text:
# Discovery of mHz UV Quasiperiodic Oscillations in Hercules X-1

## 1 Introduction

Hercules X-1/HZ Herculis is an X-ray binary consisting of a 1.24 second pulsar in an eclipsing 1.7 day orbit with a $`2\text{ M}_{}`$ mass normal companion. As a result of its many periodicities, it is one of the most frequently observed X-ray binaries. The X-rays vary over a 35 day cycle; an $`11`$ day “Main-on” state and $`8`$ day “Short-on” state (in which the observed X-ray flux is reduced by a factor of $`3`$) are separated by half of a 35-day phase (Scott & Leahy 1999). Outside of these states the X-ray flux is several % of that seen in the Main-on state. The X-ray modulation is not due to a change in the total X-ray output, as the optical magnitude continues to vary over the 1.7 day orbit due to X-ray heating of the companion star. Instead, the 35-day variation probably results from obscuration of the central source by an accretion disk which wobbles over a 35-day period due to an unknown cause. X-ray absorption dips occur at a period of 1.65 days, near to, but significantly greater than, the 1.62 day beat period between the 1.7 and 35 day periods (Crosa & Boynton 1981; Scott & Leahy 1999). Features in the X-ray spectrum near $`3040`$ keV have been interpreted as the result of cyclotron absorption (Trümper et al. 1978, Dal Fiume et al. 1998), implying a magnetic field strength $`B=2.9\pm 0.3\times 10^{12}`$ G (Mihara et al. 1990). Recently, another model has been put forward for the cyclotron lines, in which the electron momentum distribution is allowed to be anisotropic. The magnetic field strength is then inferred to be $`B=46\times 10^{10}`$ G (Baushev & Bisnovatyi-Kogan 1999).

The X-ray power spectrum is dominated by the 1.24 second pulse and its harmonics and by a continuum noise component (Belloni, Hasinger, & Kahabka 1991). There has been a single report of 144 sec period X-ray fluctuations during an X-ray turn-on (Leahy et al. 1992). The optical and UV continuua both show evidence for reprocessed pulsations (Middleditch & Nelson 1977, Boroson et al. 1996) with fractional amplitudes of several $`\times 10^3`$. The accretion disk and the atmosphere of HZ Her may both contribute to the reprocessed pulsations.

Quasiperiodic oscillations (QPOs), observed in a variety of compact accreting binary systems, have not previously been reported for Her X-1. QPOs in general are poorly understood. In the “atoll” and “Z-class” sources that show kHz QPOs, spin periods are not observed directly, cyclotron lines are not seen, and emission from the companion star is often overwhelmed by the emission from the accretion disk. Thus the discovery of QPOs in Her X-1 may help to link QPO behavior to such properties as the neutron star magnetic field and spin, and details of the mass transfer.

## 2 Observations

We have been carrying out a multiwavelength study of Hercules X-1 using the HST Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS), the Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE), the Extreme Ultraviolet Explorer (EUVE), and ground-based observatories, including the Keck Telescope. Empirical models for the emission lines observed during the first segment of our campaign, in July of 1998, have been reported in Boroson et al. (2000). A second segment of the campaign took place during July of 1999. The 1999 observations took place during an “anomalous low” state in which the X-ray flux was two orders of magnitude lower than in the expected “main-on” state, although accretion continued to take place (Parmar et al. 1999). A summary of the multiwavelength campaign results is presented in Vrtilek et al. (2000).

TABLE 1
The STIS observation log     Root name Start Time Orbital Count Rate QPOb     (MJD) (s) Phasea (s-1)   O4V405010 51371.124 2227 0.512 624 Y  O4V405020 51371.185 2636 0.549 605 Y  O4V405030 51371.253 2636 0.589 550 Y  O4V405040 51371.321 2636 0.629 491 Y  O4V405050 51371.388 2620 0.669 391 Y  O4V406010 51372.064 2227 0.065 24 N  O4V406020 51372.124 2636 0.102 57 N  O4V406030 51372.193 2636 0.142 70 N  O4V406040 51372.260 2636 0.182 92 N  O4V406050 51372.328 2620 0.221 131 N  O4V407010 51373.004 2227 0.618 561 Y  O4V407020 51373.065 2636 0.655 435 Y  O4V407030 51373.133 2636 0.695 329 Y  O4V407040 51373.200 2636 0.735 236 ?  O4V407050 51373.268 2620 0.774 158 ?  O4V408010 51374.011 2227 0.210 74 N  O4V408020 51374.072 2636 0.247 128 N  O4V408030 51384.140 2636 0.288 214 S  O4V408040 51374.207 2620 0.327 325 S

aThe orbital phase of the mid-exposure time, using the ephemeris of Deeter et al. (1991)
bY=QPOs detecteed, N=Definitely no QPOs detected, ?=Borderline significance, S=significant if a linear fit to the light curve is subtracted

The UV observations used the HST STIS. The STIS instrument design is described by Woodgate et al. (1998), and the in-orbit performance of the STIS is described by Kimble et al. (1998). We show a log of the 1999 STIS observations in Table 1. All of these observations used the E140M grating for high resolution echelle spectroscopy. This provides a spectral coverage of $`11501710`$Å with a resolving power of $`R=45,800`$ (6 km s-1).

## 3 Detection of QPOs

We obtained the HST spectra using the TIME-TAG mode, which stamps each photon with a time accurate to 125$`\mu `$sec and the position of the photon along the two axes that define the two-dimensional echelle image. To create light curves we first selected a region of the two-dimensional raw spectral image corresponding either to the entire spectrum or the brightest spectral lines (N V$`\lambda \lambda 1238.8,1242.8`$ and C IV$`\lambda \lambda 1548.2,1550.7`$). We selected the region in the two-dimensional echelle image using the task “fselect” in the FITS utility package FTOOLS (version 4.2). Then we converted the resulting file to a light curve with 0.1 second bins using the FTOOLS “fcurve” task. We then formed power spectra from the discrete Fourier transform of the data in each of the HST orbits, and for 400 second intervals within each orbit.

As a “control” on our method, we also examined STIS TIME-TAG data for the X-ray binary LMC X-4 using similar data reduction techniques. Analysis of these observations, and the search for UV pulsations with the 13.5 second LMC X-4 pulsar period, will be presented in Kaper et al. (2000). None of the 5 HST orbits in which LMC X-4 was observed showed significant power above the white noise due to counting statistics in the 1-100 mHz region.

We did not find any evidence for UV pulsations near the 1.24 s pulsar period in the 1999 data. We would have detected (with 5$`\sigma `$ significance) pulsations of rms amplitude $`0.2`$% near $`\varphi =0.5`$, amplitude $`0.3`$% near $`\varphi =0.75`$, and amplitude $`0.4`$% near $`\varphi =0.2`$ when the disk is emerging from eclipse. These values should be compared with the UV rms amplitudes found with the GHRS in Boroson et al. (1996): $`0.4`$% at $`\varphi =0.56`$ and $`0.7`$% at $`\varphi =0.83`$. In the 1998 data, during the short-on state at $`\varphi =0.76`$, we found marginal evidence (false alarm probability $`0.4`$%) for pulsations with rms amplitude of $`0.7`$%. With this sole exception, there were no UV oscillations near the pulse period in the data from either 1998 or 1999. The fractional rms amplitude is defined and related to the power spectrum in van der Klis (1989). For a constant plus pure sinusoid signal, the fractional rms amplitude is $`1/2\sqrt{2}`$ times the peak-to-peak difference, divided by the average value.

It is useful to place the non-detection of UV pulsations in context by examining the X-ray pulsations seen in 1998 and 1999. Our 1998 multiwavelength campaign overlapped with X-ray observations using Bepposax (Oosterbroek et al. 2000). These observations found that the fractional rms amplitude of the X-ray pulses during the July 1998 short-on state was 10% in the 4-10 keV band, compared with 20% in the main-on state (Fig. 4 of Oosterbroek et al. 2000). RXTE measured an X-ray flux of $`1.5\times 10^9`$ erg s-1 cm-2, steadily decreasing to $`5\times 10^{10}`$ erg s-1 cm-2 as the short-on state progressed. The 1999 RXTE observations found that although the direct component of the X-rays was obscured, X-rays were observed at $`5`$% of the normal main-on level, and continued to pulsate with the 1.24 second period, with a fractional rms amplitude of $`13`$% (Still et al. 2000). We caution, however, that these low pulse fractions do not provide a full explanation of why UV pulses were not observed, as the X-ray pulse fraction seen by the companion star and disk (which cause the UV pulsations) can be very different from that which we observe.

In Figure 1 we show the average power spectrum for each orbit in which QPOs were detected. In Figure 2 we show the average of 46 power spectra of the light curves from all HST orbits from the 1999 campaign in 400 second intervals. Near $`\varphi =0.5`$ the count rate is sufficient to detect individual QPO oscillations, which we show in Figure 3. No significant QPOs were detected in the emission line flux. The lines contribute about 20% of the total counts in the spectrum. When we subtract the light curve of the emission lines from the light curve of the total spectrum and take a power spectrum, the QPOs remain unaffected.

We could not obtain accurate Gaussian representations of the power spectra within each HST orbit. However, taking the average of all power spectra, we could fit a power-law continuum and 2 Gaussians (Figure 2). We find QPO centroids of $`\nu _1=8\pm 2`$ mHz and $`\nu _2=43\pm 2`$ mHz (we have determined errors from a Monte Carlo bootstrap analysis, Press et al. 1992). The gaussian widths of the QPOs were $`4\pm 1`$ mHz and $`21\pm 2`$ mHz. Applying the techniques outlined in van der Klis (1989), we find total rms QPO fractions of 2.1$`\pm 0.7`$% and 3.7$`\pm 0.4`$% for the two QPO peaks, respectively.

We detect QPOs at $`\varphi =0.280.33`$ if we remove a linear trend from the UV continuum light curve (Table 1). It is possible that the predominance of UV oscillations near $`\varphi =0.5`$ results from the flatter orbital light curve near $`\varphi =0.5`$. However, removing linear trends from the data for other HST orbits did not reveal mHz QPOs.

After finding QPOs in the 1999 STIS data, we examined optical observations from our 1998 campaign and found evidence for a 35 mHz QPO peak there as well (Figure 4). Results from the optical campaign will be presented in more detail in (O’Brien et al. 2000). The HST GHRS observations of Boroson et al. (1996) during the Main-On state included 1200 s of high count-rate (1100 cts s-1) data at $`\varphi =0.55`$, which show the 8 mHz QPO but not the 43 mHz QPO.

