text:
# Ph ng tr nh Nh n qu

N u th gi i l th ng nh t th n th ng nh t trong m i quan h nh n qu  v s th ng nh t ch c th c bi u hi n trong ngh a y m th i.

Theo tinh th n , s ng u nhi n, n u nh th t s c c i g l ng u nhi n, c ng ch l s n ph m c a s t t y u.

B i th gi i l th ng nh t trong m i quan h nh n qu , kh ng m t c i g c a th gi i n m ngo i m i quan h y, n n ta c th chia to n b th gi i th nh hai t p h p: t p h p $`A`$ bao g m t t c nh ng g c coi l nguy n nh n, t p h p $`B`$ bao g m t t c nh ng g l h qu .

Ch ng ta h y lo i b kh i c hai t p h p t t c c c ph n t gi ng nhau. Nh th s c 4 kh n ng sau:

1. C hai t p h p $`A`$, $`B`$ u tr th nh c c t p h p r ng, t c l kh ng c nguy n nh n thu n tu c ng nh h qu thu n tu . N i c ch kh c, th gi i kh ng c m u, c ng kh ng c k t c c cu i c ng.
2. $`A`$ kh ng r ng, $`B`$ r ng. Nh v y t n t i nguy n nh n thu n tu - th gi i c b t u nh ng kh ng c k t c c cu i c ng.
3. $`A`$ r ng, $`B`$ kh ng r ng. Kh ng c nguy n nh n thu n tu nh ng c h qu thu n tu . Th gi i kh ng c m u nh ng c k t c c cu i c ng.
4. C $`A`$, c $`B`$ u kh ng r ng. Th gi i c m u v c k t c c cu i c ng.

Ch m t trong 4 kh n ng tr n l ng v i hi n th c. l kh n ng n o v i u ph thu c v o c i g ?

M t ng l c y b n lu n lu n th i th c con ng i t m ki m nguy n nh n cho m i hi n t ng v s v t. D ng t t ng duy t m (kh ch quan v ch quan) cho r ng ni m tuy t i, tinh th n t i cao hay ng s ng t o, th ng ,… l nguy n nh n t i cao, l nguy n nh n c a t t c . D ng t t ng duy v t l i cho r ng v t ch t m i l ngu n g c c a t t c , l c i ph i c tr c nh t.

Hi n tr ng l m u thu n!

N u qu th c t n t i m t nguy n nh n t i cao, th l s kh c bi t!

Qu v y, n u kh ng t n t i s kh c bi t, th s kh ng t n t i b t c c i g , k c d ng t t ng duy t m v i nh ng ni m v tinh th n c a n , k c d ng t t ng duy v t v i c c c s v t ch t c a n . T m l i, n u kh ng c s kh c bi t th kh ng c th gi i n y.

Th nh ng, n u kh c bi t l nguy n nh n t i cao, t c l nguy n nh n c a m i nguy n nh n th n ph i l nguy n nh n c a ch nh n n a, hay n i kh c h n, n l h qu c a ch nh n .

Ch ng ta th a nh n s t n t i c a kh c bi t, i u c ngh a l ch ng ta ng m th a nh n t nh b o to n t ng i c a n : Qu v y, n u l c n y b n l nh duy v t th b n kh ng th c ng l k duy t m c n a. Qu th , khi ch a c T m b n trong, kh ng ph i l qu th theo ng ngh a c a n . C i b n kia, ch ng n o n c n l c i b n, th n kh ng th l trang gi y m b n ang c c!.

C u chuy n x y ra trong h nh h c

Ch ng ta tr l i m t c u chuy n c : cu c tranh c i xung quanh h ti n h nh h c Euclid.

V n do ch nh c i ng l c b n duy nh t y chi ph i m ng i ta lu n khao kh t t m ki m c i "nguy n nh n t i cao". y m c ch khi m t n h n, ch gi i h n trong ph m vi h nh h c, v ng i u ti n th c hi n c i u l Euclid.

B n ti n u c a ng c d d ng ch p nh n v ch ng r r ng v hi n nhi n, nh ng ti n th n m, c n g i l nh Euclid, khi n ng i ta nghi ng v b n ch t ti n c a n : " nh n y ph c t p v k m hi n nhi n".

Trong su t h n 20 th k c c nh to n h c m i th i i g ng s c ch ng minh n ch l m t nh l . Nh ng m i c g ng u v ch. V k t qu l d n t i s ra i m t h nh h c m i: h nh h c phi Euclid.

B ng c ch , ng i ta kh ng nh r ng, v n nh th l c gi i quy t: nh Euclid ng l m t ti n , v r ng i u gi thi t ng c l i d n t i h nh h c phi Euclid kh ng c m u thu n n i t i.

Nh ng… k t lu n nh v y c d d i qu kh ng?

Khi ng i ta hoan h v h nh nh m i vi c u v o y v m c ch ra c th c hi n: gi m n m c t i thi u s l ng ti n c a h nh h c v l m trong s ng ch ng, th tr tr u thay, m t ti n m i l i c l n a th m v o m t c ch ng ho ng: ti n Lobachevski. Ti n n y v ti n th n m Euclid lo i tr l n nhau!

Kh ng m t ai nh n th c r r ng v s u s c m u thu n n y ngh a l th n o. Nh ng m u thu n v n l m u thu n: n g y ra bao cu c tranh c i v ph n b c k ch li t, th m ch c s h n h c.

Sau n y, khi Bentrami ch ng minh c s ng n c a h nh h c Lobachevski tr n m t gi c u, s ph n b c c d u xu ng.

N u ngay t u, c c nh h nh h c phi Euclid khi b t tay v o x y d ng h nh h c c a m nh, tuy n b r v i c gi r ng: i t ng c a h nh h c m i kh ng ph i l m t ph ng Euclid m l m t gi c u, kh ng ph i l ng th ng Euclid m l ng th ng c a m t gi c u th c l ch ng c ai th c m c v ph n i g c !

Th t ng ti c! hay kh ng ng ti c l kh ng x y ra nh v y?

Nh ng i u ng ti c th t s l : to n b v n l i kh ng n m trong c i c a ra v gi i quy t ngo i s n kh u m h u qu c a n trong h u tr ng. B i v , cho d h nh h c phi Euclid c tuy t i ng u ch ng n a, th i u c ngh a l : c ng c ng nh ng i t ng y c a h nh h c - m t ph ng v ng th ng Euclid \- v y m gi a ch ng c th t n t i hai ki u quan h lo i tr nhau! c di n t trong c c ti n Euclide v ti n Lobachevski.

C th vi n n c c l l n y ho c kh c p m nh ch p nh n i u kh ch u n y, nh ng s kh ng ph i l s trung th c. y, t nh n tr nh n qu b ph v ; y t nh b o to n t ng i c a s kh c bi t b l n l n tr ng en, c nguy c trang gi y c ng l c i b n, v c i b n l trang gi y.

Ph ng ph p ti n c s d ng r ng r i trong to n h c r r ng mang l i nhi u ti n l i, nh ng ph ng ph p ch t t khi t nh n tr nh n qu c b o m, khi ch ng ta lu n lu n ch kh ng t c o t m t c c i t ng kh o s t ngh a th c, v t l c a ch ng. N u a ra c c ki u quan h c a c c i t ng d i d ng c c ti n m b t k n c c i t ng - ch nh n th c s c a c c m i quan h th r t c th , m t ch kh ng ng nh t, t nh n tr nh n qu b ph v v m u thu n n y sinh.

B i v c i m ch ng ta th ng nh t v i nhau l : c c i t ng l c i c tr c, c c m i quan h c a c c i t ng l h qu t t y u do s t n t i ng th i c a c c i t ng g y ra, ch kh ng ph i ng c l i.

N u ta c m t t p h p c c i t ng v ta mu n t m ki m t t c c c m i quan h c th gi a ch ng b ng ph ng ph p l p lu n logic th c l tr c h t v t ra ta ph i bi t m i quan h n i t i c a t ng lo i i t ng.

C c m i quan h n i t i quy t nh b n ch t c a i t ng, n l t m nh b n ch t c a c c i t ng quy t nh c c m i quan h c th c gi a ch ng, v t t nhi n gi a ch ng kh ng th ng th i t n t i c c m i quan h lo i tr nhau.

M i quan h n i t i, theo c ch n i c a c c tri t gia, l t nh t th n c a s v t. Khoa h c ng y nay ch nh l ang t m ki m c i t nh t th n c a s v t tr n c hai h ng, r ng h n v c b n h n.

Tr l i m ch c a c u chuy n, nh ch ng ta th y, c ng ch nh nh ng i t ng y c a h nh h c Euclid m l i c hai ki u quan h lo i tr nhau, i u ph i c hi u nh th n o?

Ch c th l h ti n Euclid l ch a y theo ngh a: s hi u v c c i t ng c a h nh h c n y l ch a ho n h o. B n th n Euclid c ng t ng a ra c c nh ngh a v c c i t ng h nh h c c a ng, nh ng nh c c nh to n h c hi n i ph ph n l : "l ng t ng", "n ng t nh tr c gi c". Theo h , c c i t ng xu t ph t c a h nh h c l kh ng nh ngh a c v ch n thu n g i ch ng l i m, ng, m t v.v. v l do t n tr ng l ch s m th i.

Nh ng, c c i t ng h nh h c c n c c c t n g i kh c n a: c c kh ng gian "kh ng chi u", "m t chi u", "hai chi u", v "ba chi u". (Kh ng gian "kh ng chi u" t c i m, l do t c gi a v o cho "tr n b ".)

Ta c th h i r ng, c c i t ng n y c th t t n t i c l p v i nhau c kh ng, n u c th v sao ch ng c th quan h v i nhau c?

L n theo m ch logic c a s vi c, ta th y r ng c c kh i ni m v nh ng i t ng n y n y sinh ra t kinh nghi m thu c qua ho t ng th c ti n c a con ng i trong T nhi n ch kh ng ph i do b m sinh, t ch ng c s n trong u c a ch ng ta (B i v y, ta kh ng n n t ch r i ch ng kh i tr c gi c, kh ng n n t c o t kh n ng h nh dung ra ch ng; i u phi l bi t bao!)

Nh n nh n m c s u h n, c th th y r ng, kh ng ph i t t c trong s c c i t ng h nh h c u c th t n t i c l p, m b t k m t kh ng gian $`n`$ chi u n o c ng l giao c a hai kh ng gian kh c c chi u l n h n m t n v $`n+1`$.

V y l , h nh nh ch ng ta c nh ngh a: i m l giao c a hai ng, ng l giao c a hai m t, m t l giao c a hai kh i, c n kh i … l giao c a nh ng kh ng gian n o n a?

Tuy nhi n, trong h nh h c, nh kh n ng h nh dung c a n o, ch ng m c nhi n tr th nh c c i t ng c l p, v gi n ti n, ta s g i ch ng l c c th c th kh ng gian.

C c i t ng n gi n nh t c a h nh h c l c c th c th ng nh t. l c c th c th , m n i m t c ch gi n n, khi ta d ch chuy n tr n ch ng theo t t c c c b c t do c th c c a ch ng, ta kh ng th ph t hi n c b t k s kh c bi t n i t i n o trong ch ng.

C c i t ng c a h nh h c Euclid l m t b ph n c a t p h p c c th c th ng nh t. N u ta x y d ng h ti n ch ri ng cho b ph n n y th r r ng h s kh ng t ng qu t.

H ti n d ng cho c c i t ng kh ng gian ng nh t ch nh l h ti n d ng cho m t c u. H nh h c Euclid ch l tr ng h p gi i h n c a h nh h c t ng qu t n y.

i v i m t c u, t c l m t ng nh t d ng t ng qu t, t n t i nh sau: hai ng th ng b t k kh ng tr ng nhau ( ng th ng l ng ng nh t chia m t ch a n th nh hai ph n b ng nhau) bao gi c ng c t nhau t i hai i m v hai i m chia i m i ng.

C th ph t bi u kh c h n: hai i m b t k tr n m t m t ng nh t ch thu c v m t ng th ng duy nh t c ng tr n m t n u ch ng kh ng chia ng n y th nh hai ph n b ng nhau.

p d ng nh n y cho m t ph ng Euclid, l tr ng h p gi i h n, ta th y ngay r ng y ch nh l n i dung c a ti n th nh t Euclid: qua hai i m ch c th k c m t ng th ng duy nh t m th i. Qu v y, hai i m b t k trong ph m vi kh o s t c c a m t ph ng Euclid ch thu c v m t ng th ng duy nh t v ch ng kh ng chia ng th nh hai ph n b ng nhau.

Nh v y, c th n i r ng, c ch ph t bi u nh 5 Euclid l kh ng ch nh x c ngay t u, b i v b t k hai ng th ng n o c a m t ng nh t cho lu n lu n c t nhau t i hai i m v chia i nhau. Tr n m t ph ng Euclid ta ch th y ho c m t giao i m c a ch ng c n i m kia ngo i v c ng; ho c l ta kh ng th y i m n o c - ch ng u n m ngo i v c c. Trong tr ng h p hai ng th ng c g i l song song (bi u ki n) v i nhau.

C c c ch ph t bi u t ng ng c a nh 5, sau khi c ch nh x c ho theo tinh th n c a nh n x t tr n, u c th c ch ng minh nh m t nh l .

M t t nh ch t r t quan tr ng c a c c th kh ng gian l : m t th c th kh ng gian b t k ch c th b ch a trong m t th c th kh ng gian kh c ng chi u, ng cong ho c c chi u l n h n nh ng cong kh ng l n h n.

i u n y h nh nh qu hi n nhi n: hai ng tr n c cong kh c nhau th kh ng th ch a trong nhau c; m t m t tr n c cong l n h n kh ng th ch a m t ng tr n c cong nh h n…

T ng t nh v y, hai kh ng gian (kh i) c cong kh c nhau th kh ng th ch a trong nhau c. (Ta h y tr l i v d v qu th v c T m, v c i b n v trang gi y…). cong y t ng ng v i m t i l ng n o c tr ng cho m i quan h n i t i c a i t ng kh o s t.

