text:
# Polaron Self-trapping in a Honeycomb Net

## I.Introduction

The transport properties of real systems are strongly affected by the presence of non linear potentials in the lattice . Nonlinearities may arise because of embedded impurities in the host lattice which favor trapping of the charge carriers  in any dimensionality  or, nonlinearities may be intrinsic to the system and driven by the electron-lattice interaction as assumed in the Molecular Crystal Model first proposed by Holstein  in the form of a discrete nonlinear Schrödinger equation for electrons coupled to harmonic phonons. Several theoretical methods have been developed in the last decades  to analyse the ground state and finite temperature properties of the unit comprising the electron plus the surrounding local lattice deformation, namely the polaron. Central to these investigations is the concept of self-trapping traditionally denoting a transition between an infinite radius state at weak electron-phonon coupling and a finite radius polaron at strong e-ph coupling. The narrowing of the polaron band and the abrupt increase of the polaron effective mass versus e-ph coupling are the classical and related indicators of the transition event which may occur or not according to the degree of adiabaticity and the dimensionality of the system. When the characteristic phonon energy $`\overline{\omega }`$ becomes larger than the electronic bandwidth the antiadiabatic regime is attained. In this case it is generally accepted that the polaron wave function spreads over a few lattice sites (small polaron) with the polaron mass being a smooth function of the e-ph coupling. Instead, the polaron self-traps in the adiabatic regime and there is growing evidence that this event takes place in any dimensionality .

When the lattice polarizations is confined to one or a few unit cells the carrier feels the details of the local structure: recent generalizations of the Holstein model have shown that the inclusion of on site lattice anharmonicity can substantially modify the size  and the mass  of the polaronic quasiparticle. While these findings could contribute to locate with more accuracy the self-trapping event in parameter space it is still unclear whether and how the transition depends on the lattice structure. To address this problem we focus here on the polaron mass renormalization in a two dimensional honeycomb net which can be viewed as a triangular Bravais lattice with a bases of diatomic molecules at the vertexes. The Holstein model is briefly reviewed and the results are discussed in Section II. The conclusions are drawn in Section III.

## II. The Holstein Model Hamiltonian

The Hamiltonian for the single electron in the Holstein model reads

$$H=t\underset{ij}{}c_i^{}c_j+g\underset{i}{}c_i^{}c_i(a_i+a_i^{})+\underset{𝐤}{}\omega _𝐤a_𝐤^{}a_𝐤$$
(1)
where the dimension dependence explicitly appears in the momentum space Hamiltonian for the harmonic lattice vibrations. $`c_i^{}`$ ( $`c_i`$ ) creates (destroys) a tight binding electron at the $`i`$ site and $`t`$ is the first neighbor hopping integral related to the bare electron half bandwidth $`D`$ by $`D=zt`$, $`z`$ being the coordination number. $`a_𝐤^{}`$ ( $`a_𝐤`$ ) creates (destroys) a k-phonon with frequency $`\omega _𝐤`$. $`g`$ is the overall electron-phonon coupling constant.

In the strong coupling regime the Lang-Firsov approach  is reliable  and the polaron mass $`m^{}`$ can be obtained via perturbative method. In $`d`$ dimensions the ratio between $`m^{}`$ and the bare band mass $`m_0`$ is :

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{m^{}}{m_0}}\right)_d=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{exp(\overline{g}^2)}{1+z^2texp(\overline{g}^2)f(\overline{g}^2)/(\mathrm{}\overline{\omega })}}`$ (2)
$`\overline{g}^2=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2g^2}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{k_x}{}}\mathrm{sin}^2{\displaystyle \frac{k_x}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{k_x,k_y}{}}(\mathrm{}\omega _𝐤)^2`$ (3)
$`f(\overline{g}^2)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{s=1}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\overline{g}^2)^s}{ss!}}`$ (4)
The series expansion in the last of eqs.(2) reflects the fact that the second order polaron self energy comprises the emission and absorption of an arbitrary number of phonons hence it is a sum over an infinite number of diagrams each having $`s`$ phonons between the two interaction vertexes. The second order of perturbative theory also introduces the effect of the adiabaticity parameter $`zt/\mathrm{}\overline{\omega }`$ on $`m^{}`$ which, in general, depends on dimensionality through: i) $`g^2d`$, ii) the first neighbors number $`z`$, iii) the Brillouin zone sums and iv) the features of the phonon spectrum.

We take a 2D honeycomb net equivalent to a triangular lattice with a two points basis. Each lattice site is a diatomic molecule with coordination number $`z=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}6}`$. Hence, the phonon spectrum has both acoustical and optical branches whose analytical expressions can be deduced by a force constants parametrization scheme:

$`\omega ^2(k_x,k_y)=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta +3\gamma }{M}}\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{M}}\sqrt{\beta ^2+\gamma ^2H(k_x,k_y)+\beta \gamma G(k_x,k_y)}`$ (5)
$`H(k_x,k_y)=`$ $`3+2(c_xc_y+s_xs_y+c_{3x}c_y+s_{3x}s_y+c_{2x})`$ (6)
$`G(k_x,k_y)=`$ $`2(2c_xc_y+c_{2x})`$ (7)
with: $`c_x=cos(k_x\sqrt{3}a/2)`$, $`c_y=cos(k_y3a/2)`$, $`c_{2x}=cos(k_x\sqrt{3}a)`$, $`c_{3x}=cos(k_x3\sqrt{3}a/2)`$, $`s_x=sin(k_x\sqrt{3}a/2)`$, $`s_y=sin(k_y3a/2)`$, $`s_{3x}=sin(k_x3\sqrt{3}a/2)`$. $`a`$ is the lattice constant and $`M`$ is the reduced molecular mass. $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ are the intra\- and inter-molecular force constants respectively in terms of which one defines: $`\omega _0^2=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\beta /M`$, $`\omega _1^2=\gamma /M`$ and the zone center optical frequency $`\overline{\omega }=\sqrt{\omega _0^2+z\omega _1^2}`$.

Previous investigations of the Holstein Hamiltonian  have shown that the intermolecular forces have to be sufficiently strong in order to predict the correct polaron bandwidth trend versus dimensionality. Thus the ground state properties of the Holstein model essentially depend on the strength of $`\omega _1`$ which should be of order $`\omega _0/2`$. When this condition is fulfilled the polaron mass turns out to be substantially dimension independent. Larger $`\omega _1`$ values are admitted in the model although they encounter the obvious upper bound $`\omega _1\omega _0`$ in a molecular lattice. This result (which has been proven in a large portion of parameter space ranging from fully adiabatic to antiadiabatic conditions) introduces a novel feature in the polaron landscape corroborated by Monte Carlo simulations , density matrix renormalization-group studies  and variational approaches.

Two quantities play a central role in polaron theory. The first, defined by

$$\lambda =\frac{Ng^2}{D_𝐤\mathrm{}\omega _𝐤}$$

$`N`$ being the number of molecular sites, represents the ratio  between the polaron binding energy and the electronic half bandwidth. It yields the energetical gain due to small polaron formation with respect to the bare electronic state. The second, defined by

$$\alpha =\frac{Ng}{_𝐤\mathrm{}\omega _𝐤}$$

, measures the lattice deformation associated with the quasiparticle formation. While in adiabatic systems the condition $`\lambda >1`$ signals the existence of the small polaron state, in antiadiabatic systems $`\alpha >1`$ is a more restrictive condition for small polaron formation .

Recent analysis  on the mobility of small polarons also in conjunction with models on polaronic high $`T_c`$ superconductivity  have led to reconsider the concept of self-trapped state which, although being intimately related to the small size of the quasiparticle, is not synonymous with small polaron state. Thus, if the narrowing of the polaron bandwidth (induced by an increasing e-ph coupling) marks the onset of the transition between large and small states still there is a range of $`g`$ values for which the polaron, although spread over a few lattice sites only, is not trapped and retains mobility properties. The self-trapping event can be instead associated with a rapid but continuos effective mass increase which is precisely located by looking at the curvature of the logarithm of the effective mass versus $`g`$. In our view this method, beyond embodying the full physical significance of the transition process, offers a simple criterion to select a ”critical $`g`$ value” as an inflection point either in the logarithm of the effective mass or in its first derivative. While the former case would identify the point of most rapid increase of the effective mass, the occurence of the latter case distinguishes a peculiar point in the mass versus g plot although the concavity-convexity change is absent.

