text:
# Northwestern University: NUHEP 706 University of Wisconsin: MADPH-00-1172 April 2000 Extending the Frontiers—Reconciling Accelerator and Cosmic Ray p-p Cross Sections

We simultaneously fit a QCD-inspired parameterization of all accelerator data on forward proton-proton and antiproton-proton scattering amplitudes, together with cosmic ray data (using Glauber theory), to predict proton-air and proton-proton cross sections at energies near $`\sqrt{s}`$ 30 TeV. The p-air cosmic ray measurements provide a strong constraint on the inclusive particle production cross section, as well as greatly reducing the errors on the fit parameters—in turn, greatly reducing the errors in the high energy proton-proton and proton-air cross section predictions.

The energy range of cosmic ray experiments covers not only the energy of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), but extends beyond it. Cosmic ray experiments can measure the penetration in the atmosphere of these very high energy protons—however, extracting proton-proton cross sections from cosmic ray observations is far from straightforward . By a variety of experimental techniques, cosmic ray experiments map the atmospheric depth at which cosmic ray initiated showers develop. The measured quantity is the shower attenuation length ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }_m`$), which is not only sensitive to the interaction length of the protons in the atmosphere ($`\lambda _{p\mathrm{air}}`$), with

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_m=k\lambda _{p\mathrm{air}}=k\frac{14.5m_p}{\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}},$$
(1)
but also depends critically on the inelasticity, which determines the rate at which the energy of the primary proton is dissipated into electromagnetic shower energy observed in the experiment. The latter effect is taken into account in Eq. (1) by the parameter $`k`$; $`m_p`$ is the proton mass and $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ the inelastic proton-air cross section. The departure of $`k`$ from unity depends on the inclusive particle production cross section in nucleon and meson interactions on the light nuclear target of the atmosphere and its energy dependence.

The extraction of the pp cross section from the cosmic ray data is a two stage process. First, one calculates the $`p`$-air total cross section from the inelastic cross section inferred in Eq. (1), where

$$\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}=\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{el}}\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{q\mathrm{el}}.$$
(2)
Next, the Glauber method  transforms the value of $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ into a proton-proton total cross section $`\sigma _{pp}`$; all the necessary steps are calculable in the theory, but depend sensitively on a knowledge of $`B`$, the slope of $`\frac{d\sigma _{pp}^{\mathrm{el}}}{dt}`$, the $`pp`$ differential elastic scattering cross section, where

$$B=\left[\frac{d}{dt}\left(\mathrm{ln}\frac{d\sigma _{pp}^{\mathrm{el}}}{dt}\right)\right]_{t=0}.$$
(3)
In Eq. (2) the cross section for particle production is supplemented with $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{el}}`$ and $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{q\mathrm{el}}`$, the elastic and quasi-elastic cross section, respectively, as calculated by the Glauber theory, to obtain the total cross section $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}`$. We show in Fig. 1

plots of $`B`$ as a function of $`\sigma _{pp}`$, for 5 curves of different values of $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$. This summarizes the reduction procedure from the measured quantity $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_m`$ (of Eq. 1) to $`\sigma _{pp}`$. Also plotted in Fig. 1 is a curve (dashed) of $`B`$ vs. $`\sigma _{pp}`$ which will be discussed later. Two significant drawbacks of this extraction method are that one needs:

1. a model of proton-air interactions to complete the loop between the measured attenuation length $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_m`$ and the cross section $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$, i.e., the value of $`k`$ in Eq. (1).
2. a simultaneous relation between $`B`$ and $`\sigma _{pp}`$ at very high energies—well above the region currently accessed by accelerators.

A proposal to minimize the impact of theory on these needs is the topic of this note.

We have constructed a QCD-inspired parameterization of the forward proton-proton and proton-antiproton scattering amplitudes  which is analytic, unitary and fits all accelerator data of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}`$, $`B`$ and $`\rho `$, the ratio of the real-to-imaginary part of the forward scattering amplitude; see Fig. 2.

