text:
# The Unusual Spectral Energy Distribution of a Galaxy Previously Reported to be at Redshift 6.68

1Observatories of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, 813 Santa Barbara, Pasadena, CA 91101, USA

2Department of Physics and Astronomy, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY 11794–3800, USA

Observations of distant galaxies are important both for understanding how galaxies form and for probing the physical conditions of the universe at the earliest epochs. It is, however, extremely difficult to identify galaxies at redshift $`z>5`$, because these galaxies are faint and exhibit few spectral features. In a previous work, we presented observations that supported the identification of a galaxy at redshift $`z=6.68`$ in a deep STIS field1. Here we present new ground-based photometry of the galaxy. We find that the galaxy exhibits moderate detections of flux in the optical $`B`$ and $`V`$ images that are inconsistent with the expected absence of flux at wavelength shortward of the redshifted Lyman-$`\alpha `$ emission line of a galaxy at redshift $`z>5`$. In addition, the new broad-band imaging data not only show flux measurements of this galaxy that are incompatible with the previous STIS measurement, but also suggest a peculiar spectral energy distribution that cannot be fit with any galaxy spectral template at any redshift. We therefore conclude that the redshift identification of this galaxy remains undetermined.

The galaxy (designated galaxy A by Chen, Lanzetta, & Pascarelle1) was previously identified in deep observations obtained by the Hubble Space Telescope using the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) in 1997 December. It has a STIS clear magnitude of $`AB(\mathrm{clear})=27.67\pm 0.09`$. The spectrum of galaxy A was extracted using a new spectrum extraction technique that employed optimal weights to spatially deblend and spectrally deconvolve the slitless spectra. The spectrum was characterized by a discontinuity at wavelength $`\lambda 9300`$ Å, which we interpreted as the Lyman-$`\alpha `$ decrement (produced by intervening Hydrogen absorption), and by an emission line at wavelength $`\lambda 9334`$, which we interpreted as Lyman-$`\alpha `$. But because of the low signal-to-noise ratios of the identified spectral features, the redshift identification of galaxy A was not indisputable.

It is extremely difficult to obtain a confirming spectrum even with a 10 m class telescope on the ground because, at near-infrared wavelengths, background sky light is the dominant source of noise and confusing sky emission lines make identifications of spectral line features ambiguous. To strengthen the identifications of the faint galaxies observed in the STIS field, we acquired deep optical $`B`$, $`V`$, and $`R`$ images of the STIS field with the WIYN telescope at the Kitt Peak National Observatory using the Mini Mosaic camera. The primary objective was to obtain sensitive photometry over a wide passband in order to provide strong constraints in the spectral energy distributions of these galaxies. In particular, a complete absence of flux at optical wavelengths shortward of the redshifted Lyman-$`\alpha `$ emission line due to intervening Hydrogen absorption would unambiguously confirm the previous redshift identification of galaxy A. The observations were carried out in a series of exposures of between 900 and $`1,200`$ s each in 2000 January. The total exposure times of the $`B`$, $`V`$, and $`R`$ images were 2.3, 2.0, and 3.5 h, which reached 5 $`\sigma `$ point source limiting $`AB`$ magnitudes of $``$ 26.3, 26.0, and 26.7, respectively. The individual exposures were reduced using standard pipeline techniques and were registered to a common origin and filtered for cosmic rays.

To measure the energy fluxes of galaxies in the STIS field, we adopted a quasi-optimal photometry technique that fits model spatial profiles of detected objects to the individual ground-based images2. The model spatial profiles were obtained by convolving smooth models of the intrinsic profiles of detected objects (determined based on the direct image previously obtained with STIS using a non-negative least-squares image reconstruction method3) with appropriate point spread functions of individual images (approximated using a Gaussian profile). The new technique provides higher signal-to-noise ratio and more accurate flux uncertainty measurements than standard techniques, because it properly accounts for the variation of the point spread functions of individual frames (the full width at half maximum of which was measured to vary between 0.5 and 1.0 arcsec) and because it accounts for uncertainty correlations between nearby, overlapping neighbors.

We present the new ground-based $`B`$, $`V`$, and $`R`$ images of galaxy A in Figure 1 together with the direct image obtained in the STIS clear filter. Contrary to expectations based on the previous analysis, galaxy A exhibits moderate detections of flux in all three ground-based images. Specifically, we estimate that galaxy A has $`B`$, $`V`$, and $`R`$ magnitudes of $`AB(B)=26.7\pm 0.2`$, $`AB(V)=26.8\pm 0.4`$, $`AB(R)=27.3\pm 0.4`$, respectively. For a galaxy at redshift $`z=6.68`$, both the $`B`$ and $`V`$ filters cover a wavelength range below the redshifted Lyman-$`\alpha `$ emission line. Therefore, the presence of optical flux in the $`B`$ and $`V`$ images indicates that galaxy A is very unlikely to be at redshift $`z=6.68`$. Nevertheless, it is puzzling that the ground-based photometry do not seem to agree with the previous STIS photometry. Specifically, we find that for a STIS clear magnitude of $`AB(\mathrm{clear})=27.67\pm 0.09`$, galaxy A is at least a factor of two too bright in the $`B`$ and $`V`$ filters when compared with known galaxy spectral energy distributions of any given redshift.

Figure 2 shows the spectral energy distribution of galaxy A established based on the broad-band photometry in the $`B`$, $`V`$, $`R`$ (open circles), and STIS clear filters (open square) in comparison to the extracted one-dimensional STIS spectrum of galaxy A cast into 350 Å bins (open triangles). The spectral coverage of each filter is indicated by horizontal bars. It further shows that galaxy A has an extremely blue color, $`AB(B)AB(R)=0.6\pm 0.4`$. The only alternative for the new photometry to be in line with the previous measurement would be that a dominant portion of the flux observed in the STIS clear filter occurred within the spectral range covered by the $`B`$, $`V`$, and $`R`$ filters (i.e. between 3500 and 9000 Å) and a negligible amount of flux at wavelengths below or beyond this range. The closest resemblance would be the spectral energy distribution of an F type star, but the apparent magnitude of this object would imply a distance of $`450`$ kpc from the Sun, many times larger than the size of the Milky Way. We therefore conclude that this cannot be the case.

Because the STIS direct image (covering a wavelength range that spans from 2000 Å to 10000 Å) is a factor of $``$ 10 times more sensitive than the ground-based images and because STIS photometric calibration is accurate to within 5% (according to the STIS Instrument Handbook), it ought to provide a strong, reliable constraint in the integrated optical flux of galaxy A. To resolve the discrepancy between the ground-based and STIS photometry for galaxy A, we first examined the photometric calibration of the ground-based images. First, we measured photometry in the $`B`$, $`V`$, and $`R`$ images for all the 1067 objects in the Hubble Deep Field (HDF) region presented by Fernández-Soto, Lanzetta, & Yahil4. Next, we converted the ground-based $`B`$, $`V`$, and $`R`$ photometry to the space-based F450W and F606W photometry using the transformation presented in Holtzman et al.5 Finally, we compared our photometry of these objects with the ones presented in Fernández-Soto, Lanzetta, & Yahil4. We found that these measurements completely agreed with each other. We therefore concluded that the photometric calibration of the ground-based images was consistent with the space-based photometry and that the discrepant photometry was due to some other factor. Because the two sets of observations were taken two years apart, the discrepant photometry could suggest that galaxy A is variable. In particular, the observed blue $`VR`$ color of galaxy A agrees with that of the supernova 1995K identified at $`z=0.479`$6. But we cannot provide further support to the hypothesis.

Regardless of the peculiarity of the spectral energy distribution of galaxy A, the conflicting results from two separate analyses also suggest that the previous analysis of the STIS observations might be in error. We therefore examined carefully the previous analysis, particularly the spectral extraction technique.

The primary arguments that were presented by Chen, Lanzetta, & Pascarelle1 to support the confidence of the redshift identification were (1) consistent flux measurements from the direct image ($`AB(\mathrm{clear})=27.67\pm 0.09`$) and the dispersed image ($`AB(\mathrm{clear})=27.72\pm 0.29`$), (2) a robust detection of the emission line at $`\lambda 9334`$, and (3) a statistically significant detection of the flux discontinuity at $`\lambda 9300`$ Å that coincided with the emission line. We confirmed the detection of the emission line and the flux discontinuity using traditional spectral extraction techniques, but we were unable to confirm the amplitude of the flux discontinuity. The amplitude of the flux discontinuity could be overestimated in the previous analysis due to small systematic errors in the sky determination of the dispersed image, but we do not find evidence for that.

The results of our analysis show that galaxy A exhibits peculiar spectral properties that cannot be explained by either galaxies or stars. We cannot resolve the incompatible photometry of the new ground-based images and the previous STIS images. Therefore, we conclude that the redshift identification of galaxy A remains undetermined.

Received .

1. Chen, H.-W., Lanzetta, K. M., Pascarelle, S. A Spectroscopically Identified Galaxy of Probable Redshift $`z=6.68`$. Nature 398, 586–588 (1999).

2. Yahata, N., Lanzetta, K. M., Chen, H.-W., Fernández-Soto, A., Pascarelle, S. M., Puetter, R. C., & Yahil, A. Photometry and Photometric Redshifts of Faint Galaxies in the Hubble Deep Field South NICMOS Field. Astrophys. J., 538, 493–504 (2000).

3. Puetter, R. C. & Yahil, A. The Pixon Method of Image Reconstruction in “The Astronomical Data Analysis Software and Systems (ADASS) VIII Conference,” eds. D. M. Mehringer, R. L. Plante, & D. A. Roberts (San Francisco: ASP), 307–316

4. Fernández-Soto, A., Lanzetta, K. M., & Yahil, A. A new catalog of photometric redshifts in the Hubble Deep Field. Astrophys. J., 513, 34–50 (1999).

5. Holtzman, J. A., Burrows, C. J., Casertano, S., Hester, J. J., Trauger, J. T., Watson, A. M., & Worthey, G. The photometric Performance and Calibration of WFPC2. PASP, 107, 1065–1093 (1995).

6. Schmidt, B. P. et al. The High-z Supernova Search: Measuring Cosmic Deceleration and Global Curvature of the Universe Using Type Ia Supernovae. Astrophys. J., 507, 46–63 (1998)

CORRESPONDENCE should be addressed to H.-W.C. (email: hchen@ociw.edu).


