this test is essentially one of the
influence of mental activity on physical reality.
R
EFERENCES
1 Cooper, L. A., & Shepard, R. N. Turning something over in the mind.
Scientific American , 1984, 25(6), 106-114.
2 Snyder, D. M. On the nature of relationships involving the observer and the
observed phenomenon in psychology and physics. Journal of Mind and
Behavior , 1983, 4, 389-400.
3 Snyder, D. M. Mental activity and physical reality. Journal of Mind and
Behavior , in press. |
arXiv:physics/9911014v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 10 Nov 1999Second virial coefficient for the Landau diamagnetism of a two component plasma
M.Steinberg, W. Ebeling, and J. Ortner
(February 2, 2008)
This paper investigates the density expansion of the thermo dynamic properties of a two com-
ponent plasma under the influence of a weak constant uniform m agnetic field. We start with the
fugacity expansion for the Helmholtz free energy. The leadi ng terms with respect to the density
are calculated by a perturbation expansion with respect to t he magnetic field. We find a new mag-
netic virial function for a low density plasma which is exact in quadratic order with respect to the
magnetic field. Using these results we compute the magnetiza tion and the magnetic susceptibility.
52.25.Kn, 05.30.-d, 05.70.Ce, 71.45.Gm
I. INTRODUCTION
The topic of matter in magnetic fields has received much atten tion. The magnetic field has a great effect on the
individual motion of charged particles. In classical mecha nics the motion of the free particles in a magnetic field can
be described by circular orbits. The frequency associated w ith the rotation is the cyclotron frequency ωc=eB0/me.
In quantum mechanics the motion perpendicular to the magnet ic field is quantized with the corresponding energy
eigenvalues E⊥= ¯hωc(n+ 1/2) [1]. A wide range of subsequent investigations covers the properties of atoms and
molecules in magnetic fields. Their study is motivated by the astrophysical implications concerned with the physics of
pulsars and neutron stars, but also by its application in qua ntum chaos [2–4]. The calculation of the energy spectrum
of a hydrogen atom in strong magnetic fields has been tackled b y various authors [5–7]. One of the complications
found in the theory is the coupling of the center of mass motio n with the relative motion [6]. This also complicates
the calculation of the thermodynamic functions of a low dens ity plasma. However, this effect becomes important
at strong fields only. Throughout this paper we will consider the weak-field limit in which case this effect becomes
negligible. In this limit the proton mass is considered to be infinite.
Although the magnetic field affects the individual motion of t he particles, there is no influence of the magnetic field
on the equilibrium properties of a classical charged partic le system. This follows from the Bohr-van-Leeuwen theorem
[8,9], which can be easily derived by changing the variable i n the momentum integrals in such a way that one works
with the variable π=p−eA. As a result of this all equilibrium properties are independ ent of the magnetic field. In
quantum mechanics this argument is no longer valid, since th e momentum operator and the coordinate operator of
a particle do not commute. A common example of an equilibrium value which depends on the magnetic field is the
magnetization of an electron gas. It was shown by Landau [10] that the low field magnetization of a spinless electron
gas, in Boltzmann statistics, is
Morb=−neβ¯h2ωc
12m, (1)
i.e., the so called orbital part contributes to a diamagneti c response. However, the full response of the free (noninter -
acting) electron gas, including the spin part, is paramagne tic.
The magnetization of a system of charged particles is a bound ary effect. In classical mechanics the magnetization
induced by the motion of the bulk electrons is cancelled by th e magnetization connected with the surface current.
Again in quantum mechanics this statement is not valid anymo re. Landau used a perturbation expansion of the
free energy with respect to the magnetic field, to circumvent difficulties due to the boundary effects. In doing so
the electrons at the boundary of the system were neglected. T hen the magnetization is found as the derivative of
the free energy with respect to the magnetic field. Another ap proach has been chosen by Teller [11]. He calculated
the current at the boundary of the system, produced by the mot ion of the elctrons under the influence of uniform
magnetic field. From this he computed the magnetization of th e system and was able to show the equivalence of his
method and Landau’s approach. However, as Teller already po inted out Landau’s method is much better suited for
more complicated problems.
The difficulties connected with the boundary effects are perha ps one of the reasons for the few results concerning the
equilibrium statistical mechanics of a low density quantum plasmas embedded in an external magnetic field. A first
attempt beyond Landau has been pursued by Alastuey and Janco vici. They studied, by means of a Wigner-Kirkwood
expansion, the magnetic properties of a nearly classical on e component plasma (OCP) in two and three dimensions
in the weak field [12] as well as in the strong field limit [13]. R elated problems were treated by Cornu [14] and Boose
1and Perez [15] who derived a formally exact virial expansion of the EOS of a multicomponent plasma by using the
Feynman Kac path-integral representation of the grand-can onical ensemble.
This paper is aimed to calculate the magnetic properties of a quantum plasma in the low density limit. These
systems are characterized by a small coupling parameter Γ, w hich is given by
Γ =e2
4πǫ0kTd, (2)
whered= (3/4πn)1/3is the mean distance between the particles. We follow the met hod of Landau for the calculation
of the magnetization. The starting point is the fugacity exp ansion of the Helmholtz free energy. In a previous work
[16] the authors have performed a perturbation expansion fo r the equation of state of a low density plasma up to
the ordern2e4, which is valid at arbitrary magnetic field strength. In the p resent paper we perform an expansion
of the thermodynamic functions for a low density plasma (Γ <1) up to the order n2and calculate the coefficients
of this expansion in quadratic order with respect to the magn etic field, without making any approximation with
respect to the Coulomb problem. Using a diagrammatic langua ge this can be restated as the calculation of all ladder
diagrams expanded to second order in the magnetic field. In do ing so we will consider the BandB2terms of the
Hamiltonion separately. We will see that the separate contr ibutions are divergent, only the sum of all contributions
give a convergent expression. This is the price which we have to pay within the present method circumventing the
calculation of boundary effects.
This paper is organized as follows. In section II, we discuss the representation of thermodynamic functions by a
fugacity expansion. The second virial coefficient of a magnet ized plasma will be discussed in section III. In the first
part of section III, we present in more detail the calculatio n of the electron-ion contribution to the thermodynamic
functions in the case of an infinite proton mass and in the seco nd part an analytical continuation will lead us to the
electron-electron contribution. In the third part of secti on III the asymptotic behavior of the new proposed magnetic
virial functions will be studied. Finally, the derived resu lts are used to compute the magnetization and the magnetic
susceptibility in section IV.
II. REPRESENTATION OF THE THERMODYNAMIC FUNCTIONS BY A FUGA CITY EXPANSION
In this section, we briefly present the general method used in this work and give the exact results derived in an
earlier work [16]. Let us consider a two-component charge-s ymmetrical system of N spin half particles of charge (-e)
and massmeand N spin half particles of charge e and mass mi. The Hamiltonoperator of our system consists of two
particle contributions. Each pair of species aandbcontributes
Hλ
ab=/parenleftbigg(pa−eaAa)2
2ma+µa
BB0σz/parenrightbigg
+/parenleftbigg(pb−ebAb)2
2mb+µb
BB0σz/parenrightbigg
+λVab(r),
σz=−1,+1 (3)
with the Coulombic interaction potential
Vab(r) =eaeb
4πǫ0r. (4)
HereHabis the Hamiltonoperator of the two particle system and H0
abof the noninteracting system. The additive term
µa
BB0σztakes into account the coupling between the intrinsic magne tic moment ( µa
B=ea¯h/(2ma)) of the charged
particles and the magnetic field.
We suppose that the pressure can be split into ideal and inter action contributions
p=pid+pint. (5)
In the case without Coulomb interaction e2= 0 the pressure and the particle density of the plasma in a hom ogeneous
magnetic field B= (0,0,B0) are given by a sum of Fermi integrals over all Landau levels n
pid=kT/summationdisplay
a2xa
Λ3a/summationdisplay
n=0′
f1
2(ln (za
n)), n =/summationdisplay
a2xa
Λ3a/summationdisplay
n=0′
f−1
2(ln (za
n)) (6)
(xa= ¯hωa
c/(2kT) withωa
c=|ea|B0/ma, Λa=h/√2πmakT, andza
n= exp [β(µ−n¯hωa
c)]). The prime indicates the
double summation due to the spin degeneracy except for the n= 0 level.
2The interaction part of the pressure will be expressed in ter ms of a fugacity expansion which will be truncated after
the second virial coefficient [17–21]
βpint=κ3
12π+/summationdisplay
ab˜za˜zb/parenleftbiggπ
3λ3
abξ3
abln(κλab) +π
2β3e2
a
4πǫ0e4
b
(4πǫ0)2+Bab/parenrightbigg
+ 0(˜z5/2ln ˜z), (7)
where we have introduced the modified fugacities
˜za=za2
Λ3axa
tanh(xa), (8)
in order to have ˜ za→nain the limit of small densities. The first term on the r.h.s of E q.(7) is the Debye contribution
in the grand canonical ensemble. The squared inverse Debye r adius is given by κ2=β(e2/ǫ0)(˜ze+ ˜zi). Since it is a
classical contribution the Debye term does not depend on the field. In the limit of small densities Eq.(7) coincides
with the formally exact virial equation of state derived by C ornu [14] and Boose and Perez [15]. We now try to extend
these calculations and focus on the calculation of the secon d virial coefficient Bab. In order to avoid convergence
problems let us in a first approach cut the Coulomb tail at larg e distances, i.e. Vab(r) = 0 ifr>R . Then the second
virial coefficient reads
Bab=1
2Ω/parenleftbiggΛ3
a
2tanh(xa)
xa/parenrightbigg/parenleftbiggΛ3
b
2tanh(xb)
xb/parenrightbigg
Tr(e−β/hatwideHab−e−β/hatwideH0
ab). (9)
This function will be studied in more detail in the next secti on.
III. SECOND VIRIAL COEFFICIENT OF A MAGNETIZED PLASMA
It is convenient to divide the second virial coefficient into t he direct part Bd
aband the exchange part Bex
aa
Bab=Bd
ab+Bex
aaδab, (10)
and to compute them separately. The exchange part of Babas defined by Eqs.(9) with the Hamiltonoperator given
by Eq.(3) is convergent while if R→ ∞ the direct part is divergent. This is due to the long range beh avior of the
Coulomb interaction which leads to collective effects. In or der to include these collective effects one has to perform a
screening procedure, which may then lead to convergent expr ession forBab. Such a technique is well established in
the zero magnetic field case [17–21] and can be easily extende d to the nonzero magnetic field case. In general, Babis
an analytic function of the interaction parameter ξab[21], defined by
ξab=−eaeb
4πǫ0kTλ ab, (11)
withλab= ¯h/√2mabkTandmab=mamb/(ma+mb) beeing the effective mass. Hence Babmay be written as a
Taylor expansion. Using the methods as described in [17–21] we derived in our earlier work [16] the lowest order
contribution to Bab. As in the zero field case we write the direct part of the second virial coefficient of the plasma in
the following form
Bd
ab=B′
ab+B′′
ab, (12)
where the contributions of second and third order in ξabare included in B′
ab, with
B′
ab=−1
8π3/2λ3
abξ2
abh2(xa,xb)−π
3/parenleftbiggC
2+ log 3 −1
2/parenrightbigg
λ3
abξ3
abh3(xa,xb). (13)
In general the magnetic field correction h2,3satisfiesh2,3= 1 if the magnetic field B= 0. The second order term has
been found in [16] and is explicitely given by
h2(xa,xb) =/parenleftBigg
1
2+4
π/integraldisplay1
0dt/radicalbig
t(1−t)(ya+yb)arctanh/radicalbig
1−(ya+yb)/radicalbig
1−(ya+yb)/parenrightBigg
, (14)
3withya,b=λ2
aa,bbsinh(xa,bt) sinh(xa,b(1−t))/(λ2
abt(1−t)2xa,bsinh(xa,b)). The magnetic field correction h3is so
far not exactly known. In the limit of zero field h3= 1 holds; furthermore, in the next section we will derive an
expression for h3in the weak field limit.
Formally the higher order contributions may be expressed by a resolvent expansion [20]
B′′
ab=1
2Ω/parenleftbiggΛ3
a
2tanh(xa)
xa/parenrightbigg/parenleftbiggΛ3
b
2tanh(xb)
xb/parenrightbigg
P′′
Tr/summationdisplay
k1
2πi/integraldisplay
Cdze−βz/bracketleftbigg1
H0
ab−zVab/bracketrightbiggk1
H0
ab−z. (15)
The contour integral may be taken in the sense of an inverse La place transform. The operator P′′means that all
terms of order less than ξ4have to be omitted, since they have already been taken into ac count inB′
ab. The series
may then be written in the general form
B′′
ab= 2π3/2λ3
ab∞/summationdisplay
k=4ζ(k−2)hk(xa,xb)
Γ(1 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξab
2/parenrightbiggk
. (16)
The functions hkexpressing the magnetic corrections satisfy the zero field c ondition
hk(0,0) = 1. (17)
Therefore in the zero magnetic field case an exact calculatio n of the convergent second virial coefficient is possible in
agreement with earlier work [20,21].
An alternative expression for the field free virial coefficien t which we may refer to as B0
abmay be obtained by
introducing the quantum virial function Q0(ξab) [21] according to
B0
ab= 2πλ3
abQ0(ξab), (18)
with
Q0(ξab) =−1
8√πξ2
ab−1
6ξ3
ab/parenleftbiggC
2+ ln 3−1
2/parenrightbigg
+√π∞/summationdisplay
k=4ζ(k−2)
Γ(1 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξab
2/parenrightbiggk
. (19)
Note that the second order term may be included into the serie s, sinceζ(0) =−1/2.
Now let us discuss the exchange part. Again, as it was shown in Ref. [16] this contribution may be written in a
Taylor expansion
Bex
aa=π3/2λ3
aa∞/summationdisplay
k=0/parenleftbig
1−22−k/parenrightbigζ(k−1)bk(xa)
Γ(1 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξaa
2/parenrightbiggk
. (20)
Here we have included the terms with nonpositive arguments i n theζfunction. In particular we have used the relation
lim
k→2(1−22−k)ζ(k−1) = ln 2. (21)
The zero field results are reproduced, since we have bk(0) = 1 and they may be written, after introducing the exchang e
virial function E0(ξaa), as
B0ex
aa=−πλ3
aaE0(ξaa), (22)
with
E0(ξaa) =√π∞/summationdisplay
k=0/parenleftbig
1−22−k/parenrightbigζ(k−1)
Γ(1 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξaa
2/parenrightbiggk
. (23)
The influence of the magnetic field on the exchange part has bee n studied in [16] for the lower order terms b0,b1, and
b2. The following analytical expression were derived
4b0(xa) =cosh(2xa)
cosh2(xa)tanh(xa)
xa, (24)
and
b1(xa) =cosh(2xa)
cosh2(xa)tanh(xa)
xaarctanh/radicalBig
1−tanh( xa)
xa/radicalBig
1−tanh( xa)
xa. (25)
For an integral representation of b2we refer the reader to Eq.(C4) of [16].
A. Expansion in the weak field limit for the ion-electron inte raction
We shall find an expansion of the second virial coefficient in th e weak-field limit. The magnetic field is now assumed
to be a small perturbation to the field free Coulomb problem. I n this case we can use the already established results
for the second virial coefficient in the absence of a field [21]. Due to the invariance of the thermodynamic functions
under the transformation B→ −Bthe first correction to the field-free results will be quadrat ic in the magnetic field.
This can also be verified in the ideal contribution (Pauli spi n magnetism and Landau diamagnetism).
Let us consider a hydrogen plasma with an infinite proton mass . This is a reasonable approximation in the weak
field limit, as the proton frequency is proportional to the in verse mass of the proton. We chose the symmetric gauge
A= 1/2 (B×r). Then the Hamiltonian in relativ and center of mass coordin ates takes the form
Hei=P2
2mi+p2
2me+meω2
c
8ρ2−i¯hωc
2∂
∂φ+µe
BB0σz−e2
4πǫ0r, (26)
whereωcis the electron cyclotron frequency. The elctron-ion contr ibutionBd
eito the second virial coefficient is given
by the following trace
Bd
ei=1
2ΩPk′/parenleftbiggΛ3
i
2/parenrightbigg/parenleftbiggΛ3
e
2tanh(xe)
xe/parenrightbigg
Tr(e−βHei−e−βH0
ei). (27)
As in the zero magnetic field case we have defined an operator Pk′that takes into account the divergency, by omitting
all terms of order ekwithk<k′.
The trace over the center of mass coodinates and over the spin variable is readily carried out. Again we use the
resolvent representation to obtain the following contribu tion
Bd
ei= 4π3/2λ3
esinh(xe)
xePk′/integraldisplay
Cdz
2πie−βzTr/parenleftbigg1
hei−z−1
h0
ei−z/parenrightbigg
, (28)
withλe= ¯h/√2mekT. Here we have introduced the Hamiltonoperators for the free relative motion
h0
ei=p2
2me+meω2
c
8ρ2−i¯hωc
2∂
∂φ, (29)
and for the relative motion of the interacting particles
hei=h0
ei−e2
4πǫ0r. (30)
We are interested in the case of a weak magnetic field without m aking any approximation with respect to the Coulomb
problem. For that we expand Beiin powers of xe= ¯hωc/2kT. It can be easily shown that the linear term is equal to
zero and the first nonvanishing term is proportional to x2
e. This contribution may be written as
Bd
ei=/parenleftbigg
1 +x2
e
6/parenrightbigg
B0
ei+B1
ei+B2
ei. (31)
The first term comes from the expansion of the normalising con stant and therefore the trace is solely given by the zero
field result [21]. In order to take into account the infinite pr oton mass in B0
eione has to replace λeibyλe= ¯h/√2mekT
5and, hence, ξeibyξe=−eeei/(4πǫ0kTλ e). The other two terms, beeing of the order O(B2), are the result of an
expansion of the trace in powers of the magnetic field and read as
B1
ei= 4π3/2λ3
ePk′/integraldisplay
Cdz
2πie−βzTr/parenleftbigg1
hc−z/parenleftbigg
−i¯hωc
2∂
∂φ/parenrightbigg1
hc−z/parenleftbigg
−i¯hωc
2∂
∂φ/parenrightbigg1
hc−z/parenrightbigg
(32)
and
B2
ei=−4π3/2λ3
ePk′/integraldisplay
Cdz
2πie−βzTr/parenleftbigg1
hc−z/parenleftbiggmeω2
c
8ρ2/parenrightbigg1
hc−z/parenrightbigg
. (33)
Herehc=p2/2me−e2/4πǫ0ris the Hamiltonian for the Coulomb problem for zero magnetic field. In what follows we
briefly outline the steps leading to the final result for B1
eiandB2
ei. For simplicity the calculations of these contributions
may be carried out separately, but as will be seen below only t he sum of both gives a convergent contribution.
1. Calculation of B1
ei
Let us first concentrate on the calculation of B1
ei. The perturbation operator has spherical symmetry. Thus it
is convenient to use the eigenfunctions of the Coulomb opera tor. With that the calculation of the matrix elements
becomes trivial. As in the zero field case we can write
B1
ei= 4π3/2λ3
ePk′/integraldisplay
Cdz
2πie−βz/braceleftBigg∞/summationdisplay
n=1n−1/summationdisplay
l=0l/summationdisplay
m=−l1
(En−z)3(¯hωc)2
4m2
+∞/summationdisplay
l=0l/summationdisplay
m=−l/integraldisplay∞
0dk1
/parenleftBig
¯h2k2
2m−z/parenrightBig3(¯hωc)2
4m21
πdδl(k)
dk/bracerightBigg
. (34)
Here we have made use of the relation between the density of st ates for the continuum states and the scattering
phase shifts δl(k) of the Coulomb system. The eigenvalues of the Coulomb syste m read asEn=−1/2n2and can be
expressed in terms of the parameter ξby
−βEn=/parenleftbiggξe
2/parenrightbigg21
n2. (35)
First we compute the discrete part of the partition function , that is given by the first term in (34) and reads
B1b
ei= 4π3/2λ3
ex2
e
Γ(3)Pk′∞/summationdisplay
n=1n−1/summationdisplay
l=0l/summationdisplay
m=−lm2e−βEn, (36)
where we have performed the inverse Laplace transform. The s ummation over m and l is trivial and one immediately
finds, that
B1b
ei= 4π3/2λ3
ex2
e
12Pk′∞/summationdisplay
n=1/parenleftbig
n4−n2/parenrightbig
exp/parenleftbiggξe
2n/parenrightbigg2
. (37)
By expanding the exponential and using the representation o f theζ-function we obtain
B1b
ei= 4π3/2λ3
ex2
e
12Pk′/summationdisplay
k=2,4,···ζ(k−4)−ζ(k−2)
Γ(1 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξe
2/parenrightbiggk
. (38)
So far we have calculated the bound state contribution to B1
ei. In the next step we consider the contribution of
continous spectrum. For that we need the scattering phase sh ifts of the field free Coulomb problem that are given by
d
dkδl(k) =−1
k2/parenleftbigge2me
¯h2/parenrightbigg
Reψ/parenleftbigg
l+ 1 +i/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsinglee2me
k¯h2/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/parenrightbigg
. (39)
6Making use of this relation and introducing t=λ2
ek2the second term in Eq.(34) may be written as
B1s
ei=π1/2λ3
ex2
ePk′/integraldisplay
Cdz
2πie−z∞/summationdisplay
l=0l/summationdisplay
m=−lm2/integraldisplay∞
0dt
t3/2ξe
(t−z)3Reψ/parenleftbigg
l+ 1 +i
2√
t|ξe|/parenrightbigg
. (40)
In order to compute the sum over m and l we will expand the ψ-function, we have
Reψ/parenleftbigg
l+ 1 +i
2√
t|ξe|/parenrightbigg
=Re∞/summationdisplay
k=01
k!ψ(k)(l+ 1)/parenleftbiggi
2√
t|ξe|/parenrightbiggk
. (41)
Now the summation over m and l may be carried out. We obtain by i ntroducing τ=l+ 1 +s
Pk′∞/summationdisplay
l=0l/summationdisplay
m=−lm21
k!ψ(k)(l+ 1) = ( −1)kPk′∞/summationdisplay
l=01
3/parenleftbig
2l3+ 3l2+l/parenrightbig∞/summationdisplay
s=01
(l+ 1 +s)k+1
= (−1)kPk′∞/summationdisplay
τ=11
τk+1τ−1/summationdisplay
l=01
3/parenleftbig
2l3+ 3l2+l/parenrightbig
= (−1)kPk′1
6(ζ(k−3)−ζ(k−1)). (42)
Next we perform all remaining integrations. In this context we may use the following integral representation
/integraldisplay
Cdz
2πie−z/integraldisplay
C′dt
t3/2ξe
(t−z)3/parenleftbiggi
2√
t|ξe|/parenrightbiggk
=2π
Γ((k+ 3)/2)/parenleftbigg|ξe|
2/parenrightbiggk+1
. (43)
Here the contour integral C′in the complex t-plane encircles the positive real axis in the mathematical positive sense.
Using Eqs.(40,42 and 43) we obtain, after shifting the summa tion indexk→k−1, the series
B1s
ei=−2π3/2λ3
ex2
e
12/summationdisplay
k=6ζ(k−4)−ζ(k−2)
Γ(1 +k/2)/parenleftbigg
−|ξe|
2/parenrightbiggk
. (44)
Finally we sum up the bound state (38) and the scattering stat e (44) contribution, which gives
B1
ei= 2π3/2λ3
ex2
12/summationdisplay
k=6ζ(k−4)−ζ(k−2)
Γ(1 +k/2)/parenleftbigg|ξe|
2/parenrightbiggk
. (45)
Here the sum runs from k= 6, since in this derivation the lower order terms k<6 would give divergent contributions .
However, formally the ζfunction can be extended to negative values and therefore th e sum to smaller kvalues such as
k= 2,3,4, and 5. It will be shown below that this extension is possibl e and gives the exact lower order contributions.
Note that the bound state contribution and the scattering st ate contribution differ by a factor of 2. This general
statement has been previously derived in the zero field case [ 20]. It is essentially a consequence of the analyticity
of the second virial coefficient Bab(ξ) and expresses the fact of compensation of bound state and sc attering state
contributions according to Levinsons Theorem [20]. One may also regard it as rule of obtaining scattering quantities
from bound state quantities. We will employ this relation in the following section.
2. Calculation of B2
ei
Again we first concentrate on the calculation of the bound sta te contribution. We may use the eigenfunction of the
Coulomb operator to evaluate the trace. Thus we have
B2b
ei=−4π3/2λ3
ePk′/integraldisplay
Cdz
2πie−βz∞/summationdisplay
n=1n−1/summationdisplay
l=0l/summationdisplay
m=−l1
(En−z)2/angbracketleftbigg
nlm/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsinglemω2
c
8r2sin2θ/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsinglenlm/angbracketrightbigg
. (46)
The calculation of the matrix elements is readily carried ou t [1], with the result
7/angbracketleftbigg
nlm/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsinglemeω2
c
8r2sin2θ/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsinglenlm/angbracketrightbigg
=meω2
c
8a2
Bn2
2/parenleftbig
5n2+ 1−3l(l−1)/parenrightbig
×4l3+ 6l2+ 2(2l+ 1)m2−2l−2
(2l+ 1)(2l−1)(2l+ 3). (47)
With that we obtain after integration and summation over the magnetic quantum number m
B2b
ei=−4π3/2λ3
ex2
e
3ξ2ePk′∞/summationdisplay
n=1n−1/summationdisplay
l=0e(1
n2ξe
2)2
n2/parenleftbig
5n2+ 1−3l(l+ 1)/parenrightbig8l3+ 12l2−2l−3
(2l−1)(2l+ 3). (48)
By summing over l we get
B2b
ei=−4π3/2λ3
ePk′∞/summationdisplay
n=1e−βEnx2
e
6ξ2en4/parenleftbig
7n2+ 5/parenrightbig
. (49)
As before we expand the exponential, introduce the ζ-function and obtain the following expression for the bound state
contribution
B2b
ei=−4π3/2λ3
ex2
e
24/summationdisplay
k=67ζ(k−4) + 5ζ(k−2)
Γ(2 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξe
2/parenrightbiggk
. (50)
Now we shall calculate the scattering part. This contributi on may be obtained by applying the same arguments that
have led to the final expression of B1
ab.
B2
ei=−2π3/2λ3
ex2
e
24/summationdisplay
k=67ζ(k−4) + 5ζ(k−2)
Γ(2 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξe
2/parenrightbiggk
. (51)
Again, only contributions k≥6 are retained from this sum.
3. Final results for the electron-ion contribution
We can now take the sum of the various contributions Eqs.(31, 45 and 51) in order to obtain the quantum virial
function. As we have indicated before we may now drop the oper atorPk′and may postulate the virial coefficient,
with
Bd
ei= 2πλ3
eQ0(ξe) + 2πλ3
ex2
e
24QB(ξe), (52)
where we have defined the new magnetic quantum virial functio nQB
abby
QB(ξab) =√π∞/summationdisplay
k=2(k−3)ζ(k−2) + (k−5)ζ(k−4)
Γ(2 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξab
2/parenrightbiggk
. (53)
In spite of the fact that the derivation given above is valid o nly fork≥6 we have extended the sum to k≥2. By
studying the asymptotic properties of this function we will show that the magnetic quantum virial function has the
correct asymptotics for large ξ. Another independent verification of this result can be obta ined by expanding the exact
second order contribution as given in Eq.(14). The quantum v irial function QB(ξe) may be interpreted as the limit of
QB(ξei) with an infinite proton mass mi→ ∞ . Fork= 3,5 we make use of the relation lim k→3(k−3)ζ(k−2) = 1.
In the next section we will show that the same analytical func tion determines also the contribution of the electron-
electron interaction.
8B. Electron-electron contribution
We first study the Hamilton operator in c.m. and relative coor dinates. In this case the hamiltonian is separable
and may be written as Hee=Hcm
ee+hee, with the center of mass hamiltonian
Hcm
ee=P2
4me+e2B2
4meR2sin Θ2−i¯hωc
2∂
∂Φ. (54)
It describes the free motion of a particle with mass 2 meparallel to the field. While we have an harmonic oscillator
with frequency ωc=eB/m eperpendicular to the field. The hamiltonian for the relative motion is given by
hee=p2
me+e2B2
16mer2sinθ2−i¯hωc
2∂
∂φ+e2
4πǫ0r. (55)
It has the same structure as the hamiltonian for the relative motion of an electron in the field of a proton with infinite
mass. The only difference is the appearance of different masse s in the various terms of heiandhee. However, by
appropriately redefining the length scales and dimensionle ss parameters involved in the problem, one can map hee
ontohei. This means in detail the replacement of λebyλeeand ofξebyξeein Eq.(52,53). Now we may use the
analyticity of the virial coefficient with respect to the inte raction parameter. We may extend the result obtained for
the electron-ion part Eq.(53) by analytical continuation t o negativeξ-values. Thus we have for the electron-electron
contribution
Bd
ee= 2πλ3
eeQ0(ξee) + 2πλ3
eex2
e
24QB(ξee). (56)
The magnetic quantum virial function QB(ξee) is given by Eq.(53). Note that this series holds also for the ion-ion
interaction if meis substituted by mi. However its contribution to the virial coefficient is neglig ible in the weak field
limit.
Let us briefly state the result for the exchange part of the ele ctron-electron contribution. It may be obtained
by introducing an additional factor ( −1)lin Eq.(34 and 46) which takes into account the exact symmetry of the
wavefunction. Then following the same steps as described in section III we find
Bex
ee=−πλ3
eecosh(2xe)
cosh2(xe)E0(ξee)−πλ3
eex2
e
6cosh(2xe)
cosh2(xe)EB(ξee), (57)
with the new magnetic exchange virial function
EB(ξaa) =√π∞/summationdisplay
k=01
Γ(1 +k/2)/parenleftbiggk
2 +k(1−24−k)ζ(k−3)−4
2 +k(1−22−k)ζ(k−1)/parenrightbigg/parenleftbiggξaa
2/parenrightbiggk
. (58)
The factor cosh(2 xe)/cosh2(xe) in Eq.(58) is a result of the spins of the particles and can be calculated exactly. Again,
one may check these results for the order k= 0,1 by comparison with the exact contributions given by Eqs.(2 4 and
25).
C. Asymptotic properties of the virial function
Let us now make an independent test of the above made statemen ts. This investigation relies on two facts. First we
consider the elctron-electron contribution only, then in t he limitξ→ ∞ the quantum virial function QB(ξ) should be
equal to the Wigner-Kirkwood expansion [12], since ξ∼¯h−1. That means in this limit the plasma behaves essentially
as a classical system. The second argument is that the electr on-electron contribution may be obtained from the ion-
electron contribution, and vice versa, by simple replaceme nts of the interaction parameter as discussed in the previou s
section. Let us start by studying the higher order contribut ionsk≥6 to the magnetic virial function (truncated virial
function), which read according to Eq.(53) as
Q′B(ξ) =√π∞/summationdisplay
k=6(k−3)ζ(k−2) + (k−5)ζ(k−4)
Γ(2 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbiggk
, (59)
withξ<0. The Γ-function can be represented by an inverse Laplace tr ansform
91
Γ(z)=/integraldisplayδ+i∞
δ−i∞dt
2πiet
tz. (60)
With that and after rearranging the sum over k, Q′B(ξ) can be rewritten as
Q′B(ξ) =√π/integraldisplayδ+i∞
δ−i∞dt
2πiet
t2∞/summationdisplay
k=4(k−3)ζ(k−2)/parenleftBigg
1 +/parenleftbiggξ
2√
t/parenrightbigg2/parenrightBigg/parenleftbiggξ
2√
t/parenrightbiggk
−√πζ(2)
Γ(4)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg4
−√π2ζ(3)
Γ(9/2)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg5
. (61)
In the following we make use of the relation
∞/summationdisplay
k=4(−1)k(k−3)ζ(k−2)xk=x4/parenleftbigg
ψ′(x)−1
x2/parenrightbigg
, x> 0, (62)
which gives then
Q′B(ξ) =√π/integraldisplayδ+i∞
δ−i∞dt
2πiet
t2/parenleftbiggξ
2√
t/parenrightbigg4/parenleftBigg
1 +/parenleftbiggξ
2√
t/parenrightbigg2/parenrightBigg/parenleftBigg
ψ′/parenleftbigg|ξ|
2√
t/parenrightbigg
−/parenleftbigg2√
t
|ξ|/parenrightbigg2/parenrightBigg
−√πζ(2)
Γ(4)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg4
−√π2ζ(3)
Γ(9/2)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg5
. (63)
It useful to employ the asymptotic expansion of the ψfunction
ψ(x) = lnx−1
2x−m/summationdisplay
s=1B2s
2sx2s+rm(x), (64)
with the Bernoulli numbers B2k. Then we can perform the inverse Laplace transform and find th e following asymptotic
expansion of the truncated magnetic quantum virial functio n
Q′B(ξ) =−√π
Γ(9/2)(1 + 2ζ(3))/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg5
−√π
Γ(4)/parenleftbigg1
2+ζ(2)/parenrightbigg/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg4
−√π
Γ(7/2)(1 +B2)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg3
−√π
2Γ(3)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg2
−√π
Γ(5/2)(B2+B4)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg
−√π
Γ(3/2)(B4+B6)/parenleftbigg2
ξ/parenrightbigg
−√π
Γ(1/2)(B6+B8)/parenleftbigg2
ξ/parenrightbigg3
+o(ξ−5).(65)
Now we may conclude that the full magnetic virial function de fined by
QB(ξ) =√π5/summationdisplay
k=2(k−3)ζ(k−2) + (k−5)ζ(k−4)
Γ(2 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbiggk
+Q′B(ξ) (66)
has the following asymptotic representation
QB(ξ) =−4
45ξ+4
1051
ξ+8
1051
ξ3+o(ξ−5). (67)
Remarkably, this procedure is accompanied by a term by term c ancellation of the lower order contributions k <6
coming from the Taylor expansion with those coming from the a symptotic expansion. The final expression may now
be compared with the ¯ h2expansion , which was computed by Alastuey and Jancovici [12 ]. The linear term in the
asymptotic expansion of QB(ξ) is the term proportional to ¯ h2-term of the Wigner Kirkwood expansion and coincides
with that of Alastuey and Jancovici. In addition to that we ha ve found higher order contributions proportional to ¯ h4
and ¯h6. With this derivation we have shown that that the magnetic vi rial function (53) has the correct asymptotic
properties. This may be regarded as a strong support of the ar gument that the sum in Eq.(59) can be extended to
the values of k=2,3,4, and 5, in order to obtain the desired re sult as given in Eq.(53).
Notice that from the Wigner-Kirkwood expansion follows the absence of the linear term in the Taylor expansion
(53).
10Finally we give the asymptotic form of QB(ξ) for positive arguments. To establish this property, we firs t observe
that the magnetic virial function obeys the following relat ion
QB(ξ) +QB(−ξ) = 2√π∞/summationdisplay
k=2,4,···(k−3)ζ(k−2) + (k−5)ζ(k−4)
Γ(2 +k/2)/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbiggk
. (68)
From this, it follows by using the representation of the ζ-function as an infinite sum and then carrying out the sum
over k, that
QB(−ξ) =QB(ξ) +√π
8ξ2+√π
96/parenleftbiggπ2
3+ 1/parenrightbigg
ξ4+ 2√πσB(ξ), (69)
where we have defined
σB(ξ) =∞/summationdisplay
n=12n2/parenleftbig
1 +n2/parenrightbig/bracketleftBigg
e(ξ
2)21
n2−1−/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg21
n2−1
2!/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg41
n4/bracketrightBigg
−∞/summationdisplay
n=1n4/parenleftbig
5 + 7n2/parenrightbig/parenleftbigg2
ξ/parenrightbigg2/bracketleftBigg
e(ξ
2)21
n2−1−/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg21
n2−1
2!/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg41
n4−1
3!/parenleftbiggξ
2/parenrightbigg61
n6/bracketrightBigg
. (70)
Now let us briefly summarize the properties of the magnetic qu antum virial function. In Fig.1 we have plotted QB(ξ)
for both positive and negative arguments, i.e. for electron -ion and electron-electron interaction , respectively. It shows
an asymmetric behavior. For opposite charged particles the magnetic quantum virial function increases exponentially
at largeξ, i.e. at low temperatures, due to the formation of bound stat es. While for like charged QB(ξ) increases
linear at large ξ.
The behavior of the exchange magnetic virial function is sho wn in Fig.2. In the quantum regime, at small ξ, one finds
a finite contribution to the thermodynamic funcitons. While EB(ξ) decreases exponentially in the classical regime,
i.e. at large ξ-values. This result was also found in [12].
IV. MAGNETIZATION AND MAGNETIC SUSCEPTIBILITY
We now compute the magnetization in linear approximation (w eak-field limit) and construct from this the mag-
netic susceptibility. Thereby spin effects and orbital effec ts are treated on equal footing. Let us suppose that the
magnetization may be divided into ideal and interaction con tributions
M=Mid+Mint. (71)
We restrict ourselves to the magnetization of the electroni c subsystem, since the magnetization of the subsystem of
the heavy positive ions is negligible small. However the con tribution of the electron-ion interaction is fully include d
into our calculation. The ideal magnetization M=−(1/Ω)(∂F/∂B ) may be calculated from
Mid=nkT∂
∂Bln/parenleftbiggnΛ3
e
2xe
tanh(xe)/parenrightbigg
. (72)
Evaluating this in the weak field limit, we get Landau’s resul t for the sum of the spin magnetism and the diamagnetism,
which reads
ML=1
6n¯h2e2βB
m2e. (73)
The interaction part of the magnetization may be expressed i n terms of the magnetic virial function. By taking the
derivative of the full second virial coefficient with respect to the magnetic field one obtains
Mint=1
6n¯h2e2βB
m2e/parenleftBigπ
4nλ3
eQB
e+π
4nλ3
eeQB
ee−3πnλ3
eeE0
ee−π
2nλ3
eeEB
ee/parenrightBig
. (74)
Here we have introduced a density expansion of the thermodyn amic functions, that can be obtained from the fugacity
expansion by an iteration procedure, as discussed in [19,20 ]. This expression may now be used to calculate the zero
field magnetic susceptibility ( χ= (∂(ML+Mint)/∂B)B=0), with the result
11χ=χL/parenleftBig
1 +π
4nλ3
eQB(ξe) +π
4nλ3
eeQB(ξee)−3πnλ3
eeE0(ξee)−π
2nλ3
eeEB(ξee)/parenrightBig
. (75)
The first term is Landau’s result for the magnetic susceptibi lity,χL= (1/6)(n¯h2e2β/m2
e), of an ideal system in
Boltzmann statistics, while the next terms describe the den sity effects. These effects contain the interaction of
the particles as well as the deviation from the Boltzmann sta tistics. Fig.3 shows the magnetic susceptibility as a
function of the density parameter nλ3
eeof the system for various temperatures. In Fig.4 we have plot ted the magnetic
susceptibility as a function of the inverse temperature for various fixed densities. We find for ξee<1.2 a decrease
and forξee>1.2 an increase of the paramagnetic susceptibility. The trans ition from negative to positive corrections
occurs atT∼2×105K. This non-monontonic dependence on the temperature is the r esult of two competiting effects.
The first effect can be explained on the basis of an ideal quantu m plasma. The exchange contribution of the order
n2, which describes the first deviation from the Boltzmann stat istics, decreases the magnetic susceptibility. On the
other hand, the interaction between the particles tends to i ncrease the magnetic susceptibility. This effect becomes
dominant at low temperatures, while at high temperatures th e exchange effects are dominant.
We note that for ξ≫1, i.e. forT≪2×105K, the contribution from the positive interaction parameter (ξ >0) may
become very large due to its exponentiell increase with 1 /T. The region where a considerable number of bound states
are formed, requires a special treatment [20]. Clearly, thi s theory is restricted to the region in which |χ−χL|/χL<1
is valid.
Finally, we mention that the magnetization and magnetic sus ceptibility of an OCP can be derived from the results
of the TCP (74,75). This limit is obtained by sending the mass of one species to infinity and the charge to zero while
ensuring charge neutrality of the system. Then the magnetic susceptibility of an OCP in linear response reads
χOCP=χL/parenleftBig
1 +π
4nλ3
eeQB(ξee)−3πnλ3
eeE0(ξee)−π
2nλ3
eeEB(ξee)/parenrightBig
. (76)
In the previous section, we have checked that this expressio n coincides with the Wigner-Kirkwood expansion derived
by Alastuey and Jancovici [13].
V. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinsc haft under grant#Eb 126/5-1. We thank P.Martin
for focussing our attention on this problem.
[1] L.D.Landau, E.M.Lifshitz, Quantum mechanics , (Pergamon, Oxford, 1958)
[2] Atoms and Molecules in Strong External Fields, ed. by P.S chmelcher and W.Schweizer, plenum press, N.Y. (1998)
[3] H.Ruder,G.Wunner,H.Herold and F.Geyer, Atoms in strong magnetic fields , (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1994)
[4] H.Friedrich and D.Wintgen, Phys. Reports 183, 37 (1989)
[5] H.Herold, H.Ruder, and G.Wunner, J. Phys. B 14, 751 (1981)
[6] A.Y.Potekhin, J. Phys. B 27, 1073 (1994)
[7] Yu.P.Kravchenko, M.A.Liberman, and B.Johansson, Phys . Rev. A 54, 287 (1996)
[8] N.Bohr, dissertation , Copenhagen (1911)
[9] J.H.vanLeeuwen, J.Physique 2, 361 (1921)
[10] L.D.Landau, Z. Phys. 64, 629 (1930)
[11] E.Teller, Z. Phys. 67, 311 (1931)
[12] A.Alastuey, B.Jancovici, Physica 97A, 349 (1979)
[13] A.Alastuey, B.Jancovici, Physica 102A , 327 (1980)
[14] F.Cornu, Europhys. Lett. 37, 591 (1997); Phys. Rev. E 58, 5268 (1998); 58, 5293 (1998), 58, 5322 (1998)
[15] D.Boose, A.Perez, Phys. Lett. A 234, 113 (1997)
[16] M. Steinberg, J. Ortner, W. Ebeling, Phys. Rev E 58, 3806 (1998)
[17] A.A.Vedenov, A.I.Larkin, Zhur.Eksptl. i Teoret.Fiz. 36, 1133 (1959)
[18] A.I.Larkin, Zhur.Eksptl. i Teoret.Fiz. 38, 1896 (1960)
[19] G.P.Bartsch, W.Ebeling, Contr. Plasma Phys. 11, 393 (1971)
[20] W.Ebeling, W.D.Kraeft, D.Kremp, Theory of bound states and ionization equilibrium in plasma s and solids , (Akademie-
Verlag, Berlin, 1976)
12[21] W.Ebeling, Physica 38, 378 (1968); 43, 293 (1969)
13Figure Captions
Fig. 1 Plot of the magnetic quantum virial function QB(ξ) . The positive branch ( ξ >0) corresponds to the
electron-proton interaction and the negative branch ( ξ<0) to the electron-electron interaction.
Fig. 2 Plot of the exchange magnetic quantum virial function EB(ξ).
Fig. 3 Magnetic susceptibility as a function of the degenera cy parameter nλ3
eefor various temperatures (note that
|ξ| ∼(157000/T[K])1/2).
Fig. 4 Magnetic susceptibility as a function of the of the cou pling parameter Γ (inverse temperature) for various
fixed densities.
14−4.0 −2.0 0.0 2.0
ξ0.01.02.03.04.0QB(ξ)
−5.0 −4.0 −3.0 −2.0 −1.0 0.0
ξ0.00.20.40.60.81.0−EB(ξ)
150.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40
nλ3
ee0.00.51.01.52.0χ/χL|ξee|=0
|ξee|=0.2
|ξee|=1.0
|ξee|=1.5
|ξee|=1.7
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40
Γ0.971.07χ/χLn = 1026 m−3
n = 1027 m−3
n = 1028 m−3
n = 1029 m−3
16 |
arXiv:physics/9911015v1 [physics.med-ph] 10 Nov 1999Is the best estimate of power equal to
the power of the best estimate?
R Hasson
Department of Applied Mathematics, The Open University, Mi lton Keynes, United
Kingdom
Abstract. In an inverse problem, such as the determination of brain act ivity given
magnetic field measurements outside the head, the main quant ity of interest is often
the power associated with a source. The ‘standard’ way to det ermine this has been
to find the best linear estimate of the source and calculate th e power associated with
this. This paper proposes an alternative method and then rel ationship to this previous
method of estimation is explored both algebraically and by n umerical simulation.
In abstract terms the problem can be stated as follows. Let Hbe a Hilbert space
with inner product /an}bracketle{t,/an}bracketri}ht. Let Lbe a linear map: H→Rn. Suppose that we are given
datab∈Rnsuch that b=Lx+ewhere eis a vector of random variables with zero
mean and given covariance matrix which represents measurem ent errors. The problem
that is addressed in this paper is to estimate /an}bracketle{tx,/hatwideXx/an}bracketri}htwhere /hatwideXis an operator on H
(e.g. the characteristic function of a region of interest).
KEYWORDS: Linear inverse problem, biomagnetic inverse pro blem, magnetoen-
cephalography (MEG).
AMS classification scheme numbers: 65J20, 92C55, 65R30.
Submitted to: Inverse ProblemsBest estimate of power 2
1. Introduction
This paper solves a problem that arose in the study of the inve rse problem in
magnetoencephalography (MEG) [1, 2]. The dominant concern in MEG analysis has
been to produce source maps of current density in the brain an d to co-register these to
anatomical data (e.g. [1, 3]). However, this may not be the mo st appropriate approach
when there is a focus on specific source regions in the brain, e .g. the thalamus, fusiform
gyrus etc. In these cases it may be more appropriate to genera te an activation curve,
a graph of the power dissipated in a specified region as a funct ion of time. Several
methods of generating activation curves have been proposed (e.g. [4, 5, 6]). This aim
of this paper is to derive an algorithm for generating activa tion curves that is optimal
with respect to the L2-norm.
Another argument for the use of activation curves is the dire ct comparison with
other functional brain imaging modalities such as positron emission tomography (PET)
and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). These mo dalities produce images
of quantities, e.g. regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF), tha t are correlated with power
dissipated rather than current density. This suggests that in order to compare results
across modalities we should use magnetic field data to produc e an estimate of the power
dissipated, i.e. an activation curve.
In Section 2 a more general problem is solved in the setting of a linear map from a
Hilbert space to a finite dimensional Hilbert space. The main result from Section 2 (i.e.
Equation 16) can be applied independently to each time insta nt of the data from a MEG
experiment. The method proposed is to find a matrix Ysuch thatbTYbapproximates
/an}bracketle{tx,/hatwideXx/an}bracketri}ht(Tdenotes matrix transposition). The derivation of the optim al matrixY
(Equation 16) with respect to the L2-norm is contained in Section 2. Section 3 goes on
to compare the main results of Section 2 with the na¨ ıve algor ithm which first computes
an estimate, xreg, using Tikhonov regularization and then computes /an}bracketle{txreg,/hatwideXxreg/an}bracketri}ht.
This algorithm was used in [4] to extract measures of brain ac tivity.
In Section 4 we specialize to the study of the MEG inverse prob lem. Definitions
appropriate to this application are introduced and a simula tion study is described. In
Section 5 an important special case is considered where the r egion of interest is the
whole brain. A simplified equation (Equation 32) for this cas e is derived and this is
compared with the total signal power which is commonly used a s an estimate of brain
activity. Section 6 is a discussion of the merits of the algor ithm together with the issues
to be addressed before applying the method in practice.
2. Methods
LetHbe a Hilbert space with inner product /an}bracketle{t,/an}bracketri}ht. LetLbe a linear map: H→Rn.
Suppose that we are given data b∈Rnsuch that
b=Lx+e (1)Best estimate of power 3
whereeis an unknown vector of random variables with zero mean and co variance matrix
Cwhich represents measurement error. Suppose that the probl em of finding an x∈H
corresponding to a b∈Rnis an ill-posed problem. The problem here is to estimate
/an}bracketle{tx,/hatwideXx/an}bracketri}htwhere /hatwideXis an operator on H.
It should be noted that no assumptions are made about the nois e in the
measurement channels other than it has zero mean and a well de fined covariance matrix
C, i.e. if the measurement noise is denoted by a vector ethen the covariance matrix is
defined byCij=eiejwhere denotes an expectation value.
Now define the adjoint map L†by
/an}bracketle{tx,L†b/an}bracketri}ht= (Lx)Tb, for allx∈H,b∈Rn. (2)
Here we are concerned with the image space IofL†. Let {/hatwideei:i= 1...n}be the usual
basis of Rnand choose a corresponding basis of I,{ψi:i= 1...n}, whereψi=L†/hatwideei.
The matrix Ywill be chosen to minimize the error for points in I. The starting point
in choosing an optimal matrix Yis to derive a suitable cost function to be minimized.
We start by expanding bTYb.
bTYb= (Lx+e)TY(Lx+e) = (Lx)TYLx+eTYLx+(Lx)TYe+eTYe(3)
As mentioned above we focus on points in I ⊆H, so we express x∈ Iin terms of our
basis:x=/summationtextn
i=1aiψi, whereai∈Rare scalars which will be written collectively as a
vectora. Equation 3 can be simplified because the expression Lxappears repeatedly,
so start by simplifying this expression:
(Lx)T/hatwideej=/an}bracketle{tx,L†/hatwideej/an}bracketri}ht=/an}bracketle{t/parenleftBign/summationdisplay
i=1aiψi/parenrightBig
,ψj/an}bracketri}ht=n/summationdisplay
i=1ai/an}bracketle{tψi,ψj/an}bracketri}ht. (4)
The right hand side of Equation 4 can be written as the jth component of a product
PawherePij=/an}bracketle{tψi,ψj/an}bracketri}ht. Note that Pis a symmetric positive definite n×nmatrix.
Substituting for Lxin Equation 3 gives:
bTYb=aTPYPa +eTYPa+aTPYe+eTYe. (5)
The projection of the operator /hatwideXontoIhas a matrix representation with respect to the
basis {ψi}defined byXij=/an}bracketle{tψi,/hatwideXψj/an}bracketri}htwherei,j= 1,...,n . Hence the target expression
can be written in terms of the vector a:
/an}bracketle{tx,/hatwideXx/an}bracketri}ht=aTXa, wherex=n/summationdisplay
i=1aiψi. (6)
ForYto be a good estimator, the right hand sides of Equations 5 and 6 should be ‘close’
for alla∈Rn. One way of achieving this is to minimize the cost function Edefined by:
E=/bardblX−PYP/bardbl2
2+/bardbleTYP/bardbl2
2+/bardblPYe/bardbl2
2+/bardbleTYe/bardbl2
2. (7)
where /bardbl /bardbl2is theL2-norm. Equation 7 can be interpreted in physical terms. The fi rst
term is the error in approximating the operator /hatwideXbyY. The second and third terms
give a measure of the overlap,induced by Y, between the measurement error and theBest estimate of power 4
imaging space, I. Note that these terms are equal for a symmetric Y. The fourth term
is a measure of how Ymagnifies the measurement error.
To minimize E,∂E/∂Y ikis derived for each element of the matrix Y. This gives
N2equations to solve for the N2unknownsYik. These may be written as a single
matrix equation. In order to illustrate the manipulations i nvolved, the method will be
elaborated for the fourth term in Equation 7. The fourth term is expanded using the
definition of the L2-norm:
/bardbleTYe/bardbl2
2=/parenleftBig/summationdisplay
α,βeαYαβeβ/parenrightBig2
. (8)
This is differentiated to obtain:
∂/bardbleTYe/bardbl2
2
∂Yik= 2/parenleftBig/summationdisplay
α,βeαYαβeβ/parenrightBig
eiek= 2/summationdisplay
α,βeieαYαβeβek. (9)
We proceed by replacing the products of random variables wit h their expectation values,
i.e.eieα=Ciαandeβek=Cβk:
∂/bardbleTYe/bardbl2
2
∂Yik= 2/summationdisplay
α,βCiαYαβCβk. (10)
This is the ikth term of the matrix product CYC. Similarly, all of the other terms in
Equation 7, when differentiated, give terms that can be writt en as theikth elements of
a product. So, the equations can be collected as:
−2PXP + 2P2YP2+ 2P2YC+ 2CYP2+ 2CYC = 0. (11)
This may be written in the form:
(P2+C)Y(P2+C) =PXP. (12)
This equation can be solved in many ways, for example by defini ngZ=Y(P2+C) and
solving for Zfirst and then for Y. This easily implemented procedure was rejected as
it computes an non-symmetric Ywhen starting with a symmetric matrix X, because
of the numerical problems associated with ill-conditioned matrices. So an alternative
scheme which preserves symmetry was devised. Let λibe the eigenvalue of the matrix
Pwith eigenvector φi. Then the matrices XandCcan be represented with respect to
the basis {φi}as new matrices X′andC′, i.e.
X=/summationdisplay
ikφiX′
ikφT
k, whereX′ik=φT
iXφk, (13)
C=/summationdisplay
ikφiC′
ikφT
k, whereC′ik=φT
iCφk. (14)
With these definitions, the matrix Ycan be finally expressed as:
Y= (P2+C)−1P/parenleftBig/summationdisplay
ikφiX′
ikφT
k/parenrightBig
P(P2+C)−1(15)
=/summationdisplay
ikλiλkφi(C′+λ2
iI)−1X′
ik(C′+λ2
kI)−1φT
k (16)Best estimate of power 5
The matrix Ycomputed using the above formula is always symmetric for a gi ven
input symmetric matrix X.
Frequently the covariance matrix Cis not known and the assumption is made that
the random variables eiare independent Gaussian random variables with a variance ζ
that is considered to be a parameter of the method. With this a ssumptionC=ζIand
Equation 16 becomes:
Y=/summationdisplay
ikλi
λ2
i+ζλk
λ2
k+ζφiX′
ikφT
k (17)
3. Comparison with na¨ ıve method
We now compare Equation 17 with the corresponding equation d erived by the na¨ ıve
method mentioned in the introduction. The na¨ ıve method for computing /an}bracketle{tx,/hatwideXx/an}bracketri}htis to
compute a minimum norm estimate using Tikhonov regularizat ion to getxregand then
compute the inner product.
To compute a xregthe first step is to choose a finite dimensional subspace R⊆H
that has an orthonormal basis {rα:α= 1,...m }. The subspace Rwill be called the
representation space and the regularized solution xregwill lie in this space. The linear
mapL:H→Rndefines a linear map from RtoRnby restriction that we will also call
L.
Now compute a singular value decomposition of L:R→RnasL=UΣVT, where
Σ is a diagonal matrix with non-negative entries σ1,σ2,...σ nandUandVare matrices
with orthonormal columns, i.e. UTU=VTV=I. Applying Tikhonov regularization
[7] to the inverse problem gives xreg=VDUTb, whereDis a diagonal matrix given by
D= (Σ2+ζI)−1Σ. So the power dissipated by this source can be computed by:
/an}bracketle{txreg,/hatwideXxreg/an}bracketri}ht=/parenleftbig
bTUDVT/parenrightbig
X/parenleftbig
VDUTb/parenrightbig
, (18)
where Xis the matrix representation of the operator /hatwideXonR, i.e. Xαβ=/an}bracketle{trα,/hatwideXrβ/an}bracketri}ht.
The right hand side of Equation 18 is of the form bT/tildewideYbwhere /tildewideYis defined to be:
/tildewideY=UDVTXVDUT(19)
The comparison with the method in the previous section relie s on the relationship
between the linear operator Land the Gram-Schmidt matrix Pthat we will now derive.
Suppose for a moment that the representation space Rwas the whole of Hand that the
basis {rα}is a complete orthonormal basis for R=H. In this case:
Pij=/an}bracketle{tψi,ψj/an}bracketri}ht=/summationdisplay
α/an}bracketle{tψi,rα/an}bracketri}ht/an}bracketle{trα,ψj/an}bracketri}ht, by completeness, (20)
=/summationdisplay
α/an}bracketle{tL†/hatwideei,rα/an}bracketri}ht/an}bracketle{trα,L†/hatwideej/an}bracketri}ht, using the definition of ψi, (21)
=/summationdisplay
α/hatwideeT
i(Lrα)(Lrα)T/hatwideej, using the definition of L†, (22)
=/hatwideeT
iL/parenleftBig/summationdisplay
αrαrT
α/parenrightBig
LT/hatwideej, by linearity, (23)Best estimate of power 6
=/hatwideeT
jLLT/hatwideei. (24)
The right hand side of this equation is the ijth component of the matrix product LLT.
So under the assumption that {rα}is a complete orthonormal basis for HthenP=LLT.
Now returning to the case when R⊂Hwe can see that for a good choice of Rthe
matrix /tildewidePdefined to be LLTwill be approximately equal to P. This is not surprising
since to compute the Gram-Schmidt matrix Pon a computer one usually takes a suitable
representation space Rand computes LLT. The singular value decomposition of L
immediately gives an eigenvalue decomposition of /tildewidePsince
/tildewideP=LLT=UΣVTVΣUT=UΣ2UT, (25)
where the last equality follows from the fact that the column s ofVare orthonormal. So
the matrix /tildewidePhas eigenvalues σ2
iwith eigenvectors, /tildewideφigiven by the columns of U.
By a similar argument to the above it can be seen that the matri x/tildewideX′defined to
beVTXVapproximates the matrix X′so we have:
/tildewideY=UD/tildewideXDUT=/summationdisplay
ikσi
σ2
i+ζσk
σ2
k+ζ/tildewideφi/tildewideX′
ik/tildewideφT
k, (26)
Now we can compare Equation 26 with Equation 17. For a good rep resentation space
Rwe have /tildewideφi≃φi,/tildewideX′≃X′and so the major difference between the two approaches
is thatλi≃σ2
i. The effect of this change can be seen by plotting out the graph s of
the functions on the interval [0 ,1] (this is the only range of interest since we could
dividing by the largest singular value restrict to this inte rval). These graphs are shown
in Figure 1 where it can be seen that Equation 17 attenuates th e contribution from the
small singular values and has a sharper cut-off than is the cas e for Equation 26. The
effect of this is that Equation 17 should attenuate the noise c omponent, which is usually
associated with the small singular values.
0.0 0.5 1.0 x0.00.51.0
y
Figure 1. Graphs of the functions x/(x2+ζ) (solid curve) and x2/(x4+ζ) (dashed
curve) for ζ= 0.5.Best estimate of power 7
4. Application
Now we apply our results to the MEG inverse problem, i.e. the p roblem of recovering
information about source current density inside the brain g iven measurements of the
magnetic field outside the brain. Let Ω denote the brain volum e. The Hilbert space of
interest to us is, L2(Ω), the space of square integrable vector fields defined on th e brain
volume Ω together with the inner product:
/an}bracketle{t/vectorj1,/vectorj2/an}bracketri}ht=/integraldisplay
Ω/vectorj1(/vector r)·/vectorj2(/vector r)
ω(/vector r)d/vector r,for all/vectorj1,/vectorj2∈L2(Ω). (27)
The factor ω(/vector r) is a weighting factor that allows some flexibility in the pro cedure. The
only restriction imposed on ω(/vector r) is that the integral over each voxel is finite. In other
papers the factor ω(/vector r) has been interpreted as a probability weight [8].
It is interesting in this context to look at the the spatial se lectivity implicit in the
use of the matrix Yas it varies in source space. Then the sensitivity profile of Yat a
point in source space, /vector r0, is defined to be
I(/vector r0) =3/summationdisplay
i=1(L/vectordi
/vector r0)TY(L/vectordi
/vector r0), (28)
where/vectordi
/vector r0is the current dipole distribution, i.e. /vectordi
/vector r0(/vector r) =δ(/vector r−/vector r0)/hatwideeiwhere {/hatwideei:i= 1,2,3}
is an orthogonal set of unit vectors and δ( ) denotes the Dirac delta function.
The spatial selectivity, I(/vector r0), may be thought of as an instrumental generalization
of the lead field of a single measurement channel. The definiti on is designed so that in
the case when Yik= 1 wheni=k=n0and 0 otherwise then the sensitivity I(/vector r0) is the
square of the magnitude of the lead field of channel n0. Note that the above definition
ofI(/vector r0) is different from the original definition proposed in [9].
To illustrate the method a simple simulated experimental sy stem (Figure 2) has
been investigated. The head is modelled as a homogeneous con ducting sphere of radius
8.9cm with its centre at (0 ,0,−0.07 cm). The source space is a 9cm ×9cm square thin
lamina consisting of 33 ×33 voxels in the plane z=−0.01cm with centre (0 ,0,−0.01 cm).
The measurement instrument is a hexagonal array of 37 second order axial gradiometers
with baseline 5cm with the lowest ’sensing’ coils in the plan ez= 4cm. Now consider,
in the context of the simulated system, the simplest possibl e region of interest operator
/hatwideX=δ(/vector r−/vector rc) where/vector rc= (0,0,−0.01cm) is the centre of source space. This type
of operator might be adopted if one simply wished to focus on a small volume of
source space. The matrix Yused as an estimator from this operator is calculated
using Equation 17. The sensitivity profile for this Ymatrix is shown in Figure 2.
The reconstruction of an activation curve has been tested on simulated data using
this region of interest operator and simulated data from a ti me varying target dipole
at (0,0,0 cm), i.e. 1cm from the region of interest. The moment of the d ipole varies
sinusoidally at 10Hz, with an envelope that rises linearly f rom zero at 200ms to a
maximum at 300ms after which it remains constant. To show the insensitivity to dipole
orientation the dipole moment was made to rotate smoothly in a tangential plane —Best estimate of power 8
-0.06 0.0 0.06x/m-0.060.00.06
y/m
-0.045 0.0 0.045x/m-0.0450.00.045
y/m
Figure 2. (left) A plan view of the experiment geometry. Crosses denot e source
space voxels and diamonds denote the projections of the cent res of the detector coils.
(right) The sensitivity profile in source space of the Ymatrix that is derived from the
operator /hatwideX=δ(/vector r−/vector rc).
this rotation is not discernible in the activation curve. In addition to the target dipole
there is distractor dipole at (0 ,0.02 cm,0), which is active from 0 to 100ms (triangular
envelope) and again from 400ms (square envelope).
In the period from 200ms to 400ms when only the target dipole i s active, the
calculated (power) activation curve matches closely that o f the target. However, the
existence of the distractor dipole within the sensitive reg ion (see Figure 2) gives rise to
apparent activity between 0ms and 100ms and inaccuracy in th e calculated activation
curve for the period after 400ms. The distractor dipole adds to the estimated power
dissipated when it is parallel to the target and subtracts wh en the target dipole has
rotated to be anti-parallel.
Error bars for the activation curve can be estimated using th e last term in
Equation 7 to give the amount of measurement noise reflected i n the activation curve.
The estimate is given by/summationtext
α,βCαβYαβ.
5. Total brain activity
As a special case of Equation 17 the task of finding an estimate of the total activity in
the source space is considered. In this case the operator /hatwideXis the identity and so
Xij=/an}bracketle{tψi,/hatwideXψj/an}bracketri}ht=/an}bracketle{tψi,ψj/an}bracketri}ht=Pij (29)
So the matrix X′can be calculated as follows
X′ij=φT
iXφj=φT
iPφj=λjφT
iφj=λjδij (30)
whereδijis the Kronecker delta. So, in this case, Yis given by the simplified formula:
Y=/summationdisplay
ijλi
λ2
i+ζλj
λ2
j+ζφiλjδijφT
j=/summationdisplay
iλ3
i
(λ2
i+ζ)2φiφT
i (31)Best estimate of power 9
0 250 500time/ms00.51.0
relative
power
Figure 3. Activation curves for a simulated experiment. The solid lin e and the dotted
lines are the activation curves of the target and distractor dipoles. The diamonds are
the calculated activation curve from the Ymatrix whose sensitivity profile is shown in
Figure 2. The error bars, omitted for clarity, would be appro ximately twice the height
of the diamonds.
This gives the following formula for computing the total act ivity.
Total activity, A(t) =/summationdisplay
iλ3
i
(λ2
i+ζ)2/parenleftbig
φT
ib(t)/parenrightbig2(32)
whereb(t) is the vector of measurements collected at time t.
Previously when an estimate of the total brain activity was n eeded the power in
the signals was used, i.e.
Total signal power, B(t) =b(t)Tb(t) (33)
These two methods have been compared for the simulated data d escribed above as shown
in Figure 4. In Figure 4 it can be seen that the estimate A(t) (shown as the solid line
on the left) more closely approximates the true activation o f the dipoles (dashed curve)
than the estimate B(t). In fact, if the error in the estimate is measured by the inte gral
of the squared discrepancies between the curves then the err or forA(t) is 2.6×10−4
whilst the error for B(t) is 6.6×10−4.
6. Discussion
We have shown that it is possible to directly compute the ‘pow er’ associated with a
source without computing the source first. The method seems r obust to noise and is not
dependent on the noise having a Gaussian profile. Correlatio ns between measurement
channels are fully taken into account. In particular it was s hown that activation curves
of brain regions can obtained from magnetic field data. The me thod provides an easily
computable way of tracking the power dissipated in a specific region of the brain.Best estimate of power 10
0 250 500time/ms00.0050.010.015
A(t)
0 250 500time/ms00.0050.010.015
B(t)
Figure 4. (left) A comparison of the total brain activity, A(t), (solid line) with a plot
of the power of the dipolar sources that generated the simula ted data (dashed line). In
order to compare with the right-hand diagram both curves are normalized to enclose a
unit area. (right) A comparison of the total signal power, B(t), (solid line) with a plot
of the power of the dipolar sources that generated the simula ted data (dashed line).
In order to compare with the left-hand diagram both curves ar e normalized to enclose
a unit area.
To use the method effectively the practical problem is to effec tively estimate the
covariance matrix. For evoked response experiments the cov ariance matrix, C, can
be estimated from the prestimulus period. For other experim ents it might be more
suitable to make the a priori assumption that the noise is uncorrelated Gaussian noise
with variance a α2that could be considered as a parameter. As αincreases, the more
closely the Ymatrix sensitivity pattern matches the region of interest, but the larger
the error bars on the resulting activation curve.
Finally, to answer the question in the title, I would say that if best is interpreted
in a leastL2-norm sense then the answer is no. The best way to estimate the power
associated with a source is to compute it directly.
References
[1] Jukka Sarvas. Basic mathematical and electromagnetic c oncepts of the biomagnetic inverse problem.
Phys. Med. Biol. , 32(1):11–22, 1987.
[2] M. H¨ am¨ al¨ ainen, R. Hari, R.J. Ilmoniemi, J. Knuutila, and O.V. Lounasmaa. Magnetoencephalog-
raphy - theory, instrumentation, and applications to nonin vasive studies of the working human
brain. Reviews of modern physics , 65(2):413–497, 1993.
[3] D. Schwartz, D. Lemoine, E. Poisot, and C. Barillot. Regi stration of MEG/EEG data with 3D
MRI: methodology and precision issues. Brain Topography , 9(2):101–116, 1996.
[4] K.D. Singh, A.A. Ioannides, R. Hasson, U. Ribary, F. Lado , and R. Llinas. Extraction of dynamic
patterns from distributed current solutions of brain activ ity. In M. Hoke, S.N. Ern´ e, Y.C. Okada,
and G.L. Romani, editors, BIOMAGNETISM: Clinical Aspects , pages 767–773, Amsterdam,
August 1992. Elsevier.
[5] C.D. Tesche, M.A. Uusitalo, R.J. Ilmoniemi, M. Huotilai nen, M. Kajola, and O. Salonen. Signal
space projections of MEG data characterise both distribute d and well-localised neuronal sources.
Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol. , 95:189–200, 1995.
[6] S. E. Robinson and D. F. Rose. Current source image estima tion by spatially filtered MEG. In
M. Hoke, S. N. Ern´ e, Y. C. Okada, and G. L. Romani, editors, Biomagnetism: Clinical Aspects ,
pages 761–765, Amsterdam, 1992. Elsevier.
[7] P.C. Hansen. Regularization tools. Numerical Algorithms , 6:1–35, 1994.Best estimate of power 11
[8] R. Hasson and S.J. Swithenby. The theoretical basis of it erative distributed solutions to the
biomagnetic inverse problem. In Advances in Biomagnetism R esearch: BIOMAG96, (Eds: C.
Aine et al) Springer-Verlag, New York, In press, 1999.
[9] R. Hasson and S.J. Swithenby. Activation curves from opt imally shaped regions. In T. Yoshimoto,
M. Kotani, S. Kuriki, H. Karibe, and N. Nakasato, editors, Recent Advances in Biomagnetism ,
pages 205–208. Tohoku University Press, Sendai, 1999. ISBN 4-925085-19-0 C3047. |
SEISMIC WAVE RECORDING BY 2S-SEISMOGRAPHS
By Ruhi Gurcan
SUMMARY
Researchers of seismic waves may construct a new seismographic recording
adding one seismometer to each component of a conventional seismic station. The
two identical conventional seismometers are set up in position of perpendicular
and are connected in parallel feeding one recording device (digital or analog).
This use of the seismometers (which they may be both horizontal or, one is
vertical) is called "two seismometers seismograph" or simply "2S-S".
2S-seismograph performs new capabilities: 1.-it cause to a higher gain which
is based on directly ground motion energy from the two orthogonal components
of signals, 2.-it has a much smoother response curve than that of the single use
of seismometer,3.-because of this smoothing, we are able to apply a higher level
of static magnification which cause to widening the response at its both ends,
therefore, 2S-System enable to work with a larger dynamic range frequency, 4.-
it has a directional and motional filtering property which may be used in some
cases advantageously, The contribution of "1", "2", "3" and "4" correspond to
unique instrumental improvements for which seismography are ever needed.
Data which are obtained from the 2S-Ss have also more advantageous properties
comparing with even that of ARRAY's: 5.-it is possible to record signals with
their larger plane components all the time by a second 2S-S connected with the
opposite ends, 6.-seismic wave types (P,S,R,L) can often be recorded separately
on a separated 2S-seismogram since researchers usually deal with a known area of
research, 7.-some implicit weak signals, which can not be readable as a phase on
the conventional seismograms, become recorded newly and readably by the 2s-Ss.
In a non-directional 2S-recordings, 2S-sismograms contains the both seismic wave
types being one predominant. However, 2S-seismograms which are obtained from
the connection opposite ends include other wave types complementerly. Therefore,
the two orthogonal 2S-seismogram contains more information and reading access
than that of the conventional for all type waves, all the time and in any case due to
“5”, “6”, “7” and “3”.
In addition to the above developments in seismographic instrumentation and the data
obtained, as the construction of a 2S-sismic station is not as costly as ARRAY stations
which uses hundreds of seismometer for the sake of a problem of better reading and
detection , 2S-data may preferably gain applications used world-wide by an extensive
users of seismic data.
INTRODUCTION
Elastic waves which are classified based on the motion of individual particles
with respect the directions of propagation of waves, we recognise as a phase
on the seismograms. Knowledge about the structure of the Earth's interior and
some quantities belong to earthquake itself are derived largely from the
observational study of the seismic phases. Refinement of the obtained
knowledge increases with the reading accuracy of the phases and along with
the number of phases that are read.In actual fact, a fairly large number of phases arrive at a seismic station from
local and tele-seismic distances. In order to have an idea, I have drown figure 1
taking a two layers of structure with a buried source and a surface receiver at a
distance of twice the layer thickness.
As shown in figure 1, we may receive more than twenty eight different phases
even from such a simple two-layer crystal model. In the figure the phases
starting with S-waves are not shown for the sake of simplicity. This simple
model demonstrates that every discontinuity, elastic property of a layer and
the quantities belong to earthquake may be evaluated several times for a better
accuracy if the earth can be heard ideally.
FIG.1. Phases involved in a layer over a half-space with a buried source.
On the other hand, due to the structure of the Earth, (with so many
discontinuance in both crust and interior) a number of phases which are not
readable today is increased because of ambient , seismic and instrumental
noise. Also, insufficient seismographic detection capability and interfering
phases of various kinds contribute to our inability in hearing the earth clearly.
Therefore, simply increasing the sensitivity of an instrument is itself not
sufficient to detect the signal’s existence and the kind of information gathered
suggests that different recording configurations are desirable.
On the other hand, seismology being a observational science, researchers use
various kind of approaches to discover recognizable phases from the
conventional seismograms. In this respect, we may mention the works of White
(1964), Shimshony and Smith (1964), Jurkevichs (1988), Samson (1981),
Montalbetti and Kanasewich (1970), Vidale (1986) and others. In general ,
most of these techniques include procedures that adds or subtracts the
perpendicular components of signals in some way mathematically for
enhancement of signals read from the earlier conventional seismograms.
However, all these work for a better recognition of phases are limited by the
recording ability of the seismograms which are already recorded.
In this respect, 2S-seismograms constitute a ready and the most accurate data
for these kind of works, shortening data acquisition since the subtraction or
addition are provided by 2S-seismograms directly. One may favour that the
combined signal components may be obtained from two channels by simply
adding their digital traces. However, these data lack the accuracy of place, time
and phase comparably as the two seismometers of the 2S-Seismograph are
calibrated on purpose at the beginning for an equal output with the same
equipment of loading, on the same pier before recording start. Additionally, it
should be noted that, because of the 2S-Seismograph’s instrumental abilities of
the higher gain, the smoothing and the larger dynamic range, 2S- data will be
never the same with the conventional in qualification.
The connection of seismometers in parallel actually has been previously treated
by A.J. Serif (1959) in the literature. However, the positions of the two
seismometers and their output are not taken into consideration for some
possible detectional patterns of recording of seismic waves. For example, the
seismometers had not been set up orthogonally and its linear output is not
analysed for the purposes of detection of P-waves, S-waves, Rayleigh and
Love waves which they all have distinct polarisation patterns for 2S-recording
with the exception of some restrictive deviation in polarisation of S-waves as
described by O. Nuttily (1962).
As the 2S-seismograms are the combination of two linear systems, the
resultant output of the system must be analytically explicit, that is, linear.
Therefore, I have also derived the transfer function of the 2S-S for basic
elements earlier in1970 and published in1983.
For the derivation of the transfer function, first, the 2S-S is represented fully
by an equivalent analog network where analogy is force-current and velocity-
voltage is used, as proposed by Kolora and Russel (1966) secondly, network
analysis and synthesis of the electrical engineering is used. in the calculation of
output of 2S-system. What is important here is that using this analogy and
analog representation I have also obtained the well known fourth and the fifth
order equation of motion of the electromagnetic seismograph ( derived Savin
and Carpenter, 1962) proving that the analogy chosen is appropriate. Upon
these verifications “ the sixth order equation of motion of an electromagnetic
seismograph” is also derived by Garcon (1979).
Using the same analogy and representation for 2S-S, its transfer function is
expressed by the ratio of polynomynal in term of Laplace parameter: S = iw
,and, the amplitude and the phase response are calculated and plotted for a
frequency range for an impulse response Gurcan (1983). Importantly, from the
plots seen that the magnification of the 2S-system which is changing based on
the angle of azimuth and response curve of a seismometers are quite
smoothed.
THE EIGHT MAJOR CAPABILITIES OF THE 2S-SEISMOGRAPHSThe following eight major results may be given in an explanatory order for
the 2S-seismograph: I- 2S-S perform the most direct and accurate
combination of components of signals. II-2S-S provides larger plane
components on the records rather than one directional component. III- 2S- S
has directional and motional filtering property quadratically. IV- There exists
the possibility of obtaining seismogram on which three dimensional P-or S-
waves are recorded separately. V- 2S-S provides separated P-and S-wave type
seismograms. VI-2S- S instrumentally provides much smoother response
curves than that of conventional use of the seismometers. VII- 2S-S feeds one
recording device with a high gain which is originated directly from the energy
of detection .. VIII- An improvement in the dynamic range of seismographs are
obtained by the smoothing and the applicability of high level static
magnification ..
Now, let us examine the way in which how these capabilities are achieved
by the 2S-Seismographs.
I- The direct and accurate combination
All the signal polarisation combinations in the literature, are usually made from
the data already recorded. This results in many inaccuracies. In this respect,
2S-Ss achieve higher level of accuracy because that: 1) Deliberately calibrated
seismometers for an equality in the output of seismometers with some common
loading at the beginning of its operation 2S-S, 2) The summation of the
currents produced by the two seismometers with the common and equal
instrumental constants is made directly and the most immediately for the
seismometers for the detection before the recording is made.
II- The larger plane components
Since the recorded energy on the 2S-seismogram refer to the addition of
two perpendicularly directional components of the signals and the plane
coincides with the plane which actually is defined by the position of the two
seismometers, the recording corresponds to a plane component of a signal.
Note that as the addition of the components is not vectorial summation but
the simple summation of the currents from the two seismometers the resultant
plane component is larger gain-wise in strength than that of the vectorial
combination. The relevant ratio may be written explicitly such as:
which corresponds to:
(the larger plane component) / (the vectorial plane component) .
This difference which is termed as “larger plane component” provides a great
advantage just it is being larger .energy as much as forty percent compared2/1)cos.cossin./(sin)cos (sin AA AA A A + +to actual plane energy in representing the signals for recording against to noise
and the friction. Thus, we must be aver of that the seismography gains an
important tool in the resolution and recordability of weak signals on
seismograms just because of this property of “larger plane component ” .
III-Directional and motional filtering
2S-seismographs may also be used as a directional and motional filter due to
the ability of summing or extracting signal components, depending on the
moving direction of senses of the seismometers' coil and the connection of their
ends.
The currents produced by the two perpendicular seismometers exhibit two
cases of mode in which the currents flow 1-) in the same direction or 2-) in
the opposite direction. Thus, the modes are termed "in phase" or "out of
phase" respectively.
These two cases of mode define two different quadrants of detection for
seismic waves such as: the additional (+) quadrant of detection and the
negational (-) quadrant of detection. This detectional patterns divide the
surface of the earth into four quadrants, two of them is (+) and the other two
is (-) quadrants for one type of seismic waves. The quadrants are defined by
the direction of the booms of seismometers such as in the case of conventional
where the axe of seismometer divides the Earth also into two hemispherically.
Indeed, it is possible to cover all of the Earth's surface arrivals by both types of
quadrants detectionally by setting a second pair of seismometers parallel to the
first setting and connecting the ends of coils oppositely to the first one. Thus,
no part of the Earth misses the advantages use of the additional (+) quadrants.
On the other hand, actually, each quadrant performs the filtration or
enhancement depend on wave type with an angle of azimuth "A" which is the
angle between the component of the particle motion of the seismic wave and
the boom of the seismometers.
IV_ Recording signals three dimensionally
There are two kinds of seismograms: one may simply be called "Horizontal "
labelled “2S-H” where the two seismometers are both horizontal, and the
other is called "Vertical" labelled “2S-V” where one component is horizontal
and the second seismometer is vertical. The 2S-V works like a recording
signals in three dimensional for P-waves when the “2S-H” is set up in a
direction of focus. Actually, it is larger than the 3D because of the vertical
component is added not vectoral but by the simple addition. This 2S-V works
also as a matinal filter for the P-waves (or, filter the S-waves when it is set
up perpendicular to the first one) The additional and negation quadrantsreplace each other depending on the connection of the seismometers' ends and
also on the senses of the vertical component of signals. In order to receive
signals of all wave types in the additional quadrants, a second 2S-V connected
with the opposite ends is required.
V_ The separated P-wave S-wave seismograms
It is well known that P-and S-waves, Rayleigh and Love waves all have distinct
polarisation patterns and with a defined mutual relationships between their
particle motion for homogeneously stratified earth.
Let us first consider the mutual relationship between S- and P-waves
emanating from the same earthquake (with some exception for S-waves
Nuttily , 1962). The S-wave particle motion, in general, is perpendicular to the
P-wave's particle motion which coincides with the wave propagation path. In
addition, the Rayleigh waves are elliptically polarised in the radial vertical plane
while the Love waves are polarised rectilinearly in horizontal plane and
orthogonal to the direction of the wave propagation. The Rayleigh type of
surface waves may have horizontal components in the propagation direction,
because of the elliptical movement of its particle motion, Nevertheless, they
keep the orthogonally large extend with the motion of the Love waves.
Actually any deviation from these theoretical considerations must carry some
knowledge from the region meaningfully and should be subjected to a
investigation. In practice, particle motion polarisation of the seismic waves are
rarely perfectly linear and orthogonal polorisationally because of the real
world. But, this does not interrupt from an important result that seismic wave
types fall detectionally into two different quadrants. That is, while one type of
the wave components are added together in a (+) quadrant, the other type of
wave components which are added in the next (-) quadrant. This results in the
most direct and accurate technique of separating the P-and S-waves.
Note that the quadrants that are additional for one type of wave become
negational quadrants for the other type of wave. This is true for both type of
body and surface waves. Arrivals whose signal direction make an angle of
about A=45 degrees with the boom of the seismometers will be eliminated
almost completely from the seismograms when they are in the (-) quadrant or,
oppositely signals will be recorded as much as doubly strengthen in the next
quadrants compared to that of conventional seismograph's outputs. This
doubling become true with the larger component combination. Here, another
important point is that the two 2S-seismographs placed in parallel but
connected at the opposite ends become complementary to each other. Thus, no
information is missed at any time and even more information all the time is
concerned with the 2S- S recordings. Therefore, we may have a seismogramon which waves coming from all quarters of the world are obtained with the
enhancement or filtration for any type of wave.
VI_ Smoothed response curves
It is a fact that the response curves of a single seismometer seismographs
(conventional uses) usually show a high notch at their resonance frequency on
its response curves depending on its damping coefficient. However, with the
use of a second seismometer on 2S-system, this high notch of the single
seismometer which cause to a high dynamic magnification (for a narrow band
of frequencies) is greatly smoothed out.
The existence of the second seismometer enlarges the circuit of the system and
the current flow over both circuits belonging to the two seismometers.
Whenever a heavy currents produced by one of the seismometers will be sent
partly over the recording device while rest of it sent over the other
seismometer causing a very important result such as smoothing in the response
curve.
Therefore, another practical effect is that the second seismometer protects the
recording device from the first seismometer's heavy current drivvings. Actually,
this smoothing effect have been shown quantitatively by calculating the output
from the transfer function of the 2S-system, for a unit impulse input, as
mention in the part of introduction.
VII_ The high gain
Because of the signals are recorded directly by an energy of the ground
vibration from the two perpendicular components, instead of one component,
2S-recording corresponds to a higher gain system compared to that of a single
conventional use. Here, it is clear that this high gain is not obtained from an
outsider connected feeder is connected for amplifying purposes but by an
energy which is generated directly from the detection of the signals carrying
knowledge about depth where the waves .pass through.
.
VIII_ Broaden the dynamic range by the high level static
magnification
We have seen that the response curves of the 2S-seismograph are much more
flatted than those of the single use of seismometers. Therefore, it becomes
possible to apply a high level of static magnification over the input of a
recording device. Obviously, this results in an elevation on the response
curve whose useful part is widened at the ends for the both high and low
frequencies. This makes the conventional seismometer work with a wider
dynamic range than that of the single seismometer usages.
DISCUSSIONSOne of the important result of this connection of seismometers is to make
weak signals readable, from which this result is obtained by the addition of
the two orthogonal components of the signals. Secondly, as the signal
components are not added vectorally but by their simple summation which
makes the signals are represented energycally not only by their plane
component but also larger in strength than that of signal's plane component
itself in detection2. Thirdly, just because of this larger plane component, some
signals which are not appeared at all on the conventional seismogram, may
become readable as they able to overcome some of the noises and friction.
Actually, some more factors support the readability of the weak signals: such
as the separating the signals according their wave types in directions and
senses of arrivals, and by the applicability of high level statistical magnification
through the smoothed the magnification over a wide range of frequency.
When we compare 2S-detection with that of ARRAY and telemetered stations,
ARRAYS are being consist of a system of seismometers which are usually
arranged in some regular geometric pattern over an area, it is difficult to accept
that an array can act as a single station point of observation for providing a
base to the particle motion of signals. Therefore, they will be of little help in
the particle motion analysis of signals.
Arrays suppress a band of wavelengths to suppress any given noise by the
phase tries serving to signal readings observationally. But , this result is
achievable only when they are strong enough to be appeared against the noise
on the seismogram. Secondly, in order to obtain high signal sensitivity by the
combination of the outputs of many seismometers, an ARRAY requires an
assumption that the pulse shape is at least approximately identical at the inputs
of all the seismometers for a distance of kms. Actually, in many case some
statistical communication theory must be adapted in order to produce a
successful result from their data, Withcomb (1969), Ingate et all (1985).
In this respect, 2S-systems provide not only analytical plane polarised
components of a signal at a point on the Earth for investigations but also
discovering new phases from the weak signals which do not appear at all on
the ARRAY’s seismograms due to noise and frictions.
The separation of the seismic waves by 2S-S provide clear shear-waves
readings from the separated seismogram, which the waves typically contain
three or four times the information carried by the P-wave train, Crampin
(1985). However, although a clear and plane separated polarisation particle
motion-wise, the azimuth studies is the weakest point in working with the 2S-
seismographs. However , it is not difficult to obtain the E-W, N-S
components and the angle of azimuth from the 2S-traces as their summation
and negation are known.The seismometers used in the 2S-seismograph may set up in a position ± 45
degrees to East for E-W and ±45 degrees to North for N-S components in
order to get world-wide standard usage. However, this standardisation is not
necessary for the most problem of seismology since many researchers deal with
a known area of seismically active; since, many problem are related to the
signals’ existence and sensitivity rather than some statistical knowledge ; and,
since, conventional directional component (EW,NS) recording of signals
corresponds not to their decomposition provided by the Earth, but to a any
division of one whole (particle) motion, why we don't measure signals with
their larger plane components which provide the best readability and
recognition for weak signals and a chance to discover new phases. The 2S-S
that are directed toward an area for a solution of special problem, may also be
useable for world-wide problem directly or applying some modification or
reduction made by a computer program for 2S-data of standard settling.
In practice, the readability and using the short period seismometers as medium
period seismometers will become extremely important since we use hundreds
of seismometers in ARRAYS for a better readability.
Motional filtering and enhancement of waves potentially provides more
information on readability of shear-wave splitting, especially, by the use of
2S-Vertical component. When one follow the senses of trace component on
the 2S-V seismograms and some more details on particle motion may be
obtained from the combination of seismometers connected with the opposite
ends, The problem stated by Camden and Crampon (1991) "shear-wave
arrivals may be contaminated by P-wave energy which will seriously distort
information contained in the shear-wave splitting" may have chance to be
investigated in more details.
Another related subject with the 2S-Ss, a question arises if there exist new
design possibilities for electromagnetic 2S-seismographs because of the
connection of two seismometers is always orthogonal. For example: (1)-
having the two seismometers in one box, (2)- as feeding the recording device
through two sources of seismometers, new construction may yield favourable
reductions on the electro-dynamic motor constant normally, (3) it may also be
useful in making the 2S-S more stable, and, (4) the existence of its own heavy
electromagnetic damping resulting from the use of two seismometers may be
used advantageously toward to manufacturing simplification by the proper
choice of instrument parameters. Actually, they may all be useable together in
making a compact form of 2S-S.
Perhaps, we should also add the possibility not to use some of the electronics
which normally used with the conventional single seismometers in stations forfiltration or amplification purposes. Therefore, some electronics do not
necessarily need when 2S-system is used.
There is also some easiness in maintaining of 2S-seismographs because they
work such as longer period of seismographs although seismometers connected
are short period in fact. That is, the enlargement in the frequency response is
effectively caused by 2S-S work like a longer period seismograph at the lover
and higher side of its frequency of dynamic range for which actually the short
period seismometers are used. Eventually, the operation and maintenance of
the broader band 2S-S system will be as easy as that of these shorter period of
seismometers' .
2S-Recording Tests
In order to make a precise comparison it would probably be necessary to place
2S-Ss operating alongside at a conventional station . An other important
requirement would be the provision of the identical seismometers and
recording devices (digital or analog) for the both types of seismographs.
However, it may not be absolutely necessary identical the seismometers since
this many instruments usually are not available at a seismic station for the 2S-
tests.And, since, the small differences in instrumentation will not prevent us
from showing the eight capabilities of 2S-system but hinder one from the
quantitative studies. Finally, in ordinary, it is become difficult to find money to
buy some extra identical seismometers without project for a seismic station.
However, as the arguments of 2S-Seismographs are so obvious, I would
suggest a direct use of 2S-s for researchers who may advantageously use for
solving their seismological problems. Actually, In order to 2S-Seismographs
gain an applicability world–wide, a seismic station or an university, making a
project, should dedicate to carry out 2S-recording experiments along with
conventional records for one or two years and the observations should be
published for all components.
Here, a limited amount of 2S-recording tests was made at The Technical
University of Istanbul. Although a connection of two long period seismometers
would have provided a more through picture of the functioning of the eight
capabilities of 2S-S. The equipment available permitted for the 2S-experiments
was the connection of two short period seismometers (Kinemetrix). FIG.2 Records of the Sarayköy earthquake (37.97 N.28.77 E) March 25,1984,
D =360 km. The upper portion of the record is from 2S-seismograph,
the lower is from conventional seismograph (W.A.).
FIG.3 Records of the Adapazarý earthquake (40.68 N.30.45 E) March 26,1984.
D =110 km. The upper record is from 2S-seismograph, the lower is from
conventional seismograph.
The experiments lasted approximately one week. During this time, only two
events could be taken into consideration. In order to make comparisons with
conventional records of these two events , seismograms of Wood-Anderson
were obtained from Kandilli, a seismic station a few km distant from the place
where the 2S-seismograph experimental recordings were made. The portion of
the conventional records which we want to compare are placed just the below
the 2S-seismograms for easy comparison. See figures 2 and 3.
There has been no attempt for phase reading on either seismogram due to the
lack of the large number of samples of data necessary for reliable identification
at the begining. Yet, it is possible to indicate some of the results from the 2S-
seismograms.
The first seismogram records belong to Sarayköy earthquake. The ratio of the
SH waves to the P-waves (SH/P) in amplitude measured from the 2S-
seismogram are far greater than that of the E-W component of the
conventional record.
It should be noted that, S-waves on the conventional record have larger
components than P waves on the E-W seismogram because of the position of
the hypocenter. On the other hand, in the record of Adapazarý the same ratio
of (SH/P) is of much less value when it is compared with the ratios taken from
the conventional record even though, the E-W component of SH-waves is
small due to the earthquake location. This reversal result is obtained because
the earthquake of Adapazarý was located approximately 80 degrees of
azimuthal difference from the first earthquake.
The opposite ratio measurements show that two different quadrantal
magnifications exist and that the arrivals which belong to the first earthquake
approach "in the additional quadrant " while similar wave arrivals (SH) of the
second earthquake approach "in the negational quadrant" of detection.
Again, I have to clarify that because of the instrumental possibilities, the
records of these earthquakes do not provide a very good example to show the
success of the 2S-seismographs. .For a simple proving purposes yet, it should
be sufficient to observe the summation and negation of the currents for the
separation of the P-and S-waves as dominant characters on the 2S-
seismograms. And, to show the large dynamic range , is adequate a station test
the both seismographs (2S-S and conventional) with identical seismometers on
a shake-table for a large range of frequency.
On the other hand, it should be born in mind that the experimental proves will
show only its practical side of 2S-seismographs, which it will always be
possible to improve the outputs instrumentally especially in its early days.
CONCLUSION
The connection of seismometers in the described form is not well documented
in published literature. However, The output of the 2S-seismograph, being the
summation of the output of two linear systems, is a linear output. This
warrants analytical explanation which actually I studied in my early works
(Garcon 1983). In this paper I tried to show some observational and practical
usage of 2S-S. The 2S-seismograph with quite different abilities pertaining
detection has potential to attract the attention of researchers who may deal
especially with a definite area of research in the earth science or even, in the
exploration geophysics.2S-seismograph combinations make contributions to major problems in
seismography and in seismological data. Such that 2S- S provides: 1- the
smoother response curves , 2- larger dynamic range, 3 -the higher detection
gain for the weak signals, 4- the larger plane or 3D components 5-the greatest
accuracy in combination of signals, 6-the capability of obtaining a seismograms
which contain only P or S-waves’ recordings, 7- discovering new phases, and
8- the recognising and recording ability for weakest phases on the seismogram
comparable with arrays stations’.
By these capabilities of 2S-seismographs we have new potentialities not only
some solution on the most important problems of seismography but an
important results in reading and recognising weak signals which are not
possible their records with the conventional recordings, including even, very
expensive techniques such as arrays or seismographs linked by telemetry as
they also lack the ability to record signals with the higher level dynamic range
and the extra energy of larger plane components for recording against to
noise.
On the other hand, as we have a new type of data, some modifications on
algorithms which are being applied to the conventional seismograms for
different purposes (such as for filtering and enhancing the signals over noise)
may also be required. Fortunately, especially in the cases of polarisation
(particle motion) and plane-component reductions, these modifications will
shorten the calculation adding some accuracy to the results.
As a result of the above explanations become apparent that the 2S-
Seismographs constitute new important capabilities for the science whose
development is essentially based on observational success.
Acknowledgments
I thank Prof. Nezihi Canitez for permission to use the seismographs at
Research Laboratories of Technical University of Istanbul. I also thank Mr.
Uður Güllü and his colleagues for technical assistance in making 2S-tests.
REFERENCES
BATH, Marcus (1962) Direction of Approach Microsiesm, Geophys J. R.
Ast. Soc.6,4 50-461
BOCK, G.and R.Kind (1991) A global study of S-to-P and P-to-S conver-
sions from the upper Mantle transitione zone. Geophys J.Int.1 07,117-129.GÜRCAN ,Ruhi (1979) Sixth order of equation of motion of an electro-
magnetic seismograph and absolute calibration, University of Istanbul, Sci.
series S.44,193-210.
GÜRCAN, Ruhi (1983) The transfer function of the two electromagnetic
seismometer seismograph which can record total 'P', 'S' or the horizontal
component of the ground motion predominantly. Universtyof Istanbul Fac.
of Eng.Period of Earthsciences C.4. S.1-2 ,147-155
INGATE, S. F. Husebye , E. S. and Christoffersson A. (1985) Regional
arrays and optimum data processing schemes, B.S.S.A Vol. 75 No4 ,
1155-1177
JURKEVICS, Andy (1988) Polarization analysis of three-component array
data, B.S.S.A . Vol 78, No5, 1725-1743
KANESHIMA S. and Ando, MESATAKA (1989) An analysis of split shear
waves observed above the cristal and uppermost, mantle, earthuakes beneath
Shikohu, Japan: implications in effective depth extent of seismic anisotropy. J.
Geo-phis R.V.94 ,810.14077-92
KOLLAR, F. and Russel, R.O. (1966) Seismometer analysis using an electric
current analog, B.S.S.A . Vol.56. 1193-1205.
MONTALBETTÝ, J. F and Kanashevich , E. R. (1970) Enhancement of
teleseismic body phases with a polarization filter, Geophysics J. Ast. Soc. 21,
NUTTLI , O and WHITMORE.J.D: (1962) On the determination of the
polarization angle of the S-waves, B:S:S:A: Vol.52, 4,95-107.
SAMSON, J. C. and Olson, J. V (1981) Data adaptive polariz ation filters
for multichanel geophysical data, Geophysics 46,1423-1431.
SAVILL, R. A. Carpenter, E. W. and Wright J. K. (1962) The derivation
and solution of indicator equation for galvanometer combination inc
uding the effect of seismometer inductance Geophys ics J. 6,409-425
SERIFF, A. J (1959) The response of seismometers in series and parallel
connections. Geophisics Vol. XXIV No 1, 49-63
SHIMSHONY, M.and S.W. SMITH (1964) Seismic signal enhancement with
three component detectors ,Geophsics Vol.XXIX, No 5, 664-671.
VIDAL, J. E. (1986) Complex polarization analysis of particle motion
B.S.S.A. 76, 5, 1393-1405.
WHITCOM B, James H. (1969) Array data processing techniques applied to
long period shear waves at fennoscandian seismograph stations,
B.S.S.A. Vol. 59, No :5, 1863-1887.
WHITE, E. (1964) Motion product seismograms ,Geophys.Vol.XXIX ,No:2,
288-99 |
arXiv:physics/9911017v1 [physics.med-ph] 11 Nov 1999The RR interval spectrum, the ECG signal and aliasing
A. Gersten(1),(4), O. Gersten(3), A. Ronen(2)and Y. Cassuto(2),(4)
(1)Dept. of Physics,(2)Dept. of Life Sciences,
(3)Dept. of Mathematics and Computer Sciences,
(4)Unit of Biomedical Engineering,
Ben-GurionUniversity of the Negev
(August 25, 1999)
Typeset using REVT EX
1Abstract
We discuss the relationship between the RR interval spectra l analysis and
the spectral analysis of the corresponding ECG signal from w hich the RR
intervals were evaluated. The ECG signal spectrum is bounde d below the
frequency f Bby using an electronic filter and sampled at rate larger than 2 fB,
thus excluding aliasing from spectral analysis. A similar p rocedure cannot
be applied to the RR interval spectral analysis, and in this c ase aliasing is
possible. One of our main effort in this paper is devoted to the problem of
how to detect aliasing in the heart rate spectral analysis. I n order to get an
insight we performed an experiment with an adult man, in whic h the ECG
signal was detected in a case where the breathing rate was lar ger than half the
heart rate. A constant breathing rate for time intervals exc eeding 5 minutes
was monitored with good accuracy using a special breathing p rocedure. The
results show distinctively a very sharp peak in the spectral analysis of the
ECG signal and corresponding (diffused) aliasing peaks in th e RR interval
spectral analysis.
New method of dealing with unevenly sampled data was develop ed which
has interesting anti-aliasing properties. There are indic ations that the VLF
peaks of the RR spectrum are originated by aliasing. Some of t he LF peaks
may have the same property.
Keywords: Hart rate, ECG signal, Spectral analysis, Aliasing
I. INTRODUCTION
The R-R interval spectral analysis is usually based on heart rate data collected in two
ways. In one method the data are collected by analog to digita l conversion of the ECG
signal and computer evaluation of the R-R intervals from the ECG signal. In the second
method, devices are used whose output is the R-R interval alo ne. The advantage of the first
2method is the control of accuracy and flexibility of the evalu ations. The second method has
the advantage of storing smaller amount of data, and it can be easily used on-line.
In the first method, usually the number of collected data (sam pled ECG signal) is
of two to three orders of magnitude larger than the R-R interv al data. Thus if only R-R
interval is analyzed a large amount of data is unused. In this paper we are trying to take
advantage of the ECG sampled signal and to derive new informa tion in addition to the
conventional R-R interval analysis [1],, [2], [3], [4].
The ECG signal spectrum is bounded below the frequency f Bby using an electronic
filter and sampled at rate larger than 2f B, thus excluding aliasing from spectral analysis. [5]
A similar procedure cannot be applied to the R-R interval spe ctral analysis, and in this case
an aliasing is possible. One of our main efforts in this paper i s devoted to the problem of
how to detect aliasing in the R-R interval spectral analysis .
In order to get an insight, we performed an experiment, in whi ch the ECG signal
of one of the authors (A.G) was detected while the breathing r ate was larger than half the
heart rate. A constant breathing rate for a time exceeding 5 m inutes was monitored with
good accuracy using a special breathing procedure with a met ronome. The results show
distinctively a very sharp peak in the spectral analysis of t he ECG signal and corresponding
(diffused) aliasing peaks in the R-R interval spectral analy sis.
The spectral analysis of the ECG signal was performed with th e standard FFT proce-
dures. The spectral analysis of the R-R intervals was perfor med with several techniques in
order to take into consideration that the data were unevenly sampled. This is presented in
section 2. In section 3 we discuss the possibility of aliasin g in the spectral analysis of the
R-R intervals. In section 4 we compare power estimations of E CG’s and R-R intervals of 3
experiments. In section 5 we analyze the results. In section 6 summary and conclusions are
presented.
3II. SPECTRAL ANALYSIS OF UNEVENLY SAMPLED DATA
The methods of spectral analysis are well developed for even ly sampled data [5], [6]. The
R-R interval data are unevenly sampled in time. In most cases an analysis is performed
with respect to beat numbers which are evenly spaced. We will below justify this method
using least squares principles. But as was recently indicat ed by Laguna et Al. [7], the
resampling of data is causing the appearance of additional h armonics. They recommend to
use a method developed by N. R. Lomb [8]. The errors of resampl ing the beats can, to large
extent, be overcome by using a cubic spline interpolation. I n this work we are suggesting
a new method of treating unevenly sampled data, which, unexp ectedly, gave good results
beyond the Nyquist frequency.
A. Analysis according to beat numbers
Let us assume that the RR intervals are given at unevenly samp led times tn, with the
values s(tn),where nis the beat number, n= 1· · ·N. Let us divide the interval [ t1, tN]
into equal subintervals
∆τ=tN−t1
N−1, (1)
and let us generate in the interval [ t1, tN] evenly sampled times:
τn= (n−1)∆τ+t1. (2)
We will use the discrete time Fourier transform (DFT) for a ba sis formed from the evenly
sampled times τn. We will assume that
s(tn) =1
NN/summationdisplay
k=1Skexp (iωkτn), ω k= 2π(k−1)/(N∆τ). (3)
The coefficients Skwill be determined by minimizing the expression
σ=N/summationdisplay
n=1/braceleftBigg/bracketleftBigg
s(tn)−1
NN/summationdisplay
k=1Skexp (iωkτn)/bracketrightBigg /bracketleftBigg
s(tn)−1
NN/summationdisplay
k=1S∗
kexp ( −iωkτn)/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
(4)
4with the result
Sk=N/summationdisplay
n=1s(tn)exp ( −iωkτn). (5)
Eqns. 5 and 3 can be handled easily with standard FFT programs . This is the usual
procedure which is adopted in most of the papers dealing with R-R interval analysis. [3] [4]
B. Other Methods
FFT can be applied more efficiently if the unevenly sampled dat a are interpolated at
evenly spaced intervals of Eq. 2. The cubic spline interpola tion is one of the good ways to
do it.
The Lomb method [8] was extensively analyzed in ref. [7]. We g ive here only the formulae
in the form of the Lomb normalized periodogram
PX(ωk) =1
2σ2
/bracketleftBig/summationtextN
n=1[s(tn)−¯s] cos (ωk(tn−τ))/bracketrightBig2
/summationtextN
n=1cos2(ωk(tn−τ))+/bracketleftBig/summationtextN
n=1[s(tn)−¯s]sin (ωk(tn−τ))/bracketrightBig2
/summationtextN
n=1sin2(ωk(tn−τ))
(6)
where ¯ sandσ2are the mean and variance of the data and the value of τis defined as
tan (2ωkτ) =/summationtextN
n=1sin (2ωktn)
/summationtextN
n=1cos (2ωktn)(7)
C. Non-Uniform Discrete Fourier Transform (NUDFT)
We present here a new method of treating unevenly spaced even ts which we call the
”non-uniform discrete Fourier transform” (NUDFT).
Let us assume that s(τn) are the exact values of the signal at the points given by Eq. 2 .
The corresponding DFT is
Sk=N/summationdisplay
n=1s(τn) exp ( −iωkτn). (8)
5Our aim is to find a good approximation to this expression in te rms of the unevenly
sampled signal s(tn).
We start with the Euler summation formula
N/summationdisplay
n=1f(τn) =1
∆τ/integraldisplayτN
τ1f(τ)dτ+1
2[f(τ1) +f(τN)] +∆τ
12[f′(τN)−f′(τ1)] +O(∆τ2) (9)
and make the following decomposition of the integral on the r ight hand side of Eq.9:
/integraldisplayτN
τ1f(τ)dτ=/integraldisplayt2
t1f(τ)dτ+/integraldisplayt3
t2f(τ)dτ+· · ·+/integraldisplaytN
tN−1f(τ)dτ (10)
and approximate each of the integrals on the right hand side w ith the trapezoidal rule:
/integraldisplayτN
τ1f(τ)dτ=1
2[f(t1) +f(t2)] (t2−t1) +· · ·+1
2[f(tN−1) +f(tN)](tN−tN−1) +O(∆τ)
(11)
From Eqs. 9 and 11 we obtain:
N/summationdisplay
n=1f(τn) =1
2∆τ{[f(t1) +f(t2)] (t2−t1) +· · ·+ [f(tN−1) +f(tN)] (tN−tN−1)}
+1
2[f(t1) +f(tN)] +O(∆τ). (12)
When the tnare equally spaced Eq. 12 becomes an identity with the O(∆τ) = 0,
therefore it seems to us that Eq. 12 is satisfied with an higher accuracy than just O(∆τ).
Eq. 12 can be applied to approximate Eq. 8 with the substituti on
f(tn) =s(tn) exp ( −iωktn), (13)
and the final result, the approximation to Eq. 8, after rearra nging the terms, becomes:
Sk=N/summationdisplay
n=1cns(tn)exp ( −iωktn) +O(∆τ), (14)
where
6c1=∆τ+t2−t1
2∆τ,
c2=t3−t1
2∆τ,
...
cN−1=tN−tN−2
2∆τ,
cN=∆τ+tN−tN−1
2∆τ,(15)
with the inverse formula
s(τn) =1
NN/summationdisplay
k=1Skexp (iωkτn) +O(∆τ), ω k= 2π(k−1)/(N∆τ), (16)
which is an interpolation formula for s(tn) at the evenly spaced points τ1· · ·τN.
III. ALIASING
Aliasing is a result of undersampling and is a well known phen omenon. In ref. [9] aliasing
was looked upon from the point of view of symmetry. It is an exa mple of wrong symmetry,
and as such should be given more attention. It is the outcome o f an incomplete basis. It
was found in ref. [9] , that for evenly sampled data with a samp ling rate fS, the spectral
amplitude S(f) evaluated with FFT, has the following symmetry properties
|S(f)|=|S(f±fS)|=|S(−f±fS)|=|S(±f±nfS)|, (17)
where fis the frequency and n is an arbitrary integer.
In order to avoid the aliasing symmetry of Eq. 17, the frequen cies should be bounded
by the Nyquist frequency (denoted here by fB) according to
fB=fS
2. (18)
The ECG signal was sampled with sampling rate 250 Hz, and an el ectronic filter was
applied, which have eliminated practically all frequencie s above 32 Hz, thus aliasing can not
occur at frequencies below 125 Hz or even below 32 Hz. The R-R i ntervals were calculated
directly from the ECG signal. The sampling rate for R-R inter vals can be defined only for
7evenly sampled data, for the methods which interpolates the unevenly sampled data, or one
can consider the average sampling rate from Eq. 1, in both cas es
¯fS= 1/∆τ= 2fN, (19)
where fNis the Nyquist frequency for the R-R intervals. As the ECG sig nal contains
frequencies much grater than fN, and the R-R intervals are derived from the ECG signal,
one can not be sure that the spectral analysis of the R-R inter vals is free from aliasing. As a
matter of fact there are indications of aliasing in some rare cases. [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]
One way to identify aliasing is to change the sampling rate an d follow the changes in the
spectrum. Unfortunately, for the R-R intervals, one can not speak about a definite sampling
rate, but rather can consider a distribution of sampling rat es. The changes in sampling rate
required to observe aliasing are of the same order as the fluct uations in the sampling rate.
Therefore in practice it is almost impossible to observe con sistent changes in the spectrum
slightly changing the heart rate.
Other possibility of detecting aliasing is by comparing the heart rate spectrum with
the ECG signal spectrum. Marked differences below the Nyquis t frequency for the power
distribution of the RR intervals compared to the ECG signal p ower distribution in the same
range may indicate aliasing. But we do not have yet a sound bas is to treat this problem.
We have devised an experiment which definitely demonstrates the aliasing in the R-
R intervals spectrum. To the best of our knowledge this is the first experiment in which
one can exactly know the correct frequency above the Nyquist frequency and can follow
the development of the aliasing, which appears to be diffused to great extent because the
symmetry of Eq. 17 is represented not by one sampling rate but by a distribution of sampling
rates, as the R-R interval is unevenly sampled.
Below we describe 3 experiments. One of them was devised to de monstrate aliasing and
the other two for learning about the relations between the R- R interval spectrum and the
spectrum of the ECG signal.
8IV. THREE EXPERIMENTS
We present below results of three experiments. In the first ex periment the ECG signal
was collected in a normal resting state. The aim of this exper iment was to compare the ECG
spectrum with the R-R intervals spectrum. In the second expe riment very slow breathing
was monitored at a rate of 0.04 Hz. Again the ECG and R-R interv al spectra were compared.
In the third experiment very fast breathing was accurately m onitored at the rate of 74/min
and 84/min. These respiratory rates were above half of the he art rates thus allowing to
observe in detail the development of aliasing.
A. The First Experiment
In this experiment (linked with the names of Zahi and Ori, whe re the second is one of
the authors: O.G) which was done in normal, resting conditio ns, we compare the power es-
timation of the R-R interval and the ECG signal, from which th e R-R interval was obtained.
The ECG signal was sampled at a rate of 250 Hz. Stable interval s of 7 minutes duration
were chosen for analysis.
In Fig. 1a the power distribution of the ECG signal of Zahi is d epicted. The attenuation
of the power with increasing frequency above 12 Hz is due to th e action of an electronic
filter. Above 32 Hz the contribution is practically zero. The average heart rate was 0.97 Hz.
The above results were zoomed to the interval [0-12] Hz in Fig . 1b. One can see distinctively
the peak around the average heart rate and the higher harmoni cs of this peak. The second
harmonic is missing, but the third, fourth, fifth and sixth ar e distinctively visible, higher
harmonics became more and more smeared and indistinguishab le above the sixth harmonic.
One should also note the large difference in power in the heart rate range, below the Nyquist
frequency of 0.49Hz, which is much smaller compared to the pe ak around the average heart
rate (0.97 Hz).
The power distribution of the RR intervals in the range [0-0. 5] Hz was computed ac-
9cording to the methods discussed in section 2 and are present ed in Figs. 2a (DFT, beat
number analysis), 2b (Spline interpolation), 2c (NUDFT). F or comparison also the power
distribution of the ECG signal in the above range is presente d in Fig. 2d.
The results of Figs. 2a, 2b, and 2c are quite similar, but the s pline interpolation (Fig.
2b) and the NUDFT (Fig. 2c) are practically identical. The th ree graphs show the structure
commonly found in the power estimation analysis of RR interv als, namely the existence of
the ”high frequency” (HF), ”low frequency” (LF) and the ”ver y low frequency” (VLF)
peaks. The ECG spectrum shows qualitatively the same struct ure (but not a quantitative
agreement), except that the ECG spectrum is highly suppress ed below 0.04 Hz, in the VLF
region, indicating a possibility of aliasing in this region in the RR analysis.
In Figs. 3 and 4a-4d the results of Ori are presented. The conc lusions are similar to those
of Zahi, except that in the ECG spectrum both VLF and LF peaks a re missing, indicating
the possibility of aliasing in these regions for the RR analy sis. Also in the ECG spectrum
of Ofek, Fig. 5b the VLF and LF, present in Fig. 5a, are missing . VLF is missing in J.C.’s
ECG spectrum (see Figs. 6a-6b).
B. The Second Experiment
In this experiment (linked again with the name Ori) we have ch ecked the ECG spectrum
near the VLF region, as the VLF was absent in the ECG spectrum f or the resting state in
the first experiment. The question was whether such a result p ersists in all ECG spectra.
Therefore we have probed the VLF region by monitoring very pr olonged breathing with a
rate of 0.04 Hz. For the spectrum of RR intervals we found that the DFT, Spline interpo-
lation and NUDFT gives similar results, and again NUDFT was p ractically identical to the
spline interpolation. Therefore we present only the result s of NUDFT, which are presented
in Fig. 7a. For comparison the spectrum of the ECG signal is gi ven in Fig. 7b. In Fig. 7a
one can see a very clean pattern of a peak at 0.04 Hz and its high er harmonics. In Fig. 7b
one can see a similar but somewhat diffused pattern. Thus this experiment indicates that
10similar respiratory patterns exists in both the RR as well as in the ECG signal.
C. The Third Experiment
In this experiment (linked to the name Alex, who is one of the a uthors: A.G) very fast
breathing was accurately monitored at the rate of 74/min and 84/min respectively. These
rates were well above half of the average heart rate thus allo wing to observe in detail the
development of aliasing. In Fig. 8 the ECG spectrum is domina ted by the very high and
narrow peak at the frequency f1= 1.234Hz, also its higher harmonics can be distinctively
seen. The frequency f1is just the breathing frequency 74/min. In the same figure one can
also see the diffused peaks near the average heart rate freque ncy of 1.636 Hz and its higher
harmonics. One should observe aliasing at about 1 .636−f1= 0.402Hz. Indeed one can
see diffused peaks around that frequency in Fig. 9a, which dis plays the power estimation of
the RR intervals using the NUDFT (which below the Nyquist rat e is similar to the spline
interpolation). The width of this region can be estimated by noting that the RR intervals
have different instantaneous sampling rates which are equal to the inverse of the RR interval
time. In Fig. 10 we have calculated the distribution of the sa mpling rates by dividing the
frequency region into 100 beans. We have shifted that distri bution by subtracting f1. As
one can see the results are confined approximately to the regi on 0.32-0.47 Hz. Indeed the
aliasing peaks of Fig. 9a appear in this region. The pictures below the Nyquist frequency
are very similar for the DFT, NUDFT, the spline interpolatio n and the Lomb method (Fig.
9b) with a similar aliasing behavior.
In principle the NUDFT and the Lomb methods should not be used above the Nyquist
frequency. Surprisingly enough we have found that both meth ods have a sharp peak at f1,
as can be seen in Figs. 9a and 9b. Both methods do not have the al iasing symmetry of the
DFT as given by Eq. 17, therefore the results are not symmetri c with respect to the Nyquist
frequency (half the sampling rate), as it is satisfied, for ex ample, in the case of the spline
interpolation. We have found an exact result at f1and a diffused aliasing around 0.4 Hz. It
11is interesting to note that both methods give almost the same result below and above the
Nyquist frequency. One can interpret the appearance of the s harp peak at f1as a result of
a partial destruction of aliasing symmetry due to uneven sam plings.
Similar results for the breathing frequency 84/min are pres ented in Figs. 11-12.
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The ECG signal spectrum is bounded below the Nyquist frequen cy f Bby using an
electronic filter and sampled at rate larger than 2f B, thus excluding aliasing from spectral
analysis. A similar procedure cannot be applied to the RR int erval spectral analysis, and
in this case an aliasing is possible. One of our main efforts in this paper was devoted to the
problem of how to detect aliasing in the R-R interval spectra l analysis.
In order to get insight into this problem three experiments h ave been analyzed. In the
first experiment the ECG signal was collected in a normal rest ing state. The aim of this
experiment was to compare the ECG spectrum with the R-R inter val spectrum. In the
second experiment very slow breathing was monitored at a rat e of 0.04 Hz. Again the ECG
and R-R interval spectra were compared. In the third experim ent very fast breathing was
accurately monitored at the rate of 74/min and 84/min respec tively. These respiratory
rates were above half of the heart rates thus allowing to obse rve in detail the development
of aliasing.
The experiments which were described above led us to the foll owing conclusions:
1. The spectral analysis of the ECG signal is more sensitive a nd accurate compared to
the R-R interval spectral analysis and is free from aliasing . Still in the present stage
it contains too much information to be of practical use. Effor ts should be made to
understand what will be the best way to extract information ( not related to the heart
condition alone as in the standard analysis of ECG) about the external influences on
the heart signal.
122. We have conducted an experiment which gave a clear insight about the mechanism of
aliasing in the R-R interval spectrum. The very sharp peak in the spectrum of the
ECG signal, which came as the result of enforced quick breath ing, reappeared as a
diffused signal in the RR spectrum. The extension of the diffus eness agrees with the
extension of the sampling rates of unevenly sampled data..
3. The VLF peak observed in the R-R interval spectrum is usual ly missing in the ECG
spectrum. This lead us to suspect that the VLF observed in the RR spectrum has its
origin in aliasing.
4. In some cases the LF peak does not show up in the ECG spectrum . This led us to
suspect that part of the LF peak is of aliasing origin.
5. Unlike in electronic devices, it is very difficult to devise procedures to detect aliasing in
humans. In electronic devices aliasing can be easily detect ed by changing the sampling
rate. In humans the fluctuations of the heart rate are of the sa me order as the required
changes in the sampling rates. It will be an important task to develop a proper
procedure for detecting aliasing in humans.
6. We have developed a new technique for spectral analysis fo r unevenly sampled data
called non-uniform discrete Fourier transform (NUDFT). Wh en employed to the RR
data, below the Nyquist frequency, it gave similar results a s those obtained by interpo-
lating the data with a cubic spline. Above the Nyquist freque ncy, the correct peak in
the spectrum was detected with great accuracy. A similar res ult was obtained with the
recently rediscovered Lomb method. We interpret this unexp ected result by a partial
destruction of aliasing symmetry in both methods. More effor ts should be made in
order to understand the anti-aliasing properties of the abo ve methods.
7. We consider aliasing to be a wrong symmetry, resulting fro m the use of an incomplete
basis, which has intrinsic symmetries inconsistent with th e properties of the signal.
Aliasing can be partially removed by reducing the symmetry o f the basis.
13REFERENCES
[1] B. Mc. A. Sayers, ”Analysis of heart rate variability”, Ergonomics, vol.16, pp 85-97,
1973.
[2] M. V. Kamath and E. L. Fallen, ”Power spectral analysis of HRV: a noninvasive sig-
nature of cardiac autonomic functions”, Crit. Rev. Biomed. Eng., vol. 21, pp . 245-311,
1993.
[3] M. Malik et al., ”Heart Rate Variability, Standards of Me asurements, Physiological
Interpretation, and Clinical Use,” Circulation, vol.93, pp 1043-1065, 1998.
[4] M. Malik and A. J. Camm (Eds.), Heart Rate Variability , Futura, Armonk NY, 1995.
[5] A. V. Oppenheim and R. W. Schafer, Discrete-Time Signal Processing , Prentice-Hall,
Englewood Cliffs NJ, 1989.
[6] L. Cohen, Time-Frequency Analysis , Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs NJ, 1995.
[7] P. Laguna, G. B. Moody and R. G. Mark, ”Power Spectral Dens ity of Unevenly Sampled
Data by Least-Square Analysis: Performance and Applicatio n to Heart Rate Signals,”
IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng ., vol. 45, pp. 698-715, 1998.
[8] N. R. Lomb, ”Least-squares frequency analysis of unequa lly spaced data.” Astrophysical
and Space Science , vol. 39N.R.L, pp. 447-462, 1976.
[9] A. Gersten, ”Dirac’s Representation Theory as a Framewo rk for Signal Theory. I. Dis-
crete Finite Signals,” Annals of Physics (N.Y.) , vol.262, pp. 47-72, 1998.
[10] H. Witte et Al.,”Evidence of a previously undescribed f orm of respiratory sinus arrhyth-
mia (RSA)–the physiological manifestation of ”cardiac ali asing”. ”, Pflugers Arch. vol.
412, pp. 442-4, 1988.
[11] M. Rother et Al., ”Cardiac aliasing–a possible cause fo r the misinterpretation of
cardiorespirographic data in neonates.”, Early Hum. Dev. vol. 20, pp. 1-12, 1989.
14[12] J. Nilsson, M. Panizza and M. Hallett, ”Principles of di gital sampling of a physiologic
signal.”, Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol. vol. 89, pp. 349-58, 1993.
[13] U. Zwiener et Al., ”Heart rate fluctuations in rabbits du ring different behavioral states.”,
Biomed. Biochim. Acta , vol. 49, pp. 59-68, 1990.
[14] U. Zwiener et Al. ”Forms of physiological aliasing with in the heart rate fluctuations by
higher frequent respiratory movements”, J. Physiol. Pharmacol. vol. 45, 563-72, 1994.
[15] U. Zwiener et Al., ”Heart rate fluctuations of lower freq uencies than the respiratory
rhythm but caused by it.”, Pflugers Arch. , vol. 429, pp. 455-61, 1995.
15Figure Captions
•Figure 1. The relative power of the ECG signal of Zahi, a) in th e spectral range of
0-36 Hz, b) in the spectral range of 0-12 Hz.
•Figure 2. The relative power computed (from the ECG signal of Zahi) by four different
methods, in the spectral range of 0-0.5 Hz, a) by DFT, b) by spl ine interpolation of
the RR data, by NUDFT, d) from the ECG signal.
•Figure 3. The relative power of the ECG signal of Ori.
•Figure 4. The relative power computed (from the ECG signal of Ori) by four different
methods, in the spectral range of 0-0.52 Hz. a) by DFT, b) by sp line interpolation of
the RR data, c) by NUDFT, d) from the ECG signal.
•Figure 5. The relative power computed (from the ECG signal of Ofek) by two different
methods, in the spectral range of 0-0.6 Hz, a) by spline inter polation of the RR data,
b) from the ECG signal.
•Figure 6. The relative power computed (from the ECG signal of J.C.) by two different
methods, in the spectral range of 0-0.46 Hz, a) by spline inte rpolation of the RR data,
b) from the ECG signal.
•Figure 7. The relative power computed (from the ECG signal of Ori with breathing
rate of 0.04 Hz) by two different methods, in the spectral rang e of 0-0.62 Hz, a) by
NUDFT, b) from the ECG signal.
•Figure 8. The relative power of the ECG signal of Alex with a br eathing rate of 1.234
Hz.
•Figure 9. The relative power computed (from the ECG signal of Alex with a breathing
rate of 1.234 Hz) by two different methods, in the spectral ran ge of 0-1.5 Hz, a) by
NUDFT, b) from the ECG signal.
16•Figure 10. A 100 bin histogram of the heart rates of Alex which are subtracted by the
breathing rate of 1.234 Hz.
•Figure 11. The relative power of the ECG signal of Alex with a b reathing rate of 1.404
Hz.
•Figure 12. The relative power computed (from the ECG signal o f Alex with a breathing
rate of 1.404 Hz) by two different methods, in the spectral ran ge of 0-1.6 Hz, a) by
NUDFT, b) from the ECG signal.
17/G13 /G17 /G1B /G14/G15 /G14/G19 /G15/G13 /G15/G17 /G15/G1B /G16/G15 /G16/G19/G13/G11/G13 /G14/G13/G11/G14/G14
/G29 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G44/G03/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G24/G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29/G4C/G4A /G11/G03 /G14
/G3D /G44 /G4B/G4C
/G15 /G13/G13/G10/G19/G15/G13/G33/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B /G28 /G26 /G2A /G0C
/G13 /G15 /G17 /G19 /G1B /G14 /G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G11/G14/G14/G45/G03/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G24/G4F /G11/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G11/G03 /G14
/G3D /G44 /G4B/G4C
/G15 /G13/G13/G10/G19/G15/G13/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48/G55/G03/G0B/G28/G26 /G2A /G0C
/G29 /G55/G48 /G54/G58 /G48 /G51 /G46 /G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G11/G14 /G13/G11/G15 /G13/G11/G16 /G13/G11/G17 /G13/G11/G18/G13/G18/G14/G13/G14/G18/G15/G13/G15/G18/G16/G13
/G44/G03
/G29 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03/G2B /G5D/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G11/G03 /G15/G03/G03 /G03/G03 /G03/G03
/G3D /G44/G4B/G4C
/G15 /G13/G13/G10/G19/G15/G13 /G39/G2F /G29
/G2F /G29
/G2B /G29/G33/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B /G27 /G29 /G37 /G0C
/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G11/G14 /G13/G11/G15 /G13/G11/G16 /G13/G11/G17 /G13/G11/G18/G13/G18/G14/G13/G14/G18/G15/G13/G15/G18/G16/G13/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G03/G15
/G45/G03 /G39/G2F /G29
/G2F /G29
/G2B /G29/G3D /G44/G4B/G4C
/G15 /G13/G13/G10/G19/G15/G13/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48/G55/G03/G0B/G36 /G53 /G4F/G4C /G51 /G48/G47/G03/G27/G29 /G37 /G0C/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G11/G14 /G13/G11/G15 /G13/G11/G16 /G13/G11/G17 /G13/G11/G18/G13/G18/G14/G13/G14/G18/G15/G13/G15/G18/G16/G13/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G11/G03 /G15
/G46/G03
/G29 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03/G2B /G5D/G39/G2F /G29
/G2B /G29 /G2F /G29/G3D /G44 /G4B/G4C
/G15/G13 /G13 /G10 /G19 /G15 /G13/G33/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B /G31 /G38 /G27 /G29 /G37 /G0C
/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G11/G14 /G13/G11/G15 /G13/G11/G16 /G13/G11/G17 /G13/G11/G18/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G13/G11/G13 /G15/G13/G11/G13 /G17/G13/G11/G13 /G19/G13/G11/G13 /G1B/G13/G11/G14 /G13/G13/G11/G14 /G15/G13/G11/G14 /G17/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G11/G03 /G15
/G47/G03
/G29 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03/G2B /G5D/G39/G2F /G29
/G2F /G29/G2B /G29/G3D /G44/G4B/G4C
/G15 /G13/G13/G10/G19/G15/G13/G33/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B /G28 /G26 /G2A /G0C/G13 /G17 /G1B /G14/G15 /G14/G19 /G15/G13 /G15/G17/G13/G11/G13 /G14/G13/G11/G14/G14/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29/G4C/G4A/G03 /G03 /G16/G03 /G03 /G03/G03 /G03
/G49
/G36/G20 /G14/G11/G13/G16/G14/G03 /G2B /G5D/G32/G55 /G4C /G10 /G15
/G14 /G13/G13/G10/G18/G15/G13/G33/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B /G28 /G26 /G2A /G0C
/G29 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03/G2B /G5D
/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G11/G14 /G13/G11/G15 /G13/G11/G16 /G13/G11/G17 /G13/G11/G18/G13/G14/G13/G15/G13/G16/G13/G17/G13/G18/G13/G19/G13
/G29 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03/G2B /G5D/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G11/G03 /G17
/G44/G03
/G2B /G29/G2F /G29/G39/G2F /G29
/G32/G55 /G4C /G10 /G15
/G14 /G13/G13/G10/G18/G15/G13
/G49
/G36/G20 /G14/G11/G13/G16/G14/G03 /G2B /G5D/G33/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B /G27 /G29 /G37 /G0C/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G11/G14 /G13/G11/G15 /G13/G11/G16 /G13/G11/G17 /G13/G11/G18/G13/G14/G13/G15/G13/G16/G13/G17/G13/G18/G13/G19/G13
/G29 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03/G2B /G5D/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G11/G03 /G17
/G45/G03 /G32/G55 /G4C /G10 /G15
/G14 /G13/G13/G10/G18/G15/G13
/G49/G36/G20 /G14/G11/G13/G16/G14/G03 /G2B /G5D/G33/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B /G36 /G53 /G4F/G4C /G51/G48/G47/G03/G27/G29 /G37 /G0C
/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G11/G14 /G13/G11/G15 /G13/G11/G16 /G13/G11/G17 /G13/G11/G18/G13/G14/G13/G15/G13/G16/G13/G17/G13/G18/G13/G19/G13
/G46/G03 /G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G11/G03 /G17
/G32/G55 /G4C /G10 /G15
/G14 /G13/G13/G10/G18/G15/G13
/G49/G36/G20 /G14/G11/G13/G16/G14/G03 /G2B /G5D/G33/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B /G31 /G38 /G27 /G29 /G37 /G0C
/G29 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03/G2B /G5D/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G11/G14 /G13/G11/G15 /G13/G11/G16 /G13/G11/G17 /G13/G11/G18/G13/G11/G13 /G13/G13/G11/G13 /G15/G13/G11/G13 /G17/G13/G11/G13 /G19/G13/G11/G13 /G1B/G13/G11/G14 /G13/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55/G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G11/G03 /G17
/G32/G55 /G4C /G10 /G15
/G14 /G13/G13/G10/G18/G15/G13
/G49/G56/G20 /G14/G11/G13/G16/G14/G03 /G4B /G5D
/G47/G03/G33/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B /G28 /G26 /G2A /G0C
/G29 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03/G2B /G5D/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G17 /G13 /G11 /G19/G13/G18/G14 /G13/G14 /G18/G15 /G13/G24 /G11/G03 /G4A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48/G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A /G11/G03 /G18
/G29 /G55 /G48/G54 /G58 /G48/G51 /G46 /G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G44/G03 /G2B /G29/G2F /G29/G39 /G2F/G29
/G32 /G49 /G48 /G4E
/G17/G17/G13 /G10 /G1B/G19/G13
/G49/G36/G20 /G14 /G11 /G14/G17/G1C/G03 /G2B /G5D/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G56 /G53 /G4F/G4C /G51/G48 /G47/G03 /G27 /G29 /G37 /G0C
A.
/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G14 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G16 /G13 /G11 /G17 /G13 /G11 /G18 /G13 /G11 /G19/G13 /G11 /G13/G13 /G11 /G15/G13 /G11 /G17/G13 /G11 /G19/G13 /G11 /G1B/G14 /G11 /G13/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11/G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A /G11/G03 /G18
/G32 /G49 /G48 /G4E
/G17/G17/G13 /G10 /G1B/G19/G13
/G49/G56/G20 /G14 /G11 /G14/G17/G1C
/G45/G03 /G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G28 /G26/G2A /G0C
/G29 /G55 /G48 /G54 /G58 /G48 /G51/G46 /G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G17/G13/G15 /G13/G17 /G13/G19 /G13/G1B /G13
/G44/G03 /G03
/G2B /G29/G2F /G29/G39 /G2F/G29/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48/G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G24 /G4F /G11/G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A /G11/G03 /G03 /G19/G03 /G03 /G03 /G03
/G2D /G11 /G26 /G11
/G15 /G13 /G13 /G10 /G19 /G15 /G13
/G49
/G36/G20 /G13 /G11 /G1C /G13/G1B/G03 /G2B /G5D/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G56 /G53 /G4F/G4C /G51/G48 /G47/G03 /G27 /G29 /G37 /G0C
/G29 /G55 /G48 /G54/G58 /G48/G51 /G46 /G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D
/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G14 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G16 /G13 /G11 /G17/G13 /G11 /G13/G13 /G11 /G14/G13 /G11 /G15/G13 /G11 /G16/G13 /G11 /G17/G13 /G11 /G18/G13 /G11 /G19/G13 /G11 /G1A
/G45/G03
/G39 /G2F/G29/G2F /G29/G2B /G29/G2D /G11 /G26 /G11
/G15/G13/G13 /G10 /G19/G15/G13
/G49/G36/G20 /G13 /G11 /G1C/G13/G1B/G03 /G2B /G5D/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48/G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G24 /G4F /G11/G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A /G11/G03 /G03 /G19/G03 /G03 /G03 /G03 /G03 /G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G28/G26 /G2A /G0C
/G29 /G55 /G48 /G54/G58 /G48/G51 /G46 /G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G14 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G16 /G13 /G11 /G17 /G13 /G11 /G18 /G13 /G11 /G19/G13/G14/G13 /G13/G15/G13 /G13/G16/G13 /G13/G17/G13 /G13/G18/G13 /G13
/G44/G03 /G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F/G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G58 /G55 /G48/G03 /G1A/G03 /G03 /G03 /G03 /G03 /G03
/G29 /G55 /G48/G54/G58 /G48 /G51 /G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G32 /G55 /G4C
/G16 /G13/G13/G13 /G10 /G16/G16/G13/G13/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G31/G38/G27 /G29 /G37 /G0C
/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G14 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G16 /G13 /G11 /G17 /G13 /G11 /G18 /G13 /G11 /G19/G13 /G11 /G13/G13 /G11 /G18/G14 /G11 /G13/G14 /G11 /G18/G15 /G11 /G13/G15 /G11 /G18/G16 /G11 /G13
/G45/G03 /G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F /G11/G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A /G11/G03 /G1A/G03 /G03 /G03 /G03 /G03 /G03
/G29 /G55 /G48/G54/G58 /G48 /G51 /G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G32 /G55 /G4C
/G16 /G13/G13/G13 /G10 /G16/G16/G13/G13/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G28 /G26 /G2A /G0C/G13 /G15 /G17 /G19 /G1B /G14 /G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G11 /G13/G13 /G11 /G17/G13 /G11 /G1B/G14 /G11 /G15/G14 /G11 /G19/G15 /G11 /G13/G15 /G11 /G17/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F/G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G58 /G55 /G48/G03 /G1B
/G16 /G47 /G03 /G4B /G44 /G55 /G50 /G52 /G51 /G4C /G46/G15/G47 /G03 /G4B /G44 /G55 /G50 /G52 /G51 /G4C /G46/G14/G56 /G57 /G03 /G4B /G44 /G55 /G50 /G52 /G51 /G4C /G46
/G49/G14/G20 /G14 /G11 /G15 /G16 /G17/G03 /G2B /G5D/G24 /G4F /G48 /G5B
/G14 /G14/G15/G13 /G10 /G14/G17/G1C/G13
/G49/G36/G20/G14 /G11 /G19/G16/G19/G03 /G2B /G5D/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G28 /G26 /G2A /G0C
/G29 /G55 /G48/G54/G58 /G48 /G51 /G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D
/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G17 /G13 /G11 /G19 /G13 /G11 /G1B /G14 /G11 /G13 /G14 /G11 /G15 /G14 /G11 /G17/G13 /G11 /G13/G13 /G11 /G15/G13 /G11 /G17/G13 /G11 /G19/G13 /G11 /G1B/G14 /G11 /G13/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G24 /G4F /G11/G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A /G11/G03 /G1C
/G29 /G55 /G48/G54/G58 /G48 /G51 /G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G44/G03
/G03 /G03 /G30 /G48 /G44 /G51
/G03 /G31 /G5C /G54/G58 /G4C /G56 /G57
/G49 /G55 /G48 /G54 /G58 /G48 /G51 /G46 /G5C/G37 /G55 /G58 /G48
/G24 /G4F /G4C /G44 /G56 /G4C /G51/G4A/G24 /G4F /G48 /G5B
/G14 /G14/G15/G13 /G10 /G14/G17/G1C/G13
/G49/G36/G20/G14 /G11 /G19/G16/G19/G03 /G2B /G5D/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G31/G38/G27 /G29 /G37 /G0C/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G17 /G13 /G11 /G19 /G13 /G11 /G1B /G14 /G11 /G13 /G14 /G11 /G15 /G14 /G11 /G17/G13 /G11 /G13/G13 /G11 /G15/G13 /G11 /G17/G13 /G11 /G19/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G24 /G4F /G11/G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A /G11/G03 /G1C/G03 /G0B /G45 /G0C
/G45/G03 /G37 /G55 /G58 /G48
/G24 /G4F /G4C /G44 /G56 /G4C /G51/G4A/G24 /G4F /G48 /G5B
/G14 /G14/G15/G13 /G10 /G14/G17/G1C/G13
/G49/G36/G20/G14 /G11 /G19/G16/G19/G03 /G2B /G5D/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G2F /G52 /G50 /G45 /G0C
/G29 /G55 /G48/G54/G58 /G48 /G51 /G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G13 /G11 /G16/G13 /G13 /G11 /G16/G18 /G13 /G11 /G17/G13 /G13 /G11 /G17/G18/G13/G14/G13/G15/G13/G16/G13/G17/G13/G18/G13/G19/G13/G1A/G13/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48/G55 /G56 /G57/G48 /G51/G03 /G48/G57/G03 /G24 /G4F /G11/G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G58/G55 /G48/G03 /G14/G13/G14 /G13 /G13/G03 /G45 /G4C /G51/G03 /G47 /G4C /G56 /G57/G55 /G4C /G45 /G58 /G57 /G4C /G52 /G51
/G36/G44 /G50 /G53 /G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G55 /G44 /G57 /G48/G03 /G10 /G14 /G11 /G15 /G16 /G17/G03 /G2B /G5D/G03 /G0B/G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D /G0C
/G13 /G15 /G17 /G19 /G1B /G14 /G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G11 /G13/G13 /G11 /G15/G13 /G11 /G17/G13 /G11 /G19/G13 /G11 /G1B/G14 /G11 /G13/G14 /G11 /G15/G14 /G11 /G17
/G57 /G4B /G4C /G55 /G47/G03
/G4B /G44 /G55 /G50 /G52 /G51 /G4C /G46
/G56 /G48 /G46 /G52 /G51/G47
/G4B /G44 /G55 /G50 /G52 /G51 /G4C /G46/G14 /G11 /G17/G13/G17/G03 /G2B /G5D/G03 /G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F/G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G58 /G55 /G48/G03 /G14/G14
/G24 /G4F /G48 /G5B /G10 /G14
/G1A /G18/G13 /G10 /G1C/G1B/G13/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G28 /G26 /G2A /G0C
/G29 /G55 /G48/G54/G58 /G48 /G51 /G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G17 /G13 /G11 /G19 /G13 /G11 /G1B /G14 /G11 /G13 /G14 /G11 /G15 /G14 /G11 /G17 /G14 /G11 /G19/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13/G13 /G11 /G13 /G18/G13 /G11 /G14 /G13/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G24 /G4F /G11/G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A /G11/G03 /G14 /G15/G03 /G0B /G44 /G0C
/G44/G03 /G37 /G55 /G58 /G48
/G24 /G4F /G4C /G44 /G56 /G4C /G51/G4A/G14 /G11 /G17 /G13 /G17/G03 /G2B /G5D
/G29 /G55 /G48/G54/G58 /G48 /G51 /G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G24 /G4F /G48 /G5B /G10 /G14
/G1A /G18/G13 /G10 /G1C/G1B/G13/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G31/G38/G27 /G29 /G37 /G0C
/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13 /G11 /G15 /G13 /G11 /G17 /G13 /G11 /G19 /G13 /G11 /G1B /G14 /G11 /G13 /G14 /G11 /G15 /G14 /G11 /G17 /G14 /G11 /G19/G13 /G11 /G13 /G13/G13 /G11 /G13 /G18/G13 /G11 /G14 /G13/G13 /G11 /G14 /G18
/G45/G03 /G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G03 /G48 /G57/G03 /G44 /G4F/G11 /G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C /G4A/G03 /G14/G15 /G03 /G0B /G45 /G0C/G03 /G03 /G03 /G03 /G03 /G03
/G24 /G4F /G48 /G5B /G10 /G14
/G1A /G18/G13 /G10 /G1C/G1B/G13
/G24 /G4F /G4C /G44 /G56 /G4C /G51/G4A/G37 /G55 /G58 /G48
/G14 /G11 /G17/G03 /G2B /G5D/G33 /G52 /G5A /G48 /G55/G03 /G0B /G2F /G52 /G50 /G45/G03 /G50 /G48 /G57 /G4B /G52 /G47 /G0C
/G29 /G55 /G48/G54/G58 /G48 /G51 /G46/G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D |
physics/9911018 11 Nov 1999/G33/G58/G45/G4F/G4C/G56/G4B/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03 /G24/G51/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G0B/G31/G3C/G0C/G0F /G03/G15/G19/G15/G0F/G03 /G17/G1A/G10/G1A/G15/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1C/G1B/G0C
/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03/G35/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C
/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G29/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G2C/G11
/G27/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G29/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56
/G24/G4F/G48/G5B/G44/G51/G47/G48/G55/G03/G2A/G48/G55/G56/G57/G48/G51
/G27/G48/G53/G44/G55/G57/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G0F
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G25/G4C/G52/G50/G48/G47/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G28/G51/G4A/G4C/G51/G48/G48/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G3D/G4F/G52/G57/G52/G5A/G56/G4E/G4C/G03/G26/G48/G51/G57/G48/G55/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G31/G48/G58/G55/G52/G56/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G46/G48
/G25/G48/G51/G10/G2A/G58/G55/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G31/G48/G4A/G48/G59
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G25/G48/G48/G55/G10/G36/G4B/G48/G59/G44/G03/G1B/G17/G14/G13/G18/G0F/G03/G2C/G56/G55/G44/G48/G4F
/G48/G10 /G50/G44/G4C/G4F/G1D/G03/G4A/G48/G55/G56/G57/G48/G51/G23/G45/G4A/G58/G50/G44/G4C/G4F/G11/G45/G4A/G58/G11/G44/G46/G11/G4C/G4F
/G35/G48/G59/G4C/G56/G48/G47/G03/G39/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G2D/G58/G4F/G5C/G03/G14/G17/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G1A
/G24/G45/G56/G57/G55/G44/G46/G57
/G3A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G50/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G49/G49/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G44/G47/G4D/G58/G56/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G48/G47
/G57/G52/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G50/G53/G4B/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F
/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G44/G55/G57/G4C/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G55/G52/G4F/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G56/G56/G48/G47/G11/G03/G24/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46
/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G53/G44/G51/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4F/G44/G45/G48/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G56/G11/G03/G24/G51
/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G03/G52/G49/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4F/G44/G45/G48/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G44/G55/G48
/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G58/G4C/G56/G4B/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55/G03 α /G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G0F/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50
/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G0F/G03/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G0B/G52/G45/G56/G48/G55/G59/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G56/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G48/G5B/G53/G48/G46/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48
/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G11/G03/G31/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G48/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G51/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G44/G55/G48
/G4F/G48/G56/G56/G03/G56/G57/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G44/G55/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G56/G11/G03/G24/G03/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48
/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G4C/G44/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G4B/G48/G51/G52/G50/G48/G51/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G48/G55/G50/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G4F/G4C/G44/G56/G4C/G51/G4A
/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G35/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G46/G48/G55/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48
/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G48/G47 /G11/G15
/G14/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G47/G03/G4F/G44/G55/G4A/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G52/G51/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F
/G52/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G56/G57/G48/G50/G56/G11/G03/G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G50/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F
/G53/G55/G52/G45/G4F/G48/G50/G56/G03/G3E/G14/G40/G0F/G03/G3E/G15/G40/G11/G03/G30/G52/G55/G48/G52/G59/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G48/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G3E/G14/G40/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G4B/G4C/G56
/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G45/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G4A/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G44/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G4C/G47/G03/G50/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G3E/G16/G10/G18/G40/G11/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56
/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G4D/G58/G56/G57/G03/G44/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G4B/G44/G56
/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G4C/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G48/G44/G57/G58/G55/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G57/G48/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G55/G52/G45/G4F/G48/G50/G56
/G3E/G19/G40/G03/G11/G03/G37/G52/G47/G44/G5C/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G4F/G50/G52/G56/G57/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G51/G4E/G03/G44/G45/G52/G58/G57/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G47/G48/G59/G48/G4F/G52/G53/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50
/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G52/G58/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G53/G44/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G48/G48/G53/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G47/G03/G52/G51/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56
/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G36/G58/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G0F/G03/G29/G48/G5C/G51/G50/G44/G51/GB6/G56/G03/G53/G44/G57/G4B/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G52/G49/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G03/G3E/G1A/G40/G03/G11/G03/G29/G52/G55/G03/G44/G03/G03/G55/G48/G46/G48/G51/G57/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G56/G48/G48/G03/G55/G48/G49/G11/G03/G3E/G1B/G40/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G52/G4A/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49
/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G45/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G03/G3E/G1C/G40/G0F/G3E/G14/G13/G40/G11/G03/G2B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48
/G46/G52/G51/G46/G48/G51/G57/G55/G44/G57/G48/G03/G50/G44/G4C/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56
/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G28/G4F/G56/G48/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G48/G48/G47/G45/G44/G46/G4E/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G50/G44/G5C
/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G52/G51/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G24/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G03/G54/G58/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G44/G03/G4F/G44/G55/G4A/G48
/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G48/G4F/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03/G2C/G0F
/G47/G48/G44/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03/G2C/G2C/G0F/G03/G47/G48/G44/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G47/G58/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G0B/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G0C/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G3E/G14/G14/G40/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G52/G51/G48/G10/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G56/G53/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52
/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G48/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G50/G58/G46/G4B/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G03/G44
/G46/G52/G51/G59/G48/G51/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G03/G57/G52/G52/G4F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G48/G55/G50/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G51/G59/G48/G51/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11
/G32/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G4B/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G48/G47/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G52/G49/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G47/G11/G03/G38/G56/G58/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G57/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G5C/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55
/G57/G52/G03/G56/G48/G46/G58/G55/G48/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G0F/G03/G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G47/G11
/G29/G52/G55/G03/G56/G46/G44/G57/G57/G48/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G58/G51/G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G57/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G52
/G58/G56/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G48/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G52/G51/G03/G55/G4C/G4A/G4A/G48/G47/G03/G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48
/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G4C/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G47/G48/G59/G48/G4F/G52/G53/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03/G3E/G14/G15/G40/G0F/G03/G3E/G14/G16/G40/G0F/G03/G3E/G14/G17/G40/G03/G0F/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G44/G45/G52/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G30/G44/G58/G55/G4C/G51/G03/G3E/G14/G18/G40/G0F
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G47/G44/G53/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G35/G52/G45/G48/G55/G57/G56/G03/G3E/G14/G19/G40/G0F/G03/G25/G52/G4B/G50/G03/G3E/G14/G1A/G40/G0F/G03/G24/G51/G57/G52/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G3E/G14/G1B/G40/G03/G44/G51/G47
/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G56/G03/G3E/G14/G1C/G40/G11/G16
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G4F/G44/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G47/G03/G45/G48/G4F/G52/G5A/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G55/G57/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G15/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G0F/G03/G57/G55/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G48/G56/G56/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G4A
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G55/G44/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G52/G5A/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G52/G4F/G58/G50/G51/G56/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G52/G49/G03/G46/G52/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44
/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G16/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/GB3/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/GB4/G03/G52/G49/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55
/G52/G49/G03/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G47/G44/G57/G44/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G4F/G44/G45/G48/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55
/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G52/G4A/G5C/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G58/G4F/G4F/G5C
/G48/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G48/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G47/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G52/G56/G48/G47/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G17/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G03/G51/G52/G51/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F
/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03/G2C/G2C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G56/G03/G52/G49
/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G47/G48/G53/G4C/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48
/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G0F/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11/G03/G2B/G48/G55/G48/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G18/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G44/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F
/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51
/G44/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46
/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G19/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G55/G48
/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G4C/G44/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G4B/G48/G51/G52/G50/G48/G51/G52/G51/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G1A/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F
/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G4C/G55/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G52
/G47/G52/G58/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G1B/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G46/G48/G55/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G4F/G48
/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G1C/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G14/G13/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G58/G50/G50/G44/G55/G4C/G5D/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G56/G11
/G15/G11/G03/G24/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G55/G44/G10/G4E/G48/G57/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G3E/G14/G40/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G03/G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G56/G57/G48/G50/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G52/G45/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G0C/G03/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G03/G44/G45/G56/G57/G55/G44/G46/G57/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G53 /G5312,..., /G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48
/G4C/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G4C/G49/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G11/G03/G38/G56/G58/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G56/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C
/G44/G49/G57/G48/G55/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G4C/G49/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G51/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G11/G03/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G03/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G56/G48/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G44/G03/G4F/G4C/G51/G48/G44/G55/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G5B/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G11
/G2C/G51/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G53/G48/G55/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G51/G48/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G44/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G11/G17
/G37/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G46/G4B/G4C/G48/G59/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G45/G55/G44/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G11/G03/G27/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57
/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G53 /G5312,..., /G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G55/G44/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G03 /G53 /G5312,,... /G03/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G03/G45/G48/G4F/G52/G5A/G11
/G2C/G51/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G03/G52/G55/G03/G45/G55/G44/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G44/G45/G56/G57/G55/G44/G46/G57/G03/G0B/G56/G48/G53/G44/G55/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G0C/G03/G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57
/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G48/G44/G4F/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48
/G3E/G15/G40/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G58/G51/G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G4C/G4A/G4A/G48/G47/G03/G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56/G03/G3E/G14/G15/G10/G14/G1C/G40/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G45/G48/G57/G57/G48/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G56/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G11/G03/G29/G52/G55
/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48
( ) /G44/G44
/G44
/G44/G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44
nn =
= =∗ ∗ ∗1
2
1 2/G17/G16 ,†/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G44†/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G57/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G0B/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G5B/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G53/G52/G56/G48/G0C
/G52/G49 /G44 /G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G56/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
( ) /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44/G44
/G44
/G44/G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44n
nnn =
=+++∗∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
121
2
1122 /G16/G17/G16 /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C
/G24/G51/G03/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G59/G44/G4F/G48/G51/G57/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G4C/G55/G4C/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G1D
/G4C /G44 /G44 /G4C /G51 /G44 /G4C /G44 /G4C /G4D/G49 /G52 /G55 /G4C /G4D
/G49 /G52 /G55 /G4C /G4D
/G44 /G44 /G44 /G4C /G4C /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44i i ij
inn== = ==≠
=
= =+++∗
∗ ∗ ∗∑,,,; ; 120
1
1122/G16
/G16δ
/G03/G03/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G0C
/G2B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G4C /G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G56/G48/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G56/G53/G44/G51/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G44/G51/G03/G51
/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G44 /G1D
/G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G51n =+++1 212 /G16 /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G17/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G03 /G4C /G44 /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03 /G44 /G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G55/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G4C /G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G0F/G03/G45/G48/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G0F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/GB3/G47/G5C/G44/G47/G4C/G46/GB4
/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G1D/G18
( ) /G44 /G45/G44
/G44
/G44/G45 /G45 /G45/G44 /G45 /G44 /G45 /G44 /G45
/G44 /G45 /G44 /G45 /G44 /G45
/G44 /G45 /G44 /G45 /G44 /G45 nnn
n
n n nn=
=
∗∗ ∗∗ ∗ ∗
∗ ∗ ∗
∗ ∗ ∗1
2
121112 1
2122 2
1 2/G17/G16/G16
/G16
/G17 /G17 /G19
/G16/G03/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G18/G0C
/G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G18/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G0C/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G0F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G1D
( ) /G2C /G4E /G4E /G51 /G51 /G58/G51 /G4C /G57 /G50 /G44 /G57 /G55/G4C /G5B
/G4E/G51
≡ =
×
=∑
/G14/G14
/G14
/G14/G19/G0F /G11 /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G19/G0C
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C
/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G2C/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G55/G48/G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
( ) /G44 /G44 /G44 /G2C /G44 /G44 /G4E /G4E /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44
/G4E/G51 /G51 = = =+++ ∑∗ ∗ ∗
/G14 /G14 /G15 /G15 /G16 /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1A/G0C
/G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G48/G51/G56/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G44/G51/G5C/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4C/G51
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G54/G58/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G4E /G1D
/G44 /G2C /G44 /G4E /G4E /G44 /G4E /G44 /G4E /G44 /G4E
kn
kn
k
in
==
= ≡
= = =∑ ∑ ∑
1 1 1/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1B/G0C
/G2C/G57/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G47/G59/G44/G51/G57/G44/G4A/G48/G52/G58/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G44/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G0C/G1D
/G29 /G4E /G49 /G4E
/G4E/G51
/G4E =
=∑
/G14/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1C/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/GB3/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/GB4/G11/G03/G2C/G57/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G55/G48/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49 /G4C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G5C/G03/G56/G58/G46/G4B/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G4C/G51
/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G53/G58/G57/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11/G03/G24
/G53/G44/G55/G57/G4C/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G03/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G33/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
/G33/G03/G20/G03/G33/G82/G20/G33/G15/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G55/G44/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G57/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G03/G4C/G51
/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G0C/G11/G03/G2C/G49/G03/G24/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55
/G5A/G4B/G52/G56/G48/G03/G44/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G45/G5C
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G24 /G44 /G45= /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G57/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G1D/G19
/G45 /G44 /G24†= /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G32/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
/G45 /G24 /G44 /G44 /G24 /G45=†/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G29/G58/G55/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G44/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55
/G33/G03/G20/G03/G33/G82/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G47/G03/G48/G44/G56/G4C/G4F/G5C/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G5A/G48
/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
/G03/G33/G82/G03/G20/G03/G0B/G33/G82/G0C/G15/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G26/G52/G50/G45/G4C/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G18/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
/G33/G15/G33/G82/G20/G33/G0B/G33/G82/G0C/G15/G0F
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G47/G58/G46/G48/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G11/G03/G24/G51/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G55/G57/G44/G51/G57/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G4C/G56
/G33 /G4E /G53 /G4E
/G4E/G51
/G4E =
=∑
/G14/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G48/G49/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G53 /G4E /G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G48/G4C/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G14/G03/G52/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G13/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G56/G11
/G28/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G14/G11/G03 /G26/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G57/G4B/G55/G48/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G26/G16/G03/G0B/G52/G49
/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G5B/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G56/G0C/G1D
/G14/G14
/G13
/G13/G15/G13
/G14
/G13/G16/G13
/G13
/G14
/G14/G14
/G15/G14
/G13 /G15/G13
/G14
/G13/G16/G14
/G15/G14
/G13=
=
=
′=
′=
′=
−
/G0F /G0F /G0F /G1D
/G0F /G0F /G0F/G44/G51/G47
/G4C /G4C/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G0C/G1D
/G2C /G4E /G4E /G4E /G4E
/G4E /G4E= =′′=
= =∑∑
/G14/G16
/G14/G16/G14 /G13 /G13
/G13 /G14 /G13
/G13 /G13 /G14/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1B/G0C
/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G56/G57/G48/G50/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44
/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G26 /G29/G15/G03/G56/G53/G44/G51/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 ′ /G14 /G03/G44/G51/G47/G03′ /G15 /G11/G03/G37/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48
/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4B/G48/G4F/G53/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G44/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G0C/G1D/G1A
/G29 /G29 =′′+′′= /G14 /G14 /G15 /G15/G82/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1C/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G29/G82/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G52/G55/G03/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G57/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G0C/G11
/G03/G24/G51/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G55/G48/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G44
/G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 =++=′+′+′′ ′ ′ /G14 /G15 /G16 /G14 /G15 /G16 /G14 /G15 /G16 /G14 /G15 /G16 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G13/G0C
/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G47/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G26 /G29/G15/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G48/G54/G11/G03/G15/G11/G14/G1C/G0C/G1D
/G29 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G44 /G29 /G44 /G29 /G44 /G29
/G44 /G44 /G44/G4C=′+′=++
= ′+′+−′′ ′ /G14 /G15 /G14 /G15 /G16
/G14/G14
/G15 /G15 /G16 /G15/G14 /G15 /G14 /G15 /G16
/G14 /G15 /G14 /G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G14/G0C
/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G58/G56/G48/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1B/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G44/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G48/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G2C /G29
/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G26 /G29/G15/G03/G1D
/G2C /G29 /G2C/G29=′′+′′= /G14 /G14 /G15 /G15 /G03/G29/G82/G20 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G14 /G14 /G15 /G15 /G16 /G16 /G03/G03 /G29 /G0E /G29 /G0E /G29† † †/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G15/G0C
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G29 /G4E /G0F/G03/G0B/G4E/G20/G14/G0F/G15/G0F/G16/G0C/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G51/G52/G51/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G26 /G29/G15/G03/G11
/G24/G51/G5C/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G26 /G29/G15
/G0F/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G54/G58/G48/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G1D
/G45 /G45 /G45 /G45 /G29 /G45 /G29 /G45 /G29 =′+′=++′ ′ /G14 /G15 /G14 /G15 /G16 /G14 /G15 /G14 /G15 /G16 /G0F /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G16/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G15/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
/G45 /G2C /G45 /G29 /G29 /G29F== + + 112 23 3 Fb Fb Fb† † †/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G17/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G52/G48/G49/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G56
/G45 /G4E /G29 /G45k=†/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G18/G0C
/G26/G52/G50/G53/G44/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G16/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G14/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G56/G48/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G03/G44/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G26/G16/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G56/G44/G50/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G52/G48/G49/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G26 /G29/G15/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G0B/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G51/G52/G51/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G0C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51
/G45/G5C/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G17/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G11/G03/G36/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G51/G52/G51/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G47/G48/G5B/G0F/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G45/G48/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G55/G48/G49/G48/G55/G55/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G55/G48/G49/G11/G03/G3E/G15/G13/G40/G03/G44/G56/G03/GB3/G46/G52/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/GB4/G11
/G2B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G58/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G48/G55/G50/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G44/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G52/G5A/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G59/G4C/G52/G58/G56/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A
/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G1D
/G28/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G15/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G33/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G11
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G03 /G4E /G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G51/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G26/G51/G0F/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56
/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G03/G2C /G4E /G4En
kn
=
=∑
1/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G2C /G51 /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G26/G51/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G26/G50/G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G51/G03/G50/G1B
/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G26/G51/G03/G0B/G50/G1F/G51/G0C/G03/G56/G53/G44/G51/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 ′k /G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G56/G53/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55
/G2C /G4E /G4Em
km
=′′
′=∑
1/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G19/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G33/G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G26/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49
/G26/G50/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G44/G51/G5C/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G03 /G45m /G52/G49/G03/G03/G26/G50/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G26/G51/G03/G44/G46/G46/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52
/G45 /G45 /G4En
kn
k=
=∑
1/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G1A/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48
/G45 /G4E /G33 /G45k m =†= ′′ =
′=∑
km
m kPkkbk n
112†,,,... /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G1B/G0C
/G44/G51/G47
/G2C /G33 /G4E /G4E /G33m
kn
=
=∑
1†/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G1C/G0C
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G52/G48/G49/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G45 /G4E /G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G46/G44/G4F/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G26/G50/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G33 /G4E /G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G48/G46/G52/G51/G47/G03/G53/G44/G55/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G1B/G0C/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G19/G0C/G11
/G16/G11/G03/G32/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48
/G2C/G51/G03/G53/G55/G44/G46/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G52/G4A/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G58/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G45/G48/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G58/G56/G58/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G47/G0F/G03/G48/G59/G48/G55/G5C/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G03 Δ /G57/G0F
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G55/G44/G57/G48/G1D
/G49 /G36 /G20 /G03/G14/G12/G03Δ /G57/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G56/G03/G2E/G03/G47/G44/G57/G44/G03/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G56/G03/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G56/G1D
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G57 /G4E /G20/G4E/G03Δ /G57/G0F/G03/G03/G4E/G20/G14/G0F/G15/G0F/GAB/G0F/G03/G2E/G03/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G0C
/G29/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G44/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G3E/G14/G40/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G58/G0B/G57 /G4E /G0C
/G0B/G4E/G20/G14/G0F/G15/G0F/G11/G11/G11/G2E/G0C/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2E/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G1D
/G58/G58 /G57
/G58 /G57
/G58 /G57K=
ν()
()
()1
2
/G17/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G0C/G1C
/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G03/G24/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03 ν /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G44/G51/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48
/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G48/G47/G03/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G55/G03/G52/G51/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G53/G44/G51/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G52/G51/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G1D
/G57 /G57 /G57K 1 21
0
00
1
00
0
1=
=
=
/G17 /G17/G16/G17, , . /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C
/G56/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57
/G57 /G58 /G58 /G57k k=ν() /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G0C
/G2C/G49/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G57/G52/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G5C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G51
ν=∗
=∑1
1ututkk
kK
()() /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G44/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G44/G51/G46/G48/G03/G44/G56/G03/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50
/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G56/G53/G48/G44/G4E/G03/G44/G45/G52/G58/G57/G03/G53/G55/G52/G45/G44/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G56/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G44/G55
/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G1D
[][] /G58 /G58 /G58 /G57 /G58 /G57
kK
k k = =
=∗∗∑ν ν()()1 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G45/G0C
/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G48/G44/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G50/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G53/G55/G52/G45/G44/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G50/G58/G56/G57/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C
/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G57/G48/G51/G03/G44/G56/G1D
/G2C /G57 /G57
kK
kk =
=∑
1/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G53/G48/G55/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G44/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48
ωk /G0F/G03/G03/G4E/G20/G14/G0F/G03/G15/G0F/GAB/G0F/G2E/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1A/G0C
/G4F/G4C/G51/G4E/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1A/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G51/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G59/G4C/G44/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G1D
/G57 /G4C /G57nk kn ωηω=exp() /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03 ω /G4E/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G46/G46/G52/G55/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G0B/G27/G29/G37/G0C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G51/G48/G51/G57/G56/G1D/G14/G13
ωω ω ηω
ω
ωk k nk
nK
nk
k
kKI ttit
it
it== =
=∑
11
2exp()
exp()
exp()/G17/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1C/G0C
/G3A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G1D
ωωδnm nm= /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G1D
ωω ω ωηωω
nm nk
kK
kmi kt
kK
tt emn= =
=−
=∑ ∑
12
1( )Δ/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G50/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G50/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G52/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G48/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G1D
/G14/G14
/G142 1++++=−
−−xxxx
xKK
... /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G15/G11/G44/G0C
/G5B /G5B /G5B /G5B /G5B/G5B
/G5BKK
αα α α α++++=−
−+ + +− 1 2 1 1
1... /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G15/G45/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G15/G11/G45/G0C/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G50/G58/G4F/G57/G4C/G53/G4F/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G15/G45/G0C/G03/G45/G5C/G03 /G5Bα/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
ωωηωωωω
ωω nmi ti Kt
i tee
emnmn
mn=−
−−−
−2 1
1( )( )
( )ΔΔ
Δ/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G1D
()ωωπ
π π
ηnm
Snm)
Ktnm)
KtfK
K−=−=−
= =
=−2
2 2
11(( ,
/,
.ΔΔω
Δω Δ /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G51/G10/G50/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G45/G58/G57/G03/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G03/G56/G48/G53/G44/G55/G44/G57/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G47/G52/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48
/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G48/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G44/G47/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G44/G51/G57/G0F/G03/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G47/G03/G45/G48/G4F/G52/G5A/G03/G44/G56/G03 α /G0F
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G46/G48/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G51/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G50/G44/G5C
/G46/G4B/G52/G52/G56/G48/G1D
ωααn n n K,( ),,,..., =+− = 1 12 Δω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G18/G44/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03α /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G44/G51/G57/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D/G14/G14
/G2C
kK
k k =
=∑
1ωωα α , , /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G18/G45/G0C
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G03/G52/G49/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G46/G4B/G44/G55/G44/G46/G57/G48/G55/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G44/G51/G57/G03α /G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G59/G48/G55/G03/G44/G51/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G4B/G52/G4C/G46/G48/G03 α /G20/G13/G03/G4C/G56
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G56/G57/G48/G51/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G51/G47/G44/G55/G47/G03/G27/G29/G37/G03/G0B/G48/G5B/G46/G48/G53/G57/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03 η /G20/G14/G12/G2E/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G27/G29/G37/G0C/G03/G49/G52/G55
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G1D
ωω
ω
ωωkk
k
kKkKit
it
itk k K =
=− = −11 01211
2exp()
exp()
exp(), (),,,,..../G17Δω /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
/G2C
kK
kk =
=∑
1ωω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G1D
/G38 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G58
/G2E/G58 /G57 /G4C /G57k k
nK
knn
nK
n kn () ()exp() ωω ω ν ω ≡ = = −
= =∑ ∑
1 11/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G0C
/G29/G52/G55/G03α /G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G03/G4C/G51/G56/G57/G48/G44/G47/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G1D
( )
( )
( )ωωαΔω
ωαΔω
ωαΔωαkk
k
k KKi t
i t
i t,exp( )
exp( )
exp( ), =+
+
+
11
2
/G17/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G44/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G1D
/G38 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G58
/G2E/G58 /G57 /G4C /G57k k
nK
knn
nK
n kn () ()exp( ),, , , , ωω ωνωα α α α ≡ = = −
= =∑ ∑
1 1/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G44/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G47/G48/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G58 /G57/G57 /G58/G57 /G58
/G2E/G38 /G4C /G57kk
nK
kn n
nK
n nk () ()exp(),, , , ≡ = =
= =∑ ∑ννωω
νω ωα α α1 1
1 1/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1C/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G10/G1C/G0C/G0F/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G18/G45/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1A/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G11
/G2C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G48/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G46/G4B/G52/G52/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03 α /G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G55/G48/G44/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G4F/G4F
/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G10 ∞≤ω≤∞ /G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G14/G15
/G44/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G53/G52/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G57/G55/G44/G53/G52/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G46/G4B/G52/G56/G48/G51
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03 α /G03/G0B/G4F/G4C/G4E/G48/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G0C/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G55/G48/G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G44/G0C/G03/G4C/G51
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
/G38 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G58
/G2E/G58 /G57 /G4C /G57
nK
nn
nK
n n () ()exp() ωω ωνω ≅= = −
= =∑ ∑
1 1/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G13/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G0F/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G5C/G1D
/G38 /G38∗=−()() ω ω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G14/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G1D
/G33 /G38 /G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C ωω=2/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G15/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G0F/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G1D
()
()()()()()()/G33 /G58 /G58 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G58
/G2E/G58 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G48
/G2E/G58 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G57nK
nn
kK
kk
kK
nK
nkitt
kK
nK
nk nknkωωω ωω
ν ν ω= =
= = −= =
==−
==∑ ∑
∑∑ ∑∑1 1
2
112
11cos./G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G16/G0C
/G24/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G51/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G15/G0C/G03/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G16/G0C/G0F/G03/G4C/G56
/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G49/G4C/G4A/G11/G03/G14/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G1D
()()() /G58 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57k k k k ()cos ..cos ..cos . = ++⋅ ++⋅ + 23062514281 2 3 π π π /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G17/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G1D/G03/G49 /G14 /G20/G18/G03/G2B/G5D/G0F/G03/G49 /G15 /G20/G18/G11/G17/G03/G2B/G5D/G0F/G03/G49 /G16 /G20/G17/G17/G03/G2B/G5D/G0F/G03/G4E/G20/G14/G0F/G15/G0F/GAB/G18/G13/G0F/G03/G49 /G36 /G20/G16/G13/G03/G2B/G5D/G20/G14/G12/G0B Δ /G57/G0C/G0F/G03/G57 /G4E /G20/G4EΔ /G03/G11 /G03
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G53/G53/G48/G44/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G44/G4F/G4C/G44/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G4F/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G1A/G11/G03/G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G44/G0C/G0F
/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G45/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G18/G45/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G44/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G33/G44/G55/G56/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
[][] /G58 /G58 /G58 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G58 /G58
/G38 /G38kK
k k
kK
k k
kK
k k= =
= ==∗∗
=
=∗∑ ∑
∑1 1
11ν ν ωω
ωωα α
α α()() ()()
()(),, ,
, ,/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G18/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G57/G52/G57/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G52/G51/G48/G11/G03/G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G44/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G18/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48
/G38k(),ωα /G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G48/G44/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G51/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G03/G53/G55/G52/G45/G44/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G11/G03/G3A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56
/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G2E/G03/G0B/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G03/G52/G49/G03/G47/G44/G57/G44/G03/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G56/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55
/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G48/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G50/G48/G44/G56/G58/G55/G48/G47/G03/G0B/G58/G51/G4F/G4C/G4E/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G51/G47/G44/G55/G47/G03/G27/G29/G37/G0C/G11/G03/G2F/G4C/G4E/G48/G5A/G4C/G56/G48/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A
/G53/G55/G52/G45/G44/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G56/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G53/G55/G52/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G4F/G5C/G03/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G52/G58/G56
/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G11/G03/G29/G52/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G14/G16
/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56 /G58 /G58 /G58 /G58 /G04/ωα /G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G04ωα /G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F
/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G17/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G57/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G5A/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G47/G58/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G44/G46/G57
/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G50/G44/G51/G5C/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G18/G45/G0C/G03/G46/G4B/G44/G55/G44/G46/G57/G48/G55/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55/G03 α /G03/G59/G4C/G44/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G18/G44/G0C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G1D
/G04/G04
ωω
αα=uu
uu/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G19/G0C
/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G48/G1D
ωωωα α 1, , ≤≤K /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G1A/G0C
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G14/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G52/G49/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G59/G4C/G48/G5A/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G4F/G52/G56/G48/G56/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55
/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G0F/G03/G56/G48/G48/G50/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G1D
() α=−−≡K s12/ /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G1B/G0C
ωnnK n K,s(//),,,..., =−− = 212 12 Δω /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G1C/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G5C/G03/G44/G56/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G51/G44/G50/G48/G4F/G5C/G1D
/G38 /G38 /G38 /G4E /G2Ek k Kk∗
−+ =−= = ()()(),,,...,,s ,s ,s ω ω ω112 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G13/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G4B/G44/G4F/G49/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G56/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G58/G57/G48/G47/G11
/G17/G11/G03/G32/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G52/G58/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G2C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G44/G56/G03/G52/G45/G56/G48/G55/G59/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G44/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G03/G44
/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G0F/G03/G56/G44/G5C/G03 /G04A /G0F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G50/G48/G44/G56/G58/G55/G48/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G48/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48
/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G03/G44/G46/G46/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G1D
/G04/G04
AuAu
uu= /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G49/G48/G5A/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G55/G57/G44/G51/G57/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G56/G1D
/G28/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G14 /G1D/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G04t /G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G1D
/G04tttt
kK
kkk =
=∑
1/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G0C
/G2C/G57/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G45/G59/G4C/G52/G58/G56/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G1D/G14/G17
/G04t tttkkk= /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G16/G0C
/G03/G03/G03/G03 ()/G04t tttn
kK
kn
kk =
=∑
1/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G17/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G1D
()/G04 /G04/ / tutuuututtuuutut
kK
kkk
kK
k k = = =
= =∑ ∑
1 122ν /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G18/G0C
/G28/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G15 /G1D/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G1D
/G04,, , ω ωωωα αα α =
=∑
kK
kk k
1/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G19/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03α /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55/G03/G4F/G44/G45/G48/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G44/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11
/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G18/G44/G0C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G45/G59/G4C/G52/G58/G56/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G1D
/G04, ,, ωωωωαα αα k kk= /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G1A/G0C
()() /G04 ., , , ω ωωωα α α αn
kK
kn
k k =
=∑
1/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G1B/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G57/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G47/G58/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G44/G46/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G50/G44/G51/G5C
/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G18/G45/G0C/G03/G46/G4B/G44/G55/G44/G46/G57/G48/G55/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55/G03 α /G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03 ω /G10/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G10/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G44/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
()/G04
.,, , ,, ,
,,ω ωωω ωω ω
ωα αα α αα α
αωα= =
== −==
−==−∑ ∑∑∑
∑∑∑kK
kk k
mK
nK
kK
kknmknm
mK
nK
kK
kiktmtn
nmtt tt
Ke tt1 111
1111/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G1C/G0C
/G2C/G57/G56/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G1D
/G04/G04
()(),,,,
,, ,ωω ωωω
ωωωαα ααα
αα α= =
==
=∗∑
∑uu
uuu u
uu
U U
uukKkkk
kK
kk k1
1/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G48/G1D
ωωωα α 1, , ≤≤K /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G28/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G16 /G1D/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G1D/G14/G18
/G04() uuttt
nK
nnn =
=∑
1/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/GB3/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/GB4/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G1D
/G04() ututtm mm = /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G04 /G04uu/G82()() () = =
==∗
=∑∑ ∑
nK
kK
n knnkk
nK
nnn ututtttt uttt
11 12/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G57/G55 /G58 /G58 /G0B /G04 /G04/G82/G0C/G20()
/G51/G2E
/G51ut
=∑
12/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G1D
ω ω
ω ωω/G04 () ()
().u ttutKeut
Ku
KUnK
nn n
nK
it
nn0 01
1 11 1= =
= == =−∑ ∑
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03 ω /G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55
/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G52/G55/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G11
/G28/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G17 /G1D/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/GB3/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/GB4/G1D
()/G04
, , , U U
nK
n n n α α α α ωωω =
=∑
1/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G56/G1D
()/G04
, , , U Un n n αα α α ω ωω = /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G1B/G0C
/G04 /G04UUα/G82
α() =
=∑
nK
n n n U
12ωωωα α α , , , /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G1C/G0C
/G57/G55 /G0B /G04 /G04UUα/G82
α /G0C () () = =
== =∑∑ ∑
kK
nK
n kn nk
nK
n U t tKU
112
12 1ω ωω ωα α α α , , , , /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G13/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G1D
() () /G57 /G38 /G57 /G38
/G2E/G57 /G58
/G2E/G58 /G57m
nK
mn n n m m/G04
, , , α α α α ωω ω 0 01 1
1= = =
=∑ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G11
/G28/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G18 /G1D/G03/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G50/G45/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G16/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G17/G1D/G14/G19
/G03 /G04 /G04UUα/G82
α/G04 /G04uu/G82/G20()()
/G4E/G2E
/G51/G2E
/G51 /G4E /G51 /G51 /G4E /G4E U ut tt
==∑∑
112 2ω ωωα α α , , , /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G15/G0C
ωαm,/G04 /G04UUα/G82
α/G04 /G04uu/G82/G57n /G20()() /G38 /G58 /G57 /G57m n mn ω ωα α , ,2 2/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G16/G0C
/G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G16/G0C/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G44/G03/G47/G52/G58/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
() /G3A /G57nm,,ωα=ωαm,/G04 /G04UUα/G82
α/G04 /G04uu/G82/G57n /G57nmωα, /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G17/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G5C/G1D
()()()
/G51/G2E
/G51 /G50 /G50
/G51/G2E
/G51 WtKU ut
= =∑ ∑ =
12
12 1,, , ω ωα α /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G18/G0C
()()()
/G50/G2E
/G51 /G50 /G51
/G50/G2E
/G50 WtKutU
= =∑ ∑ =
12
12 1,, , ω ωα α /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G19/G0C
/G28/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G19 /G1D/G03/G24/G53/G53/G55/G52/G5B/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G11/G03/G24/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03/G2C/G2C/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G56/G57/G52/G55/G03/G59/G4C/G44/G1D
/G47
/G47/G57/G57 /G58 /G57 /G4C /G58= /G04ω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G19/G0C
/G3A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G58/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G5B/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G44/G57/G03/G44/G03/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G1D
/G47
/G47/G57/G57 /G58 /G57 /G4C /G58 /G57 /G4C /G58
/G4C /G57 /G58k k
nK
n n
mK
nK
n nm m m≅ =
==
==∑
∑∑/G04 /G04
., ,
, ,, , ,ω ωωω
ωωωωωα β βα
β βα α α1
11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G1A/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G56/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G03/G44/G55/G45/G4C/G57/G55/G44/G55/G4C/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G4B/G52/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03 α /G03/G44/G51/G47/G03β /G0F/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G0F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G56/G1D
()/G47
/G47/G57/G57 /G58 /G57 /G4C /G58 /G4C /G57 /G58
/G4C
/G2E/G48 /G38k k
nK
nnn
nK
nintk
n≅ =
==
=∑
∑/G04
.,,,
,,
,ω ωωω
ω ωα ααα
αωα
α1
1/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G1B/G0C
/G29/G52/G55/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G45/G48/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G58/G44/G55/G44/G51/G57/G48/G48/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03 α /G20/G56/G0F/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G1B/G0C/G11
/G18/G11/G03/G31/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56
/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G16/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G48/G47/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G48
/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G4F/G4C/G4E/G48/G03/G48/G54/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G44/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1C/G0C/G11/G03/G25/G58/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G14/G1A
/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G46/G4B/G52/G52/G56/G48/G03/G51/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G53/G55/G44/G46/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G48/G51/G46/G52/G58/G51/G57/G48/G55
/G56/G4C/G57/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G45/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G48/G4A/G4C/G51/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G0F/G03/G4F/G4C/G4E/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G51/G52/G51/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55
/G46/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G51/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G58/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48
/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G0F/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G03/G51/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51
/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G51/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48 /G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G56/G57/G44/G55/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4F/G4C/G4E/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G51/G52/G51/G10/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G3A/G1D
/G3A /G4E /G51 /G2Ekn kn= = ωω,,,,...12 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G0C
/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G2C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48
/G4F/G4C/G51/G48/G44/G55/G4F/G5C/G03/G4C/G51/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G57/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G46/G55/G4C/G57/G48/G55/G4C/G44/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G46/G4B/G48/G46/G4E/G03/G4C/G49
/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4F/G4C/G51/G48/G44/G55/G4F/G5C/G03/G4C/G51/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G57/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G50/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G51/G57/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B
/G46/G52/G4F/G58/G50/G51/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G48/G46/G52/G51/G47/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G3A
/G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2A/G55/G44/G50/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G51/G57/G0C/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56
/G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03 Ω /G03/G5A/G4B/G52/GB6/G56/G03/G46/G52/G4F/G58/G50/G51/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56
/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G1D
Ωknknt=ω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G47/G48/G5B/G03/G4E/G03/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G10/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G52/G5A/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03 Ω/G82≡Ωhc.. /G03/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G57/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G03 Ω /G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G52/GB6/G56/G03/G55/G52/G5A/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G45/G55/G44/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G1D
Ω/G4E/G51/G4B /G46
/G4E /G51t../G20ω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G16/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G47/G48/G5B/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G10/G57/G4B/G03/G46/G52/G4F/G58/G50/G51/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G57
/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G51/G57/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G1D
Ω Ω≠ ≠ ≠ 0 0 0 , ,..or orWhc/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G17/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G0C/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
/G2C /G3A
kK
nK
knkn
kK
kk
kK
kk = = =
==−
=−
=−∑∑ ∑ ∑
111
11
11ωω ωω ωω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G18/G0C/G14/G1B
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G3A/G10/G14/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G52/G49/G03/G3A/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03 ωk−1/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G46/G4C/G53/G55/G52/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G0F
/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G1D
ωωωωδkn kn kn− −= =1 1/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G19/G0C
/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G57/G48/G51/G03/G44/G56/G1D
/G50/G2E
/G4E /G50 /G50 /G51
/G50/G2E
/G4E /G50 /G50 /G51 /G4E/G51 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57
=−
=−∑ ∑= =
11
11ω ω ω ωδ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1A/G44/G0C
/G52/G55/G03/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G59/G44/G4F/G48/G51/G57/G4F/G5C/G1D
() ΩΩΩΩ−−= =11hchcI..../G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1A/G45/G0C
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G46/G4C/G53/G55/G52/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G45/G55/G44/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G52/G5A/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03 Ω /G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G4F/G58/G50/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G57/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G03 Ω /G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G58/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G10/G19/G0C/G0F
/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G10/G1C/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G10/G1A/G45/G0C/G1D
/G58 /G57 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G58k k
nK
knn ()≡=
=−∑
11ωω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1B/G0C
/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G44/G56/G03 ωnu−1/G0F/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48
/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G48/G47/G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1A/G44/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1A/G45/G0C/G1D
/G38 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G58 /G58 /G57n n
kK
nkk
kK
nkk () () ωω ω ≡ = =−
=−
=−∑ ∑1
11
11Ω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1C/G0C
/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03 Ω /G0F
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G45/G4F/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G03/G2E/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G03/G52/G49/G03/G47/G44/G57/G44/G0F/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G59/G48/G55/G5C/G03/G4F/G44/G55/G4A/G48/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G0F/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03ΩΩ−=1hc../G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G51/G52/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56
/G51/G48/G48/G47/G48/G47/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G55/G48/G44/G57/G4F/G5C/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G49/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G44/G4F/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G3A/G4B/G48/G51
/G4F/G44/G55/G4A/G48/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G52/G4F/G59/G48/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4A/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G56/G50/G44/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G56/G57/G48/G44/G47/G03/G52/G49/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G52/G51/G48
/G46/G44/G51/G03/G58/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G47/G58/G55/G48/G11/G03/G27/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G1D
ΩΩΔΩ =−/G13 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G3A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03Ω /G13 /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G57/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G1D
ΩΩ01
0−=hc../G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G14/G1C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03 Ω/G10/G14/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G47/G48/G47/G1D
()() [ ]()
( ) ()ΩΩΔΩΩΩΔΩ ΩΔΩΩ
ΩΔΩΩ ΩΔΩΩΔΩΩ
ΩΩΔΩΩΩΔΩΩΔΩΩΔΩΩ− − −−−−−
−=−=− =−
=− =+ + +
=+ + +1
01
0 011
011
01
01
0 0 02
0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0I I
I Ihc hc hc hc hc
hc hc hc hc hc hc hc.. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .....
