text:
# High Contrast Imaging of Extrasolar Planets

## 1. Introduction

The search to directly image an extrasolar planet requires contrast levels of $``$10-9 a few $`\lambda /D`$ from the central star. Scattered light in a telescope and the diffraction pattern of the telescope’s aperture limit the contrast possible for direct detection of faint companions. The circular aperture of telescopes creates a sub-optimal diffraction pattern, the so-called Airy Pattern which is azimuthally symmetric. In addition, the intensity in the diffraction pattern of the circular aperture declines as $`\theta ^3/\theta _o`$, where $`\theta _o=\lambda /D`$. Currently the best way to diminish the Airy pattern is to use a coronagraph by using the combination of a stop in the focal plane that rejects a majority of the central bright object’s light and a Lyot stop in the pupil plane to reject high frequency light (Lyot 1939; Malbet 1996; Sivaramakrishnan et al. 2001). Several recent ideas explore the use of alternative “apodized” apertures for high contrast imaging in the optical or near-infrared (Nisenson & Papaliolios 2001; Spergel 2002; Debes, Ge, & Chakraborty 2002). These designs revisit concepts first experimented with in the field of optics (Jacquinot & Roizen-Dossier 1964). Other designs, such as the band limited mask, seek to null the light from a central star in much the same way that a nulling interfermoeter performs (Kuchner & Traub 2002).

By placing a mask into the pupil plane with a gaussian aperture, one can transform a traditional circular aperture telescope into one with a diffraction pattern better suited for high contrast imaging. Using a mask represents a quick, efficient, and cheap way to test this emerging imaging method to determine its advantages and tradeoffs and compare them to the performance of other existing techniques. Preliminary results of observign with a prototype gaussian pupil mask can be found in Debes et al. (2002).

In this proceeding we report further lab tests of the performance of GAPMs compared to lyot coronagraphs with similar throughput as well as testing the new technique of combining a GAPM with a coronagraphic image plane mask. We theoretically compare different techniques with the same throughput on the Hubble Space Telescope to determine what may be useful in a real spacecraft.

## 2. Equal Throughput Comparisons

A fairer comparison between a Lyot coronagraph and the GAPM is to have equal throughput designs and compare their contrast levels. As part of lab experiments that we are performing we compared two new GAPM designs with a Lyot coronograph that had a comparable throughput. Two types of designs were tested, idealized apertures with no secondary structure (20% throughput) and realistic masks that will be used for future observing (30% throughput), which have two gaussian aperture per quadrant, avoiding support structure. Unsaturated images GAPMs were taken to predict the flux for the longer, saturated images. We took exposures that had on the order of 107 counts in order to image the PSF. We found that this was insufficient to get high S/N on the fainter portions of the PSF and we estimate that beyond 1-2′′ the read noise begins to dominate. Longer integrations are planned.

For the coronagraphic modes we used a gaussian transmission focal plane mask with a FWHM of 500$`\mu m`$ ($`11\lambda /D`$). Short exposures were taken without the mask for estimating the peak flux of an unblocked point source for a given exposure time. The mask was then carefully aligned to within 1 pixel to block the point source.

Figure 1 shows the results of these lab tests. In both cases the hybrid designs perform as well or better, both reaching $`2\times 10^6`$. The flattening of the profile suggests that the observations were hitting the read noise limit of the PICNIC detector on PIRIS. Other experiments that were done where the mask was misaligned by several pixels presented dramatically worse results, underscoring the need for subpixel alignment and stability over an observation. This points to the utility of the GAPMs alone for quick surveys and hybrid or Lyot designs for deeper searches.

## 3. Testing other types of masks

Given the large number of potential ideas for high contrast imaging, and due to a lack of many lab tests of these designs, a way to model some of the various contrast degradations present in a real space mission would be useful for determining what designs are better suited for future TPF type missions. A strong test would be to compare the performance of the different designs on the HST, where many of these different errors are well modeled. Tinytim, the PSF modeling software used by the Space Telescope Institute, has accurate wavefront error maps of the telescope (Krist 1995). Using these wavefront error maps as input to our models allows us to compare all of the different designs with an equal footing of throughput.

Figure 2 shows a horizontal cut along the axis of highest contrast for all of the designs. In this preliminary simulation the band limited mask performs slightly better than the other designs for the same amount of throughput. This is because the Lyot stop for the band limited mask is undersized from its optimal shape by about 10$`\%`$. This would block some of the residual light that leaks through the focal plane mask. These simulations ignore mask errors in both the focal and pupil planes. Possibly with PSF subtraction techniques a factor of 10-100 deeper contrast could be achieved, allowing some bright extrasolar planets to be observed with HST. Further simulations need to be done to better understand the feasibility of such observations.

## 4. Conclusions

We have performed several simulations, lab tests, and telescope observations with GAPMs and Lyot coronagraphs in order to better understand the interplay between theory and the reality of observations. GAPMs alone provide an improvement over a simple circular aperture for quick high contrast imaging. The combination of a GAPM and a coronagraphic mask further supresses and improves the performance of the GAPM alone. The masks are very sensitive to an accurate reproduction of shape and thus need accuracies that may be as restrictive as sub-micron precision. This is possible with new nanofabrication techniques that have been perfected at the Penn State Nanofabrication facility, where future masks may be produced. Precisely fabricating these masks can potentially improve performance to the ideal limit for a mask provided it is above the scattered light limit of the telescope, bringing it in line with Lyot coronagraphs of comparable throughput. Simulations of different techniques on the HST provide an avenue to test new technologies for future NASA missions such as TPF, and show what can be possible from space.

### Acknowledgments.

Several important discussions with D. Spergel, M. Kuchner, W. Traub, C. Burrows, and R. Brown were crucial in our understanding of gaussian apertures, band limited masks, and HST image performance.

J.D acknowledges funding by a NASA GSRP fellowship under grant NGT5-119. This work was supported by NASA with grants NAG5-10617, NAG5-11427 as well as the Penn State Eberly College of Science. J. G. also acknowledges funding through Ball Aerospace Co..

## References

Debes, J. et al. 2002, ApJ, 572, L165

Jaquinot, P. & Roizen-Dossier, B., 1964, Progress in Optics, 3, 31

Kuchner, M. J. & Traub, W. A., 2002, ApJ, 570, 900

Krist, J. 1995, ASP Conf. Ser. 77, 4, 349

Lyot, B. 1939, MNRAS, 99 580

Malbet, F. 1996, A&AS, 115, 161

Nisenson, P. & Papaliolios, C. 2001, ApJ548 L201

Sivaramakrishnan, A. et al. 2001, ApJ, 552, 397

Spergel, D. N. 2001, astro-ph/0101142


format: text

text:
# Coherent transport of neutral atoms in spin-dependent optical lattice potentials

URL: \]http://www.mpq.mpg.de/ haensch/bec

## Abstract

We demonstrate the controlled coherent transport and splitting of atomic wave packets in spin-dependent optical lattice potentials. Such experiments open intriguing possibilities for quantum state engineering of many body states. After first preparing localized atomic wave functions in an optical lattice through a Mott insulating phase, we place each atom in a superposition of two internal spin states. Then state selective optical potentials are used to split the wave function of a single atom and transport the corresponding wave packets in two opposite directions. Coherence between the wave packets of an atom delocalized over up to 7 lattice sites is demonstrated.

Over the last years Bose-Einstein condensates in optical lattices have opened fascinating new experimental possibilities in condensed matter physics, atomic physics, quantum optics and quantum information processing. Already now the study of Josephson junction like effects Anderson98 ; Cataliotti01 , the formation of strongly correlated quantum phases Jaksch98 ; Orzel01 ; Greiner02a  and the observation of the collapse and revival of the matter wave field of a BEC Greiner02b  have shown some of these diverse applications. In an optical lattice, neutral atoms can be trapped in the intensity maxima (or minima) of a standing wave light field due to the optical dipole force Grimm00 . So far the optical potentials used have been mostly independent of the internal ground state of the atom. However, it has been suggested that by using spin-dependent periodic potentials one could bring atoms on different lattice sites into contact and thereby realize fundamental quantum gates Brennen99 ; Briegel00 ; Raussendorf01 ; Brennen02 , create large scale entanglement Jaksch99 ; Briegel01 , excite spin waves Sorensen99 , study quantum random walks Duer02  or form a universal quantum simulator to simulate fundamental complex condensed matter physics hamiltonians Jane02 . Here we report on the realization of a coherent spin-dependent transport of neutral atoms in optical lattices PhillipsPrivateCommunication . We show how the wave packet of an atom that is initially localized to a single lattice site can be split and delocalized in a controlled and coherent way over a defined number of lattice sites.

In order to realize a spin dependent transport for neutral atoms in optical lattices, a standing wave configuration formed by two counterpropagating laser beams with linear polarization vectors enclosing an angle $`\theta `$ has been proposed Brennen99 ; Jaksch99 . Such a standing wave light field can be decomposed into a superposition of a $`\sigma ^+`$ and $`\sigma ^{}`$ polarized standing wave laser field, giving rise to lattice potentials $`V_+(x,\theta )=V_0\mathrm{cos}^2(kx+\theta /2)`$ and $`V_{}(x,\theta )=V_0\mathrm{cos}^2(kx\theta /2)`$. Here $`k`$ is the wave vector of the laser light used for the standing wave and $`V_0`$ is the potential depth of the lattice. By changing the polarization angle $`\theta `$ one can thereby control the separation between the two potentials $`\mathrm{\Delta }x=\theta /180^{}\lambda _x/2`$. When increasing $`\theta `$, both potentials shift in opposite directions and overlap again when $`\theta =n180^{}`$, with $`n`$ being an integer. For a spin-dependent transfer two internal spin states of the atom should be used, where one spin state dominantly experiences the $`V_+(x,\theta )`$ potential and the other spin state mainly experiences the $`V_{}(x,\theta )`$ dipole force potential. Such a situation can be realized in rubidium by tuning the wavelength of the optical lattice laser to a value of $`\lambda _x=785`$ nm between the fine structure splitting of the rubidium D1 and D2 transition. Then the dipole potential experienced by an atom in e.g. the $`|1|F=2,m_F=2`$ state is given by $`V_1(x,\theta )=V_{}(x,\theta )`$ and that for an atom in the $`|0|F=1,m_F=1`$ state is given by $`V_0(x,\theta )=3/4V_+(x,\theta )+1/4V_{}(x,\theta )`$. If an atom is now first placed in a coherent superposition of both internal states $`1/\sqrt{2}(|0+i|1)`$ and the polarization angle $`\theta `$ is continuously increased, the spatial wave packet of the atom is split with both components moving in opposite directions. In a fixed polarization configuration, spin-dependent tunnelling between two lattice sites has been observed in Haycock00 .

