text:
# Asymptotic density and the asymptotics of partition functions 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 11P72; Secondary 11P81, 11B82,11B05. Key words and phrases. Partition functions, asymptotics of partitions, inverse theorems for partitions, additive number theory, asymptotic density.

## 1 The growth of $`p_A(n)`$

Let $`A`$ be a nonempty set of positive integers. The counting function $`A(x)`$ of the set $`A`$ counts the number of positive elements of $`A`$ that do not exceed $`x`$. Then $`0A(x)x`$, and so $`0A(x)/x1`$ for all $`x`$. The lower asymptotic density of $`A`$ is

$$d_L(A)=\underset{x\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{A(x)}{x}.$$

The upper asymptotic density of $`A`$ is

$$d_U(A)=\underset{x\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{A(x)}{x}.$$

We have $`0d_L(A)d_U(A)1`$ for every set $`A`$. If $`d_L(A)=d_U(A)`$, then the limit

$$d(A)=\underset{x\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{A(x)}{x}$$

exists, and is called the asymptotic density of the set $`A`$.

A partition of $`n`$ with parts in $`A`$ is a representation of $`n`$ as a sum of not necessarily distinct elements of $`A`$, where the number of summands is unrestricted. The summands are called the parts of the partition. The partition function $`p_A(n)`$ counts the number of partitions of $`n`$ into parts belonging to the set $`A`$. Two partitions that differ only in the order of their parts are counted as the same partition. We define $`p_A(0)=1`$ and $`p_A(n)=0`$ for $`n1`$.

The partition function for the set of all positive integers is denoted $`p(n)`$. Clearly, $`0p_A(n)p(n)`$ for every integer $`n`$ and every set $`A`$. A classical result of Hardy and Ramanujan  and Uspensky  states that

$$\mathrm{log}p(n)c_0\sqrt{n},$$

where

$$c_0=\pi \sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}=2\sqrt{\frac{\pi ^2}{6}}.$$

Erdős  has given an elementary proof of this result.

Let $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)`$ denote the greatest common divisor of the elements of $`A`$. If $`d=\mathrm{gcd}(A)>1`$, consider the set $`A^{}=\{a/d:aA\}`$. Then $`A^{}`$ is a nonempty set of positive integers such that $`\mathrm{gcd}(A^{})=1`$, and

$$p_A(n)=\{\begin{array}{cc}0\hfill & \text{if }n0(modd)\text{}\hfill \\ p_A^{}\left(n/d\right)\hfill & \text{if }n0(modd)\text{}\hfill \end{array}$$

Thus, it suffices to consider only partition functions for sets $`A`$ such that $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$.

In this paper we investigate the relationship between the upper and lower asymptotic densities of a set $`A`$ and the asymptotic behavior of $`\mathrm{log}p_A(n)`$. In particular, we give a complete and elementary proof of the theorem that, for $`\alpha >0`$, the set $`A`$ has density $`\alpha `$ if and only if $`\mathrm{log}p_A(n)c_0\sqrt{\alpha n}`$. This result was stated, with a sketch of a proof, in a beautiful paper of Erdős .

Many other results about the asymptotics of partition functions can be found in Andrews \[1, Chapter 6\] and Odlyzko .

## 2 Some lemmas about partition functions

###### Lemma 1

Let $`A`$ be a set of positive integers. If $`p_A(n_0)1`$, then $`p_A(n+n_0)p_A(n)`$ for every nonnegative integer $`n`$.

Proof. The inequality is true for $`n=0`$, since $`p_A(n_0)1=p_A(0)`$. We fix one partition $`n_0=a_1^{}+\mathrm{}+a_r^{}`$. Let $`n1`$. To every partition

$$n=a_1+\mathrm{}+a_k$$

we associate the partition

$$n+n_0=a_1+\mathrm{}+a_k+a_1^{}+\mathrm{}+a_r^{}.$$

This is a one–to–one map from partitions of $`n`$ to partitions of $`n+n_0`$, and so $`p_A(n)p_A(n+n_0)`$.

###### Lemma 2

Let $`A`$ be a nonempty set of positive integers, and let $`a_1A`$. For every number $`xa_1`$ there exists an integer $`u`$ such that

$$xa_1<ux$$

and

$$\mathrm{max}\{p_A(n):0nx\}=p_A(u).$$

Proof. If $`a_1A`$, then $`p_A(a_1)1`$. By Lemma 1,

$$p_A(n)p_A(n+a_1)$$

for every nonnegative integer $`n`$. Therefore, the partition function $`p_A(n)`$ is increasing in every congruence class modulo $`a_1`$. If $`0ra_11`$, then

$$\mathrm{max}\{p_A(n):0nx,nr(moda_1)\}=p_A(u_r)$$

for some integer $`u_r(xa_1,x].`$ It follows that

$$\mathrm{max}\{p_A(n):0nx\}=p_A(u),$$

where

$$u=\mathrm{max}\{u_0,u_1,\mathrm{},u_{a_11}\}(xa_1,x].$$

This completes the proof.

###### Lemma 3

Let $`A`$ be a nonempty finite set of relatively prime positive integers, and let $`k`$ be the cardinality of $`A`$. Let $`p_A(n)`$ denote the number of partitions of $`n`$ into parts belonging to $`A`$. Then

$$p_A(n)=\left(\frac{1}{_{aA}a}\right)\frac{n^{k1}}{(k1)!}+O\left(n^{k2}\right).$$

Proof. This is an old result. The usual proof (Netto , Pólya–Szegö \[9, Problem 27\]) is based on the partial fraction decomposition of the generating function for $`p_A(n)`$. There is also an arithmetic proof due to Nathanson .

###### Lemma 4

Let $`n_0`$ be a positive integer, and let $`A`$ be the set of all integers greater than or equal to $`n_0`$. Then $`p_A(n)`$ is increasing for all positive integers $`n`$, and strictly increasing for $`n3n_0+2`$.

Proof. If $`1n<n_0`$, then $`p_A(n)=0`$.

We say that a partition $`a_1+a_2+\mathrm{}+a_r`$ has a unique largest part if $`a_1>a_2\mathrm{}a_r`$. Let $`nn_0`$. Then $`p_A(n)1`$ since $`nA`$. To every partition $`\pi `$ of $`n`$ we associate a partition of $`n+1`$ by adding 1 to the largest part of $`\pi `$. This is a one–to–one map from the set of all partitions of $`n`$ and to the set of partitions of $`n+1`$ with a unique largest part, and so $`p_A(n)p_A(n+1)`$ for $`n1`$.

Let $`n3n_0+2`$. If $`nn_0`$ is even, then $`a=(nn_0)/2n_0+1`$, and $`n=2a+n_0`$. If $`nn_0`$ is odd, then $`a=(nn_01)/2n_0+1`$, and $`n=2a+(n_0+1)`$. In both cases, $`aA`$. Therefore, if $`n3n_0+2`$, then there exists a partition of $`n`$ with parts in $`A`$ and with no unique largest part, and so $`p_A(n)<p_A(n+1)`$. This completes the proof.

A set of positive integers is cofinite if it contains all but finitely many positive integers.

###### Lemma 5

Let $`A`$ be a cofinite set of positive integers. Then

$$\mathrm{log}p_A(n)c_0\sqrt{n}.$$

Proof. Since $`A`$ is cofinite, we can choose an integer $`n_0>1`$ such that $`A`$ contains the set $`A^{}=\{nn_0\}`$. Then

$$p_A^{}(n)p_A(n)p(n).$$

Since $`\mathrm{log}p(n)c_0\sqrt{n}`$, it suffices to prove that $`\mathrm{log}p_A^{}(n)c_0\sqrt{n}`$.

Let $`F=\{n:1nn_01\}`$. Applying Lemma 3 with $`k=n_01`$, we obtain a constant $`c1`$ such that $`p_F(n)cn^{n_02}`$ for all positive integers $`n`$. Each part of a partition of $`n`$ must belong either to $`A^{}`$ or to $`F`$, and so every partition of $`n`$ is uniquely of the form $`n=n^{}+(nn^{})`$, where $`n^{}`$ is a sum of elements of $`A^{}`$ and $`nn^{}`$ is a sum of elements of $`F`$. By Lemma 4, the partition function $`p_A^{}(n)`$ is increasing. Let $`nn_0`$. Then $`p_A^{}(n)1`$ and

$`p(n)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n^{}=0}{\overset{n}{}}}p_A^{}(n^{})p_F(nn^{})`$
$``$ $`cn^{n_02}{\displaystyle \underset{n^{}=0}{\overset{n}{}}}p_A^{}(n^{})`$
$``$ $`2cn^{n_01}p_A^{}(n).`$
Taking logarithms of both sides, we obtain

$`\mathrm{log}p(n)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{log}2c+(n_01)\mathrm{log}n+\mathrm{log}p_A^{}(n)`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{log}2c+(n_01)\mathrm{log}n+\mathrm{log}p(n)`$
and so

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}p(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}2c+(n_01)\mathrm{log}n}{c_0\sqrt{n}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}p_A^{}(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}2c+(n_01)\mathrm{log}n}{c_0\sqrt{n}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{log}p(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}}.`$
Taking the limit as $`n`$ goes to infinity, we have $`\mathrm{log}p_A^{}(n)c_0\sqrt{n}`$. This completes the proof.

## 3 Abelian and tauberian theorems

In this section we derive two results in analysis that will be used in the proof of Theorem 7. To every sequence $`B=\{b_n\}_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}`$ of real numbers we can associate the power series $`f(x)=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}b_nx^n`$. We shall assume that the power series converges for $`|x|<1`$. We think of the function $`f(x)`$ as a kind of average over the sequence $`B`$. Roughly speaking, an abelian theorem asserts that if the sequence $`B`$ has some property, then the function $`f(x)`$ has some related property. Conversely, a tauberian theorem asserts that if the function $`f(x)`$ has some property, then the sequence $`B`$ has a related property.

The following theorem is abelian.