M u thu n, sinh ra tr n c s c a s kh c bi t,

l ngu n ng l c c a t t c

V th c ch t, T nhi n l m t t p h p c a c c kh ng nh v ph nh.

V y T nhi n kh ng nh nh ng g v ph nh nh ng g ?

Nh ng b m t ng y c ng c khoa h c kh m ph , ph t hi n v trong cu c t m ki m , n u kh ng k n ngu n g c ng l c c a n , l p lu n logic ng vai tr to l n.

Nh ng c i m ta g i l logic ph i ch ng kh ng ph i l m t chu i nh ng kh ng nh v ph nh c c c p b c v t h p kh c nhau?

V y th khi n o c i n y c kh ng nh, c n c i kia th kh ng?

B i v t duy c ng ch l m t hi n t ng c a T nhi n, n n quy lu t kh ng nh v ph nh c a t duy c ng l quy lu t kh ng nh v ph nh c a T nhi n. N i c ch kh c, quy lu t kh ng nh v ph nh c a T nhi n ph n nh v th hi n qua ch nh quy lu t kh ng nh v ph nh c a t duy.

Quy lu t l : c i g kh ng c m u thu n n i t i th c kh ng nh, c i g ch a m u thu n n i t i th b ph nh.

S kh ng nh (n u nh n v ph a tr c c a qu tr nh) hay s ph nh (n u nh n v ph a sau c a ti n tr nh) u c ch cu i c ng l t t i v k t th c m t kh ng nh m i.

Ch ng ta h y l y m t l p nh ng kh i ni m r t g n nhau l : c , t n t i, b o to n, kh ng nh.

i l p l i v i ch ng l l p kh i ni m ph nh c a ch ng: kh ng, kh ng t n t i, kh ng b o to n, ph nh.

Ch ng n m trong s nh ng kh i ni m t ng qu t nh t, c b n nh t, b i trong b t k hi n t ng n o c a T nhi n: c m gi c, suy ngh , v n ng, bi n i v.v. u lu n lu n c s bi u hi n c a ch ng.

Nh ng ho ra l s c m nh c a hai l p kh i ni m n y kh ng t ng ng nhau (v l m t i u th t may m n).

Ch ng ta h y thi t l p kh ng nh sau g i l kh ng nh $`A`$:

"T n t i t t c , c t t c , b o to n t t c , kh ng nh t t c ".

C n kh ng nh $`B`$ c n i dung ng c l i:

"Kh ng c c i g h t, kh ng t n t i b t c c i g , kh ng b o to n c i g c , ph nh t t c ".

Kh ng nh kh ng nh $`A`$, t c l ph nh kh ng nh $`B`$. V ng c l i.

Kh ng nh $`B`$ n i r ng:

\- Kh ng c c i g h t, t c l kh ng c ch nh kh ng nh $`B`$.

\- Kh ng t n t i c i g , t c l kh ng t n t i b n th n kh ng nh $`B`$.

\- Kh ng b o to n c i g , v y l ch nh kh ng nh $`B`$ c ng kh ng c b o to n.

\- Ph nh t t c , v y l ph nh ch nh kh ng nh $`B`$.

T m l i, kh ng nh $`B`$ ch a m u thu n n i t i. N t ph nh ch nh m nh. T ph nh m nh, kh ng nh $`B`$ m c nhi n kh ng nh kh ng nh $`A`$, v i u c ngh a l : kh ng t n t i h v hay s tr ng r ng tuy t i, v ch nh b i l m th gi i c sinh ra!

C n kh ng nh $`A`$ kh ng nh t t c , k c ch nh n l n kh ng nh $`B`$, nh ng kh ng nh $`B`$ t ph nh ch nh m nh, n n kh ng nh $`A`$ kh ng ch a m u thu n n i t i.

Nh v y, trong khu n kh c a kh ng nh $`A`$ nh ng g kh ng t ph nh th c kh ng nh.

C i g c b n h n

B n kh i ni m r t quan tr ng c a tri th c l : th i gian, kh ng gian, v t ch t v v n ng. Ch ng kh c bi t nhau, nh ng ph i ch ng ch ng b nh ng v i nhau v c th t n t i c l p v i nhau?

Ta h y b t u t th i gian. N l m t th c th ch ng? n c th t n t i c l p, t ch r i kh i kh ng gian, v t ch t v v n ng ch ng?. Hi n nhi n l kh ng. Ch c n c ch ly th i gian kh i v n ng l kh i ni m v n s m t m i ngh a, th i gian s ch t. Kh i ni m v n ng c t nh c l p cao h n so v i kh i ni m th i gian.

V y th th i gian ch a ph i l c i u ti n. N kh ng t t n t i c n n n ch c th l h qu c a nh ng c i c n l i.

V n ng c ng kh ng ph i l c i c b n u ti n. N kh ng th t t n t i t ch r i kh i v t ch t v kh ng gian. Th c ch t, v n ng ch l m t bi u hi n c a m i quan h gi a v t ch t v kh ng gian.

V y th gi a hai c i c n l i, v t ch t v kh ng gian, c i n o c b n h n, c i n o c tr c, hay ch ng b nh ng v i nhau v c ng do m t c i g c b n h n sinh ra? C l t v n nh v y l th a, b i v c ng nh th i gian v v n ng, v t ch t kh ng th t ch r i v t n t i ngo i kh ng gian. H y l y m t bi u hi n c th c a v t ch t, ch ng h n, trang gi y n y. N t n t i kh ng ph i ch nh b n th n n , m c n do s t n t i ng th i c a kh ng gian bao quanh n (hay ch a n ), l m cho trang gi y v n c n l trang gi y.

R r ng l v t ch t c ng thu c v ph m tr kh ng gian v n c th l c i g kh c h n n a n u kh ng ph i l ch nh kh ng gian c m i quan h n i t i kh c v i c i kh ng gian th ng th ng m ta v n hi u?!

Nh ng khi , theo t nh ch t c a c c th kh ng gian n i tr n, i u n y l m u thu n: hai kh ng gian ng chi u c cong (t c m i quan h n i t i) kh c nhau th kh ng th ch a trong nhau c!

V y th ho c l ch ng ta sai: hi n nhi n l c th t tr ng kh t l n nhau hai v ng tr n c b n k nh kh c nhau. Ho c l T nhi n sai: t c c kh ng gian kh c nhau v o trong nhau, b t ch p m u thu n.

V m u thu n sinh ra do i u l ng l c c a v n ng, v n ng tho t ra kh i m u thu n.

Nh v y, c th n i v t ch t l t t c c c th kh ng gian c cong (t c m i quan h n i t i) n o .

Nh ng t u m sinh ra c c th kh ng gian n y v l m sao ch ng c th t n t i c?

Ch ng ta h y t ng t ng r ng t t c bi n m t h t: v t ch t, kh ng gian,… v n i chung bi n m t h t m i s kh c bi t c th c .

Khi c n l i c i g ?

Ch ng c n c i g c !

Nh ng ch nh l c i duy nh t c n l i!

R r ng c i duy nh t n y l v h n v ng nh t "kh p m i n i". N u kh ng th , s vi ph m i h i c a ch ng ta.

B y gi ch ng ta i h i m t i u ti p theo: ngay c c i duy nh t n y c ng bi n m t n t! S c n l i c i g sau n ?

Kh ng ph i v t v l m, ta th y ngay r ng c i n thay th cho n l i l ch nh n ! V v y ta h y g i c i l kh ng gian tuy t i.

Kh ng gian tuy t i c th bi n m t v o ch nh n , n i kh c h n, s ph nh n n d n t i s kh ng nh ch nh n . i u c ngh a l , c i kh ng gian tuy t i c a ch ng ta c th t t n t i m kh ng c n nh n ai c . N l c i c b n u ti n.

N c ng l "nguy n nh n t i cao" n a. V tr i v i m i mu n c a ai , n v n ch a ng s kh c bi t.

Qu v y, trong c i duy nh t kh ng ch a c i g c , v y m v n c : c i Kh ng! c i Kh ng ch a trong c i C , c i Kh ng t o n n c i C . C , nh ng kh ng l g c !

y, s ph nh c ng l s kh ng nh, c i Kh ng c ng l c i C , v ng c l i. M u thu n n i t i c a tr ng th i n y l l n v h n.

Di n t m t c ch to n h c h n i u : kh ng gian tuy t i c a ch ng ta c cong b ng kh ng. Trong kh ng gian n y t n t i c c i m m cong c a ch ng l v c ng. S kh c bi t n y l n v h n v do m u thu n sinh ra c ng l n v h n.

T nhi n kh ng mu n t n t i trong tr ng th i m u thu n nh v y. N t t m c ch gi i quy t, v k t qu l , th gi i v th m c sinh ra.

Nh v y, l i m t l n n a, c i ch n l m h m ai c ng quen thu c n u qua c c tr ng ph th ng l : "V t ch t kh ng t nhi n sinh ra (t c l kh ng sinh ra t h v ), kh ng t nhi n m t i, lu n lu n v n ng v chuy n ho t d ng n y sang d ng kh c", nay c n c kh ng nh l i r ng: "v t ch t" ng l sinh ra t "kh ng c g ". Nh ng kh ng ph i v c m nh v y. ng l c khi n n sinh ra c ng l ng l c khi n n t n t i, bi n i, v v n ng.

Bi u di n m u thu n d i d ng nh l ng:

Ph ng tr nh Nh n qu

M i m u thu n u ph t sinh b i s t n t i ng th i c a hai kh ng nh lo i tr nhau.

i u c bi u di n nh sau:

$`M=\{\begin{array}{cc}AB\hfill & \text{- Kh ng nh }K_1\hfill \\ A=B\hfill & \text{- Kh ng nh }K_2\hfill \end{array}`$

ho c

$`M=\{\begin{array}{cc}A=A\hfill & \text{- Kh ng nh }K_1\hfill \\ AA\hfill & \text{- Kh ng nh }K_2\hfill \end{array}`$

R r ng l m u thu n s c ng gay g t n u nh m c ph nh n l n nhau c a hai kh ng nh c ng l n. Nh ng m c ph nh n l n nhau c a hai kh ng nh ch c th c nh gi b ng m c kh c bi t gi a hai kh ng nh . B i v y ta c th bi u di n m u thu n m t c ch t ng tr ng nh sau: $`M=[K_1K_2]`$.

M u thu n c gi i quy t t c l hi u $`[K_1K_2]`$ s gi m t i kh ng. i u c ngh a l c hai kh ng nh $`K_1`$ v $`K_2`$ u ph i bi n i nh th n o t t i v k t th c m t kh ng nh m i $`K_3`$.

Nh v y, c c hi u $`[K_1K_3]`$ v $`[K_2K_3]`$ ph thu c v o nh ng g ? R r ng c c hi u ph thu c v o s c b o to n c a c c kh ng nh $`K_1`$ v $`K_2`$. S c b o to n c a kh ng nh n o c ng l n th s kh c bi t gi a n v kh ng nh cu i c ng c ng nh .

V y n l t m nh, s c b o to n c a m t kh ng nh n o ph thu c v o g ?

C hai y u t . 1) Ph thu c v o m u thu n n i t i c a kh ng nh , m u thu n n i t i c ng l n s c b o to n c a kh ng nh c ng nh . 2) Ph thu c v o m u thu n m i, sinh ra do s bi n i c a kh ng nh. M u thu n n y c ng l n, s bi n i c a kh ng nh c ng b c n tr v do s c b o to n c a kh ng nh c ng l n.

S bi n i, m v n ng l m t d ng c a n , sinh ra do m u thu n. N i ng h n, v n ng l bi u hi n c a s gi i quy t m u thu n.

tr n ta n i r ng, m u thu n c ng gay g t n u nh m c kh c bi t gi a hai kh ng nh lo i tr nhau c ng l n. Ch ng ta s ti p t c l m y h n k t lu n nh l ng n y: m u thu n c ng gay g t th nhu c u gi i tho t kh i n c ng b c thi t v do s v n ng, bi n i c a tr ng th i, t c l c a m u thu n, c ng quy t li t, nhanh ch ng.

N u ta g i s quy t li t, hay nhanh ch ng bi n i c a m u thu n l $`Q`$, m u thu n tr ng th i l $`M`$ th c th bi u di n nguy n l tr n nh sau:

$`QM\text{v y}Q=K_{(M)}M.`$

Ta h y g i l ph ng tr nh nh n qu , trong $`K_{(M)}`$ l ph ng ti n gi i quy t m u thu n.

Do c ch t v n m c n gi n nh t n n $`K_{(M)}`$ ch c th l m t h m c a tr ng th i, t c l h m c a ch nh m u thu n. Th c ch t, n bi u hi n m c d d ng c a s tho t bi n kh i m u thu n c a tr ng th i.

N u m u thu n c c tr ng b i c c i l ng $`\mathrm{},x,y,z,\mathrm{}`$ th c ng ch nh nh ng i l ng n y s l ph ng ti n chuy n t i m u thu n, l c c b c t do m theo m u thu n s c gi i quy t. Khi , m c d d ng c a s tho t bi n ph i c nh gi nh l o h m c a m u thu n theo c c b c t do c a n .

Gi tr o h m c a m u thu n theo m t b c t do n o c a n c ng l n th kh n ng " nh h i" th y l i tho t theo h ng y c a tr ng th i c ng l n, "l ng m u thu n" c gi i tho t theo b c t do y c ng nhi u.

Nh v y

$`K_{(M)}|M^{}(\mathrm{},x,y,z,\mathrm{})|`$

v ta c

$$Q=a|M^{}(\mathrm{},x,y,z,\mathrm{})|M(\mathrm{},x,y,z,\mathrm{}),$$
(1)
h s $`a`$ ch c th sinh ra do s l a ch n h n v c a c c i l ng.

Ch ng ta n i r ng, s kh c bi t l ngu n g c c a t t c . Nh ng s kh c bi t t n kh ng c ngh a. C i g i l "c ngh a" y ch sinh ra trong m i quan h tr c ti p, trong s so s nh tr c ti p. T nhi n kh ng th c m bi t c s kh c bi t qua "kho ng c ch". Ch ng ta th a nh n c hai lo i kh c bi t: ch t v l ng. i v i T nhi n, lo i kh c bi t n o l th c s t n t i?