As in our previous experiments, Bose-Einstein condensates of up to $`3\times 10^5`$ atoms are created in the $`|F=1,m_F=1`$ hyperfine state in a harmonic magnetic trap with almost isotropic oscillation frequencies of $`\omega =2\pi \times 16`$ Hz. A three dimensional lattice potential is then superimposed on the Bose-Einstein condensate and the intensity raised in order to drive the system into a Mott insulating phase Greiner02a  and thereby localize the atoms to individual lattice sites. Two of the three orthogonal standing wave light fields forming the lattice potential are operated at a wavelength of $`\lambda _{y,z}=840`$nm. For the third standing wave field along the horizontal $`x`$-direction a laser at a wavelength of $`\lambda _x=785`$nm is used. Along this axis a quarter wave plate and an electro-optical modulator (EOM) allow us to dynamically rotate the polarization vector of the retro-reflected laser beam through an angle $`\theta `$ by applying an appropriate voltage to the EOM (see Fig. 1). Initially the polarization angle $`\theta `$ is set to a lin$``$lin polarization configuration. After reaching the Mott insulating phase we completely turn off the harmonic magnetic trapping potential but maintain a 1 G homogeneous magnetic field along the $`x`$-direction in order to preserve the spin polarization of the atoms. This homogeneous field is actively stabilized to an accuracy of $`1`$ mG. Shortly before moving the atoms along this standing wave direction we adiabatically turn off the lattice potentials along the $`y`$\- and $`z`$-direction. This is done in order to reduce the interaction energy, which strongly depends on the confinement of the atoms at a single lattice site. We can thereby study the transport process itself, without having to take into account the phase shifts in the many body state that result from a coherent collisional interaction between atoms.

By using microwave radiation around 6.8 GHz we are able to drive Rabi oscillations between the $`|0`$ and the $`|1`$ state with resonant Rabi frequencies of $`\mathrm{\Omega }=2\pi \times 40`$ kHz, such that e.g. a $`\pi `$-pulse can be achieved in a time of $`12.5\mu `$s. The microwave field therefore allows us to place the atom in any of the two internal states $`|0`$ or $`|1`$ or an arbitrary superposition of both states.

During the shifting process of the atoms it is crucial to avoid unwanted vibrational excitations, especially if the shifting process would be repeated frequently. We therefore analyze the timescale for such a movement process in the following way. First the atom is placed either in state $`|0`$ or state $`|1`$ by using microwave pulses in a standing wave lin$``$lin polarization configuration. Then we rotate the polarization to an angle $`\theta =180^{}`$ in a linear ramp within a time $`\tau `$, such that again a lin$``$lin polarization configuration is achieved. However, during this process the atoms will have moved by a distance $`\pm \lambda _x/4`$ depending on their internal state. In order to determine whether any higher lying vibrational states have been populated, we adiabatically turn off the lattice potential within a time of $`500\mu `$s. The population of the energy bands is then mapped onto the population of the corresponding Brillouin zones Kastberg95 ; Greiner01 . By counting the number of atoms outside of the first Brillouin zone of the system relative to the total number of atoms we are able to determine the fraction of vibrationally excited atoms after the shifting of the lattice potential (see Fig. 2). For a perfectly linear ramp with infinite acceleration at the beginning and ending of the ramp one would expect the fraction of atoms in the first vibrational state to be given by $`|c_1(\tau )|^2=2v^2/(a_0\omega )^2\mathrm{sin}^2(\omega \tau /2)`$, where $`v=\lambda _x/(4\tau )`$ is the shift velocity, $`a_0`$ the size of the ground state harmonic oscillator wave function and $`\omega `$ the vibrational frequency on each lattice site.

We have measured the vibrational frequencies on a lattice site for different polarization angles $`\theta `$ by slightly modulating the lattice position and observing a resonant transfer of atoms to the first excited vibrational state. For atoms in the $`|1`$ state the vibrational frequencies remain constant for different polarization angles $`\theta `$ as the lattice potential depth $`V_1(x,\theta )`$ remains constant. However, for atoms in the $`|0`$ state the lattice potential depth $`V_0(x,\theta )`$ decreases to 50% in a lin$``$lin configuration. In order to reduce this effect we tilt the EOM by 3 and thereby decrease the strength of the $`\sigma ^{}`$ standing wave but increase the strength of the $`\sigma ^+`$ standing wave in such a polarization configuration. Then both trapping frequencies for the $`|0`$ and the $`|1`$ state decrease to approx. 85% in a lin$``$lin configuration relative to their initial value of $`\omega =2\pi \times 45`$ kHz in a lin$``$lin standing wave configuration. For such trapping frequencies of $``$45 kHz during the transport process, the excitation probability should remain below 5% for shifting times longer than $`2\pi /\omega _x`$, taking into account the finite bandwidth of our high voltage amplifier. This finite bandwidth smoothes the edges of our linear voltage ramp and thereby efficiently suppresses the oscillatory structure in the calculated excitation probability (see Fig. 2).

In order to verify the coherence of the spin-dependent transport we use the interferometer sequence of Fig. 3. Let us first consider the case of a single atom being initially localized to the $`j^{th}`$ lattice site. First, the atom is placed in a coherent superposition of the two internal states $`|0_j`$ and $`|1_j`$ with a $`\pi /2`$ microwave pulse (here the index denotes the position in the lattice). Then the polarization angle $`\theta `$ is rotated to 180, such that the spatial wave packet of an atom in the $`|0`$ and the $`|1`$ state are transported in opposite directions. The final state after such a movement process is then given by $`1/\sqrt{2}(|0_j+i\mathrm{exp}(i\beta )|1_{j+1})`$, where the wave function of an atom has been delocalized over the $`j^{th}`$ and the $`(j+1)^{th}`$ lattice site. The phase $`\beta `$ between the two wave packets depends on the accumulated kinetic and potential energy phases in the transport process and in general will be nonzero. In order to reveal the coherence between the two wave packets, we apply a final $`\pi /2`$ microwave pulse that erases the which-way information encoded in the hyperfine states. We then release the atoms from the confining potential by suddenly turning off the standing wave optical potential and observe the momentum distribution of the trapped atoms in the $`|1`$ state with absorption imaging after a time of flight period. As a result of the above sequence, the spatial wave packet of an atom in the $`|0`$ $`(|1)`$ state is delocalized over two lattice sites resulting in a double slit momentum distribution $`w(p)\mathrm{exp}(p^2/(\mathrm{}/\sigma _x)^2)\mathrm{cos}^2(p\delta x_0/2\mathrm{}+\beta /2)`$ (see Fig. 4a) where $`\delta x_0`$ denotes the separation between the two wave packets and $`\sigma _x`$ is the spatial extension of the gaussian ground state wave function on each lattice site. In order to increase the separation between the two wave packets further, one could increase the polarization angle $`\theta `$ to further integer multiples of 180. In practice, such an approach is however limited by the finite maximum voltage that can be applied to the EOM. In order to circumvent this limitation we apply a microwave $`\pi `$ pulse after the polarization has been rotated to $`\theta =+180^{}`$, thereby swapping the role of the two hyperfine states. By then returning the polarization vector to $`\theta =0^{}`$, we do not bring the two wave packets of an atom back to their original site but rather further increase the separation between the wave packets (see Fig. 3). The interlaced $`\pi `$ pulse provides a further advantage of cancelling inhomogeneous phase shifts acquired in the single particle phase $`\beta `$ in a photon echo like sequence. With increasing separation between the two wave packets the fringe spacing of the interference pattern further decreases (see Fig. 4). We have been able to observe such interference patterns for two wave packets delocalized over up to 7 lattice sites (see Fig. 4f). When moving the atoms over up to three lattice sites, the visibility of the interference pattern remains rather high with up to 60% (see Fig. 5). These high contrast interference patterns directly prove the coherence of the transport process but also show that the single particle phase $`\beta `$ acquired for each atom is almost constant throughout the cloud of atoms in our system. If the movement process is repeated more often, inhomogeneously acquired phase shifts over the cloud of atoms significantly decrease the visibility.

For many further applications of the coherent spin-dependent transport it will also be crucial that the single particle phase $`\beta `$ is not only constant throughout the cloud of atoms within a single run of the experiment, but is also reproducible between different sets of experiments. We have verified this by varying the phase $`\alpha `$ of the final microwave $`\pi /2`$ pulse in a sequence where an atom is delocalized over three lattice sites. In Figure 6 we plot the experimentally measured phase of the interference pattern vs the phase $`\alpha `$ of the final microwave pulse obtained in different runs of the experiment. We find a high correlation between the detected phase of the interference pattern vs the phase of the applied microwave pulse which proves that indeed the single particle phase is constant between different experiments and can be cancelled via the phase of the final microwave pulse.

In conclusion we have demonstrated the coherent spin-dependent transport of neutral atoms in optical lattices, thereby showing an essential level of coherent control for many future applications. The method demonstrated here e.g. provides a simple way to continuously tune the interspecies interactions by controlling the overlap of the the two ground state wave functions for the two spin states. Furthermore, if such a transport is carried out in a three dimensional lattice, where the on-site interaction energy between atoms is large, one could induce interactions between almost any two atoms on different lattice sites in a controlled way. Such controlled interactions of Ising or Heisenberg type could then be used to simulate the behavior of quantum magnets Sorensen99 , to realize quantum gates between different atoms Brennen99 ; Briegel00 ; Raussendorf01 ; Brennen02  or to generate highly entangled cluster states Jaksch99 ; Briegel00  that could form the basis of a one-way quantum computer Raussendorf01 .

###### Acknowledgements.

We would like to thank Ignacio Cirac and Hans Briegel for stimulating discussions, Alexander Altmeyer for help during the initial phase of the experiment and Anton Scheich for assistance with the electronics. We also acknowledge financial support from the Bayerische Forschungsstiftung.


text:
# Deuteron-Nucleus Collisions in a Multi-Phase Transport Model

## I introduction

To study heavy ion collisions at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven National Laboratory, in which a deconfined plasma of quarks and gluons is expected to be formed, we have developed a multi-phase transport (AMPT) model that includes both final-state partonic and hadronic interactions Zhang:ampt ; Lin:2001cx ; Lin:2001yd . The model has been very useful for understanding various observables in Au+Au collisions at RHIC such as the rapidity and transverse momentum distributions of various particles Zhang:ampt ; Lin:2001cx ; Lin:2001yd  as well as charmonium Zhang:jpsi  and strangeness Pal:strange  productions. In particular, it allows one to study both thermal and chemical equilibration in the partonic and hadronic matter formed in these collisions. The AMPT model has also been extended to include the string melting mechanism Lin:2001zk ; Lin:2002gc , in which soft strings produced from initial nucleon-nucleon interactions are converted directly to partons, in order to explain the measured elliptic flow Ackermann:2001tr  and two-pion correlation functions Adler:2001zd  at RHIC.