We investigated the time dependence of the 45 mHz QPO feature using a Gabor transform (Heil & Walnut 1989, 1990). The Gabor transform is a wavelet transform which decomposes the signal into the time-frequency plane. The discrete implementation used here is equivalent to a short-time, Gaussian-windowed Fourier transform (Boyd et al. 1995). We chose a window size of 512 seconds, and restricted the frequency range to lie between 2.5 - 90 mHz. Figure 3 displays power as a function of frequency and time for the first five observations. The palette runs from dark blue (low power) through deep red (high power). The featureless dark blue vertical strips are times during which no data was collected. Significance was estimated by performing individual, independent Fourier transforms on the data in windows fully containing the features of highest power. The strongest of these features are found to be significant at more than $`6\sigma `$.

Figure 3 shows the frequency evolution of the 45 mHz QPO as a function of time, and can be thought of as an unfolding of the single power spectrum, which shows a broad QPO feature centered about a preferred frequency. The frequency evolution shown in the Gabor transforms shows that the QPO in the overall power spectrum is composed of many individual short-time components that come and go over the entire observation.

## 4 Discussion

The “spikey” power spectra could be caused by several processes. Multiple overlapping exponential oscillating shots or a single sinusoid whose phase undergoes a random walk could each reproduce the qualitative power spectral shape observed. The Gabor transforms suggest that the QPO width is due to high Q oscillations appearing and disappearing at different frequencies. Oscillating shot noise can cause both QPO and a low-frequency red noise component together, and we have tried to determine whether the 8 mHz feature could actually be red noise associated with the 45 mHz feature. Analysis of the dynamical power spectrum through the Gabor transform shows no apparent correlation.

Are the QPOs due to the accretion disk or the X-ray heated atmosphere of HZ Her? The QPOs were not detected at $`\varphi <0.33`$ or $`\varphi >0.73`$. Models suggest that at $`\varphi <0.2`$ and $`\varphi >0.8`$, most of the optical and UV continuum arises in the accretion disk, and that from $`\varphi =0.2`$ to $`\varphi =0.8`$ the flux from the disk should be constant (Howarth & Wilson 1983). The X-ray heating of the atmosphere of HZ Her causes the optical continuum flux to reach a maximum near $`\varphi =0.5`$ (Bahcall & Bahcall 1972), and at these phases, the UV emission arises predominantly on the X-ray heated face HZ Her (Vrtilek & Cheng 1996). From Figure 6 we conclude that at $`\varphi =0.5`$, the disk continuum should contribute at most $`10`$% of the total continuum flux. Thus if the UV QPOs with 10% amplitude of the total flux result from oscillations of the disk flux, the disk flux must be modulated by an amplitude near 100%.

It would be simpler to attribute the QPOs to the heated atmosphere of HZ Her. The concentration of the QPO detections about $`\varphi =0.5`$ could be a result of the increased stellar flux; with a higher flux the QPOs would be easier to detect. The light-travel time across the X-ray heated face of the companion should be $`<10`$ seconds, as the separation of the neutron star and the system center of mass is $`a\mathrm{sin}i=13.186`$ s (Deeter et al. 1991). This allows variability on the observed timescales, while damping the harmonics of the 45 mHz QPO (which are not observed).

TABLE 2
X-ray Binary Pulsars with mHz QPOs     Name Typea $`\nu _{\mathrm{pulse}}`$ $`\nu _{\mathrm{QPO}}`$ B Reference      (mHz) (mHz) $`10^{12}`$ G   Her X-1 P 807.9 $`5,45`$ 2.9 this work      $`\pm 0.3`$   SMC X-1 P 1410 $`10,60`$  Wojdowski       et al. 1998  4U 1627-67 P 132 48 $`3`$ Chakrabarty       1998  Cen X-3 P 207 35  Takeshima       et al. 1994  4U 0115+63 T 277 62 1.0 Soong &       Swank 1989  4U 1907+09 T 2.27 55  in’tZand       et al. 1998  XTEJ1858+034 T 4.5 110  Paul & Rao       1998  V0332+53 T 229 51$`\pm 5`$  Takeshima       et al. 1994  EXO 2030+375 T 24 213  Angelini et al.       1989  A 0535+262 T 9.71 25-72  Finger et al.       1996   aP: persistent X-ray source, T: transient X-ray source

Although we conclude that the UV QPOs are probably emitted by HZ Her, they may well be reprocessed from QPOs originating in the accretion disk, either as a result of some structure in the disk emitting with the QPO frequency, or shadowing the star from X-ray emission with the same frequency. A comparison with optical and X-ray QPOs recently discovered in other X-ray pulsars supports this conclusion (see Table 2 for a summary of these systems.)

The KZ TrA/4U 1627-67 system contains an X-ray pulsar with a 7.7 s period, and shows 48 mHz QPOs in both X-ray and optical lightcurves (Chakrabarty 1998). The optical QPOs, with an amplitude of $`35`$%, are emitted by the surface of the companion in response to X-ray illumination. The QPO frequency is probably the orbital frequency of a structure revolving about the neutron star (Kommers, Chakrabarty, & Lewin 1998). The X-ray binary pulsar SMC X-1 shows X-ray power spectral turnover at $`10`$ mHz (Angelini, Stella, & White 1991) and QPOs at 60 mHz (Wojdowski et al. 1998). Transient X-ray pulsars also show QPOs; XTE J1858+034 has QPOs with $`\nu =110`$ mHz with rms amplitude 3.7-7.8% depending on the energy band (Paul & Rao 1998). The transient Be system 4U 1907+09 shows very narrow QPO with $`\nu 55`$ mHz during bursts (in’tZand, Baykal, & Strohmayer 1998).

These sources thus show QPOs with remarkably similar frequencies, and as they are all X-ray pulsars they probably have similar magnetic field strengths (for 4U 1627-67, BeppoSAX observations of a cyclotron feature imply $`B3\times 10^{12}`$ G, Orlandini et al. 1998). It thus seems natural to try to associate the QPOs with the region where the magnetic field disrupts the disk. The Alfvén radius (where the magnetic energy density equals the gas ram pressure) in Her X-1 is probably $`r_A=27\times 10^8`$ cm (McCray & Lamb 1976). Within this region, the Keplerian frequency is $`>100`$ mHz, higher than the observed QPOs. The QPO may be due to Keplerian rotation further out in the disk, but a physical reason why this region is singled out is lacking.

The 8 mHz QPO in Her X-1 is even more problematic. If it occurs as the result of Keplerian rotation, it arises at a radius in the disk of $`r=6\times 10^9`$ cm, even further from the Alfvén radius.

We also consider a “beat-frequency” interpretation (Alpar & Shaham 1985), in which the observed QPO frequency $`\nu _{\mathrm{QPO}}=45\text{mHz}=\nu _{\mathrm{ns}}\nu _K`$, where $`\nu _{\mathrm{ns}}=808\text{mHz}`$ is the neutron star spin frequency and $`\nu _K`$ is the Keplerian frequency of some material in the disk. In order for $`\nu _{\mathrm{QPO}}`$ to be a beat frequency, the Keplerian frequency must be within 5% of $`\nu _{\mathrm{ns}}`$. This seems an unlikely coincidence, although we must have $`\nu _{\mathrm{ns}}<\nu _K`$ or the gas will be expelled from the disk, spinning down the pulsar via “propellor effect” (Illarionov & Sunyaev 1975). We note that Bepposax observations ending $`<2`$ days before the start of the HST observations reported here (Parmar et al. 1999) show that the pulsar has indeed spun-down, reversing $`5`$ years of spin-up in a period of months. The beat frequency interpretation of the QPOs requires that the Alfvén radius be near the corotation radius in Her X-1 (at $`2\times 10^8`$ cm), and this does appear to be the case.

The transition between Keplerian rotation and corotation occurs at a radius $`r_00.5r_A`$ (Ghosh & Lamb 1979) over a radial zone of extent $`\mathrm{\Delta }r=0.03r_0`$. In this range, $`\nu _K`$ varies by $`5`$%, naturally leading to $`\nu _{QPO}50`$ mHz, given $`\nu _K=\nu (r_0)\nu _{\mathrm{ns}}`$. (However, this mechanism would not be able to explain the 8 mHz QPO, which requires the Keplerian frequency to be within $`0.5`$% of the pulse frequency.)

Further bolstering the beat-frequency case, we have found marginal evidence for oscillations at 760 mHz=$`80845`$ mHz in the X-ray data from RXTE from our 1998 campaign. As an example of how this could arise in a beat-frequency scenario, if a blob in orbit around the neutron star has an orbital frequency of 760 mHz, it will cover the X-ray beam from the pulsar (which rotates at 808 mHz) and prevent it from illuminating the companion star with a frequency of $`808760`$ mHz$`=48`$ mHz. The (marginally) observed 760 mHz X-ray signal would then be a direct signal from this blob, due either to emission or obscuration.

It seems more likely that the reprocessed QPOs are due to material that absorbs the X-rays and prevents them from heating HZ Her than material that emits X-rays. Whether the QPO frequency results from Keplerian rotation or a beat-frequency, the accretion disk is too cold at the implied radii to emit X-rays that significantly heat the companion.

A third possible explanation for the QPOs, that may explain the presence of both QPOs, is provided by Titarchuk & Osherovich (2000, submitted). In this explanation, the higher frequency QPO results from a global vertical oscillation of the disk, whereas the lower frequency QPO results from Keplerian rotation.

We detected UV continuum QPOs during an anomalous low state of Her X-1. Although there may be a connection between the QPO and the low state, time-resolved UV observations near $`\varphi =0.5`$ have not been common, and similar optical QPO are seen in observations using the Keck telescope (O’Brien, et al. 2000) during the short-on state (Figure 4). The IUE observations and the HST FOS observations of Anderson et al. (1994) did not have the required time resolution for the detection of QPOs.

The QPO phenomenon in Her X-1 should help us understand the origin of QPOs in other sources. The simultaneous detection of X-ray and UV QPOs during an On state could test our suggestion that HZ Her reprocesses X-ray QPOs. The UV QPOs should lag the X-ray QPOs by $`10`$ s, in a manner that varies with the orbital phase. Simultaneous measurement of UV and optical QPOs could determine the spectrum of the reprocessor. These analyses will test our proposal that the QPOs originate on the star in response to disk QPOs, and may help us distinguish between the possible origins in the disk that we have suggested.