###### Theorem 1

Let $`B=\{b_n\}_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that the power series $`f(x)=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}b_nx^n`$ converges for $`|x|<1`$. If

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{\mathrm{log}b_n}{\sqrt{n}}2\sqrt{\alpha },$$
(1)
then

$$\underset{x1^{}}{lim\; inf}(1x)\mathrm{log}f(x)\alpha .$$
(2)
If

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{\mathrm{log}b_n}{\sqrt{n}}2\sqrt{\beta },$$
(3)
then

$$\underset{x1^{}}{lim\; sup}(1x)\mathrm{log}f(x)\beta .$$
(4)
In particular, if $`\alpha >0`$ and

$$\mathrm{log}b_n2\sqrt{\alpha n},$$
(5)
then

$$\mathrm{log}f(x)\frac{\alpha }{1x}.$$
(6)
Proof. Let $`0<\epsilon <1.`$ Inequality (1) implies that there exists a positive integer $`N_0=N_0(\epsilon )`$ such that

$$b_n>e^{2(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha n}}\text{for all }nN_0.$$

For $`0<x<1`$, we let $`x=e^t`$, where $`t=t(x)=\mathrm{log}x>0`$, and $`t`$ decreases to 0 as $`x`$ increases to 1.

If $`nN_0`$, then

$$b_nx^n>e^{2(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha n}}e^{tn}=e^{2(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha n}tn}.$$

Completing the square in the exponent, we obtain

$$2(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha n}tn=\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t}t\left(\sqrt{n}\frac{(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha }}{t}\right)^2,$$

and so

$$b_nx^n>e^{\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t}}e^{t\left(\sqrt{n}\frac{(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha }}{t}\right)^2}.$$

Choose $`t_0>0`$ such that

$$\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t_0^2}>N_0+1,$$

and let $`x_0=e^{t_0}<1`$. If $`x_0<x<1`$ and $`x=e^t`$, then $`0<t<t_0`$. Let

$$n_x=\left[\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t^2}\right].$$

Then

$$N_0<\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t^2}1<n_x\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t^2}$$

and

$$\frac{(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha }}{t}1<\sqrt{\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t^2}1}<\sqrt{n_x}\frac{(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha }}{t}.$$

It follows that

$$\left(\sqrt{n_x}\frac{(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha }}{t}\right)^2<1,$$

and so

$$b_{n_x}x^{n_x}>e^{\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t}}e^t=e^{\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t}t}.$$

Since $`b_nx^n0`$ for all $`n0`$, we have

$$f(x)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}b_nx^nb_{n_x}x^{n_x}>e^{\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t}t}.$$

Therefore,

$$\mathrm{log}f(x)>\frac{(1\epsilon )^2\alpha }{t}t$$

and

$$t\mathrm{log}f(x)>(1\epsilon )^2\alpha t^2.$$

Since

$$t=\mathrm{log}x1x\text{as }x1^{}\text{,}$$

it follows that

$`\underset{x1^{}}{lim\; inf}(1x)\mathrm{log}f(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\underset{x1^{}}{lim\; inf}t\mathrm{log}f(x)`$
$``$ $`\underset{t0^+}{lim\; inf}\left((1\epsilon )^2\alpha t^2\right)`$
$`=`$ $`(1\epsilon )^2\alpha .`$
This inequality is true for every $`\epsilon >0,`$ and so

$$\underset{x1^{}}{lim\; inf}(1x)\mathrm{log}f(x)\alpha .$$

This proves (2).

If (3) holds, then there exists a positive integer $`N_0=N_0(\epsilon )`$ such that

$$b_n<e^{2(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta n}}\text{for all }nN_0$$

Let $`x=e^t`$. Then

$`f(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}b_nx^n`$
$`<`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=0}{\overset{N_01}{}}}b_nx^n+e^{\frac{(1+\epsilon )^2\beta }{t}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=N_0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}e^{t\left(\sqrt{n}\frac{(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta }}{t}\right)^2}`$
$`=`$ $`c_1(\epsilon )+e^{\frac{(1+\epsilon )^2\beta }{t}}{\displaystyle \underset{n=N_0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}e^{t\left(\sqrt{n}\frac{(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta }}{t}\right)^2},`$
where

$$0\underset{n=0}{\overset{N_01}{}}b_nx^n\underset{n=0}{\overset{N_01}{}}b_n=c_1(\epsilon ).$$

If

$$n>\left[\frac{16\beta }{t^2}\right]=N_1(t)=N_1,$$

then

$$\sqrt{n}>\frac{4\sqrt{\beta }}{t}>\frac{2(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta }}{t}$$

and

$$\sqrt{n}\frac{(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta }}{t}>\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}.$$

It follows that

$$e^{t\left(\sqrt{n}\frac{(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta }}{t}\right)^2}<e^{t\left(\frac{\sqrt{n}}{2}\right)^2}=e^{\frac{tn}{4}},$$

and so

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n=N_1+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}e^{t\left(\sqrt{n}\frac{(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta }}{t}\right)^2}`$ $`<`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=N_1+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}e^{\frac{tn}{4}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{t(N_1+1)/4}}{1e^{t/4}}}`$
$`<`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{8e^{4\beta /t}}{t}},`$
since $`1t/4<e^{t/4}<1t/8`$ for $`0<t<1`$. Moreover,

$$\underset{n=N_0}{\overset{N_1}{}}e^{t\left(\sqrt{n}\frac{(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta }}{t}\right)^2}<N_1\frac{16\beta }{t^2}.$$

Consequently,

$`f(x)`$ $``$ $`c_1(\epsilon )+e^{\frac{(1+\epsilon )^2\beta }{t}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{16\sqrt{\beta }}{t^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{8e^{4\beta /t}}{t}}\right)`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{c_2(\epsilon )e^{\frac{(1+\epsilon )^2\beta }{t}}}{t^2}}.`$
Therefore,

$$\mathrm{log}f(x)\frac{(1+\epsilon )^2\beta }{t}+\mathrm{log}\frac{c_2(\epsilon )}{t^2},$$

and so

$$t\mathrm{log}f(x)(1+\epsilon )^2\beta +t\mathrm{log}\frac{c_2(\epsilon )}{t^2}.$$

Then

$$\underset{x1^{}}{lim\; sup}(1x)\mathrm{log}f(x)=\underset{t0^+}{lim\; sup}t\mathrm{log}f(x)(1+\epsilon )^2\beta .$$

This inequality is true for every $`\epsilon >0`$, and so

$$\underset{x1^{}}{lim\; sup}(1x)\mathrm{log}f(x)\beta .$$

This proves (4).

If (5) holds, that is, if

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\mathrm{log}b_n}{2\sqrt{n}}=\sqrt{\alpha }>0,$$

then (1) and (3) hold with $`\alpha =\beta `$. These inequalities imply (2) and (4), and so

$$\underset{x1^{}}{lim}(1x)\mathrm{log}f(x)=\alpha ,$$

or, equivalently,

$$\mathrm{log}f(x)\frac{\alpha }{1x}.$$

This completes the proof.

The statement that (5) implies (6) appears in Erdős .

The following tauberian theorem generalizes a well–known result of Hardy and Littlewood .

###### Theorem 2

Let $`B=\{b_n\}_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be a sequence of nonnegative real numbers such that the power series

$$f(x)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}b_nx^n$$

converges for $`|x|<1`$. Let

$$S_B(n)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{n}{}}b_k.$$

Let $`c>0.`$ If

$$\underset{x1^{}}{lim\; sup}(1x)f(x)c,$$
(7)
then

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{S_B(n)}{n}c.$$
(8)
If

$$\underset{x1^{}}{lim\; inf}(1x)f(x)c,$$
(9)
then

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{S_B(n)}{n}c.$$
(10)
In particular, if

$$f(x)\frac{c}{1x}\text{as }x1^{}\text{,}$$
(11)
then

$$S_B(n)cn.$$
(12)
Proof. The Hardy–Littlewood theorem states that (11) implies (12). The proofs that (7) implies (8) and that (9) implies (10) require only a simple modification of Karamata’s method, as presented in Titchmarsh \[10, Chapter 7\].

## 4 Direct and inverse theorems for $`p_A(n)`$

A direct theorem uses information about the sequence $`A`$ to deduce properties of the partition function $`p_A(n)`$. An inverse theorem uses information about the partition function $`p_A(n)`$ to deduce properties of the sequence $`A`$. We begin with a direct theorem.

###### Theorem 3

Let $`A`$ be an infinite set of positive integers with $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$. If $`d_L(A)\alpha `$, then

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}\sqrt{\alpha }.$$

If $`d_U(A)\beta `$, then

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}\sqrt{\beta }.$$

Proof. Let $`A=\{a_k\}_{k=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$, where $`a_1<a_2<\mathrm{}`$. Since $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$, there is an integer $`\mathrm{}_0`$ such that $`\mathrm{gcd}\{a_k:1k\mathrm{}_01\}=1`$. Let $`\epsilon >0`$. If $`d_U(A)\beta `$, there exists an integer $`k_0=k_0(\epsilon )\mathrm{}_0`$ such that, for all $`kk_0`$,

$$\frac{k}{a_k}=\frac{A(a_k)}{a_k}<\beta +\epsilon ,$$

and so

$$k<(\beta +\epsilon )a_k.$$

Let $`A^{}=\{a_kA:kk_0\}`$ and $`F=AA^{}=\{a_kA:1kk_01\}`$.

Let $`n`$ and $`n^{}`$ be positive integers, $`n^{}n`$, and let

$$n^{}=a_{k_1}+a_{k_2}+\mathrm{}+a_{k_r}$$

be a partition of $`n^{}`$ with parts in $`A^{}`$. Then $`k_ik_0`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$. To this partition of $`n^{}`$ we associate the partition

$$m=k_1+k_2+\mathrm{}+k_r.$$

Since $`k_i<(\beta +\epsilon )a_{k_i}`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},r`$, we have

$`m`$ $`<`$ $`(\beta +\epsilon )a_{k_1}+(\beta +\epsilon )a_{k_2}+\mathrm{}+(\beta +\epsilon )a_{k_r}`$
$`=`$ $`(\beta +\epsilon )n^{}`$
$``$ $`(\beta +\epsilon )n.`$
This is a one–to–one mapping from partitions of $`n^{}`$ with parts in $`A^{}`$ to partitions of integers less than $`(\beta +\epsilon )n`$, and so

$`p_A^{}(n^{})`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m<(\beta +\epsilon )n}{}}p(m)`$
$``$ $`(\beta +\epsilon )n\mathrm{max}\{p(m):m<(\beta +\epsilon )n\}`$
$``$ $`(\beta +\epsilon )np([(\beta +\epsilon )n])`$
$`<`$ $`2np([(\beta +\epsilon )n]),`$
since the unrestricted partition function $`p(n)`$ is strictly increasing.

