text:
# Inflation as a Probe of Short Distance Physics

## I Introduction

In the last two decades, particle physics has become an indispensable part of cosmology. In fact, one of the strong motivations for studying particle physics theories that go beyond the standard model and incorporate gravity is that they may shed light on the nature of the cosmological singularities arising in general relativity. There is widespread hope that in one form or another these and other cosmological considerations may one day allow us to test physical theories whose fundamental scales are now, and perhaps forever, beyond the reach of conventional accelerator experiments.

Inflationary cosmological models, in particular, significantly highlight the important role of microphysics. For example, since the pioneering work of  it has been known that quantum field fluctuations in the early universe are stretched by inflationary expansion to scales of astrophysical relevance, providing a gratifying first principles mechanism for structure formation. Galaxies, from this viewpoint, are quantum fluctuations writ large.

In order to solve the standard cosmological puzzles, a minimum of 60 e-folds of inflationary expansion must be invoked, but in many models this number can be much larger. Taking this at face value, it means that today’s scales of cosmological relevance expanded from Planckian or sub-Planckian scales at the onset of inflation. Inflation may therefore provide a kind of Planck scale microscope, stretching the smallest of distance scales to observably large size.

It is possible, however, that in the process of such inflationary expansion the effect of Planck scale physics gets washed out, being diluted by the very growth of scales which potentially makes them visible. A similar phenomenon has been observed in black hole physics. If one traces the history of a Hawking radiated photon, one finds that it gets ever more blue-shifted toward the moment of its emission, and hence one might think it could carry an imprint of extremely high energy physical processes. In reality though, a number of studies  have concluded that such short distance physics does not have any impact on the low energy features of Hawking radiation; heuristically, short distance modifications are washed out by the memoryless process of thermalization.

In a cosmological context, the situation in this regard has been less clear. Brandenberger and Martin  carried out a study of the impact of various models of trans-Planckian physics (in fact, the same models considered in the black hole studies just mentioned) on the spectrum of density perturbations in power law inflationary models. They found that while some hypothesized Planck scale modifications to ordinary field theory yield no late time consequences (similar to the black hole conclusion) some do, indicating a cosmological sensitivity to short distance physics. On the other hand, it was argued in  that there should be no change in the perturbation spectrum if the proposed modifications still yield the adiabatic vacuum***Note that the definitions of adiabaticity used in  and  are slightly different, leaving the situation somewhat ambiguous..

In this paper we take up the issue of cosmological sensitivity to short distance physics, but from a different approach. Namely, rather than considering the ad hoc short scale modifications studied in , we focus on an interesting model introduced in , whose short distance physics is designed to incorporate a minimum length, a development naturally inspired by string theory. We present a full analysis of the perturbation spectrum produced by the presence of such a minimum length in a de Sitter background. As with any calculation of the inflationary perturbation spectrum, the modes are normalized well inside the horizon, and the calculational task is to track their evolution until they are far outside the horizon, as the perturbation spectrum is fully determined by their asymptotic values. We solve the mode equation numerically to avoid invoking any new analytical approximations, and fix the initial conditions for the numerical solution by matching to an approximate analytical solution of the mode equations that is valid at very early times.

While completing this work, Kempf and Niemeyer  posted a complementary calculation of the spectrum in the presence of a short distance cutoff. We contrast our approach with theirs, showing that the numerical evaluation of the mode functions leads to a complete description of the spectrum. We also expect that the approach used here will generalize to the broader problem of determining the impact of trans-Planckian physics on the inflationary perturbation spectrum, which can manifest itself as a change to the dispersion relation , or the initial normalization of the modes or choice of vacuum.

In what follows, we briefly review the construction of a model with a minimum length, and discuss the analytical properties of the perturbation equation. In particular, following  we show that since there is a minimum length, each mode is “created” at a finite time in the past, defined by the moment when its physical wavelength first exceeds the minimum length. We then show how to extract an approximate analytical solution that holds near this early time. This allows us to “match” this solution to a numerical solution of the full mode equation, and compute the amplitude of the perturbation spectrum as a function of the minimum length. We find that, indeed, there is an imprint of the short distance cutoff on the perturbation spectrum. We also confirm that the scenario we study does not violate bounds coming from late time particle production and quantum mechanical self consistency. More generally, we emphasize that the effect of any short distance modification can be encoded in two wavelength dependent functions, providing a phenomenological approach for systematically analysing deviations from the standard prediction of the power spectrum. We conclude with a brief discussion of the spectrum we might expect in a more general spacetime, and a summary of our conclusions.

We stress at the outset that our intent is to show explicitly that a modification to conventional physics at the Planck scale can have an observable effect on precision cosmological measurements. While of interest in its own right, the model  on which we focus should be viewed as one concrete example in which such calculations can be reliably performed, allowing us to establish definitively that cosmological observations may be a window onto Planck scale physics.

## II Perturbations With a Minimum Length

Motivated by the stringy uncertainty principle , a phenomenological Lagrangian which incorporates a short distance cutoff was recently proposed by Kempf . In this approach, the short distance cutoff is modeled by modifying the usual commutation relation to

$$[𝐱,𝐩]=i\mathrm{}\left(1+\beta 𝐩^2\right).$$
(1)
The parameter $`\beta `$ is related to the minimum distance $`\mathrm{\Delta }x_{min}`$ by $`\mathrm{\Delta }x_{min}\sqrt{\beta }`$. A Lagrangian suggested by Eq.(1) was discussed in . In this model, the tensor mode $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ obeys the following equation of motion:

$$u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^{\prime \prime }+\frac{\nu ^{}}{\nu }u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^{}+\left(\mu \frac{a^{\prime \prime }}{a}\frac{a^{}}{a}\frac{\nu ^{}}{\nu }\right)u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}=0,$$
(2)
where $`a`$ denotes the scale factor and the prime denotes differentiation with respect to conformal time $`\eta `$. Our $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ is equal to $`a^2\varphi _{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ from , while $`\stackrel{~}{k}^i=a\rho ^ie^{\beta \rho ^2/2}`$ where $`\rho ^i`$ is the Fourier transform of the physical coordinates $`x^i`$, and

$$\mu (\eta ,\rho )\frac{a^2\rho ^2}{(1\beta \rho ^2)^2},\nu (\eta ,\rho )\frac{e^{\frac{3}{2}\beta \rho ^2}}{\left(1\beta \rho ^2\right)}.$$
(3)
The cutoff is defined by requiring that $`\rho ^21/\beta `$, and is motivated by the minimum distance in string theory. Tensor perturbations with different comoving wavenumber $`k`$ reach the cutoff $`\rho ^2=1/\beta `$ at different conformal time $`\eta _k`$, where $`a^2(\eta _k)=\beta k^2`$. For de Sitter space, $`\eta _k=1/\sqrt{e\beta H^2\stackrel{~}{k}^2}`$.

Note that in evaluating the derivatives of $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ with respect to $`\eta `$, we are holding $`\stackrel{~}{k}`$ (and not the usual comoving momentum $`k`$) fixed with time. It is therefore convenient to express $`\mu `$ and $`\nu `$ in terms of $`\stackrel{~}{k}`$ by introducing the product-log, or Lambert $`W`$ function , which is defined so that $`W(xe^x)=x`$:

$$\mu =\frac{a^2}{\beta }\frac{W(z)}{\left(1+W(z)\right)^2},\frac{\nu ^{}}{\nu }=\frac{a^{}}{a}\frac{W(z)(5+3W(z))}{(1+W(z))^2}.$$
(4)
where $`z=\beta \stackrel{~}{k}^2/a^2`$. The $`W`$ function has an essential singularity when its argument is equal to $`1/e`$, and this corresponds to the precise moment (for a given $`k`$) when $`\eta =\eta _k`$. Let us examine in more detail the nature of the singularity in the equation of motion at $`\eta =\eta _k`$. The Lambert $`W`$ function $`W(z)`$ has a series expansion near the branch point $`z=1/e`$ :

$$W(z)=1+p\frac{1}{3}p^2+\frac{11}{72}p^3+\mathrm{}$$
(5)
where $`p=\sqrt{2(ez+1)}`$. The series converges for $`|p|<\sqrt{2}`$. The singular point at $`\eta =\eta _k`$ is irregular because the coefficients of $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^{}`$ and $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ are not analytic in $`\eta \eta _k`$. However, the non-analytic piece is less singular than $`1/(\eta \eta _k)`$ and is therefore subdominant. We can solve for the leading behavior of $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ by extracting the most singular terms of the equation of motion. First, write $`\eta =\eta _k(1y)`$, so that the leading terms in the equation of motion give

$$\ddot{u}_{\stackrel{~}{k}}\frac{1}{2y}\dot{u}_{\stackrel{~}{k}}+\left(\frac{1}{2\beta H^2}+1\right)\frac{1}{2y}u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}$$
(6)
where dot denotes derivatives with respect to $`y`$. Written in this form, the $`\dot{u}_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ and $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ terms both have divergences that scale as $`1/(\eta \eta _k)`$, so the equation for the leading behavior of $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ actually has a regular singular point at $`\eta _k`$.

