text:
# Transverse Velocity Scaling in 197Au + 197Au Fragmentation

The INDRA and ALADIN Collaborations

## Abstract

Invariant transverse-velocity spectra of intermediate-mass fragments were measured with the 4$`\pi `$ multi-detector system INDRA for collisions of 197Au on 197Au at incident energies between 40 and 150 MeV per nucleon. Their scaling properties as a function of incident energy and atomic number $`Z`$ are used to distinguish and characterize the emissions in (i) peripheral collisions at the projectile and target rapidities, and in (ii) central and (iii) peripheral collisions near mid-rapidity. The importance of dynamical effects is evident in all three cases and their origin is discussed.

Heavy-ion collisions in the Fermi-energy domain are rich and complex sources of fragment emissions hirsch99 . With heavy nuclei, rather large composite systems may be formed dago96 ; marie97 ; frank01  that represent the limit in charge and mass over which the bulk properties of excited nuclear matter may be experimentally explored with present-day means. More peripheral collisions may give access to systems consisting of low-density matter interacting with two residual nuclei. Such configurations are of interest for the study of isotopic effects in the phase behavior of the two-component nuclear fluid muell95 ; shi00 ; poggi01 ; baran02 .

The fragment channels of both central and peripheral collisions exhibit characteristic dynamical phenomena. A collective flow, predominantly at small impact parameters, is superimposed on the thermal motion of the emitted particles and fragments, increasing in strength with the bombarding energy reis97 . Peripheral collisions appear binary in the light-particle channels dominated by evaporation from the projectile and target remnants but are characterized by a strong component of fragment emission at rapidities intermediate between those of the projectile and of the target mont94 ; toke95 ; demp96 ; luka97 ; plagnol00 ; dore01 ; piant02 . A possibly dynamical origin of this component, frequently termed neck emission, has been suggested but its nature has not yet been satisfactorily clarified.

A well founded understanding of the mechanisms of fragmentation processes is indispensable if their potential for investigating the thermodynamic behavior of nuclear matter is to be exploited. Considerable progress in this direction has been made possible by the advent of 4$`\pi `$-type detection systems that permit the construction of complete Galilei or Lorentz invariant cross-section distributions. It will be shown, in this Letter, that transverse-velocity spectra obtained from such distributions are particularly useful for identifying the qualitatively different types of emissions on the basis of their characteristic dependences on impact parameter and incident energy. A striking invariance with the incident energy is observed for mid-rapidity fragments from peripheral collisions, the fragment component whose origin is probably the least-well understood.

The data were obtained with the INDRA multidetector pouthas  in experiments performed at the GSI for the reaction 197Au + 197Au at incident energies from 40 to 150 MeV per nucleon, i.e. over a range of relative velocities from once to twice the Fermi value. Beams of 197Au delivered by the heavy-ion synchrotron SIS were directed onto 197Au targets of 2-mg/cm2 areal thickness. Annular veto detectors directly upstream of the INDRA detection system and measurements with empty target frames have been employed in order to verify that the synchrotron beams were properly focussed into the 12-mm-diameter entrance hole of the 4$`\pi `$ detection device.

The energy calibration of the 336 CsI(Tl) detectors has primarily been derived from a detector-by-detector comparison of spectra remeasured for the reaction 129Xe + natSn at 50 MeV per nucleon with spectra measured previously at GANIL marie97 ; luka97 ; plagnol00 . There, calibration data had been obtained by scattering a variety of primary and secondary beams from thin targets. The light emission from the CsI(Tl) scintillators was parameterized according to Ref. parlog02 , and the $`Z`$ dependence of the parameters was obtained from comparing the generated $`\mathrm{\Delta }EE`$ maps to predictions of energy-loss and range tables hubert .

As in previous investigations of symmetric heavy ion collisions luka97 ; plagnol00 , the total transverse energy $`E_{}^{12}`$ of light charged particles ($`Z`$ 2) has been used as an impact parameter selector. The $`E_{}^{12}`$ spectra are found to scale linearly with the incident energy, and the scaled spectra coincide. The relation between $`E_{}^{12}`$ and the reduced impact parameter $`b/b_{\mathrm{max}}`$, obtained with the use of the geometrical prescription cavata90 , is linear in very good approximation, where $`b/b_{\mathrm{max}}`$ decreases with increasing $`E_{}^{12}`$. This behavior is very similar to that observed for the 129Xe + natSn reaction at the lower energies 25 to 50 MeV per nucleon luka97 ; plagnol00 . With the same prescription as used there, impact parameter bins were generated. The most central bin, labelled bin 8, covers impact parameters up to 5% of $`b_{\mathrm{max}}`$. The remaining part of the $`E_{}^{12}`$ spectrum is divided into 7 bins of equal width, corresponding to 7 bins of approximately equal width in $`b`$. Bin 1 contains the most peripheral collisions that were registered at the trigger condition of at least three detected particles.

Peripheral collisions display a binary character in that heavy residues of the projectile and target are observed, as far as they are within the INDRA acceptance (Fig. 1). The emission of intermediate-mass fragments, however, is neither binary nor isotropic with respect to these residues (Figs. 1,2). Their intensity is heavily weighted towards mid-rapidity where, at the lower incident energies, it displays a pronounced maximum, similar as observed for 129Xe + natSn luka97 ; plagnol00 . At higher incident energies, 100 MeV per nucleon and above, the fragment distributions start to separate at mid-rapidity, and a cross-section minimum develops (Fig. 2, top). This may be seen as the beginning of a smooth evolution into the relativistic regime where the fragment emission is concentrated at the projectile and target rapidities schuett96 .

As a potentially useful observable for identifying the dominant mechanisms of fragment production, invariant transverse-velocity spectra for selected centrality and rapidity bins are presented in Fig. 2. These spectra are expected to be Gaussian for a thermally emitting source, with a width $`\sigma ^2=T/m`$ where $`T`$ and $`m`$ are the temperature of the source and the mass of the emitted particle, respectively. If Coulomb forces act in addition, a peak will appear near the velocity corresponding to the Coulomb energy.

The cuts in rapidity $`y`$ that were used to generate the spectra are indicated in the invariant cross section plots, shown for $`Z`$ = 3 and 100 MeV per nucleon in the upper row of Fig. 2. Identical cuts in the scaled rapidity $`y/y_p`$, with a width of 25% of $`y_p`$, were used for the other bombarding energies ($`y_p`$ is the projectile rapidity). Impact-parameter bin 1 was chosen to represent peripheral collisions, and bins 7 and 8 were combined to obtain adequate statistics for central collisions. The transverse-velocity spectra of Li nuclei for the five bombarding energies are shown in the middle panels of the figure. The mean transverse energies for fragments with atomic number $`Z`$ = 3, 5, 7, 9 as a function of the incident energy are given below.

The transverse velocities near the projectile rapidity in peripheral collisions (left column) are dominated by a prominent Coulomb peak that indicates repulsion from the surface of a heavy primary fragment. The peak velocity $`\beta `$ 0.09, equivalent to 2.7 cm/ns and typical for fragment emission from a gold-like residue trock87 , is rather stable and drops by only $`\mathrm{\Delta }\beta `$ 0.01 as the energy is raised from 40 to 150 MeV per nucleon.

Coulomb peaks are absent in the emissions at midrapidity which exhibit two different scaling behaviors for the central and peripheral impact parameters. In the central case (Fig. 2, right panel), the shapes are approximately Gaussian, with an extra shoulder superimposed at the lower incident energies, most likely due to Coulomb repulsion. Both, the mean velocity and the width increase considerably with increasing bombarding energy and with the fragment mass. The mean transverse energies, correspondingly, grow approximately linearly with the incident energy but slightly slower than in proportion to the fragment mass (cf. Ref. hsi94 ). These observations reflect the increasing collectivity of the fragment motion as the incident energy rises, a result of higher compression, a resulting stronger Coulomb acceleration, and higher temperatures of the composite sources that are initially formed in central collisions nebau99 ; inpc .

The most striking behavior is observed for the mid-rapidity fragments from peripheral reactions (middle column of Fig. 2). The shapes of the transverse-velocity spectra, somewhat between Gaussian and exponential, are virtually the same at all incident energies, except perhaps for a weak shoulder that develops at the lowest energies (middle panel). The mean transverse energies are invariant with respect to the incident energy and to the fragment $`Z`$ (bottom panel). The existence of a common energy scale for intermediate-mass fragments over the investigated wide range of bombarding energies seems, at first sight, unexpected for a dynamical mechanism and raises the question of where to search for its origin.

Kinetic energies that are independent of the particle species are expected within thermal models. In the present case, however, a mean transverse energy $`E_{}`$ 30 MeV, corresponding to a temperature $`T`$ of the same magnitude, seems rather large and clearly exceeds the temperature range at which fragments can be expected to survive. Kinetic energies that appear thermal and correspond to high temperatures are obtained from the Goldhaber model in which fragment momenta are assumed to result from the nucleonic Fermi motion gold74 . This approach has proven useful for the interpretation of kinetic energies of intermediate-mass fragments from spectator decays at relativistic bombarding energies odeh00 . In the present case, however, the value $`E_{}`$ = $`T`$ = 15 MeV, derived for the Fermi momentum $`p_\mathrm{F}`$ = 265 MeV/c of heavy nuclei, amounts to only about half of the equivalent temperature that is required (Fig. 3). Since it is unlikely that the density or the temperature of the neck region attain the extreme values that would be needed to bring this value up and close to observation bauer95 , at most part of the observed energies can be ascribed to the intrinsic nucleonic motion.

