text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The main driving force behind recent work on transplanckian physics in cosmology, is to find out whether physics beyond the Planck scale can give effects on the CMBR spectrum, \[1-30\]. A crucial ingredient in inflationary cosmology is that microscopic quantum fluctuations are magnified by inflation into macroscopic seeds for galaxy formation. In standard inflation the modes of the inflaton field can be carried back in time to eras when they were much smaller than the Planck scale. For small scales the expansion of the universe can be ignored and a unique vacuum can be chosen for the inflaton. This is the Bunch-Davies vacuum. But the construction ignores the Planck scale and the natural expectation that physics beyond the Planck scale is very different from physics at low energies, and not possible to describe using a quantum field theory. The hope would be that transplanckian physics modifies the standard scenario and that the effects are magnified through inflation to leave visible imprints in the CMBR fluctuations.

There are two main approaches to investigate whether the above proposal is viable. One possibility is to use specific models of transplanckian physics, examples include models involving non commutative geometry, and investigate how this will change the predictions of inflation. Another possibility is to leave the details of the transplanckian physics for later work, and impose a cutoff on the theory at the Planck scale, or some other scale like the strings scale, where fundamentally new physics is expected. Our ignorance of the high energy physics is then encoded in the choice of initial conditions for the field modes when they start out at planckian size. Contrary to the standard scenario, the initial conditions are imposed in a situation where the time dependence of the background can not be ignored. Various natural ways of choosing the vacuum, minimal uncertainty, adiabatic to all orders etc., now give different results. The Bunch-Davies vacuum remains as a possibility but there are also other possibilities that also can be argued to be natural. A conservative approach is then to investigate the span of possibilities and see what effects, if any, they give on the CMBR. In  it was argued that the generic size of the effects is expected to be of order $`H/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the spectrum compared with the Bunch-Davies vacuum. To claim smaller effects one would need specific information about the nature of transplanckian physics. It is important to note that the generic effect is not a simple change in normalization of the spectrum but has a definite signature in the form of a modulation.

The simplified approach discussed in , which is not tied to specific models of transplanckian physics, allows for a detailed examination of the consequences and viability of the transplanckian proposal. As observed in  it essentially amounts to an investigation of the physics of the de Sitter invariant vacua introduced in , some times called the $`\alpha `$-vacua. These vacua have also recently been discussed in the context of de Sitter holography, .

The purpose of this note is to address recent discussions in the literature, in particular , where the consistency of the $`\alpha `$-vacua is questioned. In the first two of the above mentioned works it has been pointed out that quantum field theory with $`\alpha `$-vacua is not well understood. In particular there are problems with renormalizability and the definition of loop amplitudes, and there are also peculiarities in certain Greens functions that are claimed to suggest that the vacua does not make physical sense.

The outline of the note is as follows. In section two we review the construction of the $`\alpha `$-vacua, in section three we focus on the problems of non renormalizability, in section four we discuss the large scale structure of the Greens functions, in section five how $`\alpha `$ might change with time, in section six the non-thermal nature of the $`\alpha `$-vacua and, finally, we end with some conclusions.

## 2 Review of $`\alpha `$-vacua

Let us briefly review how the $`\alpha `$-vacua are constructed. We will focus on a single inflaton field, $`\varphi \left(x\right)`$, and its quantization. The Wightman function $`G^+(x,x^{})`$ for the inflaton field is defined as

$$G^+(x,x^{})=\mathrm{\Omega }\left|\widehat{\varphi }\left(x\right)\widehat{\varphi }\left(x^{}\right)\right|\mathrm{\Omega }=d^3k\varphi _𝐤\left(x\right)\varphi _𝐤^{}\left(x^{}\right),$$
(1)
where the field is expanded in modes as

$$\widehat{\varphi }\left(x\right)=d^3k\left[\varphi _𝐤\left(x\right)\widehat{a}_𝐤+\varphi _𝐤^{}\left(x\right)\widehat{a}_𝐤^{}\right].$$
(2)
Operators are equipped with hats in all expressions. We then assume that these modes are obtained through Bogolubov transformations from the Bunch-Davies modes according to

$$\varphi _𝐤\left(x\right)=A\varphi _{𝐤,BD}\left(x\right)+B\varphi _{𝐤,BD}^{}\left(x\right),$$
(3)
with

$$\left|A\right|^2\left|B\right|^2=1.$$
(4)
A convenient parametrization is to write

$$A=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1e^{\alpha +\alpha ^{}}}}B=\frac{e^\alpha }{\sqrt{1e^{\alpha +\alpha ^{}}}},$$
(5)
where $`\alpha =\mathrm{}`$ is the Bunch-Davies vacuum. For convenience we write

$$\varphi _{𝐤,BD}\left(x\right)=\varphi _{k,BD}\left(\eta \right)e^{i𝐤𝐱},$$
(6)
and demand, for simplicity, that

$$\varphi _{k,BD}\left(\eta \right)=\varphi _{k,BD}^{}\left(\eta \right).$$
(7)
To proceed, let us recall a few elementary aspects of de Sitter geometry. The metric in terms of coordinates useful for inflationary cosmology is given by

$$ds^2=dt^2a\left(t\right)^2d𝐱^2,$$
(8)
where $`a\left(t\right)=e^{Ht}`$ is the scale factor. In terms of the conformal time $`\eta =\frac{1}{aH}`$ the metric becomes

$$ds^2=\frac{1}{H^2\eta ^2}\left(d\eta ^2d𝐱^2\right).$$
(9)
The inflationary universe can be viewed as the upper right triangle of the full de Sitter space, which has a Penrose diagram with the shape of a square, where $`\eta \mathrm{}`$ corresponds to the Big Bang, while $`\eta 0`$ is the infinite future. The lower half of de Sitter space can be covered if we also consider positive $`\eta `$. A crucial ingredient in the study of the $`\alpha `$-vacua is the antipodal map, which in the above coordinates takes $`x=(\eta ,𝐱)`$ into $`\overline{x}=(\eta ,𝐱)`$, and acts like a map between the two halves of de Sitter space.

With the help of the antipodal map the Bogolubov transformation can now be written

$$\varphi _𝐤\left(x\right)=A\varphi _{𝐤,BD}\left(x\right)+B\varphi _{𝐤,BD}\left(\overline{x}\right),$$
(10)
and the Wightman function becomes

$$G^+(x,x^{})=\left|A\right|^2G_{BD}^+(x,x^{})+\left|B\right|^2G_{BD}^+(x^{},x)+AB^{}G_{BD}^+(x,\overline{x}^{})+BA^{}G_{BD}^+(\overline{x},x^{}).$$
(11)
After this brief review of the $`\alpha `$-vacua we will now turn to the main subject of the paper: do the $`\alpha `$-vacua make physical sense?

## 3 Are loop amplitudes ill defined?

In  problems with the definition of loop amplitudes were pointed out. In both papers one loop amplitudes were investigated and failed to give finite and well defined results. In  it was shown that non local counter terms in the action, involving insertions at image points, were needed. In  the analytic structure of the Greens functions indicated that pinched singularities in the loop integrations make the results ill defined. These problems are clearly of great interest and it is a challenge to make sense out of the field theory under these circumstances. But none of these problems are necessarily relevant to the issue of transplanckian physics in cosmology.

The reason is simple. The whole point with the transplanckian physics, as explained in the introduction, is to see whether effects beyond quantum field theory can be relevant for the detailed structure of the fluctuation spectrum of the CMBR. Without a planckian cutoff there is no reason to impose initial conditions at any finite scale. The only natural procedure is to go to the infinite past, when the modes are infinitely small, and make the choice there. For these small scales the expansion of the universe is irrelevant and there is a unique natural choice of vacuum. This would be the end of the story in a world without a Planck scale (and dynamical gravity) in which quantum field theory could be trusted to all energies. The issue of $`\alpha `$-vacua, and transplanckian physics, would never arise. In the real world we do expect quantum field theory to break down at high enough energy to be replaced by something else, presumably string theory. To find out what kind of effects this new physics might have, we can try to modify the transplanckian physics by hand. One way to gain control over the situation is to impose a cutoff and assume quantum field theory to hold for energies below the cutoff. It is now the issue of vacuum choice becomes important. Since the Planck scale is not infinitely smaller than the inflationary Hubble scale, the time dependence of the background has to be taken into account, and there is no unique natural vacuum. In fact, there are certain $`\alpha `$-vacua that are as natural a product of the unknown transplanckian physics as the Bunch-Davies vacuum. The modest proposal behind  is simply that we should allow for this uncertainty in the possible outcome and investigate the consequences.

To summarize, the issue of $`\alpha `$-vacua only appears when one takes a planckian cutoff into account. This is perfectly consistent with the results of . The $`\alpha `$-vacua not only needs a planckian cutoff to be of physical relevance, they need a planckian cutoff to make physical sense. In other words, the quantum field theory loop amplitudes needs planckian input to give well defined answers.