Since any second order differential equation has a power-law expansion about a regular singular point , we can explicitly construct the two independent solutions of Eq.(6) in the vicinity of $`\eta _k`$. Let $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ take the form:

$$u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}=y^\alpha \underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}c_ny^n.$$
(7)
The indicial equation is obtained by inserting this expression into into Eq.(6), expanding about $`y=0`$ and indentifying the lowest order terms, which are proportional to $`y^{\alpha 2}`$. This gives $`\alpha =0`$ or $`3/2`$. Therefore, for small $`y`$,

$$u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}c_1+c_2y^{3/2}.$$
(8)
The coefficients $`c_{1,2}`$ are constrained by the Wronskian condition which follows from the canonical commutation relation $`[\varphi _{\stackrel{~}{k}},\pi _{\stackrel{~}{r}}]=i\delta ^3(\stackrel{~}{k}\stackrel{~}{r})`$ for $`\varphi _{\stackrel{~}{k}}=u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}/a`$ and its conjugate momentum $`\pi _{\stackrel{~}{r}}`$  In the model of , the commutation relations of $`𝐱`$ and $`𝐩`$ are modified as in Eq.(1), but the field commutation relations are not changed from their standard form. While one can seek a particular interpretation, here we simply view this as providing an interesting, short distance modification of the field equations that allows for a reliable calculation of cosmological implications.:

$$u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}(\eta )u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^{}(\eta )u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^{}(\eta )u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^{}(\eta )=i\left(1\beta \rho ^2\right)\mathrm{exp}(\frac{3}{2}\beta \rho ^2).$$
(9)
Hence,

$$c_1c_2^{}c_1^{}c_2=i\eta _k\frac{4}{3}e^{3/2}.$$
(10)
The Wronskian condition mixes the two power series solutions with complex coefficients. A priori, there is a one parameter family of solutions of $`c_{1,2}`$, corresponding to different choices of the vacuum state. In the usual inflationary scenario, the natural choice of the vacuum state is the so-called Bunch-Davies vacuum which reduces to the Minkowskian vacuum for wavelengths much shorter than the Hubble scale. We now motivate a natural choice of vacuum in the present context by comparing with the Bunch-Davies vacuum. Recall that in the standard setting, the high frequency limit of the mode equation takes the form

$$u_k^{\prime \prime }(\eta )+\omega _k^2(\eta )u_k(\eta )=0,$$
(11)
whose solution is well approximated by the WKB form

$$u_k^{}(\eta )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega _k}}\mathrm{exp}(\pm i^\eta \omega _k(\eta ^{})𝑑\eta ^{})$$
(12)
if the adiabatic conditions $`\frac{\omega _k^{\prime \prime }}{\omega _k}1`$ and $`\left|\frac{\omega _k^{}}{\omega _k^2}\right|1`$ are both satisfied. The Bunch-Davies vacuum amounts to choosing the Heisenberg form of the field operator $`\widehat{u}(\eta ,𝐱)`$ to be

$$\widehat{u}(\eta ,𝐱)=\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^{3/2}}(u_k^+a_ke^{ikx}+u_k^+a_k^{}e^{ikx}),$$
(13)
with a vacuum state $`|0`$ satisfying $`a_k|0=0`$. In our case, if we could ignore the $`\dot{u}_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ in (6), similar reasoning suggests

$$u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^+(\eta )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega _k}}\mathrm{exp}(i^\eta \omega _k(\eta ^{})𝑑\eta ^{}),$$
(14)
where, from (6), we see that for $`\eta \eta _k`$,

$$\omega _k^2=\frac{A}{\eta _k^2y}$$
(15)
and

$$A=\frac{1}{4\beta H^2}+\frac{1}{2}.$$
(16)
This would give a Bunch-Davies-like vacuum of the form

$$u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^+(y)=\left(\frac{\eta _k^2y}{4A}\right)^{1/4}\mathrm{exp}(2i\sqrt{Ay}).$$
(17)
Of course, though, we can not ignore the $`\dot{u}_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ in (6), and hence this does not yield a solution to our modified mode equation. However, by modifying the prefactor of the exponential, we can in fact construct a solution of this form,

$$F(y)=\left(\frac{\sqrt{A}}{2}+iA\sqrt{y}\right)\mathrm{exp}(2i\sqrt{Ay}).$$
(18)
This solves Eq. (6); equivalently, in the series expansion of $`F(y)`$ the $`y^{1/2}`$ term cancels out, and $`F(y)`$ is seen to be a linear combination of the two power series solutions found above with $`c_1=\frac{\sqrt{A}}{2}`$ and $`c_2=i\frac{4}{3}A^2`$.

The general solution is a linear combination of the positive and the negative frequency modes

$$u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}(y)=C_+F(y)+C_{}F^{}(y)$$
(19)
with the constants $`C_\pm `$ constrained by the Wronskian condition

$$|C_+|^2|C_{}|^2=\frac{e^2}{\sqrt{\beta }\stackrel{~}{k}H}\left(\frac{1}{4\beta H^2}+\frac{1}{2}\right)^{5/2}.$$
(20)
Comparison of the osciallatory part of $`F(y)`$ with that of the Bunch-Davies vacuum suggests that $`C_{}=0`$. However, the normalization of $`F(y)`$ is not $`1/\sqrt{2\omega }`$ since the adiabatic condition is not satisfied. To be specific,

$$\frac{\omega _k^{}}{\omega _k^2}=\frac{1}{2\sqrt{Ay}}.$$
(21)
Therefore for $`y0`$, no matter how large $`A`$ is (or, more importantly, how small $`\beta `$ is), the adiabatic condition $`|\frac{\omega _k^{}}{\omega _k^2}|<<1`$ is violated. Thus these initial conditions are not smoothly connected to the “standard” form of the mode equation when it is well inside the horizon, even in the limit $`\beta 0`$ although the Lagrangian is smooth in the same limit. The discrepancy arises because whenever $`\beta 0`$, the mode’s evolution begins at a finite conformal time. Moreover, we expanded the Lambert function $`W(z)`$ with $`z=\beta \stackrel{~}{k}^2/a^2`$ around $`z=1/e`$, and this expansion is only convergent when $`z<0`$. If $`\beta =0`$, the argument of the $`W`$ function is zero, and this expansion cannot be used.

We have found the leading behavior of $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ around $`\eta \eta _k`$. The equation of motion for the tensor mode $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ is solved only up to order $`1/y`$. The residual terms can still be significant for $`\eta \eta _k`$. We deduce the subleading bahavior of $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ by the method of dominant balance . Define $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}(y)=F(y)\left(1+ϵ_1(y)\right)`$ and extract the most singular terms in the equation of motion for $`ϵ_1`$:

$$\ddot{ϵ}_1\frac{1}{2y}\dot{ϵ}_1=\frac{3A3/2}{\sqrt{y}}=0,$$
(22)
which gives

$$ϵ_1(y)=(2A1)y^{3/2}\left(\mathrm{log}y\frac{2}{3}\right).$$
(23)
This is indeed small compared with the leading term for small $`y`$. With this correction, the equation is solved up to order $`1/\sqrt{y}`$, but there are still residual $`\mathrm{ln}(y)`$ terms. The solution is further improved by the next subleading order $`ϵ_2(y)`$, where $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}=F(y)(1+ϵ_1(y))(1+ϵ_2(y))`$. The solution for $`ϵ_2(y)`$ is

$`ϵ_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{24}}\left(105330A112iA^{3/2}\right)y^2+`$ (25)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{7}{4}}\left(2A1\right)y^2\mathrm{log}y.`$
The equation of motion for $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ is therefore solved up to terms that vanish as $`\eta 0`$.

When the mode is well outside the horizon, $`\rho H`$, and see that $`\mu (\eta ,\rho )k^2`$ and $`\nu (\eta ,\rho )1`$. Consequently, $`u_k(\eta )a(\eta )`$, which reproduces the standard late time limit in the usual case with $`\beta =0`$. This limit defines the power spectrum,

$$𝒫_g(k)=\frac{k^3}{2\pi ^2}\left|\frac{u_k}{a}\right|^2.$$
(26)
which is evaluated when $`u_k`$ is well outside the horizon.

## III Numerical Results

We match the analytical form of the solution valid when the mode is well inside the horizon to a numerical evaluation of the full mode equation. In principle we might hope to evaluate the mode equation numerically from an initial time of $`y=0`$, but the coefficients of $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ and $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^{}`$ are infinite at this point so it is easier to match the numerical solutions to the approximate analytical solutions at $`y_0`$, a small but finite value of $`y`$. By varying $`y_0`$ we can ensure that our results do not depend on our choice of starting point, and that we are therefore “close enough” to $`y=0`$.

A subtle point that arises during the integration is that the subdominant terms in $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}`$ contribute terms of order $`y^{3/2}\mathrm{log}(y)`$, which contribute $`\sqrt{y}\mathrm{log}y`$ in the derivative, $`u_{\stackrel{~}{k}}^{}`$. While these terms do go to zero in the limit where $`y_0`$ is vanishingly small, they approach zero comparatively slowly. Since we are using a small but not infinitesimal value of $`y_0`$, we match the numerical solution to the “corrected” asymptotic solution, which includes the lowest order logarithmic terms. We evolve the mode equations numerically using the Bulrisch-Stoer integrator implemented in Fortran, and from the asymptotic values of $`|u_k/a|`$ we obtain the spectrum, $`P^{1/2}(k)`$.

In general the spectrum is $`k`$-dependent, but for the special case of de Sitter inflation, the background spacetime is time translation invariant, which implies that the spectrum should not depend on $`k`$ (which is equivalent to $`\stackrel{~}{k}`$ at late times). This is manifest from the mode equation and, in practice, we verified the code by solving the mode equation for multiple values of $`k`$ and found that the numerically computed spectrum was indeed scale invariant to better than 1 part in $`10^6`$.

In the previous section, we saw that imposing the Wronskian constraint led to a one parameter family of solutions, but that a comparison with the standard Bunch-Davies vacuum suggests the choice $`C_{}=0`$. We begin by analysing the consequences of relaxing this choice. In Fig. (1) we plot the spectrum computed for small values of $`\beta `$ with $`C_{}=0`$, and compare this plot to a calculation with a finite value of $`C_{}`$. In the former case, the spectrum smoothly approaches the de Sitter result $`P^{1/2}=H/2\pi `$, but does not do so for any finite value of $`C_{}`$.

Fig. 2 displays the $`\beta `$ dependence of the spectrum. For moderate values of $`\beta `$, the spectrum can be either lower or higher than the “standard” value, but for large $`\beta `$, $`P^{1/2}`$ approaches zero. For sufficiently large $`\beta `$, the overall amplitude of the perturbation spectrum is significantly reduced. In de Sitter space the power spectrum is $`k`$-independent, so the only effect is an overall normalization dependence on $`\beta `$ through the dimensionless combination $`\sqrt{\beta }H`$. Assuming one has an independent measure of $`H`$, we see that the short distance cutoff specified by $`\beta `$ does indeed leave an imprint on the spectrum. In more realistic inflationary models, as we indicate later, we believe the imprint will be $`k`$-dependent and hence also affect the shape of the power spectrum.

## IV Mode Matching After Horizon Crossing

The physical origin of the change in normalization of the power spectrum can be simply understood in terms of the asymptotic behavior of the mode solutions. In the long wavelength limit, the mode equation asymptotes to the standard mode equation for cosmological perturbations. Therefore, regardless of the nature of the short-distance physics, the mode function takes the general form:

$$u_k\left(\eta \right)=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\pi \eta }\left[D_+H_\nu \left(k\eta \right)+D_{}H_\nu ^{}\left(k\eta \right)\right],$$
(27)
where $`H_\nu `$ is a Hankel function of the first kind, and $`v=3/2`$ in de Sitter space. The constants $`D_\pm `$ are constrained by the standard Wronskian condition arising from the canonical commutation relations for the field operator:

$$u_k^{}\frac{du_k}{d\eta }u_k\frac{du_k^{}}{d\eta }=i.$$
(28)
With this constraint, the form of the mode function is completely determined (up to a phase) by the selection of a vacuum. The standard case, that of a Bunch-Davies vacuum at short wavelength, corresponds to the selection $`D_{}=0`$ and $`D_+=1`$, with our choice of normalization.