The intermediate bombarding energies are characterized by the interplay of mean-field and nucleon-nucleon collision dynamics. The importance of the latter increases with energy, due to the reduced role of Pauli blocking, as apparent in the prompt emissions of light particles lemmon99 ; dore01 . The transverse energies generated in primary nucleon-nucleon collisions should reflect the incident energy, in addition to the Fermi motion. The rise with energy, however, will be partly compensated by the reduced Pauli blocking of final states with low transverse momentum at higher incident energies. Simulations confirm that essentially only the widths of the distributions increase while the mean transverse energies rise rather slowly if the blocking effect is taken into account (Fig. 3). This property of the mean transverse energies is specific for the present range of energies at and above the Fermi value. Fragments formed by a coalescence mechanism from only scattered nucleons will have transverse energies that are clearly too high. It will be sufficient if a few of them are built into the nascent fragments which may also trigger their separation from the bulk.

The stronger Pauli blocking at the lower incident energies thus represents a compensating mechanism that contributes to the observed invariance of $`E_{}`$. This is also the case for the Coulomb potential generated by the two residues in the neck region. Essential for reactions at lower energies and in fission poggi01 ; piant02 ; field92 , its role is expected to decrease at the higher bombarding energies at which the residue velocities are comparable to or larger than those of the mid-rapidity fragments. Simulations with Coulomb trajectory calculations confirm this effect (Fig. 3). They also indicate that the Coulomb contribution to the transverse energy may depend very little on the fragment $`Z`$. In the simulations, a thermal distribution was assumed for the initial fragment motion, in accordance with the Goldhaber model. It has the consequence that heavier fragments move away more slowly from the field free zone in between the receding residues. This may explain why the Coulomb forces do not disturb the $`Z`$ invariance of the transverse motion (Fig. 2 bottom, middle panel).

All these mechanisms, whose effects are schematically illustrated in Fig. 3, are contained in realistic microscopic transport theories which thus seem suited to test the suggested reason for the observed invariances wada00 . Complications may arise from the fact that surface effects and finer details in the modelling are important in peripheral reactions and will require a rather careful treatment plagnol00 ; aichelin . Additional insight, in particular with regard to the role of the Coulomb forces, may also be gained from an experimental study of the dependence of the fragment transverse motion on the mass of the collision system.

To summarize, three different modes of fragment emission have been characterized on the basis of the transverse-velocity spectra. All of them are strongly influenced by dynamical effects. Peripheral collisions appear binary only as long as the heavy residues and evaporated light particles are considered. The emission of intermediate-mass fragments is not symmetric with respect to the residue rapidities. The mid-rapidity fragments from these collisions exhibit large transverse velocities on a scale corresponding to an effective temperature of nearly 30 MeV. The invariance of their transverse motion with incident energy and fragment $`Z`$ is most likely the result of a compensation of several dynamical effects, the initial Fermi motion in the colliding nuclei, the generation of transverse momenta in nucleon-nucleon collisions and the Coulomb interaction between the fragments and the separating residues. The important role of collective motion, linearly increasing with the incident energy over the covered range, is evident for central collisions.

The authors would like to thank the staff of the GSI for providing heavy ion beams of the highest quality and for technical support. M.B. and C.Sc. acknowledge the financial support of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft under the Contract No. Be1634/1- and Schw510/2-1, respectively; D.Go. and C.Sf. acknowledge the receipt of Alexander-von-Humboldt fellowships. This work was supported by the European Community under contract ERBFMGECT950083.


format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

A new precise measurement of $`J/\psi `$ exclusive photoproduction by ZEUS  opens a new window in our understanding of the process and allows us to give more accurate predictions for future experiments.

The key issue of the dataset  is the diffractive cone shrinkage observed in $`J/\psi `$ photoproduction which leads us to consider it a soft rather than pure QCD process so that we can apply the Soft Dipole Pomeron exchange  model.

We are improving the model while not changing its main properties such as the universality for all vector mesons and its applicability in a wide energy region. The structure of the amplitude singularities in the $`j`$-plane remains also intact but we use a nonlinear Pomeron trajectory in order to describe correctly the behaviour of the differential distributions. The use of non-linear trajectories improves, in fact, the analyticity properties of the scattering amplitude. The secondary Reggeons however, are for simplicity, taken directly with their trajectories as determined from the pure hadronic case. The $`J/\psi `$ elastic cross section is described as due to the soft Pomeron exchange but without unitarity violation.

We utilize the following picture of the interaction: a photon fluctuates into a quark-antiquark pair and as the lifetime of such a fluctuation is quite long (by the uncertainty principle it grows with the beam energy $`\nu `$ as $`2\nu /(Q^2+M_V^2)`$ ), the proton interacts via Pomeron or secondary Reggeon exchange with this quark-antiquark pair. After the interaction this pair forms a vector meson . The hint is that such an interaction must be very close to that among hadrons and, following the principle of Regge pole theory, that the Pomeron is universal in all hadron-hadron interactions and in all other processes, including DIS, provided we have an appropriate kinematical region for the Regge approach to hold (vacuum quantum numbers exchange is possible). Thus, if Pomeron exchange is possible, then it has the same properties (the form of singularity, position of such a singularity in the $`J`$-plane, trajectory etc.) as in hadron-hadron interaction. This is true at least for on shell particles. A real photon ($`Q^2=0`$) is considered it as a hadron (according to the data). For $`Q^20`$ we assume that no new singularity appears . More precisely, even if we assume a new singularity at $`Q^20`$, its contribution must be equal to zero for $`Q^2=0`$. Indeed the analysis of the data  shows that there is no need for such a new contribution.

The basic diagram is depicted in Figure 1; $`s`$ and $`t`$ are the usual Mandelstam variables, $`Q^2=q^2`$ is the virtuality of the photon.

It is well known that high-energy representation of the scattering amplitude may be expressed as a sum over the the appropriate Regge poles in the complex $`j`$ plane

$$A(s,t)_s\mathrm{}\underset{i}{}\eta _i(t)\beta _i(t)(\mathrm{cos}\theta _t)^{\alpha _i(t)},$$
(1)
where $`\eta _i(t)`$ is the signature factor and $`\theta _t`$ is the scattering angle in the $`t`$ channel.

In the case of vector meson photoproduction we utilize the variable $`z\mathrm{cos}\theta _t`$

$$z=\frac{2(W^2M_p^2)+t+Q^2M_V^2}{\sqrt{(t+Q^2M_V^2)^2+4M_V^2Q^2}}$$
(2)
where $`W^2=(p+q)^2s`$, $`M_V`$ is the vector meson mass, $`M_p`$ is the proton mass.

Assuming vector meson dominance , the relation between the forward cross sections of $`\gamma pVp`$ and $`VpVp`$ is given by

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dt}(t=0)_{\gamma pVp}=\frac{4\pi \alpha }{f_V^2}\frac{d\sigma }{dt}(t=0)_{VpVp}$$
(3)
where the strength of the vector meson coupling $`\frac{4\pi }{f_V^2}`$ may be found from $`e^+e^{}`$ decay width of vector meson $`V`$

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_{Ve^+e^{}}=\frac{\alpha ^2}{3}\frac{4\pi }{f_V^2}m_V$$
(4)
When $`V=\rho _0,\omega ,\phi ,J/\mathrm{\Psi }`$ the relations of these couplings may be obtained assuming SU(4) flavour symmetry. No attempt is made to extend flavour symmetry to SU(5) so as to incorporate also the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ coupling. The symmetry is too badly broken for this to make sense. Using the quark content of the mesons, we have

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& <Q_j^2>_\rho \hfill & =\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\frac{2}{3}+\frac{1}{3})\right|^2=\frac{1}{2},\hfill \\ & <Q_j^2>_\omega \hfill & =\left|\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\frac{2}{3}\frac{1}{3})\right|^2=\frac{1}{18},\hfill \\ & <Q_j^2>_\varphi \hfill & =\left|\frac{1}{3}\right|^2=\frac{1}{9},\hfill \\ & <Q_j^2>_{J/\psi }\hfill & =\left|\frac{2}{3}\right|^2=\frac{4}{9}.\hfill \end{array}$$

Using the property $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{Ve^+e^{}}/<Q_j^2>const`$ we can obtain the following approximate relations

$$m_\rho /f_\rho ^2:m_\omega /f_\omega ^2:m_\phi /f_\phi ^2:m_{J/\psi }/f_{J/\psi }^2=9:1:2:8$$
(5)
which are in fairly good agreement with experimental measurements of decay widths .

We take into account these relations by introducing coefficients $`N_V`$ (following to  ) and writing the amplitude as $`A_{\gamma pVp}=N_CN_VA_{VpVp}`$, where

$$N_C=3;N_\rho =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}};N_\omega =\frac{1}{3\sqrt{2}};N_\varphi =\frac{1}{3};N_{J/\psi }=\frac{2}{3}.$$
(6)
The amplitude of the process $`VpVp`$ may be written in the following form

$$A(z,t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)=IP(z,t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)+f(z,t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)+\mathrm{},$$
(7)
where, $`\stackrel{~}{Q}^2=Q^2+M_V^2`$.