In spite of its success, the AMPT model has many uncertainties in its input physical parameters, particularly those related to the initial conditions introduced to the model. For example, the number of initial minijet partons in the AMPT model, that is given by the hard processes from the HIJING model Wang:1991ht ; Wang:1991us ; Gyulassy:ew , depends on the nuclear shadowing, i.e., the modification of the parton distributions in a nucleon when it is in a nucleus. As a result, the final particle multiplicity produced in relativistic heavy ion collisions is affected by nuclear shadowing Lin:2001cx ; Lin:2001yd . The production of high $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ particles or hadrons made of heavy quarks, which is described by perturbative QCD processes, is even more sensitive to the nuclear shadowing effect. Furthermore, other nuclear effects such as the Cronin effect Cronin:zm , which set in already in p-A collisions, need to be included. The uncertainties in the initial condition also exist in other transport models with partonic degrees of freedom Zhang:1997ej ; Molnar:2000jh  as well as theoretical models such as the hydrodynamical model Kolb:2000fh ; Huovinen:2001cy ; Kolb:2001qz ; Teaney:2001av  and the QCD saturation model Kharzeev:2000ph ; Kharzeev:2001gp ; Kharzeev:2002ei ; EKRT ; Eskola:2000xq .

Since final-state interactions (FSI) are expected to be less important in deuteron-gold collisions than in collisions between heavy nuclei, both the Cronin effect and the nuclear shadowing effect (e.g., through dilepton measurements Lin:1995pk ) can be better studied in these collisions. Improved knowledge on these effects are useful for making reliable theoretical interpretations of the observations in heavy ion collisions at RHIC. In this paper, we use the AMPT model to study the global observables in deuteron-gold collisions such as the pseudo-rapidity distributions and the transverse momentum spectra. Because of the small interaction volume in d+Au collisions, we use the default AMPT model, i.e., without the string melting mechanism, in the present study, as the initial energy density produced in these collisions is expected to be small.

This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we briefly review the AMPT model. Results from the AMPT model on deuteron-gold collisions at RHIC are then shown in Sec. III, with the charged particle pseudo-rapidity distributions and their centrality dependence given in Sec. III.1, the transverse momentum spectra of different particles in Sec. III.2, and the effects due to modifications of the string fragmentation parameters and nuclear shadowing in Sec. III.3. A summary is then given in Sec. IV. Finally, the effect of centrality selection on the centrality dependence of charged particle pseudo-rapidity distributions is discussed in the Appendix.

## II The AMPT model

The AMPT model is a hybrid model that consists of four components: the initial conditions, the parton cascade, the conversion from partonic to hadronic matter, and the hadron cascade. In the default AMPT model Zhang:ampt ; Lin:2001cx ; Lin:2001yd ; Zhang:jpsi ; Pal:strange , the initial conditions are generated from the HIJING model Wang:1991ht ; Wang:1991us ; Gyulassy:ew  (version 1.383 for this study), which usually uses a Woods-Saxon radial shape for the colliding nuclei and introduces a parameterized nuclear shadowing function that depends on the impact parameter of the collision Wang:1991ht . Interactions among minijet partons, which are produced from initial hard nucleon-nucleon interactions, are modeled by the Zhang’s parton cascade (ZPC) Zhang:1997ej . After partons stop interacting, they recombine with their parent strings, which are produced from initial soft nucleon-nucleon interactions, and fragment to hadrons according to the Lund string fragmentation model Sjostrand:1993yb ; Andersson2 . Dynamics of resulting hadronic matter is then described by a hadronic cascade based on the relativistic transport (ART) model Li:1995pr . Final hadronic observables including contributions from the strong decay of resonances are determined when the hadronic matter freezes out.

In this study, we use the Hulthen wave function hulthen  to model the structure of a deuteron hj1382 :

$`u(r)=Ce^{\alpha r}\left(1e^{\mu r}\right),`$ (1)
where $`r`$ represents the relative distance between the proton and neutron in the deuteron, the normalization constant $`C`$ is determined from $`_0^{\mathrm{}}u(r)^2𝑑r=1`$, and the small $`D`$-wave contribution ($``$6%) to the deuteron wave function is neglected. With $`\alpha =(4.38\mathrm{fm})^1`$ and $`\mu =(1.05\mathrm{fm})^1`$, the root-mean-square radius of the deuteron, $`\sqrt{r^2}/2`$, is 2.0 fm, consistent with the measured value.

## III AMPT results on deuteron-gold collisions

We have studied deuteron-gold collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200`$ GeV with both deuteron and gold having the same energy of $`100`$ GeV per nucleon. In this study, “minimum bias” d+Au events are defined as those within the impact parameter range between $`0`$ and $`12`$ fm, and they are separated into different centrality bins.

### III.1 Pseudo-rapidity distributions of charged particles

Fig. 1 shows the pseudo-rapidity distributions of charged particles in the six centrality bins of 0-10%, 10-20%, 20-40%, 40-60%, 60-80%, and 80-100%. Here, the centrality is determined according to the value of $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$, i.e., the total number of participants in both deuteron and gold nuclei, in each event. The pseudo-rapidity in this study is evaluated in the nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass frame, and negative rapidities correspond to the fragmentation region of the gold nucleus. Solid curves are results from the AMPT model, while dashed curves are those from the HIJING model without quenching. Note that the AMPT model without final-state partonic and hadronic interactions is equivalent to the HIJING model without jet quenching if the popcorn mechanism, controlled mainly by parameters MSTJ(12) and PARJ(5) in the PYTHIA/JETSET program Sjostrand:1993yb , is treated in the same way. It is seen that the asymmetry in the pseudo-rapidity distributions, e.g., by comparing values of $`dN_{ch}/d\eta `$ at $`\eta =2`$ and $`\eta =+2`$, decreases as collisions become less central, and the pseudo-rapidity distribution for the most peripheral bin is almost symmetric. As expected, final-state interactions in d+Au collisions have a smaller effect on charged particle pseudo-rapidity distributions than in the case of central heavy ion collisions at RHIC Lin:2001cx ; Lin:2001yd .

We note that the appearance of small bumps around $`\eta 4`$ is mainly due to interactions of produced particles with initial incoming nucleons in the gold nucleus, which has an initial half width of $`R_{Au}/\gamma `$ in the longitudinal direction with $`R_{Au}`$ being the hard-sphere radius of the gold nucleus and $`\gamma `$ denoting the Lorentz boost factor of a nucleon in the nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass frame. If the initial half width is reduced by a factor of 5, the charged particle pseudo-rapidity distributions would be smooth around $`\eta 4`$ and also have slightly lower values in the region of $`6<\eta <3`$.

Fig. 2a) shows the pseudo-rapidity distributions of charged particles for “minimum bias” d+Au events. Solid curves are results from the AMPT model, dashed curves with open circles are AMPT results without final-state interactions, and dashed curves with filled circles are those without both final-state interactions and the popcorn mechanism for baryon-antibaryon production Zhang:ampt ; Lin:2001cx ; Lin:2001yd . We see that both final-state interactions and the popcorn mechanism broaden the pseudo-rapidity distributions, especially in the fragmentation region of the gold nucleus, leading thus to a moderate increase of the particle multiplicity in the region of $`6<\eta <3`$. We note that without final-state interactions and the popcorn mechanism, results from the AMPT model are equivalent to those from the HIJING model (without jet quenching) as same values of $`a`$ and $`b`$ in Eq.(2) are used.

One can separate events according to the number of participants from the deuteron, i.e., $`N_{\mathrm{part}}^\mathrm{d}`$. As an example, Fig. 2b) shows the pseudo-rapidity distributions of charged particles from the AMPT model for events with one or two nucleon(s) from the deuteron that are involved in primary collisions. About 2/3 of “minimum bias” events from the AMPT model have $`N_{\mathrm{part}}^\mathrm{d}=2`$ with average values of $`N_{\mathrm{part}}^{\mathrm{Au}}`$ at $`10.4`$ and the mean impact parameter at $`4.7`$ fm. On the other hand, for events with $`N_{\mathrm{part}}^\mathrm{d}=1`$ the average value of $`N_{\mathrm{part}}^{\mathrm{Au}}`$ is $`2.8`$ and the mean impact parameter is $`7.8`$ fm.

In Fig. 3, we show by the solid curve with circles the average impact parameter as a function of the average value of $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ at each centrality bin. Here, the number of participants is defined as the number of initial (projectile and target) nucleons involved in primary collisions, i.e., not including those initial nucleons that interact with produced particles in the final state. The solid curve with no symbols in Fig. 3 represents $`N_{\mathrm{part}}^\mathrm{d}`$. We see that $`N_{\mathrm{part}}^\mathrm{d}`$ increases toward the value of 2 rather quickly from peripheral to central collisions. The dashed curve with open circles shows the number of participating nucleons that also include initial nucleons that are involved in final-state interactions. It is seen that final-state interactions increase the number of participating nucleons by more than 40% for the most central events (0-10% centrality bin). However, since the energies involved in final-state interactions are much lower than those in the primary collisions, they contribute much less to particle production. In this study, we thus only include initial nucleons that are involved in primary collisions for determining $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$.

The centrality dependence of particle multiplicity and transverse energy at mid-pseudo-rapidities ($`0.5<\eta <0.5`$) are shown Fig. 4. The solid curve and the dashed curve with open squares represent, respectively, $`dN_{ch}/d\eta /\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ and $`dE_\mathrm{T}/d\eta /\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$, where $`E_\mathrm{T}`$ includes the contribution from neutral particles. In this study, $`E_\mathrm{T}=E\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ with $`\theta `$ being the polar angle, and $`E`$ is defined as the kinetic energy for baryons, the total energy including the mass for anti-baryons, and the total energy for all other particles. We observe that both the particle multiplicity and transverse energy per participant gradually decrease with increasing $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$. However, we shall see in Sec. III.3 and the Appendix that this moderate decrease with centrality will change when centralities are determined differently or when the string fragmentation function is modified in more central d+Au collisions. Fig. 4 also shows that the ratio of the transverse energy and particle multiplicity per participant (solid curve with filled squares), i.e., the average transverse energy per charged particle, is rather flat. Also shown by the solid curve with triangles is the mean transverse momentum of charged particles, which is seen to change little with $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ as well.

The centrality dependence of the charged particle multiplicity per participant at different pseudo-rapidities is shown in Fig. 5, where the value at each $`\eta `$ represents the average value within the pseudo-rapidity range of $`\eta \pm 0.5`$. We see an increase of this quantity at the backward pseudo-rapidity $`\eta =4`$ (curve with open diamonds) and a fast decrease at the forward pseudo-rapidity $`\eta =+4`$ (curve with filled diamonds). Furthermore, the decrease with centrality becomes stronger as the pseudo-rapidity changes from negative values to more positive values. These are consistent with the picture that multiple interactions in the gold nucleus push particle productions toward the negative rapidity region. Since we find that the mean transverse energy per charged particle at a given pseudo-rapidity does not change much with centrality, the centrality dependence of $`(dE_\mathrm{T}/d\eta )/\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$, i.e., the transverse energy per participant, has a similar behavior at each pseudo-rapidity as $`(dN_{ch}/d\eta )/\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$.