M t tr ng th i n o n u c m u thu n n i t i th n ph i bi n i t t i tr ng th i kh ng c m u thu n n i t i, hay ng h n, t t i tr ng th i c m u thu n n i t i nh nh t c th c.

Qu tr nh l m t chi u, tr i qua li n t c t t c c c gi tr c a m u thu n, t gi tr ban u n gi tr cu i c ng.

Nh v y, ch ng ta c g ng t thuy t ph c r ng v n ng (bi n i) nh t thi t ph i c nguy n nh n c a n v t nh ch t c a s bi n i tu n theo ph ng tr nh nh n qu . V y th s kh ng bi n i, t c s b o to n, ph i l i u m c nhi n, kh ng c n c nguy n nh n ch ng? v c th n i r ng: b t k tr ng th i n o ch c hai kh n ng: ho c c b o to n, ho c b bi n i; hay ng h n, t t c u c b o to n (kh ng nh $`A`$) nh ng n u s b o to n g y ra m u thu n th n ph i nh ng ch cho s bi n i tho t kh i m u thu n v bi n i tu n theo ph ng tr nh nh n qu .

N u lu n i m n y ng th c ng vi c c a ch ng ta ch l ch : h c c ch hi u, nh gi ng v y m u thu n c a tr ng th i, m t n theo ph ng tr nh nh n qu , khi ta s c c quy lu t c a b t k s bi n i n o.

Nh ng ch c th th ch a, cho s nh n th c n c ng c a ch ng ta v T nhi n, v ch nh b n th n con ng i v i s c m nh t duy c a n , c th gi i th ch i u k di u, m i m i l m ng c nhi n m i th h : v sao T nhi n l i c th t nh n th c c ch nh m nh, th ng qua s n ph m c a n : con ng i?!

*

* *

ng d ng nguy n l nh n qu v o m t v i tr ng h p
c th , n gi n nh t

Ch ng ta h y xem x t m t v i th d n gi n nh t minh ho cho nguy n l nh n qu .

1. Ph ng tr nh truy n nhi t

Gi s trong m t kho ng n o c a kh ng gian m t chi u ta c ph n b c a m t i l ng $`L`$ n o .

N u ph n b c s kh c bi t n i t i - t c l c ch a m u thu n n i t i - th ph n b s bi n i t t i tr ng th i c m u thu n n i t i nh nh t. S bi n i tu n theo ph ng tr nh nh n qu (1).

Ta a v o i l ng $`T`$, ngh ch o c a $`Q`$, g i l tr tr c a s gi i quy t m u thu n. Nh v y

$`T={\displaystyle \frac{1}{a|M^{}|M}}.`$

T ng s tr tr t o ra trong qu tr nh gi i quy t m u thu n t gi tr ($`M_0`$) n gi tr ($`M_0\mathrm{\Delta }M`$) ta g i l th i gian, c sinh ra do qu tr nh bi n i ($`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$).

Theo nh ngh a v t H nh 1, ta th y r ng

$`\mathrm{\Delta }t{\displaystyle \frac{2T+\mathrm{\Delta }T}{2}}\mathrm{\Delta }M,`$

nh v y

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }M}{\mathrm{\Delta }t}}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{2T+\mathrm{\Delta }T}}.`$

Ta c

$`\underset{\mathrm{\Delta }T0,\mathrm{\Delta }M0,\mathrm{\Delta }t0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }M}{\mathrm{\Delta }t}}={\displaystyle \frac{dM}{dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{T}}=a|M^{}|M.`$

Ta thu c c ch di n t m i c a nguy n l nh n qu :

$$\frac{dM}{dt}=a|M^{}(\mathrm{},x,y,z,\mathrm{})|M(\mathrm{},x,y,z,\mathrm{}).$$
(2)
Nh v y, n u ch ng ta quy c v i nhau th i gian tr th nh m t i l ng c l p, c n m u thu n l i l i l ng ph thu c n th t c tho t bi n theo th i gian c a m u thu n t l v i l n c a m u thu n v ph ng ti n gi i tho t n .

Tr ng h p m u thu n c c tr ng b i ch nh n , t c l $`M=M_{(M)}`$, ta c

$`M=M_0e^{a(tt_0)}.`$

Tr l i v i ph n b c a ch ng ta. thu n ti n, ta tr i ph n b n y theo tr c $`x`$ v l y m t i m n o l m g c to .

B i ph n b l c a m t i l ng $`L`$ n o cho n n m i gi tr c a n t i c c i m c a kh ng gian ph n b s c c ng th nguy n ( ng nh t).

S kh c bi t n i t i c a ph n b s l s kh c bi t v l ng. T i hai i m $`x_1`$ v $`x_2`$ i l ng $`L`$ l y hai gi tr $`L_1`$ v $`L_2`$ t ng ng. V kh c bi t v l ng n n ch c m t c ch nh gi duy nh t: l y hi u $`(L_2L_1)`$.

Nh ng hai i m $`x_1`$, $`x_2`$ ch "c m th y s kh c bi t" c a nhau trong m i quan h tr c ti p, m u thu n xu t hi n hay kh ng ch trong m i quan h tr c ti p : t i ranh gi i c a hai i m l n c n $`x_1`$, $`x_2`$ i l ng $`L`$ ng th i l y hai gi tr $`L_1`$, $`L_2`$, hai kh ng nh n y ph nh n l n nhau v l n c a m u thu n ph thu c v o hi u $`(L_2L_1)`$. B i v y, cho hi u $`(L_2L_1)`$ l s n ph m c a m i quan h tr c ti p gi a hai i m $`x_1`$, $`x_2`$ th ta ph i cho, ch ng h n, i m $`x_2`$ ti n g n v h n t i i m $`x_1`$ (nh ng kh ng tr ng v i n ).

Khi , m u thu n n i t i t i khu v c i m $`x_1`$ s c nh gi nh l gi i h n c a t s $`\frac{L_2L_1}{x_2x_1}`$ khi $`x_2x_1`$, t c l b ng gi tr o h m c a i l ng $`L`$ theo kh ng gian ph n b t i i m $`x_1`$.

T nh ng i u tr nh b y, ta c $`M=\frac{dL}{dx}=\frac{L}{x}`$. Thay gi tr c a $`M`$ v o ph ng tr nh nh n qu (2):

$$\frac{}{t}\frac{L}{x}=a\frac{L}{x}.$$
(3)
M u thu n n i t i t i m i i m c gi i quy t theo ph ng tr nh (3). i u l m ph n b b bi n i. Ta h y t m quy lu t c a s bi n i n y.

M u thu n n i t i t i khu v c i m $`x`$ l $`M_{x,t}=\frac{L}{x}|_{x,t}`$.

Sau kho ng th i gian $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ m u thu n n y gi m xu ng n gi tr $`M_{x,t+\mathrm{\Delta }t}=\frac{L}{x}|_{x,t+\mathrm{\Delta }t}`$.

Nh v y, h nh nh l s bi n i n y d n p m t l ng n o gi tr c a i l ng $`L`$ t c c i m c gi tr cao h n sang nh ng i m c gi tr th p h n, t o n n m t "d ng ch y" gi tr c a i l ng $`L`$ qua i m $`x`$. Trong v d c a ch ng ta "d ng ch y" ch y t nh ng i m b n tr i h n i m $`x`$ sang nh ng i m b n ph i h n n .

R r ng, l n c a "d ng ch y", t c l l ng c c gi tr $`L`$ ch y qua i m $`x`$ trong kho ng th i gian $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ l

$`𝒥_x={\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{L}{x}}|_x\mathrm{\Delta }t=a{\displaystyle \frac{L}{x}}|_x\mathrm{\Delta }t.`$

T ng t nh v y, t i i m $`x+\mathrm{\Delta }x`$, ta c

$`𝒥_{x+\mathrm{\Delta }x}=a{\displaystyle \frac{L}{x}}|_{x+\mathrm{\Delta }x}\mathrm{\Delta }t.`$

Trong v d tr n, d ng $`𝒥_x`$ l m gi tr i l ng $`L`$ t i c c i m trong kho ng $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ t ng l n, c n d ng $`𝒥_{x+\mathrm{\Delta }x}`$ th l m ch ng gi m xu ng. K t qu l s gia $`\mathrm{\Delta }L`$ m kho ng $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ nh n c l

$`\mathrm{\Delta }L|_{\mathrm{\Delta }t}`$ $`=`$ $`a\mathrm{\Delta }t\left({\displaystyle \frac{L}{x}}|_{x+\mathrm{\Delta }x}{\displaystyle \frac{L}{x}}|_x\right)`$
$`=`$ $`a\mathrm{\Delta }t{\displaystyle \frac{^2L}{x^2}}|_{x\xi x+\mathrm{\Delta }x}\mathrm{\Delta }x.`$
M t trung b nh gi tr $`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }L}`$ t i m i i m trong kho ng $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ s l

$`\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }L}|_{\mathrm{\Delta }t}{\displaystyle \frac{a\mathrm{\Delta }t\frac{^2L}{x^2}|_\xi \mathrm{\Delta }x}{\mathrm{\Delta }x}}.`$

Gi tr ch nh x c t c gi i h n

$`\mathrm{\Delta }L|_{x,\mathrm{\Delta }t}=\underset{\mathrm{\Delta }x0}{lim}\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }L}|_{\mathrm{\Delta }t}=a\mathrm{\Delta }t{\displaystyle \frac{^2L}{x^2}}|_x.`$

Nh v y,

$`\underset{\mathrm{\Delta }t0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }L}{\mathrm{\Delta }t}}|_x=a{\displaystyle \frac{^2L}{x^2}},`$

hay

$$\frac{L}{t}=a\frac{^2L}{x^2}.$$
(4)
T c bi n i theo th i gian c a i l ng $`L`$ t i l n c n c a b t k i m n o c a ph n b t l v i o h m b c hai theo kh ng gian ph n b c a i l ng n y t i ch nh i m y.

Nh ng nh ta bi t, ph ng tr nh (4) ch nh l ph ng tr nh truy n nhi t m v t l h c t m ra.

M t kh c, h qu c a c ch l p lu n tr n cho ta s b o to n gi tr c a i l ng $`L`$ trong to n b ph n b , d r ng gi tr c a i l ng n y t i m i i m ri ng bi t c th bi n i, h gi tr t i i m n y gi m i m t l ng n o th gi tr c a i m l n c n t ng l n ng m t l ng nh v y. N u kh ng gian ph n b l v h n, th c ng v i s t ng l n c a th i gian, gi tr trung b nh c a ph n b d n gi m t i kh ng.

2. Con quay h i chuy n

X t m t v d kh c. Ch ng ta c hai con quay v i m men ng l ng t ng ng l $`k_1\stackrel{}{\omega }_1`$ v $`k_2\stackrel{}{\omega }_2`$. S t n t i c a hai con quay v i s b o to n c a c c m men ng l ng c a ch ng, x t theo g c v m , l c c kh ng nh $`K_1`$ v $`K_2`$.

S b o to n c a c c vector m men ng l ng c th coi l s b o to n c a hai y u t : b o to n ph ng v b o to n l n. N u ch ng c g n v i nhau theo H nh 4.a th s b o to n ph ng c a ch ng kh ng b x m ph m, nh ng s b o to n l n c a m t vector s b s b o to n c a vector kia x m ph m. M u thu n s c ng gay g t n u s kh c bi t gi a hai l n c a c c vector n y c ng l n. K t qu l h th ng n y ph i bi n i th n o c h s c m t vector m men ng l ng duy nh t $`k_3\stackrel{}{\omega }_3`$. Trong tr ng h p hai con quay c g n v i nhau nh trong c c H nh 4.b m u thu n tr ng th i s ph c t p h n. Kh ng ch s b o to n v l n m c s b o to n v ph ng u b x m ph m. C ch th c gi i quy t m u thu n c a tr ng th i ph thu c v o k t c u c a kh p n i.

Ch ng ta x t tr ng h p th ba, c c y u t tr ng l c v ly t m (c trong tr ng h p th hai) c th coi nh kh ng ng k (H nh 5).

n gi n, ch ng ta cho r ng ng c duy tr v n t c g c $`\omega `$ c a h kh ng i. Nh v y ch ng ta s ch quan t m n m u thu n sinh ra do s b o to n ph ng c a $`k\stackrel{}{\omega }_0`$ b x m ph m.

Kh ng nh $`K_1`$ s b o to n c a $`k\stackrel{}{\omega }_0`$, n i r ng: t c bi n thi n c a ph ng vector $`k\stackrel{}{\omega }_0`$ b ng kh ng. Nh ng kh ng nh $`K_2`$ s b o to n c a $`\omega `$, n i r ng: kh ng, ph ng c a $`k\stackrel{}{\omega }_0`$ ph i bi n i v i v n t c g c $`\omega \mathrm{cos}\alpha `$.

Nh v y, m c v m , hi u $`[K_1K_2]=\omega \mathrm{cos}\alpha `$ l ngu n g c c a m u thu n v m u thu n t l v i hi u n y,

$`M\omega \mathrm{cos}\alpha ;M=k\omega _0\omega \mathrm{cos}\alpha ,`$

h s t l $`k\omega _0`$ c a v o (v n tr n quan i m v m ) d a tr n l l : n u $`\omega _0`$ b ng kh ng th ph ng c a vector $`k\stackrel{}{\omega }_0`$ kh ng t n t i m t c ch x c nh v do v n m u thu n ph t sinh do s b o to n ph ng c a n kh ng c t ra.

Thay gi tr c a $`M`$ v o ph ng tr nh nh n qu (2), ta c

$`{\displaystyle \frac{M}{t}}=ak^2\omega _0^2\omega ^2\mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\alpha .`$

T ph ng tr nh ta th y r ng, n u $`\alpha =0`$ th t c tho t bi n c a m u thu n tr ng th i b ng kh ng.