The key attribute of this construction is that regardless of the nature of the short-distance physics, the long-wavelength behavior of the modes is completely encoded in the coefficients $`D_\pm `$. In general the $`D_\pm `$ are $`k`$-dependent but in de Sitter space the situation is particularly simple, since the $`D_\pm `$ are constants.

In the standard analysis, the coefficients $`C_\pm `$ that determine the vacuum at short wavelengths are identical to the $`D_\pm `$ found by matching the mode functions to the long-wavelength limit, Eq. (27). Modifying the short distance physics can break this correspondence, and the choice of vacuum $`C_{}=0`$ in the short wavelength limit can correspond to a phase rotation in the long wavelength limit, with $`D_{}0`$. This changes the normalization of $`u_k`$, since the power spectrum depends on the integration constants as

$$𝒫_g(k)=\frac{k^3}{2\pi ^2}\left|\frac{u_k}{a}\right|^2\left|D_++D_{}\right|^2$$
(29)
in the long wavelength ($`k0`$) limit. In de Sitter space, the $`D_\pm `$ are constant, so the rotation alters the normalization of the power spectrum, but does not introduce any $`k`$ dependence. However, if the background deviates from de Sitter the $`D_\pm `$ are, in general, $`k`$-dependent, which will alter both the shape and normalization of the power spectrum as well as the short distance physics – perhaps in a dramatic way . Naturally, if a modification to short-distance physics alters $`D_\pm `$, the perturbation spectrum will change. This will lead to constraints on the form and magnitude of the modifications to $`D_\pm `$.

## V Particle Production Bounds

In addition to the perturbation spectrum, other arguments place cosmological constraints on modifications to short-distance physics. For example, Starobinsky has recently shown on quite general grounds that even a very tiny rotation away from the Bunch-Davies vacuum in the current universe would result in unacceptable production of relativistic particles. The Starobinsky bound corresponds to

$$\left|D_{}\right|^2\frac{H_0^2}{M_{\mathrm{Pl}}^2},$$
(30)
where the coefficient $`D_{}`$ is evaluated in the limit of a scale much larger than the minimum distance $`\sqrt{\beta }`$ but still much smaller than the current horizon size $`H_0^1`$. However, this bound applies to the cosmic vacuum at late times, not during inflation. If $`\left|D_{}\right|`$ is dependent on $`H`$, it can be significant during inflation, thus affecting the power spectrum, but small enough universe today to satisfy the Starobinsky bound.

As it happens, an $`H`$ dependent value of $`D_{}`$ is precisely what the model considered in this paper predicts. The magnitude of the rotation depends not on the absolute physical scale of the cuttoff, but on the ratio of the cutoff scale to the horizon size, $`\sqrt{\beta }H`$. If the horizon size and the minimum length are comparable during inflation, the power spectrum is significantly affected, but the rate of particle production today will be strongly suppressed, by the much lower value of $`H`$ in the present universe. Fig. 3 shows the dependence of the coefficient $`D_{}`$ on the ratio $`\beta H^2`$ in the numerical solution of the mode equation. The numerical results imply $`\left|D_{}\right|\beta ^n`$, with $`0.45n0.5`$ when $`\beta H^21`$. In the “real” inflationary universe, we hold $`\beta `$ fixed and reduce $`H`$, so this result implies that as the universe expands the $`D_+`$ term will become negligible.

On the basis of our present calculations, the exact dependence of $`D_{}`$ on $`\beta `$ remains unclear, since the value of $`n`$ appears to be very weakly dependent on $`\beta `$: if we evaluate $`n`$ over a few decades in $`\beta `$ (for fixed $`H`$) $`n`$ appears to slowly approach $`0.5`$ as this range is moved to smaller and smaller $`\beta `$. Thus, it is not unreasonable to assume that $`\left|D_{}\right|\beta ^{.5}`$ in the present universe, and that the particle production rate today is consistent with the Starobinsky bound.

We do not pursue this in more detail as the current model is simply a heuristic construction that mimics what we might expect from a more rigorous string theoretic description of spacetime. However, we can conclude that it is plausible that a minimum length leads to a time dependent modification of the backgroun in a universe where $`H`$ is not constant, and that the value of $`D_{}`$ will be time dependent making the particule production bound much less onerous.

Also of relevance is Tanaka’s analysis , showing that particle production during inflation can significantly change the background evolution of the spacetime. The perturbation to the stress-energy during inflation can be expressed as:

$`\delta T^{00}`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{\left(2\pi \right)^3}\left[\frac{k\left|D_{}\right|^2}{a^4}\right]}`$ (33)
$`={\displaystyle \frac{d^3p}{\left(2\pi \right)^3}p\left|D_{}\right|^2}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\left|D_{}\right|^2}{\beta ^2}},`$
where $`p`$ is the physical momentum $`p\left(k/a\right)`$, with the momentum cutoff $`p<\left(1/\sqrt{\beta }\right)`$. If perturbation theory is to be consistent, the contribution from the stress-energy from particle production must be subdominant,

$$\delta T^{00}\frac{\left|D_{}\right|^2}{\beta ^2}<<M_{\mathrm{Pl}}^2H^2.$$
(34)
Tanaka’s analysis assumed $`\left|D_{}\right|1`$, resulting in a bound on $`\beta `$ of

$$\frac{1}{\beta }<<\sqrt{M_{\mathrm{Pl}}H^2}.$$
(35)
In this model, $`D_{}`$ is $`\beta `$-dependent, weakening of the Tanaka bound, and for $`D_{}\sqrt{\beta }H`$ it becomes

$$\frac{1}{\beta }<<M_{\mathrm{Pl}}^2.$$
(36)
This is easily satisfied if $`\sqrt{\beta }`$ is within an order of magnitude or two of the Planck length. Therefore particle production places no significant constraints on the viability of this model.

## VI Discussion

We have presented an accurate calculation of the perturbation spectrum predicted for a de Sitter universe where the physics has been modified to include a minimum length. The spectrum is scale independent, which follows from the time translation invariance of a de Sitter universe. This calculation significantly extends the contemporaneous qualitative approach of , allowing us to determine how the perturbation spectrum is modified. Furthermore, it lays the groundwork for accurate calculations of the spectrum produced by other models where trans-Planckian physics has modified the “standard” evolution of cosmological perturbations, either by altering the dispersion relationship in the evolution equations, or by changing the initial conditions.

If the minimum length is much smaller than the Hubble length, its introduction has no detectable effect on the spectrum. However if these two lengths are within an order of magnitude or two, it is possible for the resulting spectrum to differ appreciably from the $`\beta =0`$ limit and for various other particle production constraints, discussed above, to be satisfied. Various values for the string scale and the Hubble scale arise in recent string theoretic approaches to cosmology (see for example ) and hence the effects studied here can potentially be significant in these and other models.

In de Sitter space, the ratio between the minimum length and the physical horizon size is constant. In almost all other inflationary backgrounds, the expansion rate is slower than exponential, and the physical horizon size will increase relative to the minimum length scale. In this case our analysis of the de Sitter background suggests that the amplitude of the longest modes (produced earliest in inflation) will be modified. Shorter modes will leave the horizon at a time when the horizon length is much larger than the physical cut-off length and their amplitude will be unaffected. We plan to return to this problem in future work, but our tentative conclusion is that the spectrum of primordial perturbations could be altered at very long wavelengths by the existence of a minimum length scale. Whether this is observable in practice will depend crucially on the number of e-folds of inflation preceding the creation of the modes which are responsible for large scale structure in the observable universe.

We close with a few observations, some rather speculative, about further studies we plan to undertake based on the present work .

$``$ All of the calculations in this paper have focused on tensor perturbations. It would be worthwhile to extend the analysis to scalar perturbations.

$``$ We find it particularly interesting that since short scale modifications yield mode equations that are asymptotic to the standard form on large scales (that is what is meant by a short scale modification) the effect on the power spectrum of any new short distance physics can be encoded in the $`k`$-dependent coefficients $`D_+`$ and $`D_{}`$. This provides a phenomenological framework for systematically seeking signals of – and establishing constraints on – short scale deviations from conventional physics.

$``$ For very large $`\beta `$, the power spectrum becomes arbitrarily small. It is tempting to interpret this as a mechanism for solving the fine tuning problem endemic to the inflationary generation of the primordial perturbation spectrum. A mechanism ensuring that the overall normalization of the spectrum is small enough to satisfy observational constraints from Large Scale Structure and the microwave background will solve this problem. For large $`\beta `$, this model appears to do just that, but we caution that this conclusion is likely naïve since it requires the minimum physical length to be much larger than the horizon volume, and we can not be sure the model has any physical validity in this regime. Further study along these lines may reveal a trustworthy suppression mechanism.

$``$ An interesting – but highly speculative – possibility is that particle production induced by a finite value of $`D_{}`$ may both be small enough to satisfy Starobinsky’s bound, but large enough to lead to new physics. Epochs where this would be particularly intriguing are immediately after inflation, where particle production from the vacuum is a potential mechanism for reheating the universe, and in the present universe if the particle production was efficient enough to modify the equation of state. To explain the latter possibility, the equation of state determines the relationship between the density and the scale factor as the universe expands and particle production reduces the rate at which the density of the universe drops with increasing volume. In general, the more weakly the density of a perfect fluid depends on volume, the more rapidly the universe will expand. Consequently, if particle production is efficient enough to alter the expansion rate of the universe, it will be increased relative to that of a universe with $`D_{}=0`$. This is particularly interesting in the light of observational evidence for dark energy, which is betrayed by a too-rapid expansion of the spacetime background. For an alternative approach of understanding the origin of dark energy from trans-Planckian physics, see .