### III.2 Transverse momentum spectra

The transverse momentum spectra of charged particles in the pseudo-rapidity range of $`1<\eta <1`$ for both “minimum bias” and 0-20% central d+Au collisions are shown in Fig. 6. Solid curves with circles are results from the AMPT model while dashed curves are those without final-state partonic and hadronic interactions. For comparisons, the AMPT results for minimum bias p+p collisions are shown by the solid curve. In all transverse momentum distributions and their ratios shown later, we include the statistical errors in the AMPT model, which become large at moderately high $`p_\mathrm{T}`$.

To better examine the distributions shown in Fig. 6, ratios of the $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ spectra of charged particles from d+Au collisions over those from minimum bias p+p collisions are shown in Fig. 7. We see that, even without final-state partonic and hadronic interactions, the ratios (dashed curves) are not flat but instead tend to increase with $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ in the range of $`03`$ GeV$`/c`$ shown in the figure. This behavior is mainly a result of different scalings for hard and soft processes with respect to the number of binary collisions in the initial conditions from the HIJING model. While particle production at high enough $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ scales with the number of initial binary collisions, low momentum particles have a weaker dependence. Final-state interactions further modify the ratios of $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ spectra, as seen from comparisons between the solid and dashed curves.

Recently, the transverse momentum spectra of charged particles in d+Au collisions have been measured at RHIC rhic-dAu . Compared with the experimental data at $`0<p_\mathrm{T}<3`$ GeV$`/c`$, the $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ dependence of the ratios from the AMPT calculations shown in Fig. 7, either with or without final-state interactions, are much weaker. Thus, interactions in the final state are not the main reason for the observed strong $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ dependence of the ratios of transverse momentum spectra, suggesting that initial-state effects such as parton momentum broadening due to the Cronin effect Cronin:zm ; Vitev:2003xu  (not included in the AMPT model so far) are important in d+Au collisions.

For identified particles such as $`\pi ^+,K^+`$ and protons, their transverse momentum spectra within the rapidity range of $`1<y<1`$ from “minimum bias” d+Au collisions are shown in Fig. 8, with the proton spectra scaled down by a factor of 10. Solid and dashed curves represent AMPT results with and without final-state interactions, respectively. Compared with results from the AMPT model on central heavy ion collisions, e.g., Fig. 2 of Ref. Lin:2001yd  for central Pb+Pb collisions at SPS, the effect of final-state interactions on the transverse momentum spectra in d+Au collisions are much weaker.

Fig. 9 shows the ratios of the $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ spectra from AMPT over those from the AMPT model without final-state interactions. Dashed curves represents the ratios of the “minimum bias” spectra shown in Fig. 8, while solid curves represent the ratios of the spectra from 0-20% d+Au collisions. We see that final-state interactions modify the $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ spectra of $`\pi ,K`$ and protons differently. Proton spectra show the largest FSI effect with low $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ protons shifting to higher $`p_\mathrm{T}`$, and the ratio for 0-20% central events has a stronger $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ dependence than that for “minimum bias” events. Both features are consistent with the existence of some transverse flow in d+Au collisions. We find that the average number of partonic collisions per parton is about 0.06 (with $`3`$ mb parton scattering cross section) and the average number of hadronic collisions per produced hadron is about 1 in “minimum bias” d+Au collisions from the AMPT model, compared with about 1 partonic collision per parton and 8 hadronic collisions per hadron in central Au+Au collisions at $`200A`$ GeV. As a result, the transverse flow due to final-state interactions in d+Au collisions is much weaker than in central heavy ion collisions. We also note that in the default AMPT model used in this study, final-state interactions among partons are less important than those among hadrons as only minijet partons are included in the parton cascade.

Ratios of the $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ spectra in d+Au collisions over those in p+p collisions from the AMPT model are shown in Fig. 10. Similar to Fig. 9, we observe the strongest $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ dependence for protons. Also, ratios of the $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ spectra of kaons have a stronger $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ dependence than those of pions. We note that, since the initial-state parton broadening due to the Cronin effect Cronin:zm  has not yet been included in the AMPT model, the $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ dependence of these ratios may get even stronger if the Cronin effect is taken into account.

### III.3 Effects of the string fragmentation parameters and nuclear shadowing

In the default AMPT model, hadron production after the partonic phase is described by the Lund string fragmentation model. In this model, the longitudinal momentum distribution of a hadron with transverse mass $`m_{}`$ produced from the string fragmentation is given by the following symmetric splitting function Andersson2 :

$`f(z)z^1(1z)^a\mathrm{exp}(bm_{}^2/z),`$ (2)
where $`z`$ denotes the light-cone momentum fraction of the produced hadron with respect to that of the fragmenting string. In the HIJING model, which reproduces the experimental charged particle multiplicities in high energy p+p and $`p\overline{p}`$ collisions, the default values of $`a=0.5`$ and $`b=0.9`$ GeV-2 are used. However, in order to reproduce the rapidity distributions of charged particles in central Pb+Pb collisions at the CERN-SPS energy using the AMPT model, we find that values of these parameters need to change to $`a=2.2`$ and $`b=0.5`$ GeV-2 Lin:2001cx ; Lin:2001yd . The increase of $`a`$ and decrease of $`b`$ relative to the default values in the HIJING model soften the splitting function and thus enhance the total charged particle multiplicity by about 20% in central Pb+Pb collisions at SPS. The change of these two parameters can perhaps be attributed to the modification of string fragmentation when multiple strings are produced and overlap in heavy ion collisions, although it is not known yet how these parameters should be modified in different colliding systems. Since peripheral d+Au collisions are expected to behave similarly as p+p collisions, and even in central d+Au collisions the string density is much lower than in central heavy ion collisions, we have assumed that the parameters $`a`$ and $`b`$ of Eq. (2) for deuteron-gold collisions have the same values as in p+p collisions, i.e., they take the default values in the HIJING model.

However, since the values of $`a`$ and $`b`$ parameters need to be modified in order to describe the total multiplicity in central heavy ion collisions, it is still possible that these parameters are also modified in non-peripheral deuteron-gold collisions. If in central deuteron-gold collisions the parameters $`a`$ and $`b`$ already have the modified values as in heavy ion collisions, the pseudo-rapidity distribution for the 20% most central deuteron-gold collisions (selected from $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$) would be given by the dashed curve in Fig. 11, which shows a substantial increase compared with the previous AMPT result obtained with default $`a`$ and $`b`$ values in the HIJING model (solid curve). Comparison of these results for deuteron-gold collisions with upcoming experimental results at RHIC will thus allow us to learn how the string fragmentation process is modified in different colliding systems or centralities.

When the nuclear shadowing effect is turned off in the AMPT model, the pseudo-rapidity distribution for the 20% most central deuteron-gold collisions is shown by the dot-dashed curve in Fig. 11, which is not much different from the solid curve obtained with the nuclear shadowing. Thus, pseudo-rapidity distributions of charged particles in deuteron-gold collisions are not very sensitive to the nuclear shadowing effect. This is different from that seen in collisions between heavy nuclei, where the effect is much larger as nuclear shadowing affects the production of minijet partons, which scales with the number of binary collisions. The effects of nuclear shadowing on $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ spectra of $`\pi ^+,K^+`$ and protons, shown in Fig. 12 for 0-20% central d+Au collisions, are also relatively small and do not have a strong $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ dependence within $`0<p_\mathrm{T}<3`$ GeV$`/c`$. Note that, although the nuclear shadowing effect is unimportant for global observables in small colliding systems such as deuteron-gold collisions, it affects significantly observables which are dominated by partonic interactions such as open charm production Lin:1995pk  or the yield of high $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ particles.

## IV summary

Using a multi-phase transport (AMPT) model that includes both final-state partonic and hadronic interactions, we have studied the pseudo-rapidity distributions of charged particles, their centrality dependence, and transverse momentum spectra of different particles in deuteron-gold collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200`$ GeV. Due to the asymmetry of these collisions, the centrality dependence of charged particle multiplicity per participant is very different at different pseudo-rapidities, and it goes from increasing with centrality at the backward pseudo-rapidity region (the fragmentation region of the gold nuclei) to decreasing with centrality at the forward region. The charged particle pseudo-rapidity distribution in central deuteron-gold collisions is also sensitive to the values of the parameters used in the string fragmentation function. Furthermore, we find that, although final-state partonic and hadronic interactions modify the transverse momentum spectra of charged particles in d+Au collisions relative to scaled p+p collisions, the $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ dependence of the modification due to final-state interactions is much weaker than observed at RHIC. Thus, initial-state effects such as parton momentum broadening due to the Cronin effect are important in deuteron-gold collisions. However, we find that final-state interactions have a much stronger effect on the $`p_\mathrm{T}`$ spectra of protons than those of kaons or pions. Comparison of these predictions with the experimental data will thus help us to learn more about initial-state effects on transverse momentum spectra and to study whether string fragmentation is modified in deuteron-gold collisions as in central heavy ion collisions.

*

## Appendix A Effects of different centrality selections

To extract useful information from the centrality dependence of global observables, it is helpful to study how the criteria of centrality selection affects the centrality dependence. The number of participants and the impact parameter are known in theoretical models, but they cannot be directly measured in experiments. Instead, experimental centrality selections usually involve cutting on the charged particle multiplicity or the transverse energy. Thus, in addition to separating events into different centrality bins using the total number of participants, we have also tried three other methods, using the impact parameter, the number of charged particles within $`1<\eta <1`$, and the total number of charged particles. For example, when the total number of charged particles is used for the centrality selection, we order all 35,000 events from the AMPT model by the total number of charged particles in each event. The centrality bin of, say 0-10%, then consists of the first 3,500 events in that ordered list.

In Fig. 13, we plot the average value of impact parameters versus the average value of $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ at six centrality bins of $`01020406080100\%`$, that are selected using these four different methods. The solid curve with circles corresponds to the centrality selection from $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$, and it thus has the largest value of $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ for the most central bin of events and the smallest value of $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ for the most peripheral bin of events. On the other hand, the centrality selection from the impact parameter, shown by the solid curve with no symbols, has the smallest value of $`\mathrm{b}`$ for the most central bin of events and the largest value of $`\mathrm{b}`$ for the most peripheral bin of events. When the number of charged particles is used to determine the centrality, the correlation between the centrality and $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ is weaker than in the case of using $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$. This is especially true when only part of the phase space is included, as using $`N_{ch}`$ within $`1<\eta <1`$ for the centrality selection (curve with open squares) leads to a narrower range of $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ than using the total number of charged particles for the centrality selection (curve with filled squares). The error bars shown for two of the curves in Fig. 13 (the curves from using $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ or impact parameter for the centrality selection) correspond to the root-mean-square widths of the impact parameters in each centrality bin, and we see that the width in the case of using $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ for determining the centrality is be quite large (around 1.2 fm) for these centrality bins. We also find that, when $`N_{ch}`$ within $`1<\eta <1`$ or the total $`N_{ch}`$ is used for the centrality selection, these widths are even larger (between 1.3 and 1.8 fm), indicating that the correlation between $`N_{ch}`$ and the impact parameter is weaker than that between $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ and the impact parameter.