..../G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G48/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G15/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G58/G57/G48/G47/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G58/G46/G46/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G5B/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G1D
[]()[]()[]()Ω ΩΩΔΩΩΩ Ω−+− −=+ =11
01
011
0nhcnhc hc .. .. .., /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G29/G52/G55/G03/G56/G50/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G03/G0B/G51/G20/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G48/G46/G52/G51/G47/G03/G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G5B/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G51/G20/G15/G0C/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G45/G48
/G56/G58/G49/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G57/G55/G5C/G03/G57/G52/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G56/G57/G44/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G11
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G10/G19/G0C/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56
/G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G1D
Ωnk nk kn t
Kit = =ω ω1exp() /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G17/G0C
() ω πncn Kt =⋅−⋅ =−(), , 1 21ΔωΔω Δ /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G55/G48/G46/G52/G59/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G46/G20/G14/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55
/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G44/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G46/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G4B/G48/G46/G4E/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G46/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G56
/G4C/G51/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G57/G11/G03/G29/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G53/G58/G55/G53/G52/G56/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G51/G48/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G51/G57
()Ω=11 1 1
21 22 2
1 2Kit it it
it it itKK
K K KK...
exp()exp()exp()
exp()exp()exp()ω ω ω
ω ω ω/G16
/G17 /G17 /G19 /G17
/G16/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G59/G44/G51/G4C/G56/G4B/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G48/G4C/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G46/G52/G4F/G58/G50/G51/G56/G03/G52/G55/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G55/G52/G5A/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G57/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G4B/G44/G53/G53/G48/G51
/G4C/G49/G1D
/G48/G5B /G53 /G0B /G0C /G48/G5B /G53 /G0B /G0C/G0F
/G48/G5B /G53 /G0B /G0C /G48/G5B /G53 /G0B /G0C/G0F/G4C /G46 /G57 /G4C /G46 /G57
/G4C /G57 /G4C /G57k n
m j⋅⋅⋅=⋅⋅⋅
⋅⋅=⋅⋅Δω Δω
Δ Δ ω ω/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G49/G52/G55/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G4E/G0F/G03/G51/G0F/G03/G50/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4D/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G16/G0C/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G52/G46/G46/G58/G55/G03/G4C/G49/G1D
/G46 /G57 /G4E /G51 /G30 ⋅⋅−=⋅ ΔΔω()2π /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G1B/G0C
/G49/G52/G55/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G48/G55/G56/G03/G4E/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G51/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G4F/G44/G55/G4A/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G03/G2E/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G48/G55/G03/G30/G11/G15/G13
/G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G18/G0C/G03/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G1B/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G51/G57/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G59/G44/G51/G4C/G56/G4B
/G4C/G49/G1D
/G46/G30/G2E
/G4E /G51/G4E /G2E /G51 /G2E /G4E /G51 /G30 =−≤≤−≤≤−≠= , , ;,,,,... 0 10 1 123 /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G1C/G0C
/G29/G52/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G2E/G20/G14/G13/G13/G0F/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G03/G49/G52/G55
/G46 /G48 /G57/G46 =100
99100
98100
50200
99200
98200
66300
99300
98300
75400
99,,,,,,,,,,,,'. /G15 /G15 /G15
/G29/G52/G55/G03/G2E/G20/G18/G13
/G46 /G48 /G57/G46 =50
4950
4850
25100
49100
48100
33150
49150
48150
37200
49,,,,,,,,,,,,,' /G15 /G15 /G15 /G11
/G2C/G51/G03/G49/G4C/G4A/G56/G11/G03/G15/G44/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G15/G45/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G45/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G48/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G51/G57/G03 Ω /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G53/G4F/G44/G5C/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G52/G49/G03/G03/G46/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G2E/G20/G18/G13/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G52/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11 /G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G51/G52/G51/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G0F
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G58/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G56/G03/G57 /G4E /G03/G0F/G03/G4E/G20/G13/G0F/G14/G0F/GAB/G0F/G2E/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G03/G4C/G56/G03 Δ /G57/G11
/G3A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G46/G57/G4F/G5C/G03/G44/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G0C/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1A/G0C/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G58/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51
/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G53/G52/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G57k /G03/G0F/G03/G4E/G20/G14/G0F/G15/G0F/GAB/G0F/G2E/G11/G03/G24/G56/G56/G58/G50/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C/G0F
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G44/G55/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G44/G57/G03/G1D
() [ ] /G57 /G2C /G57 /G57
/G2E/G4C /G57k k
nK
nkn
nK
nkn == = −
=−
=−
∑ ∑
01
011ωω ωω exp /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G13/G0C
/G31/G48/G5B/G57/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G58/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G47/G58/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G16/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G18/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G19/G0C/G0F
/G51/G44/G50/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48
Ωknknt=ω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G14/G0C
/G57/G52/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G46/G4C/G53/G55/G52/G46/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
/G2C /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57
kK
kk
kK
kk = =
=−
=−∑ ∑
11
11/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G15/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G1D
/G58 /G57 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G58k k
nK
knn ()≡=
=∑
1ωω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G16/G0C/G15/G14
/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G44/G56/G03 ω/G51u /G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11
/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G14/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G15/G0C/G0F/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G48/G47/G1D
/G38 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G58 /G58 /G57n n
kK
nkk
kK
nkk () () ωω ω ≡ = =
=−
=−∑ ∑
11
11Ω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G17/G0C
/G19/G11/G03/G24/G03/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50
/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G44/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G44/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G53/G55/G52/G45/G4F/G48/G50/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G45/G48/G03/G56/G53/G44/G51/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G52/G51/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55
/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56
/G13 /G13 ≤≤ << ωωk B BK , /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G25/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G47/G4C/G46/G48/G56/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G50/G50/G48/G47/G4C/G44/G57/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G4C/G56
/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G56/G53/G44/G51/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G44/G03/G25/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G57/G03/G50/G48/G44/G51/G56
/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G4F/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G0B/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G03/G2E/G0C/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F
/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G03/G3A/G4C/G57/G4B/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G46/G4B/G4C/G48/G59/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A
/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G1D
/G33
kB
kk =
=∑
0ωω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G46/G57/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
/G33/G4C /G49 /G50 /G25
/G4C /G49 /G50 /G25m
kB
kkm
kB
kkmmω ωωω ωδω= = =≤
>
= =∑ ∑
0 0 0, ,
, ./G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G16/G0C
/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G33/G03/G50/G44/G47/G48/G03/G44/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G25/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G0F/G03/G4F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G36 /G25 /G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G51/G48/G48/G47
/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G44/G03/G25/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G36 /G25 /G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G56/G58/G46/G4B/G03/G44
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11/G03/G25/G58/G57/G03/G5A/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G4B/G44/G53/G53/G48/G51/G56/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C/G22/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G50/G48/G44/G51/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57
/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G25/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G36 /G25 /G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G4C/G47/G03/G52/G49
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G1D
[ ] /G33 /G57 /G57
/G2E/G4C /G57m
kB
kkm
kB
km k m = = − ≡
= =∑ ∑
0 01ωω ωωτ exp() /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G17/G0C/G15/G15
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G03 τm /G0F/G03/G50/G20/G14/G0F/GAB/G0F/G2E/G0F/G03/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G36 /G25/G0F/G03 /G44/G56/G03/G44/G51/G5C/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G59 /G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48
/G36 /G25 /G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G54/G58/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G4C/G57/G11/G1D
/G59 /G33 /G59 /G33/G2C/G33 /G59 /G33 /G57 /G57 /G33 /G59 /G59
mK
mm
mK
mm ≡== =
= =∑ ∑
1 1ττ /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G18/G0C
/G3A/G4B/G4C/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 ωkkB , , 0≤≤ /G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G36 /G25 /G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56
/G0B/G19/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G4C/G49/G5C/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G46/G44/G55/G48/G49/G58/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G48/G44/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G49/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G36 /G25 /G1D
/G33 /G33/G2C/G33 /G33 /G33k
kK
k k
kB
k == =
=−
=∑ ∑ ωω ωω
01
0/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G19/G0C
/G57/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G45/G48/G46/G52/G50/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G53/G52/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G54/G58/G48/G56/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G03/G52/G58/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2E
/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G57/G4E /G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C/G0F/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G25/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G36 /G25 /G22/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48
/G46/G4C/G55/G46/G58/G50/G56/G57/G44/G51/G46/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G56/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G51/G0F/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G48/G44/G56/G4C/G45/G4F/G48/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G2E/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47
/G25/G20/G2E/G12/G15/G10/G14/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1A/G0C
/G57/G4B/G48/G51/G1D
[ ]τ ωω
ωm m
nK
kB
nnkkm
nK
kB
knm nIPt tt t
Kittt==
= −==
==∑∑
∑∑10
101exp(())
=⋅⋅+⋅−−
⋅⋅−−
=− −
⋅⋅−−
=−−
− −=
=
=∑
∑
∑/G14 /G14 /G14
/G14
/G14 /G15 /G15 /G14
/G14
/G14 /G14
/G15 /G14/G14
/G14
/G14/G2E/G4C /G25 /G57 /G57
/G4C /G57 /G57/G57
/G2E/G4C /G2E /G51 /G50 /G2E
/G4C /G57 /G57/G57
/G2E/G4C /G51 /G50
/G4C /G51 /G50 /G2E/G57/G51/G2E
/G51 /G50
/G51 /G50/G51
/G51/G2E
/G51 /G50/G51
/G51/G2E
/G51/G48/G5B/G53/G0B /G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C/G0C
/G48/G5B/G53/G0B /G0B /G0C/G0C
/G48/G5B/G53 /G3E /G0B /G12 /G0C/G0B /G0C /G12 /G40
/G48/G5B/G53/G0B /G0B /G0C/G0C
/G48/G5B/G53 /G3E /G0B /G0C/G40
/G48/G5B/G53 /G3E /G0B /G0C /G12 /G40Δω
Δω
Δωπ
π
π/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1B/G0C
/G50/G58/G4F/G57/G4C/G53/G4F/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G56/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G33/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
τπ
πτ/G50
/G51/G2E
/G51/G2E/G4C /G51 /G50
/G4C /G51 /G50 /G2E=−−
− −=∑/G14 /G14
/G15 /G14/G14/G48/G5B/G53 /G3E /G0B /G0C/G40
/G48/G5B/G53 /G3E /G0B /G0C /G12 /G40/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1C/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G52/G47/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G47/G48/G5B/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4F/G48/G49/G57/G03/G4B/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G56/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G52/G51/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51
/G4C/G51/G47/G4C/G46/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G50/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G03/G4B/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G59/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G59/G48/G55/G56/G44/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G15/G16
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G51 /G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G36 /G25 /G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G56/G53/G4F/G4C/G57
/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G1D
/G0B/G2C/G0C/G1D/G03/G03/G03τττ/G14 /G16 /G14 /G0F /G0F /G11 /G11 /G11 /G0F/G2E− /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G0B/G2C/G2C/G0C/G1D/G03/G03τττ/G15 /G17 /G0F /G0F /G11 /G11 /G11 /G0F/G2E /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G56/G1D
τπτ/G15
/G14/G15
/G15 /G14/G15 /G14
/G15 /G15 /G15 /G14 /G14/G50
/G51/G2E
/G51 /G59/G2E /G4C /G50 /G51 /G2E/G59 =−
−+−=− ∑/G12
/G48/G5B/G53 /G3E /G0B /G0C /G12 /G40/G0F /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G15/G0C
τπτ/G15 /G14
/G14/G15
/G15/G15 /G14
/G15 /G15 /G15 /G14 /G14/G50
/G51/G2E
/G51 /G59/G2E /G4C /G50 /G51 /G2E/G59−
==−
−−−∑/G12
/G48/G5B/G53 /G3E /G0B /G0C /G12 /G40/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G15/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G16/G0C/G03/G03/G50/G20/G14/G0F/G11/G11/G11/G0F/G2E/G12/G15/G03/G11
/G1A/G11/G03/G24/G4F/G4C/G44/G56/G4C/G51/G4A
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G56/G57/G58/G47/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G11/G44/G0C/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G1D
( ) /G48 /G48 /G48inkK iKnkK iKnkK −+− −±++− −±−−+∗= =2 1 2 1 2 1 πα πα πα ()/ ( )/ ( )//G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G0C
/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G47/G48/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G44/G0C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F
/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G1D
/G38 /G38 /G38
/G38 /G38 /G38n nK nK
n nK nK()()( ),
()()( )., , ,
, , ,ω ω ω
ω ω ωα α α
α α α= =
= =±∗
−±−
± −±−/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G56/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G48/G55/G50/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G49/G03/G03/G44/G55/G48/G1D
/G38 /G49 /G38 /G49 /G49 /G38 /G49 /G51/G49 /G38 /G49 /G49 /G38 /G49 /G50 /G49
/G38 /G49 /G38 /G49 /G49 /G38 /G49 /G49 /G38 /G49 /G50 /G49S S S S
S S S()()()()( ),
()()()( ),=±=±=−±=−±
=±=−±=±±∗ ∗
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G16/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G48/G55/G56/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G44/G58/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F
/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G53/G4B/G48/G51/G52/G50/G48/G51/G52/G51/G03/G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G44/G4F/G4C/G44/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G52/G46/G46/G58/G55/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G47
/G3E/G15/G14/G10/G15/G17/G40/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G56/G58/G49/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5A/G4B/G52/G4F/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G44/G55/G57/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G47/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F
/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G11/G15/G17
/G1B/G11/G03/G36/G52/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G24/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G03/G52/G49/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51
/G4A/G48/G57/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
() ( ) [ ]
()( )() ( )
()( )ωωωω ωωω
ω ωω
ωωω
ωωωω
ωωωα α α α
α α
α α
αα
ααu u u
tt u
Kit u
Kitit
itunK
n n
nK
n n
kK
nK
kkn n
nK
kK
kn n
nK
nKn
nn=
=
=
= −
= −−−
−−= =
==
==
=∑ ∑
∑∑
∑∑
∑1 1
11
11
11
11
1 1
1, , , ,
, ,
, ,
,,
,,exp
expexp
exp./G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1B/G11/G14/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
()( )() ( )
()( )ωωωω ω ωω
ωωωω
ωωωα α α α
αα
αα=
=
= −−−
−−= ==
=∑ ∑∑
∑nK
n n
kK
nK
kkn n
nK
nKn
nntt
itit
it1 11
11
11
1, , , ,
,,
,, expexp
exp./G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1B/G11/G15/G0C
/G1C/G11/G03/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G46/G48/G55/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G4F/G48
/G24/G03/G46/G55/G58/G47/G03/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G46/G48/G55/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48
/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G1D
/G0B/G2EΔ /G57/G0CΔω /G20/G15π /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1C/G11/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G03/G2EΔ /G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G03/G52/G53/G48/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03 Δω /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4A/G55/G4C/G47/G03/G4F/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55
/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G49/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G57/G55/G48/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44
/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48
/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G58/G51/G46/G48/G55/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G4F/G48/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G45/G59/G4C/G52/G58/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G1D
()()()()
/G4E/G2E
/G4E /G4E /G4E /G4E ttut U
tB=∑− +−
= −+≥12
22 20β ν ωωω
β βα α , ,
, Δ Δω/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1C/G11/G15/G0C/G15/G18
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G03β /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G58/G5B/G4C/G4F/G4C/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55/G03/G44/G51/G47/G1D
() ()()
() ()()
()()() ( ) [ ]/G57 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G58 /G57
/G38 /G38
/G25 /G57 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G38kK
k k
kK
k k
kK
k k
kK
k k
kK
k k k k= = −
= = −
=− − −= =
= =
=∑ ∑
∑ ∑
∑122
12 2
122
12 2
12ν ν
ωωω ωωω
ωων ωα α α α
α α, ,
, ,
Re () ., , , ,
, ,Δ
Δω /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1C/G11/G16/G0C
/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G1C/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G54/G58/G44/G47/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G4C/G51/G03β /G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G44/G51/G03/G44/G45/G56/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03 β /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G1D
/G03ΔΔωt B2 2 24≥/ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1C/G11/G17/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G58/G51/G46/G48/G55/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G11/G03/G30/G52/G55/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G58/G51/G46/G48/G55/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G5C/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G55/G48/G49/G56/G11/G03/G3E/G1B/G40/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G3E/G1C/G40/G11
/G14/G13/G11/G03/G03 /G36/G58/G50/G50/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G52/G51/G46/G4F/G58/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G3A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G55/G57/G48/G47/G03/G56/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G15/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48
/G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G48/G56/G56/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G55/G44/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G52/G5A/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G52/G4F/G58/G50/G51/G56
/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G46/G52/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G16/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G44/G56/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G03/G03/G4C/G51
/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G0F/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G4C/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G48/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49
/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G0F/G03/G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G56/G53/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G48/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G48/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49
/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G50/G48/G44/G51/G56/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G03/G44
/G46/G52/G51/G59/G48/G51/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G03/G57/G52/G52/G4F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G16/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/GB3/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/GB4/G03/G52/G49/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G03/G52/G49
/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G47/G44/G57/G44/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G4A/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G57/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G4F/G44/G45/G48/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G52/G4A/G5C/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G49/G58/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G48/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G48/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G52/G56/G48/G47/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G17/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G5A/G44/G5C
/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G52/G45/G56/G48/G55/G59/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G56
/G0B/G48/G5B/G53/G48/G46/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G15/G19
/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G4C/G55/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G58/G47/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G52
/G47/G52/G58/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G18/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G48/G47/G03/G03/G51/G52/G51/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48
/G51/G52/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G48/G46/G58/G4F/G4C/G44/G55/G03/G56/G57/G44/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G19/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4A/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57
/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G47/G48/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56
/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G49
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G1A/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G4C/G44/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G4B/G48/G51/G52/G50/G48/G51/G52/G51/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G1B/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48
/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G4F/G4C/G51/G4E/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G56/G48/G46/G11/G03/G1C/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G58/G51/G46/G48/G55/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G11/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G47/G48/G50/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48
/G48/G49/G49/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G44/G47/G4D/G58/G56/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G50/G53/G4B/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G53/G58/G57/G03/G52/G51
/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G44/G55/G57/G4C/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G55/G52/G4F/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G56/G56/G48/G47/G11
/G35/G48/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G1D
/G14/G11/G03/G33/G11/G24/G11/G30/G11/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G33/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G4F/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G30/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G17/G57/G4B/G03/G48/G47/G11/G03/G26/G4F/G44/G55/G48/G51/G47/G52/G51/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G32/G5B/G49/G52/G55/G47/G03/G14/G1C/G18/G1B/G0F/G03/G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G03/G48/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G03/G44/G53/G53/G48/G44/G55/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G14/G1C/G16/G13/G0C/G11
/G15/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G39/G52/G51/G03/G31/G48/G58/G50/G44/G51/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G29/G52/G58/G51/G47/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G30/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/GB4/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G33/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G48/G57/G52/G51/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G33/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G48/G57/G52/G51/G03/G31/G2D/G03/G14/G1C/G18/G19/G03/G0B/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G2A/G48/G55/G50/G44/G51/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G36/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G25/G48/G55/G4F/G4C/G51/G03/G14/G1C/G16/G15/G0C/G11
/G16/G11/G03/G2F/G11/G03/G36/G46/G4B/G5A/G44/G55/G57/G5D/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G4C/G48/G03/G47/G48/G56/G03/G27/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G14/G10/G15/G0F/G03/G2B/G48/G55/G50/G44/G51/G51/G0F/G03/G33/G44/G55/G4C/G56/G03/G14/G1C/G18/G13/G10/G14/G1C/G18/G14
/G17/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2A/G11/G28/G11/G03/G36/G4B/G4C/G4F/G52/G59/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G14/G10/G15/G0F/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G17/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1B/G03/G0B/G37/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G35/G58/G56/G56/G4C/G44/G51/G0C/G11
/G18/G11/G03/G30/G11/G2D/G11/G03/G2F/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G4B/G4C/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/GB3/G2C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G24/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G48/G47/G03/G29/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G26/G44/G50/G45/G55/G4C/G47/G4A/G48/G03/G14/G1C/G18/G1B
/G19/G11/G03/G24/G11/G03/G29/G55/G4C/G48/G47/G50/G44/G51/G0F/G03 /G2C/G51/G57/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56 /G11/G03/G16/G17/G0F/G03/G16/G13/G1A/G10/G16/G16/G1B/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G17/G11
/G1A/G11/G03/G35/G11/G33/G11/G03/G29/G48/G5C/G51/G50/G44/G51/G0F/G03 /G35/G48/G59/G11/G03/G30/G52/G47/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56 /G11/G03 /G15/G13 /G0F/G03/G16/G19/G1A/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G17/G1B
/G1B/G11/G03/G36/G11/G2F/G11/G03/G25/G55/G44/G58/G51/G56/G57/G48/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/G26/G11/G30/G11/G03/G26/G44/G59/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2A/G11/G2D/G11/G03/G30/G4C/G4F/G45/G58/G55/G51/G0F/G03 /G24/G51/G51/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G31/G11/G3C/G11/G0C /G03 /G15/G17/G1A /G0F/G15/G1A
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G14/G16/G18/G10/G14/G1A/G16/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G19
/G1C/G11/G03/G2F/G11/G03/G26/G52/G4B/G48/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G4C/G50/G48/G10/G29/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G24/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G33/G55/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G2B/G44/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/G28/G51/G4A/G4F/G48/G5A/G52/G52/G47/G03/G26/G4F/G4C/G49/G49/G56/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G03/G2D/G48/G55/G56/G48/G5C/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G18
/G14/G13/G11/G03/G2F/G11/G28/G11/G03/G29/G55/G44/G51/G4E/G56/G0F/G03/GB3/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/GB4/G0F/G03/G33/G55/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G2B/G44/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/G28/G51/G4A/G4F/G48/G5A/G52/G52/G47/G03/G26/G4F/G4C/G49/G49/G56/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G03/G2D/G48/G55/G56/G48/G5C/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1C
/G14/G14/G11/G03/G24/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G55/G56/G57/G48/G51/G0F/G03/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03/G35/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G29/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G03/G2C/G2C/G03/G2C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G47/G58/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G25/G48/G51/G10/G2A/G58/G55/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G48/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G57/G11
/G14/G15/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2A/G11/G28/G11/G03/G36/G4B/G4C/G4F/G52/G59/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G11/G03/G16/G0F/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1A
/G14/G16/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G31/G11/G3C/G44/G11/G03/G39/G4C/G4F/G48/G51/G4E/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G29/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G11/G03/G17/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G17
/G14/G17/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G0F/G03/G30/G11/G2C/G11/G03/G2A/G55/G44/G48/G59/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G31/G11/G3C/G44/G11/G03/G39/G4C/G4F/G48/G51/G4E/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G29/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G11/G18/G0F/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G19
/G14/G18/G11/G03/G2E/G11/G03/G30/G44/G58/G55/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G28/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G28/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G57/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G35/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G52/G49/G03/G37/G52/G53/G52/G4F/G52/G4A/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G2A/G55/G52/G58/G53/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G33/G52/G4F/G4C/G56/G4B/G03/G36/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G58/G45/G4F/G4C/G56/G4B/G48/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G3A/G44/G55/G56/G44/G5A/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1B
/G14/G19/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G28/G11/G03/G35/G52/G45/G48/G55/G57/G56/G0F/G03 /G2D/G11/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11 /G03 /G1A /G0F/G03/G14/G13/G1C/G1A/G10/G14/G14/G13/G17/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G19
/G14/G1A/G03/G24/G11/G03/G25/G52/G4B/G50/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G35/G4C/G4A/G4A/G48/G47/G03/G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03/G36/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G30/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G36/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G48/G55/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1A/G1B/G11/G03/G24/G11/G03/G25/G52/G4B/G50/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G44/G47/G48/G4F/G44/G03/GB3/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G2E/G48/G57/G56/G0F/G03/G2A/G44/G50/G52/G59/G03/G39/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03/G37/G55/G4C/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G36/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G1C/G11
/G14/G1B/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G33/G11/G03/G24/G51/G57/G52/G4C/G51/G48/G03 /G2D/G11/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11 /G03 /G14/G13 /G0F/G03/G18/G16/G10/G19/G1C/G0F/G03/G4C/G45/G4C/G47/G11/G03/G15/G15/G1A/G19/G10/G15/G15/G1C/G13/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1C
/G14/G1C/G11/G03/G31/G11/G31/G11/G03/G25/G52/G4A/G52/G4F/G58/G45/G52/G59/G0F/G03/G24/G11/G24/G11/G03/G2F/G52/G4A/G58/G51/G52/G59/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2C/G11/G37/G11/G03/G37/G52/G47/G52/G55/G52/G59/G0F/G03/GB3/G2C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G24/G5B/G4C/G52/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G29/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/GB4/G0F/G03/G25/G48/G51/G4D/G44/G50/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/G2F/G52/G51/G47/G52/G51/G03/G14/G1C/G1A/G18/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G35/G11/G03/G2B/G48/G55/G50/G44/G51/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G2F/G48/G46/G57/G58/G55/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56/GB4/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G14/G10/G15/G0F/G03/G25/G48/G51/G4D/G44/G50/G4C/G51/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G52/G51/G47/G52/G51/G03/G14/G1C/G1A/G13/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1A/G15/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G36/G11/G2D/G11/G2F/G11/G03/G59/G44/G51/G03/G28/G4C/G4D/G51/G47/G4B/G52/G59/G48/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G47/G48/G03/G2A/G55/G44/G44/G49/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G55/G44/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G36/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G29/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G38/G51/G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G32/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G36/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G18
/G15/G13/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G35/G03/G2E/G4F/G44/G58/G47/G48/G55/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G25/G10/G36/G11 /G03 /G36/G4E/G44/G4A/G48/G55/G56/G57/G44/G50/G0F/G03/GB3/G26/G52/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G36/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G10/G03/G24/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G3A/G52/G55/G4F/G47/G03/G36/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G0F/G03/G36/G4C/G51/G4A/G44/G53/G52/G55/G48/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G18
/G15/G14/G11/G03/G26/G11/G28/G11/G03/G36/G4B/G44/G51/G51/G52/G51/G0F/G03 /G25/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G36/G5C/G56/G57/G11/G03/G37/G48/G46/G4B/G11/G03/G2D /G11/G03 /G15/G1A /G0F/G03/G16/G1A/G1C/G10/G17/G15/G16/G0F/G03/G4C/G45/G4C/G47/G11/G03/G19/G15/G16/G10/G19/G18/G19/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G17/G1B
/G15/G15/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G2A/G11/G03/G33/G55/G52/G44/G4E/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G27/G11/G2A/G11/G03/G30/G44/G51/G52/G4F/G44/G4E/G4C/G56/G0F/G03/GB3/G27/G4C/G4A/G4C/G57/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G1D/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G4F/G48/G56/G0F /G03/G03 /G15/G1B
/G03/G03/G03 /G03/G44/G4F/G4A/G52/G55/G4C/G57/G4B/G50/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G15/G51/G47/G03/G48/G47/G11/G0F/G03/G30/G44/G46/G50/G4C/G4F/G4F/G44/G51/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G15
/G15/G16/G11/G03/G24/G11/G39/G11/G03/G32/G53/G53/G48/G51/G4B/G48/G4C/G50/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G35/G11/G3A/G11/G03/G36/G46/G4B/G44/G49/G48/G55/G0F/G03/GB3/G27/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G10/G37/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G33/G55/G52/G46/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/GB4/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G33/G55/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G2B/G44/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/G28/G51/G4A/G4F/G48/G5A/G52/G52/G47/G03/G26/G4F/G4C/G49/G49/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G03/G2D/G48/G55/G56/G48/G5C/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G1C
/G15/G17/G11/G03/G30/G11/G25/G11/G03/G33/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G57/G4F/G5C/G0F/G03/GB3/G36/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G24/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G37/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G36/G48/G55/G4C/G48/G56/GB4 /G0F/G03 /G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G14
/G29/G4C/G4A/G58/G55/G48 /G03 /G46/G44/G53/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G14/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G52/G5A/G48/G55/G03/G33/G0B ω /G0C/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G51/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G17/G0C/G11
/G15/G44/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G45/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G48/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G51/G57/G03 Ω /G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G46/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G2E/G20/G18/G13/G11
/G15/G45/G11/G03/G36/G44/G50/G48/G03/G44/G56/G03/G29/G4C/G4A/G11/G03/G15/G44/G0F/G03/G45/G58/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G56/G48/G50/G4C/G03/G4F/G52/G4A/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G4B/G50/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G5B/G48/G56/G11/G15/G1C
/G13 /G14/G13 /G15/G13 /G16/G13 /G17/G13 /G18/G13 /G19/G13/G13/G11 /G13 /G13/G13/G13/G11 /G13 /G13/G14/G13/G11 /G13 /G13/G15/G13/G11 /G13 /G13/G16/G13/G11 /G13 /G13/G17/G13/G11 /G13 /G13/G18/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57/G48/G51/G0F/G03/G29 /G4C /G4A/G58/G55/G48/G03/G14
/G16 /G49/G36/G10/G49/G16/G49/G16/G10 /G49/G36
/G15 /G49/G36/G10/G49/G15/G15 /G49/G36/G10/G49/G14
/G49/G36/G0E /G49/G15/G15 /G49/G36/G10/G49/G16
/G49/G36/G0E /G49/G14
/G49/G36/G10/G49/G15/G49/G36/G10/G49/G14
/G49/G36/G49/G16
/G49/G15/G49/G14/G03/G33/G52 /G5A /G48/G55/G03/G03/G03
/G29 /G55/G48 /G54 /G58/G48/G51/G46 /G5C/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G2B /G5D/G16/G13
/G13 /G14 /G15 /G16 /G17/G13/G11 /G13/G13/G11 /G15/G13/G11 /G17/G13/G11 /G19/G13/G11 /G1B/G14/G11 /G13/G24 /G11/G03 /G2A /G48 /G55 /G56 /G57/G48/G51/G0F/G03/G29 /G4C /G4A/G58/G55/G48/G03/G15/G44/G24/G45/G56/G11/G03 /G59 /G44 /G4F /G58/G48/G03 /G52 /G49/G03 /G5FΩ /G5F
/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G56 /G46/G44/G4F /G4C /G51 /G4A/G03 /G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55/G03/G46/G16/G14
/G13 /G14 /G15 /G16 /G17/G14/G13/G10/G14/G13/G14/G13/G10/G1B/G14/G13/G10/G19/G14/G13/G10/G17/G14/G13/G10/G15/G14/G13/G13/G24/G11/G03/G2A/G48 /G55 /G56 /G57 /G48 /G51/G0F/G03 /G29 /G4C/G4A /G58/G55 /G48/G03 /G15 /G45/G24/G45/G56/G11/G03 /G59 /G44/G4F /G58 /G48/G03/G52 /G49/G03 /G5FΩ /G5F
/G37 /G4B /G48/G03 /G56/G46/G44/G4F/G4C/G51 /G4A/G03 /G53/G44 /G55 /G44 /G50 /G48/G57/G55/G03/G46 |
physics/9911019 11 Nov 1999/G33/G58/G45/G4F/G4C/G56/G4B/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03 /G24/G51/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G0B/G31/G3C/G0C/G0F /G03/G15/G19/G15/G0F/G03 /G1A/G16/G10/G14/G13/G17/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1C/G1B/G0C
/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03/G35/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C
/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G29/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G2C/G2C/G11
/G03/G2C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G27/G58/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G26/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56
/G24/G4F/G48/G5B/G44/G51/G47/G48/G55/G03/G2A/G48/G55/G56/G57/G48/G51
/G27/G48/G53/G44/G55/G57/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G0F
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G25/G4C/G52/G50/G48/G47/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G28/G51/G4A/G4C/G51/G48/G48/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G3D/G4F/G52/G57/G52/G5A/G56/G4E/G4C/G03/G26/G48/G51/G57/G48/G55/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G31/G48/G58/G55/G52/G56/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G46/G48/G0F
/G25/G48/G51/G10/G2A/G58/G55/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G31/G48/G4A/G48/G59
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G25/G48/G48/G55/G10/G36/G4B/G48/G59/G44/G03/G1B/G17/G14/G13/G18/G0F/G03/G2C/G56/G55/G44/G48/G4F
/G48/G10/G50/G44/G4C/G4F/G1D/G03/G4A/G48/G55/G56/G57/G48/G51/G23/G45/G4A/G58/G50/G44/G4C/G4F/G11/G45/G4A/G58/G11/G44/G46/G11/G4C/G4F
/G35/G48/G59/G4C/G56/G48/G47/G03/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G2D/G58/G4F/G5C/G03/G14/G17/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G1A
/G24/G45/G56/G57/G55/G44/G46/G57
/G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G48/G46/G48/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G3E/G14/G40/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G47/G48/G44/G4F/G57/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G47/G58/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G11/G03 /G2B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G5A/G48
/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G48/G59/G4C/G52/G58/G56/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G47/G48/G50/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G57/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48
/G48/G49/G49/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G03 /G44/G47/G4D/G58/G56/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03 /G52/G55/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48
/G47/G58/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G52/G4F/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G48/G50/G53/G4B/G44/G56/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A
/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G59/G4C/G48/G5A/G48/G47/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G59/G4C/G48/G5A/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G11/G03 /G24/G51/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G51/G51/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G0F/G03 /G46/G48/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G45/G48/G46/G52/G50/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48
/G4C/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G47/G52/G50/G44/G4C/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G45/G44/G51/G47/G5A/G4C/G47/G57/G4B/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G56/G03 /G44/G51
/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G03 /G56/G58/G45/G10/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G56/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48
/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G44/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G48/G56/G56/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46
/G45/G55/G44/G10/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G55/G48/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G47/G48/G57/G44/G4C/G4F/G11 /G03 /G15
/G14/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G58/G56/G58/G44/G4F/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G44/G46/G4B/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G55/G57/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G55/G48/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G5B/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G48/G46/G48/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G3E/G14/G40/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F
/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G3E/G2C/G40/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G47/G52/G53/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G44/G46/G4B/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G55/G48/G44/G56/G52/G51/G56/G1D
/G14/G11/G03/G03 /G2C/G51/G03/G53/G55/G44/G46/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G44/G57/G44/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G46/G52/G4F/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G56/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G03/G3E/G15/G40/G11
/G15/G11/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G53/G48/G46/G58/G4F/G4C/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G11/G03/G30/G52/G55/G48/G52/G59/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G56/G48/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G0F/G03/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4F/G5C/G03/G50/G44/G51/G5C/G0F/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G48/G44/G46/G4B/G03/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G0F/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G50/G50/G52/G51/G03/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G57/G03/G52/G49
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G3E/G16/G10/G18/G40/G11
/G16/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G48/G47/G0F/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G0B/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0C/G03/G3E/G19/G10/G1B/G40/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G30/G52/G56/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G59/G48/G4F/G52/G53/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G47/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G53/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G3E/G1C/G40/G0F
/G50/G44/G47/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G14/G1C/G16/G13/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G44/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G04A /G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56
/G04
( /G04)A d
A=∫
σαααα /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G14/G11/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G03 /G04Aααα= /G0F/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 σ( /G04)A /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G58/G50/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G04A /G11/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G44/G4F/G4F/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56
/G52/G49/G03 /G4B/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G57/G48/G44/G51/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G52/G51/G03 /G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G48/G5B/G57/G48/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03 /G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G45/G48
/G59/G44/G4F/G4C/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G58/G51/G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G11
/G24/G03 /G49/G58/G4F/G4F/G03 /G50/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G4D/G58/G56/G57/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03 /G46/G44/G50/G48/G03 /G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03 /G44/G45/G52/G58/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G55/G57/G5C/G03 /G5C/G48/G44/G55/G56
/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G55/G11/G03/G24/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G48/G4A/G4C/G51/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G56/G48/G59/G48/G55/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G46/G55/G4C/G57/G4C/G46/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G50/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G39/G52/G51/G03 /G31/G48/G58/G50/G44/G51/G51/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G48/G49/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G14/G1C/G16/G15/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G47/G44/G50/G48/G51/G57/G44/G4F/G03 /G45/G52/G52/G4E/G03 /G3E/G16/G40/G1D/G03 /GB3/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F
/G29/G52/G58/G51/G47/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03 /G30/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/GB4/G03 /G5A/G55/G52/G57/G48/G1D/G03 /GB3/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G0F/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G56/G48/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G03 /G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G56/G0F/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G4B/G4C/G56
/G55/G48/G46/G48/G51/G57/G4F/G5C/G03 /G53/G58/G45/G4F/G4C/G56/G4B/G48/G47/G03 /G45/G52/G52/G4E/G0F/G03 /G15/G03 /G4B/G44/G56/G03 /G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03 /G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G4C/G56
/G56/G46/G44/G55/G46/G48/G4F/G5C/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G56/G58/G55/G53/G44/G56/G56/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G45/G55/G48/G59/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G48/G4F/G48/G4A/G44/G51/G46/G48/G0F/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G48/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G52/G49
/G4C/G51/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57/G03 /G46/G4B/G44/G55/G44/G46/G57/G48/G55/G11/G03 /G03 /G2C/G57/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G53/G48/G55/G4B/G44/G53/G56/G03 /G49/G4C/G57/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G44/G47/G59/G44/G51/G46/G48/G03 /G44/G03 /G49/G48/G5A/G03 /G44/G55/G4A/G58/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03 /G52/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G4B/G44/G4F/G49
/G52/G49/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G50/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G47/G48/G59/G4C/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G44/G45/G4F/G5C/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G50/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G0F/G03 /G50/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G48/G47/G03 /G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G0F/G03 /G0B/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G4F/G52/G52/G4E/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G47/G44/G5C/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G4A/G55/G48/G44/G57
/G53/G44/G55/G57/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03 /G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G4F/G4C/G57/G48/G55/G44/G57/G58/G55/G48/G0F/G03 /G45/G48/G46/G44/G58/G56/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G4F/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G48/G4F/G48/G4A/G44/G51/G46/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G0C/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G51/G52/G03 /G5A/G44/G5C/G03 /G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G50/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G55/G4C/G4A/G52/G55/G03 /G10/G10/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G03 /G48/G59/G48/G51/G03 /G4C/G49
/G57/G4B/G48/G56/G48/G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G47/G58/G46/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G51/G44/G57/G58/G55/G44/G4F/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G49/G44/G56/G4B/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G48/G5B/G57/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G50/G52/G51/G03 /G48/G4F/G56/G48/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G16
/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G11/G03 /G03 /G29/G52/G55/G03 /G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G0F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G50/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G03 /G44/G47/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G56/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G4C/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G48/G44/G46/G4B
/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G53/G58/G57/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G47/G4C/G44/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G11/G03 /G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G52/G56/G48/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G49/G52/G55
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G03 /G44/G46/G57/G58/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G0F/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /GB3/G4C/G50/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G05
/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03 /G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G46/G52/G51/G57/G55/G44/G47/G4C/G46/G57/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G11/G03 /G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G56/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G56/G58/G46/G4B/G03 /G44/G03 /G50/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F
/G05/G49/G4C/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G05/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G57/G4F/G5C/G03 /G51/G48/G46/G48/G56/G56/G44/G55/G5C/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G44/G46/G4B/G0F/G03 /G48/G59/G48/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G45/G4F/G48/G50/G03 /G44/G57
/G4B/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G50/G48/G55/G48/G4F/G5C/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G46/G44/G4F/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G51/G58/G50/G48/G55/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G44/G03 /G46/G4F/G48/G44/G55/G4F/G5C/G03 /G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47
/G48/G5B/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G57/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G5A/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G51/G52/G03 /G52/G45/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G4C/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G56/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G46/G48/G53/G57/G56/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G51/G52/G57/G03 /G45/G48
/G4C/G51/G46/G52/G55/G53/G52/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G03/G47/G44/G5C/G03/G49/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G0F/G03 /G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G55/G4C/G51/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03 /G51/G48/G46/G48/G56/G56/G44/G55/G5C
/G49/G52/G55/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G58/G56/G0F/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G31/G48/G5A/G57/G52/G51/G4C/G44/G51/G03 /G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03 /G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G03 /G45/G55/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G57/G03 /G44/G45/G52/G58/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G47/G48/G59/G48/G4F/G52/G53/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G56/G4C/G50/G44/G4F/G03 /G46/G44/G4F/G46/G58/G4F/G58/G56/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G0F/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G4C/G57/G56/G03 /G52/G55/G4C/G4A/G4C/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G0F/G03 /G5A/G44/G56
/G58/G51/G47/G52/G58/G45/G57/G48/G47/G4F/G5C/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G03 /G56/G48/G4F/G49/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G56/G57/G48/G51/G57/G0F/G03 /G56/G52/G03 /G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03 /G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03 /G50/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G03 /G56/G58/G4A/G4A/G48/G56/G57/G03 /G44/G03 /G51/G48/G5A
/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G58/G55/G48/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G52/G58/G55/G03 /G05/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56 /G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G4F/G5C/G03 /G50/G44/G51/G5C/G03 /G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G56/G05/G03 /G10/G10/G03 /G4C/G11/G48/G11/G0F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G50/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F
/G57/G48/G46/G4B/G51/G4C/G54/G58/G48/G03 /G5A/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03 /G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4A/G48/G47/G0F/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03 /G03 /G25/G58/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G51/G52
/G50/G48/G44/G51/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G11/G03 /G03 /G2C/G57/G03 /G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03 /G55/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G52/G58/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03 /G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G44/G4F
/G0A/G37/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G05/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G48/G56/G57/G44/G45/G4F/G4C/G56/G4B/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G50/G44/G51/G51/G48/G55/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G4D/G58/G56/G57/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G46/G4F/G48/G44/G55/G03 /G44/G51/G47
/G58/G51/G4C/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G0F/G03 /G45/G58/G57/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G52/G58/G57/G03 /G50/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G52/G45/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03 /G03 /G2C/G57/G03 /G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G48/G50/G53/G4B/G44/G56/G4C/G5D/G48/G47
/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G46/G57/G03 /G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G58/G55/G48/G03 /G51/G48/G48/G47/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G56/G57/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G50/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G55/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G44/G51/G47
/G48/G5B/G53/G4F/G44/G51/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G50/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G0F/G03 /G45/G58/G57/G03 /G55/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G4C/G57/G03 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G56/G03 /G44/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G47/G58/G55/G48/G03 /G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G4C/G51/G4A
/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G48/G55/G5C/G03/G45/G48/G4A/G4C/G51/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G0F/G03/G51/G44/G50/G48/G4F/G5C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G4C/G44/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G11/GB4
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03 /G46/G4C/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G5A/G44/G56/G03 /G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G57/G48/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G59/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G3E/G14/G46/G40/G0F/G3E/G14/G47/G40/G03 /G4C/G51
/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G14/G1C/G18/G13/GB6/G56/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G4A/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G51/G48/G5A/G03 /G4C/G51/G56/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50
/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G55/G48/G4F/G4C/G48/G59/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G57/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G44/G46/G46/G58/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G4C/G50/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03 /G24/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48
/G4D/G58/G56/G57/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03 /G5A/G44/G56/G03 /G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G3E/G14/G13/G10/G14/G15/G40/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G52/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G47
/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G4C/G4A/G4A/G48/G47/G03 /G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03 /G48/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G3E/G14/G13/G10/G14/G16/G40/G11/G03 /G3A/G4C/G57/G4B/G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G49/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G0F/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G14/G11/G14/G0C/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G49/G58/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03 /G4D/G58/G56/G57/G4C/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G48
/G50/G44/G51/G51/G48/G55/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G48/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G10/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G3E/G2C/G40/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G52/G49
/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G44/G5B/G4C/G52/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G03 /G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03 /G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G3E/G14/G17/G40/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G5A/G44/G56/G03 /G49/G58/G55/G57/G4B/G48/G55
/G44/G47/G44/G53/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G48/G4F/G44/G45/G52/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G03 /G50/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G53/G4F/G44/G4C/G51/G4F/G5C/G03 /G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03 /G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G3E/G14/G18/G10/G15/G13/G40/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G57/G55/G48/G44/G57/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G58/G56/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G45/G55/G44/G10/G4E/G48/G57/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03 /G3E/G1C/G40/G03 /G44/G51/G47
/G4E/G48/G57/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G56/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G4C/G55/G17
/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G11/G03/G24/G56/G03/G44/G03/G4A/G58/G4C/G47/G48/G4F/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G4C/G56
/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 /G0B/G48/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G44/G47/G4D/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G0C/G03 /G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G5C/G03 /G4C/G51
/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03 /G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03 /G0B/G4C/G51/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G03 /G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G48/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G0C/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G48/G46/G58/G4F/G4C/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G5C
/G52/G49/G03 /G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G03 /G5A/G44/G59/G48/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G48/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G48/G47/G03 /G0B/G44/G57
/G4F/G48/G44/G56/G57/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G45/G4F/G48/G50/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G0C/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G52/G58/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G51/G48/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G48/G5B/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G4F/G5C/G03 /G55/G48/G49/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G44/G55/G5C
/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03 /G32/G51/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G44/G56/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G5A/G44/G59/G48/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52
/G59/G44/G51/G4C/G56/G4B/G03/G44/G57/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G5C/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G4F/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G0B/G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G4C/G4A/G4A/G48/G47/G03 /G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G0C/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G5C
/G4C/G56/G03 /G44/G03 /G55/G48/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03 /G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G11/G03 /G3A/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G48/G03 /G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G48/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G44/G46/G4B/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G0F/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G0F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G59/G4C/G48/G5A/G0F/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G49/G4C/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G58/G56/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G44/G51/G47
/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G4F/G48/G44/G47/G03 /G58/G56/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G58/G51/G47/G48/G55/G56/G57/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G44
/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G51/G52/G51/G10/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48
/G52/G51/G48/G11/G03/G32/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G44/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G55/G48/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G55/G44/G10/G4E/G48/G57/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G44/G03 /G49/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03 /G52/G55/G03 /G44/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G49/G52/G55
/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03 /G24/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G58/G45/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G54/G58/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G45/G55/G52/G44/G47/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G46/G48/G51/G57/G55/G44/G57/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03 /G52/G51
/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G45/G44/G55/G48/G4F/G5C/G03 /G57/G52/G58/G46/G4B/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03 /G4F/G48/G44/G59/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G50/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G51/G48/G5B/G57
/G53/G58/G45/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11
/G15/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48 /G03
/G2C/G51/G03 /G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G3E/G2C/G40/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03 /G44/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03 /G44/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G47/G48/G5B/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G57/G55/G48/G44/G57/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03 /G44/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G47/G48/G5B/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G50/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G59/G52/G4F/G59/G48/G47/G11/G03 /G29/G52/G55/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4E/G48/G57/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56
/G0B/G2C/G16/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4F/G44/G45/G48/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G57/G03/G1D
/G57 /G0F/G03/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G1D/G03 −∞≤≤∞t /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G44/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G03/G45/G55/G44/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G1D
/G57 /G0F/G03/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G1D/G03 −∞≤≤∞t /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G45/G0C
/G49/G52/G55/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G03/G0B/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G48/G55/G50/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G3E/G19/G10/G1B/G40/G0C/G1D
() /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 ′=−′δ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03δ /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G56/G48/G48/G03/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G24/G0C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G56
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D/G18
/G04Ittdt =
−∞∞
∫/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G0C
/G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G0B/G15/G11/G14/G10/G16/G0C/G03 /G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4F/G44/G55/G4A/G48/G56/G57/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G5A/G44/G5C/G03 /G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55
/G57/G52/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G2C/G10/G15/G11/G14/G0C/G0F/G03 /G44/G03 /G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G44/G03 /G45/G55/G44/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G0B/G44/G03 /G55/G4C/G4A/G4A/G48/G47/G03 /G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G0C/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F
/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G52/G56/G57/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G44/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G45/G0C/G03/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
() ()() /G58 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G47/G57 /G58 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G47/G57 = =
−∞∞
−∞∞∗∫ ∫ , /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G17/G0C
/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G58/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G52/G48/G49/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G29/G55/G52/G50
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G56/G1D
()() /G57 /G58 /G58 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G58 /G57 = =∗(), /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G18/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03 /G58/G56/G03 /G57/G44/G4E/G48/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G49/G0B/G57/G0C/G03 /G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G44/G03 /G4E/G48/G57/G03 /G49 /G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B
/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G57 /G03 /G0B/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G51/G48/G51/G57/G56/G0C/G03 /G48/G54/G58/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G1D
/G57 /G49 /G49 /G57=() /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G19/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03 /G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03 /G4E/G48/G57/G10/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G0F/G03 /G44/G50/G52/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G50/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G51/G48
/G4F/G44/G45/G48/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 ω /G1D/G03ω /G11/G03/G2C/G57/G56/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G10/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G59/G4C/G44/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G2C/G10/G16/G11/G1B/G0C/G1D
/G57 /G48itω
πω=1
2, /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1A/G0C
/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57
ω
πω=
−∞∞
∫1
2etdtit/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1B/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1A/G0C/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G56/G52/G03/G46/G4B/G52/G56/G48/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G51/G56/G58/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51
()() ωωπδωωωω′= =−′
−∞∞
−′∫1
2edtit/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1C/G0C
/G24/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03ω /G10/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G53/G44/G51/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G10/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G56/G1D
/G04Ittdt d = =
−∞∞
−∞∞
∫∫ωωω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G36/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G2C/G10/G17/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G1D/G19
/G04ωωωωω =
−∞∞
∫d /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G4B/G44/G59/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56
/G04 , /G04, /G04 . ω ωωωωωωωωωωω = = =n n/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1A/G10/G1C/G0C/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57
() () /G57 /G4C /G58 /G57 /G4C /G58 /G47 /G4C /G57 /G58 /G47
/G4C /G48 /G58 /G47/G47
/G47/G57/G57 /G58 /G47/G47
/G47/G57/G57 /G58it/G04 /G04
,ω ωωωωωωωω
πωωω ωωωω= =
= = =−∞∞
−∞∞
−∞∞
−∞∞∫ ∫
∫ ∫1
2/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G56/G48/G51/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C /G04ω /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G1D
/G04ttttdt =
−∞∞
∫ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G4B/G44/G59/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56
/G04, /G04, /G04 t tttttttttttn n= = = /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G16/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G1D
()ωωω −=itud
du /G04 /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1A/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51
− = id
dtt tωωω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G0B/G55/G48/G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G16/G0C/G1D
− =id
dttutu /G04ω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1B/G0C
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G44/G46/G46/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1A/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1B/G0C/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55
−≡id
dt/G07ω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1C/G0C
/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03 /G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03 /G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G48/G54/G11
/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1C/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G04ω /G4C/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G47/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46
/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G4F/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G07ω /G44/G46/G57/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03 /G47/G48/G44/G4F
/G50/G52/G56/G57/G4F/G5C/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G1A
/G16/G11/G03/G26/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G36/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G24/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G47/G48/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G57/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55
/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
() /G29 /G48 /G49 /G57 /G47/G57itωπω=−
−∞+∞
∫1
2() /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G1D
/G49/G0B/G57/G0C/G20 ()/G14
/G15πωωω eFdit
−∞+∞
∫/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G0C
/G2B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03 /G58/G57/G4C/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G45/G55/G44/G10/G4E/G48/G57/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03 /G3E/G1C/G40/G0F/G03 /G0B/G44/G4A/G44/G4C/G51/G0F/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G4C/G4A/G4A/G48/G47/G03 /G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48
/G3E/G14/G1B/G40/G0C/G0F/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03 /G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G53/G55/G44/G46/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G47/G44/G57/G44/G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G4F/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G56/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56
/G56/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G50/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G52/G4F/G52/G4A/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G55/G48/G44/G56/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G46/G52/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G52/G58/G55/G56/G48/G4F/G59/G48/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03 /G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G49/G0B/G57/G0C/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G44/G03 /G45/G55/G44/G10/G4E/G48/G57/G03 /G57 /G49 /G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G4C/G56
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G44/G45/G56/G57/G55/G44/G46/G57/G03 /G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G03 /G49 /G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G48/G4C/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G57 /G49
/G52/G55/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03 ωf /G03/G1D
ω ωf ttfdt =
−∞+∞
∫ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G4C/G56
/G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G47 =
−∞+∞
∫ωωω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G1D
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G29/G0B /G49ωω)≡ /G03/G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G0C
/G57 /G48itωπω=1
2/G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03ωπωteit=−1
2/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C
/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G1D
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G47 /G48/G4C /G57 /G57/G47 /G57 /G57 /G0A /G0A/G0B /G0C/G0B /G0A /G0C = =−′=
−∞∞
∫ −
−∞∞
∫ωωωπωωδ1
2/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1A/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G03/G52/G49/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G4C/G56/G1D/G1B
/G04Ittdt d = =
−∞+∞
−∞+∞
∫∫ωωω /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G04I /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48
/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G16/G44/G11/G03/G3A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A
/G2C/G51/G03/G53/G55/G44/G46/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G57/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G03/G47/G58/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G44/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G0F/G03/G56/G44/G5C/G03/G15/G37/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F
/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G52/G51/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
/G03 /G29/G0B /G0C /G49 /G0B/G57/G0C /G48/G5B/G53/G0B/G10/G4C/G57 /G0C/G49/G0B/G57 /G0C /G47 /G57/G37 /G37ωω α ωπ≡ =
−∫/G04A
TT
1
2/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1C/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G03α()t /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G3E/G15/G15/G10/G15/G18/G40/G0F/G03/G3E/G15/G1C/G40/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G5A/G44/G56
/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55
/G04() Α=
−∫
TT
ttdtt α /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1C/G44/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G55/G48/G53/G4F/G44/G46/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G47/G48/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G1D
() ()[]/G04 /G04( /G04 /G04) IAIA tttdt tttdt =+−= +−
−∞+∞
−∞+∞
∫ ∫α α1 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G44/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03()αt /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G58/G53/G53/G52/G55/G57/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G11/G03/G29/G52/G55
/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G46/G57/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G03/G15/G37/G1D
()αt=1 /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G03/G03/G03−≤≤TtT /G1E/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G5A/G4C/G56/G48/G03/G03/G03 ()αt=0. /G0C/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G32/G51/G48/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G48/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G47/G58/G55/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G46/G52/G50/G50/G52/G51/G03/G58/G56/G48/G11/G03/G36/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11
/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G44/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
() ()[] ω αω αω f tttfdt tttfdt = +−
−∞+∞
−∞+∞
∫ ∫1
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G20/G03 () ()[] αω ω αωωω tttfdtd ttt fdt
−∞+∞
−∞+∞
−∞+∞
∫ ∫∫+′− ′′ 1
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 () =+ ′′′
−∞+∞
∫ω ωωωω fK fdT, /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G1C
() ()[] /G2E /G57 /G57 /G57 /G47/G57 ωω αωω ,′=− ′
−∞+∞
∫1 /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G55/G51/G48/G4F/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4F/G4C/G51/G48/G44/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47
() ω αω f tttfdtT=
−∞+∞
∫/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G58/G50/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G48/G47/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G50/G48/G44/G56/G58/G55/G48/G47/G03 /G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G0C/G11/G03 /G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G0B/G16/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48
/G55/G48/G46/G44/G56/G57/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G4C/G44/G4F/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G03 /G4C/G49/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G56/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G48/G1D/G03 () /G2E /G2E /G2C /G24 ωωωωωω , /G04 /G04 /G04 ′= ′≡−′ /G0F/G03 /G44/G51/G47
/G57/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G1D
ωω ωωωω ff K fdT=+ ′′′
−∞+∞
∫/G04 /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G28/G54/G11/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03 /G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G58/G56/G48/G47/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G5B/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G48/G03 /G48/G56/G57/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G48/G55/G55/G52/G55/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F
/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
ωω ωωωω ff K fdT T−≈ ′′′ ∫/G04 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03 /G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4F/G48/G03 /G0B/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03 /G4C/G49/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G16/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03 /G4B/G44/G56/G03 /G44/G03 /G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0C/G0F/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G4A/G48/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G48/G5B/G44/G46/G57/G03 /G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G58/G50/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G48/G47/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03 /G25/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G44/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B
/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G11
/G16/G45/G11/G03/G29/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G4C/G51/G4A
/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G56/G46/G55/G4C/G45/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4B/G48/G4F/G53/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55
/G04() Φ=
−∞∞
∫ϕωωωωd /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G44/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G47/G03/G0F/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G0F/G03/G4F/G4C/G51/G48/G44/G55/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G58/G50/G03/G4C/G56/G1D
/G03 () ω ϕωω ω ωϕ/G04 /G04 Φ Φ f F ttfdt ttfdt = = =
−∞∞
−∞∞
∫ ∫ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G45/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 ϕω() /G03 /G50/G52/G47/G4C/G49/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G0B/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G56/G0C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G58/G50/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57 /G49ϕ/G20 /G57 /G49Φ /G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03 /G5A/G44/G5C/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G56/G48/G46/G11/G03 /G16/G44/G0F/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G45/G59/G4C/G52/G58/G56
/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G4F/G57/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G1D
() /G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G2C /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G2C /G57 /G57 /G49 /G47 /G57 =+−=+ −′′′
−∞∞
∫/G04 /G04 /G04 /G04 ( /G04 /G04) Φ Φ Φ Φ /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G46/G0C/G14/G13
/G2F/G48/G57/G1D
ϕω ωϕ ()=
−∞∞
∫ttdt /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G57/G4B/G48/G51/G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1A/G0C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G52/G49/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G03/G4C/G56
/G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G47ϕωϕωωω =
−∞∞
∫() /G03=
−∞∞
−∞∞
∫∫tttfddt ωωϕωω '' ' /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G0C
/G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G1D
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 ωω ω''=− /G0F
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1B/G0C/G03/G45/G48/G46/G52/G50/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G49/G57/G48/G55/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G11/G4B/G11/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C/G1D
/G57 /G49 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G49 /G47 /G57ϕϕ=
−∞∞
∫−''' /G03=−
−∞∞
∫tttfdt ''' ϕ /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1C/G0C
/G4C/G51/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G55/G48/G46/G52/G4A/G51/G4C/G5D/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G59/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G1A/G0C/G03/G4C/G56
/G57 /G4C/G57 /G47 ϕ ϕωπωω =
−∞∞
∫()(/)exp() 12 /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G13/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G1D
ϕωωωω ωωω(), ,=<< −<<−
112 2 1
0for and
otherwise/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G14/G0C
/G57/G4B/G44/G51
/G57 /G49/G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G49
/G57 /G57/G47 /G57ϕπω ω=−−−
−−∞∞
∫2 2 1[sin(('))sin(('))]'
(')' /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G15/G0C
/G2C/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G48/G5B/G53/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03 /G50/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G48/G47/G03 /G55/G48/G4A/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03 /G4C/G11/G48/G11
/G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G51/G03 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 tfϕ≡= /G04Φ /G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G15/G0C/G03/G45/G48/G46/G52/G50/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C
/G57 /G49/G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G49
/G57 /G57/G47 /G57 /G04[sin(('))sin(('))]/G04
(')' ΦΦ=−−− ′
−−∞∞
∫2 2 1
πω ω/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G15/G44/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G53/G44/G55/G57/G4C/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G24/G11/G03/G2F/G44/G57/G48/G55/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03/G57/G52
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G11
/G16/G46/G11/G03/G24/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G4C/G51/G4A
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G49/G58/G55/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G57/G48/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G44/G56/G4C/G4F/G5C/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G0F
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/G4F/G48/G56/G56/G03/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G56/G11/G03/G29/G52/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G1D/G14/G14
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G49 /G49 /G49 /G57 /G57 /G49 /G47 /G57 /G49 /G49 /G47 = =
−∞∞
−∞∞
∫ ∫ωωω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G16/G0C
/G4C/G56/G03 /G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03 /G47/G4C/G55/G48/G46/G57/G4F/G5C/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03 /G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G03 /G33/G44/G55/G56/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G11/G03 /G32/G51/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51
/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G50/G44/G51/G51/G48/G55/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G47/G52/G51/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G0F/G03/G48/G11/G4A/G11/G1D
/G04/G04/G04
ωωωωω ωωωω ω
nnn
ff
fff fd
fffnfd
ff= = =−∞∞
−∞∞
∫ ∫
/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G17/G44/G0C
/G52/G55/G03/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G47/G4C/G55/G48/G46/G57/G4F/G5C/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1B/G0C/G1D
/G04/G04 ()
ωω
nfttnfdt
ffftid
dttfdt
ffn
= =−∞∞
∫−
−∞∞
∫
/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G17/G45/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G44/G51/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G1D
()/G04(), /G04 fftttdtftftt = =
−∞∞
∫ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G18/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48
/G04/G04
ffttftfdt
fffff
ff= =−∞∞
∫
/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G19/G0C
/G24/G51/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G52/G4A/G03/G52/G49/G03/G50/G48/G44/G51/G03/G4E/G4C/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G48/G51/G48/G55/G4A/G5C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48
/G2E/G47
/G47 /G57/G57 /G49/G49 /G49ftd
dttftfdt
= =
−∞∞
∫ 22
/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G1A/G0C
/G3A/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G56/G48/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G48/G56
/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4A/G48/G56/G11
/G16/G47/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G24/G58/G57/G52/G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G3A/G4C/G4A/G51/G48/G55/G03/G27/G52/G58/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G29/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G54/G58/G44/G55/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G45/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G48/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G36/G0B/G57/G0C/G1D
()/G57 /G36 /G36 /G57 /G57 /G36 /G36 /G57 /G57 /G36 /G47 /G47
/G36 /G36 /G4C/G57 /G47 /G47/G15
/G14
/G15= = ′′ ′
= ′ ′− ′−∞∞
−∞∞
−∞∞
−∞∞∫∫
∫∫ωωωωωω
πωω ωωωω /G48/G5B/G53 /G0B /G0C/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G14/G0C/G14/G15
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G48/G03 ωωτωϑτ =′+′=− /G0F /G12 /G15 /G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
() /G57 /G36 /G36 /G36 /G4C/G57 /G47 /G4721
2 22= +− −
−∞∞
−∞∞
∫∫πϑτϑτ τϑτ exp) /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G15/G0C
/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G15/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G10/G56/G53/G4F/G4C/G57/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G55/G48/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G3A/G4C/G4A/G51/G48/G55/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G51/G48/G5B/G57/G11/G03/G27/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G4A/G48/G57/G03 /G57/G5A/G52/G03 /G59/G48/G55/G5C/G03 /G4C/G50/G53/G52/G55/G57/G44/G51/G57
/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
() /G57 /G36 /G35 /G4C/G57 /G47/G15 /G14
/G15= −
−∞∞
∫πτ ττ /G0B /G0C /G48/G5B/G53 /G0C /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G16/G0C
/G57 /G36 /G3A /G57 /G47/G15
/G14/G14
/G15=
−∞∞
∫πθϑ /G0B /G0F /G0C /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G17/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G1D
/G35 /G36 /G36 /G47 /G0B /G0Cτπϑτϑτϑ = +−
−∞∞
∫1
2 22/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G18/G0C
() /G3A /G57 /G36 /G36 /G4C/G57 /G4711
2 22(,) exp) ϑπϑτϑτ ττ = +− −
−∞∞
∫/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G19/G0C
/G44/G55/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G44/G58/G57/G52/G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G3A/G4C/G4A/G51/G48/G55/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G11/G03 /G2F/G48/G57/G03 /G58/G56/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03 /G51/G52/G5A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G44/G45/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G48/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G03/G56/G54/G58/G44/G55/G48/G47/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G36/G0B/G57/G0C/G1D
()ω ωω ωω
πω/G36 /G36 /G36 /G36 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G36 /G47/G57/G47 /G57
/G36 /G57 /G57 /G36 /G4C /G57 /G57 /G47/G57/G47 /G57/G15
/G14
/G15= = ′′′
= ′ −′′−∞∞
−∞∞
−∞∞
−∞∞∫∫
∫∫/G48/G5B/G53 /G0B /G0C /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G1A/G0C
/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G57/G48/G53/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G17/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G1D
ωπω /G36 /G3A /G57 /G47/G57/G15
/G15/G14
/G15=
−∞∞
∫/G0B /G0F /G0C /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G1B/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G1D
() /G3A /G57 /G36 /G36 /G4C/G57 /G4721
2 22(,) exp) ωπωτωτ ττ = +− −
−∞∞
∫/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G1C/G0C
/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G48/G44/G56/G4C/G4F/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G1D
/G3A /G57 /G3A /G57/G14 /G15 /G0B /G0F /G0C /G0B /G0F /G0C ω ω= /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G13/G0C/G14/G16
/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G47/G52/G58/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G3A/G0B/G57/G0F ω /G0C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G3A/G4C/G4A/G51/G48/G55/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A
()
()/G3A /G57 /G36 /G36 /G4C/G57 /G47
/G36 /G57 /G57 /G36 /G4C /G47/G0B /G0F /G0C /G48/G5B/G53 /G0C
/G48/G5B/G53 /G0C /G11ωπωωωω ωω
πττ ωττ= +′−′ −′′
= +− −−∞∞
−∞∞∫
∫1
2 2 2
1
2 22/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G14/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G17/G0C/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G1B/G0C/G0C/G1D
ωπω /G36 /G3A /G57 /G47/G57/G15 /G14
/G15=
−∞∞
∫/G0B /G0F /G0C /G0F /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G57 /G36 /G3A /G57 /G47/G15 /G14
/G15=
−∞∞
∫πωω /G0B /G0F /G0C /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G15/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03 /G55/G48/G49/G11/G03 /G0B/G15/G14/G0C/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G49/G4C/G51/G47/G03 /G44/G03 /G47/G48/G57/G44/G4C/G4F/G48/G47/G03 /G48/G5B/G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G3A/G4C/G4A/G51/G48/G55/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03 /G47/G52/G58/G45/G4F/G48
/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11
/G03/G17/G11/G03/G31/G52/G51/G10/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03 /G58/G56/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G4A/G52/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G03 /G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C
/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G50/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G03 /G44/G51/G5C/G03 /G50/G52/G55/G48/G11/G03 /G2C/G49/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G03 /G52/G58/G55/G56/G48/G4F/G59/G48/G56/G03 /G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G48/G47
/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G46/G57/G44/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
ωω ωωπωω
ωω ωω
πωωωω
πωω,',()
()()
()sin(())
(),TT ttdt eitdt
TT
eiTeiT
iTTT
=
−∫′=′−=
−∫
=′−−−′−
−′=−′
−′1
2
2/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 ω,T /G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03 /G50/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G48/G47/G03 /G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F
/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G36 /G37 /G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G4C/G49
ωωπ −′=± = nTn/,,,...12 /G03/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G4F/G5C/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G51/G48/G48/G47/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55
/G04PttdtT
TT
=
−∫ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G16/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G36 /G37 /G03/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G44/G55/G48/G1D
/G57 /G37 /G33 /G57/G57 /G49/G52/G55 /G57 /G37
/G49/G52/G55 /G57 /G37T, /G04,
, ,==≤
>
0/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G17/G0C/G14/G17
() ()[]
()ω ω ω ωωωω
πω ωωωω
πωωωωω, /G04
sin
.TP ttdt ttdtd
edtddTT
TT
TT
TT
it== =′′ ′
= ′ ′=′−′
−′′− −∞∞
−
−∞∞
−−′
−∞∞∫ ∫∫
∫∫ ∫1
2/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G18/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G45/G48/G03/G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G57/G48/G51/G03/G44/G56/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G1D
ωωωω ωωωω
πωω,, /G04 /G04sin(())
(), TTPPTT
TT
ttdtT′= ′=
−∫′=−′
−′/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G19/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G15/G0C/G0F/G03/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G0F/G03/G44/G55/G48/G1D
ωπ ωω δπn n m nm nTCn TTT,C ,C ,C /, ,,,..., ,, / =+ =±± = 012 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G1A/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G26/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G44/G51/G57/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G52/G50/G48/G56/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G17/G11/G14/G0C/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49
/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G1A/G0C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G48/G57/G0F/G03/G45/G48/G46/G44/G58/G56/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G57 /G37 /G48nintω πω
,,, /002 = /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G1B/G0C
/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03 /G44/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03 /G56/G48/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G03 /G10/G37 ≤ /G57≤ /G37/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 ω,T /G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G36 /G37 /G03 /G11/G03 /G24/G56/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03 /G56/G48/G48/G03 /G4F/G44/G57/G48/G55/G0F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 ω,T /G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G17/G11/G1A/G0C/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G55/G51/G48/G55/G56/G57/G52/G51/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G11/G03 /G2F/G48/G57/G03 /G58/G56/G03 /G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G04PT /G03 /G4C/G56
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G36 /G37 /G03/G1D
/G03/G03/G04, /G04 /G04. /G04 , PTPPP TT TT T ω ωωω = == /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G1C/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G44/G46/G46/G52/G58/G51/G57/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G1A/G0C/G0F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G1D
/G04 ,,,C ,C PTTTT
nn n =
=−∞∞
∑πωω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G28/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G1A/G0C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G48/G55/G50/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
()[]
()()[]
()ω ωπωωω
πωωω
πωωωωω
ωω, /G04, ,,,
,sin
,sin
,,C ,C
,C,C
,C,C,C
,CTPTTTTT
TTT
TT
TT
nn n
nnn
n nnn
n= =
=−
−=−
−=−∞∞
=−∞∞
=−∞∞∑
∑ ∑/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G0F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G0F/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G47/G58/G46/G48/G47/G1D/G14/G18
()[]
()ωωω
ωωω ,sin
,,,C
,C,C TfT
TTf
nn
nn =−
− =−∞∞
∑ /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G53/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G56/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G56/G03/G57/G1D
/G57 /G37≤ /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G25/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G46/G4F/G52/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G56/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 ω,T /G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G03 /G44/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G4C/G56
/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G55/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G52/G47/G4C/G49/G5C/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G44/G46/G46/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G1D
/G04 /G04 /G04 /G04 /G04 /G04 ,, PPIPPPd TTdTTT T T == =
−∞∞
−∞∞
∫ ∫ωωωωωω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G35/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G0B/G17/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 ω,T /G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G03 /G44/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G36 /G37 /G03 /G11
/G2C/G51/G47/G48/G48/G47/G03/G44/G51/G5C/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G53/G53/G52/G55/G57/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G36 /G37 /G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G03/G58/G51/G4C/G54/G58/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
/G58 /G57 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G33 /G58 /G57 /G37 /G37 /G58 /G47T () /G04 ,, == =
−∞∞
∫ωωω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G31/G48/G5B/G57/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G50/G58/G4F/G57/G4C/G53/G4F/G5C/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G18/G0C/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G04PT /G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
()[]
()/G04,,sin
,. PTTdT
TTωω ωωω
πωωω ==′−′
−′′
−∞∞
∫ /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G28/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G17/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G03 /G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 ω,T /G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G50/G56/G48/G4F/G59/G48/G56/G0F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G44/G46/G46/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G55/G48/G49/G11/G03 /G0B/G14/G17/G0C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G56/G48/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 /G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G5C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G49/G52/G55
/G45/G48/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G46/G52/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G11
/G18 /G11/G03/G36/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G45/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G57/G48/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56
/G2C/G51/G03 /G56/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G17/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G5A/G44/G56/G03 /G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G48/G47
/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51
ωω≤B /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G0C
/G26/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G14/G0C/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G44/G03 /G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G36 /G25 /G03 /G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G4C/G56
/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G44/G46/G4B/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G1D
/G04P dB
BB
=
−∫
ωω
ωωω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G15/G0C/G14/G19
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G44/G55/G48/G1D
ω ωω ωω
ωω, /G04,
, ,BPfor
forBB
B==≤
>
0/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G16/G0C
() ()[]
()/G57 /G25 /G33 /G57 /G57 /G47 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G47 /G47 /G57
/G57 /G48 /G47 /G57 /G47 /G47 /G57/G25 /G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G57B
BB
BB
BB
itt, /G04
sin
.== =′′ ′
= ′ ′=′′−
′−′− −∞∞
−
−∞∞
−′−
−∞∞∫ ∫∫
∫∫ ∫ωωω ωωω
πω
πω 1
2/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G17/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G4B/G48/G46/G4E/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G56
/G57 /G25 /G57 /G25 /G57 /G57 /G47/G57 /G57/G25
/G57 /G57
BB
,,sin(())
(), ′ ′=−′
−′=
−∫ωωωω
πωω
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G18/G0C
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G4C/G49
/G57 /G57 /G51 /G51B −′=± = πω/,,,...12 /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G19/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G56/G1D
/G57 /G51 /G27 /G51nD B ,/, ,,,... = +±= πω 012 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1B/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G27/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G59/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G44/G51/G57/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G56/G53/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C
/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
/G57 /G25 /G57 /G25nD mD nmB , ,,, /=δωπ /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1C/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G56/G48/G57/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G36 /G25 /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G1D
()/G04/ ,,, , P tBtBB B nD
nnD =
=−∞∞
∑πω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G56/G03/G0B/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G18/G11/G18/G10/G18/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G03/G58/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51
()
()/G58 /G57 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G33 /G58 /G57 /G57 /G25 /G57 /G25 /G58
/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G58 /G57B
BnD nD
n
nDB
nDB nnD() /G04 ,,
sin[ ]
(),, ,
,
,,≡= =
=−
−=−∞∞
=−∞∞∑
∑π
ω
ω
ω/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G27/G20/G13/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G57/G48/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G27 ≠ /G13/G11
/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G55/G48/G46/G44/G56/G57/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
()
()/G57 /G25 /G57 /G33 /G57 /G25 /G57 /G25 /G57 /G25/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G57 /G25B
BnD nD
nnDB
nDB nnD , /G04 ,,,sin[ ]
,,, ,,
,, == =−
− =−∞∞
=−∞∞
∑ ∑π
ωω
ω/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G44/G0C
/G52/G55/G1D/G14/G1A
()
()/G57 /G25 /G33 /G57 /G57 /G25 /G57 /G25 /G57 /G25/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G57 /G25B
BnD nD
nnDB
nDB nnD , /G04 ,,,sin[ ]
,., ,,
,, == =−
− =−∞∞
=−∞∞
∑ ∑π
ωω
ω/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G45/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
()
()/G57 /G25 /G33 /G57 /G25 /G57 /G25 /G57 /G25 /G57 /G25 /G47/G57 /G47/G57/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G57 /G25nD BnD nDnDB
nD, , ,,
,, /G04, ,,,sin[ ]
, = = =−
−−∞∞
−∞∞
∫ ∫ω
π/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G26/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G47/G48/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G58/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G52/G47/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G53/G44/G55/G57/G56/G1D
/G58 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G58 /G57 /G58 /G57+ − =+− =−− ()[()()],()[()()]1
21
2 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48
/G03 /G57 /G57nn≡,0 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G0F/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G47/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G53/G44/G55/G57/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G58/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
()
()()
()
()
()()
()/G58 /G57/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G58 /G57/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G58 /G57
/G58 /G57/G57
/G57/G58/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G58 /G57/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G58 /G57/G51 /G25
/G51 /G25 /G51/G51/G51 /G25
/G51 /G25 /G51/G51
/G25
/G25/G51 /G25
/G51 /G25 /G51/G51/G51 /G25
/G51 /G25 /G51/G51−
=∞
−
=∞
−
+ +
=∞
+
=∞
+=−
−−+
+
= +−
−++
+∑ ∑
∑ ∑/G0B /G0C/G56/G4C/G51 /G3E /G40/G0B /G0C/G56/G4C/G51 /G3E /G40/G0B /G0C
/G0B /G0C/G56/G4C/G51/G0B /G0C/G0B /G0C/G56/G4C/G51 /G3E /G40/G0B /G0C/G56/G4C/G51 /G3E /G40/G0B /G0Cω
ωω
ω
ω
ωω
ωω
ω/G14 /G14
/G14 /G14/G13/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G47/G03 /G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G51/G52/G51/G10/G51/G48/G4A/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G56/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G48/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A
/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G53/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G49/G4C/G5B/G48/G47/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G44/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G59/G4C/G48/G5A/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G5A/G48
/G56/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G48/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1B/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G16/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
()()() /G58 /G57/G57
/G57 /G51/G58 /G57
nn
B
Bn ()sin=−
− =−∞∞
∑1ω
ωπ/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G52/G55/G1D
()()()/G58 /G57
/G57 /G57 /G51/G58 /G57
Bnn
Bn()
sinω ωπ=−
− =−∞∞
∑1/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03 /G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G52/G4F/G48/G03 /G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G4C/G57/G56/G03 /G4F/G48/G49/G57/G03 /G4B/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G56/G4C/G47/G48/G0F/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G4C/G57/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G59/G44/G4F/G4C/G47/G03 /G03 /G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03 /G4C/G49/G03 /G58/G0B/G57/G0C
/G47/G52/G48/G56/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G03 /G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G03 /G48/G5B/G46/G48/G53/G57/G03 /G44/G57/G03 /G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G5C/G11/G03 /G2C/G57/G03 /G4B/G44/G56/G03 /G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G5C/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G30/G4C/G57/G57/G44/G4A/G10
/G2F/G48/G49/G49/G4F/G48/G55/G03/GB5/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G3E/G15/G19/G40/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G56/G57/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03 /G59/G4C/G48/G5A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03 /G44/G51/G4A/G4F/G48/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G48/G54/G56/G11/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G19/G0C/G10/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03 /G5A/G48
/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03 /G46/G4B/G44/G55/G44/G46/G57/G48/G55/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55/G03 /G27/G0F/G03 /G4F/G48/G57/G03 /G58/G56/G03 /G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G03 /G4C/G57/G03 /G25/G0B/G27/G0C/G11
/G28/G59/G48/G55/G5C/G03 /G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03 /G03 /G57/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G44/G46/G4B/G48/G47/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G57/G20/G57 /G51 /G0E/G27/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G56/G52/G50/G48/G03 /G59/G44/G4F/G58/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G51/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G27/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G14/G1B
/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G59/G4C/G48/G5A/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G52/G49
/G25/G0B/G27/G0C/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G48/G55/G50/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G25/G0B/G27/G20/G13/G0C/G11/G03 /G29/G52/G55/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G51/G48/G48/G47/G03 /G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G58/G56/G48/G03 /G48/G54/G56/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03 /G11
/G3A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
()[ ]
()/G57 /G57/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57nDmnDmB
nDm,,
,sin
=−
−ω
π/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
()
()/G57 /G57
/G57 /G58 /G57 /G58/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G58 /G57kD
kDkDnB
kDnB nn=
= =−
− =−∞∞
∑,
,,
,sin[ ]
()ω
ω/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G1B/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G51/G52/G5A/G03 /G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G56/G48/G57/G56/G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G59/G52/G4F/G59/G48/G47/G11/G03 /G28/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G14/G1B/G0C/G03 /G44/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03 /G52/G49
/G4C/G56/G52/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G4C/G56/G52/G50/G52/G55/G53/G4B/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03/G4F/G44/G45/G48/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G0B/G4E/G0F/G27/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G52/G56/G48/G03/G4F/G44/G45/G48/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G0B/G4E/G0F/G13/G0C/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G48/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03 /G49 /G57 /G57 /G33 /G49B()≡ /G0F/G03 /G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G5C
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G24/G11/G03/G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G18/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51
()()
()/G57 /G33 /G49 /G57 /G33 /G57 /G57 /G33 /G49 /G47 /G57
/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G57 /G33 /G49 /G47 /G57B B B
B
B= ′′′
=−′
−′′′−∞∞
−∞∞∫
∫sin.ω
π/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G1C/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G14/G1C/G0C/G03 /G5A/G44/G56/G03 /G48/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G55/G48/G49/G56/G11/G03 /G3E/G15/G1A/G40/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G3E/G15/G1B/G40/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51
/G49/G52/G55/G03/G45/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G57/G48/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G51/G47/G52/G5A/G11
/G19/G11/G03/G36/G52/G50/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G03/G44/G50/G45/G4C/G4A/G58/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G29/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G03/G4F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44/G59/G52/G4C/G47/G03/G56/G52/G50/G48/G03/G44/G50/G45/G4C/G4A/G58/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G52
/G45/G48/G03/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4A/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52
ωω<B /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C
/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G5A/G4C/G56/G48/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G44/G47/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03 /G44/G51/G5C/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G5D/G48/G55/G52/G03 /G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G53/G52/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G56/G03/G57 /G51/G0F/G27/G11/G03/G03 /G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03 /G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G03/G44/G51/G03/G44/G50/G45/G4C/G4A/G58/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G58/G53/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G56/G03/G44/G57/G03/G57/G20/G03/G57 /G51/G0F/G27/G11
/G36/G58/G46/G4B/G03 /G44/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03 /G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G44/G03 /G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G03 ωω=B /G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G03 /G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03 /G48/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48
/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G14/G1C
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G24/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G53/G4F/G44/G46/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G45/G5C
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G50
() ωπ
ωωπ
ωωf ttf eft
BnnDnD
BnitnD
nD = =
=−∞∞
=−∞∞−∑ ∑ ,,,
,2/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G58/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C
ω
πωt enDitnD
,,=1
2/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G16/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G46/G52/G59/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
/G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G47
BB
=
−∫
ωω
ωωω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G17/G0C
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1B/G0C/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G55/G57/G44/G51/G57/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G03/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G55/G03/G52/G51
()δωωωωπ
ωω ωωπωωω−′=′= ′=
=−∞∞
=−∞∞
′−∑ ∑
Bnnn
Bnintt eB
,,()/
001
2/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G18/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G03/G4B/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G18/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G03 /G15ωB /G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G48/G55
/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G55/G48/G53/G48/G44/G57/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G03/G48/G59/G48/G55/G5C/G03/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G1D
( )/G14
/G15/G15ωδωωπωω
Bnin
mB e mB
=−∞∞
=−∞∞
∑ ∑= −//G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G19/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4F/G44/G56/G57/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G47/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G55/G4C/G4A/G52/G55/G52/G58/G56/G4F/G5C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G55/G48/G49/G11/G03/G3E/G16/G40/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G26/G44/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03 ωω=2B /G0F
/G4C/G51/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G57/G55/G44/G47/G4C/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G48/G54/G56/G11/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G14/G0C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G57/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G0B/G19/G11/G17/G0C/G03 /G45/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G58/G56
/G45/G44/G46/G4E/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G48/G54/G56/G11/G03 /G0B/G18/G11/G14/G0C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G58/G56/G48/G47/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G52/G58/G57/G03 /G44/G50/G45/G4C/G4A/G58/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G51/G4F/G5C
/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G44/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G1D
/G29 /G57 /G57 /G29 /G48 /G55 /G48/G44 /G4Fit() , ,() ≡= >ωω0
00 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1A/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G4B/G48/G46/G4E/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G03/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G0B/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G27/G20/G13/G0C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G17/G0C/G11
/G03 ( ) ωπ
ωπδωωωωωωωF e m
Bni t
mB Bn = = −− <
=−∞∞
−
=−∞∞
∑ ∑22 20
0 0(), /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1B/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G11/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G56/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1B/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G55/G48/G46/G52/G59/G48/G55/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G46/G57/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1A/G0C/G11/G03/G2C/G49/G03/G4C/G51/G56/G57/G48/G44/G47/G03/G52/G49/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G4C/G56
/G44/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G03 ωωB=0 /G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G56/G57/G48/G44/G47/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1B/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D/G15/G13
( ) ωπ
ωπδωωωωωωωF e m
Bni t
mB B Bn = = −− =
=−∞∞
−
=−∞∞
∑ ∑22 20
0(), /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1C/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G49/G57/G48/G55/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0C/G1D
[ ] /G57 /G29 /G48 /G47 /G48
BB
it
B Bit= −++ ≠
−∫
ωω
ω ωδωωδωωω ()()0/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G52/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G55/G48/G46/G52/G59/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G1A/G0C/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G52/G5A/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G44/G51/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G19/G0C/G11/G03/G36/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55
/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
()π
ω ωωω
ωωω ωω
21
2
20
00
Bnitn
n
B nitn
nBeft e F(d
F( n=−∞∞−
−∞∞
=−∞∞′−
=−∞∞∑ ∫∑
∑=
′′
= −,
,(),)
),/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G46/G52/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G47/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G11/G03/G2C/G49/G03/G51/G52/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G4C/G51/G57/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48
/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G47/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G5B/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G51/G4C/G49/G48/G56/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G4C/G44/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G4B/G48/G51/G52/G50/G48/G51/G52/G51/G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G4A/G55/G48/G47/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G18/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G11
/G24/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G1C/G0C/G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G18/G0C/G0F/G03/G4C/G56
/G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G47 /G57nDmD nD mD nmB ,, , , / = =
−∞∞
∫δωπ /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G52/G55
−∞∞
∫−
−−
−=sin[()]
()sin[( )]
(),
,,
,tt
tttt
ttdtnD B
nD BmD B
mD Bnm
Bω
ωω
ωδ
ωπ/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G1A/G11/G03/G03/G36/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G4F/G49/G10/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G44/G5B/G4C/G56/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G18/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G58/G51/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50
/G50/G4C/G51/G58/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G53/G4F/G58/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G5C/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G53/G55/G44/G46/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G55/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G46/G52/G4F/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G03/G47/G44/G57/G44/G03/G44/G57/G03/G44/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G46/G44/G51
/G45/G48/G03/G46/G4B/G52/G56/G48/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G48/G03/G57/G20/G13/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G4F/G49/G03/G44/G5B/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G0B/G57/G21/G13/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52
/G48/G5B/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G03/G5A/G4B/G52/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G44/G5B/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G11/G03/G30/G52/G55/G48/G52/G59/G48/G55/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G29/G52/G55/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F
/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G5C/G1D
()() /G29 /G29∗=−ωω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G0C/G15/G14
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G47/G47/G03/G53/G44/G55/G57/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G29/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G44/G56/G1D
()()[ ] ()()[ ] /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57+ − =+− =−− () ,()1
21
2/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G0C
/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G52/G56/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55
/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G56/G1D
() /G49 /G57 /G57 /G29 /G29 /G47 /G57 /G29/G0B /G47+
−∞+∞
∗+∞
= + = ∫ ∫() cos()[ ()] cos()Re[)]1
21
2
02
πωωωωπω ωω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G16/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
/G49 /G57 /G57 /G29/G0B /G47−+∞
=−∫() sin()Im[)]2
0πω ωω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G17/G0C
/G35/G48/G3E /G0C/G40 /G46/G52/G56/G0B /G0C /G3E /G0B /G0C/G40 /G29/G0B /G57 /G49 /G57 /G47/G57 ωπω =+∞
+∫2
0/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G18/G0C
/G2C /G50 /G3E /G0C/G40 /G56/G4C/G51/G0B /G0C /G3E /G0B /G0C/G40 /G29/G0B /G57 /G49 /G57 /G47/G57 ωπω =−+∞
−∫2
0/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G19/G0C
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G48/G55/G50/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G52/G56/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G56/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56
/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G1D/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G57 /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F
/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G56/G03 /G57 /G33 /G0F=1 /G03/G0B/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G33/G20/G14/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57 /G33 /G0F=−1
/G0B/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G33/G20/G10/G14/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G52/G47/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G0C/G11/G03/G31/G52/G5A/G0F/G03/G45/G48/G46/G44/G58/G56/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G47/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G03 → /G10/G57/G0F/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G56/G57/G52/G55/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57 ≥ /G13/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G44/G51/G5C/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G52/G49/G03/G57/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G56/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G47/G47/G03/G53/G44/G55/G57/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G0C/G1D
[ ][ ] /G49 /G57 /G57 /G49 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G57 /G33 /G49 /G57 /G33 /G49 /G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C /G0F /G0F ≡=+≡=+=−+ − 1 1 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G1A/G0C
/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G1D
/G57 /G57 /G33 /G57 /G33 ==+=− , ,1 1 /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G1B/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1A/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G1B/G0C/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G1D
/G57 /G33 /G33 /G57 /G57 /G33 /G33/G4C/G57
/G57 /G33 /G57 /G33
/G57 /G33 /G57 /G33 /G57 /G33 /G57 /G33 /G57 /G57/G0F /G0F /G46 /G52 /G56/G0B /G0C /G0F /G0F /G0F /G56 /G4C /G51 /G0B /G0C /G0F
/G0F /G0F /G0F
/G0F /G0F /G0F /G0F /G0B /G0C /G0F=== =−=−=
=′=−=
=′===−′=−=−′111
21 1
2
1 10
11 1 11
2ω
πω ω
πω
δ/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G1C/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G47/G47/G03/G53/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G44/G46/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G56/G1D/G15/G15
/G04,, , ,
/G04,, , ,ItPtPdttPtPdt
IPPd P Pd===+=−=−
===+=−=−−∞∞
−∞∞
−∞∞
−∞∞∫ ∫
∫ ∫11 1 1
11 1 1 ωω ωω ω ω/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G03/G29/G52/G55/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G0F/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G16/G0C/G10/G0B/G1A/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G44/G46/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
/G57 /G33 /G49 /G57 /G33 /G33 /G33 /G49 /G47 /G0F /G0F /G0F /G0F == ===∞
∫12 111
0ωω ω /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G16/G44/G0C
/G57 /G33 /G49 /G57 /G33 /G33 /G33 /G49 /G47 /G0F /G0F /G0F /G0F =−= =−=−=−∞
∫12 1 1 1
0ω ω ω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G17/G44/G0C
ω ωω , ,,, Pf PPtPfdt == ===∞
∫12 111
0/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G18/G44/G0C
ω ω ω , , , , Pf P PtPfdt =−= =−=−=−∞
∫12 1 1 1
0/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G19/G44/G0C
/G3A/G48/G03/G56/G48/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G16/G0C/G10/G0B/G1A/G11/G19/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G16/G44/G0C/G10/G0B/G1A/G11/G19/G44/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G52/G56/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G0F/G03/G45/G58/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03/G50/G58/G56/G57/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G53/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G5C/G0F/G03/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G5C
/G50/G58/G56/G57/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G4C/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G0B/G33/G20/G14/G0C/G03/G52/G55/G03/G52/G47/G47/G03/G0B/G33/G20/G10/G14/G0C/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G51/G52/G5A/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F
/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G51/G52/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G53/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G5C/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G24/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G53/G52/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G52/G58/G57/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G50/G48/G44/G56/G58/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G0F/G03/G56/G57/G44/G55/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52
/G46/G52/G4F/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G03/G47/G44/G57/G44/G03/G44/G57/G03/G44/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G51/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G20/G13/G11/G03/G25/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G52/G58/G55
/G44/G53/G53/G44/G55/G44/G57/G58/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G47/G4F/G48/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G1D
/G57 /G29 /G4C /G57 /G57
/G57 /G29/G49 /G52 /G55 /G57
/G4C /G57 /G49 /G52 /G55/GEA /G571 0 0
2
01
2
0 0
1
20= ≡
=<
≥
πω ω
πωexp() ,
, ,
exp(), ,/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G59/G44/G4F/G58/G44/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G4C/G55/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G56/G0F/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G0C/G1D
ω ωωδωω
ωπωωπωωδωω/G29 /G57 /G57 /G47/G57
/G29 /G4C /G57 /G47/G57/G4C1 0 0
2
00
01
201
21
21= =−
= −=−+−−∞∞
∞∫
∫(),
exp[()] (),/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G15/G0C/G15/G16
/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G4F/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47
/G45/G5C/G03/G44/G03/G53/G52/G4F/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4C/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G5B/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56
/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55
/G04/G57 /G57 /G57 /G47/G57+∞
=∫
/G13/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G5C/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G45/G55/G44/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C
/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G51/G52/G03/G4F/G52/G51/G4A/G48/G55/G03/G45/G48/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G1D
() ωω ωωπωωδωω /G04 . t ttdti+∞
′= ′=−′+−′ ∫
01
211
2/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48
/G24 /G57 /G29 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G29 /G47/G57 /G4C /G57 /G29 /G57 /G47/G57 /G0B /G0C /G04 /G04 /G48/G5B /G53 /G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C ωω ω
πω ≡ = = −+∞
+∞
∫ ∫
/G13 /G13/G14
/G15/G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G29/G0B/G57/G0C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G49/G52/G55/G03/G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G57/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G1D
/G29 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G29 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G29 /G47 /G4C /G57 /G24 /G47 /G0B /G0C /G04 /G04 /G04 /G48/G5B /G53 /G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C = = =+
−∞∞
+ +
−∞∞
∫ ∫ωωω
πωωω/G14
/G15/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G24/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G15/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57
/G24/G4C/G24/G47 /G0B /G0C/G0B /G0Cωπω
ωωω =′
′−′
−∞∞
∫1/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G2B/G4C/G4F/G45/G48/G55/G57/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G50/G44/G4A/G4C/G51/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G53/G44/G55/G57/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G24/G1D
/G35/G48/G3E /G0B /G0C/G40/G2C /G50 /G3E /G0B /G0C/G40/G0F
/G2C /G50 /G3E /G0B /G0C/G40/G35/G48/G3E /G0B /G0C/G40/G11/G24/G24/G47
/G24/G24/G47ωπω
ωωω
ωπω
ωωω=′
′−′
=− ′
′−′−∞∞
−∞∞∫
∫1
1/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G1B/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G18/G10/G1A/G11/G14/G1B/G0C/G03/G49/G44/G56/G57/G03/G48/G51/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G03/G47/G48/G46/G44/G5C/G03/G44/G56/G03 ω→∞ /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G55/G48/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G4F/G56/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03 /G58/G56/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G19/G11/G14/G0C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G11/G03 /G24/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G4F/G44/G46/G48
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G18/G0C/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G58/G50/G1D/G15/G17
/G03/G03/G03/G03
[ ]/G24 /G57 /G29 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G29
/G57 /G57 /G57 /G47/G57 /G57 /G29/G25 /G51/G51 /G27 /G51 /G27
/G25 /G51 /G27/G51 /G27 /G51 /G27/G0B /G0C /G04 /G04
/G0F/G0F /G0F
/G0F /G0Fωωπ
ωω
π
ωω≡ =
=+
=−∞∞
+
+≥∞∞∑
∑∫
/G13/G13/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G1C/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G44/G50/G48/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G0B/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G0C/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
() /G25 /G57 /G57 /G29 /G48 /G29 /G57
/G25 /G51 /G27/G51 /G27 /G51 /G27
/G25 /G51 /G27/G4C /G57
/G51 /G27/G51 /G27/G0B /G0C/G0F /G0F /G0F/G0Fωπ
ωωπ
ωω= =
+≥∞
+≥∞−∑ ∑
/G13 /G13 /G15/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G13/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G48/G46/G52/G51/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G13/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B
/G27/G20/G13/G0F/G03/G45/G48/G46/G52/G50/G48/G56/G1D
( )/G25 /G48/G4C/G25 /G51/G4C /G51
/G25 /G25/G25 /G0B /G0C/G48/G5B/G53 /G0B /G0C /G12/G0B /G0C /G12ωω ω ωωπωωωπω= =− −=∞
−∑/G14
/G15/G14
/G15/G14
/G14/G13 /G13/G13 /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G56/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G48/G46/G52/G51/G47/G03 /G48/G5B/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G15/G0C/G0F/G03 /G44/G4F/G57/G4B/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G03 /G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03 /G48/G5B/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G4B/G44/G59/G48
/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G48/G03 /G53/G52/G4F/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G4C/G47/G58/G58/G50/G11/G03 /G3A/G48/G03 /G50/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G45/G48/G46/G44/G58/G56/G48/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G13/G0C/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G52/G51/G48
/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G47/G03/G3D/G10/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G3E/G18/G10/G1B/G40/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G56/G57/G48/G44/G47/G0F/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G1C/G0C/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G45/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G11/G03/G28/G5B/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G13/G0C/G03 /G4C/G56
/G44/G03 /G4A/G52/G52/G47/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G5B/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G1C/G0C/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G48/G51/G56/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G4C/G57/G03 /G4B/G44/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G48/G03 /G53/G52/G4F/G48/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G4C/G47/G58/G44/G11/G03 /G2C/G51
/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G1C/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G44/G53/G53/G48/G44/G55/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G03/G46/G52/G48/G49/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G56/G1D
()( )
()/G26 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G47/G57 /G48/G57 /G57
/G57 /G57/G47/G57/G51 /G27 /G51 /G27/G4C /G57/G51 /G27 /G25
/G51 /G27/G0B /G0F /G0C/G56/G4C/G51
/G0F /G0F/G0F
/G0Fω ω
πω
πω= =−
−∞ ∞−∫ ∫ /G13 /G13/G14
/G15/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G15/G0C
/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G45/G55/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G57/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4B/G48/G4F/G53/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G17/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G1D
()()/G26 /G57/G4C /G57
/G4C/G47/G51 /G27/G51 /G27
/G25/G25
ω
πω
πωωω
ωω
/G0F/G48/G5B/G53/G0B /G0C
/G0F/G0F=−′
′−′
−∫/G14
/G15 /G15/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G15/G16/G0C
/G1B/G11/G03/G36/G58/G50/G50/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G52/G51/G46/G4F/G58/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03 /G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G47/G48/G50/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48
/G48/G49/G49/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G03 /G44/G47/G4D/G58/G56/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G44/G47/G59/G44/G51/G57/G44/G4A/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46
/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G4C/G57/G56/G03 /G46/G4F/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G5C/G0F/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G53/G44/G55/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G11/G03 /G2C/G57/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G56/G58/G4C/G57/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G58/G56/G48/G47
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03 /G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G56/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G58/G56/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G44/G51/G47
/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G49/G5C/G03 /G4A/G55/G48/G44/G57/G4F/G5C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G4F/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03 /G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G56/G48
/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03 /G24/G0F/G03 /G44/G03 /G4F/G44/G55/G4A/G48/G03 /G46/G4F/G44/G56/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G48/G47
/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G5C/G03 /G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G15/G18
/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G59/G48/G55/G4A/G48/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G4C/G57/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G56/G56/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G5C/G03 /G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G45/G48/G48/G51/G03 /G58/G56/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G55/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G52/G58/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G56/G4C/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G49/G5C/G03 /G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G56/G03 /G47/G48/G59/G4C/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 /G56/G52/G50/G48/G5A/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G49/G55/G52/G50
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G51/G47/G44/G55/G47/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G47/G58/G55/G48/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G52/G4F/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G26/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G46/G44/G4F/G44/G55/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G56/G03 /G0B/G45/G55/G44/G46/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G0C/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G57/G48/G51/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G5A/G44/G5C/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G47/G52/G48/G56/G03 /G51/G52/G57/G03 /G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47
/G52/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G4B/G52/G4C/G46/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G56/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G56/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B
/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G45/G55/G44/G46/G4E/G48/G57/G56/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03 /G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G48/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G49/G48/G44/G57/G58/G55/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G56/G46/G44/G4F/G44/G55/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G56/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4A/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G59/G44/G4F/G4C/G47/G4C/G57/G5C/G03 /G47/G52/G50/G44/G4C/G51/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 /G0B/G4C/G51/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G5C/G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G0F/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03 /G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G50/G52/G50/G48/G51/G57/G44/G0C/G11/G03 /G24/G51
/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G51/G51/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G46/G48/G44/G56/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G44/G49/G57/G48/G55
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G44/G4C/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G52/G50/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G0B/G45/G44/G51/G47/G5A/G4C/G47/G57/G4B/G0C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G45/G48/G46/G52/G50/G48/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G11/G03 /G25/G58/G57
/G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G03 /G44/G03 /G56/G58/G45/G10/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G56/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G44/G55/G48/G03 /G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G44/G51/G47
/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48
/G51/G52/G51/G10/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G4A/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G0C/G0F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G51/G47/G5A/G4C/G47/G57/G4B/G0F/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G17/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G0F/G03 /G44/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49
/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G0B/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G0C/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56
/G49/G52/G55/G03 /G44/G4F/G4F/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G56/G03 /G0B/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G10/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G17/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G0C/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G44/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G52/G51/G48/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G48/G56/G56/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G11
/G30/G52/G55/G48/G52/G59/G48/G55/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G17/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03 /G44/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G03 /G58/G56/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G4F/G44/G46/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G44/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48
/G56/G58/G50/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G4F/G4F/G03 /G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03 /G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03 /G47/G52/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G0F/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G19/G11/G15/G0C/G0F
/G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G56/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03 /G0B/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03 /G26/G0C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G56/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G03 /G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G53/G52/G56/G4C/G57/G4C/G59/G48
/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G10/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G1A/G11/G14/G1C/G0C/G03/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G47/G48/G44/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G59/G4C/G48/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G56/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03 /G44/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G57/G5A/G48/G48/G51/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G52/G59/G48/G55/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48
/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G57/G48/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G50/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G11/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G56/G56
/G52/G49/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G44/G03/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G4C/G55/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G11
/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G24
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G03/G45/G44/G56/G48/G56/G1D
() () /G5B /G5B /G5B /G5B /G5C /G5C /G5C /G5C /G5C /G5B ′=−′ ′=−′−∞≤≤∞−∞≤≤∞ δ δ , , ; /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G0C
/G4F/G4C/G51/G4E/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G4A/G48/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G0B/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C/G0C/G03/G1D/G15/G19
/G5B /G5C /G4C /G5B /G5C =/G14
/G15π/G48/G5B/G53/G0B /G0C /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G15/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03()δx /G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G45/G5C
/G2C/G20
−∞∞
−∞∞
∫ ∫= /G5B /G5B /G47 /G5B /G5C /G5C /G47 /G5C /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G16/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G2C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G48/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G1D
() δ /G5B /G5B /G44 /G5B /G5C /G5C /G5B /G47 /G5C
/G44/G44
−′= ′
−∫/G0F
()= = >
−∫/G14
/G15/G13π π/G44/G44
/G4C /G5B /G5C/G48 /G47 /G5C/G44 /G44/G5B
/G44/G5B/G44/G56/G4C/G51/G0F /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G17/G0C
/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 δ /G0B/G5B/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G56/G56/G1D
δ δ /G0B /G0C /G4F/G4C /G50 /G0B /G0F /G0C /G5B /G5B /G44
/G44=
→∞/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G18/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G52/G55/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0C/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A
/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G1D
δ δ
δ δ
δ δ()lim(), ,
, .
()lim(),
()()lim()()().x xforx
forx
xdx xdx
fxxxdx fxxxdxfxaa
aa
aa≡ =≠
∞ =
≡ =
−≡ −=→∞
−∞∞
→∞−∞∞
−∞∞
→∞−∞∞∫ ∫
∫ ∫0 0
0
1
0 0 0/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G19/G0C
/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G47/G58/G55/G48/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G4F/G44/G55/G4A/G48/G55/G03/G46/G4F/G44/G56/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F
/G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/GB3/G4C/G51/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G11/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G33/G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G0F/G03/G56/G58/G46/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G51/G4A
/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G53/G44/G55/G44/G50/G48/G57/G48/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G46/G52/G51/G59/G48/G55/G4A/G48/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G11/G03/G24/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G50/G53/G4F/G48
/G4C/G56/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G58/G56/G48/G47/G1D
/G03/G03/G03 /G33 /G44 /G5C /G5C /G47 /G5C /G33 /G44 /G2C
/G44/G44
/G44 /G0B /G0C /G1E /G4F /G4C /G50 /G0B /G0C = =
−→∞ ∫/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G1A/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G44/G56
()()() ( ) δ δ δ /G5B /G5B /G33 /G5B /G33 /G33 /G5B /G56/G58/G46/G4B /G57/G4B/G44/G57 /G5B /G5B /G33 /G2C /G5B /G5B −′= ′ −′→=−′ /G0F /G0F /G0F /G0B /G0C /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G1B/G0C/G15/G1A
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G57/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G5B/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G33/G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G56/G48/G48/G03/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G14/G44/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G16/G0C/G0C/G1D/G03/G03/G33/G20/G33/G15/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G33/G20/G33/G82/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B
/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11
/G3A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G19/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44
/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G56/G48/G55/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G1B/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
()()()
()()δ
δ δ/G5B /G5B /G33 /G5B /G33 /G2C /G33 /G5B /G5B /G33/G33 /G5B /G5B /G33/G33 /G5B /G47 /G5B
/G5B /G5B /G33 /G5B /G5B /G33 /G47 /G5B−′= ′= ′′′′′′′′
=−′′′′−′′′−∞∞
−∞∞∫
∫/G0F
/G0F /G0F /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G1C/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G49/G0B/G5B/G0C/G03/G45/G48/G03/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G56/G58/G53/G53/G52/G55/G57/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G4D/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G1D
/G49 /G5B /G5B /G49 /G5B /G33 /G49 /G5B /G33/G2C/G33 /G49 /G5B /G33/G33 /G5B /G5B /G33 /G49 /G47 /G5B
/G5B /G5B /G33 /G49 /G5B /G47 /G5B/G0B /G0C
/G0B /G0F /G0C /G0B /G0C /G11== = = ′′′
=−′′′−∞∞
−∞∞∫
∫δ/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G29/G52/G55/G03/G03/G51/G52/G51/G03/G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G56/G57/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4B/G52/G4F/G47/G56/G1D
/G5B /G33 /G49 /G5B /G5B /G33 /G5B /G33 /G49 /G47 /G5B =−′′′
−∞∞
∫δ /G0B /G0F /G0C /G11 /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G48/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G4B/G5C/G53/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G56/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G44/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G03/G56/G58/G53/G53/G52/G55/G57/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G53/G44/G46/G48/G11
/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G1D
δ π /G0B /G0F /G0C /G12 /G13 /G44 /G44= /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G3A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G55/G57/G44/G51/G57/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G03/G47/G48/G4F/G57/G44/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G17/G0C/G1D
δ δ /G0B /G0F /G0C /G0B /G0F /G0C /G45 /G5B /G44/G45/G5B /G44 /G45 =/G14/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G45/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G55/G48/G44/G4F/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G11/G03/G29/G52/G55/G03/G45/G21/G13/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G1D
δπ πδ /G0B /G0F /G0C /G0B /G0F /G0C /G45 /G5B /G44 /G48 /G47 /G5C/G45/G48 /G47/G5D/G45/G5B /G44/G45
/G44/G44
/G4C /G5B/G45 /G5C
/G44/G45/G44/G45
/G4C /G5B/G5D= = =
− −∫ ∫/G14
/G15/G14
/G15/G14/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G29/G52/G55/G03/G45/G1F/G13/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
δπ π πδ /G0B /G0F /G0C /G0B /G0F /G0C /G45 /G5B /G44 /G48 /G47 /G5C/G45/G48 /G47/G5D/G45/G48 /G47/G5D/G45/G5B /G44 /G45
/G44/G44
/G4C /G5B/G45 /G5C
/G44/G45/G44/G45
/G4C /G5B/G5D
/G44 /G45/G44 /G45
/G4C /G5B/G5D= = =−=
− −−
∫ ∫ ∫/G14
/G15/G14
/G15/G14
/G15/G14/G0F
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G0F/G03/G57/G52/G4A/G48/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G0F/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G56/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G16/G0C/G11/G03/G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G16/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G1D/G15/G1B
δ δ ()() bxbx=1/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G18/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G4C/G51/G46/G4F/G58/G47/G48/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G49/G0B/G5B/G0C/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G56/G03/G44/G57/G03/G5B/G20/G5B /G51 /G1D
δ δ /G0B /G0B /G0C/G0C/G0B /G0C/G0B /G0C /G49 /G5B/G49 /G5B/G5B /G5B
n nn =
′− ∑1/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G51/G48/G44/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5D/G48/G55/G52/G56/G1D
/G49 /G5B /G49 /G5B /G5B /G5Bn n ()()() ≈′− /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G25/G11
/G24/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G4C/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/GB6/G56/G03/G46/G5C/G46/G4F/G48/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G46/G5C/G46/G4F/G48/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G03 /G33/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G53/G4C/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G55/G52/G52/G50/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G57/G4B/G48
/G2A/G5C/G51/G48/G46/G52/G4F/G52/G4A/G5C/G03 /G27/G48/G53/G44/G55/G57/G50/G48/G51/G57/G0F/G03 /G36/G52/G55/G52/G4E/G44/G03 /G30/G48/G47/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G26/G48/G51/G57/G48/G55/G0F/G03 /G25/G48/G48/G55/G10/G36/G4B/G48/G59/G44/G0F/G03 /G2C/G56/G55/G44/G48/G4F/G0F/G03 /G5A/G44/G56
/G44/G53/G53/G55/G52/G5B/G4C/G50/G44/G57/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G44/G56/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G1D
/G39 /G57/G49/G52/G55 /G57 /G57 /G33 /G4C/G47/G4F/G48/G24 /G57 /G49/G52/G55 /G57 /G57 /G53/G58 /G50 /G53 /G4C /G51/G4A/G0B /G0C/G0F /G0B /G0C /G0F/G56/G4C/G51/G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C /G0F=<<<< 02 0
11 1 πϕ/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G39/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G58/G50/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G58/G50/G53/G48/G47/G03/G44/G4C/G55/G0F/G03/G24/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G44/G51/G57/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G58/G50/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G14/G20/G03/G16/G56/G48/G46/G0F
ϕ1 /G20/G0B/G14/G12/G19/G0C/G2B/G5D/G03 /G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G33/G03 /G5A/G44/G56/G03 /G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G44/G51/G48/G56/G57/G4B/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03 /G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G47/G58/G55/G48/G11/G03 /G30/G52/G56/G57/G03 /G52/G49
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G33/G20/G18/G56/G48/G46/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G48/G03/G16/G11/G16/G56/G48/G46/G1F/G33/G1F/G14/G19/G56/G48/G46/G11
/G29/G52/G55/G03/G53/G55/G44/G46/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G46/G44/G4F/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G53/G58/G55/G53/G52/G56/G48/G56/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G58/G56/G48/G49/G58/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G03 /G57 /G57 /G33→+/2 /G03/G45/G5C/G03/G4B/G44/G4F/G49/G03/G44
/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G03/G03/G57/G52/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G39/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G10/G33/G12/G15/G03/G1F/G03/G57/G03/G1F/G03/G33/G12/G15/G03/G1D
/G39 /G57/G49/G52/G55 /G57 /G57 /G57 /G4C/G47/G4F/G48/G24 /G57 /G57 /G49/G52/G55 /G57 /G57 /G53/G58 /G50 /G53 /G4C /G51/G4A/G0B /G0C/G0F /G0B /G0C /G0F/G56/G4C/G51/G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C /G0F=−<<− <
02
2 212 2 πϕ/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G15/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G57 /G33 /G572 12 =−()/ /G03/G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G4C/G46/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G03/G33/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G44/G03 /G50/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G51/G03 /G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C/G03 /G50/G44/G5C/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G50/G52/G55/G48/G03 /G56/G58/G4C/G57/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G0F/G03 /G51/G44/G50/G48/G4F/G5C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56
/G52/G49/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G03/G33/G1D
/G57 /G51 /G33 /G51 /G57 /G33 /G0F /G46 /G52 /G56/G0B /G12 /G0C =2π /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G51/G20/G13/G0F/G14/G0F/G15/G0F/GAB/G03/G03/G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G16/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G39/G0B/G57/G0C ≡tV /G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G1D/G15/G1C
()/G39 /G57 /G57 /G39 /G57 /G51 /G33 /G51 /G33 /G39
/G44/G44 /G51 /G57 /G33n
n
nn() ,,
cos/,==
=+=∞
==∞∑
∑0
0
122π/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G17/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G57 /G51 /G33 /G0F /G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G53/G48/G55/G4C/G52/G47/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G0F/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F
/G3E/G10/G33/G12/G15/G0F/G03/G33/G12/G15/G40/G03/G44/G51/G47
()
()[ ]()[ ]/G44/G33/G39 /G57 /G51 /G57 /G33 /G47 /G57
/G24
/G33/G49 /G57 /G57
/G49/G49 /G57 /G57
/G49n
tP
n
nn
ntttP=
=−+
−−+−
+
∫
==12
22 22
22
1 12
11 12
12()cos/
cos cos
,/
/π
ππϕϕ
ϕπϕϕ
ϕ/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G18/G0C
/G44/G51/G47
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G49 /G51 /G33n=/. /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G19/G0C
/G2B/G48/G55/G48 /G03 /G49/G14 /G20 /G14/G12/G33/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G49n /G03/G0B/G51/G21/G14/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4B/G4C/G4A/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G4B/G44/G55/G50/G52/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G11
/G2C/G51/G03/G53/G55/G44/G46/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G50/G48/G44/G56/G58/G55/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F
/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G45/G48/G03/G50/G52/G47/G4C/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G44/G46/G46/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G47/G58/G55/G48/G03/G52/G58/G57/G4F/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G48/G5B/G57
/G48/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G11/G03/G3A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G59/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G49/G03/G47/G58/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G15/G37/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G49
/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G0B/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G29/G0B/G57/G0C/G20/G39/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G55/G48/G50/G48/G50/G45/G48/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 ωπ=2f /G0C/G03/G45/G48/G46/G52/G50/G48/G56/G1D
/G2A/G44 /G37/G44/G37 /G37
T nn
nn
n n()sin() sin[()]sin[()], ωω
ωωω
ωωωω
ωω= +−
−++
+
=∞
∑0
1/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G1A/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03ωππn nfnP ==22/ /G11
/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G26
/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G29/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G49/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G48/G47/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G56/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G56
/G3E/G15/G1C/G40/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G0B/G57/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
/G0B /G0C /G0B /G0F /G0C /G0B /G0C /G3A /G49 /G45 /G44 /G44 /G49 /G57/G57 /G45
/G44/G47/G57ψ ψ =−
−
−∞∞
∗∫1
2 /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G0C/G16/G13
/G24/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G26/G11/G14/G0C/G03 ψ /G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G44/G03 /G56/G54/G58/G44/G55/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G57/G48/G4A/G55/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /GB3/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G46/G03 /G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/GB4/G11/G03 /G2C/G51/G03 /G52/G55/G47/G48/G55/G03 /G57/G52
/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G5C/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03 /G57/G52/G03 /G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 ψ /G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G45/G5C/G03 /G44/G51
/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G3A/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G4C/G57/G56/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G1D
/G57 /G3A /G45 /G44 /G44/G57 /G45
/G44/G0F=−
−1
2ψ /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G15/G0C
/G37/G4B/G44/G51/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G52/G49/G03/G49/G0B/G57/G0C/G0F/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G1D
/G45 /G44 /G3A /G49 /G45 /G44 /G3A /G57 /G57 /G49 /G47/G57 /G0F /G0F=
−∞∞
∫ /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G16/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G27/G44/G58/G45/G48/G46/G4B/G4C/G48/G56/G03 /G3E/G16/G13/G40/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48/G03 /G57/G55/G48/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G44/G03 /G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03 /G5A/G44/G5C/G11/G03 /G2F/G48/G57
/G58/G56/G03/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G3A /G27 /G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G5B/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G1D
/G57 /G3A /G4D /G4E /G57 /G57 /G4ED jkj j, ()(),/≡ = − ψ ψ222/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G17/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G52/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G03/G45/G44/G56/G4C/G56/G1D
−∞∞
∫ =⋅ lmWttWjkdtD D jkm , ,,l,δδ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G18/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G1D
/G2C /G3A /G4D /G4E /G4D /G4E /G3A
jkD D =
=−∞∞
∑
,,,. /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G19/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G49/G0B/G57/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G47/G48/G47/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G19/G0C
/G49 /G57 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G3A /G4D /G4E /G4D /G4E /G3A /G49
/G4D /G4E/G27 /G27 () ,, ,
,≡=
=−∞∞
∑ /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G1A/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G1D
/G4D /G4E /G3A /G49 /G4D /G4E /G3A /G57 /G57 /G49 /G47/G57D D , ,=
−∞∞
∫ /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G1B/G0C
/G32/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03 /G47/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03 /G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G56/G03 /G3E/G16/G14/G40/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G4A/G52/G03 /G44/G4F/G52/G51/G4A/G03 /G44/G51/G03 /G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03 /G53/G44/G57/G4B/G11/G03 /G03 /G3A/G48/G03 /G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03 /G51/G52/G5A
/G4F/G52/G52/G4E/G03 /G49/G52/G55/G03 /G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03 /G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G57/G48/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G0B/G26/G11/G15/G0C/G11/G03 /G2F/G48/G57
/G58/G56/G03/G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G39/G0B/G44/G0F/G45/G0C/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G5C/G1D
/G39 /G44 /G45 /G49 /G57/G44/G49/G57 /G45
/G44/G0B /G0F /G0C /G0B /G0C=−
1/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G1C/G0C
/G36/G58/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G51/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G48/G47/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G3E/G15/G14/G40/G1D
/G39 /G44 /G45 /G48 /G48iaCib(,)(ln)=− −Φ/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G26/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G46/G44/G4F/G48/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03 Φ /G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G1D/G16/G14
/G26/G4C/G57/G47
/G47 /G57/G47
/G47 /G57/G57/G4C/G47
/G47 /G57= +
=1
21, .Φ /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G1C/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
/G48 /G49 /G57 /G49 /G57 /G45/G4C /G45−=−Φ()(), /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G3E/G15/G14/G40/G1D
/G48 /G49 /G57
/G44/G49/G57
/G44iaC−=
(ln)() .1/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G39/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G48/G54/G11/G03 /G0B/G26/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G58/G51/G4C/G57/G44/G55/G5C/G03 /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G58/G56/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G4C/G56/G03 /G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47
/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55/G03 /G4C/G57/G56/G03 /G44/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G11 /G03 /G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G56/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G55/G48/G49/G11/G03 /G0B/G14/G13/G0C/G03 /G5A/G48/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03 /G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03 /G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G5A/G44/G5C/G11/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03 /G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G51/G48/G56/G56/G03 /G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03 /G46/G44/G51/G03 /G45/G48
/G55/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4C/G47/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G53/G48/G55/G44/G57/G52/G55/G1D
/G2C/G26/G45 /G44 /G45 /G44/G47/G45 /G47/G44
/G44=∫∫1
2
ψΨ Ψ,, , /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G17/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G44/G51/G57 /G26ψ /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G1D
/G26 /G47ψψω
ωω = <∞
−∞∞
∫/G04()
,2
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G18/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G04 /G0B /G0Cψω /G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G52/G49/G03 ψ()t /G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G15/G0C/G11/G03/G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G4A/G48/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G55/G56/G48/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G16/G0C/G1D
/G49 /G57 /G57 /G49/G26/G57 /G45 /G44 /G45 /G44 /G49/G47/G45 /G47/G44
/G44/G0B /G0C /G0F /G0F /G11 ≡=∫∫1
2
ψΨ Ψ /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G1C/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G50/G52/G47/G4C/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G1D
() /G45 /G44 /G49 /G45 /G44 /G57 /G57 /G49B nD
nnD , / ,,, Ψ Ψ =
=−∞∞
∑πω /G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G16/G44/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G17/G0C/G03/G57/G52/G1D
() /G4D /G4E /G27/G44 /G49 /G4D /G4E /G27/G44 /G57 /G57 /G49B nD
nnD , / ,,, =
=−∞∞
∑πω /G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G18/G11/G16/G45/G0C/G16/G15
/G35/G48/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G1D
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G14/G11/G03/G24/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G55/G56/G57/G48/G51/G0F/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56/G03/G35/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G29/G55/G44/G50/G48/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G2C/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G27/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G03/G29/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G56/G0F/G03/G25/G48/G51/G10/G2A/G58/G55/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G53/G55/G48/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G57/G0F/G03/G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03/G3E/G2C/G40/G11
/G15/G11/G03/G26/G11/G28/G11/G03/G36/G4B/G44/G51/G51/G52/G51/G0F/G03 /G25/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G36/G5C/G56/G57/G11/G03/G37/G48/G46/G4B/G11/G03/G2D /G11/G03 /G15/G1A /G0F/G03/G16/G1A/G1C/G10/G17/G15/G16/G0F/G03/G4C/G45/G4C/G47/G03/G19/G15/G16/G10/G19/G18/G19/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G17/G1B
/G16/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G39/G52/G51/G03/G31/G48/G58/G50/G44/G51/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G29/G52/G58/G51/G47/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G30/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/GB4/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G33/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G48/G57/G52/G51/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G33/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G48/G57/G52/G51/G03/G31/G2D/G03/G14/G1C/G18/G19/G03/G0B/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2A/G48/G55/G50/G44/G51/G03/G14/G1C/G16/G15
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G48/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0C
/G17/G11/G03/G2A/G11/G2A/G11/G03/G28/G50/G46/G4B/G0F/G03/GB3/G24/G4F/G4A/G48/G45/G55/G44/G4C/G46/G03/G30/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G36/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G30/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G29/G4C/G48/G4F/G47
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/GB4/G11/G03/G2D/G52/G4B/G51/G03/G3A/G4C/G4F/G48/G5C/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1A/G15
/G18/G11/G03/G36/G11/G2F/G11/G03/G25/G55/G44/G58/G51/G56/G57/G48/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/G26/G11/G30/G11/G03/G26/G44/G59/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2A/G11/G2D/G11/G03/G30/G4C/G4F/G45/G58/G55/G51/G0F/G03 /G24/G51/G51/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G31/G11/G3C/G11/G0C /G03 /G15/G17/G1A /G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G14/G16/G18/G10/G14/G1A/G16/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G19
/G19/G11/G03/G2F/G11/G03/G36/G46/G4B/G5A/G44/G55/G57/G5D/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G4C/G48/G03/G47/G48/G56/G03/G27/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G14/G10/G15/G0F/G03/G2B/G48/G55/G50/G44/G51/G51/G0F/G03/G33/G44/G55/G4C/G56/G03/G14/G1C/G18/G13/G10/G14/G1C/G18/G14
/G1A/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2A/G11/G28/G11/G03/G36/G4B/G4C/G4F/G52/G59/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G14/G10/G15/G0F/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G17/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1B/G03/G0B/G37/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G35/G58/G56/G56/G4C/G44/G51/G0C/G11
/G1B/G11/G03/G30/G11/G2D/G11/G03/G2F/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G4B/G4C/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/GB3/G2C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G29/G52/G58/G55/G4C/G48/G55/G03/G24/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G48/G47/G03/G29/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G26/G44/G50/G45/G55/G4C/G47/G4A/G48/G03/G14/G1C/G18/G1B
/G1C/G11/G03/G33/G11/G24/G11/G30/G11/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G33/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G4F/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G30/G48/G46/G4B/G44/G51/G4C/G46/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G17/G57/G4B/G03/G48/G47/G11/G03/G26/G4F/G44/G55/G48/G51/G47/G52/G51/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G32/G5B/G49/G52/G55/G47/G03/G14/G1C/G18/G1B/G0F/G03/G0B/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G03/G48/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G03/G44/G53/G53/G48/G44/G55/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G14/G1C/G16/G13/G0C/G11
/G14/G13/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2A/G11/G28/G11/G03/G36/G4B/G4C/G4F/G52/G59/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G11/G03/G16/G0F/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1A
/G14/G14/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G31/G11/G3C/G44/G11/G03/G39/G4C/G4F/G48/G51/G4E/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G29/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G11/G03/G17/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G17
/G14/G15/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G0F/G03/G30/G11/G2C/G11/G03/G2A/G55/G44/G48/G59/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G31/G11/G3C/G44/G11/G03/G39/G4C/G4F/G48/G51/G4E/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G29/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G59/G52/G4F/G11/G18/G0F/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G19
/G14/G16/G11/G03/G2E/G11/G03/G30/G44/G58/G55/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G2A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G28/G4C/G4A/G48/G51/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G28/G5B/G53/G44/G51/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G57/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G35/G48/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G52/G49/G03/G37/G52/G53/G52/G4F/G52/G4A/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G2A/G55/G52/G58/G53/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G33/G52/G4F/G4C/G56/G4B/G03/G36/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G58/G45/G4F/G4C/G56/G4B/G48/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G3A/G44/G55/G56/G44/G5A/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1B
/G14/G17/G11/G03/G31/G11/G31/G11/G03/G25/G52/G4A/G52/G4F/G58/G45/G52/G59/G0F/G03/G24/G11/G24/G11/G03/G2F/G52/G4A/G58/G51/G52/G59/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2C/G11/G37/G11/G03/G37/G52/G47/G52/G55/G52/G59/G0F/G03/GB3/G2C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G24/G5B/G4C/G52/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G34/G58/G44/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G29/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/GB4/G0F/G03/G25/G48/G51/G4D/G44/G50/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/G2F/G52/G51/G47/G52/G51/G03/G14/G1C/G1A/G18/G11
/G14/G18/G11/G03/G03/G2D/G11/G28/G11/G03/G35/G52/G45/G48/G55/G57/G56/G0F/G03 /G2D/G11/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11 /G03 /G1A /G0F/G03/G14/G13/G1C/G1A/G10/G14/G14/G13/G17/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G19
/G14/G19/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G33/G11/G03/G24/G51/G57/G52/G4C/G51/G48/G03 /G2D/G11/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11 /G03 /G14/G13 /G0F/G03/G18/G16/G10/G19/G1C/G0F/G03/G4C/G45/G4C/G47/G11/G03/G15/G15/G1A/G19/G10/G15/G15/G1C/G13/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1C/G16/G16
/G14/G1A/G11/G03/G24/G11/G03/G25/G52/G4B/G50/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G30/G11/G03/G2A/G44/G47/G48/G4F/G44/G0F/G03/GB3/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G03/G2E/G48/G57/G56/G0F/G03/G2A/G44/G50/G52/G59/G03/G39/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2A/G48/G4F/GB6/G49/G44/G51/G47/G03/G37/G55/G4C/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G56/G11/G03/GB3
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G36/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G1C
/G14/G1B/G11/G03/G36/G11/G2D/G11/G2F/G11/G03/G59/G44/G51/G03/G28/G4C/G4D/G51/G47/G4B/G52/G59/G48/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G47/G48/G03/G2A/G55/G44/G44/G49/G0F/G03/GB3/G24/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G2C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/GB6/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G29/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/GB4/G0F/G03/G31/G52/G55/G57/G4B/G03/G2B/G52/G4F/G4F/G44/G51/G47/G0F/G03/G24/G50/G56/G57/G48/G55/G47/G44/G50/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G19
/G14/G1C/G11/G03/G32/G11/G03/G33/G48/G4F/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2F/G11/G33/G11/G03/G2B/G52/G55/G5A/G4C/G57/G5D/G0F/G03 /G2D/G11/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03 /G16/G1B /G0F/G03/G14/G14/G18/G10/G14/G16/G1B/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G1A/G11
/G15/G13/G11/G03/G24/G11/G03/G29/G55/G4C/G48/G47/G50/G44/G51/G0F/G03 /G2C/G51/G57/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56 /G11/G03 /G16/G17 /G0F/G03/G16/G13/G1A/G10/G16/G16/G1B/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G17/G11
/G15/G14/G11/G03/G2F/G11/G03/G26/G52/G4B/G48/G51/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G4C/G50/G48/G10/G29/G55/G48/G54/G58/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G24/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G33/G55/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G2B/G44/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/G28/G51/G4A/G4F/G48/G5A/G52/G52/G47/G03/G26/G4F/G4C/G49/G49/G56/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G03/G2D/G48/G55/G56/G48/G5C/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G18
/G15/G15/G11/G03/G2F/G11/G28/G11/G03/G29/G55/G44/G51/G4E/G56/G0F/G03/GB3/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/GB4/G0F/G03/G33/G55/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G2B/G44/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/G28/G51/G4A/G4F/G48/G5A/G52/G52/G47/G03/G26/G4F/G4C/G49/G49/G56/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G03/G2D/G48/G55/G56/G48/G5C/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G1C
/G15/G16/G11/G03/G2D/G11/G2A/G11/G03/G33/G55/G52/G44/G4E/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G27/G11/G2A/G11/G03/G30/G44/G51/G52/G4F/G44/G4E/G4C/G56/G0F/G03/GB3/G27/G4C/G4A/G4C/G57/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G53/G55/G52/G46/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G1D/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G53/G4F/G48/G56/G0F /G03/G03
/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G03/G44/G4F/G4A/G52/G55/G4C/G57/G4B/G50/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G15/G51/G47/G03/G48/G47/G11/G0F/G03/G30/G44/G46/G50/G4C/G4F/G4F/G44/G51/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G15
/G15/G17/G11/G03/G24/G11/G39/G11/G03/G32/G53/G53/G48/G51/G4B/G48/G4C/G50/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G35/G11/G3A/G11/G03/G36/G46/G4B/G44/G49/G48/G55/G0F/G03/GB3/G27/G4C/G56/G46/G55/G48/G57/G48/G10/G37/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G36/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G33/G55/G52/G46/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/GB4/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G33/G55/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G2B/G44/G4F/G4F/G0F/G03/G28/G51/G4A/G4F/G48/G5A/G52/G52/G47/G03/G26/G4F/G4C/G49/G49/G56/G0F/G03/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G03/G2D/G48/G55/G56/G48/G5C/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G1C
/G15/G18/G11/G03/G30/G11/G25/G11/G03/G33/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G57/G4F/G5C/G0F/G03/GB3/G36/G53/G48/G46/G57/G55/G44/G4F/G03/G24/G51/G44/G4F/G5C/G56/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G37/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G36/G48/G55/G4C/G48/G56/GB4 /G0F/G03 /G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G14
/G15/G19/G11/G03/G2E/G11/G03/G2E/G51/G52/G53/G53/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G29/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G27/G52/G59/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G17/G1A
/G15/G1A/G11/G03/G27/G11/G03/G36/G4F/G48/G53/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G2B/G11/G32/G11/G03/G33/G52/G4F/G4F/G44/G4E/G0F/G03/G25/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G36/G5C/G56/G57/G11/G03/G37/G48/G46/G4B/G03/G2D/G11/G03 /G17/G13 /G0F/G03/G17/G16/G10/G19/G17/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G14
/G15/G1B/G11/G03/G27/G11/G03/G36/G4F/G48/G53/G4C/G44/G51/G0F/G03/G33/G55/G52/G46/G11/G03/G2C/G28/G28/G28/G03 /G19/G17 /G0F/G03/G15/G1C/G15/G10/G16/G13/G13/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1A/G19
/G15/G1C/G11/G03/G26/G11/G2E/G11/G03/G26/G4B/G58/G4C/G0F/G03/GB3/G24/G51/G03/G2C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G3A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G0F/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G15
/G16/G13/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G03/G27/G44/G58/G45/G48/G46/G4B/G4C/G48/G56/G0F/G03/GB3/G37/G48/G51/G03/G2F/G48/G46/G57/G58/G55/G48/G56/G03/G52/G51/G03/G3A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G56/GB4/G0F/G03/G36/G2C/G24/G30/G0F/G03/G33/G4B/G4C/G4F/G44/G47/G48/G4F/G53/G4B/G4C/G44/G03/G33/G24/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G15
/G16/G14/G11/G03/G2C/G11/G03/G30/G48/G5C/G48/G55/G0F/G03/GB3/G3A/G44/G59/G48/G4F/G48/G57/G56/G1D/G03/G24/G4F/G4A/G52/G55/G4C/G57/G4B/G50/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G24/G53/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G36/G2C/G24/G30/G0F/G03/G33/G4B/G4C/G4F/G44/G47/G48/G4F/G53/G4B/G4C/G44/G03/G14/G1C/G1C/G16 |
arXiv:physics/9911020v1 [physics.atom-ph] 12 Nov 1999Cold Collision Frequency Shift of an Optical Spectrum of a Tr apped Gas
Mehmet ¨O. Oktel, Thomas C. Killian∗, Daniel Kleppner∗, L. S. Levitov
Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technol ogy, Cambridge, MA 02139
(*) Also, Research Laboratory of Electronics, MIT
We develop an exact sum rule that relates the spectral shift o f a trapped gas undergoing cold
collisions to measurable quantities of the system. The meth od demonstrates the dependence of
the cold collision frequency shift on the quantum degenerac y of the gas and facilitates extracting
scattering lengths from the data. We apply the method to anal yzing spectral data for magnetically
trapped hydrogen atoms and determine the value of the 1 S−2Sscattering length.
PACS: 03.75.Fi, 32.80.Pj
The broadening and shifting of spectral lines of a gas
by collisions was among the earliest discoveries in the
development of high precision spectroscopy [1]. The
pressure shift, which originates in interatomic pertur-
bations [2], is particularly simple to interpret at low
temperatures where the thermal de Broglie wavelength
ΛT=h/(2πmk BT)1/2is much larger than the scatter-
ing lengtha[3] and the interactions arise only through
s-wave scattering. In this cold collision regime, the fre-
quency shift is much larger than the level broadening.
The theory of the cold collision shift has been devel-
oped to interpret hyperfine transitions in cryogenic hy-
drogen masers and laser cooled atomic fountains [4]. In
this work we study the shift for optical excitation in a sys-
tem that can be quantum degenerate, and apply the re-
sults to data on 1 S−2Stwo–photon excitation of trapped
atomic hydrogen [5].
For the case of a homogeneous sample of density n,
and a coherent, weak excitation that couples two inner
states of the atoms, we find
¯h∆ωcoll=g2(λ12−λ11)n , λ αβ= 4π¯h2aαβ/m . (1)
Hereg2is the equal point value of the second order corre-
lation function [6], g2≡g(2)(/vector r= 0), the state 1(2) is the
ground(excited) state, and aαβis thes-wave scattering
length forα−βcollisions.
Equation (1) shows that quantum correlations in the
system are manifest in the collision shift. For a uniform
Bose gas in thermal equilibrium g2= 2−(nBEC/n)2[7],
wherenBECis the density of condensed atoms. Above the
condensation temperature, when nBEC= 0,g2equals 2,
in which case Eq.(1) is in agreement with previous work
[4]. At zero temperature, for a pure condensate with
nBEC=n, the collision shift is half of the shift for a non-
condensed gas. Equation (1) generalizes the result [4] to
T <T BECand relates the spectral shift to the condensate
fraction.
It is quite remarkable that the factor g2in Eq.(1) mul-
tiplies bothλ12andλ11. This results from correlations
between an excited atom and other atoms. During the
excitation, the internal states of the atoms are rotated:
cosθ(t)|1S/angb∇acket∇ight+e−iφ(t)sinθ(t)|2S/angb∇acket∇ight. The angles θ(t),φ(t)
depend on laser power and on the atom’s trajectory inthe laser field, specific for each atom. However, for small
excitation power, the angle θ(t) is small, and thus the
internal states of all atoms remain nearly identical while
the laser is on, even if the excitation field is spatially
nonuniform. Therefore, during the excitation the atoms
interact as identical particles. This causes the short rang e
statistical correlations in the initial state to be replica ted
in the excited state of the gas, which results in the sta-
tistical factor g2in the first term of Eq.(1).
The transfer of spatial correlations to the excited state
is not limited to weak excitation. For the case of strong
excitation, spatial correlations in the ground state will
also be transferred to the excited state, but only pro-
vided the excitation scheme is coherent. The difference
between coherent and incoherent cases can be seen from
comparing two examples, the coherent superposition of
the ground and excited states obtained, e.g., by a π/2
pulse, and the incoherent mixture state resulting from
saturating the Rabi transition. These states will both
have equal populations in the two internal states, but
quite different correlations. In the former case of a pure
internal state the spatial correlation will be the same as
for the ground state of indistinguishable particles. In the
latter case of a mixed state the correlations will be re-
duced. Consequently, the correlation energy of the first
state will exceed that of the second state by the factor
g2.
To emphasize the non-trivial character of the result
Eq.(1), let us point out that ¯ h∆ωcolldiffers from the ther-
modynamic work needed to transfer one atom from the
state 1 to the state 2. The latter work, calculated by
removing one atom from the sample, and then introduc-
ing an atom in state 2 from far away, ignoring entropy,
is given by ( λ12−g2λ11)n. Hereλ12nis the energy of
interaction of the excited atom with the atoms in the
state 1, and g2λ11nis the chemical potential of a Bose
gas. The key difference between this process and optical
excitation, resulting in the different dependence on g2, is
the incoherence of the state of the added atom with the
initial state of the sample.
To calculate the full optical spectrum shape of a
trapped gas in the cold collision regime, other factors
would have to be considered in addition to the effects
1of statistical correlations. Optical coherence can be lost
via dephasing elastic collisions, giving rise to collision al
broadening. One would have also to take into account
atomic motion in the trap and the effects of the inho-
mogeneous density distribution in the sample, especially
in the Bose-Einstein condensate. In addition, the in-
teraction may give rise to a doublet structure of the
spectrum [9]. Altogether, these effects can lead to a
complicated broadened spectrum with asymmetric lines
[5,10,11]. However, we demonstrate below that the spec-
trum’s center of mass obeys a simple and exact sum rule
and is insensitive to these additional effects.
We lay out the theory of the shift by deriving a sum
rule (Eq.(12)) that relates the center of mass of the ob-
served spectrum to measurable experimental parameters.
The sum rule bridges between the uniform density re-
sult Eq.(1) and experimentally measured spectra. The
sum rule accounts for all interactions between atoms oc-
curing in the s−wave scattering channel, which includes
thes−wave collisional broadening. It follows from the
sum rule that collisional broadening as well as the time
of flight broadening resulting from atomic motion in the
trap do not contribute to the spectral shift. At the same
time, the effects on the shift of inhomogeneity in the gas
density and non-uniformity in the excitation field are ex-
pressed in the sum rule Eq.(12) in an exact and straight-
forward way.
We start by considering a homogeneous Bose gas and
derive Eq.(1). Then for the realistic situation of a
trapped gas sample we derive the sum rule Eq.(12), a
generalization of Eq.(1). The sum rule is exact and
general, applicable both to Doppler-free and Doppler-
sensitive spectra. Finally we apply the sum rule to exper-
imental data on the spectrum of cold trapped hydrogen
to calculate the 1 S−2Sscattering length for hydrogen.
The system: To provide the context for the theory, we
briefly describe the experimental situation. The temper-
ature of the hydrogen is 30 −100µK, well below the cold
collision threshold T≃1K[3]. The atoms are spin
polarized and interact in the triplet channel. Calculated
values of the 1 S−1Sand 1S−2Striplet scattering lengths
area11= 0.0648 nm [14] and a12=−2.3 nm [18]. We
neglect 2S−2Sscattering because the excitation rate
is assumed low (in the experiment typically 10−4of the
atoms are excited) so the background gas is essentially
pure 1S. Since |a12| ≫a11, collisions between 1 Sand 2S
atoms dominate the shift, which is to the red.
Each atom will be in some superposition of the ground
state 1Sand the excited state 2 S. In the second quanti-
zation formalism, the atoms are described by the canon-
ical Bose operators ψ1(r) andψ2(r). The Hamiltonian is
H=H0+Hint, where H0describes atoms freely moving
in the trap, and Hintis the interaction term:
H0=/integraldisplay/summationdisplay
α=1,2ψ+
α(r)/parenleftbigg
−¯h2∇2
2m+U(r)/parenrightbigg
ψα(r)d3r ,(2)Hint=1
2/integraldisplay/summationdisplay
α,β=1,2λαβψ+
α(r)ψ+
β(r)ψβ(r)ψα(r)d3r .(3)
HereU(r) is the trap potential (essentially the same for
the 1Sand the 2Sstates).
Inelastic collisions, such as collisions in which the hy-
perfine level of one or both of the colliding partners
changes, may contribute additional shifts which are not
accounted for in this formalism. However, these effects,
as well as the three-body collision effects, are small in the
experiment and can be neglected.
The two-photon 1 S−2Sspectrum consists of Doppler-
free and Doppler-sensitive excitations. In the Doppler-
free situation, the transition results from absorbing two
counter-propagating photons with equal frequencies and
zero net momentum. In the absence of interactions, the
resonance condition is 2 ωlaser=ω0, whereω0corresponds
to the resonance of a single free atom. In the Doppler-
sensitive situation, the transition is caused by two pho-
tons propagating in the same direction. For a free atom,
the resonance frequency is shifted by the recoil energy:
2¯hωlaser= ¯hω0+ (2k)2/2m, wherek= ¯hω/c is photon
momentum and mis the atom mass.
Radiative excitation in a many particle system is de-
scribed by adding to the Hamiltonian (2),(3) the term
Hrad=/integraldisplay
d3r/parenleftbig
A(r)e−iωtψ+
2(r)ψ1(r) + h.c./parenrightbig
,(4)
whereω= 2ωlaser−ω0. The two–photon excitation field
A(r) is equal, up to a constant factor, to the square of the
electric field. Spatial variation of A(r) in the Doppler-
free case occurs on a scale set by the focused laser beam
diameter, and in the Doppler-sensitive case is given by
˜A(r)cos(2kr+φ(r)), where ˜A(r) andφ(r) are slowly vary-
ing functions.
A tutorial example: Before discussing the general
case, here we derive the mean frequency shift for the
Doppler-free transition caused by a uniform excitation
fieldA(r) =A0, ignoring the 1 S−1Sinteractions
(λ11= 0). To that end, consider a gas of Natoms con-
fined in a box of volume V. Since we ignore the 1 S−1S
interaction, the many body state ground state of the sys-
tem Φ 0is simply a symmetrized product of single particle
states. It can be characterized by occupation numbers
njof the single particle plane wave states V−1/2eikjr,/summationtext
jnj=N. Initially, the internal state of all atoms is
1S.
The excited state, to lowest order in the excitation, is
given by Φ 1=HradΦ0. We consider the norm /ba∇dblΦ1/ba∇dbl2
and the expectation value of the interaction /angb∇acketleftΦ1|Hint|Φ1/angb∇acket∇ight.
The ratio of these quantities gives the mean frequency
shift. Because Φ 0is the product of plane wave states in
a box, the frequency shift can be evaluated exactly.
The norm /angb∇acketleftΦ1|Φ1/angb∇acket∇ightof the excited state is given by
2/ba∇dblΦ1/ba∇dbl2=|A0|2/integraldisplay
/angb∇acketleftΦ0|ψ+
1(r)ψ2(r)ψ+
2(r′)ψ1(r′)|Φ0/angb∇acket∇ightd3rd3r′.
(5)
To evaluate the norm one first puts the operators ψ2(r)
andψ+
2(r′) in (5) in normal order by using the commu-
tation relation [ ψ2(r),ψ+
2(r′)] =δ(r−r′). Noting that
ψ2(r)|Φ0/angb∇acket∇ight= 0, the norm is given by
/ba∇dblΦ1/ba∇dbl2=|A0|2/integraldisplay
/angb∇acketleftΦ0|ψ+
1(r)ψ1(r)|Φ0/angb∇acket∇ightd3r=|A0|2N .
(6)
To obtain the frequency shift ∆ ωcoll, we consider the ex-
pectation value /angb∇acketleftΦ1|Hint|Φ1/angb∇acket∇ight, keeping in Hintonly the
1S−2Sinteraction λ12. After arranging in normal or-
der, as in the calculation of the norm /ba∇dblΦ1/ba∇dbl2, one has
/angb∇acketleftΦ1|Hint|Φ1/angb∇acket∇ight=λ12|A0|2/integraldisplay
/angb∇acketleftΦ0|ψ+
1(r)ψ+
1(r)ψ1(r)ψ1(r)|Φ0/angb∇acket∇ightd3r .
(7)
Evaluating the expectation value for Φ 0chosen as a prod-
uct of plane wave states, one expresses Eq.(7) in terms of
the occupation numbers of the ground and excited states
as
/angb∇acketleftΦ1|Hint|Φ1/angb∇acket∇ight=λ12|A0|2
V
2/summationdisplay
i/negationslash=jninj+/summationdisplay
ini(ni−1)
.
(8)
The mean frequency shift is then given by the ratio of
(8) and the norm (6):
¯h∆ωcoll=λ12
VN/parenleftBigg
2N2−/summationdisplay
ini(ni+ 1)/parenrightBigg
. (9)
The formal reason for the factor 2 to appear in Eqs. (8, 9)
and, eventually for g2to appear in Eq.(1), is the follow-
ing. In taking the average in Eq.(7) by Wick’s theorem
[13], there are two essentially different ways to pair the
operators, analogous to the Hartree and Fock contribu-
tions to the energy. For short range interaction between
bosons, the Hartree and Fock contributions are equal and
as a result the frequency shift is twice as large as the
“mean density” result.
In the thermodynamic limit, V,N→ ∞,n=N/Vcon-
stant, the second term in Eq.(9) contributes only when
there are states filled by a macroscopic number of par-
ticles. For example, in thermodynamic equilibrium at
T <T BEC, the shift Eq.(9) is λ12(2n−n2
c/n), whereas in
a non degenerate gas, at T >T BEC, the shift is 2 λ12n.
The sum rule: We turn now to deriving a sum rule that
generalizes the result Eq.(1) to non-homogeneous sam-
ples and spatially varying excitation field (and λ11/negationslash= 0).We start with the Golden Rule formula for the absorption
spectrum,
I(ω) =2π
¯h/summationdisplay
Ei,Efδ(¯hω+Ei−Ef)|/angb∇acketleftf|Hrad|i/angb∇acket∇ight|2pi,(10)
where |i/angb∇acket∇ight,|f/angb∇acket∇ightare eigenstates of the Hamiltonian H=
H0+Hintwith the energies Ei,Ef, andpiis the statis-
tical occupation of the states |i/angb∇acket∇ight.
The sum rule for the spectrum I(ω) is found by eval-
uating the first moment:
/integraldisplay
ωI(ω)dω
2π=1
¯h3/summationdisplay
Ei,Ef(Ef−Ei)|/angb∇acketleftf|Hrad|i/angb∇acket∇ight|2pi
=1
¯h3/summationdisplay
Ei,Ef/angb∇acketlefti|Hrad|f/angb∇acket∇ight/angb∇acketleftf|[H,Hrad]|i/angb∇acket∇ightpi
=1
¯h3/summationdisplay
Ei/angb∇acketlefti|Hrad[H,Hrad]|i/angb∇acket∇ightpi. (11)
In obtaining this result we first integrated the delta func-
tion, then wrote the result as a matrix element of the
commutator [ H,Hrad] and, finally, used the completeness
relation.
Now we consider contributions of the different terms of
the Hamiltonian to the sum rule. The potential energy
operator/integraltext
(ψ+
1ψ1+ψ+
2ψ2)U(r)d3rcommutes with Hrad,
and thus does not contribute. There are two contribu-
tions, first from the interaction Hamiltonian, second from
the kinetic energy operator, denoted by FintandFkinre-
spectively. The sum rule becomes
/integraldisplay
ωI(ω)dω
2π=Fint+Fkin. (12)
For Doppler-free excitation Fkinis small compared to
Fint, whereas for Doppler-sensitive excitation it con-
tributes the larger shift.
First, consider the interaction Hint, and calculate Fint.
After evaluating the commutator in Eq.(11), one follows
the same procedure as in the above calculation of the
norm /ba∇dblΦ1/ba∇dbl. The result is
Fint=/angbracketleftbigg/integraldisplay
(λ12−λ11)|A(r)|2ψ+
1(r)ψ+
1(r)ψ1(r)ψ1(r)d3r
¯h3/angbracketrightbigg
,
(13)
where /angb∇acketleft.../angb∇acket∇ightmeans/summationtext
Ei/angb∇acketlefti|...|i/angb∇acket∇ightpi. The expectation value/angbracketleftbig
: (ψ+
1(r)ψ1(r))2:/angbracketrightbig
=G2(r), the two–particle density.
(Here :...: indicates canonical normal ordering.) Fi-
nally, using the statistical factor g2=G2/n2, the result
is
Fint=/integraldisplay
(λ12−λ11)|A(r)|2g2n2(r)d3r
¯h3. (14)
Next, we calculate Fkin, the contribution to the
sum rule coming from the kinetic energy operator
3−(¯h2/2m)/integraltext
(ψ+
1∇2ψ1+ψ+
2∇2ψ2)d3r. After evaluating
the commutator with Hrad, one has
Fkin=−¯h2
2m/angbracketleftbigg/integraldisplay
ψ+
1(r)A∗(r)/bracketleftbig
∇2,A(r)/bracketrightbig
ψ1(r)d3r
¯h3/angbracketrightbigg
.
(15)
Integrating by parts, and writing the excitation field as
A(r) =|A(r)|eiθ, yields
Fkin=/integraldisplay/parenleftbigg¯h2
2m|∇A|2n−¯h|A|2/vectorj·/vector∇θ/parenrightbiggd3r
¯h3,(16)
wherenand/vectorjare the particle number and flux densities:
n(r) =/angb∇acketleftψ+
1(r)ψ1(r)/angb∇acket∇ight,/vectorj(r) =−i¯h
2m/angb∇acketleftψ+
1(r)/vector∇ψ1(r)/angb∇acket∇ight+ h.c.
(17)
The first term in Eq.(16) generalizes the ordinary mo-
mentum recoil energy shift to the trapped gas prob-
lem [15]. The second term represents the Doppler shift
due to possible macroscopic gas flow in the sample.
To clarify this, consider A(r) =A0eipr/¯h, which would
describe Doppler-sensitive excitation. Then Fkin=
|A0|2/integraltext
(p2/2m−/vector p·/vector v)n d3r/¯h3, where/vector v=/vectorj/nis the
local velocity. The sensitivity of the frequency shift to
motion within the sample, manifest in the second term
in Eq.(16), makes it possible, in principle, to detect vor-
tices in the condensed state.
To employ the sum rule, one needs to relate the inte-
grated spectral power to A(r) andn(r). Repeating the
steps that led to Eq.(12), one obtains
Itot=/integraldisplay
I(ω)dω
2π=/integraldisplay
|A(r)|2n(r)d3r
¯h3(18)
Combining Eq.(18) with the sum rule Eq.(12), one ob-
tains an exact expression for the spectrum’s “center of
mass” ¯ω=/integraltext
ωI(ω)dω//integraltext
I(ω)dω.
For example, consider a uniform density sample, and
ignore the spatial variation of the laser field A(r).
Eq. (14) gives Fint= (λ12−λ11)g2n2/integraltext
|A(r)|2d3r/¯h3.
In our experiment Fkincan be neglected. Simplifying
Eq.(18) and combining it with Eq.(14) yields the fre-
quency shift Eq.(1).
There are two comments concerning the generality of
the sum rule. First, note that in deriving the sum rule
Eq.(12), we do not assume thermodynamic equilibrium.
The result is exact and applies to non-equilibrum sys-
tems for which the factor g2may differ from its equilib-
rium value. Second, the above derivation of the sum
rule assumes coherence of the excitation described by
(4). One can see, however, that the results (14),(16),(18)
hold as well for an incoherent excitation field of the form
A(r)eiωt+iφ(t)with a fluctuating phase φ(t). Also, it isstraightforward to generalize the results for the excita-
tion field with different spatial dependence of different
frequency components.
Analysis of the data: To investigate the utility of the
sum rule, we applied it to extract a value for a1S−2Sfrom
data on the 1 S−2Stransition in hydrogen for a normal
gas. An account of the experimental situation and ex-
amples of the spectral data will be published elsewhere
[16]. Evaluating the integrals in the sum rule requires
knowing the excitation field A(r), the value of g2, and
the density n(r). The excitation field is generated by a
Gaussian beam which is fully characterized by a single
parameter, the beam radius, which can be accurately de-
termined. For temperatures above TBEC,g2= 2. At
lower temperatures, g2depends on the temperature.
The density n(r) was found by measuring the peak den-
sity and knowing the properties of the trap. The peak
densityn0was determined by exploiting the property
that the BEC critical density is accurately described by
the ideal gas expression: nc= 2.612(2π¯h2/kBTm)3/2.
If the system is at the transition point then measuring
the temperature determines the density. The system was
cooled into the condensate regime and the spectrum was
observed as the condensate decayed. The spectrum was
measured after the condensate had decayed for ten sec-
onds, when the presence of a small though visible con-
densate assured that the peak density n0had its critical
value. The contribution of the condensate to the spec-
trum was unimportant. Thus, the only quantity required
to apply the sum rule was the temperature. This was
found by measuring the width of the Doppler-sensitive
spectrum [17].
From the experimentally measured spectrum we found
¯ν=−29±(2)KHz. We numerically calculated the inte-
grals on the right hand side of Eqs.(14),(18) and found
that 2(λ12−λ11)/h= 4.4±(1.7)×10−10Hz cm3, where
the major sources of uncertainty are the temperature and
the trap and laser geometry. From this we determined
the 1S−2Sscattering length to be a12=−1.6±(0.7)nm.
This result is in reasonable agreement with the calculated
value [18],a12=−2.3 nm.
An alternative approach to extracting the scattering
length was used in Ref. [5], where the value a12=
−1.6±(0.3)nm was reported. The interpretation em-
ployed a semiclassical description of the atomic motion
and a local density description of the phase shift. The
present method is more direct and, we believe, more reli-
able. It can be viewed as a check on the earlier analysis,
and a confirmation of the calculation of the dipolar decay
constant [20] on which it depends.
In reference [10], an internally consistent description
of the density of the condensate required assuming that
the density shift parameter in the condensate was the
same as in the normal gas, rather than half as large as
expected from this analysis. This anomaly remains to be
explained.
4As a speculative explanation, one could consider a
state close to the transition temperature in dynamical
but not in thermal equilibrium, in which several low
energy states are populated with macroscopic occupa-
tion numbers. For example, for Nparticles distributed
equally among mstates, one has ni=N/m,i= 1,...,m
in Eq.(8). Then from Eq.(9) ¯ h∆ωcoll= (2−1/m)λ12n,
i.e., the shift is described by an effective g2= 2−1/m.
For a large number mof constituent states, the effective
g2can be arbitrarily close to 2.
In summary, we have shown that quantum statistical
correlations of a cold gas sample are imprinted in the
collisional shift of the center of mass of an optical ab-
sorption spectrum. In the cold collision regime the sum
rule Eq.(12) can be applied to determine the statistical
correlation factor g2from optical spectrum. The sum
rule is valid for any gas in the cold collision regime. It
takes into account possible inhomogeneities in the sample
and the excitation field, and it is valid above and below
TBEC. Also, the sum rule is valid for a non-equilibrium
system, with g2values possibly different from those in
equilibrium. We have demonstrated the usefulness of the
sum rule by using it to extract the 1 S−2Sscattering
length for hydrogen from experimental data.
It should be pointed out that our results, the frequency
shift (1) and the sum rule (12), are only valid at small
mixing angles of the 1 Sand 2Sstates. The cold colli-
sion shift at large angle mixing is an important problem,
particularly for atomic clocks. The generalization of the
results (12) and (1) for such systems is an interesting
open problem.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank D. Fried, L. Willman, D. Landhuis and S. Moss
for their contributions in obtaining and analyzing the
data. We thank T. J. Greytak and W. Ketterle for helpful
conversations. The experimental work was supported by
the National Science Foundation and the Office of Naval
Research.
[1] A. A. Michelson, Philos. Mag. 34, 280 (1892)
[2] S. Ghezali, P. Laurent, S.N. Lea and A. Clairon, Euro-
physics Lett. 36, 25 (1996)
K. Gibble and S. Chu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1771 (1993)
N. Allard and J. Kielkopf, Rev. Mod. Phys. 54, 1103
(1982)
[3] J. Weiner, V. S. Bagnato, S. Zilio and P. S. Julienne,
Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 1 (1999)
P. S. Julienne, F. H. Mies, J.Opt.Soc.Am. B6, 2257
(1989)[4] S.J.J.M.F. Kokkelmans, B. J. Verhaar, K. Gibble, and
D. J. Heinzen, Phys. Rev . A. 56, R4389 (1997)
B. J. Verhaar, J. M. V. A. Koelman, H. T. C. Stoof,
O. J. Luiten, Phys.Rev. A35, 3825 (1987)
E. Tiesinga, B. J. Verhaar, H. T. C. Stoof, D. van Bragt,
Phys.Rev. A45, 2671 (1992)
[5] T. C. Killian, D. G. Fried, L. Willmann, D. Land-
huis, S. C. Moss, D. Kleppner, and T. J. Greytak,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3807 (1998)
[6] W. Ketterle and H.-J. Meisner, Phys. Rev. A 56, 3291
(1997)
M. Naraschewski and R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. A. 59,
4595 (1999)
[7] L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Statistical Physics I,
Ch.12, §117 (Butterworth Heinemann, 1997)
[8] C. Cesar and D. Kleppner, Phys. Rev. A. 59, 4564 (1999)
[9] M. ¨O. Oktel and L. S. Levitov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 6
(1999)
[10] D. G. Fried, T. C. Killian, L. Willmann, D. Land-
huis, S. C. Moss, D. Kleppner, and T. J. Greytak,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3811 (1998)
[11] T. C. Killian, Ph. D. Thesis, M.I.T , 1999 (unpublished)
[12] S. Stringari, Phys. Rev. B. 46, 2974 (1992)
[13] K. Huang, Statistical Mechanics (John Wiley, New York,
1987), Chap. 10
[14] M. J. Jamieson, A. Dalgarno, and M. Kimura,
Phys. Rev.A. 51, 2626 (1995)
[15] C. L. Cesar and D. Kleppner, Phys. Rev. A 59, 4564
(1999)
[16] L. Willmann, D. Landhuis, S.C. Moss, T.C. Killian,
D.G. Fried, T.J. Greytak, and D. Kleppner, in prepa-
ration
[17] D. G. Fried, Ph. D. Thesis, M.I.T , 1999 (unpublished)
[18] M. J. Jamieson, A. Dalgarno, J. M. Doyle, Mol.Phys. 87,
817 (1996)
[19] T. W. Hijmans, Yu. Kagan, G. V. Shlyapnikov, and
J. T. M. Walraven, Phys. Rev. A 48, 12886 (1993).
[20] H. T. C. Stoof, J. M. V. A. Koelman and B. J. Verhaar,
Phys. Rev. B 38, 4688 (1988)
5 |
physics/9911022 12 Nov 1999Is the Lorentz Transformation Distance-Dependent ?
Ernst Karl Kunst
An analysis of the Lorentz transformation shows that the unchangeability of the
space-time coordinates of the inertial systems under consideration and the
possibility of a direct projection of those coordinates onto another are the
underlying basic assumptions as to its unlimited validity. It is demonstrated that
from an empiric-physical point of view these assumptions are not given in the
case of inertial systems separated by very large distances. Analogous to the
impossibility to measure motion relative to absolute space, it turns out to be
physically non feasible to extend the coordinate system of any reference frame
considered at rest relative to a distantly moving system for a direct comparison
of the coordinates, and vice versa.
The extended Lorentz transformation strictly based on first physical principles
predicts the possibility of superluminal propagation of very distantly moving
material bodies and, in this case, the generation of Cerenkov radiation out of the
quantum vacuum. For many astrophysical phenomena and their experimentally
verified properties this yields a novel view.
Key Words: Distance-dependen ce of the Lorentz transformation - far-range
transformation - superluminal velocity - vacuum Cerencov radiation
Introduction
In the last decades superluminal motions in extragalactic radio and optical sources on
the grounds of the validity of the Hubble-relation for cosmic distances, and recently
also in the Milky Way, have been discovered. Furthermore, astronomers have been
observing intra day and even shorter variability in luminosity especially in lacertae
objects, nuclei of galaxies, quasars and jets of quasars as highly energetic
phenomena. The most widely discussed explanation for those phenomena are
astrophysical "beaming models" or "Doppler boosting", due to the orientation of a
moving object toward the observer at a small angle to the line of sight, presuming the
Lorentz transformation and, therewith, special relativistic aberration to be valid over
huge cosmic distances relative to our vantage point on Earth [1].
In the following analysis of inertial motion is shown that the Lorentz transformation
is distant-dependen t with the most important result, superluminal motion of material
bodies in principle to be possible. Starting point of this reviewal is the validity of special
relativity at close range or negligable separation of the inertially moving systems under
consideration, though we refer to that theory in its symmetric form [2], which we
recapitulate here in short. In the mentioned work on relativistic kinematics has been
shown a preferred rest frame of nature (/G28) in any inertial motion to exist and any0
velocity (v) to be symmetrically composite or quantized. From this a symmetric0
modification of the Lorentz transformation follows between a frame of reference S1
considered to be at rest according to the principle of relativity and a moving frame S2:x/G0C
2/G0A /G0A/G0B0(x1/G09v0t1),y/G0C
2/G0A /G0Ay1,z/G0C
2/G0A /G0Az1,t/G0C
2/G0A /G0A/G0B0(t1/G09v0
c2x1),
x1/G28/G0A /G0A/G0B0(x2/G0C/G08 /G08v0t2/G0C),y1/G28/G0A /G0Ay2/G0C,z1/G28/G0A /G0Az2/G0C,t1/G28/G0A /G0A/G0B0(t2/G0C/G08 /G08v0
c2x2/G0C),
/G0B0/G0A /G0A1/G09v02
c2/G091
2.
x2/G0A /G0Ax1,y2/G0A /G0Ay1,z2/G0A /G0Az1,t2/G0A /G0At1,
x1/G0C/G0A /G0Ax2/G0C,y1/G0C/G0A /G0Ay2/G0C,z1/G0C/G0A /G0Az2/G0C,t1/G0C/G0A /G0At2/G0C,
x2/G28/G0A /G0Ax1/G28,y2/G28/G0A /G0Ay1/G28,z2/G28/G0A /G0Az1/G28,t2/G28/G0A /G0At1/G28
x1/G28/G12x1,t1/G28/G12t1,
x2/G28/G12x2,t2/G28/G12t2.2
(1)
(1a)
(1b)where
The dashed symbols in (1) designate the moving system S and the open circles the2
system Sat rest, now considered moving relative to /G28 and S' . Likewise the observer1 0 2
resting in Swill deduce the respective transformation, which we do not cite here.2
Furthermore has been shown to be valid:
and always /G0Dv/G0D = /G0D-v/G0D. If into the second lines of (1) the upper lines are inserted, the0 0
identity results:
1. On very Distant Measures and Motions
As a physical basis in special relativity and also in its symmetric form the Lorentz
transformation is derivated by taking the dimensional axes of the systems under
consideration always to coincide and to be parallel, or with other words: It is taken for
guaranted that the space-time coordinates of an event in the moving frame are directly
projectable onto the respective ones of the reference frame considered to be at rest
and vice versa [3]. The expression as laws in Minkowskian four-dimensional space-
time [4] or its formulation as index-calculus (four-vector calculus) do not alter the
underlying physical principle. Thus, any statement about relative motion in the3
framework of relativistic kinematics basically implies velocity of a moving system or
body within or at very close range of the space-time coordinates of the frame of the
observer, considered resting. This implies that, empirically speaking, it is unjustified to
apply the transformation automatically on the kinematical relations between any two
bodies of reference, which are separated by a considerable (e. g. interplanetary,
interstellar or cosmic) spatial distance, because this proceeding obviously requires the
space-time coordinates of the frame of reference based on the volume of the body “at
rest” to be continued to the "moving" body or volume of reference and vice versa. If we
try to extend the frame of reference far beyond the limits of the physical body resting
in its coordinate source, we leave secure physic-empirical experience. In the contrary,
we are forced to admit that a concrete elongation of the coordinate system “at rest” to
the moving one (and vice versa) cannot be physically realized. We only could generate
a new coordinate system near the “moving” one, very far though resting relative to the
original system at rest. Just as it proves impossible to measure velocity relative to
Newtonian “absolute space”, a direct measurement of the dimensions and the velocity
of a very distantly moving body resting in the source of its inertial system relative to an
imaginary extension of the inertial frame at rest, turns out physically to be non feasible.
Instead, the very physical basis of statements about the parallel translational motion of
a distant object are solely measurements of light signals from that object in reference
to an unit of measure of the own volume of reference, considered to be at rest in
accord with the principle of relativity.
S and S' may be frames of reference with all coordinate axes parallel, which for the1 2
transformation equations (1) are valid. Especially may S' be in relative motion at close2
range or within the rest frame of reference S in the direction of the x-axis of the latter1
system. Very distantly from both systems we introduce a system S* in space, resting1
relative to S so that S/G09 * /G09S /G09 ' /G09 » S /G09 /G09S/G09 ' /G09, also all coordinate axes being parallel to the axes1 1212
of S and S'. The velocity of a light signal propagating through vacuum in the direction1 2
of the x-axis of S' must be "c" for an observer resting in the latter system as well as in2
the nearby system S. 1
Now let us turn toward the very distant system S* . For an observer, resting there, the1
velocity of light in S' will appear apparently slowed in dependen ce on the distance2
S/G09 * /G09S /G09 ' /G09 as well as the transversal motion of S' relative to S* .12 2 1
Thus, the apparent or relative transversal velocity of S' and the velocity of light within2
this system tend for an observer in S* toward null if he is only sufficiently apart from S'.1 2
Obviously the adjective "apparent" does not quite correspond to the facts because - as
already stated - in physical reality there are no other light signals available for
measurements of measures and velocities than those received from S'. Any2
statements as to the true velocity of S' and the true velocity of light in that system2
prove meaningless for real measurements in the coordinate system S* . Besides the1
relativity of inertial motion are dimensions, velocities and the velocity of light of distant
bodies further relativated by the spatial distance between the inertial systems under
consideration. These shrinked dimensions and retarded motions are the only
empirically ascertainable ones and must therefore considered integral part of the
principle of relativity. Thus, as the basic physical principles of relativistic kinematics of
bodies, moving very far away from each other and, therewith, of the transformation
equations, only four statements supported by physical experience exist:x/G0C
2
R/G0A /G0A/G0Bx/G0B
1/G09v0t/G0B
1
R,x1°/G0B
R/G0A /G0A/G0Bx/G0C
2/G08 /G08v0t/G0C
2
R,4
(2)
1) Validity of the (symmetric) Lorentz transformation at negligable (nearly
zero) distance between the inertial systems under consideration;
2) Physical impossibility to extend the coordinates of the reference frame
“at rest” to a very distantly moving object and its coordinate system (and
vice versa) and to measure dimensions and velocities by direct
comparison of coordinates;
3) Apparent decrease of the velocity of distant objects, moving
transverse to the line of sight and their dimensions, whereby the
"apparent velocity" as well as the shrinkage of dimensions is a simple
function of the respective value at the imaginary distance null and the
distance in Minkowskian space-time between the bodies under
consideration;
4) Independen ce of the dilation of time of moving objects of their
distance and of the direction of the vector of velocity relative to the
observer considered to be at rest.
The Lorentz transformation of a complete kinematic theory must be in accord with
these first physical principles.
2. The Symmetric Lorentz Transformation between Systems Separated by Large
Distances
It is obvious that the distance R = S/G09 * /G09S /G09 ' /G09, as observed from S* , must directly join to the12 1
coordinate source (coincident with the center of gravity) of the latter system so that the
velocity of S' relative to S* and the velocity of light at S' is slowed in accordance with2 1 2
proposition 3) and that at the distance R /G19 0 proposition 1) and, therewith, (1) becomes
fully valid. On the other hand the observer at S* according to proposition 4) continues1
to observe the lapse of time of S' being retarded. This also can be proven directly.2
Considering a Feynmanian "light signal watch", resting relative to S', we find that the2
distance factor R cancels out so that t' = /G0Bt* .201
The /G0B-factor of the x-coordinate can be directly computed from (1), whereby we write
x = x* , x° = x° *, t = t* and t° = t° *: 111111 11
The only empirically known and certain physical experience is the shrinkage of the
projection of the dimensions of a moving body plus the distance covered by it in a unit
of time of the system at rest according to proposition 3), which facts are expressed by
(2). By multiplying both equations (2), whereby according to (1a) and (1b) it is clear that
x° = x and t° = t and, therewith, x° * = x* and t° * = t* we receive11 11 11 11, /G0B/G0A /G0A1
R1/G09v2
0
c2R2
x/G0C
2/G0A /G0A/G0B/G0B
0x/G0B
1/G09v0t/G0B
1
R,y/G0C
2/G0A /G0Ay/G0B
1,z/G0C
2/G0A /G0Az/G0B
1,t/G0C
2/G0A /G0A/G0B0t/G0B
1/G09v0x/G0B
1
c2R,
x1°/G0B/G0A /G0A/G0B/G0B
0x/G0C
2/G08 /G08v0t/G0C
2
R,y1°/G0B/G0A /G0Ay/G0C
2,z1°/G0B/G0A /G0Az/G0C
2,t1°/G0B/G0A /G0A/G0B0t/G0C
2/G08 /G08v0x/G0C
2
c2R,
/G0B/G0B
0/G0A /G0A1
1/G09v2
0
c2R2,/G0B0/G0A /G0A1
1/G09v2
0
c2.
x/G0C
2/G0A /G0A x/G0B
1,t/G0C
2/G0A /G0A t/G0B
1/G0B05
(3)if always x = ct. Inserting this expression into (2) delivers the far range transformation
of relativistic kinematics and its inverse
where
Equations (3) are in full accord with the four basic physical propositions for inertially
moving systems well separated in space by a considerable distance and, therefore,
govern the transformation of their event coordinates. At interplanetary, interstellar and
intergalactic distances this is the normal case. Thus, the original Lorentz
transformation - though in its symmetric form (1) - proves to be a bo rder line case at
close range with mere "local" validity and it is obvious that (3) is the far-range form of
(1), passing into the latter if R /G19 0 and /G0B* = /G0B, x* = x, x° * = x°.00111
3. Modification of the Principle of Relativity in the Far-Range Case
From (3) is evident that
if /G0DR/G0D » /G0Dc/G0D and /G0B* =1 and hen ce the velocity of an object resting in S' , moving very far0 2/G0Cx/G0B
1
/G0Ct/G0B
1/G0A /G0A/G0Cx/G0C
2
/G0Ct/G0C
2/G0B0
ux/G0B
1/G0A /G0Aux/G0C
2/G0B0/G0A /G0Av0/G0B0.
/G501
t1
/G0A/G0A0v01dt1/G0A /G0A/G501
t2
/G0A/G0A0v02dt2
dt2/G0A /G0Adt1/G0B01,
v01/G0A /G0Av02/G0B01,
V0/G0A /G0Av01/G0A /G0Aux/G0B
1/G0A /G0Av0/G0B0,
V0/G501
t1
/G0A/G0A0dt1/G0A /G0Av0/G501
t2
/G0A/G0A0dt2.6
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)from the frame of reference S* , must be 1
which becomes to
This result is also supported by the following consideration:
For the relative movement of the systems S' and S* , separated by a considerable2 1
distance, must according to (3) and if /G0DR/G0D » /G0Dc/G0D be valid:
- the dashes and asterisks of (3) are abandoned in favour of a simplified notation -
and because of the absolute symmetry relative to /G28 also the proper time integral0
(eigenzeit) must have the same numerical value in both frames of reference. But
because the elapsed time differs, especially as observed from S the time particle dt1, 2
seems expanded b y the value
from (5) follows:
where v means velocity of S relative to SBecause (of its composite nature) v01 2 1. 02
=2v/(1 + v/c)in any case must be v > v, implying v = v. Introducing the1 1, 02 1 02 022
symbol “V" for the velocity v this results in connection with (4) in0 01
Ultimately we have
Let an inertial system S be at rest relative to the cosmic microwave background so0
that it presumably also rests relative to space-time. Now, suppose two systems S1
and S to move relative to S at equal but oppositely directed velocity v so that in the2 0 0
case where (3) is valid we have x = x = x and t = t = t/G0B, wherefrom follows210 2100/G0Cx1
/G0Ct1/G0A /G0A/G0Cx2
/G0Ct2</G0Cx0
/G0Ct0/G19v1/G0A /G0Av2<V0/G0A /G0AMax.
/G0Cx2
/G0Ct2</G0Cx0
/G0Ct0</G0Cx1
/G0Ct1/G19v2<v0<V1/G0A /G0AMax.
x12/G08 /G08y12/G08 /G08z12/G09c2
1t12/G0A /G0Ax2
0/G08 /G08y2
0/G08 /G08z2
0/G09c2
0t2
0
/G0Dn/G0D/G0A /G0A/G0B0,
V0/G0A /G0Aux/G0B
1/G0A /G0A/G0B0v07
(8)
(8a)in accordance with (7). On the other hand, for an obserer based at S according to1
special relativity should also be valid
Evidently (8a) contradicts (8). This contradiction can obviously only be resolved if all
motions are related to a system at rest relative to space-time. Otherwise we would, as
(8a) shows, arrive at contradictory results. Hence (8) must in any case be true. This
implies that also in the far-range case the scalar
remains valid, though c /G67 c = c/G0B so that ct = ct. Thus, the state of motion of any1010 1100
inertial system relative to space-time can be expressed best and shortest by
where n(/G07', 1) is a complex number in the complex ct, x-plane of symmetrically0
modified Minkowskian space-time [2]. The twin-paradox of special relativity is
resolved to the result that time dilation depend s on motion relative to space time.
Hence clocks on the Earth (in the whole system of the sun), which moves at velocity
v /G11 600 km/s relative to space-time, should run slow /G11 2 × 10 s, as compared with0-6
a clock at rest relative to the latter. This effect implies that spacecraft on a direct track
to the outer planets, as e. g. Jupiter, should arrive there minutes earlier in
dependen ce on the duration of the voyage.
4. Further Kinematic Consequences
We turn to the physical implications of (3) and its derivations (4) and (7). Evidently the
dilation of time in S' is compensated for by the symmetric inertial velocity 2
of the latter system relative to S* if both systems are far away from each other so that1
observers, resting in the coordinate sources of either system, will meet after the same
amount of time has elapsed, as measured in their systems.
Possible effects of acceleration are neglected and it is understood that asymmetric
ageing should occur if S' is accelerated, as proven by general relativity. Nevertheless,2x/G0C
2/G0A /G0Aux/G0C
2t/G0C
2,y/G0C
2/G0A /G0Auy/G0C
2t/G0C
2,z/G0C
2/G0A /G0A0.
ux/G0B
1/G0A /G0Aux/G0C
2/G0B0,uy/G0B
1/G0A /G0Auy/G0C
2/G0B0,uz/G0B
1/G0A /G0A0,
tan/G14/G0B
1/G0A /G0Atan/G14/G0C
2.
cos/G05/G0A /G0Act
n×1
/G07ct/G0A /G0A1
/G07n8
(9)in the far-range case any velocity even exeeding that of light in any amount is
possible, allowing in principle the superluminal propagation of solid bodies and
thereby transfer of information.
Consider ultra relativistic particles or photons to move relative to the very distant
system S' so that (3) is valid, according to the equations2
Transformation into the coordinates and the time of S* yields1
wherefrom follows
Thus, no relativistic aberration or Doppler boosting is to observe by an observer at S* ,1
which implies that this special relativistic effect at close range is ruled out in the far-
range case (3) as an explanation of superluminal phenomana on and in cosmic
objects, especially jets.
It clearly follows that the principle of cause and effect is not impaired if V > c.0
5. Physical Effects to Expect from the Superluminal Propagation of very Distant
Material Bodies
Analogous to the Cerenkov relation
for electrical non neutral particles moving through a material medium at superluminal
velocity v = /G07c > c/n, where "n" means the refractive index of the medium and "/G05" the
half angle of the cone of radiation [5], we have to expect an electromagnetic shock-
wave phenomenon, when a very distant material body, e. g. a particle, traverses
vacuo at the velocity V = /G0Bv /G07 c. This results from the fact that the probability "p" to000
encounter virtual photons (or elementary dipoles) for a particle traversing the
fluctuating quantum vacuum at subluminal symmetric velocity V < c should according0
to Heisenberg’s uncertainty relation /G0CE/G0Ct /G07 h rise with growing velocity. To express
the uncertainty relation as a function of velocity we write/G0CE/G0Ctc2
V2
0/G07hV2
0
c2
p/G0A /G0A/G0CE/G0Ct
h/G0A /G0A/G0CE
h/G0C/G1F/G07V4
0
c4/G061,
p/G0AhV4
0
Ec4/G0A /G0A1/G0A /G0Aconst,
cos/G05/G0A /G0Ac
V0/G0A /G0A1
/G0B0/G070,
V4
0
c4/G0A /G0AE
h/G0A /G0A/G1F,
cos/G05/G0A /G0Ah
E/G091
4/G0A /G0A/G1F/G091
4.9
(10)
(11)
(12)
(13)
(14)
(15)so that the left-hand side attains the highest and the right-hand side the lowest
possible value, where h is Planck’s constant. This follows, because /G08h = 2/G1B = 2/G2Dc =11
mc, where /G1B means fundamental length and /G2D quantum of time [6]. From (10) is1 1
derived
where V /G06 c. Evidently (11) results in p = 1 if V/c = 1. This implies the energy E of0 0
virtual photons to become real and stable for a moving particle if its far-range velocity
V = c. In this case (11) delivers /G0CE = h/G0C/G1F and /G0C/G1F = /G1F = 1, because /G1F must attain the0
value of the lowest possible frequency. Hence if V exceeds the velocity of light, from0
(11) follows
where always V/c /G07 1. Thus, real radiation arises off the vacuum and analogous to0
(9) we have
where V /G07 c and /G07 = v/c.0 00
The Cerenkov half angle /G05 of vacuo tends to a maximum value if /G0B/G19 0 and to its0
minimum value if /G0B /G19 1. According to (12) between superluminal velocity V /G07 c and0 0
highest frequency of the radiated photons the relation
is valid, wherefrom in connection with (13) follows10
“E” in the sense of symmetrically modified special relativity [2] means center-of-mass
energy E = (2E), where E means conventional photon energy.phot phot1/2
6. Evidence of Vacuum Cerenkov Radiation in High Energetic Astrophysical
Phenomena
From the foregoing is clear that in the far-range case relativistic beaming is excluded
as an explanation of the characteristics of jets and especially of the often observed
superluminal motions in jets. According to this distance-dependen t extention of
special relativistic kinematics is superluminal motion as natural as any sub-light
velocity.
It is predicted that most if not all non-thermal emission of cosmic objects is due to
vacuum Cerenkov radiation.
With the polarization of space (vacuum) by a superluminal particle and the radiation
of photons must be connected a continous energy (velocity) loss of the moving
particle, analogous to the stopping power owing to the density effect of the theory of
Cerencov radiation [5]. This effect naturally explains the variation in the continuum
emission of Active Galactic Nucleii (AGN) and jets, where years after fast outbursts in
the optical region corresponding events at radio frequencies are found [7]. High
energetic particles generating optical or vacuum Cerenkov radiation of still higher
frequencies, e. g. in a jet, would according to (14) travel at a velocity of /G11 10 c and,4
therewith, cover the whole length of the jet of some kpc in a couple of years, gradually
loosing energy and slowing down. Thus an intensity variation, e. g. due to a sudden
rise of the particle number in the jet stream, would first occur in the emission of
highest frequency and then in the mentioned time wander through the whole
frequency band down to the radio hot spot. The experimentally found strong variability
of the gamma-ray luminosity of blazars and its correlation with the far-infrared
luminosity of the latter [8] (also in other AGN) can also be explained by sudden
variations of a particle flux streaming randomly off the blazar core at diferent highly
relativistic velocities. This picture is strongly supported by the HST view of a certain
class of radio galaxies, which revealed non-thermal nuclear sources with a linear
correlation between the radio and optical luminosities [9].
The relativistic vacuum Cerenkov effect also explains in a fully way other observed
phenomena, optical and otherwise, on and in jets of high energetic extragalactic
systems, especially the marked colour variation along jets from blue over red, near
infrared to radio wavelengths, as for instance in the elliptical galaxy M87 and even the
occurrence of X-ray emission, as in the jets of the quasar 3C 273 [10] and again M87
[11]. Furthermore, the frequently observed onesidedness of the jet phenomenon in
the frame of our theory can be ea sily explained by two counter directed ultra
relativistic jets with radiation cones according to (13) and (15), and the jet axes mildly
inclined against the line of sight. In this case the Cerenkov radiation from the farer jet
is always directed away from the observer to remain undetectable, except from stray
particles. This effect also explains the relative faintness of the counter jet of HH 30 in
the Milky Way [12].
Finally most recent HST observations of optical jets in radio galaxies have shown11
definite examples of two-sided optical hotspots and jets [13], which clearly rule out
Doppler boosting, but are explained easily by vacuum Cerenkov radiation.
References
[1] Rees, M. J., Nature 211, 468 - 470 (1966)
[2] Kunst, E. K.: Is the Kinematics of Special Relativity incomplete?,
physics/9909059
[3] Einstein, A., Ann. d. Phys. 17, 897 (1905)
[4] Minkowski, H., Ann. d. Phys. 47, 927 (1915)
[5] Frank, I. & Tamm, I., C. R. Acad. USSR 14, 109 (1937)
[6] Kunst, E. K.: On the Origin of Time, physics/9910024
[7] Nesterev, N. S. et al., Astron. Astrophys. 296, 628 - 632 (1995)
[8] Zhang, Y. H. & Xie G. Z., Astron. Astrophys. 317, 393 - 396 (1997)
[9] Chiaberge, M. et al., Astron. Astrophys. 349, 77 - 87 (1999)
[10] Neumann, M. et al., Astron. Astrophys. 326, 69 - 76 (1997)
[11] Neumann, M. et al., Astron. Astrophys. 318, 383 - 389 (1997)
[12] Bacciotti, F. et al., Astron. Astrophys. 350, 917 - 927 (1999)
[13] Sparks,W. B. et al.: Optical Jets in Radio Galaxies,
www.stsci/meetings/shst2/sparksb2.html
12
|
arXiv:physics/9911023v1 [physics.comp-ph] 12 Nov 1999An improved Rosenbluth Monte Carlo scheme
for cluster counting and lattice animal
enumeration
C M Care∗R Ettelaie†
February 2, 2008
Abstract
We describe an algorithm for the Rosenbluth Monte Carlo enu-
meration of clusters and lattice animals. The method may als o be
used to calculate associated properties such as moments or p erimeter
multiplicities of the clusters. The new scheme is an extensi on of the
Rosenbluth method for growing polymer chains and is a simpli fication
of a scheme reported earlier by one of the authors. The algori thm may
be used to estimate the number of distinct lattice animals on any lat-
tice topology. The method is validated against exact and Mon te Carlo
enumerations for clusters up to size 50, on a two dimensional square
lattice and three dimensional simple cubic lattice. The met hod may be
readily adapted to yield Boltzmann weighted averages over c lusters.
1 Introduction
The enumeration of lattice animals is an important problem i n a variety of
physical problems including nucleation [1], percolation [ 2] and branched poly-
mers [3]. A lattice animal is a cluster of Nconnected sites on a lattice with
∗Materials Research Institute, Sheffield Hallam University, Pond Street, Sheffield, S1
1WB, UK
†Colloids and Rheology Unit, ICI Wilton, PO Box 90, Wilton, Mi ddlesbrough, Cleve-
land, TS90 8JE, UK
1given symmetry and dimensionality and we seek to enumerate a ll distinct
animals with a given number of sites. Exact enumeration has b een carried
out for small lattice animals using a variety of methods [2,4 ,5] but the meth-
ods become computationally prohibitive for large animals. Many techniques
have been used to enumerate larger lattice animals includin g various Monte
Carlo growth schemes [2,6–8], a constant fugacity Monte Car lo method [9],
an incomplete enumeration method [10] and reaction limited cluster-cluster
aggregation [3].
In the following paper we describe an improvement of a method proposed
by one of the authors [11] which was based on an extension of th e scheme
proposed by Rosenbluth and Rosenbluth [12] for enumerating self avoiding
polymer chains. The central problem in using the Rosenbluth scheme for lat-
tice animal enumeration is calculating the degeneracy of th e clusters which
are generated. In the method proposed by Care, the cluster gr owth was mod-
ified in a way which forced the degeneracy to be N! where Nis the number
of sites occupied by the lattice animal. However the resulti ng algorithm was
fairly complicated to implement. An alternative method of c orrecting for
the degeneracy had been proposed by Pratt [13]. In this latte r scheme the
correcting weight is more complicated to determine and must be recalculated
at each stage of the cluster growth if results are sought at ea ch cluster size.
However the Pratt scheme does not require any restriction on the growth of
the cluster.
In this paper we show that there are a class of Rosenbluth like algorithms
which yield a degeneracy of Nand which are straightforward to implement.
The method provides an estimate of the number of lattice anim als and can
also yield estimates of any other desired properties of the a nimals such as
their radius of gyration or perimeter multiplicities [2]. W e describe and
justify the algorithm in Section 2 and present results to ill ustrate the use of
the method in Section 3. Conclusions are given in Section 4
2 Algorithm
Any algorithm, suitable for the purpose of the enumeration o f lattice animals
using the Rosenbluth Monte Carlo approach, must satisfy two important
criteria. First of all it has to be ergodic. That is to say, the algorithm should
have a non zero probability of sampling any given cluster sha pe. The second
criteria relates to the degeneracy that is associated with e ach cluster and
2requires this to be determinable. This degeneracy arises fr om the number
of different ways that the same cluster shape can be construct ed by the
algorithm. While it is easy to devise methods of growing clus ters that meet
the first requirement, the second condition is more difficult t o satisfy. For
many simple algorithms the calculation of the degeneracy, f or every cluster,
can be a more complex problem than the original task of enumer ating the
number of lattice animals.
In the original Rosenbluth Monte Carlo approach of Care [11] , this dif-
ficulty was overcome by ensuring that the degeneracy for all c lusters of size
Nwas the same and equal to N!. However, to achieve this result the al-
gorithm had to employ a somewhat elaborate procedure. This m ade the
implementation of the method rather complicated, as well as limiting its
possible extension to enumeration of other type of clusters . Here we shall
consider an alternative algorithm, which while satisfying both of the above
criteria, is considerably simpler than the algorithm propo sed by Care. In
Section 2.1 we describe the algorithm in its most basic form, before proving
in Section 2.2 that the ergodicity and the degeneracy requir ements are both
met. In Section 2.3 we demonstrate how the basic algorithm ca n be further
refined to improve its efficiency.
2.1 Basic Algorithm
Having chosen a suitable lattice on which the clusters are to be grown (square
and simple cubic lattices were used in this study for 2D and 3D systems,
respectively), a probability pof acceptance and q= (1 −p) of rejecting
sites is specified. Although in principle any value of p betwe en 0 and 1 can
be selected, the efficiency of the sampling process is largely dependent on a
careful choice of this value, as will be discussed later. In a ddition, an ordered
list of all neighbours of a site on the lattice is made. For exa mple, for a 2D
square lattice this might read (right, down, left, up). Whil e the order initially
chosen is arbitrary, it is essential that this remains the sa me throughout a
given run. In the basic algorithm, once chosen, the probabil itypremains
fixed during the Monte Carlo sampling procedure. However in S ection 2.3
the effect of relaxing this requirement is discussed.
We construct an ensemble of NEclusters and for each of these calculate
a weight factor which we subsequently use to calculate weigh ted averages of
various cluster properties. For a property Oof the clusters, the weighted
3average is defined as
< O > W=1
NENE/summationdisplay
α=1WαOα (1)
The weight associated with cluster αwithNsites is defined to be Wα=
1/(dNPα) where Pαis the normalised probability of growing the cluster and
dNis a degeneracy equal to the number of ways of growing a partic ular
cluster shape. It can be shown [11] that the weighted average can be used
to estimate the number, cN, of lattice animals of size Nand other properties
such as the average radius of gyration R2
N:-
E[<1>W] = cN (2)
E[< R2
ν>W] =cN/summationdisplay
{ν=1}R2
Nν=cNR2
N (3)
During the growth of each cluster we maintain a record of the s ites which
have been occupied, the sites which have been rejected and a ‘ last-in-first-out
stack’ of sites which is maintained according to the rules de scribed below.
Each cluster is grown as follows
(i). Starting from an initial position, the neighbours of th is site are exam-
ined one at a time according to the list specified above. An adj acent
site is accepted with a probability p or else is rejected.
(ii). If the adjacent site is rejected, a note of this is made a nd the next
neighbour in the list is considered.
(iii). If on the other hand it is accepted, then this becomes t he current site
and its position is added to top of a stack, as well as to a list o f accepted
sites. The examination of the sites is now resumed for the nei ghbours
of this newly accepted site. Once again this is done in the str ict order
which was agreed at the start of the algorithm.
(iv). Sites that have already been accepted or rejected are n o longer available
for examination. Thus, if such a site is encountered, it is ig nored and
the examination is moved on to the next eligible neighbour in the list.
(v). If at any stage the current site has no more neighbours le ft, that is
all its adjacent sites are already accepted or rejected, the n the current
position is moved back by one to the previous location. This w ill be
the position below the current one in the stack. The current p osition is
4removed from the top of the stack, though not from the list of a ccepted
sites.
(vi). The algorithm stops for one of the following two reason s. If ever the
number of accepted sites reaches N, then the algorithm is imm ediately
terminated. In this case a cluster of size N is successfully p roduced.
Note that unlike some of the other common cluster growth algo rithms
[8], it is not necessary here for every neighbour of the gener ated cluster
to be rejected. Some of these might still be unexamined befor e the
algorithm terminates. The second way in which the algorithm stops is
when it fails to produce a cluster of size N. In this case, the number of
accepted sites will be M < N , with all the neighbours of these Msites
already having been rejected, leaving no eligible sites lef t for further
examination. From step (v), it is clear that in cases such as t his, the
current position would have returned to the starting locati on.
(vii). The probability of producing a cluster of size N, in a m anner involving
rrejections, is simply p(N−1)qr. Hence the weight, Wα, associated with
the growth of the cluster is given by
Wα= 1/(dNp(1−N)(1−p)r) (4)
where the degeneracy, dN, is shown below to be exactly N. Failed
attempts have a zero weight associated with them. However th ey must
be included in the weighted average of equation (1).
(viii). During the growth of a cluster of size N, we may also collect data for all
the clusters of size Mwhere M≤N. It must be remembered that the
weights for these smaller clusters must be calculated with a degeneracy
ofM.
A specific example is helpful in demonstrating the algorithm . Figure 1
displays a successful attempt in forming a cluster of size N= 4, on a square
lattice. The order in which the neighbours were examined was chosen to
be right, down, left and up. Let us now consider various steps involved
in construction of this cluster in detail. Beginning from th e initial position
labelled cell one, the adjacent site to the right of this posi tion is examined. In
this case the site is rejected and the current position remai ns on the cell one.
Such rejected cells are indicated by the letter X. The next ne ighbour in the
list is the one below, labelled cell two. As it happens this is accepted. Thus,
the current position moves to this site and its position is ad ded to the top
5Figure 1: Sequence of accepted sites leading to a cluster of s izeN= 4. The
sites examined but rejected along the way are indicated by X. In our notation
this sequence can be represented by {0,1,1,0,0,0,1 }
of the stack, ahead of the position of cell one. The process of examining the
neighbours is resumed for sites adjacent to cell two. Once ag ain, following the
strict order in the list, the site labelled three to the right of current position
is considered first. This is also accepted and as before is pla ced at the top of
the stack. At this stage the stack contains the positions of c ells three, two
and one, in that order. The current position is now cell three .
The site to the right of this, followed by the one below, are te sted and
both rejected in succession. Since both the neighbours to th e left ( iecell
one) and the one above have already been considered, the curr ent position
has no more eligible neighbours left to test. Therefore, fol lowing step (v)
above, site three is removed from the stack. This leaves the p osition of cell
two at the top of the stack, making this the current position a gain. The cell
two has two neighbours, the adjacent sites below and to the le ft, which are
still unexamined. Of these, according to our agreed list, th e site below takes
precedent, but as shown in Figure 1 this is rejected. Current position remains
on the cell two and the neighbouring site (cell labelled four ) to the left of this
position is tested. As it happens this is accepted. A cluster of the desired
sizeN= 4 is achieved, bringing this particular attempt to a succes sful end.
For the subsequent discussion, it is useful to represent a se quence of ac-
ceptance and rejections by a series of 1 and 0. Thus, for the ca se shown in
6Figure 1 we have {0,1,1,0,0,0,1 }. Note that at any stage throughout a series,
the position of the current site and that of the neighbour to b e examined,
relative to the starting cell, are entirely specified by the d ecisions that have
been made so far. In other words, given a sequence of one and ze ros we can
determine precisely the shape of the cluster that was constr ucted. This is
only possible because of the manner in which the neighbours o f the current
position are always tested in a strict pre-defined order. For an algorithm
that considers the neighbouring sites at random, the same wi ll clearly not be
true.
The procedure described above needs to be repeated a large nu mber of
times, to obtain the weights for the ensemble average defined in equation (1).
In particular, using equation 2, the number of lattice anima ls of size Ncan
now be determined.
2.2 Ergodicity and degeneracy of the algorithm
Let us now discuss the issue of the ergodicity of the algorith m. We wish to
see whether, starting from any particular site on a given clu ster, a series of
acceptance and rejections (1 and 0) can always be determined which leads to
that cluster shape. We stress that we are not concerned about how probable
such a sequence is likely to be, but merely that it exists. We c an attempt
to construct such a sequence by following the same rules as ou r algorithm
described above, with one exception; we accept and reject ea ch examined
site according to whether it forms part of the target cluster shape or not.
Obviously, in the original algorithm, each such move has a no n zero chance
of occurring, provided pis not set to zero or one. Since we only accept
sites that belong to the cluster in question, it follows that if the sequence
is successful then we would achieve the desired cluster shap e. However, we
might argue that for some choice of target cluster and starti ng position, a
series started in this manner will always terminate prematu rely. That is to
say, it will inevitably lead to a failure, with only part of th e required cluster
having been constructed. Now, it is easy to see that this cann ot be true. If
the series fails, it implies that all the neighbouring sites of the sub-cluster
formed so far are rejected. However, the rest of the cluster m ust be connected
to this sub-cluster at some point. Hence, at very least, one n eighbouring site
of the sub-cluster must be part of the full cluster and could n ot have been
rejected. Starting from any of the sites belonging to a clust er then, it is
always possible to write down a sequence of one and zeros that will result
7in the formation of that cluster. Similarly, considering ev ery starting point
on a cluster of size N, another implication of the above result is that the
corresponding cluster shape can be generated in a minimum of at least N
distinct ways.
Next, we shall show that the degeneracy of a cluster of size Nin our
algorithm is in fact exactly N(unlike the original algorithm of Care [11]
which has a degeneracy of N!). Let us suppose that starting from a particular
site on a given target cluster shape, our algorithm has two di stinct ways of
forming this cluster. Associated with each of these, a serie s of one and zeros
can be written down, in the same manner as that indicated abov e. The
two ways of constructing the cluster must necessarily begin to differ from
each other at some stage along the sequence, where we will hav e a 1 in one
case and a 0 in the other. Now since up to this point the two seri es are
identical, the site being examined at this stage will be the s ame for both
cases. This is rejected in one sequence (hence 0) whereas it i s accepted in
the other (hence 1). It immediately follows that these two di ffering ways of
constructing the cluster cannot result in the same shape. Us ing this result,
together with previous one regarding the ergodicity of the a lgorithm, we are
lead to conclude that, starting from a given site on a cluster , the algorithm
has one and only one way of constructing the cluster. Hence, f or a cluster of
sizeN, the degeneracy is simply N.
2.3 Refined algorithms
2.3.1 Adjacent site stack
During the growth of the cluster a stack can be constructed of all the sites
which are adjacent to the cluster and still available for gro wth. When a new
site is added to the cluster, its neighbours are inspected in the predetermined
sequence and any available ones are added to the top of this st ack. (Note
that this stack differs from that discussed in Section (2.1)) . The choice of
site to be occupied can be made from all the adjacent sites in a single Monte
Carlo decision. Thus, if we consider the underlying process in the method
described above, at each step there is a probability pof the site being accepted
and a probability q= 1−pof the site being rejected. We therefore need
to generate a random number with the same distribution as the number
of attempts needed to obtain an acceptance. The probability of making k
8attempts of which only the last is successful, is
pk=qk−1p (5)
where 1 ≤k <∞and/summationtext∞
k=1pk= 1. In order to sample from this distribution
we note that the associated cumulative distribution, Cm, is given by
Cm=m/summationdisplay
k=1qk−1(1−q) = 1 −qm(6)
Hence if we generate a random number, η, uniformly distributed in the range
0< η < 1, then a number mgiven by
m= Int/bracketleftbiggln(η)
ln(q)+ 1/bracketrightbigg
(7)
will have been drawn from the required distribution. Thus we generate the
number maccording to equation (7) and use this to determine which sit e on
the stack is selected, with m= 1 corresponding to the site at the top of the
stack. If m > N adj, where Nadjis the number of available adjacent sites, the
cluster growth is terminated as explained in step ((vi)) in S ection 2.1. All
the adjacent sites lying above the chosen site in the stack ar e transferred into
the list of rejected sites. The list of adjacent sites is then adjusted to include
the new available sites adjacent to the recently accepted si te. As before, it
is crucial that these are added to the top of the list in the str ict predefined
order.
2.3.2 Variable probability
An apparent disadvantage of the methods so far described is t hat with fixed
choice of probability, p, occasions arise when a cluster growth will terminate
before reaching a cluster of size N, simply because the Monte Carlo choice
rejected all the neighbouring sites. This problem can be ove rcome if the
value of pis allowed to vary as the cluster grows. The simplest method i s to
determine the number, Nadj, of available adjacent sites at each point in the
cluster growth and select one of these sites with uniform pro bability. This
effectively makes p= 1/Nadjand thereby increases the chances of growing a
cluster of size N. Note that it is still possible for a cluster growth to become
blocked. This happens when the chosen site is the one at the bo ttom of
the current eligible neighbours list, thus causing all the o ther neighbouring
sites in the list to be rejected in one step. If the newly accep ted site has
9itself no unexamined neighbours to add to the list, the algor ithm terminated
prematurely. Modified in the manner described above the weig ht associated
with a cluster is now
Wα=ΠN
i=1Ni
adj
N(8)
rather than the expression given in equation (4).
However, when this variable probability method was tested i t was found
that although it reduced the number of rejected clusters, it was inefficient
at sampling the space of possible clusters when compared wit h method de-
scribed in section (2.3.1). This inefficiency was measured by comparison of
the standard deviation in the estimated cluster number for a ny given number
of clusters in the sampling ensemble. It is thought that the i nefficiency of
the variable probability method arises because it gives too much weight to
sites lower in the stack, yielding many non-representative clusters. It is pos-
sible that this problem could be overcome by using a non-unif orm sampling
distribution ( cf[11]) but this was not tested in this work and the method
described in (2.3.1) was used to obtain the results describe d in Section (3) .
3 Results
In order to test the algorithm described in Section (2) it was used to esti-
mate the number of lattice animals on a square 2D lattice and a simple cubic
3D lattice for which exact results are known up to certain siz es [5]. Before
collecting data it was necessary to determine the optimum va lue of the prob-
ability pwith which an adjacent site is accepted during the cluster gr owth.
The effect of changing pon the estimated error in the number of clusters of
size 50 on the 2D and 3D lattices can be seen in Figure 2. It can b e seen that
there is a fairly broad range of values of pfor which the error is a minimum
and a value of p= 0.6 was used to obtain the results described below for the
2D lattice and 0 .72 for the 3D lattice. The distribution of weights is log nor-
mal [11] and becomes highly skewed for large cluster sizes; t his is a standard
problem with Rosenbluth methods [14]. The minimum in the err or achieved
by the choice of the value of the probability phas the effect of minimising
the variance of the distribution of the weights, Wα.
In Table 1 we present results obtained using the algorithm de fined in
section 2 using the adjacent site stack method of section 2.3 to enumerate
clusters on a simple cubic 3D lattice for clusters up to size 5 0. The results
10Figure 2: Percentage errors for clusters of size 50
were obtained from an ensemble of 2 .5×107clusters. The data took 3.3
hours to collect on a R5000 Silicon Graphics workstation usi ng code written
in the language C but with no attempt to optimise the code. Onl y 30% of the
clusters achieved a size of 50. The results are quoted togeth er with a standard
error, eest, calculated by breaking the data into 50 blocks and determin ing
the variance of the block means for each cluster size. If the n umber of samples
in each block is sufficient, it follows from the central limit t heorem that the
sampling distribution of the means should become reasonabl y symmetrical.
We therefore also quote a skewness ,ξ, defined by [15]
ξ=m3/m3/2
2 (9)
where miis the ithmoment about the mean of the sampling distribution.
It is expected that ξ<∼0.5 for a symmetrical distribution and ξ >1 for a
highly skew distribution. The statistic ξshould be treated with some caution
since it is likely to be subject to considerable error becaus e it involves the
calculation of a third moment from a limited number of data po ints.
Exact results are known for clusters up to size 13 [6] and in th e table we
quote the values for the quantity χdefined by
χM=|cexact
M−cest
M
cexact
Meest
M| (10)
11Figure 3: Variation of percentage error with cluster size.
where cMis the number of clusters of size Mand it can be seen that all the
values of χareO(1). Hence we assume that eestis an acceptable method
of estimating the error in the method. However it is likely th at the eestwill
underestimate the true error if the distribution becomes mo re skew. We also
quote in Table 1 the values of cNcalculated by Lam [6] using a Monte Carlo
incomplete enumeration method together with the error esti mates reported
for this method.
In Table 2 we quote data collected from a square two dimension al lattice
by collecting data from 2 .5×107clusters up to size 50. This data only
took 1.45 hours to collect but only 2% of the clusters achieve d a size of 50.
Comparison is given with exact results [5] up to clusters of s ize 19. The
rate of growth of errors for the two and three dimensional dat a is shown
in Figure 3 and it can be seen that the errors associated with t he method
diverge are beginning to diverge quite rapidly above cluste rs of size 50. This
behaviour is to be expected with a technique which is based on sampling from
a log normal distribution. In the previous paper [11] equiva lent results were
obtained for clusters up to size 30 with approximately the sa me sample size.
The improvement up to clusters of size 50 obtained by the new m ethod arises
because the weight associated with clusters of a certain siz e is generated from
roughly half as many random numbers. This effectively halves the standard
12deviation of the log normal distribution of the weights and a llows larger
clusters to be sampled before the method becomes unusable.
4 Conclusions
We have described a simple Rosenbluth algorithm for the Mont e Carlo enu-
meration of lattice animals and clusters which can be applie d to any lattice
topology. A merit of the scheme is that for thermal systems it may be easily
adapted to include Boltzmann weightings following, for exa mple, the argu-
ments used by Siepmann at al[16] in the development of the configurational
bias technique. Similarly, the method can be applied to calc ulation of the av-
eraged properties of a cluster of a given size, in the site per colation problem.
In this case we have
< O > =<(1−P)tO > W
<(1−P)t>W=/summationtextNE
α=1Wα(1−P)tαOα/summationtextNE
α=1Wα(1−P)tα(11)
where Pis the probability of site occupation in the percolation pro blem of
interest and tαthe number of perimeter sites [17] of the cluster α. Preliminary
results also indicate that the method may be useful in the stu dy of the
adsorption of clusters onto solid surfaces. A possible nume rical limitation of
the method arises from the highly skew probability distribu tion of Rosenbluth
weights which occurs for large cluster sizes. However the me thod presented
in this work is able to work to considerably higher cluster si zes than the one
described in [11] before this becomes a problem.
References
[1] G. Jacucci, A. Perini, and G. Martin, J Phys A:Math and Gen 16, 369
(1983).
[2] B. F. Edwards, M. F. Gyure, and M. Ferer, Phys Rev A 46, 6252 (1992).
[3] R. C. Ball and J. R. Lee, J Phys I France 6, 357 (1996).
[4] H. P. Peters, D. Stauffer, H. P. H¨ olters, and K. Loewenich , Z Physik B
34, 339 (1979).
[5] M. F. Sykes and M. Glen, J Phys A: Math Gen 9, 87 (1976).
13[6] P. M. Lam and F. Family, Physica A 231, 369 (1996).
[7] D. Stauffer, Phys Rev Lett 41, 1333 (1978).
[8] P. L. Leath, Phys Rev Lett 36, 921 (1976).
[9] S. Redner and P. J. Reynolds, J Phys A: Math and Gen 14, 2679 (1981).
[10] P. M. Lam, Phys Rev A 34, 2339 (1986).
[11] C. M. Care, Phys Rev E 57, 1181 (1997).
[12] M. N. Rosenbluth and A. W. Rosenbluth, J Chem Phys 23, 356 (1955).
[13] L. Pratt, J Chem Phys 77, 979 (1982).
[14] J. Batoulis and K. Kremer, J Phys A: Math Gen 21, 127 (1988).
[15] M. G. Bulmer, Principles of Statistics (Oliver and Boyd, London, 1965).
[16] J. I. Siepmann and D. Frenkel, Mol Phys 75, 59 (1992).
[17] D. Stauffer, A. Aharony, and Taylor, Introduction to percolation theory
(Taylor and Francis, 1992).
List of Figures
1 Sequence of accepted sites leading to a cluster of size N= 4.
The sites examined but rejected along the way are indicated
by X. In our notation this sequence can be represented by
{0,1,1,0,0,0,1 }. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2 Percentage errors for clusters of size 50 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3 Variation of percentage error with cluster size. . . . . . . . . . 12
14NRosenbluth Exact Lam [6] eestTrue Lam [6] χ ξ
estimate value estimate % error % error % error
23.000×1003
31.499×10115
48.600×101868.594×1010.03 0.00 0.51 0.18 0.07
55.339×102534 5.321×1020.03 0.02 0.54 0.77 0.00
63.483×1033 481 3.475×1030.04 0.05 0.58 1.30 0.14
72.351×10423 502 2.353×1040.05 0.02 0.63 0.42 0.14
81.630×105162 913 1.631×1050.05 0.03 0.65 0.58 0.73
91.153×1061 152 870 1.155×1060.06 0.03 0.73 0.50 0.62
108.302×1068 294 738 8.291×1060.06 0.09 0.86 1.40 0.16
116.054×10760 494 540 6.042×1070.06 0.08 0.87 1.29 0.50
124.464×108446 205 905 4.442×1080.07 0.05 0.87 0.70 0.12
133.326×1093 322 769 129 3.291×1090.08 0.11 0.97 1.34 0.48
142.496×10102.461×10100.07 1.09 0.35
151.887×10111.862×10110.07 1.16 -0.10
161.436×10121.416×10120.10 1.22 0.25
171.098×10131.082×10130.10 1.27 -0.03
188.448×10138.329×10130.09 1.37 0.12
196.520×10146.446×10140.11 1.38 0.20
205.048×10155.002×10150.13 1.41 -0.07
213.929×10163.897×10160.14 1.47 -0.21
223.063×10173.052×10170.14 1.49 -0.42
232.399×10182.391×10180.16 1.61 -0.11
241.882×10191.877×10190.19 1.68 0.16
251.485×10201.480×10200.21 1.70 -0.02
261.169×10211.168×10210.21 1.75 -0.11
279.214×10219.209×10210.20 1.81 0.06
287.316×10227.290×10220.21 1.88 0.18
295.790×10235.786×10230.24 1.96 -0.12
304.600×10244.610×10240.25 2.01 0.44
Table 1: Table continued on next page
15NRosenbluth Exact Lam [6] eestTrue Lam [6] χξ
estimate value estimate % error % error % error
313.674×10250.26 -0.28
322.929×10260.25 0.26
332.342×10270.27 0.54
341.872×10280.31 0.46
351.501×10290.31 -0.32
361.199×10300.32 0.33
379.631×10300.39 1.08
387.691×10310.35 0.18
396.203×10320.40 0.27
404.984×10330.45 0.54
413.999×10340.43 0.35
423.205×10350.46 0.23
432.605×10360.49 0.35
442.100×10370.62 2.32
451.684×10380.71 0.43
461.353×10390.69 0.65
471.087×10400.58 0.36
488.892×10400.68 0.53
497.223×10410.79 0.02
505.789×10420.75 0.78
Table 1: Continued:- Degenerate Rosenbluth estimate of the number of lat-
tice animals of size Non a three dimensional square lattice using 2 .5×107
sample clusters, each grown to N= 50 with p= 0.72; exact values from [6];
estimated values and associated errors from incomplete enu meration method
of Lam [6]; calculation of error estimate described in text; ‘true’ error is frac-
tional difference of Rosenbluth estimate and exact value; χandξare defined
in the text.
16NRosenbluth Exact eestTrue χ ξ
estimate value % error %error
21.999×1002
36.000×10060.02 0.01 0.22 -0.48
41.900×10119 0.03 0.00 0.00 -0.65
56.300×10163 0.03 0.01 0.31 0.14
62.160×102216 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.36
77.601×102760 0.04 0.02 0.43 -0.27
82.724×1032 725 0.04 0.03 0.60 0.08
99.903×1039 910 0.05 0.07 1.48 -0.14
103.644×10436 446 0.05 0.01 0.21 0.10
111.352×105135 268 0.06 0.04 0.69 0.09
125.056×105505 861 0.07 0.04 0.66 -0.04
131.903×1061 903 890 0.08 0.04 0.51 -0.24
147.205×1067 204 874 0.09 0.01 0.06 -0.13
152.741×10727 394 666 0.09 0.05 0.49 -0.33
161.046×108104 592 937 0.09 0.01 0.07 -0.09
174.009×108400 795 844 0.11 0.03 0.29 0.74
181.543×1091 540 820 542 0.12 0.13 1.09 0.44
195.942×1095 940 738 676 0.10 0.01 0.15 0.26
202.298×10100.13 -0.42
218.895×10100.15 -0.02
223.451×10110.17 0.62
231.341×10120.18 0.61
245.228×10120.20 1.61
252.039×10130.19 -0.04
267.970×10130.26 -0.05
273.122×10140.25 0.00
281.225×10150.24 0.33
294.831×10150.28 0.20
301.883×10160.30 -0.13
Table 2: Table continued on next page
17NRosenbluth Exact eestTrue χξ
estimate value % error %error
317.426×10160.33 0.97
322.945×10170.45 0.59
331.160×10180.34 0.19
344.561×10180.47 0.44
351.800×10190.40 0.23
367.121×10190.52 0.29
372.823×10200.57 0.67
381.122×10210.67 -0.03
394.417×10210.65 0.71
401.763×10220.83 1.30
416.979×10220.84 1.02
422.738×10230.78 0.37
431.088×10240.82 -0.16
444.341×10240.93 2.12
451.704×10250.97 0.52
466.802×10251.10 0.73
472.673×10261.07 0.41
481.058×10271.02 0.60
494.209×10271.14 0.26
501.664×10281.28 0.29
Table 2: Continued:- Degenerate Rosenbluth estimate of the number of lat-
tice animals of size Non a two dimensional square lattice using 2 .5×107
sample clusters, each grown to N= 50 with p= 0.60; exact results from [5];
calculation of error estimate described in text; ‘true’ err or is fractional dif-
ference of Rosenbluth estimate and true value; χandξare defined in the
text.
18 |
arXiv:physics/9911024v1 [physics.flu-dyn] 12 Nov 1999Quasilinear theory of the 2D Euler equation
Pierre-Henri Chavanis
Laboratoire de Physique Quantique, Universit´ e Paul Sabat ier, 118 route de Narbonne 31062 Toulouse, France
(March 17, 2008)
Motivated by the numerical investigations of [1] Laval et al.
(1999), we develop a quasilinear theory of the 2D Euler equa-
tion and derive an integro-differential equation for the evo -
lution of the coarse-grained vorticity ω(r, t). This equation
respects all the invariance properties of the Euler equatio n
and conserves angular momentum in a circular domain and
linear impulse in a channel (as well as in an infinite domain).
The explicit energy is not rigorously conserved as it is part ly
transfered into fine-grained fluctuations but the total ener gy
is conserved. We prove a H-theorem for the Fermi-Dirac en-
tropy and make the connection with statistical theories of 2 D
turbulence.
PACS numbers: 47, 47.10.+g, 47.27.Jv, 47.32.Cc
A fundamental difficulty in fluid turbulence is the de-
velopement of motion at very small scales, down to the
dissipation scale, while numerical computations are lim-
ited by the scale of the numerical mesh. One cannot sim-
ply ignore the contribution of the small scales, otherwise
energy would accumulate at the grid mesh and produce
a bottle neck instability. In general, a turbulent viscos-
ity (or hyperviscosity) is introduced in order to provide a
source of dissipation and regularize the equations. How-
ever, this additional term is relatively ad hoc and breaks
the conservation laws of the Euler equation.
A small-scale parametrization of 2D turbulence can be
constructed on the basis of thermodynamical considera-
tions. Using a Maximum Entropy Production Principle
(MEPP), [2] Robert & Sommeria (1992) obtained an “op-
timal” relaxation equation for the coarse-grained vortic-
ity which respects all the conservation laws of the inviscid
dynamics. This approach was extended by [3] Chavanis
& Sommeria (1997) who derived a set of equations re-
specting in addition the invariance properties of the Eu-
ler equation. However, this thermodynamical approach is
based on the assumption that the system evolves towards
a maximum entropy state or a collection of maximum en-
tropy “bubbles” [4]. In this letter, we obtain a small-scale
parametrization of 2D turbulence starting directly from
the Euler equation. We prove a H-theorem and recover
the results of the statistical theory as an approximation
of our model.
For a two-dimensional incompressible and inviscid
flow, the Euler equation can be written:
∂ω
∂t+u∇ω= 0 (1)
u=−z∧ ∇ψ ω =−∆ψ (2)whereωz=∇∧uis the vorticity and ψthe streamfunc-
tion (zis a unit vector normal to the flow). The velocity
can be expressed as an integral over the vorticity field as
u(r,t) =/integraldisplay
d2r′V(r′→r)ω(r′,t) (3)
where
V(r′→r) =−1
2π(r′−r)⊥
|r′−r|2+Vb(r′→r) (4)
represents the velocity created in rby a vortex of unit
circulation located in r′(r⊥is the vector rrotated by
+π
2). The term Vb(r′→r) accounts for boundary effects
(Vb=0in an infinite domain) and can be calculated with
the method of “images”.
We assume that the initial condition consists of a patch
of uniform vorticity ω=σ0surrounded by irrotational
flow. This patch is unstable and the Euler equation
builds up a complicated filamentation at smaller and
smaller scales. In practice, we are only interested in
the “coarse-grained” vorticity ω(r,t) defined as the lo-
cal average of ω(r,t) on a cell of size ǫ2. The fluctuating
vorticity ˜ω=ω−ωis simply the difference between the
exact vorticity and the smoothed-out vorticity. If we take
the local average of the Euler equation (1), we obtain a
convection-diffusion equation:
∂ω
∂t+u∇ω=−∇J (5)
for the coarse-grained field with a current J=˜ω˜urelated
to the correlations of the fine-grained fluctuations. In
turns, the fluctuations depend on the smoothed-out field
according to the equation:
∂˜ω
∂t+u∇˜ω=−˜u∇ω−˜u∇˜ω+˜u∇˜ω (6)
obtained by substracting (1) and (5).
We shall now neglect the non linear terms which ap-
pear in the right hand side of equation (6). This “quasi-
linear approximation” is well-known in plasma physics
and in stellar dynamics for the Vlasov-Poisson system
(see, e.g, [5]) but, to our knowledge, it has never been ap-
plied to the 2D Euler system, although the equations are
relatively similar [6–8]. It is therefore interesting in it self
to develop this theory (Chavanis 1997, draft paper). In
addition, the recent numerical investigations of [1] Laval
et al. (1999) have demonstrated that these nonlinear
terms are indeed negligible. The quasilinear theory can
1therefore provide an accurate small-scale parametrizatio n
of 2D turbulence.
We consider therefore the coupled system
∂ω
∂t+Lω=−∇˜ω˜u (7)
∂˜ω
∂t+L˜ω=−˜u∇ω (8)
whereL=u∇is an advection operator.
Introducing the Greenian:
G(t2,t1)≡exp/braceleftBigg
−/integraldisplayt2
t1dtL(t)/bracerightBigg
(9)
we can immediately write down a formal solution of (8),
namely:
˜ω(r,t) =G(t,0)˜ω(r,0)
−/integraldisplayt
0dsG(t,t−s)˜u(r,t−s)∇ω(r,t−s) (10)
Although very compact, this formal expression is in fact
extremely complicated. Indeed, all the difficulty is en-
capsulated in the Greenian G(t,t−s) which supposes
that we can solve the smoothed out Lagrangien flow:
dr
dt=u(r,t) (11)
betweentandt−s.
The objective now is to substitute the formal result
(10) back into (7) and make some closure approximation
in order to obtain a self-consistant equation for ω(r,t).
If the vorticity were purely advected by the stochastic
velocity field u(like a passive scalar), the interaction (3)
would be switched off and we would end up with a diffu-
sion equation for ωwith a diffusion coefficient D∼1
4τ˜u2
whereτis the decorrelation time [7,9]. However, in the
case of the Euler equation, the velocity fluctuations are
induced by the fluctuations of the vorticity itself accord-
ing to:
˜u(r,t) =λ/integraldisplay
d2r′V(r′→r)˜ω(r′,t) (12)
Therefore, considering (10) and (12), we see that the vor-
ticity fluctuations ˜ ω(r,t) are given by an iterative pro-
cess: ˜ω(t) depends on ˜u(t−s) which itself depends on
˜ω(t−s) etc... Since |˜u|, of orderωǫ, is much smaller
than|u|, of orderLω(whereL≫ǫis the size of the
domain), we can solve this problem perturbatively. For
convenience, we have introduced a counting parameter
λin (12) which will be set equal to one ultimately. To
orderλ2, we obtain:∂ω
∂t+Lω=−λ∂
∂rµ/integraldisplay
d2r′Vµ(r′→r)G(t,0)G′(t,0)
טω(r,0)˜ω(r′,0) +λ2∂
∂rµ/integraldisplayt
0ds/integraldisplay
d2r′d2r′′
×Vµ(r′→r)/braceleftbigg
G′(t,0)G(t,t−s)Vν(r′′→r)
טω(r′,0)˜ω(r′′,t−s)∂ω
∂rν(r,t−s)
+G(t,0)G′(t,t−s)Vν(r′′→r′)
טω(r,0)˜ω(r′′,t−s)∂ω
∂r′ν(r′,t−s)/bracerightbigg
(13)
In this expression, the Greenian Grefers to the fluid par-
ticler(t) and the Greenian G′to the fluid particle r′(t).
The contribution proportional to λreflects some kind of
self-interaction (see equation (19)) and will be ignored in
the following. Using the properties:
G(t1,t2) =G(t1,t3)G(t3,t2) (14)
and:
˜ω(r,t) =G(t,0)˜ω(r,0) +o(λ) (15)
we can synchronize the two terms in the correlation func-
tions to obtain:
∂ω
∂t+Lω=∂
∂rµ/integraldisplayt
0ds/integraldisplay
d2r′d2r′′Vµ(r′→r)
×G′(t,t−s)G(t,t−s)
×/braceleftbigg
Vν(r′′→r)˜ω(r′,t−s)˜ω(r′′,t−s)∂ω
∂rν(r,t−s)
+Vν(r′′→r′)˜ω(r,t−s)˜ω(r′′,t−s)∂ω
∂r′ν(r′,t−s)/bracerightbigg
(16)
To close the system, it remains to evaluate the correlation
function ˜ω(r,t)˜ω(r′,t). We shall take [7]:
˜ω(r,t)˜ω(r′,t) =ǫ2δ(r−r′)˜ω2(r,t) (17)
A simple model for justifying (17) will be proposed in a
forthcoming article [10]. Now:
˜ω2=(ω−ω)2=ω2−ω2(18)
For the case that we consider, the exact vorticity field ω
can take only two values ω= 0 andω=σ0. This implies
thatω2=σ0×ω=σ0ωand therefore:
˜ω(r,t)˜ω(r′,t) =ǫ2δ(r−r′)ω(σ0−ω) (19)
Substituting this expression in equation (16) and carry-
ing out the integration on r′′, we obtain:
∂ω
∂t+u∇ω=ǫ2∂
∂rµ/integraldisplayt
0ds/integraldisplay
d2r′Vµ(r′→r)t
×/braceleftbigg
Vν(r′→r)ω′(σ0−ω′)∂ω
∂rν
+Vν(r→r′)ω(σ0−ω)∂ω′
∂r′ν/bracerightbigg
t−s(20)
2We have written ω′
t−s≡ω(r′(t−s),t−s),ωt−s≡ω(r(t−
s),t−s),Vµ(r′→r)t≡Vµ(r′(t)→r(t)) andVν(r′→
r)t−s≡Vν(r′(t−s)→r(t−s)) where r(t−s) is the
position at time t−sof the fluid particle located in r=
r(t) at timet. It is determined by the characteristics (11)
of the smoothed-out Lagrangian flow.
Equation (20) is a non Markovian integro-differential
equation: the value of ωinrat timetdepends on the
value of the whole vorticity field at earlier times . If the
decorrelation time τis short, we can make a Markov
approximation and simplify the foregoing expression in
∂ω
∂t+u∇ω=ǫ2τ
2∂
∂rµ/integraldisplay
d2r′Vµ(r′→r)
×/braceleftbigg
Vν(r′→r)ω′(σ0−ω′)∂ω
∂rν
+Vν(r→r′)ω(σ0−ω)∂ω′
∂r′ν/bracerightbigg
(21)
In the case of an infinite domain, V(r→r′) =−V(r′→
r) and we have the further simplification
∂ω
∂t+u∇ω=ǫ2τ
8π2∂
∂rµ/integraldisplay
d2r′Kµν(r′−r)
×/braceleftbigg
ω′(σ0−ω′)∂ω
∂rν−ω(σ0−ω)∂ω′
∂r′ν/bracerightbigg
(22)
where
Kµν(r′−r) =ξµ
⊥ξν
⊥
ξ4=ξ2δµν−ξµξν
ξ4(23)
andξ ξξ=r′−r. The symmetrical form of this equation is
of course reminiscent of the Landau equation in plasma
physics. Note that even if |r′−r| ×Kµν(r′−r) diverges
like|r′−r|−1asr′approaches r, the integral remains
well-behaved because the term in brackets goes to zero
simultaneously.
Introducing a tensor
Dµν=ǫ2τ
2/integraldisplay
d2r′Vµ(r′→r)Vν(r′→r)ω′(σ0−ω′)
(24)
and a vector
ηµ=ǫ2τ
2/integraldisplay
d2r′Vµ(r′→r)Vν(r→r′)∂ω′
∂r′ν(25)
equation (21) can be rewritten in the more illuminating
form:
∂ω
∂t+u∇ω=∂
∂rµ/bracketleftbigg
Dµν∂ω
∂rν+ω(σ0−ω)ηµ/bracketrightbigg
(26)
This equation has the structure of a generalized Fokker-
Planck equation with a diffusion term and a drift term.
The importance of a drift in the self-organization of 2Dturbulence was stressed by [11] Chavanis (1998c) using
a point vortex model. Here, the drift is non linear in
ωso that (26) is not, strictly speaking, a Fokker-Planck
equation. This nonlinearity accounts for the constraint
ω(r,t)≤σ0imposed at any time by the conservation of
the microscopic vorticity (see equation (1)).
Equation (21) respects the invariance properties of the
2D Euler equation and has the same structure as equation
(23) of [3] Chavanis & Sommeria (1997) derived on the
basis of thermodynamical arguments. In their work, the
constraints of the Euler equation were satisfied with the
aid of Lagrange multipliers. In this new approach, the
conservation laws follow naturally from the symmetrical
structure of equation (21) [10]. This is more satisfying
on a physical point of view. Moreover, in the thermody-
namical approach, the increase of entropy is postulated
whereas in the present situation an H-theorem for the
Fermi-Dirac entropy
S=−/integraldisplay/braceleftbiggω
σ0lnω
σ0+/parenleftbigg
1−ω
σ0/parenrightbigg
ln/parenleftbigg
1−ω
σ0/parenrightbigg/bracerightbigg
d2r(27)
results immediately from equation (21). This is proved
by taking the time derivative of (27), substituting for
(21), interchanging the dummy variables randr′and
summing the two resulting expressions. This yields:
˙S=ǫ2τ
4/integraldisplay
d2rd2r′σ4
0
ω(σ0−ω)ω′(σ0−ω′)
×/parenleftbigg
V(r′→r)ω′(σ0−ω′)∇ω
+V(r→r′)ω(σ0−ω)∇ω′/parenrightbigg2
(28)
which is clearly positive. It is remarkable that a quasilin-
ear theory is sufficient to generate a turbulent viscosity
(but also a drift) and a source of entropy. We don’t
necessarily have to advocate the non linear terms in (6)
to get these properties. Note also that the entropy as-
sociated with the (coarse-grained) Euler equation is the
Fermi-Dirac entropy (27) in agreement with the works of
[12] Miller (1990) and [13] Robert & Sommeria (1991) at
equilibrium. This confirms that other proposed function-
als ( [14] Boltzmann entropy, [15] enstrophy, [16] Tsal-
lis entropy) are only approximate (see discussion in [17]
Brands et al. 1999).
A further connection with the statistical theory of 2D
turbulence can be found. Equation (21) is an integro-
differential equation whereas the equations derived from
the MEPP [2,7,3] are differential equations. The usual
way to transform an integro-differential equation into a
differential equation is to make a guess for the function
ω′appearing in the integral. It makes sense to replace ω′
by its optimal value
ω′=σ0
1 +λeβσ0ψ′ (29)
3maximizing entropy at fixed energy and circulation. Sub-
stituting in (24) (25) and making a “local approximation”
(which is now permissible since the integral diverges log-
arithmically when r′→r), we obtain
η ηη=Dβ∇ψ (30)
D=τǫ2
8πln/parenleftbiggL
ǫ/parenrightbigg
ω(σ0−ω) (31)
In equation (30), we recover the form of the drift derived
by [11] Chavanis (1998c) in a point vortex model. The
drift coefficient can be interpreted as an Einstein formula.
Substituting for the drift in (26) we recover the equation
∂ω
∂t+u∇ω=∇(D(∇ω+βω(σ0−ω)∇ψ)) (32)
derived by [2] Robert & Sommeria (1992) using a Max-
imum Entropy Production Principle. In this formalism,
β(t) is a Lagrange multiplier which evolves in time ac-
cording to
β(t) =−/integraltext
D∇ω∇ψd2r/integraltext
Dω(σ0−ω)(∇ψ)2d2r(33)
so as to conserve energy. Equation (32) can be in-
terpreted as a generalized Fokker-Planck equation [11].
Note that the present approach provides the value (31)
of the diffusion coefficient which was left unknown by
the variational principle. This value coincides with the
estimate of [7] Chavanis et al. (1996) and [9] Robert &
Rosier (1997) based on a passive scalar model.
In conclusion we have obtained a new equation for
the evolution of the coarse-grained vorticity in 2D tur-
bulence. This equation respects the invariance proper-
ties and conservation laws of the Euler equation. We
have proved a H-theorem for the Fermi-Dirac entropy
and made a connection with the statistical theory of 2D
turbulence. Previous relaxation equations [2,7,3] are re-
covered as an approximation of our model. The results
of this letter can be extended to an arbitrary spectrum
of vorticity levels [10] and can provide a useful small-
scale parametrization of 2D turbulence. These results
also complete the analogy between 2D turbulence and
stellar systems [5–8].
[1] J.P. Laval, B. Dubrulle & S. Nazarenko, Phys. Rev. Lett.
(1999), to appear.
[2] R. Robert & J. Sommeria, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69(1992)
2776.[3] P.H. Chavanis & J. Sommeria, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78(1997)
3302.
[4] P.H. Chavanis & J. Sommeria, J. Fluid Mech. 356(1998)
259.
[5] P.H. Chavanis, MNRAS 300(1998a) 981.
[6] P.H. Chavanis, PhD thesis, Ecole Normale Sup´ erieure de
Lyon (1996).
[7] P.H. Chavanis, J. Sommeria & R. Robert, Astrophys. J.
471(1996) 385.
[8] P.H. Chavanis, Annals N.Y Acad. Sci. 867(1998b) 120.
[9] R. Robert & C. Rosier, J. Stat. Phys. 86(1997) 481.
[10] In preparation.
[11] P.H. Chavanis, Phys. Rev. E 58(1998c) R1199.
[12] J. Miller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65(1990) 2137.
[13] R. Robert & J. Sommeria, J. Fluid Mech. 229(1991)
291.
[14] G. Joyce & D. Montgomery, J. Plasma Phys. 10(1973)
107.
[15] C.E. Leith, Phys. Fluids 27(1984) 1388.
[16] B.M. Boghosian, Phys. Rev. E 53(1996) 4754.
[17] H. Brands, P.H. Chavanis, R. Pasmanter & J. Sommeria
Phys. Fluids 11(1999) 3465.
4 |
arXiv:physics/9911026v1 [physics.atom-ph] 12 Nov 1999Multipositronic systems
K´ alm´ an Varga∗
Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, I llinois 60439, USA
The stability and structure of systems comprising a nega-
tive ion and positrons are investigated by the stochastic va ri-
ational method. It is shown that the H−and the Li−ions
can bind not only one but two positrons. The binding en-
ergies of these double positronic atoms E(H−,e+,e+)=0.57eV
and E(Li−,e+,e+)=0.15eV are somewhat smaller than those
of their single positronic counterparts (E(HPs)=1.06eV an d
E(LiPs)=0.32 eV). We have also found that a Ps−, Ps−and
a proton form a bound system.
36.10.Dr, 31.15.Pf.,71.35.-y,73.20.Dx
The many-body problem is conceptually simple and
well defined in atomic physics: indistinguishable fermions
(electrons) interact via the Coulomb potential in the ex-
ternal Coulomb field of the atomic nuclei. The solution
of this many-body problem is very difficult, because in
addition to the direct interaction between the electrons,
their indistinguishability brings an exchange correlatio n
into effect. Despite the complexity enormous progress
has been made in this field which has been rapidly de-
veloping ever since the birth of quantum mechanics. The
calculations have been mainly focused on systems (atoms
and molecules) where fast electronic motion takes place
in the field of slowly moving heavy positive charges.
Much less is known about systems which contain posi-
tively and negatively charged particles of equal or nearly
equal masses. The simplest examples of these systems are
the Positronium ion ( e+, e−, e−) (predicted by Wheeler
[1] in 1946, experimentally observed by Mills [2] in 1981),
the Ps 2molecule ( e+, e+, e−, e−) (predicted by Hylleraas
and Ore [3] in 1947, not observed yet in nature), or the
HPs molecule (indirectly observed, see [4]). These sys-
tems have been extensively studied by various theoreti-
cal methods in the last few years [5]. The existence of
these small systems makes theorists curious as to whether
(similarly to molecules) larger stable systems containing
positrons can also be formed. One can ask whether a sys-
tem of melectrons npositrons (for example an (3 e−,3e+)
system) is bound or whether a positron, a positronium,
a Ps−ion or a Ps 2molecule can attach itself to an atom
or molecule.
The theoretical description of such systems (let alone
the prediction of their stability against autodissociatio n)
is obviously very difficult. The difficulty can largely be
attributed to the fact that the electron-electron and the
electron-positron correlations are quite different due to
the attraction and to absence of the Pauli-principle con-
straint in the latter case. The tiny binding energies of
these loosely bound extended systems require highly ac-curate calculations.
Recent calculations have given the very surprising re-
sult that a positron can cling to a neutral atom [6]. The
simplest such positronic atom is the Lie+. The com-
plexity of the calculation of its small binding energy is
best illustrated by the fact that many otherwise suc-
cessful methods had failed to predict the existence of
the bound state of this system [7,8]. These calculations
show that the energy of the Lie+is lower than that of
the Li atom but the energy was not below the Li++Ps
dissociation threshold. The first rigorous proof show-
ing that the positron can attach itself to a Li atom was
given by Ryzhikh and Mitroy [6] by using the stochas-
tic variational method (SVM) [9,10]. This finding has
been later confirmed by different theoretical approaches
[11–13]. Other atoms (e.g. Be,Na,Mg,Cu,Zn and Ag)
has also been found to be capable of binding a positron
[14–16].
There is an other family of positronic atoms which are
formed when positronium is attached to an atom. The
possibility of the existence of such systems is more ob-
vious: removing the positron leaves behind a negatively
charged ion so one can understand how the positron be-
comes bound. The simplest example of such system is
the HPs molecule which has been the subject of numer-
ous theoretical investigations and has been experimen-
tally observed as well [4]. Another examples are the
LiPs, NaPs and KPs atoms. The LiPs has been de-
scribed by several microscopic methods [12,14], while the
other two bound systems have been predicted by a semi-
microscopic model [15,16].
In this paper we explore the possibility of the formation
of stable atoms/ions containing two or more positrons.
The simplest known example for such system is the Ps 2
molecule. The study is inspired by the speculation that
if a neutral atom can bind a positron then it may even
be able to bind a positively charged Ps+=(e+,e+,e−) ion.
This motivation can also be phrased in an other way: If
positronium can bind itself to a neutral atom “A” form-
ing a neutral system “APs” then can we attach a positron
into APs?
The stochastic variational method systematically im-
proves the correlation functions between the particles
and it is especially suitable to solve Coulombic few-body
problems. The method has been tested on a number of
problems in different fields of physics and it has been
proved to be highly accurate and reliable [10,17]. The
present study is restricted to states with total orbital an-
gular momentum L=0 and the following trial function is
assumed
Ψ =A{e−1
2xAxχSM S}, (1)where x= (x1, ...xN−1) is a set of relative coordinates,
χSM Sis the spin function, and Ais a matrix of nonlinear
variational parameters. The nonlinear parameters are
optimized by the stochastic variational method through
a trial and error procedure. The details can be found in
Ref. [10].