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Supersymmetry at finite temperature has a number of interesting properties. Foremost is the appearance of a massless fermion mode, the so-called Goldstino. As finite temperature corrections are different for particles obeying Bose-Einstein and Fermi-Dirac statistics, a finite temperature state is not invariant under supersymmetry transformations. Since the transformation parameter of supersymmetry is a Grassmann variable, the breaking of supersymmetry therefore implies the existence of a massless Goldstone fermion.

One situation where such properties might be particularly relevant is during the reheating stage after inflation. It has been shown that light fermions may play an important role in the reheating process, and so it is important to know whether massless or nearly massless fermions might be a requirement in supersymmetric models due to the phenomenon of the Goldstone fermion. However, there is an important distinction between finite temperature physics and the far from equilibrium, finite energy density situation relevant to inflation.

Despite the rich activity in out of equilibrium field theory, the case of supersymmetric models has not yet been properly investigated. In this letter, we address a supersymmetric model including all of the superpartner degrees of freedom, including the fermions. The model is one with a global $`O(N)`$ symmetry which we solve exactly in the limit of large $`N`$.

Working at large finite energy density, but far from thermal equilibrium, we study the dynamics of the model and see that the system indeed evolves to an attractor state for which a set of fermion modes becomes massless. We argue that this state is related to the spontaneous breaking of the $`O(N)`$ symmetry and that, therefore, the fermions are massless because they are superpartners of Goldstone bosons. Somewhat surprisingly, the $`O(N)`$ symmetry is not restored at high energy as would normally be expected. As the energy is increased, the contributions from the various superpartners to the effective masses of the particle modes cancel each other, a result due to supersymmetry.

We stress that although there are $`O(N)`$ symmetric vacua in this theory which are degenerate in energy with the $`O(N)`$ broken vacua, at high energies the system invariably evolves to the $`O(N)`$ broken vacua for which there are massless fermions. In this way, the final vacuum state of the system is predetermined by the high energy evolution. The possibility that there may be selection rules between degenerate vacua resulting from the early evolution of the universe is a primary result of this work.

The model we study contains an $`O(N)`$ singlet superfield, characterized by the non-zero vacuum expectation value of the scalar component, $`\varphi (t)`$, and an $`O(N)`$ vector supermultiplet. The $`O(N)`$ vector fields have time dependent masses determined by an order parameter $`m_{}^2(t)`$ reflecting the internal dynamics of the system. If $`\varphi (t=0)`$ is far enough from the supersymmetric vacua, i.e., if the initial energy density is sufficiently large, the system evolves in such a way that the order parameter $`m_{}^2(t)`$ asymptotically vanishes, corresponding to zero masses for all of the fields of the $`O(N)`$ vector multiplet. The state is indicative of the spontaneous breaking of the $`O(N)`$ symmetry.

We note that while the ground state upon which this finite energy state is built is supersymmetric, the energy is distributed differently among the fermions and bosons due to their differing statistics. This is analogous to what is known from equilibrium studies at finite temperature. In a cosmological context it is expected that the quanta in the highly excited state would become diluted with expansion and the universe would eventually find itself approaching the underlying ground state.

It is also worth mentioning that the state is stable to the introduction of small soft supersymmetry breaking to the Lagrangian. Such terms explicitly break the supersymmetry, while not introducing any terms which disrupt the supersymmetric solution to the hierarchy problem. Here we find that the qualitative behavior is unchanged by such terms as the system still evolves to an attractor $`O(N)`$ broken state. Furthermore, such terms in fact introduce small masses to one set of scalar fields of order the soft breaking scale $`m_s`$, which is taken to be much smaller than the overall scale of supersymmetry $`\mu `$. The fermions meanwhile gain a mass several orders of magnitude smaller.

Although this is only a toy model, the important features of the model – the combination of continuous symmetries leading to Goldstone bosons and supersymmetries leading to massless superpartners – are completely general. We also note that in models without additional continuous symmetries, such as the ordinary Wess-Zumino model, the far from equilibrium system is found to evolve toward a state for which the fermions become massless; this case will be studied in detail in a future publication. The results may be important to our understanding of aspects of cosmology, such as supersymmetry based inflation models and electroweak baryogenesis.

## 2 The model

The $`O(N)`$ extension of the Wess-Zumino model consists of a chiral superfield multiplet $`S_0=(A_0,B_0;\psi _0;F_0,G_0)`$, which acts as a singlet under $`O(N)`$, coupled to $`N`$ chiral superfields $`S_i=(A_i,B_i;\psi _i;F_i,G_i)`$ with $`i=1\mathrm{}N`$, transforming as a vector under $`O(N)`$. Here, $`A`$ and $`F`$ are real scalars, $`B`$ and $`G`$ are pseudo-scalars, and $`\psi `$ is a Majorana fermion. The superpotential has the form

$`W(S_0,S_i)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}MS_0^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\kappa }{6\sqrt{N}}}S_0^3`$ (1)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mu S_i^2+{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2\sqrt{N}}}S_0S_i^2.`$
We expand in terms of the component fields and eliminate the auxiliary fields via their equations of motion. To allow for a proper large $`N`$ limit, the expectation value of $`A_0`$ must be of order $`\sqrt{N}`$. We therefore set

$$A_0=\sqrt{N}\varphi ,B_0=0.$$
(2)
The field $`B_0`$ is taken to have zero expectation value for the sake of simplicity. We assume that the initial state satisfies the $`O(N)`$ symmetry which requires that $`A_i=B_i=0`$. It is convenient to take full advantage of this symmetry to define fields $`A`$, $`B`$, and $`\psi `$ such that $`_iA_iA_i=NA^2`$, $`_iB_iB_i=NB^2`$, and $`_i\overline{\psi }_i\psi _i=N\overline{\psi }\psi `$. The resulting Lagrangian to leading order in $`N`$ is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{N}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\mu \varphi ^\mu \varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\mu A^\mu A+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_\mu B^\mu B`$ (3)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\varphi ^2\left(M+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\kappa \varphi \right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\mu +\lambda \varphi \right)^2\left(A^2+B^2\right)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\lambda }{2}}\left[M\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\kappa \varphi ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\lambda \left(A^2B^2\right)\right]\left(A^2B^2\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu _\mu \psi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mu \overline{\psi }\psi {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\lambda \varphi \overline{\psi }\psi .`$
The system may be completely characterized by the equation of motion for the mean field $`\varphi `$

$$\ddot{\varphi }+\frac{M+\kappa \varphi }{\lambda }m_{}^2+\lambda m_\psi A^2+B^2+\frac{1}{2}\lambda \overline{\psi }\psi =0,$$
(4)
and by the time dependent masses of the $`\psi `$, $`A`$, and $`B`$ fields:

$`m_\psi `$ $`=`$ $`\mu +\lambda \varphi ,`$ (5)
$`m_A^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_\psi ^2+m_{}^2,`$ (6)
$`m_B^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_\psi ^2m_{}^2,`$ (7)
with,

$$m_{}^2\lambda \left[M\varphi +\frac{1}{2}\kappa \varphi ^2+\frac{1}{2}\lambda A^2B^2\right].$$
(8)
The expectation values, $`\overline{\psi }\psi `$, $`A^2`$, and $`B^2`$ are determined in the usual way in terms of the non-equilibrium mode functions for the individual fields. General details, including the renormalization procedure may be found in Refs. . Specific details for this model will be provided in future work.

Note that the appearance of $`A^2B^2`$ on the right hand side of the expression for $`m_{}^2`$, Eq. (8), means that this expression plays the role of a gap equation which must be satisfied by the dynamics. Also note that the sum rule $`m_A^2+m_B^22m_\psi ^2=0`$ is automatically satisfied for all times as required by supersymmetry.

Through use of the equations of motion, it is straightforward to show that the variation of the Lagrangian (3) vanishes under supersymmetry transformations up to a total derivative. To this order, the Lagrangian is completely supersymmetric with $`\varphi `$ acting as a classical background field.

We stress that the evolution determined by equation (4) and the time dependent masses (5) – (8) exactly solves the quantum field theoretical system described by the superpotential (1) in the $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit to all orders in perturbation theory. We have made no further approximations and the only simplifications, eg., $`B_0=A_i=B_i=0`$, correspond to choices of initial conditions.

## 3 Numerical results

Finite energy density is imposed via out of equilibrium initial conditions for the zero mode $`\varphi `$. The evolution toward the non-perturbative attractor state is depicted in Fig. 1 with the corresponding masses of the fields in Fig. 2. We note the following characteristics. The evolution begins with large oscillations of $`\varphi `$ over the entire classically allowed range of evolution. During this initial period, the field fluctuations $`A^2`$ and $`B^2`$ grow. After a relatively short period of time, the mean field settles down precisely to the point $`\varphi =\mu /\lambda `$. The result is that the $`N`$ fermions become massless.

Interestingly, the scalar fluctuations continue to grow until a state is formed for which the fields $`A`$ and $`B`$ are massless as well (Fig. 2). This configuration remains completely stable. We also find that this behavior persists up to energy densities much higher than any natural scale in the problem, indicating that there is no symmetry restoration and that this represents the generic behavior of the system. This is made possible by the cancellation of contributions from $`A^2`$ and $`B^2`$ in the gap equation (8), a direct consequence of supersymmetry, which allows these field fluctuations to become arbitrarily large while not changing their contributions to the masses of the field quanta. The growth of these fluctuations also provides the mechanism for driving the fermion mass to zero, see Eq. (4).

In order to understand the supersymmetric field configuration reached by the non-equilibrium time evolution, it is illuminating to study the effective potential for static field configurations as a function $`\varphi `$. It is obtained (see, e.g. ) by maximizing with respect to $`m_{}^2`$ the potential

$`V(\varphi ,m_{}^2)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(M\varphi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\kappa \varphi ^2\right){\displaystyle \frac{m_{}^2}{\lambda }}{\displaystyle \frac{m_{}^4}{2\lambda ^2}}`$ (9)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{64\pi ^2}}\left[g(m_A^2)+g(m_B^2)2g(m_\psi ^2)\right],`$
where $`g(m_i^2)=m_i^4(\mathrm{ln}(m_i^2/m^2)3/2)`$.

The effective potential $`V(\varphi )`$ is plotted in Fig. 3 along with the tree level potential. We see that the effective potential has a minimum at $`\varphi =\mu /\lambda `$, and one finds that at this point all the masses vanish. To understand this new minimum, it is helpful to remember that, if one allows for states which break $`O(N)`$, such that, for example, $`A_1=\sigma 0`$ then one finds $`O(N)`$ breaking minima at $`\lambda \varphi =\mu `$ and $`\lambda \sigma =\pm \sqrt{2\mu M\kappa \mu ^3/\lambda }`$. As a result of the convexity theorem, the exact large $`N`$ effective potential must be flat between these minima as in a Maxwell construction. Hence, there must be a new minimum in the full effective potential as shown in the figure.