L y o h m c a m u thu n theo th i gian,

$$\frac{\alpha }{t}=ak\omega _0\omega \mathrm{cos}\alpha ,(\alpha 0).$$
(5)
S bi n i c a $`\alpha `$ g y ra m u thu n m i, m u thu n n y t l v i gi tr c a $`\frac{\alpha }{t}`$, do s kh ng c s b o to n v n ng theo y u t $`\alpha `$, v nh v y t c tho t bi n trong c ng th c (5) ch nh l v n t c t c th i c a tr c m t ph ng quay theo y u t $`\alpha `$.

Th i gian g c gi a tr c m t ph ng quay (t c ph ng c a vector $`k\stackrel{}{\omega }_0`$) v ph ng n m ngang bi n i t gi tr ($`+0`$) n gi tr ($`\alpha `$) s l

$`t={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2ak\omega _0\omega }}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{1+\mathrm{sin}\alpha }{1\mathrm{sin}\alpha }}|_{+0}^\alpha .`$

3. V b n ch t c a c i g i l "tr ng"

V t l h c hi n nay cho r ng th gi i c c u t o b i c c h t c b n. V y th m t v n c t ra l : c c h t c b n ph i c c u tr c n i t i th n o c th b o to n c i v i nguy n l nh n qu ?

C th gi i quy t v n n y m t c ch thu n tu l thuy t c kh ng?

Cho r ng c m t kh ng gian h u h n $`[A]`$ c c u tr c n i t i tho m n s b t bi n i v i nguy n l nh n qu .

Kh ng gian n y n m trong kh ng gian tuy t i \[O\] c a ch ng ta. T i n i ranh gi i c a hai kh ng gian xu t hi n m u thu n do s kh c bi t gi a hai kh ng gian g y ra.

B i c hai kh ng gian u t b o to n n n m u thu n ch c th c gi i quy t b ng c ch h nh th nh m t v ng m (t c tr ng), nh s kh c bi t tr l n d u h n, i u ho h n. C u tr c c a v ng m ph i th n o m c i u ho t t i gi tr l n nh t, t c l m u thu n n i t i t i m i i m c a tr ng c gi tr nh nh t c th c.

M t i u r r ng l c ng xa t m c a kh ng gian $`[A]`$, t nh ch t $`[A]`$ c ng gi m i. N i c ch kh c, v ng m (tr ng) bao quanh kh ng gian $`[A]`$ c ng c t nh ch t $`[A]`$ nh ng t nh ch t n y l h m c a $`r`$, t c kho ng c ch t i m ang x t c a tr ng t i t m c a kh ng gian $`[A]`$.

T nh ng i u tr nh b y v n u k hi u v ng m l $`T`$, ta c

$`T_{[A]}=g(r){\displaystyle \frac{[A]}{r}},`$

$`g(r)`$ l m t h m ch a bi t, n c tr ng cho s h i ho n i t i c a tr ng.

N u trong v ng tr ng $`T_{[A]}`$ c m t kh ng gian $`[B]`$ v kh ng gian n y kh ng l m nhi u lo n ng k tr ng $`T_{[A]}`$, th khi s kh c bi t gi a $`[B]`$ v $`T_{[A]}`$ s bu c $`[B]`$ ph i v n ng trong tr ng t t i v tr m kh c bi t gi a $`[B]`$ v $`T_{[A]}`$ c tr s nh nh t ( y ch ng ta cho r ng kh ng gian $`[B]`$ c ng c kh n ng t b o to n). M u thu n tr ng th i t l v i hi u $`\left[[B]T_{[A]}\right]`$.

N u t m c h s $`c`$ d ng "d ch ng n ng " c a t nh ch t $`[B]`$ sang "ng n ng " c a t nh ch t $`[A]`$ th m u thu n c th c di n t nh sau:

$`M=f\left(c[B]g(r){\displaystyle \frac{[A]}{r}}\right),f\text{h s t l .}`$

Quy lu t v n ng c a kh ng gian $`[B]`$ trong tr ng $`T_{[A]}`$ s c t m ra qua ph ng tr nh nh n qu (2):

$`{\displaystyle \frac{M}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`a|M^{}|M`$
$`=`$ $`a[A]f^2\left|{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)rg^{}(r)}{r^2}}\right|\left(c[B][A]{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)}{r}}\right).`$
y, i l ng chuy n t i (b c t do) c a m u thu n l $`r`$.

B i s v n ng c a kh ng gian $`[B]`$ ph i x y ra ng th i theo t t c c c ph ng c th nh ph n h ng t m, do v n t c tho t bi n t ng h p c a tr ng th i - t c l v n t c t ng h p c a kh ng gian $`[B]`$ trong tr ng $`T_{[A]}`$ s c nh gi nh l t ch ph n c a t c tho t bi n theo m i ph ng c th nh ph n h ng t m.

$`{\displaystyle \frac{M}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`a[A]4\pi f^2{\displaystyle _0^{\frac{\pi }{2}}}|{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)rg^{}(r)}{r^2}}|(c[B][A]{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)}{r}})\mathrm{cos}^2\phi d\phi `$
$`=`$ $`a\pi ^2f^2[A]|{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)rg^{}(r)}{r^2}}|(c[B][A]{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)}{r}}).`$
Khai tri n v tr i ta c

$`f[A]{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{r}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`a\pi ^2f^2[A]|{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)rg^{}(r)}{r^2}}|(c[B][A]{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)}{r}})`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{r}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`af\pi ^2{\displaystyle \frac{\left|g(r)rg^{}(r)\right|}{g(r)}}\left(c[B][A]{\displaystyle \frac{g(r)}{r}}\right).`$
N u ch ng t c r ng s bi n i c a $`r`$ c ng nh s b o to n c a $`\frac{r}{t}`$ g y ra m u thu n m i t l v i ch nh $`\frac{r}{t}`$, th t c tho t bi n v a thu c c ng ch nh l v n t c t c th i c a $`[B]`$ trong tr ng $`T_{[A]}`$.


format: text

text:
# Coupled-channel study of 𝛾𝑝→𝐾⁺Λ

## 1 Introduction

A major issue in strong interaction physics is to understand baryon spectroscopy. Meson-baryon scattering has been the predominant reaction used to study the properties of nucleon resonances ($`N^{}`$). An appealing alternative is to use electromagnetic probes, e.g., $`\gamma NN^{}\pi N`$. In this photon-induced process, the relative weakness of the electromagnetic interaction allows one to use first-order descriptions of the incident channel, thus making possible more reliable extraction of $`N^{}`$ information from data. With the recent development of new facilities such as Jefferson Lab, ELSA, GRAAL, MAMI, and SPring-8, it is now possible to obtain accurate data for meson electromagnetic production, including spin-dependent observables.

Among meson photoproduction processes, pion photoproduction is by far the most studied theoretically and experimentally. However, increased effort has also been devoted in recent years to investigate kaon photoproduction. Such studies are motivated by several considerations: (1) the production of strangeness associated with kaons ($`K`$) and hyperons ($`Y`$) allows one to study the role played by $`s`$ quarks versus $`u`$ and $`d`$ quarks; (2) higher mass resonances can be better studied by investigating the $`N^{}K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`N^{}K\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ decays; (3) the so-called “missing resonances”  predicted by quark models, but not observed in $`\pi N`$ scattering, might be found in kaon photoproduction since they may couple strongly to $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`K\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ channels.

At photon laboratory energies from the kaon photoproduction threshold of $`\sqrt{s}=`$ 1.61 GeV to about 2.5 GeV, the isobar model is most widely used for extracting $`N^{}`$ parameters from the kaon photoproduction data . This model is based on an effective Lagrangian approach in which a number of tree diagrams are evaluated with coupling constants partly fixed from independent hadronic and electromagnetic data. Although the isobar models describe the existing kaon photoproduction data fairly well, multi-step or coupled-channel (CC) effects due to intermediate $`\pi N`$ states are ignored. The sequence $`\gamma N\pi NKY`$ in kaon photoproduction can be substantial, since $`\gamma N\pi N`$ amplitudes are much greater than the direct $`\gamma NKY`$ amplitudes. If this is indeed the case, the $`N^{}`$ parameters obtained from one-step isobar models can not be directly compared with the predictions from existing hadron models. The importance of the final-state interaction(FSI) in interpreting the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonant parameters extracted from $`\gamma N\pi N`$ data has been demonstrated in Ref. . In this work, we investigate the same problem concerning the role of CC final state interactions in kaon photoproduction.

Among existing studies of kaon photoproduction, coupled-channel effects have been investigated using two approaches. Kaiser et al.  applied a coupled-channel approach with chiral SU(3) dynamics to investigate pion- and photon-induced meson production near the $`KY`$ threshold. Although their recent results  include p-wave multipoles, and thus reproduce data slightly above the threshold region, their chiral SU(3) dynamics model can not provide the higher partial waves that are important in describing the data at higher energies. A similar approach has also been taken in Ref. .

The second CC approach was developed by Feuster and Mosel . They used a $`K`$-matrix method to investigate photon- and meson-induced reactions, including $`\gamma pK^+\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. In the $`K`$-matrix approach, all intermediate states are put on-shell and hence the important off-shell dynamical effects can not be accounted for explicitly. The advantage of their approach is its numerical simplicity in handling a large number of coupled channels. However, the extracted $`N^{}`$ parameters may suffer from the difficulties in interpreting them in terms of extant hadron models, such as the constituent quark model.

In this paper, we present a dynamical CC model in which the meson-baryon off-shell interactions are defined in terms of effective Lagrangians. This is achieved by a direct extension of the existing dynamical models  for pion photoproduction to include $`KY`$ channels. We follow the approach developed by Sato and Lee . In this first attempt, we do however need to make several simplifications since it is a rather complex task to deal simultaneously with the meson-baryon and photon-baryon intertwined CC problems. First, we adopt an existing isobar model developed earlier by Williams, Ji and Cotanch (WJC)  as initial input for the direct $`\gamma pK^+\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ process. This fixes the number of $`N^{}`$ to be considered and the leading tree-diagrams associated with strange particles. Second, we use the $`\gamma N\pi N`$ and $`\pi N\pi N`$ partial-wave amplitudes from the VPI partial-wave analysis  to define the amplitudes associated with the $`\pi N`$ channel. This drastically reduces the amount of data we have to confront in the coupled-channel approach. However, the strong interaction matrix elements of $`KYKY`$ and $`\pi NKY`$ transition operators are derived rigorously from effective Lagrangians using the unitary transformation method of Ref. . This derivation marks our major differences with Kaiser et al.  since we include all relevant higher partial waves and our approach is applicable at all energies. We solve the resulting CC equations with numerical precision to account for the meson-baryon off-shell interactions. The dynamical content of our approach is clearly very different from the $`K`$-matrix model of Feuster and Mosel .

Our CC approach is defined by the starting Lagrangian and by the several approximations such as the Sato-Lee unitary transformation and a three-dimensional reduction of the Bethe-Salpeter equation. Such approximations have been pursued successfully by numerous authors in order to solve difficult strong interaction problems starting from relativistic field theory. Lagrangian-based dynamics differs considerably from models motivated by the $`S`$\- or $`K`$-matrix approach based on tree-diagrams, in which the dynamics is partly defined by postulating crossing symmetry . While S-matrix plus tree-diagram approaches can be a very useful working tool, no solid proof exists that crossing symmetry can be derived “exactly” from relativistic quantum field theory. The best effort is a perturbative derivation in a simple model, such as presented in Bjorken and Drell. Thus, our approach is not expected to respect crossing symmetry, although the driving terms of the employed coupled-channel scattering equations can be made to have crossing symmetry. Compared with the previous models based on tree-diagrams supplemented by crossing symmetry , the coupled-channel approach can satisfy “dynamically” the multi-channel unitarity condition. The CC approach offers the advantage of including strong dynamics for both kaon photoproduction and kaon radiative decays, while also incorporating cusp structure due to channel coupling, which is not described by tree-diagram based theories. Therefore, there are advantages to the CC approach that we believe out-weigh the desire for a crossing symmetric theory.

## 2 Coupled-channel approach

A coupled-channel framework for studying kaon photoproduction can be obtained straightforwardly by generalizing the dynamical approach developed by Sato and Lee  in their investigation of $`\pi N`$ scattering and pion photoproduction. By adding the $`KY`$ channel and appropriate $`N^{}`$ states to their formalism, one can show that the collision matrix, $`A_{KY,\gamma N}`$, of the $`\gamma NKY`$ reaction can be written in operator form as

$`A_{KY,\gamma N}=R_{KY,\gamma N}+a_{KY,\gamma N}.`$ (1)
Here $`R_{KY,\gamma N}`$ denotes the resonant part (to be specified later), and the nonresonant part $`a_{KY,\gamma N}`$ is defined by

$`a_{KY,\gamma N}`$ $`=`$ $`b_{KY,\gamma N}`$ (2)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{K^{}Y^{}}{}}t_{KY,K^{}Y^{}}G_{K^{}Y^{}}^{(+)}b_{K^{}Y^{},\gamma N}+{\displaystyle \underset{\pi N}{}}t_{KY,\pi N}G_{\pi N}^{(+)}b_{\pi N,\gamma N},`$
where $`G_\alpha ^{(+)}`$ is the meson-baryon propagator for channel $`\alpha .`$ Here $`b_{KY,\gamma N}`$ and $`b_{\pi N,\gamma N}`$ are the nonresonant photoproduction operators for $`KY`$ and $`\pi N`$ respectively. The scattering operators $`t_{KY,K^{}Y^{}}`$ and $`t_{KY,\pi N}`$ describe the nonresonant parts of the final $`KYK^{}Y^{}`$ and $`\pi NKY`$ transitions, respectively. Obviously, the third term of Eq. (2) contains the coupled-channel effects due to the intermediate $`\pi N`$ channel.

