text:
# Feasibility of Reconstructing the Quintessential Potential Using SNIa Data

## I Introduction

Recent various observations , in particular distance measurements to SNIa , strongly suggest that the universe is currently dominated by a positive vacuum energy density with negative pressure. The smallness of the vacuum energy density $`(10^{12}\mathrm{GeV})^4`$ has revived the idea that the cosmological “constant” is not really a constant but rather decaying. The idea of quintessence  (see also  and references therein) is that vacuum energy density is played by a scalar field rolling down the almost flat potential similar to cosmological inflation, and a lot of models have been proposed so far. However, there is currently no clear guidance from particle physics as to which quintessence models may be suitable. Then it should be the observations that decide which model is correct or not. As a bottom-up approach, we have proposed that distance measurements to SNIa may allow one to reconstruct the equation of state of the dark energy or the effective potential of the quintessence field .

Future observational project, such as SNAP(SuperNova/Acceleration Probe)***http://snap.lbl.gov could gather 2,000 SNIa in a single year and could put significant constraint on the cosmological parameters (including the equation of state of the dark energy $`w`$). In view of the future prospect for high-z SNIa search, we investigate in detail the feasibility of the method for reconstructing the equation of state and the effective potential of the quintessence field from SNIa data . While our work was being completed, we became aware of related work  which focuses on the uncertainty in the reconstruction of the equation of state of dark energy.

## II Parameterizing the luminosity distance

Considering the future prospect for high-z SNIa search, we believe it particularly useful to fit the observed luminosity distance $`d_L(z)`$ to a function of $`z`$ which has the following properties: (1)the good convergence (the relative error is hopefully less than 0.1% because the distance error expected from SNAP will be less than a few percent) for $`0<z<10`$; (2) the correct asymptotic behavior for $`z1`$ ($`H(z)(1+z)^{3/2}`$). We present a fitting function for $`d_L(z)`$.

We restrict ourselves to a flat FRW universe henceforth and assume Einstein gravity.The reconstruction equation for the so called extended quintessence  is presented in . In a flat model, the luminosity distance $`d_L(z)`$ is written in terms of the coordinate distance $`r(z)`$ to an object at $`z`$ as

$$\frac{d_L(z)}{(1+z)}=r(z)=_t^{t_0}\frac{dt^{}}{a(t^{})}=_0^z\frac{dz^{}}{H(z^{})}=_y^1\frac{2dy^{}}{H(y^{})y^3},$$
(1)
where $`t_0`$ is the present time and $`y=1/\sqrt{1+z}`$. It is interesting to note that in terms of $`y`$, $`r(y)`$ is a linear function of $`y`$ if $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=1`$. Therefore, the $`d^2r(y)/dy^2`$ contains the information of the non-zero pressure (see Eq.(5) below). We will elaborate on the advantage of using $`y`$ and $`r`$ in a separate paper.

In analogy with Pen’s powerful fitting formula for $`r(z)`$ for a flat FRW universe with a cosmological constant , we propose to fit $`r(z)`$ in the following functional form§§§An extension to an open or closed model is immediate once $`\mathrm{\Omega }_K`$ is known: $`H_0r(z)=|\mathrm{\Omega }_k|^{1/2}\mathrm{sin}_K\left(|\mathrm{\Omega }_k|^{1/2}(\eta (1)\eta (y))\right)`$, where $`\mathrm{sin}_K(x)=\mathrm{sin}(x)(\mathrm{sinh}(x))`$ if $`K=1(1)`$.:

$`H_0r(z)=\eta (1)\eta (y)`$ (2)
$`\eta (y)=2\alpha \left[y^8+\beta y^6+\gamma y^4+\delta y^2+\sigma \right]^{1/8}.`$ (3)
The requirement $`H(z)/H_01`$ for $`z0`$ imply that $`\sigma `$ is found to be a dependent parameter: $`\sigma =\left(\alpha \left(1+3\beta /4+\gamma /2+\delta /4\right)\right)^{8/9}1\beta \gamma \delta `$. However, we shall treat $`\sigma `$ as a free parameter for simplicity in numerical calculations. For $`y0(z\mathrm{})`$, we have $`H(z)/H_01/(\alpha y^3)`$. For the Einstein-de Sitter universe, $`\alpha =1,\beta =\gamma =\delta =0`$.

### A demonstrating the goodness of fit

We shall demonstrate that the fitting function Eq.(3) indeed does a good job. For this purpose, we calculate the maximum relative error in $`r(y)`$ between the actual value and that calculated from the fitting function Eq.(3) in the range $`0.3<y<1(10>z>0)`$. We consider cosmological models consisting of matter and dark energy of constant equation of state $`wp_X/\rho _X=0,1/3,2/3,1`$ with $`0.1\mathrm{\Omega }_M1`$. We fit each template luminosity distance, $`r_i`$, by the functional form Eq.(3) using the Davidon-Fletcher-Powell method. We minimize $`_{y_i}(r_ir(y_i))^2/r_i^2`$ with N=30 data points. The result is shown in Fig. 1. We find the maximum relative error is less than 0.05%. Our fitting function thus seems more powerful by order of magnitude than the one proposed in .

## III Reconstructing the Equation of State and the Effective Potential

One of the prime interest in the reconstruction issue is whether the effective equation of state of the x-component $`wp_X/\rho _X`$ is different from $`1`$, which is the unique signature of the dynamical vacuum energy. If observations would suggest $`w1`$, then the next urgent project would be the real reconstruction of the effective potential, which should have profound implications for particle physics as well as for cosmology.

In this section, we reconstruct the equation of state of dark energy and the effective potential of the quintessence field. Regarding the energy density of the Universe, we assume two components: nonrelativistic matter with its present density parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and x-component with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X=1\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. An extension to include the radiation component is immediate but with negligible effect.

### A reconstructing the equation of state

In terms of a dimensionless variable $`\widehat{r}H_0r`$, the equation-of-state of x-component $`w`$ is written as

$`w(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3d\widehat{r}(z)/dz+2(1+z)d^2\widehat{r}(z)/dz^2}{3\left(d\widehat{r}(z)/dz\right)\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_M\left(d\widehat{r}(z)/dz\right)^2(1+z)^31\right)}}`$ (4)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4yd^2\widehat{r}/dy^2}{3\left(d\widehat{r}/dy\right)\left(\mathrm{\Omega }_M\left(d\widehat{r}/dy\right)^24\right)}}.`$ (5)
$`w`$ thus depends on the second derivative of the luminosity function. Put another way, the luminosity distance depends on $`w`$ through a multiple integral relation . Whether $`w=1`$ or not will clearly signify whether the dark energy is constant in time or not.

In Fig. 2, we show the reconstructed $`w(y)`$ for cosmological models with constant equation of state $`w=0,1/3,2/3,1`$ to examine the effect of the ambiguity in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. The template $`\widehat{r}_i`$ is constructed by assuming $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.30`$ for $`0.60<y<1(1.78>z>0)`$. The template is fitted using the ansatz Eq.(3) by minimizing $`_{y_i}(\widehat{r}_i\widehat{r}(y_i))^2/\widehat{r}_i^2`$ with N=10 data points. We also plot the reconstructed $`w(y)`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.25,0.26,\mathrm{},0.35`$(from top to bottom) as dotted curves. We find that the uncertainty in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ would enlarge an error in $`w(y)`$ for small $`y`$ (large $`z`$). In particular, when we overestimate $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$, $`w(y)`$ may diverge at some $`y`$ where the denominator in Eq.(5) may vanish. However, an error in $`w`$ remains relatively small near $`y=1`$: 10% uncertainty in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ results in at most 19% error in $`w`$ for $`y>0.80(z<0.56)`$. The error is largest for the cosmological constant (19% error) and becomes less significant for larger $`w`$. For example, for $`w=2/3`$ model, the error is less than 12% for $`y>0.80`$. Hence it might be possible to discriminate between $`w=1`$ and $`w1`$. The combination of SNIa measurements and high precision measurements of the power spectrum expected from the Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP) and Planck satellites could make a clear distinction .

### B reconstructing the effective potential

Reconstructing equations are

$`\widehat{V}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{\left(d\widehat{r}(z)/dz\right)^2}}+(1+z){\displaystyle \frac{d^2\widehat{r}(z)/dz^2}{\left(dr(z)/dz\right)^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\mathrm{\Omega }_M(1+z)^3,`$ (6)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\varphi }(z)}{dz}}\right)^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(d\widehat{r}(z)/dz\right)^2}{(1+z)^2}}\left[2(1+z){\displaystyle \frac{d^2\widehat{r}(z)/dz^2}{\left(d\widehat{r}(z)/dz\right)^3}}3\mathrm{\Omega }_M(1+z)^3\right],`$ (7)
where $`\widehat{\varphi }\kappa \varphi ,\widehat{V}\kappa ^2V/H_0^2`$ with $`\kappa ^2=8\pi G`$. Alternatively, in terms of $`y=1/\sqrt{1+z}`$

$`\widehat{V}(y)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{6}{y^6(d\widehat{r}/dy)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{2d^2\widehat{r}/dy^2}{y^5(d\widehat{r}/dy)^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{3\mathrm{\Omega }_M}{2y^6}},`$ (8)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{d\widehat{\varphi }(y)}{dy}}\right)^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{12}{y^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4d^2\widehat{r}/dy^2}{y(d\widehat{r}/dy)}}3\mathrm{\Omega }_M{\displaystyle \frac{(d\widehat{r}/dy)^2}{y^2}}.`$ (9)
In order to demonstrate the effectiveness of the fitting function Eq.(3), we reconstruct the effective potential of the quintessence field. We consider three kinds of potentials which have some theoretical backgrounds; (a) cosine type , $`\widehat{V}(\widehat{\varphi })=M^4(\mathrm{cos}(\widehat{\varphi })+1)`$; (b) inverse power law type , $`\widehat{V}(\widehat{\varphi })=M^4\widehat{\varphi }^\alpha `$; (c) exponential type , $`\widehat{V}(\widehat{\varphi })=M^4\mathrm{exp}(\lambda \widehat{\varphi })`$. $`M`$ and $`\lambda `$ are fixed to give $`\mathrm{\Omega }_X=1\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. $`\alpha =4`$ is assumed hereafter.