In this context one should note that a rough cutoff in the sum over momenta and energies in (1) at the Planck scale, regulates the standard singularities in the Greens functions that occur when the insertions can be joined by a light ray. But it is not really these singularities that make trouble, it is rather those that are due to the image charges. But, as is easily seen, all terms in the Wightman function in (11) are regulated with this procedure. With these regulated Greens functions finite loop amplitudes can be constructed, even though their values are sensitive to exactly how the cutoff is implemented, that is, the results depend on transplanckian physics. The main point is that in a quantum gravity theory, where the Planck scale plays an important role, space time points are expected to be effectively smeared to a size of order Planck scale. That is, it is meaningless to claim, for instance, that you sit exactly on a light cone.

Many of the problems with the $`\alpha `$-vacua are related to the image charges and their apparent non local nature. This is what we turn to next.

## 4 Do image charges break causality?

Another issue that has been brought up concerns the long distance behavior of the theory. As we have seen, the $`\alpha `$-vacua can easily be constructed by allowing for image charges on the wrong side of de Sitter space. Greens functions might therefore receive contributions directly from a source but also through the image. This has caused concerns that the theory does not make physical sense and one might worry about problems of, e.g., causality.

It is, however, important to bear in mind the physical interpretations of the various Greens functions. The ones which are important for causality are the commutator and the retarded Greens functions, which are independent of the choice of vacuum and always vanish outside of the light cone. When physics depending on these Greens functions is studied, there is no difference between the standard Bunch-Davies vacuum and the more general $`\alpha `$-vacua. Greens functions that do depend on the choice of vacua, and therefore are different for the $`\alpha `$-vacua, are, e.g., the Feynman propagator and the Hadamard function. These are the ones that exhibit the extra singularities, outside of the light cone, that have caused some worries. One should note, however, that these Greens functions in general are expected to be non zero outside the light cone; the Bunch-Davies vacuum is no exception. Contrary to the commutator and retarded Greens function they encode information about the vacuum and correlations in the vacuum fluctuations. Unorthodox behavior, like in the case of the $`\alpha `$-vacua, might seem surprising but does not necessarily imply that the theory is inconsistent.

Of particular interest in this context is the Hadamard function. Note that the Feynman propagator can be written in terms of the vacuum independent retarded and advanced Greens functions and the vacuum dependent Hadamard function. The extra singularities of the Hadamard function occur, if we consider points at equal time in Robertson-Walker coordinates, for points separated by the diameter of de Sitter space. They simply imply that the correlation between fluctuations at such points is enhanced. The vanishing of the commutator guarantees that this can not be used for communications and can not lead to any break of causality. The large separation between the points makes it a little difficult for an observer to actually measure the correlations, although it is suggested in  that interactions might facilitate this. As far as the transplanckian effects are concerned, this is, however, not really the main point. When inflation ends the full structure of the Hadamard function will become visible and available to the CMBR. As suggested in , the end of inflation transforms the meta observables of  into real observables. Unfortunately, the direct detection of correlations over distances of the order the de Sitter diameter is not possible. At the end of inflation, the modes relevant for the CMBR are much larger than the de Sitter diameter, and the direct as well as the image mediated fluctuations are hidden in the extremely small scales. The only aspect that is claimed to be of relevance for the CMBR is a possible large scale tail.

 reached the same conclusion as in the present work concerning the irrelevance of correlations over spatial distances in the Feynman propagator. The authors of  continued, however, by pointing out that even though the singularities are harmless, a propagator that behaves like in Minkowsky space for small distances does not suffer from them anyway. Small distances and Minkowsky behavior can certainly be reached in the present universe well above the Planck scale. But, as has already been emphasized, the situation is very different during inflation when the Planck scale might be just a few orders of magnitude smaller than the inflationary scale. In such a universe Minkowsky behavior can not be reached before transplanckian physics make quantum field theory irrelevant. This way of arguing for the Bunch-Davies vacuum therefore lacks force.

Finally, it should be noted that it is essential for the consistency of the vacua that we restrict ourselves to half of de Sitter space. As pointed out already in , the direction of time changes on the wrong side of de Sitter. This also guarantees that there is no retarded propagator connecting an image charge with anything on the right half of de Sitter space.111Note however recent work, , where other possibilities to handle this problem are discussed.

## 5 Can $`\alpha `$ change with $`H`$?

In  it is argued that $`\alpha `$ can not vary with a changing $`H`$. The reason, according to , is that local physics can not know about how $`H`$ changes and consequently $`\alpha `$ must remain constant. Since present day physics requires $`e^\alpha `$ to be substantially lower than any value that would be of interest to inflation, and $`\alpha `$ can not change with time, all interesting effects due to transplanckian physics are excluded.

However, one should note that even the Bunch-Davies modes have a dependence on $`H`$. This is easily seen from the Fourier transform of a Bunch-Davies mode given by

$$\varphi _{𝐤,BD}\left(x\right)=\eta H\frac{1}{\sqrt{2k}}e^{ik\eta }\left(1\frac{i}{k\eta }\right)e^{i𝐤𝐱},$$

where $`k`$ is the comoving momentum. The form when the mode is created at the fundamental scale is obtained by using $`p=k/a=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and recalling that $`\eta =\frac{1}{aH}`$. The result has a dependence on $`H`$, and the planckian physics preparing the modes in a Bunch-Davies state therefore needs to know about the value of $`H`$. In a pure quantum field theory world the dependence is naturally generated through the expansion of the universe while the mode is in the transplanckian regime. A further dependence on $`H`$ through $`\alpha `$ is not qualitatively much different and it is easy to see that such a dependence is quite natural and local. The scale factor depends on time through $`a\left(t\right)=e^{Ht}`$, with the expansion of space as a local effect taking place everywhere. The conjugate time interval associated with a mode of energy $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is $`1/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, and during this time interval space expands by a factor $`e^{H\left(t+1/\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)Ht}=e^{H/\mathrm{\Lambda }}1+\frac{H}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. This is true also for spatial distances close to the Planck scale and it is therefore natural to expect effects of the order $`\frac{H}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$. This is immediately obvious from looking at the Bunch-Davies modes above, but transplanckian physics might lead to an additional dependence on $`\frac{H}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ through $`\alpha `$.

The simplest, and most natural dependence, is that we have

$$e^\alpha \frac{H}{\mathrm{\Lambda }},$$

and that this remains true at all times. Not only during inflation. However, in  it has been pointed out that even this small value of $`e^\alpha `$ could be in conflict with present day measurements of high energy gamma rays. A vacuum of the type above, it is claimed, would lead to a higher rate of particle creation than what is acceptable. The discrepancy is not large, considering the sensitivity of the argument to the detailed astro-physics involved – it is a matter of an order of magnitude or two – but it nevertheless suggests that a more complicated behavior than the one above might be needed. This is precisely the subject of  where the vacuum relaxes towards the Bunch-Davies vacuum once inflation is over. At any rate, high energy gamma rays could, as suggested in , be another way to probe planckian physics in an expanding universe. One should also investigate how these effects might vary due to local variations in $`H`$.

## 6 Will the $`\alpha `$-vacua thermalize?

As discussed in  the $`\alpha `$-vacua are not thermal. One effect of this is that a detector in an $`\alpha `$-vacuum will not end up in thermal equilibrium. An equilibrium will be reached , but it will not be thermal in character and in general not obey the laws of detailed balance. For a detector with just two levels, equilibrium trivially implies detailed balance between the two levels even though the occupation numbers will be non standard. With three levels, however, the situation is more unusual. Instead of detailed balance between any two levels, there will be a net transition rate from, say, level one to level two, from level two to level three and then back to level one. This is a consequence of the non thermal nature of the background and does not imply any inconsistent physics of the detector. A question one can ask, however, is whether and how such a background can sustain itself. Will there be processes that act to thermalize the background?

In  it is argued based on holography and complementarity that this will indeed be the case. The main argument is that, according to a specific observer in de Sitter space, any perturbation will be redshifted as it approaches the de Sitter horizon and apparently boiled to pieces through the ever higher temperature that the perturbation experiences according to the observer. All perturbations will inevitably be thermalized. One would conclude from this that all traces of physics taking place on smaller scales than the horizon will be erased and the featureless and thermal Bunch-Davies modes are the only thing that remains. However, this is slightly problematic if we take a point of view based on the Robertson-Walker coordinates in (8). We can now follow the modes through the de Sitter horizon and see how they freeze when they expand and become larger than the de Sitter radius. The analogue would be to follow an observer who ventures inside a black hole and find that nothing peculiar or dramatic happens near the horizon. And this seems to be the appropriate point of view to take when discussing fluctuations generated through inflation. Holography and complementarity are intriguing concepts that could be important for cosmology, but for this particular exercise they do not seem to be relevant. As observers of the CMBR we are more in the position of an observer inside a black hole rather than one on the outside.