$`IP(z,t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)`$ is the Pomeron contribution for which we use the so called dipole Pomeron which gives a very good description of all hadron-hadron total cross sections ,. Specifically, $`IP`$ is given by

$$IP(z,t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)=ig_0(t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)(iz)^{\alpha _{IP}(t)1}+ig_1(t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)ln(iz)(iz)^{\alpha _{IP}(t)1},$$
(8)
where the first term is a single $`j`$-pole contribution and the second (with an additional $`ln(iz)`$ factor) is the contribution of the double $`j`$-pole.

A similar expression applies to the contribution of the $`f`$-Reggeon

$$f(z,t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)=ig_f(t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)(iz)^{\alpha _f(t)1}.$$
(9)
It is important to stress that in this model the intercept of the Pomeron trajectory is equal to 1

$$\alpha _{IP}(0)=1.$$
(10)
Thus the model does not violate the Froissart-Martin bound .

For $`\rho `$ and $`\phi `$ meson photoproduction we write the scattering amplitude as the sum of a Pomeron and $`f`$ contribution. According to the Okubo-Zweig rule, the $`f`$ meson contribution should be suppressed in the production of the $`\phi `$ and $`J/\psi `$ mesons, but given the present crudeness of the state of the art, we added the $`f`$ meson contribution in the $`\phi `$ meson case. While we expect the $`f`$ contribution to $`J/\psi `$ meson production to be essentially zero, we believe that it is not irrelevant for $`\phi `$ meson production due to $`\omega \varphi `$ mixing. Indeed, in the $`\phi `$ decay mode, more than $`15`$% is due to non strange particles and the $`\overline{K}K`$ decay mode is present in $`f`$ meson decay.

For $`\omega `$ meson photoproduction, we include also $`\pi `$ meson exchange (see also the discussion in ), which is needed in the low energy sector given that we try to describe the data for all energies $`W`$. Even though we did not expect it, the model describes well the data down to threshold.

In the integrated elastic cross section

$$\sigma (z,M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)_{el}^{\gamma pVp}=4\pi \underset{t_{}}{\overset{t_+}{}}𝑑t|A^{\gamma pVp}(z,t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)|^2,$$
(11)
the upper and lower limits

$$2t_\pm =\pm \frac{L_1L_2}{W^2}(W^2+Q^2M_V^22M_p^2)+\frac{(Q^2+M_p^2)(M_V^2M_p^2)}{W^2},$$
(12)
$$L_1=\lambda (W^2,Q^2,M_p^2),L_2=\lambda (W^2,M_V^2,M_p^2),$$
(13)
$$\lambda ^2(x,y,z)=x^2+y^2+z^22xy2yz2zx,$$
(14)
are determined by the kinematical condition $`1\mathrm{cos}\theta _s1`$ where $`\theta _s`$ is the scattering angle in the s-channel of the process.

The accurate account of the kinematically available $`t`$ region allows us to describe effectively the threshold behaviour of cross sections, so that when $`WW_{threshold}`$ we have $`t_{}t_+`$ and the elastic cross section goes to zero. The imaginary part of the amplitude does not vanish at threshold, but it turns out that the kinematical cancellation alone accounts for the threshold behaviour. The kinematical character of the threshold behaviour of the integrated cross sections was studied long ago .

For the Pomeron contribution (8) we use a nonlinear trajectory

$$\alpha _{IP}(t)=1+\gamma (\sqrt{4m_\pi ^2}\sqrt{4m_\pi ^2t}),$$
(15)
where $`m_\pi `$ is the pion mass. Such a trajectory was utilized for photoproduction amplitudes in ,  and its roots are very old .

For the $`f`$-meson contribution for the sake of simplicity we use the standard linear Reggeon trajectory

$$\alpha _{IR}(t)=\alpha _{IR}(0)+\alpha _{IR}^{}(0)t.$$
(16)
In the case of nonzero virtuality of the photon, we have a new variable in play $`Q^2=q^2`$. At the same time, the cross section $`\sigma _L`$ is nonzero. According to , QCD predicts the following dependence for $`\sigma _T`$, $`\sigma _L`$ and their ratio as $`Q^2`$ goes to infinity:

$`\sigma _T{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Q^8}}(x_{IP}G(x_{IP},\stackrel{~}{Q}^2/4))^2;`$
$`\sigma _L{\displaystyle \frac{1}{Q^6}}(x_{IP}G(x_{IP},\stackrel{~}{Q}^2/4))^2;`$ (17)
$`R\sigma _L/\sigma _TQ^2/M_V^2;`$
$`\sigma =(\sigma _T+\sigma _L)|_{Q^2\mathrm{}}\sigma _L.`$
Wheere $`x_{IP}G(x_{IP},\stackrel{~}{Q}^2/4)`$ is the gluon distribution function and $`x_{IP}=\frac{Q^2+M_V^2}{W^2+M_V^2}`$ (see however  where another possibility is investigated).

## 2 The Model

For the Pomeron resides we use the following parametrization

$`g_i(t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)={\displaystyle \frac{g_i}{Q_i^2+\stackrel{~}{Q}^2}}exp(b_i(t;\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)),`$ (18)
$`i=0,1.`$
The slopes are chosen as

$`b_i(t;\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)=\left(b_{i0}+{\displaystyle \frac{b_{i1}}{1+\stackrel{~}{Q}^2/Q_b^2}}\right)(\sqrt{4m_\pi ^2}\sqrt{4m_\pi ^2t}),`$ (19)
$`i=0,1,`$
to comply with the previous choice (15) and analyticity requirements .

The Reggeon residue is

$$g_{IR}(t;M_V^2,\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)=\frac{g_{IR}M_p^2}{(Q_{IR}^2+\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)\stackrel{~}{Q}^2}exp(b_{IR}(t;\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)),$$
(20)
where

$$b_{IR}(t;\stackrel{~}{Q}^2)=\frac{b_{IR}}{1+\stackrel{~}{Q}^2/Q_b^2}t,$$
(21)
$`g_0,g_1`$, $`Q_0^2(GeV^2)`$, $`Q_1^2(GeV^2)`$, $`Q_{IR}^2(GeV^2)`$, $`Q_b^2(GeV^2)`$, $`b_{00}(GeV^1)`$, $`b_{01}(GeV^1)`$, $`b_{10}(GeV^1)`$, $`b_{11}(GeV^1)`$, $`b_{IR}(GeV^2)`$ are adjustable parameters. $`IR=f`$ for $`\rho `$ and $`\phi `$, $`IR=f,\pi `$ for $`\omega `$. We use the same slope $`b_{IR}`$ for $`f`$ and $`\pi `$ Reggeon exchanges.

### 2.1 Photoproduction of vector mesons by real photons ($`Q^2=0`$).

In the fit we use all available data starting from the threshold for each meson. As the new dataset of ZEUS  provides us with the unique information on both integrated elastic cross section and differential distribution of exclusive $`J/\psi `$ meson photoproduction, we keep only these data for $`Q^2=0`$. This allows us to explore the effects of nonlinearity of the Pomeron trajectory and residues. In the region of non zero $`Q^2`$ the combined data of H1 and ZEUS is used.

Different experiments have different normalization especially at low energies. This implies that the $`\chi ^2/\mathrm{d}.\mathrm{o}.\mathrm{f}.`$ will not be very good while the overall agreement is quite satisfactory.

The whole set of data is composed of $`357`$ experimental points 444The data are available at
REACTION DATA Database http://durpdg.dur.ac.uk/hepdata/reac.html
CROSS SECTIONS PPDS database http://wwwppds.ihep.su:8001/c1-5A.html and, with a grand total of $`12`$ parameters, we find $`\chi ^2/\mathrm{d}.\mathrm{o}.\mathrm{f}=1.49`$. The main contribution to $`\chi ^2`$ comes from the low energy region ( $`W4GeV`$); had we started fitting from $`W_{min}=4GeV`$, the resulting $`\chi ^2/\mathrm{d}.\mathrm{o}.\mathrm{f}=0.85`$ for the elastic cross sections would be much better and more appropriate for a high energy model.

In order to get a reliable description and the parameters of the trajectories and residues we use elastic cross sections for each process from threshold up to the highest values of the energy and differential cross sections in the whole t-region where data are available: 0 $`|t|`$ 1.6 $`GeV^2`$. The data on differential cross section of $`\rho `$ meson production at $`W=71.3GeV`$ and $`\phi `$ meson production at $`W=13.731GeV`$ are not included in the fitting procedure.

The parameters are given in Table 1. The errors on the parameters are obtained by MINUIT.

The results are presented in Fig. 2, which shows also the prediction of the model for $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(9460)`$ photoproduction.

As can be seen, the model describes the vector meson exclusive photoproduction data without the need of Pomeron contribution with intercept higher than 1. In addition, the rapid rise of the $`J/\psi `$ cross section at low energies is described as a transition phenomenon, a delay of the onset of the real asymptotic.

Had one assumed SU(5) flavour symmetry for the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(9460)`$, we would have found $`<Q_j^2>_\mathrm{{\rm Y}}=1/9`$ and thus $`N_\mathrm{{\rm Y}}=N_\phi `$. This relation leads to underestimate the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}`$ photoproduction cross section (see solid line Fig. 2). Phenomenologically we find that $`N_\mathrm{{\rm Y}}=N_{J/\psi }`$ gives a better description of the data on $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(9460)`$ production (dotted line), but perhaps an intermediate value would be more appropriate.

