text:
# There are Salem numbers of every trace

## 1. Introduction

A Salem number is an algebraic integer greater than $`1`$ whose other conjugates all lie in the closed disc $`|z|1`$, with at least one on $`|z|=1`$. Our main result is the following.

###### Theorem 1.

For every negative integer $`T`$ there is a Salem number of trace $`T`$ and degree at most $`\mathrm{exp}\mathrm{exp}(22+4T\mathrm{log}T)`$ .

It is easy to produce Salem numbers of any nonnegative trace, so the title of the paper is justified. The interest in this result is that, until now, all Salem numbers found had trace no smaller than $`1`$ (). Furthermore, it is now known that a Salem number of degree $`d10`$ has trace at least $`1d/9`$, and it seemed conceivable that there was a finite lower bound for the trace. For more details see the end of the paper.

To provide a little background, we give a brief sketch of some facts about Salem numbers. The minimal polynomial $`P(z)`$ of a Salem number $`\tau `$ is reciprocal, that is, it satisfies $`z^{\mathrm{deg}P}P(1/z)=P(z)`$, so that $`\tau ^1`$ is a conjugate of $`\tau `$, and the coefficients of $`P`$ are “palindromic”. All conjugates of $`\tau `$ apart from $`\tau `$ and $`\tau ^1`$ lie on $`|z|=1`$, and $`P(z)`$ has even degree. For every $`\epsilon >0`$ and Salem number $`\tau `$ there is a $`\lambda (\tau )`$ such that for $`k=0,1,2\mathrm{}`$ all $`\lambda \tau ^k`$ have distance at most $`\epsilon `$ from an integer. If a number field $`K`$ contains a Salem number $`\tau `$ of full degree $`[K:]`$ then every full degree Salem number in $`K`$ is a power of the smallest such Salem number in $`K`$. It is not known whether there are Salem numbers arbitrarily close to $`1`$. If “Lehmer’s conjecture” is true, then there are not. The smallest known Salem number $`1.176280818\mathrm{}`$, discovered by Lehmer in 1933, has minimal polynomial $`L(z)=z^{10}+z^9z^7z^6z^5z^4z^3+z+1`$. The polynomial $`L(z)`$ had just appeared (in 1932) in Reidemeister’s book  as the Alexander polynomial of a pretzel knot. For recent connections with knot theory, see E. Hironaka . The polynomial $`L(z)`$ can also be obtained from the characteristic polynomial $`E_{10}(x)`$ of the (adjacency matrix of the) Coxeter graph $`E_{10}=`$  by the transformation $`L(z)=z^5E_{10}(z^{1/2}+z^{1/2})`$. There are currently $`47`$ known Salem numbers less than $`1.3`$ (see Mossinghoff ).

Salem numbers are closely related to Pisot numbers, which are much better understood. A Pisot number is an algebraic integer greater than $`1`$ whose other conjugates all lie in the open disc $`|z|<1`$. For every Pisot number $`\theta `$, the distance of $`\theta ^n`$ from the nearest integer tends to $`0`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$. The set of all Pisot numbers is a closed subset of the real line. Every Pisot number is a limit point of Salem numbers, and Boyd \[4, p. 327\] has conjectured that Pisot numbers are the only limit points of Salem numbers. If this is true, then the set of all Pisot and Salem numbers is also closed. See Bertin et al , Boyd , Ghate and Hironaka  and Salem  for these and other results about Salem and Pisot numbers.

It is already known (see ) that there are Pisot numbers of every trace. However, we can greatly reduce the known upper bound for the smallest degree of a Pisot number of given negative trace.

###### Theorem 2.

For every negative integer $`T`$ there is a Pisot number of trace $`T`$ and degree at most the sum of the first $`2T+4`$ primes.

This sum is asymptotic to $`2T^2\mathrm{log}T`$. The simple examples $`z^3z1`$, $`z^2z1`$ and $`zn(n2)`$ of minimal polynomials of Pisot numbers then show that there are Pisot numbers of every trace.