A more conservative approach would be to predict the evolution of the fluctuations without thinking about holography. Any effect that would threaten to thermalize the $`\alpha `$-vacua must then be due to interactions. To be specific one could imagine a thermal background with a small perturbation that starts out at Planck scale. It is important to note that the temperature is very low with the thermal wave length of the order of the de Sitter radius itself. As a consequence a planckian mode is relatively safe in the beginning. As it redshifts, and its energy decreases towards the de Sitter temperature, the thermalization effects should become more important. This happens over a period of time a few times the inverse temperature. But at the same time the mode will expand past the horizon and freeze. One seems to conclude that the thermalization effects could be important in an interacting theory, but it is not clear that they will suppress any difference with respect to the Bunch-Davies vacuum by orders of magnitude. Much less wipe out any difference completely. Clearly more detailed work is needed to make a precise prediction.

## 7 Conclusions

In this short note we have discussed a few of the problems of transplanckian physics that can be addressed in the simplified framework of $`\alpha `$-vacua. Our conclusion is that the peculiar image singularities of the Feynman propagator, as well as problems with non renormalization, do not necessarily imply the ruling out of transplanckian effects. A true inconsistency at this level would have had dramatic implications. Without observational input we would have been able to exclude all models of transplanckian physics that result in other vacua than the Bunch-Davies, including the non commutative examples discussed in, e.g., . We do not believe that such strong conclusions can be drawn from work done so far. We have furthermore considered the way $`\alpha `$ might change. We do not see any fundamental difficulties in this respect but note that the work of  shows that there are important constraints coming from present day physics. Issues of thermalization also need further investigation but we do not think that any argument based on holography put forward so far gives any meaningful constraints.

To summarize, we believe that the essence of the arguments of  is the following claim: it is not consistent to assume a fixed high energy cut off where unknown transplanckian physics delivers states different form the Bunch-Davies vacuum. An important point of the present paper is that possible problems are not visible in the cutoff theory. All problems must rely on claims about contributions from energy scales above the cutoff, energy densities etc., and speculations about transplanckian physics. Clearly, more work is needed to figure out how unorthodox transplanckian physics really can be.

## Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Lars Bergström, Daniel Domert, Martin Olsson, Hector Rubinstein, Gary Shiu and Konstantin Zarembo for valuable discussions. The author is a Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences Research Fellow supported by a grant from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation. The work was also supported by the Swedish Research Council (VR).


format: text

text:
# Long-term Properties of Accretion Disks in X-ray Binaries: I. the variable third period in SMC X-1

## 1 Introduction

The X-ray lightcurves of persistent neutron star X-ray binaries exhibit periodicities which give information about physical mechanisms at work in the systems. Systems with high magnetic fields can show X-ray pulsations on timescales from milliseconds to seconds, due to channeling of accreting matter onto small emitting regions on the neutron star . Also found are quasi - periodic oscillations, on disk - magnetosphere interaction timescales ranging from milliseconds to fractions of a second . Orbital modulations are also seen on timescales ranging from a few tens of minutes to a few tens of days. The orbit manifests itself in the X-ray as either a change in mass transfer (and therefore emission) in an eccentric orbit, or a change in the character or magnitude of absorption, in some cases eclipses by the donor .

### 1.1 Superorbital Periods

However, in a small number of sources with high or low-mass companions (e.g. SMC X-1, Her X-1, LMC X-4) a third (or “superorbital”) period is also present, typically on a scale of tens of days. Early in the history of X-ray astronomy an explanation for the behaviour of the LMXB Her X-1 was suggested (Petterson 1977) which involved a disk that was tilted and/or warped by the intense radiation pressure from the central X-ray source, thereby causing it to precess with the observed long period. In doing so it can periodically obscure the central source, giving rise to a modulation of the X-ray flux at the precession period. This model has been the subject of renewed theoretical examination in recent years (see e.g. Wijers and Pringle 1999). Other models for superorbital periods have been proposed, including precession of the magnetic axis of the neutron star  and a hierarchical third body .

It should also be noted that superorbital periods on timescales as long as hundreds of days have been reported in a number of X-ray sources (see e.g. Smale and Lochner 1992), namely those bright enough to be detectable by the first generation of all-sky monitors (such as those on Vela-5B and Ariel 5). However, these modulations are distinctly “quasi-periodic” in that even long-term monitoring datasets do not yield precise periods in their power spectra, but a broad peak, often superposed on “red-noise” power. Examples of these include Cyg X-2 ($`P`$70-80d; Paul, Kitamoto & Makino 2000), GX354-0 ($`P`$70d; Kong, Charles & Kuulkers 1998, X1916-051 ($`P`$83d; Homer et al. 2001) and X1820-30 ($`P`$200d; Chou & Grindlay 2001), although in the latter case the long period is sufficiently stable that it has been suggested  that X1820-30 could be a triple system. Most of these modulations are rather different from those exhibited by SMC X-1, Her X-1 and LMC X-4 in that they are much lower amplitude and do not appear to be due to varying obscuration. It has been customary to also interpret these superorbital periods as due to a precessing, possibly warped accretion disc, with the lower amplitudes due to lower inclinations.

Clearly the detailed investigation of these long-period phenomena is an observational challenge in that it really requires regular, systematic monitoring of the X-ray flux, preferably with a single instrument in each energy range. In the energy range 1.3 - 12.1 keV, the RXTE All-Sky Monitor (ASM) provides a continuous dataset of all bright X-ray sources, that has been continuously compiled over a period of more than six years. Up to energies of 1 MeV, the Burst And Transient Source Experiment (BATSE) has provided a continuous dataset over a period of almost a decade. The advent of such long-term continuous datasets has made the work we describe here possible. This paper is the first in a series that examines the nature and properties of these superorbital variations.

### 1.2 SMC X-1

SMC X-1 is a massive X-ray binary system consisting of a 1.6 $`\pm `$ 0.1 M neutron star (an X-ray pulsar) and a high mass (17.2 $`\pm `$ 0.6 M) B0 I optical companion, known as Sk 160 (Reynolds et al 1993). The spin period of the pulsar is 0.71 s and the orbital period of the system is 3.89 days, and its orbital period is decaying on a timescale of $`10^5`$ years (see Reynolds et al. (1993) and references therein). SMC X-1 also has a superorbital period of approximately 60 days believed to be the consequence of a precessing, warped, accretion disk (see Wojdowski at al. (1998) and references therein). This disk is presumed to periodically occult the X-rays from the central source, thereby creating a modulation in the X-ray lightcurve in a manner analogous to that of Her X-1.

A comprehensive X-ray investigation of the SMC X-1 system has been presented by Wojdowski et al  which examines all of the available data up to JD 24450660 (early 1998). As well as showing a superorbital period of $``$ 60 days, they demonstrate that the X-ray source has been continously active for at least the last 30 years and that the mass transfer rate to the neutron star has been roughly constant over this time. The latter is inferred from the fact that the pulsar has been steadily spinning-up on a timescale of hundreds of years. Based on the placement of pulse and eclipse profiles within the superorbital cycle, it was suggested that the luminosity and spectrum during the (orbital) eclipses are unaffected by the long cycle. It was thus argued that no intrinsic source variation could be responsible for the 60 day modulation, since the superorbital variation was present only in the out-of-eclipse data. Periodic occultation of the pulsar by the rim of a warped accretion disk, precessing under the gravity of the giant companion was shown to be consistent with the observations.

However, whilst confirming the presence of the superorbital modulation, Wojdowski et al also noted that it was not steady, but appeared to vary between 50 and 60 days. The identification of pointings with phase in the superorbital cycle could therefore not be made independently of the pointed lightcurves themselves. Instead, timing in the superorbital cycle was performed by creating a consistent scenario, then fitting the pointings to that scenario. We therefore believe that the elimination of intrinsic luminosity variation is open to question.

In this work we present the results of an analysis of both ASM and BATSE data that allows the variation in the third period to be followed continuously over more than a decade. We also extend the timeline of observations by 3 years since Wojdowski et al , which allows us to see that the variation of the third period might itself be periodic, as suggested by Ribo et al (2001). We show that this variation in the long period must be due to interaction of modes in a warped, precessing accretion disk.