We would like to thank Vladimir Osherovich and Lev Titarchuk for discussions and suggestions. Based on observations with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract GO-05874.01-94A. BB and SDV supported in part by NASA (NAG5-2532, NAGW-2685), and NSF (DGE-9350074). BB acknowledges an NRC postdoctoral associateship. HQ is employed on PPARC grant L64621. We would like to thank R. Kelley and D. Chakrabarty for suggestions.


format: text

text:
# Biased Galaxy Formation And Measurements Of 𝛽

## 1 Introduction

In cosmological linear perturbation theory, there is a simple relation between the peculiar velocity and the mass density fields,

$$𝐯(𝐱)=\frac{f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)}{4\pi }\delta _m(𝐱^{})\frac{(𝐱^{}𝐱)}{|𝐱^{}𝐱|^3}d^3x^{},$$
(1)
where $`\delta _m(𝐱)\rho (𝐱)/\overline{\rho }1`$ is the mass density contrast, $`f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{0.6}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ is the ratio of the average mass density of the universe to the critical density (Peebles 1980). The differential form of this relation is

$$\stackrel{}{}𝐯(𝐱)=f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)\delta _m(𝐱).$$
(2)
These relations suggest that if we map the mass density and velocity fields, a comparison of the two will yield a measurement of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$. Unfortunately, we cannot observe the mass distribution directly. We can only detect luminous matter, of which galaxies are the basic unit. The relation between the galaxy and mass distributions, usually referred to as “bias”, depends on the details of the galaxy formation process. A complete theory of galaxy formation should predict what environments galaxies form in and how they are distributed in space with respect to the mass. However, while galaxy formation is one of the most actively pursued fields of theoretical cosmology, our current understanding of it is far from perfect. The relation between galaxies and mass is often parameterized by the linear bias model $`\delta _g=b\delta _m`$, where $`\delta _g`$ is the galaxy density contrast and $`b`$ is the linear bias factor. Equation (2) then becomes

$$\stackrel{}{}𝐯(𝐱)=\beta \delta _g(𝐱),$$
(3)
where $`\beta =f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)/b`$.

Methods that use equation (3), or some form of it, to infer the cosmic mass density can only directly measure $`\beta `$, a degenerate combination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and $`b`$. In practice, $`\beta `$ is usually estimated from a comparison between the galaxy density field, inferred from galaxy redshift maps, and galaxy peculiar velocities, which require distance measurements to individual galaxies. This estimate is made either through a density-density comparison, where the mass density field is predicted from the smoothed peculiar velocity field and is then compared to the observed galaxy density field, or through a velocity-velocity comparison, where galaxy peculiar velocities are predicted from the galaxy density field and are then compared individually to observed galaxy peculiar velocities. Alternatively, $`\beta `$ can be measured solely from galaxy redshift maps by analyzing the anisotropy of galaxy clustering produced by redshift-space distortions, using either the power spectrum or correlation function in redshift space. Based on these three main approaches, there are many techniques that have been developed and used to estimate $`\beta `$ (see Strauss & Willick 1995 for a review of these techniques).

Since the bias relation depends on the complex process of galaxy formation, it is probably more complicated than the one-parameter linear bias model. It can, in general, be non-linear, stochastic, and possibly non-local (Dekel & Lahav 1999). Therefore, it is not obvious exactly what information a measurement of $`\beta `$ contains. Moreover, it is not clear whether the different techniques for estimating $`\beta `$ are measuring the same quantity. The primary purpose of this paper is to examine these issues and determine what can be learned about bias from measurements of $`\beta `$. We create simulated galaxy distributions with various non-trivial bias prescriptions and use them to measure $`\beta `$ with different existing techniques. The general approach is similar to the one we followed in Narayanan, Berlind & Weinberg (2000) (hereafter NBW), where we investigated the sensitivity of large-scale structure statistics to bias.

An additional motivation for this study is that there are large discrepancies in current $`\beta `$ measurements made with different methods. For example, analyses of the IRAS 1.2-Jy galaxy redshift survey (Fisher et al. 1995) have yielded $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.89\pm 0.12`$ by the density-density approach (Sigad et al. 1998), $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.50\pm 0.04`$ by the velocity-velocity approach (Willick & Strauss 1998), and $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.52\pm 0.13`$ by the redshift-space distortion approach (Cole, Fisher & Weinberg 1995). Table 1 summarizes current $`\beta `$ estimates for IRAS-selected samples of galaxies made using different techniques. The estimates of $`\beta `$ span the range $`0.41.0`$, and the most extreme measurements differ from each other at the $`4\sigma `$ level. Some authors have suggested that these discrepancies could be caused by complexity in the bias relation affecting different methods in different ways (Willick et al. 1997; Sigad et al. 1998; Dekel & Lahav 1999). For example, each technique effectively probes the bias on a different physical scale, so it is plausible that a scale-dependent bias relation could cause such discrepancies. In this paper we examine whether the variation in measured values of $`\beta `$ can be naturally explained by complexity of bias.

We employ a variety of simple, non-linear, local bias prescriptions to create galaxy distributions from the outputs of N-body simulations. We then measure $`\beta `$ using somewhat idealized versions of three different methods: a density-density comparison, a velocity-velocity comparison, and an analysis of the anisotropy of the redshift-space power spectrum. We assume that galaxy positions and peculiar velocities are known perfectly, and we therefore do not attempt to model the random and systematic errors that exist in real data. We are thus able to isolate the effects of different types of local biasing on measurements of $`\beta `$ without worrying about how these measurements will be affected by observational errors. The systematic errors that exist in real observations are, of course, very important, but they are best dealt with in the context of specific data sets. We compare our $`\beta `$ measurements to two well-defined functions. The first is $`\beta _\sigma (R)=\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{0.6}/b_\sigma (R)`$. Here, $`b_\sigma (R)`$ is the bias function defined as $`b_\sigma (R)=\sigma _g(R)/\sigma _m(R)`$, where $`\sigma _g(R)`$ and $`\sigma _m(R)`$ are the rms fluctuations of the galaxy and mass density fields, smoothed with a top-hat filter of radius $`R`$. The second function is $`\beta _P(k)=f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)/b_P(k)`$, where $`b_P(k)`$ is the bias function in Fourier space, defined as $`b_P(k)=\sqrt{P_g(k)/P_m(k)}`$, where $`P_g(k)`$ and $`P_m(k)`$ are the power spectra of the galaxy and mass distributions. In NBW we demonstrated that, for local bias models, $`b_\sigma (R)`$ and $`b_P(k)`$ become scale-independent at large scales. We denote the asymptotic large-scale values of $`\beta _\sigma (R)`$ and $`\beta _P(k)`$ as $`\beta _\sigma `$ and $`\beta _P`$, respectively.

## 2 Models

We have carried out N-body simulations of three different cosmological models, all based on inflation and cold dark matter (CDM). The first is an $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1`$, $`h=0.5`$ model ($`hH_0/100\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1`$), with a tilted power spectrum of density fluctuations designed to satisfy both COBE and cluster normalization constraints. The cluster constraint requires $`\sigma _{8m}\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{0.6}0.55`$ (White, Efstathiou & Frenk 1993), where $`\sigma _{8m}`$ is the rms amplitude of linear mass density fluctuations in top-hat spheres of radius $`8h^1`$Mpc. Matching the COBE-DMR constraint and $`\sigma _{8m}=0.55`$ with $`h=0.5`$ requires an inflationary spectral index $`n=0.803`$ if one incorporates the standard inflationary prediction for gravitational wave contributions to the COBE anisotropies (see Cole et al. 1997 and references therein). The other two models have $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.2`$ and $`0.4`$, with a power spectrum shape parameter $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.25`$ (in the parameterization of Efstathiou, Bond & White 1992) and a cluster-normalized fluctuation amplitude $`\sigma _{8m}=0.55\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{0.6}`$. These two models are open models with no cosmological constant ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0`$). Since $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ has a negligible effect on peculiar velocities at fixed $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$, our results for the two open models should also hold for flat-$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ cosmologies having the same values of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and the same matter power spectrum. All simulations were run with a particle-mesh (PM) N-body code written by C. Park, which is described and tested by Park (1990). Each simulation uses a $`400^3`$ force mesh to follow the gravitational evolution of $`200^3`$ particles in a periodic cube $`400h^1`$Mpc on a side, starting at $`z=23`$ and advancing to $`z=0`$ in 46 steps of equal expansion factor $`a`$. We have run four independent realizations of each of the above cosmological models, and all of the results shown in this paper have been averaged over these four realizations.

The bias between galaxies and mass should ultimately be a prediction of a theory of galaxy formation. There are currently three theoretical approaches to predicting how galaxies are distributed in space with respect to the mass. Semi-analytic models of galaxy formation identify virialized dark matter halos in moderate resolution N-body simulations and then populate them with galaxies using analytic prescriptions (e.g., Kauffmann et al. 1999; Benson et al. 2000); high resolution N-body simulations resolve individual galaxy-sized dark matter halos within larger halos (e.g., Kravtsov & Klypin 1999; Colín et al. 1999; Moore et al. 1999); hydrodynamic simulations follow the evolution of both dark matter and baryons, including the effects of gas cooling, star formation, and feedback, and identify galaxies based on the location of cold baryonic lumps (e.g., Cen & Ostriker 1992; Katz, Hernquist & Weinberg 1992; Katz, Weinberg & Hernquist 1996; Blanton et al. 1999; Pearce et al. 1999). All three approaches have made much progress in the last few years, but we are still far from a complete and compelling theory of galaxy formation, and even the most ambitious applications of these techniques have explored only a small selection of cosmological models and relatively small simulation volumes. Rather than adopt a specific, detailed theory of bias, we employ a simple approach to modeling the “generic” effects of bias on large-scale structure measurements. We apply plausible biasing schemes to select galaxy particles from the mass distributions and check which measurements of $`\beta `$ are sensitive to the details of the biasing scheme and which are robust, extending the approach used by NBW (see also Mann, Peacock & Heavens 1998).

We create galaxy distributions by applying various local biasing prescriptions to the mass distributions. In these bias prescriptions, the probability of a given mass particle being selected as a galaxy depends on the properties (density, geometry, or velocity dispersion) of the mass distribution, averaged in top-hat spheres of radius $`4h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$, centered on that particle. These prescriptions are also used and described in more detail by NBW and Narayanan et al. (1999). In brief, the bias prescriptions are:

(1) Semi-analytic: An empirical bias prescription derived by Narayanan et al. (1999) which characterizes the relation between the galaxy and mass density fields in the semi-analytic galaxy formation models of Benson et al. (2000).

(2) Sqrt-Exp (Square-root Exponential): A bias prescription in which $`(1+\delta _g)\sqrt{(1+\delta _m)}e^{\alpha (1+\delta _m)}`$. Here, $`(1+\delta _g)`$ and $`(1+\delta _m)`$ are the galaxy and mass overdensities, respectively. This prescription is intended to be monotonic (for $`\alpha >0`$) and non-linear, but it can be tuned to allow galaxies to be either biased or anti-biased with respect to the mass, and it yields a non-trivial bias relation even when $`b_\sigma =1`$.

(3) Power-law: A bias prescription in which $`(1+\delta _g)(1+\delta _m)^\alpha `$. This is similar to the bias relation suggested by Cen & Ostriker (1993), based on hydrodynamic simulations.

