text:
# David maps and Hausdorff Dimension

## 1. Introduction

An orientation-preserving homeomorphism $`\phi :UV`$ between planar domains is called quasiconformal if it belongs to the Sobolev class $`W_{\text{loc}}^{1,1}(U)`$ (i.e., has locally integrable distributional partial derivatives in $`U`$) and its complex dilatation $`\mu _\phi :=\overline{}\phi /\phi `$ satisfies

$$\mu _\phi _{\mathrm{}}<1.$$

In terms of the real dilatation defined by

$$K_\phi :=\frac{1+|\mu _\phi |}{1|\mu _\phi |}=\frac{|\phi |+|\overline{}\phi |}{|\phi ||\overline{}\phi |},$$

the latter condition can be expressed as

$$K_\phi _{\mathrm{}}<+\mathrm{}.$$

The quantity $`K_\phi _{\mathrm{}}`$ is called the maximal dilatation of $`\phi `$. We say that $`\phi `$ is $`K`$-quasiconformal if its maximal dilatation does not exceed $`K`$.

For later comparison with the properties of David maps defined below, we recall some basic properties of quasiconformal maps (see \[A\] or \[LV\]):

1. If $`\phi `$ is $`K`$-quasiconformal for some $`K1`$, so is the inverse map $`\phi ^1`$.
2. A $`K`$-quasiconformal map $`\phi :UV`$ is locally Hölder continuous of exponent $`1/K`$. In other words, for every compact set $`EU`$ and every $`z,wE`$,

$$|\phi (z)\phi (w)|C|zw|^{\frac{1}{K}}$$

where $`C>0`$ only depends on $`E`$ and $`K`$.
3. A quasiconformal map $`\phi :UV`$ is absolutely continuous; in fact, the Jacobian $`J_\phi =|\phi |^2|\overline{}\phi |^2`$ is locally integrable in $`U`$ and

(1.1)
$$\mathrm{area}\phi (E)=_EJ_\phi 𝑑x𝑑y,$$

for every measurable $`EU`$.
4. More precisely, the Jacobian $`J_\phi `$ of a quasiconformal map $`\phi :UV`$ is in $`L_{\text{loc}}^p(U)`$ for some $`p>1`$. If we define

(1.2)
$$p(K):=sup\{p:J_\phi L_{\text{loc}}^p(U)\text{for every}K\text{-quasiconformal map}\phi \text{in}U\},$$

then $`p(K)`$ is independent of the domain $`U`$ and

(1.3)
$$p(K)=\frac{K}{K1}.$$

This was conjectured by Gehring and Väisälä in 1971 \[GV\] and was proved by Astala in 1994 \[As\].
5. Let $`\{\phi _n\}`$ be a sequence of $`K`$-quasiconformal maps in a planar domain $`U`$ which fix two given points of $`U`$. Then $`\{\phi _n\}`$ has a subsequence which converges locally uniformly to a $`K`$-quasiconformal map in $`U`$.

The measurable Riemann mapping theorem of Morrey-Ahlfors-Bers \[AB\] asserts that any measurable function $`\mu `$ in a domain $`U`$ which satisfies $`\mu _{\mathrm{}}<1`$ is the complex dilatation of some quasiconformal map $`\phi `$ in $`U`$, which means $`\phi `$ satisfies the Beltrami equation $`\overline{}\phi =\mu \phi `$ almost everywhere in $`U`$. Recent progress in conformal geometry and holomorphic dynamics has made it abundantly clear that one must also study this equation in the case $`\mu _{\mathrm{}}=1`$. With some restrictions on the asymptotic growth of $`|\mu |`$, the solvability of the Beltrami equation can still be guaranteed. One such condition is given by David in \[D\]. Let $`\sigma `$ denote the spherical area in $`\widehat{}`$ and $`\mu `$ be a measurable function in $`U`$ which satisfies

(1.4)
$$\sigma \{zU:|\mu (z)|>1\epsilon \}C\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{\alpha }{\epsilon }\right)\text{for all}\epsilon <\epsilon _0$$

for some positive constants $`C,\alpha ,\epsilon _0`$. Then David showed that the Beltrami equation $`\overline{}\phi =\mu \phi `$ has a homeomorphic solution $`\phi W_{\text{loc}}^{1,1}(U)`$ which is unique up to postcomposition with a conformal map. Motivated by this result, we call a homeomorphism $`\phi :UV`$ a David map if $`\phi W_{\text{loc}}^{1,1}(U)`$ and the complex dilatation $`\mu _\phi `$ satisfies a condition of the form (1.4). Equivalently, $`\phi `$ is a David map if there are positive constants $`C,\alpha ,K_0`$ such that its real dilatation satisfies

(1.5)
$$\sigma \{zU:K_\phi (z)>K\}Ce^{\alpha K}\text{for all}K>K_0.$$

To emphasize the values of these constants, sometimes we say that $`\phi `$ is a $`(C,\alpha ,K_0)`$-David map. Note that when $`U`$ is a bounded domain in $``$, the spherical metric in (1.4) or (1.5) can be replaced with the Euclidean area.

David maps enjoy some of the useful properties of quasiconformal maps, but the two classes differ in many respects. As indications of their similarity, let us mention the following two facts:

1. Every David map is absolutely continuous; the Jacobian formula (1.1) still holds.
2. Tukia’s Theorem \[T\]. “Let $`C,\alpha ,K_0`$ be positive and suppose $`\{\phi _n\}`$ is a sequence of $`(C,\alpha ,K_0)`$-David maps in a domain $`U`$ which fix two given points of $`U`$. Then $`\{\phi _n\}`$ has a subsequence which converges locally uniformly to a David map in $`U`$.” It is rather easy to show that some subsequence of $`\{\phi _n\}`$ converges locally uniformly to a homeomorphism, but that this homeomorphism must be David is quite non-trivial. We remark that the parameters of the limit map may a priori be different from $`C,\alpha ,K_0`$.

Here are further properties of David maps which indicate their difference with quasiconformal maps:

1. The inverse of a David map may not be David.
2. A David map may not be locally Hölder.
3. The Jacobian of a David map may not be in $`L_{\text{loc}}^p(U)`$ for any $`p>1`$.

As an example, the homeomorphism $`\phi :𝔻(0,e^1)𝔻`$ defined by

$$\phi (re^{i\theta }):=\frac{1}{\mathrm{log}r}e^{i\theta }$$

is a David map but $`\phi ^1`$ is not. Moreover, $`\phi `$ is not Hölder in any neighborhood of $`0`$, and $`J_\phi L_{\text{loc}}^p`$ for $`p>1`$.

The main goal of this note is to show how David maps differ from quasiconformal maps in the way they change Hausdorff dimension of sets. Recall that the Hausdorff $`s`$-measure of $`E`$ is defined by

$$H^s(E):=\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}\underset{𝒰}{inf}\underset{i}{}(\mathrm{diam}U_i)^s,$$

where the infimum is taken over all countable covers $`𝒰=\{U_i\}`$ of $`E`$ by sets of Euclidean diameter at most $`\epsilon `$. The Hausdorff dimension of $`E`$ is defined by

$$\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}E:=inf\{s:H^s(E)=0\}.$$

Quasiconformal maps can change Hausdorff dimension of sets only by a bounded factor depending on their maximal dilatation. This was first proved by Gehring and Väisälä \[GV\] who showed that if $`\phi :UV`$ is $`K`$-quasiconformal, $`EU`$, $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}E=\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}\phi (E)=\beta `$, then

$$\frac{2(p(K)1)\alpha }{2p(K)\alpha }\beta \frac{2p(K)\alpha }{2(p(K)1)+\alpha }.$$

Here $`p(K)>1`$ is the constant defined in (1.2). By Astala’s result (1.3), one obtains

$$\frac{2\alpha }{2K(K1)\alpha }\beta \frac{2K\alpha }{2+(K1)\alpha }$$

which can be put in the symmetric form

(1.6)
$$\frac{1}{K}\left(\frac{1}{\alpha }\frac{1}{2}\right)\frac{1}{\beta }\frac{1}{2}K\left(\frac{1}{\alpha }\frac{1}{2}\right).$$

It follows in particular that quasiconformal maps preserve sets of Hausdorff dimension $`0`$ and $`2`$.

By contrast, we prove
Theorem A. Given any two numbers $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ in $`[0,2]`$, there exists a David map $`\phi :`$ and a compact set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ such that $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}\mathrm{\Lambda }=\alpha `$ and $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}\phi (\mathrm{\Lambda })=\beta `$.
The proof shows that the parameters of $`\phi `$ can be taken independent of $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$.

In the special case of a $`K`$-quasicircle, i.e., the image $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of the round circle under a $`K`$-quasiconformal map, the estimate (1.6) gives

$$1\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}\mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{2K}{K+1}$$

(the lower bound comes from topological considerations). It is well-known that $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can in fact take all values in $`[1,2)`$. We show that the upper bound $`2`$ is attained by a David image of the round circle. Let us call a Jordan curve $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ a David circle if there exists a David map $`\phi :`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\phi (𝕊^1)`$, where $`𝕊^1`$ is the unit circle $`\{z:|z|=1\}`$.
Theorem B. There exist David circles of Hausdorff dimension $`2`$.
One corollary of this result is that there are Jordan curves of Hausdorff dimension $`2`$ that are (quasi)conformally removable (see §4).

Both results are bad (or exciting?) news for applications in holomorphic dynamics, where one often wants to estimate the Hausdorff dimension of invariant sets by computing the dimension in a conjugate dynamical system. The dichotomy of having dimension $`<2`$ or $`=2`$ for such invariant sets, which is respected by quasiconformal conjugacies, is no longer preserved by David conjugacies. For example, by performing quasiconformal surgery on a Blaschke product, Petersen proved that the Julia set of the quadratic polynomial $`Q_\theta :ze^{2\pi i\theta }z+z^2`$ is locally-connected and has measure zero whenever $`\theta `$ is an irrational of bounded type \[P\]. In this case, the boundary of the Siegel disk of $`Q_\theta `$ is a quasicircle whose Hausdorff dimension is strictly between $`1`$ and $`2`$ (compare \[GJ\]). On the other hand, by performing a trans-quasiconformal surgery and using David’s theorem, Petersen and the author extended the above result to almost every $`\theta `$ \[PZ\]. It follows that there exists a full-measure set of rotation numbers $`\theta `$ for which the boundary of the Siegel disk of $`Q_\theta `$ is a David circle but not a quasicircle. Thus, Theorem B opens the possibility that this boundary alone might have dimension $`2`$, which would be a rather curious phenomenon.

## 2. Preliminary constructions

For two positive numbers $`a`$ and $`b`$, we write

$$ab$$

if there is a universal constant $`C>0`$ such that $`aCb`$. We write

$$ab$$

if $`ab`$ and $`ba`$, i.e., if there is a universal constant $`C>0`$ such that $`C^1baCb`$. In this case, we say that $`a`$ and $`b`$ are comparable.

### A family of Cantor sets

Given a strictly decreasing sequence $`𝒅=\{d_n\}_{n0}`$ of positive numbers with $`d_0=1`$, we construct a Cantor set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅)`$ as the intersection of a nested sequence $`\{\mathrm{\Lambda }_n\}_{n0}`$ of compact sets in the unit square $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0:=[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]\times [\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]`$ defined inductively as follows. Set $`a_1:=2^2(d_0d_1)`$ and define $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$ as the disjoint union of the four closed squares of side-length $`2^1d_1`$ in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ which have distance $`a_1`$ to the boundary of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ (see Fig. 1). Suppose $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}`$ is constructed for some $`n2`$ so that it is the disjoint union of $`4^{n1}`$ closed squares of side-length $`2^{(n1)}d_{n1}`$. Define

(2.1)
$$a_n:=2^{(n+1)}(d_{n1}d_n).$$

For any square $`S`$ in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}`$, consider the disjoint union of the four closed squares in $`S`$ of side-length $`2^nd_n`$ which have distance $`a_n`$ to the boundary of $`S`$. The union of all these squares for all such $`S`$ will then be called $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$. Clearly $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ is the disjoint union of $`4^n`$ closed squares of side-length $`2^nd_n`$, and the inductive definition is complete.