Computations for negative trace down to $`25`$ (see Section 8) indicate that the upper bound on the degree in Theorem 1 should be comparable with that in Theorem 2. However, a proof of this does not seem within reach at present.

In , for infinitely many degrees $`d`$ the existence of a Pisot number of degree $`d`$ and trace $`<\frac{\mathrm{log}d}{4(\mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}d)^{3/2}}`$ was proved. Theorem 2 improves this bound to $`c\sqrt{d}/\mathrm{log}d`$ for some positive constant $`c`$.

One ingredient needed for the proof of Theorem 1 is a result concerning the exponent of maximal torsion cosets on a variety (Theorem 8), which may be of independent interest.

To end the introduction, we mention one immediate consequence of Theorem 1.

###### Corollary 3.

For infinitely many $`n`$ there is a totally positive algebraic integer of degree $`n`$ and trace less than $`2n\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}n/\mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}n`$.

This follows easily from Theorem 1, using the fact that $`\tau +1/\tau +2`$ is totally positive for any Salem number $`\tau `$.

## 2. Outline of the proof

There are two main ingredients in the proof of Theorem 1. The first is a new construction for Salem numbers, which uses pairs of polynomials whose zeros interlace on the unit circle. It is an extension of the Salem number construction method used in , where the interlacing polynomials arose from star-like trees. This new construction produces a polynomial of any specified negative trace that is, up to a possible cyclotomic factor, the minimal polynomial of a Salem number (or a reciprocal Pisot number).

The purpose of the second ingredient is to get rid of the possibility of a cyclotomic factor, while at the same time bounding the degree of the Salem number. It is based on ideas of Schmidt , and gives an upper bound for the exponent of a maximal torsion coset on a variety. This result is applied to a particular hypersurface to prove that the parameters in our polynomial construction can be chosen so that the polynomial in fact has no cyclotomic factor. This gives us our Salem number of the specified trace, with a bound on its degree.

## 3. Construction of Salem and Pisot numbers by interlacing

###### Lemma 4.

Suppose that $`\gamma >0`$, $`\alpha _1<\beta _1<\alpha _2<\mathrm{}<\beta _{d1}<\alpha _dA`$, and

$$f(x):=\frac{\gamma _{j=1}^{d1}(x\beta _j)}{_{j=1}^d(x\alpha _j)}.$$
(1)
Then $`f(x)`$ can be written as

$$f(x)=\underset{j}{}\frac{\lambda _j}{x\alpha _j},\text{with }\lambda _j>0\text{for all }j.$$
(2)
Further, the equation $`f(x)=1`$ has real roots $`\gamma _1,\mathrm{},\gamma _d`$, where $`\alpha _1<\gamma _1<\beta _1<\alpha _2<\gamma _2<\beta _2\mathrm{}<\gamma _{d1}<\beta _{d1}<\alpha _d<\gamma _d`$. Also $`\gamma _d>A`$ if and only if $`f(A)>1`$.

Conversely, every $`f(x)`$ of the form (2) can be written in the form (1) for some $`\gamma >0`$ and $`\beta _1,\mathrm{},\beta _{d1}`$ that interlace with the $`\alpha _j`$.

###### Proof.

The interlacing condition for the roots easily implies (2). Then the results follow immediately on applying the Intermediate Value Theorem to $`_j\frac{\lambda _j}{x\alpha _j}`$. ∎

We say that a pair of relatively prime polynomials $`p`$ and $`q`$ satisfy the circular interlacing condition if they both have real coefficients, positive leading term, and all their zeros lie on the unit circle, and interlace there. This last condition means that, progressing clockwise around the unit circle, a zero of $`p`$ and a zero of $`q`$ are encountered alternately. Thus $`p`$ and $`q`$ have the same degree, and neither has a multiple zero. Note too that if $`p`$ and $`q`$ satisfy the circular interlacing condition, so do $`p(z^n)`$ and $`q(z^n)`$ for $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$. In particular, the pair $`z^n1`$ and $`z^n+1`$ satisfy it.