(4) Threshold: A bias prescription in which galaxies do not form below some mass density threshold, and they form with equal efficiency at densities above that threshold.

(5) Sigma: A bias prescription in which galaxies are selected with equal probability from mass particles that have a velocity dispersion $`\sigma _v`$ greater than some threshold value.

(6) Sheet: A bias prescription that selects galaxies in regions where the mass distribution is planar. We compute the eigenvalues ($`\lambda _3>\lambda _2>\lambda _1`$) of the moment of inertia tensor in spheres of radius $`4h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ around each mass particle and select galaxies to be those mass particles that have the highest ratio of $`\lambda _3/\lambda _1`$.

(7) High-$`z`$: A bias prescription identical to the Power-law bias, except galaxies are selected based on the mass distribution at redshift $`z=3`$. This prescription is intended to produce a biasing relation that is stochastic on the $`4h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ scale at $`z=0`$, though still biased in the mean.

Each of the bias models contains one tunable parameter that is adjusted so that the resulting galaxy distribution has an rms fluctuation, in top-hat spheres of radius $`12h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$, of $`\sigma _{12}0.7`$. The values of $`b_\sigma (12)`$ for the galaxy distributions are 1.7, 1.0, and 0.67 for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$, 0.4, and 0.2, respectively. In all the analyses in this paper, we form the mass and galaxy density fields by cloud-in-cell (CIC) binning the particle distributions onto a $`200^3`$ grid. We create a volume-weighted, smoothed velocity field from the discrete galaxy peculiar velocities using the method of Babul et al. (1994). Specifically, we first form the momentum field by CIC-binning the momentum of every galaxy onto a $`200^3`$ grid. We smooth this momentum field with a Gaussian filter of radius $`R_1=R_s/2`$ and divide it by a similarly smoothed density field to form a mass-weighted smoothed velocity field. We then smooth this velocity field with another Gaussian filter of radius $`R_2=(R_s^2R_1^2)^{1/2}`$, so that the effective smoothing radius is $`R_s`$. Because the second smoothing dominates over the first, the final velocity field is volume-weighted rather than mass-weighted.

## 3 Density-Density Comparison

Density-density comparisons make direct use of equation (3) to measure $`\beta `$. The whole process, however, involves many steps. Radial peculiar velocities must first be computed for a sample of galaxies that have both redshift and (redshift-independent) distance measurements. Due to the large uncertainties present in galaxy distance measurements, individual galaxy radial peculiar velocities are poorly known. The resulting radial velocity field must therefore be smoothed over a large scale to reduce the velocity errors. The full 3-dimensional velocity field is then inferred from the radial velocity field using the POTENT method proposed by Bertschinger & Dekel (1989), under the assumption that galaxy velocities trace the gravitational potential field of the underlying mass distribution. Finally, the divergence of this smoothed 3-dimensional velocity field yields the linear-theory prediction for the smoothed mass density field. On the other side of the density-density comparison, the real space galaxy density field is obtained from a galaxy redshift catalog, after correcting the galaxy redshifts for peculiar velocities estimated using the redshift space density field itself. The real-space galaxy density field is then smoothed on the same scale as the velocity field. After all of these steps are taken, the observed galaxy density field may be directly compared to the predicted mass density field. As shown by equation (3), the slope of this comparison yields $`\beta `$.

In practice, a non-linear generalization of equation (3) is used to determine $`\beta `$ (e.g., Dekel et al. 1993; Hudson et al. 1995; Sigad et al. 1998; Dekel et al. 1999). For example, Sigad et al. (1998) measure $`\beta `$ from a comparison of the IRAS 1.2-Jy galaxy density field, $`\delta _{IRAS}`$, to the mass density field derived from Mark III peculiar velocities. They predict the mass density field using the non-linear approximation

$$\delta _{POT}=(1+ϵ_1)f^1\stackrel{}{}𝐯+(1+ϵ_2)f^2\mathrm{\Delta }_2+(1+ϵ_3)f^3\mathrm{\Delta }_3,$$
(4)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_3`$ are second and third order terms that involve sums of double and triple products of partial derivatives of the velocity field, and the three coefficients $`ϵ_1`$, $`ϵ_2`$ and $`ϵ_3`$ are empirically determined from a family of CDM N-body simulations. In addition, Sigad et al. (1998) use a non-linear approximation to convert the IRAS galaxy redshift map to real space. Since equation (4) contains higher powers of $`f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)`$, it is not possible to measure $`\beta `$ simply by fitting a line through the $`\delta _{IRAS}`$ vs. $`\delta _{POT}`$ relation. Sigad et al. (1998) first assume a value for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and then fit a line through the relation to get $`b^1`$. Their estimate for $`\beta `$ is then equal to $`f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)/b`$. Since the initial choice of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ does not seem to affect the final $`\beta `$ measurement, it appears that it is indeed a degenerate combination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and $`b`$, even in this mildly non-linear regime.

Aside from addressing non-linear effects, density-density analyses must deal with a host of problems that arise due to the imperfect nature of observational data sets. In particular, the peculiar velocity errors, when smoothed, give rise to inhomogeneous Malmquist bias, which is difficult to correct for. Moreover, density-density analyses must deal with issues such as non-uniform sampling and imperfect survey boundaries in both the galaxy redshift, and peculiar velocity data. Sparse sampling of the velocity field, for example, makes it particularly hard to smooth the velocity data in an unbiased way. Much work has been done recently to understand and control all of these problems (Dekel et al. 1999). Current density-density comparisons smooth the velocity field with a Gaussian filter of radius $`12h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ and yield rather high values of $`\beta `$ compared to other techniques (see Table 1 for a summary of current measurements). The analysis of Sigad et al. (1998) yields $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.89\pm 0.12`$.

We wish to focus directly on the influence of bias on density-density comparisons, and we therefore adopt a simpler approach to analyzing our numerical data sets. We assume perfect knowledge of both the real-space positions and the velocities of galaxies in our simulation volume. We then smooth the galaxy velocity field with a Gaussian filter of some radius $`R`$ and compare its divergence to the galaxy density field smoothed at the same scale. We fit a line of form $`(\stackrel{}{}𝐯)=\beta \delta _g+C`$ to the density-density relation in the region $`0.5<\delta _g<0.5`$ in order to estimate $`\beta `$. Figures 1 and 2 show this procedure when the velocity and density fields are smoothed at $`12h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ for the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$ and $`0.2`$ models. In each panel we show the mean relation between $`(\stackrel{}{}𝐯)`$ and $`\delta _g`$ for a given bias prescription, along with its $`1\sigma `$ scatter, and the best-fit line to this relation (we have omitted the Sigma and High-$`z`$ bias prescriptions because they produce results that are nearly identical to the Threshold and Power-law prescriptions, respectively). The slope $`\beta _{\mathrm{fit}}`$ of the best-fit line is indicated at the lower right corner of each panel. Also shown, for purposes of comparison, is the asymptotic large-scale value of $`\beta _\sigma (R)`$. Table 2 summarizes the results for all the biasing models (including the Sigma and High-$`z`$ bias models) for each of the three cosmological models.

For $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$ and 0.4, all the bias models, with the exception of the Sqrt-Exp and Sheet models, have best-fit estimates of $`\beta `$ that are in excellent agreement with the asymptotic large-scale value $`\beta _\sigma `$, deviating not more than $`4\%`$ from this value. The Sqrt-Exp model yields a best-fit value that is substantially higher than $`\beta _\sigma `$, whereas the Sheet model yields a $`\beta `$ estimate that is somewhat lower than $`\beta _\sigma `$. However, the strong degree of non-linearity in the $`(\stackrel{}{}𝐯)`$ vs. $`\delta _g`$ relation for both of these models is striking in appearance and can probably be ruled out with existing data (e.g., Sigad et al. 1998). For $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.2`$, the situation is slightly different. The Semi-analytic and Power-law models yield $`\beta `$ estimates that underestimate $`\beta _\sigma `$ by $`10\%`$, whereas the Sqrt-Exp model yields a $`\beta `$ estimate that overestimates $`\beta _\sigma `$ by $`8\%`$. Of course, analyses of real data sets must deal with the additional complications of non-linearity and statistical biases, but these have been addressed in the papers cited above and depend in detail on properties of the data sets themselves. Our results show that once these challenges are met, the value of $`\beta `$ derived from POTENT-like analyses should be close to the asymptotic value of $`\beta _\sigma `$, for a fairly broad range of assumptions about the form of biasing.

## 4 Velocity-Velocity Comparison

Velocity-velocity comparisons make use of equation (1) to measure $`\beta `$. Roughly speaking, the observed galaxy redshift distribution is used to predict the peculiar velocities of individual galaxies using equation (1), with $`f(\mathrm{\Omega }_m)`$ replaced by an assumed value for $`\beta `$. These velocity predictions are then compared directly to peculiar velocity measurements made using redshift-independent distance measurements. The best estimate of $`\beta `$ is that for which the predicted and measured galaxy velocities show the best agreement.

Two distinct velocity-velocity methods have been used in recent measurements of $`\beta `$. The first method, described by Willick et al. (1997), requires that the galaxy distribution be converted from redshift space to real space before it is used to predict peculiar velocities. This is a slightly tricky step, since the peculiar velocities are both the final product and a required intermediate ingredient in this process. Once the galaxy positions are corrected for redshift-space distortions, the galaxy density field must be smoothed in order to suppress the effects of non-linear evolution and shot noise. Equation (1) is then used to compute the predicted velocity field from the smoothed galaxy density field, assuming a value for $`\beta `$. Finally, a maximum likelihood analysis (VELMOD) is used to find the value of $`\beta `$ that produces the best match between the predicted and observed galaxy velocities, assuming that an individual galaxy’s velocity is the sum of the linear theory prediction and an uncorrelated “thermal” velocity. In practice, there are many technical difficulties involved in this process. To compute the predicted velocity field, the galaxy density field must be integrated over all space, as shown by equation (1). Consequently, any systematic problems in the galaxy redshift data (such as empty regions) will affect the predicted velocity field everywhere. Moreover, the true velocity at any location will be affected to some extent by density features that are outside the volume sampled by a redshift survey. Willick et al. (1997) address this issue by adding to the predicted velocity field a quadrupole term that models the tidal field arising from density features external to the volume probed by the IRAS 1.2-Jy redshift survey. The current VELMOD analysis compares the velocities predicted from the galaxy density field of the IRAS 1.2-Jy redshift survey, smoothed with a Gaussian filter of radius $`3h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$, to the peculiar velocities in the Mark III catalog and yields $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.5\pm 0.04`$ (Willick & Strauss 1998).