Different centrality selections also lead to differences in both the shape and magnitude of the pseudo-rapidity distributions at the same centrality bin. Solid curves in Fig. 14a and 14b show the pseudo-rapidity distributions of charged particles using, respectively, the impact parameter and $`N_{ch}`$ within $`1<\eta <1`$ for determining the centrality. The distributions corresponding to using $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ for the centrality selection are also shown by the dashed curves for comparison. From Fig. 14a, we find that $`dN_{ch}/d\eta `$ at $`\eta =0`$ grows slower with centrality when the impact parameter instead of $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ is used for the centrality selection. However, it is interesting to see, from comparing Fig. 15a with Fig. 5, that the centrality dependences of $`(dN_{ch}/d\eta )/\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ for the two cases are quite similar. This is due to the compensating effect of slower growth of $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ with centrality when the impact parameter is used to select the centrality (see Fig. 13). We note that in relativistic heavy ion collisions where the multiplicity is much higher, these different methods for the centrality selection lead to quite similar results, contrary to those shown in Figs. 13 and 14 for d+Au collisions.

Fig. 15b shows the centrality dependence of charged particle multiplicity per participant at different pseudo-rapidities when $`N_{ch}`$ within $`1<\eta <1`$ is used for the centrality selection. Comparing with Fig. 5, we find that the centrality dependence at $`\eta =4`$ or $`\eta =+4`$ is similar to the case where $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ determines the centrality, but the centrality dependence at $`\eta =2,0`$ or $`+2`$ is totally different. For example, while in Fig. 5 (and in Fig. 15a) the curve of $`(dN_{ch}/d\eta )/\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ at $`\eta =0`$ shows a small decrease with centrality, the corresponding curve in Fig. 15b increases significantly with centrality. We note that these differences from Fig. 5 exist even when the total number of $`N_{ch}`$ is used for selecting the centrality (instead of $`N_{ch}`$ within $`1<\eta <1`$). Part of this large difference in the centrality dependence is due to the stronger increase of $`dN_{ch}/d\eta (\eta =0)`$ with centrality in the case when $`N_{ch}`$ around mid-pseudo-rapidity is used to determine the centrality, as shown in Fig. 14b. Also, since the average value of $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$ grows slower with centrality in this case (see Fig. 13), the difference is further enhanced after dividing $`dN_{ch}/d\eta `$ by $`\mathrm{N}_{\mathrm{part}}`$. Figs. 14 and 15 thus show that the criteria of centrality selection can introduce appreciable differences in the centrality dependence of global observables in deuteron-gold collisions, and corresponding care must be taken when comparing theoretical results with experimental data on centrality dependences.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank Ulrich Heinz, Peter Jacobs and Michael Murray for valuable comments. This paper is based on work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG02-01ER41190 (Z.W.L.) and by the U.S. National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY-0098805 as well as the Welch Foundation under Grant No. A-1358 (C.M.K.)


text:
# The role of E1-E2 interplay in multiphonon Coulomb excitation

## I Introduction

Recent studies of Coulomb-induced breakup of weakly bound nuclei indicate a considerable reduction of the dissociation probability in comparison with the prediction of the first-order Born calculation Esbensen and Bertsch (2002). The reduction is associated with dynamic polarization, where the quadrupole field creates a polarization that influences the effects induced by the dominating electric dipole. This is a well-known phenomenon in atomic stopping theory, where the stopping power for charged particles deviates from the $`Z^2`$ dependence of Bethe’s formula Bethe (1930), $`Z`$ being the charge of a particle. Measurements, as for example, of the stopping power for protons and anti-protons Andersen et al. (1989), indicate the presence of a $`Z^3`$ correction. Over the years a substantial progress has been made in measuring and understanding of this phenomenon Andersen (1983); Porter and Jeppesen (1983); Porter and Lin (1990); Novkovic et al. (1993); Pitarke et al. (1993); Arista and Lifschitz (1999); Leung (1989).

In this work we consider the Coulomb excitation of a charged particle bound by a harmonic-oscillator potential. The time-dependent electric dipole (E1) and quadrupole (E2) fields of a projectile excite the particle, and within this approximation the quantum problem is treated exactly. This problem has been studied in the past, starting from the classical treatment by Ashley, Ritchie, and Brandt Ashley et al. (1972), followed by quantum perturbation theory Hill and Merzbacher (1974), and later further perturbative Born terms Mikkelsen and Sigmund (1989); Mikkelsen and Flyvbjerg (1990) have also been considered. Exact numerical solutions to the time-dependent quantum problem have been demonstrated by Mikkelsen and Flyvbjerg Mikkelsen and Flyvbjerg (1992). The use of a harmonic oscillator model, as was previously argued Mikkelsen and Sigmund (1989), is justified for reasons of simplicity and at the same time good quality of results in comparison with observed stopping powers. The preset work adds yet another reason, as it demonstrates how classical results such as Ashley et al. (1972); Jackson and McCarthy (1972) can be used to obtain exact quantum answers. Thus, the approach presented here does not involve heavy numerical calculations. It presents a simple and transparent way to understand and to treat exactly the Coulomb excitation of an oscillator. As an application of the presented technique, rather than repeating previous numerical calculations, we concentrate on a less explored aspect of Coulomb excitation; here the overall excitation probability, the dipole and quadrupole transition amplitudes, and their interplay are discussed.

We use a connection between classical and quantum mechanics which is usually complex and in most cases takes an approximate quasiclassical form. However, in situations where the dynamics of a system is determined by linear equations of motion, with arbitrary time-dependent parameters, the classical-to-quantum correspondence is exact. The harmonic oscillator which is driven by the time-dependence of its parameters, such as mass, frequency or external force, is an example of such a situation. Most theoretical developments in the field of parametric excitations of harmonic systems were done more than three decades ago Lewis (1967); Lewis and Riesenfeld (1969); Popov and Perelomov (1969, 1970); Baz et al. (1969). Despite this, it is only during the past decade theorists began to embrace the beauty of this problem and to discuss its relevance to many physical processes. Photon generation, lasers Abdalla et al. (1998), quantum interference and two-photon excitations Georgiades et al. (1999), phase transitions, critical phenomena Isar (1999); Drummond et al. (2001), information theory Aliaga et al. (1993), ion traps, oriented chiral condensates Volya et al. (2000) are examples of recent developments. Squeezed states that appear as solutions in parametrically driven harmonic systems, also known as two-photon coherent states, generalize the concept of coherent states Glauber (1963) to include two-quanta couplings in the radiation field Yuen (1976); Hartley and Ray (1982).

By presenting this work we further expand applications of the squeezed state formalism to problems of Coulomb excitation. We focus our efforts on classical and quantum effects resulting from the interplay of one-(dipole) and two-quanta (quadrupole) couplings of an oscillator system to an external field. Using symmetries we derive simple formulas for excitation probabilities and transition amplitudes that explicitly show quantum interference effects and can be used to improve perturbative calculations.

This work is divided into four sections. In Sec. II we review the properties of harmonic-oscillator systems and the transition from a classical to a quantum description, which is based on canonical transformation. We summarize the properties of the parameters that describe the initial state to final state transition ($`S`$-matrix) and derive transition amplitudes and excitation probability relevant to Coulomb excitation. Section III is dedicated to applications. Here we consider the classical solution and address the transition to the quantum treatment. We discuss quantum corrections, perturbative limits, charge asymmetry, and two-phonon excitations. The role of E1 and E2 interplay is emphasized in these discussions. We summarize our findings in Sec. IV.

## II Parametric excitation of coupled oscillator system

We consider a system of $`N`$ oscillators with the unperturbed Hamiltonian

$$H_0=\underset{l}{}\left(\frac{p_l^2}{2}+\frac{\omega _l^2q_l^2}{2}\right).$$
(1)
These oscillators are disturbed by a time-dependent force $`F_l(t)`$ and time-dependent frequency parameters $`Q_{ll^{}}(t)=Q_{l^{}l}(t),`$ expressed by

$$H_{\mathrm{int}}(t)=\frac{1}{2}\underset{ll^{}}{}Q_{ll^{}}(t)q_lq_l^{}+\underset{l}{}F_l(t)q_l.$$
(2)
It is assumed that $`H_{\mathrm{int}}(t)=0`$ in the infinite past $`t\mathrm{}`$ and in the infinite future $`t\mathrm{}.`$ First we quantize this problem in the infinite past. Here

$`q_l={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega _l}}}\left(a_le^{i\omega _lt}+a_l^{}e^{i\omega _lt}\right),`$ (3a)
$`p_l=i\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _l}{2}}}\left(a_le^{i\omega _lt}a_l^{}e^{i\omega _lt}\right),`$ (3b)
where $`a_l^{}`$ and $`a_l`$ are time-independent creation and annihilation operators for the $`l`$-th mode. For any other time we introduce creation and annihilation operators $`b_l^{}(t)`$ and $`b_l(t)`$ so that the coordinates and momenta in the Heisenberg representation are

$`q_l={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega _l}}}\left(b_l(t)e^{i\omega _lt}+b_l^{}(t)e^{i\omega _lt}\right),`$ (4a)
$`p_l=i\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _l}{2}}}\left(b_l(t)e^{i\omega _lt}b_l^{}(t)e^{i\omega _lt}\right).`$ (4b)
The operators $`b^{}(t)`$ and $`b(t)`$ are defined in the interaction representation, as the time dependence due to $`H_0`$ is introduced explicitly in Eq. (4). For the infinite past we have by definition

$$b(\mathrm{})=a,b^{}(\mathrm{})=a^{}.$$
(5)
At $`t+\mathrm{}`$ $`b(t)`$ and $`b^{}(t)`$ also become time-independent

$$b(\mathrm{})=b,b^{}(\mathrm{})=b^{}.$$
(6)
The transformation from the original operators $`a`$ and $`a^{}`$ to the intermediate $`b`$ and $`b^{}`$ is determined by a general Bogoliubov transformation

$$b_l(t)=\underset{l^{}}{}\left(u_{ll^{}}(t)a_l^{}+v_{ll^{}}(t)a_l^{}^{}\right)+c_l(t).$$
(7)
In order to simplify the notation we will write this in matrix form as

$$b(t)=u(t)a+v(t)a^{}+c(t).$$
(8)
The perturbation $`H_{\mathrm{int}}`$ drives the nontrivial time dependence of these creation and annihilation operators

$$i\frac{d}{dt}b=[b(t),H_{\mathrm{int}}]=(t)+𝒬^{}(t)b+𝒬^+(t)b^{},$$
(9)
where matrices

$$𝒬_{}^{\pm }{}_{ll^{}}{}^{}(t)=\frac{Q_{ll^{}}(t)}{2\sqrt{\omega _l\omega _l^{}}}e^{i(\omega _l\pm \omega _l^{})t}$$
(10)
and a vector

$$_l(t)=\frac{F_l(t)}{\sqrt{2\omega _l}}e^{i\omega _lt}$$

are introduced. The $`𝒬^{}`$ and $`𝒬^+`$ are hermitian and symmetric matrices, respectively. The time dependence of the parameters $`u`$ and $`v,`$ as follows from (9), are determined from

$`i{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}u=𝒬^{}u+𝒬^+v^{},`$ (11a)
$`i{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}v=𝒬^{}v+𝒬^+u^{},`$ (11b)
and

$$i\frac{d}{dt}c=𝒬^{}c+𝒬^+c^{}+.$$
(12)
These equations are solved numerically with initial conditions

$$u(\mathrm{})=1,v(\mathrm{})=0,c(\mathrm{})=0,$$
(13)
which follow from (5). We stress here that solving Eqs. (11) and (12) is equivalent to finding a full classical solution to the problem. This follows from the fact that the equations of motion are linear, so the time-dependence of a Heisenberg operator becomes identical to the time-dependence of its classical analog.

