text:
# 𝐶𝑃 Violation for Leptons at Higher Energy Scales

## Abstract

The phase convention independent measure of $`CP`$ violation for three generations of leptons is evaluated at different energy scales. Unlike in the quark sector, this quantity does not vary much between the weak and the grand unification scales. The behavior of the measure of $`CP`$ violation in the Standard Model is found to be different from that in the extensions of the Standard Model.

with the discovery of neutrino mixing, which indicates nonzero neutrino masses , there recently has been a lot of interest in neutrino physics, including measuring possible $`CP`$ violation in the leptonic sector of the three-generation Standard Model . $`CP`$ nonconservation in the leptonic sector has important implication in leptogenesis in the early universe, as it can feed into a baryon asymmetry through the sphaleron mechanism . One of the necessary conditions to have baryogenesis or leptogenesis is $`CP`$ violation . It is thus natural to discuss $`CP`$ nonconservation in the leptonic sector at higher energy scales.

In analogy with the quark sector, the Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (MNS) matrix describes the mixing among the flavor eigenstates $`\nu _\alpha `$ and mass eigenstates $`\nu _i`$ of neutrinos with $`\alpha =e,\mu ,\tau `$ and $`i=1,2,3`$

$$V_{MNS}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}c_{12}c_{13}& s_{12}c_{13}& s_{13}e^{i\delta }\\ c_{23}s_{12}c_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{12}c_{23}s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{13}s_{23}\\ s_{12}s_{23}c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{12}s_{23}c_{23}s_{12}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{23}c_{13}\end{array}\right),$$
(1)
where $`c_{ij}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij}`$, $`s_{ij}\mathrm{sin}\theta _{ij}`$ ($`0\theta _{ij}\pi /2`$), and $`\delta `$ is a phase. Instead of referring to the above phase-dependent matrix, it has been proven that with three generations of fermions $`CP`$ is not conserved if and only if the single parametrization-independent quantity

$$\mathrm{det}C=\mathrm{det}[NN^{},EE^{}]$$
(2)
is nonvanishing , where $`N`$ and $`E`$ denote the $`3\times 3`$ Yukawa coupling matrices for the neutrinos and charged leptons, respectively***As pointed out in Ref. , the definition in Eq. (2) implies that the neutrinos are Dirac-type particles. If one has Majorana neutrinos, the definition should be $`\mathrm{det}C=\mathrm{det}[N^{}N,EE^{}]`$ which, however, does not affect later analyses.. In terms of $`V_{MNS}`$ matrix elements,

$$\mathrm{det}C=2(m_\tau ^2m_\mu ^2)(m_\mu ^2m_e^2)(m_e^2m_\tau ^2)(m_{\nu _\tau }^2m_{\nu _\mu }^2)(m_{\nu _\mu }^2m_{\nu _e}^2)(m_{\nu _e}^2m_{\nu _\tau }^2)J,$$
(3)
where $`m_{\nu _\tau \nu _\mu \nu _e}`$ and $`m_{\tau ,\mu ,e}`$ are eigenvalues of $`N`$ and $`E`$, respectively, and $`J=s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}c_{12}c_{23}c_{13}^2\mathrm{sin}\delta `$ is an invariant proposed by Jarlskog in the quark sector . The quantity $`\mathrm{det}C`$ vanishes if (i) any two leptons with the same charge have the same mass; (ii) any of the angles $`\theta _{ij}`$ has the value $`0`$ or $`\pi /2`$, or (iii) $`\delta =0`$ or $`\pi `$.These conditions are not independent of one another; see, for example, Ref. .

To study the scale dependence of $`\mathrm{det}C`$, it is natural to solve its renormalization group equation (RGE) given a set of initial values for the relevant quantities such as the Yukawa and gauge couplings at the weak scale. Unlike the situation in the quark sector where the analogous quantity drops by 4 to 5 orders of magnitude and may provide insufficient $`CP`$ violation for baryogenesis , we will show that this quantity for leptons does not change very much between the weak and grand unification theory (GUT) scales, which we take to be $`10^{16}`$ GeV. Since $`CP`$ violation is one of the ingredients for baryogenesis or leptogenesis , this may have an important consequence for the evolution of the early universe.

We will consider two methods for neutrinos to acquire mass: (1) the neutrinos have the Dirac masses generated through the the same mechanism as the other fermions; and (2) the neutrinos obtain Majorana masses through the seesaw mechanism . We will study the situation in the Standard Model (SM), the two Higgs doublet model (THDM) and the minimal supersymmetric model (MSSM).

As shown in Ref.  for quarks, $`\mathrm{det}C`$ obeys a rather simple equation under the renormalization group. In the leptonic sector, this equation can be derived from the renormalization group equations for $`N`$ and $`E`$. They can be written in the following form:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}t}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[G_N+T_N+c_{11}NN^{}+c_{12}EE^{}\right]N,`$ (5)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}E}{\mathrm{d}t}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left[G_E+T_E+c_{21}EE^{}+c_{22}NN^{}\right]E,`$ (6)
where $`t(1/16\pi ^2)\mathrm{ln}(\mu /M_Z)`$, and $`G_N`$, $`G_E`$, $`T_N`$, $`T_E`$ and $`c_{ij}`$ are listed in Table I with $`U`$ and $`D`$ being the $`3\times 3`$ up-type and down-type Yukawa coupling matrices, respectivelyThe trace part of radiative corrections comes from the fermion loops on the Higgs fields where quark contributions enter..

Using Eqs. (2) and ( $`CP`$ Violation for Leptons at Higher Energy Scales), one obtains

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}C}{\mathrm{d}t}=\{C,A\},$$
(7)
where $`A=(G_N+G_E)+(T_N+T_E)+(2c_{11}+c_{12})N^{}N+(2c_{21}+c_{22})E^{}E`$. Since

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{det}C}{\mathrm{d}t}}=2\mathrm{Tr}A,`$
we obtain a simple evolution equation

$$\frac{(\mathrm{det}C)_\mu }{(\mathrm{det}C)_{M_Z}}=\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^\tau (2\mathrm{Tr}A)dt\right].$$
(8)
Assuming a hierarchy structure in the Yukawa couplings, one can neglect contributions from $`D`$, $`N`$ and $`E`$ as unimportant because at the leading order of the perturbative correction the top quark loop in the Higgs field renormalization dominates. Some comments are in order:

* Assuming that all contributions to the Yukawa coupling evolution are due to a heavy top quark, we find that all lepton Yukawa couplings scale in the same way . Therefore, the ratio $`(\mathrm{\Delta }M^2)_\mu /(\mathrm{\Delta }M^2)_{M_Z}`$ is independent of the lepton masses, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }M^2(m_\tau ^2m_\mu ^2)(m_\mu ^2m_e^2)(m_e^2m_\tau ^2)(m_{\nu _\tau }^2m_{\nu _\mu }^2)(m_{\nu _\mu }^2m_{\nu _e}^2)(m_{\nu _e}^2m_{\nu _\tau }^2)`$.
* Most of the running of $`\mathrm{det}C`$ is due to the running of masses (instead of that of the Jarlskog invariant $`J`$), which is mainly a result of the dominant top quark Yukawa coupling. By comparing the running of $`\mathrm{det}C`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }M^2`$, we find that, as expected, $`J`$ does not change very much over the energy scale range considered.

When running $`\mathrm{det}C`$ in the three models considered, the vacuum expectation energy of the Higgs field is taken to be $`v=174`$ GeV in the SM and $`v=\sqrt{v_u^2+v_d^2}`$ with $`\mathrm{tan}\beta v_u/v_d=10`$ §§§The value of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ cannot be too large if the top quark effect is considered to be dominant. If $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ is very large, bottom quark contributions to the evolution should be taken into account too. in both the THDM and MSSM. With $`y_t`$ being the Yukawa coupling of the top quark, one has

$`\mathrm{Tr}A\{\begin{array}{c}3\left(\frac{54}{20}g_1^2+\frac{9}{2}g_2^2\right)+18y_t^2(\mathrm{SM}),\hfill \\ 3\left(\frac{54}{20}g_1^2+\frac{9}{2}g_2^2\right)+9y_t^2(\mathrm{THDM}),\hfill \\ 3\left(\frac{12}{5}g_1^2+6g_2^2\right)+9y_t^2(\mathrm{MSSM}).\hfill \end{array}`$ (12)
As one can see from Eqs. (12), the evolution of $`\mathrm{det}C`$ for leptons differs from that for quarks because it does not involve the QCD coupling, which significantly drags down the running quark masses.

The evolution of the ratio $`(\mathrm{det}C)_\mu /(\mathrm{det}C)_{M_Z}`$ as a function of the energy scale $`\mu `$ for Dirac neutrinos is shown in FIG. 1. It is seen that $`\mathrm{det}C`$ has a very distinct behavior in the SM that is different from that in the THDM and MSSM. It is the result of a stronger dependence on $`y_t`$ for $`\mathrm{Tr}A`$ in the SM in Eq. (12) and the evolution of $`y_t`$ itself. A convex curve for the SM follows from $`y_t`$ becoming smaller at larger scales, thus decreasing $`\mathrm{Tr}A`$. The minor difference between the THDM and MSSM is due to the differences between the coefficients of $`g_1`$ and $`g_2`$. Therefore, the dependence on $`y_t`$ is the dominant factor in determining the evolution of $`(\mathrm{det}C)_\mu /(\mathrm{det}C)_{M_Z}`$. Within the SM, $`\mathrm{det}C`$ becomes larger as the energy scale goes up; whereas in both the THDM and MSSM, $`\mathrm{det}C`$ evolves to a smaller value. At the GUT scale, $`\mathrm{det}C`$ in the SM is $`6`$ times bigger than in the THDM and $`12`$ times than in the MSSM. The curves for the scale dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }M^2`$ are almost identical to those for $`\mathrm{det}C`$. Numerically, $`(\mathrm{det}C,\mathrm{\Delta }M^2)`$ at the GUT scale is $`(2.42,2.42)`$, $`(0.40,0.39)`$, and $`(0.21,0.19)`$ in the SM, THDM and MSSM, respectively.

