text:
# Fission of Multielectron Bubbles in Liquid Helium

## I Introduction

Multielectron bubbles (MEBs) are fascinating entities which appear when a surface of bulk helium covered by a 2D film of electrons becomes unstable . MEBs are cavities in the liquid helium, filled with electrons that form a 2D spherical layer at the inner surface of the bubble. Recent proposals to stabilize MEBs  have stimulated theoretical investigations into its properties , since this system holds the promise of studying the electron gas in a controlled way, bereft from material impurities. The density of this electron gas can be tuned over more than four orders of magnitude by pressurizing the liquid helium  and this tunability would make the observation of a hexatic phase  and the quantum melting of a ripplopolaron Wigner lattice  experimentally feasible. For these investigations, both theoretical and experimental, the question of the stability of multielectron bubbles is of crucial importance. In this paper, the results reported in a recent letter  on the pressure dependence of the frequency of the modes of deformation of an MEB are discussed in the framework of new results obtained using the Bohr model for fissioning .

The energy and the radius of a multielectron bubble with $`N`$ electrons can be estimated by balancing the surface tension with the electrostatic Coulomb repulsion . In this approximation, the energy of the MEB is proportional to $`N^{4/3}`$, so that the energy of a single bubble with $`N`$ electrons is larger than the energy of two bubbles at infinite distance and with $`N/2`$ electrons each. The lower energy of the fissioned bubble has led to speculations about the stability of multielectron bubbles. Since MEBs with $`N`$ up to $`10^8`$ were observed experimentally , albeit in a transient manner (lasting a few msec), there must exist a formation barrier preventing the fissioning of MEBs. Early investigations ruled out gravitationally induced instabilities and tunneling decay of the bubbles as possible fissioning mechanisms . Salomaa and Williams  considered dynamical stability against “boiling off” a single electron from a multielectron bubble and found stability against this type of fission for bubbles with $`N>1520`$.

Preceding studies of the small amplitude oscillations of the bubble shape  have shown that the quadrupole mode of oscillation has a vanishing frequency when no pressure is applied on the liquid helium. Furthermore it was shown that with increasing positive pressure successive modes can be driven to a vanishing frequency . The amplitude of modes of deformation that have a vanishing frequency can grow until they become of the order of the bubble radius. This deformational instability can lead to fissioning of the bubble. Salomaa and Williams  have investigated the dynamics of this deformational instability using coupled Rayleigh-Plesset equations for the deformation amplitudes and the bubble radius, and found that when the initial amplitude of the quadrupole mode of deformation is larger than $`6\%`$ of the bubble radius, the amplitude of the oscillation keeps growing as a function of time. However, their method is not valid when the oscillation amplitude becomes comparable to the radius of the bubble; hence we need to develop a new approach to describe the fission process.

## II The Bohr model for fissioning multielectron bubbles

In this paper, we apply the Bohr liquid-drop model of fissioning nuclei  to MEBs. This method is valid for both small and large amplitude deformations of atomic nuclei and describes the nucleus as a charged droplet with surface tension. It was recently successfully improved to derive the fragment mass asymmetries in nuclear fission . In such models of nuclear fission, and similar models for the breaking up of homogeneously charged liquid droplets, an approximation is used to calculate the properties of the fission process. This approximation consists of describing the surface of the splitting nucleus (or droplet) in terms of two or three quadratic forms (spheroids and hyperboloids). Such a surface is parametrized in cylindrical coordinates through

$$\rho =\{\begin{array}{c}\sqrt{a_Lb_L(zf_L)^2}\text{ for }z_0zz_1\hfill \\ \sqrt{a_Mb_M(zf_M)^2}\text{ for }z_1zz_2\hfill \\ \sqrt{a_Rb_R(zf_R)^2}\text{ for }z_2zz_3\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
where

$`a_i`$ is the square of the semimajor axis of the spheroid along the radial direction. For a hyperboloid, $`a_i`$ is negative ($`i=L,M,R`$);

$`b_i`$ is the deformation parameter: the square of radial semimajor axis divided by the square of the longitudinal semimajor axis;

$`f_i`$ is the centre of the spheroid (hyperboloid);

$`z_0=f_La_L/\sqrt{b_L}`$ is the leftmost point of the shape;

$`z_3=f_R+a_R/\sqrt{b_R}`$ is the rightmost point of the shape.

These parameters are illustrated in Fig. 1. The surface determined by (1) describes the shape of the bubble and allows to investigate both spheroidal bubbles and emerging spheroidal fragments. The shape parameters $`\{a_L,a_M,a_R\},`$ $`\{b_L,b_M,b_R\},`$ $`\{f_L,f_M,f_R\},`$ $`\{z_1,z_2\}`$ are not independent if one imposes continuity and continuous derivatives at the meeting points of the quadratic forms. These conditions, together with fixing the origin at $`z_0`$ to remove translations from the set of shape changes under consideration, allows to eliminate five of the eleven variables. The six independent parameters that are kept in our treatment are: $`a_L,b_L,a_R,b_R,f_Rf_L`$ and $`z_1`$. For a droplet of incompressible fluid, there would be another constraint (that of fixed volume) to remove one more parameter, but in the case of MEBs the volume does not have to remain constant during deformations .

Within this model, an expression for the energy of a bubble with a given shape (fixed by choosing the shape parameters $`a_L,b_L,a_R,b_R,f_Rf_L`$ and $`z_1`$) is obtained. The stable shape of the bubble is found by minimizing the energy as a function of the shape parameters – the shape parameters set up a ‘shape space’. Both the case of the spherical, unsplit bubble and the case of a bubble split in two fragments can be described with appropriate shape parameters, so these two cases can be represented by distinct points in the shape space. The dynamics of the fissioning of the multielectron bubble can then be studied by determining the energy along the trajectories in shape space which go from the point representing the spherical, unsplit bubble to the point representing a bubble split in two. The unsplit bubble may have a higher energy than the fissioned bubble, but if there is an energy barrier along each trajectory in shape space, then the single bubble is metastable with respect to fissioning. The height of the energy barrier along the optimal fissioning trajectory is the metastability energy barrier.

In section III we set up the expression for the energy of a bubble with given shape parameters (the energy of a given point in shape space). In section IV, we discuss the results of the minimization of the energy in shape space and the results for the optimal trajectory for fissioning of a multielectron bubble.

## III Energy of a deformed MEB

The energy of an MEB is determined as a function of the shape of the bubble by three contributions: (i) the surface tension energy $`E_\sigma =\sigma S`$ where $`\sigma =3.6\times 10^4`$ J/m2 is the surface tension of liquid helium and $`S`$ is the bubble surface, (ii) the pressure-related energy $`E_p=pV`$ where $`p`$ is the (experimentally tunable) difference in pressure inside and outside the bubble and $`V`$ is the volume of the MEB; and (iii) the electrostatic repulsion energy $`E_C`$ of the electrons. The first two terms are easily evaluated since the surface and volume of the bubble are related straightforwardly to the shape parameters. The surface is given by

$$S=\underset{i=1,2,3L,M,R}{}\text{ }\pi \underset{z_{i1}f_i}{\overset{z_if_i}{}}\sqrt{a_i+b_i(b_i1)x^2}𝑑x,$$
(2)
where in the case of split bubbles ($`b_M<0`$ and $`a_M<0`$) the integration domain should not include the region of space in between the bubble fragments. The volume is

$$V=\underset{f_L\sqrt{a_L/b_L}}{\overset{f_R+\sqrt{a_R/b_R}}{}}𝑑z\text{ }\pi \rho ^2(z),$$
(3)
where the cylindrical radius $`\rho (z)`$ is given by (1). The integral in expression (3) is a piecewise sum of integrals of the type

$$\underset{z_a}{\overset{z_b}{}}\pi \left[a+b(zf)^2\right]𝑑z=\pi a(z_bz_a)\frac{b}{3}((z_bf)^3(z_af)^3).$$
(4)
The evaluation of the electrostatic energy is greatly simplified by the observation  that the quantum mechanical correction (the exchange term) is negligible for the determination of the total electrostatic energy. Furthermore the electrons in the bubble are not smeared out throughout the bubble volume, but remain in a nanometer thin, effectively two-dimensional layer anchored to the helium surface . This layer conforms to the helium surface also when the bubble deforms . We will assume that the surface density of electrons is homogeneous along the surface and equal to $`n_\text{s}=N/S`$ where $`N`$ is the number of electrons and $`S`$ is the area of the deformed bubble. Some justification of this assumption comes from a recent calculation of the coupled ripplon-phonon modes of oscillation of an MEB . In the calculation of Ref. , the coupling between the modes of deformation of the helium surface (“ripplons”) and the redistribution of the surface density of electrons (“phonons”) was investigated, and it was derived that this coupling was weak enough not to affect strongly the oscillation frequencies of ripplons and phonons. Within the assumptions described in this paragraph, we may write the electrostatic repulsion energy as

$`E_C`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3𝐫d^3𝐫^{}\frac{(n_\text{s}e).(n_\text{s}e)}{\epsilon |𝐫𝐫^{}|}}`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(2\pi n_se)^2}{\epsilon }}{\displaystyle \underset{z_0}{\overset{z_3}{}}}𝑑z{\displaystyle \underset{z_0}{\overset{z_3}{}}}𝑑z^{}{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}𝑑k\mathrm{cos}[k(zz^{})]I_0(k\rho _<)K_0(k\rho _>)\rho (z)\rho (z^{}),`$ (6)
where $`\rho _<=\mathrm{min}[\rho (z),\rho (z^{})]`$ is the smallest of the two cylindrical radii and $`\rho _>=\mathrm{max}[\rho (z),\rho (z^{})]`$ is the largest. $`I_0`$ is the modified Bessel function of the first kind with index $`0`$, and $`K_0`$ is the modified Bessel function of the second kind with index $`0`$.

The total energy of a deformed bubble with given shape parameters is then given by

$$E=\sigma S+pV+E_C.$$
(7)
Expressions (2),(3), and (5) allow to calculate the total energy $`E`$ of the bubble for any point in the shape space discussed in the previous section. In Ref.  the energy of an MEB undergoing small-amplitude oscillations was calculated. The total energy (7) of the deformed bubble used in the present treatment agrees perfectly with the results of Ref.  in those cases where both approaches are applicable. Also the equilibrium radius of a spherical bubble, obtained by minimizing the expression (7) with respect to the radius, obviously agrees with the result of .