Pisot numbers whose minimal polynomials are reciprocal behave in some ways like Salem numbers. It is clear that they must be quadratic.

###### Proposition 5.

Suppose that the polynomials $`p`$ and $`q`$ satisfy the circular interlacing condition, have integer coefficients, and that $`p`$ is monic (and thus cyclotomic). Then

1. if $`p(1)=0`$, or $`q(1)=0`$ and $`2p(1)q^{}(1)<0`$, then $`(z^21)p(z)zq(z)`$ is the minimal polynomial of a Salem number (or perhaps a reciprocal Pisot number), possibly multiplied by a cyclotomic polynomial. \[Note: one of $`p(1)`$ and $`q(1)`$ is always $`0`$.\]
2. always $`(z^2z1)p(z)zq(z)`$ is the minimal polynomial of a Pisot number.

###### Proof.

Firstly, it is clear that, as the zeros of $`p`$ and $`q`$ interlace, both $`1`$ and $`1`$ must be zeros of $`pq`$, all other zeros of both $`p`$ and $`q`$ occurring in complex conjugate pairs. Put $`z+1/z=x`$, real and in $`[2,2]`$ for $`z`$ on the unit circle.

1. Let $`\gamma `$ be the leading coefficient of $`q`$.

Suppose first that $`p`$ and $`q`$ have even degree $`2d`$. If $`z^21`$ divides $`q`$, then

$$f(x):=\frac{z}{z^21}\frac{q(z)}{p(z)}=\frac{\gamma _{j=1}^{d1}(x\beta _j)}{_{j=1}^d(x\alpha _j)},$$
(3)
where the $`\alpha _j=r_j+1/r_j`$, $`\beta _j=s_j+1/s_j`$ for zeros $`r_j`$ of $`p`$, $`s_j`$ of $`q`$, and

$$2<\alpha _1<\beta _1<\alpha _2<\mathrm{}<\beta _{d1}<\alpha _d<2.$$

Thus, by Lemma 4, this quotient is equal to $`_j\frac{\lambda _j}{x\alpha _j}`$ for some $`\lambda _j>0`$. On the other hand, if $`z^21`$ divides $`p`$, then

$$\frac{z}{z^21}\frac{q(z)}{p(z)}=\frac{\gamma _{j=1}^d(x\beta _j)}{(x^24)_{j=1}^{d1}(x\alpha _j)},$$

with

$$2<\beta _1<\alpha _1<\beta _2<\mathrm{}<\alpha _{d1}<\beta _d<2.$$

Thus Lemma 4 can be applied again to give the same conclusion.

Now suppose that $`p`$ and $`q`$ have odd degree $`2d+1`$. Then for $`\epsilon `$ equal to one of $`\pm 1`$, $`(z\epsilon )`$ divides $`q`$ and $`(z+\epsilon )`$ divides $`p`$. Then

$$\frac{z}{z^21}\frac{q(z)}{p(z)}=\frac{\gamma _{j=1}^d(x\beta _j)}{(x+2\epsilon )_{j=1}^d(x\alpha _j)},$$

and

$$2<\beta _1<\alpha _1<\beta _2<\mathrm{}<\beta _d<\alpha _d<2\text{for }\epsilon =1$$

$$2<\alpha _1<\beta _1<\alpha _2<\mathrm{}<\alpha _d<\beta _d<2\text{for }\epsilon =1$$

so that again Lemma 4 applies.