In addition, the high energy cosmic ray data of Fly’s Eye  and AGASSA  experiments are also simultaneously used, i.e., $`k`$ from Eq. (1) is also a fitted quantity—we refer to this fit as a global fit . We emphasize that in the global fit, all 4 quantities, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}`$, $`B`$, $`\rho `$ and $`k`$, are simultaneously fitted. Because our parameterization is both unitary and analytic, its high energy predictions are effectively model-independent, if you require that the proton is asymptotically a black disk. Using vector meson dominance and the additive quark models, we find further support for our QCD fit—it accommodates a wealth of data on photon-proton and photon-photon interactions without the introduction of new parameters. In particular, it also simultaneously fits $`\sigma _{pp}`$ and $`B`$, forcing a relationship between the two. Specifically, the $`B`$ vs. $`\sigma _{pp}`$ prediction of our fit completes the relation needed (using the Glauber model) between $`\sigma _{pp}`$ and $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$. The percentage error in the prediction of $`\sigma _{pp}`$ at $`\sqrt{s}=30`$ TeV is $`1.2`$%, due to the statistical error in the fitting parameters (see references ). A major difference between the present result, in which we simultaneously fit the cosmic ray and accelerator data, and our earlier result, in which only accelerator data are used, is a significant reduction (about a factor of 2.5) in the errors of $`\sigma _{pp}`$ at $`\sqrt{s}=30`$.

In Fig. 3,

we have plotted the values of $`\sigma _{pp}`$ vs. $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ that are deduced from the intersections of our $`B`$-$`\sigma _{pp}`$ curve with the $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ curves of Fig. 1. Figure 3 allows the conversion of measured $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ cross sections to $`\sigma _{pp}`$ total cross sections. The percentage error in $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ is $`0.8`$ % near $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}=450`$mb, due to the errors in $`\sigma _{pp}`$ and $`B`$ resulting from the errors in the fitting parameters. Again, the global fit gives an error of a factor of about 2.5 smaller than our earlier result, a distinct improvement.

When we confront our predictions of the p-air cross sections ($`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$) as a function of energy with published cross section measurements of the Fly’s Eye  and AGASSA  groups, we find that the predictions systematically are about one standard deviation below the published cosmic ray values. It is at this point important to recall Eq. (1) and remind ourselves that the measured experimental quantity is $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_m`$ and not $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$. We emphasize that the extraction of $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ from the measurement of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_m`$ requires knowledge of the parameter $`k`$. The measured depth $`X_{\mathrm{max}}`$ at which a shower reaches maximum development in the atmosphere, which is the basis of the cross section measurement in Ref. , is a combined measure of the depth of the first interaction, which is determined by the inelastic cross section, and of the subsequent shower development, which has to be corrected for. $`X_{\mathrm{max}}`$ increases logarithmically with energy with elongation rate ($`\mathrm{\Delta }X_{\mathrm{max}}`$ per decade of Lab energy) of 50–60 g/cm2 in calculations with QCD-inspired hadronic interaction models. The position of $`X_{\mathrm{max}}`$ directly affects the rate of shower attenuation with atmospheric depth, which is the alternative procedure for extracting $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$. The rate of shower development and its fluctuations are the origin of the deviation of $`k`$ from unity in Eq. (1). Its predicted values range from 1.5 for a model where the inclusive cross section exhibits Feynman scaling, to 1.1 for models with large scaling violations . The comparison between prediction and experiment is further confused by the fact that the AGASA  and Fly’s Eye  experiments used different values of $`k`$ in the analysis of their data, i.e., AGASA used $`k=1.5`$ and Fly’s Eye used $`k=1.6`$.

We therefore decided to let $`k`$ be a free parameter and to make a global fit to the accelerator and cosmic ray data, as emphasized earlier. This neglects the possibility that $`k`$ may show a weak energy dependence over the range measured. Recently, Pryke has made Monte Carlo model simulations that indicate that $`k`$ is compatible with being energy-independent. Using an energy-independent $`k`$, we find that $`k=1.349\pm 0.045`$, where the error in $`k`$ is the statistical error of the global fit. By combining the results of Fig. 2 (a) and Fig. 3, we can predict the variation of $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ with energy, $`\sqrt{s}`$. In Fig. 4

we have rescaled the published high energy data for $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ (using the common value of $`k=1.349`$), and plotted the revised data against our prediction of $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ vs. $`\sqrt{s}`$.