We have $`A=A^{}F`$, where $`A^{}F=\mathrm{}`$. The set $`F`$ is a nonempty finite set of integers of cardinality $`k_01`$, and $`\mathrm{gcd}(F)=1`$ since $`k_0\mathrm{}_0`$. By Theorem 3, there exists a constant $`c`$ such that

$$p_F(n)cn^{k_02}$$

for every positive integer $`n`$. Every partition of $`n`$ with parts in $`A`$ can be decomposed uniquely into a partition of $`n^{}`$ with parts in $`A^{}`$ and a partition of $`nn^{}`$ with parts in $`F`$, for some nonnegative integer $`n^{}n`$. Then

$`p_A(n)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n^{}=0}{\overset{n}{}}}p_A^{}(n^{})p_F(nn^{})`$
$``$ $`cn^{k_02}{\displaystyle \underset{n^{}=0}{\overset{n}{}}}p_A^{}(n^{})`$
$``$ $`cn^{k_02}(n+1)\mathrm{max}\{p_A^{}(n^{}):n^{}=0,1,\mathrm{},n\}`$
$``$ $`2cn^{k_01}\mathrm{max}\{p_A^{}(n^{}):n^{}=0,1,\mathrm{},n\}`$
$`<`$ $`2cn^{k_01}2np([(\beta +\epsilon )n])`$
$`=`$ $`4cn^{k_0}p([(\beta +\epsilon )n]).`$
Since $`\mathrm{log}p(n)c_0\sqrt{n}`$, it follows that for every $`\epsilon >0`$ there exists an integer $`n_0(\epsilon )`$ such that

$$\mathrm{log}p(n)<(1+\epsilon )c_0\sqrt{n}$$

for $`nn_0(\epsilon ).`$ Therefore,

$`\mathrm{log}p_A(n)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{log}4c+k_0\mathrm{log}n+\mathrm{log}p([(\beta +\epsilon )n])`$
$`<`$ $`\mathrm{log}4c+k_0\mathrm{log}n+(1+\epsilon )c_0\sqrt{(\beta +\epsilon )n}`$
for $`n(n_0(\epsilon )+1)/(\beta +\epsilon ).`$ Dividing by $`c_0\sqrt{n}`$, we obtain

$$\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}\frac{\mathrm{log}4c+k_0\mathrm{log}n}{c_0\sqrt{n}}+(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta +\epsilon },$$

and so

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}(1+\epsilon )\sqrt{\beta +\epsilon }.$$

Since this inequality is true for all $`\epsilon >0`$, we obtain

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}\sqrt{\beta }.$$

Next we prove that if $`d_L(A)\alpha `$, then

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}\sqrt{\alpha }.$$

This inequality is trivial if $`\alpha =0`$, since $`\mathrm{log}p_A(n)/c_0\sqrt{n}0`$ for all sufficiently large $`n`$.

Let $`\alpha >0`$ and

$$0<\epsilon <\alpha .$$

There exists an integer $`k_0=k_0(\epsilon )`$ such that, for all $`kk_0`$,

$$\frac{k}{a_k}=\frac{A(a_k)}{a_k}>\alpha \epsilon ,$$

and so

$$a_k<\frac{k}{\alpha \epsilon }.$$

Since $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$, every sufficiently large integer can be written as a sum of elements of $`A`$, and so there exists an integer $`N_0`$ such that $`p_A(n)1`$ for all $`nN_0`$. Let $`p^{}(n)`$ denote the number of partitions of $`n`$ into parts $`kk_0`$. To every partition

$$n=k_1+\mathrm{}+k_r\text{with }k_1\mathrm{}k_rk_0\text{,}$$

we associate the partition

$$m=a_{k_1}+\mathrm{}+a_{k_r}.$$

Then

$$m<\frac{k_1}{\alpha \epsilon }+\mathrm{}+\frac{k_1}{\alpha \epsilon }=\frac{n}{\alpha \epsilon }.$$

This is a one–to–one mapping from partitions of $`n`$ with parts greater than or equal to $`k_0`$ to partitions of integers $`m`$ less than $`n/(\alpha \epsilon )`$, and so

$`p^{}(n)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m<\frac{n}{\alpha \epsilon }}{}}p_A(m)`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{n}{\alpha \epsilon }}\mathrm{max}\left\{p_A(m):m<{\displaystyle \frac{n}{\alpha \epsilon }}\right\}`$
$`<`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{n}{\alpha \epsilon }}p_A(u_n),`$
where, by Lemma 2 (since $`a_1A`$), the integer $`u_n`$ belongs to the bounded interval

$$\frac{n}{\alpha \epsilon }a_1<u_n\frac{n}{\alpha \epsilon }.$$

The sequence $`\{u_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ is not necessarily increasing, but

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}u_n=\mathrm{}.$$

Let $`d`$ be the unique positive integer such that

$$0<(\alpha \epsilon )a_1d<(\alpha \epsilon )a_1+1.$$

For every $`i,j1`$,

$`u_{(i+j)d}u_{id}`$ $`>`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{(i+j)d}{\alpha \epsilon }}a_1\right){\displaystyle \frac{id}{\alpha \epsilon }}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{jd}{\alpha \epsilon }}a_1`$
$``$ $`(j1)a_1.`$
It follows that $`u_{(i+1)d}>u_{id}`$, and so the sequence $`\{u_{id}\}_{i=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ is strictly increasing. Similarly,

$`u_{(i+j)d}u_{id}`$ $`<`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(i+j)d}{\alpha \epsilon }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{id}{\alpha \epsilon }}a_1\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{jd}{\alpha \epsilon }}+a_1`$
$`<`$ $`(j+1)a_1+{\displaystyle \frac{j}{\alpha \epsilon }}.`$
Let $`j_0`$ be the unique integer such that

$$\frac{N_0}{a_1}+1j_0<\frac{N_0}{a_1}+2.$$

Then

$$u_{id}u_{(ij_0)d}>(j_01)a_1N_0$$

for all $`ij_0`$.

For every integer $`nj_0d`$ there exists a unique integer $`\mathrm{}j_0`$ such that

$$u_\mathrm{}dn<u_{(\mathrm{}+1)d}.$$

Then

$$nu_{(\mathrm{}j_0)d}<u_{(\mathrm{}+1)d}u_{(\mathrm{}j_0)d}<(j_0+2)d+\frac{j_0+1}{\alpha \epsilon }$$

and

$$nu_{(\mathrm{}j_0)d}u_\mathrm{}du_{(\mathrm{}j_0)d}>N_0.$$

Since

$$p_A(nu_{(\mathrm{}j_0)d})1,$$

Lemma 1 implies that

$$p_A(n)p_A(u_{(\mathrm{}j_0)d})>\left(\frac{\alpha \epsilon }{(\mathrm{}j_0)d}\right)p^{}((\mathrm{}j_0)d).$$

Since

$$n<u_{(\mathrm{}+1)d}\frac{(\mathrm{}+1)d}{\alpha \epsilon },$$

it follows that

$$(\mathrm{}j_0)d>(\alpha \epsilon )n(j_0+1)d.$$

Since $`p^{}(n)`$ is the partition function of a cofinite subset of the positive integers, Lemma 5 implies that for $`n`$ sufficiently large,

$`\mathrm{log}p_A(n)`$ $`>`$ $`\mathrm{log}p^{}((\mathrm{}j_0)d)+\mathrm{log}(\alpha \epsilon )\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{}j_0)d`$
$`>`$ $`(1\epsilon )c_0\sqrt{(\mathrm{}j_0)d}+\mathrm{log}(\alpha \epsilon )\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{}j_0)d`$
$`>`$ $`(1\epsilon )c_0\sqrt{(\alpha \epsilon )n(j_0+1)d}+\mathrm{log}(\alpha \epsilon )\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{}j_0)d.`$
Dividing by $`c_0\sqrt{n}`$, we obtain

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}(1\epsilon )\sqrt{\alpha \epsilon }.$$

This inequality holds for $`0<\epsilon <\alpha `$, and so

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}\sqrt{\alpha }.$$

This completes the proof.

###### Theorem 4

Let $`A`$ be a set of positive integers with $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$. If $`d(A)=\alpha >0`$, then $`\mathrm{log}p_A(n)c_0\sqrt{\alpha n}`$.

Proof. This follows from Theorem 3 with $`\alpha =\beta `$.

###### Theorem 5

Let $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_{\mathrm{}},m`$ be integers such that

$$1a_1<\mathrm{}<a_{\mathrm{}}m$$

and

$$(a_1,\mathrm{},a_{\mathrm{}},m)=1.$$

Let $`A`$ be the set of all positive integers $`a`$ such that $`aa_i(modm)`$ for some $`i=1,\mathrm{},\mathrm{}`$. Then

$$\mathrm{log}p_A(n)c_0\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{}n}{m}}.$$

Proof. The set $`A`$ satisfies $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$ and $`d(A)=\mathrm{}/m`$, and so the result follows from Theorem 4 with $`\alpha =\mathrm{}/m`$. Using Erdős’s elementary method, Nathanson  has also given a direct proof of Theorem 5.

###### Theorem 6

Let $`A`$ be a set of positive integers with $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$. If $`d(A)=0`$, then $`\mathrm{log}p_A(n)=o(\sqrt{n}).`$

Proof. If $`A`$ is infinite, this follows from Theorem 3 with $`\beta =0`$. If $`A`$ is finite, this follows from Lemma 3.

The next result is an inverse theorem; it shows how the growth of the partition function $`p_A(n)`$ determines the asymptotic density of the sequence $`A`$.

###### Theorem 7

Let $`A`$ be an infinite set of positive integers with $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$. If $`\alpha >0`$ and

$$\mathrm{log}p_A(n)c_0\sqrt{\alpha n}=2\sqrt{\frac{\pi ^2\alpha n}{6}},$$
(13)
then $`A`$ has asymptotic density $`\alpha `$.