Now one of $`\{p(1),q(1)\}`$ is zero and the other positive, and $`(z^21)p(z)zq(z)`$ is the numerator of $`1f(x)`$. Hence the conditions given at $`z=1`$ are clearly those necessary and sufficient for $`(z^21)p(z)zq(z)`$ to have a real zero greater than $`1`$.
2. We consider the sum

$$\frac{q(z)}{p(z)}+\frac{z^n+1}{z^n1}$$

and write its uncancelled numerator and denominator as $`q^{}(z)g(z)`$ and $`p^{}(z)g(z)`$ respectively, where $`q^{}`$ and $`p^{}`$ are relatively prime. Then, because the pairs $`\{q,p\}`$ and $`\{z^n+1,z^n1\}`$ satisfy the circular interlacing condition, so do $`q^{}`$ and $`p^{}`$, by Proposition 6. (Note that there is no circularity, as the proof of Proposition 6 uses only part (a) of this proposition.) Then $`g(z)((z^21)p^{}zq^{})=z^n((z^2z1)pzq)(z^2+z1)p+zq`$ is of the form $`z^nR(z)\pm R^{}(z)`$, where $`R(z)=(z^2z1)pzq`$ and $`R^{}(z)=z^{\mathrm{deg}R}R(1/z)`$, using the fact that one of $`p^{}`$ and $`q^{}`$ (say $`p^{}`$) is reciprocal, and the other (say $`q^{}`$) satisfies $`z^{\mathrm{deg}q^{}}q^{}(1/z)=q^{}(z)`$. Now, for any $`\epsilon >0`$, apply Rouché’s Theorem on the circle $`|z|=1+\epsilon `$, and let $`n\mathrm{}`$. This shows that $`R(z)=(z^2z1)pzq`$ has at most one zero in $`|z|>1`$. Also, $`R`$ has no zeros on $`|z|=1`$, as any such zero would also be a zero of $`R^{}`$, and, as is easily checked, $`R`$ and $`R^{}`$ are relatively prime. Finally, because one of $`\{p(1),q(1)\}`$ is zero and the other positive, in fact $`R(1)<0`$, so that $`R`$ does have one zero on $`z>1`$.

###### Proposition 6.

Suppose that the pairs of polynomials $`p_i,q_i(i=1,\mathrm{},I)`$ each satisfy the circular interlacing condition. Then $`_i\frac{q_i(z)}{p_i(z)}`$ is equal to a quotient $`\frac{q(z)}{p(z)}`$, where $`p`$ and $`q`$ also satisfy the circular interlacing condition.

###### Proof.

From Lemma 4 and the proof of Proposition 5(a), we know that for each $`i`$

$$\frac{z}{z^21}\frac{q_i(z)}{p_i(z)}=\underset{j}{}\frac{\lambda _j}{x\alpha _j}$$
(4)
where $`x=z+1/z`$, the $`\lambda _j`$ are positive, and the $`\alpha _j`$ are all real and in $`[2,2]`$. On adding, the same applies to $`_i\frac{z}{z^21}\frac{q_i(z)}{p_i(z)}`$. Hence, by Lemma 4, this sum is equal to a positive scalar multiple of a quotient of polynomials $`\frac{_{j=1}^{d1}(x\beta _j)}{_{j=1}^d(x\alpha _j)}`$, where $`2\alpha _1<\beta _1<\alpha _2<\mathrm{}<\beta _{d1}<\alpha _d2`$. Then on substituting $`x=z+1/z`$ and considering separately the cases when $`\alpha _1=2`$ or $`\alpha _d=2`$, we get the main result.