The second velocity-velocity method, described by Nusser & Davis (1994) (hereafter ND94) and first implemented by Davis, Nusser & Willick (1996), compares the galaxy density field to the observed peculiar velocity field directly in redshift space. Another important difference between this method and VELMOD is that Davis et al. (1996) do not compare predicted and observed velocities of individual galaxies. Instead, they expand both the predicted velocity field that is derived from the redshift-space galaxy density field and the velocity field that is measured from redshift-independent distances into a set of orthogonal modes. They then perform a mode-by-mode comparison of the two fields and determine the value of $`\beta `$ for which the best match is obtained. The ND94 method has been applied to estimate $`\beta _{IRAS}`$ by combining the 1.2-Jy redshift survey with the Mark III peculiar velocity sample, yielding $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.6\pm 0.2`$ (Davis et al. 1996), with a surface-brightness fluctuation sample, yielding $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.42_{0.06}^{+0.10}`$ (Blakeslee et al. 1999), and with a type Ia supernova sample, yielding $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.4\pm 0.15`$ (Riess et al. 1997). Most recently, Nusser et al. (2000) have applied this method to the Point Source Catalog redshift survey (PSCz) and the ENEAR peculiar velocity sample to obtain $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.5\pm 0.1`$.

In order to investigate the effects of bias on velocity-velocity measurements of $`\beta `$, we perform a simplified VELMOD-like analysis. As in the density-density comparisons, we assume perfect knowledge of both the real-space positions and velocities of galaxies in our simulation volumes. We smooth the galaxy density field with a Gaussian filter of radius $`R`$ and use equation (1) to predict the velocity field. We then interpolate to galaxy positions to find predicted velocities ($`𝐯_{\mathrm{pred}}`$) for all the galaxies. Finally, we compare these with the true galaxy velocities ($`𝐯_{\mathrm{true}}`$). The slope of the best-fit line to the $`𝐯_{\mathrm{true}}`$ vs. $`𝐯_{\mathrm{pred}}`$ relation is our measurement of $`\beta `$. We do not include a constant offset term in our fit as we did for the density-density analysis, but it would make little difference to our results because the $`𝐯_{\mathrm{true}}`$ vs. $`𝐯_{\mathrm{pred}}`$ relations are very close to linear. The offset term is important in the density-density analysis because of the non-linearity of the $`\delta _{\mathrm{true}}`$ vs. $`\delta _{\mathrm{pred}}`$ relations. Figures 3 and 4 show this procedure when the galaxy density field is smoothed with a Gaussian filter of radius $`3h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ for our $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$ and $`0.2`$ models. In each panel we show the mean relation between $`𝐯_{\mathrm{true}}`$ and $`𝐯_{\mathrm{pred}}`$ for a given bias prescription, along with its $`1\sigma `$ scatter, and the best-fit line to this relation (as before, we have omitted the Sigma and High-$`z`$ bias prescriptions because they produce results that are nearly identical to the Threshold and Power-law prescriptions, respectively). The slope $`\beta _{\mathrm{fit}}`$ of the best-fit line is indicated at the lower right corner of each panel. Also shown, for purposes of comparison, is the asymptotic large-scale value of $`\beta _\sigma (R)`$. Table 2 summarizes the results for all the biasing models (including the Sigma and High-$`z`$ bias models) for each of the three cosmological models.

For all three cosmological models, all the bias models, with the exception of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$ Sheet model, have best-fit estimates of $`\beta `$ that agree well with the asymptotic large-scale value $`\beta _\sigma `$, deviating not more than $`11\%`$ from this value. The Sheet model yields a $`\beta `$ estimate that is $`33\%`$ lower than $`\beta _\sigma `$.

For smoothing lengths larger than $`5h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$, we discovered a systematic error that affects $`\beta `$ estimates made using the VELMOD method, even in the case where galaxies trace mass. It arises because a smoothed quantity ($`𝐯_{\mathrm{pred}}`$) is compared to an unsmoothed quantity ($`𝐯_{\mathrm{true}}`$), and the errors in the predicted velocities are thus correlated with the predicted velocities themselves. This issue is fully explored in a previous paper (Berlind, Narayanan & Weinberg 2000). The mode-by-mode method of ND94 should not be affected by this systematic error because it effectively smooths both the velocity and the density fields in the same manner. For a smoothing length of $`3h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$, the influence on VELMOD analyses is small, at least for the cosmological models considered here.

## 5 Anisotropy Of Redshift-Space Clustering

Both density-density and velocity-velocity methods require measurements of galaxy peculiar velocities in addition to redshifts. Peculiar velocity measurements always contain large statistical and systematic uncertainties because they rely on distance-indicator relations that have substantial intrinsic scatter as well as uncertain calibrations and environmental dependencies. Moreover, these methods usually require the galaxy density field in real space and therefore rely on a conversion of the observed redshift-space galaxy density field. There is an entirely different approach to estimating $`\beta `$ that does not suffer from either of these problems, though it does require very large redshift samples for effective application. It takes advantage of the fact that line-of-sight distortions in redshift space are caused by the same velocities that density-density and velocity-velocity methods must measure independently. It is possible to estimate $`\beta `$ simply by analyzing these redshift-space distortions, or, more specifically, by measuring the anisotropy of the galaxy clustering in redshift space.

Kaiser (1987) showed that, in the linear regime, the redshift-space galaxy power spectrum \[$`P_g^S(k,\mu )`$\] is related to the real-space galaxy power spectrum \[$`P_g^R(k)`$\] by

$$P_g^S(k,\mu )=(1+\beta \mu ^2)^2P_g^R(k),$$
(5)
where $`\mu `$ is the cosine of the angle between the line-of-sight and the wave-vector $`𝐤`$ of a fluctuation in the galaxy density field. This equation is derived using the plane-parallel approximation, i.e, in the case where the volume probed is distant enough that all lines of sight to it are effectively parallel. Equation (5) reveals that the redshift-space power spectrum is anisotropic. The power spectrum of fluctuations along the line-of-sight is amplified by the amount $`(1+\beta )^2`$ with respect to the power spectrum in real space, whereas the power spectrum of fluctuations perpendicular to the line-of-sight is not affected at all. The redshift-space power spectrum (5) has been shown to reduce to a sum of monopole ($`l=0`$), quadrupole ($`l=2`$), and hexadecapole ($`l=4`$) terms,

$$P_g^S(k,\mu )=P_0^S(k)L_0(\mu )+P_2^S(k)L_2(\mu )+P_4^S(k)L_4(\mu ),$$
(6)
where $`L_l(\mu )`$ are Legendre polynomials. The first two moments are related to the real space galaxy power spectrum by

$`P_0^S(k)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\beta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{5}}\beta ^2\right)P_g(k),`$
$`P_2^S(k)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\beta +{\displaystyle \frac{4}{7}}\beta ^2\right)P_g(k)`$ (7)
(Cole, Fisher & Weinberg 1994). Hamilton (1992) derived a similar set of relations for the multipole moments of the redshift-space galaxy correlation function. Equations (6) and (7) provide us with two different ways to measure $`\beta `$ from the redshift space power spectrum $`P^S(k,\mu )`$ (from now on we will drop the subscript $`g`$ in the galaxy power spectrum); using $`P^S(k)/P^R(k)`$, the ratio of the angle-averaged redshift-space power spectrum (monopole) to the real-space power spectrum, or using $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$, the ratio of the quadrupole and monopole moments of the redshift-space power spectrum. These ratios are, in principle, measurable and in linear theory they are related to $`\beta `$ by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{P^S(k)}{P^R(k)}}`$ $`=`$ $`1+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\beta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{5}}\beta ^2,`$ (8)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{P_2(k)}{P_0(k)}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\frac{4}{3}\beta +\frac{4}{7}\beta ^2)}{(1+\frac{2}{3}\beta +\frac{1}{5}\beta ^2)}}.`$ (9)
These ratios yield an estimate of $`\beta `$ at each wavenumber $`k`$. However, non-linearity in the velocity and density fields produces distortions in an opposite sense to the linear theory predictions, leading to systematically lower estimates of $`\beta `$ even on scales as large as $`50h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$. Hence, it is essential to model the non-linearities accurately in order to estimate $`\beta `$ using currently available redshift surveys. Cole et al. (1995) estimated $`\beta `$ from $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$ by assuming an exponential velocity distribution model, in which galaxies have uncorrelated small scale peculiar velocities drawn from an exponential distribution in addition to their linear theory velocities. Applying this method to the IRAS 1.2-Jy redshift survey, they found $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.52\pm 0.13`$. Fisher & Nusser (1996) modeled the non-linearity in $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$ by using the Zel’dovich approximation (Zel’dovich 1970), thus assuming that the scale dependence in this ratio is caused by coherent, rather than random, non-linear motions. They found $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.6\pm 0.2`$. Finally, Hatton & Cole (1999) proposed and tested an empirical model for the non-linearity in $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$ by examining the scale dependence of this ratio in a large number of N-body simulations spanning a broad range of cosmological parameters. This model is more general than the previous ones because it is based on fully non-linear N-body data.

Equations (8) and (9) only hold in the linear regime and the plane-parallel approximation. In order to use these relations to measure $`\beta `$, we must measure $`P^S(k,\mu )`$ in volumes that are both large (so that they contain fluctuations large enough to be in the linear regime) and far away (so that all lines of sight to a single volume are approximately parallel). These constraints make it difficult to accurately measure $`\beta `$ from the redshift surveys that exist today. Ongoing surveys, such as the 2dF redshift survey and Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS), will be much better suited to this purpose because they will probe very large volumes, although even then non-linearity will be important. To avoid the need for the distant observer approximation, Fisher, Scharf & Lahav (1994) measured $`\beta `$ from the IRAS 1.2-Jy redshift survey by expanding the galaxy redshift-space density field into spherical harmonics and maximizing the likelihood that an assumed real-space galaxy power spectrum would yield that specific set of harmonics. The free parameters in this spherical harmonic analysis (SHA) are $`\beta `$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the latter determining the shape of the real-space power spectrum. Fisher et al. (1994) obtained $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.94\pm 0.17`$. More recently, Ballinger et al. (2000) used the SHA method to measure $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.40\pm 0.10`$ for the PSCz, and Hamilton, Tegmark & Padmanabhan (2000) developed an optimal way to apply the SHA method to the same survey and measured $`\beta _{IRAS}=0.41_{0.12}^{+0.13}`$. Table 1 gives a summary of $`\beta `$ measurements from redshift-space distortions in IRAS selected galaxy redshift surveys (also see Hamilton 1998 for a review of such measurements).