This trial function includes explicit exp( −αr2
ij) corre-
lation factors between the particles and it gives very ac-
curate solutions provided that the nonlinear parameters
(in the exponents) are properly optimized. As the num-
ber of parameters for a typical system is at least a few
thousands a direct search for the optimal values is out
of question. The stochastic variational method sets up a
basis successively enlarging the model space by including
the optimal trial functions. This basis was systemati-
cally improved by a refining procedure: The basis states
were replaced by randomly chosen states which lower the
energy. The energy found in this variational procedure
converges to the upper bound of the exact ground state
energy of the system. The Correlated Gaussians offer
computational advantage: fast analytical evaluation of
the matrix elements and good approximation to various
wave functions. They also have well-kown drawbacks
such as their slow convergence (compared to exponen-
tial functions) and the fact that they do not satisfy the
cusp condition.
The simplest (A,Ps+) is the (H,Ps+)=(p,e−,e−,e+,e+)
system. This five-body system can dissociate into
H+Ps+, p+Ps 2or HPs+e+, the lowest dissociation
thresholds are shown in Fig. 1. To validate the method
we have calculated the energies of the Ps 2and HPs
molecules (see Table I.). The SVM significantly improved
the theoretical values of the binding energies of these
systems. Our calculation shows that the energy of the
(H,Ps+) is below the dissociation threshold and forms
an electronically stable system. The H−ion can bind
not only one but two positrons. The binding energy of
(H,Ps+)=HPse+(0.021 a.u) is comparable to that of HPs
(0.039 a.u.). The convergence of the energy as a function
of the basis dimension is shown in Table I.
The HPse+system can be also viewed as a bound sys-
tem of a proton and a Ps 2molecule. The Ps 2molecule
cannot bind an extra electron or positron because of the
Pauli principle. Our calculations show that the Ps 2can
bind a charged particle if it is distinguishable from the
electron and the positron. The binding energy of a five-
body system Ps 2+x+=(e+,e+,e−,e−,x+) consisting a hy-
potetical “x” particle is bound for any 0 ≤me/mx≤1
mass ratio. This has been checked by calculating the
binding energy of that system for several different mx
masses ( mx= 1050,100,10,8,6,4,2,1 in units of m e). So
while the (e+,e+,e+,e−,e−) is unbound the Ps 2can bind
any charged particle, e.g. µ+or p+, because the Pauli
principle does not restrict the motion of fifth particle in
that case.
Some of the properties of these systems are shown in
Table II. It is intriguing to compare the relative dis-
tances between the particles in HPs and HPse+. Theelectron-nucleus or electron-electron relative distance s
are almost the same in the two systems. The average
nucleus-positron distance, however is substantially larg er
in HPse+. An other interesting property is that the rel-
ative distance between positrons is about twice that be-
tween electrons. All these facts suggest that a possible
geometrical picture of the HPse+looks as an isosceles tri-
angle formed by the two positrons and the proton and the
two electrons are moving between the positive charges.
The two positrons are placed on the vertices of the base-
line of the triangle, and this baseline is so long that the
system almost looks like as a linear chain. The HPse+
is somewhat related to H+
3. In H+
3three protons and
two electrons form a very stable system, where the three
protons are at the vertices of an equilateral triangle. By
changing the mass of two of the positive charges this equi-
lateral triangle is changed to an isosceles triangle, and in
the positronic limit it looks like a linear chain.
The Li atom can bind a positron or a positronium
forming an electronically stable Lie+or LiPs [6]. The
binding energy of the Lie+is very small and it can be
best viewed as a positronium orbiting around a Li+core.
In our calculation we replace the positron with a Ps 2
ion and try to determine the binding energy. In this
case we have six active particles, four electrons and two
positrons. This system has various different dissociation
channels (see Fig. 2). The calculated energies of the
relevant subsystems are listed in Table III.
Our calculation shows that the Li can bind a Ps+ion
to form an electronically stable LiPse+. The calculated
binding energy might not be very accurate due to the
complexity of the system, but it is definitely below the
lowest threshold (see Fig. 2). The convergence of the
binding energy is shown in Table I. Further increase of
the basis size would improve the ground state energy.
This system, again, can be viewed in different ways.
One can say that a Li atom can bind a Ps+ion, or a Li−
ion is able to bind two positrons or the Ps 2molecule can
attach itself to a Li+ion.
The relative distances between the particles in LiPse+
are shown in Table III. The average distance between
the nucleus and the positron or between a positron and
an electron is larger than that in LiPs but smaller than
what one can find in Lie+. This would suggest a picture
of LiPse+as a Li+core with an orbiting Ps 2molecule.
These systems are electronically stable but the
positron electron pair can annihilate by emitting two pho-
tons. The annihilation rate is proportional to the prob-
ability of finding an electron and a positron at the same
position in a spin singlet state (see eq. (21) in [15]).
The expectation values of the positron-electron delta
functions ( δe+e−=/an}bracketle{tΨ|δ(re−−re+)|Ψ/an}bracketri}ht) are 1 .4×10−2,
1.1×10−2and 1.1×10−2, for Lie+, LiPs and LiPse+. Due
to the possible inaccuracy of the energy and wave func-
tion of the LiPse+system the annihilation rate should
be considered as a qualitative estimate and it is about
Γ2γ= 4.4×109sec−1.
The (H−,e+,e+) is a positively charged system so onemay try to add one more electron to see if it remains
stable. The convergence of the energy is shown in Fig. 3.
The energy of the system slowly converges to the lowest
(HPs+Ps) threshold and the size of the system contin-
uously increases showing that this system is unlikely to
be bound. Surprisingly, however, by adding two elec-
trons to (H−,e+,e+) one gets a bound system as shown
in Fig. 3. This system “H−Ps2” contains a proton, two
positrons and four electrons, and can also be considered
as a three-body system of a proton a Ps−and a Ps−ion
as an analogy of the H−ion (where the electrons are re-
placed by the composite Ps−ions). The convergence of
the energy is slow and the calculation of a more accurate
binding energy would require a considerably larger basis
dimension (see Table I.)
We have shown, for the first time, that neutral atoms
can bind not only a single positron but a more complex
positive charge, the Ps+ion as well. Besides the two
cases (HPse+and LiPse+) it is quite possible that other
systems can be also bound. Although the investigation of
larger systems is beyond the scope of the present method,
other approaches (like QMC [12,18] or Fixed core SVM
[15]) might be used to study the possible bound state of
Ps+(or two positrons) with larger atoms/ions. Examples
are (1) the recent QMC study of positronic water [18] and
a new study with the Fixed core SVM which confirms the
existence of the LiPse+and shows that a larger ion (Na+)
[20] can also bind a Ps 2molecule.
The investigation of these exotic systems are very im-
portant from theoretical point of view. These systems
serve as test grounds for new methods: They provide a
special environment where not only the electron-electron
but other interleptonic correlations are also important.
While the chance of experimental observation of these
systems is even more challenging than those of the
positronic atoms [19], some of the properties of positronic
systems can be affected by these bound states and the
theoretical prediction of their existence might be very
useful.
Systems, similar to (p+,e+,e+,e−,e−) might exist in
semiconductors. Both the charged exciton (system of
two electrons and a hole, akin to Ps−) and the biexciton
(two electrons and two holes, similar to Ps 2) have been
experimentally observed [21,22]. Larger systems of “mul-
tiexcitons” (system of several electron-hole pairs) have
also been observed [23,24]. These systems are of course
different from the electron-positron systems because the
electron-hole mass ratio ( σ=me/mh) differs from unity
and also because there is no annihilation so their obser-
vation might be easier. The stability for electrons and
positrons indicates the stability for systems with slightl y
different mass ratios. The present study might give a
hint for the existence of similar systems in semiconduc-
tors as well. In GaAs, for example, there are heavy holes
(σ= 0.196) and light holes ( σ= 0.707). A system simi-
lar to (p+,e+,e+,e−,e−) would comprise two electrons, a
heavy, and two light holes.
This work was supported by the U. S. Department ofEnergy, Nuclear Physics Division, under contract No. W-
31-109-ENG-39 and OTKA grant No. T029003 (Hun-
gary).
[1] J. A. Wheeler, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 48, 219 (1946).
[2] A. P. Mills, Phys. Rev. Lett 46, 717 (1981).
[3] E. A. Hylleraas and A. Ore, Phys. Rev. 71, 493 (1947).
[4] D. M. Schrader, F. M. Jacobsen, N. P. Fradsen and U.
Mikkelsen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 57 (1992).
[5] For example see the references in D. B. Kinghorn and R.
D. Poshusta, Phys. Rev. A 47, 3671 (1993), and in Y. K.
Ho, Phys. Rev. A 48,4789 (1993).
[6] G. Ryzhikh and J. Mitroy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 794124
(1998).
[7] S.J. Ward, M. Horbatsch, R. P. McEachran and A. D.
Stauffer, J. Phys. B: At.Mol. Opt. Phys. 223763 (1998).
[8] T. Yoshida and G. Miyako, Phys. Rev. A 544571 (1996).
[9] V. I. Kukulin and V. M. Krasnopolsky, J. Phys. G3, 795
(1977).
[10] Y. Suzuki and K. Varga, Stochastic variational approac h
to quantum mechanical few-body problems, Springer-
Verlag, 1998.
[11] J. Yuan, B. D. Esry, T. Morishita and C. D. Lin, Phys.
Rev. A 58, R4 (1998).
[12] D. Bressanini, M. Mella and G. Morosi, J. Chem. Phys.
108, 4756 (1998).
[13] K. Strasburger and H. Chojnacki, J. Chem. Phys. 108
3218 (1998).
[14] G. Ryzhikh, J. Mitroy and K. Varga, J. Phys. B: At.Mol.
Opt. Phys. 31L265 (1998).
[15] G. Ryzhikh, J. Mitroy and K. Varga, J. Phys. B: At.Mol.
Opt. Phys. 313965 (1998).
[16] G. Ryzhikh and J. Mitroy J. Phys. B: At.Mol. Opt. Phys.
321375 (1999).
[17] K. Varga, J. Usukura, and Y. Suzuki, Phys. Rev. Lett.
80, 1876 (1998).
[18] N. Jiang and D. M. Schrader, Phys.Rev.Lett 815113
(1998).
[19] J. Mitroy and G. Ryzhikh, J. Phys. B: At.Mol. Opt. Phys.
32L111 (1999).
[20] J. Mitroy and G. Ryzhikh, J. Phys. B: At.Mol. Opt. Phys.
32L621 (1999).
[21] G. Finkelstein, H. Shtrikman and I. Bar-Joseph, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 74, 976 (1995).
[22] D. Birkedal, J. Singh, V. G. Lyssenko, J. Erland, and J.
M. Hvam, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 672 (1996).
[23] A. G. Steele, W. G. McMullen, and M. L. W Thewalt,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 592899 , (1987).
[24] M. Bayer et. al. Phys. Rev. B 584740 (1998).TABLE I. The convergence of the total energy (E) and the
energy relative to the lowest threshold ( ǫ) as a function of
basis size. The energy value in parenthesis (below the name
of the system) is the lowest dissociation threshold. Atomic
units are used. Infinite mass was used for the proton and Li
nucleus.
system Basis size E ǫ
HPse+100 −0.809371 0.02017
(−0.78919) 200 −0.809993 0.02080
400 −0.810152 0.02096
LiPse+100 −7.79502 unbound
(−7.7959) 200 −7.79811 0.00219
400 −7.80212 0.00620
800 −7.80510 0.00918
(p+,2e+,4e−) 100 −1.02981 unbound
(−1.0512) 200 −1.04409 unbound
400 −1.05077 unbound
800 −1.05542 0.00423
TABLE II. Properties of Coulombic few-body systems.
The particle “x” is distinguishable from both the electron
and the positron, but is has the same mass as the electron.
Atomic units are used.
system Energy /angbracketleftr2
e−p/angbracketright /angbracketleftr2
e+p/angbracketright /angbracketleftr2
e−e−/angbracketright /angbracketleftr2
e−e+/angbracketright /angbracketleftr2
e+e+/angbracketright
HPs −0.78919 7.81 16.25 15.87 15.58
Ps2 −0.51600 46.37 29.11 46.37
HPse+−0.81015 7.49 31.84 15.14 33.71 65.40
x+Ps2−0.55647 33.48 52.11 36.24 33.46 52.21
TABLE III. Total energies and expectation values of vari-
ous operators in double positronic Li. Some other species ar e
included for comparison. re+andre−are the distances be-
tween the nucleus and the positron and the nucleus and the
electron, respectively. Atomic units are used.
system Energy /angbracketleftre+/angbracketright /angbracketleftre−/angbracketright /angbracketleftre−e+/angbracketright /angbracketleftre−e−/angbracketright /angbracketleftre+e+/angbracketright
Lie+−7.5323 10.03 3.44 7.83 6.43
LiPs −7.7397 6.32 2.82 5.56 4.75
LiPse+−7.8051 7.51 3.30 6.12 5.71 6.15FIG. 1. Energy levels of the HPse+and the HPs+e+and
H+PS+dissociation channels.
0−0.82−0.81−0.8−0.79−0.78−0.77−0.76−0.75Energy (atomic units)H+Ps+
HPs
HPs+
FIG. 2. Energy levels of LiPse+and its most relevant dis-
sociation channels.
−7.81−7.80−7.79−7.78−7.77−7.76−7.75−7.74−7.73Energy (atomic units)LiPsLi+Ps+ +e+
Lie++Ps
Li++Ps2
LiPs+
FIG. 3. Convergence of the energy
of the (p+,e+,e+,e−,e−,e−) and (p+,e+,e+,e−,e−,e−,e−) sys-
tems. The dotted line is the HPs+Ps, the dashed line is the
H−+Ps2, the long dashed line is the HPs+Ps−threshold.
0 200 400 600 800
basis dimension−1.07−1.05−1.03−1.01−0.99−0.97−0.95Energy (atomic units)(p+,e+,e+,e−,e−,e−)
(p+,e+,e+,e−,e−,e−,e−) |
null |
physics/9911028 14 Nov 1999/G33/G58/G45/G4F/G4C/G56/G4B/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G24/G51/G51/G11/G03/G29/G52/G51/G47/G11/G03/G2F/G11/G03/G47/G48/G03/G25/G55/G52/G4A/G4F/G4C/G48/G0F/G03 /G15/G14 /G0F/G19/G1A/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1C/G19/G0C
/G26/G32/G31/G36/G28/G35/G39/G28/G27/G03/G26/G38/G35/G35/G28/G31/G37/G36/G03/G32/G29/G03/G37/G2B/G28/G03/G30/G24/G3B/G3A/G28/G2F/G2F/G03/G28/G34/G38/G24/G37/G2C/G32/G31/G36
/G3A/G2C/G37/G2B/G03/G28/G2F/G28/G26/G37/G35/G2C/G26/G03/G24/G31/G27/G03/G30/G24/G2A/G31/G28/G37/G2C/G26/G03/G36/G32/G38/G35/G26/G28/G36
/G24/G11 /G03 /G2A/G48/G55/G56/G57/G48/G51
/G27/G48/G53/G44/G55/G57/G50/G48/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G0F/G03/G25/G48/G51/G10/G2A/G58/G55/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G38/G51/G4C/G59/G48/G55/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G0F/G03/G25/G48/G48/G55/G10/G36/G4B/G48/G59/G44/G0F/G03/G2C/G56/G55/G44/G48/G4F
/G48/G10/G50/G44/G4C/G4F/G1D/G03/G4A/G48/G55/G56/G57/G48/G51/G23/G45/G4A/G58/G50/G44/G4C/G4F/G11/G45/G4A/G58/G11/G44/G46/G11/G4C/G4F
/G24/G25/G36/G37/G35/G24/G26/G37
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G31/G48/G5A/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48
/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G32/G51/G48/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G49/G48/G44/G57/G58/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G50/G52/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G44/G55/G48
/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G59/G44/G55/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11/G03/G03/G2C/G51
/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G0F/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G52/G55/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46
/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11/G03/G03/G29/G58/G55/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G52/G55/G48/G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G50/G52/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G52/G55/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48
/G48/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G47/G0F/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G03/G0B/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G0C/G11/G03/G03/G24/G51/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G49/G48/G44/G57/G58/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57/G03/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G0F/G03/G44/G49/G57/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G56/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47
/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G52/G57/G44/G4F/G03/G4B/G48/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G52/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G11/G15
/G14/G11/G03/G03/G2C/G31/G37/G35/G32/G27/G38/G26/G37/G2C/G32/G31
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G4C/G51/G56/G53/G4C/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G50/G44/G51/G5C
/G4C/G50/G53/G52/G55/G57/G44/G51/G57/G03/G47/G48/G59/G48/G4F/G52/G53/G50/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G56/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G56/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G55/G44/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G46
/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G52/G59/G48/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G11/G03/G03/G3C/G48/G57/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G57/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G55/G48/G50/G44/G55/G4E/G44/G45/G4F/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4F/G44/G5A/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F
/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G4C/G51/G58/G52/G58/G56/G4F/G5C/G03/G45/G48/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G52/G59/G48/G55/G48/G47/G03/G3E/G14/G10/G14/G14/G40/G11/G03/G29/G58/G56/G4B/G46/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G31/G4C/G4E/G4C/G57/G4C/G51/G03/G3E/G14/G40/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47
/G46/G52/G4F/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G52/G56/G57/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G44/G50/G52/G58/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G58/G46/G4B/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4F/G44/G5A/G56/G11/G03/G03/G24/G46/G46/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52
/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G57/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G44/G03/G4B/G52/G53/G48/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G56/G03/G05/G56/G4C/G51/G46/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G0A/G56/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G03/G4B/G4C/G47/G47/G48/G51
/G0B/G51/G52/G51/G10/G4A/G48/G52/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G0C/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G5C/G11/G11/G11/G05/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G30/G52/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G51/G03/G15/G13/G03/G5C/G48/G44/G55/G56/G03/G44/G4A/G52/G0F/G03/G2F/G4C/G53/G4E/G4C/G51/G03/G3E/G17/G40/G03/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G58/G51/G48/G5B/G53/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G2E/G4C/G45/G45/G4F/G48
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G29/G44/G4C/G55/G4F/G4C/G48/G03/G03/G3E/G18/G40/G03/G57/G52/G03/G47/G48/G59/G48/G4F/G52/G53/G03/G44/G03/G50/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G44/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G03/G52/G49/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G11
/G24/G51/G47/G48/G55/G56/G52/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G24/G55/G57/G4B/G58/G55/G56/G03/G3E/G19/G40/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G03/G44/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G52/G57/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G44/G4F/G56/G11/G03/G03/G24/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G35/G52/G56/G48/G51/G03/G3E/G1A/G40/G03/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48
/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G46/G4C/G48/G51/G46/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G52/G51/G48/G51/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G11/G03/G03/G35/G48/G46/G48/G51/G57/G4F/G5C
/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G4F/G4C/G56/G50/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G4C/G50/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G36/G58/G47/G45/G48/G55/G5C/G03/G03/G3E/G1B/G40/G03/G5A/G4B/G52/G03/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G4F/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G59/G4C/G52/G58/G56/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G57/G52/G03/G44
/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G0F/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G47/G58/G46/G48/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G2F/G4C/G53/G4E/G4C/G51/G11/G03/G03/G2B/G4C/G56/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G48
/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57/G03/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G44/G53/G53/G48/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52
/G45/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G48/G51/G48/G55/G4A/G5C/G03/G50/G52/G50/G48/G51/G57/G58/G50/G03/G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G46/G58/G56/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G58/G4F/G47/G03/G50/G48/G51/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G44/G57/G57/G48/G50/G53/G57/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G56/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44/G03/G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G10/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G44/G59/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G3E/G14/G10/G16/G0F/G03/G1C/G10/G14/G14/G40/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G56/G48
/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G0F/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46
/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G49/G48/G44/G57/G58/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G50/G52/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G59/G44/G55/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G0B/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G53/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G0C/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G4F/G57/G4B/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G16
/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G4F/G5C/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G48/G51/G57/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G10/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G56/G1E/G03/G57/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56
/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G51/G46/G4F/G58/G47/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G56/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G56/G03/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G44/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G52/G55/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G11
/G29/G58/G55/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G52/G55/G48/G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G50/G52/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G52/G55/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48
/G48/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G11/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47
/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G52/G51/G4F/G5C/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G59/G44/G4F/G4C/G47/G03/G48/G59/G48/G51/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G52/G55/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G11
/G2C/G51/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G48/G50/G53/G4B/G44/G56/G4C/G5D/G48/G03/G53/G55/G4C/G50/G44/G55/G4C/G4F/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G44/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G50/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G03/G52/G49/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47
/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G4C/G51 /G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G54/G58/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G58/G51/G48/G5B/G53/G48/G46/G57/G48/G47/G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G5C/G48/G57/G03/G46/G52/G51/G46/G48/G51/G57/G55/G44/G57/G48/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G4C/G4A/G51/G4C/G49/G4C/G46/G44/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F
/G50/G48/G44/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G52/G55/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G5D/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G53/G55/G52/G45/G4F/G48/G50/G56/G0F/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G59/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G49/G58/G57/G58/G55/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G55/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G44/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57/G03/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B
/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G03/G0B/G36/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G16/G0C/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47
/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G52/G57/G44/G4F/G03/G03/G4B/G48/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G56/G11
/G15/G11/G03/G10/G03/G37/G2B/G28/G03/G29/G2C/G35/G36/G37/G03/G36/G28/G37/G03/G32/G29/G03/G31/G28/G3A/G03/G03/G2F/G24/G2A/G35/G24/G31/G2A/G2C/G24/G31/G36
/G37/G4B/G55/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G52/G58/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G44/G53/G48/G55/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G56/G4B/G44/G4F/G4F/G03/G58/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G55/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G51/G52/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G35/G48/G49/G11/G03/G3E/G14/G15/G40/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G49/G03/G44/G51
/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55/G03 Aµν /G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03 /G24 /G24D
µν µνσλσλε=1
2/G44/G51/G47/G03∂∂∂µ µ≡/x /G0F
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03εµνσλ /G03/G4C/G56 /G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G52/G57/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G2F/G48/G59/G4C/G10/G26/G4C/G59/G4C/G57/G44/G03/G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55/G03/G0B/G47/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G0C/G11/G03/G31/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G11 /G0B /G0C /G24 /G24DD= /G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48
/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G45/G48/G03/G49/G58/G51/G46/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G55/G03/G46/G52/G10/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G46/G03/G56/G57/G44/G51/G47/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G59/G48/G4F/G52/G46/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G4F/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G11
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G55/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G52/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46
/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55/G03 /G29µν /G1D
∂ πνµν ν F cje=−(/)4 /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G44/G0C
/G03∂µµνFD=0 /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G45/G0C/G17
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G4De
ν /G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G0B /G4D /G4C /G46e e
4=ρ /G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03ρe/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G46/G4B/G44/G55/G4A/G48/G03/G47/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G0C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48
/G48/G5B/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G52/G49/G03 /G29µν /G03/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G29D
µν /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G24 /G11/G03 /G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G48/G44/G56/G4C/G4F/G5C/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G0B/G56/G48/G48
/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G24/G0C /G03 /G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
/G29 /G4D /G4Dce e
µνπ
µννµ ∂∂ =− −4( ) /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C
/G4C/G11/G48/G11/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G5C/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C/G0F/G03/G45/G58/G57/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G44/G4F/G5A/G44/G5C/G56/G03/G59/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G59/G48/G55/G56/G44/G11
/G2C/G49/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G46/G4F/G58/G47/G48/G47/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F /G03 /G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G3E/G14/G16/G40/G1D
∂ πµµν ν F cje=−(/)4 /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G44/G0C
∂ πµµν ν FicjD m=−(/)4 /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G45/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G4Dm
ν /G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G0B /G4D /G4C /G46m m
4=ρ /G1E/G03ρm/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G46/G4B/G44/G55/G4A/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G56/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0C/G11/G03/G03/G29/G55/G52/G50
/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G0C/G0F/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G0B/G56/G48/G48/G03/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G24/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G1D
/G29 /G46 /G4D /G4D /G4C /G4D /G4De e m mD
µν µννµ µννµ π∂∂∂∂ =− −+ − (/)[ ( )] 4 /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G03/G15/G11/G17/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G57/G44/G4E/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G56/G57/G48/G51/G57/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57
/G57/G52/G03 /G29 /G29D↔ /G03/G0F/G03 /G4D /G4C/G4De m↔ /G0C/G1D
/G29 /G46 /G4D /G4D /G4C /G4D /G4De eD m m
µν µννµ µννµ π∂∂ ∂∂ =− − + − (/)[( )( )] 4 /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G18/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G1D
/G2FI ce e
ceeFF Fjj jj =− + −−1
2()() ( )() ∂∂ ∂∂µλσµλσπ
µνµννµπ
µµ4 42/G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G19/G0C
/G2F /G20 /G2FIIIcm mD
cmmiFjj jj + − +4 42 π
µνµννµπ
µµ ∂∂( )() /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1A/G0C
/G25/G5C/G03/G59/G44/G55/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G2FI /G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G03 /G29µν /G03/G0F/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G44/G56/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G44/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C
/G59/G44/G55/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03 /G4De
µ /G03/G11/G03/G2C/G49/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G59/G44/G55/G5C/G03/G03 /G2FII/G03 /G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03 /G29µν /G03/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G03/G17/G0C/G03/G1E
/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G03/G16/G44/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G59/G44/G55/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03 /G4De
µ /G03/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G45/G0C/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G59/G44/G55/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B
/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03 /G4Dm
µ /G03/G11/G18
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G48/G46/G58/G4F/G4C/G44/G55/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G03/G03/G03 /G2FI /G03/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G03 /G2FII /G03/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G47/G52/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G47/G48/G53/G48/G51/G47/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G4F/G5C/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G10/G52/G55/G47/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G56/G1E/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G49/G52/G55/G48/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G50/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G0B/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G31/G52/G48/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G56/G0C/G11
/G3A/G48/G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G4A/G48/G51/G48/G55/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G2FI /G0F/G03/G45/G58/G57/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G44/G4F/G5A/G44/G5C/G56/G03/G59/G4C/G46/G48/G03/G59/G48/G55/G56/G44/G0F/G03/G45/G58/G57/G03 /G2FII/G03 /G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G57/G48/G4F/G5C/G11/G03/G03/G24/G4F/G57/G4B/G52/G58/G4A/G4B/G03 /G2FI /G03/G50/G44/G5C/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G0F/G03/G56/G57/G4C/G4F/G4F/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G2FI /G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F
/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G45/G48/G46/G44/G58/G56/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G56/G52/G4F/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G46/G52/G55/G55/G48/G56/G53/G52/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03 /G2FI/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03 /G2FI /G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55/G1D
/G37/G29/G29/G4D/G4D
/G29 /G29 /G29 /G4DI
II I
ee
I ceµν µν
νσλµσλ
νσµσ
µν νσλµσλπ
νσµσδ∂
∂∂∂∂
∂∂∂
δ∂∂ ∂=− −
=+ −LL L
L() ()
()()8/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1B/G0C
/G49/G52/G55/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G0F/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G31/G52/G48/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G56/G0F
∂νµνTI=0 /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1C/G0C
/G3A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G49/G58/G55/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G52/G55/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G1B/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G50/G52/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G44/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
/G37 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29
/G29 /G29 /G29 /G29I
µνµν ησλησλησλλησ ηηλσσλ
νσλµσλ νσµλλσδ∂∂ ∂∂ ∂∂
∂∂ ∂∂=− − −
+ +[()() ()()]
()()1
2
2/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G13/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G5C /G0F /G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03 /G2FII /G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55/G1D
/G37/G29/G29/G4D/G4D/G4D/G4D
/G29 /G29 /G29 /G4D /G4C /G29 /G4DII
IIII II
ee II
mm
II ce Dmµν µν
νσλµσλ
νσµσ
νσµσ
µννσλµσλπ
νσµσνσµσδ∂
∂∂∂∂
∂∂∂∂
∂∂∂
δ∂∂ ∂ ∂=− − −
=+ − +LL L L
L() () ()
()()( )8/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G36/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G55/G48/G56/G56/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G17/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G1D
/G37 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29
/G29 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29 /G29II D D
D Dµνµν ησλησλησλλησ ηηλσσλ ηηλσσλ
νσλµσλ νσµλλσ νσµλλσδ∂∂ ∂∂ ∂∂ ∂∂
∂∂ ∂∂ ∂∂=− − − −
+ + +[()() ()()()()]
()()1
2
2 2/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G15/G0C/G19
/G16/G11/G03/G10/G03/G37/G2B/G28/G03/G36/G28/G2F/G29/G10/G27/G38/G24/G2F/G03/G24/G31/G27/G03/G24/G31/G37/G2C/G10/G36/G28/G2F/G29/G10/G27/G38/G24/G2F/G03/G26/G24/G36/G28/G36
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G55/G10/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G1D
Ψ ΨaaaHiEa =− = =,,,; , 123 04 /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G2Ba /G44/G51/G47/G03 /G28a /G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C /G11/G03 /G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56 /G03 /G47/G48/G51/G52/G57/G48
/G54 /G4D /G4C/G4D /G47 /G4D /G4C/G4Dcem
cem
µπ
µµ µπ
µµ =+ =−4 4(), (), /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G03/G15/G0C
/G4E /G54µµ µ∂=+* *24Ψ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G03/G16/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03 /G54µ*/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03Ψµ*/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G5B/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03 /G54µ /G44/G51/G47/G03Ψµ /G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G11/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G24/G53/G53/G48/G51/G47/G4C/G5B/G03/G25/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G4C/G56
/G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G3E/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G40/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G1D
/G4C /G35 /G54aa ()µνµ ν ∂+=Ψ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C
/G4C /G35 /G4Eaa ()*
µνµ ν ∂+=Ψ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G48/G56/G03 /G35µ+/G44/G55/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2B/G48/G55/G50/G4C/G57/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03 /G35µ /G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G17/G0C/G11/G03/G28/G44/G46/G4B/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G44/G45/G52/G59/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G59/G44/G4F/G48/G51/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G0C/G11/G03/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G4B/G48/G46/G4E/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A
/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G56/G44/G57/G4C/G56/G49/G4C/G48/G47/G1D
/G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C − =+iR iRµµαβννβγαγµµ ∂ ∂δ∂∂ /G03/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G19/G0C
/G30/G58/G4F/G57/G4C/G53/G4F/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G0C/G03/G45/G5C/G03 −iRµµ∂. /G03/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51
Ψa aiRq =−()µνµν∂ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1A/G0C
Ψa aiRk+=−()µνµν∂ /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C
/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51
/G2F /G4C /G35 /G54 /G54 /G54SD
a a a a =− + +1
21
2 ()()() ∂∂ ∂µ µ µνµν νν ΨΨΨ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G03/G16/G11/G03/G1C/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03 Ψa /G0F/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G56/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1A/G0C/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B
/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03 /G54ν /G03/G0F/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G56/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C/G0F/G03/G44/G49/G57/G48/G55/G03/G48/G50/G53/G4F/G52/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G0B /G0C /G0B /G0C /G35 /G35a a µν µν+=− /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G1A
/G2C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G0F/G03/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51
/G2F /G4C /G35 /G4E /G4E /G4EASD
a a a a =− + +1
21
2 ()()()* * *∂∂ ∂µ µ µνµν νν ΨΨΨ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G03/G14/G14/G0C
/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4F/G44/G5A/G56/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G59/G4C/G52/G58/G56/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G25/G58/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51
/G2F /G4C /G35 /G54 /G4C /G35 /G4E /G4E /G54a a a a a a =− + + − ()()() ()* *∂∂ ∂ ∂µ µ µνµν µνµννν ΨΨΨ Ψ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G15/G0C
/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G44/G47/G47/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G5C/G11/G03/G03/G39/G44/G55/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03 Ψa /G03/G0F/G03Ψa*/G03/G0F/G03 /G54ν /G03/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G4Eν /G03 /G4C/G57/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G56/G03/G57/G52
/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1A/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G1B/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G18/G0C/G11/G03/G2C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G58/G4F/G57/G44/G51/G48/G52/G58/G56/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C
/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G1D
ΨΨ ΨΨa ai
a ai i ie e qqekke → → → →− − α α
ν να
ν να, , , .* */G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G31/G52/G48/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G0A/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G48/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03 /G2Dµ /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G48/G47/G1D
/G2D /G35 /G54 /G35 /G4Ei
aaaa a a a a µ µ µ µνν µνν ∂ ∂ = − − +21
21
2 ( )() ()* * * *ΨΨΨΨΨ Ψ /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G03/G0B/G16/G10/G14/G17/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G48/G55/G50/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G57/G48/G51/G03/G44/G56
/G2D /G2B /G28 /G28 /G2B /G28 /G2B /G28 /G4D /G2B /G4D /G46
/G2B /G28 /G28 /G2B /G2B /G28 /G28 /G2B /G28 /G2B/G46/G28
/G57/G2B /G28/G46/G2B
/G57aaaam e e m
aaaaµ µ µ µ
µ µ µ∂ ∂ πρρ
∂ ∂∂
∂∂
∂
µ= − − −−×−×
= − −∇⋅−∇⋅−×∇×−−×∇×+
=4
1 1
123[ ( )/]
[()() ( )( )];
,,,/G26 /G26 /G26 /G26 /G26 /G26
/G26 /G26 /G26 /G26 /G26 /G26/G26/G26 /G26/G26
/G0B/G16/G11/G03/G14/G18/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G47/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G1D
/G2D /G4C /G2D /G28/G46/G2B
/G57 /G46/G4D /G2B/G46/G28
/G57 /G46/G4D
/G28 /G28 /G2B /G2Bm e
0 414 14=−=⋅+ −⋅+
=−⋅∇×−⋅∇×/G26/G26/G26 /G26/G26/G26
/G26 /G26 /G26 /G26( )( )
()().∂
∂π ∂
∂π
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G2C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G45/G56/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G56/G58/G4F/G57/G03/G46/G52/G4C/G51/G46/G4C/G47/G48/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G44/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G45/G5C /G03 /G2F/G4C/G53/G4E/G4C/G51/G03/G3E/G17/G40
/G3E/G56/G48/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G35/G48/G49/G56/G11/G03/G3E/G19/G40/G0F/G03/G3E/G1B/G40/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G3E/G14/G13/G40/G40/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G52/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G11/G03/G26/G44/G4F/G4E/G4C/G51/G03/G3E/G14/G17/G40/G03/G4B/G44/G56/G03/G56/G4B/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G54/G58/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G52/G55/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G4C/G49/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G58/G50/G45/G48/G55/G03/G52/G49/G03/G55/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G4F/G48/G49/G57/G03/G46/G4C/G55/G46/G58/G4F/G44/G55/G4F/G5C
/G53/G52/G4F/G44/G55/G4C/G5D/G48/G47/G03/G53/G4B/G52/G57/G52/G51/G56/G11/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G03/G5A/G52/G55/G47/G56/G0F/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4A/G44/G55/G47/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G52/G55/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G52/G57/G44/G4F/G03/G4B/G48/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G11/G03/G03/G3A/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11/G1B
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G57/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G48/G56/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G5C/G03/G26 /G26
EE⋅∇×=()0 /G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G45/G48/G48/G51/G03/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55
/G4C/G51/G59/G48/G56/G57/G4C/G4A/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G56/G4C/G51/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G50/G4C/G47/G47/G4F/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4F/G44/G56/G57/G03/G46/G48/G51/G57/G58/G55/G5C/G03/G3E/G14/G18/G40/G03/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G10/G46/G44/G4F/G4F/G48/G47/G03/G56/G46/G55/G48/G5A
/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G56/G03/G3E/G14/G18/G40/G0F/G03/G3E/G14/G13/G40/G03/G52/G55/G03/G25/G48/G4F/G57/G55/G44/G50/G4C/G03/G3E/G14/G18/G40/G03/G59/G48/G46/G57/G52/G55/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G56/G0F/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G53/G48/G55/G57/G5C/G03/G26 /G26
E E×∇×=()0 /G11
/G17/G11/G03/G10/G03/G36/G38/G30/G30/G24/G35/G3C/G03/G24/G31/G27/G03/G26/G32/G31/G26/G2F/G38/G36/G2C/G32/G31/G36
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G51/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G56/G58/G46/G46/G48/G48/G47/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G53/G55/G52/G47/G58/G46/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F
/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G4B/G48/G51/G03/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G48/G47/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G47/G4C/G51/G4A
/G52/G49/G03/G44/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G57/G5C/G53/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4F/G44/G5A/G56/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G46/G4F/G58/G47/G48/G47/G11/G03/G03/G29/G52/G55
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G56/G03/G47/G48/G59/G48/G4F/G52/G53/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G5A/G52/G55/G4E/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G5A/G44/G56/G03/G53/G52/G56/G56/G4C/G45/G4F/G48/G0F/G03/G49/G58/G55/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G52/G55/G48/G0F/G03/G57/G52/G03/G48/G4F/G4C/G50/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G50/G52/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G3E/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G15/G0C/G40/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G45/G48/G56/G57/G03/G52/G49/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G4F/G48/G47/G4A/G48/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G45/G48/G48/G51/G03/G56/G58/G46/G46/G48/G56/G56/G49/G58/G4F/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G55/G56/G57/G03/G57/G4C/G50/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A
/G44/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G3E/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G15/G0C/G40/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G57/G03/G58/G51/G47/G48/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G45/G52/G57/G4B/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G44/G51/G47
/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G3E/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G17/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G19/G0C/G14/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G53/G55/G48/G59/G4C/G52/G58/G56/G4F/G5C/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G52/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G2F/G4C/G53/G4E/G4C/G51/G1E/G03/G45/G58/G57/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G52/G58/G55/G03/G46/G44/G56/G48/G0F/G03/G4C/G57
/G4C/G56/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G46/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G48/G5A/G03/G50/G48/G57/G4B/G52/G47/G03/G47/G48/G59/G48/G4F/G52/G53/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G58/G56/G03/G49/G52/G55/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G57/G55/G58/G46/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57/G56/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G48/G55/G53/G55/G48/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44
/G56/G58/G46/G46/G48/G56/G56/G49/G58/G4F/G03/G44/G57/G57/G48/G50/G53/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G03/G44/G56/G03/G44
/G46/G4F/G52/G56/G48/G47/G03/G56/G5C/G56/G57/G48/G50/G0F/G03/G4C/G55/G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G44/G46/G57/G03/G51/G44/G57/G58/G55/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G52/G58/G55/G46/G48/G56/G11
/G24/G33/G33/G28/G31/G27/G2C/G3B/G03/G24
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G28/G5B/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G03/G29/G52/G55/G50/G03/G52/G49/G03 /G29µν /G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G27/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03 /G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G17/G0C
/G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G51/G52/G57/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G52/G49/G03/G35/G48/G49/G11/G03/G3E/G14/G15/G40/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G52/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G56/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55/G03 /G29µν /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G59/G4C/G44
/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G48/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G50/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G56/G57/G55/G48/G51/G4A/G57/G4B/G56/G03/G26
E /G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G26
H /G55/G48/G56/G53/G48/G46/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G4F/G5C/G03/G45/G5C/G1D/G1C
/G0B /G0C /G29/G2B /G2B /G4C /G28
/G2B /G2B /G4C /G28
/G2B /G2B /G4C /G28
/G4C /G28 /G4C /G28 /G4C /G28z y x
z x y
y x z
x y z=−−
− −
− −
0
0
0
0/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55/G03 /G29 /G29D
µν µνλσλσε=1
2 /G03/G4C/G56/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G45/G5C
/G0B /G0C /G29/G4C /G28 /G4C /G28 /G2B
/G4C /G28 /G4C /G28 /G2B
/G4C /G28 /G4C /G28 /G2B
/G2B /G2B /G2BDz y x
z xy
y x z
x y z=−
−
−
−−−
0
0
0
0/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G15/G0C
/G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G45/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G10/G4E/G51/G52/G5A/G51/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G1D
∂∂∂µλσσµλλσµ FFF ++=0. /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G16/G0C
/G37/G44/G4E/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G16/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51
∂∂ ∂∂∂ ∂∂∂∂µµλσ µσµλλσµ σµµλλµµσ F FF F F =− + =− + ( ) /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G17/G0C
/G31/G52/G5A /G03 /G5A/G48/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G48/G03/G52/G51/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G10/G4B/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G14/G44/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G15/G0C/G11/G03/G32/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G4B/G48/G46/G4E/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G59/G44/G4F/G48/G51/G57/G03/G57/G52
∂∂∂ εµ σ λπ
λσµνν λσ µλ σµFFF jD D D
ce++=−4. /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G18/G44/G0C
∂∂∂ εµλσσµλλσµπ
λσµνν FFFijcm++=−4. /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G03/G18/G03/G45/G0C
/G24/G53/G53/G4F/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03 ∂µ /G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4F/G48/G49/G57/G03/G57/G52/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G18/G44/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G52/G45/G57/G44/G4C/G51
∂∂∂∂∂∂ ε∂µµ λµ σµπ
λσµνµν λσ µσ µλF F F jD D D
ce= − −4/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G03/G19/G0C
/G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A
ε∂ε∂∂∂∂λσµνµν λσµνµννµ λσσλ j jjjje e e e eD= −=−1
2( )( ) /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G03/G1A/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G58/G45/G56/G57/G4C/G57/G58/G57/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G45/G0C/G03/G4C/G51/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G4C/G4A/G4B/G57/G10/G4B/G44/G51/G47/G03/G56/G4C/G47/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G19/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48
/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G18/G0C/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G17/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G53/G55/G52/G59/G48/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G44/G03/G56/G4C/G50/G4C/G4F/G44/G55/G03/G5A/G44/G5C/G03/G45/G5C/G03/G44/G53/G53/G4F/G5C/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G52/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G18/G45/G0C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03 ∂µ
/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G4F/G48/G49/G57/G11/G14/G13
/G24/G33/G33/G28/G31/G27/G2C/G3B/G03/G25
/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G36/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G27/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G24/G51/G57/G4C/G10/G36/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G27/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56
/G29/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55/G56/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G14/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G24/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G49/G52/G55/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G46/G52/G50/G45/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G29 /G29 /G29SD D=+ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G44/G51/G57/G4C/G61/G56/G48/G4F/G49/G10/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G03/G46/G52/G50/G45/G4C/G51/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
/G29 /G29 /G29ASD D=− /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G15/G0C
/G38/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03 /G29SD/G44/G51/G47/G03 /G29ASD/G44/G55/G48/G03/G4A/G4C/G59/G48/G51/G03/G45/G5C
/G0B /G0C /G0F /G0B /G0C /G0F* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *F FSDz yx
z x y
y x z
x y zASDz y x
z x y
y x z
x y z=−
−
−
−−−
=−−
− −
− −
0
0
0
00
0
0
0ΨΨΨ
Ψ ΨΨ
ΨΨ Ψ
ΨΨΨΨΨΨ
Ψ ΨΨ
ΨΨ Ψ
ΨΨΨ/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G16/G0C
/G2F/G48/G57/G03/G58/G56/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G56/G48/G57/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G50/G44/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G48/G56
/G36/G4C
/G4C
/G4C
/G4C/G36/G4C
/G4C
/G4C
/G4C/G36/G4C
/G4C
/G4C
/G4C/G36/G4C
/G4C
/G4C
/G4C
/G35/G4C
/G4C
/G4C
/G4C/G35/G4C
/G4C
/G4C
/G4C/G35/G4C
/G4C
/G4C
/G4C/G351 2 3 4
1 2 3=−
−
=−
−
=−
−
=
=−
−
=−
−
=−
−
, , , ,
, , ,4=−
−
−
−
i
i
i
i,
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G17/G0C
/G57/G4B/G48/G51
/G29 /G4CSD
a a µν µν =−(S)Ψ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G44/G20/G14/G0F/G15/G0F/G16/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G18/G0C
/G29 /G4C /G35ASD
aa µν µν =−()*Ψ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03 /G44/G20/G14/G0F/G15/G11/G16/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G19/G0C
/G29/G58/G55/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G50/G52/G55/G48/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G44/G56/G56/G58/G50/G48/G03/G3E/G1C/G40
ΨΨ440==*/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G1A/G0C/G14/G14
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G51/G52/G57/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57
/G0B /G0C /G0B /G36 /G0C /G35aa µν µν=+/G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G1B/G0C
/G44/G51/G47/G03/G48/G54/G58/G4C/G59/G44/G4F/G48/G51/G57/G4F/G5C
/G0B /G36 /G0C /G0B /G0Cµν µν a aR=+/G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G03/G1C/G0C
/G37/G4B/G48/G51/G0F/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G28/G54/G56/G11/G03/G0B/G15/G11/G16/G0C/G0F/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G15/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G18/G0C/G10/G0B/G25/G11/G1C/G0C/G0F/G03/G5A/G48/G03/G4B/G44/G59/G48
∂ ∂ ∂µµν µνµ µνµ ν Fi iR qSD
a a aa =− =− =−+(S) () Ψ Ψ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G13/G0C
∂ ∂ ∂µµν µνµ µνµ ν FiR i dASD
a aa a=− =− =−+() (S)* *Ψ Ψ /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G14/G0C
/G24/G03/G49/G48/G5A/G03/G55/G48/G50/G44/G55/G4E/G56/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G51/G48/G48/G47/G48/G47/G03/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G11/G03/G03/G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G56/G57/G48/G51/G57/G03/G5A/G4C/G57/G4B/G03/G48/G44/G46/G4B/G03/G52/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G45/G58/G57
/G44/G56/G03ΨΨ440==*/G0F/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G03/G48/G5B/G4C/G56/G57/G56/G03/G44/G51/G03/G44/G50/G45/G4C/G4A/G58/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G47/G48/G49/G4C/G51/G4C/G51/G4A/G03 /G0B /G0C /G35µν /G17 /G44/G51/G47 /G03 /G0B /G0C /G36µν4 /G11 /G03/G37/G4B/G4C/G56/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G55/G48/G44/G56/G52/G51/G03/G5A/G4B/G5C
/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G51/G52/G57/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G4F/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G5B/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G0F/G03/G45/G58/G57/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G46/G4B/G48/G46/G4E/G03/G57/G4B/G44/G57/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G5C/G03/G44/G55/G48
/G46/G52/G51/G56/G4C/G56/G57/G48/G51/G57/G11/G03/G03/G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G48/G5B/G53/G4F/G4C/G46/G4C/G57/G4F/G5C/G03/G45/G48/G03/G50/G44/G47/G48/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G5B/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G52/G49/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G0F/G03/G4C/G49/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G4C/G56
/G55/G48/G53/G4F/G44/G46/G48/G47/G03/G45/G5C/G1D
/G4C /G35 /G54a a ()**
µνµ ν ∂Ψ= /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G03/G14/G15/G0C
/G3A/G48/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G44/G4F/G56/G52/G03/G55/G48/G5A/G55/G4C/G57/G48/G03/G4C/G57/G03/G44/G56/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G56/G1D
/G54 /G4C /G35 /G4C /G35aa aa ν νµ ν µ∂ ∂* * *() () = −+Ψ Ψ 244 /G03/G0F
/G52/G55/G0F/G03/G58/G56/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G28/G54/G11/G03/G0B/G16/G11/G16/G0C/G1D
/G4C /G35 /G54 /G4Eaa ()** *
µνµ ν νν ∂ ∂+=+ ≡ Ψ Ψ24 /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G16/G0C
/G37/G4B/G58/G56/G03/G49/G4C/G51/G44/G4F/G4F/G5C/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G57/G5A/G52/G03/G46/G52/G50/G53/G4F/G48/G5B/G03/G46/G52/G51/G4D/G58/G4A/G44/G57/G48/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G59/G55/G4C/G57/G57/G48/G51/G03/G44/G56/G1D
/G4C /G35 /G54aa ()µνµ ν ∂+=Ψ /G03/G0F /G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B /G25/G11/G14/G17/G44/G0C
/G4C /G35 /G4Eaa ()*
µνµ ν ∂+=Ψ /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G17/G45/G0C
/G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G15/G0C/G03/G46/G44/G51/G03/G45/G48/G03/G47/G48/G55/G4C/G59/G48/G47/G03/G49/G55/G52/G50/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G52/G4F/G4F/G52/G5A/G4C/G51/G4A/G03/G2F/G44/G4A/G55/G44/G51/G4A/G4C/G44/G51/G03/G47/G48/G51/G56/G4C/G57/G5C/G1D
/G2F /G35 /G35 /G54 /G54i
aa aa 02= + −−+[() ()]* * * *Ψ ΨΨ ΨΨΨνµνµ νµνµ νννν ∂ ∂ /G03/G11/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G18/G0C/G14/G15
/G29/G52/G55/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G49/G55/G48/G48/G03/G49/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G03/G48/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G0B /G54 /G54µµ==*0 /G0C/G0F/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G4C/G51/G59/G44/G55/G4C/G44/G51/G46/G48/G03/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47 /G03 /G57/G48/G51/G56/G52/G55
τδ ∂ ∂µν µν νµ νµ =− ++L R Ri
b baab baa 0 2[() ()]* *Ψ ΨΨ Ψ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G19/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G35/G48/G49/G11/G03/G3E/G14/G13/G40/G11/G03/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G47/G58/G44/G4F/G4C/G57/G5C/G03/G57/G55/G44/G51/G56/G49/G52/G55/G50/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51
ΨΨ ΨΨa ai
a aie e → →− α α, ,* *
/G4F/G48/G44/G47/G56/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G56/G48/G55/G59/G48/G47/G03/G48/G51/G48/G55/G4A/G5C/G03/G46/G58/G55/G55/G48/G51/G57
/G2D /G35 /G35i
b baab baa µ µ µ = −+
2[() ()]* *Ψ ΨΨ Ψ /G03/G0F/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G25/G11/G14/G1A/G0C
/G5A/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G4C/G56/G03/G55/G48/G4F/G44/G57/G48/G47/G03/G57/G52/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G03/G52/G51/G48/G03/G49/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03/G4C/G51/G03/G35/G48/G49/G11/G03/G3E/G1B/G40/G11/G14/G16
/G35/G28/G29/G28/G35/G28/G31/G26/G28/G36
/G14/G0C/G03/G39/G11/G2C/G11/G03/G29/G58/G56/G4B/G46/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G24/G11/G2A/G11/G03/G31/G4C/G4E/G4C/G57/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/G36/G52/G59/G11/G03/G03 /G2D/G11/G03 /G33/G44/G55/G57/G11/G03/G03/G31/G58/G46/G4F/G11/G03/G14/G17/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1B/G16/G0C/G03/G14/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G55/G48/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G4C/G51/G1E
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G2C/G11/G3C/G58/G11/G03/G2E/G55/G4C/G59/G56/G4E/G4C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G39/G11/G30/G11/G03/G36/G4C/G50/G58/G4F/G4C/G4E/G0F/G03/G38/G4E/G55/G11/G03/G03/G29/G4C/G5D/G11/G03/G03/G3D/G4B/G11/G03/G0B/G38/G36/G36/G35/G0C/G03/G16/G13/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1B/G18/G0C/G03/G14/G17/G18/G1A/G11
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G39/G11/G2C/G11/G03/G29/G58/G56/G4B/G46/G4B/G4C/G46/G4B/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G24/G11/G2A/G11/G03/G31/G4C/G4E/G4C/G57/G4C/G51/G0F/G03 /G36/G5C/G50/G50/G48/G57/G55/G4C/G48/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G30/G44/G5B/G5A/G48/G4F/G4F/GB6/G56/G03/G28/G54/G58/G44/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56 /G0F/G03/G35/G48/G4C/G47/G48/G4F/G0F/G03/G27/G52/G55/G47/G55/G48/G46/G4B/G57
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G14/G1C/G1B/G1A
/G15/G0C/G03/G2D/G11/G35/G11/G03/G32/G53/G53/G48/G51/G4B/G48/G4C/G50/G48/G55/G0F/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G03/G35/G48/G59/G11/G03/G16/G1B/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G16/G14/G0C/G03/G1A/G15/G18/G11
/G15/G0B/G02/G02 /G35/G11/G03/G30/G4C/G4A/G51/G44/G51/G4C/G0F/G03/G28/G11/G03/G35/G48/G46/G44/G50/G4C/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G30/G11/G03/G25/G44/G4F/G47/G52/G0F/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G57/G11/G03/G03/G31/G58/G52/G59/G52/G03/G26/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G57/G52/G03/G14/G14/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1A/G17/G0C/G03/G18/G19/G1B/G11
/G03 /G37/G4B/G48/G03/G46/G52/G51/G57/G55/G4C/G45/G58/G57/G4C/G52/G51/G56/G03/G52/G49/G03/G28/G57/G57/G52/G55/G48/G03/G30/G44/G4D/G52/G55/G44/G51/G44/G03/G44/G55/G48/G03/G53/G55/G48/G56/G48/G51/G57/G48/G47/G03/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G11
/G17/G0C/G03/G27/G11/G30/G11/G03/G2F/G4C/G53/G4E/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G11/G03/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G18/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G19/G17/G0C/G03/G19/G1C/G19/G11
/G18/G0C/G03/G37/G11/G3A/G11/G25/G11/G03/G2E/G4C/G45/G45/G4F/G48/G0F/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G11/G03/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G19/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G19/G18/G0C/G03/G14/G13/G15/G15/G1E
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G27/G11/G25/G11/G03/G29/G44/G4C/G55/G4F/G4C/G48/G0F/G03/G31/G58/G52/G59/G52/G03/G2A/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G57/G52/G03/G16/G1A/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G19/G18/G0C/G03/G1B/G1C/G1A/G11
/G19/G0C/G03 /G31/G11/G03 /G24/G51/G47/G48/G55/G56/G52/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G24/G11/G30/G11/G03/G24/G55/G57/G4B/G58/G55/G56/G0F/G03/G2C/G51/G57/G11/G03/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G28/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G52/G51/G11/G03/G17/G18/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1A/G1B/G0C/G03/G16/G16/G16/G1E/G03/G19/G13/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1B/G19/G0C/G18/G15/G1A/G11
/G1A/G0C/G03 /G2D/G11/G03 /G35/G52/G56/G48/G51/G0F/G03/G24/G50/G11/G03/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G17/G1B/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1B/G13/G0C/G03/G14/G13/G1A/G14/G11
/G1B/G0C/G03/G24/G11/G03/G36/G58/G47/G45/G48/G55/G5C/G0F/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G03/G24/G1D/G03/G30/G44/G57/G4B/G11/G03/G03/G2A/G48/G51/G11/G03/G14/G1C/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1B/G19/G0C/G03/G2F/G16/G16/G11
/G1C/G0C/G03/G35/G11/G35/G11/G03/G2A/G52/G52/G47/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G37/G11/G2D/G11/G03/G31/G48/G4F/G56/G52/G51/G0F/G03/G05/G26/G4F/G44/G56/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G28/G4F/G48/G46/G57/G55/G4C/G46/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G30/G44/G4A/G51/G48/G57/G4C/G46/G03/G29/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G56/G05/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G24/G46/G44/G47/G48/G50/G4C/G46/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56/G03/G0B/G31/G48/G3A/G03/G3C/G52/G55/G4E/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G1A/G14/G0C/G0F/G03/G26/G4B/G11/G03/G14/G14/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G55/G48/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G4C/G51/G11
/G14/G13/G0C/G03/G33/G11/G03/G2B/G4C/G4F/G4F/G4C/G52/G51/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G36/G11/G03/G34/G58/G4C/G51/G51/G48/G5D/G0F/G03/G2C/G51/G57/G11/G03/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G11/G03/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G15/G18/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1B/G19/G0C/G03/G1A/G15/G1A/G11
/G14/G14/G0C/G03/G28/G11/G03/G2A/G4C/G44/G51/G51/G48/G57/G57/G52/G0F/G03/G2F/G48/G57/G57/G11/G03/G03/G31/G58/G52/G59/G52/G03/G26/G4C/G50/G48/G51/G57/G52/G03/G17/G17/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G1B/G18/G0C/G03/G14/G17/G13/G0F/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G55/G48/G49/G48/G55/G48/G51/G46/G48/G56/G03/G57/G4B/G48/G55/G48/G4C/G51/G11
/G13/G14/G0B/G02/G02 /G2F/G11/G03/G2F/G44/G51/G47/G44/G58/G03/G44/G51/G47/G03/G28/G11/G03/G2F/G4C/G49/G56/G4B/G4C/G57/G5D/G0F/G03/G05/G37/G4B/G48/G03/G26/G4F/G44/G56/G56/G4C/G46/G44/G4F/G03/G37/G4B/G48/G52/G55/G5C/G03/G52/G49/G03/G29/G4C/G48/G4F/G47/G56/G05/G0F/G03/G24/G47/G47/G4C/G56/G52/G51/G10/G5A/G48/G56/G4F/G48/G5C/G03/G33/G55/G48/G56/G56
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G0B/G26/G44/G50/G45/G55/G4C/G47/G4A/G48/G0F/G03/G30/G44/G56/G56/G11/G0F/G03/G14/G1C/G18/G14/G0C/G11
/G14/G16/G0C/G03/G33/G11/G24/G11/G30/G11/G03/G27/G4C/G55/G44/G46/G0F/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G03/G35/G48/G59/G11/G03/G1A/G17/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G17/G1B/G0C/G03/G1B/G14/G1A/G11
/G14/G17/G0C/G03/G30/G11/G2A/G11/G03/G26/G44/G4F/G4E/G4C/G51/G0F/G03/G24/G50/G48/G55/G11/G03/G03/G2D/G11/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G11/G03/G16/G16/G03/G0B/G14/G1C/G19/G18/G0C/G03/G1C/G18/G1B/G11
/G14/G18/G0C/G03/G2D/G11/G2F/G11/G03/G28/G55/G4C/G46/G4E/G56/G48/G51/G0F/G03/G4C/G51/G03 /G2B/G44/G51/G47/G45/G58/G46/G4B/G03/G47/G48/G55/G03/G33/G4B/G5C/G56/G4C/G4E /G03/G39/G52/G4F/G11/G03/G03/G2C/G2C/G2C/G12/G14/G0F/G03/G36/G11/G03/G29/G4F/G58/G4A/G4A/G48/G0F/G03/G28/G47/G11/G0F
/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G03/G36/G53/G55/G4C/G51/G4A/G48/G55/G03/G39/G48/G55/G4F/G44/G4A/G0F/G03/G25/G48/G55/G4F/G4C/G51/G03/G14/G1C/G19/G13/G0F/G03/G53/G11/G03/G1B/G15/G19/G11 |
physics/9911029 14 Nov 1999Evaluation of the Extension of the Cerebral Blood Flow
and its Main Parameters
A.Gersten
Department of Physics,
and Unit of Biomedical Engineering,
and Zlotowski Center for Neuroscience,
Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
Beer-Sheva 84105, Israel
E-mail: gersten@bgumail.bgu.ac.il2
Abstract
Among the major factors controlling the cerebral blood flow (CBF) - cerebral perfusion
pressure (CPP), arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), cerebral metabolism, arterial
partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and cardiac output (CO), the effect of PaCO2is
peculiar in being independent of autoregulatory CBF mechanisms and it allows to explore
the full range of the CBF. We have developed a simple physical model, and have derived
a simple four parameter formula, relating the CBF to PaCO2. The parameters are: Bmax ,
the maximal CBF, Bmin the minimal CBF, p0 the value of PaCO2at the average CBF and
the parameter A, the slope at this point. The parameters can be extracted in an easy way,
directly from the experimental data. With this model five experimental data sets of
human, rats, baboons and dogs were well fitted. The same type of parametrization was
also used successfully for fitting experimental data of PaO2of dogs. We have also looked
on the dependence of the PaCO2parameters on other factors and were able to evaluate
their dependence on the mean arterial blood pressure.3
1. Introduction
In recent years there was a considerable progress made in utilizing measurements of
the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) in order to study brain functioning (Knezevic et
al.,1988, Angerson et al.,1989, Ginsberg and Scheinberg, 1991, Costa and Ell, 1991,
Howard, 1992). But it seems that the physical and mathematical aspects of the global
cerebral blood flow (CBF), or average rCBF, were not sufficiently explored. Our main
interest is of using physical principles (Hobbie, 1988) and physical and mathematical
reasoning and means in order to describe in a simple way the main features of CBF.
The human brain consists of about 2% of the adult body weight, but consumes (at rest)
about 15% of the cardiac output (CO) and about 20%
(Sokoloff, 1989, Guyton, 1991).
Glucose is the main source of cellular energy through its oxidation (Sokoloff, 1989,
Moser, 1988). The cerebral glucose utilization is almost directly proportional to the CBF ,
(Harper, 1989, McCulloch, 1988, Harper and McCulloch, 1985). The CBF can be
influenced by abnormal glucose levels, is increased during hypoglycemia (Horinaka et al.,
1997) and decreased during hyperglycemia Duckrow, 1995).
Normal mean CBF is approximately 50-55 ml/100g/min, but declines with the age
(above the age of about 30), in a rate of approximately 58.5-0.24×age ml/100g/min
(Maximilian and Brawanski, 1988, Hagstadius and Risberg, 1983, see also Yamamoto et
al., 1980, for other details).
The cardiac output can be increased many times (up to about tenfold) during very
heavy exercise or work (see Appendix A), But only part of the cardiac output increase
can be accommodated by the brain blood vessels because of autoregulatory mechanisms
and of the vessels limited capacitance, which is influenced by their elasticity, limited
space of the cranium and the presence of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF).
There exist autoregulatory mechanisms which maintain the CBF approximately
constant for cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP) over an approximate range of 60-160 mm
Hg (Harper, 1989, McCulloch, 1988, Aaslid et al., 1989, Ursino, 1991). Outside this
autoregulatory range the CBF may decrease (CPP<60 mm Hg) as in the case of hypotonia4
(Sokoloff, 1989) or increase (CPP>160 mm Hg) as in the case of high hypertension
(Guyton, 1991). But again, the above statements are valid only for normal functioning.
For some abnormal functioning the autoregulatory mechanisms may break down, for
example if PaCO2> 70 mm Hg (Harper, 1989, Harper, 1966).
The CBF is also influenced by the value of cerebral tissue PO2, which normal range is
35-40 mmHg. A decrease below approximately 30 mmHg will cause the increase of CBF
(Guyton, 1991), for details see sec. 5.
The main parameter influencing the CBF is the arterial PaCO2. About 70% increase
(or even less) in arterial PaCO2may double the blood flow (normal value of PaCO2 is
about 40 mmHg.) (Sokoloff, 1989, Guyton, 1991). A.M. Harper (Harper, 1989) gave an
interesting and vivid description of the above situation:
chemists, computer experts and mathematicians producing reams of data and results
accurate to the nth decimal place from pixel sizes which are shrinking by the week, it is
easy to forget that a few deep breaths from the patient could lower his arterial carbon
dioxide tension by 2 mm Hg (0.27 kPa) and reduce his cerebral blood flow by about 5 per
cent. Were this to go unnoticed, the efforts put into our measurements will have been in
The CBF is very sensitive to PaCO2and it is our aim to demonstrate in a simple physical
model that important information about CBF capacitance can be obtained by considering
only the dependence of CBF on PaCO2. Slowing down the breathing rate, without
enhancing the airflow (Fried and Grimaldi, 1993, Timmons and Ley, 1994), can increase
PaCO2. It is plausible that this is one of the essences of yoga pranayama (Bernard, 1960)]
and of Tibetan yoga (Garma, 1963). It seems that biofeedback training of breathing (Fried
and Grimaldi, 1993, Timmons and Ley, 1994) may become an important method of
treating health problems.5
2. Cerebral blood flow and arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide
Let us first examine the existing data of the CBF as a function of arterial CO2. Let us
start with the older data. In (Longobardo et al., 1987) the data of (Salazar and Knowls,
1964) are presented as:
minL93.0PaminmmHgL04.0 Q
2CO brain −
⋅= /G06 , (2.1)
without giving the validity range. From (Guyton, 1991) we can deduce that the relation is
approximately linear in the range
37 mmHg<
2COPa<60 mm Hg . (2.2)
For a brain weight of about 1.4 kg, eq.(1) can be presented in units more commonly used:
min/g100/mL66Paming100mmHgmL9.2Q
2CO brain ⋅−
⋅⋅= /G06 , (2.3)
for 100g of brain tissue. Out of the range of the inequality (2.2) the CBF becomes much
less sensitive to the changes of PaCO2. Equation (2.3) with the restriction (2.2) will be
used here as the first approximation. Of course one can expect individual changes. In
hyperventilation (Fried and Grimaldi, 1993) one goes below the lower limit of eq.(2.2),
therefore one needs a more accurate and meaningful treatment. Below we derive a more
accurate description of the data.
Inspection of experimental data, especially the more accurate ones on animals, like
ones done with rhesus monkeys (Reivich, 1964), or with rats (Siesjo and Ingvar, 1986,
Sage et al., 1981) led us to conclude that the CBF (which will be denoted later as B) is
limited between two values. This we can interpret in the following way: the upper limit
Bmax corresponds to maximal dilation of the blood vessels and the lower (non-negative)
limit Bmin to the maximal constriction of the vessels. We can incorporate these
requirements using the following assumptions:
()dB
dpAFBB
BBAFz zBB
BB
zF(F(F'F' BBB=−
−
=≥=−
−
≤≤ ====≤≤≤min
maxminmin
maxmin
min max,
,))()(), ,0
01010100 (2.4)6
where A is a constant and the condition F(0)=0 corresponds to the requirement that the
constriction is maximal, F(1)=0 correspond to maximal dilation. Another physical
boundary constraint can be formulated, for the derivatives
1 0)=0, meaning that the approach to the limits is not abrupt but smooth.
A simple choice satisfying these requirements is:
()() Fz z=sin2π, (2.5)
which also allows to integrate analytically eq. (2.4). This is so as from eq.(2.4):
( ) dBBBdz =−maxmin, (2.6)
and one can easily check that
ttanCons)z(ctg1
)z(sindz
2+ππ−=
π∫ . (2.7)
From Eq. (2.7)
()
1 212
1 2 2z
zzsinzsinzzsin1)z(ctg1)z(ctg1
)z(sinzd2
1ππ−π
π=ππ+ππ−=′π′∫ . (2.8)
and in particular
).z(ctg1
)z(sinzd
2z
21π
π−=′π′∫ (2.9)
Eqs. (2.4) and (2.5) can be now converted to
( )dz
zAdp
BB sin()maxmin2π=−. (2.10)
Integrating Eq. (2.10), using Eq. (2.8), we obtain
()[ ]
() [ ]() [ ]B)pp(A
BBsinBBsinBBsin 1r
minrB min Br B
Δ−=− −−
πΔπ
ΔπΔπ
, (2.11)
where the index r is associated with a reference point pr to which corresponds CBF of Br,
and
min maxBBB −=Δ . (2.12)
One can invert Eq. (2.11) if for the reference point for CBF the value half way between
the extremes is being taken. A simple presentation is obtained if in addition to Eq. (2.12)
one introduces the constants:7
)z(pp,AdpdB;);BB()z(BB21
0
BBmin max21
21
0
0== =
+ ===
=. (2.13)
Remembering that pPaCO≡2, from Eqs. (2.11), (2.9) and the relation:
arcctgzarctgz ()() π ππ+ =2,
we can finally obtain:
BpBBarctgppA
Bp ()(), =+⋅−
>000Δ
Δ ππ (2.14)
where B0 is the half way value of the CBF (z=1/2) between the maximal and minimal B,
p0 is the value of p corresponding toB0, and A is the slope at this point. All these
parameters can be estimated easily, directly from the data.
Approximate values of Bmin, Bmax, p0 and A, for the data of Fig. 2.1 based on
(Wyngaarden, 1992) (the circles are not the actual data, but they were extracted from the
curve fitting the data) are given below:
B ccgB ccg
AccgmmHgpmmHgmin max//min, //min,
.//min/, .= =
= =3100 114100
19100 430 (2.15)
Figure 2.1 The dependence of CBF on the partial tension of CO2.
The fit is according to eqs. (2.7) and (2.8). The data (circles) are based on
(Wyngaarden, 1992). No indication is given which animal was experimented./G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13/G13/G15 /G13/G17 /G13/G19 /G13/G1B /G13/G14 /G13/G13
/G53/G13/G20 /G17 /G16/G03 /G50/G50/G2B/G4A
/G24 /G20 /G14 /G11 /G1C/G03 /G50 /G4F /G12/G14 /G13 /G13 /G4A /G12 /G50 /G4C/G51 /G12/G0B/G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G0C/G25
/G50/G44 /G5B/G20 /G14/G14 /G17/G03 /G50 /G4F /G12 /G14 /G13/G13/G4A /G12 /G50 /G4C /G51/G25/G50 /G4C /G51/G20 /G16/G03 /G50 /G4F/G12 /G14/G13 /G13 /G4A /G12 /G50 /G4C /G51/G26 /G25 /G29/G03 /G03 /G0B /G50/G4F /G12 /G14 /G13/G13/G4A/G12 /G50 /G4C/G51/G0C
/G33/G44/G26 /G32/G15/G03 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B /G4A/G0C8
This result should be considered only as a typical example, not as a universal one. Please
note the large difference in the slopes (2.15 against 1.9) in eqs. (2.3) and (2.15).
Approximate values of Bmin, Bmax, p0 and A, for the data (solid curve) of Fig. 2.2 based
on (Reivich, 1964) are given below:
.mmHg47p,mmHgmin//g100/cc9.1Amin,/g100/cc100Bmin,/g100/cc10B
0minmax
= == =
(2.15a)
The doted line is a best fit to the data with
)]plog(251.5exp[1057018.929.20)p(B
− ++= . (2.15b)
The data in Fig.2.2 are based on experiments with 8 animals. They are scattered
to large extent, therefore one can suspect that there are large individual differences
between the animals. Indeed the data of each animal separately are more regular. In Fig.
2.3 the data of the 5th animal are shown. Approximate values of Bmin, Bmax, p0 and A, for
the data (dotted curve) of Fig. 2.3 based on (Reivich, 1964) are given below:
.mmHg47p,mmHgmin//g100/cc5.1Amin,/g100/cc120Bmin,/g100/cc0B
0minmax
= == =
(2.15c)
For rats the data of (Sage et al., 1981) are fitted with:
.mmHg78.38.36p,mmHgmin//g100/cc62.182.18Amin,/g100/cc4.114.480Bmin,/g100/cc19.438.75B
0minmax
±= ±=±= ±=
(2.16)
and are displayed in fig. 2.4. Inspecting eq. (2.7) we find that
BB BBmin max (), () =−∞ =∞, (2.17)
i.e. Bmin is in the non-physical (non-physiological) region of p, far away from the physical
region. Therefore the results should not depend significantly on its value. The maximum
constriction should be estimated from the CBF at the border of the physical region:
BBBarctgpA
B()000=−⋅
Δ
Δ ππ. (2.18)9
Figure 2.2 The dependence of CBF of rhesus monkeys on the partial tension of CO2. The continuous
curve is the approximate fit to eq. (2.7) for the data of (Reivich, 1964). The dotted line is the fit with eq.
(2.15b).
Figure 2.3 The dependence of CBF of rhesus monkeys on the partial tension of CO2. The continuous
curve is the approximate fit eq. (2.15.c) for the data of (Reivich, 1964)./G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G14 /G17/G13 /G14 /G19/G13 /G14 /G1B/G13 /G15 /G13/G13 /G15 /G15/G13/G13/G15 /G13/G17 /G13/G19 /G13/G1B /G13/G14 /G13/G13/G14 /G15/G13
/G24/G51/G4C /G50 /G44/G4F/G03 /G18/G26 /G25/G29/G03 /G52 /G49/G03 /G55 /G4B /G48/G56 /G58 /G56/G03/G50 /G52 /G51 /G4E /G48 /G5C /G56/G03/G0B /G50 /G4F/G12/G14 /G13 /G13 /G4A /G12 /G50 /G4C/G51 /G0C
/G33/G44 /G26 /G32
/G15/G03/G03 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03/G2B/G4A/G0C/G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G14 /G17/G13 /G14 /G19/G13 /G14 /G1B/G13 /G15 /G13/G13 /G15 /G15/G13/G13/G15 /G13/G17 /G13/G19 /G13/G1B /G13/G14 /G13/G13/G14 /G15/G13/G14 /G17/G13/G26 /G25 /G29/G03 /G52/G49/G03 /G55 /G4B /G48 /G56 /G58 /G56/G03 /G50 /G52/G51 /G4E /G48 /G5C /G56/G03 /G0B /G50 /G4F/G12 /G14 /G13/G13/G4A /G12 /G50 /G4C /G51 /G0C
/G33 /G44 /G26 /G32/G15/G03 /G0B/G50 /G50/G03 /G2B /G4A /G0C10
/G13 /G15/G13 /G17/G13 /G19/G13 /G1B/G13/G13/G14/G13 /G13/G15/G13 /G13/G16/G13 /G13/G17/G13 /G13/G18/G13 /G13/G19/G13 /G13
/G25
/G50 /G4C /G51/G20 /G1A/G18/G11/G16/G1B/G03 /G0E /G03 /G17 /G11 /G14/G1C/G03 /G50 /G4F /G12 /G14/G13/G13/G4A/G12 /G50 /G4C/G51
/G25
/G50 /G44 /G5B/G20 /G17/G1B/G13/G11/G17/G03 /G0E /G03 /G14/G14 /G11 /G17/G03 /G50 /G4F /G12 /G14/G13/G13/G4A/G12 /G50 /G4C/G51
/G53
/G13/G20 /G16/G19/G11/G16/G1B/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G1A/G1B/G03 /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B /G4A
/G24/G20/G14/G1B /G11 /G1B/G15/G03 /G0E /G03 /G14 /G11 /G19/G15/G03 /G50 /G4F /G12 /G14/G13/G13/G4A/G12 /G50 /G4C/G51 /G12 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B /G4A /G0C
/G38/G53/G53 /G48 /G55/G03 /G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03 /G52/G51/G03 /G48 /G5B/G53/G11/G03 /G48 /G55 /G55 /G52/G55 /G1D/G03 /G14/G17 /G11 /G15/G08/G26 /G25/G29/G03 /G4C/G51/G03 /G55 /G44/G57/G56/G03 /G0B /G50/G4F/G12 /G14 /G13 /G13/G4A /G12/G50/G4C /G51 /G0C
/G33/G44 /G26/G32/G15/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G03
Figure 2.4 The dependence of CBF of rats on the partial tension of CO2. The continuous curve is
the best fit to eq. (2.7) for the data of (Sage et al., 1981)]. The error bars were added to the data according
to the procedure outlined in sec. 3.
3. Error estimation
While performing the best fit (the least square fit) to experimental data, the chi squared
()
()χ2
12
2=−
=∑
nN
nn
nte
eΔ, (3.1)
is being minimized with respect to the searched parameters (Bmin , Bmax , p0 , A). Above,
in eq. (3.1), en are the experimental data, Δen their errors (standard deviations), N the
total number of experimental points, and tn are the theoretical predictions (from eq. (2.7),
in our case, depending on the parameters Bmin , Bmax , p0 , A ). The data that we are using
do not have the experimental errors evaluated. Therefore we are enforced to use some
assumptions, which may lead to reasonable results. Our first assumption is that the errors
are proportional to the measured results (i.e., there is a fixed percentage error C):
Δen =C. en . (3.2)11
Let χ02 be the minimal value of eq. (3.1). If the theory is exact, the expectation value for
the chi squared is
χ02=N, (3.3)
otherwise
χ02>N. (3.4)
Substituting eq. (3.2) into eq. (3.1) and taking into account the two possibilities (3.3) or
(3.4) we obtain:
()
()CNte
e nN
nn
n≤−
=∑1
12
2=CUB , (3.5)
which gives us an upper bound for the percentage error. Throughout the paper we use in
the figures (only when the error bars are not supplied) for error bars the values:
Δen =CUB. En . (3.6)
The error of a parameter is defined as the value of the change of this parameter from the
best fit, which causes a change in the chi squared by one unit. This is the procedure,
which will be used throughout the paper, for estimating the errors of the model
parameters. Thus if near the local minimum at P0 with respect to a parameter P, the chi
squared behaves like
() 2
02|
PPP
21
222
2
02
02
χ=χ∂χ∂−+χ=χ , (3.7)
the error ΔP of the parameter P can be evaluated from
2
02|
PP211222
2 2
02
χ=χ∂χ∂Δ==χ−χ . (3.8)
In fig. 3.1 we present a fit to data for which the errors (standard deviations) were
carefully evaluated. There are there 10 experimental points of the CBF of baboons
(Branch et al., 1991, Ewing et al., 1989, Ewing et al., 1990) as a function of partial
arterial tension of CO2 . The resulting fit parameters are inside fig. 3.1. It is interesting to
note the value of the chi squared 10.04 is very close to the expectation value 10 (data
points). This give more confidence, not only for the evaluated standard deviations, but
also for the theory.12
/G13 /G14 /G13 /G15 /G13 /G16 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G18 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1A /G13 /G1B /G13 /G1C /G13 /G14 /G13/G13/G13/G18 /G13/G14 /G13/G13/G14 /G18/G13/G15 /G13/G13/G15 /G18/G13/G16 /G13/G13/G16 /G18/G13
/G25
/G50 /G4C /G51/G20 /G18/G19/G11/G14 /G0E /G16 /G16/G11/G16/G03 /G50/G4F /G12/G14/G13/G13/G4A /G12/G50/G4C /G51
/G25
/G50 /G44 /G5B/G20 /G15/G17/G19/G11/G17 /G0E /G14 /G14/G18/G11/G18/G03 /G50/G4F /G12/G14/G13/G13/G4A /G12/G50/G4C /G51
/G53
/G13/G20 /G18/G1B/G11/G1C /G0E /G1B /G11/G1C/G19/G03 /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A
/G24/G20/G15/G1A /G11 /G1B /G0E /G19 /G19/G11/G1A/G03 /G50/G4F /G12/G14/G13/G13/G4A /G12/G50/G4C /G51/G12 /G0B/G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G0C
χ
/G13/G15 /G20 /G14/G13/G11/G13/G17/G26 /G25/G29/G03 /G52 /G49/G03 /G45 /G44 /G45 /G52 /G52 /G51 /G56/G03/G0B /G50 /G4F/G12/G14 /G13 /G13 /G4A /G12 /G50 /G4C/G51 /G0C/G03
/G33/G44 /G26/G32/G15/G03 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A /G0C
Figure 3.1 The dependence of CBF of baboons on the partial tension of
CO2. The data with their errors (standard deviations) were taken from
(Branch et al., 1991, Ewing et al., 1989, Ewing et al., 1990)
4. Modification of the Cerebrovascular Responses of PaCO2
It was emphasized in sec. 2 that the experimental data cited there were based
on some measurements done on individuals and that the parameters may be dependent on
other factors as well. In sec. 1, for example, the age factor was indicated. In experiments
performed on dogs it was found that the cerebrovascular dilation induced by hypercapnia
is attenuated by hypo tension (Harper and Glass, 1965).
In this section we will discuss the dependence of the parameters given by the model
of eq. (2.7) on the mean arterial blood pressure (MABP). There are some experimental
data on dogs (Harper, 1989, McCulloch, 1988, Harper, 1966, Harper and Glass, 1965)
which will allow us to do so. In figs. 3, 4 and 5 the data (circles) are presented for
MABP=150, 100, and 50 mm HG. The error bars attached to them were computed
according to the procedures of sec. 3.13
/G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13 /G14 /G15/G13/G13 /G11/G13/G13 /G11/G15/G13 /G11/G17/G13 /G11/G19/G13 /G11/G1B/G14 /G11/G13/G14 /G11/G15/G14 /G11/G17/G14 /G11/G19/G14 /G11/G1B/G15 /G11/G13/G15 /G11/G15/G15 /G11/G17/G15 /G11/G19
/G30/G48 /G44 /G51/G03 /G44 /G55/G57 /G48 /G55/G4C /G44 /G4F/G03/G25 /G33 /G1D/G03/G14 /G18 /G13/G03 /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A
/G25
/G50 /G4C /G51/G20 /G13/G11/G15/G15/G15/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G13/G17/G16
/G25
/G50 /G44 /G5B/G20 /G15/G11/G14/G14/G15/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G13/G16/G18
/G53
/G13/G20 /G17/G18/G11/G1C/G16/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G1B/G1C/G03 /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B /G4A
/G24/G20/G13 /G11 /G13/G16/G16/G14/G1B/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G13/G14/G1A/G15/G03 /G0B/G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G0C /G10 /G14
/G38/G53/G53 /G48 /G55/G03 /G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03 /G52/G51/G03 /G48 /G5B/G53/G11/G03 /G48 /G55 /G55 /G52/G55 /G1D/G03 /G14/G16 /G11 /G15/G08
/G24/G55/G57 /G48 /G55/G4C /G44 /G4F/G03/G33/G26 /G32/G15/G03 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A /G0C/G35 /G48 /G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G46 /G48 /G55 /G48 /G45 /G55 /G44/G4F/G03 /G45 /G4F/G52 /G52 /G47/G03 /G49 /G4F/G52/G5A/G03/G03/G03
Figure 4.1 The dependence of CBF of dogs on the partial tension of CO2, relative to its
value at 40 mm Hg, for mean arterial blood pressure of 150 mm Hg. The data are based
on (Harper and Glass, 1965). The error bars were added to the data according to the procedure
outlined in sec. 3.
/G13 /G15/G13 /G17/G13 /G19/G13 /G1B/G13 /G14/G13/G13 /G14/G15/G13/G13/G11/G13/G13/G11/G15/G13/G11/G17/G13/G11/G19/G13/G11/G1B/G14/G11/G13/G14/G11/G15/G14/G11/G17/G14/G11/G19/G14/G11/G1B/G15/G11/G13
/G30 /G48 /G44/G51/G03 /G44 /G55 /G57 /G48/G55 /G4C /G44 /G4F/G03 /G25/G33/G1D/G03 /G14/G13 /G13/G03 /G50/G50 /G2B /G4A
/G25/G50 /G4C /G51/G20/G13/G11/G18/G19/G15/G03 /G0E /G03/G11/G13/G18/G16/G19
/G25
/G50 /G44 /G5B/G20/G14/G11/G18/G14/G1B/G03 /G0E /G03/G11/G13/G16/G15
/G53
/G13/G20/G17/G16/G11/G15/G17/G03 /G0E /G03/G14/G11/G16/G1A/G03 /G50/G50 /G2B/G4A
/G24 /G20/G13/G11/G13/G14/G1C/G13/G14/G03 /G0E /G03/G11/G13/G13/G15/G15/G18
/G38/G53/G53/G48/G55/G03/G45/G52 /G58/G51 /G47/G03/G52 /G51/G03 /G48 /G5B /G53/G11/G03/G48/G55/G55/G52/G55/G1D/G03/G14 /G15 /G11/G19/G08/G35/G48/G4F/G44 /G57 /G4C/G59 /G48/G03 /G46/G48 /G55 /G48/G45 /G55/G44 /G4F/G03 /G45/G4F/G52/G52 /G47/G03 /G49/G4F/G52 /G5A/G03 /G03 /G03
/G24/G55 /G57 /G48 /G55 /G4C/G44/G4F/G03/G33/G26 /G32/G15/G03 /G0B/G50 /G50/G03 /G2B /G4A/G0C
Figure 4.2 The dependence of CBF of dogs on the partial tension of CO2, relative to its
value at 40 mm Hg, for mean arterial blood pressure of 100 mm Hg. The data are based on
(Harper and Glass, 1965)]. The error bars were added to the data according to the procedure
outlined in sec. 3.14
For the 150 and 100 mm Hg data the chi squared had definite minimum. The results of
the fits are inside the figures 4.1 and 4.2.
The fit to the 50 mm Hg data was more problematic, as the data (see fig. 4.3) are
almost consistent with a straight line (equal to one) and there was no definite minimum.
We had to impose some constraints on the parameters. It seemed to us as a reasonable
assumption to assume that for AMBP=0, the CBF=0, and consequently Bmin =Bmax =1,
and also A=0. For the low values of AMBP=50 mm Hg we expected the above
parameters to converge to their AMBP=0 values. In the fit the most unstable was the A
parameter. As we expected it to converge to zero for AMBP=0 we used as a constraint
the demand that in the search it will reach its lowest value in a local minimum. This value
of A was further kept unchanged. The results of that constrained search are given inside
fig. 4.3.
/G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13 /G14 /G15/G13/G13 /G11/G13/G13 /G11/G14/G13 /G11/G15/G13 /G11/G16/G13 /G11/G17/G13 /G11/G18/G13 /G11/G19/G13 /G11/G1A/G13 /G11/G1B/G13 /G11/G1C/G14 /G11/G13/G14 /G11/G14/G14 /G11/G15/G14 /G11/G16/G14 /G11/G17/G14 /G11/G18
/G24/G55/G57 /G48 /G55/G4C /G44 /G4F/G03/G33/G26 /G32/G15/G03 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A /G0C/G35 /G48 /G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G46 /G48 /G55 /G48 /G45 /G55 /G44/G4F/G03 /G45 /G4F/G52 /G52 /G47/G03 /G49 /G4F/G52/G5A/G03/G03/G03/G30/G48 /G44 /G51/G03 /G44 /G55/G57 /G48 /G55/G4C /G44 /G4F/G03/G25 /G33 /G1D/G03/G18 /G13/G03 /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A
/G25
/G50 /G4C /G51/G20 /G13/G11/G1B/G15/G16/G13/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G13/G16/G15/G13
/G25
/G50 /G44 /G5B/G20 /G13/G11/G1C/G1C/G1A/G15/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G13/G14/G13/G14
/G53
/G13/G20 /G14/G19/G11/G14/G1C/G03 /G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G19/G19/G03 /G50 /G50 /G2B/G4A
/G24/G20/G13 /G11 /G13/G17/G1A/G16/G03/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G13/G15/G15/G1C/G03 /G0B/G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G0C /G10 /G14
/G38/G53/G53 /G48 /G55/G03 /G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03 /G52/G51/G03 /G48 /G5B/G53/G11/G03 /G48 /G55 /G55 /G52/G55 /G1D/G03 /G1C /G11 /G1B/G08
Figure 4.3 The dependence of CBF of dogs on the partial tension of CO2, relative to its value at 40
mm Hg, for mean arterial blood pressure of 50 mm Hg. The data are based on (Harper and Glass,
1965). The error bars were added to the data according to the procedure outlined in sec. 3.
The parameters, which were obtained in the 3 searches are displayed in figs. 4.4-4.7.15
/G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G14 /G17/G13 /G14 /G19/G13/G13 /G11/G13/G13 /G11/G15/G13 /G11/G17/G13 /G11/G19/G13 /G11/G1B/G14 /G11/G13
/G48 /G5B /G53 /G48 /G46 /G57 /G48 /G47/G25/G50 /G4C /G51/G03 /G03 /G0B/G35 /G48/G4F /G44 /G57/G4C /G59 /G48 /G0C
/G30/G48 /G44 /G51/G03 /G44 /G55/G57 /G48 /G55/G4C /G44 /G4F/G03/G45/G4F /G52 /G52 /G47/G03 /G53 /G55 /G48/G56/G56 /G58 /G55 /G48/G03 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G0C
Figure 4.4 The best fit values of the parameter Bmin the cases presented
in figures 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 against the mean arterial blood pressure.
/G10 /G15/G13 /G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G14 /G17/G13 /G14 /G19/G13/G14 /G11/G13/G14 /G11/G15/G14 /G11/G17/G14 /G11/G19/G14 /G11/G1B/G15 /G11/G13/G15 /G11/G15
/G48 /G5B /G53 /G48 /G46 /G57 /G48 /G47
/G30/G48 /G44 /G51/G03 /G44 /G55/G57 /G48 /G55/G4C /G44 /G4F/G03/G45/G4F /G52 /G52 /G47/G03 /G53 /G55 /G48/G56/G56 /G58 /G55 /G48/G03 /G0B /G50 /G50 /G2B/G4A/G0C/G25/G50 /G44/G5B/G03 /G03 /G0B/G35 /G48/G4F /G44 /G57/G4C /G59 /G48 /G0C
Figure 4.5 The best fit values of the parameter Bmax for the cases presented
in figures 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 against the mean arterial blood pressure.16
/G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G14 /G17/G13 /G14 /G19/G13/G13/G14 /G13/G15 /G13/G16 /G13/G17 /G13/G18 /G13
/G30/G48 /G44 /G51/G03 /G44 /G55/G57 /G48 /G55/G4C /G44 /G4F/G03/G45/G4F /G52 /G52 /G47/G03 /G53 /G55 /G48/G56/G56 /G58 /G55 /G48/G03 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G0C/G53/G13/G03 /G03 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A /G0C
Figure 4.6 The best fit values of the parameter p0 for the cases presented
in figures 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 against the mean arterial blood pressure.
/G10 /G15/G13 /G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G14 /G17/G13 /G14 /G19/G13/G13 /G11/G13/G13/G13 /G11/G13/G14/G13 /G11/G13/G15/G13 /G11/G13/G16/G13 /G11/G13/G17/G13 /G11/G13/G18/G13 /G11/G13/G19/G13 /G11/G13/G1A
/G48 /G5B /G53 /G48 /G46 /G57 /G48 /G47
/G30/G48 /G44 /G51/G03 /G44 /G55/G57 /G48 /G55/G4C /G44 /G4F/G03/G45/G4F /G52 /G52 /G47/G03 /G53 /G55 /G48/G56/G56 /G58 /G55 /G48/G03 /G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G0C/G24/G03/G0B /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G0C /G10 /G14 /G03 /G03
Figure 4.7 The best fit values of the parameter A for the cases presented
in figures 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 against the mean arterial blood pressure.17
5. Cerebral blood flow and arterial partial pressure of oxygen
It appears that the model of eq. (2.7) can be also applied to the description of the
dependence of the CBF on arterial partial pressure of oxygen PO2. For the data of
(McDowall, 1966, Harper, 1989) (for dogs) a fit was obtained which is fully depicted in
fig. 5.1. Above arterial pressure of about 50 mm Hg there is practically no change in
CBF.
/G13 /G15 /G13 /G17 /G13 /G19 /G13 /G1B /G13 /G14 /G13/G13 /G14 /G15/G13 /G14 /G17/G13 /G14 /G19/G13/G13 /G11/G13/G13 /G11/G15/G13 /G11/G17/G13 /G11/G19/G13 /G11/G1B/G14 /G11/G13/G14 /G11/G15/G14 /G11/G17/G14 /G11/G19/G14 /G11/G1B/G15 /G11/G13/G15 /G11/G15/G15 /G11/G17/G15 /G11/G19
/G33/G32
/G15/G03 /G4C /G51/G03 /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G35 /G48 /G4F/G44/G57/G4C/G59/G48/G03/G03/G46 /G48 /G55 /G48 /G45 /G55 /G44/G4F/G03 /G45 /G4F/G52 /G52 /G47/G03 /G49 /G4F/G52/G5A/G25/G50 /G4C /G51/G20 /G14/G11/G13/G14/G17/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G13/G14/G1B
/G25/G50 /G44 /G5B /G20 /G15/G11/G15/G1A/G14/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G13/G1A/G15
/G53/G13/G20 /G16/G1B/G11/G16/G14/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G17/G1C/G03 /G50 /G50/G03 /G2B /G4A
/G24/G20/G03 /G10/G13 /G11 /G14/G18/G1B/G03 /G0E /G03 /G11 /G13/G17/G1C/G03 /G0B/G50 /G50/G03 /G2B/G4A/G0C/G10 /G14
/G38/G53/G53 /G48 /G55/G03 /G45/G52/G58/G51/G47/G03 /G52/G51/G03 /G48 /G5B/G53/G11/G03 /G48 /G55 /G55 /G52/G55 /G1D/G03 /G14/G14 /G11 /G1A/G08
Figure 5.1 The dependence of CBF of dogs on the partial tension of O2, relative
to its value above 70 mm Hg. The data are based on (McDowall,1966, Harper, 1989). The error
bars were added to the data according to the procedure outlined in sec. 3.
6. Discussion and conclusions
The major factors controlling the cerebral blood flow (CBF) are cerebral perfusion
pressure (CPP), arterial partial pressure of oxygen (PaO2), cerebral metabolism, arterial
partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2), and cardiac output (CO). The effect of
PaCO2is peculiar in being independent of autoregulatory CBF mechanisms and allows to
explore the full range of the CBF. In Sec. 2 a simple model was derived describing the18
dependence of the CBF on PaCO2,and a simple formula, eq. (2.7), was derived. The
model parameters Bmax , Bmin , A and p0 , have a simple meaning and can be determined
easily from the experimental data. Although it appears that the minimal CBF Bmin reaches
this value for negativePaCO2, far away from the physical region, it strongly affects the
near zero tensions. The other parameters: Bmax , A and p0 are more directly related to the
data. Bmax can be associated with the dilation of the blood vessels and with the maximal
CBF, therefore it is a good indicator of the CBF capacitance. We can expect that it should
be age dependent and decline with age. The parameter A, the slope, can be connected
with the adaptability to changes in PaCO2. It should also decline with age. In this way we
not only found an accurate procedure, but also found age dependent parameters related
to the elasticity and adaptability of the blood vessels and CBF.
By analyzing the cardiovascular and the respiratory systems one can try to device
exercises with the aim to improve the values of the parameters. In parallel, experiments
are needed to study the age dependence of these parameters.
As the values ofpPaCO≡2 influence strongly the CBF, one can consider breathing
exercises as means of increasing the elasticity of brain vessels. For example by alternately
hyperventilating and hypoventilating (or breath holding) one can alternately shrink and
dilate the cerebral blood vessels, exercising in this way their elasticity.
Theoretically one can with the increase of PaCO2increase to large extent the CBF, but
in practice this has its dangers and also is very difficult to achieve, as with a slight change
of PaCO2from normal, there is a strong urge to ventilate. For very advanced yogis the
training of breath holding is of fundamental importance (Bernard, 1960). The minimal
time, in their opinion, to get real benefits, is 3 minutes, which is extremely difficult and
dangerous for Westerners. But one should take into account that the aims of yogis are
quite peculiar and that Westerners can benefit from much milder forms of exercise (Fried
and Grimaldi, 1993). Indeed, the milder forms of pranayama (the yoga system of
breathing) seems to be quite beneficial, as research around the world indicates (Chandra,
1994, Fisher, 1971, Juan et al., 1984, Kuvalayananda, 1933, Kuvalayananda and
Karambelkar, 1957, Nagarathna, 1985, Patel, 1975, Stanescu et a., 1981, Rama et. al.,19
1979). In Russia the breathing exercises of K.P. Buteyko MD are well known (Buteyko
1983), but they are not documented in advanced scientific journals (outside Russia see
Berlowitz, 1995). In this method the patients are learned to breathe superficially and to
hold (out) the breath for about 1 minute. All this in order to increase the PaCO2.
It seems to us that with rhythmic breathing exercises, with some mild breath holding,
one can gradually build up the PaCO2towards beneficial values, including an improved
mental activity. Although a large amount of information has been already gained (Kety
and Schmidt, 1946, Kety and Schmidt, 1948, Sokoloff et al., 1955, Lassen, 1959,
Sokoloff, 1960, Harper and Bell, 1963, Reivich, 1964, Ingvar and Risberg, 1965, Shapiro
et al., 1965, Shapiro et al., 1966, Huber and Handa, 1967, Waltz, 1970, Fujishima et al.,
1971, Harper et al., 1972, Kuschinsky et al., 1982, Paulson et al., 1972, Smith and
Wollman, 1972, Symon et al., 1973, Ingvar and Schwartz, 1974, Fitch et al., 1975,
Strandgaard et al., 1975, Jones et al., 1976, McKenzie et al., 1979a, 1979b,Yamaguchi et
al., 1979, Maximilian et al., 1980, Yamamoto et al., 1980, Sokoloff, 1981, Gross et al.,
1981, Kuschinsky et al., 1981, Gur et al., 1982, and others quated in this paper), more
theoretical and experimental work is needed to clarify this issue.
The autoregulatory mechanisms of the brain, independent of PaCO2, keeps the CBF
constant as long as the CPP is below 160 mm Hg (and above 60 mmHg). With higher
increased cardiac output (as evaluated in the Appendix A) can affect the brain if at the
same time CPP exceeds 160 mm Hg. We expect that the increase of CBF will be limited
by Bmax as this parameter is determined by the mechanical properties of blood vessels and
the cranial space limits.
Appendix A
The effect of exercise on cardiac output and CBF
The highest efficiency for conversion of food energy into muscle work is at best
25%, the rest is converted into heat (Guyton, 1991). On the other hand the amount of heat
produced in the body is directly proportional to the oxygen consumption. At rest the rate20
of consumption is about 0.2 to 0.3 L/min, and it can increase to 3-6 L/min during
maximal exercise Guyton, 1991), depending, among other things, upon age, sex and level
of fitness. The energy production is about 5 kcal per 1 L of oxygen consumed. For
example, in running, the energy production is approximately 0.2 mL of oxygen per 1 kg
of body weight and per meter run. Accordingly, a 70 kg runner, running 2000 m, will
produce about 140 kcal of energy. If he will be well insulated with a proper dressing,
great part of this energy may be used to increase his body temperature, and for releasing
humidity from the lungs. Remembering that 15% of the cardiac output goes to the brain,
we may infer that the brain can receive a large amount of heat energy.
According to Hodgkin and Huxley the reaction rate R in the axon changes with the
temperature change ΔT in the following way (Hobbie, 1988): RTC=310Δ/o.
The cardiac output C is directly proportional to the work output W and to the oxygen
consumption /G06VO2. From (Guyton, 1991), which considers typical experimental results,
we derived the following linear relations:
C=6.8 +7( /G06VO2- 0.25 L/min) L/min , (A.1)
C=[6.8+0.0141⋅W] L/min, (W in kg⋅m/min) , (A.2)
/G06VO2=[0.25 +0.00202⋅W] L/min, (W in kg⋅m/min) . (A.3)
Let us take as an example a runner running 2000m and consuming (additional to the con-
sumption at rest of about .25L/min) 28 L of oxygen. His cardiac output will depend on
2km distance in 14 min. (a mediocre
time), we will find from eq. (A.1) that his cardiac output will be 20.8 L/min, i.e. 3 times
larger than his cardiac output at rest. We can see that even a moderate exercise can in-
crease to a large extent the cardiac output. If the body will be well insulated, a large
amount of energy (in the form of heat) could have been transmitted to the brain. The
autoregulatory mechanisms of the brain forbid it from occurring as long as the CPP is
below 160
be increased, but the CBF should be always limited by the value Bmax which was found in
Sec. 2. 21
According to (McArdle et al., 1996) the CBF increases during exercise by
approximately 25 to 30% compared to the flow at rest (Herlhoz et al., 1987, Thomas et
al., 1989).
References
Aaslid R , Lindegaard, K, Sorteberg, W, and Nornes H. (1989) Cerebral Autoregulation
Dynamics in Humans, Stroke, 20, 45-52.
Angerson WJ, Sheldon CD, Barbenel JC, Fisher AC and Gaylor JDS (Eds.) (1989):
Blood Flow in the Brain, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Bernard T (1960) Hatha Yoga, Arrow Books, London.
Branch CA, Ewing JR, Butt SM, Helpern JA, Welch KMA (1991): Signal-to-noise and
acute toxicity of a quantitative NMR imaging measurement of cerebral perfusion in
baboons, in (Ginsberg and Scheinberg, 1991) p. S778.
Berlowitz D; Denehy L; Johns DP; Bish RM; Walters EH (1995), The Buteyko asthma
breathing technique, Med. J. Aust., 162, 53.
Buteyko KP, Therapy of Hemohypocarbia, USSR patent No. 1067640, 15.9.1983.
Chandra FA: Respiratory Practices in Yoga, in Timmons B.H. and Ley R. (Eds.):
Behavioral and Psychological Approaches to Breathing Disorders. Plenum Press,
New York 1994, pp. 221-30.
Costa DC and Ell PJ(1991) Brain Blood Flow in Neurology and Psychiatry, Churchill
Livingstone, Edinburgh.
Duckrow RB (1995) Decreased cerebral blood flow during acute hyperglycemia. Brain
Res. 703(1-2): 145-150
Ewing JR, Branch CA, Helpern JA, et al. (1989) Stroke, 20:259-267.
Ewing JR, Branch CA, Fagan S, et al. (1990) Stroke, 21:(1):100-1-6.
Fischer RA (1971) Cartography of the ecstatic and meditative states. Science 174:
897-904.
Fitch W, MacKenzie ET, Harper AM (1975). Effects of decreasing arterial
pressure on cerebral blood flow in the baboon: Influence of the sympathetic nervous
system. Circulation Res., 37, 550-557.22
Fried R and Grimaldi J (1993) The Psychology and Physiology of Breathing: in beha -
vioral medicine, clinical psychology, and psychiatry, Plenum, New York NY
Fujishima, M, Scheinberg, P, Busto, R & Reinmuth, 0M (1971). The relation
between cerebral oxygen consumption and cerebral vascular reactivity to carbon
dioxide. Stroke 2, 251-257.
Garma CC Chang (1963) Teachings of Tibetan Yoga, Citadel, Secaucus NJ
Ginsberg MD and Scheinberg P (Eds.) (1991) XVth International Symposium on
Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, Raven Press, New York
Gross PM, Harper AM, Teasdale GM (1981) Cerebral circulation and
histamine. 1. Participation of vascular HI and H2 receptors in vasodilatatory
responses to carotid arterial infusion. J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab., 1, 97-108.
Gur RC, Gur RE, Obrist WD, Hungerbuhler JP, Younkin L, Rosen AD, Skolnick BE,
Reivich, M. (1982). Sex and handedness differences in cerebral blood flow during
rest and cognitive activity. Science, 217, 654-660.
Guyton AC (1991) Textbook of Medical Physiology, W.B. Saunders, New York 1991
Hagstadius S and Risberg J (1983) The effects of normal aging on the rCBF during
resting and functional activation. RCBF Bulletin, 6, 116-120, 1983
Harper AM (1966). Autoregulation of cerebral blood flow: influence of the
arterial blood pressure on the blood flow through the cerebral cortex. J. Neurol.
Neurosurg. Psychial. 29, 398-403.
Harper AM (1989
Principles, in (Angerson et al., 1988) pp. 1-10.
Harper AM, Bell RA. (1963). The effect of metabolic acidosis and alkalosis on the blood
flow through the cerebral cortex. J. Neural. Neurosurg. Psychiat., 26:341-344.
Harper AM, Deshmukh VD, Rowan J0, Jennett WB. (1972). The influence of
sympathetic nervous activity on cerebral blood flow. Arch. Neurol., 27:1-6.
Harper AM, Glass HI (1965) Effect of alterations in the arterial carbon Dioxide tension
on the blood flow through the cerebral cortex at normal and low arterial blood
pressures. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 28: 449-452.
Harper AM and McCulloch J (1985) Cerebral blood flow and cerebrovascular disease, in23
Swash M and Kennard C (Eds.): Scientific Basis of Clinical Neurology, Churchill
Living-stone, Edinburgh, pp. 518-32.
Herlhoz K et al. (1987) Regional cerebral blood flow in man at rest and during exercise.
J. Neurol. 234:9.
Hobbie RK (1988) Intermediate Physics for Medicine and Biology, 2d ed., Wiley, New
York NY
Horinaka N et al. (1997) Examination of potential mechanisms in the enhancement of
cerebral blood flow by hypoglycemia and pharmacological doses of deoxyglucose.
J. Cereb. Blood Flow Metab. 17(1): 54-63.
Howard Y (Ed.) (1992) Cerebral Blod Flow Measurement with Stable Xenon-Enhabced
Computed Tomography, Raven Press, New York 1992
Huber P, Handa J (1967). Effect of contrast material, hypercapnia, hyperventilation,
hypertonic glucose and papaverine on the diameter of the cerebral
arteries. Investigative Radiology, 2:17-32.
Ingvar DH, Risberg, J. (1965). Influence of mental activity upon regional cerebral blood
flow in man. In D. H. Ingvar & N. A. Lassen (Eds.). Regional cerebral blood flow,
an international symposium. Acta Neurol. Scand. (Suppl. 14).
Ingvar DH, Schwartz M (1974). Blood flow patterns induced in the dominant
hemisphere by reading. Brain, 97, 274-288.
Jones, J. V., Fitch, W., MacKenzie, E. T., Strandgaard, S., & Harper, A. M. (1976).
Lower limit of cerebral blood flow autoregulation in experimental renovascular
hypertension in the baboon. Circulation Res., 39, 555-557.
Juan G, Calverly P, Talamo E, Schnader J, Roussos (1984) C. Effect of carbon
dioxide on diaphragmatic function in human beings. New England Journal of
Medicine, 310: 874-879.
Kety, S. S., & Schmidt, C. F. (1946). The effects of active and passive hyperventilation
on cerebral blood flow, cerebral oxygen consumption, cardiac output, and blood
pressure of normal young men. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 15, 107-119.
Kety, S. S., & Schmidt, C. F. (1948). Effects of arterial tensions of carbon dioxide
and oxygen on cerebral blood flow and cerebral oxygen consumption of normal24
young men.. Journal of Clinical Investigation, 27, 484-492.
Knezevic S, Maximilian VA, Mubrin Z, Prohovnik I, Wade J (Eds.) (1988) Handbook of
Regional Cerebral Blood Flow, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London.
Kuschinsky, W., Suda, S., & Sokoloff, L. (1981). Local cerebral glucose utilization
and blood flow during metabolic acidosis. Am. J. Physiol., 241, H772-H777.
Kuschinsky W, Wahl M, Bosse 0, Thurau, K (1972) Perivascular potassium and pH as
determinants of local pial arterial diameter in cats. Circulation Res., 31:240-247.
Kuvalayananda, Swami (1933) Oxygen absorption and carbon dioxide elimination
in Pranayama. Yoga Mimamsa, 4, 267-289.
Kuvalayananda, Swami, and Karambelkar, PV (1957) Studies in alveolar air during
Kapalabhati. Yoga Mimamsa, 7, 87-97.
Lassen, N. A. (1959). Cerebral blood flow and oxygen consumption in man. Physiology
Review, 39:183-238
Longobardo GS, Cherniak NS, Strohl KP and Fouke JM (1987) Respiratory control
and mechanics, in Skalak R and Shu Chien (eds.) Handbook of Bioengineering,
McGraw-Hill Book Co. New York, pp. 25.1-25.39
MacKenzie ET, McGeorge AP, Graham DI, Fitch W, Edvinsson L & Harper AM (1979)
Effects of increasing arterial pressure on cerebral blood flow in the baboon:
Influence of the sympathetic nervous system. Pfliigers Arch., 378, 189-195
Maximilian VA, Prohovnik I & Risberg, J (1980) Cerebral hemodynamic response to
mental activation in normo- and hypercapnia. Stroke, 11, 342-347.
Maximilian VA and Brawanski A (1988) Functional and Vascular Challenge Procedures
During Noninvasive rCBF Measurements, in (Knezevic et al., 1988) pp 79-121.
McArdle William D., Katch FI and Katch VL (1996) Exercise physiology: energy,
nutrition, and human performance. 4th ed. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore
McCulloch J (1988) The Physiology and Regulation of Cerebral Blood Flow, in
(Knezevic et al., 1988) pp. 1-24.
McDowall DG (1966) Inter-relationships between blood oxygen tensions and cerebral
blood flow. In Oxygen measurement in blood and tissues (ed. J.P. Payne and D.W.
Hill) p. 205. Curchill, London.25
Moser RP (1988) Physiological imaging in cerebral ischemia, in Erickson DL, (ed.):
Revascularization for the Ischemic Brain, Futura Publishing Co. Mount Kisco, New
York, pp19- 32
Nagarathna R, and Nagendra HR (1985) Yoga for bronchial asthma: A controlled study.
British Medical Journal 291: 1077-1079.
Patel C (1975) Twelve-month follow-up of yoga and biofeedback in the management of
hypertension. Lancet 2: 62-64.
Paulson 0B, Olesen J., Christensen MS. (1972). Restauration of autoregulation
of cerebral blood flow by hypocapnia. Neurology, 22: 286-293.
Rama Swami, Ballentine R., and Hymes A (1979) Science of breath. Honesdale,
Pennsylvania: Himalayan Intern. Inst. of Yoga Science and Philosophy
Reivich, M. (1964). Arterial PC02 and cerebral hemodynamics. American Journal
of Physiology, 206, 25-35.
Sage JI, Van Uitert RL and Duffy TE (1981) Simultaneous measurement of cerebral
blood flow and unidirectional movement of substances across the blood-brain
barrier: theory, method, and application to leucine. J. Neurochem. 36: 1731-1738
Salazar G and Knowls JH (1964) An analysis of pressure-volume characteristics of the
lungs, J. Appl. Physiol., 19: 97-104
Sengupta D. Harper M, & Jennett B (1973). Effect of carotid ligation on cerebral blood
flow in baboons. 1. Response to altered arterial PC02. J. Neurol. Neurosurg.
Psychiat., 36, 736-741.
Sengupta D. Harper M, & Jennett B (1974). Effect of carotid ligation on cerebral blood
flow in baboons. 2. Response to hypoxia and haemorrhagic hypotension. J. Neurol.
Neurosurg. Psychiat., 37, 578-584.
Shapiro W, Wasserman AJ., & Patterson, J. L. (1965). Human cerebrovascular
response time to elevation of arterial carbon dioxide tension. Archives of
Neurology 13: 130-138.
Shapiro W. Wasserman A. J., & Patterson, J. L. (1966). Mechanism and pattern of
human cerebrovascular regulation after rapid changes in blood C02 tension. Journal
of Clinical investigation, 45, 913-922.
Siesjoe BK (1984): Cerebral circulation and metabolism. J. Neuroserg. 60:883-908
Siesjoe BK and Ingvar M (1986): Ventilation and brain metabolism, in Handbook of26
Physiology, The Respiratory System, Vol II, American Physiological Society ,
Bethesda, Maryland, pp. 141-161
Sokoloff, L. (1960). The effects of carbon dioxide on the cerebral circulation.
Anesthesiology, 2I, 664-673.
Sokoloff, L. (1981). Relationship among functional activity, energy metabolism, and
blood flow in the central nervous system. Federation Proceedings, 40, 2311-2316.
Sokoloff L (1989), Circulation and Energy Metabolism of the Brain, in Siegel GJ (ed.):
Basic Neurochemistry, 4th ed., Raven Press, New York NY
Sokoloff, L., Mangold, R., Wechsler, R. L., and Kety, S. S. (1955). The effect of
mental arithmetic on cerebral circulation and metabolism. Journatof Clinical
Investigation, 34, 1101-1108.
Smith AL, Wollman H (1972) Cerebral blood flow and metabolism. Anesthesiol. 36:
378-400.
Stanescu DC, Nemery B, Veriter C, Marechal C (1981) Pattern of breathing and
ventilatory response to C02 in subjects practising Hatha-Yoga. Journal of Applied
Physiology, 51: 1625-1629.
Strandgaard, M., Jones, J. V., MacKenzie, E. T., & Harper, A. M. (1975). Upper
limit of cerebral blood flow autoregulation in experimental renovascular
hypertension in the baboon. Circulation Res., 37, 164-167.
Symon L, Held K, Dorsch WC (1973). A study of regional autoregulation in
the cerebral circulation to increased perfusion pressure in normocapnia and
hypereapnia. Stroke, 4, 139-147.
Thomas SN et al. (1989) Cerebral blood flow during submaximal and maximal dynamic
exercise in humans. J. App. Physiol. 67:744,
Timmons BH, Ley R. (Eds.): Behavioral and Psychological Approaches to
Breathing Disorders. Plenum Press, New York 1994
Ursino M (1991), Mechanisms of Cerebral Blood Flow Regulation, Critical
Reviews in Biomedical Engineering, 18:255-288.
Waltz AG (1970). Effect of PaCO2 on blood flow and microvasculature of the
ischemic and nun-ischemic cerebral cortex. Stroke 1: 27-37.27
Wyngaarden JB, Smith LH and Bennett JC (1992 Cecil Textbook of Medicine, Saunders
figure 468-7, p. 2150 (from: Lord R.: Surgery of Occlusive Cerebrovascular
Disease. C. V. Mosby, St. Louis 1986).
Yamaguchi F, Meyer JS, Sakai F, Yamamoto M (1979) Normal human ageing and
cerebral vasoconstrictive responses to hypocapnia. J. Neurol. Sciences 44, 8794.
Yamamoto M, Meyer JS, Sakai F, Yamaguchi F. (1980). Aging and
cerebral vasodilator response to hypercarbia. Archives of Neurology, 37, 489-496. |
arXiv:physics/9911030v1 [physics.comp-ph] 15 Nov 1999One-way multigrid method in electronic structure calculat ions
In-Ho Lee
School of Physics, Korea Institute for Advanced Study, Cheo ngryangri-dong, Dongdaemun-gu,
Seoul 130-012, Korea
Yong-Hoon Kim and Richard M. Martin
Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana Cha mpaign, Illinois 61801
(September 17, 1999)
Abstract
We propose a simple and efficient one-way multigrid method for self-
consistent electronic structure calculations based on ite rative diagonalization.
Total energy calculations are performed on several differen t levels of grids
starting from the coarsest grid, with wave functions transf erred to each finer
level. The only changes compared to a single grid calculatio n are interpolation
and orthonormalization steps outside the original total en ergy calculation and
required only for transferring between grids. This feature results in a minimal
amount of code change, and enables us to employ a sophisticat ed interpola-
tion method and noninteger ratio of grid spacings. Calculat ions employing a
preconditioned conjugate gradient method are presented fo r two examples, a
quantum dot and a charged molecular system. Use of three grid levels with
grid spacings 2 h, 1.5h, and hdecreases the computer time by about a factor
of 5 compared to single level calculations.
71.15.-m, 71.15.Nc, 71.15.Mb, 71.15.Pd
Typeset using REVT EX
1I. INTRODUCTION
Recently, the usefulness of the real-space technique based on three-dimensional uniform
grid and higher-order finite-difference formula1has been demonstrated2,3for the electronic
structure calculations within the framework of the Kohn-Sh am (KS) density functional the-
ory (DFT).4All the computations are performed in real space without res ort to fast Fourier
transforms as in the planewave formalism. The major parts of calculations are local opera-
tions, so the algorithm is easily parallelized. Furthermor e, explicit storage of the Hamiltonian
matrix elements can be avoided, since the Laplacians and pot ential-wave functions multi-
plications are respectively evaluated by the finite-differe nce operation on the wave functions
and a simple one-dimensional vector multiplications.
Since the number of grids Ngis order of 105∼106, which increases further with the
system size and/or the level of accuracy, one requires an effic ient numerical procedure for
the Hamiltonian diagonalization in finite-difference real- space schemes. Iterative diagonal-
ization methods are usually employed as in other modern elec tronic structure calculations,
and due to the orthogonality condition between the KS orbita ls the complexity of this iter-
ative diagonalization scales as O(N2
bNg), whereNbrepresents the number of lowest states
taken into account. It turns out that the prefactor of this sc aling can be very dependent on
the details of calculation scheme, and the development of a n ew algorithm which results in
the optimal prefactor is a very important and challenging pr oblem at the moment. Among
the most promising approaches in the literature are the mult igrid (MG) algorithms.5,6MG
methods originated as attempts to accelerate relaxation me thods and they have been very
successful in improving the speed and accuracy in a wide vari ety of science and engineering
applications by combining computations at different scales of grid levels. In the context
of DFT electronic structure calculations, several groups h ave already applied the multi-
grid scheme to the solution of KS equations and demonstrated its efficiency: Briggs et al.
adopted coarse-grid-correction multigrid algorithm to th e calculations of various periodic
and nonperiodic systems.7Ancilotto et al. implemented full multigrid diagonalization pro-
cedure to study the fragmentation of charged Li clusters.8While these two works employed
the pseudopotentials, Beck et al. has demonstrated the feasibility of all-electron grid calc u-
lation by employing full multigrid algorithm.9These authors typically use integer ratio of
grid spacings (e.g., 4 h, 2h, andh) and correction multilevel algorithm (V-cycle).
In this article, we introduce a simple one-way multigrid alg orithm5to accelerate self-
consistent electronic structure calculations based on ite rative diagonalization. Calculations
start from the coarsest grid level and approximate solution s are transferred successively up
to the finest grid. An interesting aspect of this method is tha t the number of interpolation
is minimized : Interpolations are performed outside of orig inal total energy calculation part,
hence only for (number of grid levels −1) times when the wave functions are transferred to the
next finer grid level. It enables us to use an accurate interpo lation scheme and the noninteger
ratio of grid spacing in the hierarchy of grids. Specifically we employ three different uniform
grids spacings, 2 h, 1.5h, andhto obtain the solution at the resolution of grid spacing h,
in which calculations on the preceding two coarse grids prov ide a good initial guess of the
wave functions for the finest level calculation. We demonstr ate the efficiency of the current
scheme on the twenty-electron quantum dots and the charged H cluster systems in which
the ionic potentials have been replaced by ab initio pseudopotentials. The comparison with
2a single-level calculations shows a factor of 5 improvement in CPU time.
II. METHODS
A. Basic issues
The iterative total energy minimization based on DFT is a non linear problem in which
the KS equations (Hartree atomic units are used throughout t his paper)
/braceleftbigg
−1
2/vector∇2+Vext(/vector r) +˜VH(/vector r) +˜Vσ
xc(/vector r)/bracerightbigg
ψσ
j(/vector r) =ǫσ
jψσ
j(/vector r), σ=↑,↓,j= 1,· · ·,Nb (1)
and the Poisson equation
/vector∇2˜VH(/vector r) =−4πρ(/vector r), (2)
are closely coupled in the self-consistency loop.10Here ˜VH(/vector r) and ˜Vσ
xc(/vector r) respectively repre-
sent the input Hartree and spin dependent exchange-correla tion potential, at each iteration
within the self-consistent calculations. Vext(/vector r) stands for the external potential, and the
charge density ρ(/vector r) is defined as the squared summation of the occupied KS orbita ls. In
the higher-order finite-difference real space formulation, the KS and Poisson equations are
discretized on a uniform grid. The Laplacian operation is ev aluated by the higher-order
finite difference formula1which is characterized by the finite-difference order Nand grid
spacingh:
d2
dx2f(x) =N/summationdisplay
j=−NCjf(x+jh) +O(h2N+2), (3)
where {Cj}are constants.
In the present work solutions of the KS equations for the lowe stNbeigenstates are
found by the iterative preconditioned conjugate gradient m ethod of Bylander, Kleinman, and
Lee,11,12for a given total potential Vσ
KS(/vector r) =Vext(/vector r)+˜VH(/vector r)+˜Vσ
xc(/vector r). The Hartree potential
VH(/vector r) is obtained by solving the Poisson equation. Note that, for each self-consistent step,
we need to solve two Poisson equations for the given input and output charge densities. For
the finite systems considered here the boundary values of Har tree potential are evaluated
using a multipole expansion of the potential of the charge di stribution and the relaxation
vectors at the boundary are set to zero for the Dirichlet boun dary conditions. The solution
of Poisson equation inside of the box has been first generated by a Fourier method with low
order finite difference ( N= 1),6and it has been subsequently relaxed by the preconditioned
conjugate gradient method13,14with higher-order finite difference formula. At each step we
choose the new input density and potential using a simple lin ear mixing of output and input
densities.11
After obtaining orbitals and density from self-consistent solutions of Poisson and KS
equations, the total electronic energy is obtained:
Etot=/summationdisplay
σ,jǫσ
j−/summationdisplay
σ/integraldisplay
d3r{˜VH(/vector r) +˜Vσ
xc(/vector r)}ρσ(/vector r) +1
2/integraldisplay
d3r′/integraldisplay
d3rρ(/vector r)ρ(/vector r′)
|/vector r−/vector r′|+Exc[ρ↑(/vector r),ρ↓(/vector r)],(4)
3where the summations over the single particle energy ( ǫσ
j) are carried out for all the states
below the Fermi level, and Exc[ρ↑(/vector r),ρ↓(/vector r)] is the exchange-correlation energy. For our
local spin density approximation we use the Perdew and Zunge r’s parameterization of the
Ceperley and Alder’s quantum Monte Carlo data.15
B. One-way multigrid method
The most time-consuming part of the self-consistent electr onic structure calculations
described in the previous subsection is the iterative solut ion of KS equations. The sources
of this computation bottleneck can be traced to broadly two ( but closely related) aspects
of self-consistent iterative diagonalization schemes. Fi rst of all, in general we do not have
a good initial guess of wave functions, which generate densi ty, and hence ˜VH(/vector r) and ˜Vσ
xc(/vector r)
in Eq. (1). So initial several self-consistency steps will b e used to obtain solutions of biased
Hamiltonians, although they tend to be the most time-consum ing part. Secondly, in single
iterative solution of KS equations, a direct application of a relaxation method on the fine
grid has trouble in damping out the long-ranged or slowly var ying error components in the
orbitals. This can be understood by the usual spectral analy sis of relaxation scheme, or
considering that the nonlocal Laplacian operation on a fine g rid is physically short-ranged.
This means that there is an imbalance in the relaxation step f or the long-ranged and short-
ranged error components.
MG is a quite general concept, and the choice of a specific algo rithm is very dependent
on the problem under consideration. For our purpose, we seek a procedure which generates
a good initial guess for the finest grid calculation and effect ively removes long-range error
components of wave functions in the solution of KS equations . In this work, we employed
the one-way multigrid scheme with three different uniform gr ids with noninteger ratio of
spacings, 2h, 1.5h, andh. The calculation starts from the coarsest grid 2 h, and in each
grid-level calculation, Eqs. (2) and (1) are solved self-co nsistently as in the usual single-level
algorithm. After each self-consistent calculation on a coa rse grid, only wave functions are
interpolated to the next fine grid, and another set of self-co nsistent calculation is performed.
Since that the interpolated wave functions usually do not sa tisfy the orthonormality condi-
tion any more, we take an extra Gram-Schmidt orthogonalizat ion process after each orbital
interpolation. So we have two interpolations and two Gram-S chmidt orthogonalization pro-
cesses for our hierarchy of three grid systems. In Fig. 1, we s ummarize the algorithmic flow
of the procedures.
While an efficient interpolation/projection scheme is a cruc ial ingredient of any successful
application of MG method, we note that it can be also time-con suming and tricky part due
to the physical conditions such as orthonormality of wave fu nctions. Hence our strategy,
which is the characteristic of the current scheme, is to mini mize the number of data transfer
between different grid levels, while employ a sophisticated interpolation method which is
very accurate and allow us to use a noninteger ratio of grid sp acings. Specifically, we
used a three-dimensional piecewise polynomial interpolat ion with a tensor product of one-
dimensional B-splines as the interpolating function.6,16A piecewise cubic polynomials have
been taken as B-splines.
4III. EFFICIENCY AND DISCUSSIONS
We consider two different electronic systems of a localized q uantum dot model and a
charged hydrogen cluster to demonstrate the efficiency of the present algorithm. We first take
a twenty-electron quasi two-dimensional quantum dot model ed by an anisotropic parabolic
confinement potential3Vext(/vector r) =1
2ω2
xx2+1
2ω2
yy2+1
2ω2
zz2. In-plane potential is characterized
by the confinement energies ωx=ωy= 5 meV, and ωz= 45 meV has been taken to reproduce
the dot-growth z-direction confinement caused by the quantum wells and heter ojunctions.3
Our calculations for anisotropic parabolic dot in GaAs host material (dielectric constant
ǫ= 12.9, effective mass m∗= 0.067me) are based on the effective mass approximation, and
rescaled length and energy units are a∗
B= 101.88˚A and 10.96 meV, respectively. Uniform
grid spacing h= 0.3a∗
Bwith box size 81 ×81×21a∗3
Bhave been used, hence the number of
grid points is about 1 .4×105points at the finest grid level ( h= 0.3a∗
B) while only about
1.6×104points at the coarsest grid level (2 h= 0.6a∗
B). Finite difference order N= 3 has
been used at grid levels hand 1.5h, whileN= 1 for grid level 2 h, to solve a set of spin-
polarized KS equations with fifteen orbitals in each spin cha nnel. Noninteracting eigenstates
(Hermite polynomials) are used as an initial guess for the co arsest grid calculation.
The CPU times for each self-consistent iteration are shown i n Fig. 2. The horizontal
axis stands for the self-consistency iteration index, whil e the vertical axis is the required
computer time for a given iteration step. The case of the pres ent three-level one-way multi-
grid algorithm is shown in the lowest panel (c). Comparing wi th the results of a single-level
calculation shown in the panel (a), we see significant saving s of the computation time, in
which total computation time is about 5 times shorter than a s ingle-level calculation. While
the three-level MG scheme requires more number of self-cons istent iterations (28 iterations
compared with 20 iterations), they are mostly performed in t he coarsest grid 2 h, and at
the finest grid level hwe only need several iterations. Interpolation and orthono rmalization
steps are indicated by downward arrows, which take only a sma ll amount of computation
time.
To further demonstrate the advantage of the usage of the inte rmediate grid spacing 1 .5h
in our three-level scheme, we show the CPU time of two-level ( 2handh) calculation in the
panel (b). While the number of iterations taken in the finest g ridhis still much smaller than
the single-level calculation, it is much larger than that in the three-level calculation, resulting
in the ratio of computation times 5 : 2 : 1 for one-, two-, and th ree-level grid calculations.
Although noninteger ratio of grid spacing is not widely used in MG applications, this clearly
shows its usefulness.
We obtained similar results of factor 5 improvements in comp utation speed for other
test cases, such as the ab initio nonlocal pseudopotential calculation of a charged hydroge n
cluster H+
9. Details of the calculation are identical to those of quantu m dot calculations,
except that ionic external potentials are treated by separa ble17nonlocal pseudopotential
generated by the method of Troullier and Martins.18Finite difference order N= 6 at grid h
and 1.5h, andN= 1 for the grid 2 hhave been used to solve spin-unpolarized KS equations
with the lowest 6 states. The number of grid points involved i n the finest grid calculation is
3.5×105, while it is 4 .3×104for the coarsest grid calculation.
We have to emphasize that the improvements seen in previous e xamples are purely
induced by the a simple usage of MG idea, in which the only modi fication from the original
5single-level code was the addition of an outer loop which tra nsfer the wave functions. We can
expect that the introduction of the MG scheme at different sta ges of calculations, such as
the correction path for the relaxation of KS orbital or Hartr ee potential, will result in further
improvements. To do so, we will need additional residual com putation and projection steps
that can be combined with our conjugate gradient solvers. We also note that it will require an
interpolation strategy and grid levels which are different f rom the current method. Finally,
we point out that this type of one-way multigrid idea is very s imilar to often-used practices in
plane-wave calculations based on iterative diagonalizati on, in which a solution is first found
at one energy cutoff (equivalent to a coarse grid) and used as t he input to a higher energy
cutoff calculation (equivalent to a finer grid). This corresp onds to interpolating solutions
from a coarser to a finer grid using Fourier components.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
In this work, we demonstrated that the introduction of a simp le one-way multigrid
method greatly improves the efficiency of real-space electro nic structure calculations based
on the iterative solution of KS equations. While minimizing the number of data transfer
between grids, we employed an accurate interpolation metho d, which enabled us to incor-
porate three-level grids with noninteger ratio of grid spac ings. Our general strategy of using
2h, 1.5h, andh, showed a factor 5 improvement of computation time, while it required only
minimal computer code modifications. The usefulness of the i ntermediate grid step 1 .5hhas
been shown by comparing the current scheme with two-level (2 handh) calculations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported in part by the National Science Found ation under grant DMR
9802373. We are grateful to supercomputer center SERI.
6REFERENCES
1B. Fornberg and D. Sloan, in Acta Numerica 1994 , edited by A. Iserles (Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, Cambridge, 1994), pp. 203-267.
2J. R. Chelikowsky, N. Troullier, and Y. Saad, Phys. Rev. Lett .72, 1240 (1994); J. R.
Chelikowsky, N. Troullier, K. Wu, and Y. Saad, Phys. Rev. B 50, 11 355 (1994).
3I.-H. Lee, V. Rao, R. M. Martin, and J.-P. Leburton, Phys. Rev . B57, 9035 (1998).
4P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Phys. Rev. 136, B864 (1964); W. Kohn and L. J. Sham,
Phys. Rev. 140, A1133 (1965).
5C. C. Douglas, IEEE Computational Science & Engineering, Wi nter 55 (1996).
6W. H. Press, S. A. Teukolsky, W. T. Vetterling, and B. P. Flann ery,Numerical Recipes in
Fortran , (Second edition, Cambridge University Press, 1992).
7E. L. Briggs, D. J. Sullivan, and J. Bernholc, Phys. Rev. B 52, R5471 (1995).
8F. Ancilotto, P. Blandin, and F. Toigo, Phys. Rev. B 59, 7868 (1999).
9J. Wang and T. Beck, preprint cond-mat/9905422 and referenc es therein.
10M. C. Payne, M. P. Teter, D. C. Allan, T. A. Arias, and J. D. Joan nopoulos, Rev. Mod.
Phys.64, 1045 (1992).
11D. M. Bylander, L. Kleinman, and S. Lee, Phys. Rev. B 42, 1394 (1990).
12A. P. Seitsonen, M. M. Puska, and R. M. Nieminen, Phys. Rev. B 51, 14 057 (1995).
13J. C. Strikwerda, Finite Difference Schemes and Partial Differential Equation s,
(Wadsworth, Belmont, California, 1989), pp. 333-335.
14T. Hoshi, M. Arai, and T. Fujiwara, Phys. Rev. B 52, R5459 (1995).
15D. M. Ceperley and B. J. Alder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 566 (1980); J. Perdew and A. Zunger,
Phys. Rev. B 23, 5048 (1981).
16C. De Boor, A Practical Guide to Splines Vol. 5, (Springer-Verlag, New York, 1978), pp.
173-182.
17L. Kleinman and D. M. Bylander, Phys. Rev. Lett. 48, 1425 (1982).
18N. Troullier and J. L. Martins, Phys. Rev. B 43, 8861 (1991).
7FIGURES
FIG. 1. Schematic diagram of the present one-way multigrid a lgorithm discussed in the text.
The self-consistent calculation at each level is done by usi ng preconditioned conjugate gradient
relaxation. The values in circles, 2 h, 1.5h, and hstand for the uniform grid spacing for a given
level. The calculation starts at the coarsest level (level 1 , 2h) at the bottom, and ends at the finest
grid (level 3, h) at the top. Orbital interpolation and orthogonalization s tep is taken after each
coarse grid (level 1 and 2) calculation.
FIG. 2. CPU time vs. self-consistent iteration number for 20 -electron quantum dot cal-
culations in (a) single-level ( h), (b) two-level (2 handh), and (c) three-level (2 h, 1.5h, and h)
schemes. Within the local spin density approximation, we mi nimized the total energy with re-
spect to the electronic degree of freedom. Downward arrows i n (b) and (c) indicate the inter-
polation-orthogonalization steps. Calculations are perf ormed on a DEC alpha 433au personal
workstation.
8self-consistent calculation
self-consistent calculation
self-consistent calculationh
1.5h
2hinterpolation & orthogonalization
interpolation & orthogonalizationlevel 3 level 2 level 1
Computation flows from left to rightFig. 1
90 5 10 15 20 25 30
iteration010203040CPU time (min)
2h 1.5h h
(c)010203040 2h h
(b)010203040 h
(a)
Fig. 2
10 |
arXiv:physics/9911031v1 [physics.comp-ph] 15 Nov 1999Object-oriented construction of a multigrid electronic-s tructure
code with Fortran 90
Yong-Hoon Kim,1∗In-Ho Lee,2and Richard M. Martin1,3
1Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Ch ampaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA
2School of Physics, Korea Institute for Advanced Study, Cheo ngryangri-dong, Dongdaemun-gu,
Seoul 130-012, Korea
3Material Research Laboratory, University of Illinois at Ur bana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801,
USA
(October 7, 1999)
Abstract
We describe the object-oriented implementation of a higher -order finite-
difference density-functional code in Fortran 90. Object-o riented models of
grid and related objects are constructed and employed for th e implementa-
tion of an efficient one-way multigrid method we have recently proposed for
the density-functional electronic-structure calculatio ns. Detailed analysis of
performance and strategy of the one-way multigrid scheme wi ll be presented.
PACS: 02.70.-c,02.70.Bf,71.15.-m,71.15.Mb
Keywords: Electronic structure; Density-functional theory; Multig rid;
Object-oriented programming; Fortran 90; Scientific compu ting
I. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, the usefulness of the real-space technique based on three-dimensional
uniform grid and accurate forms of finite-difference formula has been demonstrated for
the electronic-structure calculations [1–6]. Since all th e computations are performed in
real space, the major part of the calculations are local oper ations, which makes the algo-
rithm easily parallelized and implementation of order-N al gorithm [7] transparent. This
is in contrast to plane wave method methods which rely upon gl obal fast Fourier trans-
forms. Furthermore, since the Laplacians and potential-wa ve functions multiplications are
respectively evaluated by the finite-difference operation o n the wave functions and a simple
∗Corresponding author
Address: Department of Physics, 1110 W. Green St., Urbana, I L 61801-3080, USA
E-mail: yhoon@physics.uiuc.edu
Telephone number: (217) 244-0391
Fax number: (217) 333-9819
1one-dimensional vector multiplications on the fly, explici t storage of the Hamiltonian ma-
trix elements can be avoided and the matrix diagonalization can be efficiently performed by
iterative diagonalization methods such as conjugate gradi ent method.
Although there has been great emphasis on the algorithmic de velopments in the real-
space electronic-structure calculation schemes, we feel t hat the issue of the code construction
and organization has been relatively neglected. Recently, we have proposed an efficient and
easy-to-implement one-way multigrid algorithm which resu lts in significant enhancement in
computation speed for grid-based iterative electronic-st ructure calculations [8]. In spite of
the advantage of the multigrid in general [9,10,12], it requ ires complications of coding and
organization of data structure because it involves several grid levels and data transfer be-
tween them. In such a situation, we found the modern programm ing construction paradigm,
object-oriented1programming [13] can be useful. Our original code was writte n in Fortran
90 [14] with heavy recycling of our previous planewave codes written in Fortran 77, in
conventional non-object-oriented programming style, wit h the purpose of typical scientific
programming, namely the quick implementation of a physical idea. Although we tried to
keep the code maintainable and clear, it quickly became long and messy with each addi-
tion of function and implementation of an idea. We recognize d that the complexity of the
conventional programming style is an obstacle, or at least a complication, especially for the
implementation of multigrid. Hence, we restructured the co de by introducing object-oriented
modeling concepts, and in this work we will report our experi ence of this transition and the
implementation of the multigrid method with the newly desig ned code. Although object-
oriented programming should be most straightforward in obj ect-oriented languages such as
C++, it is in principle also possible in non-object-oriente d languages [13], and especially
relatively easy with Fortran 90 which supports many ingredi ents of object-oriented coding.
Object-oriented scientific programming using Fortran 90 ha s been of much interest in recent
years [15–19], and this paper will add additional informati on to this discussion. In addition,
since grid-based simulations are common in other scientific and engineering computations,
we expect our work is a helpful guide for the code constructio n in those fields.
The outline of the current paper is as follows. In Sec. II, we fi rst describe the electronic-
structure calculation scheme within the Kohn-Sham density -functional theory, and our
methodology based on the higher-order finite difference form ulation. In Sec. III, we re-
view the key concepts of object-oriented methodologies, an d describe the introduction of
object-oriented concepts into our grid-based program writ ten in Fortran 90. In Sec. IV, we
briefly review the multigrid theory, and describe the one-wa y multigrid scheme which we
have recently proposed [8]. Implementation of the one-way m ultigrid method is discussed,
and especially the simplification induced by the object-ori ented design is emphasized. The
impressive enhancement of computational efficiency due to th e introduction of the one-way
multigrid method has been demonstrated in our previous publ ication, and here more de-
tailed analysis of performance test and multigrid strategy will be reported. The current
work will be summarized in Sec. V.
1Although “object-orientation” is both a language feature a nd a design methodology, this paper
is primarily concerned with the design aspect.
2II. HIGHER-ORDER FINITE-DIFFERENCE KOHN-SHAM
ELECTRONIC-STRUCTURE CALCULATION METHOD
The (spin-dependent) Kohn-Sham (KS) density-functional t heory (DFT) [20] is an
independent-electron theory in which one obtains the singl e-particle wave functions ψσi(r)
for spin channel σ=↑,↓and eigenvalues ǫσiby solving KS equations (Hartree atomic units
are used throughout the paper)
/bracketleftbigg
−1
2∇2+VKS
eff,σ(r)/bracketrightbigg
ψσi(r) =ǫσiψσi(r), (1)
with the spin density
nσ(r) =Nσ/summationdisplay
i=1fσi|ψσi(r)|2, (2)
whereNσis the number of occupied σspin orbitals. The effective KS potential VKS
eff,σ(r) is
composed of external, Hartree, and exchange-correlation c ontributions,
VKS
eff,σ(r) =Vext(r) +VH(r) +Vxc,σ(r), (3)
among which VH(r) andVxc,σ(r) depend on the charge density (and wave functions for
orbital-dependent Vxc,σ(r) [4]), hence Eqs. (1),(2), and (3) form a self-consistent sy stem of
equations. In the usual local density approximation, Vxc,σ(r) is calculated inexpensively,
hence the solution of KS equations [Eq. (1)] and generation o fVH(r) comprise main parts
of calculations. For localized systems, VH(r) are typically obtained by solving the Poisson
equation
∇2VH(r) =−4πn(r). (4)
wheren(r) is the total charge density n(r) =n↓(r) +n↑(r).
In our higher-order finite-difference real-space formulati on [1,3,4], we discretize both KS
and Poisson equations on a three-dimensional uniform grid ( with grid spacing h) with a
higher-order finite difference representation (with finite- difference order N)
d2
dx2f(x) =N/summationdisplay
j=−NCjf(x+jh) +O(h2N+2), (5)
where {Cj}are constants calculated by the algorithm of Ref. [21]. KS eq uations have
been solved by the preconditioned conjugate gradient (CG) m ethod [22,23] supplemented
by subspace diagonalizations with localized2wavefunctions. The Hartree potential has been
obtained from the solution of Poisson equation [Eq. (4)] on t heentire simulation box, by
first generating boundary values with multipole expansion, and then propagating solutions
inside of the box with the combination of the low-order finite -difference (N=1) fast Fourier
2Vanishing boundary condition is used for wavefunctions. Se e Sec. IIIB.
3transform method and the higher-order finite-difference (ty pically N=5) preconditioned CG
method. At each self-consistent step we generate a new input Hartree-exchange-correlation
potential using the simple linear mixing of output and input potentials. The computational
procedure is summarized in Fig. 1. Further details of the com putation method can be found
in Ref. [3,4].
III. FORTRAN 90 IMPLEMENTATION OF OBJECT-ORIENTED CONCEPT S
A. Object-oriented programming
Roughly speaking, an object consists of a set of operations o n some hidden data. Fol-
lowing Rumbaugh et al. [13], the key components of the object-oriented approach ar e:
1.Identity −data is quantized into discrete, distinguishable objects.
2.Classification −objects with the same data structure and behavior are groupe d into
a class.
3.Polymorphism −the same operation may behave differently on different classe s.
4.Inheritance −sharing of data structures and behaviors among classes base d on a
hierarchical relationship.
In addition, there are several themes underlying object-or iented technology which give cor-
responding benefits:
•Abstraction −focusing on the essential, inherent aspects of an entity enh ances the
understanding of the problem itself, and preserves the free dom to make decisions as
long as possible by avoiding premature commitments to detai ls.
•Encapsulation −separating the external aspects of an object from the intern al imple-
mentation details of the object prevents a program from beco ming so interdependent
that a small change has massive ripple effects.
•Combining data and behavior −keeping data structure hierarchy identical to the oper-
ation inheritance hierarchy shifts the burden of deciding w hat implementation to use
from the calling code to the class hierarchy.
•Sharing −sharing of code using inheritance induces savings in code an d more impor-
tantly conceptual simplicity by reducing the number of dist inct cases that must be
understood and analyzed.
•Emphasis on object structure, not procedure structure −stressing what an object is,
rather than how is is used, makes the program more stable in the long run, since
the features supplied by an object are much more stable than t he way it is used as
requirements evolve with time.
•Synergy −using identity, classification, polymorphism, and inherit ance together results
in usually cleaner, more general, and more robust program.
These abstract ideas will be made concrete by examples in the next section.
4B. Fortran 90 implementation of object-orientation
In this section we describe the object-oriented constructi on of grid-related objects in
Fortran 90. Fortran 90 keywords will be denoted as bold upper case characters, and object-
oriented concepts relevant to the discussion will be shown i n italic characters. Before pro-
ceeding, we briefly consider the modeling of objects: The mos t basic components in the
finite-difference electronic-structure code is the grid, wh ich has the information of grid co-
ordinates and number of grid panels along the x−,y−, andz−directions. We choose to
use a uniform grid along each direction. In actual calculati ons, however, we employ only a
localized region in real space to save the memory and enhance the computational efficiency.
In addition, the grid is apparently constructed in a simulat ion box with basic information on
the grid starting and finishing coordinates. So, we actually have a hierarchy of three grid-
related physical objects whose two-dimensional represent ations as shown in Fig. 2. Below
we present the implementations of this hierarchy of concept s using TYPE s of simulation
box (simbox ), grid ( grid), and sub-grid ( subgrid )3.
2MODULE forTYPE simbox and corresponding procedures
MODULE m_simbox
IMPLICIT NONE
PRIVATE
PUBLIC :: simbox,new,display,...
TYPE simbox
! Initial/final coordinates of the simulation box
! along x/y/z-dir.
REAL :: xi,xf,yi,yf,zi,zf
END TYPE simbox
INTERFACE new
MODULE PROCEDURE simbox_construct
END INTERFACE
INTERFACE display
MODULE PROCEDURE simbox_print
END INTERFACE
...
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE simbox_construct(x1,x2,y1,y2,z1,z2,box)
! Assign given initial/final coordinates of the simulation
! box to ’simbox’ components.
REAL, INTENT(IN) :: x1,x2,y1,y2,z1,z2
3All the program listings in this paper have been simplified fr om original versions for clarity of
presentation. Each module includes more subroutines, and d ouble-precision has been used for real
variables.
5TYPE(simbox), INTENT(OUT) :: box
...
END SUBROUTINE simbox_construct
SUBROUTINE simbox_print(box,name)
! Print out simulation box information.
TYPE(simbox), INTENT(IN) :: box
CHARACTER*(*), INTENT(IN), OPTIONAL :: name
...
END SUBROUTINE simbox_print
...
END MODULE m_simbox
2MODULE forTYPE grid and corresponding procedures.
MODULE m_grid
USE m_simbox, ONLY: simbox
IMPLICIT NONE
PRIVATE
PUBLIC :: grid,new,delete,display,...
TYPE grid
! Pointer to simulation box
TYPE(simbox), POINTER :: pt_simbox
! Number of grid panels along x/y/z dir.
INTEGER :: nx,ny,nz
! Number of total grid points
INTEGER :: ngrid
! Grid spacings along x/y/z dir.
REAL :: dx,dy,dz
! grid coordinates along x/y/z dir
REAL, DIMENSION(:), POINTER :: xcrd,ycrd,zcrd
END TYPE grid
INTERFACE new
MODULE PROCEDURE grid_construct
END INTERFACE
INTERFACE delete
MODULE PROCEDURE grid_destruct
END INTERFACE
INTERFACE display
MODULE PROCEDURE grid_print
END INTERFACE
...
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE grid_construct(box,n1,n2,n3,grd)
6! For the given simulation box, and the number of grid
! panels along each direction, assign/construct grid
! components.
TYPE(simbox), INTENT(IN), TARGET :: box
INTEGER, INTENT(IN) :: n1,n2,n3
TYPE(grid), INTENT(OUT) :: grd
...
! Simulation box coordinates
grd%pt_simbox => box
...
! Grid coordinates generation.
ALLOCATE(grd%xcrd(0:n1), ... STAT=ierr)
IF(ierr/=0) ... ! Allocation error handling
...
END SUBROUTINE grid_construct
SUBROUTINE grid_destruct(grd)
TYPE(grid) :: grd
...
! Nullify pointer to ’simbox’
IF(ASSOCIATED(grd%pt_simbox)) NULLIFY(grd%pt_simbox)
! Deallocate ’xcrd’,’ycrd’,’zcrd’
IF(ASSOCIATED(grd%xcrd)) THEN
DEALLOCATE(grd%xcrd, STAT=ierr)
IF(ierr/=0) ... ! Deallocation error handling
ENDIF
...
END SUBROUTINE grid_destruct
SUBROUTINE grid_print(grd,name)
! Print out grid information.
USE m_simbox, ONLY: display
TYPE(grid), INTENT(IN) :: grd
CHARACTER*(*), INTENT(IN), OPTIONAL :: name
...
CALL display(box)
...
END SUBROUTINE grid_print
...
END MODULE m_grid
2MODULE forTYPE subgrid and corresponding procedures.
MODULE m_subgrid
USE m_grid, ONLY: grid
7IMPLICIT NONE
PRIVATE
PUBLIC :: subgrid,new,delete,...
TYPE subgrid
! Pointer to ’grid’
TYPE(grid), POINTER :: pt_grid
! Number of sub-grid points
INTEGER :: nsubgrid
! local grid index number,
! 0 for outside of localized region.
INTEGER, DIMENSION(:,:,:), POINTER :: index
END TYPE subgrid
INTERFACE new
MODULE PROCEDURE subgrid_construct
END INTERFACE
INTERFACE delete
MODULE PROCEDURE subgrid_destruct
END INTERFACE
...
CONTAINS
SUBROUTINE subgrid_construct(grd,sbgrd)
TYPE(grid), INTENT(IN), TARGET :: grd
TYPE(subgrid), INTENT(OUT) :: sbgrd
...
! Assign pointer to full grid.
sbgrd%pt_grid => grd
! Allocate subgrid index array and initialize
ALLOCATE(sbgrd%index(0:grd%nx,0:grd%ny,0:grd%nz), &
STAT=ierr)
IF(ierr/=0) ! Deallocation error handling
...
END SUBROUTINE subgrid_construct
SUBROUTINE subgrid_destruct(sbgrd)
TYPE(subgrid) :: sbgrd
...
! Nullify pointer to ’grid’, ’pt_grid’
IF(ASSOCIATED(sbgrd%pt_grid)) NULLIFY(sbgrd%pt_grid)
! Deallocate ’index’ array of type ’subgrid’ variable
IF(ASSOCIATED(sbgrd%index)) THEN
DEALLOCATE(sbgrd%index,STAT=ierr)
IF(ierr/=0) ! Deallocation error handling
ENDIF
END SUBROUTINE subgrid_destruct
...
END MODULE m_subgrid
8First, note that in each case we define a new TYPE which consists of corresponding
variables, such as xi,xf, etc. forsimbox andnx,ny,nz, etc. forgrid. The ability to define
derived TYPE s is a crucial ingredient of object-oriented code construct ion. [abstraction ] By
using these newly defined TYPE s, we construct/destroy corresponding variables together ,
and especially pass them to procedures ( FUNCTION s andSUBROUTINE s) as a single
argument, which enables the procedure interfaces to be simp le and stable. [ identity ] We
locate a TYPE definition in the corresponding MODULE to make it globally accessible.
In addition, note that we hide the implementation details by first declaring all the entities
in the MODULE asPRIVATE and list only exceptions as PUBLIC fordata hiding4.
[encapsulation ] New TYPE definitions made PUBLIC to outside can be USEd in the
calling routines by including the corresponding module, an d individual components of the
TYPE can be accessed by following the variable by a percentage sig n % and the name of
the component5. Note that, for enhanced safety, we use ONLY qualifier to access public
entites in the USEd module.
Secondly, in all the MODULE s, weCONTAIN procedures which operate on the cor-
responding TYPE definition. Hence when employing each MODULE , the user will access
the data structure and its behavior at the same time. [ classification ] Hence at this stage we
have achieved the basic requirements for the “object-orien tation”: we organized program as
collection of discrete objects that incorporate both data s tructure ( TYPE ) and behavior
(procedures attached to the TYPE by being CONTAIN ed).
Next, note that, when we CONTAIN procedures, we employ MODULE PRO-
CEDURE statement to give them generic names, and make those generic names (in-
stead of original names of the procedures) be accessible fro m the outside by giving
them a PUBLIC attribute. In doing so, we can give different procedures a sin gle
generic name. For example, we use the same generic name new for different proce-
dures of TYPE s,simbox (simbox construct ),grid (gridconstruct ), and subgrid
(subgrid construct ).[polymorphism6]
Finally, in the MODULE m grid,TYPE grid inherits the simbox information, and
again this gridinformation (including that of simbox ) is inherited to TYPE subgrid
4One can list all the entities in each MODULE asPRIVATE orPUBLIC , or make the default
PUBLIC and then only list exceptions as PRIVATE . However, for the purpose of data hiding ,
the current form is strongly recommended [14].
5One can even hide the data components of a derived TYPE to the outside of the MODULE by
preceding the first component declaration in the derived TYPE definition by PRIVATE attribute.
In that case, to access the components, it is required to writ e procedures which manipulate and
return the components and include them in the same MODULE .
6To be more specific, this is static polymorphism . A good discussion on how to implement a
run-time polymorphism can be found in Ref. [18].
9inMODULE m subgrid . [inheritance ] So,TYPE grid variables will contain informa-
tion on the simulation box ( xi,xf, etc ), and TYPE subgrid variables will contain the
information on the grid(nx,ny,nz, etc. ) and the simbox in which the gridhas been
constructed. Note that for the implementation of this hiera rchy structure, we have used
POINTER s. In Fortran 90, to avoid execution efficiency degradation, a ll objects to which
aPOINTER may point should have a TARGET attribute. Hence, input variables ( IN-
TENT attribute IN)boxin the procedure gridconstruct (generic name new) of the
MODULE m gridandgrdin the procedure subgrid construct (generic name new) of
theMODULE m subgrid have the TARGET attribute. POINTER s have been asso-
ciated with TARGET s byPOINTER assignment statements:
pointer =>target
in the procedures gridconstruct andsubgrid construct . In addition inheriting data,
it is also possible for a procedure to inherit another proced ure. In our example, a procedure
gridprint in the MODULE m gridinherits (by USE statement) another procedure
simbox print (generic name display ) located in the MODULE m simbox . Again, note
that we give a generic name display to both gridprint andsimbox print.
Now we comment on additional Fortran 90 language features re lated with our examples.
First, we do not use a MODULE as a storage place of global variables, although it is pos-
sible to do so, because we found it is rather clumsy and risky f or the large-scale coding due
to the problem of global storage similar to that arises in the usage of COMMON block in
Fortran 77. MODULE is exclusively used as a place for TYPE definitions and correspond-
ing procedures. Next, since ALLOCATABLE arrays cannot be used in derived TYPE
definitions, we use instead POINTER s (see gridconstruct andsubgrid construct ).
Again, in this case of POINTER usage, we arrange the allocation to occur in a well-
defined corresponding procedure contained in the same modul e, which makes the usage of
the derived TYPE more safe and robust. Note that pointer disassociation ( NULLIFY )
and deallocation ( DEALLOCATE ) are also handled in a similar way (see griddestruct
and pwd subgrid detruct ).
Before closing this section, we summarize the strategy of th e modeling of a new (or the
remodeling of a present) large-scale code in Fortran 90 with object-oriented concepts, which
we found useful.
1. Identify an object and define the corresponding variables as aTYPE . These variables
are typically global variables, or frequently passed varia bles from the main program
to procedures, used together in a procedure in the conventio nal non-object-oriented
programming style. Be careful on the hierarchy (dependence ) of the objects.
2. Construct (identify) subroutines closely related with t heTYPE . (Re)arrange the pro-
cedure interfaces (and contents if necessary) using the TYPE definition.
3. Define a MODULE corresponding to the TYPE , and include the TYPE definition
from step 1 and CONTAIN procedures identified in step 2 in the MODULE , and
give them generic names.
4. Make the TYPE definition and generic names of procedures PUBLIC .
Remind that the initial stage takes most of the time in the obj ect-oriented approach, which
is especially true in the remodeling of an existing code, sin ce the remaining process is
10mostly changing interfaces and variable names in existing p rocedures and including them in
MODULE s (assuming that the previous code is well-designed, hence t he restructuring is
straightforward). It should be also emphasized that we find t his process is actually beneficial
for doing physics itself, in that the programmer (usually th e physicist herself or himself) has
to consider (reconsider in the case of remodeling of a presen t code) and identify carefully
the structures embedded in the problem under consideration , hence results in making one
focus more on the physical pictures. We refer the reader to Re f. [13] for further discussion
of the benefits of object-oriented programming.
IV. OBJECT-ORIENTED IMPLEMENTATION OF MULTIGRID METHODS
A. Multigrid method
We first briefly review the theory of the multigrid method [9–1 2]. The fundamental idea
behind all multigrid methods is to combine computations don e on different scales, based
on the observation that many iterative methods tend to reduc e the high-frequency (i.e.
oscillatory) components of the error rapidly but reduce the low-frequency (i.e. smooth)
components of the error much slowly. Since the notions of smo oth or oscillatory components
of the error are relative to the mesh on which the solution is d efined, in particular, a
component that appears smooth on a fine grid may appear oscill atory on a coarse grid,
we can naturally think of using coarser grid to reduce this (n ow oscillatory) error and
interpolate back to the fine grid. The key to the successful im plementation of a multigrid
method is the choice of grids of different scales, the strateg y to proceed through them, and
how we move objects among them. Broadly the multigrid algori thms can be divided into
two basic categories [12]:
1. Correction methods −start at the finest level, and use the coarser levels solely to
compute a correction which is added to the approximate solut ion on the finest level.
2. Nested iteration methods −generate initial guesses on coarser levels and frequently
reuse coarser levels for corrections also.
Specific examples of these correction path and nested iterat ion path are shown in Fig 3-(a)
and (b). Roughly speaking, when a good initial guess is avail able, a correction algorithm
can be used, otherwise we should use a nested iteration schem e [12].
B. One-way multigrid method in electronic-structure calcu lations and its
implementation
Multigrid is a quite general concept, and apparently the cho ice of a specific algorithm
depends on the nature of the problem under consideration. We have recently demonstrated
that the introduction of a simple one-way multigrid method ( Fig. 3-b) greatly improves
the efficiency of real-space electronic-structure calculat ions based on the iterative solution
of KS equations [8]. The motivation of our work was based on th e observation that the
most time-consuming part of the self-consistent electroni c-structure calculations described
11in Sec. II is the iterative solution of KS equations [22,23]. The sources of this computation
bottleneck can be traced to broadly two (but closely related ) aspects of self-consistent iter-
ative diagonalization schemes. First of all, in general we d o not have a good initial guess of
wave functions, which generate density, and hence VH(r) andVxc,σ(r) in Eq. (1). So initial
several self-consistency steps will be used to obtain solut ions of biased Hamiltonians, al-
though they tend to be the most time-consuming part. Secondl y, in single iterative solution
of KS equations, a direct application of a relaxation method on the fine grid has trouble in
damping out the long-ranged or slowly varying error compone nts in the orbitals. This can
be understood by the usual spectral analysis of relaxation s cheme [11], or considering that
the nonlocal Laplacian operation on a fine grid is physically short-ranged.
Hence, for our purpose, we seek a multigrid procedure which g enerates a good initial
guess for the finest grid calculation and effectively removes long-range error components
of wave functions in the solution of KS equations [Eq. (1)]. W hile an efficient interpo-
lation/projection scheme is a crucial ingredient of any suc cessful application of multigrid
method, we note that it can be also time-consuming and tricky part since in our case we
need to transfer a large number of wave functions which shoul d observe the orthonormality
conditions. Hence our strategy, which is the characteristi c of the scheme, is to minimize the
number of data transfer between different grid levels, and em ploy an accurate interpolation
method which is very accurate and allow us to use even a nonint eger ratio of grid spacings:
The calculation starts from the coarsest grid 2 h, and in each grid-level calculation, Eqs. (1)
and (4) are solved self-consistently as in the usual single- level algorithm shown in Fig. 1. Af-
ter each self-consistent calculation on a coarse grid, only wave functions are interpolated to
the next fine grid, and another set of self-consistent calcul ation is performed. Since that the
interpolated wave functions usually do not satisfy the orth onormality condition any more,
we take an extra Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization process af ter each orbital interpolation.
Hence we have n−1 interpolations and Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization proc esses for the
n−level multigrid calculations. For the interpolation, we us ed a three-dimensional piecewise
polynomial interpolation with a tensor product of one-dime nsional B-splines as the interpo-
lating function [10,24]. A piecewise cubic polynomials hav e been taken as B-splines. In Fig.
4, we summarize the computational procedure for the case of t hree grids, 2 h, 1.5h, andh.
We refer the reader to Ref. [8] for further discussion of the m ethod and the comparison with
other multigrid schemes [2,5,6].
Now we describe the implementation of the one-way multigrid algorithm of Fig. 4 using
the object-oriented components constructed in Sec. IIIB. T he main part of the code is
shown below.
SUBROUTINE mg_ks_dft(box,ng,...)
USE m_simbox, ONLY: simbox
USE m_grid, ONLY: grid,new,display,delete
USE m_subgrid, ONLY: subgrid,new,delete
USE m_wavefunction, ONLY: wavefunction,new,delete
...
IMPLICIT NONE
TYPE(simbox), INTENT(IN) :: box ! Simulation box informati on
INTEGER, INTENT(IN) :: ng(3) ! Number of grid panels
! at the finest grid
12...
! Local variables
TYPE(grid), ALLOCATABLE, DIMENSION(:) :: grd
TYPE(subgrid), ALLOCATABLE, DIMENSION(:) :: sbgrd
TYPE(wavefunction), ALLOCATABLE, DIMENSION(:), TARGET : : wf
...
! Allocatable arrays
! ’nlevel’ is number of multigrid level
ALLOCATE(grd(nlevel),sbgrd(nlevel),wf(nlevel),STAT= ierr)
IF(ierr/=0) ... ! Error handling
...
! One-way multigrid loop
DO ilvl = 1,nlevel
! Assign number of grid panels for each multigrid level
! ’ratio’ is grid spacing ratio with finest grid as 1
n1 = NINT(ng(1)/ratio(ilvl))
n2 = NINT(ng(2)/ratio(ilvl))
n3 = NINT(ng(3)/ratio(ilvl))
! Generate grid for level=’ilvl’
CALL new(box,n1,n2,n3,grd(ilvl))
CALL display(grd(ilvl))
! Generate subgrid for level=’ilvl’
CALl new(grd(ilvl),sbgrd(ilvl))
! Effective region allocation in the subgrid
...
! Generate wavefunctions
CALL new(...,wf(ilvl))
! If level>1, interpolate w.f.(ilvl-1) => w.f.(ilvl)
IF(ilvl>=2) THEN
! Interpolate: wf(ilvl-1) => wf(ilvl)
...
! and orthonormalize them
...
! Destruct: grid(ilvl-1), subgrid(ilvl-1), wf(ilvl-1).
CALL delete(grd(ilvl-1))
CALL delete(sbgrd(ilvl-1))
13CALL delete(wf(ilvl-1))
ENDIF
! Adjust calculation parameters according to grid level.
...
! Solve KS-equations for level=’ilvl’
CALL ksdft(...)
! Remove grid(ilvl), subgrid(ilvl), wf(ilvl)
! at the last MG step
IF(ilvl == nlevel) THEN
CALL delete(grd(ilvl))
CALL delete(sbgrd(ilvl))
CALL delete(wf(ilvl))
ENDIF
END DO
! Deallocate arrays
DEALLOCATE(grd,sbgrd,wf)
...
END SUBROUTINE mg_ks_dft
The simplification of the coding induced by object-oriented programming style should
be obvious in this example. Since the simulation box is assig ned only once in the current
method, it has been generated once in the higher level and pas sed as an input variable,
and only grids and sub-grids built in the simulation box have beenALLOCATE d for the
number of multigrid levels7. In addition to the objects we described in Sec. IIIB, we use
TYPE wavefunction which has not been described but has been constructed in a sim ilar
way as others. Again, note that we use the same generic names o f procedures for different
TYPE s,newanddelete . It should be also noted that actual allocatable arrays in TYPE
grid(xcrd, etc. ),subgrid (index ), and most importantly wavefunction whose size is
(number of grid points) ×(number of states) ×(number of spins) are only ALLOCATE d
when they are required, and those arrays are DEALLOCATE d as soon as they become
unnecessary. These processes are elegantly handled by newanddelete calls.
7However, simbox objects can be also frequently generated if we perform adapt ive mesh refine-
ment type calculations.
14C. Performance test
For the analysis of performance enhancement due to our multi grid method, we reconsider
a quasi-two-dimensional quantum dot model that has been emp loyed in Ref. [8], in which
a 20-electron quantum dot has been studied with one-level ( h), two-level (2 handh), and
three-level (2 h, 1.5h, andh) methods. Here, a more detailed analysis of performance is
provided, with varying number of electrons up to 24 and addit ional four-level (4 h, 2h, 1.5h,
andh) calculations. While calculations were performed on the en tire simulation box with
the original code in Ref. [8] , here we employ the newly design ed object-oriented code which
use only the grid points inside of a spherical region with a ra dius 8.0a∗
B. Two calculations
are further different in simulation parameters.
Quantum dot in GaAs host material (dielectric constant ǫ= 12.9, effective mass m∗=
0.067me) is modeled by an anisotropic parabolic confinement potenti alVext(r) =1
2ω2
xx2+
1
2ω2
yy2+1
2ω2
zz2, in which the z-axis is taken as the dot growth direction. As in Ref. [8], we u se
the confinement energies ωx=ωy= 5 meV, and ωz= 45 meV. Our calculations are based on
the effective mass approximation, and rescaled length and en ergy units are respectively a∗
B
= 101.88 rAand 10.96 meV. Uniform grid spacing h= 0.3a∗
Bwith box size 18 ×18×18a∗3
B
have been used. Incorporation of the spherical local region results in the usage of only about
35% of total number of grids, hence the number of grid points i nvolved in the calculations
is 1.2×103for grid 4h, 1.0×104for grid 2h, 2.4×104for grid 1.5h, and 7.9×105for
gridh. Finite-difference order N[Eq. (5)] for the solution of the KS equations and Poisson
equation are chosen such that the range of the physical cover age is approximately same, so
N= 5 forh,N= 3 for 1.5hand 2h, andN= 1 for 4h. Noninteracting eigenstates (Hermite
polynomials) are used as an initial guess for the coarsest gr id calculation. Spin-unpolarized
calculations have been performed for the simplicity of perf ormance comparison, although
the spin-polarized scheme should be employed to observe pos sible spin-polarized states and
the corresponding Hund’s rule [3].
We first show the CPU times of self-consistent iterations in 1 -, 2-, 3-, and 4-level 24-
electron calculations in Fig. 6 to contrast the characteris tics of self-consistent calculations
in the conventional 1-level and multigrid methods. The hori zontal axis stands for the self-
consistency iteration index, while the vertical axis is the required computer time for a given
iteration step. Interpolation and orthonormalization ste ps in multi-level calculations are
indicated by downward arrows. While the multigrid calculat ions requires more number of
self-consistent iterations in general, they are mostly per formed in the coarsest grid, and at
the finest grid level hwe only need two or three iterations, which demonstrates tha t coarse
grid calculations provide a good initial solution for the fin est gridhcalculation and results
in significant time saving.
In Fig. 5, we compare the performance of different multigrid s trategies for different
number of electrons. Note that in general the use of multigri d improves the computation
speed, and moreover its efficiency increases with the system s ize. Computation speed-up
defined as (CPU time for 1-level calculation)/(CPU time for n-level calculation) amounts to
more than 7 for the 24 electron case with 4-level method. Seco nd, while the 3- and 4-level
computations are usually better than the 2-level one, its sp ecific performance varies with
the number of electrons. The rule of thumb is that 4-level met hod should be used for the
electron number larger than 20, otherwise 3-level is sufficie nt.
15V. CONCLUSIONS
In the modern computation era when the increase of computati onal capability increases
almost exponentially with time, it is clear that physicists can attack more ambitious prob-
lems requiring more challenging large-scale computations . However, with the growth of
the size of the problem, typically the complexity of the prob lem itself, hence the compli-
cation of the code also increases. Object-oriented methodo logy can be a valuable solution
to this problem of complexity of modern scientific computati ons, and, in this paper, we
showed one example of the application of the object-orienta tion methodology to the large-
scale code implementation in Fortran 90. Specifically, we tr eated a real-space grid-based
electronic-structure program which solves the KS and Poiss on equations self-consistently,
and especially explained how we have implemented the one-wa y multigrid method we have
recently proposed [8] using the object-oriented technique s. According to our experience, we
believe that it pays to write a scientific program in object-o riented fashion in the long run,
and further the cost we have to pay is minimal compared with it s benefits even when using
a non-object-oriented language Fortran 90.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work has been supported by the National Science Foundat ion under Grant No.
DMR 9802373 (Y.-H.K. and R.M.M). Computations were perform ed in the Material Re-
search Laboratory Center for Computation.
16REFERENCES
[1] J. R. Chelikowsky, N. Troullier, and Y. Saad, Phys. Rev. Lett 72(1994) 1240; J. R.
Chelikowsky, N. Troullier, K. Wu, and Y. Saad, Phys. Rev. B50(1994) 11355.
[2] E. L. Briggs, D. J. Sullivan, and J. Bernholc, Phys. Rev. B52(1995) R5471; Phys. Rev.
B54(1996) 14362.
[3] I.-H. Lee, V. Rao, R. M. Martin, and J.-P. Leburton, Phys. Rev. B57(1998) 9035; I.-H.
Lee, K.-H. Ahn, Y.-H. Kim, R. M. Martin, and J.-P. Leburton, Phys. Rev. B(1999),
to be published.
[4] Y.-H. Kim, I.-H. Lee, and R. M. Martin, in Stochastic Dynamics and Pattern Formation
in Biological and Complex Systems , edited by S. Kim, K. Lee, T.K. Lim and W. Sung
(AIP, 1999); Y.-H. Kim, M. St¨ adele, and R. M. Martin, Phys. Rev. A60(1999) 3633.
[5] F. Ancilotto, P. Blandin, and F. Toigo, Phys. Rev. B59(1999) 7868.
[6] J. Wang and T. Beck, preprint cond-mat/9905422 and refer ences therein.
[7] S. Goedecker, Rev. Mod. Phys. 71(1999) 1085.
[8] I.-H. Lee, Y.-H. Kim, and R. M. Martin, Phys. Rev. B(1999), submitted.
[9] M.T. Heath, Scientific Computing: An Introductory Survey. (Mcgraw-Hill, New York,
1997).
[10] W.H. Press, S.A. Teukkolsky, W.T. Vetterling, B. Flann ery,Numerical Recipies in For-
tran, 2nd edition. (Cambridge University, Cambridge, England, 1992).
[11] W. Briggs, A Multigrid Tutorial. (SIAM, Philadelphia, 1987).
[12] C.C. Douglas, IEEE Computational Science &Engineering ,Winter (1996) 55.
[13] J. Rumbaugh, M. Blaha, W. Premerlani, F. Eddy, and W. Lor ensen, Object-Oriented
Modeling and Design. (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1991).
[14] T.M.R. Ellis, I.R. Philips, T.M. Lahey, Fortran 90 Programming. (Addison-Wesley,
Wokingham, England, 1994).
[15] V.K. Decyk, C.D. Norton, and B.K. Szymanski, ACM Fortran Forum 16(1997) 13.
[16] J.R. Cary, S.G. Shasharina, J.C. Cummings, J.V.W. Reyn ders, and P.J. Hinker, Com-
put. Phys. Comm. 105(1997) 20.
[17] M.G. Gray and R.M. Roberts, Comput. Phys. 11(1997) 355.
[18] V.K. Decyk, C.D. Norton, and B.K. Szymanski, Comput. Phys. Comm. 115(1998) 9.
[19] P.F. Dubois, Sci. Programming 1(1999) 7; ftp-icf.llnl.gov/pub/OBF90.
[20] P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Phys. Rev. 136(1964) B864; W. Kohn and L. J. Sham,
Phys. Rev. 140(1965) A1133.
[21] B. Fornberg and D. Sloan, in Acta Numerica 1994 , A. Iserles ed., (Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, 1994) p. 203.
[22] M. P. Teter, M. C. Payne, and D. C. Allan, Phys. Rev. B40(1989) 12255; M. C. Payne,
M. P. Teter, D. C. Allan, T. A. Arias, and J. D. Joannopoulos, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64
(1992) 1045.
[23] D. M. Bylander, L. Kleinman, and S. Lee, Phys. Rev. B42(1990) 1394.
[24] C. de Boor, A Practical Guide to Splines, 2nd edition. (Springer-Verlag, New York,
1984).
17FIGURES
FIG. 1. Flowchart of the current higher-order finite-differe nce electronic-structure calculations
based on the iterative CG diagonalization. Only the dotted p arts are repeated in the higher-level
multigrid calculations shown in Fig. 4.
FIG. 2. Two-dimensional representation of the hierarchy of three physical objects for grid-based
calculations: (a) simulation box, (b) grid, and (c) sub-gri d. Only filled circles in (c) are actually
used for computations.
FIG. 3. Examples of multigrid algorithmic flow: (a) correcti on path, and (b) nested iteration
path. Level 3 has the finest grid, level 1 the coarsest; comput ation flows from left to right.
FIG. 4. Schematic diagram of the present one-way multigrid a lgorithm for the case of
three-level (2 h, 1.5h, and h) calculations. The calculation starts at the coarsest leve l (level 1,
2h) at the bottom, and ends at the finest grid (level 3, h) at the top. At level 2 and 3, only the
dotted parts of the self-consistent calculation in Fig. 1 ar e performed. Orbital interpolation and
orthogonalization step is taken after each coarse grid (lev el 1 and 2) calculation.
FIG. 5. CPU time vs. self-consistent iteration number of twe nty-four-electron quantum dot
calculations in (a) one-level ( h), (b) two-level (2 handh), (c) three-level (2 h, 1.5h, and h), and
(d) four-level (4 h, 2h, 1.5h, and h) schemes. Downward arrows in (b), (c), and (d) indicate
interpolation-orthonormalization steps. Total computat ion time is (a) 59.5, (b) 12.9, (c) 11.0, and
(d) 8.3 minutes. Calculations are performed on DEC alpha 500 au workstations.
FIG. 6. Comparison of the computational efficiency enhanceme nt inn−level one-way multigrid
methods, where nis 2 (2 handh), 3 (2 h, 1.5h, and h), and 4 (4 h, 2h, 1.5h, and h), for electron
number 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24. Computation speed-up has been de fined as (CPU time for 1-level
calculation)/(CPU time for n-level calculation). Total computation time of 1-level cal culation has
been denoted in minutes for each electron number. Calculati ons are performed on DEC alpha
500au workstations.
18Generate grid and sub-grid
Construct V (r)ext
σiσiψ Construct initial f , (r), and n (r)σin
Calculate V (r) and V (r)H xcin in
σiψ
σiψ
σiε
212KS[- + V (r)] = σ Solve
outby CG
Calculate n (r), V (r), and V (r)
H xc σout out out
Calculate total energyYesNoRead simulation data from input file
Self-consistent?Mix V (r) & V (r)
Hxcin
Hxc
Fig. 1
19(a)(b) (c)
Fig. 2
20 V cycleLevel 1Level 2Level 3
Level 2Level 3
Level 1
MultigridOne-way (b) (a)
W cycleNested-iteration
Fig. 3
21h
2hSelf-consistent calculation1.5hψ2
interpolateψ
ψ1ψ2
interpolateSelf-consistent calculation
iσ iσiσ iσ
Level 1Level 2Level 3
Self-consistent calculation3
Fig. 4
220 5 10 15 20 25 30
Iteration number0200400600CPU time (sec)
020040060002004006000200400600
h
hhh
2h
2h
2h1.5h
1.5h 4h
Fig. 5
234 8 12 16 20 24 28
Number of electrons012345678Computation speed−up1−level
2−level
3−level
4−level
15:54 36:47 19:03 36:10 59:28
Fig. 6
24 |
null |
physics/9911033 16 Nov 1999
1Effects of laser polarization in laser-assisted
electron-helium inelastic collisions:
a sturmian approach
O. El Akramine, A. Makhoute and D. Khalil
U.F.R de Physique Atomique, Molèculaire & Optique Appliquée,
Faculté des Sciences, Université Moulay Ismaïl,
B.P. 4010 Beni M’hamed, Meknès, Morocco.
A. Maquet and R. Taïeb
Laboratoire de Chimie Physique-Matière et Rayonnement,
Université Pierre et Marie Curie, 11 Rue Pierre et Marie Curie,
75 231 Paris Cedex 05, France.
Short title: Laser-assisted inelastic electron-helium collisions
PACS number(s): 32.80K, 34.80
Submitted to: J. Phys. B.
Date: 15, September 1998.2Abstract
The influence of linearly and circularly polarized laser fields on the dynamics of fast
electron-impact excitation in atomic helium is discussed. A detailed analysis is made in the
excitation of 21S, 31S and 31D dressed states of helium target. By using a semiperturbative
treatment with the Sturmian basis expansion, we take into account the target atom distortion
induced by a laser field. Important differences appear between the angular distributions
depending on the different states of polarization, in particular the circular polarization presents
an experimental interest. We give new features (intermediate resonances) for both
polarizations, concerning the n = 2 states of helium for emission and the n = 3 for the
absorption, in term of laser frequency. Qualitative differences from the case of laser-assisted
elastic collisions have been evidenced.31. Introduction
In the recent years, the study of electron–atom collisions in the presence of a laser field
is a subject of intense research activity, not only because the importance of these processes in
applied domains (such as plasma heating), but also in view of their interest in fundamental
atomic collision theory. Experimentally, laser-assisted electron-atom scattering processes have
recently become feasible. Several experiments have been performed, in which the exchange of
one or more photons between the electron–target and the laser field has been observed in
laser–assisted elastic [1] and inelastic scattering [2-5]. In particular, the excitation processes
have been largely investigated in the literature by several authors [6-9], mainly in the
perturbative (weak-field) limit. The first theoretical studies on the inelastic scattering were
inspired from the pioneering works [10-12], in which the interaction between the free electron
and the field can be treated exactly (i.e. to all orders in the field strength) by using the exact
Volkov waves [13].
The incorporation of laser parameters as intensity, frequency and in particular
polarization in the laser–assisted collisions gives interesting results and considerably enrich
the study of the collision process. The influence of this later parameter have attracted a great
deal of attention in theoretical works and experimental. In fact the theoretical studies of
polarization dependence have been previously performed by Cavaliere et al. [14] for
Simultaneous electron–photon excitation at high impact energies and large differences have
been predicted. For impact energies near threshold there is experimental evidence of
differences between linear and circular polarization [15] and a recent extension of the Kroll
and Watson theory by Mittleman [16] predicts differences in the first order of the
development of the transition amplitude as a function of the laser frequency. Taïeb et al [17]
studied the influence of the laser polarization on the angular distribution of the ejected
electron in laser-assisted (e, 2e) reactions. Fainstein and Maquet [18] studied the polarization
dependence of laser–assisted electron–hydrogen elastic collisions, where important
differences appear between the angular distributions depending on the different states of
polarization.
In the present paper we want to extend our previous results [22] to the case of laser-
assisted inelastic electron-helium collisions. A comparison between the two4polarizations linear and circular of electric laser field will be made for different geometries.
We have performed an ‘‘exact’’ evaluation of the needed infinite sum-over-states, based on
simplified hydrogenic functions of the excited spectrum of helium [12]. In the purpose to
confirm our numerical results, we have performed the calculations as in our previous paper
[22] by two different methods both based on the Sturmian basis expansion. The first one
consists in expanding the radial term of the Coulomb Green function on a discrete basis of
Sturmian functions [19-20], which allows us to take into account exactly the bound-
continuum-state contributions, which is of crucial importance for electron impact excitation at
intermediate energies [23]. In the second method, the calculation is performed by expanding
the first-order perturbed wave function onto the same Sturmian basis [17, 21]. The use of
these two methods independently allows us to accurately determine the contribution of the
entire singly discrete or continuous excited spectrum (note that the doubly excited states are
not taken into account by these methods). The present technique has been applied extensively
to a variety of laser assisted electron atom collisions involving the transfer of one or several
photons between the electron-atom system and the laser field in the cases of elastic, inelastic
collisions and (e,2e) reactions. We neglect the exchanges effects in the presence work, since
the field-free exchange effects are essentially negligible at the high impact energies considered
here, and they are either smaller or slightly enhanced in the presence of a laser field [24].
The paper is structured as follows. In section 2 we present the general formalism of
laser-assisted inelastic electron-helium collisions in the case of linear and circular
polarizations. An account is then given of the techniques that we have used to evaluate the
scattering amplitudes. Section 3 contains a detailed presentation of our numerical results as
well as their physical interpretations which will be discussed in this part and section 4
concludes the paper. Atomic units used through this paper.52- Theory
Following our previous work [22], we consider the classical monochromatic and
single mode field, that is spatially homogenous over atomic dimensions and has, in the
Coulomb gauge, the electric field represented in the collision plane (/G04/G04)xy− −
[ [ ] ] F x y (t) Fsin(t) (t)tan()0 2 = = − − /G04 /G04cosω ωη(1)
where F0 and ω are respectively the amplitude and the frequency of the electric laser
field. The η parameter measures the ellipticity of the field polarization and we have the
particular cases of linear polarization (η = 0) and circular polarization (η = π/2). We can
represent the electric laser field in terms of their spherical components by
( ))t(iexpˆiF)t(
10 ϕ+ωλ−λ=∑
±=λλε ε F (2)
where ηλ+=λ 2tanˆiˆˆ yxε ε is the unitary polarization vector.
In the presence of this field, we consider the inelastic scattering process (electron–
helium), represented by the following equation
eEHeSLHeeEk fki f− −+ +→+ (,)() (,)*k ki 11ω (3)
where ki and kf are respectively the wave vectors of the incident and scattered
electrons in the presence of the laser field. Ek
kii=2
2 and Ek
kff=2
2 are the projectile
initial and final energies. The target helium is initially in the ground state 11S and will
be excited after the scattering in one of the ‘‘bound’’ final states. The integer L is the
number of photons transferred between the (electron–helium) system and the field,
positive values of L correspond to the absorption of photons by the system and negative
ones correspond to stimulated emission of photons.6The energy conservation relation corresponding to the laser–assisted excitation
(Eq. 3), reads
f i k* He
0 k EELEE +=ω++ (4)
where EHe
0= -2.904 a.u. and E*are, respectively, the ground and the final excited state
energies of the helium target.
The interaction between the projectile and the laser field is treated exactly and his
solution is given by the non–relavistic Volkov wave function )t,(0rkχ [13, 22], where k
being the projectile wave vector and, where 0rrepresents free electron coordinate.
For the interaction laser–target, we are interested by fields which have electric
strengths smaller than the atomic unit (F0 << 5.109 V/cm), and frequencies different
from the atomic transition energies, then the perturbation theory is the most appropriate
method to solve the interaction process. At first order time–dependent perturbation
theory the ‘‘ dressed ’’ wave function )t,(nXΦ is well known (see ref. [22]), where
X ≡ ≡ (r1, r2) are the coordinates of the two helium target electrons and n is the principal
quantum number.
Remembering that we are working in the geometry, where the incident electron is
fast and exchange effects are small, we shall, as a first approximation, carry out a first–
Born treatment of the scattering process. The first–Born S–matrix element for the
inelastic collision from the ground state of the target to a final excited state of energy E*,
in the direct channel, is given by
Sidt t tVt ttfB
k f d kf i , (,)(,)(,)(,)(,)01
0 0 0 0 =−−∞+∞∫χ χ r X r r X Φ Φ (5)
where ∑
=+−=2
1jj0 00dr1
r2)t,(Vr , is the direct interaction potential, r0j = r0- rj,
)t,(0Kirχ and )t,(0Kfrχ are respectively the Volkov wave functions of the incident
and scattered electrons in the presence of the laser field. )t,(0XΦ and )t,(fXΦ are
respectively the '' dressed '' atomic wave functions describing the fundamental and final
excited states. After integration on the time variable, we have7S iEEEELeffB
kf
LkiHeiL
fBLk
,*
,,() ( ) ()01 1
0 012= −+−−−
=−∞+∞
∑π δ ωγ
K (6)
with
() η=γ2tanˆ.ˆ.tankxkyk(7)
K = ki - kf is the momentum transfer which is relatively small, ffBL
,,
01 is the first–Born
approximation to the inelastic scattering amplitude with the transfer of L photons, which
can be written as
)(f)(f)(fL,1B
atomL,1B
elecL,1B
0,f K K K + = (8)
with
f JR VelecBL
LKfd1
2 02 ,() ()~(,) K
KKX =− ψ ψ (9)
and
IIIIIL,1B
atom ff)(f +=K (10)
where
n df
n 0n0ni
K1L
0n0ni
K1L
2 II )(V~ Me)R(JMe)R(J
2i
K2fk k
ψ ψ
ω−ω−ω+ω
−=∑+γ−
−−γ
+XK, (11)
and
)12()(V~ Me)R(JMe)R(J
2i
K2f0 dn
n nffni
K1L
nffni
K1L
2 IIIk k
ψ ψ
ω−ω−ω+ω
−
−= ∑−γ+
++γ−
−XK,
The terms felecBL1,()K and )(fL,1B
atomK are called, respectively ‘‘electronic’’
(corresponds to the interaction of the laser field with incident electron only) and
‘‘atomic’’ (include the dressing effects and thus describe the distortion of the atom
target by the electromagnetic radiation), with nRψ ψ=±±.ˆFM'n0n'n ε ε are the dipole8matrix elements, 'n n'nn EE−=ω are the atomic transition frequencies and the potential
()XK,V~
d is given by
~(,)exp() V id j
jKX K.r = −
=∑ 2
12
(13)
In the equations (11) and (12) nψ is a target state of energy nω in the absence of
external field and
()()2
22 2
0 k 2tanˆ.ˆ. R
η+ α= ykxk (14)
where 20
0F
ω=α represents the oscillation amplitude of a classical electron in a laser
field, JL is an ordinary Bessel function of order L and ∑
==2
1jjrR is the sum of all
target coordinates.
The first–Born differential cross section for the helium excitation with the transfer of
L photons is given by
d
dk
kfinel f
ifBL σ
Ω
=,,()012
K (15)
The corresponding first–Born differential cross section for the helium excitation with
the dressing neglected reads
d
dk
kfinel
nodresgf
ielecBL σ
Ω
=
sin,()12
K (16)
In the calculation of the two amplitudes of the equation (10), we need to know the
explicit form of the atomic wave functions. For the ground state of helium, we use the
wave function proposed by Byron and Joachain [25]. For the 21S, 31S states, Francken et9al. [12] have constructed the corresponding wave functions. The form of the states n1P
and n1D is also given by Francken et al. [12].
In the case of the excitation of the 21S, 31S and 31D states, we have only the n1P as
intermediate states; it is a simple matter to include all simply excited states of this type.
In the case of the excitation of the n1P states, we have taken into account besides the
n1D states, the n1S with principal quantum number n≤3 only. We note that the doubly
excited target states are neglected because the weak contribution of these states for the
inelastic processes [12].
The second-order hydrogenic matrix elements appearing in the equations (11) and
(12) have the general form
() )()r(VG)r(V)( T0 22,1c 1 f 2,1 r r φ Ω φ=± ±(17
where 1Vand 2V are any perturbation operators, which takes the following forms,
namely K.rie and r.ˆ±ε ε.
with
ω±−=Ω+± He
0*
1EE (18)
and
ω±−=Ω+± He
0He
2 EE (19)
where E auHe
02+
=−... φf()r and )(0rφ are respectively the orbital functions of the
final and the initial states. The main difficulty encountered in the numerical estimation
of the transition amplitude lies in the computation of the second order atomic matrix
elements ±
2,1T containing the Coulomb Green function ()±Ω2,1cG, especially when the
argument ±Ω2,1 of the Coulomb Green’s function is positive. These difficulties can often
be overcome by using an extension of Zernik’s approach [26] for the solution of the
relevant inhomogeneous differential equations or by using partial–wave expansions of
the amplitudes and the corresponding radial parts of the partial–wave component ±
2,1T
which are given respectively by the following expression10)r(R)r(V)(G)r(V)r(RMHe
0r
12,1r
2He
f 2,1±
λ±Ω = (20)
Therefore the calculation of the radial amplitudes (17) reduces to the computation of
matrix elements of the general form (Eq. 20). Where r
1Vand r
2V are any radial
perturbation operators corresponding to jλ (Kr) and r. With jλ (Kr) is a spherical Bessel
function, ()±
λΩ2,1G is the radial part of the λth partial–wave component of the Coulomb
green function, and )r(RHe
f and )r(RHe
0 are respectively the radial functions of the final
and initial states.
The radial amplitude (20) can be conveniently calculated by using a Sturmian
approach. In order to double–check our numerical results we have used two different
methods, which although relying both a Sturmian approach, differ somewhat in the
practicalities of the computation. These methods are namely:
i) Sturmian expansion of the Coulomb Green function [19-20].
ii) Sturmian expansion of the first–order perturbed wave function [17, 21, 22 ].
The basic idea underlying of the two techniques that we have used lies in the expansion
onto the radial Sturmian basis of one or several components of the general amplitude ±
2,1M.113. Results and discussion
The present semiperturbative method with the Sturmian basis expansion takes into
account the target atom distortion induced by the presence of laser field. The validity of
our treatment is based on the fact that the laser–helium target interaction is nonresonant.
We note that the excitation process can be considered as nonresonant if for a given
frequency, the intensity does not exceed a certain limit [12]. The condition on the
intensity is more stringent if the laser frequency is comparable to any characteristic atom
excitation frequency. Such conditions will be respected by our choice of the Nd–YAG
laser of frequency ω = 1.17 eV and electric intensity F0 = 106 V/cm.
We are interested in demonstrating the effects of the polarization effects in the
inelastic collision of fast electrons by a helium target in the presence of a laser field. For
linear polarization, we have considered two particular geometries where the polarization
vector of the field is taken to be parallel to the momentum transfer K (F0 // K), and to be
parallel to the wave vector of the incident electron ki (F0 // ki). For circular polarization,
we have chosen two distinct geometries corresponding respectively to the laser wave
vector k being perpendicular to the scattering plane (CPP) and to be parallel to the
scattering plane (CPC). Note that, for linear polarization the laser–assisted differential
cross section only depends on the orientation of the polarization unit vector /G04ε ε± ±.
In order to illustrate the effects of the laser polarization on the variations of the
differential cross sections, we have chosen to compare our results obtained for F0 //K
(linear polarization figure 1-a) with those corresponding to CPP (circular polarization
figure 1-c). The reason for this particular choice is that the electronic term felecBL1,()K, is
the same for both geometries, because the argument of the Bessel function reduces to an
identical value RKk= =α0 in these two cases. The same situation occurs when one
compares the differential cross sections corresponding to F0 // ki ( linear polarization,
figure 1-b) with those obtained for CPC (circular polarization coplanar, figure 1-d), the
argument of the Bessel function being then reduced to an identical value
R kkk if = =− −α θ0(cos()), where θ is the scattering angle. In both cases, the differences
observed in the angular dependence of the cross sections result from the differences
between the contributions of the atomic terms, i.e. on the dressing of the target.12Before presenting the results of our calculations, we want to make a remark
concerning the phase γk used in equations (6), (7), (11) and (12) for taking into account
the effects of the laser polarization on the variations of the laser-assisted differential
cross sections. This phase is particularly important for circular polarization CPC, when
tan()γk vanishes, so that [] γ πk=0mod, these values of γkcorrespond to the case
where the two components of the electric field in the plane( () )/G04,/G04yz vary, as a function of
time, with the same phase γk= =0, or with opposite phases γπk= =. The change of
phase is absent in the case of circular polarization CPP.
The figures 2 and 3 represent the first-Born differential cross sections corresponding
to the excitation of the 21S and 31D states as function of scattering angle θ, for the
absorption of one photon L = 1 (inverse bremsstrahlung process), the fast incident
electron is characterized by an energy of E eVki=500. In each of these two figures,
we have displayed the inelastic scattering amplitude for two different geometries for
each polarization state. For linear polarization with F0 // K, F0 // ki and for circular
polarization with two distinct orientations of a circularly polarized laser beam CPP and
CPC.
As indicated in our previous paper for elastic scattering [22], we have observed the
existence of two kinds of minima (m1) and (m2) corresponding, respectively, to the
situations when 0)(f)(fL,1B
atomL,1B
elec = +K K , and at angles such that the argument Rkof the
Bessel functions actually vanishes. This last minimum exists only in the case when
F0 // ki , it localisation in terms of θ is given by the relation kkif− =cos()θ0 and can
be observed, in the case of excitation, for large laser frequencies, which are not feasible
in practice. So all destructive interferences, presented in this paper, correspond to the
minimum (m1).
In figure 2(a) and figure 2(b), we show the laser-assisted differential cross sections
corresponding to 11S→→21S excitation process. The complete result obtained by using
the scattering amplitude Eq.(10) for two polarizations is compared to the ‘‘electronic ’’
cross section in which dressing effects are neglected. As in the case of elastic collisions
[22] dressing effects are shown to be dominant in the forward direction for linear
polarization where F0 // K and F0 // ki, and circular polarization (CPC) with γπk= = and13for larger scattering angles for circular polarization CPP and CPC with γk= =0. We can
see that for angles below 12° there are important differences between the two
polarizations. This behaviour is particularly important from the experimental point of
view since it is in principle easier to measure the laser–assisted differential cross section
amplitudes (for larger scattering angles), where the dressing effects of the target
contribute significantly. Moreover, we notice a destructive interference between the
electronic and the atomic amplitudes near of θ ≈ 3, 2°, for linear polarization F0 // K and
F0 // ki and near of θ ≈ 7° for the circular polarization CPC with γπk= =, (the electronic
and the atomic amplitudes are varying in opposite directions when the momentum
transfer increases). The presence of such interference pattern is a general feature of
11S→→ n1S transitions in the case of inverse bremsstrahlung L> >0. This is due to the
presence, in the atomic term, of S-P transition amplitudes, which behave like K-1 for
small K.
The results displayed in figures 3(a) and 3(b) correspond to the 11S→→ 31D
transition and show that dressing effects are also dominant for scattering angles θ < 15°,
for both linear and circular polarizations. Moreover, we note that in this case the
interference between the electronic and atomic amplitudes is constructive. This contrasts
with the results obtained for 11S––> n1S transitions. We notice that in the case of 31S
state excitation, a qualitatively similar behaviour, as in the case of 11S––> 21S process,
is observed. We do not show figures concerning 11S→→n1P transitions, since dressing
effects are rather small in this case. Indeed the electronic S-P amplitude, which behaves
like K-1 for small K, now dominates the cross section at small angles.
In the case of emission process L = -1, figure 4 shows an opposite behaviour of the
cross section than for the case of absorption L = 1, in fact, the destructive interference
observed in figure 2(a) and 2(b), for the two geometries F0 // K and F0 // ki of the linear
polarization, becomes constructive, and the constructive interference of the cross section
for circular polarization becomes destructive. This behaviour can be explained by the
change of Bessel functions from absorption L = 1 to emission L = -1, making a change
of sign of the atomic amplitude.
In figures 5, 6 and 7, we present the frequency dependence of the differential cross
sections for the cases of inverse bremsstrahlung ( absorption of one photon L = 1) and
stimulated bremsstrahlung (emission of one photon L = -1). We take a fixed scattering14angle θ = 10° and an incident electron energy E eVki= =500. We have normalized the
cross sections, as function of laser frequency, to the averaged laser intensity IcF=02
8π.
Figure 5(a) displays the excitation of 11S→→31S for absorption of one photon and for the
two polarizations (linear polarization with F0// K and circular polarization CCP). At a
frequency of ω ≈ 13 eV, we remark a minimum for the circular polarization CPP, which
is induced by destructive interferences between electronic and atomic terms of the
differential cross section. Indeed, the phase-dependent factor kieγ± present in the
atomic term changes the sign of its real part thus making the change from constructive
to destructive interference. This type of minimum can not exist in the linear polarization
where F0// K because, here we have a constructive interference. For the large
frequencies, abrupt changes in the vicinity of Bohr transition frequencies indicate that
the behaviour of the cross sections with respect to the laser frequency strongly depends
on the structure of the target. It is interesting to remark the presence of minima between
two successive resonances for linear and circular polarization. This behaviour results
from the fact that the resonant atomic amplitudes change of sign between two
resonances and can compensate the direct contribution independently of the polarization
state. It is also important to note that these scattering amplitudes are sensitive to the
presence of those Bohr transitions even far away from resonance. Figure 5(b) displays
the differential cross sections as a function of the laser frequency, for linear polarization
where F0 // ki and CPC circular polarization where γk= =0, we remark a qualitatively
similar behaviour as in figure 5(a), with a small shift of the minimum for the CPC
circular polarization with γk= =0. While in the case whereγπk= =, the change of sign
of atomic amplitude, induced by the phase factor kieγ± introduces a constructive
interference. We note that for the CPC polarization with γπk= =, the cross section
dependence in terms of frequency shows a similar behaviour as in terms of scattering
angle. An important point in this figure 5 is the observation of intermediate resonances,
which correspond to transitions involving intermediate states. Such peaks can be
interpreted as corresponding to Simultaneous Electron -Photon Excitation (SEPE), (see
Appendix). This process (SEPE), which is investigated in the excitation of the helium
23S state [27, 28], can be explained by an excitation which occur through the15‘simultaneous’ impact of an electron and one or more photons. Indeed, this excitation is
accomplished by the absorption or the emission of one photon energy ω /G21 combined
with a simultaneous inelastic scattering in which the electron provides the energy
decrement )EE(
i fk k− required to excite the desired state. We note that these peaks
appear in the region of small frequencies.
The results displayed in figures 6 correspond to the 11S→→31D excitation as a
function of laser photon energy. We observe in this case destructive interferences for the
two polarizations (linear and circular) and for the different geometries. We observe also
the intermediate resonances corresponding to the SEPE process.
Figure 7 represents the 11S→→21S excitation cross section as a function of the laser
photon energy in the case of emission process L=-1, and shows a different behaviour
than for the case of absorption L = 1 (Figure 8). In fact, for the two polarizations, the
scattering amplitude exhibits peaks corresponding to radiative transitions which are
induced by SEPE process (see Appendix). This behaviour of the differential cross
sections, at low frequencies, characterize the excitation of states with principal quantum
number n=3 for absorption and the excitation of n=2 for emission in term of
frequencies. Such characteristics constitute one of the main differences between elastic
and inelastic scattering in a laser field. By comparing figure 7 and figure 8, we note that
in the case of bremsstrahlung stimulated, a large difference is observed with respect to
the case of inverse bremsstrahlung. This asymmetry does not exist in the elastic
scattering case. We conclude, for these figures 5, 6 and 7 displaying the frequency
dependence, that all results have common features: peaks at low frequencies
corresponding to the SEPE process, minimum between 0.2 and 0.4 a.u. due to
destructive interferences between electronic and atomic amplitudes and for large
frequencies there are resonances induced by the presence of the Bohr transitions
between the initial and intermediate states.16 Conclusion
In this paper we have extended our treatment of electron-helium elastic
collisions in the presence of a linearly and circularly polarized laser field to the case
of the excitation. The calculations have been performed by two different methods
both based on the Sturmian basis expansion. Important differences have been found
when we compare the differential cross sections for two laser polarizations (circular
and linear) by using different geometries. In the cases of excitation n1S and n1D, we
have remarked that dressing effects are important and dominant, for linear
polarization and circular polarization with γπk=, only in the region of small
scattering angles, while for circular polarization with γk= =0, the dressing effects are
important at large scattering angles. Our results show that, everything else being
fixed, a circularly polarized laser (CPP and CPC with γk= =0) can give larger cross
sections than a linearly polarized one, by several orders of magnitude. This should
constitute an interesting and attractive point for the experimentalists to measure the
cross section amplitudes in the case of circularly polarized laser beam. New features
have been observed in the case of frequency dependence, indeed, in the case of n = 3
excitation for absorption and n = 2 for emission, intermediate resonnances appear in
the region of small laser frequencies, which correspond to dipole transitions
interpreted by Simultaneous Electron -Photon Excitation process.17Acknowledgements
We wish to thank Professor C. J. Joachain for helpful communication. It is a pleasure to
thank also Professor B. Wallbank and Doctor N. J. Mason for sending us their interesting
reprints concerning this subject. The Co-operation between ' Université Moulay Ismaïl,
Meknès, Maroc ' and ' Université Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris VI, France ' has greatly
influenced the present paper.18APPENDIX: ENERGY DIAGRAMS CORRESPONDING TO THE
SIMULTANEOUS ELECTRON-PHOTON EXCITATION
OF HELIUM 21S and 31S STATES.
We interpret the resonances appearing in the region of small frequencies by
representing the energy diagrams corresponding to these ‘simultaneous’ electron-
photon excitation of n=2 for emission and n = 3 for absorption in terms of
frequencies. We consider the responsible quantities of these resonances, which are
given (from Eq. 16) by
ωnf ± ω = 0 (1)
In the other hand, the energy conservation equation (Eq. 5) reads
EELEEkiHe
kf++=+0ω*(2)
1. Case L = -1 (emission).
In this case, only the helium (n = 2) states can present such resonances. We
consider the excitation of 21S, and for the first resonance corresponding to the
intermediate state 21P, the relations (1) and (2) become
ω21
S = ω21
P - ω
and
E21
P = Eki - Ekf + E11
S
the corresponding energy diagram is191 S2 S2 P
111
E - Ekikfhω
Energy level diagram of helium corresponding to the
‘simultaneous’ excitation of 21S with (L = -1). The photon
energy is )(ω/G21 and the excess of energy between incident
and diffused electrons is (Eki - Ekf).
A similar procedure is made for the other resonances corresponding to the
intermediate states 31P, 41P, 51P,....
2. Case L = +1 (absorption).
Only the states with (n = 3), which can be excited by ‘simultaneous ‘electron-
photon excitation (SEPE) and we choose the 31S for example, 21P is the unique
intermediate state with energy lower than the final state. The equations (1) and (2)
write
ω31
S = ω21
P + ω
and
E21
P = Eki - Ekf + E11
S
and the corresponding diagram is represented by201 S2 S2 P
111
E - Ekikfhω3 S3 P 3 D11 1
Energy level diagram of helium corresponding to the
‘simultaneous’ excitation of 31S with (L = +1). The photon
energy is )(ω/G21 and the excess of energy between incident
and diffused electrons is (Eki - Ekf).21References
[1] A. Weingartshofer, J. K. Holmes, J. Sabbagh and S. I. Chu, J. Phys. B 16, 1805
(1983). See also, B. Wallbank, J. K. Holmes, J. Phys. B 27, 1221 (1994).
[2] M. A. Khaboo, D. Roundy and F. Rugamas, Phys. Rev. A 54, 4004 (1996).
[3] S. Luan, R. Hippler and H. O. Lutz, J. Phys. B 24, 3241(1991).
[4] N. J. Mason and W. R. Newell, J. Phys. B 22, 777 (1989).
[5] B. Wallbank, J. K. Holmes and A. Weingartshofer, Phys. Rev. A 40, 5461, (1989);
J.Phys. B 23, 2997 (1990).
[6] N. K. Rahman and F. H. M. Faisal, J. Phys. B 11, 2003 (1978).
[7] S. Jetzke, F. H. M. Faisal, R. Hippler and O. H. Lutz, Z. Phys. A 315, 271, (1984).
[8] S. Jetzke, J. Broad and A. Maquet, J. Phys. B 20, 2887 (1987).
[9] R. S. Pundir and K. C. Mathur, Z. Phys. D 1, 385 (1986).
[10] F. W. Byron Jr, P. Francken and C. J. Joachain, J. Phys. B 20 5487 (1987).
[11] F. W. Byron Jr and C. J. Joachain, Phys. Rev. A 35 1590 (1987).
[12] P. Francken, Y. Attaourti and C. J. Joachain, Phys. Rev. A 38, 1785 (1988).
[13] D. M. Volkov, Z. Phys 94, 250 (1935).
[14] P. Cavaliere, C. Leone and G. Ferrante; Nuevo Cimento D 4, 79 (1984).
[15] N. J. Mason and W. R. Newell, J. Phys. B 23, L179 (1990).
[16] M. H. Mittleman, J. Phys. B26 2709 (1993).
[17] R. Taïeb, V. Véniard, A. Maquet, S. Vucic and R. M. Potvielge, J. Phys. B 24,
3229 (1991).
[18] P. D. Fainstein and A. Maquet, J. Phys. B 27, 5563 (1994).
[19] A. Maquet, Phys. Rev. A 15, 1088 (1977).
[20] C. J. Joachain, A. Makhoute, A. Maquet and R. Taïeb, Z. Phys. D 23, 397 (1992).
[21] D. Khalil, A. Maquet, R. Taïeb, C. J. Joachain, and A. Makhoute, Phys. Rev.A 56,
4918 (1998).
[22] D. Khalil, O. El Akramine, A. Makhoute, A. Maquet and R. Taïeb, J. Phys. B 31, 1
(1998).
[23] S. Vucic, Phys. Rev. A 51, 4754 (1995).22[24] G. Ferrante, C. Leone and F. Trombetta, J. Phys. B 15, L475 (1982); F. Trombetta
and C. J. Joachain, and G. Ferrante, ibid. 19, 1081 (1986).
[25] F. W. Byron Jr and C. J. Joachain, Phys. Rev. A 146 1 (1966).
[26] W Zernik, Phys. Rev. 135 A51-7 (1964).
[27] N. J. Mason and W. R. Newell, J. Phys. B 22, 777 (1989).
[28] B. Wallbank, J. K. Holmes and A. Weingartshofer, J. Phys. B 22, L615 (1989).23Figures Captions
Figure 1: Selected scattering geomeries for electron-helium collisions in the presence
of linearly, (a), (b) and circularly, (c), (d), polarized laser fields.
(a) F0 // K, (b) F0 // ki, (c) CPP and (d) CPC see text.
Figure 2: First-Born differential cross section corresponding to the electron-impact
excitation of the 21S state atomic helium with absorption of one photon (L=1) as a
function of the scattering angle. The incident electron energy is 500 eV, the laser
frequency is 1.17 eV and the electric field strength is 106 V cm-1. Dotted line: results
obtained by neglecting the dressing of the target.
(a) Solid line: circular polarization (CPP). Dashed line: linear polarization ( F0 // K ).
(b) Solid line: circular polarization (CPC) with γk= =0 and γπk= =. Dashed line: linear
polarization ( F0 // ki ).
Figure 3: Same as Figure 2 but for the excitation of the 31D state of atomic helium.
Figure 4: Same as Figure 2 but with emission of one photon (L=-1).
Figure 5: First-Born differential cross section corresponding to the electron-impact
excitation of the 31S state atomic helium with absorption of one photon (L = 1) as a
function of laser frequency for a fixed scattering angle θ = 10°. The incident electron
energy is 500 eV. The cross sections have been normalized to the mean laser intensity
IcF=02
8π. Dotted line: results obtained by neglecting the dressing of the target.
(a) Solid line: circular polarization (CPP). Dashed line: linear polarization ( F0 // K ).
(b) Solid line: circular polarization (CPC) with γk= =0. Dashed line: linear polarization
( F0 // ki ).
Figure 6: Same as Figure 5 but for the excitation of the 31D state of atomic helium
and with absorption of one photon (L = 1).24Figure 7: Same as Figure 5 but for the excitation of the 21S state of atomic helium
and emission of one photon ( L = -1 ).
Figure 8: Same as Figure 7 but for the absorption of one photon ( L = 1 ). |
THEORETICAL STUDY OF QUANTUM DISSIPATION AND
LASER NOISE EFFECTS ON THE ATOMIC RESPONSE
O. El Akramine♣, A. Makhoute♣*, M. Zitane♣ and M. Tij♣
♣ UFR Physique Atomique, Moléculaire & Optique Appliquée
Université Moulay Ismail, Faculté des Sciences,
B.P. 4010 Beni M’hamed, Meknès, Morocco.
* Physique Atomique Théorique, Faculté des Sciences,
Université Libre de Bruxelles,
CP 227, Brussels, Belgium.
Short title: Theoretical study of quantum dissipation and Laser noise effects
PACS index number(s): 42.50.Lc, 42.50.Ct
Submitted to: Phys. Rev A.
Date: 14 September 1998Abstract
The nonlinear dynamics of dissipative quantum systems in incoherent laser fields is
studied in the framework of master equation with random telegraph model describing the
laser noise and Markovian approximation for dealing with the system-bath couplings. Floquet
theory and time-dependent perturbation methods are used to facilitate both analytical and
numerical solutions. We develop a theoretical formalism that provides a powerful tool for the
detailed analysis of the dissipative quantum dynamics of multilevel systems driven by intense
stochastic laser fields. It is found that the system relaxes to a steady state by the effect of laser
phase and frequency noises and the kinetic of this relaxation increases with the addition of
dissipative terms, introduced by the coupling to the reservoir. The case of amplitude
fluctuations shows a different behavior. Other results concerning the destruction of quantum
coherence and the dynamical localization will be established and further relaxation
mechanisms such spontaneous emission and ionization process will be also considered.I- INTRODUCTION
The study of the time evolution of quantum systems, which are on the one hand driven
by an external field and in contact with a heat bath (reservoir) on the other hand, has received
a great deal of attention in recent years [1-4]. In quantum optics, such systems are
investigated in the dressed-atom picture of resonance fluorescence [5], where a beam of atoms
interacts with a coherent laser field and all the electromagnetic modes of the vacuum [6].
Moreover, it is by now recognized that nearly all types of laser–atom interactions can be
strongly affected by laser noise. Indeed one practical reason to this fact is the use, in
experiments, of high powers which are obtained in pulsed operation, and thus at the expense
of poorly stabilized laser beams. Furthermore, real atoms experience a fluctuating
environment of many perturbing interactions and ideal lasers exist only in theoretical models,
while the used laser sources are subjected to many types of fluctuations notably in phase,
amplitude and frequency [7-10]. Other kinds of fluctuations due to collisional effects can
affect the atomic transition frequencies [9,11]. Therefore, we cannot establish, without taking
into account of the dissipative action of the environment and the statistical properties of the
laser light, a rigorous comparison between theoretical predictions and experimental results.