The plot of $`\sigma _{pp}`$ vs. $`\sqrt{s}`$, including the rescaled cosmic ray data is shown in Fig. 5. Clearly, we have an excellent fit, with good agreement between AGASA and Fly’s Eye. In order to extract the cross sections’ energy dependence from the cosmic ray data, the experimenters of course assigned energy values to their cross sections. Since the cosmic ray spectra vary so rapidly with energy, we must allow for systematic errors in $`k`$ due to possible energy misassignments. At the quoted experimental energy resolutions, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{Log}_{10}(E_{\mathrm{lab}}(\mathrm{ev}))=0.12`$ for AGASSA and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{Log}_{10}(E_{\mathrm{lab}}(\mathrm{ev}))=0.4`$ for Fly’s Eye, where $`E_{\mathrm{lab}}`$ is in electron volts, we find from the curve in Fig. 4 that $`\mathrm{\Delta }k/k=0.0084`$ for AGASSA and $`\mathrm{\Delta }k/k=0.0279`$ for Fly’s Eye. We estimate conservatively that experimental energy resolution introduces a systematic error in $`k`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Delta }k_{\mathrm{systematic}}=\sqrt{(\mathrm{\Delta }k_{\mathrm{AGASSA}}^2+\mathrm{\Delta }k_{\mathrm{FLYSEYE}}^2)/2}=0.028`$. Thus, we write our final result as $`k=1.349\pm 0.045\pm 0.028`$, where the first error is statistical and the last error is systematic.

Recently, Pryke has published a comparative study of high statistics simulated air showers for proton primaries, using four combinations of the MOCCA and CORSIKA program frameworks, and SIBYLL and QGSjet high energy hadronic interaction models. He finds $`k=1.30\pm 0.04`$ and $`k=1.32\pm 0.03`$ for the CORSIKA-QGSjet and MOCCA-Internal models, respectively, which are in excellent agreement with our measured result, $`k=1.349\pm 0.045\pm 0.028`$.

Further, Pryke obtains $`k=1.15\pm 0.03`$ and $`k=1.16\pm 0.03`$ for the CORSIKA-SIBYLL and MOCCA-SIBYLL models, respectively, whereas the SYBILL group finds $`k=1.2`$, which is not very different from the Pryke value. However, the SYBILL-based models, with $`k=`$1.15–1.20, are significantly different from our measurement of $`k=1.349\pm 0.045\pm 0.028`$. At first glance, this appears somewhat strange, since our model for forward scattering amplitudes and SIBYLL share the same underlying physics. The increase of the total cross section with energy to a black disk of soft partons is the shadow of increased particle production which is modeled in SYBILL by the production of (mini)-jets in QCD. The difference between the $`k`$ values of 1.15–1.20 and 1.349 results from the very rapid rise of the $`pp`$ cross section in SIBYLL at the highest energies. This is an artifact of the fixed cutoff in transverse momentum used to compute the mini-jet production cross section, and is not a natural consequence of the physics in the model. There are ways to remedy this.

In conclusion, the overall agreement between the accelerator and the cosmic ray $`pp`$ cross sections with our QCD-inspired fit, as shown in Fig. 5, is striking. We find that the accelerator and cosmic ray $`pp`$ cross sections are readily reconcilable using a value of $`k=1.349\pm 0.045\pm 0.028`$, which is both model independent and energy independent—this determination of $`k`$ severely constrains any model of high energy hadronic interactions. We predict high energy $`\sigma _{pp}`$ and $`\sigma _{p\mathrm{air}}^{\mathrm{inel}}`$ cross sections that are accurate to $``$ 1.2% and 0.8%, respectively, at $`\sqrt{s}=30`$ TeV.

At the LHC ($`\sqrt{s}=14`$ TeV), we predict $`\sigma _{\mathrm{tot}}=107.9\pm 1.2`$ mb for the total cross section, $`B=19.59\pm 0.11`$ (GeV/c)-2 for the nuclear slope and $`\rho =0.117\pm 0.001`$, where the quoted errors are due to the statistical errors of the fitting parameters.

In the near term, we look forward to the possibility of repeating this analysis with the higher statistics of the HiRes  cosmic ray experiment that is currently in progress and the Auger  Observatory.


format: text

text:
# Comment on “Viscous cosmology in the Kasner metric”.

## Abstract

Abstract: We show in this comment that in an anisotropic Bianchi type I model of the Kasner form, it is not possible to describe the growth of entropy, if we want to keep the thermodynamics together with the dominant energy conditions. This consequence disagrees with the results obtained by Brevik and Pettersen \[Phys. Rev. D 56, 3322 (1997)\].