The Cantor set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅)`$ is defined as $`_{n0}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$. We have

$$\mathrm{area}\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅)=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}\mathrm{area}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n=\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim}d_n^2.$$

###### Lemma 2.1.

The Hausdorff dimension of the Cantor set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝐝)`$ satisfies

(2.2)
$$2\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; sup}\frac{2\mathrm{log}d_{n+1}}{\mathrm{log}d_n+n\mathrm{log}2}\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}\mathrm{\Lambda }2\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\frac{2\mathrm{log}d_n}{\mathrm{log}d_n+n\mathrm{log}2}.$$

###### Proof.

For each $`n0`$, there are $`4^n`$ squares of diameter $`2^{\frac{1}{2}n}d_n`$ covering $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Hence the Hausdorff $`s`$-measure of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is bounded above by

$$\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}^n(2^{\frac{1}{2}n}d_n)^s=2^{\frac{s}{2}}\underset{n\mathrm{}}{lim\; inf}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}^{n(2s)}d_n^s,$$

which is zero if $`s>2lim\; inf_n\mathrm{}(2\mathrm{log}d_n)/(\mathrm{log}d_n+n\mathrm{log}2)`$. This proves the upper bound in (2.2).

The lower bound follows from a standard mass distribution argument: Construct a probability measure $`\mu `$ on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ which gives equal mass $`4^n`$ to each square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$, so that

$$\mu (S)=\frac{\mathrm{area}(S)}{d_n^2}\text{if}S\text{is a square in}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n.$$

Let $`x\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\epsilon >0`$, and choose $`n`$ so that $`2^nd_n<\epsilon 2^{(n1)}d_{n1}`$. The disk $`𝔻(x,\epsilon )`$ intersects at most $`\pi \epsilon ^2/(4^nd_n^2)`$ squares in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ each having $`\mu `$-mass of $`4^n`$. It follows that

$$\mu (𝔻(x,\epsilon ))\frac{\epsilon ^2}{d_n^2}=\epsilon ^s\frac{\epsilon ^{2s}}{d_n^2}\epsilon ^s\frac{2^{n(2s)}d_{n1}^{2s}}{d_n^2}.$$

If $`s<2lim\; sup_n\mathrm{}(2\mathrm{log}d_{n+1})/(\mathrm{log}d_n+n\mathrm{log}2)`$, the term $`2^{n(2s)}d_{n1}^{2s}/d_n^2`$ will tend to zero as $`n\mathrm{}`$, so that

$$\mu (𝔻(x,\epsilon ))\epsilon ^s.$$

It follows from Frostman’s Lemma (see for example \[M\]) that $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}\mathrm{\Lambda }s`$. This gives the lower bound in (2.2). ∎

### Standard homeomorphisms between Cantor sets

We construct standard homeomorphisms with controlled dilatation between Cantor sets of the form $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅)`$ defined above. The construction will depend on the following lemma:

###### Lemma 2.2.

Fix $`0<ab<\frac{1}{2}`$. Let $`A_a`$ be the closed annulus bounded by the squares

$$\{(x,y)^2:\mathrm{max}\{|x|,|y|\}=\frac{1}{2}\}\text{and}\{(x,y)^2:\mathrm{max}\{|x|,|y|\}=\frac{1}{2}a\},$$

and similarly define $`A_b`$. Let $`\phi :A_aA_b`$ be a homeomorphism which is the identity on the outer boundary component and acts affinely on the inner boundary component, mapping $`\frac{1}{2}a`$ to $`\frac{1}{2}b`$. Then $`\phi `$ can be extended to a $`K`$-quasiconformal homeomorphism $`A_aA_b`$, with

(2.3)
$$K\frac{b(12a)}{a(12b)}.$$

###### Proof.

Let us first make a simple observation: If $`z`$ and $`w`$ are points in the upper half-plane and $`L:^2^2`$ is the affine map such that $`L(0)=0`$, $`L(1)=1`$ and $`L(z)=w`$ (see Fig. 2), then the real dilatation of $`L`$ is given by

(2.4)
$$K_L=\frac{|z\overline{w}|+|zw|}{|z\overline{w}||zw|}.$$

To prove the lemma, take the triangulations of $`A_a`$ and $`A_b`$ shown in Fig. 2 and extend $`\phi `$ affinely to each triangle. After appropriate rescaling, it follows from (2.4) that on a triangle of type I in the figure, the dilatation of $`\phi `$ is comparable to $`b/a`$, while on a triangle of type II, the dilatation of $`\phi `$ is comparable to $`b(12a)/(a(12b))`$. Since $`b(12a)/(a(12b))b/a`$, we obtain (2.3). ∎

Now take a decreasing sequence $`𝒅=\{d_n\}`$ of positive numbers with $`d_0=1`$, let $`\{a_n\}`$ be defined as in (2.1), and consider the Cantor set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$. Take another such sequence $`𝒅^{}=\{d_n^{}\}`$ and let $`a_n^{},\mathrm{\Lambda }_n^{},\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅^{})`$ denote the corresponding data. We construct a homeomorphism $`\phi :`$ which maps the Cantor set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅)`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅^{})`$. This $`\phi `$ is the uniform limit of a sequence of quasiconformal maps $`\phi _n:`$ with $`\phi _n(\mathrm{\Lambda }_n)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_n^{}`$, defined inductively as follows. Let $`\phi _0`$ be the identity map on $``$. Suppose $`\phi _{n1}`$ is constructed for some $`n1`$ and that it maps each square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}`$ affinely to the corresponding square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}^{}`$. Define $`\phi _n=\phi _{n1}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}`$ and let $`\phi _n`$ map each square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ affinely to the corresponding square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n^{}`$. The remaining set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ is the union of $`4^n`$ annuli on the boundary of which $`\phi _n`$ can be defined affinely. By rescaling each annulus in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ and the corresponding annulus in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n^{}`$, we are in the situation of Lemma 2.2, so we can extend $`\phi _n`$ in a piecewise affine fashion to each such annulus. This defines $`\phi _n`$ everywhere, and the inductive definition is complete.

To estimate the maximal dilatation of $`\phi _n`$, note that by the above construction $`\phi _n`$ is conformal in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ and has the same dilatation as $`\phi _{n1}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}`$. On each of the $`4^n`$ annuli in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$, the dilatation of $`\phi _n`$ can be estimated using (2.3) in Lemma 2.2. In fact, rescaling each such annulus by a factor $`2^n/d_{n1}`$ and the corresponding annulus in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n^{}`$ by a factor $`2^n/d_{n1}^{}`$, it follows from (2.3) that the dilatation of $`\phi _n`$ on each such annulus is comparable to

$`\mathrm{max}\{{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{a_n^{}}{2^nd_{n1}^{}}(12\frac{a_n}{2^nd_{n1}})}{\frac{a_n}{2^nd_{n1}}(12\frac{a_n^{}}{2^nd_{n1}^{}})}},{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{a_n}{2^nd_{n1}}(12\frac{a_n^{}}{2^nd_{n1}^{}})}{\frac{a_n^{}}{2^nd_{n1}^{}}(12\frac{a_n}{2^nd_{n1}})}}\}`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{max}\{{\displaystyle \frac{a_n^{}(d_{n1}2^{n+1}a_n)}{a_n(d_{n1}^{}2^{n+1}a_n^{})}},{\displaystyle \frac{a_n(d_{n1}^{}2^{n+1}a_n^{})}{a_n^{}(d_{n1}2^{n+1}a_n)}}\}`$
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{max}\{{\displaystyle \frac{a_n^{}d_n}{a_nd_n^{}}},{\displaystyle \frac{a_nd_n^{}}{a_n^{}d_n}}\}.`$
To sum up, the construction gives a sequence $`\{\phi _n\}`$ with the following properties:

1. $`\phi _n=\phi _{n1}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}`$.
2. $`\phi _n`$ maps each square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ affinely to the corresponding square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n^{}`$.
3. $`\phi _n`$ is $`K_n`$-quasiconformal, where

(2.5)
$$K_n\mathrm{max}\{K_{n1},\frac{a_n^{}d_n}{a_nd_n^{}},\frac{a_nd_n^{}}{a_n^{}d_n}\}$$

and $`K_0=1`$.

Evidently, $`\phi :=lim_n\mathrm{}\phi _n`$ is a homeomorphism which agrees with $`\phi _n`$ on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ for every $`n`$ and satisfies $`\phi (\mathrm{\Lambda })=\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$. We call this $`\phi `$ the standard homeomorphism from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$. Observe that by the construction, the inverse map $`\phi ^1`$ is the standard homeomorphism from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

## 3. Proof of Theorem A

We are now ready to prove Theorem A cited in §1.
Proof of Theorem A. If $`0<\alpha ,\beta <2`$, it is well-known that there is a $`K`$-quasiconformal map $`\phi :`$ mapping a set of dimension $`\alpha `$ to a set of dimension $`\beta `$ (see for example \[GV\]). Moreover, by (1.6), the minimum $`K`$ this would require is

$$\mathrm{max}\{\frac{\frac{1}{\beta }\frac{1}{2}}{\frac{1}{\alpha }\frac{1}{2}},\frac{\frac{1}{\alpha }\frac{1}{2}}{\frac{1}{\beta }\frac{1}{2}}\}.$$

In what follows we consider the remaining cases where $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are distinct and at least one of them is $`0`$ or $`2`$.

Consider the sequences $`𝒅=\{d_n\}`$, $`𝒅^{}=\{d_n^{}\}`$ and $`𝒅^{\prime \prime }=\{d_n^{\prime \prime }\}`$ defined by

$$d_n:=2^{\frac{n}{\mathrm{log}n}},d_n^{}:=2^{\nu n},d_n^{\prime \prime }:=2^{n\mathrm{log}n},$$

where $`\nu >0`$, and construct the Cantor sets $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅)`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅^{})`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\prime \prime }=\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅^{\prime \prime })`$ as in §2. By Lemma 2.1,

$$\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}(\mathrm{\Lambda })=2,\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}(\mathrm{\Lambda }^{})=\frac{2}{\nu +1},\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}(\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\prime \prime })=0.$$

We prove that the standard homeomorphisms between these three Cantor sets and their inverses are all David maps; this will prove the theorem. In view of Tukia’s Theorem quoted in §1, it suffices to check that the sequence of approximating homeomorphisms are David maps with uniform parameters $`(C,\alpha ,K_0)`$. In fact, the estimates below show that we can always take $`C=\alpha =1`$.

$``$ Case 1. Mapping $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$. Suppose $`\{\phi _n\}`$ is the sequence of quasiconformal maps which approximates the standard homeomorphism $`\phi `$ from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$. To estimate the dilatation of $`\phi _n`$, note that

(3.1)
$$a_n=2^{(n+1)}(d_{n1}d_n)2^n(2^{\frac{n1}{\mathrm{log}(n1)}}2^{\frac{n}{\mathrm{log}n}})\frac{2^{n\frac{n}{\mathrm{log}n}}}{\mathrm{log}n}$$

and

(3.2)
$$a_n^{}=2^{(n+1)}(d_{n1}^{}d_n^{})2^n(2^{\nu (n1)}2^{\nu n})2^{(\nu +1)n}.$$

Hence

$$\frac{a_n^{}d_n}{a_nd_n^{}}\frac{2^{(\nu +1)n}2^{\frac{n}{\mathrm{log}n}}}{\frac{2^{n\frac{n}{\mathrm{log}n}}}{\mathrm{log}n}2^{\nu n}}\mathrm{log}n.$$

It follows from (2.5) that there is a sequence $`1<K_1<K_2<\mathrm{}<K_n<\mathrm{}`$ with $`K_n\mathrm{log}n`$ such that $`\phi _n`$ is $`K_n`$-quasiconformal. Fix the index $`n`$ and a number $`K>1`$. Choose $`j`$ so that $`K_jK<K_{j+1}`$. Then

$`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K\}`$ $`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K_j\}`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{area}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_j)=d_j^2=4^{\frac{j}{\mathrm{log}j}}.`$
Since $`KK_j\mathrm{log}j`$, we obtain

$$\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K\}e^K,$$

provided that $`K`$ is bigger than some $`K_0`$ independent of $`n`$. It follows that the $`\phi _n`$ are all $`(1,1,K_0)`$-David maps.

