text:
# Zeta Function Zeros, Powers of Primes, and Quantum Chaos

## I Introduction

The Riemann zeta function is at the heart of number theory, and has also played a pivotal role in the study of quantum chaos . There is a deep connection between the complex zeros of the zeta function and Random Matrix Theory . The zeros possess the same statistical properties as the energy eigenvalues of a dynamical Hamiltonian that is nonintegrable and whose dynamics are not time-reversal invariant. Unfortunately, this Hamiltonian is not known in terms of its dynamical variables. The main source of insight into this unknown quantum chaotic system comes from Gutzwiller’s pioneering work , that expresses the oscillatory part of the quantum density of states as a sum over classical periodic orbits. (Such sums are now referred to as trace formulas.) It is well-known that the oscillatory part of the density of the Riemann zeros is given by a Gutzwiller-like sum, with one periodic term for every integer power of a prime number . (A smoothed density of the Riemann zeros has also been studied in Ref. .) From this perspective, one can infer that a spectrum consisting of the Riemann zeros is generated by a Hamiltonian (albeit unknown) whose classical orbits have actions that are logarithms of primes and integer powers of primes.

Conversely, one could ask whether it is also possible to calculate the prime number sequence from a sum of oscillatory terms, with one term for every zero of the zeta function. Although less widely-known, such a series was actually given by Riemann himself . Riemann derived an exact formula for the density of the primes (and their integer powers) that can be expressed as the sum of a smooth function and an infinite series of oscillatory terms involving the complex zeros of the zeta function. The smooth part has been thoroughly studied in the context of the prime number theorem whereas the oscillatory part has been largely ignored. Interestingly, it is the latter that contains the essential information about the location of the primes, as shown below. There is a vast literature on the distribution of the prime numbers. It is recognized that their distribution exhibits global regularity and local irregularity . The nearest-neighbour spacings (NNS) of the primes is known to be Poisson-like , corresponding to an almost uncorrelated random distribution. This is very different in character from the Gaussian Unitary Ensemble (GUE) distribution of the Riemann zeros. Nevertheless, it is possible to generate the almost-uncorrelated sequence of all integer powers of primes from the interference of the highly-correlated Riemann zeros.

As mentioned above, from the perspective of semiclassical periodic orbit theory, the density of the Riemann zeros has the structure of a dynamical trace formula with periodic orbits. It is natural to ask whether Riemann’s formula is a trace formula for the primes. Despite having the oscillatory terms, as discussed below, Riemann’s formula is not a trace formula of dynamical origin. But, this does not preclude the existence of a trace formula for the primes. If one does exist, then this would support the notion that there exists a Hamiltonian system whose quantum spectrum is the primes. In any case, the exclusion of Riemann’s formula as a trace formula suggests that there would be no correspondence between the classical dynamics and the Riemann zeros for this system.

The purpose of this paper is to study the density of the primes from the perspective of numerical semiclassics. To our knowledge, Riemann’s series has not been studied numerically. We first verify that Riemann’s formula does produce spectral lines at the positions of the primes and their powers, even when the series is truncated. This is not completely unexpected since Riemann’s series converges conditionally to the exact density which is a set of $`\delta `$-function spikes. However, the $`\delta `$ functions arise from the *entire* series. The truncated series is an approximation to the exact density. It does not yield spikes, but rather lines of various widths, heights and (unknown) shapes and it is not at all obvious that the relative line intensities of the truncated series are correct. We examine this problem both numerically and analytically. We then provide a simple rule for estimating the value of the largest zero required to sufficiently resolve individual lines of a specific shape in some interval of interest and describe how to control the error incurred from a truncation of the series.

## II Riemann’s Formula

We start from the Euler product formula

$$\zeta (\beta )=\underset{p}{}(1p^\beta )^1,\text{Re}\beta >1,$$
(1)
where the product is over all primes $`p`$. It follows that $`_p_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{exp}(n\beta \mathrm{ln}p)=\mathrm{ln}\zeta (\beta )`$. Dividing both sides by $`\beta `$ and then taking the inverse Laplace transform of both sides with respect to $`E`$, we immediately obtain

$$N(E)=\underset{p}{}\underset{n}{}\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{\Theta }\left(E\mathrm{ln}p^n\right)=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_{ai\mathrm{}}^{a+i\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{ln}\zeta (\beta )}{\beta }e^{\beta E}\text{d}\beta ,$$
(2)
where $`a>1`$. Riemann evaluated the RHS of Eq. (2) to obtain $`N(E)`$. Upon differentiation with respect to $`E`$ and the subsequent substitution $`x=e^E`$, we obtain the density $`\rho (x)`$ of $`p^n/n`$ along the real axis $`x`$ as

$$\rho (x)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{ln}x}\frac{1}{x\left(x^21\right)\mathrm{ln}x}2\underset{\alpha >0}{}\frac{\mathrm{cos}(\alpha \mathrm{ln}x)}{x^{1/2}\mathrm{ln}x},$$
(3)
where $`x>1`$. This formula assumes the Riemann hypothesis, which states that the infinite number of complex zeros of the zeta function all lie on the critical line $`\beta =(1/2\pm i\alpha )`$, where $`\alpha `$ is real and positive. Note that explicit use of the symmetry of the complex zeros has been made to reduce the summation to cosine functions. A generalized version of the Riemann formula, where the zeros may lie anywhere in the critical strip is given in Ref. . We shall denote the sum over the oscillatory terms on the RHS of Eq. (3) as $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(x)`$. Since Eq. (3) is exact, it is clear that the $`\delta `$-function spikes of $`\rho (x)`$ must be generated from the interference of the terms in $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(x)`$. From our experience in periodic orbit quantization , we know that a coarse-grained version of the exact density of states can be reproduced even from a truncated periodic orbit sum. Therefore, in the following section, we focus on the numerical analysis of the truncated series.

Before presenting the results, however, we briefly review the pioneering numerical work of Riesel and Göhl . The LHS of Eq. (2) is a set of step functions, with unit steps at every prime $`p`$, one-half steps at $`p^2`$, one-third steps at $`p^3`$ and so on, and may be obtained by taking the contour integral of $`\mathrm{ln}\zeta (\beta )/\beta `$ on the RHS of the equation. Riemann  denotes this function by $`f(x)`$ and Edwards by $`J(x)`$ . The number of primes less than $`x`$, denoted by $`\pi (x)`$, may be expressed in terms of $`f(x)`$ as

$$\pi (x)=\underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\mu (n)f(x^{1/n})}{n},$$
(4)
where $`\mu (n)`$ is the Möbius function . The modulating effect of the oscillatory terms due to the first twenty nine pairs of the complex Riemann zeros was numerically examined by Riesel and Göhl  in 1970. This early work already showed the approximate formation of the first few steps at the prime numbers, and modulations for some larger primes. Note that the series (4) requires a knowledge of the Möbius function, and is much more complicated than Eq. (3). Riesel and Göhl actually replaced the sum over the Möbius functions by the Gram series involving factorials which are difficult to compute accurately for large integers. In this paper, we shall rather study formula (3) for $`\rho (x)`$ since it contains more information than the formula for the density of the primes (no powers) which can be obtained from the derivative of $`\pi (x)`$.

## III Numerics

Numerically, we can only evaluate a finite number of terms from Riemann’s infinite series. Although it would seem by inspection that all terms of the series are equally important and that there is no optimal ordering of the terms, Riemann states that the series is conditionally convergent and that it must be summed in order of increasing size of $`\alpha `$. (For any series whose convergence is conditional, the order of summation must be specified since different orderings produce different results.) In this case, the “natural order” is the correct one. Riemann goes on to state that with this ordering the truncated series should give an approximation to the density of primes (and their powers), but that using a different ordering, the resulting finite series can approach arbitrary real values. We have verified this numerically and found that using finite sets of zeros chosen according to different rules yields incorrect results. Thus, for the numerical work that follows, we use the correct ordering.

### III.1 Line Intensities of the Truncated Series

We first computed Eq. (3) using the first $`10^4`$ zeros and observed lines at the positions of the primes and their powers for $`x<5000`$. However, for $`x>2000`$, many lines cannot be fully resolved and the signal eventually dies out. This is due to truncation since only a small number of zeros have been included. (This will be discussed in more detail below.) Nevertheless, even this small number of zeros yields narrow lines at the lowest primes. In Fig. 1, we display the result for $`x[1.5,100]`$. Although one can clearly observe lines at the positions of the primes, the relative intensities cannot be determined by inspection since the lineshapes are not uniform (see Fig. 2). This is a common problem in spectral analysis, and is often resolved by imposing a more uniform lineshape through convolution of the signal with an appropriate smooth “response function” . The response function is typically a peaked function that falls to zero in both directions from its maximum. Gaussian functions are positive-definite and decay rapidly. They are also convenient to use since their shape only depends on a single parameter (the variance) and therefore can be easily controlled.

Thus, we next convolve this approximate density $`\rho (x)`$ (i.e. smooth term and truncated series) with an *unnormalized* Gaussian of variance $`\sigma `$:

$$\rho (x)G_\sigma (x)=_1^{\mathrm{}}\rho (x^{})G_\sigma (xx^{})\text{d}x^{},$$
(5)
where

$$G_\sigma (x)=\mathrm{exp}(x^2/2\sigma ^2).$$
(6)
The effect of the convolution is that rapidly oscillating features are washed out and smooth peaked features are smeared into the shape of the response function. If the lines were perfect $`\delta `$ functions of height $`D_n`$, then from Eq. (5), these would be replaced by $`D_nG_\sigma (xx_n)`$, i.e. Gaussians of variance $`\sigma `$ with height $`D_n`$ at $`x=x_n`$. Of course, the lines are not $`\delta `$-function spikes so that the resultant lineshapes are not exactly Gaussian, but as long as the intrinsic linewidth is sufficiently small compared to the variance, the deviation from a perfect Gaussian is quite negligible. Therefore, the convolution produces a series of Gaussian lines, each of the same width. The key point is that the lineshapes are now essentially uniform so that the actual heights can be meaningfully compared and immediately interpreted as the relative intensities. It is important to keep in mind that since the response function has a maximum height of unity, the height of a line after convolution should be the area under that line before convolution. The reason for this is that although the lines of the original signal act like $`\delta `$ functions with respect to the response function, they do have nonzero widths and so their effective $`\delta `$-function “heights” $`D_n`$, are equal to the areas. In this sense, the convolution procedure is equivalent to directly integrating the area under each line of the signal. However, the convolution technique is much simpler and avoids errors that can arise from the long oscillatory tails of individual lines. Note that this procedure cannot resolve two adjacent lines when the spacing between them is smaller than $`\sigma `$ and thus $`\sigma _{\text{max}}=1/2`$.