If a smaller value of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ is used, the ratio $`(\mathrm{det}C)_\mu /(\mathrm{det}C)_{M_Z}`$ in the THDM and MSSM will behave more like that in the SM. This is because in this case $`y_t`$ is larger at the electroweak scale compared to the case with a larger $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$. One should also note that in some circumstances the evolution of $`y_t`$ blows up because within the dominant top Yukawa coupling assumption,

$`y_t(\tau )={\displaystyle \frac{y_t(0)E(\tau )}{1cy_t(0)_0^\tau E(t)dt}},`$ (13)
where $`E(\tau )=\mathrm{exp}\left[_0^\tau a_ig_i^2dt\right]`$ and $`c>0`$. The numerical values of $`a_i`$ with $`i=1,2,3`$ and $`c`$ depend upon the model. Eq. (13) tells us that either one has to include other fermion contributions or that higher order perturbative corrections  should be considered when the denominator gets close to zero.

The other interesting case occurs when the neutrino masses are acquired through the seesaw mechanism. In this case, we have the effective interaction $`N\overline{\psi }_{\nu _L}\psi _{\nu _L}HH`$. This will introduce two extra loop contributions on the Higgs legs compared to the previous case. Therefore, in the seesaw model both $`G_N`$ and $`T_N`$ are twice as big as for Dirac neutrinos.

We see in Fig. 2 that the quantity $`\mathrm{det}C`$ at the GUT scale is roughly twice as big as in Fig. 1. $`(\mathrm{det}C,\mathrm{\Delta }M^2)`$ at the GUT scale is $`(5.05,5.05)`$, $`(0.84,0.79)`$, and $`(0.49,0.42)`$ in the SM, THDM and MSSM, respectively.

Regardless of their different behavior, we see that for all models considered the evolution of $`\mathrm{det}C`$ is, unlike the quark sector , of order $`10^1`$ to $`10`$ in going from the electroweak scale to the GUT scale. The actual factors that enter a $`CP`$-violating quantity are not necessary only $`\mathrm{det}C`$, but may involve other mass scales relevant to the process. The $`CP`$-violating mechanism responsible for leptogenesis may have a different origin. As long as the physics the gives rise to lepton asymmetry effects at a higher energy scale is in the same multiplet of the Standard Model particles within the unified theory, as an effective theory, the quantity $`\mathrm{det}C`$ will still be a good indicator of how much $`CP`$ nonconservation would be at higher energy scales, though the exact relation depends upon models.

As delineated in Ref.  with a toy model containing two very heavy SU(2)-doublet scalars, if the neutrinos acquire small Dirac masses, the $`CP`$-violating processes due to the heavy scalars at the large energy scale can produce a neutrino asymmetry. Both the heavy scalars and the light Dirac neutrinos are out of equilibrium at the weak scale where sphalerons come into play to produce baryon and lepton number violation. Similarly, if the neutrino masses are generated through the seesaw mechanism with very heavy ($`10^{16}`$ GeV) singlet right-handed neutrinos, then both the out-of-equilibrium and $`CP`$ violation conditions can be satisfied around the GUT scale. One then can have lepton asymmetry leading to baryogenesis .

We conclude that hierarchical neutrino masses suggest that the possible leptonic $`CP`$ violation strength at the GUT scale differs from that at the electroweak scale by no more than one order of magnitude. Since this quantity is reparametrization invariant, models of grand unified theories should give consistent predictions for it. The fact that the measure of the leptonic $`CP`$ nonconservation does not have a significant decrease at higher scales may help leptogenesis in the early Universe.

The author would like to thank F.J. Gilman, I.Z. Rothstein, and L. Wolfenstein for useful discussions and A.K. Leibovich for comments. This work is supported by the Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG02-91ER40682.


format: text

text:
# Experimental Test of Complementarity by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Techniques

## Abstract

We have tested complementarity for the ensemble-averaged spin states of nuclei 13C in the molecule of 13CHCl3 by the use of the spin states of another nuclei 1H as the path marker. It turns out that the wave-particle duality holds when one merely measures the probability density of quantum states, and that the wave- and particle-like behavior is simultaneously observed with the help of measuring populations and coherences in a single nuclear magnetic resonance(NMR) experiment. Effects of path-marking schemes and causes of the appearance and disappearance of the wave behavior are analyzed.

Whether the wave-like and particle-like behavior, the fundamental attributes of quantum mechanical entities, can display or be observed simultaneously in a single experiment has been argued since the foundation of quantum mechanics in 1920’s. Bohr claimed the answer to be negative and expressed it as complementarity, one of the most basic principles of quantum mechanics. Bohr complementarity is usually illustrated by the famous two-slit experiment, in which a quantum object reaches a final state along two different paths simultaneously. The probability density or population of the final state displays interference when two paths are indistinguishable. Any attempt or practice to gain ’which-path’ information unavoidably destroys the interference pattern. As the different path and the interference pattern are commonly attributed to a particle and a wave correspondingly, the results stated above are thus superficially referred to unobservableness of the particle- and wave-like behavior under the same experimental condition, in short, wave-particle duality of matter.

Complementarity was justified by analyzing the physical principles of early ’thought’ experiments like Einstein’s recoiling slit or Feynman’s light microscope and recent experimental results with two trapped ions, an atom interferometer and a pair of entangled photons inspired by the proposal of Scully $`etal`$. The mechanisms or origins that enforce complementarity, however, vary from one experimental situation to another\[3,5,7-11\]. In the ’thought’ experiments with classical which-path markers, the act of labelling or measuring the paths invariably introduces a random momentum transfer or uncontrolled phase shift, thus washing out the interference fringes, which can be explained by Heisenberg uncertainty relation. While marking the path quantum-mechanically in the recent experiments does not lead to noticeable phase shift, disappearance of interference when measuring the probability density of the final state originates in quantum correlations of the which-path detector and observed quantum state, and the uncertainty principle plays no role.

In all previous variants of the two-slit experiment the wave behavior was observed by measuring the population in the final state, and the quantum state of the center-of-mass motion for micro-particles was investigated. Is complementarity applicable to the internal states for a microscopic object or even a bulk ensemble? What are the effects of different path-marking schemes and the causes of appearance and disappearance of the wave behavior? Is there another way to detect the wave behavior of the quantum states except the population measurement? Most significantly, is observation of the wave and particle behavior under the same experimental condition absolutely prohibited indeed? These questions motivated us to perform this study by using an ensemble of nuclear spins as sample with NMR techniques.

Our experiment scheme is illustrated in Fig.1. An ensemble of molecules with two spin-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ nuclei is firstly prepared in the initial state $`|\psi _i=|0_b|0_a`$ $`|00`$, where $`b`$ is the observed nuclei, $`a`$ is the labelling ones, and $`|0`$ and $`|1`$ represent the states with spin-up and spin-down respectively. In Fig.1a, an operation $`R_i^b(\theta )=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha (\theta )& \beta (\theta )\\ \beta (\theta )& \alpha (\theta )\end{array}\right)`$ on nuclei $`b`$ transforms the initial state $`|00`$ into an intermediate state $`|\psi _{1m}>=\left[\alpha (\theta )|0_b+\beta (\theta )|1_b\right]`$ $`|0_a`$(assuming $`|\alpha (\theta )|^2+|\beta (\theta )|^2=1`$ ), which is then transferred to the final state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_{1f}>=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}[(\alpha (\theta )+\beta (\theta )e^{i\varphi })|0>_b+(\beta (\theta )\alpha (\theta )e^{i\varphi })|1>_b]|0>_a`$ by the operation $`U^b(\varphi )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& e^{i\varphi }\\ e^{i\varphi }& 1\end{array}\right)`$ on $`b`$. As the labelling nucleus $`a`$ remains in the state $`|0>_a`$ all the time as a spectator, two paths along which the nuclei $`b`$ reaches the final state $`|0_b(|1_b)`$ through the intermediate state $`|0_b`$ and $`|1_b`$ are indistinguishable. The probability density of finding b in the final state $`|0_b(|1_b)`$ is measured to be $`\frac{1}{2}\left[1+2\alpha (\theta )\beta (\theta )\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right](\frac{1}{2}\left[12\alpha (\theta )\beta (\theta )\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right])`$. Repeating experiment by changing $`\varphi `$ will produce Ramsey fringes denoted by the term $`\pm \alpha (\theta )\beta (\theta )\mathrm{cos}\varphi `$ , showing wave behavior obviously. While in Fig.1b, the operations $`R_2^{ba}(\theta )=CN_{ba}R_1^b(\theta )`$ and $`U^b(\varphi )`$ are successively executed, with $`CN_{ba}`$ being the controlled-NOT gate in quantum computing, $`b`$ and $`a`$ , the control and target qubits respectively. The intermediate states $`|\psi _{2m}=\alpha (\theta )|00+\beta (\theta )|11`$ and the final state $`|\psi _{2f}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\{|0_b\left[\alpha (\theta )|0_a+\beta (\theta )e^{i\varphi }|1_a\right]+|1_b\left[\alpha (\theta )e^{i\varphi }|0_a+\beta (\theta )|1_a\right]\}`$ are thus obtained. Since the states $`|0_b`$ and $`|1_b`$ are definitely marked by $`|0_a`$ and $`|1_a`$ respectively in the preparation of the intermediate state, i.e., $`|0_b|0_a`$ and $`|1_b|1_a`$ , and those markers remain unchanged in the later transformation $`U^b(\varphi )`$, two paths along which spin $`b`$ involves to the final state $`|0_b(|1_b)`$ from the intermediate states $`|0_b`$ and $`|1_b`$ simultaneously can be precisely identified by the states of $`a`$. The probability densities of finding spin $`b`$ in the final state $`|0_b`$ from the intermediate states $`|0_b`$ and $`|1_b`$ are $`\frac{1}{2}\left|\alpha (\theta )\right|^2`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}\left|\beta (\theta )\right|^2`$ respectively ( the same for the final state $`|1_b`$ ). The particle behavior is thus clearly revealed. However, the probability density of finding $`b`$ in the final state $`|0_b`$ or $`|1_b`$ is to be 1/2, a constant independent on $`\varphi `$ , due to the orthogonality of the quantum correlation states, so Ramsey fringes disappear. If one can detect the coherence, $`\alpha (\theta )\beta (\theta )\mathrm{sin}\varphi `$ , between the final states $`|00`$and $`|01`$( similar for $`|10`$ and $`|11`$) while measuring the probability density of those states, then the wave behavior reappears via the dependence of the coherence on $`\varphi `$ , and the particle behavior is shown by the path marker and measurement of the population from different paths. Therefore, simultaneous observation of the wave and particle behavior in a single experiment is accomplished.