## Acknowledgments

R.E. and W.H.K. are supported by the Columbia University Academic Quality Fund and the Department of Energy. The work of B.R.G. is supported in part by the DOE grant DE-FG02-92ER40699B. The work of G.S. was supported in part by the DOE grant DE-FG02-95ER40893 and the University of Pennsylvania School of Arts and Sciences Dean’s fund. We thank Philip Argyres, Vijay Balasubramanian, Clifford Burgess, Chong-Sun Chu, Eanna Flanagan, Achim Kempf, Jens Niemeyer, Lam Hui and Henry Tye for discussions.


format: text

text:
# 1 Skyrmion energies for the Coulomb interaction as a function of the Zeeman coupling strength calculated with HF (full line), EFT (dashed) and MFT (dotted). In the limit 𝑔→0 the Bogomol’nyi bound is approached.

Effective action for quantum Hall skyrmions.
A. Teufel and H. Walliser

Fachbereich Physik, Universität Siegen, D57068 Siegen, Germany

## Abstract

Recently, an $`O(3)`$ type of effective action was presented for the quantum Hall ferromagnet, which accounts for bag formation observed in microscopic Hartree-Fock calculations. We apply this action in the soliton sector and compare with Hartree-Fock results. We find good agreement over the whole parameter range where skyrmions exist. The standard minimal $`O(3)`$ model cannot explain the bag and has further shortcomings connected with that fact.

PACS 73.43.-f, 73.21.-b, 12.39.Dc

Keywords: skyrmions, $`O(3)`$-model

Various experiments  have revealed evidence that quantum Hall ferromagnets exhibit charged excitations that are toplologically stable spin–textures named skyrmions. In a recent revised Hartree–Fock (HF) calculation  based on the formulation by Fertig et. al. , it was found that the magnetization is not a unit vector, instead its length is substantially reduced in regions with non–zero excess charge (bag formation). This phenomenon is intuitively understood, because electrons in quantum Hall systems are mobile such that in regions with reduced electron density also the magnetization is expected to be reduced. In this way, the charged spin–texture is intimately connected with a bag which accomodates the excess charge.

There has been a lot of effort to derive an effective field theory for the quantum Hall ferromagnet , but all these approaches restrict the magnetization to a unit vector field. It was quite recently, that an effective $`O(3)`$ type of effective action was proposed in terms of a gradient expansion , which actually accounts for bag formation. With lengths measured in units of the magnetic length $`\mathrm{}=\sqrt{\mathrm{}c/eB}`$, and energies in units of the Coulomb energy $`e^2/ϵ\mathrm{}`$, the full energy functional is given by

$`E[\widehat{𝒎}]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _s}{2}}{\displaystyle d^2r\left[_i\widehat{𝒎}_i\widehat{𝒎}\frac{1}{4}(_i\widehat{𝒎}_i\widehat{𝒎})^2\right]}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle d^2r_1d^2r_2\rho ^C(𝒓_1)V(𝒓_1𝒓_2)\rho ^C(𝒓_2)}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle d^2r\left[1\left(1\frac{1}{4}_i\widehat{𝒎}_i\widehat{𝒎}\right)\widehat{m}_3\right]}+𝒪(6),`$
where $`\rho _s`$ represents the spin stiffness, e.g. $`4\pi \rho _s=\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{\pi /2}`$ for the Coulomb interaction. Then, for a given electron–electron interaction there is only one dimensionless parameter in the theory, namely, the effective Zeeman coupling $`g=g_s\mu _BB/(e^2/ϵ\mathrm{})`$.

In addition to the non–linear sigma, the interaction and Zeeman terms of the standard minimal $`O(3)`$ model , there appears a symmetric fourth order term and a correction to the Zeeman term. The most important amendment is that the magnetization is no longer directly identified with the $`O(3)`$ unit vector field, instead it is related to it in a nontrivial way

$$𝒎=\sigma \widehat{𝒎}=\left(1\frac{1}{4}_i\widehat{𝒎}_i\widehat{𝒎}\right)\widehat{𝒎}+𝒪(4).$$
(2)
This relation holds independently from the electron–electron interaction employed and reflects the fact that the bag is always present, for all soliton sizes. With the physical charge density replaced by the topological density,

$$\rho ^C=\frac{1}{8\pi }ϵ_{ij}\widehat{𝒎}(_i\widehat{𝒎}\times _j\widehat{𝒎})+𝒪(4),$$
(3)
it was argued in Ref. , that the energy functional (S0.Ex2) is unique up to $`𝒪(4)`$ in the gradient expansion and linear terms in the Zeeman coupling $`g`$. For short ranged forces it was explicitely shown that this energy functional gives the correct results for extended spin–textures. In the following we will investigate the case of the Coulomb interaction.

The classical equations of motion following from the energy functional (S0.Ex2) are solved by the hedgehog ansatz

$$\widehat{𝒎}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{sin}F(r)\mathrm{cos}\phi \\ \mathrm{sin}F(r)\mathrm{sin}\phi \\ \mathrm{cos}F(r)\end{array}\right),$$
(4)
where the angle function $`F(r)`$ determines the orientation of the unit vector $`O(3)`$ field. With this ansatz the azimuthal angle may be integrated,

$`E[F]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _s}{2}}{\displaystyle d^2r\left[F^2+\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2F}{r^2}\frac{1}{4}\left(F^2+\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2F}{r^2}\right)^2\right]}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi }}{\displaystyle d^2r_1\rho ^C(r_1)d^2r_2\rho ^C(r_2)\frac{1}{r_>}K\left(\frac{r_<}{r_>}\right)}`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g}{4\pi }}{\displaystyle d^2r\left[1\mathrm{cos}F+\frac{1}{4}\left(F^2+\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2F}{r^2}\right)\mathrm{cos}F\right]}.`$
Here, $`K(x)`$ represents a complete elliptic integral of the first kind  with $`r_>=\mathrm{max}(r_1,r_2)`$ and $`r_<=\mathrm{min}(r_1,r_2)`$ respectively. The integro–differential equation for the angle function is derived straightforwardly and solved with the appropriate boundary conditions using familiar relaxation methods .

In the following we compare results of (i) the microscopic Hartree-Fock theory (HF), (ii) the effective field theory (EFT) defined by the energy functional (S0.Ex2) together with relation (2), and (iii) the standard minimal field theory (MFT). In Fig.1 we show the dependence of the soliton energy on the Zeeman coupling. For extremely small $`g`$, i.e. large solitons, all three curves approach the Bogomol’nyi bound , $`\frac{1}{4}\sqrt{\pi /2}`$, of the famous Belavin–Polyakov (BP) soliton .

With increasing $`g`$ then, the minimal $`O(3)`$ model starts to overestimate the soliton energy. In the HF calculation there exists a critical Zeeman coupling $`g_c0.053`$ beyond which solitons cease to exist. Although we should not expect the gradient expansion to be reliable for too small solitons, the energy functional (S0.Ex2) reflects this fact only at a somewhat smaller value $`g_c0.049`$: the attractive symmetric fourth order term is strengthend and finally destroys the soliton. In contrast, the minimal $`O(3)`$ model possesses stable soliton solutions for all Zeeman couplings.

Next, we are going to compare the profiles $`F(r)`$ and $`\sigma (r)`$, and the charge and spin densities

$`\sigma (r)=1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\left(F^2(r)+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2F(r)}{r^2}}\right),`$ (6)
$`\rho ^C(r)={\displaystyle \frac{F^{}(r)\mathrm{sin}F(r)}{4\pi r}},`$ (7)
$`m_3(r)=\sigma (r)\mathrm{cos}F(r)`$ (8)
for selected Zeeman couplings i.e. $`g=0.01`$ (larger soliton) and $`g=0.03`$ (smaller soliton). As expected, larger deviations are observed of course for the smaller soliton, where the gradient expansion converges more slowly.

Generally, the energy functional (S0.Ex2) leads to a much better agreement with the microscopic HF as compared to the minimal field theory. In particular, this improvement is noticed for the bag shape functions depicted in Fig. 3: there is no bag in the MFT and accordingly the corresponding profile is $`1`$. From (8) it follows then immediately that the spin density starts always at $`1`$ at the origin (Fig. 5). For the spin densities of EFT and HF there exists no such restriction.

Finally, we discuss the number of reversed spins defined as the spatial integral over the spin density

$$K=\frac{1}{4\pi }d^2r(1m_3)\frac{1}{2}.$$
(9)
The value $`1/2`$ is subtracted for convenience such that the quasihole has $`K=0`$. The number of spin–flips can be viewed as a measure for the soliton’s size.

Its dependence on the Zeeman coupling (Fig. 6) behaves similar to that of the soliton energy (Fig. 1) for the three models. With increasing coupling strength, the minimal $`O(3)`$ model starts to overestimate the number of spin–flips. The EFT stays close to the HF result practically over the whole region where stable solitons exist. Since the Coulomb interaction considered here represents the extreme case of a long ranged force and the EFT becomes exact for short ranged forces, we may infer that this agreement is only improved when more realistic interactions, which for example take the finite thickness of the layer into account , are considered.

Concluding we may say that the energy functional (S0.Ex2) gives a good description of skyrmions in the soliton sector. The present investigation particularly supports our previous statement that the $`𝒪(4)`$ terms in the gradient expansion are unique. Compared to the minimal $`O(3)`$ model this is considered a considerable improvement. Through the skyrmion–skyrmion and skyrmion–antiskyrmion interactions, the additional terms in the effective action modify also the properties of multi–skyrmion systems such as skyrmion gas and lattice .

Bag formation will also affect the time–derivative part of the effective action. This is interesting and should be investigated. Furthermore, it is desirable to derive an effective field theory which takes the scalar field as dynamical field seriously into account, without resorting to the gradient expansion.


text:
# Magnetic order in the Ising model with parallel dynamics

## I Introduction

In this note we discuss the equilibrium properties of Probabilistic Cellular Automata (PCA) reversible with respect to a Gibbs measure derived by a suitable Hamiltonian. A PCA  is a lattice model with discrete variables which are subject to a probabilistic simultaneous updating in discrete time steps: all configurations are accessible in a single updating.

PCA arise as an extended definition of Deterministic Cellular Automata in which the updating follows a set of deterministic local rules. The huge number of possible deterministic (or probabilistic) rules makes the topic of Cellular Automata overwhelmingly abundant. One of the most famous Cellular Automata systems is the Conway’s “Game of life”; in spite of the very simple deterministic majority rule assigned, the system, which is a kind of spin lattice, presents an extremely rich and complex evolution pattern.

PCA have been studied in a wide variety of contexts, ranging from biology to the theory of automation, while their role in statistical mechanics has been thoroughly investigated only relatively recently in . The particular family of automata we study is obtained by implementing in parallel fashion the heat bath dynamics . In other terms, we define a rule for the transition probabilities such that all single spins of a lattice are updated simultaneously with heat bath rates. This amounts to define a Markov chain for the evolution of the spin system, having the characteristics of a PCA.