## 2 RXTE Observations

Launched in 1996, the Rossi X-Ray Timing Explorer (RXTE) carries an All Sky Monitor (ASM), which gives continuous coverage of the entire sky. Typically 5-10 readings - called “dwells” - are taken of each of a list of sources per day, lasting about 90 seconds per dwell. Timing information is provided to within a thousandth of a day, as well as crude spectral information. The ASM is sensitive to photon energies between 1.3 and 12.1 keV, broken into three energy channels (1.3-3.0 keV, 3.0-5.0 keV and 5.0-12.1 keV). A total of 6.1 years of data (MJD 50083-52312) from the ASM were used in our analysis. Since the X-ray flux of SMC X-1 varies by a factor of $`>`$10 over the 40-60 day high-low state cycle, the data quality obtained by the ASM is variable. For all analyses reported in this paper, the ASM data were selected by background and quality of coverage; all points with background level above 10 $`cs^1`$ were rejected. Crude X-ray spectral information can be obtained from the ASM data by constructing hardness ratios of the three channels. In this case we define the ratio to be the sum of the count rate in the two high energy channels (3.0 - 12.1 keV) to that at low energy (1.3 - 3.0 keV). A section of the ASM lightcurve can be found in figure 1

## 3 BATSE Observations

The Burst And Transient Source Experiment (BATSE) carried on the Compton Gamma Ray Observatory (CGRO) provided near continuous monitoring of SMC X-1 for a period of just over 9 years from JD 24448361 - 24451690. Data were reduced by the Earth Occultation Technique (EOT) described by Harmon et al  and Zhang et al . By exploiting the Earth’s limb as an occulting mask, individual X-ray sources can be located with an accuracy of 1°. During each 90 minute orbit of CGRO, two measurements of the total 20-100 keV flux from SMC X-1 were made as the source moved into and out of occultation due to the satellite’s motion. Sources at $`|dec|>41\mathrm{°}`$, such as SMC X-1, undergo intervals, typically lasting a few days, during each spacecraft precession period where they are not occulted by the Earth. These intervals manifest themselves as gaps in the data. To improve signal-to-noise and to remove effects of spacecraft repointings, daily average count spectra were generated for each detector by averaging the individual step measurements for each detector and each energy channel. These count spectra were then fitted simultaneously for each detector viewing the source with a photon power law model with a fixed photon index of 3 and a normalization equal to the integrated 20-100 keV flux in photons $`cm^2s^1`$ that was forward-folded through the detector response matrices (Briggs 1995; Pendleton et al. 1995). A fixed photon index was used because it was not well determined from fits to 1-day average spectra. The 1-day average 20-100 keV fluxes were used for this analysis. A section of the BATSE lightcurve can be found in figure 1.

## 4 Dynamic Power Spectrum Analysis

The ASM and BATSE data were analysed using a ‘dynamic power spectrum’ approach, designed to allow any changes in the X-ray modulation to be closely followed. The Lomb-Scargle periodogram code (Scargle 1982, 1989) implemented in Starlink software PERIOD was adapted in conjunction with a sliding ‘data window’ to produce power density spectra (PDS) for a series of overlapping stretches of the time series. Adjustable parameters in the analysis were the length of the data window and the amount of time by which the window was shifted each time to obtain the overlapping stretches of data. The code accounted for variations in the number of datapoints per interval such that the power spectrum resolution was identical for each interval. Choice of data window length was influenced by the expected minimum number of cycles needed for a significant detection of modulation due to SMC X-1. Since the ‘third period’ is already established to be approximately 40-60 days, the data window was set at 4 cycles (200 days). Of course, a longer window has the effect of reducing sensitivity to changes on timescales shorter than the window length.

The amount of shift between consecutive intervals influences the degree to which changes can be followed, for example setting the shift to equal the window length, results in zero overlap and no ability to determine whether an observed change in the PDS was gradual or sudden. Conversely, excessive overlap reduces the statistical independence of consecutive intervals. In any case there is no gain in sensitivity once the barrier of the periodogram resolution is approached, this being a significant factor when there are only a few signal cycles in the window. A shift of 50 days was used as this corresponds to approximately one cycle of the 40-60 day modulation.

The result of the above procedure was an array of periodograms at identical resolution covering each dataset in many overlapping intervals. These results were then visualized by constructing 3-dimensional maps in (Time, Frequency, Power) space with spectral power being represented jointly by grayscale intensity and contours. The grayscale represented the raw periodograms and the contours provided a smoothed interpolation over the data.

The Dynamic Power Spectra of SMC X-1 in the BATSE and ASM wavebands is seen in figure 2. Not only is there a clear superorbital period on a period similar to that reported by Wojdowski et al , but it varies with time, on a scale of $``$ 7 years. Simulations show that the smooth shape of variation cannot be reproduced with a simple replacement of one periodicity at $``$ 55 days by another at $``$ 47 days, and we believe we are dealing with variation of a single periodicity. Some additional structure is seen in the BATSE lightcurve at roughly twice the frequency of the main structure: this is thought to be a harmonic of the main variation. The agreement between the datasets suggests that whatever process is responsible for the variation affects both wavebands.

### 4.1 Investigation of systematic errors

To investigate the sensitivity of the analysis to noise and systematic errors, the analysis was run on artificial lightcurves with the sampling of the SMC X-1 datasets but with noise superposed. Two cases were tested for: (1) varying amplitude variations of stable period with gaussian white noise, (2) white noise only. Red noise, in which the noise amplitude depends on frequency, was not tested for on the grounds that there is no evidence for it in the power spectrum of SMC X-1. Some spectral leakage was found for noisy datasets of known periodicity (see figure 3 for an example), identifiable in that their shape mirrors that of the strongest variation. Pure white noise produced no periodicities at any time above spectral power corresponding to roughly 80 % significance.

In the case of BATSE occultation data, interaction between the precession period of $``$ 51 days and any detected periodicity might be expected. This possibility was carefully investigated, and found to produce a negligible effect. The orbital precession period was plotted for the duration of the BATSE dataset and found not to correlate with the variation in superorbital period. Furthermore, no bright X-ray sources are within the Earth Occultation errorbox of 2°from SMC X-1.

However the key point to note is the close correlation between the ASM and CGRO results during the period of overlap. This is convincing in itself because RXTE has a different orbital precession period and the ASM works on an entirely different principle to BATSE. Data from the ASM and BATSE provide a 4.4 year stretch of simultaneous coverage in two separate regions of the X-ray spectrum. During this period of overlap (MJD 50083-51690), the behaviour of the superorbital period is closely mirrored in the two, completely independent, datasets. This can be seen clearly in figure 2. Nor is this effect seen in any other bright X-ray source observed by the CGRO.

## 5 Spectral Behaviour of the Third Period

We use the spectral information on the variability which is provided by the multi-channel nature of the ASM dataset, in order to discriminate between possible superorbital period mechanisms. To increase signal to noise, binning the data by phase is desired. However, the variation in superorbital period rules out folding over the entire dataset. Examination of figure 2 shows that over the region MJD 50550 - 50800, the superorbital period is roughly stable for both ASM and BATSE datasets.

Figure 4 shows the phase-binned lightcurve of the SMC X-1 datasets during this interval. We see immediately that the ASM variations mirror those in of BATSE. Furthermore, the shape of the ASM total count rate variation is almost exactly reproduced in the variation of the hardness ratio. The relation between total count rate and spectral hardness is shown explicitly in figure 5.

When the ASM phase-binned lightcurve is split into its individual channels (figure 6), we see that the amplitude of variation is highly energy dependent. The variation at energies 1.3 - 3.0 keV, represented by ASM channels 1 and 2, has amplitude $``$ 1 $`cs^1`$ and the variation is smooth, whereas at energies 5.0 - 12.1 keV the variation is about twice this amplitude.

## 6 Discussion

Our analysis of the RXTE and CGRO archival datasets has not only confirmed the presence of the superorbital period in SMC X-1, it has clearly demonstrated that this itself is varying on an even longer timescale (conceivably a “fourth” period!). Here we shall discuss the superorbital period, along with reasons why it might vary with time. Four mechanisms have been put forward to explain the superorbital period, and we shall discuss these for the case of SMC X-1.

### 6.1 Spectral information as a broad discriminant

Broadly speaking, mechanisms for generating a superorbital period must do so by a variation in the X-ray intensity of the source, by variation in uncovered area as seen from the observer, or by a varying absorption along the line of sight to the observer. However we can immediately rule out varying absorption. This is because the BATSE lightcurve varies in the same way as that of the ASM, showing that the variation occurs across the entire energy range 1.3 - 100 keV. This rules out absorption by wind or accretion disk. For example, although the wind density in SMC X-1 can vary by factors of up to $``$1000 (Blondin and Woo 1995, Wojdowski et al 2000, see also Vrtilek et al., 2001), this would have no effect on the BATSE lightcurve. This also rules out in the case of SMC X-1 the conventional explanation for superorbital variations, in which varying absorption by a disk warp causes the periodicity.