### II.1 Properties of the $`S`$-matrix

In this work we will be interested only in the initial to final state transition probabilities, i.e., in the $`S`$ matrix that comes from the transformation of operators

$$b=ua+va^{}+c,b^{}=u^{}a^{}+v^{}a+c^{}.$$
(14)
The inverse transformation is

$$a=u^{}bv^Tb^{}+c^{},a^{}=u^Tb^{}v^{}+c_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{},$$
(15)
where

$$c^{}=u^{}c+v^Tc^{}.$$
(16)
Transformation (14) is canonical and preserves commutation relations so that if $`[a_l,a_l^{}^{}]=\delta _{ll^{}}`$ then $`[b_l,b_l^{}^{}]=\delta _{ll^{}};`$ this puts some conditions on the matrices $`u`$ and $`v`$

$`uu^{}vv^{}=1,uv^Tvu^T=0,`$ (17a)
$`uu^{}v^Tv^{}=1,u^{}vv^Tu^{}=0.`$ (17b)
These linear canonical transformations, so-called symplectic transformations, are often encountered in classical mechanics. The generators of the above symplectic transformation form a group which generalizes the simple $`SU(1,1)`$ group Profilo and Soliana (1991); Gerry (1987); Lianfu et al. (1997) of a one-dimensional oscillator. In general any infinitesimal time evolution can be described by a linear canonical transformation which preserves the phase space in accordance with Liouville’s theorem. The beauty of our case is that the linearity remains for any period of time evolution. This allows for an exact classical-to-quantum correspondence. Besides the method that we implement in this paper, the Wigner transformation Wigner (1932) that establishes the correspondence between the classical phase space distribution and the quantum density matrix can also be used to exactly reconstruct the quantum solution from its classical analog Esbensen (1981). The application of the Wigner transformation in studies of various properties of the harmonic oscillator has been demonstrated repeatedly Han et al. (1988); Agarwal and Arun Kumar (1991); Aliaga et al. (1993).

### II.2 Survival probability

Here we assume that $`u,`$ $`v`$ and $`c`$ are known. Using these we determine transition amplitudes between quantum states. Coherent states,

$$|\alpha =e^{|\alpha |^2/2}\underset{n=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\alpha ^n}{\sqrt{n!}}|n,$$
(18)
provide the best means for addressing this problem. In this basis the evolution operator $`U`$ is Mollow (1967)

$$\beta |U|\alpha =A^0\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{1}{2}(|\beta ^2|+|\alpha ^2|)+\frac{1}{2}\beta ^{}v(u^{})^1\beta ^{}\frac{1}{2}\alpha ^T(u^{})^1v\alpha +\beta ^{}(u^{})^1\alpha \beta ^{}(u^{})^1c^{}\alpha ^T(u^{})^1c^{}\right).$$
(19)
The normalization constant $`A^0`$ is determined by the completeness condition

$$\frac{1}{\pi ^N}d^{2N}\beta |\beta |U|\alpha |^2=1,$$
(20)
where integration goes through both real and imaginary parts of $`\beta .`$ This is an important parameter, since it sets the scale of all transitions and it determines the probability to remain in the ground state $`P_{0,0}=|0|U|0|^2=|A^0|^2.`$ The quantity $`P_{0,0}`$ is given by the Gaussian integral, where $`\alpha `$ is set to zero for simplicity

$$\frac{\pi ^N}{P_{0,0}}=d^{2N}\beta \mathrm{exp}\left\{|\beta |^2+\mathrm{}(\beta ^T\rho \beta +2c^T\beta 2c^{}\rho \beta )\right\}.$$
(21)
We introduce here the matrix

$$\rho =v(u^{})^1,$$
(22)
which is a characteristic of quadrupole excitation. Besides some trivial normalization that will be further discussed, the matrix element $`\rho _{ij}`$ is the amplitude of a single step two-quanta excitation of $`i`$-th and $`j`$-th modes. The classical time evolution of this matrix follows from the time evolution of $`u`$ and $`v`$ (11), and is given by

$$i\frac{d}{dt}\rho =\rho 𝒬_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}+𝒬^{}\rho +\rho 𝒬_{}^{+}{}_{}{}^{}\rho +𝒬^+.$$
(23)
This result explicitly shows that $`\rho `$ is a symmetric matrix ($`\rho =\rho ^T`$).

The multidimensional Gaussian integral can be taken as

$$d^{2n}𝐛\mathrm{exp}(𝐛^T\mathrm{𝐀𝐛}+2𝐬^T𝐛)=\frac{\pi ^n}{\sqrt{det𝐀}}\mathrm{exp}\left(𝐬^T𝐀^1𝐬\right),$$
(24)
where relevant to our case

$$𝐛=\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{}\beta \\ \mathrm{}\beta \end{array}\right),𝐜=\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{}c\\ \mathrm{}c\end{array}\right),𝐀=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1\mathrm{}\rho & \mathrm{}\rho \\ \mathrm{}\rho & 1+\mathrm{}\rho \end{array}\right),$$
(25)
$$𝐬=𝐐^T𝐜,𝐐=\left(\begin{array}{cc}1\mathrm{}\rho & \mathrm{}\rho \\ \mathrm{}\rho & (1+\mathrm{}\rho )\end{array}\right).$$
(26)
Because of the previously discussed properties of the Bogoliubov transformation, inversion of the matrix $`𝐀`$ is not needed. It can be shown that $`𝐜^T\mathrm{𝐐𝐀}^1𝐐^T𝐜=c^{}c+\mathrm{}(c^T\rho ^{}c).`$ This results in

$$P_{00}=\sqrt{det(1\rho ^{}\rho )}\mathrm{exp}\left[c^{}c+\mathrm{}(c^T\rho ^{}c)\right].$$
(27)
The survival probability in the above form unifies the roles of E1 and E2 processes, and establishes a direct and simple relation between the quantities of perturbation theory, $`\rho `$ and $`c,`$ and the exact answer. There is a clear meaning of the different terms in the product (27). The $`\mathrm{exp}(c^{}c)`$ represents the excitation of a coherent state due to the dipole interaction; the term $`\sqrt{det(1\rho ^{}\rho )}`$ is a result of quadrupole squeezing Volya et al. (2000). The remaining part $`\mathrm{exp}[\mathrm{}(c^T\rho ^{}c)]`$ is a result of quantum interference.

### II.3 Transition Amplitudes

Equation (19) can be used to obtain transition amplitudes. Coefficients in a Taylor expansion of (19) are related to transition amplitudes between oscillator states Volya et al. (2000), with one-dimensional oscillator, for example,

$$\beta |U|\alpha =e^{(|\alpha |^2+|\beta |^2)/2}\underset{n,m}{}n|U|m\frac{(\beta ^{})^n\alpha ^m}{\sqrt{n!m!}}.$$
(28)
Below we denote by $`|i,j,k\mathrm{}`$ the normalized state containing single quanta in $`i,j,k\mathrm{}`$ oscillator modes (later we will use directions $`x`$ $`y`$ and $`z`$). A single-quantum excitation amplitude is given by

$$j|U|0=A^0\{(u^{})^1c^{}\}_j=A^0\{(c\rho c^{})\}_j,$$
(29)
where the subscript $`j`$ denotes a component of the vector in the brackets. Since the interaction vanishes in both the infinite past and infinite future, the transition probabilities are symmetric with respect to initial and final states, in agreement with general principles of quantum mechanics. However, the decay amplitude from an excited one-phonon state to the ground state, which is

$$0|U|j=A^0\{(u^{})^1c^{}\}_j,$$
(30)
differs from the excitation amplitude by a non trivial phase. This emphasizes the effect of quantum interference between dipole and quadrupole amplitudes. Setting either $`c`$ or $`\rho `$ to zero restores the symmetry.

The transition amplitude from the ground state to the excited state with two oscillator quanta, requires expansion of (19) to the order $`\beta ^2`$

$$ij|U|0=\frac{\sqrt{1+\delta _{ij}}}{2}\left(A^0\rho _{ij}+\frac{i|U|0j|U|0}{A^0}\right).$$
(31)
The first term in the above equation is due to a direct quadrupole transition, since its amplitude is directly proportional to $`\rho .`$ The second term describes the second-order dipole process.

For an initially excited system the transition amplitudes can be calculated in a similar manner, by expanding in both $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta ;`$ for example

$$i|U|j=A^0(u^{})_{ij}^1+\frac{i|U|00|U|j}{A^0}.$$
(32)
Tailor expansion of a Gaussian form can be used to define Hermite polynomials, in particular for the multi-variable case such as Eq. (19). This, in turn, allows for an analytic expression of transition amplitudes between oscillator states. Useful iterative relations between amplitudes that follow from properties of Hermite polynomials can be obtained in this way, or alternatively, iterative relations can be derived directly from the properties of the evolution operator Fernandez and Tipping (1989).

The energy transfer, which is important for calculating the stopping power, can be calculated using Eq. (14). For the excitation from the ground state we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E=0|\underset{l}{}\omega _lb_l^{}b_l|0=\underset{l}{}\omega _l|c_l|^2+\underset{ll^{}}{}\omega _l|v_{ll^{}}|^2.$$
(33)
The above presents an average energy transfer. The energy spread can also be calculated as in Volya et al. (2000).