## IV Results and discussions

To describe the fissioning of the bubble through a shape deformation, we will investigate the trajectory in shape space that has the lowest energy and that starts from the spherical bubble with equilibrium diameter $`d=z_3z_0=2R_\text{b}`$. The equilibrium radius $`R_\text{b}`$ for the spherical bubble with $`N`$ electrons can be found by minimizing

$$E^{\text{spherical}}=4\pi \sigma R_\text{b}^2+\frac{4\pi }{3}pR_\text{b}^3+\frac{N^2e^2}{2\epsilon R_\text{b}}.$$
(8)
When $`p=0,`$ this radius is $`R_\text{b}=\sqrt[3]{N^2e^2/(8\pi \epsilon \sigma )}`$ (for example, with $`N=10^4`$ electrons in the bubble, $`R_\text{b}=1.064`$ $`\mu `$m). To investigate the presence of an energy barrier stabilizing the MEB against fissioning, we calculate the minimum energy (and shape) of a bubble as a function of $`d=z_3z_0`$, the elongation of the shape along the axis of symmetry (see Fig. 1).

### A Zero pressure

The results of this minimization are shown in Fig. 2, for an MEB with $`N=10^4`$ electrons at $`p=0`$. For every given value of $`d`$ (the x-axis), the shape parameters $`a_L,b_L,a_R,b_R,f_Rf_L,z_1`$ are varied under the constraint $`z_3z_0=d`$. The optimal variational energy per electron $`E/N`$ given by expression (7) is shown in Fig. 2, along with the optimal variational shape for some selected points (marked by A,B,E).

At $`d=2R_\text{b}`$, we find that the optimal shape is a spherical bubble (the point marked by A in Fig. 1). At increased $`d`$, the optimal bubble shape becomes ellipsoidal (for example, point B). The energy as a function of $`d`$, for $`d<3.012`$ $`\mu `$m, is independent of $`d`$. This is in agreement with previous results on the frequency of the vibrational modes of the bubble . The eigenmodes of vibration of the bubble surface are characterized by spherical harmonic mode numbers $`\{\mathrm{},m\}`$, and the eigenfrequencies (at $`p=0`$) are given by :

$$\omega (\mathrm{})=\sqrt{\frac{\sigma }{\rho R_\text{b}^3}(\mathrm{}2)(\mathrm{}^21)}$$
(9)
The deformation corresponding to point B in Fig. 2 is an $`\mathrm{}=2`$ eigenmode of the system. This mode has zero frequency according to expression (9). This means that it does not cost energy to introduce small amplitude $`\mathrm{}=2`$ deformations of the bubble, and the energy should remain constant as a function of $`d`$, as it does (see Fig. 2).

The curve representing the minimum variational energy as a function of $`d`$ has a sudden change of slope near $`d=3.012`$ $`\mu `$m. The inset shows more results near this point. We found that near this point two different minima exist, corresponding to two topologically distinct shapes. On the horizontal part of the curve (dashed line containing point B or point C in the inset of Fig. 2) the shape is an ellipsoid. On the curve with negative slope (full curve containing point E or point D in the inset of Fig. 2), the optimal shape is a bubble split up into two fragments with $`N/2`$ electrons in each of the fission fragments. These two topologies compete for the global minimum. For $`d>3.012`$ $`\mu `$m, the fissioned bubble has lower energy: point D is lower in energy than point C.

Let’s investigate whether there exists some energy barrier stabilizing the elongated bubble of point C against fission towards the fissioned shape corresponding to D. To split up an elongated bubble (C) into fission fragments (D), the bubble shape has to deform through intermediate shapes, as those shown in Fig. 3. These intermediate shapes appearing during the fission trace out a trajectory in shape space, starting at the point corresponding to C and ending in the point corresponding to D. This trajectory can be parametrized by an interpolation parameter which is zero at the starting point (C) and 1 at the endpoint (D). The energy of the intermediate shape as a function of the interpolation parameter is shown in Fig. 3. It is clear that the two minima (elongated bubble, interpolation parameter=0, and split-up bubble, interpolation parameter=1) are separated by an energy barrier, of the order of 0.2 eV per electron. During the process of fission, the elongated bubble has to be deformed to create the neck between the fission fragment and the parent bubble. This deformation must involve high-$`\mathrm{}`$ modes of deformations, which cost energy $`\omega (\mathrm{})>0`$. This gives rise to the energy barrier shown in Fig. 3.

At this point it is also possible to clarify why the main limitation of the Bohr model of fissioning does not affect our result. This limitation is that only the splitting off of a single fragment -albeit of any size- can be described. A fissioning process whereby the bubble splits in three or more parts cannot be modelled realistically using only three quadratic surfaces. Nevertheless it is clear that such a fissioning process would involve high-$`\mathrm{}`$ modes of deformation: the more fragments appear at the surface, the more complicatedly it has to be deformed. Such a fissioning process would therefore require even higher energy and its realization would be much less likely. Note that the size of the fission fragments ($`N/2`$) is in agreement with expression (8) for the energy of a spherical bubble, $`E^{\text{spherical}}(N)N^{4/3}`$. This can be easily shown from minimizing $`E^{\text{spherical}}(m)+E^{\text{spherical}}(Nm)`$ with respect to the optimal fragment size $`m`$.

### B Effect of positive pressure

In Ref. , it was shown that with increasing pressure, more and more eigenmodes of the bubble deformation obtain vanishing frequencies. The pressure dependence of the frequency of these modes is given by :

$$\omega (\mathrm{})=\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{}+1}{\rho R_\text{b}^3}\left[\sigma (\mathrm{}^2+\mathrm{}+2)+2pR_\text{b}\frac{N^2e^2}{4\pi \epsilon R_\text{b}^3}\mathrm{}\right]}$$
(10)
where $`R_\text{b}`$ is now the equilibrium radius under pressure, which satisfies $`2pR_\text{b}+4\sigma =e^2N^2/(4\pi \epsilon R_\text{b}^3)`$. The effect of positive pressure is such that some modes of deformation become ‘soft’ (i.e. have vanishing frequency): for example, for a bubble with $`10^4`$ electrons at $`p=3`$ mbar ($`R_\text{b}=0.95`$ $`\mu `$m) the $`\mathrm{}=2`$ and $`\mathrm{}=3`$ modes of deformation are unstable .

Fig. 4 shows the result for the minimum variational energy of a bubble with $`10^4`$ electrons at $`p=3`$ mbar ($`R_\text{b}=0.95`$ $`\mu `$m) as a function of the elongation $`d`$. As the bubble deforms (along the curve containing points ABC in Fig. 4), its energy decreases. Also, in contrast with the zero-pressure case, the lowest energy shape for $`d<2.68`$ $`\mu `$m exhibits deformations with both $`\mathrm{}=2`$ and $`\mathrm{}=3`$ character. This is in agreement with (10).

Again two bubble topologies compete for the global minimum: the solution where the shape is a singly connected surface (squares in Fig. 4), and the solution where the bubble is split in two fragments (circles in Fig. 4). For $`d<2.68`$ $`\mu `$m the singly connected, unsplit bubble has the lower energy, whereas at larger $`d`$, the fissioned bubble has lower energy.

The availability of higher angular momentum modes (such as $`\mathrm{}=3`$) allows the MEB to deform to create a ‘neck’ connecting an emergent fission fragment with the ‘parent’ bubble, without increasing the total energy of the bubble. In the inset of Fig. 4, we show the variational energy of the intermediate shapes assumed by the bubble during a fission process going from point C to point D in Fig. 4. The ‘interpolation parameter’ traces out the trajectory in shape space during the fission process, as described in the discussion of Fig. 2 in the previous subsection. The energy barrier which was present in the case of zero pressure is no longer present, and we conclude that pressurized MEBs are unstable when the pressure is high enough to drive $`\mathrm{}>2`$ modes unstable.

In ref.  it was shown that the pressure at which a particular mode of deformation becomes unstable, is larger for bubbles with fewer electrons. Thus, when the pressure is raised so as to make a bubble with $`N`$ electrons unstable and fission that bubble, the resulting fission products with $`N/2`$ electrons may still be metastable. To fission also those fragments the pressure needs to be raised further.

### C Effect of negative pressure

Liquid helium can sustain a negative pressure of $`9`$ bar ($`\pm 1`$ bar) before it cavitates . Here, a negative pressure on the MEB means that the force associated with this pressure is directed outward, away from the bubble center. Shikin  estimated in a simplified model that MEBs with a radius larger than the zero-pressure equilibrium radius $`R_\text{b}(p=0)`$ may be metastable in the sense that there exists a restoring force which counteracts small deformations. Salomaa and Williams  found that the nonlinear coupling between the radial mode of oscillation and the deformational modes of oscillation may lead to a small increase in the time-averaged radius, stabilizing the bubble. A straightforward way to increase the bubble radius is by applying negative pressure. In Ref.  we showed that for negative pressures all the eigenmodes of deformation acquire a positive frequency.

The liquid-drop model of fission allows to describe deformations beyond the small-amplitude region of validity of the Rayleigh-Plesset equations used in . Figure 5 shows the result of negative pressures on the shape and fissioning of the bubble. The variational minimum energy is again shown as a function of the elongation along the axis of symmetry $`d=z_3z_0`$, for a bubble with $`N=10^4`$ electrons at $`p=3`$ mbar ($`R_b=1.5`$ $`\mu `$m). In contrast to unpressurized MEBs and MEBs at positive pressure, now three geometries compete for the global minimum instead of two: (A) an $`\mathrm{}=2`$ deformed bubble, (B) the split-up bubble, and (C) a spherical bubble with expanded radius. To deform the bubble from any of these three shapes into another, intermediate shapes have to be assumed and an energy barrier will be present like in the case of zero pressure.

But, apart from this energy barrier, another energy barrier is present: from the increase of the energy with increasing $`d`$ in Fig. 5, it is clear that there is a restoring force for small-amplitude deformations. This restoring force was absent for $`p=0`$ (compare Fig. 5 with Fig. 2) and in the case of $`p>0`$ the force was of opposite sign and driving the instability (compare Fig. 5 with Fig. 4). The restoring force is related to the lowest frequency of the eigenmodes, $`\omega (\mathrm{}=2)`$ which becomes positive at negative pressures, as derived in . The restoring force results in an additional energy barrier of 0.15 eV per electron in the case studied here. We emphasize that the additional energy barrier related to the intermediate bubble shapes (as illustrated by Fig. 3 for the $`p=0`$ case) is present also at negative pressures (but not at positive pressures large enough to drive $`\mathrm{}>2`$ modes to zero frequency).

