text:
# Evidence for an unconventional magnetic instability in the spin-tetrahedra system Cu₂Te₂O₅Br₂

\[

## Abstract

Thermodynamic experiments as well as Raman scattering have been used to study the magnetic instabilities in the spin-tetrahedra systems $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{X}_2`$, X=Cl and Br. While the phase transition observed in the Cl system at $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$=18.2 K is consistent with 3D AF ordering, the phase transition at $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$=11.3 K in the Br system has several unusual features. We propose an explanation in terms of weakly coupled tetrahedra with a singlet–triplet gap and low lying singlets.

\]

Reduced dimensionality of a quantum spin system in combination with frustration leads in many cases to unconventional and interesting ground states or magnetic phase diagrams. Prominent examples are the frustrated and dimerized spin-1/2 chain, represented by the low-temperature phase of $`\mathrm{CuGeO}_3`$, or the two-dimensional Shastry-Sutherland lattice with orthogonally arranged spin dimers and a frustrating inter-dimer coupling, realized in $`\mathrm{SrCu}_2(\mathrm{BO}_3)_2`$. These systems show a spin liquid ground state with a singlet–triplet gap. Frustration is evident in the latter system as dispersionless elementary triplets and multi-particle bound states of triplet and singlet character .

Spin triangles and tetrahedra that are strongly coupled into Kagomé or pyrochlore structures are at the origin of another important class of frustrated spin systems . Although the consequences of the classical ground-state degeneracy for the quantum case have not been fully elucidated theoretically, there are good reasons to believe that such models do not possess magnetic long-range order (LRO) but low-lying singlets . Scenarios leading to the development of LRO within this non-magnetic manifold have been put forward .

The limit of weakly-coupled tetrahedra with spin S=1/2 has been studied in some detail in 3D and 1D, and the physics is expected to be very interesting. However, they have not been investigated experimentally so far due to the lack of appropriate materials. The recently found spin system $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{X}_2`$, with X=Cl, Br, contains tetrahedral clusters of $`\mathrm{Cu}^{2+}`$ with S = 1/2 in a distorted square planar $`\mathrm{CuO}_3\mathrm{X}`$-coordination . These tetrahedra align to tubes or chains along the  direction, as they are separated along  and  direction by different Te-O coordinations (see Fig. 1a). Substituting Br for Cl in this system widens up the unit cell and increases its volume from 367 to 391$`\AA ^3`$, by 7%, while bond angles or anisotropies do not change essentially. Therefore, this system allows in a unique way to study the interplay of frustration and coupling in a tetrahedra quantum spin system.

Preliminary measurements of the magnetic susceptibility $`\chi `$(T) of both compounds showed a maximum at $`\mathrm{T}_{\chi _{\mathrm{max}}}`$ = 23 K and 30 K for X=Cl, Br and a strong reduction at low temperatures, typical for a spin gap system. Assuming that the compounds consist of weakly-coupled units of 4 spins with couplings $`\mathrm{J}_1`$ and $`\mathrm{J}_2`$ (see Fig. 1b), the best fit of the susceptibility - quite a good one actually - was obtained for $`\mathrm{J}_1=\mathrm{J}_2=`$ 38.5 K and 43 K for X=Cl and Br respectively. The effect of inter-tetrahedra coupling was not included in this fit however .

We present here an investigation of both compounds, using detailed susceptibility, specific heat and Raman measurements. These measurements indicate an onset of antiferromagnetic order in the chloride compound at 18.2 K, pointing to a significant inter-tetrahedra coupling. In contrast, the bromide shows a very unusual phase transition at 11.3 K, at a temperature where a large part of the magnetic excitations have already been frozen out. A possible scenario for this transition shall be discussed.

The preparation of the samples and single crystals used for our measurements is described elsewhere . Specific heat and susceptibility measurements were performed on powder samples using a Quantum Design measurement property system and a SQUID magnetometer, respectively. The Raman scattering experiments were performed with a $`\lambda `$ = 514 nm laser line and a power level of 0.05-2 mW focused on a spot of 0.05-0.1 mm diameter. The whisker-like single crystals with typical dimensions $`0.10.11\mathrm{mm}^3`$ and the measurement geometry did allow experiments in (cc), (yc) and (yy) light scattering polarizations, with c parallel to the crystallographic  direction and y given by a linear combination of the  and  direction. Based on the tetragonal $`\mathrm{P}\overline{4}`$ space group and the missing center of inversion these polarizations correspond to the A symmetry and combinations of B and E symmetry, respectively.

Results of our detailed investigation of the magnetic susceptibility $`\chi `$(T) of both compounds are shown in Fig. 2. Whereas the high temperature part of $`\chi `$(T) at and above $`\mathrm{T}_{\chi _{\mathrm{max}}}`$ is very similar in both compounds, pronounced differences are observed at low temperatures. In the chloride a clear kink is evident in $`\chi `$(T) at $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$ = 18.2 K. This anomaly corresponds to a pronounced step-like increase of the slope $`\chi `$(T)/$``$T with decreasing temperature, as shown in the inset of Fig.2. In other words, the susceptibility in the ordered state is smaller than it would be in the disordered state. Applying a magnetic field leads to a reduction of the size of this anomaly and thus to an increase of the susceptibility for $`\mathrm{T}<\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$.

The specific heat $`\mathrm{C}_\mathrm{p}`$(T) of $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Cl}_2`$ (see Fig. 3, upper curves with upper temperature scale) shows a mean field like transition with a sizeable anomaly at $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$. A magnetic field of 13.5 T leaves this anomaly almost unchanged, only a slight decrease of $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$ from 18.2 K to 18.0 K is discernible. All these features: the reduction of the susceptibility for $`\mathrm{T}<\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$, the mean field type of transition, the reduction of the anomaly in $`\chi `$(T) in an applied field whereas no reduction is observed in $`\mathrm{C}_\mathrm{p}`$(T) and the very weak decrease of $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$ with increasing B, point to a 3D-antiferromagnetic ordering in a system with only weak spin-anisotropies. Since this transition occurs below the well-defined maximum in $`\chi `$(T), with $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$/$`\mathrm{T}_{\chi _{\mathrm{max}}}`$ = 0.78, these results indicate that $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Cl}_2`$ is a low-dimensional spin systems with a significant inter-tetrahedra (or inter-chain) coupling.

In contrast, the low temperature behavior of $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Br}_2`$ is quite different and rather unusual. For temperatures below $`\mathrm{T}_{\chi _{\mathrm{max}}}`$, $`\chi `$(T) decreases considerably, by more than 50 %. This indicates the freezing out of a large part of the magnetic triplet excitations as expected in a system with a spin gap. Whereas at first sight no anomaly can be observed in $`\chi `$(T) at low fields (0.1 T), the derivative $`\chi (\mathrm{T})`$/$`\mathrm{T}`$ reveals a small but well discernible step at $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$ = 11.5 K. This step however has the opposite sign compared to $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Cl}_2`$, i.e. the slope for $`\mathrm{T}<\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$ is smaller than for $`\mathrm{T}>\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$. This means, that the susceptibility of $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Br}_2`$ and thus the magnetization in the ordered state is larger than it would be in the disordered state. This is opposite to the expected result for antiferromagnetic ordering. For $`\mathrm{T}<\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$, the magnetization is strictly proportional to the applied field between B = -1 T and 1 T and shows no remanence. Thus ferromagnetic ordering or canted antiferromagnetism can be excluded for $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Br}_2`$. The anomaly in $`\chi `$(T) increases significantly in a magnetic field larger than 1 T. For B = 5 T, it is quite evident that $`\chi `$(T) is higher in the ordered state than it would be in the disordered state.

The specific heat of $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Br}_2`$ at B = 0 (see Fig. 3, lower curves with lower temperature scale) shows a small but well-defined mean field like anomaly at $`\mathrm{T}=\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$. This proves that this transition also occurs in the absence of an external field. Applying a magnetic field leads to a very strong increase of the size of the anomaly, by more than a factor of 3 at B = 13 T, and to a pronounced shift of $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$ to higher temperatures, from $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$(0) = 11.4 K to $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$(B=13T) = 12.4 K. In thermodynamic terms, this shift corresponds to the larger magnetization of the ordered state compared to the disordered state. Fitting a power law to the field dependence of $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$ as determined from $`\mathrm{C}_\mathrm{p}`$(T), $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}(\mathrm{B})=\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}(0)`$+$`\mathrm{a}\mathrm{B}^\mathrm{n}`$, we obtain $`\mathrm{n}=1.41\pm 0.05`$. Using the low temperature parts (T$``$$`T_o`$, $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$) and the high temperature parts (T$`>`$To, $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$) of the specific heat results, we made a rough estimate of the magnetic specific heat and of the magnetic entropy $`\mathrm{S}_\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{T})`$. For $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Br}_2`$, the magnetic entropy at $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$ is only a quite small portion of the total spin entropy expected at high temperatures $`\mathrm{S}_\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o})1.8\mathrm{J}/\mathrm{Kmol}=0.16\mathrm{Rln2}/\mathrm{spin}`$, whereas for $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Cl}_2`$, the entropy at $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$ is much larger, $`\mathrm{S}_\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N})4.1\mathrm{J}/\mathrm{Kmol}=0.36\mathrm{Rln2}/\mathrm{spin}`$. This is related to the difference in the ratio $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}/\mathrm{J}`$ and $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{N}`$/J and indicates that in the bromide, a large part of the magnetic degrees of freedom are freezing out at higher temperatures.