PACS number(s): 98.80.Hw, 98.80.Bp

Brevik and Pettersen  have studied the consequences that a Bianchi type I metric of the Kasner form

$`ds^2=dt^2+t^{2p_1}dx^2+t^{2p_2}dy^2+t^{2p_3}dz^2`$ (1)
occurs for the equation of state for the cosmic fluid, characterized by a shear viscosity $`\eta `$ and a bulk viscosity $`\xi `$. In their work, they concluded that for a viscous fluid, with $`\eta 0`$ and $`\xi 0`$, and from Einstein equations, the requirement that the three Kasner parameters $`p_i`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$) be constant implies that $`\eta 1/t`$ and $`\xi 1/t`$.

From their equation (29) it is obtained an explicit expression for the shear viscosity given by

$`\eta ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\kappa t}}(1S),`$ (2)
where $`\kappa =8\pi G`$ and $`S={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}p_i`$. It could be shown from thermodynamics that we should impose the condition $`\eta 0`$ . Therefore, we see from expression (2) that we must require that

$`S10.`$ (3)
On the other hand, the entropy production, in an anisotropic Kasner type universe, becomes

$`\dot{\sigma }{\displaystyle \frac{2S^2}{nk__BTt^2}}\eta A,`$ (4)
where $`A=1/3{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}(1H_i/H)^2=3Q/S^210`$, $`Q={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}p_i^2`$, $`n`$ is the baryon number density, $`k__B`$ is the Boltzmann constant and $`T`$ the temperature.

In expression (4) we have restricted to the case in which the shear viscosity $`\eta `$ is vastly greater than the bulk viscosity $`\xi `$, as was considered in Ref. .

Thus, following the result obtained by Brevik and Pettersen, we conclude that in an anisotropic Kasner type model, the parameters entering in the metric have to satisfy the bound $`S1`$, in order to deal with an appropriated physical model.

On the other hand, if we require the model to satisfy the dominant energy conditions, specified by $`\rho P_j\rho `$ , where $`\rho `$ is the energy density and $`P_j`$ (with $`j=x,y,z`$) are the effective momenta related to the corresponding coordinate axis, we could show that the shear viscosity $`\eta `$ necessarily, in this sort of model, becomes negative, since these dominant energy conditions imply that $`S1`$, and not $`S1`$, as was specified by Brevik and Pettersen.

To see this, let us write the dominant energy condition explicitly in terms of the parameters that enter in the metric (1), i.e. $`p_1,p_2`$ and $`p_3`$.

Einstein field equations can be written in comoving coordinates as (with $`\kappa =8\pi G=1`$)

$$\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{b}}{b}+\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{c}}{c}+\frac{\dot{b}}{b}\frac{\dot{c}}{c}=\rho ,$$
(5)
$$\frac{\ddot{b}}{b}+\frac{\ddot{c}}{c}+\frac{\dot{b}}{b}\frac{\dot{c}}{c}=P_x,$$
(6)
$$\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}+\frac{\ddot{c}}{c}+\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{c}}{c}=P_y$$
(7)
and

$$\frac{\ddot{a}}{a}+\frac{\ddot{b}}{b}+\frac{\dot{a}}{a}\frac{\dot{b}}{b}=P_z,$$
(8)
where $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ are the anisotropic expansion factors. From the metric (1) they are given by $`a=t^{p_1}`$, $`b=t^{p_2}`$ and $`c=t^{p_3}`$. Thus, the Einstein s field equations (5)-(8) reduce to

$$\rho =\frac{p_1p_2+p_1p_3+p_2p_3}{t^2},$$
(9)
$$P_x=\frac{p_2^2+p_3^2p_2p_3+p_2p_3}{t^2},$$
(10)
$$P_y=\frac{p_1^2+p_3^2p_1p_3+p_1p_3}{t^2}$$
(11)
and

$$P_z=\frac{p_1^2+p_2^2p_1p_2+p_1p_2}{t^2}.$$
(12)
Here, as was mentioned above, $`P_j`$, with $`j=x,y,z`$, represent the effective momenta in the corresponding coordinate axis. Note that either $`\rho `$ and $`P_j`$ (with $`j=x,y,z`$) scale as $`t^2`$. Thus, the dominant energy conditions will give some specific relations between the Kasner parameters $`p_i`$.