The inverse maps $`\psi _n:=\phi _n^1`$ are also $`K_n`$-quasiconformal with the same dilatation $`K_n\mathrm{log}n`$ and they converge uniformly to $`\psi :=\phi ^1`$. Moreover, if $`K_jK<K_{j+1}`$, then

$`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\psi _n}(z)>K\}`$ $`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\psi _n}(z)>K_j\}`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{area}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_j^{})=(d_j^{})^2=4^{\nu j}`$
$``$ $`e^K,`$
provided that $`K`$ is bigger than some $`K_0`$ independent of $`n`$. It follows that the $`\psi _n`$ are all $`(1,1,K_0)`$-David maps.

$``$ Case 2. Mapping $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\prime \prime }`$. The argument here is quite similar to the previous case. We have

(3.3)
$$a_n^{\prime \prime }=2^{(n+1)}(d_{n1}^{\prime \prime }d_n^{\prime \prime })2^n(2^{(n1)\mathrm{log}(n1)}2^{n\mathrm{log}n})2^{nn\mathrm{log}n+\mathrm{log}n}$$

Hence, using (3.2) and (3.3), we obtain

$$\frac{a_n^{\prime \prime }d_n^{}}{a_n^{}d_n^{\prime \prime }}\frac{2^{nn\mathrm{log}n+\mathrm{log}n}2^{\nu n}}{2^{(\nu +1)n}2^{n\mathrm{log}n}}2^{\mathrm{log}n}.$$

Let $`\{\phi _n\}`$ be the sequence of quasiconformal maps which approximates the standard homeomorphism $`\phi `$ from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\prime \prime }`$. It follows from (2.5) that there is a sequence $`1<K_1<K_2<\mathrm{}<K_n<\mathrm{}`$ with $`K_n2^{\mathrm{log}n}`$ such that $`\phi _n`$ is $`K_n`$-quasiconformal. Fix the index $`n`$ and a number $`K>1`$, and choose $`j`$ so that $`K_jK<K_{j+1}`$. Then $`KK_j2^{\mathrm{log}j}`$ and

$`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K\}`$ $`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K_j\}`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{area}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_j^{})=(d_j^{})^2=4^{\nu j}`$
$``$ $`e^K,`$
provided that $`K`$ is bigger than some $`K_0`$ independent of $`n`$.

The inverse maps $`\psi _n:=\phi _n^1`$ are $`K_n`$-quasiconformal with $`K_n2^{\mathrm{log}n}`$ and they converge uniformly to $`\psi :=\phi ^1`$. Moreover, if $`K_jK<K_{j+1}`$, then

$`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\psi _n}(z)>K\}`$ $`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\psi _n}(z)>K_j\}`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{area}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_j^{\prime \prime })=(d_j^{\prime \prime })^2=4^{j\mathrm{log}j}`$
$``$ $`e^K,`$
provided that $`K`$ is bigger than some $`K_0`$ independent of $`n`$.

$``$ Case 3. Mapping $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\prime \prime }`$. Using (3.1) and (3.3), we obtain

$$\frac{a_n^{\prime \prime }d_n}{a_nd_n^{\prime \prime }}\frac{2^{nn\mathrm{log}n+\mathrm{log}n}2^{\frac{n}{\mathrm{log}n}}}{\frac{2^{n\frac{n}{\mathrm{log}n}}}{\mathrm{log}n}2^{n\mathrm{log}n}}2^{\mathrm{log}n}\mathrm{log}n=n^{\mathrm{log}2}\mathrm{log}n.$$

Let $`\{\phi _n\}`$ be the sequence of quasiconformal maps which approximates the standard homeomorphism $`\phi `$ from $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{\prime \prime }`$. It follows then from (2.5) that there is a sequence $`1<K_1<K_2<\mathrm{}<K_n<\mathrm{}`$ with $`K_nn^{\mathrm{log}2}\mathrm{log}n`$ such that $`\phi _n`$ is $`K_n`$-quasiconformal. Fix $`n`$, let $`K`$ be sufficiently large, and choose $`j`$ so that $`K_jK<K_{j+1}`$. Then

$`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K\}`$ $`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K_j\}`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{area}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_j)=(d_j)^2=4^{\frac{j}{\mathrm{log}j}}.`$
But $`KK_jj^{\mathrm{log}2}\mathrm{log}j`$, so

$$\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K\}e^K,$$

provided that $`K`$ is bigger than some $`K_0`$ independent of $`n`$.

The inverse maps $`\psi _n:=\phi _n^1`$ are $`K_n`$-quasiconformal with $`K_nn^{\mathrm{log}2}\mathrm{log}n`$ and they converge uniformly to $`\psi :=\phi ^1`$. Moreover, if $`K_jK<K_{j+1}`$, then

$`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\psi _n}(z)>K\}`$ $`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\psi _n}(z)>K_j\}`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{area}(\mathrm{\Lambda }_j^{\prime \prime })=(d_j^{\prime \prime })^2=4^{j\mathrm{log}j}`$
$``$ $`e^K,`$
provided that $`K`$ is bigger than some $`K_0`$ independent of $`n`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4. Proof of Theorem B

The idea of the proof of Theorem B is to construct a David map $`\phi :`$ which sends a linear Cantor set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]`$ to a Cantor set of the form $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅)`$ with dimension $`2`$. The image $`\phi ([\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}])`$ will then be an embedded arc of dimension $`2`$. Since the construction allows $`\phi =\text{id}`$ outside the square $`[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]\times [\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]`$, we can easily complete this arc to a David circle.

### A linear Cantor set

Consider the closed unit square $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0:=[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]\times [\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]`$ in the plane. We construct a nested sequence $`\{\mathrm{\Sigma }_n\}_{n0}`$ of compact sets whose intersection is a linear Cantor set. For $`1j4`$, let $`f_j:`$ be the affine contraction defined by

$$f_j(z)=\frac{1}{8}z+\frac{2j5}{8},$$

and set

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_n:=\underset{j_1,\mathrm{},j_n}{}f_{j_1}\mathrm{}f_{j_n}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_0),$$

where the union is taken over all unordered $`n`$-tuples $`j_1,\mathrm{},j_n`$ chosen from $`\{1,2,3,4\}`$. It is easy to see that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$ is the disjoint union of $`4^n`$ closed squares of side-length $`8^n`$ with centers on $`[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]`$ and sides parallel to the coordinate axes (compare Fig. 5 left). We define the Cantor set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ as the intersection $`_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$. Evidently, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a subset of $`[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]`$ which has linear measure zero and Hausdorff dimension $`2/3`$.

### A quasiconformal twist

The proof of Theorem B depends on the following lemma which is a triply-connected version of Lemma 2.2. For simplicity we denote by $`S(p,r)`$ the open square centered at $`p`$ whose side-length is $`r`$.

###### Lemma 4.1.

Fix $`0<a<1/5`$ and let $`A`$ and $`B`$ be the closed triply-connected sets defined by

$`A:=`$ $`\left([0,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}]\times [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}]\right)\left(S({\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}})S({\displaystyle \frac{3}{8}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}})\right)`$
$`B:=`$ $`\left([0,{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}]\times [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}]\right)\left(S({\displaystyle \frac{1+i}{4}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}2a)S({\displaystyle \frac{1i}{4}},{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}2a)\right)`$
(see Fig. 3). Let $`\phi :AB`$ be a homeomorphism which is the identity on the outer boundary component and acts affinely on the inner boundary components, mapping $`S(\frac{1}{8},\frac{1}{8})`$ to $`S(\frac{1+i}{4},\frac{1}{2}2a)`$ and $`S(\frac{3}{8},\frac{1}{8})`$ to $`S(\frac{1i}{4},\frac{1}{2}2a)`$, respecting the horizontal and vertical sides. Then $`\phi `$ can be extended to a $`K`$-quasiconformal map $`\phi :AB`$, with

$$K\frac{1}{a}.$$

###### Proof.

We consider the affine cell decompositions of $`A`$ and $`B`$ shown in Fig. 3 and require $`\phi `$ to map each cell in $`A`$ to its corresponding cell in $`B`$ in a piecewise affine fashion. By symmetry, it suffices to define $`\phi `$ piecewise affinely between the cells labeled I, II, III, and IV. We let $`\phi `$ be affine between the triangular cells III. On the cells I and II we subdivide the trapezoids into two triangular cells and define $`\phi `$ to be affine on each of them. An easy computation based on (2.4) then shows that the dilatation of $`\phi `$ on I, II, and III is comparable to $`1/a`$.

It remains to define $`\phi `$ between the cells IV and estimate its dilatation. Note that the cell IV in $`A`$ has bounded geometry, so there is a $`K_11`$ and a piecewise affine $`K_1`$-quasiconformal map $`f_1`$ from this cell to the square with vertices $`0,1,(1+i)/2,(1i)/2`$ which maps the horizontal edge of this cell to the segment from $`(1i)/2`$ to $`1`$ (see Fig. 4). The cell IV in $`B`$, after a conformal change of coordinates $`T`$, becomes the $`4`$-gon with vertices

$$0,1,z:=\frac{12a}{4a}+\frac{i}{2},z^{}:=1\frac{(14a)i}{4a}.$$

Let $`f_2`$ be the piecewise affine map on this $`4`$-gon which maps the triangle $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0,1,z)`$ to $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0,1,(1+i)/2)`$ and the triangle $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0,1,z^{})`$ to $`\mathrm{\Delta }(0,1,(1i)/2)`$ (see Fig. 4). Then a brief calculation based on (2.4) shows that $`f_2`$ is $`K_2`$-quasiconformal, with $`K_21/a`$. The map $`\phi `$ can then be defined by $`T^1f_2^1f_1`$, whose dilatation $`K_1K_2`$ is clearly comparable to $`1/a`$. ∎

We are now ready to prove Theorem B cited in §1.
Proof of Theorem B. Consider the Cantor set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$ constructed above and the Cantor set $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }(𝒅)=_{n=0}^{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ constructed in §2, where $`𝒅=\{d_n\}`$ is defined by $`d_n:=2^\sqrt{n}`$. It follows from Lemma 2.1 that $`\mathrm{dim}_\mathrm{H}(\mathrm{\Lambda })=2`$.

We construct a David map $`\phi :`$, identity outside the square $`[\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]\times [\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}]`$, with the property $`\phi (\mathrm{\Sigma })=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Then the embedded arc $`\phi ([\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2}])`$ contains $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and hence has dimension $`2`$. By pre-composing $`\phi `$ with an appropriate quasiconformal map, we obtain a David map sending the round circle to a Jordan curve of dimension $`2`$.

The map $`\phi `$ will be the uniform limit of a sequence of quasiconformal maps $`\phi _n:`$ with $`\phi _n(\mathrm{\Sigma }_n)=\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$, defined inductively as follows. Let $`\phi _0`$ be the identity map on $``$. To define $`\phi _1`$, set $`\phi _1=\phi _0`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ and map each of the four squares in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ affinely to the “corresponding” square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$. Here “corresponding” means that the squares in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$, from left to right, map respectively to the north west, south west, north east and south east squares in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_1`$ (compare Fig. 5). The remaining set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_0\mathrm{\Sigma }_1`$ is the union of two triply-connected regions, on the boundary of which $`\phi _1`$ can be defined affinely, so we can extend $`\phi _1`$ to each such region as in Lemma 4.1.

In general, suppose $`\phi _{n1}`$ is constructed for some $`n2`$ and that it maps each square in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{n1}`$ affinely to a square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}`$. Define $`\phi _n=\phi _{n1}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{n1}`$ and let $`\phi _n`$ map each square in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$ affinely to the “corresponding” square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ in the above sense. The remaining set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{n1}\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$ is the union of $`2^{2n1}`$ triply-connected regions on the boundary of which $`\phi _n`$ can be defined affinely. By rescaling each such region in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{n1}\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$ by a factor $`8^{n1}`$ and the corresponding region in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{n1}\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$ by a factor $`2^{n1}/d_{n1}`$, we are in the situation of Lemma 4.1, so we can extend $`\phi _n`$ in a piecewise affine fashion as in that lemma, and the dilatation of the resulting extension will be comparable to

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \frac{d_{n1}}{2^{n1}a_n}& =\frac{d_{n1}}{2^{n1}2^{(n+1)}(d_{n1}d_n)}\hfill \\ & =\frac{2^{\sqrt{n1}}}{2^{n1}2^{(n+1)}(2^{\sqrt{n1}}2^\sqrt{n})}\hfill \\ & \sqrt{n}.\hfill \end{array}$$

The sequence $`\{\phi _n\}`$ obtained this way has the following properties:

1. $`\phi _n=\phi _{n1}`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{n1}`$.
2. $`\phi _n`$ maps each square in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$ affinely to the corresponding square in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_n`$.
3. $`\phi _n`$ is $`K_n`$-quasiconformal, with $`K_n\sqrt{n}`$.