In Fig.1(a), four plots of the polaron mass (in units of the bare band mass) as a function of the $`g`$ coupling are reported on while the corresponding curvatures of the logarithm of the mass are shown in Fig.1(b). High optical phonon frequencies are assumed. Our selected plots range from an extreme adiabatic ($`t=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}200}meV`$) to a moderately antiadiabatic ($`t=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}meV`$) regime. At a fixed $`g`$ the antiadiabatic polaron is always heavier than the adiabatic polarons but the peculiar points, resolved as the minima of the curves displayed in Fig.1(b), lie at decreasing $`g`$ values by decreasing the degree of adiabaticity. Then, an antiadiabatic polaron may self-trap already at $`g2.7`$ weighing $`m_{eff}14`$ while an extreme adiabatic polaron self-traps only at $`g3.8`$ with $`m_{eff}123`$. The correctness of our perturbative approach is monitored by the $`\lambda `$ and $`\alpha `$ values which are larger than one in all the displayed points consistently with the assumption on the existence of small polarons. In the intermediate adiabatic cases $`t=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}100}meV`$ and $`t=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}50}meV`$ we find $`m_{eff}73`$ at $`g3.5`$ and $`m_{eff}40`$ at $`g3.3`$ respectively. Thus, a 2D honeycomb net seems to sustain mobile adiabatic polarons in a window of strong coupling regimes approximately defined by $`2.5g3.3`$. In Figs.2, the phonon frequencies are still high, although much reduced with respect to Figs.1. As a main effect the polaron masses are roughly doubled while the peculiar minima of the second derivative of the logarithm of the effective mass (Fig.2(b)) do not shift substantially versus $`g`$ with respect to the corresponding cases in Fig.1(b). To emphasize the role of the lattice structure we have compared the adiabatic polaron (with $`t=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}100}meV`$) in the present 2D honeycomb net with the previously investigated  square lattice. As an example, provided that: i) the same overall e-ph coupling $`g=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}3.38}`$ is taken, ii) the same values of intra- and inter-molecular force constants are assumed ($`\omega _0=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}50}meV`$ and $`\omega _1=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}25}meV`$) and these values are consistent with the strong coupling perturbative method, we find $`m_{eff}140`$ for the honeycomb net polaron against $`m_{eff}1200`$ for the square lattice. Also the intermediate adiabatic polaron ($`t=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}50}meV`$) behaves in a similar manner being $`m_{eff}200`$ in the honeycomb net polaron against $`m_{eff}1700`$ in the square lattice assuming the same input parameters as above. We have also considered the effect of the acoustical branch of the phonon spectrum on the polaron properties. In all cases, with different degree of adiabaticity, the minima of the second derivative (Fig.3(b)) occur at much lower $`g`$ values than for optical polarons. However, no physical meaning can be attached to these values since they are well outside the range of validity of the Lang-Firsov based perturbative method. When the method holds ($`g>2.5`$) no peculiar point can be resolved in the polaron behavior versus $`g`$ which is anyway characterized by a huge mass renormalization. Figs.(3) have been reported also to point out that the occurence of distinctive features in the mass or mass derivative curves, far from being a cogent criterion for the self-trapping event, just indicates a trend which needs to be corroborated by the analysis of other independent quantities.

## IV. Conclusions

We have developed a perturbative study of the molecular crystal model assuming the existence of strong electron-phonon coupling conditions which favor the formation of small polarons. The Lang-Firsov method permits to calculate the mass renormalization for specific structures once the phonon spectrum is known. Rather than applying the model to real systems as previously done for simple lattices, we have examined whether alternative structures as the 2D honeycomb net may host polarons which are both small and mobile. Infact we have found that adiabatic small polarons are lighter by roughly a factor eight than in the square lattice once the same input parameters are assumed. Adiabatic polarons have been studied as a function of the e-ph coupling and distinctive points in the mass behavior (versus $`g`$) have been selected and put in relation with a possible occurence of the self-trapping event. Although not ultimative this criterion seems plausible provided that such ”self-trapping $`g`$ points” are obviously well within the range of applicability of the Lang-Firsov scheme. We find that small optical polarons in the honeycomb net can self-trap if the electron-lattice system couples in the range $`3<g<4`$. The exact location of the transition depends on the adiabaticity parameter with intermediate adiabatic polarons lying in the lower portion of that range. Our results suggest that adiabatic optical polarons can be mobile in the honeycomb net although a strong coupling regime holds. The small polaron effective mass is of order $`550`$ times the bare band mass before the self-trapping point is attained, with more adiabatic polarons being lighter once the e-ph coupling is fixed.

This work has been done in Trequanda (Siena).


format: text

text:
# A Phenomenological Study on Lepton Mass Matrix Textures

## Abstract

The three active light neutrinos are used to explain the neutrino oscillations. The inherently bi-large mixing neutrino mass matrix and the Fritzsch type, bi-small mixing charged lepton mass matrix are assumed. By requiring the maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing for the atmospheric neutrino problem and the mass-squared difference approperiate for the almost maximal mixing solution to the solar neutrino problem, the following quantities are predicted: the $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ mixing, $`V_{e3}`$, CP violation in neutrino oscillations, and the effective electron-neutrino mass relevant to neutrinoless double beta decays.

preprint:   AS-ITP-2001-017 hep-ph/0110119

Keywords: lepton, neutrino oscillation, CP violation.

Understanding the fermion mass pattern is a great challenge in elementary particle physics. Lacking of a standard theory for the flavor physics, phenomenological ansatz might be very helpful . In view of the recent observation about neutrino oscillations , this paper studies the lepton sector. The masses of charged leptons have been known experimentally quite well . They are expected to have a similar origin as quarks which have small mixings among three generations.

The small neutrino masses indicated by experiments can be naturally understood by the seesaw mechanism . However, the observations have shown increasing evidence that leptonic mixings are bi-maximal, or almost bi-maximal among the three generations. Such a mixing scenario were then considered variously .

This paper starts from the flavor eigenstates of both charged leptons and neutrinos. We assume that the charged lepton mass matrix is of the Fritzsch type , namely,

$$_l=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& ae^{i\alpha }& 0\\ ae^{i\alpha }& 0& be^{i\beta }\\ 0& be^{i\beta }& c\end{array}\right),$$
(1)
where $`cba>0`$ and $`a<b^2/c`$. And the neutrino mass matrix is of the inherently bi-large mixing type ,

$$_\nu =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}ϵ& m_1& m_2\\ m_1& ϵ& 0\\ m_2& 0& ϵ\end{array}\right),$$
(2)
where $`m_1m_2ϵ>0`$. Note that $`m_1,m_2`$ and $`ϵ`$ are always real in the above form of $`_\nu `$. These two matrices are of simplicity in the analysis, and the parameters in them are uniquely fixed. Although Eq. (2) will be speculated further in the end of this paper, we still have no definite principles for them. Some more theoretical works for the bi-maximal leptonic mixing were considered in Ref. .

The mass matrix Eq. (1) gives

$$\begin{array}{ccc}a& =& \left(\frac{m_em_\mu m_\tau }{m_em_\mu +m_\tau }\right)^{1/2},\hfill \\ b& =& \left(m_\mu m_\tau +m_\mu m_em_em_\tau \frac{m_em_\mu m_\tau }{m_em_\mu +m_\tau }\right)^{1/2},\hfill \\ c& =& m_em_\mu +m_\tau .\hfill \end{array}$$
(3)
Eq. (2) gives neutrino masses,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}m_{\nu _1}& =& \sqrt{m_1^2+m_2^2}+ϵ,\hfill \\ m_{\nu _2}& =& \sqrt{m_1^2+m_2^2}+ϵ,\hfill \\ m_{\nu _3}& =& ϵ.\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
Charged leptons provide bi-small mixing among the three generations, whereas neutrinos provide bi-large mixing. The diagonalization of $`_l`$ is made by the following unitary matrix ,

$$U_l=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}U_{11}^l& U_{12}^l& U_{13}^l\\ U_{21}^le^{i\alpha }& U_{22}^le^{i\alpha }& U_{23}^le^{i\alpha }\\ U_{31}^le^{i(\alpha +\beta )}& U_{32}^le^{i(\alpha +\beta )}& U_{33}^le^{i(\alpha +\beta )}\end{array}\right),$$
(5)
where

$$\begin{array}{ccc}U_{11}^l& =& \left[1+\left(\frac{m_e}{a}\right)^2+\left(\frac{b}{a}\frac{m_e}{m_\tau m_\mu }\right)^2\right]^{1/2},\hfill \\ U_{22}^l& =& \left[1+\left(\frac{a}{m_\mu }\right)^2+\left(\frac{b}{m_\tau +m_e}\right)^2\right]^{1/2},\hfill \\ U_{33}^l& =& \left[1+\left(\frac{m_\mu m_e}{b}\right)^2+\left(\frac{a}{b}\frac{m_\mu m_e}{m_\tau }\right)^2\right]^{1/2},\hfill \\ U_{12}^l& =& \frac{a}{m_\mu }U_{22}^l,\hfill \\ U_{13}^l& =& \frac{a}{b}\frac{m_\mu m_e}{m_\tau }U_{33}^l,\hfill \\ U_{23}^l& =& \frac{m_\mu m_e}{b}U_{33}^l,\hfill \\ U_{21}^l& =& \frac{m_e}{a}U_{11}^l,\hfill \\ U_{31}^l& =& \frac{b}{a}\frac{m_e}{m_\tau m_\mu }U_{11}^l,\hfill \\ U_{32}^l& =& \frac{b}{m_\mu +m_e}U_{22}^l.\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
$`_\nu `$ is diagonalized by

$$U_\nu =\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}& 0\\ \frac{\mathrm{sin}\theta }{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{\mathrm{sin}\theta }{\sqrt{2}}& \mathrm{cos}\theta \\ \frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{\sqrt{2}}& \frac{\mathrm{cos}\theta }{\sqrt{2}}& \mathrm{sin}\theta \end{array}\right),$$
(7)
where $`\mathrm{sin}\theta ={\displaystyle \frac{m_1}{\sqrt{m_1^2+m_2^2}}}`$. Note that $`U_\nu `$ is independent on $`ϵ`$. The physical lepton mixing is given by

$$V=U_l^{}U_\nu .$$
(8)
It is the combination of the large mixing from $`U_\nu `$ and the small mixing from $`U_l`$ that gives the maximal mixing of $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$. In our scenario, $`\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ deviates from $`\pm {\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}`$ remarkably. This is because the $`(23)`$ component of $`V`$ is mainly composed of $`\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ and $`U_{23}^l\sqrt{m_\mu /m_\tau }0.3`$ which is not negligible. On the other hand, the matrix $`U_\nu `$ itself will give a maximal mixing in the $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ oscillation, because the charged lepton contribution to $`V_{12}`$ is only about $`\sqrt{m_e/m_\mu }0.01`$.