The sample we used is the molecule of carbon-13 labelled chloroform 13CHCl3, nuclei 13C and 1H of which were chosen as observed nuclei $`b`$ and labelling ones $`a`$ respectively. Experiments were carried out on a Bruker ARX 500 spectrometer with conventional liquid NMR technique. The resonance frequencies are about 125 MHz for 13C and 500 MHz for 1H, and the scalar coupling constant $`J_{ab}`$ is near 215 Hz. Four lines, two for 13C and two for 1H spectra, can be well resolved. By applying two simultaneous line-selective pulses with appropriate frequencies and rotation angles as well as a magnetic field gradient pulse consecutively on the ensemble of nuclei 13C and 1H in thermal equilibrium, we prepared the quantum ensemble in an effective pure state expressed by the density matrix $`\rho _{00}^i=AE+B`$ $`|0000|`$, where E is a $`4\times 4`$ unit matrix, A and B are constants with $`AB`$. As $`\rho _{00}^i`$ has the same quantum-mechanical properties and NMR experimental results as the pure state $`|00`$, the conclusions extracted from experiments on $`\rho _{00}^i`$ can be applied to characterize $`|00`$. Operation $`R_1^b(\theta )`$ was implemented by a pulse $`(\theta )_y^b`$, a pulse applied on 13C and rotating a angle $`\theta `$ along the negative y-axis. The amplitudes of the wave function of the intermediate state thus obtained are $`\alpha (\theta )=\mathrm{cos}(\theta /2)`$ and $`\beta (\theta )=\mathrm{sin}(\theta /2)`$. Two values of $`\theta `$ were set at 90 and 53.24 in different runs, corresponding to the ratio $`\left|\alpha (\theta )\right|^2/\left|\beta (\theta )\right|^2`$ of populations in two intermediate states to be 1 and 4. The controlled-NOT gate $`CN_{ba}`$ was achieved by a pulse sequence $`(\pi /2)_y^a(1/2J_{ab})(\pi /2)_y^{a,b}(\pi /2)_x^{a,b}(\pi /2)_y^b`$ , where $`1/2J_{ab}`$ is the time interval of free evolution period. Transformation $`U^b(\varphi )`$ could be denoted by $`e^{iI_x^b\theta _1}e^{iI_y^b\theta _2}e^{iI_x^b\theta _1}`$ with $`I_{x,y}^b`$ being the spin operators of the nuclei 13C and $`\theta _1=\mathrm{tan}^1(\mathrm{sin}\varphi )`$ , $`\theta _2=2\mathrm{sin}^1(\mathrm{cos}\varphi /\sqrt{2})`$ , so it was performed by a pulse sequence $`(\theta _1)_x^b(\theta _2)_y^b(\theta _1)_x^b`$ . Various values of $`\varphi `$ were obtained by assuming appropriate $`\theta _1`$ and $`\theta _2`$. So the wave and particle behavior in given situation could be examined by inspecting the dependence of populations and coherences on $`\varphi `$ . Reading-out pulses $`(\pi /2)_y^a`$ and $`(\pi /2)_y^b`$ were finally applied and spectra for 1H and 13C were recorded. As the population difference and coherence of relevant states were transferred to the measured transverse magnetization after applying read-out pulses and embodied in the real and imaginary parts of the line intensity of the recorded spectra respectively, the normalized population and coherence of the interested states were extracted in Figs.2-4 by data analyzing and fitting.

Variations of the normalized populations $`\rho _{00}^{f_1}`$ and $`\rho _{10}^{f_1}`$ of the states $`|00`$ and $`|10`$ versus $`\varphi `$ when two paths along which the spin ensemble of nuclei 13C involve from the intermediate states to the final states cannot be discerned by the invariable state $`|0_a`$ of the spectator nuclei 1H are shown in Fig.2. The range of $`\varphi `$ is assumed in $`(0,2\pi )`$ due to its $`2\pi `$ periodicity. Ramsey fringes can be clearly seen for two sets of data in the case of the ratio of the normalized populations in two intermediate states to be 1 and 4. The visibility of fringes decreases with the population ratio increased. These experimental results are in good agreement with the theoretical expectation. Experimental errors are mainly due to the imhomogeneity of the RF field and static magnetic field of the spectrometer, imperfect calibration of applied pulses (esp., the $`\theta _1`$ and $`\theta _2`$ setting in different runs), and signal decay during the experiment.

Variations of normalized populations versus $`\varphi `$ when two paths from the intermediate to final states are distinguishable by the states of the labelling nuclei 1H are depicted in Fig.3. In this case the populations, $`\rho _0^{f_2}`$ and $`\rho _1^{f_2}`$, of the observed nuclei 13C in the final states $`|0_b`$ and $`|1_b`$ respectively don’t vary with $`\varphi `$ regularly, i.e., the wave behavior does not manifest itself in this way. Experimental data are also fairly consistent with the theory.

It can be concluded from Figs.2 and 3 that the conventional description of Bohr complementarity still holds for the quantum entity characterized by the internal states of a spin ensemble. The wave behavior displays in the measured populations when both paths are indistinguishable, and disappears in population measurements if one attempts to get which-path information. Nevertheless, we have measured the coherences, $`C_0`$ and $`C_1`$, between the relevant state pairs $`(|00,|01)`$ and $`(|10,|11)`$ respectively, besides the population measurements when both paths were labelled by the states of nuclei 1H. The measured coherences of the final states $`|0_b`$ and $`|1_b`$ (see Fig.4) also showed oscillatory property with $`\varphi `$, thus revealing the wave behavior in another way. Because the results given in Figs.3 and 4 were observed in the same time and under the same experimental situation, we then conclude that simultaneous observation of the wave and particle behavior of a quantum entity has been achieved in a single experiment.

Some remarks will be made as follows. In all previous two-slit experiments the wave behavior was solely observed through the population measurement. The results extracted from those experiments, including ours shown in Figs.2 and 3, confirmed that the oscillatory feature of populations excludes with the path distinguishability. Complementarity stated as ”simultaneous observation of the wave and particle behavior is prohibited” is therefore valid in and only in the sense that one merely observes the population in his experiment.

As well known, observation of the wave behavior in classical and quantum physics requires that the relative phase between relevant wave components keep constant. The wave behavior can be manifested through the existence of coherence and population oscillation. As labelling different evolution paths by means of appropriate quantum states does not bring about any random phase shift and makes the phase difference between the wave function of the states involved unchanged, the wave character maintains after path-labelling. Although the populations in the final states remain invariable with $`\varphi `$, the oscillating coherence between states originated from different intermediate states and marked by labelling nuclei 1H can surely be used to show the wave character. Therefore, realization of simultaneous observation of the wave and particle behavior of any quantum object with the help of quantum path marking and measuring populations and coherence is physically reasonable and universal in principle. This scheme is readily feasible for the internal state of quantum systems using the techniques existing nowadays or available in the near future, e.g., for the internal state of atoms and molecules by optical spectroscopy. If some means of observing the coherence or other observable characterizing the wave behavior of the center-of-mass states of any quantum entity could be found out and executed in practice, simultaneous observation of the wave and particle behavior is then applicable to all quantum systems.

Besides the wave-particle duality, complementarity sometimes has endowed with more general concept. Two observable are referred to be complementarity if precise knowledge of one of them implies that all possible outcomes of measuring the other one are equally possible. All canonical conjugate pairs (e.g., position and momentum) and two incommutable observable (e.g., longitudinal and transverse polarizations) are such examples. Complementarity in this general sense is consistent with current framework of quantum mechanics but beyond the scope of the present paper.

In conclusion, we have experimentally tested Bohr complementarity for the quantum entity characterized by the internal states of a nuclear spin ensemble in the bulk matter using concepts of the controlled-NOT gate and entangled states in quantum computing as well as techniques in NMR spectroscopy. Simultaneous observation of the wave and particle-like behavior of the quantum object was realized for the first time. The reasons why both behaviors could not be observed in the same time were revealed. The condition and method of observing the both in a single experiment were proposed. It was indicated that the method proposed in the present paper could be applied to the internal and center-of-mass states of a single micro-particle and macroscopic ensemble and would be nearly feasible for the internal state of some other quantum objects.

The authors thank Xi’an Mao, Maili Liu, Shibiao Zheng, Tao Zhang and Hansheng Yuan for discussions and technical assistance. The work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China.

Captions of the figures

Fig.1 Schematic of a ’two-slit’ experiment with internal states of a quantum entity. The entity involves from the initial state $`|00`$ via the intermediate to final one by transformations of (a) $`R_1^b(\theta )`$ and $`U^b(\varphi )`$ ; (b) $`R_2^{ab}(\theta )`$ and $`U^b(\varphi )`$ (see text).

Fig.2 Normalized population vs. the relative phase $`\varphi `$ when evolution paths are indistinguishable. Experimental data points $``$ and $``$ denote the populations $`\rho _{00}^{f_1}`$ in the state $`|00`$, $``$ and $`+`$ denote $`\rho _{10}^{f_1}`$ in the state $`|10`$. Theoretical curves expressed by $`\frac{1}{2}(1\pm \mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi )`$ are depicted with the solid lines. (a) $`\theta =90^{}`$ and (b) $`\theta =53.24^{}`$ .