In itself, the relation between ASM intensity and spectral hardness does not act as a good discriminant between mechanisms, as the lightcurve represents a multiple component source (see Tanaka 1997 for a review). In the case of neutron star XRB, the soft component (usually identified with energies $`<`$ 3 keV) is taken to originate in the accretion disk, through multi-temperature disk blackbody emission (Mitsuda et al 1984) combined with a Comptonised component (White, Stella and Parmar 1988). The wind is also represented at a low level in the soft component of the emission from SMC X-1 . However it should be noted that a small component of the soft emission may in some cases arise at the surface of the neutron star .

Emission at harder energies is identified with the surface region of the neutron star itself, through shock or Coulomb heating or Compton scattering at the boundary layer . It has recently been suggested that the similarity in X-ray spectra between low state neutron star systems and black hole candidates identifies the dominant source of the hard component as the advection dominated accretion flow (ADAF) between the inner disk and compact object .

Thus the majority of the soft component of the ASM lightcurve can be identified with the accretion disk or matter ejected from the companion, whereas the hard component corresponds to emission at or near the surface of the neutron star itself. In this way, the spectral dependence of the ASM lightcurve allows us to determine the region in which variation is taking place. The superorbital variation is strongly energy dependent: as can be seen from figures 4, 5 & 6, the ASM variation is most pronounced at energies $`>`$ 5keV, while there is little or no variation at energies $`<`$ 3 keV. This suggests we can identify the observed superorbital variation with changes at or near the surface of the neutron star.

This interpretation is only valid if ejected material does not dominate the soft component of the RXTE lightcurve. ASCA spectra of the X-ray pulsar Cen X-3  do indeed contain little or no variation at energies $`<`$2 keV in eclipse, whereas the hard component varies significantly. The authors model the spectrum with three components (figure 6 of Ebisawa et al 1996): a hard component from the neutron star itself, significant at energies $`>3keV`$, a component due to electron scattering in circumstellar matter, dominant at energies 1 \- 5 keV, and a soft component due to scattering from interstellar dust, dominant at energies $`<2`$ keV, by virtue of the location of Cen X-3 in the galactic plane.

In SMC X-1, however, the circumstellar component cannot be an important contributor to the ASM lightcurve. In the case of Cen X-3, the pulse period is strongly energy dependent, with little or no evidence for the pulsation at energies corresponding to the circumstellar electron scattering or interstellar dust components , which suggests circumstellar and interstellar scattering matter are responsible for the emission of the bulk of the soft X-rays. The position of SMC X-1 out of the galactic plane rules out any significant interstellar dust component, and its pulse profile is clear and present right down to 0.1keV . This rules out domination of the soft X-ray lightcurve from circumstellar or interstellar scattering regions. Thus the absence of superorbital variation in the soft energy bands of the ASM lightcurve is truly showing that radiation from the disk is not an important participant in the variation.

### 6.2 Mechanisms of Superorbital Variation

Precession of the neutron star’s magnetic axis was invoked to explain the $``$35d periodicity in Her X-1 (by changing the accretion geometry; see Trümper et al. 1986). However this mechanism can be ruled out in the case of SMC X-1 for two reasons. Firstly, the precession torque is expected to be of the same order as the spin-up torque . But pointed X-ray observations of SMC X-1 show the spin period to be monotonically decreasing , suggesting that precession should either also monotonically decrease in period, or if the sign of the torque changes, produce more violent behaviour in the dynamic power spectrum over time. This is not observed. Secondly, the precession of the neutron star would result in a superorbital variation of the pulse profile, whereas pointed observations suggest that the pulse profile is in fact stable . Forced precession has recently been ruled out in the case of Her X-1 for exactly this reason .

Another possibility is variation in mass transfer from donor to neutron star on the superorbital period. Giant pulsators, most notably RR Lyrae variables, are known to change their pulsation periods (see, e.g: Jurscik 2001). Thought to be driven by horizontal branch evolution, these pulsation period changes are typically monotonic and of order 1 d per 0.1 GYr . However there are cases in which the variation is more chaotic and on a faster timescale , so we must address this mechanism. The fact that such pulsations have never been detected in the donor of SMC X-1, given the high sensitivity of searches for such behaviour, leads us to strongly doubt the existence of pulsations at all. Furthermore, we expect companion star pulsations to produce large changes in bulk mass transfer rate from donor to accretion disk, manifesting themselves as large changes in the magnitude, or even direction (see, e.g: Nelson et al. 1997) of spin of the neutron star. As noted by Wojdowski et al (1998), however, the changes in neutron star spin rate are always in the same sense.

More gentle variation in mass transfer rate can be brought about if the XRB is part of an hierarchical triple. The third body causes the inner XRB to undergo nodal precession, leading to mass transfer variations on a timescale determined by the orbital periods of the binary and hierarchical third body . This mechanism could give rise to both the superorbital period and the longer period of its variation, with the orbit of the third body the superorbital period and its variation period that of the nodal precession. Such a mechanism can be ruled out for SMC X-1, however, by consideration of the orbit of the centre of mass of the inner XRB about the system centre of mass, and the variation in pulse arrival time this would produce. Measured discrepancies between pulse arrival delays and those predicted from a two-body system amount to less than $``$ 10ms in RXTE PCA data . To produce such a small variation in pulse arrival time, the third body would have to orbit the inner XRB with the normal vector of the orbit pointing $`<`$ 2°from the line of sight, for any stellar third body. Thus a third body scenario requires an extraordinary degree of fine-tuning to reproduce the observed results, especially when we consider that SMC X-1 itself is an eclipsing binary and thus would have high orbital inclination with respect to the orbit of the third body.

This leaves us with precession of a warped accretion disk as the mechanism responsible for the superorbital period. Such systems are usually thought to have as their primary observational effect a change in absorption, which has been ruled out for this system. What is not ruled out is a variation in uncovered emitting area, as suggested for Her X-1 (Gerend & Boynton 1976). Also not ruled out is variable deposition of energy at the boundary layer, brought on by the quasi-steady nature of the precession. This is not in conflict with the spin-up of the neutron star, as there are deviations from a purely monotonic increase . Indeed if one looks at the residuals in the quadratic fit to the pulse period , the residuals show variation of similar shape and timescale to the variations of the superorbital X-ray period! It is currently uncertain if this is a real effect or a statistically insignificant artifact. If statistically significant, this would provide direct evidence linking the variation in third period to variation in accretion flow onto the neutron star.

There is a third way in which a warped, precessing accretion disk might manifest itself in the X-ray lightcurves examined here. Studies of CVs have shown that local values of mass transfer in accretion disks can dramatically exceed the mass transfer rate from donor to acceptor, as shown in CV’s with prominent bright spots such as LX Ser . In the case of SMC X-1, the quasi-steady decrease in spin period noted by Wojdowski et al (1998) suggests that mass transfer from the donor star is also quasi-steady, either in a Roche Lobe stream or collimated wind, allowing such a bright spot to exist. SMC X-1 is expected to have a small accretion disk given its HMXB nature, which, if warped, might allow the mass transfer stream to reach close enough to the neutron star that the resulting bright spot becomes an important component in the X-ray emission of the system, as suggested by Warner (2002, private communication). As the warp precesses, the intersection point moves radially through the disk, thus varying the brightness and spectral hardness of emission - as seen in figure 4. Furthermore, as the mass transfer stream would be varying its position on the precession period, the intersection point would drive the warp further. Such a mechanism is deserving of further theoretical investigation.

The warped, precessing accretion disk has one clear advantage over the other mechanisms considered here: it can support variations in superorbital period. To show this, we summarise first the properties of warped accretion disks.

### 6.3 Stability of Precessing, Warped Accretion Disks

The hypothesis that warped, precessing accretion disks might be responsible for superorbital periods in XRB gained acceptance through the canonical precessing disk systems Her X-1, SS 433 and LMC X-4 . The measured $``$160d precession of the relativistic jets in SS433 have also been identified with precession of the accretion disk . Tidal forces on the disk by the companion can lead to a constant rate of precession if the disk can become tilted out of the plane (see eg: Wijers and Pringle 1999), but two issues then arise: (i) how to cause a fluid disk to precess with uniform frequency, and (ii) how to maintain tilting out of the plane.

Modelling of disk behaviour by Wijers & Pringle  and subsequent more rigorous treatment by Ogilvie & Dubus (2001: hereafter OD01) has shown that an accretion disk is unstable to radiation-driven warping when the luminosity of the central source exceeds a critical value. This instability provides a mechanism enabling the disk to tilt and to remain tilted and so to precess with a period that is comparable to the recorded values for superorbital periods in X-ray binaries. Furthermore the models also provide for the possibility of both retrograde and prograde motion. Thus all the superorbital periods seen in X-ray binaries might now be accountable by the same model.