The conditions $`P_j\rho `$, with $`j=x,y,z`$, yield to three inequations given by

$$(Sp_1)(S1)0,$$
(13)
$$(Sp_2)(S1)0$$
(14)
and

$$(Sp_3)(S1)0,$$
(15)
which, after adding them, reduced to just one inequation given by

$`2S(S1)0.`$ (16)
In a similar way, from $`P_j\rho `$ we get the inequations

$`S(1+p_1)p_1Q,`$ (17)
$`S(1+p_2)p_2Q,`$ (18)
and

$`S(1+p_3)p_3Q.`$ (19)
After adding them we get

$`S{\displaystyle \frac{AS^2}{2}}.`$ (20)
From expression (20), we see that $`S0`$, since by definition $`A0`$. With this condition on $`S`$, we obtain from expression (16) that necessarily $`S`$ should be greater than one. This means that a Bianchi type I metric of the Kasner form, always give rise to a negative shear viscosity, where expression (2) applies. From this result, and from expression (4), we observe that we are finished with the unfavored situation in which $`\dot{\sigma }0`$, giving the meaning that the entropy in this sort of universe decreases instead of increasing.

In conclusion, we have shown in this comment that it is not possible to describe the growth of entropy in the universe for a viscous anisotropic Bianchi type I metric of the Kasner form, if we want to keep the thermodynamic conditions together with the dominant energy conditions.

MC and SdC were supported by COMICION NACIONAL DE CIENCIAS Y TECNOLOGIA through Grants FONDECYT N0 1990601 and N0 1971157. Also MC was supported by Dirección de Promoción y Desa-rrollo de la Universidad del Bío-Bío, and SdC was supported from UCV-DGIP 123.744/99.


text:
# Angular Distributions in Higgs Decays

## Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the Robert A. Welch Foundation.


text:
# Stable ⁸⁵"Rb" Bose-Einstein Condensates with Widely Tunable Interactions

## Abstract

Bose-Einstein condensation has been achieved in a magnetically trapped sample of $`{}_{}{}^{85}\text{Rb}`$ atoms. Long-lived condensates of up to $`10^4`$ atoms have been produced by using a magnetic-field-induced Feshbach resonance to reverse the sign of the scattering length. This system provides many unique opportunities for the study of condensate physics. The variation of the scattering length near the resonance has been used to magnetically tune the condensate self-interaction energy over a very wide range. This range extended from very strong repulsive to large attractive self-interactions. When the interactions were switched from repulsive to attractive, the condensate shrank to below our resolution limit, and after $`5\text{ms}`$ emitted a burst of high-energy atoms.

Atom-atom interactions have a profound influence on most of the properties of Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) in dilute alkali gases. These interactions are well described in a mean-field model by a self-interaction energy that depends only on the density of the condensate $`(n)`$ and the s-wave scattering length $`(a)`$ . Strong repulsive interactions produce stable condensates with a size and shape determined by the self-interaction energy. In contrast, attractive interactions ($`a<0`$) lead to a condensate state where the number of atoms is limited to a small critical value determined by the magnitude of $`a`$ . The scattering length also determines the formation rate, the spectrum of collective excitations, the evolution of the condensate phase, the coupling with the noncondensed atoms, and other important properties.

In the vast majority of condensate experiments the scattering length has been fixed at the outset by the choice of atom. However, it was proposed that the scattering length could be controlled by utilizing the strong variation expected in the vicinity of a magnetic-field-induced Feshbach resonance in collisions between cold $`(\mu \text{K})`$ alkali atoms . Recent experiments on cold $`{}_{}{}^{85}\text{Rb}`$ and Cs atoms and Na condensates have demonstrated the variation of the scattering length via this approach . However, extraordinarily high inelastic losses in the Na condensates were found to severely limit the extent to which the scattering length could be varied and precluded an investigation of the interesting negative scattering length regime . These findings prompted the subsequent proposal of several exotic coherent loss processes that remain untested in other alkali species .

Here we report the successful use of a Feshbach resonance to readily vary the self-interaction of long-lived condensates over a large range. In $`{}_{}{}^{85}\text{Rb}`$ there exists a Feshbach resonance in collisions between two atoms in the $`\text{F}=2,\text{m}_\text{f}=2`$ hyperfine ground state at a magnetic field $`B155\text{Gauss(G)}`$ . Near this resonance the scattering length varies dispersively as a function of magnetic field and, in principle, can have any value between $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`+\mathrm{}`$ (see inset in Fig. 1). This has allowed us to reach novel regimes of condensate physics. These include producing very large repulsive interactions $`(n_{pk}|a|^310^2)`$, where effects beyond the mean-field approximation should be readily observable. We can also make transitions between repulsive and attractive interactions (or vice-versa). This now makes it possible to study condensates in the negative scattering length regime, including the anticipated “collapse” of the condensate , with a level of control that has not been possible in other experiments . In fact, this ability to change the sign of the scattering length is essential for the existence of our $`{}_{}{}^{85}\text{Rb}`$ condensate. Away from the resonance the large negative scattering length ($`400a_0`$ ) limits the maximum number of atoms in a condensate to $`80`$ . However, we have produced condensates with up to $`10^4`$ atoms by operating in a region of the Feshbach resonance where $`a`$ is positive.