We have computed Eq. (5) for the range of interest in Fig. 1. This is shown in Fig. 3 using $`\sigma =0.05`$. We note here that the heights do not depend on the specific value of $`\sigma `$ due to the fact the Guassian is not normalized. As more terms are included in the sum, the natural linewidths decrease and the convolution becomes more accurate. It is then possible to produce high-resolution lines by using smaller variances. For example, using $`10^5`$ zeros, we produced lines with a variance $`\sigma =0.01`$. It would be useful to know how many primes can be resolved using a prescribed number of zeros. In the present scheme, one simply observes where the lines of the original signal develop a sufficiently large width. The important criterion here is that all linewidths should be at least smaller than the mean spacing between all powers of primes in the interval of interest. Of course, the width of any line is related to the number of terms used in truncating the series. Although this relationship can be determined, there is still the problem that all the lines have different shapes. Thus, we shall find it more useful to determine for what values of $`x`$ the truncated formula can no longer produce lines of a specific uniform shape.

### III.2 Sum Rule and Numerical Convergence

The convergence of the series can be examined using a more controlled application of the convolution procedure described above. The general idea is to construct a series (“sum rule”) that absolutely converges to a “coarse-grained” version of the exact density. This density is obtained by replacing all spikes of the exact density by smooth peaked functions. One immediate advantage is improved convergence since it is easier to reproduce the well-defined *smooth* peaked functions of a coarse-grained density using a truncated sum rule than it is to reproduce spikes using the original truncated series. However, for our purposes, the more important reason for using a sum rule is to *control* the convergence of the series. This will become evident after the sum rule is given. The sum rule itself is obtained from a direct convolution of the original series with a “smoothing function”, that is, some smooth function whose Fourier coefficients rapidly decrease. (Since the original series consists of cosines, the resulting integral is essentially a cosine transform of the smoothing function.)

The above discussion is quite general. We now connect this idea with the numerical calculations described above. Assume the coarse-grained density consists of a set of Gaussian functions of variance $`\sigma `$ centered at each prime (or prime power) with heights equal to unity (or the reciprocal power). We want to construct a series as described above that converges to this density, that is, we want to find a Gaussian sum rule for Riemann’s series. To do this, we convolve Riemann’s series term-by-term with a Gaussian smoothing function. For the following calculation, we will define $`S_\alpha (x)=\alpha \mathrm{ln}x`$ and $`A(x)=2/\sqrt{x}\mathrm{ln}x`$. Then, we can write Riemann’s formula as $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(x)=A(x)_\alpha \text{Re}\{\mathrm{exp}[iS_\alpha (x)]\}`$. The Gaussian sum rule is

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\sigma (x)`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(x)G_\sigma (x)={\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}\stackrel{~}{\rho }(x^{})e^{(xx^{})^2/2\sigma ^2}\text{d}x^{}`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\text{Re}\left\{{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}A(x^{})e^{iS_\alpha (x^{})}e^{(xx^{})^2/2\sigma ^2}\text{d}x^{}\right\},x>1.`$
For $`\sigma \sigma _{\text{max}}=1/2`$, the Gaussian rapidly decays to zero. This implies that the main contribution to the integral comes from a small interval centered about $`x^{}=x`$. Elsewhere, the integrand is practically zero. Thus, we make two approximations to proceed further. First, the amplitude function $`A(x^{})`$ changes very slowly and on the small interval of interest $`A(x^{})A(x)`$. Secondly, the phase function $`S_\alpha (x^{})`$ can be replaced by its Taylor series expansion about $`x^{}=x`$: $`S_\alpha (x^{})=S_\alpha (x)+S_\alpha ^{}(x)(x^{}x)+\mathrm{}`$. If we retain the leading-order term only,

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\sigma (x)`$ $``$ $`A(x){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\text{Re}\left\{{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}e^{i[S_\alpha (x)+S_\alpha ^{}(x)(x^{}x)]}e^{(xx^{})^2/2\sigma ^2}\text{d}x^{}\right\}`$ (8)
$`=`$ $`A(x){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\text{Re}\left\{e^{i[S_\alpha (x)xS_\alpha ^{}(x)]}e^{x^2/2\sigma ^2}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}e^{[x^2(2x+2i\sigma ^2S_\alpha ^{}(x))x^{}]/2\sigma ^2}\text{d}x^{}\right\}`$
$`=`$ $`\sqrt{2\pi }\sigma A(x){\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}e^{\sigma ^2S_\alpha ^2(x)/2}\text{Re}\left\{e^{iS_\alpha (x)}\right\},`$
where we have used the standard result for the Gaussian integral . Finally, the Gaussian sum rule for Riemann’s series is

$`\stackrel{~}{\rho }_\sigma (x)={\displaystyle \frac{2\sqrt{2\pi }\sigma }{\sqrt{x}\mathrm{ln}x}}{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}e^{\sigma ^2\alpha ^2/2x^2}\mathrm{cos}(\alpha \mathrm{ln}x).`$ (9)
This sum rule explicitly shows the effect of convolution on the series; each term is modulated by an exponential factor. This factor essentially controls the convergence of the series for all values of $`x`$. Although the orginal series is only conditionally convergent, as long as the correct ordering is used, this sum rule is also *absolutely* convergent. As stated above, we seek an approximate relation between the maximum zero included in the sum and the maximum prime that can be resolved. One way to determine this is as follows. First, specify the value of the largest zero, $`\alpha _{\text{max}}`$ and include all zeros $`\alpha \alpha _{\text{max}}`$. Then, there exists a set of values $`x<x_{\text{max}}`$ for which the exponential factor falls below some threshold parameter $`\epsilon `$. This condition immediately gives the simple relation

$$x_{\text{max}}=\left[\frac{\sigma }{\sqrt{2\mathrm{ln}(\epsilon )}}\right]\alpha _{\text{max}},$$
(10)
where $`0<\epsilon <M`$. For $`\alpha >\alpha _{\text{max}}`$ and $`xx_{\text{max}}`$, all terms are exponentially smaller than $`\epsilon `$ and are thus numerically insignificant. The choice of the parameter $`\epsilon `$ depends on the desired precision of a resolved line. An upper bound $`M`$ for the parameter is the value of the exponential factor ($`e^{3/2}`$) at its inflection point $`x_I=(1/\sqrt{3})\sigma \alpha `$ . This implies $`x_{\text{max}}<x_I`$. The lower bound can be as small as machine zero (for example $`10^{16}`$). However, there is no reason for such an extreme choice since we are mostly interested in determining where numerical errors become significant (i.e. where lines are no longer *visibly* resolved and the intensities are erroneous by more than 1%). Of course, higher precision can be imposed at the cost of resolving fewer primes. But, since the improved precision will not be apparent in the graph of $`\rho _\sigma (x)`$, there is no compelling reason to choose exceedingly small values. For our purposes, a convenient choice is $`\epsilon =e^{7/2}`$.

We now provide a few examples to illustrate the utility of relation (10). As a first example, we take $`\alpha _{\text{max}}9878`$ which is the $`10^4`$th zero. Using the above formula (with $`\sigma =0.1`$) yields $`x_{\text{max}}373`$. In Fig. 4, we evaluate Eq. (9) using the first $`10^4`$ zeros (and include the smooth term). One can clearly see significant errors for $`x>400`$. As a second example, we take $`\alpha _{\text{max}}74921`$ (the $`10^5`$th zero). The formula then gives $`x_{\text{max}}2832`$. In Fig. 5, we truncate Eq. (9) at this value of $`\alpha _{\text{max}}`$ and observe significant errors occur for $`x>2900`$.

An additional benefit of the sum rule is that it gives us an immediate measure of the error incurred from truncation. The largest errors are in the vicinity of $`x_{\text{max}}`$ where there are contributions $`O(\epsilon )`$ that have been excluded. For all other values of $`x<x_{\text{max}}`$, the excluded terms are exponentially smaller. Of course, we have complete control of this error through our freedom in specifying $`\epsilon `$. In the case of the original truncated series, it is not immediately obvious what the errors are, but they can be determined through more elaborate analysis.

## IV Discussion and Conclusion

By writing $`\zeta (\gamma +it)=|\zeta (\gamma +it)|\mathrm{exp}(i\theta _\gamma (t))`$, we see that all the information about the zeros along the $`t`$axis is contained in the phase $`\theta _\gamma (t)`$. This has to jump by $`\pi `$ to accomodate the sign change in $`\zeta `$ at every zero, and it can be shown that the oscillating part of the density of the zeros on the critical line is proportional to the derivative of the imaginry part of $`\mathrm{ln}\zeta (t)`$ with respect to $`t`$ . On the other hand, we see from Eq. (2) that the appropriate contour integral over $`\mathrm{ln}\zeta (\beta )`$ also yields $`\rho (x)`$ relating to the primes. Thus, the phase of the zeta function, as defined above, connects the Riemann zeros to the primes.

As mentioned above, if the series is truncated, the signal gradually dies out as $`x`$ increases. This can be understood by noting that due to the logarithmic dependence, each term produces an oscillation whose period continually increases while its amplitude decays. Clearly, more high frequency (large $`\alpha `$) terms are required for sufficient constructive interference. This explains the fact that lines at small values of $`x`$ are resolved more quickly than at larger values. Although the higher frequency terms are responsible for short-range oscillations and one could imagine exclusive use of those terms rather than lower frequency terms, the difficulty is the conditional convergence of the series and the fact that all of the terms are equally important. Unfortunately, this implies that Riemann’s formula is impractical for resolving lines at large primes. This is also consistent with Eq. (10). If one is interested in using Riemann’s series to find (new) large primes, for example, on the order of $`10^{250,000}`$, then one requires an accurate knowledge of roughly the same number of zeros.

We emphasize that Riemann’s formula, is only correct if the Riemann hypothesis is true. Otherwise, if a pair of zeros occur at $`\beta _\pm =\gamma \pm i\alpha `$, the factor $`x^{1/2}`$ in the denominator of the oscillating term of Eq. (3) should be replaced by $`x^{(1\gamma )}`$ . An interesting numerical experiment is to move the zeros off the critical line, that is, to arbitrarily change their real parts. We find this still produces lines at the primes and their powers, but the relative intensities are incorrect. This is interesting since it demonstrates that the location of the primes depends only on the imaginary part of the zero. The real part only affects the intensities which are anyway not evident from a direct evaluation of the series. This provides another motivation for the numerical and analytical procedures described in this paper.

It is natural to compare the oscillating part of the density $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(x)`$ with the semiclassical trace formula  of a dynamical system. One could identify $`\alpha `$ as an orbit label, one for each zero of the zeta function and $`x`$ as the single-particle energy variable. Then, $`\rho (x)`$ in Eq. (3) may be interpreted as the density of states as a function of energy with the first term on the RHS corresponding to the smooth Thomas-Fermi (TF) contribution . In the oscillating part, the argument $`\alpha \mathrm{ln}x`$ of the cosine term should then correspond to the action $`S_\alpha (x)`$ of the orbit $`\alpha `$. Note however that there are no implicit repetition indices in Eq. (3) thereby implying that even if one gives a dynamical interpretation to $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }(x)`$, the orbits are not periodic. This is in direct contrast to the trace formula for the Riemann zeros, in which the orbits are periodic with primitive period $`\mathrm{ln}p`$ for each prime . Of course, the most striking feature is that the amplitude has no $`\alpha `$ dependence. Even oscillatory contributions to the density of states from non-periodic trajectories usually have amplitudes that depend on the orbit . In the event that there is a fortuitous cancellation of the index $`\alpha `$, it is unlikely that the energy dependence in the denominator of the oscillating term as well as the TF term can then be generated consistently by the same Hamiltonian. Consequently, Riemann’s formula is not a trace formula of dynamical origin.