The results are shown in Fig. 3. The dotted curves are numerically reconstructed $`w(y)`$ and $`\widehat{V}(\widehat{\varphi })`$ with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.30`$ being assumed, while the solid curves are the original ones up to $`y=0.6`$. We fix the present value of $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ to unity.

We also plot the dashed curves assuming $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.25,0.27,0.33,0.35`$. Since the smaller $`y`$, the larger the error in $`w(y)`$, the range of $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ significantly depends on the assumed $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. We note that for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M>0.30`$, $`w`$ becomes less than $`1`$ and thus the right hand side of Eq.(9) turns negative at some $`y`$. So we stop the reconstruction of $`\widehat{V}(\widehat{\varphi })`$ there. The range of $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ is larger (smaller) for smaller (larger) $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. For example, in the case of cosine potential, the true range of $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ is $`0.41<\widehat{\varphi }1.00`$, while the reconstructed range is $`0.41<\widehat{\varphi }1.00`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.30`$, $`0.17<\widehat{\varphi }1.00`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.25`$, $`0.25<\widehat{\varphi }1.00`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.27`$, $`0.59<\widehat{\varphi }1.00`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.33`$, and $`0.66<\widehat{\varphi }1.00`$ for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.35`$. However, it is interesting that the whole shape of $`\widehat{V}(\widehat{\varphi })`$ is less sensitive to the uncertainty in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$, although $`w`$ and the range of $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ are dependent on the assumed value of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. If we assume smaller $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$, the resulting potential energy is larger via Eq.(8). On the other hand, $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ decreases more rapidly back in time via Eq.(9). The opposite is the case for larger $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. Both effects make the reconstructed shape of $`\widehat{V}(\widehat{\varphi })`$ converge to the true one.

## IV Reconstructing the Equation of State and the Effective Potential from Simulated Data

We simulate the actual reconstruction procedure using numerically generated data $`r_i=r(y_i)+\delta r_i`$ $`(i=1,\mathrm{},N)`$ with $`\delta r_i`$ being Gaussian distributed (zero mean and variance $`\sigma r(y_i)`$). The simulated data assumes a cosmological model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=0.30`$. We consider $`N=30`$ data and take $`\sigma =0.03`$ or $`\sigma =0.005`$. The former error is the distance error of the binned data expected from observations of 200 supernovae by SNAP, while the latter is for 6000 supernovae. We only consider statistical uncertainties.

We distribute the data uniformly in $`y`$ from $`y=0.95(z=0.11)`$ to $`y=0.60(z=1.78)`$. We perform thousands of Monte-Carlo realizations. The 68% confidence intervals of the reconstructed potentials are shown in Fig. 4 and Fig. 5. The horizontal axis is the averaged value of $`\widehat{\varphi }`$, while the vertical axis is the averaged value of $`\widehat{V}`$. The effect of the reduced error may be dramatic. We allow for 10% error in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ to assess the ambiguity in the reconstruction of the potential. Obervations of very distant supernovae at $`z3`$ by NGST (Next Generation Space Telescope) and/or observations of galaxy cluster abundance by SZE (Sunyaev-Zel’dovich Effect) survey will determine $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ to a few % .

It should be noted that the fitted $`\widehat{r}(y)`$ does not necessarily satisfy the positivity of the right-hand-side of Eq.(9), that is, the weak energy condition. We perform the reconstruction using only the data which satisfy the weak energy condition.Conversely, Eq.(9) might provide an upper bound on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$, if we assume that the dark energy respects the weak energy condition, although it is not always the case . That induces the bias toward larger $`\dot{\varphi }^2`$. This is why the range of $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ is larger than that of the true one and why the intervals of the reconstructed potential is distributed downward. Such an effect is particularly significant for the cosine type potential because in this model the equation of state is almost $`w=1`$ at higher redshift. Therefore, good estimate of the upper bound of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ is crucial for the success of the reconstruction.

## V Summary

We have studied the feasibility of reconstructing the equation of state of dark energy and the effective potential of the quintessence field from SNIa data by taking into account the uncertainty in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ as well as the error in the luminosity distance. We have found that $`w`$ and the range of $`\widehat{\varphi }`$ are dependent on the assumed value of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$, while the whole shape of $`\widehat{V}(\widehat{\varphi })`$ is less sensitive to the uncertainty in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. If $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ could be constrained to some 10% accuracy by other observations, which may not be unrealistic expectation , then future high precision measurements of distances to thousands of SNIa could reveal the shape of the quintessential potential.

###### Acknowledgements.

One of the authors (TC) would like to thank Misao Sasaki and Fumio Takahara for useful comments and Dragan Huterer for useful discussion at the early stage of this work. This work was supported in part by Grant-in-Aid of Scientific Research of the Ministry of Education, Culture, and Sports, No.11640274 and 09NP0801.


format: text

text:
# Early times in tunneling

\[

## Abstract

Exact analytical solutions of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation with the initial condition of an incident cutoff wave are used to investigate the traversal time for tunneling. The probability density starts from a vanishing value along the tunneling and transmitted regions of the potential. At the barrier width it exhibits, at early times, a distribution of traversal times that typically has a peak $`\tau _p`$ and a width $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$. Numerical results for other tunneling times, as the phase-delay time, fall within $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$. The Büttiker traversal time is the closest to $`\tau _p`$. Our results resemble calculations based on Feynman paths if its noisy behaviour is ignored.

\]

Quantum tunneling, that refers to the possibility that a particle traverses through a classically forbidden region, constitutes one of the paradigms of quantum mechanics. In the energy domain, where one solves the stationary Schrödinger equation at a fixed energy $`E`$, tunneling is well understood. In the time domain, however, there are aspects still open to investigation. Recent technological achievements as the possibility of constructing artificial quantum structures at nanometric scales or the manipulation of individual atoms have stimulated work on time-dependent tunneling both at applied and fundamental levels. A problem that has remained controversial and the subject of a great deal of attention over the years is the tunneling time problem, that can be stated as the question: How long it takes to a particle to traverse a classically forbidden region? In time-dependent tunneling, many works attempting to answer the above question consider the numerical analysis of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation with the initial condition of a Gaussian wave packet. A common feature of the majority of these approaches is that the initial wave packet extends through all space. As a consequence the initial state, although it is manipulated to reduce as much as possible its value along the tunneling and transmitted regions, contaminates from the beginning the tunneling process and hence usually it is required a long time analysis of the solutions. The above situation may be circumvented by considering cutoff wave initial conditions.

In this work we consider a analytic time-dependent solutions to the Schrödinger equation with the initial condition at $`\tau =0`$ of a incident cutoff wave, to investigate the traversal time for tunneling through a potential barrier. The problem may be visualized as a gedanken experiment consisting of a shutter, situated at $`x=0`$, that separates a beam of particles from a potential barrier of height $`V_0`$ located in the region $`0xL`$. At $`\tau =0`$ the shutter is opened. The probability density rises initially from a vanishing value and evolves with time through $`x>0`$. At the barrier edge $`x=L`$, the probability density at time $`\tau `$, yields the probability of finding the particle after a time $`\tau `$ has elapsed. Since initially there is no particle along the tunneling region, detecting the particle at the barrier edge at time $`\tau `$, provides a measure of its traversal time through the tunneling region.

The transient behavior of the time-dependent solution at early times and at distances close to the interaction region plays a significant role in our approach. Other formulations, based on the stationary solutions of the Schrödinger equation, refer to asymptotically long times at large distances and hence ignore transient effects. These approaches provide a single value for the traversal time. In contrast, our approach leads to a distribution of traversal times as in works based on the Feynman path integral method, though as indicated below both approaches differ in important aspects.

In a recent paper we have obtained the time-dependent solution to the Schrödinger equation for tunneling through an arbitrary potential of finite range with the initial condition of a cutoff plane wave of momentum $`k`$. The solution may be written as a term proportional to the free solution plus a contribution involving an infinite sum of resonance terms associated with the $`S`$matrix poles of the potential. Our approach is based on the Laplace transform technique and considers some analytical properties of the outgoing wave propagator. Some decades ago Moshinsky considered the free case solution to the above problem. Moshinsky showed that the probability density, for a fixed value of the distance $`x_0`$ as a function of $`t`$, exhibits a transient regime that he named diffraction in time. Recently, observations of that phenomenon have been reported. For the sake of simplicity in our approach, as Moshinsky also did, we consider the instantaneous removal of the shutter. This may be seen as a kind of ‘sudden approximation’ to a shutter opening with finite velocity, where the treatment becomes more involved. As shown below the terms depending on the $`S`$matrix poles provide a novel transient behavior that may dominate the early times in the tunneling process.

The plane wave cutoff initial condition discussed in Refs.  refers to a shutter that acts as a perfect absorber (no reflected wave). One can also envisage a shutter that acts as a perfect reflector. In such a case the initial wave may be written as,

$$\psi _s(x,k,\tau =0)=\{\begin{array}{cc}e^{ikx}e^{ikx},& x<0\\ 0,& x>0.\end{array}$$
(1)
One can then proceed along lines similar to those discussed in Ref.  to derive the time-dependent solution $`\psi _s(x,k,\tau )`$ of the Schrödinger equation for a potential $`V(x)`$ that vanishes outside the region $`0xL`$. The solution along the internal region reads,

$`\psi _s(x,k,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi (x,k)M(0,k,\tau )\varphi (x,k)M(0,k,\tau )`$ (3)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\varphi _n(x)M(0,k_n,\tau ),(0xL)`$
where $`\varphi (x,k)`$ refers to the stationary solution and $`\varphi _n(x)=2iku_n(0)u_n(x)/(k^2k_n^2)`$ is given in terms of the resonant (Gamow) states $`\{u_n(x)\}`$ and complex poles $`\{k_n\}`$ of the problem. Similarly the transmitted solution becomes,