Note furthermore that, if there is a driving force which can excite the deformation to large amplitude and overcome the barriers, the MEB may be destroyed in one of two ways: either by fissioning of the bubble, after which the fission fragments move away from each other, or the MEB may keep expanding until it fills a volume large enough to counteract the negative pressure (i.e. the MEB serves as a nucleation center for cavitation).

## V Conclusions

In this paper, the liquid drop model of fissioning was applied to the problem of multielectron bubbles in liquid helium. We found that, even though there exists, at $`p=0`$, a mode of deformation which can grow without increasing the total energy of the bubble, there is still an energy barrier present which prevents fissioning of the bubble. This barrier was explained by the intermediate shapes that the fissioning bubble has to assume in order to create a neck between the emerging fission fragment and the parent bubble. These intermediate shapes involve eigenmodes of deformation which cost substantial energy (0.2 eV per electron for a 10000 electron bubble). At positive pressure, these higher angular momentum modes can obtain a vanishing frequency as discussed in , and this causes the energy barrier to vanish and the bubble to become unstable. However, at negative pressure, when all the modes of deformation have a non-vanishing frequency, there is an additional element of stability in that there is a restoring force which counteracts small amplitude deformations. The present study, based on the liquid drop model, independently confirms and extends the conclusions presented in a previous letter , namely that a positive pressure can make the MEB unstable, whereas a small negative pressure makes the MEB metastable against fission. The additional result presented in this paper is that also at zero pressure the MEB is metastable.

## VI Acknowledgments

Discussions with J. Huang are gratefully acknowledged. J. Tempere is supported financially by the FWO-Flanders with a mandate ‘Postdoctoral Fellow of the Fund for Scientific Research - Flanders’ (Postdoctoraal Onderzoeker van het Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek - Vlaanderen). This research has been supported by the Department of Energy, grant DE-FG002-85ER45190, and by the GOA BOF UA 2000, IUAP, the FWO-V projects Nos. G.0071.98, G.0306.00, G.0274.01, WOG WO.025.99N (Belgium).

## Figure captions

NOTE: due to the size requirements of the figure files in the Los Alamos preprint archive, the quality of the figures has been reduced in this preprint - contact the authors for high-quality figures.

FIG. 1. The model shape for a fissioning MEB consists of three quadratic forms, for example two spheroids connected by a hyperboloidal neck as illustrated in this figure. The relation between the model shape and the parameters used in the text, expression (1), is shown in this figure.

FIG. 2. The minimum variational energy per electron (in eV) of an $`N=10^4`$ electron MEB at $`p=0`$ is shown as a function of the bubble elongation $`d`$ (microns). This energy is obtained by minimizing expression (7) with respect to the shape parameters illustrated in Fig. 1, and subject to the constraint $`z_3z_0=d`$. The symbols (squares and diamonds) are the results of the minimization and the curves are guides for the eye. For some points of interest (A,B,E) the corresponding shape of the bubble is illustrated. Two bubble shapes compete for the minimum energy: an elliptically elongated bubble (points on the dashed curve) and the fissioned bubble (points on the full curve). For $`d<3.012`$ $`\mu `$m the elongated bubble is the minimum energy shape whereas for larger $`d`$ the fissioned bubble is the minimum energy shape.

FIG. 3. When a $`10^4`$ electron MEB at zero pressure is elongated more than $`d=3.012`$ $`\mu `$m, the minimization of the total energy shows that it becomes energetically favorable to split the bubble in two equal fragments. However, in order to fission the elongated bubble, it has to deform in such a way that a neck develops where the bubble can split in two. These intermediate shapes of the bubble are higher in energy than either the elongated shape (C) or the split bubble (D), and give rise to the presence of an energy barrier. Points C and D in this figure correspond to those of Fig. 2; the fission process traces out a trajectory in shape space connecting C and D and parametrized by an interpolation parameter ranging from 0 (C) to 1 (D).

FIG. 4. The minimum variational energy per electron of an $`N=10^4`$ electron MEB at $`p=3`$ mbar is shown as a function of the bubble elongation $`d`$ (in micron). For some points of interest (A,B,C,D), the bubble shape is illustrated. In the inset, the energy is shown as a function of the interpolation parameter which takes the shape parameters from point C into those from point D. Comparing this figure with Figs. 2,3, it is clear that the bubble now can decrease its energy monotonically while splitting: applying a positive pressure so that $`\mathrm{}>2`$ modes of deformation obtain a vanishing frequency can remove the energy barrier and make the MEB unstable.

FIG. 5. The minimum variational energy per electron of an $`N=10^4`$ electron MEB at $`p=3`$ mbar is shown as a function of the bubble elongation $`d=z_3z_0`$ (in micron). Three geometries compete for the global minimum: the $`\mathrm{}=2`$ mode of deformation of the bubble (point A), the split bubble (point B) and the spherical bubble with large radius (point C). At negative pressure, there exists an additional energy barrier associated with a restoring force which prevents small-amplitude deformations ($`d<4`$ $`\mu `$m) from growing. The inset shows the region near the maximum of the energy barrier in more detail.


format: text

text:
# 0. Introduction

## 0. Introduction

Throughout this note all rings and algebras considered in this paper are commutative with identity elements, and all ring homomorphisms are unital. Throughout, $`k`$ stands for a field.

Among local rings there is a well–known chain:

Regular $``$ Complete intersection $``$ Gorenstein $``$ Cohen–Macaulay.

These concepts are extended to non–local rings: for example a ring is regular if for all prime ideal $`𝔭`$ of $`R`$, $`R_𝔭`$ is a regular local ring.

In this paper, we shall investigate if these properties are conserved under tensor product operations. It is well–known that the tensor product $`R_AS`$ of regular rings is not regular in general, even if we assume $`R`$ and $`S`$ are $`A`$–algebra and $`A`$ is a field, see Remark 1.7. In , Watanabe, Ishikawa, Tachibana, and Otsuka, showed that under a suitable condition tensor products of regular rings are complete intersections. It is proved in , that the tensor product $`R_AS`$ of Cohen–Macaulay rings are again Cohen–Macaulay if we assume $`R`$ is flat $`A`$–module and $`S`$ is a finitely generated $`A`$–module, and in , it is shown that the same is true for Gorenstein rings. Recently, in , Bouchiba and Kabbaj showed that if $`R`$ and $`S`$ are $`k`$–algebras such that $`R_kS`$ is Noetherian then $`R_kS`$ is a Cohen–Macaulay ring if and only if $`R`$ and $`S`$ are Cohen–Macaulay rings.

In this paper we shall show that the same is true for complete intersection and Gorenstein rings. Also it is shown that $`R_kS`$ satisfies Serre’s condition $`(S_n)`$ if and only if $`R`$ and $`S`$ satisfy $`(S_n)`$.

## 1. Main results

A Noetherian local ring $`R`$ is a complete intersection (ring) if its completion $`\widehat{R}`$ is a residue class ring of a regular local ring $`S`$ with respect to an ideal generated by an $`S`$–sequence. We say that a Noetherian ring is locally a complete intersection if all its localizations are complete intersections.

A Noetherian ring $`R`$ satisfies Serre’s condition $`(S_n)`$ if $`0ptR_𝔭\text{Min}\{n,\text{dim}R_𝔭\}`$ for all prime ideal $`𝔭`$ of $`R`$. Also, a Noetherian ring $`R`$ satisfies Serre’s normality condition $`(R_n)`$ if $`R_𝔭`$ is a regular local ring for all prime ideal $`𝔭`$ with $`\text{dim}R_𝔭n`$.

The following Theorem is collected from \[2; Remark 2.3.5, Corollary 3.3.15, Theorem 2.1.7, and Theorem 2.2.12\]:

Theorem 1.1. Let $`\phi :(R,𝔪)(S,𝔫)`$ be a flat local homomorphism of Noetherian local rings. Then the following hold:

> (a) $`S`$ is a complete intersection (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay) $``$ $`R`$ and $`S/𝔪S`$ are complete intersections (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay).
>
> (b1) If $`S`$ is regular then $`R`$ is regular.
>
> (b2) If $`R`$ and $`S/𝔪S`$ are regular then $`S`$ is regular. $`\mathrm{}`$

Corollary 1.2. Let $`\phi :RS`$ be a flat homomorphism of Noetherian rings. Then the following hold:

> (a) If $`R`$ and the fibers $`R_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_RS`$, $`𝔭\text{Spec}(R)`$, are regular (resp. locally complete intersections, Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay) then $`S`$ is regular (resp. locally complete intersection, Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay).
>
> (b) If $`S`$ is locally complete intersection (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay) then the fibres $`R_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_RS`$, $`𝔭\text{Spec}(R)`$, are locally complete intersections (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay)

Proof. (a): Let $`𝔮\text{Spec}(S)`$. Set $`𝔭=𝔮R\text{Spec}(R)`$. The induced homomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }:R_𝔭S_𝔮`$ is flat and local. It is clear that $`S_𝔮/𝔭R_𝔭S_𝔮`$ is a localization of $`R_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_RS`$. Now the assertion follows from Theorem 1.1.

(b): Let $`𝔭\text{Spec}(R)`$. Then $`R_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_RSS_𝔭/𝔭S_𝔭`$, where $`S_𝔭=T^1S`$ and $`T=R𝔭`$, and we have

$$\text{Spec}(S_𝔭/𝔭S_𝔭)=\{𝔮S_𝔭/𝔭S_𝔭|𝔮\text{Spec}(S),𝔮𝔭S,𝔮(R𝔭)=\mathrm{}\}.$$

For $`𝔮S_𝔭/𝔭S_𝔭\text{Spec}(S_𝔭/𝔭S_𝔭)`$ we have to show that $`(S_𝔭/𝔭S_𝔭)_{𝔮S_𝔭/𝔭S_𝔭}S_𝔮/𝔭S_𝔮`$ is complete intersection (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay). Consider the induced flat local homomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }:R_𝔭S_𝔮`$. Now the assertion follows from Theorem 1.1. $`\mathrm{}`$

Theorem 1.3. (See \[2; Propositions 2.1.16 and 2.2.21\] Let $`\phi :RS`$ be a flat homomorphism of Noetherian rings. Then the following hold:

> (a) Let $`𝔮\text{Spec}(S)`$ and $`𝔭=𝔮R`$. If $`S_𝔮`$ satisfies $`(S_n)`$ (resp. $`(R_n)`$) then $`R_𝔭`$ satisfies $`(S_n)`$ (resp. $`(R_n)`$).
>
> (b) If $`R`$ and the fibers $`R_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_RS`$, $`𝔭\text{Spec}(R)`$, satisfy $`(S_n)`$ (resp. $`(R_n)`$) then $`S`$ satisfies $`(S_n)`$ (resp. $`(R_n)`$). $`\mathrm{}`$

Corollary 1.4. Let $`\phi :RS`$ be a faithfully flat homomorphism of Noetherian rings. Then the following hold:

> (a) If $`S`$ is regular (resp. locally complete intersection, Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay), then so is $`R`$.
>
> (b) If $`S`$ satisfies $`(S_n)`$ (resp. $`(R_n)`$), then so does $`R`$.