With regard to spectral statistics, it is well known that nearest-neighbour spacings (NNS)  of the Riemann zeros obey the GUE distribution of Random Matrix Theory, characteristic of a chaotic quantum system without time-reversal symmetry . The same zeros also generate the spectrum of the primes and their powers through Riemann’s formula (3). As mentioned earlier, the NNS distribution of the primes is Poisson-like , with some level repulsion, which, if at all of dynamic origin, hints only to near-integrability . Thus, it is quite remarkable that the highly-correlated sequence of the zeros can (through Riemann’s formula) interfere to produce the almost-uncorrelated sequence of the primes.

In conclusion, we have demonstrated that the spectrum of the primes and their integer powers can be accurately generated from a sum of periodic terms, each term involving a zero of the zeta function. This is in the spirit of semiclassical periodic orbit theory, where the individual levels of a quantum spectrum may be resolved from a sum of oscillatory terms, each arising from periodic orbits. Despite the accuracy of the generated spectrum, Riemann’s formula is not a trace formula. However, this does not imply that there is no such formula, and it would still be interesting to understand the spectrum of the primes in terms of periodic orbits. This could provide insight into the structure of a possible trace formula for the primes. If this formula could be found, the remaining challenge would be to obtain the corresponding Hamiltonian.

###### Acknowledgements.

We acknowledge Ranjan Bhaduri, Randy Dumont, Avinash Khare, John Nieminen, Muoi Tran, Jim Waddington for useful discussions, and Andrew Odlyzko for supplying the Riemann zeros. This work was financially supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).


format: text

text:
# Highest Energy Neutrino Showers in EUSO

## Introduction: EUSO and GZK $`\nu `$

The very possible discover of an UHECR astronomy, the solution of the GZK paradox, the very urgent rise of an UHE neutrino astronomy are among the main goals of EUSO project. This advanced experiment in a very near future will encompass AGASA-HIRES and AUGER and observe for highest cosmic ray showers on Earth Atmosphere recording their tracks from International Space Station by Telescope facing dawn-ward the Earth. Most of the scientific community is puzzled by the many mysteries of UHECRs: their origination because of their apparent isotropy, is probably extragalactic. However the UHECR events are not clustered to any nearby AGN, QSRs or Known GRBs within the narrow (10-30 Mpc radius) volume defined by the cosmic 2.75 $`K^o`$ proton drag viscosity (the so called GZK cut-off ). The recent doublets and triplets clustering found by AGASA seem to favor compact object (as AGN) over more exotic topological relic models, mostly fine tuned in mass (GUT, Planck one) and time decay rate to fit all the observed spectra. However the missing AGN within a GZK volume is wondering. A possible remarkable correlation recently shows that most of the UHECR event cluster point toward BL Lac sources . This correlation favors a cosmic origination for UHECRs, well above the near GZK volume. In this frame a relic neutrino mass ,  $`m_\nu 0.4`$ eV or ($`m_\nu 0.1÷5`$ eV) may solve the GZK paradox  , ,,,, overcoming the proton opacity being ZeV UHE neutrinos transparent (even from cosmic edges to cosmic photon Black Body drag) while interacting in resonance with relic neutrinos masses in dark halos (Z-burst or Z-WW showering models). These light neutrino masses do not solve the galactic or cosmic dark matter problem but it is well consistent with old and recent solar neutrino oscillation evidences ,, and most recent claims by KamLAND  of anti-neutrino disappearance (all in agreement within a Large Mixing Angle neutrino model and $`\mathrm{}m_{\nu }^{}{}_{}{}^{2}710^5eV^2`$) as well as these light masses are in agreement with atmospheric neutrino mass splitting ($`\mathrm{}m_\nu 0.07`$ eV) and in fine tune with more recent neutrino double beta decay experiment mass claim $`m_\nu 0.4`$ eV . In this Z-WW Showering for light neutrino mass models large fluxes of UHE $`\nu `$ are necessary,,, , or higher than usual gray-body spectra of target relic neutrino or better clustering are needed : indeed a heaviest neutrino mass $`m_\nu 1.22.2`$ eV while still being compatible with known bounds, might better gravitationally cluster leading to denser dark local-galactic halos and lower neutrino fluxes. It should remarked that in this frame the main processes leading to UHECR above GZK are mainly the WW-ZZ and the t-channel interactions ,. These expected UHE neutrino fluxes might and must be experienced in complementary and independent tests.

## 1  UHE $`\nu `$ Astronomy by the $`\tau `$ Showering

While longest $`\mu `$ tracks in $`km^3`$ underground detector have been, in last three decades, the main searched UHE neutrino signal, Tau Air-showers by UHE neutrinos generated in Mountain Chains or within Earth skin crust at Pevs up to GZK ($`>10^{19}`$ eV) energies have been recently proved to be a new powerful amplifier in Neutrino Astronomy , ,,,. This new Neutrino $`\tau `$ detector will be (at least) complementary to present and future, lower energy, $`\nu `$ underground $`km^3`$ telescope projects (from AMANDA,Baikal, ANTARES, NESTOR, NEMO, IceCube). In particular Horizontal Tau Air shower may be naturally originated by UHE $`\nu _\tau `$ at GZK energies crossing the thin Earth Crust at the Horizon showering far and high in the atmosphere ,, ,,. UHE $`\nu _\tau `$ are abundantly produced by flavour oscillation and mixing from muon (or electron) neutrinos, because of the large galactic and cosmic distances respect to the neutrino oscillation ones (for already known neutrino mass splitting). Therefore EUSO may observe many of the above behaviours and it may constrains among models and fluxes and it may also answer open standing questions. I will briefly enlist, in this first preliminary presentation, the main different signatures and rates of UHECR versus UHE $`\nu `$ shower observable by EUSO at 10% duty cycle time within a 3 year record period, offering a first estimate of their signals. Part of the results on UHECR are probably well known, even here it is re-estimated. Part of the results, regarding the UPTAUs and HORTAUs, are new and they rule the UHE $`\nu `$ Astronomy in EUSO.

## 2 Upward UHE $`\nu `$ Showering in Air

Let us first consider the last kind of Upward $`\tau `$ signals due to their interaction in Air or in Earth Crust. The Earth opacity will filter mainly $`10^{14}10^{15}`$eV upward events ,,,,; therefore only the direct $`\nu `$ shower in air or the UPTAUs around PeVs will be able to flash toward EUSO in a narrow beam ($`2.510^5`$ solid angle) jet blazing apparently at $`10^{19}10^{20}`$eV energy. The shower will be opened in a fan like shape and it will emerge from the Earth atmosphere spread as a triplet or multi-dot signal aligned orthogonal to local terrestrial magnetic field. This signature will be easily revealed. However the effective observed air mass by EUSO is not $`10\%`$ (because duty cycle) of the inspected air volume $`150km^3`$, but because of the narrow blazing shower cone it corresponds to only to $`3.7210^3`$ $`km^3`$. The target volume increases for upward neutrino Tau interacting vertically in Earth Crust in last matter layer (either rock or water), making upward relativistic $`PeVs`$ $`\tau `$ whose decay in air born finally an UPTAUs; in this case the effective target mass is (for water or rock) respectively $`5.510^2`$$`km^3`$ or $`1.510^1`$ $`km^3`$. These volume are not extreme. The consequent foreseen thresholds are summirized for $`3`$ EUSO years of data recording in Figure $`4`$. The UPTAUs signal is nearly $`15`$ times larger than the Air-Induced $`\nu `$ Shower. A more detailed analysis may show an additional factor three (due to the neutrino flavours) in favor of Air-Induced Showers, but the more transparent role of PeV multi-generating upward $`\nu _\tau `$ while crossing the Earth, makes the result summirized in figure. The much wider acceptance of BATSE respect EUSO and the consequent better threshold (in BATSE) is due to the wider angle view of the gamma detector, the absence of any suppression factor as in EUSO duty cycle, as well as the $`10`$ (for BATSE) over $`3`$ (for EUSO) years assumed of record life-time. Any minimal neutrino fluence $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\nu _\tau }`$ of PeVs neutrino

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{\nu _\tau }10^2eVcm^2s^1$$

might be detectable by EUSO.

## 3 Downward and Horizontal UHECRs

Let us now briefly reconsider the nature of common Ultra High Cosmic Rays (UHECR) showers. Their rate will offer a useful test for any additional UHE neutrino signals. Let us assume for sake of simplicity a characteristic opening angle of EUSO telescope of $`30^o`$ and a nominal satellite height of $`400`$ km, leading to an approximate atmosphere area under inspection of EUSO $`1.510^5km^2`$. Let us discuss the UHECR shower: It has been estimated (and it is easy to verify) a $`210^3`$ event/year rate above $`310^{19}`$ eV. Among these ”GZK” UHECR (either proton, nuclei or $`\gamma `$) nearly $`7.45\%150`$ event/year will shower in Air Horizontally with no Cherenkov hit on the ground. The critical angle $`6.7^o`$ corresponding to $`7.45\%`$ of all the events, is derived from first interacting quota (here assumed for Horizontal Hadronic Shower near $`44`$ km following ,,): Indeed the corresponding horizontal edge critical angle $`\theta _h`$ $`=`$ $`6.7^o`$ below the horizons ($`\pi /2`$) is found (for an interacting height h near $`44`$ km):$`\theta _h=\mathrm{arccos}\frac{R_{}}{(R_{}+h_1)}1^o\sqrt{\frac{h_1}{km}}`$. These Horizontal High Altitude Showers (HIAS),, will be able to define a new peculiar showering, mostly very long (hundred kms) and bent and forked (by few or several degrees) by local geo-magnetic fields. The total UHECR above $`310^{19}`$ eV will be $`6000`$ UHECR and $`450`$ Horizontal Shower within 3 years; these latter horizontal signals are relevant because they may mimic Horizontal induced $`\nu `$ Air-Shower, but mainly at high quota ($`3040km`$) and down-ward. On the contrary UHE neutrino tau showering, HORTAUs, to be discussed later, are also at high quota ($`23km`$), but upward-horizontal. Their outcoming angle will be ($`0.2^o3^o`$) upward. Therefore a good angular ($`0.20.1^o`$) resolution to distinguish between the two signal will be a key discriminator. While Horizontal UHECR are an important piece of evidence in the UHECR calibration and its GZK study , at the same time they are a severe back-ground noise competitive with Horizontal-Vertical GZK Neutrino Showers originated in Air, to be discussed below. However Horizontal-downward UHECR are not confused with upward Horizontal HORTAUs by UHE neutrinos to be summirized in last section. Note that Air-Induced Horizontal UHE neutrino as well as all down-ward Air-Induced UHE $`\nu `$ will shower mainly at lower altitudes ($`10km`$) ; however they are respectively only a small ($`2\%`$, $`8\%`$) fraction than HORTAUs showers to be discussed in the following. An additional factor $`3`$ due to their three flavour over $`\tau `$ unique one may lead to respectively ($`6\%`$, $`24\%`$) of all HORTAUs events: a contribute ratio that may be in principle an useful test to study the balanced neutrino flavour mixing.