The most pertinent of the OD01 results for this discussion is the classification of behaviour into modes of warping (see figure 7 of OD01). The stability of the accretion disk to warping is predicted as a function of the mass ratio $`q`$ and the binary separation $`r_b`$, for two regimes of mass input. The first region boundary corresponds to matter input at the Lindblad resonance radius $`r_o`$, for which every source above this line for which matter is input in this way can sustain mode 1 and higher warps. If matter is input at the circularisation radius $`r_c`$, this border does not apply, and persistent warping is not possible. Between the upper border of this region and the dotted line, mode 0 warping persists. Finally in the uppermost region, mode 1 and higher warping modes become possible.

The location of the borders between stability regions in $`r_b`$ \- $`q`$ space depends strongly on the global disk viscosity parameter, $`\alpha `$ and the neutron star accretion efficiency $`\eta `$. Uncertainty in these values translates into uncertainty as to the location of the border between regions and thus the stability classification of a system. However, the adopted values of $`\alpha `$ = 0.3 and $`\eta `$ = 0.1 are usually assumed to be appropriate for neutron star XRB (Frank, King & Raine 1995, OD01 and references therein).

As a HMXB, the accretion disk in SMC X-1 is unlikely to reach out to $`r_o`$. Moreover, that the spin period has been decreasing in a steady way compared to most other HMXB’s suggests that mass transfer from donor to disk is also comparatively steady, suggesting mass transfer is collimated in some way, even if not by Roche overflow. These considerations lead us to suggest that the true site of mass input is closer to $`r_c`$ than to $`r_o`$, so we use the stability scheme appropriate for mass input at $`r_c`$. SMC X-1 is then placed near the border between the region supporting stable mode 0 warping and that supporting mode 1 and higher modes. We would thus expect the disk to form a precessing warp, giving rise to a long periodicity. However, this may not be a stable monotonic warp; instead, there may be an interaction between modes by virtue of the unique location of SMC X-1 near the border between the two regions. As two or more modes compete, then, a longer term variation may be set up in which the sum of modes itself changes slowly with time. This may manifest itself as the observed variation in the superorbital period of SMC X-1, which must represent an important constraint on future development of such models.

## 7 Conclusion

We have used the dynamic power spectrum to show that the superorbital period of SMC X-1 varies in a coherent, apparently almost sinusoidal, way. In conjunction with the spectral behaviour of this variation, we have seen that a precessing, warped accretion disk must be responsible for the superorbital variation. However the influence of the warp may be felt not only through varying occultation, as is supposed for Her X-1, but through varying accretion at the neutron star boundary layer, permitted because the disk precession is not steady but quasi-steady. Finally we saw that the variation of the superorbital period is fully consistent with current stability theory of warps in accretion disks. An interaction of warp modes can give rise to the varying superorbital period, allowing its variation to change direction several times in a few years.

This remarkable result was only possible due to the superb, long time-base of the CGRO and RXTE databases. It heralds a new understanding of the structure and evolution of accretion disks which may have implications for disks on all scales. A search for similar behaviour in other X-ray binaries in these datasets is under way and will be the subject of future papers.

Acknowledgments

SGTL and WIC were in receipt of PPARC research studentships. WIC thanks Professor Brian Warner for interesting discussion on the observational consequences of tilted and warped disks, and Drs. Phil Uttley and Guillaume Dubus for informative comments. This work was only made possible through the efforts of the ASM/RXTE team at MIT and GSFC, and the BATSE/CGRO team at MSFC.


text:
# References

## Abstract

Vacuum fluctuations have observable consequences, like the Casimir force appearing between two mirrors in vacuum. This force is now measured with good accuracy and agreement with theory. We discuss the meaning and consequences of these statements by emphasizing their relation with the problem of vacuum energy, one of the main unsolved problems at the interface between gravitational and quantum theory.

Casimir effect and vacuum energy

1Laboratoire Kastler Brossel UPMC/ENS/CNRS case 74, Campus Jussieu, F75252 Paris Cedex 05

The emergence of quantum theory has profoundly altered our conception of empty space by forcing us to consider vacuum as permanently filled by quantum field fluctuations. These fluctuations have numerous observable effects in microscopic physics. They also have manifestations in the macroscopic world, such as the Casimir force appearing between two mirrors in vacuum as a consequence of the radiation pressure of vacuum fluctuations. This force has recently been measured with a good accuracy and in a correct agreement with theory, the latter taking into account the real optical properties of the mirrors used in the experiments.

Before discussing the precise meaning of these statements, we will present historical remarks devoted to the birth of the theory of vacuum fluctuations as well as the difficult relation of their energy with gravitation theory. We will also emphasize some features of the Casimir effect which may be of interest in the cosmological context discussed in the present volume . The Casimir force is equivalent to a negative pressure arising from the interaction of vacuum fluctuations with mirrors. Whereas the vacuum energy density is infinite in the absence of cutoff and badly defined (i.e. cutoff-dependent) otherwise, the Casimir pressure is well defined and cutoff-independent. It is found to have a ‘weak’ non vanishing value, i.e. a value much smaller than any estimate of the ‘large’ vacuum energy density. Furthermore, this value agrees with the results of experimental measurements. We will finally discuss briefly other mechanical effects of vacuum fluctuations which appear for moving mirrors. These effects also correspond to perfectly well defined theoretical predictions which are in principle observable, although their very small magnitude has up to now prevented their experimental observation.

We begin with a few historical remarks related to the early history of vacuum fluctuations. The classical idealization of space as being absolutely empty was already affected by the advent of statistical mechanics, when it was realized that space is in fact filled with black body radiation. It is precisely for explaining the properties of this thermal radiation that Planck introduced his first quantum law in 1900 . In modern terms, this law gives the mean energy per electromagnetic mode as the product of the energy of a photon $`\mathrm{}\omega h\nu `$ by a mean number of photons $`\overline{n}`$ per mode

$$\overline{E}_{\mathrm{bbr}}=\overline{n}\mathrm{}\omega \overline{n}=\frac{1}{\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{k_\mathrm{B}T}\right)1}$$
(1)
Here ‘bbr’ labels the effect of black body radiation. Planck was certainly aware of the unsatisfactory character of his first derivation. Like Einstein and other physicists, he attempted for years to give a more satisfactory proof of this law by studying in more detail the interaction between matter and radiation. These attempts and the related discussions which led finally to the discovery by Einstein of the quantum absorption-emission laws and of the Bose statistics of photons  are described for example in .

In a paper written in 1911, Planck  wrote a different expression where the mean energy per mode $`\overline{E}`$ contains a term $`\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{2}`$ which describes a zero-point energy superimposed to the black-body radiation energy

$$\overline{E}=\overline{E}_{\mathrm{bbr}}+\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{2}$$
(2)
In contrast with the thermal fluctuations which disappear at the limit of zero temperature and can thus be ‘pumped out’ of a cavity by lowering the temperature, the zero-point fluctuations are still present at zero temperature. The arguments used by Planck for deriving his second law can no longer be considered as consistent today. Einstein was working along the same lines at the same time and he noticed in a paper  written with Stern in 1913 that the first Planck law does not reproduce exactly the classical limit at high temperature whereas the second law passes successfully this consistency check

$$T\mathrm{}\overline{E}_{\mathrm{bbr}}k_\mathrm{B}T\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{2}+\frac{\mathrm{}^2\omega ^2}{12k_BT}+\mathrm{}\overline{E}=k_\mathrm{B}T+O\left(\frac{1}{T}\right)$$
(3)
This may considered as the first known argument still acceptable today: it fixes the numerical factor $`\frac{1}{2}`$ in front of $`\mathrm{}\omega `$, a factor which was varying between 0 and 1 in the papers published at this time. Amazingly, this argument fixes the magnitude of zero-point fluctuations, essentially visible at low temperatures, by demanding their disappearance in the high temperature limit to be as perfect as possible !

It is worth emphasizing that physicists were numerous to take zero-point fluctuations seriously, long before the latter were rigorously deduced from the fully developed quantum theory. As Planck, most of them restricted their discussion of zero-point fluctuations to the case of atomic motion. Nernst is credited for having been the first to emphasize that the zero-point fluctuations should also exist for field modes . In this sense, he may be considered as the father of ‘vacuum fluctuations’, that is precisely the zero-point fluctuations of the electromagnetic field. He remarked that the very existence of these fluctuations dismisses the classical idea of an empty space which may be attained, at least in principle, by removing all matter from an enclosure and lowering the temperature down to zero. He also noticed that this existence constitutes a challenge for gravitation theory. When the vacuum energy density is calculated by adding the energies $`\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{2}`$ over all field modes, an infinite value is obtained. When a high frequency cutoff is introduced, the sum is finite but still much larger than the mean energy observed in the world around us through gravitational phenomena.