We observe that the way of implementing the heat bath dynamics reflects into a qualitative modification of the equilibrium properties of the model. In particular, an Ising-like ferromagnetic Hamiltonian with two body interactions, defines a PCA reversible with respect to a Gibbs measure determined by an Hamiltonian allowing a low temperature antiferromagnetic phase. This behavior is absent if a serial dynamics is implemented, for which at most one spin of the system is updated at any time.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section II we define the PCA under consideration and the spin model Hamiltonian, $`H`$, determining the heat bath single spin rates. In Section III the structure and the low temperature antiferromagnetic properties of $`H^{}`$ are discussed. There follows a discussion of its equilibrium properties and ground states. Finally, in Section IV, it is considered the case in which the heat bath spin rates are determined by a (two body) next-to-nearest neighbor interaction. The dynamical generation of antiferromagnetic couplings is reviewed in the conclusive remarks.

## II Coupling proliferation in reversible PCA’s

Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be a finite two–dimensional square lattice and $`|\mathrm{\Lambda }|`$ its cardinality. For each $`x=(x_1,x_2),y=(y_1,y_2)\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ we denote by $`|xy|`$ the Euclidean distance on the lattice. Let $`\sigma (x)\{1,+1\}`$ a spin variable associated to the site $`x\mathrm{\Lambda }`$; the space $`\{1,1\}^\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ of configurations is denoted by $`𝒮`$.

Let us consider a generic Hamiltonian $`H:\sigma 𝒮H(\sigma )`$ and the corresponding equilibrium Gibbs measure

$$\mu (\sigma )=\frac{e^{\beta H(\sigma )}}{_{\eta 𝒮}e^{\beta H(\eta )}},$$
(1)
with $`\beta `$ the inverse of the temperature. We now define the heat bath single spin rates: given the site $`x\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, we consider the Gibbs equilibrium measure for $`\sigma _x`$ with respect to a fixed configuration $`\sigma `$ on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\{x\}`$. Letting $`a\{1,+1\}`$, we have

$$p_x(a|\sigma )=\frac{\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta H(a,\sigma )\right\}}{\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta H(a,\sigma )\right\}+\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta H(a,\sigma )\right\}},$$
(2)
where $`(\pm a,\sigma )`$ are the configurations equal to $`\sigma `$ on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\{x\}`$ and to $`\pm a`$ on $`x`$. Note that the normalization condition $`p_x(a|\sigma )+p_x(a|\sigma )=1`$ is trivially satisfied.

We can now implement the heat bath dynamics in a serial fashion, namely we can consider the Markov chain $`\sigma _t`$ ($`t`$ being the discrete time temporal variable), with transition probabilities

$$P(\sigma ,\eta )=\{\begin{array}{cc}(1/|\mathrm{\Lambda }|)p_x(\eta (x)|\sigma )& \text{if }x\mathrm{\Lambda }\text{ such that }\sigma =\eta \text{on}\mathrm{\Lambda }\{x\}\hfill \\ 0& \text{ otherwise }\hfill \end{array}$$
(3)
for all $`\sigma ,\eta 𝒮`$. The transition probabilities (3) are reversible with respect to the Gibbs measure (1), i.e., the detailed balance condition is satisfied or, equivalently, the equilibrium measure is the Gibbs measure (1).

A different point of view can be taken : we define the transition probabilities $`P(\sigma ,\eta )`$ in such a way that all the spins are simultaneously and independently updated, in a parallel fashion, with the heat bath rates (2). Thus, instead of (3) we consider the Markov chain $`\sigma _t`$ defined by

$$P(\sigma ,\eta )=\underset{x\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}p_x\left(\eta (x)|\sigma \right)\sigma ,\eta 𝒮.$$
(4)
This amounts to define a Probabilistic Cellular Automata (PCA).

In general the equilibrium properties of the Markov chain (4) are not trivial, for instance it is not obvious that there exists a Gibbs measure such that the detailed balance principle is satisfied.

Let us consider, now, the case of the two body interactions and suppose that the Hamiltonian has the form:

$$H(\sigma )=\underset{x,y\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}J_{x,y}\sigma (x)\sigma (y)\underset{x\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}h_x\sigma (x),$$
(5)
where $`J_{x,y}`$ are the pair couplings between spins at sites $`x,y`$, and $`h_x`$ is the external magnetic field acting on the spin at site $`x`$. For physical reasons we suppose that the pair couplings are symmetric, namely $`J_{x,y}=J_{y,x}`$ for all $`x,y\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The heat bath single spin rates are given by

$$p_x(a|\sigma )=\frac{1}{1+\mathrm{exp}\left\{\beta \left[H(a,\sigma )H(a,\sigma )\right]\right\}}=\frac{1}{2}\left[1+a\mathrm{tanh}\beta S_x(\sigma )\right],$$
(6)
where

$$S_x(\sigma )=\underset{y\mathrm{\Lambda }\{x\}}{}J_{x,y}\sigma (y)+h_x,$$
(7)
for any $`\sigma 𝒮`$ and $`x\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. It is easy to show  that the Probabilistic Cellular Automaton (4) with single spin rates (6) is reversible with respect to the Gibbs measure $`\mu ^{}`$ on $`𝒮`$ associated to the Hamiltonian

$$H^{}(\sigma )=\beta \underset{x\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}h_x\sigma (x)\underset{x\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{cosh}\left[\beta S_x(\sigma )\right].$$
(8)
In other words the detailed balance condition

$$P(\sigma ,\eta )\mathrm{exp}\{H^{}(\sigma )\}=P(\eta ,\sigma )\mathrm{exp}\{H^{}(\eta )\},$$
(9)
is satisfied for any $`\sigma ,\eta 𝒮`$. This means that $`H^{}(\sigma )`$ is the equilibrium Hamiltonian of a system governed by $`H(\sigma )`$ and evolving with the law (4).

The choice of the two body interaction in equation (5) is strictly connected to the reversibility of the resulting Probabilistic Cellular Automaton (4) . For example, consider the three body interaction Hamiltonian $`H(\sigma )=_{x,y,z\mathrm{\Lambda }}J_{x,y,x}\sigma (x)\sigma (y)\sigma (z)`$ with the three body couplings $`J_{x,y,z}`$ symmetric with respect to permutations of the indices and such that $`J_{x,y,z}0`$ if and only if $`xyzx`$. Then the problem of showing the reversibility of the parallel dynamics can be reduced to the problem of finding a function $`\varphi :\sigma 𝒮\varphi (\sigma )`$ such that

$$\varphi (\sigma )3\beta \eta (x)\underset{y,z\mathrm{\Lambda }\{x\}}{}J_{x,y,z}\sigma (y)\sigma (z)=\varphi (\eta )3\beta \sigma (x)\underset{y,z\mathrm{\Lambda }\{x\}}{}J_{x,y,z}\eta (y)\eta (z),$$

which has no solution.

Let us now discuss the main feature of reversible heat bath derived probabilistic automata. As it has been seen above, if the starting Hamiltonian is given by (5), then the Markov chain (4) is reversible with respect to the Gibbs measure with Hamiltonian $`H^{}`$ given by (8). It is clear that new kind of interactions, different from the one present in the original Hamiltonian $`H`$, arise when $`H^{}`$ is considered.

Suppose, for instance, that the starting Hamiltonian has range $`r>0`$, namely $`J_{x,y}=0`$ for any $`x,y\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that $`|xy|>r`$. Then we have $`S_x(\sigma )=_{y:\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}<|xy|r}J_{x,y}\sigma (y)+h_x`$, a sort of average of the spins inside a ball centered at site $`x`$ with radius equal to $`r`$. Hence, by expanding $`H^{}`$ as a sum of potentials we will get all the possible couplings inside the ball, starting from the two body up to the $`N(r)`$ body interaction, with $`N(r)`$ the number of sites inside the ball. In some sense these new couplings are dynamically generated. In the following we will discuss few interesting particular cases.

## III Nearest neighbor Ising model

Let us consider the standard nearest neighbors Ising model with no external magnetic field, namely we consider (5) with $`J_{x,y}=J/2`$ for any $`x,y\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that $`|xy|=1`$, $`J_{x,y}=0`$ otherwise, and $`h_x=0`$ for any $`x\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The Hamiltonian $`H^{}`$ is the sum of averages performed over the four site crosses centered at each site of the lattice. We then expect all the possible interactions inside the cross.

As it as been seen in  it is possible to extract the potentials and rewrite the Hamiltonian $`H^{}`$ in the following way

$$H^{}(\sigma )=J_1\underset{xy_\stackrel{}{\sqrt{2}}}{}\sigma (x)\sigma (y)J_2\underset{xy_\stackrel{}{2}}{}\sigma (x)\sigma (y)J_3\underset{\mathrm{}_{xywz}}{}\sigma (x)\sigma (y)\sigma (w)\sigma (z),$$
(10)
where the three sums (see Fig. 1a) are respectively performed over the pairs of next to the nearest neighbors (sites at distance $`\sqrt{2}`$), the pairs of third neighbors (sites at distance $`2`$), the four site diamond shaped clusters (plaquettes with side length equal to $`\sqrt{2}`$). The coupling constants are given by

$$J_1=\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{cosh}(2\beta J)\frac{1}{2}\beta J,J_2=\frac{1}{2}J_1,J_3=\frac{1}{16}\mathrm{log}\frac{\mathrm{cosh}^2(2\beta J)}{\mathrm{cosh}^8(\beta J)}\frac{1}{4}\beta J,$$
(11)
where “$``$” means the limiting behavior for $`\beta \mathrm{}`$. There exist several possible ways to extract the potentials. A very natural one, in the case of spin variable, is to consider the function $`\phi _x(\sigma )=\mathrm{log}\mathrm{cosh}[(\beta J/2)_{y\mathrm{\Delta }_x}\sigma (y)]`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x=\{y\mathrm{\Lambda }:|yx|=1\}`$ is the set of nearest neighbors of site $`x`$, and its expansion

$$\phi _x(\sigma )=\underset{X\mathrm{\Delta }_x}{}c(X)\underset{yX}{}\sigma (y),$$

with the coefficients $`c(X)`$ given by

$$c(X)=\frac{1}{2^{|\mathrm{\Delta }_x|}}\underset{\sigma \{1,+1\}^{\mathrm{\Delta }_x}}{}\phi _x(\sigma )\underset{yX}{}\sigma (y),$$

where, we recall, $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_x|=4`$ is the cardinality of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_x`$ (see ).