Evidently, $`\phi :=lim_n\mathrm{}\phi _n`$ is a homeomorphism which agrees with $`\phi _n`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_n`$ for every $`n`$ and satisfies $`\phi (\mathrm{\Sigma })=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

To check that $`\phi `$ is a David map, choose a sequence $`1<K_1<K_2<\mathrm{}<K_n<\mathrm{}`$ with $`K_n\sqrt{n}`$ such that $`\phi _n`$ is $`K_n`$-quasiconformal. Fix some $`n`$, let $`K>1`$, and choose $`j`$ such that $`K_jK<K_{j+1}`$. Then

$`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K\}`$ $`\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K_j\}`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{area}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_j)=2^{4j}.`$
Since $`KK_j\sqrt{j}`$, we have

$$\mathrm{area}\{z:K_{\phi _n}(z)>K\}e^K,$$

provided that $`K`$ is bigger than some $`K_0`$ independent of $`n`$. It follows that the $`\phi _n`$ are all $`(1,1,K_0)`$-David maps. By Tukia’s Theorem in §1, we conclude that $`\phi =lim_n\mathrm{}\phi _n`$ is a David map. $`\mathrm{}`$

### Removability of David circles

A compact set $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is called (quasi)conformally removable if every homeomorphism $`\phi :`$ which is (quasi)conformal off $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is (quasi)conformal in $``$. It is well-known that conformal and quasiconformal removability are identical notions.

Every set of $`\sigma `$-finite $`1`$-dimensional Hausdorff measure, such as a rectifiable curve, is removable. Quasiarcs and quasicircles provide examples of removable sets which can have any dimension in the interval $`[1,2)`$. One can even construct removable sets of dimension $`2`$: the Cartesian product of two linear Cantor sets with zero length and dimension $`1`$ is such a set.

At the other extreme, sets of positive area are never removable, as can be seen by an easy application of the measurable Riemann mapping theorem. Also, there exist non-removable sets of Hausdorff dimension $`1`$ (see for example \[K\]).

To add an item to the above list of examples, we show that David circles are removable, which, combined with Theorem B, proves that there exist removable Jordan curves of Hausdorff dimension $`2`$. First we need the following simple lemma on David maps (compare \[PZ\]) whose analogue in the quasiconformal case is standard.

###### Lemma 4.2.

Suppose $`\phi :`$ is a homeomorphism whose restrictions to $`𝔻`$ and $`\overline{𝔻}`$ are David. Then $`\phi `$ itself is a David map.

###### Proof.

The complex dilatation $`\mu =\mu _\phi `$ is defined almost everywhere in $``$ and satisfies an exponential condition of the form (1.4) in $`𝔻`$ and in $`\overline{𝔻}`$ (by making $`C`$ bigger and $`t`$ and $`\epsilon _0`$ smaller if necessary, we can assume that the same constants $`(C,t,\epsilon _0)`$ work for both $`𝔻`$ and $`\overline{𝔻}`$). So to prove the lemma, we need only show that $`\phi W_{\text{loc}}^{1,1}()`$.

On every compact subset of $`𝕊^1`$, the ordinary partial derivatives $`\phi `$ and $`\overline{}\phi `$ exist almost everywhere, are integrable, and coincide with the distributional partial derivatives of $`\phi `$. We check that $`\phi `$, and hence $`\overline{}\phi =\mu \phi `$, is locally integrable near the unit circle $`𝕊^1`$.

Let $`D`$ be any small disk centered on $`𝕊^1`$. We have

$$|\phi |^2=\frac{J_\phi }{1|\mu |^2}\frac{J_\phi }{1|\mu |},$$

so that

(4.1)
$$|\phi |(J_\phi )^{\frac{1}{2}}(1|\mu |)^{\frac{1}{2}}.$$

Now $`J_\phi L^1(D)`$ since $`_DJ_\phi \mathrm{area}(\phi (D))<+\mathrm{}`$, and $`(1|\mu |)^1L^1(D)`$ because of the exponential condition (1.4). It follows from Hölder inequality applied to (4.1) that $`\phi L^1(D)`$. ∎

###### Theorem 4.3.

David circles are (quasi)conformally removable.

###### Proof.

Let $`\phi :`$ be a David map and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\phi (𝕊^1)`$. Let $`f:`$ be a homeomorphism which is conformal in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Then the homeomorphism $`f\phi `$ is David in $`𝔻`$ and in $`\overline{𝔻}`$. By Lemma 4.2, $`f\phi :`$ is a David map. Since $`\mu _{f\phi }=\mu _\phi `$ almost everywhere, it follows from the uniqueness part of David’s theorem \[D\] that $`f`$ must be conformal in $``$. ∎


format: text

text:
# Arresting Accretion Torques with Gravitational Radiation

## 1. Introduction

It has been over twenty years since the discovery of the first millisecond radio pulsar (MSP) by Backer et al. (1982). Since then, large numbers of MSPs have been found in globular clusters and in the field. The theoretical expectation is that these NSs are “recycled” and spun-up by prolonged accretion (see reviews by Phinney & Kulkarni 1994; Bhattacharya 1995). If accreting material arrives with the specific angular momentum of a particle orbiting at the NS radius ($`R=10R_6\mathrm{km}`$), then it takes $`10^8\mathrm{yr}`$ of accretion at a rate $`\dot{M}10^9M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$ for a $`M=1.4M_{1.4}M_{}`$ NS to reach $`\nu _s=500`$ Hz from an initially low frequency (see Cook et al. 1994 for a thorough set of numbers). Many binary scenarios (e.g. Burderi et al. 1999) easily provide such an $`\dot{M}`$ and transfer enough material to spin-up the NS to submillisecond periods. Hence, if there is no limiting physics, rapid rotation is expected and there should be no “cutoff” in the population other than that from the transferred mass.

The piece of limiting physics typically discussed is magnetic accretion (e.g. Ghosh & Lamb 1979). For a given $`\dot{M}`$ and magnetic dipole strength, $`\mu `$, the NS has a magnetospheric radius inside of which the flow is fixed by the magnetic topology. However, as the NS is spun-up, material rotating in the disk at the magnetospheric radius eventually co-rotates with the NS, such that further accretion will not likely spin it up. Namely, an equilibrium spin period is reached that matches the Kepler period at the magnetosphere

$$P_{eq}=8\mathrm{ms}\left(\frac{10^9M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1}{\dot{M}}\right)^{3/7}\left(\frac{\mu }{10^{27}\mathrm{G}\mathrm{cm}^3}\right)^{6/7},$$
(1)
and further accretion is likely accomodated by alternating epochs of spin-up and spin-down. Such phenomena have been seen in the highly magnetic ($`\mu >10^{30}\mathrm{G}\mathrm{cm}^3`$, $`B>10^{12}\mathrm{G}`$) accreting pulsars in high mass X-ray binaries (see Bildsten et al. 1997 for an overview). The $`P_{eq}`$’s for these NSs range from 1-1000 seconds for $`\dot{M}10^{10}10^7M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$, clearly implying a range of $`\mu `$’s.

As discussed by Chakrabarty, the $`\nu _s`$’s inferred from nearly coherent oscillations (given by $`\nu _B`$ in Table 1) during Type I bursts finally revealed rapidly rotating NSs in LMXBs. In addition, there are three accreting millisecond pulsars: SAX J1808.4$``$3658 ($`\nu _s=401\mathrm{Hz}`$; Wijnands & van der Klis 1998), XTE J1751-305 ($`\nu _s=435\mathrm{Hz}`$; Markwardt et al. 2002) and XTE J0929-314 ($`\nu _s=185\mathrm{Hz}`$; Galloway et al. 2002) which have $`10^{11}M_{}\mathrm{yr}^1`$. All of the $`\nu _s`$’s are at least a factor of two away from the breakup frequency. It is also striking that, despite $`\dot{M}`$ contrasts of nearly a factor of 1000, the NS rotation rates are all within a factor of 2-3 of each other. White and Zhang (1997) (and others) have argued that this similarity arises because these NSs are magnetic and have reached $`P_{eq}`$. This has two requirements: (i) a tight relation between $`\mu `$ and $`\dot{M}`$ so that they all reach the same equilibrium, and (ii) a method of hiding the persistent pulse typically seen from a magnetic accretor. The state of knowledge of the $`\mu `$ values of these accreting NSs is quite limited (see Cumming’s contribution), though we desire them to have adequate $`\mu `$’s to become MSPs.

The current $`\nu _s`$ measurements of these accreting NSs thus suggests a limiting frequency that is not easily accomodated by either magnetic limitations or lifetime arguments. This indication, combined with the theoretical insights summarized next, points to GW emission as a new piece of physics that can limit the spin-up. This would be “bad news” for those carrying out searches for previously hidden large populations of submillisecond MSPs, but “good news” for ground-based gravitational wave searches.

## 2. GW Emission from Crustal Quadrupoles and/or R-Modes

Let’s start with a simple hypothesis, which is that the NS has a misaligned quadrupole moment, $`Q`$, induced by accretion. The strong $`\nu _s`$ dependence of GW emission defines a critical frequency beyond which accretion can no longer spin-up the star. The NS will radiate energy via GW’s at a rate $`\dot{E}=32GQ^2\omega ^6/5c^5`$, where $`\omega =2\pi \nu _s`$, and lose angular momentum at the rate $`N_{gw}=\dot{E}/\omega `$. Balancing this spin-down torque with the characteristic spin-up accretion torque, $`N_a\dot{M}(GMR)^{1/2}`$, gives the $`Q`$ needed so as to halt spin-up (Bildsten 1998)

$$Q10^{37}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^2\left(\frac{\dot{M}}{10^9\mathrm{M}_{}\mathrm{yr}^1}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{500\mathrm{Hz}}{\nu _s}\right)^{5/2},$$
(2)
or $`10^8`$ of the NS moment of inertia. The similarities in $`\nu _s`$ then arise because of the weak dependencies of the critical frequency, $`\nu _{s,crit}\dot{M}^{1/5}Q^{2/5}`$.

Bildsten (1998) and Ushomirsky et al. (2000) described physical mechanisms in the deep NS crust that map temperature perturbations into density perturbations in order to create a crustal quadrupole while accreting. Quadrupolar symmetry is not required, it is just the most efficient radiator. Ushomirsky et al. (2000) showed that 1-5 % lateral temperature perturbations are adequate, and that if the composition or heating asymmetries are independent of $`\dot{M}`$, then the induced quadrupole scales $`\dot{M}^{1/2}`$ so that the limiting $`\nu _s`$ weakly depends on $`\dot{M}`$. The critical open questions to the ab initio theory are: (i) What is the cause of the required few percent temperature perturbations? and (ii) Can the elastic readjustment of the crust be accomodated without cracking? This question is critical for the precession of isolated pulsars (see Link’s contribution).

Another GW emission mechanism is that offered by the newly discovered r-mode instability for the fluid in the NS core. In a series of remarkable breakthroughs, the gravitational physics community has shown (see Andersson’s 2002 recent review for references) that r-modes (those waves which get a large part of their restoring force via the Coriolis term) are unstable to the emission of gravitational radiation via the Chandrasekhar-Friedman-Schutz instability. Namely, the radiation of GWs excites the modes, regardless of spin frequency!