## 4  Air Induced UHE $`\nu `$ Shower

UHE $`\nu `$ may hit an air nuclei and shower vertically or horizontally or more rarely nearly up-ward: its trace maybe observable by EUSO preferentially in inclined or horizontal case. Indeed Vertical Down-ward ($`\theta 60^o`$) neutrino induced Air Shower occur mainly at lowest quota and they will only partially shower their UHE $`\nu `$ energy because of the small slant depth ($`10^3gcm^2`$) in most vertical down-ward UHE $`\nu `$ shower. The observed EUSO air mass ($`1500km^3`$, corresponding to a $`150`$ $`km^3`$ for $`10\%`$ EUSO record time) is only ideally the UHE neutrino calorimeter. Indeed inclined ($`\theta 60^o`$) and horizontal Air-Showers ($`\theta 83^o`$) (induced by GZK UHE neutrino) may reach their maximum output and their event maybe observed ; therefore only a small fraction ($`30\%`$ corresponding to $`50`$ $`km^3`$ mass-water volume for EUSO observation) of vertical downward UHE neutrino may be seen by EUSO. This signal may be somehow hidden or masked by the more common down-ward UHECR showers. The key reading signature will be the shower height origination: $`(40km)`$ for most downward-horizontal UHECR, $`(10km)`$ for most inclined-horizontal Air UHE $`\nu `$ Induced Shower. A corresponding smaller fraction ($`7.45\%`$) of totally Horizontal UHE neutrino Air shower, orphan of their final Cherenkov flash, in competition with the horizontal UHECR, may be also clearly observed: their observable mass is only $`V_{Air\nu Hor}`$ $`11.1`$ $`km^3`$ for EUSO observation duty-cycle. These masses reflect into a characteristic threshold behaviour shown by bounds in Figure $`7`$.

### 4.1  UHE $`\nu _\tau \tau `$ Double Bang Shower

A more rare, but spectacular, double $`\nu _\tau `$-$`\tau `$ bang in Air (comparable in principle to the PeVs expected ”double bang” in water ) may be exciting, but difficult to be observed; the EUSO effective calorimeter mass for such Horizontal event is only $`10\%`$ of the UHE $`\nu `$ Horizontal ones (($`1.1`$ $`km^3`$)); therefore its event rate is nearly excluded needing a too high neutrino fluxes see Fig.$`6`$; indeed it should be also noted that the EUSO energy threshold ($`310^{19}`$eV) imply such a very large $`\tau `$ Lorents boost distance; such large $`\tau `$ track exceed (by more than a factor three) the EUSO disk Area diameter ($`450`$km); therefore the expected Double Bang Air-Horizontal-Induced $`\nu `$ Shower thresholds are suppressed by a corresponding factor as shown in Figure $`6`$. More abundant single event Air-Induced $`\nu `$ Shower (Vertical or Horizontal) thresholds are facing different Air volumes and quite different visibility as shown and summirized in $`Fig7`$. It must be taken into account an additional factor three (because of three light neutrino states) in the Air-Induced $`\nu `$ Shower arrival flux respect to incoming $`\nu _\tau `$ (and $`\overline{\nu _\tau }`$ ), making the Air target not totally a negligible calorimeter.

### 4.2  UHE $`\nu _\tau \tau `$ Air Single Bang Shower

There are also a sub-category of $`\nu _\tau `$ \- $`\tau `$ ”double bang” due to a first horizontal UHE $`\nu _\tau `$ charged current interaction in air nuclei (the first bang) that is lost from the EUSO view; their UHE secondary $`\tau `$ fly and decay leading to a Second Air-Induced Horizontal Shower, within the EUSO disk area. These horizontal ”Double-Single $`\tau `$ Air Bang” Showers (or if you like popular terminology, these Air-Earth Skimming neutrinos or just Air-HORTAU event) are produced within a very wide Terrestrial Crown Air Area whose radius is exceeding $`600800`$ km surrounding the EUSO Area of view. However it is easy to show that they will just double the Air-Induced $`\nu `$ Horizontal Shower rate due to one unique flavour. Therefore the total Air-Induced Horizontal Shower (for all $`3`$ flavours and the additional $`\tau `$ decay in flight) are summirized and considered in Fig.7. The relevant UHE neutrino signal, as discussed below, are due to the Horizontal Tau Air-Showers originated within the (much denser)Earth Crust:the called HORTAUs (or Earth Skimming $`\nu _\tau `$).

## 5 UHE $`\nu _\tau \tau `$ from Earth Skin: HORTAUs

As already mention the UHE $`\nu `$ astronomy maybe greatly amplified by $`\nu _\tau `$ appearance via flavour mixing and oscillations. The consequent scattering of $`\nu _\tau `$ on the Mountains or into the Earth Crust may lead to Horizontal Tau Air-Showers :HORTAUs (or so called Earth Skimming Showers ,,). Indeed UHE $`\nu _\tau `$ may skip below the Earth and escape as $`\tau `$ and finally decay in flight, within air atmosphere, as well as inside the Area of view of EUSO, as shown in Figure $`8`$. Any UHE-GZK Tau Air Shower induced event is approximately born within a wide ring (whose radiuses extend between $`R300`$ and $`R800`$ km from the EUSO Area center). Because of the wide area and deep $`\tau `$ penetration ,, the amount of interacting matter where UHE $`\nu `$ may lead to $`\tau `$ is huge ($`210^5`$ $`km^3`$) ;however only a tiny fraction of these HORTAUs will beam and Shower within the EUSO Area within EUSO.After carefully estimate (using also results in ,, ,) I probed a lower bound (in sea matter) for these effective Volumes respectively at ($`1.110^{19}`$eV) and at ($`310^{19}`$ eV) energy:

$$V_{eff}A_{EUSO}\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{sin}\delta \stackrel{~}{\theta }_{h_1}l_\tau \delta \stackrel{~}{\theta }_{h_1}$$
(1)
The above geometrical quantities $`\delta \stackrel{~}{\theta }_{h_1}`$,$`l_\tau `$, are the Earth Skimming or HORTAU angle and tau interaction lenght defined in reference  while $`A_{EUSO}`$ is the EUSO Area. Assuming a characteristic EUSO radius of $`225`$ km and at above energies one obtains a lower bound:

$$V_{eff}5.1310^3km^3$$

$$V_{eff}6.2510^3km^3$$

These are the bounds applied in red curves in figures. A more exact and detailed derivation offer a larger Volume:

$$V_{eff}A_{EUSO}(\mathrm{sin}\delta \stackrel{~}{\theta }_{h_1})^2l_\tau $$
(2)
These volumes are twice the above considered bounds but are not discussed here. Therefore at GZK energies ($`1.110^{19}`$eV) the horizontal $`\tau `$ by HORTAUs are more than $`50`$ times more abundant than any corresponding Horizontal Air Induced at energy $`10^{19}`$eV neutrino air-induced at the same energy. It should be remind that all these bound for EUSO in figure are already suppressed by a factor $`0.1`$ due to minimal EUSO duty cycle.

However the Air-Shower induced neutrino may reflect all three light neutrino flavours, while HORTAUs are made only by $`\nu _\tau `$,$`\overline{\nu _\tau }`$ flavour. Nevertheless the dominant role of HORTAUs overcome (by a factor $`15`$) all other Horizontal EUSO neutrino event: their expected event rate are, at $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu 310^3`$ eV $`cm^2s^1`$ neutrino fluence (as in Z-Shower model in Figure $`910`$), a few hundred event a year and they may already be comparable or even may exceed the expected Horizontal CR rate. Dash curves for both HORTAUs and Horizontal Cosmic Rays are drawn assuming an EUSO threshold at $`10^{19}`$eV. Because the bounded $`\tau `$ flight distance (due to the contained terrestrial atmosphere height) the main signal is better observable at $`1.110^{19}`$eV than higher energies as emphasized in Fig.$`910`$ at different threshold curves.

## 6 Conclusions

Highest Energy Neutrino signals may be well observable by next generation satellite as EUSO: the main source of such neutrino traces are UPTAUs (Upward Tau blazing the telescope born in Earth Crust) and mainly HORTAUs (Horizontal Tau Air-Showers originated by an Earth-Skimming UHE $`\nu _\tau `$). These showers will be opened in a characteristic thin fan-jet ovals like the $`8`$-shape horizontal cosmic ray observed on Earth. The UPTAUs will arise mainly at PeV energies (because the Earth neutrino opacity at higher energies and because the shorter $`\tau `$ boosted lenght , at lower energies); UPTAUs will be detected as a thin stretched multi-pixel event by EUSO, whose orientation is polarized orthogonal to local geo-magnetic field. The EUSO sensibility (effective volume ($`V_{eff}`$$`0.1km^3`$) for 3 years of detection) will be deeper an order of magnitude below present AMANDA-Baikal bounds. Horizontal Tau Air-Shower at GZK energies will be better searched and revealed. They are originated along huge Volumes around the EUSO Area. Their horizontal skimming secondary $`\tau `$ decay occur far away $`500`$ km, at high altitude ($`2040`$ km) and it will give clear signals distinguished from downward horizontal UHECR. HORTAUs are grown by UHE neutrino interactions inside huge volumes ($`V_{eff}`$$`51306250km^3`$) respectively for incoming neutrino energy $`E_{\nu _\tau }`$ $`10^{19}`$ eV and $`310^{19}`$ eV. To obtain these results we applied the procedure described in recent articles ,,. As summirized in last Figures the expected UHE fluence

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu 10^3eVcm^2s^1$$

needed in most Z-Shower models (as well as in most topological relic scenario) to solve GZK puzzles, will lead to nearly a hundred of horizontal events a year comparable to UHECR ones. Even in the most conservative scenario where a minimal GZK-$`\nu `$ fluence must take place (at least at

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\nu 10eVcm^2s^1$$

,just comparable to well observed Cosmic Ray fluence), a few or a ten of such UHE astrophysical neutrino must be observed (respectively at $`10^{19}`$ eV and $`310^{19}`$ eV energy windows) during three year of EUSO data recording. To improve their visibility EUSO must, in our opinion one may:
a) Improve the fast pattern recognition of Horizontal Shower Tracks with their few distant dots with forking signature.
b) Enlarge the Telescope Radius to embrace also lower $`10^{19}`$ eV energy thresholds where UHE neutrino signals are enhanced.
c) Consider a detection at angular $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta `$ and at height $`\mathrm{\Delta }h`$ level within an accuracy $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta 0.2^o`$,$`\mathrm{\Delta }h2`$ km.
Even all the above results have been derived carefully following ,, in a minimal realistic framework they may be used within $`10\%`$ nominal value due to the present uncertain in EUSO detection capabilities.

### Acknowledgment

The author wish to thank Prof. Livio Scarsi for inspiring the present search as well as the EUSO collaboration for the exciting discussion during November workshop in Rome; the author thanks also C.Leto and P.G.De Sanctis Lucentini and M.Teshima for support and technical suggestions.

## References


text:
# Comment on “Stimulated Raman adiabatic passage from an atomic to a molecular Bose-Einstein condensate”

Currently also at \]Department of Physics, University of Turku, FIN-20014 Turun yliopisto, Finland.