Let us discuss the numerical results. The quantity $`\sqrt{m_1^2+m_2^2}`$ is taken to be $`0.05`$ eV as indicated by the atmospheric neutrino problem. By requiring the maximal $`\nu _\mu \nu _\tau `$ mixing, we obtain

$$m_14.3\times 10^2\mathrm{eV},m_22.5\times 10^2\mathrm{eV}.$$
(9)
The solar neutrino problem is solved by the energy independent solution  which needs

$$|ϵ|10^310^4\mathrm{eV}\mathrm{or}10^610^8\mathrm{eV}.$$
(10)
The $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ mixing deviates from the maximal one slightly. With the above results, we get

$$\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{e\mu }0.99.$$
(11)
The $`\nu _e\nu _\tau `$ mixing is predicted as

$$|V_{e3}|0.049.$$
(12)
The CP violation in the neutrino oscillations is determined by the rephasing-invariant parameter $`J`$ ,

$$\mathrm{Im}(V_{i\lambda }V_{j\rho }V_{i\rho }^{}V_{j\lambda }^{})=J\underset{k,\delta }{}ϵ_{ijk}ϵ_{\lambda \rho \delta }.$$
(13)
In our case, Eqs. (5$``$8) give

$$\begin{array}{ccc}J& =& \frac{U_{12}^l}{2}(U_{11}^{l2}+U_{21}^{l2}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +U_{31}^{l2}\mathrm{cos}^2\theta +U_{21}^lU_{31}^l\mathrm{sin}2\theta \mathrm{cos}\beta )\hfill \\ & & \times [U_{22}^l\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\alpha +U_{32}^l\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}(\alpha +\beta )]\hfill \\ & & \frac{U_{11}^l}{2}(U_{12}^{l2}+U_{22}^{l2}\mathrm{sin}^2\theta +U_{32}^{l2}\mathrm{cos}^2\theta +U_{22}^lU_{32}^l\mathrm{sin}2\theta \mathrm{cos}\beta )\hfill \\ & & \times [U_{21}^l\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\alpha +U_{31}^l\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}(\alpha +\beta )]\hfill \\ & & \frac{1}{4}\sqrt{\frac{m_e}{m_\mu }}\mathrm{cos}\theta \left\{\mathrm{sin}2\theta \mathrm{sin}\alpha 2\sqrt{\frac{m_\mu }{m_\tau }}[\mathrm{sin}(\alpha +\beta )2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \mathrm{sin}\alpha \mathrm{cos}\beta ]\right\}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
Numerically, choosing $`\alpha =\beta =\frac{\pi }{2}`$, we can get $`J0.008`$; choosing $`\alpha =0`$ and $`\beta =\frac{\pi }{2}`$, $`J0.004`$.

The neutrinoless double beta decay experiments will measure the effective electron-neutrino mass

$$m_{\nu _e}|\underset{\lambda }{}V_{e\lambda }^2m_{\nu _\lambda }|$$
(15)
which, by keeping $`ϵ`$ terms to the leading order, in our case is

$$\begin{array}{ccc}m_{\nu _e}& =& 2\sqrt{m_1^2+m_2^2}U_{11}^l[(U_{21}^l\mathrm{sin}\theta +U_{31}^l\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{cos}\beta )^2+(U_{31}^l\mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\beta )^2]^{1/2}ϵU_{11}^{l2}\hfill \\ & & 2\sqrt{m_1^2+m_2^2}\sqrt{\frac{m_e}{m_\mu }}\mathrm{sin}\theta ϵ\hfill \\ & & 0.006\mathrm{eV}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(16)
Experiments in the near future will check the reality of the lepton mass matrices studied in this paper. In addition to SNO, Borexino and KamLAND will check the result of Eq. (11) for the $`\nu _e\nu _\mu `$ mixing . The long baseline neutrino experiments  and neutrino factories will measure $`V_{e3}`$ and CP violation in neutrino oscillations. GENIUS is able to test the $`m_{\nu _e}`$ given in Eq. (16).

Finally let us look at the underlying reasons of the neutrino mass matrix in Eq. (2). These Majorana masses are thought to be generated by the seesaw mechanism. It is natural to assume that the Dirac neutrino mass matrix has similar form as that of charged leptons,

$$_𝒟=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \stackrel{~}{a}& 0\\ \stackrel{~}{a}& 0& \stackrel{~}{b}\\ 0& \stackrel{~}{b}& \stackrel{~}{c}\end{array}\right),$$
(17)
where the possible phases are not considered, because $`_\nu `$ of Eq. (2) is real and what we are looking at is magnitudes of righ-handed neutrino masses. In this case, the texture of Eq. (2) requires the following form of the right-handed neutrino mass matrix,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}_{}& =& \frac{1}{ϵ}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}\stackrel{~}{a}^2\mathrm{cos}^2\theta & \stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\theta & \stackrel{~}{a}\mathrm{cos}\theta (\stackrel{~}{c}\mathrm{sin}\theta \stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{cos}\theta )\\ \stackrel{~}{a}\stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\theta & \stackrel{~}{b}^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta & \stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{sin}\theta (\stackrel{~}{c}\mathrm{sin}\theta \stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{cos}\theta )\\ \stackrel{~}{a}\mathrm{cos}\theta (\stackrel{~}{c}\mathrm{sin}\theta \stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{cos}\theta )& \stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{sin}\theta (\stackrel{~}{c}\mathrm{sin}\theta \stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{cos}\theta )& (\stackrel{~}{c}\mathrm{sin}\theta \stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{cos}\theta )^2\end{array}\right)\hfill \\ & & +\frac{\stackrel{~}{a}}{\sqrt{m_1^2+m_2^2}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \stackrel{~}{a}\mathrm{sin}\theta & 0\\ \stackrel{~}{a}\mathrm{sin}\theta & 2\stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{cos}\theta & \stackrel{~}{c}\mathrm{cos}\theta +\stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{sin}\theta \\ 0& \stackrel{~}{c}\mathrm{cos}\theta +\stackrel{~}{b}\mathrm{sin}\theta & 0\end{array}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$
(18)
Note that in the above equation, the first matrix is the leading one. But it is of rank one. Only with the second matrix which is a perturbation to the first, is $`_R`$ nonsingular. In the right-handed neutrino spectrum, there is a heavy one with mass around $`(10^{15}10^{16})`$ GeV, and there are two relatively light neutrinos which are about two orders smaller than the first, if we take $`ϵ10^4`$ eV. The form of $`_R`$ seems that some tuning is needed in order to keep the form of the texture assumed in Eq. (2). We wonder if there is a natural way to produce it, for instance from some flavor symmetry.

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank Zhi-Zhong Xing for helpful discussions and comments. C.L. was supported in part by the National Natural Science Foundation of China with grant no. 10047005.


text:
# Comment on ”Peculiar Scaling of Self-Avoiding Walk Contacts”

\[

\]

Baiesi, Orlandini and Stella have recently shown  that the set of all non-bonded nearest neighbour (NN) contacts between the two halves of a self-avoiding walk is a multifractal characterized by a universal exponent, $`\tau `$. In the presence of NN interactions, and in two dimensions, they have shown that $`\tau 1.93`$ above the $`\theta `$ temperature, $`T_\theta `$, wheras $`\tau =1`$ at and below $`T_\theta `$. They have shown further that the exponent $`\tau `$ could be superuniversal with a value, $`\tau =2`$, for contacts between a self-avoiding walk and a confining wall. The purpose of this comment is to demonstrate that such contact-scaling is broken for the recently proposed Interacting Growth Walk (IGW) .

IGW starts from an arbitrarily chosen site, $`𝐫_0`$, of a regular $`d`$-dimensional lattice of coordination number $`z`$, whose sites are initially ’unoccupied’ (by monomers). The first step is made in one of the $`z`$ available directions, by choosing an ’unoccupied’ NN of $`𝐫_0`$, say $`𝐫_1`$, at random with equal probability. Let $`\{𝐫_j^mm=1,2,\mathrm{},z_j\}`$ be the ’unoccupied’ NNs available for the $`j^{th}`$ step of the walk. If $`z_j=0`$, the walk can not grow further because it is geometrically ’trapped’. It is, therefore, discarded and a fresh walk is started from $`𝐫_0`$. If $`z_j0`$, the walk proceeds by choosing one of the available sites, say $`𝐫_j^m`$, with a probability proportional to $`exp[\beta n_{NN}^m(j)ϵ_0]`$, where $`n_{NN}^m(j)`$ is the number of non-bonded NN sites of $`𝐫_j^m`$ and $`\beta =1/k_BT`$, $`k_B`$ is the Boltzmann constant. At ’infinite’ temperature ($`\beta =0`$), the walk generated will be the same as the Kinetic Growth Walk (KGW), reference given in . However, at finite temperatures, the walk will prefer to step into a site with more non-bonded NN contacts when the energy per contact, $`ϵ_0`$, is negative. We may set $`ϵ_0=1`$ without loss of generality.