Different approaches to the dissipative dynamics of open quantum systems in strong
external fields has been proposed and applied to the description of atoms under the influence
of thermal noise [1-4]. While for the incoherence of laser field, a series of models, all based
on
so-called pre-Gaussian Markovian processes [7-10] has been used in order to describe the
stochastic behavior of the laser field. It is important to mention a few technical features of this
model. It is based on the two-state random telegraph. It is not a Gaussian model but rather‘‘pre-Gaussian’’ and has a Gaussian limit [8]. Our choice of the random telegraph is based on
the simplicity of this model that permits a unified treatment of different noisy laser in phase,
amplitude and frequency. Several works have reported on the action of random process on a
two–level system [7-10,12-15], particularly the evolution populations σnn and the ionization
probability.
In the present paper, we want to elucidate the role of quantum dissipation and laser
noise on the atomic response. For this purpose, we derive a master equation, which provides a
general framework for the dynamics of atoms interacting with strong laser noisy and thermal
reservoir.
The basic idea underlying the theoretical formalism of that paper is to take into
account the exact dynamics of the interaction between atomic system and external field by
employing the Floquet basis for the reduced system rather than the stationary unperturbed
states
[1,2]. The interaction of the system (laser–atom) with the reservoir will be treated by the time-
dependent perturbation theory, this treatment leads to a generalized quantum master equation
for the reduced density matrix. Such statistical fundamental equation firstly introduced in
quantum optic by Burshtein [16-18], contains all information concerning, respectively, the
atomic transition dynamics, the stochastic evolution of laser field fluctuations and the
dissipative mechanisms. We are concerned here with an important theme of contemporary
research, namely the interplay between quantum coherence and external noise. In fact, the
destruction of quantum coherence by noise is central to many fields and is reflected in the
large number of papers recently published on this subject [19-23].
Since our computations are made at exact resonance, where the effects of spontaneous
emission are important [24] and for strong laser field, where the probability to realize anionization of atoms is highest. Therefore we shall here extend our theory by the inclusion of
the relaxation rates corresponding to the spontaneous emission and the ionization processes
and present the corresponding numerical results.
The theory is developed in section 2, by considering the case of strong laser–atom
interaction in the presence of laser noise and dissipative effects, which are introduced by the
coupling to the reservoir. Within the framework of the Floquet representation and the
Markovian approximation, detailed theoretical calculations are feasible to obtain the reduced
matrix density elements. The account of Floquet theory given here is rather brief, since the
theory has been discussed at length in the recent literature (see e. g. refs. [25-29]). Moreover,
the influence of ionization process on the response atomic function is presented. Numerical
results concerning a model of two–level system is presented in section 3. At the end a
summary of our results is given.II- THEORY
We consider in this paper an atomic system, which interacts with an external classical
laser field. Moreover, the system (laser-atom) is coupled to a quantified radiation field in
thermal equilibrium. In the following we will consider the behavior of the atom coupled to a
reservoir with many degrees of freedom.
The aim of this paper is to provide a description of the dynamics in terms of the
degrees of freedom of the atomic system alone by elimination of the reservoir variables. Since
the atoms are driven strongly by an external laser field, our master equation is based on the
atomic Floquet states rather than the unperturbed atomic states.
The total Hamiltonian governing the dynamics of the coupled system of matter and
radiation degrees of freedom takes the form
HtHtHHAL IR ()()= ++− (1)
whereHtAL−() is the total Hamiltonian of the atomic system and the external laser field,
without interaction with the reservoir, given by
HtHVtHAL A SE −=++ () () (2)
with HA denotes the stationary atomic Hamiltonian, V(t) the dipole interaction between the
atomic system and the laser field and HSE the Hamiltonian of the simultaneous emission,
which reads
Γ−=2HSE/G21(3)where Γ is a diagonal matrix composed by the Einstein coefficients of spontaneous
emission process and defined by [29]
∑
〈γ=Γ
n'nSE
'nn nn (4)
here γnnSE
' are the radiative decay rates.
The Hamiltonian that describes the coupling between the matter degrees of freedom and the
quantified radiation field may be written in the dipole approximation as
( ) ∑ γ+γ=+
j*
jjjj I aaz H /G21 (5)
where jγ are the coupling constants. aj+and aj are the quantum operators of creation and
annihilation, z denotes the component of the dipole operator on the (OZ) axis. The free
Hamiltonian of the reservoir is represented by
∑
+ ω=+
jjjj R21aa H /G21 (6)
with jω is a frequency corresponding to the jeme mode of the free quantified radiation.
The Von Neumann equation for the statistical operator ρ of the total system reads
[]ρ=∂∂ρ),t(Hti/G21 (7)We introduce the interaction representation for treating the equation (7), and we put
HtHtHAL R 0()()= +− (8)
that is considered as the time-dependent unperturbed Hamiltonian, the evolution operator
corresponding to this Hamiltonian is given by
UtUtUtR ()()() =⊗0 (9)
and
)tHiexp('dt)'t(Hiexp)t(URt
0LA/G21 /G21−
−=
+−∫(10)
where []...+is an operator of time ordering. In the interaction representation, the total density
operator ρ(t) and the interaction Hamiltonian HI take the following form
~()()()() ρ ρ tUttUt =+(11)
and
~()()() HtUtHUtI I =+(12)
and the dynamic equation (7 ) becomes
[])t(~),t(H~
t)t(~
iIρ=∂ρ∂/G21 (13)We assume that the interaction between the atomic system and the reservoir is weak that the
coupling constants γj→0 and Cstt2
j=γ for t→∞. In these conditions, the equation (13)
will be treated by the time-dependent perturbation theory. At the second order in ~HI, this last
reads
[] [ ] [ ] ∫ρ −ρ =∂ρ∂ t
tI I 2 0 I
0)'t(~,)'t(H~,)t(H~'dt1)t(~,)t(H~
i1
t)t(~
/G21 /G21(14)
In writing Eq. (14), it has been assumed that the interaction is adiabatically switched on at
time (t0→−∞). Prior to this, the atomic system and the reservoir are uncorrelated and the
total density matrix is given by the direct product
~()~() ρσρ ttR 0 0=⊗ (15)
where ~()σt0 is the reduced system density operator at initial time in the interaction
representation and defined by the trace over the reservoir states. ρR is the reservoir
distribution function at equilibrium given by
RRBR
RZ)TK/Hexp(−=ρ (16)
here ZR , TR are respectively the partition function and the temperature of the reservoir and KB
is the Boltzman constant.
We need to define the Hamiltonian of interaction between the atomic system and the laser
field without its coupling with the bath. In the dipole approximation, it reads( ))t(x)t(tcoszFe)t(V0 +ϕ+ω = (17)
in the case of phase fluctuations,
or ()())t(tcosz)t(x1Fe)t(V0 ϕ+ω += (18)
in the case of amplitude fluctuations, where ω is the laser frequency and e is the electron
charge. F0 is the electric field amplitude (possibly fluctuating in magnitude) and ϕ(t) is the
instantaneous phase of the laser (fluctuating around the mean value). In this paper, we use an
intense laser field affected by a temporal stochastic process of jumps. These fluctuation
mechanisms are described by the pre-Gaussian Markovian models [7-10]. In particular, we
adopt the simplest example of two-state random telegraph, which is defined by xta()=±,
where a is the amount of the jump assigned to the stochastic signal.
Since the telegraph process that we are considering here is Markovian, the
conditioned probability density function associated with it, namely )t,st,s(p00, is shown
to satisfy the following Chapman–Kolmogorov equation [7-10,30]
∂
∂tpststTpststTpstst (,,)(,,)(,,)0 00 00 01 1=− +− (19)
here s0 is the initial state of random telegraph at the time t0.
In the compact form [31], the equation (19) write as∑=
's's's
ss dtdPWP (20)
where
−−=1111
T1's
sW is the relaxation matrix composed by the frequencies of telegraph
jumps process, where s and s’ are two different states of random telegraph (s = 1,2) and
corresponding to the telegraph signal amplitude {}a,a+− . T denotes the dwell time (i.e., the
mean time between interruptions) of the telegraph. In the following, and in presence of the
noise, all physical operators, such reduced density operator, interaction Hamiltonian, dipole
operator…, will be indiced by s in indication of the stochasticity influence.
By elimination of the reservoir variables in Eq. (14), we have
[ ] [ ] ∫σ −=σt
ts sI sIR 2 s
0)'t(~,)'t(H~,)t(H~Tr'dt1)t(~
/G21/G06 (21)
After tracing on the reservoir variables, we combine the Chapman-Kolmogorov equation (20),
which represents the stochastic evolution of the random telegraph, to the equation (21)
representing the atomic dynamics. A master equation for the reduced density operator is
derived in the interaction picture
∑ +σ=σ
'ss 's's
s s )t(D~)t(~)t(~W /G06 (22)
where
[ ] [ ] ∫σ −=t
ts sI sIR 2 s
0)'t(~,)'t(H~,)t(H~Tr'dt1)t(D~
/G21 (23)is the time-dependent operator describing the dissipative effects induced by the coupling to
the reservoir. In writing the expression of ~()Dts, we have replace up ~()~() ρσρs s R tt≈⊗ to
second order in the coupling constants by its zeroth-order approximate. Since ~()HtIs is a
periodic function in time, we explicitly construct the operator U0(t). To this end, it is
necessary to treat the interaction with the strong incoherent laser field exactly, and solve the
corresponding Schrodinguer equation generated by the Hamiltonian HtAL−() by using the
Floquet theory. According to Floquet’s theorem [25-29], there exists a complete set of
solutions labeled by quantum numbers α of the form
)t()/tiexp()t(s, s α ααφε−=ψ /G21 (24)
Where αε/G21 and φα,()st are respectively the quasi-energies and the eigenstates of Floquet.
The time-evolution operator U0(t) for the matter degrees of freedom in the Floquet
representation [1,2], is given by
)0()t()/tiexp()t(Us, s, 0 α α α φφε= /G21 (25)
In the interaction picture, the operators annihilation, creation and dipole respectively aj,
aj+and z take the form
~()()exp() aUtaUt itaj j jj = =−+ω, (26)
~exp() a itaj jj+ +=ω (27)and
)0()t()k(Z)t)k(iexp()t(Uz)t(U)t(z~
s, s,'
ks, s α α
βαβα αβ+φφ ε = = ∑ (28)
where
[] ∫ωπ
β α βα φφω−πω=2
0s, s, s, )t(z)t(tkiexpdt2)k(Z (29)
are the dipole matrix elements between Floquet states. The symbol ‘prime’ in the sum Eq.
(28) indicates that only the triplets ()αβ,,kthat verify the condition 0k>ω+ε−εβα /G21 will
be considered, in the purpose to eliminate the degenerate Floquet eigenstates. In order to
calculate the dissipation operator ~()Dts, we follow the methodology formulated in the
Ref. [1], indeed, we have
( )[ ]~() ..()
,'
Ht e FaHcIs jikt
sj
jkj= +−∑∑γεω
αβ
αβαβ(30)
with H.c. is the hermitic conjugate,
Fs s s αβ α β φφ, , ,()() =00 (31)
and
ω+ε−ε=εβα βα /G21k )k( (32)
where −∞<<+∞k.By taking into account of the (Eq. 30), ~()Dtsreads in the form( ) {
( )} )33( .c.H)'t(~FF)'t,t(AF)'t(~F)'t,t(Aaa)'t(~FF)'t,t(AF)'t(~F)'t,t(Aaa'dt )t(D~
ss,'s, s,'' ss, jjss,''s, s, ss, jj'
k'
'k''jt
t2
j s
0
+σ − σ +σ − σ γ =
αββα βα βα++βααβ+
αβ βα+
βαβα∑∑∑∫
with
() ( )( ) ( ) AttZkZkiktik ts s j j (,')()()exp() exp(')', ,*
'' = ′ − −′′ αβ βα αβ αβ εω ε ω (34)
and
1
RBj
j jj 1TKexp)(Naa−
+
−
ω=ω=/G21(35)
N(ωj) is the photon number operator. Since the freedom degrees of the bath are infinite, we
can make the substitution γ ωωj
jdJ2... ()... →∫∑ , where J(ω) is a function which is
proportional to the bath spectral density. In order to perform the integration, which is present
in the expression of ~()Dts Eq. (33), further conditions must be imposed on the reservoir in
the purpose to prevent the energy, initially in the atomic system, from returning back from the
heat bath to the system in any finite time, i.e., (treat the coupling of the reduced system to the
reservoir as an irreversible process). At this stage, we make two approximations.
i) Equation (33) contains ~(')σst in the integral, and hence the behavior of the atomic system
depends on its past history from 0t't= to tt'=. The motion of the atomic system is
however, damped by the coupling to the reservoir and damping destroys the knowledge of the
past behavior of the system. Therefore the first assumption is that )t(~.
σdepends only on it’s
present value ~()σst (Markovian approximation) [1,2].ii) Let us consider an operator B of the bath and it’s time correlation function +−BB)'tt( .
Since the reservoir is assumed to be large and Markovian. Thus it is expected that
+−BB)'tt( will be nonzero for some time interval ttR−<'τ, where τR is the correlation
time of the reservoir. Interactions at times t and t’ become progressively less correlated for
ttR −>>'τ. The correlation function +−BB)'tt( is only maximum at 'tt=. We can
therefore tend the superior born of integration in Eq. (33) to the infinite (t→∞).
With these two approximations and by using the following expression for the initial
time (t0→−∞),
( ) ( )( ) dti kt k 'exp (')' (')''ωε πδωεαβ αβ − = −′′−∞+∞∫2 (36)
The integro-differential equation reads
()()( ) {
() ( )( )} )37( .c.H)t(~FF)t('AF)t(~F)t('A)'k(N1)t(~FF)t('AF)'t(~F)t('A)'k(N)'k(J 2)t(D~
ss,''s, s,'' ss, ''ss,''s, s, ss, '''
k'
'k'''' s
+σ − σ ε++σ − σ ε ε π=
αββα βα βα+
βαβααβ+
αβ βα βα
βαβαβα∑∑
Where
( ) ( ) )'k(Z)k(Zt)k()k(iexp)t('A*
s,'' s, '' βα βα βα αβε−ε= . (38)
This last quantity is maximal for
π=′ε−εβ′α′ βα n2)k()k( (39)Where n is a positive or negative integer, for the case of 0n= only terms such as
()αβαβ ,,(',',') k k= must be kept in Eq. (37). The equation (33) takes the final form
[ ][ ] ( ) {
( )[ ][ ] ( )}~() ()(())~(), ,~()
(())~(), ,~(), , , ,'
, , , ,Dt kNkFtFF tF
NkFtFF tFs ss s ss s
k
ss s ss s= +
++ +∑Ωαβ αβ αβ βα αβ βα
αβ
αβ βα αβ βα αβε σ σ
ε σ σ 1(40)
with
() Ωαβ αβ αβ πε () ()(), kJkZks =22(41)
By projecting on the Floquet basis {}φα,()s0, the master equation for the diagonal and the
off- diagonal elements respectively )t(~
s,αασ and )t(~
s,βασ read
( ) ∑ ∑
′ γααγα γγαγ αα αα σ−σ +σ=σ
s'
s, s, 's,'s
s s, )t(~M)t(~M)t(~W)t(~/G06(42)
and
())t(~MM21)t(~W)t(~
s,
s'
's,'s
s s, βα
′ γγβ γα βα βα σ
+ −σ=σ∑ ∑/G06(43)
where the coefficients αβMare defined by
() ( ) { ()} M Nk kNkk
kαβ αβ αβ αβ βα ε ε = + + ∑21 ()() ()() Ω Ω (44)and their solutions are given by
[]~()exp()~(),,','
,'σ σαααβββ
βssss
st t = −∑ Λ1 0 (45)
and
[]~()exp()~(),
,,',' σ σαβ
γαγγβ s
sss s t t = −
′∑ Λ2 0 (46)
where
Λ1αβ αβ βααβ αη
ηδ δ δ,''
ss ss
ss W M M =− −−
∑ ′ (47)
and
( ) Λ21
2αγ αγ αγ
ηαη βη δδδ,''
''
ss ss
ss W MM =− + +
∑ (48)
The theoretical expressions for populations and coherence of quasienergie states respectively
Eq. (45) and Eq. (46) have to be transformed back into the atomic basis which yields σnn and
σnn’. In Schrödinguer picture we then obtain
[ ]∑
′′+σ+σ −=σ
ss s's
s s 0 s )t(D)t(W)t(),t(Hi)t(/G21/G06 (49)
with
DtUDUs s ()~=+
0 0 (50)
( ) { [ ][ ] ( )
[ ][ ] ( )} )51( )t(R),t()t(R)t(R)t(),t(R))k((N)t(R,)t()t(R)t(R)t(),t(R))k((N1)k( )t(D
s, s s, s, s s,s, s s, s, s s,'
ks
+
βα βα+
βα βα βαβα+
βα βα+
βα βα
βαβα
σ + σ ε+σ + σ ε+ Ω=∑where
()( ) RtUtFUt i ttts s s s αβ αβ αβ α β εεφφ, , , , ()() ()exp ()() = =−−+
0 0 (52)
The main difficulty of typical problems lies in the correct averaging of the matrix density
over all realizations of noise. In fact, what is physically wanted is σnn', that is, the
solution to the master equation in the atomic states and averaged over the ensemble of
jumps of the implicit telegraph x (t). To obtain σnn' one proceeds indirectly, by defining
a marginal average σnnst',(), given by the equation
σ σnn
sgs'()=∑ nn',s (53)
where g(s) is the initial probability distribution of the random process and σnnst',() the
average value of σnnt'() under the condition that x (t) is fixed at the value s at time t.
By projecting on the atomic basis {}n, the master equation in the Schrödinguer picture then
finally reads
∑ ∑∑ ∑
σ +σ
−+σ
+ +σ=σ
′
'n'ms,'n'ms,n'n'mm
'ms,'mms,'mm0 s,'mms 'ms,'mm s,n'm0 s,n'm 's,nm's
s s,nm
)t()t(2D)t( )t(Hi)t(1D)t()t()t(Hi)t(1D)t(W)t(
/G21/G21/G06
(54)
with the two terms responsible of the dissipation are defined by( ) {
}Dt kNk tt
Nk tmns ms ns
k
ms ns1 1, , ,'
, ,() ()(()()()
(())()=− + ++
+∑Ωαβ αβ α α
αβ
αβ β βεφφ
εφφ(55)
and
( ) {
}D t kNk tttt
Nk ttttmmnns
kmsmsnsns
msmsnsns2 2 1′′ ′+
′+
′+
′+= + + ∑ ,'
, , , ,
, , , ,() ()(())()()()()
(())()()()()Ωαβ αβ
αββ α α β
αβ α β β αεφφφφ
εφφφφ(56)
where )t(s,nαφare the Floquet states, which are projected on the atomic basis {}n.
It is important to note that the general master equation (54) contains dissipative terms
Eq. (55) and Eq. (56) that explicitly depend on time. This is the main difference to the usual
optical Bloch equations. The physical interpretation to this fact is the strong distortion of the
atomic dipole moment, which is induced by the external laser field. Since the atom couples to
the environment via its dipole moment, the laser field also strongly influences the dissipation
process [2].III- Results and discussion.
In this section we gather typical numerical results for the excitation and ionization of
two-level atoms by strong laser fields in the presence of noise and dissipation mechanisms.
To illustrate the effects of dissipation and laser noise on the atomic response, we present the
evolution of atomic populations )t(nnσ, which are obtained by numerical integration of the
master equation (54). Our theoretical formalism is valid for the general case of multilevel
systems but in order to keep the discussion simple; we will restrict our application to the
two-level atoms for which a detailed study of the dissipative non-linear dynamics will be
presented. A particular attention will be paid to the case of strong laser field, where the dipole
operator is taken between the Floquet eigenstates {})t(s,αφ rather than between
unperturbed atomic states {}n.
Having established the effects of strong laser noise on the atomic response and
explored some features of different sources of noise (phase, amplitude and frequency). We
concentrate our attention in this paper to the examination of quantum dissipation induced by
coupling to the reservoir and when the noise is added to the laser field. We choose the inverse
Rabi frequency Ω as time unit in the aim to analyze the obtained results in term of the noise
magnitude. We are interested by a large light intensity such that the Rabi frequency is set to
be equal to the atomic unit (Ω = 1 a.u.), This certainly is a very strong intensity. III. 1 Dissipative nonlinear quantum dynamics in the excitation of two-level systems.
We begin by representing only the effects of quantum dissipation on the atomic
response. Figures 1(a) and 1(b) show time evolution of populations of a two-level atomic
system driven by strong coherent laser field sufficiently intense to remove a significant
fraction of the population from the atomic ground state. One might think that the only
consequence of a field this intense would be to lower the overall of the atom. The optical field
is nearly resonant with allowed transition between discrete states of two-level atom. In
absence of spontaneous emission decay and ionization effects, Figure 1(a) represents the
atomic response without dissipation, the atomic system oscillates between the ground state 1
and some other discrete level 2 and we have the ordinary Rabi oscillations. In Figure 1(b)
the dissipation effect introduces a damping of Rabi oscillations. If damping effects are
present, we expect that the Rabi oscillations will eventually become damped out and that the
population’s difference will approach some steady-state value for large scale of time. Hence,
Rabi oscillations are not present in the steady state.
It’s interesting to note the presence of an irregular behavior on the oscillations of the
two populations for a strong laser field; in fact we observe small oscillations which come to
superpose to the Rabi oscillations, their amplitude is weak and disappears when the electric
field strength F0 becomes small with respect to the atomic unit of field strength. These little
oscillations represent the fast no-rotating variable phases () ( )t iexp'nnω+ω± in laser-atom
interaction, which is treated in a non-perturbative way (Floquet theory).
Figure 2, shows some typical results, in fact we take into account of both laser phase
noise and dissipation influences. Taking a phase jump a = 0.4π and three switching rates
(ΩT = 0.1, 1 and 10). We display the time evolution populations on two column, in thecolumn (A), only the effect of laser noise is considered, we remark in this case that for a
switching rate (ΩT = 1), i.e., the noise frequency (1/T) is of the same size order that the Rabi
frequency Ω, a destruction of the atomic coherence is observed. The damping rate is strong
and the relaxation to the steady state is rapid. The Rabi oscillations are restored when we
consider the case of slow fluctuations (ΩT = 10) and fast fluctuations (ΩT =0.1) and the
damping rate is weak. The column (B) represents the same situation but by introducing
moreover of the laser noise the dissipative terms (see Eqs (55) and (56)). A similar behavior is
remarked as the column (A), but with damping rate more intense. For a switching rate
(ΩT = 0.1), a partial destruction of the atomic coherence is induced by the dissipation effects.
The kinetic of populations relaxation is more rapid that in the column (A). We remark that
one of the effects of the quantum dissipation is the breaking of the atomic coherence
especially for the case of (ΩT = 0.1) and the establishment of the dynamical localization
regime for the case of (ΩT = 1). In Figure 3, we plot the time evolution of two-level atom
populations in two situations, in first time, by neglecting the effect of quantum dissipation
(column (A)) and considering only an amplitude telegraph noise and in second time we
combine the two influences of noise and quantum dissipation. Taking an amplitude jump
a = 0.1 a.u. and three different switching rates (ΩT = 0.1, 1 and 100). The column (A) shows
pronounced quasi-oscillations, we remark a very weak damping at (ΩT = 1 and ΩT=100) and
rapid relaxation for (ΩT = 0.1) with respect to the both cases of (ΩT = 1 and 100). In order to
lead the system to the steady state we must use a large number of Rabi periods rather than in
the case of phase fluctuations. The column (B) shows closely similar behavior that in column
(A). The complicated structure of these curves is a consequence of the action of amplitude
laser noisy on the reduced system dynamics. In fact, one observes a separation between the
two occupation probabilities, every population )t(11σ and )t(22σ performs independentlyirregular oscillations, which converge to stationary state. In constraints to the case of phase,
the addition of dissipation in Figure 3 (column (B)) introduces a weakness of the damping.
Figure 4 illustrates the case of frequency fluctuations, this kind of noise is introduced
by collisional effects, indeed the transition frequency ω21 can also fluctuate around its fixed
value. The simplest model of such interruption collisions [9,11] assumes that the atomic
transition frequency ω21 should be replaced by ω21 (t) = ω21 + x(t). By taking a jump
parameter
a = 0.1 a.u. and three different frequency switching rates (ΩT = 1, 10 and 100). We remark in
the column (A) damped quasiperiodic oscillations. The case of (ΩT = 10) corresponds to
strong damping without any convergence to a steady state. While the relaxation to an
equilibrium state of value 1/2 is clear for a switching rate (ΩT = 1). The damping becomes
weak for (ΩT = 100) and two independent beats phenomena are observed. The complicated
time evolution of populations is a result of Rabi oscillation interference. In the column (B)
where we take into account of quantum dissipation, the two populations relax to equilibrium
state. The thermal noise induced by coupling to the bath introduces a complete destruction of
the atomic coherence. The kinetic of relaxation and rate damping decrease from the case of
fast fluctuations (ΩT = 0.1) to the slow fluctuations (ΩT = 100).
In Figures 2 and 4, the comparison between the two columns (A) and (B) shows that
the dissipation which behaves as a noise (thermal noise) leads the system to an equilibrium
state with rapid kinetic of relaxation. The damping rates become large when we introduce the
dissipation terms (column B). In other hand, we clearly see the destruction of atomic
coherence, which increases, when we take into account of dissipation . The dynamical
localization regime appears for phase and frequency noises. However Figure 3 shows
important asymmetries. This behavior is justified by the fact that in the case of amplitudefluctuations, the jump parameter a, assigned to stochastic process, appear in term of laser
intensity F0 (1 ± a ), while in the case of phase noisy , the dependence occurs in term of
()aiexp±.
III. 2 Dissipative nonlinear quantum dynamics in the ionization of two-level systems.
Having established a formal framework for the excitation of atoms by laser noisy in
presence of the reservoir action and explored some of its general predictions. We turn now to
the examination of ionization effects on the populations and the illustration of the
modifications generated by the different kinds of noise and quantum dissipation on the
ionization rates. In order to analyze the ionization effects we adopt the extended two-level
system model proposed by Yeh and Eberly [14,32]. The computation of ionization probability
is made by the incorporation of responsible term of ionization [s,mnECστ− , with
()()mn nc mc mnmc EC 1RR2/1 R δ−+ +δ=τ and ncR is the relaxation rate from the excited state
|n〉 to the continuum |c〉] in the motion equation (54). The trace of σover a complete set
atomic states leads to the expression ∑
=σ−=2
1nnn ion1)t(P for the total ionization probability of
the system [4,13,33].
We begin by showing successively the effects of laser noise and reservoir dissipation
on the ionization probability. As illustrated in Figure 5, we have plotted total ionization as a
function of Rabi periods. Taking an intense electric laser field such as (Ω = 1 a.u.) and a
resonant laser frequency. The four curves of Figure 5 correspond respectively to the situations
where: noise and dissipation are neglected, only the noise is considered, only dissipation
effect is retained and both noise and dissipation exist. In Figure 5(a) we have considered aphase noise of a = 0.4π, the results depend on the fluctuations time scale (1/T) compared to
the other characteristic time scales of the problem such the Rabi frequency Ω. The minimum
variations of the ionization probability are obtained, where we neglect both noise and
dissipation. When we take into account of dissipation, the ionization probability increases.
For large number of Rabi period, we remark that the phase fluctuations effect is more
important that the reservoir action, in fact, the ionization probability rapidly increases when
we introduce phase fluctuations corresponding to the case of (ΩT = 0.1). In presence of
dissipation terms, the ionization probability variations remain closely constant. We conclude
that noise and dissipation rapidly leads the atom to the ionization states. Figure 5(b) shows the
case of amplitude noise, where the jump parameter is taken a = 0.1 a.u. and a switching rate
(ΩT = 1). A close behavior is observed as Figure 5(a) but the amplitude noise effect is very
weak. The technique that we have used will be applied subsequently to frequency noise.
A plot that gives a pictorial sense of how ionization proceeds in time is given in
Figure 6. The total probability of ionization Pion(t) as a function of the Rabi period is plotted
together with the occupation probabilities of bound states. The oscillations in these curves
reflect the Rabi oscillations of the atom between the resonantly coupled states 1 and 2.
These oscillations are damped by ionization in a few Ωt’s. This behavior is well known from
the study of bound states coupled by an intense field. The column (A) of Figure 6 shows the
response of two–level in presence of phase noise and (B column) by considering moreover the
effect of dissipation. The same parameters are taken as Figure 2. The populations, which have
not been lost through direct ionization to the atomic continuum, oscillate in the same manner
that in absence of ionization effect, but there is a progressive decay to a zero probability. The
ionization probability can be viewed as dominant in a few Rabi periods and increases rapidlyin time when the quantum dissipative effects are considered. Figure 7 displays the same
behavior that Figure 6 but for an amplitude noise.
CONCLUSION
In this paper we have investigated at length the non-linear dynamics of dissipative
quantum atomic systems subjected to the action of heat bath and periodically driven by strong
laser field which is affected by classical noise. We have derived and solved a master equation
for atoms in strong noisy laser fields and in presence of reservoir dissipative effects. Such
equation based on the Floquet states rather than the unperturbed atomic states has given
typical and interesting results concerning the atomic dynamics. In fact, we have demonstrated
how the master equation formalism, the Floquet theory, the pre-Gaussian models of laser
noise and the Markovian coupling of quantum system to an environment can be combined
together in order to tackle a general theoretical formalism and a powerful tool for the detailed
analysis of the interaction of an atomic system with intense incoherent laser field and with a
large reservoir.
We have shown that the dissipation terms, which are time dependent respect to those
in the Bloch equations, force the system to settle to some ‘‘ preferred states ’’ it is the
dynamical localization regime observed in the cases of phase and frequency noises, as we
have explored in this paper. Moreover under the action of these decay mechanisms, the
atomic system exhibits different regimes such as the destruction of coherence, the relaxation
to equilibrium state. In general, the strength of damping and the kinetic of relaxation increase
with the addition of dissipation effects but the case of amplitude fluctuations show a different
behavior. We have also analyzed the modifications induced by ionization effects.Acknowledgments
It is a pleasure to thank the Professors A. Buchleitner, R. Graham and Heinz-Peter
Breuer for sending us their interesting reprints concerning this subject. We also wish to thank
Professors A. Maquet and C. J. Joachain for very helpful suggestions and communication.References
[1] Blümel R, Buchleitner A, Graham R, Sirko I, Smilansky and Walther H 1991 Phys. Rev.
A 44 4521.
[2] Breuer Heinz-Peter and Petruccione Francesco 1997 Phys. Rev. A 55 3101.
[3] Graham R and Hübner R 994 ANNALS Of Physics 234 300.
[4] Buchleitner A, Delande D and Gay J C 1995 J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 12 505.
[5] Cohen–Tannoudji C, Dupont–Roc J, Grtyynberg G 1988 ‘‘ Processus d’interaction entre
photons et atomes ’’( Paris InterEditions et Editions du CNRS ).
[6] Mollow B R, 1975 Phys. Rev. A 12 1919.
[7] Eberly J H K, Wodkiewicz K and Shore B.W 1984 Phys. Rev. A 30 2381.
[8] Wodkiewicz K, Shore B W and Eberly J H 1984 J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 1 398.
[9] Wodkiewicz K, Shore B W and Eberly J H 1984 Phys. Rev. A 30 2390.
[10] Francken P and Joachain C J 1987 Phys. Rev. A 36 1663.
[11] Wodkiewicz K 1979 Phys. Rev. A 19 1686.
[12] Agarwal G S 1978 Phys. Rev. A 18 1490.
[13] Lambropoulos P and Zoller P1981 Phys. Rev. A 24 379.
[14] Yeh J J and Eberly J H 1981 Phys. Rev. A 24 888.
[15] Allen L and Eberly J H 1975 ‘‘Optical Resonance and Two-Level Atoms’’
(New York: Wiley) p 28, 41,47–50 and 171.
[16] Burshtein A I 1966 Sov. Phys.–JETP 22 939.
[17] Burshtein A I 1965 Sov. Phys.–JETP 21 567.
[18] Zusman L D and Burshtein A I 1972 Sov. Phys.–JETP 34 520.
[19] Gallagher T F and Cooke W E 1979 Phys. Rev. Lett. 42 835.
[20] Arnett K, Smith S J, Ryan R E, Bergeman T, Metcalf H, Hamilton M Wand Brandenberger J R 1990 Phys. Rev. A 41 2580.
[21] Agrawal G P 1988 Phys. Rev. A 37 2488.
[22] Caldeira A O and Leggett A J 1983 Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 140 374.
[23] Bayfield J E and Sokol D W 1988 Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 2007.
[24] Graham R and Miyazaki S 1996 Phys. Rev. A 53 2683.
[25] Shirley J H 1965 Phys .Rev.B 138 979.
[26] Chu Shih-I 1985 Adv At. Mol. Phys. 21 197-253.
[27] Potvielge R M, Shakeshaft R 1992 Adv. At. Mol. Opt. Phys. Supplement 1 [Atoms
in Intense Laser Fields Ed M. Gavrila ( New York: Academic)] 373.
[28] Dörr M, Joachain C J, Potvielge R M and Vucic S 1994 Phys. Rev. A 49 4852.
[29] Faisal F H M 1987 ‘‘ Theory of Multiphoton Processes ’’(New York: Plenum
Press).
[30] Van Kampen N G 1981 ‘‘ Stochastic processes in physics and chemistry ’’ (Amsterdam:
North Holland).
[31] Brissaud A and Frisch U 1974 J. Math. Phys 15 524.
[32] Yeh J J and Eberly J H ‘Proceedings of Second International, Conference on
Multiphoton Processes’, edited by Janossy M and Varro S (Hungarian Academy of
Science, Budapest, 1981), p. 305.
[33] Hornberger K and Buchleitner A 1998 In Press in Europhys. Lett.Figure captions
Figure 1. Populations σnn versus time (in units of inverse Rabi frequency Ω) for
two–level atoms, resonantly excited by an intense electric laser field, such that the Rabi
frequency is set Ω = 1 a.u. The emission spontaneous coefficient is γ21 = Ω/105 a.u.
(a) Both effects of noise and dissipation are neglected (coherent laser and no coupling
to the reservoir).
(b) In absence of noise and the dissipation is considered.
Figure 2. Populations σnn versus time (in units of inverse Rabi frequency Ω) for
two–level atom resonantly excited by random telegraph phase noise, successive frames are for
different values of phase switching rates ΩT = 0.1, 1 and 10. We use strong laser field, such
that the Rabi frequency is set Ω = 1 a.u. The phase jump parameter is a = 0.4π, the emission
spontaneous coefficient is γ21 = Ω/105 au.
- The column (A) represents the effects of phase noise.
- The column (B) represents the same situation as column (A) but by adding the dissipative
effects.
Figure 3. Same as Figure 2., but for an amplitude noise with the jump parameter is
a = 0.1 a.u. and three switching rates ΩT = 0.1, 1 and 100.
Figure 4. Same as Figure 3., but for a frequency noise.Figure 5. Ionisation probability )t(Pion versus time (in units of inverse Rabi frequency
Ω). Same parameters as the previous figures are used. The The relaxation rate from bound
states to the continuum is 100/Rc2Ω=.
(a) Dotted line: )t(Pion in absense of noise and dissipation. Dashed line: only the effect of
phase noise for ΩT = 0.1. Dashed-Dotted line: only the effect of dissipation is considered and
Solid line: both effects of noise and dissipation are considered.
(b) Same as (a), but for an amplitude noise with ΩT = 1.
Figure 6. The columns A and B are, respectively, same as Figure 2(A) and
Figure 2(B), but take into account of the ionisation process represented by the probability
Pion(t). The relaxation rate from bound states to the continuum is 100/Rc2Ω=.
Figure 7. The columns A and B are, respectively, same as Figure 3(A) and
Figure 3(B), but take into account of the ionisation process represented by the probability
Pion(t). The relaxation rate from bound states to the continuum is 100/Rc2Ω=.0 100 Ω 01Ionization Probability
0 100 Ω01Ionization Probabilityt
tΩT= 0.1
ΩT = 1no noise.with noise.dissipation only.noise and dissipation.
(a)
(b)0 20
Ω 0.01.00 200.01.00 200.01.0
0 200.01.0Populations and P
0 20
Ω 0.01.0Populations and P0 200.01.0Populations and PΩT = 10
tΩ
Ω(A) (B)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩ
ΩT = 0.1T = 1T = 10
ΩT = 1
T = 0.1Pionion ion ion0 100
Ω 0.01.00 200.01.00 200.01.0
0 200.01.0Populations and P
0 100
Ω 0.01.0Populations and P0 200.01.0Populations and PΩT = 100
tΩ
Ω(A) (B)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩ
ΩT = 0.1T = 1T = 100
ΩT = 1
T = 0.1Pionion ion ion0 100
Ω 0.01.00 200.01.00 200.01.0
0 200.01.0Populations
0 100
Ω 0.01.0Populations0 200.01.0PopulationsΩT = 100
tΩ
Ω(A) (B)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩ
ΩT = 0.1T = 1T = 100
ΩT = 1
T = 0.10 50 100
Ω 0.01.00 1000.01.00 1000.01.0
0 1000.01.0Populations
0 50 100
Ω 0.01.0Populations0 1000.01.0PopulationsΩT = 100
tΩ
Ω(A) (B)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩ
ΩT = 1T = 10T = 100
ΩT = 10
T = 10 20
Ω 0.01.00 200.01.00 200.01.0
0 200.01.0Populations
0 20
Ω 0.01.0Populations0 200.01.0PopulationsΩT = 10
tΩ
Ω(A) (B)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩ
ΩT = 0.1T = 1T = 10
ΩT = 1
T = 0.10 14 Ω 01Populations
0 14 Ω01Populationst
tρ
ρ11
22(a)
(b)0 100 Ω 01Ionization Probability
0 100 Ω01Ionization Probabilityt
tΩT= 0.1
ΩT = 1without noise.with noise.dissipation only.noise and dissipation.
(a)
(b) |
1THE KINETIC OF THE ATOMIC RELAXATION INDUCED BY
LASER NOISE
O. El Akramine♣ and A. Makhoute♣*
♣ UFR Physique Atomique, Moléculaire & Optique Appliquée
Université Moulay Ismail, Faculté des Sciences,
B.P. 4010 Beni M’hamed, Meknès, Morocco.
* Physique Atomique Théorique, Faculté des Sciences,
Université Libre de Bruxelles,
CP 227, Brussels, Belgium.
Short title: Atomic Relaxation Induced by Laser Noise
PACS number(s): 32.80K, 34.80
Submitted to: J. Phys. B
Date: May, 19 19982Abstract
We present a theoretical study of strong laser-atom interactions, when the laser field
parameters are subjected to random processes. The atom is modelled by a two–level and
three–level systems, while the statistical fluctuations of the laser field are described by a
pre-Gaussian model. The interaction of the laser–target is treated nonperturbatively by
using the calculation method based on the hermitian Floquet theory. Our aim consists in
studying the kinetic of atomic relaxation induced by a laser noise. In the resonant case
and electric field strengths small with respect to the atomic unit electric strength, the
present nonperturbative results are in agreement with those obtained within the rotating
wave approximation of Eberly et al. and Wodkiewicz et al., for an atom modelled by a
two–level system. We discuss some examples which demonstrate the destruction of
atomic coherence by the noise, the regime of relaxation to equilibrium state and the
optical analogue of motional narrowing. We also give new results for two–level and
three–level systems, and for a strong laser field at exact resonance, in the case of phase,
amplitude noises. The case of fluctuation due to collisions is also discussed. Our
numerical results indicate that ionisation effects, in the presence of laser noise, can lead
to important modifications of the populations for strong laser–atom interactions. The
changes generated onto the ionisation rates by the noise are also investigated.31. Introduction
It is actually recognised that nearly all types of laser–atom interactions can be
strongly affected by laser noise. In fact, real atoms experience a fluctuating environment
of many perturbing interactions and ideal lasers exist only in theoretical models, while
the used laser sources are subjected to many types of fluctuations notably in phase,
amplitude and frequency. Stochastic variations of the Hamiltonian can be due not only
to the field but also to the jump–type transitions of the atom from one energy state to
another, jumps which are characteristic of condensed phases and which modulate its
interaction with the medium [1]. Therefore, we cannot realise, without taking into
account the statistical properties of the laser radiation, an exact comparison between
theoretical predictions and experimental results. Incorporation of such stochastic
properties into the Liouville equation by fully microscopic treatment (relaxation times
and bandwidths) [2] give modest results, so we use a theoretical models based on the
Markov pre–Gaussian processes [2–5]. These processes, composed of N–independent
two–state jump processes (random telegraphs), form a non–Gaussian stochastic models,
also called Markov chains. Such a Markov chain offers a detailed discussion of the
atomic response. Our choice of the Markov chain is based on the simplicity of this
model and the remarkable property of convergence to a Gaussian stochastic process
when N → +∞. We derive the proper master equation for the density operator driven by
a noise described by two–state stochastic telegraph process. This fundamental equation
first introduced in quantum optic by Burshtein [2–4], contains all information
concerning both the atomic transitions dynamic and the stochastic evolution of laser
field fluctuations.
Several works have reported on the action of random process on a two–level system
[1-4,6,7], particularly the evolution populations. In the present article we want to
investigate the atomic response to a noise laser, i.e., to describe the relaxation of the
atomic level populations ρnn. It should be noted that the kinetic of the phase relaxation
contains information on the width and shape of the spectral lines [1]. We also extend
our study to a three–level system and we provide the ionisation influence for strong4laser–atom interactions, when the laser field parameters are subjected to random
process.
We are concerned here with an important theme of contemporary research, namely
the interplay between quantum coherence and external noise. The destruction of
quantum coherence by noise is central to many fields of physics and is reflected in the
large number of papers recently published on this subject [8-12].
In this paper we are interested by a strong laser field whose frequency is resonant;
time dependent perturbation theory and rotating wave approximation (RWA) [13] are
therefore not adequate to resolve the interaction process. Indeed, the perturbation
method is justified when the electric field strength F0 remains much smaller than the
atomic unit of field strength, namely F0 << 5.109 V cm-1 and when the laser photon
energy is not tuned close to an atomic transition energy. The second limitation is
resolved by the RWA, however there is the Bloch–Sierget shift [13] which deteriorates
the efficiency of this approximation, especially when the laser intensity increases. We
explore the limits of validity of rotating wave approximation for multi-level system
and/or for strong laser field. We have therefore developed a nonperturbative treatment
of the laser–atom interactions, based on the Floquet theory [14-18]. This
nonperturbative method allows to transform the time dependent Liouville or
Schrödinger equation to a stationary problem of eigenvalues. This problem can be
solved without restrictions on the laser parameters, i.e., its solution requires at most a
finite matrix diagonalization. It is another advantage of Floquet method in the context of
laser–atom interactions.
The paper is structured as follows. In section 2, we present a detailed description of
the theoretical formalism, which is valid for the general case of multi-level atoms. By
considering the case of noise strong laser–atom interactions, for which detailed Floquet
calculations are feasible to obtain the density matrix elements, which are solutions of the
master equation. The account of Floquet theory given here is rather brief, since the
theory has been discussed at length in the recent literature (see e. g. refs. [14–18]).
Numerical results concerning the model of two–level and three–level systems are
presented and discussed in section 3, where the phase and amplitude noises are
described by random telegraph and Markov chain. The case of fluctuations due to5collisions is analysed. We also discuss the noise effect on the ionisation process. At the
end a summary of our results is given.62. General formalism
We consider a model of multi–level atom excited by a classical purely
monochromatic laser field described by an electric field linearly polarised,
F0 (t) = F0 cos(ωt + φ(t)). (1)
Here F0 is the electric field amplitude (possibly fluctuating in magnitude) and φ(t) is the
instantaneous phase of the laser ( fluctuating around the zero value ). The laser
parameters are affected by a stochastic process of jumps. We represent these
fluctuations by a Markovian Pre–Gaussian models. Thereafter, we denote the random
telegraph and the Markov chain respectively [3]; by the processes [ x(t) = ±a ] and
[ X(t) = {– Na, –(N-2)a, ..., (N-2)a, and Na}], with a is the amount of the jump assigned
to the stochastic signal and N the number of random telegraph signals [3].
In order to incorporate a laser phase or amplitude noise in equations, treating the
laser–atom interactions, we have therefore describe the system states considered in
terms of the density matrix elements. The time dependent behaviour of the density
operator ρ is given by the Liouville equation [18]
[][] iii /G21/G21/G21 t =H(s), ∂
∂ρρ− ++2Γ Λ ,ρ , (2)
where Γ and Λ are two diagonal matrix corresponding to the spontaneous emission
process and defined by [18]
Γnnnnnn=∑
<γ''andΛnnnnnnnnt =∑
>γρ
''''(), (3)
where γnn’ is the radiative decay rate. H(s) is the non–relativistic periodical Hamiltonian
in the presence of the laser noisy and s labels any possible state of the random process.
In the case of the laser amplitude fluctuations, H(s) may be written as7H(s) = H0 + e F0(1 + x (t) ).R cos (ωt + φ(t)) ( 4)
and, in the case of the laser phase fluctuations, it takes the following form
H(s) = H0 + e F0.R cos (ωt + φ(t) + x(t) ), (5)
where H0 is the nonperturbative Hamiltonian, ω the frequency of laser field, e is the
electric charge and R the dipole operator.
In the stationary eigenstates {|n〉} of the unperturbed system Hamiltonian, the
equation (2) could be written in the following system of coupled differential equations
for the time dependent matrix elements density ρnn’ (t) as
ρ ρ ρ ρ ρρ ω
δ.
' ' ' ''
'() ()( )nn nnnn kn nk nkknnkknk
nnnnii
s si=− − − −
+
+∑ ' M
/G21/G21
nk kn'M
2Γ Γ
Λ, (6)
where ωnnnnEE
''=−
/G21 is the Bohr frequency associated with the n → n’ transition,
Mnk(s) the dipole coupling matrix elements in presence of fluctuations, corresponding to
stochastic state s of the random process and δnn’ is the Kronecker symbol.
Since the process that we are considering here is Markovian, the conditioned
probability density function associated with it, namely () pstst,,00, is shown to satisfy
the following Chapman–Kolmogorov equation [2–4,19,20 ]
∂
∂tpssN
TpssN
TNs
NpssNs
Npss (,t,t)(,t,t) (,t,t)(,t,t)0 00 00 002222 =− ++− +−+
, ( 7)
here s0 is the initial state of Markov chain at the time t0.
In the simple case of random telegraph signal, the above equation reduces to
∂
∂tpststTpststTpstst (,,)(,,)(,,)0 00 00 01 1=− +− . (8)
In the compact form , the equation (8) write as8ds
dtssPWP=' s', (9)
with [] Wss
T'=−−1
1111 is the relaxation matrix composed by the frequencies of telegraph
jumps process, where s and s’ are two different states of random telegraph
(s and s’ = 1,2), corresponding to the telegraph signal amplitude (±a). T denote the dwell
time (i.e., the mean time between interruptions) for the telegraph.
The main difficulty of typical problems lies in the correct averaging of the matrix
density over all realisations of noise. In fact, what is wanted is ρnn', that is, the
solution to the equation (6) averaged over the ensemble of jumps of the implicit
telegraph x(t). To obtain ρnn' one proceeds indirectly, defining a marginal average
ρnn’,s (t), by the equation
ρ ρnn
sgs'()=∑ nn',s, (10)
where g(s) is the initial probability distribution of the random process and ρnn’,s (t) the
average value of ρnn’(t) under the condition that x(t) is fixed at the value s at time t.
Combining the Chapman–Kolmogorov equation (9) for the probability density function
and the dynamic equation (6) for the statistical operator ρ(t), a master equation can be
derived for the so–called marginal averages ρnn’,s (t) [2,3]. It reads
∂
∂ρ
ρ ρ ρρ
ωρδ ρnns
knsnknkskn nkknsnksknk
nnsnnnnsssnnsiMsMsi
W',
', ,' ',,'
',','','() ()( )t
i =
nn'− − −
−+
+ +∑/G21/G21
2Γ Γ
Λ (11)
with
Λnnsnn nnnnst,' ''',() =∑
>γρ . (12)
The equation (11) exhibits a system of differential equations with periodical
coefficients. This system constitutes a fundamental equation for any statistical study of
the interaction processes in the presence of fluctuations. By using the usual Floquet
technique [14–18], we can seek the solution of the form9ρε ω
nnsi i t
n ns te e C
M',/
', ()=− −
=−∞+∞∑ t M M /G21. (13)
The Floquet coefficients CnnsM
', and the pseudo–energies ε can be found by solving
numerically the eigenvalues problem
[ ]
[ ]1
21 1 1
/G21
/G21C sCMsC sC s
iCC M Ci C
iWssknsnk knsnkknks nks
nkknsnksknknn' nnsnn nnnnn
nn' nn's', ', , ,
', ,' ', ''',
, ,() () () ()
( ) '
'M+1 M-1 M+1 M-1
M M M M
M M M M M
C= Ckn' kn'-1
n's
s'++ ∑ − −
− + ∑ +− +∑
+− +
>Γ Γω ω γδ
ε (14)
where the dipole coupling matrix elements Mnks−1() and Mnks+1() are defined by
Msnk() = Menksit −−1()ω + Menksit ++1()ω (15)
In matrix representation, the system of equations (14) could be written in the following
compact form, as
G ψ = ε ψ (16)
where G is the infinite tridiagonal block Floquet matrix, ε and ψ the eigenvalues and the
eigenvectors of G. In numerical calculations, the series expansion in function of M
(expression (13)) is truncated to a finite Mmax number of terms which permits the
convergence of eigenvalues and eigenvectors of G. In the absence of noise, the density
operator satisfies a 9×9 matrix differential equation with constant coefficients ( case of
three–level system ). The master equation allows stochastic telegraph type noise to be
added at the sole expense to enlarge the matrix dimensionality from 9×9 to 9ns×9ns; ns
represents here the two states of random telegraph signal. When we consider the Floquet
solution based on the development of Fourier, we enlarged also the matrix
dimensionality from 9ns×9ns to 9ns(2Mmax+1)×9ns(2Mmax+1), with (2Mmax+1) is the
number of Floquet matrix blocs. We remark that dimensionality of G becomes very
large10[dim G = n2×ns×(2Mmax+1), with n is the number of atomic states] and depends of Mmax
This latter is the truncated number of Fourier development permitting the convergence
of eigenvalues and eigenvectors of Floquet matrix. It is important to remark the
following fact, the Floquet pseudo–energies εj are only defined modulo the photon
energy, so the Floquet quasienergy are not unique. We extract the pseudo–energies εj,
which are physically independents, from the Floquet matrix eigenvalues.
The Floquet solution of the system (14) is a linear combination of all solutions
corresponding to different pseudo–energiesεj, and their eigenvectors CnnsMj
',,ε, we set
ρ αε ω ε
nns jit
jnn
iMt
MMM
nnsMt e eCjs
j
',/
',,()
maxmax
=−
=×
−
=−+
∑ ∑
12
(17)
where αj are the constants of linear combination, determined by the initial conditions
[ρ11(t= 0) = 1 and ρ22(t = 0) = ρ33(t = 0) = 0]. On averaging over all realisations of the
random signal, we obtain the final expression of matrix density elements ρnn’(t) as
ρ αε ω ε
nn
sjit
jnn
iMt
MMM
nnsMtgse eCjs
j
'/
',,()()
maxmax
=
=−
=×
−
=−+
∑∑ ∑
12
12
(18)
We remark that the Floquet method permits us to evaluate exactly atomic response
functions in finite terms, and we can then examine the influence of laser fluctuations on
these functions.113. Results and discussion
By describing external sources of noise by Pre–Gaussian Markov chains composed of
N–independent jump processes, we treated two different sources of pre–Gaussian noise
(phase and amplitude) by using a simple general master equation soluble in finite terms.
Our application is carried out in two cases. In first, the model of two–level atom on
resonance is considered and it results compared with those obtained by Eberly et al. and
Wodkiewicz et al. [2,3]. We also provide some results for atomic response, when RWA
approximation is not justified for strong laser fields. In second, the behaviour of three–
level atom response to laser noisy is investigated. We choose the inverse Rabi frequency
Ω as time unit, (where Ω = dnk.F0, with d nk is the dipole matrix element between levels
|n〉 and |k〉), in the aim to analyse the obtained results in terms of the noise strength .
In the absence of any noise source ( electric laser field is purely coherent) and if we
neglect the other relaxation rates ( spontaneous decay and ionisation rate), the behaviour
of the populations of two-level and three–level systems is illustrated in Figure 1., which
shows a superposition of several undamped oscillation modes ( Rabi oscillations). The
system remains indefinitely in this oscillatory state.
3. 1. Two–level atom in presence of random telegraph laser noise.
As already noted by several authors [2–4], the behaviour of a two–level atom to
pre–Gaussian noise in strong laser–atom interactions depends critically on a special
telegraph noise. The agreement between the two methods (the numerical calculation
within the framework of rotating wave approximation and the present nonperturbative
method of calculation based on the Floquet theory) is good at resonant excitation and
when the electric field strength F0 remains much smaller than the atomic unit of field
strength 5. 109 V/cm. This behaviour is illustrated in Figure 2.(A), where we show an
example of phase random telegraph influence on atomic level populations
corresponding to the phase jumps a = 0.4π, the electric field strength F0 = 106 V/cm for
the phase switching rates (ΩT = 0.1, 1 and 10). Figure 2.(B) displays the atomic level
populations resonantly excited by random telegraph phase noise, corresponding to the12phase jumps a = 0.4π, the electric field strength F0 = 5. 108 V/cm and from phase
fluctuations for three different rates switching. The regime of weak damping is observed
for (ΩT = 10). The atomic populations exhibit a motional narrowing regime for small
Rabi frequency compared to the frequency noise (ΩT = 0.1), in this case, the telegraph
jumps are too fast that the atomic system can feel only the mean value of fluctuations.
For (ΩT = 1), we note a partial destruction of the atomic coherence by the phase noise
and the kinetic of relaxation is rapid (strong damping). The two populations converge to
a steady-state of value 1/2, in indication that the phase jump relaxation is purely
‘‘transverse’’[2]. It is interesting to note the presence of an irregular behaviour on the
oscillations of the two populations for a strong laser field; in fact, we observe small
oscillations which come to superpose to the Rabi oscillations, their amplitude is weak
and disappears when the electric field strength F0 becomes small with respect to the
atomic unit of field strength. These little oscillations represent the fast variable phases
e± i (ω+ωnn’)t which are safely neglected by the authors [2–4], by using the rotating
wave approximation. Figure 3 shows an example of amplitude telegraph influence on
atomic level populations. Taking a = 0.1, three different amplitude switching rates (ΩT
= 0.1,1,100) and the electric field strength is F0 = 5. 108 V/cm. We remark a very weak
damping at (ΩT = 0.1,1) and a beats phenomena at (ΩT = 100). In order to lead the
system to the relaxation process, we must use a large number of Rabi periods than in the
case of phase fluctuations. The main difference observed between the random telegraph
phase and amplitude modulation arises from the choice of the laser stochastic
fluctuations.
As already mentioned in the introduction, under collision effects, the transition
frequency ω21 can also fluctuates around its fixed value ω21. The simplest model of
such interruption collisions [4,21] assumes that the atomic transition frequency ω21
should be replaced by ω21 (t) = ω21 + x(t). Figure 4 displays , the influence of such
collisional noise on the atomic response, where we take the electric field strength F0 = 5.
108 V/cm, the jump parameter a = 0.1 and three different frequency switching rates (ΩT
= 1, 10 and 100). We remark damped quasiperiodic oscillations. The case of (ΩT = 10)
corresponds to strong damping without any convergence to a steady state. While the
relaxation to a equilibrium state of value 1/2 is clear for a switching rate (ΩT = 1). The13damping becomes weak for (ΩT = 100) and two independent beats phenomena are
observed. The complicated time evolution of populations is a result of Rabi oscillations
interference.
3. 2. Two–level atom in presence of Markov chain laser noise.
We generalise the case of random telegraph to a Markov chain, which treats the
phase and amplitude fluctuations of strong laser field interacting resonantly with a two
level system. Figure 5. shows the atomic response for a Markov chain composed of
three and seven phase telegraphs, with the phase jump parameter is a = 0.4π, the electric
field strength is F0 = 108 V/cm and (ΩT = 1, 100, 1000 ). For (ΩT = 1), we remark that
the phase noise entirely eliminates the atomic coherence. The Rabi oscillations have
been completely destroyed and the relaxation process is rapid, while for the cases
(ΩT = 100 and ΩT=1000) the coherence effects are restored even though the field is
fluctuating. The damping strength decreases progressively for (ΩT = 100) and
(ΩT = 1000). Similar behaviour is also observed when we increase the number of phase
telegraphs (seven telegraphs), but the damping becomes more intense and we clearly
observe the convergence to a Gaussian limit.
Figure 6. shows the same situation, as Figure. 5, but for amplitude noise with the
jump parameter a = 0.1. New beats phenomena which appear at large switching rates
(ΩT = 100, 1000 ). We remark that the degree of Gaussian character and the kinetic of
convergence to a stationary state increase with the number N of random telegraphs. This
behaviour justifies the pre–Gaussian property of Markov chains.
3. 3. Three–level system in presence of random telegraph laser noise.
Multilevel systems show a variety of interesting optical effects with laser fields
[22-23]. It would be interesting to study how the incoherence sources affect the
population evolution of multilevel atoms. For the sake of numerical simplicity (the
Floquet matrix dimentionality largely increases from two-level to multi-level), we only
extend our application to a three-level atom driven by stochastic strong laser field at14resonance. Our model of three-level atom is a ladder system which contains three
discrete bound states and a continuum. It may be considered as a generalisation of the
so-called ‘‘extended two–level’’ model proposed by Yeh and Eberly [24], where they
have assumed that the bound–continuum dipole moments are weakly energy dependent
so that it is well justified to use the adiabatic following elimination of the continuum
degrees of freedom [24]. In absence of ionisation, no loss out of the system occurs, but
damping is supplied by spontaneous decay and laser noisy within the three-level system,
so that non zero populations are maintained in a steady-state for large times. Figure 7
clearly illustrates this behaviour in the case of one phase telegraph, with a = 0.4π, three
different phase switching rates (ΩT= 0.1, 1 and 10) and the electric field strength is
F0 = 5. 108 V/cm. The relaxation process is observed for (ΩT = 1) with strong damping.
The cases of (ΩT = 0.1) and (ΩT = 10) correspond to weak damping. The three
populations ρ11 (t), ρ22 (t) and ρ33 (t) converge to a stationary state of value 1/3.
Figure 8. shows the case of atomic response for amplitude noise with a = 0.1,
F0 = 5. 108 V/cm and (ΩT= 1, 10, 100 ). For (ΩT = 1) we have a weak damping and a
strong damping for (ΩT = 10), the populations ρ11 (t) and ρ33 (t) converge to a stationary
state of value 3/8, while ρ22 (t) converge to a stationary state of value 1/4 with rapid
damping than for ρ11 (t) and ρ33 (t). Quantum beats appear for (ΩT = 100) between ρ11
(t) and ρ33 (t), while ρ22 (t) shows beats independently. It is apparent that important
asymmetries between the atomic response in the case of phase and amplitude
fluctuations should be expected. This difference is justified by the fact that in the case of
amplitude fluctuations, the jump parameter a, assigned to stochastic process, appear in
term of laser intensity F0.(1 ± a ), while in the case of phase noisy , the dependence
occurs in term of (e± i a ).
3.4 Ionisation effects on field–atom interactions in presence of laser noise.
Since we have considered a strong laser field, we would have a large ionisation for
all atoms. In order to take into account of the noise laser effects on the atomic
populations and ionisation process, we will incorporate the responsible term of15ionisation [τ EC = - Rnc δnn’ -1/2 (Rnc + Rn’c) (1 - δnn’), where Rnc is the relaxation rate
from the excited state |n〉 to the continuum |c〉] in the motion equations (2), (6), (11) and
(14). Two ionisation probabilities are calculated respectively the instantaneous
probability Pt tI()()=−1η where η ρ()tnn
n=
=∑
13
, and the mean ionisation probability
PteImRtI()=−−1 where RI and we represent the effect of different laser noises on the
average ionisation probability PtIm(). Same behaviour can be observed for the
ionisation rate RI. Figure 9(a) displays the time evolution of the two-probabilities PI(t)
and PtIm()in absence of noise. Figure 9(b) illustrates the influence of one amplitude
telegraph on the average ionisation probability PtIm(). The same parameters as Figure 6
are used. The results depend on the fluctuations time scale compared to the other
characteristic time scales of the problem. The minimum ionisation rate is obtained for
(ΩT = 10). Figure 9(c) shows a weak effect of phase noise on the ionisation probability
and minimum ionisation rate is obtained for (ΩT = 1).
Figure 10. shows the response of two–level (A column) and three–level (B column)
systems in the case of laser phase noise described by a random telegraph. The same
parameters are taken as Figure 2.(B column) and Figure 7. The novelty in this figure is
the incorporation of ionisation process, which is represented by the instantaneous
ionisation probability PI(t). A loss of population has been induced by ionisation, indeed,
we remark that the populations oscillate in the same manner that in absence of
ionisation effect, but there is a progressive decay to the zero probability, while the
ionisation probability PI (t) increases in time. The same behaviour is observed in the
case of laser amplitude noise and for a Markov chain.164. Conclusion
In this paper, we have presented a general stochastic treatment to incoherence
properties induced by laser fluctuations (phase and amplitude) and by collision effects
(frequency). Our method is based on the nonperturbative Floquet theory with
pre-Gaussian processes and collisional approach modelling the different sources of
noise. A detailed discussion of the noise effects on the atomic response has been given
by resolving a master equation. We have examined the behaviour of three–level systems
at ‘high’ laser intensities where both the two-state approximation and the rotating wave
approximation fail. Our treatment has given good results. In fact, we have not only
reproduced the results of other authors [2,3] for two-level system, (when the ionisation
effects are neglected) but also, we have established new interesting results concerning
the little oscillations which appear on the populations ρnn. Our results show a
destruction of the atomic coherence by the noise and a relaxation regime to equilibrium
state. The damping rate or relaxation kinetic is related to the size order of fluctuations.
We have also investigated the effect of noise on the ionisation rates. On the basis of
these results, obtained for two–level and three–level systems, the Floquet approach is
then useful in the nonperturbative treatment of the interaction processes in presence of
external sources of noise, because any restriction on the laser parameters is imposed.
The nonperturbative method is very convenient for analysing the effects of laser noise
on multi–level and real atomic systems.17References
[1] Burshtein A I 1966 Sov. Phys.–JETP 22 939.
[2] Eberly J H K, Wodkiewicz K and Shore B.W 1984 Phys. Rev. A 30 2381.
[3] Wodkiewicz K, Shore B W and Eberly J H 1984 J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 1 398.
[4] Wodkiewicz K, Shore B W and Eberly J H 1984 Phys. Rev. A 30 2390.
[5] Francken P and Joachain C J 1987 Phys. Rev. A 36 1663.
[6] Burshtein A I 1965 Sov. Phys.–JETP 21 567.
[7] Zusman L D and Burshtein A I 1972 Sov. Phys.–JETP 34 520.
[8] Gallagher T F and Cooke W E 1979 Phys. Rev. Lett. 42 835.
[9] Arnett K, Smith S J, Ryan R E, Bergeman T, Metcalf H, Hamilton M W
and Brandenberger J R 1990 Phys. Rev. A 41 2580.
[10] Agrawal G P 1988 Phys. Rev. A 37 2488.
[11] Caldeira A O and Leggett A J 1983 Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 140 374.
[12] Bayfield J E and Sokol D W 1988 Phys. Rev. Lett. 61 2007.
[13] Allen L and Eberly J H 1975 ‘‘Optical Resonance and Two-Level Atoms’’
(New York: Wiley) p 28, 41,47–50 and 171.
[14] Chu Shih-I 1985 Adv At. Mol. Phys. 21 197-253.
[15] Shirley J H 1965 Phys .Rev.B 138 979.
[16] Potvielge R M, Shakeshaft R 1992 Adv. At. Mol. Opt. Phys. Supplement 1 [Atoms
in Intense Laser Fields Ed M. Gavrila ( New York: Academic)] 373.
[17] Dörr M, Joachain C J, Potvielge R M and Vucic S 1994 Phys. Rev. A 49 4852.
[18] Faisal F H M 1987 ‘‘ Theory of Multiphoton Processes ’’(New York: Plenum
Press).
[19] Van Kampen N G 1981 ‘‘ Stochastic processes in physics and chemistry ’’
(Amsterdam: North Holland).
[20] Brissaud A and Frisch U 1974 J. Math. Phys 15 524.
[21] Wodkiewicz K 1979 Phys. Rev. A 19 1686.
[22] Whitley R M and Stroud C R 1976 Phys. Rev. A 14 1498.
[23] Avan P and Cohen-Tannoudji C 1977 J. Phys. B 10 171.
[24] Yeh J J and Eberly J H 1981 Phys. Rev. A 24 888.18[25] Yeh J J and Eberly J H ‘Proceedings of Second International, Conference on
Multiphoton Processes’, edited by Janossy M and Varro S (Hungarian Academy of
Science, Budapest, 1981), p. 305.
Figure captions
Figure 1. Populations ρnn versus time (in units of inverse Rabi frequency Ω) for
two–level (a) and three–level (b) atoms, resonantly excited by purely coherent laser
(no fluctuations). The electric field strength is F0 = 5. 108 V/cm and the emission
spontaneous coefficients are γ21 = γ32 = 1.9 10-5
Figure 2. The columns A and B represent the populations ρnn versus time (in units of
inverse Rabi frequency Ω) for two–level atom resonantly excited by random telegraph
phase noise, successive frames are for different values of phase switching rates
ΩT = 0.1, 1 and 10. The phase jump parameter is a = 0.4π, the emission spontaneous
coefficients are γ21 = γ32 = 1.9 10-5 and the electric field strengths are F0 = 106 V/cm and
F0 = 5 108 V/cm, respectively, for the plots of the columns A and B.
Figure 3. Populations ρnn versus time (in units of inverse Rabi frequency Ω) for
two–level atom resonantly excited by random telegraph amplitude noise, successive
frames are for different values of amplitude switching rates ΩT = 0.1, 1 and 100. The
amplitude jump parameter is a = 0.1, the electric field strength is F0 = 5.108 V/cm and
the emission spontaneous coefficients are γ21 = γ32 = 1.9 10-5.
Figure 4. Populations ρnn versus time (in units of inverse Rabi frequency Ω) for
two–level atom resonantly excited by random telegraph frequency noise, successive
frames are for different values of switching rates ΩT = 1, 10 and 100. The jump
parameter is a = 0.1, the electric field strength is F0 = 5.108 V/cm and the emission
spontaneous coefficients are γ21 = γ32 = 1.9 10-5.
Figure 5. Populations ρnn versus time (in units of inverse Rabi frequency Ω) for
two–level atom resonantly excited by Markov chain phase noise, composed of three19phase random telegraphs (N = 3) and an extension to a Markov chain of seven phase
random telegraphs (N = 7). Successive frames are for different values of phase
switching rates ΩT = 1, 102 and 103. The electric field strength is F0 = 108 V/cm, the
phase jump parameter is a = 0.4π and the radiative decay rates are γ21 = γ32 = 1.9 10-5
Figure 7. Populations ρnn versus time (in units of inverse Rabi frequency Ω) for
threelevel atom resonantly excited by a random telegraph phase noise, with phase noise
a = 0.4π. Successive frames are for different values of switching rates ΩT = 0.1, 1 and
10. The electric field strength is F0 = 5.108 V/cm, the phase jump parameter is a = 0.4π
and the radiative decay rates are γ21 = γ32 = 1.9 10-5.
Figure 8. Same as Figure 7., but for amplitude fluctuations and the jump parameter is
a = 0.1.
Figure 9. Ionisation probability versus time (in units of inverse Rabi frequency Ω).
The electric field strength is F0 = 108 V/cm, the radiative decay rates are
γ21 = γ32 = 1.9 10-5 and The relaxation rates from bound states to the continuum are
RRc c 2 310 ==Ω/.
(a) Solid line: mean ionisation probability PtIm(). Dotted line: instantaneous ionisation
probability PtI(). Solid and dotted lines are in absence of noise.
(b) Solid line: mean ionisation probability in absence of noise. Dashed line: in presence
of amplitude noise (a = 0.1) with ΩT = 1. Dotted line: in presence of amplitude noise
with ΩT= 10.
(c) Same as (b), but for phase noise (a = 0.4π).
Figure 10. The columns A and B are, respectively, same as Figure 2.(B) and
Figure 7., but take into account of the ionisation process represented by the probability
PI (t). The relaxation rates from bound states to the continuum are RRc c 2 310 ==Ω/.0 13 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0Populations
tρ
ρ
ρ11
22
330 13 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0Populations
t(a)
(b)ρ
ρ11
220 5 10 15 20
Ω / 2π0.01.000.01.00.000.01.0
00.01.0Populations
0 5 10 15 20
Ω / 2π0.01.0Populations00.01.0PopulationsΩ
T= 0.1T = 10
tΩ(A) (B)
Ω
ΩΩT= 10
T= 1T= 1
ΩT= 0.1ρ
ρ11
22
t0 100 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0Populations0 100 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0Populations0 100 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0PopulationsΩ
Ω
ΩT = 0.1T = 1T = 100
22
tρ
ρ11
tt0 100 Ω / 2π0.01.0Populations0 100 Ω / 2π0.01.0Populations0 100 Ω / 2π0.01.0PopulationsΩ
ρ
ρt
ΩT = 1T = 100
11
22ΩT = 10
t
t0 25 50 75100
Ω / 2π0.01.00 1000.01.00.00 100.000.01.0
0 1000.01.0Populations
0 25 50 75100
Ω / 2π0.01.0Populations0 1000.01.0Populations
T = 1
tΩ
Ω(N = 3) (N = 7)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩT = 1000
T = 100
ΩT = 1ΩT = 100ΩT = 10000 25 50 75100
Ω / 2π0.01.00 1000.01.00.00 100.000.01.0
0 1000.01.0Populations
0 25 50 75100
Ω / 2π0.01.0Populations0 1000.01.0PopulationsΩT = 1000
tΩ
Ω(N = 3) (N = 7)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩ
ΩT = 1T = 100T = 1000
ΩT = 100
T = 10 100 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0Populations0 100 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0Populations0 100 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0PopulationsΩ
ΩΩT = 10
T = 1T = 100
ttt
ρ
ρ
ρ11
22
330 40 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0Populations0 40 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0Populations0 40 Ω / 2π0.00.51.0PopulationsΩ
ΩΩT = 1
T = 0.1T = 10
ttt
ρ
ρ
ρ11
22
330102030405060
Ω / 2π0.01.000.01.00.000.01.0
00.01.0Populations and P
0102030405060
Ω /2π0.01.0Populations and P00.01.0Populations and PΩT = 10
tΩ
Ω(A) (B)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩ
ΩT = 0.1T = 1T = 10
ΩT = 1
T = 0.1ρP 33 ionion ion ionρ
ρ
P11
22
ion0 10 20 30 40
Ω / 2π0.01.000.01.00.000.01.0
00.01.0Populations and P
0 10 20
Ω /2π0.01.0Populations and P00.01.0Populations and PΩT = 10
tΩ
Ω(A) (B)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩ
ΩT = 0.1T = 1T = 10
ΩT = 1
T = 0.1ρ P
33ionion ion ionρ
ρ
P11
22
ion0 10 20 30 40
Ω / 2π0.01.000.01.00.000.01.0
00.01.0Populations and P
0 10 20 30 40
Ω /2π0.01.0Populations and P00.01.0Populations and PΩT = 10
tΩ
Ω(A) (B)
ρ
ρ11
22
tΩ
ΩT = 0.1T = 1T = 10
ΩT = 1
T = 0.1ρ P33ionion ion ionρ
ρ
P11
22
ion |
arXiv:physics/9911036v1 [physics.pop-ph] 16 Nov 19999.84vs.9.84:
The Battle of Bruny and Bailey
J. R. Mureika1
Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ont ario M5S 1A7 Canada
Abstract
At the recent 1999 World Athletics Championships in Sevilla , Spain, Canada’s Bruny Surin matched Donovan Bailey’s
National and former World Record 100 m mark of 9.84 s. The unoffi cial times for each, as read from the photo-finish,
were 9.833 s and 9.835 s respectively. Who, then, is the faste st Canadian of all time? A possible solution is offered,
accounting for drag effects resulting from ambient tail-win ds and altitude.
From the moment Bruny Surin’s silver-clad Seville performa nce popped up on the screen, it was
only a matter of time before the question was raised.
This story, of course, has its roots in the July 27, 1996 perfo rmance of one Donovan Bailey,
Canada’s prime hopeful at the centennial Olympic Games in At lanta. Coming from behind, Dono-
van shifted to a gear which that day only he possessed, surgin g ahead to the tape in a World Record
mark of 9.84s. Fast forward to August 22, 1999: Montreal’s Br uny Surin battles for global century
supremacy with the formidable Maurice Greene, who a shy 2 mon ths earlier had eclipsed Bailey’s
world mark in an ominously reminiscent 9.79s. Although fall ing mildly short of his rival’s 9.80s gold
medal romp, Surin’s time was far from disappointing, yet in a way uniquely Canadian: 9.84s.
The score so far: 9.84s Bailey, 9.84s Surin– but is a 9.84s alw ays a 9.84s? Without delving too
deeply into the philosophical, one needs to address the stan dards of electronic timing. For those
not familiar with the equipment, the top-of-the-line photo -finish cameras actually sample at 0.001s,
implying that the athletes’ performances are initially rec orded to three decimal places. For various
reasons, the precision is only kept to two places, but the rou nding process isn’t quite scientific.
Unless the third decimal place is ’0’, the times are rounded upto the next highest hundredth. So,
two performances can be up to 0.009s apart, and stillbe regarded as “equal”!
Herein lies our current dilemma. In a recent issue of Athletics [1], it was pointed out that Bailey’s
9.84 s was initially a 9.835 s, while Surin’s 9.84 s was really 9.833 s. How does reaction time fit in?
Donovan slept in the blocks for 0.174 s (a potential nail-in- the-coffin for an Olympic final!), while
Bruny blasted ahead of his field in 0.127 s. So, after a little m ath, Surin clocks in with 9.706 s, but
Bailey now leads at 9.661 s.
Is Donovan’s performance truly of Olympic proportions, as c ompared to Bruny’s?? In case you
didn’t see this coming (by now you should all know better), we can’t disregard two vital pieces of
data: wind speed and altitude! The measurements in question were +0 .7 m/s in Atlanta (approxi-
mately 315 m above sea level), and +0 .2 m/s in Seville (about 12 m above sea level). Since a tail-win d
boosts a sprint time, Bailey’s +0 .7 m/s tail gave him more of an advantage than Surin’s +0 .2 m/s.
However, a higher altitude sprint is easier than one closer t o sea level– hence, a Seville race will be
slower than one in Atlanta! What to do?? Is this debate destin ed for the files of Unsolved Mysteries ?
Through the miracle of numerical modeling, it’s possible to estimate the benefit associated with
each statistic. Drag is calculated as
drag=1
2ρ CdA(v−w)2, (1)
1newt@palmtree.physics.utoronto.caAltitude (m) w: +0.0 m/s +1 .0 m/s +2 .0 m/s
0 +0 .000 s +0 .064 s +0 .121 s
1000 +0 .043 +0 .099 +0 .149
2000 +0 .079 +0 .130 +0 .174
2234 +0 .087 +0 .137 +0 .180
where Ais the cross-sectional area of the sprinter, Cdis the drag coefficient, ρthe density of the
air,vthe sprinter’s speed, and wthe wind speed. Note the dependence on ρandw: the higher
the altitude, the thinner the air, the lower the value of ρ. Likewise, the stronger the tail wind, the
smaller ( v−w)2gets. Hence, both imply a lower overall drag on the sprinter. Since the effect of wind
will vary with altitude, it’s reasonable to convert all perf ormances to their sea level equivalent (or 0
metres altitude). The following chart gives a quick indicat ion of the degree to which a 9.72 s sea-level
clocking (assuming reaction is subtracted) will be boosted by differing wind and altitude conditions.
The last row represents the elevation of Mexico City, to give appreciation for the advantage experi-
ence in the 1968 Olympics (the density of air is roughly 76 −78% that at sea level, so clearly with the
right tail wind, it’s no wonder that the sprints and jumps exp erienced record-breaking performances).
Plugging the numbers into my model [2], I find the following qu ick figures: the altitude+wind
combo for Bailey implies that his race would be equivalent to roughly a 9.719 s (+0 .044 s from
just wind; +0 .058 s combined). Surin’s race would correspond to a 9.720 s ce ntury (+0 .013 s wind;
+0.014 s combined).
There we have it: instead of 9.84 vs.9.84, after correcting for reaction time and drag effects,
we end up with 9.720 s vs.9.719 s. Since exact values of CdandAare unknown, their estimation
introduces a degree of uncertainty to any calculation. So, i t’s certainly not unreasonable to expect
that this could account for a 0.001s discrepancy, implying t hat Bailey’s and Surin’s times are effec-
tively indistinguishable!
Thus, whose 9.84 s is faster? According to these preliminary results: they’re boththe fastest.
But, with two 9.84 s clockings toping the national list, Cana da certainly comes out ahead. Perhaps
the 2000 season will shed some definitive light on the individ ual battle.
References
[1] Cecil Smith, “Inside Track”, Athletics: Canada’s National Track and Field Running Magaz ine
(November 1999)
[2] J. R. Mureika, “A realistic mathematical sprint model ac counting for wind and altitude effects”
(in preparation ) |
physics/9911037 17 Nov 19991
/G53/G40/G54/G44/G39/G56/G40/G3/G51/G53/G50/G41/G44/G47/G40/G3/G44/G49/G3/G51/G53/G40/G39/G44/G57/G40/G53/G42/G40/G49/G38/G40/G3/G54/G40/G52/G56/G40/G49/G38/G40/G54/G3/G36/G54
/G36/G3/G42/G56/G44/G39/G40/G3/G55/G50/G3/G55/G43/G40/G3/G50/G53/G44/G42/G44/G49/G3/G50/G41/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G53/G40/G51/G47/G44/G38/G36/G55/G44/G50/G49
/G3/G11/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G18/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G86/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G18/G39/G49/G36/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G18
/G83/G85/G72/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G72/G89/G72/G81/G87/G86/G12
/G37/G85/G76/G68/G81/G3/G46/G17/G3/G39/G68/G89/G76/G86
/G53/G72/G86/G72/G68/G85/G70/G75/G3/G41/G82/G88/G81/G71/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G54/G82/G88/G87/G75/G72/G85/G81/G3/G38/G68/G79/G76/G73/G82/G85/G81/G76/G68/G15/G3/G44/G81/G70/G17
/G24/G24/G27/G19/G3/G47/G68/G3/G45/G82/G79/G79/G68/G3/G37/G82/G88/G79/G72/G89/G68/G85/G71/G15/G3/G51/G48/G37/G3/G25/G19/G15/G3/G47/G68/G3/G45/G82/G79/G79/G68/G3/G38/G36/G3/G28/G21/G19/G22/G26/G3 /G56/G17/G54/G17/G36/G17
/G21/G3/G41/G76/G74/G88/G85/G72/G86
/G21/G20/G3/G51/G68/G74/G72/G862
/G36/G37/G54/G55/G53/G36/G38/G55/G3/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G70/G82/G85/G72/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87 /G86/G3 /G10
/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G80/G82/G86/G87/G3/G70/G79/G82/G86/G72/G79/G92/G3/G80/G68/G87/G70 /G75/G72/G71/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75
/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G19/G17/G23/G16/G20/G20/G17/G20/G3/G76/G81/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G36/G81/G3/G72/G91/G70 /G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73
/G68/G70/G76/G71/G76/G70/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G79/G82/G90/G72/G85/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G72/G86/G87/G76/G80/G68/G87/G72/G15/G3/G69/G88/G87/G3/G81/G82/G87/G3/G69/G92/G3/G80 /G82/G85/G72/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81
/G21/G17/G22/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86/G17/G3/G58/G76/G87/G75/G3/G20/G3/G87/G85/G92/G83/G87/G82/G83/G75/G68/G81/G3/G11/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G23/G3/G68/G71/G71/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G12/G3/G76 /G81/G3/G24/G21/G28
/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G15/G3/G3 /G10/G3/G86/G76/G74/G81/G76/G73/G76/G70/G68/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G88/G81/G71/G72/G85/G16/G85/G72/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G72/G71
/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G15/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G86/G87/G72/G81/G87/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G3/G76/G81/G3/G76/G87/G86/G3/G85 /G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72
/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G69/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G74/G72/G81/G72/G87/G76/G70/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G17/G3/G53/G72/G86/G76 /G71/G88/G72
/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G41/G40/G49/G16/G20/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G16 /G24/G10/G3/G83/G79/G68/G70/G72/G71
/G87/G75/G72/G76/G85/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G20/G16/G20/G22/G17/G3/G51/G85/G82/G78/G68/G85/G92/G82/G87/G72/G3/G86/G72/G83/G87/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G83 /G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G15
/G41/G87/G86/G61/G15/G3/G68/G85/G82/G86/G72/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G76/G72/G85/G15/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G27/G16/G20/G20/G17/G3/G51/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76 /G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G81
/G36/G55/G51/G16/G71/G85/G76/G89/G72/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G82/G81/G3/G83/G88/G80/G83/G3/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G68/G86/G3/G68/G3/G80/G68/G85/G78/G72/G85/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G70/G72/G79/G79/G3 /G80/G72/G80/G69/G85/G68/G81/G72
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G44/G87/G3/G76/G81/G71/G76/G70/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G72/G89/G72/G81/G87/G3/G87/G82/G82/G78/G3/G83/G79/G68/G70/G72/G3/G81/G72/G68/G85/G3 /G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G26/G17
/G38/G72/G79/G79/G3/G71/G76/G89/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G90/G72 /G85/G72
/G76/G81/G73/G72/G85/G85/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G82/G70/G72/G79/G79/G3/G68/G81/G87/G72/G70/G72/G71/G72 /G81/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G79/G68/G86/G87/G3/G70/G82/G80/G80/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G82/G85/G17/G3/G47/G68/G87/G72/G16/G73/G82/G85/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G86
/G70/G75/G68/G85/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G93/G72/G71/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G86/G72/G15/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92 /G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G15
/G85/G72/G89/G72/G85/G86/G72/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G68/G86/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G85/G76/G69/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G82/G87/G76/G71/G72/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G87/G68/G86/G72/G17 /G3/G55/G75/G76/G86
/G86/G88/G74/G74/G72/G86/G87/G86/G3/G86/G82/G80/G72/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G83/G85/G82/G70/G72/G86/G86/G72/G86/G15/G3/G76/G81/G70/G79/G88/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70 /G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71
/G71/G72/G82/G91/G92/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G82/G87/G76/G71/G72/G3/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G15/G3/G82/G81/G70/G72/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G71/G3/G82/G81/G3/G70/G68/G87/G68/G79/G92/G86 /G87/G86/G3/G81/G82/G87
/G73/G82/G88/G81/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G72/G91/G87/G68/G81/G87/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86/G17/G3/G40/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G82/G73
/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G72/G81/G93/G92/G80/G72/G86/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G93/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G85 /G76/G80/G3/G53/G49/G36/G16
/G39/G49/G36/G3/G75/G92/G69/G85/G76/G71/G86/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G89/G76/G72/G90/G72/G71/G3/G68/G86/G3/G72/G89/G76/G71/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G68/G3/G80/G76/G91/G72/G71/G3/G71/G88/G83/G79 /G72/G91/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75
/G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G86/G87/G85/G68/G81/G71/G86/G15/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3 /G68/G81/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G87/G82
/G39/G49/G36/G3/G74/G72/G81/G82/G80/G72/G173
/G54/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G92/G3/G76/G81/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G68 /G81/G71/G3/G86/G82/G80/G72
/G68/G70/G70/G72/G86/G86/G82/G85/G92/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G74/G72/G81/G82/G80 /G72/G3/G76/G81
/G70/G72/G79/G79/G86/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G72/G68/G70/G75/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G87/G75/G85/G72/G72/G3/G71/G82/G80/G68/G76/G81/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G79/G76/G73/G72/G3/G86/G88/G74/G74/G72/G86 /G87/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87
/G39/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G85/G82/G86/G72/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G72/G85/G68/G17/G20/G3/G36/G86
/G85/G76/G69/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G82/G87/G76/G71/G72/G86/G3/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G72/G3/G71/G72/G82/G91/G92/G85/G76/G69/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G82/G87/G76/G71/G72/G86/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G53 /G49/G36/G3/G83/G85/G76/G80/G72/G86
/G79/G68/G74/G74/G76/G81/G74/G3/G86/G87/G85/G68/G81/G71/G3/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G3/G71/G88/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71 /G3/G76/G86
/G76/G81/G87/G72/G74/G85/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G87/G82/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G79/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G82/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3/G70/G72/G79/G79/G3/G83/G85/G82/G70/G72/G86/G86/G72 /G86/G15/G3/G39/G49/G36
/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G3/G72/G89/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G3/G85/G76/G69/G82/G82/G85/G74/G68/G81/G76/G86/G80/G15/G3/G72 /G84/G88/G76/G83/G83/G72/G71
/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G85/G76/G69/G82/G93/G92/G80/G72/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G68/G81/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G74/G72/G81/G82/G80/G72/G17/G21/G16/G22/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G86/G70/G72/G81/G68/G85/G76/G82/G3/G68/G83/G83/G72/G68/G85/G86
/G68/G87/G3/G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G70/G72/G15/G3/G75/G82/G90/G72/G89/G72/G85/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G68/G81/G76/G73/G72/G86/G87/G3/G75/G72/G87/G72/G85/G82/G74/G72/G81/G72/G76 /G87/G92/G3/G82/G73
/G80/G68/G81/G92/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G15/G3/G76/G81/G70/G79/G88/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72 /G17/G24/G3/G55/G82
/G85/G72/G70/G82/G81/G70/G76/G79/G72/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G79/G68/G86/G87/G3/G70/G82/G80 /G80/G82/G81
/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G82/G85/G15/G3/G76/G87/G3/G76/G86/G3/G83/G85/G82/G83/G82/G86/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G88/G81/G71/G72/G85/G90/G72/G81/G87
/G86/G88/G69/G86/G87/G68/G81/G87/G76/G68/G79/G3/G70/G75/G68/G81/G74/G72/G15/G3/G73/G82/G79/G79/G82/G90/G76/G81/G74/G3/G86/G72/G83/G68/G85/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G37/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76 /G68/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80
/G36/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G68/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G40/G88/G78/G68/G85/G92/G68/G17/G25/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G74/G68/G76/G81/G76/G81/G74/G3/G68/G81/G3/G76/G81/G86/G76/G74/G75/G87
/G76/G81/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G68
/G83/G85/G72/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G86/G82/G88/G85/G70/G72/G15/G3/G83/G85/G82/G80/G83/G87/G72/G71/G3/G68/G3/G86/G72/G68/G85/G70/G75/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G72/G89/G76/G71/G72/G81/G70 /G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86
/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72 /G71/G3/G69/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72
/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G74/G72/G81/G72/G87/G76/G70/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G17
/G3/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G3/G83/G85/G72/G70/G72/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G10/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G10/G3/G70/G82/G88/G79/G71 /G3/G69/G72
/G72/G91/G83/G72/G70/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G76/G81/G89/G82/G79/G89/G72/G3/G68/G81/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G86/G72/G15/G3/G71/G72/G73/G76/G70/G76/G72 /G81/G87/G3/G76/G81
/G79/G68/G87/G72/G16/G70/G82/G80/G72/G85/G86/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G83/G82/G86/G86/G76/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G75/G85/G82/G81/G76/G70 /G79/G76/G81/G74
/G72/G89/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G16/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G72/G85/G68/G3/G69/G92/G3/G80/G72/G68/G81/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G68 /G83/G83/G85/G82/G68/G70/G75
/G90/G68/G86/G3/G85/G72/G70/G82/G74/G81/G76/G93/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G40/G70/G78/G3/G9/G3/G39/G68/G92/G75/G82/G73/G73/G17/G26/G3/G37/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G68/G76/G81/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86/G3/G82/G73
/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G78/G81/G82/G90/G81/G15/G3/G87/G75/G72/G92/G3/G83/G85/G82/G83/G82/G86/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86 /G76/G80/G83/G79/G72
/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G76/G81/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G86/G72/G74/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G72/G85/G85/G72/G71/G82/G91/G76/G81
/G76/G81/G71/G76/G70/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G86/G80/G68/G79/G79/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G3/G75/G68/G71/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G89/G72/G71/G3/G90/G75/G72/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70 /G82/G71/G72/G3/G90/G68/G864
/G76/G81/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G72/G17/G3/G53/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G73/G72/G85/G85/G72/G71/G82/G91/G76/G81/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G85 /G72/G70/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92
/G86/G75/G82/G90/G81/G3/G87/G82/G3/G80/G68/G87/G70/G75/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81/G3/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G73/G76/G73/G87/G75/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G27 /G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86
/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G76/G73/G76/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G27/G3/G44/G81/G3/G68/G71/G71/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71
/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G80/G72/G80/G69/G85/G68/G81/G72/G3/G83 /G85/G82/G87/G82/G81
/G83/G88/G80/G83/G3/G11/G43/G14/G16/G36/G55/G51/G68/G86/G72/G12/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G71/G72/G80/G82/G81/G86/G87/G85/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G80/G68/G87/G70/G75/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72
/G26/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G86/G88/G83/G83/G82/G85/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G83/G82/G86/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G73/G76/G85/G86/G87/G3/G70/G72 /G79/G79/G86/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75
/G68/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G16/G83/G75/G82/G86/G83/G75/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G80/G72/G80/G69/G85/G68/G81/G72/G15/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G68/G69/G82/G88/G87/G3/G80/G76/G71/G90/G68/G92 /G3/G87/G75/G85/G82/G88/G74/G75
/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G76/G86/G3/G81/G82 /G90
/G72/G91/G68/G80/G76/G81/G72/G71/G17/G3/G44/G87/G3/G90/G76/G79/G79/G3/G69/G72/G3/G86/G72/G72/G81/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G83/G85/G82/G70/G72/G86/G86/G3/G70/G68/G81/G3/G69/G72/G3 /G87/G85/G68/G70/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82
/G68/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G82/G70/G72/G79/G79/G3/G68/G81/G87/G72/G70/G72/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G79/G68/G86/G87/G3/G70/G82/G80/G80/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G82/G85/G17
/G3/G3/G44/G81/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G76/G81/G89/G72/G86/G87/G76/G74/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G90/G75/G82/G86/G72/G3/G83/G75/G92/G79/G82/G74/G72/G81/G72/G87/G76 /G70
/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G72/G86/G87/G68/G69/G79/G76/G86/G75/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G92/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G69/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3/G71/G76/G89/G72 /G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72
/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G79/G68/G86/G87/G3/G70/G82/G80/G80/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G82/G85/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G82/G85/G71/G72/G85/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G15/G3 /G87/G75/G85/G82/G88/G74/G75
/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3/G73/G72/G68/G87/G88/G85/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G76/G85/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G87/G75 /G82/G86/G72
/G72/G91/G83/G72/G70/G87/G72/G71/G3/G68/G87/G3/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G76/G73/G76/G72/G71/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G55/G75 /G72/G86/G72
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G72/G86/G87/G68/G69/G79/G76/G86/G75/G72/G71/G3/G68/G73/G87/G72/G85/G3/G85/G72/G70/G82/G74/G81/G76/G93/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G75/G68/G71
/G70/G82/G72/G89/G82/G79/G89/G72/G71/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G3/G69/G76/G82/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G87/G76/G70/G3/G83/G68/G87/G75/G90/G68/G92/G86/G15/G3/G90/G75 /G76/G70/G75
/G76/G81/G76/G87/G76/G68/G79/G79/G92/G3/G69/G85/G68/G81/G70/G75/G72/G71/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G76/G87/G85/G68/G87/G72/G3/G70/G92/G70/G79/G72/G17/G3/G58/G76/G87/G75/G3/G83/G68/G87 /G75/G3/G79/G72/G81/G74/G87/G75/G86
/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G70/G92/G70/G79/G72/G15/G3/G71/G76/G86/G87/G76/G81/G70/G87/G3/G87/G92/G83/G72/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68 /G70/G76/G71/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72
/G86/G72/G72/G81/G3/G87/G82/G3/G72/G81/G87/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G68/G87/G3/G71/G76/G73/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86/G27/G29/G3/G49/G43/G23/G14/G3/G73/G76/G91/G72/G85/G86
/G11/G36/G86/G83/G15/G3/G42/G79/G88/G15/G3/G36/G86/G81/G15/G3/G42/G79/G81/G12/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G83/G68/G87/G75/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G81/G79/G92/G3/G20/G3/G82/G85/G3/G21/G3/G85/G72/G68 /G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G15
/G83/G85/G72/G70/G72/G71/G72/G71/G3/G86/G80/G68/G79/G79/G15/G3/G76/G81/G70/G85/G72/G68/G86/G76/G81/G74/G79/G92/G3/G75/G92/G71/G85/G82/G83/G75/G82/G69/G76/G70/G3/G80/G82/G79/G72/G70/G88/G79/G72/G86/G3 /G11/G36/G79/G68/G15
/G57/G68/G79/G15/G3/G51/G85/G82/G15/G3/G54/G72/G85/G15/G3/G42/G79/G92/G15/G3/G38/G92/G86/G15/G3/G55/G75/G85/G15/G3/G47/G72/G88/G15/G3/G44/G79/G72/G15/G3/G48/G72/G87/G12/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3 /G83/G68/G87/G75/G86/G3/G82/G73
/G23/G3/G87/G82/G3/G26/G3/G85/G72/G68/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G92/G3/G83/G85/G72/G70/G72/G71/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G69/G72/G68/G85/G76/G81 /G74/G3/G79/G68/G85/G74/G72
/G69/G68/G86/G76/G70/G3/G82/G85/G3/G68/G85/G82/G80/G68/G87/G76/G70/G3/G86/G76/G71/G72/G3/G70/G75/G68/G76/G81/G86/G3/G11/G36/G85/G74/G15/G3/G47/G92/G86/G15/G3/G51/G75/G72/G15/G3/G55/G92/G85/G15/G3 /G43/G76/G86/G15
/G55/G85/G83/G12/G15/G3/G90/G75/G82/G86/G72/G3/G83/G68/G87/G75/G86/G3/G72/G91/G87/G72/G81/G71/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G28/G3/G87/G82/G3/G20/G23/G3/G85/G72/G68/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G17/G3/G36/G3/G86 /G72/G87/G3/G82/G73
/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81/G86/G3/G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G70/G79/G68/G85/G76/G73/G76/G72/G71/G3/G79/G82/G81/G74/G16/G85/G72/G70/G82/G74/G81/G76 /G93/G72/G715
/G85/G72/G74/G88/G79/G68/G85/G76/G87/G76/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G17/G28/G3/G55/G75/G72/G92/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82/G3/G80/G68/G87/G70/G75/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G83/G85/G72/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72
/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G17/G27
/G3/G3/G55/G90/G82/G3/G73/G72/G68/G87/G88/G85/G72/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G88/G86/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3 /G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G72
/G90/G75/G72/G81/G3/G68/G81/G3/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G76/G70/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70 /G72
/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G89/G68/G79/G17/G3/G41/G76/G85/G86/G87/G15/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G11/G83/G68/G87/G75/G3/G79/G72/G81/G74/G87/G75/G12/G3/G82/G73/G3/G76/G87/G86/G3/G80/G82/G86/G87 /G3/G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G71
/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G81/G82/G87/G72/G71/G17/G3/G58/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G68/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G69 /G72/G73/G82/G85/G72
/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G15/G3/G76/G87/G86/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G90/G76/G79/G79/G3/G72/G91 /G70/G79/G88/G71/G72
/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G86/G3/G68/G71/G71/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G68/G87/G3/G68/G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G85/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G17/G3/G36/G3/G86 /G76/G93/G72/G68/G69/G79/G72
/G71/G76/G73/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G76/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G75/G3/G79/G72/G81/G74/G87/G75/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G82/G86/G87/G3/G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G71 /G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72
/G76/G81/G3/G68/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G55/G85/G83/G3/G11/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G23/G12/G3/G86/G88/G69/G86/G87/G68/G81/G87 /G76/G68/G79/G79/G92
/G71/G72/G70/G85/G72/G68/G86/G72/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G68/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G68/G73 /G87/G72/G85
/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G74/G72/G81/G72/G87/G76/G70/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G15
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G20/G23
/G3/G32/G3/G11/G20/G3/G16/G3/G73/G12/G49/G3/G15/G3/G73/G3/G32/G3/G3 /G3/G3/G3/G3/G73/G76/G3/G15/G3/G19/G3/G35/G3/G73/G3/G35/G3/G20
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G76/G32/G81/G14/G20
/G3/G70/G82/G85/G85/G72/G86/G83/G82/G81/G71/G86/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G73/G85/G68/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3/G70/G82/G81/G87/G68/G76/G81/G76/G81 /G74/G3/G49
/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G15/G3/G90/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G81/G82/G81/G72/G3/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G68/G3/G83/G68/G87/G75/G3/G79/G72/G81/G74/G87/G75/G3/G72/G91/G70/G72/G72/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G81
/G85/G72/G68/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G17/G3/G73/G76/G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G91/G83/G72/G70/G87/G72/G71/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75
/G83/G68/G87/G75/G3/G79/G72/G81/G74/G87/G75/G3/G76/G17/G3/G38/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G3/G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G71/G3 /G69/G92/G3/G20
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G71/G71/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G3/G85/G72/G68/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71
/G69/G76/G82/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G30/G3/G72/G68/G70/G75/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G69/G72/G76/G81/G74/G3/G72/G86/G87/G76/G80/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G85/G72/G84/G88/G76/G85/G72 /G3/G68
/G81/G82/G87/G76/G82/G81/G68/G79/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G89/G68/G79/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G19/G25/G3/G92/G85/G17/G27
/G3/G3/G36/G3/G86/G72/G70/G82/G81/G71/G3/G76/G81/G71/G76/G70/G68/G87/G82/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G3/G10/G68/G74/G72/G10/G3/G85/G72/G79/G76/G72/G71/G3/G82/G81/G3/G74/G82/G82 /G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73
/G73/G76/G87/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81/G3/G68 /G87/G3/G68/G3/G74/G76/G89/G72/G81
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G36/G74/G85/G72/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G80/G3/G90/G76/G79 /G79/G3/G87/G72/G81/G71/G3/G87/G82
/G68/G3/G80/G68/G91/G76/G80/G88/G80/G3/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G15/G3/G90/G75/G72/G81/G3/G86/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G816
/G76/G81/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G87/G68/G85/G74/G72/G87/G72/G71/G3/G68/G3/G86/G88/G73/G73/G76/G70/G76/G72/G81/G87/G3/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71 /G88/G72/G86/G17
/G51/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G76/G81/G89/G82/G79/G89/G72/G71/G3/G68/G3/G81/G82/G81/G16/G83/G68/G85/G68/G80/G72/G87/G85/G76/G70/G3/G80/G72 /G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G15
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G46/G82/G79/G80/G82/G74/G82/G85/G82/G89/G16/G54/G80/G76/G85/G81/G82/G89/G3/G87/G72/G86/G87/G17/G3/G36/G3/G86/G76/G81/G74/G79/G72/G3/G83/G72/G68/G78/G3/G76/G81/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81 /G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73
/G73/G76/G87/G15/G3/G82/G85/G3/G68/G81/G3/G54/G16/G86/G75/G68/G83/G72/G71/G3/G70/G88/G85/G89/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G72/G71/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G92/G3/G83/G82/G85/G87/G85/G68/G92/G15
/G85/G72/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G15/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G69/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G68/G73/G87/G72/G85/G3/G70 /G82/G71/G72
/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G54/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G23/G3/G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G3/G80/G68/G85/G78/G72/G71/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3 /G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G70/G82/G71/G72/G17/G3/G54/G88/G69/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G87/G3/G70/G75/G68/G81/G74/G72/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G80/G76/G81/G82/G85/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G72/G71
/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G85/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G3/G86/G80/G68/G79/G79/G3/G86/G75/G76/G73/G87/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G17/G3/G58/G76/G87/G75 /G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72
/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G22/G26/G3/G80/G82/G81/G82/G80/G72/G85/G76/G70/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G20/G19/G3/G68/G86/G3/G85/G72/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G70/G72/G15
/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G83/G85/G72/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3/G70/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G69/G72/G3/G71/G72/G80/G82/G81/G86 /G87/G85/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82
/G69/G85/G82/G68/G71/G79/G92/G3/G68/G83/G83/G85/G82/G68/G70/G75/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3 /G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G15
/G68/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G76/G85/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G3/G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G82/G3/G70/G82/G71 /G72
/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15
/G83/G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G19/G22/G19/G26/G3/G14/G3/G22/G17/G19/G27/G91/G20/G19/G16/G21/G54
/G90/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G83/G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G86/G68/G80/G83/G79/G72
/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G85/G72/G86/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G68/G80/G72/G3/G88/G81/G71/G72/G85/G79/G92/G76/G81/G74/G3/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76 /G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81
/G68/G81/G71/G3/G54/G3/G86/G76/G74/G81/G76/G73/G76/G72/G86/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G30/G3/G85/G72/G74/G85/G72/G86/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86 /G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G15
/G85/G53/G15/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G19/G17/G20/G23/G17
/G3/G3/G54/G82/G80/G72/G3/G83/G72/G68/G78/G3/G69/G85/G82/G68/G71/G72/G81/G76/G81/G74/G3/G68/G70/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G81/G76/G72/G71/G3/G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87 /G75/G72/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81
/G87/G82/G90/G68/G85/G71/G3/G76/G87/G86/G3/G88/G83/G83/G72/G85/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G70/G87/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3/G79/G76/G80/G76/G87/G15/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G23/G17/G3/G36/G81/G3 /G72/G91/G83/G68/G81/G86/G76/G82/G81
/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G73/G76/G91/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G89/G68/G79/G3/G90/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G69/G72/G3/G68/G81/G87/G76/G70/G76/G83/G68 /G87/G72/G71/G15/G3/G68/G86
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G16/G86/G76/G87/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G70/G85/G72/G68/G86/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82 /G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G82/G73
/G74/G85/G82/G90/G76/G81/G74/G3/G86/G76/G93/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G91/G76/G87/G92/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G87/G72/G80/G83/G82/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G75/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3/G90/G82 /G88/G79/G71/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82
/G86/G79/G82/G90/G3/G68/G86/G3/G89/G68/G85/G76/G68/G81/G87/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G71/G72/G70/G85/G72/G68/G86/G72/G71/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G76/G80/G83/G85/G82/G89/G72/G71
/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G73/G76/G71/G72/G79/G76/G87/G92/G17/G3/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G68/G85/G87/G88/G85/G72/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G10/G82/G81/G72/G3/G87/G53/G49/G36/G3/G86/G83 /G72/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G83/G72/G857
/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G76/G72/G86/G10/G15/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G15/G3/G90/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G73/G88/G85/G87/G75 /G72/G85
/G82/G69/G86/G70/G88/G85/G72/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G15/G3/G73/G82/G79/G79/G82/G90/G76/G81/G74/G3/G68/G83/G83/G72/G68/G85/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73
/G76/G86/G82/G68/G70/G70/G72/G83/G87/G82/G85/G86/G17/G3/G53/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G68/G81/G68/G79/G92/G86/G76/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73 /G76/G79/G72/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72
/G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G86/G87/G72/G81/G87/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G86/G83/G72/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G92/G17/G3/G53/G72/G86 /G76/G71/G88/G72
/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G86/G3/G73/G82/G88/G81/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G89/G72/G71/G3/G69/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73 /G3/G87/G75/G72
/G74/G72/G81/G72/G87/G76/G70/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G90/G76/G71/G72/G3/G83/G75/G92/G79/G82/G74/G72 /G81/G72/G87/G76/G70
/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G41/G76/G74/G88/G85/G72/G3/G20/G3/G86/G75/G82/G90/G86/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G86/G72/G89/G72/G85/G68/G79/G3/G83/G85/G82 /G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G15
/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G87/G75/G72/G76/G85/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G72/G81/G87/G85/G92/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G74/G72/G81/G72/G87/G76/G70/G3 /G70/G82/G71/G72/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72
/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G76/G81/G70/G79/G88/G71/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G69/G76/G82/G87/G76/G70/G3/G70/G68/G87/G68/G79/G92/G86/G87/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G76/G73 /G76/G70
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G41/G76/G74/G88/G85/G72/G3/G20
/G72/G81/G93/G92/G80/G72/G86/G3/G68/G85/G85/G85/G68/G81/G74/G72/G71/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G81/G3/G72/G91/G83/G68/G81/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G85/G68/G81/G74/G72/G17/G3 /G53/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86
/G88/G83/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G24/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G87/G82/G3/G73/G72/G85 /G85/G72/G71/G82/G91/G76/G81
/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G68/G81/G68/G72/G85/G82/G69/G72/G15/G3/G38/G79/G82/G86/G87/G85/G76/G71/G76/G88/G80/G3/G83/G68/G86/G87/G72/G88/G85/G76/G68/G81/G88/G80 /G15/G26/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G26
/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G43/G14/G16/G36/G55/G51/G68/G86/G72/G3/G11/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G57/G16
/G36/G55/G51/G68/G86/G72/G12/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G85/G72/G81/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G82/G87/G72/G15/G3/G54/G88/G79/G73/G82/G79/G82/G69/G88/G86/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G82/G70/G68/G79 /G71/G68/G85/G76/G88/G86/G17/G20/G20
/G44/G87/G3/G76/G86/G3/G72/G91/G87/G85/G72/G80/G72/G79/G92/G3/G88/G81/G79/G76/G78/G72/G79/G92/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G68/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G90/G76 /G87/G75/G3/G68
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G24/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G15/G3/G68/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G73/G72/G85/G85/G72/G71/G82/G91/G76/G81/G15/G3/G70/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3 /G87/G75/G72
/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G72/G3/G11/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G23/G12/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G27/G3/G82/G85/G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3/G86/G72/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72
/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G20/G19/G30/G3/G25/G17/G24/G24/G91/G20/G19/G16/G27/G3/G35/G3/G83/G3/G35/G3/G20/G17/G25/G23/G91/G20/G19/G16/G25/G15/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92
/G79/G76/G80/G76/G87/G86/G3/G85/G72/G73/G72/G85/G15/G3/G85/G72/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G15/G3/G87/G82/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81
/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G17/G3/G36/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G26/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71 /G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72
/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82/G3/G71/G72/G83/G68/G85/G87/G86/G3/G86/G76/G74/G81/G76/G73/G76/G70/G68/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G73/G72/G85/G72 /G81/G70/G72
/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G30/G3/G22/G17/G26/G24/G91/G20/G19/G16/G21/G3/G35/G3/G83/G3/G35/G3/G25/G17/G24/G19/G91/G20/G19/G16/G21/G17/G3/G50/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G76/G81
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G85/G3/G89/G76/G81/G87/G68/G74/G72/G15/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G86/G87/G72 /G81/G87/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G73/G87/G72/G85/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G73/G72/G85/G85/G72/G71/G82/G91/G76/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76 /G71/G178
/G3/G3/G42/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81 /G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3/G72/G91/G68/G80/G76/G81/G72/G71/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81/G86/G15/G3/G68/G87/G3/G72/G68/G70/G75/G3 /G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73
/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G74/G76/G89/G72/G81/G3/G76/G81/G3/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G17/G3/G38/G82/G81/G86/G76/G86/G87/G72/G81/G87/G3/G90/G76/G87 /G75/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G79/G76/G80/G76/G87/G72/G71/G3/G85/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G76/G87/G86/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G15/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88 /G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86
/G73/G82/G85/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G73/G72/G85/G85/G72/G71/G82/G91/G76/G81/G3/G82/G83/G87/G76/G80/G68/G79/G79/G92/G3/G80/G68/G87/G70/G75/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82 /G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81
/G68/G87
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G3/G41/G76/G74/G88/G85/G72/G3/G21
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G24/G17/G23/G3 /G34/G32/G19/G17/G22/G20/G3/G11/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G69/G72/G86/G87/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G11/G83/G80/G68/G91/G12/G3/G34/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3/G72/G85/G85/G82/G85/G30
/G54/G17/G40/G17/G3/G32/G3 /G18/G47/G81/G15/G3/G90/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3 /G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3/G71/G72/G89/G76/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G11/G75/G68/G79/G73/G16/G90/G76/G71/G87/G75
/G82/G73/G3/G83/G72/G68/G78/G3/G68/G87/G3/G83/G80/G68/G91/G3/G91/G3/G19/G17/G25/G19/G25/G12/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G68/G80/G83/G79/G72/G3/G83/G82/G76/G81/G87/G86
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G72/G68/G78/G12/G3/G53/G72/G83/G79/G68/G70/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G57/G68/G79/G23/G25/G3/G69/G92/G3/G42/G79/G88/G20/G26/G15/G3/G90/G75 /G76/G70/G75
/G70/G82/G68/G79/G76/G74/G81/G3/G68/G73/G87/G72/G85/G3/G86/G88/G83/G72/G85/G83/G82/G86/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G72/G74/G80/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G68/G81/G3/G72/G68/G85 /G79/G92/G3/G74/G72/G81/G72
/G71/G88/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G26/G3/G74/G76/G89/G72/G86/G3/G68/G3/G86/G79/G76/G74/G75/G87/G79/G92/G3/G80/G82/G85/G72/G3/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G76/G70/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81
/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G68/G83/G83/G85/G68/G76/G86/G72/G71/G17/G27/G3/G42/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G24/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G76/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G81
/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G72/G71/G15/G3/G75/G82/G90/G72/G89/G72/G85/G15/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G19/G17/G28/G27/G3/G87/G82/G3/G19/G17/G28/G19/G17/G3/G36/G79/G86/G82/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G86/G87/G72/G81 /G87/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75
/G76/G87/G86/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G85/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G12/G15/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G73/G85/G72 /G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86
/G80/G68/G87/G70/G75/G72/G71/G3/G80/G82/G86/G87/G3/G70/G79/G82/G86/G72/G79/G92/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G25/G17/G21/G3 /G34/G3/G19/G17/G23/G24/G17/G3/G40/G91/G70/G79/G88/G86/G76/G82/G81
/G82/G73/G3/G70/G75/G68/G85/G74/G72/G71/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G83/G82/G79/G68/G85/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G11/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G21/G3/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G86/G12 /G3/G73/G85/G82/G80
/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G12/G3/G70/G82/G81/G73/G82/G85/G80/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G86/G87/G85/G82/G81/G74/G3/G86/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81 /G3/G73/G82/G85/G70/G72/G86
/G73/G82/G85/G3/G81/G82/G81/G16/G83/G82/G79/G68/G85/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G83/G85/G72/G69/G76/G82/G87/G76/G70/G3/G80/G72 /G80/G69/G85/G68/G81/G72
/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G17/G3/G58/G75/G72/G81/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G85/G76/G86/G82/G81/G86/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71 /G88/G72
/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G87/G85/G76/G70/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86 /G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G23/G16
/G20/G19/G15/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G26/G3/G76/G80/G83/G85/G82/G89/G72/G71/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G19/G17/G23/G23/G27/G3/G87/G82/G3/G19/G17/G24/G26
/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G68/G12/G17
/G3/G3/G51/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G26/G3/G83/G79/G68/G70/G72/G86/G3/G76/G87/G3/G68/G87/G3/G68/G3/G87 /G88/G85/G81/G76/G81/G74/G16
/G83/G82/G76/G81/G87/G3/G76/G81/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G41/G82/G79/G79/G82/G90/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G72/G89/G72/G81/G87/G15/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G73/G76/G85/G86/G87
/G83/G82/G86/G76/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G3/G70/G75/G68/G85/G74/G72/G71/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G68/G85/G82/G80/G68/G87/G76/G70/G3/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G86/G3/G72/G81/G87/G72/G85/G72/G71 /G3/G87/G75/G729
/G70/G82/G71/G72/G17/G27/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G68/G81/G87/G76/G84/G88/G76/G87/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G43/G14/G16/G36/G55/G51/G68/G86/G72/G20/G21/G15/G20/G22/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G76/G81/G87/G85/G68/G80/G72/G80/G69/G85/G68/G81/G72
/G79/G82/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G86/G88/G74/G74/G72/G86/G87/G86/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3 /G87/G75/G72/G3/G73/G76/G85/G86/G87
/G70/G72/G79/G79/G86/G15/G3/G72/G81/G70/G68/G83/G86/G88/G79/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G68/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G16/G83/G75/G82/G86/G83/G75/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G80/G72/G80/G69/G85/G68 /G81/G72/G15
/G68/G79/G87/G72/G85/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G88/G85/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G38/G82/G81/G73/G76/G81/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3/G82 /G73/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92
/G80/G82/G79/G72/G70/G88/G79/G68/G85/G3/G83/G85/G82/G70/G72/G86/G86/G72/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G76/G81/G3/G68/G3/G70/G72/G79/G79/G3/G80/G72/G80/G69/G85/G68/G81/G72/G3/G90/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G73/G85 /G72/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G80
/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G87/G85/G76/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G81/G76/G82/G81/G76/G70/G3/G85/G72/G68/G70/G87/G68/G81/G87/G86/G3/G74/G82/G89/G72/G85/G81/G76/G81/G74 /G3/G68
/G83/G85/G76/G80/G82/G85/G71/G76/G68/G79/G3/G86/G88/G85/G73/G68/G70/G72/G3/G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G17/G27/G15/G20/G23/G3/G36/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G73/G72/G85/G85/G72/G71/G82/G91/G76/G81/G3/G83/G85/G72/G71/G68/G87/G72/G71
/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G15/G3/G69/G92/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G3/G70/G85/G76/G87/G72/G85/G76/G68/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G24/G3/G85/G72/G86 /G76/G71/G88/G72
/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G15/G3/G21/G68/G12/G3/G72/G81/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G68/G81 /G76/G82/G81/G76/G70/G17
/G55/G75/G72/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G83/G85/G72/G70/G72/G79/G79/G88/G79/G68/G85/G3/G80/G72/G87/G68/G69/G82/G79/G76/G86/G80/G3/G82/G81/G3/G70/G75/G68/G85/G74/G72
/G68/G87/G87/G85/G68/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G76/G86/G3/G73/G88/G85/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3/G76/G79/G79/G88/G86/G87/G85/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G88/G79/G87/G76/G68/G81/G76/G82/G81 /G76/G70
/G80/G82/G79/G72/G70/G88/G79/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G70/G72/G81/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G80/G72/G87/G68/G69/G82/G79/G76/G86/G80/G17/G20/G23/G16/G20/G25
/G3/G3/G38/G72/G79/G79/G3/G71/G76/G89/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G73/G82/G88/G81/G71 /G3/G87/G82
/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G87/G72/G3/G68/G73/G87/G72/G85/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G26/G15/G3/G68/G86/G3/G68/G81/G87/G76/G70/G76/G83/G68/G87/G72/G71/G17/G3/G51/G85/G82/G78/G68/G85/G92/G82/G87/G72
/G86/G72/G83/G87/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G15/G3/G41/G87/G86/G61/G15/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G69/G82/G87/G75/G3/G36/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G68/G3/G68/G81/G71 /G3/G37/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G68
/G20/G26/G3/G72/G86/G87/G68/G69/G79/G76/G86/G75/G76/G81/G74/G3/G76/G87/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G76/G85/G3/G70/G82/G80/G80/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72 /G86/G87/G82/G85/G17
/G54/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G19/G16/G20/G20/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G11/G47/G92/G86/G15/G3/G51/G75/G72/G15/G3/G55/G92/G85/G12/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G80/G82/G86/G87/G3 /G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G71
/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G86/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G41/G87/G86/G61/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G12/G15/G3/G68/G79/G87/G75/G82/G88/G74/G75/G3/G87/G75/G72 /G92/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72
/G88/G81/G71/G72/G85/G16/G85/G72/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G72/G71/G3/G11/G28/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G28/G23/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G89/G86/G17/G3 /G25/G3/G82/G73/G3/G25/G21
/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G30/G3/G83/G11/G69/G76/G81/G82/G80/G76/G68/G79/G12/G3/G32/G3/G21/G17/G22/G25/G91/G20/G19/G16/G24/G12/G17/G3/G50/G80/G76/G86/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G43/G76/G86/G14/G55/G85/G83/G15
/G73/G88/G85/G87/G75/G72/G85/G80/G82/G85/G72/G15/G3/G76/G81/G71/G76/G70/G68/G87/G72/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G68/G81/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G3/G76 /G81/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G41/G87/G86/G61/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G30/G3/G21/G17/G25/G27/G91/G20/G19/G16/G25/G3/G35/G3/G83/G3/G35/G3/G23/G17/G23/G24/G91/G20/G19/G16/G23/G17/G3/G38/G72/G79/G79
/G71/G76/G89/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G80/G68/G92/G3/G87/G75/G88/G86/G3/G69/G72/G3/G87/G85/G68/G70/G72/G71/G3/G69/G68/G70/G78/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G87/G3/G79/G72/G68/G86/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3 /G20/G20/G3/G71/G88/G85/G76/G81/G74
/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G40/G89/G76/G71/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G72/G79/G79/G3/G71/G76/G89/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G86/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3 /G68/G86/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72
/G27/G17/G22/G3/G34/G3/G19/G17/G23/G22/G3/G76/G86/G3/G73/G88/G85/G81/G76/G86/G75/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G85/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G41/G87/G86/G61
/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81/G86/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G68/G12/G17/G3/G55 /G75/G72/G86/G7210
/G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G3/G73/G76/G91/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G72/G83/G87/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G3/G68/G87/G3 /G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G27/G16
/G20/G20/G15/G3/G83/G82/G86/G86/G76/G69/G79/G92/G3/G86/G82/G82/G81/G3/G68/G73/G87/G72/G85/G3/G68/G83/G83/G72/G68/G85/G68/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G73/G76/G85/G86/G87/G3/G70/G72/G79 /G79/G86/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G36/G3/G41/G40/G49/G16/G20/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G15/G3/G39/G49/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G57/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G76/G87/G86/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G82/G88/G86/G3/G71/G82 /G80/G68/G76/G81/G3/G76/G81
/G39/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G3/G44/G3/G83/G85/G82/G89/G76/G71/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G73/G76/G85/G86/G87/G3/G72/G89/G76/G71/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72 /G86/G76/G86/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86
/G72/G81/G93/G92/G80/G72/G3/G87/G68/G85/G74/G72/G87/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G53/G49/G36/G16/G39/G49/G36/G3/G75/G92/G69/G85/G76/G71/G3/G80/G82/G79/G72/G70/G88/G79/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G71 /G88/G85/G76/G81/G74
/G79/G68/G74/G74/G76/G81/G74/G3/G86/G87/G85/G68/G81/G71/G3/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G36/G3/G86/G87/G85/G88 /G70/G87/G88/G85/G68/G79
/G68/G81/G71/G3/G73/G88/G81/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G68/G79/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G92/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G24/G10/G16/G72/G91/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G3 /G82/G73
/G37/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G68/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G40/G88/G78/G68/G85/G92/G68/G20/G27/G3/G83/G79/G68/G70/G72/G86/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G72/G81/G93/G92/G80/G72/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G76/G85/G3/G70/G82/G80/G80/G82/G81
/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G82/G85/G17/G3/G41/G40/G49/G16/G20/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G86/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G88/G83/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86 /G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G20
/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G12/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G3/G76/G86/G15/G3/G23/G17/G20/G27/G91 /G20/G19/G16/G21/G3/G35/G3/G83
/G35/G3/G20/G17/G23/G27/G91/G20/G19/G16/G20/G17/G3/G44/G87/G86/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G80/G82/G86/G87
/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G87/G76/G69/G79/G72/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G27/G17/G26/G3 /G34/G3/G20/G17/G19/G24/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G68/G12/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G86/G72
/G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G3/G76/G81/G71/G76/G70/G68/G87/G72/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G41/G40/G49/G16/G20/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81 /G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G28/G16
/G20/G20/G17
/G3/G3/G54/G72/G79/G72/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G76/G70/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G81/G82/G87/G76/G70/G72/G68/G69/G79/G92/G3/G86/G78/G72/G90/G72/G71/G3/G87 /G75/G72
/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G3/G87/G82/G90/G68/G85/G71/G3/G68/G81/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G76/G72/G85/G3 /G70/G82/G71/G82/G81
/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81/G17/G3/G54/G87/G85/G88/G70/G87/G88/G85/G68/G79/G3/G86/G87/G88/G71/G76/G72/G86/G3/G82/G81/G3/G68/G3/G83/G75/G68/G74/G72/G3/G41/G40/G49/G16/G20/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82 /G74
/G85/G72/G89/G72/G68/G79/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G36/G86/G83/G3/G70/G79/G88/G86/G87/G72/G85/G86/G3/G69/G76/G81/G71/G3/G71/G76/G89/G68/G79/G72/G81/G87/G3/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G11/G61 /G81/G15/G3/G48/G81/G12/G3/G68/G87
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G68/G87/G68/G79/G92/G87/G76/G70/G3/G86/G76/G87/G72/G15/G3/G76/G81/G3/G73/G85/G82/G81/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G75/G72/G79/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G68/G85/G70/G75/G17/G3/G54/G72/G89 /G72/G85/G68/G79/G3/G36/G86/G83
/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G3/G80/G82/G87/G76/G73/G3/G69/G72/G75/G76/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G75/G72/G79/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G68 /G85/G70/G75/G15
/G90/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G92/G3/G90/G82/G88/G79/G71/G3/G73/G68/G70/G76/G79/G76/G87/G68/G87/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G3/G85/G72/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G17/G20/G28/G3/G54/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G21
/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G11/G36/G86/G83/G15/G3/G42/G79/G88/G15/G3/G36/G86/G81/G15/G3/G42/G79/G81/G12/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G79/G68/G85/G74/G72/G86/G87/G3/G74/G85/G82/G88 /G83/G3/G82/G73
/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G86/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G41/G40/G49/G16/G20/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G86/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G12/G17/G3/G55 /G75/G72/G92
/G68/G70/G70/G82/G88/G81/G87/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G20/G18/G23/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G79/G79/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G11/G20/G21/G18/G23/G27/G12/G15/G3 /G90/G76/G87/G75
/G68/G70/G76/G71/G76/G70/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G85/G72/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G76/G81/G74/G3/G22/G18/G23/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G80/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G72/G91/G70/G72 /G72/G71/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G21/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G28/G16/G20/G20/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G15/G3/G90 /G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G92
/G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G72/G3/G20/G18/G24/G3/G87/G82/G3/G20/G18/G25/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G86/G86/G76/G74/G81/G72/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G17/G27/G3/G54/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G21/G16/G73/G85/G72/G7211
/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72 /G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86
/G68/G81/G71/G3/G68/G86/G86/G76/G74/G81/G72/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G86/G75/G76/G73/G87/G72/G71/G3/G83/G80/G68/G91/G3/G87/G82/G3/G20/G20/G17/G24/G3 /G34/G3/G19/G17/G25/G23/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86
/G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G72/G86/G87/G76/G80/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G85/G68/G79 /G3/G41/G40/G49/G16/G20/G3/G69/G92
/G21/G17/G27/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86/G15/G3/G83/G79/G68/G70/G76/G81/G74/G3/G76/G87/G3/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G88/G83/G83/G72/G85/G3/G79/G76/G80/G76/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85 /G72/G89/G76/G82/G88/G86
/G85/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G81/G72/G68/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G3/G76/G81/G3/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G85/G68/G81/G74 /G72/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G38/G82/G81/G86/G76/G86/G87/G72/G81/G87/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G87/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G15/G3/G81/G82/G81/G16/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86 /G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81
/G87/G75/G72/G24/G10/G16/G72/G91/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G3/G71/G82/G80/G68/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G3/G44/G20/G27/G3/G76/G81/G70/G79/G88/G71/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G87/G82
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G22/G30/G3/G21/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86/G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72 /G86/G17
/G41/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G68/G80/G82/G81/G74/G3/G20/G25/G26/G3/G81/G82/G81/G16/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G71/G76/G86/G83/G79/G68 /G92/G72/G71
/G80/G68/G91/G76/G80/G88/G80/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87 /G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G20/G17/G23
/G34/G3/G19/G17/G26/G24/G30/G3/G21/G17/G26/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86/G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86 /G17/G3/G37/G82/G87/G75
/G83/G68/G85/G68/G80/G72/G87/G72/G85/G86/G3/G85/G72/G89/G72/G68/G79/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G81/G82/G81/G16/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G86/G76/G87/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G81 /G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72
/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G89/G72/G71/G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G76/G87/G86/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G15/G3/G68/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G3/G86 /G76/G87/G72/G86/G17
/G3/G3/G38/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G70/G82/G85/G72/G3/G86/G88/G69 /G88/G81/G76/G87/G86/G3/G82/G73
/G39/G49/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G89/G76/G71/G72/G3/G73/G88/G85/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3/G72/G89/G76/G71/G72/G81 /G70/G72/G3/G82/G73
/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G55/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G16/G24/G10/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G27/G3/G69/G68 /G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G68
/G86/G83/G72/G70/G76/G72/G86/G15/G3/G76/G81/G70/G79/G88/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G72/G85/G80/G82/G83/G75/G76/G79/G72/G86/G3/G55/G75/G72/G85/G80/G82/G87/G82/G74/G68/G3/G80/G68/G85/G76/G87/G76/G80/G68 /G3/G68/G81/G71
/G41/G72/G85/G89/G76/G71/G82/G69/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G88/G80/G3/G76/G86/G79/G68/G81/G71/G76/G70/G88/G80 /G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G87/G75/G72/G85/G80/G82/G83/G75/G76/G79/G76/G70
/G72/G88/G85/G92/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G82/G81/G15/G3/G48/G72/G87/G75/G68/G81/G82/G70/G82/G70/G70/G88/G86/G3/G77/G68/G81/G81/G68/G86/G70/G75/G76/G76 /G15/G3/G70/G82/G81/G87/G68/G76/G81/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86
/G88/G83/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G20/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G12/G3/G76/G81/G3/G80/G82/G87/G76/G73/G86/G3/G20/G15/G3/G26/G68/G15/G69/G3/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G61/G81/G3/G69 /G76/G81/G71/G76/G81/G74
/G80/G82/G87/G76/G73/G86/G3/G20/G16/G22/G17/G21/G19/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G3/G75/G68/G86/G3/G68/G3/G83/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92/G15/G3/G25/G17/G21/G21/G91/G20/G19/G16/G21/G3/G35/G3/G83
/G35/G3/G20/G17/G27/G27/G91/G20/G19/G16/G20/G17/G3/G53/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G70/G82/G85/G85/G72/G79/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G82/G83/G87/G76/G80/G68/G79/G79/G92/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75
/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G21/G17/G20/G3 /G34/G3/G19/G17/G26/G24/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G68/G12/G17/G3/G55/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G16/G24/G10/G3/G76/G81
/G85/G72/G89/G72/G85/G86/G72/G3/G74/G92/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G11/G70/G68/G85/G69/G82/G91/G92/G3/G71/G82/G80/G68/G76/G81/G12/G3/G82/G73/G3/G3/G54/G88/G79/G73/G82/G79/G82/G69/G88/G86/G3/G86/G75/G76/G69 /G68/G87/G68/G72/G3/G37/G20/G21
/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G82/G83/G36/G3/G74/G72/G81/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G55/G17/G3/G80/G68/G85/G76/G87/G76/G80/G68/G15/G21/G20/G3/G69/G92/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G85/G76/G86/G82/G81/G15
/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G22/G15/G3/G76/G81/G3/G80/G82/G87/G76/G73/G86/G3/G20/G16/G20/G19/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87 /G75
/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G69/G72/G86/G87/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G21/G17/G24/G3 /G34/G3/G19/G17/G27/G23/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G86/G7212
/G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G3/G73/G76/G91/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G16 /G24/G10
/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G20/G16/G20/G22/G17
/G3/G3/G55/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G16/G24/G10/G3/G76/G86/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G3/G76/G81/G3/G69/G82/G87/G75/G3/G83/G85/G82/G78/G68/G85/G92/G82/G87/G72/G3 /G71/G82/G80/G68/G76/G81/G86/G15
/G21/G20/G3/G90/G75/G76/G79/G72/G3/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G86/G72/G3/G44/G44/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G79/G79/G3/G22/G3/G71/G82/G80/G68/G76/G81/G86/G17/G21/G21/G3/G37/G82/G87/G75
/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G86/G3/G70/G79/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G69/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72 /G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G83/G85/G82/G78/G68/G85/G92/G82/G87/G72/G3/G71/G82/G80/G68/G76/G81/G86/G17/G3/G53/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85 /G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G44
/G83/G85/G82/G87/G82/G80/G72/G85/G86/G15/G3/G51/G68/G85/G38/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G51/G68/G85/G40/G15/G21/G22/G3/G76/G81/G71/G76/G70/G68/G87/G72/G15/G3/G75/G82/G90/G72/G89/G72/G85/G15/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G92
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G68/G73/G87/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G68/G12/G17/G3/G36/G86/G3/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86 /G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44
/G83/G85/G72/G70/G72/G71/G72/G71/G3/G71/G72/G70/G68/G87/G68/G81/G68/G86/G72/G15/G3/G68/G70/G70/G82/G85/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G15/G3/G74/G72 /G81/G72/G86
/G68/G83/G83/G68/G85/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G82/G79/G76/G71/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G87/G82/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G3/G70/G75/G85/G82/G80/G82/G86/G82/G80/G72/G86/G15/G3/G90/G75 /G76/G70/G75/G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G85
/G69/G72/G70/G68/G80/G72/G3/G70/G76/G85/G70/G88/G79/G68/G85/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G79/G68/G86/G87/G3/G70/G82/G80/G80/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G82/G85/G17
/G3/G3/G40/G68/G70/G75/G3/G70/G82/G85/G72/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72 /G3/G72/G91/G75/G76/G69/G76/G87/G86
/G68/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G83/G72/G68/G78/G3/G76/G81/G3/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G69/G17/G3/G54/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G39/G3/G11 /G3/G68/G81/G68/G79/G82/G74/G15
/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G69/G76/G81/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G71/G82/G80/G68/G76/G81/G12/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G82/G81/G86/G3/G54/G17/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G82/G70/G68/G79/G71/G68/G85 /G76/G88/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71
/G43/G68/G79/G82/G68/G85/G70/G88/G79/G68/G3/G80/G68/G85/G76/G86/G80/G82/G85/G87/G88/G76 /G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G76/G87/G86/G3/G72/G88/G78/G68/G85/G92/G82/G87/G72/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G86/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80
/G54/G68/G70/G70/G75/G68/G85/G82/G80/G92/G70/G72/G86/G3/G3 /G70/G72/G85/G72/G89/G76/G86/G76/G68/G72/G15/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G86/G3/G36/G38/G23/G19/G15/G3/G37/G23/G23/G15/G21/G23/G3/G71/G76/G86/G83/G79/G68/G92
/G82/G83/G87/G76/G80/G68/G79/G3/G68/G74/G85/G72/G72/G80/G72/G81/G87/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G28/G17/G25/G3 /G34/G3/G19/G17/G26/G24/G17/G3/G43/G76/G86/G3/G76/G86
/G76/G87/G86/G3/G80/G82/G86/G87/G3/G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G12/G17/G3/G36/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G85/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3/G83/G85 /G82/G73/G76/G79/G72
/G68/G85/G76/G86/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3 /G3/G82/G73/G3/G40/G86/G70/G75/G72/G85/G76/G70/G75/G76/G68/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G37/G17/G3 /G86/G88/G69/G87/G76/G79/G76/G86/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G86/G15
/G21/G24/G3/G68/G79/G69/G72/G76/G87/G3 /G10/G3/G69/G76/G81/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G71/G82/G80/G68/G76/G81/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G83/G85/G72/G71/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G82/G86/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G56/G51/G16/G83/G85/G82/G80/G82/G87/G72/G85/G17/G3/G36/G80/G82/G81/G74/G3/G22/G20/G23/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G15/G3/G20/G23/G23/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71
/G11/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G76/G87/G92/G15/G3/G19/G17/G23/G25/G12/G17/G3/G44/G87/G86/G3/G80/G82/G86/G87/G3/G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G69/G72/G76/G81/G74/G3/G43 /G76/G86/G3/G11/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72
/G20/G22/G12/G17/G3/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G69/G72/G86/G87/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87/G72/G85/G81/G3/G68/G87
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G19/G17/G23/G3 /G34/G3/G19/G17/G28/G21/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3 /G10/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G40/G17/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76 /G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G76/G87/G86
/G72/G88/G78/G68/G85/G92/G82/G87/G72/G3/G68/G81/G68/G79/G82/G74/G88/G72/G3/G76/G81/G3/G54/G17/G3/G70/G72/G85/G72/G89/G76/G86/G76/G68/G72 /G15/G3/G85/G83/G82/G3/G21/G20/G3/G74/G72/G81/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G15/G21/G25
/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G80/G68/G87/G70/G75/G72/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68/G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G20/G17 /G20/G3/G34/G3/G19/G17/G27/G2413
/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G69/G12/G17/G3/G36/G3/G86/G76/G81/G74/G79/G72/G3/G55/G85/G83/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G71/G3/G68/G80/G82/G81/G74/G3/G20/G23/G21/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72 /G71
/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G17/G3/G137/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80
/G40/G17/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76/G15/G3/G85/G83/G82/G37/G3/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G54 /G17/G3/G70/G72/G85/G72/G89/G76/G86/G76/G68/G72 /G3/G85/G83/G69/G21/G3/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G15/G21/G26
/G79/G76/G78/G72/G90/G76/G86/G72/G15/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G69/G72/G86/G87/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G68 /G87/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72
/G20/G20/G17/G19/G3/G34/G3/G19/G17/G26/G27/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G69/G12/G17/G3/G38/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3 /G3/G72/G91/G87/G72/G81/G71/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82
/G43/G76/G86/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G12/G17
/G3/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G86/G3 /G10/G3/G68/G85/G72/G3/G86/G72/G72/G81/G3/G87/G82/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86
/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G19/G16/G20/G20/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G92/G3/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G48/G82/G85/G72/G82/G89/G72/G85 /G15/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G86/G76/G81/G74/G79/G72/G3/G55/G85/G83/G3/G76/G81/G3/G3 /G10/G3/G11/G20/G18/G24/G21/G28/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G12/G3/G86/G76/G74/G81/G76/G73/G76/G70/G68/G81/G87/G79/G92
/G88/G81/G71/G72/G85/G16/G85/G72/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G30/G3/G24/G17/G20/G25/G91/G20/G19/G16/G26/G3/G35/G3/G83/G3/G35/G3/G20/G17/G25/G26/G91/G20/G19/G16/G22
/G17/G3/G49/G82/G3/G55/G85/G83/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G71/G3/G68/G80/G82/G81/G74/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G11/G19/G18/G20/G25/G24/G12/G3 /G76/G81
/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G82/G81/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G39/G17/G3/G3/G55/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3/G73/G76/G81/G71/G76/G81/G74/G86/G3 /G86/G75/G82/G90/G3/G53/G49/G36
/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G82/G70/G72/G79/G79/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3 /G20/G19/G16/G20/G22
/G70/G82/G71/G72/G17
/G3/G3/G54/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G92/G3/G76/G81/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G36/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G68/G15/G3/G37 /G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G68
/G68/G81/G71/G3/G40/G88/G78/G68/G85/G92/G68/G21/G27/G3/G72/G86/G87/G68/G69/G79/G76/G86/G75/G72/G71/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G71
/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G79/G68/G86/G87/G3/G70/G82/G80/G80/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G82/G85/G17/G21/G28/G3/G44/G87/G86/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72
/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G81/G82/G90/G3/G73/G88/G85/G81/G76/G86/G75/G72/G86/G3/G68/G3/G83/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G79/G72/G3/G87/G76/G80/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G3/G73/G82/G85
/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G72/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G72/G85/G68/G17/G3/G36/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87 /G75/G3/G41/G40/G49/G3/G20
/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G86/G15/G3/G68/G81/G3/G72/G91/G70/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G21/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G86/G78/G72/G90/G72/G71/G3/G72/G86/G87/G76 /G80/G68/G87/G72/G86
/G69/G68/G86/G72/G71/G3/G82/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G87/G82/G90/G68/G85/G71/G3/G68/G81/G3/G72 /G68/G85/G79/G76/G72/G85
/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G17/G3/G42/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3 /G21/G16/G73/G85/G72/G72
/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G15/G3/G68/G71/G89/G68/G81/G70/G72/G71/G3/G83/G80/G68/G91/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G72/G68/G70/G75/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G69/G92/G3/G88/G83/G3/G87/G82/G3/G21/G17/G22
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G86/G17/G3/G37/G85/G82/G68/G71/G79/G92/G15/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G83/G79/G68/G70/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G82/G85/G76/G74/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92 /G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G68/G87
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G20/G16/G20/G22/G17/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G68/G74/G85/G72/G72/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G17/G3 /G44/G87/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82
/G86/G88/G83/G83/G82/G85/G87/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G73/G76/G81/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G89/G72/G71/G3/G90/G75/G72 /G81/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G74/G72/G81/G72/G87/G76/G70/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G86/G87/G76/G79/G79/G3/G76/G81/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G72/G1714
/G3/G3/G55/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G21/G16/G73/G85/G72/G72/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86
/G76/G81/G71/G76/G70/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G137/G10/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G73/G76/G85/G86/G87/G3/G68/G80/G82/G81/G74/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72 /G85/G68/G86/G72
/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G86/G3/G11/G83/G80/G68/G91/G3/G32/G3/G20/G20/G17/G26/G3 /G34/G3/G19/G17/G23/G20/G12/G17/G3/G48/G88/G87/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G68/G79/G3/G68/G81/G68/G79/G92/G86/G76/G86/G22/G19
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G85/G79/G92/G3/G85/G72/G89/G72/G68/G79/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G137/G10/G3/G70/G82/G81/G87/G68/G76/G81/G86/G3/G69/G76/G81/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G86/G76/G87/G72/G86/G3/G73/G82 /G85/G3/G69/G82/G87/G75
/G39/G49/G36/G3/G87/G72/G80/G83/G79/G68/G87/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G3/G74/G85/G82/G90/G87/G75/G3/G83/G82/G76/G81/G87/G3/G11/G22/G10/G16/G87/G72 /G85/G80/G76/G81/G88/G86/G12/G17
/G54/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G75/G82/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G76/G72/G86/G15/G22/G20/G3/G73/G88/G85/G87/G75/G72/G85/G80/G82/G85/G72/G15/G3/G86/G75/G82/G90/G3/G68/G3/G79/G76/G78/G72/G79/G92/G3/G78/G76/G81/G86/G75/G76/G83
/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3 /G10/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G85/G72/G89/G72/G85/G86/G72/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G68/G86/G72/G3/G11/G86/G76/G80/G76/G68/G81/G3/G36/G44/G39/G54/G3/G89/G76/G85/G88/G86/G12/G15/G3
/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G68/G3/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3/G83/G85 /G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86
/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G68/G70/G87/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G39/G49/G36/G15/G3/G82/G85/G3/G53/G49/G36/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G3/G44/G15/G22/G21/G3/G83/G79/G88/G86/G16/G86/G87/G85/G68/G81/G71/G3/G89/G76/G85/G88/G86/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36
/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G86/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G83/G85/G82/G78/G68/G85/G92/G82/G87/G72/G3/G85/G72/G89/G72/G85/G86/G72/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G68/G86/G72/G22/G22/G3/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G54/G16
/G86/G75/G68/G83/G72/G71/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G70/G88/G85/G89/G72/G86/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G69/G12/G15/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G76/G86/G87/G72/G81/G87 /G3/G90/G76/G87/G75
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G73/G87/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G17/G3/G51/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G86 /G3/G82/G69/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71
/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G86/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G15/G3/G85/G72/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G15/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G22/G15/G3/G20/G20/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3/G20/G23/G30
/G43/G76/G86/G14/G55/G85/G83/G3/G82/G80/G76/G86/G86/G76/G82/G81/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G86/G72/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G81/G82/G87/G3/G86/G76/G74/G81/G76/G73/G76 /G70/G68/G81/G87/G15
/G19/G17/G20/G27/G3/G35/G3/G83/G3/G35/G3/G19/G17/G22/G25/G17/G3/G36/G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G16/G73/G82/G85/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G81/G82
/G89/G76/G86/G76/G69/G79/G72/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G83/G72/G68/G78/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G68/G12/G15/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G85 /G72/G71/G3/G76/G81
/G87/G92/G83/G72/G3/G44/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G44/G44/G3/G85/G76/G69/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G87/G68/G86/G72/G22/G23/G3/G68/G81/G71/G15/G3/G68/G86/G3/G81/G82/G87/G72/G71/G15/G3/G76/G81
/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G44/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G82/G80/G72/G85/G86/G3/G51/G68/G85/G38/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G51/G68/G85/G40/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G68/G12/G17 /G3/G55/G75/G72/G92
/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G87/G82/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G22/G16/G20/G23/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G74/G79/G92/G70/G92/G79/G3/G85/G68/G71/G76/G70 /G68/G79/G3/G71/G82/G80/G68/G76/G81
/G11/G87/G92/G83/G72/G3/G44/G44/G44/G12/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G81/G3/G40/G17/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76/G3/G87/G92/G83/G72/G3/G44/G44/G3/G85/G76/G69/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70 /G87/G68/G86/G72/G15
/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G81/G3/G68/G71/G72/G81/G82/G86/G92/G79/G70/G82/G69/G68/G79/G68/G80/G76/G81/G3/G70/G82/G73/G68/G70/G87/G82/G85/G15/G22/G23/G3/G71/G76/G86/G83/G79/G68/G92/G72/G71/G3/G68/G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G16
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G92/G3/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G44/G87/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88 /G72/G86/G3/G88/G83/G3/G87/G82
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G20/G30/G3/G87/G75/G76/G86/G3/G70/G88/G87/G16/G82/G73/G73/G3/G75/G68/G71/G3/G83/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92/G15/G3/G19/G17/G19/G28/G3 /G35/G3/G83/G3/G35/G3/G19/G17/G21/G23/G17/G3/G44/G87/G86
/G82/G91/G92/G74/G72/G81/G3/G86/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G89/G76/G87/G92/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G54/G16/G68/G71/G72/G81/G82/G86/G92/G79/G80/G72/G87/G75/G76/G82/G81/G76/G81/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G41/G72 /G54/G3/G70/G79/G88/G86/G87/G72/G85
/G70/G82/G73/G68/G70/G87/G82/G85/G86/G3/G73/G68/G89/G82/G88/G85/G3/G87/G92/G83/G72/G3/G44/G44/G44/G3/G85/G76/G69/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G82/G87/G76/G71/G72/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G87/G68/G86/G72/G3 /G69/G72/G76/G81/G74
/G68/G81/G70/G72/G86/G87/G85/G68/G79/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G92/G83/G72/G3/G44/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G44/G44/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G87/G68/G86/G72/G86/G15/G3/G90/G75/G82/G86/G72/G3/G68/G79/G79/G82/G86/G87 /G72/G85/G76/G7015
/G70/G82/G81/G87/G85/G82/G79/G3/G80/G72/G70/G75/G68/G81/G76/G86/G80/G3/G76/G87/G3/G86/G75/G68/G85/G72/G86/G17/G22/G24/G3/G51/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G3/G85/G72/G86/G88/G79/G87/G86/G3/G86/G88/G83/G83/G82/G85/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72
/G89/G76/G72/G90/G21/G28/G15/G22/G24/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G72/G91/G87/G68/G81/G87/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G87/G68/G86/G72/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G70/G72/G71/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G68/G81/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G76/G72/G85
/G70/G68/G87/G68/G79/G92/G86/G87/G17/G3/G44/G87/G3/G83/G88/G87/G68/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G3/G70/G68/G87/G68/G79/G92/G93/G72/G71/G3/G71/G72/G82/G91/G92/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G82/G87/G76/G71/G72/G3/G86 /G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86
/G69/G72/G73/G82/G85/G72/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G79/G72/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G74/G72/G81/G72/G87/G76/G70/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G17/G3/G47/G68/G87/G72/G16/G73/G82/G85/G80/G76/G81/G74
/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86/G3/G68/G79/G86/G82/G3/G70/G75/G68/G85/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G93/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G22/G10/G16/G24/G10/G3/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G3/G71/G82/G80 /G68/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73
/G39/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G16/G3/G46/G79/G72/G81/G82/G90/G3/G73/G85/G68/G74/G80/G72/G81/G87/G15/G22/G21/G3/G70/G79/G68/G80/G83/G3/G79/G82/G68/G71/G76/G81/G74/G3/G73/G68/G70/G87/G82/G85/G3/G53/G41/G16
/G38/G3/G16/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G3 /G15/G22/G25/G3/G53/G49/G68/G86/G72/G3/G43/G20/G15/G22/G26/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G76/G69/G82/G16/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G93/G92/G80/G72/G86
/G87/G72/G79/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G22/G27/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G53/G49/G68/G86/G72/G3/G51/G17/G22/G28
/G3/G3/G55/G75/G76/G86/G3/G68/G81/G68/G79/G92/G86/G76/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G76/G70/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87 /G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G75/G68/G86
/G83/G85/G82/G89/G76/G71/G72/G71/G3/G72/G89/G76/G71/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G83/G85/G72/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G80/G72/G70/G75/G68/G81/G76/G86/G80/G3/G82/G73/G3/G39 /G49/G36
/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G54/G76/G74/G81/G76/G73/G76/G70/G68/G81/G87/G3/G74/G68/G83/G86/G3/G85/G72/G80/G68/G76/G81/G15/G3/G75/G82/G90/G72/G89/G72/G85/G17/G3/G54/G82/G80/G72 /G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G16
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G76/G81/G74/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G68/G79/G80/G82/G86/G87/G3/G70/G72/G85/G87/G68/G76/G81/G79/G92/G3/G87/G82/G82/G78/G3 /G82/G89/G72/G85
/G73/G88/G81/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G82/G81/G70/G72/G3/G83/G72/G85/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G82/G87/G75/G72/G85/G3/G80/G82/G79/G72/G70/G88/G79/G72/G86/G15/G3/G81/G82/G87/G3/G73/G82 /G88/G81/G71/G3/G76/G81
/G87/G75/G72/G3/G85/G72/G70/G82/G85/G71/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G72/G91/G87/G68/G81/G87/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86/G17/G3/G53 /G49/G36
/G68/G83/G83/G68/G85/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G83/G85/G82/G89/G76/G71/G72/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G76/G81/G73/G85/G68/G86/G87/G85/G88/G70/G87/G88/G85/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87 /G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71
/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G79/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G76/G81/G3/G83/G85/G72/G16/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G83/G85/G72/G16/G70/G72/G79/G79/G88/G79/G68/G85/G3/G86/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G86/G15/G21/G16/G23/G15/G27/G15/G20/G25/G15/G23/G19
/G92/G72/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G86/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G79/G68/G87/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G68/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3/G70/G82 /G71/G72/G17/G3/G44/G87/G86
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G83/G85/G72/G86/G88/G80/G68/G69/G79/G92/G3/G85/G72/G87/G68/G85/G71/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G68/G81/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G85/G72/G79/G76/G68 /G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G81/G3/G68
/G85/G76/G69/G82/G93/G92/G80/G68/G79/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G86/G72/G17/G3/G39/G72/G82/G91/G92/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G82/G87/G76/G71/G72/G3/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G3/G69/G92/G3/G68 /G3/G73/G85/G72/G72
/G85/G68/G71/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G80/G72/G70/G75/G68/G81/G76/G86/G80/G3/G68/G83/G83/G72/G68/G85/G86/G3/G69/G72/G92/G82/G81/G71/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G70/G82/G83 /G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68
/G85/G76/G69/G82/G93/G92/G80/G72/G17/G22/G24/G3/G43/G82/G90/G72/G89/G72/G85/G15/G3/G68/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G82/G16/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G87/G68/G86/G72/G3/G76/G81/G89/G82/G79/G89/G76/G81/G74/G3/G74/G79/G92/G70/G92/G79/G3/G68/G81/G71
/G38/G92/G86/G16/G87/G75/G76/G92/G79/G3/G73/G85/G72/G72/G3/G85/G68/G71/G76/G70/G68/G79/G86/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G68/G71/G72/G81/G82/G86/G92/G79/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G41/G72/G54/G16/G70/G79/G88/G86 /G87/G72/G85
/G70/G82/G73/G68/G70/G87/G82/G85/G86/G15/G3/G70/G82/G88/G79/G71/G15/G3/G76/G81/G3/G83/G85/G76/G81/G70/G76/G83/G79/G72/G15/G3/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G68/G86/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79 /G92/G3/G68/G86
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G24/G3/G76/G81/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G41/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G3 /G86/G83/G72/G70/G76/G73/G76/G70
/G73/G82/G85/G3/G53/G49/G36/G16/G39/G49/G36/G3/G75/G92/G69/G85/G76/G71/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G68/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85 /G68/G86/G72/G15/G3/G69/G92
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G20/G20/G16/G20/G22/G15/G3/G70/G82/G81/G73/G82/G85/G80/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G82/G70/G70/G88/G85/G85/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G80/G76 /G91/G72/G71
/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G86/G87/G85/G68/G81/G71/G86/G17/G3/G54/G76/G81/G70/G72/G3/G85/G72/G89/G72/G85/G86/G72/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86 /G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G68/G86/G7216
/G72/G89/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G79/G92/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G68/G73/G87/G72/G85/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G81/G71/G68/G85/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G11/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G69/G12/G15 /G3/G53/G49/G36
/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G76/G73/G76/G70/G76/G87/G92/G3/G80/G68/G92/G3/G75/G68/G89/G72/G3/G69/G72/G72/G81/G3/G80/G82/G71/G76/G73/G76/G72/G71/G23/G20/G3/G87/G82/G3/G70/G68/G87/G68/G79/G92/G93/G72
/G53/G49/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G17/G3/G40/G68/G85/G79/G92/G3/G73/G82/G85/G80/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73
/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G44/G3/G73/G68/G89/G82/G88/G85/G86/G3/G68/G3/G79/G76/G81/G72/G68/G85/G3/G80/G82/G79/G72/G70/G88/G79/G72/G3/G68/G86/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G75/G92 /G69/G85/G76/G71
/G76/G81/G87/G72/G85/G80/G72/G71/G76/G68/G87/G72/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G68/G81/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G87/G82/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G74 /G72/G81/G82/G80/G72/G17
/G53/G72/G73/G72/G85/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86
/G3/G20/G17/G3/G50/G79/G86/G72/G81/G15/G3/G42/G17/G3/G45/G17/G3/G9/G3/G58/G82/G72/G86/G72/G15/G3/G38/G17/G3/G53/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G26/G12/G3/G38/G72/G79/G79/G3 /G27/G28/G15/G3/G28/G28/G20/G16/G28/G28/G23/G17
/G3/G21/G17/G3/G38/G72/G70/G75/G15/G3/G55/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G25/G12/G3/G51/G85/G82/G70/G17/G3/G49/G68/G87/G79/G17/G3/G36/G70/G68/G71/G17/G3/G54/G70/G76/G17/G3/G56/G17/G54/G17/G36/G17/G3 /G27/G22/G15/G3/G23/G22/G25/G19/G16
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G23/G22/G25/G22/G17
/G3/G22/G17/G3/G42/G76/G79/G69/G72/G85/G87/G15/G3/G58/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G25/G12/G3/G49/G68/G87/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G22/G20/G28/G15/G3/G25/G20/G27/G17
/G3/G23/G17/G3/G45/G82/G92/G70/G72/G15/G3/G42/G17/G3/G41/G17/G3/G9/G3/G50/G85/G74/G72/G79/G15/G3/G47/G17/G3/G40/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G22/G12/G3/G76/G81/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G58 /G82/G85/G79/G71/G3/G72/G71/G86/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G42/G72/G86/G87/G72/G79/G68/G81/G71/G15/G3/G51/G17/G3/G41/G17/G3/G9/G3/G3/G36/G87/G78/G76/G81/G86/G15/G3/G45/G17/G3/G41/G17/G3/G11/G38/G82/G79/G71/G3/G54/G83/G85/G76/G81/G74/G3 /G43/G68/G85/G69/G82/G85
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G51/G85/G72/G86/G86/G15/G3/G51/G79/G68/G76/G81/G89/G76/G72/G90/G15/G3/G49/G60/G12/G3/G83/G83/G17/G3/G20/G16/G21/G24/G17
/G3/G24/G17/G3/G48/G88/G86/G75/G72/G74/G76/G68/G81/G15/G3/G36/G17/G3/G53/G17/G3/G9/G3/G46/G82/G82/G81/G76/G81/G15/G3/G40/G17/G3/G57/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G25/G12/G3/G51/G85/G82/G70/G17/G3/G49 /G68/G87/G79/G17
/G36/G70/G68/G71/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G54/G70/G76/G17/G3/G56/G54/G36/G3 /G28/G22/G15/G3/G20/G19/G21/G25/G27/G16/G20/G19/G21/G26/G22/G17
/G3/G25/G17/G3/G40/G71/G74/G72/G79/G79/G15/G3/G39/G17/G3/G9/G3/G39/G82/G82/G79/G76/G87/G87/G79/G72/G15/G3/G58/G17/G3/G41/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G26/G12/G3/G38/G72/G79/G79/G3 /G27/G28/G15/G3/G28/G28/G24/G16/G28/G28/G27/G17
/G3/G26/G17/G3/G40/G70/G78/G15/G3/G53/G17/G3/G57/G17/G3/G9/G3/G39/G68/G92/G75/G82/G73/G73/G15/G3/G48/G17/G3/G50/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G25/G25/G12/G3/G54/G70/G76/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3 /G20/G24/G21/G15/G3/G22/G25/G22/G16/G22/G25/G25/G17
/G3/G27/G17/G3/G39/G68/G89/G76/G86/G15/G3/G37/G17/G3/G46/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G28/G12/G3/G51/G85/G82/G74/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G83/G75/G92/G86/G17/G3/G48/G82/G79/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G79/G17/G3 /G26/G21/G15/G3/G20/G24/G26/G16
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G21/G23/G22/G17
/G3/G28/G17/G3/G55/G68/G92/G79/G82/G85/G15/G3/G41/G17/G3/G45/G17/G3/G53/G17/G3/G9/G3/G38/G82/G68/G87/G72/G86/G15/G3/G39/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G28/G12/G3/G37/G76/G82/G54/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G86 /G3/G21/G21/G15/G3/G20/G26/G26/G16
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G20/G27/G26/G17
/G20/G19/G17/G3/G48/G76/G79/G79/G72/G85/G15/G3/G54/G17/G15/G3/G45/G68/G81/G76/G81/G15/G3/G45/G17/G15/G3/G47/G72/G86/G78/G15/G3/G36/G17/G3/G48/G17/G3/G9/G3/G38/G75/G82/G87/G75/G76/G68/G15/G3/G38 /G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G26/G12
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G45/G17/G3/G48/G82/G79/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G79/G17 /G3/G20/G28/G25/G15/G3/G25/G23/G20/G16/G25/G24/G25/G1717
/G20/G20/G17/G3/G39/G72/G81/G71/G68/G15/G3/G46/G17/G15/G3/G46/G82/G81/G76/G86/G75/G76/G15/G3/G45/G17/G15/G3/G50/G86/G75/G76/G80/G68/G15/G3/G55/G17/G15/G3/G39/G68/G87/G72/G15/G3/G55/G17/G3/G9/G3 /G60/G82/G86/G75/G76/G71/G68/G15
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G48/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G28/G12/G3/G45/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G79/G17/G3/G38/G75/G72/G80/G17/G3 /G21/G25/G23/G15/G3/G26/G20/G20/G28/G16/G3/G26/G20/G21/G20/G17
/G20/G21/G17/G3/G58/G68/G79/G78/G72/G85/G15/G3/G45/G17/G3/G40/G17/G15/G3/G38/G82/G93/G72/G81/G86/G15/G3/G36/G17/G3/G47/G17/G15/G3/G39/G92/G72/G85/G15/G3/G48/G17/G3/G53/G17/G15/G3/G41/G72/G68/G85 /G81/G79/G72/G92/G15/G3/G44/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G48/G17/G15/G3/G51/G82/G90/G72/G79/G79/G15/G3/G54/G17/G3/G45/G17/G3/G9/G3/G53/G88/G81/G86/G90/G76/G70/G78/G15/G3/G48/G17/G3/G45/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G26/G12/G3/G37/G76/G82/G70 /G75/G72/G80/G17/G3/G54/G82/G70/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G55/G85/G68/G81/G86/G17/G3 /G20/G24/G15/G3/G20/G19/G23/G16/G20/G19/G25/G17
/G20/G22/G17/G3/G49/G72/G79/G86/G82/G81/G15/G3/G49/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G23/G12/G3/G37/G76/G82/G70/G75/G76/G80/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G83/G75/G92/G86/G17/G3/G36/G70/G87/G68/G3 /G20/G20/G19/G19/G15/G3/G20/G19/G28/G16/G20/G21/G23/G17
/G20/G23/G17/G3/G58/G68/G70/G75/G87/G72/G85/G75/G68/G88/G86/G72/G85/G15/G3/G42/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G21/G12/G3/G51/G85/G82/G74/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G83/G75/G92/G86/G17/G3/G48/G82/G79/G17/G3/G37/G76 /G82/G79/G17/G3 /G24/G27/G15
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G27/G24/G16/G21/G19/G20/G17
/G20/G24/G17/G3/G46/G68/G81/G71/G79/G72/G85/G15/G3/G50/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G23/G12/G3/G45/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G79/G17/G3/G51/G75/G92/G86/G17/G3 /G21/G19/G15/G3/G20/G25/G24/G16/G20/G25/G28/G17
/G20/G25/G17/G3/G39/G68/G89/G76/G86/G15/G3/G37/G17/G3/G46/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G27/G12/G3/G51/G85/G82/G74/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G83/G75/G92/G86/G17/G3/G48/G82/G79/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G79/G17/G3 /G25/G28/G15/G3/G27/G22/G16
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G20/G24/G19/G17
/G20/G26/G17/G3/G48/G68/G85/G74/G82/G79/G76/G81/G15/G3/G58/G17/G15/G3/G58/G68/G81/G74/G15/G3/G53/G17/G3/G9/G3/G46/G88/G80/G68/G85/G15/G3/G48/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G25/G12/G3/G45/G17/G3/G37/G68 /G70/G87/G17/G3 /G20/G26/G27/G15
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G20/G22/G21/G19/G16/G20/G22/G21/G26/G17
/G20/G27/G17/G3/G53/G82/G69/G76/G81/G86/G15/G3/G51/G17/G15/G3/G51/G68/G83/G83/G76/G81/G15/G3/G39/G17/G3/G45/G17/G3/G38/G17/G15/G3/G58/G82/G82/G71/G15/G3/G53/G17/G3/G39/G17/G3/G9/G3/G47/G76/G81 /G71/G68/G75/G79/G15/G3/G55/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G23/G12/G17/G3/G45/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G79/G17/G3/G38/G75/G72/G80/G17/G3 /G21/G25/G28/G15/G3/G21/G27/G24/G22/G24/G16/G21/G27/G24/G22/G27/G17
/G20/G28/G17/G3/G38/G72/G86/G78/G68/G15/G3/G55/G17/G3/G36/G17/G15/G3/G54/G68/G92/G72/G85/G86/G15/G3/G45/G17/G3/G53/G17/G15/G3/G54/G87/G76/G72/G85/G15/G3/G42/G17/G3/G9/G3/G54/G88/G70/G78/G15/G3 /G39/G17
/G11/G20/G28/G28/G25/G12/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G49/G68/G87/G88/G85/G72/G3 /G22/G27/G21/G15/G3/G28/G19/G16/G28/G22/G17
/G21/G19/G17/G3/G46/G68/G79/G87/G82/G88/G80/G15/G3/G43/G17/G15/G3/G51/G82/G85/G87/G72/G80/G72/G85/G15/G3/G38/G17/G15/G3/G38/G82/G81/G73/G68/G79/G82/G81/G76/G72/G85/G76/G15/G3/G41/G17/G15/G3/G39/G88 /G74/G88/G72/G87/G15/G3/G48/G17
/G9
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G37/G82/G88/G87/G75/G76/G72/G85/G15/G3/G71/G72/G3/G79/G68/G3/G55/G82/G88/G85/G15/G3/G38/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G26/G12/G3/G54/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G17/G3/G36/G83/G83/G79/G17/G3/G48 /G76/G70/G85/G82/G69/G76/G82/G79/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3 /G21/G19/G15/G3/G24/G19/G24/G16/G24/G20/G21/G17
/G21/G20/G17/G3/G45/G68/G91/G72/G79/G15/G3/G38/G17/G15/G3/G37/G82/G88/G87/G75/G76/G72/G85/G3/G71/G72/G3/G79/G68/G3/G55/G82/G88/G85/G15/G3/G38/G17/G15/G3/G39/G88/G74/G88/G72/G87/G15/G3/G48/G17/G3 /G9/G3/G49/G68/G71/G68/G79/G15
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G48/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G25/G12/G3/G49/G88/G70/G79/G72/G76/G70/G3/G36/G70/G76/G71/G86/G3/G53/G72/G86/G17/G3 /G21/G23/G15/G3/G23/G25/G25/G27/G16/G23/G25/G26/G24/G17
/G21/G21/G17/G3/G37/G72/G85/G74/G72/G85/G15/G3/G45/G17/G3/G48/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G27/G12/G3/G38/G88/G85/G85/G17/G3/G50/G83/G76/G81/G17/G3/G54/G87/G85/G88/G70/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G79/G17/G3 /G27/G15/G3/G21/G25/G16/G22/G21
/G21/G22/G17/G3/G37/G72/G69/G72/G68/G85/G15/G3/G38/G17/G3/G48/G17/G15/G3/G38/G75/G68/G85/G85/G82/G81/G15/G3/G36/G17/G15/G3/G37/G82/G89/G72/G15/G3/G45/G17/G3/G48/G17/G15/G3/G37/G72/G69/G72/G68/G85 /G15/G3/G38/G17/G3/G9
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G53/G72/G81/G68/G88/G71/G76/G81/G15/G3/G45/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G27/G12/G3/G36/G81/G87/G76/G80/G76/G70/G85/G82/G17/G3/G36/G74/G72/G81/G87/G86/G3/G38/G75/G72/G80/G82/G17/G3 /G23/G21/G15/G3/G21/G19/G21/G23/G1618
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G21/G19/G22/G20/G17
/G21/G23/G17/G3/G47/G68/G81/G74/G72/G85/G15/G3/G43/G68/G76/G81/G15/G3/G45/G17/G15/G3/G55/G75/G88/G85/G76/G68/G88/G91/G15/G3/G51/G17/G3/G9/G3/G61/G76/G79/G79/G76/G74/G15/G3/G58/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28 /G28/G24/G12/G3/G51/G85/G82/G70/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G49/G68/G87/G79/G17/G3/G36/G70/G68/G71/G17/G3/G54/G70/G76/G17/G3/G56/G54/G36 /G3/G28/G21/G15/G3/G24/G26/G25/G27/G16/G24/G26/G26/G21/G17
/G21/G24/G17/G3/G37/G82/G92/G79/G68/G81/G15/G3/G54/G17/G3/G36/G17/G15/G3/G54/G88/G75/G15/G3/G45/G16/G58/G17/G15/G3/G55/G75/G82/G80/G68/G86/G15/G3/G54/G17/G3/G48/G17/G3/G9/G3/G51/G85/G76/G70/G72 /G15/G3/G38/G17/G3/G58/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G28/G12/G3/G45/G17/G3/G37/G68/G70/G87/G17/G3 /G20/G26/G20/G15/G3/G21/G24/G24/G22/G16/G21/G24/G25/G21/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G28/G12/G17
/G21/G25/G17/G3/G36/G79/G79/G76/G86/G82/G81/G15/G3/G47/G17/G3/G36/G17/G15/G3/G48/G82/G92/G79/G72/G15/G3/G48/G17/G15/G3/G54/G75/G68/G79/G72/G86/G15/G3/G48/G17/G3/G9/G3/G44/G81/G74/G79/G72/G86/G15 /G3/G38/G17/G3/G45/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G24/G12/G17/G3/G38/G72/G79/G79/G3 /G23/G21/G15/G3/G24/G28/G28/G16/G25/G20/G19/G17
/G21/G26/G17/G3/G54/G90/G72/G72/G87/G86/G72/G85/G15/G3/G39/G17/G15/G3/G49/G82/G81/G72/G87/G15/G3/G48/G17/G3/G9/G3/G60/G82/G88/G81/G74/G15/G3/G53/G17/G3/G36/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G26/G12/G3/G51 /G85/G82/G70/G17
/G49/G68/G87/G79/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G36/G70/G68/G71/G17/G3/G54/G70/G76/G17/G3/G56/G54/G36/G3 /G27/G23/G15/G3/G20/G20/G28/G21/G16/G20/G20/G28/G25/G17
/G21/G27/G17/G3/G42/G85/G82/G83/G83/G15/G3/G44/G17/G15/G3/G53/G72/G76/G87/G72/G85/G15/G3/G58/G17/G3/G39/G17/G15/G3/G54/G72/G81/G87/G72/G81/G68/G70/G15/G3/G36/G17/G15/G3/G61/G76/G79/G79/G76/G74/G15 /G3/G58/G17/G15
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G54/G70/G75/G81/G68/G69/G72/G79/G15/G3/G53/G17/G15/G3/G55/G75/G82/G80/G80/G15/G3/G48/G17/G3/G9/G3/G54/G87/G72/G87/G87/G72/G85/G15/G3/G46/G17/G3/G50/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G27/G25/G12
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G54/G92/G86/G87/G72/G80/G17/G3/G36/G83/G83/G79/G17/G3/G48/G76/G70/G85/G82/G69/G76/G82/G79/G17/G3 /G26/G15/G3/G28/G24/G16/G20/G19/G20/G17
/G21/G28/G17/G3/G37/G72/G81/G81/G72/G85/G15/G3/G54/G17/G3/G36/G17/G15/G3/G40/G79/G79/G76/G81/G74/G87/G82/G81/G15/G3/G36/G17/G3/G39/G17/G3/G9/G3/G55/G68/G88/G72/G85/G15/G3/G36/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28 /G27/G28/G12/G3/G51/G85/G82/G70/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G49/G68/G87/G79/G17/G3/G36/G70/G68/G71/G17/G3/G54/G70/G76/G17/G3/G56/G54/G36/G3 /G3/G27/G25/G15/G3/G26/G19/G24/G23/G16/G26/G19/G24/G27/G17
/G22/G19/G17/G3/G45/G76/G81/G15/G3/G39/G17/G3/G45/G17/G3/G9/G3/G61/G75/G82/G88/G15/G3/G60/G17/G3/G49/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G25/G12/G3/G76/G81/G3/G48/G72/G87/G75/G82/G71/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G40 /G81/G93/G92/G80/G82/G79/G82/G74/G92
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G72/G71/G17/G3/G36/G71/G75/G92/G68/G15/G3/G54/G17/G11/G36/G70/G68/G71/G72/G80/G76/G70/G3/G51/G85/G72/G86/G86/G15/G3/G54/G68/G81/G3/G39/G76/G72/G74/G82/G12/G3 /G21/G26/G22/G15/G3/G22/G19/G19/G16/G22/G20/G28/G17
/G22/G20/G17/G3/G48/G70/G43/G72/G81/G85/G92/G15/G3/G38/G17/G3/G54/G17/G15/G3/G41/G79/G82/G90/G72/G85/G15/G3/G36/G17/G3/G48/G17/G3/G9/G3/G43/G68/G90/G78/G72/G85/G15/G3/G45/G17/G3/G53/G17/G3/G11 /G20/G28/G27/G27/G12
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G38/G68/G81/G70/G72/G85/G3/G38/G72/G79/G79/G86 /G3/G25/G15/G3/G22/G24/G16/G23/G20/G17
/G22/G21/G17/G3/G37/G79/G68/G81/G70/G82/G15/G3/G47/G17/G15/G3/G37/G72/G85/G81/G68/G71/G15/G3/G36/G17/G15/G3/G37/G79/G68/G86/G70/G82/G15/G3/G48/G17/G3/G36/G17/G3/G9/G3/G54/G68/G79/G68/G86/G15/G3 /G48/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G20/G12
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G42/G72/G81/G72/G3 /G20/G19/G19/G15/G3/G21/G26/G16/G22/G27
/G22/G22/G17/G3/G59/G76/G82/G81/G74/G15/G3/G60/G17/G3/G9/G3/G40/G76/G70/G78/G69/G88/G86/G75/G15/G3/G55/G17/G3/G43/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G19/G12/G3/G40/G48/G37/G50/G3/G45/G17/G3 /G28/G15/G3/G22/G22/G24/G22/G16/G22/G22/G25/G21/G17
/G22/G23/G17/G3/G55/G68/G88/G72/G85/G15/G3/G36/G17/G3/G9/G3/G37/G72/G81/G81/G72/G85/G15/G3/G54/G17/G3/G36/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G26/G12/G3/G51/G85/G82/G70/G17/G3/G49/G68/G87/G79/G17/G3/G36/G70 /G68/G71/G17/G3/G54/G70/G76/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G56/G54/G36/G3 /G28/G23/G15/G3/G24/G22/G16/G24/G27/G17
/G22/G24/G17/G3/G53/G72/G76/G70/G75/G68/G85/G71/G15/G3/G51/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G22/G12/G3/G54/G70/G76/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3 /G21/G25/G19/G15/G3/G20/G26/G26/G22/G16/G20/G26/G26/G26/G17
/G22/G25/G17/G3/G50/G10/G39/G82/G81/G81/G72/G79/G79/G15/G3/G48/G17/G15/G3/G50/G81/G85/G88/G86/G87/G15/G3/G53/G17/G15/G3/G39/G72/G68/G81/G15/G3/G41/G17/G3/G37/G17/G15/G3/G38/G75/G72/G81/G15/G3/G48 /G17/G3/G9
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G43/G88/G85/G90/G76/G87/G93/G15/G3/G45/G17/G11/G20/G28/G28/G22/G12/G3/G49/G88/G70/G79/G72/G76/G70/G3/G36/G70/G76/G71/G3/G53/G72/G86/G17/G3 /G21/G20/G15/G3/G20/G16/G22/G1719
/G22/G26/G17/G3/G38/G68/G80/G83/G69/G72/G79/G79/G15/G3/G36/G17/G3/G42/G17/G3/G9/G3/G53/G68/G92/G15/G3/G39/G17/G3/G54/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G20/G12/G3/G51/G85/G82/G70/G17/G3/G49/G68/G87/G79/G17 /G3/G36/G70/G68/G71/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G54/G70/G76/G17/G3/G56/G54/G36 /G3/G28/G19/G15/G3/G28/G22/G24/G19/G16/G28/G22/G24/G23/G17
/G22/G27/G17/G3/G47/G76/G74/G81/G72/G85/G15/G3/G45/G17/G15/G3/G43/G88/G74/G75/G72/G86/G15/G3/G55/G17/G3/G53/G17/G15/G3/G54/G75/G72/G89/G70/G75/G72/G81/G78/G82/G15/G3/G36/G17/G15/G3/G48/G68/G81/G81 /G15/G3/G48/G17/G15
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G47/G88/G81/G69/G79/G68/G71/G15/G3/G57/G17/G3/G9/G3/G38/G72/G70/G75/G15/G3/G55/G17/G3/G53/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G26/G12/G3/G54/G70/G76/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3 /G21/G26/G25/G15/G3/G24/G25/G20/G16/G24/G25/G26/G17
/G22/G28/G17/G3/G42/G82/G83/G68/G79/G68/G81/G15/G3/G57/G17/G15/G3/G37/G68/G91/G72/G89/G68/G81/G76/G86/G15/G3/G36/G17/G3/G39/G17/G15/G3/G47/G68/G81/G71/G86/G80/G68/G81/G15/G3/G39/G17/G3/G9/G3/G36 /G79/G87/G80/G68/G81/G15/G3/G54/G17
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G26/G12/G3/G45/G17/G3/G48/G82/G79/G17/G3/G37/G76/G82/G79/G17/G3 /G21/G25/G26/G15/G3/G27/G20/G27/G16/G27/G21/G28/G17
/G23/G19/G17/G3/G39/G68/G89/G76/G86/G15/G3/G37/G17/G3/G46/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G24/G12/G3/G51/G75/G76/G79/G17/G3/G55/G85/G68/G81/G86/G17/G53/G82/G92/G17/G54/G82/G70/G17/G11/G47/G82/G81/G71/G82/G81 /G12
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G37/G22/G24/G19 /G15/G22/G23/G24/G16/G22/G24/G21/G17
/G23/G20/G17/G3/G47/G68/G93/G70/G68/G81/G82/G15/G3/G36/G17/G15/G3/G57/G68/G79/G89/G72/G85/G71/G72/G15/G3/G57/G17/G15/G3/G43/G72/G85/G81/G68/G81/G71/G72/G93/G15/G3/G42/G17/G15/G3/G42/G68/G85/G76/G74 /G79/G76/G82/G15/G3/G51/G17/G15
/G3/G3/G3/G3/G41/G82/G91/G15/G3/G42/G17/G3/G40/G17/G3/G9/G3/G50/G85/G82/G15/G3/G45/G17/G3/G11/G20/G28/G28/G21/G12/G3/G45/G17/G3/G48/G82/G79/G17/G3/G40/G89/G82/G79/G17/G3 /G22/G24/G15/G3/G24/G21/G23/G16/G24/G22/G25/G1720
/G41/G76/G74/G88/G85/G72/G3/G79/G72/G74/G72/G81/G71/G86
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G20/G17/G3/G39/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68 /G76/G70
/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G17/G3/G55/G75/G72/G3/G85/G68/G81/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G85/G72/G86/G83/G72/G70/G87/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75 /G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72
/G82/G73/G3/G68/G71/G71/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G87/G82/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G15/G3/G76/G86/G3/G68/G81/G3/G76/G81/G71/G76/G70/G68/G87/G82/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G90/G75/G72/G81/G3/G68/G3 /G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81
/G73/G82/G85/G80/G72/G71/G3/G76/G81/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G83/G85/G72/G71/G76/G89/G72/G85/G74/G72/G81/G70/G72/G3/G72/G85/G68/G17/G3/G53/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G73/G76/G79/G72/G86/G3/G68 /G85/G72/G3/G86/G75/G82/G90/G81
/G73/G82/G85/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G70/G68/G87/G68/G79/G92/G93/G76/G81/G74/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G80/G82/G81/G82/G80/G72/G85/G3/G86/G92 /G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86
/G68/G81/G71/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G83/G85/G82/G78/G68/G85/G92/G82/G87/G72/G3/G70/G72/G79/G79/G3/G71/G76/G89/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G51/G85 /G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71
/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G68/G3/G80/G72/G80/G69/G85/G68/G81/G72/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G82/G81/G3/G83/G88/G80/G83/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G68/G81/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G82/G87/G75/G72/G85 /G80/G82/G83/G75/G76/G79/G76/G70
/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G73/G72/G85/G85/G72/G71/G82/G91/G76/G81/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G68/G81/G3/G68/G81/G68/G72/G85/G82/G69/G76/G70/G3/G72/G88/G69/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76 /G88/G80
/G72/G91/G72/G80/G83/G79/G76/G73/G92/G3/G89/G72/G85/G92/G3/G72/G68/G85/G79/G92/G15/G3/G83/G85/G72/G69/G76/G82/G87/G76/G70/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G17/G3/G36/G87/G3/G87/G82/G83/G15/G3/G68 /G80/G76/G81/G82
/G68/G70/G76/G71/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G74/G85/G82/G88/G83/G86/G15/G3/G90/G75/G82/G86/G72/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G68/G86/G86/G76/G74/G81/G72/G71/G3/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3 /G86/G68/G80/G72
/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72/G3/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G55/G85/G68/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G72/G68/G70/G75/G3/G86/G87 /G68/G74/G72
/G72/G73/G73/G72/G70/G87/G76/G89/G72/G79/G92/G3/G70/G82/G85/G85/G72/G86/G83/G82/G81/G71/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G68/G71/G71/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G82/G81/G72/G3/G85/G72/G68/G70/G87/G76/G82 /G81/G3/G86/G87/G72/G83/G3/G87/G82
/G68/G81/G3/G68/G80/G76/G81/G82/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G3/G69/G76/G82/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G87/G76/G70/G3/G83/G68/G87/G75/G90/G68/G92/G30/G3/G83/G68/G87/G75/G3/G79/G72/G81/G74/G87/G75/G3/G69/G72/G76 /G81/G74
/G80/G72/G68/G86/G88/G85/G72/G71/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G70/G76/G87/G85/G68/G87/G72/G3/G70/G92/G70/G79/G72/G17/G3/G40/G68/G70/G75/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G82/G71/G72
/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G90/G68/G86/G3/G72/G86/G87/G76/G80/G68/G87/G72/G71/G3/G87/G82/G3/G85/G72/G83/G85/G72/G86/G72/G81/G87/G3/G68/G3/G81/G82/G87/G76/G82/G81/G68/G79/G3/G76/G81/G87 /G72/G85/G89/G68/G79/G3/G82/G73
/G20/G19/G25/G3/G92/G85/G17/G27/G3/G41/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G92/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G86/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G72/G86
/G72/G91/G68/G80/G76/G81/G72/G71/G3/G68/G83/G83/G72/G68/G85/G3/G88/G81/G71/G72/G85/G3/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G17
/G41/G76/G74/G17/G3/G21/G17/G3/G51/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92/G3/G70/G88/G85/G89/G72/G86/G3/G83/G72/G68/G78/G3/G68/G87/G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G86/G87/G68/G74/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G82/G71 /G72
/G72/G89/G82/G79/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G69/G72/G86/G87/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G69/G72/G87/G90/G72/G72/G81/G3/G68/G86/G86/G76/G74/G81/G72/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G83/G68/G87/G87 /G72/G85/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71
/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G92/G3/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G70/G82/G81/G86/G72/G85/G89/G72/G71/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G3/G76/G81/G3/G72/G68/G70 /G75/G3/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G76/G70
/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G17/G3/G11/G68/G12/G3/G51/G85/G72/G69/G76/G82/G87/G76/G70/G15/G3/G70/G72/G79/G79/G3/G71/G76/G89/G76/G86/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G71/G72/G82/G91/G92/G85/G76/G69/G82/G81/G88/G70 /G79/G72/G82/G87/G76/G71/G72
/G86/G92/G81/G87/G75/G72/G86/G76/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G68/G70/G70/G72/G86/G86/G82/G85/G92/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G11/G69/G12/G3/G72/G81/G93/G92/G80/G72/G86/G3/G76 /G81/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G82/G85
/G53/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G85/G72/G89/G72/G85/G86/G72
/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G76/G82/G81/G17/G3/G39/G49/G36/G51/G15/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G11/G83/G82/G79/G3/G44/G16/G79/G76/G78/G72/G12/G3/G70/G68 /G87/G68/G79/G92/G87/G76/G7021
/G86/G76/G87/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G46/G79/G72/G81/G82/G90/G3/G73/G85/G68/G74/G80/G72/G81/G87/G15/G22/G21/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G20/G22/G27/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G25/G26/G15/G3/G90/G75/G72/G85/G72/G3/G81/G3/G76/G86
/G81/G88/G80/G69/G72/G85/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G76/G87/G72/G86/G3/G70/G82/G80/G83/G68/G85/G72/G71/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3 /G3/G87/G75/G72/G3/G73/G85/G68/G70/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G86/G76/G87/G72/G86/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75
/G76/G71/G72/G81/G87/G76/G70/G68/G79/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72/G86/G17/G3/G41/G71/G81/G15/G3/G73/G72/G85/G85/G72/G71/G82/G91/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G38/G17/G3/G83/G68/G86/G87/G72/G85/G76/G68/G81 /G88/G80/G15/G26/G3/G81/G3/G32
/G21/G24/G15/G3/G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G23/G27/G17/G3/G41/G40/G49/G16/G20/G15/G3/G24/G10/G16/G72/G91/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G68/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G75/G88/G80/G68/G81/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G40/G17/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76 /G15/G20/G27
/G81/G3/G32/G3/G21/G20/G24/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G21/G21/G17/G3/G41/G87/G86/G61/G15/G3/G73/G76/G79/G68/G80/G72/G81/G87/G82/G88/G86/G3/G87/G72/G80/G83/G72/G85/G68/G87/G88/G85/G72/G3/G86/G72/G81/G86/G76/G87/G76/G89/G72
/G80/G88/G87/G68/G81/G87/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G3/G82/G73/G3/G27/G3/G69/G68/G70/G87/G72/G85/G76/G68/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G20/G3/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G82/G81/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G76/G72/G86 /G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G20
/G70/G75/G79/G82/G85/G82/G83/G79/G68/G86/G87/G3/G86/G82/G88/G85/G70/G72/G15/G20/G26/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G22/G28/G19/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G23/G28/G17/G3/G51/G68/G85/G38/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G51/G68/G85/G40/G15
/G83/G68/G85/G87/G76/G87/G76/G82/G81/G3/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G76/G81/G86/G3/G38/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G40/G3/G82/G73/G3/G48/G92/G70/G82/G83/G79/G68/G86/G80/G68/G3/G75/G82/G80/G76/G81/G76 /G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G40/G17/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76/G15
/G21/G22/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G26/G20/G26/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G22/G19/G3/G11/G51/G68/G85/G38/G12/G15/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G25/G19/G21/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G22/G26/G3/G11/G51/G68/G85/G40/G12/G17/G3/G51/G47/G15
/G83/G85/G82/G87/G72/G82/G79/G76/G83/G76/G71/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G3/G82/G73/G3/G43/G14/G16/G36/G55/G51/G68/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G54/G17/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G82/G70/G68/G79/G71/G68/G85/G76/G88/G86 /G15/G20/G20/G3/G81/G3/G32
/G20/G20/G15/G3/G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G26/G22/G17/G3/G53/G49/G36/G51/G15/G3/G39/G49/G36/G3/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G83/G82/G79/G92/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87 /G86/G3/G15
/G10/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G39/G29/G3 /G3/G82/G73/G3/G40/G17/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76/G15/G3/G85/G83/G82/G37/G3/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G15/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G92/G72/G68/G86/G87/G15/G3/G85/G83/G69/G21
/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G15/G21/G26/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G22/G23/G21/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G23/G21/G30/G3/G3 /G10/G3/G82/G73/G3/G40/G17/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G92/G72/G68/G86/G87/G15/G3/G85/G83/G82/G21/G20
/G83/G85/G82/G71/G88/G70/G87/G15/G21/G25/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G22/G21/G23/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G23/G23/G30/G3/G39/G3/G82/G73/G3/G21/G3/G68/G85/G70/G75/G68/G72/G82/G81/G3/G86/G83/G72/G70/G76/G72/G86/G3/G68/G81/G71
/G92/G72/G68/G86/G87/G3/G86/G88/G69/G88/G81/G76/G87/G86/G3/G36/G38/G23/G19/G15/G3/G37/G23/G23/G15/G21/G23/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G21/G25/G24/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G25/G21/G17/G3/G53/G49/G36/G53/G15/G3/G53/G49/G36
/G71/G72/G83/G72/G81/G71/G72/G81/G87/G3/G53/G49/G36/G3/G85/G72/G83/G79/G76/G70/G68/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G20/G24/G3/G83/G79/G88/G86/G3/G86/G87/G85/G68/G81/G71/G3/G89/G76/G85/G88/G86/G72/G86/G15/G22/G22/G3/G81/G3/G32
/G20/G25/G27/G15/G3/G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G20/G25/G17/G3/G53/G49/G53/G15/G3/G85/G76/G69/G82/G81/G88/G70/G79/G72/G82/G87/G76/G71/G72/G3/G85/G72/G71/G88/G70/G87/G68/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G40/G17/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76
/G11/G70/G79/G68/G86/G86/G3/G44/G12/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G55/G17/G3/G68/G70/G76/G71/G82/G83/G75/G76/G79/G68 /G3/G11/G70/G79/G68/G86/G86/G3/G44/G44/G12/G22/G23/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G22/G25/G25/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G21/G23/G30
/G53/G55/G15/G3/G85/G72/G89/G72/G85/G86/G72/G3/G87/G85/G68/G81/G86/G70/G85/G76/G83/G87/G68/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G48/G92/G91/G82/G70/G82/G70/G70/G88/G86/G3/G91/G68/G81/G87/G75/G88/G86/G3/G11/G80/G86 /G48/G91/G20/G25/G21/G15
/G80/G86/G48/G91/G25/G24/G12/G3/G68/G81/G71/G3/G40/G17/G3/G70/G82/G79/G76/G3/G11/G80/G86/G40/G70/G25/G26/G15/G3/G80/G86/G40/G70/G37/G27/G25/G12/G15/G22/G22/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G20/G26/G27/G15/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G27/G22/G17
/G55/G82/G83/G82/G3/G44/G15/G3/G87/G92/G83/G72/G3/G44/G16/G24/G10/G3/G87/G82/G83/G82/G76/G86/G82/G80/G72/G85/G68/G86/G72/G3/G82/G73/G3/G54/G17/G3/G86/G75/G76/G69/G68/G87/G68/G72/G3/G37/G20/G21/G3 /G68/G81/G71/G3/G55/G17
/G80/G68/G85/G76/G87/G76/G80/G68/G15/G21/G20/G3/G81/G3/G32/G3/G21/G22/G19/G15/G3/G3 /G3/G32/G3/G19/G17/G24/G19/G17/G3/G83/G15/G3/G83/G85/G82/G69/G68/G69/G76/G79/G76/G87/G92/G3/G87/G75/G68/G87/G3/G85/G72/G86/G76/G71/G88/G72
/G68/G81/G71/G3/G70/G82/G71/G82/G81/G3/G73/G85/G72/G84/G88/G72/G81/G70/G92/G3/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G86/G3/G90/G72/G85/G72/G3/G73/G85/G82/G80/G3/G86/G68/G80/G72/G3/G88/G81 /G71/G72/G85/G79/G92/G76/G81/G74
/G71/G76/G86/G87/G85/G76/G69/G88/G87/G76/G82/G81/G15/G3/G90/G76/G87/G75/G3/G74/G82/G82/G71/G81/G72/G86/G86/G3/G82/G73/G3/G73/G76/G87/G3/G71/G72/G87/G72/G85/G80/G76/G81/G72/G71/G3/G69/G92/G3/G68
/G46/G82/G79/G80/G82/G74/G82/G85/G82/G89/G16/G54/G80/G76/G85/G81/G82/G89/G3/G87/G72/G86/G87/G1722 |
arXiv:physics/9911038v1 [physics.bio-ph] 17 Nov 1999Super-paramagnetic clustering of yeast gene
expression profiles
G. Getza, E. Levinea, E. Domanyaand M. Q. Zhangb
aDepartment of Physics of Complex Systems, Weizmann Institu te of Science,
Rehovot 76100, Israel
bCold Spring Harbor Laboratory, P. O. Box 100, Cold Spring Har bor, New York
11724, USA
Abstract
High-density DNA arrays, used to monitor gene expression at a genomic scale, have
produced vast amounts of information which require the deve lopment of efficient
computational methods to analyze them. The important first s tep is to extract
the fundamental patterns of gene expression inherent in the data. This paper de-
scribes the application of a novel clustering algorithm, Su per-Paramagnetic Cluster-
ing (SPC) to analysis of gene expression profiles that were ge nerated recently during
a study of the yeast cell cycle. SPC was used to organize genes into biologically rel-
evant clusters that are suggestive for their co-regulation . Some of the advantages of
SPC are its robustness against noise and initialization, a c lear signature of cluster
formation and splitting, and an unsupervised self-organiz ed determination of the
number of clusters at each resolution. Our analysis reveale d interesting correlated
behavior of several groups of genes which has not been previo usly identified.
1 Introduction
DNA microarray technologies have made it straightforward t o monitor simul-
taneously the expression levels of thousands of genes durin g various cellular
processes [1][2]. The new challenge is to make sense of such m assive expression
data [3]. In most such experiments, investigators compare t he relative change
of gene expression levels between two samples (one is called the target, such
as a disease sample; the other is called the control, such as a normal sample).
In a typical experiment simultaneous expression levels of t housands of genes
are viewed over a few tens of time-points (or different tissue s [4]). Hence one
needs to analyse arrays that contain 105−106measurements.
The aims of such analysis are typically to (a) group genes wit h correlated
expression profiles; (b) Focus on those groups which seem to p articipate in
Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 2 February 2008some biological process; (c) Provide a biological interpre tation of the clusters.
Interpretations could be co-regulation of the mean cluster expression with a
known process, a promoter common to most of the genes in the cl uster, etc.
(d) In experiments that compare data from different tissues ( such as tumor
and normal [4]) one also tries to differentiate them on the bas is of their genetic
expression profiles.
The sizes of the datasets and their complexity call for multi -variant cluster-
ing techniques which are essential for extracting correlat ed patterns in the
swarm of data points in multidimensional space (for example , each relative
gene expression profile with k time-points may be regarded as a k-dimensional
vector).
2 SPC
Currently, two clustering appoaches are very popular among biologists. One
is average linkage, a hierarchical clustering method [5], w ith the Pearson cor-
relation used as a similarity measure [6]. The other is self- organizing maps
(SOMs) [7], whose most popular implementation for array dat a analysis is
GENECLUSTER [8].
We present here clustering performed by SPC, a hierarchical clustering method
recently introduced by Blatt et al [9]. It is based on an analo gy to the physics
of inhomogeneous ferromagnets. Full details of the algorit hm [10] and the
underlying philosophy [11] are given elsewhere ; here only a brief description
is provided.
The input required for SPC is a distance matrix between the Ndata points
that are to be clustered. From such a distance matrix one cons tructs a graph,
whose vertices are the data points and edges identify neighb oring points. Two
points iandjare called neighbors (and connected by an edge) if they satis fy
theK-mutual-neighbor criterion, i.e. iff jis one of the Knearest points to i
and vice versus. With each edge we associate a weight Jij>0, which decreases
as the distance between points iandjincreases.
Assignement of the datapoints to clusters is equivalent to p artitioning this
weighted graph. Cluster indices play the role of the states o f Potts spins as-
signed to each vertex (i.e. to each original data point). Two neighboring spins
are interacting ferromagnetically with strength Jij. This Potts ferromagnet is
simulated at a sequence of temperatures T. The susceptibility and the correla-
tion function for neighboring pairs of spins are measured. T he pair correlation
function serves to identify clusters: high correlation mea ns that the two data
points belong to the same cluster.
2The temperature Tcontrols the resolution at which clustering is performed;
the algorithm finds typical clusters at all resolutions. At v ery low temperatures
all points belong to a single cluster and as Tis increased, clusters break
into smaller ones until at high enough temperatures each poi nt forms its own
cluster. The clusters found at all temperatures form a dendr ogram. Blatt et
al showed that the SPC algorithm is robust since the clusters are formed due
to collective behavior of the system. The major splits can be easily identified
by a peak in the susceptibility. For more details see [9–11].
3 Yeast Cell Cycle and Microarray Data
We applied SPC on a recently published data set [14] to determ ine whether
it could automatically expose known clusters without using prior knowledge.
Eisen et al [6] clustered the genes on the basis of data combined from 7 dif-
ferent experiments. We suspected that mixing the results of different experi-
ments may introduce noise into the data associated with a sin gle one. There-
fore we chose to use only a single time course, that of gene exp ression as
measured in a single process (cell division cycles followin g alpha-factor block-
and-release [12]). Furthermore, we focused on genes that ha ve characterized
functions (2467 genes) for easier interpretation.
Genetic controls and regulation play a central role in deter mination of cell
fate during development. They are also important for the tim ing of cell cycle
events such as DNA replication, mitosis and cytokinesis. Ye ast is a single cel-
lular organism, which has become a favorite model in molecul ar biology due
to the easiness of genetic and biochemical manipulation and the availability of
the complete genome. Like all living cells, the yeast cell cy cle consists of four
phases: G1 →S→G2→M→G1..., where S is the phase of DNA synthesis (repli-
cating the genome); M stands for mitosis (division into two d aughter cells),
and the two gap phases are called G1 (preceding the S phase) an d G2 (follow-
ing the S phase). At least four different classes of cell cycle regulated genes
exist in yeast [13]: G1 cyclins and DNA synthesis genes are ex pressed in late
G1; histone genes in S; genes for transcription factors, cel l cycle regulators and
replication initiation proteins in G2; and genes needed for cell separation are
expressed as cells enter G1. Early and late G1-specific trans cription is medi-
ated by the Swi5/Ace2 and Swi4/Swi6 classes of factors, resp ectively. Changes
in the master cyclin/Cdc28 kinases are involved in all class es of regulation.
In the alpha-factor block-release experiments, MATa cells were first arrested in
G1 by using alpha pheromone. Then the blocker was removed; fr om this point
on the cell division cycle starts and the population progres ses with significant
cell cycle synchrony. RNA was extracted from the synchroniz ed sample, as
well as a control sample (asynchronous cultures of the same c ells growning
3exponentially at the same temperature in the same medium).
Fluorescently labeled cDNA was synthesized using Cy3 (”gre en”) for the con-
trol and Cy5 (”red”) for the target. Mixtures of equal amount s of the two
samples were taken at every 7min and competitively hybridiz ed to individual
microarrays containing essentially all yeast genes. The ra tio of red to green
light intensity (proportional to the RNA concentrations) w as measured by
scanning laser microscopy (See [12] for experimental detai ls). The actual data
provided at the Stanford website [14] is the log ratios.
In the their analysis, Spellman et al. were focusing on ident ification of 800 cell
cycle regulated genes (that may have periodic expression pr ofiles). In our test
of SPC, in addition to oscillatory genes we were also looking for any groups
of genes with highly correlated expression patterns.
4 SPC Analysis of Yeast Gene Expression Profiles
We clustered the expression profiles of the 2467 yeast genes o f known func-
tion over data taken at 18 time intervals (of 7 min) during two cell division
cycles, synchronised by alpha arrest and release. Denote by Eijthe relative
expression of gene iat time interval j. Our data consist of 2467 points in an
18-dimensional space, normalised in the standard way:
Gij=Eij−<Ei>
σi;< E i>=1
18/summationtext18
j=1Eij;σ2
i=1
18/summationtext18
j=1E2
ij−< E i>2
We looked for clusters of genes with correlated expression p rofiles over the
two division cycles. The SPC algorithm was used with q= 20 component
Potts spins, each interacting with those neighbors that sat isfy the K-mutual
neighbor criterion[10] with K= 10. Euclidean distance between the normal-
ized vectors was used as the distance between two genes. This distance is
proportional to the Pearson correlation used by Eisen et. al. .
AtT= 0 all datapoints form one cluster, which splits as the syste m is
“heated”. The resulting dendrogram of genes is presented in Fig. 1. Each node
represents a cluster; only clusters of size larger than 6 gen es are shown. The
last such clusters of each branch, as well as non-terminal cl usters that were
selected for presentation and analysis (in a way described b elow) are shown
as boxes. The circled boxes represent the clusters that are a nalysed below.
The position of every node along the horizontal axis is deter mined for the
corresponding cluster according to a method introduced by A lon et al [4];
proximity of two clusters along this axis indicates that the corresponding tem-
poral expression profiles are not very different. The vertica l axis represents the
4resolution, controlled by the “temperature” T≥0. The vertical position of a
node or box is determined by the value of Tat which it splits. A high verti-
cal position indicates that the cluster is stable, i.e. cont ains a fair number of
closely-spaced data points (genes with similar expression profiles).
In order to identify clusters of genes whose temporal variat ion is on the scale
of the cell cycle, we calculated for each cluster a cycle score S1, defined as
follows. First, for each cluster C(with NCgenes) we calculate the average
normalized expression level at all j= 1, ...,18 time intervals and the corre-
sponding standard deviations σC(j):
¯GC(j) =1
NC/summationdisplay
i∈CGij [σC(j)]2=1
NC/summationdisplay
i∈C(Gij)2−[¯GC(j)]2
Next, we evaluated the Fourier transform of the mean express ion profiles ¯GC(j)
for every gene cluster C. To suppress initial transients, the Fourier transform
is performed only over j= 4, ...,18. Denote the absolute values of the Fourier
coefficients by Ak; the ratio between low-frequency coefficients and the high-
frequency ones was used as a figure of merit for the time scale o f the variation.
We observed that clusters that satisfy the condition
SC
1=/summationtext4
k=2Ak/summationtext8
k=6Ak>2.15 (1)
have the desired time dependence, and found 29 clusters (con sisting of 167
genes) to have such scores. For many of these clusters, howev er, the temporal
variation was very weak, i.e. of the same order as the standar d deviations
σC(j) of the individual gene expressions of the cluster. We define d another
score, SC
2, for which we required
SC
2=1
1818/summationdisplay
j=1/bracketleftBigg¯GC(j)
σC(j)/bracketrightBigg2
>5.6 (2)
For clusters Cthat satisfy this condition the “signal” significantly exce eds the
noise. We select a cluster if its score exceeds 5.6, while its parent’s score does
not. Only 4 clusters, containing 86 genes, satisfy both cond itions (1) and (2);
these are numbered 1 – 4 on Fig. 1. Seven additional relativel y stable clusters
which did notsatisfy our two criteria, but are of interest, are also selec ted and
circled on figure 1.
The corresponding time sequences are shown in Fig 2: ¯GC(j) is plotted for each
cluster versus time j, with the error bars representing the standard deviations
σC(j). Clusters 1,2 and 4 clearly corresponds to the cell cycle.
5500 1000 1500 200015202530354045
104 1135
827196
Fig. 1. Dendrogram of genes. Clusters 1 - 4 were selected acco rding to our criteria,
eq. (1 - 2). The other circled and numbered clusters are also i nteresting (see text).
5 Details and Interpretation of gene clustering.
The full lists of genes that constitute the 11 selected clust ers are given in our
website [15]. We present here a short analysis of our cluster s. We use standard
notation for bases: R stands for A or G, W for A or T, K for G or T, N for
any base.
Cluster # 1: These are mostly Late G1 phase specific genes. They con-
tain the major cell cycle regulators: Cln1,2, Clb5,6 and Swi 4 as well as DNA
replication and repair genes. One can easily detect MCB (ACG CGT) or SCB
(CRCGAAA) sites in their promoters to which MBF (Swi6p+Mbp1 p) and
SBF (Swi6p+Swi4p) bind respectively [13].
Cluster # 4: This cluster contains mostly S phase genes and is dominated b y
the histones. Histones are required for wrapping up nascent DNA into nucle-
osomes, their promoters are regulated by CCA (GCGAARYTNGRG AACR),
NEG (CATTGNGCG) as well as SCB (CGCGAAA) [3].
Cluster # 2: These are mostly G2/M phase genes. They contain the ma-
jor cell cycle regulators: Clb1,2 and Swi5/Ace2. It is known that all genes
co-regulated with Clb1,2 are mainly controlled by either Mc m1 at P-box
60 10 20−101
Cluster #1 (Nc =35)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #2 (Nc =22)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #3 (Nc =11)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #4 (Nc =18)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #5 (Nc =11)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #6 (Nc =9)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #7 (Nc =42)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #8 (Nc =11)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #9 (Nc =23)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #10 (Nc =13)
0 10 20−101
Cluster #11 (Nc =7)
Fig. 2. Mean normalized expression of selected clusters, ve rsus time, measured at
intervals of 7 minutes. Error bars represent the standard de viations σC(j).Ncis the
number of genes in each cluster. The clusters are numbered as in figure 1.
(TTWCCYAAWNNGGWAA) or by Mcm1+SFF through the composite si te:
(P-box)N2-4RTAAAYAA [12][3].
Clusters # 5, # 6 and # 8: These are mostly ribosomal protein (RP)
genes. The genome of Saccharomyces cerevisiae contains 137 genes coding for
ribosomal proteins [16]. Since 59 genes are duplicated, the ribosomal gene fam-
ily encodes 78 different proteins, 32 of the small and 46 of the large ribosomal
subunit. They are co-regulated because they are sub-compon ents of ribosome
machinery for protein translation. All genes in cluster #6 r eside on chromo-
somes 2, 4 and 5, except rpl11b which resides on chromosome 9. All genes
in clusters #5 and #8 (which are very close in the dendrogram o f Figure 1)
reside on chromosomes 8-16, except rps17b which resides on c hromosome 4.
It is likely that the expression of these ribosomal genes is c orrelated to their
chromosomal locations. It is interesting that the expressi on profiles appear to
7have pronounced oscillations (throughout in #5, at early ti mes in #6 and late
times in #8). Like most of the RP genes, the ribosomal genes in the 3 clusters
also contain multiple global Regulator Rap1p binding sites in their promoters
within a preferred window of 15-26 bp [17]. The transcriptio n of most RP
genes is activated by two Rap1p binding sites, 250 to 400 bp up stream from
the initiation of transcription. Since Rap1p can be both an a ctivator and a
silencer, it is not known whether Rap1p is responsible for th e oscillation. This
oscillation could be a result of interplay between cell cycl e and Rap1p activity
which determines the mean half life of the RP mRNAs (5-7min, [ 18]). As fresh
medium was added at 91min during the alpha-factor experimen ts, the genes
in #6 and in #8 may have different responses to the nutrient cha nge.
Cluster #7: This cluster has 42 genes that are largely not cell cycle regu -
lated. These genes have diverse functions in general metabo lism. When search-
ing promoter regions for regulatory elements using gibbsDN A [20], a highly
conserved motif GCGATGAGNT is shared by 90 % of genes. This el ement
seems to be novel, it has some similarity to Gcn4p site TGACTC and Yap1p
site GCTGACTAATT [19]. When searching the yeast promoter da tabase -
SCPD [21], we found that the BUF site in the HO gene promoter an d the
UASPHR site in the Rad50 promoter appear to contain the core m otif GAT-
GAG. Although we do not know if this element is functional or w hat might be
the trans-factor, it is still very likely that it may contrib ute the co-regulation
of this cluster of genes.
Cluster #10: This cluster is characterized by a pronounced dip towards th e
end of the profile. They are not cell cycle regulated by and lar ge, except Clb4
(a S/G2 cyclin ) and Rad54 (a G1 DNA repair gene). By searching promoter
elements, we found a conserved motif RNNGCWGCNNC that is sha red by a
subset of the genes (Clb4, YNL252C, Rad54, Rpb10, Atp11 and P ex13). It
partially matches a PHO4 binding motif (TCGGGCCACGTGCAGCG AT) in
the promoter of Pho8. However, the PHO4 consensus, CACGTK, d oes not
appear in the conserved motif of our cluster. Therefore we su spect that it is a
novel motif which should be tested by experiments.
6 Summary
We used the SPC algorithm to cluster gene expression data for the yeast
genome. We were able to identify groups of genes with highly c orrelated tem-
poral variation. Three of the groups found clearly correspo nd to well known
phases of the cell cycle; some of our observations of other cl usters reveal fea-
tures that have not been identified previously and may serve a s the basis of
future experimental investigations.
8Acknowledgements
Research of E. Domany was partially supported by the Germany -Israel Science
Foundation (GIF) and the Minerva foundation. Research of M. Q. Zhang was
partially supported by NIH/NHGRI under the grant number HG0 1696.
References
[1] Lockhart DJ, Dong H, Byrne MC, et al. (1996) Nat. Biotech. 14, 1675-1680.
[2] De Risi J, Iyer V and Brown PO (1997) Science 278, 680-686.
[3] Zhang MQ (1999) Genome Res. 9, 681-688.
[4] Alon, U., Barkai, N., Notterman, D.A., Gish, K., Ybarra, S., Mack, D., AND
Levine, A. J. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 96, 6745–6750.
[5] Hartigan J (1975) Clustering Algorithms (Wiley, New York).
[6] Eisen M, Spellman PT, Brown PO and Botstein D (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA 95, 14863-14868.
[7] Kohonen T (1997) Self-Organizing Maps (Springer, Berli n).
[8] Tamayo P, Slonim D, Mesirov J et al. (1999) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96,
2907-2912.
[9] Blatt, M., Wiseman, S., and Domany, E. 1996a. “Super–par amagnetic clustering
of data”, Physical Review Letters 76, 3251–3255.
[10] M. Blatt, S. Wiseman and E. Domany, Neural Computation 91805 (1997).
[11] E. Domany, Physica A 263 , 158 (1999)
[12] Spellman PT, Sherlock G, Zhang MQ et al. (1998) Mol. Biol. Cell. 9, 3273-3297.
[13] Koch C and Nasmyth K (1994) Curr. Biol. 6 , 451-459.
[14] The data can be obtained from http://cellcycle-www.st andford.edu
[15] http://www.weizmann.ac.il/physics/complex/clust ering/
[16] Mager WH, Planta RJ, Ballesta JG et al. (1997) Nucl. Acid. Res. 25, 4872-4875.
[17] Lascaris RF, Mager WH and Planta RJ (1999). Bioinformatics 15, 267-277.
[18] Li B, Nierras CR and Warner JR (1999). Mol Cell Biol 19, 5393-5404.
[19] Hinnebusch AG (1992). In The Molecular and Cellular Biology of the Yeast
Sacchromyces: Gene Expression , Vol.2, pp319, Cold Spring Harbor Press, New
York.
[20] Zhang MQ (1999a). Comput. Chem. 23, 233-250.
[21] Zhu J and Zhang MQ (1999). Bioinformatics 15, 607-611.
9 |
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400t(s)V(µ µV)
15
FIGURE 1 a)
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
400t(s)V(µ µV)
15
FIGURE 1 b)00.51
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8f(Hz)
FIGURE 2 a)
00.20.4
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8f(Hz)
FIGURE 2 b)V(t)V(t+τ τ)
400400
-300-300
FIGURE 3 a)
V(t)V(t+τ τ)
400400
-300-300
FIGURE 3 b)
FIGURE 4 a)
FIGURE 4 b)
1 of 1
FIGURE 5
1 of 1
1 of 1FIGURE 7 a)
FIGURE 7 b)
FIGURE 7 c)
FIGURE 8 a)
FIGURE 8 b)
Correlation Dimension Maps of EEG
from epileptic Absences
*Carla Silva (MSc), +Iveta R. Pimentel (DPhil), *Alexandre Andrade (MSc),
#John P. Foreid (MD) and *Eduardo Ducla-Soares (PhD)
*Institute of Biophysics and Biomedical Engineering and +Condensed Matter Physics Centre,
University of Lisbon, Campo Grande, 1700 Lisboa. # Portuguese Institute of Oncology, Lisboa.