The state that is reached by the evolution is therefore a phase consisting of different spontaneously broken $`O(N)`$ states in coexistence.

The values of $`\varphi `$ and the mass parameters obtained at late times in the out of equilibrium evolution correspond precisely to such a state. The state itself is a highly excited one and is time dependent in a coherent way. Furthermore, we find that the system is attracted towards this configuration once the energy density is sufficiently high.

As a side note, we point out that the effective potential in the $`\varphi `$ direction is non-convex. This has to do with the fact that $`\varphi `$ acts as a simple classical zero mode whose fluctuations are completely negligible in the leading order large $`N`$ limit.

Next, we introduce soft symmetry breaking to the $`O(N)`$ model via a scalar mass $`m_s`$ for the $`A`$ and $`B`$ fields such that $`m_A^2=m_\psi ^2+m_{}^2+m_s^2`$ and $`m_B^2=m_\psi ^2m_{}^2+m_s^2`$. Fig. 4 shows the result for a value $`m_s^2/\mu ^2=10^4`$. We see again that the system reaches the attractor state, and the explicit soft symmetry breaking terms provide a mass for the $`A`$ field equal to $`\sqrt{2}m_s`$, while the $`B`$ field remains massless. The fermion mass is found to be three orders of magnitude smaller.

We make the following conclusions. First, supersymmetry may play a very important role in the dynamics of the early universe beyond ordinary model building. The requirement of massless fermions appearing in the spectrum, in particular, may be important to inflationary and reheating dynamics and could also play a significant role in baryogenesis. Furthermore, the constraints of supersymmetry can lead to a preferential choice between multiple degenerate vacua through the existence of attractor states at finite energy density. Such issues are deserving of further study.

## Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dan Boyanovsky for directing their interest toward out of equilibrium supersymmetry.


text:
# The VIOLENT ENVIRONMENT of the SHAPLEY CONCENTRATION: a MULTIWAVELENGTH VIEW

## 1 Introduction

Merging clusters are the most energetic and common phenomena in the Universe, but it is not clear in which way the kinetic energy of this phenomenon is dissipated and which is the influence on the galaxy population. There are some observational features that have been associated with the cluster merging, like shocks in the hot gas, radio halos, relics and wide angle tail radiosources, and the presence of starburst galaxies, even if the precise theorical description is not yet completely assesed.
Rich superclusters are the ideal environment for the detection of cluster mergings, because the peculiar velocities induced by the enhanced local density of the large-scale structure favour the cluster-cluster and cluster-group collisions, in the same way as the caustics seen in the simulations.
The most remarkable examples of cluster merging seen at an early stage are found in the central region of the Shapley Concentration, the richest supercluster of clusters within 300 h-1 Mpc . This supercluster represents a unique laboratory where it is possible to follow cluster mergings and to test related astrophysical consequences.
We present the results of an extensive, multiwavelength survey of the central part of the Shapley Concentration, with the use of optical spectra, radio and X-ray data (see also the poster by Zucca et al., these proceedings).
Updates to this project can be found at the WWW page:
http://boas5.bo.astro.it/$``$bardelli/shapley/shapley\_new.html

## 2 OPTICAL DATA

We performed extensive redshift surveys in the central part of the Shapley Concentration, covering both the cluster and the intercluster galaxies. We focussed in particular on the A3558 and the A3528 complexes, two chains of interacting clusters. We derived the dynamical parameters of each cluster (Bardelli et al. 1994, 1998a, 2000b) and we studied their substructures (Bardelli et al. 1998b, 2000b).
The analysis of substructures is important in order to fully describe the galaxy dynamics in major mergings: in this sense the DEDICA algorithm (Pisani 1996) is particularly powerful, because it is possible to perform both a bi-dimensional and a three-dimensional (i.e. using the galaxy velocity as the third coordinate) analysis.
In Figures 1 and 2 we show the results of this analysis on the A3528 and the A3558 complexes, respectively.
In the A3558 complex, the members of the chain appear to be fragmented in a large number of components: in fact we found 21 significant three-dimensional subclumps. On the contrary, the A3528 complex is less fragmented: in fact, even if these two complexes have similar sizes, in the A3528 complex we detect only 8 significant three-dimensional subclumps.

## 3 RADIO DATA

We performed a radio survey at 22cm with the ATCA telescope to 1 mJy in the region of the A3558 and A3528 cluster complexes, obtaining a total of 450 sources (Venturi et al. 2000a, 2000b). Among these sources, $`100`$ have optical counterpart and 43 have redshifts in the Shapley Concentration.
In Figure 3 we show the detected radiosources overlaid on the optical isodensity contours: filled circles and squares are sources with optical counterparts. The position of the radiosources at the distance of the Shapley Concentration is reported in Figure 4, where the wedge diagrams of the optical sample are presented.
The bivariate radio-optical lunimosity function has been calculated for the A3528 and A3558 cluster complexes and compared with the luminosity function of normal clusters (Ledlow & Owen 1996) in Figure 5: it is clear that in the A3558 complex a significant lack of radiogalaxies is present.
In the region of interacting clusters, a number of extended radiosources has been detected (Figure 6 and Figure 7). The study of these sources is particularly important for deriving physical constraints on the interaction of electrons with the ICM. In particular, Venturi et al. (1999), studying a relic radio source at the periphery of the A3558 complex, individuated a possible shock front between the A3556 cluster and a smaller group.
Following this strategy we will integrate the optical, X-ray and radio data in order to have a general description of the ongoing phenomena (Figure 8).

## 4 X-RAY DATA

Fundamental data on the physics of the ICM during a merging come from the X-ray band. Figure 11 (taken from Ettori et al. 1997) shows a mosaic of ROSAT-PSPC images of clusters in the A3558 complex.
Bardelli et al. (1996) and Kull & Böhringer (1999) showed that the three clusters (A3562, A3558 and A3556) and the two poor groups (SC1329-131 and SC1327-312) of this complex are enbedded in a hot gas filament. This fact points toward a major merging event. A careful analysis of the distribution and the temperature of the ICM is currently in progress with the use of ROSAT and BeppoSAX data (Ettori et al. 2000, see Figures 12 and 13).
For the A3528 cluster complex, pointed XMM observations have been allocated.

## 5 CONCLUSIONS

In this contribution we described a multiwavelength study of two cluster complexes at the center of the Shapley Concentration: both these structures are formed by interacting clusters and have sizes of the order of $`7`$ h-1 Mpc .

In the A3558 complex, the members of the chain appear to be fragmented in a large number of components, detected with high significance both in the optical and in the X-ray band. All these components are embedded in a hot gas filament. Moreover, Venturi et al. (2000) found a deficiency of radiogalaxies in the A3558 complex with respect to the radio-optical luminosity function of normal clusters and Bardelli et al. (1998b) found an excess of blue galaxies in the expected position of the shock.
These facts could suggest that the dynamical processes acting on this complex are in a rather advanced stage and that the merging events were already able to induce modifications in the galaxy population. Our conclusion is that the A3558 complex is a cluster-cluster collision (otherwise called “major merging”) seen just after the first core-core encounter, where an intervening cluster impacted onto the richer object A3558. Indeed the clumpiness found eastward of A3558 could be due to the galaxies of this intervening cluster, which is now emerging from the main component. This scenario is also confirmed by numerical simulations of merging clusters (see f.i. lower panels in Fig.2 of Burns et al. 1994, which show the structure after the core-core encounter).

In the A3528 cluster complex, the effect of interactions is less spectacular. This complex appear less fragmented than the A3558 complex and the bivariate radio-optical luminosity function is not different with respect to the other clusters.
All these characteristics of the A3528 complex seem to indicate that this is a “young” structure (Bardelli et al. 2000b): the two interacting cluster pairs (A3528N-A3528S and A3530-A3532) resemble the simulations of Burns et al. (1994) for the pre-merger case (see upper panels of their Fig.2). This scenario is consistent with the suggestions of Reid et al. (1998), based on the analysis of extended radiosources in this region and with the fact that the merging effects on the galaxy population and on the cluster dynamics are not yet evident.
Given the overall overdensity of this region, at the end these two main components will merge together in a major merging event, forming a structure similar to the A3558 complex.

The “age” difference of the two complexes is mainly due to their overdensities, which lead to different collapse times (see Table 5 in Bardelli et al. 2000a). This fact confirms that the Shapley Concentration is a “laboratory” where it is possible to study the formation of clusters at different stages.

## References


text:
# Radiation Pressure Induced Instabilities in Laser Interferometric Detectors of Gravitational Waves

## I Introduction

The general theory of relativity predicts the existence of gravitational waves. Since gravity couples very weakly to matter, highly sensitive detectors are required to detect gravitational waves. Over the next decade several large-scale interferometric gravitational wave detectors will come on-line. These include the LIGO, composed of two interferometric detectors situated in the United States each with baselines of 4 km, VIRGO, an Italian/French project located near Pisa with a baseline of 3 km, GEO600, a British/German interferometer under construction near Hannover with a baseline of 600 m, TAMA in Japan, a medium-scale laser interferometer with a baseline of 300 m and with funding approval AIGO500, the proposed 500 m project sponsored by ACIGA . The large scale interferometers will use Fabry-Perot cavities and the ground based detectors will have arm lengths of few kilometers. There are several noise sources which plague the detector. Amongst them, the photon shot noise is dominant at high frequencies. It is reduced by increasing the amount of power of the laser source, as the noise is inversely proportional to the square root of the power. Therefore the cavities envisaged will operate with very high powers in their arms, tens of kiloWatts for initial detectors and perhaps powers as high as megaWatts in planned advanced detectors. The high power stored in the cavities can generate a number of nonlinear effects which would adversely affect the operation of the optical cavity. Here, we look into one such effect, namely, the dynamics of mirrors under the radiation pressure force. In earlier literature, we and others had investigated the thermo-elastic deformation of the mirrors due to the absorption of the power in the coatings and performed a longitudinal analysis of the cavity . Following these investigations, we studied the effects of radiation pressure in the cavity, in the regime when the displacement of the mirror is small compared with the line-width of the cavity, the cavity is servoed at resonance with a realistic servo control and the variation in the radiation pressure force is linearly dependent on the displacement. The radiation pressure effects have also been investigated in earlier literature . Here, however, since we now have a reasonably good idea about the instrumental parameters to be used in the large scale detectors, we expect that our analysis here will be important to the experimentalists. We assume that the mirrors are hanging ‘freely’ (there is no active servo control) and the radiation pressure exerts force on them which displaces them from resonance. It is very important for people involved in the experiments being built to have a quantitative idea of the magnitude of these effects. For instance, it would be necessary to take into account these effects and modify the servo transfer functions to be used for the control of the experiments.