$`\psi _s(x,k,\tau )`$ $`=`$ $`T(k)M(x,k,\tau )T(k)M(x,k,\tau )`$ (5)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}T_nM(x,k_n,\tau ),(xL)`$
where $`T(k)`$ and $`T(k)`$ are transmission amplitudes, and $`T_n=2iku_n(0)u_n(L)\mathrm{exp}(ik_nL)/(k^2k_n^2)`$. In the above two equations the functions $`M(x,k,\tau )`$ and $`M(x,k_n,\tau )`$ are defined as,

$$M(x,q,t)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{e}^{(imx^2/2\mathrm{}\tau )}\mathrm{e}^{y_q^2}\mathrm{erfc}(y_q),$$
(6)
where the argument $`y_q`$ is given by

$$y_q\mathrm{e}^{i\pi /4}\left(\frac{m}{2\mathrm{}\tau }\right)^{1/2}\left[x\frac{\mathrm{}q}{m}\tau \right].$$
(7)
In Eqs. (6) and (7) $`q`$ stands either for $`k`$ or $`k_n`$, the index $`n`$ refers to a given complex pole. Poles are located on the third and fourth quadrants of the complex $`k`$-plane. The solution for the free case with the reflecting initial condition is, $`\psi _s^0(x,k,\tau )=M(x,k,\tau )M(x,k,\tau )`$. ¿From the analysis given in Ref.  one can see that the above exact solutions satisfy the corresponding initial conditions, i.e., they vanish exactly for $`x>0`$. At very long times it is also shown in Ref.  that the terms $`M(x,k_n,\tau )`$ that appear in the above equations vanish. The same occurs for $`M(x,k,\tau )`$ while, as shown firstly in Ref. , $`M(x,k,\tau )`$ tends to the stationary solution. Hence, at long times, each of the above exact solutions go into the corresponding stationary solutions, namely, along the internal region as $`\psi (x,\tau )=\varphi (x,k)\mathrm{exp}(iE\tau /\mathrm{})`$ and along the external region as $`\psi (x,\tau )=T(k)\mathrm{exp}(ikx)\mathrm{exp}(iE\tau /\mathrm{})`$. Note that at early times and short distances there is a competition between the contribution of the free-type terms ($`M`$ functions depending on $`k`$) and the pole terms ($`M`$ functions depending on either $`k_n`$ or $`k_n`$) in Eqs. (3) and (5). As exemplified below, depending on the potential parameters one may have the predominance of one or the other type of terms. Note also that the initial state is not strictly monochromatic (it extends from $`\mathrm{}`$ to $`0`$) and hence it has a distribution of components around $`k`$ in momentum space. One could construct an initial cutoff wavepacket as a linear combination of cutoff waves. However, since we compare below with definitions of tunneling times involving plane waves, wavepackets will not be considered here. Besides, in general they involve no negligible momentum components above the barrier potential and hence obscure the dynamics of tunneling.

In order to apply the above ideas, we consider a model that has been used extensively for the tunneling time problem, namely, the rectangular barrier potential, characterized by a height $`V_0`$ in the region $`0xL`$. The shutter is located at $`x=0`$. In order to calculate Eqs. (3) and (5) for the initial condition (1), in addition to the parameters $`V_0`$, $`L`$, and that corresponding to the incident energy $`E=\mathrm{}^2k^2/2m`$, we need to determine the complex poles $`\{k_n\}`$ and resonant states $`\{u_n(x)\}`$. It is well known that for a finite range potential there are an infinite number of poles. The $`S`$matrix poles for the rectangular barrier potential may be obtained from the corresponding transmission amplitude $`T(k)=4kq\mathrm{exp}(ikL)/J(k)`$, where $`q=[k^2k_0^2]^{1/2}`$ with $`k_0^2=2mV_0/\mathrm{}^2`$. They correspond to the zeros of $`J(k)`$ in the $`k`$plane, namely,

$$J(k)=(q+k)^2\mathrm{exp}(iqL)(qk)^2\mathrm{exp}(iqL)=0.$$
(8)
We follow a well established method to obtain the solutions to the above equation. The resonant states of the problem satisfy the time-independent Schrödinger equation of the problem with outgoing boundary conditions. They read,

$$u_n(x)=C_n\left[\mathrm{e}^{iq_nx}+b_n\mathrm{e}^{iq_nx}\right],(0xL)$$
(9)
where $`b_n=(q_n+k_n)/(q_nk_n)`$ and $`C_n`$ may be obtained from the normalization condition,

$$_0^Lu_n^2(x)𝑑x+i\frac{u_n^2(0)+u_n^2(L)}{2k_n}=1.$$
(10)
Note that both the complex poles and the resonant states are a function of $`V_0`$ and $`L`$ and hence are a property of the system.

To exemplify the time evolution of the probability density we consider the set of parameters: $`V_0=0.711eV`$, $`L=10nm`$, $`E=0.1422eV`$, $`m^{}=0.067m_e`$, inspired in semiconductor quantum structures. Our choice of parameters guarantees that most momentum components of the initial state tunnel through the potential. Figure 1 shows a plot of $`|\psi (L,\tau )|^2`$, calculated at the barrier edge $`x=L`$ as a function of time in units of the free passage time $`\tau _f=mL/(\mathrm{}k)=11.56fs`$. We have used Eq. (5), though Eq. (3) holds the same. The time-dependent solution is normalized by $`|T(k)|^2=5.332\times 10^9`$. One sees that as soon as $`\tau 0`$ the probability density starts to grow up. As discussed elsewhere, this is due to the non-relativistic character of the description. Einstein causality may be fulfilled by cutting off the contributions to the probability density smaller than $`\tau _0=L/c`$. In our example $`\tau _0=0.033fs`$ or $`\tau _0/\tau _f=0.0028`$, too small to be appreciated in Fig. 1. At early times one sees a time domain resonance structure. Thereafter the probability density approaches essentially its asymptotic value. We found that the resonant sum is the relevant contribution to the time domain resonance since that of the free-type term is quite small and varies smoothly with time. In the transmitted region, $`x>L`$, not shown here, the time domain resonance becomes a propagating structure, as follows from Eq. (5). The time domain resonance corresponds to a transient effect and as it propagates through the transmitted region becomes smaller and smaller. Asymptotically, at large distances and times, it becomes very small while the free-type term becomes the dominant contribution with its wavefront propagating with velocity $`v=\mathrm{}k/m`$. Calculations using the absorbing initial condition exhibit a similar time domain resonance. Hence a linear combination of reflecting and absorbing initial conditions should also exhibit it.

The time domain resonance represents a distribution of traversal times. The corresponding peak represents the largest probability to find the tunneling particle at the barrier edge $`x=L`$. In our example, as shown in Fig. 1, the time domain resonance peaks at $`\tau _p=5.326fs`$, faster than the free passage time across the same distance of $`10`$ $`nm`$, that is, $`\tau _p/\tau _f=0.46`$. Note that the distribution is quite asymmetric. Altough the first resonance term of the solution provides the main contribution, convergence of the series usually requires to sum up to $`100`$ terms. The inset displays the probability density from $`\tau /\tau _f=2`$ up to $`\tau /\tau _f=20`$. One sees a small structure around $`\tau /\tau _f=3`$ and then the probability density decreases very fast towards unity, the stationary regime. The main range of traversal times occurs around the peak value $`\tau _p`$. We define the width of the distribution, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$, by the rule of the half-width at half-maximium. This yields $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau =13.48fs`$ or $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau /\tau _f=1.16`$. The resonance is broad, since $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau 2\tau _p`$. We have found that for fixed $`V_0`$ and $`E`$, and a decreasing $`L`$, the width diminishes. The same occurs for fixed $`E`$ and $`L`$, and an increasing $`V_0`$. Systematically, however, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau >\tau _p`$. For the sake of comparison, the arrows in Fig. 1 indicate the values calculated for a number of definitions of tunneling times existing in the literature for the rectangular barrier potential, as the Larmor time of Baź and Rybachenko, $`\tau _{LM}`$; the semi-classical or Büttiker-Landauer time, $`\tau _{BL}`$; the Büttiker traversal time, $`\tau _B`$, and the phase-delay time, $`\tau _D`$ . All of them fall within the broad range of values given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$. Note, however, that the Büttiker traversal time $`\tau _B`$ is the closest to $`\tau _p`$. As shown below we have found this situation extensively in our numerical calculations. Also, since the barrier is opaque, $`\tau _B`$ is close to $`\tau _{BL}`$.

We refer briefly to approaches to the tunneling time problem based on the Feynman path integral method. For plane waves and a rectangular barrier potential Fertig has derived an expression, $`C(\tau )`$, that gives the probability amplitude that a particle remains a time $`\tau `$ in a region, (Eq. (3) of Ref. ). Recently Yamada has plotted $`G(\tau )=|C(\tau )|^2`$ versus $`\tau `$ (Fig. 2 of Ref.). His parameters are the same as in our Fig. 1, i.e., $`V_0/E=5`$ and $`kL=5`$. Our calculation for $`|\psi (L,\tau )|^2`$ resembles the average shape of $`G(\tau )`$, provided its noisy behavior is ignored. Note, however, that the meaning of both quantities is different. As indicated by Yamada, $`G(\tau )`$ refers to a ‘residence time’ whereas our approach corresponds to a ‘passage’ or traversal time.

In Fig. 2 we plot $`\tau _p`$ (solid squares)for different values of the opacity $`\alpha =k_0L`$, with $`k_0=[2mV_0]^{1/2}/\mathrm{}`$. Keeping $`V_0`$ fixed and varying $`L`$ defines $`\alpha (L)`$. We can then identify two regimes, one in the range $`2\alpha (L)5`$, the tunneling regime, where $`\tau _p`$ remains almost constant as $`\alpha (L)`$ increases, and another regime, the opaque regime, with $`\alpha (L)>5`$, where we find that $`\tau _p`$ increases linearly. The first behaviour above is related to the first top-barrier S-matrix pole and the second one to the components of the incident wave that go above the barrier. There is still another regime, not shown in Fig. 2, where $`\alpha (L)<1`$, that corresponds to very shallow or very thin barriers or both and will not be considered here. There the free-type terms in Eq. (5) dominate over the resonant contribution. For comparison we plot the Büttiker traversal time $`\tau _B`$ (hollow circles). We see that $`\tau _B`$ remains rather close to $`\tau _p`$. Note, however, that $`\tau _B`$ behaves linearly in the whole range. This different qualitative behaviour as a function of $`L`$ between both times deserves further study. The inset in Fig. 2 exhibits a similar comparison for the opacity $`\alpha (V_0)`$, with $`L`$ fixed and varying $`V_0`$. Here we observe that $`\tau _B`$ remains quite close to $`\tau _p`$ in the whole range. Regarding the phase-delay time $`\tau _D`$, its predictions usually fall within the width $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$. For fixed $`V_0`$ and $`E`$, $`\tau _D`$ as a function of $`L`$ exhibits qualitatively a different behaviour than that of Fig. 1 (See Fig. 5 in ref. ).