At any given temperature, we make a large number of attempts  to generate $`N`$-step IGWs, identify the non-bonded NN contacts between the two halves of the walks, locate their centres of mass and compute the ensemble average of the $`q`$-th power of the average radius of gyration, $`<R_c^q(N)>N^{\sigma _q}`$, $`(q>0)`$. From the observed power-law dependence of the moments, we obtained $`\sigma _q`$ as a function of $`q`$ for IGWs on a square lattice, and have plotted them in the upper inset of Fig.1 for $`\beta =0,1/2,1,2`$ and $`300`$. The fact that $`\sigma _q/q`$ depends on $`q`$ for all these temperatures is related to the specific nature of the corresponding distributions, $`P_\beta (R_c,N)`$, which we have shown in the lower inset of Fig.1 for $`N=300`$. It is clear that the distribution has a power-law form, $`P_{\beta =0}(R_c,N=300)R_c^\tau `$, only at infinite temperature. By demanding that the $`q`$-th moment, obtained from the scaling form, $`P_{\beta =0}(R_c,N)R_c^\tau f(R_c/N^\nu )`$ where the end-to-end distance exponent $`\nu =3/4`$ for the KGW, be consistent with the monte carlo data in Fig.1, we get the contact-exponent, $`\tau 1.90\pm 0.02`$. That this value of $`\tau `$ is consistent with the assumed scaling form is further confirmed in Fig.1, where we have shown that the distributions corresponding to $`N=200`$ and $`N=300`$ could be collapsed reasonably well. Thus, the IGW at infinite temperature (or equivalently, the KGW) has the same contact-scaling behaviour as a self-avoiding walk However, at finite temperatures, it has none.

S.L. Narasimhan1∗, P.S.R. Krishna1∗, K.P.N.Murthy2 and M. Ramanadham1
1Solid State Physics Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai - 400 085, India.
2Materials Science Division, Indira Gandhi Centre for Atomic Research, Kalpakkam - 603 102, India.

glass@apsara.barc.ernet.in


text:
# 1 Definitions

## 1 Definitions

###### Definition 1.1.

Braid Group $`B_n`$

$`B_n`$ is the group generated by $`\sigma _1,\mathrm{},\sigma _{n1}`$ with the following relations:

$$\sigma _i\sigma _j=\sigma _j\sigma _i|ij|>1$$

$$\sigma _i\sigma _{i+1}\sigma _i=\sigma _{i+1}\sigma _i\sigma _{i+1}.$$

###### Definition 1.2.

Half Twist

Let $`HB_n`$, we say that $`H`$ is a half twist if $`H=P\sigma _iP^1`$ for some $`1in2`$ and $`PB_n`$.

###### Definition 1.3.

Hurwitz move on $`G^m`$ ($`R_k,R_k^1`$)

Let $`G`$ be a group, $`\stackrel{}{t}=(t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)G^m`$. We say that $`\stackrel{}{s}=(s_1,\mathrm{},s_m)G^m`$ is obtained from $`\stackrel{}{t}`$ by the Hurwitz move $`R_k`$ (or $`\stackrel{}{t}`$ is obtained from $`\stackrel{}{s}`$ by the Hurwitz move $`R_k^1`$) if

$$s_i=t_i\text{ for }ik,k+1,$$

$$s_k=t_kt_{k+1}t_k^1,s_{k+1}=t_k.$$

###### Definition 1.4.

Hurwitz move on factorization

Let $`G`$ be a group and $`tG`$. Let $`t=t_1\mathrm{}t_m=s_1\mathrm{}s_m`$ be two factorized expressions of $`t`$. We say that $`s_1\mathrm{}s_m`$ is obtained from $`t_1\mathrm{}t_m`$ by the Hurwitz move $`R_k`$ if $`(s_1,\mathrm{},s_m)`$ is obtained from $`(t_1,\mathrm{},t_m)`$ by the Hurwitz move $`R_k`$.

###### Definition 1.5.

Hurwitz equivalence of factorization

The factorizations $`s_1\mathrm{}s_m`$, $`t_1\mathrm{}t_m`$ are Hurwitz equivalent if they are obtained from each other by a finite sequence of Hurwitz moves. The notation is $`t_1\mathrm{}t_m\stackrel{HE}{}s_1\mathrm{}s_m`$.

## 2 Projecting to $`S_n`$

Let $`\varphi :B_nS_n`$ be the natural homomorphism to $`S_n`$, given by $`\varphi (b)\pi _b`$ where $`\pi _b`$ is the permutation given by the strings of $`b`$. In terms of definition 1.1, $`\varphi :B_nS_n`$ is defined by $`\varphi (\sigma _i)=(i,i+1)1in1`$.

###### Proposition 2.1.

Let $`b_1\mathrm{}b_m`$, $`r_1\mathrm{}r_m`$ be two factorizations in $`B_n`$ s.t. $`b_1\mathrm{}b_m\stackrel{HE}{}r_1\mathrm{}r_m`$, then, $`\varphi (b_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (b_m)\stackrel{HE}{}\varphi (r_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (r_m)`$.

Proof: It is sufficient to show for the case where the factorization $`r_1\mathrm{}r_m`$ is obtained from $`b_1\mathrm{}b_m`$ by a single Hurwitz move, $`R_i`$, and therefore, $`r_i=b_ib_{i+1}b_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}`$ and $`r_{i+1}=b_i`$ and $`r_k=b_k`$ if $`ki,i+1`$.
By performing $`R_i`$ on $`\varphi (b_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (b_i)\varphi (b_{i+1})\mathrm{}\varphi (b_m)`$ we get

$$\varphi (b_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (b_i)\varphi (b_{i+1})\varphi (b_i)^1\varphi (b_i)\mathrm{}\varphi (b_m)$$

which is equal to,

$$\varphi (b_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (b_ib_{i+1}b_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{1})\varphi (b_i)\mathrm{}\varphi (b_m)$$

which is the same as $`\varphi (r_1)\mathrm{}\varphi (r_m)`$.

From Propositions 2.1, we are interested in the properties of the Hurwitz equivalence relation on factorizations in $`S_n`$. In $`B_n`$ we are interested in $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2`$ factorizations where all factors are powers of half-twists.
$`\mathrm{\Delta }^2=(\sigma _1\mathrm{}\sigma _{n1})^n`$ is a full $`2\pi `$ twist of all the strings (in $`B_n`$) and therefore, $`\varphi (\mathrm{\Delta }^2)=1_{S_n}`$. If $`H`$ is a half twist by definition 1.2, we get that $`\varphi (H)=(i,j)1i,jn`$. As a result, when projecting to $`S_n`$, we are interested in the properties of $`1_{S_n}`$ factorizations with transpositions or $`1_{S_n}`$ (when the power of the half twist is even) as factors.

## 3 Hurwitz Equivalence Properties in $`S_n`$

###### Definition 3.1.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i=(a_i,b_i)1a_i,b_in`$ be a factorization. We define the graph of the factorization $`G_F=(V_F,E_F)`$ where $`V_F=\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ are the vertices and $`E_F=\{(i,j)|k\text{ s.t. }\mathrm{\Gamma }_k=(i,j)\}`$ are the edges of the factorization graph.

###### Definition 3.2.

We define the weight of an edge $`(i,j)E_F`$ as the number of elements $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k`$ s.t. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_k=(i,j)`$. The weight of $`(i,j)`$ in the factorization $`F`$ will be noted as $`W_F((i,j))`$.

For a given graph $`G_F`$ we denote the graphs of its connected components as $`G_F^1,\mathrm{},G_F^d`$ where $`d`$ is the number of connected components in the graph. For each connected component, let $`G_F^i=(V_F^i,E_F^i)`$, where $`V_F^i`$ are the vertices of $`G_F^i`$ and $`E_F^i`$ are the edges.

###### Definition 3.3.

We define the weight of the connected component $`G_F^i`$ to be:

$$W(G_F^i)=\underset{e_rE_F^i}{}W(e_r)$$

###### Theorem 3.4.

Let $`F_1,F_2`$ be two $`1_{S_n}`$ factorizations with the same number of factors. Then $`F_1\stackrel{HE}{}F_2`$ if and only if $`G_{F_1}`$ and $`G_{F_2}`$ have the same number of connected components $`G_{F_1}^1,\mathrm{},G_{F_1}^d`$ and $`G_{F_2}^1,\mathrm{},G_{F_2}^d`$ respectively, and there exists a permutation $`\pi `$ s.t. $`V_{F_1}^i=V_{F_2}^{\pi (i)}`$ and $`W(G_{F_1}^i)=W(G_{F_2}^{\pi (i)})`$ for each $`id`$.

In other words, two factorizations are Hurwitz equivalent if and only if the connected components of the factorizations graphs contain the same nodes and have the same weights.

###### Example 3.5.

The $`1_{S_n}`$ factorizations,

$$F_1=(2,6)(1,4)(1,5)(3,6)(4,5)(1,5)(2,3)(3,6)$$

$$F_2=(2,6)(1,5)(3,6)(3,6)(2,6)(1,5)(1,4)(1,4)$$

have connected components with the same nodes and and weights as shown in Figure 1, and by Theorem 3.4 they are Hurwitz equivalent.

The rest of the section will be devoted to the proof of Theorem 3.4. Starting with the first direction of the theorem.

Proof of the first direction: In the proof of the first direction we prove that if two factorizations are Hurwitz equivalent the factorizations have the same graph components with the same weights. Therefore, it is sufficient to show that when operating a single Hurwitz move, the vertices and weights of the graph’s connected components will remain the same.

Let $`F_1=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$ and $`F_2=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^1\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$ the factorization obtained from $`F_1`$ by performing Hurwitz move $`R_i`$.
Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_j=(a_j,b_j),1a_j,b_jn,jm`$, then, in the cases where:

$$\{a_i,b_i\}\{a_{i+1},b_{i+1}\}=\varphi \text{ or}$$

$$\{a_i,b_i\}\{a_{i+1},b_{i+1}\}=\{a_i,b_i\}$$

We get that,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}$$

and the two factorizations have the same factors in a different order, so the factorizations graphs $`G_{F_1}`$ and $`G_{F_2}`$ are the same.