The experimental apparatus was similar to the double magneto-optical trap (MOT) system used in our earlier work . Atoms collected in a vapor cell MOT were transferred to a second MOT in a low-pressure chamber. Once sufficient atoms have accumulated in the low-pressure MOT, both the MOT’s were turned off and the atoms were loaded into a purely magnetic, Ioffe-Pritchard “baseball” trap. During the loading sequence the atom cloud was compressed, cooled and optically pumped, resulting in a typical trapped sample of about $`3\times 10^8`$ $`{}_{}{}^{85}\text{Rb}`$ atoms in the $`\text{F}=2,\text{m}_\text{f}=2`$ state at a temperature of $`T=45\mu \text{K}`$. The lifetime of atoms in the magnetic trap due to collisions with background atoms was $`450\text{s}`$.

Forced radio-frequency evaporation was employed to cool the sample of atoms. Unfortunately, $`{}_{}{}^{85}\text{Rb}`$ is plagued with pitfalls for the unwary evaporator familiar only with $`{}_{}{}^{87}\text{Rb}`$ or Na. In contrast to those atoms, the elastic collision cross section for $`{}_{}{}^{85}\text{Rb}`$ exhibits strong temperature dependence due to a zero in the s-wave scattering cross section at a collision energy of $`E/k_B350\mu \text{K}`$ . This decrease in the elastic collision cross section with temperature means that the standard practice of adiabatic compression to increase the initial elastic collision rate does not work. $`{}_{}{}^{85}\text{Rb}`$ also suffers from unusually high inelastic collision rates. We recently investigated these losses and observed a mixture of two and three-body processes which varied with $`B`$ . The overall inelastic collision rate displayed several orders of magnitude variation across the Feshbach resonance, with a dependence on $`B`$ similar to that of the elastic collision rate. However, the inelastic rate increased more rapidly than the elastic rate towards the peak of the Feshbach resonance, and was found to be significantly lower in the high field wing of the resonance than on the low field side. This knowledge of the loss rates, together with the known field dependence of the elastic cross section , has enabled us to successfully devise an evaporation path to reach BEC. This begins with evaporative cooling at a field $`(B=250\text{G})`$ well above the Feshbach resonance. To maintain a relatively low density, and thereby minimize the inelastic losses, a relatively weak trap is used. The low initial elastic collision rate means that about $`120\text{s}`$ are needed to reach $`T2\mu \text{K}`$, putting a stringent requirement on the trap lifetime. As the atoms cool, the elastic rate increases and it becomes advantageous to trade some of this increase for a reduced inelastic collision rate by moving to $`B=162.3\text{G}`$ where the magnitude of the scattering length is decreased. The remainder of the evaporation is performed at this field (with a radial (axial) trap frequency of $`17.5\text{Hz}`$ $`(6.8\text{Hz})`$). In contrast to field values away from the Feshbach resonance, the scattering length is positive at this field and stable condensates may therefore be produced.