Summary
Purpose: The understanding of brain activity, and in particular events such as epileptic seizures, lies on
the characterisation of the dynamics of the neural networks. The theory of non-linear dynamics
provides signal analysis techniques which may give new information on the behaviour of such
networks. Methods: We calculated correlation dimension maps for 19-channel EEG data from 3
patients with a total of 7 absence seizures. The signals were analysed before, during and after the
seizures. Phase randomised surrogate data was used to test chaos. Results: In the seizures of two
patients we could distinguish two dynamical regions on the cerebral cortex, one that seemed to exhibit
chaos whereas the other seemed to exhibit noise. The pattern shown is essentially the same for seizures
triggered by hyperventilation, but differ for seizures triggered by light flashes. The chaotic dynamics
that one seems to observe is determined by a small number of variables and has low complexity. On
the other hand, in the seizures of another patient no chaotic region was found. Before and during the
seizures no chaos was found either, in all cases. Conclusions: The application of non-linear signal
analysis revealed the existence of differences in the spatial dynamics associated to absence seizures.
This may contribute to the understanding of those seizures and be of assistance in clinical diagnosis.
Key words: EEG, Absences, Epilepsy, Chaos, Correlation Dimension.
1. Introduction
Over the last few years there has been an increasing interest in the application of non-linear dynamics
theory, commonly referred as chaos theory, to brain activity. Those studies have mostly been
concerned with EEG signals from intracranial or scalp recordings, in animals or human subjects, and
considered in particular epilepsy, sleep, cognitive and evoked responses (see e.g. Elbert et al 1994, and
Pritchards and Duke 1995).
Chaos theory (Schuster 1984, Bassingthwaighte et al 1994, Elbert et al. 1994) allows a characterisation
of the dynamics of complex systems from the analysis of a signal generated by the system, which
consists of a series of measurements in time of a pertinent and easily accessible variable. In brain
studies one uses EEG data to investigate the dynamics of the brain neuronal networks.
EEG signals show in general great irregularity that may have different origins, i.e. it may be simply
due to noise or otherwise may reflect the presence of chaos. Chaos is irregular behaviour that occurs in
deterministic systems with a small number of independent variables that are non-linear. Noise is
simply produced by random fluctuation of many variables. Chaos theory allows a distinction on wether
1 of 9the irregularities in the EEG signal are due to chaos or noise. Such approach may therefore provide a
new insight into the dynamics of brain activity since the two situations involve different underlying
mechanisms. In the presence of chaos, the complexity of the dynamics can be quantified in terms of
the properties of the attractor in phase-space, e.g. its correlation dimension D2. Dimensional analysis
may therefore provide a classification of brain activity in terms of its complexity. However a careful
discussion is necessary to distinguish chaos from noise because finding a correlation dimension D2 is a
necessary but not a sufficient condition for chaos. Even though the presence of chaos cannot be
assured, the correlation dimension analysis may provide valuable information as a tool to detect
differences in the dynamic behaviour associated to different degrees of determinism.
There are different types of epilepsy (Lopes da Silva and Niedermeyer 1993), with a focal or
generalised nature. Epileptic seizures may occur spontaneously or may be induced by various means.
Well-controlled intracranial EEG recordings were performed in rats with focal epilepsy and the data
was analysed using chaos theory (Pijn et al. 1991), in order to test the ability of this tool to detect the
epileptogenic focus and the spread of the seizure activity. A decrease of the correlation dimension D2
was observed at the seizure onset. Later, chaos analysis was applied to intracranial EEG recordings
from a group of patients with unilateral temporal lobe epilepsy (Lehnerty and Elger 1995). A low value
of D2 was found during the seizure, again especially at the zone of ictal onset. Recently, Pijn et al.
(1997) carried out a very thorough analysis of chaos in intracranially EEG recorded signals, during
interictal and ictal states, of temporal lobe epileptic patients. Although they were not able to ascribe a
value of D2 to the signals showing seizure activity, they found significant evidence of the existence of
a considerable degree of determinism in the system generating those signals. On the contrary, they
found that signals from areas that did not show seizure activity were almost indistinguishable from
their randomised versions, regardless of whether they were recorded during interictal or ictal states.
They then concluded that, in the particular case studied, chaos analysis yields good results in terms of
locating the epileptogenic region and following the ictal spread throughout the brain. Looking at a
generalised type of epilepsy, Babloyanz and Destexhe (1986), who were the first to apply chaos theory
to epileptic activity, analysed EEG signals from an absence seizure, recorded at two different sites on
the brain. They found chaos in the signals, with a low value of D2 which implies low complexity.
Chaotic behaviour with a higher value of D2 was also reported (Frank et al. 1990) for epileptic activity
but, in this case, the seizures were a generalised state with both absence and grand mal events.
In this work we present a chaos analysis of 19-channel EEG data normally recorded in a clinical
setting, from patients with absence seizures. This type of generalised epilepsy usually invades the
entire cerebral cortex and shows, in general, a bilateral symmetry between the two hemispheres. Our
purpose on analysing such a set of channels is to detect possible spatial variations in the cerebral
dynamics. We present maps of the correlation dimension D2 over the brain, for a total of 7 seizures
from 3 patients, stimulated either by hyperventilation or light flashes. Those seizures were selected
from a more extended set of data (18 seizures from 9 patients) as they are representative of the
different dynamical behaviours that we found and that will be presented in this work. We analyse the
EEG signals before, during and after the epileptic seizures, in order to look at differences in the
dynamics of the neuronal networks at the various states. This may allow a characterisation of the
epileptic activity. In order to have a stronger test to distinguish chaos from noise we compare our
original EEG signals with surrogate data obtained through phase randomisation of their Fourier
components (Pijn et al. 1991).
2. Materials and Methods
2.1 Data acquistion
2 of 9Electroencephalographic recordings of 19 channels in a standard 10/20 referential configuration, were
taken from patients with absences. The signals were recorded before, during and after the epileptic
seizures. These were triggered by hyperventilation or light flashes. The reference potential was given
by the average of the signals at electrodes located on each side of the chin. A Bio-Logic recording
system was used with an acquisition rate of 100Hz or 200Hz, and the signals were filtered high-pass
1Hz and for the sampling rate of 200Hz also with a low-pass 70Hz (the highest value available for
spontaneous activity recording, in the system used).
2.2 Data analysis
We start by presenting the most traditional forms of data analysis, direct inspection of the time series,
power spectrum and auto-correlation, and then evolve into techniques of chaos theory, which will
allow a distinction on wether the irregularities in the EEG signals are noise or possibly chaos; in the
latter case a quantitative characterisation of the complexity of the dynamics is provided in terms of the
correlation dimension D2.
EEG signal. Signals associated to a triggered epileptic seizure were observed over the entire scalp. Fig.
1 shows EEG recordings at two different channels on a patient. During the seizure the electrical
potential of the brain V(t) suddenly increases by typically a factor of ten, switching into a series of
spike - slow wave complexes with a dominant frequency of ≈ 3Hz, which shows some irregularity. All
the signals observed, at the different channels on each patient, seem to exhibit the same structure,
though with differences in amplitude depending on the site. The measured seizures had durations from
about 7 to 15s.
Power spectrum. The power spectrum gives information on the frequency values present in the signal
and their weights. Although the power spectrum has played a major role in data analysis, it misses
crucial information on the phase contents of the signals. Fig. 2 shows the power spectrum of the
signals in Fig. 1. One can see a large peak at ≈ 3Hz (and the harmonic at ≈ 6Hz), and a broad band
around that value extending from lower to higher frequencies. This band is associated to the
irregularities in the EEG signal. The power spectrum for all the signals, at the different channels on a
patient, seem to exhibit the same structure, though again with differences in amplitude depending on
the site.
Auto-correlation. The auto-correlation function, defined as A(t) = ∫ V(t')V(τ +t')dt', gives information
on the correlations in time present in the signal. We calculated the auto-correlation for the EEG signal
at the different channels in each patient and found that it is an oscillating function with a decaying
envelope. This indicates that the signal has important correlations but they decay which implies that
there is loss of information in time.
The scalp electrical potential of the brain that one measures results from a set of d independent
variables Xi(t), which specify the state of the system at any time. Those variables define a
d-dimensional phase-space, in which the state of the system is represented by A
chaotic system is characterised by having an attractor, that is a limiting set of points to which all
trajectories are attracted in the phase-space. The attractor has a fractal structure and the complexity of
the dynamics can be quantified in terms of the correlation dimension of the attractor D2. D2 is a lower
estimator of the Hausdorff dimension D which measures the occupation of the attractor in phase-space
(D2<D<d).
In order to investigate the chaotic nature of the dynamics, and possibly measure its complexity, one
needs to reconstruct the dynamics of the system in phase-space from the measured time series V(t).
This can be done by the "method of time delays" (Takens 1981), which is based on building vectors
3 of 9associated to each time ti on the time series, with components that are the signal at time ti plus an
increasing number of time delays τ :
Those vectors create a pseudo phase-space with dimension m, which is topologically equivalent to the
original phase space, for m≥ 2d+1. We take τ equal to the first zero crossing of the auto-correlation, so
that the original and delayed signals are not strongly correlated; this is a usual choice for τ , and the
results do not depend significantly on τ when it is taken within reasonable limits (Schuster 1984,
Fraser and Swinney 1986, Libert and Schuster 1989, Bassingthwaighte et al 1994, Elbert et al. 1994).
Map. A look into the phase-space of the system can be obtained via the map, that is the plot of V(t+τ )
vs V(t). The map represents a projection of the attractor in the pseudo phase-space and reflects the
correlations in the signal. In Fig. 3 we present the maps corresponding to the signals in Fig. 1. The two
maps are clearly different: in a) one can identify an attractor which reflects particular correlations in
the signal and may therefore imply chaos, whereas in b) the space is more or less uniformly covered
which is more characteristic of noise. This kind of analysis is giving for the first time evidence that
although the EEG time series look similar in all the channels, indeed different dynamics may be
occurring in different areas of the brain.
Correlation dimension. Using the Grassberger-Procaccia (1983a, 1983b) algorithm to determine the
correlation dimension D2, one defines the correlation integral:
where, θ (x) = 1 if x ≥ 0, θ (x) = 0 if x < 0, and N is the number of points in the time series. Cm(r)
measures the fraction of pairs of points in space that are closer than r. If the system is chaotic one has
that for sufficiently large m, m>m*, the correlation integral takes the following scaling form,
independent of m,
C(r) ~ rD2 (1)
with the exponent giving the correlation dimension D2 of the attractor corresponding to the measured
signal. Hence D2 can be obtained from the slope of ln C(r) vs ln r. The quantity m* is the minimal
embedding dimension as it is the lowest integer dimension containing the whole attractor; m* gives
information on the number of independent variables governing the dynamics of the system.
The correlation integrals associated to the signals in Fig. 1 are shown in Fig. 4. In order to avoid
spurious effects we made the "Theiler correction" to auto-correlation in the correlation integrals
(Theiler 1986, Theiler 1990). In the plots of the correlation integral, the region that is relevant for the
analysis of the epileptic signal is the one corresponding to the larger values of r, the region for the
smaller values of r being strongly contaminated by small amplitude noise from different origins. It is
clear that the channels in a) and b) exhibit different behaviour. One observes that in a) there is a region
where the correlation integral behaves like (1), which means that ln Cm(r) has a constant slope, also
independent of m. Such behaviour is translated into the presence of a plateau in the plot of the slopes,
and its value gives the correlation dimension D2. The embedding dimension m* is given by the value
of m above which the plateau sets. We therefore conclude that the EEG signal in Fig. 1-a) seems to
exhibit chaotic behaviour. By contrast, in b) no plateau is observed in the plot of the slopes, which
4 of 9means that the correlation integral never behaves like (1), and hence the EEG signal in Fig. 1-b) does
not exhibit chaotic behaviour. One could expect that even the presence of small amplitude noise could
blur the appearance of a plateau. In order to have some sensitivity to that problem, we made a
simulation in which we considered a sinusoidal signal mixed with different levels of noise, and
verified that even in the presence of noise which is 40% of the signal, the plateau remains defined.
This implies that the presence or absence of a plateau in the EEG signals is intrinsic to the signal, up to
that level of noise. The results here obtained from the correlation integrals confirm the observations
made from the maps.
Chaos vs noise. Finding a finite correlation dimension D2 does not however necessarily imply having
chaos, because coloured (i.e. power law spectra) noise may also give rise to it (Osborne and
Provenzale 1989). In order to distinguish chaos from noise, we built a control signal that has the same
power spectrum as the measured signal, but has randomised phases. Then we compared the measured
and control signals via the correlation integral slope: only if the two look different may it be concluded
that the measured signal is not noise and may be chaotic. Fig. 5 shows the correlation integral and
respective slope for the control signal corresponding to the signal of Fig. 1-a), to be compared with Fig
4-a). One clearly sees the difference between the two signals, with an absence of a plateau in the
control signal. We therefore conclude that the measured signal seems to exhibit chaotic behaviour.
This analysis was done for all the signals showing a finite correlation dimension, and for all we
observed that the measured and control signals were different, thus implying a possible presence of
chaos.
We recall that, even after passing the phase randomisation test, the existence of a D2 does not
necessarily imply chaos, but, as we have just seen, it provides a mean to detect differences in the
dynamical behaviour over the scalp.
The application of a correlation dimension analysis implicitly assumes that the signal that we are
studying is stationary. An epileptic seizure may naturally have some non-stationarity. In order to
investigate this aspect we compared, for some seizures, the correlation dimension analysis obtained for
the complete seizure with that obtained for its first half.
3. Results
We now present the results of the correlation dimension analysis of the 19-channel EEG data for 3
patients with absences. We compare different seizures of the same patient, triggered by
hyperventilation or light flashes, and seizures from different patients.
Patient A. Is a 16 year old boy with absences who is pharmaco-resistant. The MRI and CT scans are
normal, but the SPECT shows a hipoperfusion of the right temporal and parietal lobes. The ictal EEG
recording has a slightly lower amplitude on the right temporal lobe while the interictal recording
exhibits a right focus also in that region.
We analysed three seizures of this patient with durations of approximately 10s, 15s and 12s, which
were triggered by hyperventilation. They were recorded at 200Hz, 100Hz and 100Hz, respectively. Fig.
6 shows the map of the slopes of ln Cm(r) for one of the seizures. There one can see that part of the
channels (1, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9) exhibit a plateau, to which corresponds a correlation D2, and hence seem
to present chaos, whereas the other channels do not exhibit a plateau, and hence rather seem to present
noise. It is important to notice that all the channels with a plateau have the same value for the
correlation dimension D2 and the same value for the embedding dimension m*. The analysis of the
two other seizures gives similar results. In Fig. 7 we present the maps for the correlation dimension D2
5 of 9corresponding to the three seizures of this patient. The main feature that emerges from this analysis is
that one can clearly distinguish two regions with different dynamics: the frontal and left parietal and
temporal parts seem to exhibit chaotic behaviour whereas the rest rather seem to show noise.
Furthermore, one finds the same pattern for the different seizures of this patient, which are also
characterised by the same values of the correlation dimension D2 and embedding dimension m*. For
two of the seizures (the 10s and the 15s ones), we also compared the maps of D2 for the complete
seizures, with those for the first half of the seizures. We observed that the distinction of two dynamics
regions remains in the latter (for example, the signals in Fig. 1 show the same behaviour as reported
before), but some channels (located in particular in the rear part of the scalp), that did not show chaos
in the former, seem now to exhibit chaos (with the D2 and m* of the former). This implies that the
dynamics may be changing in time, in some channels. However, because we are interested in
characterising the dynamics of the seizure as a whole, we consider the analysis of the complete signal
to be the proper procedure. In addition, for one of the seizures (the15s one) we analysed a bipolar
montage, and found that signals associated to pairs of channels (4-10, 5-10, 5-11, 6-10, 6-11, 10-15
14-18) mainly located on the central part of the head, were giving rise to a plateau and hence a
correlation dimension D2 ≈ 1.9.
Patient B. Is a 12 year old girl with absences that have responded favourably to Sodium Valproate
medication.
We analysed two seizures of this patient, with duration of approximately 7s and 8s, the first being
triggered by hyperventilation and the second by light flashes, they were both recorded at 100Hz. For
each of the seizures one finds again two dynamic regions but now exhibiting different patterns as
shown in Fig. 8, which presents the maps of the correlation dimension D2 corresponding to the two
seizures. The seizure triggered by hyperventilation shows a correlation dimension on the frontal and
left parietal and temporal parts, in a similar way to the observed for patient A, whereas the seizure
triggered by light flashes shows a left/right symmetry, with the frontal part having a correlation
dimension. For both cases one finds that all the channels exhibiting a plateau have the same correlation
dimension D2 and embedding dimension m*.
Patient C. Is a 13 year old girl that has absences with walking automatism. Her epilepsy has had good
evolution under Sodium Valproate medication.
We analysed two seizures of this patient, with duration of approximately 9s and 12s, triggered by
hyperventilation. They were both recorded at 200Hz. We find that in both seizures none of the
channels shows a plateau, that is a correlation dimension D2, and hence none of the channels exhibits
chaos, in contrast to those of the other two patients.
For the three patients we also analysed the EEG signals before and after the seizures, and for all the
cases we did not find a plateau in any of the channels, which implies that there is no sign of chaos
there.
4. Conclusions
The results that we obtained show that chaos analysis provides new information on the dynamics
underlying absences epilepsy, and allows a distinction between situations not realised before by the
more conventional forms of analysis.
In the seizures of two patients we were able to distinguish regions with different behaviour: part of the
cerebral cortex seems to exhibit chaos whereas the other part seems to exhibit noise. The observation
6 of 9of different dynamic regions occurring in absences had not been seen before, as far as we know. The
pattern is essentially the same for different seizures of the same patient, when triggered by
hyperventilation, but varies for seizures of the same patient triggered either by hyperventilation or light
flashes. The dynamics is characterised by a correlation dimension D2≈ 1.7-1.9, which implies low
complexity, and an embedding dimension m*≈ 4-5, which indicates that the dynamics is governed by a
small number of variables. The determination of the number of variables governing the dynamics is a
valuable clue for model construction and possible activity control. Babloyantz and Destexhe (1986)
had found D2 = 2.05± 0.09 and m*=5, which are in good agreement with our values. On the contrary,
in the seizures of another patient we were not able to distinguish different dynamic regions and all the
cerebral cortex seems to exhibit noise. Our results therefore reveal the existence of different dynamical
situations associated to absences.
For the EEG signals before and after the epileptic seizures, we did not find evidence of chaotic
behaviour.
It would be most desirable to understand what are the above results implying about the nature of the
epileptic absences. It would also be desirable to investigate the correlation between the D2 maps and
the clinical picture of the patients in order to possibly use it as a diagnostic tool. In the future we would
like to complement the present study with the construction of maps for the Kolmogorov entropy and
the Lyapounov exponents, in order to get more information on the possible chaotic behaviour, though
these studies demand longer time series and therefore require special care in the selection of the length
of the seizures and the acquisition rate. Nevertheless the results that we presented here already reveal
new aspects of absences epilepsy.
Acknowledgements:
We are grateful to F. Lopes da Silva for helpful discussions and comments.
References:
Babloyantz, A. and Destexhe, A. Low-dimensional chaos in an instance of epilepsy. Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. USA, 1986, 83:3513-3517.
Bassingthwaighte, J. B., Liebovitch, L. S. e West, B. J., Fractal Physiology, Oxford University Press,
1994.
Elbert, T., William, J., Kowalik, Z., Skinner, J.E., Graf, K.E. and Birbaumer, N. Chaos and
physiology: deterministic chaos in excitable cell assemblies. Physiological Reviews, 1994, 74(1):1-47.
Frank, G.W., Lookman, T., Nerenberg, M.A., Essex, C., Lemieux, J. and Blume, W. Chaotic time
series analyses of epileptic seizures. Physica D, 1990, 46: 427-438.
Fraser, A.M. and Swinney, H.L. Independent coordinates for strange attractors from mutual
information. Phys. Rev. A, 1986, 33(2):1134-1140.
Grassberger, P. and Procaccia, I. Measuring the strangeness of strange attractors. Physica 9D, 1983,
189-208.
7 of 9Grassberger, P. and Procaccia, I. On the characterization of strange attractors. Phys. Rev. Lett., 1983
50(5):346-349.
Lehnertz, K. and Elger, C.E. Spatio-temporal dynamics of the primary epileptogenic area in temporal
lobe epilepsy characterized by neuronal complexity loss. Electroenceph. Clin. Neurophysiol., 1995,
95:108-117.
Liebert, W. and Schuster, H.G. Proper choice of the time delay for analysis of chaotic time series.
Phys. Lett. A, 1989, 142(2-3), 107-111.
Lopes da Silva, F.H. and Niedermeyer, E. Electroencephalography: basic principles, clinical
applications, and related fields, William &Wikins, Baltimore, 1993.
Osborne, A.R. and Provenzale, A. Finite correlation dimension for stochastic systems with power-law
spectra. Physica D, 1989, 35:357-381.
Pijn, J.P., van Neerven, J., Noest, A. and Lopes da Silva, F.H. Chaos or noise in EEG signals;
dependence on state and brain site. Electroencephalogr. Clin. Neurophysiol., 1991, 79:371-381.
Pijn, J.P., Velis, D.N., van der Heyden, M.J., DeGoede, J., van Veelen, C.W. and Lopes da Silva, F.H.
Nonlinear dynamics of epileptic seizures on basis of intracranial EEG recordings. Brain Topography,
1997, 9:249-270.
Pritchards, W.S. and Duke, D.W. Measuring chaos in the brain - a tutorial review of EEG dimension
estimation. Brain and Cognition, 1995, 27:353-397.
Schuster, H.G. Deterministic Chaos. Physik-Verlag, Weinheim, 1984.
Takens, F. Detecting strange attractors in turbulance. In: D.A. Rand and L.S. Young (Ed.), Dynamical
Systems and Turbulence, Lecture Notes in Math. 898. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1981.
Theiler, J. Spurious dimension from correlation algorithms applied to limited time-series data. Phys.
Rev. A, 1986, 34(3): 2427-2432.
Theiler, J. Estimating fractal dimension. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 1990,
7(6):1055-1073.
Figure legends:
Fig. 1 - EEG signal recorded on patient A (seizure of 10s) at: a) channel 1, b) channel 10.
Fig. 2 - Power spectrum of the signals in Fig. 1-a) and b), respectively.
Fig. 3 - Map corresponding to the signals in Fig. 1-a) and b), respectively (τ =8x10-2s).
Fig. 4 - Correlation integral Cm(r), and slope of ln Cm(r), with increasing m, for the signals in Fig. 1-a)
and b), respectively.
8 of 9Fig. 5 – Correlation integral, Cm(r), and slope of ln Cm(r), with increasing m, for the control signal
corresponding to the signal in Fig. 1-a).
Fig. 6 - Channel map for the slope of ln Cm(r), for the seizure of 10s in patient A; the channels with a
plateau have D2 ≈ 1.7 and m* ≈ 5.
Fig. 7 - Channel map for the correlation dimension D2 of three seizures from patient A, triggered by
hyperventilation, with duration: a)10s, b)15s and c) 12s; for all of them D2 ≈ 1.7, m* ≈ 5 for a) and m*
≈ 4 for b) and c).
Fig. 8 - Channel map for the correlation dimension D2 of two seizures from patient B, triggered by: a)
hyperventilation, and b) light flashes, with duration 7s and 8s, respectively; for both D2≈ 1.9 and m*≈
4.
9 of 9 |
arXiv:physics/9911040v1 [physics.ins-det] 17 Nov 1999Effect of Optical Coating and Surface
Treatments on Mechanical Loss in Fused
Silica
Andri M. Gretarsson, Gregory M. Harry, Steven D. Penn, Peter R.
Saulson, John J. Schiller, and William J. Startin
Abstract. We report on the mechanical loss in fused silica samples with various
surface treatments and compare them with samples having an o ptical coating. Mild
surface treatments such as washing in detergent or acetone w ere not found to affect the
mechanical loss of flame-drawn fused silica fibers stored in a ir. However, mechanical
contact (with steel calipers) significantly increased the l oss. The application of a high-
reflective optical coating of the type used for the LIGO test m asses was found to greatly
increase the mechanical loss of commercially polished fuse d silica microscope slides. We
discuss the implications for the noise budget of interferom eters.
I INTRODUCTION
In samples made of high Qmaterials, such as fused silica or sapphire, a damaged
or optically coated surface can be the dominant source of mec hanical loss and
could limit our ability to reduce thermal noise in interfero meters. We apply a
general method for quantifying surface loss to measurement s of samples with optical
coatings and differing surface treatments. This enables us t o estimate the effect of
coatings on the internal mode thermal noise of interferomet er test masses as well
as the effect of suspension filament surface damage on the pend ulum mode thermal
noise.
II QUANTIFYING SURFACE LOSS
Surface loss may be quantified by the dissipation depth ds, defined by1
φ=φbulk(1 +µds
V/S), (1)
where φ= 1/Qis the measured loss angle of the sample when all sources of ex trinsic
loss (such as recoil damping or clamping friction) have been eliminated, φbulkis the
loss angle of the bulk material, Vis the volume of the sample, and Sis the surface
area. The unitless µis a geometrical factor that takes into account the relative
amount of elastic deformation occurring at the surface and h ence the emphasis
placed on the condition of the surface due to the sample geome try and mode of
oscillation. The geometrical factor µis of order unity for simple geometries sothat, as a rule of thumb, surface loss tends to dominate when dsis greater than
the volume to surface area ratio. For fibers in transverse osc illation µ= 2, while
for ribbon or microscope slide geometries in transverse osc illation µ= 3. Although
φbulkanddsmay in general be functions of frequency, no frequency depen dence was
seen in our measurements. For uncoated samples the dissipat ion depth provides a
quantitative measure of the physical condition of the surfa ce.
III SURFACE TREATMENT OF UNCOATED
SAMPLES
By measuring the quality factor Qof samples before and after different types
of surface treatment, we calculated the dissipation depth a ssociated with each
treatment. We measured the quality factors of untreated and treated fused sil-
ica (Suprasil 2) fibers drawn in a natural gas and oxygen flame. We also measured
the quality factor of a fused silica (Suprasil 2) microscope slide, both as supplied
(mechanically polished) and as subsequently etched. Using an apparatus specifi-
cally designed for the purpose of reducing extrinsic source s of loss (Fig. 1a) we were
generally able to reduce extrinsic losses sufficiently so tha t the dominant sources of
loss remaining were thermoelastic loss, bulk loss, and surf ace loss.1In each case we
measured the quality factors at frequencies where thermoel astic loss was negligible.
In this regime the quality factors were frequency independe nt, although in a minor-
ity of cases random mode-to-mode differences in Qwere apparent. This was most
likely due to residual sources of excess loss. To reduce the s ystematic error due to
such residual sources of excess loss we took the highest Qmode to be indicative of
the quality factor resulting from bulk loss and surface loss alone.
To investigate the effects of washing surfaces in solvents we wiped a fiber with
paper wipes (KimwipesTm) saturated with acetone. We also agitated a fiber in an
ultrasonic bath of detergent and warm tap-water for a half ho ur, followed by a half
hour ultrasonic bath of warm tap-water, followed by a second rinse with a stream
of distilled water. After measuring the Q we then waited 14 da ys with the fiber
under vacuum ( ≈10−6Torr) and re-measured the Q. In an attempt to simulate the
effects of hydroxy catalysis bonding2(silicate bonding) of fused silica surfaces we
washed a fiber with ethyl alcohol and then submerged it in a 0.5 Molar solution of
KOH and distilled water for 24.6 hrs, then rinsed in distille d water. To investigate
the effect of mechanical damage we lightly pinched two fibers a t 1 cm intervals with
stainless steel measurement calipers.
To remove the outer surface entirely (and with it any mechani cal surface damage)
we etched three fused silica fibers in solutions of hydrofluor ic acid (HF) and distilled
water. After etching, the fibers were rinsed with distilled w ater. The first etch was
performed on a fiber of diameter 120 ±20µm and the etch removed 1 .5±0.5µm
from the surface. The second etch was performed on one of the fi bers previously
pinched with calipers. It had a pre-etch diameter of 840 ±50µm and the etch
depth was 45 ±3µm. The third etch was performed on a fiber of pre-etch diameterFIGURE 1. Schematic diagram of the experimental setups. (a).Setup for measuring fiber Qs.
(b).Setup for measuring slide Qs. The isolation bobs and fibers prevent the measured sample Q
from being degraded by rubbing in the clamp and from recoil in the lower Qsupport structure.
350±60µm. The etch depth was 90 ±28µm. Finally, we etched the microscope
slide. As supplied, the microscope slide surface had receiv ed a commercial 80-50
(scratch-dig) polish. The etch removed 100 µm from this surface.
Table 1 summarizes our results. For three of the fibers, with s urfaces as drawn,
the dissipation depth is around 200 µm. Fiber I has a surface that is initially worse
(higher ds) while Fiber M has a surface that is initially better. Althou gh an effort
was made not to touch the surfaces of the fibers with fingers or o ther objects during
handling, conditions were not stringently uniform. The fibe rs were also stored for
varying durations in clean glass tubes and could come into li ght contact with the
inner surface of the tubes. Depending on the storage time or a mount of contact,
some deviation in dscan be expected.
Figure 2 shows how strongly different treatments affected the surface of fibers.
Most of the treatments either produced no change in the condi tion of the surface
or they made it only slightly worse. However, pinching the su rface at regular
(1 cm) intervals with calipers significantly increased the d issipation depth, possibly
due to small cracks formed by the mechanical contact. Simila rly, the mechanically
polished microscope slide had the highest measured ds. It is interesting to note that
the surface of Fiber I, after being significantly damaged by c alipers, was restored
to a condition better than as drawn (or perhaps more appropri ately better than
“as stored and handled”) by the 45 µm HF etch. The resulting dissipation depth
agrees with the best as drawn case, having a value of about 100 µm.
The question arises why most samples undergoing HF etches di d not show sig-
nificant surface improvement. In the case of the severely dam aged slide, we believeTABLE 1. Dissipation depth for different surface treatments.
sample treatment ds[µm] ∆ ds[µm]a
Fiber B as drawn 180 ±50
Fiber B acetone 200 ±50 17 ±10
Fiber C as drawn 190 ±30
Fiber C calipers 310 ±40 124 ±20
Fiber F as drawn 190 ±40
Fiber F detergent solution, rinse 190 ±40 −1±9
Fiber F after 14 days in vacuum 160 ±30 −25±10
Fiber F 1.5 µm HF etch 220 ±50 31 ±12
Fiber I as drawn 340 ±50
Fiber I calipers 620 ±100 281 ±74
Fiber I 45 µm HF etch 100 ±20 −244±30
Fiber L as drawn 210 ±50
Fiber L 1:500 KOH solution, rinse 310 ±80 95 ±29
Fiber M as drawn 100 ±20
Fiber M 90 µm HF etch 180 ±40 86 ±25
Slide C as supplied (polished) 860 ±140
Slice C 100 µm HF etch 850 ±160 10 ±140
aChange in dsfrom the as drawn or as supplied state. The un-
certainty in ∆ dsis not the root of the quadratic sum of uncer-
tainties in dssince not all the variables involved in calculating
dsare independent between treatments.
the etch was too shallow. After etching, hairline scratches on the slide were visible
to the naked eye. Etching opens up microscopic cracks impart ed by the polishing
process and their presence, post-etch, is evidence that the surface was still dam-
aged. As for the fiber etches, only one (the etch of Fiber I) res ulted in an improved
dissipation depth. This may be due to the fact that Fiber I had an as drawn dissipa-
tion depth somewhat higher than any other fiber and may have be en inadvertently
damaged between drawing and installation in our apparatus. Mechanical damage
can be repaired by HF etching3,4(though the etches must be sufficiently deep).
The HF etch may thus have removed the damaged surface of Fiber I, reducing the
dissipation depth from the initially measured value.
We should not neglect the possibility that chemical contami nation of the surface,
in particular contamination with atmospheric water,4may also lead to increased
loss. The ubiquity of dsvalues in the range 100-200 µm could be due to the difficulty
of isolating samples from atmospheric water. This would als o explain the failure of
the etches to reduce the dissipation depth below this range.
IV SURFACE LOSS DUE TO OPTICAL COATING
The surface loss due to optical coatings was investigated by measuring the quality
factors of the modes of fused silica slides. We measured the Qs for three slidesFIGURE 2. Change in the condition of fiber surfaces as compared to the in itial surface as
drawn, ∆ dsvs treatment. Horizontal lines mark the uncertainty in ∆ ds.
of dimensions 76 mm ×25 mm ×1 mm. The slides were suspended below a
monolithic, fused-silica isolation system, as shown in Fig . 1b. The slides’ vibration
was monitored by positioning the LED and shadow sensor aroun d the suspending
fiber directly above the slide.
Two of the three slides, A and B, were optically coated while t he third slide,
C, was retained uncoated as a control. (Slide C was later etch ed as reported in
the preceding section.) As supplied, the slides had receive d a commercial 80-50
polish. The optical coating applied to Slide A and Slide B was a high-reflective
(HR) coating 2 .4µm thick consisting of 14 layers of alternating SiO 2and Ta 2O5.
The slides were coated by ion beam sputtering in the same coat ing run as optics
for LIGO by Research Electro-Optics in Boulder Colorado. Af ter the coating run
they were baked at 450◦C to relieve stress.
The quality factors for each measured resonant mode of slide s A and B and equiv-
alent dissipation depths are shown in Table 2. The quality fa ctors and equivalent
dissipation depths for the measured modes of the uncoated Sl ide C (as supplied)
are given for comparison.
The coated Slide B was suspended from the center of one of its s hort edges, as
shown in Fig. 1b. When the supporting fiber was connected to th e slide using
a hydrogen-oxygen torch the coating became visibly damaged . Where the flame
from the torch contacted the coating, the coating took on a mi lky appearance. This
occurred in a crescent shape approximately 3 mm across at the top of the slide. The
high value of dsfor the second mode is believed to be due to this damage. To tes t
this, the top 5 mm of this slide were immersed in a 50% solution (by weight) of HF
and water for about 6 hours. Rinses with distilled water were applied periodically
to remove flakes of the coating. The etch removed most of the da maged part of theTABLE 2. Resonant Qs and equivalent dissipation depth in coated slides.
Slide Surface treatment Mode Frequency Q d s[µm]
A HR-coating with no 2 1022 Hz 1 .1±0.5×10546±21×103
visible damage 3 1944 Hz 1 .6±0.1×10532±3×103
4 2815 Hz 1 .6±0.1×10532±3×103
B HR-coating damaged 2 952 Hz 3 .1±0.2×104160±15×103
at top by flame. 3 1851 Hz 1 .6±0.1×10532±3×103
B Damaged region removed 2 962 Hz 1 .3±0.1×10539±4×103
C Uncoated, as supplied 2 1188 Hz 4 .0±0.2×1061.1±0.2×103
(“80-50” polish) 3 2271 Hz 4 .9±0.3×1060.86±0.14×103
coating and the Qwas re-measured. The Qand dissipation depth of the second
mode was now of the same magnitude as that measured for the thi rd mode and for
all modes of Slide B.
The coated Slide A was hung from a corner rather than from the c enter of the
top edge. This was because, in the corner, the fused silica su bstrate was masked
(by the supports) during the coating process. This left a reg ion with no optical
coating about 1 mm in radius and centered on the corner. The fib er was very
carefully welded to the slide at this point. While some heat f rom the torch certainly
reached the coated region, no damage to the coating could be s een afterwards. Both
modes of Slide A showed similar Qs and similar dissipation de pths as the modes
of Slide B after the damaged region was removed. Since the unc oated Slide C
has significantly less dissipation than the coated slides, a nd since the coated slides
all show approximately the same level of dissipation, we con clude that the high
dissipation depth associated with the coated slides, ds≈3 cm, is a result of the
HR optical coating.
If our measurements are characteristic of the coatings for L IGO, this would lead
to noticeably increased thermal noise for the LIGO test mass es. However, the
surfaces of the slides did not receive the same treatment pri or to the coating as
the LIGO test masses. They were not superpolished and no part icular efforts were
made to ensure the absolute cleanliness of the surfaces. It i s possible that the
interface between the coating and the silica is more lossy th an a polished surface
interface would be. Superpolished samples of fused silica h ave been obtained and
research is continuing to determine the loss in superpolish ed and coated samples.
V IMPLICATIONS FOR THERMAL NOISE
Surface loss in the filaments suspending LIGO test masses cou ld have implications
for the interferometer noise budget.5Surface loss associated with fibers implies a
lower limit on the level of pendulum mode thermal noise achie vable using thin
ribbon suspensions. While dissipation dilution implies re duced pendulum modethermal noise as the ribbon thickness is reduced, the effects of surface loss are
increased. The result is a diameter independent lower limit for the pendulum mode
thermal displacement noise spectral density
x2
min(ω) =24kBTg
ML2ω5/radicalBigg
Y
12σdsφbulk, (2)
where ωis the angular frequency, kBis Boltzmann’s constant, Tis the temperature,
gis the acceleration due to gravity, Mis the suspended mass, Lis the length of the
suspension, Yis Young’s modulus, and σis the stress in the suspending ribbons.
For typical values of the parameters and ds= 200 µm, we have
xmin(ω= 2π×10 Hz) ≈6×10−20m/√
Hz.
While this is sufficient for the goals of LIGO II, it is clear fro m the dependence on ds
that mechanical surface damage such as is induced by caliper s must be prevented.
Surface loss due to optical coatings may significantly incre ase the thermal noise
due to internal modes of the test masses. To relate the dissip ation depth measured
for an optical coating to the internal mode thermal noise we f ollow the work of
Levin6and Bondu et al.7This enables an approximate calculation of the relevant µ.
Using Eq. 1 we obtain after some analysis a preliminary estim ate for the test-mass
loss angle,
φ≈φbulk(1 + 0 .4ds
r0), (3)
where r0is the Gaussian radius of the laser beam. Since r0≈2 cm for LIGO II, it
is clear that if ds≈3 cm, as measured for the coated slides, then the HR coating
will be a significant contributor to test mass thermal noise.
REFERENCES
1. A. M. Gretarsson, G. M. Harry, Rev. Sci. Instr., 704081 (1999).
2. S. Rowan, S.M. Twyford, J. Hough, D.-H. Gwo and R. Route Phy s. Lett. A 246471
(1998).
3. Uhlman and Kreidl ed., Elasticity and Strength in Glass , Academic Press, New York,
1980.
4. R. H. Doremus, Glass Science , Second Edition, John Wiley, New York, 1994.
5. A manuscript describing these effects is in preparation by the authors and by S.
Rowan, G. Cagnoli, and J. Hough of University of Glasgow.
6. Y. Levin, Phys. Rev. D 57659 (1998).
7. F. Bondu, P. Hello, J. Y. Vinet, Phys. Lett. A 246227 (1998). |
arXiv:physics/9911041v1 [physics.bio-ph] 18 Nov 1999On the Biological Advantage of Chirality1
by
G. Gilat
Department of Physics, Technion
Haifa 32000, Israel
e-mail: gilat@physics.technion.ac.il
Abstract
The presence of chirality in the main molecules of life may we ll be not
just a structural artifact, but of pure biological advantag e. The possibility
of the existence of a phenomenon of a special mode of interact ion, labeled
as ”chiral interaction” (CI), for which structural chirali ty is a necessary con-
dition, is the main reason for such an advantage. In order to d emonstrate
such a possibility, macroscopic chiral devices are introdu ced and presented
as analogies for such an interaction. For this purpose it is i mportant to make
a clear distinction between geometric and physical chirali ties, where the lat-
ter are capable to perform chiral interactions with various media. Apart
from chirality, a few other structural elements are require d. In particular,
the presence of an interface that separates between the chir al device and the
1to be published in “Advances in Biochirality”, Eds. G. Palyi , C. Zucchi & L. Caglioti,
Elsevier Science S.A.
1medium with which it is interacting. The physical chirality is build into this
very interface where chiral interaction is taking place. On a molecular level,
soluble proteins in particular, the active medium is the pre sence of random
ionic motion in the aqueous solvent. As a result of chiral int eraction a certain
perturbation, or current, is generated and flowing along the coils of α-helix
structure in one preferred direction out of two possible one s. A model for
such a chiral interaction is presented and a few significant c onsequences are
pointed out. In particular, it is important to emphasize the time-irreversible
feature of chiral interaction, which leads to its non-ergod ic nature that is to be
considered a necessary condition for evolutionary process es in biomolecules.
As yet there exists no direct experimental evidence for the v alidity of chiral
interaction on a molecular level, but there are quite a few in direct supporting
evidences. In particular, there exists an experimental res ult by Careri et al.
who found a clear linkage between the free protonic motion in the hydration
layer of proteins and their enzymatic activity. A few direct experiments for
verifying the validity of chiral interaction on molecular l evel are proposed
hereby for hydrophobic amino acids at the water-air interfa ce, where chiral
interaction may take place. Among these there is also a new ap proach of
applying a SQUID to detect a weak magnetic field that is associ ated with
the chiral interaction effect. If proven right, chiral inter action may open new
approaches and possibilities for better understanding of t he rather complex
autocatalytic function of soluble proteins.
21. Introduction
The phenomenon of structural chirality has been recognized since the
early 19th century when Arago [1] and Biot [2] demonstrated t he effect of
optical activity in quartz crystals. It was Louis Pasteur [3 ] who first observed
chirality on a molecular level and he referred to this effect a s dissymmetry.
It was Kelvin [4] who first addressed this phenomenon as ”chir ality”, since a
chiral structure of an object does not necessarily imply a to tal lack of symme-
try of such an object. According to Kelvin a given object or se t is chiral if and
only if it cannot be made to superimpose, or overlap, exactly its mirror image
by any continuous transformation. (i.e. by any rotation and /or translation).
The concept of chirality is of geometric nature in principle , but currently this
very term is also being used in other domains such as high ener gy physics,
which may cause semantic problems in its usage. In addition t o this it is
also important to address chirality within its own dimensio nality. The space
we live in is 3-dimensional (3d) so that chirality is usually regarded as a 3d
property. In fact, such property exists also in 2-dimension al (2d) space, that
is, within a plane. This can be demonstrated by two asymmetri c triangles,
one being the mirror image of another. Although these two tri angles are
geometrically identical, they cannot be made to superimpos e one another by
any rotation and/or translation within the plane they are co ntained in. In
order to make them coincide with one another, it is necessary to take one of
these triangles out of this plane, rotate it around in 3d spac e and then bring
it back into the same plane. Then it becomes possible to make t hem overlap
precisely with one another. Such a triangle is an example of 2 d chiral figure
3or object. Any 2d chiral object is considered to be achiral in 3d space. As a
matter of fact, such a consideration is not limited to 2d spac e. In principle,
also a 3d chiral object ”can be made” to coincide with its mirr or image by
”taking it out into a 4-dimensional (4d) space, rotating it a round there and
then bringing it back to 3d space”. Such an operation is mathe matically or
imaginatively possible, but not practically. the reason fo r this is that our
physical space is of 3-dimensions only.
In recent years there has been a considerable progress in the development
and understanding of the mathematical aspects of chirality [5-6]. Among
other things, there exist several attempts [7-9] of quantif ying this very con-
cept. These attempts are still having certain problems of un iqueness, so that
a question such as: ”What is the most chiral triangle?” obtai ns at least three
different answers [10,11]. As a matter of fact, most approach es of treating
chirality from mathematical aspects employ the geometric v iew-point of chi-
rality, which hardly contains any physical meaning. In real ity, the concept
of chirality has a significant physical basis and this is mean t to be one of the
main features of the present article. For this reason it beco mes necessary to
distinguish between so-called geometric and physical chir alities [11,12]. Geo-
metric chirality is referred to the shape of pure geometric b odies or sets, such
as triangles or tetrahedrons or any arbitrary shapes in 2- or 3-dimensional
spaces. Physical chirality is referred to the shape of any di stribution in space
of a physical property such as mass, charge, energy potentia l, or even quan-
tum properties such as electronic wave-function distribut ion throughout a
4molecule, or any other quantum mechanical property. If such a distribu-
tion does not contain any reflection symmetry plane, then, by analogy, it
is to be referred to as a chiral physical distribution. There exist two ma-
jor distinctions between physical and geometric objects. G eometric bodies
are distributed homogeneously in space, whereas physical p roperties may be
of varying densities, such as mass distribution, which is no t necessarily ho-
mogeneous in space. This difference may well complicate the m athematical
aspects of physical chiralities. A second distinction of ma jor physical signifi-
cance is the possibility of interaction that may exist betwe en a distribution of
physical property and some medium that happens to be present at the same
vicinity. In the case of molecular structures it may be neces sary to distin-
guish between various different physical distributions suc h as nuclear masses,
(i.e. atomic locations within the molecule), or electronic distributions that
are presented by the wave-function distributions. The poss ibility of a chiral
distribution of a physical property is the origin of the biol ogical advantage
of chirality. In order to clarify this statement it may be hel pful to look first
at macroscopic objects where chirality plays a necessary an d useful role in
their function.
2. Macroscopic Chiral Devices
An intriguing question that is being repeated in may scienti fic publica-
tions concerns the ‘left’ (L) and ‘right’ (D) identity of chi ral molecules, such
as: ”Why are amino-acids L and not D?”. There exist several sp eculations
that try to answer this interesting question. A more constru ctive question
to be asked presently is: ”why are the molecules of life chira l?”, and this is
5regardless of their being L or D. Is there any biological adva ntage in their
chiral nature when compared to achiral molecules? And the an swer given
here to this question is: ”Yes”. The source of such an advanta ge comes from
a specific type of interaction for which chirality is a necess ary condition. Such
an interaction is to be labeled as: ”chiral interaction” (CI ) and it has already
been treated in various publications [11,13-17].
Chiral interaction (CI) is not typical of molecular structu re only, and there
exist various macrodevices which function according to the same principle.
The simplest and most spectacular one is the windmill. When w ind blows
at the rotors of a mill, it ‘ knows’ immediately in which direc tion to rotate,
clockwise or anti-clockwise. If the windmill, in particula r its vanes, were
symmetric, it would not be able to ‘make up its mind’ to select a definite
rotational direction. The shape of vanes of a windmill, wher e contact is
made with the wind, is designed to break the L-D symmetry, i.e ., it is chiral.
This structure is of useful dynamical advantage which enabl es the mill to
transform energy from the wind to, say, a rotating millstone . Another simple
mechanical device is a rotating water sprinkler, where the m edium interacting
with the sprinkler is the flow of water. The next example is som ewhat more
sophisticated because it depends on a different mode of chira lity. This device
is a variant of the Crookes’ radiometer (see figure 1). The act ive medium in
this case is light radiation. The element of chirality here i s in the difference
of the colors of the rotating blades, being black and silver, respectively, and
this is a special example of physical chirality. When light i s shining on silver
faces it is reflected away, whereas it is absorbed by the black ones.
6/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0
/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1
/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0/0
/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/1B
A
Figure 1: A variant of Crookes’ radiometer offers an example o f chiral in-
teraction. The asymmetry in the optical absorption coefficie nt between the
black and the silver vanes generates a temperature differenc e between these
vanes when light is shining at the device. The air close to the black vanes
expands as a result, which pushes the vane around the axis AB i n the pre-
ferred direction of the black vane. The physical chirality i s built into this
device by the distribution of the black and silver colors, i. e. by the difference
in the optical absorption coefficients in the vanes.
7This causes the black faces to become warmer than the silver o nes, which
in turn expands the air in their close vicinity, so that the bl ack wing is pushed
backwards. The selection of the sense of rotation of this typ e of Crooke’s
radiometer is made by the variance of the colors of the vanes, that is, by
their respective optical absorption coefficient. The physic al chirality in this
device is presented by the distribution of the optical absor ption coefficient,
not by the shape of the vanes which is achiral.
All the examples presented here are of mechanical nature, i. e., the effect
of chiral interaction (CI) results in a mechanical rotation in one preferred
direction out of two possible ones around a given axis of the d evice. This is
so because the source of the interaction, i.e. the medium, us ually is external
to the chiral device. In the case of an electric device which g enerates a static
current flowing in one preferred direction out of two possibl e ones, the source
of the interaction may be embedded within the device. This is the case, for
instance, of an electric cell which consists of two different electrodes coming
in contact with an electrolyte. It is obvious that in order to reverse the
direction of the current it is necessary to interchange the t wo electrodes with
one another, but this does not necessarily require any chira l operation. This
is so because the source of the current flow is internal, so tha t the structure of
the device can be completely symmetric, as is the case of a cyl indric battery.
In the case of an electric thermocouple, the operation can st ill be regarded
as CI since the source of the interaction, i.e. the temperatu re difference, is
external to the device.
8Before proceeding to molecular systems, it becomes useful t o summarize
the main features of CI in macrodevices. In all these example s there exists
a specific active medium with which each chiral device is inte racting, and
this happens always at an interface separating the device fr om the medium,
where physical chirality is built into this interface. CI is a process by which
energy is transferred from the medium to the chiral device, w here one out
of two possible modes of rotational motion is selected and ge nerated. Such
a feature of selectivity can be considered as a mode of organi zation. Two
modes of different natures, namely, mechanical or electric m otions, can be
created within the device. The electric mode, i.e. the curre nt, is of practically
massless charge motion flowing along a conductor.
3. Chiral Interaction in Molecular Systems
3a. General Features and Physical Background.
The origin of CI in molecular systems is in the motion of free i ons in
aqueous solutions. This is to be considered as the necessary medium for
CI, whereas the interacting ‘chiral device’, i.e. the chira l molecule, must
include certain specific features which enable it to functio n as a ‘chiral device’.
These conditions fit well soluble proteins that contain elec tric dipole moments
that interact electrostatically with moving ions in the sol vent. Owing to the
large dielectric constant of water ( ǫ= 81), the range of CI is limited to
approximately (10 −20)˚A. The permanent electric dipole moment [18] of
the protein molecule consists of the amino (NH+) and the carbonyl (CO−)
groups along the peptide bonding chains. This dipole moment is presented
schematically by PN (see figure 2). Let us now examine the moti on of a
9Figure 2: The deflection of a positive ion Pifrom a linear track, presented
byP1A, into a curved track P1Bdue to an electric dipole moment PN. The
curved motion of P1induces a non-zero time-averaged electric field E/bardblalong
PN. A negative ion (not shown here)is deflected in the opposit e direction,
but, being of opposite sign to P1, it will induce E/bardblin the same direction of
P1.
10positive ion P 1approaching PN. Let E/bardbl(t) be the time dependent com-
ponent of an electric field /vectorEinduced by P 1along PN. The time average of
E/bardbl(t) is given by:
E/bardbl=1
T/integraldisplayT
0E/bardbl(t)dt (1)
In the absence of any interaction P 1moves along a straight line P 1A so
that for T→ ∞, we have E/bardbl→0. Since PN is in fact an electric dipole
moment, the actual track of the ion P 1is now presented by the orbit of P 1B
rather than P 1A. This is so because the ion is being deflected away from P
and attracted by N. For this shape of an orbit, not being on a st raight line,
E/bardbl∝negationslash= 0 for T→ ∞, and it is pointing in the direction of P. Let us now
look for the case of a negative moving ion, not shown in the figu re. It is also
deflected by the electric dipole but in the opposite directio n in comparison
to P 1. Being also of opposite charge, it will induce an electric fie ldE/bardblin
the same direction as the positive ion. In other words, E/bardblremains in the
same direction for positive and negative ions alike. Anothe r fact that is of
significance is the independence of the motional direction o f P1. For instance,
if P1moves backward on the same track in the opposite direction, i t will still
produce E/bardblin the same direction as before.
The electric field E/bardbl, caused by the deflection of random ionic motion in
the solvent, due to the existence of a permanent dipole momen t, becomes
a source of repetitive perturbation of the molecular system . The system
responds to such an external perturbation, according to the Le Chatelier
law, in an attempt of maintaining an equilibrium state withi n the system,
11i.e., it evokes an internal perturbation along closed loops of chemical bonds
in an attempt to neutralize the external perturbation. Such an internal
perturbation, or ‘current’, selects one out of two possible directions of motion
as in the case in macrodevices, in particular, the electric c ell. This effect is
to be regarded as ‘Chiral Interaction’ (CI), on a molecular l evel scale [19].
Since the molecules involved in such an interaction, i.e. so luble proteins, are
considerably heavier than the deflected ions in the solvent, any mechanical
effects of CI can be neglected in comparison to its electric eff ect.
3b. The Necessity of an Interface
In the description of chiral macrodevices the necessary exi stence of an in-
terface, where CI is taking place, has been emphasized. Surp risingly enough,
such an interface becomes also necessary for molecular chir al systems. This
is shown schematically in Figure 3. If moving ions approach a closed ring
attached to an electric dipole PN, from all possible directi ons, the induced
perturbation, i.e. CI, averages out to zero. This is so becau se IAcancels
out I Bon the average, so that the net induced perturbation becomes zero on
the average. For this reason, in order to maintain a non-zero CI, it becomes
necessary to limit the access of ions approaching the ring to about half of
the space surrounding it, i.e., limit the access of P 2, in comparison to P 1.
This can be accomplished by an interface (denoted by S), that prevents the
access of free ions, i.e. P 2from the space above S, so that CI can go on in
one preferred direction, i.e. I A, for an indefinite length of time.
In nature there exist several interfaces. Most obvious one i s the solvent-air
interface, which is macroscopic. At this interface there ex ists a strong
12Figure 3: Schematic representation of why it is necessary to have an interface
in order to maintain a non-zero chiral interaction. Let P1be a moving ion
approaching an electric dipole moment PN fixed, for simplici ty, on the diam-
eter of a ring of closed chemical bonds. P1is deflected from its linear track
according to its charge sign, and induces an electric field E/bardbland a resultant
chiral current IAin the ring. A similar ion P2approaches from above and
induces IBin the opposite direction along the ring, so that on the avera ge
there exists no CI. In order to maintain a non-zero CI it is nec essary to stop
or limit the approach of ions from one of these two semicircle s. This can be
accomplished by a separating interface represented by S.
13change, or gradient /vector▽c, in the ionic strength cof the solvent. This pro-
vides for a variation |/vector▽c·d|in the ionic strength across a loop of chemical
bonds such as Cα·COO−·NH+
3, of a hydrophobic amino acid molecule [13]
attached to the water surface, where d≈few˚A. The origin of the elec-
tric dipole moment along this loop is due to the existence of a zwitterion in
amino acids in the presence of water. A sufficiently strong gra dient in the
ionic strength at the close vicinity of the water-air interf ace can maintain CI
for molecules such as amino acids that are aligned normal to t his interface.
Another natural interface of molecular size exists at the su rface of globular
proteins. This interface intervenes between the solvent, w here free ionic mo-
tion persists, and the the interior part of the molecule wher e no ionic motion
exists. Owing to this interface, CI can occur for globular pr oteins in the bulk
of the solvent. Somewhat surprising and encouraging is the o bservation that
soluble proteins must become globular in order to function a s enzymes [20].
This fact may indicate a possible linkage between CI and enzy matic activity
of proteins, a possibility to be further discussed in what fo llows. Looking
at the secondary α-helix structure of proteins, each segment of such a loop,
containing the NH+. . .CO−bond, can be considered as a ‘chiral element’
with which free ions in the solvent are interacting (see figur e 4). This mode
of interaction, being CI on a molecular level, is schematica lly shown and
described in figure 5.
3c. Formal Treatment of Chiral Interaction
Next, a formal treatment of the intrinsic molecular perturb ation, or ‘chiral
current’ I cis presented for a single chiral element.
14This is carried out by applying the Langevin equation [13,21 ]:
dIc
dt=−γIc+F(t) (2)
where γ=τ−1
Ris the attenuation or dissipation constant of IcandτRis
the relaxation time of the chiral perturbation or current I c. F(t) represents
a series of stochastic events of random approaches of moving ions in the
solvent to the chiral element presented in figure 4 or 5. F(t) i s presented
mathematically by:
F(t) =τ−1/summationdisplay
αiδ(θ−θi) exp[−γ(t−ti)] (3)
where αiis the i-th current, or perturbation increment occurring at timeti.
θ=t/τ,θi=ti/τandτis the stochastic time constant, being the average
time gap between two successive stochastic events of solven t ions approaching
the chiral element. The solution of equation 2 yields:
Ic=/summationdisplay
αiΘ(θ−θi) exp[−γ(t−ti)] (4)
where Θ( χ) is a step-function. The time-average ∝angbracketleftIc∝angbracketrightfor long periods Ti>> τ
and (T1−T2)>> τ is given by
∝angbracketleftIc∝angbracketright=1
T2−T1/integraldisplayT2
TiIc(t)dt (5)
For a steady-state situation it is assumed that ∝angbracketleftdIc/dt∝angbracketright∼=0, so that [11,17]:
∝angbracketleftIc∝angbracketright=α
γτ=ατR
τ(6)
where α=∝angbracketleftαi∝angbracketrightis the average chiral current perturbation generated per
each stochastic event, and αis proportional to the magnitude of the electric
15Figure 4: A segment of an α-helix structure which can be considered as a
segment in a globular protein. The H-bond connecting two suc cessive coils
are presented by broken lines and they are all oriented in the same direction,
i.e. from O(-) to N(+). The H-bonds together with the covalen t bonds
connecting N and O around the loop are considered as a ‘chiral element’.
(Original drawing by Irwin Geis).
16Figure 5: A schematic representation of a chiral element in a globular protein.
The electric dipole moment sticking into the solvent, that i s, on the left hand
side of the interface S, represents the H-bonds interconnec ting the coils in
theα-helix. The possible motion of ions (only positive ones are s hown) in
the solvent is shown, and so is the induced electric field E tha t generates the
chiral current I in the chiral element. The interface S repre sents the surface
of the globular protein so that mobile ions exist only on the l eft side of S.
17dipole-moment in the peptide bond. τis inversely proportional to c, which
represents the ionic strength of the solvent, so that ∝angbracketleftIc∝angbracketrightis proportional to the
product ατRc, that is: ∝angbracketleftIc∝angbracketright ∝ατRc. From equation 6 it can be deduced that
ifτR<< τ then∝angbracketleftIc∝angbracketright →0. In other words, if the relaxation time τRof the
chiral current perturbation is much shorter than the averag e stochastic time
τ, then CI vanishes. The physical meaning of this is that the io nic strength
cmust be sufficiently large to maintain the chiral interaction CI.
3d. Estimates and Conclusions
In the absence of any experimental data concerning CI in mole cular sys-
tems, it is still not easy to make reliable estimates for the s ize of the effect
of CI. It is obvious that, owing to the large mass ratio of the p rotein relative
to a moving ionic mass, only CI of the second kind can be invoke d, i.e. of
electronic or massless motion. The estimate of the energy in volved in this
process of CI is of the order of (10−2−10−3)kT per stochastic event (17),
which signifies it is a ‘subthermal effect’. The relatively sm all energy con-
tents does not mean that such an effect can be ignored. On the co ntrary,
the smallness of this effect, as well as the degree of its sophi stication, may
provide for information transfer throughout a complex mole cule such as pro-
tein, and may be significant for its specific enzymatic functi on. This aspect
will be further discussed in what follows. The necessary ing redients of CI on
a molecular level may be now listed as:
1. The existence of a chiral element (or molecule) that inclu des an electric
dipole moment as part of the chiral structure;
182. The presence of a polar solvent that is sufficiently rich in m obile ions;
3. The existence of closed loops of chemical bonds in the chir al element;
and
4. The presence of an interface that separates between two me dia that
differ largely in their respective ionic strength and/or in t heir ionic
mobilities in the close vicinity of a chiral element.
It should be emphasized that CI in biomolecules is still a hyp othesis await-
ing for experimental verification. If confirmed, it may becom e of considerable
significance as a mode of self-organization that is pertinen t to the intrinsic
control of enzymatic activity of proteins. It should also be stressed that all
the ingredients required for CI occur in nature for globular proteins as well
as for amino acids oriented at the water-air interface. It is also of interest
to point out the relevance, or necessity, of the presence of n itrogen atoms in
the structure of amino acids and proteins. The physical asym metry between
the amino NH+and the carbonyl CO−groups provides for the existence of
an electric dipole moment which is a necessary condition for CI. Hydrocar-
bons alone, lacking the presence of N, cannot participate in the generation
of CI. it is important to notice that physical effects of chira lity have well
been known for long [3], and they involve mainly optical phen omena, such as
optical activity [22] and related effects. These effects are t o be considered as
‘chiral scattering’ rather than ‘chiral interactions’ bec ause they concern only
the effect of chiral systems on electromagnetic radiation. I n the case of CI,
the main effect to be considered is the generation of an intrin sic perturbation
19within the chiral system, which is ignored in the case of chiral scat tering. In
addition to this, CI is not limited to optical effects only, as is the case in the
phenomena of chiral scattering. Needless to add that the dis tinction between
chiral scattering and CI does not mean that there is no relati on between these
two concepts. The opposite is correct.
4. General Features and the Advantages of Chiral Interactio n
4a Thermodynamic and Space-Time Symmetry Considerations
Thermodynamical aspects of CI have already been considered [11,16-17].
The basic effect of CI, where a molecule is being perturbed and thus is devel-
oping a persistent current in a single selected direction, i s thermodynamically
uncommon. Such a perturbation can be considered as an excite d state of in-
definitely long lifetime. This means that however small is th e energy of such
a perturbation, the system will never completely reach ther mal equilibrium.
That is, as long as the chiral system is surviving. Such a phen omenon has
certain peculiar aspects and in order to better appreciate t hem let us now
look back at the example of a windmill. While so doing, macros copic effects
such as friction and other energy dissipative effects are ign ored. What we
see now is a significant space-time symmetry feature of CI, be ing of time-
irreversible nature, in contrast to many common mechanical examples. For
instance, if flow of time is reversed, a satellite moving in sp ace ‘will move’
on the same track in the opposite direction. This is so becaus e of the nature
of the forces acting on it in space. In the case of a windmill, o r other chiral
devices, if time is reversed the windmill ‘will not be able’ t o move in the
20opposite direction because of the shape of its rotors, which is still pushing it
in the same direction. What does move backward is the mirror-image of the
same windmill. Thus, in order to obtain a complete-reversal , it is also neces-
sary ‘to reverse’ space. In the case of an electric cell, by re versing the flow of
time the current ‘does flow’ in the opposite direction even th ough the elec-
trochemical potential is still acting in the same direction , which contradicts
the sense of the current motion. In order to reverse the flow of the current it
is necessary to interchange the electrodes, i.e. to reverse also the sense of the
electrochemical potential. To summarize on this symmetry c onsideration, CI
is not a time-reversal process but rather of space-time invariance, and this
is so because of the chiral nature of such an interaction. Let T represent a
time-reversal operation and P is a space (or parity) reflecti on operation, then
the main conclusion of this argument is that CI does not obey T -invariance
but rather PT-invariance.
Moving back to CI on a molecular level, it can readily be deduc ed that
such a symmetry consideration may have deep impact on the the rmodynam-
ical aspects of CI. In the absence of T-invariance on a molecu lar scale it
means that CI does notobey the classical detailed balance principles [24].
Detailed balance implies that at equilibrium the number of o ccurrences of
each chemical reaction in the forward direction is the same a s that in the
reverse direction. In other words, equilibrium does exist n ot only macro-
scopically but also for each individual microscopic reacti on. A necessary
condition for detailed balance is the conservation of time r eversibility, which
is not being obeyed by CI. Moreover, the persistence of CI in o ne selected
21direction prevents the molecular system from reaching ther mal equilibrium.
This conclusion is related to the ergodic assumption introduced by Boltz-
mann over a century ago. According to this assumption, any pr operty taken
as an average over a large ensemble of particles within a clos ed box, being at
thermal equilibrium with its environment, can also be obtai ned for a single
particle under the same conditions, if averaged over a suffici ently long time.
The behaviour of CI presents, therefore, a non-ergodic system. The origin for
this is the generation of an intrinsic molecular perturbati on that is moving in
one selective direction out of two possible ones, as a result of a continuous in-
teraction with random ionic motion in the solvent at the clos e vicinity of the
molecule. Such a behaviour is uncommon for ordinary molecul ar systems and
it is the consequence of several structural details listed a bove, in particular,
its chiral structure as well as the presence of a microscopic interface.
4b. Non-Ergodicity and Evolution
The subject of thermal equilibrium and ergodicity may becom e of prob-
lematic nature dealing with systems that contain more sophi sticated ele-
ments. As long as relatively simple objects, such as mass poi nts, or plain
molecules are concerned, the ergodic assumption seems to be fulfilled in gen-
eral. The problem arises when less simple systems are involv ed, in particular,
those which do not obey time reversal invariance. For exampl e, suppose that
an aqueous solution reaches thermal equilibrium and then a b acterium is
thrown into it. A quasi-microscopic system, such as a living bacterium, is
certainly not time-reversible in its function, and as long a s it stays alive
it also does not reach thermal equilibrium, i.e. it is a non-ergodic system.
22A similar conclusion can be reached for any microscopic livi ng system that
happens to be immersed in a macroscopic surrounding being at thermal equi-
librium. The question that can be asked now is: “what is the smallest system
that can remain at a non-ergodic state within a macroscopic s ystem being at
thermal equilibrium”. Such a question cannot be readily ans wered. It seems
reasonable to assume that any sufficiently complex microscop ic system, or
molecule, that can perform in a ‘machine-like’ mode of opera tion, being time-
irreversible in nature, will remain non-ergodic under such a condition for as
long time as it does not break down or decompose into simpler a nd smaller
elements. Soluble proteins, as well as other sufficiently com plex biomolecules,
seem to comply with this requirement. It seems to be the case, and this is
so to the best knowledge of the author, that only ‘machine-li ke’ biomolecules
can be considered as microscopic non-ergodic systems. It ma y well be the
case that also microelectronics systems may achieve such a s tate with further
development. In view of this it becomes of much interest to po int out that
non-ergodicity may well be a phenomenon related to the micro scopic level of
function of life in nature.
Another question of much interest concerns the possible sig nificance of
non-ergodicity in nature. Microscopic systems or molecule s that reach easily
thermal equilibrium do not seem to be liable for any process o f intrinsic
organization. Another significant aspect of the function an d operation of
complex molecular systems has to do with its usefulness. Any time reversal
activity can be regarded as completely ineffective from this view point of
usefulness. For this very reason the breaking of time-rever sal invariance of
23processes becomes necessary for a practical operation of an y useful value.
All machine operations are time-irreversible, and these in clude microscopic
‘machines’ as well, such as molecular proteins. Non-ergodi city becomes a
feature closely related to time-irreversibility for sophi sticated microscopic
systems. Upon combining together these various features, i t seems reasonable
to deduce that the process of biomolecular evolution in natu re is closely
related to them. For this reason it becomes plausible to assu me that non-
ergodicity is to be regarded a necessary condition for molec ular evolution
[11]. The CI hypothesis has similar features to those descri bed hereby, and it
is based on well recognized structural details as well as on e xternal source of
random ionic motion, which provides for a physical well expl icable model. For
these reasons it is anticipated that CI may become of major va lue for better
understanding of the function of operative biomolecules, s oluble proteins in
particular. This is so, provided that more experimental sup port is to be
found for its viability.
4c. Order of Magnitude Estimate
Another aspect of CI perturbation concerns the size of its en ergy content,
being of the order of (10−1−10−2)kT per chiral element, which is rather small
in comparison to thermal energy, being of the order of kT. The significance of
such subthermal perturbation is not relevant to the size of i ts energy content,
but rather to its degree of ordering or sophistication. The e nergy content of
a biomolecule is considerably larger, and this can serve as s ource of energy
for its operational functions. The energy associated with C I can become
operational upon ‘switching on’ and ‘switching off’ the acti ve groups in the
24molecule. In other words, CI may be relevant to the control me chanism of
biomolecular function, rather than to its operational func tion, which requires
much more energy. A similar comparison of amounts of energy c an be made
between a robot and a computer that controls its activity. Th e energy needed
for control is considerably smaller than that required for t he function of a
robot, although its degree of sophistication is rather impr essive. The rela-
tively low energy content of CI has an additional advantage a s well. Being
of considerably lower energy than typical thermal energy of the order of kT,
does help to increase its length of relaxation time τRwhich contributes to
the persistence of CI. The reason for this effect is related to the presence of
a large population of energy modes of similar energy levels, as is the case of
thermal energy, which decreases their ‘life-times’ length s, owing to the high
liability of interactivity among such modes.
4d. Possible Magnetic Effect
This concerns the possibility of CI to induce magnetic fields along the
axes of coils of the α-helix segments of which the globular protein consists.
The direction of this magnetic field follows the axis of each s egment sepa-
rately and its magnitude is crudely estimated to be of the ord er of 0.01T,
or 100 gauss. It may well be too early to elaborate on the possi ble prac-
tical significance of such an intrinsic molecular magnetic fi eld. However, it
has already been emphasized by Steiner and Ulrich [24] that m agnetic fields
can have significant effects on the polarization of electroni c and nuclear spins
during chemical reactions, which may considerably affect ch emical yields and
25kinetics. It is important to emphasize that the sizeof magnetic fields, ap-
plied externally to chemical reactions, has negligible effe ct on these reactions.
It is also important to point out that in contrast to regular c hemical reac-
tions, where an external magnetic field is applied in arbitra ry direction with
respect to any molecule participating in such a reaction, th e intrinsic field
induced by CI happens to be acting at the optimal location and direction
where it is needed. This may well become a crucial feature of C I, which can
efficiently contribute to the autocatalytic function of solu ble proteins. An-
other interesting feature of such an intrinsic magnetic fiel d induced by CI,
is related to the description of ‘chiral favourable environ ment’ introduced by
Barron [25], who proposes to apply a combination of electric and magnetic
fields parallel to one another in order to generate an enantio meric excess in a
chiral synthesis performed in their close presence. Actual ly, such an intrinsic
combination exists in the globular state of soluble protein s in the presence of
CI. The electric field is generated by the electric dipole mom ent that exists
along the peptide bond that comes into touch with the solvent surrounding
the globular protein, whereas the magnetic field is induced i n parallel to it
by CI along the axes of the coils of the α-helix.
5. Experimental Verification and Support
5a. Background
The presence of CI perturbation along one selected directio n may produce
an additional effect. Although CI is largely still a hypothes is awaiting for an
experimental verification, there exist several pieces of ev idence supporting its
validity. Let us first indicate that its very existence is bas ed largely on general
26physical principles which are hard to refute, as well as on ge neral symme-
try arguments. All macroscopic examples are based on such co nsiderations.
In addition, it is important to notice that CI is a special and uncommon
molecular phenomenon, which requires a set of structural co nstraints for its
possible validity, in analogy to macroscopic chiral device s. These include the
presence of an electric dipole moment, as well as an interfac e separating be-
tween the active medium in the solvent and the inner part of th e molecule.
All these happen to exist for soluble proteins. Before looki ng at a possible
and practical experiment, we note two specific difficulties th at may affect the
observation of CI. The first one concerns the size of the effect , which is quite
small, and the second is the fact of its being an intrinsic mol ecular event,
which limits its experimental accessibility. The second di fficulty concerns
proteins rather than amino acids, which are of more open stru cture. On the
other hand, there are good reasons why it is desirable to obse rve CI. Such
an effect can provide for a better understanding of the comple x nature and
operation of biomolecular function.
In the lack of any direct experimental evidence for the valid ity of CI it
may be helpful to look for existing experimental results tha t may bear certain
close relation to this phenomenon. For this very purpose an indirect experi-
ment has been proposed [17], based on an assumption that CI is a necessary
condition for enzymatic activity in soluble proteins. Such an assumption,
reasonable as it may sound, presents a certain constraint th at at best can
provide for a strong positive experimental support of CI, ra ther than a di-
rect verification of its validity. Such an experiment was act ually performed
27by Careri et al. [26,27]. This experiment concerns the effect of dehydration
on the protonic motion throughout the hydration layers arou nd soluble pro-
teins. The amount of water surrounding each protein molecul e is of crucial
importance for free protonic motion around this molecule. T his is associated
with the so-called ‘percolation transition’ involving wat er clusters around the
protein molecule. By dehydrating the water layers beyond th e percolation
transition, the protonic motion stops, and so does also, sim ultaneously, the
enzymatic activity of the molecule. As soon as there exists e nough water
within the hydration layer surrounding the molecule, free p rotonic motion,
or mobility, becomes possible and resumes again. This in tur n causes also
the onset of enzymatic activity in the protein molecule. Pro tonic motion is
identical in fact, with free ionic mobility being a necessar y condition for CI
in soluble proteins. This fact links closely between chiral interaction and
these experimental results. The close causal connection be tween protonic, or
ionic, mobility and enzymatic activity in soluble proteins , fits precisely with
the assumption of the existence of CI.
5b. Enantiomeric Excess Experiment
A direct experiment to observe CI has already been proposed [ 11,17,28].
In order to perform such an experiment, it is necessary to mak e use of some
observable property that is generated by this effect. Such is the case with
amino acid molecules attached to the water-air interface. F or this purpose a
racemic solution of a hydrophobic amino acid, such as trypto phan, may be
employed, as is shown schematically in Figure 6. The side cha in R attaches
itself to the water surface, and CI occurs around the loop NH+
3.COO−.C,
28which contains a zwitterion where an H-bond may exist betwee n NH+
3and
COO−. The ring of bonds may also contain a water molecule that rela xes
the angular strain of the bonds [28]. CI becomes possible the re, close to
the water-air interface, owing to the gradient /vector▽c∝negationslash= 0 of the ionic strength c
across the ring of bonds at the water surface. CI induces ther e a magnetic
dipole moment /vector µ, which has opposite components for the L and D enan-
tiomers, respectively, with regard to the normal to the wate r surface. Next,
an external magnetic field /vectorBis applied normal to the water surface and this
interacts with /vector µwith energy Eµ:
Eµ=±/vector µ./vectorB. (7)
where the ±signs depend on the L or D chirality respectively. This energ y
adds to the hydrophobic energy Eh, i.e.E=Eh+Eµor:
E=Eh±/vector µ./vectorB, (8)
which results in an energy difference of 2 Eµbetween the two enantiomers.
This, in turn, creates a small population change ∆ nbetween the two enan-
tiomers according to Boltzmann law:
∆n=nL−nD (9)
which depends on the direction of /vectorB. In order to estimate the size of this
effect, i.e. of ∆ n/n, where n=n0
L=n0
Dis the racemic population, it is
necessary to estimate the magnetic dipole moment µ, and this is given [17]
by:µ≈(10−1−10−2)µB, where µBis the Bohr magneton. Then
∆n
n=2µB
kT∼=10−3(forµ∼=10−1µB) (10)
29and B is of the order of a few teslas.
The measurement itself can be performed by removing monolay ers from
the water surface [29] that contains the amino acid populati on and then by
measuring their optical activity elsewhere, not in the pres ence of the magnetic
field. Other advanced technologies may also be available for this purpose [30].
The physical reasoning behind this experiment resembles th e reasoning
leading to the natural selection of the L-anantiomer of amin o acid in ter-
restrial biomolecular evolution. The mechanism may well be the same, but
instead of an applied magnetic field there exists the vertica l component of the
terrestrial field. It is suggested that this process could ha ve happened during
the prebiotic era over a localized region of the earth, where the vertical com-
ponent of the terrestrial magnetic field had a well defined com ponent over a
sufficiently time length, so that one enantiomer, presumably L, had a slight
energy advantage over D. The difference in energy is rather sm all, being of
the order of (10−8−10−9)kT. This energy estimate, although quite small, is
still considerably larger, by some 7 or 8 orders of magnitude , than the weak
nuclear current (WNC) interaction mechanism proposed by Ko ndepudi and
Nelson [31] for the natural selection of the L-anantiomer. T he present mech-
anism does not give an a priori advantage to either L or D enantiomer. This
advantage is an accidental outcome of the direction of the no rmal magnetic
field of earth that happened to exist at the specific region of t he ocean where
and when natural selection happened to occur. Recently, Bar ron [25] has pro-
posed to apply a ‘chiral favorable environment’ of an electr ic and magnetic
fields parallel to one another, which may prefer one enantiom eric chirality
30over the other. In order to perform such an experiment, Barro n proposes
also to rotate charges mechanically, which would make it sim ilar, though
considerably more awkward, to the approach of CI.
5c. Detection of Associated Magnetic Effects
Apart from a possible enantiomeric excess effect, owing to an external
magnetic field applied on a racemic solution, there exist als o other magnetic
effects of CI that can be detected experimentally. These have already been
indicated above for the case of soluble globular proteins. S uch a magnetic
structure may be detected, perhaps, by polarized neutron sc attering. An-
other quite fascinating possibility is related to the SQUID apparatus, an
abbreviation of Superconducting Quantum Interference Dev ice [32], which
can detect extremely small magnetic fields with resolution o f the order of
one part in 1011of the earth’s magnetic field, or of femtotesla (10−15tesla).
This is so in addition to its possibility of detection very mi nute changes,
or differences, in magnetic fields. For this purpose it is suit able to prepare
monomeric solution of a single enantiomer, say L, of a hydrop hobic amino
acid in a sufficiently large concentration. Such a solution wi ll create a mag-
netic monolayer at the water-air interface. This is due to th e presence of a
surface of magnetic moments induced by CI, all having parall el components
in the same direction normal to the water-air interface. (Se e figure 6). Such
a magnetic monolayer may generate a sufficiently strong magne tic field, nor-
mal to this surface, to be detectable by the SQUID. The size of the magnetic
field produced by, say, 1012molecules of amino acid per 1 cm2of this surface,
31Figure 6: Two hydrophobic amino acid enantiomers L and D are s hown. The
side chain R penetrates the water-air interface LS. /vectorBis an external magnetic
field applied normal to LS and interacts with the induced magn etic moments
/vector µ. Due to the opposite orientations of /vector µwith respect to /vectorBto L and D
respectively, there exists a small energy difference of 2 /vector µ./vectorBbetween the two
enantiomers, at the water-air surface LS.
32is estimated to be of the order of 10−12to 10−14tesla at a distance of 1
mm above the surface. Such a magnetic field can, hopefully, be detected by
a SQUID [32].
6. The Reality of Chiral Interaction
The main motivation of the present treatment of CI comes form funda-
mental questions such as: ”why are the molecules of life chir al?” or, more
specifically, ”does chirality offer any biological advantag e to biomolecules?”.
CI may provide for a positive answer to such questions. For th is very reason
it has been helpful to inspect macroscopic chiral devices an d draw conclusions
for chiral molecules by pure analogy. Two modes of operation were found for
CI, namely, massive rotational motion of the chiral device a nd a circular flow
of massless perturbation, such as a current, throughout the device. Of these,
only the massless mode of motion is found suitable for molecu lar CI. More-
over, given certain structural details, all happen to exist in soluble proteins,
certain chiral molecules have the capability of interactin g with randomly
moving ions in a solvent. This interaction produces an intri nsic perturbation
that moves in one preferred direction out of two possible one s. Such a capa-
bility does not exist for achiral molecules. This mode of per turbation within
a chiral molecule gives rise to a certain degree of non-ergod icity, which may
also be regarded as a certain amount of negative entropy. It i s tempting
to compare this to the somewhat naive conclusion of Shroding er [33] in his
bookWhat is Life? , where he claims for such a phenomenon that: ‘it feeds on
negative entropy’. In the present context CI enables protei ns to reduce their
33entropy, i.e. to avoid thermal equilibrium by a minute amoun t, which is to
be regarded as a mode of ‘subthermal organization’. It is her eby conjectured
[11,17] that such a phenomenon of non-ergodicity is to be con sidered as a
necessary condition for evolutionary process in biomolecu les. It is also im-
portant to observe that such features require CI to become a m icroscopically
time-irreversible [34] phenomenon. In fact, if proteins ar e to be regarded as
‘biological machines’, there must exist an element of time i rreversibility in
their function.
These arguments are rather general and still somewhat specu lative, since
as yet CI has not been proven to be real on molecular level. Mor eover, it may
be quite plausible that such arguments are crucial to the fun ction of proteins,
though it is still not easy to describe exactly how. We still n eed a much better
insight into their function. However, it is important to ind icate that if CI is
indeed of significance for protein function, then it can be us eful to ascribe
biological significance to various structural features of s oluble proteins that
otherwise would remain plain facts. Among these features th e chirality of
the protein molecule can be mentioned, in particular the cha rge distribution
on the peptide H-bonds connecting the loops along the α-helix coils, which
are of physical chiral nature. In addition, this also offers a certain meaning
to the presence of nitrogen atoms in proteins and amino acid c onstitution,
where the asymmetry between N and O atoms is responsible for t he dipolar
charge on the peptide H-bonds. By comparison, N atoms are tot ally absent
in hydrocarbons. Also structurally meaningful is the exist ence of closed loops
of chemical bonds in proteins, which provide for a means of de livering the
34CI perturbation around the molecule. This holds for βsheets as well [19].
An additional meaningful fact is the parallelism, or consis tency, of all dipolar
moments along the α-helix, which adds up to a total dipole moment in each
separate segment of a globular protein along the narrow zone that happens
to be in contact with the solvent. (see figure 4). All these str uctural details
have already been considered in the assumptions leading to t he proposal of
CI, so that their biological significance is not surprising. More surprising is
the fact that soluble proteins must become globular before t hey can function
as enzymes. This fact has not been considered previously. It links up neatly
with the necessity of an interface for the operation of CI. An other fact of
biological importance is the presence of free mobile ions in a solvent, which
leads to the preference of physiological, rather than pure o r distilled water,
as the solvent material. These mobile ions are necessary for generating CI
in biomolecules. Most relevant and significant, so far, is th e contribution
made by the experiment [26,27] of Careri et al., which reveal s the connection
between protonic motion in the hydration layer of proteins a nd the onset of
enzymatic activity. This experiment provides for an impres sive support for
the CI hypothesis.
Apart from these facts there exist two related points that ar e of biomolec-
ular evolutionary significance. One of these has to do with th e possibility that
CI was playing an important role in the natural selection of t he L-anantiomer
of amino acids. The other is the evolutionary significance of the non-ergodic
nature of CI. Although in nature there hardly exists any ther mal equilib-
rium, it seems very likely that non-ergodic systems, such as proteins, become
35much more susceptible to evolutionary processes in compari son to systems
that readily reach thermal equilibrium. it is also interest ing to indicate that
any living system is non-ergodic as well.
Another aspect of CI concerns the amount of energy involved i n such a
process. This energy is rather small, subthermal in effect, w hich may evoke
criticism as to its significance. Such criticism is rather co mmon among sci-
entists who attribute significance to energy according to it s size. What is
significant in complex systems such as proteins, may well be t he quality, or
the degree of sophistication of energy, rather than its size . For instance, in-
formation transferred by electromagnetic wave involves ce rtain modulations
of this wave and their respective energy is much less than the energy of the
wave itself, though its content is of major importance and us efulness. An-
other example is the small amount of energy required to switc h on and off
a much larger source of energy. This is to be regarded as a mode of control
energy which may be of main significance in CI. In the case of a r obot con-
trolled by a computer, we have a similar example. The quantit y of energy
required by a robot is considerably larger than that of the co mputer, but
without this small quantity of energy, the robot cannot func tion coherently.
Another, rather cruel example, concerns the size of energy c hange that oc-
curs over the small interval during which a creature dies. Th is change in
energy is very small, but its significance is enormous. This e xample may
well indicate the significance of the content of such a small a mount of en-
ergy. It is interesting, even fascinating, to point out that in the case of CI
all this ordered energy comes from chaotic random motion of i ons, and this
36is mainly due to the chiral nature of CI. In addition to all the se, it may be
relevant to indicate that the density of energy states for su bthermal energies
in molecular systems is considerably smaller than that with in the thermal
range, which makes subthermal energies less convertible, o r dissipative, than
thermal modes of energy, and therefore functionally more effi cient.
Another significant feature of CI is its time irreversibilit y. It is important
to emphasize that any time-reversible operation is meaning less when regarded
from aspects of usefulness. Any productive machine functio n becomes au-
tomatically time-irreversible if its operation is of any me rit. For instance,
even information transfer, which usually requires very lit tle energy, is totally
a time-irreversible process. The source of time reversibil ity in physics comes
from the nature of the Newtonian mass point which is an ideall y symmetric
object. If instead of such a symmetric point mass, an element ary physical
chiral object [11] is to be employed, then it becomes likely t hat instead of
time-reversal invariance the rule of PT-invariance will do minate. This may
well be the main source, or reason, for the biological advant age of chirality.
In conclusion, let it be reminded that in spite of strong but i ndirect sup-
port, such as that of the experiment of Careri et al. [26,27], the CI hypothesis
is still in its infancy and requires much more insight, under standing and de-
velopment, not to mention additional support from direct ex periments as
discussed here and elsewhere [11,17,28].
377. Conclusions
The phenomenon of chiral interaction has been described and treated in
detail in this article. Various uncommon features of such an interaction are
described and discussed. It is also claimed that chiral inte raction may well be
of significant biological advantage, and this is due to its po ssible linkage and
relevance to enzymatic activity of soluble proteins. Anoth er reason for such
an advantage is that chiral interaction may be the source of n on-ergodicity in
biological molecules, which might be relevant to the proces s of biomolecular
evolution in nature.
Acknowledgement
The author wishes to thank Dr. Robert M. Clegg for his help in d iscover-
ing the work of Careri et al. He also wishes to thank Ms. Elizab eth Youdim,
and Ms. Gila Etzion for their considerable help in completin g this article.
38References:
1. F. Arago; “Memoires de la Classe des Sciences Math. et Phys . de
l’Institut Imperial de France”, Part 1, p. 93, (1811).
2. J.B. Biot; “Memoires de la Classe des Science Math. et Phys . de
l’Institut Imperial de France”, Part 1, 1, (1812).
3. L. Pasteur; Ann. Chim. 24, 457 (1848).
4. W.T. Kelvin; “Baltimore Lectures” (C.J. Clay & Sons, Lond on, 1904).
5. P.G. Mezey; J. Math. Chem. 17, 185 (1995), Comput. Math. 34 , 105
(1997), and references therein.
6. G. Gilat and Y. Gordon; J. Math. Chem. 16, 37 (1994).
7. G. Gilat; J. Phys. A, 22, L545 (1989), ibid.Found. Phys. Lett. 3, 189
(1990).
8. A.B. Buda and K. Mislow; J. Am. Chem. Soc. 114, 6006 (1992).
9. H. Zabrodsky and D. Avnir, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 117, 462 (1995) .
10. A.B. Buda, T.P.E. Auf der Heyde and K. Mislow; Angew. Chem . Int.
Ed. Engl. 31, 989 (1992).
11. G. Gilat; The Concept of Structural Chirality, in “Conce pts in Chem-
istry” Ed. D.H. Rouvray (Research Studies Press and Wiley & S ons,
London, New York, 1996), p. 325.
3912. G. Gilat; J. Math. Chem. 15, 197 (1994).
13. G. Gilat; Chem. Phys. Lett. 121, 9 (1985).
14. G. Gilat and L.S. Schulman; Chem. Phys. Lett. 121, 13 (198 5).
15. G. Gilat; Chem. Phys. Lett. 125, 129 (1986).
16. G. Gilat; Chem. Phys. Lett. 137, 492 (1987).
17. G. Gilat; Mol. Eng. 1, 161 (1991).
18. A.S. Davydov; “Biology and Quantum Mechanics”, (Pergam on Press,
Oxford, 1982).
19. For more details concerning the steric structure of glob ular proteins,
see R. Huber and W.S. Bennett Jr. in “Biophysics” Eds. W. Hopp e,
W. Lohmann, H. Markl & H. Ziegler, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin , 1983),
p. 372. Globular proteins contain also β-sheets which are capable too
of generating CI in solvents.
20. H. Tschesche; in “Biophysics”, Eds. W. Hoppe, W. Lohmann , H. Markl
& H. Ziegler, (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983), p. 37.
21. H. Haken; “Synergetics - an Introduction”, (Springer-V erlag, Berlin,
1977).
22. L.D. Barron; “Molecular Light Scattering and Optical Ac tivity”, (Cam-
bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982).
4023. L.E. Reichl; “A Modern Course in Statistical Mechanics” , (University
of Texas Press, Austin, TX 91980, 1980), p. 468.
24. U.E. Steiner and T. Ulrich; Chem. Rev. 89, 51 (1989).
25. L.D. Barron; Science 266, 1491 (1994), and references th erein.
26. G. Careri, A. Giasanti and J.A. Rupley; Phys. Rev. A37, 27 03 (1988).
27. J.A. Rupley and G. Careri; Adv. Protein Chem. 41, 37, (199 1).
28. G. Gilat; Chem. Phys. 140, 195 (1990).
29. M. Pomeranz, F.H. Docol and A. Segmuller; Phys. Rev. Lett . 40, 2467
(1978).
30. G.L. Gaines, Jr.; “Insoluble Monolayers at Liquid-Gas I nterfaces”, (Wi-
ley & Sons, New York 1966), p. 125 and references therein.
31. D.K. Kondepudi and G.W. Nelson; Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 1023 (1983),
ibid.Phys. Lett. 106A, 203 (1984).
32. J. Clarke, Sci. Am. 271, 46 (1994).
33. E. Schrodinger; “What is Life” (Cambridge University Pr ess, Cam-
bridge, 1944),
34. P.C.W. Davies; “The Physics of Time Asymmetry”, (Surrey University
Press, 1974).
41 |
arXiv:physics/9911042v1 [physics.atm-clus] 18 Nov 1999Melting in large sodium clusters: An orbital-free molecula r dynamics study.
Andr´ es Aguado, Jos´ e M. L´ opez, and Julio A. Alonso
Departamento de F´ ısica Te´ orica, Universidad de Valladol id, Valladolid 47011, Spain
Malcolm J. Stott
Department of Physics, Queen’s University, Kingston, Onta rio K7L 3N6, Canada
The melting-like transition in sodium clusters Na N, with N=55, 92, and 142 is studied by using
constant-energy molecular dynamics simulations. An orbit al-free version of the Car-Parrinello tech-
nique is used which scales linearly with system size allowin g investigation of the thermal behaviour
of large clusters. The details of the melting transition are heavily dependent on the specific isomer
used as the starting configuration for the heating process. A n amorphous isomer of Na 142melts in
two steps, the first one (at ≈130 K) being characterized by the high mobility of the atoms l ocated
on the cluster surface, and the second, homogeneous melting (at≈270 K), involves diffusive motion
of all the atoms across the cluster. For an icosahedral isome r those two steps are found to be much
closer in temperature (at ≈240 K and 270 K, respectively). For the case of Na 92, the icosahedral
isomer again melts in two well defined steps, surface melting at≈130 K and homogeneous melting
at≈240 K, whereas an amorphous isomer shows an extremely broad, featureless melting transition.
In the case of Na 55, only an icosahedral isomer was investigated, which melted in a single stage
at≈190 K. Our results on homogeneous melting for Na 142and Na 92are in excellent agreement
with recent experimental determinations of melting temper atures and latent heats. However, the
experimentally observed enhancement of the melting temper ature around N=55 is not reproduced
by the calculations.
PACS numbers: 36.40.Ei 64.70.Dv
I. INTRODUCTION
The melting-like transition in finite clusters consisting
of a small number of atoms, although poorly understood,
is of fundamental interest as clusters are often produced
in a disordered ”liquid” state,1and is relevant to appli-
cations of clusters, for example, the catalytic activity of
small platinum clusters depends critically on their melt-
ing temperatures.2Recent experimental advances reveal
some details of the melting-like transition but, at the
same time, show new and interesting features. Martin3
determined the cluster size dependence of the melting
temperature T mof large sodium clusters, composed of
thousands of atoms, by observing the vanishing of the
atomic shell structure in the mass spectra upon heat-
ing. It was concluded that T mgrows with cluster size,
but the results did not extrapolate yet to the T mof the
bulk. Peters et al.4performed X-ray diffraction experi-
ments on large Pb clusters and observed the occurrence
of surface melting before homogeneous melting. Electron
diffraction5may also help in detecting a surface melting
stage.2Haberland and coworkers6have studied the vari-
ation with temperature of the photofragmentation spec-
tra of Na N(N=50–200) clusters, and have deduced from
it the melting temperatures of the clusters. Intriguingly,
they find that for some cluster sizes the melting tempera-
ture is a local maximum not in exact correspondence with
either the electronic or the atomic shell closing numbers,
but bracketed by the two, suggesting that both effects
are relevant to the melting process.
A number of computer simulations of melting in small
metallic and nonmetallic clusters have been reported,
the majority of which employed phenomenological inter-
atomic potentials.7–9The use of such parameterized po-tentials allows the consideration of long dynamical tra-
jectories for large clusters.8,9Ab initio methods, which
have also been used, accurately treat the electronic struc-
ture of the cluster,10but are much more expensive com-
putationally and are usually restricted to the study of
small clusters for short dynamical trajectories.11Re-
cently, Rytk¨ onen et al.12have performed ab initio molec-
ular dynamics (aiMD) simulations of the melting of a
sodium cluster with 40 atoms, but such a “large” clus-
ter required the use of a fast heating rate. These aiMD
treatments use the Kohn-Sham (KS) form13of density
functional theory (DFT), and orthogonalization of the
one-electron KS orbitals is the limiting step in their per-
formance. However, DFT shows that the total energy
of the electronic system can be expressed in terms of
just the electronic density,14and orbital-free (OF) ver-
sions of the CP technique based on the electron den-
sity have been developed and employed, both in solid
state15,16and cluster17–20applications. These OF meth-
ods scale linearly with the system size allowing the study
of larger clusters for longer simulation times than typ-
ical aiMD simulations. However, quantum shell effects
are neglected, so that features associated with electronic
shell closings are not reproduced.
Previously,20we have used the orbital-free molecular
dynamics (OFMD) method to study the melting pro-
cess in small sodium clusters, Na 8and Na 20, clusters
outside the range covered by Haberland’s photofragmen-
tation experiments.6Here, we report constant energy
OFMD simulations in a study of the melting-like tran-
sition in larger clusters, Na 55, Na 92and Na 142, which
are within the size range covered in those experiments,
and for which a full ab initio treatment of their ther-
mal properties would be very expensive. Even for the
1OFMD method those large clusters represent a substan-
tial computational effort. The aim of our work is to study
the mechanisms by which the melting-like transition pro-
ceeds in these large clusters. In the next section we briefly
present some technical details of the method. The results
are presented and discussed in section III and, finally,
section IV summarizes our main conclusions.
II. THEORY
The orbital-free molecular dynamics method is a Car-
Parrinello total energy scheme which uses an explicit
kinetic-energy functional of the electron density, and
has the electron density as the dynamic variable, as
opposed to the KS single particle wavefunctions. The
main features of the energy functional and the calcula-
tional scheme have been described at length in previous
work,15,17,19,20and details of our method are as described
by Aguado et al.20In brief, the electronic kinetic en-
ergy functional of the electron density, n(/vector r), corresponds
to the gradient expansion around the homogeneous limit
through second order14,21–23
Ts[n] =TTF[n] +1
9TW[n], (1)
where the first term is the Thomas-Fermi functional
TTF[n] =3
10(3π2)2/3/integraldisplay
n(/vector r)5/3d/vector r, (2)
and the second is the lowest order gradient correction,
where TW, the von Weizs¨ acker term, is given by
TW[n] =1
8/integraldisplay| ∇n(/vector r)|2
n(/vector r)d/vector r. (3)
The local density approximation is used for exchange and
correlation.24,25In the external field acting on the elec-
trons, Vext(/vector r) =/summationtext
nv(/vector r−/vectorRn), we take vto be the lo-
cal pseudopotential of Fiolhais et al.,26which reproduces
well the properties of bulk sodium and has been shown
to have good transferability to sodium clusters.27
The cluster is placed in a unit cell of a cubic superlat-
tice, and the set of plane waves periodic in the superlat-
tice is used as a basis set to expand the valence density.
Following Car and Parrinello,10the coefficients of that
expansion are regarded as generalized coordinates of a
set of fictitious classical particles, and the correspondin g
Lagrange equations of motion for the ions and the elec-
tron density distribution are solved as described in Ref.
20.
The calculations for Na 92and Na 142used a supercell of
edge 71 a.u. and the energy cut-off in the plane wave ex-
pansion of the density was 8 Ryd. For Na 55, the cell edge
was 64 a.u. and the energy cut-off 10 Ryd. In all cases, a
64×64×64 grid was used. Previous tests20indicate that
the cut-offs used give good convergence of bond lengths
and binding energies. The fictitious mass associated to
the electron density coefficients ranged between 1.0 ×108
and 3.3 ×108a.u., and the equations of motion were in-
tegrated using the Verlet algorithm28for both electronsand ions with a time step ranging from ∆t = 0.73 ×
10−15sec. for the simulations performed at the lowest
temperatures, to ∆t = 0.34 ×10−15sec. for those at the
highest ones. These choices resulted in a conservation of
the total energy better than 0.1 %.
The first step of the simulations was the determination
of low temperature isomers for each of the three cluster
sizes. For such large clusters it is very difficult to find
the global minimum because the number of different lo-
cal minima increases exponentially with the number of
atoms in the cluster. Instead, one has to be satisfied
with structures that are approximations to the global
minimum, and we used two methods to find these. First,
we used dynamical simulated annealing,10by heating a
number of initial random configurations of the clusters
to 600 K and then slowly cooling them. This process
always led to amorphous structures for Na 92and Na 142,
and to a nearly icosahedral structure for Na 55. Secondly,
we assumed icosahedral growth. Thus, for Na 142, we re-
moved five atoms from the surface of a 147 atom, three-
shell perfect icosahedron. For Na 92, we constructed an
icosahedral isomer by following the growing sequence de-
scribed by Montejano-Carrizales et al,29and for Na 55we
took a perfect two-shell icosahedron.
Several molecular dynamics simulation runs at differ-
ent constant energies were performed in order to obtain
the caloric curve for each isomer. The initial positions
of the atoms for the first run were taken by slightly de-
forming the equilibrium geometry of the low temperature
isomer. The final configuration of each run served as the
starting geometry for the next run at a different energy.
The initial velocities for every new run were obtained by
scaling the final velocities of the preceding run. The total
simulation times varied between 8 and 18 ps for each run
at constant energy.
A number of indicators to locate the melting-like tran-
sition were employed. Namely, the specific heat defined
by7,30
Cv= [N−N(1−2
3N−6)< E kin>t< E−1
kin>t]−1,
(4)
where N is the number of atoms and <>tindicates the
average along a trajectory; the mean square displace-
ment, < r2(t)>, given by7
< r2(t)>=1
Nntnt/summationdisplay
j=1N/summationdisplay
i=1[/vectorRi(t0j+t)−/vectorRi(t0j)]2,(5)
where ntis the number of time origins, t0j, considered
along a trajectory; the time evolution of the distance
between each atom and the instantaneous center of mass
of the cluster
ri(t) =|/vectorRi(t)−/vectorRcm(t)|1/2; (6)
and finally, the density of atoms, ρ(r), a distance raway
from the center of mass, averaged over a whole dynamical
trajectory.
2III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The structures for the low energy isomers resulting
from the simulated annealing starting from a number
of random initial configurations for Na 142and Na 92, are
amorphous arrangements. Because the complexity of the
potential energy surfaces typical of these large cluster
sizes renders the simulated annealing search unreliable,
we have doubts that these are the ground structures of
Na142and Na 92. On the other hand, it is known that the
specific isomer used to start the heating dynamics can
affect significantly the details of the melting transition.31
Therefore, we have adopted additional isomers in order
to study the influence of the initial structure on clus-
ter melting. For Na 142, another isomer was obtained
by removing five sodium atoms from a perfect three-
shell icosahedron. The icosahedral growing sequence in
nickel clusters has been studied by Montejano-Carrizales
et al,29and they have shown that the 12 vertices of the
outermost shell are the last sites to be occupied. As-
suming the same growth sequence for sodium clusters,
we have removed five atoms from the vertex positions of
Na147, considering all possibilities, and have then radially
relaxed the resulting structure. In the most stable struc-
ture thus formed, the five vacancies form a pentagon.
For Na 92, we have adopted the umbrella growing model
of Montejano-Carrizales et al.29The resulting structure,
also radially relaxed, corresponds to three complete um-
brellas on top of a perfect Na 55icosahedron. Calculated
low-temperature dynamical trajectories verify that these
structures are indeed stable isomers of Na 92. An impor-
tant difference between the icosahedral and amorphous
structures is that the former has a much smoother sur-
face. The icosahedral isomers are ∼0.017–0.020 eV/atom
more stable than the amorphous. The presence of amor-
phous structures in the potential energy surface, within
an energy range of ∼0.01 eV/atom of the ground state,
has been predicted by Garz´ on and coworkers32for gold
clusters of intermediate size, the amorphous structures
were found to be the global minima for a number of
cluster sizes. For Na 55, the simulated annealing resulted
in a slightly distorted two-shell icosahedron, and only
this isomer was considered for that cluster size. Calvo
and Spiegelmann have studied the low-energy isomers of
sodium clusters in the same size range, both through pair
potential and tight-binding (TB) calculations,9and have
also found icosahedral structures for Na 55, Na93, Na139
and Na 147.
For each cluster we have calculated the total energy
as a function of the internal temperature, defined as the
average of the ionic kinetic energy20- the so-called caloric
curve. A thermal phase transition is indicated in the
caloric curve by a change of slope, the slope being the
specific heat; the height of the step gives an estimate of
the latent heat of fusion. However, melting processes are
more easily recognised as peaks in the specific heat as a
function of temperature calculated directly from eq. (4)
and shown in fig. 1.
The specific heat curves for Na 142(fig. 1a) display
two peaks indicating a two-step melting process. For the
amorphous cluster these steps are widely separated at thetemperatures Tam
s≈130 K and Tam
m≈270 K, but much
closer together for the icosahedral Na 142cluster at tem-
peratures Tico
s≈240 K and Tico
m≈270 K, close enough
so that only one slope change in the caloric curve can be
distinguished in this case. The results suggest that the
melting transition in Na 142starts at a temperature T s
and finishes at T mwith the difference in the melting of
the two isomers being only the much smaller T svalue for
the amorphous isomer. Homogeneous melting occurs at
T=T m≈270 K in both cases, a result in excellent agree-
ment with the experiments of Haberland and coworkers,6
who give an approximate value of 280 K. The estimated
latent heat of fusion is q m≈15 meV/atom consistent
with the experimental value of ∼14 meV/atom. How-
ever, the premelting stage at T=T sis not detected in
the experiments. Our results for the icosahedral isomer
could be consistent with this because the two specific heat
peaks are close to one another and the height of the first
is much smaller than that of the second; consequently
they could be indistinguishable experimentally. Calvo
and Spiegelmann9have performed Monte Carlo (MC)
simulations using a semiempirical many-atom potential.
The lowest-energy isomer they found for Na 139was also a
defective three-shell icosahedron, in this case with 8 sur-
face vacancies. They also report two close peaks in the
specific heat curve indicating a two-step melting process,
with T s≈210 K and T m≈230 K. They concluded
that those two temperatures get closer as the cluster
size increases, so that for clusters in this size range one
can consider in practical terms just one peak in the spe-
cific heat and a single melting temperature. Tight bind-
ing molecular dynamics calculations were performed by
the same authors.9Although the specific values obtained
for the melting temperatures through the tight-binding
methodology are different from those obtained with the
phenomenological simulations (they tend to overestimate
the experimental values, while empirical potentials tend
to underestimate them), the qualitative picture of melt-
ing in two close steps is the same in both methods.
The results for Na 92are shown in fig. 1b. The melting
of the amorphous isomer proceeds over a broad temper-
ature interval, and there are no significant peaks in the
specific heat or slope changes in the caloric curve. The
latent heat is close to zero; something that had been
found previously for some amorphous gold clusters.33
These results are in disagreement with the experiments
of Haberland et al.6In contrast the icosahedral isomer
shows two-step melting with a prepeak at T s≈130
K and homogeneous melting at T m≈240 K. In this
case T sand T mare well separated, but the first peak
is much smaller than the second which could again ac-
count for the absence of the prepeak in the experiments,
although alternatively we may not yet have found the
ground state structure. Nevertheless, the calculated val-
ues for the homogeneous melting stage: T m≈240 K
and q m≈8 meV/atom, are in excellent agreement with
the experimental values,6250 K and 7 meV/atom respec-
tively. Calvo and Spiegelmann9have performed MC sim-
ulations for Na 93with similar conclusions, finding (with
phenomenological potentials) a small bump near 100 K
and a main peak near 180 K. The TB simulations give
3values for those two temperatures roughly 100 K higher.
The experiments6indicate a substantial enhancement
of the melting temperature in the size region around
N=55 atoms. The reported melting temperature of Na+
55
is 325 K, surprisingly, higher than that of Na 142, which
is a local maximum in the size region close to the third
icosahedral shell closing (Na 147). Our simulations do not
reproduce this enhancement of T mand predict that Na 55
melts in a single stage at T m≈190 K (fig. 1c), a re-
sult found also by Calvo and Spiegelmann.9The OFMD
method does not account for electronic quantum-shell ef-
fects, and full KS calculations may be needed in order to
clarify this discrepancy, although it is not clear a priori
how quantum effects could shift the value of T mby such
a large amount. Of course, another possibility is that the
icosahedron is not the ground state. However, K¨ ummel
et al34have recently found that the experimental pho-
toabsorption spectrum of Na+
55is best reproduced with a
slightly oblate isomer which is close to icosahedral. We
have also investigated a bcc-like growing sequence finding
that bcc structures are less stable than icosahedral ones
for all cluster sizes studied. Nevertheless, we checked
the melting behavior of a Na 55isomer with bcc structure
and did not find an enhanced melting temperature for it
either.
Various parameters have been calculated in order to in-
vestigate the nature of the melting transitions. The long
time behaviour of the mean square atomic displacements
given by eq. (5), gives information about diffusion. For
both Na 92and Na 142clusters at temperatures less than
Ts< r2(t)>has zero slope at long times, indicating
only oscillatory motion of the atoms. For temperatures
between T sand T mthe slope of < r2(t)>at large times
gives the diffusion coefficient which, we find, is larger for
the amorphous structure than for the icosahedral isomer.
At temperatures above Tmthe slopes are similar for the
amorphous and icosahedral clusters and the diffusion is
appreciably faster as appropriate for a liquid.
The short-time averages (sta) of the distances between
each atom and the instantaneous center of mass of the
cluster, < ri(t)>sta, have been calculated, and the clus-
ter evolution during the trajectories has been followed vi-
sually using computer graphics. The < ri(t)>stacurves
for Na 142are presented in Figs. 2-4 for three represen-
tative temperatures. At low temperature (Fig. 2) the
values of < ri(t)>staare almost independent of time
(the curves for the two isomers of Na 92are qualitatively
similar to those for Na 142and are omitted; the curves
for Na 55are similar to those of the two inner shells of
the icosahedral Na 142isomer). The movies show that
the clusters are solid, the atoms just vibrating around
their equilibrium positions. Curve crossings are due to
oscillatory motion and slight structural relaxations rath er
than diffusive motion. A substantial difference between
the behaviour of the icosahedral and amorphous clus-
ters at low temperature is seen by comparing Figs. 2a
and 2b. For the former we can distinguish quasidegen-
erate groups which are characteristic of the symmetry:
one line near the centre of mass of the cluster identifies
the central atom (its position does not exactly coincide
with the center of mass because of the location of thefive surface vacancies); 12 lines correspond to the first
icosahedral shell; another 42 complete the second shell,
within which we can distinguish the 12 vertex atoms from
the rest because their distances to the centre of mass are
slightly different; finally, 82 lines describe the external
shell, where again we can distinguish the 7 vertex atoms
from the rest. In contrast, the lines for the amorphous
isomer in Fig. 2b are quite dispersed. Similar results to
these have been reported by Garz´ on et al.32for icosa-
hedral and amorphous gold clusters. The radial density
distributions ρ(r) for Na 142are shown in Fig. 5a and 5b
for the icosahedral and amorphous isomers respectively.
At the lowest temperature, T=30 K, the atoms in the
icosohedral isomer are distributed in three main atomic
shells, a surface-like shell and two inner shells; subshell s
in the two outermost shells are due to atoms in the vertex
positions. The shell structure is still evident at T=130 K.
The amorphous isomer also exhibits a three-shell struc-
ture at the lowest temperature but with many sub-peaks.
At T=160 K, a temperature between Tam
sand T mfor
the amorphous isomer, the structure of Na 142is more
fluid. Fig. 3b reveals that the surface of the amorphous
cluster is melted, surface atoms undergoing diffusive mo-
tion by interchanging frequently with neighboring sur-
face atoms. The atoms in the outer core-like shell are
somewhat less mobile, as seen in the movies and in the
reduced spread of the < ri(t)>stacurves (compare the
two bold lines), and atom interchanges are less frequent.
The greater fluidity of the cluster is also evident in the
density distribution shown in Fig.5b. At this interme-
diate temperature ρshows less structure, and although
the grouping of atoms into three shells is still discern-
able, the fine structure is washed by thermal effects. A
slight volume expansion is observed. Turning now to the
icosahedral isomer at T=160 K, Fig. 3a shows less disor-
der than for the amorphous isomer at this temperature
which is below T s. However, the movies reveal isomer-
ization transitions, similar to those found at the begining
of the melting-like transition of Na 8and Na 20.20These
transitions involve directly the motion of the vacancies
in the outer shell, and through a highly concerted pro-
cess, different permutational isomers of the ground state
structure are visited. The onset of this motion is gradual
and would not lead to a significant peak in the specific
heat. Fig. 5a shows that the distinction into three atomic
shells is still clear.
For intermediate temperatures the other two cluster
sizes show a number of differences for which we offer ex-
planations. Na 55does not show surface melting, or at
leastTsandTmare so close as to be indistinguishable.
The icosahedral isomer of Na 92shows surface melting
much more removed from Tmthan for Na 142, and the
amorphous isomer shows no abrupt transition whatso-
ever. Na 55is a perfect two-shell icosahedron, so sur-
face atoms have no empty sites available to move to, and
diffusion within an atomic shell is as difficult as diffu-
sion across different shells. When the surface atoms have
enough energy to exchange positions with another surface
atom they can as easily migrate throughout the whole
cluster, and melting proceeds in a single stage at 190
K. For the icosahedral isomer of Na 92, the temperature
4identified as Tico
sis in the range where the isomerization
processes of Na 142set in, but for the smaller cluster these
processes give rise to a distinct peak in the specific heat.
This happens because of the larger number of vacancies
in the third incomplete shell allowing much easier diffu-
sion of the surface atoms which sample a large portion of
configurational space. The density distribution in solid-
like amorphous Na 92shows that the shell structure is
less pronounced than in amorphous Na 142, in particular
the minima between shells are much less deep. It seems
that in Na 92there are no spatially forbidden zones for
the atoms even at low temperature, and the cluster is
more uniformly amorphous than its 142 atom counter-
part. When melting sets in, it involves directly all the
atoms in the cluster, and the melting proceeds gradually
in a broad temperature range.
Fig. 4 shows the time evolution of < ri>stafor Na 142
at a temperature T= 361 K for which the cluster is in the
“liquid” regime. Now, all the atoms diffuse throughout
the cluster. Some specific cases of atoms that at the
begining of the simulation are near (far from) the center
of mass of the cluster and end in a position far from (near)
the center of mass of the cluster are shown in boldface.
The density distribution at this temperature shown in
Fig. 5b no longer displays atomic shell structure, and
apart from some minor variations the density is uniform
across the cluster. The expansion of the cluster by about
5 bohr over the low temperature clusters is evident, and
the surface is more diffuse. The density is also constant
at 280 K (see fig. 5a), just above the melting point. The
other clusters at the highest temperatures have a similar
uniform density distribution.
Our results for icosahedral isomers suggest that the
melting transition in large clusters occurs in a smaller
temperature range than for small clusters such as Na 8or
Na20.20Furthermore, the size of any prepeak diminishes
with respect to the main homogenous melting peak as
the cluster size increases, that is as the fraction of atoms
on the surface of the cluster that can take part in pre-
melting decreases. Consequently, a homogeneous melt-
ing temperature can be defined with less ambiguity for
the larger clusters. These comments apply to the caloric
and the specific heat curves, which are the quantities
amenable to experimental measurement. In contrast, mi-
croscopic quantities such as the diffusion coefficient D or
the< ri(t)>stacurves are very sensitive to any small re-
organization in the atomic arrangement, and it is difficult
to determine the melting temperature from the variation
of these quantities with temperature. For example, D in-
creases substantially when the cluster surface melts, but
undergoes just a further small enhancement upon homo-
geneous melting. A good structural, as opposed to a ther-
mal indicator of the melting transition in medium-sized
or large clusters is the shape of the ionic density distri-
bution. The density displays pronounced shell structure
at low temperatures which is smoothed out somewhat at
intermediate temperatures where the vacancy diffusion
and/or surface melting mechanisms are present. Above
Tmthe density is flat throughout the cluster apart from
some noise due to the relatively short runs, in no case
longer than 20 ps.In figure 6 we compare our calculated values of the
melting temperature for several cluster sizes with the
experimental values. Our earlier results for Na 8and
Na2020are also included, although for such small sizes
there is ambiguity in defining a melting temperature. For
Na92and Na 142there is excellent agreement with the ex-
perimental results.6Recently, measurements have been
reported35,36of the temperature dependence of the pho-
toabsorption cross sections for Na+
n(n=4–16). Although
the spectra do not show signatures of any sharp melting
transition, which could be due to a broad transition re-
gion, some comparison between theory and experiment
can be made. The spectra do not change appreciably
upon increasing the cluster temperature, until at T=105
K (the value given as the experimental melting temper-
ature of Na 8in Fig. 6), the spectra begin to evolve in a
continuous way. In our study of the melting behaviour
of Na 820we found a broad transition starting at T=110
K and continuing to T=220 K at which point the “liq-
uid” state was fully developed. This may explain the
absence of abrupt changes in the photoabsorption spec-
trum with temperature. In any case, we feel that the
good agreement between theory and experiment extends
to the small sizes. However, our method is not expected
to give accurate results whenever oscillations in the melt-
ing temperature with cluster size arise as a consequence
of electronic shell effects. The discrepancy for Na 55re-
mains intriguing. In this regard it is perhaps noteworthy
that our calculated melting temperatures for the three
large clusters fit precisely the expected large N behaviour,
Tm(NaN)=T m(bulk) + C/N2
3, where Cis a constant,
and yield as a bulk melting temperature T m(bulk)=350
K, which is close to the observed value of 371 K. A simi-
lar extrapolation to the bulk melting temperature is not
evident in the experimental data.
IV. SUMMARY
The melting-like transitions of Na 142, Na 92, and
Na55have been investigated by applying an orbital-free,
density-functional molecular dynamics method. The
computational effort which is required is modest in
comparison with the traditional Car-Parrinello Molecu-
lar Dynamics technique based on Kohn-Sham orbitals.
Specifically, the computational effort to update the elec-
tronic system scales linearly with the system size N, in
contrast to the N3scaling of orbital-based methods. This
saving allows the study of large clusters. However, the
cost is an approximate electron kinetic energy.
Melting is found to depend on the starting low-
temperature isomer. An amorphous isomer of Na 142
melts in two well-defined steps. The transition at T s≈
130 K, from a rigid cluster in which the atoms are vi-
brating around fixed equilibrium positions to a phase
in which the surface atoms become mobile, is best de-
scribed as surface melting. This is followed at T m≈270
K by homogeneous melting. For the icosahedral Na 142
isomer, thermal, macroscopic properties place these two
stages much closer in temperature (240 and 270 K re-
spectively), in better accordance with the experimental
5one-stage picture. Nevertheless, there is diffusive motion
involving surface defects at a temperature as low as 130
K. For Na 92, the melting transition of the amorphous iso-
mer is spread over a broad temperature range, and there
are no abrupt signatures in the caloric curve. Again the
melting of the icosahedral isomer gives better agreement
with the one-stage picture. There is a secondary peak
at 130K, which is much smaller than the main peak at
240 K. Na 55, being a perfect two-shell icosahedron with
no surface defects melts in a single stage at 190 K. In all
cases, for T >Tmthe atoms are able to diffuse through-
out the cluster volume. Both the calculated T mat which
homogeneous melting occurs and the estimated latent
heat of fusion q mare in excellent agreement with the ex-
perimental results of Haberland and coworkers for Na 142
and Na 92; our earlier results on the melting of Na 820are
also consistent with the variation of the measured opti-
cal spectrum with temperature. A serious discrepancy
between theory and experiment remains for Na 55.
We have found that structural quantities obtained
from the simulations which are very useful in the study
of melting in small clusters,20such as the diffusion coef-
ficient, are not, in the case of the larger clusters studied
here, efficient indicators of homogeneous melting, which
is easily located with thermal indicators. A better struc-
tural indicator is the evolution with temperature of the
average radial ion density. This quantity becomes con-
stant when homogeneous melting occurs, highlighting the
collective nature of the melting-like transition.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: We would like to
thank H. Haberland, S. K¨ ummel and F. Calvo for sending
us copies of their respective works prior to publication.
This work has been supported by DGES (Grant PB95-
0720-C02-01), NATO(Grant CRG.961128) and Junta de
Castilla y Le´ on (VA63/96 and VA28/99). A. Aguado ac-
knowledges a graduate fellowship from Junta de Castilla
y Le´ on. M. J. Stott acknowledges the support of the
NSERC of Canada and an Iberdrola visiting professor-
ship at the University of Valladolid.
Captions of Figures and Tables.
Figure 1 Specific heat of Na 142(a), Na 92(b) and Na 55
(c) as functions of the internal cluster temperature. The
deviation around the mean temperature is smaller than
the size of the circles.
Figure 2 Short-time averaged distances between each
atom in Na 142and the center of mass, as functions of
time for (a) the icosahedral isomer at T= 30 K and (b)
the amorphous isomer at T= 47 K.
Figure 3 Short-time averaged distances between each
atom in Na 142and the center of mass, as functions of time
for (a) the icosahedral isomer and (b) the amorphous
isomer at T= 160 K. The bold lines follow the evolution of
an atom in the surface shell and another in the outermost
core shell.
Figure 4 Short-time averaged distances between each
atom in Na 142and the center of mass, as functions of
time at T= 361 K. The bold lines are to guide the eye in
following the diffusive behavior of specific atoms.Figure 5 Averaged radial ionic densities of the icosa-
hedral (a) and amorphous (b) isomers of Na 142, each at
some representative temperatures. Notice the evolution
towards an average constant density as the temperature
increases. The same trend is observed for the other two
cluster sizes.
Figure 6 Calculated melting temperatures, compared
with the experimental values of T m. The experimental
values for the larger cluster sizes are taken from ref. 6,
while that for the smallest Na 8cluster is taken from ref.
35 (see text for details).
1C. Ellert, M. Schmidt, C. Schmitt, T. Reiners, and H.
Haberland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 1731 (1995); P. Brock-
haus, K. Wong, K. Hansen, V. Kasperovich, G. Tikhonov,
and V. Kresin, Phys. Rev. A 59, 495 (1999).
2Z. L. Wang, J. M. Petroski, T. C. Green, and M. A. El-
Sayed, J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 6145 (1998).
3T. P. Martin, Phys. Rep. 273, 199 (1996).
4K. F. Peters, J. B. Cohen, and Y. W. Chung, Phys. Rev.
B57, 13430 (1998).
5M. Maier-Borst, D. B. Cameron, M. Rokni, and
J. H. Parks, Phys. Rev. A 59, R3162 (1999).
6M. Schmidt, R. Kusche, W. Kronm¨ uller, B. von Is-
sendorff, and H. Haberland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 99 (1997);
M. Schmidt, R. Kusche, B. von Issendorff, and H. Haber-
land, Nature 393, 238 (1998); H. Haberland et al., in “Pro-
ceedings of the International Symposium on Small Particles
and Inorganic Clusters, ISSPIC9” Eur. Phys. J. D (to be
published).
7J. Jellinek, T. L. Beck, and R. S. Berry, J. Chem. Phys. 84,
2783 (1986); H. L. Davis, J. Jellinek, and R. S. Berry, ibid.
86, 6456 (1987); T. L. Beck, J. Jellinek, and R. S. Berry,
ibid.87, 545 (1987); J. P. Rose and R. S. Berry, ibid.
96, 517 (1992); ibid.98, 3246 (1993); ibid.98, 3262
(1993); V. K. W. Cheng, J. P. Rose, and R. S. Berry,
Surf. Rev. Lett. 3, 347 (1996); F. Calvo and P. Labastie,
J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 2051 (1998); J. P. K. Doye and
D. J. Wales, Phys. Rev. B 59, 2292 (1999); preprint
cond-mat/9905407 (1999); A. Bulgac and D. Kusnezov,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 1335 (1992); Phys. Rev. B 45, 1988
(1992); N. Ju and A. Bulgac, Phys. Rev. B 48, 2721
(1993); M. Fosmire and A. Bulgac, ibid.52, 17509 (1995);
Z. Phys. D 40, 458 (1997); A. Bulgac, Z. Phys. D 40,
454 (1997); J. M. Thompson and A. Bulgac, ibid.40, 462
(1997); Z. B. G¨ uvenc and J. Jellinek, ibid.26, 304 (1993);
C. Rey, L. J. Gallego, J. Garc´ ıa-Rodeja, J. A. Alonso, and
M. P. I˜ niguez, Phys. Rev. B 48, 8253 (1993); J. Garc´ ıa-
Rodeja, C. Rey, L. J. Gallego, and J. A. Alonso, ibid.49,
8496 (1994); L. J. Lewis, P. Jensen, and J. L. Barrat, ibid.
56, 2248 (1997); S. K. Nayak, S. N. Khanna, B. K. Rao,
and P. Jena, J. Phys: Condens. Matter 10, 10853 (1998).
8C. L. Cleveland, W. D. Luedtke, and U. Landman, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 81, 2036 (1998); Phys. Rev. B 60, 5065 (1999).
9F. Calvo and F. Spiegelmann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 2270
(1999); unpublished results.
10R. Car and M. Parrinello, Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2471 (1985);
M. C. Payne, M. P. Teter, D. C. Allan, T. A. Arias, and J.
D. Joannopoulos, Rev. Mod. Phys. 64, 1045 (1992).
611U. R¨ othlisberger and W. Andreoni, J. Chem. Phys. 94,
8129 (1991).
12A. Rytk¨ onen, H. H¨ akkinen, and M. Manninen,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 3940 (1998).
13W. Kohn and L. J. Sham, Phys. Rev. 140, 1133A (1965).
14P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Phys. Rev. 136, 864B (1964).
15M. Pearson, E. Smargiassi, and P. A. Madden,
J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 5, 3221 (1993); E. Smargiassi
and P. A. Madden, Phys. Rev. B 49, 5220 (1994); M. Foley,
E. Smargiassi, and P. A. Madden, J. Phys.: Condens. Mat-
ter6, 5231 (1994); E. Smargiassi and P. A. Madden,
Phys. Rev. B 51, 117 (1995); ibid.51, 129 (1995); M. Fo-
ley and P. A. Madden, ibid.53, 10589 (1996); B. J. Jes-
son, M. Foley, and P. A. Madden, ibid.55, 4941 (1997); J.
A. Anta, B. J. Jesson, and P. A. Madden, ibid.58, 6124
(1998).
16N. Govind, Y. A. Wang, and E. A. Carter, J. Chem. Phys.
110, 7677 (1999).
17V. Shah, D. Nehete, and D. G. Kanhere, J. Phys.: Con-
dens. Matter 6, 10773 (1994); D. Nehete, V. Shah, and
D. G. Kanhere, Phys. Rev. B 53, 2126 (1996); V. Shah and
D. G. Kanhere, J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 8, L253 (1996);
V. Shah, D. G. Kanhere, C. Majumber, and G. P. Das,
ibid.9, 2165 (1997); A. Vichare and D. G. Kanhere,
J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 10, 3309 (1998); A. Vichare and
D. G. Kanhere, Eur. Phys. J. D 4, 89 (1998); A. Dhavale,
V. Shah, and D. G. Kanhere, Phys. Rev. A 57, 4522 (1998).
18N. Govind, J. L. Mozos, and H. Guo, Phys. Rev. B 51,
7101 (1995); Y. A. Wang, N. Govind, and E. A. Carter,
ibid.58, 13465 (1998).
19P. Blaise, S. A. Blundell, and C. Guet, Phys. Rev. B 55,
15856 (1997).
20A. Aguado, J. M. L´ opez, J. A. Alonso, and M. J. Stott, J.
Chem. Phys. 111, 6026 (1999).
21Theory of the inhomogeneous electron gas. Editors S.
Lundqvist and N. H. March. Plenum Press, New York
(1983).
22W. Yang, Phys. Rev. A 34, 4575 (1986).
23J. P. Perdew, Phys. Lett. A 165, 79 (1992).
24J. P. Perdew and A. Zunger, Phys. Rev. B 23, 5048 (1981).
25D. Ceperley and B. Alder, Phys. Rev. Lett. 45, 566 (1980).
26C. Fiolhais, J. P. Perdew, S. Q. Armster, J. M. McLaren,
and H. Brajczewska, Phys. Rev. B 51, 14001 (1995); ibid.
53, 13193 (1996).
27F. Nogueira, C. Fiolhais, J. He, J. P. Perdew, and A. Rubio,
J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 8, 287 (1996).
28L. Verlet, Phys. Rev. 159, 98 (1967); W. C. Swope and
H. C. Andersen, J. Chem. Phys. 76, 637 (1982).
29J. M. Montejano-Carrizales, M. P. I˜ niguez, J. A. Alonso,
and M. J. L´ opez, Phys. Rev. B 54, 5961 (1996).
30S. Sugano, Microcluster Physics , Springer-Verlag, Berlin
(1991).
31V. Bonaci´ c-Kouteck´ y, J. Jellinek, M. Wiechert, and P. Fan -
tucci, J. Chem. Phys. 107, 6321 (1997); D. Reichardt,
V. Bonaci´ c-Kouteck´ y, P. Fantucci, and J. Jellinek, Chem.
Phys. Lett. 279, 129 (1997).
32I. L. Garz´ on, K. Michaelian, M. R. Beltr´ an, A. Posada-
Amarillas, P. Ordej´ on, E. Artacho, D. S´ anchez-Portal, an d
J. M. Soler, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 1600 (1998).
33F. Ercolessi, W. Andreoni, and E. Tosatti, Phys. Rev. Lett.
66, 911 (1991).
34S. K¨ ummel, M. Brack, and P. -G. Reinhard, unpublished
results.
35M. Schmidt, C. Ellert, W. Kronm¨ uller, and H. Haberland,Phys. Rev. B 59, 10970 (1999).
36H. Haberland, in “ Metal Clusters ”, ed. W. Ekardt (John
Wiley & Sons Ltd. 1999), p. 181.
7[
0 100 200 300 400 500
T (K)2.04.06.08.010.0Specific Heat (kb)Icosahedron
Amorphous
850.0 150.0 250.0 350.0
T (K)3.04.05.06.07.08.0Specific Heat (Kb)Icosahedron
Amorphous
950 150 250 350
T (K)2.03.04.05.06.07.08.0Specific Heat (Kb)
100 2000 4000 6000
t (fs)01020<r>(a.u.)
110 5000 10000
t (fs)0510152025<r>(a.u.)
120 5000 10000 15000 20000
t (fs)01020<r> (a.u.)
130 2000 4000 6000 8000
t (fs)01020<r>(a.u.)
140 2000 4000 6000
t (fs)0102030<r>(a.u.)
152 12 22
r (bohr)0.0000.0010.0020.0030.0040.005Atomic Density (a.u.)30 K
130 K
160 K
280 K
160 10 20 30
r (bohr)0.0000.0010.0020.0030.004Atomic Density (a.u.)47 K
160 K
361 K
170 50 100 150
Number of Atoms100200300400Melting Temperature (K)Calculated
Experimental
18 |
arXiv:physics/9911043v1 [physics.optics] 19 Nov 1999Moving Embedded Solitons
Alan R. Champneys
Department of Engineering Mathematics, The University of B ristol,
Bristol BS8 1TR, United Kingdom
Boris A.Malomed
Department of Interdisciplinary Studies, Faculty of Engin eering, Tel Aviv University,
Tel Aviv 69978, Israel
October 31, 2013To appear in J Phys A.
Abstract
The first theoretical results are reported predicting moving solitons residing inside ( em-
bedded into) the continuous spectrum of radiation modes. The model taken is a Bragg-
grating medium with Kerr nonlinearity and additional secon d-derivative (wave) terms.
The moving embedded solitons (ESs) are doubly isolated (of c odimension 2), but, never-
theless, structurally stable. Like quiescent ESs, moving E Ss are argued to be stable to
linear approximation, and semi-stable nonlinearly. Estimates show that moving ESs may
be experimentally observed as ∼10 fs pulses with velocity ≤1/10th that of light.
PACS: 42.81.Dp; 42.79.Dj; 42.50.Rh; 03.40.Kf
Recent studies have revealed a novel type of soliton (“solit ary wave” is more accurate since
we do not assume integrability) that is embedded into the continuous spectrum, i.e., the soli-
ton’s internal frequency is in resonance with linear (radia tion) waves. Generally, such a soliton
should not exist, one finding instead a “quasi-soliton” with non-vanishing oscillatory tails (ra-
diation component) [1]. Nevertheless, bona fide (exponentially decaying) solitons can exist as
codimension-one solutions if, at discrete values of the (quasi-)soliton’s i nternal frequency, the
amplitude of the tail exactly vanishes, while the soliton re mains embedded into the continuous
spectrum. This requires the spectrum of the corresponding l inearized system to consist of (at
least) two branches, one corresponding to exponentially lo calized solutions, and the other to
radiation modes. In terms of the travelling-wave ordinary d ifferential equations (ODEs), the
origin must be a saddle-centre equilibrium.
Examples of such embedded solitons (ESs) were found in water-wave models [2] and in several
nonlinear-optical ones, e.g., a Bragg grating with dispers ion and/or diffraction terms [3], and
second-harmonic generation (SHG) in the presence of a self- defocusing Kerr nonlinearity ([4, 5]).
The term “ES” was proposed in Ref. [4].
It is relevant to stress that ESs, although they are isolated solutions, are notstructurally
unstable. Indeed, a small change of the model’s parameters w ill slightly change the location of
ES (e.g., its energy and momentum, see below), but will not de stroy it, which is quite obvious
from the already published results [2, 4]. In this respect, t hey may be called generic solutions of
codimension one.
1ESs are interesting for several reasons, firstly because the y frequently appear when higher-
order (singular) perturbations are added to the system, whi ch may completely change its soliton
spectrum (see e.g. [3]). Secondly, optical ESs may have a pot ential for applications, just because
they are isolated solitons rather than members of continuou s families. Finally, and most cru-
cially for their physical applications, it appears that ESs aresemi-stable objects. That is, as is
proven in Ref. [4] analytically in a fairly general form, and checked numerically for a particular
model combining SHG (quadratic) and Kerr (cubic) nonlinear ities, ESs are fully stable in the
linear approximation, but are subject to a slowly growing (s ub-exponential) one-sided nonlinear
instability (see below). The analytical proof of the semist ability presented in Ref. [4] applies
to any system that gives rise to ESs. As for the one-sided nonl inear instability, its development
depends on values of the system’s parameters; in some cases, it may be developing so slowly
that ES, to all practical purposes, may be regarded as a fully stable object [6].
An issue important both for applications and by itself is whe thermoving ESs (ones with
non-zero momentum) may occur in systems where they cannot be generated by a straightfor-
ward transformation, like Galilean or Lorentz transformat ion (the absence of the corresponding
invariance is typical for nonlinear-optical systems). The objective of the present work is to
search for moving ESs in a physically important system, viz. , a nonlinear Bragg-grating model
similar to that introduced in [3], which takes into account s econd-derivative (wave) terms. In
fact (see below), this system has a broader physical purport than was originally assumed in [3].
The absence of the Galilean or Lorentzian invariance in it is obvious because there is a reference
frame in which the Bragg grating is quiescent. Although exac t solutions for moving solitons
are available in the traditional version of this model, whic h neglects the second-derivative terms
[7, 8], they can be obtained by the Lorentz transformation fr om the quiescent solitons only in
the limiting case of the Thirring model [9], which is complet ely integrable [10].
We start from a system of partial differential equations (PDE s) governing evolution of right-
(u(x, t)) and left- ( v(x, t)) traveling waves that continuously transform into each ot her due to
the resonant reflection on the grating:
iut+iux+ (2k)−1(uxx−utt) +/parenleftBig
σ|u|2+|v|2/parenrightBig
u+v= 0,
ivt−ivx+ (2k)−1(vxx−vtt) +/parenleftBig
σ|v|2+|u|2/parenrightBig
v+u= 0.
Here, the cubic and linear cross-coupling terms account, re spectively, for nonlinear cross-phase
modulations and Bragg scattering. The most natural physica l value of the relative self-modulation
coefficient σis 1/2 , but it will be quite useful to keep σas an arbitrary positive parameter. Note
that Eqs. (1) and (2) have three natural integrals of motion: the energy (norm) and momentum,
E≡/integraldisplay+∞
−∞/bracketleftBig
|u(x)|2+|v(x)|2/bracketrightBig
dx, P ≡i/integraldisplay+∞
−∞(u∗
xu+v∗
xv)dx,
and a Hamiltonian, an expression for which is obvious.
The energy plays a crucial role in analyzing ES stability [4] , as ESs are isolated solutions
with uniquely determined values of the energy. Hence, any sm all perturbation which slightly
increases the ES’s energy is safe, while a perturbation that slightly decreases the energy triggers
a slow (sub-exponential) decay into radiation. So in this se nse, the weak instability of an ES is
one-sided, as mentioned above, and in some cases it may be extremely weak [6].
Eqs. (1) and (2) can be derived from the Maxwell’s equations f or a nonlinear medium,
assuming a superposition of two counter-propagating elect romagnetic waves, u(x, t) exp( ikx−
iωt) and v(x, t) exp(−ikx−iωt), where the wavenumber kand frequency ωare related by the
linear dispersion relations (disregarding their Bragg cou pling), the functions u(x, t) and v(x, t)
2being slowly varying as compared to the carrier waves. Takin g (for simplicity) a medium whose
temporal dispersion may be neglected, and setting c0≡1 (hence, ω=k), one derives, to lowest
order in the small parameter 1 /2k, Eqs. (1) and (2) without the second-derivative terms, i.e. , a
standard model of the Bragg reflector filled by a Kerr-nonline ar medium [7, 8]. As shown in [3],
the second-derivative (wave) terms which come in at the next order drastically alter the soliton
spectrum of the model (since this is a singular perturbation , increasing the order of the PDEs).
In an experiment (see below for an estimate of physical param eters), the effect of the additional
terms may be seen if the observation time and/or propagation distance are long enough.
Solitons are solutions of the form
u(x, t) = exp( −i∆ωt)U(ξ), v(x, t) = exp( −i∆ωt)V(ξ),
where ξ≡x−vt,vis the soliton’s velocity, and ∆ ωis a frequency shift. The substitution of
this expression into Eqs. (1) and (2) yields the ODEs,
χU+i(1−c)U′+DU′′+/parenleftBig
σ|U|2+|V|2/parenrightBig
U+V= 0, (1)
χV−i(1 +c)V′+DV′′+/parenleftBig
σ|V|2+|U|2/parenrightBig
V+U= 0, (2)
where χ≡∆ω+(∆ω)2/2k, the effective velocity is c≡(1+∆ ω/k)v, and an effective dispersion
coefficient is D≡(1−v2)/2k.
In [3] the same ODEs were derived in two more special physical contexts: (i) a nonlinear
Bragg-grating medium incorporating spatial-dispersion effects and (ii) spatial evolution (i.e. with
trealized as a propagation coordinate) in a planar waveguide equipped with a Bragg grating
in the form of a set of parallel scores, taking ordinary diffra ction into regard. While all these
systems are described Eqs. (1) and (2), the new physical inte rpretation of the model as describing
the usual Bragg-grating system with the wave terms taken int o regard, seems most fundamental.
To look for ES solutions, we must first satisfy the necessary c ondition, viz., that the lineariza-
tion of the ODEs should be of the saddle-centre type. That is, at least one pair of eigenvalues
must be purely imaginary (otherwise, we are dealing with regular , i.e., non-embedded, solitons),
and at least one pair must notbe purely imaginary (otherwise, there can be no exponential ly
decaying tails). Hence the region in which ESs may exist may b e delineated by substituting
U, V∼exp(λξ) into the linearized equations and solving the resulting ei ghth-order algebraic
equation for λnumerically. It is easy to demonstrate that purely real or im aginary eigenvalues
always appear in pairs, and complex eigenvalues in quadrupl es: ifλis an eigenvalue, then so are
±λand±λ∗.
We do not display here the full results for the linear spectru m, as they are rather cumbersome.
But note that in the quiescent case ( c= 0) the spectrum is expressible in a closed form [3], and
the region in the ( χ, D) -plane where ESs may occur is just |χ|<1,D >0. When c/negationslash= 0, these
borders to the saddle-centre region of ( c, χ, D )-space retain exactly the same meaning (but there
appear additional bounding surfaces that, in fact, are notencountered by any of the ES branches
that we have computed, see below). Two degenerate limits of s pecial interest are χ→+1 (the
soliton amplitude going to zero) and χ→ −1 (a smooth transition into a regular soliton).
Eqs. (1) and (2) were numerically solved by means of the same t echniques as used in Ref.
[3]. That is, a two-point boundary-value problem is posed on a long but finite x-interval, with
boundary conditions chosen to place the solution in the stab le or unstable eigenspaces at the
endpoints [11]. The boundary-value problem can be formulat ed so that the imaginary parts of
A(ξ) and B(ξ) are always even functions, while the real parts are odd. Usi ng these reversibility
conditions at the midpoint of the soliton, the numerical pro blem was posed more simply on
3the half x-interval. Only fundamental (single-humped) solitons were sought because, although
multi-humped ESs may easily exist, they have no chance to be s table [4]. Continuation of the
solutions corresponding to variation of relevant paramete rs was carried out by means of the
well-known software package AUTO [12].
Quiescent ESs (with c= 0) in the present model were found in Ref. [3] , aided by the
observation that, at c= 0, Eqs. (1) and (2) admit an invariant reduction V≡U∗, thus reducing
the system’s order from 8 to 4. The result was that there exist exactly three different branches
of quiescent ES solutions. Because ESs exist at isolated val ues of the energy, each branch can
be represented by a curve E(D) in three separate D-intervals (which overlap). Equivalently, the
curves can be represented as D(χ) for−1< χ < 1.
To the best of our knowledge, moving ESs have never been found before in any model. Our
numerical solution of the full system (1) and (2) has demonst rated that an arbitrary quiescent
EScannot be directly continued into a moving one. Nevertheless, movi ng ESs exist, but they
turn out to be of codimension two, i.e., they are double -isolated, both in the energy and in
the momentum (but, nevertheless, they remain structurally stable objects). In other words, a
moving ES is described by curves E(D) andP(D). Equivalently, such curves may be represented
in the ( D, c, χ )-space, an important characteristic of a moving soliton be ing its velocity c. The
mathematical reason for the codimension being two is that, f or the 8th-order model, there are
twopairs of eigenvalues on the imaginary axis (rather than one p air for the reduced 4th-order
model satisfied by the quiescent ESs). A simple count of dimen sions of the unstable manifold
and symmetric set of the reversibility then yields that to fo rce their intersection (implying the
existence of a solitary wave) requires two parameters to be v aried.
The results were found to be sensitive to the value of σ(see Eqs. (1) and (2)); note that
in the case c= 0,σis trivially scaled out [3]. The case at which it was easiest t o find moving
ESs was σ= 0. The results obtained for this case are summarized in Fig. 1, which shows that
each branch of quiescent ES solutions gives rise, through a p itchfork bifurcation occurring at
some special value of D, to two mutually symmetric branches of moving ESs. In Fig. 1 ( and
Fig. 2 below), we cut each branch at points where they go over i nto regular (non-ES) solitons
(atχ=−1). Also, we have not depicted the quiescent branches all the way up to χ= +1 due
to numerical difficulties occurring in this singular limit.
In the case σ= 0, it was easy to find additional branches of moving-ES solut ions that are
notconnected to the quiescent ones. Only one such disjoint bran ch is shown in Fig. 1. It is
quite interesting that this disjoint branch persists for al l|χ|<1 without ever bifurcating from
a quiescent ES.
Although the case σ= 0 exactly corresponds to the Thirring model [9], it has no st raight-
forward meaning for optical systems. Therefore, we now focu s attention on the most physically
relevant case σ= 1/2. In this case, only one branch of quiescent ESs, correspond ing to the
smallest values of D, gives rise, through a bifurcation, to branches of moving so litons. Scanning
the parameter space has not yielded any disjoint branch, cf. Fig. 1. This case is shown, in various
forms, in Fig. 2. It is interesting, in particular, that the m omentum of the moving ESs vanishes
at a nonzero value of the velocity, exactly (within the accur acy of the numerical calculation) as
it passes into the non-embedded region ( χ <−1), see Fig. 2b.
The plot that simultaneously shows the energy of the moving E Ss and of the coexisting
quiescent ESs (Fig. 2c) is especially important. Following the lines of the stability analysis
of ESs developed in [4], we can draw conclusions concerning t he stability of both types of the
ES solitons. The analysis developed in [4] shows that a small perturbation which decreases the
energy of an isolated ES solution would trigger a continual d ecrease of energy via emission of
4radiation. In the model considered in Ref. [4], this would ev entually lead to complete decay of
ESs into radiation. However, in the present case, a moving ES is likely to shed not only its energy,
but also momentum, and eventually to decay into a quiescent E S. Because this instability is weak
(sub-exponential), we may view the full set of ESs as a tri-stable system, in which transitions
from ESs moving at the velocities ±cto the quiescent one are possible.
The latter configuration has a potential for use in optical-m emory devices. If an incoming
moving ES represents a new bit of information, its radiation -mediated transition into a quiescent
ES can be triggered by a specially inserted perturbation (e. g., a localized spatial inhomogeneity,
which can be readily made switchable and movable if created b y a laser beam focused on a spot
in the medium [13]). Thus, the incoming bit could be captured and stored in the memory.
Further numerical explorations have revealed that the sing le branch of moving ESs existing
atσ= 1/2 isnota continuation in σof any branch existing at σ= 0; actually, the continuations
of all those branches terminate between σ= 0.1 and σ= 0.2, but a new branch appears in the
same region which continues to that found at σ= 1/2. Continuation of this branch to larger
values of σ(the case σ→ ∞ has a physical application to dual-core optical fibers or wav eguides)
shows that it terminates at σ≈1.645. Additional moving ESs exist at still larger values of σ
(e.g., at σ= 8.7), but none was found for σ >10.
Finally, one can estimate the values of the physical quantit ies for direct experimental ob-
servation of these ESs in a Bragg-grating medium. First of al l, it is relevant to note that, as
Fig. 2a clearly shows, the velocity at which moving ESs may be observed includes all the values
from 0 up to ∼(1/10)c0, which is an interesting result by itself, and is quite conve nient for the
experiment.
A parameter which is crucial for the physical relevance of th e model characterizes the relative
smallness of the wave (second-derivative) terms in Eqs. (1) and (2). Obviously, it is D/W,W
being the ES width. From the data presented in the insets to Fi gs. 1 and 2, it follows that this
parameter takes a nearly constant value, ∼0.1, along a moving-ES branch. On the other hand,
from the underlying PDEs, it follows that, in terms of physic al quantities, the same smallness
parameter is ∼λ/4πc0T, where λ≡2π/kis wavelength of light, and Tis the temporal width
of the pulse. Taking λ∼1.5µm, and equating the two expressions for the same smallness, w e
conclude that one needs T∼10 fs.
In recently reported experiments in which the temporal soli tons were first observed in a
Bragg-grating medium Twas much larger; ∼10 ps [14]. However, much shorter pulses can be
produced by means of existing experimental techniques. For instance, the first experimental
observation of temporal solitons in second-harmonic-gene rating media used pulses of width 58
ps [15]. Moreover, generation of stable pulses with the temp oral duration<
∼5 fs, which contain
just two optical cycles, has been successfully demonstrate d in recent years (see, e.g., Ref. [16]
and references therein). This circumstance suggests a poss ible link between ESs and rapidly
developing studies of the ultrashort few-cycle optical pul ses.
We appreciate valuable discussions with M.J. Friedman, D.J . Kaup, Y.S. Kivshar, and J.
Yang. The stay of B.A.M. at the University of Bristol was supp orted by a Benjamin Meaker
visiting professorship.
References
[1] J.P. Boyd, Weakly Nonlocal Solitary Waves and Beyond-All-Orders Asym ptotics (Kluwer:
Dodrecht, Boston, London, 1998).
5[2] A.R. Champneys and M.D. Groves, J. Fluid Mech. 342, 199 (1997). R. Grimshaw and P.
Cook in Hydrodynamics eds. A.T. Chang, J.H. Lee and D.Y.C. Leung (Balkema: Rotterd am,
1996)
[3] A.R. Champneys, B.A. Malomed, and M.J. Friedman, Phys. R ev. Lett. 80, 4169 (1998).
[4] J. Yang, B.A. Malomed and D.J. Kaup, “Embedded solitons i n second-harmonic-generating
systems”, Phys. Rev. Lett., in press
[5] S. Trillo, A.V. Buryak, and Y.S. Kivshar, Opt. Comm. 122, 200 (1996); O. Bang, Y.S.
Kivshar, and A.V. Buryak, Opt. Lett. 22, 1680 (1997).
[6] J. Yang, A.R. Champneys, B.A. Malomed, and D.J. Kaup, to b e published.
[7] D.N. Christodoulides and R.I. Joseph, Phys. Rev. Lett. 62, 1746 (1989); A. Aceves and S.
Wabnitz, Phys. Lett. A 141, 37 (1989).
[8] C.M. de Sterke and J.E. Sipe, Progr. Opt. 33, 203 (1994).
[9] W.E. Thirring, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 3, 91 (1958).
[10] A.V. Mikhailov, JETP Lett. 23, 320 (1976); D.J. Kaup and A.C. Newell, Lett. Nuovo
Cimento 20, 325 (1996).
[11] E.J. Doedel, M.J. Friedman, and B.I. Kunin, Numer. Algo rithms 14, 103 (1997); A.R.
Champneys, Yu.A. Kuznetsov, and B. Sanstede, Int. J. Bifurc ation Chaos 6, 867 (1996).
[12] E.J. Doedel, A.R. Champneys, T.R. Fairgrieve, Yu.A. Ku znetsov, B Sanstede, and W.
Wang, AUTO97 Continuation and Bifurcation Software for Ord inary Differential Equations,
1997. Available by anonymous ftp from ftp.cs.concordia.ca , directory pub/doedel/auto.
[13] B.A. Malomed, Z.H. Wang, P.L. Chu, and G.D. Peng, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 16, 1197 (1999).
[14] B.J. Eggleton, R.E. Slusher, C.M. de Sterke, P.A. Krug, and J.E. Sipe, Phys. Rev. Lett.
76, 1627 (1996).
[15] P. Di Trapani, D. Caironi, G. Valiulis, A. Dubietis, R. D anielius, and A. Piskarskas, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 81, 570 (1998).
[16] V.P. Kalosha and J. Herrmann, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 544 (1999).
6Figure Captions
Figure 1: The solution branches of the quiescent and moving ( dotted amd solid lines) embedded
solitons in the case σ= 0; squares show bifurcations, circles label points. (a) Th e velocity vs.
the effective dispersion coefficient D. The insets show typical examples of the solutions on the
first branch. (b) The effective frequency χvs.D.
Figure 2: Various representations of the single branch of th e moving embedded solitons existing
in the physically relevant case, σ= 1/2: (a) the same as in Fig. 1; (b) the momentum vs. D;
(c) the energy vs. D, with insets showing the solutions at labeled points. The qu iescent solitons
branch from which the moving-soliton branch bifurcates is a lso shown.
7-1-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.200.20.4
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-1-0.8-0.6-0.4-0.200.20.40.60.81
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 100.40.81.21.6
-6-4-2024600.40.81.21.6
-6-4-202462
|V|2|U|
1234
ξξ
Dc (a)
χ
D(b)
1231
2
3
4
3
41
2
Figure 1:
8789101112
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6-0.1-0.0500.050.1
0.20.30.40.50.6-0.6-0.4-0.200.20.40.6
0.20.30.40.50.6
00.511.522.5
-6-4-2024600.511.522.5
-6-4-20246D(a) (b) c P
D
D(c)|U|2
|V|2ξ
ξ123
4
123
4
3
2
1
12
34441
2
3
E
Figure 2:
9 |
arXiv:physics/9911044v1 [physics.optics] 19 Nov 1999Frequency selection by soliton excitation in nondegenerat e intracavity downconversion
Dmitry V. Skryabin1, Alan R. Champneys2, and William J. Firth1
1Department of Physics and Applied Physics, University of St rathclyde, Glasgow, G4 0NG, Scotland
2Department of Engineering Mathematics, University of Bris tol, Bristol, BS8 1TR, England
(June 14, 1999)
We show that soliton excitation in intracavity downconvers ion naturally selects a strictly defined
frequency difference between the signal and idler fields. In p articular, this phenomenon implies
that if the signal has smaller losses than the idler then its f requency is pulled away from the cavity
resonance and the idler frequency is pulled towards the reso nance and vice versa . The frequency
selection is shown to be closely linked with the relative ene rgy balance between the idler and signal
fields.
Exchange of ideas between nonlinear optics and non-
linear dynamics of spatially distributed systems has pro-
duced a series of interesting results over the last decade,
and has opened up one of the most active areas of current
research. In this particular work we will consider novel
phenomena associated with soliton excitation in the prac-
tically and fundamentally important area of nondegener-
ate intracavity down-conversion.
The essence of parametric down-conversion is virtual
absorption of a pump photon at frequency ωpwith a sub-
sequent reemission of two photons with frequencies ωi
andωs, where indices iandsstand, respectively, for the
idler and signal fields. Down-conversion can be realized
both in free propagation and in intracavity schemes. The
latter takes advantage of positive feedback provided by
the mirrors and thus transforms the passive free propaga-
tion scheme into an active generator or optical parametric
oscillator (OPO) [1,2].
Influence of the transverse degrees of freedom on the
quantum [3] and classical [3–11] aspects of the parametric
processes have recently become a subject of significant ac-
tivity. Among the main attraction points on the classical
side are localised structures [5–11]. Bright diffractionle ss
localised excitations inside an optical cavity supported
by different nonlinearities ( cavity solitons ) have been re-
cently observed experimentally [12] and suggested for
all-optical processing and storage of information [9,13],
see also recent reviews [14]. The large quadratic nonlin-
earities of artificially phase matched materials [2] make
parametric cavity solitons [5–11] particularly attractiv e
for practical application, especially where fast material
response is an issue.
Down-conversion processes can be divided into degen-
erate and nondegenerate. In the former case idler and
signal photons are identical while in the latter they differ
in frequencies and/or polarizations. It has been shown
that transverse patterns in nondegenerate OPO [4,5] and
soliton dynamics in nondegenerate free propagation [11]
have qualitative differences from their degenerate coun-
terparts. The difference can be formally identified as due
to an additional symmetry, in the differential phase of
signal and idler fields [11]. This symmetry is suppressed
in the degenerate case. As a result the frequency of thesignal component of any solution, including solitons, is
exactly half the pump frequency, ωs≡ωi=ωp/2. On
the other hand, in the nondegenerate case any arbitrary
frequency difference 2Ω between the idler and signal fields
still satisfies the condition ωp=ωs+ωi. This raises the
question of whether there are any physical constraints on
Ω.
While in free propagation the value of Ω is limited
only by phase matching conditions, this problem becomes
more subtle in the OPO because cavity effects come into
play. A review of early works on this issue, exploring
approaches based on the plane wave approximation, can
be found in [1]. More recently Longhi [4] has shown that
if diffraction is included then Ω becomes a function of
the magnitude of the transverse component of the signal
and idler wave vectors, /vectorki
⊥=−/vectorks
⊥, of the exact trav-
elling wave solution which exists in this system [4]. For
the fixed OPO parameters |ks,i
⊥|can take any values from
certain continuous bands and hence so can Ω.
The primary object of this Letter is to demonstrate
that Ω is constrained when a cavity soliton is excited in
the nondegenerate OPO. We show how this follows from
a general relation between the soliton energies and the
cavity losses. Existence of this relation, which has not
been previously identified in this context, seems to be
closely related to survival of differential phase symmetry
in the presence of cavity losses. We use this symmetry
to derive aproximate formulae for Ω in certain limits.
Understanding this problem is not only practically im-
portant, but also holds the key to construction of entire
families of cavity solitons.
Mean-field equations describing interaction of the sig-
nal, idler and pump waves in OPO [3,4,8] can be pre-
sented in the dimensionless quasi-Hamiltonian form
(∂t+γm)Em=iδH
δE∗m, m=s,i,p (1)
whereHis the following functional: H=/integraltext
dx[−αs|∂xEs|2−αi|∂xEi|2−αp|∂xEp|2+δs|Es|2+
δi|Ei|2+δp|Ep|2+ (EpE∗
iE∗
s+µE∗
sE∗
i+c.c.)].tis
the time measured in the units of τcb, whereτcis
the cavity round-trip time and bis an arbitrary scal-
ing constant. γm=Tmb/2, whereTmare the effec-
1tive mirror transmitivities. x=X[2ks/(bL)]1/2and
αm=ks/km, whereXis the transverse coordinate in
physical units, kmare the longitudinal components of
the wave vectors and Lis a cavity round-trip length.
δm=bτc(ωm−ωcav
m) are the detunings from the cavity
resonances ωcav
m. Physically, validity of these equations
requires small losses and detunings: γm,δm<<bπ . As-
suming, for simplicity, that ωsis close to ωi, we can
fixαs,i= 2αp= 1, but still allow differences in δs,δi
andγs,γi. Then the phase matching conditions imply
n(ωs)≃n(ωi)≃n(ωp), wheren(ω) is the linear re-
fractive index and the following scalings can be derived
for the field variables. µis proportional to the external
pump field Ep:Ep=µ/radicalBig
2(δ2p+γ2p)/˜Tωp/(bτcχωs), here
χis the effective quadratic susceptibility. The physi-
cal fields Emare given by Es,i=√
2Es,ieiφ/2/(bτcχωs),
Ep= 2eiφ(Ep+µ/radicalBig
δ2p+γ2p)/(bτcχωs), whereφ=
−atan(γp/δp).
We seek localized solutions of Eqs. (1) in the form
Em(x,t) =Am(x,∆)eiΩmt, where Ω s,i=±∆±(δs−
δi)/2, Ωp= 0. Then Amobey the set of differential
equations
−iγsAs= (∂2
x+δ−∆)As+ (Ap+µ)A∗
i,
−iγiAi= (∂2
x+δ+ ∆)Ai+ (Ap+µ)A∗
s, (2)
−i2γpAp= (∂2
x+ 2δp)Ap+ 2AsAi,
whereδ= (δs+δi)/2. The previously introduced
frequency difference 2Ω between the idler and signal
fields is linked with the parameter ∆ by the formula:
2Ω = (2∆ + δs−δi)/(bτc) We are interested in bright
single-hump solitons, implying Am(x= +∞) = 0 and
∂xAm(x= 0) = 0. Existence of such solitons in the
parameter region where the trivial zero solution bifur-
cates subcritically can be predicted for ∆ = 0, γs=γi
by analogy with the well studied degenerate case, where
this condition reads δδp>γsγp[6,9,10]. In the nondegen-
erate case solitons have been found as a result of direct
numerical simulations of Eqs. (1) starting from either
’random’ [5] or localized [8] initial conditions. Subcrit-
ical bifurcation and the related phenomenon of optical
bistability in the nondegenerate OPO have been demon-
strated experimentally in [15].
For fixed cavity parameters solitons can exist either for
∆ continuously varying in a certain range or for only a
discrete set of ∆ values. We will show that the latter situ-
ation is realised for γs,i/negationslash= 0. We thus assert that the cav-
ity selects the frequency difference between the signal and
idler when a parametric soliton is excited. Note that the
related problem of frequency selection has been studied
in the general context of the complex Ginzburg-Landau
equation (CGLE) with subcritical bifurcation [16], which
also can be applied to describe laser with saturable ab-
sorber [12,17]. The possibility of the approximate re-
duction of Eqs. (1) to the CGLE in the different limitshas been demonstrated in [8]. However, the problem of
the frequency selection by solitons in OPO has not been
previously formulated even within the framework of the
CGLE approximation. This fact has in turn prevented
construction of the family of stationary soliton solutions
of Eqs. (2) and rigorous study of their stability.
To start our analysis of the frequency selection, prob-
lem, we define the energy parameters Qm=/integraltextdx|Em|2
and the energy imbalance ( Q−=Qs−Qi). Manipulation
of Eqs. (1) reveals that the rate of change of Q−is given
by
∂tQ−=−2γ+Q−−2γ−Q+= 2γiQi−2γsQs,(3)
hereγ±= (γs±γi)/2 andQ+=Qs+Qi. Thus for any
steady state solution, such as soliton solutions of Eqs.
(2), the condition
γsQs=γiQi, (4)
must be satisfied. Eq. (4) is consistent with the expec-
tation that the field with the smaller losses will have the
larger energy.
To further interpret relations (3), (4) let us recall
that in free propagation downconversion is a Hamilto-
nian process. Then by Noether’s theorem every con-
tinuous symmetry implies a corresponding conservation
law, see e.g. [11]. Cavity losses destroy the Hamiltonian
structure of the problem, see Eqs. (1), and the input
pump breaks the phase symmetry linked with conserva-
tion of the total energy ( Qs+Qi+ 2Qp). The symmetry
(Es,Ei)→(Eseiψ,Eie−iψ) in the differential phase ψ,
however, survives in the cavity configuration, so how do
the losses change the associated law ∂tQ−= 0? Self-
evidently the relation (3) becomes this conservation law
in the Hamiltonian limit, which suggests a more general
link between this energy relation and the symmetry in
the differential phase.
Now using cavity solitons as an example we will demon-
strate that condition (4) constrains the frequency differ-
ence of the signal and idler components of the intracavity
field. We consider signal and idler losses small compare
to the cavity detunings γs,i/|δ| ≪1 and setb= 1. Con-
servation of Q−is restored for γs,i= 0 and thus Eq. (4)
is satisfied automatically. A soliton family then exists
forδ <0, with ∆ continuously varying in the interval
(δ,−δ). Outside this interval exponential localization of
As,iis not possible. Now suppose that for γs,i∼ǫ≪1
∆ becomes a slow function of t, i.e.∂t∆∼ǫ, then Eq.
(3) immediately gives an equation for the adiabatic evo-
lution of ∆: ∂t∆·∂∆Q−=−γ+Q−(∆)−γ−Q+(∆).
For stationary soliton solutions ∂t∆ = 0 and intersec-
tions of the curve Qs/Qias a function of ∆ with the line
Qs/Qi=γi/γsgive selected values of ∆. We plot in Fig.
1(a) the existence curve corresponding to the numerically
built [18] single-hump soliton family in the plane ( µ,∆)
2forδ=−1 and losses of the signal and idler of order sev-
eral percent. Dots in Fig. 1(a) correspond to values of
∆ obtained by the perturbative method. The agreement
is excellent, which also indicates that the limit of small
cavity losses is non-singular. The latter is a necessary
condition for a linkage between Eq. (3) and the differ-
ential phase symmetry. Typical transverse profiles of the
soliton components are presented in Fig. 1(b).
To study stability of the solitons we seek solu-
tions of Eqs. (1) in the form ( Am(x) +ǫ(um(x,t) +
iwm(x,t)))eiΩmt. After standard linearization we derive
∂t/vectorξ=ˆL/vectorξ, where/vectorξ= (us,ui,up,ws,wi,wp)TandˆLis
the linear non-self-adjoint differential operator. The dis -
crete spectrum of ˆLhas been found numerically using
second-order finite differences. Any discrete eigenvalue
ofˆLwith positive real part makes the soliton unstable.
The new soliton family turns out to be stable over the
section (A,H) in Fig. 1(a). The Hopf instability of the
(H,B) branch, and the instability of the ( O,A) branch
are similar to the case of the degenerate OPO [10]. At
the pointBthe single-hump branch bifurcates back in µ,
initiating a sequence of multi-hump solitons.
The above perturbation approach to find selected val-
ues of ∆ requires γs,ismall, which is satisfied in most
practical situations, but we also assumed δ∼O(1). This
fails ifγs,i/|δ| ∼O(1) or ∼ǫ−1, which physically means
that the cavity becomes tuned close to resonance with
the signal and idler fields. Then terms proportional to δ
in Eqs. (2) should also be considered as perturbations.
In this case Eqs. (2) simply do not have solitary solutions
in zero order and therefore Qs,ican’t be considered func-
tions of ∆. To overcome this difficulty we used another
perturbation approach, also based on the ψ-symmetry.
Note first that the cavity solitons become wider on ap-
proach to resonance [19], and so to avoid large compu-
tational windows it is convenient to take large b, e.g.
b= 2/Ts. Thenγm∼1 physically corresponds to small
losses. Now, observing that Ai=Asis a solution of Eqs.
(2) forγs=γiand ∆ = 0, we assume γ−,|∆| ∼ǫ. At
first order in ǫ
ǫ(ˆL −∂t)/vectorξ= ∆/vectorξψ−γ−/vectorP, (5)
where/vectorξψ= (−ImAs,ImAs,0,ReAs,−ReAs,0)Tis the
neutral mode generated by the ψ-symmetry, i.e. ˆL/vectorξψ= 0,
and/vectorP= (ReAs,−ReAs,0,ImAs,−ImAs,0)T. Eq. (5)
immediately yields
∆ =γ−/angbracketleft/vectorP|/vectorζψ/angbracketright
/angbracketleft/vectorξψ|/vectorζψ/angbracketright, (6)
where the new vector /vectorζψis the neutral mode of ˆL†, i.e.
ˆL†/vectorζψ= 0, generated by the ψ-symmetry (which can be
found numerically). As usual, /angbracketleft..|../angbracketrightdefines inner product
inL2. We again find an excellent agreement between Eq.
(6) and numerical solutions of Eqs. (2), see Fig. 2(a).In this case, stability analysis reveals that the solitons
are stable along the entire segment ( A,B), withBagain
marking the transition to multi-hump soliton solutions.
We also found that /angbracketleft/vectorP|/vectorζψ/angbracketright//angbracketleft/vectorξψ|/vectorζψ/angbracketrightis positive throughout
a wide region of parameters. This implies that the sign of
γ−determines the sign of ∆, at least for parameter val-
ues where our perturbative approach is valid. Fig. 1(a)
and selective numerical checks in parameter regions far
outwith the validity of our perturbative methods sup-
port a conjecture that the relationship sgnγ −=sgn∆
has a general character. Note finally that any difference
in diffraction constants αsandαiwill also affect the fre-
quency selection, but we leave this mechanism for future
analysis.
To assess possibilities of experimental observation of
these cavity solitons let us take as an example a 1 cmlong
monolithic planar waveguide cavity with χ(2)≃20pm/V ,
typical for a noncritically phase matched potassium nio-
bate crystal. Suppose the waveguide to be ∼1mmwide
and∼1µmthick, excited by an elliptical pump beam at
frequency ∼1015Hz. Other parameters as for Fig. 2(a)
then imply the following real world values: pump power
∼µ2×1W, selected frequency difference ∼Ω×109Hz
and cavity soliton width ∼30µm.
To excite cavity solitons one can apply spatially lo-
calised optical pulses at any of the three frequencies. Op-
timisation of the pulse parameters goes beyond of our
present scope. However, to demostrate how the selection
of the frequency difference happens, we show in Fig. 3
results of direct simulation of Eqs. (1) with, as initial
condition, a pulse at frequency ωswith duration around
0.1τc, intensity several times the peak soliton intensity,
and width of order the soliton width. Intensities of all
three components of the excited soliton become constant
after a transient period, see Fig. 3(a), while the real
parts of the signal and idler fields exhibit undamped os-
cillations, confirming selection of ∆ with the predicted
value, see Fig. 3(b).
The main physical conclusion which can be drawn from
the above results is that, if the signal has the smaller
losses its frequency is pulled away from the cavity res-
onance while the idler frequency is pulled towards reso-
nance and vice versa , see Figs. 1(a),2(a). If the signal
and idler losses are equal then the selected value of ∆
is zero, see Eq. (6), which implies that both the idler
and the signal are equally detuned from cavity resonance.
Thus the cavity structure balances the energies of the
idler and signal components during soliton excitation, in
accord with Eqs. (3), (4). The understanding of this
frequency selection mechanism has allowed us to recon-
struct an entire family of single-hump cavity solitons and
to study their stability. Our results are likely to find ap-
plications in interpretation of other spatio-temporal phe -
nomena in nondegenerate OPOs and also to be relevant
in other intracavity parametric processes with symmetry
in the differential phase, e.g., second harmonic generation
3with competing parametric process [20] and nondegener-
ate four-wave mixing [21].
We are indepted to G.K. Harkness, D. Michaelis and
U. Peschel for assistance with numerical problems at the
early stage of the work and to G.J. de Valc´ arcel for
insightful remarks. D.V.S. acknowledges financial sup-
port from the Royal Society of Edinburgh and British
Petroleum. The work is partially supported by ESPRIT
project PIANOS and EPSRC grant GR/M19727.
[1] C. Fabre, in ”Advanced photonics with second-order op-
tically nonlinear processes” , eds. A.D. Boardman et al.
(Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1998), pp. 293-318.
[2] V. Berger, see [1], pp. 345-374.
[3] L.A. Lugiato and G.L. Oppo, Optics Express 3, 60
(1998).
[4] S. Longhi, Phys. Rev. A 53, 4488 (1996).
[5] V.J. Sanchez-Morcillo et al., Phys. Rev. A 56, 3237
(1997).
[6] K. Staliunas and V.J. S´ anchez-Morcillo, Opt. Commun.
139, 306 (1997); S. Longhi, Phys. Scripta 56, 611 (1997);
S. Trillo and M. Haelterman, Opt. Lett. 23, 1514 (1998).
[7] M. Tlidi, P. Mandel, and M. Haelterman, Phys. Rev.
E56, 6524 (1997); M. Tlidi, P. Mandel, and R. Lefever,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 979 (1998); K. Staliunas, Phys. Rev.
Lett.81, 81 (1998); S. Trillo, M. Haelterman, and A.
Sheppard, Opt. Lett. 22, 970 (1997); G.L. Oppo, A.J.
Scroggie, and W.J. Firth, J. Opt. B 1, 133 (1999); M. Le
Berre et al., J. Opt. B 1, 153 (1999).
[8] S. Longhi, Opt. Commun. 149, 335 (1998); P.S. Jian et
al., Opt. Lett. 24, 400 (1999).
[9] D.V. Skryabin and W.J. Firth, Opt. Lett. 24, 1056
(1999).
[10] D.V. Skryabin, Phys. Rev. E 60, R3508 (1999).
[11] D.V. Skryabin and W.J. Firth, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3379
(1998); A.V. Buryak, Y.S. Kivshar, and S. Trillo, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 77, 5210 (1996).
[12] V.B. Taranenko, K. Staliunas, and C.O. Weiss, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 81, 2236 (1998); K. Staliunas et al., Phys.
Rev. A 57, 599 (1998).
[13] W.J. Firth and A.J. Scroggie, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1623
(1996); W.J. Firth, A. Lord, and A.J. Scroggie, Phys.
Scripta T67, 12 (1996); M. Brambilla et al., Phys. Rev.
Lett.79, 2042 (1997); L. Spinelli et al., Phys. Rev. A 58,
2542 (1998); D. Michaelis, U. Peschel, and F. Lederer,
Opt. Lett. 23, 337 (1998).
[14] N.N. Rosanov, Prog. Opt. 35, 1 (1996); W.J. Firth and
G.K. Harkness, Asian J. Phys. 7, 665 (1998).
[15] C. Richy et al., J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 12, 456 (1995).
[16] B.A. Malomed, Physica D 29, 155 (1987); S. Fauve and
O. Thual, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 282 (1990).
[17] T. Kapitula and B. Sandstede, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 15,
2757 (1998); A.G. Vladimirov et al., J. Opt. B 1, 101
(1999).
[18] E.J. Doedel, A.R. Champneys, T.R. Fairgrieve, Y.A.Kuznetsov, B. Sandstede, and W. Wang, AUTO97 Con-
tinuation and Bifurcation Software for Odinary Differ-
ential Equations, 1997 . Available from ftp.cs.concordia
directory pub/doede/auto .
[19] D.V. Skryabin, in Nonlinear Guided Waves and Their
Applications 1999 , p. 154, OSA Technical Digest Series
(OSA Washington DC, 1999).
[20] M.A.M. Marte, Phys. Rev. A 49, R3166 (1994); P. Lo-
dahl and M. Saffman, Phys. Rev. A 60, 3251 (1999).
[21] R.E. Slusher et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 55, 2409 (1985).
0.20.40.60.81.0
µ-0.125-0.120-0.115-0.110 ∆(a)
A
HOB
01234567
x0.00.51.01.52.0|Am| (b)
FIG. 1. (a) Existence curve in the ( µ,∆)-plane for the fam-
ily of single-hump cavity solitons, demonstrating selecti on of
∆. Full line corresponds to the results of numerical contin-
uation, dotted line was obtained using perturbative method s
(see text) in the limit γs,i/|δ| ≪1:δ=δp=−1,γs= 0.04,
γi= 0.05,γp= 0.1,b= 1. Solitons are stable only in the
small interval ( A,H), see text for details. (b) Soliton trans-
verse profile for µ= 0.3, ∆ = −0.1255007. Full line: |As|,
dashed line: |Ai|, dotted line: |Ap|.
1.81.92.0
µ0.04600.04650.04700.04750.04800.04850.0490 ∆ A
OB(a)
1.81.92.0
µ010203040Qm
AA
OBB
(b)
FIG. 2. (a) Existence curve in the ( µ,∆)-plane for family
of single-hump cavity solitons, demonstrating selection o f ∆.
Full line corresponds to the results of numerical continuat ion,
dotted line was obtained using Eq. (6): δ=−1.8,δp=−4,
γs= 1,γi= 0.95,γp= 2,b= 2/Ts. Solitons are stable only
in the interval ( A, B). (b) Plots showing dependence of Qm
vsµ. Parameters as for (a). Full line: Qs, dashed line: Qi,
dotted line: Qp.
4050100150200
t0123|Am(x=0)| (a)
050100150200
t-4-2024ReAm(x=0) (b)FIG. 3. Soliton excitation by a localized signal-field pulse .
Temporal evolution of (a) |Em|and (b) ReE matx= 0. Full
line: signal, dashed line: idler, dotted line: pump. Other p a-
rameters as for Fig. 1(b). Our predicted ∆ corresponds to a
period ∼50 time units.
5 |
arXiv:physics/9911045v1 [physics.optics] 19 Nov 1999Embedded Solitons in a Three-Wave System
Alan R. Champneys
Department of Engineering Mathematics, The University of B ristol,
Bristol BS8 1TR, United Kingdom
Boris A.Malomed
Department of Interdisciplinary Studies, Faculty of Engin eering,
Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel
We report a rich spectrum of isolated solitons residing insi de (embedded into) the continuous radi-
ation spectrum in a simple model of three-wave spatial inter action in a second-harmonic-generating
planar optical waveguide equipped with a quasi-one-dimens ional Bragg grating. An infinite sequence
of fundamental embedded solitons are found, which differ by t he number of internal oscillations.
Branches of these zero-walkoff spatial solitons give rise, t hrough bifurcations, to several secondary
branches of walking solitons. The structure of the bifurcat ing branches suggests a multistable con-
figuration of spatial optical solitons, which may find straig htforward applications for all-optical
switching.
I. INTRODUCTION
Recent studies have revealed a novel class of embedded
solitons (ESs) in various nonlinear-wave systems. An ES
is a solitary wave which exists despite having its inter-
nal frequency in resonance with linear (radiation) waves.
ESs may exist as codimension-one solutions, i.e., at dis-
crete values of the frequency, provided that the spectrum
of the corresponding linearized system has (at least) two
branches, one corresponding to exponentially localized
solutions, the other one to delocalized radiation modes.
In such systems, quasilocalized solutions (or “generalize d
solitary waves” [1]) in the form of a solitary wave resting
on top of a small-amplitude continuous-wave (cw) back-
ground are generic [2]. However, at some special values of
the internal frequency, the amplitude of the background
may exactly vanish, giving rise to an isolated soliton em-
bedded into the continuous spectrum.
Examples of ESs are available in water-wave mod-
els, taking into account capillarity [3], and in several
nonlinear-optical systems, including a Bragg grating
incorporating wave-propagation terms [4] and second-
harmonic generation in the presence of the self-defocusing
Kerr nonlinearity [5] (the latter model with competing
nonlinearities was introduced earlier in a different con-
text [6]).
It is relevant to stress that ESs, although they are iso-
lated solutions, are notstructurally unstable. Indeed,
a small change of the model’s parameters will slightly
change the location of ES (e.g., its energy and momen-
tum, see below), but will not destroy it, which is clearly
demonstrated by the already published results [3,5]. In
this respect, they may be called generic solutions of codi-
mension one.
ESs are interesting because they naturally appearwhen higher-order (singular) perturbations are added
to the system, which may completely change its soli-
ton spectrum. Optical ESs have a potential for applica-
tions, due to the very fact that they are isolated solitons,
rather than occurring in continuous families. The stabil-
ity problem for ESs was solved in a fairly general analyti-
cal form in Ref. [5], which was also verified by direct sim-
ulations of the model considered. It was demonstrated
that ES is a semi-stable object which is fully stable to
linear approximation, but is subject to a slowly growing
(sub-exponential) one-sided nonlinear instability. Deve l-
opment of this weak instability depends on values of the
system’s parameters; in some cases, it is developing so
slowly that ES, to all practical purposes, may be regarded
as a fully stable object [7].
In the previously studied models, only a few branches
of ESs were found, and only after careful numerical
searching, which suggest they may be hard to observe in
a real experiment. The present work aims to investigate
ESs in a recently introduced model of a three-wave inter-
action in a quadratically nonlinear planar waveguide with
a quasi-one-dimensional Bragg grating [8], which can be
quite easily fabricated. It will be found that ESs occur in
abundance in this model, hence it may be much easier to
observe them experimentally. It should also be stressed
that, unlike the previously studied models, in which ESs
appear in relatively exotic conditions, e.g., as a result of
adding singular perturbations [4] or specially combining
different nonlinearities [5], the model that will be con-
sidered below and found to give rise to a rich variety of
ESs, is exactly the same which was known to support
vast families of ordinary (non-embedded) gap solitons.
This, in particular, implies that ES can be found in the
corresponding system under the same conditions which
are necessary for the observation of the regular solitons,
1i.e., the experiment may be quite straightforward. An es-
timate of the relevant physical parameters will be given
at the end of the paper.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In sec-
tion 2, we recapitulate the model and obtain solutions in
the form of fundamental zero-walkoff ESs, which, physi-
cally, correspond to the case when the Poynting vector of
the carrier waves is aligned with the propagation direc-
tion. The analysis is extended in section 3 to the case of
fundamental walking ESs, for which the Poynting vector
and the propagation distance are disaligned. Concluding
remarks are collected in section 4.
II. THE MODEL AND ZERO-WALKOFF
SOLITONS
The model describes spatial solitons produced by the
second-harmonic generation (SHG) in a planar waveg-
uide, in which two components of the fundamental har-
monic (FH), v1andv2, are linearly coupled by the Bragg
reflection on a grating in the form of a system of scores
parallel to the propagation direction z(for a more de-
tailed description of the model see [8]):
i(v1)z+i(v1)x+v2+v3v∗
2= 0, (1)
i(v2)z−i(v2)x+v1+v3v∗
1= 0, (2)
2i(v3)z−qv3+D(v3)xx+v1v2= 0. (3)
Herev3is the second-harmonic (SH) field, xis a normal-
ized transverse coordinate, qis a real phase-mismatch
parameter, and Dis an effective diffraction coefficient.
The diffraction terms in the FH equations (1) and (2)
are neglected as they are much weaker than the artificial
diffraction induced by the Bragg scattering, while the SH
wave, propagating parallel to the grating, undergoes no
reflection, hence the diffraction term is kept in Eq. (3).
Experimental techniques for generation and observa-
tion of spatial solitons in planar waveguides are now well
elaborated ( [9]), and the waveguide carrying a set of
parallel scores with a spacing commensurate to the light
wavelength (which is necessary to realize the resonant
Bragg scattering) can be easily fabricated. Therefore, the
present system provides a medium in which experimen-
tal observation of ESs is most plausible. As mentioned
above, the observation of ES in this system should be fur-
ther facilitated by the fact that it supports a multitude
of distinct ES states, see below.
Eqs. (1)–(3) have three dynamical invariants: the
Hamiltonian, which will not be used below, the energy
flux (norm)
E≡/integraldisplay+∞
−∞/bracketleftbig
|v1(x)|2+|v2(x)|2+ 4|v3|2/bracketrightbig
dx, (4)
and the momentum,P≡i/integraldisplay+∞
−∞((v1)∗
xv1+ (v2)∗
xv2+ 2(v3)∗
xv3)dx. (5)
The norm played a crucial role in the analysis of the ES
stability carried out in [5].
-44
1 -1
28
1kq
FIG. 1. The ( k, q) parameter plane of the three-wave
model (1) – (3). The linear analysis (the results of which
are summarized in the inset boxes) shows that ES with c= 0
may occur only in the region between the solid bold lines. The
bundle of curves emanating from the point ( k= 1, q=−4)
are branches of embedded-soliton solutions with c= 0.
Soliton solutions to Eqs. (1)–(3) are sought in the form
v1,2(x, z) = exp( ikz)u1,2(ξ), v3(x, z) = exp(2 ikz)u3,
(6)
where ξ≡x−cz, with cbeing the walkoff (slope) of the
spatial soliton’s axis relative to the light propagation di -
rection z. The substitution of (6) into Eqs. (1)–(3) leads
to an 8th-order system of ordinary differential equations
(ODEs) for the real and imaginary parts of v1,2,3(primes
standing for d/dξ):
−ku1+i(1−c)u′
1+u2+u3u∗
2= 0, (7)
−ku2−i(1 +c)u′
2+u1+u3u∗
1= 0, (8)
−(4k+q)u3+Du′′
3−2icu′
3+u1u2= 0. (9)
Before looking for ES solutions to the full nonlinear
equations, it is necessary to investigate the eigenvalues λ
of their linearized version, in order to isolate the region
in which ESs mayexist. Substituting u1, u2∼exp(λξ),
andu3∼exp(2λξ) into Eqs. (6)–(8) and linearizing,
one finds that the FH and SH equations decouple in the
linearized approximation. The FH equations give rise to
a biquadratic characteristic equation,
(1−c2)2λ4+ 2/bracketleftbig
(1 +c2)k2−(1−c2)/bracketrightbig
λ2+ (k2−1)2= 0,
(10)
2and the SH equation produces another four eigenvalues
given by
/bracketleftbig
Dλ2−(4k+q)/bracketrightbig2+ 4c2λ2= 0. (11)
A necessary condition for the existence of ESs is that
the eigenvalues given by Eq. (10) have non-zero real parts
- this is necessary for the existence of exponentially lo-
calized solutions - while the eigenvalues from Eq. (11)
should be purely imaginary (otherwise, one will have or-
dinary, rather than embedded, solitons). This discrimi-
nation between the two sets of the eigenvalues is due to
the fact that Eqs. (7) and (8) for the FH components
are always linearizable, while the SH equation (9) may
benonlinearizable , which opens the possibility for the ex-
istence of ESs [5]. As it follows from Eqs. (10) and (11),
these two conditions imply
k2+c2<1; 4k+q < c2/D . (12)
For the case c= 0, the parametric region defined by the
inequalities (12) is displayed in Fig. 1.
-4-20246
-8-4048-404812
-8-4048-8-4048
-8-4048-4-2024
-8-40481u3
Re u1u
Im u113
Re u
3
Re u1
Im u1Im uu
Re u13Im u
u
1(b)
(c) (d)(a)
(=Im u )(=-Re u )
22
ξ ξu u
uuξ ξ
FIG. 2. Typical examples of the fundamental embedded
solitons with the zero walkoff: (a) the ground-state for k= 0;
(b) the same solution for k=−0.95; (c,d) the first and eighth
“excited states” for k= 0.
In Ref. [8], numerous ordinary ( gap[10]) soliton solu-
tions to the present model have been found by means of a
numerical shooting method. To construct ES solutions,
we applied the same method to Eqs. (7), (8) and (9),
allowing just one parameter to vary. From each ES so-
lution that was found this way, branches of the solutions
were continued in the parameters k, qandc, by means of
the software package AUTO [11]. Note that the c= 0 so-
lutions admit an invariant reduction u2=−u∗
1,u3=u∗
3,
which reduces the system to a 4th-order ODE system,
thus making numerical shooting feasible.
We confine the analysis to fundamental solitons, which
implies that the SH component u3has a single-humped
shape (a distinctive feature of gap solitons in the same
system is that not only fundamental solitons, but alsocertain double-humped two-solitons (bound states of two
fundamental solitons) appear to be stable [8]). Note that
double- and multi-humped ESs must exist too as per a
theorem from Ref. [12], but leaving them aside, we will
still find a rich structure of fundamental ESs.
-12. 5 -10. 0 -7. 5 -5. 0 -2. 5 0. 0 2. 50.250.500.750.1000.1250.1500.
-450 -3000100E
q
FIG. 3. A diagram of the c= 0 embedded solitons on the
(energy-flux, mismatch) plane. The inset zooms the most in-
teresting part of the diagram.
We begin with a description of the results from the re-
duced case c= 0, when an additional scaling allows us
to set D≡1 without loss of generality. The results are
displayed in Figs. 1 – 3. There is a strong evidence for ex-
istence of an infinite “fan” of fundamental ES branches.
Among them, we define a ground-state soliton as the one
which has the simplest internal structure (Fig. 2a). The
next “first excited state” differs by adding one (spatial)
oscillation to the FH field (Fig. 2c). Adding each time
an extra oscillation, we obtain an indefinitely large num-
ber of “excited states” (as an example, see the 8th state
in Fig. 2d). We stress, however, that all the “excited
states” belong to the class of the fundamental solitons,
rather than being bound states thereof.
In Fig. 1, the first nine states (branches) are shown in
the (k, q) parametric plane. Note that the whole bundle
of the branches originates from the point ( k= 1, q=−4),
which is precisely the intersection of the two lines which
limit the existence region of ES (see Eq. (12) with c= 0).
At this degenerate point, the linearization (see above)
gives four zero eigenvalues. More branches than those
depicted in Fig. 1 have been found, the numerical re-
sults clearly pointing towards the existence of infinitely
many branches, accumulating on the border q+ 4k= 0
of the ES-region. In the accumulation process, each u3
component is successively wider, while the u1,2ones have
more and more internal oscillations.
Since kis an arbitrary propagation constant, from
physical grounds, the results obtained for the c= 0 solu-
tions are better summarized in terms of energy flux Evs.
mismatch q(Fig. 3). Note that all the branches shown in
Fig. 3 really terminate at their edge points, which exactly
correspond to hitting the boundary k=−1, see Fig. 1.
3It is also noteworthy that all the solutions are exponen-
tially localized, except at the edge point k=−1, where
a straightforward consideration of Eqs. (7)–(9) demon-
strates that, in this case, ES are weakly (algebraically)
localized as |x| → ∞ (cf. Fig 2b):
u1≈/radicalbig
−(4k+q)|x|−1, u2≈(1/2)/radicalbig
−(4k+q)|x|−2,
u3≈x−2.
Finally, we observe from Figs. 1 and 3 that the first
“excited-state” branch has a remarkable property that it
corresponds to a nearly constant value of q. This means
that while, generally, ES are isolated ( codimension-one )
solutions for fixed values of the physical parameters, this
branch is nearly generic , existing in a narrow interval of
theq-values between −4.0 and−3.74.
III. WALKING SOLITONS
We now turn to ESs with c/negationslash= 0, i.e., walking ones.
These were sought for systematically by returning to the
full 8th-order-ODE model and allowing the AUTO pack-
age to detect bifurcations (of the pitchfork type), while
moving along branches of the c= 0 solutions. It tran-
spires that allthe bifurcating branches have c/negationslash= 0, i.e.,
they are walking ESs. Such solutions are of codimension-
twoin the parameter space (i.e., the solutions can be
represented by curves k(q),c(q)), which can be estab-
lished by a simple counting argument after noting that
the 8th-order linear system has two pairs of pure imagi-
nary eigenvalues. Alternatively, the walking ESs can be
represented, in terms of the energy flux and momentum
(see Eqs. (4) and (5)), by curves E(q) and P(q). We
present results only for the walking solutions which bi-
furcate from the ground and first excited c= 0 states,
while other walking ESs can also be readily found.
It was found that the ground-state branch has ex-
actly two bifurcation points, giving rise to two distinct
walking-ES solution branches (up to a symmetry). These
new branches are shown, in terms of the most physi-
cally representative c(q) and E(q) dependences, in Fig.
4. Note that they, eventually, coalesce and disappear. As
the inset to Fig. 4b shows, they disappear via a tangent
(fold, or saddle-node) bifurcation.
The first excited state has three bifurcation points.
One of them gives rise to a short branch of walking ESs
that terminates, while two others appear to extend to
q=−∞(their ostensible “merger” in Fig. 5 is an arti-
fact of plotting). It is known that, in the large-mismatch
limitq→ −∞ , the present three-wave model with the
quadratic nonlinearity goes over into a modified Thirring
model with cubic nonlinear terms [13]. This suggests that
the latter model may also support ES. However, consid-
eration of this issue is beyond the scope of the present
work.-20. 0
-17. 5-15. 0
-12. 5-10. 0
-7. 5-5. 0
-2. 50. 0-0. 75-0. 50-0. 250. 000. 250. 500. 75
-20. 0
-17. 5-15. 0
-12. 5-10. 0
-7. 5-5. 0
-2. 50. 00.50.100.150.200.250.300.350.400.
-19.16 -19.1356357(a)
(b)q
Ec
q
FIG. 4. Two branches of “walking” ( c/negationslash= 0) embedded soli-
tons bifurcating from the ground-state c= 0 branch: (a) the
walkoff c, and (b) the energy flux Evs. the mismatch q. The
horizontal segment in (a) shows the branch of the c= 0 solu-
tions. The inset in (b) shows that the two branches meet and
disappear via a typical tangent bifurcation.
Fig. 4 clearly shows that, in a certain interval of the
mismatch parameter q, the system gives rise to a multi-
stability , i.e., coexistence of different types of spatial soli-
tons in the planar optical waveguide (for instance, taking
account of the fact that each c/negationslash= 0 branch has symmetric
parts with the opposite values of c, we conclude that there
arefivecoexisting solutions at qtaking values between
about−8 and−11). This situation is of obvious interest
for applications, especially in terms of all-optical switc h-
ing [9]. Indeed, switching from a state with a larger value
of the energy flux to a neighboring one with a smaller flux
can be easily initiated by a small localized perturbation,
in view of the above-mentioned one-sided semistability
of ES, shown in a general form in [5]. Such a switching
perturbation can be readily made controllable and mov-
able if created by a laser beam launched normally to the
planar waveguide and focused at a necessary spot on its
surface [14]. Switching between the two branches with
c/negationslash= 0 can be quite easy to realized too, due to small
energy-flux and walkoff/momentum differences between
them, see Fig. 4.
IV. CONCLUSION
To conclude the analysis, it is necessary to estimate the
actual size of the relevant physical parameters. This is,
in fact, quite easy to do, as there is no essential difference
4in the estimate from that which was presented in Ref. [8]
for the ordinary solitons in exactly the same model. This
means that a diffraction length ∼1 cm is expected for
the SH component, and, definitely, the diffraction lengths
for the FH components, which are subject to the strong
Bragg scattering, will be no larger than that. Thus, a
sample with a size of a few cm may be sufficient for the
experimental observation of ESs. The sample may be an
ordinary planar quadratically nonlinear waveguide with a
set of parallel scores written on it. The other parameters,
such as the power of the laser beam that generates the
solitons, etc., are expected to be the same as in the usual
experiments with the spatial solitons [9]. As concerns
the weak semi-instability of ESs, it may be of no practi-
cal consequence for the experiment, as it would manifest
itself only in a much larger sample. In this connection, it
may be relevant to mention that, strictly speaking, the
usual spatial solitons observed in numerous experiments
are all unstable (e.g., against transverse perturbations) in
the usual (linear) sense, but the instability has no room
to develop in real experimental samples.
Finally, we see from Figs. 4 and 5 that the maximum
walkoff that ESs can achieve is, in the present notation,
slightly smaller than 1. According to the geometric inter-
pretation of the underlying equations (1) - (3) (see details
in the original work [8]), this implies that the maximum
size of the misalignment angle between the propagation
direction and the axis of the spatial soliton may be nearly
the same as the (small) angle between the Poynting vec-
tors of the two FH waves and that of the SH wave.
To summarize the work, we have found a rich spec-
trum of isolated solitons residing inside the continuous
spectrum in a simple model of the three-wave spatial in-
teraction in a second-harmonic-generating planar optical
waveguide equipped with a quasi-one-dimensional Bragg
grating. An infinite sequence of fundamental embedded
solitons were found. They differ by the number of in-
ternal oscillations. The embedded solitons are localized
exponentially, except for a limiting degenerate case, when
they become algebraically localized. Branches of the
zero-walkoff spatial solitons give rise, through bifurca-
tions, to several branches of walking solitons. The struc-
ture of the bifurcating branches provides for a multistable
configuration of the spatial optical solitons. This may
find straightforward applications to all-optical switchin g.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The stay of B.A.M. at the University of Bristol was
supported by a Benjamin Meaker fellowship. A.R.C.
holds and U.K. EPSRC Advanced Fellowship.-25.0 -20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 0-1. 00-0. 75-0. 50-0. 250. 000. 250. 500. 751. 00
-40.0 -35.0 -30.0 -25.0 -20.0 -15.0 -10.0 -5.0 00100200300400500600700800900-5 -2-0.300.3(a)
(b)c
E
qq
FIG. 5. Three branches of the walking ( c/negationslash= 0) embedded
solitons bifurcating from the c= 0 branch corresponding to
the first “excited state”, depicted similarly to Fig. 4 The in set
in (a) shows in detail the central part of the diagram.
[1] J.P. Boyd, Weakly Nonlocal Solitary Waves and Beyond-
All-Orders Asymptotics (Kluwer: Dodrecht, Boston,
London, 1998).
[2] D.J. Kaup, T.I. Lakoba, and B A. Malomed, J. Opt. Soc.
Am. B 14, 1199 (1997).
[3] A.R. Champneys and M.D. Groves, J. Fluid Mech. 342,
199 (1997). R. Grimshaw and P. Cook, in Hydrodynamics
eds. A.T. Chang, J.H. Lee and D.Y.C. Leung (Balkema:
Rotterdam, 1996)
[4] A.R. Champneys, B.A. Malomed, and M.J. Friedman,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 4169 (1998).
[5] J. Yang, B.A. Malomed, and D.J. Kaup, Phys. Rev. Lett.,
in press.
[6] S. Trillo, A.V. Buryak, and Y.S. Kivshar, Opt. Comm.
122, 200 (1996); O. Bang, Y.S. Kivshar, and A.V.
Buryak, Opt. Lett. 22, 1680 (1997).
[7] J. Yang, A.R. Champneys, B.A. Malomed, and D.J.
Kaup, to be published.
[8] W.C.K. Mak, B.A. Malomed, and P.L. Chu. Phys. Rev.
E58, 6708 (1998).
[9] G.I. Stegeman, D.J. Hagan, and L. Torner, Opt. Quan-
tum Electron. 28, 1691 (1996).
[10] C.M. de Sterke and J.E. Sipe, Progr. Opt. 33, 203 (1994).
Lett. Nuovo Cimento 20, 325 (1996).
[11] E.J. Doedel, A.R. Champneys, T.R. Fairgrieve, Yu.A.
Kuznetsov, B. Sanstede, and W. Wang, AUTO97 Con-
5tinuation and Bifurcation Software for Ordinary Differ-
ential Equations, 1997. Available by anonymous ftp from
ftp.cs.concordia.ca, directory pub/doedel/auto.
[12] A. Mielke, P. Holmes and O. O’Reilly, J. Dynamics Diff.Eq.4, 95 (1992)
[13] S. Trillo, Opt. Lett. 21, 1732 (1996).
[14] B.A. Malomed, Z.H. Wang, P.L. Chu, and G.D. Peng, J.
Opt. Soc. Am. B 16, 1197 (1999).
6 |
arXiv:physics/9911046v1 [physics.atom-ph] 19 Nov 1999Berlin Sfb288 Preprint
physics/9911046
Existence criteria for stabilization
from the scaling behaviour of ionization probabilities
C. Figueira de Morisson Faria,†A. Fring∗and R. Schrader∗1
†Max-Planck-Institut f¨ ur Physik komplexer Systeme,
N¨ othnitzer Str. 38, D-01187 Dresden, Germany
∗Institut f¨ ur Theoretische Physik,
Freie Universit¨ at Berlin, Arnimallee 14, D-14195 Berlin, Germany
Abstract
We provide a systematic derivation of the scaling behaviour of various quantities
and establish in particular the scale invariance of the ioni zation probability. We
discuss the gauge invariance of the scaling properties and t he manner in which
they can be exploited as a consistency check in explicit anal ytical expressions, in
perturbation theory, in the Kramers-Henneberger and Floqu et approximation, in
upper and lower bound estimates and fully numerical solutio ns of the time dependent
Schr¨ odinger equation. The scaling invariance leads to a di fferential equation which
has to be satisfied by the ionization probability and which yi elds an alternative
criterium for the existence of atomic bound state stabiliza tion.
PACS numbers: 32.80.Rm, 32.80.Fb, 33.80.Rv, 42.50.Hz, 03. 65.Db
November 1999
1e-mail addresses: Faria@mpipks-dresden.mpg.de,
Fring@physik.fu-berlin.de,
Schrader@physik.fu-berlin.de1 Introduction
It is up to now still not possible to carry out computations of ionization probabilities
or ionization rates in the high intensity regime in a totally satisfactory manner. In
particular analytical results are extremely rare. Especia lly concerning the issue of so-
called atomic stabilization [1], numerous computations ma y be found in the literature
which are contradictory in many cases. Alone for the relativ ely simple problem of the
one-dimensional delta-potential there exist various rece nt computations which do [2, 3]
or do not [4, 5] support the existence of stabilization. Roug hly speaking, stabilization
is the effect that the ionization probability (or ionization rate to some authors) as a
function of the laser field intensity is decreasing or consta nt in some region. For fur-
ther references and a more detailed terminology, that is, a d istinction into transient,
adiabatic, interference or resonance stabilization, see f or instance [6].
It would be highly desirable to settle the controversial iss ue and pinpoint possible
mistakes, erroneous physical or mathematical assumptions made in the course of the
computations. The main intention of this note is to contribu te to this debate and
provide additional alternative consistency criteria. For this purpose we analyze the
scaling behaviour of several quantities involved in the cal culations which address the
above-mentioned problem. This constitutes an adaptation o f an idea which has been
proved to be extremely powerful in the context of quantum fiel d theory, for instance in
form of the renormalization group flow (see almost any book on quantum field theory).
In the context of atomic physics, scaling laws have been cons idered before [7] in a
“semiempirical” fashion, as the authors refer themselves t o their own analysis. In order
to overcome the slightly ad hoc way of arguing we provide in th is note a systematic
derivation of various scaling laws, which are compatible wi th the ones proposed in [7].
In particular, we establish the scale invariance property o f the ionization probability. As
a consequence one may exploit these symmetry properties and check various analytical as
well as numerical expressions for the ionization probabili ty for consistency. In addition,
when considering the ionization probability as a function o f various parameters the scale
invariance property allows to trade one particular variabl e for others. This permits to
interpret and rigorously explain various types of behaviou r which occurred before for
more specific situations in the literature. For instance, fo r the Hydrogen atom it was
found in [8] that for increasing principal quantum number th e ionization probability
decreased and in [9] the opposite behaviour was observed. Ou r analysis culminates in
the formulation of a simple alternative criterium for the ex istence of stabilization.
Our manuscript is organized as follows: In section 2 we deriv e systematically the
scaling properties of various quantities and establish in p articular the invariance of the
ionization probability under scaling. We show that this pro perty is preserved under
gauge invariance. Furthermore, the scale invariance can be exploited as a consistency
check in various computations. We exhibit this for explicit analytical expressions, for
perturbative calculations, for approximate evaluations i n form of Kramers-Henneberger-
and Floquet states and for upper and lower bound estimates. W e demonstrate how
the scaling properties can be exploited to trade some variab les for others and use this
feature to explain several types of physical behaviour. As a consequence of our analysis
in section 2, we provide in section 3 a differential equation w hich has to be satisfied by
the ionization probability and an alternative criterium fo r the existence of stabilization.
1We state our conclusions in section 4.
2 Scaling behaviour of ionization probabilities
We consider an atom with potential V(/vector x) in the presence of a sufficiently intense laser
field, such that it may be described in the non-relativistic r egime by the time-dependent
Schr¨ odinger equation in the dipole approximation
iℏ∂ψ(/vector x,t)
∂t=/parenleftbigg
−ℏ2
2me∆ +V(/vector x) +e/vector x·/vectorE(t)/parenrightbigg
ψ(/vector x,t) =H(/vector x,t)ψ(/vector x,t). (1)
We further take the pulse to be of the general form
/vectorE(t) =/vectorE0f(t) (2)
wheref(t) is a function whose integral over tis assumed to be well behaved, with
f(t) = 0 unless 0 ≤t≤τ. This means τis the pulse duration, f(t) the pulse shape
function and E0the amplitude of the pulse, which we take to be positive witho ut loss
of generality.
Denoting by λ >0 the dilatation factor and by ηthe scaling dimension of the
eigenfunction ϕ(/vector x) :=ψ(/vector x,t= 0) of the Hamiltonian H(/vector x,t= 0), we consider the
following scale transformations1
/vector x→/vector x′=λ/vector x andϕ(/vector x)→ϕ′(/vector x′) =λ−ηϕ(/vector x). (3)
Making the physical assumption that the Hilbert space norm r emains invariant, i.e.
/bardblϕ(/vector x)/bardbl=/bardblϕ′(/vector x′)/bardbl, we deduce immediately that the scaling dimension has to be η=d/2,
withdbeing the dimension of the space. Introducing now the scalin g of the dimensional
parameters ℏ,meandeas
ℏ→ℏ′=ληℏℏ, m e→m′
e=ληmemeande→e′=ληee (4)
we can scale the whole problem to atomic units, i.e. ℏ=e=me, for instance by
the choice λ=ℏ,ηℏ=−1,ηe=−logℏ(e) andηme=−logℏ(me). Staying for the
time being in these units the scaling behaviour (3) may be rea lized by scaling the
coupling constant. Considering for instance the wavefunct ionϕ(x) =√αexp(−α|x|)
of the only bound state when the potential in (1) is taken to be the one-dimensional
delta-potential V(x) =αδ(x), equation (3) imposes that the coupling constant has
to scale as α→α′=λ−1α. Choosing instead the Coulomb potential in the form
V(/vector x) =α/rrequires the same scaling behaviour of the coupling constan t for (3) to
be valid. This is exhibited directly by the explicit express ions of the corresponding
wavefunctions ϕnlm(/vector x)∼α3/2(αr)lexp(−αr/n)L2l+1
n+l(2αr/n) (see e.g. [10]).
From a physical point of view it is natural to require further , that the scaling be-
haviour of the wavefunction is the same for all times
ψ(/vector x,t)→ψ′(/vector x′,t′) =U′(t′,0)ϕ′(/vector x′) =λ−d/2ψ(/vector x,t) =λ−d/2U(t,0)ϕ(/vector x).(5)
1More formally we could also carry out all our computations by using unitary dilatation oparators
U(λ), such that the transformation of the eigenfunction is desc ribed by U(λ)ϕ(/vector x) =ληϕ′(λ/vector x) and
operators Oacting on ϕ(/vector x) transform as U(λ)OU(λ)−1=O′.
2Consequently this means that the time evolution operator sh ould be an invariant quan-
tity under these transformations
U(t1,t0) =T/parenleftBig
e−i
ℏ/integraltextt1
t0H(/vector x,s)ds/parenrightBig
→U′(t′
1,t′
0) =T/parenleftBigg
e−i
ℏ/integraltextλ2t1
λ2t0H′(/vector x,s)ds/parenrightBigg
=U(t1,t0).(6)
HereTdenotes the time ordering. Equation (6) then suggests that t he scaling of the
time has to be compensated by the scaling of the Hamiltonian a nd Planck’s constant in
order to achieve invariance. Scaling therefore the time as
t→t′=ληtt , (7)
withηtbeing unknown for the moment, equation (6) only holds if the S tark Hamiltonian
of equation (1) scales as
H(/vector x,t)→H′/parenleftbig
/vector x′,t′/parenrightbig
=ληHH(/vector x,t) with ηH=ηℏ−ηt. (8)
The properties (7) and (8) could also be obtained by demandin g the invariance of the
Schr¨ odinger equation (1). The overall scaling behaviour o fH(/vector x,t) is governed by the
scaling of the Laplacian, the electron mass and Planck’s con stant, such that we obtain
the further constraint
ηH= 2ηℏ−ηme−2. (9)
As a consequence we can read off the scaling properties of the p otential as
V(/vector x)→V′/parenleftbig
/vector x′/parenrightbig
=ληHV(/vector x). (10)
What does this behaviour imply for some concrete potentials ? Having scaled everything
to atomic units, relation (9) suggests that ηH=−2. Considering for this situation
the one-dimensional delta-potential and the Coulomb poten tial in the forms specified
above, equation (10) imposes that the coupling constant has to scale asα→α′=λ−1α
in both cases. This behaviour of the coupling constant is in a greement with our earlier
observations for the corresponding wavefunctions. We also observe immediately that
the behaviour (10) may be realized for the general class of Ka to small potentials. We
recall that if for each constant βwith 0< β < 1 there exists a constant γ, such that
/bardblVψ/bardbl ≤β/bardbl−∆ψ/bardbl+γ/bardblψ/bardblholds for all ψin the domain D(−∆/2), the potential V
is called Kato small. We see immediately that the scaling of t he first term is entirely
governed by the Laplacian such that β→β′=βis scale invariant and that γhas to
scale asγ→γ′=λ−2γdue to the scale invariance of the norm.
It is intriguing to note that there exists an interesting cla ss of potentials which scale
alone via their dependence on /vector rand which do not contain any energy scale αat all, as
for instance V(/vector x) = 1/r2or the two-dimensional delta potential.
In [7] the interesting proposal was made to exploit the scali ng behaviour in order
to use known properties of the Hydrogen atom to understand th e behaviour of Helium.
For this purpose the Schr¨ odinger equation describing Heli um, i.e. (1), for the potential
VHe(/vector x) =−Ze2/rand the mass mereplaced by the reduced mass µ, is scaled to the
one which describes Hydrogen. Translating the quantities o f [7] into our conventions
this transformation is realized by λ= (µ/m e)Z,ηt= logλ(Z2µ/m e),ηµ= logλ(me/µ),
3ηZ=−logλZandηℏ=ηe= 0. These quantities are consistent with the additional
constraintηH= 2ηℏ−ηme−2,which results for the potential VHe(/vector x) from the scaling
arguments. We would like to point out that this is only one of m any possible choices.
It might be more convenient to use for instance λ=Z,ηt= 2,ηµ=ηℏ=ηZ+ 1 =
logZ(me/µ) andηe= 0 instead.
We will now consider the constraint resulting from equation (8) on the scaling behaviour
of the pulse. We have
/vectorE(t)→/vectorE′/parenleftbig
t′/parenrightbig
=ληE/vectorE(t) with ηE=ηH−ηe−1. (11)
This equation is not quite as restrictive as for the potentia l, since in the latter case we
could determine the behaviour of the coupling whereas now a c ertain ambiguity remains
in the sense that we can only deduce
/vectorE0→/vectorE′
0=ληEo/vectorE0, f(t)→f′/parenleftbig
t′/parenrightbig
=ληff(t),withηE0+ηf=ηE. (12)
Thus, under the assumptions we have made, it is not possible t o disentangle the contri-
bution coming from the scaling of the amplitude or the pulse s hape function. However,
there might be pulse shape functions for which hfhas to be 0, since no suitable param-
eter is available in its explicit form to achieve the scaling .
Finally, we come to the scaling behaviour of the ionization p robability. Denoting by
Pthe orthogonal projection in L2(IR3) onto the subspace spanned by the bound states
ofH(/vector x,t= 0), the ionization probability turns out to be a scale invar iant quantity
P(ϕ) =/bardbl(1−P)U(τ,0)ϕ/bardbl2→ P′/parenleftbig
ϕ′/parenrightbig
=P(ϕ). (13)
This follows by means of (3), (6) and by noting that the projec tion operator has to be
a scale invariant quantity, i.e. P→P′=P. From a physical point of view this is clear
unless we were able to scale bound states into the continuum, which is impossible, since
negative energies will remain always negative even after be ing scaled. Mathematically
this means we have to demand that P′andPare related to each other by a unitary
transformation.
We recapitulate that our sole assumptions in this derivatio n were to demand the
invariance of the Hilbert space norm, i.e. /bardblϕ(/vector x)/bardbl=/bardblϕ′(/vector x′)/bardbl, and that the scaling of the
wavefunction is preserved for all times.
We shall now utilize this symmetry property in various appro aches, which can be
carried out either numerically or analytically. At this poi nt we scale everything to atomic
units which we will use from now onwards.