To end we stress that the largest probability to find the tunneling particle at the barrier width, given by $`\tau _p`$, is sensitive to both variations of the barrier width $`L`$ and of the height $`V_0`$, and also, that the Büttiker traversal time is found very close to the value of $`\tau _p`$ though we find qualitative differences between them as a function of $`L`$.

G. G-C. thanks M. Moshinsky for useful discussions and acknowledges support of DGAPA-UNAM under grant IN116398. We also acknowledge partial financial support of Conacyt under contract no. 431100-5- 32082E.


text:
# Magnetic field induced luminescence spectra in a quantum cascade laser

\[

## Abstract

We report on our study of the luminescence spectra of a quantum cascade laser in the presence of an external magnetic field tilted from the direction perpendicular to the electron plane. The effect of the tilted field is to allow novel optical transitions because of the coupling of intersubband-cyclotron energies. We find that by tuning the applied field, one can get optical transitions at different energies that are as sharp as the zero-field transitions.

\]

The unipolar quantum cascade laser (QCL)  is the product of ingenious quantum engineering that exploits the properties of electrons confined in semiconductor nanostructures. As yet, this is the only high power semiconductor laser that operates at and above room temperature in the mid-infrared range . Intense interest on this system derives from its technological importance in trace-gas analysis, in particular, for environmental control, remote chemical sensing, pollution monitoring, non-invasive medical diagnostics, etc. . Here we study the novel effects of a tilted magnetic field on a QCL where the coupled intersubband-cyclotron transitions are allowed . We find that as the subbands quantize into discrete Landau levels, new luminescence peaks appear that correspond to those transitions. The peaks exhibit a prominent red shift but can be made as sharp and large as the zero-field case by tuning the applied field.

The system we have studied here is sketched schematically in Fig. 1, where a GaInAs quantum well of 7.4 nm width is sandwiched between two AlInAs tunneling barriers. When a suitable bias is applied, electrons tunneling through the upstream barrier generate photons and escape quickly to the next well through the downstream barrier. Superlattice structures on both sides of the active region act as electron injector or Bragg mirrors and control the rate of electron escape . The operating wavelength of the lasers is determined by the quantum confinement rather than the bandgap of the materials.

An externally applied magnetic field tilted from the direction perpendicular to the electron plane is a well-studied problem experimentally as well as theoretically, in the context of quantum Hall effects . For a magnetic field tilted from the $`z`$ direction the perpendicular and parallel motions of electrons are coupled and as a result, transitions between different Landau levels of the ground and upper subbands become possible. Interestingly, the perpendicular component of the tilted field provides magnetic quantization, somewhat analogous to the situation proposed for a quantum-dot cascade laser  where the quantization of the planar motion is due to replacement of the quantum wells by quantum dots . The Hamiltonian of the system in a tilted field is

$$=_{}+_{}+^{}$$

where

$`_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m^{}}}p_z^2+V_{\mathrm{eff}}(z)+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{z^2}{\mathrm{}_{}^4}}`$
$`_{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m^{}}}\left[p_x^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{\mathrm{}_{}^4}}(x+X)^2\right]`$
$`^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}}{m^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{zp_x}{\mathrm{}_{}^2}}`$
with $`X\frac{p_y}{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}_{}^2`$ the center coordinate of the cyclotron motion and $`\mathrm{}_{}^2=c\mathrm{}/eH_y`$, $`\mathrm{}_{}^2=c\mathrm{}/eH_z`$ are the magnetic lengths. Here we have chosen the Landau gauge vector potential, $`𝐀=(H_yz,H_zx,0)`$. The magnetic field is therefore in the $`yz`$ plane and $`H_y=H\mathrm{sin}\theta ,H_z=H\mathrm{cos}\theta `$, $`\theta `$ is the tilt angle and $`H`$ is the total magnetic field .

The effective potential is made up of the (i) confinement potential, (ii) Hartree potential, and the (iii) exchange-correlation potential . The wave functions of the Hamiltonian $`_{}`$, which depend only on $`z`$-coordinate are obtained from

$$_{}\psi _n=E_n\psi _n(z).$$

Solutions of this equation determine the energy levels and wave functions of the subbands. The total Hamiltonian is diagonalized by choosing the basis wave functions

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{n,N,X}`$ $`=`$ $`L^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\mathrm{i}{\displaystyle \frac{X}{y}}\mathrm{}_{}^2\mathrm{i}{\displaystyle \frac{z_{nn}}{\mathrm{}_{}^2}}(xX)\right)`$
$`\times `$ $`\xi _N(xX)\psi _n(z)`$
$`\xi _N(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{i}^N(2^NN!\pi ^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{}_{})^{1/2}H_N\left({\displaystyle \frac{x}{\mathrm{}_{}}}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{2\mathrm{}_{}^2}}\right)`$
$`z_{nm}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝑑z\psi _n(z)z\psi _m(z)}`$
where $`H_N(x)`$ is the Hermite polinomial. The Hamiltonian matrix elements $`(n^{}N^{}X^{}||nNX)`$ are then calculated in this basis. The matrix is diagonal in $`X`$. To calculate the wave functions we use three subbands and 20 Landau lebels on each subband.

Once we diagonalize the Hamiltonian the chemical potential is then obtained from the equation

$$N_s=\frac{2}{2\pi \mathrm{}_{}^2}\underset{N}{}\frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}(\beta (E_{2,N}\mu ))+1}$$

where $`E_{2,N}`$ is the energy of $`N`$-th Landau level in the second subband (only the second subband is occupied). The optical spectra are calculated as follows : Optical transitions occur between Landau levels of the second and first subbands. We introduce the variables that are proportional to matrix elements of optical transitions

$`u_{(N,N_1)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{eF}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2m^{}}{\mathrm{}^2}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1,N|^{}|2,N_1)}{(E_{2,N_1}E_{1,N})^2(\mathrm{}\omega )^2}}`$
$`\times `$ $`\left\{f(E_{2,N_1})\right\}^{\frac{1}{2}}`$
where $`^{}`$ is the change of Hamiltonian due to an external electric field $`F`$ in the $`z`$ direction, and $`f(\epsilon )`$ is the Fermi distribution function. Note that we consider the first subband as empty. The emission spectrum is related to $`u_{(N,N_1)}`$ through

$$(\omega )\omega \frac{1}{2\pi \mathrm{}_{}^2}\underset{N,N_1}{}z_{1,2}\left\{f(E_{2,N_1})\right\}^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{}(u_{(N,N_1)})$$

where $`\omega `$ is the frequency of the emitted photon.

Intensity of the optical emission is determined by the dipole matrix elements between initial (before emission) and final (after emission) states of the multi-electron system. In dipole transitions the transition intensity is proportional to the overlap between $`(x,y)`$-dependent parts of the wave functions of the initial and final states . For a vanishing perpendicular magnetic field this results in conservation of the two-dimensional momentum in the optical transition. For non-zero perpendicular magnetic fields the states of the two-dimensional electrons are classified by two numbers: the Landau level index and by a number that distinguishes the degenerate states of an electron within a Landau level, for example, by $`x`$ component of the momentum. The energy of the single electron system depends only on the number of the Landau level, and the wave functions are harmonic oscillator functions whose center is determined by the $`x`$ component of the momentum. If the magnetic field is directed perpendicular to the two-dimensional layer then optical transitions are allowed only between the states with the same two-dimensional quantum numbers. In this case we will have a single line which corresponds to the optical transitions between states with the same Landau level index.

Introduction of a non-zero parallel magnetic field in $`y`$ direction results in modification of the wave function in a Landau level: the position of oscillator wave functions is now determined by $`y`$ component of the momentum and also by average position of the electron in $`z`$ direction, $`z`$ that depends on the number of subbands. Figure 1 illustrate this dependence. Electrons in the first subband and in the second subband are localized in the quantum wells 7.4 nm and 4.2 nm, respectively. This opens up the possibility for optical transitions between different Landau levels and at the same time it suppresses the optical transitions between the states with the same Landau level indices.

Evolution of the emission spectra as a function of the tilted magnetic field and tilt angle are illustrated in Figs. 2 and 3. In Fig. 2, the optical spectra are shown for three values of the perpendicular component of the field and for different values of parallel component of field for a fixed $`H_{\mathrm{perp}}`$. Clearly, for small $`H_{\mathrm{perp}}`$ (Fig. 2a), the emission spectra do not feel the Landau quantization and we have a single peak which broadens with increasing $`H_{\mathrm{par}}`$. For higher fields such as $`H_{\mathrm{perp}}=5`$ tesla (Fig.2b), we find new features in the emission spectra. For a small parallel field, $`H_{\mathrm{par}}=1`$ tesla, main transitions are between the states with the same Landau index, hence a single peak that corresponds to transitions from the zeroth Landau level of second subband to that of the first subband. An increase of the parallel field makes transitions to higher Landau levels more intense. Appearance of a shoulder at $`H_{\mathrm{par}}=5`$ tesla corresponds to transitions to the first Landau level of the first subband. Similarly, peaks at $`H_{\mathrm{par}}=10`$ tesla and 15 tesla correspond to transitions from zeroth Landau level of the second subband to the higher Landau level of the first subband. The energy separations between the peaks are equal to the separations between Landau levels of the first subband. In Fig. 2c, transitions to non-zero Landau level become more intense and we observe an interplay between the transitions to zero and to the first Landau levels with increasing parallel field. For a small $`H_{\mathrm{par}}`$ ($`H_{\mathrm{par}}=1`$ tesla), there is only a strong transition to zeroth Landau level. For $`H_{\mathrm{par}}=5`$ tesla, we observe the appearance of a small peak that corresponds to transitions to the first Landau level, and for $`H_{\mathrm{par}}=10`$ tesla and 15 tesla, transitions to the first Landau level become strongest and we observe the formation of a new narrow peak that corresponds to a transition to the first Landau level.