Light scattering studies have been performed on both systems as function of temperature. The optic (q$``$0) phonon frequencies of $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Br}_2`$ are generally smaller compared with $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Cl}_2`$. This is consistent with the larger unit cell volume of the bromide. Details of the phonon spectrum will be given elsewhere. In the low energy range comparable to the spin gap of the systems we observe two signals in $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Br}_2`$ that do not fit to phonon scattering. The excitation spectrum of $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Cl}_2`$ is less spectacular. The corresponding energy regime displays a much weaker temperature dependence and a smaller intensity of scattering. It will not be further discussed here.

In $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Br}_2`$ the high-temperature spectra are dominated by a pyramidal-shaped scattering continuum centered at 61 $`\mathrm{cm}^1`$=88 K, corresponding to 2$`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ = 86 K previously determined from the magnetic susceptibility . The continuum is attributed to a two-magnon-like scattering process . Its total linewidth and the low energy onset at 40 $`\mathrm{cm}^1`$ both point to an appreciable inter-tetrahedra coupling. For reduced temperatures, $`\mathrm{T}<9\mathrm{K}`$, a second maximum with smaller linewidth develops. It shows a soft mode-like behavior and reaches its maximum energy of 18 $`\mathrm{cm}^10.6\mathrm{\Delta }`$ at lowest temperatures. This intensity is undoubtedly related to the instability observed in our thermodynamic experiments. In the same temperature regime an additional shoulder develops on the high frequency side of the scattering continuum. This leads to a small shift of this signal from 61 to 63 $`\mathrm{cm}^1`$.

These two scattering signals are only observed in (cc) polarization with both electric field vectors parallel to the crystallographic c-axis and the chains of tetrahedra. This symmetry selection rule and the temperature dependence of the low energy mode are similar to the properties of a singlet bound state observed in the dimerized phase ($`\mathrm{T}<\mathrm{T}_{\mathrm{SP}}=14.5\mathrm{K}`$) of $`\mathrm{CuGeO}_3`$. In this spin chain system frustration leads to a binding effect of two elementary triplets to a well-defined mode at $`1.78\mathrm{\Delta }`$ . The ”in chain” selection rule that is observed in both systems in combination with the final linewidth of the continuum are the result of an appreciable quasi-one-dimensional inter-tetrahedra coupling.

Let us start the discussion by noting that the main features of the Br system can be understood in terms of weakly coupled tetrahedra. The spectrum of a tetrahedron is depicted in Fig. 1c. If $`\mathrm{J}_1=\mathrm{J}_2`$ above $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$, as suggested by the fit of the susceptibility at high temperature, then the ground-state is a two-fold degenerate singlet, and the first excitation is a three-fold degenerate triplet located at $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\mathrm{J}_1`$ above the GS. These triplets would then lead to Raman scattering at $`2\mathrm{\Delta }=86K`$, in agreement with our data.

The origin of the phase transition at $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$ could be a small distortion of the tetrahedra that leads to different values for $`\mathrm{J}_1`$ and $`\mathrm{J}_2`$, hence to a lifting of the degeneracy between the two GS singlets. This is similar to the spin-Peierls scenario of Yamashita and Ueda. In this picture, the Raman scattering observed below 9 K would involve transitions between the singlet GS and the first excited singlet. Note that the entropy jump of such a transition is expected to be a small fraction of $`\mathrm{R}\mathrm{ln}2/\mathrm{spin}`$, in agreement with the specific heat data.

Let us now discuss all the other issues raised by the present results. First of all, the Cl and Br compounds turn out to be very different. As a first step toward understanding this difference, we have performed ab-initio calculations of the electronic structure of these systems. These results will be reported elsewhere. These calculations give access to the hopping integrals but not to the exchange integrals. So the information is only qualitative. The main difference between the two systems is that the ratio of the intraplaquette hoppings $`t_2/t_1`$ is closer to 1 in the Br system than in the Cl one. This is consistent with our proposal that the physics of weakly coupled tetrahedra is realized in the Br system but not in the Cl one.

As a first step to understand the Raman continuum we have analyzed the light-scattering cross section of a coupled array of tetrahedra, extending however only in 1D along the c-axis . Based on exact diagonalization and bond-operator theory it is found that in this case the continuum is determined by the spin-zero two-triplet excitations of an effective dimerized spin-one chain. Due to triplet interactions the corresponding Raman continuum is strongly renormalized with respect to the bare two-triplet spectrum. It displays no van-Hove type edge-singularities, a width set by the inter-tetrahedral coupling, and a smooth convex shape with a single maximum. The latter shape is encouraging, yet still different from the pyramid-like spectrum of fig.4. This is consistent with our ab-initio band structure calculations indicating that the inter-tetrahedral couplings are comparable along and perpendicular to the tubes. A study of the Raman response of a 3D array of coupled tetrahedra is in progress.

Finally a lot remains to be done to understand in detail what happens at $`\mathrm{T}_\mathrm{o}`$ in the Br system, in particular whether there is a change of the local geometry, as implied by our interpretation of Raman data, as well as the influence of the magnetic field on the transition, which might require to take into account the Dzyaloshinskii-Moriya interaction which is a priori present in that system.

In summary, our results have revealed that both the Cl and Br compounds undergo a phase transition at low temperatures, but that these phase transitions appear to be of different nature: While there is good evidence in favor of a 3D magnetic ordering in Cl, the transition in the Br compound is very unusual, with the appearance of low energy Raman scattering below the transition. If our interpretation of the origin of this low-energy scattering is confirmed, this makes $`\mathrm{Cu}_2\mathrm{Te}_2\mathrm{O}_5\mathrm{Br}_2`$ the first system with only singlet low-energy excitations that undergo a phase transition involving these singlet low-energy degrees of freedom. Since the Cl and Br systems are very similar a priori, their difference at low temperature suggest that they might be located on both sides of a quantum critical point in a system of coupled tetrahedra.

We are grateful for helpful discussions with M. Zhitomirsky, K. Ueda, H. Kageyama, H. Rosner, B. Büchner, and G. Güntherodt. This work was supported in part by the DFG through SPP1073.


format: text

text:
# Poisson Chern-Simons Gauge Theory

## 1 Introduction

The study of noncommutative gauge theories has been a popular subject since their relation to Matrix theory  and String theory  has been understood. They are interesting because they preserve some of the nonlocal properties inherent in String theory. For example, T-duality is a manifest symmetry . For a recent review of noncommutative gauge theory see .

It is generally assumed that in the limit of a vanishing noncommutativity parameter a noncommutative gauge theory reduces to a commutative one. Whether this is the case depends on the precise way the limit is taken. The infinitesimal gauge transformations in a noncommutative gauge theory take the form

$$\delta \widehat{A}=d\widehat{ϵ}i[\widehat{A}\stackrel{}{,}\widehat{ϵ}].$$

Let us introduce the rescaled quantities $`A=\theta \widehat{A}`$ and $`ϵ=\theta \widehat{ϵ}`$ , where $`\theta `$ is the noncommutative parameter. Then, gauge transformations written in terms of the rescaled quantities take the form

$$\delta A=dϵ+\frac{1}{i\theta }[A\stackrel{}{,}ϵ].$$

If we take the $`\theta 0`$ limit the second term does not vanish, rather it becomes a Poisson bracket

$$\delta A=dϵ+\{A,ϵ\}.$$
(1)
I will refer to these type of gauge transformation as a Poisson gauge transformation. It has appeared in the light cone formulation of the membrane action  and in the Lagrangian fluid dynamics formulation of the quantum Hall effectaaaThe spatial coordinate functions of the fluid are defined as $`X^i=x^i+\theta ϵ^{ij}\widehat{A}_i`$ thus they are related to $`A_i`$ by a translation and a rotation. . It was also discussed in the context of noncommutative gauge theories of D-branes .

Here we will present another example, the Poisson Chern-Simons gauge theory on a group manifold. It can be obtained formally as the large representation limit of the noncommutative Chern-Simons gauge theory discussed in . However, I will introduce it independently of its noncommutative partner. One reason to study these models is that we can understand their geometry. This is not always possible for the noncommutative versions. In particular, the “dimension” of a noncommutative space is not a very well defined quantity; it only makes sense in the commutative limit. In the commutative limit for the $`SU(2)`$ case, we can clarify the relation between the fuzzy sphere of  and the the three-fold of . In particular we find that while the action can be naturally written on a three dimensional manifold, the component fields must be invariant under a $`U(1)`$ action so they naturally live on a two sphere.

The plan of the paper is as follows. In Section 2, I will review the formulation of gauge theory on a group manifold. In Section 3, I describe how to introduce a Poisson bracket on functions on the group which are invariant under the left action of a stability subgroup. This is closely related to the Lie-Poisson bracket on the dual of the Lie algebra of the group. I will also extend the bracket to the exterior algebra and use it to give a BRST formulation of the calculus. In the last section I will introduce the Poisson Chern-Simons action, first for the $`SU(2)`$ case, and then for an arbitrary compact Lie group $`G`$ . For $`GSU(2)`$ I will also point out some difficulties with interpreting the noncommutative Chern-Simons, as proposed in , as a toy model for Witten’s string field theory  .