It is important to remark that the second nearest neighbor interaction, $`J_1`$, is positive and dominating; hence we expect a low temperature antiferromagnetic phase to exist. What appears very remarkable is that we have derived an antiferromagnetic behavior in a purely dynamical way as a result of the coupling proliferation. If a parallel heat bath Ising dynamics is implemented, the equilibrium Gibbs measure shows a low temperature antiferromagnetic phase despite the simple physical ferromagnetic coupling of the Ising model. This phenomenon is, obviously, absent if the Ising heat bath dynamics is implemented in a serial fashion.

The equilibrium properties of the model can be understood by remarking that two independent models are found if the lattice is partitioned into two square sublattices with step $`\sqrt{2}`$ (the even and the odd sublattice). Each model is, indeed, an eight vertex model with nearest neighbors coupling $`J_1`$, next to the nearest neighbors coupling $`J_2`$ and plaquette interaction $`J_3`$. This model has been widely studied both in two  and three  dimensions. From (11) and the very well known properties of the two–dimensional eight vertex model we have that on each sublattice there are two coexisting low temperature phases, respectively with positive and negative magnetization. Hence, by combining in all the possible ways the two phases we get, for the original model, the $`3`$ different low temperature phases corresponding to the three ground states $`\psi _0,\psi _1,\psi _2`$ (see Fig. 2).

It is of some interest a direct study of the hamiltonian (10): ground states can be defined as those configurations on which the Gibbs measure $`\mu ^{}`$, associated to the Hamiltonian $`H^{}`$, is concentrated when the limit $`\beta \mathrm{}`$ is considered, namely as the minima of the energy

$$E(\sigma )=\underset{\beta \mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{H^{}(\sigma )}{\beta }=\underset{x\mathrm{\Lambda }}{}|S_x(\sigma )|,$$
(12)
uniformly in $`\sigma 𝒮`$. It is rather clear that with periodic boundary conditions there exist three coexisting minima $`\psi _0,\psi _1,\psi _2𝒮`$ (see Fig. 2), with energy $`4|\mathrm{\Lambda }|`$, such that $`\psi _0(x)=+1`$, $`\psi _1(x)=(1)^{x_1+x_2}`$ and $`\psi _2(x)=1`$ for all $`x=(x_1,x_2)\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Notice that $`\psi _1`$ is the chessboard configuration.

The problem is, now, to understand if this coexistence of different states persists at a finite small temperature, namely if the system undergoes a low temperature phase transition. We give an heuristic argument: at finite temperature ground states are perturbed because small droplets of different phases show up. The idea is to calculate the energetic cost of a perturbation of one of the four coexisting states via the formation of a square droplet of a different phase. If it results that one of the three states $`\psi _0,\psi _1,\psi _2`$ is more easily perturbed, then we will conclude that this is the equilibrium phase at finite temperature.

A simple calculation, see , shows that the energy cost of a square droplet of side length $`n`$ of one of the two homogeneous ground states plunged in one of the two chessboards (or vice versa) is equal to $`8n`$. On the other hand if an homogeneous phase is perturbed as above by the other homogeneous phase, or one of the two chessboards is perturbed by the other one, then the energy cost is $`16n`$.

Hence, from the energetical point of view the most convenient excitations are those in which an homogeneous phase is perturbed by a chessboard or vice versa. Moreover, for each state $`\psi _0,\psi _1,\psi _2`$ there exist two possible energetically convenient excitations: there is no entropic reason to prefer one of the four ground states to the others when a finite low temperature is considered. This remark strongly suggests that at small finite temperature the three ground states still coexist.

## IV Next to the nearest neighbor Ising model

Let us consider the Ising model with no external magnetic field and next to the nearest neighbor interaction, namely we consider (5) with $`J_{x,y}=J/2`$ for any $`x,y\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that $`|xy|=\sqrt{2}`$, $`J_{x,y}=0`$ otherwise, and $`h_x=0`$ for any $`x\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

It is possible to extract the potentials as seen in Section III. The Hamiltonian $`H^{}`$ can be written as

$$H^{}(\sigma )=J_1\underset{xy_\stackrel{}{2}}{}\sigma (x)\sigma (y)J_2\underset{xy_{\stackrel{}{2\sqrt{2}}}}{}\sigma (x)\sigma (y)J_3\underset{\mathrm{}_{xywz}}{}\sigma (x)\sigma (y)\sigma (w)\sigma (z),$$
(13)
where the three sums (see Fig. 1b) are respectively performed over the pairs of third nearest neighbors (sites at distance $`2`$), the pairs of sites at distance $`2\sqrt{2}`$, the plaquettes with side length equal to $`2`$. The coupling constants are still given by (11).

In order to study this model we remark that if the lattice is partitioned into four square sublattices with step $`2`$, then we obtain four independent models one on each sublattice, each model being again an eight vertex model with nearest neighbors coupling $`J_1`$, next to the nearest neighbors coupling $`J_2`$ and plaquette interaction $`J_3`$. Hence, on each sublattice we have the two degenerate ground states with all the spins, respectively, equal to one and minus one. By combining in all the possible ways these two states we get, for our model, $`2^4=16`$ different ground states. On the torus, namely when periodic boundary conditions are considered, some of the ground states are equivalent, so we get the seven states $`\psi _0,\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _6`$ in Fig. 2 and 3. The fact that the phase transition persists at finite small temperature is, as in Section III a straightforward consequence of the known behavior of the eight vertex model.

In this note we observed the relation between the two body ferromagnetic interaction of the Ising model and the low temperature antiferromagnetic behavior of the equilibrium Hamiltonian obtained evolving the initial system with a parallel heat bath dynamics. Any lattice system with two body interactions and having a self-organization resembling the parallel dynamics here described in the simple Ising model, could evolve towards unexpectedly complex equilibrium states. The influence of the parallel dynamics on the physical properties of the equilibrium measure emerges as an interesting new feature that deserves further explorations.

###### Acknowledgements.

ENMC wishes to express his thanks to the Physics Department of the University of Helsinki for its warm hospitality. ENMC also thanks J.L. Lebowitz for having introduced him to the interesting topic of PCA’s and P. Dai Pra for a useful discussion. ADP acknowledges support from EU-TMR programme, contract CT98-0169.

Figure captions

Fig. 1: Couplings $`J_1`$, $`J_2`$ and $`J_3`$ for the hamiltonian (10) (resp. (13)) are shown in (a) (resp. (b)).

Fig. 2: The three ground states $`\psi _0,\psi _1,\psi _2`$ depicted from the left to the right.

Fig. 3: The four ground states $`\psi _3,\psi _4,\psi _5,\psi _6`$ depicted from the left to the right.


text:
# Specific Heat of Mg11B2

## Abstract

Measurements of the specific heat of Mg11B2, from 1 to 50 K, in magnetic fields to 9 T, give the Debye temperature, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ = 1050 K, the coefficient of the normal–state electron contribution, $`\gamma _n`$ = 2.6 mJ mol-1 K-2, and a discontinuity in the zero–field specific heat of 133 mJ mol-1 K-1 at $`T_c`$ = 38.7 K. The estimated value of the electron-phonon coupling parameter, $`\lambda `$ = 0.62, could account for the observed $`T_c`$ only if the important phonon frequencies are unusually high relative to $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$. At low $`T`$, there is a strongly field–dependent feature that suggests the existence of a second energy gap, about four times smaller than the major gap.

The superconductivity of MgB2, with $`T_c`$ = 39 K Nagamatsu  and an isotope effect Budko ; Hinks ; Lawrie  consistent with the phonon–mediated electron pairing of the BCS theory Bardeen , has reopened the question of the maximum $`T_c`$ that can be produced by that mechanism McMillan ; Allen . It also raises the complementary question: What is the mechanism of the superconductivity of MgB2 itself? In this Letter, we report measurements of the heat capacity ($`C`$) of Mg11B2 that give information relevant to the latter question: Comparison of the coefficient ($`\gamma _n`$) of the normal–state electron contribution to $`C`$ with band–structure calculations Sun ; An ; Kortus  gives an estimate of the electron–phonon coupling parameter ($`\lambda `$). The value of $`\lambda `$ suggests moderately strong coupling, but whether it can account for the high value of $`T_c`$ on the basis of phonon coupling alone depends on the values of other parameters that are not yet determined. In the superconducting state $`C`$ deviates from the BCS expression in a way that has no parallel among known superconductors, and which suggests the presence of a second, smaller gap in the electron density of states (EDOS), which has a non–BCS dependence on $`T`$.

The Mg11B2 sample was a powder, prepared by reacting 11B powder and Mg metal in a capped BN crucible at 850oC under a 50–bar argon atmosphere for 1.5 hours. Thermal contact to the powder was achieved by mixing it with a small amount of GE7031 varnish (a common low–$`T`$ thermal contact agent with a known heat capacity) in a thin–walled copper cup. These extra contributions to the addenda limited the precision of the data. However, the alternate method of providing thermal contact, sintering the powder, can have adverse effects on the sample Franck  and may in some cases account for differences between the results reported here and those obtained in other measurements. The measurements of $`C`$ were made by a modified heat–pulse technique, 1–32 K, and by a continuous–heating technique, 29–50 K. Measurements in magnetic field ($`H`$) were made on the field–cooled (FC) sample after applying the field at $`T60`$ K. For $`H`$ = 1 T, for which the field penetration is about 50% of that in the normal state, measurements made after applying the field at 1 K were indistinguishable from the FC results, suggesting that equilibrium flux distributions were attained.