### 2.2 Differential cross section of vector meson exclusive production

The differential cross section is given by

$$\frac{d\sigma }{dt}=4\pi |A(z,t;\stackrel{~}{Q}^2,M_V^2)|^2.$$
(22)
Using the amplitude from the previous section this quantity is now calculated and the comparison with the data is presented in Fig. 4, 4, 6, 5, 8 and 8.

Given the universality of our approach we conclude that extracting the Pomeron trajectory from the experimental data as proposed in  and  using the data depicted in Fig. 5 cannot be regarded as a valid argument to support either hard Pomeron contribution or the BFKL Pomeron.

Exploring the nonlinearity of the Pomeron trajectory (16) and slopes (19), we have tried adding to either a linear term or a heavier threshold; both give negligibly small effects. Thus we conclude that new ZEUS data on $`d\sigma _{J/\psi }/dt`$ (see for example Fig. 6) are a strong support in favor of the nonlinear Pomeron trajectory.

### 2.3 Photoproduction of vector mesons by virtual photons
($`Q^2>0`$).

In (18) and (20) the $`Q^2`$\- dependence ($`\stackrel{~}{Q}^2=Q^2+M_V^2`$) is completely fixed up to an a priori arbitrary dimensionless function $`f(Q^2)`$ such that $`f(0)=1`$. Thus, we may introduce a new factor that differentiates virtual from real photoproduction:

$$f(Q^2)=\left(\frac{M_V^2}{\stackrel{~}{Q}^2}\right)^n$$
(23)
Accordingly, in the case $`Q^20`$ we use the following parametrizations for Pomeron couplings (compare with Eq. 18):

$$\widehat{g}_i(t;\stackrel{~}{Q}^2,M_V^2)=f(Q^2)g_i(t;\stackrel{~}{Q}^2,M_V^2),i=0,1,$$
(24)
where, for the sake of completeness, we will examine three different choices for the asymptotic $`Q^2`$ behaviour of the Pomeron residue

Choice I

$$n=1,\sigma _T(Q^2\mathrm{})\frac{1}{Q^8}.$$
(25)
Choice II

$$n=0.5,\sigma _T(Q^2\mathrm{})\frac{1}{Q^6}.$$
(26)
Choice III

$$n=0.25,\sigma _T(Q^2\mathrm{})\frac{1}{Q^5}.$$
(27)
For the reggeon couplings we have

$$f_{IR}(Q^2)=\left(\frac{c_1M_V^2}{c_1M_V^2+Q^2}\right)^{n_2},$$
(28)
where $`c_1`$ is an adjustable parameter and $`n_2=0.25,0.25,0.5`$ for choice I, II, III.

Accordingly, in the case $`Q^20`$ we use the following parametrizations for Reggeons couplings (compare with Eq. 20):

$$\widehat{g}_{IR}(t;\stackrel{~}{Q}^2,M_V^2)=f_{IR}(Q^2)g_{IR}(t;\stackrel{~}{Q}^2,M_V^2).$$
(29)
The lack of data on the ratio $`\sigma _L/\sigma _T`$, especially in the high $`Q^2`$ domain, does not allow us to draw definite conclusions about its asymptotic behaviour (the Regge theory is not the appropriate tool for giving predictions in this case), nor do we have a unique prescription in the framework of our model. There may be several realizations of the model with different asymptotic behaviour of $`\sigma _L/\sigma _T`$ . As a demonstration of such a possibility we explore the predictions (17) and use the following (most economical) parametrization for $`R`$ (which cannot be deduced from the Regge theory)

Choice I, II, III

$$R(Q^2,M_V^2)=\left(\frac{cM_V^2+Q^2}{cM_V^2}\right)^{n_1}1$$
(30)
where $`c`$ and $`n_1`$ are adjustable parameters for choice I, II, III.

We have, thus, 3 additional adjustable parameters as compared with real photoproduction. In order to obtain the values of the parameters for the case $`Q^20`$, we fit just the data555The data are available at
REACTION DATA Database http://durpdg.dur.ac.uk/hepdata/reac.html
CROSS SECTIONS PPDS database http://wwwppds.ihep.su:8001/c1-5A.html on $`\rho _0`$ meson photoproduction in the region $`0Q^235GeV^2`$; the parameters for photoproduction by real photons are the same as in Table 1. In order to avoid the low $`W`$ region where nucleon resonances may spoil the picture of $`\rho `$ meson exclusive production, we restrict ourselves to the energy domain $`W4GeV`$ for $`Q^20`$.

The parameters thus obtained are shown in Table 2.

The results of the fit are depicted in Figs. 10, 10, 12, 12. In these figures as well as in all following ones the solid lines, dashed lines and dotted lines correspond to the choice I, II, III correspondingly. The description of the data is very good at all energies. Both high energy data from ZEUS and H1 Fig. 10 and low energy data from HERMES Fig. 12 are accounted for. In the region of the HERMES data (Fig. 12) our description is comparable to the one of Haakman, Kaidalov and Koch  (see  for details).

We can now check the predictions of the model. As stated earlier, we aim at a unified model for all vector meson production, thus the only variable that changes is the mass of the vector meson. In the following figures we depict our predictions for $`\omega `$, $`\phi `$ and $`J/\psi `$ mesons and we compare them with the available data. The description of the data is very good for all the three mesons. The $`\chi ^2=0.89`$ for $`J/\psi `$ meson exclusive production follows without any fitting. Both $`W`$ and $`Q^2`$ dependences are reproduced very well. Notice that, so far, the three choices I, II, III all give equally acceptable reproduction of the data.

We now plot the various ratios $`\sigma _L/\sigma _T`$ (these data were not fitted) corresponding to Eqs (25),(26),(27) (shown with the solid (choice I), dashed (choice II) and dotted (choice III) lines) in Fig. 19, 19, 19. The result shows, indeed, a rapid increase of $`\sigma _L/\sigma _T`$ with increasing $`Q^2`$, however one can see that our intermediate choice II is preferable to either I or III on this basis.

Let us examine the obtained dependences. We find that the data prefer

$$R(Q^2\mathrm{})\left(\frac{Q^2}{M_V^2}\right)^{n_1},$$
(31)
where $`n_12,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}1},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0.3}`$ in choice I, II and III. Our, probably oversimplified, estimates and the data show $`0.3<n_1<1`$, see Fig. 19, thus $`\sigma 1/Q^N`$ where $`N(4,4.4)`$ as $`N=62n_1`$ for the choice II and $`N=52n_1`$ for the choice III. However it is evident that new more precise data on $`R`$ are need.

## 3 Conclusion

We have shown that minor changes in the Soft Dipole Pomeron model recently developed  for vector meson photoproduction allow us to describe well the new ZEUS data  on the differential and integrated cross-sections for $`\gamma pJ/\psi p`$. Again, all available data on photoproduction of other vector mesons at $`Q^2=0`$ as well as $`Q^20`$ are well reproduced.

The changes made do not affect the main properties of the model such as: (i) the Pomeron intercept which is equal to one, (ii) the hardness of the Pomeron, i.e. the fact that it is a double pole in the complex $`j`$-plane.

We take directly into account the kinematical limits through the variable $`z\mathrm{cos}\theta _t`$. The nonlinear Pomeron trajectory $`\alpha _P(t)=1+\gamma (\sqrt{4m_\pi ^2}\sqrt{4m_\pi ^2t})`$ turns out to be more suitable for the nonlinearity of the diffractive cone shown by the new ZEUS data. This is not unexpected as the linear behaviour of the $`IP`$ trajectory is hard to reconcile with analyticity. We have implemented also the correct limits of $`t`$-integration. The last circumstance allows us to account for the threshold behaviour of the cross-sections.

We would like to emphasize the following important points (confirming the main findings of  and repeating some of them)

1. The new ZEUS data  (in contrast to the old ones) quite definitely point towards the nonlinearity of the Pomeron slope and trajectory.
2. Our model describes the data also at low energies due to the kinematical shrinkage of the available $`t`$ region. This is particularly important for $`J/\psi `$ production where the bulk of the available data is not so far from its threshold.
3. Phenomenologically we find that in the region of available $`Q^2`$ the ratio $`\sigma _L/\sigma _T(Q^2/M_V^2)^{n_1},`$ where $`0.3<n_1<1`$. The definite conclusion can be derived only with new precise data on the ratio $`\sigma _L/\sigma _T`$, especially for high $`Q^2`$.
4. Pomeron and secondary Reggeons appear as universal objects in Regge theory . The corresponding $`j`$-singularities of the $`\gamma `$ p amplitudes and their trajectories are universal. They do not depend on the properties of the external particles and, consequently, on $`Q^2`$ (only residues or vertex functions may depend on $`Q^2`$). We believe that the unitarity restrictions on the Pomeron contribution obtained strictly for the $`hh`$ case must hold also for $`\gamma h`$ if it is universal.
5. The growth with energy of hadronic total cross sections and the restriction on the Pomeron intercept ($`\alpha _{IP}(0)1`$) implied by the Froissart-Martin bound  imply that the Pomeron is a more complicated singularity than a simple pole with $`\alpha _{IP}(0)=1`$. We have considered the simplest case when the Pomeron is a double $`j`$-pole leading to $`\sigma (s)\mathrm{ln}s`$. We have shown that one does not need a contribution with $`\alpha (0)>1`$ (hard Pomeron) violating unitarity in order to describe the exclusive photoproduction data in the present region of $`Q^2`$ and $`t`$.

### Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Michele Arneodo, Alexander Borissov, Jean-Rene Cudell and Alessia Bruni for various and fruitful discussions. One of us (E.M.) would like to thank the Department of Theoretical Physics of the University of Torino for its hospitality and financial support during his visit to Turin.


text:
# Floquet states and persistent currents transitions in a mesoscopic ring

## Abstract

We consider the effect of an oscillating potential on the single-particle spectrum and the time-averaged persistent current of a one-dimensional phase-coherent mesoscopic ring with a magnetic flux. We show that in a ring with an even number of spinless electrons the oscillating potential has a strong effect on the persistent current when the excited side bands are close to the eigen levels of a pure ring. Resonant enhancement of side bands of the Floquet state generates a sign change of the persistent current.

PACS: 72.10.-d, 73.23.-b, 73.23.Ra

Mesoscopic systems subject to a periodic in time, external driving force are now of considerable interest. This is illustrated by work concerning low frequency ac-transport , photon-assisted tunneling , and quantum pumping . This list could easily be extended. Electrons interacting with a time-dependent potential  can gain or loss energy and thus the electron system has no stationary states and, in particular, there is no stationary ground state. However if the external potential is periodic in time we can describe the state of a system using the Floquet function  which is a superposition of wave functions with energies shifted by $`n\mathrm{}\omega `$ (here $`n`$ is an integer; $`\omega `$ is the frequency of the driving potential). The existence of many components (side bands) of a wave function has a strong effect on the properties of a mesoscopic system. For instance, side bands open up additional channels for transmission through the mesoscopic system - photon assisted transmission (see e.g., Refs. ). The existence of side bands is also a necessary condition for pumping charge through an unbiased mesoscopic sample .

The aim of the present paper is to investigate the properties of a phase-coherent mesoscopic ring in the Floquet state. We are interested in the coherent properties of the Floquet state of a ring structures with an oscillating potential. In a ring structure the wave functions must not only be periodic in time but also periodic in space. As a consequence a ring, in the presence of an Aharonov-Bohm flux  $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ exhibits a persistent current  . The persistent current is a signature of the coherence of the ground state of a mesoscopic ring . Therefore, it is intersting to investigate how the persistent current is affected by a time-dependent potential. We find that under certain conditions the system exhibits transitions between the different components of the Floquet state. Our analysis shows that the absolute value of the amplitudes of the side bands of the Floquet states are strong functions of frequency and of flux. As a consequence the persistent current displays transitions as a function of frequency and flux.

Let us consider the time-dependent Schrödinger equation for an electron wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)`$ on a circle of circumference $`L`$ threaded by an Aharonov-Bohm magnetic flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ with an oscillating delta-function potential

$$\begin{array}{c}i\mathrm{}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t)}{t}=\widehat{H}(x,t)\mathrm{\Psi }(x,t),\hfill \\ \\ \widehat{H}(x,t)=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2m}\left(\frac{}{x}2\pi i\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\right)^2+V(t)\delta (x),\hfill \\ \\ V(t)=2LV\mathrm{cos}(\omega t).\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
Here $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0=h/e`$ is the magnetic flux quantum. To solve this equation we will use the method of Floquet functions . Because the Hamiltonian $`\widehat{H}`$ depends on time the system has no stationary eigenstates. Since the Hamiltonian is periodic in time, the states of Eq.(1) can, according to the Floquet theorem, be represented as a superposition of wave functions with energies shifted by $`n\mathrm{}\omega `$

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_E(x,t)=e^{iEt/\mathrm{}}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\psi _n(x)e^{in\omega t}.$$
(2)
By analogy with a pure ring problem we choose the functions $`\psi _n(x)`$ in the following form

$$\psi _n(x)=e^{2\pi i\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\frac{x}{L}}\left(a_ne^{ik_nx}+b_ne^{ik_nx}\right).$$
(3)
Here $`k_n=\sqrt{2mE_n/\mathrm{}^2}`$ and $`E_n=E+n\mathrm{}\omega `$. The coordinate $`x`$ is directed along the ring $`0x<L`$. Note, that for the evanescent modes ($`E_n<0`$) we put $`k_n=i\kappa _n`$ with $`\kappa _n=\sqrt{2m|E_n|/\mathrm{}^2}`$.

On a ring the Floquet eigenfunction $`\mathrm{\Psi }_E`$ must be periodic in $`x`$. In addition its derivative is discontinuous at the delta function barrier. Thus $`\mathrm{\Psi }_E`$ is subject to the following boundary conditions

$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Psi }_E(x,t)=\mathrm{\Psi }_E(x+L,t),\hfill \\ \\ \frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_E(x,t)}{x}|_{x=+0}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_E(x,t)}{x}|_{x=L0}\hfill \\ \\ =\frac{2m}{\mathrm{}^2}V(t)\mathrm{\Psi }_E(0,t).\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
These boundary conditions define the discrete set of Floquet eigenenergies $`E^{(l)}`$ (where $`l`$ is an integer) and corresponding Floquet eigenfunctions $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{E^{(l)}}`$ which are characteristic for the ring problem. The quantization of the Floquet energy in a finite-size system is quite analogous to the quantization of an energy in the time-independent problem. In addition each Floquet state can be occupied by only one electron (because of the Pauli principle) and thus the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_E`$ must be normalized

$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{T}\underset{0}{\overset{T}{}}𝑑t\underset{0}{\overset{L}{}}𝑑x|\mathrm{\Psi }_E|^2\underset{n}{}\underset{0}{\overset{L}{}}𝑑x|\psi _n|^2=1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(5)
Here $`T=2\pi /\omega `$. Furthermore, note that usually the Floquet energy $`E`$ is determined within the interval $`0E<\mathrm{}\omega `$. However in our problem it is convenient not to reduce the discrete set of $`E^{(l)}`$ to this interval.

Substituting Eq.(2) and Eq.(3) into the Eqs.(4) we obtain the following relations between coefficients $`a_n`$ and $`b_n`$ of the Floquet function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_E`$ corresponding to the Floquet energy $`E`$

$$\begin{array}{c}a_nA_n+b_nB_n=0,\hfill \\ \\ a_nA_nb_nB_n=\hfill \\ \\ i\frac{2\upsilon }{k_n}(a_{n1}+b_{n1}+a_{n+1}+b_{n+1}).\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
Here we have introduced

$$\begin{array}{c}A_n=e^{2\pi i\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}}e^{ik_nL},\hfill \\ \\ B_n=e^{2\pi i\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}}e^{ik_nL},\hfill \\ \\ \upsilon =\frac{mLV}{\mathrm{}^2}.\hfill \end{array}$$
(7)
Eqs.(6) couples amplitudes of different index $`n`$. As a consequence we obtain an infinite system of uniform linear equations for the coefficients $`a_n`$ and $`b_n`$ ($`n=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$). To have a nontrivial solution the corresponding (infinite range) determinant must be equal to zero. This condition defines the allowed values of the Floquet energy and the corresponding set of coefficients $`a_n`$ and $`b_n`$.

Using the method of continued fractions  the calculation of an infinite range determinant can be greatly simplified. To this end we rewrite the first equation of Eqs.(6) as follows

$$b_n=a_n\frac{A_n}{B_n},$$
(8)
Substituting the above relation into the second equation of Eqs.(6) we obtain a recursive equation for the coefficients $`a_n`$. It is convenient to introduce new quantities $`x_n`$ ($`n0`$)

$$x_n=\frac{1}{\upsilon }\frac{a_n}{a_{n1}}\frac{\mathrm{sin}(k_nL)}{\mathrm{sin}(k_{n1}L)}\frac{B_{n1}}{B_n}.$$
(9)
Here and hereafter the upper (lower) sign is for $`n1`$ ($`n1`$). In terms of the $`x_n`$ the recursive equation reads

$$x_n=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(k_nL)}{k_nD_n\upsilon ^2\mathrm{sin}(k_nL)x_{n\pm 1}},$$
(10)
where

$$D_n=\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\right)\mathrm{cos}(k_nL).$$
(11)
We can write the solution of Eq.(10) in the form of a continued fraction

$$x_n=\frac{\mathrm{sin}(k_nL)}{k_nD_n\frac{\upsilon ^2h_{n\pm 1}}{k_{n\pm 1}D_{n\pm 1}\frac{\upsilon ^2h_{n\pm 2}}{k_{n\pm 2}D_{n\pm 2}\frac{\upsilon ^2h_{n\pm 3}}{\mathrm{}}}}}.$$
(12)
Here $`h_{n\pm 1}=\mathrm{sin}(k_nL)\mathrm{sin}(k_{n\pm 1}L),`$ Using the quantities $`x_n`$ and Eq.(9) we can express any $`a_n`$ through the $`a_0`$

$$a_n=a_0\upsilon ^{|n|}\frac{B_n}{B_0}\frac{\mathrm{sin}(k_0L)}{\mathrm{sin}(k_nL)}\underset{j=\pm 1}{\overset{n}{}}x_i,n0.$$
(13)
The corresponding relation between $`b_n`$ and $`b_0`$ can be easily obtained from the above equation and Eq.(8).