Proof. The generating function

$$f(x)=\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}p_A(n)x^n=\underset{aA}{}(1x^a)^1$$

converges for $`|x|<1`$, and

$`\mathrm{log}f(x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{aA}{}}\mathrm{log}(1x^a)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{aA}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{x^{ak}}{k}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}b_{\mathrm{}}x^{\mathrm{}},`$
where

$$b_{\mathrm{}}=\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{aA}{\mathrm{}=ak}}{}\frac{1}{k}0.$$

Let

$$S_B(x)=\underset{\mathrm{}x}{}b_{\mathrm{}}.$$

Then $`S_B(x)0`$ for all $`x`$, and $`S_B(x)=0`$ if $`x<1`$. We have

$`S_B(n)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n}{}}}b_{\mathrm{}}={\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{}=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{aA}{\mathrm{}=ak}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}{\displaystyle \underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{aA}{an/k}}{}}1={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}A\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{k}}\right).`$
By Möbius inversion, we have

$$A(n)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{\mu (k)}{k}S_B\left(\frac{n}{k}\right).$$

By Theorem 1, the asymptotic formula (13) implies that

$$(1x)\mathrm{log}f(x)\frac{\pi ^2\alpha }{6}\text{ as }x1^{}\text{.}$$

Theorem 2 implies that

$$S_B(n)\frac{\pi ^2\alpha n}{6}.$$

We define the function $`r(x)`$ by

$$\frac{S_B(x)}{x}=\frac{\pi ^2\alpha }{6}+r(x).$$

Then $`r(x)=o(x)`$. For every $`\epsilon >0`$ there exists an integer $`n_0=n_0(\epsilon )>e^2`$ such that

$$|r(x)|<\epsilon $$

for all $`xn_0.`$ If $`k>n/n_0`$, then $`n/k<n_0`$ and $`0S_B(n/k)S_B(n_0)`$. Therefore,

$`A(n)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (k)}{k}}S_B\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{k}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{1kn/n_0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (k)}{k}}S_B\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{k}}\right)+{\displaystyle \underset{n/n_0<kn}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (k)}{k}}S_B\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{k}}\right)`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2\alpha n}{6}}{\displaystyle \underset{1kn/n_0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (k)}{k^2}}+n{\displaystyle \underset{1kn/n_0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (k)}{k^2}}r\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{k}}\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{n/n_0<kn}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mu (k)}{k}}S_B\left({\displaystyle \frac{n}{k}}\right).`$
We evaluate these three terms separately. Since

$$\underset{1kn/n_0}{}\frac{\mu (k)}{k^2}=\frac{6}{\pi ^2}\underset{k>n/n_0}{}\frac{\mu (k)}{k^2}=\frac{6}{\pi ^2}+O\left(\frac{n_0}{n}\right),$$

it follows that

$$\frac{\pi ^2\alpha n}{6}\underset{1kn/n_0}{}\frac{\mu (k)}{k^2}=\alpha n+O\left(1\right).$$

The second term satisfies

$$\left|n\underset{1kn/n_0}{}\frac{\mu (k)}{k^2}r\left(\frac{n}{k}\right)\right|\epsilon n\underset{1kn/n_0}{}\frac{1}{k^2}=O(\epsilon n).$$

The last term is bounded independent of $`n`$, since

$$\left|\underset{n/n_0<kn}{}\frac{\mu (k)}{k}S_B\left(\frac{n}{k}\right)\right|S_B(n_0)\underset{n/n_0<kn}{}\frac{1}{k}2S_B(n_0)\mathrm{log}n_0=O(1).$$

Therefore,

$$A(n)=\alpha n+O(\epsilon n)+O(1),$$

and so $`d(A)=\alpha `$. This completes the proof.

###### Theorem 8

Let $`A`$ be a set of positive integers with $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$, and let $`\alpha >0`$. Then $`d(A)=\alpha `$ if and only if

$$\mathrm{log}p_A(n)c_0\sqrt{\alpha n}.$$

Proof. This follows immediately from Theorem 3 and Theorem 7.

Remark. Let $`A`$ be an infinite set of positive integers with $`\mathrm{gcd}(A)=1`$. Let $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ be nonnegative real numbers such that

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}\sqrt{\alpha }$$

and

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{\mathrm{log}p_A(n)}{c_0\sqrt{n}}\sqrt{\beta }.$$

Does it follow that $`d_L(A)\alpha `$ and $`d_U(A)\beta `$? This would imply that $`d_L(A)=\alpha `$ if and only if $`lim\; inf_n\mathrm{}\mathrm{log}p_A(n)/c_0\sqrt{n}=\sqrt{\alpha }`$, and $`d_U(A)=\beta `$ if and only if $`lim\; sup_n\mathrm{}\mathrm{log}p_A(n)/c_0\sqrt{n}=\sqrt{\beta }`$.


format: text

text:
# Step wise destruction of the pair correlations in micro clusters by a magnetic field

## Abstract

The response of $`nm`$-size spherical superconducting clusters to a magnetic field is studied for the canonical ensemble of electrons in a single degenerate shell. For temperatures close to zero, the discreteness of the electronic states causes a step like destruction of the pair correlations with increasing field strength, which shows up as peaks in the susceptibility and heat capacity. At higher temperatures the transition becomes smoothed out and extends to field strengths where the pair correlations are destroyed at zero temperature.

The electron pair correlations in small systems where the single-particle spectrum is discrete and the mean level spacing is comparable with the pairing gap have recently been studied by means of electron transport through $`nm`$-scale Al clusters . The pair correlations were found to sustain an external magnetic field of several Tesla, in contrast to much weaker critical field of $`H_c=99`$ Gauss of bulk Al. A step wise destruction of the pair correlations was suggested . It is caused by the subsequent excitation of quasi particle levels, which gain energy due to the interaction of their spin with the external field. This mechanism is very different from the transition to the normal state caused by a magnetic field applied to a macroscopic superconductor. Hence it is expected that physical quantities, as the susceptibility $`\chi `$ and the specific heat capacity $`C`$, which indicate the transition, behave very differently in the micro cluster. The present letter addresses this question.

For the micro clusters the energy to remove an electron is much larger than the temperature $`T`$. The fixed number of the electrons on the cluster was demonstrated by the tunneling experiments . Hence, one must study the transition from the paired to the unpaired state in the frame of the canonical ensemble. The small number of particles taking part in superconductivity causes considerable fluctuations of the order parameter, which modify the transition . Consequences of particle number conservation for the pair correlations in micro clusters have also been discussed recently in , where a more complete list of references to earlier work can be found.

In order to elucidate the qualitative features we consider the highly idealized model of pair correlations between electrons in a degenerate level, which permits to calculate the canonical partition function. A perfect Al-sphere of radius $`R=(15)nm`$ confines $`N210^3310^5`$ free electrons. Its electron levels have good angular momentum $`l`$. Taking the electron spin into account, each of these levels has a degeneracy of $`2M`$, where $`M=2l+1`$. For a spherical oscillator potential, the average angular momentum at the Fermi surface is $`łN^{1/3}1.4`$, where $`N`$ is the number of free electrons. The distance between these levels is $`\mathrm{\Delta }e10`$ $`meV`$ is much larger than the BCS gap parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which is less than 1$`meV`$. Therefore, it is sufficient to consider the pair correlations within the last incompletely filled level. This single-shell model also applies to a hemisphere, because its spectrum consists of the spherical levels with odd $`l`$, and to clusters with a superconducting layer covering an insulating sphere (cf. ) or hemisphere.

The single-shell model Hamiltonian

$`H=H_{pair}\omega (L_z+2S_z),`$ (1)
$`H_{pair}=GA^+A,A^+={\displaystyle \underset{k>0}{}}a_k^+a_{\overline{k}}^+,`$ (2)
consists of the pairing interaction $`H_{pair}`$, which acts between the electrons in the last shell with the effective strength $`G`$, and the interaction with the magnetic field. We introduced the Larmour frequency $`\mathrm{}\omega =\mu _BB`$, the Bohr magneton $`\mu _B`$, the $`z`$-components of the total orbital angular momentum and spin $`L_z`$ and $`S_z`$. The label $`k=\{\lambda ,\sigma \}`$ denotes the $`z`$ -projections of orbital momentum and spin of the electrons, respectively, and $`A^+`$ creates an electron pair on states $`(k,\overline{k})`$, related by the time reversal.

The magnetic susceptibility and heat capacity of the electrons are

$$\chi =\frac{\mu _B^2}{\mathrm{}^2V}\frac{^2F(T,\omega )}{\omega ^2},C=\frac{^2F(T,\omega )}{T^2},$$
(3)
The free energy $`F`$ derived from the Hamiltonian (1) gives only the paramagnetic part $`\chi _P`$ of the susceptibility, because we left out the term quadratic in $`B`$. For the fields we are interested in (magnetic length is small as compared to the cluster size), the latter can be treated in first order perturbation theory, generating the diamagnetic part of the susceptibility

$$\chi _D=\frac{m\mu _B^2<x^2+y^2>}{\mathrm{}^2V}410^6N^{2/3},$$
(4)
where $`m`$ is the electron mass is and $`V`$ the volume of the cluster. It is nearly temperature and field independent . The numerical estimate for Al assumes constant electron density. For $`nm`$ scale clusters $`\chi _D10^3`$. It is much smaller than $`\chi _D1`$ for macroscopic superconductors, which show the Meissner effect. Since the magnetic field penetrates the cluster it can sustain a very high field of $`BTesla`$. On the other hand, the $`\chi _D`$ is three orders of magnitude larger than the Landau diamagnetic susceptibility observed in normal bulk metals.

The exact solutions to the pairing problem of particles in a degenerate shell were found in nuclear physics  in terms of representations of the group $`SU_2`$. The eigenvalues $`E_\nu `$ of $`H_{pair}`$ are

$$E_\nu =\frac{G}{4}(N_{sh}\nu )(2M+2N_{sh}\nu ).$$
(5)
where $`N_{sh}`$ is the number of particles in the shell. The seniority, which is the number of unpaired particles, is constrained by $`0\nu N_{sh}`$ and $`\nu M`$. The degenerate states $`\{\nu ,i\}`$ of given seniority $`\nu `$ differ by their magnetic moments $`\mu _Bm_{\nu ,i}`$, where $`i=\{L\mathrm{\Lambda }S\mathrm{\Sigma }\}`$ takes all values of the total orbital $`(L)`$ and total spin $`(S)`$ momenta and their total $`z`$-projections $`(\mathrm{\Lambda },\mathrm{\Sigma })`$ that are compatible with the Pauli principle for $`\nu `$ electrons. In presence of a magnetic field the states have the energy

$$U_{\nu ,i}(\omega )=E_\nu \omega m_{\nu ,i},m_{\nu ,i}=(\mathrm{\Lambda }+2\mathrm{\Sigma })_{\nu ,i},$$
(6)
and the canonical partition function becomes

$`Z={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ,i}{}}\mathrm{exp}(\beta U_{\nu ,i})`$ (7)
$`={\displaystyle \underset{\nu }{}}\mathrm{exp}(\beta E_\nu )[\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }_{\nu 2}(1\delta _{\nu .0})],`$ (8)
$`\beta =1/T,\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu ={\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\mathrm{exp}(\beta \omega m_{\nu ,i}).`$ (9)
To evaluate the sums we take into account symmetry of the wave functions of the $`\nu `$ unpaired electrons and reduce the sums (9) to products of sums over orbital projections of completely antisymmetric states (one column Young diagram, cf. ) with $`\nu /2+\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`\nu /2\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ electrons.