## 4. The exponent of maximal torsion cosets

As usual, let $`𝔾_m`$ denote the multiplicative group of $``$. An $`r`$-dimensional subtorus $`H`$ of $`𝔾_m^n`$ is a subgroup of the group $`𝔾_m^n=\{(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n)x_i0\}`$ where, for some $`r`$, parameters $`t_1,\mathrm{},t_r`$ and integer matrix $`E=(e_{ji})_{(j=1,\mathrm{},r;i=1,\mathrm{},n)}`$ of rank $`r`$ we have $`x_i=t_1^{e_{1i}}\mathrm{}t_r^{e_{ri}}`$. It is an algebraic subgroup of $`𝔾_m^n`$, defined by the equations $`\{𝐱^𝐚=1𝐚A\}`$, where the $`𝐚A`$ span the lattice of integer vectors orthogonal to the rows of $`E`$. A torsion coset is a translate $`𝝎H`$ of $`H`$ by a torsion point $`𝝎=(\omega _1,\mathrm{},\omega _n)`$, the $`\omega _i`$ being roots of unity. An exponent of $`𝝎H`$ is any multiple of its order as an element of the group $`𝔾_m^n/H`$. A maximal torsion coset of a variety $`V`$ is a torsion coset not properly contained in any other torsion coset in $`V`$. Results of Laurent \[10, Th. 2\], Bombieri and Zannier \[3, Th. 2\], and Schmidt \[18, pp. 159–60\] state that for any variety $`V𝔾_m^n`$ defined over a number field $`K`$, the union of all torsion cosets contained in $`V`$ is in fact contained in a union of finitely many maximal torsion cosets in $`V`$, with an upper bound for this number depending only on the parameters of $`K`$ and $`V`$. Furthermore, in  Schmidt has given an explicit bound of this kind.

The finiteness of the number of maximal torsion cosets in $`V`$ immediately implies the existence of a single exponent for all these cosets. This fact can be used to prove, as in Section 6, that there are Salem numbers of a given trace, but without the upper bound on the smallest degree of such a number. The results that follow (Corollary 9 in particular) are needed to produce this degree bound.

We denote a typical torsion coset by $`𝙲=𝝎𝐭^E=(\omega _i_{j=1}^rt_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{e_{ji}})_{(i=1,\mathrm{},n)}𝔾_m^n`$, $`E`$ being an $`r\times n`$ integer matrix of rank $`r`$.

Consider a system of linear equations

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}a_\mathrm{}iu_i=0(\mathrm{}=1,\mathrm{},L).$$
(5)
Following Schmidt, a solution $`𝐮=(u_1,\mathrm{},u_N)𝔾_m^N`$ will be called nondegenerate if there is no subset $`I`$ of $`\{1,\mathrm{},N\}`$ with $`0<\mathrm{\#}I<N`$ such that

$$\underset{iI}{}a_\mathrm{}iu_i=0(\mathrm{}=1,\mathrm{},L).$$

###### Lemma 7.

(see \[18, p. 168–9\],  ) Suppose we have a nondegenerate solution of (5) where the $`u_i`$ are all roots of unity. Then, up to a factor of proportionality, the $`u_i`$ are all $`P_N^{}`$-th roots of unity, where $`P_N^{}`$ is the product of all primes up to $`N`$.

In fact, their result tells us that such solutions are $`m`$-th roots of unity, where $`m`$ is the product of at most $`2\sqrt{N}`$ distinct primes $`pN`$. However, we need an exponent valid uniformly for solution sets of different such $`N`$-term equations. This is why we take $`P_N^{}`$-th roots of unity, $`P_N^{}`$ being the $`\mathrm{lcm}`$ of all such $`m`$. A uniform ‘killer’ exponent is provided by the following result, and its corollary.

###### Theorem 8.

Suppose that $`V`$ is an affine variety in $`𝔾_m^n`$ defined over $``$, given say by polynomial equations

$$\underset{𝐢}{}a_\mathrm{}𝐢𝐱^𝐢=0(\mathrm{}=1,\mathrm{},L)$$
(6)
with total degree $`d`$. Suppose also that the set

$$𝒩(V)=\{𝐢^na_\mathrm{}𝐢0\text{ for some }\mathrm{}\}$$

has diameter $`D(V)`$. Then every $`(nk)`$-dimensional maximal torsion coset on $`V`$ has an exponent $`mP_N^{}`$ for some integer $`mD(V)^{2k}k^{k/2}`$. Here $`N:=\mathrm{\#}𝒩(V)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n+d}{d}\right)`$.