### II.4 One dimensional harmonic oscillator

The special case of a one-dimensional harmonic oscillator with time-dependent parameters has been extensively studied previously Husimi (1953); Popov and Perelomov (1969, 1970); Baz et al. (1969); Sebawe Abdalla (1986a, b); Abe and Ehrhardt (1993). According to Eq. (27) the probability to remain in the ground state is

$$P_{00}=\sqrt{1|\rho |^2}\mathrm{exp}\left\{|c|^2\left[1|\rho |\mathrm{cos}(\varphi _\rho 2\varphi _c)\right]\right\},$$
(34)
where $`\varphi _\rho `$ and $`\varphi _c`$ are phases of $`\rho `$ and $`c,`$ respectively. This agrees with the previously obtained result Baz et al. (1969). We will further on encounter a one-dimensional case where $`c=0.`$ Here only even-quanta transitions are possible, and the excitation probabilities from the ground state and first excited state by $`2n`$ quanta are

$$P_{0,2n}=\frac{(2n)!}{2^{2n}(n!)^2}|\rho |^{2n}\sqrt{1|\rho |^2},$$
(35)
$$P_{1,2n+1}=\frac{(2n+1)!}{2^{2n}(n!)^2}|\rho |^{2n}(1|\rho |^2)^{3/2}.$$
(36)
## III Coulomb excitation

We consider here the problem of Coulomb excitation of a particle bound in a harmonic-oscillator potential, by a projectile of charge $`Z`$. We assume that the projectile moves along a fixed trajectory $`\stackrel{}{R}(t)`$ in the $`xy`$ plane. In order to utilize the treatment discussed above we expand the Coulomb potential up to quadratic terms in the particle coordinate $`q,`$ namely, treating it in the dipole-quadrupole approximation

$$V_{\mathrm{coul}}(t)=\frac{C}{R^3}\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{R}+\frac{C}{2R^5}\left(3(\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{R})^2q^2R^2\right),$$
(37)
where $`C=Ze^2.`$ The non-zero components of $`H_{\mathrm{int}}`$ defined in Eq. (2) are

$$F_x(t)=\frac{CR_x}{R^3},F_y(t)=\frac{CR_y}{R^3},$$
(38)
$$Q_{xx}=\frac{C}{R^5}\left(3R_x^2R^2\right)Q_{yy}=\frac{C}{R^5}\left(3R_y^2R^2\right),$$

$$Q_{xy}=Q_{yx}=\frac{3CR_xR_y}{R^5},Q_{zz}=\frac{C}{R^3}.$$
(39)
These expressions show that the mode in the direction perpendicular to the scattering plane is decoupled, and it is excited by the quadrupole term only. Further, we assume a straight line trajectory so that $`\stackrel{}{R}(t)=(b,\mathrm{v}t,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}).`$ This does not simplify the problem, since our formalism can be used for any trajectory. This assumption, however, allows us to compare with previous results Ashley et al. (1972); Hill and Merzbacher (1974); Mikkelsen and Sigmund (1989). We introduce the following notations

$$𝔡_i=\frac{C}{b\mathrm{v}\sqrt{2\omega _i}},𝔮_{ij}=\frac{C}{2b^2\mathrm{v}\sqrt{\omega _i\omega _j}},$$
(40)
and

$$\xi _i=\frac{b\omega _i}{\mathrm{v}},$$
(41)
where $`i`$ and $`j`$ are indices referring to $`x,`$ $`y`$ and $`z`$ directions. Often we will assume $`\omega _x=\omega _y=\omega _z=\omega ;`$ in that case the corresponding indices are omitted. The parameters $`𝔡`$ and $`𝔮`$ can be viewed as dipole and quadrupole strengths, so that their ratio $`1/(b\sqrt{2\omega })`$ determines the applicability of the multipole expansion.

### III.1 Perturbative treatment

Here we will discuss several approximations. The first one is the usual approximation relevant to multipole expansion of the Coulomb field. It utilizes the smallness of the photon wave length as compared to the size of the system. The next two limits are the “sudden limit” where $`\xi 1`$ and the “adiabatic limit” $`\xi 1.`$ Finally, we will use the term Born approximation which corresponds to some order in the iterative solution of the classical equations (11) and (12). Since the classical equations of motion allow here for an exact reconstruction of the wave function, the use of this terminology does not contradict its quantum notion.

All of the results in this study, such as in Eqs. (27), (29), and (31), are fully determined by the parameters $`c`$ and $`\rho ,`$ which may be referred to as shift (dipole) and squeezing (quadrupole) parameters, respectively. Both of these parameters can be expanded using the above approximations. Each order of Born approximation results in the next order correction in terms of the quadrupole strength (40). Thus an expansion of $`c`$ and $`\rho `$ is a series

$$c=𝔡\underset{n=1,2,\mathrm{}}{}𝔠^{(n)}(\xi )𝔮^{n1},\rho =\underset{n=1,2,\mathrm{}}{}𝔯^{(n)}(\xi )𝔮^n,$$
(42)
where $`n=1,2\mathrm{}`$ is the corresponding Born order. The coefficients $`𝔠^{(n)}`$ and $`𝔯^{(n)}`$ are $`\xi `$ dependent only.

The lowest order long-range dipole approximation is a textbooks example Bertulani and Baur (1988). Using Eq. (12) we obtain

$$c𝔡c^{(1)}=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}i\frac{F_l(t)}{\sqrt{2\omega _l}}e^{i\omega _lt}dt.$$
(43)
This leads to

$$c_x^{(1)}=2i\xi _xK_1\left(\xi _x\right),c_y^{(1)}=2\xi _yK_0\left(\xi _y\right),c_z^{(1)}=0.$$
(44)
We note that $`c_y^{(1)}`$ is real, and $`c_x^{(1)}`$ is imaginary.

Using (23) the squeezing parameter $`\rho `$ can be calculated in a similar Born-type perturbative manner. In the lowest order we obtain

$`\rho _{xx}=4i𝔮_{xx}\xi _x\left[K_1(2\xi _x)+2\xi K_0(2\xi _x)\right],`$ (45a)
$`\rho _{yy}=8i𝔮_{yy}\xi _y^2K_0(2\xi _y),`$ (45b)
$`\rho _{xy}=4𝔮_{xy}\sqrt{\xi _x\xi _y}(\xi _x+\xi _y)K_1(\xi _x+\xi _y),`$ (45c)
$`\rho _{zz}=4i𝔮_{zz}\xi _zK_1(2\xi _z).`$ (45d)
The above results can also be obtained using time dependent perturbation theory. The first order excitation probability in the $`i`$-th direction is $`P_i^\mathrm{I}=|c_i|^2.`$ The probability to excite quanta $`i,j`$ in a single step quadrupole process is to the lowest order $`P_{i,j}^{\mathrm{II}}=(1+\delta _{i,j})|\rho _{ij}|^2/4.`$ These results can be compared with the exact transition amplitudes in Eqs. (29) and (31).

In the sudden limit $`\xi 0`$ the dipole contribution comes from the transverse direction: $`c_x2i𝔡,`$ while for quadrupole excitations $`|\rho _{xx}||\rho _{zz}|2𝔮`$ are dominant in this limit. The adiabatic limit $`\xi \mathrm{}`$ is a textbook example of preservation of adiabatic invariances with exponential precision Landau and Lifshitz (1976).

### III.2 $`Z^3`$ corrections in classical solutions

The long range dipole contribution is the main part of the cross section, thus any corrections to $`c`$ are the most important. We denote as $`c_0(t)`$ the inhomogeneous part of the solution to Eq. (12)

$$c_0(t)=i_{\mathrm{}}^t(t^{})𝑑t^{}.$$
(46)
The $`c_0c_0(\mathrm{})=dc^{(1)}`$ is the previously discussed first Born dipole amplitude. The second Born correction, which here simply means the second order approximation to the classical solution of Eq. (12) is

$$i\delta c=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}[𝒬^{}c_0(t)+𝒬^+c_0^{}(t)]𝑑t.$$
(47)
This integral can be studied numerically or perturbatively with respect to $`\xi .`$

In Fig. 1 the dependence of the real and imaginary parts of $`c`$ are shown as functions of $`\xi .`$ In the adiabatic limit, which corresponds to large $`\xi `$ all of these functions decay exponentially: $`c^{(2)}\mathrm{exp}(2\xi )`$ as dictated by the adiabatic nature Landau and Lifshitz (1976). Approaching the sudden limit all corrections go to zero as powers of $`\xi .`$ In the $`\xi 0`$ limit $`\mathrm{}𝔠_x^{(1)}`$ is the dominant term, and the lowest order correction to it is $`\mathrm{}𝔠_x^{(2)}3\pi \xi ^2.`$ This leads to the following approximation for the probability Ashley et al. (1972)

$$P_\mathrm{x}=4𝔡^2(13\pi 𝔮\xi ^2).$$
(48)
The above correction behaves as $`Z^3`$ with the charge of the projectile, and reduces the excitation probability in repulsive Coulomb scattering. This correction is completely classical as it appears in a solution of classical differential equations, see Ashley et al. (1972). Note that the homogeneous part of (12) which is the source of this polarization effect, is caused by the E2 field.

Higher order corrections to the squeezing parameter $`\rho `$ are relatively large but are generally less important due to the overall smallness of the quadrupole amplitude. Here again we iteratively solve the classical equation (23). This equation contains no dipole parameters, thus the correction on $`\rho `$ is self-induced and would not change in the absence of the E1 field. Assuming that

$$i\rho _0(t)=_{\mathrm{}}^t𝒬^+(t^{})𝑑t^{}=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t^{}\mathrm{\Theta }(tt^{})𝒬^+(t^{}),$$
(49)
the second Born correction is

$$i\delta \rho =_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\left(\rho _0(t)𝒬^{}(t)+𝒬_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{}(t)\rho _0(t)\right).$$
(50)
For the case of equal frequencies, this expression can be calculated analytically

$`\delta \rho _{xx}=8𝔮^2\xi \left[K_1(2\xi )2\xi K_2(2\xi )\right]i\pi 𝔮^2\xi (12\xi )e^{2\xi },`$ (51a)
$`\delta \rho _{xy}=2\pi 𝔮^2\xi ^2e^{2\xi }8i𝔮^2\xi ^2K_1(2\xi ),`$ (51b)
$`\delta \rho _{yy}=i\pi 𝔮^2\xi (1+2\xi )e^{2\xi },`$ (51c)
$`\delta \rho _{zz}=8𝔮^2\xi K_1(2\xi )+{\displaystyle \frac{16}{3}}i𝔮^2\xi ^2K_1(2\xi ).`$ (51d)
In the $`\xi 0`$ limit, excitations due to the quadrupole field comes from the $`x`$ and $`z`$ directions, leading to the following approximate E2 contribution to the excitation probability

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P_\rho =2𝔮^2(1+\pi 𝔮\xi (14\xi ))+2𝔮^2\left(1+\frac{8}{3}𝔮\xi \right).$$
(52)
The charge asymmetry in this case is of opposite sign, resulting in an enhanced probability for repulsive interaction. This enhancement can only be observed in measurements if the dominant dipole transitions are blocked or restricted.