The main result of this paper is to establish that the freely hanging mirrors continuously gain energy and swing with ever increasing amplitude when subjected to radiation pressure force arising from the light field. This result seems to be in opposition with the results of Meystre et al., who found in  a mirror confinement due to the radiation pressure. The reason for this difference of behaviour is the ‘time delay’ effect which is also examined in detail in this paper. The time delay is large for the long (kilometric) cavities, primarily studied here, while it can be neglected for short cavities such as the one studied by Meystre et al.  and those used in most of labs. Closed form expressions have been given which facilitate in understanding the physics of the phenomenon.

The paper is organized as follows:
In section II, we set up the equation of motion of the free mirrors. We examine the motion of the mirrors with the two forces $`(i)`$ the radiation pressure force, $`(ii)`$ the force of gravity. In section III, we numerically integrate the equations of motion using the so called ‘Phase Space Method’. We present the results for the particular case, when the mirrors are in the resonance positions and the laser is switched on. We observe that the amplitude of the motion of the mirrors increases with time and energy is pumped into the system. For very large times, when the amplitude of the system is also very large, so that the mirrors cross several of the Fabry-Perot resonances in one cycle of the pendulum, the motion approximates to that of an anti-damped harmonic oscillator. We give also, for comparison, the numerical results obtained for a short cavity : no anti-damping is exhibited in this case, in agreement with earlier results . In section IV, we obtain analytically, under the quasi-static approximation, the phase space trajectories of the motion of the individual mirrors as well as the motion in the differential mode and the common mode (the centre of mass mode). The analytical results match with the numerical ones remarkably. In section V, we give a quantitative description of the phenomenon under the assumption that the velocity of the mirror does not change very much on the time scale of the storage time of the cavity. We find that the gain in energy is due to a differential radiation pressure force arising from the asymmetry, according as the mirrors are approaching each other or moving away from each other. We obtain approximate analytical expressions for the differential force, the time ‘delay’ and then proceed to compute the gain in energy per cycle when the mirrors encounter a single resonance or cross several resonances. For large amplitudes, when the mirrors cross several resonances, the system behaves like an anti-damped harmonic oscillator. We can then associate an effective negative $`Q`$-factor for the system. We show that the $`Q`$-factor depends on the input power, the finesse of the cavity and the round trip time of the cavity. Finally in section VI, we study the behaviour of the system when it is initially in equilibrium and goes out of lock. This may happen when the servo loop is suddenly opened.

## II Optical and mechanical equations

We consider only ‘free’ mirrors meaning that no servo control loop is used. The only forces acting on the mirrors are the radiation pressure force and gravity which manifests itself as the restoring force of the pendulum. We consider a single cavity with mirrors $`M1`$ and $`M2`$ which are suspended as shown in fig.1. The input beam $`A`$ enters the cavity from mirror $`M1`$ and bounces back and forth between the two mirrors. After several round trips, whose number is of the order of the finesse of the cavity, the field builds up inside the cavity. The magnitude of the field depends on the finesse of the cavity, the input power and the detuning of the cavity. The field or the power produces the radiation pressure force which pushes on the mirrors, driving them apart, thus changing the distance between the two. This in turn changes the power inside the cavity. For instance, if the mirrors were hanging in a position of resonance, the radiation pressure force drives the cavity out of resonance, reducing the radiation pressure force. The mirrors start swinging with radiation pressure force adjusting to the continuously varying length of the cavity. It is found that the radiation pressure force does not adjust instantaneously to the new length but lags behind the expected static force given by the Fabry-Perot curve (the Airy function) by a time-lag comparable to the storage time of the cavity. The time-lag has been called ‘time delay’ in earlier literature .

The slowly varying amplitude of the field inside the cavity at time $`t`$, denoted by $`B(t)`$ satisfies the following equation,

$$B(t)=t_1A\mathrm{exp}[ikx_1(t)]+RB(t\tau )\mathrm{exp}[ikL(t)],$$
(1)
where, $`x_i(t)`$, $`r_i`$ and $`t_i`$, $`i=1,2`$ are the positions, reflectivities and transmitivitties of the mirrors $`M1`$ and $`M2`$ respectively; $`R=r_1r_2`$, $`k=2\pi /\lambda `$, where $`\lambda `$ is the wavelength of the laser light, $`\tau `$ is the round trip time and

$$L(t)=2x_2(t\tau /2)x_1(t)x_1(t\tau ).$$
(2)
In case of the VIRGO cavity, the arm length $`L_0`$ is 3 km, the round trip time $`\tau =2L_0/c2\times 10^5`$ seconds, where $`c`$ is the speed of light. This equation provides an iterative relation between the field amplitude at time $`t`$ to the field amplitude at time $`t\tau `$ and the positions of the mirrors. We investigate the following two situations:

1. The mirrors are hanging in the positions of resonance and the laser is switched on at the time $`t=t_0`$.
2. The mirrors are hanging in an equilibrium state with the radiation pressure force balancing the restoring force of the suspension.

Situation 1 represents a possible experiment. When the servo-control is not operating, the mirrors will be freely in motion. Then, when the laser is switched on, the radiation pressure will affect the motion of the mirrors. However, here, we mainly deal with the case (as given in 1), when the mirrors are initially at rest and in the resonance position. However, many of our analytical formulae, for example, that of ‘time-delay’ apply to more general situations.
Situation 2 describes the case when the interferometer is already in operation. Now if the servo-control loop is suddenly opened, the system will tend to become unstable. This case is also investigated.

The equations of motion for the mirrors correspond to forced harmonic oscillator with the forcing term arising from the radiation pressure force. We first compute the radiation pressure forces on each mirror. For mirror $`M1`$, the radiation pressure force comprises of two terms, electric field due the input laser beam, $`A`$ and the intra-cavity field $`B`$ as shown in fig.1. The radiation pressure force on $`M1`$ is,

$$F_1(t)=\frac{2}{c}\left[R^2P(t\tau )r_1^2P_0\right],$$
(3)
where, $`P(t)=|B(t)|^2`$, $`P_0=|A|^2`$ and $`c`$ is the speed of light. $`r_i^2`$ is the fraction of average number of photons reflected by $`i`$ th mirror for $`i=1,2`$ respectively.
For $`M2`$, the radiation pressure force is given by

$$F_2\left(t\frac{\tau }{2}\right)=\frac{2r_2^2}{c}P(t\tau ).$$
(4)
The equations of motion for the mirrors with the masses, natural frequencies and damping constants, $`m_i`$, $`\omega _i`$, $`\tau _i`$; $`i=1,2`$, respectively, are

$$m_i\left[\ddot{x}_i+\frac{2}{\tau _i}\dot{x}_i+\omega _i^2(x_ix_{i0})\right]=F_i(t),$$
(5)
where $`x_{i0}`$ is the initial position of the mirror such that the separation between the mirrors before switching on the laser is $`L_0=x_{20}x_{10}`$. The full system of equations to be evolved in time are the equations from (1) to (5) (non-linearly coupled equations). In section III, we first carry out the task numerically and in later sections, after we have gained sufficient physical insight into the problem, we shall present the semi-analytical results.

## III The numerical solution

For the numerical calculation, we consider the VIRGO parameters for the suspension and the optical cavity. We assume $`m_1=m_2=m28`$ kg., $`\omega _1=\omega _2=\omega 3.75`$ rad./sec. which corresponds to a resonant frequency of about 0.6 Hz. The $`Q`$ factor for the suspension is typically of the order of $`10^6`$. The optical parameters are $`\tau 2\times 10^5`$ sec., the wavelength of the carrier wave $`\lambda 1.064\mu `$m, $`r_10.94`$, $`r_21`$. The wave number is $`k=2\pi /\lambda `$ and $`R0.94`$. We examine the behaviour of the system with the input power varying between 1 kW to 30 kW. Initial detectors will be operated at input powers $``$ 1 kW and advanced detectors at powers of few hundred kW or even upto a MW. Note that these are the input powers for the main cavities after power recycling has been implemented.

With the above values for the parameters, we find that the instabilities set in, on the time-scales of few seconds to few hundred seconds. Since the $`Q`$-factor of the pendulum suspension is so large, the damping in the oscillations can be neglected for the numerical integrations carried over the time intervals $`\frac{Q}{\omega }10^6`$ seconds. Most of our numerical integrations range from few seconds to at most few thousands of seconds. Neglecting damping, the equations of motion for the mirrors become,

$$\ddot{x}_i+\omega ^2(x_ix_{i0})=\frac{F_i(t)}{m}=f_i(t),i=1,2.$$
(6)
The equations of motion of the mirrors are non-linear differential equations and cannot be solved by simple methods. We integrate the equations by the so called ‘Phase Space method’ described below:
Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be the time-step of integration. The natural time step we assume is $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\tau `$. We assume that the forcing term is a constant during each time step. This assumption is not unrealistic because the round trip time interval for the VIRGO cavity is of the order of $`10^5`$ seconds; note that this approximation will hold a fortiori for more common (much shorter) cavities. The equations simplify enormously under this assumption. Thus we can integrate the equations exactly within this time interval.
The evolution of the equations goes as follows:

$$x_{n+1}=x_n\mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{\Delta }+p_n\mathrm{sin}\omega \mathrm{\Delta }+\frac{f_n(1\mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{\Delta })}{\omega ^2},$$
(7)
$$p_{n+1}=x_n\mathrm{sin}\omega \mathrm{\Delta }+p_n\mathrm{cos}\omega \mathrm{\Delta }+\frac{f_n\mathrm{sin}\omega \mathrm{\Delta }}{\omega ^2},$$
(8)
where we have dropped the indices 1,2 for simplicity and $`p=\dot{x}/\omega `$. Here, $`x`$ represents the displacement from the mean position $`x_0`$. The index $`n`$ represents the value of the variable at the time $`n\mathrm{\Delta }`$, i.e. for example, $`x_n=x(n\mathrm{\Delta })`$. The optical component has the following iterative evolution:

$$f_{1n}=\frac{2[R^2P_{n1}r_1^2P_0]}{mc},$$
(9)
$$f_{2n}=\frac{2r_2^2P_{n1}}{mc},$$
(10)
$$P_n=|B_n|^2,$$
(11)
$$B_n=t_1A\mathrm{exp}(ikx_{1n})+RB_{n1}\mathrm{exp}(ikL_n),$$
(12)
$$L_n=2x_{2n}x_{1n}x_{1,n1}.$$
(13)
This scheme solves the system of equations. Since it is the length of the cavity that actually matters for this problem, we define the variable,

$$\psi (t)=k[x_2(t)x_1(t)]kL_0,$$
(14)
and present the results in phase space plots of $`\dot{\psi }/\omega `$ vs $`\psi `$. $`\psi (t)`$ is called the differential mode.