$`\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu ={\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{min}}{\overset{\nu /2}{}}}2(1+\delta _{\mathrm{\Sigma }.0})^1\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\nu /2+\mathrm{\Sigma }}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_{\nu /2\sigma }\mathrm{cosh}(2\beta \omega \mathrm{\Sigma }),`$ (10)
$`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{min}=[1()^\nu ]/4`$ (11)
$`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Phi }}_k=\delta _{k.0}+(1\delta _{k.0}){\displaystyle \underset{\mu =1}{\overset{k}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}\beta \omega \frac{2l+2\mu }{2}}{\mathrm{sinh}\beta \omega \frac{\mu }{2}}}.`$ (12)
The derivation of (7 \- 12) will be published separately .

The pair correlation energy is

$`E_c(T,\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{Z}}{\displaystyle \underset{\nu }{}}E_\nu exp(\beta E_\nu )[\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu \mathrm{\Phi }_{\nu 2}(1\delta _{\nu .0})]`$ (13)
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_c^2(T,\omega )/G.`$ (14)
Here we have defined the parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$, which measures the amount of pair correlations. Applying the mean field approximation and the grand canonical ensemble to our model, the thus introduced $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ becomes the familiar BCS gap parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Accordingly we also refer to $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ as the ”canonical gap”. However, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ must be clearly distinguished from $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ because it incorporates the correlations caused by the fluctuations of the order parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. For the case of a half filled shell and even $`N_{sh}`$, the BCS gap is $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0)\mathrm{\Delta }(T=0,\omega =0)=GM/2`$. Ref.  found $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0)=0.30.4meV`$ for Al-clusters with $`R=510nm`$, which sets the energy scale.

Let us first consider the destruction of the pair correlations at $`T=0`$. The lowest state of each seniority multiplet has the maximal magnetic moment

$$m_\nu =\frac{\mu _B}{4}\{\nu (2M\nu )\frac{1}{2}[1()^\nu ]+4(1\delta _{\nu .0})\}.$$
(15)
According to (5), (6) and (15) the state of lowest energy changes from $`\nu `$ to $`\nu +2`$ at

$`\omega _{\nu +2}={\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }(0)}{M}}\left[\delta _{\nu .0}+{\displaystyle \frac{M\nu }{M\nu 1}}(1\delta _{\nu .0})\right].`$ (16)
At each such step $`m_\nu `$ increases according to (15). The pair correlations are reduced because two electron states are blocked. At the last step leading to the maximum seniority $`\nu _{max}`$ all electron states are blocked. Hence the field $`B_c`$ corresponding to $`\omega _c=\omega _{\nu _{max}}`$ can be regarded as the critical one, which destroys the pairing completely at $`T=0`$. For a half filled shell $`\omega _c=3\mathrm{\Delta }(0)/M`$ for even electron number and $`4\mathrm{\Delta }(0)/M`$ for odd ($`\nu _{max}=M1`$ and $`M`$, respectively).

Fig. 1 illustrates the step wise destruction of pairing by blocking for the half filled shell $`M=11`$ ($`l=5`$). This mechanism was discussed in , where the crossing of states with different seniority could be observed. It is a well established effect in nuclear physics, where the states of maximum angular momentum, are observed as ”High-K isomers” . Fig. 1 also shows results for the mean field (BCS) approximation (cf. ) to the single shell model. The pair correlations are more rapidly destroyed. The quantum fluctuations of the order parameter stabilize the pairing.

We introduce $`T_c`$ as the temperature at which the mean field pair gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }(T_c,\omega =0)`$ takes the value zero when the magnetic field is absent. For the half filled shell $`T_c=\mathrm{\Delta }(0)/2`$. Fig. 1 shows the mean field gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }(T,\omega )`$, It behaves as expected from macroscopic superconductors: The frequency where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ shifts towards smaller values with increasing $`T`$. Fig. 2 shows that the temperature where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ shifts from $`T_c`$ to lower values for $`\omega >0`$.

However, fig. 1 also demonstrates that the canonical gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ behaves differently. For $`T=0.8T_c`$ there is a region above $`\omega _c`$ where there are still pair correlations. For $`T=2T_c`$ this region extends to $`2\omega _c`$. The pair correlations fall off very gradually with $`\omega `$. Fig. 2 shows how these ”temperature induced” pair correlations manifest themselves with increasing $`T`$. For $`\omega =0`$ there is a pronounced drop of of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ around $`T_c`$, which signalizes the break down of the static pair field. Above this temperature there is a long tail of dynamic pairing. For $`\omega \omega _c`$ the dynamic pair correlations only built up with increasing $`T`$.

The temperature induced pairing can be understood in the following way: At $`T=0`$, all electrons are unpaired when the state of maximum seniority becomes the ground state for $`\omega >\omega _{crit}`$. At $`T>0`$ excited states with lower seniority enter the canonical ensemble, reintroducing the pair correlations.

Here we have adopted the terminology of nuclear physics, calling ”static” the mean field (BCS) part of the pair correlations and ”dynamic” the quantal and statistical fluctuations of the mean field (or equivalently of the order parameter). The ”pair vibrations”, which are oscillations of the pair field around zero , are well established in nuclei. Fluctuation induced superconductivity was discussed before . The fluctuations play a particularly important role in the systems the size of which is smaller than the coherence length,

Fig. 3 shows a very small cluster ($`M=7`$) with very pronounced steps. Already at $`T=0.1T_c`$ the steps are noticeably washed out. In the single-shell model the step length is $`\omega _\nu \omega _{\nu 2}\mathrm{\Delta }(0)/M`$. Accordingly, no individual steps are recognizable at $`T=0.1T_c`$ for the large cluster ($`M=23`$) shown. Yet there is some irregularity around $`\omega =0.7\omega _c`$, which is a residue of the discreteness of the electronic states. It is thermally averaged out for $`T=0.2T_c`$. Hence only for $`M<50`$ i. e. $`N<210^4`$ and $`T<0.1T_c`$ the step wise change of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ is observable.

The discreteness of the electronic levels has dramatic consequences for the the susceptibility at low temperatures. As shown in the upper panel of fig. 4, $`\chi _P`$ has pronounced peaks at the frequencies where the states with higher seniority and magnetic moment take over. The paramagnetic contribution is very sensitive to the temperature and to the fluctuations of the order parameter. Using the BCS mean field approximation we find much more narrow peaks, which are one to two orders of magnitude higher. For the larger cluster in the lower panel the individual steps are no longer resolved, resulting in a peak of $`\chi _P`$ near $`\omega =0.7\omega _c`$. Since for the considered temperatures it is unlikely to excite states with finite magnetic moment, $`\chi _P`$ is small at low $`\omega `$ . It grows with $`\omega `$ because these states come down. It falls off at large $`\omega `$ when approaching the maximum magnetic moment of the electrons in the shell. The curve $`T=0.1T_c`$ shows still a double peak structure, which is residue of the discreteness of the electron levels.

The heat capacity is displayed in fig. 5. Is has a double peak structure for the $`M=7`$ cluster at $`T=0.02T_c`$. In this case $`C`$ is very small because the spacing between the states of different $`\nu `$ is much larger than $`T`$. Near a crossing the spacing becomes small and $`C`$ goes up. The dip appears because at the crossing frequency the two states are degenerate. Then they do not contribute to $`C`$ because their relative probability does not depend on $`T`$. For $`T=0.1T_c`$ the probability to excite states with different seniority has increased and $`C`$ takes substantial values between the crossings. The dips due to the degeneracy at the crossings remain. For the $`M=23`$ cluster $`C`$ shows only two wiggles, which are the residue of the discreteness of the electronic levels.

The deviation of real clusters from sphericity will attenuate the orbital part of $`\chi _P`$ and round the steps of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_c`$ already at $`T=0`$. The back-bending phenomenon observed in deformed rotating nuclei  is an example. How strongly the orbital angular momentum is suppressed needs to be addressed by a more sophisticated model than the present one. In any case, there will be steps caused by the reorientation of the electron spin, if the spin orbit coupling is small as in Al . Most of the findings of the present paper are expected to hold qualitatively for these spin flips.

In summary, at a temperature $`T<0.1T_c`$ an increasing external magnetic field causes the magnetic moment of small spherical superconducting clusters ($`R<5nm`$) to grow in a step like manner. Each step reduces the pair correlations until they are destroyed. The steps manifest themselves as peaks in the magnetic susceptibility and the heat capacity. The steps are washed out at $`T>0.2T_c`$. For $`TT_c`$, reduced but substantial pair correlations persist to a higher field strength than for $`T=0`$. This phenomenon of the temperature-induced pairing in a strong magnetic field is only found for the canonical ensemble.

Supported by the grant INTAS-93-151-EXT.


text:
# Dependence of Spiral Galaxy Distribution on Viewing Angle in RC3 This work is supported by both the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant 19603003, and K. C. Wong Education Foundation, Hong Kong.

## Abstract

The normalized inclination distributions are presented for the spiral galaxies in RC3. The results show that, except for the bin of $`81^{}`$-$`90^{}`$, in which the apparent minor isophotal diameters that are used to obtain the inclinations, are affected by the central bulges, the distributions for Sa, Sab, Scd and Sd are well consistent with the Monte-Carlo simulation of random inclinations within 3-$`\sigma `$, and Sb and Sbc almost, but Sc is different. One reason for the difference between the real distribution and the Monte-Carlo simulation of Sc may be that some quite inclined spirals, the arms of which are inherently loosely wound on the galactic plane and should be classified to Sc galaxies, have been incorrectly classified to the earlier ones, because the tightness of spiral arms which is one of the criteria of the Hubble classification in RC3 is different between on the galactic plane and on the tangent plane of the celestial sphere. Our result also implies that there might exist biases in the luminosity functions of individual Hubble types if spiral galaxies are only classified visually.