In a recent experiment by Blaser et al. , QCL based on photon-assisted tunneling transition was subjected to a parallel field of upto 14 tesla. The luminescence spectra showed a broadening of the peak but almost no shift (a very tiny blue shift was observed) with an increasing parallel field. Broadening of the luminescence peak with increasing parallel field is also visible in Fig. 2(a) where the perpendicular field is rather small, but the experimentally observed broadening is much more rapid. In addition, there is a strong red shift in Fig. 2(a) that is not visible in the observed spectra. In the present scheme, a red shift seems to be quite natural in the single-electron picture . The change of the wave function due to a parallel field ($`H_{\mathrm{par}}<10`$ tesla) is small for the first and the second subbands. Magnetic field changes the energy spectrum because of a shift of the parabolic energy dispersion by a value that is proportional to the field. This results in a broadening and red shift of the emission spectrum without the many-body effects. The many-body effects changes the results only slightly and results in a blue shift ($``$ 4 meV) of the emission spectra that is independent of the applied magnetic field. The observed total intensity of emission line gets smaller with higher parallel fields. At 10 tesla, it is smaller than its value at zero field ($`I_0`$) by 45% (0.55 $`I_0`$) . In contrast, our calculated values indicate a reduction by 16% (0.84 $`I_0`$).

In our present scheme, the small blue shift (or almost absence of any shift) observed in  in a strong parallel field cannot be explained by many-body corrections, because these corrections in samples of  are small and have a weak magnetic field dependence. The weak magnetic field dependence of many-body effects was also demonstrated in  for much wider quantum wells (30-46 nm) where one expects even larger magnetic field dependence than for narrow wells. One possible explanation of the observed results of  might be due to the presence of disorder in the system which tends to localize the two-dimensional electrons  and thereby break the conservation of momentum in the optical emission. Magnetic field tends to delocalize the states which can result in a decrease of emission intensity and widening of the emission lines. Our present results would, of course, be valid for disorder-free high-mobility systems.

In Fig. 3, the emission spectra are shown for three values of the total magnetic field $`H`$ and for different values of the tilt angle at a fixed $`H`$. For a small field (Fig. 3a) we have a red shift of the emission spectra with increasing parallel field (i.e., increasing tilt angle). For $`\theta =45^{}`$ there is a weak structure resulting from the Landau quantization. At higher fields (Fig. 3b,c), one observes the evolution of the emission spectra from a broad peak at a large angle, $`\theta =80^{}`$, (large parallel field and a small perpendicular field) to a single narrow peak for small angle. In the latter case, the parallel component of the magnetic field is small and all optical transitions are transitions between the Landau levels with the same index. For an intermediate tilt angle, there are two peaks that correspond to transitions from the zeroth Landau level of the second subbband to zeroth and the first Landau levels of the first subband. The intensity of transition to the first Landau level increases with increasing angle which means an increase of the parallel field. It has its maximum at $`\theta =45^{}`$ and for total magnetic field of $`H=21`$ tesla one observes the formation of a strong narrow peak at $`\theta =45^{}`$ associated with a suppression of the original peak corresponding to the transition to zeroth Landau level of the first subband. This is the same peak as shown in Fig. 2 for $`H_{\mathrm{perp}}=H_{\mathrm{par}}=15`$ tesla. From these results, we conclude that by suitably tuning the externally applied tilted field, lasing due to coupled intersubband-cyclotron transitions that is as strong as the zero-field case (but at different energies) can be acheived. Although for the present system the magnetic fields where the novel transitions take place are rather high, by suitably engineering the device parameters these transitions can be made to occur at lower fields.

We would like to express our gratitude to P. Fulde for his kind support and for valuable discussions. We also thank S. Blaser for helpful discussions and for his unpublished results.


text:
# Massive warm dark matter

## I introduction

The standard Big Bang model has been very successful in explaining the large scale structure in the universe. An essential feature in the model is dark matter. By far the most successful candidate for dark matter is cold dark matter, collisionless particles which are so massive that they are very non-relativistic during the entire structure formation history .

However, in the past few years high resolution N-body simulations have shown that standard collisionless CDM apparently fails to reproduce observations on galactic or smaller scales. Observations indicate that the halo of a galaxy like the milky way has almost an order of magnitude fewer small satellite halos than is found in CDM simulations .

Also, the central cores of dark matter halos have singular density profiles, approaching almost $`\rho r^{1.5}`$ at small $`r`$ . This is in contrast to observations of low surface brightness galaxies, where the dark matter halos apparently have almost constant density.

This seems like a very serious problem for the CDM structure formation picture. However, at present it cannot be completely excluded that the discrepancy is due to the low quality of either simulations or observations. For instance very high resolution simulations which include baryons have yet to be carried out , and rotation curve measurements of LSB galaxies may have greater uncertainties than previously estimated .

However, the amount of observational data in conflict with the CDM model is quite large and it seems a very real possibility that we may have to abandon the simplest CDM collisionless models. The simplest possibility (other possibilities, such as self-interacting CDM have been proposed ) is that power is suppressed on small scales, either because of the initial power spectrum from inflation  or because of thermal motion of the dark matter particles. The latter possibility corresponds to warm  or hot dark matter and has received a lot of attention recently. WDM seems able to explain many of the problems which CDM suffers from, notably the substructure and the angular momentum problems . However, it remains to be seen whether WDM can also prevent singular cores from forming .

Because WDM seems a quite promising candidate for dark matter it is definitely worthwhile to look closer at the possible particle physics mechanisms for producing it. The simplest possibility is that the warm dark matter is a relativistically decoupled species with a thermal distribution function. This possibility has been reviewed a number of times and we shall not discuss it further . Rather we will investigate the intriguing possibility that warm dark matter could have been produced non-thermally. It is possible that dark matter particles with masses much higher than thermal warm dark matter could have been produced with enough thermal energy to make up warm dark matter. We shall discuss three distinct possibilities for this, namely production by decay of a heavy species , production by annihilation of a heavy species, and finally self heating by number changing self interactions of the warm dark matter particles . We then go on to discuss any possible signatures that can distinguish massive warm dark matter from ordinary warm dark matter.

Note that there is another possibility for non-thermal warm dark matter, namely that the WDM particles are very light, but have been produced with very low average momentum. This could happen if the WDM particles are sterile neutrinos that have been produced via oscillations with an active species  or by relativistic decays of massive fermions into bosons .

## II production mechanisms for massive warm dark matter

A non-thermal warm dark matter candidate could have been produced in several different ways via interactions with other particles in the plasma. We here review three distinct possibilities: self-interactions, decays and pair-annihilations. In the following, $`\varphi `$ is used to denote either the WDM field or the WDM particles, irrespective of whether they are bosons or fermions.

### A Production by self interactions

Carlson et al.  suggested an interesting way to heat cold dark matter relative to standard CDM, namely by number changing self-interactions. This was proposed as a means of reconciling the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=1`$ CDM model with large scale structure observations. However, subsequently it was shown by de Laix, Scherrer and Schaefer  that this model produced a very poor fit to observations.

At present the consensus is that the correct model for large scale structure is a flat $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model , and so there is no need to modify the physics of CDM to change the formation of large scale structure. Self-interacting dark matter could instead be invoked as a possible means of explaining the observed small scale structure. CDM with a large self-scattering cross section has been proposed , and subsequently warm dark matter with self-scatterings . However, if the self-interactions are sufficiently strong there are very likely number changing reactions as well. This model is almost equivalent to that originally proposed by Carlson et al. . If dark matter has such strong self-interactions that number changing reactions occur in equilibrium, the effective temperature of the species will drop much slower than for other species. In case of full thermal equilibrium maintained by self-interactions, the distribution function is (assuming Boltzmann statistics) $`f=\mathrm{exp}(E/T)`$. Also, in thermal equilibrium the total entropy within a comoving volume is conserved. In this case, the effective temperature of the distribution is

$$\frac{T}{m}=\left(3\mathrm{log}(a)K\right)^1,$$
(1)
for $`Tm`$. $`a`$ is the scale factor and $`K`$ is a constant. This shows that the effective temperature of the species only drops logarithmically. Note that this behaviour is in stark contrast with that of the other species for which $`Ta^1`$. Thus, the particle distribution is heated to higher temperature than the surrounding medium by transforming particles into kinetic energy. This leads to a much larger free streaming length for such particles than for thermally decoupled particles with the same mass. The observational bounds on the self-scattering cross section can be translated into a rough bound on the number changing reactions, depending on the specific type of WDM particle.

Pseudoscalars — A likely candidate in this category is a particle like the majoron (although there should be no coupling to standard model fields) with a simple $`\alpha \varphi ^4`$ self-interaction term. $`42`$ number changing interactions take place via a $`\varphi ^6`$ term in the effective Lagrangian . Based on purely dimensional arguments the rate for this reaction should be

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{42}n^3\alpha ^4/m^8,$$
(2)
where $`n`$ denotes the number density. In all reasonable scenarios we should expect that the dimensionless coupling constant, $`\alpha 1`$. However, we can also put another constraint on $`\alpha `$ from simple elastic scattering. The rate for elastic scattering of these particles is

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }nv\alpha ^2/m^2,$$
(3)
where $`v`$ is their relative velocity. It has recently been shown in numerical simulations that dark matter with a large elastic cross section is not a good candidate because galaxies have very singular halos and are too spherical . A safe upper bound on the 2-body elastic scattering cross section is

$$\sigma 10^{22}m_{\mathrm{GeV}}\mathrm{cm}^2,$$
(4)
yielding an upper limit on $`\alpha `$

$$\alpha ^22.6\times 10^{22}m_{\mathrm{eV}}^3.$$
(5)
The quantity of interest here is the ratio of the number changing interaction rate and the Hubble parameter, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }/H`$. For pseudo-scalars this can be written as

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{H}1.1\times 10^{30}(\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi h^2)^3\alpha ^4m_{\mathrm{eV}}^{11}T_{\mathrm{eV}}^7g_{}^{1/4},$$
(6)
using the bound on $`\alpha `$. $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi `$ is the present-day density contribution of the WDM and $`g_{}`$ is the number of relativistic degrees of freedom present. Freeze-out occurs at $`\mathrm{\Gamma }/H1`$, corresponding to the bound

$$m_{\mathrm{eV}}^{5/7}0.0017(\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi h^2)^{3/7}T_{\mathrm{freeze},\mathrm{eV}}.$$
(7)
As soon as the number changing reactions freeze out the particles become non-relativistic. Therefore, if this scenario is to work, we must demand that $`T_{\mathrm{freeze}}100200`$ eV, so that the WDM has the correct amount of thermal motion. For pseudo-scalars this translates into

$$m_{\mathrm{eV}}0.22(\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi h^2)^{3/5}T_{\mathrm{freeze},\mathrm{eV}}.$$
(8)
The conclusion is that massive WDM cannot be produced in this fashion unless special circumstances prevail. One way out is to tinker with the $`42`$ reaction rate, increasing it by a large factor over the naive estimate. However, it seems safe to assume that this type of heating is an unlikely production mechanism for WDM.