The density distribution of the trapped atom cloud was probed using absorption imaging with a $`10\mu \text{s}`$ laser pulse $`1.6\text{ms}`$ after the rapid $`(0.2\text{ms})`$ turn-off of the magnetic trap. The shadow of the atom cloud was magnified by about a factor of 10 and imaged onto a CCD array to determine the spatial size and the number of atoms. The emergence of the BEC transition was observed at $`T15\text{nK}`$. Typically, we were able to produce “pure” condensates of up to $`10^4`$ atoms with peak number densities of $`n_{pk}1\times 10^{12}\text{cm}^3`$. The lifetime of the condensate at $`B=162.3\text{G}`$ was about $`10\text{s}`$ . This lifetime is consistent with that expected from the inelastic losses we have measured in cold thermal clouds. It is notable that our evaporation trajectory suffered a near-catastrophic decline prior to the observation of the BEC transition. We approached the required BEC phase space density at 100 nK with about $`10^6`$atoms, but then lost a factor of about $`50`$ in the atom number before the characteristic two-component density distribution was visible. Over this part of the trajectory, the cooling efficiency has become low (and the phase space density remain approximately constant). This is because the mean free path is comparable to the cloud size and the high density results in high losses. This situation improves when the number of atoms becomes sufficiently low, and we are then able to obtain a significant fraction of the atoms in a condensate. The number of atoms in the condensate after we reach this favorable low-density regime is obviously a delicate balance between the elastic (cooling) and inelastic (loss) collision processes in the cloud. Both of these are strongly field dependent near the Feshbach resonance. Although we are able to decrease the loss rate by moving to higher fields, the ratio of elastic to inelastic collisions actually decreases and it becomes harder to form condensates. For example, at $`B=164.3\text{G}`$ we can only produce condensates of a few thousand atoms. Conversely, moving to lower fields does not help because we reach the favorable low-density cooling regime at smaller numbers of atoms. This restriction together with the larger loss rate means that at $`B=160.3\text{G}`$, for example, we are unable to form condensates.

One of the features of the high inelastic loss rates reported in the Na experiments was an anomalously high decay rate when the condensate was swept rapidly through the Feshbach resonance . In light of this work, it was essential to determine to what extent the $`{}_{}{}^{85}\text{Rb}`$ condensate was perturbed in being swept across the Feshbach peak during the trap turn-off. These measurements also provide an additional test of coherent loss mechanisms such as those in references . We applied a linear ramp to the current in the baseball coil to sweep the magnetic field experienced by the atoms from $`B=162.3\text{G}`$ across the Feshbach peak to $`B132\text{G}`$ and then immediately turned off the trap and imaged the atom cloud. From the images we determined the fraction of condensate atoms lost as a function of the inverse ramp speed (Fig. 2). The loss for the fastest ramp, which corresponds to the direct turn-off of the magnetic trap, is less than $`9\%`$. This was determined in a separate experiment where the condensate was imaged directly in the magnetic trap both before and after the ramp. For comparison, the experiment was repeated using a cloud of thermal atoms much hotter than the BEC transition temperature. The results for the thermal atoms are consistent with the known inelastic loss rates in the vicinity of the Feshbach resonance . The strong and poorly characterized temperature dependence of these known loss rates near the Feshbach peak makes it difficult to determine what fraction of the observed condensate loss can be attributed to the usual inelastic loss processes and we cannot, therefore, rule out a coherent aspect to the loss process. There have been several models of coherent loss processes put forward to explain the corresponding sodium results. However, these calculations are based on the Timmermans theory  of coupled atomic and molecular Gross-Pitaevskii equations which is unlikely to be applicable to the conditions of the present experiment .

We also changed the self-interaction energy by varying the magnetic field and observed the resulting change in the condensate shape. By applying a linear ramp to the magnetic field we have varied the magnitude of $`a`$ in the condensate by almost three orders of magnitude. The duration of this ramp was sufficiently long $`(500\text{ms})`$ to ensure that the condensate responded adiabatically. Fig. 3 shows a series of condensate images for various magnetic fields. They illustrate how we are able to easily change $`a`$ over a very wide range of positive values. Moving towards the Feshbach peak the condensate size increases due to the increased self-interaction energy. The density distribution approaches the parabolic distribution with an aspect ratio of $`\lambda _{TF}=\omega _z/\omega _r`$ expected in the TF regime . Moving in the opposite direction the cloud size becomes smaller than our 7 micron resolution limit shortly before we reach the noninteracting limit where the condensate density distribution is a Gaussian whose dimensions are set by the harmonic oscillator lengths ($`l_i=(\mathrm{}/m\omega _i)^{1/2}`$ where $`i=r,z`$) . We took condensate images similar to those shown at many field values between 156 and 166 G. From the images the full widths at half-maximum (FWHM) of the column density distributions were determined. The scattering length was then derived by assuming a TF column density distribution with the same FWHM $`((Na)^{1/5})`$. In Fig. 1 we plot the scattering length derived in this manner versus the magnetic field. It shows that these values agree with the predicted field dependence of the Feshbach resonance.