Below 2 K, there is an $`H`$–dependent hyperfine contribution to $`C`$. There are also several $`H`$–independent features in $`C`$, including an “upturn” below 2 K, that are probably associated with small amounts of impurity phases (or possibly with the GE varnish, although past experience makes that seem unlikely). Partly for that reason, most of the interpretation of the results is based on an analysis of the differences, $`C(H)C(9\text{ T})`$, in which the $`H`$–independent extraneous contributions and most of the contributions of the addenda, including the varnish, cancel. $`C(H)C(9\text{ T})`$ was calculated after the data were corrected for the hyperfine contributions and a small $`H`$–dependent part of the heat capacity of the sample holder. Since $`C`$ is the sum of an $`H`$–dependent electron contribution ($`C_e`$) and an $`H`$–independent lattice contribution ($`C_l`$), an analysis of $`C(H)C(9\text{ T})`$ also has the advantage that $`C_l`$ cancels, leaving $`C_e(H)`$, the contribution of greater interest. In the normal state $`C_e(H)=\gamma _nT`$, independent of $`H`$; in the mixed state $`C_e(H)`$ includes a $`T`$–proportional term, $`\gamma (H)T`$, and $`H`$–dependent terms; in the superconducting state, $`C_e(0)=C_{es}`$

The upper critical field ($`H_{c2}`$) of MgB2 is approximately linear in $`T`$ with $`H_{c2}(0)16`$ T Budko2 . This is reasonably consistent with the $`C`$ measurements, for which the onset of the transition to the mixed state, at $`H=H_{c2}(T)`$, is marked by the deviations of $`C(H)C(9\text{ T})`$ from zero (see Fig 1(a)). It leads to the expectation that for 9 T the sample would be in the normal state for $`T20`$ K. The data actually plotted in Fig. 1(a) are the differences, $`[C(H)C(9\text{ T})]/T`$, but with the scale shifted by $`\gamma `$(9 T). (They are essentially point–to–point differences, with no smoothing of the 9–T data, which increases the scatter.) The values of $`\gamma (H)`$ have been determined by fitting the low–$`T`$, mixed– and superconducting–state data with $`[C(H)C(9\text{ T})]=[\gamma (H)\gamma (9\text{ T})]T+a\mathrm{exp}(b/T)`$, where $`a`$ and $`b`$ are $`H`$ dependent. Consistent with the $`H=0`$ data, $`\gamma (0)`$ was taken as zero, fixing the values of $`\gamma (H)`$ for all $`H`$. Figure 2 shows $`\gamma (H)`$ vs $`H`$, and the extrapolation to $`H_{c2}(0)=16`$ T to obtain $`\gamma _n=2.6`$ mJ mol-1 K-2. Although the extrapolation is somewhat arbitrary, the very small differences between $`\gamma `$(5 T), $`\gamma `$(7 T), and $`\gamma `$(9 T) suggest that it gives $`\gamma _n`$ to within $`0.1`$ mJ mol-1 K-2. If the sample were normal at all temperatures in 9 T the quantity shown in Fig. 1(a) would be exactly $`C_e(H)/T`$. That is not the case, but the differences are small, as shown by the small differences between $`C`$(5 T), $`C`$(7 T), and $`C`$(9 T). Quantitatively, $`C_e(H)/T`$ is underestimated by the amount $`\gamma _nC_e(9\text{ T})/T`$. For $`T10`$ K, $`\gamma _nC_e(9\text{ T})/T\gamma _n\gamma (9\text{ T})0.08`$ mJ mol-1 K-2; for $`10T20`$ K, where there must be a small broad anomaly in $`C`$(9 T), the underestimate is smaller and $`T`$–dependent.

The transition to the superconducting state, shown in Fig. 1(c), with an entropy–conserving construction that gives $`T_c=38.7`$ K and $`\mathrm{\Delta }C(T_c)=133`$ mJ mol-1 K-1, is relatively sharp, with a width $``$ 2 K. In this temperature interval the sample is in the normal state for $`H`$ = 9 T, and addition of $`\gamma _n=2.6`$ mJ mol-1 K-2 to the quantity plotted would give the electron contribution to $`C`$ through the transition. The effect of $`H`$ in broadening the transition (to the mixed state), as expected for measurements on a powder with an anisotropic $`H_{c2}`$ An ; deLima , is evident in Fig. 1(a).

The thermodynamic consistency of the data, including in particular the very unusual $`T`$ dependence of $`C_{es}(0)`$, can be tested by calculating the difference in entropy ($`S`$) between 0 and $`T_c`$ for different fields. The result of such a test is shown in Fig. 3(a) where the entropies obtained by integrating the plotted points are compared with $`\gamma (9\text{ T})T`$, which represents the 9 T data. At 40 K, the entropies for all $`H`$ are within $`\pm `$ 2% of the same value. The result of a second integration of the entropies to obtain free energy differences and the thermodynamic critical field ($`H_c`$) is shown in Fig. 3(b).

Fitting the 9–T data for $`20T50`$ K with $`C(9\text{ T})=\gamma _nT+C_l`$, where $`C_l=B_3T^3+B_5T^5`$, gave $`B_3=5.1\times 10^3`$ mJ mol-1 K-4 and $`B_5=2.5\times 10^6`$ mJ mol-1 K-6. The Debye temperature ($`\mathrm{\Theta }`$), calculated following the usual convention of using the value of $`B_3`$ per g atom, is $`1050\pm 50`$ K.

Fig. 1(a) includes a comparison of the experimental $`C_{es}`$ with that for a BCS superconductor with $`\gamma _n=2.6`$ mJ mol-1 K-2 and $`T_c`$ = 38.7 K. For $`T27`$ K, $`C_{es}`$ is approximately parallel to the BCS curve; at lower $`T`$ it rises above the BCS curve and then decreases to zero as $`a\mathrm{exp}(b/T)`$, but with values of $`a`$ and $`b`$ very different from those of the BCS superconductor. It seems unlikely that this behavior could be understood on the basis of gap anisotropy similar to that known in other superconductors. Qualitatively, it gives the appearance of a transition to the superconducting state in two stages: the first, a partial transition at $`T_c`$ that leaves a “residual” $`\gamma `$ (the extrapolation of $`C_{es}`$ to $`T=0`$ from above 12 K gives $`1`$ mJ mol-1 K-2, but it should be regarded as an overestimate because it does not allow for the full entropy associated with the second stage); a second stage that is associated with a second, smaller, energy gap, which decreases in amplitude in the vicinity of 10 K. Taking the exponential decrease in $`C_{es}`$ as a manifestation of a BCS–like transition, and comparing the parameters $`a`$ and $`b`$ with BCS theory, gives $`T_c`$ = 11 K and $`\gamma =0.74`$ mJ mol-1 K-2. This interpretation of $`C_{es}`$ is, to some degree, understandable on the basis of theoretical considerations: It has been suggested that the gaps may be different on two parts of the Fermi surface Liu , and, depending on the strength of the electron–phonon coupling between, and on, the two parts, the amplitude of the small gap can show a relatively abrupt decrease at a temperature well below $`T_c`$. Although both gaps open at $`T_c`$, that feature in the small gap could produce the observed feature in $`C_{es}`$ in the 8–12 K region. The existence of two gaps on the Fermi surface is also consistent with scanning tunneling spectroscopy, which has shown both a flat–bottomed BCS–like gap at low $`T`$, but with a small amplitude, $`2`$ meV, corresponding to a BCS $`T_c`$ of $`13`$ K Rubio , and a V–shaped gap with an amplitude of $`5.2`$ meV, corresponding to a BCS $`T_c`$ of 35 K Karapetrov , more compatible with the observed $`T_c`$. Despite the difficulty of explaining why and how different groups measure different gaps (see also Schmidt  and Sharoni ), it is striking how well these two gaps would account for $`C_{es}`$: At low $`T`$, where the thermal excitations are too weak to overcome the larger gap, the exponential behavior of $`C_{es}`$ is consistent with the smaller gap; the opening of the large gap at $`T_c`$ explains the large $`\mathrm{\Delta }C(T_c)`$. Moreover, between 20 K and $`T_c`$, $`C_{es}/T`$ has a linear behavior (see Fig. 1(a)), which is consistent with a V–shaped gap. (Similar $`T^2`$ behavior has been seen in heavy–fermion superconductors Fisher .)

Anisotropy in $`H_{c2}`$ cannot explain the dramatic increase in $`\gamma (H)`$ at low $`H`$ shown in Fig. 2. The dashed curve is a calculation using the effective–mass model with an anisotropy of 10, which is already greater than reported values An ; deLima , but $`\gamma (H)`$ cannot be fitted with any value of the anisotropy. The rapid increase in $`\gamma (H)`$ at low $`H`$ reflects the difference between $`C_e(0.5\text{ T})`$ and $`C_e(0)`$ below 10 K, and is related to the existence of the second gap.

An average over the Fermi surface of the electron–phonon coupling parameter can be estimated by comparing $`\gamma _n`$ with band–structure calculations of the “bare” EDOS at the Fermi surface ($`N(0)`$) using the relation $`\gamma _n=(1/3)\pi ^2k_B^2N(0)(1+\lambda )`$. $`N(0)`$ has been reported as 0.68, 0.71, and 0.72 states eV-1 unit cell-1 (Refs. Sun , An , and Kortus  respectively) giving $`\lambda =0.62`$, 0.56, and 0.53. Theoretically calculated values of $`\lambda `$ are 0.68 Sun , and $`1`$ Kortus . In the Mc Millan relation McMillan , $`T_c`$ is related to $`\lambda `$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, and the electron–electron repulsion ($`\mu ^{}`$) by

$$T_c=(\mathrm{\Theta }/1.45)\mathrm{exp}\{1.04(1+\lambda )/[\lambda \mu ^{}(1+0.62\lambda )]\},$$
(1)
with $`\mu ^{}`$ frequently taken to be $``$ 0.1 McMillan ; Allen . With $`\lambda =0.62`$, the highest of the values derived from $`\gamma _n`$ and $`N(0)`$, and $`\mathrm{\Theta }=1050`$ K Eq. (1) gives $`T_c=22`$ K, too low by almost a factor two. With these values of $`\lambda `$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$, $`T_c=39`$ K would require $`\mu ^{}=0.030`$, an unusually low value. However, in this expression $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ represents a relatively crude estimate of the phonon frequencies that are important in the electron pairing. As derived from the coefficient of the $`T^3`$ term in $`C_l`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is really a measure of the frequencies of the low–frequency acoustic phonons, which may not be particularly relevant to the pairing of the electrons. In the Debye model, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is also the cut–off frequency, but real phonon spectra often extend to significantly higher frequencies. In the Allen and Dynes version of the theory Allen , $`\mathrm{\Theta }/1.45`$ is replaced by $`\omega _{log}/1.20`$, where $`\omega _{log}`$ is a moment of the phonon frequencies in which they are weighted by the electron–phonon matrix elements. More detailed calculations that take into account relevant features of the phonon spectrum and electron–phonon scattering may give a value of the pre–exponential factor in Eq. (1) that accounts for the observed $`T_c`$ with a physically plausible value of $`\mu ^{}`$, but until they are available, the question of whether the electron pairing in MgB2 is phonon mediated would seem to remain open.