Scalars — If the particles are scalars there could be a $`32`$ number changing term of the form $`\mathrm{\Gamma }n^2\alpha ^3/m^5`$ . In this case Eq. (8) changes into

$$m_{\mathrm{eV}}4.1(\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi h^2)^{2/5}$$
(9)
Again, the conclusion is that self-heating cannot be the production mechanism.

Fermions — For fermions the situation is quite different. The leading number changing reaction is $`2f+2\overline{f}f\overline{f}`$. The fermion-fermion interaction necessitates some new force carrier, $`\eta `$. If it is a boson with mass smaller than the fermion then the reaction $`f\overline{f}2\eta `$ will dominate completely and the fermion will quickly disappear by annihilation. Thus, the force carrier would have to be more massive than $`f`$. But in that case the reaction $`2f+2\overline{f}f\overline{f}`$ will be suppressed by high orders of $`T/m_\eta 1`$. Thus we can expect the number changing rate for fermions to be much smaller than for pseudoscalars and far too small to be of any practical interest.

Thus, no matter what nature the dark matter particles have, it is very unlikely that self-heating can increase the thermal energy sufficiently that WDM results.

### B Production by decay of a massive species

Another, and perhaps more obvious way is to produce the WDM particles, $`\varphi `$, via decays of strongly non-relativistic particles, $`X`$ . We can write the present day thermal velocity of the warm dark matter as

$$v=\frac{p}{m_\varphi }\frac{T_{\gamma ,0}}{m_\varphi }\left(\frac{g_{,0}}{g_{,d}}\right)^{1/3}\left(\frac{m_X}{T_\gamma }\right)_{T=T_{\mathrm{decay}}}$$
(10)
We can use this relation to find how much energy density was in the $`X`$-particles when they decayed

$$\rho _{X,d}=\frac{m_X}{m_\varphi }\rho _c\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi \left(\frac{g_{,d}}{g_{,0}}\right)\left(\frac{T_{\gamma ,d}}{T_{\gamma ,0}}\right),$$
(11)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi `$ is the present day contribution to $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ from the warm dark matter. From these relations we can calculate the ratio $`\rho _X/\rho _R`$ at decay

$$\frac{\rho _X}{\rho _R}=0.025\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi h^2\left(\frac{v}{0.4\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}\right)\left(\frac{g_{,d}}{g_{,0}}\right)^{1/3}.$$
(12)
From this we can conclude that the $`X`$-particles never dominated the energy density of the universe prior to decay. However, the radiation produced at decay adds a significant contribution to $`\rho _R`$ which could be detectable.

If the decay took place prior to BBN ($`z10^{12}`$) the $`\varphi `$ particles were highly relativistic during BBN and their contribution to the radiation energy density is (in units of the energy density of a standard massless neutrino species)

$$\mathrm{\Delta }N_\nu =0.185\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi h^2\left(\frac{v}{0.4\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}\right).$$
(13)
For $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi =0.3`$ and $`h=0.65`$ this yields $`\mathrm{\Delta }N_\nu 0.023`$, too small a perturbation to be detected. Even with high precision measurements of the primordial abundances this value seems out of reach . If the decay is after BBN, the contribution of $`X`$ during BBN is entirely negligible.

Next, one can ask whether this is detectable in the CMBR anisotropy. At recombination the $`\varphi `$-particles are already strongly non-relativistic. Their contribution to the radiation energy density can be estimated as

$$\rho _{\varphi ,R}\frac{1}{2}v^2\mathrm{\Omega }_\varphi h^2\left(\frac{T_\gamma }{T_{\gamma ,0}}\right)^3.$$
(14)
Again, we can parameterize this, in units of neutrino species at recombination, to be

$$\mathrm{\Delta }N_\nu 1.7\times 10^8\left(\frac{v}{0.4\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1}\right)^2\left(\frac{T_\gamma }{T_{\gamma ,0}}\right).$$
(15)
At recombination this gives $`\mathrm{\Delta }N_\nu 2\times 10^5`$, which is too small to be detected, even with the upcoming high-precision experiments MAP and PLANCK .

Note that thermally decoupled WDM gives the same contribution to the cosmic radiation density as does the decay-produced WDM. Thus, this effect would in no case allow us to distinguish the two different types of dark matter (unless the decay is after BBN, in which case the decay-produced WDM would not contribute to the radiation during BBN).

### C Production by annihilation of a massive species

The final production mechanism we shall discuss is via the pair-annihilation of some massive fermion species. Here, the $`\varphi `$-particles are produced via $`X\overline{X}2\varphi `$. $`\varphi `$ can be either a boson or a fermion. The prime example would be a heavy neutrino species annihilating into massless fermions. Annihilations will in general not produce $`\varphi `$ with much greater than thermal energies. The reason is that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }/H`$ is always an increasing function of $`T`$ for non-relativistic particles, so that very few high energy annihilation products are produced (unless one invokes a specific physical mechanism to prevent annihilations at high temperature ).

In any case, if warm dark matter is produced by the annihilation of a massive species, the annihilation rate must be high enough that practically all heavy particles disappear before the annihilation freezes out. Otherwise the remaining heavy particles will quickly begin to dominate the energy density, resulting in a standard CDM scenario. But in the limit of strong interactions, the specifics of the annihilation reaction does not matter, the decay proceeds in equilibrium. The final energy density of the annihilation products can then be found by solving the simple differential equations (assuming $`22`$ annihilation and Boltzmann statistics of the involved species)

$$\frac{dn_{\mathrm{TOT}}}{dt}=\frac{dn_\mathrm{X}}{dt}+\frac{dn_\varphi }{dt}=3Hn_{\mathrm{TOT}}$$
(16)
$$\frac{d\rho _{\mathrm{TOT}}}{dt}=\frac{d\rho _\mathrm{X}}{dt}+\frac{d\rho _\varphi }{dt}=3H(\rho _{\mathrm{TOT}}+P_{\mathrm{TOT}}).$$
(17)
$$f_{\mathrm{X},\varphi }=\mathrm{exp}((\sqrt{m_{\mathrm{X},\varphi }^2+p^2}\mu )/T),$$
(18)
where $`\mu `$ and $`T`$ denote the common pseudo-chemical potential and temperature of the two species.

Fig. 1 shows the outcome of the annihilation process. The average energy of the light particles is slightly higher than the expected $`3T`$, namely $`E_\varphi =3.78T`$. However, this clearly shows that any annihilation-product cannot act as strongly non-thermal warm dark matter.

After reviewing these three possible production scenarios for non-thermal WDM we conclude that the only plausible possibility is that the WDM particles have been produced by the decay of some massive species.

## III coupling to standard model fields

Warm dark matter could in principle be coupled to standard model fields. Thermal dark matter is much lighter than the $`Z`$-mass and therefore any coupling to the standard model fields would likely show up as a branching to $`\varphi `$ in the $`Z`$-decay. However, thermal WDM cannot be detected in standard dark matter search experiments that rely on nuclear recoil effects because the mass is much below detection threshold . That would not need be the case for massive warm dark matter candidates. In principle the WDM particles could scatter on nuclei and be observed in direct detection experiments. However, the WDM should never come into equilibrium with the standard model particles in the early universe. Otherwise a purely thermal distribution results, and the end product is cold dark matter. This puts a strict upper limit on the coupling between $`\varphi `$ and standard model fields.

As an example we calculate the energy equilibration rate for a Dirac neutrino-like particle, $`\varphi `$, in the early universe. The squared matrix element for $`\varphi `$ scattering on a massless standard model fermion is roughly

$$|M|^2\eta G_F^2(p_\varphi p_f)(p_\varphi ^{^{}}p_f^{^{}}),$$
(19)
for energy transfers below $`m_Z`$. The dimensionless parameter $`\eta `$ denotes the effective coupling strength of $`\varphi `$ to $`Z`$. From the above matrix element we estimate the scattering rate for a $`\varphi `$-particle to be

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_s=n_f\sigma \eta G_F^2E_\varphi E_fT_f^3.$$
(20)
The average energy of $`\varphi `$ is much bigger than that of $`f`$. Thus, on average the momentum transfer in each scattering is equivalent to $`E_f`$. The energy equilibration rate can then be estimated as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_E\eta G_F^2E_f^2T_f^3\eta G_F^2T_f^5.$$
(21)
If the WDM particles are to stay out of thermal equilibrium then

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{H}<1$$
(22)
must be fulfilled at all times after $`\varphi `$ is produced. This above equation can be transformed into a bound on $`\eta `$

$$\eta <2.8g_{}^{1/2}T_{\mathrm{MeV}}^3.$$
(23)
Thus, the bound strengthens with increasing temperature and is strongest at $`T_d`$, the decay temperature of the parent.

A direct detection experiment would typically use WIMP-nucleon elastic scattering recoil. The elastic scattering cross section is given approximately by

$$\sigma \eta G_F^2\mu ^2,$$
(24)
where $`\mu =(m_Nm_\varphi )/(m_N+m_\varphi )`$ is the reduced mass of the system.

The present generation of experiments have reached a limit of $`\sigma 1`$ pb for masses of $`\varphi `$ in the GeV range . In that case $`\mu /m_N1`$ and the detection limit corresponds roughly to

$$\eta 20.$$
(25)
Using Eq. (23) we find that

$$T_{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{MeV}}0.5$$
(26)
if the $`\varphi `$-particles were to have been detected in the present experiments. The next generation of dark matter experiments will probably achieve about a factor $`10^3`$ better sensitivity, yielding $`T_{\mathrm{d},\mathrm{MeV}}5`$. In any case, if this type of warm dark matter is to be detected in direct detection experiments it must have been produced at the epoch of BBN or later, otherwise the upper bound on the coupling to standard model fields becomes so tight that no direct detection experiment will be able to see it.