To see the dynamical feature of our CC approach, we now combine the resonant term $`R_{KY,\gamma N}`$ with the nonresonant operator $`b_{KY,\gamma N}`$ and define $`B_{KY,\gamma N}R_{KY,\gamma N}+b_{KY,\gamma N}`$. Eqs. (1)-(2) then become

$`A_{KY,\gamma N}`$ $`=`$ $`B_{KY,\gamma N}`$ (3)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{K^{}Y^{}}{}}t_{KY,K^{}Y^{}}G_{K^{}Y^{}}^{(+)}b_{K^{}Y^{},\gamma N}+{\displaystyle \underset{\pi N}{}}t_{KY,\pi N}G_{\pi N}^{(+)}b_{\pi N,\gamma N}.`$
The nonresonant meson-baryon transition operators $`t_{KY,KY}`$ and $`t_{KY,\pi N}`$ are defined by the following CC equations:

$`t_{KY_f,KY_i}`$ $`=`$ $`v_{KY_f,KY_i}`$ (4)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{KY}{}}v_{KY_f,KY}G_{KY}^{(+)}t_{KY,KY_i}+{\displaystyle \underset{\pi N}{}}v_{KY_f,\pi N}G_{\pi N}^{(+)}t_{\pi N,KY_i},`$
$`t_{KY_f,\pi N_i}`$ $`=`$ $`v_{KY_f,\pi N_i}`$ (5)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{KY}{}}v_{KY_f,KY}G_{KY}^{(+)}t_{KY,\pi N_i}+{\displaystyle \underset{\pi N}{}}v_{KY_f,\pi N}G_{\pi N}^{(+)}t_{\pi N,\pi N_i}.`$
The above equations define the off-shell scattering amplitudes. Clearly, the amplitudes $`t_{KY,K^{}Y^{}}`$ and $`t_{KY,\pi N}`$, which are needed to evaluate the second and third terms of Eq. (3), can be obtained from solving Eqs. (4)-(5) if the potentials $`v_{KY,K^{}Y^{}}`$ and $`v_{KY,\pi N}`$ and the nonresonant $`\pi N`$ amplitude $`t_{\pi N,\pi N}`$ can be calculated from a model. We now note that if the last two terms in the right-hand-side of Eq. (3) are neglected, our CC model reduces to those previously developed isobar models for which $`A_{KY,\gamma N}=B_{KY,\gamma N}`$. In that limit, the resonances are then included in the $`R`$ term.

The nonresonant meson-baryon $`t`$-matrix defined by Eqs. (4)-(5) is only part of the full meson-baryon scattering $`T`$-matrix. The $`N^{}`$ excitations must be included. By extending the $`\pi N`$ scattering formulation of Ref.  to include the $`KY`$ channel, one can show that the full meson-baryon scattering amplitude can be written as

$$T_{\alpha ,\beta }(E)=t_{\alpha ,\beta }(E)+t_{\alpha ,\beta }^R(E),$$
(6)
where $`\alpha ,\beta =\pi N,KY`$. The nonresonant amplitudes $`t_{\alpha ,\beta }`$ are identical to those in Eqs. (4)-(5). The resonant term at resonant energy $`E_N^{}`$ can be written in the familiar Breit-Wigner form (after performing a proper diagonalization in the $`N^{}`$ channel space)

$$t_{\alpha ,\beta }^R(E)=\underset{N^{}}{}\frac{\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{N^{},\alpha }^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{N^{},\beta }}{EE_N^{}+\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_N^{}^{(tot)}},$$
(7)
with the total width

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_N^{}^{(tot)}=\underset{\alpha }{}|\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{N^{},\alpha }|^2.$$
(8)
In the above equations, $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{N^{},\alpha }`$ describes the decay of an $`N^{}`$ resonance into a meson-baryon channel $`\alpha `$. Eqs. (6)-(8) will be the starting point for developing a strategy for using the empirical $`\pi N`$ scattering amplitudes to solve Eqs. (4)-(5).

## 3 Simplifications

One way to approach the coupled-channel equations presented in the previous section is to use effective Lagrangians to construct the photoproduction operators $`b_{KY,\gamma N}`$ and $`b_{\pi N,\gamma N}`$, and meson-baryon potentials $`v_{\alpha ,\beta }`$. Then one could attempt to solve the full $`T`$-matrix equations consistently as done in Ref.  for pion photoproduction. This program is too difficult and we therefore make some simplifications in order to first gauge the role of the $`\pi N`$ channels in kaon photoproduction. The procedures used in this paper are outlined in Figures 1 and 2.

As indicated in Figure 1, we take the isobar model developed by Williams, Ji and Cotanch (WJC)  to describe the direct kaon photoproduction. The WJC model contains both the resonant and nonresonant amplitudes, but does not include the meson-baryon final state interactions. Thus, we can identify the amplitude generated from this isobar model as $`B_{KY,\gamma N}`$ in Eq. (3). The nonresonant term $`b_{KY,\gamma N}`$ needed for evaluating Eq. (2) can then be obtained from

$$b_{KY,\gamma N}=[B_{KY,\gamma N}]_{WJC}[R_{KY,\gamma N}]_{WJC}$$
(9)
where the resonant part $`[R_{KY,\gamma N}]_{WJC}`$ is also from the WJC model. The “subtract resonance term” procedure Eq. (9) is indicated in the lower left part of Fig. 1.

Turning to the upper part of Figure 1, we do not compute the amplitude of the $`\gamma N\pi N`$ process—that is a complicated CC problem by itself. Instead, we start with the VPI partial-wave amplitudes for pion photoproduction . We then define the nonresonant part of pion photoproduction amplitude by subtraction

$$b_{\pi N,\gamma N}=[B_{\pi N,\gamma N}]_{VPI}R_{\pi N,\gamma N},$$
(10)
where the resonant amplitude is calculated from

$$R_{\pi N,\gamma N}(E)=\underset{N^{}}{}\frac{\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{N^{},\pi N}^{}\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{N^{},\gamma N}}{EE_N^{}+\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_N^{}^{(tot)}}.$$
(11)
The partial decay widths $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{N^{},\gamma N}`$ and $`\overline{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_{N^{},\pi N}`$ and the total widths $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_N^{}^{(tot)}`$ can be calculated from the parameters listed by the Particle Data Group (PDG).

Eqs. (9) and (10) only define the on-shell matrix elements of the nonresonant photoproduction amplitudes. To evaluate the second and the third FSI terms in Eq. (3), we need to define their off-shell behavior. For simplicity, we set

$$b_{\alpha ,\gamma N}(q,k;E)=b_{\alpha ,\gamma N}(q_0,k;E)\frac{F(q)}{F(q_0)},$$
(12)
where $`\alpha =KY`$ and $`\pi N`$, $`k`$ and $`q_0`$ are the on-shell photon and meson momenta fixed by the total energy $`E`$, $`q`$ is the desired off-shell value, and $`F(q)`$ is a form factor to be defined later.

We now introduce a procedure to calculate the nonresonant meson-baryon amplitudes $`t_{KY,K^{}Y^{}}`$ and $`t_{KY,\pi N},`$ which are shown as shaded boxes in Fig. 1. The procedure for obtaining these transition amplitudes is outlined in Fig. 2. We again start with the VPI amplitude. By using Eqs. (6)-(8), the on-shell nonresonant part of $`\pi N`$ amplitude $`t_{\pi N,\pi N}`$ is then defined by

$$t_{\pi N,\pi N}=[T_{\pi N,\pi N}]_{VPI}t_{\pi N,\pi N}^R,$$
(13)
where the resonant term $`t_{\pi N,\pi N}^R`$, defined by Eq. (7), can be calculated using the resonant parameters listed by PDG. We then use the same off-shell extrapolation defined by Eq. (12) to define the half-off-shell $`\pi N`$ t-matrix which is needed to evaluate the matrix element of the second term of Eq. (5).

With the nonresonant $`t_{\pi N,\pi N}`$ defined by the above procedure, Eqs. (4)-(5) can be solved by constructing the potentials $`v_{KY,KY}`$ and $`v_{KY,\pi N}`$. Here we use the unitary transformation method of Ref. . The considered potentials are illustrated in Figs. 3 and 4. To solve the coupled equations (4)-(5), the meson-baryon potentials must also be regularized by form factors. For simplicity, a form factor $`F(𝐪)=(\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^2}{\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^2+𝐪^2})^2`$ is used to regularize all vertices in Figs. 3 and 4, where $`𝐪`$ is the momentum of the external meson in the center-of-mass frame.

To minimize the number of free parameters in this calculation, we fix most of the couplings in Figs. 3 and 4 by using either the known PDG values , or from the predictions of SU(3) flavor symmetry  or constituent quark models . The coupling strengths of the terms involving $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ are not known and therefore are not included in this exploratory investigation. This of course should be improved in later studies. To further simplify the calculation, the form factor $`F(q),`$ used in defining the off-shell behavior of the nonresonant photoproduction and $`t_{\pi N,\pi N},`$ is assumed to be the same as that for regularizing the potentials $`v_{KY,KY}`$ and $`v_{KY,\pi N}`$. Thus, only one cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ needs to be determined.

## 4 Results

We start with the WJC model and hence the considered resonances and all coupling strengths are fixed, as listed in the third column of Table 1. The only parameter in our CC model is the cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ of the form factors which regularize $`b_{\pi N,\gamma N}`$, $`b_{KY,\gamma N}`$, $`t_{\pi N,\pi N}`$, and potentials $`v_{KY,KY}`$ and $`v_{KY,\pi N}`$, as described in Section 3. We determine this parameter by fitting the $`\pi ^{}pK^0\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ data. This fit is done by first solving Eqs. (4)-(5) to obtain the nonresonant amplitude $`t_{K\mathrm{\Lambda },\pi N}`$. The resonant part of this reaction is calculated from using Eq. (7) and the resonant parameters listed by PDG. We find that the total cross section data of $`\pi ^{}pK^0\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can be fitted by setting $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c=680`$ (MeV/c). This procedure then fixes the nonresonant meson-baryon amplitudes $`t_{KY,K^{}Y^{}}`$ and $`t_{KY,\pi N}`$ that are needed to evaluate the FSI effects on the photoproduction amplitude using Eq. (3).

In Figure 5, we illustrate the predicted FSI effects on the total cross sections of $`\gamma pK^+\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Four curves are shown: (1) the direct photoproduction calculated using the WJC model, $`B_{K\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$; (2) the direct production plus the $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ FSI effects, $`B_{K\mathrm{\Lambda }}+t_{K\mathrm{\Lambda },K\mathrm{\Lambda }}G_{K\mathrm{\Lambda }}^{(+)}b_{K\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$; (3) the direct production plus the $`\pi N`$ FSI effects, $`B_{K\mathrm{\Lambda }}+t_{K\mathrm{\Lambda },\pi N}G_{\pi N}^{(+)}b_{\pi N}`$; (4) the direct results plus both the $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\pi N`$ FSI effects, i.e., our full CC results $`A_{K\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. We also compare these results with the SAPHIR data . Note that the WJC model was developed before the SAPHIR measurement and hence their original fit (dashed curve) deviates from these recent data.

In Figure 5, we see significant differences up to 20% of the total cross sections with the $`\pi N`$ FSI (third term of Eq. (3)) turned on and off. Clearly, the CC effects due to the $`\pi N`$ channels make quite a sizable contribution to kaon photoproduction and should be included in any kaon photoproduction calculation. Further examination reveals that the major CC effects are from the s-wave $`E_{0+}`$ multipole. In contrast, the $`K\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ FSI effect (second term of Eq. (3)) is quite small.

Our full results (solid curve in Fig. 5) based on the WJC parameters deviate from the experimental data. We find that the data can not be reproduced by only changing the original WJC parameters. Here we emphasize that WJC published their predictions prior to the SAPHIR measurements. In trying to fit this new data set, containing both differential and total cross sections, we fail to reproduce the high energy ($`W>1950`$ MeV) part. This failure is likely due to our lack of resonances with mass around 1800 to 1900 MeV. It has been shown  that good agreement with SAPHIR data is obtained if one introduces two spin-3/2 resonances $`N^{}`$(1720) and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$(1890), provided off-shell effects are included . However, including those two spin-3/2 resonances, with off-shell dynamics, requires 3 extra free parameters per resonance. Our CC study aims to delineate the role of FSI and we wish to keep the number of free parameters as small as possible. That is why we have not yet introduced the requisite spin-3/2 resonances, but only spin-1/2 resonances. One of these spin-1/2 resonances that we do include, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$(1810), is of some help in the relevant 1800 to 1900 MeV mass range. We also note that a small contribution from the $`N^{}(1535)`$ also improves the fit.

The extracted coupling constants (Table 1, last column) show that only two of the original WJC couplings get modified. The curve corresponding to the parameter changes is depicted in Fig. 6, where we also show the results of the FSI decomposed as in Fig. 5. Comparison between Figs. 5 and 6 make clear that the numerical results for the FSI depend on the resonance content of the reaction mechanism. However, this dependence is very smooth in the case of the two configurations considered here and does not alter the general trends nor the importance of the FSI effects.

## 5 Conclusions

In this work we do not aim for an accurate reproduction of the data of kaon photoproduction. We rather focus on the coupled-channel effects on this reaction. The major conclusion from this study is that the $`\pi N`$ channels make significant contributions through the coupled-channel mechanism and must be included in a proper calculation for kaon photoproduction reactions.

Our approach, based on an extension of the dynamical model of Ref. , will be the basis for future investigations. In particular, the $`K\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ channels must be included in a more complete study of kaon electromagnetic production, which is currently in progress. It is especially interesting to study the $`K\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ threshold effects (e.g., cusps at $`K\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ threshold) in a CC calculation and their effect on spin observables. In addition, more channels, such as $`\eta N`$, $`\pi \mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\rho N`$, must be included in a complete coupled-channel calculation.

The authors would like to thank S.A. Dytman, R. Schumacher, and S.N. Yang for helpful discussions. W.-T. C. is grateful to ANL and Saclay for the hospitality extended to him during his visits. This work was supported in parts by the U.S. National Science Foundation (PHY-9514885 and PHY-9970775), the National Science Council of ROC under grant No. NSC89-2112-M002-078, a University of Pittsburgh Andrew Mellon Predoctoral Fellowship, and U.S. DOE Nuclear Physics Division(Contract No. W-31-109-ENG).


text:
# Separability Criterion for all bipartite Gaussian States

## Appendix

In this Appendix we present the lemmas which are needed in order to prove Props. 1 and 2.