1 Shanghai Astronomical Observatory, Chinese Acadenmy of Scienes,

Shanghai 200030

2 National Astronomical Observatories, Chinese Acadenmy of Scienes,

Beijing 100012

3 Chinese Academy of Science-Peking University Join Beijing Astrophysical Center,

Beijing 100087

4 Joint Lab of Optical Astronomy, Chinese Acadenmy of Scienes,

Shanghai 200030

5 Young Astronomical Center, Shanghai Astronomical Observatory,

Chinese Acadenmy of Scienes, Beijing 100871

E-mail: (majun, gxsong, cgshu)@center.shao.ac.cn

PACS: 98.52.Nr, 98.62.Ve

A spiral galaxy inherently consists of a halo, bulge and thin disk with spiral structure, which emerges from the central region or the end of a bright bar. Optical images of spirals, which are the projected ones on the tangent plane of the celestial sphere, are dominated by the light coming from stars, as modified by the extinction and reddening of dust. If galaxies with the same morphologies are oriented at different angles of inclination (i.e., the angle between the galactic plane and the tangent plane of the celestial sphere), their images are different. It means that the inclination of a spiral galaxy affects its image, especially, the extent to which the arms are unwound. When a spiral galaxy has a large inclination, its arms would appear tightly coiled on the image even if they should be loosely wound on the galactic plane.

Hubble1,2 introduced an early scheme to classify galaxies. Its concepts are still in use, which consists of a sequence starting from elliptical, through lenticular, to spiral galaxies. This scheme has been extended by some astronomers3-14 over the years, who try to employ multiple classification criteria. Galaxies originally classified Sc on the Hubble system cover a large interval along the sequence, ranging from regular well-developed arms in early Sc to nearly chaotic structures in very late Sc. de Vaucouleurs4,5 introduced Scd, Sd, Sdm, Sm and Im to Sc and SBc. In his classification, Sc class has well-developed arms, and the arms become more and more chaotic and the tightness of spiral arms is not considered any more from Scd to Im. Galaxy morphological classification is still mainly done visually by dedicated astronomers on the images, based on the Hubble’s original scheme and its modification. It is possible for each of observers to give slightly different weights to various criteria, although the criteria for classification are accepted generally by them. Lahav et al.15 and Naim et al.16 investigated the consistency of visual morphological classifications of galaxies from six independent observers, and found that individual observers agree with one another with combined rms dispersions of between 1.3 and 2.3 type units, typically about 1.8 units of the revised Hubble numerical type, although there are some cases where the range of types given to it was more than 4 units in width.

In the present letter, we investigate how dependence of spiral galaxies distribution on viewing angles is. The sample adopted in this letter is from the Third Reference Catalogue of Bright Galaxies by de Vaucoulours et al.17 (hereafter, RC3), the Hubble types of which are from Sa to Sd. In RC3, it is complete for galaxies that have apparent diameters at the $`D_{25}`$ isophotal level larger than 1 arcminute and the total B-band apparent magnitudes $`B_T`$ brighter than about 15.5, with a redshift not in excess of 15000 kms-1. In order to complete the analyzed sample in the absolute magnitude, we select the galaxies from RC3 that are larger than 1 arcminute at the $`D_{25}`$ isophotal level, brighter than -20.1 for the absolute B-band magnitudes and limited within a redshift of 10000 kms-1. It can be confirmed that the selected sample within these ranges is complete in both luminosity and space. The adopted values of $`d_{25}/D_{25}`$ are from 0.2 to 1.0 (including 0.2 and 1.0) for calculating the inclinations ($`D_{25}`$ and $`d_{25}`$ are the apparent major and minor isophotal diameters measured at or reduced down to the surface brightness level $`\mu _B=25.0`$ B magnitudes per square arcsecond in B-band.). Our statistical sample contains 2519 spiral galaxies. A Hubble constant of 75 kms-1Mpc-1 is assumed throughout.

The inclination of a spiral galaxy is not only an important parameter, but also difficult to determine. If we assume that the thickness of the spiral plane is rather inconsiderable compared with its extension and, when a spiral galaxy is inclined moderately to the plane of sky and the thickness of nucleus can be omitted, the inclination may be obtained by

$$\gamma =\mathrm{arccos}(\frac{d}{D}),$$
(1)
where $`D`$ and $`d`$ are the apparent major and minor isophotal diameters, respectively. When a spiral galaxy is seen quite edge-on, it is not possible to count with the nuclear part as having a thickness to be left out of consideration. Then, Eq. (1) can not be used to calculate the inclination, because the apparent minor isophotal diameter consists of two parts, one is attributed by the disk and, another by the bulge that decreases the real value of inclination. Considering that the disk is not infinitely thin, Tully18 corrected Eq. (1) by

$$\gamma =\mathrm{arccos}\sqrt{[(\frac{d}{D})^20.2^2]/(10.2^2)}+3^{}.$$
(2)
The constant of $`3^{}`$ is added in accordance with an empirical recipe. But, when $`d/D=0.2`$, Eq. (2) will give a wrong inclination, that is $`\gamma =93^{}`$. The adopted formula for obtaining the inclination of a spiral galaxy in the present letter is

$$\gamma =\mathrm{arccos}\sqrt{[(\frac{d_{25}}{D_{25}})^20.2^2]/(10.2^2)}$$
(3)
in order to avoid the inclination that is larger than $`90^{}`$.

Figure 1 plots the normalized inclination distribution for whole spiral galaxies in our sample with bin size of $`10^{}`$. Open circles present individual values. At the same time, we generate a Monte-Carlo sample of random inclinations for comparison, which are presented by filled circles with the error bars of the solids and dots denoting 1-$`\sigma `$ and 3-$`\sigma `$ levels respectively. From this picture, we can see that, except for the bin of $`81^{}`$-$`90^{}`$, the distribution is almost consistent with the Monte-Carlo random distribution within 3-$`\sigma `$. This means that, in RC3, when the apparent minor isophotal diameters are obtained, the effects of central bulges have not been eliminated for some edge-on spiral galaxies.

Figs. 2-8 plot the normalized inclination distributions for Sa-Sd galaxies with bin size of $`10^{}`$, respectively. Open circles also denote the values in each bin. In Figs. 2-8, the Monte-Carlo samples of random inclinations are also produced and the error bars have the same meanings as Fig. 1. They show that, except for the bin of $`81^{}`$-$`90^{}`$, the distributions for Sa, Sab, Scd and Sd are well consistent with the Monte-Carlo simulation of random inclinations within 3-$`\sigma `$, Sb and Sbc almost. The distribution of Scd is consistent with the Monte-Carlo simulation within 1-$`\sigma `$ very well. But, the distribution of Sc is quite different from the Monte-Carlo simulation.

Based on the analysis above, we find that, in RC3, except for Scd and Sd, the central bulges of which can be neglected, the effects of central bulges may have not been eliminated for some inclined spiral galaxies when the apparent minor isophotal diameters are obtained. At the same time, the effects of central bulges only can not accout for the difference between the real distribution and the Monte-Carlo simulation for Sc, and other factors are needed. A candidate may be that some quite inclined spirals, the arms of which are inherently loosely wound on the galactic plane and should be classified to Sc galaxies, have been incorrectly classified to the earlier ones, because the tightness of spiral arms, which is one of the criteria of the Hubble classification in RC3, is different between on the galactic plane and on the tangent plane of the celestial sphere. Our result also implies that there might exist biases in the luminosity functions of individual Hubble types if spiral galaxies are only classified visually.

Fig. 1. Normalized inclination distribution for whole sample spirals with bin size of $`10^{}`$. The open and close circles are individual values and a Monte-Carlo simulation of random inclinations. The solid and dotted lines denote 1-$`\sigma `$ and 3-$`\sigma `$ levels, respectively.

Fig. 2. Same as Fig. 1, but for Sa galaxies.

Fig. 3. Same as Fig. 1, but for Sab galaxies.

Fig. 4. Same as Fig. 1, but for Sb galaxies.

Fig. 5. Same as Fig. 1, but for Sbc galaxies.

Fig. 6. Same as Fig. 1, but for Sc galaxies.

Fig. 7. Same as Fig. 1, but for Scd galaxies.

Fig. 8. Same as Fig. 1, but for Sd galaxies.


text:
# References

NYU-TH/00/02/02

Metastable Gravitons and Infinite Volume Extra Dimensions

G. Dvali, G. Gabadadze and M. Porrati

Department of Physics, New York University, New York, NY 10003

Abstract

We address the issue of whether extra dimensions could have an infinite volume and yet reproduce the effects of observable four-dimensional gravity on a brane. There is no normalizable zero-mode graviton in this case, nevertheless correct Newton’s law can be obtained by exchanging bulk gravitons. This can be interpreted as an exchange of a single metastable 4D graviton. Such theories have remarkable phenomenological signatures since the evolution of the Universe becomes high-dimensional at very large scales. Furthermore, the bulk supersymmetry in the infinite volume limit might be preserved while being completely broken on a brane. This gives rise to a possibility of controlling the value of the bulk cosmological constant. Unfortunately, these theories have difficulties in reproducing certain predictions of Einstein’s theory related to relativistic sources. This is due to the van Dam-Veltman-Zakharov discontinuity in the propagator of a massive graviton. This suggests that all theories in which contributions to effective 4D gravity come predominantly from the bulk graviton exchange should encounter serious phenomenological difficulties.

If Standard Model particles are localized on a brane, the volume of extra dimensions can be as large as a millimeter without conflicting to any experimental observations . This is also true for warped spaces in which the extra dimensions are non-compact but have a finite volume  (for earlier works on warped compactifications see ).