## IV discussion

We have discussed various possible means of producing warm dark matter, with specific focus on the possibility of very heavy warm dark matter. Dark matter self-heating was found to be excluded by present observational bounds. Also, production by pair-annihilation of a massive species cannot produce strongly non-thermal dark matter. The only viable production mechanism was found to be production by the non-relativistic decay of a massive relic.

From a structure formation point of view there is very little difference between massive warm dark matter and standard thermally decoupled warm dark matter for the same average free streaming length. Interestingly , as opposed to standard warm dark matter it could be possible to detect massive warm dark matter in a direct detection experiment, because the particle mass can easily be in the GeV range or above. However, it was also found that such WDM would have to have been produced at relatively low temperatures, otherwise the WDM distribution would have been brought into thermal equilibrium by interactions with the standard model fields.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported by a grant from the Carlsberg foundation


text:
# Pulsar Astronomy: the HST Contribution

## 1 Introduction

Although conspicous INSs such as the Crab and Vela pulsars have been observed from the very beginning of the mission, HST started to play a key role on the study of the optical behaviour of these faint targets after the first refurbishing mission in 1993. The study did not proceed systematically, e.g. from the brighter to the dimmer, but rather following a random walk dictated by the allocation of observing time. Table 1 lists all the INSs (be they bona fide pulsars or radio-silent neutron stars) observed so far by the HST.

Although their number is limited, the objects in Table 1 sample 10 magnitude in brightness and 4 decades in age, going from the youngest pulsars, such as the Crab and PSR B0540-69, to rather old ones, such as PSR B0950+08.

All INSs, but the Crab, are faint. All challenging, sometimes plainly impossible to observe from the ground. This was the case of PSR B1055-52 (Mignani et al. 1997) which, together with PSR B1929+10 and PSR B0950+08 (Pavlov et al. 1996) have been seen only with the HST using the FOC and the U filter. To the score of HST identifications we can add the INS candidate RXJ 1856-3754 (Walter & Matthews 1997).

## 2 The Data

Over the years, HST has collected light curves, for the Crab (Percival et al. 1993) and PSR B0540-69 (Boyd et al. 1995), spectra, for the same two objects (Gull et al. 1998; Hill et al. 1997), and images in different filters for all of them. The major results obtained by HST in pulsar astronomy have been reviewed by Mignani et al. (2000). The observational efforts pursued by different groups with the imaging instruments on board HST are summarized in Table 2, where, for sake of clarity, the spectral coverage provided by HST has been roughly divided in two infrared channels (IR and I), four optical ones (R,V,B,U)- plus narrow bands (NB)- and one ultraviolet. In Table 2, NICMOS, WFPC2, and FOC observations are indicated. If an observation has been done more than once, the number in parenthesis gives the number of repetitions.

Table 2 shows quite eloquently that not all the entries in Table 1 received the same amount of observing time: it is worth noticing that, apart from the ”dancing Crab”, the objects with the highest number of observations is the rather dim Geminga, followed by PSRB0656+14, to show that objects fainter than V=25 were not discriminated in this study. The amount of information contained in this comprehensive list has been used:

* to measure pulsars’ proper motions and parallactic displacements,
* to study plerion phenomenology
* to assess the spectral distribution of objects too faint for spectroscopy

The major achievements are summarized in the next sections.

## 3 High Resolution Imaging

### 3.1 INS astrometry.

For all the pulsars observed more than once, namely the Crab, Vela, PSR B0656+14 and Geminga, a proper motion has been measured, yielding also new and independent measurements of the objects’ transverse velocities. This topic is reviewed in these proceedings by Mignani et al. Sometimes, the accurate determination of the proper motion has been a by-product of a sequence of observations aimed at the measurement of the object’s parallactic displacement and hence its distance (see also De Luca et al., these proceedings). This has been done for Geminga (Caraveo et al. 1996) and is currently underway for the Vela pulsar. Determining the distance to a pulsar allows the assessment of the absolute optical luminosity which, compared with the overall energy loss dE/dt, yields the efficiency to convert rotational energy loss into optical emission, an important parameter in pulsar modelling.

### 3.2 Morphology studies

HST imaging of Crab, Vela and PSR B0540-69 allows one to trace the relativistic pulsar wind and to better study the plerion phenomenology. Moreover, with the proper motion vectors clearly aligned with the axes of symmetry of the Crab and Vela plerions, proper motions, or rather the mechanisms responsible for them, seem to play a role in shaping the inner remnants (see Mignani et al., these proceedings, and Pavlov et al. 2000).

Comparisons between HST frames and recently obtained Chandra high resolution images open new avenues to study the multiwavelength behaviour of young energetic plerions. The case of PSR B0540-69 is discussed in an accompanying paper by Caraveo et al. .

### 3.3 Multicolor Imaging

HST multicolor imaging appears to be the next best thing to a spectrum for studying the spectral shape of faint objects and discriminating between thermal emission from the INS surface and non thermal magnetospheric one.

Two classical examples are

* PSR B0656+14, where Pavlov et al. (1997) have shown a composite spectral shape featuring both a thermal and non-thermal components (see Fig.1, left panel)
* Geminga, for which Bignami et al. (1996) and Mignani et al. (1998) have provided the evidence of a cyclotron spectral feature on top of a thermal continuum (see Fig.1, right panel). If correct, the cyclotron identification (discussed also by Jacchia et al. 1999) of the feature would provide the first in situ measurement of the magnetic field of an isolated neutron star.

## 4 Conclusions.

All in all, the study of INSs, in spite of their faintness, has yielded a wealth of interesting results definitely worth the time and efforts devoted to them. New identifications have been secured while new insights have been achieved for pulsars already identified.

Of course, a lot remains to be done. Young pulsars are definitely promising targets, thus we should concentrate on newly discovered young objects, such as the 16 msec one in the LMC. Here the timing capability of the STIS, so far poorly exploited, should be fully used.

Radio quiet candidate neutron stars are also promising, although admittedly demanding, targets.


text:
# Theorem 1

Matrix representation of the

generalized Moyal algebra

Jerzy F. Plebański111E-mail: pleban@fis.cinvestav.mx Maciej Przanowski∗,∗∗222E-mail: przan@fis.cinvestav.mx

and Francisco J. Turrubiates333E-mail: fturrub@fis.cinvestav.mx

Department of Physics

Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN

Apartado Postal 14-740, México, D.F., 07000, México.

∗∗Institute of Physics

Technical University of Łódź,

Wólczańska 219, 93-005, Łódź, Poland.

Abstract

It is shown that the isomorphism between the generalized Moyal algebra and the matrix algebra follows in a natural manner from the generalized Weyl quantization rule and from the well known matrix representation of the destruction and creation operators.

PACS numbers: 03.65.Ca

Keywords: Deformation quantization, Quantum mechanics.

This short note is motivated by Merkulov’s paper “The Moyal product is the matrix product” , where the canonical isomorphism between the Moyal algebra and an infinite matrix algebra has been found.

Here we are going to show how the results of previous works  and the well known in quantum mechanichs  representation of the position, $`\widehat{x}`$, and the momentum, $`\widehat{p}`$, operators lead to isomorphisms between various $``$-algebras and infinite matrix algebra.

First remind the basic theorems .

Let $`P[[x,p,\mathrm{}]]`$ be the $``$ linear space of all formal power series of $`x,p`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ where $`(x,p)\times `$ are the coordinates of the phase space $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\times `$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ is a real parameter (the deformation parameter). The phase space $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\times `$ is endowed with usual symplectic form

$$\omega =dpdq$$
(1)
Let also $`\widehat{P}[[\widehat{x},\widehat{p},\mathrm{}]]`$ be an associative algebra over $``$ of the formal power series of $`\widehat{x},\widehat{p},\mathrm{}\widehat{1}`$. The self-adjoint operators $`\widehat{x}`$ and $`\widehat{p}`$ act in a Hilbert space $``$ and satisfy the commutation relation

$$[\widehat{x},\widehat{p}]:=\widehat{x}\widehat{p}\widehat{p}\widehat{x}=i\mathrm{}\widehat{1}.$$
(2)
As usual, $`\widehat{1}`$ denotes the unity operator.

$`\widehat{P}[[\widehat{x},\widehat{p},\mathrm{}]]`$ is the eveloping algebra of the Heisenberg-Weyl algebra generated by $`\widehat{x},\widehat{p},\mathrm{}\widehat{1}.`$

The following theorem holds

###### Theorem 1

There exists a vector space isomorphism

$$W_g:P[[x,p,\mathrm{}]]\widehat{P}[[\widehat{x},\widehat{p},\mathrm{}]]$$

such that

(i)$`W_g(1)=\widehat{1}`$

$`W_g(p^mx^n)=\underset{s=0}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(m,n)}{}}g(m,n,s)\mathrm{}^s\widehat{p}^{ms}\widehat{x}^{ns}`$

$`m,nN,m+n0,g(m,n,s),g(m,n,0)=1`$

(ii)$`i\mathrm{}W_g\left(\{x,A\}_𝒫\right)=[\widehat{x},W_g(A)]`$

$`i\mathrm{}W_g\left(\{p,A\}_𝒫\right)=[\widehat{p},W_g(A)]`$

for every $`AP[[x,p,\mathrm{}]],`$ with $`\{,\}_𝒫`$ denoting the Poisson bracket.

Moreover, every isomorphism $`W_g:P[[x,p,\mathrm{}]]\widehat{P}[[\widehat{x},\widehat{p},\mathrm{}]]`$ satisfies the conditions (i) and (ii) iff

$$g(m,n,s)=\frac{\left(1\right)^sm!n!}{s!\left(ms\right)!\left(ns\right)!}\frac{d^sf(y)}{dy^s}|_{y=0}$$
(3)
where $`f(y)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}f_ky^k,`$ $`f_0=1,`$ is a formal series independent of $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{}`$

(Of course, one can easily recognize in the conditions (ii) of Theorem 1, the modified Dirac quantization rules).

Then, the second theorem reads

###### Theorem 2

Let $`W_g:P[[x,p,\mathrm{}]]\widehat{P}[[\widehat{x},\widehat{p},\mathrm{}]]`$ be the vector space isomorphism defined in Theorem 1.