Proof. Let $`𝔭\text{Spec}(R)`$. Since $`\phi `$ is faithfully flat there exists $`𝔮\text{Spec}(S)`$ such that $`𝔭=𝔮R`$. Consider the flat local homomorphism $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }:R_𝔭S_𝔮`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{\phi }(r/s)=\phi (r)/\phi (s)`$. Now the assertion follows from Theorems 1.1 and 1.3. $`\mathrm{}`$

Proposition 1.5. Let $`k`$ be a field, $`L`$ and $`K`$ be two extension fields of $`k`$. Suppose that $`L_kK`$ is Noetherian. Then the following hold:

> (a) $`L_kK`$ is locally complete intersection.
>
> (b) If $`k`$ is perfect then $`L_kK`$ is regular.

Proof. (a): With the same method in the proof of \[4; Theorem 2.2\], we can assume that $`K`$ is a finitely generated extension field of $`k`$ (note that, in view of Theorem 1.1, \[4; Lemma 2.1\] is true with “Gorenstein ring” replaced by “complete intersection”). Now using \[2; Proposition 2.1.11\] we have that $`L_kK`$ is isomorphic to

$$A=T^1(L[x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_n])/(f_1,f_2,\mathrm{},f_m)T^1(L[x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_n]),$$

where $`T`$ is a multiplicatively closed subset of $`L[x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_n]`$ and $`f_1,f_2,\mathrm{},f_m`$ is a $`T^1(L[x_1,x_2,\mathrm{},x_n])`$–sequence. Therefore $`A`$ is locally complete intersection, cf. \[2; Theorem 2.3.3(c)\].

(b): The assertion follows from the note on page 49 of  . $`\mathrm{}`$

Theorem 1.6. Let $`R`$ and $`S`$ be non–zero $`k`$–algebras such that $`R_kS`$ is Noetherian. Then the following hold:

> (a) $`R_kS`$ is locally complete intersection (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay) if and only if $`R`$ and $`S`$ are locally complete intersections (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay).
>
> (b) $`R_kS`$ satisfies $`(S_n)`$ if and only if $`R`$ and $`S`$ satisfy $`(S_n)`$.
>
> (c) If $`R_kS`$ is regular then $`R`$ and $`S`$ are regular.
>
> (d) If $`R_kS`$ satisfies $`(R_n)`$ then $`R`$ and $`S`$ satisfy $`(R_n)`$.
>
> (e) The converse of parts (c) and (d) hold if $`\mathrm{char}(k)=0`$ or $`\mathrm{char}(k)=p`$ such that $`k=\{a^p|ak\}`$.

Proof. Consider two faithfully flat homomorphism:

$$\phi :RR_kS\text{and}\psi :SR_kS$$

of Noetherian rings.

If $`R_kS`$ is regular (resp. locally complete intersection, Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay) then by Corollary 1.4 we have $`R`$ and $`S`$ are regular (resp. locally complete intersections, Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay). Also if $`R_kS`$ satisfies $`(S_n)`$ (resp. $`(R_n)`$) then by Corollary 1.4, $`R`$ and $`S`$ satisfy $`(S_n)`$ (resp. $`(R_n)`$).

Now let $`R`$ and $`S`$ be locally complete intersection (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay). By Corollary 1.2 it is enough to show that the fibres $`(R_kS)_RR_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭R_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_kS`$ over every prime ideal $`𝔭`$ of $`R`$ is locally complete intersection (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay). Consider the flat homomorphism $`\gamma :SR_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_kS`$. Using Corollary 1.2, it is enough to show that the fibres $`(R_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_kS)_SS_𝔮/𝔮S_𝔮R_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_kS_𝔮/𝔮S_𝔮`$ over every prime $`𝔮`$ of $`S`$ is locally complete intersection (resp. Gorenstein, Cohen–Macaulay). But it is clear to see that $`R_𝔭/𝔭R_𝔭_kS_𝔮/𝔮S_𝔮`$ is Notherian, since it is a localization of $`R/𝔭_kS/𝔮R_kS/(𝔭_kS+R_k𝔮)`$, which is Noetherian. Now the assertion follows from Proposition 1.5.

If $`R`$ and $`S`$ satisfy $`(S_n)`$, with the same proof $`R_kS`$ satisfies $`(S_n)`$.

By using the Proposition 1.5 the proof of part (e) is the same. $`\mathrm{}`$

Remark 1.7. The converse of part (c) in Theorem 1.6 is not true. For example, let $`k`$ be an imperfect field of characteristic 3, let $`ak`$ be an element with no cube root in $`k`$. Then $`K=k[x]/(x^3a)k[x]`$ is a splitting field of $`x^3a`$ over $`k`$. Thus $`K_kKK[x]/(x^3a)K[x]`$, which is not regular.

Acknowledgment. The authors would like to thank the referee for his/her comments.

References

>  Samir Bouchiba and Salah-Eddine Kabbaj, Tensor products of Cohen-Macaulay rings: solution to a problem of Grothendieck, J. Algebra 252 (2002), 65–73.
>
>  Winfried Bruns and Jürgen Herzog, Cohen-Macaulay rings, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993.
>
>  A. Grothendieck, Éléments de géométrie algébrique IV. Étude locale des schémas et des morphismes deschémas. II. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. Publ. Math., No. 24, 1965.
>
>  Rodney Y. Sharp, Simplifications in the theory of tensor products of field extensions. J. London Math. Soc., 15, (1977), 48–50.
>
>  Kei-ichi Watanabe, Takeshi Ishikawa, Sadao Tachibana, and Kayo Otsuka, On tensor products of Gorenstein rings, J. Math. Kyoto Univ., 9 (1969), 413–423.


text:
# Quantum theory from four of Hardy’s axioms

## I Introduction

In Bayesian probability theory Bernardo1994 ; Kyburg1980 , probabilities are not objective states of nature, but rather are taken to be degrees of belief that determine an agent’s decisions in the face of uncertainty. It can be shown that degrees of belief must obey the usual rules of the probability calculus if the agent’s decisions are rational (for references and a summary of the argument, see Caves2002a ). In a Bayesian framework, probabilities and measured frequencies are strictly separate concepts. This leads to conceptual clarity in statements that involve both probabilities and frequencies. Furthermore, adopting the Bayesian viewpoint has important practical consequences in the field of statistics Bernardo1994 ; Malakoff1999 .

If the Bayesian interpretation is applied to quantum mechanical probabilities, one is led naturally to the viewpoint that quantum states represent states of belief. This viewpoint is attractive for many reasons. For instance, it eliminates the difficulties associated with regarding quantum state collapse as a real physical process. Within the Bayesian framework, one can account effortlessly for the tight connection between measured frequencies and the probabilities obtained from the quantum probability rule Caves2002c . The Bayesian approach has led to new mathematical results Caves2002b ; Caves2002a , a better understanding of prior information in quantum tomography Schack2001a , and an optimized entanglement purification protocol Brun2001a .

Hardy Hardy-0101  (see also Hardy-0111 ) has recently given a derivation of the mathematical structure of quantum theory from five simple axioms. In his first axiom, Hardy identifies probability with measured frequency in the limit of an infinite number of repetitions of a given experiment. In Hardy’s formulation, a quantum state is a property of a preparation device. This is a problematical notion. Attempts to base probability theory on a definition of probability as frequency in infinite ensembles VonMises1957  have largely failed (see, e.g., vanFraassen1977 ; Jaynes2003 ). For instance, without further complicating assumptions, a relative frequency specified for an infinite ensemble does not in any way restrict the corresponding frequency for a finite subensemble. Furthermore, attaching the notion of a quantum state to a preparation device appears to limit quantum theory to the description of laboratory experiments. But surely one would want to assign a quantum state, e.g., to a light pulse arriving from a distant star.

The details of Hardy’s mathematical proof turn out to be mostly independent of the specific assumptions of his first axiom. In the present paper, we show that it is indeed possible to reformulate Hardy’s derivation in such a way that the axioms refer to Bayesian probabilities for the outcomes of measurements performed on a single physical system (see also Hardy’s remarks at the end of section 6.1 of Hardy-0101 ). In Sec. II, we briefly review Hardy’s basic setup and axioms. In Sec. III, we provide a Bayesian reformulation of the problem and explain how Hardy’s proof can be modified accordingly. In Sec. IV, we conclude by showing how the connection between probabilities and measured frequencies is recovered in our formulation.

## II Hardy’s setup

In Hardy-0101 , Hardy considers the following situation. An experimenter has a preparation device, a transformation device, and a measurement device. Associated with each preparation is a state, “defined to be (that thing represented by) any mathematical object that can be used to determine the probability associated with the outcomes of any measurement that may be performed on a system prepared by the given preparation.” If a physical system is incident on the measurement device, it outputs a number $`l`$, where $`l=1,\mathrm{},L`$. If no physical system is incident on the measurement device, it outputs the number 0.

Hardy then defines a probability measurement in the following way. A given measurement is performed on an ensemble of $`n`$ systems each prepared by a given preparation device. Then the number of times, $`n_+`$, is recorded that a particular outcome $`l_1`$, or subset of outcomes $`S_1\{1,\mathrm{},L\}`$, is observed. The measured probability is then defined as

$$\mathrm{prob}_+=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{n_+}{n}.$$
(1)
It is then assumed that there exists a minimum number, $`K`$, of appropriately chosen probability measurements that completely specify the state of the system. These $`K`$ probabilities can be represented by a column vector

$$𝐩=(p_1,p_2,\mathrm{},p_K)^T,$$
(2)
which represents the state. The result of any probability measurement can be inferred from the vector $`𝐩`$. The number $`K`$ is called the number of degrees of freedom of the system. It follows from the axioms below that the set of states is convex; pure states are defined as the extremal points of this convex set.

Finally, the dimension, $`N`$, of the system is defined as the maximum number of states that can be distinguished reliably in a single-shot measurement. Using these terms, Hardy derives the usual Hilbert-space formulation of quantum theory from the following five axioms, quoted verbatim from Hardy-0101 .