We are left with the case where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i=(a_i,b)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}=(a_{i+1},b)`$.
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^1=(a_i,a_{i+1})`$ replaces $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}`$. We will show that the theorem still holds for this case.

###### Lemma 3.6.

1. If $`v_1,v_2V_{F_1}^r`$ then $`v_1,v_2V_{F_2}^{r_1}`$ for some $`r_1`$.
2. If $`v_1V_{F_1}^{r_1}`$ and $`v_2V_{F_1}^{r_2}`$, $`r_1r_2`$ then $`v_1V_{F_2}^{t_1}`$ and $`v_2V_{F_2}^{t_2}`$, for some $`t_1,t_2`$ s.t. $`t_1t_2`$.
3. If $`V_{F_1}^{r_1}=V_{F_2}^{t_1}`$ then $`W(G_{F_1}^{r_1})=W(G_{F_2}^{t_1})`$.

Proof 1: Since $`v_1,v_2V_{F_1}^r`$ there is a sequence of edges connecting them in $`G_{F_1}^r`$, say, $`\{e_s\}_{s=1}^p`$.
Since $`G_{F_1}^r`$ is a connected component, $`\{e_s\}_{s=1}^pE_{F_1}^r`$. So if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}E_{F_1}^r`$ all $`\{e_s\}_{s=1}^p`$ remain as elements in the factorization $`F_2`$, since only $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}`$ is replaced by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}^1`$.
In the case where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}E_{F_1}^r`$, every $`s\mathrm{`}`$ s.t. $`e_{s\mathrm{`}}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}`$ will be replaced in the sequence by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i\mathrm{\Gamma }_{i+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_i^1=(a_i,a_{i+1})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_i=(a_i,b)`$ which are elements in $`F_2`$ and connect $`a_{i+1}`$ with $`b`$.

Proof 2: From (1), we conclude that the number of vertices in a connected component can only increase. Therefore, if $`v_1V_{F_1}^{r_1}`$ and $`v_2V_{F_1}^{r_2}`$, $`r_1r_2`$ and they are in the same connected component $`V_{F_2}^t`$ in $`G_{F_2}`$, then $`V_{F_1}^{r_1},V_{F_1}^{r_2}V_{F_2}^t`$. Therefore, there exists an edge $`(v\mathrm{`}_1,v\mathrm{`}_2)E_{F_2}^t`$ s.t. $`v\mathrm{`}_1,v\mathrm{`}_2`$ belongs to a different connected components in $`G_{F_1}`$. But the only edge that was added is $`(a_{i+1},a_i)`$ and $`a_{i+1},a_i`$ are in the same connected component in $`G_{F_1}`$.

Proof 3: From (1) and (2), we see that the connected components remain the same. The weights of the connected components remain the same since all edges are the same except for $`(a_i,b)`$ that was replaced by $`(a_i,a_{i+1})`$. But $`a_i,a_{i+1},b`$ are all in the same connected component. Therefore the weight of all connected components remain the same.

The Lemma proves that when performing a Hurwitz move on two transpositions the nodes of the connected components remain the same and so are the weights of the connected components. If one or both of the factors are $`1_{S_n}`$, the Hurwitz move does not change the factors only the order and therefore, the theorem still holds.

This concludes the proof of the first direction.

Proof of the second direction: To complete Theorem 3.4 we need to show that if two factorizations have the same connected components with the same weights they are Hurwitz equivalent. To prove that we will show that each factorization is Hurwitz equivalent to a standard canonical factorization which depends only on the nodes of the factorization‘s connected components and their weights.

###### Lemma 3.7.

Let $`(a,b)(c,d)`$ be a factorization is $`S_n`$ then,

1. By performing Hurwitz move $`R_0`$ we get:

$$(a,b)(c,d)\stackrel{HE}{}\{\begin{array}{cc}(c,d)(a,b),\text{ if }\{a,b\}\{c,d\}=\varphi \hfill & \\ (c,d)(a,b),\text{ if }\{a,b\}\{c,d\}=\{a,b\}\hfill & \\ (a,d)(a,b),\text{ if }b=c\text{ and }ad\hfill & \end{array}$$
2. By performing Hurwitz move $`R_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}`$ we get:

$$(a,b)(c,d)\stackrel{HE}{}\{\begin{array}{cc}(c,d)(a,b),\text{ if }\{a,b\}\{c,d\}=\varphi \hfill & \\ (c,d)(a,b),\text{ if }\{a,b\}\{c,d\}=\{a,b\}\hfill & \\ (c,d)(a,d),\text{ if }b=c\text{ and }ad\hfill & \end{array}$$
3. $`(a,b)1_{S_n}\stackrel{HE}{}1_{S_n}(a,b)`$

Proof: Trivial.

From Lemma 3.7 (3) the $`1_{S_n}`$ factors commutes with all other factors. Each factorization is Hurwitz equivalent to a factorization where all $`1_{S_n}`$ factors are on the left of the factorization and the two factorizations have the same transpositions as factors. Since the theorem requires that the weights of the connected components is equal and that both factorizations have the same number of factors, the number of $`1_{S_n}`$ factor is equal.
Therefore, to prove Theorem 3.4 we can ignore the $`1_{S_n}`$ factors, and find standard canonical form to the transposition factors only.

Let $`F_1=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$ be a factorization of $`1_{S_n}`$ where all factors are of transpositions.

###### Lemma 3.8.

If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_jE_{F_1}^{t_1}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{j+1}E_{F_1}^{t_2}`$, $`t_1t_2`$ then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_j\mathrm{\Gamma }_{j+1}\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_m\stackrel{HE}{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{j+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_j\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$.

Proof: Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_j`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{j+1}`$ belong to a different connected component, they do not connect the same vertex and therefore, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_j\mathrm{\Gamma }_{j+1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_j^1=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{j+1}`$ (See Lemma 3.7). Therefore, by operating Hurwitz move $`R_i`$ they commute.

As a result, for each connected component, all elements of the component commutes with all elements of other components. Therefore, factorization is Hurwitz equivalent to a factorization with the same factors ordered according to the component they belong too. For example, order the connected components by the lowest vertex they contain, then gather all factors of the first component to the left, and after them the factors of the second component and so on.

Let $`\{G_{F_1}^r\}_{r=1}^s`$ be the distinct connected components of $`G_{F_1}`$. From Lemma 3.8, $`F_1\stackrel{HE}{}f_1\mathrm{}f_s`$ where $`f_r`$ is a factorization with elements from $`E_{F_1}^r`$. The length of the factorization $`f_r`$ is equal to $`W(G_{F_1}^r)`$ and $`s`$ is the number of connected components. Therefore, to conclude the proof, it is sufficient to show that each $`f_r`$ is Hurwitz equivalent to a standard canonical factorization which depends only on the length of $`f_r`$ (which can never be changed by Hurwitz moves) and $`V_{F_1}^r`$.

We define an order on $`V_{F_1}^r`$ vertices, $`V_{F_1}^r=\{v_{t_1},\mathrm{},v_{t_l}\}`$. Note that since $`F_1=1_{S_n}`$ then, $`f_r=1_{S_n}`$ as a product.

###### Lemma 3.9.

Let $`f=\mathrm{\Gamma }_1\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_m`$ be a factorization with a single connected component, $`G_f^1`$, then $`v_1,v_2V_f^1,f\stackrel{HE}{}(v_1,v_2)\gamma _1\mathrm{}\gamma _{m1}`$.

Proof: Proof by induction on the minimal length of the path connecting $`v_1`$ with $`v_2`$. In the case where the minimal length is $`1`$, there exists $`1jm`$ s.t. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_j=(v_1,v_2)`$. Operating $`\{R_{k}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}\}_{k=j2}^0`$ sequence of Hurwitz moves, we get a factorization $`(v_1,v_2)\gamma _1\mathrm{}\gamma _{m1}`$ (See Lemma 3.7). We will assume that the lemma is true for a path with length less than $`n`$, we will prove that the factorization where the minimal path between $`v_1`$ and $`v_2`$ is $`n`$, is Hurwitz equivalent to a factorization which the path between $`v_1`$ and $`v_2`$ is of length $`n1`$:

Let $`(a_1,a_2),(a_2,a_3),\mathrm{},(a_n,a_{n+1})`$ be the minimal path between $`v_1=a_1`$ and $`v_2=a_{n+1}`$. To prove the above we will perform another induction, on the number of factors which are in between $`(a_1,a_2)`$ and $`(a_2,a_3)`$. We will assume that $`(a_1,a_2)`$ is left to $`(a_2,a_3)`$:

$$f=\mathrm{}(a_1,a_2)(b_1,c_1)(b_2,c_2)\mathrm{}(b_k,c_k)(a_2,a_3)\mathrm{}$$

Let $`k`$ be the number of factors between $`(a_1,a_2)`$ and $`(a_2,a_3)`$.
In the case where $`k=0`$, $`(a_1,a_2)(a_2,a_3)\stackrel{HE}{}(a_1,a_3),(a_1,a_2)`$ and we are done since the new factorization contains the path $`(a_1,a_3),(a_3,a_4),\mathrm{},(a_n,a_{n+1})`$ which is of length $`n1`$.
In the case where $`k>0`$:

* If $`\{a_1,a_2\}\{b_1,c_1\}=\varphi `$ then, $`(a_1,a_2)(b_1,c_1)\stackrel{HE}{}(b_1,c_1)(a_1,a_2)`$ (By Lemma 3.7), and now $`(a_1,a_2)`$ and $`(a_2,a_3)`$ are separated by $`k1`$ factors, and so we are done.
* If $`a_1=b_1`$ then, $`(a_1,a_2)(a_1,c_1)\stackrel{HE}{}(a_2,c_1)(a_1,a_2)`$ (By Lemma 3.7), and now $`(a_1,a_2)`$ and $`(a_2,a_3)`$ are separated by $`k1`$ factors. Note that $`(a_1,c_1)`$ is not an element in the path (since the path is minimal).
* If $`a_2=b_1`$ then, $`(a_1,a_2)(a_2,c_1)\stackrel{HE}{}(a_1,c_1)(a_1,a_2)`$ (By Lemma 3.7), and now $`(a_1,a_2)`$ and $`(a_2,a_3)`$ are separated by $`k1`$ factors. Note that if $`(a_2,c_1)`$ is in the path then $`c_1=a_3`$ and then $`k=0`$.