The beauty of the r-modes is that there is no need to invoke an asymmetry. That part comes immediately once it has been shown that the GW excitation beats the viscous damping. However, finding the minimum $`\nu _s`$ to trigger the instability involves understanding the viscosity of the NS core and the coupling of the r-modes to the overlying crust (e.g. Levin & Ushomirsky 2001; Wagoner 2002). The critical $`\nu _s`$ depends on both the NS structure and core temperature, and current calculations place the accreting NSs squarely in the transition regime between stable and unstable. Hence, the hypothesis of r-mode instability remains quite viable. How the angular momentum is lost by GW emission once the mode goes unstable and starts to grow is complicated by Levin’s (1998) discovery that the internal heating from a runaway r-mode leads to a limit cycle behavior and transient GW emission. The duty cycle for GW emission is set by how large the mode amplitude can be before non-linear effects set in. Arras et al.’s (2002) current estimates of the mode saturation imply that the GW emission occurs for $`10^{34}`$ years every $`100`$ Myr. Most recently, Wagoner (2002) showed that the damping microphysics is uncertain enough that it is possible for steady-state r-mode emission with an internal wave amplitude of $`10`$ cm.

For persistent GW emission under either scenario, the GW strain at Earth from a source at distance $`d`$ can be found. For simplicity, I do it here for the quadrupolar deformation (the GW signal is then at $`2\nu _s`$, for r-modes it would be $`4\nu _s/3`$) where $`h_c=2.9G\omega ^2Q/dc^4`$ after suitably averaged over spin orientations (Brady et al. 1998). Presuming the NS luminosity is $`LGM\dot{M}/R`$ then $`h_c`$ is written in terms of the observable $`F=L/4\pi d^2`$ (Wagoner 1984)

$$h_c1.3\times 10^{27}\frac{R_6^{3/4}}{M_{1.4}^{1/4}}\left(\frac{F}{10^9\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1}\right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{300\mathrm{Hz}}{\nu _s}\right)^{1/2},$$
(3)
which represents a lower limit for $`h_c`$ due to the $`L`$ to $`\dot{M}`$ conversion I chose and since $`F`$ is never fully measured. The minimum $`h_c`$’s for those NSs which have $`\nu _s`$ inferred from Type I bursts are shown in Table 1 and plotted in Figure 1. The average 2-10 keV fluxes were either from van Paradijs (1995) or my own estimates. The figure caption describes the curves (see Cutler and Thorne 2002 for details) and makes it clear that Sco X-1 is an excellent target. However, the simplest LIGO-II search would be one where the pulse ephemeris is known and that is only true for the three accreting ms pulsars. The best is SAX J1808.4$``$3658 at $`\nu _s=401`$ Hz, which is nearby, has accretion outbursts roughly every two years, and a well known orbit (Chakrabarty & Morgan 1998). A dedicated search at 802 Hz with a tuned LIGO-II could bear fruit.

## 3. Conclusions and Implications for Millisecond Radio Pulsar Searches

I have hopefully made the case that both theory and observation point to a new limiting mechanism to NS spin-up: GW emission. If true, the impact on MSP searches is clear: many fewer rapidly rotating MSPs will be found than predicted in those scenarios that neglect this physics. One way that such physics could reveal itself is to put in a “cutoff” in the MSP population at some particular frequency. The prime complication is attributing such a cutoff to the underlying population and not observational selection.

However, in 47 Tuc, the observational selection is calculable, and between 300 and 600 Hz, the MSP sensitivity drops by only 30 percent (see Figure 2 of Camilo et al. 2000). Such a small sensitivity drop is not adequate to explain the population decline (see solid line in Figure 2) to high frequencies in 47 Tuc. I also plot the $`\nu _s`$ distribution for 13 accreting NS with a dashed line. This sample is not, to our knowledge, biased in frequency in any way. If this is the injection distribution that becomes like that in 47 Tuc, then the higher $`\nu _s`$ systems must spin-down a factor of 1.5 in 5-8 Gyrs, easily accomodated with a surface field of $`B(25)\times 10^8\mathrm{G}`$.

### Acknowledgments.

I thank P. Arras, D. Chakrabarty and A. Cumming for comments and my previous co-authors on this work, Curt Cutler and Greg Ushomirsky, for many insights. This research was supported by NASA via grant NAG 5-8658 and by the NSF under Grants PHY99-07949 and AST02-05956. L. B. is a Cottrell Scholar of the Research Corporation.

## References

Andersson, N. 2002, to appear in Classical and Quantum Gravity, astro-ph/0211057

Arras, P., Flanagan, E. E., Morsink, S. M., Schenk, A. K., Teukolsky, S. A., & Wasserman, I., 2002, ApJ, to appear (astro-ph/0202345)

Backer, D. C., Kulkarni, S. R., Heiles, C. E., Davis, M. M. & Goss, W. M. 1982, Nature, 300, 728

Bhattacharya, D. 1995, in “X-Ray Binaries”, ed. W. H. G. Lewin, J. van Paradijs & E. P. J. van den Heuvel (London: Cambridge), p. 233

Bildsten, L. et al. 1997, ApJS, 113, 367

Bildsten, L. 1998, ApJ, 501, L89

Brady, P. R., Creighton, T., Cutler, C., & Schutz, B. F. 1998, PRD, D57, 1

Burderi, L., Possenti, A., Colpi, M., di Salvo, T. & D’Amico, N. 1999, ApJ, 519, 285

Camilo, F., Lorimer, D. R., Freire, P., Lyne, A. G. & Manchester, R. N. 2000, ApJ, 535, 975

Chakrabarty, D. & Morgan, E. H. 1998, Nature, 394, 346

Cook, G. B., Shapiro, S. L. & Teukolsky, S. A. 1994, ApJ, 423, L117

Cutler, C. & Thorne, K. S. 2002, gr-qc/0204090

Galloway, D. K., Chakrabarty, D., Morgan, E. H., & Remillard, R. A., 2002, ApJ, 576, L137

Ghosh, P. & Lamb, F. K. 1979, ApJ, 234, 296

Levin, Y. 1998, ApJ, 517, 328

Levin, Y. & Ushomirsky, G. 2001, MNRAS, 324, 917

Markwardt, C. B., Swank, J. H., Strohmayer, T. E., in ’t Zand, J. J. M. & Marshall, F. E. 2002, ApJ, 575, L21

Phinney, E. S. & Kulkarni, S. R. 1994, ARAA, 32, 591

Ushomirsky, G., Cutler, C. & Bildsten, L. 2000, MNRAS, 319, 902

van Paradijs, J. 1995, in “X-Ray Binaries”, ed. W. H. G. Lewin, J. van Paradijs & E. P. J. van den Heuvel (London: Cambridge), p. 536

Wagoner, R. V. 1984, ApJ, 278, 345

Wagoner, R. V. 2002, ApJ, 578, L63

White, N. & Zhang, W. 1997, ApJ, 490, L87

Wijnands, R. & van der Klis, M. 1998, Nature, 394, 344


text:
# Entire invariant solutions to Monge-Ampère equations

## 1. Proofs

We begin with a simple lemma:

###### Lemma 1.1.

Let $`KO(n)`$ be a compact subgroup acting irreducibly on $`^n`$. For any $`x^n`$, let $`C_x`$ be the convex hull of the orbit $`Kx`$. There exists an $`ϵ>0`$ such that the ball $`B(0,ϵ)`$ is contained in $`C_x`$ for any $`x`$ with $`|x|=1`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose that the conclusion does not hold. Then there exists a sequence of points $`x_k`$ with $`|x_k|=1`$ such that the boundary of $`C_{x_k}`$ contains a point $`y_k`$ with $`y_k0`$. By choosing a convergent subsequence of $`x_k`$ we find a point a point $`x_{\mathrm{}}`$ on the unit sphere such that $`0`$ lies on the boundary of $`C_x_{\mathrm{}}`$. As $`C_x_{\mathrm{}}`$ is convex, it lies to one side of any of its supporting hyperplanes at $`0`$. Hence the orbit $`Kx_{\mathrm{}}`$ lies to one side of a hyperplane $`H`$ passing through $`0`$. Therefore the center of mass of the orbit

$$m=\frac{1}{|K|}_Kgx_{\mathrm{}}𝑑g$$

cannot be the origin unless the whole orbit lies on $`H`$. On the other hand $`m`$ has to be the origin as it is a $`K`$-invariant point and the representation is irreducible. It follows that the orbit $`Kx_{\mathrm{}}`$ is contained in a hyperplane and from this the subspace generated linearly by $`Kx_{\mathrm{}}`$ is a proper $`K`$-invariant subspace of $`^n`$, a contradiction. ∎

We now prove Theorem 0.1. Put $`f_k=f+1/k`$ and $`g_k=g+1/k`$, $`k_+`$. Let $`B_r`$ denote the ball of radius $`r`$ centred at the origin. Let $`R_k`$ be a number defined by

$$_{B_{R_k}}f_k=_{B_k}g_k.$$

According to  there exists a unique (up to a constant) strictly convex solution $`\varphi _k`$ of

(1.1)
$$f_k(\varphi _k)detD_{ij}\varphi _k=g_k(x)$$

which is of class $`C^{1,\beta }`$, for some $`\beta >0`$, and such that $`\varphi _k`$ maps $`B_k`$ onto $`B_{R_k}`$. Moreover, as $`KO(n)`$ and all the data are $`K`$-invariant, $`\varphi _k`$ is $`K`$-invariant (this follows from uniqueness, since $`\varphi _kg`$, $`gK`$, is also a solution of (1.1)). To prove the existence of a weak solution to (0.1), defined on all of $`^n`$, it is enough to show that the functions $`\varphi _k`$ are uniformly (in $`k`$) bounded on any ball $`B_R`$, $`kR`$. Indeed, a bounded sequence of convex functions on a bounded open convex domain has a convergent subsequence. This follows from the elementary fact, which we will use repeatedly, that the slopes of supporting hyperplanes of a convex function, bounded by $`R`$ on a domain $`G`$, are bounded by $`2R/\delta `$ on any subdomain $`G^{}`$ such that $`\text{dist}(G^{},G)\delta `$.

Let us show that the functions $`\varphi _k`$, $`kR`$, $`\varphi _k(0)=0`$, are bounded on $`B_R`$ uniformly in $`k`$. It is enough to show that $`\varphi _k`$ are bounded uniformly on $`B_R`$. Suppose that there exists a sequence of points $`x_{k_j}`$ in $`B_R`$ such that $`\left|\varphi _{k_j}(x_{k_j})\right|j`$. Let $`y_{k_j}=\varphi _{k_j}(x_{k_j})`$. Consider the unique solution $`\psi _k`$, $`\psi _k(0)=0`$, to the equation

$$g_k(\psi _k)detD_{ij}\psi _k=f_k(y)$$

mapping $`B_{R_{k_j}}`$ onto $`B_{k_j}`$. According to , $`\psi _k`$ is the inverse of $`\varphi _k`$. Thus $`\psi _{k_j}(y_{k_j})=x_{k_j}`$ and hence $`\left|\psi _{k_j}(y_{k_j})\right|R`$. Observe that $`\psi _k(0)=0`$ since $`\psi _k`$ is $`K`$-equivariant and the representation is irreducible. Let $`v_{k_j}`$ be the unit vector in the direction $`y_{k_j}`$. Since $`\psi _k`$ is convex, $`\psi _{k_j}(y),v_{k_j}R`$ for all $`y[0,y_{k_j}]`$ and therefore $`\left|\psi _{k_j}(y)\right|R|y|`$ for such $`y`$. Using now Lemma 1.1 we conclude that for any $`r>0`$, $`\psi _{k_j}`$ is bounded by $`\frac{R}{ϵ}r`$ on $`B_r`$ for large $`j`$. It follows that there is a subsequence of $`\psi _{k_j}`$ convergent to a convex solution $`\psi :^n`$ of

$$g(\psi )detD_{ij}\psi =f.$$

The function $`\psi `$ is bounded by $`Rr/ϵ`$ on any $`B_r`$. Since $`\psi `$ is convex, $`\psi `$ is bounded by $`4R/ϵ`$ on $`B_{r/2}`$. Thus $`U=\psi \left(^n\right)`$ is contained in $`B_{4R/ϵ}`$. However

$$+\mathrm{}=_^nf=_Ug,$$

which leads to a contradiction. Theorem 0.1 is proved.

###### Proposition 1.2.

Suppose, in addition, that $`_^ng>0`$. Then any entire $`K`$-invariant convex solution $`\varphi `$ of (0.1) is a proper function.