Probabilities. Relative frequencies (measured by taking the proportion of times a particular outcome is observed) tend to the same value (which we call the probability) for any case where a given measurement is performed on a ensemble of $`n`$ systems prepared by some given preparation in the limit as $`n`$ becomes infinite.

Simplicity. $`K`$ is determined by a function of $`N`$ (i.e. $`K=K(N)`$) where $`N=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ and where, for each given $`N`$, $`K`$ takes the minimum value consistent with the axioms.

Subspaces. A system whose state is constrained to belong to an $`M`$ dimensional subspace (i.e. have support on only $`M`$ of a set of $`N`$ possible distinguishable states) behaves like a system of dimension $`M`$.

Composite systems. A composite system consisting of subsystems $`A`$ and $`B`$ satisfies $`N=N_AN_B`$ and $`K=K_AK_B`$.

Continuity. There exists a continuous reversible transformation on a system between any two pure states of that system.

These axioms are stated in a manifestly frequentist language. Axiom 1 defines probability in terms of limiting frequency, and the number of degrees of freedom $`K`$, defined explicitly in terms of frequency measurements, has a central position in both axioms 2 and 4. Nevertheless, a Bayesian formulation of Hardy’s program turns out to be straightforward.

## III The Bayesian setup

The Bayesian setup we are about to describe differs from Hardy’s setup in the following ways. In the Bayesian formulation, it will not be necessary to refer to preparation devices or ensembles. Everything is expressed in terms of single physical systems. The concept of a probability measurement is not needed (see Caves2002b  for a Bayesian account of what it means to effectively measure a quantum probability in a laboratory experiment). Axiom 1 can be eliminated.

Our primitives are physical systems, transformation devices and measurement devices. As before, the non-null outcomes of a measurement device are labeled $`l=1,\mathrm{},L`$. We define a special class of measurements, so-called yes-no measurements, that have only two outcomes, which we label yes and no. E.g., for a given measurement device, the questions “is the outcome equal to $`l_1`$?” and “is the outcome in the set $`S_1\{1,\mathrm{},L\}`$?” define yes-no measurements.

The state of a system is now defined to be any mathematical object that summarizes a physicist’s state of belief about a system in that it can be used to determine the probabilities associated with the outcomes of any measurement that may be performed on the system. In this definition, probability means the physicist’s degree of belief about the outcome of a measurement performed on a single system. Degrees of belief acquire an operational definition in decision theory and can be shown to obey the usual probability rules (see Caves2002a  for details and references).

We now assume that there exists a number of yes-no measurements such that the probabilities for their outcomes determine the state fully. Let $`K`$ be the minimum number of such yes-no measurements, and fix a set of $`K`$ such measurements, the fiducial measurements. As before, the state is then given by the probabilities assigned to the yes outcomes of the fiducial measurements, i.e., by a vector $`𝐩=(p_1,\mathrm{},p_K)^T`$. For any yes-no measurement there exists a function $`f`$ that maps any state $`𝐩`$ to the probability for the yes outcome if the measurement is performed on a system to which $`𝐩`$ is assigned. This can be expressed as

$$\mathrm{Pr}(\mathrm{yes})=f(𝐩).$$
(3)
Finally, as before, the dimension, $`N`$, of the system is defined as the maximum number of states that can be distinguished reliably in a single measurement.

It turns out that most parts of Hardy’s proof are unaffected by our reformulation Hardy-private . Wherever Hardy refers to a probability measurement, we refer instead to “probability assigned to the yes outcome of a yes-no measurement”. The only exception is the part of the proof that uses axiom 1 explicitly, i.e., sections 6.4 and 6.5 of Hardy-0101 .

Section 6.4 of Hardy-0101  introduces the function $`f`$ defined above, and derives the inequality $`0f(𝐩)1`$ from the assumption that probabilities are measured frequencies. We get this inequality from the assumption that the probabilities assigned by a physicist are degrees of belief and therefore obey the laws of probability. Since $`f(𝐩)=\mathrm{Pr}(\mathrm{yes})`$, it follows that $`0f(𝐩)1`$. It is worth pointing out that the Bayesian derivation of this inequality does not depend on the notion of repeated trials and is therefore completely independent of the frequentist derivation Caves2002a .

Section 6.5 of Hardy-0101  introduces the idea of a mixture of two quantum states, which is then used to derive linearity of the quantum probability rule and quantum transformations. Hardy defines a mixture as an ensemble consisting of a fraction $`\lambda `$ of systems prepared in a state $`𝐩_A`$ and a fraction $`1\lambda `$ of systems prepared in a state $`𝐩_B`$. This construction cannot be used in our Bayesian approach, which refers only to a single system, not a large ensemble of systems. In particular, in the Bayesian approach, the mixing parameter $`\lambda `$ cannot be interpreted as a limiting frequency of systems prepared in a particular way. A different proof of linearity is therefore required.

Our alternative derivation of linearity is based on the idea of conditioning, which is central to Bayesian theory in general. Assume that $`𝐩_A`$ and $`𝐩_B`$ are possible states for a given system. Then we can imagine a situation in which a physicist’s state assignment depends on some event $`E`$. The event $`E`$ could be the outcome of a previous measurement, or some other piece of information that affects his state assignments. If he knew that $`E`$ was true, he would make the state assignment $`𝐩_A`$, and if he knew that $`\neg E`$ was true, he would make the state assignment $`𝐩_B`$. We now assume that he does not know the truth value of $`E`$. Instead, he assigns the probabilities $`\mathrm{Pr}(E)=\lambda `$ and $`\mathrm{Pr}(\neg E)=1\lambda `$ to the events $`E`$ and $`\neg E`$, and makes the state assignment $`𝐩_C`$.

If we now apply the function $`f`$ for a given yes-no measurement to the state $`𝐩_A`$, we obtain the conditional probability for the outcome yes, given that $`E`$ is true,

$$f(𝐩_A)=\mathrm{Pr}(\mathrm{yes}|E).$$
(4)
Applying $`f`$ to the state $`𝐩_B`$ gives the conditional probability for the outcome yes, given that $`\neg E`$ is true,

$$f(𝐩_B)=\mathrm{Pr}(\mathrm{yes}|\neg E).$$
(5)
Finally, applying $`f`$ to the state $`𝐩_C`$ gives the unconditional probability for the outcome yes,

$$f(𝐩_C)=\mathrm{Pr}(\mathrm{yes}).$$
(6)
Since we have assumed that the physicist’s probability assignments are Bayesian degrees of belief, they must obey the usual probability rules (see above). In particular, they obey the law of total probability,

$$\mathrm{Pr}(\mathrm{yes})=\mathrm{Pr}(\mathrm{yes}|E)\mathrm{Pr}(E)+\mathrm{Pr}(\mathrm{yes}|\neg E)\mathrm{Pr}(\neg E).$$
(7)
By substituting Eqs. (46) and the definition of $`\lambda `$, we obtain

$$f(𝐩_C)=\lambda f(𝐩_A)+(1\lambda )f(𝐩_B).$$
(8)
This is the same equation that Hardy derives in section 6.5 of Hardy-0101 . Following Hardy, we can now apply Eq. (8) to the $`K`$ fiducial measurements. For the $`k`$-th fiducial measurement, $`f(𝐩)`$ is the $`k`$-th component of $`𝐩`$. Writing the $`K`$ resulting equations in vector form, we obtain

$$𝐩_C=\lambda 𝐩_A+(1\lambda )𝐩_B,$$
(9)
which can be combined with Eq. (8) to give

$$f(\lambda 𝐩_A+(1\lambda )𝐩_B)=\lambda f(𝐩_A)+(1\lambda )f(𝐩_B).$$
(10)
This establishes convex linearity of the function $`f`$. For a different Bayesian derivation of Eq. (10), see Fuchs2002a , which builds on the theory of quantum Bayesian updating introduced in Fuchs-0205 .

## IV Discussion

In the previous section, we have seen that most of Hardy’s derivation of quantum theory remains valid if probabilities are given a Bayesian interpretation. In the Bayesian formulation, Hardy’s frequentist axiom 1 can be omitted. Linearity now follows from the basic setup, where quantum states are defined as compendia of probabilities for the outcomes of arbitrary single-shot yes-no measurements. In this sense, quantum theory can be derived from the last four of Hardy’s five axioms.

It may seem, however, that something important is lost in the Bayesian approach. Hardy’s version of quantum theory makes statements about actual frequencies measured in a laboratory, which are conspicuously absent from the Bayesian formulation given above. We will now review an almost trivial argument that establishes a tight connection between Bayesian quantum state assignments and measured frequencies.

Suppose an experiment consisting of the preparation of a system and a subsequent yes-no measurement is repeated $`n`$ times. Assume that the experimenter assigns the $`n`$-fold tensor product state

$$\rho ^n\rho \rho \mathrm{}\rho $$
(11)
to the $`n`$ copies of the system, where $`\rho `$ is a single-system density operator. Suppose the single-system measurement is described by the projection operators $`P_{\mathrm{yes}}`$ and $`P_{\mathrm{no}}=1P_{\mathrm{yes}}`$. The probability for yes in the first measurement is then $`q\mathrm{Pr}(\mathrm{yes})=\mathrm{tr}(\rho P_{\mathrm{yes}})`$. The probability for $`k`$ yes outcomes and $`nk`$ no outcomes in $`n`$ repetitions of the experiment is easily found to be

$$\mathrm{Pr}(k)=\left(\begin{array}{c}n\\ k\end{array}\right)q^k(1q)^{nk},$$
(12)
which for large $`n`$ is strongly peaked near $`k/n=q`$. The probability that the measured frequency is near $`q`$ approaches 1 as $`n`$ tends to infinity. The Bayesian starting point of regarding probability and measured frequency as two separate concepts thus leads to a transparent and tight connection between quantum states and measured frequencies. Nothing is lost by abandoning the a priori identification of probabilities with measured frequencies.

## Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Chris Fuchs for stimulating discussions and important suggestions.


text:
# On the Vacuum Energy in Expanding Space-TimesTalk presented at the 18th IAP Colloquium in Paris, July 1-5, 2002

## 1 Introduction

Theoretical evidence points towards the existence of a finite shortest length in nature. In particular, general relativity and quantum theory together indicate that the concept of distance loses operational meaning at the Planck scale: In any ‘microscope’, test particles aimed to resolve a region of Planckian size ($`10^{35}m`$) would possess sufficient momentum uncertainty to significantly randomly curve and thereby disturb the region in space that they were meant to resolve.