We first consider the case when the mirrors are hanging in the resonance position and the laser is switched on. As the power builds up, the radiation pressure acts on the mirrors, driving them apart resulting in the detuning of the cavity. This reduces the radiation pressure force and the mirrors swing back. The motion is oscillatory and as we note, the oscillations increase in amplitude. We employ two values of input power namely, 1 kW (initial VIRGO) and 30 kW corresponding to advanced detectors. The results are presented by the phase space trajectories of the mirrors. We consider four variables for the purpose, $`x_1`$, $`x_2`$, $`\psi `$ and $`\varphi `$. $`\varphi `$, defined later in the text in eq. (24), section IV - B, is called the common mode. For the range of powers considered 1 kW to 30 kW, the phase space curves obtained from numerical simulations, for few tens of seconds are qualitatively the same.
We make the following general observations about the features:

1. We observe from figs.4 and 5 that the radius of the phase space curve increases with every cycle which indicates that the mirrors continuously gain energy from the input laser beam implying that the system is nonconservative. We also observe that the gain per cycle is not constant but some sort of a periodic function of the radius of the phase space diagram. We shall consider this phenomenon in detail in section V.
2. The (static) radiation pressure force peaks when the cavity is in resonance and drops down to zero when it is out of resonance, (see fig.3). The full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the radiation pressure force $`F(\psi )`$ is about $`0.06`$ rad, corresponding to the FWHM of the cavity resonance curve for a finesse of 50. Hence, for the initial stretch of the phase space trajectory, the mirrors experience the radiation pressure force whereas during the rest of the time, they only experience the restoring force (and the force due to the input power for $`M1`$). The phase-space trajectory is circular during the restoring force regime and is deformed away from the circularity when the mirrors encounter the appreciable amount of radiation pressure near resonance (see fig.4).
3. Since the laser is beamed in the positive $`x`$-direction, there is an asymmetry about the origin. This shifts the centre of mass trajectory to the positive side of the $`x`$ axis (see fig.4). The period of oscillation of the common mode is twice that of the period of the differential mode of the system (see fig.2).
4. If we let the laser beam pump in energy for large amounts of time, the amplitude also becomes large and the mirrors sweep across several resonances. The phase space trajectory then tends to become more and more circular and the motion approximates to that of a simple harmonic motion. This feature can be observed in all the four modes. The circularity of the trajectory implies that the motion is almost ‘free’. The radiation pressure force has little effect because the mirrors sweep too quickly across the resonances for it to affect their motion. However, as we shall see that the steady gain in energy still persists. Figure 5 depicts this phenomenon.
5. The amount of energy imparted to mirror 2 by the laser beam after getting reflected, is more than to mirror 1. Thus M2 swings with larger amplitude as compared to M1 (see fig.4) (the radiation force is larger on M2).
6. Let’s turn now to the dynamics of a short cavity. The fig.6 shows the space of phase trajectory for the differential mode $`\psi `$, for a short cavity of length $`L_0=30`$ cm (instead of 3 km for the other examples) and with the same optical and mechanical parameters and initial conditions as in fig.5 obtained with the 3 km long cavity. The round-trip time is here $`\tau 2\times 10^9`$ s, and the simulation lasts for 500 s (corresponding to a huge number of round trips in the cavity). At the contrary of the kilometric cavity, see fig.5, no energy gain is found. This is in accord with the results of Meystre et al., who have previously developped a theory of radiation-pressure driven cavities . The physical reason for this difference of behaviour between a short (common) cavity and a kilometric one is precisely due to the difference of length, as explained in the following sections. Time delay effects are thus of utmost importance for very long cavities, while they can be neglected for usual ones (and so have been neglected in Meystre’s theory ).

## IV Phase space trajectories for the first cycle

In this section, we obtain approximate closed form expressions for the equations of the phase space trajectories for about a period of one cycle. For the VIRGO case, this turns out to be between one or two seconds. This analysis could be useful in the context of the initial locking of the cavity.

### A The differential mode $`\psi `$

The equations of motion of the individual mirrors, equations (3) to (5) allow us to write the equation of motion of the system of mirrors in the differential mode as,

$$\ddot{\psi }+\omega ^2\psi =\frac{k}{m}[F_2(t)F_1(t)].$$
(15)
In the quasi-static approximation,

$$P(t\tau )P(t)=\frac{P_{max}}{1+(\frac{2}{\pi })^2\mathrm{sin}^2\psi },$$
(16)
where $`=\pi \sqrt{R}`$$`/(1R)`$ is the finesse of the cavity and

$$P_{max}=\frac{t_1^2P_0}{(1R)^2}.$$
(17)
Thus the equation for $`\psi `$ is,

$$\frac{\ddot{\psi }}{\omega ^2}+(\psi +\psi _0)=\frac{F_0}{1+(\frac{2}{\pi })^2\mathrm{sin}^2\psi },$$
(18)
where

$$F_0=\frac{2k(r_2^2+R^2)}{m\omega ^2c}P_{max},$$
(19)
and

$$\psi _0=\frac{2kP_0r_1^2}{m\omega ^2c}.$$
(20)
For the VIRGO cavity, we have the following numerical values for the quantities:
$`\psi _00.88P_0/10kW`$, $``$ 50 and $`F_062.6P_0/10kW`$.
For $``$ 1, the term on the right hand side of equation (18) is non-zero only when $`\psi 1`$. With the approximation $`\mathrm{sin}\psi \psi `$, we can easily integrate equation (18) to get the phase space trajectory of the mirrors,

$$\frac{\dot{\psi }^2}{\omega ^2}+(\psi +\psi _0)^2=\frac{F_0\pi }{}\mathrm{tan}^1(\frac{2}{\pi }\psi )+\psi _0^2.$$
(21)
For low powers like 1 kW, the approximation $`\mathrm{sin}\psi \psi `$ works remarkably well and agrees with the numerically obtained phase space trajectory. In order to compare the analytical and numerical results, we compare the maximum value of $`\psi `$, namely $`\psi _{max}`$, of the trajectories for various input powers in fig.7.

1. When $`\psi `$ is small that is near resonance, the equation of the trajectory reduces to

$$\frac{\dot{\psi }^2}{\omega ^2}=2F_0\psi .$$
(22)
Thus the trajectory is parabolic in shape and passes through the origin.
2. When $`\psi 1`$, the trajectory is a circle as expected since there is hardly any radiation pressure force acting on the mirrors. The equation of the trajectory in this regime is

$$\frac{\dot{\psi }^2}{\omega ^2}+(\psi +\psi _0)^2=\frac{F_0\pi ^2}{2}+\psi _0^2.$$
(23)

When the input power is very large $`50`$ kW, the trajectory does not maintain this simple shape. For example, when $`P_0=50`$ kW, the trajectory is as shown in fig.8.

This is because the high powers make the mirrors cross several resonances in the first cycle itself and consequently the trajectory has more complex behaviour. We do not pursue this case here.

### B The common mode $`\varphi `$

In this sub-section, we study the motion of the center of mass of the system of two mirrors. We define the center of mass coordinate of the two mirrors as,

$$\varphi =k(x_1x_{10})+k(x_2x_{20}).$$
(24)
The equation of motion of the system in the center of mass coordinate is,

$$\ddot{\varphi }+\omega ^2\varphi =\frac{k}{m}[F_1(t)+F_2(t)],$$
(25)
where for $`F_1(t)`$ and $`F_2(t)`$ are given by equations (3) and (4). The equation of motion takes the form,

$$\frac{\ddot{\varphi }}{\omega ^2}+(\varphi \psi _0)=\frac{F_c}{1+(\frac{2}{\pi })^2\mathrm{sin}^2\psi },$$
(26)
where

$$F_c=\frac{2k(r_2^2R^2)t_1^2P_0}{mc\omega ^2(1R)^2}.$$
(27)
For VIRGO parameters, $`F_c4.0\frac{P_0}{10kW}`$. The above equation is a second order differential equation and is coupled nontrivially to the $`\psi `$ mode. The strategy we adopt is to study the motion of the center of mass in different regimes; (1) near the resonance and (2) away from the resonance. The full trajectory is obtained by matching the solution in the region of the overlap.

1. For $`0\psi 0.5`$; $`\mathrm{sin}\psi \psi `$, equation (26) becomes

$$\frac{\ddot{\varphi }}{\omega ^2}+(\varphi \psi _0)=\frac{F_c}{1+(\frac{2\psi }{\pi })^2}.$$
(28)
Further for $`\psi 3\times 10^3`$, $`(\frac{2\psi }{\pi })^21`$; we neglect $`(\frac{2\psi }{\pi })^2`$ as compared to 1 and obtain,

$$\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{\omega ^2}+\varphi ^2=2(F_c+\psi _0)\varphi .$$
(29)
For the VIRGO cavity and input power 1 kW, $`F_c0.4`$. Neglecting the quadratic term in $`\varphi `$ as compared to the linear term, we see that the motion of the center of mass describes a parabola for low values of $`\psi `$ and $`\varphi `$,

$$\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{\omega ^2}0.97\varphi .$$
(30)
We compare the slopes of the phase space diagrams in the differential mode as well as the common mode. The phase space curve is more steeper in the common mode as compared to the differential mode.
2. Away from resonance, $`\psi 0.5`$, the power stored inside the cavity is almost zero. The equation of motion of the center of mass is given by,

$$\ddot{\varphi }+\varphi =\psi _0.$$
(31)
The solution for the initial conditions $`\varphi =\varphi _0,\dot{\varphi }=\dot{\varphi }_0`$ is,

$$\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{\omega ^2}+(\varphi \psi _0)^2=\frac{\dot{\varphi }_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{\omega ^2}+(\varphi _0\psi _0)^2.$$
(32)

This solution must be matched to the solution in case 1. Suppose we match the solution at $`\varphi _0=0.5`$, from equation (29) we have $`\dot{\varphi }/\omega 0.7`$. This gives the approximate solution. In general, the solution in this region is,

$$\frac{\dot{\varphi }^2}{\omega ^2}+(\varphi \psi _0)^2=2(F_c+\psi _0)\varphi _0+(\varphi _0\psi _0)^2\varphi _0^2.$$
(33)
The equations (29) and (33) describe the full solution for this mode.