## Abstract

Collective two-color photoassociation of a freely-interacting 87Rb Bose-Einstein condensate is theoretically examined, focusing on stimulated Raman adiabatic passage (STIRAP) from an atomic to a stable molecular condensate. In particular, Drummond et al. \[Phys. Rev. A65, 063619 (2002)\] have predicted that particle-particle interactions can limit the efficiency of collective atom-molecule STIRAP, and that optimizing the laser parameters can partially overcome this limitation. We suggest that the molecular conversion efficiency can be further improved by treating the initial condensate density as an optimization parameter.

Stimulated Raman adiabatic passage (STIRAP) from an atomic to a molecular condensateMAC00  in the presence of particle-particle interactions was recently investigated HOP01 ; DRU02 . In particular, Drummond et al. DRU02  predict that, for a 87Rb Bose-Einstein condensate (BEC) of typical density ($`\rho 10^{14}\mathrm{cm}^3`$), the STIRAP conversion efficiency can be limited in practice by two-photon dephasing caused by particle interactions, and that said limitation can be partially overcome by optimizing the laser parameters. The purpose of this Comment is to suggest that the role of particle-particle interactions can be further downplayed, and the conversion efficiency improved, by treating the initial condensate density as an additional optimization parameter.

The mean-field equations for collective two-color photoassociation of a freely-interacting gas can be written

$`i\dot{a}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{aa}|a|^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ag}|g|^2\right)a\chi a^{}b,`$ (1a)
$`i\dot{b}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\delta \frac{1}{2}i\gamma _s\right)b\frac{1}{2}\left(\chi aa+\mathrm{\Omega }g\right),`$ (1b)
$`i\dot{g}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ag}|a|^2+\mathrm{\Lambda }_{gg}|g|^2\right)g\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Omega }b,`$ (1c)
where the complex amplitudes $`a`$, $`b`$, and $`g`$ represent the respective atomic, excited-molecular, and stable-molecular condensates. The laser-matter interactions that drive the respective atom-molecule and molecule-molecule transitions are $`\chi (t)=\chi _0\mathrm{exp}[\left(tD_1\right)^2/T^2]`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }(t)=\mathrm{\Omega }_0\mathrm{exp}[\left(tD_2\right)^2/T^2]`$, where $`\chi _0`$ includes the effects of Bose-enhancement MAC00 , i.e., $`\chi _0\sqrt{\rho }`$ . The two-photon (intermediate) detuning is $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ ($`\delta `$), and the mean-field shift due to atom-atom (atom-molecule, molecule-molecule) interactions is $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{aa}=\rho \lambda _{aa}=4\pi \mathrm{}\rho a_{aa}/m`$ ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ag}=\rho \lambda _{gg}=3\pi \mathrm{}\rho a_{ag}/m`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{gg}=\rho \lambda _{gg}=2\pi \mathrm{}\rho a_{gg}/m`$), where $`m`$ is the atom mass and $`a_{aa}`$ ($`a_{ag}`$, $`a_{gg}`$) is the atom-atom (atom-molecule, molecule-molecule) scattering length. Spontaneous decay is included with the rate $`\gamma _s`$, which is generally large enough to justify neglect of any mean-field shifts for the excited-molecular state.

Explicit numbers for 87Rb are DRU02  $`\gamma _s=7.4\times 10^7\mathrm{s}^1`$, $`\chi _0=2.1\times 10^6\sqrt{\rho /\rho _0}\mathrm{s}^1`$, $`\rho _0=4.3\times 10^{14}\mathrm{cm}^3`$, $`\lambda _{aa}=4.96\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^3/\mathrm{s}`$, $`\lambda _{ag}=6.44\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^3/\mathrm{s}`$; although unknown, the stable-molecule mean-field shift $`\lambda _{gg}=2.48\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^3/\mathrm{s}`$ is estimated by assuming equal atom-atom and molecule-molecule scattering lengths.

The idea of optimizing the density of the initial atomic Bose-Einstein condensate is drawn from investigations into forming a molecular condensate via Feshbach-resonant interactionsFESH , i.e., magnetoassociation, where collision-induced vibrational relaxation of the molecules is included as a complex particle-particle scattering length, and where a moderate density helps to alleviate the associated irreversible losses MOD\_DEN .

Consider for example the density $`\rho =4.3\times 10^{12}\mathrm{cm}^1`$, so that $`\chi _0=2.1\times 10^5\mathrm{s}^1`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{aa}=213\mathrm{s}^1`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{gg}=107\mathrm{s}^1`$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{ag}=277\mathrm{s}^1`$. The mean-field shifts are then roughly three orders of magnitude smaller than the peak Bose-enhanced free-bound coupling $`\chi _0`$, and since $`\chi _0`$ sets the timescale for atom-molecule STIRAP MAC00 , we expect a smaller role for particle interactions compared to when $`\rho =\rho _0`$. This intuition is confirmed in Fig. 1. Note that efficient short-pulse conversion requires asymmetric pulses HOP01 ; DRU02 . The optimal density is $`\stackrel{~}{\rho }10^{12}\mathrm{cm}^3`$, for which conversion to a molecular BEC occurs on a timescale $`T=5\times 10^3/\chi _050\mathrm{ms}`$. Optimizing the laser parameters DRU02  should give even further improvement.

Granted, experiments are inhomogeneous and our theory is not. But inhomogeneity may be approximated by averaging over a Thomas-Fermi density distribution, and the subsequent optimal density should be in the same ballpark as the homogeneous prediction. For $`N=5\times 10^5`$ atoms in a spherically symmetric trap, reducing the trap frequency from $`\omega _r/2\pi =100\mathrm{Hz}`$ DRU02  to $`\omega _r/2\pi 1\mathrm{Hz}`$ decreases the peak density to roughly the optimal value. If the photoassociation laser fails to overlap with the expanded BEC for experimentally reasonable intensities, the cloudsize could be adjusted by lowering the atom number, or Feshbach-tuning the scattering length FESH , or a combination thereof.

One-body correlations are neglected as per our original work MAC00  (see also Ref. NAI03 ). Similarly, rogue pair correlations due to photodissociation to noncondensate modes can be prominent for low density JAV02 ; however, the density dependence is weak, and we show elsewhere MAC04  that, as expected, rogue correlations are safely neglected for low excited-state fractions ($`10^6`$) and photodissociation that is much slower than spontaneous decay.

Additional molecular levels and bound-bound transitions induced by the photoassociation laser DRU02  are also neglected. The intermediate detunings herein ($`\delta =\chi _010^6\mathrm{s}^1`$) are trivial compared to the molecular level spacing ($`10^{10}\mathrm{s}^1`$), and the lower density allows for exact two-photon resonance (compared to $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$ in Ref. DRU02 ). Omitting these physics is not unreasonable.

Finally, the so-formed molecules are vibrationally hot DRU02 , and molecule-molecule and atom-molecule collisions may thus foster relaxation to lower-lying vibrational levels. While the quenching rate is unknown, a lower density is favorable on this account also (like the mean-field shifts, the quenching rate is proportional to $`\rho `$), and a lower peak bound-bound Rabi coupling ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_0/\chi _0=50`$ compared to $`10^3`$ DRU02 ) means that, for user-friendly bound-bound laser intensities, it should be possible to target vibrationally cooler (i.e., lower-lying) levels. All told, favorable quenching rates should be achievable.

In conclusion, we suggest that the role of particle-particle collisions can be further downplayed in STIRAP from an atomic to a molecular condensate, and the conversion efficiency thereby improved, by optimizing the initial BEC density along with the laser parameters. Moreover, we have shown elsewhere that Feshbach-tuning the scattering length can improve the molecular conversion efficiency even further MAC04 . Hence, if all available knobs are tweaked, experiments may yet wind up close to the ideal MAC00  of near-unit efficiency.

Support: Academy of Finland (MM, projects 43336 and 50314); Magnus Ehrnrooth Foundation (AC); NSF and NASA (JJ, PHY-0097974 and NAG8-1428); express thanks (from JJ) to Helsinki University of Technology and Matti Kaivola for support and hospitality.


text:
# Construction and enlargement of dilatonic wormholes by impulsive radiation

## I Introduction

Wormholes are tunnels through space-time, linking otherwise separated regions of a single universe, or bridges joining two different universes. Since traversable wormholes were introduced by Morris and Thorne MT  as theoretically allowable space-times in Einstein gravity, wormholes have been pursued as an attractive research topic involving the possibility of rapid interstellar travel and even time machines, as reviewed by Visser V . The properties of static Morris-Thorne wormholes have been studied by many authors and it is known even in non-static situations that a negative-energy source is necessary for traversable wormholes to exist HV1 ; HV2 ; wh ; IH . Assuming such a source, there are interesting and practical problems of clarifying the dynamical nature of wormholes, such as how to construct a traversable wormhole and how to enlarge the throat enough to enable human beings to pass through it.

Not long ago, a unified framework for black holes and traversable wormholes was proposed wh , indicating that they are dynamically interconvertible when the trapping horizons locally characterizing them wh ; IH ; 1st ; bhd  bifurcate or merge. This theory was first concretely confirmed in an exactly soluble model, CGHS two-dimensional dilaton gravity CGHS  with an additional negative-energy scalar field to support wormholes dw , then in standard Einstein gravity numerically SH . In seeking analytic solutions in full Einstein gravity, we have found non-static solutions to be difficult to obtain, except in the idealization of impulsive radiation, where the radiation is concentrated so as to deliver finite energy and momentum in an instant.

In this paper, we construct some of the simplest models of dynamic wormhole processes by employing impulsive radiation in a generalized dilaton gravity model, specifically: wormhole construction from a black hole, wormhole operation by energy balance and wormhole reduction or enlargement. The last point addresses a common belief that, while wormholes are possible or even expected at the Planck scale, large-scale wormholes are unlikely or even impossible. Actually self-inflating wormholes were recently discovered numerically SH , but to date there have been no concrete examples of stable wormhole enlargement, where the wormhole size is controlled.

In Sec. II we review the static CGHS CGHS  black-hole and HKL dw  wormhole solutions and generalize the dilaton gravity model. We find solutions describing the construction of a wormhole from a black hole in Sec. III. In Secs. IV and V, we study processes to change the throat radius of the wormhole by controlling impulsive radiation, either from one universe or from both universes. The final section is devoted to summary.

## II black holes and wormholes in dilaton gravity

The CGHS two-dimensional dilaton gravity CGHS  is generalized by the action dw

$$_S\mu \left[e^{2\varphi }\left(R+4(\varphi )^2+4\lambda ^2\right)\frac{1}{2}(f)^2+\frac{1}{2}(g)^2\right]$$
(1)
where $`S`$ is a 2-manifold, $`\mu `$, $`R`$ and $``$ are the area form, Ricci scalar and covariant derivative of a Lorentz 2-metric on $`S`$, $`\lambda `$ represents a negative cosmological constant, $`\varphi `$ is a scalar dilaton field, $`f`$ is a Klein-Gordon field representing matter and $`g`$ is a ghost Klein-Gordon field. The last term is added to the CGHS action in order that $`g`$ provides the negative energy densities needed to support a traversable wormhole MT ; V ; wh ; HV1 ; HV2 ; IH . By choosing future-pointing null coordinates $`(x^+,x^{})`$, the line element may be written as

$$ds^2=2e^{2\rho }dx^+dx^{}.$$
(2)
Taking the gauge choice $`\rho =\varphi `$ and transforming the dilaton field $`\varphi `$ to $`r=2e^{2\varphi }`$, the field equations reduce to a simple form: the evolution equations

$`_+_{}f`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (3)
$`_+_{}g`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (4)
$`_+_{}r`$ $`=`$ $`4\lambda ^2`$ (5)
and the constraints

$$_\pm _\pm r=(_\pm g)^2(_\pm f)^2.$$
(6)
The field $`r`$ plays a similar role to the areal radius in spherical symmetry cc ; 1st .