Fig.3 Normalized populations vs. the relative phase $`\varphi `$ when two paths are distinguishable. Data points $``$, $``$, $``$ and $`+`$ denote $`\rho _{00}^{f_2}`$, $`\rho _{01}^{f_2}`$, $`\rho _{10}^{f_2}`$ and $`\rho _{11}^{f_2}`$, the notations of square and star denote $`\rho _0^{f_2}`$ and $`\rho _1^{f_2}`$ respectively. Theoretical curves expressed by $`\rho _{00}^{f_2}=\rho _{10}^{f_2}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{cos}^2\frac{\theta }{2}`$, $`\rho _{01}^{f_2}=\rho _{11}^{f_2}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{sin}^2\frac{\theta }{2}`$ and $`\rho _0^{f_2}=\rho _{00}^{f_2}+\rho _{01}^{f_2}=\rho _1^{f_2}=\rho _{10}^{f_2}+\rho _{11}^{f_2}=\frac{1}{2}`$ are depicted with the solid lines. (a) and (b) $`\theta =90^o`$, (c) and (d) $`\theta =53.24^o`$.

Fig.4 Coherence vs. $`\varphi `$ when two paths are distinguishable. Data points $``$ and $``$ denote the coherence between the states $`|00>`$ and $`|01>`$, $``$ and $`+`$, between the states $`|10>`$ and $`|11>`$. Theoretical curves expressed by $`\pm \frac{1}{2}\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi `$ are depicted with the solid lines. (a) $`\theta =90^o`$, (b) $`\theta =53.24^o`$.


text:
# Initial Condition for QGP Evolution from NEXUS

## 1 Introduction

Unfortunately there does not exist a single formalism able to account for a complete nucleus-nucleus collision. Rather we have to – at least for the moment – divide the reaction into different stages

(see fig. 1) and try to understand them as well as possible. There is, first of all, the primary interaction when the two nuclei pass through each other. Since at very high energies the longitudinal size is, due to the gamma factor, almost zero (of the order 0.1 fm at RHIC), all the nucleons of the projectile interact with all the nucleons of the target instantaneously. In such a primary interaction many partons are created, which interact (in the pre-equilibrium stage) before reaching an equilibrium, referred to as quark-gluon plasma. The system then expands, passing via phase transition (or sudden crossover) into the hadron gas stage. The density decreases further till the collision rate is no longer large enough to maintain chemical equilibrium, but there are still hadronic interactions till finally the particles “freeze out”, i.e. they continue their way without further interactions.

The equilibrium stage is often treated macroscopically, by solving hydrodynamical equations. Here, usually very simplified initial conditions are used, like flat distributions in space-time rapidity. This could be done much better by calculating the initial conditions for the hydrodynamical evolution on the basis of a realistic model for the primary interactions.

We recently presented a completely new approach  for hadronic interactions and the initial stage of nuclear collisions, referred to as neXus, where we provide a rigorous treatment of the multiple scattering aspect. Questions of energy conservation are clearly determined by the rules of field theory, both for cross section and particle production calculations, which is not the case in all of the corresponding models used so far to calculate the initial stage. In addition, we introduced (currently only to leading order) so-called enhanced diagrams, responsible for screening and diffraction. It was not the idea to create another model with some more features, but to provide a model which is theoretically consistent, and therefore much more realistic than all the approaches used before. We are therefore using neXus in order to determine macroscopic quantities after the first stage, when the two nuclei have traversed each other, such that these quantities may be used as initial conditions for a macroscopic treatment of the later stages of the collision.

Calculating for example energy densities from a model like neXus or any other model for primary interactions, is not trivial. We know the momenta of all the partons and we may calculate the energy density of the partonic system on a given hyper-surface (constant $`\tau `$), as shown in fig. 2.

Here only the “resolvable” (or hard) partons are considered (dots on the hyperbola representing a hyper-surface). But this is certainly not the correct answer for the quantity of interest, since there are many “unresolved” (or soft) partons around, which contribute to the energy density in a significant fashion. The problem can be solved by using the string model, which is nothing but an attempt to treat the “soft partons” implicitly . The soft partons represent the string between “kinks”, the latter ones representing the hard partons, see fig. 3.

Thus we are able to calculate energy densities in nucleus-nucleus collisions taking properly into account soft and hard (resolvable and unresolvable) contributions.

The outline of this paper is as follows: we first review briefly the basic elements of the neXus model, before we discuss in somewhat more detail the role of strings in this approach and the dynamics of strings. We then proceed to calculate energy densities for a given proper time, taking into account the hard and the soft partons.

## 2 The NEXUS Model

The most sophisticated approach to high energy hadronic interactions is the so-called Gribov-Regge theory . This is an effective field theory, which allows multiple interactions to happen “in parallel”, with phenomenological objects called “Pomerons” representing elementary interactions . Using the general rules of field theory, one may express cross sections in terms of a couple of parameters characterizing the Pomeron. Interference terms are crucial, as they assure the unitarity of the theory.

A big disadvantage is the fact that cross sections and particle production are not calculated consistently: the fact that energy needs to be shared between many Pomerons in case of multiple scattering is well taken into account when considering particle production (in particular in Monte Carlo applications), but not for cross sections .

Another problem is the fact that at high energies, one also needs a consistent approach to include both soft and hard processes. The latter ones are usually treated in the framework of the parton model, which only allows the calculation of inclusive cross sections.

We recently presented a completely new approach  for hadronic interactions and the initial stage of nuclear collisions, which is able to solve several of the above-mentioned problems. We provide a rigorous treatment of the multiple scattering aspect, such that questions of energy conservation are clearly determined by the rules of field theory, both for cross section and particle production calculations. In both (!) cases, energy is properly shared between the different interactions happening in parallel. This is the most important new aspect of our approach, which we consider a first necessary step to construct a consistent model for high energy nuclear scattering.

We first consider $`pp`$ scattering. An elementary interaction is given as a sum of soft, semi-hard, and hard contributions: $`T_{22}=T_{\mathrm{soft}}+T_{\mathrm{semi}}+T_{\mathrm{hard}}`$, as discussed in detail in ref. . We have a hard contribution $`T_{\mathrm{hard}}`$, when the the first partons on both sides are valence quarks, a semi-hard contribution $`T_{\mathrm{semi}}`$, when at least on one side there is a sea quark (being emitted from a soft Pomeron), and finally we have a soft contribution, when there is no hard scattering at all (see fig. 4).

$`T_{\mathrm{hard}}`$ is calculated using the standard techniques of perturbative QCD, $`T_{\mathrm{soft}}`$ is parameterized, and $`T_{\mathrm{semi}}`$ is calculated as a convolution of $`T_{\mathrm{soft}}`$ and $`T_{\mathrm{hard}}`$. We have a smooth transition from soft to hard physics: at low energies the soft contribution dominates, at high energies the hard and semi-hard ones, at intermediate energies (that is where experiments are performed presently) all contributions are important.

Let us consider nucleus-nucleus ($`AB`$) scattering. The nucleus-nucleus scattering amplitude is defined by the sum of contributions of diagrams, corresponding to multiple elementary scattering processes between parton constituents of projectile and target nucleons. These elementary scatterings are the sum of soft, semi-hard, and hard contributions: $`T_{22}=T_{\mathrm{soft}}+T_{\mathrm{semi}}+T_{\mathrm{hard}}`$. A corresponding relation holds for the inelastic amplitude $`T_{2X}`$. We introduce “cut elementary diagrams” as being the sum over squared inelastic amplitudes, $`_X(T_{2X})`$$`(T_{2X})^{}`$, which are graphically represented by vertical dashed lines, whereas the elastic amplitudes are represented by unbroken lines:

$`=T_{22}`$,   $`=_X(T_{2X})`$$`(T_{2X})^{}`$.

This is very handy for treating the nuclear scattering model. We define the model via the elastic scattering amplitude $`T_{ABAB}`$ which is assumed to consist of purely parallel elementary interactions between partonic constituents, described by $`T_{22}`$. The amplitude is therefore a sum of many terms. Having defined elastic scattering, inelastic scattering and particle production is practically given, if one employs a quantum mechanically self-consistent picture. Let us now consider inelastic scattering: one has of course the same parallel structure, just some of the elementary interactions may be inelastic, some elastic. The inelastic amplitude being a sum over many terms – $`T_{ABX}=_iT_{ABX}^{(i)}`$ – has to be squared and summed over final states in order to get the inelastic cross section, which provides interference terms $`_X(T_{ABX}^{(i)})(T_{ABX}^{(j)})^{}`$. These can be conveniently expressed in terms of the cut and uncut elementary diagrams, as shown in fig. 5.

One has to be careful about energy conservation: all the partonic constituents (lines) leaving a nucleon (blob) have to share the momentum of the nucleon. So, in the explicit formula one has an integration over momentum fractions of the partons, taking care of momentum conservation. This formula is the master formula of the approach, allowing calculations of cross sections as well as particle production. In the latter case, the master formula provides probability distributions for the momenta taken by the Pomerons and the remnants. A very detailed description with many applications and comparisons with data can be found in .

So far we described only the basic version of the model. In reality we also consider triple Pomeron vertices to lowest order, as discussed in detail in ref. . We do not yet consider higher orders, nor do we consider the case where the two legs of the triple Pomeron are connected to different nuclei. All this is work in progress.

## 3 Hadronic Structure of Cut Pomerons

In order to develop our multiple scattering theory, we use a simple graphical representation of a cut Pomeron, namely a thick vertical dashed line connecting the external legs representing nucleon components,

as shown in fig. 6. This simple diagram hides somewhat the fact that there is a complicated structure hidden in this Pomeron, and the purpose of this section is to discuss in particular the internal structure of the Pomeron.

Let us start our discussion with the soft Pomeron. Based on Veneziano’s topological expansion one may consider a soft Pomeron as a “cylinder”, i.e. the sum of all possible QCD diagrams having a cylindrical topology, see fig. 7.