This concludes the proof of Lemma 3.9.

###### Lemma 3.10.

1. $`(a,b)(a,b)(a,c)(a,c)\stackrel{HE}{}(a,c)(a,c)(a,b)(a,b)`$.
2. $`(a,b)(a,b)(a,c)(a,c)\stackrel{HE}{}(a,b)(a,b)(b,c)(b,c)`$.

Proof 1: $`(a,b)(a,b)(a,c)\stackrel{HE}{}(a,c)(a,b)(a,b)`$ By operating Hurwitz moves $`R_1`$ and $`R_0`$ and therefore, $`(a,b)(a,b)(a,c)(a,c)\stackrel{HE}{}(a,c)(a,c)(a,b)(a,b)`$.
Proof 2: By performing the Hurwitz moves $`R_1^1,R_2^1,R_1^1`$.

Now we are ready to start forming $`f_r`$ into a standard canonical form:
$`v_{t_1},v_{t_2}V_f^r`$, from Lemma 3.9,

$$f_r\stackrel{HE}{}(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})f_r^1$$

where $`f_r^1`$ is the factorization with the $`W(G_{f_r}^1)1`$ other factors.
$`f_r^1=(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})`$ since $`f_r=1_{S_n}`$ and $`f_r^1=(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})^1f_r`$.
Because $`f_r^1=(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})`$, $`f_r^1`$ contains a path connecting $`v_{t_1}`$ with $`v_{t_2}`$. Again, using Lemma 3.9 we get,

$$f_r\stackrel{HE}{}(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})f_r^2\text{ and }f_r^2=1_{S_n}$$

By the first direction of Theorem 3.4 $`(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})f_r^2`$ still creates a single connected component. Therefore, there is a path between $`v_{t_2}`$ and $`v_{t_3}`$, which means that $`f_r^2`$ contains a path from $`v_{t_2}`$ to $`v_{t_3}`$ or from $`v_{t_1}`$ to $`v_{t_3}`$ (for example in some cases where the path in $`G_f^r`$ includes $`(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})`$).
In the first case we get $`f_r\stackrel{HE}{}(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_2},v_{t_3})(v_{t_2},v_{t_3})f_r^4`$ and in the second case we get $`f_r\stackrel{HE}{}(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_3})(v_{t_1},v_{t_3})f_r^4`$ which is by Lemma 3.10 Hurwitz equivalent to the first case.

We continue with this process to bring $`f_r`$ to the form:
$`(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_2},v_{t_3})(v_{t_2},v_{t_3})\mathrm{}(v_{t_{m1}},v_{t_m})(v_{t_{m1}},v_{t_m})f_r^{2m2}`$
Assume we came to the point where:
$`f_r\stackrel{HE}{}(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})\mathrm{}(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})f_r^{2k2}`$ where $`k<m`$ and $`f_r^{2k2}`$ is a factorization with $`W(G_f^r)2k+2`$ factors.
Same as before, the new factorization creates a connected graph and $`f_r^{2k2}=1_{S_n}`$. Since the graph is connected, $`f_r^{2k2}`$ contains a path from $`v_{t_{k+1}}`$ to one of the vertices $`v_{t_s}sk`$. So, there is a path from $`v_{t_s}(sk)`$ to $`v_{t_{k+1}}`$ which does not include the factors left to $`f_r^{2k2}`$ because they create a connected graph which does not include $`v_{t_{k+1}}`$. So, from Lemma 3.9,

$$f_r\stackrel{HE}{}(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})\mathrm{}(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})(v_{t_{k+1}},v_{t_s})f_r^{2k1}\text{,}$$

and since $`f_r^{2k1}=(v_{t_{k+1}},v_{t_s})`$ as a product, there is a path from $`v_{t_{k+1}}`$ to $`v_{t_s}`$.
By Lemma 3.9,

$$f_r\stackrel{HE}{}(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})\mathrm{}(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})(v_{t_{k+1}},v_{t_s})(v_{t_{k+1}},v_{t_s})f_r^{2k}\text{.}$$

Now, only using the factors left to $`f_r^{2k}`$ we need to change $`(v_{t_{k+1}},v_{t_s})(v_{t_{k+1}},v_{t_s})`$ to $`(v_{t_k},v_{t_{k+1}})(v_{t_k},v_{t_{k+1}})`$. Since $`sk`$ there is a path from $`v_{t_s}`$ to $`v_{t_k}`$ in the graph created by the factors on the left, from this fact and using Lemma 3.10 we see that the factorizations:
$`(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})\mathrm{}(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})(v_{t_s},v_{t_{k+1}})(v_{t_s},v_{t_{k+1}})\text{ and}`$
$`(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})\mathrm{}(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})(v_{t_{k1}},v_{t_k})(v_{t_k},v_{t_{k+1}})(v_{t_k},v_{t_{k+1}})`$
are Hurwitz equivalent, since Lemma 3.9 allows us to commute couples of transpositions, or to change one vertex in the couple if the two couples have a common vertex.

To complete the proof of Theorem 3.4 we need to show that we can also bring the right factors, $`f_r^{2m2}`$ to a standard form. This can be done in a similar way to the above procedure:
Take the first factor in $`f_r^{2m2}`$, i.e. $`f_r^{2m2}=(v_{t_x},v_{t_y})f_r^{2m1}`$ and again by using Lemma 3.9 we get $`f_r^{2m2}\stackrel{HE}{}(v_{t_x},v_{t_y})(v_{t_x},v_{t_y})f_r^{2m}`$.

Using Lemma 3.10 and the factors on the left, we can change $`(v_{t_x},v_{t_y})(v_{t_x},v_{t_y})`$ to $`(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})`$ since the graph of the factors on the left is the same as $`f_r`$. This concludes the proof of Theorem 3.4 since every factorization $`f_r`$ is Hurwitz equivalent to:

$$(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})\mathrm{}(v_{t_{m1}},v_{t_m})(v_{t_{m1}},v_{t_m})(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})\mathrm{}(v_{t_1},v_{t_2})$$

Which depends only on the factorization graph and the number of factors in the factorization.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Investigations of the $`\eta `$ meson production via the $`pppp\eta `$ reaction address the question of the strength of the proton-$`\eta `$ interaction at low relative momenta of the interacting particles. In the frame of the optical potential model this interaction can be expressed in terms of phase shifts, which in turn are described by the scattering length $`a_{\eta N}`$ and the effective range of the potential. Usually, the $`a_{\eta N}`$ is defined as a complex quantity with the imaginary part accounting for the $`\eta N\pi N`$ and $`\eta N\pi \pi N`$ processes. The real part of it is a direct measure of the formation – or non-formation – of an $`\eta `$-nuclear quasi-bound state . At present it is still not known whether the attractive interaction between $`\eta `$ meson and nucleons is strong enough to form an $`\eta `$-mesic nucleus or a quasi-bound $`\eta `$NN state. The values of Re(aηN) range between 0.25 fm and 1.05 fm depending on the analysis method and the studied reaction . According to reference, within the present inaccuracy of Re(aηN) the existence of quasi-bound $`\eta `$-mesic light nuclei could be possible. The shape of the energy dependence of the $`pd^3`$He $`\eta `$ cross section implies that either the real or imaginary part of the $`\eta ^3\text{He}`$ scattering length has to be very large , which may be associated with a bound $`\eta ^3\text{He}`$ system. Similarly encouraging are results of reference, where it is argued that a three-body $`\eta `$NN resonant state, which may be formed close to the $`\eta `$d threshold, may evolve into a quasi-bound state for Re($`a_{\eta N}`$$``$ 0.733 fm. Also the close to threshold enhancement of the total cross section of the $`pppp\eta `$ reaction was interpreted as being either a Borromean (quasi-bound) – or a resonance $`\eta `$pp state , provided that Re($`a_{\eta N}`$$``$ 0.7 fm. Contrary, recent calculations performed within a three-body formalism indicate  that a formation of a three-body $`\eta `$NN resonance state is rather not possible, independently of the $`\eta `$N scattering parameters. Moreover, the authors of reference  exclude the possibility of the existence of an $`\eta `$NN quasi-bound state. However, results of both calculations , although performed within a three-body formalism, used the assumption of a separability of the two-body $`\eta `$N and NN interactions, and hence the new quality in the three-body $`\eta `$NN-interaction is not excluded and deserves experimental investigations.

## 2 Experimental results

A Close to threshold measurement of the $`pppp\eta `$ reaction allows to study the interaction of the $`\eta `$-meson with the proton. At an excess energy of Q = 15.5 MeV, at which the reported measurement has been performed, the final state particles are in the range of the strong interaction much longer than $`10^{23}`$ s – typical life-time of N and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ baryon resonances. Thus their mutual interaction may significantly influence the distributions of their relative momenta.