In vacuum, $`f=g=0`$, the general solution to the field equations is CGHS

$$r=2m4\lambda ^2x^+x^{}$$
(7)
where the origin has been fixed. The constant $`m`$ may be interpreted as the mass of the space-time, whose global structure has been described previously cc . For $`m>0`$ this describes the CGHS static black hole, analogous to the Schwarzschild black hole. The Penrose diagram is shown in Fig. 1(i).

Recently the solution dw

$$r=a+2\lambda ^2(x^+x^{})^2,g=2\lambda (x^+x^{}),f=0$$
(8)
has been found, where the origin has again been fixed. If $`a>0`$, this represents a traversable wormhole, hereafter called the HKL wormhole, with analogous global structure to a Morris-Thorne wormhole: a throat $`r=a`$ at $`x^+=x^{}`$, joining two regions with $`r>a`$, an $`x^+>x^{}`$ universe and a reflected $`x^+<x^{}`$ universe, as depicted in Fig. 1(ii).

Thus the model naturally contains both static black holes and static traversable wormholes. A characteristic feature of both cases is the trapping horizons, defined by $`rr=0`$, or equivalently $`_+r=0`$ or $`_{}r=0`$ wh ; IH ; 1st ; bhd . In the CGHS black hole, they coincide with the event horizons $`r=2m`$ at $`x^{}=0`$ and $`x^+=0`$ respectively. In the HKL wormhole, there is a double trapping horizon, $`_+r=_{}r=0`$, at the throat $`r=a`$. This illustrates how trapping horizons of different type may be used to locally define both black holes and wormholes wh . Also relevant are the locally trapped regions where $`rr<0`$, consisting of future trapped regions if $`_\pm r<0`$ or past trapped regions if $`_\pm r>0`$, as occur in black holes or white holes respectively. Locating the trapping horizons and the locally trapped regions is a key feature of the analysis of dynamic situations.

In the following, we wish to take delta-function profiles for the radiation energy densities

$$\rho _\pm =(_\pm f)^2(_\pm g)^2$$
(9)
where units have been fixed. To avoid ill-defined square roots of delta functions, the model may be formally generalized to

$`_\pm _\pm r`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _\pm `$ (10)
$`_+_{}r`$ $`=`$ $`4\lambda ^2`$ (11)
$`_\pm \rho _{}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (12)
where the energy densities $`\rho _\pm `$ are now regarded as basic and need not be derived from Klein-Gordon fields. The evolution equations (11-12) have the general solutions

$`r(x^+,x^{})`$ $`=`$ $`r_+(x^+)+r_{}(x^{})4\lambda ^2x^+x^{}`$ (13)
$`\rho _\pm (x^+,x^{})`$ $`=`$ $`\rho _\pm (x^\pm ).`$ (14)
The constraints (10) are preserved by the evolution equations in the $`_{}`$ directions, and so may be reduced to

$$_\pm _\pm r_\pm =\rho _\pm .$$
(15)
The constraints are manifestly integrable for $`r_\pm `$ given initial data

$`\rho _\pm `$ on $`x^{}=x_0^{}`$ (16)
$`(r,_+r,_{}r)`$ at $`x^+=x_0^+`$, $`x^{}=x_0^{}`$ (17)
for constants $`x_0^\pm `$. The data consist of the energy-density profiles of the left-moving and right-moving radiation, plus lower-dimensional data for the metric. Then the general procedure is to specify this initial data according to the desired physical situation, integrate the constraints (15) for $`r_\pm `$, then the solution follows as (13-14). Consequently, the effect of the radiation is much easier to see than in Einstein gravity, though the model shares various physically important features including gravitational collapse to black holes satisfying cosmic censorship cc .

## III construction of a wormhole from a black hole

We study how to construct a traversable wormhole from a black hole by irradiating it with negative energy. Although a similar idea has been studied previously dw , now we present a simpler solution involving impulsive radiation, which is a preliminary to construct an analytic solution in four-dimensional Einstein gravity. We consider a CGHS black hole subjected to impulsive negative-energy radiation at some positive value $`x_0`$ of the Kruskal-like coordinates $`x^\pm `$, with energy density chosen in order to close up the future trapped region by merging its trapping horizons, followed by the constant irradiation needed to maintain the static wormhole:

$`\rho _\pm `$ $`=`$ $`4\lambda ^2x_0\delta (x^\pm x_0)4\lambda ^2\mathrm{\Theta }(x^\pm x_0)`$ (18)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the unit Heaviside step function and $`\delta `$ the Dirac (delta-function) distribution. When differentiating to check solutions, it may be useful to remember that the derivative $`\delta ^{}`$ of the delta function, as a distribution acting on test functions $`f`$, satisfies $`\delta ^{}f=\delta f`$ or $`(\delta f)^{}=0`$. Of course $`\mathrm{\Theta }^{}=\delta `$.

Assuming a black hole of mass $`m`$ in the initial region, we obtain the solution

$`r`$ $`=`$ $`2m4\lambda ^2x^+x^{}+2\lambda ^2(x_{}^{+}{}_{}{}^{2}x_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})\mathrm{\Theta }(x^+x_0)`$ (19)
$`+2\lambda ^2(x_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}x_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})\mathrm{\Theta }(x^{}x_0).`$
The solution in the final region $`x^\pm >x_0`$ can be recognized as an HKL wormhole (8). In more detail, the trapping horizons

$$0=_\pm r=4\lambda ^2\left(x^\pm \mathrm{\Theta }(x^\pm x_0)x^{}\right)$$
(20)
are located at

$$\{\begin{array}{cc}x^{}=0,\hfill & x^\pm <x_0\hfill \\ x^+=x^{},\hfill & x^\pm >x_0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(21)
and their radii are

$$r_0=\{\begin{array}{cc}2m,\hfill & x^\pm <x_0\hfill \\ 2m4\lambda ^2x_0^2,\hfill & x^\pm >x_0.\hfill \end{array}$$
(22)
as depicted in Fig. 2. In this solution, the throat radius $`a=2m4\lambda ^2x_0^2`$ of the wormhole is smaller than the horizon radius $`2m`$ of the initial black hole. Thus we require $`2\lambda ^2x_0^2<m`$ in order that a wormhole is constructed.

The results are similar to the previous solution dw , except that here the trapping horizons move discontinuously rather than continuously, a well-known property under infinitesimally thin mass shells HE . This is a general feature of the solutions presented in this article, stemming from the fact that the field equations or Einstein equations relate $`_\pm _\pm r`$ to the energy densities $`\rho _\pm `$, so that delta-function $`\rho _\pm `$ causes discontinuous $`_\pm r`$. This is, of course, an idealization of a situation where a concentrated packet of radiation causes swift movement of the trapping horizon.

A recently discovered four-dimensional wormhole solution pr  can be similarly constructed from a Schwarzschild black hole in full Einstein gravity KHK . By the time reverse, we can also obtain a picture where a wormhole collapses into a black hole by beaming in impulsive radiation at the moment of switching off the supporting ghost radiation. In this case, the horizon radius of the black hole is larger than the throat radius of the initial wormhole. This reduces to the sudden collapse case dw  without the impulsive radiation and $`x_0=0`$.

## IV wormhole enlargement and reduction

We are interested in how to create wormholes with throat large enough for human beings to pass from one universe to another. It is practically useful if it can be achieved by processes from our universe only. In this section, we study wormhole operation by energy balance from one universe only. We irradiate the wormhole from our universe with impulsive radiation of equal positive and negative energy at different times:

$`\rho _+`$ $`=`$ $`4\lambda ^2\beta ^2\delta (x^+x_0)+\beta ^2\delta (x^+x_1)`$
$`\rho _{}`$ $`=`$ $`4\lambda ^2`$ (23)
where $`x_1>x_0`$, so that the positive-energy impulse follows the negative-energy impulse. Assuming a wormhole of throat radius $`a`$ initially, we obtain the solution

$`r`$ $`=`$ $`a+2\lambda ^2(x^+x^{})^2+\beta ^2(x^+x_0)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^+x_0)`$ (24)
$`\beta ^2(x^+x_1)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^+x_1).`$
The locations of the trapping horizons $`_\pm r=0`$ are given by

$`x^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}x^+,\hfill & x^+<x_0\hfill \\ x^++\beta ^2/4\lambda ^2,\hfill & x_0<x^+<x_1\hfill \\ x^+,\hfill & x^+>x_1\hfill \end{array}`$ (28)
$`x^{}`$ $`=`$ $`x^+.`$
One sees that the wormhole mouth $`_+r=0`$ is shifted out by the negative-energy radiation and back again by the positive-energy radiation, merging with the unmoved $`_{}r=0`$ mouth to leave a static wormhole again, Fig. 3(i). As in the previous section, the sudden shift of the wormhole mouth is due to the impulsive nature of the radiation. The throat radii of the initial and final wormholes are

$$r_0=\{\begin{array}{cc}a,\hfill & x^\pm <x_0\hfill \\ a+\beta ^2(x_1x_0),\hfill & x^\pm >x_1\hfill \end{array}$$
(29)
so that the throat of the final state becomes larger than that of the initial state.

On the other hand, if $`x_1<x_0`$, where the negative-energy impulse follows the positive-energy impulse, the throat of the final state becomes smaller than that of the initial state, Fig. 3(ii). Then we need $`\beta ^2(x_0x_1)<a`$ to obtain a wormhole rather than a naked singularity. If one thinks of the positive-energy impulse as an idealized model of a fast-moving traveller traversing the wormhole, this suggests how to operate and maintain the wormhole for transport, including the back-reaction of the traveller wh . This also demonstrates the stability of the wormhole to such dynamic perturbations.

In summary, the throat radius of the wormhole can be adjusted at will by controlling the energy and timing of impulses. The example demonstrates the property, following from the second law of wormhole dynamics wh , that the wormhole becomes smaller (respectively larger) after an operation in which the wormhole mouths bifurcate to open up a contracting (respectively expanding) region of future (respectively past) trapped surfaces and subsequently merge again. Note that the energies $`\pm \beta ^2`$ of the impulsive radiation are equal and opposite, to ensure that the wormhole mouths merge again, as expected from the first law of wormhole dynamics wh .