The phase space trajectory for the individual mirrors can be obtained from the motion of the mirrors in the differential and the common modes. The trajectories of the $`x_1`$ and $`x_2`$ modes are shown in figures 2 and 4.

## V Energy considerations and anti-damping

In the previous section, we examined the motion of the mirrors under the radiation pressure force. We noted that each time when the mirrors cross a resonance they experience an impulsive force. In this section, we analyze in detail as to how the system gains energy as each resonance is encountered.

### A Quasi-static approximation

We start with the quasi-static approximation in which the system is conservative, thus there is no net gain in energy. We then phenomenologically introduce the ‘time delay’, $`\tau _{lag}`$ which now leads to gain in energy. We thus obtain $`\tau _{lag}`$ in terms of the cavity parameters and this gives us an equation for an anti-damped harmonic oscillator. The energy gain can be obtained as shown in the following sections. Finally, for large times, the gain can be expressed through a negative $`Q`$ of a harmonic oscillator. In the quasi-static approximation, we assume that the mirrors are moving ‘slowly’ that is the intra-cavity power has time to adjust itself to the slowly changing positions of mirrors, i.e. $`\tau \dot{\psi }1R`$. Thus neglecting $`\tau `$ from the equation of motion we obtain,

$$\frac{\ddot{\psi }}{\omega ^2}+(\psi +\psi _0)=F_s(\psi ),$$
(34)
where $`\psi _0`$ as given in the previous section gives the constant displacement due to the constant input power $`P_0`$ from the laser beam and $`F_s(\psi )`$ is the radiation pressure force in the static case is given by,

$$F_s(\psi )=\frac{F_0}{1+(\frac{2}{\pi })^2\mathrm{sin}^2\psi },$$
(35)
where $`F_0`$ is given in equation (19). The dimensionless energy of the system is an integral of motion and is obtained as

$$E=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\dot{\psi }^2}{\omega ^2}+V_{sus}(\psi )+V_0(\psi )+V_{rad}(\psi ),$$
(36)
where the potentials are given by,

$$V_{sus}(\psi )=\frac{1}{2}\psi ^2,$$
(37)
$$V_0(\psi )=\psi _0\psi ,$$
(38)
$$V_{rad(\psi )}=_0^\psi F_s(\psi )𝑑\psi .$$
(39)
The system is conservative in this approximation. These results have been obtained in the earlier literature .

However, we note from the results of numerical simulations that the system indeed gains energy with every cycle of oscillation. Moreover, this gain occurs when the radiation pressure force is appreciable i.e. when the system is near resonance. Most importantly, we observe from the numerical simulations that radiation pressure force lags behind its quasi-static value by a ‘time-lag’ which we denote by $`\tau _{lag}`$. We find that in the case of VIRGO, $`\tau _{lag}`$ varies from about $`16\tau `$ to $`30\tau `$ as one climbs up the resonance curve from half its maximum to the maximum. $`\tau _{lag}`$ is of the order of the storage time of the cavity. With this in mind we write the force $`F(t)F_s(t\tau _{lag})`$ and obtain the following equation of motion,

$$\frac{\ddot{\psi }}{\omega ^2}+(\psi +\psi _0)=F_s(\psi (t\tau _{lag})).$$
(40)
Taylor expanding the forcing term to the first order we obtain,

$$\frac{\ddot{\psi }}{\omega ^2}+\tau _{lag}\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }\dot{\psi }+(\psi +\psi _0)=F_s(\psi ),$$
(41)
as the equation of motion for the system. The $`\dot{\psi }`$ term in equation (41) is responsible to the gain/loss of energy of the system. This solely depends on the sign of $`\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }`$ since $`\tau _{lag}`$ is always positive. If we start the system from resonance at $`\psi =0`$, $`\psi `$ starts increasing slowly and in the region, $`\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }<0`$ and the system experiences more force than what it would have been in the quasi-static case. This excess force is manifested in an excess amount of energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$. In general, the energy gained/lost over a certain amount of time is given by,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E=_{\psi _1}^{\psi _2}\tau _{lag}(\psi )\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }\dot{\psi }𝑑\psi =_{t_1}^{t_2}\tau _{lag}\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }\dot{\psi }^2𝑑t.$$
(42)
It is clear from equation (42) that when $`\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }<0`$, the energy gain $`\mathrm{\Delta }E>0`$ and vice-versa. But since the radiation pressure force always gives a kick in the positive -$`\psi `$ direction,the $`|\dot{\psi }|`$ is always larger when $`\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }<0`$. In other words, the amount of energy gained by the system is more than the amount of energy lost. Hence, there is always a net gain in energy when the system crosses a resonance. We need to compute this extra force $`\mathrm{\Delta }F`$ which gives rise to the gain in the energy to the first order in $`\tau _{lag}`$. We obtain,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }F=\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }\dot{\psi }\tau _{lag}.$$
(43)
We note that $`\mathrm{\Delta }F`$ depends on the phase velocity and $`\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }`$. Since $`\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }0`$ when the system is away from resonance, $`\mathrm{\Delta }F`$ comes into play only in the region of resonance. Another way of describing the fundamental asymmetry is to say that for the moving mirror, the wavelength of the laser light is modified by the Doppler effect. When the mirrors are approaching each other, the apparent frequency of the light for the cavity is increased, or equivalently, the line-width of the cavity seen from the laboratory frame is narrower and vice versa when the mirrors move away from one another, the line-width is seen to be broader. The consequence is that the braking force (when the mirrors move against the light) acts for a shorter time than the accelerating force, when the mirrors are moving away from each other. Over one cycle the energy difference is positive and there is a continuous increase of mechanical energy which comes from the laser.

### B The computation of the time-delay

In this section, we obtain a closed form expression for the ‘time-delay’, $`\tau _{lag}`$ under the approximation that the relative velocity of the mirrors does not change much during the storage time of the cavity. This is observed in the numerical simulations and hence the approximation may be justified. $`\tau _{lag}`$ is the most important quantity for computing the rate of gain in energy. The intra-cavity radiation field at $`n`$-th time instant $`B_n`$ is related to the intra-cavity field at $`n+1`$-th time instant via an iterative relation,

$$B_{n+1}=t_1A+R\mathrm{exp}(2i\psi _n)B_n,$$
(44)
where, $`B_n=B(n\tau )`$, $`\psi _n=\psi (n\tau )`$. We compute the field $`B_n`$ from initial time $`t_0`$, which we take to be zero. We take the time step for the iteration to be the round trip time $`\tau `$. In order to compute the intra-cavity field, it is necessary to know the temporal behaviour of $`\psi `$. For the static case, when the mirrors are stationary, we get the equilibrium field $`B_s`$. When the mirrors are moving, the approximation now comes into play, namely, we assume that $`\dot{\psi }`$ is constant over the storage time of the cavity.
The Taylor expansion of $`\psi _k`$ to the first order around $`t=0`$ is,

$$\psi _k=\psi _0+k\tau \dot{\psi }_0,$$
(45)
where $`\psi _0=\psi (t=0).`$ Iterating equation (44) $`n`$ times starting from $`t=0`$ when $`B=B_0`$, we obtain,

$$B_n=t_1A\underset{m=0}{\overset{n1}{}}R^me^{2i_{k=nm}^{n1}\psi _k}+R^ne^{2i_{k=0}^{n1}\psi _k}B_0.$$
(46)
For large $`n`$, the last term in equation (46) tends to zero and the electric field amplitude at the $`n`$-th iteration is given by,

$$B_n=t_1A\underset{m=0}{\overset{n1}{}}R^me^{2i_{k=nm}^{n1}\psi _k}.$$
(47)
* If the relative separation between the mirrors is constant in time, $`\psi _k=\psi _0`$, we retrieve the equilibrium field $`B_s`$:

$$B_s=t_1A\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}R^me^{2im\psi _0}=\frac{t_1A}{1Re^{2i\psi _0}}.$$
(48)
* Turning now to the case in hand, when $`\psi _k`$ varies linearly with time, the sum in the exponential for large $`n`$ is approximately given by

$$\underset{k=nm}{\overset{n1}{}}\psi _km\psi _n\frac{1}{2}m^2\tau \dot{\psi _0}.$$
(49)
We combine equations (47) and (49) to obtain,

$$B_n=t_1A\underset{m=0}{\overset{n1}{}}R^me^{2im\psi _n}e^{im^2\tau \dot{\psi _0}}.$$
(50)
If $`\dot{\psi }`$ is small then the exponent can be linearized. Then it is possible to express the field as the sum of the static term $`B_s`$ and the remaining part $`\mathrm{\Delta }B`$ which corresponds to the time lag.
We write

$$B_n=B_s+\mathrm{\Delta }B,$$
(51)
where

$$\mathrm{\Delta }B=i\tau t_1A\dot{\psi _0}\underset{m=0}{\overset{n1}{}}R^me^{2im\psi _n}m^2.$$
(52)
Summing the arithmetico-geometric series  yields,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }B=2it_1A\tau \frac{\dot{\psi }R^2e^{4i\psi }}{(1Re^{2i\psi })^3}.$$
(53)
The corresponding power $`\mathrm{\Delta }P`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P=2Re(B_n\mathrm{\Delta }B_n^{})\frac{16t_1^2|A|^2\tau R^2\psi \dot{\psi }(1R)}{[(1R)^2+4R\psi ^2]^3}.$$
(54)
Refering to equation (19), we get the expression for the dimensionless extra force,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }F=\frac{2k(r_2^2+R^2)}{m\omega ^2c}\mathrm{\Delta }P.$$
(55)
The above expression of power is for values of $`\psi `$ near resonance when $`\psi 1`$. When $`\psi n\pi `$, the same expression can be replaced by the $`\psi n\pi `$ under similar approximations. The effective ‘time delay’ $`\tau _{lag}`$ is now obtained from (43), (54) and (55).

$$\tau _{lag}=\frac{2\tau R}{(1R)(1+(\frac{2}{\pi })^2\psi ^2)}.$$
(56)

We note from the equation (56) that the effective time lag is maximum at the resonance and starts decreasing as one goes away from the resonance value. For VIRGO parameters, we compute the value of the $`\tau _{lag}`$. At FWHM, i.e. $`\psi 0.03`$, $`\tau _{lag}16\tau `$, going up to $`\tau _{lag}30\tau `$ as one approaches resonance.