2.1 Gauge invariance
First of all we would like to establish that these scaling pro perties hold in every gauge, as
one naturally expects. We recall that different gauges are re lated by a time-dependent
unitary operator Ag2←g1(t). For instance the wavefunction in gauge g1and gauge g2
are related as Ψ g2(/vector x,t) =Ag2←g1(t)Ψg1(/vector x,t). The velocity gauge is obtained from the
length gauge by
Av←l(t) =ei/vectorb(t)·/vector x→A′
v←l(t′) =Av←l(t) (14)
4the velocity gauge from the Kramers-Henneberger gauge by
Av←KH(t) =e−ia(t)ei/vector c(t)·/vector p→A′
v←KH(t′) =Av←KH(t) (15)
and the length gauge from the Kramers-Henneberger gauge by
Al←KH(t) =e−ia(t)e−i/vectorb(t)·/vector xei/vector c(t)·/vector p→A′
l←KH(t′) =Al←KH(t). (16)
The defining relations for the classical momentum transfer /vectorb(t), the classical displace-
ment/vector c(t) and the classical energy transfer /vector a(t) then yield
/vectorb(t) =/vectorE0b0(t) =/integraldisplayt
0ds/vectorE(s)→/vectorb′(t′) =/integraldisplaytλ2
0dsλ−3/vectorE(sλ−2) =λ−1/vectorb(t) (17)
/vector c(t) =/vectorE0c0(t) =/integraldisplayt
0ds/vectorb(s)→/vector c′(t′) =/integraldisplaytλ2
0dsλ−1/vectorb(sλ−2) =λ/vector c(t) (18)
/vector a(t) =/vectorE0a0(t) =1
2/integraldisplayt
0dsb2(s)→/vector a′(t′) =/integraldisplaytλ2
0dsλ−2b2(sλ−2) =/vector a(t).(19)
These quantities scale in the expected manner, that is /vectorb(t) scales as a momentum, /vector c(t) as
the space and /vector a(t) remains invariant. Taking these properties into account, we observe
easily that the operator Ag2←g1(t) is an invariant quantity under scaling
Ag2←g1(t)→A′
g2←g1(t) =Ag2←g1(t) (20)
for all cases g1andg2mentioned. Hence the scaling behaviour is preserved in all g auges.
It is interesting to note that one may reverse the logic here a nd deduce from a broken
scale invariance onto a broken gauge invariance. However, i n general gauge invariance
is not broken in such a crude manner, e.g. in [11] (see eqn. (22 ) therein) the gauge
invariance is broken in a scale invariant fashion.
2.2 Symmetry properties for analytical expressions of P
Keeping the pulse shape function invariant under the scalin g transformations we in-
corporate now the explicit functional dependence into the i onization probability. The
fundamental parameters are the field amplitude, the pulse le ngth and the coupling con-
stant. The previous observations then suggest that
P(E0,τ,α) =P(E′
0,τ′,α′). (21)
Assuming from now on that the coupling constant scales as for the one-dimensional
delta- and the Coulomb potential, the meaning of equation (2 1) is that the ionization
probability remains invariant under the transformations
E0→E′
0=λ−3E0, τ →τ′=λ2τ, α →α′=λ−1α . (22)
We can exploit the symmetry property (21) most easily when we have an explicit ana-
lytical expression for P(ϕ) at hand. Considering for example the δ-potential and taking
5the pulse to be the δ-kick, i.e.E(t) =E0δ(t), b(t) =E00+, c(t) = 0,the ionization
probability of the bound state was computed to be [12]
P(ϕ) = 1−4
π2/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle∞/integraldisplay
−∞dpexp/parenleftBig
−iτα2p2
2/parenrightBig
/parenleftBig
1 + (p+b(τ)/α)2/parenrightBig
(1 +p2)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
. (23)
Obviously the r.h.s. of (23) passes the test and remains inva riant under the scale trans-
formation in form of (17) and (22).
2.3 Perturbation theory
Usually one is not in the fortunate situation to have explici t expressions for the ionization
probability available as in the previous subsection. Howev er, the symmetry property may
also be utilized when computing P(ϕ) approximately either in a numerical or analytical
fashion. We recall that the essential ingredient of perturb ation theory is to expand
the time evolution operator as a series in E0orαfor small or large field intensities,
respectively. We can formally write
U(t1,t0) =∞/summationdisplay
n=0U(n|t1,t0). (24)
SinceU(t1,t0) is a scale invariant quantity, the invariance property (6) must hold order
by order, that is for 0 ≤n≤ ∞we have
U(n|t1,t0)→U′(n|t′
1,t′
0) =U(n|t1,t0). (25)
Considering now for instance the high intensity regime and p erforming Gordon-Volkov
perturbation theory (e.g. [13, 14]), the first terms in (24) r ead
U(0|t1,t0) = exp( i(t1−t0)∆/2) = exp(i(t1−t0)λ2λ−2∆/2) =U′(0|t′
1,t′
0) (26)
U(1|t1,t0) =i/integraldisplayt1
t0dsU(0|t1,s)VU(0|s,t0) =U′(1|t′
1,t′
0). (27)
Whilst it was fairly obvious that the general expressions (2 6) and (27) remain invariant
under scaling, this consistency check might be less trivial when carried out after the
expressions have been evaluated explicitly either numeric ally or analytically.
2.4 Expansions in terms of Kramers-Henneberger states or Fl oquet
states
The essence of the Kramers-Henneberger approximation (e.g . [15]) is to exploit the fact
that when the gauge transformation (16) is carried out on the Stark Hamiltonian, the
term involving the laser pulse disappears and instead the po tential is shifted by the total
classical displacement, i.e. V(/vector x)→V(/vector x−/vector c(t)). Having chosen the pulse in such a way
that/vector c(t) is a periodic function in time, one can expand the shifted po tential in a Fourier
series
V(/vector x−/vector c(t)) =∞/summationdisplay
n=−∞Vneinωt. (28)
6In the Kramers-Henneberger approximation one assumes now t hat the zero mode is
dominant such that the remaining terms may be treated as pert urbations. From the
scaling behaviour of the l.h.s. of (28) we deduce immediatel y that the frequency has to
scale inverse to the time, i.e. ω→ω′=λ−2ω, and that each mode in the series scales
in the same way as the potential, i.e.
Vn→V′
n=λ−2Vn. (29)
As an example let us consider the expansion for a square-well potential of depth αV0and
of widthdsubjected to a pulse of linearly polarized monochromatic li ght. The modes
are of the general form (first reference in [15])
Vn=|αV0|g[(d/2−x)ω2/E0], (30)
where the explicit formula of the function gis given in term of Chebyshev-polynomials
which, however, is not important for our purpose. We only nee d to know that it scales
by means of its argument alone. Since the argument is scale in variant, we observe with
the help of (10) for ηH= 2 in atomic units that (29) holds for each coefficient in (30).
The analysis of the scaling behaviour of the Floquet expansi on is very similar. In-
stead of exploiting the periodicity of the potential one mak es additional use of the
periodicity of the field and expands ψ(/vector x,t) =/summationtext∞
n=−∞ψn(/vector x)einωt. It is then obvious by
the same reasoning as before that the scaling of the individu al modes has to be the same
as for the field itself, i.e. ψn(/vector x)→ψ′
n(/vector x′) =λ−d/2ψn(/vector x).
2.5 Upper and lower bounds
In [13, 17, 16, 14] analytical expressions for upper and lowe r bounds, Pu(ϕ) and Pl(ϕ),
respectively, were derived and analyzed. Depending on the p articular parameters these
expressions put more or less severe constraints on the actua l value of P(ϕ), in the sense
thatPl(ϕ)≤ P(ϕ)≤ Pu(ϕ). Since P(ϕ) is a scale invariant quantity, also the bounds
have to respect this symmetry. Otherwise they could be scale d to any desired value. We
present just one example for one particular upper bound (the arguments carry through
equally for lower bounds) to convince ourselves that this is indeed the case. For instance
under the condition b(τ)2/2>−E≡binding energy of ϕ, the following upper bound
was derived in [13]
Pu(ϕ) =/braceleftBiggτ/integraldisplay
0/bardbl(V(/vector x−c(t)ez)−V(/vector x))ϕ/bardbldt+|c(τ)| /bardblpzϕ/bardbl+2|b(τ)|/bardblpzϕ/bardbl
2E+b(τ)2/bracerightBigg2
.(31)
It is easy to see term by term that the r.h.s. of (31) scales inv ariantly. In [16] we
have already exploited this property. In fact, we found that the bound (31) is only
considerably below 1 for very small values of the pulse lengt hτ. Since the binding
energy has to scale in the same manner as the Hamiltonian H(/vector x,t= 0), that is E→E′=
λ−2E, we could also, due to the scale invariance property, enlarg e the pulse durations
by considering higher Rydberg states. In this way we could st udy pulses which are
physically more conceivable, at the cost of having to deal wi th higher principal quantum
numbers.
72.6 Trading some variables for others
Of course the principle mentioned at the end of the last subse ction is very general and we
may always trade some variables for others, simply by bringi ng the relevant λ’s in (22)
to the other side of the equation. For instance from P(λ3E0,τ,α) =P(E0,λ2τ,λ−1α) it
follows that instead of varying the field amplitude and keepi ngτandαfixed, we could
equivalently keep E0fixed and vary simultaneously τandαin the described fashion.
As a consequence we can give some alternative physical inter pretation to the extreme
intensity limit considered in [17, 12]
lim
E0→∞P(ϕ) = limτ→∞
α→0P(ϕ). (32)
This means switching off the potential and exposing the atom t o an infinitely long
pulse with some finite field amplitude is equivalent to keepin g the pulse length and the
coupling constant finite and taking the field amplitude to infi nity.
0 1 2 3 4 5 60,00,20,40,60,81,0
(b)
E0 P(Ψ) α = 0.5
α = 1.0
α = 1.5
α = 2.00 2 4 6 8 100,00,20,40,60,81,0
(a)
E0 P(Ψ) α = 0.5
α = 1.0
α = 1.5
α = 2.0
Figure 1: Part (a) shows the ionization probability as a func tion of the field amplitude E0for a
δ-potential atom subjected to a δ-kick pulse (23) for τ= 0.001 and various coupling constants.
Part (b) shows the ionization probability to zeroth order Go rdon-Volkov perturbation theory as
a function of the field amplitude E0for aδ-potential atom subjected to a double δ-kick pulse of
the formE(t) =E0(δ(t)−2δ(t−τ))forτ= 1.1 and various coupling constants. Notice that
for this pulse the conditions b(τ) = 0 andc(τ)/negationslash= 0 hold. For a detailed derivation see [12].
8We can also use the scale invariance property to give a simple explanation to a
behaviour, which at first sight appears somewhat puzzling. I n [12, 8] it was observed
that the ionization probability is sometimes a decreasing a nd sometimes an increasing
function of the coupling constant when the other parameters are kept fixed, refer to
figure 1.
Important for the explanation of this feature is that in the f ormer case b(τ) =
0,c(τ)/negationslash= 0 and in the latter b(τ)/negationslash= 0,c(τ) = 0. Assuming now that the dependence
of the ionization probability on the field amplitude enters o nly through the quantities
b(τ) andc(τ) and in addition that the dependence on the pulse length is ve ry weak in
comparison with the one on b(τ),c(τ) andα, according to the scale invariance property
we can write
P(b(τ),c(τ),α)≈ P(λ−1b(τ),λc(τ),λ−1α). (33)
Thus, in case the functional dependence on c(τ) is much weaker than the one on b(τ),
we have to increase the coupling constant when the total clas sical momentum transfer is
increased in order to keep the ionization probability fixed. Noting that E∼α−2, this is
expected from the classical point of view, since to free a mor e deeply bound state with
the same probability requires a larger momentum transfer. I n the reversed case, in which
the functional dependence on c(τ) is much stronger than the one on b(τ) we have to
decrease the coupling constant when the total classical dis placement is increased in order
to keep the ionization probability at the same value. Also th is behaviour is expected
from a classical point of view, since when a less deeply bound state is freed with the
same probability, it will be further displaced.
The behaviour in figure 1 is therefore explained by relation ( 33). Note that in figure
1(b) the value of P(E0= 0), which of course has to be zero, is a measure for the
poor quality of the zeroth order Gordon-Volkov perturbatio n theory, at least in this low
intensity regime. Finally it is worth to note that the crosso ver which takes place for the
curves ofα= 1.5 andα= 2 indicates that in fact (33) is not exact and the pulse lengt h
has to be scaled also. It is not an indication that the higher o rder terms need to be
taken into account, since, as we discussed in subsection 2.3 , scale invariance holds order
by order in perturbation theory.
3 Existence criteria for stabilization
As a consequence of (21) it is elementary to derive a different ial equation which has to
be satisfied by the ionization probability
λdP
dλ= 2τ∂P
∂τ−α∂P
∂α−3E0∂P
∂E0+λ∂P
∂λ. (34)
As an example one may easily convince oneself that (23) indee d satisfies (34).
One way to speak of stabilization is when the ionization prob ability as a function of
the field amplitude satisfies
∂P
∂E0≤0 (35)
forE0∈[0,∞) on a finite interval. Noting now that the transformation of t he length
scale is a symmetry for the ionization probability, i.e. rel ation (13), we have ∂P/∂λ=
9dP/dλ= 0. Then, according to the differential equation (34), the cr iterium (35) for the
existence of stabilization may be written alternatively as
2τ∂P
∂τ≤α∂P
∂α. (36)
Once again it will be instructive to verify this statement fo r an explicit example. We
believe that hitherto no analytical expression for the ioni zation probability is known
which obeys the strict inequality in (35). However, it was sh own [17, 12] that in the
extreme intensity limit E0→ ∞ the equal sign holds. In particular when b(τ) =c(τ) = 0
one obtains non-trivial expressions in this case. Taking fo r instance the potential to be
theδ-potential in three dimensions, the ionization probabilit y of the only bound state
was computed to [17]
P(ϕ) = 1−1
π/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleU/parenleftbigg3
2,1
2;iτα2
2/parenrightbigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle2
, (37)
withUbeing the confluent hypergeometric function. Obviously (37 ) satisfies the cri-
terium (36) for the equal sign.
It is interesting to note that for potentials which do not pos sess an energy scale, like
the ones mentioned after (10), relation (36) reduces to ∂P/∂τ≤0 forτ∈[0,∞) on
a finite interval. This means that for increasing pulse lengt h the ionization probability
should decrease, which is as counterintuitive as the statem ent (35).
4 Conclusions
We have shown that transforming the length scale correspond s to a symmetry in the
ionization probability P(ϕ). We demonstrated that this symmetry property may be
used as a consistency check in various approximation method s in numerical or analytical
form. One should also note that every numerical code which fu lly solves the Schr¨ odinger
equation can be tested for consistency by appropriately sca ling all variables. Moreover
one can employ the scale invariance to avoid certain problem s which sometimes plague
numerical calculations as for instance the occurrence of ve ry small numbers near machine
precision or of very large numbers. By re-scaling all parame ters one might be able to
avoid such difficulties and still describe exactly the same ph ysical situation.
We have further shown, in section 2.6, that certain types of b ehaviour for which one
has very often intuitive physical explanations may be confir med by means of scaling
arguments.
We like to stress that none of the above considerations is res tricted to a particular
intensity regime of the pulse in comparison with the potenti al and they hold for low
as well as ultra high intensities, although the latter regim e is of course currently of
more interest. The above considerations may of course be car ried out also for other
quantities of interest like ionization rates I, harmonic spectra etc. It follows for instance
immediately that the ionization rate has to scale inverse to the time, i.e. I → I =λ−ηtI.
Fermi’s golden rule scales for instance in this way.
As an outlook one should keep in mind that like in numerous oth er situations the
physics becomes more interesting when the symmetry is broke n. For instance for the
10two-dimensional delta potential we noted already that ther e is a priori no energy scale
available. However, these potentials suffer from ultraviol et divergencies at the origin
which have to be renormalised. Through this procedure one th en introduces an addi-
tional scale, which is a situation reminiscent of relativis tic quantum field theory. Another
interesting situation arises when we have more than one intr insical physical scale in our
system. In many situations one scale is dominating the other and the problem is re-
ducible to one with only one parameter. However, there might intriguing situations
in which the scales combine in an arbitrary complicated mann er as for instance in a
statistical physics problem where we have a microscopic len gth scale which specifies the
typical distance between fluctuating magnetic degrees of fr eedom and the correlation
length.
Acknowledgment: A.F. and R.S. are grateful to the Deutsche Forschungsgemein -
schaft (Sfb288) for partial support. We would like to thank M . D¨ orr for bringing the
existence of the second reference in [7] to our attention.
References
[1]M. Gavrila and J.Z. Kaminski, Phys. Rev. Lett. 52(1984) 613.
[2]Q. Su, B.P. Irving, C.W. Johnson and J.H. Eberly, J. of Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 29
(1996) 5755.
[3]S. Geltman, Jour. of Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 32(1999) 853.
[4]S. Geltman, Phys. Rev. A 45(1992) 5293; J. of Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 27(1994)
257;J. of Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 27(1994) 1497.
[5]T. Mercouris and C.A. Nicolaides; J. of Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 32(1999) 2371.
[6]H.G. Muller, Proceedings of Super-Intense-Laser-Atom Physics IV , eds. H.G.Muller and
M.V. Fedorov (Kluwer Acad. Publ., Amsterdam, 1996 ).
[7]P. Lambropoulos and X. Tang, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 4(1987) 821;
L.B. Madsen and P. Lambropoulos, Phys. Rev. A 59(1999) 4574.
[8]M. Pont and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A 44 (1991) R4110.
[9]W.E. Cooke and R. Shakeshaft, Phys. Rev. A43(1991) 251.
[10]H.A. Bethe and E.E. Salpeter, ” Quantum Mechanics of One and Two-Electron Atoms”
(Springer, Berlin, 1957).
[11]P.W. Milonni, Phys. Rev. A 38(1988) 2682.
[12]C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, A. Fring and R. Schrader ” Momentum Transfer, Displace-
ment and Stabilization ”, in preparation.
[13]A. Fring, V. Kostrykin and R. Schrader, J. of Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 29(1996)
5651.
11[14]C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, A. Fring and R. Schrader ” Analytical Treatment of Stabi-
lization ”,Laser Physics 9(1999) 379.
[15]E.A. Volkova, A.M. Popov and O.V. Smirnova, JETP 79(1994) 736; JETP 82(1996) 72;
E.A. Volkova, A.M. Popov, O.V. Smirnova and O.V. Tikhonova, JETP 84(1997) 658.
[16]C. Figueira de Morisson Faria, A. Fring and R. Schrader, J. of Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt.
Phys.31(1998) 449.
[17]A. Fring, V. Kostrykin and R. Schrader, J. of Phys. A: Math. Gen. 30(1997) 8599.
12 |
arXiv:physics/9911047v1 [physics.chem-ph] 19 Nov 1999LYCEN 9121
June 1991
ON QUANTUM GROUPS AND THEIR POTENTIAL USE
IN MATHEMATICAL CHEMISTRY∗
Maurice Kibler1and Tidjani N´ egadi2
1Institut de Physique Nucl´ eaire de Lyon
IN2P3-CNRS et Universit´ e Claude Bernard
43 Boulevard du 11 Novembre 1918
F-69622 Villeurbanne Cedex, France
2Laboratoire de Physique Th´ eorique
Institut des Sciences Exactes
Universit´ e d’Oran Es-S´ enia
31100 Es-S´ enia, Alg´ erie
Abstract
The quantum algebra suq(2) is introduced as a deformation of the
ordinary Lie algebra su(2). This is achieved in a simple way by making use
ofq-bosons. In connection with the quantum algebra suq(2), we discuss
theq-analogues of the harmonic oscillator and the angular momen tum.
We also introduce q-analogues of the hydrogen atom by means of a q-
deformation of the Pauli equations and of the so-called Kust aanheimo-
Stiefel transformation.
∗Paper published in Journal of Mathematical Chemistry 11, 13-25 (1992).
Paper written from a lecture presented (by M. K.) at the “IV In ternational
Conference on Mathematical and Computational Chemistry”, Bled (Yu-
goslavia), 3 - 7 June 1991.
01. Introduction
A new algebraic structure, the structure of quantum group, h as been
developed since 1985 [1-3] and is still the subject of develo pments both in
mathematics and theoretical physics. Such a structure, whi ch is related to
the structure of Hopf bi-algebra, takes its origin in variou s fields of the-
oretical physics (e.g., statistical mechanics, integrabl e systems, conformal
field theory).
The notion of quantum group is more easily approached throug h the
one of quantum algebra. Loosely speaking, the latter notion corresponds
to a deformation, depending on a certain parameter q, of a Lie algebra.
Most of the applications of quantum algebras, of potential u se for chemical
physics, have been mainly devoted to the harmonic oscillato r [4-8] and to
coherent states [9,10].
It is the aim of this paper to briefly describe one of the simple st quan-
tum groups, viz., the quantum group SUq(2), or rather its quantum algebra
suq(2), and to underline its potential use in chemical physics. For this pur-
pose, we examine in turn three dynamical systems connected w ith quan-
tum groups : the q-deformed harmonic oscillator, the q-deformed angular
momentum and the q-deformed hydrogen atom. These new systems, also
referred to as q-analogues, reduce to the corresponding ordinary sytems in
the limiting case q= 1.
The paper presents a review character as far as the q-analogues of the
harmonic oscillator (in Section 2) and the angular momenta ( in Section 3)
are concerned. The discussion (in Section 3 and Appendix 2) a bout the
relevance of the quantum algebra soq(3,2) for studying the q-analogues
of spherical and hyperbolic angular momenta is new. The intr oduction
(in Section 4) of q-analogues for the hydrogen atom is developed for the
first time. No sophisticated mathematical pre-requisite is necessary to
understand this self-contained article.
12.q-Analogue of the Harmonic Oscillator
We start with the usual Fock space
F={|n >:n∈N} (1)
which is very familiar to the chemist.
Definition 1. Let us define the linear operators a+,aandNon the
vector space Fby the relations
a+|n >=/radicalbig
[n+ 1]|n+1> a |n >=/radicalbig
[n]|n−1> N |n >=n|n >
(2)
witha|0>= 0, where we use the notation
[c]≡[c]q=qc−q−c
q−q−1=sinh(clnq)
sinh(ln q)c∈C (3)
for a given qin the field of complex numbers C.
It is to be observed that in the limiting case q= 1, we have simply
[c] =cso that a+,aandNare (respectively) in this case the ordinary
creation, annihilation and number operators encountered i n various areas
of theoretical chemistry and physics. In the case where q/ne}ationslash= 1, with qnot
being a root of unity, the operators a+,aandNdefined by equations
(2-3) are called q-deformed creation, annihilation and number operators,
respectively. (In this case, the complex number [ c] defined by (3) is a q-
deformed number; some algebraic relations satisfied by such q-deformed
numbers are listed in Appendix 1.)
Property 1. As a trivial property, we have
(a)†=a+(N)†=N [N,a+] =a+[N,a] =−a (4)
where ( X)†denotes the adjoint of the operator Xand [X,Y]≡[X,Y]−=
XY−Y Xthe commutator of XandY.
2Property 2. As a basic property, we can check that
aa+= [N+1] a+a= [N]aa+−q−1a+a=qNaa+−qa+a=q−N(5)
where we use the abbreviation
[X]≡[X]q=qX−q−X
q−q−1=sinh(Xlnq)
sinh(ln q)X∈ F (6)
which parallels for operators the defining relation (3) for n umbers.
The set {a,a+}satisfying (4-6) is a set of q-bosons as originally defined
by Macfarlane [4] and Biedenharn [5] (see also Refs. [6,7]). F rom equation
(5), it is clear that the operators aanda+reduce to ordinary bosons in
the limiting case q= 1.
We are now in a position to introduce a q-deformed harmonic oscilla-
tor. The literature on this subject is now abundant and the re ader may
consult, for example, Refs. [4-10] for further details.
Definition 2. From the q-deformed creation and annihilation operators
aanda+, let us define the operators
px=i/radicalbigg
¯hµω
2(a+−a)x=/radicalBigg
¯h
2µω(a++a) (7)
acting on F, where ¯ h,µandωhave their usual meaning in the context of
the (ordinary) harmonic oscillator.
Equation (7) defines q-deformed momentum and position operators px
andx, respectively, and bears the same form as for the ordinary cr eation
and annihilation operators corresponding to the limiting c aseq= 1.
Property 3. The commutator of the q-deformed operators xandpxis
[x,px] =i¯h([N+ 1]−[N]) (8)
3which reduces to the ordinary value i¯hin the limiting case q= 1.
In terms of eigenvalues, equation (8) can be rewritten as
[x,px] =i¯hcosh[( n+1
2)lnq]
cosh(1
2lnq)(9)
when q/ne}ationslash= 1. Thus, we may think of a q-deformed uncertainty principle: the
right-hand side of (9) increases with n(i.e., with the energy, see equation
(11) below) and is minimum as well as n-independent in the limiting case
q= 1 [5].
Definition 3. We define the self-adjoint operator HonFby
H=1
2µpx2+1
2µ ω2x2=1
2(a+a+aa+)¯h ω=1
2([N] + [N+ 1]) ¯ h ω
(10)
in terms of the q-deformed operators previously defined.
In the limiting case q= 1, the operator His nothing but the Hamil-
tonian for a one-dimensional harmonic oscillator. Followi ng Macfarlane [4]
and Biedenharn [5], we take equation (10) as the defining rela tion for a
q-deformed one-dimensional harmonic oscillator. The case o f aq-deformed
d-dimensional, with d≥2, (isotropic or anisotropic) harmonic oscillator
can be handled from a superposition of one-dimensional q-deformed oscil-
lators.
Property 4. The spectrum of His given by
E≡En=1
2([n] + [n+ 1]) ¯h ω= [2]q1
21
2[n+1
2] ¯h ω n ∈N(11)
and is discrete.
This spectrum turns out to be a deformation of the one for the o r-
dinary one-dimensional harmonic oscillator correspondin g to the limiting
caseq= 1. The levels are shifted (except the ground level) when we p ass
fromq= 1 to q/ne}ationslash= 1 : the levels are not uniformly spaced.
43.q-Analogues of Angular Momenta
We now continue with the Hilbert space
E={|jm > : 2j∈N, m=−j(1)j} (12)
spanned by the common eigenvectors of the z-component and the square
of a generalized angular momentum.
Definition 4. We define the operators operators a+,a+
+,a−anda+
−
on the vector space Eby the relations
a+|jm > =/radicalbig
[j+m]|j−1
2,m−1
2>
a+
+|jm > =/radicalbig
[j+m+ 1]|j+1
2,m+1
2>
a−|jm > =/radicalbig
[j−m]|j−1
2,m+1
2>
a+
−|jm > =/radicalbig
[j−m+ 1]|j+1
2,m−1
2>(13)
where the numbers of the type [ c] are given by (3).
In the limiting case q= 1, equation (13) gives back the defining rela-
tions used by Schwinger [11] in his (Jordan-Schwinger) appr oach to angular
momentum (see also Ref. [12]). By introducing
n1=j+m n 2=j−m n 1∈N n2∈N (14)
and
|jm >≡ |j+m,j−m >=|n1n2>∈ F1⊗ F2 (15)
equation (13) can be rewritten in the form
a+|n1n2>=/radicalbig
[n1]|n1−1,n2>
a+
+|n1n2>=/radicalbig
[n1+ 1]|n1+ 1,n2>
a−|n1n2>=/radicalbig
[n2]|n1,n2−1>
a+
−|n1n2>=/radicalbig
[n2+ 1]|n1,n2+ 1>(16)
5Therefore, the sets/braceleftbig
a+,a+
+/bracerightbig
and/braceleftbig
a−,a+
−/bracerightbig
are two commuting sets of q-
bosons. More precisely, we can prove that
a+a+
+−q−1a+
+a+=qN1a−a+
−−q−1a+
−a−=qN2
[a+,a−] = [a+
+,a+
−] = [a+,a+
−] = [a+
+,a−] = 0 (17)
with
N1|n1n2>=n1|n1n2> N 2|n1n2>=n2|n1n2> (18)
defining the number operators N1andN2.
Definition 5. Let us consider the operators
J−=a+
−a+ J3=1
2(N1−N2) J+=a+
+a− (19)
defined in terms of q-bosons.
Property 5. The action of the linear operators J−,J3andJ+on the
spaceEis described by
J−|jm > =/radicalbig
[j+m] [j−m+ 1]|j,m−1>
J3|jm > =m|jm >
J+|jm > =/radicalbig
[j−m] [j+m+ 1]|j,m+ 1>(20)
a result that follows from (13) and (19).
The operators J−andJ+are clearly shift operators for the quantum
number m. The operators J−,J3= (J3)†andJ+= (J−)†reduce to
ordinary spherical angular momentum operators in the limit ing case q= 1.
The latter assertion is evident from (20) or even directly fr om (19).
At this stage, the quantum algebra suq(2) can be introduced, in a
pedestrian way, from equations (19) and (20) as a deformatio n of the or-
dinary Lie algebra of the special unitary group SU(2). In this regard, we
have the following property.
6Property 6. The commutators of the q-deformed spherical angular
momentum operators J−,J3andJ+are
[J3,J−] =−J− [J3,J+] = + J+ [J+,J−] = [2 J3] (21)
which reduce to the familiar expressions known in angular mo mentum
theory in the limiting case q= 1.
Equation (21) is at the root of the definition of the quantum al gebra
suq(2). Roughly speaking, this algebra is spanned by any set J−,J3,J+of
three operators satisfying (21) where we recognize familia r commutators
except for the third one. The notion of invariant operator al so exists for
quantum algebras. In this connection, we can verify that the operator
J2=1
2(J+J−+J−J+) +[2]
2[J3]2(22)
is a Casimir operator in the sense that it commutes with each o f the gener-
atorsJ−,J3andJ+of the quantum algebra suq(2). It can be proved that
the eigenvalues of the hermitian operator J2are [j][j+ 1] with 2 j∈N, a
result compatible with the well-known one corresponding to the limiting
caseq= 1.
Definition 6. We now introduce the operators
K−=a+a− K3=1
2(N1+N2+ 1) K+=a+
+a+
− (23)
which are indeed q-deformed hyperbolic angular momentum operators.
Property 7. The action of the operators K−,K3andK+on the space
Eis described by
K−|jm > =/radicalbig
[j−m][j+m]|j−1,m >
K3|jm > = (j+1
2)|jm >
K+|jm > =/radicalbig
[j−m+ 1][j+m+ 1]|j+ 1,m >(24)
7a result to be compared to (20).
The operators K−andK+behave like shift operators for the quantum
number j. The operators K−,K3= (K3)†andK+= (K−)†reduce
to ordinary hyperbolic angular momentum operators in the li miting case
q= 1 [11,12]. From equation (24), we expect that they generate the
quantum algebra suq(1,1), a result which is trivial when q= 1.
Property 8. The commutators of the q-deformed hyperbolic angular
momentum operators K−,K3andK+are
[K3,K−] =−K− [K3,K+] = + K+ [K+,K−] =−[2K3]
(25)
which characterizes the quantum algebra suq(1,1).
Equations (20) and (21), on one hand, and equations (24) and ( 25), on
the other, can serve to develop the theory of q-deformed spherical and hy-
perbolic angular momenta. This theory involves the q-deformation of cou-
pling (Clebsch-Gordan) coefficients and recoupling (Racah an d Wigner)
coefficients, projection operators, etc. and shall not be des cribed here (see,
among numerous papers, Ref. [13]). In the limiting case q= 1, the Wigner-
Racah algebra of SU(2), in an SU(2)⊃U(1) basis, plays a considerable
rˆ ole in this theory ; in this case, the Lie algebra of the de Si tter group
SO(3,2) is the natural framework for studying the Wigner-Racah alg e-
bra of SU(2). We devote the rest of this section to some basic elements
indicating the relevance of the quantum algebra soq(3,2) when q/ne}ationslash= 1.
Definition 7. We define the operators
k+
+=−a+
+a+
+ k+
−=a+
−a+
− k−
−=−a+a+ k−
+=a−a−
(26)
in terms of q-bosons.
Property 9. The action of the operators k+
+,k+
−,k−
−andk−
+on the
8spaceEis described by
k+
+|jm > =−/radicalbig
[j+m+ 1][j+m+ 2]|j+ 1,m+ 1>
k+
−|jm > =/radicalbig
[j−m+ 1][j−m+ 2]|j+ 1,m−1>
k−
−|jm > =−/radicalbig
[j+m−1][j+m]|j−1,m−1>
k−
+|jm > =/radicalbig
[j−m−1][j−m]|j−1,m+ 1>(27)
so that they act like mixed step operators for the quantum num bersjand
m.
Some further properties, of interest for the quantum algebr asoq(3,2),
of the operators of type J,Kandkare relegated on Appendix 2.
4.q-Analogue of the Hydrogen Atom
We now consider an (ordinary) hydrogenlike atom in 3 dimensi ons
with reduced mass µand nuclear charge Ze. We deal here only with the
discrete spectrum of this (Coulomb) dynamical system, i.e. , with negative
energies E.
According to Pauli [14], the Coulomb system can be described in an
operator form by the equations (see also Ref. [15])
A2−B2= 0 E/parenleftbig
2A2+ 2B2+ ¯h2/parenrightbig
=−1
2µ Z2e4(28)
In equation (28), the operators A2=/summationtext
iA2
iandB2=/summationtext
iB2
istand for
the Casimir operators of the Lie algebras asu(2) and bsu(2), of type su(2),
spanned by {Ai:i= 1,2,3}and{Bi:i= 1,2,3}, respectively, where
Ai=1
2(Li+Ni) Bi=1
2(Li−Ni) Ni=/radicalbigg
−µ
2EMi(29)
In equation (29), Li(i= 1,2,3) and Mi(i= 1,2,3) denote the components
of the angular momentum operator and the Laplace-Runge-Lenz -Pauli vec-
tor operator, respectively.
9The transition from the ordinary hydrogen atom to a q-deformed hy-
drogen atom can be achieved by passing from the (direct sum) L ie algebra
asu(2)⊕bsu(2)∼so(4) to the quantum algebra asuq(2)⊕bsuq(2). The
application of this deformation to equation (28) leads to th eq-analogue of
the hydrogen(like) atom whose energy spectrum is given by
E≡Ej=1
4[j][j+ 1] + 1E0 2j∈N (30)
where
E0=−1
2µ Z2e4
¯h2(31)
is the energy of the ground state.
Theq-deformed atom thus defined has the same ground state energy
as the ordinary atom. The other states are shifted when passi ng from
q= 1 to q/ne}ationslash= 1. The whole (discrete) spectrum of the q-deformed hydrogen
atom exhibits the same degeneracy as the ordinary one. Of cou rse, the
q-deformed spectrum coincides with the ordinary one when qgoes to 1.
To close this section, we should mention there are other ways to define
aq-analogue of the hydrogen atom which do not lead to the spectr um (30-
31). In this respect, by using the Kustaanheimo-Stiefel tra nsformation (see
Ref. [15]), we are left with a q-deformed hydrogen atom characterized by
the discrete spectrum
E≡En1n2n3n4=16
ν(n1n2n3n4)2E0
ν(n1n2n3n4) =4/summationdisplay
i=1[ni] + [ni+ 1] ni∈N (i= 1,2,3,4) (32)
Equation (32) can be derived (i) by transforming the three-d imensional
hydrogen atom into a four-dimensional isotropic harmonic o scillator by
means of the Kustaanheimo-Stiefel transformation [15], (i i) by passing from
the latter oscillator to its q-analogue and (iii) by invoking the “inverse”
10Kustaanheimo-Stiefel transformation. The result (32) thu s obtained con-
stitutes an alternative to (30).
5. Closing Remarks
We have concentrated in the present paper on q-deformations of three
dynamical systems (harmonic oscillator, angular momentum and hydro-
gen atom) largely used in physical chemistry. The q-deformed dynamical
systems have been introduced in connection with the quantum algebra
suq(2) which turns out to be a deformation of su(2) characterized by the
deformation parameter q.
We have seen that the parameter qenters the (energy) spectra for the
q-analogues of the considered dynamical systems. There is no universal
significance of the parameter q. However, in view of the fact that the lim-
iting case q= 1 gives back the usual spectra, the deformation parameter
qmight be considered as a fine structure parameter (like a curv ature con-
stant), to be obtained from a fitting procedure, for describi ng small effects.
In addition, it may happen in some situations that it is worth to consider
qas a completely free parameter with values far from 1 leading to new
models [16].
We have experienced that the correspondence between the hyd rogen
atom and its q-analogue is not one-to-one. (This is indeed a general prob-
lem we face when dealing with q-analogues.) As a remedy, the use of
theq-derivative leading to a q-deformed Schr¨ odinger equation might be
interesting. Also, the use of sets of noncommuting q-bosons might be ap-
propriate to ensure suq(2) covariance.
Acknowledgments
One of the authors (M. K.) thanks Y. Saint-Aubin for communic ating
his lecture notes (Ref. [17]) on quantum groups. He is gratefu l to J. Katriel
and S. L. Woronowicz for interesting discussions.
11Appendix 1
In this appendix we give some formulas useful for dealing wit hq-
deformed numbers [ c] when care real numbers or integers.
From equation (3), we easily get
lim
q→1[c]q=c
[−c]q=−[c]q[c]1
q= [c]q
[c]q≥cforc >1
Furthermore, the following relations
[a+b] = [a]qb+q−a[b]
[a+ 1][b+ 1]−[a][b] = [a+b+ 1]
[a][b+c] = [a+c][b] + [a−b][c]
[a]2−[b]2= [a−b][a+b]
hold for any (real) numbers a,bandc.
In the case where nis a positive integer, we have
[n] =/summationdisplay
i=(1−n)(2)(n−1)qi=qn−1+qn−3+...+q−n+3+q−n+1n∈N− {0}
and we can define the factorial of [ n] as
[n]! = [ n][n−1]...[1] n∈N [0]! = 1
As illustrative examples, we have
[0] = 0 [1] = 1 [2] = q−1+q
[3] =q−2+ 1 + q2[4] =q−3+q−1+q+q3
12and
[2][2] = [1] + [3] [2][3] = [2] + [4] [3][3] = [1] + [3] + [5]
which is reminiscent of the addition rule for angular moment a.
In the case where qis a root of unity, we have
q= exp( i2πk1
k2)k1∈N k2∈N
[c] =sin(2πk1
k2c)
sin(2πk1
k2)
For instance,
k1= 1 k2= 4 ⇒q=i=√
−1 =⇒[0] = [2] = [4] = ...= 0
so that [ c] = 0 can occur for c/ne}ationslash= 0.
13Appendix 2
It is a simple matter of calculation to determine the commuta tion
relations between the 10 operators of type J,Kandkdefined in Section
3. We list in the following only the nonvanishing commutator s. The arrow
indicates the limit when qgoes to 1.
Nonvanishing [ k,k] matrix elements :
[k+
+,k−
−] =−[2K3+ 2J3−1]−[2K3+ 2J3+ 1]→ − 4(K3+J3)
[k+
−,k−
+] =−[2K3−2J3−1]−[2K3−2J3+ 1]→ − 4(K3−J3)
Nonvanishing [ J,K] matrix elements :
[J+,K+] = k+
+([K3−J3−1
2]−[K3−J3+1
2])→ − k+
+
[J+,K−] = k−
+([K3+J3−1
2]−[K3+J3+1
2])→ − k−
+
[J−,K+] = k+
−([K3+J3+1
2]−[K3+J3−1
2])→+k+
−
[J−,K−] = k−
−([K3−J3+1
2]−[K3−J3−1
2])→+k−
−
Nonvanishing [ J,k] matrix elements :
[J3,k+
+] =k+
+[J3,k+
−] =−k+
−[J3,k−
−] =−k−
−[J3,k−
+] =k−
+
[J+,k+
−] = K+([K3−J3+3
2]−[K3−J3−1
2])→+ 2K+
[J+,k−
−] = K−([K3+J3+1
2]−[K3+J3−3
2])→+ 2K−
[J−,k+
+] = K+([K3+J3−1
2]−[K3+J3+3
2])→ − 2K+
[J−,k−
+] = K−([K3−J3−3
2]−[K3−J3+1
2])→ − 2K−
Nonvanishing [ K,k] matrix elements :
[K3,k+
+] =k+
+[K3,k+
−] =k+
−[K3,k−
−] =−k−
−[K3,k−
+] =−k−
+
[K+,k−
−] = J−([K3+J3+1
2]−[K3+J3−3
2])→+ 2J−
[K+,k−
+] = J+([K3−J3−3
2]−[K3−J3+1
2])→ − 2J+
[K−,k+
+] = J+([K3+J3−1
2]−[K3+J3+3
2])→ − 2J+
[K−,k+
−] = J−([K3−J3+3
2]−[K3−J3−1
2])→+ 2J−
From the commutation relations in this appendix and in Secti on 3, we
recover that the set {J,K,k }spans the (10-dimensional) noncompact Lie
algebra so(3,2)∼sp(4,R) in the limiting case q= 1 [12].
14References
[1] V.G. Drinfel’d Sov. Math. Dokl. 32254 (1985).
[2] M. Jimbo Lett. Math. Phys. 1063 (1985).
[3] S.L. Woronowicz Comm. Math. Phys. 111613 (1987).
[4] A.J. Macfarlane J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 224581 (1989).
[5] L.C. Biedenharn J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 22L873 (1989).
[6] C.-P. Sun and H.-C. Fu J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 22L983 (1989).
[7] P.P. Kulish and N.Yu. Reshetikhin Lett. Math. Phys. 18143 (1989).
[8] M. Nomura J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 592345 (1990).
[9] C. Quesne Phys. Lett. 153A 303 (1991).
[10] J. Katriel and A.I. Solomon J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 242093 (1991).
[11] J. Schwinger, On angular momentum, Report U.S. AEC NYO-3071
(1952). (Published in: Quantum Theory of Angular Momentum , eds. L.C.
Biedenharn and H. van Dam (New York: Academic, 1965).)
[12] M. Kibler and G. Grenet J. Math. Phys. 21422 (1980).
[13] Yu.I. Kharitonov, Yu.F. Smirnov and V.N. Tolstoy, Meth od of the pro-
jection operators and q-analog of the quantum angular momentum theory,
Reports 1607 and 1636, Institut of Nuclear Physics, Academy of Scien ces
of the USSR, Leningrad (1990).
[14] W. Pauli Z. Phys. 36336 (1926).
[15] M. Kibler and T. N´ egadi Lett. Nuovo Cimento 37225 (1983); J. Phys.
A: Math. Gen. 164265 (1983); Phys. Rev. A292891 (1984).
[16] J.A. Tuszy´ nski and M. Kibler (work in progress).
[17] Y. Saint-Aubin, Quantum groups and their application t o conformal
quantum field theories, Report CRM-1663, Universit´ e de Montr´ eal (1990).
15 |
arXiv:physics/9911048v1 [physics.bio-ph] 21 Nov 1999Coherence Resonance and Noise-Induced Synchronization in Globally Coupled
Hodgkin-Huxley Neurons
Yuqing Wang, David T. W. Chik, and Z. D. Wang
Department of Physics, The University of Hong Kong,
Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, P.R. China
The coherence resonance (CR) of globally coupled Hodgkin-H uxley neurons is studied. When the
neurons are set in the subthreshold regime near the firing thr eshold, the additive noise induces limit
cycles. The coherence of the system is optimized by the noise . A bell-shaped curve is found for
the peak height of power spectra of the spike train, being sig nificantly different from a monotonic
behavior for the single neuron. The coupling of the network c an enhance CR in two different ways.
In particular, when the coupling is strong enough, the synch ronization of the system is induced and
optimized by the noise. This synchronization leads to a high and wide plateau in the local measure
of coherence curve. The local-noise-induced limit cycle ca n evolve to a refined spatiotemporal order
through the dynamical optimization among the autonomous os cillation of an individual neuron, the
coupling of the network, and the local noise.
87.22.Jb, 05.40.+j
The phenomenon of stochastic resonance (SR) has
been intensively studied for the last decade1. The re-
sponse of a noisy nonlinear system to a deterministic sig-
nal can be optimized by noise. Recently, it has been
shown that, in the absence of a deterministic signal,
the noisy nonlinear system exhibits SR-like behavior2–8.
This phenomenon, which is referred to as coherence res-
onance (CR) or autonomous SR, was first discussed in a
simple autonomous system in the vicinity of the saddle-
node bifurcation2,3. The nonuniform noise-induced limit
cycle leads to a peak at a definite frequency in the power
spectrum. The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) increases first
to a maximum and then decreases when the intensity of
noise increases, showing the optimization of the coher-
ent limit cycle to the noise. The frequency was observed
to shift to a higher value by increasing the noise inten-
sity. The CR has also been found in excitable systems, e.
g.,the Fitz Hugh-Nagumo model4, the Hodgkin-Huxley
(HH) model5, the Plant model and the Hindermarsh-
Rose model6. Moreover, an experimental evidence of CR
was reported very recently8.
Synchronization in nonlinear stochastic systems has
also attracted growing interests in recent years9–15. SR
and noise-induced global synchronization have been stud-
ied. Regardless of whether the system is locally or glob-
ally coupled, the coupling can enhance the signal trans-
duction and the SNR of the local unit. The coupling
strength can be considered to be another tuning param-
eter of SR. Meanwhile, the noise-induced global synchro-
nization, which coincides with the optimized local per-
formance of the single element in the network, is ob-
served. Moreover, in the study of the coupled stochas-
tic limit cycle, Kurrer and Schulten16have studied an-
alytically a model of globally coupled stochastic neu-
rons and found noise-enhanced synchronization. On the
other hand, Rappel and Karma17studied properties of
the power spectra of globally coupled neurons and founda new effect of noise-induced delta-peak. Recently, the
synchronization and the effect of CR in two coupled ex-
citable oscillators are also investigated numerically and
experimentally18.
In this paper, the CR of the globally coupled HH neu-
rons is studied numerically for the first time. We show
that the coupling of the network can enhance CR in
two different ways. When the coupling is weak, the CR
phenomenon behaves similar to that of a single neuron,
and no spatiotemporal order can be observed. When
the coupling becomes strong enough, the local measure
of coherence jumps up to a wide plateau first and then
jumps down from the plateau as the intensity of noise
increases, due to the spatiotemporal synchronization of
the network. The coupling tends to stabilize the noise-
induced limit cycle and synchronization. The peak fre-
quency of noise-induced limit cycle is selected to be the
spatiotemporal order through the optimization among
the excitability of a single neuron, the coupling of the
network, and the local noise. The phase of synchronized
oscillation is also determined through the dynamical evo-
lution of the system. Because the HH model serves as a
paradigm for spiking neurons, we may relate our results
to the existence of coherent spontaneous oscillations ob-
served in the brain cortex19–21.
A network of coupled HH neurons is described by the
following equations:
dVi
dt=fi−Ii(t)−ηi−1
N−1N/summationdisplay
j=1,j/negationslash=iJijSj, (1)
dmi
dt=m∞(V)−mi
τm(V), (2)
dni
dt=n∞(V)−ni
τn(V), (3)
1dhi
dt=h∞(V)−hi
τh(V), (4)
where fi=fi(Vi, mi, ni, hi) is
fi=−gNam3
ihi(Vi−VNa)−gKn4
i(Vi−VK)−gL(Vi−VL).(5)
Each neuron is described by a set of four time-dependent
variables ( Vi,mi,ni,hi) where Viis the membrane po-
tential, miandhithe activation and inactivation vari-
ables of sodium current, and nithe activation variable of
potassium current. The meaning and detailed values of
the parameters can be found in Ref.22. The simulation
was done by using the fourth order Runge-Kutta method
with the time step being taken as 0.01msec.
Each neuron is subject to an independent noise ηi
with the same intensity, which is determined from an
Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process τcdηi/dt=−ηi+√
2Dξ,
where ξis the Gaussian white noise23.Dandτc(=
0.1msec. ) are the intensity and the correlation time of
the noise, respectively. Ii(t) is the input current, which
will be time-independent and will bias the neuron near
the saddle-node bifurcation. The last term in Eq. (1)
is the coupling of the network. The effect of the firing
activity of jth neuron on the ith neuron is modeled by an
impulse current to the ith neuron, which is proportional
to the efficacy of the synapse Jijand is generated when
thejth neuron is active. Jij=Jfor all pairs of neurons
withJthe coupling strength of the system. The neu-
ron is active whenever its membrane potential exceeds a
threshold V∗(= 0mVhere). This activity can be de-
noted by Sj= Θ(Vj−V∗), where Θ( x) = 1 if x≥0
and Θ( x) = 0 if x <0. In the present simulation, only
the excitatory coupling is considered ( J >0), that is, the
last term is the excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP)
received by the single neuron.
The HH neuron is an excitable one. For a dc input
current I0, the firing threshold is Ic= 6.2µA/cm2. The
spike limit cycle occurs at Icdue to the saddle-node bi-
furcation. To observe the CR, we set the input current
I0= 6.0µA/cm2for each neuron24, that is, the system
is set in the subthreshold regime near the threshold or
saddle-node bifurcation. For one single HH neuron, the
coherence resonance was discussed in detail in Ref.5. In
the present simulation, we focus on a globally coupled
network, and attempt to extract more significant infor-
mation of CR.
The CR exhibits two different behaviors when the cou-
pling intensity changes. They can be seen in the power
spectrum of the output spike trains. In the absence of
noise, a single neuron stays at the quiescent state in which
the membrane potential is below V∗. In this case, there
would be no synaptic transmission between the neurons,
and the whole network would stay at the quiescent state.
If an independent local noise ( D≥0.3) is applied to each
neuron, the system begins to fire spike trains. When the
coupling is weak ( e.g.J=5.0), the power spectrum den-
sities of the spike trains for different intensities of noiseare shown in Fig. 1(a). A broad peak can be seen, sim-
ilar to the single neuron case (see Fig. 2 in Ref.5). This
behavior of CR is similar but different to that of a single
neuron.
161412108642020406080100104105(a)432
1
Power
f (Hz)
D
8642020406080100104105106(b)
423
1
Power
f (Hz)
D
FIG. 1. (a) The power spectrum of the spike trains with
a weak coupling strength J= 5.0 for the noise intensity
D= 1.0, 5.0, 10.0 and 15 .0. (b) The power spectrum of
the spike train with a strong coupling J= 10.0 forD= 0.5,
3.0, 5.0, and 7 .0. The size of the network N= 1000.
When the coupling of the network is strong ( e.g.,J=
10.0), the power spectrum densities of the spike trains for
different intensities of noise are shown in Fig. 1(b). As
the noise is weak, a broad peak is also observed. How-
ever, when the noise intensity increases, the peak be-
comes higher and sharper. This type of power spectrum
is quite different from that for usual CR discussed pre-
viously. The sharp peak is induced by the network itself
and locked at the frequency of spontaneous limit cycle.
The detail of this kind of power spectrum has been ad-
dressed in Ref.17. When the noise intensity increases fur-
ther, the sharp peak tends to become broad, keeping the
general trend of CR in the single neuron case.
The difference of spatiotemporal orders of the network
leads to such two different behaviors of CR. In previous
2studies of the conventional SR , each unit in the network
receives a common external signal with the same fre-
quency and phase. The external signal represents an ex-
ternal ‘clock’ leading to the synchronization of the whole
system. So the tuning of the synchronization to the local
noise, which coincides with the local SNR behavior, can
be observed when the external signal is sufficient strong9.
However, in the case of CR, the situation is different.
There is no such kind of global tuning in the network.
The local oscillation of each unit is noise-induced limit
cycle. The phase is random in time and is irrelevant to
each other. Besides, a broad peak in Fig.1(a) means that
the frequency has some uncertainty. As a result, the syn-
chronization is not guaranteed in the case of CR.
4000 4050 4100 4150 420002004006008001000
EPSP (a)
Neuron Number
4000 4050 4100 4150 420002004006008001000D=10, J=5(b)
Time (msec)Time(msec)
Time (msec)
Neuron Number
4000 4050 4100 4150 420002004006008001000D=15, J=5D=1, J=5
(c)
Neuron Number
Time (msec)4000 4050 4100 4150 42000.000.050.100.150.200.25D=1, J=5(d)
Time (msec)
4000 4050 4100 4150 42000.000.050.100.150.200.25D=10, J=5(e)
EPSP
4000 4050 4100 4150 42000.000.050.100.150.200.25D=15, J=5(f)
EPSP
Time (msec)
FIG. 2. The raster of the network and corresponding
excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP) of a neuron with
J=5.0 for different intensities of noise: D=1.0 ((a) & (d)),
D=10.0 ((b) & (e)), and D=15.0 ((c) & (f)). The network
size N=1000.
When the coupling is weak, the raster records all the
firing events in the network and the corresponding EPSP
of a single neuron for different intensities of noise are
shown in Fig. 2. From Figs. 2(a)-(c), we can see that
there is no synchronization in the system. Especially,
Fig. 2(b) appears to be the most coherent state (D=10.0,shown in Fig. 4(a) later). To see the influence of the net-
work on the local unit, the EPSP of an arbitrarily chosen
neuron is shown in Figs. (d)-(f). There is a tendency
that the EPSP increases when the intensity of noise in-
creases. The power spectrum of the EPSP has a broad
peak, which coincides with the CR frequency, similar to
that of the spike train (not shown here).
Figure 3 illustrates how the synchronization can be
observed when the coupling is strong. It is shown in
the raster (Figs. 3(a)-(c)) that, when the noise is weak
(D=0.5), there is no synchronization. Its corresponding
power spectrum is given in line 1 in Fig. 1(b). When the
noise intensity increases, as shown in Fig. 3(b), the syn-
chronization can be observed. Note that this spatiotem-
poral order is achieved by increasing the intensity of the
independent local noise in the absence of external peri-
odic forcing. As shown in Fig. 3(e), the EPSP received
by a single neuron has an explicit periodicity, that is, the
network produces a kind of periodic oscillation due to the
synchronization, which is quite similar to a deterministic
signal input to each neuron. The corresponding power
spectrum density of the spike train is shown as line 2
in Fig. 1(b). The sharp peak comes from the periodic
EPSP which reflects the effect of the synchronization on
the local unit, in agreement with the work on the coupled
integrate and fire neurons17. When the noise intensity
increases further, the synchronization is destroyed; both
the explicit periodicity of the EPSP and the high peak
in the power spectrum of the spike train disappear.
Physically, the spatiotemporal order is established
through the dynamical evolution of the system. As shown
in Eq. (1), the EPSP that each neuron receives is the av-
erage of the events of the other N−1 neurons. Even
if there is no synchronization in the system, the power
spectrum of the resulted EPSP should have a dominate
frequency of the limit cycle. This noise-induced EPSP
is aperiodic. Its intensity and quality are dependent on
the intensity of noise and the coupling strength. When
the coupling strength is weak, the EPSP is very small
in comparison with the intensity of the local noise. No
correlation between the output spike train and the input
EPSP can be established. When the coupling strength is
strong enough, the situation will be different. Although
the EPSP is still too small for a weak noise, the quality
of EPSP is improved and the intensity is increased as
the noise increases, due to the CR in the single element
level. Since the input current contains a signal with the
same frequency as the output, the output as well as the
EPSP will be refined. This is a process of positive feed-
back. Because the EPSP is the average output of other
neurons, the local neuron tends to keep the pace of such
an averaged signal through the dynamical optimization
process. Finally, a spatiotemporal order can be reached
and the frequency of oscillation, which is just the fre-
quency of CR, is ‘selected’ by the dynamical process. If
the noise intensity increases further, the synchronizatio n
is destroyed. So the EPSP can be viewed as a kind of in-
direct feedback. The EPSP is noise-induced and can be
3optimized by noise, while such local noise disturbs the
feedback by adding irregularity at each time step. On
the other hand, when the coupling is significant, the pos-
itive feedback is established. As a result, the EPSP will
evolve gradually to become an identical periodic forcing
on every single element in the system. The synchroniza-
tion can be observed and optimized by the noise. Due
to the feature of CR in the globally coupled neurons, re-
gardless of whether the system is in the synchronized or
desynchronized state, the frequency locking at the CR
frequency always exists. The synchronization shown in
Fig. 3(b) is a kind of phase locking of all the elements in
the network.
4000 4050 4100 4150 420002004006008001000D=0.5, J=10
EPSP (a)
Neuron Number
4000 4050 4100 4150 420002004006008001000D=3, J=10 D=3, J=10(b)
Time (msec.)Time(msec.)
Time (msec.)
Neuron Number
4000 4050 4100 4150 420002004006008001000 D=10, J=10(c)
Neuron Number
Time ( msec. )4000 4050 4100 4150 42000.00.20.40.60.81.01.2D=0.5, J=10(d)
Time (msec.)
4000 4050 4100 4150 42000.00.20.40.60.81.01.2(e)
EPSP
4000 4050 4100 4150 42000.00.20.40.60.81.01.2 D=10, J=10(f)
EPSP
Time ( msec. )
FIG. 3. The raster of the network and corresponding
excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP) of a neuron with
J=10.0 for different intensities of noise: D=0.5 ((a) & (d)),
D=3.0 ((b) & (e)), and D=10.0 ((c) & (f)). The network size
N=1000.
Such noise-induced synchronization possesses two in-
teresting features. First, the synchronization frequency is
dependent on the local noise and the coupling. Secondly,
the phase of spatiotemporal oscillation is determined by
the dynamical evolution of the system itself. Because of
this, the peak frequency of CR is locked at the frequency
of the synchronized oscillation. However, the phase of
the synchronized oscillation is ‘selected’ by the indirectfeedback process which is sensitive to the detail process
in the noisy environment. For example, different initial
conditions of the simulation lead to the same frequency
but different phases of the synchronized oscillation.
We can characterize CR quantitatively via a coherence
factor β2, which is the measure of coherence and defined
as:
β=h(∆ω/ω p)−1, (6)
where handωpare the height and the frequency of the
peak, and ∆ ωis the width of the peak at the height
h1=e−1
2h.
Theβvsthe noise intensity Dfor different couplings
of the network is shown in Fig. 4(a). When Dincreases,
βincreases first and then decreases after reaching the
maximum. The coupling may be viewed as a tuning pa-
rameter of CR. For comparison, the CR of a single neuron
case is also displayed in the figure (J=0). The enhance-
ment of CR is significant when the coupling is stronger.
When the coupling is weak, there is no spatiotemporal
order in the system. The value of βis the same order
of the magnitude as that of the single neuron case, and
similar β−Dcurves are exhibited in the two cases. How-
ever, when the coupling becomes strong enough, the β
increases dramatically with D at first, showing the onset
of synchronization, and then a wide plateau is followed,
indicating that the self-evolved spatiotemporal order is
stable against a large range intensity of local noise. The
normalized βvsthe noise intensity for different coupling
is also shown in the inset of Fig. 4(a) .
The difference of the CR in the single neuron case and
the coupled neurons can be seen in Fig. 4(b), in which
the peak height of the power spectrum densities of the
spike train is plotted against the noise intensity Dfor dif-
ferent couplings of the network. In the single HH neuron
case (J=0), the height of the peak increase monotonically
as the noise increases (see also Figure 4(b) in Ref.5). In
the coupled HH neurons, similar to Fig. 4(a), a bell-
shaped curve is observed. Once the synchronization is
established, the peak height increases dramatically. On
the other hand, even when the coupling is weak and no
synchronization is established, as shown in the inset of
Fig. 4(b), the bell-shape curve can still be observed (J=1,
and J=5 curve in Fig. 4(b)). This means that the height
of CR peak is tuned by the noise in the absence of syn-
chronization. As shown in Fig. 2(d)-(f), the EPSP can
be regarded as a kind of aperiodic signal which has the
same frequency as the output. The tuning to the noise of
such an aperiodic signal is similar to SR, however, unlike
the usual SR, the EPSP here is produced by the network
itself through CR. The intensity and quality of the EPSP
are different for different strengthens of noise due to the
effect of CR. So, even though the power spectrum density
of the spike train is similar to that of the single neuron
case, the mechism is different. The effect of CR can be
enhanced significantly by the coupling even when there
is no synchronization.
41 10 100102103104105106107108109
(a)
J=0
J=1
J=5
J=10
J=15β
D
1 100.00.20.40.60.81.0Normalized Height
D
1 10 100104105106107108109
(b)
J=0
J=1
J=5
J=10
J=15Height of the Peak
D1 100.00.20.40.60.81.0Normalized β
D
FIG. 4. (a) The measure of coherence βversus the in-
tensity of noise for different coupling strengths. Inset: Th e
normalized coherence factor βversus the intensity of noise.
The same data in (a) is divided by its own maximum for each
curve. (b) The height of the peak of the power spectrum
versus the intensity of noise for different coupling strengt h.
Inset: The normalized height of peak versus the intensity of
noise. The same data in (b) is divided by its own maximum
for each curve. The size of the network is N=100. The lowest
lines in (a) and (b) are the same one for the single neuron
case.
Figure 5(a) illustrates how the βchanges with the size
of the strongly coupled network (J=10.0). Clearly, the
β−Dcurve changes little whenever the number of the
neurons in the network is larger than 50, with the onset-
point and the end-point of synchronization being almost
unchanged. Although the network is globally coupled,
the degree of synchronization is roughly irrelevant to the
size of the network if it is sufficiently large.
Figure 5(b) shows the peak frequency of CR as a
function of the intensity of noise for different coupling
strengths. We can see that, regardless of the coupling
strength, the frequency will increase when the noise in-
creases, with the same tendency as that for a single neu-
ron case. On the other hand, the frequency increases as
the coupling strength increases, tuning CR in another
way. Moreover, There is no dramatic change of the fre-quency when the spatiotemporal order is established. In
fact, we can not see the difference of synchronized and
non-synchronized states of the system from this kind of
plot. Both are CR states.
1 1054565860626466687072
J=1
J=5
J=10
J=15
(b)Frequency ( Hz )
D 1 10102103104105106107
N=1
N=50
N=100
N=200
(a)β
D
FIG. 5. (a) The measure of coherence βversus the inten-
sity of noise for different sizes of the network when J=10.0.
(b) The frequency of CR versus the noise intensity for differ-
ent coupling strengths. The size of network N=100.
Finally, we address the relevance of the CR of the glob-
ally coupled HH neurons to the activities of realistic neu-
ral systems. In recent years, synchronized spontaneous
oscillations have been observed in the brain cortex and
are proposed to possess a binding function, where the
spatially-distributed neurons resonate to generate large
function states that bring about cognition19–21. From the
simulations, we may elucidate how these synchronized
spontaneous oscillations are established. It would be the
CR state. The frequency of oscillation is determined by
the excitability of a single neuron, the coupling of the
network, and the noise. On the other hand, the synchro-
nization may be noise-induced, giving a possibility that
the noise would play an active role in neural activities.
The synchronized state would be stable in a large range
intensity of the local noise. This feature would enable
the neural system to fulfill cognition function in noisy
5environment.
In summary, we have studied the CR of globally cou-
pled network of HH neurons. It is found that, when the
coupling is strong, the synchronization is induced and
optimized by the noise. The frequency of CR of the lo-
cal element is locked at the spatiotemporal oscillation
frequency, and the phase of spatiotemporal oscillation is
determined by the dynamical evolution. A wide plateau
in the β−Dcurve was observed for the strongly coupled
network with large sizes, indicating a stable spatiotem-
poral order in a large range intensity of local noise. The
effect of CR can be enhanced greatly by the coupling re-
gardless of the spatiotemporal order of the system. Our
results may be relevant to the synchronized spontaneous
oscillations observed in some realistic neural systems.
1K. Wiesenfeld and F. Moss, Nature (London) 37333
(1995); A. R. Bulsara and L. Gammaitoni, Phys. Today
49,39 (1996); L. Gammaitoni, P. H¨ anggi, P. Jung, and F.
Marchesoni, Rev. Mod. Phys. 70, 223 (1998);
2G. Hu, T. Ditzinger, C. N. Ning, and H. Haken, Phys. Rev.
Lett.71, 807 (1993).
3W. J. Rappel and S. H. Strogatz, Phys. Rev. E 50, 3249
(1994).
4A. S. Pikovsky and J. Kurths, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 775
(1997).
5S. G. Lee, A. Neiman, and S. Kim, Phys. Rev. E 57, 3292
(1998).
6A. Longtin, Phys. Rev. E 55, 868 (1997).
7A. Neiman, P. Saparin, and L. Stone, Phys. Rev. E 56, 270
(1997).
8D. E. Postnov, S. K. Han, T. G. Yim, and O. V. Sosnovt-
seva, Phys. Rev. E 59, R3791 (1999).
9A. Neiman, A. Silchenko, V. Anishchenko, and L.
Schimansky-Geier, Phys. Rev. E 58, 7118 (1998).
10A. Neiman, L. Schimansky-Geier, F. Moss, B. Shulgin, and
J. J. Collins, Phys. Rev. E 60, 284 (1999); B. V. Shulgin,
A. Neiman, and V. Anishchenko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 4157
(1995).
11A. Silchenko, T. Kapitaniak, and V. Anishchenko, Phys.
Rev. E 59, 1593 (1999).
12J. F. Linder, B. K. Meadows, W. L. Ditto, M. E. Inchiosa,
and A. R. Bulsara, Phys. Rev. Lett. 75, 3 (1995); Phys.
Rev. E 53, 2081 (1996).
13M. Morillo, J. Gomez-Ordonez, and J. M. Casado, Phys.
Rev. E 52, 316 (1995).
14J. M. G. Vilar and J. M. Rub’, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2886
(1997).
15P. Jung and G. Mayer-Kress, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 2130
(1995).
16C. Kurrer and K. Schulten, Phys Rev. E 516213 (1995).
17W.-J. Rappel and A. Karma, Phys Rev. Lett. 773256
(1996).
18S. K. Han, T. G. Yim, D. E. Postnov, and O. V. Sosnovt-seva, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1771 (1999).
19R. Llin´ as and U. Ribary, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 88,
2078 (1993).
20M. Steriade, I. Timofeev, N. D˝ urm˝ uller, and F. Grenier, J.
Neurophysiol. 79, 483 (1998).
21M. A. L. Nicolelis, L. A. Baccala, R. C.S. Lin, and J. K.
Chapin, Science 268, 1353 (1995).
22A. L. Hodgkin and A. F. Huxley, J. Physiol. (London) 117,
500 (1952); D. Hansel, G. Mato, and C. Meunier, Phys.
Rev. E 48, 3470 (1993).
23P. V. E. McClintock and F. Moss, in Noise in Nonlinear Dy-
namical Systems , edited by F. Moss and P. V. E. McClin-
tock (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England,
1989). Vol. 3, p. 243.
24It is not necessary to assume the same I0for every neuron
in the network. The only requirement is to set the neu-
rons near the threshold or saddle-node bifurcation. For a
random distributed I0, we will observe almost the same
phenomenon reported later on.
6 |
arXiv:physics/9911049v1 [physics.atm-clus] 21 Nov 1999Symmetry in Order-Disorder Changes of Molecular Clusters
Ana Proykova†, Dessislava Nikolova†, and R.Stephen Berry∗
†University of Sofia, Faculty of Physics, 5 James Bourchier Bl vd., Sofia-1126, Bulgaria
∗The University of Chicago, Department of Chemistry Chicago , IL 60637, USA
The dynamic orientational order-disorder transition of cl usters consisting of octahedral AF6
molecules is formulated in terms of symmetry-adapted rotat or functions. The transition from a
higher-temperature body-centered-cubic phase whose mole cules are orientationally disordered at
their sites to lower-temperature, monoclinic, orientatio nally-ordered phase is a two-step process:
first, at temperatures well below the limit of stability for t he liquid, a transition occurs to a partially
ordered monoclinic phase driven by the rotational-vibrati onal coupling. This transition has two local
minima in the free energy, and hence behaves like a finite-sys tem counterpart of a first-order transi-
tion. Further lowering of the temperature initiates anothe r transition, to an orientationally-ordered
base-centered monoclinic structure. This last transition is dominated by rotational-rotational inter-
action and is found from simulations to be continuous. The te mperature of this transition predicted
by the analytic theory presented here for a 59-molecule clus ter of TeF6, 27K, is in good agreement
with the 30K result of canonical Monte Carlo calculations.
PACS:36.40Ei, 64.70Kb, 02.70Lq, 61.50-f
1Below the freezing point, the plastic phases of molecular su bstances are known to form highly symmetrical lattices
with orientationally disordered molecules [1]. As the temp erature of the disordered substance is still lowered, a phas e
transition to a more orientationally-ordered phase takes p lace. The new phase might have a crystal structure of lower
symmetry, characterized by long-range orientational orde r. This is called displacive-ordering transition. Similar struc-
tural transformations have been also detected in small, fre e clusters consisting of rigid octahedral molecules SF6[2]
andTeF6[3,4] and have been studied by numerical simulations [5–9] a nd experimentally [10,11]. The change between
phases may be continuous or discontinuous depending on the i nteraction potential. However, simulations of clusters
always produce smooth behavior in the sense that clusters in different phases coexist over a range of temperatures
and pressures, regardless of the order of the transition in t he thermodynamic, large-N limit. In many cases, the
crystal forms observed depend strongly on the conditions of production, thus leading to different interpretations of
what should be the final structures of the clusters at low temp eratures. Structures such as triclinic, monoclinic and
hexagonal were reported for the same material [6]. In our pre vious simulations, we have shown that the finite size
of clusters causes rotational [7] and strong surface effects [12], appearance of vibrational-rotational coupling, non e of
which are expected in bulk systems of the same symmetry.
Vibrational-rotational coupling was considered qualitat ively to explain the two-step process of ordering in some
clusters of octahedral molecules, Ohsymmetry, as the temperature decreases [4,8]. Below the mel ting temperature,
those clusters assume a body-centered cubic structure bcc,Ohsymmetry, and orientational disorder of the molecules
[2,5,3]. Simulations show [13] that this transition involv es passage between two forms at different local minima in
the free energy, and hence is the apparent counterpart of a fir st-order transition. Whether these two minima remain
apart or converge as N→ ∞ is an unsettled question [2,3]. A temperature decrease driv es a phase transition from the
orientationally disordered bccstructure to an orientationally ordered monoclinic phase, C2h. Since no normal mode of
Ohcarries the group directly to C2hthis transition could occur in two steps: first, the bcctransforms into a partially
ordered monoclinic phase driven by rotational-translatio nal coupling. Second, after a further temperature decrease ,
another transition to an orientationally ordered phase wit hout change of the symmetry of the lattice sites takes place.
In the present paper we analyze analytically the dynamic ori entational order in clusters of rigid octahedral molecules
of typeAF6to determine the contribution of various interactions to th e total potential and the nature of the
temperature-driven solid-solid transformation of plasti c clusters. The symmetry of the molecules, Oh, and the
molecular sites in the cluster, OhorC2h, are taken into account explicitly in our analysis, based on the theory
of orientationally-disordered crystals [14,15]. The site position of each molecule is determined by the Cartesian coo r-
dinates of its mass center at A. Throughout the paper we refer to ( i) a space (laboratory) axis system XYZ, fixed at
the cluster’s center of mass; ( ii) a nonrotating system X′Y′Z′parallel toXYZ but with its origin translating with
the molecular center of mass; ( iii) a rotating, body-fixed system xyz. For rigid molecules, these axes coincide with
the principle axes of inertia.
The translation of a molecule is separable as the motion of th e molecular center of mass in the XYZ coordinates.
Thexyzorientation in the XYZ system is given with Ω ≡(θ,φ,ψ ), whereθandφare the ordinary polar coordinates
of thezaxis in theXYZ system and ψis an angle in the xy-plane measuring the rotation clockwise about the zaxis.
The molecular orientation in orientationally-disordered high-Tcrystals has been presented in terms of symmetry-
adapted rotator functions used by James and Keenan [16] to de scribe the orientational phase of methane with tetra-
hedral symmetry.
Let us consider an octahedral molecule nin its initial orientation Ω nwhere the molecular axes coincide with the
laboratory system axes. The orientational density distrib ution is expanded in terms of spherical harmonics Ym
l(Ω).
The molecular symmetry requires that l= 0,4,6,....and only certain linear combinations of Ym
loccur. For each
allowedl, we determine the molecular symmetry-adapted functions
Sλ
l(Ωn) =l/summationdisplay
m=−lYm
l(Ωn)αmλ
l (0.1)
where the superscript λrefers to the identity representation of the cubic group Ohandαm
lare tabulated in Ref. [15].
A molecular form factor is defined for the allowed l=0,4,6,...as
gλ
l=Na/summationdisplay
ν=0Sλ
l[Ων(n)] (0.2)
if the molecular axes coincide with the space axes; Nais the number of the atoms in a molecule; Ω ν(n) denotes the
orientation of atom νin the space-fixed system.
2Unlike bulk crystals, the cubic structure of a free cluster i s broken at the cluster surface. In what follows, we
consider the symmetry of the volume molecules, defined as mol ecules having all the neighbors required by a specific
point group. We neglect the symmetry-breaking associated w ith the surface molecules, which belong to a different
group, if any. The separate description of the surface and th e volume limits the analysis. In the closing remarks, we
discuss a possible correction to this assumption.
The orientational changes at a cubic site are also expressed in terms of site-symmetry-adapted functions [15]:
Sτ
l(Ω) =l/summationdisplay
m=−lYm
l(Ω)αmτ
l, (0.3)
where the superscript τ= (G, Γ,p,ρ) indicates the irreducible representations Γ of the group G,pdistinguishes
between the representations that occur more than once, and ρdenotes the rows of a given representation. The
symmetry-adapted functions represent a complete basis in t he Ω(θ,φ,ψ )-space. The l= 4 manifold of this system
reduces to the representation A1g,Eg,T1g,T2gunderG≡Ohand to the representations 5 Agand 4BgunderG≡C2h.
For the normalized function Sτ
4we find:
αmτ
4= [0.763,m= 0; 0.457,m=±4] forOh,A1g,1,1
αmτ
4= [0.645,m= 0;−0.541,m=±4] forOh,Eg,1,1
αmτ
4= [−0.707,m=±2] forOh,Eg,2,1
αmτ
4= [−i0.663,m=±1;−i0.25,m=±3] forOh,T1g,1,1
αmτ
4= [±i0.663,m=±1;−i0.25,m=±3] forOh,T1g,2,1
αmτ
4= [±i0.707,m=±4] forOh,T1g,3,1
αmτ
4= [±i0.663,m=±3;±i0.25,m=±1] forOh,T2g,1,1
αmτ
4= [±0.663,m=±3;±0.25,m=±1] forOh,T2g,2,1
αmτ
4= [±i0.707,m=±2] forOh,T2g,3,1.
The largest contribution to the crystal field is that of the A1gcomponent of the l= 4 manifold.
At low temperatures, clusters of AF6molecules adopt a monoclinic structure C2h. All coefficients ατare equal to
1 for the five-fold representation Ag(m= 0,±2,±4) and for the four-fold representation Bg(m=±1,±3).
An arbitrary molecular orientation Ω n′with respect to the initial one Ω nis obtained by a rotation specified with
the Euler angles ( ω=α,β,γ ). Rotation Ωbof a molecule does not affect the spherical harmonics Yk
l(Ωb) defined in the
body system. In the space system these are changed to ˆR(ω)Yk
l(Ωb) =/summationtextl
m=−lYm
l(Ωs)Dmk
l(ω), where Ωsdetermines
the space orientation of the molecule. For a molecule in arbi trary orientation Ω n′, the symmetry-adapted function
changes to
ˆR(ω)Sλ
l(Ωb) =l/summationdisplay
k=−ll/summationdisplay
m=−lYm
l(Ωs)Dmk
l(ω)αkλ
l (0.4)
withDmk
l(ω) the Wigner matrices. We determine the spherical harmonics Ym
l(Ωs) from the equation inverse to (0.1)
and put it in (0.4). The result is
ˆR(ω)Sλ
l(Ωb) =/summationdisplay
τ,m,kSτ
l(Ωs)(αmτ
l)Dmk
l(ω)αkλ
l (0.5)
The equation (0.5) relates the symmetry-adapted functions Sλ
l(Ωb) for the body (molecular) system and the
symmetry-adapted functions Sl(Ωs) for the space (cluster) system. Rewriting the eq. (0.5) as ˆR(ω)Sλ
l(Ωb) =/summationtext
τSτ
l(Ωs)∆τλ
l(ω), where ∆τλ
l(ω) =/summationtextl
k=−l/summationtextl
m=−l(αmτ
l)Dmk
l(ω)αkλ
lare the rotator functions ∆τλ
l(ω) defined by
the symmetry properties of the molecule αkλ
land of the site αmτ
l. Rotator functions with l= 3 were introduced for
solidCD4in [16]. The rotator function’s average value ¯∆τλ
l(ω) is zero in the disordered phase and non-zero in the
orientationally ordered phase. This property makes it suit able to be chosen as an order parameter .
So far we have considered a single molecule at a specific site. The orientational configuration of Nmolecules in the
cluster is given by ∆τλ
l(ω(n)) = ∆τλ
l(n) wheren= 1,2,...,N , labels each molecule’s center at its lattice position rn.
The interaction between two molecules nandn′can be written as a sum of atom-atom potentials [7]:
V(n,n′) =Na/summationdisplay
ν,ν′V(n,ν;n′,ν′) (0.6)
3where (n,ν) labels the νthatom in the molecule at site rn. The total potential VofNmolecules is:
V=N/summationdisplay
n<n′Na/summationdisplay
ν,ν′V(n,ν;n′,ν′) (0.7)
The potential V(n,ν;n′ν′) depends on the distance rνν′between the atoms νandν′. The position of the νthatom
in thenthmolecule with respect to the space system is given by
R(n,dν) =rn+dνΩν(n) +u(n)
withu(n) being the displacement of the nthmolecule from its site position rn. Ων(n) indicates the orientation of the
vector rnνin the space system and dνis its length. We expand Vfrom Eq.(0.6) in terms of the displacements u(n):
V(n,n′) =∞/summationdisplay
p=0/summationdisplay
ν,ν′1
(p!)V(p)
i1...ip(rνν′)[ui1(n)−ui1(n′)].../bracketleftbig
uip(n)−uip(n′)/bracketrightbig
(0.8)
with the notation
V(p)
i1...ip(rνν′) =∂pV(rνν′)
∂(rνν′)i1...∂(rνν′)ip|u=0 (0.9)
The coefficients Vpcontain the orientational dependence of the molecules at th e sitesnandn′. We expand them
in terms of symmetry-adapted functions Sτ
l(0.3). In the following we write Sµ(ν) forSτ
l(Ων), whereµ≡µ(τ,l):
Vp
i1...ip(rνν′) =/summationdisplay
µµ′c(p)
i1...ipµµ′(n,n′)Sµ(ν)Sµ′(ν′). (0.10)
The coefficients c(p)
i1...ipµµ′(n,n′) are determined from
c(p)
i1...ipµµ′(n,n′) =/integraldisplay
dΩν/integraldisplay
dΩν′V(p)
i1...ip(n,n′)Sµ(ν)Sµ′(ν′). (0.11)
We putV(p)from Eq.(0.10) in Eq.(0.8) and use the molecular form factor Eq.(0.2) if the molecular axes coincide
with the space axes or/summationtext
νSµ(ν) =gλ
l∆µ(ω) if the molecule is rotated at an angle ω. Thus the pair potential becomes:
V(n,n′) =/summationdisplay
p/summationdisplay
µµ′1
p!cp
i1...ipµµ′(n,n′)gλ
lgλ
l′∆µ(n)∆µ′(n′)[ui1(n)−ui1(n′)].../bracketleftbig
uip(n)−uip(n′)/bracketrightbig
(0.12)
Molecular and site symmetry considerations restrict the nu mber of terms in the sums, thus reducing the computa-
tional effort to obtain the contribution of the different inte ractions in the total pair potential Eq. (0.12).
The value of p= 0 corresponds to a rigid lattice (no displacements of the mo lecular center of mass). For this case
we get only rotational-rotational interaction between two molecules with µ/negationslash= (0,0) andµ′/negationslash= (0,0):
V0(n,n′) =/summationdisplay
µµ′c0
µµ′(n,n′)gλ
lgλ
l′∆µ(n)∆µ′(n′) (0.13)
The total rotational interaction is the sum over all molecul es/summationtextN
n,n′V0(n,n′).
The matrix of rotational-rotational interaction is defined by
ˆJµµ′(n,n′) =c(0)
µµ′(n,n′)gλ
lgλ
l′ (0.14)
where
c(0)
µµ′(n,n′) =/integraldisplay
dΩν/integraldisplay
dΩν′V(0)
i1...ip(n,n′)Sµ(ν)Sµ′(ν′). (0.15)
The structure of the interaction matrices c(0)
µµ′(n,n′) depends on the symmetry of Sµand on the relative position
(n,n′) of two interacting molecules on a lattice with a symmetry sp ecified byτ.
4The cluster transforms from a disordered cubic to an ordered monoclinic structure at Tcthat is the temperature
at which the free energies of the two forms are equal. In order to calculate Tcwe also need the total field acting
on the molecule at site r(n). The zerothapproximation is to consider spherical-symmetrical molec ulesµ′= (0,0)
acting on a molecule n µ/negationslash= (0,0) on a rigid lattice p= 0:V(0)(n,n′)|l′=0=/summationtext
µc(0)
µ(n,n′)gλ
lgλ∆µ(n). Setting
µ′= (0,0) yieldsSµ′=SA1g
0= (4π)−1/2andg0=Na(4π)−1/2. The coefficients c(0)
µ(n,n′) become: c(0)
µ(n,n′) =
1√(4π)/integraltext
dΩν/integraltext
dΩν′V(0)(n,n′)Sµ(ν).
Let us denote the interaction matrices c(0)
µ(n,n′) weighted with the molecular factors gλ
landgλ
0withυR
a, wherea
is an index for ( l,A1g,p,ρ):υR
a=/summationtext
n′c(0)
a(n,n′)gλ
lgλ
0.. The crystal field acting on the molecule nis:
VR(n) =/summationdisplay
aυR
a∆a(ω,n) (0.16)
The rotator functions ∆A1g
l(ω) in Eq.(0.16) are cubic functions.
The pair vibrational-rotational interaction is obtained f rom (0.12) for p= 1,µ/negationslash= (0,0), andµ′= (0,0):
VTR(n,n′) =V(1)(n,n′) =/summationdisplay
iµc(1)
iµ(n,n′)gλ
lgλ
0∆µ(n)[ui(n)−ui(n′)]. (0.17)
The sum over all molecules results in the total bilinear inte ractionVTR=/summationtext
n,n′VTR(n,n′).
The translational-orientational interaction is caused by the change of the orientational potential due to the dis-
placement of the nearest neighbors.
The pair vibrational-vibrational interaction is obtained from Eq.(0.12) for p= 2,µ′= (0,0),µ= (0,0):
VTT(n,n′) =V(2)(n,n′) =/summationdisplay
i1,i21
2c(2)
i1i2(n,n′)gλ
0gλ
0[ui1(n)−ui1(n′)] [ui2(n)−ui2(n′)] (0.18)
This gives for the total vibrational-vibrational interact ionVTT=/summationtext
n,n′VTT(n,n′). Now the total potential is:
V=VR+VTT+VTR+VRR(0.19)
The equation (0.19) may be expanded with higher order terms w hich may become important in some structural phase
transitions [17].
Having determined the interactions and the total field, we ca n calculate the free energy Fof each phase as a function
of the rotator functions considered as order parameters [18 ]:
F= 0.5/summationtext
q/bracketleftBig
ˆ1χ−1
0+FT[ˆJ]/bracketrightBig
δµ(q)δµ′(−q), where FT(ˆJ) andδµ(q) are the Fourier images of the rotator matrix ˆJ
and ∆ µ(ω), respectively; ˆ1 is the 3x3 unit matrix; χ0≡xT−1is the single molecule orientational susceptibility [19]:
x=Z−1gl/integraltext
dωexp (−VR(ω)/T)(∆ µ(ω))2withZ=/integraltext
dωexp (−VR/T) the partition function. The expectation value
ofxdoes not depend on the components of the rotator function ∆. T wo phases of clusters coexist in equal amounts
or with equal frequency when their free energies are equal. I n the limit of N→ ∞, a phase transition occurs at Tc,
which is the point where an eigenvalue of [ ˆ1T+x(T)FT[ˆJ] vanishes, if the transition is continuous. The temperatur e
dependence of xis very weak which means that the Curie-Weiss law χ0=x(T)/(T−Tc) is valid for negative diagonal
elements of ˆJ. The transition point Tcoccurs at the largest value of the matrix for the representat ions allowed by the
symmetry of the system, i.e. Tc=max[−xˆJ].
As an example, we have applied this group-theoretical appro ach to the case of a cluster containing 59 TeF6molecules
and have compared the results to those published in [7–9]. In order to account for the broken symmetry at the cluster
surfaces, we use sum over the nearest neighbors. Since the mo lecules of type AF6have no low-order electrostatic
moments, the Coulomb contribution to the Lennard-Jones pot ential can be neglected, see fig.2 in [4].
We compare the rotational-rotational contributions, Eq.( 0.13), with their vibrational-rotational counterparts, ( 0.17),
for theTeF6molecule with the nearest neighbors located at sites with cu bic or monoclinic symmetry. For the purpose,
we determine the vibrational spectrum, the crystal field (0. 16), and the rotational matrix (0.14).The CERN Library
[20] is used to compute he elements of (0.14). The contributi on froml=l′= 4 is the largest. The ˆJmatrices in a
cubic symmetry environment is:
ˆJT2g=
0.011 −0.0007 0
−.0007 −0.02 0
0 0 1 .63
5ˆJT1g=
−0.004−0.001 0
−.001−0.011 0
0 0 −3.81
ˆJEg=/parenleftbigg
0.17−0.02
−0.02 2.41/parenrightbigg
.
These matrices are diagonal in C2hbecause it has only one-dimensional representations. The d iagonal elements of
ˆJin the case of C2hare:
ˆJ(X11) = [0.043,0.043,−0.027,−0.027,0.014,0.014,−0.011,−0.011]
ˆJ(X12) = [−0.41,−0.41,0.018,0.018,−0.003,−0.003,−0.002,−0.002]
ˆJ(X13) = [−0.22,−0.22,−0.08,−0.08,−0.0005,−0.0005,−0.0004,−0.0004]
The largest value of ˆJis obtained for the representation A1g, so we choose as an order parameter the rotator
functions for this representation and expand the free energ yFin terms of the corresponding rotator functions. A1g
is the only common representation for OhandC2h. To find correlation of OhandC2hwe carry out the correlation in
two steps: first, pass from OhtoD4hand then imply the table for D4hto go on to C2h[15].
The coefficients υRnecessary to compute the crystal field (0.16) are calculated from Eq.(0.15). We get for the cubic
symmetryυR
Oh=−7.98 in the approximation of the nearest eight neighbors. For t he monoclinic structure, C2h, this
coefficient is υR
Oh=−0.61. From Eq.(0.2) we obtain for the octahedral molecule of TeF6:g0=1.98 andg4=1.29.
In the approximation of the nearest neighbors interaction w e have determined the energy per molecule: in Oh, the
rotational-rotational energy is 4 meV and the vibrational-rotational is 1 meV; inC2h, these values are 1.2 meV and
0.02meV, respectively. The conclusion is that the vibrational-rot ational interaction can be neglected in the ordering
of molecules on monoclinic sites, so that the lower-tempera ture transition is entirely driven by rotational ordering
and that transition is continuous even in small systems. How ever on cubic sites, motion of the molecular centers of
mass must be taken into account, and the transition acts at le ast in small systems like it is first-order. The highly
degenerate state of an octahedral molecule in the octahedra l environment is resolved by a distortion of the cluster if
the model requires a rigid molecule. In this case we must deal with the Jahn-Teller effect that distorts the cluster.
This implies that a transition to a lower-symmetry structur e is initiated. The larger value of the rotational-rotation al
interaction, however, leads to a partial ordering of the mol ecules which we clearly see [8] in the thermodynamically
less favored state of clusters of small size. The transition from a cubic to monoclinic structure is resolved with the
appearance of the representation of EginDhwhich is equivalent to condensation of an active mode.
Taking into account the rotational-rotational interactio n in the total field (0.19) for the orientational ordering in C2h
we obtainTc=max[−xˆJ] = 27K. This is in a good agreement with the result ( ∼30K) computed in the molecular
dynamics simulations [7]. Thus we show that the choice of cub ic rotator functions (0.16) as an order parameter is
suitable for describing the mechanism of phase changes.
A final comment is that the theory of discrete point groups use d in the present work sets limits on handling at
once the surface and volume symmetries. However, the approa ch of continuous symmetry measures as developed by
Zabrodsky, Pinsky and Avnir [21,22] might make it possible t o bring together the surface and the volume symmetry
properties.
Acknowledgments The research was partially supported by Grant No.3270/1999 from the Scientific Fund at the
University of Sofia and Grant No. CHE-9725065 from the Nation al Science Foundation.
6[1] J. Timmermans, J.Phys.Chem.Solids, 18, 1(1961).
[2] J. Farges, M.F. de Feraudy, B. Raoult, G.J. Torchet, J. Ch em. Phys. 78, 5067 (1983).
[3] L.S.Bartell, L. Harsami, E.J. Valente, NATO ASI Ser. B 158, 37 (1987).
[4] A. Proykova, R. Radev, Feng-Yin Li, R.S.Berry, J.Chem. P hys.110,3887(1999)
[5] J. Farges, M.F. de Feraudy, B. Raoult, G.J. Torchet, J. Ch em. Phys. 84, 3491 (1986).
[6] L.S.Bartell, F.J.Dulls, B.Chunko, J.Phys.Chem. 95, 6481 (1991).
[7] A. Proykova, R.S.Berry, Z.Phys. D 40, 215(1997).
[8] R. A. Radev, A. Proykova, R.S.Berry, http://www.ijc.co m/articles/1998v1/36
[9] R. A. Radev, A. Proykova, Feng-Yin Li, R.S.Berry, J. Chem . Phys. 109, 3596 (1998).
[10] B. Raoult, J.Farges, M.F. de Feraudy, G. Torchet, Z.Phy s.D12, 85 (1989).
[11] M. Schmidt, R. Kusche, W. Kronmueller, B. von Issendorff , H. Haberland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 99 (1997).
[12] A. Proykova, R.S.Berry, Eur.Phys.Journal D 9, (in press) (1999).
[13] A. Proykova, I. Daykov, R.S.Berry, (in preparation)
[14] F.Seitz, Modern Theory of Solids , McGraw Hill, New York, 1940.
[15] C.J.Bradley and A.P.Cracknell, The Mathematical Theory of Symmetry in Solids (Clarendon, Oxford, 1972).
[16] H.M.James, T.A.Keenan, J.Chem.Phys. 3112 (1959)
[17] V.L.Ginzburg, A.P.Levanyuk, A.A. Sobyanin, Phys.Rep .57151 (1980)
[18] R. M. Lynden-Bell and K. H. Michel, Rev. of Mod. Phys. 66, 721 (1994).
[19] K.H.Michel, J.R. Copley, D.N.Neumann, Phys.Rev Lett. 68, 2929 (1992)
[20] CERN Program Library (CERN, Geneva, Switzerland) (199 5)
[21] H. Zabrodsky, S. Peleg, D. Avnir, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 114, 7843 (1992)
[22] M. Pinsky and D. Avnir, Inorg. Chem. 37, 5575 (1998)
7 |
arXiv:physics/9911050v1 [physics.ins-det] 23 Nov 1999A fast programmable trigger for isolated
cluster counting in the BELLE experiment
H.J.Kim,1S.K.Kim, S.H.Lee, T.W.Hur,2C.H.Kim, F.Wang,3
I.C.Park,4
Department of Physics, Seoul National University, Seoul 15 1-742, Korea
Hee-Jong Kim,
Department of Physics, Yonsei University, Seoul 120-749, K orea
B.G.Cheon,
KEK, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0801, Japan
E. Won.5,6
Research Institute for Basic Sciences, Seoul National Univ ersity, Seoul 151-742,
Korea
Abstract
We have developed a fast programmable trigger processor boa rd based on a field
programmable gate array and a complex programmable logic de vice for use in the
BELLE experiment. The trigger board accommodates 144 ECL in put signals, 2
NIM input signals, 24 ECL output signals, and the VME bus spec ification. An
asynchronous trigger logic for counting isolated clusters is used. We have obtained
trigger latency of 50 ns with a full access to input and output signals via a VME in-
terface. The trigger logic can be modified at any time dependi ng on the experimental
conditions.
Key words: Trigger; FPGA; CPLD; VME
PACS: 07.05.Hd, 07.50.Qx, 07.50.Ek
Preprint submitted to Elsevier Preprint 17 December 20131 Introduction
Fast, complex, general-purpose trigger systems are requir ed for modern parti-
cle physics experiments. Although custom-made CMOS gate ar rays are used
for extremely fast applications such as first-level trigger s (∼25 ns) for LHC
experiments[1], field programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) are an attractive op-
tion for environments that require a less demanding speed ( <100 ns) but a
more flexible trigger logic implementation. The logic of FPG A-based trigger
systems can be readily changed as the nature of signal and bac kground con-
ditions vary. Such trigger systems are flexible and can be ada pted to many
different applications. Commercial products that have thes e functionalities ex-
ist (for example, the Lecroy 2366 Universal Logic Module, Le croy Co.) and
can be used for implementing rather simple trigger logic. In the case of the
calorimeter trigger for the BELLE experiment, the number of channels, data
transfer rates, and the complexity of the trigger logic prec lude the use of
commericially available devices. We developed a 9U VME[2] m odule that ac-
commodates more than a hundred ECL signals for the triggerin g purpose.
The resulting board is a general purpose asynchronous progr ammable trigger
board that satisfies VME specifications.
2 Trigger requirements for the BELLE Experiment
The BELLE experiment[3] at KEK in Japan, is designed to exloi t the physics
potential of KEKB, a high luminosity, asymmetric e+e−collider operating at
a cm energy (10.55 GeV) corresponding to the Υ(4 S) resonance. In partic-
ular, BELLE is designed to test the Kobayashi-Maskawa mecha nism for CP
violation in B meson sector. The KEKB design luminosity is 1 ×1034cm−2s−1
with a bunch crossing rate of 2 ns. The BELLE detector consist s of seven sub-
systems; a silicon vertex detector (SVD), a central drift ch amber (CDC), an
aerogel Cherenkov counter (ACC), an array of trigger and tim e of flight scintil-
lation counters (TOF/TSC), an electro-magnetic calorimet er (ECL), KLand
1Also affiliated with Department of Physics and Astronomy, Lou isiana State Uni-
versity, Baton Rouge, LA 70803, USA
2Permanent Address : SsangYong Information & Communication s Corp., 24-1 Jeo-
dong 2-ga, Jung-gu, Seoul 100-748, Korea
3Permanent Address : Institute of High Energy Physics Academ ia Sinica, China
4Permanent Address : LG Semicon Co.,Ltd. 1, Hyangjeong-dong , Hungduk-gu,
Cheongju-si 361-480, Korea
5Corresponding author; E-mail: eiwon@bmail.kek.jp; Tel: + 81 298 64 5351; FAX:
+81 298 64 2580
6Also affiliated with KEK, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0801, Japan
2muon detectors (KLM) and extreme forward calorimeters (EFC ). A 1.5 Tesla
axial magnetic field is produced by a superconducting soleno id located outside
of the ECL. The KLM is outside of the solenoid and provides a re turn yoke for
the detector’s magnetic field. The BELLE trigger system requ ires logic with
a level of sophistication that can distinguish and select de sired events from
a large number of background processes that may change depen ding on the
conditions of the KEKB storage ring system. Figure 1 shows a s chematic view
of the BELLE trigger system. As shown in Fig. 1, the trigger in formation from
individual detector components is formed in parallel and co mbined in one fi-
nal stage. This scheme facilitates the formation of redunda nt triggers that rely
either only on information from the calorimeter or from the t racking systems.
The final event trigger time is determined by requiring a coin cidence between
the beam-crossing RF signal and the output of the final trigge r decision logic.
The timing and width of the subsystem trigger signals are adj usted so that
their outputs always cover the beam-crossing at a well define d fixed delay of
2.2µs from the actual event crossing.
The ECL is a highly segmented array of ∼9000 CsI(Tl) crystals with silicon
photodiode readout installed inside the coil of the solenoi d magnet. Pream-
plifier outputs from each crystal are added in summing module s located just
outside of the BELLE detector and then split into two streams with two dif-
ferent shaping times (1 µs and 200 ns): the slower one for the total energy
measurement and the faster one for the trigger. For the trigg er, signals from
a group of crystals are summed to form a trigger cell (TC), dis criminated,
digitized (as differential ECL logic signals), and fed into fi ve Cluster Counting
Modules (CCMs) that count the number of isolated clusters in the calorime-
ter. In total, the ECL has 512 trigger cells: 432 in the barrel region and 80 in
the endcaps. The trigger latency of the CCM trigger board is ∼150 ns. Each
module accepts 132 inputs and outputs 16 logic signals. (The actual board can
accommodate a maximum of 144 inputs and provide as many as 24 o utput
signals; for BELLE we have chosen to use 132 input and 16 outpu t lines per
board).
Given the complexity discussed above and the required flexib ility, we chose to
use a complex FPGA to apply the isolated clustering algorith m and a CPLD
device in order to match the VME bus specifications. For the FP GA, we use
an XC5215-PG299 chip that has 484 configurable logical block s (CLBs), and
for the CPLD, an XC95216-5PQ160, which provides 4,800 usabl e gates. Once
the CPLD is loaded, it permanently holds all of the VME bus spe cification
logic. In contrast, the trigger logic contained in the FPGA i s lost during a
power down, and must be reconfigured during start-up, either from an on-
board PROM or from a computer (VME master module) through VME bus.
This takes a few milliseconds. In the following we describe i n some detail the
trigger logic design of the CCM board and how we achieve our pe rformance
requirements.
33 Logic Design
We used XACTTMsoftware provided by Xilinx[4] to design, debug and simu-
late our logic. The trigger processor board accepts the diffe rential ECL logic
signals from the calorimeter trigger cells. There are many p ossible strategies
for finding and counting the number of isolated clusters (ICN ) among the
calorimeter trigger cells. But, since the trigger decision has to be made within
a limited time period, a simple algorithm is desirable. We de vised simple logic
that counts only one cluster from a group of connected cluste rs. For the case
of a number of connected clusters, we count only the upper most cluster in the
right most column among them. This is demonstrated for a 3 ×3 trigger cell
array in Fig. 2. Here, the trigger cell under the counting ope ration is num-
bered as “0”. If the cell “0” satisfies the logic diagram shown in Fig. 2, it is
considered to be a single isolated cluster. We have applied t his simple logic
to the output of GEANT-based[5] full Monte Carlo simulation of various B
decay modes as well as Bhabha scattering events and compared the perfect
cluster number and the cluster number returned by the above l ogic. The re-
sults are summarized in Table 6. In all the cases, the discrep ancies between
the perfect cluster counting and the isolated cluster count ing logic are below
the 1 % level; despite its simplicity, the counting logic wor ks exceptionally
well. This simple clustering logic is applied to over 132 inp ut signals and the
number of isolated clusters are then tallied. In addition to the cluster counting
logic, we also delay the 132 input and 16 output signals and re gister them in
a set of FIFO RAMs (the pattern register) located on the board . The signals
are delayed (in order for them to be correctly phased) by appr oximately 800
ns by means of an 8 MHz delay pulse and stored in FIFO RAMs at the trigger
decision. The delay time can be easily changed by modifying t he logic. The
pattern register allows a continuous monitoring of the oper ation of the CCM
module. The recorded cluster and ICN bits are read out throug h the VME bus
independently of the ICN counting system. The FPGA counts th e number of
clusters asynchronously and the simulated timing diagram i n Fig. 3 indicates
that the time needed for the ICN counting is 47 ns.
In order to satisfy the complete VME bus specification, a set o f logical blocks
(Address Decoder, Interrupter, Control Logic, Configurati on Control Logic,
CSR, and FIFO RAM Control) are developed and downloaded into the CPLD.
The logical blocks are designed as a VME A24/D32 slave interf ace. Compara-
tors are used to decode addresses being probed by the master m odule. Status
bits are implemented in order to check the status of the config uration comple-
tion of FPGA chip and triggering process itself. Control bit s are implemented
to stop the output of the triggering signal, to start the outp ut of the triggering
signal, to enable the reconfiguration of the FPGA chip via a PR OM or the
VME bus, and to control the FIFO RAM that serves as the pattern register.
All the functionalities were tested extensively during the development phase
4and completely debugged before they were implemented in the experiment.
4 Hardware Implementation
The CCM module houses the main FPGA chip for the ICN counting, the
CPLD chip for implementing the VME bus specifications, ECL-T TL and
NIM-TTL converters, the PROM holding the FPGA configuration , and the
FIFO RAM pattern register. A schematic diagram and an assemb led board
are shown in Figs. 4 and 5, respectively. The printed circuit board is a VME
9U size four-layer board. All connectors, switches, compon ents, and download-
ing circuitry are mounted on one side of the board. The logic s ignals to and
from the FPGA are TTL CMOS, and are interfaced with the differe ntial ECL
logic signals to the rest of the trigger and data acquisition system. Standard
10124 (10125) chips with 390 Ω pull down resisters (56 ×2 Ω termination
resisters) are used to convert TTL to ECL (ECL to TTL). The inp ut polarity
is such that a positive ECL edge produces a negative TTL edge a t the FPGA
input. Also on-board are several discrete-component, NIM- TTL converters
that interface with two external NIM control signals: the ma ster trigger signal
(MTG) and the external clock. Three 7202 CMOS asynchronous F IFO chips
( 3×1024 Bytes ) provide the pattern register. The actual regist ration for
one event includes 132 inputs, 16 outputs, 8 reserved bits, 1 0 memory address
bits, and 2 unsed bits; a total of 146 bits are registered in th e three FIFO
chips.
Programs for the FPGA chip can be downloaded from an on-board PROM
(Master Serial Mode) or via the VME bus (Peripheral Asynchro nous Mode).
We use an XC17256D Serial Configuration PROM and the clusteri ng logic
is downloaded by a PROM writer that is controlled by a persona l computer.
The choice of the VME master module is the FORCE[6] SUN5V, a 6U VME
bus CPU board that has a 110 MHz microSPARC-II processor runn ing Solaris
2.5.1. Accessing the CCM from the VME master module is simply done by
mapping the device (in our case, the CCM) into the memory of th e master
module. From there, the clustering logic can also be loaded i nto the FPGA
chip. All of the control software was developed in this maste r module with
GNU[7] gcc and g++ compilers. An object-oriented graphical user interface
based on the ROOT[8] framework was also developed. Resettin g the module,
downloading the logic to FPGA from the PROM or the VME bus, and the
FIFO reading are all implemented in the graphical user inter face. Programs
for the CPLD chip are downloaded through an on-board connect or from the
parallel port of a personal computer and it enables the downl oading of the
CPLD program whenever necessary.
The base address of the board is set by a 8-pin dip switch on boa rd. A hardware
5reset switch that resets the FPGA, the CPLD, and the FIFO RAMs is provided
on the front panel. There are four LEDs indicating power on/o ff, MTG in, and
two configuration of FPGA completion (LDC and SX1). Two fuses (250V 2A)
and four capacitors (100 µF) are on ±5 V lines for the protection purpose.
The trigger board has been fully tested and the results have b een compared
with software simulations. Test results are shown in Fig. 6, where a cluster-
counting time of approximately 50 ns is found, which is in goo d agreement
with the 47 ns time predicted by the simulation.
5 Performance with e+e−collisions
The BELLE detector started taking e+e−collision data with all subsystems,
the data acquisition systems, and accompanying trigger mod ules operational
in early June of 1999. Six CCM modules installed in the electr onics hut counted
isolated clusters from the e+e−collision in the calorimeter. Five CCM modules
were used to count isolated clusters from the five sections of the calorimeter;
the sixth module collected and summed the outputs from the ot her five. The
flexibility inherent in the design of the board allowed the us e some of the input
and ouput channels of the sixth module to generate triggers f or Bhabha events
as well as calorimeter timing signals.
In a∼100K event sample of actual triggers, we found a nearly perfe ct cor-
respondence between the numbers of isolated clusters provi ded by the trigger
logic and those inferred from TDC hit patterns that are avail able at the offline
analysis stage. Figure 7(a) shows the correlation between t he number of iso-
lated clusters from TDC hit patterns and ICN numbers from CCM modules.
As is shown here, there are few cases that ICN numbers from CCM modules
are smaller than numbers from TDC hit patterns. Figure. 7 (b) shows the
mismatch rate between the TDC-based and-CCM based cluster n umbers as
a function of the TDC-based cluster numbers. For more than 99 .8 % of the
cases, the two numbers are identical. We attribute the small level of inconsis-
tency to the limitations of the clustering counting logic (s ee section 3) and the
infrequent occurence of timing offset on the input signals.
6 Conclusions
We have developed a fast trigger processor board utilizing F PGA and CPLD
technology. It accommodates 144 ECL input signals and provi des 24 ECL
output signals. It functions as a 9U VME module that enables t he loading
of revised trigger logic and the online resetting of the modu le. In addition,
6a pattern register on the board contains all of the input/out put ECL signals
that were used in a process. The isolated clustering logic is measured to have
a time latency of 50 ns, in good agreement with the prediction of the simu-
lation. Sufficient hardware and software flexibility has been incorporated into
the module to make it well suited for dealing with a variety of experimental
conditions.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank thr BELLE group for their installation and mainte-
nance of the detector, and acknowledge support from KOSEF an d Ministry of
Education (through BSRI) in Korea.
References
[1] Annu. Rev. Nucl. Sci. 44609 (1994).
[2] VME bus International Trade Association, VMEbus Specifi cation Manual
ANSI/IEEE STD 1014-1987 (1987).
[3] The BELLE Collaboration, Technical Design Report , KEK report 95-1(1995).
[4] Xilinx Inc., San Jose, CA, USA.
[5] GEANT, Detector Description and Simulation Tool, CERN p rogram library
long writeup W5013.
[6] Force Computers Inc. 2001 Logic Drive, San Jose, CA, USA.
[7] Free Software Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place - Suite 3 30, Boston, MA 02111,
USA.
[8] ROOT - An Object Oriented Data Analysis Framework, Proce edings
AIHENP’96 Workshop, Lausanne, Sep. 1996, Nucl. Inst. & Meth . in Phys. Res.
A 389 (1997) 81-86. See also http://root.cern.ch/.
7Table 1
The testing of the isolated cluster counting logic using sim ulations. The numbers
in the first row indicate the difference between the perfect cl uster number and the
isolated cluster number from the logic.
ICN(logic)-ICN(perfect) 0 1 2
Bhabha 100 % 0 % 0 %
B0→JψK S→l+l−π+π−99.15 % 0.85 % 0.00 %
B0→JψK S→l+l−πoπo98.55 % 1.45 % 0.00 %
B0→π+π−99.15 % 0.85 % 0.00 %
B0→πoπo98.95 % 1.05 % 0.00 %
B+→π+πo98.95 % 1.05 % 0.00 %
B0→K∗γ 99.15 % 0.80 % 0.05 %
B0→ρ±π∓99.15 % 0.85 % 0.00 %
8Cathod Pads
Stereo WiresSVD
CDC
TSC
ECL
EFC
KLMAxial WiresR phi
Z
Hit
4x4 Sum
Amp.
HitTrack SegmentR phi Track
Z Track
Z Finder
TSC Trigger
Low Threshold
High Threshold
E Sum
mu hitLow Threshold
High ThresholdZ TrackCombined Track
Cluster Count
Cluster Count
Bhabha LogicThreshold
Two gammaR phi TrackGlobal Decision Logic
Topology
2.2 micro sec after event crossing
Beam CrossingTrigger Signal
Gate/Stop
Fig. 1. A block diagram of the BELLE trigger system. Informat ion from all sub
detectors is gathered in the GDL, where the trigger decision is made.
94 0 1
2
3
40 : final signal
0 1 2 3
Fig. 2. A logic diagram for the isolated cluster number count ing. Among nine trigger
cells, only the three center cells and center and bottom righ t cells are considered in
isolated cluster counting logic.
10l LCCN3............l LCCN2............l LCCN1............l LCCN0............l LTRIG30.........i MCLK..............2.3 us 2.35 us 2.4 us 2.45 us 2.5 us 2.55 us 2.6 us 2.65 us 2.7 us 2.75 us
Fig. 3. The simulated timing for ICN counting. From the top, t he system clock
(MCLK), the input trigger signal (LTRIG30), and the four ICN bits (lowest to
highest, LCCN0-3) are shown. The time difference between LTR IG30 and LCCN0
is measured to be 47.3 ns (One unit on the top is 5 ns).
11VMEbus INTERFACE and CONNECTORS
I/O CONNECTORSCLOCK selection
XC5125-PG299FPGAXC95216-PQ160CPLD
PROM
FIFO RAM
IDT 7202DATA (24bits)DATAOCCNTRIGMTG
controlconfiguration
pattern
register-1
pattern
register-2
FIFO
control
configuration by VMEDATA
address
VME clock
BERR*DTACK*
configuration
by PROMEXT CLK
ETM INMCLK0SYSCLK
IN*IN/MC10125 MC10124
controlPROM
CCN*CCN/
[0:23][0:143]NIM-TTL
Fig. 4. A simplified schematic of the CCM trigger board.
12Fig. 5. An assembled CCM trigger board. The FPGA chip is the bi g square-shaped
chip near the center (gray color) and the CPLD is smaller squa re surface-mounted
chip near the top (black color).
13 27 Dec 1998 23:26
/banner /banner
D I S P L A Y : TIMING DIAGRAM /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner
K n o b = S c r o l l /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner /banner
M em o r y Di
s p l a y e d : A CQM EM /CHR_DM_TRG_OUT /CHR_DM_IN /CHR_DM_IN /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT /DEL_RUBOUT
/Right_ovf
C u r s o r 1 = +0009161 µs
Fi
r s t T r a c e Di
s p l a y e d : 000 C u r s o r 2 = +0000000 µs
Ti
m e / Di
v : 2 0 nS C u r s o r /Up_ovf
= 9 . 1 6 1 9 8 5 m s
A/UNDERSCORE
05 :1
A/UNDERSCORE
04 :1
A/UNDERSCORE
03 :1
A/UNDERSCORE
02 :1
A/UNDERSCORE
01 :1
A/UNDERSCORE
00 :1
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
OFF
/CHR_GRAT1 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT8 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT1 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT8 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT1 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT3 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT6 /CHR_GRAT5 /CHR_GRAT8 /CHR_GRAT5
/CHR_SMALL_F /CHR_SMALL_1
/CHR_SMALL_F /CHR_SMALL_2
/CHR_SMALL_F /CHR_SMALL_3
/CHR_SMALL_F /CHR_SMALL_4
/banner /banner /banner /banner /CHR_SMALL_F /CHR_SMALL_5 /banner /banner /banner
/banner /banner /banner /banner /CHR_SMALL_F /CHR_SMALL_6 /banner /banner /banner
/banner /banner /banner /banner /CHR_SMALL_F /CHR_SMALL_7 /banner /banner /banner
/CHR_SMALL_F /CHR_SMALL_8
Search /Left_ovf
Change Acqmem Default Search Auxi
li
ary Di
splay Spli
t
Search /Right_ovf
Cursors To Refmem Di
splay Def. Data Formats Di
splay
Fig. 6. Measured timing results for ICN counting. Starting f rom the top, two input
ECL signals and output ICN bits (lowest to highest bits) are d isplayed. Each time
division is 20 ns.
14Fig. 7. The ICN-counting performace of the CCM modules. (a) I CN from TDC hit
patterns vs. ICN from CCM modules, (b) mismatch rates betwee n ICN from TDC
hit patterns and from CCM as a function of the ICNs from CCM mod ules.
15 |
arXiv:physics/9911051v1 [physics.chem-ph] 23 Nov 1999SPIN-LATTICE RELAXATION IN ZERO-MAGNETIC FIELD
INDUSED BY MOLECULAR REORIENTATIONS
M.I.Mazhitov, Yu.A.Serebrennikov
The stochastic Liouville method is used to analyze the gener al problem
of spin-lattice relaxation in zero-field for molecules unde rgoing Markovian
reorientations.
I. Introduction
The resolution advantage of zero-field (ZF) studies for orie ntationatty dis-
ordered materials is well known. In particular, the novel-p ulsed ZF NMR
and NQR technique [I,2] offers an excellent approach to this p roblem since
it removes the orientational anisotropy which produces the broad high-field
line shapes in solids. In ZF NMR and NOR the signal comes from l ongitu-
dinal nuclear magnetization, i.e. the rank-I statisiical t ensor. Time-domain
ZF signals have also been observed using the method of pertur bed angu-
lar correlations of γ-ray cascades [3]. From such experiments it is possible
to extract information concerning the zero-field spin-latt ice relaxation (ZF
SLR) of rank ≥2 statistical tensors. The corresponding response functio n
depends on the rates and microscopic details (in the slow-mo tional regime)
of molecular reorientations which modulate the antisotrop ic part of the spin
Hamiltonian.
Mathematical techniques have recently been developed whic h make anal-
yses of ZF NMR spectra in the complete tumbling regime feasib le [4-6]. Our
purpose here is to extend this theory. We present a general fo rmalism which
enables us to compute the response function of statistical t ensors of arbitrary
rank-kirrespective of the models used to describe the Markovian mo lecular
reorientations. A compact expression for the correspondtn g spectral function
is obtained, which is valid for the complete tumbling regime . To illustrate the
use of the theory we calculate the rank −2 perturbation coefficient of γ-ray
cascades arising from the quadrupole interaction of a spin −1 nucleus with an
axially symmetric electric field gradient. All the calculat ions in this paper are
confined to situations that are macroscopically isotropic. There is continuity
with the formalism of the preceding articles [4-6] and inter mediate results
1derived there are assumed to have been looked at by the reader .
2. Theory
In ZF the spin Hamiltonian for the problem is
ˆH(Ω) =/summationdisplay
q,p(−1)pˆF2pD2
q−p(Ω)A2q (1)
Here ˆF2pis the p-component of a second-rank spin tensor operator in the
laboratory frame. A2qare components of a ZF splitting tenser expressed
in the molecular coordinate system(the principal axis fram e) and D2
q−p(Ω)
are the Wigner rotation matrices describing the transforma tion between the
two frames. The explicit form of ˆF2pandA2qwill depend on the type of
interaction.
For sufficiently large molecules in dense media the stochasti c reorienta-
tional process may be assumed to be Markovian. It then follow s that an ap-
propriate ensemble average spin density operator ˆ ρ(Ω, t) obeys the stochastic
Liouville equation (SLE) [7,8]
∂ˆρ(Ω, t)
∂t=−iHxˆρ(Ω, t) +ˆˆLΩˆρ(Ω, t) (2)
where Hxˆρ= [ˆH,ˆρ],¯h= 1 andˆˆLΩis the stationary Markovian operator
describing the tumbling process. Eq.(2) must be solved with the initial con-
dition
ˆρ(Ω,0) =φ(Ω)ˆρ(Ω) =ˆρ(0)
8π2(3)
which takes into account the fact that for isotropic systems there is an equi-
librium distribution of molecular orientations φ(Ω) =1
8π2
The status of the spin ensemble can be discussed in terms of st atistical
tensors ρ(kp)(i.e. state multipole moments )
ˆρ(Ω, t) =/summationdisplay
k,pρ(kp)(Ω, t)ˆTkp(I) (4)
where the coefficient ρ(kp)(Ω, t) and the irreducible polarization operator ˆTkp(I)
[9] are given by
ρ(kp)(Ω, t) =Tr[ˆρ(Ω, t)ˆT+
kp(I)],
2ˆTkp(I) =/parenleftBigg2k+ 1
2I+ 1/parenrightBigg1/2/summationdisplay
mm′CIm′
Im kp|Im′/angbracketright/angbracketleftIm| (5)
HereCIm′
Im kpis a Clebsch-Gordan coefficient. The corresponding response
and spectral functions, Gkp(t) and ˜Gkp(s), are obtained as averages over the
equilibrium (isotropic) distribution:
Gkp(t) =/integraldisplay
dΩρkp(Ω, t), (6)
˜Gkp(s) =/integraldisplay∞
0Gkp(t) exp(−st)dt, (7)
where the tilde denotes Laplace transformation.
It thus follows from eqs. (5) and (6),(7) that
Gkp(t) =Tr(/integraldisplay
dΩˆD(Ω)ˆρ(Ω)ˆD+(Ω)/summationdisplay
q(−1)pDk
q−p(Ω))ˆTkq(I)≡/summationdisplay
qTr[ˆσkp
q(t)ˆTkq(I)]
(8)
where ˆD(Ω) is the finite rotation operator. Following refs. [4,10], we multiply
both sides of eq.(2) by ˆD(Ω) on the left and by ( −1)pˆD+(Ω)Dk
q−p(Ω) on the
right. In isotropic systems this procedure allows integrat ion over Ω in the
general form as reported in ref. [10]. Through a straightfor ward extension of
the derivation described in ref. [10] we obtain a compact diff erential kinetic
equation
˙ˆσ(kp)
q(t) =−iHx(0)ˆσ(kp)
q(t)−τ−1
ˆσ(kp)
q(t)−/summationdisplay
q1ˆˆP(k)
qq1ˆσ(kp)
q1(t)
, (9)
where τis the mean lifetime between rotational jumps,
Hx(0) =/summationdisplay
µ(−1)µFx
2µA2−µ (10)
ˆˆP(k)
qq1ˆσ(kp)
q1(t) =/integraldisplayˆD(˜Ω)ˆσ(kp)
q1(t)ˆD+(˜Ω)Dk
qq1(˜Ω)f(˜Ω)d˜Ω, (11)
where ˜Ω = Ω −Ω′(see also refs. [4,10] ). The initial condition for eq. (9) is
obtained from eqs. (3), (4) and (8):
ˆσ(kp)
q(0) =ρ(kp)(0)ˆT+
kq
2k+ 1(12)
3Formally eq. (9) is similar to the impact equation which desc ribes gas-phase
relaxation. Reorientations may be classified as either ”wea k” or ”strong” de-
pending on the angular jump, with its size set by the function f(Ω). The new
formulation of the problem allows a solution irrespective o f this circumstance
in the general form.
From that purpose let us re-express ˆ σ(kp)
qin the form
ˆσ(kp)
q(t) =/summationdisplay
KQ[σ(kp)
q(t)]KQˆTKQ(I) (13)
It is easy to see that in this representation the response fun ction can be
written as
G(kp)(t) =/summationdisplay
q(−1)q[σ(kp)
q(t)]k,−q (14)
Then we have, using vector notation,
˙X(t) =−(iˆˆΛ+ˆˆ)X(t) (15)
where the column vector X(t) is constructed from the coefficients σ(kp)
q(t)]KQ.
The elements of the evolution,ˆˆΛ, and the motivational, ˆˆ= (1−ˆˆP/τ,
operator matrices are [9]
ˆˆΛqq1
KQ K 1Q1=Tr(ˆH(0)[ˆTK1Q1(I),ˆT+
KQ(I)])δqq1=
/summationdisplay
K′Q′(−1)Q(K1Q1;K−Q)K′Q′
Tr(ˆH(0)ˆTK′Q′(I))δqq1 (16)
ˆˆqq1
KQ K 1Q1=/summationdisplay
LMNW(L)
MNCLM
kq KQCLN
kq1K1Q1(17)
where
(K1Q1;K−Q)K′Q′
≡(−1)2I+K′
[(−1)K+K1+K′−1][(2K+ 1)(2 K1+ 1)]1/2×
×CK′Q′
KQ K 1Q1
K K 1K′
I I I
(18)
W(L)
MN= (δMN−A(L)
MN), A(L)
MN=/integraldisplay
f(˜Ω)DL
MN(˜Ω)d˜Ω (19)
To derive eq.(17) we have used the Clebsch-Gordan series for the product of
Wigner matrices [ 9 ]. Eq.(15) can be solved by Laplace transf ormation to
give
˜X(s) =ˆˆM−1
(s)X(0) (20)
4where M(s) =sˆˆ1+iˆˆΛ+ˆˆ. It is easy to see from eqs. (12) and (13) that in
this representation
X(0) = [ σkp
q(0)]KQ=
(−1)qρ(kp)(0)
2k+ 1δKkδq,Q
(21)
Eq.(20) is particularly suitable for numerical computatio n of the spectral
function (7). The key step in the calculation is the inversio n of matrixˆˆM: ’
˜G(kp)(s) =/summationdisplay
qq1(−1)q+q1[ˆˆM−1
]qq1
k−q,k−q1ρ(kp)(0)
2k+ 1(22)
SinceˆˆMhas finite dimensions the inversion is readily achieved by st andard
techniques. The result of eq.(21) provides a general recipe for calculating the
response of the rank −kstatistical tensor on Markovian molecular reorienta-
tions in ZF. The most severe restriction of the model is that t he lattice is
described only in terms of the orientationat degrees of free dom.
In the case osotropically rotating molecules, f(˜Ω) =f(cos(˜β))/4π2, from
(17) and (19) we obtain
qq1
KQ K 1Q1=/summationdisplay
Lτ−1
θLCL0
kq K−qCL0
kq1k−q1δKK1δq−Qδq1−Q1 (23)
where τ−1
θL=WL00is the orientational relaxation time of the axial L−rank
tensor. To illustrate the use of the theory we consider the ca se where the
dominant anisotropic part of the spin Hamiltonian is the axi ally symmetric
quadrupote interaction [5]:
ˆH(0) =/radicaltp/radicalvertex/radicalvertex/radicalbt2
3DQKIˆT20(I)≡/radicaltp/radicalvertex/radicalvertex/radicalbt2
3eQV zz
2I(2I−1)KIˆT20(I) (24)
where Qis the nuclear quadrupole moment,
KI= (−1)2I[1
30I(I+ 1)(4 I2−1)(2I+ 3)]1/2(25)
As follows from (16), (18) and (23)
ˆˆΛqq1
KQ K 1Q1= (−1)2I+K[10
3(2K1+1)]1/2DQKICKQ
K1Q20
2K K 1
I I I
[(−1)K+K1−1]δqq1δQQ1
(26)
5As can be seen from (22) and (25) the components [ σ(kp)
q]K−qare uncoupled
from the rest of the vector Xand the problem reduces to the inversion of the
matrix Min ”Kq” subspace. It is convenient to calculate ˜Gkp(s) in the basis
of eigenfunctions of the operator ˆˆ. In the ” Kq” subspace we have
[ˆˆU−1ˆˆˆˆU]Kn K 1n1=′
Kn K 1n1=γnδKK1δnn1,ˆˆUKq Kn =Cn0
kq K−q(27)
ˆˆUis the unitary matrix which makes the submatrix [′]qq1
K−q K−q1in (22) di-
agonal, γn=τ−1
θndenotes the eigenvalues. It is easy to see that in this
representation eqs. (14) and (21) give
˜G(kp)(s) =
1
sˆˆ1+iˆˆΛ′
+ˆˆ
k0,k0ρ(kp)(0), (28)
where .
ˆˆΛ′
Kn K 1n1= (−1)2I+k2DQKI
/radicaltp/radicalvertex/radicalvertex/radicalbt2
3(2K+ 1)(2 K1+ 1)(2 n+ 1)(2 N1+ 1)
1/2
×
×C20
n0n10
K K 12
I I I
K K 12
n1n k
(δKK1+1+δKK1−1) (29)
Consequently only one element of the inverted matrix (ˆˆM)−1
is needed to
calculate the spectral function.
3. Discussion
In the fast motional limit, DQτθ2≪1 , taking into account (26)-(28) to
second order in perturbation theory, we have
G(kp)(s) = (s+λk)−1ρ(kp)(0), G(kp)(t) = exp[ −λkt)ρ(kp)(0)
where
λk=3
80(eQV zz)2τθ2k(k+ 1)[4 I(I+ 1)−k(k+ 1)−1]
I2(2I−1)2
in agreement with Abragam and Pound[11]
6For a simple illustration of the formalism introduced in sec tion 2 we con-
sider a case with I= 1. From (26)- (28) we obtain
˜G1p(s) =(s+τ−1
θ2)2+1
3D2
Q
s[(s+τ−1
θ2)2+D2
Q] +2
3D2
Qτ−1
θ2ρ1p(0) (30)
˜G2p(s) =ρ2p(0)N1(s)
sN1(s) +N2(s), (31)
where
N1(s) =1
7D2
Q(s+τ−1
θ4) +16
35D2
Q(s+τ−1
θ2) + (s+τ−1
θ2)2(s+τ−1
θ4)
N2(s) =2
5D2
Q(s+τ−1
θ2)(s+τ−1
θ4)
Eq. (30) is identical to there suh of ref. [5](eq.(24)) which describes the
ZF NMR spectral function [1,2]. Ordinary NMR coils can only d etect rank-1
tensors. However, by experimental observaiion of γ-ray cascades, it is possible
to extract information concerning the relaxation of k≥2 statistical tensors.
In particular, the measurer anisotropy [3, 11, 12] is propor tional to Gk0(t).
Sometimes it is convenient to observe the average correlati on of all decays:
Gk0(∞) =τ−1
N/integraldisplay∞
0Gk0(t) exp(−t
τN),
which is just the Laplace transformation at s=τ−1
N, where τNis the mean
nuclear lifetime.
The spectral function (30) depends on τθ2andτθ4. In the ”strong collision”
model f(Ω) =1
8π2andτθ2=τθ4=τ. In contrast, τ−1
θn=n(n+ 1)Drunder
Debye orientational diffusion with coefficient Dr. Thus in the slow tumbling
regime the precise form of the angular correlation depends o n dynamical
details of the motion.
It is interesting to compare our exact result (30) with the ap proximate an-
alytical solution of the problem which has been obtained by L inden-Bell [12].
It is easy to see (by Laplace transformation of thc correspon ding expressions
forG20(t) which have been given in ref.[12] that in the fast motional r egime
our results coincide. However, her approximation is not suffi cient to obtain
good quantitative agreement wich eq. (30) in the slow-motio nal limit, when
DQτθ2≃1.
7References
1. D. Weitkamp, A. Sielecki, D. Zax, K. Ziim and A. Pines, Phys .Rev.Letters
50 ( 1983) 1897.
2. A. Thayer and A. Pines, Accounts Chem. Res. 20 (1987) 47.
3. R.M. Steffen and H. Frauenfelder, in: Perturbed angular co rrelations,
eds. E. Karlson, E. Matthias and K. Siegbahn (North-Holland , Amster-
dam, 1964) p. 3.
4. Yu.A.Serebrennikov, Chem.Phys. 112 ( 1987) 253.
5. Yu.A.Serebrennikov, Chem,Phys.Letters 137 (1987) 183.
6. Yu.n.Serebrennikov, M.I. Majitov and Z.M. Muldakhmetov , Chum. Phys.
121 (1988) 307.
7. A.I.Bershtein and Yu.S.Oseledchik, Soviet Phys.JETP 51 (1966) 1072.
8. R.Kubo, Advan.Chem.Phys. 16 (1969) 101.
9. D.A. Varshalovich, A.N. Moskalev and V.K. Khersonsky, Qu antum the-
ory of angular moment (Nauka, Moscow, 1975).
10. Yu.A Serebrennikov, S.I. Temkin and A.I. Burshtein, Che m.Phys. (
1983) 31
11. A.Abragam and R.V.Pound, Phys.Rev. 92 ( 1953) 943.
12. R.Lynden-Bell, Mol.Phys. 22 (1971) 837. ,
8 |
arXiv:physics/9911052v1 [physics.atm-clus] 23 Nov 1999Electron exchange model potential: Application to positro nium-helium scattering
P. K. Biswas and Sadhan K. Adhikari
Instituto de F´ ısica Te´ orica, Universidade Estadual Paul ista, 01.405-900 S˜ ao Paulo, S˜ ao Paulo, Brazil
(February 2, 2008)
The formulation of a suitable nonlocal model potential for e lectron exchange is presented, checked
with electron-hydrogen and electron-helium scattering, a nd applied to the study of elastic and
inelastic scattering and ionization of ortho positronium ( Ps) by helium. The elastic scattering and
then= 2 excitations of Ps are investigated using a three-Ps-stat e close-coupling approximation.
The higher ( n≥3) excitations and ionization of Ps atom are treated in the fr amework of Born
approximation with present exchange. Calculations are rep orted of phase shifts, and elastic, Ps-
excitation, and total cross sections. The present target el astic total cross section agrees well with
experimental results at thermal to medium energies.
PACS Number(s): 34.10.+x, 36.10.Dr
I. INTRODUCTION
The neutral Ps beam provides a great deal of advantage over ch arged projectiles as a probe to study the structure
of atoms, molecules and surface. Recently, there have been a great deal of interest in positronium- (Ps-) atom
scattering due to the improvement of Ps sources and Ps beams. Total scattering cross section of ortho Ps, which
has a larger lifetime than para Ps, have been measured for var ious targets [1,2] with an objective of understanding
the Ps-interaction dynamics with matter. Among all Ps-atom systems, the positronium-hydrogen (Ps-H) system is
the simplest and is of special theoretical interest [3]. How ever, due to experimental difficulties in obtaining nascent-
hydrogen atomic target there has been no experimental study of Ps-H scattering. The next most complicated Ps-atom
system is the positronium-helium (Ps-He) system in which th ere are good experiments on total cross section [1,2].
However, there are no theoretical studies [4–7] which can ac count for the measured total cross sections of ortho Ps-He
scattering . We address the present study towards an underst anding of the measured total cross sections of Ps-He
scattering at low and medium energies using a suitably devel oped model exchange potential.
The interaction of neutral Ps atom with neutral atom or molec ule is very much different from that of charged
1electron and positron with neutral targets [8]. In any Ps-at om scattering, the elastic and even-parity state transitio n
direct amplitudes to close-coupling approximation (CCA) a re zero [3] due to internal charge and mass symmetry of
Ps. In addition, the adiabatic polarization potential is al so zero and the electron-exchange mechanism appears as
the main driving force at low energies apart from the correct ion expected from polarization/Van der Waals force [3].
This was not the case for electron-impact scattering where b oth the direct and exchange interactions play their roles
in determining the solution of the scattering equations. Th e Ps-atom system allows the possibility for studying the
effect of exchange in an environment characteristically diff erent from that of the electron-atom system due to the
composite nature of Ps. Recently, in addition to total cross section at medium to high energies [1], thermalization of
Ps in gaseous He has also been measured [2]. However, it is of s erious concern that dynamical calculations with the
reliable and widely used static-exchange model with usual a ntisymmetrization [4–6] fail severely yielding very large
total cross sections compared to the measured data [1,2], sp ecially at low energies. The experiments of Refs. [1,2]
are consistent among themselves. They collectively sugges t a lowering trend of cross sections from a peak at 20 eV
towards lower energies. This trend is missing from all previ ous published calculations. Moreover, due to the large
error bar on the measured cross section at 10 eV of Ref. [1] and absence of data near Ps excitation and ionization
thresholds, it is not clear whether the cross section has a mi nimum or not in this energy region. The present study
also addresses this feature from a theoretical point of view .
The proper inclusion of exchange effect is a major technical o bstacle in performing dynamical calculations in complex
systems [9]. The effect of electron exchange is usually accou nted for in a quantum dynamical calculation through
the antisymmerization of the wave function which introduce s nonorthogonal functions to these calculational schemes
including the usual static-exchange model. These antisymm etrization schemes with nonorthogonality defect lead to
overcompleteness in the Hilbert space and associated theor etical and numerical difficulties in the CCA and related
formalisms. Moreover, when short-range (exchange) correl ations are important, the CCA converges very slowly [10].
Several discussions and prescriptions to remedy this defec t have appeared in the literature in connection with electro n
impact scattering [9]. This problem has been overcome to som e extent in electron-impact scattering using different
methodologies −with essentially exact (variational) treatment of exchang e in simpler cases, with effective correlation
and suitable model potentials [11] for larger targets. Gros s deviations of previous calculations [4–6] on Ps-He scatte ring
2from measurements at low energies [2] could be a consequence of the nonorthogonality defect and/or the inadequacy
of the correlation effect in exchange-dominated Ps-impact s cattering, specially at low energies.
To address this problem we choose to remove the nonorthogona lity from the exchange kernel of the momentum-space
CCA equation by using a suitable model potential. The additi onal simplicity of the present exchange potential makes
it very attractive for performing dynamical calculation in many-electron systems. The exchange model is shown to
be readily applicable to electron- and Ps-impact scatterin g problems. In order to test the generality and reliability o f
the exchange model we apply it to electron-hydrogen ( e−-H) and electron-helium ( e−-He) scattering, in addition to
Ps-He scattering.
We present a theoretical study of ortho-Ps-He scattering em ploying a three-Ps-state CCA scheme in momentum
space where the usual nonorthogonal exchange kernel arrisi ng from antisymmetrization is replaced by the present
model exchange potentials. The helium atom is always assume d to be in its initial ground state and the Ps(1s),
Ps(2s), and Ps(2p) states are included in the coupled-chann el calculation. Being the lightest atom, Ps is more
vulnerable to excitation than the inert helium atom in Ps-He scattering. Also, the Ps-excitation thresholds are the
lowest ones in this system. Hence, the present three-Ps-sta te model seems to be a reasonable one to describe Ps-He
scattering from low to medium energies. The cross sections f or higher discrete and continuum excitations of Ps atom
are calculated in the framework of the first Born approximati on including present exchange. These Born cross sections
are added to the above three-Ps-state cross sections to pred ict the target elastic total cross section.
The plan of the paper is as follows. In Sec. II we present the mo del exchange potential for electron-impact scattering
and numerical results for electron scattering by H and He. In Sec. III we present the model exchange potential for
Ps-impact scattering and numerical results for Ps scatteri ng by He. Finally, in Sec. IV we present a summary of our
findings.
II. EXCHANGE POTENTIAL FOR ELECTRON-IMPACT SCATTERING
Although, we are mostly interested in developing an exchang e potential for Ps-impact scattering in this work, first
we illustrate and check our model in the case of electron-ato m scattering where the exchange potential is well under
control. We develop the present exchange model for e−-H elastic scattering using H(1s) orbital and finally extend it
3to the case of inelastic scattering by a complex target descr ibed by a Hartree-Fock (HF) wave function. The exchange
potentials are derived from the following exchange transit ion amplitude
g(kf,ki) =−1
2π/integraldisplay
dr1dr2φ∗(r2)1
r12φ(r1)
×exp[i(ki.r2−kf.r1)], (2.1)
where the position vector of the incident (target) electron isr2(r1). Hereφis the wave function of H, ki(kf) is
the initial (final) momentum of the incident electron, and r12=r1−r2. Amplitude (2.1) is the leading term of the
exchange amplitude at large energies [12] and also the usual starting point for deriving model exchange potentials
[11]. To remove the nonorthogonality defect we seek an excha nge potential of the form
g(kf,ki)∼/integraldisplay
drφ∗(r)U(r,ki,kf)φ(r), (2.2)
where the form of Uis to be determined. We consider the integration over the coo rdinate of the final projectile
electron r1of Eq. (2.1) below. Using φ(r) =π−1/2α3/2exp(−αr), taking Fourier transformation, and performing the
integration over r1, we obtain
I≡/integraldisplay
dr11
r12φ(r1)exp(−ikf.r1)
=4α5/2
π3/2/integraldisplay
dqexp(−ikf.r2)
(kf−q)2exp(iq.r2)
(q2+α2)2. (2.3)
Any average value prescription for ( kf−q)2in Eq. (2.3) will reduce Eq. (2.1) to form (2.2). Then, in the m odel
exchange potential, the final and initial state wave functio ns will be expressed in terms of same coordinates. Recalling
that internal kinetic energy of H ( q2/2) is given by α2/2 in atomic units, we take average of q2asα2, and set
(kf−q)2≈(k2
f+α2), where the average value of the scalar product is assumed to be zero. After taking an inverse
Fourier transformation in Eq.(2.3), the final model exchang e potential takes the following simple form
g(kf,ki)≈−2
k2
f+α2/integraldisplay
φ∗(r2)exp(iQ.r2)φ(r2)dr2, (2.4)
where Q=ki−kf.Although we derived Eq. (2.4) for elastic scattering, this r esult is straightforwardly extendable
to inelastic e−-H scattering to a final H(2s,2p), H(3s,3p,3d), ..., etc. orb ital. In such cases the final model exchange
potential for transition from state νtoν′becomes
4gν′ν(kf,ki)≈ −2
k2
f+α2ν/integraldisplay
φ∗
ν′(r2)exp(iQ.r2)φν(r2)dr2,
(2.5)
where the parameter ανrefers to the initial state ν.
Similar model potentials were derived by Ochkur and also by R udge [12]. Ochkur’s result is obtained by setting
α= 0 in the prefactor of Eq. (2.5). Rudge’s result corresponds to taking the prefactor ( k2
f+α2)−1= (kf−iα)−2.
The model exchange potential (2.5) has the following desira ble physical properties. This potential is the strongest at
the lowest possible energy ( kf= 0) for the weakest bound atomic orbital ( αν→0). Hence, the effect of exchange is
more pronounced at low energies for the loosely bound orbita ls.
For a general HF wave function, ψν(r1,...,rj,...,rN) =A[/producttextN
j=1φνj(rj)],where Ais the antisymmetrization operator
and the position vectors of the electrons are rj,j= 1,2,...,N and the atomic orbitals φνj(r) have the following form:
φνj(r)≡/summationdisplay
κaκjφκj(r), (2.6)
where the index νrepresenting the atomic state is dropped on the right-hand s ide. Summing over appropriate target
electronsjand allowing for inelastic channels, the full exchange pote ntial is given by
BE,ν′ν(kf,ki) =/summationdisplay
jgj=−/summationdisplay
j/summationdisplay
κκ′2aκjaκ′j
Dκκ′j
×/integraldisplay
φ∗
κ′j(r)exp(iQ.r)φκj(r)dr, (2.7)
with
Dκκ′j= [k2
f+α2
κj], (2.8)
whereφκj(r) is theκth function of the jth electron, and ακjrefer to the initial state.
The model potential (2.7) with prefactor Dκκ′jof Eq. (2.8) is not time-reversal symmetric. However, if we p erform
the integration over the initial projectile electron r2in Eq. (2.1) first, and carry on a similar procedure, we obtain
exchange potential (2.7) with Dκκ′j= (k2
i+α2
κ′j), whereακ′jrefer to the final state. These two possibilities suggest
the following symmetric prefactor
Dκκ′j= [(k2
i+k2
f)/2 + (α2
κj+α2
κ′j)/2] (2.9)
5in Eq. (2.7). The two possibilities (2.8) and (2.9) correspo nding to two averaging At high energies, the model exchange
potential (2.7) with different averaging prescriptions lea d to the Oppenheimer exchange potential [13]. However, at
low energies the cross section is sensitive to the averaging procedure and the value of the parameter αin prefactors
(2.8) or (2.9). This sensitivity may well be exploited to tun e the parameter αof a particular averaging procedure in
order to obtain a better fit with experiment at low energies.
Although, the model potential (2.7) is derived for the groun d state of the atomic target, it is straightforward to see
that the same result is also valid for target excitations in t he final state using a similar averaging prescription. Hence
model potential (2.7) is equally valid for both elastic and i nelastic scattering by the target.
We have used the exchange potential (2.7) in e−-H ande−-He scattering and calculated the elastic cross sections.
We also demonstrate the effect of different averaging procedu res−symmetric and nonsymmetric, and the variation
of the parameter αwhenever relevant. In the case of e−-H scattering we exhibit the results for elastic cross secti on in
a coupled H(1s,2s,2p) model using the above exchange potent ial in the symmetric form (2.9) with the exact value of
the parameter α. Fore−-He scattering we present results for elastic cross section in the static-exchange model using
the symmetric form (2.9). In the case of He we present a variat ion of the parameter so as to obtain a better fit with
experiment.
In Fig. 1 we present results for e−-H scattering using Eqs. (2.7) and (2.9), where we exhibit th e exchange Born,
static-exchange, and H(1s,2s,2p) cross sections without v ariation of the parameter α. In this figure we compare the
low-energy cross sections with experimental results [14] a nd the calculations by Temkin and Lamkin [10]. At medium
energies the results are compared with essentially converg ed calculation of Callaway [15]. We also plot the total
first Born cross section with Oppenheimer exchange [13]. At l ow energies the present H(1s,2s,2p) cross sections are
improvement over the present static-exchange cross sectio ns. At higher energies they are essentially identical and
only the static-exchange results are shown. At large energi es, as expected, the present cross sections tend to the total
first exchange-Born (Born+Oppenheimer exchange) results. Both at low and medium energies the agreement of the
present cross sections with the results of other workers is e ncouraging. We verified that both the exchange Born,
static-exchange cross sections are sensitive to the variat ion of the parameter αin the prefactor (2.9). We demonstrate
the effect of such variation at low energies in the study of e−-He scattering where it seems more relevant.
6In Fig. 2 we plot the present static-exchange cross section o f electron-helium scattering for model exchange potential
given by Eqs. (2.7) and (2.9) with the HF helium wave function of Ref. [16]. In this case we present results for first
exchange-Born and static-exchange elastic cross sections with the exact parameters α’s. Here we also present results
for static-exchange cross sections with modified value for t he parameters α(<q2>= (0.4α)2) in the prefactor (2.9)
for bothκandκ′corresponding to initial and final states, respectively. (T he parameters in the helium wave function
under the integral in Eq. (2.7) are left unchanged as should b e.) The results are compared with experimental results
and the five-state [He(1s,21s,23s,21p,23p)] CCA calculation of Burke et al [18] using model exchange p otential.
The present static-exchange cross-sections agree reasona bly with experiment [17] at medium to high energies. The
variation of the parameter αin this case has led to good agreement with experiment and the CCA calculation of Burke
et al [18] at lower energies. For obtaining a better agreemen t with experiment the effect of excitation and polarization
of the target should be taken into account. This could be done by considering a coupled-channel calculation with
helium excitations as in the electron-hydrogen scattering considered above. With this reliability achieved in the e−-H
ande−-He systems we extend this exchange model to Ps impact cases.
III. EXCHANGE POTENTIAL FOR POSITRONIUM-IMPACT SCATTERIN G
A. Formulation
Here, we first we develop the present exchange model potentia l for Ps-H elastic scattering using H(1s) orbital and
finally extend it to inelastic Ps scattering by a many-body ta rget described by a HF wave function. We start with
the following exchange transition amplitude [11]
g(kf,ki) =−1
π/integraldisplay
dxdr1dr2φ∗(r2)χ∗(t1)1
r12φ(r1)
×χ(t2)exp[i( ki.s2−kf.s1)], (3.1)
where the position vector of the electron (positron) of Ps is r2(x). Here sj= (x+rj)/2,tj= (x−rj),j= 1,2,
χ(φ) is the wave function of Ps (H). As in the previous section, to remove the nonorthogonality defect we seek an
exchange potential of the form
g(kf,ki)∼/integraldisplay
drdtφ∗(r)χ∗(t)U(r,t,ki,kf)φ(r)χ(t), (3.2)
7whereUis to be determined. We consider the integration over the coo rdinate of the final projectile electron r1of Eq.
(3.1) below. Using φ(r) =π−1/2α3/2exp(−αr) andχ(t) =π−1/2β3/2exp(−βt), taking Fourier transformation, the
integral Ioverr1is given by
I ≡/integraldisplay
dr1χ∗(t1)1
r12φ(r1)exp(−ikf.s1),
=4(αβ)5/2
π4/integraldisplay
dpdqexp(−ikf.r2/2)
(kf/2−p+q)2
×exp(iq.t2)
(q2+β2)2exp(ip.r2)
(p2+α2)2. (3.3)
Again we employ an average value prescription for ( kf/2−p+q)2in Eq. (3.3) which will reduce Eq. (3.1) to form
(3.2). Recalling that the internal kinetic energies of H (re presented by p2/2m;m= 1) and Ps ( q2/2m;m= 1/2)
are given by α2/2 andβ2in atomic units, we take the averages of p2andq2asα2andβ2, respectively, and set
(kf/2−p+q)2≈(k2
f/4 +α2+β2) in Eq. (3.3), where the average values of the scalar product s are assumed to
be zero. After taking an inverse Fourier transformation in E q.(3.3) and transforming the set of variables x,r1,r2to
t2,r1,r2, where the Jacobian is unity, the final model exchange potent ial becomes
g(kf,ki)≈ −4(−1)l′+1
k2
f/4 +α2+β2/integraldisplay
φ∗(r2)exp(iQ.r2)φ(r2)dr2
×/integraldisplay
χ∗(t2)exp(iQ.t2/2)χ(t2)dt2, (3.4)
wherel′is the angular momentum of the final Ps state and Eq. (3.4) has b een multiplied by ( −1)l′+1the final-
state parity. This provides the correct sign of the exchange potential given by formal antisymmetrization for elastic
and all Ps excitation channels. This exchange potential cou ld be considered to be a generalization of Rudge-type
exchange Born amplitude [12] for electron-impact scatteri ng to more complex situations. For a general HF orbital
(2.6), summing over appropriate target electrons jand allowing for inelastic Ps channels, the (target-elasti c) model
exchange potential is given by
BE,µ′µ(kf,ki) =/summationdisplay
jgj=−/bracketleftbigg/summationdisplay
j/summationdisplay
κκ′4aκjaκ′j(−1)l′+1
Dκκ′j
×/integraldisplay
φ∗
κ′j(r)exp(iQ.r)φκj(r)dr/bracketrightbigg
×/integraldisplay
χ∗
n′l′(t)exp(iQ.t/2)χnl(t)dt, (3.5)
with
8Dκκ′j= [k2
f/4 +α2
κj+β2
n′] (3.6)
whereµ≡nl(µ′≡n′l′) are the initial (final) Ps quantum numbers, φκj(r) is theκth function of the jth electron
for the atomic ground state, and βn′corresponds to the final inelastic Ps state, for which the der ivation of the model
potential is similar and leads to the same result (3.4) or (3. 5). For Ps ionization, the constant β2
n′, which corresponds
to the final Ps-state binding energy, is taken as 0 in Eq. (3.5) .
As noted in Sec. II, the exchange potential given by Eqs. (3.5 ) and (3.6) is not time-reversal symmetric. However,
if one performs in Eq. (3.1) the integration over the coordin ate of the initial projectile electron r2first with a similar
average-value prescription as above one will obtain exchan ge potential (3.5) with Dκκ′j= [k2
i/4 +α2
κ′j+β2
n]. These
two possibilities suggest the following symmetric prefact or
Dκκ′j= [(k2
f+k2
i)/8 + (α2
κj+α2
κ′j)/2 + (β2
n′+β2
n)/2]. (3.7)
Both choices (3.6) and (3.7) lead to good numerical results. At high energies the results are independent of this choice.
At low energies they are sensitive to the choice and the value of the parameter αin Eqs. (3.6) and (3.7). In this work
we shall present only results of choice (3.6) with the origin al and modified value of the parameter α.
The target-elastic direct Born Ps-He amplitude for Ps trans ition from state µtoµ′is given by [7]
BD,µ′µ(kf,ki) =4
Q2/bracketleftbigg
2−/summationdisplay
κκ′/summationdisplay
jaκjaκ′j
×/integraldisplay
φ∗
κ′j(r)exp(iQ.r)φκj(r)dr/bracketrightbigg
×/integraldisplay
χ∗
µ′(t)[exp(iQ.t/2)−exp(−iQ.t/2)]χµ(t)dt
(3.8)
With the present prescription, the Ps-impact exchange pote ntial is written in the form of product of projectile and
target form factors, as the direct potential above. This sim ple form of the amplitudes facilitates numerical calculati ons.
B. Numerical Application to Ps-He Scattering
In the case of target-elastic Ps-He scattering, electron ex change between the incident Ps and target He is only possible
between like spins. Consequently, only the spin-triplet st ate of the electrons undergoing exchange is possible. We
9define appropriately symmetrized spin-triplet “Born” ampl itudes, B, viaBµ′µ(kf,ki) =BD,µ′µ(kf,ki)−BE,µ′µ(kf,ki).
The appropriately symmetrized scattering amplitude fsatisfies the following momentum-space Lippmann-Schwinge r
scattering integral equation [6]
fµ′µ(k′,k) =Bµ′µ(k′,k)
−/summationdisplay
µ′′/integraldisplaydk′′
2π2Bµ′µ′′(k′,k′′)fµ′′µ(k′′,k)
E−ǫµ′′−k′′2/4 + i0,
(3.9)
whereǫµ′′is the total energy of the Ps and He states in the intermediate stateµ′′andEis the total energy of the
system. The differential cross section is defined by ( dσ/dΩ)µ′,µ= (k′/k)|fµ′µ(k′,k)|2.
We performed static-exchange [with µ′′= Ps(1s) in Eq. (3.9)] and three-Ps-state [with µ′′= Ps(1s,2s,2p) in
Eq. (3.9)] calculations using exact wave functions for Ps an d HF atomic orbitals for He [16]. After a partial-wave
projection, Eq. (3.9) was solved by the method of matrix inve rsion. Maximum number of partial waves included in
the calculation was 10. Contribution of higher partial wave s to cross sections was included by corresponding Born
terms. To predict the cross sections at medium energies, we a lso calculated the discrete excitation (3s, 3p, 3d, 4s, 4p,
4d, 4f, 5p, 5d, 5f, 6p) and ionization cross sections of Ps in t he first Born approximation keeping the target frozen to
its initial ground state using the present exchange model.
In Fig. 3 we plot the present target-elastic total cross sect ion [Ps(1s,2s,2p) three-Ps-state cross section plus targe t-
elastic total Born cross sections for n≥3 Ps-excitations and Ps-ionization]. The experimental tot al Ps-He cross
sections of two different groups −recent low-energy cross section of Ref. [2] and medium- to hi gh-energy cross
sections of Ref. [1] −are also plotted. For comparison we also plot the static-exc hange and 22-coupled-pseudo-state
(without exchange) cross sections of Refs. [6] and [7], resp ectively. The measured Ps-impact total cross section of Ref .
[1] has a peak near 20 eV and a lowering trend below this energy , and the recent measurement around 1 eV of Ref.
[2] is consistent with this trend. However, due to large erro r bar of the measurement of Ref. [1] at their lowest energy
(10 eV) and due to inadequate data in this energy region, it is not clear from experiment whether the total cross
section has a minimum near the Ps excitation threshold or not . This question is addressed in the present theoretical
investigation. At energies below the Ps-excitation thresh olds, the elastic cross section is found to be a monotonicall y
decreasing function of energy, as is usually found in many si milar scattering problems. In the narrow energy band
10between 5.1 to 6.8 eV, all the Ps-inelastic channels open up c ausing a sharp increase of the total cross section, as can
be seen in Fig. 7, resulting in a minimum of total cross sectio n near the Ps-excitation threshold. With this feature of
the cross section, the present calculation bridges the two d ifferent experimental findings and points out a minimum
in total cross section near the Ps(2s) threshold. This featu re is also noticed in the unpublished theoretical work of
Peach [19]. While the 22-coupled-pseudo-state calculatio n [7], which includes the Ps excitation and ionization effect s
through pseudo states, completely denies this trend; the st atic-exchange cross sections [4–6] are too large to match
the measurement near Ps(2s) threshold.
So far we have parametrized the model potential from a physic al argument and presented results with it. In Eq.
(3.5)ακj’s are parameters of HF orbitals. In Fig. 3 we also exhibit the consequence of a small variation of ακjin the
prefactor (k2
f/4 +α2
κj+β2
n′)−1of Eq. (3.5). The full line, providing an overall better agre ement with experiment, is
obtained by varying parameters ακj’s in the prefactor (3.6), which is taken as
Dκκ′j= [k2
f/4 + (0.88ακj)2+β2
n′] (3.10)
in both the static-exchange and three-Ps-state calculatio ns. Unless specifically mentioned, all results presented he re
are calculated with this modified prefactor. The above reduc tion in the average value of < p2>has led to a better
agreement with experiment.
Next we present an account of phase shifts and angle-integra ted partial cross sections with modified prefactor
(3.10). The present static-exchange and three-Ps-state el astic scattering phase shifts for different partial waves be low
the lowest excitation threshold are shown in Figs. 4 (S wave) and 5 (P and D waves). The present phase shifts
are different from those of previous calculations [4–6] as is expected from the cross-section pattern. However, for
comparison we show the phase shifts of the recent work by Sark ar and Ghosh [6] in Figs. 4 and 5. At these energies
the S-wave phase shifts alone control the elastic cross sect ion. The present low-energy elastic S-wave phase shifts are
expected to be more reasonable to those of the previous calcu lations as from Fig. 3 we find that the present cross
sections are in better agreement with experiment.
In Fig. 6 we plot the present low-energy elastic cross sectio ns for static-exchange and three-Ps-state calculations. W e
compare these cross sections with the recent sophisticated low-energy experimental cross section of Ref. [2] measured
using time-resolved Doppler Broadening Spectroscopy and t he previous static-exchange cross sections of Refs. [4–6].
11Here, just to have a feeling, we also plot the present static- exchange cross section calculated with the exact parameter
αin the prefactor. The present three-Ps-state cross section s are significantly smaller than previous theoretical cross
sections and are in close agreement with experiment. The pre sent exchange Born cross sections are also smaller
than those of previous calculations. For example, Sarkar an d Ghosh [6] obtained the first Born elastic cross sections
131.9πa2
0and 12.5πa2
0at 0.068 eV and 1 eV, compared to the present first Born elastic cross sections 8.8 πa2
0and
3.7πa2
0, respectively. The present three-Ps-state cross sections are smaller than the static-exchange cross sections and
are well within the experimental error bar. However, in the p resent calculation we have neglected long-range van der
Waals interaction. The effect of this interaction has been sh own [5] to increase the zero-energy cross section by as
much as 30%, while around 1 eV its effect is to increase the cros s section by about 3% only. Hence, the inclusion of
this interaction is expected to further improve the agreeme nt with experiment at low energies.
In Fig. 7 we exhibit the different angle-integrated partial c ross sections for the three-Ps-state calculation. Here
we show the Ps(1s) and Ps(2s+2p) cross sections from the thre e-Ps-state calculation and Ps( n≥3) excitation and
Ps-ionization cross sections using the present total first B orn model. At medium energies the Ps-ionization cross
sections are the largest and dominates the trend of the total cross section of Fig. 3. This feature has also been
observed by Campbell et al [7] in Ps-H scattering.
Table I: Angle-integrated Ps-He partial cross sections in πa2
0at different positronium energies: EB −first Born
with present exchange; PSE −present static exchange; SE −static exchange of Ref. [6]; TPS −three-Ps-state with
present exchange
12Energy Ps(1s) Ps(2s) Ps(2p) Ps(1s) Ps(1s) Ps(1s) Ps(2s) Ps(2p) Ps(n≥3)Ps-ion
(eV) EB EB EB SE PSE TPS TPS TPS EB EB
0.068 13.73 14.4 3.73 2.70
0.612 10.88 12.9 3.34 2.36
1.088 9.05 12.1 3.07 2.13
1.7 7.31 11.3 2.80 1.88
2.448 5.79 10.5 2.52 1.62
4.352 3.57 9.0 1.99 1.09
5 3.10 1.85 0.89
5.508 2.81 0.80(−1)1.51 1.75 0.81 0.49(−1)0.83
6 2.56 0.10 1.87 1.66 0.81 0.70(−1)1.16
6.8 2.22 0.12 1.98 7.7 1.53 0.81 0.74(−1)1.39 0.69
8 1.84 0.11 1.86 1.35 0.79 0.64(−1)1.44 0.86 0.74
10 1.39 0.91(−1)1.54 1.11 0.73 0.52(−1)1.31 0.78 2.05
15 0.80 0.54(−1)1.00 0.71 0.55 0.45(−1)0.92 0.52 3.67
20 0.52 0.35(−1)0.72 3.6 0.49 0.41 0.33(−1)0.68 0.38 4.10
30 0.27 0.17(−1)0.44 2.0 0.26 0.24 0.18(−1)0.43 0.23 3.96
40 0.16 0.10(−1)0.31 0.7 0.16 0.15 0.11(−1)0.30 0.16 3.52
50 0.11 0.65(−2)0.23 0.11 0.10 0.68(−2)0.23 0.11 3.09
600.75(−1)0.45(−2)0.19 0.8(−1)0.75(−1)0.72(−1)0.46(−2)0.18 0.93(−1)2.72
800.41(−1)0.24(−2)0.13 0.1(−1)0.41(−1)0.40(−1)0.25(−2)0.13 0.63(−1)2.14
100 0.25(−1)0.14(−2)0.98(−1)0.2(−2)0.25(−1)0.25(−1)0.14(−2)0.98(−1)0.49(−1)1.74
The angle-integrated partial cross sections are of crucial importance and are presented in Table I. These partial
cross sections are calculated with the modified prefactor (3 .10) and leads to total cross section in better agreement
with experiment. These cross sections should be considered to be the most realistic results of the present model study
except near zero energy where van der Waals force might play a crucial role, which is not taken into account. In
13addition to the three-Ps-state cross sections we also prese nt our first Born and static-exchange results in Table I with
modified prefactor (3.10). For comparison we also show the st atic-exchange results of Sarkar and Ghosh [6]. The
present elastic Born cross sections are much smaller than th ose of Ref. [6]. The present three-Ps-state elastic cross
sections are smaller than the static-exchange cross sectio ns, which demonstrates the effect of large polarizability of
Ps.
IV. SUMMARY
We have presented simple model exchange potentials for elec tron- and Ps-impact scattering suitable for performing
dynamical calculation in many-electron systems and checke d it in electron scattering from H and He and applied it
to Ps scattering from He. The present static-exchange and th ree-Ps-state coupled-channel cross sections of electron-
impact scattering are in agreement with other existing resu lts [10,14,15,17,18]. We have performed static-exchange
and three-Ps-state calculations for Ps-He scattering at lo w and medium energies. To exhibit the usefulness of the
present exchange at medium energies, higher excitations an d ionization of Ps are calculated using the first Born model
with present exchange. The present target-elastic total cr oss sections agree well with experiment [1,2] both at low
and medium energies.
The work is supported in part by the Conselho Nacional de Dese nvolvimento Cient´ ıfico e Tecnol´ ogico and Funda¸ c˜ ao
de Amparo ` a Pesquisa do Estado de S˜ ao Paulo of Brazil.
[1] A. J. Garner, G. Laricchia, and A. Ozen, J. Phys. B 29, 5961 (1996).
[2] M. Skalsey, J. J. Engbrecht, R. K. Bithell, R. S. Vallery, and D. W. Gidley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 3727 (1998).
[3] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, J. Phys. B 31, 3147 (1998); and references therein.
[4] P. A. Fraser, J. Phys. B 1, 1006 (1968).
[5] M. I. Barker and B. H. Bransden, J. Phys. B 1, 1109 (1968).
[6] N. K. Sarkar and A. S. Ghosh, J. Phys. B 30, 4591 (1997).
14[7] M. T. McAlinden, F. G. R. S. MacDonald, and H. R. J. Walters , Can. J. Phys. 74, 434 (1996).
[8] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, J. Phys. B 31, L315 (1998).
[9] M. J. Seaton, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. 245, 469 (1953); P. G. Burke and M. J. Seaton, Methods Comput. Phy s.10, 1 (1971);
A. T. Stelbovics and B. H. Bransden, J. Phys. B 22, L451 (1989).
[10] P. G. Burke and H. M. Schey, Phys. Rev. 126, 147 (1962); A. Temkin and J. C. Lamkin, ibid. 121, 788 (1961).
[11] M. E. Riley and D. G. Truhlar, J. Chem. Phys. 63, 2182 (1975); A. W. Fliflet and V. McKoy, Phys. Rev. A 21, 1863
(1980); F. A. Gianturco, XIX ICPEAC, Eds. L. J. Dub´ e et al., A IP Conference Proceedings 360 (AIP Press, Woodbury,
1995), pp 211; S. Hara, J. Phys. Soc. Japan 22, 710 (1967); M. A. Morrison, A. N. Feldt, and D. Austin, Phys. Rev. A 29,
2518 (1984); P. Baille and J. W. Darewych, J. Phys. B 10, L615 (1977);
[12] M. R. H. Rudge, Proc. Phys. Soc. 86, 763 (1965); V. I. Ochkur, Sov. Phys. −JETP 18, 503 (1964).
[13] J. R. Oppenheimer, Phys. Rev. 32, 361 (1928).
[14] R. H. Neynaber, L. L. Marino, E. W. Rothe, and S. M. Trujil lo, Phys. Rev. 124, 135 (1961).
[15] J. Callaway, Phys. Rev. A 32, 775 (1985).
[16] E. Clementi and C. Roetti, At. Data and Nucl. Data Tables 14, 177 (1974).
[17] D. Andrick and H. Bitsch, J. Phys. B 8, 393 (1975), F. J. de Heer and R. H. J. Jansen, ibid. 10, 3741 (1977), D. F.
Register, S. Trajmar, and S. K. Srivastava, Phys. Rev. A 21, 1134 (1980); D. E. Golden and H. W. Bandel, Phys. Rev.
138, A14 (1965).
[18] P. G. Burke, J. W. Cooper, and S. Ormonde, Phys. Rev. 183, 245 (1969).
[19] G. Peach, unpublished, as quoted in Ref. [1].
15Figure Caption:
1. Elastic electron-hydrogen cross section: present stati c exchange model (dashed-double-dotted line); present Bor n
(dashed line); present H(1s,2s,2p) model (full line); tota l first Born with Oppenheimer exchange (dashed-triple-dott ed
line); polarized orbital model by Temkin and Lamkin [10] at l ower energies ( <10 eV) and CCA model by Callaway
[15] at higher energies (dashed-dotted line); experiment ( solid circles, Ref. [14]) [H(1s,2s,2p) CCA model results by
Burke and Schey [10] are very close to Temkin and Lamkin and ar e not shown].
2. Elastic electron-helium cross section: present static e xchange with exact parameters α(dashed-dotted line);
present Born with exact α(dashed line); present static exchange with modified α(full line); He(1s,21s,23s,21p,23p)
CCA calculation of Burke et al. (dashed-double-dotted line , Ref. [18]) experiment (solid circles and crosses, Ref. [17 ]).
3. Total Ps-He cross sections at different positronium energ ies: present target-elastic result from three-Ps-state
model plus present first exchange Born for n≥3 excitations and ionization of Ps (dashed line); present ta rget-
elastic result with modified parameter α2
κjin the prefactor (full line); static-exchange model of Sark ar and Ghosh
(dashed-dotted line, Ref. [6]); 22-coupled-pseudo-state model of McAlinden et al. (dashed-double-dotted line, Ref.
[7]); experiment (square, Ref. [2]; circle Ref. [1]).
4. S-wave elastic Ps-He phase shifts at different positroniu m energies: present three-Ps-state model (full line);
present static-exchange model (dashed line); static-exch ange model of Sarkar and Ghosh (dotted line, Ref. [6]).
5. P- and D-wave elastic Ps-He phase shifts at different posit ronium energies: notations are the same as in Fig. 4.
6. Angle-integrated Ps-He elastic cross section at low posi tronium energies: present three-Ps-state model (full line );
present static-exchange model (dotted line); present stat ic-exchange with unmodified parameter α(dashed-tripple-
dotted line); Fraser (dashed-double-dotted line, Ref. [4] ); Barker and Bransden (dashed-dotted line, Ref. [5]); Sark ar
and Ghosh (plus, Ref. [6]); experiment shown by square (Ref. [2]).
7. Angle-integrated Ps-He partial cross sections at differe nt positronium energies with exact α: present elastic from
three-Ps-state model (full line) and Ps(2s+2p) excitation (dashed-dotted line) from three-Ps-state model, present
Ps(n≥3) excitation (dashed-double-dotted line) and Ps ionizati on (dashed line) using first Born approximation with
present exchange.
160 40 80 120
Energy (eV)110Elastic Cross Section ( a02)Figure 1
0 10010201 10 100
Energy (eV)010203040Elastic Cross Section (a02)Figure 20 20 40 60
Energy (eV)02468Total Cross Section (10 -16 cm2)Figure 30 1 2 3 4 5
Energy (eV)2.02.53.0S-wave Elastic Phase Shift (Radian)Figure 40 1 2 3 4 5
Energy (eV)-0.16-0.12-0.08-0.040.00P- and D-wave Elastic Phase Shifts (Radian)L=2
L=1Figure 50 1 2 3 4 5
Energy (eV)04812Total Cross Section (10 -16 cm2)Figure 60 20 40 60 80
Energy (eV)01234Partial Cross Section ( a02)Figure 7 |
arXiv:physics/9911053v1 [physics.atm-clus] 23 Nov 1999Low-energy quenching of positronium by helium
Sadhan K. Adhikari, P. K. Biswas, and R. A. Sultanov
Instituto de F´ ısica Te´ orica, Universidade Estadual Paul ista, 01.405-900 S˜ ao Paulo, S˜ ao Paulo, Brazil
(February 2, 2008)
Very low-energy scattering of orthopositronium by helium h as been investigated for simultane-
ous study of elastic cross section and pick-off quenching rat e using a model exchange potential.
The present calculational scheme, while agrees with the mea sured cross section of Skalsey et
al, reproduces successfully the parameter1Zeff, the effective number of electrons per atom in a
singlet state relative to the positron. Together with the fa ct that this model potential also leads
to an agreement with measured medium energy cross sections o f this system, this study seems
to resolve the long-standing discrepancy at low energies am ong different theoretical calculations
and experimental measurements.
PACS Number(s): 34.10.+x, 36.10.Dr
Studies on positronium- (Ps-)impact scattering
have gained momentum these days due to the avail-
ability of ortho-Ps beam in the laboratory and its vast
applicational potential coupled with the present in-
adequate and inconclusive understanding of its inter-
action dynamics with matter [1]. Ps scattering by
neutral targets has posed a challenge to theoreticians
on a proper accounting of experimental data as most
existing theoretical works disagree with the major ex-
perimental trend.
The discrepancy figures out prominently in the Ps-
He system where there are many theoretical and ex-
perimental studies. The medium-energy experimental
cross section shows a declining trend with decreasing
energy [2] from a peak around 20 eV for Ps-He scat-
tering. Similar trend is also observed in Ps-H 2and Ps-
Ar systems [2,3]. This trend, which is supported by
the recent measurement of Skalsey et al [4], could not
be reproduced in most theoretical predictions [5–9].
At very low energies, these theories and experiments
[2–4,10,11] on the Ps-He system are inconsistent with
each other and also among themselves. For illustra-
tion, the zero-energy cross sections calculated on Ps-
He by different authors vary from 3 .3˚A2[12] to 16 .54
˚A2[13] while the measured values range from 2 .3±0.4
˚A2(at 0.915 eV) [4] to 11 ±3˚A2(between 0 to 0.3
eV) [10]. Pointing out the very reactive nature of Ps
scattering and its associated convergence difficulties,
a prescription for the generation of nonlocal model
exchange potential has been advocated recently and
applied successfully to different electron-impact (tar-
gets: H, He) and Ps-impact (targets: H [15,16], He
[14], H 2[17], Ar, Ne [18]) scatterings problems using
static-exchange to three-Ps-state models. The three-
Ps-state calculation for Ps-He predict a further lower
zero-energy cross section of 2.42 ˚A2[14].
In this work we shed light on the abovementioned
discrepancy in Ps-He system in conjunction with a
determination of the parameter1Zeffwhich denotes
the effective number of electrons per atom in a singletstate relative to the positron. The study of this pa-
rameter is supposed to provide a stringent test for the
model potential. The incident ortho Ps(1s) atom in
a triplet state with a lifetime of 142ns can decay into
three photons and is more stable than its para coun-
terpart in a singlet state with a lifetime of 0.125ns for
a two-photon decay mode. However, in its interaction
with matter, the positron of Ps can find an atomic
electron in a spin-singlet state and the two can be
annihilated by a two-photon decay mode without re-
ally forming a para Ps atom by electron exchange.
This process is termed pick-off quenching. From the
experimental pick-off quenching rate the parameter
1Zeffcan be extracted. Theoretically1Zeffcan be
calculated from the wave function of the Ps-He sys-
tem Ψ( rp, sp;r1, s1;r2, s2;r3, s3) where randsrefer
to position and spin, the suffix prefers to the positron
andi= 1,2,3 refer to the electrons. Following Barker
and Bransden [7,13], the amplitude for finding the
positron and one of the atomic electrons in a relative
singlet state is
Φ(rp;r1;r2,s2;r3, s3) =< χ0(sp, s1)|Ψ>, (0.1)
where χ0is the singlet wave function. The parameter
1Zeffis given by
1Zeff= 3/summationdisplay
spin/integraldisplay
drpdr1dr2dr3δ(rp−r1)|Φ|2.(0.2)
The factor 3 appears as each of the three electrons of
the Ps-He system contributes equally to1Zeff.
Unlike the scattering cross sections, which are de-
termined from the asymptotic part of the Ps-He wave
function, the parameter1Zeffis sensitive to the Ps-He
wave function at short distances and its correct eval-
uation in a theoretical calculation should provide a
sensitive test about its realistic nature. There is con-
siderable discrepancy between theory and experiment
in the value of the parameter1Zeff. The experimen-
tal measurements have yielded1Zeff= 0.108±0.01
1[13,19],1Zeff= 0.135±0.068 [7,20], and1Zeff=
0.25±25% [7,21], whereas different static-exchange
calculations have yielded values ranging from 0.02 to
0.1 [5,7,13]. Compared to other exchange potentials,
the present scheme leads to substantially weaker re-
pulsive exchange potential and it is expected that the
present scheme will lead to a larger value of1Zeffin
Ps-He system as is demanded by experiments [19–21].
In the static-exchange approximation the Ps-He
wave function is represented by the following an-
tisymmetrized product of the internal wave func-
tions of Ps(1s), φPs(r1−rp), and singlet He(1s1s),
φHe(r2,r3), with a wave function of relative motion,
Fk(R), and a suitable spin function:
Ψ =AφPs(t)φHe(r2,r3)Fk(R)χ(s1, s2, s3, sp),(0.3)
where R= (r1+rp)/2,t=r1−rp,Ais the anti-
symmetrizer, kthe incident Ps momentum, and χthe
spin function.
On expanding F(R) in partial waves
Fk(R) =∞/summationdisplay
L=0(2L+ 1)(kR)−1FL(R)PL(cosθ),(0.4)
where θis the angle between kandR, the follow-
ing integro-differential equation is obtained from the
Schr¨ odinger equation:
/parenleftbiggd2
dR2+k2−L(L+ 1)
R2/parenrightbigg
FL(R)
=/integraldisplay∞
0VL(R, R′)FL(R′)R′2dR′, (0.5)
where we use VL(R, R′) is the nonlocal exchange
potential. The asymptotic boundary conditions for
Fk(R) and FL(R) are given by
Fk(R)∼R→∞exp(ikRcosθ) +f(θ)exp(ikR)
R,(0.6)
FL(R)∼R→∞sin(kR−Lπ/2 +δL), (0.7)
where δLis the scattering phase shift, and the scat-
tering amplitude f(θ) is given by
f(θ) =∞/summationdisplay
L=0(2L+ 1)exp(iδL)sinδL
kPL(cosθ).(0.8)
The total elastic and momentum transfer cross sec-
tions are given by
σel(k2) =/integraldisplay
|f(θ)|2dΩ, (0.9)
σm(k2) =/integraldisplay
|f(θ)|2(1−cosθ)dΩ, (0.10)
respectively. Some of the experiments provide
only low-energy momentum-transfer cross section and
hence we also calculate this observable in this study.We employ He(1s1s) wave function of the following
form
φHe(r2,r3) =u2(r2)u3(r3) (0.11)
ui(r) =/summationdisplay
κaκiφκi(r), (0.12)
withφκi(r) = exp( −ακir)Y00.In the present calcula-
tion we use an accurate two-term parametrization of
(0.12) [22]. In momentum space the model exchange
potential has the following form [14]:
B(kf,ki) =/bracketleftbigg/summationdisplay
j/summationdisplay
κκ′4aκjaκ′j
Dκκ′j
×/integraldisplay
φ∗
κ′j(r)exp(iQ.r)φκj(r)dr/bracketrightbigg
×/integraldisplay
φ∗
Ps(t)exp(iQ.t/2)φPs(t)dt,(0.13)
withQ=ki−kf,V(p,q) =−B(p,q)/(2π2) and
Dκκ′j= [k2
f/4 +α2
κj+β2] (0.14)
where φκj(r) is the κth function of the jth elec-
tron for the atomic ground state, and φPs(t) =
β3/2exp(−βt)/√π. The direct potential for this prob-
lem is zero, and there is a change of sign in the spin-
triplet Ps-He potential below. The partial-wave con-
figuration space nonlocal potential of Eq. (0.5) is
given by
VL(R, R′) =/parenleftbigg2
π/parenrightbigg2/integraldisplay∞
0/integraldisplay∞
0p2dpq2dq
×jL(pR)VL(p, q)jL(qR′) (0.15)
and
VL(p, q) =−π2/integraldisplay1
−1dxPL(x)V(p,q), (0.16)
where xis the angle between pandq. Although the
model exchange potential (0.16) has been found to
be satisfactory for calculating scattering cross sections
[14], it is interesting to investigate if it is also effective
in the calculation of finer scattering observables, such
as the parameter1Zeff.A scheme for the calculation
of1Zefffor He wave functions of type (0.11) is given
by Fraser and Kraidy [13] and we employ the same in
the present calculation.
First we show our results for the low-energy elastic
and momentum-transfer cross sections in Fig. 1 to-
gether those obtained from other theories and experi-
ments. The triplet Ps-He scattering length in this case
is 0.87 a0, compared to 1.39 a0obtained by Drachman
and Houston [5]. The discrepancy among various re-
sults is apparent in this plot. The three experimental
2results for cross sections [4,10] shown by solid circles
vary from 2.3 ˚A2[4], through 7.45 ˚A2[11], to 11 ˚A2
[10] at 0.9 eV, 0 eV, and 0.15 eV, respectively. It is
difficult to reconcile these three experimental results
in a theoretical model. Previous static-exchange cal-
culations [7–9,13] except those of Ref. [14] all tend
to support the largest cross section of Ref. [10]. The
model calculation of Drachman and Houston [5] de-
noted by a cross in Fig. 1 is consistent with the exper-
iment of Ref. [11]. This discrepancy has been partially
resolved in the study of Ref. [14], where it has been
demonstrated that the present model exchange poten-
tial is unique in being able to reproduce experimental
cross sections [2,3] upto medium energies (about 60
eV) fairly well. Other theoretical calculations are un-
able to reproduce [7,8,13] the experimental trend of
total cross section at different energies with a mini-
mum around 5.1 eV. The present elastic (full line) and
momentum-transfer (dashed line) static-exchange cal-
culations are consistent with the experiment of Skalsey
et al [4].
0 1 2 3 4 5
Energy (eV)0481216Elastic Cross Section (10 -16 cm2)Figure 1
Fig. 1. Angle-integrated Ps-He cross section at
low positronium energies: present momentum trans-
fer from static-exchange model (dashed line); present
elastic from static-exchange model (full line); elastic
from static-exchange of Ref. [7] (dashed-dotted line);
of Ref. [13] (dashed-double-dotted line); of Ref. [8]
(dashed-triple-dotted line); theory of Ref. [5] (cross);
experiments at 0 eV, 0.15 eV, and 0.9 eV of Refs.
[11,10,4], respectively (solid circle).
Next we perform an S-wave calculation for the pa-
rameter1Zeff. In Fig. 2 we plot the results for the
present calculation of1Zeffat different energies. For
comparison we also plot the results of previous calcu-
lation by Barker and Bransden [7] and by Fraser and
Kraidy [13] and the existing three experimental data.
Although Drachman and Houston [5] did not calcu-
late1Zeffat different energies, their low-energy value
of 0.1 is in reasonable agreement with the present re-
sult of 0.11 and experiment of Refs. [19,20]. The three
experimental results with error bars cover the rangeof 0.07 to 0.31 for1Zeff. Of the three experiments the
one by Duff and Heymann [19] with the smallest error
bar might be the most accurate.
The much too small values of1Zeffobtained in
previous calculations [7,13] seem to be a consequence
of a much stronger (exchange) repulsion in the elas-
tic channel of these models. This is reflected in the
zero-energy cross section or the scattering length of
these calculations. For a repulsive potential the low-
energy cross section increases with repulsion, conse-
quently, the previous calculations have led to unusu-
ally large triplet scattering lengths compared to the
present work. This is most clearly exhibited in a cor-
relation exhibited in Fig. 3 where we plot1Zeffversus
triplet scattering length of different calculations. The
larger the scattering length the smaller is the1Zeff.
This correlation is similar to different correlations ob-
served in the study of Ps-H scattering in Ref. [16].
0.01 0.10 1.00
Energy (eV)0.00.10.20.31Z effFigure 2
Fig. 2. The parameter1Zeffat different positron-
ium energies: calculation including angular momenta
L= 0,1,2 of Ref. [13] (dashed-dotted line), of Ref. [7]
(dashed line); calculation for L= 0 of present model
(full line); the experimental points denoted solid cir-
cle, diamond, cross taken from Refs. [19–21], respec-
tively.
We next comment on two aspects of the present
calculation. First, we used a two-term helium wave
function. We also repeated our calculation with the
one-term helium wave function of Ref. [9] and the five-
term wave function used in Ref. [14]. The results for
both the cross section and1Zeffsuffer insignificant
change with the change of wave function. For1Zeff,
the different results are within the error bar of Ref.
[19]; for cross section they are also within the error
bar of Ref. [4]. Hence we do not believe the present
results to be so peculiar as to be of no general validity.
Secondly, we performed a L= 0 calculation for1Zeff.
At the experimental energies less than 0.03 eV, the
effect of higher partial waves is practically zero (well
within the error bar of Ref. [19]); at 1 eV this effect is
3quite small.
0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0
Scattering Length (units of a0)0.000.040.080.121Z effFigure 3
[5]
[5][7]
[7][13][PR]
Fig. 3. The parameter1Zeffversus scattering
length of various calculations denoted by solid circle
and labeled by reference number [5,7,13]. The present
result is labeled by [PR], full line denotes a linear fit.
From the consideration above, we believe the
present static-exchange calculation as well as the pre-
vious calculations [14] using the same exchange po-
tential provide a realistic account of very low-energy
Ps-He scattering. However, the precise agreement of
the static-exchange calculation with experiment is ex-
pected to be incidental. For a complete understanding
of this problem higher excited states of both Ps and
He should be incorporated in the model. The inclu-
sion of Ps excitation channels has been found [14] to
decrease the low-energy cross sections and we might
need to refit the low-energy cross sections by chang-
ing the parameters αand/or βof the potential in Eq.
(0.14), as in Refs. [16,14].
In conclusion, we have used a recently suggested
nonlocal model exchange potential [15,16,14,17] and
applied it to the study of Ps-He scattering at low ener-
gies. We have critically examined the static-exchange
calculation to see if it can account for satisfactorily
[14] the measured cross sections of Refs. [2,4] and
the ‘measured’ value of the parameter1Zeffof Refs.
[19,20]. The present calculation is in reasonable agree-
ment with the calculation of Ref. [5]. However, it is
difficult to reconcile the present calculation with the
experiment of Ref. [21]. In a previous study [14], the
present exchange potential has been found to repro-
duce the low- to medium-energy cross sections of Refs.
[2,4] well. This coupled with the present study seems
to indicate that the1Zeffmeasurement of Ref. [19]
and the high- and low-energy cross section measure-
ments of Refs. [2] and [4] are consistent among each
other as well as with the present calculation which
possibly provides a faithful description of low-energy
Ps-He scattering. We observe a correlation between
1Zeffand triplet scattering length of various calcula-
tions (Fig. 3), which demonstrates that the smaller
the scattering length the larger is the value of1Zeff.
This correlation is similar to different correlations ob-served between the low-energy Ps-H observables re-
cently [16].
We thank Prof. B. H. Bransden for suggesting this
investigation, and for his helpful comments and en-
couragements. The work is supported in part by the
CNPq and FAPESP of Brazil.
[1] D. W. Gidley, A. Rich, and P. W. Zitzewitz, Positron
Annihilation Ed P. G. Coleman, S. C. Sharma, and L.
M. Diana, (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1982) p. 11
[2] A. J. Garner, G. Laricchia, and A. Ozen, J. Phys. B
29, 5961 (1996).
[3] N. Zafar, G. Laricchia, M. Charlton, and A. J. Garner,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1595 (1996).
[4] M. Skalsey, J. J. Engbrecht, R. K. Bithell, R. S.
Vallery, and D. W. Gidley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 3727
(1998).
[5] R. J. Drachman and S. K. Houston, J. Phys. B 3,
1657 (1970).
[6] S. Hara and P. A. Fraser, 1975 J. Phys. B 8, L472
(1975).
[7] M. I. Barker and B. H. Bransden, J. Phys. B 1, 1109
(1968); 2, 730 (1969).
[8] N. K. Sarkar and A. S. Ghosh, J. Phys. B 30, 4591
(1997).
[9] P. A. Fraser, Proc. Phys. Soc. 79, 721 (1962).
[10] Y. Nagashima, T. Hyodo, K. Fujiwara, and A.
Ichimura, J. Phys. B 31, 329 (1998).
[11] K. F. Canter, J. D. McNutt, and L. O. Roellig, Phys.
Rev. A 12, 375 (1975).
[12] G. Peach, unpublished , as quoted in Garner et al [2].
[13] P. A. Fraser and M. Kraidy, Proc. phys. Soc. 89, 533
(1966).
[14] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, Phys. Rev. A 59,
363 (1999).
[15] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, J. Phys. B 31, 3147
(1998).
[16] S. K. Adhikari and P. K. Biswas, Phys. Rev. A 59,
2058 (1999).
[17] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, J. Phys. B 31, L315,
L737 (1998).
[18] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, submitted for pub-
lication.
[19] B. G. Duff and F. F. Heymann, Proc. R. Soc. 270,
517 (1962).
[20] F. F. Heymann, P. E. Osmon, J. J. Veit and W. F.
Williams, Proc. Phys. Soc. 78, 1038 (1961).
[21] L. O. Roellig and T. M. Kelly, Phys. Rev. Lett. 18,
387 (1967).
[22] F. W. Byron and C. J. Joachain, Phys. Rev. 146, 1
(1966).
4 |
arXiv:physics/9911054v1 [physics.atm-clus] 23 Nov 1999Positronium-Hydrogen-Atom Scattering in a Five-State Mod el
Sadhan K. Adhikari and P. K. Biswas
Instituto de F´ ısica Te´ orica, Universidade Estadual Paul ista 01.405-900 S˜ ao Paulo, S˜ ao Paulo, Brazil
(February 2, 2008)
The scattering of ortho-positronium (Ps) by hydrogen atoms has been investigated in a five-state
coupled-channel model allowing for Ps(1s)H(2s,2p) and Ps( 2s,2p)H(1s) excitations using a recently
proposed electron-exchange model potential. The higher ( n≥3) excitations and ionization of the
Ps atom are calculated using the first Born approximation. Ca lculations are reported of scattering
lengths, phase shifts, elastic, Ps- and H-excitation, and t otal cross sections. Remarkable correlations
are observed between the S-wave Ps-H binding energy and the s inglet scattering length, effective
range, and resonance energy obtained in various model calcu lations. These correlations suggest that
if a Ps-H dynamical model yields the correct result for one of these four observables, it is expected
to lead to the correct result for the other three. The present model, which is constructed so as to
reproduce the Ps-H resonance at 4.01 eV, automatically yiel ds a Ps-H bound state at −1.05 eV
which compares well with the accurate value of −1.067 eV. The model leads to a singlet scattering
length of 3.72 a0and effective range of 1.67 a0, whereas the correlations suggest the precise values of
3.50a0and 1.65 a0for these observables, respectively.
PACS Number(s): 34.10.+x, 36.10.Dr
I. INTRODUCTION
Recently, there have been several experimental and
theoretical investigations of ortho positronium (Ps) atom
scattering from different neutral atomic and molecular
targets. Experiments have primarily measured total Ps-
atom scattering cross sections from various targets [1–3].
In addition to total cross sections, the theoretical stud-
ies have also predicted partial cross sections and phase
shifts for Ps-H [4–9], Ps-He [8,10–12], and Ps-H 2[13,14]
systems. Ps scattering by neutral targets is of special in-
terest, as the direct amplitudes for elastic and even-parit y
state transitions are zero [15] due to the internal charge
and mass symmetry of Ps. Hence the electron-exchange
interaction is the dominating factor at low energies in any
Ps-impact scattering with neutral targets apart from the
effect of polarization and van der Waals forces [10,16].
Ps scattering makes it possible to study the effect of
exchange in an environment characteristically different
from that of the electron-atom systems [15]. Among all
Ps-atom systems, the positronium-hydrogen (Ps-H) sys-
tem is the simplest and is of fundamental interest. The
Ps-H scattering has most of the complications of a many-
body problem, but few-body techniques can be employed
for its solution.
A general feature of the measured total cross section
in Ref. [1] for Ps scattered by He, Ar, and H 2, is a peak
near 20 −25 eV and a decreasing trend below this en-
ergy. Recent measurements near 1 eV [2] are consistent
with this trend. However, because of the large error bars
on the measurement in Ref. [1] at the lowest energy (10
eV) and due to inadequate data in this energy region,
it is not clear from experiment whether the total cross
section has a minimum near the Ps excitation thresh-
old or not. The recent three-Ps-state studies of Refs.
[9,12,14] suggest the existence of a minimum near thePs(2s) threshold. This feature of the cross section is able
to reconcile the two different experimental findings and is
also noticed in the unpublished theoretical work of Peach
[17]. The R-matrix calculation [7,8] for H and He, in
which 22 coupled pseudo states are included, does not
show this trend; whereas the static-exchange (one-state)
cross sections [10] for He are too large to match the mea-
surement near the Ps(2s) threshold [12]. In this respect,
the model-potential studies of Refs. [9,12,14] are unique
in reproducing the experimental trend of Ps-impact scat-
tering by H, He, and H 2. Unphysically large low-energy
cross sections of previous cross sections are expected to
be a consequence of the nonorthogonality arising from
antisymmetrization and the very reactive nature of Ps
scattering [9,12,14].
In this paper we present a theoretical study of ortho-
Ps-H scattering employing a five-state model allow-
ing for excitation of both Ps and H atoms using the
model exchange potential mentioned above. The follow-
ing states are included in the calculation: Ps(1s)H(1s),
Ps(2s)H(1s), Ps(2p)H(1s), Ps(1s)H(2s), and Ps(1s)H(2p)
and such a model should be considered adequate at low
energies. The cross sections for higher discrete and con-
tinuum excitations of the Ps atom are calculated in the
framework of Born approximation. These Born cross sec-
tions are added to the above five-state cross sections to
predict the total cross section.
Although, the parametrization of the model exchange
potential of Ref. [12], which is obtained using a physical
argument, is satisfactory, it is not unique and leaves an
option for the parameters to be varied to tune to some
precise data at low energies. In the absence of experimen-
tal Ps-H cross sections we tune this parameter to repro-
duce the energy of the singlet S-wave resonance. Ho has
provided the most precise estimate of S-wave resonance
energy, which is 4.01 eV (width 0.075 eV) [18]. Frolov
1and Smith have made the most accurate estimate of the
S-wave bound state, which is 1.067 eV [19]. We varied the
parameter of our model to fit the Ps-H resonance energy
at 4.01 eV and found that the same model without any
further adjustment also produced a Ps-H bound state at
−1.05 eV. No previous scattering model has been able to
produce these two features of the Ps-H system simulta-
neously and so precisely. Similar to those obtained in the
three-nucleon system [20,21], we find remarkable corre-
lation between the S-wave Ps-H binding energy and the
singlet scattering length, effective range, and resonance
energy obtained in various model calculations. These
correlations suggest that if a model yields the correct re-
sult for one of these observables it should also yield the
correct result for the other three. The present model
leads to reasonably accurate energies for the Ps-H bound
state and resonance and because of the above correlation
the singlet scattering length and effective range are also
expected to be fairly accurate.
We describe the calculational scheme, model exchange
potential and numerical results in Sec. II and a summary
of our findings in Sec. III.
II. MODEL POSITRONIUM-HYDROGEN
CALCULATION
A. Calculational Scheme
The total antisymmetrized wave function for the Ps-H
system allowing excitation of both Ps and H is given by
Ψ±(r1,r2,x)≡1√
2/summationdisplay
µ,ν[φµ(r2)χν(t1)Fµν(s1)
±φµ(r1)χν(t2)Fµν(s2)], (2.1)
wheresj= (x+rj)/2 andtj= (x−rj),j= 1,2, with x
the positron coordinate and rjare the coordinates of the
two electrons, φµ(χν) is the bound-state wave function of
H (Ps) in quantum state µ(ν), and Fµνis the continuum
orbital of Ps with respect to H. The Schr¨ odinger equation
for this wave function when projected on the final H and
Ps states φµ′andχν′, respectively, leads to the follow-
ing Lippmann-Schwinger scattering integral equation in
momentum space
f±
µ′ν′,µν(k′,k) =B±
µ′ν′,µν(k′,k)
−/summationdisplay
µ”,ν”/integraldisplaydk”
2π2B±
µ′ν′,µ”ν”(k′,k”)f±
µ”ν”,µν(k”,k)
E− Eµ”−ǫν”−k”2/4 + i0.
(2.2)
where the singlet and triplet “Born” amplitudes, B±,
are given by B±
µ′ν′,µν(kf,ki) = gD
µ′ν′,µν(kf,ki)±
gE
µ′ν′,µν(kf,ki),where gDandgErepresent the direct and
exchange Born amplitudes and the f±are the singlet and
triplet scattering amplitudes, respectively. The energie sof the intermediate Ps and H states are ǫν′′andEµ′′and
Eis the total energy of the system. The differential cross
section is defined by
/parenleftbiggdσ
dΩ/parenrightbigg
µ′ν′,µν=k′
4k[|f+
µ′ν′,µν(k′,k)|2+ 3|f−
µ′ν′,µν(k′,k)|2],
(2.3)
and the quenching cross section that describes conversion
from ortho- to para-positronium is defined by
/parenleftbiggdσ
dΩ/parenrightbiggquen
µ′ν′,µν=k′
16k|f+
µ′ν′,µν(k′,k)−f−
µ′ν′,µν(k′,k)|2.
(2.4)
B. Model Exchange Potential
The derivation of the model exchange potential has
been adequately described recently and here we quote
the principal results [12]. The Ps-H model exchange po-
tential is given by [22]
gE
µ′ν′,µν(kf,ki) =4(−1)l+l′
D/integraldisplay
φ∗
µ′(r)exp(iQ.r)φµ(r)dr2
×/integraldisplay
χ∗
ν′(t)exp(iQ.t/2)χν(t)dt,(2.5)
with
D=k2
f/4 +α2
µ+β2
ν′ (2.6)
where landl′are the angular momenta of the initial and
final Ps states, the initial and final Ps momenta are ki
andkf,Q=ki−kf.α2
µ/2 and α2
µ′/2, and β2
νandβ2
ν′
are the binding energies of the initial and final states of
H and Ps in atomic units (au), respectively. The factor
(−1)l+l′provides the correct sign of the exchange po-
tential given by formal antisymmetrization. In previous
works [9,12,14] only the l= 0 component of this model
potential was given. The model exchange potential given
by Eqs. (2.5) and (2.6) is not time-reversal symmetric.
A time-reversal symmetric form has also been suggested
in which Eq. (2.6) is replaced by [12]:
D= (k2
i+k2
f)/8 + (α2
µ+α2
µ′)/2 + (β2
ν+β2
ν′)/2,(2.7)
which leaves the elastic Born results unchanged.
C. Numerical Results
After a partial-wave projection, the singlet (+) and
triplet ( −) scattering equations (2.2) are solved by the
method of matrix inversion. The maximum number of
2partial waves included in the calculation is ten. Contri-
bution of higher partial waves to cross sections is included
by using the Born terms.
0 1 2 3 4 5
Energy (eV)1234S-wave Elastic Phase Shift (radian)Triplet
SingletFigure 1
Fig. 1 S-wave elastic scattering phase shifts for singlet
and triplet states at different Ps energies: present five-sta te
(full line), present two-state (dotted line), present stat ic ex-
change (dashed-double-dotted line) Hara and Fraser (dashe d
line, Ref. [5]), Sinha et al. (dashed-dotted line, Ref. [6]) .
0.0 0.5 1.0
Binding Energy (eV)345678Scattering Length (units of a0)Figure 2
Fig. 2 The singlet scattering length versus binding energy
of different models: open triangles (Ref. [7]), open circles (cal-
culated from phase shifts of Ref. [6]), solid triangle (from Ref.
[4]), star (as calculated in Ref. [4] from phase shifts of [5] ),
solid circle (five-state calculation with C= 1 and 0.784 in Eq.
(2.8)), full line (straight line fit).
In our latest calculations [12] we find that the sym-
metric form provides better results and therefore here
we present results of Ps-H scattering using a five-state
model and Eqs. (2.5) and (2.7) that includes the fol-
lowing states: Ps(1s)H(1s), Ps(2s)H(1s), Ps(2p)H(1s),
Ps(1s)H(2s), and Ps(1s)H(2p). The truncated model
that includes the first three of these states will be referred
to as the three-Ps-state, or simply, the three-state, model ,
and the three-H-state model includes the first, fourth and
fifth of this set. The model that includes the first nstates
of this set will be termed the n-state model. The Born
terms for the simultaneous excitation of both H and Ps
atoms are found to be small and will not be consideredhere in the coupled-channel scheme. Higher excitations
and ionization of Ps are conveniently treated in the Born
approximation including exchange and higher excitations
and ionization of H are excluded. We calculate the elastic
Ps(1s)H(1s) cross section and inelastic excitation cross
sections to Ps(2s)H(1s), Ps(2p)H(1s), Ps(1s)H(2s), and
Ps(1s)H(2p) states. We also calculate cross sections for
the discrete excitation of the 3s, 3p, 3d, 4p, 4d, 4f, 5p,
5d, 5f, 6p states and also for ionization of Ps in the first
Born approximation, keeping the target frozen to its ini-
tial ground state using exchange given by Eqs. (2.5) and
(2.7).
0.0 0.5 1.0
Binding Energy (eV)123Effective Range (units of a0)Figure 3
Fig. 3 S-wave singlet effective range versus binding energy
of different models: open triangles (Ref. [7]), solid triang le
(from Ref. [4]), solid circle (five-state calculation with C=
0.784 in Eq. (2.8)), full line (straight line fit).
0.0 0.5 1.0
Binding Energy (eV)4.04.55.0Resonance Energy (eV)Figure 4
Fig. 4 4. S-wave singlet resonance versus binding energy
of different models: open circle (Refs. [19,18]), open trian gle
(Ref. [7]), solid triangle (from Ref. [4]), solid circle (fiv e-state
calculation with C= 1 and 0.784 in Eq. (2.8)), full line
(straight line fit).
In previous studies we found that the exact values of
the parameters αandβin Eqs. (2.6) and (2.7) lead to
good results for cross sections. However, these parame-
ters in Eqs. (2.6) and (2.7) correspond to some average
value of momentum [12] and it was noted that one could
conveniently allow these parameters to vary in order to
improve the fit with experiment. As there are no exper-
iments in Ps-H scattering, we choose these parameters
to fit the known S-wave singlet resonance at 4.01 eV in
3the Ps-H system [18]. The resonance is found in the two-
state model with Ps(1s)H(1s) and Ps(2s)H(1s) states. It
continues to exist as more states are included in the dy-
namical equation. However, its energy reduces a little
(by up to about 0.05 eV) as more and more states are
added. The position of the resonance in the five-state
and two-state models with the exact parameters α’s and
β’s in Eq. (2.7) is 4.72 eV and 4.76 eV, respectively.
We find that the Ps-H resonace energy decreases and the
binding energy increases monotonically, as the values of
the parameters α’s and β’s are reduced in Eq. (2.7). For
a systematic reduction we used in place of Eq. (2.7) the
following form:
D= (k2
i+k2
f)/8 +C2[(α2
µ+α2
µ′)/2 + (β2
ν+β2
ν′)/2],
(2.8)
where Cis an arbitrary factor. In order to obtain the
S-wave resonance at 4.01 eV in the five-state model we
needC= 0.784, which is the most accurate estimate of
this energy [18]. Interestingly enough, with this value
ofC, the five-state model produces a Ps-H bound state
at−1.05 eV, which is consistent with both the accurate
theoretical estimate of −1.067 eV [19] and experimental
result of −1.1±0.2 eV [23]. The binding energy is cal-
culated by extrapolating the calculated kcotδvalues at
positive energies to negative energies using the following
effective-range expansion: kcotδ=−1/a+r0k2/2+Bk4,
and finding the solution of kcotδ−ik= 0 at the bound
state, where δis the S-wave phase shift, athe scatter-
ing length, r0the effective range, kthe momentum, and
Bthe coefficient of the k4term. In all calculations pre-
sented in this work we use the value of C= 0.784 in Eqs.
(2.8) and (2.5). The simultaneous accurate reproduction
of both the binding and resonance energies assures the
reliability of our model.
The elastic scattering S-wave phase shifts for different
partial waves for singlet and triplet states below the low-
est excitation threshold are shown in Fig. 1. We compare
the S-wave phase shifts with the static-exchange phase
shift of Hara and Fraser [5] and the three-state close-
coupling approximation (CCA) phase shifts of Sinha et
al. [10]. We also show our static-exchange phase shifts.
The phase shifts of Hara and Fraser are identical with
the static exchange results of Ref. [10]. The phase shifts
of Sinha et al. and of Hara and Fraser suggests that the
trend of convergence of the S-wave phase shifts of Ref.
[10] is in the direction of the present phase shifts.
Because of the existence of a low-energy effective-range
expansion, the binding energy of a weakly bound singlet
Ps-H state should be correlated with the S-wave singlet
scattering length in different model calculations. This
is shown in Fig. 2 where we plot the singlet scatter-
ing length versus binding energy for several calculations.
The straight-line correlation between these two observ-
ables for various model calculations implies that a model
that produces the correct energy of the Ps-H bound state,
should also produce the correct scattering length andgood low-energy phase shifts. This correlation explicit in
the effective-range expansion is a consequence of the dy-
namics of the problem. The dominance of the short-range
part of the interaction is responsible for the appearance of
correlation between low-energy observables in a system
[20]. In the trinucleon system in the attractive S-wave
doublet channel all low-energy observables were found to
be correlated with binding energy in different model cal-
culations [20,21], which implies if a model yields the cor-
rect result for one of the low-energy observables it should
also yield the correct result for the others. Such correla-
tions were used to predict different low-energy trinucleon
observables from results of different model calculations.
These predictions were later confirmed in other rigorous
calculations and experiments [21].
0 20 40 60 80 100
Energy (eV)0.010.101.0010.00Partial Cross Section (units of a02)Figure 5
Fig. 5 Partial Ps-H cross sections from the five-state
model at different Ps energies: Ps(1s)H(1s) elastic (upper f ull
line), Ps(2s)H(1s) excitation (lower full line), Ps(1s)H( 2s) ex-
citation (dotted line), Ps(1s)H(2p) excitation (dashed-d otted
line), Ps(2p)H(1s) excitation (dashed-triple-dotted lin e), Ps-
ionization Born cross section (dashed line), Ps-excitatio n
(n≥3) Born cross section (dashed-double-dotted line).
Correlation is also possible among other low-energy S-
wave singlet Ps-H observables which are not obviously re-
lated. For example, we find a correlation between S-wave
singlet Ps-H binding energy and effective range, which is
shown in Fig. 3. In this figure we plot the effective
ranges of Refs. [4,7] and their respective binding ener-
gies together with the five-state result. We also observe
a correlation between S-wave singlet Ps-H binding and
resonance energies, which is shown in Fig. 4. The essen-
tially exact resonance and binding energies [18,19] lie on
the line in Fig. 4 obtained by our calculation and those of
Refs. [4,7]. The reproduction of the correct value of the
singlet Ps-H effective range and resonance energy in ad-
dition to the scattering length assures proper variation
of the phase shift in our model. The previous calcula-
tions [4–7] have possibly not converged well as they do
not produce the correct energies of Ps-H bound state and
resonance. The five-state model reproduces the positions
of the Ps-H bound state and resonance fairly accurately,
4and so it is expected that the present singlet scattering
length, 3.72 a0, effective range, 1.67 a0, phase shifts and
low-energy cross sections are more close to the converged
results than those of previous calculations. The correla-
tions of Fig. 2 and 3 suggest that the correct singlet scat-
tering length and effective range, corresponding to the
accurate Ps-H binding energy of 1.067 eV [19], should be
3.5a0and 1.65 a0, respectively, in close agreement with
our model calculation. In the triplet case there is no
bound state and no interesting correlation is observed.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Energy (eV)04812Total Cross Section (units of a02)πFigure 6
Fig. 6 Total cross section for Ps-H scattering at different Ps
energies: present total (full line), three-Ps-state CCA (d otted
line, Ref. [6]), target-elastic total of 22-pseudo-state m odel
including Ps-ionization and excitations (full line, Ref. [ 7]),
Ps-H 2experiment reduced by a factor of 2 ( •, Refs. [1]).
Table I: Singlet scattering length and effective range in
units of a0and S-wave singlet binding energies ( EB) in
eV for different number of coupled states in two different
models: Present and R-matrix model of [7]. The numbers
with an asterisk denote prediction from correlation of
Figs. 2 and 3 and that with a dagger denote accurate
prediction in Ref. [19].
Ref.1-st 3-st5-st9-st22-st
a+Our4.05 3.853.72 3.50∗
a+[7]7.25 6.70 5.51 5.20
r+
0Our1.82 1.721.67 1.65∗
r+
0[7]3.07 2.98 2.63 2.52
EBOur0.87 0.981.05 1.067†
EB[7]0.263 0.326 0.543 0.634
To illustrate the trend of convergence of our calcula-
tion, we show in Table I the results for singlet scatter-
ing length, effective range, and binding energies for one-,
three-, and five-state schemes with model exchange po-
tential and compare with the conventional R-matrix cal-
culation of Ref. [7] for different number of coupled states.
In this table we also show the predictions for the scatter-
ing length and effective range obtained from correlations
in Figs. 2 and 3 consistent with the correct Ps-H binding
[19]. The triplet scattering lengths for the one-, three-,and five-state models, which do not provide any correla-
tion, are 1.83 a0, 1.69a0, and 1.68 a0, respectively.
The model calculation leads to reasonable convergence
for cross section and phase shifts at low energies as the
number of states is increased. This is illustrated for
low-energy cross sections in Table II for different basis
sets. Finally, we present the low-energy phase shifts and
quenching cross sections of the five-state model in Table
III. As in Ref. [7], the quenching cross section has a min-
imum between 0 and 1 eV and a maximum between 1
and 2 eV. However, the low-energy quenching as well as
elastic cross sections are somewhat smaller than those of
Ref. [7] and are expected to be more converged.
Table II: Low-energy elastic cross sections in units of
πa2
0using different basis sets for different kin au, incident
positron energy E= 6.8k2eV.
k1-state 2-state 3-state 4-state 5-state 3-H-state
0.026.39 24.78 23.35 23.35 22.36 24.10
0.124.81 23.44 22.04 22.04 21.18 22.89
0.221.24 20.35 19.02 19.00 18.43 19.89
0.317.60 17.13 15.83 15.83 15.51 16.79
0.414.82 14.62 13.34 13.34 13.18 14.42
0.512.76 12.72 11.44 11.43 11.35 12.58
0.611.01 11.05 9.72 9.72 9.68 10.89
0.79.42 9.55 8.14 8.14 8.10 9.27
0.88.02 7.69 6.20 6.19 6.19 7.82
In Fig. 5 we plot the Ps(1s)H(1s), Ps(2s)H(1s),
Ps(2p)H(1s), Ps(1s)H(2s), and Ps(1s)H(2p) cross sec-
tions for the five-state calculation, and the Born cross sec-
tions for n≥3 Ps-excitations and Ps-ionization. These
cross sections are also exhibited in Table IV. The to-
tal cross section is plotted in Fig. 6 where we compare
our results with those of the 22-pseudo-state R-matrix
and three-state CCA calculations of Refs. [6,7]. In the
absence of experimental results on Ps-H scattering, we
compare the total cross section with the total Ps-H 2cross
section data ( •) reduced by a factor of two [2]. This
should provide a fair comparison except at very low en-
ergies. The experimental trend, which clearly demon-
strates a broad maximum in the total cross section for all
the Ps-impact scattering problems around 20 eV [1] and
possibly a minimum near the Ps(2s) excitation thresh-
old [12], is correctly reproduced in our calculation. The
Ps-ionization cross section is largely responsible for pro -
ducing this trend in Ps-H scattering and also in Ps-He
and Ps-H 2scattering [12,14]. The 22-pseudo-state cal-
culations of Refs. [7,8] do not have this trend even after
including Ps-ionization and H-excitation and ionization
cross sections. The Ps-H cross sections of Ref. [6] shown
in Fig. 5 do not include higher excitations and ioniza-
tions of Ps and H; but the trend of their result suggests
that it may agree with the experimental trend of a maxi-
mum if these cross sections are included. However, at low
energies our cross sections are much smaller than those
of Refs. [6,7].
5Table III: Low-energy phase shifts in radians and ortho-Ps( 1s) to para-Ps(1s) conversion cross sections in units of
πa2
0for the five-state model for different kin au. The entries for k= 0 correspond to the scattering lengths in units
ofa0, incident positron energy E= 6.8k2eV.
kδ+
0 δ−
0 δ+
1 δ−
1 δ+
2 δ−
2 σquen
(au)(rad) (rad) (rad) (rad) (rad) (rad) (πa2
0)
0.03.72 1.68 1.02
0.12.78−1.67(−1)4.77(−3)−2.33(−3)1.8(−5)−1.4(−5)0.99
0.22.44−3.27(−1)3.70(−2)−1.67(−2)5.3(−4)−4.0(−4)0.91
0.32.14−4.74(−1)1.16(−1)−4.76(−2)3.5(−3)−2.6(−3)0.93
0.41.89−6.02(−1)2.39(−1)−9.18(−2)1.2(−2)−8.6(−3)1.07
0.51.68−7.06(−1)3.72(−1)−1.42(−1)2.9(−2)−2.0(−2)1.21
0.61.52−7.84(−1)4.78(−1)−1.90(−1)5.5(−2)−3.6(−2)1.21
0.71.43 7.373( −1)5.41(−1)−2.28(−1)8.8(−2)−5.5(−2)1.10
0.84.12 7.196( −1)5.69(−1)−2.47(−1)1.2(−1)−7.3(−2)1.07
In this study we find that the H-excitation cross sections are much smaller than the Ps-excitation cross sections
and the H-excitation channels have less effect on the converg ence of the solution at low energies compared to the
Ps-excitation channels. This is consistent with the fact th at the polarizability of the H atom is one-eighth of that of
the Ps atom. In view of this, the difference between our low-en ergy results and those of Refs. [6,7] seems to be due
to their unconverged nature and not due to the neglect of H sta tes in their model. This is explicit in their estimation
for Ps-H binding energies.