As discussed in detail in , the “nucleon components” mentioned earlier, representing the external legs of the diagram, are always quark-anti-quark pairs, indicated by a dashed line (anti-quark) and a full line (quark) in fig. 7. Important for the discussion of particle production are of course cut diagrams, therefore we show in fig. 7 a cut cylinder representing a cut Pomeron: the cut plane is shown as two vertical dotted lines. Let us consider the half-cylinder, for example, the one to the left of the cut, representing an inelastic amplitude.

We may unfold this object in order to have a planar representation, as shown in fig. 8. Here, the dotted vertical lines indicate the cuts of the previous figure, and it is there where the hadronic final state hadrons appear. Lacking a theoretical understanding of this hadronic structure, we simply apply a phenomenological procedure, essentially a parameterization. We require the method to be as simple as possible, with a minimum of necessary parameters. A solution coming close to these demands is the so-called string model: each cut line is identified with a classical relativistic string. A Lorentz invariant string breaking procedure provides the transformation into a hadronic final state, see fig. 9.

The phenomenological microscopic picture which stays behind this procedure was discussed in a number of reviews : the string end-point partons resulted from the interaction appear to be connected by a color field. With the partons flying apart, this color field is stretched into a tube, which finally breaks up giving rise to the production of hadrons and to the neutralization of the color field.

We now consider a semi-hard Pomeron of the “sea-sea” type, where we have a hard pQCD process in the middle and a soft evolution at the end, see fig. 10.

We generalize the picture introduced above for the soft Pomeron. Again, we assume a cylindrical structure. For the example of fig. 10, we have the picture shown in fig. 11: the shaded areas on the cylinder ends represent the soft Pomerons, whereas in the middle part we draw explicitly the gluon lines on the cylinder surface. We apply the same procedure as for the soft Pomeron: we cut the diagram and present a half-cylinder in a planar fashion, see fig. 11.

We observe one difference compared to the soft case: there are three partons (dots) on each cut line: apart from the quark and the anti-quark at the end, we have a gluon in the middle. We again apply the string picture, but here we identify a cut line with a so-called kinky string, where the internal gluons correspond to internal kinks. The underlying microscopic picture will be presented by three color-connected partons - the gluon connected by the color field to the quark and to the anti-quark. The string model provides then a “parameterization” of hadron production, see fig. 12.

The procedure described above can be easily generalized to the case of complicated parton ladders involving many gluons and quark-anti-quark pairs. One should note that the treatment of semi-hard Pomerons is just a straightforward generalization of the string model for soft Pomerons, or one might see it the other way round: the soft string model is a natural limiting case of the kinky string procedure for semi-hard Pomerons. In a similar way one may treat Pomerons of valence type.

The general picture should be clear from the above examples: in any case, no matter what type of Pomeron, unresolved soft partons play a very important role. In the string model, they represent the string pieces between the hard partons. In case of single Pomeron exchange in proton-proton scattering, particle production can be treated in a phenomenological fashion via the hadronization of two (in general kinky) strings. In nuclear collisions, the situation is more complicated, since we have many Pomerons and consequently many strings – closely packed – which interact with each other. Nevertheless, we can use the string picture to calculate energy densities, by considering the strings at an earlier stage, before they hadronize.

It should be noted finally that particle production from cut Pomerons is not the whole story. Cutting the complete diagram, one has as well to cut the projectile and target remnants, which may or not be excited. High mass excitations are as well considered as strings.

## 4 Dynamics of Strings

The string dynamics is derived from the Nambu-Goto Lagrangian, which has been constructed based on invariance arguments. The corresponding equation of motion for the string is a wave equation, with a solution

$$X(r,t)=X_0+\frac{1}{2}\left[_{rt}^{r+t}g\left(\xi \right)𝑑\xi \right],$$
(1)
for the four-vector $`X(r,t)`$, having already assumed that the initial spatial extension of the string is zero. The quantity $`X_0`$ represents the formation point of the string, which coincides with the position of the nucleon-nucleon interaction being at the origin of the string formation. The space-like variable $`r`$ represents the position along the string for given time $`t`$, whereas the function $`g`$ defines the initial velocity,

$$g(r)=\dot{X}(r,t)|_{t=0}.$$
(2)
We will consider here a special class of strings, namely those with a piecewise constant function $`g`$,

$$g(r)=v_k\mathrm{for}\frac{E_{k1}}{\kappa }r\frac{E_k}{\kappa },\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}kn$$
(3)
for some integer $`n`$. We use for the string tension $`\kappa =1`$ GeV/fm. The set $`\{E_k\}`$ is a partition of the interval $`[0,E]`$, with $`E`$ being the string energy,

$$0=E_0<E_1<\mathrm{}<E_{n1}<E_n=E,$$
(4)
and $`\{v_k\}`$ represents $`n`$ constant 4-vectors. Such strings are called kinky strings, with $`n`$ being the number of kinks, and the $`n`$ vectors $`v_k`$ being called kink velocities. The function $`g`$ must be symmetric and periodic, with the period $`2E/\kappa `$. This defines $`g`$ everywhere, and eq. (1) is the complete solution of the string equation, expressed in terms of the initial condition $`g`$. In the case of kinky strings the latter is expressed in terms of the kink velocities $`\{v_k\}`$ and the energy partition $`\{E_k\}`$.

What has all this to do with cut Pomerons? So far nothing, and to establish a link, we have to provide some mapping from the language of Pomerons and partons into the language of strings. We discussed earlier that a cut Pomeron may be identified with two sequences of partons of the type

$$qgg\mathrm{}g\overline{q},$$
(5)
representing all the partons on a cut line. We identify such a sequence with a kinky string, by requiring

$$\mathrm{parton}=\mathrm{kink},$$
(6)
which means we identify the partons of the above sequence with the kinks of a kinky string, such that the partition of the energy is given by the parton energies,

$$E_k=\mathrm{energy}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{parton}k$$
(7)
and the kink velocities are just the parton velocities,

$$v_k=\frac{\mathrm{momentum}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{parton}k}{E_k}.$$
(8)
We consider massless partons, so that the energy is equal to the absolute value of the parton momentum.

An example is shown on fig. 13, we have 6 partons – a quark and an anti-quark, with 4 gluons in between – symbolically displayed in the first sub-figure, with a total cms energy of 14 GeV. One sees that the perturbative gluons play an important role in the beginning of the movement, and later from 2 GeV on, the longitudinal character dominates. A string breaks typically after $`1\text{ GeV}/\kappa `$, with $`\kappa `$ being the string tension, which gives much importance to the perturbative gluons.

## 5 Energy Densities from Strings

Based on the string formalism, we are now able to calculate energy densities. As discussed above, a string $`S`$ is a two-dimensional surface $`X(r,t)`$ in Minkowski space, whose intersection with the surface

$$t^2z^2=\tau ^2$$
(9)
defines uniquely a curve $`S_\tau `$, which we refer to as “String at given proper time $`\tau `$”. Our aim is to calculate the energy density and the velocity flow at a given proper time $`\tau `$, in other words, along the curve $`S_\tau `$.

Let us consider a small string piece $`\mathrm{\Delta }S_\tau `$, in other words a segment of the string curve $`S_\tau `$ between two neighboring points $`A`$ and $`B`$, being sufficiently close so that the string piece may be considered as point-like. According to relativistic string theory, the four-momentum of this string piece in the lab system is given as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P_{\mathrm{lab}}=_A^B\left\{\frac{X(r,t)}{t}dr+\frac{X(r,t)}{r}dt\right\}.$$
(10)
The partial derivatives can be expressed in terms of the initial velocity $`g`$ as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{X(r,t)}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[g(r+t)+g(rt)\right]`$ (11)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{X(r,t)}{r}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left[g(r+t)g(rt)\right].`$ (12)
This velocity function is known, in fact it is defined via the mapping of a system of $`n`$ partons into string language:

$$g(r)=v_k\mathrm{for}\frac{E_{k1}}{\kappa }r\frac{E_k}{\kappa },\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1}kn,$$
(13)
where $`v_k`$ is the four-velocity of the $`k^{\mathrm{th}}`$ parton divided by $`\gamma `$, and the difference $`E_kE_{k1}`$ is its energy. So the four-momentum of a string segment can be easily expressed in terms of the original parton momenta.

We use hyperbolic coordinates,

$$q_0=\tau =\sqrt{t^2z^2},q_1=x,q_2=y,q_3=\eta =\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{1+z/t}{1z/t},$$
(14)
where $`z`$ is considered to be the coordinate along the beam axis, and $`t`$ is the time. The variables $`x`$ and $`y`$ are the transverse coordinates. For given $`\tau `$ and $`\eta `$, we define a frame $`F_\eta `$ via a Lorentz boost with boost rapidity $`\eta `$. The four-momentum of the above-mentioned string piece is given as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P^\mu =\mathrm{\Lambda }_\nu ^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }P_{\mathrm{lab}}^\nu ,$$
(15)
with the corresponding transformation tensor $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