### C Energy gain near the resonance at $`\psi =0`$

In this section, we examine the motion of the mirrors for small amplitudes. Initially before the laser is switched on, the cavity is at resonance i.e. the two mirrors are separated by an integral multiple of $`\pi `$ in phase ($`\frac{kL_0}{\pi }`$ is an integer). The system starts from $`\psi =0`$ and the motion is allowed to evolve with time. We restrict the amplitude to $`|\psi |\pi `$ and study the system in this regime. Our goal is to compute the net gain in energy, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}`$ during one cycle of oscillation. We have,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}=2_0^{\psi _1}\mathrm{\Delta }F(\psi )𝑑\psi ,$$
(57)
where

$$\mathrm{\Delta }F(\psi )=\frac{16\tau R^2F_0\psi \dot{\psi }}{(1R)^3(1+(\frac{2\psi }{\pi })^2)^3}.$$
(58)
We note that $`\frac{dF_s}{d\psi }0`$ in this regime. We set an arbitrary cut-off $`\psi _1`$ (when $`\mathrm{\Delta }F1`$) as the system moves away from the resonance. The factor of two is because the force is encountered twice during the cycle.
The $`\dot{\psi }`$ is obtained from the energy balance equation,

$$\frac{1}{2}\frac{\dot{\psi }^2}{\omega ^2}=_0^\psi F_s(\psi )𝑑\psi \frac{\pi }{2}F_0\mathrm{tan}^1(\frac{2\psi }{\pi }).$$
(59)
Thus from (57) and (58) we get,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}=8\omega \tau \sqrt{\frac{R}{\pi }}F_0^{3/2}I(\varphi _1),$$
(60)
where,

$$I(\varphi _1)=_0^{\varphi _1}\frac{\varphi (\mathrm{tan}^1\varphi )^{1/2}}{(1+\varphi ^2)^3}𝑑\varphi ,$$
(61)
and $`\varphi _1=2\psi _1/\pi `$. The cut-off $`\varphi _1`$ should be away from the resonance and we find for VIRGO, $`\varphi _15`$ is an acceptable value.

The numerical and the analytical results are compared in fig.9 by plotting the gain in energy per cycle for various input powers.

### D Energy gain for large amplitudes

As the mirrors gain energy, they swing with ever increasing amplitude and sweep over several resonance peaks of the Fabry-Perot cavity. The system gains energy at every resonance peak and thus the energy gained per cycle is the sum of the energy gained at each resonance encountered. The peaks are encountered at $`\psi =n\pi `$, with $`n_{max}nn_{min}`$, $`n_{min}<0`$ and $`n_{max}>0`$. The total number of resonances encountered by the mirrors is $`n_{max}+|n_{min}|+1`$. Also it is observed that $`n_{max}|n_{min}|`$ due to the built-in asymmetry arising due the laser power pumped in the positive $`x`$-direction (see fig.3).
Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_n`$ be the energy gain at the $`n`$-th resonance, then the total energy gained per cycle $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}`$ is given by,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}=\underset{n_{min}}{\overset{n_{max}}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }E_n,$$
(62)
where

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_n=\mathrm{\Delta }E_{n+}+\mathrm{\Delta }E_n,$$
(63)
and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_n`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{n+}`$ is the energy lost or gained respectively and given by the following expressions,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{n+}=_{n\pi }^{n\pi +\psi _1}\mathrm{\Delta }F𝑑\psi >0,$$
(64)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_n=_{n\pi \psi _1}^{n\pi }\mathrm{\Delta }F𝑑\psi <0.$$
(65)
Combining equations (57,58,62 to 65) we get the energy gain at $`n\pi `$ as,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_n\frac{16\tau R^2F_0}{(1R)^3}(\dot{\psi }_{n+}\dot{\psi }_n)_0^{\psi _1}\frac{\psi }{(1+(\frac{2\psi }{\pi })^2)^3}𝑑\psi ,$$
(66)
where $`\dot{\psi }_n`$ and $`\dot{\psi }_{n+}`$ are the relative phase velocities of the mirrors for $`\psi n\pi `$ and $`\psi n\pi `$ respectively. The energy gained at different resonance positions of the mirrors is different because the $`\dot{\psi }`$ is different at different resonances, $`\dot{\psi }`$ is maximum when $`|n|`$ is small and becomes small when $`n`$ approaches $`n_{min}`$ or $`n_{max}`$. Thus the net energy gain per cycle is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}\frac{\tau R^2F_0}{(1R)^3}\left(\frac{\pi }{}\right)^2\underset{n_{min}}{\overset{n_{max}}{}}(\dot{\psi }_{n+}\dot{\psi }_n).$$
(67)
The next task is to compute the $`(\dot{\psi }_{n+}\dot{\psi }_n)`$, the increase in phase space velocity while crossing the resonance position as a function of $`n`$. For large values of $`n`$, the radiation pressure effect reduces remarkably as is observed in fig.3. Hence we take the static force equation to compute the increase in the phase space velocities. We integrate equation (41) neglecting the anti-damping term obtaining the change in kinetic energy as,

$$\frac{1}{2\omega ^2}(\dot{\psi }_{n+}^2\dot{\psi }_n^2)=F_0_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{1+(\frac{2}{\pi })^2\psi ^2}𝑑\psi 2\psi _1\psi _02n\pi \psi _1.$$
(68)
Equation (68) reduces to

$$\frac{(\dot{\psi }_{n+}\dot{\psi }_n)}{\omega }=\frac{\frac{\pi ^2F_0}{}4\psi _1(\psi _0+n\pi )}{2\dot{\psi }(n\pi )/\omega },$$
(69)
where we have approximated $`\dot{\psi }_{n+}+\dot{\psi }_n2\dot{\psi }(n\pi ).`$
To compute $`\dot{\psi }(n\pi )/\omega `$ analytically, we consider the dimensionless instantaneous energy as given by equation (36),

$$E=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\dot{\psi }^2}{\omega ^2}+\frac{1}{2}(\psi ^2+2\psi \psi _0)\frac{2k(r_2^2+R^2)t_1^2P_0}{m\omega ^2c}J(\psi ),$$
(70)
where $`J(\psi )=_0^\psi \frac{d\psi }{(1R)^2+4R\mathrm{sin}^2\psi }`$. We can approximate the integral for large motions as $`J(\psi )\frac{n\pi }{1R^2}\frac{\psi }{1R^2}`$ for $`n`$ crossings of the resonances. Assuming $`r_2=1`$ and $`r_1=R`$, we have,

$$\frac{\dot{\psi }^2}{\omega ^2}+(\psi \psi _c)^2=(2E+\psi _c^2),$$
(71)
where $`\psi _c=\frac{2kP_0}{m\omega ^2c}\frac{P_0}{10kW}`$ (for VIRGO parameters). The phase space trajectory is a circle centred around $`\psi _c`$ with radius

$$\rho =\sqrt{2E+\psi _c^2}.$$
(72)
Equation (71) gives $`\frac{\dot{\psi }(n\pi )}{\omega }`$ as

$$\frac{\dot{\psi }(n\pi )}{\omega }=\sqrt{\rho ^2(n\pi \psi _c)^2}.$$
(73)
We rewrite the gain in energy per cycle as,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}=\frac{\tau R^2F_0\omega }{(1R)^3}\left(\frac{\pi }{}\right)^2S(n_{max},n_{min}),$$
(74)
where $`n_{max}`$ is the greatest integer not greater then $`(\psi _c+\rho )/\pi `$ and $`n_{min}`$ is the smallest integer not smaller then $`(\psi _c\rho )/\pi `$. We have,

$$S(n_{max},n_{min})=\underset{n=n_{min}}{\overset{n_{max}}{}}g(n\pi ),$$
(75)
where

$$g(n\pi )=\frac{\frac{\pi ^2F_0}{2}2\psi _1(\psi _0+n\pi )}{\sqrt{\rho ^2(n\pi \psi _c)^2}}.$$
(76)
For large motion of the mirrors, since the mirrors cross many resonances, we may replace the sum by an integral over $`n`$. Changing over to the variable $`M=n\pi \psi _c`$, in which the system appears more symmetric about the origin, we have,

$$S=_{M_{min}}^{M_{max}}\frac{\alpha \beta M}{(\rho ^2M^2)^{1/2}}𝑑M$$
(77)
where $`\alpha =\frac{\pi F_0}{2}\frac{2\psi _1}{\pi }(\psi _0+\psi _c)`$ and $`\beta =\frac{2\psi _1}{\pi }`$. $`M_{max}`$ and $`M_{min}`$ correspond to $`n_{max}`$ and $`n_{min}`$ respectively.
We note that $`\rho `$ satisfies the following inequalities,

$$M_{max}\rho M_{max}+1,|M_{min}|\rho |M_{min}|+1.$$
(78)
We observe that when $`n`$ is large, the difference between $`|M_{min}|`$ and $`M_{max}`$ is small, of the order of 1 or 2 times $`\pi `$. We denote the difference, by $`\delta M`$ where,

$$\delta M=M_{max}|M_{min}|=M_{max}+M_{min}.$$
(79)
The integral in equation (77) splits into three parts $`S=S_1S_2S_3`$, where

$$S_1=2\alpha \mathrm{sin}^1M_{max}/\rho ,$$
(80)
$$S_2\delta M\frac{2\alpha }{(\rho ^2M_{max}^2)^{1/2}},$$
(81)
$$S_3\beta \frac{M_{max}\delta M}{(\rho ^2M_{max}^2)^{1/2}}.$$
(82)
The dominant term is $`S_1`$ which gives the general behaviour and shape of the curve shown in fig.10. While $`S_2`$ produces a small kink in the curve, the effect of $`S_3`$ can essentially be ignored. In case of the VIRGO cavity and $`P_0=30`$ kW and $`\rho 20`$, $`S_116.7`$, $`S_21.75`$ and $`S_30.26`$. For the initial VIRGO detector, $`P_0=1`$ kW, and $`\rho 4.0`$, $`S_10.56`$ while $`S_2,S_30`$.