For our simulation analyses, we estimate $`\beta `$ from the anisotropy of the redshift-space power spectrum using an approach that is similar to that of Cole et al. (1995), but somewhat simplified. We take the line-of-sight direction to be a Cartesian axis of the simulation cube, implicitly assuming that the whole simulation volume is far enough away to satisfy the distant observer approximation. We measure $`P^S(k,\mu )`$ and $`P^R(k)`$ using a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT), and we extract the multipole moments by fitting equation (6) to $`P^S(k,\mu )`$. We compute the average values and $`1\sigma `$ uncertainties of the ratios $`P^S(k)/P^R(k)`$ and $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$ from the four independent realizations of each galaxy distribution. The points in Figures 5 and 6 represent the functions $`\beta (\lambda )`$ obtained from solving for $`\beta `$ in equations (8)and (9), respectively, where $`\lambda =2\pi /k`$. These functions asymptote to a constant value only on large scales, since equations (7) only hold under the assumption of linear theory. We estimate $`\beta `$ for each bias model using two methods. (1) We use the Cole et al. (1995) exponential velocity distribution model to model the non-linearity in $`P^S(k)/P^R(k)`$, and we estimate $`\beta `$ by fitting this model to our measured $`P^S(k)/P^R(k)`$. We perform the fit only using modes that correspond to scales $`\lambda >20h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$, and the fitting parameters are $`\beta _{\mathrm{fit}}`$ and $`\sigma _v`$ (the small-scale velocity dispersion). The thick lines in Figure 5 represent the resulting fits for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$. (2) We use the Hatton & Cole (1999) empirical model to model the non-linearity in $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$, and we estimate $`\beta `$ by fitting this model to our measured $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$. As before, we perform the fit only using modes that correspond to scales $`\lambda >20h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$, and the fitting parameters are $`\beta _{\mathrm{fit}}`$ and $`k_{\mathrm{nl}}`$ (the wavenumber that corresponds to the scale at which the ratio $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$ is equal to zero). The thick lines in Figure 6 represent the resulting fits for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$. The thin lines in Figures 5 and 6 show the function $`\beta _P(\lambda )=\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{0.6}/b_P(\lambda )`$, where $`b_P(\lambda )\sqrt{P_g(k)/P_m(k)}`$ at $`k=2\pi /\lambda `$. In both figures, the best-fit estimates $`\beta _{\mathrm{fit}}`$ are indicated at the lower right corner of each panel. Also shown, for purposes of comparison, are the asymptotic large-scale values of $`\beta _\sigma (R)`$. Table 2 summarizes these values and also includes results for the Sigma and High-$`z`$ bias models, which are omitted from Figures 5 and 6, and for the low $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ cosmological models.

For all three cosmological models and all bias models, with the exception of the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$ Sqrt-Exp and Sheet models, the best-fit estimates of $`\beta `$ made using the redshift-to-real-space ratio $`P^S(k)/P^R(k)`$ underestimate $`\beta _\sigma `$ by $`1020\%`$. This underestimate occurs even for the unbiased (mass) models, indicating that it arises because the exponential velocity distribution model for the non-linear behaviour of $`P^S(k)/P^R(k)`$ is not accurate at this level. Cole et al. (1995) reached a similar conclusion about the accuracy of this non-linear model, in a slightly different manner. The Hatton & Cole (1999) empirical model does a better job fitting the quadrupole-to-monopole ratio $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$. For $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$, all of the bias models, with the exception of Sqrt-Exp and Sheet, yield $`\beta `$ estimates that underestimate $`\beta _\sigma `$ by $`38\%`$. For low $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$, all of the bias models, again with the exception of Sqrt-Exp, yield $`\beta `$ estimates that agree well with $`\beta _\sigma `$.

## 6 Summary

Figures 7, 8 and 9 summarize all of our results for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$, 0.4, and 0.2, respectively. Each panel corresponds to a particular biasing prescription and shows $`\beta `$ estimates, as a function of smoothing length, made using a density-density comparison (circles) and a velocity-velocity comparison (squares). Also shown, at arbitrary scales, are the $`\beta `$ estimates made from the anisotropy of redshift-space clustering (triangles). Solid points represent the smoothing scales that correspond to recent observational estimates of $`\beta `$: the density-density (POTENT-like) estimate made with a $`12h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ Gaussian smoothing (solid circle; cf. Sigad et al. 1998), the velocity-velocity (VELMOD-like) estimate made with a $`3h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ Gaussian smoothing (solid square; cf. Willick et al. 1997), and the redshift-space anisotropy estimate made using the quadrupole-to-monopole ratio of the redshift-space power spectrum, $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$, marked at an arbitrary scale (solid triangle; cf. Cole et al. 1995). Also shown, for comparison, is the function $`\beta _\sigma (R)`$ (solid line).

These results allow us to answer the question “what is $`\beta `$?”. In most cases, to a fairly good approximation, the quantity $`\beta `$ estimated by these methods is close to the ratio $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{0.6}/b_\sigma `$, where $`b_\sigma `$ is the asymptotic, large-scale value of the function $`\sigma _g(R)/\sigma _m(R)`$. This is true for all three methods and for all three cosmological models. This reassuringly simple answer is just what one might have hoped for. In our models, the bias relation in non-linear and bias factors like $`b_\sigma (R)`$ and $`b_P(k)`$ are scale-dependent on small scales. Nonetheless, the value of $`\beta `$ has a well-defined, intuitively sensible meaning that holds for a wide range of such models. Furthermore, measurements of $`\beta `$ from density-density comparisons, velocity-velocity comparisons, and analyses of the anisotropy of redshift-space clustering, should, in principle, yield consistent results.

There are some exceptions to this simple characterization. The clearest is the Sqrt-Exp bias model, which has a strongly non-linear relation between galaxy and mass density. This model exhibits the greatest scale dependence of $`b_\sigma (R)`$ and $`b_P(k)`$, and different methods of estimating $`\beta `$ give very different results. However, the strikingly non-linear shape of the $`(\stackrel{}{}𝐯)`$ vs. $`\delta _g`$ relation for this model can be ruled out by current POTENT analysis of observational data (Sigad et al. 1998), so a bias relation with such pathological effects is probably unrealistic. Another exception is the Sheet bias model. Here the different methods yield measurements of $`\beta `$ that agree well with each other, but they do not match the large-scale value $`\beta _\sigma `$.

Our results imply that non-linear local bias is unlikely to account for the large discrepancies that exist between current observational estimates of $`\beta _{IRAS}`$ using different techniques. We have also performed these analyses for the non-local bias model considered by NBW, where the relation between galaxy and mass density on the $`4h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ scale is modulated by the larger scale environment. Although the model does not have a clearly defined asymptotic value of $`\beta _\sigma `$, the different $`\beta `$ estimation methods nonetheless give results that are consistent with each other. We therefore conclude that the discrepancies among current observational estimates of $`\beta `$ probably arise from the interaction between the systematic errors in the observational data sets (the redshift and peculiar velocity catalogs) and the specific details of the various analysis methods. If the observational challenges can be overcome, measurements of $`\beta `$ by these methods can yield a useful, physically meaningful quantity: $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m^{0.6}`$ divided by a bias factor that characterizes the ratio of rms galaxy and mass fluctuations, on large scales.

We note with great sadness the passing of Jeff Willick, who has been a leader in this field for more than a decade. We are grateful to Jeff and to Scott Gaudi and Michael Strauss for helpful input and comments. This work was supported by NSF grant AST-9802568. AAB and VKN were supported by Presidential Fellowships from the Graduate School of The Ohio State University during phases of this project.
Table 1. Current $`\beta `$ measurements for IRAS selected galaxies

| Data | Method | Paper | $`\beta `$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| IRAS 1.2-Jy + Mark III | POTENT | Sigad et al. (1998) | $`0.89\pm 0.12`$ |
|  | VELMOD | Willick & Strauss (1998) | $`0.50\pm 0.04`$ |
|  | ND94 | Davis et al. (1996) | $`0.60\pm 0.20`$ |
|  | ROBUST | Rauzy & Hendry (2000) | $`0.60\pm 0.125`$ |
| IRAS 1.2-Jy + SNIa | ND94 | Riess et al. (1997) | $`0.40\pm 0.15`$ |
| IRAS 1.2-Jy + SBF | ND94 | Blakeslee et al. (1999) | $`0.42_{0.06}^{+0.10}`$ |
| IRAS 1.2-Jy | $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$ | Cole et al. (1995) | $`0.52\pm 0.13`$ |
|  | $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$ | Fisher & Nusser (1996) | $`0.60\pm 0.20`$ |
|  | SHA | Fisher et al. (1994) | $`0.94\pm 0.17`$ |
|  | $`\sigma _{}^2/\sigma _{}^2`$ | Bromley, Warren & Zurek (1997) | $`0.80_{0.30}^{+0.40}`$ |
| IRAS QDOT | $`P^S(k)/P^R(k)`$ | Peacock & Dodds (1994) | $`1.00\pm 0.20`$ |
|  | $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$ | Cole et al. (1995) | $`0.54\pm 0.30`$ |
| PSCz + ENEAR | ND94 | Nusser et al. (2000) | $`0.50\pm 0.10`$ |
| PSCz | SHA | Ballinger et al. (2000) | $`0.40\pm 0.10`$ |
|  | SHA | Hamilton, Tegmark & Padmanabhan (2000) | $`0.41_{0.12}^{+0.13}`$ |

Note—We have listed only the most recent estimates for a given data set from each group.