Now we can write down the equations containing only $`a_0`$ and $`b_0`$. Using Eqs.(6) for $`n=0`$ and expressing $`a_{\pm 1}`$ and $`b_{\pm 1}`$ in terms of $`a_0`$ and $`b_0`$, respectively, we get

$$\begin{array}{c}a_0A_0+b_0B_0=0,\hfill \\ \\ a_0A_0b_0B_0=\hfill \\ \\ i\frac{2\upsilon ^2}{k_0}(x_1+x_{+1})(a_0+b_0).\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
This system of equations has a nontrivial solution if its determinant equals to zero

$$\begin{array}{c}k_0\left[\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\right)\mathrm{cos}(k_0L)\right]\hfill \\ \\ \upsilon ^2(x_1+x_{+1})\mathrm{sin}(k_0L)=0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(15)
The solutions $`k_0^{(l)}`$ ($`l=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}`$) of this (dispersion) equation give us a set of allowed Floquet eigenenergies $`E^{(l)}`$ = $`(\mathrm{}k_0^{(l)})^2`$ $`/(2m)`$ and corresponding side bands $`E_n^{(l)}`$ = $`E^{(l)}`$ \+ $`n\mathrm{}\omega `$.

Note, that in the absence of an oscillating barrier ($`\upsilon =0`$) we obtain the well known spectrum of a perfect ring with a magnetic flux

$$E^{(l)}(\mathrm{\Phi })=\frac{h^2}{2mL^2}\left(l+\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\right)^2.$$
(16)
For a weak potential ($`\upsilon 0`$) the Floquet energies are close to those given by Eq.(16).

The main component (corresponding to the energy $`E^{(l)}`$) of the Floquet wave function has a large amplitude: $`a_0^{(l)}`$ and/or $`b_0^{(l)}1`$. This is due to constructive interference in the ring. In the general case, the amplitudes of side bands (corresponding to energies $`E_n^{(l)}`$, $`n0`$) are small due to destructive interference. They are $`a_n^{(l)},b_n^{(l)}\upsilon ^{|n|}`$ for a weak potential and $`a_n^{(l)},b_n^{(l)}\upsilon ^{|n|}`$ for a strong potential. Mathematically the effect of interference in a ring is described by Eq.(15) (for the main component) and by the denominator in Eq.(10) (for the side bands). However there is a special (resonant) case when the amplitude of a particular side band with an energy $`E_{n_r}^{(l)}`$ is comparable with the amplitudes of the main component (corresponding to the energy $`E^{(l)}`$). This is the case when the energy $`E_{n_r}^{(l)}`$ of the side band is close to another Floquet eigenenergy $`E^{(l^{})}`$. Note that at the same time the corresponding side band $`E_{n_r}^{(l^{})}`$ is close to $`E^{(l)}`$.

To determine the Floquet wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{E^{(l)}}`$ we need to know $`a_0^{(l)}`$ (then the coefficients $`b_0^{(l)}`$, $`a_n^{(l)}`$ and $`b_n^{(l)}`$ can be found from Eq.(8) and Eq.(13)). We find this coefficient from the normalization condition Eq.(5). Substituting Eqs.(2), (3), (8), and Eq.(13) into Eq.(5) we obtain

$$|a_0^{(l)}|^2=\frac{1}{L}\frac{\mathrm{sin}^2(k_0^{(l)}L/2\pi \mathrm{\Phi }/\mathrm{\Phi }_0)}{Z^{(l)}\mathrm{sin}^2(k_0^{(l)}L)},$$
(17)
where

$$\begin{array}{c}Z^{(l)}=\frac{\xi _0^{(l)}}{\mathrm{sin}^2(k_0^{(l)}L)}\hfill \\ \\ +\underset{n0}{}\upsilon ^{2|n|}\frac{\xi _n^{(l)}}{\mathrm{sin}^2(k_n^{(l)}L)}\underset{j=\pm 1}{\overset{n}{}}|x_j^{(l)}|^2,\hfill \end{array}$$
(18)
and

$$\begin{array}{c}\xi _n^{(l)}=1\mathrm{cos}(k_n^{(l)}L)\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\right)\hfill \\ \\ +\frac{\mathrm{sin}(k_n^{(l)}L)}{k_n^{(l)}L}\left[\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}\right)\mathrm{cos}(k_n^{(l)}L)\right].\hfill \end{array}$$
(19)
Next we consider the current carried by the Floquet state $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{E^{(l)}}`$. We will concentrate on the time averaged (dc) current $`I_{dc}`$. To this end we integrate the quantum mechanical current

$$I[\mathrm{\Psi }]=i\frac{e\mathrm{}}{2m}\left(\mathrm{\Psi }\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }^{}}{x}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }}{x}\right)\frac{e^2}{m}A\mathrm{\Psi }\mathrm{\Psi }^{},$$
(20)
(where $`A=\mathrm{\Phi }/L`$ is a vector potential) over the time period $`T=2\pi /\omega `$

$$I_{dc}^{(l)}=\frac{1}{T}\underset{0}{\overset{T}{}}𝑑tI[\mathrm{\Psi }_{E^{(l)}}(x,t)],$$
(21)
and obtain

$$I_{dc}^{(l)}=\frac{e\mathrm{}}{m}\underset{E_n^{(l)}>0}{}k_n^{(l)}\left(|a_n^{(l)}|^2|b_n^{(l)}|^2\right).$$
(22)
Note that the evanescent modes do not contribute to the current, therefore we sum over the propagating modes only ($`E_n^{(l)}>0`$).

Now we can analyze the effect of an oscillating potential on the electron wave function and the corresponding quantum mechanical current. From the discussion given above, it follows that the oscillating potential has in general a weak effect on the wave function which is mainly determined by interference due to the ring geometry. But as we already mentioned this is not the case at resonance when the difference between two Floquet eigenenergies is an integer number of the energy quantum $`\mathrm{}\omega `$.

The resonant frequencies are determined by the level spacing. In the perfect ring investigated here the spectrum has special features. Especially at zero flux (or multiples of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2`$) we have levels crossing each other. Consequently for small flux there are two energy scales which determine the resonant frequencies. The first scale is the (large) level spacing $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(l)}`$ = $`E^{(l+1)}`$ \- $`E^{(l)}`$ that is a common feature of all finite-size systems. For a small enough sample $`L0`$ the corresponding resonant frequency is large $`\omega _\mathrm{\Delta }`$ = $`\mathrm{\Delta }^{(l)}/\mathrm{}`$ $`L^2`$ $`\mathrm{}`$. The second scale is determined by the magnetic flux dependent separation $`\delta ^{(l)}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ = $`E^{(l)}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ \- $`E^{(l)}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ between levels which are degenerate (in pairs) at zero flux (or at multiples of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2`$) given by $`E^{(l)}(0)`$ = $`E^{(l)}(0)`$ (see Eq.(16)). This energy scale is a specific feature of ballistic, perfect, ring-like structures. The $`n^{th}`$ resonance $`\delta ^{(l)}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ = $`n\mathrm{}\omega `$ occurs (in the case of a weak potential) at

$$\omega =\frac{2\mathrm{\Delta }^{(l)}}{n\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0}.$$
(23)
Note that at this condition the $`n^{th}`$ side band $`E_n^{(l)}`$ is in resonance with $`E^{(l)}`$ and vice versa: the $`n^{th}`$ side band $`E_n^{(l)}`$ is in resonance with $`E^{(l)}`$.

From Eq. (23) we can see that at small magnetic flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }0`$ the resonant frequency is small even for a small ring. Thus we conclude that even a slowly (adiabatically)

$$\omega \mathrm{\Delta }/\mathrm{},$$
(24)
oscillating potential can essentially influence electronic properties of a ring at small $`\mathrm{\Phi }0`$ (or at $`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2`$) magnetic fluxes. This regime is of interest in the present paper. In what follows we describe numerical results concerning the Floquet states in a ring with a small magnetic flux.

Let us consider a ring at zero magnetic flux with a delta-function potential oscillating with a fixed frequency $`\omega `$. In this case the Floquet eigenenergies $`E^{(l)}=(\mathrm{}k_0^{(l)})^2/(2m)`$ (where $`k_0^{(l)}`$ is a solution of Eq.(15)) are the same as for a pure ring Eq.(16). This is because the time averaged potential is zero.

Further, we choose some pair of degenerate (at $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$) Floquet energies $`E^{(l)}`$ and $`E^{(l)}`$. Because of interference the main component $`\psi _0`$ of the Floquet wave function has a considerable amplitude: $`b_0^{(l)}1/L`$, $`a_0^{(l)}1/L`$ (all other coefficients are close to zero). Now we increase the magnetic flux which causes the levels $`E^{(l)}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ and $`E^{(l)}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ first to follow the energies of a pure ring Eq.(16). However close to the first resonance $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0\mathrm{}\omega /(2\mathrm{\Delta }^{(l)})`$ they ”interact” with the corresponding side bands ($`E_{+1}^{(l)}`$ and $`E_1^{(l)}`$, respectively) and show an avoided crossing behavior.

Close to resonance, because of constructive interference on the ring, the amplitude of the wave function corresponding to the first side band considerably increases : $`a_1^{(l)}1/L`$ and $`b_{+1}^{(l)}1/L`$. The same occurs at the higher resonances. Thus we can say that at the resonance the Floquet state corresponds to an electron equally distributed between two states with energies shifted by $`n\mathrm{}\omega `$ (for the $`n^{th}`$ resonance). This is evident from Fig.1 where we depict the dependence of the Floquet energy $`E^{(l)}`$ and some side bands on the magnetic flux. The width of the solid lines is proportional to the square of the absolute value of the amplitude ( the probability of occupation ) of the side band of the Floquet state.