The ability to tune the atom-atom interactions in a condensate presents several exciting avenues for future research. One is to explore the breakdown of the dilute-gas approximation near the Feshbach peak. The lifetime of the condensate decreases with larger a, but for a lifetime of about 100 ms, which is sufficient for many experiments, we have created static condensates with $`n_{pk}|a|^310^2`$. For such values, effects beyond the mean field approximation, such as shifts in the frequencies of the collective excitations , are about 10%.

A second avenue is the behavior of the condensate when the scattering length becomes negative. When we increased the magnetic field beyond $`B=166.8\text{G}`$, where $`a`$ was expected to change sign, a sudden departure from the smooth behavior in Figs. 1 and 3 was observed. As $`a`$ was decreased the condensate width decreased and then about 5 ms seconds after the change in sign there was a sudden explosion that ejected a large fraction of the condensate. This left a small observable remnant condensate surrounded by a “hot” cloud at a temperature on the order of 100 nK. These preliminary results on switching from repulsive to attractive interactions suggest a violent, but highly reproducible, destruction of the condensate. The ability to control the precise moment of the onset of $`a<0`$ instability is a distinct advantage over existing methods for studying this regime which rely on analyzing ensemble averages of “post-collapse” condensates . The dynamical response of the condensate to a sudden change in the sign of the interactions can now be investigated in a controlled manner, probing the rich physics of this dramatic condensate “collapse” process.

We are pleased to acknowledge useful discussions with Murray Holland, Jim Burke, Josh Milstein and Marco Prevedelli. This research has been supported by the NSF and ONR. One of us (S. L. Cornish) acknowledges the support of a Lindemann Fellowship.


text:
# Harmonically dancing space-time nodes: quantitatively deriving relativity, mass, and gravitation

## Reference

Einstein, A., 1905, Annalen der Physik, 18, 891.

Heisenberg, W., 1930, Physical Principles of the Quantum Theory, Dover, NY.

Lorentz, H.A., Einstein, A., Minkowski, H., & Weyl, H., 1923, The Principles
Relativity - a Collection of Original Memoirs, trans. W. Perret & G.B.
Jeffrey, London: Methuen & Co. Ltd., paperback reprint, Dover Publ. (1958).

Schwarzschild, K., 1916, Über das Gravitationsfeld eines Massenpunktes
nach der Einsteinschen Theorie, Sitzber Preuss. Acad. Wiss. Berlin
189 – 196.

## Figure Captions

Figure 1: The space-time lattice of stationary ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$) and moving ($`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$) observers are illustrated here for the case of distance measurements. The ‘tickmarks’ of the ruler of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ are marked as the topmost set of black dots. The rod to be measured is the short bar immediately beneath, and is at rest with respect to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. Observer $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ measures the length of this rod while in motion, by simultaneously acquiring data on the positions of the front and rear end of the rod. It is postulated that effectively $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ is using a moving set of ‘tickmarks’, and if microscopically these are connected by oscillators which vibrate while in motion, the ‘tickmarks’ widen as depicted in the lower half of the diagram. Consequently $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ obtains a smaller value for the length of the rod.

Figure 2: The space-time lattices of inertial observers $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ (top) and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ (bottom), the latter ‘moving’ at velocity $`𝐯`$ with respect to the former, who is regarded as ‘stationary’. If $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ measures $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ between two ‘stationary’ events at the same time, or $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ at the same position, in each case the result is less than that obtained by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$. This means for ‘orthogonal’ measurements of space and time performed by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$, the ‘tickmarks’ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ are more widely separated, as indicated by the lower grid.

Figure 3: Illustrating the origin of mass and gravitation. Top: a region $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ (the rest frame lattice of observer $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$) has higher than ambient temperature. Mass is proportional to the incumbent extra energy. The physical boundary of the mass (shown here in the space dimension only) is drawn as a rectangular box, inside of which all the energy surplus resides, as a result the nodes are much more widely spaced than outside. Middle: The same region as it appears in the lattice of observer $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ who ‘moves’ with respect to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ at velocity $`𝐯`$. Separation between any pair of nodes is now increased by the factor $`\gamma `$, meaning fewer oscillators within $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, but more energy per oscillator. The net increase in enclosed energy (hence mass) is $`\gamma `$ (see text). Bottom: Energy is conducted outwards from $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to the ambient lattice by phonons, which causes the separation between nodes to gradually reach the natural minimum at asymptotically large distances. Note that the inner boundary from which the energy transport commences is an abstract quantity which need not be the physical size of the mass; in fact, the former is usually within the latter.