Then for any $`A,BP[[x,p,\mathrm{}]]`$

$$W_g\left(A\right)W_g\left(B\right)=W_g\left(A_gB\right)$$
(4)
where

$$A_gB=\widehat{\alpha }^1\left[\left(\widehat{\alpha }A\right)\left(\widehat{\alpha }B\right)\right]$$

$$\widehat{\alpha }:=\alpha \left(\mathrm{}\frac{^2}{xp}\right)=f\left(\mathrm{}\frac{^2}{xp}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{i}{2}\left(\mathrm{}\frac{^2}{xp}\right)\right\}$$
(5)
and “$``$” stands for the usual Moyal product

$$AB=A\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}\stackrel{}{𝒫}\right\}B$$
(6)
$$A\stackrel{}{𝒫}B:=\{A,B\}_𝒫=\frac{A}{x}\frac{B}{p}\frac{A}{p}\frac{B}{x}$$

$`\mathrm{}`$

It can be also shown that $`W_g\left(A\right)`$ is a symmetric operator for every real $`AP[[x,p,\mathrm{}]]`$ if and only if the formal series $`\alpha =\alpha \left(y\right)=f\left(y\right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{i}{2}y\right\}`$ is real.

In terms of $`\alpha `$ we have

$$g(m,n,s)=\left(\frac{i}{2}\right)^s\frac{m!n!}{\left(ms\right)!\left(ns\right)!}\underset{k=0}{\overset{s}{}}\frac{\left(2i\right)^k}{\left(sk\right)!}\alpha _k$$
(7)
where $`\alpha _k`$ are defined by

$$\alpha \left(y\right)=\underset{k=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\alpha _ky^k,\alpha _0=1$$
(8)
Now we introduce the well known in quantum mechanics operators, $`\widehat{a}`$ (“the destruction operator”) and its hermitian conjugate $`\widehat{a}^{}`$ (“the creation operator”) such that

$$\widehat{x}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\widehat{a}^{}+\widehat{a}\right)\widehat{p}=i\mathrm{}\left(\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}\right)$$
(9)
$$[\widehat{a},\widehat{a}^{}]=1$$

It is an easy matter to show that

$$\widehat{x}=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{2}\left(\widehat{a}^{}\right)^2\right\}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{4}\widehat{a}^2\right\}\widehat{a}^{}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{4}\widehat{a}^2\right\}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{2}\left(\widehat{a}^{}\right)^2\right\}$$
(10)
$$\widehat{p}=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{2}\left(\widehat{a}^{}\right)^2\right\}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{4}\widehat{a}^2\right\}\left(i\mathrm{}\widehat{a}\right)\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{4}\widehat{a}^2\right\}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{2}\left(\widehat{a}^{}\right)^2\right\}$$

Therefore one can define an algebra isomorphism

$$L:=\widehat{P}[[\widehat{x},\widehat{p},\mathrm{}]]\widehat{P}[[\widehat{a}^{},i\mathrm{}\widehat{a},\mathrm{}]]$$

by

$$L\left(\widehat{x}\right)=\widehat{a}^{}\mathrm{and}L\left(\widehat{p}\right)=i\mathrm{}\widehat{a}.$$
(11)
Consequently, by Theorems 1 and 2 we obtain the algebra isomorphism

$$LW_g:P[[x,p,\mathrm{}]]\widehat{P}[[\widehat{a}^{},i\mathrm{}\widehat{a},\mathrm{}]]$$

$$LW_g\left(p^mx^n\right)=\underset{s=0}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(m,n)}{}}\frac{\left(\mathrm{}\right)^sm!n!}{s!\left(ms\right)!\left(ns\right)!}\frac{d^sf\left(y\right)}{dy^s}|_{y=0}\left(i\mathrm{}\widehat{a}\right)^{ms}\left(\widehat{a}^{}\right)^{ns}$$

$$\left(LW_g\left(A\right)\right)\left(LW_g\left(B\right)\right)=LW_g\left(A_gB\right),A,BP[[x,p,\mathrm{}]].$$
(12)
Now, employing the standard matrix representation of $`\widehat{a}`$ and $`\widehat{a}^{}`$

$$\widehat{a}a=\left(\begin{array}{ccccc}0& 1& 0& 0& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& \sqrt{2}& 0& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& 0& \sqrt{3}& \mathrm{}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \end{array}\right)$$

$$\widehat{a}^{}a^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}\\ 1& 0& 0& \mathrm{}\\ 0& \sqrt{2}& 0& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& \sqrt{3}& 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\end{array}\right)$$
(13)
and substituting the matrices $`a`$ and $`a^{}`$ instead of $`\widehat{a}`$ and $`\widehat{a}^{},`$ respectively, into (12) one finds the algebra isomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{W_g}`$ between the generalized Moyal algebra $`(P[[x,p,\mathrm{}]],_g)`$ and the matrix algebra $`P[[a^{},i\mathrm{}a,\mathrm{}]].`$

Denote $`F^{(m,n)}:=\left(i\mathrm{}a\right)^m\left(a^{}\right)^n.`$ Simple calculations lead to the following non vanishing elements of the matrices $`F^{(m,n)}\left(m+n>0\right):`$

$$\left(F^{(m,0)}\right)_{j,j+m}=\left(i\mathrm{}\right)^m\sqrt{j\left(j+1\right)\mathrm{}\left(j+m1\right)},$$

$$\left(F^{(0,n)}\right)_{j+n,j}=\sqrt{j\left(j+1\right)\mathrm{}\left(j+n1\right)},$$

$$\left(F^{(m,n)}\right)_{j,j+mn}=\left(i\mathrm{}\right)^m\left(j+mn\right)\mathrm{}\left(j+m1\right)\sqrt{j\left(j+1\right)\mathrm{}\left(j+mn1\right)},$$

$$\mathrm{for}m>n>0;$$

$$\left(F^{(m,m)}\right)_{j,j}=\left(i\mathrm{}\right)^mj\left(j+1\right)\mathrm{}\left(j+m1\right),$$

$$\left(F^{(m,n)}\right)_{j+nm,j}=\left(i\mathrm{}\right)^m\left(j+nm\right)\mathrm{}\left(j+n1\right)\sqrt{j\left(j+1\right)\mathrm{}\left(j+nm1\right)},$$

$$\mathrm{for}n>m>0.$$
(14)
Finally, we have

$$\stackrel{~}{W_g}\left(p^mx^n\right)=\underset{s=0}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(m,n)}{}}\frac{\left(\mathrm{}\right)^sm!n!}{s!\left(ms\right)!\left(ns\right)!}\frac{d^sf\left(y\right)}{dy^s}|_{y=0}F^{(ms,ns)}$$
(15)
This formula corresponds to Merkulov’s result but in slightly another representation and in our case we deal with generalized Moyal products $`_g.`$

Examples

(1) The Moyal $``$-algebra

It is well known that this algebra is induced by the Weyl ordering of operators . In this case the operator $`\widehat{\alpha }=1`$. Hence by (5)

$$f(y)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{i}{2}y\right\}\frac{d^sf(y)}{dy^s}|_{y=0}=\left(\frac{i}{2}\right)^s$$

and we get now (the index “g” is omitted)

$$\stackrel{~}{W}\left(p^mx^n\right)=\underset{s=0}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(m,n)}{}}\frac{\left(i\mathrm{}\right)^sm!n!}{2^ss!\left(ms\right)!\left(ns\right)!}F^{(ms,ns)}$$
(16)
(compare with Merkulov’s result)

(2) The $`_{(st)}`$-algebra

This algebra follows from the standard ordering

$$p^mx^n\widehat{x}^n\widehat{p}^m$$

Here $`\alpha (y)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{i}{2}y\right\}.`$ Hence

$$f(y)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{iy\right\}\frac{d^sf(y)}{dy^s}|_{y=0}=\left(i\right)^s$$

Consequently

$$\stackrel{~}{W}_{st}\left(p^mx^n\right)=\underset{s=0}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(m,n)}{}}\frac{\left(i\mathrm{}\right)^sm!n!}{s!\left(ms\right)!\left(ns\right)!}F^{(ms,ns)}$$
(17)
(3) The $`_{(ast)}`$-algebra

This is the algebra which follows from the anti-standard ordering

$$p^mx^n\widehat{p}^m\widehat{x}^n$$

Now $`\alpha (y)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{i}{2}y\right\}.`$ Hence $`f(y)=1`$ and it remains only one term with $`s=0`$ in (15).

Hence

$$\stackrel{~}{W}_{ast}\left(p^mx^n\right)=F^{(m,n)}$$
(18)
(Compare with Merkulov’s paper ).

(4) The $`_{(sym)}`$-algebra

Here we deal with the algebra generated by the symmetric ordering. So one has $`\alpha (y)=\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{y}{2}\right).`$ Therefore,

$$f(y)=\frac{1}{2}\left(1+\mathrm{exp}\left\{iy\right\}\right)\frac{d^sf(y)}{dy^s}|_{y=0}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\delta _{s,0}+\left(i\right)^s\right).$$

Consequently:

$$\stackrel{~}{W}_{sym}\left(p^mx^n\right)=F^{(m,n)}+\underset{s=1}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(m,n)}{}}\frac{\left(i\mathrm{}\right)^sm!n!}{2(s!)\left(ms\right)!\left(ns\right)!}F^{(ms,ns)}$$
(19)
Finally we consider

(5) The $`_{BJ}`$-algebra

This algebra follows from the Born-Jordan ordering.

Now $`\alpha (y)=\frac{\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{y}{2}\right)}{\left(\frac{y}{2}\right)}.`$ Therefore

$$f(y)=\frac{1}{iy}\left(1\mathrm{exp}\left\{iy\right\}\right)\frac{d^sf(y)}{dy^s}|_{y=0}=\frac{\left(i\right)^s}{s+1}$$

Hence

$$\stackrel{~}{W}_{BJ}\left(p^mx^n\right)=\underset{s=0}{\overset{\mathrm{min}(m,n)}{}}\frac{\left(i\mathrm{}\right)^sm!n!}{(s+1)!\left(ms\right)!\left(ns\right)!}F^{(ms,ns)}.$$

Acknowledgments

We are indebted to Hugo García-Compeán for pointing out Merkulov’s paper. This paper is partially supported by CONACYT and CINVESTAV (México) and by KBN (Poland). M. Przanowski thanks the staff of Departamento de Física at CINVESTAV, (México, D.F.) for warm hospitality.