We are now going to calculate the energy momentum tensor $`T^{\mu \nu }`$ for a string piece in the frame $`F_\eta `$. The general definition in kinetic theory is

$$T^{\mu \nu }(\stackrel{}{q})=\frac{d^3p}{E}p^\mu p^\nu f(\stackrel{}{q},\stackrel{}{p}),$$
(16)
where $`\stackrel{}{q}`$ is a position four-vector, and $`f`$ the phase space density (particles per phase space volume) for a given time. For our point-like string piece we have in principle

$$f(\stackrel{}{q},\stackrel{}{p})=\delta (\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }P})\delta (\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{Q}).$$
(17)
Knowing that a string with zero width is a mathematical idealization, we introduce a Gaussian-type smearing function $`W(q)`$, normalized as $`W(q)4\pi q^2𝑑q=1`$. So we define

$$f(\stackrel{}{q},\stackrel{}{p})=\delta (\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }P})W\left(\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{Q}\right),$$
(18)
with the norm in hyperbolic coordinates being given as

$$\stackrel{}{q}=\left(q_1\right)^2+\left(q_2\right)^2+\tau ^2\left(q_3\right)^2.$$
(19)
The energy momentum tensor for the complete string is then just the sum over all string pieces, which gives

$$T^{\mu \nu }(\stackrel{}{q})=\underset{\mathrm{string}\mathrm{segments}}{}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }P^\mu \mathrm{\Delta }P^\nu }{P^0}W\left(\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{Q}\right).$$
(20)
We define a local comoving frame via the four-velocity

$$u^\mu (\stackrel{}{q})=\frac{n^\mu (\stackrel{}{q})}{\sqrt{n^\mu (\stackrel{}{q})n_\mu (\stackrel{}{q})}}$$
(21)
with

$$n^\mu (\stackrel{}{q})=T^{0\mu }(\stackrel{}{q}).$$
(22)
This allows then the calculation of the energy density in the comoving frame,

$$ϵ(q)=T^{\mu \nu }(\stackrel{}{q})u_\mu (\stackrel{}{q})u_\nu (\stackrel{}{q}),$$
(23)
and the flow velocity

$$\stackrel{}{v}(q)=\stackrel{}{u}(q)/u^0.$$
(24)
## 6 Results

In the following, we show results for different high energy reactions. All the calculations are done at the proper time $`\tau =`$ 1fm/c, and we suppress writing this variable in the following. We use always a width $`\sigma =0.5\text{fm}`$ for smearing function $`W(q)`$. We define the rapidity field $`y_z(x,y,\eta )`$ as

$$y_z(x,y,\eta )=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{1+v_z(x,y,\eta )}{1v_z(x,y,\eta )},$$
(25)
where $`v_z(x,y,v_z)`$ is the $`z`$ component of the velocity field.

As a reference, we first show results for a single string without kinks, having an energy of 50 GeV, as it may occur in electron-positron annihilation. In fig. 14, we plot the energy density $`ϵ(x,y,\eta )`$ as a function of $`x`$ and $`\eta `$ for $`y=0`$. As expected, the energy density is peaked around $`x=0`$, whereas it is distributed evenly in $`\eta `$ between limits defined by the energy of the string. Since there is a cylindrical symmetry with respect to the $`z`$ axis, it is no surprise that the energy density as a function of $`x`$ and $`y`$ for $`\eta =0`$ shows a narrow peak around $`x=y=0`$, as seen in fig. 15. The rapidity field $`y_z(x,y,\eta )`$ as a function of $`x`$ and $`\eta `$ for $`y=0`$ is shown in fig. 16, where we observe roughly $`y_z(x,y,\eta )=\eta `$. The other components of the velocity field are zero.

Kinky strings show a very similar behavior. Due to the transverse momenta introduced via the kinks, the cylindrical symmetry is slightly distorted, and we observe as well very small but finite values for the transverse components of the velocity fields.Since the results are so close to the simple string discussed above, we do not show the figures here.

Next we consider proton-proton scattering at 50 GeV.

Here we have usually several strings, the minimum number being two, plus two remnants (which may be strings in case of high mass excitation). In the example considered here, we have altogether four strings, with respective energies of 17.2 GeV, 9.3 GeV, 7.6 GeV and 15.8 GeV. Since the strings have different masses and are not sitting in the cms system, the energy density $`ϵ(x,y,\eta )`$ as a function of $`x`$ and $`\eta `$ for $`y=0`$ does not show such a flat behavior as in the case of a pure string, as seen in fig. 17, but we observe a peak at $`\eta =0`$, whose value is roughly 2.5 times bigger than the one for a string. However, the energy density as a function of $`x`$ and $`y`$ for $`\eta =0`$ shows as well a narrow peak around $`x=y=0`$, as shown in fig. 18, and the rapidity field $`y_z(x,y,\eta )`$ is roughly equal to $`\eta `$ , see fig. 19.

Let us consider gold-gold collisions at RHIC (200 AGeV). In fig. 20,

we show the energy density $`ϵ(x,y,\eta )`$ as a function of $`x`$ and $`\eta `$ for $`y=0`$. For a fixed value of $`x`$, we observe a similar shape as for proton-proton scattering: a broad distribution with a smooth peak around zero. Of course, the magnitude is much bigger. Considering, however, the variation with $`x`$ for given $`\eta `$, we observed large fluctuations: pronounced peaks followed by deep valleys. If we regard the energy density as a function of $`x`$ and $`y`$ for $`\eta =0`$, as shown in fig. 21,

we observe correspondingly several peaks overlaying the general roughly rotationally symmetric structure, which increases towards the center. To investigate the origin of these fluctuations, we show in fig. 22 the distribution of the number of

nucleons (projectile plus target) projected to the plane $`z=0`$, in units nucleons per $`\mathrm{fm}^2`$. From a spherically symmetric nuclear density, we expect a rotationally symmetric distribution of this projection, increasing towards the center ($`x=y=0`$). This is also what one observes, roughly. But looking more closely, we clearly observe large fluctuations with pronounced peaks. And even more, these peaks correspond exactly to the peaks in the energy density distribution, which proves that the fluctuations in energy density are due to geometrical fluctuations in the distribution of nucleons.

We finally consider rapidity and velocity fields: in fig. 23 the rapidity field $`y_z(x,y,\eta )`$ and in fig. 24 the $`x`$ component $`v_x(x,y,\eta )`$ of the velocity field, both as a function of $`x`$ and $`\eta `$ for $`y=0`$. We observe roughly $`y_z=\eta `$ and $`v_x`$ close to zero. So the velocity field is practically purely longitudinal and shows the so-called “Bjorken scaling” ($`y_z=\eta `$).

## 7 Summary

We presented a new way to calculate macroscopic quantities like energy density or velocity (or rapidity) fields at an early stage of a nucleus-nucleus collision at ultra-relativistic energies. The calculation is based on a sophisticated treatment of the primary interactions, when the two nuclei are traversing each other, using the parton-based Gribov-Regge model neXus. The important point is an appropriate treatment of soft partons, which contribute substantially and which are usually completely neglected. In neXus, soft and hard physics are considered consistently: hard partons are treated explicitly based on pQCD, soft ones are included implicitly, using the string picture. This allows a quite reliable calculation of the above-mentioned macroscopic quantities.

We analyzed single strings, proton-proton scattering and heavy ion collisions. In the latter case, we find almost perfect “Bjorken scaling”: the rapidity $`y_z`$ coincides with the space-time rapidity $`\eta `$, whereas the transverse flow is practically zero. This is often employed as initial condition for hydrodynamical treatments. However, the $`\eta `$ dependence of the energy density does not show a well defined plateau corresponding to “boost invariance”. Furthermore, the distribution of the energy density in the transverse plane shows typically a very “bumpy” structure, which fluctuates considerably from event to event.

This work has been funded in part by the IN2P3/CNRS (PICS 580) and the Russian Foundation of Basic Researches (RFBR-98-02-22024). H.J.D. acknowledges support from NASA grant number NAG-9246.


text:
# 𝑆𝑈(2) lattice gauge theory at non-zero temperature with fixed holonomy boundary condition Talk presented by M. Müller-Preussker

## Abstract

We study $`SU(2)`$ lattice gauge theory at $`T>0`$ in a finite box with fixed holonomy value at the spatial boundary. We search for (approximate) classical solutions of the lattice field equations and find in particular the dissociated calorons recently discussed by van Baal and collaborators.

The quark confinement has not yet found a satisfactory explanation. Several models are under consideration. The dual superconductor scenario views confinement as a dual Meissner effect due to the condensation of Abelian monopoles. An alternative promising approach is based on the center-vortex dominance picture. On the other hand there is the semiclassical approach based on instanton solutions. It provides successful phenomenology for many phenomena in hadron physics. Unfortunately, instanton gas or liquid models fail to explain confinement. The question arises, whether other extended classical objects - e.g. monopoles or dyons - could be suited to describe confinement within a semi-classical approach.

We consider $`SU(2)`$ lattice gauge theory at finite temperature with periodic boundary conditions characterized additionally by a non-trivial holonomy $`𝒫(𝐱)`$ at the spatial boundary. The Polyakov line at the boundary is then the trace of the holonomy $`L(𝐱)=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{t}r𝒫(𝐱).`$

Our investigation (see also ) is motivated by papers of Pierre van Baal and co-workers , who have thoroughly reconsidered the carriers of topological charge in a Yang-Mills field at finite temperature (calorons). They have analytically demonstrated that completely different caloron solutions appear once a non-trivial holonomy $`𝒫(𝐱)`$ at $`|𝐱|\mathrm{}`$ is admitted. These solutions differ from the ’t Hooft periodic instantons employed for the standard semi-classical approach at finite temperatures . The latter solutions have trivial holonomy i.e. $`𝒫(𝐱)1`$ for $`|𝐱|\mathrm{}`$.

The most interesting feature of the new calorons is the fact that monopole constituents of an instanton can become explicit as degrees of freedom . They carry magnetic charge (in fact, they are BPS monopoles ) and $`1/N_{\mathrm{color}}`$ units of topological charge. Being part of classical solutions of the Euclidean field equations, one can hope that the instanton constituents can play an independent role in the semiclassical analysis of $`T0`$ Yang-Mills theory (and of full QCD).

Here we present an exploratory study where we have searched for characteristic differences between the two phases as far as semiclassical background fields are concerned. The latter become visible in the result of cooling.

We have fixed during the simulation and under cooling the boundary time-like link variables in order to keep a certain value of $`𝒫(𝐱)=𝒫_{\mathrm{}}`$ everywhere on the spatial surface of the system while conserving periodicity. In this case, the influence of the respective phase, that we want to describe, is twofold : (i) the cooling starts from genuine thermal Monte Carlo gauge field configurations, generated on a $`N_s^3\times N_t`$ lattice; (ii) the value of the holonomy $`𝒫_{\mathrm{}}`$ was chosen in accordance with the average of $`L`$, which is approximately vanishing in the confinement phase and nonvanishing but far from unity in the deconfinement phase at not too high temperatures.