### III.3 Exact treatment

We start this section by showing the comparison of the exact excitation probability and the first Born dipole approximation, $`P_{\mathrm{born}}=c_0^{}c_0,`$ see Fig. 2. The harmonic-oscillator model is rather crude and can not be used to fully understand features of the realistic Coulomb dissociation of nuclei. However, it can still provide a qualitative picture. For example the Coulomb dissociation of $`{}_{9}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{17}`$F can be looked at assuming that the proton outside the oxygen core is bound by a harmonic potential. The frequency of the oscillator, related to the dipole excitation energy, is assumed to be of the order of 1 MeV. In this case a unit of the oscillator length corresponds to 6.4 fm. Assuming Coulomb excitation by $`{}_{28}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{56}`$Ni we have $`C=6.3.`$ The choice of parameters used in some figures below is guided by this model. In Fig. 2 we use impact parameter $`b=4`$ ($`b=25.6`$ fm), $`C=6,`$ and the range of velocities from 0.2 to 20 (oscillator units) that corresponds to the incident energies from 0.02 to 200 MeV/u. The choice of impact parameter is restricted by the range of applicability of the multipole expansion $`\sqrt{2}b1.`$ Our discussions also imply that the probability to find the nucleon in the oscillator at a distance from origin larger than impact parameter is negligible. For $`b=2`$ this probability is 4%, assuming the ground state wave function. However for $`b=4`$ that we use, this is less than $`10^3`$ %.

As seen in Fig. 2 the effects of higher order corrections are significant. The a difference between repulsive and attractive interactions is also transparent. This confirms the recent results of more realistic calculations Esbensen and Bertsch (2002).

#### III.3.1 Higher-order corrections

From the classical solutions for $`\rho `$ and $`c`$ exact quantum results can be extracted using Eq. (27). In order to discuss the impact of a quantum treatment we can make an expansion of the exact answer in Eq. (27), which gives

$$P_\mathrm{x}=1P_{00}c^{}c\frac{(c^{}c)^2}{2}+\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{Tr}(\rho ^{}\rho )\mathrm{}(c^T\rho ^{}c)$$
(53)
$$=P_{\mathrm{born}}+\mathrm{\Delta }P_c+\mathrm{\Delta }P_\rho +\mathrm{\Delta }P_{\mathrm{inter}}.$$

We identify here three main corrections to the first Born dipole excitation probability. The first is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P_c=c^{}c\frac{(c^{}c)^2}{2}P_{\mathrm{born}},$$

which is a correction to the dipole transition probability. It is known that the excitation of a quantum oscillator by an external force creates a coherent state. The dipole amplitude $`c,`$ which is related to a classical shift of the oscillator from its equilibrium position, appears in the exponent of Eq. (27). This accounts for all second and higher order E1 processes. Exponentiation of the dipole amplitude, in order to account for the loss of strength to multi-phonon excitations, has been previously discussed Norbury and Baur (1993). We stress here that other parts of $`\mathrm{\Delta }P_c`$ are of classical origin and mainly $`Z^3`$-dependent. They come from the effect of the quadrupole field on the shift of the oscillator from its equilibrium. This creates a deviation of $`c`$ from the Born result $`c_0`$ as discussed in Sec. III.2.

The next term in (53),

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P_\rho =\mathrm{Tr}(\rho ^{}\rho )/2,$$

is a quadrupole contribution, which comes from the expansion of the square root in (27). Similar to the exponent in the dipole term, the use of the square root accounts for all higher order quadrupole transitions.

Finally, a very interesting and purely quantum interference effect appears through the last term in (53),

$$\mathrm{\Delta }P_{\mathrm{inter}}=\mathrm{}(c^T\rho ^{}c).$$

Although it may seem that this is a quantum Barkas correction, correction vanishes to lowest order. This follows from Eqs. (44) and (45).

In Fig. 3 the absolute values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }P_c,`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }P_\rho ,`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }P_{\mathrm{inter}}`$ relative to the first Born E1 probability are plotted as functions of velocity.

The figure demonstrates that dominant corrections to the first order dipole probability come from second and higher order dipole transitions, and from the lowest order quadrupole. The interference term contributes only on the level of 1%, and quickly vanishes in the sudden limit. As discussed above, the interference term vanishes to order $`Z^3.`$ Thus it is a $`Z^4`$ term to leading order.

#### III.3.2 $`Z`$-dependence

In order to examine the $`Z`$-odd part of the excitation probability from a different point of view we introduce the Barkas factor

$$B=\frac{P_\mathrm{x}(Z)P_\mathrm{x}(Z)}{P_\mathrm{x}(Z)+P_\mathrm{x}(Z)}.$$
(54)
As discussed above this effect owes its existence to the classical dynamic interplay between E1 and E2 fields. With the validity of a multipole expansion, the bulk of this correction is expected to be proportional to the quadrupole amplitude $`𝔮.`$ In Fig. 4 $`B/𝔮`$ is plotted as a function of $`\xi .`$

Various cases corresponding to different impact parameters and projectile charges are considered. In the second Born approximation, the $`B/𝔮`$ is only a function of $`\xi ,`$ thus independent of both charge and impact parameter Mikkelsen and Sigmund (1989). Deviations observed on the plot emphasize the significance of other corrections that scale as higher powers in $`𝔮`$ and higher odd powers in $`Z.`$

The charge asymmetry related to the dipole-quadrupole interference appears naturally in various transition amplitudes. The Fig. 5 shows the transition probability from the ground state to the state with two quanta in $`z`$ direction. In this transition the vanishing out-of-plane dipole force makes the quadrupole term dominant. As demonstrated by Eq. (52) the $`Z^3`$ Barkas-type charge dependence of the quadrupole term $`\rho `$ is of the opposite sign in comparison to the dipole-quadrupole case shown in Figs. 2 and 4. In agreement with this, an enhancement of the excitation probability in repulsive Coulomb interaction is observed in Fig. 5.

#### III.3.3 Interplay of dipole and quadrupole fields

Our harmonic-oscillator model incorporates E1 and E2 electromagnetic processes exactly. The role and interplay of these processes in multi-phonon excitation may be of interest in the physics of Giant Dipole Resonances (GDR) Bertulani et al. (1996); Norbury and Baur (1993). Although precise calculations with inclusion of the relevant microscopic physics of GDR are beyond the scope of this paper, we consider here the effect that the E2 process plays in the two phonon excitation probability

$$P_{0,2}=\underset{i<j}{}|ij|U|0|^2.$$

We introduce a quadrupole coupling strength $`x`$ which simply scales the quadrupole part of the perturbation Hamiltonian (2). This can be viewed as scaling the quadrupole strength $`𝔮x𝔮.`$ The limits $`x=0`$ and $`x=1`$ naturally correspond to the cases when E2 is neglected and when E2 is at its natural value, respectively. Eq. (31), as one would expect from perturbation theory, shows that the amplitude for a two-phonon excitation is given by the sum of two terms that reflect the first order quadrupole and second order dipole processes. The E1 and E2 interplay is not trivial here and comes in several places. The first term in (31) at large quadruple strength is directly proportional to $`x.`$ Thus in this limit a quadratic scaling of the excitation amplitude is expected. At a smaller strength a substantial contribution to the second term in (31) appears as a classical dynamic polarization effect, influencing the amplitude $`c.`$ This can reduce the excitation probability for a repulsive interaction. Finally, the phases of terms in (31) can interfere. It must be noted that the dynamic polarization disappears at very low and very high velocities. Also both $`𝔡1/v`$ and $`𝔮1/v`$ but since dipole comes in the second order, the quadrupole amplitude dominates at high velocity leading to

$$P_{0,2}(x)=4𝔮^2x^2.$$
(55)
In Fig. 6 the two-phonon excitation probability as a function of the coupling strength $`x`$ is shown relative to the case with no E2, $`x=0.`$ Observed features are in agreement with the above discussion. Cases corresponding to repulsive interaction, shown by solid lines, always lead to reduced probability as compared to kinematically identical situations but attractive interaction (dashed lines). The dynamic polarization effect is maximized around $`v=3`$ which is consistent with the enhanced charge asymmetry observed in Fig. 2. In this velocity regime, the polarization effect is so strong that for repulsive interactions “turning on” the quadrupole field ($`x=1`$) leads to a reduction of a two-phonon excitation probability.

## IV Conclusions

In this work we considered a simple model of a charged particle in a harmonic-oscillator potential. The system is excited by the electric dipole and quadrupole fields of a charged projectile passing by. We have developed an application of the squeezed-state formalism to solve this problem exactly. In terms of the one-phonon dipole excitation amplitudes $`c`$ and the direct two-phonon quadrupole excitation amplitudes $`\rho `$ we derived simple expressions for various transition amplitudes, and the total and multi-phonon excitation probabilities. The parameters $`c`$ and $`\rho `$ are determined from classical equations. Our results are exact for a harmonic oscillator. For a general case they can be used as a parameterization, extending the higher-order (multi-phonon) dipole approximation introduced by Norbury and Baur Norbury and Baur (1993) to include the quadrupole field and related interference effects.

We discussed the interplay between the electric dipole and quadrupole fields and the resulting effects on various excitation probabilities. In the intermediate range of energies, between instant and adiabatic limits, ($`0.5<\xi <7`$) the influence of dynamic polarization dominates. It was shown that the origin of this effect is purely classical. The quadrupole polarization influences the effect of the dipole force, leading to a significant change in the excitation probability. This phenomenon, known in stopping power theory as Barkas effect, in the lowest order leads to a $`Z^3`$ charge dependence, and reduces the excitation probability for repulsive Coulomb interactions. We found a similar classical effect of self-induced polarization in the quadrupole amplitude. This effect is of the opposite sign and for the same repulsive kinematics results in an enhancement of the quadrupole amplitude. The effect was demonstrated in $`z`$-polarized two-phonon excitations. Our exact results exhibit some additional higher-order quantum contributions, but corrections from these are small. We presented a number of numerical calculations and plots that demonstrate a variety of observable phenomena that can be attributed to the E1-E2 interplay.

By presenting this work we hope to introduce the coherent plus squeezed-state formalism to the field of nuclear reaction physics and nuclear excitations. Numerous developments that use dipole excitations can be extended to include quadrupole transitions. Not every physical situation can be described by a harmonic oscillator. However, armed with an exact solution and a full set of time-dependent wave functions, perturbation theory based on squeezed states can be a promising future direction.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors are thankful to Carlos A. Bertulani for useful discussions. This work was supported by the U. S. Department of Energy, Nuclear Physics Division, under contract No. W-31-109-ENG-38.