###### Proof.

The ingredients for the proof come from Schmidt . Take $`r=nk`$ and a maximal $`r`$-dimensional torsion coset $`𝙲=𝝎𝐭^E`$ on $`V`$, so that

$$a_\mathrm{}𝐢𝝎^𝐢𝐭^{E𝐢}=0(\mathrm{}=1,\mathrm{},L).$$

Our aim is to find $`𝝎_1`$ with also $`𝙲=𝝎_1𝐭^E`$, with $`𝝎_1`$ a vector of $`(mP_N^{})`$-th roots of unity for some $`mD(V)^{2k}k^{k/2}`$. Now for any $`𝐣^r`$ the coefficient of $`𝐭^𝐣`$ is

$$\underset{𝐢:E𝐢=𝐣}{}a_\mathrm{}𝐢𝝎^𝐢=0(\mathrm{}=1,\mathrm{},L).$$
(7)
Here the sums over $`𝐢`$ are taken over all relevant $`𝐢`$ in $`𝒩(V)`$. Now (7) may be degenerate, splitting into nondegenerate equations

$$\underset{𝐢I_q}{}a_\mathrm{}𝐢𝝎^𝐢=0(\mathrm{}=1,\mathrm{},L,qQ\text{ say})$$
(8)
for nonempty subsets $`I_q`$ of $`^n`$. Now, for a single $`q`$, apply Lemma 7 to (8), to obtain

$$\underset{𝐢I_q}{}a_\mathrm{}𝐢𝝎^{𝐢𝐢_q}=0(\mathrm{}=1,\mathrm{},L)$$
(9)
where $`𝐢_q`$ is some fixed vector in $`I_q`$. Here, the number of terms is at most $`N`$ . Then for all $`qQ`$, we have from Lemma 7 that all $`𝝎^{𝐢𝐢_q}(qQ)`$ are vectors of $`P_N^{}`$-th roots of unity.

Recalling that $`k=nr`$, we claim that the set of all vectors $`\{𝐢𝐢_q𝐢I_q,qQ\}`$ generates a $`k`$-dimensional sublattice $`_𝙲`$ of $`^n`$. For, from (7), the lattice $`^E`$ spanned by the rows of $`E`$ is orthogonal to $`_𝙲`$, and so $`_𝙲`$ has dimension $`nr`$. But if the inequality were strict, there would be a nonzero vector $`𝐢^{}^n`$ orthogonal to $`_𝙲`$ and not in the rational span of $`^E`$. Then for $`𝐢I_q`$ we would have $`𝐢^{}𝐢=𝐢^{}𝐢_q`$ (and also of course $`E𝐢=E𝐢_q`$), so for any $`u𝔾_m`$ we would have, for $`\mathrm{}=1,\mathrm{},L`$,

$`{\displaystyle a_\mathrm{}𝐢𝝎^𝐢𝐭^{E𝐢}u^{𝐢^{}𝐢}}`$ $`={\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐢I_q}{}}a_\mathrm{}𝐢𝝎^𝐢𝐭^{E𝐢_q}u^{𝐢^{}𝐢_q}`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{q}{}}𝐭^{E𝐢_q}u^{𝐢^{}𝐢_q}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐢I_q}{}}a_\mathrm{}𝐢𝝎^𝐢`$
$`=0,`$
and so the larger torsion coset $`𝝎𝐭_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{E^{}}`$ would lie on $`V`$, where $`𝐭^{}=(𝐭,u)`$ and $`E^{}=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{E}{𝐢^{}}\right)`$, contradicting the maximality of $`𝝎𝐭^E`$.