Table IV: Ps-H partial cross sections in units of πa2
0at different positronium energies
EPs(1s)- Ps(2s)- Ps(2p)- Ps(1s)- Ps(1s)- Ps(n≥3)-Ps-ion-
(eV) H(1s) H(1s) H(1s) H(2s) H(2p) H(1s) H(1s)
5.08 4.70
5.5 4.88 1.01(−1)7.92(−1)
6 4.53 1.55(−1)1.40
6.8 4.10 1.52(−1)1.83 9.06(−1)
8 3.59 1.34(−1)1.93 1.08 1.02
10 2.91 1.19(−1)1.74 9.16(−1)2.55
11 2.64 1.17(−1)1.45 1.38(−1)2.33(−1)8.26(−1)3.02
12 2.34 1.12(−1)1.28 2.06(−1)3.04(−1)7.45(−1)3.35
15 1.78 9.64(−2)1.07 1.99(−1)3.10(−1)5.60(−1)3.76
20 1.19 6.91(−2)7.93(−1)1.20(−1)2.11(−1)3.79(−1)3.64
258.17(−1)4.54(−2)5.98(−1)7.48(−2)1.37(−1)2.78(−1)3.26
305.73(−1)3.00(−2)4.68(−1)4.88(−2)9.09(−2)2.16(−1)2.87
403.08(−1)1.47(−2)3.16(−1)2.42(−2)4.52(−2)1.46(−1)2.25
601.17(−1)5.11(−3)1.85(−1)8.71(−3)1.57(−2)8.50(−2)1.52
805.65(−2)2.37(−3)1.28(−1)4.08(−3)7.20(−3)5.90(−2)1.13
1003.15(−2)1.29(−3)9.72(−2)2.22(−3)3.87(−3)4.50(−2)0.90
III. SUMMARY
We have performed a five-state calculation of Ps-H scatterin g using a recently proposed non-local model exchange
potential. The model considers excitation of both Ps and H at oms and yields cross sections for transitions to following
final states starting from the initial state Ps(1s)H(1s): Ps (1s)H(1s), Ps(2s)H(1s), Ps(2p)H(1s), Ps(1s)H(2s), and
Ps(1s)H(2p). Higher excitations and ionization of the Ps at om are treated by the Born approximation including
exchange. The cross sections are in qualitative agreement w ith experimental trend. Our five-state model yields
singlet and triplet scattering lengths of 3.72 a0and 1.68 a0, and the singlet effective range of 1 .67a0. The calculation
reproduces the singlet S-wave Ps-H resonance at 4.01 eV [18] and predicts a Ps-H binding energy of 1 .05 eV compared
to the accurate binding energy of 1.067 eV [19]. This assures us as to the realistic nature of our model. We
observe correlations between the S-wave singlet Ps-H bindi ng energy and singlet scattering length, effective range,
and resonance energy obtained in different calculations. Th ese correlations of other observables with binding energy
demostrate the degree of convergence of various model calcu lations as can be seen in Figs. 2, 3, and 4. Considering
precise Ps-H binding energy of 1.067 eV, correlations in Fig s. 2 and 3 suggest a singlet scattering length of 3.5 a0and
6an effective range of 1.65 a0. The inclusion of higher-order states in our five-state mode l are not expected to influence
the low-energy results significantly as has been demonstrat ed in Table II, but their effect could be considerable at
medium to high energies. A further detailed calculation inc luding these states will help to understand the dynamics
more precisely.
The work is supported in part by the Conselho Nacional de Dese nvolvimento - Cient´ ıfico e Tecnol´ ogico, Funda¸ c˜ ao
de Amparo ` a Pesquisa do Estado de S˜ ao Paulo, and Financiado ra de Estudos e Projetos of Brazil.
[1] A. J. Garner, G. Laricchia, and A. Ozen, J. Phys. B 29, 5961 (1996); N. Zafar, G. Laricchia, M. Charlton, and A. Gar ner,
Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 1595 (1996); A. J. Garner and G. Laricchia, Can. J. Phys. 74, 518 (1996).
[2] M. Skalsey, J. J. Engbrecht, R. K. Bithell, R. S. Vallery, and D. W. Gidley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 3727 (1998).
[3] Y. Nagashima, T. Hyodo, K. Fujiwara, and A. Ichimura. J. P hys. B 31, 329 (1998); K. F. Canter, J. D. McNutt, and L.
O. Roellig, Phys. Rev. A 12, 375 (1975);
[4] R. J. Drachman and S. K. Houston, Phys. Rev. A 12, 885 (1975).
[5] S. Hara and P. A. Fraser, J. Phys. B 8, L472 (1975).
[6] P. K. Sinha, P. Chaudhury, and A. S. Ghosh, J. Phys. B 30, 4643 (1997).
[7] C. P. Campbell, M. T. McAlinden, F. G. R. S. MacDonald, and H. R. J. Walters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 80, 5097 (1998).
[8] M. T. McAlinden, F. G. R. S. MacDonald, and H. R. J. Walters , Can. J. Phys. 74, 434 (1996).
[9] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, J. Phys. B 31, 3147 (1998). Unfortunately, there was a numerical error in the calculations
reported there. The error affected mostly the elastic result s below 5 eV and the Ps ionization cross section.
[10] M. I. Barker and B. H. Bransden, J. Phys. B 1, 1109 (1968); ibid. 2, 730 (1969)
[11] P. A. Fraser, J. Phys. B 1, 1006 (1968); N. K. Sarkar and A. S. Ghosh, ibid. 30, 4591 (1997).
[12] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, Phys. Rev. A 59, xxx (1999); in press Ms. AU6375.
[13] M. Comi, G. M. Prosperi, and A. Zecca, Nuovo Cimento 2, 1347 (1983).
[14] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, J. Phys. B 31, L737 (1998).
[15] P. K. Biswas and S. K. Adhikari, J. Phys. B 31, L315 (1998).
[16] P. K. Sinha and A. S. Ghosh, Phys. Rev. A 58, 242 (1998).
[17] G. Peach, unpublished, as quoted in Refs. [1].
[18] Y. K. Ho, Phys. Rev. A 17, 1675 (1978).
[19] A. M. Frolov and V. H. Smith, Jr., Phys. Rev. A 55, 2662; see, also, N. Jiang and D. M. Schrader, Mat. Sc, Forum 255-2 ,
312 (1997); Y. K. Ho, Phys. Rev. A 34, 609 (1986); A. Ore, Phys. Rev. 83, 665 (1951).
[20] S. K. Adhikari, T. Frederico, and I. D. Goldman, Phys. Re v. Lett. 74, 487 (1995); S. K. Adhikari and K. L. Kowalski,
Dynamical Collision Theory and its Applications , (Academic Press, San Diego, 1991) Chap. 7.
[21] A. C. Phillips, Nucl. Phys. A107 , 209 (1968); W. Dilg, L. Koester, and W.Nistler, Phys. Lett. 36B, 208 (1971); S. Ishikawa
and T. Sasakawa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 317 (1986); B. F. Gibson, Nucl. Phys. A543 , 1c (1992).
[22] This is in fact −2π2times the model exchange potential or the exchange Born term .
[23] D. M. Schrader, F. M. Jacobson, N. P. Frandsen, and U. Mik kelsen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 57 (1992).
7 |
arXiv:physics/9911055v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 23 Nov 1999UW/PT 99–27
Effective Field Theory for Quasi-Classical Plasmas
Lowell S. Brown and Laurence G. Yaffe
Department of Physics, University of Washington
Seattle, Washington 98195–1560
(February 21, 2014)
Abstract
We examine the equilibrium properties of hot, dilute, non-r elativistic plas-
mas. The partition function and density correlation functi ons of a classical
plasma with several species are expressed in terms of a funct ional integral
over electrostatic potential distributions. This is a conv enient formulation
for performing a well-defined perturbative expansion. The l eading order,
field-theoretic tree approximation automatically include s the effects of De-
bye screening. (No further partial resummations are needed for this effect.)
Subleading, one-loop corrections are easily evaluated. Th e two-loop correc-
tions, however, have ultraviolet divergences. These corre spond to the short-
distance, logarithmic divergence which is encountered in t he spatial integral of
the Boltzmann exponential when it is expanded to third order in the Coulomb
potential. Such divergences do not appear in the underlying quantum theory
— they are rendered finite by quantum fluctuations. We show how such di-
vergences may be removed and the correct finite theory obtain ed by introduc-
ing additional local interactions in the manner of modern eff ective quantum
field theories. We compute the two-loop induced coupling by e xploiting a
non-compact su(1,1) symmetry of the hydrogen atom. This enables us to ob-
tain explicit results for density-density correlation fun ctions through two-loop
order and thermodynamic quantities through three-loop ord er. The induced
couplings are shown to obey renormalization group equation s, and these equa-
tions are used to characterize all leading logarithmic cont ributions in the the-
ory. A linear combination of pressure and energy and number d ensities is
shown to be described by a field-theoretic anomaly. The effect ive Lagrangian
method that we employ yields a very simple demonstration tha t, at long dis-
tance, correlation functions have an algebraic fall off (bec ause of quantum
effects) rather than the exponential damping of classical De bye screening.
We use the effective theory to compute, easily and explicitly , this leading long
distance behavior of density correlation functions.Contents
I Introduction and Summary 4
A Relevant Scales and Dimensionless Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
B Utility of the Effective Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
II Classical Coulomb Plasmas 23
A Functional Integral for the Classical Partition Function . . . . . . . . . . . 23
B Mean Field Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
C Loop Expansion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
D Particle Densities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
E Loop Expansion Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
F Thermodynamic Quantities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5
G Density-Density Correlators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
H Charge Correlators and Charge Neutrality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
III Effective Field Theory 43
A Quantum Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
B Classical Limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
C Induced Couplings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
D Renormalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
E Matching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
F Non-zero Frequency Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
IV Two-Loop Results 66
A Number Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
B Energy Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
C Pressure and Free Energy Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
D Number Density Correlators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 9
V Three-Loop Thermodynamics 73
A Binary Plasma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
B One-Component Plasma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
VI Higher Orders and the Renormalization Group 82
A Renormalization Group Equations and Leading Logs . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
B Leading Logs to All Orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
C “Anomalous” Virial Relation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
VII Long Distance Correlations 96
APPENDIXES 99
A Functional Methods 99
1 Connected Generating Functional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
2 Effective Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
3 Effective Potential, Thermodynamic Quantities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
24 Time-Dependent Correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
B Green’s Functions and Determinants 114
C Required Integrals 122
1 Coulomb Integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
a Powers of V. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
2 Debye Integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
a Powers of G. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
b Convolution integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
c Even worse integrals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
D Quantum Coulomb su(1,1)Symmetry Exploited 131
1 Coulomb su(1,1) Symmetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
2 Direct Contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6
3 Exchange Contribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 1
E First Quantum Correction to Classical One-Component Plas ma 144
F Some Elements of Quantum Field Theory 148
1 Perturbation Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8
2 Straightforward Expansions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
3 Loop Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
G Calculations Using Functional Methods 153
1 Results Through One Loop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
2 Two-Loop Effective Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 7
3I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY
Our work applies contemporary methods of effective quantum fi eld theory to the tra-
ditional problem of a multicomponent, fully ionized hot (bu t non-relativistic) plasma. In
this regime, a classical description might appear to suffice. But the short-distance (1 /r)
singularity of the Coulomb potential gives rise to divergen ces in higher-order terms. Taming
these divergences requires the introduction of quantum mec hanics. Quantum fluctuations
smooth out the short-distance singularity of the Coulomb po tential so that the quantum,
many particle Coulomb system is completely finite. This nece ssity for including quantum
effects, even in a dilute plasma, is discussed later in this in troduction when the relevant
parameters which characterize the various physical proces ses in the plasma are examined.
As we shall see, contemporary effective quantum field theory m ethods simplify high-order
perturbative computations and generally illuminate the st ructure of the theory. Effective
quantum field theories do, however, utilize a somewhat compl icated formal apparatus in-
volving regularization, counter terms, and renormalizati on. In an effort to make our work
available to a wider audience, we shall develop the theory in several stages, and attempt
to give a largely self-contained presentation.1A brief review of some of the basic quantum
field theory techniques used in our paper is presented in Appe ndix F. We begin, in Section
II, by casting the purely classical theory in terms of a funct ional integral, show how dimen-
sional continuation is convenient even at this purely class ical level to avoid infinite Coulomb
self-energies, and show how the simple saddle-point evalua tion of the functional integral —
known as a tree approximation in quantum field theory — immedi ately gives the traditional
resummation that provides Debye screening of the long-dist ance Coulomb potential. The
first sub-leading, so-called “one-loop,” corrections to th e plasma thermodynamics and corre-
lation functions are also evaluated in this section. These l owest-order results are also used to
illustrate general relations among correlations function s which are described more formally,
and systematically, in Appendix A.
The divergence associated with the singular, short-range b ehavior of the Coulomb po-
tential first arises at the subsequent, “two-loop” level of a pproximation as shown in Section
III. This section explains how the previous purely classica l theory is obtained from a limit of
the quantum theory, and how the quantum corrections that tam e the classical divergences
appear in the form of induced couplings that contain compens ating divergences. This dis-
cussion uses various results on functional determinants an d Green’s functions contained in
Appendix B. Although it is relatively easy to construct the “ counter terms” that render
the classical theory finite, it is considerably more difficult to obtain the finite pieces in the
induced couplings that ensure that a calculation in the effec tive theory correctly reproduces
the corresponding result in the full quantum theory. In the l atter part of this section the
“matching conditions” for the leading two-loop induced cou plings are derived, and the two-
loop induced couplings are explicitly evaluated. The key to this evaluation is the exploitation
of ansu(1,1) symmetry of the Coulomb problem, which permits one to deri ve a simple and
explicit representation for the two-particle contributio n to the density-density correlation
1Other discussions of effective field theory techniques, appl ied to quite different physical problems,
may be found in Refs. [1,2] and references therein.
4function. This su(1,1) symmetry, and its consequences, are presented in Appendi x D. Sec-
tion III concludes with an examination of the necessary incl usion in the effective theory of
interactions involving non-zero frequency components of t he electrostatic potential.
It is worth noting that our determination of the induced coup lings is based on examining
Fourier transforms of number-density correlation functio ns at small but non-vanishing wave
number. We use this method because these functions — at non-v anishing wave number —
may be computed in a strictly perturbative fashion with no re summation needed to account
for the Debye screening that is necessary to make the zero wav e number limit of these corre-
lation functions finite.2Matching in this fashion enables us to use the simple pure Cou lomb
potential for which the exact group-theoretical technique s apply. Our procedure is roughly
equivalent to computing the second-order virial coefficient for a pure Coulomb potential,
except that this coefficient has a long-distance, infrared di vergence. This logarithmic diver-
gence is removed by Debye screening, but there is always the d ifficulty of determining the
constant under the logarithm. Our method avoids this difficul ty. Years ago, W. Ebeling
[and later Ebeling working together with collaborators] co mputed the second-order virial
coefficient for a pure Coulomb potential with a long-distance cutoff, and then related this
quantity to other ladder approximation calculations so as t o obtain results that are, except
for one term, equivalent to, and consistent with, our result s for the induced couplings. Their
work is summarized in ref [4]. This seminal work is certainly very impressive and signifi-
cant, but it is much more complex than our approach, and (at le ast in our view) is far more
difficult to understand in detail.
With the leading induced couplings in hand, we turn in Sectio n IV to compute all the
thermodynamic quantities and the density-density correla tors to two-loop order. As far
as we have been able to determine, the two-loop results for th e density-density correlation
functions obtained in Section IV are new. Various integrals required for these computations
are evaluated in Appendix C, and an alternative derivation o f the two-loop thermodynamic
results using compact functional methods appears in Append ix G.
The thermodynamic results are extended to the next, three-l oop, order in Section V. We
give complete, explicit results for the pressure (or equati on of state), Helmholtz free energy,
and internal energy, as well as the relations between partic le densities and chemical potentials
in a general multi-component plasma. We also display the spe cializations of the equation
of state for the cases of a binary electron-proton plasma, an d a one component plasma (in
the presence of a constant neutralizing background charge d ensity). As discussed at the end
of this section, a genuine classical limit exists only for th e special case of a one-component
plasma. As a check on our results, Appendix E presents an inde pendent, self-contained
calculation of the leading O(¯h2) corrections to the equation of state of a one-component
plasma in the semi-classical regime.
Prior results in the literature, corresponding to our three -loop level of accuracy, for the
free energy and/or the equation of state go back more than 25 y ears. The book by Kraeft,
Kremp, Ebeling, and R¨ opke [5] quotes a result for the Helmho ltz free energy which, except
2The utility of matching at small but non-vanishing wavenumb er, thereby enabling one to ignore
the effects of Debye screening, has been emphasized by Braate n and Nieto [3].
5for the omission of one term and a few trivial misprints, agre es with our expression.3A
fairly recent publication by Alastuey and Perez [6] contain s an expression for the Helmholtz
free energy, to three loop order, which does agree precisely with our result. For the special
case of a one-component plasma, recent papers by DeWitt, Rie mann, Schlanges, Sakakura,
and Kraft [7,8] report results for some, but not all, of the te rms contained in the three-
loop pressure. These partial results are consistent with ou r three-loop pressure, once an
unpublished erratum of J. Riemann is taken into account.
Just as in any effective field theory, the induced couplings th at must be introduced to
remove the infinities of the classical plasma theory obey ren ormalization group equations. In
Section VI we show how these renormalization group equation s may be employed to compute
leading logarithmic terms in the partition function — terms involving powers of logarithms
whose argument is the (assumed large) ratio of the Debye scre ening length to the quantum
thermal wave length of the plasma. Since Planck’s constant, which carries the dimensions
of action, does not appear in classical physics, fewer dimen sionless ratios can be formed in
a classical theory than in its quantum counterpart. In parti cular, the partition function of
the classical theory depends upon a restricted number of dim ensionless parameters, from
which a linear relation between the pressure, internal ener gy, and average number densities
follows. This relation is altered by the necessary quantum- mechanical corrections. Section
VI also explains how this alteration of the linear relations hip is connected to “anomalies”
brought about by the renormalization procedure that makes t he classical theory finite.
We conclude our work, in Section VII, with an examination of t he long-distance behavior
of the density-density correlation function. Despite the p resence of Debye screening, it is
known that quantum fluctuations cause correlations to fall o nly algebraically with distance
[10–12]. Using the effective theory, we compute the coefficien t of the resulting leading power-
law decline in a very simple and efficient fashion.
It should be emphasized that the major purpose of this paper i s to introduce the methods
of modern quantum field theory into the traditional field of pl asma physics. Although many
of the results that we derive and describe have been obtained previously, the methods that
we employ to obtain these results are new, and they substanti ally reduce the computational
effort as well as illuminating the general structure of the th eory. Although our work may
have the length, it is not a review paper; its length results f rom our desire to make the
presentation self-contained so that it may be read by someon e who is neither an expert in
plasma physics nor quantum field theory. Since our work is not a survey of a field, we have
not endeavored to provide anything resembling a comprehens ive bibliography.
A. Relevant Scales and Dimensionless Parameters
Various dimensionless parameters characterize the relati ve importance of different phys-
ical effects in the plasma. Before plunging into the details o f our work, we first pause to
introduce these parameters and discuss their significance.
3See Eqs. (2.50)–(2.55) of Ref. [5]. See footnote 44 on page 79 for details.
6Leteandndenote the charge and number density of a typical ionic speci es in the plasma.
For simplicity of presentation in this qualitative discuss ion, we shall assume that the charges
and densities of all species in the multicomponent plasma ar e roughly comparable, and shall
ignore the sums over different species which should really be present in formulas such as
(1.2) below. The subsequent quantitative treatment will, o f course, remedy this sloppiness.
We shall be concerned with neutral plasmas which are sufficien tly dilute so that the average
Coulomb energy of a particle is small compared to its kinetic energy. We use energy units
to measure the temperature Tand writeβ= 1/T. In the ideal gas limit, the average kinetic
energy is equal to3
2T. The Coulomb potential is e2/(4πr) in the rationalized units which
we shall use. So the typical Coulomb energy is e2/(4πd) whered≡n−1/3denotes the mean
inter-particle separation. Hence, the dimensionless para meter
Γ≡e2
4πdT=βe2
4πn1/3(1.1)
is essentially the ratio of the potential to kinetic energy i n the plasma, and it is an often used
measure of the relative strength of Coulomb interactions in a plasma. However, we shall see
that Γ is not the proper dimensionless parameter which gover ns the size of corrections in
the classical perturbation expansion.
A charge placed in the plasma is screened by induced charges. The screening length
equals the inverse of the Debye wave number which we denote as κ. It is given (to lowest
order in a dilute plasma) by
κ2=βe2n. (1.2)
A different measure of the strength of Coulomb interactions i n the plasma is defined by
g=βe2κ
4π. (1.3)
This is the ratio of the electrostatic energy of two particle s separated by a Debye screening
length to the temperature (which is roughly the same as the av erage kinetic energy in the
plasma). Equivalently, it is ratio of the “Coulomb distance ”
dC≡βe2
4π(1.4)
to the screening length κ−1. The Coulomb distance dCis the separation at which the
electrostatic potential energy of a pair of charges equals t he temperature.4
The number of particles Nκcontained within a sphere whose radius equals the screening
lengthκ−1is inversely related to g,
Nκ=4π
3κ−3n=1
3g. (1.5)
4Dynamically, the Coulomb distance dCis also the impact parameter necessary for an O(1)
change in direction to occur during the scattering of a typic al pair of particles in the plasma.
7Hence the weak coupling condition g≪1 is equivalent to the requirement that the num-
ber of charges within a “screening volume” be large, Nκ≫1. In this case, a mean-field
treatment of Debye screening holds to leading order, and per turbation theory is a controlled
approximation.
It is easy to check that the two measures of interaction stren gth,gand Γ, are related by
g=√
4πΓ3. However, we shall show in our subsequent development that g, not Γ, is the
dimensionless parameter whose increasing integer powers c haracterize the size of successive
terms in the classical perturbative expansion for thermody namic properties of the plasma.
As we shall discuss, the classical perturbation series has a convenient graphical representation
in which contributions at n-th order in perturbation theory are represented by graphs ( or
Feynman diagrams) with nloops. We shall see that gis the “loop expansion” parameter,
such that contributions represented by n-loop graphs are of order gn. Although gand Γ are
directly related as noted above, we emphasize again that it i sgwhich is the correct classical
expansion parameter.
To bring out this point even more strongly, we note that the sc reened Debye potential
between two charges eaandeba distancerapart is given by eaebe−κr/(4πr). The modi-
fication of the self energy of a particle of charge eawhen it is brought into the plasma is
given by half the difference between the Debye potential and i ts Coulomb limit for the case
of zero charge separation,1
2limr→0(e2
a/4πr)[e−κr−1], which is −e2
aκ/(8π). Each particle in
the plasma makes this correction to the thermodynamic inter nal energy of the plasma, and
so including this leading order correction to the energy den sity gives
u=/summationdisplay
a/braceleftBigg3
2Tna−e2
aκ
8πn0
a/bracerightBigg
=T/summationdisplay
ana/braceleftBigg3
2−βe2
aκ
8π/bracerightBigg
, (1.6)
which shows the appearance of g, or more explicitly βe2
aκ/(8π), as the correct Coulomb
coupling constant in this case. This result for the internal energy which we have heuristically
obtained agrees with the correct one-loop result (2.84) tha t is derived below.
A classical treatment of a plasma with purely Coulombic inte ractions is, however, never
strictly valid. The classical partition function fails to e xist due to the singular short-distance
behavior of the Coulomb interaction. This can be seen in an el ementary fashion directly
from the divergence, for opposite signed charges, of the Bol tzmann-weighted integral over the
relative separation of two charges,/integraltext(d3r) exp{βe2/4πr}. In the perturbative expansion of
the classical theory, this problem first manifests itself at two-loop order through the diagram
✫✪✬✩
t t(1.7)
The three lines in this graph correspond to the three factors of the Coulomb interaction
energy (e2/4πr)3that appear in the expansion of the Boltzmann exponential to third order.
This graph represents a relative correction to the partitio n function of5
5Note that this contribution is indeed of order g2, in accordance with its origin as a two-loop
81
3!nβ3/integraldisplay
(d3r)/parenleftBigge2
4πr/parenrightBigg3
=1
3!/parenleftBiggβe2κ
4π/parenrightBigg2/integraldisplaydr
r. (1.8)
Once screening effects are properly included, the large-dis tance logarithmic divergence of
this integral will be cut off at the classical Debye screening lengthκ−1. But no classical
mechanism exists to remove the short-distance divergence o f the integral. To tame this
divergence, one must include quantum effects.
The non-relativistic quantum-mechanical description of a charged plasma is completely
finite; quantum fluctuations cut-off the short-distance dive rgences of the classical theory.
The de Broglie wavelength for a particle of mass mand kinetic energy comparable to the
temperature is of order
λ≡¯h/radicalBigg
2πβ
m. (1.9)
This is in accord with the average (rms) momentum of/radicalBig
3m/βfor a particle in a free gas at
temperature T= 1/β. We will refer to λas the “thermal wavelength”. This length sets the
scale of the limiting precision with which a quantum particl e in the plasma can be localized.
Using the thermal wavelength as the lower limit in the integr al (1.8), and the Debye length
as the upper limit, one obtains a finite result,
/integraldisplayκ−1
λdr
r=−ln(λκ), (1.10)
which replaces the infinity that would otherwise arise in a pu rely classical treatment. This
logarithm of the ratio of a quantum wavelength to the screeni ng length will necessarily
appear in coefficients of two-loop (and higher order) contrib utions to all thermodynamic
quantities.6
This quick discussion shows that quantum mechanics must ent er into the description
of the thermodynamics of a plasma — at least if two-loop or bet ter accuracy is desired.
In addition to regularizing the divergences of the classica l theory, quantum mechanics also
provides “kinematic” corrections via the influence of quant um statistics. To estimate the
graph.
6A one-component plasma (with an inert, uniform background n eutralizing charge density) has
only repulsive Coulomb interactions. In this special case, the Boltzmann factor exp {−βe2/4πr}
itself provides a short-distance cutoff at the Coulomb dista ncedC=βe2/4π, resulting in logarithmic
terms of the form ln( dCκ) = lng. [In this regard, see Eq. (3.84) and its discussion.] Howeve r, if
the quantum thermal wavelength is larger than the Coulomb di stance,λ > d C, then this purely
classical removal of the would-be short-distance divergen ce is physically incorrect, for the quantum
effects already come into play at larger distances, and the co rrect logarithmic term has the form
ln(λκ). The neutrality of a binary or multicomponent plasma requi res that they have attractive
as well as repulsive Coulomb interactions. These plasmas th us always require quantum-mechanical
fluctuations to remove their potential short-distance dive rgences.
9size of these effects, we recall that for a free Bose ( −) or Fermi (+) gas, the partition function
is given by
lnZ
V=∓gS/integraldisplay(d3p)
(2π¯h)3ln/bracketleftBigg
1∓exp/braceleftbigg
−β/parenleftbiggp2
2m−µ/parenrightbigg/bracerightbigg/bracketrightBigg
. (1.11)
HereVis the volume containing the system, gS= 2S+ 1 is the spin degeneracy factor, µis
the chemical potential of the particle, and
z≡eβµ(1.12)
is the corresponding fugacity. The limit of classical Maxwe ll-Boltzmann statistics is obtained
when−βµ≫1 so that the fugacity z≪1. Near this regime, the logarithm in Eq. (1.11)
may be expanded in powers of the fugacity, and the resulting G aussian integrals then yield
lnZ
V=gSλ−3z/bracketleftBigg
1±z
25/2+z2
35/2+···/bracketrightBigg
. (1.13)
The corresponding number density defined by nV=∂lnZ/∂(βµ) is thus given by
n=gSλ−3z/bracketleftBigg
1±z
23/2+z2
33/2+···/bracketrightBigg
. (1.14)
We shall always assume that the plasma is dilute,
nλ3
gS≪1, (1.15)
so that a fugacity expansion is appropriate. This condition that the plasma be dilute can
be stated in another way. If all single-particle states in mo mentum space were filled up
to a (Fermi) momentum pF, the density would take on the value n=gSp3
F/(6π2¯h3) cor-
responding to a non-interacting Fermi gas at zero temperatu re. The diluteness condition
is equivalent to the requirement that the Fermi energy EF=p2
F/2mcorresponding to the
given density be small in comparison with the temperature,
EF
T=β¯h2
2m/parenleftBigg6π2n
gS/parenrightBigg2/3
=/parenleftbigg9π
16z2/parenrightbigg1/3
≪1. (1.16)
However, it is the fugacity z, not this ratio, that is the appropriate expansion paramete r.
Once quantum mechanics enters the analysis, another dimens ionless parameter involving
the ratio of two energies appears. This is the Coulomb potent ial energy for two particles
separated by one thermal wavelength, divided by the tempera ture,
η=βe2
4πλ. (1.17)
Recalling the definition (1.9) of the thermal wave length and noting that the average (rms)
particle velocity in a free gas is given by v=/radicalBig
3/βm, this ratio may equivalently be expressed
as
10η=/radicalBigg
3
2πe2
4π¯hv. (1.18)
This parameter is also related to the ratio of temperature to binding energy of two particles
in the plasma with equal and opposite7chargeeand reduced mass m. The hydrogenic
ground state of two such particles has a binding energy of
ǫ=/parenleftBigge2
4π/parenrightBigg2m
2¯h2. (1.19)
The ratio of this energy to the temperature is just η2(up to a factor of π),
η2=1
πβǫ. (1.20)
Note that the quantum parameter ηbecomes small at sufficiently high temperature, but that
it diverges at low temperatures or in the formal ¯ h→0 orm→ ∞ limits. We should also
remark that the quantum effects measured by ηonly appear in two-loop and higher-order
processes. Thus these effects are suppressed by a factor of g2.
The quantum parameter η, together with the particle densities, also provides an est imate
of how many bound atoms are present in a dilute plasma. The Sah a equation, which is simply
the condition for chemical equilibrium between bound atoms and ionized particles, states
that the fraction of bound atoms in the plasma is8
nλ3eβǫ=nλ3eπη2. (1.21)
Hereλrefers to the thermal wavelength corresponding to the reduc ed mass of the two
charges. Thus, for a dilute plasma to be (nearly) fully ioniz ed, the parameter πη2, for oppo-
site signed charges, must be small compared to −lnnλ3. If the plasma is sufficiently dense
that the Debye screening length becomes comparable to the si ze of isolated atoms, then the
Saha equation — which neglects interactions with the plasma — breaks down. Such plas-
mas can remain essentially fully ionized, even when the Saha equation predicts a substantial
number of bound atoms, because Debye screening shortens the range of attractive interac-
tions and effectively prevents the formation of bound states . The perturbative treatment
which we shall develop applies only to the case of well ionize d plasmas.
Underlying any effective field theory, such as the one that we d evelop in this paper, is a
separation between the length scales of interest and the sca les of the underlying dynamics.
7For the general case of opposite but unequal charges, e2is replaced by the product of charges
−eaeb.
8This is just the requirement that the chemical potential plu s binding energy of the lowest bound
state equal the sum of the chemical potentials of the bound st ate constituents. Since an atom in
free space has an infinite number of bound levels, and the pres ence of the surrounding particles in
the plasma produces screening effects, the Saha equation onl y provides a rough indication of the
numbers of bound atoms present. Indeed, the fraction of boun d atoms in a plasma is intrinsically
only an approximately defined concept.
11Our length scales of interest will be of order of the Debye scr eening length κ−1or longer.
The relevant microscopic scales are the Coulomb distance dC=βe2/4πand the thermal
wavelength λ. The condition that the screening length κ−1be much larger that the Coulomb
distancedCis just the statement that the classical loop expansion para meter must be small,
g=βe2κ
4π=dC
κ−1≪1. (1.22)
As noted above, the thermal wavelength λwill provide the short-distance cutoff in expres-
sions, such as Eq. (1.10), which diverge in the purely classi cal theory. We assume that
λκ≪1, (1.23)
so that there is a large separation between the scales of inte rest and this short distance
cutoff. The quantum theory will generate additional correct ions suppressed by powers of
(λκ) which, since λis proportional to Planck’s constant ¯ h, represent an ascending series in
powers of ¯h, in contrast to the ln ¯ heffects arising from the short-distance cutoff.
The diluteness parameter nλ3is not independent of our other dimensionless parameters
since
nλ3=(κλ)3
(βe2κ)=(κλ)3
4πg, (1.24)
or
nλ3=(κλ)2
(βe2/λ)=(κλ)2
4πη=g2
4πη3. (1.25)
In order to have a systematic expansion in which the size of di fferent effects can be easily
categorized, we will treat the Coulomb parameter η=βe2/4πλas a number that is formally
of order one. Consequently, if we regard κλas the basic small parameter which justifies the
use of an effective field theory, then g=βe2κ/4π=η(κλ) isO(κλ), while the diluteness
parameternλ3isO((κλ)2), thus formally justifying the inequalities g≪1 andnλ3≪1.
The highly ionized plasma at the core of the Sun provides an ex ample of astrophysical
interest. This plasma is mostly composed of electrons and pr otons. We take the nominal
values for the central temperature as T= 1.5×107K, and the electron and proton densities
asne=np= 5.0×1025/cm3. Since this temperature is to be compared to atomic energies ,
electron volts are far more convenient units, with T= 1.3 KeV. It is also convenient to think
of distances and densities in terms of the atomic length unit , the Bohr radius a0= 5.3×10−9
cm. Thusne=np= 7.4/a3
0. Sincee2/4πa0= 27 eV, and a0= 4π¯h2/mee2, it is easy to
find that the Debye wave number at the Sun’s center is given by κ= 2.0/a0and that the
electron’s quantum thermal wave length is λe= 0.36a0, with the proton wave length a factor
of√
1840 smaller, λp= 8.4×10−3a0. Hence, at the center of the Sun, the classical loop
expansion parameter is quite small, g=βe2κ/4π= 0.042. For the proton,
κλp= 0.017, n pλ3
p= 4.4×10−6,βe2
4πλp= 2.4, (1.26)
so the inequalities κλ≪1 andnλ3≪1 are also well satisfied. For the electron,
12κλe= 0.72, n eλ3
e= 0.35,βe2
4πλe= 0.058. (1.27)
While the proton fugacity is tiny, zp= 2.2×10−6, the electron fugacity ze= exp(βµe) =
neλ3
e/2 = 0.17 is small but not insignificant, which means that the Fermi- Dirac correction to
Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics for the electron are a few per cent. Although the Saha equation
predicts that there are 20% or so neutral hydrogen atoms in th e core of the sun, this is wrong
since the Debye screening length is half the Bohr radius. The core of the Sun is essentially
completely ionized. The fact that κλeis only slightly less than one means that the utility
of the effective theory (for describing electron contributi ons to the thermodynamics at the
core of the Sun) cannot really be judged until one knows wheth erκλor, for example, κλ/2π
appears as the natural expansion parameter. And there is onl y one way to find out — one
must compute multiple terms in the perturbative expansion a nd examine the stability of the
series for the actual parameters of interest.
B. Utility of the Effective Theory
For a sufficiently dilute ionized plasma, all corrections to i deal gas behavior are negligible.
As the plasma density increases, the leading corrections ar e very well known and come from
either the inclusion of quantum statistics for the electron s or the first order inclusion of
Debye screening. At this “trivial” level of effort, the resul ting equation of state is easy to
write down:
βp
n= 1 +ne
n/bracketleftBig
2−5/2ze+ 2 (2−5−3−5/2)z2
e+···/bracketrightBig
−κ3
24πn. (1.28)
Herenis the total particle density (ions plus electrons), and zeis the electron fugacity,
which is related to the electron number density as shown in Eq . (1.14). The electron fu-
gacity corrections just come from combining Eqs. (1.13) and (1.14) [and noting that in the
thermodynamic limit βp= (lnZ)/V], while the Debye screening correction will be derived
in section II [Eq. (2.81)]. Since the ions are so much more mas sive than the electrons, their
fugacity will be very small, and their quantum statistics co rrections may be neglected.
The effective theory we construct incorporates systematica lly higher-order interaction
effects not contained in the trivial equation of state (1.28) . In sections IV and V we will
give explicit forms for the complete second and third order c orrections to the equation of
state expanded in powers of the loop expansion parameter g=βe2κ/4π. These results are
valid provided the temperature and density are notin a regime where:
1. The electron density is so large that an expansion in elect ron fugacity is useless. This
occurs when the electrons are nearly degenerate and their qu antum degeneracy pressure
becomes a dominant effect.
2. The temperature is so low that the loop expansion of the effe ctive theory is useless.
This happens when the plasma ceases to be nearly fully ionize d.
3. The temperature is so high that a non-relativistic treatm ent is inadequate. This re-
quires that the temperature be small in comparison with the e lectron rest energy of
511 KeV.
13As a concrete test of the utility of our effective theory, one m ay insert the numerical
values of the density and temperature quoted above as charac teristic of the solar interior
(T≡1.3 KeV,n≡15a−3
0) into the third order result (5.20) for the equation of state .9
Displaying the first, second, and third order corrections se parately, one finds that
βp
n= 1−0.00693 + 0.01429 + 0.00074 + ···. (1.29)
All corrections to the ideal gas limit are small, but the seco nd order correction is larger than
the first. However, it is important to understand that our exp ansion of the effective theory is
based on formally treating the Coulomb parameters η=βe2/4πλof all species as numbers
of order one. As indicated in Eq. (1.25), this means that quan tum statistics corrections
proportional to the k-th power of fugacity (or nλ3) are automatically included at 2 k-loop
order in the effective theory. For the solar plasma, because t he electron fugacity is small, but
larger than the plasma coupling g, the dominant correction to ideal gas behavior comes from
quantum statistics, not from Debye screening. Consequentl y, a more instructive comparison
is to examine the size of corrections generated by the effecti ve theory after removing (or
resuming) the non-interacting quantum statistics correct ions. This comparison gives
βp
n−βp
n/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
free=−0.006930 −0.001516 + 0.000736 + ···, (1.30)
where (βp/n)|freedenotes the equation of state for non-interacting particle s, but with quan-
tum statistics for the electrons. Expanding in electron fug acity, as in (1.28), and inserting
the same characteristic parameters gives
βp
n/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
free= 1 + 0.01581 + 0.00105 + 0.00010 + ···. (1.31)
Both the quantum statistics series (1.31), and the effective theory expansion (1.30) are now
quite well behaved. For these parameter values, it appears t hat the three-loop effective
theory result (1.30), combined with the first three terms10in the fugacity expansion (1.31),
will correctly predict the equation of state to within an acc uracy of a few parts11in 104.
9For this comparison, we assume that the plasma contains only protons and electrons. This is not
realistic very near the center of the sun, where a significant abundance of helium is also present.
10Adding the quadratic electron fugacity correction [that is , theO(z2
e) term in (1.28), or the
10−3term in (1.31)] to the three-loop effective field theory resul t is entirely reasonable since this
quantum statistics correction is in fact the dominant part o f the complete four-loop contribution
of the effective theory when the Coulomb parameter for the ele ctron is small, βe2/4πλe≪1, as
it is in the Sun. The last term of Eq. (1.31) is the free-partic le limit of the six-loop contribution
in our expansion of the effective theory. This cubic fugacity correction, for our characteristic solar
parameters, makes only a 10−4correction to the equation of state.
11We remind the reader that portions of the solar neutrino spec trum are exceptionally sensitive
to the central temperature. So a very small change in the equa tion of state can potentially produce
a measurable change in the solar neutrino flux.
14Missing from the above quantitative results, and from our an alysis in subsequent sections,
are relativistic corrections. The leading “kinematic” rel ativistic effects may be obtained by
inserting the relativistic kinetic energy E(p) =/radicalBig
(pc)2+ (mc2)2−mc2into the ideal gas
partition function (1.11). The dominant effects come from th e electrons, due to their small
mass. Expanding E(p) in powers of momentum, one finds that
βp=ni+2ze
λ3
e/bracketleftBigg
1 +15
8T
mec2−ze
25/2/parenleftbigg
1 +15
16T
mec2/parenrightbigg
+O(z2
e) +O/parenleftbiggT
mec2/parenrightbigg2/bracketrightBigg
, (1.32)
wherenidenotes the total density of ions. The electron density, ne≡ze∂(βp)/∂ze, receives
exactly the same15
8T
mec2correction. Hence, this correction (plus all further corre ctions to
βpwhich are linear in ze) cancels in the equation of state. However, other thermodyn amic
quantities, such as the internal energy, do receive relativ eO(T/m ec2) relativistic corrections.
For the equation of state, the first relativistic correction which does contribute comes from
theO(T/m ec2) perturbation to the O(z2
e) quantum statistics term, and one finds that
∆rel./parenleftBiggβp
n/parenrightBigg
=15
16ne
nze
25/2T
mec2. (1.33)
For the characteristic solar parameters used above, this co rrection is less than a part in 104,
∆rel./parenleftBiggβp
n/parenrightBigg
= 0.000036. (1.34)
A hot plasma also contains black body radiation. The contrib ution to the pressure arising
from this photon gas is given by the familiar formula
∆photon/parenleftBiggβp
n/parenrightBigg
=π2
45/parenleftbiggT
¯hc/parenrightbigg31
n=π2
45/parenleftbigg2πT
mec2/parenrightbigg3/21
nλ3
e
=/parenleftbiggT
6.1 KeV/parenrightbigg31
na3
0. (1.35)
For the solar parameters that we have adopted,
∆photon/parenleftBiggβp
n/parenrightBigg
= 0.00063, (1.36)
which is the size of our third order correction. The relative importance of this photon gas
correction increases rapidly as the temperature is increas ed, and it must be included in some
of the regions discussed at the end of this section.
The transverse photons also interact with the charged parti cles to alter the thermody-
namic relations. This effect is dominated by the coupling wit h the light electrons. It may be
easily obtained by using the radiation gauge to compute the fi rst-order perturbation arising
from the ‘seagull’ interaction Hamiltonian density ( e2/2mec2)ψ†ψA2and taking the j·A
interaction to second order. Since the current involves ev/c, one expects that the second-
orderj·Acontribution is suppressed by ( ve/c)2∼T/m ec2relative to the ‘seagull’ term.
This is confirmed by a detailed computation. A simple calcula tion expresses the (leading
order inT/m ec2) ‘seagull’ contribution as
15∆rad.(βp) =−βe2
2mec2/bracketleftBig
∝an}b∇acketle{tA(0)2∝an}b∇acket∇i}htT− ∝an}b∇acketle{tA(0)2∝an}b∇acket∇i}htT=0/bracketrightBig
ne=−απ
3T
mec2ne, (1.37)
whereα=e2/(4π¯hc) = 1/137.···is the fine structure constant. Note that the vacuum, or
T→0, contributions are subtracted as they are completely abso rbed by renormalization
of the bare electron parameters. Since ne=∂(βp)/∂(βµe), this correction is equivalent
to a shift in the electron chemical potential of δµe=−π
3(αT2/mec2). It modifies the
chemical potential — electron density relation and thus has no effect on the equation of
state. However, the correction does affect other thermodyna mic quantities such as the
internal energy.12The leading corrections to the equation of state involving t he interactions
of transverse photons are actually of relative order αze(T/m ec2)2. One finds that
∆rad./parenleftBiggβp
n/parenrightBigg
=−απ
3ne
nze
23/2/parenleftbiggT
mec2/parenrightbigg2
. (1.38)
For the characteristic solar parameters used above, this is utterly negligible even at the part
in 104level,
∆rad./parenleftBiggβp
ne/parenrightBigg
= 1.5×10−9. (1.39)
Depending on the mass and composition of a star, the electron fugacity in stellar interiors
may be relatively small (as in the Sun), or may be large enough to completely invalidate a
quasi-classical treatment (as in white dwarfs or very massi ve stars). Figures 1–4 represent
an attempt to delineate the region of validity of the effectiv e theory in the temperature-
density plane for the case of a pure Z= 1 proton-electron plasma [Fig. 1], a pure Z= 2
(ionized helium) plasma [Fig. 2], a pure Z= 6 (ionized carbon) plasma [Fig. 3], and a pure
Z= 13 (ionized aluminum) plasma [Fig. 4]. The solid line shows where the second and
third order corrections in the fugacity expansion for elect rons become equal in size. This
occurs before any of the individual first, second, or third or der fugacity corrections exceed
unity, and provides a convenient signal that the fugacity ex pansion is no longer well-behaved.
The dashed line shows where the size of effective field theory c orrections to the equation of
state first exceed unity.13This is taken as an indication that the perturbative expansi on
of the effective field theory has broken down. The effective fiel d theory is valid only in the
region above (or to the left of) both of these lines. In Fig. 4, the temperature range extends
into the relativistic domain. The horizontal dotted line in this figure shows where the15
8T
mec2
relative correction to the electron pressure exceeds unity , and provides an indication of where
relativistic corrections invalidate our non-relativisti c treatment.
12A recent paper [13] has attempted to argue that radiative cor rections are far larger than this
relativeO(αT/m ec2) effect. The conclusions of this paper are not correct.
13More precisely, this line shows where any of the one-, two-, o r three-loop corrections first exceed
unity. To match the earlier discussion, the non-interactin g quantum statistics portion of the two-
loop correction is not included.
1610-210-1100101
Density (a0-3)10-210-1100Temperature (KeV)10-1100101102Density (gm/cm3)
105106107
Temperature (K)
FIG. 1. Region of validity of the effective theory for the case of a pureZ= 1 ionized hydrogen
plasma. On the bottom axis, density denotes the total partic le density (electrons plus protons)
in units of the Bohr radius, while the top axis shows the corre sponding mass density. The solid
line shows where the fugacity expansion breaks down. The das hed line shows where the size of
“non-trivial” effective field theory corrections to the equa tion of state first exceed unity. (See the
text for more precise descriptions.) The effective field theo ry is valid only in the region above both
of these lines.
For a given density (and composition), if the effective field t heory is to be useful, then the
temperature must be high enough so that the perturbative exp ansion of the theory is valid,
but not so high so that all corrections to ideal gas behavior g enerated by the effective theory
are too small to be relevant. In other words, the size of the eff ects produced by the effective
theory must be large enough to be interesting. Figures 5–10 s how log plots of the size of
corrections to the equation of state for various compositio ns and two different densities of
the plasma. In these plots, the solid line shows the ideal gas result, including quantum
statistics for the electrons but no interactions. The long d ashed line shows the one-loop
Debye screening correction, the medium dashed line shows th e two-loop correction (minus
its non-interacting quantum statistics piece), and the sho rt dashed line shows the three-loop
effective field theory correction. Plotted are the absolute v alues of the various corrections.
The one-loop Debye screening correction is always negative . The “cusps” pointing downward
on the two- and three-loop curves show where these correctio ns cross zero and change sign.
Asymptotically, for large temperature, the (non-trivial p art of the) two-loop correction is
negative for Z= 1 and positive for Z≥2, while the three-loop correction is asymptotically
positive in all these plots. Each plot begins at temperature s which are too low for the
effective theory to be valid, includes the region where the eff ective theory can be useful, and
ends at temperatures sufficiently high that all corrections t o ideal gas behavior are tiny.
1710-210-1100101102
Density (a0-3)10-210-1100101Temperature (KeV)100101102103Density (gm/cm3)
106107108
Temperature (K)
FIG. 2. Region of validity for the effective theory for a pure Z= 2 ionized helium plasma. The
curves have the same meaning as in Fig. 1.
10-1100101102
Density (a0-3)10-1100101102Temperature (KeV)100101102103Density (gm/cm3)
107108109
Temperature (K)
FIG. 3. Region of validity for the effective theory for a pure Z= 6 ionized carbon plasma. The
curves have the same meaning as in Fig. 1.
1810-1100101102103
Density (a0-3)100101102Temperature (KeV)101102103104Density (gm/cm3)
107108109
Temperature (K)
FIG. 4. Region of validity for the effective theory for a pure Z= 13 ionized aluminum plasma.
The solid and dashed curves have the same meaning as in Fig. 1. The dotted horizontal line shows
where relativistic corrections to the electron pressure ex ceed unity; our non-relativistic treatment
is valid only below this line.
1910-1100
Temperature (KeV)10-610-510-410-310-210-1100101106107Temperature (K)
10-610-510-410-310-210-1100
FIG. 5. Corrections to the equation of state, βp/n, as a function of temperature for a pure Z= 1
plasma with a total density (electrons plus protons) of 1 a−3
0. Here, and in the following related
figures, the solid line shows the ideal gas result, including quantum statistics for the electrons but
no interactions. The long dashed line shows the one-loop Deb ye screening correction, the medium
dashed line shows the two-loop correction (minus its non-in teracting quantum statistics piece), and
the short dashed line shows the three-loop effective field the ory correction. The absolute values
of the various corrections are plotted. On the two- and three -loop curves, the “cusps” pointing
downward show where these corrections cross zero and change sign. For this density, the effective
field theory is only useful for temperatures above about 0.06 KeV. Below this temperature, the
three-loop correction exceeds the size of the one-loop corr ection (and exceeds unity at temperatures
below about 0.04 KeV), clearly showing that the perturbativ e expansion of the effective theory has
ceased to be reliable.
10-1100101
Temperature (KeV)10-610-510-410-310-210-1100101107108Temperature (K)
10-610-510-410-310-210-1100
FIG. 6. Same as Fig. 5, but at a total particle density of 10 a−3
0.
20100101
Temperature (KeV)10-610-510-410-310-210-1100101107108Temperature (K)
10-610-510-410-310-210-1100
FIG. 7. Same as Fig. 5, but for a pure Z= 6 plasma at a particle density of 1 a−3
0.
100101
Temperature (KeV)10-610-510-410-310-210-1100101107108Temperature (K)
10-610-510-410-310-210-1100
FIG. 8. Same as Fig. 5, but for a pure Z= 6 plasma at a particle density of 10 a−3
0.
21100101102
Temperature (KeV)10-610-510-410-310-210-1100101108109Temperature (K)
10-610-510-410-310-210-1100
FIG. 9. Same as Fig. 5, but for a pure Z= 13 plasma at a particle density of 1 a−3
0.
101102
Temperature (KeV)10-610-510-410-310-210-1100101108109Temperature (K)
10-610-510-410-310-210-1100
FIG. 10. Same as Fig. 5, but for a pure Z= 13 plasma at a particle density of 10 a−3
0.
22II. CLASSICAL COULOMB PLASMAS
We consider a plasma of Adifferent species of charged particles (ions and electrons) and
use the letters a,b,···= 1,···,Ato denote a specific species with charge eaand massma.
In the classical limit, the particle mass only appears in the thermal wavelength
λ2
a=2πβ¯h2
ma, (2.1)
whereβis the inverse temperature measured in energy units, and the thermal wavelength
itself only serves to define the free-particle density n0
ain terms of the chemical potential µa
and spin degeneracy factor gaof the given species:
n0
a=gaλ−3
aeβµa. (2.2)
The grand canonical partition function for a free gas compos ed of these species is given by
Zfree=/summationdisplay
{Na}/integraldisplay
dσN1
1···dσNA
A, (2.3)
wheredσN
ais theN-particle measure for species a,
dσN
a≡1
N!(d3ra,1)n0
a···(d3ra,N)n0
a. (2.4)
The factors of λ−3
ahidden in the n0
afree-particle densities in this measure come from per-
forming the momentum integrals in the equilibrium phase-sp ace distribution,
λ−3
a=/integraldisplay(d3p)
(2π¯h)3exp{−βp2/2ma}, (2.5)
and the remaining parts of n0
aarise from the degeneracy ( ga) and fugacity ( eβµa) factors that
enter into the definition of the grand canonical ensemble. In troducing the total volume of
the system
V ≡/integraldisplay
(d3r), (2.6)
which we shall always assume is arbitrarily large, and carry ing out the summations, we get
Zfree=A/productdisplay
a=1/summationdisplay
Na(Vn0
a)Na
Na!= exp/braceleftbigg
VA/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/bracerightbigg
. (2.7)
A. Functional Integral for the Classical Partition Functio n
The corresponding grand canonical partition function for a plasma with Coulomb inter-
actions between all the charged particles is
23Z=/summationdisplay
{Na}/integraldisplay
dσN1
1···dσNA
Aexp/braceleftbigg
−β
2/summationdisplay
k/ne}ationslash=lekelVC(rk−rl)/bracerightbigg
. (2.8)
Here the indices k,lin the exponential run over all particles of all the various t ypes;rkand
ekdenote the coordinates and charge of any given particle, res pectively. We employ rational
units, so that the Coulomb potential for unit charges is give n by
VC(r) =1
4πr. (2.9)
We choose to work with the grand canonical ensemble because, as we shall see, it has a
simple functional integral representation which leads to a very convenient diagrammatic form
for perturbation theory and allows easy use of effective field theory techniques. However,
we are ultimately interested in calculating physical quant ities as a function of the particle
densities, not chemical potentials, of the various species . Since the presence of interactions
between particles will modify the particle density — chemic al potential relation, we will need
to compute particle densities as a function of chemical pote ntial, and then invert this relation
(order-by-order in perturbation theory) to re-express res ults in terms of particle densities.
The physical particle densities, which we will denote as ¯ na, satisfy charge neutrality,
∝an}b∇acketle{tQ∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=V/summationdisplay
aea¯na= 0, (2.10)
as required for a sensible thermodynamic limit.
It will be useful to regard the chemical potentials as tempor arily having arbitrary spatial
variation,µa(r). This extends the partition function to be a functional of t hese generalized
chemical potentials, Z→Z[µ], which is then the generating functional for number densit y
correlation functions. The free-particle number density — chemical potential relation (2.2)
is now generalized to
n0
a(r)≡gaλ−3
aeβµa(r), (2.11)
with the variational derivative
δ
δβµ b(r′)n0
a(r) =δabδ(r−r′)n0
a(r). (2.12)
Here, and henceforth, variations in βµa, and inβ, will be regarded as independent. In other
words,βµais to be varied while holding βfixed, and vice-versa. The density of particles of
speciesais given by the variational derivative of ln Z[µ] with respect to the corresponding
generalized chemical potential,
∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ≡/angbracketleftBig/summationdisplay
iδ(r−ra,i)/angbracketrightBig
β=δ
δβµ a(r)lnZ[µ], (2.13)
while two functional derivatives yield the connected part o f the density-density correlator,
Kab(r−r′)≡ ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)nb(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ− ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ∝an}b∇acketle{tnb(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ
=/angbracketleftbigg/summationdisplay
i,jδ(r−ra,i)δ(r′−rb,j)/angbracketrightbigg
β−/angbracketleftBig/summationdisplay
iδ(r−ra,i)/angbracketrightBig
β/angbracketleftbigg/summationdisplay
jδ(r′−rb,j)/angbracketrightbigg
β
=δ
δβµ a(r)δ
δβµ b(r′)lnZ[µ]. (2.14)
24After the functional derivatives have been taken,14it will be assumed that the spatially-
dependent, generalized chemical potentials µc(r) revert to the usual constant chemical po-
tentialsµc.
The cumbersome form of the grand partition functional (2.8) can be replaced by a much
leaner functional integral representation by using the Gau ssian integral relation
/integraldisplay
[dφ] exp/braceleftbigg
β/integraldisplay
(dνr)/bracketleftBig
1
2φ(r)∇2φ(r) +iρ(r)φ(r)/bracketrightBig/bracerightbigg
= Det−1/2/bracketleftBig
β(−∇2)/bracketrightBig
exp/braceleftBigg
−β
2/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)ρ(r)Vν(r−r′)ρ(r′)/bracerightBigg
, (2.15)
which follows from completing the square in the functional i ntegral on the left. The auxiliary
fieldφ(r) is nothing but the electrostatic scalar potential.15The relation above has been
written inνspatial dimensions with
Vν(r−r′)≡/integraldisplay(dνk)
(2π)νeik·(r−r′)
k2(2.16)
the Coulomb potential in νdimensions. We choose to make a continuation in spatial di-
mensions at this juncture because it automatically removes infinite particle self-interactions.
Dimensional continuation is a regularization procedure wh ich introduces no external or ex-
traneous dimensional constants. Hence, since there is noth ing available to make up the
correct dimensional quantity, in dimensional continuatio n
Vν(0) = 0, (2.17)
and particle self-interactions vanish. We shall see how thi s works out in practice as our
development unfolds. We shall also need the technique of dim ensional continuation to deal
with the short-distance divergences of the classical Coulo mb theory — the divergences that
are removed by quantum fluctuations which we shall later hand le using effective field theory
methods. Hence one might as well get accustomed to dimension al continuation at an early
stage. At the end of our computations we shall, of course, tak eν→3. In view of the
functional formula (2.15), it follows that the grand canoni cal partition function may be
written as
Z[µ] = Det1/2/bracketleftBig
β(−∇2)/bracketrightBig/integraldisplay
[dφ] exp/braceleftBigg
−β
2/integraldisplay
(dνr)φ(r)/parenleftBig
−∇2/parenrightBig
φ(r)/bracerightBigg
×exp/braceleftBiggA/summationdisplay
a=1/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a(r)eiβeaφ(r)/bracerightBigg
. (2.18)
14The derivation of the results (2.13) and (2.14) from the spat ially varying chemical potential
extension of the standard form (2.8) of the partition functi on requires a little thought. These results
are obvious however if one imagines the classical partition function to be given by the classical limit
of the quantum form Z[µ] = Tr exp {−βH+/integraltext(dr)/summationtext
aβµa(r)na(r)}, with all operators commuting
in this classical limit.
15More precisely, −iφis the normal electrostatic potential. Inserting an i(or rotating the contour
of the functional integral) is necessary to obtain an absolu tely convergent functional integral.
25Since−∇2is a positive operator, the first, Gaussian, part of the integ rand gives a well-
defined and convergent functional integral. Expanding the s econd exponential in a power
series in the free-particle densities n0
a, and using the functional integration formula (2.15), it
is easy to see that the result (2.18) does indeed reproduce th e Coulomb plasma generating
functional (2.8). Note that this equivalence requires that the self-interaction terms vanish,
which is the case with our dimensional regularization [Eq. ( 2.17)]. Combining the two
exponentials of (2.18), one may write the partition functio n in the concise form
Z[µ] =N0/integraldisplay
[dφ]e−Scl[φ;µ], (2.19)
with an “action” functional defined by
Scl[φ;µ]≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)/braceleftBiggβ
2[∇φ(r)]2−A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a(r)eiβeaφ(r)/bracerightBigg
, (2.20)
and the overall normalization factor
N0≡Det1/2/bracketleftBig
β(−∇2)/bracketrightBig
. (2.21)
Varying the functional integral representation (2.19) wit h respect to the chemical poten-
tialµa(r) yields the representation
∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=/angbracketleftBig /angbracketleftBig
n0
a(r)eiβeaφ(r)/angbracketrightBig /angbracketrightBig
(2.22)
for the density of particles of type a, where in general ∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{t···∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht denotes a functional integral
average,
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tO∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht ≡Z[µ]−1N0/integraldisplay
[dφ]e−Scl[φ]O. (2.23)
With the generalized chemical potentials restricted to con stant values, Eq. (2.22) gives the
functional integral representation for the usual grand can onical average of the number density
of particles of species a. A second variation with the chemical potentials then restr icted to
constant values yields the representation of the density-d ensity correlation function (2.14),
Kab(r−r′) =/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
n0
aeiβeaφ(r)n0
beiβebφ(r′)/angbracketrightBig /angbracketrightBig
−/angbracketleftBig /angbracketleftBig
n0
aeiβeaφ(r)/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig/angbracketleftBig /angbracketleftBig
n0
beiβebφ(r′)/angbracketrightBig /angbracketrightBig
+δabδ(r−r′)/angbracketleftBig /angbracketleftBig
n0
aeiβeaφ(r)/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
. (2.24)
The final contact term proportional to δ(r−r′) appears (when a=b) because the functional
integral naturally generates correlators involving disti nct particles,
/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
n0
aeiβeaφ(r)n0
aeiβeaφ(r′)/angbracketrightBig /angbracketrightBig
=/angbracketleftbigg/summationdisplay
i/ne}ationslash=jδ(r−ra,i)δ(r′−ra,j)/angbracketrightbigg
β. (2.25)
This differs from the corresponding term in (2.14) precisely by the single-particle contact
term∝an}b∇acketle{t/summationtext
iδ(r−ra,i)δ(r′−ra,i)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=δ(r−r′)∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ.
Since the functional integral of a total derivative vanishe s,
260 =/integraldisplay
[dφ]δ
δφ(r)e−Scl[φ;µ], (2.26)
the field equation ∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tδScl[φ;µ]/δφ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht= 0 is an exact identity. For the action (2.20), this is
the Poisson equation
∇2∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tiφ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht (2.27)
with the charge density
ρ(r)≡A/summationdisplay
a=1ean0
a(r)eiβeaφ(r). (2.28)
Integrating both sides of (2.27) over all space yields the co ndition of total charge neutrality,
0 =∝an}b∇acketle{tQ∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=A/summationdisplay
a=1ea/integraldisplay
(dνr)∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ. (2.29)
This identity holds for any choice of the generalized chemic al potentials µa(r), in essence
because the average value of the electrostatic potential φwill always adjust itself to produce
a charge neutral equilibrium state.16
The fact that the chemical potentials enter the action (2.20 ) only through the combi-
nationn0
aeiβeaφ(withn0
a∝eβµa) means that the theory is completely unchanged if the
electrostatic potential is shifted by an arbitrary constan t,
iφ→iφ+c, (2.30a)
provided the chemical potentials are correspondingly adju sted,
µa→µa−eac. (2.30b)
Consequently, the values of the chemical potentials are not uniquely determined by the
physical particle densities. This is also reflected in the fa ct that the conditions
¯na=∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ, a = 1,...,A, (2.31)
only giveA−1 linearly independent constraints on the chemical potenti als — precisely be-
cause charge neutrality (2.29) is an automatic identity. To obtain uniquely defined chemical
potentials (when they revert back to their normal constant v alues), one must remove the
(physically irrelevant) freedom (2.30) to shift the mean va lue of the electrostatic potential.
We will make the obvious choice, and demand that the thermal a verage of the electrostatic
potential vanish,
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht ≡0, (2.32)
to fix the chemical potentials uniquely.
16Assuming, of course, that the plasma contains both positive ly and negatively charged species.
27B. Mean Field Theory
Saddle-points of the functional integral (2.19) correspon d to solutions of the field equation
δScl[φ;µ]
δφ(r)= 0, (2.33)
which, for the action (2.20), is just the Debye-H¨ uckel equa tion
− ∇2φ(r) =iA/summationdisplay
a=1ean0
a(r)eiβeaφ(r). (2.34)
The leading saddle-point approximation corresponds to neg lecting all fluctuations in φaway
from the saddle-point, so that
lnZ0[µ] =−Scl[φ;µ], (2.35)
withφsolving the field equation (2.34). In quantum field theory, th is approximation is com-
monly called the tree approximation because the classical a ction is the generating functional
of connected tree graphs. In statistical mechanics it is kno wn as the mean field approxima-
tion. In Appendix A we shall describe the effective action fun ctional Γ[φ;µ] which is the
generalization of the classical action Scl[φ;µ] that takes account of the thermal fluctuations
about the mean field which are described by the functional int egral and thus provides an ex-
act description of the plasma. As will be shown in Appendix A, the effective action method
can be used to derive general properties of the plasma physic s. Our work now with the
mean field approximation will provide an introduction to the later use of the more general
effective action as well as illustrating basic plasma proper ties.
For constant chemical potentials, the field equation reduce s to the (lowest-order) charge
neutrality condition,17
/summationdisplay
aean0
aeieaβφ= 0, (2.36)
and
lnZ0[µ] =V/summationdisplay
an0
aeieaβφ. (2.37)
The mean-field number density — chemical potential relation is given by
17Note that this constraint does not have a perturbative solut ion that can be be expanded in
powers of the electric charge. This lack of a perturbative so lution occurs because φappears only
in the combination eaφ. Moreover, the lack of a perturbative solution and conseque nt condition of
overall charge neutrality is related to the infinite range of the Coulomb potential. If, for example,
the Coulomb potential were replaced by a Yukawa potential wi th range 1/m, the classical field
equation for constant fields would become −im2φ=/summationtext
aean0
aeieaβφ,which imposes no constraint
on the total charge and which does have a perturbative soluti on forφ.
28¯na=V−1∂lnZ0
∂βµ a/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
β
=n0
aeieaβφ+iβ/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
aean0
aeieaβφ/bracketrightBigg∂φ
∂βµ a
=n0
aeieaβφ, (2.38)
with the last equality following from the charge neutrality condition (2.36). If the free-
particle densities satisfy “bare” charge neutrality,
0 =/summationdisplay
aean0
a, (2.39)
then the saddle-point condition (2.36) has the trivial solu tionφ(r) = 0, the physical densities
¯na, within this mean field approximation, will equal the free-p article densities n0
a, and the
mean-field partition function equals the usual ideal gas res ult,
Z0= exp/braceleftbigg
VA/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/bracerightbigg
. (2.40)
The average energy of our grand canonical ensemble is the the rmodynamic internal en-
ergy,
U=¯E=∝an}b∇acketle{tE∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=−∂lnZ
∂β/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
βµ. (2.41)
Sincen0
a∼β−3/2, varying the neutrality condition (2.36) with respect to βgives
−3
2β−1/summationdisplay
aean0
aeieaβφ+i
βκ2
0∂(βφ)
∂β= 0, (2.42)
where
κ2
0≡/summationdisplay
aβe2
an0
aeieaβφ(2.43)
will be seen to be the lowest-order (squared) Debye wave numb er. The first term of (2.42)
again vanishes by virtue of charge neutrality (2.36), and so
∂(βφ)
∂β= 0. (2.44)
Hence, to lowest order the average energy
¯E=3
2β−1V/summationdisplay
a¯na=3
2T/summationdisplay
a¯Na, (2.45)
which is just the familiar formula for an ideal gas.
Second derivatives of ln Zproduce correlators. The second derivative of ln Z0with respect
to the inverse temperature gives the lowest-order result fo r the mean square fluctuation in
energy,
29/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
E−¯E/parenrightBig2/angbracketrightbigg
β=−∂¯E
∂β=15
4T¯E. (2.46)
Mixed temperature — chemical potential derivatives yield t he correlation between energy
and particle number fluctuations,
/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
E−¯E/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBig
β=−∂¯Na
∂β=3
2T¯Na. (2.47)
These are again just the results for a free gas. But for fluctua tions in particle numbers,
given by second derivatives with respect to the chemical pot entials, one must account for
the fact that varying the chemical potentials will cause the mean field to vary. Since the
charge neutrality constraint (2.36) holds for arbitrary ch emical potentials, varying it with
respect to the chemical potentials yields
ea¯na+iκ2
0∂φ
∂βµ a= 0, (2.48)
Hence,
/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Nb−¯Nb/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBig
β=∂Na
∂βµ b=δab¯Na+¯Naieaβ∂φ
∂βµ b
=δab¯Na−ea¯Naβ
κ2
0eb¯nb. (2.49)
The physical implications of this result, which differs from the ideal gas result, will be
discussed below in subsection IIG.
C. Loop Expansion
The saddle-point (or “loop”) expansion of the functional in tegral (2.19), incorporates
corrections beyond mean field theory and systematically gen erates the perturbative expan-
sion for physical quantities of interest. In the developmen t that follows, we shall assume
that all of the desired functional derivatives with respect to the generalized, spatially vary-
ing chemical potentials which produce the insertions in the functional integral, as shown in
the previous number density (2.22) and density-density cor relator (2.24), have already been
taken. Thus, we henceforth restrict our considerations to c onstant chemical potentials. In
the lowest-order approximation, the free-particle densit iesn0
awill equal the physical densities
¯na, which are charge neutral (2.10). However, perturbative co rrections to the chemical po-
tential — number density relation will shift the free-parti cle densities away from the physical
densities, and therefore displace the true saddle point awa y fromφ= 0. Even though the
bare neutrality constraint (2.39) no longer holds in higher orders, it will be most convenient
to expand the functional integral about φ= 0 instead of the true saddle-point value. At each
stage of this (loop) expansion, further corrections to the b are (tree approximation) charge
neutrality constraint (2.39) appear which alter the relati on amongst the chemical potentials
that arises from charge neutrality. Expanding the action in powers ofφand separating the
quadratic and constant terms gives
30Scl[φ;µ] =S0[φ;µ] + ∆S[φ;µ], (2.50)
where
S0[φ;µ]≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)/braceleftbigg
−A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a+β
2φ(r)/bracketleftBig
−∇2+κ2
0/bracketrightBig
φ(r)/bracerightbigg
, (2.51)
and
∆S[φ;µ]≡ −/integraldisplay
(dνr)A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/braceleftBig
eiβeaφ(r)−1 +1
2β2e2
aφ(r)2/bracerightBig
=−/integraldisplay
(dνr)A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/braceleftBig
[iβeaφ(r)] +1
3![iβeaφ(r)]3+1
4![iβeaφ(r)]4+···/bracerightBig
.(2.52)
In Eq. (2.51), κ2
0is the lowest-order Debye wave number previously defined in E q. (2.43).
Since the bare neutrality condition is modified by loop corre ctions,/summationtext
aean0
awill not vanish
beyond the mean field approximation. Consequently, ∆ Scontains a piece linear in the field
φandφ= 0 does not remain a saddle point in higher orders.
Evaluating the action at φ= 0 gives the ideal gas partition function The first (“one-
loop”) correction is obtained by neglecting18∆Sand integrating over fluctuations in φwith
just the quadratic action S0. This gives the Gaussian functional integral
Z1=Z0Det1/2/bracketleftBig
β(−∇2)/bracketrightBig/integraldisplay
[dφ] exp/braceleftBigg
−β
2/integraldisplay
(dνr)φ(r)/parenleftBig
−∇2+κ2
0/parenrightBig
φ(r)/bracerightBigg
=Z0Det−1/2/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2κ2
0/bracketrightbigg
. (2.53)
The product of the determinant produced by the Gaussian inte gration with the prefactor
(which may be written as the inverse determinant of the opera tor inverse) produces the
determinant shown on the second line. This functional deter minant will be evaluated shortly.
The correlation function of potential fluctuations ∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)φ(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht, to lowest order, is given by
the Green’s function for the linear operator ( −∇2+κ2
0) appearing in S0,
β∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)φ(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(0)=N0
Z1/integraldisplay
[dφ]e−S0βφ(r)φ(r′) =Gν(r−r′). (2.54)
HereGν(r−r′) denotes the Debye Green’s function (in ν-dimensions), which satisfies
/bracketleftBig
−∇2+κ2
0/bracketrightBig
Gν(r−r′) =δ(r−r′), (2.55)
and has the Fourier representation
18As discussed in the next subsection, the term in ∆ Slinear in the field may be counted as being
of one-loop order. However, because it is odd in φ, its first order contribution to the functional
integral vanishes (just like the φ3term) and so it does not contribute to one-loop result (2.53) .
31Gν(r−r′) =/integraldisplay(dνk)
(2π)νeik·(r−r′)
k2+κ2
0. (2.56)
Expanding the functional integral (2.19) in powers of ∆ Swill lead to Feynman diagrams in
which each line represents a factor of this Debye Green’s fun ction times 1 /β, with vertices
joiningklines representing factors of/summationtext
an0
a(iβea)k.
The coincident limit of the Debye Green’s function Gν(0) will be needed in the following
sections. This is easily computed in any dimension by writin g the denominator in (2.56) as
a parameter integral of an exponential, and interchanging t he parameter and wave number
integrals,
Gν(0) =/integraldisplay∞
0dse−κ2
0s/integraldisplay(dνk)
(2π)νe−k2s=/integraldisplay∞
0dse−κ2
0s(4πs)−ν/2
=κν−2
0
(4π)ν/2Γ/parenleftbigg
1−ν
2/parenrightbigg
. (2.57)
Since Γ( −1
2) =−2√π, theν→3 limit ofGν(0) is perfectly finite and yields
lim
ν→3Gν(0) =−κ0
4π. (2.58)
Comparing this with the Debye Green’s function fixed at three dimensions,
G3(r) =e−κ0r
4πr, (2.59)
one sees that
lim
r→01
4πr/bracketleftBig
e−κ0r−1/bracketrightBig
=−κ0
4π. (2.60)
In other words, the dimensional regularization method auto matically deletes the vacuum
self-energy contribution that comes from the pure Coulomb p otential.
D. Particle Densities
Although the densities of the various particle species may b e obtained simply by differen-
tiating the partition function with respect to the correspo nding chemical potential — which
we shall do subsequently — one may directly evaluate these de nsities using diagrammatic
perturbation theory. We shall do this through one-loop orde r to illustrate the working of the
perturbation theory and charge neutrality. In perturbatio n theory, the density of particles of
a given species is evaluated by expanding the exponential in (2.22) in powers of φyielding,
to one loop order,
∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)
β=/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
n0
aeiβeaφ(r)/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
=n0
a/bracketleftBig
1 +iβea∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht −1
2β2e2
a/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
φ(r)2/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig/bracketrightBig
=n0
a/bracketleftBig
1 +iβea∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)−1
2βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightBig
. (2.61)
32+ + = + a a<n > a a/0/0/1/1 /0/0/1/1 a/0/0/1/1 /0/0/1/1 /0/0/1/1 /0/0/1/1
FIG. 11. One-loop order contributions to the mean particle d ensity ∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ. Labeled blobs ( a•)
refer to insertions of the number density n0
aeiβeaφfor a given species; a labeled blob radiating klines
stands for a factor of n0
a(iβea)k. The condition ∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht= 0 implies that the second and third diagrams
cancel. More generally, the condition ∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht= 0 implies that such “tadpole” diagrams cancel in
the expansion of any quantity, and such diagrams may simply b e neglected. This cancelation is
described more fully in Appendix A.
In the tree approximation with φ= 0, the charge neutrality condition (2.36) requires
that the chemical potentials are arranged such that/summationtextean0
a= 0. Thus, this sum should be
considered to start out at one-loop order. The one-legged ve rtex, the coefficient of the term
in the interaction part of the action (2.52) linear in φ, is proportional to this sum, and hence
it also should be considered to start at one-loop order. Thus computing the expectation
value ofφto one-loop order requires expanding e−∆Sin powers of φand keeping the linear
and cubic terms. This expansion, shown in the graphs of figure 12, gives
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)=N0
Z1/integraldisplay
[dφ]e−S0φ(0)/integraldisplay
(dνr)/summationdisplay
an0
a/bracketleftBig
(iβeaφ(r)) +1
3!(iβeaφ(r))3/bracketrightBig
=i
κ2
0A/summationdisplay
a=1ean0
a/bracketleftBig
1−1
2βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightBig
. (2.62)
This calculation is spelled out in greater detail in the deri vation of Eq. (F21) in Appendix
F. Note that the first term in Eq. (2.62), the tree approximati on, is obtained by expanding
the tree level neutrality condition (2.36) to zeroth and firs t order inφ.
Imposing the condition (2.32) that the mean electrostatic p otential vanish now requires,
to this order, that
A/summationdisplay
a=1ean0
a=1
2βGν(0)A/summationdisplay
a=1e3
an0
a, (2.63)
which alters the tree level neutrality constraint (2.39) on the chemical potentials, making the
sum on the left-hand side of Eq (2.63) equal to the one-loop co ntribution on the right-hand
side. This confirms the statement above that the sum on the lef t-hand should be considered
to start out at one-loop order. With the imposition of the one -loop constraint (2.63), the
expression (2.61) for the one-loop densities simplifies to
∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)
β=n0
a/bracketleftBig
1−1
2βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightBig
. (2.64)
The discussion of the density that we have just given is illus trated in figure 11. Inverting
the one-loop density relation (2.64) to express the bare den sityn0
ain terms of the physical
density ¯nagives
n0
a= ¯na/bracketleftBig
1−1
2βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightBig−1= ¯na/bracketleftBig
1 +1
2βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightBig
, (2.65)
33=<φ> + 0= /0/0/1/1 /0/0/1/1
FIG. 12. One-loop order contributions to ∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ. Unlabeled blobs (or vertices) represent inser-
tions of −∆Staken to some order in φ; a vertex joining klines stands for a factor of/summationtext
an0
a(iβea)k.
Each line represents a factor of the Debye Green’s function d ivided byβ, and the contribution of
each diagram is to be multiplied by the appropriate symmetry factor which, for the diagram above
containing a loop, the “tadpole graph,” is 1 /2. The condition ∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht= 0 taken to one-loop order
implies that the one-legged vertex (— •) must cancel the one-loop “tadpole”. Hence this one-legged
vertex should be counted here as being a one-loop contributi on. Two-loop diagrams (and beyond)
generate further higher-order corrections to the one-legg ed vertexiβ/summationtext
aean0
a.
to one-loop order. Note that e2
aGν(0)/2 is the self-energy of a charge eain the Debye
screened plasma, and so the right-hand side of Eq. (2.64) may be recognized as the first
order expansion of the Boltzmann factor exp {−βe2
aGν(0)/2}. Other effects besides this
simple exponentiation of course appear in higher orders. Al so note that the mean charge
density (computed to one-loop order) vanishes, as it must, e ven before the imposition of the
constraint (2.63), for it follows from Eq’s. (2.61) and (2.6 2) and the definition (2.43) of the
lowest-order Debye wave number that
∝an}b∇acketle{tρ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)
β=A/summationdisplay
b=1eb∝an}b∇acketle{tnb∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)
β
=A/summationdisplay
b=1ebn0
b/bracketleftBig
1−1
2βe2
bGν(0)/bracketrightBig
+A/summationdisplay
b=1βe2
bn0
b∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tiφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)
=A/summationdisplay
a=1ean0
a/bracketleftBig
1−1
2βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightBig/parenleftBigg
1−A/summationdisplay
b=1βe2
bn0
b
κ2
0/parenrightBigg
= 0. (2.66)
E. Loop Expansion Parameter
We have just seen that the size of one-loop corrections is mea sured, inνdimensions, by
the dimensionless parameter βe2Gν(0)∼βe2κν−2
0, which reduces to βe2κ0in three dimen-
sions. This parameter is the essentially the ratio of the Cou lomb energy for two particles
separated by a Debye screening distance to their typical kin etic energy in the plasma. Since
κ2
0∼βe2/d3, wheredis the average interparticle spacing, this expansion param eter is also
[βe2/d]3/2— the 3/2 power of the ratio of the average Coulomb energy in the plasm a to the
kinetic energy in the plasma.
At higher orders in the perturbative expansion, the relativ e contribution of any Feynman
diagram containing ℓloops will be suppressed by [ βe2κν−2
0]ℓ, or in three dimensions, by
34[βe2κ0]ℓ. A detailed proof of this appears in section 3 of Appendix F.19In other words, the
loop expansion parameter is [ βe2κ0] (up to some O(1) numerical factor). In fact, we shall
find in our explicit calculations that [ βe2κ/4π] appears as the most natural loop expansion
parameter.
F. Thermodynamic Quantities
All thermodynamic quantities may be derived from the grand c anonical partition func-
tion. In particular, the internal energy density uis given by
uV=−∂lnZ
∂β/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
βµ, (2.67)
where, as indicated the partial derivative is taken with the all theβµafixed, while the
chemical potential — number density relation is given by
¯naV=∂lnZ
∂βµ a/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
β, (2.68)
where now βis held fixed in the partial differentiation. The grand potent ial Ω(V,T,{µa})
is related to the partition function of the grand canonical e nsemble by
Z=e−βΩ. (2.69)
The grand potential is extensive for a macroscopic volume, a nd it is simply related to the
pressure, Ω = −pV, or
p=lnZ
βV. (2.70)
And a Legendre transform of the grand potential gives the Hel mholtz free energy,
F(V,T,{Na}) = Ω( V,T,{µa}) +/summationtext
aµaNa. Hence the free energy density is given by
f=−p+/summationdisplay
aµa¯na. (2.71)
The previous zeroth order and one-loop results (2.40) and (2 .53) express the partition
function through one-loop order as
Z1= exp/braceleftbigg
VA/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/bracerightbigg
Det−1/2/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2κ2
0/bracketrightbigg
. (2.72)
19Here is a brief version. The rescaling φ=˜φ/(βe),r=˜r/κ0in the functional integral (2.19)
conveniently reveals the dimensionless loop expansion par ameterg=βe2κν−2
0: the integrand
acquires the canonical form e−˜S[˜φ]/g, with all dependence on the dimensionless parameter gisolated
in the explicit prefactor which controls the validity of a sa ddle-point expansion.
35To evaluate the determinant, one may apply the general varia tional formula
δln DetX= TrX−1δX (2.73)
to a variation of κ2
0, to show that
δln Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2κ2
0/bracketrightbigg
=/integraldisplay
(dνr)Gν(0)δκ2
0. (2.74)
Since this is homogeneous in κ0of degreeν−2, it implies that
ln Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2κ2
0/bracketrightbigg
=2
νGν(0)κ2
0V, (2.75)
and thus20
Z1= exp/braceleftbigg/bracketleftbigg/summationdisplay
an0
a−1
νκ2
0Gν(0)/bracketrightbigg
V/bracerightbigg
, (2.76)
Let us now go over to the physical limit ν→3. Using Eq. (2.58) for G3(0), we have
Z1= exp/braceleftBigg/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
an0
a+κ3
0
12π/bracketrightBigg
V/bracerightBigg
, (2.77)
Since
∂n0
a
∂βµ a/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
β=n0
a,∂κ2
0
∂βµ a/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
β=βe2
an0
a, (2.78)
it follows from Eq. (2.77) that the number density to one loop order is given by
¯na=∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)
β=n0
a/bracketleftBigg
1 +βe2
aκ0
8π/bracketrightBigg
, (2.79)
in agreement with the physical ν→3 limit of the previous direct calculation (2.64). To
one-loop order, the pressure is given by
p1=TV−1lnZ1=T/summationdisplay
an0
a/bracketleftBigg
1 +βe2
aκ0
12π/bracketrightBigg
. (2.80)
20This result assumes that the chemical potentials (and tempe rature) are constrained so that
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht= 0 (to one loop order). If this constraint is violated, as it a pparently is in varying βto obtain
the internal energy by Eq. (2.67) or varying βµato obtain the density of particles of species aby
Eq. (2.68), then additional terms are present in the complet e one-loop result. These additional
terms do not contribute to the first variations yielding the e nergy or number densities and hence
may be neglected for these terms, but they do contribute to se cond or higher variations that define
correlation functions. This is discussed more fully in Appe ndix A; see in particular Sections 1
and 3.
36Re-expressing the one-loop pressure in terms of physical pa rticle densities using Eq. (2.79)
produces
p1=T/summationdisplay
a¯na/bracketleftbigg
1−βe2
aκ0
24π/bracketrightbigg
. (2.81)
This is the equation of state of the plasma to one-loop order.
Using
−∂n0
a
∂β/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
βµ=3
2Tn0
a,−∂κ2
0
∂β/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
βµ=1
2Tκ2
0, (2.82)
it follows from Eq. (2.77) that the internal energy to one-lo op order is given by
u1=T/summationdisplay
an0
a/bracketleftBigg3
2+βe2
aκ0
16π/bracketrightBigg
. (2.83)
or, in terms of the physical density ¯ na,
u1=T/summationdisplay
a¯na/bracketleftBigg3
2−βe2
aκ0
8π/bracketrightBigg
. (2.84)
And finally, the Helmholtz free energy density, to one-loop o rder, is
f1=T/summationdisplay
a¯na/bracketleftBigg
−1 + ln(¯naλ3
a/ga)−βe2
aκ0
12π/bracketrightBigg
. (2.85)
G. Density-Density Correlators
We now compute the density-density correlator Kab(r−r′) through one loop order. Ex-
panding about φ= 0, the first non-vanishing (“tree” graph) contribution app ears when ∆ S
is neglected and the explicit exponentials in (2.24) are exp anded to linear order, yielding
Ktree
ab(r−r′) =δabδ(r−r′)n0
a−βn0
an0
beaebGν(r−r′). (2.86)
Fourier transformation produces the density-density corr elation as a function of wave num-
ber,
˜Ktree
ab(k) =δabn0
a−βean0
aebn0
b
k2+κ2
0. (2.87)
Multiplying this result by Vand taking the limit k→0 gives the tree or mean-field
approximation to the total particle number fluctuations for the various species:
/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Nb−¯Nb/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBigtree
β=δab¯Na−ea¯Naβ
κ2
0eb¯nb, (2.88)
in agreement with the previous result (2.49). The second ter m on the right-hand side of this
equality is a consequence of charge neutrality. It involves the ratio of charges, and shows
37that one cannot naively expand in powers of charges. It cause s the number fluctuations to
depart from Poisson statistics even in this lowest-order ap proximation. Its presence ensures
that
/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig
Q/angbracketrightBigtree
β=/summationdisplay
beb/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Nb−¯Nb/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBigtree
β= 0, (2.89)
where in the first equality we made use of total average charge neutrality,
∝an}b∇acketle{tQ∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=/summationdisplay
aea¯Na= 0. (2.90)
Multiplying Eq. (2.89) by eaand summing over ashows that21
/angbracketleftBig
Q2/angbracketrightBigtree
β= 0. (2.91)
Thus, at least at tree level, there is no fluctuation in the tot al charge of the ensemble de-
scribed by our functional integral. The usual grand canonic al ensemble is modified by the
long-range Coulomb potential so that only subsectors of tot ally neutral particle configura-
tions appear in the sum over configurations. The general stru cture of the number density
correlation function described below [in particular Eq. (2 .115)] shows that the vanishing of
charge fluctuations (2.91) holds to all orders, and thus, in g eneral, only neutral configura-
tions contribute to the ensemble. Finally, we note that, to l owest order, charge neutrality
also ensures that the fluctuation of the total number of parti clesN=/summationtext
aNain the grand
canonical ensemble is Poissonian,
/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
N−¯N/parenrightBig2/angbracketrightbiggtree
β=/summationdisplay
a,b/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Nb−¯Nb/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBigtree
β=¯N. (2.92)
As shown in Eq. (2.113) below, higher-order corrections alt er this result.
One-loop corrections to the density correlator are obtaine d by expanding both e−∆Sand
the exponentials in the density operator insertions of (2.1 4) in powers of φ, and retaining all
next-to-leading order corrections. This leads to the one-l oop contributions shown graphically
in Fig. 13. There are three classes of diagrams: those which c ancel, those which simply serve
to replace bare densities by the physical densities (to one- loop order), and the rest. Diagrams
aandbcancel, as do c&d, ande&f, because their sum is proportional to ∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ≡0. Here,
as well as in higher orders, all such “tadpole” diagrams can s imply be neglected. That these
single-particle reducible graphs22cancel to all orders is proven in Appendix A. Diagrams g
andhcorrect the explicit bare densities in (2.86) by
21In this regard, it is worth noting that ˜Ktree
ab(0) is a symmetrical, real, positive, semi-definite
matrix whose only vanishing eigenvalue appears for the eige nvector whose components are the
electric charges ea(provided all densities n0
aare non-zero). These properties are easily demonstrated
explicitly. First define the matrix Nab≡δab/radicalbig
n0aand then the matrix L ≡ N−1˜Ktree(0)N−1, so
thatLab=δab−vavbwithva≡ea/radicalbig
βn0a/κ0. The claimed properties hold because vis a unit
vector.
22A graph is ‘single-particle reducible’ if it can be separate d into two disjoint pieces by cutting a
single line.
38/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1/0/0 /1/1
/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1/0/0 /1/1
/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1
/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1/0/0 /1/1
ca b
a b
mb
ibba
dae
ab a
b afb/0/0 /1/1
a/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1
b/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1
l k ja b/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1
b a/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1a
/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1
gb/0/0 /1/1
/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1a/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1ab
a/0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1
hb
FIG. 13. One loop diagrams contributing to the connected den sity-density correlation function
Kab(r−r′) =∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)nb(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htconn
β. Diagrams a–fare all tadpole diagrams which cancel and hence can
be neglected. Diagrams g–imerely serve to correct the bare densities appearing in the l owest order
result. Diagrams j–minvolve the essentially new contribution C(1)
abdiscussed in the text.
∆n(1)
a=∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)
β−n0
a, (2.93)
giving the one-loop contribution
−β/bracketleftBig
∆n(1)
an0
b+n0
a∆n(1)
b/bracketrightBig
eaebGν(r−r′). (2.94)
Diagramicorrects the Debye wave number which appears in the Green’s f unctionGν(r−r′);
explicitly it produces
−βn0
an0
beaeb∂Gν(r−r′)
∂κ2
0/summationdisplay
aβe2
a∆n(1)
a, (2.95)
or in Fourier space,
βn0
an0
beaeb
(k2+κ2
0)2/summationdisplay
aβe2
a∆n(1)
a. (2.96)
The net effect of these two classes of diagrams (plus the one lo op correction to the δab∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ
contact term) is to replace, through one loop order, the part icle densities and Debye wave
number appearing in (2.87) with their physical values,
39˜Ktree
ab(k)→˜Ktree,(1)
ab(k)≡δab¯na−βea¯naeb¯nb
k2+ ¯κ2. (2.97)
Here ¯κ2is the Debye wave number computed with physical particle den sities,
¯κ2≡/summationdisplay
aβe2
a¯na. (2.98)
The second part of Eq. (2.97) involves
˜Gtree,(1)(k) =β−1
k2+ ¯κ2, (2.99)
which is just the Fourier transform of the tree level electro static potential correlator
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)φ(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}htas given in Eq. (2.54), but with the physical Debye wave numbe r ¯κ. Under-
standing the general structure of the number density correl ation function will be facilitated
if (2.97) is rewritten in the form
˜Ktree,(1)
ab(k) =δab¯na−(βea¯na)˜Gtree,(1)(k) (βeb¯nb). (2.100)
The remaining graphs j–mgive non-trivial corrections. Diagram jmay be viewed as
generating a correction to the first, ‘contact’ term part of ( 2.100),
δab¯na→˜Cab(k) (2.101)
where, to one-loop order,
˜C(1)
ab(k) =δab¯na+1
2(βe2
a¯na)D(2)
ν(k) (βe2
b¯nb), (2.102)
with
D(2)
ν(k)≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)e−ik·rGν(r)2. (2.103)
This function represents the loop which is common to diagram sj–m. Graphskandl
correspond to making the corrections
ea¯na→/summationdisplay
cec˜C(1)
ca(k), e b¯nb→/summationdisplay
cec˜C(1)
cb(k), (2.104)
in the factors flanking ˜Gtree,(1)(k) in Eq. (2.100). Physically, these diagrams may be viewed as
generating corrections to the coupling between the particl e density operators and fluctuations
in the electrostatic potential. The final graph mis a one-loop polarization (or ‘self-energy’)
correction to the electrostatic potential correlator
G(r−r′) =∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)φ(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht. (2.105)
This graph, together with higher order graphs in which the sa me “bubble” is inserted two
or more times, produce a change in the (Fourier transformed) potential correlator given by
˜Gtree,(1)(k)−1→˜G(k)−1≡β/bracketleftbigg
k2+β/summationdisplay
a,beaeb˜Cab(k)/bracketrightbigg
, (2.106)
40with the same one-loop result (2.102) for ˜Cab(k). Note that, according to Eq. (2.102),
β/summationdisplay
a,beaeb˜C(1)
ab(k) = ¯κ2+β
2/summationdisplay
a,b(βe3
a¯na)D(2)
ν(k) (βe3
b¯nb), (2.107)
showing that this ‘self-energy’ contribution includes the previous squared Debye wave num-
ber ¯κ2as well as the loop contribution described by graph m. Putting the pieces together,
we find that the one-loop corrections conform to the general s tructure
˜Kab(k) =˜Cab(k)−/bracketleftBig
β/summationdisplay
cec˜Cca(k)/bracketrightBig˜G(k)/bracketleftBig
β/summationdisplay
cec˜Ccb(k)/bracketrightBig
. (2.108)
That this form holds to all orders is proven in Appendix A, wit h this result given in
Eq. (A57). This Appendix shows that ˜Cab(k) is a single-particle irreducible function, sym-
metric inaandb, and provides its definition in terms of an effective action fu nctional.
Section G 1 of that appendix also demonstrates how the comple te one-loop calculation may
be easily performed using somewhat more sophisticated func tional techniques.
The explicit form of the one-loop function D(2)
ν(k) is easily evaluated in three dimensions
since
G2
3(r) =e−2κ0r
(4πr)2=1
4π/integraldisplay∞
2κ0dµe−µr
4πr. (2.109)
Thus taking the Fourier transform and interchanging integr als yields the dispersion relation
representation
D(2)
3(k) =1
4π/integraldisplay∞
2κ0dµ
k2+µ2, (2.110)
which is readily evaluated to give
D(2)
3(k) = (4πk)−1arctank
2κ0. (2.111)
Thek= 0 limit of ˜Kab(k) characterizes the fluctuations in particle numbers,
/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Nb−¯Nb/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBig
β=V˜Kab(0). (2.112)
The one-loop result for ˜Kab(0) is easily generated by inserting (2.111) into (2.102) and t hence
into (2.108). In particular, for the total particle number N=/summationtext
aNa, one finds to one-loop
order
/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
N−¯N/parenrightBig2/angbracketrightbigg
β=¯N+V¯κ3
16π, (2.113)
which explicitly shows that the Coulomb interactions gener ate non-Poissonian statistics for
fluctuations in total particle number.
41H. Charge Correlators and Charge Neutrality
As noted earlier, the charge neutrality condition (2.29) ho lds in the presence of arbitrary
chemical potentials µa(r). Consequently, a corollary of (2.29) is an identity for the correlator
of the number density of some species awith the total charge:
0 =δ
δµa(r)∝an}b∇acketle{tQ∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=A/summationdisplay
b=1/integraldisplay
(dνr′)Kab(r−r′)eb
=A/summationdisplay
b=1˜Kab(0)eb. (2.114)
It follows from the general structure (2.108) of the density correlator and the form (2.106)
of the inverse Green’s function that
/summationdisplay
b˜Kab(k)eb=/summationdisplay
b˜Cab(k)eb/braceleftBigg
1−β˜G(k)/bracketleftBigg
β/summationdisplay
c,deced˜Ccd(k)/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
=/summationdisplay
b˜Cab(k)ebβk2˜G(k), (2.115)
which does indeed vanish in the limit k2→0 in accordance with Eq. (2.114).
The charge density — charge density correlation function is given by
˜K(k) =/summationdisplay
a,bea˜Kab(k)eb
=k2/bracketleftBig/summationtext
a,bea˜Cab(k)eb/bracketrightBig
k2+β/bracketleftBig/summationtext
a,bea˜Cab(k)eb/bracketrightBig, (2.116)
or equivalently
˜K(k) =k2T−k4˜G(k), (2.117)
whereT= 1/βis the temperature in energy units. It has the small wave numb er limit
˜K(k) =k2T+O(k4). (2.118)
This limit, which follows directly from the structure (2.10 8) that is established in Appendix
A, also follows from examining the coupling of the plasma to a static external electric
potential. The static dielectric function of the plasma ǫ(k) is related to the charge density
correlation function by
˜K(k) =k2
β/bracketleftBigg
1−1
ǫ(k)/bracketrightBigg
. (2.119)
This will be derived in the following section [ c.f.Eq. (3.22)]. Thus, the small wave number
limit (2.118) implies that ǫ(k)→ ∞ ask→0. But this is just the statement that the
plasma is a conductor — when an external uniform electric fiel d is applied to the plasma,
charges move and the plasma becomes polarized in such a way as to completely screen the
constant external field. The small wave number behavior of th e static dielectric function is
made explicit by inserting Eq. (2.116) in Eq. (2.119) to obta in
ǫ(k) = 1 +β
k2/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
a,bea˜Cab(k)eb/bracketrightBigg
. (2.120)
42III. EFFECTIVE FIELD THEORY
We have just worked out the statistical mechanics of a classi cal, multicomponent plasma
through one-loop order. One cannot go to higher order in this purely classical theory.
Ultraviolet divergences appear at two-loop order and beyon d. For example, the pressure in
two-loop order receives a contribution from the diagram
✫✪✬✩
t t
(3.1)
which is proportional to the integral of the cube of the Debye Green’s function,/integraltext(dνr)Gν(r)3.
In three-dimensions, the short-distance part of this integ ral behaves as/integraltext(d3r)/r3, which is
logarithmically divergent. This divergence can be seen in a n elementary fashion directly
from the divergence (for opposite signed charges) of the Bol tzmann-weighted integral over
the relative separation of two charges,/integraltext(d3r) exp{−βeaebVC(r)}. Diagram (3.1) is just the
third-order term in the expansion of this integral in powers of the charges. These ultraviolet
divergences of the classical theory are tamed by quantum-me chanics — quantum fluctua-
tions smear out the short distance singularities. To reprod uce the effects of this quantum
mechanical smearing, we must augment our previous dimensio nally regulated classical the-
ory with additional local interactions which both serve to c ancel the divergences present in
diagrams such as (3.1), and reproduce quantum corrections w hich are suppressed by powers
of ¯h(or equivalently κλ). The coefficients of some of these induced interactions will diverge
in theν→3 limit. The finite parts of these coefficients (or “induced cou plings”) will then
be determined by matching predictions of this effective quas i-classical theory with those of
the underlying quantum mechanical theory.
A. Quantum Theory
The full (non-relativistic) many-body quantum theory gene rates the grand canonical
partition function — extended to be a number density generat ing functional ZQM[µ] by the
introduction of the generalized, spatially varying chemic al potentials µa(r) — as a trace over
all states,
ZQM[µ] = Tr exp/braceleftbigg
−β/bracketleftbigg
H−A/summationdisplay
a=1/integraldisplay
(d3r)µa(r)na(r)/bracketrightbigg/bracerightbigg
, (3.2)
wherena(r) is the number density operator for particles of species a. The multi-particle
Hamiltonian of the complete system has the structure
H=A/summationdisplay
a=1Ka+A/summationdisplay
a,b=1HCoul
ab, (3.3)
whereKarepresents the kinetic energy of all particles of species aandHCoul
abis the Coulomb
energy between particles of types aandb. In second-quantized notation,
43Ka=1
2ma/integraldisplay
(d3r)∇ˆψa(r)†· ∇ˆψa(r), (3.4)
and
HCoul
ab=eaeb
2/integraldisplay
(d3r)(d3r′)ˆψa(r)†ˆψb(r′)†VC(r−r′)ˆψb(r′)ˆψa(r). (3.5)
The quantum-mechanical partition function ZQM[µ] may be expressed as a functional
integral involving Apairs of fields ψ∗
a(r,τ), ψa(r,τ) defined on the imaginary time interval
[0,β].23Just as in the previous section, the Coulomb interaction bet ween charges can be
written in terms of a Gaussian functional integral over an au xiliary electrostatic potential.
Therefore,
ZQM[µ] = Det1/2/bracketleftBig
−∇2/bracketrightBig/integraldisplay
[dφ] exp/braceleftBigg
−1
2/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)/parenleftBig
∇φ(r,τ)/parenrightBig2/bracerightBigg
×A/productdisplay
a=1/integraldisplay
[dψ∗
adψa] exp/braceleftBigg
−/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)La/bracerightBigg
, (3.6)
where
La=ψ∗
a(r,τ)/braceleftBigg∂
∂τ−∇2
2ma−µa(r)−ieaφ(r,τ)/bracerightBigg
ψa(r,τ). (3.7)
The integrations are now over ν <3 spatial dimensions, since we work with the dimension-
ally regulated theory. As explained earlier, the dimension ally continued Coulomb potential
vanishes at vanishing spatial separation [Eq. (2.17)], and so there are no infinite particle
self-energies with this regularization scheme.
If the generalized chemical potentials have arbitrary vari ation in both space and imagi-
nary time, then ln ZQM[µ] is the generating functional for connected time-ordered c orrelation
functions of the density operators
na(r,τ) =ψ∗
a(r,τ)ψa(r,τ). (3.8)
These correlation functions are periodic in the imaginary t imeτwith period β. Thus they
have a Fourier series representation with frequencies ωn≡2πn/β = 2πnT/¯h, where in the
last equality we have restored Planck’s constant ¯ h. In the ¯h→0 classical limit, all these
frequencies run off to infinity save for the static n= 0 mode. Thus the classical limit in-
volves zero-frequency correlators and, correspondingly, generalized chemical potentials that
are independent of the imaginary time24τ. This is the reason that we are restricting the
23These fields may be either complex fields satisfying periodic boundary conditions, ψa(r,τ+β) =
ψa(r,τ), or anti-commuting Grassmann algebra valued fields satisf ying antiperiodic boundary con-
ditions,ψa(r,τ+β) =−ψa(r,τ). The first case describes the quantum mechanics of Bosons, w hile
the second describes Fermions. The following discussion is applicable to either case.
24Generalized chemical potentials that depend upon both spac e andrealtime do, however, have a
role to play in the classical theory since they may be used to p robe the response to time-dependent
disturbances.
44generalized chemical potentials to be time-independent. S ince the extended Hamiltonian of
the system including the chemical potential terms is time in dependent, the ensemble aver-
ages remain time-translationally invariant. Thus ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r,τ)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβis independent of τ, and it may
be replaced by the τ= 0 form ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ. Accordingly,
δ
δβµ a(r)lnZQM[µ] =1
β/integraldisplayβ
0dτ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r,τ)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ. (3.9)
The variational derivative of this result now yields25
Kab(r,r′) =δ
δβµ a(r)δ
δβµ b(r′)lnZQM[µ]
=β−1/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/bracketleftBig
∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r,τ)nb(r′,0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ− ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ∝an}b∇acketle{tnb(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ/bracketrightBig
. (3.10)
If every chemical potential is shifted by an amount proporti onal to the corresponding
charge,µa(r)→µa(r) +eaλ(r), then derivatives of the partition function with respect t o
λ(r) generate correlation functions of the charge density ρ(r,τ)≡/summationtext
aeana(r,τ),
∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=/summationdisplay
aea∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=δ
δβλ(r)lnZQM[µ+eλ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
λ=0, (3.11)
and
K(r,r′) =/summationdisplay
a,beaebKab(r,r′) =δ
δβλ(r)δ
δβλ(r′)lnZQM[µ+eλ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
λ=0
=β−1/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/bracketleftBig
∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(r,τ)ρ(r′,0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ− ∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ/bracketrightBig
. (3.12)
Alternatively, if one makes a compensating change of variab lesφ→φ+iλin the functional
integral (3.6), all dependence on λdisappears from the charged field Lagrangian La, and
the net effect is merely to shift the Gaussian measure for the e lectrostatic potential,
exp/braceleftbigg
−1
2/integraldisplay
dτ(dνr) [∇φ]2/bracerightbigg
→exp/braceleftbigg
−1
2/integraldisplay
dτ(dνr) [∇(φ+iλ)]2/bracerightbigg
= exp/braceleftbigg
−1
2/integraldisplay
dτ(dνr)/bracketleftBig
(∇φ)2−2iφ∇2λ−(∇λ)2/bracketrightBig/bracerightbigg
.(3.13)
Hence,
25The final form shown for the second variation (3.10) involves an integral over imaginary time of
the time-ordered correlation function Kab(r,τ;r′,τ′) =δ
δµa(r,τ)δ
δµb(r′,τ′)lnZ[µ] which is symmetric,
Kab(r,τ;r′,τ′) =Kba(r′,τ′;r,τ), periodic in imaginary time, Kab(r,τ;r′,τ′) =Kab(r,τ−β;r′,τ′) =
Kab(r,τ;r′,τ′−β), and (when evaluated at constant chemical potentials), ti me-translation invari-
ant,Kab(r,τ;r′,τ′) =Kab(r,τ−τ′;r′,0). Since the integral in (3.10) has τ >0, the product of
density operators appearing in the integrand is trivially t ime-ordered.
45ZQM[µ+eλ] =ZQM[µ]eβ/integraltext
(dνr)1
2(∇λ)2/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
ei/integraltext
dτ(dνr)φ∇2λ/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
, (3.14)
and consequently
∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=δ
δβλ(r)lnZQM[µ+eλ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
λ=0=∇2i∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht, (3.15)
and
K(r,r′) =δ
δβλ(r)δ
δβλ(r′)lnZQM[µ+eλ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
λ=0
=−β−1∇2
rδ(r−r′)− ∇2
r∇2
r′G(r,r′), (3.16)
where Gis the zero-frequency correlator of fluctuations in the elec trostatic potential,
G(r,r′)≡β−1/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/bracketleftBig
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r,τ)φ(r′,0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht − ∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht/bracketrightBig
. (3.17)
The relation (3.15) is just the Poisson equation (now derive d in the full quantum theory).
When the chemical potentials have no spatial variation, ∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}htis constant, the charge
density ∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβvanishes, and the correlation functions K(r,r′) andG(r,r′) depend only on
r−r′. In this case, Eq. (3.16) becomes a simple relation between t he Fourier transformed
correlators,
˜K(k) =β−1k2−(k2)2˜G(k). (3.18)
Because of screening, ˜G(k) is bounded as k→0. Hence,
˜K(k) =Tk2+O(k4), (3.19)
and we have an alternative proof of the exact relation (2.118 ) discussed in the previous
section.
The charge density correlator ˜K(k) is directly related to the static dielectric function of
the plasma. To see this, note that Z[µ+eλ] is precisely the partition function in the presence
of an applied electrostatic potential −λ(r). The variation of charge density with respect to
λis just the charge density correlator times β,δ∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ/δλ(r) =βK(r,r′). Hence, the
Fourier transform of the charge density induced by this appl ied potential, to first order in
the applied field, is ˜ ρind(k) =β˜K(k)˜λ(k), or equivalently the induced electric field is
˜Eind(k) =−ik
k2˜ρind(k) =−β˜K(k)
k2˜D(k), (3.20)
where D(r) =∇λ(r) is the applied field. The ratio of the applied field to the tota l field (at
a given wave number) defines the static dielectric function ǫ(k),
˜D(k) =ǫ(k)/braceleftBig˜D(k) +˜Eind(k)/bracerightBig
. (3.21)
Thus
46ǫ(k) =/bracketleftBigg
1−β˜K(k)
k2/bracketrightBigg−1
=1
k2˜G(k). (3.22)
The first equality is equivalent to Eq. (2.119) asserted prev iously. The condition (3.19)
implies that ǫ(k) diverges as k→0. This, of course, reflects the fact that the plasma is a
conducting medium which exactly screens uniform applied el ectric fields. Finally, expressing
the correlator ˜G(k) in terms of the self-energy (or polarization tensor), ˜G(k)−1=β[k2+Π(k)],
shows that Π( k)/k2andǫ(k) are related by
ǫ(k)−1 =Π(k)
k2. (3.23)
Appendix A (as quoted in Eq. (2.106)) shows that the self-ene rgy Π(k) =β/summationtext
a,beaeb˜Cab(k).
Inserting this form yields the previously quoted relation ( 2.120) between the dielectric func-
tion and ˜Cab(k).
B. Classical Limit
In the limit in which the thermal wavelength λais much smaller that the scale of spatial
variation in the electrostatic potential, λa|∇lnφ(r)| ≪1, the functional integral over the
charged fields ψ∗
aandψamay be performed explicitly. Appendix B presents this calcu lation
in detail. Neglecting corrections suppressed by powers of λa, one finds that
/integraldisplay
[dψ∗
adψa] exp/braceleftbigg
−/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)La/bracerightbigg
= exp/braceleftbigg/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a(r)eiea/integraltextβ
0dτ φ(r,τ)/bracerightbigg
. (3.24)
This is just the classical limit of the quantum partition fun ction for particles moving in a
background potential −iφ(r,τ). Heren0
a(r) is the free-particle density of species a(inν
dimensions),
n0
a(r) =gaeβµa(r)/parenleftBiggma
2πβ/parenrightBiggν/2
=gaλ−ν
aeβµ(r), (3.25)
(which reduces to (2.2) when ν→3). Notice that the result (3.24) only depends on the
time-integral of the electrostatic potential.26Consequently, it is useful to make a Fourier
series expansion of the electrostatic potential on the imag inary time interval 0 <τ <β . We
separate out the zero frequency mode by writing
φ(r,τ) =φ(r) +/summationdisplay
n/ne}ationslash=0φn(r)e−iωnτ, (3.26)
where
ωn≡2πn
β. (3.27)
26This will not be true when sub-leading terms are included, as discussed later in this section.
47Sinceφ(r,τ) is real, the zero mode part is real, φ∗(r) =φ(r), whileφ−n(r) =φ∗
n(r). The
non-zero frequency modes do not contribute to the functiona l integral result (3.24). Hence,
in this classical limit, the non-zero frequency modes only a ppear in the initial Gaussian
functional integral in Eq. (3.6), and they may be trivially i ntegrated out. Their only effect
is to change the determinantal prefactor in Eq. (3.6) from it s implicitν+1 dimensional form
to anν-dimensional form which just normalizes the Gaussian funct ional integral of the zero
modes to unity if there were no other factors. Hence, in the cl assical limit one finds that
Z[µ] =N0/integraldisplay
[dφ]e−Scl[φ;µ], (3.28)
where
Scl[φ;µ] =/integraldisplay
(dνr)/braceleftBiggβ
2φ(r)/bracketleftBig
−∇2/bracketrightBig
φ(r)−A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a(r)eiβeaφ(r)/bracerightBigg
. (3.29)
This is precisely the representation (2.18) for the classic al partition function derived in the
preceding section. We have just seen that this form emerges n aturally as the limit of the
quantum partition function.
C. Induced Couplings
But this “derivation” of (3.29) as the classical limit of the quantum partition function
(3.6) is wrong ! As emphasized earlier, the classical partition function ( 3.29) is singular when
ν→3, while the quantum partition function (3.6) is completely regular in 3 dimensions. It is
impossible for the classical partition function (3.29) to e qual the quantum partition function
up to negligible corrections. What went wrong was the use of E q. (3.24), which is valid for a
sufficiently slowly varying background φ(r,τ), inside a functional integral over fluctuations in
φ— which includes fluctuations on scales comparable to the typ ical de Broglie wavelengths
of the charged particles. In other words, the contributions of short distance fluctuations
inφwere mangled when going from the quantum partition function (3.6) to the classical
partition function (3.29). To fix this error one may, in princ iple, integrate exactly over the
charged fields ψ(r,τ) together with the non-zero frequency modes φn(r) of the electrostatic
potential, to produce a non-local, effective action SQM[φ;µ] for the remaining zero-frequency
modeφ(r) such that
Z[µ] =N0/integraldisplay
[dφ]e−SQM[φ;µ]. (3.30)
However, explicitly constructing or dealing with this non- local action is impossible. Our
aim is to construct a local approximation to SQMwhich retains those parts of the complete
non-local action which must be added to the classical theory to obtain finite, correct results
to a given order in powers of the ratio of scales κλ. To do this, the first step is to regulate
the theory by working in ν <3 dimensions and then add to classical action (2.20) additio nal
local terms, referred to as induced interactions, which bot h serve to fix the incorrect short-
48distance behavior of the classical theory, and incorporate quantum effects suppressed27by
powers of ¯h,
Scl[µ]→Seff[φ;µ]≡Scl[φ;µ] +Sind[φ;µ]. (3.31)
The induced interactions Sindmay, in general, include arbitrary combinations of the field
φ(r) and its derivatives at a point r, integrated over all space. However, only terms which are
consistent with the symmetries of the original underlying t heory can appear. Of particular
importance is the invariance φ→φ−icandµa→µa−eac. The discussion of Eq. (2.30) shows
that this is an invariance of the classical theory. In view of the structure (3.7) of the quantum
Lagrangian, this shift is also an invariance of the full quan tum theory. Consequently, only the
combination n0
aeiβeaφ, which is invariant under this combined shift of φandµa, plus spatial
derivatives of µa(r)+ieaφ(r), will appear in Sind. As a result, the induced interactions have
the general structure
Sind[φ;µ] =/summationdisplay
p=2/summationdisplay
a1···ap/integraldisplay
(dνr)g0
a1···apβ3(p−1)n0
a1(r)eiβea1φ(r)···n0
ap(r)eiβeapφ(r)
+/summationdisplay
p=1/summationdisplay
a1···ap/integraldisplay
(dνr)h0
a1···apβ3p+1/bracketleftBig
∇/parenleftBig
µa1(r)+iea1φ(r)/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig2n0
a1(r)eiβea1φ(r)···n0
ap(r)eiβeapφ(r)
+/summationdisplay
p=2/summationdisplay
a1···ap/integraldisplay
(dνr)k0
a1···apβ3p+1/bracketleftBig
∇/parenleftBig
µa1(r)+iea1φ(r)/parenrightBig
· ∇/parenleftBig
µa2(r)+iea2φ(r)/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig
×n0
a1(r)eiβea1φ(r)···n0
ap(r)eiβeapφ(r)
+···, (3.32)
where the final ellipsis ···stands for similar terms with four or more derivatives.
For calculations to a given loop order, only a finite number of the induced interactions
are needed. The classification of the various terms accordin g to the order in which they first
contribute will be spelled out below.
Interactions involving only a single density (that is, the c lassical −n0
aeiβeaφinteraction,
the two-derivative term proportional to h0
a, and corresponding higher derivative terms) have
coefficients which are finite in three dimensions, and are simp ly determined by expanding
the charged field functional integral (3.24) as described in appendix B. The result (B52) of
this appendix, also shown in Eq. (3.91), gives
h0
a=λ2
a
48πβ2=¯h2
24βma. (3.33)
The induced couplings g0
a1···ap(as well ash0
a1···ap,etc.) multiplying two or more densities
will contain poles in ν−3 which serve to cancel poles at ν=3 generated by two-loop and
higher order graphs generated by the classical interaction (or the single-density induced
interactions). The “infinite” parts of Sind[φ;µ], (that is, the residues of these pole terms)
27It will also be necessary to include non-linear interaction s involving the non-zero frequency
modesφn(r). This will be discussed at the end of this section.
49are relatively easy to calculate — they are precisely the ter ms needed to make the complete
theory finite (as it must be). This will be illustrated explic itly in the following subsection.
The remaining “finite” parts of these induced couplings, the non-pole terms, can only be
obtained by matching results for some physical quantity com puted in this effective theory
with corresponding results for the same quantity computed i n the original (full quantum)
theory. The first such matching for an induced coupling will b e performed at the end of this
section. Once the required matching is done, to a given loop o rder, the effective theory may
then be used to calculate any other physical quantity.
To ascertain the loop order of the various induced interacti ons, we note that since/integraltext(dνr)n0
ais dimensionless, g0
a1···aptimes the remaining p−1 factors of β3n0
amust be di-
mensionless. In the physical ν→3 limit, the particle density n0
a∼1/d3, wheredis the
interparticle spacing, e2/dhas the dimensions of energy, and βe2/dis dimensionless. Hence
g0
a1···apmust be a pure number28timese6(p−1)(where, bye6we mean six factors of the various
chargesea), so that each of the p−1 densities is accompanied by a factor of β3e6. Equiv-
alently, each of the p−1 densities appears in the form β2e4(βe2n0
a)∼[βe2κ0]2. Recalling
thatβe2κ0is just the loop-counting parameter, we see that the g0
a1···apinteraction with no
derivatives and pdensities will first contribute at 2( p−1) loop order. Similarly, for the inter-
actions with two derivatives, h0
a1···apandk0
a1···apmust both be dimensionless functions of the
quantum parameters times e6p−2inν=3 dimensions. This is because each particle density
is again accompanied by a factor of β3e6, so that the p-density two-derivative interactions
involve the dimensionless quantity ( βe2κ0)2p/integraltext(dr)β(∇φ)2. Consequently, the induced cou-
plingsh0
a1···apandk0
a1···apfirst contribute to correlation functions at 2 ploop order. Induced
interactions with four or more derivatives, which were not d isplayed explicitly in (3.32), are
only needed for calculations at four loop order or beyond. No te that there are no induced
couplings which first contribute at any odd loop order.
The multiple-density induced couplings have poles at ν=3, and so the dimensionality ν
must be kept away from three until all terms of a given order ha ve been combined. The
extra dimensional factors needed away from ν=3 have the form of factors of λ3−ν, whereλ
stands for a characteristic thermal wavelength of particle s in the plasma. Since the Coulomb
potential in νdimensions has the coordinate dependence r2−ν, an extension of the analysis
in the previous paragraph shows that the induced coupling g0
a1···ap∝λ−2(p−1)(ν−3)while both
h0
a1···apandk0
a1···ap∝λ−2p(ν−3).
Because the interactions depend on the chemical potentials , physical particle densities
in the effective theory (3.31) are not equal to the functional integral average of n0
aeiβeaφ, as
in the original classical theory. Rather,
∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ≡δlnZ
δβµ a=−/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBiggδSeff
δβµ a/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
=/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBigg
n0
aeiβeaφ−δSind
δβµ a/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
, (3.34)
and similarly for the density-density correlator,
Kab(r,r′)≡δ2lnZ
δβµ a(r)δβµ b(r′)
28More precisely, a dimensionless function of the various qua ntum parameters βe2/λa.
50=/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBiggδSeff
δβµ a(r)δSeff
δβµ b(r′)/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
− ∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ∝an}b∇acketle{tnb∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ−/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBiggδ2Seff
δβµ a(r)δβµ b(r′)/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
. (3.35)
D. Renormalization
The residue of a pole in an induced coupling may be determined by calculating a suitable
n-point density correlator to a given loop order, and requiri ng that the result be finite as
ν→3. Once this has been done for all the couplings that appear in a given order, then
any other process will be finite to this order. In addition to t he pole terms in the induced
couplings, there are, of course, finite remainders. These fin ite terms are determined by
matching a result computed in our effective theory to the same result computed in the full
quantum theory. We shall take up the matching problem later. Here we shall exhibit the
nature of the (infinite) pole terms by examining several exam ples.
At two-loop order, the induced coupling g0
abcontributes through the last term in (3.35)
to the irreducible part ˜Cab(k) of the density-density correlator. The only other contrib utions
at this order which are singular as ν→3 are the diagrams:
✫✪✬✩
t t ✛ ✛ k k
a b✫✪✬✩
tt
✛ ✛ k ka(3.36)
[The full set of two-loop diagrams contributing to ˜Cab(k) is shown in figure 16 of the following
section.] The second diagram of (3.36) generates a contact t erm proportional to δaband
independent of the external momentum k. The contribution to ˜Cab(k) of these diagrams,
plus theg0
abinteraction, is
˜C(2,sing)
ab(k) =β3n0
an0
b/bracketleftBigg
−2g0
ab−e3
ae3
b
3!D(3)
ν(k)/bracketrightBigg
+β3δabA/summationdisplay
c=1n0
an0
c/bracketleftBigg
−2g0
ac−e3
ae3
c
3!D(3)
ν(0)/bracketrightBigg
,
(3.37)
whereD(3)
ν(k) denotes the Fourier transform of the cube of the Debye poten tial,
D(3)
ν(k)≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)e−ik·rGν(r)3. (3.38)
The function D(3)
ν(k) has a simple pole in ν−3, which arises from the existence, in 3 dimen-
sions, of a non-integrable 1 /r3short-distance singularity in the integrand. The long-dis tance
behavior of the integral is effectively cut-off by the larger o f the Debye wavenumber κor
the external wave-vector k. This function is evaluated explicitly in section 2 of appen dix C
[c.f.Eq. (C31)] but for our present purposes all we need is the resi due of the pole in ν−3.
Since this pole arises solely from the short-distance behav ior, its residue does not depend on
whether korκcontrols the long distance behavior. Using the result (C31) and neglecting
pieces that are non-singular when ν= 3 gives
D(3)
ν(k) =1
2 (4π)21
3−ν(κ2)ν−3[1 +O(ν−3)]. (3.39)
51Note that it makes no difference whether the factor which prov ides the correct dimensions is
written as ( κ2)ν−3, as (k2)ν−3, or as a power of some arbitrary wave vector µ, since different
choices merely correspond to a change in the non-singular pa rt ofD(3)
ν(k). For example,
κ2(ν−3)
3−ν=µ2(ν−3)
3−ν+ ln/parenleftBiggµ2
κ2/parenrightBigg
+O(ν−3). (3.40)
As will be seen explicitly later on, it is generally very conv enient to make use of this arbitrary
scale in the pole residue and write all such divergent quanti ties in terms of a single, standard,
but arbitrary parameter µwith the dimensions of wavenumber or inverse length, a param eter
that is also used to exhibit the extra dimensions that arise w hen the parameters are extended
beyondν= 3 dimensions. Thus we write the induced coupling g0
abas
g0
ab=µ2(ν−3)/bracketleftBigg
−1
4!(eaeb)3
(4π)21
3−ν+gab(µ)/bracketrightBigg
. (3.41)
In view of the result (3.39), the first pole term in this expres sion cancels the singular con-
tributions arising from D(3)
ν(k) in Eq. (3.37). The prefactor µ2(ν−3)absorbs the variation in
dimension when νdeparts from ν= 3, and so the remaining finite coupling gab(µ) always
retains itsν= 3 dimensions. This finite (or “renormalized”) coupling mus t depend upon µ
in such a way as to ensure that the bare coupling g0
abis independent of the arbitrary value of
µ. Thus we have defined the finite coupling gabto be a scale-dependent “floating” coupling,
and we shall later exploit the renormalization group result s that follow from the arbitrary
character of µ. For now, we simply note that gab(µ) will soon be determined by matching
the effective theory to the underlying microscopic theory.
Similar considerations apply to the induced couplings of hi gher loop order. At four-loop
order, the irreducible correlator ˜Cab(k) receives contributions from the h0
abandk0
abderivative
interactions which are proportional to k2. Therefore, to determine the pole parts of these
couplings, it is sufficient to focus just on those contributio ns to ˜Cab(k) (at four-loop order)
which are also proportional to k2and singular as ν→3. [There are additional singular
contributions to ˜Cab(k) at four-loop order which are proportional to κ2. The renormaliza-
tion of these terms requires the four-loop coupling g0
abcin addition to h0
abandk0
ab. The
determination of g0
abcis discussed below.]
There is only one four loop diagram constructed from the clas sical interaction which
contributes to ˜Cab(k) and contains a term singular as ν→3 that is proportional to k2:
✫✪✬✩
t t ✛ ✛ k k
a b(3.42)
In addition, the following four-loop order diagrams involv ing the classical interaction plus
the finiteh0
ainduced interaction contain terms proportional to k2which are singular as
ν→3:
b
aa b a(3.43)
52Here, the circled ‘X’ denotes the vertex generated by the h0
ainduced interaction. Since h0
a
itself counts as a two-loop factor, these diagrams contribu te to the correlator at four-loop
order. The contributions of the h0
abandk0
abinteractions, plus the above graphs, give
˜C(4,sing)
ab(k) =β5n0
an0
b/bracketleftBigg
2k2k0
ab−k2e3
ae3
b
3!/parenleftBig
h0
a+h0
b/parenrightBig
D(3)
ν(k)−e5
ae5
b
5!D(5)
ν(k)/bracketrightBigg
+k2δabβ5A/summationdisplay
c=1n0
an0
c/parenleftBigg
2h0
ac−2h0
ae3
ae3
c
3!D(3)
ν(0)/parenrightBigg
+O(κ2), (3.44)
where only the pieces proportional to k2have been displayed, and where
D(5)
ν(k)≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)e−ik·rGν(r)5. (3.45)
This integral may be evaluated explicitly using the methods of appendix C. However, the
part of the integral which is proportional to k2and singular as ν→3 arises solely from
the short-distance singularity in the integrand. To extrac t just this portion of the integral,
it is sufficient to use unscreened Coulomb potentials instead of the Debye potential. The
resulting Fourier transform of Vν(r)5is evaluated in appendix C [ c.f.Eq. (C14)] where it is
shown that
/integraldisplay
(dνr)e−ik·rVν(r)5=−k2
4! (4π)4/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBigg2(ν−3)1
3−ν+ finite. (3.46)
Using this result plus (3.39), it is easy to see that the four- loopO(k2) part of ˜Cab(k) will be
finite asν→3 provided
h0
ab=µ2(ν−3)/bracketleftBigg
−h0
aπ
3/parenleftbiggeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg31
3−ν+hab(µ)/bracketrightBigg
, (3.47)
and
k0
ab=µ2(ν−3)/bracketleftBigg
−2π
4!·5!/parenleftbiggeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg51
3−ν
+π
3!/parenleftbiggeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg3/parenleftBig
h0
a+h0
b/parenrightBig1
3−ν+kab(µ)/bracketrightBigg
. (3.48)
Just as before with gab(µ), the finite renormalized couplings hab(µ) andkab(µ) can only be
determined by matching with the full quantum theory.
The final four loop induced coupling g0
abcmultiplies three factors of bare particle den-
sities. The most convenient way to determine the poles in thi s coupling is to consider the
(irreducible part of the) triple density correlator,
˜Kabc(k,q)≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)(dνr′′)ei(k·r+q·r′−(k+q)·r′′)δ3lnZ
δβµ a(r)δβµ b(r′)δβµ c(r′′).(3.49)
This correlator receives a contribution of −3!g0
abcβ6n0
an0
bn0
cfrom theg0
abcinduced coupling.
It also receives contributions, which are singular as ν→3, from the four-loop diagrams:
53✫✪✬✩
tt
t✛✁✁ ✕
❆❆ ❑kq
k+qab
c ✫✪✬✩
tt
t✛✁✁ ✕
❆❆ ❑kq
k+qab
ctt
t✛✁✁ ✕
❆❆ ❑kq
k+qab
c(3.50)
(plus 5 other versions of the second diagram, and 2 other vers ions of the third diagram, in
which the labels are permuted in various ways). In addition, there is a singular four-loop
contribution involving the two-loop coupling g0
ab.29Provided the external momenta kand
qare non-zero, one may replace the Debye potentials in all the se diagrams by unscreened
Coulomb potentials without changing the residue of the 1 /(ν−3) poles. In order for the sum
of these contributions to be finite, the four-loop coupling g0
abcmust have both single and
double poles in ν−3. The resulting structure for g0
abc, and yet higher-order couplings, will
be discussed further in section VI.
E. Matching
The most direct approach to determine the finite part of the tw o-loop coupling g0
abgiven
in Eq. (3.41) is to compare the density-density correlator ˜Kab(k) in the effective theory
and the original quantum theory. Because the induced coupli ngg0
abmakes a contribution
to˜Cab(k) (and hence to the full correlator ˜Kab(k)) proportional to n0
an0
b, it is sufficient to
retain in both the effective and fundamental theories only th ose contributions with the same
n0
an0
bdependence on the bare densities. Since it is the short-dist ance contributions which
must be correctly matched, Debye screening may be completel y ignored [3] if one compares
the correlator evaluated at a non-zero wave number k. Consequently, to determine the
two-loop coupling g0
abit is sufficient to work just to second order in the fugacity exp ansion.
And because the induced coupling g0
abmakes a momentum-independent contribution to the
correlator (3.37), it is also sufficient to work in the limit of small momentum k≪λ−1and
neglect all contributions which vanish as k→0.30
The tree and one-loop contributions to the correlator are gi ven by Eqs. (2.102) and
(2.106)–(2.108). Two-loop contributions to ˜Kab(k) which are proportional to n0
an0
barise
in two ways. The one-particle irreducible part ˜Cab(k) receives such a contribution from
the first term in (3.37). In addition, there is a one-particle reducible contribution arising
from the two-loop h0
ainteraction appearing in Eq. (3.32). This may be seen as foll ows.
29There are also “contact” terms proportional to δab,δbcorδac, analogous to the second term
appearing in (3.37). However, the required pole terms in g0
abcmay be entirely inferred from the
non-contact terms in ˜Kabc(k,q) which are proportional to n0
an0
bn0
c. The resulting value of g0
abc
necessarily also renders the contact terms finite, just as se en explicitly at two-loop order in (3.37).
30To carry out the matching for the four-loop derivative coupl ingh0
ab, one would need to evaluate
and compare the O(k2) terms in the density-density correlator.
54Theh0
ainteraction generates, through the last term of (3.35), a tw o-loop contribution of
−2β2δabh0
an0
ak2to the irreducible correlator ˜Cab(k). A two-loop reducible contribution to
the full correlator ˜Kab(k) of31
2β4n0
an0
beaeb(h0
a+h0
b)k2˜G(k). (3.51)
is then generated by the two-loop cross term in Eq. (2.108) wh ich results from this irreducible
contribution together with the lowest-order piece contain ed in Eq. (2.102). As noted above,
for this matching calculation (only), we may neglect Debye s creening by sending κ→0.
In this limit, the electrostatic potential correlator G(k) is, to lowest order, just 1 /(βk2).
In other words, the 1 /k2of the (Fourier transformed) Coulomb potential cancels the k2
appearing from the two derivatives in the h0
ainteraction, leading to result which (with the
neglect of Debye screening) is non-vanishing as k→0.
Consequently, the relevant portion of the complete correla tor˜Kab(k) in the effective
theory is
˜K(2)
ab(k) =n0
an0
b/bracketleftBigg
−βeaeb
k2+(βeaeb)2
2D(2)
ν(k)−(βeaeb)3
3!D(3)
ν(k)
−2β3g0
ab+ 2β3eaeb(h0
a+h0
b)/bracketrightBigg
+··· (3.52)
where ···denotes irrelevant terms with different dependence on the ba re densities.32With
31This term may equivalently be described as arising from the fi rst term of (3.35) when one
variation acts on the ∇φ· ∇µcpart of the h0
cinteraction in Eq. (3.32) and the other variation acts
on the classical interaction.
32An independent way to derive the h0
aterms in the result (3.52), which illuminates the character
of the theory, is as follows. In our construction of the inter action terms in the effective theory
(3.32), we fixed the meaning of the functional integration fie ldφby requiring that the invariance
φ→φ−ic,µa→µa−eacbe maintained, implying that this field and the chemical pote ntials always
appear in the combination µa+ieaφ. This requirement casts the theory in its most useful form.
However, since φis simply a dummy integration variable, one is free to make fie ld redefinitions
that violate this restriction, and it is sometimes convenie nt to do so temporarily. Since n0
a(r)∝
exp{βµa(r)}, the cross term in the h0
ainteraction involving ∇φ·∇µamay equivalently be written as
2β3/summationtext
aieah0
aeiβeaφ∇φ·∇n0
a.To first order in h0
a, which is all that concerns us, the field redefinition
φ→φ−2β2/summationdisplay
biebh0
bn0
beiβebφ
in the kinetic termβ
2(∇φ)2removes the cross term [and produces an irrelevant addition al contri-
bution involving h0
ah0
b(∇φ)2]. The effect of the same field redefinition on the classical int eraction
term−/summationtext
an0
aeiβeaφ, again to leading order in h0
a, is a change in the action that is equivalent to the
induced coupling alteration
g0
ab→g0
ab−eaeb(h0
a+h0
a).
This combination is precisely what appears in Eq. (3.52), an d serves as an independent check on
the validity of that result.
55the neglect of Debye screening, the integrals D(m)
ν(k) reduce to Fourier transforms of powers
of the original Coulomb potential,
C(m)
ν(k) = lim
κ→0D(m)
ν(k) =/integraldisplay
(dνr)e−ik·rVν(r)m. (3.53)
Theκ→0 limit of (2.111) immediately gives
C(2)
3(k) =1
8k, (3.54)
and in the first part of appendix C it is shown [ c.f.C13] that
C(3)
ν(k) =1
2 (4π)2/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBiggν−3/braceleftbigg1
3−ν+ 3−γ+O(ν−3)/bracerightbigg
, (3.55)
whereγ= 0.57721···is Euler’s constant. Inserting g0
abfrom (3.41), and using
lim
ν→31
3−ν
/parenleftBig
µ2/parenrightBigν−3−/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBiggν−3
= ln/parenleftBiggk2
4πµ2/parenrightBigg
(3.56)
to take the physical ν→3 limit yields
˜K(2)
ab(k) =n0
an0
b/braceleftBigg
−βeaeb
k2+(βeaeb)2
16k+π
3/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBiggk2
4πµ2/parenrightBigg
−3 +γ/bracketrightBigg
−2β3gab(µ) +βeaebλ2
ab
24π/bracerightBigg
+··· (3.57)
for then0
an0
bpiece of the density-density correlator, neglecting Debye screening, to two-loop
order. In writing the last term of (3.57) we have made use of th e definition (3.33) of h0
ato
express
h0
a+h0
b=λ2
a+λ2
b
48πβ2=λ2
ab
48πβ2, (3.58)
in whichλabis the thermal wavelength for the reduced mass 1 /mab= 1/ma+ 1/mb.
We write the corresponding result in the underlying quantum theory as the Fourier
transform of the density-density correlator33
33We are glossing over a subtlety here, for Eq. (3.59) involves the equal time expectation value
∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r1,0)nb(r2,0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ, whereas our desired correlator is the zero-frequency corr elation function
(3.10). The difference between these two is just the sum of cor relations at all non-zero Matsubara
frequencies ωn. However, as discussed at the end of this section, non-zero f requency correlators
are proportional to k2(due to current-conservation), and hence do not affect the ma tching for the
g0
abinteraction in the effective classical theory, which may be e xtracted from the k→0 behavior
of the density-density correlator.
56Kab(r1,r2)≡ ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r1)nb(r2)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ− ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r1)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ∝an}b∇acketle{tnb(r2)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ
=Z−1Tr/bracketleftBig
e−βH+/summationtext
aβµaNana(r1)nb(r2)/bracketrightBig
− ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r1)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ∝an}b∇acketle{tnb(r2)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ. (3.59)
The subtraction of ∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ∝an}b∇acketle{tnb∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβremoves what would otherwise be a delta function contributi on
to the Fourier transform at k= 0, and is completely ignorable when working at k∝ne}ationslash= 0. We
specifically want the second-order contribution in the fuga city expansion of Kab(r1,r2). For
our purposes, this is most conveniently obtained by using an (old-fashioned) expansion of
the trace in terms of ordinary quantum-mechanical multi-pa rticle states rather than using
many-body quantum field theory. The desired second-order te rms in the fugacity expansion
come from the two-particle subspace of the thermodynamic tr ace over all particle states, so
that
K(2)
ab(r1,r2) =1
2/summationdisplay
cdeβµceβµd/integraldisplay
(d3r)(d3r′)∝an}b∇acketle{trc,r′d|e−βHcdna(r1)nb(r2)
[|rc,r′d∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht ± |r′d,rc∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht].(3.60)
Here,|rc,r′d∝an}b∇acket∇i}htdenotes the (un-symmetrized) two-particle basis ket with o ne particle of species
catrand one of species datr′,Hcdis the (first-quantized) two particle Hamiltonian,
Hcd=p2
1
2mc+p2
2
2md+eced
4π|r1−r2|, (3.61)
and the ±sign in the final combination of ket vectors accounts for Bose (+) or Fermi ( −)
statistics. To avoid a clutter of notation, we temporarily u se the indices a,bto denote spin
components as well as species labels. Now
na(r1)nb(r2)1
2[|rc,r′d∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht ± |r′d,rc∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht]
={δacδ(r1−r) +δadδ(r1−r′)}{δbcδ(r2−r) +δbdδ(r2−r′)}1
2[|rc,r′d∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht ± |r′d,rc∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht]
→ {δabδ(r1−r2)δacδ(r1−r) +δacδ(r1−r)δbdδ(r2−r′)}[|rc,r′d∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht ± |r′d,rc∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht],(3.62)
where in the last line terms which become equivalent when ins erted into (3.60) have been
combined. Since we are only interested in terms proportiona l ton0
an0
b(or equivalently
eβµaeβµb) the contact term involving δabδ(r1−r2) may be neglected.34The density operators
na(as well as the Hamiltonian Hcd) are spin independent, so that the sum over particle spins
just produces the spin degeneracies gaandgb. Hence, reverting to the previous notation in
which the indices a,blabel only different species without regard to spin, the requ ired piece
of the quantum mechanical density-density correlator is gi ven by
K(2)
ab(r1,r2) =gaeβµagbeβµb/bracketleftBig
∝an}b∇acketle{tr1,r2|e−βHab|r1,r2∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht ±(δab/ga)∝an}b∇acketle{tr1,r2|e−βHab|r2,r1∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht/bracketrightBig
.(3.63)
34As it stands, this contact term is infrared divergent since D ebye screening, which involves an
arbitrary number of particles, is needed to provide the long -distance cut off which makes the contact
term infrared finite. It is precisely because the required va lue of the induced coupling gabcan be
deduced solely from the non-contact part of the correlator t hat it is permissible to ignore Debye
screening in this matching calculation and just use a fugaci ty expansion.
57At this point, it is convenient to write the two-particle Ham iltonian in terms of center-of-
massRand relative rcoordinates,
Hab=Hcm
ab+Hrel
ab, (3.64)
with
Hcm
ab=P2
2Mab, (3.65)
the Hamiltonian for center-of-mass motion with total mass Mab≡ma+mb, and
Hrel
ab=p2
2mab+eaeb
4π|r|(3.66)
the Hamiltonian for relative motion with reduced mass m−1
ab≡m−1
a+m−1
b. The Fourier
transform now reads
˜K(2)
ab(k) =/integraldisplay
(d3r)e−ik·rgaeβµagbeβµb∝an}b∇acketle{tR|e−βHcm
ab|R∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht/bracketleftBig
∝an}b∇acketle{tr|e−βHrel
ab|r∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht ±(δab/ga)∝an}b∇acketle{tr|e−βHrel
ab|−r∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht/bracketrightBig
.
(3.67)
Our goal is to compare ˜K(2)
ab(k) with the effective theory result (3.57), and to adjust the
finite coupling gab(µ) in the effective theory so that both results coincide up to co rrections
that vanish as k→0.
The center-of-mass matrix element is just
∝an}b∇acketle{tR|e−βHcm
ab|R∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/integraldisplay(d3P)
(2π)3exp/braceleftBigg
−βP2
2Mab/bracerightBigg
= Λ−3
ab, (3.68)
where
Λab= ¯h/parenleftBigg2πβ
Mab/parenrightBigg1/2
(3.69)
is the thermal wavelength of the center-of-mass motion. We s hall also make use of the
thermal wavelength of the relative motion,
λab= ¯h/parenleftBigg2πβ
mab/parenrightBigg1/2
. (3.70)
Note that since the product of the reduced mass maband the total mass Mabis just the
product of the separate masses, mabMab=mamb, the corresponding relation also holds for
the thermal wavelengths, Λ abλab=λaλb. Hence
gaeβµagbeβµbΛ−3
ab=n0
an0
bλ3
ab, (3.71)
and we may write
˜K(2)
ab(k) =n0
an0
bλ3
ab[F+(k)±(δab/ga)F−(k)], (3.72)
58with
F±(k) =/integraldisplay
(d3r)e−ik·r∝an}b∇acketle{tr|e−βHrel
ab|±r∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht. (3.73)
As shown in appendix D, an explicit representation for the ma trix elements F±(k) may
be found by expressing the relative Hamiltonian in terms of t he generators of an su(1,1)
algebra. The result for the direct term, given in Eq. (D67), i s
F+(k) =λ−3
ab/braceleftBigg
−βeaeb
k2+(βeaeb)2
16k
+π
3/parenleftbiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftbiggλ2
abk2
4π/parenrightbigg
−3 +γ+8πλ2
ab
(βeaeb)2+f/parenleftbiggβeaeb
4πλab/parenrightbigg/bracketrightBigg
+O(k)/bracerightBigg
,(3.74)
where the function f(y) has the (convergent) power series expansion
f(y) =−3
4y−3√π
2∞/summationdisplay
n=1/parenleftBig
−√πy/parenrightBignζ(n+1)
Γ((n+5)/2). (3.75)
The asymptotic behavior of this function as y→ ±∞ is spelled out in detail in Eqs. (D71)
and (D74). Here we note that in the case of strong repulsive in teractions corresponding to
y→+∞,f(y) increases only as ln y, with
f(y)∼ln(4πy2) + 3γ−8
3−1
4πy2+O(y−4). (3.76)
For the case of strong attractive interactions with the resu lting deeply bound Coulombic
states when y→ −∞ ,f(y) grows very rapidly,
f(y)∼3
πy3exp/braceleftBig
πy2/bracerightBig
. (3.77)
The corresponding result for the exchange piece, given in Eq . (D98), is
F−(k) =π
3λ−3
aa/parenleftbiggβe2
a
4π/parenrightbigg3˜f/parenleftbiggβe2
a
4πλaa/parenrightbigg
+O(k), (3.78)
where the function ˜f(y) has the (convergent) expansion
˜f(y) =3
8πy3−3
2πy2+3 ln2
2y−3√π
2∞/summationdisplay
n=0/parenleftBig
−√πy/parenrightBign/bracketleftbigg
1−1
21+n/bracketrightbiggζ(n+2)
Γ((n+5)/2). (3.79)
They→ ∞ asymptotic behavior is given in Eq. (D97), and yields the str ong decrease
˜f(y)∼2√
3
y2πexp/braceleftbigg
−3π
2/parenleftBig
2y2/parenrightBig1/3/bracerightbigg
. (3.80)
Note that since the λabwere defined in terms of the reduced mass of the a—bsystem,
λaa=√
2λa.
59Inserting the results (3.74) and (3.78) into Eq. (3.72), and comparing to the result (3.57)
computed in the effective quasi-classical theory, we see tha t the two results coincide provided
that
gab(µ) =−π
6/parenleftbiggeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg3/bracketleftBig
ln/parenleftBig
µ2λ2
ab/parenrightBig
+ Γab/bracketrightBig
, (3.81)
where35
Γab≡f(ηab)±(δab/ga)˜f(ηaa), (3.82)
withηabdenoting the quantum parameter for species aandb,
ηab≡βeaeb
4πλab, (3.83)
and where, as usual, the exchange term in (3.82) comes in with a plus (minus) sign if species
ais a Boson (Fermion).
In the limit of strong repulsion, ηab→+∞, Eq’s. (3.76) and (3.80) inform us that
gab(µ)∼ −π
6/parenleftbiggeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBiggβ2e2
ae2
bµ2
4π/parenrightBigg
+ 3γ−8
3/bracketrightBigg
. (3.84)
Note that this limit does not involve Planck’s constant ¯ h: The argument of the logarithm
entails the classical ratio of the Coulomb energy of two char ges a distance µ−1apart to the
temperature. (When this coupling is inserted in physical qu antities, it will appear with a
ln(κ/µ) term which turns the arbitrary distance µ−1into the Debye length κ−1.)36In view of
35Previous work [4–6] makes use of dimensionless parameters ξab(also called xab) related to
our notation by ξab=−√
4πηab, and functions Q(ξab) ,E(ξab) of these parameters. To establish
contact with this prior work (which also does not use our rati onalized Gaussian electrostatic units),
we note that
Γ(ηab) +γ+ ln 9 −1 =6√
2/parenleftbigg4π
βeaeb/parenrightbigg3/parenleftBigg
λ2
ab
2π/parenrightBigg3/2/braceleftbigg1
6ξab+Q(ξab)±δab
gaE(ξab)/bracerightbigg
.
Here,λab= ¯h[2πβ/m ab]1/2is our definition of the thermal wavelength; various previou s work uses
the same symbol to denote either ¯ h/radicalbig
β/m abor ¯h/radicalbig
β/2mab. Note that our eaeb/(4π) becomes just
eaebwhen converting to unrationalized electrostatic units,
36Writing the result in terms of the Coulomb distance (1.4), bu t for the specific charges ea,eb,
dab=βeaeb/4π, gives
gab(µ)∼ −1
24π
3!/parenleftbiggeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg3
[ln (dabµ) +···].
This form is in precise accord with the remarks made in footno te 6. Namely, the coefficient of
ln(dabµ) exactly corresponds to the two-particle part of the partit ion function, with the exponential
of the Coulomb interaction expanded to third order and the in tegration over the relative coordinate
cut off at the short distance daband at the long distance µ−1.
60Eq. (3.76), the first correction to this classical limit is of order ¯h2. On the other hand, in the
limit of strong attraction, ηab→ −∞ , the exponential blow-up exhibited in Eq. (3.77) shows
that our perturbative development breaks down, as it must, s ince in this limit the ionized
plasma must condense into neutral atoms. This is, of course, a highly quantum-mechanical
regime. Finally, for small ηab, the exchange term (3.79) dominates and, with λaa=√
2λa,
one has
Γab∼ ±δab
ga/parenleftBigg4π
βe2a/parenrightBigg33λ3
a
2√
2π. (3.85)
Noting that this multiplies ( n0
a)2e6
a, the result appears as an exchange term independent
of the particle’s charge. Indeed, we shall shortly see in the following Sec. IV that this is
just the usual free particle exchange correction that is qua dratic in the fugacity. The next
term of order η−2
aain the exchange contribution ˜f(ηaa) gives the familiar order e2exchange
correction to the plasma.
With the single two-loop coupling g0
abcompletely determined by Eqs. (3.41) and (3.81),
one may now use the quasi-classical effective theory to compu te thermodynamics, or other
quantities of interest, to two or three loop order. Before fo ur-loop calculations of physical
quantities can be performed, the undetermined scales in the four loop couplings g0
abc,h0
ab
andk0
abwould need to be determined by an analogous higher order matc hing calculation.
This we have not attempted to do.
F. Non-zero Frequency Modes
Up to this point, the effects of the non-zero frequency compon ents of the potential φ(r,τ),
defined by the Fourier series (3.26) and repeated here for con venience,
φ(r,τ) =φ(r) +/summationdisplay
m/ne}ationslash=0φm(r)e−iωmτ, ω m=2πm
β, (3.86)
have been ignored. These components, which obey the reality constraint
φ∗
m(r) =φ−m(r), (3.87)
characterize quantum fluctuations in the electrostatic pot ential. They decouple from the
zero-frequency degrees of freedom and could be trivially in tegrated out in the leading-order
classical limit. But in higher orders, this is no longer true . To examine the effects which
result from non-zero frequency fluctuations, we return to th e full quantum theory whose
functional integral representation (3.6) may be rewritten as
ZQM[µ] =N′
0/integraldisplay
[dφ] exp/braceleftBigg
−1
2/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)/parenleftBig
∇φ(r,τ)/parenrightBig2/bracerightBigg
exp{−Sint[φ;µ]}
=N′
0/integraldisplay
[dφ]/productdisplay
m/ne}ationslash=0[dφm] exp/braceleftBigg
−β
2/integraldisplay
(dνr)/bracketleftbigg
|∇φ(r)|2+/summationdisplay
m/ne}ationslash=0|∇φm(r)|2/bracketrightbigg/bracerightBigg
exp{−Sint[φ;µ]}.
(3.88)
61In the first line, the integration measure [ dφ] represents functional integration over the space-
time dependent field φ(r,τ). In the second line, [ dφ] now stands for functional integration
over just the time-independent (static mode) φ(r), while in the following product [ dφm]
denotes functional integration over the remaining non-zer o frequency modes. The prefactor
N′
0involves the square root of the functional determinant of th e Laplacian operator for all of
the modes, N′
0= Det1/2[−β∇2]. The final factor of e−Sintdenotes the product of Gaussian
functional integrals for each charged species,
exp{−Sint[φ;µ]} ≡A/productdisplay
a=1/integraldisplay
[dψ∗
adψa] exp/braceleftbigg
−/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)La/bracerightbigg
, (3.89)
with
La=ψ∗
a(r,τ)/bracketleftBigg∂
∂τ−∇2
2ma−µa(r)−ieaφ(r,τ)/bracketrightBigg
ψa(r,τ). (3.90)
In Appendix B, we derive the complete large mass asymptotic e xpansion of Sint. For our
present purposes the first two terms, displayed in Eqs. (B51) and (B52), are sufficient. They
give
Sint[φ;µ] =A/summationdisplay
a=1/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a(r)eieaβ φ(r)/braceleftBigg
−1 +β2λ2
a
48π/bracketleftBig
∇µa(r) +iea∇φ(r)/bracketrightBig2
+β2λ2
ae2
a
16π3/summationdisplay
m/ne}ationslash=01
m2|∇φm(r)|2+O/bracketleftBig
(βλaea∇φ)4,(βλa∇µa)4/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
.(3.91)
The zero-frequency parts which appear here have already bee n included in the effective
theory. These are precisely the classical eieaβφinteraction, plus the first derivative interaction
in (3.32) involving h0
a[∇µa(r)+iea∇φ(r)]2. Because of the presence of the exponential factor
eieaβφ(r), the third term in (3.91) generates a coupling between the no n-zero frequency modes
ofφand the static mode.
The expansion (3.91) is valid if the potential φ(r,τ) varies slowly on the scale of the
thermal wavelength λa. As discussed earlier, inserting this expansion (truncate d to two
derivative terms) into the functional integral (3.89) comp letely mangles the effects of short-
distance fluctuations in φ. However, as with any effective field theory, the resulting er rors
are compensated, to any given order in κλ, by including the requisite induced interactions
and suitably adjusting their coefficients.
At this point, one may contemplate completely integrating o ut the non-zero frequency
modes ofφin order to generate an effective theory containing only the s tatic potential φ(r).
But doing so would be a mistake. Integrating out the non-zero frequency modes is no longer
trivial because of the coupling between the static and non-z ero frequency modes. More im-
portantly, the resulting functional of φ(r) could not be adequately approximated by any set
of local interactions. Correlations of the non-zero freque ncy components of φonly decrease
like 1/r(due to the long-range nature of Coulomb interactions), and are not Debye screened.
This will be demonstrated below. In physical terms, the abse nce of Debye screening in the
potential correlations at non-zero (Matsubara) frequenci es reflects the effect of inertia on
the response of charges in the plasma. Consequently, if one c ompletely integrates out the
62non-zero frequency components of φ, then the resulting theory will contain complicated
non-local interactions which decrease only algebraically with distance. To produce a useful
effective theory, that can be approximated by local interact ions, one must explicitly retain
in the effective theory all degrees of freedom with long dista nce correlations—including the
non-zero frequency components of φ. In other words, the complete effective theory must
have the form
Z[µ] =N′
0/integraldisplay
[dφ]/bracketleftBig/productdisplay
m/ne}ationslash=0dφm/bracketrightBig
exp/braceleftBig
−Scl[φ;µ]−Sind[φ;µ]−Snon−static[φ,φm;µ]/bracerightBig
,(3.92)
whereSclandSindare given in Eqs. (3.29b) and (3.32), respectively, and
Snon−static[φ,φm;µ] =/integraldisplay
(dνr)/summationdisplay
m/ne}ationslash=0β
2|∇φm(r)|2/braceleftBigg
1 +β
8π3m2/summationdisplay
aλ2
ae2
an0
aeiβeaφ(r)/bracerightBigg
+···.
(3.93)
The final ellipsis denotes yet higher-order terms involving four or more derivatives, as well
as non-zero frequency induced interactions involving |∇φm|2multiplying products of two or
more densities.
At leading order (when all interaction terms in Snon−staticare neglected), the correlator
of the non-zero frequency components of φ(timesβ) is given by an unscreened Coulomb
potential,
βG(0)
m(r,r′)≡β∝an}b∇acketle{tφm(r)φ∗
m(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht0=1
4π|r−r′|, (3.94)
since this is the Green’s function of −∇2. In other words, the Fourier transformed correlator
is given by
β˜G(0)
m(k) = 1/k2. (3.95)
Because the sub-leading interaction in (3.93) involves the square of the gradient φm(r), and
notφm(r) itself, this interaction does not cause non-zero frequenc y correlations to develop
a finite correlation length. Rather, it merely produces an O[(κλ)2] change in the residue
of the 1/k2pole of ˜Gm(k). Recalling that ωm= 2πm/β (which has units of energy in our
notation) and noting that the (lowest-order) plasma freque ncyωPis defined by
ω2
P=/summationdisplay
ae2
an0
a
ma=/summationdisplay
ae2
aλ2
an0
a
2πβ¯h2, (3.96)
we find that with this correction,
/bracketleftBig
β˜Gm(k)/bracketrightBig−1=k2/bracketleftBigg
1 +¯h2ω2
P
ω2m/bracketrightBigg
. (3.97)
This same result is obtained from the k→0 limit of the sum of ring diagrams contributing to
this correlator, which generates a denominator involving t he one-loop polarization function
Π(k,ω). This well-known function is presented in Eq. (B40) of Appe ndix B. The k→0 limit
63corresponds to the classical limit, and the continuation ωm/¯h→i(ω−iǫ),ǫ→0+, further
produces the classical retarded response function. The res ulting pole at ω=ωPcorresponds
to the propagation of classical longitudinal plasma waves, waves whose resonant frequency
is independent of their wave number.
The lack of Debye screening of the non-zero frequency fluctua tions in the electrostatic
potential is an exact result. It is a consequence of electrom agnetic current conservation,
dρ/dt +∇ ·j= 0, or equivalently gauge invariance. The fundamental quan tum theory (3.6)
is, in particular, invariant under time-dependent, but spa ce-independent, gauge transforma-
tions,
φ(r,τ)→φ(r,τ) +dχ(τ)
dτ, ψ a(r,τ)→eieaχ(τ)ψa(r,τ). (3.98)
The effective theory must necessarily share this invariance . But in the effective theory, where
the charged fields have been integrated out, these gauge tran sformations reduce to arbitrary
constant shifts in the non-zero frequency components of φ,
φm(r)→φm(r) +iωmχm, (3.99)
whereχmare the Fourier components of χ. This means that the effective theory (3.93) can
never depend on the non-zero frequency fields φm(r) other than through their gradients.
And this implies that arbitrarily long wavelength fluctuati ons in the non-zero frequency
components of φmust have arbitrarily low action, which in turn implies that the Fourier
transform of the correlation function ∝an}b∇acketle{tφm(r)φ∗
m(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htwill diverge as k→0. In other words,
the interactions of the effective theory cannot cause the pol e in the non-zero frequency
correlator to shift away from37k= 0. A detailed explanation of these points is given in
Appendix A4.
The first interaction term in Snon−staticis formally O[(κλ)2] smaller than the leading
|∇φm|2term and thus is of two-loop order. As noted above, this term p roduces a relative
change of this size in non-zero frequency correlators. Howe ver, it does not affect thermody-
namic quantities, or static correlators, at two-loop order because
∝an}b∇acketle{t∇φm(r)· ∇φ−m(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=β−1/integraldisplay(dνk)
(2π)ν= 0 (3.100)
in our dimensional continuation regularization.38In fact, the non-zero frequency interac-
tion term first affects the thermodynamic quantities at six-l oop order, through the diagram
37This is completely analogous to Goldstone’s theorem provin g the presence of long range fluctua-
tions in any theory with a spontaneously broken continuous s ymmetry. Since the symmetry (3.99)
shiftsφm, it is impossible for the expectation values ∝an}b∇acketle{tφm∝an}b∇acket∇i}htto be invariant under this symmetry.
Consequently, φmmust have long range correlations.
38This identity would not hold if we had chosen to employ a differ ent regularization scheme, such
as a momentum cutoff, in defining the effective theory. Had we do ne so, it would be necessary
to adjust the coefficient of the classical n0
aeiβeaφinteraction in order to compensate for cutoff-
dependent effects resulting from fluctuations of the non-zer o frequency modes.
64b a /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1
FIG. 14. First non-vanishing correction to ln Zinvolving the non-zero frequency modes of
φ(r,τ). The dashed lines represent the long-range, unscreened Co ulomb Green’s functions of the
non-zero frequency modes. Each vertex represents one inser tion ofSnon−static(specifically that
part which is linear in the static mode φ(r)). The relative size of the resulting contribution
isO[(λκ)4(βe2κ)2], since each vertex contains an overall factor of λ2, and the two loops of the
diagram generate two powers of the loop expansion parameter βe2κ. Because we are treating the
quantum parameters βe2
a/λaas fixed numbers of order one, the net result is a contribution of
six-loop order.
illustrated in Fig. 14. However, even though the non-zero fr equency interactions are sup-
pressed by numerous powers of κλ, they fundamentally alter the long-distance behavior of
the static density-density correlator. Instead of exhibit ing classical Debye-screened expo-
nential decay, the correlator acquires a long-distance tai l which decreases only algebraically
with distance. This happens at five-loop order as shown in sec tion VII, where a simple but
explicit evaluation of the resulting long-distance limit i s given.
65IV. TWO-LOOP RESULTS
/0/0 /1/1
FIG. 15. Two-loop diagrams contributing to ln Z. The circled ‘X’ denotes the φ-independent
part of the two-loop g0
abinduced interaction.
The two loop contributions to ln Zare given by the diagrams shown in figure 15. They
correspond to the analytic expression
lnZ2
V=lnZ1
V+1
23/summationdisplay
an0
a/bracketleftBig
βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightBig2−/summationdisplay
a,bβ3n0
an0
b/bracketleftBigge3
ae3
b
2·3!/integraldisplay
(dνr)Gν(r)3+g0
ab/bracketrightBigg
.(4.1)
As noted earlier in Eq. (2.58), the ν→3 limit ofGν(0) is finite and equals −κ0/(4π). The
integral of the cube of the Debye Green’s function,
D(3)
ν(0) =/integraldisplay
(dνr)Gν(r)3, (4.2)
is the vanishing wave number limit of the corresponding Four ier transform (which is the
reason for the notation used here). It is computed in Appendi x C2 [ c.f.Eq. (C32)] and
shown to be
D(3)
ν(0) =1
(4π)2/parenleftBigg9κ2
4π/parenrightBiggν−31
2/braceleftbigg1
3−ν+ 1−γ+O(ν−3)/bracerightbigg
. (4.3)
The two-loop induced coupling g0
ab, given in (3.41), cancels the ν→3 pole ofD(3)
ν(0). It is
convenient to write the final bracket in (4.1) as
/bracketleftBigge3
ae3
b
2·3!/integraldisplay
(dνr)Gν(r)3+g0
ab/bracketrightBigg
=1
12e3
ae3
bD(3)
R(0;µ) +gab(µ), (4.4)
where, in view of Eq’s. (3.41) and (4.3),
D(3)
R(0;µ) =1
32π2
/parenleftBigg9κ2
0
4π/parenrightBiggν−3
−/parenleftBig
µ2/parenrightBigν−3
1
3−ν+ 1−γ+O(ν−3)
. (4.5)
The physical ν→3 limit is finite, as it must be, and gives
D(3)
R(0;µ) =−1
32π2/braceleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9κ2
0
4πµ2/parenrightBigg
−1 +γ/bracerightBigg
. (4.6)
Note that the coefficient of the induced interaction that prod uces this finite result was
determined from a different physical quantity, the density- density correlator. Nevertheless
66the structure of the effective theory [in particular, the shi ft symmetry (2.30)] guarantees that
the single two-loop g0
abinteraction removes the cutoff-dependence in any physical q uantity
computed to either two or three loop order.
Putting the pieces together, including the previous one-lo op result (2.80) and the value
(3.81) for the renormalized coupling gab(µ), produces ln Zto two-loop order (as a function
of bare particle densities),
lnZ2
V=A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a
1 +1
3/parenleftBiggβe2
aκ0
4π/parenrightBigg
+1
8/parenleftBiggβe2
aκ0
4π/parenrightBigg2
+π
6A/summationdisplay
a,b=1n0
an0
b/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
abκ2
0
4π/parenrightBigg
−1 +γ+ Γab/bracketrightBigg
. (4.7)
As was remarked above, the leading term in Γ abwhenηabbecomes small comes from the
exchange contribution. Using the limiting form (3.85) of Γ abgives the exchange correction
lnZexch
2
V=±1
4√
2A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/parenleftBig
λ3
an0
a/ga/parenrightBig
=±A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
aeβµa
25/2, (4.8)
which is just the first quantum statistics correction shown i n Eq. (1.13).
A. Number Density
The particle number density of species ais given by
∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=∂
∂βµ alnZ
V, (4.9)
where the partial derivative is computed at fixed β. Inserting the result (4.7) and using
∂n0
b
∂βµ a=δabn0
a,∂κ0
∂βµ a=βe2
an0
a
2κ0,
and∂ηbc/∂(βµa) = 0, yields
∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=n0
a
1 +/parenleftBiggβe2
aκ0
8π/parenrightBigg
+1
2/parenleftBiggβe2
aκ0
8π/parenrightBigg2
+1
8/parenleftBig
n0
aβe2
a/parenrightBigA/summationdisplay
b=1n0
b/parenleftBiggβe2
b
4π/parenrightBigg2
+π
6n0
aβe2
a
κ2
0A/summationdisplay
b,c=1n0
bn0
c/parenleftBiggβebec
4π/parenrightBigg3
+π
3n0
aA/summationdisplay
b=1n0
b/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
abκ2
0
4π/parenrightBigg
−1 +γ+ Γab/bracketrightBigg
. (4.10)
The first bracket contains the first three terms in the expansi on of the exponential
exp/parenleftBiggβe2
aκ0
8π/parenrightBigg
= exp/bracketleftBig
−1
2βe2
aG3(0)/bracketrightBig
, (4.11)
67which is just the Boltzmann factor for the polarization corr ection to the self-energy of a
speciesaparticle when it is placed in the plasma. The next term is just
1
2n0
a/parenleftBiggβe2
aδκ
4π/parenrightBigg
, (4.12)
where
δκ
4π=1
4A/summationdisplay
b=1n0
b/parenleftBiggβe2
b
4π/parenrightBigg2
(4.13)
is the change in the lowest-order Debye wave number induced b y the first-order density
correction. Thus, through the order we have computed, our re sult is equivalent to
¯na=∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=n0
a/braceleftBigg
exp/parenleftBiggβe2
a
2¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg
+β2e2
a
4!κ2
0/bracketleftBiggA/summationdisplay
b=1n0
b/parenleftBiggβe3
b
4π/parenrightBigg/bracketrightBigg2
+π
3A/summationdisplay
b=1n0
b/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
abκ2
0
4π/parenrightBigg
−1 +γ+ Γab/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
, (4.14)
where ¯κ= [/summationtext
aβe2
a¯na]1/2is the Debye wave number computed with the physical particle
densities. Inverting this result to express the bare densit ies in terms of the physical densities
is now easy since, to this order, the bare quantities in the re maining two-loop terms may
simply be replaced by physical quantities,
n0
a= ¯na/braceleftBigg
exp/parenleftBigg
−βe2
a
2¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg
−β2e2
a
4! ¯κ2/bracketleftBiggA/summationdisplay
b=1¯nb/parenleftBiggβe3
b
4π/parenrightBigg/bracketrightBigg2
−π
3A/summationdisplay
b=1¯nb/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
ab¯κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
−1 +γ+ Γab/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
. (4.15)
B. Energy Density
The internal energy density in the plasma is given by
u=/angbracketleftbiggH
V/angbracketrightbigg
β=−∂
∂βlnZ
V, (4.16)
where now βµais kept fixed for all a. Noting that n0
a∝λ−3
a∝β−3/2,κ2
0∝β−1/2, and
ηab∝β1/2, one finds at two loop order
βu=A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/bracketleftBigg3
2+1
4/parenleftBiggβe2
aκ0
4π/parenrightBigg/bracketrightBigg
−π
12A/summationdisplay
a,b=1n0
an0
b/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3
[1 +ηabΓ′
ab], (4.17)
or in terms of the physical densities,
βu=3
2A/summationdisplay
a=1¯na−¯κ3
8π−π
2A/summationdisplay
a,b=1¯na¯nb/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/braceleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
ab¯κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
−1
3+γ+ Γab+1
6ηabΓ′
ab/bracerightBigg
.(4.18)
Here (and henceforth),
Γ′
ab≡f′(ηab)±δab˜f′(ηab), (4.19)
with the functions fand˜fgiven in Eqs. (3.75) and (3.79), respectively.
68C. Pressure and Free Energy Density
The pressure, re-expressed in terms of physical densities, is the equation of state. To two
loop order
βp=lnZ
V=A/summationdisplay
a=1¯na−¯κ3
24π−π
6A/summationdisplay
a,b=1¯na¯nb/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
ab¯κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
+γ+ Γab/bracketrightBigg
. (4.20)
And the two-loop Helmholtz free energy density is
βf=A/summationdisplay
a=1¯na/bracketleftBig
−1 + ln(¯naλ3
a/ga)/bracketrightBig
−¯κ3
12π
−π
6A/summationdisplay
a,b=1¯na¯nb/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
ab¯κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
+γ+ Γab−1/bracketrightBigg
. (4.21)
D. Number Density Correlators
The two-loop diagrams contributing to the irreducible part ˜Cab(k) of the number density
correlation function are shown in figure 16. Diagrams a–drepresent (momentum indepen-
dent) contributions to the contact term δab∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ. As noted earlier, only diagrams dandk
(plus the induced coupling contribution l) are singular as ν→3; all the other diagrams may
be evaluated directly in three dimensions. The explicit con tributions of these diagrams to
˜Cab(k) are given by39
Σa=δabβ2n0
ae4
a1
23G3(0)2, (4.22a)
Σb=−δab/summationdisplay
cβ3n0
an0
ce2
ae4
c1
22D(2)
3(0)G3(0), (4.22b)
Σc=δab/summationdisplay
c,dβ4n0
an0
cn0
de2
ae3
ce3
d1
22D(121)
3(0), (4.22c)
Σd=−δab/summationdisplay
cβ3n0
an0
ce3
ae3
c1
3!D(3)
ν(0), (4.22d)
Σe=−β3n0
an0
b/parenleftBig
e4
ae2
b+e2
ae4
b/parenrightBig1
22D(2)
3(k)G3(0), (4.22e)
Σf=/summationdisplay
cβ4n0
an0
bn0
ce2
ae2
be4
c1
2D(111)
3(k)G3(0), (4.22f)
Σg=/summationdisplay
cβ4n0
an0
bn0
ce2
ae2
be4
c1
22D(2)
3(k)2, (4.22g)
39There are two versions each of diagrams eandh, differing only by the interchange a↔band
k→ −k. The contributions of both diagrams of each pair are include d in Σ eand Σ h.
69kg f
j i lheb c a d
FIG. 16. Two-loop diagrams contributing to the irreducible part˜Cab(k) of the density-density
correlator. The arrows merely serve to indicate where exter nal momentum flows in and out of each
diagram; the vertices where momentum flows in and out should b e regarded as having attached
species labels aandb, respectively. The circled ‘X’ in diagram ldenotes the contribution from the
two-loop interactions proportional to either g0
aborh0
a. Diagrams a–dare two loop contributions
to the contact term δab∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ. These terms, together with part of diagram l, simply provide the
two-loop correction to the number density ∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ. Not shown are reflected versions of diagrams
eandhwhich differ only by an interchange of incoming and outgoing v ertices. Diagram eand
its reflection are one-loop corrections to the densities tha t appear in the vertex factors in the
one-loop result for ˜Cab(k). Diagram fis a one-loop density correction to the Debye wave number
in the Debye Green’s function appearing in the one-loop ˜Cab(k). Thus, the effect of diagrams a
throughf(plus a part of l) is merely to put the correct physical densities, to two-loo p order,
in the previous one-loop ˜Cab(k). Only diagrams gthroughk(plus the remaining part of l) give
non-trivial, two-loop corrections to ˜Cab(k).
70Σh=/summationdisplay
cβ4n0
an0
bn0
c/parenleftBig
e3
ae2
b+e2
ae3
b/parenrightBig
e3
c1
2D(211)
3(k), (4.22h)
Σi=−/summationdisplay
c,dβ5n0
an0
bn0
cn0
de2
ae2
be3
ce3
d1
2D(1211)
3(k), (4.22i)
Σj=−/summationdisplay
c,dβ5n0
an0
bn0
cn0
de2
ae2
be3
ce3
d1
2DJ(k), (4.22j)
Σk=−β3n0
an0
be3
ae3
b1
3!D(3)
ν(k), (4.22k)
Σl=−2β3g0
abn0
an0
b−2δab/summationdisplay
cβ3g0
acn0
an0
c−2δabβ2h0
an0
ak2, (4.22l)
where the required integrals are
D(n)
ν(k)≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)e−ik·rGν(r)n, (4.23)
D(lmn)
ν(k)≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr1)e−ik·rGν(r−r1)lGν(r1)mGν(r)n, (4.24)
D(klmn)
ν(k)≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr1)(dνr2)e−ik·rGν(r−r1)kGν(r1−r2)lGν(r2)mGν(r)n, (4.25)
DJ(k)≡/integraldisplay
(d3r)(d3r1)(d3r2)e−ik·rG3(r−r1)G3(r−r2)G3(r1−r2)G3(r1)G3(r2).(4.26)
These integrals are evaluated in appendix C2 (with help from Ref. [14]).
By examining the graphical structure, it is easy to see that t he irreducible density cor-
relator has the form
˜Cab(k) =δab¯na˜Fa(k) +1
2/parenleftBig
βe2
a¯na/parenrightBig˜Fab(k)/parenleftBig
βe2
b¯nb/parenrightBig
, (4.27)
which generalizes the one-loop result (2.102). The derivat ive interaction involving the in-
duced coupling h0
ais responsible for generating the k-dependence in the δabcontact term,
˜F(2)
a(k) = 1−2β2h0
ak2. (4.28)
The terms Σ athrough Σ d, together with the second part of the renormalization term Σ l,
just give the two-loop corrections to the number density ∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβthat appears in δab¯nain the
general form above. It is straightforward to show that these terms are just the two-loop
parts in the previous result (4.10) for the number density. T he one-loop correction, given in
Eq. (2.102), involves
˜F(1)
ab(k) =D(2)
3(k). (4.29)
Recalling that the one-loop density correction reads
δ∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=−1
2βe2
aG3(0)n0
a, (4.30)
we see that the two-loop term Σ egives the one-loop correction for each of the two explicit
density factors appearing in the second term of (4.27), with ˜Fab(k) taking on its one-loop
valueD(2)
3(k). Writing out D(111)
3(k) in terms of Fourier integrals [as is done explicitly in
Eq. (C39)], it is easy to see that
71D(111)
3(k) =−1
2dD(2)
3(k)
dκ2
0. (4.31)
Therefore Σ faccounts for the correction to the one-loop ˜F(1)
ab(k) brought about by replacing
the bare Debye wavenumber κ0by its one-loop corrected value. In summary, the two-loop
terms Σ athrough Σ f, plus the second piece of Σ l, just provide simple density corrections to
the one-loop ˜C(1)
ab(k), and all of these terms may be omitted if the correct physica l densities
¯naare used in the construction of ˜C(1)
ab(k).
To assemble the remaining terms in the two-loop, irreducibl e correlator, we first use the
explicit form (3.41) of the induced coupling g0
abto write the sum of Σ kand the first piece of
Σlas
Σk(k)−2β3g0
abn0
an0
b=−β3n0
an0
b/bracketleftbigg1
3!/parenleftBig
e3
ae3
b/parenrightBig
D(3)
R(k;µ) + 2gab(µ)/bracketrightbigg
(4.32)
where
D(3)
R(k;µ)≡D(3)
ν(k)−1
2(4π)2µ2(ν−3)
3−ν. (4.33)
This is the non-vanishing wave number extension of D(3)
R(0;µ) previously introduced in
Eq. (4.5). Using the result (C30) for D(3)
ν(k) in dispersion relation form and taking the
physicalν→3 limit yields
D(3)
R(k;µ) =−1
(4π)21
2/braceleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9κ2
4πµ2/parenrightBigg
−3 +γ+ 2/integraldisplay∞
3κds/parenleftBiggk2
s+ 3κ/parenrightBigg1
k2+s2/bracerightBigg
.(4.34)
Alternatively, using the result (C31) for D(3)
ν(k) evaluated in terms of elementary functions
gives theν= 3 limit
D(3)
R(k;µ) =−1
(4π)21
2/braceleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9κ2
4πµ2/parenrightBigg
−3 +γ+6κ
karctank
3κ+ ln/bracketleftbigg
1 +k2
9κ2/bracketrightbigg/bracerightBigg
.(4.35)
Combining the one-loop result (4.29) with this renormalize d contribution of Σ kplus the
other non-trivial two-loop terms Σ gthrough Σ j, and recalling the definition (6.3) of the
couplinggab(µ), leads to
˜F(2)
ab(k) =D(2)
3(k)/bracketleftBig
1 +1
2/summationdisplay
cβ2¯nce4
cD(2)
3(k)/bracketrightBig
+/summationdisplay
cβ2¯nc(ea+eb)e3
cD(211)
3(k)
−/summationdisplay
c,dβ3¯nc¯nde3
ce3
d/bracketleftBig
D(1211)
3(k) +DJ(k)/bracketrightBig
−1
3βeaeb/bracketleftBig
D(3)
R(k)−1
2(4π)−2/parenleftBig
lnµ2λ2
ab+ Γab/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig
. (4.36)
The functions D(2)
3(k),D(211)
3(k) andD(1211)
3(k) are given in dispersion relation form in
Eq’s. (C21), (C51), and (C52) of Appendix C. The same functio ns are also expressed in
terms of elementary functions and the Euler dilogarithm (or Spence function) in Eq’s. (C21),
(C56), and (C57). The function DJ(k) is not so tractable. However, it has been expressed
72in terms of a one-dimensional integral by Rajantie [14]. His result is quoted in Eq. (C70) of
Appendix C.
Thek→0 limit of the irreducible correlator is related to the parti cle number fluctuations.
Using the results (C22), (C53), (C54), and (C71) for D(2)
3(0),D(211)
3(0),D(1211)
3(0) andDJ(0),
plus Eq. (4.6) for D(3)
R(0), we have
˜F(2)
ab(0) =1
8πκ/bracketleftBigg
1 +1
2/summationdisplay
cβ2¯nce4
c
8πκ/bracketrightBigg
+1
6/summationdisplay
c¯ncβ2(ea+eb)e3
c
(4π)2κ2
−1
12/summationdisplay
c,d¯nc¯ndβ3e3
ce3
d
(4π)2κ4+1
6βeaeb
(4π)2/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
abκ2
4π/parenrightBigg
−1 +γ+ Γab/bracketrightBigg
.(4.37)
To check this result, we note that, as is shown in Eq. (A68) of A ppendix A, there is a simpler
way to obtain the same result, namely:
˜Cab(0) =−∂∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ
∂βµ b=−∂∝an}b∇acketle{tnb∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ
∂βµ a, (4.38)
where the partial derivatives are to be computed at fixed β. It is a straight forward matter
to take the βµbderivative of the two-loop result (4.10) for the density ∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβand confirm
[via Eq. (4.27)] that the result (4.37) is indeed correct.
V. THREE-LOOP THERMODYNAMICS
There are nine diagrams, shown in figure 17, which contribute to lnZ(or equivalently
the pressure) at three-loop order. Diagrams a–fare finite as ν→3 and may be computed
directly in 3 dimensions. The explicit contributions of the se diagrams to (ln Z)/Vare:
Γa+ Γb=/summationdisplay
a,b,c,dβ6n0
an0
bn0
cn0
de3
ae3
be3
ce3
d/bracketleftbigg1
4!DM+1
24D(2121)
3(0)/bracketrightbigg
, (5.1)
Γc+ Γd=−/summationdisplay
a,b,cβ5n0
an0
bn0
ce4
ae3
be3
c/bracketleftbigg1
23D(211)
3(0)G3(0) +1
23D(221)
3(0)/bracketrightbigg
, (5.2)
Γe=−/summationdisplay
aβ3n0
ae6
a1
23·3!G3(0)3(5.3)
Γf+ Γg=/summationdisplay
a,bβ4n0
an0
be4
ae4
b/bracketleftbigg1
24D(2)
3(0)G3(0)2+1
2·4!D(4)
ν(0)/bracketrightbigg
, (5.4)
Γh=/summationdisplay
a,bβ4n0
an0
be5
ae3
b1
2·3!D(3)
ν(0)Gν(0), (5.5)
Γi=/summationdisplay
a,bβ4g0
abn0
an0
b(ea+eb)21
2Gν(0)−/summationdisplay
aβ4h0
an0
ae2
aκ2
0Gν(0). (5.6)
The last term of Eq. (5.6) comes from
β/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
∇φ(r)2/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig(0)=−κ2
0Gν(0)−→
ν→3κ3
0
4π, (5.7)
73c
gb
d e f
ia
h
FIG. 17. Three-loop diagrams contributing to the ln Z. The circled ‘X’ denotes the insertion
of the part of the two-loop g0
abandh0
ainteractions which are quadratic in φ.
which easily follows using the same method that lead to Eq. (2 .58). The integral
DM≡/integraldisplay
(d3r)(d3r′)(d3r′′)G3(r)G3(r′)G3(r′′)G3(r−r′)G3(r′−r′′)G3(r′′−r) (5.8)
corresponds to the “Mercedes” graph aof Fig. 17, and the other required integrals are
defined in Eq’s. (4.23)–(4.25). These integrals are evaluat ed in appendix C2 (with help
from Ref. [14]. Once again, the final contribution Γ iinvolving the single two-loop coupling
g0
abremoves the short-distance singularities in both the three -loop graphs Γ gand Γ hthat
diverge in three dimensions. Note that this cancelation of d ivergences involves the detailed
structure of the induced coupling interaction with its expo nential dependence upon the
potentialφ. As discussed earlier, the basic (“primitive”) divergence s which the induced
couplings must cancel appear only in even loop order. The sub sidiary divergences at this
three-loop order are canceled by the non-trivial potential dependence of the two-loop induced
coupling. Inserting the explicit results for these integra ls produces the physical ν→3 limit
of lnZto three loop order:
lnZ3
V=lnZ2
V+1
4! (4π)3/braceleftBigg/summationdisplay
a,b,c,dβ6n0
an0
bn0
cn0
de3
ae3
be3
ce3
dC1
κ3
0
+/summationdisplay
a,b,cβ5n0
an0
bn0
ce4
ae3
be3
cC2
κ0
74+/summationdisplay
aβ3n0
ae6
aκ3
0/bracketleftBigg
C3+8πλ2
a
β2e4a/bracketrightBigg
+/summationdisplay
a,bβ4n0
an0
be4
ae4
bκ0/bracketleftBigg
C4+ ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
ab¯κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
+ Γab/bracketrightBigg
+/summationdisplay
a,bβ4n0
an0
be5
ae3
bκ0/bracketleftBigg
C5+ ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
ab¯κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
+ Γab/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
, (5.9)
with
C1=CM+3
4Li2(−1
3) + ln3
4+π2
16= 0.119131 ···, (5.10a)
C2=−3 Li2(−1
3) +1
2−π2
4=−1.04030···, (5.10b)
C3=1
2, (5.10c)
C4=γ−9
4−2 ln3
4=−1.09742···, (5.10d)
C5=γ−1 =−0.422784 ···, (5.10e)
where
Li2(−z)≡ −/integraldisplayz
0dt
tln(1 +t). (5.11)
is Euler’s dilogarithm, CMis given in Eq. (C68), and Γ abwas defined in Eq. (3.82).
Differentiating Eq. (5.9) with respect to βyields the internal energy, in terms of bare
parameters, to three loop order:
βu=A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/braceleftBigg3
2+1
4/parenleftBiggβe2
aκ0
4π/parenrightBigg
−C3
32/parenleftBiggβe2
aκ0
4π/parenrightBigg3
+1
48/parenleftBiggκ2
0λ2
a
4π/parenrightBigg/parenleftBiggβe2
aκ0
4π/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b=1n0
an0
b/braceleftBigg1
48/parenleftBiggβ3e3
ae3
b
(4π)2/parenrightBigg
[1 +ηabΓ′
ab]
+1
32/parenleftBiggβ4e5
ae3
bκ0
(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBigg
C5+2
3+ ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
ab¯κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
+ Γab+2
3ηabΓ′
ab/bracketrightBigg
+1
32/parenleftBiggβ4e4
ae4
bκ0
(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBigg
C4+2
3+ ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
ab¯κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
+ Γab+2
3ηabΓ′
ab/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c=1n0
an0
bn0
c/braceleftBiggC2
32/parenleftBiggβ5e4
ae3
be3
c
κ0(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c,d =1n0
an0
bn0
cn0
d/braceleftBiggC1
32/parenleftBiggβ6e3
ae3
be3
ce3
d
κ3
0(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
, (5.12)
while differentiating with respect to the chemical potentia ls yields the particle densities (in
terms of bare parameters) to three loop order:40
40Graphs with n“clover leafs” produce a factor of [ G3(0)]n. The first graph shown in Fig. 15 is
a two-loop clover leaf graph; graph eof Fig. 17 is a three-loop clover leaf graph, and it yields the
valueC3=1
2given in Eq. (5.10c). Formula (5.13) shows that these graphs form part of the generic
density correction factor exp {βe2κ0/8π}, extending the result quoted in Eq. (4.11).
75¯ns=∝an}b∇acketle{tns∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=n0
s
1 +/parenleftBiggβe2
sκ0
8π/parenrightBigg
+1
2/parenleftBiggβe2
sκ0
8π/parenrightBigg2
+2C3
3!/parenleftBiggβe2
sκ0
8π/parenrightBigg3
+1
12/parenleftBiggβe2
sκ0
4π/parenrightBigg/parenleftBiggκ2
0λ2
s
4π/parenrightBigg
+A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/braceleftBigg1
8/parenleftBiggβ3e2
se4
a
(4π)2/parenrightBigg
+1
12/parenleftBiggβ3e3
se3
a
(4π)2/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−1 + ln/parenleftBig
9
4λ2
asκ2
0/π/parenrightBig
+ Γas/bracketrightBig
+C3
16/parenleftBiggβ4e2
se6
aκ0
(4π)3/parenrightBigg
+κ0
8/parenleftBiggβ2e2
se2
aλ2
a
(4π)2/parenrightBigg
+κ0
12/parenleftBiggβ4e4
se4
a
(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
C4+ ln/parenleftBig
9
4λ2
as¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γas/bracketrightBig
+κ0
24/parenleftBiggβ4[e3
se5
a+e5
se3
a]
(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
C5+ ln/parenleftBig
9
4λ2
as¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γas/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
+A/summationdisplay
a,b=1n0
an0
b/braceleftBigg1
24/parenleftBiggβ4e2
se3
ae3
b
κ2
0(4π)2/parenrightBigg
+C2
24/parenleftBiggβ5e4
se3
ae3
b
κ0(4π)3/parenrightBigg
+C2
12/parenleftBiggβ5e3
se4
ae3
b
κ0(4π)3/parenrightBigg
+1
48/parenleftBiggβ5e2
se5
ae3
b
κ0(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
C5+ 2 + ln/parenleftBig
9
4λ2
ab¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γab/bracketrightBig
+1
48/parenleftBiggβ5e2
se4
ae4
b
κ0(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
C4+ 2 + ln/parenleftBig
9
4λ2
ab¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γab/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c=1n0
an0
bn0
c/braceleftBiggC2
48/parenleftBiggβ6e2
se4
ae3
be3
c
κ3
0(4π)3/parenrightBigg
−C1
6/parenleftBiggβ6e3
se3
ae3
be3
c
κ3
0(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c,d =1n0
an0
bn0
cn0
d/braceleftBiggC1
16/parenleftBiggβ7e2
se3
ae3
be3
ce3
d
κ5
0(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
. (5.13)
Inverting the relation between physical and bare densities , and inserting the explicit
values forC3,C4andC5(because this simplifies the subsequent results), yields
n0
s= ¯ns
1−/parenleftBiggβe2
s¯κ
8π/parenrightBigg
+1
2/parenleftBiggβe2
s¯κ
8π/parenrightBigg2
−1
3!/parenleftBiggβe2
s¯κ
8π/parenrightBigg3
−1
6/parenleftBiggβe2
s¯κ
8π/parenrightBigg/parenleftBigg¯κ2λ2
s
4π/parenrightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a=1¯na/braceleftBigg1
12/parenleftBiggβ3e3
se3
a
(4π)2/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−1 + ln(9
4λ2
as¯κ2/π) + Γ as/bracketrightBig
+¯κ
12/parenleftBiggβ4e4
se4
a
(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−3 + ln/parenleftBig
4λ2
as¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γas/bracketrightBig
−¯κ
24/parenleftBiggβ4e5
se3
a
(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−1 + ln/parenleftBig
9
4λ2
as¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γas/bracketrightBig
+¯κ
8/parenleftBiggβ2e2
se2
aλ2
a
(4π)2/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b=1¯na¯nb/braceleftBigg1
24/parenleftBiggβ4e2
se3
ae3
b
¯κ2(4π)2/parenrightBigg
+C2−1
24/parenleftBiggβ5e4
se3
ae3
b
¯κ(4π)3/parenrightBigg
+C2−1
2
12/parenleftBiggβ5e3
se4
ae3
b
¯κ(4π)3/parenrightBigg
+1
48/parenleftBiggβ5e2
se4
ae4
b
¯κ(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−1 + ln/parenleftBig
4λ2
ab¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γab/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
+A/summationdisplay
a,b,c=1¯na¯nb¯nc/braceleftBiggC2−1
2
48/parenleftBiggβ6e2
se4
ae3
be3
c
¯κ3(4π)3/parenrightBigg
−C1
6/parenleftBiggβ6e3
se3
ae3
be3
c
¯κ3(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
76+A/summationdisplay
a,b,c,d =1¯na¯nb¯nc¯nd/braceleftBiggC1
16/parenleftBiggβ7e2
se3
ae3
be3
ce3
d
¯κ5(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
. (5.14)
Using this result to express the pressure in terms of physica l densities gives the equation of
state41,42
βp=lnZ
V=A/summationdisplay
a=1¯na/braceleftBigg
1−1
6/parenleftBiggβe2
a¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg
−1
8/parenleftBiggβe2
a¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg/parenleftBigg¯κ2λ2
a
4π/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b=1¯na¯nb/braceleftBigg1
24/parenleftBiggβ3e3
ae3
b
(4π)2/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ+ ln/parenleftBig
9
4λ2
ab¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γab/bracketrightBig
+1
16/parenleftBiggβ4e4
ae4
b¯κ
(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−7
3+ ln/parenleftBig
4λ2
ab¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γab/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c=1¯na¯nb¯nc/braceleftBigg1
16/parenleftBiggβ5e4
ae3
be3
c
¯κ(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
C2−1
2/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
41As noted just below, a completely explicit result for the Hel mholtz free energy has been available
in the literature since the mid-1980’s, and the pressure is r elated to the Helmholtz free energy by the
easy-to-apply thermodynamic identity, p=−∂F/∂V|T,N. Despite the appearance of several more
recent papers reporting results for the pressure [6–9], we a re unaware of any existing publication
which contains the complete, explicit three-loop expressi on (5.15).
42In footnote 32 it was remarked that a field redefinition could b e performed that removes the
∇µa· ∇φcross term in the h0
cinteraction which contributes to the reducible part of the d ensity-
density correlator. For thermodynamic quantities, it is th e (∇φ)2term in the h0
acoupling of the
induced interactions (3.32) that contributes, since the ch emical potentials are now constants. To
independently check the h0
acontributions to the pressure or free energy, one may follow the logic
of footnote 32 in a slightly different way. To leading order in h0
a, the (∇φ)2part of this interaction
is removed by the field redefinition φ→φ−β2/summationtext
biebh0
bn0
beiβebφ.The effect of this redefinition on
the classical interaction, again to leading order in h0
a, is equivalent to the alteration of the induced
couplingg0
ab→g0
ab−1
2eaeb(h0
a+h0
b).In view of the evaluation (3.33) of h0
a, and the relation (3.81)
betweengaband Γ ab, this substitution is equivalent to the change
π
6/parenleftbiggeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg3
Γab−→π
6/parenleftbiggeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg3
Γab+1
2/parenleftbiggeaeb
48πβ2/parenrightbigg/parenleftBig
λ2
a+λ2
b/parenrightBig
.
Due to the charge neutrality condition/summationtextea¯na= 0, this change has no effect at two loop order.
It is easy to check that the three loop terms in the equation of state (5.15) and the Helmholtz
free energy (5.17) are in agreement with the corrections pro duced by this redefinition. It is worth
noting that the effect of the h0
ainteraction for the original partition function written in terms of
the bare densities n0
aisnotproduced by the change given above. The field redefinition cha nges the
dependence of the partition function on the bare densities, and also changes the relation between
physical and bare densities. However, when these modified re sults are re-expressed in terms of the
physical densities, the same physical equation of state eme rges, as it must.
77−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c,d =1¯na¯nb¯nc¯nd/braceleftBigg1
16/parenleftBiggβ6e3
ae3
be3
ce3
d
¯κ3(4π)3/parenrightBigg
[C1]/bracerightBigg
. (5.15)
The internal energy expressed in terms of the physical densi ties is given by
βu=A/summationdisplay
a=1¯na/braceleftBigg3
2−1
2/parenleftBiggβe2
a¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg
−7
24/parenleftBiggβe2
a¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg/parenleftBigg¯κ2λ2
a
4π/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b=1¯na¯nb/braceleftBigg1
8/parenleftBiggβ3e3
ae3
b
(4π)2/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−1
3+ ln(9
4λ2
ab¯κ2/π) + Γ ab+1
6ηabΓ′
ab/bracketrightBig
+3
16/parenleftBiggβ4e4
ae4
b¯κ
(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−23
9+ ln/parenleftBig
4λ2
ab¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γab+1
9ηabΓ′
ab/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c=1¯na¯nb¯nc/braceleftBigg3
16/parenleftBiggβ5e4
ae3
be3
c
¯κ(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
C2−1
2/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c,d =1¯na¯nb¯nc¯nd/braceleftBigg3
16/parenleftBiggβ6e3
ae3
be3
ce3
d
¯κ3(4π)3/parenrightBigg
[C1]/bracerightBigg
, (5.16)
while the Helmholtz free energy is
βf=A/summationdisplay
a=1¯na/braceleftBigg
−1 + ln(¯naλ3
a/ga)−1
3/parenleftBiggβe2
a¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg
−1
12/parenleftBiggβe2
a¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg/parenleftBigg¯κ2λ2
a
4π/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b=1¯na¯nb/braceleftBigg1
24/parenleftBiggβ3e3
ae3
b
(4π)2/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−1 + ln(9
4λ2
ab¯κ2/π) + Γ ab/bracketrightBig
+1
24/parenleftBiggβ4e4
ae4
b¯κ
(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
γ−3 + ln/parenleftBig
4λ2
ab¯κ2/π/parenrightBig
+ Γab/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c=1¯na¯nb¯nc/braceleftBigg1
24/parenleftBiggβ5e4
ae3
be3
c
¯κ(4π)3/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
C2−1
2/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
−A/summationdisplay
a,b,c,d =1¯na¯nb¯nc¯nd/braceleftBigg1
24/parenleftBiggβ6e3
ae3
be3
ce3
d
¯κ3(4π)3/parenrightBigg
[C1]/bracerightBigg
. (5.17)
This result agrees with the corresponding result in Alastue y and Perez [6],43and it agrees for
the most part and except for some small misprints with the res ult to be found in Ref. [5].44
43In particular, we agree with the result for the Helmholtz fre e energy given in Eq. (7.3) of
Ref. [6]. Their result involves two constants, also called C1andC2. The relations between their
and our parameters reads C1,AP=−π2[C2−1
2], andC2,AP=−4π3C1. Using our numbers gives
C1,AP= 15.2021, to be compared with their value 15 .201±0.001, andC2,AP=−14.7752, to be
compared to their −14.734±0.001. It should also be noted that the error estimate given at t he
end of their equation, which reads 0( n3lnn) in our notation, is wrong. Our next section examines
the nature of the leading logarithmic terms to all orders. In particular, we show that the density
dependence of the next (four loop) correction is given by O(n3ln2n).
44The last term in the first line of our Eq. (5.17) is missing from Eq. (2.52) of Ref. [5]. In
78As explained in the next section, the combination
A=β(3p−u)−3
2A/summationdisplay
a=1¯na (5.18)
would vanish identically if the plasma could be treated enti rely in a classical manner. How-
ever, the results above give
A=−1
(4π)2
1
24A/summationdisplay
a,b=1¯na¯nbβ3e3
ae3
b/bracketleftBig
1−1
2ηabΓ′
ab/bracketrightBig/bracketleftBigg
1 +βeaeb¯κ
4π/bracketrightBigg
+1
12A/summationdisplay
a=1¯naβe2
a¯κ3λ2
a
.
(5.19)
The next section shows how Amay be independently computed from quantum corrections
to the virial theorem for a classical Coulomb plasma, and dis cusses how Aplays a role
analogous to the anomalies which appear in relativistic qua ntum field theory.
A. Binary Plasma
These expressions simplify considerably for a two-compone nt plasma such as an electron-
proton plasma where −ee=ep≡e, and charge neutrality requires that ¯ ne= ¯np≡n/2. For
example, the three-loop equation of state becomes
βp
n= 1−1
3/parenleftBiggβe2¯κ
8π/parenrightBigg/braceleftBigg
1 +3
8¯κ2(λ2
e+λ2
p)
4π/bracerightBigg
−1
24/parenleftBiggβe2¯κ
8π/parenrightBigg2/braceleftBigg
ln/bracketleftBigg4mpme
(mp+me)2/bracketrightBigg
+ Γee+ Γpp−2 Γep/bracerightBigg
−1
8/parenleftBiggβe2¯κ
8π/parenrightBigg3/braceleftBigg
4γ−28
3+ 2 ln/bracketleftbigg
λeeλppλ2
ep/parenleftBig
4¯κ2/π/parenrightBig2/bracketrightbigg
+ Γee+ Γpp+ 2 Γ ep/bracerightBigg
.(5.20)
This expression simplifies a bit more if the very small electr on/proton mass ratio is neglected,
which is to say that the formal mp→ ∞ limit is taken. In this limit, Eq’s. (3.76), (3.80),
(3.82), and (3.83) yield:
ln/bracketleftBigg4mpme
(mp+me)2/bracketrightBigg
+ Γpp−→mp→∞ln
8π/parenleftBiggβe2
4πλe/parenrightBigg2
+ 3γ−8
3, (5.21)
and
2 lnλpp¯κ+ Γpp−→mp→∞ln
4π/parenleftBiggβe2¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg2
+ 3γ−8
3, (5.22)
addition, the coefficient of the term involving (1 −ln4
3) should be 1 /6, notπ/3. [Finally, there is
a typographical error in the free energy for a non-interacti ng gas, which lacks the spin degeneracy
factor inside the logarithm appearing in Eq. (2.50).]
79so that
limmp→∞βp
n= 1−g
6−g2
96
ln
8π/parenleftBiggβe2
4πλe/parenrightBigg2
+ 3γ−8
3+ Γee−2 Γep
−g3
64/braceleftBigg
ln/bracketleftBiggg2
2π3(4¯κλe)6/bracketrightBigg
+ 7γ−12 + Γ ee+ 2 Γ ep+16πλ2
e
(βe2)2/bracerightBigg
,(5.23)
whereg=βe2¯κ/(4π) is the dimensionless Coulomb coupling parameter. We note t hat the
proton mass mpdisappears and this limit is well-behaved.
B. One-Component Plasma
Another special case is the “jellium” model, in which a singl e charged particle species
moves in the presence of a neutralizing, uniform background charge density. This is the one-
component plasma (OCP) which is much discussed in the litera ture. It may be obtained by
taking a limit of a plasma containing two species: one of char gee, number density n, and
massm; the other ‘spectator’ species of charge eB≡ −ze, number density nB≡n/z, and
massmB, withz→0. The charge of each spectator particle becomes vanishingl y small, but
their density diverges, so as to preserve total charge neutr ality. The net result (for static
equilibrium properties) is that the spectator particles ac t like an smooth inert background
charge density. The ideal gas pressure of the spectator part icles diverges as z→0, and
must be subtracted from the total pressure before sending zto zero. If the background,
spectator particles are not taken to have a very large mass, mB→ ∞, then they will also
make quantum, exchange contributions to the pressure. To th e three-loop order to which
we compute, these unwanted exchange contributions, in the z→0 limit, are given by
pex
B=∓e2
Bn2
B
1
24/parenleftBiggβeB2
4π/parenrightBigg2
+¯κ
16/parenleftBiggβeB2
4π/parenrightBigg3
1
gB˜f(ηB)
→ ∓n2
16gB
1
βz2/parenleftBigg4πβ¯h2
mB/parenrightBigg3/2
−4e2/parenleftBiggβ¯h2
mB/parenrightBigg
+ 3√πe2¯κ/parenleftBiggβ¯h2
mB/parenrightBigg3/2
, (5.24)
wheregBis the spin degeneracy of the spectator particles. These ter ms are also to be
subtracted from the total pressure. The resulting one-comp onent equation of state, to
three-loop order, is given by
βp
n/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
OCP= 1−g
6−g2
24/braceleftBigg
γ+ ln/bracketleftBigg9κ2λ2
e
2π/bracketrightBigg
+ Γee(ηee)/bracerightBigg
−g3
16/braceleftBigg
γ+ ln/bracketleftBigg8κ2λ2
e
π/bracketrightBigg
+ Γee(ηee) +1
4πη2
ee−17
6+C1+C2/bracerightBigg
.(5.25)
Hereκ= (nβe2)1/2is the Debye wavelength due to the single charge species. Onc e again,
we have written the result in terms of ascending powers of the dimensionless parameter
g=βe2κ/(4π) which characterizes the strength of Coulomb interactions in the plasma. On
the other hand, our result entails no restriction on the size of the quantum parameter
80ηee=βe2
4πλee, (5.26)
which, together with λ2
ee= 2λe, has been used to re-express the order g3λ2
eterm in terms of
1/η2
ee.
An often treated special case of the one-component plasma is its classical limit. As
already alluded to in footnotes 6 and 36, in this limit the Bol tzmann factor with the repul-
sive potential provides damping at the Coulomb distance dC=βe2/4π, and the quantum-
mechanical fluctuations are not required to obtain a finite th eory. (And, moreover, dCis
the correct, physical cutoff if dC> λe.) The ¯h→0 limit takes ηee→ ∞, and Eq’s. (3.76),
(3.80), and (3.82) give
Γee(ηee) = ln/parenleftBig
4πη2
ee/parenrightBig
+ 3γ−8
3−1
4πη2ee+O(1/η4
ee). (5.27)
Thus, we see explicitly that the short-distance cut off in the logarithm now involves
λ2
eη2
ee=/parenleftBiggβe2
4π/parenrightBigg21
2=1
2d2
C, (5.28)
and so, including the O(¯h2) corrections which come from the 1 /η2
eeterms, we find that
βp
n/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
OCP class= 1−g
6−g2
24/braceleftBigg
2 ln(3κdC) + 4γ−8
3−1
4πη2
ee/bracerightBigg
−g3
16/braceleftBigg
2 ln(4κdC) + 4γ−11
2+C1+C2/bracerightBigg
. (5.29)
To obtain an independent check on this result, the order ¯ h2quantum correction for the
canonical partition function of the classical one-compone nt plasma is independently derived
in Appendix E. There it is shown that there are no ¯ h2corrections in three and higher loop
orders — in agreement with the lack of an ¯ h2correction to the order g3term here — while
the two-loop ¯ h2correction given in Eq. (E22) of that Appendix agrees exactl y with that in
theg2term in Eq. (5.29), the term involving 1 /η2
ee.
Riemann, Schlanges, DeWitt, and Kraeft [7] report an equati on of state for a one-
component plasma. The terms in their formula which we classi fy as being of tree, one-,
and two-loop order — the terms of order g0,g1, andg2which appear in the first line of
Eq. (5.25) — agree precisely with our result. They do not, how ever, present all the terms of
three-loop, g3order, but rather only include terms “up to the order ( ne2)5/2”. We note that
such a statement has only a formal significance since ne2bears dimensions, and hence there
is no physical significance in assuming that it is small. The t erms retained by Riemann et
al.are only those parts of the three-loop results which involve leading inverse powers of the
quantum parameter ηee, explicitly
βp
n/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleO(g3), O(e5)
OCP=−g3
32π/braceleftBigg1
2η2ee±3
ge/bracketleftBigg1
4η3ee−1
η2ee/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
. (5.30)
Here,ge= 2 is the spin degeneracy of the electron, and we have chosen t o separate the
exchange contributions so as to facilitate comparison with Ref. [7]. Our result does not
81altogether agree with formula (23) given by Riemann et al. [7] in that our exchange term of
orderg3/η3
ee=O(e3) is a factor 1 /2 than theirs. The earlier paper by DeWitt, Schlanges,
Sakakura, and Kraeft [8] contains, in its Eq. (15), the same t hree-loop contributions, with
the same discrepancies. Their two-loop terms are correct as far as they go, but in this paper
the two-loop terms also stop at the formal order of ( ne2)5/2rather than containing the full
dependence on βe2/λas in the later paper. Recently, we received an unpublished e rratum
from J. Riemann in which the coefficient of the O(g3/η3
ee) exchange term is corrected by a
factor of two, and now all results are in agreement.
VI. HIGHER ORDERS AND THE RENORMALIZATION GROUP
A. Renormalization Group Equations and Leading Logs
In section IIID we introduced an arbitrary scale µin order to separate induced couplings
into pole terms and “renormalized” finite contributions. Fo r the first induced coupling this
amounted to writing
g0
ab=µ2(ν−3)/bracketleftBigg
−1
4!(eaeb)3
(4π)21
3−ν+gab(µ)/bracketrightBigg
. (6.1)
However, since the theory in general, and the bare coupling g0
abin particular, knows nothing
about the arbitrary value of the scale µ, we must have dg0
ab/dµ= 0. This requires that
µ2d
dµ2gab(µ) = (3 −ν)gab(µ)−(eaeb)3
4! (4π)2, (6.2)
which is the renormalization group equation for the renorma lized coupling gab(µ). In the
physical limit ν= 3, the solution of the renormalization group equation may b e expressed
as
gab(µ) =1
4!(eaeb)3
(4π)2ln/parenleftBiggµ2
ab
µ2/parenrightBigg
. (6.3)
In other words, the form of the renormalized (or “running”) c ouplinggab(µ) is completely
dictated by the pole terms, which in turn depend only on the fo rm of the effective the-
ory. It is only the integration constants, which we have expr essed asµ2
ab, that must be
determined by matching the effective theory to the underlyin g quantum theory. The wave
numbersµabprovide the quantum damping or cutoff to the classical theory and hence must
be proportional to inverse thermal wave lengths. The result of the matching (6.3) shows
that
µ−2
ab=λ2
abeΓab, (6.4)
where Γ ab, defined in Eq. (3.82), depends only the quantum parameter ηab≡βeaeb/(4πλab).
In this section we are interested not in the precise results b ut rather in exhibiting the lead-
ing logarithmic parts, that is, those contributions that ac quire arbitrarily large logarithms
in the limit of small thermal wave lengths. Thus we introduce λto denote a characteristic
82thermal wave length in the plasma, and write µ2
ab=cab/λ2wherecabare dimensionless
numbers that depend on the species and on the quantum paramet ersηab, but formally are
O(1) and fixed. Thus ln( µ2
ab/µ2) =−ln(λ2µ2)+lnc2
ab, and the extra logarithm involving cab
is negligible in the formal λ→0 limit.
The first contribution to ln Zinvolving a potentially large logarithm arises at two-loop
order. From Eq. (4.7), the relevant two-loop part of ln Z,
lnZ(2)
V=π
6A/summationdisplay
a,b=1n0
an0
b/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9λ2
abκ2
0
4π/parenrightBigg
−1 +γ+ Γab/bracketrightBigg
+···, (6.5)
exhibits a term which depends logarithmically on the ratio o f scales (λκ). If the plasma is
sufficiently dilute, then ln( λκ) will be large compared to one, and the logarithmic term will
provide the dominant part of the entire two-loop correction . The terms shown in (6.5) come
from the sum of the induced coupling g0
abcontribution and the two-loop graph
✫✪✬✩
t t
a b(6.6)
which together contribute
−/summationdisplay
a,bβ3n0
an0
b/bracketleftBigge3
ae3
b
12D(3)
R(0;µ) +gab(µ)/bracketrightBigg
(6.7)
to (lnZ)/V, with
D(3)
R(0;µ) =−1
32π2/braceleftBigg
ln/parenleftBigg9κ2
4πµ2/parenrightBigg
−1 +γ/bracerightBigg
, (6.8)
as shown in Eqs. (4.1), (4.4) and (4.6). The renormalization group equation (6.2) ensures
that the sum (6.7) does not depend upon the arbitrary scale µ. It is, however, convenient to
chooseµ2=κ2/4π, for then the entire logarithmic term in ln Z(2)comes from the induced
couplinggab(µ)∼ −ln(λ2κ2/4π), rather than from the two-loop graph (6.6).45Thus, the
leading logarithmic piece of the two-loop partition functi on may be expressed as
lnZ(2,ll)
V=−/summationdisplay
a,bn0
an0
bβ3gab(κ2/4π) =1
4!/summationdisplay
a,bn0
an0
b(βeaeb)3
(4π)2ln/parenleftBiggλ2κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
. (6.9)
The virtue of this simple observation is that it easily gener alizes to higher orders, and
allows one to determine the leading logarithmic contributi ons to the pressure at any order
with very little work. To be concrete, we first consider four- loop contributions to ln Z.
[Logarithmic contributions at odd-loop orders are discuss ed below.] Pole terms in ν−3 arise
from (a) divergent four-loop graphs (shown below), (b) the i nduced coupling g0
abcwhich first
45We could equally well have chosen µ2to equal 9κ2/4πor justκ2, instead of κ2/4π. SuchO(1)
changes in the scale µhave no effect on the following discussion of higher-order le ading-log results.