## 2 Gauge Theory on Group Manifolds

In order to fix the notation and to make the paper more self-contained, I will give a brief review of gauge theory on a group manifold $`G`$ . I will assume that $`G`$ is compact, connected and simply-connected. For simplicity I will also asume that $`G`$ is simple, but most of what follows also works for semi-simple groups. Since the Lie algebra valued $`1`$-form $`g^1\mathrm{d}g`$ is left invariant we have the following expansion

$$g^1\mathrm{d}g=T_ac^a,$$

where the $`T_a`$’s are antihermitean and satisfy the Lie algebra $`[T_a,T_b]=f_{ab}^cT_c`$ , and $`c^a`$ are left invariant 1-forms. The forms $`c^a`$ give a globally defined vielbein on the group manifold. The exterior derivative acting on a function $`F`$ on the group can be written as

$$\mathrm{d}F=c^aL_a(F),$$
(2)
where $`L_a`$ are left invariant vector fields satisfying $`[L_a,L_b]=f_{ab}^cL_c`$ . Explicitly, they are given by

$$L_a=\mathrm{tr}(T_ag\frac{}{g^T}).$$

We can also extend (2) to the exterior derivative on an arbitrary form. Let $`b_a`$ be an operator acting on a form $`\omega `$ as

$$b_a(\omega )=i_{L_a}\omega ,$$

where $`i`$ denotes the inner product of the vector field $`L_a`$ with the form $`\omega `$ . Then the exterior derivative can be written as

$$\mathrm{d}=c^aL_a\frac{1}{2}f_{ab}^cc^ac^bb_c,$$
(3)
where we assume that $`L_a`$ only acts on the component functions. Note that $`b_a`$ and $`c^a`$ are odd and satisfy the ghost anti-commutation relations $`\{b_a,c^d\}=\delta _a^d`$ .

Let us now consider gauge theory on the group manifold $`G`$. Later we will mainly be interested in a $`U(1)`$ gauge theory but for now we will write our formulae so that they can also be used in the nonabelian casebbbOne should not confuse the commutators in this section which would not be present in an abelian theory, with the $``$-commutators appearing in a noncommutative gauge theory.. The gauge potential $`A`$ can be written globally as

$$A=c^aA_a,$$
(4)
where we have made an implicit choice of the bundle. Using the definition of the exterior derivative (3), one can show that the components of the field strength $`F=\mathrm{d}AiA^2=\frac{1}{2}c^ac^bF_{ab}`$ take the form

$$F_{ab}=L_a(A_b)L_b(A_a)i[A_a,A_b]f_{ab}^cA_c.$$

Similarly, one can show that the global and infinitesimal gauge transformations have the form

$`A_a^{}`$ $`=`$ $`g^1A_ag+ig^1L_a(g),`$
$`\delta A_a`$ $`=`$ $`L_a(ϵ)i[A_a,ϵ].`$ (5)
The Yang-Mills action is given by

$$𝒮_{YM}=dg\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{tr}(F_{ab}F^{ab}),$$

where the tangent space indexes are raised and lowered with $`\delta _{ab}`$ and $`\mathrm{d}g`$ denotes the Haar measure on the group.

The Chern-Simons form $`\omega _{CS}=\mathrm{tr}(A\mathrm{d}A+\frac{2}{3i}A^3)`$ takes the following form

$$\omega _{CS}=c^ac^bc^c\mathrm{tr}(A_aL_b(A_c)\frac{1}{2}A_af_{bc}^dA_d+\frac{1}{3i}A_a[A_b,A_c]).$$

For the three-dimensional group $`SU(2)`$ , we can also define a Chern-Simons action

$$𝒮_{CS}=\frac{k}{4\pi }\omega _{CS},$$

by integrating the $`3`$-form $`\omega _{CS}`$ over the group manifold.

## 3 Poisson Algebra and BRST Calculus

For a $`U(1)`$ gauge theory the gauge transformation (5) is simply $`\delta A_a=L_a(ϵ)`$ . We would like to modify the $`U(1)`$ Yang-Mills and Chern-Simons actions above in such a way that the gauge transformation becomes similar to the one discussed in the introduction

$$\delta A_a=L_a(ϵ)+\{A_a,ϵ\}.$$
(6)
First, however we must pick an appropriate Poisson bracket. While there are known examples of Poisson brackets on groups (related to quantum groups) we will not be interested in these. Instead I will consider another bracket which can only be defined on a subset of functions on the group. Let $`\lambda `$ be an element of the Lie algebra of $`G`$. We assume that $`G`$ is semi-simple so we can also think of $`\lambda `$ as an element of the dual of the Lie algebra. We denote by $`H_\lambda `$ the stability subgroup of $`\lambda `$ i.e. $`[H_\lambda ,\lambda ]=0`$ . Then the bracket can only be used on functions $`F`$ invariant under left multiplication by elements $`h`$ of $`H_\lambda `$

$$F(hg)=F(g).$$
(7)
These functions can be identified with functions on $`H_\lambda `$$`\backslash G`$ and this space can in turn be identified with the coadjoint orbit on the dual of the Lie algebra of $`G`$ passing through $`\lambda `$ . But this is a symplectic leaf of the Lie-Poisson bracket and thus is has a natural Poisson bracket . If $`x_a`$ denotes linear coordinates on the dual of the Lie algebra of $`G`$, the Lie-Poisson bracket on these generators is given by

$$\{x_a,x_b\}=f_{ab}^cx_c.$$
(8)
The map $`gg^1\lambda g`$ can be thought of as a map from $`H_\lambda `$$`\backslash G`$ to the dual of the Lie algebra. Note that two points $`g`$ and $`g^{}`$ belonging to the same coset of $`H_\lambda `$$`\backslash G`$ are mapped to the same point. The algebra of function on the group satisfying (7) is generated by

$$x_a=\mathrm{tr}(T_ag^1\lambda g),$$

so in principle all we need is the bracket (8) . However it is interesting to have the bracket defined directly on the group. One can show that the bracket takes the form

$$\{F,G\}=𝒫^{ab}L_a(F)L_b(G),$$
(9)
where $`𝒫^{ab}`$ is defined as follows. First let $`M_{ab}f_{ab}^cx_c`$ . Note that $`M`$ is a degenerate antisymmetric matrix. If fact the number of zero eigenvalues coincide with the codimension of the symplectic leaf. Then, $`𝒫^{ab}`$ is defined to act as minus the inverse of $`M`$ in the subspace where $`M`$ in nondegenerate and to act as zero in the orthogonal subspace. For $`SU(2)`$ we have $`𝒫^{ab}=(x^dx_d)^1f^{abc}x_c`$ and the Poisson bracket takes the form

$$\{F,G\}=\frac{1}{(x^dx_d)}f^{abc}x_aL_b(F)L_c(G).$$

We will not need to know the explicit form of $`𝒫^{ab}`$ and will use only the fact that it must satisfy

$$M_{ab}𝒫^{bc}M_{cd}=M_{ad},$$
(10)
which is a direct consequence of its definition. To show that (9) gives the correct Poisson bracket it is enough to check that on the generators $`x_a`$ it gives (8). This can be easily accomplished using (10) Note also, that when one of the entries in (9) is $`x_a`$ , we have $`\{x_a,F\}=L_a(F)`$ .

Next we extend (9) from left $`H_\lambda `$-invariant function to left $`H_\lambda `$-invariant forms. Such forms can be expanded in components as

$$\chi =\frac{1}{p!}c^{a_1}\mathrm{}c^{a_p}\chi _{a_1\mathrm{}a_p},$$

where $`\chi _{a_1\mathrm{}a_p}`$ are left $`H_\lambda `$-invariant functions on the group. The graded bracket is uniquely defined by requiring that it acts as a derivation on each of its entries, that $`c^a`$ have trivial bracket with the components and satisfy

$$\{c^a,c^b\}=0,$$

and that on components it reduces to the Poisson bracket (9) .

One can further extend the graded bracket to include the odd inner product operators $`b_a`$. Then, since $`\{x_a,F\}=L_a(F)`$ we can rewrite the exterior derivative acting on forms in BRST form

$$d\chi =\{Q,\chi \},$$

where the BRST function is given by

$$Q=c^ax_a\frac{1}{2}f_{ab}^cc^ac^bb_c.$$

Note that $`\{Q,Q\}=0`$ , and this guarantees the nilpotency of the exterior derivative.

## 4 Poisson Chern-Simons on Compact Lie Groups

Having defined the Poisson bracket (9) and its graded extension, we can now try to find a Poisson Chern-Simons action invariant under the Poisson gauge transformation (6). We will do so first for $`G=SU(2)`$ and then generalize it to an arbitrary group.

### 4.1 The $`SU(2)`$ Case

Experience with noncommutative gauge theories has taught us that their actions look similar to nonabelian gauge theories with $``$-commutators instead of nonabelian commutators. Since these would become Poisson brackets in the limit that we are considering, it is not difficult to guess the form of the Poisson Chern-Simons action

$$𝒮_{PCS}=\frac{k}{4\pi }A\{Q,A\}+\frac{1}{3}A\{A,A\}.$$
(11)
The integral in (11) is just the integral of a $`3`$-form on the $`SU(2)`$ group manifold. It has two important properties. If $`\chi ^p`$ denotes a $`p`$-form the integral satisfies

$`{\displaystyle \{Q,\chi ^2\}}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (12)
$`{\displaystyle \{\chi ^1,\chi ^2\}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \{\chi ^2,\chi ^1\}}=0.`$ (13)
Since $`\{Q,\chi ^2\}=\mathrm{d}\chi ^2`$ the relation (12) reflects the fact that $`SU(2)`$ is a manifold without boundary. I will now sketch how to prove (13). First, by writing the forms in components, one can show that (13) is a consequence of the following relation

$$dg\{F,G\}=0,$$
(14)
where $`F`$ and $`G`$ are arbitrary left $`H_\lambda `$-invariant functions in the group. We have

$`{\displaystyle dg\{F,G\}}={\displaystyle dg\{F,x_a\}_aG}`$ $`=`$
$`{\displaystyle dg[\{F_aG,x_a\}F\{_aG,x_a\}]}`$ $`=`$
$`{\displaystyle dg[L_a(F_aG)+F_a_bG\{x_a,x_b\}]}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
The last equality follows from the invariance of the Haar measure $`dgL_a(F)=0`$ and the antisymmetry of the Poisson bracket. Note that (14) is true for any compact Lie group not just for $`SU(2)`$ . Using (12) and (13) it is not difficult to prove the gauge invariance of the action (the Poisson Chern-Simons form $`\omega _{PCS}=A\{Q,A\}+\frac{1}{3}A\{A,A\}`$ is not invariant under this gauge transformation, only the action is).