The existence of a finite shortest length in nature could have cosmological implications. This is because in an expanding universe the independent modes are comoving modes, i.e. modes whose wavelength expands with the universe. Therefore, if there is a finite minimum length in nature, then new comoving modes of initially Planckian wave length must be created continually. A priori, each new mode comes with its own vacuum energy - which could contribute to the cosmological ‘constant’, and which could also be related to the inflaton potential.

During inflation, in particular, the new modes expand only about four or five orders of magnitude before their dynamics freezes upon crossing the Hubble horizon . After such a brief expansion period the new modes could still possess properties that can be traced back to Planck scale physics. Therefore, relics of Planck scale physics which were frozen at horizon crossing could later have contributed to the seeding of density perturbations and may be observable in the CMB and in the subsequent structure formation. A signature of Planck scale effects could exist, for example, in contributions to the scalar/tensor ratio . Crucial in this context is the curl component of the polarization spectrum of the CMB, which is likely to be measurable with MAP, Planck or a later satellite-based telescope.

## 2 Models of space-time with an ultraviolet cutoff

Any concrete candidate model of the short-distance structure of space-time must explain how new comoving modes continually arise and should therefore imply potentially measurable predictions for the cosmological constant, the inflaton potential and the seeding of structure formation.

A straightforward possibility is to model space-time as being discrete. It is still unclear, however, how space-time’s continuity at large scales could emerge from a lattice description, in particular, as space-time is expanding. It is tempting, therefore, to speculate that a quantum gravity theory such as M-theory, see , or a foam theory, see , might eventually reveal the structure of space-time as being in between discrete and continuous, perhaps such as to combine the ultraviolet finiteness of lattices with continuous symmetry properties of manifolds.

Concretely, let us begin by asking whether it is at all possible that the points of space or of space-time form a set whose cardinality is in between discrete (i.e. countable) and continuous. The answer is a qualified no:

Cantor already conjectured (tragically) that there is no set whose cardinality lies in between discrete and continuous. In the year 1900, this so-called continuum hypothesis (CH) was listed by Hilbert as the first in his list of 23 problems for the 20th century. By the middle of the 20th century the problem’s subtle solution was found by Gödel and Cohen. They showed that, within standard set theory, CH can neither be proved nor disproved.

This result means that on the one hand we could enforce the existence of sets of intermediate cardinality by simply claiming their existence in a new axiom for set theory. On the other hand, however, the answer of Cohen and Gödel implies that it would be impossible to explicitly construct any such set within standard set theory, since otherwise CH could be disproved. This also means that any explicit set of space-time points can only be of discrete or continuous cardinality (theoretically, sets of space-time points could also be of higher than continuous cardinality, but it appears safe to discard this possibility since it would imply more rather than fewer ultraviolet divergencies).

We had asked whether there is a possibility by which nature might combine the ultraviolet finiteness of lattices with the continuous symmetry properties of manifolds. There still is a possibility.

## 3 Finiteness of the density of degrees of freedom

Let us recall that physical theories are formulated not directly in terms of points in space or in space-time but rather in terms of the functions over the set of points. This suggests a whole new class of mathematical models for a finite minimum length, which might beautifully combine the ultraviolet finiteness of lattices with the continuous symmetry properties of manifolds:

As first proposed in , fields in space-time could be functions over a continuous manifold as usual, while, crucially, the class of fields that can occur is such that if a field is sampled only at discrete points then its amplitudes can already be reconstructed at all points in the manifold - if the sampling points are spaced densely enough. The maximum average sample spacing which allows one to reconstruct the continuous field from discrete samples could be on the order of the Planck scale.

Since any one of all sufficiently tightly spaced lattices would allow reconstruction, no particular lattice would be preferred. Thus, all the continuity and symmetry properties of the manifold would be preserved. The physical theory could be written, equivalently, either as living on a continuous manifold, thereby displaying all its external symmetries, or as living on any one of the sampling lattices of sufficiently small average spacing, thereby displaying its ultraviolet finiteness. Physical fields, while being continuous or even differentiable, would possess only a finite density of degrees of freedom.

The mathematics of classes of functions which can be reconstructed from discrete samples is well-known, namely as sampling theory, in the information theory community, where it plays a central role in the theory of sources and channels of continuous information as developed by Shannon, see .

## 4 Sampling theory

The simplest example in sampling theory is the Shannon sampling theorem: Choose a frequency $`\omega _{max}`$. Consider the class $`B_{\omega _{max}}`$ of continuous functions $`f`$ whose frequency content is limited to the interval $`(\omega _{max},\omega _{max})`$, i.e. for which: $`\stackrel{~}{f}(\omega )=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}f(x)e^{i\omega x}=0\text{ whenever }|\omega |\omega _{max}.`$ If the amplitudes $`f(x_n)`$ of such a function are known at equidistantly spaced discrete values $`\{x_n\}`$ whose spacing is $`\pi /\omega _{max}`$ or smaller, then the function’s amplitudes $`f(x)`$ can be reconstructed for all $`x`$. The reconstruction formula is:

$$f(x)=\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}f(x_n)\frac{\mathrm{sin}[(xx_n)\omega _{max}]}{(xx_n)\omega _{max}}$$
(1)
For the proof, note that $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$ has compact support and can therefore be represented both as a Fourier series of the $`f(x_n)`$ and as a Fourier transform of $`f(x)`$. The theorem is in ubiquitous use for example in digital audio and video. Sampling theory, see , studies generalizations of the theorem for various different classes of functions, for non-equidistant sampling, for multi-variable functions and it investigates the effect of noise, which could be quantum fluctuations in our case. Due to its engineering origin, sampling theory for generic pseudo- Riemannian manifolds is still virtually undeveloped, but should be of great interest. As was shown in , generalized sampling theorems automatically arise from stringy uncertainty relations, namely whenever there is a finite minimum position uncertainty $`\mathrm{\Delta }x_{min}`$, as e.g. in uncertainty relations of the type: $`\mathrm{\Delta }x\mathrm{\Delta }p\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}(1+\beta (\mathrm{\Delta }p)^2+\mathrm{})`$, see . A few technical remarks: the underlying mathematics is that of symmetric non self-adjoint operators. Through a theorem of Naimark, unsharp variables of POVM type arise as special cases.

## 5 Application in Cosmology

It is possible to obtain explicit candidate models of quantum field theory close to the Planck scale by implementing a minimum length in nature as a sampling theoretical maximum information density. To this end, in , the above mentioned stringy uncertainty relations were implemented through their corresponding commutation relations. Physical fields then automatically become reconstructible everywhere from their samples on any lattice of spacing smaller than the Planck length.

The calculations were done for flat expanding background space-times, such as de Sitter space. As expected, comoving modes are continually being created. The modes’ wave equations are still of the form $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{\prime \prime }+m(\eta )\mathrm{\Phi }^{}+n(\eta )\varphi =0`$ but each mode now possesses of course a starting time $`\eta _0`$. At a given mode’s starting time $`\eta _0`$ the coefficient functions $`m(\eta )`$ and $`n(\eta )`$ are singular. This singularity has not yet been fully understood. However, since it determines the initial conditions and the vacuum its understanding will be crucial for predicting the size and signature of potentially observable effects. For the Hamiltonian, mode generation happens by continually adding the new modes’ $`a_\stackrel{}{k}`$ and $`a_\stackrel{}{k}^{}`$ operators:

$$H=_{\stackrel{}{k}^2<\frac{a(\eta )^2}{l_{Pl}^2}}d^3k\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_\stackrel{}{k}^{}\mathrm{\Pi }_\stackrel{}{k}_\stackrel{}{k}\right)$$

Here, $`a(\eta )`$ is the scale factor. Clearly, there is a continual production of vacuum energy if it is not artificially normal ordered away. Its size and properties are currently being investigated. It should be very interesting to apply sampling theory also to holographic bounds on the area density of information.


text:
# Few-body correlations in the QCD phase diagram

## 1 Introduction

Lattice and effective model calculations provide a rich and exciting sketch of the phase diagram of Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD). Two regions may coarsely be distinguished: a hadronic phase and a plasma phase. Since quarks are considered part of the fundamental building blocks of matter the existence of a hadronic phase is already an indication of strong correlations between quark-antiquark and three-quarks. Further on, in both phases correlations lead to more interesting phenomena, such as clustering of nucleons to form nuclei, or superfluidity (in nuclear matter) and color superconductivity (in quark matter). In particular in the later cases a weak residual interaction is enough to destabilize the ground state (just as is the case for the formation of Cooper pairing). These investigations are usually based on the study of two-particle correlations. There are reasons to go beyond two-particle correlations, e.g.:

* Particle production even in a dense environment such as deuteron formation in a heavy ion reaction, need a third particle to conserve energy-momentum Kuhrts:2001zs .
* To study the properties of $`\alpha `$-particles Beyer:2000ds  or determine the critical temperature of a possible $`\alpha `$-particle condensate alpha ; Tohsaki:2001an ; Suzuki:2002me  needs an in-medium four-body equation.
* Recent results in the Hubbard model indicate, that three-particle contributions may lead to a different (lower) critical temperature compared to the simple Thouless criterion letz . Question of this type have not been addressed for nuclear matter.
* The chiral phase transition is often discussed along with a confinement-deconfinement transition based on investigating mesons (quark-antiquark states), see e.g. Ref. Blaschke . Does this transition happen for nucleons (three-quark states) at the same density/temperature?

To investigate these issues a first step is to develop and solve proper effective in-medium three- and four-body equations that are valid at finite temperatures and densities analogous to the Feynman-Galitskii or Bethe-Goldstone equations fet71 . This has been achieved in the past for the nonrelativistic problem Beyer:2000ds ; Beyer:1996rx ; Beyer:1999tm ; Beyer:1999zx . These equations have been derived on the basis of statistical Green functions fet71 . The Green functions have been decoupled utilizing a cluster expansion, see e.g. duk98 . To tackle these questions in the (deconfined) quark-phase, in addition, such in-medium few-body equations must obey special relativity. As chiral symmetry breaking is presumably restored (up to small current masses) the quarks may become very light objects and therefore relativistic effects should play a larger role than for isolated systems. Here, relativity is realized using the light front form of relativistic dynamics Dirac:49 . First results are given in Refs. Beyer:2001bc ; Mattiello:2001vq  on the confinement-deconfinement (Mott) transition.

## 2 Theory

We use Dyson equations to tackle the many-particle problem, see e.g. Ref. duk98 . This enables us to decouple the hierarchy of Green functions. The Dyson equation approach used here is based on two ingredients: i) all particles of a cluster are taken at the same global time ii) the ensemble averaging for a cluster is done for an uncorrelated medium. The resulting decoupled Green functions may be economically written as resolvents in the $`n`$-body space, where $`n=2,3,4,\mathrm{}`$ is the number of particles in the considered cluster.