For a lattice of size $`16^3\times 4`$ we have chosen $`\beta =2.2`$ (confinement, $`L0.`$) and $`\beta =2.4`$ (deconfinement, $`L=0.27`$), respectively. We freeze the timelike links $`U_{x,\mu =4}`$ at the spatial boundary equally to each other such that $`(U_{x,\mu =4})^{N_t}=𝒫_{\mathrm{}}`$. For the holonomy itself, an ‘Abelian’ form $`𝒫_{\mathrm{}}=a_0+ia_3\tau _3`$ was chosen, with $`a_0=L`$ and $`a_3=\sqrt{1a_0^2}`$ in correspondence with the average Polyakov line. In order to search exclusively for objects with low action the criterion for stopping at some cooling step $`n`$ was that $`S_n<2S_{\mathrm{inst}}`$, the last change of action $`|S_nS_{n1}|<0.01S_{\mathrm{inst}}`$, and $`S_n2S_{n1}+S_{n2}<0`$ ($`S_{\mathrm{inst}}`$ denoting the action of a single instanton). For each $`\beta `$-value we have scanned $`O(200)`$ configurations obtained by cooling.

As can be seen from Table 1 the cooled sample obtained in the confinement phase has a different composition than that of the deconfinement phase.

In the following let us explain these configurations in some detail.

In the confinement phase clearly dominate ‘dyon-dyon’ pairs ($`DD`$) reminiscent of the new caloron solutions. In Figs. 1 we show, projected onto the $`x_1x_2`$-plane (i.e. summed over $`x_3,x_4`$ or $`x_3`$, resp.), the topological charge and the Polyakov line, respectively, of such a ‘dyon’ pair. Notice the opposite sign of the Polyakov line near the maxima of the two bumps of topological charge.

Other selfdual objects, having a rather $`O(4)`$ rotationally invariant distribution of action and topological charge, are frozen out relatively infrequently. They resemble the ’t Hooft periodic instanton. We call them caloron ($`CAL`$). Under the specific boundary conditions, however, the Polyakov line distribution around the caloron exhibits opposite peaks. Thus, this type of configurations appears to be a limiting case of the ‘dyon-dyon’ pairs.

Both $`DD`$ and $`CAL`$ objects can be well fitted by the analytically known solutions . In Fig. 2 we show measured and fitted action density profiles for a typical $`DD`$ configuration found in the confinement phase.

The frequency distribution of the scale sizes $`\rho `$ obtained by these fits is shown in Fig. 3.

Mixed configurations with two lumps of opposite topological charge are found in a quarter of the configurations. We call them ‘dyon-antidyon’ pairs ($`D\overline{D}`$). In these configurations the Polyakov line has a same-sign maximum on top of the opposite-sign topological charge lumps. Besides of this, the two sums $`Q_+=_xq(x)\mathrm{\Theta }(q(x))`$ and $`Q_{}=_xq(x)\mathrm{\Theta }(q(x))`$ are almost equal to $`+\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`\frac{1}{2}`$, respectively, which supports an interpretation as half-instanton and half-antiinstanton. With respect to cooling these semi-classical objects are as quasistable as the $`DD`$ configurations. Therefore, one is tempted to interprete the $`D\overline{D}`$ pair as a solution of the field equation of motion, too. But so far we do not have a clear understanding of these objects.

It is remarkable that selfdual or antiselfdual $`DD`$ configurations are very rare in the deconfinement phase. $`D\overline{D}`$ mixed configurations are typical for this phase.

In the deconfined phase the next important type of cooled configurations are purely magnetic ones ($`S_{\mathrm{magnetic}}>>S_{\mathrm{electric}}`$) with quantized action in units of $`S_{\mathrm{inst}}/2`$. We call them $`M`$ configurations. With a lower probability also magnetic configurations with twice as large action ($`2M`$ type configurations) are found. After fixing the maximally Abelian gauge these configurations turn out to be completely Abelian. We can identify them as pure equally distributed magnetic fluxes related to world-sheets of Dirac strings (‘Dirac sheet’) on the dual lattice. With some rate they also emerge in the result of further cooling of $`D\overline{D}`$ configurations.

Concluding we can say that the environment considered with fixed holonomy at spatial boundaries provides an interesting pattern of semi-classical objects characteristic for the confinement as well as for the deconfinement phase. We have no evidence so far, that the finite temperature gauge fields in large volumes can be understood in terms of quantum fluctuations around calorons with non-trivial holonomy. This question is under consideration at present. Anyway, we feel that the development of a semiclassical approach based on solutions with non-trivial holonomy might have a chance to shed more light on the mechanisms of the deconfinement transition.


text:
# Universality of the Directed Polymer Model

## Abstract

The universality of the directed polymer model and the analogous KPZ equation is supported by numerical simulations using non-Gaussian random probability distributions in two, three and four dimensions. It is shown that although in the non-Gaussian cases the *finite size* estimates of the energy exponents are below the persumed universal values, these estimates *increase* with the system size, and the further they are below the universal values, the higher is their rate of increase. The results are explained in terms of the efficiency of variance reduction during the optimization process.

The directed polymer model  and the analogous KPZ equation  have drawn significant attention recently . The original introduction of the model  considered directed polymers in random media, and more recently it has been applied to model other processes such as tearing and cracks formation . The study of the model is focused on the characteristics of the optimal path which connects two distant points in a random environment. Passing through any point of that environment is associated with a random valued cost, usually expressed in units of energy or time. Unlike the simple case of constant cost, the path of minimal cost (the optimal path) is usually not the straight line which connects the two points, and its mean transversal distance from the straight line which connects its endpoints grows as a power law with the distance between the endpoints. Another power law behaviour is associated with the relation between the variance of the energy cost (or time cost), and the distance between the endpoints. These two power laws are expressed in terms of their exponents, which are connected by a scaling relation. The random environment is usually simulated by a lattice whose bonds (or sites) are assigned with random values, and it is generally believed that the characteristics of the optimal path are universal, i.e. apart from very special cases, the exponents depend only on the dimension of the lattice and not on the details of the lattice structure, or the type of randomness associated with it.

The universality hypothesis was recently challenged by numerical results  which showed that for dimensions higher than 2, the values of the estimated exponents do depend on the type of the probability distribution which is associated with the random lattice. In particular, non-Gaussian distributions yield lower values for the exponents compared to Gaussian distribution values, which are the persumed universal values. This publication has raised strong opposition in the form of three recent articles , which argued that the estimates presented in  are affected by finite size effects, and thus they are not the asymptotic values of the exponents in these cases. Two of these articles  independently suggested that the estimates presented in  are disturbed by directed percolation effects. However, none of these opposing articles presented any alternative numerical estimates to those presented in .

This article presents results of numerical simulations for the three and four dimensional cases studied in , but for larger lattices. The results show that the estimates presented in  are indeed below the asymptotic values of the exponents. Moreover, it is shown that though convergence to asymptotic values happens at lattice sizes much bigger than studied, the data suggest the presence of the universal values in all cases. In the second part of the article the directed percolation explanation presented in Refs.  is challenged, and an alternative explanation is presented in terms of the efficiency of variance reduction during the optimization process.

In two dimensions, the directed polymer model can be described as follows: In a square lattice which was cut along its diagonal and oriented as a triangle whose apex is up and the diagonal is its base, we assign to each bond or site a random number. Of all the paths leading from the apex (the origin) to the base, we refer only to those whose direction is *always* down to the base. For each one of these paths we calculate the sum of the random numbers along it, which defines its value. We focus our interest on the path of minimal value which we call ”the optimal path”, and define the space exponent $`\nu `$ by $`Dt^\nu `$, where D is the mean distance of the endpoint of the optimal path from the center of the base, and t is the size of the triangle. In terms of a polymer which orients itself along the optimal path, t is the length of the directed polymer chain. Another exponent which characterizes this model is the energy exponent $`\omega `$, defined by $`\sigma _Et^\omega `$, where E is the the value of the optimal path (or the energy of the directed polymer), and $`\sigma _E`$ is its standard deviation. These two exponents are related by the scaling relation $`\omega =2\nu 1`$ . In the two dimensional case, the values of the exponents are $`\nu 2/3`$ , $`\omega 1/3`$, and the values 2/3 and 1/3 are considered to be exact. In dimensions higher then 2, there are only numerical estimates for the values of the exponents, and in the three and four dimensional cases, the accepted values for the exponents are $`\nu 0.62`$, $`\omega 0.24`$, and $`\nu 0.59`$, $`\omega 0.18`$ respectively . However, these numerical estimates were obtained for random values taken from Gaussian distribution, while non-Gaussian distributions, though preserving the space exponents , yield lower estimates for the energy exponents . The dependence of the estimated energy exponents on the form of the probability distribution suggests non-uniersality of the model , and a break of the scaling relation. It is this discrepancy which is adressed in our study.

Our numerical simulations for d=2 and d=3, were performed with random bonds whose values were taken from uniform distribution. The results are presented in terms of local exponents, computed by $`\mathrm{log}_4(V(2t)/V(t/2))`$, where V is either D or $`\sigma _E`$. Since we are interested in the relation between the local exponents and the universal values, the results are presented in Figure 1 by normalized local exponents, where the estimated values are divided by the persumed universal values: $`\nu =2/3`$, $`\omega =1/3`$, in 2 dimensions, and $`\nu =0.62`$, $`\omega =0.24`$, in 3 dimensions. The results of Figure 1 can be summarized as follows:

1. All local exponents *steadily increase* with t.
2. In both 2 and 3 dimensions the local space exponents have practically reached their universal values.
3. The local energy exponents in the three dimensional case are lower than those of the two dimensional one, but their rate of increase is higher.