Let us consider three real matrices $`0A=A^TM_{n,n}`$, $`0B=B^TM_{m,m}`$, and $`CM_{n,m}`$, and

$$M=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& C\\ C^T& B\end{array}\right)=M^TM_{n+m,n+m}.$$
(11)
###### Lemma 1

The following statements are equivalent:

$`M0`$.

$`\mathrm{ker}(B)\mathrm{ker}(C)`$ and $`ACB^1C^T0`$.

$`\mathrm{ker}(A)\mathrm{ker}(C^T)`$ and $`BC^TA^1C0`$ note\_pinv .

Proof:  We will just prove the first equivalence since the other one is analogous. We use that $`M0`$ iff for any two real vectors $`a\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^n`$ and $`b\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^m`$

$$a^TAa+b^TBb+a^TCb+b^TC^Ta0.$$
(12)
On the other hand, $`ACB^1C^T0`$ iff for any $`a\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^n`$ we have

$$a^TAaa^TCB^1C^Ta0.$$
(13)
(i)$``$(ii): We assume (12). First, $`\mathrm{ker}(B)\mathrm{ker}(C)`$ since otherwise we could always choose a $`b\mathrm{ker}(B)`$ so that $`a^TCb>a^TAa`$. Second, if we choose $`b=B^1C^Ta`$ then we obtain (13). (ii)$``$(i): We now assume (13). Then, $`A=CB^1C^T+P`$, where $`P0`$. Defining $`\stackrel{~}{a}B^1C^Ta`$, we have that $`C^Ta=B\stackrel{~}{a}`$ (since $`\mathrm{ker}(B)\mathrm{ker}(C)`$), and thus the lhs of (12) can be expressed as $`a^TPa+(\stackrel{~}{a}+b)^TB(\stackrel{~}{a}+b)`$, which is positive.

In the derivations of Props. 1 and 2 we have not included explicitly the conditions imposed by the present lemma on the kernels of $`B`$ and $`C`$. However, one can easily verify that all the problems that may arise from these kernels are eliminated by using pseudoinverses instead of inverses of matrices note\_pinv .

Let us consider two real matrices $`A=A^TM_{n,n}`$ and $`C=C^TM_{n,n}`$, and

$$M=\left(\begin{array}{cc}A& C\\ C^T& A\end{array}\right)=M^TM_{2n,2n}.$$
(14)
###### Lemma 2

$`M0`$ iff $`A+iC0`$.

Proof:  This follows from the observation that $`M`$ is real, and that for any pair of real vectors $`a,b\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}^N`$ we have $`(aib)^{}(A+iC)(aib)=(ab)^TM(ab)`$.


text:
# Optical Photometry of the GRB 010222 Afterglow

## 1 Introduction

GRB 010222, one of the brightest bursts detected so far, was detected in both the Gamma-Ray Burst (GRB) Monitor and the Wide Field Camera-1 (WFC) aboard the BeppoSAX satellite, on Feb 22.308 (Piro 2001). The refined position from WFC was centred at $`\mathrm{RA}=14^\mathrm{h}52^\mathrm{m}12.24^\mathrm{s}`$ and $`\mathrm{DEC}=+43^{}00^{}43.2^{\prime \prime }`$ (J2000) with an error circle of radius 2.5 arcmin (Gandolfi 2001a). BeppoSax detected the X-ray afterglow in the 1.6–10 keV range about 9 hours after the GRB prompt event (Gandolfi 2001b). The X-ray afterglow was also observed by the Chandra Observatory about 15 hours after the burst on Feb 22.936 UT (Garmire et al. 2001) and again on March 3.54 UTC (Harrison, Yost & Kulkarni 2001). The Bepposax observations between 8 and 65 hours since the outburst are reported by in’t Zand et al (2001).

Henden (2001a) reported the detection of the optical transient (OT) at about 18th magnitude in $`V`$, about 4.4 hours after the burst, located at $`\mathrm{RA}=14^\mathrm{h}52^\mathrm{m}12.0^\mathrm{s}`$, $`\mathrm{DEC}=+43^{}01^{}06^{\prime \prime }`$ (J2000). Photometry of the OT has been reported in several GCN circulars and by Masetti et al (2001), Lee et al (2001), Sagar et al (2001) and Stanek et al (2001a). The optical spectrum of the OT showed several absorption line systems superimposed on a power-law continuum (Garnavich et al 2001; Jha et al 2001a,b; Masetti et al 2001). These absorption line systems consisted of red-shifted doublets of Fe II (2585, 2599 Å), Mg II (2796, 2803 Å) and a host of other lines which indicate basically three intervening absorbers located at $`z`$ 0.927, 1.155 and 1.475. The detection of Mg I line and the presence of strong absorption lines of Mg II with equivalent widths of $``$ 1–3 Å are generally interpreted as indicating that the GRB occurred in a galaxy at the highest redshift seen, viz. $`z`$ = 1.475. The equivalent width of the Mg II doublet is particularly large, especially in the system at $`z`$ = 1.475 ($``$ 3 Å) which implies a column density of $`n_H10^{21}`$ atoms cm-2, if the composition is taken to be universal.

We report here the optical observations made using the recently installed 2-m telescope at the Indian Astronomical Observatory, located in Hanle, Ladakh ($`78^{}57^{}51^{\prime \prime }`$ E; $`32^{}46^{}46^{\prime \prime }`$ N; altitude of 4500 m above msl). This set of observations forms one of the first data sets obtained from the telescope on scientific programmes even as the commissioning tests are underway. Also included in the paper are the observations made using the telescopes at the Vainu Bappu Observatory.

## 2 Observations and Analysis

### 2.1 Observations

The optical transient (OT) associated with GRB 010222 was observed for $`8`$ days both from the Indian Astronomical Observatory (IAO) and the Vainu Bappu Observatory (VBO) beginning $`0.6`$ day after the event.

#### 2.1.1 IAO

$`R`$ band CCD photometry from IAO was carried out using the optical CCD imager on the recently installed 2-m telescope. The telescope was installed in September 2000 and is undergoing commissioning tests. Details of the observatory and telescope may be obtained from http://www.iiap.ernet.in/iao and also Anupama (2000). The CCD imager is equipped with Johnson-Cousins $`UBVRI`$ filters (see Bessell 1990) and a $`1024\times 1024`$ SITe chip of 24$`\mu `$m square pixels covering a field of $`4.7\times 4.7`$ arcmin at the f/9 Cassegrain focus. On Feb 22, four 600s exposures were obtained, while three 600s and two 300s exposures were obtained on Feb 26. The images recorded on Feb 22 are slightly trailed due to tracking and guiding errors, but are usable.

#### 2.1.2 VBO

The OT was observed in the $`R`$ band on Feb 22 and 23 using the 1-m Zeiss telescope equipped with a CCD imager similar to that in use at IAO. The total field covered at the f/13 Cassegrain focus is $`6.5\times 6.5`$ arcmin.

Using a CCD imager similar to the other two systems, at the f/3.25 prime focus of the 2.3m VBT, the OT was observed in the $`R`$ and $`I`$ bands on Feb 24 and 25 and in the $`R`$ band on Feb 28 and Mar 1 (Cowsik & Bhargavi 2001). The total field covered was $`10.4\times 10.4`$ arcmin.

### 2.2 Analysis

We describe in the following, the analysis of the IAO and VBO 1-m data. The details of the VBT data analysis are presented in Bhargavi (2001).

All images were bias subtracted using the mean value of the nearest bias frames and flatfield corrected using a master flat generated by combining several twilight flats. Often a few processed frames were aligned and combined before extracting magnitudes in order to improve the S/N ratio. These frames are indicated in a single row of Table 1. It was not possible to perform a PSF fitting to the data obtained from IAO on Feb 22 as the stellar profiles are affected by the tracking and guiding errors. In order to have a uniform mode of magnitude estimation for all sets of data, magnitudes were obtained using aperture photometry and growth curve method (Howell 1989). Aperture photometry of the OT and several bright stars in the field was performed using concentric apertures ranging from 0.7 to 14 arcsec diameter centred on the object. Sky background was subtracted using a 1.5 arcsec annulus with an inner radius of 5–8 arcsec for the OT and 8–10 arcsec for the brighter stars. Based on a growth curve for the brighter stars, a 6–7 arcsec aperture was chosen for the photometric measurements to include most of the light from the source. The OT being faint, its magnitude estimated from the 3–4 arcsec aperture. Corrections for the photons from the source outside this aperture were made using a correction factor estimated from the growth curve of the brighter stars (average of Henden 5, 16, 18, 27). The zero points were determined using star ‘A’ of Stanek et al. (2001b) whose magnitude was assumed to be $`R=17.175`$ following Henden (2001b).

The magnitudes of other stars in the field were compared with Henden’s photometry to ascertain that no systematic errors exist between the two data sets. A colour transformation equation was determined for residuals of the field stars with respects to Henden’s photometry using Henden 5, 9, 11, 13, 16, 25, 33 (VBO) or 7, 11, 13, 16, 18, 20 (IAO). The bluest star Henden 18 was not used at VBO since it showed that the colour equation is nonlinear below $`(VR)=0.3`$. Since the OT had a colour of $`(VR)=0.37\pm 0.05`$ (Masetti et al 2001), the nonlinearity does not affect the results. The zero-point correction to the field star photometry, together with the colour correction, resulted in a total correction ranging between 0.014 and 0.022 mag for different frames.

The details of observations and derived magnitudes are listed in Table 1 and plotted in Fig. 1.

### 2.3 $`R`$ band light curve

The $`R`$ band light curve of the OT of GRB 010222 is obtained using magnitudes from the following sources: (1) IAO and VBO magnitudes reported in this paper (VBO1 = 1-m telescope; VBT = 2.34-m telescope), (2) Sampurnanand Telescope (ST) observations reported by Sagar et al. (2001), (3) Telescopio Nazionale Galileo (TNG), Asiago, and Loraino Observatory measurements reported by Masetti et al. (2001), (4) F.L. Whipple Observatory (FLWO) and Vatican Advanced Technology Telescope (VATT) measurements reported by Stanek et al. (2001a and kindly made available by K.Z. Stanek), and (5) Canada-France-Hawaii Telescope (CFHT) measurements reported by Veillet (2001a, b), (6) Subaru telescope measurements reported by Watanabe et al (2001) — though these estimates have large errors, they provide a point in the gap near the break. All these magnitudes are listed in Table 2.

## 3 Results and Discussion

### 3.1 Power-law Fits

The $`R`$ light curve shows a broken power-law behaviour with the first phase ending around 10 hours after which the decline became steeper. The curves before and after the break can be fit by power laws

$$I(R,t)=I_0(t/t_b)^\alpha ,$$

where the time $`t`$ is measured from the time of GRB detection, i.e. 2001 February 22.3080 (Piro 2001), and $`t_b`$ is the time of break in the curve. The power law exponents for the two phases are denoted by $`\alpha _1(t<t_b)`$ and $`\alpha _2(t>t_b)`$.

Two linear $`\chi ^2`$-fits were obtained against $`\mathrm{log}t`$ using the magnitudes in Table 2. In order to obtain the asymptotic behaviour, the points close to the break between $`t`$ = 0.3 – 0.8 d were excluded. The derived parameters are listed in Table 3 as Model 1. The quoted errors for $`I_0`$ and $`t_b`$ are derived using $`\pm 1\sigma `$ errors on $`\alpha _1,\alpha _2`$, and the intercepts in magnitude. The degrees of freedom ($`\nu `$) are also shown. The fits are shown in Fig. 2 by straight lines.

The following smooth empirical function (cf. Beuermann et al. 1999) is often used to fit light curves of optical transients of GRBs.

$$I(t)=(2^{\frac{1}{s}}I_0)\left[(t/t_b)^{\alpha _1s}+(t/t_b)^{\alpha _2s}\right]^{\frac{1}{s}}$$

where $`s>1`$ is a sharpness parameter and increases as the break becomes sharper. We find that such a curve does not describe the data in Table 2 well. We obtain a good fit if we exclude the region $`t`$ = 0.3 – 0.8 d as shown in Model 2 of Table 3. The $`\chi ^2`$ reduces considerably as $`s`$ increases until $`s10`$ and decreases very slowly thereafter. We have shown the fit for $`s=10`$ by a dotted curve in Fig. 2. The constraint on smoothness also tends to increase the slope before the break and decrease it after the break. While the smooth fit provides smaller formal errors on the parameters, there is no specific reason to prefer the asymptotic values resulting from this fit to the values derived by linear fits away from the break. Figure 2 shows systematic deviation of the points away from the break which can be reduced only by increasing the value of $`s`$. On the other hand, a large value of $`s`$ recovers the slopes fit by separate straight lines.

The light curve parameters derived above may be compared with the values derived by Masetti et al. (2001): $`\alpha _1=0.60\pm 0.03`$, $`\alpha _2=1.31\pm 0.03`$, $`t_b=0.48\pm 0.02`$ d, and $`s=3.4\pm 0.8`$. Sagar et al (2001) derive a slightly steeper fit with $`\alpha _1=0.76\pm 0.03`$, $`\alpha _2=1.37\pm 0.02`$ with $`s=4`$, and the break $`t_b=0.71\pm 0.07`$ considerably later than derived here, but in agreement with Stanek et al (2001a): $`\alpha _1=0.80\pm 0.05`$, $`\alpha _2=1.30\pm 0.05`$, $`t_b=0.72\pm 0.1`$, though with a much sharper break ($`s=10`$).

There appears a drop in the light curve with respect to both the fits around Feb 23.0. The observations of IAO and UPSO both agree in this behaviour (see inset in Fig. 1). The VBO 1-m magnitudes have large errors and the deviations are not apparent.