By means of the COSY-11 detection system, using a stochastically cooled proton beam of the cooler synchrotron COSY and a hydrogen cluster target, we have performed a high statistics measurement of the $`pppp\eta `$ reaction at an excess energy of Q = 15.5 MeV. The experiment was based on the four-momentum registration of both outgoing protons, whereas the $`\eta `$ meson was identified via the missing mass technique. Figure 1a presents the missing mass spectrum, with the clear signal originating from $``$24000 events of the $`pppp\eta `$ reaction seen on a flat distribution due to multi-pion production. By means of the simultaneous measurement of elastically scattered protons we were able to monitor not only the luminosity but also the synchrotron beam geometrical dimensions and its position relative to the target. This, and the correction for the mean beam-momentum-changes determined by means of the Schottky-spectrum and the known beam optics, allow us to reproduce exactly the observed missing mass distribution as it is shown by the dashed line in Figure 1a, which is hardly distinguishable from the real data. Figure 1b shows that the full range of the $`\eta `$ meson center-of-mass polar scattering angles has been covered by the detection system acceptance. This permitted to determine the angular distribution of the created $`\eta `$ meson which, as can be seen in Figure 2a, is completely isotropic within the shown statistical errors. The observed distribution is consistent with the previous measurement performed at an excess energy of Q = 16 MeV at the CELSIUS facility . However, it improves the former statistics by a factor of 80. The determination of the four-momentum vectors for both outgoing protons of each registered event gives the complete information of the $`\eta `$pp-system allowing for investigations of the $`\eta `$p and $`\eta `$pp interactions. Figures 2b and 2c show the Dalitz-plots of the identified $`pp\eta `$ system corrected for the detection acceptance and the proton-proton interaction. The enhancement from the $`\eta `$-proton interaction at small m$`{}_{}{}^{2}{}_{p\eta }{}^{}`$ is evident. However, one can also easily recognize a difference between Figures 2b and 2c, which originates from various prescriptions of the proton-proton FSI enhancement factors. It is well established that for the close-to-threshold meson production the energy dependence of the total cross section and the distributions of the differential cross section are predominantly determined by the nucleon-nucleon final state interaction . However, when reducing the proton-proton FSI effect to a multiplicative factor, one finds that it depends on the assumed nucleon-nucleon potential and on the produced meson mass . Figures 2b and 2c present the extreme cases in the estimation of the proton-proton

FSI effects. Due to these differences a derivation of the $`\eta p`$ or $`\eta pp`$ scattering length from the taken data will require a careful estimation of the model dependence of corrections for the proton-proton FSI.

Acknowledgments: This work was partly supported by the European Community - Access to Research Infrastructure action of the Improving Human Potential Programme.


text:
# Rapid optical spectroscopy of X-ray binaries with Keck II

## 1. Introduction

In the last 5+ yrs, with the increasing availability of 4+ metre optical telescopes and fast CCDs it has become possible to perform high time resolution optical spectroscopy. Fast read-out modes are becoming available on these telescopes allowing 1-2k pixel spectra to be read out on timescales of seconds or faster. This allows us to use spectroscopy to explore the rapid optical variability of relatively bright objects (V $`<`$ 15), for instance interacting binaries, where previously only broad-band photometry had been possible.

There are currently two ways to perform such observations. The first uses a drift mode, whereby the exposed region of the CCD is rapidly shifted to an available space on the CCD near the serial register of the CCD. The number of spectra that can be taken in one exposure in this mode is limited by either the physical size of the CCD, or the size of the memory buffer. Once this limit has been reached the data is read-out and a new exposure can begin. This read-out can takes $``$ 10 seconds and leads to poor duty cycles for the fastest observations (for example 2048$`\times `$19.2 millisecond observations, which is standard for the VLT takes 39.35 seconds, but is followed by a read-out time of 92 seconds.) An alternative method uses a continuous-clocking mode, where the CCD is read-out constantly. Unlike the drift mode, there is no limit to the number of spectra that can be readout ina given exposure and deadtime is kept to a minimum. Currently only drift modes are available for visiting observers, examples of these types of modes are

* High Time resolution (HIT) mode using the FOcal Reducer Spectrograph (FORS2) on the Very Large Telescope at Cerro Paranel in Chile. This drift mode allows up to 2048 spectra to be shifted down the CCD before read-out. A number of fixed exposure times are available, between 1 and 300-msec. (A continuous clocking mode will be available soon.)
* Low Smear Drift mode using ISIS on the William Herschel Telescope on La Palma. This drift mode allows is limited by the size of the memory on the DMS (16Mb). It allows read-out of several spatial pixels in a given exposure.
* Drift mode using RGO spectrograph on the Anglo-Australian Telescope at Siding Spring, New South Wales. This mode is similar to the LSD mode on the WHT, again using a physical buffer which limits the number of spectra that can be obtained in one exposure.

A continuous clocking mode works in a similar manner to drift mode systems, however it doesn’t suffer from time-consuming read-out the data, as is the case with existing systems. This is critical in reducing the overheads of such systems, especially when working at the fastest rates, as highlighted earlier. The continuous clocking system used in our project was developed by Richard Gomer for use with the Low-Resolution Imaging Spectrograph (LRIS; Oke, 1995) at the Cassegrain focus of the 10 metre Keck II telescope, situated near the summit of Mauna Kea, Hawaii. In the next sections, I will describe the data we obtained using this system, including details of the data reduction necessary and highlight some of the results obtained.

## 2. The project

The three main goals of the project were

* Echo mapping of X-ray binaries
* Correlated long timescale variability ($``$ hours)
* Spectroscopic timing studies

Echo mapping is an indirect imaging technique that uses the time delays between X-ray and optical variability to map the reprocessing regions in an X-ray binary (see O’Brien and Horne (2001a) for a review of echo-mapping of X-ray binaries). The optical emission arises from the reprocessing of X-ray irradiation and the time of flight difference between the directly observed X-rays and the subsequent reprocessed optical emission constrains the position of the reprocessing region. This technique has been used to map the broad line region in Active Galactic Nuclei (Horne 2001) and more recently adapted to X-ray binaries to constrain the positions of the reprocessing sites in such systems (Hynes et al. 1998; O’Brien et al. 2001d). However, such projects have been limited to short duration photometric observations, whilst RXTE and EXOSAT have allowed us to accurately observe the X-ray variability on timescales of milliseconds. Our goal is to search for time delayed echoes of the rapid X-ray variability and use this to map the accretion flow in X-ray binaries.

Perhaps the most exciting consequence of using optical spectroscopy for echo-mapping is the ability to create physical parameter echo-maps (eg. temperature and density maps) by comparing the time delays from different emission lines. Such maps could be used to constrain models for the accretion flow, for instance helping to determine the role played by Advection Dominated Accretion Flows (ADAFs) on the inner regions of the accretion flow.

Correlated long timescale variability is vital in understanding the multi wavelength picture of X-ray binaries, in order to improve phenomenological models of such systems. Photometry shows us that rapid variability occurs on many/all timescales and traditional spectroscopy reveals a number of different emission lines in the optical spectra. Spectra of sufficient time resolution will allow us to understand the rapid response of such systems and whether or not this is driven by the X-ray irradiation.

Spectroscopic timing studies will not only reveal the existence of any periodic or quasi-periodic variability in such systems, but also to constrain the production mechanism and site using the spectrum of the variability. In the case of X-ray binaries this will allow us to search for analogues of the QPOs seen in the X-ray power spectra of such systems.

## 3. The data acquisition system

The data were obtained during 5 clear nights UT 02-06 July 1998. During the observations over 1.2 million spectra were obtained. The principal targets were Cygnus X-2, Hercules X-1 and Scorpius X-1, for which the observations were simultaneous with RXTE to search for correlated X-ray and optical variability. Additional targets were observed when X-ray observations were not possible (earth occultation, SAA passage). Table 1 is a summary of the observations, including the approximate number of optical spectra taken on each target and a brief description of each object.

### 3.1. Technical description

The data system works by creating an invisible tap on the fibre optic cable between the VME and timing boards, to intercept and record the data from the CCD in the form of a continuous byte stream. With the data system switched on, the CCD is set into continuous read-out mode, where the rows of the CCD are shifted down the CCD and readout every $``$ 0.072 seconds, fixing the time resolution of the data system. The data can be thought of as coming from a virtual CCD with 2148 columns (including 25 pixels of under-scan and 75 pixels of over-scan) and $`(A+T/0.072)`$ rows, where $`T`$ is the duration of the run in seconds and $`A`$ is the row number, from the serial read-out, where the image of the slit falls on the CCD. The spatial dispersion is 4.6 pixels/arcsecond, so with on-chip binning of 8, each row covers 1.74 arcseconds. A 5.2 arcsecond slit was used to ensure that all the incident starlight was collected. The slit was partially covered using aluminized mylar tape to create a 5.2x5.2 arcsecond square aperture. Thus the image of the aperture covers three rows of pixels on the CCD, one row containing the object and two rows containing sky. Since we have no information as to the exact location of the image on the CCD our uncertainty in $`A`$ is $`\pm 1`$, leading to an intrinsic uncertainty in the absolute timing of $`\pm 0.072`$ seconds. It also leads to a correlation between adjacent spectra, since three pixels are being exposed simultaneously, however this is low since the seeing was $`0.8`$ arcseconds during the observations.

Two time reference systems were used. First, an internal clock which updated roughly every 55 ms was used to mark the time on each 2148-pixel spectrum. This clock was used to display the time on the monitor, and the displayed time was compared to the audible WWVH time signal received by a short wave radio. The offset could be determined to roughly 0.1 seconds, and this was recorded roughly every 30 minutes.