In the framework of Ref.  the volume $`VL^N`$ of extra $`N`$ space dimensions sets the normalization of a four-dimensional graviton zero-mode. Therefore, the relation between the observable and the fundamental Planck scales ($`M_P`$ and $`M_{Pf}`$ respectively) reads as follows:

$`M_P^2=M_{Pf}^{2+N}V.`$ (1)
A similar relation holds for the Randall-Sundrum (RS) scenario , where the role of $`L^2`$ is played by the curvature of $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$. In this case the extra dimension is not compact, nevertheless its length (or volume) is finite and is determined by the bulk cosmological constant $`L1/\sqrt{|\mathrm{\Lambda }|}`$. In the scenario of Ref.  gravity becomes high-dimensional at distances $`r<<L`$ with the corresponding change in Newton’s law

$$1/r1/r^{1+N}.$$
(2)
The same holds true for RS-type scenarios with non-compact extra dimensions .

The purpose of the present letter is to study whether the volume of extra space can be truly infinite while the four-dimensional Planck mass is still finite. In this case the relation (1) should somehow be evaded. Since there are no normalizable zero modes in such cases, the effects of 4D gravity must be reproduced by exchanging the continuum of bulk modes. An example of this type was recently proposed in Ref. . The physical reason why such an exchange can indeed mimic the $`1/r`$ Newtonian law can be understood as follows. The four-dimensional graviton, although is not an eigenstate of the linearized theory, can still exist as a metastable resonance with a finite lifetime $`\tau _g`$. In such a case one might hope that the exchange of this graviton approximates Newton’s law at distances shorter than the graviton lifetime but changes the laws of gravity at larger scales. The question is whether the four-dimensional effective theory obtained in this way is phenomenologically viable. In the present paper we will argue that, despite the correct Newtonian limit, the infinite volume scenario has problems in reproducing other predictions of Einstein’s theory. This problem is shared by any model in which the dominant contribution to 4D gravity comes from the exchange of continuum states. The reason behind such a discrepancy is the van Dam-Veltman-Zakharov discontinuity in the propagator of a massive spin-2 field in the massless limit . Very briefly, the physical effects of additional polarizations of a massive graviton survive in the massless limit and change dramatically predictions of the theory . As a result, any theory which relies on the exchange of massive (no matter how light) gravitons, will give rise to predictions which differ from those of General Relativity.

We shall consider the five-dimensional Einstein gravity coupled to an arbitrary energy-momentum tensor $`T_{AB}`$ which is independent of four space-time coordinates $`x_\mu `$. We will assume that $`T_{AB}`$ results from a certain combination of branes, bulk cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and classical field configurations which preserve four-dimensional Poincaré invariance. Einstein’s equations $`G_{AB}=T_{AB}+g_{AB}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ give rise to a metric of the following form

$$ds^2=A(z)\left(ds_4^2dz^2\right),$$
(3)
where $`z`$ is an extra coordinate, and we assume that the four-dimensional metric $`ds_4^2`$ is flat. The volume of the extra space in this construction is determined by an integral

$$_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}A^{5/2}(z)𝑑z.$$
(4)
For instance, in the RS framework $`A(z)=(1+H|z|)^2`$, where $`H`$ is proportional to the square root of the cosmological constant $`H\sqrt{|\mathrm{\Lambda }|}`$. This warp factor gives rise to a finite expression in (4). An infinite volume theory is obtained if, for instance, the value of $`A(z)`$ tends to a nonzero constant as $`z`$ goes to $`\pm \mathrm{}`$. If the volume is finite, there is a normalizable zero-mode graviton in the spectrum of fluctuations about this background . Indeed, let us parametrize the four-dimensional graviton fluctuations as follows:

$$ds^2=A(z)\left[(\eta _{\mu \nu }+h_{\mu \nu }(x,z))dx^\mu dx^\nu dz^2\right].$$
(5)
The corresponding linearized Schrödinger equation for the excitation $`h_{\mu \nu }(x,z)=A^{3/4}(z)\mathrm{\Psi }(z)h_{\mu \nu }^{(0)}(x_\mu )`$ takes the form:

$`\left(_z^2+{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{A^{\prime \prime }}{A}}{\displaystyle \frac{A^2}{4A^2}}\right\}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }(z)=m^2\mathrm{\Psi }(z).`$ (6)
Where $`\eta ^{\mu \nu }_\mu _\nu h^{(0)}=m^2h^{(0)}`$ and primes denote differentiation with respect to $`z`$. This equation has a zero-mode solution for a generic form of a warp factor $`A(z)`$:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{\mathrm{zm}}(y)=A^{3/4}(z).$$
(7)
This implies that the $`z`$ dependent part of the fluctuations $`h(x,z)`$ is just a constant, i.e., $`h(x,z)=\mathrm{const}.\mathrm{exp}(ipx)`$. If the integral in (4) diverges, the volume is infinite and the zero-mode is not normalizable. Thus, the spectrum in this case would consist of continuum states only. One should notice, however, that even in this case the correct Newtonian limit may be recovered in some approximation by exchanging the continuum of non-localized states! The physical reason for such a behavior is that the 4D localized graviton, although not an eigenstate, can still exist as a metastable resonance with an exponentially long lifetime, $`\tau _g`$. Therefore, the exchange of this resonance could give rise to a correct Newtonian potential at intermediate distances. Note that this is just a reformulation of the fact that the tower of the bulk states conspire in such a way that the Newtonian potential is seen as an approximation. To make these discussions a bit precise let us turn to the propagator of a massive metastable graviton. This is given as follows:

$$G_4^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }(x)=\frac{dp^4}{(2\pi )^4}\left(\frac{1}{2}(g^{\mu \alpha }g^{\nu \beta }+g^{\mu \beta }g^{\nu \alpha })\frac{1}{3}g^{\mu \nu }g^{\alpha \beta }+𝒪(p)\right)D(p^2,m_0^2,\mathrm{\Gamma })e^{ip(x)},$$
(8)
where $`D(p^2,m_0^2,\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ stands for the scalar part of a massive resonance propagator, $`D(p^2,m_0^2,\mathrm{\Gamma })=(p^2m_0^2+im_0\mathrm{\Gamma })^1`$. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ denotes the width of the resonance. The momentum dependent part in the tensor structure gives zero contribution when the propagator is convoluted with a conserved energy-momentum tensor, thus, this part will be omitted. In order to make a contact with continuum modes, let us use the following spectral representation for $`D`$:

$`D(p^2,m_0^2,\mathrm{\Gamma })={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho (s)}{sp^2+iϵ}𝑑s},`$ (9)
where $`s`$ denotes the Mandelstam variable and $`\rho (s)`$ is a spectral density. If the assumption of the resonance dominance is made, then $`\rho (s)`$ is approximated by a sharply peaked function around the resonance mass $`s=m_0^2`$. In what follows we assume that the resonance lifetime is very big and we neglect the effects of a nonzero resonance width (these will modify gravity laws at very large distances only). Exchanging such a particle between two static sources one obtains the potential

$$V(r)\frac{e^{\sqrt{s}r}}{r}\rho (s)𝑑s.$$
(10)
This expressions reproduces a standard $`1/r`$ interaction at distances $`r<<(m_0)^1`$ in the single, narrow-resonance approximation, $`\rho (s)\delta (sm_0^2)`$. On the other hand, we can expand the spectral density $`\rho (s)`$ into the complete set of bulk modes

$$\rho (s)=_0^{\mathrm{}}|\psi _m(0)|^2\delta (sm^2)𝑑m.$$
(11)
Here, $`\psi _m(0)`$ denote the wave functions of the bulk modes at the point $`z=0`$. Using this expression for the spectral density one finds the following potential

$$V(r)_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{e^{mr}}{r}|\psi _m(0)|^2𝑑m.$$
(12)
This is nothing but the potential mediated by the continuum of the bulk modes. Thus, the effect of the metastable graviton, when it exists, can be read off the expression which includes all the bulk modes. These two descriptions are complementary to each other. In the case when the resonance exists, the continuum modes can conspire in such a way that (12) yields the $`1/r`$ law in a certain approximation. The inverse statement is also likely to be true. In the appendix we will show explicitly the presence of a resonance state in a model with infinite volume extra dimension and $`1/r`$ potential produced by the bulk modes . As we mentioned above, such model gives Newtonian gravity only at intermediate distances. At large distances, the five-dimensional laws of gravity should be restored (due to the metastable nature of the resonance). This phenomenon could have dramatic cosmological and astrophysical consequences. Indeed, at large cosmic scales the time-dependence of the scale factor $`R(t)`$ in Freedman-Robertson-Walker metric would dramatically change due to the change in the laws of gravity111A different possibility to modify the long distance gravity due to an additional massive graviton was proposed earlier in Ref. . In the view of phenomenological problems discussed below, this graviton should be very weakly coupled..

Another interesting comment concerns bulk supersymmetry. Since the volume of the extra dimension is infinite, it might be possible to realize the following scenario. The bulk is exactly supersymmetric and SUSY is completely broken on a brane (this could be a non-BPS brane which is stable for some topological reasons ). The transmission of SUSY breaking from the brane worldvolume to the bulk is suppressed by the volume of the bulk and is vanishing. In such a case one could imagine a setup where the bulk cosmological constant is zero due to the bulk SUSY222Note that local SUSY does not necessarily imply vanishing of the vacuum energy. However, this can be accomplished by imposing on a model additional global symmetries..

Having these attractive features of the theories with truly infinite extra dimensions discussed, we move to some phenomenological difficulties of these models. In fact, we will argue below that these theories cannot reproduce other predictions of Einstein’s general relativity. The reason is that all the spin-2 modes that dominantly contribute to the four-dimensional gravity in this case are massive modes. It has been known for a long time  that propagator of massive spin-2 states has no continuous massless limit. As a result the effects of the massless spin-2 graviton are different from the massive one, no matter how small the mass is. Let us show how this affects the phenomenology of infinite volume theories. The four-dimensional gravity on a brane is reproduced by an exchange of the continuum of bulk gravitons. At a tree level this gives

$$G_5_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑m𝑑x^4d^4x^{}T_{\mu \nu }(x)G_m^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }(xx^{})T_{\alpha \beta }^{}(x^{}),$$
(13)
where $`T_{\mu \nu }(x)`$ and $`T_{\mu \nu }^{}(x^{})`$ are the energy-momentum tensors for two gravitating sources. For $`m0`$ the graviton propagator is given by

$$G_m^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }(xx^{})=\frac{dp^4}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{\frac{1}{2}(g^{\mu \alpha }g^{\nu \beta }+g^{\mu \beta }g^{\nu \alpha })\frac{1}{3}g^{\mu \nu }g^{\alpha \beta }+𝒪(p)}{p^2m^2iϵ}e^{ip(xx^{})},$$
(14)
whereas for $`m=0`$ we have

$$G_0^{\mu \nu \alpha \beta }(xx^{})=\frac{dp^4}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{\frac{1}{2}(g^{\mu \alpha }g^{\nu \beta }+g^{\mu \beta }g^{\nu \alpha })\frac{1}{2}g^{\mu \nu }g^{\alpha \beta }+𝒪(p)}{p^2iϵ}e^{ip(xx^{})}.$$
(15)
As we see, the tensor structures in the two cases are different. In the massless limit, the propagator exhibits the celebrated van Dam-Veltman-Zakharov discontinuity. This is due to the difference in the number of degrees of freedom for massive and massless spin-2 fields. In our case this difference is very transparent, KK gravitons at each mass level “eat up” three extra degrees of freedom of $`g_{5\mu }`$ and $`g_{55}`$ components of the higher dimensional metric (“graviphotons” and “graviscalars” respectively).