The equations of motion derived from (11) can be written compactly

$$\{Q+A,Q+A\}=0.$$
(15)
Note also that the gauge transformation (6) can be written as

$$\delta A=\{Q+A,ϵ\}.$$
(16)
To obtain the spectrum, it is enough to consider the linearized equations of motion (15) and gauge transformations (16), which take the form

$$\{Q,A\}=0,\delta A=\{Q,ϵ\}.$$
(17)
To this order, the solutions of the equations of motion modulo gauge transformations coincide with the cohomology of $`Q`$ .

In components the Poisson Chern-Simons action takes the form

$$𝒮_{PCS}=\frac{k}{4\pi }dgϵ^{abc}(A_a\{x_b,A_c\}\frac{1}{2}A_af_{bc}^dA_d+\frac{1}{3}A_a\{A_b,A_c\}),$$
(18)
while the infinitesimal Poisson gauge transformation is given by

$$\delta A_a=L_a(ϵ)+\{A_a,ϵ\}=\{x_a+A_a,ϵ\}.$$
(19)
The equations of motion, written in components, have the form $`F_{ab}=0`$ , with the field strength $`F_{ab}`$ given by

$$F_{ab}=L_a(A_b)L_b(A_a)+\{A_a,A_b\}f_{ab}^cA_c=\{x_a+A_a,x_b+A_b\}f_{ab}^c(x_c+A_c).$$
(20)
We have normalized the Poisson Chern-Simons action in a similar way as a standard Chern-Simons action. However the level $`k`$ does not seem to be quantizedcccThis is in contract to Chern-Simons on the noncommutative plane where the level is quantized .. In the noncommutative Chern-Simons theory  one can explicitly check the invariance of the action under global gauge transformations. It should also be possible to do this directly in the Poisson Chern-Simons case, but we will not do this here. Even if we generalize the theory in the obvious way to a $`U(n)`$ Poisson Chern-Simons the level is not quantized. However, note that the lack of quantization of the level is not so surprising. Indeed, if one scales out the Poisson bracket, the action reduces to a standard $`U(n)`$ Chern-Simons but we still have the invariance under $`H_\lambda =U(1)`$. Thus instead of $`\pi _3(U(n))`$ , gauge transformations are classified by $`\pi _2(U(n))`$ which is trivial.

### 4.2 Arbitrary Compact Lie Groups Case

It was noticed in  that the noncommutative Chern-Simons gauge theory can be generalized to an arbitrary compact group $`G`$. In our case we can arrive at a similar result as follows. In equation (18) we can substitute the structure constants of $`G`$ , (with appropriately placed indices,) for the $`ϵ`$-tensor

$$𝒮_{PCS}dgf^{abc}(A_aL_b(A_c)\frac{1}{2}A_af_{bc}^dA_d+\frac{1}{3}A_a\{A_b,A_c\}).$$
(21)
One can check that this action is also invariant under the Poisson gauge transformation (19).

We can write the action (21) in a more geometric way as follows. On any group manifold we can define the left invariant $`3`$–form

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{tr}[(g^1\mathrm{d}g)^3].$$

Then the action can be written

$$𝒮_{PCS}\mathrm{\Omega }\omega _{PCS}=dg<\mathrm{\Omega },\omega _{PCS}>,$$
(22)
where $``$ denotes the Hodge dual and $`<,>`$ denotes the inner product of $`3`$-forms.

However, it is clear that in the action (18) the $`ϵ`$-tensor comes from the volume of integration and it is an accident (in the three dimensional case) that it coincides with the structure constants of the group $`SU(2)`$. Thus one wonders if substituting the structure constants for the $`ϵ`$-tensor does not have some undesirable consequences. Indeed, while it is true that the action (21) is gauge invariant, the equations of motion derived from it read

$$f^{abc}F_{bc}=0,$$
(23)
and these only imply the vanishing of the field strength if the rank of the group is three. Thus for arbitrary $`G`$ we do not have $`\{Q+A,Q+A\}=0`$ . Similarly, in the noncommutative Chern-Simons case the equation $`(Q+A)^2=0`$ claimed in  is only valid for $`G=SU(2)`$ . In Witten’s string field theory  it is implicitly assumed that the “integral” is nondegenerate, such that the equations of motion are exactly the vanishing of the field strength. Therefore we can only interpret the three dimensional case as a toy model for Witten’s string field theory. It is however an interesting problem to find nontrivial solutions of nonvanishing field strength of the equations (23).

It is also possible to define a Poisson Yang-Mills gauge theory on a group manifold

$$𝒮_{PYM}=dg\frac{1}{4}F_{ab}F^{ab},$$

where now the field strength is given by (20). Note that the Lagrangian is only covariant under Poisson gauge transformations and just as in noncommutative gauge theories one has to integrate to obtain a gauge invariant action.

We conclude by noting that Poisson gauge theories are interesting because they retain some of the properties of noncommutative gauge theories. For example there are no local Poisson gauge invariant quantities. It would be desirable to develop a better understanding of the observables of these theories. Note also that in a manner similar to the “regularization” of the membrane action discussed in , we can quantize the Poisson bracket on the coadjoint orbits , (see also  for a more recent treatment in the spirit of this paper,) and obtain the noncommutative Chern-Simons action. The quantization leads to unitary representations only if $`\lambda `$ is a weight. In this case we obtain the noncommutative Chern-Simons theory corresponding to the irreducible representation whose highest weight is $`\lambda `$ . It would be interesting to find the Poisson Chern-Simons theory corresponding to the reducible representations discussed in .

###### Acknowledgments.

I would like to thank Klaus Bering and Alexios Polychronakos for useful discussions. This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract Number DE-FG02-91ER40651-TASK B.


text:
# Effect of quantum entanglement on Aharonov-Bohm oscillations, spin-polarized transport and current magnification effect

## I Introduction

In recent times there is a great deal of interest in mesoscopic systems, sparked by the advancement of technology. Experimental investigations on these systems have provided several surprising quantum behavior in total contrast to that anticipated from the classical theory of metals. One of the prominent mesoscopic effects is that of Aharonov-Bohm(AB) oscillations in the transport property of normal metal rings enclosing magnetic flux. Here AB oscillations are revealed  in the resistance of a small metal ring as a function of the magnetic field with a period equal to $`\varphi _0=hc/e`$, the fundamental flux quanta. The oscillations in the resistance arise from the interference of electronic waves traversing the two alternative arms of the ring. The changing magnetic flux alters the relative phase difference between the probability amplitudes associated with different paths(upper and lower arms of the loop). The amount of flux $`\varphi _0`$ is required to enforce a $`2\pi `$ relative phase shift between two alternative paths, This leads to the constructive and destructive interference in the transmission of an electron across the conductor as one tunes the magnetic flux. At high temperatures the inelastic scattering length is much larger than the sample dimensions and as a result the transport is completely phase coherent, i.e., it is dominated by quantum interference effects. At very low temperatures the inelastic scattering length is much smaller than the sample dimensions which leads to classical behavior(loss of interference). This process is referred to as dephasing or decoherence as a result of the randomizing of the interfering particle’s phase. The decoherence mechanism signals the limits beyond which the system dynamics approaches the classical behavior and arises due to the coupling of a particle to its environment. This subject of intrinsic decoherence and dephasing is being pursued actively in the area of mesoscopic physics

In a double slit setup, interference results from the lack of knowledge of (or indistinguishability of) the electron path. Thus a measurement of which path the electron has taken, wipes out the interference pattern. It is known that in a ring interferometer the electron affects the environment and changes its state differently in the two arms of the ring thereby affecting the interference. This amounts to a measurement of the path of the interfering particle by the environment resulting in loss of interference. Such interferometers are thus also termed as “which-path” detectors. In an alternate picture, the environment affects the electron phase differently in the two arms, thus randomizing their relative phase difference leading to dephasing. The two views were shown to be equivalent. It is well known that the electron-environment entanglement can also lead to decoherence. However, unlike other approaches, entanglement leads to decoherence even in absence of any energy transfer . Experiments have been carried out which are aimed at measuring these coherence properties and it has been observed for instance, by placing a micro-detector near one arm of the AB interferometer causes decoherence. Thus motivated, we consider a simple model of dephasing in an Aharonov-Bohm ring with a spin-half impurity (spin-flipper) in one arm. This example also serves to illustrate the effect of multiple reflections on ”which-path” detection.

By introducing a magnetic impurity atom (to be referred to as the spin-flipper, or the flipper, for short) in one arm of the ring, one can couple the spin of the electron ($`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$) to the spin of the flipper ($`\stackrel{}{S}`$) via the exchange interaction . This leads to scattering of the electron in which the spin state of the electron and the impurity is changed without any exchange of energy. Additionally, this scattering leads to the entanglement-induced reduction of interference pattern . Let the electron be incident from the left reservoir with its spin pointing “up” (see Fig. 1). The spin of the electron passing through the upper arm may or may not be flipped by the flipper. In the case that the spin is unflipped, one would expect the usual AB-oscillations of the transmission due to interference of the partial waves passing through the upper and the lower branches of the ring. However, in the case that the spin is flipped, one would think, guided by naive intuition, that a path detection has taken place and hence one would be led to conclude that the interference pattern for the spin-down component would be wiped out. This is true provided we consider only two forward propagating partial waves. However, there are infinitely many partial waves in this geometry which are to be superposed to get the total transmission. These arise due to the multiple reflections from the junctions and the impurity site. Consider, for example, an incident spin-up particle moving in the upper arm which is flipped at the impurity site and gets reflected to finally traverse the lower arm before being transmitted. Naturally, this partial wave will interfere with the spin-flipped component transmitted along the upper arm. This results in non-zero transmission for the spin-flipped electron. Thus on taking into account the multiple reflections (more than just two partial waves) the presence of magnetic impurity does not lead to ”which-path” information. However, we show that the presence of magnetic impurity does lead to the reduction of AB-oscillations.