## V symmetric wormhole enlargement

Now we construct solutions to enlarge the throat by beaming in impulsive radiation symmetrically from both universes. We give two solutions, a simple one which is difficult to generalize to full Einstein gravity, and a more delicate one which can be so generalized. The first example is a symmetrized version of that of the previous section:

$`\rho _\pm `$ $`=`$ $`4\lambda ^2\beta ^2\delta (x^\pm x_0)+\beta ^2\delta (x^\pm x_1).`$ (30)
Assuming a wormhole with initial throat radius $`a`$, we obtain the solution

$`r`$ $`=`$ $`a+2\lambda ^2(x^+x^{})^2+\beta ^2(x^+x_0)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^+x_0)`$ (31)
$`+\beta ^2(x^{}x_0)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^{}x_0)\beta ^2(x^+x_1)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^+x_1)`$
$`\beta ^2(x^{}x_1)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^{}x_1).`$
This also describes an HKL wormhole (8) in the final region $`x^\pm >x_1`$. The initial and final wormhole regions have throats $`_+r=_{}r=0`$ at $`x^+=x^{}`$, with radii

$`r_0`$ $`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}a,\hfill & x^\pm <x_0\hfill \\ a+2\beta ^2(x_1x_0),\hfill & x^\pm >x_1\hfill \end{array}`$ (34)
respectively. Then the wormhole is enlarged if $`x_1>x_0`$, so that the negative-energy impulse precedes the positive-energy impulse, as before. The final formation of a static wormhole is again dependent on the additional radiation having equal and opposite energies $`\pm \beta ^2`$. For a slow burst of duration $`x_1x_0>\beta ^2/4\lambda ^2`$, the wormhole mouths $`_\pm r=0`$ are shifted so that the oppositely moving positive-energy impulses intersect them, while for a rapid burst of duration $`x_1x_0<\beta ^2/4\lambda ^2`$, the mouths enclose the entire middle region $`x_0<x^\pm <x_1`$ between the impulses, Fig. 4.

In full Einstein gravity, we wish to patch together Schwarzschild, static-wormhole pr  and Vaidya regions. However, the four-dimensional analogue of the middle region in the above example is not known analytically. So for the second example, we switch off the non-impulsive radiation between the impulses and switch it back on afterwards:

$`\rho _\pm `$ $`=`$ $`4\lambda ^2\mathrm{\Theta }(x_0x^\pm )\beta ^2\delta (x^\pm x_0)+\alpha ^2\delta (x^\pm x_1)`$ (35)
$`4\lambda ^2\mathrm{\Theta }(x^\pm x_1).`$
Then the middle region is vacuum and therefore part of a CGHS white hole. Assuming the initial region $`x^\pm <x_0`$ to be an HKL wormhole of throat radius $`a`$, we find the solution

$`r`$ $`=`$ $`a4\lambda ^2\left(x^+x^{}+x_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\right)+4\lambda ^2x_0(x^++x^{})+2\lambda ^2(x^+x_0)^2\mathrm{\Theta }(x_0x^+)+2\lambda ^2(x^{}x_0)^2\mathrm{\Theta }(x_0x^{})`$ (36)
$`+\beta ^2(x^+x_0)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^+x_0)+\beta ^2(x^{}x_0)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^{}x_0)\alpha ^2(x^+x_1)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^+x_1)`$
$`\alpha ^2(x^{}x_1)\mathrm{\Theta }(x^{}x_1)+2\lambda ^2(x^+x_1)^2\mathrm{\Theta }(x^+x_1)+2\lambda ^2(x^{}x_1)^2\mathrm{\Theta }(x^{}x_1).`$
Now we want the final region $`x^\pm >x_1`$ to be an HKL wormhole in the usual coordinates, Fig. 5. Then we find the relations

$$x_0=\frac{\beta ^2}{4\lambda ^2},x_1=\frac{\alpha ^2}{4\lambda ^2}$$
(37)
between the energy and timing of the impulses. This simplifies the solution in the initial, middle and final regions:

$`r`$ $`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}a+2\lambda ^2(x^+x^{})^2,\hfill & x^\pm <x_0\hfill \\ a+4\lambda ^2x_{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}4\lambda ^2x^+x^{},\hfill & x_0<x^\pm <x_1\hfill \\ a+4\lambda ^2(x_0^2x_1^2)\hfill & \\ +2\lambda ^2(x^+x^{})^2,\hfill & x_1<x^\pm ,\hfill \end{array}`$ (42)
which are recognizable as CGHS (7) white-hole or HKL wormhole (8) regions. The wormhole throats are at $`x^+=x^{}`$ with radii

$`r_0`$ $`=`$ $`\{\begin{array}{cc}a,\hfill & x^\pm <x_0\hfill \\ a+4\lambda ^2(x_0^2x_1^2),\hfill & x_1<x^\pm .\hfill \end{array}`$ (45)
Thus the throat radius of the final wormhole is larger than that of the initial one, again due to the negative-positive energy ordering of the burst.

Note that $`x_0<x_1<0`$, so that $`\alpha ^2<\beta ^2`$, meaning that the positive-energy impulsive radiation does not completely balance the negative-energy impulsive radiation, since some supporting negative energy has already been removed. The difference $`\alpha ^2\beta ^2=4\lambda ^2(x_1x_0)`$ equals the energy $`_{x_0}^{x_1}\rho _\pm 𝑑x^\pm `$ missing as compared with the static wormhole.

Combining with the results from the previous section, we have confirmed that the radius of the wormhole throat is enlarged when an expanding region of past trapped surfaces is opened and closed between the initial and final static wormholes, by bifurcating and merging the wormhole mouths, defined as trapping horizons. In addition, the solution just presented is one of the simplest where the wormhole is enlarged, in the sense that each relevant region is part of either a static white hole, a static wormhole or a pure-radiation region, joined at null boundaries, which is also possible in full Einstein gravity KHK .

## VI summary

In this paper, we have used an exactly soluble dilaton gravity model to study wormhole dynamics under impulsive radiation, finding solutions where a traversable wormhole is created from a black hole or the throat radius of a wormhole is enlarged or reduced, the size being controlled by the energy and timing of the impulses. Where the solutions consist of black-hole, static-wormhole and pure-radiation regions matched along null boundaries, we can succeed to construct similar analytic solutions in full Einstein gravity, though the analytical details are much more complex KHK .

The recipe to enlarge the wormhole is to cause the wormhole mouths to bifurcate, opening up an expanding region of past trapped surfaces, then merge again, by adding additional negative energy followed by compensating positive energy. The general proof involves the first and second laws of wormhole dynamics and is a future important work in the unified framework for black-hole and wormhole dynamics wh . The second law determines whether the area increases or decreases, and the first law quantifies it in terms of the energy supplied and work done.

The results in this paper show how to create a traversable wormhole of human size in principle, if negative-energy matter can be controlled. Self-inflating wormholes were discovered recently SH , but the present solutions are the first to describe stable wormhole enlargement. Clarifying the dynamical behavior of wormholes is a quite attractive subject, since the cosmic short-cuts and time travel usually considered as science fiction are thereby closer to being realized.

###### Acknowledgements.

HK was supported in part by grant R01-2000-00015 from KOSEF, SAH by Korea Research Foundation grant KRF-2001-015-DP0095, and SWK by Korea Research Foundation grant KRF-2000-041-D00128.


text:
# On the Red-Green-Blue Model

## I Introduction

We investigate the red-green-blue (RGB) model, which was introduced by Benjamini and Schramm. An RGB configuration is a system of the loops on a region of the triangular lattice, which is obtained by superimposing three perfect matchings (or dimer coverings) on offset hexagonal lattices as shown in Figure 1. The sites of the triangular lattice may be three-colored so that no two adjacent sites have the same color. If we delete the sites of a given color (say blue), then the sites of the other two colors (red and green) form a hexagonal lattice on which we can construct a random perfect matching (the blue perfect matching). When we superimpose the red, green, and blue perfect matchings, each vertex is matched with one neighboring vertex of each of the other two colors. Since each vertex has degree two, an RGB configuration consists of closed loops, and each loop has an orientation if we follow the edges in the order red to green to blue.

It is worth remarking that the boundary conditions of dimer systems can have a profound impact on the behavior of dimers even far within the interior of a region Cohn et al. (1996, 1998, 2001). There are height functions associated with dimer configurations on the cartesian lattice Levitov (1990); Zheng and Sachdev (1989) and hexagonal lattice Blöte and Hilhorst (1982) (see also Thurston (1990); Propp (2002)). If there is an imbalance between the different colors of vertices along the boundary, then the height along the boundary will be “tilted”, and this affects the dimers throughout the region. Consequently, the behavior of the RGB model on regions with tilted boundary conditions could be different from the behavior of the RGB model on the regions that we consider here, where the three color classes along the boundary are balanced (“flat” boundary conditions).

In earlier work, Kenyon and the author Kenyon and Wilson (1999) found experimentally that the fractal dimension of these loops is $`3/2`$. Here we report on additional experiments, where we find that the winding angle variance at a typical point on a loop is $`1\times \mathrm{log}D`$ where $`D`$ is the diameter of the loop, and that the system of loops appears to be conformally invariant. These properties suggest that the RGB loops are closely related to stochastic Loewner evolution Schramm (2000) with parameter $`\kappa =4`$ (SLE4), and that the RGB loops belong to the same universality class as the contours of 2D Fortuin-Kasteleyn Fortuin and Kasteleyn (1972) clusters at criticality when $`q=4`$, and the loops formed in the double-dimer (or “double-domino”) model Kondev and Henley (1995), which in turn are thought to correspond to the “contours” of a Gaussian free field Kondev and Henley (1995). However, the system of RGB loops does not have the same limiting behavior as the system of double-dimer loops, because we also find that the RGB loops are more tightly nested than the double-dimer loops.

## II Generating RGB configurations

To generate an RGB configuration of a region, we need to generate dimer coverings of three regions of the hexagonal lattice. There are many ways to generate dimer coverings of the the hexagonal lattice, but the fastest of these is based on a generalization of Temperley’s bijection Temperley (1974) between spanning trees and dimers. To generate the perfect matchings on the hexagonal lattice, the corresponding spanning trees are on a directed triangular lattice (see Kenyon et al. (2000) for details), and these spanning trees may be quickly generated using an algorithm based on loop-erased random walk Propp and Wilson (1998). This generalized-Temperley bijection only works for regions of the hexagonal lattice that have certain special (very flat) boundary conditions, so we can only expect to use it to generate RGB configurations of certain nice regions. One region where we can use spanning trees to rapidly generate RGB configurations is the equilateral triangle with side length $`3L`$ (Figures 1 & 2).

## III Windiness of RGB loops

We recall the definition of the windiness of a loop used in Wieland and Wilson (2002). Consider an ant which travels along the loop; after the ant has just traversed a given edge in the loop, before traversing the next edge it will either turn left $`120^{}`$, turn right $`120^{}`$, or not turn at all. If we keep track of the total turning (measured in radians) when the ant travels from point $`A`$ to point $`B`$ on the loop, then this is (approximately) the winding angle between points $`A`$ and $`B`$. When the ant travels all the way around the loop, it has turned $`\pm 360^{}`$, so to make the winding angle between points $`A`$ and $`B`$ independent of the number of times that the ant travels around the loop and the direction of travel, we adjust the total turning (measured in radians) by $`2\pi \times [\text{\# steps between }A\text{ and }B]÷[\text{length of loop}]`$. To define the winding angle at a given point $`X`$ relative to the global average direction, we pick an arbitrary point $`A`$, compute the winding angle from $`A`$ to $`X`$, and subtract a global constant so that the average winding angle at points on the curve is $`0`$.