Since we choose a model in which there is no normalizable-zero mode, the whole answer is given by the bulk continuum. Let us show that the 4D gravity which is obtained in this way cannot reproduce observable effects of General Relativity. Let us first consider the Newtonian limit. In this case, we take two static point-like sources

$$T_{\mu \nu }(x)=m_1\delta _{\mu 0}\delta _{\nu 0}\delta (\stackrel{}{x}),T_{\mu \nu }^{}(x^{})=m_2\delta _{\mu 0}\delta _{\nu 0}\delta (\stackrel{}{x^{}}\stackrel{}{r}).$$
(16)
For this setup the bulk graviton exchange gives

$$\frac{2}{3}m_1m_2G_5𝑑m\frac{e^{mr}}{r}|\psi _m(0)|^2.$$
(17)
Since the leading behavior of the integral for the particular case at hand is $`1/r`$,

$$𝑑m\frac{e^{mr}}{r}|\psi _m(0)|^2\frac{a}{r}+\mathrm{},$$
(18)
the correct Newtonian limit may be reproduced ($`a`$ is some normalization constant). On the other hand, since the exchange of one normalizable massless graviton would give

$$G_N\frac{1}{2}\frac{m_1m_2}{r},$$
(19)
we have to set

$$aG_5=\frac{3G_N}{4}.$$
(20)
This identification provides the correct Newtonian potential for static sources. So far so good. Unfortunately, the problem arises when one tries to account for moving sources. To see this let us take one of the sources to be a moving point-like particle of mass $`m_2`$ and proper time $`\tau `$. The energy-momentum tensor for this particle is written as:

$$T_{\mu \nu }^{}(x^{})=m_2𝑑\tau \dot{x_\mu }\dot{x_\nu }\delta (x^{}x(\tau )).$$
(21)
The result of the bulk graviton exchange then gives

$$G_5m_1m_2𝑑\tau (\dot{x_0}\dot{x_0}\frac{1}{3}\dot{x_\mu }\dot{x^\mu })𝑑m\frac{e^{mr(\tau )}}{r(\tau )}|\psi _m(0)|^2,$$
(22)
where $`r=\stackrel{}{x}(\tau )`$. With the identification (20), in the leading order this yields

$$\frac{3}{4}G_Nm_1m_2𝑑\tau (\dot{x_0}\dot{x_0}\frac{1}{3}\dot{x_\mu }\dot{x^\mu })\frac{1}{r(\tau )}.$$
(23)
On the other hand the exchange of a normalizable graviton zero-mode produces the following result

$$G_Nm_1m_2𝑑\tau (\dot{x_0}\dot{x_0}\frac{1}{2}\dot{x_\mu }\dot{x^\mu })\frac{1}{r(\tau )}.$$
(24)
This shows the discrepancy between the predictions of the two theories. In particular, the same procedure applied to the problem of bending of light by the Sun gives the discrepancy by the factor $`3/4`$. Indeed, for the bending of light in the gravitational field of the Sun, the tree-level bulk graviton exchange gives:

$`G_5M_{\mathrm{Sun}}T_{00}(k,q,ϵ_\mu ,ϵ_\nu ^{}){\displaystyle 𝑑m\frac{\delta (k_0q_0)}{(kq)^2m^2i\epsilon }|\psi _m(0)|^2}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{G_NM_{\mathrm{Sun}}T_{00}\delta (k_0q_0)}{|\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}|^2}}+\mathrm{},`$ (25)
where $`T_{00}(k,q,ϵ_\mu ,ϵ_\nu ^{})`$ is the component of the energy-momentum tensor for photons in the momentum representation, and $`k(ϵ_\mu )`$ and $`q(ϵ_\nu ^{})`$ are the momenta(polarizations) of initial and final photons. This is just $`3/4`$ of the result of the 4D massless graviton exchange.

Summarizing, we have shown that in theories with truly infinite extra dimensions the correct four-dimensional Newtonian gravity can be obtained at intermediate distances due to a metastable resonance graviton. This description is complementary to the exact summation of continuum modes. Due to the finite lifetime of the resonance the laws of gravity are modified at large distances. This would give rise to interesting cosmological consequences. Moreover, these models could allow to preserve bulk supersymmetry while it is completely broken on a brane. Unfortunately, these models encounter a number of phenomenological difficulties. The effects of additional polarization degrees of freedom of massive gravitons survive even in the massless limit and lead to substantial discrepancies with the predictions of General Relativity. It might be possible to cure these discrepancies by introducing new very unconventional interactions. The addition of dilaton-type scalars coupled to $`T_\mu ^\mu `$ seems to make things worse.

Acknowledgments

We wish to thank Ian Kogan and Valery Rubakov for comments. The work of G.D. is supported in part by David and Lucile Packard Foundation Fellowship for Science and Engineering and by Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship. That of G.G. is supported by NSF grant PHY-94-23002. M.P. is supported in part by NSF grant PHY-9722083.

Note added

After this paper was prepared for submission the work  appeared. The authors of this work have also realized that metastable gravitons can be responsible for the $`1/r`$ law in theories with infinite extra dimensions. However, the generic phenomenological difficulties of this class of theories which is a crucial part of our work have not been addressed in .

After this work appeared on the net, we were informed by V. Rubakov that in the revised version of Ref.  the role of a metastable graviton was also elucidated and its decay width was calculated.

Appendix

Below we show the presence of a resonance in a system with an infinite extra dimension. The particular example which we consider is the one studied in Ref. . The five-dimensional interval defining the background and four-dimensional graviton fluctuations is set as follows (here we choose to use a non-conformaly flat metric in order to be consistent with the conventions of ):

$`ds^2=\left[A(y)\eta _{\mu \nu }+h_{\mu \nu }(x,y)\right]dx^\mu dx^\nu dy^2.`$ (26)
There is a 3-brane with positive tension $`T`$ which is located at $`y=0`$. In addition, there are two 3-branes with equal negative tensions $`T/2`$ located at a distance $`y_c`$ to the left and right of the positive-tension brane. For $`|y|<y_c`$ the space is $`\mathrm{AdS}_5`$ and the warp-factor is normalized as $`A(y)=\mathrm{exp}(2Hy)`$. Furthermore, for $`|y|>y_c`$, the space becomes Minkowskian and the corresponding warp-factor is a constant, $`c^2\mathrm{exp}(2Hy_c)`$. Thus, at large distances, i.e. $`|y|>>y_c`$, the system reduces to a single tensionless brane embedded in five-dimensional Minkowski space-time. For simplicity of presentation in what follows we will deal with the positive semi-axis only, i.e., $`y0`$ (the negative part of the whole $`y`$ axis is restored by reflection symmetry). Choosing the traceless covariant gauge for graviton fluctuations ($`h_\mu ^\mu =0,^\mu h_{\mu \nu }=0`$) the Einstein equations take the form:

$`\mathrm{\Psi }^{\prime \prime }4H^2\mathrm{\Psi }+m^2e^{2Hy}\mathrm{\Psi }=0,0<y<y_c,`$
$`\mathrm{\Psi }^{\prime \prime }+{\displaystyle \frac{m^2}{c^2}}\mathrm{\Psi }=0,y>y_c.`$ (27)
Where we have introduced the $`y`$ dependent part of the fluctuations as follows $`h(x,y)\mathrm{\Psi }(y)\mathrm{exp}(ipx)`$. Furthermore, the mass-shell condition for graviton fluctuations is defined as $`p^2=m^2`$. The equations presented above should be accompanied by the Israel matching conditions at the points where the branes are located. For the particular case at hand these conditions take the form

$`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}+2H\mathrm{\Psi }=0,y=0;`$
$`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}|_{\mathrm{jump}}=2H\mathrm{\Psi },y=y_c.`$ (28)
The solutions to equations (27) are combinations of Bessel functions for $`0<y<y_c`$, and exponentials for $`y>y_c`$:

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_m(y)=A_mJ_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{H}}e^{Hy}\right)+B_mN_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{H}}e^{Hy}\right),0<y<y_c,`$ (29)
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_m(y)=C_m\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{m}{c}}(yy_c)\right)+D_m\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{m}{c}}(yy_c)\right),y>y_c.`$ (30)
The constant coefficients $`A_m,B_m,C_m`$ and $`D_m`$ are determined by using the matching conditions (28) (along with the normalization equation). The presence of a resonance state requires that the coefficient of the incoming wave in the solution ($`D_m`$ in this case) vanishes at a point in the complex $`m`$ plane. This determines a resonance. Calculating $`D_m`$ and putting $`D_m=0`$ one finds:

$`K_1(\rho )I_2\left(\rho e^{Hy}\right)+I_1(\rho )K_2\left(\rho e^{Hy}\right)=I_1(\rho )K_1\left(\rho e^{Hy}\right)K_1(\rho )I_1\left(\rho e^{Hy}\right),`$ (31)
where we have introduced a new variable $`\rho im/H`$. This relation can be solved for small values of $`\rho `$. The result is $`\rho 2\mathrm{e}\mathrm{x}\mathrm{p}\left(3Hy_c\right)`$. Therefore, the resonance width is proportional to

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }H\mathrm{exp}\left(3Hy_c\right).`$ (32)
In the limit $`y_c\mathrm{}`$, the resonance width goes to zero and one recovers a zero-mode graviton localized on a positive tension brane .