83contributes at four-loop order, and (c) the two-loop induce d coupling g0
abinserted into the
two-loop graph
(6.10)
in which the left vertex represents the usual classical inte raction while the cross on the right
vertex denotes the insertion of the induced interaction wit h coupling g0
ab. The contribution
of the four-loop induced coupling g0
abcto (lnZ)/Vis just
I(4)
gabc≡ −β6/summationdisplay
a,b,cn0
an0
bn0
cg0
abc. (6.11)
Using Eq. (4.3), the leading divergence in the contribution of diagram (6.10) to (ln Z)/Vis
easily seen to be
I(4)
gab≡1
121
3−ν/parenleftBiggκ2
4π/parenrightBiggν−3/summationdisplay
a,b,cn0
an0
bn0
c/parenleftBiggβ3(ea+eb)3e3
c
(4π)2/parenrightBigg
β3g0
ab[1 +O(3−ν)]. (6.12)
Since the bare coupling g0
abitself contains a single pole in ν−3, this contribution has a double
pole. Various four-loop graphs also yield double poles in ν−3. There is, however, no need
to compute the double pole terms of these four loop graphs bec ause they are completely
determined by the renormalization group. To prove this, we fi rst note that g0
abcis completely
symmetrical in the indices abc, has the dimensions of µ4(ν−3)times 12 powers of charges,
and must cancel the double poles (as well as lower order singl e poles) in both diagram (6.10)
and the divergent four-loop graphs. Consequently, g0
abcmust have the form
g0
abc=µ2(ν−3)1
(3−ν)1
(24π)2/braceleftBig
g0
ab(ea+eb)3e3
c+g0
bc(eb+ec)3e3
a+g0
ca(ec+ea)3e3
b/bracerightBig
+µ4(ν−3)
R(2)
abc
(3−ν)2+R(1)
abc
(3−ν)+gabc(µ)
. (6.13)
The first set of terms removes the divergence in Eq. (6.12), wh ile theR(2)
abcandR(1)
abcterms
cancel the double and single poles generated by four-loop gr aphs, respectively.46The re-
maining finite ‘renormalized’ coupling is gabc(µ). Nowdg0
abc/dµ= 0 anddg0
ab/dµ= 0, while
dgabc(µ)/dµmust be finite. Therefore, the single pole terms that result w henµin Eq. (6.13)
is varied must cancel,
0 =1
(24π)2/braceleftBig
g0
ab(ea+eb)3e3
c+g0
bc(eb+ec)3e3
a+g0
ca(ec+ea)3e3
b/bracerightBig/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
pole+µ2(ν−3)2R(2)
abc
3−ν,(6.14)
46Strictly speaking, the R(2)
abcandR(1)
abcterms cancel primitively divergent four-loop graphs. Four
loop graphs containing divergent two-loop sub-graphs are r endered finite by insertions of the g0
ab
interaction in finite two-loop graphs.
84or, inserting the explicit form (6.1) for g0
ab,
R(2)
abc=1
72e3
ae3
be3
c
4! (4π)4/braceleftBig
(ea+eb)3+ (eb+ec)3+ (ec+ea)3/bracerightBig
. (6.15)
This result is easily confirmed by direct computation. The gr aph
✫✪✬✩
t t
✫✪✬✩
t
(6.16)
produces a double pole contribution to (ln Z)/Vinvolving the square of Eq. (4.3):
1
32π21
3−ν/parenleftBiggκ2
4π/parenrightBiggν−3
2
β6
2 (3!)2/summationdisplay
a,b,cn0
an0
bn0
c/parenleftBig
e3
ae6
be3
c/parenrightBig
. (6.17)
The graph
✫✪✬✩
tt
t (6.18)
also produces a double pole contribution to the partition fu nction. It is not difficult to show
that the double pole in this graph, without vertex and symmet ry factors, is just 1 /2 times
the square of the single pole contribution (4.3) of the two-l oop graph.47A easy exercise now
shows that the double pole contribution of this graph is give n by
1
2
1
32π21
3−ν/parenleftBiggκ2
4π/parenrightBiggν−3
2
β6
2·3!/summationdisplay
a,b,cn0
an0
bn0
c/parenleftBig
e5
ae4
be3
c/parenrightBig
. (6.19)
It is a simple matter to verify that the double pole divergenc es in Eq’s. (6.17) and (6.19)
are indeed canceled by the contribution (6.15) to the g0
abccoupling term.
The renormalization group equation for the finite coupling gabc(µ) may now be obtained
by returning to the condition that dg0
abc/dµ= 0. Since the single pole terms in dg0
abc/dµ
have been shown to cancel, this condition reduces to
47An outline of the proof is as follows. Choose the left-hand 5- point vertex in (6.18) to be
the origin. Assign the upper 4-point vertex the coordinate r1, and the lower 3-point vertex the
coordinate r2. The double pole contribution comes from the most singular i ntegration region where
|r1| ≪ |r2| ≪κ−1. In computing the leading contribution from this region, th e right-hand line
running between r2andr1can be replaced by a line that runs between r2and the origin. Thus, as
far as the leading singularity is concerned, the graph reduc es to the graph (6.16) except that the
condition |r1|<|r2|must be imposed. Since the graph (6.16) is symmetrical under the interchange
of these two coordinates, imposing this condition merely mu ltiplies the result by 1 /2.
850 =1
36 (4π)2/braceleftBig
gab(ea+eb)3e3
c+gbc(eb+ec)3e3
a+gca(ec+ea)3e3
b/bracerightBig
+2R(1)
abc+ 2 (3−ν)gabc−µ2d
dµ2gabc. (6.20)
Using Eq. (6.3) for gaband taking the physical limit ν= 3, gives
µ2d
dµ2gabc= 2R(1)
abc+8
27e3
ae3
be3
c
(16π)4/bracketleftBigg
(ea+eb)3ln/parenleftbiggµ2
ab
µ2/parenrightbigg
+ (eb+ec)3ln/parenleftbiggµ2
bc
µ2/parenrightbigg
+ (ec+ea)3ln/parenleftbiggµ2
ca
µ2/parenrightbigg/bracketrightBigg
.
(6.21)
The integration of this renormalization group equation giv es
gabc(µ) =−4
27e3
ae3
be3
c
(16π)4/bracketleftBigg
(ea+eb)3ln2/parenleftbiggµ2
ab
µ2/parenrightbigg
+ (eb+ec)3ln2/parenleftbiggµ2
bc
µ2/parenrightbigg
+ (ec+ea)3ln2/parenleftbiggµ2
ca
µ2/parenrightbigg/bracketrightBigg
−2R(1)
abcln/parenleftbiggµ2
abc
µ2/parenrightbigg
, (6.22)
where the integration constant has been written as a scale µabcwhich, once again, will be of
order of (the inverse of) a typical thermal wavelength λ−1, but whose precise value can only
be determined by matching to the underlying quantum theory. Note that the single pole
residueR(1)
abcin the renormalization group equation (6.21) gives rise to s ingle log terms in
the running coupling (6.22), which are subleading compared to the double log terms when µ
is much much less than λ−1. The residue R(1)
abcis determined by the less singular single-pole
terms of the previous double pole contributions, plus the si ngle pole produced by the graph
✫✪✬✩
tt
t (6.23)
which has no double pole contribution. Since our purpose her e is just to illustrate the
character of the theory, we shall not bother to compute R(1)
abcexplicitly.
Recalling that the divergent terms in the classical theory h ave all their non-integral
dimensional dependence appearing as integer powers of κν−3, we see that, just as in the
previous two-loop discussion, choosing µ2=κ2/4πin the induced couplings not only removes
the poles in these classical loop graphs, it also prevents th e appearance of any additional large
logarithms in the resulting finite contributions of four-lo op graphs. Thus taking µ2=κ2/4π
and inserting (6.22) into (6.11) immediately yields the lea ding logarithmic contribution to
the partition function at four-loop order:
lnZ(4,ll)
V=1
(16π)4/summationdisplay
a,b,cβ6n0
an0
bn0
c/braceleftBigg8
9/bracketleftBig
e3
ae6
be3
c+ 3e5
ae4
be3
c/bracketrightBig
ln2/parenleftBiggλ2κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
+O/bracketleftBig
e12ln(λκ)/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
.
(6.24)
86B. Leading Logs to All Orders
Exactly the same approach may be used to determine the leadin g log contributions at
higher orders. Consider first the situation at an even loop or der. The induced coupling
g0
a1···ap+1makes its first contribution to (ln Z)/Vat 2p-loop order. This contribution is
I(2p)
A≡ −β3p/summationdisplay
a1···ap+1n0
a1···n0
ap+1g0
a1···ap+1. (6.25)
For later convenience, we will refer to g0
a1···ap+1as the rank- pcoupling. Poles in ν−3 up to
orderpare generated at 2 p-loop order and must be canceled by the rank- pinduced coupling.
In particular, order ppoles are generated by diagrams of the form
k p-k-1(6.26)
in which the left and right vertices represent insertions of the rankkand rankp−k−1 cou-
plingsg0
a1···ak+1andg0
ak+2···ap+1, respectively. The contribution of these diagrams to (ln Z)/V
is
I(2p)
B=−β3p
4! (4π)2/parenleftBiggκ2
4π/parenrightBiggν−31
3−νp−1/summationdisplay
k=0/summationdisplay
a1···ap+1n0
a1···n0
ap+1g0
a1···ak+1g0
ak+2···ap+1
×/parenleftBig
ea1···ak+1/parenrightBig3/parenleftBig
eak+2···ap+1/parenrightBig3, (6.27)
where we have introduced the shorthand abbreviation
ea1···ak≡ea1+···+eak. (6.28)
By defining g0
a≡ −1, and including the terms where k= 0 andk=p−1, this expression also
includes the case where either vertex in the diagram (6.26) r epresents the original classical
interaction. Since the rank- kcouplingg0
a1···ak+1contains poles in ν−3 up to order k(and
g0
ak+2···ap+1has poles of order p−k−1), this contribution does generate order- ppoles. To
cancel these poles, the rank- pcoupling must have the form
g0
a1···ap+1=−1
4! (4π)2µ2(ν−3)1
3−νp−1/summationdisplay
k=0S/braceleftbigg
g0
a1···ak+1g0
ak+2···ap+1/parenleftBig
ea1···ak+1/parenrightBig3/parenleftBig
eak+2···ap+1/parenrightBig3/bracerightbigg
+···+µ2p(ν−3)
p/summationdisplay
k=1R(k)
a1···ap+1
(3−ν)k+ga1···ap+1(µ)
. (6.29)
Here, Sdenotes a symmetrization operator which averages over all p ermutations of the
indicesa1···ap+1. TheR(k)terms cancel the poles of order kgenerated by (primitively
divergent) 2 p-loop graphs, and the unwritten “ ···” pieces denote terms proportional to
µ4(ν−3)which cancel the poles generated by induced couplings total ing rankp−2 inserted into
divergent four loop graphs, terms proportional to µ6(ν−3)which cancel the poles generated
by induced couplings of rank p−3 inserted into divergent six loop graphs, etc.
87The renormalization group condition dg0
a1···ap+1/dµ2= 0 must hold as an exact identity.
The variation of (6.29) with respect to µhas poles in ν−3 up to order p−1. The coefficients
of each order pole must cancel independently. As discussed b efore, this means that the
residuesR(k), fork= 2,···,pare completely fixed by the structure of the lower order
diagrams. The renormalization group equation for the remai ning finite terms, evaluated at
ν= 3, becomes
µ2d
dµ2ga1···ap+1=−1
4! (4π)2p−1/summationdisplay
k=0S/braceleftbigg
ga1···ak+1gak+2···ap+1/parenleftBig
ea1···ak+1/parenrightBig3/parenleftBig
eak+2···ap+1/parenrightBig3/bracerightbigg
+···.
(6.30)
The key point is that when µ2is chosen to be of order κ2, the only source of large logarithms
are the induced couplings themselves; the rank- krenormalized coupling ga1···akis of order48
[ln(λµ)]k−1. Consequently, the terms shown explicitly on the right hand side of (6.30) are
proportional to lnp−1(λµ), while all the unwritten “ ···” terms have at most p−2 powers of
ln(λµ). Integrating (6.30), neglecting the sub-leading pieces, gives
ga1···ap+1(µ) =−lnλ2µ2
4! (4π)2pp−1/summationdisplay
k=0S/braceleftbigg
ga1···ak+1gak+2···ap+1/parenleftBig
ea1···ak+1/parenrightBig3/parenleftBig
eak+2···ap+1/parenrightBig3/bracerightbigg
.(6.31)
Equation (6.31), together with the starting condition ga≡ −1, provides a simple recursive
recipe for determining the leading-log contribution to the rank-pinduced coupling ga1···ap+1.
The leading-log contribution to ln Zat 2p-loop order is then just
lnZ(2p,ll)
V=−β3p/summationdisplay
a1···ap+1n0
a1···n0
ap+1ga1···ap+1, (6.32)
where the renormalized induced couplings are to be evaluate d atµ=O(κ). The resulting
contribution is O[(βe2κ)2plnp(λκ)] in magnitude.49
The leading-log contributions at odd-loop orders are also e asily determined. When the
scaleµisO(κ), so that the only source of large logarithms are the induced couplings them-
selves, the largest number of logarithms at a given odd loop o rder will result from diagrams
48This has been shown explicitly for k= 2 and 3. The current section may be regarded as an
inductive proof of this assertion to all orders.
49The alert reader will have noticed that we have ignored the in duced couplings for derivative
interactions, h0
a1···ap,k0
a1···ap,etc., in this discussion. The four loop couplings h0
abandk0
abin the
induced action (3.32) give rise to only a single log at four lo op order, not a double log, and so it
does not contribute to the leading log result. Moreover, jus t as in the previous case of the ga1···ap
couplings, these two-derivative couplings generate a sequ ence of higher powers of logs, but each
member in this sequence of contributions is suppressed by on e power of ln κλcompared to the
corresponding leading-log contribution. In the same manne r, the four-derivative or higher terms
schematically denoted by the ellipsis ···in Eq. (3.32) give rise to still further subdominant logs.
885k
kk
2k3
k14
FIG. 18. Leading-log contributions to ln Zat odd-loop order. Circled vertices labeled kde-
note the insertion of the rank- kinduced interaction proportional to g0
a1···ak+1. For order 2 p+ 1
contributions, the ranks of all the insertions around the lo op must sum to p.
where the maximal number of induced couplings are inserted i nto a graph with only one
explicit loop. At loop order of 2 p+ 1, this means a single insertion of the rank pinduced
coupling, or two insertions of rank kand rankp−kcouplings, or more generally, the insertion
of any collection of induced couplings whose ranks total p, as illustrated in figure 18. Rather
than following the cookbook method and struggling to get the proper combinatorial factors
to evaluate these diagrams, it is much easier to simply retur n to the original functional
integral representation (3.30). The sum of the graphs in que stion just corresponds to the
contribution of the order φ(r)2terms in the first line of the induced interaction (3.32) to th e
action
S(2)
ind= ∆κ2β
2/integraldisplay
(dνr)φ(r)2, (6.33)
where
∆κ2=−∞/summationdisplay
p=2/summationdisplay
a1···apβ3p−2n0
a1···n0
apga1···ap/parenleftBig
ea1···ap/parenrightBig2. (6.34)
Thus, the total effect of these terms is to simply shift the unp erturbed (squared) Debye wave
number,
κ2
0→κ2
ll≡κ2
0+ ∆κ2. (6.35)
Referring back to the one-loop correction (2.77), we see the sum of these odd-loop order
leading logarithms plus the original one-loop contributio n is given by
∞/summationdisplay
p=0lnZ(2p+1,ll)=−κ3
ll
12πV. (6.36)
A straightforward exercise expanding (6.36) and (6.34), an d iterating (6.32), will yield
the explicit leading-log contributions at any given order. The results up to order 6 are:
lnZ(2,ll)
V=L/summationdisplay
a,bβ3n0
an0
be3
ae3
b, (6.37)
89lnZ(3,ll)
V=κ0L
8π/summationdisplay
a,bβ4n0
an0
be3
ae3
b(ea+eb)2, (6.38)
lnZ(4,ll)
V=L2/summationdisplay
a,b,cβ6n0
an0
bn0
ce3
ae3
be3
c(eb+ec)3, (6.39)
lnZ(5,ll)
V=L2
32πκ0/summationdisplay
a,b,c,dβ8n0
an0
bn0
cn0
de3
ae3
be3
ce2
d
×/bracketleftBig
4(eb+ec)3(ea+eb+ec)2+ed(ea+eb)2(ec+ed)2/bracketrightBig
, (6.40)
lnZ(6,ll)
V=L3
3/summationdisplay
a,b,c,dβ9n0
an0
bn0
cn0
de3
ae3
be3
ce3
d/bracketleftBig
(ea+eb)3+ 2(eb+ec+ed)3/bracketrightBig
(ec+ed)3,(6.41)
where
L ≡1
4! (4π)2ln/parenleftBiggλ2κ2
4π/parenrightBigg
. (6.42)
Converted to physical densities, this becomes
lnZ(2,ll)
V=−L/summationdisplay
a,bβ3¯na¯nbe3
ae3
b, (6.43)
lnZ(3,ll)
V=−κL
8π/summationdisplay
a,bβ4¯na¯nbe4
ae4
b, (6.44)
lnZ(4,ll)
V=−12L2/summationdisplay
a,b,cβ6¯na¯nb¯nce3
ae4
be5
c, (6.45)
lnZ(5,ll)
V=−5L2
16πκ/summationdisplay
a,b,c,dβ8¯na¯nb¯nc¯nde2
ae3
be4
ce4
d/bracketleftBig
e2
aeb+ 12ebeced+ 16ebe2
d+ 12ece2
d/bracketrightBig
,(6.46)
lnZ(6,ll)
V=−12L3/summationdisplay
a,b,c,dβ9¯na¯nb¯nc¯nde3
ae3
be4
ce5
d
×/bracketleftBig
3eaebec+ 3e2
bec+ 3e2
ced+ 3ece2
d+ 5ebe2
d+ 14ebeced/bracketrightBig
.(6.47)
Note that for even-loop orders these leading-logarithmic c ontributions always include a sum
of particle densities weighted by an odd power of the charge. Consequently, the leading-
logarithmic contributions at even-loop order vanish in the special case of a neutral symmetric
binary plasma, such as a pure electron-proton plasma, where the charges of the two species
are equal and opposite and the the physical densities are nec essarily equal due to charge
neutrality. This is a general result, which follows from the recursive structure of (6.31) and
the vanishing of its initial term.
C. “Anomalous” Virial Relation
The grand canonical partition function may be regarded as a f unction of the temperature
and the (bare) density n0
a, chargeea, and thermal wavelength λaof each species. If one
90defines an average density nwhich is the geometric mean of the bare densities n0
aand thus
entailsβ−3/2times the exponential of the average of the chemical potenti als, then one may
alternatively express a specific density in terms of the aver age density and a relative density
ratioxa,
n0
a≡nxa. (6.48)
The charges of each species may similarly be written in terms of some mean charge eand a
relative charge ratio ya,
ea≡eya. (6.49)
Any dependence on the thermal wavelength λamay be re-expressed as dependence on the
dimensionless quantum parameter ηa=βe2
a/4πλa. Consequently, any n-loop contribution
will equal ( βe2κ0)ntimes some function of the dimensionless variables {xa},{ya}and{ηa}.
This is a precise version of the statement that the loop expan sion parameter (in the physical
limit of three dimensions) is βe2κ0. The point to be emphasized is that the parameter βe2κ0
captures the overall powers of the inverse temperature, cha rge, and densities that appear
in a given loop order. Therefore, the grand canonical partit ion function has the functional
form
lnZ=F(βe2κ0,x,y,η )/parenleftBig
V/summationdisplay
bn0
b/parenrightBig
. (6.50)
Let us pretend, for the moment, that Fdoes not depend on the quantum parame-
tersηa— that the purely classical theory exists. We note that the di fferential operator /bracketleftBig
β∂
∂β−3
2/summationtext
a∂
∂βµ a/bracketrightBig
annihilates the density ratios xa, the charge ratios ya, and also βe2κ0
because
/bracketleftBigg
β∂
∂β−3
2/summationdisplay
a∂
∂βµ a/bracketrightBigg
β2e4κ2
0∼/bracketleftBigg
β∂
∂β−3
2/summationdisplay
a∂
∂βµ a/bracketrightBigg
β3/2/summationdisplay
beβµb= 0. (6.51)
Since
/bracketleftBigg
β∂
∂β−3
2/summationdisplay
a∂
∂βµ a/bracketrightBigg
n0
b=−3n0
b, (6.52)
this shows that
/bracketleftBigg
3 +β∂
∂β−3
2/summationdisplay
a∂
∂βµ a/bracketrightBigg
F(βe2κ0,x,y)/parenleftBig
V/summationdisplay
bn0
b/parenrightBig
= 0. (6.53)
In other words, a purely classical partition function must s atisfy
/bracketleftBigg
3 +β∂
∂β−3
2/summationdisplay
a∂
∂βµ a/bracketrightBigg
lnZ= 0. (6.54)
Recalling that the pressure pappears as
lnZ[µ] =βpV, (6.55)
91the thermodynamic, internal energy density uis given by
−∂lnZ[µ]
∂β=uV, (6.56)
and the number density ¯ naof speciesaby
∂lnZ[µ]
∂βµ a= ¯naV, (6.57)
the identity (6.54) for a purely classical plasma is equival ent to the relation
3βp−βu−3
2/summationdisplay
a¯na= 0. (6.58)
The purely classical plasma, of course, does not exist. The i nduced couplings necessary to
render the theory finite give rise to additional dependence o n the quantum parameters ηa.
Hence, in fact,
A≡3βp−βu−3
2/summationdisplay
a¯na∝ne}ationslash= 0. (6.59)
The non-vanishing of Aarises from the ‘anomalous’ dependence on the underlying qu antum
physics. This behavior shows that Ais akin to the anomalies encountered in relativistic
quantum field theories.
To find an expression for the anomaly A, which may be evaluated without separately
computing the pressure, internal energy, and densities, we turn to the functional integral
representation of the grand canonical partition function. It proves convenient for this specific
application to use a scaled potential ˜φ(r) =βφ(r) so that the interaction terms now involve
n0
aeieaβφ=n0
aeiea˜φ, (6.60)
with no explicit appearance of the inverse temperature β(although it does reside in the
densitiesn0
a). Thus the functional integral takes the form
Z[µ] = Det1/2/bracketleftBig
−β−1∇2/bracketrightBig/integraldisplay
[d˜φ] exp/braceleftBigg
−1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr)/parenleftBig
∇˜φ(r)/parenrightBig2−Sint[˜φ;µ]/bracerightBigg
. (6.61)
Although the method that we shall outline is valid for Sint[˜φ;µ] taken to arbitrary order, to
keep the notation simple, we shall consider only those piece s that contribute to the three-loop
order to which we have calculated,
Sint[˜φ;µ] =/integraldisplay
(dνr)/bracketleftbigg
−/summationdisplay
an0
aeiea˜φ(r)+/summationdisplay
a,bg0
abβ3n0
aeiea˜φ(r)n0
beieb˜φ(r)
−/summationdisplay
ah0
aβ2e2
a/parenleftBig
∇˜φ(r)/parenrightBig2n0
aeiea˜φ(r)+···/bracketrightbigg
. (6.62)
We shall first find an expression for the pressure using its ide ntification with the response
to a change in the volume,
92δlnZ[µ] =βpδV, (6.63)
with the change in volume realized by a dilation transformat ion of the spatial coordinates
within the functional integral. To do this in a conceptually simple way, we temporarily
introduce general coordinates xkand a metric tensor gkl, so that the physical distance
between neighboring points is given by
ds2=ν/summationdisplay
k,l=1gkldxkdxl. (6.64)
The (∇˜φ)2part of the action in the functional integral now takes on the generally covariant
form
/integraldisplay
(dνx)/radicalBig
detggkl∂k˜φ(x)∂l˜φ(x)/bracketleftBigg1
2β−/summationdisplay
ah0
aβ2e2
an0
aeiea˜φ(x)/bracketrightBigg
. (6.65)
For the terms in Sintwhich do not involve derivatives, the introduction of gener alized coor-
dinates is effected by simply including the factor√detgin the spatial integration measure.
To effect a dilation or scale change, we take
gkl=e2σδkl. (6.66)
In view of the distance interval (6.64), this has the effect of the length alteration L→Leσ.
With this metric, the determinantal factor and inverse metr ic are simply
/radicalBig
detg=eνσ, gkl=e−2σδkl. (6.67)
Finally, taking the constant parameter σto be infinitesimal, σ→δσ, we have a volume
changeδV=νδσV. Thus, the variation of the functional integral (6.61) brou ght about by
the volume change in the pressure definition (6.63) gives
νβp=−(ν−2)/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBigg/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2/bracketleftBigg1
2β−/summationdisplay
ah0
aβ2e2
an0
aeiea˜φ/bracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
+ν/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
an0
aeiea˜φ−/summationdisplay
a,bg0
abβ3n0
aeiea˜φn0
beieb˜φ/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
. (6.68)
Using the functional integral representation (6.61) to eva luate the definitions (6.56) and
(6.57) of the energy and particle number yields
−βuV=1
2β/angbracketleftbigg/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2/angbracketrightbigg/angbracketrightbigg
V −/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBigg
β∂
∂βSint[˜φ;µ]/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
. (6.69)
and
−/summationdisplay
a¯naV=/summationdisplay
a/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBigg∂
∂βµ aSint[˜φ;µ]/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
. (6.70)
Since each of the quantities that make up the anomaly (6.59) i s well defined, we may write
it as aν→3 limit in a form that will prove to be convenient,
93A=νβp−βu−ν
2/summationdisplay
a¯na. (6.71)
The results above express this as
A=/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBigg
(3−ν)1
2β/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2+/bracketleftBigg
ν−2 +β∂
∂β−ν
2/summationdisplay
c∂
∂βµ c/bracketrightBigg/summationdisplay
ah0
aβ2e2
a/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2n0
aeiea˜φ/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
+/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBigg/bracketleftBigg
ν+β∂
∂β−ν
2/summationdisplay
c∂
∂βµ c/bracketrightBigg
/summationdisplay
an0
aeiea˜φ−/summationdisplay
a,bg0
abβ3n0
aeiea˜φn0
beieb˜φ
/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
.(6.72)
The commutation relation
/bracketleftBigg
ν+β∂
∂β−ν
2/summationdisplay
c∂
∂βµ c/bracketrightBigg
n0
a=n0
a/bracketleftBigg
β∂
∂β−ν
2/summationdisplay
c∂
∂βµ c/bracketrightBigg
. (6.73)
implies that the classical action part of Sint, proportional to/summationtext
an0
aeiea˜φ, does not contribute
to the anomaly A(as required). Moreover,
/bracketleftBigg
β∂
∂β−ν
2/summationdisplay
c∂
∂βµ c/bracketrightBigg
β3n0
b=β3n0
b/bracketleftBigg
(3−ν) +β∂
∂β−ν
2/summationdisplay
c∂
∂βµ c/bracketrightBigg
. (6.74)
Hence we have, to our three-loop order of accuracy,
A=/angbracketleftBigg/angbracketleftBigg
(3−ν)1
2β/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2+/summationdisplay
aβ3∂h0
a
∂βe2
an0
a/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2eiea˜φ/angbracketrightBigg/angbracketrightBigg
−/summationdisplay
ab/bracketleftBigg/parenleftBigg
(3−ν) +β∂
∂β/parenrightBigg
g0
ab/bracketrightBigg
β3/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
n0
aeiea˜φn0
beieb˜φ/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
. (6.75)
To compute the two and three loop contributions to the anomal yA, we first note that
since to these orders the number densities are given by
¯na=n0
a/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
eiea˜φ/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
+h0
aβ2e2
an0
a/angbracketleftbigg/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2eiea˜φ/angbracketrightbigg/angbracketrightbigg
−2/summationdisplay
bβ3g0
abn0
an0
b/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
eiea˜φeieb˜φ/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
,(6.76)
we may write the pressure (6.68) as
νβp=−(ν−2)1
2β/angbracketleftbigg/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2/angbracketrightbigg/angbracketrightbigg
+/summationdisplay
a/bracketleftbigg
ν¯na+ 2e2
an0
ah0
aβ2/angbracketleftbigg/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2eiea˜φ/angbracketrightbigg/angbracketrightbigg/bracketrightbigg
+ν/summationdisplay
a,bβ3g0
abn0
an0
b/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
eiea˜φeieb˜φ/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
. (6.77)
The pressure and densities are, of course, well defined in the ν→3 limit. Hence, in the
above expression, the pole in ν−3 in the final term, coming from g0
ab, must be canceled by a
similar pole, with opposite residue, in/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
(∇˜φ)2/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
. Since the contribution of the coupling h0
a
has a coefficient that is already of two-loop order, to the orde r to which we work,
lim
ν→3(3−ν)1
2β/angbracketleftbigg/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
∇˜φ/parenrightBig2/angbracketrightbigg/angbracketrightbigg
= 3/summationdisplay
a,bβ3/bracketleftbigg
lim
ν→3(3−ν)g0
ab/bracketrightbigg
n0
an0
b/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
eiea˜φeieb˜φ/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
. (6.78)
94Recalling the result (6.1) for g0
ab, we have
lim
ν→3(3−ν)g0
ab=−1
4!(eaeb)3
(4π)2. (6.79)
Sinceλ2
ab∼β, Eqs. (6.3), (6.4), and (3.82) also inform us that, in the ν→3 limit,
β∂g0
ab
∂β=−1
4!(eaeb)3
(4π)2/bracketleftBig
1 +1
2ηabΓ′
ab/bracketrightBig
, (6.80)
where Γ′
ab≡dΓab/dηabis given in Eq. (4.19). Finally, Eq. (3.33) gives
β3∂
∂βh0
a=−λ2
a
48π. (6.81)
Thus, reverting to the conventionally normalized field φ, and discarding terms of higher
order,
A=−1
4!/summationdisplay
a,bβ3n0
an0
b(eaeb)3
(4π)2∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{texp{iβ(ea+eb)φ(r)}∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht/bracketleftBig
3−2−1
2ηabΓ′
ab/bracketrightBig
−/summationdisplay
aλ2
a
48πe2
aβ2n0
a/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
(∇φ)2/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
. (6.82)
In the last line we use the result (5.7),
β/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
(∇φ)2/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
=κ3
4π. (6.83)
For the remaining terms, we expand the exponential involvin gφto second order to generate
the sub-leading (three loop) contribution. It involves, in the physical ν→3 limit
β/angbracketleftBig/angbracketleftBig
φ2/angbracketrightBig/angbracketrightBig
= lim
ν→3Gν(0) =−κ0
4π. (6.84)
Expanding ( ea+eb)2, the terms involving e2
aande2
bjust provide the one-loop corrections that
alter the bare densities n0
aandn0
ato the physical densities ¯ naand ¯nb. Hence, only the cross
term provides a non-trivial correction, and we have
A=−1
4!1
(4π)2/summationdisplay
a,b¯na¯nb(βeaeb)3/bracketleftBig
1−1
2ηabΓ′
ab/bracketrightBig/parenleftBigg
1 +βeaeb¯κ
4π/parenrightBigg
−/summationdisplay
aλ2
aκ2
48πβe2
aκ
4π¯na. (6.85)
This agrees with Eq. (5.19).
95b a /0/0 /1/1 /0/0 /1/1
FIG. 19. Correction to the irreducible density-density cor relatorCabgenerated by the induced
interaction Snon−staticinvolving the non-zero frequency modes of φ(r,τ). The dashed lines represent
the long-range, unscreened Coulomb Green’s functions of th e non-zero frequency modes.
VII. LONG DISTANCE CORRELATIONS
As noted in section III, the interaction (3.93) which couple s the static and non-zero
frequency modes of the electrostatic potential only affects thermodynamic quantities at six-
loop order. However, this term does generate some qualitati vely new effects in correlation
functions. In particular, it destroys the exponential scre ening of the quasi-classical theory
[10–12]. This effect is easy to calculate using the effective t heory as given in Eq’s. (3.92)
and (3.93).
We will first examine the workings of this effect on the single- particle irreducible part
Cab(r−r′) of the number density correlation function. The graph of Fi g. 19 is produced if
each of the variational derivatives in the definition (3.35) of the number density correlator act
onSnon−staticin the functional integral (3.92). The non-zero-frequency potentials that this
brings down from the exponential become tied together into t he product of two unscreened,
long-ranged Coulomb Green’s functions. Since the result is single-particle irreducible, it
defines an O[(βe2κ)(κλ)4] correction to Cab(r−r′).50Explicitly, the calculation that we
have just described gives the long-ranged contribution
∆Cab(r−r′) =1
(4π)2n0
an0
be2
ae2
bλ2
aλ2
bβ2/summationdisplay
m/ne}ationslash=02
(2πm)4/bracketleftBig
∇k∇lVC(r−r′)/bracketrightBig2. (7.1)
Here
/summationdisplay
m/ne}ationslash=02
(2πm)4=ζ(4)
4π4=1
360, (7.2)
and
/bracketleftBig
∇k∇lVC(r−r′)/bracketrightBig2=6
(4π)2|r−r′|6, (7.3)
and so
∆Cab(r−r′) =1
60(βe2
an0
aλ2
a) (βe2
bn0
bλ2
b)
(4π)4|r−r′|6. (7.4)
Consequently, density-density correlations do not, in fac t, decay exponentially but rather
have long-distance 1 /r6tails.
50More precisely, a correction of relative size O/bracketleftbig(βe2κ)(κλ)4/bracketrightbigfor wavenumbers of O(κ).
96We may use the relation given in Eq. (2.106) connecting the el ectrostatic Green’s function
G(r−r′) =∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)φ(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}htandCab,
β˜G(k) =/bracketleftbigg
k2+β/summationdisplay
a,beaeb˜Cab(k)/bracketrightbigg−1
, (7.5)
to find the long-distance tail in G(r−r). Treating ∆ Cab(r−r′) as a perturbation and noting
that the long-distance limit of the unperturbed Green’s fun ction is given by the Debye
screened function, we have51
β∆G(r−r′) =−/integraldisplay
(d3r1)(d3r2)e−κ|r−r1|
4π|r−r1|β/summationdisplay
a,beaeb∆Cab(r1−r2)e−κ|r2−r′|
4π|r2−r′|. (7.6)
Since the flanking Debye Green’s functions that appear here a re of short range, to obtain
the long-distance behavior of β∆G(r−r′) we may replace ∆ Cab(r1−r2) by ∆Cab(r−r′) and
use
˜G(0) =/integraldisplay
(d3r)e−κr
4πr=1
κ2(7.7)
to find that the potential correlator also acquires a 1 /r6tail,
G(r−r′)∼ −1
60/summationdisplay
a,b(βe3
an0
aλ2
a) (βe3
bn0
bλ2
b)
(4πκ)4|r−r′|6. (7.8)
Comparing the magnitude of this 1 /r6tail to the original e−κr/4πrDebye potential, one
finds that the cross-over from exponential to power-law deca y occurs at the parametric scale
κr∼ −ln/bracketleftBig
(λκ)4(βe2κ)/bracketrightBig
. (7.9)
This characterizes the number of e-foldings over which exponential Debye screening could,
in principle, be observed before the power-law tail takes ov er.
Finally, the total charge-density correlator K(r−r′), related to G(r−r′) as shown in
Eq. (3.16), acquires a 1 /r10tail,
K(r−r′)∼28/summationdisplay
a,b(βe3
an0
aλ2
a) (βe3
bn0
bλ2
b)
(4πκ)4|r−r′|10. (7.10)
When specialized to the case of a one-component plasma in the presence of a constant
neutralizing background, Eq. (7.10) becomes
K(r)∼28e2
(4π)4λ4
r10=7e2
(4π)2/parenleftBiggβ¯h2
m/parenrightBigg21
r10. (7.11)
This agrees with the result of the far more intricate calcula tion of Cornu and Martin [12].
51Treating ∆Cab(r−r′) as a perturbation is legitimate, even though it determines the leading long
distance behavior. One may show this rigorously by noting th at ∆˜Cab(k)∼ |k|3for smallk, and
that this controls the discontinuity of ˜G(k) whenk2is small and negative.
97ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The interest of one of the authors (L.S.B) in classical plasm a physics was piqued by R. F.
Sawyer. His work on this paper began while visiting the Los Al amos National Laboratory
and continued at the Aspen Center for Physics and was largely completed during another
visit to the Los Alamos National Laboratory. We would like to thank H. De Witt for several
clarifying discussions and particularly for making us awar e of various related prior results
which were helpful in resolving interim discrepancies. Com munications with W.-D. Kraeft
and M. Schlages were also helpful in this regard. This work wa s supported, in part, by the
U.S. Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG03-96ER4095 6.
98APPENDIX A: FUNCTIONAL METHODS
In this Appendix, we define, in the context of our plasma theor y, the generating function
of connected correlation functions and its Legendre transf orm, the effective action.52We
review relevant properties of these functionals that are we ll known in quantum field theory,
and then describe how number densities and density–density correlation functions are related
to them. In particular, we show how the density-density corr elator may be expressed in
terms of a “single-particle irreducible” function in a way t hat explicitly exhibits its structure,
particularly its small wave-number behavior. We also show h ow the mean-square fluctuations
in energy, and particle numbers, may be expressed in terms of the same single-particle
irreducible functions. This formalism is applied to comput e the number densities, density–
density correlators, and equation of state to two loop order in an particularly efficient manner
in a final appendix so as to illustrate methods complimentary to those employed in the text.
The partition function of our theory, in either its original quantum form (3.6), or re-
expressed as an effective theory (3.92), has a functional int egral representation
Z[µ] =N/integraldisplay
[dφ] exp{−S[φ;µ]}, (A1)
where [dφ] denotes functional integration over a space and time depen dent potential φ(r,τ)
which is periodic, φ(r,β) =φ(r,0). The action S[φ;µ] has the form
S[φ;µ] =1
2/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr) [∇φ(r,τ)]2+Sint[φ;µ]. (A2)
In the original quantum theory the interaction part of the ac tionSintis (minus the logarithm
of) the functional integral over all charged fields,
exp{−Sint[φ;µ]}=/productdisplay
a/integraldisplay
[dψ∗
adψa] exp/braceleftbigg
−/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)La/bracerightbigg
, (A3)
withLathe charged field Lagrangian defined in (3.90), but with the ch emical potentials now
extended to be functions of imaginary time as well as space, µa(r)→mua(x) =µa(r,τ).
In the effective theory, Sintis the sum of the classical interaction and the various induc ed
interactions,
Sint[φ;µ] =−β/integraldisplay
(dνr)/summationdisplay
an0
aeiβeaφ0+Sind[φ0;µ] +Snon−static[φ0,φm;µ], (A4)
withSindandSnon−staticgiven in Eqs. (3.32) and (3.93), respectively, and {φm(r)}denoting
the Fourier components of φ(r,τ), as defined in Eq. (3.26).
In the following formal discussion, we will allow the genera lized chemical potentials
µ(r,τ) to vary both in space and (imaginary) time. The only feature of the interaction
52Our discussion of the effective action for a plasma parallels that given for quantum field theory
in Sections 4 and 5 of Brown [15], Chapter 6, which contains ma ny more details.
99terms which will be relevant is the fact that iφ(r,τ) couples to the total charge density via
the dependence of Sint[φ;µ] on the generalized chemical potentials µa(r,τ), or
δ
δφ(r,τ)Sint[φ;µ] =i/summationdisplay
aeaδ
δµa(r,τ)Sint[φ;µ]. (A5)
This is a reflection of the invariance (2.30) of the theory und er the combined shifts φ→φ−ic
andµa→µa−eac.
In the following discussion, for notational convenience, w e will use single symbols x,y,
etc., to denote a (Euclidean) space-time coordinate so that, fo r example, φ(x)≡φ(r,τ).
And we will write/integraltext
xas shorthand for/integraltextβ
0dτ/integraltext(dνr).
1. Connected Generating Functional
The addition of an external charge density or source σ(x) coupled to the field φ(x) defines
a functional W[σ;µ] which is the generating functional for connected φfield correlation
functions — correlators whose graphical representations h ave no disconnected parts. The
definition is
expW[σ;µ] =/integraldisplay
[dφ] exp/braceleftbigg
−S[φ;µ] +/integraldisplay
xφ(x)σ(x)/bracerightbigg
. (A6)
In the presence of the source, a normalized thermal expectat ion value is defined by
∝an}b∇acketle{tF[φ]∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β=e−W[σ;µ]/integraldisplay
[dφ]F[φ] exp/braceleftbigg
−S[φ;µ] +/integraldisplay
xφ(x)σ(x)/bracerightbigg
, (A7)
and in terms of this expectation value
δW[σ;µ]
δσ(x)=∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β. (A8)
The insertion in the functional integrand of the functional derivative of −Sint[φ;µ] with
respect to a generalized chemical µa(x) produces the average particle number density, up to
an overall factor of eW[σ;µ]. Thus the properly normalized particle number density of sp ecies
ais given by
∝an}b∇acketle{tna(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β=δW[σ;µ]
δµa(x). (A9)
This is the number density in the presence of both spatially ( or temporally) varying chemical
potentialsµb(x) and the external charge density σ(x). With the chemical potentials {µa}
taken to be constants and σtaken to vanish, Eq. (A9) reduces to the constant number
density ¯na=∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβof particles of species a. We shall denote this limit by a vertical bar with
a subscript 0. Thus,
¯na=δW[σ;µ]
δµa(x)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A10)
100The total charge density in the presence of all the sources is given by
∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β=/summationdisplay
aea∝an}b∇acketle{tna(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β=/summationdisplay
aeaδW[σ;µ]
δµa(x). (A11)
The partial derivative of W[σ;µ] with respect to the inverse temperature53defines the aver-
age energy in the presence of the source σ,
∝an}b∇acketle{tE∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β=−∂W[σ;µ]
∂β. (A12)
In the limit of vanishing source and constant chemical poten tials, this reduces to the ther-
modynamic internal energy,
U=∝an}b∇acketle{tE∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=−∂W[σ;µ]
∂β/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A13)
Second variations with respect to the chemical potentials p roduce the number density cor-
relation function,
Kab(x−x′) =δ2W[σ;µ]
δµa(x)δµb(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A14)
The static correlator discussed in the text is just the time a verage of this space-time depen-
dent correlator,
Kab(r−r′) =β−1/integraldisplayβ
0dτ K ab(r−r′,τ−τ′). (A15)
We shall also have occasion to use the φfield correlation function defined by
G(x−x′) =δ2W[σ;µ]
δσ(x)δσ(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A16)
Since the functional integral of a total functional derivat ive vanishes,
0 =/integraldisplay
[dφ]δ
δφ(x)exp/braceleftbigg
−S[φ;µ] +/integraldisplay
yφ(y)σ(y)/bracerightbigg
, (A17)
the functional integral with an extra factor of
δS[φ;µ]
δφ(x)−σ(x) (A18)
included in the integrand vanishes. Hence, in view of the for m (A2) of the action and the
result (A5), the expectation value of the field equation is an exact identity:
− ∇2∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β=i/summationdisplay
aeaδW[σ;µ]
δµa(x)+σ(x)
=i∝an}b∇acketle{tρ(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β+σ(x). (A19)
53When varying β, the Fourier components µa(r,ωm)≡/integraltextβ
0µa(r,τ)eiωmτdτandσ(r,ωm)≡/integraltextβ
0σ(r,τ)eiωmτdτ(withωm≡2πm/β ) are to be held fixed.
1012. Effective Action
The effective action functional Γ[ ¯φ;µ] is defined by a Legendre transform of the generating
functionalW[σ;µ]. It generalizes the mean field theory described in Sec. IIB t o include
the effects of thermal and quantum fluctuations. The effective action functional has two
important properties: Not only does it contain only connect ed graphs (as does W), it
contains no single-particle reducible graphs — graphs whic h can be cut into two disjoint
pieces by cutting a single line. This is shown explicitly to t wo-loop order in Appendix G 2
below. This property simplifies calculations. For example, when Γ is used to compute the
free energy, one can simply delete all “tadpole” graphs. Mor eover, as we shall see, the use
of the effective action together with the functional relatio ns that we are developing reveals
the basic structure of the theory in a very useful form. The eff ective action functional is
obtained by setting
∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β=¯φ(x), (A20)
that is, by considering the field expectation value rather th an the source to be the indepen-
dent variable. The effective action is then defined by the Lege ndre transformation
Γ[¯φ;µ]≡/integraldisplay
xσ(x)¯φ(x)−W[σ;µ]. (A21)
Because of Eq’s. (A8), (A9), and (A12),
δΓ[¯φ;µ] =/integraldisplay
x/braceleftBig
σ(x)δ¯φ(x)− ∝an}b∇acketle{tna(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
βδµa(x)/bracerightBig
+∝an}b∇acketle{tE∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
βdβ. (A22)
Thus we may consider Γ to be a functional of the independent va riables ¯φ(x),µa(x), andβ,
with the (partial) functional derivatives
δΓ[¯φ;µ]
δ¯φ(x)=σ(x), (A23)
−δΓ[¯φ;µ]
δµa(x)=∝an}b∇acketle{tna(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β, (A24)
and the ordinary partial derivative
∂Γ[¯φ;µ]
∂β=∝an}b∇acketle{tE∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β. (A25)
In view of Eq. (A23), evaluating the effective action at a stat ionary point, a point where
δΓ/δ¯φ= 0, is the same as setting the source σto zero. With constant chemical potentials
and a vanishing source, the last equalities reduce to the ord inary number density and internal
energy. As remarked in the text, the grand canonical partiti on function is related to the
grand potential by Z= exp {−βΩ}, and so the grand potential is given by the effective
action evaluated at its stationary point in the limit of cons tant chemical potentials,
βΩ = Γ[ ¯φ;µ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle0. (A26)
102We return momentarily to consider σ(x) andµa(x) as independent variables so as to
compute the source functional derivative of Eq. (A23):
/integraldisplay
yδ2Γ[¯φ;µ]
δ¯φ(x)δ¯φ(y)δ¯φ(y)
δσ(x′)=δ(x−x′), (A27)
or, in view of Eq. (A8),
/integraldisplay
yδ2Γ[¯φ;µ]
δ¯φ(x)δ¯φ(y)δ2W[σ;µ]
δσ(y)δσ(x′)=δ(x−x′). (A28)
In the limit of constant chemical potentials and a vanishing source, this becomes
/integraldisplay
yδ2Γ[¯φ;µ]
δ¯φ(x)δ¯φ(y)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0G(y−x′) =δ(x−x′). (A29)
Thus
δ2Γ[¯φ;µ]
δ¯φ(x)δ¯φ(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0=G−1(x−x′) (A30)
is the operator inverse to the potential correlation functi onG(x−x′). After a Fourier trans-
form [in space and (periodic) time],
˜G(k,ωm)≡/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)e−iωmτ+ik·rG(r,τ), (A31)
the linear integral equation (A29) reduces to the algebraic relation:
˜G−1(k,ωm)˜G(k,ωm) = 1. (A32)
To uncover the structure of the potential correlation funct ion, we first write the field
equation (A19) for the expectation value in terms of the effec tive action functional. This is
done by using Eq’s. (A20), (A23), and (A24), to obtain
− ∇2¯φ(x) =−i/summationdisplay
aeaδΓ[¯φ;µ]
δµa(x)+δΓ[¯φ;µ]
δ¯φ(x). (A33)
Taking the functional derivative of this relation with resp ect to ¯φ(x′) and then setting the
chemical potentials constant and the source to zero produce s
− ∇2δ(x−x′) =−i/summationdisplay
aeaγa(x−x′) +G−1(x−x′), (A34)
where we have defined a two-point vertex or coupling by
γa(x−x′)≡δ2Γ
δµa(x)δ¯φ(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A35)
Thus in wave number/frequency space
103˜G−1(k,ωm) =k2+i/summationdisplay
aea˜γa(k,ωm). (A36)
The structure of the potential correlation function is inti mately connected to that of the
number density correlation function. Hence it is useful to e xamine the relationship between
the effective action and the number density correlator. Reca lling the expression (A14) for
this function in terms of W[σ;µ] and then the fact [Eq. (A9)] that one functional derivative
defines the number density, we see that we may write
Kab(x−x′) =δ
δµb(x′)∝an}b∇acketle{tna(x)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A37)
In this equation, σandµaare taken to be the independent variables, with ¯φa function of
these independent variables. Thus, using Eq. (A24) to expre ss the number density in terms
of the effective action, we obtain
Kab(x−x′) =−δ2Γ
δµa(x)δµb(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0−/integraldisplay
yδ2Γ
δµa(x)δ¯φ(y)δ¯φ(y)
δµb(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A38)
We define
Cab(x−x′)≡ −δ2Γ
δµa(x)δµb(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0, (A39)
and recall the definition (A35) to write Eq. (A38) as
Kab(x−x′) =Cab(x−x′)−/integraldisplay
yγa(x−y)δ¯φ(y)
δµb(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A40)
To deal with the final variational derivative which appears h ere, we note that with σand
theµataken to be the independent variables,
δσ(z)
δµb(x′)= 0, (A41)
and so Eq. (A23) implies that
δ2Γ
δµb(x′)δ¯φ(z)+/integraldisplay
yδ¯φ(y)
δµb(x′)δ2Γ
δ¯φ(y)δ¯φ(z)= 0. (A42)
In the limit of constant chemical potentials and vanishing s ource, the first term here is just
γb(x′−z) and the second factor in the integrand is G−1(y−z). Hence
δ¯φ(y)
δµb(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0=−/integraldisplay
zG(y−z)γb(x′−z), (A43)
and Eq. (A40) becomes
Kab(x−x′) =Cab(x−x′) +/integraldisplay
y,zγa(x−y)G(y−z)γb(x′−z), (A44)
104or, in wave number/frequency space,
˜Kab(k,ωm) =˜Cab(k,ωm) + ˜γa(k,ωm)˜G(k,ωm) ˜γb(k,ωm). (A45)
Since the function ˜Cab(k,ωm) is a double variational derivative of the effective action f unc-
tional Γ[ ¯φ;µa], it is single-particle irreducible. On the other hand, ˜G(k,ωm), the potential
correlation function, is not single-particle irreducible .
We have yet to express the number density and potential corre lation functions in the
simplest terms. To do so, we return to the expectation of the fi eld equation (A19). With
µaandσtaken to be independent variables, the functional derivati ve of this equation with
respect to a generalized chemical potential, with the chemi cal potentials then set constant
and the source to zero, gives
−∇2δ¯φ(x)
δµb(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0=i/summationdisplay
aeaKab(x−x′). (A46)
With the use of Eq’s. (A43) and (A45), the Fourier transform o f this constraint may be put
in the form
−/bracketleftBig
k2+i/summationdisplay
aea˜γa(k,ωm)/bracketrightBig˜G(k,ωm) ˜γb(k,ωm) =i/summationdisplay
aea˜Cab(k,ωm). (A47)
The factor in square brackets on the left-hand side of this re sult is, according to Eq. (A36),
justG−1(k,ωm). Hence,
˜γb(k,ωm) =−i/summationdisplay
aea˜Cab(k,ωm). (A48)
Accordingly,
G−1(k,ωm) =k2+/summationdisplay
a,beaeb˜Cab(k,ωm), (A49)
and
˜Kab(k,ωm) =˜Cab(k,ωm)−/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay
cec˜Cca(k,ωm)/bracketrightBig˜G(k,ωm)/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay
cec˜Ccb(k,ωm)/bracketrightBig
. (A50)
We have found that both the potential and number density corr elation functions are de-
termined by the single-particle irreducible function ˜Cab(k,ωm). We should note that the
definition (A39) of this function, plus rotation and time rev ersal invariance, implies the
symmetry54
˜Cab(k,ωm) =˜Cba(k,ωm) (A51)
which thus carries over to the number density correlation fu nction ˜Kab(k,ωm).
The above results may also be used to reveal the structure of c orrelation functions in-
volving the charge density. The correlation function of the charge density with the number
density of species ais given by
54See, for example, Brown [15], Chapter II, Problem 5.
105/summationdisplay
b˜Kab(k,ωm)eb=/summationdisplay
b˜Cab(k,ωm)eb/braceleftbigg
1−˜G(k,ωm)/bracketleftbigg/summationdisplay
c,deced˜Ccd(k,ωm)/bracketrightbigg/bracerightbigg
=/summationdisplay
b˜Cab(k,ωm)ebk2G(k,ωm). (A52)
Thek→0 limit gives the correlator of the number density with the to tal charge. This
vanishes, as it must for the neutral plasma. Finally, the cha rge density – charge density
correlation function is given by
˜K(k,ωm) =/summationdisplay
a,bea˜Kab(k,ωm)eb
=k2/bracketleftBig/summationtext
a,bea˜Cab(k,ωm)eb/bracketrightBig
k2+/summationtext
a,bea˜Cab(k,ωm)eb. (A53)
This form exhibits explicitly the small wave number behavio r
˜K(k,ωm)∼k2,ask→0. (A54)
Static correlators, which are the focus of attention in the m ain text, are related to the
zero frequency component of the corresponding time depende nt correlator functions by a
factor ofβ−1:
˜Kab(k) =β−1˜Kab(k,0), (A55)
and similarly for ˜Cab(k),˜G(k),etc. Consequently, the static versions of Eqs. (A49), (A50),
(A53), and (A54) are
G−1(k) =βk2+β2/summationdisplay
a,beaeb˜Cab(k), (A56)
˜Kab(k) =˜Cab(k)−/bracketleftBig
β/summationdisplay
cec˜Cca(k)/bracketrightBig˜G(k)/bracketleftBig
β/summationdisplay
cec˜Ccb(k)/bracketrightBig
, (A57)
˜K(k) =k2/bracketleftBig/summationtext
a,bea˜Cab(k)eb/bracketrightBig
k2+β/summationtext
a,bea˜Cab(k)eb, (A58)
and
˜K(k)∼β−1k2,ask→0. (A59)
3. Effective Potential, Thermodynamic Quantities
In quantum field theory, the effective potential (times the sp ace-time volume) is defined
to be the restriction of the effective action to spatially (an d temporally) uniform fields. We
have already remarked that the further restriction to the st ationary point yields the grand
potential (times β). With constant chemical potentials, the stationarity con ditionδΓ/δ¯φ= 0
106is just the condition that charge neutrality hold for a given value of ¯φ. For convenience, we
will assume that physical chemical potentials are chosen su ch that this stationary point lies
at¯φ= 0, so that
βΩ = Γ[ ¯φ;µ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle¯φ=0. (A60)
This is the function that we have computed to three loops. How ever, the charge neutrality
constraint is never used in our computations, and so, in fact , the function Γ[ ¯φ=0;µ] has
been calculated for arbitrary (constant) chemical potenti alsµa. This extension of the grand
potential is needed for the computation of thermodynamic av erage numbers and energy
and for the correlators of these quantities. Just as in our pr evious work, to derive general
relationships it is convenient temporarily to work with Γ[ ¯φ;µ] for arbitrary constant ¯φand
µa. The results of these derivations, however, will depend onl y upon the ¯φ= 0 functions
that have been computed.
With uniform fields, Eq. (A23) reduces to
∂Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂¯φ=σβV. (A61)
As we have remarked before, the restriction to a vanishing so urce,σ= 0, determines
¯φ=¯φ(β,{βµa}), (A62)
and inserting this value of ¯φin Γ yields the physical grand potential βΩ. With arbitrary
chemical potentials, ¯φis non-vanishing so as to keep a zero charge density in the pla sma.
The previous expressions (A24) and (A25), evaluated with ¯φat the stationary point (A62),
gives the physical particle numbers and energy,
¯Na=∝an}b∇acketle{tnaV∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=−∂Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂βµ a, (A63)
and
U=¯E=∝an}b∇acketle{tE∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ=∂Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β. (A64)
To obtain relations for the fluctuations of these quantities , we first need two results. The
derivative of Eq. (A61) with respect to the inverse temperat ure keeping σ= 0 so that ¯φis
determined by Eq. (A62) gives, just as in the previous analog ous calculation of the chemical
potential functional derivative (A42),
∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂¯φ+V˜G−1(0)∂¯φ
∂β= 0. (A65)
Note that, from (A56),
˜G−1(0) =β2/summationdisplay
a,bea˜Cab(0)eb, (A66)
and
107˜Cab(0) =1
V∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂βµ a∂βµ b(A67)
may be computed directly at ¯φ= 0 with chemical potentials set to values which satisfy
charge neutrality (for ¯φ= 0) after the derivatives have been performed. Thus ˜Cab(0) can be
obtained from the computation of the grand potential βΩ. We may simply write
˜Cab(0) =−∂∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ
∂βµ b=−∂∝an}b∇acketle{tnb∝an}b∇acket∇i}htβ
∂βµ a, (A68)
where the partial derivatives are taken at constant tempera ture or fixed β. In a similar
fashion, the derivative with respect to the inverse tempera ture of the charge neutrality
condition
/summationdisplay
aea∂Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂βµ a= 0 (A69)
produces
/summationdisplay
aea/braceleftBigg∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a+∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂¯φ∂βµ a∂¯φ
∂β/bracerightBigg
= 0. (A70)
We use Eq’s. (A35), (A48), and (A66) to write this as
∂¯φ
∂β=−iβ
V˜G(0)/summationdisplay
aea∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a. (A71)
After the derivatives in the relations above have been taken , we may again assume that the
chemical potentials are chosen to give charge neutrality at ¯φ= 0.
With these results in hand, we can examine the fluctuations of energy and particle
numbers. The energy fluctuations in the grand canonical ense mble are given by
/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
E−¯E/parenrightBig2/angbracketrightbigg
β=−∂
∂β∂Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β
=−∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β2−∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂¯φ∂¯φ
∂β. (A72)
We can make use of Eq. (A65) to write this as
/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
E−¯E/parenrightBig2/angbracketrightbigg
β=−∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β2+∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂¯φ1
V˜G(0)∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂¯φ, (A73)
or alternatively use Eq’s. (A65) and (A71) to write
/angbracketleftbigg/parenleftBig
E−¯E/parenrightBig2/angbracketrightbigg
β=−∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β2−/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
aea∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a/bracketrightBiggβ2
V˜G(0)/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
aea∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a/bracketrightBigg
.(A74)
This latter form may be evaluated at ¯φ= 0 with the chemical potentials chosen to give charge
neutrality after their derivatives have been taken. Thus, t his latter form is determined by the
108quantities calculated for the grand potential βΩ. The energy — particle number correlation
is given by
/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
E−¯E/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBig
β=−∂¯Na
∂β=∂
∂β∂Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂βµ a
=∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a+∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂¯φ∂βµ a∂¯φ
∂β. (A75)
With the use of Eq’s. (A35), (A48), and (A71), this becomes
/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
E−¯E/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBig
β=∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a−/summationdisplay
beb∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ b˜G(0)β2/summationdisplay
c˜Cac(0)ec.(A76)
Again, this result depends only upon quantities involved in the construction of βΩ. Note
that, in view of Eq. (A66), the charge neutrality condition i s obeyed,
/summationdisplay
a/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
E−¯E/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBig
βea= 0. (A77)
Finally, we note that the Fourier transform (A57) evaluated at zero wave number yields the
particle number — particle number correlators,
/angbracketleftBig/parenleftBig
Na−¯Na/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
Nb−¯Nb/parenrightBig/angbracketrightBig
β=V/braceleftBig˜Cab(0)−/bracketleftBig
β/summationdisplay
cec˜Cca(0)/bracketrightBig˜G(0)/bracketleftBig
β/summationdisplay
cec˜Ccb(0)/bracketrightBig/bracerightBig
.(A78)
The results that we have obtained may be used to compute the sp ecific heat at constant
volume. This is simply related to the derivative of the avera ge energy with respect to the
inverse temperature at constant particle numbers,
CV=−β2∂¯E
∂β/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
{¯Na}. (A79)
Thus the chemical potentials must change as the temperature is varied in order to maintain
constant numbers. That is, we have
d¯E=∂¯E
∂βdβ+/summationdisplay
a∂¯E
∂βµ ad(βµa)
=/braceleftBigg∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β2+/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
aea∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a/bracketrightBiggβ2
V˜G(0)/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
aea∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
dβ
+/summationdisplay
a/braceleftBigg∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a−/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
beb∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
β∂βµ b/bracketrightBigg
˜G(0)β2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay
c˜Cac(0)ec/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
d(βµa), (A80)
with the chemical potential changes constrained by
0 =d¯Na=∂¯Na
∂βdβ+/summationdisplay
b∂¯Na
∂βµ bd(βµb)
=−/braceleftBigg∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a−/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
beb∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ b/bracketrightBigg
˜G(0)β2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay
c˜Cac(0)ec/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg
dβ
+/summationdisplay
bV/braceleftBig˜Cab(0)−/bracketleftBig
β/summationdisplay
cec˜Cca(0)/bracketrightBig˜G(0)/bracketleftBig
β/summationdisplay
cec˜Ccb(0)/bracketrightBig/bracerightBig
d(βµb). (A81)
109Introducing the inverse matrix ˜C−1(0),
/summationdisplay
b˜C−1(0)ab˜Cbc(0) =δac, (A82)
which is a symmetric matrix since ||˜Cab(0)||is symmetric, we may rewrite Eq. (A81) as
d(βµa) =1
V/summationdisplay
b˜C−1(0)ab∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ bdβ
−ea/braceleftBigg1
V/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
beb∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ b/bracketrightBigg
˜G(0)β2dβ−˜G(0)β2/summationdisplay
bceb˜Cbc(0)d(βµc)/bracerightBigg
.(A83)
Because of charge neutrality (A77), a change d(βµa) proportional to eadoes not alter
Eq. (A80). Hence
∂¯E
∂β/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
{Na}=∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β2+1
V/summationdisplay
a,b∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ a˜C−1(0)ab∂2Γ(¯φ;µ)
∂β∂βµ b. (A84)
4. Time-Dependent Correlations
We noted in subsection F of section III that although the stat ic two-point potential
correlation function, the zero frequency part of the genera l correlator, describes a Debye
screened potential (except for the very long-distance tail elucidated in section VII), the
non-zero frequency parts of this correlation function are n ot Debye screened. Recalling the
general result (A49):
G−1(k,ωm) =k2+/summationdisplay
a,beaeb˜Cab(k,ωm), (A85)
this lack of Debye screening for ωm∝ne}ationslash= 0 is the statement that, for this case,
k2→0 : ˜Cab(k,ωm)∼k2, (A86)
which implies that G−1(r−r′,ωm) behaves as |r−r′|−1for large |r−r′|. In this section we
shall show how this follows from the conservation of the numb er currents or, equivalently,
from the gauge invariance of the coupling of the basic theory to a set of [( ν+1)-dimensional]
vector potentials.
Number-current correlation functions are generated by cou pling a vector potential
Aa
µ(x)≡(Aa
4(x),Aa(x)) for each particle species a. This is done by augmenting the La-
grangian (3.90) for each basic charged field to read
La=ψ∗
a(r,τ)/braceleftBigg∂
∂τ−Aa
4(r,τ)−1
2ma[∇ −iAa(r,τ)]2−µa−ieaφ(r,τ)/bracerightBigg
ψa(r,τ).(A87)
Connected correlation functions of nspace-time currents Ja
µ(x)≡(na(r,τ),Ja(r,τ)) are
produced by nfunctional derivatives δ/δAa
µ(x) acting on the generating functional W. In
particular, the connected number-density correlation fun ction (A14) is now extended to the
space-time correlation function
110Kµν
ab(x−x′) =δ2W[σ;A]
δAaµ(x)δAbν(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A88)
The corresponding connected, single-particle irreducibl e function is given by the same func-
tional derivatives of the Legendre transform of W, the effective action Γ. This extension of
Eq. (A39) reads
Cµν
ab(x−x′) =−δ2Γ
δAa
µ(x)δAb
ν(x′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (A89)
The actions formed from the extended Lagrangians (A87) are i nvariant under local phase
rotations of the charged fields
ψ∗
a(x)→ψ∗
a(x) exp{−iλa(x)}, ψ a(x)→exp{iλa(x)}ψa(x), (A90)
coupled with the gauge transformations of the external pote ntials
Aa
4(x)→Aa
4(x) +i∂λa
∂τ, Aa
k(x)→Aa
k(x) +∂λa
∂xk. (A91)
The integration measures of the charged field functional int egrals are unchanged by the
phase rotation (A90). Hence the connected generating funct ionalW[A] is invariant under
the gauge transformation (A91). This invariance carries ov er to the effective action Γ[ A]
since the Legendre transformation which relates it to W[A] involves only neutral fields that
are not altered by the phase rotation or gauge transformatio n. In the limit of an infinitesimal
transformation, the gauge invariance gives functional diff erential statements
∂µδ
δAa
µ(x)W[A] = 0 =∂µδ
δAa
µ(x)Γ[A], (A92)
where we have adopted the shorthand notation
∂µ=/parenleftBigg
i∂
∂τ,∂
∂xk/parenrightBigg
. (A93)
Taking additional functional derivatives of Eq’s. (A92) sh ows that any number current cor-
relation function has a transverse form. In particular, one additional functional derivative
yields
∂µKµν
ab(x−x′) = 0 =∂νKµν
ab(x−x′), (A94)
and
∂µCµν
ab(x−x′) = 0 =∂νCµν
ab(x−x′). (A95)
In terms of Fourier components,
−iωm˜C4ν
ab(k,ωm) +kl˜Clν
ab(k,ωm) = 0. (A96)
111We are now in a position to demonstrate that the potential cor relation function at non-
zero frequency has no Debye screening. Three paragraphs ago , we remarked that this
correlator is determined by ˜Cab(k,ωm) =˜C44
ab(k,ωm). Because of rotational invariance,
˜Cl4
ab(k,ωm) =klfab(k2,ωm) and theν= 4 component of the Fourier form (A96) of the
divergence condition becomes
−iωm˜Cab(k,ωm) +k2fab(k2,ωm) = 0. (A97)
This demonstrates the assertion (A86) that ˜Cab(k,ωm)∼k2ask2→0 whenωm∝ne}ationslash= 0 and
thus that there is no Debye screening in the ωm∝ne}ationslash= 0 potential correlation function G(k,ωm).
The fact that, for small k2,˜Cab(k,ωm) =O(k2) whenωm∝ne}ationslash= 0 but ˜Cab(k,0) =O(1) might
appear a bit odd since ˜Cab(k,ωm) is equal to an analytic function of ω,Fab(k2,ω), evaluated
at discrete points on the imaginary axis,55ω=iωm=i2πm/β . Thus one might expect a
uniform behavior in ωwhich would require that ˜Cab(k,0) =O(k2) for smallk2and no Debye
screening. In fact, the behavior of the analytic function Fab(k2,ω) is not uniform in k2when
ωis small. This non-uniform behavior is illustrated by the si mple one-loop contribution
of the charged fields to ˜Cab(k,ωm). To further simplify the result, we also take the ¯ h→
classical limit but with the frequency ωm/¯hkept fixed to obtain
˜Cab(k,ωm) =˜C44
ab(k,ωm) =δab/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)ν1
i(ωm/¯h)−(p·k/ma)k·∂
∂pn0
a(p), (A98)
where
n0
a(p) =gaexp/braceleftBigg
−β/bracketleftBiggp2
2ma−µa/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
(A99)
is the Maxwell-Boltzmann density of particles in momentum s pace. This result is obtained
by taking the indicated limits of Eq. (B40) in the following A ppendix. Taking ωm= 0 gives
˜Cab(k,O) =δab/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)ν1
(−p·k/ma)(−βp·k/ma)n0
a(p)
=δabβn0
a, (A100)
which produces the leading order contribution to the Debye w ave number,
/summationdisplay
abeaeb˜Cab(k,O) =/summationdisplay
aβe2
an0
a=κ2
0, (A101)
yielding for small k2[c.f.Eq. (A85)]
G−1(k,0)≈k2+κ2
0, (A102)
On the other hand, for ωm∝ne}ationslash= 0, the linear term in kin Eq. (A98) vanishes, and expanding
the denominator to first order in ktogether with a partial integration of k·∂
∂pgives the
smallk2limit
55See, for example, the discussion in Problem 4 of Chapter II of Brown [15].
112˜Cab(k,ωm) =δab/parenleftBigg¯h
ωm/parenrightBigg2k2
man0
a. (A103)
The corresponding small k2contribution to the potential correlator produces
G−1(k,ωm)≈k2/bracketleftBigg
1 +¯h2ω2
P
ω2
m/bracketrightBigg
, (A104)
where
ω2
P=/summationdisplay
ae2
an0
a
ma(A105)
is the lowest order contribution to the plasma frequency. Th is is the result (3.97) given in
the text.
To see how the non-uniform behavior of the one-loop correlat or (A98) is in accord with
the conservation (A96) of the number current correlators, w e note that the classical limit of
a one-loop calculation also gives
˜Cl4
ab(k,ωm) =δab/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)νpl
ma1
i(ωm/¯h)−(p·k/ma)k·∂
∂pn0
a(p). (A106)
We see that these contributions to −iωm˜C44
ab(k,ωm) +kl˜Cl4
ab(k,ωm) combine to form the
integral of a total derivative which vanishes, and so the cur rent conservation is confirmed.
We also note the non-uniform limits
˜Cl4
ab(k,0) = 0, (A107)
while forωm∝ne}ationslash= 0,
k2→0 : ˜Cl4
ab(k,ωm) =δabi¯h
ωmn0
a
makl. (A108)
For the sake of completeness, we note that the calculations l eading to Eq. (A50) are
easily generalized to relate the number current correlatio n functions to their single-particle
irreducible counterparts. The result is
˜Kµν
ab(k,ωm) =˜Cµν
ab(k,ωm)−/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay
cec˜C4µ
ca(k,ωm)/bracketrightBig˜G(k,ωm)/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay
cec˜C4ν
cb(k,ωm)/bracketrightBig
.(A109)
We also note that time-reversal and spatial-rotation invar iance together with the current
conservation imply the symmetries
˜Cµν
ab(k,ωm) =˜Cνµ
ab(k,ωm) =˜Cµν
ba(k,ωm), (A110)
and
˜Cµν
ab(k,ωm)∗=˜Cµν
ab(−k,−ωm). (A111)
113APPENDIX B: GREEN’S FUNCTIONS AND DETERMINANTS
The result (3.6) in the text involves a product of path integr als of the form56
Z[V] =/integraldisplay
[dψ∗dψ] exp/braceleftBigg
−/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)ψ∗(r,τ)/bracketleftBigg∂
∂τ−∇2
2m−µ+V(r,τ)/bracketrightBigg
ψ(r,τ)/bracerightBigg
,(B1)
withmone of the masses {ma}andV(r,τ) =−ieφ(r,τ), withethe corresponding charge
ea. When the chemical potential is augmented to contain a spati ally varying part so as to
generate number density correlation functions, its spatia lly varying part will be implicitly
included in the potential V. The field ψ(r,τ) is either periodic (for Bosons) or antiperiodic
(for Fermions) in τwith period β. The external potential V(r,τ) is initially defined in the
interval 0<τ <β , but may be extended to all real τby regarding it as a periodic function
with period β. The functional integral produces an inverse determinant i n the Bose case
and a determinant in the Fermi case,
Z[V] = Det∓1/bracketleftBigg∂
∂τ−∇2
2m−µ+V(r,τ)/bracketrightBigg
. (B2)
In this appendix, we shall show how the determinant Z[V] is related to a sum of ordinary,
single-particle quantum-mechanical amplitudes. We shall then make use of this result to
derive approximate evaluations of Z[V] that become valid in the limit in which the dy-
namics may be treated classically, approximations that are used in the calculations of the
text. These needed results could perhaps be obtained more qu ickly with other methods,
but the development given here hopefully illuminates the ch aracter of the theory and the
intermediate results that are obtained may be useful in othe r contexts.
The determinant can be constructed by integrating its varia tion. The familiar form for
the variation of the determinant gives
δlnZ[V] =∓/integraldisplayβ
0/integraldisplay
(dνr)Gβ(r,τ;r,τ+0)δV(r,τ), (B3)
in which the thermal Green’s function Gβis defined by
/bracketleftBigg∂
∂τ−∇2
2m−µ+V(r,τ)/bracketrightBigg
Gβ(r,τ;r′τ′) =δ(τ−τ′)δ(r−r′), (B4)
together with the boundary conditions that it be periodic fo r Bosons and antiperiodic for
Fermions with a period of β,
Gβ(r,τ+β;r′τ′) =Gβ(r,τ;r′,τ′+β) =±Gβ(r,τ;r′,τ′). (B5)
The coincident time limit used in the variation (B3), in whic hτ′→τfrom above, is needed
to give the proper operator ordering ψ†ψthat represents the density operator.
56We use the notation Z[V] because, when Vis independent of imaginary time τ, this functional
integral is a representation the grand canonical partition function for a gas of particles with no
mutual interactions but moving in the external potential V.
114To construct the thermal Green’s function, it is convenient to introduce the quantum-
mechanical transformation function in imaginary time ∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ|r′,τ′∝an}b∇acket∇i}htwhose dynamics is gov-
erned by the external potential. It is defined by
/bracketleftBigg∂
∂τ−∇2
2m+V(r,τ)/bracketrightBigg
∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ|r′,τ′∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht= 0, (B6)
together with the boundary condition
∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ|r′,τ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=δ(r−r′). (B7)
We now assert that the thermal Green’s function in the interv al−β≤τ,τ′≤βhas the
construction (akin to an image construction in electrostat ics)
Gβ(r,τ;r′,τ′) =θ(τ−τ′)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ|r′,τ′∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht+∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)neµ(τ−τ′+nβ)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ+nβ|r′,τ′∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht, (B8)
whereθ(τ) is the unit step function. Proof: Since
Gβ(r,τ′+0;r′,τ′)−Gβ(r,τ′−0;r′,τ′) =∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ′|r′,τ′∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=δ(r−r′), (B9)
Eq. (B6) implies that the inhomogeneous Green’s function eq uation (B4) is obeyed. And
the construction is easily seen to satisfy the periodicity c ondition (B5).
The coincident time limit of the Green’s function which ente rs into the variation (B3)
thus has the representation
Gβ(r,τ;r,τ+0) =∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)nenβµ∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ+nβ|r,τ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht. (B10)
Thus
δlnZ[V] =−∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)n+1enβµ/integraldisplayβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ+nβ|r,τ∝an}b∇acket∇i}htδV(r,τ). (B11)
Since the potential is periodic,
V(r,τ+kβ) =V(r,τ), (B12)
so is the transformation function in the presence of this pot ential,
∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ+kβ+nβ|r,τ+kβ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ+nβ|r,τ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht. (B13)
Hence, since we may add nequal copies if we divide by n, we may write
δlnZ[V] =−∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)n+1enβµ
n/integraldisplaynβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ+nβ|r,τ∝an}b∇acket∇i}htδV(r,τ). (B14)
To integrate this variational statement, we introduce a com plete set of intermediate states
and write
115∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ+nβ|r,τ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/integraldisplay
(dν¯ r)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ+nβ|¯ r,nβ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acketle{t¯ r,nβ|r,τ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht, (B15)
and again use the periodicity of the external potential to wr ite
∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ+nβ|¯ r,nβ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ|¯ r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht. (B16)
Hence, the variational statement may be expressed as
δlnZ[V] =−∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)n+1enβµ
n/integraldisplaynβ
0dτ/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dν¯ r)∝an}b∇acketle{t¯ r,nβ|r,τ∝an}b∇acket∇i}htδV(r,τ)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,τ|¯ r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht
=∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)n+1enβµ
n/integraldisplay
(dν¯ r)δ∝an}b∇acketle{t¯ r,nβ|¯ r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht, (B17)
where the second equality recognizes that this is just the va riation of the transformation
function when the potential is varied. Hence,
lnZ[V] =∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)n+1enβµ
n/integraldisplay
(dνr)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht, (B18)
which expresses the determinant in terms of an expansion in p owersnof the fugacity z=eβµ
whose coefficients are traces of single-particle transforma tion functions over the imaginary
time interval (0 ,nβ). To confirm that the correct integration constant has been s ecured,
we note that when the external potential V(r,τ) vanishes, this form immediately gives the
free-particle partition function since in this case
∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht0=/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)νe−nβp2/2m, (B19)
and so
lnZ[V] =∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)n+1
nenβµ/integraldisplay
(dνr)/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)νe−nβp2/2m
=∓/integraldisplay(dνr)(dνp)
(2π)νln/bracketleftBig
1∓eβµe−βp2/2m/bracketrightBig
, (B20)
which is the well-known result for the quantum-statistical free-particle partition function.
The single-particle transformation functions that appear here have a convenient path
integral representation
/integraldisplay
(dνr)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/integraldisplay
[dr] exp/braceleftBigg
−/integraldisplaynβ
0dτ/bracketleftBiggm
2dr
dτ·dr
dτ+V(r(τ),τ)/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
. (B21)
Here the functional integral is over all paths that begin and end at position r,r(0) =r=
r(nβ), with rthen integrated over the large spatial volume V. In other words, the integral
is over all paths which are periodic with period nβ¯h. In the limit in which the quantum-
mechanical aspects of the particle’s dynamics is not import ant, the classical limit for the
dynamics which is equivalent to the large mass mlimit, the dominant path is just the
constant path r(τ) =rso that, in this limit,
116/integraldisplay
(dνr)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht0/integraldisplay
(dνr) exp/braceleftBigg
−n/integraldisplayβ
0dτ V(r,τ)/bracerightBigg
, (B22)
where the overall constant is determined by the free-partic le limit (B19), and the periodicity
of the potential has been used to write the integral from 0 to nβasntimes the integral
from 0 toβ. Placing this approximation in the general result (B18) giv es
lnZ[V] =∓/integraldisplay(dνr)(dνp)
(2π)νln/bracketleftBigg
1∓exp/braceleftBigg
βµ−βp2
2m−/integraldisplayβ
0dτ V(r,τ)/bracerightBigg/bracketrightBigg
. (B23)
In this expression, the quantum Bose-Einstein or Fermi-Dir ac statistics are treated exactly,
but the dynamics is treated entirely classically. In the lim it of classical statistics, −βµ≫1,
and only the first term in the expansion of the logarithm is sig nificant. Replacing Vby−ieφ
and remembering the definition of the bare particle density p uts this classical limit in the
form
lnZ[V] =/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0exp/braceleftBigg
ie/integraldisplayβ
0dτ φ(r,τ)/bracerightBigg
. (B24)
This is the formula used in the text and derived there so as to o btain the correct Coulomb
classical partition function. Here we have obtained it as th e classical limit of the many-
particle, quantum mechanical system.
To find sub-leading corrections to the large mass limit, it is convenient first to derive an
exact series representation. The representation is obtain ed by placing the Fourier transform
representation of the potential
V(r,τ) =/integraldisplay(dνk)
(2π)ν˜V(k,τ)eik·r(B25)
in the exponent of the functional integral (B21) and expandi ng the exponential in powers of
the potential. Interchanging the orders of integration the n yields
/integraldisplay
(dνr)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht
=∞/summationdisplay
l=0(−1)l
l!/integraldisplaynβ
0dτ1/integraldisplay(dνk1)
(2π)ν˜V(k1,τ1)···/integraldisplaynβ
0dτl/integraldisplay(dνkl)
(2π)ν˜V(kl,τl)zn[F],(B26)
in which
zn[F] =/integraldisplay
[dr] exp/braceleftBigg
−/integraldisplaynβ
0dτ/bracketleftBiggm
2dr
dτ·dr
dτ+F(τ)·r(τ)/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
, (B27)
with
F(τ) =−il/summationdisplay
a=1kaδ(τ−τa). (B28)
The remaining path integral (B27) describes free-particle motion (in imaginary time) be-
tween “kicks” introduced by the impulsive force F(τ). To evaluate this path integral explic-
itly, we write the path r(τ) as a constant mean position rplus a deviation whose integral
117over the interval (0 ,nβ) vanishes. The integration measure factors into an ordinar y integral
over the mean position ( dνr) and a constrained measure [ dr]′which denotes integration over
the space of periodic functions with vanishing mean. The int egration over the mean position
produces a delta-function,
/integraldisplay
(dνr) exp/braceleftBigg
il/summationdisplay
a=1ka·r/bracerightBigg
= (2π)νδ/parenleftBiggl/summationdisplay
a=1ka/parenrightBigg
, (B29)
reflecting the spatial translational invariance of the theo ry. Hence the time integral of the
impulsive force must vanish,
/integraldisplaynβ
0dτF(τ) = 0. (B30)
The remaining functional integral can be evaluated by ‘comp leting the square’. This is
done with the aid of a Green’s function fn(τ−τ′) defined in the space of periodic functions
with vanishing mean. We take this function to be dimensionle ss so that it obeys
nβd2
dτ2fn(τ) =δ(τ)−(nβ)−1, (B31)
together with the periodicity condition
fn(τ+nβ) =fn(τ). (B32)
The solution, when −nβ≤τ≤nβ, is
fn(τ) =|τ|
2nβ/parenleftBigg
1−|τ|
nβ/parenrightBigg
, (B33)
up to an additive constant. For the formulas below, it is conv enient to choose the particular
solution (B33) which vanishes at τ= 0. The square is completed by shifting the functional
integration variable to ∆ r(τ)≡r(τ)−¯ r(τ), where
¯ r(τ)≡nβ
m/integraldisplaynβ
0dτ′fn(τ−τ′)F(τ′). (B34)
Since the Green’s function fn(τ−τ′) is periodic, ¯ r(τ) is periodic, and since r(τ) is periodic,
so is ∆ r(τ). Moreover, since fn(τ−τ′) obeys the Green’s function equation (B31) and F(τ′)
has a vanishing mean [Eq. (B30)],
md2
dτ2¯ r(τ) =F(τ). (B35)
Hence we may make the shift and freely integrate by parts with no boundary contributions
to evaluate the remaining functional integral and obtain
zn[F] = (2π)νδ/parenleftbigg
i/integraldisplaynβ
0dτF(τ)/parenrightbigg
exp/braceleftBigg
−nβ
2m/integraldisplaynβ
0dτdτ′fn(τ−τ′)F(τ)·F(τ′)/bracerightBigg
zn[0].(B36)
118The final factor zn[0] is a free particle path integral in the absence of any extern al force.
This is just a constant whose precise value is of no concern si nce the overall normalization
will be trivially determined a posteriori by requiring that our result exhibit the correct free
particle limit when the potential Vvanishes. With these results in hand, we now see that
the series (B26) may be written as
/integraldisplay
(dνr)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht
=/integraldisplay
(dνr)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht0∞/summationdisplay
l=0(−1)l
l!/integraldisplaynβ
0dτ1/integraldisplay(dνk1)
(2π)νeik1·r˜V(k1,τ1)···
/integraldisplaynβ
0dτl/integraldisplay(dνkl)
(2π)νeikn·r˜V(kl,τl) exp/braceleftBiggnβ
ml/summationdisplay
b>a=1ka·kbfn(τa−τb)/bracerightBigg
. (B37)
To illustrate the working of our results and to make contact w ith more familiar forms, we
examine the two-point, charge density – charge density corr elation function. This function
is given by the double functional derivative of Eq. (B37) wit h respect to ˜Vwith ˜Vthen
taken to vanish, the result summed over nas in Eq. (B18), and multiplied by the square of
the charge of the particle which we denote simply as e2. We also take the Fourier transform
in the imaginary time as well as space. In view of the time-tra nslation invariance of the
result, this Fourier transform is given by one imaginary tim e integral over the interval 0 ,nβ
with a factor exp {iωτ}while the other imaginary time integral just provides a fact or ofnβ,
with the factor of βremoved by the Fourier transform conventional normalizati on. Thus
the correlation function is given by
Π(k,ω) =e2∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)n+1enβµ
n∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht0n/integraldisplaynβ
0dτ eiωτexp/braceleftBigg
−nβk2
mfn(τ)/bracerightBigg
. (B38)
In order to perform the sum and the Fourier transform, we reca ll Eq’s. (B19) and (B33) to
write
∝an}b∇acketle{tr,nβ|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht0exp/braceleftBigg
−nβk2
mfn(τ)/bracerightBigg
=/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)νexp/braceleftBigg
−nβp2
2m/bracerightBigg
exp/braceleftBigg
−k2
2mτ/parenleftBigg
1−τ
nβ/parenrightBigg/bracerightBigg
=/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)νexp/braceleftBigg
−nβp2
2m/bracerightBigg
exp/braceleftbigg
−τ
2m/parenleftBig
k2−2k·p/parenrightBig/bracerightbigg
,
(B39)
where the second equality57follows by making the translation p→p−τk/nβ. Since the
frequencyωis a positive or negative integer multiple of 2 π/β, we find that
57This later form is the result obtained by using operator meth ods to evaluate
Tre−nβp2/2meik·r(τ)e−ik·r(0),
where r(τ) =r(0)−ipτ/mis the operator free-particle motion in imaginary time.
119Π(k,ω) =e2∞/summationdisplay
n=1(±1)n+1/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)νenβµexp/braceleftBigg
−nβp2
2m/bracerightBigg1−exp/braceleftBig
−nβ
2m(k2−2p·k)/bracerightBig
(1/2m) (k2−2p·k)−iω
=e2/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)νF±(p−k/2)−F±(p+k/2)
p·k/m−iω, (B40)
where
F±(p) =/bracketleftBigg
exp/braceleftBigg
βp2
2m−βµ/bracerightBigg
∓1/bracketrightBigg−1
(B41)
are the free-particle Bose or Fermi distributions, and we ha ve made a further translation
p→ −p+k/2. This is the familiar form for the density-density correla tor in the ‘random
phase’ or single-ring approximation.58
Let us now restrict the discussion to the limit of classical, Maxwell-Boltzmann statistics
where
Π(k,ω) =e2/integraldisplay(dνp)
(2π)νeβµexp/braceleftBigg
−β
2m/parenleftBig
p2+k2/4/parenrightBig/bracerightBigg2 sinh/parenleftBigβp·k
2m/parenrightBig
p·k/m−iω. (B42)
Taking the frequency to vanish and expanding in powers of the wave number gives
Π(k,0)≃e2βn0/bracketleftBigg
1−βk2
12m/bracketrightBigg
≃κ2
d/bracketleftBigg
1−λ2k2
24π/bracketrightBigg
. (B43)
Here in the second line we have written κ2
d=e2βn0, which is the contribution to the squared
Debye wave number of a particle of generic charge eand density n0, andλ2= 2π¯h2β/mfor
the corresponding thermal wave length. We have explicitly i ncluded the factor of ¯ h2here
to emphasize that this is a quantum correction. On the other h and, expanding in the wave
number with the frequency non-zero gives
Π(k,ω)≃e2n0
mk2
ω2=ω2
pk2
ω2=κ2
dλ2k2
2π(β¯hω)2, (B44)
in which we have identified the generic contribution to the sq uared plasma frequency ω2
p=
e2n0/m. The plasma frequency is, of course, purely a classical quan tity. However, the
discrete frequencies that enter here are the quantum freque ncies that are positive or negative
integers times 2 π/¯hβ, withβtaken to have the units of inverse energy.
The original form of the classical statistics limit is
Π(k,ω) =e2n0/integraldisplayβ
0eiωτexp/braceleftBigg
−λ2k2
2πf(τ)/bracerightBigg
, (B45)
58See, for example, Eq. (30.9) and the discussion about it, in F etter and Walecka [16].
120where we now write
f(τ) =f1(τ) =|τ|
2β/parenleftBigg
1−|τ|
β/parenrightBigg
. (B46)
Since this is periodic in τwith period β, it has the Fourier series representation
f(τ) =∞/summationdisplay
m=−∞fme−iωmτ, (B47)
withωm= 2πm/β . Expanding Eq. (B45) to order k2and comparing with the results above,
we conclude that
fm=/braceleftBigg
−1/(2πm)2, m∝ne}ationslash= 0;
1/12, m = 0.(B48)
These coefficients are, of course, the same as those obtained d irectly from the Fourier trans-
formation of f(τ).
We now return to the heavy mass limit, or equivalently the cla ssical limit ¯ h→0, which
takesλ2→0. In this limit, the final exponential in Eq. (B37) is set to on e, and the resulting
series may be trivially summed to reproduce the previous res ult (B22). The first correction to
this limit may be obtained by expanding the exact result (B37 ) to first order in λ2. Although
this is easily done for an arbitrary term nin the fugacity expansion zn, we shall need only
then= 1 result corresponding to the classical limit of Maxwell-B oltzmann statistics. Hence
we now restrict the discussion to n= 1 and write f1(τ) =f(τ) as before. For a term which
began with lpotentials, there are l(l−1)/2 such first-order correction terms. Hence, the 1 /l!
factor becomes1
2/(l−2)!, and the remaining l−2 factors of the potential again sum to an
exponential form, yielding
/integraldisplay
(dνr)eβµ∝an}b∇acketle{tr,β|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0exp/braceleftBigg
−/integraldisplayβ
0dτV(r,τ)/bracerightBigg
×/bracketleftBigg
1−λ2
4π/integraldisplayβ
0dτ1dτ2f(τ1−τ2)∇V(r,τ1)· ∇V(r,τ2) +O(λ4)/bracketrightBigg
.(B49)
We may now apply this result to obtain the corresponding effec tive action interaction
terms. In the first line of Eq. (B49), we replace n0byn0(r) to account for possible spatially
varying chemical potentials and replace −Vbyieφ. In the second line which involves the
gradient of the potential, we must take −V→ieφ+µ. Using the Fourier decomposition
φ(r,τ) =∞/summationdisplay
m=−∞φme−iωmτ, (B50)
the Fourier series representation for f(τ) given above, and summing over the various particle
species yields the action terms S0+Sintwhere
S0=−/summationdisplay
a/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a(r)eiβeaφ0(r)(B51)
is the classical action, while
121Sint=/summationdisplay
aβ2λ2
a
48π/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a(r)eiβeaφ0(r)/braceleftBig
∇[µ(r) +ieaφ0(r)]/bracerightBig2
+/summationdisplay
aβ2λ2
ae2
a
16π3/summationdisplay
m/ne}ationslash=01
m2/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a(r)eiβeaφ0(r)∇φm(r)· ∇φ−m(r). (B52)
APPENDIX C: REQUIRED INTEGRALS
1. Coulomb Integrals
The pure Coulomb potential for unit charges in νdimensions may be expressed as the
Fourier transform
Vν(r) =/integraldisplay(dνk)
(2π)νeik·r
k2. (C1)
To evaluate the potential explicitly, it is convenient to us e the representation
1
k2=/integraldisplay∞
0dse−sk2, (C2)
interchange the sandkintegrations, and perform the resulting Gaussian kintegral. Writing
s= 1/tconverts the result to the standard form of a Γ function, and y ields
Vν(r) =Γ/parenleftBig
ν
2−1/parenrightBig
4πν/2/parenleftbigg1
r2/parenrightbiggν
2−1
. (C3)
a. Powers of V
The same procedure may be used to evaluate Fourier transform s of powers of the Coulomb
potential,
C(n)
ν(k)≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)e−ik·rVν(r)n. (C4)
We insert the form (C3) for the Coulomb potential, use
r−a= Γ(a
2)−1/integraldisplay∞
0dssa
2−1e−sr2, (C5)
to represent the resulting power of r, interchange integrals and evaluate the Gaussian r
integral. The variable change s= 1/tonce again produces the standard representation of
the Γ function, yielding
C(n)
ν(k) =Γ/parenleftBig
ν
2−1/parenrightBign
Γ/parenleftBig
n(ν
2−1)/parenrightBigΓ/parenleftBig
n−ν
2(n−1)/parenrightBig
(4π)n/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBiggν
2(n−1)−n
. (C6)
122To obtain the ν→3 limit of this result for various powers of the potential n, we make
use of
Γ(z) Γ(1−z) =π
sinπz, (C7)
(from which follows Γ(1 /2) =√π), use
ψ(z)≡d
dzln Γ(z), (C8)
withψ(1) = −γ, whereγ= 0.57721···is Euler’s constant, and Legendre’s duplication
formula
Γ(2z) = 22z−1π−1/2Γ(z) Γ(z+ 1/2), (C9)
(which shows that ψ(1/2) =−γ−ln 4, a result that will also be needed). Using these
ingredients, we find that C(2m)
ν(k) has a smooth limit as ν→3,
C(2m)
3(k) =(−1)m+1
4/parenleftbigg1
4π/parenrightbiggm√π
Γ(2m−1)/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBiggm−3
2
. (C10)
In particular, we will need
C(4)
3(k) =−1
(16π)2√
k2. (C11)
For odd powers (greater than 1) there is a simple pole in 3 −νarising from the last gamma
function in (C6), and one finds that
C(2m+3)
ν (k) = (−1)m/parenleftbigg1
4π/parenrightbiggm+2/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBiggm+(ν−3)(m+1)1
Γ(2m+ 3)
×/braceleftbigg1
3−ν+ (3
2+m)/bracketleftBig
γ+ ln 4 +ψ(3
2+m)/bracketrightBig
+ (1+m)ψ(1+m) +O(ν−3)/bracerightbigg
.
(C12)
In particular,
C(3)
ν(k) =1
2 (4π)2/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBiggν−3/braceleftbigg1
3−ν+ 3−γ+O(ν−3)/bracerightbigg
, (C13)
C(5)
ν(k) =k2
4! (4π)4/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBigg2(ν−3)/braceleftbigg
−1
3−ν−26
3+ 2γ+O(ν−3)/bracerightbigg
. (C14)
1232. Debye Integrals
The Debye potential for a point charge in νspatial dimensions has the Fourier transform
representation
Gν(r) =/integraldisplay(dνk)
(2π)νeik·r
k2+κ2. (C15)
Writing the denominator as
1
k2+κ2=/integraldisplay∞
0dse−(k2+κ2)s, (C16)
interchanging integrals, performing the resulting Gaussi an integral in k, and scaling the re-
sulting parameter integration variable by s=t(r/2κ) expresses Gν(r) in terms of a standard
representation for a modified Bessel function,
Gν(r) =1
(2π)ν/2/parenleftbiggκ
r/parenrightbiggν
2−11
2/integraldisplay∞
0dtt−ν/2exp/braceleftbigg
−κr
2/parenleftbigg
t+1
t/parenrightbigg/bracerightbigg
=1
(2π)ν/2/parenleftbiggκ
r/parenrightbiggν
2−1
Kν
2−1(κr). (C17)
The power series development of the modified Bessel function yields
Gν(r) =1
2 (2π)ν/2∞/summationdisplay
m=0(−1)m
m!/parenleftbiggκr
2/parenrightbigg2m/bracketleftBigg/parenleftbigg2
r2/parenrightbiggν
2−1
Γ(−m+ν
2−1)
+/parenleftBiggκ2
2/parenrightBiggν
2−1
Γ(−m−ν
2+ 1)/bracketrightBigg
, (C18)
which displays the singular and regular terms for small r.
a. Powers of G
LetD(n)
ν(k) denote the Fourier transform of the n-th power of the Debye potential,
D(n)
ν(k)≡/integraldisplay
(dνr)e−ik·rGν(r)n. (C19)
The density-density correlation function at l-loop order requires D(n)
ν(k) fornup tol+1,
and the k= 0 limits, D(n)
ν(0) forn≤l+1, are needed for the l-loop free energy.
D(1)
ν(k) is just the Fourier transformed Debye potential,
D(1)
ν(k) =˜G(k) =1
k2+κ2, (C20)
whileD(2)
ν(k) may be evaluated directly in three dimensions (and was alre ady computed in
section 2),
124D(2)
3(k) =1
4π/integraldisplay∞
2κdµ
k2+µ2=1
4πkarctank
2κ. (C21)
It has the vanishing wave number limit
D(2)
3(0) =1
8πκ. (C22)
ForD(n)
ν(k) withn≥3, one must work in ν <3 dimensions and separate out the terms
which diverge as ν→3, terms which arise from the small rregion of the Fourier transform
(C19). Since the Coulomb potential in νdimensions, Vν(r), is theκ→0 limit ofGν(r), the
short-distance limit of the expansion (C18) may be written a s
Gν(r) =Vν(r)/bracketleftBig
1 +O/parenleftBig
(κr)2/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig
+κν−2
(4π)ν/2Γ(1−ν
2)/bracketleftBig
1 +O/parenleftBig
(κr)2/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig
. (C23)
To compute D(3)
ν(k), we note that as r→0,Vν(r)∼(1/r)ν−2, and so [Gν(r)3−Vν(r)3] is
less singular than 1 /r3whenν→3. Hence the Fourier transform of this difference may be
evaluated directly in ν= 3 dimensions, and we may write
D(3)
ν(k) =/integraldisplay
(d3r)e−ik·r[G3(r)3−V3(r)3] +C(3)
ν(k) +O(ν−3), (C24)
whereC(3)
ν(k) is the Fourier transform of the cube of the Coulomb potentia l previously
evaluated in Eq. (C13). To compute the integral of the differe nce of the cube of the Debye
and Coulomb potentials, we represent
G3(r)3=e−3κr
(4πr)3=1
(4π)2/integraldisplay∞
3κdµ(µ−3κ)e−µr
4πr, (C25)
and use its κ→0 limit to represent V3(r)3. Placing an upper bound µ=Mon the these
parametric integrals, with the limit M→ ∞ reserved until the end of the computation,
allows separate Fourier transforms to be taken, with the res ult, using Eq. (C13), that
D(3)
ν(k) =1
(4π)2lim
M→∞/braceleftBigg/integraldisplayM
3κdµµ−3κ
k2+µ2−/integraldisplayM
0dµµ
k2+µ2/bracerightBigg
+1
(4π)2/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBiggν−31
2/braceleftbigg1
3−ν+ 3−γ+O(ν−3)/bracerightbigg
. (C26)
To keep the result in a dispersion relation or spectral form, we write
µ
k2+µ2=1
µ−1
µk2
k2+µ2(C27)
in the first (Debye) integral and add the part
/integraldisplayM
3κdµ
µ= ln/parenleftbiggM
3κ/parenrightbigg
(C28)
to the −ln(M/k) produced by the second (Coulomb) integral. The limit M→ ∞ can then
be taken, and these two pieces reduce to1
2ln(k2/9κ2). Since in the ν→3 limit
125/parenleftBiggk2
4π/parenrightBiggν−31
3−ν=/parenleftBiggκ2
4π/parenrightBiggν−31
3−ν+ ln/parenleftBiggκ2
k2/parenrightBigg
, (C29)
the ln(k2/κ2) terms cancel, as they must, and there remains
D(3)
ν(k) =1
(4π)2/parenleftBigg9κ2
4π/parenrightBiggν−31
2/braceleftBigg1
3−ν+ 3−γ−2/integraldisplay∞
3κdµ/parenleftBiggk2
µ+ 3κ/parenrightBigg1
k2+µ2+O(ν−3)/bracerightbigg
.
(C30)
We have written an overall factor of ( κ2)ν−3so as to keep the dimensions correct when
ν−3∝ne}ationslash= 0 although this factor may be replaced by unity when it multi plies regular terms.
It is a simple matter to evaluate the final integral and obtain the explicit result
D(3)
ν(k) =1
(4π)2/parenleftBigg9κ2
4π/parenrightBiggν−31
2/braceleftBigg1
3−ν+ 3−γ−6κ
karctank
3κ−ln/bracketleftbigg
1 +k2
9κ2/bracketrightbigg
+O(ν−3)/bracerightBigg
,
(C31)
whose k→0 limit is equal to
D(3)
ν(0) =1
(4π)2/parenleftBigg9κ2
4π/parenrightBiggν−31
2/braceleftbigg1
3−ν+ 1−γ+O(ν−3)/bracerightbigg
. (C32)
The computation of D(4)
ν(k) may be performed in a similar fashion. Again referring to
Eq. (C23), it is easy to check that
Gν(r)4−Vν(r)4−4Vν(r)3κν−2
(4π)ν/2Γ(1−ν
2) (C33)
is less singular than 1 /r3whenν→3. Hence,
D(4)
ν(k) =C(4)
ν(k) + 4C(3)
ν(k)κν−2
(4π)ν/2Γ(1−ν
2)
+/integraldisplay
(d3r)e−ik·r1
(4π)4/bracketleftBigge−4κr
r4−1
r4+4κ
r3/bracketrightBigg
+O(ν−3). (C34)
As before, we write the terms in the square brackets in the Fou rier transform integral as
parametric integrals over e−µr/rand interchange integrals to obtain
D(4)
ν(k) =1
(4π)3lim
M→∞/braceleftBigg1
2/integraldisplayM
4κdµ(µ−4κ)2
k2+µ2−1
2/integraldisplayM
0dµµ(µ−8κ)
k2+µ2/bracerightBigg
+C(4)
ν(k) + 4C(3)
ν(k)κν−2
(4π)ν/2Γ(1−ν
2). (C35)
With the aid of the results (C11) and (C13) for C(4)
ν(k) andC(3)
ν(k), it is a straightforward
matter to compute D(4)
ν(k). Since we need only D(4)
ν(0), we shall simply state that
D(4)
ν(0) =−2κ
(4π)3/parenleftBiggκ2
4π/parenrightBigg3(ν−3)/2/braceleftbigg1
3−ν+ 4−3
2γ−5 ln2/bracerightbigg
. (C36)
126b. Convolution integrals
The Fourier transforms
D(lmn)
ν(k) =/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr1)e−ik·rGν(r−r1)lGν(r1)mGν(r)n, (C37)
and
D(klmn)
ν(k) =/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr1)(dνr2)e−ik·rGν(r−r1)kGν(r1−r2)lGν(r2)mGν(r)n,(C38)
were defined in the text in Eq’s. (4.24) and (4.25). The two-lo op correlators require the
evaluation of D(111)(k),D(211)(k), andD(1211)(k), while the three-loop free energy involves
D(211)(0),D(221)(0), andD(2121)(0). All of these quantities are well defined and may be
evaluated directly in ν= 3 dimensions.
The Fourier transform representation of D(111)(k) reads
D(111)
3(k) =/integraldisplay(d3q)
(2π)3[q2+κ2]−2[(k−q)2+κ2]−1. (C39)
This is just the derivative with respect to the (squared) Deb ye wave number of the Fourier
transform of the square of the Debye Green’s function, D(2)
3(k),
D(111)
3(k) =−1
2dD(2)
3(k)
dκ2=1
8πk1
k2+ 4κ2. (C40)
The other needed integrals are most easily evaluated using t he spectral representation
for the square of a Debye propagator in three dimensions,
G3(r)2=/integraldisplay∞
2κdµ
4πe−µr
4πr=/integraldisplay(d3k)
(2π)3/integraldisplay∞
2κdµ
4πeik·r
k2+µ2. (C41)
Inserting this form into the definitions of D(211)
3(k) andD(1211)
3(k), Fourier transforming, and
interchanging orders of integration produces
D(211)
3(k) = ∆( k;κ,κ), (C42)
and
D(1211)
3(k) =−∂
∂m2∆(k;κ,m)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
m=κ, (C43)
in which
∆(k;κ,m)≡/integraldisplay∞
2κdµ
4π/integraldisplay(d3q)
(2π)31
(q2+µ2)1
(q2+m2)1
(k−q)2+κ2. (C44)
The partial fraction decomposition
1
q2+µ21
q2+m2=1
µ2−m2/bracketleftBigg1
q2+m2−1
q2+µ2/bracketrightBigg
(C45)
127yields two convolution integrals
/integraldisplay(d3q)
(2π)3/bracketleftBigg1
q2+m2−1
q2+µ2/bracketrightBigg1
(k−q)2+κ2(C46)
which just represent the Fourier transform of the difference of two products in coordinate
space,
/bracketleftBigge−mr
4πr−e−µr
4πr/bracketrightBigge−κr
4πr=/integraldisplayκ+µ
κ+mdu1
4πe−µ1r
4πr. (C47)
Hence
∆(k;κ,m) =1
(4π)2/integraldisplay∞
2κdµ
µ2−m2/integraldisplayκ+µ
κ+mdµ1
µ2
1+k2. (C48)
Using
1
µ2−m2=−1
2md
dµln/bracketleftBiggµ+m
µ−m/bracketrightBigg
, (C49)
and integrating by parts gives
∆(k;κ,m) =1
(4π)21
2m/braceleftBigg
ln/bracketleftbigg2κ+m
2κ−m/bracketrightbigg/integraldisplay3κ
κ+mdµ
k2+µ2+/integraldisplay∞
3κdµ
k2+µ2ln/bracketleftBiggµ+m−κ
µ−m−κ/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
.(C50)
This result yields
D(211)
3(k) =1
(4π)21
2κ/braceleftBigg
ln 3/integraldisplay3κ
2κdµ
k2+µ2+/integraldisplay∞
3κdµ
k2+µ2ln/bracketleftBiggµ
µ−2κ/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
, (C51)
and
D(1211)
3(k) =1
(4π)21
4κ2/braceleftBiggln 3
k2+ 4κ2−4
3κ/integraldisplay3κ
2κdµ
k2+µ2−/integraldisplay∞
3κdµ
k2+µ2/bracketleftBigg1
µ+1
µ−2κ/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
+1
2κ2D(211)
3(k). (C52)
Simple integrations give the k= 0 limits
D(121)
3(0) =D(211)
3(0) =1
(4π)21
6κ2, (C53)
and
D(1211)
3(0) =1
(4π)21
18κ4, (C54)
where in Eq. (C53) we have noted that at zero wave number D(121)
3(0) =D(211)
3(0). Again,
we have placed the results (C51) and (C52) in dispersion rela tion form. They may also be
expressed in terms of elementary functions and Euler’s dilo garithm
128Li2(−z)≡ −/integraldisplayz
0dt
tln(1 +t). (C55)
The dilogarithm contributions are exhibited by changing th e dispersion relation integration
variable to s= 1/µ, and then making partial fraction decompositions and furth er linear
transformations on the sintegration variable. The results are:
D(211)
3(k) =1
(4π)21
4kκ/braceleftBigg
iLi2/parenleftbigg
−2 +ik
κ/parenrightbigg
−iLi2/parenleftbigg
−2−ik
κ/parenrightbigg
+iLi2/parenleftbigg
−ik
3κ/parenrightbigg
−iLi2/parenleftbiggik
3κ/parenrightbigg
+ 2 ln3 arctank
2κ/bracerightBigg
, (C56)
and
D(1211)
3(k) =1
(4π)21
8kκ3/braceleftBigg
−8
3arctank
2κ+/parenleftBigg8
3+4κ2
k2+ 4κ2/parenrightBigg
arctank
3κ
−2κ
k/parenleftbiggk2+ 2κ2
k2+ 4κ2/parenrightbigg
ln/bracketleftbigg
1 +k2
9κ2/bracketrightbigg/bracerightBigg
+1
2κ2D(211)
3(k). (C57)
The same techniques may be used to compute D(221)(0) andD(2121)(0). It is easy to see
that
D(221)
3(0) =T(κ,κ), (C58)
and
D(2121)
3(0) =−∂
∂m2T(κ,m)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
m=κ, (C59)
where
T(κ,m)≡/integraldisplay∞
2κdµ1
4π/integraldisplay∞
2κdµ2
4π/integraldisplay(d3q)
(2π)31
(q2+µ2
1)(q2+µ2
2)(q2+m2). (C60)
The three-dimensional qintegral can be readily evaluated using spherical coordina tes. Since
the radial integral is even in q, it may be extended to run over −∞< q < +∞if it is
multiplied by 1 /2. The resulting integral over an infinite range is trivially evaluated by
contour integration. A little algebra puts the result in the form
T(κ,m) =1
(4π)3/integraldisplay∞
2κdµ1dµ21
(µ1+m)(µ2+m)(µ1+µ2). (C61)
The change of variables
µ1= (m+ 2κ)(y−1−1)x+ 2κ, µ 2= (m+ 2κ)(y−1−1)(1−x) + 2κ, (C62)
converts the integration region to 0 <x,y < 1. Thexintegration is easily performed with
the result that
T(κ,m) =2
(4π)3/integraldisplay1
0dy1
(2κ+m) +y(2κ−m)1
1 +yln1
y. (C63)
129A partial fraction decomposition, integration by parts, an d a simple scale change for the
integration variable in one of the terms gives the final form
T(κ,m) =1
(4π)31
m/bracketleftbigg
Li2/parenleftbigg
−2κ−m
2κ+m/parenrightbigg
+ Li 2(−1)/bracketrightbigg
. (C64)
Hence, using Li 2(−1) =π2/12, we have
D(221)
3(0) =1
(4π)31
κ/bracketleftBig
Li2/parenleftBig
−1
3/parenrightBig
+π2
12/bracketrightBig
, (C65)
and
D(2121)
3(0) =1
(4π)31
2κ3/bracketleftBig
Li2/parenleftBig
−1
3/parenrightBig
+π2
12+4
3ln3
4/bracketrightBig
. (C66)
c. Even worse integrals
The final integral needed for the three loop free energy is the “Mercedes” integral
DM=/integraldisplay
(d3r)(d3r′)(d3r′′)G3(r)G3(r′)G3(r′′)G3(r−r′)G3(r′−r′′)G3(r′′−r), (C67a)
≡CM
(4πκ)3. (C67b)
The pure number CMmay be shown [14] to be given by
CM=1√
2/integraldisplay1
0dx√
3−x2/bracketleftBigg
ln3
4+ ln3 +x
2 +x−x2
4−x2ln4
2 +x+x
2 +xln3 +x
3/bracketrightBigg
(C68a)
= 0.0217376 ···. (C68b)
The final integral needed for the two-loop self energy is
DJ(k) =/integraldisplay
(d3r)(d3r1)(d3r2)e−ik·rG3(r−r1)G3(r−r2)G3(r1−r2)G3(r1)G3(r2) (C69a)
≡J(k/κ)
(4π)2κ4. (C69b)
This integral is related to the discontinuity of the Mercede s integral if the screening length in
one of the Debye potentials is analytically continued. It is not (so far as we know) expressible
in terms of standard functions. However, Rajantie [14] has s hown that it may be reduced
to the one-dimensional form
J(z) =z−2
√
z2+ 3/integraldisplay1
0dx√
z2+ 4−x2/braceleftBigg2z
2 +x/bracketleftbigg
arctanz
2 +x−arctanz
2/bracketrightbigg
+ ln/bracketleftBiggz2+ (2 +x)2
(2 +x)2/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
.
(C70)
For smallz,
J(z) =1
36−2z2
243+O(z4). (C71)
130APPENDIX D: QUANTUM COULOMB SU(1,1)SYMMETRY EXPLOITED
As discussed in the text, the ultraviolet divergences of cla ssical two-loop order quantities
are tamed by quantum fluctuations. The value of the first induc ed coupling which must
be added to the classical theory can be inferred from the comp utation of the quantum-
mechanical, two-particle, finite-temperature correlatio n function. With the center-of-mass
motion factored out as done in the text [Eq. (3.67)], the Four ier transform of the direct
contribution to the relative motion correlation for partic le speciesa,breads
F+(k) =/integraldisplay
(d3r)e−ik·r∝an}b∇acketle{tr|e−βH|r∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht. (D1)
while the exchange contribution is
F−(k) =/integraldisplay
(d3r)e−ik·r∝an}b∇acketle{tr|e−βH|−r∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht. (D2)
Here
H=p2
2mab+eaeb
4πr, (D3)
is the Hamiltonian for the relative motion, with
1
mab=1
ma+1
mb(D4)
the reduced mass of the two particles. To temporarily simpli fy the notation, we shall write
mab=mandeaeb/4π=e2so that the Hamiltonian reads
H=p2
2m+e2
r. (D5)
Placing the factor of e−ik·rinside the matrix element in Eq. (D1) and treating the coordi nate
ras an operator allows one to express the correlation functio n as a quantum-mechanical
trace,
F+(k) = Tre−βHe−ik·r. (D6)
For the exchange contribution (D2), we may write |−r∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=P |r∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht, where Pis the parity
operator, so that
F−(k) = Tr Pe−βHe−ik·r. (D7)
The evaluation of F−(k) closely parallels that of F+(k). To keep the presentation as simple as
possible we will focus on F+(k), and then summarize the analogous results for the exchange
contribution F−(k) at the end of this appendix.
It proves convenient to write the correlation function F+(k) as a contour integral involv-
ing the Green’s function
G(k,E) = Tr1
H−Ee−ik·r; (D8)
131E
FIG. 20. Integration contour for F+(k). The Green’s function G(k,E) has a cut along the
positive real axis and, in the case of an attractive potentia l, bound state poles at En=−me4/(2n2)
forn= 1, 2, ... .
namely59
F+(k) =/integraldisplay
CdE
2πie−βEG(k,E), (D9)
where the contour C, shown in Fig. 20, wraps clockwise about t he cut along the positive real
Eaxis and also encircles all the bound-state poles which occu r whene2<0, corresponding
to an attractive Coulomb potential. We shall first compute G(k,E) when the energy Eis
real and sufficiently negative so that Elies to the left of all singularities, and only later
analytically continue to energies lying on the contour C. Th us at first we write
E=−γ2
2m, (D10)
withγreal and further restricted by γ >|e2|mwhen the potential is attractive. In view of
the spherical symmetry of the problem, we may average over th e orientations of kand use
G(k,E) = Tr1
H−Esinkr
kr. (D11)
In view of the cyclic symmetry of the trace, this may be expres sed as
G(k,E) =1
kTr1√r(H−E)√rsinkr. (D12)
59This is slightly cavalier. Although the trace defining F+(k) in (D6) is well-defined, the corre-
sponding trace in (D8) has a high-energy divergence in two or more dimensions. This divergence,
which merely reflects the growth of the density of states at hi gh energy, is independent of the
chargee2. Therefore, we should really subtract the e2→0 limit inside the trace defining G(k,E)
and writeF+(k) =F0
+(k)+ ∆F+(k), whereF0
+(k) =λ−3
ab(2π)3δ(k) is thee2= 0 limit, so that the
contour integral (D9) becomes a representation just for the difference ∆ F+(k). But to keep the
notation as simple as possible, we will not indicate this sub traction explicitly.
1321. Coulomb su(1,1)Symmetry
This latter form permits a remarkably simple evaluation by g roup theory.60To do this,
we first define the Hermitian operator
J0=1
2γ√rp2√r+γ
2r, (D13)
so that
√r(H−E)√r=γ
mJ0+e2. (D14)
The√rtransformation converts the energy eigenvalue problem to a coupling eigenvalue
problem. To see this, we consider the Coulomb bound states |nlm∝an}b∇acket∇i}htwhich have the fixed
energy −γ2/2mthat corresponds to (mutually attractive) charges ±enobeying the Bohr
formula
γ2
2m=e4
nm
2n2, (D15)
or
e2
n=nγ
m. (D16)
Hence,
J01√r|nlm∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=m
γ√r/bracketleftBiggp2
2m+γ2
2m/bracketrightBigg
|nlm∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht
=m
γ√re2
n
r|nlm∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht
=n1√r|nlm∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht, (D17)
and so the eigenvalues j0ofJ0are the positive integers,
j0=n, n = 1,2, ... . (D18)
For a fixed principal quantum number n,lranges over 0 ≥l≥n−1 andmin turn varies
through −l≥m≥+l. Thus the degeneracy of the n’th eigenvalue is
60Thissu(1,1) symmetry is a subgroup of a larger so(4,2) “dynamical” symmetry of the hydro-
gen which was noted many years ago by Barut, Fronsdal, Nambu, and others [17]. The explicit
construction used here of the generators in terms of canonic al variables was, to our knowledge, first
done by one of the authors (LSB) and G. J. Maclay and appears in the latter’s Ph.D. dissertation
[18]. Although we know of no other references, this construc tion may well appear elsewhere in the
literature.
133n−1/summationdisplay
l=0(2l+ 1) =n2. (D19)
To exploit the latent group properties, we introduce the Her mitian dilation operator
which is conveniently labeled as
J2=1
2(r·p+p·r), (D20)
and denote the commutator of J0andJ2asJ1(times −i),
[J0,J2] =−iJ1. (D21)
Since
i[p,J2] =p, i [r,J2] =−r, (D22)
J1differs from J0merely by a sign change,
J1=1
2γ√rp2√r−γ
2r. (D23)
Moreover, a further commutation with J2restores the original signs,
[J1,J2] =−iJ0. (D24)
And a straight forward computation of the final commutator sh ows that the algebra closes,
[J0,J1] =iJ2. (D25)
The three Pauli spin matrices σkobey thesu(2) Lie algebra
[σk,σl] = 2iǫklmσm. (D26)
Thus, as far as the commutation relations go, we have the corr espondences
J0↔1
2σ3,J1↔i
2σ1,J2↔i
2σ2, (D27)
which identifies the commutators of the Jawith the Lie algebra su(1,1). This, of course,
corresponds to a non-compact group which has infinite-dimen sional irreducible representa-
tions.
With these results in hand, we return to our computation. Sin ce
J0− J1=γr, (D28)
the sine function in Eq. (D12) may be written in terms of group generators. Using this and
the expression (D14) for the denominator in Eq. (D12), we obt ain
G(k,E) =m
2iγkTr1
J0+ (me2/γ)/bracketleftBig
eik(J0−J1)/γ−e−ik(J0−J1)/γ/bracketrightBig
. (D29)
134Representing the denominator in terms of the integral of an e xponential now places the
result in terms of the trace of the product of group elements:
G(k,E) =m
2iγk/integraldisplay∞
0dse−(me2/γ)sTre−sJ0/bracketleftBig
eik(J0−J1)/γ−e−ik(J0−J1)/γ/bracketrightBig
. (D30)
The products of two group elements may be expressed as a third group element. Since
the trace is invariant under similarity transformations, t his third group element may be
“rotated” into one involving only the generator J0,
Tre−sJ0e±ik(J0−J1)/γ= Tre−s±J0. (D31)
The required parameters s±will be determined momentarily. Evaluating the trace using the
known eigenvalues j0=nofJ0with multiplicity n2yields
Tre−s±J0=∞/summationdisplay
n=1n2e−s±n=/parenleftBigg∂
∂s±/parenrightBigg21
es±−1
=1
4coshs±/2
sinh3s±/2. (D32)
Therefore
G(k,E) =m
8iγk/integraldisplay∞
0dse−(me2/γ)s/bracketleftBiggcoshs+/2
sinh3s+/2−coshs−/2
sinh3s−/2/bracketrightBigg
. (D33)
In view of the algebraic isomorphism between the group gener ators and the Pauli ma-
trices, the parameters s±may be found by replacing the generators in Eq. (D31) by the
equivalent 2 ×2 Pauli matrices. Hence,
2 coshs±/2 = trexp/braceleftbigg
−s±1
2σ3/bracerightbigg
= trexp/braceleftbigg
−s1
2σ3/bracerightbigg
exp/braceleftBigg
±ik
2γ(σ3−iσ1)/bracerightBigg
= trexp/braceleftbigg
−s1
2σ3/bracerightbigg/bracketleftBigg
1±ik
2γ(σ3−iσ1)/bracketrightBigg
=e−s/2/bracketleftBigg
1±ik
2γ/bracketrightBigg
+e+s/2/bracketleftBigg
1∓ik
2γ/bracketrightBigg
. (D34)
We write
/bracketleftBigg
1 +ik
2γ/bracketrightBigg
=eiθ/2/radicalBigg
1 +k2
4γ2(D35)
so that Eq. (D34) becomes
coshs±/2 =/radicalBigg
1 +k2
4γ2cosh(s∓iθ)/2. (D36)
135bht
iθ
θ-is
FIG. 21. Integration contours for G(k,E).
A short calculation yields
sinh2s±/2 =/parenleftBigg
1 +k2
4γ2/parenrightBigg/bracketleftBig
sinh2(s∓iθ)/2 + sin2θ/2/bracketrightBig
. (D37)
For later use, note that
θ= 2 arctan( k/2γ) =k/γ+O(k3). (D38)
Hence
G(k,E) =m
8iγk1
1 + (k/2γ)2/integraldisplay∞
0dse−(me2/γ)s/braceleftBiggcosh(s−iθ)/2
[sinh2(s−iθ)/2 + sin2θ/2]3/2
−cosh(s+iθ)/2
[sinh2(s+iθ)/2 + sin2θ/2]3/2/bracerightBigg
.(D39)
As noted in footnote 59, all along we should have subtracted t hee2= 0 contribution
fromG(k,E). In the integral representation above, this simply means r eplacinge−(me2/γ)s
by [e−(me2/γ)s−1]. As anticipated, this subtraction removes what would oth erwise be a
singularity in the integral at s= 0.
2. Direct Contribution
To compute the integral (D39) (with the e2=0 piece removed), it is convenient to deform
the path of integration into the contours shown in Fig. 21. Fo r the first term in braces in the
integrand, the contour is taken to run first over a portion of t he imaginary axis, s=iφ,0<
φ<θ, and then to continue along the line parallel to the real axis ,s→s+iθ,0<s< ∞.
The integration contour for the second term in the braces is t he complex conjugate of the
first. These contour deformations produce
G(k,E) =m
4γk1
1 + (k/2γ)2/bracketleftBig
J/parenleftBig
θ,me2
γ/parenrightBig
−sin/parenleftBig
me2
γθ/parenrightBig
I/parenleftBig
θ,me2
γ/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig
, (D40)
where
136J(θ,z) =/integraldisplayθ
0dφ[coszφ−1]cos(θ−φ)/2
[sin2θ/2−sin2(θ−φ)/2]3/2, (D41)
and
I(θ,z) =/integraldisplay∞
0dse−zs coshs/2
[sinh2s/2 + sin2θ/2]3/2. (D42)
Although this general result may be of interest in other cont exts, here we are interested
in the small k2behavior, since this determines the induced couplings in th e effective theory.
In the first integral J(θ,z), it is convenient to make the variable change φ=θ(1−x) and
write the integral as
J(θ,z) =θ/integraldisplay1
0dx[coszθ(1−x)−1]cosθx/2
[sin2θ/2−sin2θx/2]3/2. (D43)
Recalling that θ≃k/γ, we may expand the trigonometric functions in the integrand in
Eq. (D43) and keep only the leading terms to obtain
J(θ,z) =−4z2/integraldisplay1
0dx(1−x)1/2
(1 +x)3/2+O(θ2). (D44)
Writing (1 + x)−3/2=−2(d/dx)(1 +x)−1/2and integrating by parts produces an end-point
contribution and an integral made trivial by the substituti onx= sinχ, and one finds that
J(θ,z) =−z2(8−2π) [1 +O(θ2)]. (D45)
IfI(θ,z) is expanded in powers of z, the first three terms are singular as θ→0, while all
remaining terms have finite θ→0 limits. It is convenient to separate the singular terms by
writing
I(θ,z) =I0(θ)−zI1(θ) +1
2z2I2(θ) +¯I(θ,z), (D46)
where
Ik(θ)≡/integraldisplay∞
0dsskcoshs/2
[sinh2s/2 + sin2θ/2]3/2, (D47)
and
¯I(θ,z)≡/integraldisplay∞
0ds/bracketleftBig
e−zs−1 +zs−1
2z2s2/bracketrightBig coshs/2
[sinh2s/2 + sin2θ/2]3/2. (D48)
Sinced(sinhs/2) = (ds/2) coshs/2, the change of variable sinh s/2 = sin(θ/2) tanχmakes
the integral I0(θ) elementary,
I0(θ) =2
sin2θ/2/integraldisplayπ/2
0dχcosχ=2
sin2θ/2=8
θ2+2
3+O(θ2). (D49)
To evaluate I1(θ) we write
137I1(θ) =/integraldisplay∞
0ds8s
[s2+θ2]3/2+/integraldisplay∞
0dss/parenleftBiggcoshs/2
[sinh2s/2 + sin2θ/2]3/2−8
[s2+θ2]3/2/parenrightBigg
.(D50)
The first integral, which is easy to evaluate, contains the pi ece which is singular as θ→0,
while the second integral is finite as θ→0 and may be evaluated directly at θ= 0. Therefore,
I1(θ) =8
θ+/integraldisplay∞
0ds/parenleftBigg
scoshs/2
sinh3s/2−8
s2/parenrightBigg
+O(θ)
=8
θ−/parenleftBiggs
sinh2s/2+ 2coshs/2
sinhs/2−8
s/parenrightBigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle∞
0+O(θ)
=8
θ−2 +O(θ). (D51)
A similar approach may be used for I2(θ) if one first splits the integral into the contributions
froms<1 ands>1,
I2(θ) =/integraldisplay1
0ds8s2
[s2+θ2]3/2+/integraldisplay1
0dss2/parenleftBiggcoshs/2
[sinh2s/2 + sin2θ/2]3/2−8
[s2+θ2]3/2/parenrightBigg
+/integraldisplay∞
1dss2 coshs/2
[sinh2s/2 + sin2θ/2]3/2
=−8(1 + lnθ/2) +/integraldisplay1
0ds/parenleftBigg
s2coshs/2
sinh3s/2−8
s/parenrightBigg
+/integraldisplay∞
1dss2coshs/2
sinh3s/2+O(θ)
=−8(1 + lnθ/2) + lim
ǫ→0/bracketleftBigg
8 lnǫ+/parenleftBigg
8 ln sinhs/2−s2
sinh2s/2−4scoshs/2
sinhs/2/parenrightBigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle∞
ǫ/bracketrightBigg
+O(θ)
= 4−8 lnθ/2 +O(θ). (D52)
The final integral ¯I(θ,z) is non-singular as θ→0, and so we may simply set θequal to zero
and then integrate-by-parts twice,
¯I(0,z) =−/integraldisplay∞
0ds/bracketleftBig
e−zs−1 +zs−1
2z2s2/bracketrightBigd
ds1
sinh2s/2
=−z/integraldisplay∞
0ds/bracketleftBig
e−zs−1 +zs/bracketrightBig1
sinh2s/2
= 4z/integraldisplay∞
0ds/bracketleftBig
e−zs−1 +zs/bracketrightBigd
ds1
es−1
= 4z2/integraldisplay∞
0dse−zs−1
es−1. (D53)
The denominator may be expanded in a geometric series and the resultingsintegrals per-
formed to give
¯I(0,z) =−4z3∞/summationdisplay
l=11
l(l+z). (D54)
Using
138ψ(z+1) +γ=z∞/summationdisplay
l=11
l(l+z), (D55)
whereψ(z) is the logarithmic derivative of the gamma function and γis Euler’s constant,
yields the closed-form result
¯I(0,z) =−4z2[ψ(z+1) +γ]. (D56)
This form may be used to make contact with the literature on qu antum Coulomb corrections
[4,5]. A power series expansion in zis obtained if the denominator in the sum (D54) is
expanded in powers of zand the order of the resulting double sum interchanged. This
process gives
¯I(0,z) = 4z2∞/summationdisplay
n=1(−z)nζ(n+1), (D57)
where
ζ(n) =∞/summationdisplay
l=11
ln(D58)
is the Riemann ζfunction.
Assembling the various pieces contributing to the Green’s f unctionG(k,E) and inserting
θ= (k/γ)−1
12(k/γ)3+O(k/γ)5(D59)
produces
G(k,E) =m/braceleftBigg
−2z
k2+π
2z2
γk+1
γ2/bracketleftBiggz
6−z2
2−z3ln/parenleftbigg2γ
k/parenrightbigg
−z3
6−z
4¯I(0,z)/bracketrightBigg
+O(k)/bracerightBigg
,(D60)
wherez=me2/γ. This result is to be inserted into the contour integral (D9) relating
G(k,E) to the thermal correlator F+(k) which, with the e2= 0 subtraction made explicit,
reads
∆F+(k)≡F+(k)−F0
+(k) =/integraldisplay
CdE
2πie−βEG(k,E). (D61)
Inserting the power series representation (D57) for ¯I(0,z) and recalling that γ2=−2mE,
the required contour integrals are easily performed using H ankel’s formula61
1
Γ(α)=/integraldisplay
Cdt
2πi(−t)−αe−t, (D62)
and its derivative with respect to α,
61See, for example, p. 245 of Whittaker and Watson [19].
139ψ(α)
Γ(α)=/integraldisplay
Cdt
2πiln(−t) (−t)−αe−t. (D63)
The result, neglecting O(k) contributions, is
∆F+(k) =/parenleftbiggm
2πβ/parenrightbigg3/2/braceleftBigg
−4πβe2
k2+π2β2e4
k
+πβ3e6
3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftbiggβk2
2m/parenrightbigg
+γ−3 +1
βme4+f/parenleftBigg/radicalBigg
βme4
2π/parenrightBigg/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
,(D64)
where
f(y)≡ −3
4y−3√π
2∞/summationdisplay
n=1/parenleftBig
−√πy/parenrightBignζ(n+1)
Γ((n+5)/2). (D65)
Returning to our rationalized units with e2→eaeb/4π, replacing the mass parameter
by the reduced mass, m→mab, and writing the result in terms of the thermal wavelength
corresponding to the reduced mass
λab=/parenleftBigg2πβ
mab/parenrightBigg1/2
(D66)
gives
∆F+(k) =λ−3
ab/braceleftBigg
−βeaeb
k2+(βeaeb)2
16k
+/parenleftbiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightbigg3π
3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftbiggλ2
abk2
4π/parenrightbigg
+γ−3 +8πλ2
ab
(βeaeb)2+f/parenleftbiggβeaeb
4πλab/parenrightbigg/bracketrightBigg
+O(k)/bracerightBigg
.(D67)
Evaluating f(y) using the power series representation (D65) is appropriat e ifβeaeb/λab
is order one or smaller. But if βeaeb/λabis large, which corresponds to the formal m→ ∞
limit, one needs the asymptotic form of f(y) for large argument. The result differs depending
on whether the Coulomb interactions are attractive or repul sive. Consider the repulsive case
first, where z=me2/√
−2mEis positive on the negative real Eaxis. In this case ¯I(0,z)
has no poles on the negative real Eaxis, which reflects the absence of bound states for
repulsive potentials. Thus, for repulsive interactions th e contour integral (D9) only wraps
about the positive Eaxis, and ¯I(0,z) appears with |argz|< π. Hence the large mlimit
may be obtained by using the large zasymptotic behavior of the ψfunction,
ψ(z+ 1)∼lnz+1
2z−∞/summationdisplay
n=1B2n
2nz2n, (|argz|<π) (D68)
whereB2nare the Bernoulli numbers, to write the asymptotic form of Eq . (D56) as
¯I(0,z)∼ −4z2/parenleftBigg
lnz+γ+1
2z−∞/summationdisplay
n=1B2n
2nz2n/parenrightBigg
.(|argz|<π) (D69)
140Using this form for ¯I(0,z) and re-evaluating the contour integral (D61) yields the as ymptotic
expansion for large positive argument,
f(y)∼2 ln(2√πy) + 3γ−8
3−3
2√π∞/summationdisplay
n=1(−1)nB2n
2nπny2nΓ(n−3
2). (D70)
Evaluating the first term in the sum with B2= 1/6 and Γ( −1/2) =−2√πyields
f(y) = 2 ln(2√πy) + 3γ−8
3−1
4πy2+O(1/y4). (D71)
To obtain the corresponding limit in the attractive case, no te that Eq. (D65) gives
f(y)−f(−y) =−3
2y+ 3π∞/summationdisplay
m=0ζ(2m+ 2)
(m+ 2)!πmy2m+1. (D72)
We insert the definition (D58) of the ζfunction and interchange the order of the summa-
tions. The sum over mnow produces an exponential with its first two expansion coeffi cients
removed, and we obtain
f(y)−f(−y) =−3
2y+3
πy3∞/summationdisplay
n=1n2/bracketleftBigg
exp/braceleftBiggπy2
n2/bracerightBigg
−1−πy2
n2/bracketrightBigg
. (D73)
Asy→ −∞ , the first term in the sum, which corresponds to the lowest bou nd state
contribution, dominates,
f(y)∼3
πy3exp/braceleftBig
πy2/bracerightBig
, (D74)
with exponentially small corrections.
3. Exchange Contribution
The same approach may be used to evaluate the exchange contri bution
F−(k) = Tr Pe−βHe−ik·r. (D75)
Since the parity operator Pcommutes with all the su(1,1) group generators, all the previous
formulas hold for this exchange term with the trivial change of an insertion of Pin the trace
defining the Green’s function. To evaluate the final trace
TrPe−s±J0,
we note that the |nlm∝an}b∇acket∇i}htbasis which diagonalizes J0as shown in Eq. (D17) has the familiar
parity assignment of the hydrogen atom states,
P |nlm∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=|nlm∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(−1)l. (D76)
Hence, we have essentially the same evaluation of the trace a s before except that the previous
degeneracy factor (D19) is replaced by
141n−1/summationdisplay
l=0(−1)l(2l+ 1) = −(−1)nn. (D77)
Thus we now have
TrPe−s±J0=−∞/summationdisplay
n=1(−1)nne−s±n
=1
4 cosh2s±/2, (D78)
and Eq. (D33) is replaced by
G−(k,E) =m
8iγk/integraldisplay∞
0dse−(me2/γ)s/bracketleftBigg1
cosh2s+/2−1
cosh2s−/2/bracketrightBigg
. (D79)
We are interested in the (finite) k= 0 limit. Recalling Eq. (D36) and that θ∼k/γ, this
is given by
G−(0,E) =m
8γ2/integraldisplay∞
0dse−(me2/γ)slim
θ→01
iθ/bracketleftBigg1
cosh2(s−iθ)/2−1
cosh2(s+iθ)/2/bracketrightBigg
,
=−m
4γ2/integraldisplay∞
0dse−(me2/γ)sd
ds1
cosh2s/2. (D80)
Expressing the hyperbolic cosine in terms of exponentials a nd performing two partial inte-
grations produces
G−(0,E) =m
γ2h/parenleftbiggme2
γ/parenrightbigg
(D81)
with
h(z) =1
4−z
2+z2/integraldisplay∞
0dse−zs1
es+ 1. (D82)
Expanding the denominator and performing the sintegration gives
h(z) =1
4−z
2+z2
2∞/summationdisplay
l=1/braceleftBigg1
l+ (z−1)/2−1
l+z/2/bracerightBigg
. (D83)
Adding and subtracting 1 /lin the sum, combining denominators, and referring to the rep -
resentation (D55), identifies the sum as the difference of two ψfunctions, and yields the
closed form result
h(z) =1
4−z
2+z2
2/bracketleftBigg
ψ/parenleftBiggz+2
2/parenrightBigg
−ψ/parenleftBiggz+1
2/parenrightBigg/bracketrightBigg
. (D84)
Expanding the denominators in Eq. (D83) in powers of zand using
∞/summationdisplay
l=1(−1)l+1
lz=/bracketleftBig
1−21−z/bracketrightBig
ζ(z) (D85)
142gives the useful power series expansion
h(z) =1
4−z
2+z2∞/summationdisplay
n=0(−z)n(1−2−n)ζ(n+1). (D86)
Here then= 0 member of the sum is to be understood as containing
lim
z→1/bracketleftBig
1−21−z/bracketrightBig
ζ(z) =∞/summationdisplay
l=1(−1)l+1
l= ln 2. (D87)
Inserting this series into the contour integral
F−(0) =/integraldisplay
CdE
2πie−βEG−(0,E), (D88)
and again making use of Hankel’s formula (D62) produces
F−(0) =/parenleftbiggm
2πβ/parenrightbigg3/2
β3e6π
3˜f/parenleftBigg/radicalBigg
βme4
2π/parenrightBigg
, (D89)
where
˜f(y) =3
8πy3−3
2πy2+3 ln2
2y−3√π
2∞/summationdisplay
n=0/parenleftBig
−√πy/parenrightBign/bracketleftbigg
1−1
21+n/bracketrightbiggζ(n+2)
Γ((n+5)/2). (D90)
To obtain the behavior for the case of strong repulsion, that is, the large y2=βme4/2
limit, we return to the integral expression (D82) for h(z). Writing
1
es+ 1=1
2−1
2tanhs
2, (D91)
performing simple integrals, and rescaling the integratio n variable casts this integral repre-
sentation in the form
h(z) =−1
2/integraldisplay∞
0due−u/bracketleftbigg
ztanh/parenleftbiggu
2z/parenrightbigg
−u
2/bracketrightbigg
. (D92)
This result shows explicitly that h(z) is an even function of z=me2/γ. WritingE=p2/2m
setsγ=√
−2mE=ip, with no problem with the sign of isince only even functions of γ
appear. And, again because only even functions of pappear, we may replace the contour
integral (D88) in the Eplane by a contour integral in the pplane having the exactly the
same contour. Thus
F−(0) =−/integraldisplay
Cdp
2πi1
pe−βp2/2mh/parenleftBiggme2
ip/parenrightBigg
. (D93)
Introducing the integral representation (D92) into this co ntour integral, interchanging the
integration order, and rescaling the contour integration v ariable by writing p= 2me2ζ/u
yields
143F−(0) =1
4/integraldisplay∞
0duue−u/integraldisplay
Cdζ
2πi1
ζexp/braceleftBig
−2βme4ζ2/u2/bracerightBig/bracketleftBiggtanζ
ζ−1/bracketrightBigg
. (D94)
The integrand of the contour integral has no pole at ζ= 0 since the quantity in the square
brackets vanishes there. Thus the only singularities of the integrand come from the factor
in square brackets, which has a series of simple poles at odd i nteger multiples of π/2 with
residue −1. Since these poles are encircled in a negative, clockwise s ense, we obtain
F−(0) =1
4/integraldisplay∞
0duue−u∞/summationdisplay
n=0/bracketleftBigg2
(2n+1)π/bracketrightBigg2
exp/braceleftBig
−βme4(2n+1)2π2/2u2/bracerightBig
. (D95)
The leading asymptotic behavior is obtained by evaluating t heuintegral, term-by-term,
using the method of steepest descents. Only the n= 0 term of the sum is relevant, since
the remaining terms are exponentially smaller. Writing the result in terms of the function
˜f(y) defined in Eq. (D89) with y2=βme4/2πgives
˜f(y)∼3
y3π3/integraldisplay∞
0duue−uexp/braceleftBig
−y2π3/u2/bracerightBig
, (D96)
whose steepest descent evaluation yields
˜f(y) =2√
3
y2πexp/braceleftbigg
−3π
2/parenleftBig
2y2/parenrightBig1/3/bracerightbigg/bracketleftBigg
1 +17
18π1
(2y2)1/3+···/bracketrightBigg
. (D97)
Since the exchange term involves interactions of a single pa rticle type, the reduced mass
mappearing in the above formulae is ma/2 for species a. Reverting to our rationalized units
gives
F−(0) =λ−3
aa3
π/parenleftbiggβe2
a
4π/parenrightbigg3˜f/parenleftbiggβe2
a
4πλaa/parenrightbigg
, (D98)
whereλaa=√
2λa. Note that here the argument of ˜f(y) is always positive.
APPENDIX E: FIRST QUANTUM CORRECTION TO CLASSICAL
ONE-COMPONENT PLASMA
Here we shall derive the leading, order ¯ h2, quantum correction to the N-particle canon-
ical partition function of the classical, one-component pl asma. This result appears in the
literature [Eq. (24) of [20]], but we will give a self-contai ned pedagogical treatment. To do
so, it is convenient first to examine the path integral repres entation of the single-particle
partition function previously given in Eq. (B21), namely
/integraldisplay
(d3r)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,β|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/integraldisplay
[dr] exp/braceleftBigg
−1
¯h/integraldisplay¯hβ
0dτ/bracketleftBiggm
2dr
dτ·dr
dτ+V(r(τ))/bracketrightBigg/bracerightBigg
. (E1)
We have explicitly displayed the factors of ¯ hwhich appear when βandτhave their con-
ventional units of inverse energy and time, respectively. W e state again that the functional
144integral is over all paths which are periodic with period β¯h. It is therefore convenient to use
a Fourier series representation for the path,
r(τ) =r+ξ(τ), (E2)
in which
ξ(τ) =∞/summationdisplay
n=−∞
n/negationslash=0ξnexp/braceleftBigg
−2πinτ
¯hβ/bracerightBigg
(E3)
contains the non-zero frequency fluctuations of the path abo ut its mean position r. As we
shall see, the size of the fluctuations ξ(τ) are of order ¯ h. Since the (imaginary) time average
of these fluctuations vanish, the leading quantum-mechanic al correction appears in
/integraldisplay
(d3r)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,β|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=/integraldisplay
(d3r) exp{−βV(r)}/integraldisplay
[dξ] exp
−βm
2∞/summationdisplay
n=−∞
n/negationslash=0/parenleftBigg2πn
¯hβ/parenrightBigg2
ξn·ξ−n
×
1−β∞/summationdisplay
n=−∞
n/negationslash=0ξk
nξl
−n∇k∇lV(r) +O(ξ4)
.(E4)
The path integral over the fluctuations defines a correlator w hich is just the inverse of the
matrix defining the quadratic form in the exponential,
∝an}b∇acketle{tξk
nξl
−n′∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=δn,n′δkl1
βm/parenleftBigg¯hβ
2πn/parenrightBigg2
. (E5)
Using
∞/summationdisplay
n=−∞
n/negationslash=01
2n2=ζ(2) =π2
6, (E6)
one immediately finds
/integraldisplay
(d3r)∝an}b∇acketle{tr,β|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=∝an}b∇acketle{tr,β|r,0∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht0/integraldisplay
(d3r) exp{−βV(r)}/braceleftBigg
1−β2¯h2
24m∇2V(r) +O(¯h4)/bracerightBigg
.(E7)
In other words, to O(¯h2), the effect of quantum fluctuations is equivalent to a shift i n the
potential energy V(r) appearing in the classical partition function by
δV(r) =β¯h2
24m∇2V(r). (E8)
As a check on the result (E7), we note that a partial integrati on of one of the gradients in
the∇2term, together with the identification λ2= 2π¯h2β/mand other minor notational
changes, places this result in precisely the form of the first line of Eq. (B52).
This result is easily extended to the case of the canonical pa rtition function for N
particles. This case is represented by a path integral over t he variables ra(τ), where
a= 1,2,···, N,
145ZN=/integraldisplay/productdisplay
a[dra] exp
−1
¯h/integraldisplay¯hβ
0dτ
m
2/summationdisplay
adra
dτ·dra
dτ+1
2/summationdisplay
a/ne}ationslash=bV(ra(τ)−rb(τ))
.(E9)
The leading quantum, order ¯ h2, corrections come from the quadratic fluctuations in the
coordinates ra(τ) andrb(τ) in each of the potential terms. Expanding these terms out fr om
the exponential is performed in a compact fashion if the N-particle number densities are
introduced,
n(r) =N/summationdisplay
a=1δ(r−ra), (E10)
along with the canonical two-particle correlator
KN(r−r′) =/angbracketleftbigg/summationdisplay
a/ne}ationslash=bδ(r−ra)δ(r−rb)/angbracketrightbigg
=/angbracketleftBig
n(r)n(r′)−δ(r−r′)n(r)/angbracketrightBig
. (E11)
With this notation, the change in the N-particle canonical partition function ZNfor a general
variation in the interparticle potential is given by
δlnZN=−β
2/integraldisplay
(d3r)(d3r′)KN(r−r′)δV(r−r′). (E12)
Thus, in view of the previous one-particle result (E8), but k eeping in mind that both the
coordinates in the potential undergo fluctuations, we see th at the leading quantum correction
is given by
δlnZN=−β
2/integraldisplay
(d3r)(d3r′)KN(r−r′)β¯h2
12m∇2V(r−r′). (E13)
Taking account of translational invariance, which gives an overall factor of the system volume
V, and remembering the definition −βF= lnZNof the Helmholtz free energy F, we have
δF=β¯h2
24mV/integraldisplay
(d3r)KN(r)∇2V(r). (E14)
This general result may be applied to a one-component plasma in the presence of a
uniform neutralizing background charge density [since a st rictly classical limit exists in this
special case where the charge carriers all have a common sign of their charge]. However, one
must be careful to properly handle the effect of the neutraliz ing background charge density
before taking the thermodynamic limit. The easiest way to do so is to regard the interaction
potential for the one-component plasma as the µ→0 limit of the regularized potential
V(r) =e2/parenleftBigge−µr
4πr−1
Vµ2/parenrightBigg
. (E15)
The integral of this potential over the large volume Vof the system vanishes, reflecting
that a proper subtraction of the uniform background charge d ensity has been performed.
[Equivalently, this amounts to using a regularized Coulomb potentiale−µr/(4πr) with a total
charge density of e[n(r)−¯n], where ¯n=N/Vis the fixed average particle density.]
146Now using
− ∇2V(r) =e2/parenleftBigg
δ(r)−µ2e−µr
4πr/parenrightBigg
, (E16)
Eq. (E14) becomes
δF=β¯h2e2
24mV/bracketleftBigg
−KN(0) + lim
µ→0µ2/integraldisplay
(d3r)KN(r)e−µr
4πr/bracketrightBigg
. (E17)
Because of the singularity of the Coulomb potential when r→0, the two-particle correlation
KN(r) vanishes as r→0,
KN(r)∝exp{−βV(r)} →0 asr→0, (E18)
and therefore the first term in Eq. (E17) identically vanishe s. On the other hand, at large
separations, the number densities are not correlated, and s o
KN(r)→/parenleftbiggN
V/parenrightbigg2
= ¯n2asr→ ∞. (E19)
For infinitesimal µ, the integral in the second term of Eq. (E17) is dominated by a rbitrarily
large distances, and hence one may simply replace KN(r) in the integrand by its asymptotic
value of ¯n2. When multiplied by µ2, the resulting error one is making in the short distance
part of the integral has no affect on the µ→0 limit. Consequently,
δF=β¯h2e2
24mV¯n2lim
µ→0µ2/integraldisplay
(d3r)e−µr
4πr
=β¯h2e2
24mV¯n2. (E20)
Finally, the pressure is given by p=−∂F/∂VwithNandβfixed. Thus, since V¯n2=
N2/V, we find that the first quantum correction to the pressure of cl assical one-component
plasma is given by
δ/parenleftBiggβp
n/parenrightBigg
=β¯h2
24mβe2¯n. (E21)
Recalling the definitions κ2=βe2n,g=βe2κ/4π,λ2
ee= 4πβ¯h2/m, andηee=βe2/(4πλee),
we may rewrite this result as
δ/parenleftBiggβp
n/parenrightBigg
=g2β¯h2
24m/parenleftBigg4π
βe2/parenrightBigg2
=g2
24/parenleftBigg1
4πη2ee/parenrightBigg
. (E22)
This correction agrees with that which appears in Eq. (5.29) in the text, as well as with the
discussion of Eq. (24) in Ref. [20]. Note that since the O(¯h2) correction is proportional to
g2, it is entirely contained in the two-loop contribution of th e equation of state; no O(¯h2)
corrections are contained in any higher-loop contribution s.
147APPENDIX F: SOME ELEMENTS OF QUANTUM FIELD THEORY
Here we shall briefly derive and review some of the methods of q uantum field theory
that are used in the text. For simplicity we shall explicitly treat the case of the functional
integral representation of the classical plasma without th e induced interactions that provide
the quantum corrections which make the theory finite. These a dditional interactions entail
no essential changes in the techniques that we are about to ou tline, and their effects are
easily described by including the appropriate additional t erms in the functional integrand.
In the same vein, we shall also neglect the quantum-mechanic al imaginary time dependence
discussed in Sec. IIIF. Thus we shall examine the generating functional
Z[µ] = Det1/2/bracketleftBig
−β∇2/bracketrightBig/integraldisplay
[dφ] exp{−S[φ;µ]}, (F1)
in which
S[φ;µ] =β
2/integraldisplay
(dνr)φ(r)/parenleftBig
−∇2/parenrightBig
φ(r) +Sint[φ;µ], (F2)
where
Sint[φ;µ] =−/summationdisplay
a/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a(r)eiβeaφ(r). (F3)
With the generalized chemical potential functions µa(r) taken to be constants, the generating
functionalZ[µ] reduces to the grand canonical partition function. Functi onal derivatives
with respect to the generalized chemical potentials, with t hese potentials then taken to be
constants, yield number density correlation functions.
1. Perturbation Theory
Perturbation theory developments of correlation function s can be done in essentially
either of two ways: One can first perform the functional deriv atives with respect to the
generalized chemical potentials to bring down extra factor s in the functional integrand that
represent the particle densities and then set the chemical p otentials to be constants and make
a perturbative expansion. Or one can make a formal perturbat ive expansion of the functional
integral with spatially varying, generalized chemical pot entialsµa(r), and then expand the
result in a spatial varying part of the chemical potentials t o identify the correlation functions.
Either case is subsumed in a slight generalization of the sec ond way in which we write the
functional integration field as φ(r) =¯φ(r) +φ′(r), where ¯φ(r) is some suitable background
field. We then take out and explicitly display the pieces of ze roth and second order in the
fluctuation field φ′(r). Since the background field ¯φappears as a ‘constant’ translation in
the (dummy) functional integration variable, [ dφ] = [dφ′], and so with this separation and
with an operator or infinite matrix notation,
Z[µ] = Det1/2/bracketleftBig
−β∇2/bracketrightBig
exp/braceleftBig
−S[¯φ;µ]/bracerightBig
/integraldisplay
[dφ′] exp/braceleftBig
−(β/2)φ′/bracketleftBig
−∇2+V(¯φ;µ)/bracketrightBig
φ′/bracerightBig
F[φ′]. (F4)
148Here
V(¯φ;µ;r) =/summationdisplay
aβe2
an0
a(r)eiβea¯φ(r), (F5)
and
F[φ′] = exp/braceleftBig
−˜Sint[φ′;¯φ,µ]/bracerightBig
···, (F6)
where −˜Sint[φ′;¯φ,µ] contains the linear, cubic, and higher order terms in φ′in the exponen-
tial. The ellipsis ···stands for possible insertions in the integrand of the facto rs of the form
n0
aeiβeaφ(r)that result in the first case above when functional derivativ e are first taken to
construct correlation functions. We shall soon work out exp licit examples that should make
this perhaps somewhat abstract formulation clear.
To obtain the perturbative development, we first note that by completing the square to
obtain a Gaussian functional integral which produces an infi nite, Fredholm determinant, we
have, using again an operator notation, the evaluation:
X[ζ] = Det1/2/bracketleftBig
β(−∇2)/bracketrightBig/integraldisplay
[dφ′] exp/braceleftBig
−(β/2)φ′/bracketleftBig
−∇2+V(¯φ;µ)/bracketrightBig
φ′+iφ′ζ/bracerightBig
= Det1/2/bracketleftBig
β(−∇2)/bracketrightBig
Det−1/2/bracketleftBig
β(−∇2+V)/bracketrightBig
exp{−(1/2β)ζGζ}
= Det−1/2/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V/bracketrightbigg
exp/braceleftBigg
−1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)ζ(r)G(r,r′)ζ(r′)/bracerightBigg
, (F7)
where in the last line we have noted that the product of determ inants is the determinant
of the product of operators and used ordinary notation with G(r,r′) the Green’s function
defined by
/bracketleftBig
−∇2+V(¯φ;µ;r)/bracketrightBig
G(r,r′) =δ(ν)(r−r′). (F8)
We next note that62
exp/braceleftBigg
−1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)ζ(r)G(r,r′)ζ(r′)/bracerightBigg
=
exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)δ
δφ(r)G(r,r′)δ
δφ(r′)/bracerightBigg
exp/braceleftbigg
i/integraldisplay
(dνr)φ(r)ζ(r)/bracerightbigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ=0. (F9)
62The essence of the proof of this relation is obtained by repla cing the functions by numbers, and
by observing that
exp/braceleftbiggd
dxgd
dx/bracerightbigg
exp{ipx}/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
x=0= exp {−ipx}exp/braceleftbiggd
dxgd
dx/bracerightbigg
exp{ipx}
= exp/braceleftbigg
e−ipxd
dxeipxge−ipxd
dxeipx/bracerightbigg
= exp/braceleftbigg/parenleftbiggd
dx+ip/parenrightbigg
g/parenleftbiggd
dx+ip/parenrightbigg/bracerightbigg
= exp {−pgp}.
149Hence the functional integral (F7) defining X[ζ] may instead be replaced by an exponential
functional derivative operation which, in the operator not ation, reads
X[ζ] = Det−1/2/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V/bracketrightbigg
exp/braceleftBigg1
2βδ
δφ′Gδ
δφ′/bracerightBigg
exp{iφ′ζ}/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ′=0. (F10)
Now the functional X[ζ] defined by the functional integral (F7) has precisely the sa me
form as the functional integral (F4) defining the thermodyna mic generating functional Z[µ]
except that F[φ′] is replaced by the functional Fourier transform factor exp {iφ′ζ}. Since
this functional Fourier transform factor can be used to gene rate any functional, we conclude
that
Z[µ] = Det−1/2/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V/bracketrightbigg
exp/braceleftBig
−S[¯φ;µ]/bracerightBig
exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)δ
δφ′(r)G(r,r′)δ
δφ′(r′)/bracerightBigg
F[φ′]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ′=0. (F11)
This is the functional form than lends itself to a perturbati ve development by expanding
the exponential of the functional derivatives. Performing the functional derivatives produces
the “Wick contractions” that are familiar in quantum field th eory and lead to the familiar
graphical representation. The exact analytic form with the proper numerical factors asso-
ciated with a given graph is easily obtained from the expansi on of the exponential and the
operation of the functional derivatives.63
2. Straightforward Expansions
We consider the ordinary partition function in which all the chemical potentials are
constants. This will illustrate the use of this functional d erivative formulation in a straight-
forward fashion. In this case we take the background field to v anish, ¯φ= 0, and so the
quadratic part of the action involves the lowest-order Deby e (squared) wave number
κ2
0=βA/summationdisplay
a=1e2
an0
a, (F12)
withV →κ2
0, and so the Green’s function reduces to the Debye Green’s fun ctionGν(r−r′)
that was defined previously in Eq. (2.56). With constant chem ical potentials and with ¯φ= 0,
−S[0;µ] =/summationdisplay
an0
a/integraldisplay
(dνr), (F13)
while the determinantal prefactor reduces to that evaluate d previously in Eq. (2.75) of the
text,
63The functional derivatives may be viewed as ‘pacmen’ that ea t up fields sprouting from vertices
with each pair of devoured fields connected by a line that repr esents the Green’s function G(r,r′).
150Det−1/2/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2κ2
0/bracketrightbigg
= exp/braceleftbigg
−Gν(0)1
νκ2
0/integraldisplay
(dνr)/bracerightbigg
. (F14)
Therefore, the first two factors in the general perturbative formula (F11) yield the partition
function valid up to one-loop order,
Z1= exp/braceleftBigg/bracketleftBigg/summationdisplay
n0
a−Gν(0)κ2
0
ν/bracketrightBigg/integraldisplay
(dνr)/bracerightBigg
, (F15)
the result (2.76) in the text, and hence
Z[µ] =Z1exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)δ
δφ(r)Gν(r−r′)δ
δφ(r′)/bracerightBigg
exp/braceleftBig
−˜Sint[φ;µ]/bracerightBig/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingleφ=0.(F16)
Here
−˜Sint[φ;µ] =/integraldisplay
(dνr)/summationdisplay
an0
a/braceleftbigg
eiβeaφ(r)−1 +1
2[βeaφ(r)]2/bracerightbigg
. (F17)
As a first application of of this method, we derive the result ( 2.62) for ∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)given in
the text. To all orders
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=Z[µ]−1Z1exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr1)(dνr2)δ
δφ(r1)Gν(r1−r2)δ
δφ(r2)/bracerightBigg
/braceleftBigg
φ(0) exp/braceleftBig
−˜Sint[φ;µ]/bracerightBig/bracerightBigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ=0. (F18)
To the desired one-loop order, with the linear coupling to φcounted as itself of one-loop
order as explained in the discussion of Eq. (2.62) of the text ,
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(0)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)= exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr1)(dνr2)δ
δφ(r1)Gν(r1−r2)δ
δφ(r2)/bracerightBigg
/braceleftBigg
φ(0)A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/integraldisplay
(dνr)/bracketleftBig
(iβeaφ(r)) +1
3!(iβeaφ(r))3/bracketrightBig/bracerightBigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ=0
=/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr1)(dνr2)δ
δφ(r1)Gν(r1−r2)δ
δφ(r2)/bracerightBigg
φ(0)A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/integraldisplay
(dνr)(iβeaφ(r))
+1
2/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr1)(dνr2)δ
δφ(r1)Gν(r1−r2)δ
δφ(r2)/bracerightBigg2
φ(0)A/summationdisplay
a=1n0
a/integraldisplay
(dνr)1
3!(iβeaφ(r))3
=i/integraldisplay
(dνr)Gν(0−r)A/summationdisplay
a=1ean0
a/bracketleftbigg
1−1
2βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightbigg
. (F19)
In view of the Fourier representation (2.56) of the Debye Gre en’s function,
151/integraldisplay
(dνr)Gν(0−r) =1
κ2
0, (F20)
and so
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tφ∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)=i
κ2
0A/summationdisplay
a=1ean0
a/bracketleftbigg
1−1
2βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightbigg
, (F21)
which is just the result (2.62) of the text.
The perturbative expansions of the density and density–den sity correlations discussed in
the text follow from
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=Z[µ]−1Z1exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr1)(dνr2)δ
δφ(r1)Gν(r1−r2)δ
δφ(r2)/bracerightBigg
/braceleftBigg
n0
aeiβeaφ(r)exp/braceleftBig
−˜Sint[φ;µ]/bracerightBig/bracerightBigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ=0, (F22)
and
∝an}b∇acketle{t∝an}b∇acketle{tna(r)nb(r′)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht=Z[µ]−1Z1exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr1)(dνr2)δ
δφ(r1)Gν(r1−r2)δ
δφ(r2)/bracerightBigg
/braceleftBigg
n0
aeiβeaφ(r)n0
beiβebφ(r′)exp/braceleftBig
−˜Sint[φ;µ]/bracerightBig/bracerightBigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ=0. (F23)
3. Loop Parameter
It was emphasized in the text that the size of loop correction s is measured, in νdi-
mensions, by the dimensionless parameter βe2Gν(0)∼βe2κν−2
0, which reduces to βe2κ0in
three dimensions: A perturbative term corresponding to a gr aph containing ℓloops is of
order [βe2κν−2
0]ℓ, or in three dimensions, [ βe2κ0]ℓ. That is, the power of [ βe2κ0] counts the
loop order of the expression. It should be noted that these lo op graphs are connected and
single-particle irreducible. In this counting, e2denotes a generic, typical charge of any of
the particle species, or, equivalently, one could write ea=Zae, andeis the electron charge.
Here we shall sketch the proof of this assertion.
To do this, we examine the expansion of the perturbative form ula (F16) in powers of the
unperturbed densities, which we write in the schematic form
ZN[µ]∼1
N!exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)δ
δφ(r)Gν(r−r′)δ
δφ(r′)/bracerightBigg
/integraldisplay
(dνr1)n0(r)eiβeφ(r1)/integraldisplay
(dνr2)n0(r)eiβeφ(r2)···/integraldisplay
(dνrN)n0(r)eiβeφ(rN)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ=0.
(F24)
This corresponds to a graph with Nvertices. Functional derivatives with respect to µ(r)
may be taken to give number density correlators. We have omit ted the subtraction of the
152unit andφ2terms which appear in the interaction part of the action (F17 ), which we may do
with the understanding that at least three φfunctional derivatives are taken at each vertex
or that each vertex emits at least three propagator lines.
Let us first assume that functional derivatives have been tak en so that each vertex is
connected by a single propagator line. At this stage, we have a graph which is a polygon with
Nlines andNvertices. Note that since our counting applies to connected , single-particle
irreducible graphs, any of these graphs must have such a peri meter polygon. To exhibit
the parameters, we introduce dimensionless spatial coordi nates by writing r=q/κ0. Then
the propagator Gν(r−r′) becomesκν−2
0times a dimensionless function of the dimensionless
variable ( q−q′). The functional derivative operations in Eq. (F24) produc e a propagator
line timesβ−1with a factor of βeat each end of the line. Thus for each propagator line
and the vertex factors associated with both ends of the line w e have an overall factor of
βe2κν−2
0. Each vertex involves/integraltext(dνr)∼κ−ν
0timesn0(a dimensionless product), and so, all
together for our skeleton polygon, we have Nfactors ofβe2n0κ−2
0. Butβe2n0∼κ2
0, and so
these are just Nfactors of 1. If we measure the size of this skeleton one-loop graph in term
of the unperturbed grand potential βΩ∼/integraltext(dνr)n0, then one factor of βe2κν−2
0remains to
characterize the order of the one-loop graph.
The remainder of the proof is now trivial. Each additional pr opagator line added to the
skeleton polygon gives a factor βe2κν−2
0and increases the number of loops by one.
APPENDIX G: CALCULATIONS USING FUNCTIONAL METHODS
We turn now to apply the functional methods using the alterna tive background field
method mentioned in the preceding Appendix. We choose the ba ckground field ¯φ(r) used
there to be the solution φcl(r) of the classical field equation of the total action which now
contains a source:
Stot[φ;σ;µ] =S[φ;µ]−β/integraldisplay
(dνr)φ(r)σ(r)
=/integraldisplay
(dνr)/braceleftBiggβ
2φ/parenleftBig
−∇2/parenrightBig
φ−/summationdisplay
ana(r) exp{iβeaφ} −βφσ/bracerightBigg
. (G1)
Thusφcl(r) is defined by
− ∇2φcl(r) =i/summationdisplay
aean0
a(r) exp{iβeaφ(r)}+σ(r). (G2)
This choice is made because, since the action is stationary f or variations about the solution
of the classical field equation, with φ=φcl+φ′, there are no linear terms in the fluctuation
fieldφ′and the result (F11) of the previous Appendix takes the form
exp{W[σ;µ]}= Det−1/2/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V[φcl;µ]/bracketrightbigg
exp{−Stot[φcl;σ;µ]}
exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)δ
δφ′(r)G(r,r′)δ
δφ′(r′)/bracerightBigg
exp{−˜Sint[φ′;φcl,µ]}/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ′=0.
(G3)
Here
153V(φcl;µ;r) =/summationdisplay
aβe2
an0
a(r)eiβeaφcl(r), (G4)
with
/braceleftBig
−∇2+V(φcl;µ;r)/bracerightBig
G(r,r′) =δ(r−r′), (G5)
and
−˜Sint[φ′;φcl,µ] =/integraldisplay
(dνr)/summationdisplay
an0
a(r)eiβeaφcl(r)/braceleftbigg
eiβeaφ′(r)−1−iβeaφ′(r) +1
2[βeaφ′(r)]2/bracerightbigg
.
(G6)
1. Results Through One Loop
We shall make use of this general result in the next section wh ere the two-loop correction
will be evaluated. Here we note that action of the exponentia l of functional derivatives on
the exponential of ˜Sintproduces only two and higher order loops since ˜Sintcontains no linear
terms inφ′. Hence, to the one-loop order with which we are concerned her e, we have
W[σ;µ] =W(1)[σ;µ] =−Stot[φcl;σ;µ]−1
2ln Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V[φcl;µ]/bracketrightbigg
. (G7)
To obtain the effective action described in Appendix A, we firs t need the relation between
∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}htσ
β=δW[σ;µ]
δβσ(r)(G8)
andφcl(r). Since the action Stot[φcl;σ;µ] is stationary for field variations about φcl, the
induced variation in φclwhen the source σis varied does not contribute to δStotand only
the explicit source variation contributes, giving
−δStot[φcl;σ;µ]
δβσ(r)=φcl(r). (G9)
This is the classical or tree contribution. Using the formul aδln DetX= TrX−1δX, the one
loop contribution is contained in
δln Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V[φcl;µ]/bracketrightbigg
= Tr/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V[φcl;µ]/bracketrightbigg−11
−∇2δV[φcl;µ]
= Tr/bracketleftBig
−∇2+V[φcl;µ]/bracketrightBig−1δV[φcl;µ]
=/integraldisplay
(dνr)G(r,r)iβg3(r)δφcl(r), (G10)
where
g3(r) =/summationdisplay
aβe3
an0
a(r)eiβeaφcl(r). (G11)
The variation of the equation (G2) defining the classical sol ution yields
154/braceleftBig
−∇2+V(φcl;µ;r)/bracerightBig
δφcl(r) =δσ(r), (G12)
and so
δφcl(r)
δσ(r′)=G(r,r′). (G13)
Hence, to one-loop order,
∝an}b∇acketle{tφ(r)∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)=δW(1)[σ;µ]
δβσ(r)=φcl(r) + ∆φ(r), (G14)
where
∆φ(r) =−i
2/integraldisplay
(dνr′)G(r,r′)g3(r′)G(r′,r′). (G15)
The correction ∆ φ(r) is a one-loop contribution corresponding to a “tadpole” gr aph. This
graph is just the same as the second graph in Fig. 12 except tha t now the vertex is given
byg3(r′) and the lines represent the Green’s function G(r,r′). With the source vanishing,
and with/summationtextean0
ataken to be of one-loop order, φcl= (i/κ2
0)/summationtextean0
ato this order. Thus,
to one-loop order, φclcan be taken to vanish in the explicitly one-loop term ∆ φ, and the
Green’s functions there can be replaced by the Debye functio ns. With these remarks in
mind, it is easy to check that general one-loop result (G14) r educes to the previous result
(F21).
The effective potential is taken to be a functional of the field expectation value which we
relabel as ¯φ(r). The one-loop action (G7) is a functional of the classical fi eldφcl(r) which
differs from the expectation value by the one-loop correctio n ∆φ(r). Since the classical action
is stationary for variations about φcl(r), replacing φcl(r) in it by ¯φ(r) entails a correction
involving ∆ φ(r)2, which is of two-loop order. Since the determinantal contri bution is already
of first order, replacing φcl(r) in it by ¯φ(r) also gives a two-loop correction. Thus, to one-
loop order, we may replace φcl(r) by¯φ(r) in the action functional (G7). [The explicit form
for ∆φgiven in the previous paragraph is, of course, not needed to r each this conclusion.
We made this explicit calculation because the result will be used in the next section on the
two-loop effective action.] The effective action for the time -independent field ¯φis defined by
simply restricting the Legendre transformation (A21) to in volve time-independent quantities
so that the imaginary time integral is replaced by a factor of β. The source–field product in
the Legendre transformation cancels the source term in the r elation (G1) between Stot[φ;σµ]
andS[φ;µ], and we have to one-loop order
Γ(1)[¯φ;µ] =S[¯φ;µ] +1
2ln Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V[¯φ;µ]/bracketrightbigg
. (G16)
It proves convenient to rewrite the determinant in the form:
Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V/bracketrightbigg
= Det/bracketleftbigg1
−∇2/braceleftBig
−∇2+κ2
0+/parenleftBig
V −κ2
0/parenrightBig/bracerightBig/bracketrightbigg
= Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2κ2
0/bracketrightbigg
Det/bracketleftBig
1 +Gν/parenleftBig
V −κ2
0/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig
. (G17)
155Here we have added and subtracted the (squared) Debye wave nu mberκ2
0for the (lowest-
order) densities when the generalized chemical potentials reduce to the their standard, spa-
tially uniform form, µa(r)→µa, andGνis the Debye Green’s function for this wave number.
The first factor in Eq. (G17) is the one-loop correction to the standard partition function;
in the limit in which the generalized chemical potentials be come constant and ¯φ= 0,V= 0,
and we see that since
S[¯φ;µ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0=−/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a, (G18)
the grand partition function to one-loop order is given by
lnZ1=−Γ(1)[¯φ;µ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0
=n0
aV −1
2ln Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2κ2
0/bracketrightbigg
, (G19)
in agreement with Eq. (2.53).
To compute the number densities and number-density correla tion functions to one-loop
order, we first note that
ln Det/bracketleftBig
1 +Gν/parenleftBig
V −κ2
0/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig
= Tr ln/bracketleftBig
1 +Gν/parenleftBig
V −κ2
0/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig
= TrGν/parenleftBig
V −κ2
0/parenrightBig
−1
2Tr/bracketleftBig
Gν/parenleftBig
V −κ2
0/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig2+···
=Gν(0)/integraldisplay
(dνr1)/parenleftBig
V(¯φ;µ;r1)−κ2
0/parenrightBig
−1
2/integraldisplay
(dνr1)(dνr2) [Gν(r1−r2)]2/parenleftBig
V(¯φ;µ;r1)−κ2
0/parenrightBig/parenleftBig
V(¯φ;µ;r2)−κ2
0/parenrightBig
+···. (G20)
Since/parenleftBig
V(¯φ;µ;r2)−κ2
0/parenrightBig
→0 when the generalized chemical potentials take on their con stant
values and the field ¯φvanishes, only the first term on the right-hand side of the las t equality
contributes to the number density which involves a single fu nctional derivative before this
limit is taken, only the first two terms contribute to the numb er density correlation function,
and so forth for the higher correlators.
To compute the density – chemical potential relation to one- loop order, we note that
sinceV(¯φ;µ;r2) is related to n0
a(r) by Eq. (G4) and
δn0
b(r′)
δβµ a(r)=δabδ(r−r′)n0
a(r), (G21)
it is easy to compute
∝an}b∇acketle{tna∝an}b∇acket∇i}ht(1)
β=δΓ[¯φ;µ]
δβµ a(r)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0=n0
a/bracketleftbigg
1−1
2βe2
aGν(0)/bracketrightbigg
, (G22)
which is the result (2.64) in the text.
As discussed in Appendix A, the density-density correlatio n function is determined by
156Cab(r−r′) =−δ
δβµ a(r)δ
δβµ b(r′)Γ[¯φ;µ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0. (G23)
In the leading, tree approximation,
Ctree
ab(r−r′) =−δ
δβµ a(r)δ
δβµ b(r′)S[¯φ;µ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0=δabn0
aδ(r−r′). (G24)
The correction arising from the first trace term in Eq. (G20) i s just to replace the lowest-
order, chemical potential – density relation n0
ahere with the corrected functional form n(1)
a.
Of course, to whatever order we work, at the end we replace the chemical potential – density
relation by the actual densities ¯ na. The contribution from the second trace in Eq. (G20)
is obtained with the same ingredients used in the number dens ity evaluation, and we find
that, through one-loop order,
C(1)
ab(r−r′) =δab¯naδ(r−r′) +1
2βe2
a¯naGν(r−r′)2βe2
b¯nb. (G25)
This is precisely Eq. (2.102) of the text.
2. Two-Loop Effective Action
We turn now to compute the effective action to two-loop order. Before obtaining the
terms that contribute to two-loop order, it is instructive t o examine some two-loop order
terms that cancel among themselves. As was discussed in Appe ndix A, the effective action
is single particle irreducible. We can now see explicitly ho w this works out to the two-loop
order. In the preceding section, we noted that the replaceme nt ofφclby
¯φ=φcl+ ∆φ (G26)
entailed two-loop corrections. First we note that, since th e action is stationary for variations
about the classical solution, we have, to order ∆ φ2,
Stot[¯φ;σ;µ]≃Stot[φcl;σ;µ] +1
2/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)δ2Stot[φ;σ;µ]
δφ(r)δφ(r′)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φcl∆φ(r)∆φ(r′). (G27)
Since ∆φis already of one-loop order, we can replace φclby¯φin the second term here.
Since the second variation of the classical action brings in V(¯φ;µ;r) and produces the inverse
Green’s function, to two-loop order,
Stot[φcl;σ;µ] =Stot[¯φcl;σ;µ]−β
2/integraldisplay
(dνr)∆φ(r)/bracketleftBig
−∇2+V(¯φ;µ;r)/bracketrightBig
∆φ(r). (G28)
Again to two-loop order, the correction to the determinant c ontribution is given, in view of
Eq. (G10), by
1
2ln Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V[φcl;µ]/bracketrightbigg
=1
2ln Det/bracketleftbigg
1 +1
−∇2V[¯φ;µ]/bracketrightbigg
−1
2/integraldisplay
(dνr)G(r,r)iβg3(r) ∆φ(r), (G29)
157We define ∆Γ[ ¯φ;µ] by the sum of the two-loop corrections which appear above. U sing the
definitions (G15) of ∆ φand (G5) of G(r,r′), and a little algebra, we find that
∆Γ[¯φ;µ] =−β
8/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)G(r,r)g3(r)G(r,r′)G(r′,r′)g3(r′). (G30a)
This corresponds to the “dumbbell” graph,
✣✢✤✜
t t
✣✢✤✜
(G30b)
This graph is obviously single-particle reducible. Hence i t must cancel the single-particle
reducible piece of the remaining part ∆Γ(2+)[¯φ;µ] of the effective action which we now turn
to compute.
The variational derivative expression (G3) for exp {W[σ;µ]}is a convenient tool to use
to calculate this remaining part of the effective action. For the two-loop terms of interest,
the exponential of the interaction terms (G6) can be approxi mated by
exp{−˜Sint[φ′;φcl,µ]} ≃ −β4
2/parenleftbigg1
3!/parenrightbigg2/integraldisplay
(dνr1)g3(r1)φ′(r1)3/integraldisplay
(dνr2)g3(r2)φ′(r2)3
+β3
4!/integraldisplay
(dνr1)g4(r1)φ′(r1)4, (G31)
where we recall that (to our order)
g3(r) =/summationdisplay
aβe3
an0
a(r)eiβea¯φ(r). (G32)
and define
g4(r) =/summationdisplay
aβe4
an0
a(r)eiβea¯φ(r). (G33)
To our order of interest, the Legendre transform relation be tweenWand Γ reduces to simply
W=−Γ, the classical action and determinantal terms do not contr ibute, and Eq. (G3) gives
−∆Γ(2+)[¯φ;µ] = exp/braceleftBigg1
2β/integraldisplay
(dνr)(dνr′)δ
δφ′(r)G(r,r′)δ
δφ′(r′)/bracerightBigg
/braceleftBigg
−β4
2/parenleftbigg1
3!/parenrightbigg2/integraldisplay
(dνr1)g3(r1)φ′(r1)3/integraldisplay
(dνr2)g3(r2)φ′(r2)3
+β3
4!/integraldisplay
(dνr1)g4(r1)φ′(r1)4/bracerightBigg/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
φ′=0. (G34)
It is a straightforward matter to carry out the functional de rivatives and verify that one set
of terms precisely cancels the previous “dumbbell” piece (G 30a). Thus, we prove explicitly
to two-loop order that the effective action functional has no single-particle reducible terms.
The remaining terms give
∆Γ(2)[¯φ;µ] =β
21
3!/integraldisplay
(dνr1)/integraldisplay
(dνr2)g3(r1)G(r1,r2)3g3(r2)
−β
4/integraldisplay
(dνr1)g4(r1)G(r1,r1)2+S(2)
ind[¯φ;µ], (G35)
158where the last term stands for the two-loop contribution of t he induced interaction (3.32)
that we have belatedly added. To our two-loop order, this add itional term is given by the
p= 2 piece of Eq. (3.32) evaluated in the tree approximation wh ich replaces the potential
by its expectation value ¯φ. Using the result (3.41) for the coupling constant gives
S(2)
ind[¯φ;µ] =/summationdisplay
ab
gab(µ)−π
61
3−ν/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3
µ2(ν−3)
/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a(r) exp/braceleftBig
iβea¯φ(r)/bracerightBig
n0
b(r) exp/braceleftBig
iβeb¯φ(r)/bracerightBig
+/summationdisplay
ah0
aβ4/integraldisplay
(dνr)/bracketleftBig
∇/parenleftBig
µa(r)+iea¯φ(r)/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig2n0
a(r)eiβea¯φ(r). (G36)
To make use of the first part of this interaction to present an e xplicitly finite result in the
ν→3 limit, we write the single particle irreducible two-loop e ffective action as a sum of
two parts,
∆Γ(2)[¯φ;µ] = ∆Γ(2)
1[¯φ;µ] + ∆Γ(2)
2[¯φ;µ]. (G37)
The first part, defined by,
∆Γ(2)
1[¯φ;µ] =β
21
3!/integraldisplay
(dνr1)/integraldisplay
(dνr2)g3(r1)/bracketleftBig
G(r1,r2)3−G3(r1−r2)3/bracketrightBig
g3(r2)
−β
4/integraldisplay
(dνr1)g4(r1)G(r1,r1)2(G38)
may be evaluated directly at ν= 3 since the subtraction of the cube of the three-dimensiona l
Debye Green’s function G3(r1−r2) in the first double integral renders it finite while (with
dimensional continuation) the remaining single integral i s well-behaved in the ν→3 limit.
Making a convenient rearrangement of the remaining part giv es
∆Γ(2)
2[¯φ;µ] =β
21
3!/integraldisplay
(dνr1)/integraldisplay
(dνr2)g3(r1)Gν(r1−r2)3[g3(r2)−g3(r1)]
+β
21
3!/integraldisplay
(dνr1) [g3(r1)]2/integraldisplay
(dνr2)Gν(r1−r2)3+S(2)
ind[¯φ;µ]. (G39)
Theν→3 limit may be taken in the first line on the right-hand side of t his equation since
a subtraction has been make that gives an integrable singula rity when r1=r2. The result
(C32) gives
/integraldisplay
(dνr2)Gν(r1−r2)3=1
(4π)21
2
/parenleftBiggκ2
0
4π/parenrightBiggν−31
3−ν+ 1−γ−2 ln3
. (G40)
Thus the pole terms on the second line on the right-hand side o f Eq. (G39) combine the give
the well-defined ν→3 limit
1
3−ν/parenleftBiggκ2
0
4π/parenrightBiggν−3
1−/parenleftBiggκ2
0
4πµ2/parenrightBigg3−ν
→ −ln/parenleftBiggκ2
0
4πµ2/parenrightBigg
. (G41)
159Thus, taking the ν→3 limit and writing the first line in Eq. (G39) in a symmetrical manner,
we arrive at
∆Γ(2)
2[¯φ;µ] =−β
41
3!/integraldisplay
(dνr1)/integraldisplay
(dνr2)Gν(r1−r2)3[g3(r2)−g3(r1)]2
/summationdisplay
ab
gab(µ)−π
6/parenleftBiggβeaeb
4π/parenrightBigg3/bracketleftBigg
ln/parenleftBiggκ2
0
4πµ2/parenrightBigg
−1 +γ+ 2 ln3/bracketrightBigg
/integraldisplay
(dνr)n0
a(r) exp/braceleftBig
iβea¯φ(r)/bracerightBig
n0
b(r) exp/braceleftBig
iβeb¯φ(r)/bracerightBig
+/summationdisplay
ah0
aβ4/integraldisplay
(dνr)/bracketleftBig
∇/parenleftBig
µa(r)+iea¯φ(r)/parenrightBig/bracketrightBig2n0
a(r)eiβea¯φ(r). (G42)
The sum
Γ[¯φ;µ]≈Γ(1)[¯φ;µ] + ∆Γ(2)
1[¯φ;µ] + ∆Γ(2)
2[¯φ;µ] (G43)
is the generating functional for all the connected, single- particle irreducible contributions
through two-loop order. For example, the double functional derivative of this result with
respect to the chemical potentials, with the chemical poten tials then taken constant and
¯φ= 0, produces the irreducible number density correlation fu nctionCabthrough two-loop
order, the result summarized in Eq. (4.27) of the text. The gr and potential is given by the
effective action with the generalized chemical potentials t aking on constant values and with
¯φ= 0, The two-loop contribution to the grand potential plus th e previous lower-order terms
give
βΩ(2)(β,µ) = Γ(1)[¯φ;µ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0+ ∆Γ(2)
1[¯φ;µ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0+ ∆Γ(2)
2[¯φ;µ]/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle
0(G44)
In this limit, the first piece of ∆Γ(2)
1[¯φ;µ] in Eq. (G38) vanishes while the second piece
involvesG3(0) which has the value −κ0/4πaccording to Eq. (2.58). Moreover, in this limit,
the first line on the right-hand side of the equation above for ∆Γ(2)
2[¯φ;µ] also vanishes. With
these remarks in mind, it is a simple matter to verify that our effective action results agree
with the result (4.7) of the text.
160REFERENCES
[1] H. Georgi, Effective Field Theory , Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 43, 209–252 (1993).
[2] Joseph Polchinski, in Proc. of Recent Directions in Particle Theory: From Superstrings
and Black Holes to the Standard Model (TASI – 92) , ppg. 235–276, J. Harvey and J.
Polchinski, eds, World Scientific, 1993.
[3] E. Braaten and A. Nieto, Phys. Rev. D 51, 6990 (1995); 53, 3421 (1996).
[4] W. Ebeling, W.-D. Kraeft, and D. Kremp, Theory of Bound States and Ionization
Equilibrium in Plasmas and Solids , Akademie-Verlag, Berlin, 1976.
[5] W.-D. Kraeft, D. Kremp, W. Ebeling, and G. R¨ opke, Quantum Statistics of Charged
Particle Systems , Plenum, NY, 1986.
[6] A. Alastuey and A. Perez, Phys. Rev. E 53, 5714 (1996).
[7] J. Riemann, M. Schlages, H. E. DeWitt, and W. D. Kraeft, Ph ysicaA219 , 423 (1995).
[8] H. E. DeWitt, M. Schlages, A. Y. Sakakura, and W. D. Kraeft , Phys. Lett. A197 , 326
(1995).
[9] J. Riemann, M. Schlages, H. E. DeWitt, and W. D. Kraeft, Pr oc. of Intl. Conf. Physics
of Strongly Coupled Plasmas , ppg. 82–86, World Scientific (1996).
[10] D. Brydges and A. Seiler, J. Stat. Phys. 42, 405 (1986).
[11] A. Alastuey and Ph. A. Martin, Phys. Rev. A 40, 6485 (1989).
[12] F. Cornu and Ph. A. Martin, Phys. Rev. A 44, 4893 (1991).
[13] M. Opher and R. Opher, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 4835 (1999).
[14] A. Rajantie, Nucl. Phys. B480 , 729 (1996); Nucl. Phys. B513 , 761(E) (1998).
[15] L. S. Brown, Quantum Field Theory , Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 1992.
[16] A. L. Fetter and J. D. Walecka, Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems , McGraw-
Hill, New York, 1971.
[17] C. Fronsdal, Phys. Rev. 171, 1811 (1968), and references therein.
[18] G. J. Maclay, Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University (197 2).
[19] E. T. Whittaker and G. N. Watson, A Course of Modern Analysis , Cambridge Univ.
Press, Cambridge, 1952.
[20] J. P. Hansen, Phys. Rev. A 8, 3096 (1973).
161 |
arXiv:physics/9911056v1 [physics.plasm-ph] 24 Nov 1999UW/PT-99-1
New Use of Dimensional Continuation
Illustrated by dE/dx in a Plasma
Lowell S. Brown
Department of Physics, University of Washington
Seattle, Washington 98195
(February 20, 2014)
Abstract
Physical processes ranging from the Lamb shift to the energy lossdE/dx of
a charged particle traversing a plasma entail two different m echanisms that
are important at two different energy or length scales. Here w e examine the
energy loss example because its analysis is simple. On one ha nd, it involves
soft collisions that are screened by collective effects at la rge distances while,
on the other hand, there are hard, short-distance collision s where the exact
details of the single-particle interactions must be taken i nto account. We
introduce a novel technique of dimensional continuation in which the soft
processes are computed for dimensions ν <3, the hard processes for ν >3,
and we explain why their sum yields the correct result for the physical limit
atν= 3 dimensions.
1The usual method for obtaining the energy loss for a charged p article moving through
matter is to divide the calculation into two parts: The long- distance, soft collisions and the
short-distance, hard collisions. Collective effects are im portant in the long-distance part,
and it is evaluated from the j·Epower loss of a particle moving in a dielectric medium. The
hard collisions are described by Coulomb scattering. The ru b is to join the disparate pieces
together. For the case of classical scattering, this is ofte n done by computing the energy loss
in Coulomb scattering out to some impact parameter, and then adding the j·Eenergy loss
for all larger impact parameters. Although such methods do y ield the correct large logarithm
without much difficulty, the logarithm of the ratio of the two s cales which is large, the purely
numerical constants (which one expects to be of order one) th at accompany the logarithm
are harder to compute. Here we describe an easily applied met hod that yields a unique
result – the result including the constants in addition to th e large logarithm. The new idea
is to compute the energy loss from Coulomb scattering over al l angles, but for dimensions
ν >3 where there are no infrared divergences. A separate calcul ation of the energy loss
using the j·Eheating is done for ν <3, where the volume integration may be extended
down to the particle’s position without encountering an ult raviolet divergence. Both of these
results have a simple pole at ν= 3, but they both may be analytically continued beyond
their initial range of validity. In their original domain of dimensionν, both calculations are
performed to the leading order in the plasma density. As will be seen, although the Coulomb
scattering result is the leading order contribution for ν >3, it is of subleading order when
ν <3. Conversely, the j·Eheating is subleading for ν >3 but leading for ν <3. Hence, the
sum of the two (analytically continued) processes gives the leading and (first) subleading
terms in the plasma density for all dimensions ν, and thus, in the limit of this sum at ν= 3,
the pole terms must cancel with the remainder yielding the co rrect physical limit to leading
order in the plasma density.
It should be emphasized that we are making use of a new and novel application of
continuation to dimensions ν/negationslash= 3 to compute results that are well-defined and finite at the
physicalν= 3 dimension. We are notusing dimensional continuation to render infinities
finite so as to perform renormalizations as one does in quantu m field theory. Moreover , our
purpose is to introduce and describe this new application of dimensional continuation; the
energy loss problem is used onlyas a convenient vehicle for illustrating the new idea.
Since the reasoning here may appear to be subtle, it is worth i llustrating it with
a trivial mathematical example, the behavior of the modified Hankel function Kν(z) in
the small argument zlimit with the index νalso small. For ν >0, the leading term
isKν(z)=(z/2)−ν(1−νγ)/2ν,while forν <0 it isKν(z) =−(z/2)ν(1 +νγ)/2ν,where
γ= 0.5772···is Euler’s constant. For ν >0 one term is leading and the other subleading,
while forν <0 their roles are interchanged. Thus their sum
Kν(z)≃1
2ν/braceleftBigg/parenleftbiggz
2/parenrightbigg−ν
[1−νγ]−/parenleftbiggz
2/parenrightbiggν
[1 +νγ]/bracerightBigg
(1)
contains both the leading and subleading terms for both ν >0 andν <0. The limit ν→0
of this sum yields the correct small zresultK0(z) =−ln(z/2)−γ. It is must be emphasized
that the correct constant terms [ln 2 −γ] are obtained by this method in addition to the
logarithm −lnzwhich is large for small z.
Since we are only interested in describing the new method, we simplify the discussion by
treating only the electrons in a classical plasma (electron recoil gives the dominant energy
2loss since they are light), and by taking the moving projecti le velocityvpto be much larger
than the electron velocities in the plasma so that the latter may be neglected relative to
vp. We shall assume, however, that the projectile velocity is s mall in comparison with the
velocity of light so that this particle produces a simple Cou lomb field (as modified by the
plasma) and that nonrelativistic mechanics applies.
We first compute the j·Eheating with ν <3. Since the current jis that of a particle of
chargeepand velocity vpat the point r=vpt, this energy loss mechanism gives dE/dt =
−epvp·E(vpt,t) , with E(r,t) the electric field produced by the moving particle. Solving
the field equation by Fourier transform, it is easy to find that
dE<
dt= 4πe2
p/integraldisplay(dνk)
(2π)νik·vp
k2/bracketleftBigg1
ǫ(k·vp,k)−1/bracketrightBigg
, (2)
where final −1 in the square brackets produces a term in the integrand that is odd in kand
thus makes no contribution to the complete integral. It is in cluded so as to to make the
convergence of the integral at large wave number manifest so long asν <3. The function
ǫ(ω,k) is the frequency and wave-number dependent dielectric fun ction of the plasma. The
nature of this function is illustrated by the first approxima tion [1] (which is the classical
limit of the ring sum of quantum statistical mechanics)
ǫ(ω,k) = 1 +4πe2
k2/integraldisplay
(dνv)1
ω+iǫ−k·v1
mek·∂
∂vne(v), (3)
where theǫ→0+in the denominator corresponds to a retarded response. With ω=k·vp
and, by our simplifying assumption, vp≫v, we see that the ωterm in the denominator
dominates so that ǫ(ω,k) may be replaced by ǫ(ω,0). This limit of Eq.(3) is obtained by
expanding the denominator to first order in k·vand integrating ∂/∂vby parts to secure
ǫ(ω,0) = 1−ω2
e
(ω+iǫ)2, (4)
whereωeis the plasma frequency defined by
ω2
e=4πe2ne
me. (5)
It should be noted that this result has a greater range of vali dity than its derivation would
indicate; namely, under our assumptions that the wave numbe r be small and the frequency
be large, the dielectric function generally assumes this as ymptotic form. Using it in Eq.(2),
performing the integration over the component of kparallel to vpby a contour integration
closed by a large semi-circle in the upper-half plane, and wr itingdx=vpdtgives
dE<
dx= 2πe2
p/integraldisplay(dν−1k)
(2π)ν−1ω2
e
ω2
e+v2
pk2. (6)
Exponentiating the denominator via
D−1=/integraldisplay∞
0dse−sD, (7)
3interchanging integrals, performing the resulting ν−1 Gaussian kintegrals, and recognizing
the finalsintegral as a standard representation of the Γ function give s
dE<
dx= 2πe2
p/parenleftBiggω2
e
4πv2p/parenrightBiggν−1
2
Γ/parenleftbigg3−ν
2/parenrightbigg
, (8)
or, with the neglect of terms which vanish when ν→3,
dE<
dx=e2
pω2
e
v2p/parenleftBiggω2
e
4πv2p/parenrightBiggν−3
2/braceleftbigg1
3−ν−γ
2/bracerightbigg
. (9)
The pole in this expression, which becomes negative when ν >3, corresponds to the ultra-
violet divergence which appear when ν→3.
We turn now to the ν >3 case where the energy loss is computed by single-particle
scattering. By the conservation of energy, the energy loss i n the scattering of the projectile
velocity vp→v′
pon electrons whose initial velocity may be neglected is ∆ E=−(mp/2)[v′
p2−
v2
p] = (me/2)v′
e2. Since the initial electron has no momentum, this can be writ ten in the
invariant form ∆ E=q2/(2me), where qis the electron momentum transfer in the scattering
process. With the initial electron at rest, the differential rate of scattering is vpnedσ, where
neis the electron density in the plasma and dσis the cross section element. Since dx=vpdt,
the energy loss for ν >3 is given by
dE>
dx=ne
2me/integraldisplay
dσq2. (10)
We first evaluate this scattering contribution when the inte raction is weak, when η=
epe/¯hvp≪1. In this case, the quantum-mechanical Born approximation result is appropriate
with, inν >3 dimensions,
/integraldisplay
dσBq2=/integraldisplay(dνp′)
(2π¯h)ν2π¯hδ/parenleftBiggp′2
2m−p2
2m/parenrightBigg/parenleftBigg4π¯hepe
q2/parenrightBigg21
vq2. (11)
Here (1/m) = (1/me) + (1/mp) defines the reduced mass m. Writingq2= 4m2v2sin2θ/2,
and (dνp′) =mp′(ν−2)d(p′2/2m) Ων−2sinν−2θdθ,with sinν−2θ= [2 cosθ/2 sinθ/2]ν−2,and
noting that the solid angle Ω ν−2is given by
Ων−2
2π=π(ν−3)/2
Γ/parenleftBig
ν−1
2/parenrightBig, (12)
we get, on setting χ=θ/2,
/integraldisplay
dσBq2=8π(epe)2
v2/parenleftBiggm2v2
π¯h2/parenrightBigg(ν−3)/21
Γ/parenleftBig
ν−1
2/parenrightBig/integraldisplayπ/2
0dχcosν−2χsinν−4χ. (13)
The integral which appears here has the value ( ν−3)−1+O(ν−3) as one can show by
dividing it into two parts with a suitable partial integrati on or by expressing it in terms of
4the standard integral representation of the Beta function. Placing the result in Eq. (10) and
taking the initial electron to be at rest gives
dE(Qm)
>
dx=e2
pω2
e
v2p/parenleftBiggm2v2
p
π¯h2/parenrightBiggν−3
2/braceleftbigg1
ν−3+γ
2/bracerightbigg
. (14)
The pole in this expression, which become negative when ν <3, corresponds to an infrared
divergence in the ν→3 limit.
When this result is added to that in Eq. (9) the divergent pole terms cancel, and the
physical limit ν→3 is
dEQm
dx=e2
pω2
e
v2
pln/parenleftBigg2mv2
p
¯hωe/parenrightBigg
. (15)
As indicated before, this is the correct result to leading or der in the plasma density. Instead
of using the plasma density for the proof, it is equivalent to use the linearly related plasma
frequencyωe. We have computed the leading and subleading terms in this qu antity. The
result (9) for dE</dxinvolvesω2
e×ω(ν−3)
ewhile the result (14) for dE>/dxinvolves just
ω2
e. Hence, for ν <3, (9) is leading and (14) is subleading, while for ν >3, their roles are
reversed. Thus, in either region the sum of the two contribut ions contains both the leading
and (first) subleading terms, and so the limit of the sum at the physical dimension ν= 3
yields the correct result to leading order in the plasma dens ity.
The result (15), including the proper constants inside the l ogarithm, may be essentially
obtained by applying the j·Eheating formula (2) directly in three dimensions with the us e
of the single-ring graph quantum form of the dielectric func tion in the limit in which the
electrons in the plasma are taken to have negligible velocit y. Using this function [2],
ǫ(ω,k) = 1−ω2
e
(ω+iǫ)2−(¯hk2/2me)2, (16)
in Eq. (2), a straight forward calculation gives the result ( 15) as the leading term for small
ωe, except that the correct reduced mass min Eq. (15) is replaced by the electron mass
mesince the current jdescribes the motion of a very heavy projectile particle. Th is sort of
calculation was done some time ago by Lindhard [3], but it is r estricted to a cold plasma
whose electron velocities are much less than that of the proj ectile. On the other hand, our
method is easily extended [4] to treat the case of a hot plasma where this restriction is not
imposed, and again a complete calculation can be performed w hich includes the constants
in addition to the logarithm.
Our method can be used to extend the result (15) to arbitrary v alues ofη=eep/(¯hvp),
always retaining the correct additional constants. To do th is, we use some clever mathemat-
ics of Lindhard and Sorensen [5], but in a manner which justifi es that these constants have
been kept. Namely, we compute
∆dE>
dx=ne
2me/integraldisplay
(dσ−dσB)q2. (17)
This difference is well behaved in the limit ν→3 since the pole at ν= 3 produced by the
cross section integral comes from soft, infrared physics wh ich is completely contained in the
5Born approximation dσB. Although we always have in mind this difference, for simplic ity
of exposition we shall omit the subtraction of the Born term i n an intermediate step: The
partial wave decomposition of the scattering amplitude and standard manipulations yield
/integraldisplay
dσq2= 2π¯h2∞/summationdisplay
l=0(l+ 1)/braceleftBig
2−e2i[δl−δ(l+1)]−e−2i[δl−δ(l+1)]/bracerightBig
. (18)
For the Coulomb potential
e2iδl=Γ(l+ 1 +iη)
Γ(l+ 1−iη)eiφ, (19)
where the phase φis independent of l. Using Γ( z+ 1) =zΓ(z), a little algebra, and
subtracting the Born approximation, we find that
/integraldisplay
(dσ−dσB)q2= 4πη2¯h2∞/summationdisplay
l=0/bracketleftBigg1
l+ 1 +iη+1
l+ 1−iη−2
l+ 1/bracketrightBigg
=−4πe2e2
p
v2
p2 [Reψ(1 +iη) +γ], (20)
whereψ(z) is the logarithmic derivative of the gamma function, ψ(z) = Γ′(z)/Γ(z), and Re
denotes the real part. Recalling the definition (5) of the pla sma frequency, we now have [6]
∆dE>
dx=−e2
pω2
e
v2
p[Reψ(1 +iη) +γ], (21)
with the energy loss for all ηvalues given by
dE
dx=dEQm
dx+ ∆dE>
dx. (22)
In the classical case, η=eep/(¯hvp) becomes large. Using the limit
|z| → ∞ :ψ(1 +z) = lnz+O(z−1), (23)
Eq’s. (21), (22), and (15) yield the classical form
dECl
dx=e2
pω2
e
v2pln/parenleftBigg
2e−γmv3
p
epeωe/parenrightBigg
. (24)
This result, including the proper constant 2 e−γthat appears within the logarithm, was
obtained long ago by Kramers [7]. It may also be obtained dire ctly [8] with our dimensional
continuation methods by using the classical Coulomb scatte ring cross section for dimension
ν >3 in the scattering energy loss expression (10).
Essentially the method introduced in this letter has been us ed before [9] to calculate
the Lamb shift, with the role of the plasma density replaced b y the nuclear charge. That
exposition, however, was presented in a somewhat mystical m anner, and it unfortunately
did not bring out the essence of the method. The method introd uced in this letter has also
recently been applied to compute the electrical conductivi ty of a classical plasma [10].
6This presentation of my ideas has been improved by conversat ions with L. G. Yaffe. G.
Bertsch brought the work [3] of Lindhard to my attention and s howed me an alternative
derivation of his result. This work was supported, in part, b y the U. S. Department of Energy
under grant DE-FG03-96ER40956, and it was completed at the S anta Barbara Institute for
Theoretical Physics and at the Los Alamos National Laborato ry.
7REFERENCES
[1] See, for example, E. M. Lifshitz and L. P. Pitaevskii, Physical Kinetics , Pergamon Press,
1981, Sec. 29.
[2] This result may be inferred, for example, from the discus sion in Sec. 33 of A. L. Fetter
and J. D. Walecka, Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems , McGraw-Hill Book Co.,
1971.
[3] J. Lindhard, Dan. Mat. Fys. Medd. 28, no. 8 (1954).
[4] L. S. Brown and R. F. Sawyer, to be published.
[5] J. Lindhard and A. H. Sorensen, Phys. Rev. A 53, 2443 (1996), Sec. III.
[6] This interpolation formula was first obtained by F. Bloch , Ann. Phys. (Leipzig) 16, 285
(1933).
[7] H. A. Kramers, Physica 13, 401 (1947).
[8] L. S. Brown, unpublished.
[9] L. S. Brown, Quantum Field Theory , Cambridge University Press, 1992.
[10] L. S. Brown, unpublished.
8 |
arXiv:physics/9911057v1 [physics.ed-ph] 24 Nov 1999Solidification pipes: from solder pots to igneous rocks
M. Stewart Siuaand Dmitry Budkerb,c∗
aDepartment of Applied and Engineering Physics, Cornell Uni versity, Ithaca NY 14850
bDepartment of Physics, University of California, Berkeley , CA 94720-7300
cNuclear Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Labo ratory, Berkeley CA 94720
(July 26, 2013)
When a substance that shrinks in volume as it solidifies
(for example, lead) is melted in a container and then cooled,
a deep hole is often found in the center after resolidificatio n.
We use a simple model to describe the shape of the pipe and
compare it with experimental results.
In an experiment that involves atomic beams of thal-
lium [1], it was noticed that a deep narrow hole was
formed in the thallium that melted and resolidified. The
hole that formed was at the center of the container and
extended from the surface to nearly the bottom. It was
surmised that the phenomenon was due to the change in
volume of thallium during solidification. Such formation
is sometimes known as “pipe” in metallurgy [2]. In this
note, we discuss a simple model of pipe formation and
compare it with straightforward experiments that can be
carried out in classrooms.
Suppose a molten substance is cooling in a circular
cylinder. Assuming that solidification occurs from the
side walls of the container inwards in the radial direction
and neglecting the surface tension effects, we should ex-
pect the liquid level to drop as a layer of solid is formed
because of the higher density of the solid. Consider a
newly solidified layer of thickness dr. Let ρsandρlbe
the solid and liquid densities respectively, and let h(r)
be the height of solid as a function of radius r. Equat-
ing the mass before and after solidification, one obtains
a differential equation:
πr2hρl=π(r−dr)2(h−dh)ρl+ 2πrhdrρ s.(1)
Keeping only first order differentials, we get:
dh
h= 2/parenleftbiggρs−ρl
ρl/parenrightbiggdr
r. (2)
With the boundary condition of h(R) =h0, where Rand
h0are the radius of the container and the initial liquid
level respectively, the solution is:
h=h0/parenleftBigr
R/parenrightBig2α
, α=ρs−ρl
ρl≥0. (3)
This solution (plotted in Fig. 1 for the parameters
of an experiment described below) gives a sharp hole inthe center, the shape of which, for a given container and
liquid volume, is determined by α, the fractional density
change.
With this simple model in mind, we have performed
solidification experiments with various substances (this
time omitting the highly toxic thallium). The changes in
densities upon solidification for these materials and for
thallium are listed in Table I [2–4]. As expected, pipes
are observed in all materials tested except Wood’s metal
(an alloy of 50% Bi, 25% Pb, 12.5% Cd and 12.5% Sn).
Indeed, Wood’s metal has the property that the volume
changes little during solidification. Note that for sub-
stances that expand upon solidification (water, bismuth,
antimony and gallium), no ”anti-pipe” is formed because
the liquid is pushed out by the expanded solidified ma-
terial and assumes a horizontal level.
Photographs of several experimental samples are
shown in Figures 2-5. Figure 2 shows a sample of conven-
tional solder alloy (60% lead, 40% tin) that was melted
and poured into a glass beaker where it cooled and solid-
ified. The sample was then cut through the center of the
pipe, the resulting cross-section is shown in Figure 3.
Comparing the shape of the pipe predicted by our sim-
ple model (Fig. 1) to the one observed experimentally
(Figs. 2 and 3), one finds that, while the shape is repro-
duced qualitatively, there are also significant discrepan-
cies. First, the pipe does not actually go to the bottom
of the container as the model predicts. Second, the pipe
in the experiment turns out to be much wider. Presum-
ably this is because we have assumed that solidification
occurs only from the sides (see below).
In fact, when cooling from the surface and the bottom
becomes significant, other scenarios in addition to pipe
formation are possible. Fig. 4 shows a solidified lead
sample, in which a layer of solid on the surface covers
the pipe, turning it into a cavity. We can see that the
cavity width is greater than the pipe width predicted
from Equation 3. Qualitatively this can be understood
from the requirement of mass conservation: the material
solidified on the top does not have a chance to fill the
pipe.
To reduce the relative solidification rate from the sur-
face, we attempted accelerated cooling from the sides by
putting a beaker with molten solder into a water bath.
This time, instead of a deep pipe, a surface recession
shown in Fig. 5 was observed. To explain this observa-
tion, we modified the model by adding a term to account
1for solidification from the bottom.
Letkbe the ratio of the solidification rate of the bot-
tom to that of the sides. In order to keep the model as
simple as possible, we assume k=hr=0/R. (Note that
this would not be a valid approximation for large k. If
the solidification from the bottom is sufficiently rapid,
the entire substance solidifies before solidification from
the sides reaches r= 0. In the cases discussed here, how-
ever, the liquid level is high and the cooling rate from
the bottom is about the same as that from the sides, so
the assumption can be safely granted.) The differential
equation analogous to Equation 1, with the shorthand
h′=h−k(R−r), is then:
πr2h′ρl=π(r−dr)2(h′−kdr−dh)ρl
+2πrh′drρs+π(r−dr)2kdrρ s. (4)
Simplifying, we get
dh
dr=2α(h−kR)
r+ 3kα. (5)
The solution is a long algebraic expression, which we omit
here, but the solution plot (for k= 1) is given in Fig. 6.
Comparing it to the picture of the sample (Fig. 5), one
can find close resemblance between the two.
So far we have neglected the effect of surface tension
(a simple discussion of surface tension is given in [6], for
example). If wetting occurs at the solid-liquid interface
of the solidifying substance, the surface of the liquid will
not be flat, and the curvature of the surface will affect
the final shape of the solid. However, it is reasonable
to assume that this effect only becomes significant when
the dimension of the contained liquid is ”capillary” —
i.e., the radius of curvature of the surface near the wall, a,
becomes comparable to the radius of the liquid surface, r.
From dimensional analysis, we expect a2∼σ
ρg. Plugging
in realistic parameters, for example, ρl= 104kg/m3(for
metal), σ= 0.5N/m, we obtain a∼2mm. This means
that surface tension only becomes important near the
center of the container. The effect should be observable
at the bottom of the pipe. Qualitatively, we would expect
the bottom to be more concave than predicted by our
model due to the curved liquid surface, and this is indeed
the case (see Fig. 3).
In conclusion, we have discussed the mechanism of for-
mation of surface pipes upon resolidification of materials
withρl/ρs<1. These prominent formations can often be
observed in solder pots, candle containers, etc. They are
important in metallurgy [2] where they have to be taken
into account in casting processes. Similar formations also
occur in igneous rocks due to density changes of magma
on solidification [5]. However, it is often difficult to sepa-
rate this effect from a large number of other factors that
determine the structure and texture of igneous rocks.The authors are grateful to D. E. Brown, D. DeMille,
J. Demouthe, D. F. Kimball, S. M. Rochester, V. V.
Yashchuk for useful discussions. This work was sup-
ported by National Science Foundation under CAREER
Grant No. PHY-9733479.
-2-1012
r□cm-2-1012
012
h□cm
-2-1012
r□cm-2-1012
FIG. 1. A plot of solution (3) with h0= 2.5cm,
R= 2.3cm, α = 0.025.
FIG. 2. Top view of the solder sample. h0≈2.5cm,
R≈2.3cm.
FIG. 3. Cross section of the solder sample in Fig.2.
2FIG. 4. Cross section of the lead sample with h0≈9cm,
R≈2.2cm. Note that the pipe is closed from the top, forming
a cavity.
FIG. 5. Solder sample cooled in a water bath. h0≈3.6cm,
h0≈2.3cm. The curvature on the sides is, presumably,
due to anti-wetting of solder with the glass surface of the
container.-2 -1 1 2cm0.511.522.533.5cm
FIG. 6. A plot of the solution for Equation (5) with k= 1
and other parameters as those for the sample in Fig. 5. An
extremely narrow pipe (radius <10−3cm) is present in the
plot, but as one would reasonably expect, such delicate stru c-
ture is not found in the sample.
∗e-mail: budker@socrates.Berkeley.edu
[1] D. DeMille, D. Budker, and E. D. Commins, Measurement
of the Stark-induced amplitudes of the 6 P1/2to 7P1/2
transition in atomic thallium, Phys. Rev. A 50(6), 4657
(1994); Photoionization and photodissociation propertie s
ofTl2observed in a hypersonic beam, Chem. Phys. Lett.,
229(1-2), 35 (1994).
[2] B. Chalmers, Principles of Solification (John Wiley &
Sons, N.Y., 1964), pp. 285-287.
[3] Metal Handbook 2, 9th ed., Amer. Soc. for Metals, Ohio
(1979).
[4] The Merck Index, 8th ed., Merck & Co., N.J. (1968).
[5] F. Grout, Petrography and Petrology (McGraw-Hill, N.Y.
1932), p.36.
[6] A. Kikoin and I. Kikion, Molecular Physics (Mir Publish-
ers, 1978), pp. 320ff.
3 |