### 3.2 The Jet Model and Physical Conditions

The favoured model for GRB afterglows is synchrotron or inverse Compton scattering of electrons accelerated in a relativistic shock wave expanding in its surrounding medium (Mészáros & Rees 1997; Sari, Piran & Narayan 1998). The shock decelerates as it sweeps up ambient matter and the emission fades down. A steepening of the light curve has been observed in the optical transients of several GRB sources and has been generally explained either through expansion in a dense medium or in terms of collimated outflows (Rhoads 1999; Sari, Piran & Halpern 1999). The latter (jet) model is of special interest since it reduces the total energy requirement and increases the actual rate of occurrence of such events. According to this model, the hydrodynamics of the relativistic jet is not influenced by the finite angular size during the early evolution when the bulk Lorentz factor $`\gamma >\theta _0^1`$ where $`\theta _0`$ is the opening angle of the jet in radians. In this case, the light curve behaves similar to the isotropic expansion. However, when $`\gamma \theta _0^1`$, the sideways expansion of the jet becomes significant and the light curve becomes steeper. The break in the light curve is expected at

$$t_j6.2(E_{52}/n_1)^{\frac{1}{3}}(\theta _0/0.1)^{\frac{8}{3}}\mathrm{hr},$$

where $`E_{52}`$ is the isotropic energy of the ejecta in the units of $`10^{52}`$ ergs, $`n_1`$ is the ambient particle density in cm-3, assumed to be homogeneous (Sari, Piran & Halpern 1999). With $`t_b=(1+z)t_j`$ in the observer’s frame, we derive

$$\theta _0=5^{}.7\left[\frac{t_b}{6.2(1+z)}\right]^{\frac{3}{8}}\left(\frac{n_1}{E_{52}}\right)^{\frac{1}{8}}.$$

For an isotropic energy of $`E_{52}=78`$ (in’t Zand et al 2001), the observed value of $`t_b=10.3\pm 2.6`$ h, implies a beam angle in the range of $`2^{}.8\pm 0^{}.3`$ ($`n_1=1`$) and $`16^{}\pm 1^{}.5`$ ($`n_1=10^6`$). Note that the dependence on $`n_1`$ and $`E_{52}`$ is rather weak.

The narrow beam angle ($`3^{}`$ for $`n_1=1`$) implies that such outbursts actually occur at a rate 1500 times higher than observed. This is not much higher than inferred for average GRBs with slightly wider beam angles, which has already triggerred an interest to look for their remnants in the local universe (Paczyński 2001).

The models of the evolution of the outflow also predict a spectral energy distribution (SED) with a peak either at the characteristic synchrotron frequency ($`\nu _m`$) or at the cooling frequency ($`\nu _c`$) depending on whether the cooling is slow or fast (Sari & Esin 2001). The spectrum would be self-absorbed below a frequency $`\nu _a`$ which generally lies in the radio region. The shape of the spectrum and its time evolution can be determined by a single parameter $`p`$, the electron power law distribution index, assuming adiabatic expansion, or expansion of a jet in a homogeneous medium and neglecting the dust extinction. The shape and decay rate of the optical spectrum would then depend on its location with respect to $`\nu _c`$ and $`\nu _m`$. We assume in the following that the spectrum is dominated by synchrotron rather than inverse Compton scattering and reached the slow cooling phase well before the break in the light curve.

Kulkarni et al (2001) report a 350 GHz detection of the OT on Feb 22.54 at $`4.2\pm 1.2`$ mJy. It was detected at 22 GHz a little later (Feb 22.62) with a flux of $`0.70\pm 0.15`$ mJy (Berger & Frail 2001). The $`R`$ band flux at these times based on our fit are: 0.110 mJy (Feb 22.54) and 0.093 mJy (Feb 22.62). The 220 GHz detections on Feb 23 and 24 (Kulkarni et al 2001) are slightly lower than expected from these two points. Based on these observations, $`\nu _m`$ is estimated to be in the sub-mm region just before the break. Further, the 350 GHz as well as 220 GHz flux remained nearly constant between Feb 22.54 and 24.68 (Kulkarni et al 2001). Such a behaviour is expected when the peak frequency is passing through this spectral region. Kulkarni et al (2001) hypothesized that most of the sub-mm flux arises from the host galaxy, either from starburst regions, or due to reprocessing of GRB radiation. In such an event, the sub-mm flux of the OT will be lower and the peak could be placed at higher frequencies.

It has been suggested by Lee et al (2001) that the break in $`R`$ band decay may be caused by the passage of $`\nu _m`$ through this spectral region. The $`JK`$ magnitudes reported by Masetti et al (2001) around 1–2 days after the outburst show little variation with time. If we suppose that $`\nu _m`$ was passing through this region around day 1.0, considering that it drops as $`t^{3/2}`$ in the adiabatic expansion phase, it could have passed through the optical region around the time of the break. However, the light curves of Masetti et al (2001) appear fairly achromatic despite limited data in the early phase and thus there is no strong indication of $`\nu _m`$ passing through the optical region.

If we consider the possibility that $`\nu _m<\nu _{opt}<\nu _c`$, we expect $`\alpha _1=3(p1)/4`$ and $`\alpha _2=p`$ (Sari, Piran & Halpern 1999). The observed slopes yield two estimates of $`p=1.72\pm 0.09`$ and $`1.26\pm 0.01`$, considerably harder than the value of 2.4 obtained for several other GRBs. The optical spectrum is then predicted to vary as $`\nu ^\beta `$ with $`\beta =(p1)/2`$. The two estimates of $`\beta `$ would then be $`0.36\pm 0.05`$ and $`0.131\pm 0.005`$, considerably flatter than observed.

If we assume, on the other hand, that $`\nu _m<\nu _c<\nu _{opt}`$, we obtain $`\alpha _1=(3p2)/4`$ and $`\alpha _2=p`$. The derived values of $`p`$ are $`1.39\pm 0.09`$ and $`1.26\pm 0.01`$ with the spectral index $`\beta =p/2=0.70\pm 0.05`$ and $`0.631\pm 0.005`$. These values are more consistent with each other and can be reconciled with the observed optical spectrum considering that extinction in the host galaxy would modify this spectral region (Lee et al 2001).

The 350 GHz flux decayed from $`4.2\pm 1.3`$ mJy on Feb 24.68 (Kulkarni et al 2001) to $`0.7\pm 0.15`$ mJy on March 2 (Ivison et al 2001). If all the flux is attributed to the GRB, the deduced decay index is $`\alpha `$ = 1.52 which is numerically equal to $`p`$ in the jet model. The 2–10 keV flux also decayed with $`\alpha `$ = 1.33 beginning a couple of hours before the break to 2.4 days after the break (in’t Zand et al 2001).

The expressions for the decay rate exponents derived by Sari, Piran & Halpern (1999) assume an electron power law index of $`2.4`$. Bhattacharya (2001) has derived expressions for the case of $`p=`$ 1–2 assuming that there is an upper cutoff in the electron energy spectrum at $`\gamma _u\mathrm{\Gamma }^q`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the bulk Lorentz factor of the blast wave, and a single power law between $`\gamma _m`$ and $`\gamma _u`$. The decay rate exponents can then be derived in terms of $`p`$ and $`q`$. Assuming that $`\nu _c<\nu _{\mathrm{opt}}<\nu _u`$ where $`\nu _u`$ is another critical frequency associated with $`\gamma _u`$, Eqs (26) and (28) of Bhattacharya (2001) imply $`3\alpha _2=4\alpha _1+2.`$ Since $`\alpha _2`$ has been determined well, we derive $`\alpha _1=0.447`$ using this relation, and derive a value of $`q2`$ for $`p1.5`$.

Dai & Cheng (2001), on the other hand, assumed a flat electron energy spectrum that gets steeper after the cooling break at $`\gamma _c>\gamma _m`$, and deduced that the light curve of the jet would decay as $`t^2`$ irrespective of the value of $`p`$ as long as it is between 1–2. Observations are at variance with this model suggesting that either the jet model is not applicable, or the electron energy spectrum has a different shape.

It thus appears likely that the electron energy spectrum was considerably harder ($`p1.5`$) for GRB 010222 compared to typical GRBs ($`p2.02.5`$) exhibiting steeper decay in the optical. Sagar et al (2001) also reached a similar conclusion from the spectral slope assuming $`\nu _c<\nu _{\mathrm{opt}}`$. A similar hard spectrum was suggested by Panaitescu (2001) for GRB 000301c whose spectrum around the light curve break shows a good resemblance with GRB 010222.

### 3.3 The Light Curve soon after the Break

The light curve of GRB 010222 is not well-observed between the time it was lost to the Pacific coast and later when it was recaptured from the Indian observatories. The early observations from IAO and ST suggest that the light curve had a significant dip with respect to the power law after the break. Similar deviations were also seen in the case of GRB 000301c and were attributed by Berger et al (2000) to the inhomogeneities in the ambient interstellar medium. These authors have argued that the flux above $`\nu _a`$ would vary with ambient density as $`n_1^{1/2}`$. Thus the brightness would increase when the shock overtakes denser regions and dip when it reaches lower density regions.

Wang & Loeb (2000) and Ruffini et al. (2001) have considered the effects of inhomogeneities in the interstellar matter on the radiation from the afterglow in somewhat greater detail. They find that variations are expected over timescales of seconds or tens of seconds when the bulk Lorentz factor is high ($`>100`$) and increase to days when the Lorentz factor reduces to $`3`$, if one assumes that the shock propagates through a medium similar to the local interstellar matter.

The observed $`R`$ magnitudes of GRB 010222 between 14 and 17 hours since the outburst depart from the power law by $`0.107\pm 0.066`$ mag including all the data in Table 2, and $`0.111\pm 0.055`$ mag if we consider only the IAO and ST estimates which have an average error of 0.027 mag (see inset in Fig. 1). The 0.1 mag depression in the light curve can easily be caused by a 20% decrease in the ambient density. The rms fluctuation of 0.06 mag, though statistically not very significant, can be caused by density fluctuations of little over 10%. The IAO and ST observations have a mean interval of 0.6 hours. The bulk Lorentz factor has a value of about 20 at this epoch, at which time, density fluctuations of $`\sigma _n/n`$ of 1–3 over 100 AU length scales and 0.1–0.2 over 1000 AU length scales can produce fluctuations of 0.05 mag amplitude over timescales of an hour. The values of density contrast are consistent with the inhomogeneities in the local interstellar medium (Lauroesch & Meyer 1999). The observed column densities of $`N_\mathrm{H}10^{21}`$ cm-2 imply a total path length of 300 pc for $`n_11`$, comparable to the thickness of disks of galaxies. We thus suspect that GRB 010222 occurred in a normal interstellar environment.

Fluctuations are not noticed in the light curves of most GRB afterglows suggesting that the ambient medium is considerably smooth around them. On the other hand, structure is evident over timescales of tens of seconds in the BATSE observations (see in’t Zand et al in case of GRB 010222) which can be attributed to interstellar density fluctuations (Ruffini et al. 2001). Future GRB afterglows may be monitored more systematically with a view to probing the stucture of the ambient medium.

## 4 Summary

The $`R`$ band photometry of the OT of GRB 010222 performed with the telescopes at IAO, Hanle and VBO, Kavalur is presented here. These measurements together with the photometry reported in the literature show that the $`R`$ band light curve of GRB 010222 had a sharp break at 10 hours from the outburst with decay rates 0.542 and 1.263 before and after the break. The light curve shows some evidence of fluctuations soon after the break. It is suggested that the variations are caused by the inhomogeneities in the ambient medium.

Following the standard models of collimated jet outflow, the early break in the light curve implies that the beam had a very narrow opening angle of $`3^{}`$. This is probably the narrowest observed for any GRB so far.

The decay rates imply a hard spectrum of electron energy distribution ($`p1.5`$), which is consistent with the a spectral index of $`\beta 0.75`$ in the optical region.

It would thus appear that GRB 010222 is an example of a high-energy outburst with a narrow jet with a hard electron energy spectrum in a normal interstellar medium.

### Acknowledgements

We are greatly indebted to the 2-m telescope project team which helped in the procurement and installation of the telescope at the high altitude site in less than 3 years, and developed all the necessary infrastructure including the enclosure, power supply, liquid nitrogen supply, and communication link to Hosakote near Bangalore for remote operation and downloading the data. We also thank K. Jayakumar for obtaining images from VBT on February 28 and March 1. We thank P. Bhattacharjee and P.N. Bhat for stimulating discussions and the referees for their valuable comments.

Figure 1. Photometric observations reported in this paper. Magnitudes are in $`R`$ band except where noted. Circles: IAO 2-m telescope; triangles: VBO 1-m telescope; open squares: VBT ($`R`$ band); filled squares: VBT ($`I`$ band). The $`R`$ band upper limits obtained with VBT are also shown. The fits shown in Fig. 2 are also marked. The inset shows the region soon after the break magnified, with the IAO (filled circles) and ST (Sagar et al 2001; open circles) magnitudes.