When we measure the variance in the winding angle at random points along the longest loop in the RGB configuration in a region of order $`L`$, we find that the variance grows like $`1\times \mathrm{log}L`$ — so in the notation of Wieland and Wilson (2002), $`\kappa _2=1`$. This winding angle variance coefficient of 1 also shows up in in the contours of FK clusters at criticality when $`q=4`$, and other related models such as the double-dimer model, and SLE4 (see Duplantier and Saleur (1988); Wieland and Wilson (2002); Duplantier and Binder (2002)).

## IV Conformal invariance of RGB loops

Since there is only one region, the equilateral triangle, for which we can rapidly generate RGB configurations, this makes the testing of conformal invariance somewhat interesting. The test that we use is similar in spirit to the tests used by Schramm to test the conformal invariance of the uniform spanning tree. We conformally mapped the RGB model on the triangular domain to a circular domain, as shown in Figure 2. If the RGB model with flat boundary conditions were conformally invariant, then it must be that after we map a region to the disk, the resulting system of loops would be rotationally invariant. But if conformal invariance failed to hold, then there would be no particular reason to believe that the loops mapped to the disk would be rotationally invariant. After all, referring to Figure 2, the points in the disk to which the corners of the triangle are mapped certainly look different than other points in the disk, so a priori we would expect the image in the disk to be anisotropic if the RGB model were not conformally invariant. As we shall see, the minimum spanning tree model fails this test, so this test is a nontrivial test of conformal invariance.

To test the rotational invariance of the image of the RGB model in the disk, we singled out the outermost loop surrounding the center of the circular domain, and collected statistics on its furthest extents in the $`\pm x`$\- and $`\pm y`$-directions. If the loops in the RGB model are conformally invariant, then these four random variables would be equidistributed. But otherwise, there would be no particular reason to believe that any of these random variables (other than the first two) would have the same distributions. As shown in Figure 3, the cumulative distribution functions for these four random variables appear to coincide, so we conclude that the RGB model appears to be conformally invariant.

## V Conformal non-invariance of minimum spanning trees

To evaluate the efficacy of our conformal invariance test, we applied it to two additional models: the minimum spanning tree and uniform spanning tree models. The minimum spanning tree (MST) is formed by assigning uniformly random edge weights to the edges of the cartesian lattice, and picking the spanning tree (connected acyclic subset of

edges) which minimizes the total weight. The uniform spanning tree (UST) is simply a spanning tree chosen uniformly at random from all spanning trees.

Figure 4 shows the MST of a square grid after it is conformally mapped to the unit disk, with three of the corners mapped to the three cube roots of unity. To test the rotational invariance of the MST after it is mapped to the disk, we looked at the paths connecting the three points at the cube roots of unity (highlighted in Figure 4), and focused on the “triple-point” $`T`$ contained in all three paths. If the image of MST in the disk were isotropic, then $`T`$, $`e^{2\pi i/3}T`$, and $`e^{4\pi i/3}T`$ would be equidistributed. However, as Figure 5 illustrates, these variables are not equidistributed, so we conclude that the MST is not conformally invariant. The conformal non-invariance of the MST is surprising, given the close relationship between the MST and invasion percolation Chayes et al. (1985), the close relationship between invasion percolation and percolation, and the conformal invariance of percolation Langlands et al. (1994); Cardy (1992); Smirnov (2001).

In contrast to the MST, the UST passes this test, as shown in Figure 6. The triple point $`T`$ connecting three boundary points of the UST is already known to be conformally invariant Kenyon (2000), and indeed the entire UST process is now known to be conformally invariant Lawler et al. (2001).

Thus we learn not only that the minimum spanning tree is not conformally invariant, but that this test is a nontrivial test of conformal invariance.

## VI Nesting of RGB loops

For a scale-invariant loop model on a region of side length $`L`$, we would expect the number of loops surrounding a point to scale as $`\text{const.}\times \mathrm{log}L`$. The value of this constant is a measure of how deeply nested the loops are. For the double-dimer model, Kenyon Kenyon (1997) proved that this nesting constant is $`1/\pi ^2`$. We measured the nesting constant of the RGB loops, and found that it is $`20\%`$$`25\%`$ larger than the double-dimer nesting constant, but we do not have a guess for its exact value. Figure 7 shows that the outermost red-green-blue loops are in a sense larger than the outermost double-dimer loops, which is consistent with the red-green-blue loops being more tightly nested within one another.

## VII Conclusions

Our experiments indicate that the loops of the RGB model (with flat boundary conditions) are conformally invariant and have windiness constant $`1`$. Earlier experiments Kenyon and Wilson (1999) have indicated that the fractal dimension is $`3/2`$. These properties suggest that RGB loops belong to the same universality class as double-dimer loops, the fully-packed-loop model with $`n=2`$, and the contours of critical FK clusters with $`q=4`$, and are closely related to SLE4. However, the system of RGB loops (not just individual loops) differs from the system of double-dimer loops, because the loops are nested within one another more tightly.

## Acknowledgements

We thank Oded Schramm for useful discussions.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The discovery of a possible accelerated expansion of our present universe from type Ia supernovae (), is perhaps the most remarkable cosmological finding of recent years. Furthermore, the flatness of the universe ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_{tot}=1`$) determined by Cosmic Microwave Background observations (), togheter with the low matter density ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_{matter}<0.4`$) inferred from Large Scale Structure () are suggesting the presence of a cosmological constant with high statistical significance. However, the CMB+LSS result relies on the assumption of a particular class of models, based on adiabatic primordial fluctuations, cold dark matter and a cosmological constant as dark energy component . In the following we will refer to this class of model as $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-Cold Dark Matter ($`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-CDM).

This weak point, shared by most of the current studies, should not be overlooked: it might be possible that a different solution to the dark energy scenario than a cosmological constant can affect the CMB+LSS determination. It is therefore timely to investigate if the actual CMB data is in complete agreement with the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-CDM scenario or if we are losing relevant scientific informations by restricting the current analysis to a subset of models.

Here first we check to what extent modifications to the standard $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-CDM scenario are needed by current CMB observations with a model-independent analysis obtained fitting the actual data with a phenomenological function and characterizing the observed multiple peaks through a Monte Carlo Markov Chain (MCMC) algorithm, which allows us to investigate a large number of parameter simultaneously ($`15`$ in our case). We found a very good agreement between the position, relative amplitude and width of the peaks obtained through the model independent approach with the same features expected in a $`4`$-parameters model template of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-CDM spectra. Second, since the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-CDM is a good fit to the CMB data, we then move to other possible candidates for the dark energy component to see what kind of constraint we can obtain. The common characteristic of alternative scenarios to a cosmological constant, like quintessence or domain walls, is that their equations of state, $`w_{dark}=p/\rho `$, might differ from the value for a cosmological constant, $`w_\mathrm{\Lambda }=1`$. Observationally finding $`w_{dark}`$ different from $`1`$ will therefore be a success for the alternative scenarios. We found that the present CMB and LSS data can put strong constraints on the values of $`w_{dark}`$ assumed as a constant.

## 2 Phenomenological fit to the CMB data and agreement with the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-CDM scenario.

We model the multiple peaks in the CMB angular spectrum by the following function:

$$\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)C_{\mathrm{}}/2\pi =\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }T_i^2\mathrm{exp}((\mathrm{}\mathrm{}_i)^2/2\sigma _i^2)$$
(1)
where, in our case, $`N=5`$. We use this formula to make a phenomenological fit to the current CMB data, constraining the values of the $`15`$ parameters $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_i`$, $`\mathrm{}_i`$ and $`\sigma _i`$. For the CMB data, we use the recent results from the BOOMERanG-98, DASI, MAXIMA-1,CBI, and VSA experiments. The power spectra from these experiments were estimated in $`19`$, $`9`$, $`13`$, $`14`$ and $`10`$ bins respectively (for the CBI, we use the data from the MOSAIC configuration), spanning the range $`2\mathrm{}1500`$. For the DASI, MAXIMA-I and VSA experiments we use the publicly available correlation matrices and window functions. For the BOOMERanG and CBI experiments we assign a flat interpolation for the spectrum in each bin $`\mathrm{}(\mathrm{}+1)C_{\mathrm{}}/2\pi =C_B`$, and we approximate the signal $`C_B`$ inside the bin to be a Gaussian variable. The likelihood for a given phenomenological model is defined by $`2\mathrm{l}\mathrm{n}=(C_B^{ph}C_B^{ex})M_{BB^{}}(C_B^{}^{ph}C_B^{}^{ex})`$ where $`M_{BB^{}}`$ is the Gaussian curvature of the likelihood matrix at the peak.

We consider $`10\%`$, $`4\%`$, $`5\%`$, $`3.5\%`$ and $`5\%`$ Gaussian distributed calibration errors for the BOOMERanG-98, DASI, MAXIMA-1, VSA, and CBI experiments respectively and we include the beam uncertainties by the analytical marginalization method presented in (). The phenomenological fit is operated through a MCMC algorithm. The MCMC approach is to generate a random walk through parameter space that converges towards the most likely value of the parameters and samples the parameter space following the joint likelihood, the posterior probability distribution. A description of the method used can be found in . As reported in  we found an excellent agreement between the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-CDM scenario and the model-independent fit. This result is evident in Figure 1 where we plot the best-fit phenomenological model with the best-fit obtained under the assumption of a $`4`$ parameters $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-CDM template.

## 3 Quintessence.

Since the present CMB data is in wonderful agreement with the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$-CDM scenario, we can now try to extend the set of theoretical models, allowing for values of the dark energy equation of state different from $`1`$. However, as already stressed by many authors (see e.g. ) it is necessary to combine the CMB data with different data sets in order to obtain reliable constraints, since each dataset suffers from degeneracies with the remaining cosmological parameters. Even if one restricts consideration to flat universes and to a value of $`w_{dark}`$ constant in time then the SN-Ia luminosity distance and position of the first CMB peak are highly degenerate in $`w_{dark}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{dark}`$, the energy density in quintessence. In Fig. 2 we report the $`68\%`$ and $`95\%`$ likelihood contours in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{dark}w_{dark}`$ plane  with the inclusion of the new CBI, VSA and Archeops datasets.

The equation of state parameter is constraied to be $`1.62<w_{dark}<0.76`$ at $`95\%`$ c.l., in agreement with the $`w_{dark}=1`$ cosmological constant case and giving no support to a quintessential field scenario with $`w_{dark}>1`$. A frustrated network of domain walls or an exponential scaling field are excluded at high significance. In addition a number of quintessential models are highly disfavored, like, for example, power law potentials with $`p1`$ . However dark-energy ’phantom’ models with $`w<1`$ (see e.g. ) can be in agreement with the data we considered. The result is consistent with other recent independent analyses (see  in these proceedings and references therein).

Acknowledgements.  We are grateful to Rachel Bean, Anthony Lasenby, Laura Mersini, Mike Hobson, and Mark Trodden.