Table 2. Estimates of $`\beta `$ from the biased models, using different techniques

|  |  | POTENT | VELMOD | $`P^S(k)/P^R(k)`$ | $`P_2(k)/P_0(k)`$ |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Model | $`\beta _\sigma `$ | $`\beta _{\mathrm{est}}`$ | $`\beta _{\mathrm{est}}`$ | $`\beta _{\mathrm{est}}`$ | $`\beta _{\mathrm{est}}`$ |
| $`\mathrm{\Omega }=1.0`$ |  |  |  |  |  |
| Mass | 1.00 | 0.92 | 0.94 | 0.80 | 0.93 |
| Semi-analytic | 0.61 | 0.61 | 0.56 | 0.54 | 0.57 |
| Sqrt-Exp. | 0.62 | 0.84 | 0.69 | 0.64 | 0.98 |
| Power-law | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.57 | 0.52 | 0.55 |
| Threshold | 0.57 | 0.55 | 0.56 | 0.47 | 0.55 |
| Sigma | 0.54 | 0.53 | 0.56 | 0.46 | 0.52 |
| Sheet | 0.66 | 0.53 | 0.44 | 0.46 | 0.52 |
| High-$`z`$ | 0.60 | 0.58 | 0.55 | 0.52 | 0.58 |
| $`\mathrm{\Omega }=0.4`$ |  |  |  |  |  |
| Mass | 0.58 | 0.56 | 0.54 | 0.50 | 0.64 |
| Semi-analytic | 0.57 | 0.55 | 0.54 | 0.49 | 0.59 |
| Sqrt-Exp. | 0.77 | 0.93 | 0.80 | 0.69 | 0.76 |
| $`\mathrm{\Omega }=0.2`$ |  |  |  |  |  |
| Mass | 0.38 | 0.36 | 0.35 | 0.32 | 0.43 |
| Semi-analytic | 0.52 | 0.46 | 0.48 | 0.41 | 0.51 |
| Sqrt-Exp. | 0.66 | 0.71 | 0.64 | 0.59 | 0.57 |
| Power-law | 0.54 | 0.49 | 0.48 | 0.45 | 0.52 |

Note—POTENT results are shown for a $`12h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ Gaussian smoothing. VELMOD results are shown for a $`3h^1\mathrm{Mpc}`$ Gaussian smoothing. For $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1.0`$, all uncertainties are $`0.005`$. For low $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$, uncertainties are $`0.002`$, except for Sqrt-Exp models, where they are $`0.04`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.4`$ and $`0.02`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.2`$.


text:
# Microscopic Theory of Damon-Eshbach Modes in Ferromagnetic Films

## Abstract

The surface spin wave branches in ferromagnetic films are studied using a microscopic theory which considers both magnetic dipole-dipole and Heisenberg exchange interactions. The dipole terms are expressed in a Hamiltonian formalism, and the dipole sums are calculated in a rapidly convergent form. The Damon-Eshbach surface modes are analyzed for different directions of the spin-wave propagation and also for different ratios of the strength of the dipole interactions relative to the exchange interactions. Numerical results are presented using parameters for Fe and GdCl3.

It is well known theoretically that, in quasi-two-dimensional systems, such as ultrathin ferromagnetic films, the short-range exchange interactions alone are not necessarily sufficient to establish a Ferromagnetic ordering above the ground state, and that it is necessary to take into account the anisotropy and long-range character of the dipolar interactions. Regarding the spin dynamics in ferromagnetic films, a macroscopic (or continuous medium) theory for the dipole-dominated regime was given by Damon and Eshbach in terms of magnetostatic modes. They identified a surface branch of the spectrum, now known as the Damon-Eshbach (DE) mode. Recently, microscopic theories have been used to study the dipole-exchange spin waves (SW) in ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic films.

The DE mode has a number of striking and unusual properties. For example, the existence condition of this mode depends on the propagation angle relative to the principal axes of the crystal. The x-direction in our case, being within the range $`0\theta <\theta _c`$, where $`\theta _c`$ depends on the characteristics of the system, such as the applied field and dipolar strength (see Ref. 6 for a review). The aim of this paper is to study the DE modes in ferromagnetic films at low temperatures ($`TT_c`$, where $`T_c`$ is the Curie temperature) by using a microscopic theory, and including both magnetic dipole-dipole and Heisenberg exchange interactions. The dipole terms are expressed in a Hamiltonian formalism, and the dipole sums are calculated in a rapidly convergent form. In order to find the critical $`\theta _c`$ where the DE modes vanish, we have to study the dependence of the DE modes and the SW energies (for each of the discrete branches) on the variation of the exchange parameter, on the strength of the dipolar interaction, and on the wave vector direction of propagation. Another important factor in the analisys is the effect of different dipole interaction strengths (relative to the exchange)on the dispersion relation of the SW. Numerical results are presented using parameters for Fe and GdCl3.

Consider a ferromagnetic film with $`N`$ atomic layers arranged on a simple cubic lattice, with lattice constant $`d`$. The wave vector $`𝐪`$ makes an angle $`\theta `$ with respect to the $`x`$-axis, and the Zeeman field $`H_0`$ is assumed to be parallel to $`z`$ direction. The surface of the film is in the $`xz`$ plane, while the $`y`$-axis is perpendicular to the film. The Hamiltonian can be written as

$$H=\frac{1}{2}\underset{ij}{}J_{ij}𝐒_i𝐒_jg\mu _BH_0\underset{i}{}S_i^z+\frac{1}{2}(g\mu _B)^2\underset{ij}{}D_{ij}^{\alpha \beta }S_i^\alpha S_j^\beta ,$$
(1)
where $`𝐒_i`$ is the spin operator at site $`i`$ and $`J_{ij}`$ is the exchange coupling between sites labeled $`i`$ and $`j`$. We assume that the exchange coupling is $`J_1`$ and $`J_2`$ for nearest and next-nearest neighbors respectively. The second term of the above equation is the Zeeman term, and the dipole-dipole interaction between spins is represented by the last term, where $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ denote the components $`x,y,`$ or $`z`$, and

$$D_{ij}^{\alpha \beta }=\{|𝐫_{ij}|^2\delta _{\alpha \beta }3r_{ij}^\alpha r_{ij}^\beta \}/|𝐫_{ij}|^5$$
(2)
whit $`𝐫_{ij}=𝐫_j𝐫_i`$, and the case $`i=j`$ excluded from the sums in Eq. (1).

Using the Holstein-Primakoff transformations, the Hamiltonian can be expanded as $`H=H^{(2)}+H^{(3)}+H^{(4)}+\mathrm{}`$ (apart from a constant), where $`H^{(m)}`$ denotes the term involving a product of $`m`$ boson operators. Here we are considering the non-interacting (linear) SW modes that are described by the quadratic term $`H^{(2)}`$. Therefore, the Hamiltonian takes the form:

$$H=\underset{qnn^{}}{}\{A_{nn^{}}(𝐪)a_{qn}^{}a_{qn^{}}+B_{nn^{}}(𝐪)[a_{qn}a_{qn^{}}+a_{qn}^{}a_{qn^{}}^{}]\}.$$
(3)
Here we are using a representation of the boson operators $`a^{}`$ and $`a`$ in terms of a $`2D`$ wave vector $`𝐪=(q\mathrm{cos}\theta ,q\mathrm{sin}\theta )`$, q being the modulus of $`𝐪`$, parallel to the film surface and indices $`n`$, $`n^{}`$ $`(=1,2,\mathrm{},N)`$ that label the atomic layers parallel to the surface. The coefficients $`A_{nn^{}}(𝐪)`$ and $`B_{nn^{}}(𝐪)`$ are described in Ref.5. A linear transformation to new boson operators can then be found such that $`H`$ takes a diagonalized form . Its eingenvalues yield the energies $`E_\nu (𝐪)`$ of the discrete SW branches, where $`\nu `$(=1,2,…,N) labels the branches.

In Fig. 1(a), we show the behavior of the lowest SW branches for very small wave vectors in a GdCl3 film with $`N=20`$. For this material, we use the parameters; $`4\pi M=(g\mu _BS)/d^3=0.82`$ T to characterize the dipolar strength, the bulk exchange field $`H_{Ex}=6S(J_1+2J_2)=0.54`$ T, and $`H_0=0.36`$ T. We have taken the case of $`\theta =0`$ (the Voigt geometry), for which it is known that there is a Damon-Eshbach (DE) surface mode in the magnetostatic continuum limit where exchange is neglected. It can be seen that a purely magnetostatic DE mode starts at $`q_x=q=0`$ at the frequency $`18.25`$ GHz. There are hybridizations until the eighth mode, and the DE mode tends to be flat around the value $`21.5`$ GHz with increasing $`q_x`$. On the other hand, in a material such as Fe that has a much smaller value for the ratio $`4\pi M/H_{Ex}`$, it is necessary to consider a much larger film thickness in order for the DE mode to hybridize with the lowest bulk branch. This is because in a thicker film, the density of modes increases and create more modes in the region where the DE mode propagates, making hybridizations possible. An example for Fe is given in Fig. 1(b) considering $`N=120`$, $`4\pi M=2.14`$ T, $`H_{Ex}=2140`$ T, and $`H_0=0.054`$ T. Only the lowest branches of the spectrum are shown in Fig. 1(b), where it can be seen that much smaller values of $`q_x`$ are necessary (compared with the previous example) to see the analogue of the DE mode in the spectrum.

In Fig. 2, we show results for the SW frequencies of the above-mentioned materials considering the SW propagation direction $`\theta `$. In Fig. 2(a), the dependence of the lowest GdCl3 SW branches on $`\theta `$ is shown for a fixed value $`qa/\pi `$. For small wavevectors, the branches decrease their frequency values as $`\theta =0`$ goes from 0 to $`\theta =\pi /2`$. As in Fig. 1, the hybridization of the modes is seen to decrease until the second mode. The two lowest branches are the most affected by the SW propagation direction. The others tend to become flat after certain angle values. The figure also shows the reciprocity of the dispersion relation as the angle goes to $`\pi `$. The same effect can be observed in Fig. 2(b) considering Fe. In this case, the dependence of the modes on the angle is much weaker than in the case of GdCl3, and only the two lowest modes are affected by the propagation angle.

In conclusion, we have used a microscopic theory to study Damon-Eshbach SW modes in the dipole-exchange regime in thin ferromagnetic films. We analyzed the dependence of the DE modes on the SW propagation direction and the ratio between dipolar and exchange strengths. The results show that the DE modes tends to vanish as the system change from the Voigt geometry to a general propagation direction, and that this change depends on the strength of the ratio between the dipole and exchange interactions.

We acknowledge the financial support from the FUNCAP, CAPES and CNPq, Brazilian agencies.

FIGURE CAPTIONS

Fig.1 The linear SW dispersion relation for the lowest branches of (a) a 20-layer GdCl3 film and (b) a 120-layer Fe film. In both cases $`\theta =0`$.

Fig.2 The SW frequencies as a function of the propagation direction $`\theta `$ for (a) a 20-layer GdCl3 film taking $`qa/\pi =0.02`$ and (b) a 120-layer Fe film for $`qa/\pi =0.002`$.


text:
# What Are Stories Made Of? - Quantitative Categorical Deconstruction of Creation

## I Microscopic Representation and Universal Dynamics

Several years ago, the Microscopic Representation Approach  was introduced in order to understand in a systematic manner the way in which the human concept describes a very big number of microscopic objects, in terms of a limited number of macroscopic characters defined by them. According to this approach, the microscopic picture and the macroscopic one are considered to be two different pictures of one reality, that are complimentary to each other, as the ocean is both an aggregate of molecules and a mass of waves. In each scale should be found the macroscopic objects and the laws of their behavior, which are generated from the microscopic scale. At the same period of time a similar approach, the Universal Dynamics Approach  was developed but from the opposite direction: from the universal to the macroscopic. It put the emphasis on the theory, therefore it is more comfortable for the presentations of the fundamentals. This approach looked for the most fundamental physical theory, under the rule that a theory is the more fundamental the less structure it assumes a priori. It starts with the basic assumption that: The human mind thinks about relations between Objects (this assumption is becoming more precise after introducing axiomatic characters for ”relations” and ”objects”). A collection of objects with their inter-relations is defined as ”a system”. Objects of a system can be systems themselves, i.e. with internal structure, which allows a framework for the discussion of self-organization in complex systems. The relations are directed and will therefore be called ”arrows”, some of which are identified as fundamental in a given level of description and will be called ”links”. Arrows are composed of links and own the main importance in the description of a system. For example: in a system which is a thin brick wall - the objects are the bricks and the arrows define the relations between each brick and its six nearest neighbors, twelve next nearest neighbors etc. Fig 1 describes a system which is a thin brick wall. The arrows are those who are defining the structure and turn the wall into more than a pile of bricks. In this framework the dynamics of the system is described: the basic options of getting a new system from a given one are - death of an object or a link, duplication of an object or a link, merging identical objects or links, creating missing adjacent links or promoting an arrow, which can be composed of two or several links, to the status of link. The dynamical processes assembled from such elementary operations were called ”drama”.