Due to the nature of the continuous byte stream of data, it was impossible to obtain accurate times for each individual spectrum. In order to find the times accurately timestamps were placed at several points throughout the observations. These timestamps were created using an incandescent lamp that illuminated the CCD at a known time, from which we found an ephemeris and exposure time. Individual time marks, accurate to approximately 200ms, were placed after every other spectrum using the computer clock. These were used as a check for our calculated ephemeris and exposure time.

### 3.2. Sky subtraction

Sky spectra were taken at the beginning and end of each run, by moving the telescope, so that long timescale variations could be detected. The mean and variable components of the sky spectrum were found by creating a lightcurve for each pixel and extracting the mean (coefficient 1) and gradient (coefficient 2) of this lightcurve. The average gradient was found to be $`<5\times 10^7`$ counts/spectrum. Each run consisted of $`40,00080,000`$ spectra, so that the expected change in the sky level during the run is $``$ 0.1%. The gradient was therefore set to zero during our analysis so that no spurious pixel to pixel variations were introduced. The mean value was calculated for each run and filtered in wavelength, with a running median filter of width 11 pixels.

This mean sky spectrum also shows several electronic features. The origin of these features is unknown, but they appear to be removed very well from the object spectra if modeled as sky features. During the sky subtraction, the variance of these points was increased so that their weighting in subsequent analysis was reduced.

### 3.3. Wavelength calibration

The arc calibration was done by fitting a second order polynomial to 7 identified lines in a median spectrum of 1400 individual exposures of Hg and Ar lamps. The individual arc lines are broad due to the large slit width used in our observations (5.2 arcseconds, or 60 $`\AA `$), however the Gaussian fits to the lines find the centroid well (This can be seen by comparing the calculated wavelengths of spectral lines to their known wavelengths). Arc spectra from the beginning and end of the exposures were used to take into account any drifts in the wavelength scale. The wavelength calibration was applied using the molly spectral analysis package.

### 3.4. Flux calibration

The individual spectra on a given night were flux calibrated using exposures taken of the standard star, Feige 67 (Oke 1990). A low order polynomial fit was found to the median of 2000 individual spectra and this calibration was applied using the subroutine fcal in the analysis package molly. Unfortunately, due to the sudden drop off in the response of the grating used, it was not possible to fit to the standard star below $``$ 3600Å, thus reducing our effective wavelength coverage.

## 4. Summary of results

While the thorough analysis of such a vast and unique dataset could take many years, I wish to briefly summarize some of the initial findings of our work. These results highlight progress made towards each of the three goals of the project.

### 4.1. Correlated X-ray and optical variability in Cygnus X-2

We have created simultaneous X-ray and optical lightcurves from our dataset, including continuum and line lightcurves from the optical spectra in order to investigate the correlations in the system. We have found correlations on the timescales of hours that are shown in Figures 1 and 2, however these correlations are not as simple as one would expect. In the simple model of reprocessing, hard X-ray penetrate below the optical photosphere, heating these regions, which subsequently emit optical and UV photons as they cool. The soft X-ray photons are absorbed above the optical photosphere and result in emission line photons. Both of these processes should lead to a direct relation between the X-ray and optical fluxes, once the recombination and cooling timescales are taken into account. However, we have observed that while this direct relation holds when the source is on the Normal Branch (hard X-ray spectrum, medium intensity), it does not hold on the Flaring branch (soft X-ray spectrum, low intensity), as illustrated in Figure 1. However the correlated variability appears stronger on the flaring branch, where the X-ray variability is greater, which appears to contradict the previous observation of an anti-correlation in this state. Further work is needed in order to understand this phenomenon, however it appears that the X-ray flux is comprised of more than one component, one of which is responsible for the short timescale ($``$ 10’s seconds) correlations and another of which is responsible for the longer variability ($``$ minutes-hours) which has no rapid response in the optical. The origin of these components remains unclear, although it is possibly related to the balance between the accretion and outflow rates (O’Brien 2001c), which varies as the state changes in the system and are expected to have different spectra.

### 4.2. Echo-mapping of Cygnus X-2

In order to perform echo-mapping of Cygnus X-2 it will be necessary to decompose the X-ray variability into the individual components described in the previous section. By removing the slowly varying component we will determine the lightcurve of the variability that drives the rapid response. The correlations can be seen in teh non-deconvolved lightcurve shown in Figure 3 during the first set of observations around t=77000 secs. Preliminary analysis of these lightcurves reveal a time delay of $``$ 60 secs in the cross-correlation functions. This is in the delay expected if the reprocessing is taking place in the outer regions of the accretion disc. The peak will come from reprocessing at the rear of the disc, where the projected area of the reprocessing region is greatest (O’Brien 2000). This supports the work of Casares et al. (1998), who found little evidence for irradiation on the innerface of the companion star.

### 4.3. Optical mHz QPOs in Hercules X-1

We observed a low coherence QPO in the continuum and lines of Hercules X-1 (O’Brien et al. 2001b). The power spectrum was fitted with 3 components (White noise, power law and a QPO) and the central frequency of the QPO determined to be 35mHz (see Figure 4). The dynamic power spectrum, shown in Figure 5, created using the Gabor transform method (Boyd ????), shows the QPO is comprised of several higher coherence QPOs with a range of frequencies. The coherence of these individual features are higher and are associated with a dynamical timescale in the disc. The central frequency is similar to that observed by Boroson et al. (2000) in the UV lightcurve of Her X-1 and is tentatively associated with the impact point of the accretion stream, incident on the twisted, precessing accretion disc. No evidence was found for this QPO in the simultaneous X-ray power spectrum, although the observations took place during the X-ray “off-state” of the 35-day super-orbital periodicity.

### 4.4. Emission line oscillations in V2051 Ophiuchi

During a short observation, covering only 200seconds, Steeghs et al. (2000) observed continuum and line emission oscillations in the eclipsing dwarf nova V2051 Ophiuchi. These observations took place during the decline from a normal outburst of this system and included observations during an eclipse, enabling a determination of the spectrum of the white dwarf, which is difficult to decompose with slower spectroscopic observations.

The continuum oscillations with a period of 56.12 seconds are associated with the spinning white dwarf, while emission line oscillations with a period of 29.77 seconds are associated with a region $``$ 12 white dwarf radii from the white dwarf. The form of the emission line oscillation is shown in Figure 6, which shows a clear blue-red shift pattern. Steeghs et al. (2000) identify this with the vertical structure in the disc at the circularisation radius, where the accretion stream impacts onto the disc.

## 5. Summary and future

We have obtained low resolution spectra of interacting binaries with integration times of milliseconds and little or no deadtime with a novel continuous clocking data acquisition mode and the current hardware available on the Keck II telescope. These observations have revealed a number of interesting phenomena, including time-delayed optical variability that is being driven by X-ray irradiation in the LMXB Cygnus X-2. We have studied the long timescale correlations between the X-ray and optical spectra in Cygnus X-2 as it changes X-ray state, as defined by its position in the X-ray colour-colour diagram. We have also studied QPOs in the continuum and lines of the X-ray pulsar Hercules X-1 and the dwarf nova V2051 Ophiuchi.

These observations highlight some of the interesting phenomena that can be explored with rapid spectroscopy of systems like X-ray Binaries and Cataclysmic Variables and how such observations can help deepen our knowledge of existing phenomena and explore a range of new phenomena in a relatively unexplored region of parameter space. However, equally importantly, they show how such studies can be performed with existing hardware during bright time. This increases the productivity of large telescopes during these periods without the need for expensive, dediated instruments. This dataset shows that large telescopes have the under-used ability to allow astronomers to go deeper and faster, a capability that should not be overlooked.

#### Acknowledgments.

The author would like to thank the many collaborators in this project; especially Keith Horne, Richard Gomer, Bev Oke, Danny Steeghs and Warren Skidmore who have all contributed directly to this work. We also thank John Cromer for writing, testing, and loading the software that allowed the LRIS CCD to read out continuously, and Bob Leach for helpful discussions. We especially thank Tom Bida and Frederic Chaffee for kindly letting us make changes to the LRIS system.

## References

Boroson, B., O’Brien, K., Horne, K., Kallman, T., Still, M., Boyd, P., Quaintrell, H. & Vrtilek, S. 2000, ApJ, 545, 399

Casares, J. Charles, P. & Kuulkers, E. 1998, ApJ, 493, L39

Horne, K., 2001, in Proceedings of the Astro-tomography workshop, Brussels, July 2000, eds. H.Boffin, D.Steeghs, J.Cuypers, Springer-Verlag

Hynes, R.I., O’Brien, K., Horne, K., Chen, W. & Haswell, C. 1998, MNRAS, 299, L37

O’Brien, K. 2000, PhD Thesis, University of St Andrews

O’Brien, K. & Horne, K., 2001a, in Proceedings of the Astro-tomography workshop, Brussels, July 2000, eds. H.Boffin, D.Steeghs, J.Cuypers, Springer-Verlag

O’Brien, K., Horne, K., Boroson, B., Still, M., Gomer, R., Oke, JB, Boyd, P. & Vrtilek, S. 2001b, MNRAS, in press

O’Brien, K., Horne, K., Gomer, R. & Oke, J.B. 2001c, MNRAS, submitted

O’Brien, K., Hynes, R., Horne, K., Haswell, C., Chen, W. & Still, M., 2001d, MNRAS, submitted

Oke, J.B. 1990, AJ, 99, 162

Oke, J.B. et al. 1995, PASP, 107, 375

Steeghs, D., O’Brien, K., Horne, K., Gomer, R. & Oke, J.B. 2001, MNRAS, 323, 484