Within the same model we also study spin-polarized transport. We have discussed the symmetry properties of reflection and transmission coefficients of different spin channels in the presence of magnetic flux. In particular the spin-conductance which is related to the spin polarised transmission coefficient is shown to be asymmetric in flux reversal. We also study the current magnification effect. In the case of a mesoscopic loop with unequal arms connected to two electron reservoirs at chemical potentials $`\mu _1`$ and $`\mu _2`$ via ideal leads, currents $`I_1`$ and $`I_2`$ flow in the lower and upper arm respectively of the loop such that total current $`I=I_1+I_2`$ is conserved in accordance with Kirchoff’s law. In general these two currents differ in magnitude and are individually smaller than the total current $`I`$. However, in certain range of Fermi energies the current $`I_1`$ or $`I_2`$ may become larger than the total current $`I`$. The property that current in one of the arms is larger than the transport current is referred to as current magnification effect. To conserve the total current at the junctions, the current in the other arm becomes negative, i.e., flows against the applied external field. In such a situation one can interpret that the negative current flowing in one arm continues to flow as a circulating current in the loop. The magnitude of the negative current in one of the arms flowing against the direction of the applied current is taken to be that of the circulating current. When the negative current flows in the upper arm the circulating current direction is taken to be anticlockwise (or negative) and when it flows in the lower arm the circulating current direction is taken to be clockwise (or positive). The circulating current here arises in the absence of magnetic field. Like AB effect, this effect too is purely quantum mechanical in origin. Even though quantum entanglement dephases AB oscillations, we find however, that in contradiction to the naive expectation of a reduction of current magnification, it leads to enhancement as well as suppression of the effect. This fact points out the limitations of a model based on the interaction induced entanglement of quantum states to the general understanding of dephasing in quantum systems.

## II Theoretical Treatment

We study the problem using the quantum waveguide theory approach  and the spin degree of freedom of the electron is dealt with in line with Ref. . We consider an impurity consisting of a flipper capable of existing in M different discrete internal spin states and located at a particular position on the upper arm of the ring (see Fig. 1). The spin $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$ of the electron couples to the flipper spin $`\stackrel{}{S}`$ via an exchange interaction $`J\stackrel{}{\sigma }\stackrel{}{S}\delta (xl_3)`$. The magnetic flux threading the ring is denoted by $`\varphi `$ and is related to the vector potential $`A=\varphi /L`$, $`L`$ being the ring circumference . During passage of the electron through the ring, the total spin angular momentum and its $`z`$-component remain conserved. We consider the incident electron to be spin-polarized in the up-direction.

Let $`l_2`$ be the length of the lower arm of the ring and the impurity atom be placed at a distance $`l_3`$ from the junction J1, $`l_4`$ being the remaining segment length of the upper arm. The various segments of the ring and its leads are labeled as shown in Fig. 1 and the wave functions in these segments carry the corresponding subscripts. The wave functions in the five segments for a left-incident spin-up electron can be written as follows:

$`\psi _1`$ $`=`$ $`(e^{ikx}+r_ue^{ikx})\chi _m\alpha +r_de^{ikx}\chi _{m+1}\beta ,`$ (1)
$`\psi _2`$ $`=`$ $`(A_ue^{ik_1x}+B_ue^{ik_2x})\chi _m\alpha +(A_de^{ik_1x}+B_de^{ik_2x})\chi _{m+1}\beta ,`$ (2)
$`\psi _3`$ $`=`$ $`(C_ue^{ik_1x}+D_ue^{ik_2x})\chi _m\alpha +(C_de^{ik_1x}+D_de^{ik_2x})\chi _{m+1}\beta ,`$ (3)
$`\psi _4`$ $`=`$ $`(E_ue^{ik_1x}+F_ue^{ik_2x})\chi _m\alpha +(E_de^{ik_1x}+F_de^{ik_2x})\chi _{m+1}\beta ,`$ (4)
$`\psi _5`$ $`=`$ $`t_ue^{ikx}\chi _m\alpha +t_de^{ikx}\chi _{m+1}\beta .`$ (5)
where $`k_1=k+(e\varphi /\mathrm{}cL)`$, $`k_2=k(e\varphi /\mathrm{}cL)`$, $`k`$ is the wave-vector of incident electron. The wavefunction in Eqn.(1) is a correlated function (entangled state) of the electron and the impurity spin which takes into account that the exchange interaction conserves the $`z`$-component of the total spin. The subscripts $`u`$ and $`d`$ represent “up” and “down” spin states of the electron with the corresponding spinors $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ respectively (i.e., $`\sigma _z\alpha =\frac{1}{2}\alpha `$, $`\sigma _z\beta =\frac{1}{2}\beta `$) and $`\chi _m`$ denotes the wave function of the impurity  with $`S_z=m`$ (i.e., $`S_z\chi _m=m\chi _m`$). The reflected (transmitted) waves have amplitudes $`r_u`$ ($`t_u`$) and $`r_d`$ ($`t_d`$) corresponding to the “up” and “down” spin components respectively.

Equations (1) along with the boundary conditions(continuity and the current conservation at junctions J1 and J2) were solved to obtain the amplitudes $`t_u`$, $`t_d`$, $`r_u`$ and $`r_d`$. Since the analytic expressions are very lengthy, We confine ourselves to graphical interpretation of the results. We have taken the flipper to be a spin-half object ($`M=2`$) situated in the upper arm. Now, depending upon the initial state of the flipper we have possibility of either spin-flip scattering ($`\sigma _z=1/2,S_z=1/2`$) or no spin-flip scattering ($`\sigma _z=1/2,S_z=1/2`$), as demanded by the conservation of the total spin and its $`z`$-component. In the case of no-spin-flip scattering ($`\sigma _z=1/2,S_z=1/2`$) the problem at hand reduces to that of simple potential scattering from the impurity. We have set $`\mathrm{}=2m=1`$ and throughout the value of interaction strength $`G(=2mJ/\mathrm{}^2)`$ is given in dimensionless units. The parameters used for the analysis are mentioned in the figure captions.

## III Results and discussion

To begin with we first state the observed symmetry properties of the transport coefficients in spin-flip scattering case where the electron spin is opposite to the flipper spin. It is worth noting that due to the presence of spin degree of freedom the problem in hand although one-dimensional becomes a multi-channel problem. The spin-up reflection coefficient $`R_u=|r_u|^2`$, spin-down reflection coefficient $`R_d=|r_d|^2`$ and total reflection coefficient $`R=R_u+R_d`$ as a function of the magnetic flux exhibit the AB-oscillations with flux periodicity of $`2\pi \varphi _0`$. All three reflection coefficients are symmetric in the flux reversal as expected on general grounds.

The spin-up transmission coefficient $`T_u=|t_u|^2`$ , spin-down transmission coefficient $`T_d=|t_d|^2`$ which exhibit AB oscillations are asymmetric under flux reversal. The total transmission coefficient $`T=T_u+T_d`$(related to the two-terminal electrical conductance), however, is symmetric in flux reversal. The transmission coefficient at flux $`\varphi `$ for the case when the incident particle is spin-up and the impurity is spin-down is equal to the transmission coefficient for the case when incident particle is spin-down and impurity is spin-up but the flux direction is reversed. For the spin-polarized transport the total polarization $`T_uT_d`$ is related to the spin-conductance . The above symmetry properties imply that the spin-conductance is asymmetric under the flux reversal. This can be easily noted from Fig. 2. In the figure we have plotted the variation of spin polarization $`\chi =(T_uT_d)/T`$ as a function of the magnetic flux $`\varphi `$. This spin-polarization can be experimentally measured by using the well known spin-valve (magnetic valve or filter) effect . It should be noted that at zero temperature the total electrical and spin conductances are to be calculated by summing up with equal weight-age the total transmission coefficients for all the four cases, i.e., $`\sigma _z=\pm 1/2`$ and $`S_z=\pm 1/2`$.

As discussed in the introduction, due to multiple reflections the presence of a spin-flipper in one arm does not lead to ”which-path” information. This would have implied the complete blocking of spin-down transmission. In contrast we clearly observe the AB-oscillations for the case of $`T_d`$ originating from multiple reflections. We now address the question of partial loss of interference due to the spin-flipper. In Fig. 3 we have plotted the total transmission coefficient $`T=T_u+T_d`$ for the spin-flip scattering (SFS) case , and $`T=T_u`$ ($`T_d=0`$) for the no spin-flip scattering (NSFS) case for different parameters as indicated in the figures 3(a-d). As expected $`T`$ exhibits AB oscillations which are periodic in flux with a period $`2\pi \varphi _0`$ and they are symmetric under flux reversal. It is interesting to note, however, that the interference fringe visibility (or the magnitude of amplitude of AB oscillations) for the SFS case is always smaller than that for the case of NSFS. This clearly indicates partial decoherence.