## II Applications

Several applications  of the approach to domains outside natural sciences were developed. Two examples for these applications are the works in New Product Development  and in Creative Advertising Ideas . In both these domains we do not expect to find well-defined lines of thought. Yet, during their study according to the universal approach it was revealed that out of the many possible routes of the dynamics, specific routes can be clearly defined and shown to be preferred - these are the ”Creativity Templates”. The templates can be identified and described in an abstract and simple way so they can be easily and efficiently applied and objectively tested. An example for such a template is the development of a delivery motorbike that bakes pizza during the delivery ride according to the Component Connection Template (table 1 shows an example for the Component Connection Template). Following the simple instructions of the algorithm, leads the dynamics of the mind to the new creation. The efficiency of the templates was tested quantitatively: a group of marketing personal were trained for 4-5 hours in one of the templates. This group and a control group who did not receive the training were asked to generate ideas for new products in three categories. The first group used the template and the second group used conventional ideation methods (brainstorming, questionnaires etc.). Eight senior marketing professionals acted as judges and rated the ideas on a 1-7 scale according to their originality (1=not original at all, 7=very original) and according to their recommendation to implement the idea (1=not recommended at all, 7=highly recommended). The judges were blind to the identity of the individuals who generated the ideas and to one another. In spite of the short length of the training the advantage of the first group was salient: they received the average of 5.09 vs. 4.18 in originality and 4.40 vs. 3.36 in value.

## III The Diagonal Link or: The Transitive Template

In the present paper we propose a more basic elementary building block underlying most (may be all) of the creative acts. We call it the ”Diagonal Link” according to its structure or ”Transitive Template” according to its function. The ”Diagonal Link” seems to be the basic element that humans use in constructing and understanding reality in the widest sense. In order to test this possibility we use the ”Diagonal Link” as the elementary microscopic operation in the Microscopic Representation study of Creation as described in symbolic religious stories. Structurally, the ”Diagonal Link” resembles a transitivity connection (fig 2 illustrates transitivity connection). In the example brought in the previous section it can be seen clearly in fig 3. In the same way we found that each of the Creativity Templates included, at least once, a Diagonal Link as the core of the creative process. As the basic assumption of the Microscopic Representation and Universal Dynamics related to the fundamental infrastructure of the human way of thinking, we assumed that we will be able to find similar phenomena in other fields and turned to study the tales of Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav using this approach. We focused on the first story and studied the appearances of the Diagonal Link and their role. It should be emphasized that the analysis was performed in a mechanical method that referred only to the syntactic structure and not to the meaning of the text.

## IV Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav’s Stories and the Creation Story

In a very simplified and short way we can say that according to the Kabala (the Jewish medieval mystical tradition) creation starts when G-d withdrew in order to make room for the world to be created. After the creation, a line of light was sent from the infinite G-d into the created world but due to the deficiencies of the world it could not bear the light and was ”broken” with the sparks of light scattered all around it. The human task is to collect these divine sparks and bring them back to their roots. This task is laid upon every human being, more on the Nation of Israel and most on the righteous person - the Tzadik. This dynamics has many manifestations: the exile of the soul in the body and the need of the individual to redeem it by bettering oneself and lifting oneself spiritually, the exile of the Nation of Israel and their need to return to the Land of Israel, the exile of the Divine Presence and the need to help it to be re-united with G-d etc. Rabbi Nachman of Bratslav (1772-1810) saw himself as a Tzadik and as such he felt, like other Hassidic (the Hassidic movement is a pre-modern Jewish revival movement, deeply inspired by Kabala) sages, responsible for the redemption process and for the recruitment of his followers to help in the process. At a certain point he felt that the direct cognitive approach did not give enough fruits and that his explicit teachings did not enlighten his people as he expected. At that point he decided to convey his message in an implicit manner through story telling. The first story that he told was ”The Story of The Lost Princess” . It starts with a king who once got angry with his beloved daughter and cursed her that the no-good will take her. After she disappeared the king became so sorry and regretful that his Second-to-The-King volunteered to go out and look for the princess. After many hardships he found the princess who instructed him how to save her by fasting, not sleeping and longing for her, but twice he failed by eating or drinking and consequently falling asleep and the princess was transferred to the golden mountain. During his wanderings looking for the golden mountain he met a giant who was responsible for all animals who tried to convince him to give up, but even after all the animals did not know anything about the golden mountain the Second-to-The-King remained determined to continue his search. So the giant sent him to his brother who was responsible for all the birds. After repeating the same scenario he sent the Second to the third brother who was responsible for all the winds. After the winds did not know about the golden mountain and the Second-to-The-King started to cry, came another wind who apologized that it was late as it had to deliver a princess to a golden mountain. The giant then ordered the wind to take there also the Second and equipped him with a tool that will help him there. The end of the story was not told; we only have a comment of the editor saying that in the end he managed to save her but Rabbi Nachman did not tell how. The story is usually interpreted along the lines described in the first paragraph of this section. The king represents G-d and the pair second-princess represents either the individual and his soul or the Tzadik and the Divine Presence. The story was not completed by Rabbi Nachman, because the story of creation is not finished and the harmonious unification was not yet accomplished.

## V Diagonal Links in ”The Story of The Lost Princess”

When performing the diagonal analysis on ”The Story of the Lost Princess”, 18 diagonal links were found. Two examples are presented in table 2. Our assumption was that diagonal links indicate key-events in the story and in order to check if the events associated with these 18 diagonal links were to be considered important events we went through 21 authors who commentated ”The Story of the Lost Princess”. We looked at the 29 events they referred to and ranked them according to the number of writers referring to them. When comparing the events pointed by the diagonal links we found that they matched quite fully the top part of the list: the first event that was not pointed by a diagonal link was number 14 in the ranked list and only one of these events matched a low-ranked event (number 22). The detailed analysis of this study will be published elsewhere. For the purpose of this paper it is enough that appearance of a diagonal link indicates a crucially significant point in the story.

## VI ”The Lost Princess” and its parallel ”The Raven” of the Grimm Brothers

The Grimm Brothers’ story ”The Raven” starts with a queen who lost her patience with her daughter and cursed her to become a raven, which she did and flew to a black forest. A man going through the forest heard the raven and went to it. He met the princess who instructed him how to save her by fasting, not sleeping and waiting for her at a specific time. Thrice he failed by drinking and falling asleep and the princess was transferred to the golden palace. During his wanderings looking for the golden palace he met a giant who first was hostile but then tried to help him. He looked for the palace in his map but in vain. He tried a bigger map and again - in vain. Then he convinced the man to wait for his brother who, when came back, looked at his map that was still bigger but the palace was not on it. At last they found the palace in an old map and the giant took the man most of the way toward it. The man took from three thieves the equipment that helped him enter the palace and release the princess. The story ends with the princess thanking the man for saving her and declaring their wedding to be celebrated the next day. This story is clearly a parallel to Rabbi Nachman’s ”The story of the Lost Princess” although they are not identical. S. Pitrushka claims that neither of the two stories is the source of the other but they both share a common source in the Polish story ”A Diverting Story about the Virtuous Princess Banialuce From an Eastern Land” by Hieronim Morsztyn (died in 1655). Although Rabbi Nachman did not know the Polish language, Pitrushka quotes the Polish historian A. Brinker who proved that ”Princess Banialuce” was translated to the Ukrainian language. Finding a parallel story was indeed intriguing in light of the fact that Rabbi Nachman did refer to the relations between his stories and other folk tales. Rabbi Nachman’s tales were edited by his main disciple Rabbi Nathan Sternhartz of Nemirow. In his first introduction Rabbi Nathan tells : ”Before \[the Rebbe (Hassidic sage)\] began telling the first story in this book, he declared, ”Many hidden meanings and lofty concepts are contained in the stories the world tell. These stories, however, are deficient: they contain many omissions. They are also confused, and people do not tell them in the correct order …”. The Rebbe spoke about this. Then he began to tell the story on the following page. He said, ”I told this story while on a journey …” In contemporary words, Rabbi Nachman claims that folk tales need to be upgraded and is moving to give an example how he does it. Therefore it was especially interesting to perform a diagonal analysis on ”The Raven” .

## VII Results

In the analysis we found 12 diagonal links in ”The Raven”. Further examination showed that out of the 18 diagonal links of ”The Lost Princess” only 9 were present in ”The Raven”. In 8 out of the 9 missing appearances, the event itself was present in ”The Raven” but its description lacked the diagonal link. On the other hand, in all three diagonal links that appeared in ”The Raven” and did not appear in ”The Lost Princess” the event itself was not part of the story. Two of these are placed in the last part of the story, the part that Rabbi Nachman did not tell. When calculating the density of diagonal links’ appearances according to the number of words we found that in ”The Raven” there were 12 diagonal links in 1652 words, which is a density of 0.7 percent. In ”The Lost Princess” there were 18 diagonal links in 1312 words, which is a density of 1.4 percent.

## VIII Meaning we attach to findings

In an earlier section we showed that an appearance of a diagonal link indicates a part of the story which is of special quality. From this obviously derives that the overall importance of the text increases with the density of diagonal links appearances. The double density that was found in ”The Lost Princess” in comparison to ”The Raven” indicates a significant difference in quality. According to our findings Rabbi Nachman managed to execute what he was trying to do - to upgrade the story.

## IX Future Experiments

Our intention now is to analyze the story of ”Princess Banialuce” and one of the theoretical teachings of Rabbi Nachman. According to the above we expect to find a significant difference in the diagonal density between ”The Lost Princess” and ”Princess Banialuce” and a non-significant difference between the stories and the teachings of Rabbi Nachman.

Fig.1: A system which is a thin brick wall

Fig.2: Transitivity Connection

Fig.3: Component Connection Template as Diagonal Link

Tab.1: Example for the Component Connection Template

Tab.2: Two examples of diagonal links found in ”The Story of the Lost Princess”