###### Proof.

Suppose that there exists an unbounded sequence of points $`x_k`$ such that $`\varphi (x_k)`$ is bounded. Using convexity of $`\varphi `$ and Lemma 1.1 we conclude that $`\varphi `$ is a bounded function. This however implies that $`\varphi `$, being convex and defined on all of $`^n`$, is constant, which contradicts the assumption on $`g`$. ∎

This proposition allows us to prove the regularity results of Theorem 0.2. The proof is essentially the same as the one given by Caffarelli and Viaclovsky ; we give it here for completeness.

Consider the convex (and bounded by the last proposition) sets $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c=\{x;\varphi (x)c\}`$, $`c`$. For every $`c`$, we can find $`R(c)>c`$ such that $`\text{dist}(\mathrm{\Omega }_c,\mathrm{\Omega }_{R(c)})1`$. By the argument used before, the slopes $`\varphi `$ of $`\varphi `$ are bounded by $`2R(c)`$ on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$. If $`f`$ and $`g`$ are strictly positive and continuous, then equation (0.2) implies that there are constants $`\lambda _1,\lambda _2`$, depending on $`c`$, such that

(1.2)
$$\lambda _1|B||\varphi (B)|\lambda _2|B|$$

for any Borel subset $`B\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$. We can apply Corollary 2 in  to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{c+1}`$ and conclude that $`\varphi `$ is strictly convex at any point of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c`$. Since $`c`$ was arbitrary, $`\varphi `$ is strictly convex everywhere. Now the main result of  implies that $`\varphi `$ is locally of class $`C^{1,\beta }`$, where “locally” means that $`\beta `$ can be chosen uniformly only on bounded subsets of $`^n`$. We observe that the only additional properties of $`f`$ and $`g`$ we have used so far is the boundedness of $`1/f`$ and $`1/g`$. Therefore we have proved:

###### Proposition 1.3.

In the situation of Theorem 0.1 suppose, in addition, that $`1/f`$ and $`1/g`$ are locally bounded functions and let $`\varphi `$ be an entire $`K`$-invariant convex weak solution of (0.1). Then $`\varphi `$ is of class $`C^{1,\beta }`$ on any compact subset $`P`$, where $`\beta `$ may depend on $`P`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

To finish the proof of Theorem 0.2, assume that $`f`$ and $`g`$ are of class $`C^{0,\alpha }`$. Now, $`\varphi `$ is a solution of $`detD_{ij}\varphi =\stackrel{~}{g}`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{g}=g/f(\varphi )`$. Since, by the last proposition, $`\varphi `$ is Hölder continuous, $`\stackrel{~}{g}`$ is (locally) of class $`C^{0,\gamma }`$. Using (1.2), we can apply Theorem 2 in  to $`u(x)=\varphi (x)c`$, $`c`$ and the convex and bounded set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_c=\{x;u(x)0\}`$ to conclude that $`\varphi `$ is locally of class $`C^{2,\gamma }`$ and hence globally $`C^2`$. Therefore $`\stackrel{~}{g}=g/f(\varphi )`$ is of class $`C^{0,\alpha }`$ everywhere and, repeating the argument, we conclude that $`\varphi `$ is $`C^{2,\alpha }`$. Higher regularity is standard.


text:
# Anomalous dissipation in the mixed state of underdoped cuprates close to the superconductor-insulator boundary

,

(December 17, 2002)

## Abstract

We present a comparative study of Nernst effect and resistivity in underdoped samples of Bi2Sr2CuO6+δ and La2-xSrxCuO4. The Nernst effect presents a peak in a region of the H-T diagram where resistivity shows a non-metallic temperature dependence. Our results illustrate that the mechanism of dissipation in the mixed state of underdoped cuprates is poorly understood. Large quantum superconducting fluctuations and vanishing vortex viscosity are among suggested explanations for an enhanced Nernst signal close to the superconductor-insulator boundary.

Recently, the peculiar behavior of Nernst effect in copper oxide superconductors has become a subject of growing attentionong1 ; ong2 ; ong3 ; capan ; sondhi ; kontani ; weng ; ikeda ; ikedater . In conventional superconductors, Nernst effect, namely the transverse component of the thermopower in a magnetic field, is known to be associated with vortex movementhuebenerbook . However, Xu *et al.*ong1  reported that in underdoped La2-xSrxCuO4 a large residual signal persists in the normal state and well above Tc. This observation has been confirmed in other families of cuprate superconductors including Bi2Sr2CuO6+δ and YBa2Cu3O6+yong2 ; ong3 . The normal-state Nernst signal is present over a wide doping range, but attenuates as one moves towards the superconductor-insulator boundary or the overdoped regime in the phase diagramong2 . Remarkably, the temperature scale up to which such an anomalous Nernst signal extends is about 130K, regardless of the particular system studied. Moreover, the Nernst signal is found to persist at magnetic fields as high as 30T both in overdopedong3  and in underdopedcapan  compounds.

The debate on the origin of this residual Nernst signal in the normal state of underdoped cuprates is still open and has stimulated a number of theoretical works during the past months. Fluctuations of the superconducting order parameter above Tc are considered to be the most plausible explanation for such a signal. Ussishkin, Sondhi and Husesondhi , for example, used a Time-Dependent-Ginzburg-Landau(TDGL) approach. Within gaussian approximation and subtracting magnetization currents, they found a sizeable Nernst signal due to superconducting fluctuations. Weng and Muthukumarweng  have suggested that in a Resonant-Valence-Bond(RVB) picture, the coupling of spinon vortices to holons, can give rise to an enhanced Nernst effect above Tc in the so-called spontaneous vortex phase. A different route has been taken by Kontanikontani  who calculated Nernst coefficient beyond the Relaxation Time Approximation. By taking a self-consistent account of vertex corrections for currents, he found that the quasi-particle contribution to Nernst effect is no longer negligible in presence of antiferromagnetic and superconducting fluctuations. These studies point to the presence of strong superconducting fluctuations in the pseudogap regime and suggest that the superconducting transition is not a mean-field transitionlevin  but rather a vortex-antivortex unbinding type of transitiontesanovic . It is puzzling, however, that these strong fluctuations are not detected in charge transport. Indeed, in the temperature window associated with the residual Nernst signal, the magnetoresistance do not present any strong feature.

In this paper, we focus on the behavior of the Nernst effect in the underdoped regime close to the supercoductor-insulator transition. In underdoped cuprates, the destruction of superconductivity in high magnetic fields is accompanied with the emergence of an “insulating” normal state presenting a weakly diverging non-metallic resistivityando ; boebinger ; ono . Our study concentrates on very underdoped samples of La2-xSrxCuO4 and Bi2Sr2CuO6+δ close enough to the superconductor-insulator boundary for a moderate magnetic field of 12T to introduce a non-metallic resistivity. By simultaneously measuring Nernst effect and resistivity in the mixed state, we found that these two transport properties, both supposedly associated with vortex motion, are no longer correlated in this regime. In sharp contrast with other superconductors, the maximum in the Nernst occurs in a temperature window associated with a non-metallic resistivity. This result highlights the limits of our current understanding of the dissipation mechanism in a field-induced superconductor-insulator transition.

Nernst coefficient, the ratio of the transverse electric field to the longitudinal thermal gradient, was measured in presence of a magnetic field parallel to the c-axis with a one-heater-two-thermometer set-up. The set-up allowed to measure the resistance of the sample in the same conditions. The thermal gradient was obtained using two RuO2 or Cernox thermometers connected via gold or silver wires to two electrodes along the sample. The same electrodes were used to measure the voltage drop induced by a charge current applied along the sample and therefore to monitor the resistance of the sample. Two other lateral electrodes were used to measure the DC transverse voltage produced by applying a heat current along the sample with a heater chip. The two thermometers and the heater were held in the vacuum by long thin highly resistive manganin wires which were also used to measure their resistance. In this way, the path of the heat current along the sample was controlled. No correction was made for the magneto-resistance of thermometers. We estimate that the error on the absolute magnitude of the temperature gradient at 12T due to this approximation is less than 10 percent. Note that such a correction is only relevant for single crystals; for thin films, the thermal gradient is almost totally controlled by the substrate’s thermal conductivity and is not expected to vary with the magnetic field. The heat current was kept low enough to keep $``$T/T below 5$`\%`$. At each temperature, the Nernst signal was extracted by reversing the sign of the magnetic field and keeping only the antisymmetric part of the signal. In this way, the offset signal due to the misalignment of the contacts and an eventual contribution of the wires was subtracted.

The samples used in this study were two c-axis oriented thin films of Bi2Sr2CuO6+δ(Bi-2201) and a single crystal of La1.94Sr0.06CuO4. The Bi-2201 thin films were epitaxially grown by RF magneton sputtering on a SrTiO3 substratebi2201 . The oxygen content of initially overdoped samples was reduced by annealing in controlled atmosphere as already detailed in a previous study of the evolution of resistivity with doping in Bi2Sr2-zLazCuO6+δkons . Gold electrodes were sputtered on them and wires were connected with silver paint to these electrodes. The La1.94Sr0.06CuO4 single crystal was made in an optical furnace using a travelling-solvent floating zone technique and was already used and mentioned in our previous studycapan . It was subsequently oxygen annealed at 10 bar and 450C for 10 days in order to enhance the homogeneity of oxygen distribution. Low-resistivity contacts on this crystal were made by baking Dupont 6838 silver paint electrodes with oxygen flow at 450C for 10 minutes.

Figures 1 and 2 show Nernst effect and resistivity as a function of temperature in two Bi2Sr2CuO6+δ thin films, at several magnetic fields up to 12T. At zero field, both samples present a broad resistive transition which shifts to lower temperatures with increasing magnetic field. The critical temperature, taken as the temperature associated with resistivity dropping to half of the full normal-state value, was found to be 15K for the first and 9K for the second sample. The resistivity of the 9K sample presents a clear non-metallic upturn which becomes more pronounced as the field is increased. In the case of 15K sample, the non-metallic behavior is absent at low fields but sets in at 12T, indicative of a higher doping level. Using the critical temperature and the room-temperature resistivity of these samples, one can make a very rough estimate of doping level by comparing them with values obtained in systematic studies of doping dependence of resistivitykons ; rifi  and thermopowerkons2 . This yields $`\delta `$ 0.08 for the 9K sample and $`\delta `$ 0.09 for the 15K sample.

In both samples, Nernst effect presents the broad peak commonly associated with the vortex movement in the mixed state of type II superconductors. The amplitude of this peak increases initially with increasing magnetic field before starting to decrease at 10T. But the peak *does not* shift to lower temperatures as the field is increased. This is in sharp contrast with the behavior observed in optimally-doped cuprates, where the Nernst peak follows the field-induced shift in resistive transitionhuebener . Note that in both samples at 12T, the peak occurs at a temperature interval where resistivity is increasing with decreasing temperature. In the case of 15K sample, while resistivity presents a continuous evolution from the low-field metallic to the high-field localization behavior, the temperature dependence of the Nernst effect remains unaffected. This, added to the fact that Nernst effect has a similar behavior in both samples, seems to suggest that that Nernst effect is not disturbed by the onset of localization observed in resistivity. Comparing the two Bi-2201 thin films, one important feature is that the mismatch between the Nernst peak and the resistive transition becomes more pronounced as the magnetic field is increased or the doping is reduced at constant field. As these are the parameters that tune the superconductor-insulator transition, the anomalous dissipation that we report here might be related to this transition. Note, however, that the threshold field for non-metallic resistivity does not correspond to the onset of this absence of correlation between Nernst effect and resistivity.

This contrasting behavior of Nernst effect and resistivity is even more pronounced in the La1.94Sr0.06CuO4 as seen in figure 3. As a result of an extensive oxygen annealing, this sample presents a smooth zero-field resistive transition centered around 11.4K in contrast with the broad double transition seen before annealingcapan . Nevertheless, the contrasting behavior of Nernst effect and resistivity was found to be robust to oxygen annealing and this rules out extrinsic inhomogeneity as a primary cause for it. As seen in the figure, for fields larger than 6T, the resistivity does not show any sign of superconducting transition down to 1.2K. Note, however, that, even taken alone, this behavior of resistivity does not indicate a complete destruction of superconductivity, since a positive magnetoresistance is present up to 12T. In the same temperature range, we observe a peak in Nernst effect which shifts to higher temperature with increasing magnetic field. After an initial increase, the amplitude of this peak begins to decrease with increasing magnetic field for fields exceeding 2T. Moreover, as seen in the insert, the Nernst signal changes sign well above Tc, revealing a small quasi-particle contribution with opposite sign to the vortex Nernst signal, consistent with previous reportsong2 .