We see that with increasing magnetic flux the particle belonging to some Floquet eigenstate undergoes a transition between states with an opposite direction of movement. For instance, let us assume that at zero magnetic flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }=0`$ the particle is in state $`E_0^{(l)}`$ with $`a_0^{(l)}=0`$ and $`b_0^{(l)}=1/L`$ and thus it carries a diamagnetic current $`I_{dc}^{(l)}<0`$ (see Eq.(22)). Then after the first resonance (see Fig.1) it passes into the state $`E_1^{(l)}`$ with $`a_1^{(l)}=1/L`$ and $`b_1^{(l)}=0`$. In this case the particle carries a paramagnetic current $`I_{dc}^{(l)}>0`$. Correspondingly, after the second resonance ($`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0\mathrm{}\omega /\mathrm{\Delta }^{(l)}`$) the particle undergoes a transition into the state $`E_{+1}^{(l)}`$ with $`a_{+1}^{(l)}=0`$ and $`b_{+1}^{(l)}=1/L`$ and it again carries a diamagnetic current, and so on. Such a behavior has a strong effect on the persistent current carried by the (spinless) electrons on the ring.

Surprisingly, the pair of electrons occupying two Floquet sates $`E^{(l)}`$ and $`E^{(l)}`$ carry exactly the same current as in the case of a pure ring:

$$I_{dc}^{(l)}+I_{dc}^{(l)}=2I_0\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0},$$
(25)
where $`I_0=eh/(mL^2)`$. Therefore the oscillating delta-function potential has no effect on the persistent current in a ring with an odd number $`N_e`$ of (spinless) electrons

$$I_{odd}=N_eI_0\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }_0},|\mathrm{\Phi }|<\mathrm{\Phi }_0/2.$$
(26)
However this is not the case for a ring with an even number of electrons. In this case the current $`I_{even}`$ is mainly determined by the ”unpaired” electron in the highest occupied Floquet state. As we discussed above the current carried by this electron oscillates with a large amplitude. In the low frequency limit (see Eq.(24)) of interest here the period $`\delta \mathrm{\Phi }`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0\mathrm{}\omega /(2\mathrm{\Delta }^{(l)})`$ of these oscillations is much smaller than the magnetic flux quantum $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$.

In Fig.2 we depict the dependence of the persistent current on the magnetic flux in a ring with four ($`I_{even}`$) and five ($`I_{odd}`$) electrons.

We would like to emphasize that the behavior of the persistent current in a ring with an even number of electrons is due to an interplay between the interference in a ring and the excitation of side bands by an oscillating potential. The persistent current reflects the behavior of a single Floquet state. The interaction with an oscillating potential can not lead to transitions between the different Floquet states. As a consequence the particle stays in the same Floquet state when the magnetic flux changes. Because of interference the particle losses or gains some energy quanta $`\mathrm{}\omega `$ which brings it into the appropriate sub state of the Floquet state when the magnetic flux goes through the resonant value.

However the interaction with an environment can lead to transitions between different Floquet states. In this case the particle will relax to the lowest unoccupied Floquet state corresponding to a given value of a magnetic flux and the peculiarities of $`I_{even}`$ will be diminished. This effect will be considered elsewhere.

We remark on an essential difference between the oscillations of the persistent current investigated here and the oscillations of a persistent current with a period of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$. In the ballistic case the energy is quadratic in the magnetic flux Eq.(16) and the properties of a ring (in particular, the persistent current) become periodic in $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ (with a period of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$) only because of the relaxation to the state with a minimum energy (for a more detailed discussion see ). In contrast, the oscillations of interest here (see Fig.2 ) occur if only the system stays at the same Floquet state (when the magnetic flux changes).

In the present paper we have considered a perfect ring. But the effect under consideration is quite general because it is due to a competition between the quantum mechanical interference and the excitation of side bands by an oscillating scatterer. In particular, in the presence of disorder there is no level degeneracy . However the oscillating scatterer can still generate transitions between the different components of the Floquet state (and thus can affect the persistent current) if only an appropriate resonant condition is fulfilled: $`n\mathrm{}\omega =E^{(l)}(\mathrm{\Phi })E^{(l+1)}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ (here $`E^{(l)}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ are energy levels in a ring with disorder). The only difference from the perfect ring case is that (in the low frequency limit) the transitions are due to many photon processes: $`n1`$.

In conclusion, within the framework of the Floquet states approach we have considered the effect of an oscillating delta-function potential on the persistent current in a ring of noninteracting spinless electrons threaded by a magnetic flux. We have found an unusual strong parity effect in a weak magnetic flux. The current in a ring with an odd number of electrons is diamagnetic and exactly the same as in a pure ring. In contrast the current in a ring with an even number of electrons oscillates in sign with a large amplitude and with a small (compared with $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$) period.

This work is supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation.


text:
# Pre-avalanche instabilities in a granular pile

## Abstract

We investigate numerically the transition between static equilibrium and dynamic surface flow of a $`2D`$ cohesionless granular system driven by a continuous gravity loading. This transition is characterized by intermittent local dynamic rearrangements and can be described by an order parameter defined as the density of critical contacts, e.g. contacts where the friction is fully mobilized. Analysis of the spatial correlations of critical contacts shows the occurence of “fluidized” clusters which exhibit a power-law divergence in size at the approach of the stability limit. The results are compatible with recent models that describe the granular system during the static/dynamic transition as a multi-phase system.

Avalanches and debris flows are of special interest both for industrial and natural processes. Although many advances have been made in the physical understanding of granular flow both from a microscopic and a continuum point of view (see for example Savage and Hutter (1989); Bouchaud et al. (1995); Douady et al. (1999); Campbell (1990); Pouliquen (1999); Rajchenbach (2002)), the mechanisms leading to the transition of a granular material from a static equilibrium to a dynamic state are still unclear, and difficult to analyze experimentally. Recent hydrodynamic model based on phase transition theory describes the granular material as a two-phase material with a ”solid” (static) and a “liquid” (flowing) phase Aranson and Tsimring (2001). This transition, also advocated in others conditions Mueth et al. (2000); Metcalfe et al. (2002), is important for the understanding of avalanche instability in the context of risk assessment.
The purpose of this paper is to investigate numerically this static to dynamic transition in a minimal model configuration, e.g. a 2D cohesionless granular medium driven by continuously loading body force, here a continuous tilt under gravity. We find that the evolution is chacterized by intermittent local instabilities and can be described by the fraction of contacts where friction force is completely mobilized. A more detailed description involves “fluidized” areas which percolate when the system reaches the stability limit. These results would be in favor of a description in terms of a multiphase system undergoing a phase transition.
The contact friction is described by the classical Coulomb’s law. Relative slip between two particles in contact can occur only when the friction force is fully activitated, i.e $`f_t=\pm \mu f_n`$, where $`f_t`$ and $`f_n`$ are respectively the tangential and normal forces at the contact and $`\mu `$ is the contact friction coefficient. This defines the Coulomb threshold. Otherwise, no slip can occur and $`f_t[\mu f_n,\mu f_n]`$. The numerical simulations were performed using the Contact Dynamics method Jean and Moreau (1992); Moreau (1994), based on a fully implicit resolution of the contact forces. This allows for an accurate determination of the ratio $`f_t/f_n`$ independently of any numerical regularization parameter. In all the simulations, the contact friction coefficient is $`\mu =0.5`$ and collisions are perfectly inelastic.
The initial configuration of the pile is generated by random deposition of $`N_p=4000`$ disks in a rectangular box; the disks have a uniform distribution of diameters within the range $`[D_{min},D_{max}]`$. We used the ratio $`D_{max}/D_{min}=1.5`$, but we checked that for a polydispersity as large as $`D_{max}/D_{min}=10`$ the results remain essentially unchanged. The granular samples prepared by random deposition have a rectangular shape with a nearly flat surface, a thickness of $`30D`$ and a width of $`120D`$, where $`D`$ is the mean disk diameter. The initial coordination number, i.e. the mean number of contacts of a particle, is $`z3.6`$. It shows only weak fluctuations (up to $`5\%`$) in the course of tilting. The results presented below were obtained from $`15`$ independent runs in which the random processing of grain sizes is the only source of noise.
The granular bed is slowly tilted with a constant rotation rate ($`0.001^{}`$ per time step). The slope increases from $`\theta =0^{}`$ to the maximum angle of repose $`\theta _c20^{}`$ at which a surface avalanche occurs. Within the picture of ideal Coulomb’s material, $`\theta _c`$ is related to the internal coefficient of friction of the pile $`\mu _{eff}`$ through the relation $`\mu _{eff}=tan(\theta _c)0.35`$ Roux and Radjai (2001). However, the evolution of the pile towards $`\theta _c`$ is not monotonous. Indeed, we observe the occurence of local instabilities owing to the mobilization of friction between particles. Initially $`f_t`$ at the contacts is only partially activated, namely $`|f_t|<\mu f_n`$. But upon tilting, a number of contacts reach the Coulomb threshold, i.e. $`|f_t|=\mu f_n`$. These contacts can not sustain further shear force increment and can lead eventually to a slip instability or the disappearance of the contact. We call them critical contacts. We describe the evolution of the pile in terms of the fraction $`\nu `$ of critical contacts over a volume $`V`$ and as a function of $`\theta `$:

$$\nu (\theta ,V)=\frac{N_c}{N}_V,$$
(1)
where $`N_c`$ and $`N`$ are respectively the number of critical contacts and the total number of contacts in $`V`$ at slope angle $`\theta `$. Since the density of contacts remains almost constant due to close-packing ($`NV`$), $`\nu `$ also represents the density of critical contacts. It characterizes the plastic state of the pile.
The evolution of $`\nu (\theta ,V_{pile})`$ is reproducible from run to run even though there are rapid fluctuations of $`\nu `$ within the system (see Fig 1(a)). When averaging the $`\nu `$ evolution over 15 independant realizations (inset graph in Fig 1(a)), we observe a regular increase of $`\nu (\theta )`$ from an intial value $`\nu =0`$ to a maximum value $`\nu 0.08`$ at the maximum angle of repose $`\theta _c`$. This indicates that a partial plastification occurs well before the stability limit of the pile. Such a transition is however characterized by rapid fluctuations of $`\nu `$. They are the signature of intermittent instabilities during which loss of critical contacts occurs through local dynamical rearrangements, as can be seen in the fluctuations of the mean kinetic energy in Fig 1(b). This suggests that even though the density of critical contacts increases in the mean during the mobilization stage of the system, the population of critical contacts is renewed by these intermittent instabilities and a single critical contact is only of short-life time due to its metastable state. During the intermittent evolution, the system can explore extreme $`\nu `$-states as seen in Fig 1(a). When averaging over small $`\theta `$ size windows the extremal states at each $`\theta `$ and for all independant realizations, their evolution exhibits a well defined limit envelope (see Fig 1(c)). It shows an exponential convergence towards an asymptotic limit characterized by a critical state $`\nu _c0.08`$, corresponding to the stability limit. The granular system can therefore be described in terms of an order parameter $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\nu /\nu _c`$ which varies from zero to one and characterizes the partially fluidized transition.
Owing to the intrinsic geometrical and stress fluctuations of each individual realization, each pile can explore rare extremal states beyond the critical limit $`\nu _c`$ in the course of its evolution. These states are metastable and followed eventually by local dynamical rearrangements, the size of which can be characterized by the fraction $`\mathrm{\Delta }N/N`$ of contacts lost in that event. When analysing the size of the local rearrangements as a function of the $`\nu `$-state explored by the system prior to the event (see Fig 2), we found that the pile evolution is characterized by frequent weak rearrangements, less than 1$`\%`$, that corresponds to $`\nu `$-states of the system below $`\nu _c`$, and rare and strong rearrangements corresponding to extremal states $`\nu >\nu _c`$. The intermittent rearrangements during the mobilization occurs both in the bulk and close to the free surface.
The evolution of $`\nu `$ may be also interpreted in terms of the mean separation distance $`\lambda (\theta )`$ between two critical contacts:

$$\lambda (\theta )=\sqrt{\frac{2}{z(\theta )\nu (\theta )}}D$$
(2)
where $`z(\theta )`$ is the coordination number. During the mobilization, $`\lambda `$ decreases from $`+\mathrm{}`$ when $`\nu =0`$ to $`\lambda _c=2.5D`$ when $`\nu =\nu _c`$. For $`\lambda <\lambda _c`$, i.e. $`\nu >\nu _c`$, the packing undergoes large-scale instabilities due to spatial correlations among critical contacts (see Fig. 2).
To investigate the distribution of critical contacts, we introduce the probability density function (pdf) $`P(\nu )`$ of finding a local state $`\nu `$ within a contact neighbourghood. The size of this neighbourghood must not be smaller than the minimum length separating two critical contacts, of the order of $`D`$, nor larger than the typical size of spatial heterogeneities of $`\nu `$ (to be analyzed later). In particular, we introduce the pdf $`P_c(\nu )`$ at critical contacts and the pdf $`P_{nc}(\nu )`$ at non-critical contacts. The distributions $`P_c`$ and $`P_{nc}`$ time-averaged over all the loading phase from $`\theta =0`$ to $`\theta _c`$ are displayed in Fig 3. The range of local states $`\nu `$ is quite wide for both distributions: $`P_c`$ has a well-defined peak at $`\nu \nu _c`$, whereas $`P_{nc}`$ is a decreasing function with a high peak at $`\nu =0`$. This indicates that critical contacts tend to appear preferentially in the vicinity of other critical contacts, and are strongly correlated spatially. It is worth to note here that the most probable local state is found to be the critical state $`\nu _c`$ that characterizes the whole pile at the stability limit.
We study the spatial correlations by defining the mean state $`\overline{\nu }`$ in a neighbourghood of critical contacts as a function of the neighbourghood’s size $`r`$ and of the inclination angle $`\theta `$ of the pile. In practice, we explore $`r[1D,20D]`$. Denoting $`\nu _i`$ the local state in the vicinity of a contact $`i`$, $`\overline{\nu }(\theta ,r)`$ can be expressed as follows:

$$\overline{\nu }(\theta ,r)=\frac{1}{N_c}\underset{i\{N_c\}}{}\nu _i(\theta ,r).$$
(3)
where $`N_c`$ is the number of critical contacts in the pile. The evolution of $`\overline{\nu }(\theta ,r)`$ is displayed in Fig. 4(a) for three values of $`\theta `$. Independantly of the inclination $`\theta `$, $`\overline{\nu }`$ decreases rapidly as a function of $`r`$ as long as $`r10D`$. Beyond this distance, $`\overline{\nu }`$ remains almost constant and equal to the state of the pile $`\nu (\theta ,V_{pile})`$. Such an evolution of $`\overline{\nu }(\theta ,r)`$ can be approximated by (see Fig 4(b)):

$$\overline{\nu }(\theta ,r)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\nu _{\mathrm{}}(\theta )\left(1+A(\theta )r^{\alpha (\theta )}\right)\hfill & \text{if }r10D,\hfill \\ \nu _{\mathrm{}}(\theta )\hfill & \text{if }r>10D.\hfill \end{array}$$
(4)
where $`\nu _{\mathrm{}}(\theta )`$ is the state of the pile at $`\theta `$, and $`A(\theta )`$ and $`\alpha (\theta )`$ are affine functions of $`\theta `$. The distance $`L10D`$ arises here as the characteristic length of the spatial correlations between critical contacts.
The spatial correlations can be illustrated when looking at two snapshots of the pile for different values of the inclination angle $`\theta `$ (see Fig 5). In particular, the system exhibits clusters of critical contacts where $`\nu \nu _c`$. These clusters can no longer sustain shear load increment and eventually lead to local rearrangements. They can be analysed as “fluidized” zones with $`\theta `$ increasing size.
We define $`r_c`$ the mean size of the clusters of critical contacts characterized by a state $`\nu =\nu _c`$. Equation (4) yields

$$r_c(\theta )=\left[\frac{1}{A(\theta )}\left(\frac{\nu _c}{\nu _{\mathrm{}}}1\right)\right]^{1/\alpha (\theta )},$$
(5)
where $`\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$ is defined as the state of the pile $`\nu (\theta ,V_{pile})`$ averaged over all the simulations (see inset graph in Fig 1). The evolution of $`r_c(\theta )`$, displayed in Fig 6, shows a slow increase from around $`2D`$ to $`4D`$ as long as $`\theta 15`$ degrees. For larger $`\theta `$, the size increases quickly with a power-law divergence $`(\theta _c\theta )^\beta `$. That is reminescent of a percolation-like process. The value $`\theta =15`$ degrees may be related to the dynamical angle of repose of the pile, but this would require further investigation.
The mobilization of the granular pile is related to the occurence of “fluidized” clusters of critical contacts. The size of these clusters increases with $`\theta `$, with a power-law divergence as $`\theta \theta _c`$. This result is in support of a description of the granular system during mobilization as a multi-phase system. The transition from a static equilibrium to a dynamical flow is controlled by the order parameter $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\nu /\nu _c`$, and the stability threshold would result from a multi-phase instability. Detailed analysis of the phases interaction during transition still requires further analysis.
Forces in granular media have been shown to obey a broad distribution and to define a strong and a weak contact network. Forces transmitted along the strong contact network exceed the mean force in the media and are responsible for the mechanical strength of the medium, with a typical correlation length $`\xi 10D`$ Radjai et al. (1998); Mueth et al. (1998). By contrast, forces transmitted along the weak contact network mainly contributes to an average pressure. In an extended forthcoming paper, we show that critical contacts appear mostly within the weak contact network. They correspond to lower pressure as a result of a screening effect by the strong contact network that support the deviatoric load and controls the static stress evolution. Critical contacts tend to be organized as “fluidized” clusters that eventually destabilize the pile when their size becomes comparable with the correlation length of strong forces $`\xi `$. The avalanche instability appears as a two phase instability triggered by the interaction between these correlated clusters and a solid skeleton made of the strong contact network. The influence of material parameters such as the coefficient of friction and the degree of configurational disorder in the pile are the purpose of further work. The extension of the problem to three dimensions has to be investigated.

We gratefully acknowledge S. Roux and D. Sornette for useful discussions and suggestions about this work. This research was supported by the French Ministry of Research and the CNRS through the ACI “Catastrophes Naturelles” and the GdR “Milieux Divisés”.