Figure 2. The broken power law fits to the early and late phases of the GRB 010222 optical transient in the $`R`$ band corresponding to Model 1 of Table 3. A smooth fit corresponding to Model 2 of Table 3 is shown as a dotted curve.

| Table 1. GRB010222: CCD Photometry | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Date (UT) | Telescope | Exp Time(s) | Band | Magnitude |
| 2001 Feb |  |  |  |  |
| 22.8931 | VBO 1-m | 180+300 | $`R`$ | $`19.646\pm 0.087`$ |
| 22.9413 | VBO 1-m | 1800 | $`R`$ | $`19.393\pm 0.086`$ |
| 22.9438 | IAO 2-m | 600 | $`R`$ | $`19.631\pm 0.031`$ |
| 22.9703 | VBO 1-m | 1800 | $`R`$ | $`19.512\pm 0.062`$ |
| 22.9958 | IAO 2-m | 600 | $`R`$ | $`19.634\pm 0.044`$ |
| 23.0056 | IAO 2-m | 600 | $`R`$ | $`19.747\pm 0.029`$ |
| 23.0139 | IAO 2-m | 600 | $`R`$ | $`19.765\pm 0.029`$ |
| 23.9375 | VBO 1-m | 2400+1800+1200 | $`R`$ | $`20.870\pm 0.057`$ |
| 24.977 | VBT | 600 | $`I`$ | $`20.8\pm 0.2`$ |
| 24.9924 | VBT | 600 | $`R`$ | $`21.405\pm 0.17`$ |
| 25.9816 | VBT | 900 | $`I`$ | $`21.42\pm 0.18`$ |
| 25.9955 | VBT | 900 | $`R`$ | $`21.99\pm 0.13`$ |
| 26.9385 | IAO 2-m | 3$`\times `$600+2$`\times `$300 | $`R`$ | $`22.229\pm 0.077`$ |
| 28.9014 | VBT | 1200 | $`R`$ | $`>22.1`$ |
| 28.9257 | VBT | 2400 | $`R`$ | $`>22.1`$ |
| 2001 Mar |  |  |  |  |
| 1.9319 | VBT | 1800 | $`R`$ | $`>21.9`$ |

| Table 2. GRB010222: $`R`$ magnitudes used | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Date (UT) | Telescope | Mag |
| 2001 Feb |  |  |
| 22.4595 | FLWO | $`18.40\pm 0.05`$ |
| 22.4610 | FLWO | $`18.36\pm 0.03`$ |
| 22.4695 | FLWO | $`18.40\pm 0.03`$ |
| 22.508 | SUBARU | $`18.4\pm 0.1`$ |
| 22.5106 | FLWO | $`18.55\pm 0.03`$ |
| 22.5349 | FLWO | $`18.54\pm 0.05`$ |
| 22.5417 | FLWO | $`18.63\pm 0.05`$ |
| 22.5480 | FLWO | $`18.66\pm 0.05`$ |
| 22.5519 | FLWO | $`18.67\pm 0.07`$ |
| 22.642 | SUBARU | $`18.9\pm 0.1`$ |
| 22.8931 | VBO1 | $`19.65\pm 0.09`$ |
| 22.911 | ST | $`19.48\pm 0.02`$ |
| 22.921 | ST | $`19.59\pm 0.02`$ |
| 22.930 | ST | $`19.66\pm 0.02`$ |
| 22.9413 | VBO1 | $`19.39\pm 0.09`$ |
| 22.9438 | IAO | $`19.63\pm 0.03`$ |
| 22.9703 | VBO1 | $`19.51\pm 0.06`$ |
| 22.9958 | IAO | $`19.63\pm 0.04`$ |
| 23.005 | ST | $`19.80\pm 0.02`$ |
| 23.0056 | IAO | $`19.75\pm 0.03`$ |
| 23.010 | ST | $`19.70\pm 0.03`$ |
| 23.0139 | IAO | $`19.77\pm 0.03`$ |
| 23.056 | Masetti | $`19.75\pm 0.05`$ |
| 23.063 | Masetti | $`19.79\pm 0.04`$ |
| 23.211 | Masetti | $`20.00\pm 0.01`$ |
| 23.219 | Masetti | $`20.01\pm 0.01`$ |
| 23.3015 | FLWO | $`20.12\pm 0.06`$ |
| 23.4076 | FLWO | $`20.31\pm 0.09`$ |
| 23.4458 | FLWO | $`20.40\pm 0.09`$ |
| 23.870 | ST | $`20.77\pm 0.35`$ |
| 23.9375 | VBO1 | $`20.87\pm 0.06`$ |
| 24.127 | Masetti | $`20.89\pm 0.09`$ |
| 24.236 | Masetti | $`21.06\pm 0.03`$ |
| 24.239 | Masetti | $`21.05\pm 0.02`$ |
| 24.9924 | VBT | $`21.41\pm 0.17`$ |

| Table 2. contd. | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Date (UT) | Telescope | Mag |
| 2001 Feb |  |  |
| 25.253 | Masetti | $`21.64\pm 0.03`$ |
| 25.4469 | FLWO | $`21.73\pm 0.17`$ |
| 25.9955 | VBT | $`21.99\pm 0.13`$ |
| 26.911 | ST | $`22.20\pm 0.10`$ |
| 26.9385 | IAO | $`22.23\pm 0.08`$ |
| 27.139 | Masetti | $`22.11\pm 0.25`$ |
| 27.264 | Masetti | $`22.38\pm 0.05`$ |
| 28.653 | CFHT | $`22.73\pm 0.10`$ |
| 2001 Mar |  |  |
| 1.628 | CFHT | $`22.96\pm 0.10`$ |
| 2.641 | CFHT | $`23.10\pm 0.10`$ |
| 18.9 | VATT | $`24.53\pm 0.25`$ |

| Table 3. Light curve fit parameters | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Parameters | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 |
| $`I_0`$ | $`79_{21}^{+35}`$ | $`77.1\pm 0.4`$ | $`77.6\pm 0.4`$ |
| $`t_b(d)`$ | $`0.427\pm 0.107`$ | $`0.434\pm 0.003`$ | $`0.431\pm 0.002`$ |
| $`\alpha _1`$ | $`0.542\pm 0.071`$ | $`0.594\pm 0.011`$ | $`0.598\pm 0.008`$ |
| $`\alpha _2`$ | $`1.263\pm 0.011`$ | $`1.234\pm 0.005`$ | $`1.241\pm 0.003`$ |
| $`s`$ |  | 10 | 4.5 |
| $`\chi ^2(\nu )`$ | 4.5(7), 21(20) | 39 (27) | 126 (42) |


text:
# Catastrophic senescence of the Pacific salmon without mutation-accumulation

## 1 Introduction

According to the evolutionary theory of aging senescence is ultimately caused by a declining pressure of natural selection as one gets older and older . One manifestation of senescence (which can be most easily handled on the computer) is an increase of mortality with age or, more precisely, a decrease of survivors at age $`a`$, from an initial population of newly born offspring at time $`0`$. Senescence is attributed to several factors like environment, metabolism, and, most important, by several genetic mechanisms. Two major genetic mechanisms, which are under discussion and need not necessarily exclude each other, are antagonistic pleitropy and mutation- accumulation. Based on the latter mechanism, i.e. on the hypothesis of an increase of deleterious mutations with age, Penna et al. (1995) proposed a bit-string model  , which nowadays is widely used for Monte Carlo simulations of aging, because it predicts many experimentally observed features of senescence (for a recent review see ). One of the successful predicitions is the catastrophic senescence for the Pacific salmon.

Pacific salmon show the most dramatic manifestation of aging. As semelparous individuals they breed only once in their life, all at the same age, with plenty of offspring, and die a few weeks later . In contrast to salmon, iteroparous individuals breed repeatedly and age more gradually.

## 2 The model

Recently Stauffer has proposed a model which is based on the postulate of a minimum reproduction age and a maximal genetic lifespan . Only these two numbers are transmitted from generation to generation, with certain mutations, by asexual reproduction. The population consists of $`N`$ individuals $`i`$ $`(i1,\mathrm{},N)`$ initially. Each individual is characterized by three integers: its age $`a(i)`$, its minimum reproduction age $`a_m(i)`$ and its maximal genetic lifespan $`a_d(i)`$ with $`0a_m(i)<a_d(i)32`$. The maximal lifetime is restricted to 32 time units (called years), the minimum reproduction age may be chosen between zero and $`a_d(i)1`$. Within these constraints the values of $`a_m(i)`$ and $`a_d(i)`$ are randomly mutated for an offspring by $`\pm 1`$, away from the maternal values, and for each child separately. These mutations realize some kind of antagonistic pleiotropy in the sense that a shorter lifespan or a later reproduction age increase the birth rate. (“Parents die to make place for their children”.) After an individual has reached its minimum reproduction age, it gives birth to one offspring with probability $`b`$, chosen as $`(1+ϵ)/(a_d(i)a_m(i)+ϵ)`$ with $`ϵ=0.08`$ for convenience. Independently of the genetic death, which happens automatically and unavoidably if $`a(i)=a_d(i)`$, at each time interval an individual can also die “accidentally”, with the Verhulst probalility $`N/N_{max}`$. $`N_{max}`$ is called the carrying capacity to account for the fact that any given environment can only support populations up to some maximal size $`N_{max}`$. Otherwise the individuals die because of food and space limitations. Stauffer’s model shows the basic features required for senescence. The age distribution shows an increase of mortality with age. Moreover, a self-organization of a typical age of first reproduction and of death is observed, similarly to Ito’s self-organization of a minimum reproduction age in the framework of the Penna model . In this paper we apply Stauffer’s model to the population dynamics of Pacific salmon and check whether the model is able to reproduce the qualitative features of catastrophic senescence. For a given value of $`N_{max}`$ and an initial population of $`N`$ individuals we specify $`a_m(i)=1`$ and $`a_d(i)=16`$ for all $`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$ as initial values. One Monte Carlo iteration then consists of the following three steps that we call “deaths”, “births” and “aging”.

* In the first loop of “deaths” over all individuals, each individual dies either with the Verhulst probability $`N/N_{max}`$, or, if it survives space and food limitations, because it has reached its maximal genetically allowed age $`a_d(i)`$. Otherwise it survives. The initial population of size $`N`$ gets reduced this way.
* In the second loop of “births” over all individuals, each individual gives birth to $`n_b1`$ offspring with probability $`b=1.08/(a_d(i)a_m(i)+0.08)`$, provided the maternal age is not below the minimum reproduction age and equals a fixed given integer $`a_0`$ with $`0a_m(i)a_0<a_d(i)32`$ and $`a_0(i)=a_0`$ is chosen the same for all individuals. The latter condition obviously accounts for the specific features of salmon which breed only once and all at the same age. It turns out that the choice of the number of offspring $`n_b`$ is not arbitrary, because the second condition is so restrictive that the population only survives for sufficiently large $`n_b`$. Now the values of $`a_m`$ and $`a_d`$ for the offspring are mutated away from the maternal values, again at each time interval by $`\pm 1`$ for each child separately as in Stauffer’s model, but with probability $`p_s<1`$. This way the mutations become suppressed with probability $`1p_s`$, to account for the experimental fact that the time interval for reproduction of salmon is rather narrow for any generation. Unless mutations are suppressed, they have the tendency of spreading the first reproduction age within a broader time interval. On the histograms of aging this has a similar effect as iteroparous reproduction. The question is whether the minimum reproduction age adjusts itself to a value which is self-consistent with the prescribed fixed reproduction age $`a_0`$. The remaining mutations should drive the initial values for $`a_m(i)`$ towards $`a_0`$.
* In the third step of a single iteration, the population which remains from the first two steps ages by one time unit, $`(a(i)a(i)+1)`$. The population size and averages over the individual minimum reproduction ages and the maximal lifespans are stored. From a certain number of iterations on also the individual ages $`a(i)`$, $`a_m(i)`$ and $`a_d(i)`$ are stored in histograms as a function of the time interval $`j`$, $`j(1,\mathrm{},32)`$.

Now the iterations are repeated a number of $`t`$ times until the population dynamics has stabilized and the fluctuations in average values are negligibly small.

## 3 Results

Figs.1 and 2 show various histograms of ages $`a_d`$ for genetic death which were obtained for the following choice of parameters. In Fig.1 the carrying capacity $`N_{max}`$ is chosen as $`210^5`$, $`N`$ initially as $`N_{max}/2`$. The number of iterations $`t`$ is $`210^4`$. The actual reproduction age $`a_0`$ is fixed to 6, and the number of births $`n_b`$ which an individual can give to offspring at the age of 6 is 12. Mutations of the minimum reproduction age of offspring are suppressed by $`80\%(+)`$, $`95\%(\text{x})`$ and $`99\%()`$, respectively. The histograms show a clear self-organized maximum of genetic death at an age of 7. In discrete time units this means that death occurs most likely directly after reproduction. The peaks are the sharper the stronger the suppression of mutations. The qualitative shape of the histograms stays the same when $`N_{max}`$ is varied over several orders of magnitude. Already after $`100`$ iterations the population dynamics stabilizes in the sense that the population size oscillates regularly between stable minimum and maximum values. These regular oscillations build up randomly during the first $`100`$ iterations and then are reproduced with the period $`a_0=6`$. The value of $`n_b=12`$ is the minimal integer so that the population with $`95\%`$ suppression of mutations survives as a whole. For smaller $`n_b`$ it dies out after a few iterations. This feature is in qualitative agreement with nature. Pacific salmon produce plenty offspring once they breed to compensate for the restrictive conditions on $`a_m`$ and $`a_0`$ independent of $`i`$. The maximum of the histogram of ages for the minimal reproduction age lies at an age of 6, consistent with the prescribed value $`a_0`$.

In Fig.2 we compare histograms of ages for genetic death between iteroparous (full line) and semelparous (dashed line) reproduction. The dashed curve was obtained for $`N_{max}=210^5`$, $`t=210^4`$, $`a_0=6`$, $`n_b=12`$, $`1p_s=99\%`$. Again it shows a sharp peak at the age of 7. The histogram for iteroparous reproduction was obtained for $`N_{max}=210^7`$, $`t=210^4`$, reproduction can happen at any age between $`a_m(i)`$ and $`a_d(i)`$, (i.e. i-dependent and possibly several times in one life), $`n_b=1`$ and no suppression of mutations of $`a_m(i)`$ and $`a_d(i)`$ for the offspring. The hundred times larger value for $`N_{max}`$ was chosen for convenience to get comparable numbers for $`a_d`$ in spite of the different reproduction conditions. The maxima of both curves are self-organized, but in the iteroparous case the maximum is much broader, going along with a gradual increase of senescence with time or a less rapid aging than in the case of salmon, compatible with the Penna model .

## 4 Summary

Stauffer’s model based on the two postulates of a minimum reproduction age and a maximal genetic lifespan predicts the catastrophic senescence for the Pacific salmon in a qualitative way. The larger the suppression of mutations, the faster die the individuals after reproduction, and the larger is the number of births in one reproduction step which is necessary to sustain the species. The self-organized maximum of the histogram of ages $`a_m`$ is self-consistent with the only allowed age $`a_0`$ for reproduction, a restriction that is used as an input. Stauffer’s explanation works without mutation-accumulation, whereas mutation-accumulation was an essential ingredient in the Penna model. Therefore, differently from what the success of the Penna model might have suggested, mutation-accumulation does not seem to be essential for explaining gross qualitative features of senescence.

## 5 Acknowlegdment

I would like to thank Dietrich Stauffer for stimulating discussions.