Across a wide range of the cuprate phase diagram, the Nernst effect and resistivity do not give identical accounts of the way magnetic field destroys superconductivity. Recent high-field investigations of Nernst effect in overdoped La1.8Sr0.2CuO4 indicate that the upper critical field extracted from the resistivity measurements is systematically lower than the Hc2 obtained from the Nernst signalong3 . A similar discrepancy has also been reported in the case of electron-doped Nd2-xCexCuO4 at different doping levelsgollnik . Our results indicate that the decoupling between the two probes of vortex state becomes particularly striking by approaching to the insulating side of the phase diagram and in the presence of field-induced non-metallic resistivity.

Recently, in order to explain the absence of correlation between Nernst effect and resistivity, Ikeda proposed a model based on quantum superconducting fluctuations described by a 2D Ginzburg-Landau actionikeda . Noticing that in underdoped cuprates, the normal-state resistance per CuO2 plane becomes comparable to the quantum of resistance Rq=$`\frac{h}{4e^2}`$=6.45k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, he argued that in the underdoped regime, as a result of a reduced superfluid density, superconducting fluctuations are not only enhanced, but become quantum in nature in contrast to the optimally-doped regime dominated by thermal fluctuations. The same formalism has already been used to describe quantum fluctuations in the context of the field-tuned superconductor-insulator transition in dirty two-dimensional superconducting filmsgoldman , accounting for non-universal values of resistance and the absence of a well-defined critical field at the transition by including effects of Coulomb repulsionikedabis .

In Ikeda’s scenarioikeda , the apparent contradiction between a vortex-like behavior in Nernst effect and a normal-state like resistivity is due to a vanishingly small vortex contribution to the total resistivity which is thus dominated by the insulating background, whereas the Nernst effect is enhanced in the quantum fluctuation regime. Decomposing the pair wavefunction on Landau levels and taking into account the $`\omega 0`$ terms, the theory provides expressions for transport entropy and conductivity in presence of quantum fluctuations as a function of the propagator of the first two Landau level fluctuation fields. This model can mimic the observed behavior of both transport energy and resistivity reported here in the high temperature window above the Nernst peakikedater .

The doping dependence of vortex viscosity may constitute an alternative explanation for the observed discrepancy between resistivity and Nernst data. The vortex equation of movement contains a dissipative term proportional to vortex viscosity $`\eta `$huebenerbook . Since the Nernst signal is inversely proportional to this viscosity (N$`\frac{S_\mathrm{\Phi }}{\eta }`$, with SΦ the vortex entropy), a vanishing viscosity would lead to an enhanced Nernst signal as well as a rapid saturation of resistivity to its normal state value. A scenario along these lines was suggested to account for the anomalous behavior of the resistive transition in overdoped Tl2Ba2CuO6+δgeshkenbein . In the latter compound, the apparent Hc2 extracted from resistivity lie below the thermodynamic one deduced from specific heat datamackenzie . Experimental evidence for a reduced vortex viscosity in overdoped Bi-2201 has been recently provided by microwave surface impedance measurements at low fieldsmatsuda . On the other hand, studying the properties of a d-wave superconductor in a slave boson-U(1) gauge theory, Ioffe and Millis proposed that viscosity should vanish in the vicinity of the Mott insulatormillis . Therefore, in such a picture, the coexistence between an enhanced Nernst signal and a saturated flux-flow resistivity is expected to enhance with underdoping. Further investigations of the doping dependence of vortex viscosity are necessary to shed more light on this issue.

Finally, we note that recent Scanning Tunnelling microscopy studies indicate that vortex cores in cuprates present an unusual electronic excitation spectrumhoffman . Moreover, in the underdoped regime, inelastic neutron scatteringlake  and Nuclear Magnetic Resonancemitrovic ; mitrovic2  experiments have revealed enhanced antiferromagnetic correlations associated with vortex cores. The possible contribution of these excitations to the Nernst signal is yet to be explored.

In conclusion, we found that the decoupling between Nernst effect and resistivity becomes more pronounced as one sweeps the cuprate phase diagram from optimal doping to the very underdoped limit. In particular, the Nernst effect presents a peak where the corresponding resistivity is non-metallic. Such an anomalous dissipation regime may prove to be relevant for the studies of superconductor-insulator transition in dirty conventional superconducting thin-films.

We acknowledge helpful discussions with R. Ikeda, H. Kontani and I. Ussishkin.

*Present address: Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545*


text:
# Crossover and scaling in a two-dimensional field-tuned superconductor

\[

## Abstract

Using an analysis similar to that of Imry and Wortis, it is shown that the apparent first order superconductor to metal transition, which has been claimed to exist at low values of the magnetic field in a two-dimensional field-tuned system at zero temperature, can be consistently interpreted as a sharp crossover from a strong superconductor to an inhomogeneous state, which is a weak superconductor. The true zero-temperature superconductor to insulator transition within the inhomogenous state is conjectured to be that of randomly diluted $`XY`$ model. An explaination of the observed finite temperature approximate scaling of resistivity close to the critical point is speculated within this model.

\]

Two-dimensional (2D) zero-temperature magnetic field($`H`$)-tuned superconductor-insulator transition (SIT) has recently attracted a lot of attention. It is common to think of this transition as a prototypical continuous quantum phase transition (QPT) at a critical magnetic field $`H=H_c`$ with a diverging correlation length $`\xi |H_cH|^\nu `$, and associated scaling. Here, $`\nu `$ is the correlation length exponent. The state on the $`H<H_c`$ side of the transition is a superconductor where the vortices are localized in a so-called vortex glass state, and the Cooper pairs are delocalized. The state on the other side of the transition is an insulator, where the vortices form a superfluid (they follow Bose statistics as well in a dual representation), and the Cooper pairs are localized. Exactly $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑡}`$ the transition, both the vortices and the Cooper pairs are delocalized, and the system is supposed to show metallic behavior with a universal resistivity.

However, recent experiments on amorphous Mo-Ge films do not show scaling in the limit of very low temperatures $`T100mK`$, do not show universal resistivity at the putative transition point, and, in fact, show signatures of zero temperature saturation of Ohmic resistance in a wide range of $`H`$ on both sides of the putative $`H_c`$. The system thus appears to have a metallic ground state in almost all cases $`\mathrm{𝑒𝑥𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡}`$ below a very low value of the magnetic field, $`H_{\text{sm}}`$ (‘sm’ for superconductor-metal), where true superconductivity is apparently recovered. Hysteresis is observed in the vicinity of $`H_{\text{sm}}`$. Phenomenologically, there seems to be a zero-temperature first order field-tuned superconductor to metal transition at $`HH_{\text{sm}}`$. The conventional picture of the field-tuned SIT, then, needs to be seriously revisited. There is also experimental evidence of a metallic-like phase in thickness or disorder-tuned superconductor-insulator systems. The possibility of a metallic phase intervening between the insulating and the superconducting phases has been a subject of many recent theoretical papers. In the following, we will discuss only the field-tuned systems; whether similar considerations can be applied to other systems as well is left for future study.

We will first focus on the low field superconductor to metal transition in the field-tuned system and argue that it is a remnant effect of the effects of quenched disorder on the first order vortex lattice melting transition of the pure system at a higher value of $`H=H_{\text{cr}}`$. Effects of quenched disorder on first order transitions have a long history in the literature. Imry and Ma  showed that for disorder coupling as random fields conjugate to the order parameter, first order transitions are completely eliminated below a critical dimension which depends on the symmetry of the order parameter. Imry and Wortis  then argued that for disorder coupling as random bond (or random $`T_c`$ in a classical system), the discontinuities associated with a first order transition are eliminated. They also proposed a mechanism of how that happens and indicated the possibility that for this kind of disorder-coupling the first order transition may reduce to a continuous one. Later, Aizenman and Wehr  proved mathematical theorems conclusively proving these heuristic assertions. In this paper, we will closely follow the argument of , but make the most use of a feature, often overlooked, that the elimination of discontinuities of a first order transition due to random-bond coupling of the disorder can start as a sharp crossover at $`D=2`$. Beyond the sharp crossover and within the resulting inhomogenous state, the true thermodynamic phase transition can be percolative, which is a continuous transition and thus consistent with the established theorems.

We will work in terms of field-induced vortices instead of Cooper pairs. The putative SIT is then the melting transition of the vortex solid to a vortex liquid, which, in fact, is a vortex superfluid. In the limit of a clean system free of any impurities, this is the first order Abrikosov lattice melting transition at $`n=n_{\text{cr}}`$. For an average impurity concentration $`p`$, let’s assume that $`n_{\text{cr}}`$ is renormalized to $`n_{\text{cr}}(p)`$. At this level, $`n_{\text{cr}}(p)`$ is an assumed first order transition point between a vortex solid phase and a vortex liquid phase. The vortex solid phase may be a vortex glass (see, however,), or a phase where the vortices are trapped individually by the impurity potentials, or even some (as yet) unknown state where the vortices are localized (note that in the presence of random pinning by impurities, which couple to a crystalline solid as random fields, the translational long range order of the crystal is destroyed below $`D=4`$). Our second assumption is that, in the vortex solid phase, $`\mathrm{𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑙}`$ fluctuations in the impurity concentration modulate the $`\mathrm{𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑎𝑙}`$ $`n_{\text{cr}}`$. This is sensible (although we cannot prove it here), since the impurities, along with the repulsive interaction among the vortices, are responsible for vortex-localization. This can also be seen as following from the dependence of $`n_{\text{cr}}(p)`$ on $`p`$. Local $`p`$ may fluctuate from the average $`p`$, and locally modulate the critical concentration. Later, we will argue, following, that $`n_{\text{cr}}(p)`$ will be rounded in a real system by domain formation on both sides of the transition, and the hypothetical vortex solid will loose its meaning. This is the reason why a precise characterization of the vortex solid is irrelevant for the present purpose. This line of argument will, however, bring out the importance of a sharp crossover-concentration, $`n_{\text{sm}}`$, which we will identify with $`H_{\text{sm}}`$, beyond which the domains proliferate and the system shows appreciable low-temperature resistance. The true macroscopic superconductor-insulator transition at $`H_c`$ can then only be defined in terms of percolation, by that of randomly diluted Josephson Junctions between the domains of the vortex solid phases. Since the zero-temperature SIT in this framework is essentially geometric, and not a prototypical QPT, scaling at finite temperature close to the critical point is not immediate. We will speculate on the consequences of such a transition to finite temperature scaling of Ohmic resistivity.

In order to clarify the said remnant effect, let us flesh out the arguments for the effects of disorder on a first order transition. In our formulation in terms of a hypothetical vortex solid (and not a crystalline lattice), the analysis of  directly applies. It will pay to briefly go through the argument, however, since we will use the final result to explain the experiments. It will also help develop the alternative framework of SIT presented here (see also ). Since the correlation length $`\xi _{\text{c}r}`$ remains finite at the transition, only regions of finite area $`\xi _{\text{c}r}^2`$ are correlated close to the transition. The $`\mathrm{𝑡𝑦𝑝𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙}`$ density fluctuation of the impurities in a correlated region of linear dimension $`\xi _{\text{c}r}`$ is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }p[p(1p)]^{\frac{1}{2}}\xi _{\text{c}r}^1.$$
(1)
Density fluctuations of other magnitudes are possible, but their probabilities are exponentially suppressed. So a correlated region has impurity concentration $`p+\mathrm{\Delta }ppp\mathrm{\Delta }p`$ with maximum probability. Now suppose we are approaching the transition point by increasing the perpendicular magnetic field $`H`$, thus increasing $`n`$. As long as $`n<n_{\text{cr}}(p)`$ the system is nominally in the solid phase. But a typical correlated region may already be in the $`\mathrm{𝑤𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑔}`$ phase due to fluctuations in the impurity concentration. The $`\mathrm{𝑤𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑔}`$ phase is a vortex liquid, which is not yet a superfluid since the size is finite. Thus, if there were no interfacial surface energy between the solid and the liquid phases, then the first order transition would have had a smearing width

$$\mathrm{\Delta }n_{\text{cr}}=|\frac{dn_{\text{cr}}(p)}{dp}|\mathrm{\Delta }p,$$
(2)
and the domain-sizes would have been of the order of $`\xi _{\text{c}r}`$.