Considering only $`S_1`$, the energy gain per cycle is approximately given by,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}=\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}^1\frac{M_{max}}{\rho },M_{max}\rho M_{max}+1,$$
(83)
where,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}=\frac{\tau R^2F_0\omega \pi ^3}{(1R)^3^2}\left(\frac{\pi F_0}{2}\frac{2\psi _1}{\pi }(\psi _0+\psi _c)\right).$$
(84)
We observe the following features in the profile of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}`$:

* At the resonance position , $`\rho =M_{max}`$ the energy gain is maximum and equal to $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}`$. For the VIRGO cavity specifications and input power of 30 kW, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}3.8`$. When $`P_0=1`$ kW, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}4.2\times 10^2`$.
* Equation (83) shows that the energy gain per cycle is a decreasing function of $`\rho `$. The energy gain decreases till the next resonance is crossed, where it suddenly increases to $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}`$. As the amplitude increases, $`\rho `$ increases from $`M_{max}`$ to $`M_{max}+1`$, the mirrors sweep across the resonances a little faster which deprives them from gaining the full energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}`$. $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle}`$ therefore reduces from $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}`$ to $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{min}`$, where

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{min}=\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}}{\pi }\mathrm{sin}^1\frac{M_{max}}{M_{max}+1}.$$
(85)
* The energy profile in this range of $`\rho `$ i.e.$`M_{max}`$ to $`M_{max}+1`$ can be approximately given by,

$$(\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}\mathrm{\Delta }E_{cycle})^2=\frac{8(\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max})^2}{\pi ^2M_{max}}(\rho M_{max}).$$
(86)
We note that the minimum value is,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{min}\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}\left(1\left(\frac{8}{\pi ^2M_{max}}\right)^{1/2}\right),$$
(87)
and it tends to the maximum value $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}`$ as $`M_{max}`$ becomes very large.
* In fig.10, it is seen that there is a kink after $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{min}`$ is reached . The kink occurs because $`M_{min}`$ reduces by 1 when the mirrors cross yet another resonance on the negative side. This is accounted for by the second term.

Since the $`E\rho ^2`$, the rate of increase of $`\rho `$ per cycle, denoted by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho `$ is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho =\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }E}{\rho }`$.

### E The negative Q-factor

In the previous section, we have seen that for large values of $`\rho `$, the amount of energy gained by the system of two mirrors per cycle is a constant and tends to $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}`$. The system is an anti-damped harmonic oscillator which gains on an average, constant amount of energy per cycle. We may therefore associate a negative quality factor $`Q`$, where $`Q>0`$, with the system which describes the anti-damping. In this section, we endeavor to study the behaviour of $`Q`$.
The equation of motion of an anti-damped harmonic oscillator is given by,

$$\frac{\ddot{\chi }}{\omega ^2}\frac{\dot{\chi }}{\omega Q}+\chi =0,$$
(88)
where $`Q`$ is constant. The solution for $`\chi `$ is of the form

$$\chi \chi _0e^{\omega t/2Q}e^{\pm i\omega t}.$$
(89)
where $`\chi =\psi \psi _c`$. The amplitude is $`\rho \chi _0e^{\omega t/2Q}`$ when $`\rho `$ is sufficiently large so that the phase space trajectory is approximately circular and can be compared to a simple harmonic oscillator. Since a constant amount of energy is gained per cycle, the $`Q`$ will be a function of time. However, we can still describe the system by an average $`Q`$ taken over a cycle, which we denote by $`<Q>_{cycle}`$, since the change in $`Q`$ during one cycle is small. Moreover, we assume $`\frac{1}{\omega <Q>_{cycle}}\frac{d<Q>_{cycle}}{dt}1`$ i.e. the fractional variation of $`<Q>_{cycle}`$ over a period of a cycle can be ignored. Thus we obtain a W.K.B. solution for $`\rho (t)`$ as,

$$\rho (t)=\rho (t_0)\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{1}{2}_{t_0}^t\frac{\omega dt}{<Q>_{cycle}}\right],$$
(90)
where $`t_0`$ is some fixed but arbitrary initial time instant and $`\rho (t_0)`$ is the radius of the circular phase-space trajectory at $`t_0`$. We have also assumed that $`<Q>_{cycle}1`$. From equations (72) and (90) the energy of the harmonic oscillator is given by,

$$E(t)E(t_0)=\frac{1}{2}\rho ^2(t_0)\left[\mathrm{exp}\left(_{t_0}^t\frac{\omega dt}{<Q>_{cycle}}\right)1\right].$$
(91)
Since the energy gain is a constant and during a cycle equal to $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}`$, we can equate $`\frac{2\pi }{\omega }\frac{dE}{dt}`$ to $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}`$ to obtain,

$$E(t)E(t_0)=\frac{\omega \mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}}{2\pi }(tt_0).$$
(92)
The time evolution of $`\rho `$ is obtained, which yields,

$$\rho (t)=\rho (t_0)\left[1+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}}{\pi \rho _0^2}\omega (tt_0)\right]^{1/2}.$$
(93)
Equating the logarithmic derivatives of (90) and (93) we obtain,

$$<Q>_{cycle}(t)=<Q>_{cycle}(t_0)+\omega (tt_0),$$
(94)
where $`<Q>_{cycle}(t_0)=\frac{\pi \rho ^2(t_0)}{\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}}`$. We observe that both the energy and the $`<Q>_{cycle}`$ increase linearly with time while the amplitude $`\rho `$ increases as $`t^{1/2}`$. $`<Q>_{cycle}(t)`$ depends through $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}`$ on the input power, finesse and the round trip time.

For $`P_0=30`$ kW of input power, the trajectory more or less obtains a circular shape when $`\rho (t_0)15`$. For the VIRGO parameters,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_{max}0.42(\frac{P_0}{10kW})^23.79.$$
(95)
Thus $`<Q>_{cycle}(t_0)186`$ and so

$$<Q>_{cycle}(t)186+\omega (tt_0).$$
(96)
Further, if we also consider the effect of the damping of the suspension then the limit cycle will be approached when $`<Q>_{cycle}Q_{sus}10^6`$ for VIRGO. $`<Q>_{cycle}`$ will attain this value after $`\omega t10^6`$ which corresponds to little more than 3 days. The corresponding amplitude is given by,

$$\rho =\rho (t_0)\left[1+\frac{\omega (tt_0)}{<Q>_{cycle}(t_0)}\right]^{1/2}1100.$$
(97)
This simple analysis will have to be modified when the limit cycle is almost reached, that is when, $`<Q>_{cycle}Q_{sus}`$. Here, however our goal was to estimate the time it takes to reach this stage. The above analysis is then adequate for the purpose. However, when the servo operates or otherwise such a situation is unlikely to arise because other effects such as mirror tilting etc. will be important long before and then the dynamics will be completely different.

## VI The equilibrium case

Lastly, we examine the case when the mirrors are in equilibrium under the radiation pressure force and the restoring force. We have to determine whether the equilibrium is stable or unstable. To this end, we perturb the equation (41) about a given equilibrium point. Writing $`\psi =\psi _{eq}+\delta \psi `$ and linearizing, we get,

$$\delta \ddot{\psi }\frac{2}{\tau _{eq}}\delta \dot{\psi }+\mathrm{\Omega }^2\delta \psi =0,$$
(98)
where,

$$\tau _{eq}=\left(\frac{\pi }{2}\right)^3\frac{(1+(\frac{2\psi _{eq}}{\pi })^2)^3}{F_0\psi _{eq}\tau \sqrt{R}},$$
(99)
and

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{eq}^2=2\left(\frac{2}{\pi }\right)^2\frac{\psi _{eq}F_0}{(1+(\frac{2\psi _{eq}}{\pi })^2)^2}.$$
(100)
If $`\psi _{eq}0`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{eq}^20`$, the sign of $`\tau _{eq}`$ does not matter and the instability grows exponentially. If on the other hand $`\psi _{eq}>0`$, then although $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{eq}^2>0`$, $`\tau _{eq}>0`$ and this leads to gradually growing oscillations until the pendulum tips over the maximum. We plot the phase space trajectory for the input power of 1 kW in fig.11. We conclude from this that the cavity is always unstable when radiation pressure forces act. The time-delay plays a crucial role in making the system unstable. The negative Q-factor for the motion of the mirrors near the equilibrium position, is given by,

$$Q=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }_{eq}\tau _{eq}.$$
(101)
For an input power of 30 kW, with VIRGO cavity parameters, the equilibrium position of the mirrors near the resonance at zero is $`\psi _{eq}0.25`$. The corresponding values of the other quantities are $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{eq}4.75`$ and $`\tau _{eq}10^4`$ seconds. The negative Q-factor, $`Q2.3\times 10^4`$. Whereas for initial VIRGO, $`P_01`$ kW, $`\psi _{eq}0.16`$ thus $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{eq}1.67`$, $`\tau _{eq}3.1\times 10^4`$ seconds, the negative Q-factor, $`Q2.6\times 10^4`$.

## VII Conclusion

We have analysed the effect of radiation pressure on the freely hanging mirrors (no servo loop) suspended in the laser interferometric optical cavities. After numerically evolving the full set of equations of motion with respect to time, we find that the amplitude of the mirror oscillations continuously increases as time progresses. We introduce the ‘time delay’, that is the time taken for field to adjust to the motion of the mirrors, in a phenomenological way to explain the observed gain. We conclude that the gain in energy is due to the differential radiation pressure force arising from the asymmetry depending upon the motion of the mirrors. From another viewpoint, we can also explain the gain in energy qualitatively by the Doppler effect. With respect to the mirror, the frequency of the incoming laser beam is higher as compared to that of the outgoing laser beam due to the Doppler effect. The deficit of the energy of the laser beam after getting reflected from the mirror can be looked upon as the energy gained by the mirrors. The values of the energy gain per cycle are computed analytically under the reasonable assumption that the mirrors are not accelerated within the time scale of the storage time of the cavity. For VIRGO parameters, the analytical values agree remarkably with the numerical values. The interesting point to note is that the motion of the mirrors approaches that of an anti-damped harmonic oscillator with a constant gain in energy as time progresses which implies that the mirrors move too quickly to get affected by the radiation pressure force. The negative Q-factor of the anti-damped oscillator depends on the input power, the finesse and the round trip time of the cavity and increases linearly as a function of time. The analysis will have to be modified when the negative Q-factor becomes of the order of the damping Q-factor of the suspension fibre, if such a case can arise.

In this paper, we have shown that the radiation pressure force makes the freely hanging mirror unstable for all values of the input power and irrespective of the initial conditions.
The above analysis is relevant in the event, when the interferometer is in operation and if the servo loop is suddenly opened. Then the motion of the hanging mirrors can be deduced from the above analysis. This analysis will be helpful in designing a servo-control which can prevent this instability. In a previous work , the servo-control was included in the linear regime of the Fabry-Perot curve assuming the transfer function for the servo given by Caron et al. . Their work sets the stage for analysing the system in the non-linear regime as well, but it is then needed to know how servo-control operates in the full regime.

## VIII Acknowledgement

The authors thank the IFCPAR (project no. 1010 - 1) under which a substantial part of this work was carried out. One of us (SVD) thanks the PPARC, U.K. for financial support, where this work was finished.