To quantify the decoherence, we calculate the amplitude of AB oscillations by taking the difference between the maximum and the minimum of total transmission coefficient as a function of flux $`\varphi `$ over one period of the oscillation. A plot of the variation of the amplitude of oscillation of total transmission $`T`$ with the interaction strength $`G`$ for the two cases, no spin-flip scattering (NSFS: $`S=1/2m=1/2`$) and spin-flip scattering (SFS: $`S=1/2m=1/2`$), is shown in the figure Fig. 4. The signature of loss of interference is that the amplitude of AB oscillation of transmission coefficient for the spin-flip case is always smaller than that for the no spin-flip case for all non-zero values of coupling strength $`G`$. In other words the reduction of amplitude of AB oscillations is stronger for the spin-flip scattering case. We have verified the above observation for other parameters in the problem. Thus the presence of spin-flipper reduces the AB-oscillations. This substantiates our claim of decoherence due to entanglement.

Now We will turn our attention to current magnification and associated effect of circulating currents as defined in earlier works. Fig. 5 shows the plot of circulating current density ($`I_c`$) versus $`kL`$ for the two separate cases of spin-flip scattering and no-spin-flip scattering. When the impurity spin is “up” the interaction does not allow spin-flip for a spin-up incident electron and the impurity acts as a static potential scatterer. On the other hand when the impurity spin is “down” a spin-flip scattering takes place. We compare the circulating current densities for these two cases in order to see the role of entanglement induced by the spin-flipper. The solid curve is for the no-flip case while the dashed one is for the spin-flip case. The impurity strength ($`G`$) for both the cases is $`4.0`$. In both the cases we take $`l_2/L=0.6`$ and $`l_3/L=l_4/L=0.2`$. The figure shows that , the circulating current for spin-flip case is significantly less than that of the no-flip case in the range $`12<kL<16`$. Thus one is led to believe that the flipper acting as a dephasor suppresses the quantum phenomena of current magnification.

However, this naive expectation turns out to be incorrect. This is substantiated in Fig. 6 which shows circulating current densities for the spin-flip and no-flip cases in the range $`16<kL<19`$ for the same lengths as mentioned above. From this figure we see that in this range of Fermi energies the amplitude of the circulating current is actually enhanced in spite of the spin-flip scattering.

Thus the flipper can not only suppress the current magnification effect but can also enhance it in some other range of Fermi energies. Thus far we have discussed how the flipper affects current magnification effect. The flipper also induces some new features. In Fig. 7 we have plotted circulating current density ($`I_c`$) versus $`kL`$ for $`l_3/L=l_4/L=0.25`$ and $`l_2/L=0.5`$ in the range $`5.6<kL<6.6`$ shows an additional peak in the circulating current density arising at a point corresponding to a minimum of spin-up transmission (which is same as the maximum of the spin-down transmission). This is indicative of the spin-flip process. This effect is unique for the flipper having no counterpart in case of a simple impurity, i.e., in this region ($`5.6<kL<6.2`$) no-flip scattering case does not show any circulating current. This can be ascribed to the additional phase shifts caused by spin-flip scattering along-with multiple reflections. In the range $`6.2<kL<6.6`$ spin-flip scattering suppresses the current magnification.

Further, we see another interesting feature, namely the phenomenon of current reversal. This is depicted in Fig.8. In this figure we plot the circulating current density ($`I_c`$) versus $`kL`$ for $`l_3/L=l_4/L=0.3125`$ and $`l_2/L=0.375`$ in the wave vector range $`10<kL<15`$ in which we see that the spin-flip circulating current reverses its direction as compared to the no-flip case, i.e., an anti-clockwise circulating current for the no-flip case is converted into a clockwise one in the spin-flip case.

In conclusion we have shown that presence of the spin-flipper which reduces the AB oscillations(partial decoherence), need not reduce the amplitude of current magnification. In fact, in certain range of Fermi energies the flipper enhances the current magnification. We believe that the suppression of some quantum features and non-suppression of some other quantum effects is a characteristic feature of entanglement, environment consisting of finite degrees of freedom and the absence of inelastic scattering. We expect the same to happen in other models based only on the notion of entanglement. Only the presence of inelastic scattering(or coupling of a system to an environment with infinite degrees of freedom), leading to irreversible loss of phase memory, can dephase AB oscillations and reduce current magnification simultaneously. Our analysis on the same model shows that two probe spin-conductance is asymmetric in flux reversal as opposed to the two probe electrical conductance which is symmetric. Further case of a spin-flipper with higher number of internal states and that of flippers in both arms of the ring are under investigation. We hope that our results will stimulate further interest and understanding of dephasing and decoherence arising from different models based on quantum entanglement.

## IV Acknowledgements

The author thanks Sandeep K. Joshi, Dr. D. Sahoo and Colin Benjamin for several useful discussions on this subject.


text:
# The photoproduction of vector mesons

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Since a photon has the same quantum numbers as vector mesons, a beam of high energy photons is a beam of quark-antiquark pairs. Their flavor is selected by the kind of vector meson which is detected: light quarks for $`\rho `$ or $`\omega `$, strange quarks for $`\varphi `$ and charmed quarks for $`J/\psi `$ mesons. The life time of the fluctuation $`2\nu /(Q^2+M_V^2)`$ is given by the uncertainty principle and increases with the beam energy $`\nu `$: for instance, a 5 GeV beam of real photons fluctuates into a beam of $`\rho `$ mesons over 4 fm. Therefore, the interaction with matter of a beam of energetic photons is similar to the interaction of hadrons.

This is illustrated in Fig. 1, which shows the variation, against the available c.m. energy $`W=\sqrt{s}`$, of the cross section of the photoproduction of vector mesons , from threshold up to the HERA energy range. The rise with energy is due to the Pomeron exchange ($`s^{0.16}`$), while the exchange of the $`f_2`$ Regge trajectory ($`s^1`$) is necessary to reproduce the trend of the cross section in the intermediate energy range of SLAC and FNAL. At low energy, the exchange of the Regge trajectories of the $`\sigma `$ and $`\pi `$ mesons account for the $`s^2`$ fall off of the cross section in the $`\rho `$ and $`\omega `$ channels respectively. More details on the model are given in Ref. . Note that, due to the dominant $`s\overline{s}`$ nature of the $`\varphi `$ meson, this channel is dominated by the exchange of the Pomeron.

Such a picture fails to reproduce the energy variation of the cross section of $`J/\psi `$ meson photoproduction. The reason is that the large mass of the charmed quark sets the hard scale and prevents the exchanged gluons to reinteract and form a Pomeron. Indeed, models based on the exchange of two gluons  are able to relate the rapid rise of the cross section with energy to the evolution of the gluon distribution in the proton. This finding was generalized to the description of exclusive vector meson electroproduction, at high virtuality $`Q^2`$, in terms of Generalized Parton Distributions wich are discussed elsewhere  in these proceedings.

In this talk, I will explore another direction: I will increase the mometum transfer $`t=(k_\gamma k_V)^2`$ to resolve the Pomeron and Reggeons, which are exchanged in exclusive photoproduction of vector mesons, into their simplest gluon or quark content.

## 2 $`\varphi `$ MESON PHOTOPRODUCTION

$`\varphi `$ meson photoproduction allows to prepare a $`s\overline{s}`$ pair of strange quarks and study its interaction with hadronic matter. At low momentum transfer $`t`$ (small angle), its diffractive scattering is mediated by the exchange of the Pomeron. At high momentum transfer (large angle), the impact parameter is small and comparable to the gluon correlation length (the distance over which a gluon propagates before hadronizing): the Pomeron is resolved into its simplest component, two gluons which may couple to each of the quarks in the emitted vector meson or in the proton target. This is illustrated in Fig. 2, which shows data recently recorded at DESY  and JLab . At low $`t`$, the data confirm the shrinkage of the forward diffraction peak and the slow rise of the cross section with the energy, as expected from the exchange of the Pomeron Regge trajectory. The two gluon exchange contribution matches the Pomeron exchange contribution around $`t1`$GeV2 and reproduces the data at higher $`t`$. In the JLab energy range, $`u`$-channel nucleon exchange “pollutes” the highest $`t`$ bin: here the $`\varphi NN`$ coupling constant $`g_{\varphi NN}=3`$ is the same as in the analysis of the nucleon electromagnetic form factors . More details may be found in ref. .

Such a finding is important as it tells us that, in the intermediate range of momentum transfer (let’s say $`1t10`$ GeV 2), large angle exclusive meson production can be understood in a perturbative way at the level of effective parton degrees of freedom: dressed quark and gluon propagators, constituent quark wave functions of the nucleon and of the meson, etc…. At low momentum transfer (up to $`t2`$ GeV2), the cross section is driven by their integral properties: any nucleon wave function which reproduces the nucleon form factor leads to the same result; any gluon dressed propagator which reproduces the gluon correlation length ($`0.2`$ fm) leads to the same result. At higher momentum transfer, the cross section becomes more sensitive to the details of the wave function (giving access the quark correlations) and the shape of the gluon propagator. I refer to the contribution of F. Cano  for a more detailed account. Suffice to say that the large momentum cross section is reduced when either a more realistic wave function (than used in ref. ), or a gluon propagator with a running mass (instead of a gaussian gluon propagator as in ref. ), is used.

At JLab, the experiment has been repeated at higher energy (around Eγ = 4.5 GeV). The $`u`$-channel backward peak is moved at higher values of $`t`$, leaving more room to reveal and check the two gluon exchange contribution. The preliminary results (not shown) confirm these predictions. Such studies provide us with a bridge with Lattice QCD calculations. The mass of the gluon, $`m_g(0)400`$ Mev at vanishing virtuality, is close to the prediction of those calculations. In the near future they may also provide us with an estimate of quark correlations in the wave functions of hadrons.