But if we take into account the interfacial surface energies, as we must, then the domain-sizes can be much bigger than $`\xi _{\text{c}r}`$. This is possible, because the system has to balance the loss in the surface energy by gaining sufficient volume energy. By creating domains comprising several correlated regions with linear dimensions $`\xi _{\text{c}r}`$, it can maximize the gain in volume energy. One can show that, as one approaches the critical concentration $`n_{\text{cr}}(p)`$ by varying $`H`$, clusters of a general size $`l`$ will be first unstable at a concentration $`n_{\text{cr}}(p)\mathrm{\Delta }n`$ whenever

$$\mathrm{\Delta }ng(l),$$
(3)
where $`g(l)`$ is a function of the domain size $`l`$,

$$g(l)=[p(1p)]^{\frac{1}{2}}l^1|\frac{dn_{\text{cr}}(p)}{dp}|\frac{C\sigma n_{\text{cr}}(p)l^2}{f(p)}.$$
(4)
Here $`\sigma `$ is the interfacial surface tension, $`C`$ is a geometrical factor of order one, and $`f(p)`$ is a function of $`p`$, $`f(p)=[n\frac{(f_lf_s)}{n}]_{p,n_{\text{cr}}(p)}`$, where $`f_l`$ and $`f_s`$ are the free energy densities of the vortex liquid and solid phases respectively. The formula in Eq. 4 is for $`D=2`$. The first term is a measure of the volume energy gain by creating the liquid phase in a domain of size $`l`$, and the second term comes from the surafce energy lost by doing it. Equation 3 is the first order analog of the Harris criterion. Both the rounding width $`\mathrm{\Delta }n`$ and the domain-size $`l^{}`$ are now determined by the single equation,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }n=g(l^{}),$$
(5)
where $`l^{}`$ maximizes $`g(l)`$. This does not mean, however, that for $`n<n_{\text{cr}}(p)g(l^{})`$ the system is free of domains. What Eq. 5 simply implies is that within the rounding width $`\mathrm{\Delta }n=g(l^{})`$ of $`n_{\text{cr}}(p)`$, the $`\mathrm{𝑡𝑦𝑝𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙}`$ domains of the vortex liquid of size $`l^{}`$ will proliferate in the solid. This is because here the system is nearer to the transition point of the clean system. For the dimension of interest in the present paper, $`D=2`$, we give in Fig. 1 a schematic sketch of $`g(l)`$.

The basic point of observation, which is also one of the central points in the present paper, is that $`g(l)`$ rises from zero at $`l=l_0`$ and goes back to zero for $`l\mathrm{}`$, and so is $`\mathrm{𝑝𝑒𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑑}`$ at the point of inflection $`l=l^{}`$. Consequently, as we increase the density of the vortices, $`n`$, by increasing $`H`$, domains of vortex liquid of size $`l^{}`$ can first appear sharply (sharpness depends on the width of the peak of $`g(l)`$ at $`l^{}`$, which in turn depends on the parameters of the system such as $`\sigma `$ and $`f(p)`$) at $`n=n_{\text{sm}}=n_{\text{cr}}(p)\mathrm{\Delta }n=n_{\text{cr}}(p)g(l^{})`$. Also, if $`\xi _{\text{c}r}`$, the finite correlation length of the would-be first order transition, is smaller than $`l^{}`$, then the domain-size at the sharp crossover is not bounded by $`\xi _{\text{c}r}`$, rather it is $`l^{}`$, which can be much bigger than $`\xi _{\text{c}r}`$ again depending on the system parameters. As $`n`$ is increased more, the function $`g(l)`$ also satisfies Eq. 3 for values of $`l`$ other than $`l^{}`$, and, in particular, the domain sizes can be arbitrarily large as $`\mathrm{\Delta }n0`$. The typical domain size, however, will always be $`l^{}`$, since by creating domains of that size the system gains maximum energy.

A domain of the vortex solid phase is $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑙𝑚𝑜𝑠𝑡}`$ a superconductor, since the vortices are immobile. Similarly, a domain of the vortex liquid phase is $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑙𝑚𝑜𝑠𝑡}`$ an insulator. Low-temperature transport properties of a phase with inhomogenous admixture of such domains have been recently studied in. Because of quantum tunneling of the vortices among the domains of vortex liquid, finite resistance arises in the system. The formula given in for this residual saturation tunneling resistance produces good fits to the experimental data . One of our aims in this paper has been to clarify the origin of such an inhomogenous state and to show that it can first occur sharply with increasing $`H`$. For values of $`H`$ less than the crossover value, $`H_{\text{sm}}`$, the system is a strong superconductor with no appreciable residual resistance. This is because the domains of the vortex solid are large (the domains of the vortex liquid are rare), which makes the tunneling of the vortices impossible. For $`HH_{\text{sm}}`$ the system has domains of typical size $`l^{}`$ and the resulting weak superconductor has low-temperature tunneling resistance. Because of the proliferation of the domains, hysteresis may be observed in the vicinity of $`H_{\text{sm}}`$, and the sharp crossover may $`\mathrm{𝑙𝑜𝑜𝑘}`$ like a first order superconductor to metal quantum phase transition. This is the remnant effect alluded to before.

Experiments of have observed approximate scaling of resistivity inside the metallic-like phase in the phase diagram. This is indicative of a continuous phase transition at some critical value of $`H=H_c>H_{\text{sm}}`$. This transition, however, must be defined in the sense of percolation, since the vortices are not in the perfect solid phase. As we have seen, for $`HH_{\text{sm}}`$ the sample is in an inhomogenous admixture of domains of $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑙𝑚𝑜𝑠𝑡}`$ superconductors and $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑙𝑚𝑜𝑠𝑡}`$ insulators of typical size $`l^{}`$. As $`H`$ increases towards $`H_{\text{cr}}`$ the insulating domains proliferate since the energy gain by creating them increases. The requisite continuous phase transition, then, can be that of two-dimensional randomly diluted Josephson Junctions. The fact that the $`IV`$ curves are nonlinear at relatively low currents attests to the presence of Josephson Junctions in this region of the phase-diagram. Ignoring capacitive charging energies of the individual domains, which is reasonable for large enough domain-sizes, this system is isomorphic to randomly diluted $`XY`$ model in two dimensions.

These models exhibit classical phase transitions. When the sites or the bonds are randomly diluted, the transition temperature $`T_c(x)`$ decreases monotonically with the concentration $`x`$ of occupied sites (or bonds). At the percolation threshold $`x=x_c`$, which corresponds to $`H=H_c`$ in the present problem, an infinite connected cluster of occupied sites ceases to exist, and $`T_c(x)=0`$. The point $`P:x=x_c(H=H_c),T=0`$ is a multicritical point where long range thermodynamic and geometric order develop simultaneously. This $`\mathrm{𝑡𝑟𝑢𝑒}`$ critical point $`H_c`$ may not be the same as the would-be first order melting point of the clean system, $`H_{\text{cr}}`$. It will depend on the value of the percolation threshold in a more microscopic calculation. The experimental observation that $`H_c`$ is about $`20`$ times bigger than $`H_{\text{sm}}`$ is a quantitative issue and is beyond the scope of the present paper. A numerical simulation study of the vortex system to know the function $`g(l)`$, which involves parameters $`C`$ ($`2\pi `$ for a circle), $`\sigma `$ and $`f(p)`$ is left for future study. Once maximized, this function will give an estimate of $`H_{\text{sm}}`$ ($`n_{\text{sm}}=n_{\text{cr}}(p)g(l^{})`$), and will also test whether $`g(l)`$ is indeed a sharply peaked function to validate the conjecture of a sharp crossover. In Fig. 2, we show a proposed phase diagram of the system within the randomly diluted $`XY`$ model.

In the conventional theory of the SIT, the Ohmic resistivity, $`\rho `$, was predicted to attain a universal value $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑡}`$ the transition point $`H_c`$. Its finite temperature scaling-form was predicted to be

$$\rho \rho _QF[\frac{|HH_c|}{T^{1/z\nu }}],$$
(6)
where $`\rho _Q`$ is the quantum of resistance, $`\nu `$ and $`z`$ are the correlation length exponent and the dynamic exponent, respectively, and $`F`$ is a scaling function. A small non-zero temperature reduces the effective dimension of the system from three to two, and a finite-size scaling argument produces the scaling-form close to the zero-temperature critical point. Recent experiments have not found a universal critical resistivity, although the scaling form has been verified for $`T100mK`$ with a value of $`z\nu 4/3`$. At lower temperatures, breakdown of the scaling has been observed.

In our model of the SIT, because $`P`$ is a continuous critical point where correlation length diverges, scaling of observables at $`T=0`$ is immediate and follows from the well-studied theory of percolation. Scaling at finite temperature close to the percolation threshold is, however, not well-understood. This is because the zero-temperature transition is essentially geometric, and the concepts of reduced dimensionality with temperature and associated finite-size scaling don’t apply. Here, we will speculate on an explaination of the experimental observations. For any $`T>0`$ at $`x=x_c`$, $`\rho `$ is nonzero since the superconducting correlation length is finite and is expected to be thermally activated. Close to the point $`P`$ there are two relevant correlation lengths that diverge; the percolation correlation length $`\xi _x`$ diverges as $`\xi _x|xx_c|^{\nu _x}`$, and the thermal correlation length of the diluted $`XY`$ model, $`\xi _T`$, diverges as $`\xi _TT^{\nu _T}`$. This is true as long as $`\xi _x\xi _T`$, because of the reduced dimensionality of the percolating cluster. As this is a crossover effect for any $`xx_c`$, but not exactly $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑡}`$ the percolation threshold, the condition on $`\xi _T`$ puts a lower bound on temperature, only $`\mathrm{𝑎𝑏𝑜𝑣𝑒}`$ which the following holds. Here $`\nu _x`$ and $`\nu _T`$ are critical exponents with values in two dimensions $`4/3`$ and $`0.981.03`$ , respectively. In a scaled expression for $`\rho `$ for $`T0`$ and $`xx_c`$, these two lengths must occur in the dimensionless ratio $`\xi _T/\xi _x`$,

$$\rho (|xx_c|,T)\frac{h}{4e^2}\stackrel{~}{\rho }f(\xi _T/\xi _x)\frac{h}{4e^2}\stackrel{~}{\rho }\varphi (\frac{|xx_c|}{T^{\nu _T/\nu _x}}).$$
(7)
Here $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }`$ is a dimensionless constant, $`\frac{h}{4e^2}`$ is the quantum of resistance present for dimensional reasons, and $`f`$ and $`\varphi `$ are scaling functions. The argument of $`\varphi `$ is a power of the argument of $`f`$. Writing $`H`$ for $`x`$ and using the values for $`\nu _T`$ and $`\nu _x`$ appropriate for $`2D`$, we get

$$\rho (|HH_c|,T)\frac{h}{4e^2}\stackrel{~}{\rho }\varphi (\frac{|HH_c|}{T^{3/4}}).$$
(8)
in the scaling region close to $`P`$.

In summary, we have proposed a low-field crossover from a strong superconductor to an inhomogenous state which is a weak superconductor and so can be resistive even at very low temperature. If the crossover is sharp, which is possible in two dimensions but depends on the system-parameters, it will look like a first order superconductor-metal phase transition. The true thermodynamic superconductor-insulator critical point lies within the imhomogenous state and is conjectured to be isomorphic to that of diluted $`XY`$-model. An explaination of the observed finite temperature scaling of resistivity close to the critical point is presented and that it is only approximate, consistent with experiments, is pointed out.

This work has been supported by the NSF under Grant No. DMR-9971138. I thank S. Chakravarty and S. A. Kivelson for many helpful discussions. I also thank Enzo Granato for a correspondence.