This major problem, which has been known since 1916, can be named the ‘vacuum catastrophe’ , in analogy with the ‘ultraviolet catastrophe’ solved by Planck in 1900. The analogy is more than formal as shown by the expression of the mean energy density calculated by summing (2) over all field modes up to a high frequency cutoff $`\omega _{\mathrm{max}}`$

$$\overline{\rho }=\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{bbr}}+\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{vac}}\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{bbr}}=\frac{\pi ^2\left(k_\mathrm{B}T\right)^4}{15\left(\mathrm{}c\right)^3}\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{vac}}=\frac{\left(\mathrm{}\omega _{\mathrm{max}}\right)^4}{8\pi ^2\left(\mathrm{}c\right)^3}$$
(4)
$`\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{bbr}}`$ represents the energy density of black body radiation and it is proportional to the fourth power $`T^4`$ of temperature, in consistency with the Stefan-Boltzmann law. The fact that it has a finite value independent of the cutoff is a great success of Planck theory of black body radiation. But this success is ruined by the appearance of the second term ! The vacuum energy density $`\overline{\rho }_{\mathrm{vac}}`$ is proportional to the fourth power $`\omega _{\mathrm{max}}^4`$ of the cutoff, it diverges when $`\omega _{\mathrm{max}}`$ goes to infinity and it is in any case enormously larger than the observed energy density of empty space, for any value of the cutoff compatible with quantum field theory at the energies where the latter is well tested. This is directly connected to the ‘cosmological constant problem’  which has remained unsolved up to now despite considerable efforts for proposing solutions (see the discussions in the present volume ).

The existence of vacuum fluctuations was confirmed by the quantum theory of electromagnetic field . We do not need the complete theory in the present paper and we will present instead a simple representation of vacuum fluctuations used in the domain of quantum optics . To this aim, we represent the field $``$ in any of the involved modes, with a frequency $`\omega `$, as a sum $`_1\mathrm{cos}\omega t+_2\mathrm{sin}\omega t`$ of two components proportional to $`\mathrm{cos}\omega t`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}\omega t`$ respectively. $`_1`$ and $`_2`$ are called the quadrature components of the field mode and they are quite analogous to the position and momentum of an harmonically bound particle. In particular, the two quadrature components are conjugated observables obeying an Heisenberg inequality $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1\mathrm{\Delta }_2_0^2`$. This is the basic reason for the necessity of quantum fluctuations of electromagnetic fields, $`_0`$ being a constant measuring the amplitude of these quantum fluctuations. By definition, vacuum is simply the state corresponding to the minimum energy. Since the field energy is proportional to $`_1^2+_2^2`$, this leads to null mean fields $`_1=_2=0`$ and to equal and minimal variances for the two quadratures $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1^2=\mathrm{\Delta }_2^2=_0^2`$. This corresponds to the vacuum energy $`\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{2}`$ of the second Planck law (2).

It is worth emphasizing that vacuum fluctuations are real electromagnetic fields propagating in space with the speed of light, as any free field. Since the vacuum state corresponds to the minimal energy of field fluctuations, it is impossible to use this energy to build up perpetual motions violating the laws of thermodynamics. But electromagnetic vacuum fluctuations have well known observable consequences in atomic physics  and, more generally, in quantum field theory . An atom interacting only with vacuum fields suffers spontaneous emission processes induced by these fields. When fallen in its ground state, the atom can no longer emit photons but its coupling to vacuum still results in measurable effects like the Lamb shift of absorption frequencies. Two atoms located at different locations in vacuum experience an attractive Van der Waals force which plays an important role in physico-chemical processes. Casimir was studying this effect when he discovered in 1948 that a force arises between two mirrors placed in vacuum . This effect is discussed below.

These fluctuations have also been thoroughly studied through their effect on the properties of photon noise. Photon noise indeed reflects the quantum field fluctuations entering an optical system and they can be studied, controlled and, even in some cases, manipulated by using specifically designed devices . This can be used for improving the noise control in high sensitivity measurement apparatuses developed for example for detecting gravitational waves or testing the equivalence principle in space experiments . In this respect, the status of vacuum fluctuations in modern quantum theory is as firmly established as that of most quantum phenomena.

However, the problem of gravitation of the energy of vacuum fluctuations has persisted since Nernst. This point was crudely stated by Pauli in his textbook on Wave Mechanics  :

> ‘At this point it should be noted that it is more consistent here, in contrast to the material oscillator, not to introduce a zero-point energy of $`\frac{1}{2}h\nu `$ per degree of freedom. For, on the one hand, the latter would give rise to an infinitely large energy per unit volume due to the infinite number of degrees of freedom, on the other hand, it would be principally unobservable since nor can it be emitted, absorbed or scattered and hence, cannot be contained within walls and, as is evident from experience, neither does it produce any gravitational field’

A part of these statements is simply unescapable : the mean value of vacuum energy does not contribute to gravitation as an ordinary energy. This is just a matter of evidence since the universe would look very differently otherwise. However, it is certainly not possible to deduce, as Pauli did, that vacuum fluctuations have no observable effects. Certainly, vacuum fluctuations can ‘be emitted, absorbed, scattered…’ as shown by their numerous microscopic effects. When ‘contained within walls’, they lead to the observable, and in fact observed, Casimir effect discussed below. And even if the reference level setting the zero of energy for gravitation theory turns out to be finely tuned in the vicinity of the mean value of vacuum energy density, energy differences and energy fluctuations still have to contribute to gravitation, a point which will be discussed in the end of this paper.

We now come back to the discussion of the Casimir force. Casimir calculated this force in a geometrical configuration where two plane mirrors are placed a distance $`L`$ apart from each other, parallel to each other, the area $`A`$ of the mirrors being much larger than the squared distance $`\left(AL^2\right)`$. Casimir considered the ideal case of perfectly reflecting mirrors and obtained the following expressions for the force $`F_{\mathrm{Cas}}`$ and energy $`E_{\mathrm{Cas}}`$

$$F_{\mathrm{Cas}}=\frac{\mathrm{}c\pi ^2A}{240L^4}E_{\mathrm{Cas}}=\frac{\mathrm{}c\pi ^2A}{720L^3}$$
(5)
The signs correspond to a convention opposite to the standard convention of thermodynamics (but common in papers on the Casimir force) : the force is attractive and corresponds to a negative pressure; meanwhile, the energy is a binding energy corresponding to a mean energy density slightly smaller inside the cavity than in the outside vacuum. Note that the energy density and pressure obey the equation of state of pure radiation.

The accuracy of the first experiments was limited but it has been greatly improved in recent measurements (see reviews in ). Several experiments reached an experimental precision at the % level by using an atomic force microscope (AFM)  or micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS) . Furthermore, the measurements agree with theory also at the % level provided that deviations from the ideal situation considered by Casimir are properly accounted for.

Let us first discuss the effect of imperfect reflection of the metallic mirrors used in the experiments. Note that the ideal Casimir formulas (5) only depend on the geometrical quantities $`A`$ and $`L`$ and on two fundamental constants, the speed of light $`c`$ and Planck constant $`\mathrm{}`$. This is a remarkably universal feature in particular because these formulas are independent of the atomic constants, for instance the electron charge $`e`$. This means that the Casimir force corresponds to a saturated response of the mirrors which reflect 100 % of the incoming light in the ideal case, whatever their atomic constitution may be. But experiments are performed with metallic mirrors which do not reflect perfectly all field frequencies and this has to be taken into account in theoretical estimations . It follows that the force between real mirrors depends on the properties of the latter.

Imperfectly reflecting mirrors are described by scattering amplitudes which depend on the frequency, wavevector and polarization while obeying general properties of stability, high-frequency transparency and causality. The two mirrors form a Fabry-Perot cavity with the consequences well-known in classical or quantum optics : the energy density of the intracavity field is increased for the resonant frequency components whereas it is decreased for the non resonant ones. The Casimir force is but the result of the balance between the radiation pressure of the resonant and non resonant modes which push the mirrors respectively towards the outer and inner sides of the cavity . This balance includes not only the contributions of ordinary waves propagating freely outside the cavity but also that of evanescent waves. Using analyticity properties of the scattering amplitudes, the Casimir force is finally written as an integral over imaginary frequencies $`\omega =i\xi `$ (with $`\xi `$ real)

$$F=\frac{\mathrm{}A}{\pi }\underset{p}{}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2𝐤}{4\pi ^2}\underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d\xi \frac{\kappa r_1r_2}{\mathrm{exp}\left(2\kappa L\right)r_1r_2}\kappa =\sqrt{𝐤^2+\frac{\xi ^2}{c^2}}$$
(6)
$`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ are the reflection amplitudes of the two mirrors as they are seen from the intracavity fields and they are evaluated at imaginary frequencies, for a transverse wavevector $`𝐤`$ and a polarization $`p`$; $`\kappa `$ is the analytical prolongation of the longitudinal wavevector which determines the dephasing corresponding to one round trip.