## 3 $`\rho `$ AND $`\omega `$ MESON PHOTOPRODUCTION

In contrast to the $`\varphi `$ meson sector, quark interchanges are not forbidden in the $`\rho `$ and $`\omega `$ meson photoproduction sector. Fig. 3 shows the latest data  obtained at JLab. At low $`t`$ the good agreement with the data is obtained adding, on top of the two gluon exchange amplitude, the exchange of the $`f_2`$ and $`\sigma `$ Regge trajectories, while the rise at high $`t`$ comes from the $`u`$-channel exchange of the $`N`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ Regge trajectories (see ref. ). At intermediate $`t`$, the two gluon exchange contribution misses the data by a factor three. The agreement is restored when a saturating trajectory ($`\alpha (t)=1`$ when $`t>3`$ GeV2) is used instead of a linear trajectory, for mesons. It leads to the asymptotic quark counting rules, which model-independently determine the energy dependency of the cross section at large -t. In a model where the mesons are built from a potential, the linear confining potential leads to the linear long range part of the trajectory, which corresponds to the spectrum of the excited states of the meson, and the one gluon exchange short range potential leads to the saturating part of the trajectory . In that sense, the exchange of the linear part of the trajectory can be viewed as the exchange of two quarks strongly interacting in a non pertubative way, while the exchange of the saturating part can be viewed as the exchange of two quarks interacting by the exchange of a single perturbative hard gluon. Saturating trajectories provides us with an economic and effective way to incorporate hard scattering mechanisms .

Such a model reproduces also the sparse data in the $`\omega `$ production channel (Fig. 4). In this channel pion exchange dominates the cross section in the JLab energy range (see Fig. 1), and the pion saturating trajetory is the same as the one which reproduces the cross section of the $`\gamma p\pi ^+n`$ reaction around $`90^{}`$ . The effect is more dramatic than in the $`\rho `$ channel, and I am eagerly waiting for the final analysis of the recent JLab data.

Note that the dip at hight $`t`$ is due to the zero in the nucleon non degenerated Regge trajectory : this is the only trajectory which can be exchanged, contrary to the $`\rho `$ channel.

Such a model leads also to the $`s^7`$ asymptotic behavior of the $`\theta =90^{}`$ cross section of the $`p(\gamma ,\rho )p`$ reaction depicted in Fig. 5. The two gluon exchange is too low, and the use of a massive gluon propagator ($`m_g(0)=400`$ MeV), instead of a gaussian one, decreases further its contribution at large $`t`$. The bulk of the cross section comes from the exchange of the $`\sigma `$ Regge saturated trajectory.

## 4 COMPTON SCATTERING

At high energy, the real photon emitted in Compton scattering has enough time to fluctuate into a vector meson. Therefore, the Compton scattering cross section can be obtained by mutiplying the $`\rho `$ meson photoproduction cross section, which dominate over the $`\omega `$ and $`\varphi `$ ones, by $`4\pi \alpha _{em}/f_V^2`$ (where $`f_V`$ is the radiative decay constant of the vector meson).

This leads to a good accounting of the sparse existing data: Fig. 6 shows the excitation function at $`\theta =90^{}`$, while Fig. 7 shows the angular distribution at $`E_\gamma =4`$ GeV. A more comprehensive set of data will soon come from JLab.

## 5 CHARM PHOTOPRODUCTION

The threshold regime of charmonium production can provide a new window into multi-quark, gluonic, and hidden color correlations in hadronic wave functions. In contrast to charm production at high energy, charm production near threshold requires all of the target’s constituents to act coherently in the heavy quark production: only compact Fock states with radius of the order of the Compton wavelength of the charm quark can contribute to charm production at threshold. Under these circumstances, one can relate  the energy dependency of the cross section to the behavior of its different gluonic components near $`x=1`$: $`(1x)^2`$ for two gluon exchange, $`(1x)^0`$ for three gluon exchange.

Fig. 8 shows that such an expectation is consistent with the sparse existing data and calls for a comprehensive dedicated measurement when the energy upgrade of JLab becomes a reality.

## 6 CONCLUSIONS

A consistent picture is emerging from the study of exclusive photoproduction of vector meson and Compton scattering.

At low momentum transfer, it relies on diffractive scattering of the hadronic contents of the photon, in a wide energy range from threshold up to the HERA energy domain.

At high momentum transfer, it relies on a partonic description of hard scattering mechanisms which provides us with a bridge with Lattice Gauge calculations. The dressed gluon and quark propagators have already been estimated on lattice. One may expect that correlated constituent quark wave functions (at least their first moments) will soon be available from lattice.

To day, JLab is the only laboratory which allows to explore this regime, thanks to its high luminosity. Its current operation, at 4–6 GeV, has already revealed a few jewels. Its energy uprade to 12 GeV will permit a more comprehensive study of this field. Among other topics, this will allow to study the onset of asymptotic freedom, to determine the correlations between quarks and to single out the van der Walls part of the force between hadrons.


text:
# Spectral Consequences of Deviation from Spherical Composition Symmetry in Type Ia Supernovae

## 1 Introduction

Three-dimensional calculations of white dwarf deflagrations suggest significant deviation from spherical composition symmetry in the resulting Type Ia supernova (SN) envelopes (Khokhlov, 2000; Hillebrandt et al., 2000). Yet the well-documented spectral homogeneity of normal events tightly constrains the model output spectra. This inspires us to consider a very general question relevant to three-dimensional calculations of white dwarf explosions: How much and what kinds of deviation from spherical composition symmetry might still produce morphologically plausible and homogeneous spectra from all lines of sight?

The present Letter addresses this question using some simple arguments. In §2, using a modified version of the direct analysis code SYNOW, we generate some sample spectra to demonstrate artifacts caused by deviation from spherical composition symmetry. Motivated by these results, we pursue in §3 a possible means of constraining deviation from spherical composition symmetry by considering the formation of a single unblended line in an envelope with a simple composition perturbation. The small scatter in the depths of Si II absorption features in normal Type Ia spectra near maximum light may indicate that any composition perturbations present exist only on small scales.

## 2 Clumpy SN Spectra

The fast, parameterized, SN spectrum synthesis code SYNOW has been used for “direct” analysis Fisher et al. (1997) of several SNe of varying types \[e.g., Type Ia SN 1994D Hatano et al. (1999), Type Ib SN 1999dn Deng et al. (2000), Type Ic SN 1994I Millard et al. (1999), Type II SN 1999em Baron et al. (2000)\]. The goal of direct analysis is to establish line identifications and intervals of ejection velocity within which the presence of lines of various ions is detected, without adopting any particular hydrodynamical model. Composition and velocity constraints obtained from SYNOW then can provide guidance to those who compute hydrodynamical explosion models and to those who carry out computationally intensive NLTE spectrum modeling. A complete description of the workings of SYNOW can be found in Fisher (2000). Here we present only the background necessary to understand the modifications made to allow SYNOW to produce spectra from model envelopes without spherical composition symmetry.

### 2.1 SYNOW and ClumpySYN

In its simplest form, SYNOW uses spherical composition symmetry and the assumption of resonance scattering for line formation. Line formation takes place in an envelope surrounding a sharp photosphere, a source of continuum radiation. SYNOW treats line formation in the Sobolev approximation, which is a good one for analysis purposes. The profile of a line is determined by the adopted radial distribution of the line optical depth and the line source function.

The geometric algorithm that SYNOW uses to calculate the line source function at a given point in the envelope requires some explanation. Consider an atmosphere like that depicted in Figure 1. The shaded region represents the sharp photosphere, and we draw an imaginary boundary at $`v_{max}`$ where the optical depth in all lines we are considering drops to a negligible amount. Our goal is to calculate the source function in some line with wavelength $`\lambda `$ at the point P.

Adopting the simple explosion velocity law $`vr`$ implies that surfaces of constant velocity with respect to the point P in the atmosphere are spheres centered on that point. In an envelope with spherical composition symmetry, points physically relevant for computing the line source function at P are those on such common point velocity spheres which are within $`v_{max}`$ of the explosion center and are not occulted by the photosphere. Two such surfaces are labelled A and B in the figure. The cone C denotes the boundary of an occultation region produced by the photosphere.

Now consider two other lines with wavelengths $`\lambda _A`$ and $`\lambda _B`$ such that $`\lambda =\lambda _A(1+\mathrm{\Delta }v_A/c)=\lambda _B(1+\mathrm{\Delta }v_B/c)`$ where $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_A`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }v_B`$ are the velocity radii of spheres A and B respectively. Photons that redshift with respect to the matter into resonance with the line $`\lambda _B`$ along the surface B scatter isotropically. Some of these are redirected towards P. These photons redshift further until they come into resonance with the line $`\lambda _A`$ at surface A. Here they can be scattered away from P or proceed unhindered to redshift into resonance with the line $`\lambda `$ at P. Similarly, photons emitted from the photosphere that redshift into resonance with the line $`\lambda _A`$ on the sphere A can be scattered towards or away from P. By computing the intensity arriving at P from many surfaces and the photosphere, the source function in the line $`\lambda `$ at P can be built up. Clearly, computing the source function as a function of radius is the most intensive part of a SYNOW calculation as the program considers a long list of lines. Even so, an entire spectrum covering many lines can be produced in minutes.

One special case that occurs when calculating the source function is when no shorter wavelength lines are close enough to $`\lambda `$ in wavelength to be scattered from a corresponding surface within the sphere $`v_{max}`$. In such a case, the line is unblended and the source function consists only of the photospheric intensity times the geometric dilution factor of the photosphere.