The results related to the two dimensional local energy exponents supply a test for the validity of a recent suggestion proposed in . According to this suggestion, the difference between the local exponents and their asymptotic values decreases in proportion to $`t^\gamma `$, where $`\gamma =0.23\pm 0.02`$. However, the data presented in Figure 1 suggests that the convergence towards the asymptotic value in this case (and in this range of chain lengths) is characterizes by logarithmic rather than power law dependence on the chain length. The probability of power law dependence, which is determined by the measurement errors, was calculated and found to be nil.

The numerical simulations of the four dimensional case were performed on the random site version of the model , with two types of probablity distributions: the uniform distribution, and the arched distribution: $`p(r)(1|r|)^{1/2}`$, $`1<r<1`$. In both cases the local space exponents approach their Gaussian values of $`0.59`$, but in both cases the local energy exponents are much lower then their Gaussian values. Moreover, the local energy exponents initially decline, and the crucial question is whether, as suggested in , their minimal values are also their asymptotic values. Thus, in Figure 2 the estimates of the local energy exponents are shifted by their minimal values: 0.116 in the uniform distribution case, and 0.048 in the arched distribution case, showing the difference between the estimates and their minima. As can be clearly seen, after the fall comes the rise, and the local exponents of the arched distribution case, which are lower than the local exponents of the uniform case, also increas faster, similar to the picture presented in Figure 1.

In conclusion, Figures 1 and 2 present coherent picture of systems which have not yet reached their asymptotic local exponents, and whose local energy exponents are much more sensitive to the form of the probability distribution then their local space exponents. The local space exponents are close to the Gaussian values, while the further is a local energy exponent below the Gaussian value, the higher is its rate of increase. These results provide in our opinion a solid support for the universality hypothesis.

As mentioned above, both Refs.  and  suggested an explanation of the results of  in terms of directed percolation effects. In the directed percolation model, the random bonds (or sites) are assigned with values taken from the bimodal (0,1) distribution, with probability $`p`$ to get zero valued bonds. The set of sites which are connected by zero valued bonds to the origin compose a directed percolation cluster. In the case of $`p>p_c`$, where $`p_c`$ is called the critical probability, there is a finite probability to get clusters of infinite length. From the directed polymer model point of view, in the case of bimodal (0,1) distribution and $`p>p_c`$, after an initial search of random duration, the optimal path orients itself along a directed percolation cluster, and thus the mean energy and energy variance of the optimal paths reach constant values which are independent of system size, and the energy exponent is zero valued.

In  it was shown that in the case of $`p<p_c`$, the pattern of the local energy exponents is similar to those found in the worse cases studied in . Both  and  address the the fact that the higher is the low end of the random site continuous distribution, and thus the more it resembles the low end of the bimodal distribution, the lower are the local energy exponents. Both of them also argue that the much lower than universal values recorded in  for higher dimensions, are the result of the lower $`p_c`$ of directed percolation in higher dimensions. A lower $`p_c`$ implies that the same continuous distributions resemble more faithfully the critical bimodal distribution with its zero valued energy exponent.

In their reply to the comment of , Newman and Swift  have already challenged the directed percolation explanation, and argued that results obtained for the uniform distribution are unlikely to be an outcome of bimodal distribution (or directed percolation) effects. To this critique we would like to add another: The crux of the matter in the bimodal distribution case, both above and below $`p_c`$, is the ability of the optimal paths to orient themselves along directed percolation clusters without any change in their energy values . No such situation can occur in the continuous distribution case. This fundemental difference is the reason for another difference between the bimodal and continuous cases: In the bimodal case, not only the energy variance of the optimal paths grows slowly with lattice size, but so does also their mean energy, whose growth rate approaches logarithmic dependence on lattice size as $`p`$ approaches $`p_c`$. Actually, the slow growth rate of the mean energy, combined with the fact that no optimal path can decrease its energy, lead inevitably to the slow growth rate of the energy variance in the bimodal case. In contrast, in all the continuous cases studied in , the mean energy is almost proportional to the lattice size. The difference between logarithmic dependence and linear dependence is a matter of substance, not of a degree.

Moreover, the whole discussion untill now focused on the cases of lower than universal values of the local exponents. But opposite cases also exist. Figure 3 presents local exponents obtained for a simple two dimensional lattice whose bonds are assigned with the negative values of random numbers taken from the Gaussian distribution and raised to powers of $`k=2,4,6`$. The probability distribution in these cases is $`p(r)|r|^{(k1)/k}e^{1/2|r|^{2/k}}`$; $`r<0`$, and they all have massive left tails whose length grows with $`k`$. As can be seen in Figure 3, the longer is the left tail, the higher are the local exponents, which are even higher then 1/2 at some stages.

Since the optimal paths orient themselves along lower than average energy bonds, the important part of the bond probability distribution is its left hand side (L.H.S.). The numerical evidence which should be explained can be summarized as follows: A decreasing (right tailed) L.H.S yields initially lower than universal local exponents. An increasing (left tailed) L.H.S. might yield initially either lower or higher than universal values, the longer the left tail, the higher are the local exponents.

In the following, an alternative to the directed percolation explanation is presented. This alternative explanation relies heavily on the form of the optimal paths energy distribution, which for long enough paths arrives eventually at a fixed functional form. The persumed universality of the model is connected with the assumption that apart from very special cases, like the bimodal distribution at $`p>p_c`$, this functional form is independent of the initial probability distribution of the random bonds. The asymptotic functional form resembles a Gaussian whose left tail is longer than its right tail, and the higher the dimension, the more skewed to the left is the form.

Two different mechanisms determine this form of the asymptotic probability distributions: The first is the growth of the system, which causes the energy of any random path to have eventually a Gaussian distribution, regardless of the random bond distribution. The second mechanism is the optimization process, which favors lower values, and thus transfers weight from the right side to the left side of the optimal paths energy distribution.

Let us consider a right tailed optimal paths energy distribution, and a left tailed one. In both cases a major part of the variance comes from the tail. When the optimization process is performed on the right tailed distribution, it transfers probabilistic weight from the tail to the center, thus reducing effectively the variance of the distribution. In contrast, when the optimization process is performed on the left tailed distribution, it transfers weight from the center to the left tail, thus increasing the variance. In the case of a symetric distribution, weight is deleted from the right tail and added to the left tail, but since the center also moves to the left, the variance is reduced. Actually, even in many cases of pure left tailed distributions, the movement of the center to the left more then compensates for the additional weight at the left tail, and the result is a decrease in the variance.

As a result of the optimization process, the asymptotic probability distribution is skewed to the left, the rate of growth of the variance is lower then 1, and the mean energy is not strictly proportional to lattice size. Of course, the higher the dimension, the more nearest neighbours has each site, and the more efficient is the optimization/variance reduction process. This is the reason for both the more skewed to the left asymptotic probability distribution, and the lower values of the exponents in higher dimensions.

Moreover, if in the intermediate stage the optimal paths distribution is less skewed to the left than its asymptotic form, the variance reduction efficiency is higher than in the final stage, and thus the local exponents are lower than their asymptotic (universal) values. The opposite happens in the case of an intermediate distribution which is more skewed to the left than the asymptotic form. It should only be added that the form of the optimal path probability distribution resembles initially the form of the random bond probability distribution, and this analysis explains all the numerical evidence summarized above.

A recent article  discusses the random bond probability distribution which would lead to the fastest convergence of the local energy exponents to their asymptotic values. According to the above analysis, the best choise is simply a random bond distribution which resembles the asymptotic form of the optimal paths distribution.

The last issue which should be considered is the larger deviations from universal values recorded for the same random site distributions in higher dimensions. According to the above analysis, the reason for these larger deviations is not the smaller diferrence between these distributions and the critical bimodal distribution, but the bigger difference between these distributions and the more skewed to the left asymptotic form of the optimal paths probability distribution.

In conclusion, this study supports the universality of the directed polymer model in two ways. First, it is shown that finite size effects do influence the estimated local exponents of the non-Gaussian distributions in higher dimensions. Then, these finite size effects are explained by the form of the optimal paths probability distribution, and its influence on the efficiency of variance reduction during the optimization process.

We wish to thank the German Israel Foundation (GIF) for financial support.

REFERENCES

1. M. Kardar and Y.-C Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 2087 (1987).
2. M. Kardar, G. Parisi and Y.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 889 (1986).
3. T. Halpin-Healy and Y.-C. Zhang, Phys. Rep. 254, 215 (1995).
4. Fractals and Disordered Systems, eds. A. Bunde and S. Havlin, 2nd Edition, 1995 (Springer, Berlin).
5. T.J. Newman and M.R. Swift, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 2261 (1997).
6. T. Halpin-Healy, Phys. Rev. E, 58, R4096 (1998).
7. H. Chate, Q.-H Chen and L.-H. Tang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5471 (1998).
8. P. De Los Rios, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 4236 (1999).
9. D.A. Huse and C.L. Henley, Phys. Rev. Lett. 54, 2708 (1985).
10. B.M. Forrest and L.-H Tang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 1405 (1990).
11. J.M. Kim, M.A. Moore and A.J. Bray, Phys. Rev. A 44, 2345 (1991).
12. T.J. Newman and M.R. Swift, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5472 (1998).
13. E. Perlsman and S. Havlin, Europhys. Lett. 46, 13 (1998).
14. T. Halpin-Healy and R. Novoseller, e-print cond-mat/0004251.

FIGURES

Fig. 1. The local exponents of $`\nu `$ and $`\omega `$ (normalized to the universal values), as a function of the chain length for d=2 and d=3. The random bonds values are taken from uniform distribution.

Fig. 2. The local exponents of $`\omega `$ as a function of the chain length for the random site lattice in d=4. The results are shifted by their minimal values: 0.116 for the uniform distribution, and 0.048 for the arched distribution, thus presenting the the difference between the local exponents and their minima.

Fig. 3. The local exponents of $`\omega `$ as a function of the chain length. The results are shown for 3 random bond probability distributions in d=2. The bonds are assigned with the negative values of random numbers taken from the Gaussian distribution and raised to powers of $`k=2,4,6`$.