The solution of the one-particle problem in Hartree-Fock approximation leads to the following quasi-particle energy

$$\epsilon _1=\frac{k_1^2}{2m_1}+\underset{2}{}V_2(12,\stackrel{~}{12})f_2\frac{k_1^2}{2m_1^{\mathrm{eff}}}+\mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{HF}}(0).$$
(1)
The last equation introduces the effective mass that is a valid concept for the rather low densities considered here and $`\mu ^{\mathrm{eff}}\mu \mathrm{\Sigma }^{\mathrm{HF}}(0)`$. The Fermi function $`f_if(\epsilon _i)`$ for the $`i`$-th particle is given by

$$f(\epsilon _i)=\frac{1}{e^{\beta (\epsilon _i\mu )}+1}.$$
(2)
The resolvent $`G_0`$ for $`n`$ noninteracting quasiparticles is

$$G_0(z)=(zH_0)^1NR_0(z)N,H_0=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\epsilon _i$$
(3)
where $`G_0`$, $`H_0`$, and $`N`$ are formally matrices in $`n`$ particle space. The Matsubara frequency $`z_\lambda `$ has been analytically continued into the complex plane, $`z_\lambda z`$ fet71 . The Pauli-blocking for $`n`$-particles is

$$N=\overline{f}_1\overline{f}_2\mathrm{}\overline{f}_n\pm f_1f_2\mathrm{}f_n,\overline{f}=1f$$
(4)
where the upper sign is for Fermi-type and the lower for Bose type clusters. The full resolvent $`G(z)`$ is given by

$$G(z)=(zH_0V)^1N,V\underset{\mathrm{pairs}\alpha }{}N_2^\alpha V_2^\alpha .$$
(5)
Note that $`V^{}V`$. For the two-body case as well as for a two-body subsystem embedded in the $`n`$-body cluster the standard definition of the $`t`$ matrix leads to the Feynman-Galitskii equation for finite temperature and densities fet71 ,

$$T_2^\alpha (z)=V_2^\alpha +V_2^\alpha N_2^\alpha R_0(z)T_2^\alpha (z).$$
(6)
Introducing the Alt Grassberger Sandhas (AGS) alt67  transition operator $`U_{\alpha \beta }(z)`$ the effective inhomogeneous in-medium AGS equation reads

$$U_{\alpha \beta }(z)=(1\delta _{\alpha \beta })R_0^1(z)+\underset{\gamma \alpha }{}N_2^\gamma T_2^\gamma (z)R_0(z)U_{\gamma \beta }(z).$$
(7)
The homogeneous in-medium AGS equation uses the form factors defined by

$$|F_\beta \underset{\gamma }{}\overline{\delta }_{\beta \gamma }N_2^\gamma V_2^\gamma |\psi _{B_3}$$
(8)
to calculate the bound state $`\psi _{B_3}`$

$`|F_\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\beta }{}}\overline{\delta }_{\alpha \beta }N_2^\beta T_2^\beta (B_3)R_0(B_3)|F_\beta .`$ (9)
Finally, the four-body bound state is described by

$$|_\beta ^\sigma =\underset{\tau \gamma }{}\overline{\delta }_{\sigma \tau }U_{\beta \gamma }^\tau (B_4)R_0(B_4)N_2^\gamma T_2^\gamma (B_4)R_0(B_4)|_\gamma ^\tau ,$$
(10)
where $`\alpha \sigma ,\gamma \tau `$ and $`\sigma ,\tau `$ denote the four-body partitions. The two-body input is given in (6) and the three-body input by (7). Note that, although we have managed to rewrite the above equations in a way close to the ones for the isolated case, they contain all the relevant in-medium corrections in a systematic way, i.e. correct Pauli-blocking and self energy corrections. The numerical solution requires some mild approximations that are however well understood in the context of the isolated few-body problem.

## 3 Results

An experiment to explore the equation of state of nuclear matter is heavy ion collisions at various energies. Here we focus on intermediate to low scattering energies and compare results to a recent experiment 129Xe+119Sn at 50 MeV/A by the INDRA collaboration INDRA . A microscopic approach to tackle the heavy ion collision is given by the Boltzmann equation for different particle distributions and solved via a Boltzmann Uehling Uhlenbeck (BUU) simulation dan91 ; Dan92 . The reaction rates appearing in the collision integrals are a priori medium dependent. However, previously this medium dependence has been neglected. Within linear response theory for infinite nuclear matter the use of in-medium rates leads to faster time scales for the deuteron life time and the chemical relaxation time as has been shown in detail in Refs. Beyer:1997sf ; Kuhrts:2000jz . This faster time scales should have consequences for the freeze out of fragments.

We use the in-medium AGS equations (7) that reproduce the experimental data in the limit of an isolated three-body system. For details on the specific interaction model see Ref. Beyer:1996rx . We investigate the influence of medium dependent rates in the BUU simulation of the heavy ion collision as compared to use of isolated (i.e. experimental) rates. Figure 2 shows that the net effect (gain-minus-loss) of deuteron production becomes larger for the use of in-medium rates (solid) compared to using the isolated rates (dashed). The change is significant, however, a comparison with experimental data is difficult since deuterons may also be evaporating from larger clusters that has not been taken into account in the present calculation so far. The ratio of protons to deuterons may be better suited for a comparison to experiments that is shown in Figure 2. The use of in-medium rates (solid) lead to a shape closer to the experimental data (dots) than the use of isolated rates (dashed).

In these calculation, besides the change of rates, also the Mott effect has been taken into account.

Figure 3 shows the dependence of the binding energy for different clusters at a given temperature of $`T=10`$ MeV and at rest in the medium.

In Figure 4 part of the phase diagram of nuclear matter is shown. The condition for the onset of superfluidity for $`\alpha `$-particles is $`B(T_c,\mu ,P=0)=4\mu `$. The critical temperature found by solving the homogeneous AGS equation for $`\mu <0`$ confirms the onset of $`\alpha `$ condensation even at higher values (dotted) as given earlier (solid, from alpha ) which was based on a variational calculation using the 2+2 component of the $`\alpha `$ particle. For $`\mu >0`$ the condition $`E=4\mu `$ for the phase transition can also be fulfilled. However, the significance for a possible quartetting needs further investigation. Due to the many channel situation of more than two-particles equations, the Thouless criterion might be revisited.

Work supported by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.


text:
# Rates of reconnection in pulsar winds

## 1 Introduction

Magnetic reconnection is a very important phenomenon in many laboratory and astrophysical plasmas (Biskamp 2000, Priest & Forbes 2000). Most reconnection models are based on two classical schemes suggested by Sweet & Parker and Petschek. Recognition that magnetic reconnection processes are also of great importance in high energy astrophysics, where dynamic behavior is often dominated by super-strong magnetic fields, with energy density $`B^2/(8\pi )`$ larger than the rest energy of the matter $`\rho c^2`$, has led Lyutikov & Uzdensky (2002) to formulate the relativistic Sweet-Parker reconnection. In this Letter we apply the model of relativistic reconnection to the problem of energy conversion in pulsar winds.

The $`\sigma `$ paradox ($`\sigma `$ is conventionally defined as the ratio of Poynting to particle fluxes or, equivalently, as a ratio of the magnetic to plasma energy density) is a long-standing problem in pulsar physics (Rees & Gunn 1974, Kennel & Coroniti 1984). Models of the pulsar magnetosphere (Goldreich & Julian 1969, Arons & Scharlemann 1979, Ruderman & Sutherland 1975) predict that near the light cylinder most of the spin-down luminosity of a pulsar should be in a form of Poynting flux, $`\sigma 1`$. On the other hand, modeling of the dynamics of the Crab nebula (and other PWNs like W44, Shelton et al. 1999, Vela, Pavlov et al. 2001, PWN around PSR B1509-58, Gaensler et al. 2002) gives a low value of $`\sigma `$ at what is commonly believed to be a reverse shock - strongly magnetized flows cannot match the boundary conditions (Rees & Gunn 1974, Kennel & Coroniti 1984).

Most promising resolution of the $`\sigma `$ paradox invokes internal dissipation of the magnetic fields in the equatorial flow due to break down of MHD approximation (Coroniti 1990, Michel 1994, Melatos & Melrose 1996). In the equatorial plane of an oblique rotator, the MHD wind forms striped structures, in which alternating $`B_\varphi `$ regions are separated by current sheets. As plasma flows out from the pulsar, the plasma density decreases in proportion to $`r^2`$ reaching a critical radius, where it becomes less than the critical charge density $`n_{\mathrm{crit}}r^1`$ required to carry the current. Beyond this limiting radius MHD approximation breaks down. Coroniti (1990) has argued that such a breakdown of MHD would lead to effective dissipation of the field. This process was called reconnection since it is supposed to destroy magnetic field and transfer energy to particles, similar to the effects of reconnection in a classical (e.g. Solar physics) sense. Later Michel (1994) extended the Coroniti’s model, arguing that if reconnection is efficient, the structure of the wind nebula may be very different from the ideal MHD one envisioned by the Kennel & Coroniti (1984). In particular, the flow may not have a reverse shock, but may simply decelerate smoothly to match nebular boundary conditions. This model has been criticized by Lyubarsky & Kirk (2001) (LK afterward) who argued that acceleration of the flow, resulting from extra pressure released during reconnection, may not leave enough time for destruction of the field.

The physical model used by all the above authors is, in fact, not a reconnection model in the classical sense. The geometry and dynamics of the flow in the above models is completely different from (and in some sense contradictory to) the reconnection models. In the original Coroniti model, the thickness of the dissipation layer, which is assumed to be equal to the Larmor radius based on the external magnetic field and internal thermal particle velocity, plays a passive role. As the magnetic field of the wind decreases with radius, the thickness of the dissipation layer increases: the reconnection layer “eats out” the magnetic field. At the same time the inflowing plasma always remains at rest with respect to reconnection layer. This type of a dynamical behavior is quite contrary to reconnection, where magnetic field actually flows into the reconnection region. The flow dynamics proposed by LK is even more different from the classical reconnection picture. LK have argued that the expansion of the reconnection layer will push away the magnetic field - a situation reverse to that of reconnection, where magnetic field is “sucked” into the reconnection layer.