This expression holds for dissipative mirrors as well as non dissipative ones . Thanks to high-frequency transparency, it is regular for any physical amplitudes $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$, in spite of the infiniteness of vacuum energy. It goes to the Casimir formula (5) at the limit where mirrors may be considered as perfect $`\left(r_1r_21\right)`$ over the frequency range of interest. Since metals are perfect reflectors at frequencies lower than their plasma frequency, the real force (6) deviates from the ideal expression (5) at distances $`L`$ shorter than a few plasma wavelengthes, typically $`0.3\mu `$m for gold or copper (for a more detailed discussion, see ).

A second important correction is due to the geometry. The ideal formula (5) corresponds to the geometry of two parallel plane plates whereas recent experiments have been performed with a sphere and a plane. The force in the latter geometry is usually estimated from the proximity theorem which basically amounts to integrate the force contributions of the various inter-plate distances as if they were independent. The force evaluated in this manner is thus given by the Casimir energy evaluated in the plane-plane geometry for the distance $`L`$ of closest approach. Although the accuracy of this approximation remains to be mastered, it is thought to give a reliable approximation in the recent experiments . The two already discussed corrections, respectively associated with imperfect reflection and plane-sphere geometry, have a significant impact on the value of the Casimir force and, thus, may be considered to be tested in the comparison between experimental measurements and theoretical expectations.

There are still further corrections taken into account in theory-experiment comparisons. The first one is the radiation pressure of thermal fluctuations which are superimposed to vacuum fluctuations as soon as the temperature differs from zero. Basically, this correction amounts to replace in (6) the vacuum energy by the total energy (2) of vacuum and black body fluctuations. The number of thermal photons is appreciable at low frequencies $`\mathrm{}\omega <k_\mathrm{B}T`$ so that the thermal correction from the ideal formula is significant at large distances, typically above $`3\mu `$m at room temperature (for a more detailed discussion, see ). As a consequence, it is smaller than 1% for the most precise measurements which correspond to distances below $`0.5\mu `$m. The same conclusion is reached for the surface roughness correction, here because it would play a significant role at distances shorter than those explored in the experiments . Since these two last corrections are small in the most precise recent measurements, the corresponding effects cannot be considered to have been tested experimentally.

We may conclude the discussion of the Casimir force by saying that the recent experimental and theoretical work have made possible an accurate comparison, say near the 1% level, between measurements and expectations. This is important for the reason discussed in the introduction. The Casimir force is the most accessible experimental consequence of vacuum fluctuations in the macroscopic world and it is crucial to test it with the greatest care and accuracy. Note also that mastering the Casimir force is a key point in a lot of very accurate force measurements at distances between nanometer and millimeter and which are motivated by searches for new short range weak forces predicted in theoretical unification models (see  for reviews).

In the sequel of this paper, we will discuss dynamical generalizations of the Casimir effect. To be precise, the Casimir force is a mechanical consequence of vacuum radiation pressure observed in the presence of two static mirrors. There also exist such consequences for mirrors moving in vacuum and they are directly connected to the problem of relativity of motion. Even a single mirror isolated in vacuum experiences the fluctuations of vacuum radiation pressure . When the mirror is motionless, the resulting force has a null mean value due to the balance between the contributions of opposite sides. When the mirror is moving, the balance is broken for the mean force which means that vacuum exerts a radiation reaction against motion. This reaction corresponds to a damping of the mechanical energy which is associated with an emission of radiation by the moving mirror into vacuum. The dissipative force is described by a susceptibility allowing one to express the force $`F(t)`$ in a linear approximation versus the time-dependent position $`q(t)`$. This expression is more conveniently written in the Fourier domain with $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ the frequency of mechanical motion

$$F[\mathrm{\Omega }]=\chi [\mathrm{\Omega }]q[\mathrm{\Omega }]$$
(7)
The motional susceptibility $`\chi [\mathrm{\Omega }]`$ is directly related to the force fluctuations evaluated for a mirror at rest through quantum fluctuation-dissipation relations . We emphasize that it describes dissipative effects, i.e. the radiation reaction force and associated radiation emission, for a mirror moving without further reference than the vacuum fluctuations .

For comparison, let us consider a mirror moving through a thermal equilibrium field. It is well-known that a friction force proportional to the velocity $`q^{}`$ arises in this case. In the frequency domain, the susceptibility is thus proportional to the frequency : for a perfectly reflecting mirror in the limits of large plane area and large temperature $`\left(A\frac{c^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }^2},k_\mathrm{B}T\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }\right)`$, it is read as

$$\chi _{\mathrm{bbr}}[\mathrm{\Omega }]=\frac{i\pi ^2\mathrm{}A}{15}\left(\frac{k_\mathrm{B}T}{\mathrm{}c}\right)^4\mathrm{\Omega }F_{\mathrm{bbr}}(t)=\frac{\pi ^2\mathrm{}A}{15}\left(\frac{k_\mathrm{B}T}{\mathrm{}c}\right)^4q^{}(t)$$
(8)
The damping coefficient is proportional to the fourth power of temperature, again in full conformity with the Stefan-Boltzmann law, and it vanishes when $`T`$ goes to zero. This does not lead to the absence of any dissipative effect of vacuum on a moving scatterer. For a perfectly reflecting mirror in the limits of large plane area and low temperature $`\left(A\frac{c^2}{\mathrm{\Omega }^2},k_\mathrm{B}T\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }\right)`$, we obtain

$$\chi _{\mathrm{vac}}[\mathrm{\Omega }]=\frac{i\mathrm{}A}{60\pi ^2c^4}\mathrm{\Omega }^5F_{\mathrm{vac}}(t)=\frac{\mathrm{}A}{60\pi ^2c^4}q^{\prime \prime \prime \prime \prime }(t)$$
(9)
The susceptibility is now proportional to the fifth power of frequency which means that the force is proportional to the fifth order time derivative of the position. In particular, the radiation reaction force vanishes in the case of uniform velocity, so that the reaction of vacuum cannot distinguish between inertial motion and rest, in full consistency with the principle of special relativity of motion. The quantum formalism gives an interesting interpretation of this property : vacuum fluctuations are preserved under Lorentz transformations and they appear exactly the same to an inertial observer as to an observer at rest. At the same time, the existence of dissipative effects associated with arbitrary motion in vacuum challenges the principle of relativity of motion in its more general acceptance. The space in which motion takes place can no longer be considered as absolutely empty since vacuum fluctuations are always present, giving rise to real dissipative effects. In this sense, vacuum fluctuations allow us to define privileged reference frames for the definition of mechanical motions.

Note that the form of the last result can be guessed from the previous one through a mere dimensional analysis : the effect of temperature $`T`$ appears in (8) measured as the fourth power $`\left(\frac{k_\mathrm{B}T}{\mathrm{}}\right)^4`$ of a frequency which is replaced by $`\mathrm{\Omega }^4`$ in (9). A similar dimensional argument appeared in the discussion of the expression (4) of vacuum energy density with $`\left(\frac{k_\mathrm{B}T}{\mathrm{}}\right)^4`$ replaced by $`\omega _{\mathrm{max}}^4`$. There is however an important difference : the vacuum term which was ill-defined in (4) has now a regular cutoff-independent expression while being associated with well-defined physical effects. This is a further example, after the static Casimir effect, where we obtain a ‘weak’ (with respect to the ‘large’ vacuum energy density) but non vanishing value for an effect induced by vacuum fluctuations.

Clearly, it would be extremely interesting to obtain experimental evidence for the dissipative effects associated with motion in vacuum. These effects are exceedingly small for any motion which could be achieved in practice for a single mirror, but an experimental observation is conceivable with a cavity oscillating in vacuum. In this case, the emission of motional radiation is resonantly enhanced  and specific signatures are available for distinguishing the motional radiation from spurious effects . Hence, an experimental demonstration appears to be achievable with very high finesse cavities .

The radiation reaction force associated with the motion of a cavity in vacuum contains an inertial contribution in the specific case of uniformly accelerated motion. This effect is a quantum version, at the level of vacuum fluctuations, of Einstein argument for the inertia of a box containing a photon bouncing back and forth. Here, Einstein law of inertia of energy has to be applied to the case of a stressed body, where it is read

$$F_{\mathrm{vac}}=\mu a\mu =\frac{E_{\mathrm{Cas}}F_{\mathrm{Cas}}L}{c^2}$$
(10)
The explicit calculation of the vacuum radiation reaction force gives an expression which perfectly fits this law . This means that the Casimir energy, which is a variation of the vacuum energy, contributes to the inertia of the Fabry-Perot cavity as expected from the general principles of relativity. Again this entails that, even if the mean value of vacuum energy does not contribute to gravity, energy differences such as the Casimir energy are expected to contribute to gravitational or inertial phenomena .

Acknowledgements.  We thank G. Barton, F. Capasso, E. Fischbach, M.-T. Jaekel, S. Lamoreaux, J. Long, P.A. Maia Neto, U. Mohideen and R. Onofrio for stimulating discussions.