The parameters $`(H_c(0))^2/\gamma _nT_c^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }C(T_c)/\gamma _nT_c`$ measure the strength of the electron pairing Padamasee . In the BCS, weak–coupling limit, their values are 5.95 and 1.43, respectively. There are a number of “strong–coupled” superconductors for which these parameters are greater than the BCS values, but relatively few for which they are smaller Padamasee . For Mg11B2 they are unusually small, 5.46 and 1.32, which, in contrast with the value of $`\lambda `$, suggests extreme weak coupling. This indication of weak coupling, based on bulk properties, is in qualitative agreement with tunneling results that may have been influenced by surface effects Karapetrov .

In general, there are more differences than similarities among the specific heat measurements on MgB2 Budko ; Wang ; Kremer ; Marcenat ; Walti . However, in several important respects, including the low–$`T`$ behavior of $`C_{es}`$, the results of the Geneva group Wang  are qualitatively similar to those reported here, and the differences that do occur are readily understood in terms of sample dependence. A comparison with their results, which were obtained by different experimental techniques on sintered sample of commercial material, attests the qualitative validity of the major features reported both here and in Ref. Wang : The value of $`\gamma _n`$, 2.7 mJ mol-1 K-2, and the test of thermodynamic consistency in Ref. Wang  are similar and of comparable accuracy to those reported here, but limited by paramagnetic Fe impurities in Ref. Wang  and the precision of the data here. Although the superconducting–state entropies are essentially identical at $`T_c`$, the specific heat anomaly at $`T_c`$ in Ref. Wang  is broader, leading to a substantial underestimate of $`\mathrm{\Delta }C(T_c)`$. Most importantly, the $`T`$–dependence of $`C_{es}`$ in the 4–15 K range, which shows the presence of a second gap (or extreme an unusual anisotropy), is essentially the same in both cases. However, for $`T4`$ K, $`C_{es}`$ was obscured by the contribution of paramagnetic impurities and the limiting $`T0`$ dependence was taken as approximatively $`T^2`$ Wang , which would be expected for line nodes, rather than the exponential dependence reported here.

Several other values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }C(T_c)`$, all for sintered samples and all lower than that reported here, have been given in other reports Budko ; Kremer ; Marcenat ; Walti . Values of $`\gamma _n`$ that range from 1.1 to 5.5 mJ mol-1 K-2, based on different Kremer ; Walti  or unspecified Budko  analysis of experimental data have also been reported, but the very similar values reported here and in Ref. Wang , are supported by the thermodynamic consistency of the data

We have benefited from useful discussions with J. M. An, M. L. Cohen, G. W. Crabtree, J. P. Franck, R. A. Klemm, C. Marcenat, I. I. Mazin, and W. E. Pickett. The work at LBNL was supported by the Director, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, Materials Sciences Division of the U. S. DOE under Contract No. DE–AC03–76SF00098. The work at ANL was supported by the U. S. DOE, BS-MS under Contract No. W–31–109–ENG–38.


text:
# Charmonium Production off Nuclei: from SPS to RHIC

## Abstract

The physics of charmonium suppression in nuclear collisions drastically changes between the energies of SPS and RHIC. Mechanisms suppressing charmonia at the SPS are reviewed, neither of which is important at RHIC. On the other hand, coherence, or shadowing of $`c`$ quarks and gluons barely seen at SPS, becomes a dominant effect at RHIC providing a much stronger suppression. The onset of coherence at Fermilab energies explains why the observed cross section ratio falls steeply at large Feynman $`x_F`$. In nuclear collisions the variation of charmonium suppression with $`x_F`$ suggests a sensitive probe to look for the QGP.

1. Introduction

Charmonium production in heavy ion collisions at high energies is subject to a two-step suppression well separated in time,

$$S_{AB}^\mathrm{\Psi }=S_{nucl}S_{FSI}.$$
(1)
The early stage presented by the first factor is due to multiple interaction with the colliding nucleons. It includes absorption and shadowing. At the late stage the formed charmonium attenuates through the cloud of matter produced in the collision, providing the second suppression factor in (1). Actually, this is the factor probing the properties of the created matter and is the main goal of measurements . However, it is impossible to single the final state interaction (FSI) factor out of the overall suppression in Eq. (1) unless the first factor, $`S_{nucl}`$, providing the main contribution, is reliably known. Surprisingly, this problem is not settled yet even for $`pA`$ collisions.

2. Pitfalls and perspectives for the QGP search at the SPS

We give here a brief list of effects contributing to nuclear suppression of the charmonium production rate in $`pA`$ and $`AB`$ collisions at SPS energies.

1. Absorption. The model for the factor $`S_{nucl}`$ widely used at the SPS is based on a simple idea that the charmonium is produced instantaneously inside the nucleus and then attenuates with a constant absorption cross section treated as a fitted parameter. This model is missing important effects and predicts a suppression which is independent of Feynman $`x_F`$, while the data show that $`S_{nucl}(x_F)`$ falls dramatically with $`x_F`$ .

2. Formation time. Apparently, the produced $`\overline{c}c`$ pair takes time to develop the charmonium wave function. According to the uncertainty principle one cannot momentarily disentangle the different levels and conclude which state has been produced. It takes a time, called the formation time (length), which is inversely related to the charmonium mass splitting. Corrected for Lorentz time dilation it can be estimated to be $`t_f=2E_\mathrm{\Psi }/(M_\mathrm{\Psi }^{}^2M_{J/\mathrm{\Psi }}^2)`$. The NA38/50 experiments  detect charmonia with $`E_\mathrm{\Psi }50GeV`$, therefore $`t_f\text{ }>R_A`$ and the formation effects are important. A quantum-mechanical description of the evolution of a $`\overline{c}c`$ wave packet in an absorptive medium was suggested in , and in a hadronic representation in . A beautiful quantum effect has been found: in spite of naive expectations the $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ attenuation should be similar or even less than that of $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$, provided that the energy is sufficiently high . At the same time, in $`BA`$ collisions, $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{}`$ is more suppressed due to the inverse kinematics for nuclei $`A`$ and $`B`$ . At the same time the effective absorption cross for $`J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ varies with energy and nuclear thickness and cannot be treated as a universal parameter .

3. Energy loss. This mechanism was suggested in  right after the NA3 collaboration published the first data demonstrating a steep drop of the cross section ratio at large $`x_F`$. The incoming hadron experiences an inelastic collision on the surface of the nucleus, followed by hadronization and energy loss of the projectile partons. As a result, they arrive at the point of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ creation with diminished energy. Therefore, the value of $`x_F`$ in this elementary process must be shifted to a higher value resulting in extra suppression. A similar, but weaker nuclear suppression was also predicted in  for the Drell-Yan reaction, confirmed by the E772/E866 experiments. The recent analysis  of this data led to the rate of energy loss per unit of length $`dE/dz=2.3\pm 0.52\pm 0.5GeV/fm`$ in agreement with the value used in . The mechanism of energy loss alone is able to describe the main features of the NA3 data, later confirmed by the E537 experiment .

4. Gluon enhancement in nuclei. There is some model-dependent evidence  that the gluon density is enhanced in heavy nuclei by about $`1020\%`$ at large $`x_20.1`$. Accidentally, this is just the value corresponding to the kinematics of the NA38/50 experiments. Therefore, theoretical predictions should be corrected for this factor $`\sigma _{pA}^\mathrm{\Psi }/\sigma _{pN}^\mathrm{\Psi }G_A(x_2)/G_N(x_2)1.11.2`$.

5. Excitation of nuclear matter in $`AB`$ collisions. It is commonly assumed that charmonium produced in heavy ion collisions propagates and attenuates in conventional cold nuclear matter. However, each nucleon met by the $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ has already interacted at least once with other nucleons and must be in an excited state. First of all, inelastic $`NN`$ collisions are followed by gluon radiation which also contributes to the break-up of the $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ . Second, inelastic $`NN`$ collisions are mediated by color exchange. Therefore, all the nucleons met by the $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ are in colored states and interact stronger than colorless ones . These effects are able to explain the observed suppression of the total cross section of charmonium production, including lead-lead, but do not leave much room for the FSI suppression which manifests itself in central collisions at large $`E_T`$.

6. Scanning the QGP. Although the observed $`E_T`$ dependence of charmonium suppression cannot be reproduced by simplest models, still more sophisticated approaches are more successful, and manifestation of the FSI suppression is disputable (e.g. see ). A new sensitive probe for FSI, scanning the produced matter by varying $`x_F`$ of the charmonium, has been suggested recently . One can see it on the plot Fig. 2 illustrating the time – longitudinal coordinate distribution of the created medium.

Interaction with the medium most dense at central rapidities causes a specific minimum at $`x_F=0`$ in the nuclear suppression factor. This would be an indisputable signature of FSI, which is also very sensitive to QGP production.

3. From Fermilab to RHIC.

A new phenomenon, quantum coherence, or quark and gluon shadowing is expected to become dominant at RHIC. However, before jumping to RHIC energies, one must understand (as observed at Fermilab ) the $`x_F`$ dependence of $`Psi`$ suppression, which demonstrates the onset of coherence. The first full QCD (parameter free) calculation of the dependence of nuclear suppression on $`x_F`$ is performed in . The results are compared with data  in Fig. 4 where contributions of different mechanisms are explicitly shown.

The curves correspond to: absorption and shadowing for the produced $`\overline{c}c`$ (thin solid curve); gluon shadowing added (dotted); energy loss included (dashed); gluon antishadowing added (thick solid). One can see that gluon shadowing is the main source of nuclear suppression at small $`x_2`$.

Energy loss violating $`x_2`$ scaling still noticeable at Fermilab completely vanishes at RHIC. Predictions  for nuclear suppression in $`pAu`$ and $`AuAu`$ collisions at RHIC are depicted in Fig. 4. On top of that one should expect a FSI suppression which is strongest at $`x_F=0`$.

An opposite effect of FSI enhancement of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ due to fusion of produced $`\overline{c}c`$’s has been predicted recently . However, if gluon shadowing suppresses direct $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ by nearly an order of magnitude, it should be square of that for the fusion mechanism. It may eliminate fusion even at LHC due to gluon saturation. Apparently, this problem needs further study. Nevertheless, whatever happens, FSI suppression or enhancement, it will show up only on top of the nuclear suppression which has to be well understood.

Acknowledgement: I am thankful to J. Hüfner, A. Polleri and A.V. Tarasov for fruitful and enjoyable collaboration. I am also grateful to Tim Hallman for careful reading the manuscript and making numerous improving comments. Partial support from the GSI grant No. GSI-OR-SCH is acknowledged.