In this paper we reconsider the problem of reconnection in pulsar winds, applying the Lyutikov & Uzdensky (2002) model of relativistic reconnection. Lyutikov& Uzdensky (2002) presented a relativistic generalization of the simplest model of magnetic reconnection — the Sweet–Parker model — to strongly magnetized plasmas. In the spirit of the Sweet–Parker model, the reconnection layer is assumed to have a rectangular shape with a width $`L`$ and thickness $`\delta L`$. The width $`L`$ of the reconnection layer is determined by the global system size; also prescribed are the ratio $`\sigma `$ of the magnetic field energy density to the plasma energy density in the ideal-MHD inflow region, and the plasma resistivity $`\eta `$. In contrast, the thickness $`\delta `$ of the reconnection region, and the plasma inflow and outflow velocity are calculated as a part of the analysis. As the plasma enters the reconnection layer, it slows down, coming to a halt at a stagnation point. At the same time, magnetic energy is dissipated and converted into internal energy of the pair-rich plasma. In the out-flowing region, the plasma is accelerated by the pressure gradients, reaching some terminal relativistic velocity $`\gamma _{\mathrm{out}}`$.

Lyutikov& Uzdensky (2002) have found that the structure of the reconnection layer (its thickness, the inflow and outflow velocities) depend on the ratio of two large dimensionless parameters of the problem - magnetization parameter $`\sigma 1`$ and the Lundquist number

$$S=\frac{Lc}{\eta }1.$$
(1)
In the sub-alfvenic regime, $`\sigma S^2`$, the flow is determined by the set of equations 111These relations are valid for both the non-relativistic reconnection, $`\sigma 1`$, and for relativistic, $`\sigma 1`$.

$`\beta _{\mathrm{in}}\gamma _{\mathrm{in}}{\displaystyle \frac{L}{\delta }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{S}},`$
$`\gamma _{\mathrm{in}}(1+\sigma )\gamma _{\mathrm{out}},`$
$`\beta _{\mathrm{in}}(1+\sigma ){\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{L}}.`$ (2)
The inflow velocity is non-relativistic, $`\beta _{\mathrm{in}}1`$, for $`\sigma S`$, strongly relativistic sub-alfvenic, $`1\gamma _{\mathrm{in}}\gamma _A`$ for $`S\sigma S^2`$ ($`\gamma _A=\sqrt{2\sigma }`$ is the Lorentz factor of the Alfvén wave velocity in the incoming region), and near alfvenic, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{in}}\gamma _A`$ for $`\sigma S^2`$. The outflowing plasma is moving always relativistically, $`\gamma _{\mathrm{out}}1`$ if $`\sigma 1`$.

## 2 Reconnection in pulsar winds

Beyond the light cylinder the pulsar wind is quasi-radial, moving with strongly relativistic velocity (typical Lorentz factor $`\gamma _0=\sqrt{\sigma }100`$), and is strongly magnetized $`\sigma 10^4`$, dominated by the toroidal magnetic field $`B1/r`$. In the equatorial plane of an oblique rotator the alternating polarity of the magnetic field create conditions favorable for reconnection (Michel 1994, Coroniti 1990, LK).

We are interested in the maximum possible reconnection rate in the pulsar wind (conventionally, the term “reconnection rate” refers to the inflow velocity of plasma in terms of Alfvén velocity). The maximum reconnection rate corresponds to the maximum value for the resistivity and thus the minimal Lundquist number, which may be estimated using Bohm’s arguments that the maximum diffusion coefficient in the magnetized plasma cannot be much larger than $`r_Lv`$ where $`r_L`$ is the Larmor radius and $`v`$ is the typical velocity of the electrons (of the order of the speed of light in our case). Thus, in the limit $`\sigma 1`$

$$\eta \frac{c^2}{\omega _B}$$
(3)
which gives

$`S{\displaystyle \frac{L}{r_L}}`$ (4)
$`\delta {\displaystyle \frac{r_L}{\beta _{\mathrm{in}}\gamma _{\mathrm{in}}}}`$ (5)
$`\beta _{\mathrm{in}}^2\gamma _{\mathrm{in}}\sigma {\displaystyle \frac{r_L}{L}}`$ (6)
The cyclotron frequency $`\omega _B`$ in the wind frame

$$\omega _B\frac{\omega _{B,LC}}{\gamma _0}\frac{r_{LC}}{r}$$
(7)
where $`r_{LC}c/\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the pulsar light cylinder, and $`\omega _{B,LC}`$ is the cyclotron frequency at the light cylinder.

The maximum width of the reconnection layer cannot be larger than the hydrodynamically causally connected sector of the wind $`Lr/\gamma _0`$. Using eqns. (4-7) we can then estimate the Lundquist number in the wind

$$S\frac{\omega _{B,LC}}{\gamma _0^2\mathrm{\Omega }}$$
(8)
Note, that the Lundquist number is independent of radius.

For a “typical” pulsar with the surface field $`B_{NS}10^{12}`$ G and $`\mathrm{\Omega }10`$ rad/sec, $`\omega _{B,LC}10^9`$ rad/sec the Lundquist number is

$$S10^4$$
(9)
and thus for $`\sigma 10^4`$ we expect a weakly relativistic inflow velocity with

$$\beta _{\mathrm{in}}^2\gamma _{\mathrm{in}}\frac{\sigma }{S}1$$
(10)
## 3 Discussion

Using the formulation of relativistic reconnection by Lyutikov & Uzdensky (2002) we have found that the dynamical and kinematic constraints set on the rates of reconnection in pulsar winds may still allow very efficient reconnection given by eq. (10). If the inflow velocity in the plasma frame indeed reaches $`c`$, then magnetic field of the wind would annihilate after propagating $`\gamma _0^2r_{LC}10^4r_{LC}`$. We do not believe that such high rates are indeed realized (see, though, Kirk et al. 2002, who have argued that efficient dissipation within several light cylinders may be responsible for pulsar high energy emission). By choosing the Bohm prescription for resistivity and by neglecting the pressure of the ambient plasma we have estimated the upper limits on the rates of reconnection. More realistic calculations should be based on the microphysics of the reconnection layer, e.g. tearing mode in relativistic regimes (Zelenyi & Krasnoselskikh 1979) and computer simulations of relativistic reconnection layers (Zenitani & Hoshino 2001, Larrabee et al. 2002). This should provide the estimates for the Lundquist number in the layer. In addition, heating of the plasma by dissipating magnetic fields should also be taken into account. The corresponding model should be at least two-dimensional, allowing for the extra pressure to be relieved in the $`\theta `$ direction.

In spite of these limitations, this simple estimate shows that reconnection can be very efficient in relativistic plasmas. In the case of the Crab nebula, the magnetic flux has to be destroyed only by the time the wind reaches the wisps located at $`r_w10^{17}`$ cm, or $`10^8`$ light cylinder radii away. Assuming that initially $`\gamma _0100`$, the inflowing velocity necessary to destroy the magnetic field needs to be only $`10^4`$ of the speed of light. This is 4 orders of magnitude smaller than the maximum reconnection velocity (10). To provide such an inflow velocity the Lundquist number may be 8 orders of magnitude larger. Given such large range of allowed parameters, it is possible that the reconnection indeed is able to destroy effectively the magnetic flux in pulsar winds.

Perhaps the main argument against reconnection in the wind comes from the absence of observed high energy emission from the central part of the Crab nebula (Weisskopf et al. 2000). Reconnection is usually accompanied by efficient particle heating and acceleration which should result in radiative losses. In fact, in the case of pulsar winds, reconnection need not to destroy the magnetic field - it need only destroy the magnetic flux (e.g., by changing the topology of the field lines) to allow the flow to match the non-relativistically moving boundary of the nebular. Changing of topology may require very little dissipation. Alternatively, the pulsar wisps, conventionally associated with the reverse shock, may indeed be the signs and the sites of reconnection (Michel 1994) happening in an initially cold wind which has not crossed the fast sonic point (cold winds have asymptotic fast Mach number at most unity, Kennel et al. 1983; thus, in order for reconnection to be efficient in slowing down the pulsar wind the flow must be subsonic).

The results of this work may be contrasted with those of Coroniti (1990) and LK. On a microscopical level there are some similarities. For example, comparing the thickness of reconnection sheet assumed by Coroniti and LK with our result for the Bohm-type diffusion, eq. (5), shows that the thickness of the reconnection layer does become of the order of Larmor radius, $`\delta r_Lr`$, but only when the inflowing velocity becomes weakly relativistic $`\beta _{in}\gamma _{in}1`$.

The key difference is that the “reconnection models” of Coroniti (1990) and LK are one-dimensional. If the flow is forced to be one-dimensional then the dissipated energy has to stay inside the reconnection layer in a thermalized form, leading to the unusual dynamics derived by LK. The assumption of one-dimensionality is in a sharp contrast to classical reconnection which is at least a two-dimensional (and most likely three-dimensional) process. Thus, if reconnection happens in pulsar winds the flow structure will be at least two-dimensional, so that the particle pressure created by the dissipation of the magnetic field will be relieved in the direction orthogonal to the initial inflow direction (radial) and not along it as argued by LK.

In the two-dimensional Sweet-Parker model the outflowing velocity is directed along the external magnetic field lines. In the case of the equatorial flow in pulsar winds, this corresponds to the azimuthal direction. In a perfectly axisymmetric picture such outflow is obviously impossible. Contrary to LK we suggest that instead of preserving the axially symmetric form at all costs, the flow would become non-axially symmetric and thus two-dimensional (and most likely three dimensional). As soon as reconnection starts in some localized region, a localized deposition of energy will distort the flow and break the azimuthal symmetry, setting up some complicated velocity pattern, with plasma moving in and out of the reconnection regions (see Fig. 1). Mutual interaction of different layers then becomes an important issue. Redeposition of energy back into the flow from reconnection regions would affect the rates of reconnection only after a considerable fraction of the magnetic field has been dissipated. Under certain circumstances reconnection in one localized region may push plasma into other reconnection sites, speeding up reconnection, as is illustrated in Fig. 1. These issues are beyond the scope of this Letter.

Based on these arguments we conclude that the one-dimension approach to the problem of reconnection in pulsar winds and the ensuing result that reconnection is not important is likely to be incorrect - one has to consider at least two-dimensional (and possible full three-dimensional) problem. Our simple estimates show that in pulsar winds the plasma may flow into the reconnection region with mildly relativistic velocities insuring a much more efficient reconnection than argued by LK. Since we have calculated only the upper limits on the reconnection rate, we cannot make a conclusive statement if reconnection indeed occurs efficiently. This requires an understanding of the microphysical processes (e.g., evolution of tearing mode) in strongly relativistic magnetized plasmas and of the three-dimensional structure of the flow.

We would like to thank John Kirk, Yuri Lyubarsky for their interest in this work and Vicky Kaspi and Alissa Nedossekina for comments on the manuscript.