When spherical composition symmetry is broken, a particular scheme must be chosen to parameterize the line optical depths on a three-dimensional grid instead of along a radius. We call the code we use in this case “ClumpySYN,” and choose to group together regions in the atmosphere in spherical “clumps.” We can confine species to the clumps by setting the corresponding line optical depths to zero everywhere else. Conversely, we can exclude species from clumps by setting corresponding line optical depths to zero within clumps while assigning nonzero values elsewhere. We still adopt a particular radial profile ($`\tau \mathrm{exp}(v/v_e)`$) to determine the value of the line optical depth at a point if it is allowed to be nonzero there.

Unfortunately, distributing line optical depth in a way that breaks spherical symmetry introduces a new wrinkle. Figure 2 illustrates that when optical depth is distributed in an arbitrary fashion, different regions of the surfaces A and B contribute to the intensity at P in an angular dependent way. The above geometric algorithm for determining the source function everywhere can either be generalized to handle such arbitrary optical depth distributions (instead of a simple function of radius only) or we can ignore line blending. When we compare two spectra generated with the same spherically symmetric composition but with and without line blending (or multiple scattering), we find that the differences between them are minor. Hence, in ClumpySYN we choose to neglect multiple scattering when calculating the source function. Now the source function in each line simply equals the photospheric intensity times the geometric dilution factor of the photosphere.

A new geometric algorithm could be developed to compute the source function including multiple scattering, but since SYNOW makes several assumptions already (i.e., pure presonance scattering source function, a sharp photosphere) such an improvement seems only marginally profitable. This is especially clear in light of the similarity of spherically symmetric synthetic spectra with and without multiple scattering.

### 2.2 Sample ClumpySYN Spectra

An example of a clump configuration is shown in Figure 3. Here, we place an upper velocity boundary at 25000 km s-1. We allow the clumps to overlap and have radii in velocity space between 5000 and 6000 km s-1. The fraction of the volume taken up by clumps in the envelope (between the photosphere at 11000 km s-1 and the upper boundary) in Figure 3 is about 66%. Several such models were generated with different volume filling factors, and model output spectra were computed from several lines of sight with ClumpySYN.

Motivated by Figure 12 of Khokhlov (2000), we partition the clumps into two parts. In the inner part of the clumps, we place Fe II ions. In the outer part, we place intermediate mass ions (Si II, Ca II, S II). Outside the clumps, we place O I. The choice of these particular ions is motivated by a maximum light fit of SN 1994D Hatano et al. (1999).

Figure 4 presents synthetic spectra from models with different envelope filling factors. Each graph displays four spectra, one each of four different lines of sight spaced 90 degrees apart about the equator. We note that higher volume filling factors cover the photosphere more effectively and the spectra are quite similar along all lines of sight. At lower filling factors, perspective-dependent spectral diversity begins to creep in, particularly in absorption features.

## 3 The Threshold Clumping Scale

Previous studies of SN spectra from geometries departing from spherical symmetry are polarization investigations (e.g., Howell et al., 2001; Wang et al., 1997) and some axisymmetric configuration line profiles Jeffrey & Branch (1990). These consider ellipsoidal deformations of the envelope. Here we are concerned with less global perturbations in composition.

To illustrate clearly the effects of composition clumping on spectra, we consider the formation of a single unblended line in an expanding SN envelope. The standard assumptions of SYNOW we also apply here: homologous expansion and resonance scattering. In this simple exercise, we characterize the degree of clumping with two parameters. The first parameter governs the cross sectional area of an individual clump relative to the area of the photodisk (the photosphere’s cross section along a line of sight). The second controls the spatial deployment of the clumps, their sparsity or density. Within clumps, line optical depth is defined relative to its value at the photosphere ($`\tau \tau _{phot}\mathrm{exp}(v/v_e)`$).

With the line source function known everywhere and $`\tau `$ assigned to clumps, computing the line profile is simple. We integrate over each surface of common velocity relative to an observer at infinity to obtain the flux as a function of velocity (or observer frame wavelength). In homologous flow, these surfaces are planes perpendicular to the line of sight.

We define the “photodisk covering factor” for a plane of common velocity as the ratio of the area in clumps intersecting that plane which are contained in the projected photodisk area to the total photodisk area. In a spherically symmetric composition, $`\tau `$ is greatest at the photosphere so the deepest part of the absorption feature corresponds to the common velocity plane tangent to the photosphere (unless the line is very strong). Clearly, decreasing the covering factor in this plane weakens the absorption minimum relative to the “totally covered photodisk” minimum. One could compensate for this weakening by increasing $`\tau _{phot}`$, but there is a limit to how effective this can be; even as $`\tau _{phot}`$ is increased to infinity, the minimum flux will saturate because the uncovered portion of the photodisk shines through. This implies that for a given observed absorption depth fit by some choice of $`\tau _{phot}`$ assuming total photodisk coverage, there is some minimum covering factor determined by $`\tau _{phot}\mathrm{}`$ that could fit the same line.

If the average clump is much smaller in cross section than the photodisk area, the covering factor will tend to be the same value from all lines of sight, inducing only limited perspective-dependent absorption depth diversity. On the other hand, if the average clump has a large cross section comparable to the photodisk area, observers with different lines of sight will measure different line profiles. The covering factor as the line of sight is shifted will vary enormously.

To illustrate these facts, $`\tau `$ is assigned to a three dimensional Cartesian grid using the following “white noise” prescription. The grid is partitioned into regular cubical cells with $`s`$ grid points along each edge. The list of cubical cells is then traversed and at each cell a uniform random deviate is chosen. If the deviate is less than a prescribed value $`f_c`$, $`\tau `$ is assigned to each grid point contained within the cell according to the exponential $`\tau `$ profile, otherwise $`\tau `$ is set to zero at all points in the cell. In the end, for $`N`$ cells, about $`f_cN`$ will be cubical clumps and the remainder will be empty. We choose to compute line profiles for six observers situated at infinity such that the lines of sight are perpendicular to cell faces so the value of $`f_c`$ will roughly equal the fraction of grid points within clumps on each common velocity plane. The cubical shape of the clumps causes the line profiles to be jagged, but other choices will just smooth out the line profiles and not change the general result, since the photodisk covering factor is the important quantity.

In Figures 5a and 5c, line profiles for two values of $`s`$ (8 and 32 grid points respectively) are shown. In each figure, five values of $`f_c`$ are shown, and six different viewpoints of each realization are superimposed. The photodisk radius is 50 grid points and the optical depth at the photosphere is set to 7.5. The optical depth falls off with radius exponentially, with an e-folding length of 15 grid points. In Figure 5a, the ratio of each clump cross section to the photodisk area is small, about 1/120. Hence, for all values of $`f_c`$, the line profiles are quite similar from all lines of sight. However, in Figure 5c, each clump cross section is 1/8 the area of the photodisk for the six observers, so changing perspective radically alters the actual fraction of the photodisk covered. This introduces perspective-dependent line profile diversity.

Figures 5b and 5d are plots of absorption feature depth versus $`f_c`$. For $`s=8`$ (5b), the depths measured by each observer are close together while for $`s=32`$ (5d), the depths are scattered markedly. In both figures, a vertical line indicates the lowest $`f_c`$ value where $`\tau _{phot}`$ could be increased to match a $`f_c=1`$ observation. A collection of spectra which exhibit significant absorption depths consistent across the observed sample indicate that any clumps present must be small and densely deployed, i.e., a consistent, deep line implies that the photodisk is nearly covered by optical depth from all lines of sight.

In normal Type Ia SNe, one possible spectrum feature that might help constrain the actual amount of clumping is the distinctive Si II doublet ($`\lambda \lambda `$ 6347, 6371 Å) near maximum light. We studied a sample of good quality maximum light spectra obtained over the last two decades and found that measured Si II depth does not vary appreciably from event to event. A few examples in the wavelength range of interest are shown in Figure 6. The average value of the absorption depth is about 0.67 relative to the continuum, with a standard deviation of 0.06. If we interpret these observations as instances of the same class of event observed from different lines of sight, the lack of substantial scatter implies that the composition clump scale of Si in normal Type Ia SNe is similar to that used to create line profiles in Figure 5a. Any clumps of Si present must be smaller than the detection threshold for clumping, which we have illustrated to be set by clumps much smaller than 1/10 the area of the photodisk.

## 4 Conclusion

By effecting minor modifications to the direct analysis code SYNOW, we have produced ClumpySYN, a code that can generate spectra from compositions without spherical symmetry. Based on a simple parameterization, we suggest that the important factor for spectra from events lacking a spherical composition is the fraction of the photosphere covered by clumps. If the clumps are large compared to the size of the photosphere, inhomogeneity in unblended line absorption becomes manifest. Below a threshold scale, these clumps only weaken absorption along different lines of sight by the same amount. Absorption strength accounted for by spherically symmetric compositions can be recovered in clumpy models by increasing optical depth, but only to an extent.

In addition, we suggest that the robustness of absorption depth measurements in the Si II feature in normal Type Ia SNe implies that any perturbations in composition away from spherical symmetry are smaller than the threshold scale. From this, one might conclude that if a general characteristic of deflagration models is the formation of large clumps of Si and Fe, then normal Type Ia SNe are not the result of deflagrations. More conservatively, we suggest that explosion models must avoid generating large-scale bubbles or clumps in composition to recover normal Type Ia SN spectral homogeneity.

The authors wish to thank members of the University of Oklahoma Supernova Research Group, David Jeffery and the anonymous referee for comments and suggestions. Partial support for this work was provided by NSF grants AST-9731450 and 9986965, and NASA grant NAG 5-3505.