Next take a basis $`\mathbf{}_1,\mathrm{},\mathbf{}_k`$ of vectors in $`\{𝐢𝐢_q𝐢I_q,qQ\}`$ for $`_𝙲`$, and put $`𝝎=e^{i𝜽}=(e^{i\theta _1},\mathrm{},e^{i\theta _n})`$. Write $`𝜽=_{j=1}^k\lambda _j\mathbf{}_j+𝝍`$, where $`𝝍=𝝆E`$ for some $`𝝆^r`$. Then, on solving the system of linear equations

$$\mathbf{}_i𝜽=\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}\lambda _j\mathbf{}_i\mathbf{}_j(i=1,\mathrm{},k)$$

and using the fact that $`P_N^{}\mathbf{}_i𝜽0(mod2\pi )(i=1,\mathrm{},k)`$, we see that $`P_N^{}det(\mathbf{}_i\mathbf{}_j)𝝀0(mod2\pi )`$. Note too that $`det(\mathbf{}_i\mathbf{}_j)0`$. Then, using the Cauchy-Schwartz and Hadamard inequalities, we have that

$$|det(\mathbf{}_i\mathbf{}_j)|D(V)^{2k}k^{k/2}.$$

Put $`𝐭_1=e^{i𝝆}`$. Then $`𝐭_1^E=e^{i𝝍}`$, and for $`𝝎_1=𝝎𝐭_1^E`$ and some $`m^{}=mP_N^{}`$ with $`mD(V)^{2k}k^{k/2}`$ we have $`𝝎_1^m^{}=1`$. Since

$$𝙲=𝝎𝐭^E=𝝎(𝐭_1𝐭)^E=𝝎_1𝐭_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{E}$$

say, we see that $`𝙲`$ has exponent $`m^{}`$. ∎

This result immediately gives us a killer exponent $`K`$ valid for all maximal torsion cosets on $`V`$.

###### Corollary 9.

Let $`V`$ be as in the Theorem, and $`K=P_N^{}\mathrm{lcm}(1,2,\mathrm{},D(V)^{2n}n^{n/2})`$, where $`N=\mathrm{\#}𝒩(V)`$. Then every maximal torsion coset of $`V`$ has exponent $`K`$.

## 5. Maximal torsion cosets on a particular hypersurface

We shall be applying the results of the previous section to the affine hypersurface $`h(𝐱)=0`$, where $`𝐱=(x_0,\mathrm{},x_n)𝔾_m^{n+1}`$ and

$$h(𝐱)=2(x_0^21)\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}(x_i1)x_0\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}(x_j+1)\underset{\underset{ij}{i=1}}{\overset{n}{}}(x_i1).$$

The reason for looking at this hypersurface is that we shall apply the identity

$$\frac{h(𝐱)}{2x_0_{i=1}^n(x_i1)}=\frac{x_0^21}{x_0}\frac{1}{2}\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{x_i+1}{x_i1},$$
(10)
which is connected to our interlacing considerations of Section 3.

###### Lemma 10.

The only maximal torsion cosets of $`h`$ with $`x_0`$ nonconstant are the algebraic subgroups $`B_{ij}`$ of $`𝔾_m^{n+1}`$, where $`ij`$ are both nonzero, and

$$B_{ij}=\{𝐱x_i=x_j=1,x_0=t_0,x_{\mathrm{}}=t_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{}i,j)\},$$

of rank $`n1`$.

###### Proof.

Clearly no point on $`h=0`$ can have just one $`x_i=1.`$ If $`𝐱`$ with any two $`x_i,x_j=1`$ is on $`h=0`$ then it belongs to $`B_{ij}`$. Thus any other rank $`r`$ maximal torsion coset with $`x_0`$ nonconstant has no $`x_i`$ identically $`1`$, so that we must have $`x_0=\omega _0t_1^{e_{10}}\mathrm{}t_r^{e_{r0}}`$, where $`(e_{10},\mathrm{},e_{r0})0`$ and $`x_i=\omega _it_1^{e_{1i}}\mathrm{}t_r^{e_{ri}}`$, where $`(e_{1i},\mathrm{},e_{ri})0`$ whenever $`\omega _i=1`$. By avoiding certain hyperplanes we can choose $`\pm (k_1,\mathrm{},k_r)^r`$ not orthogonal to any nonzero $`(e_{1i},\mathrm{},e_{ri})`$. Then for $`(t_1,\mathrm{},t_r)=(t^{k_1},\mathrm{},t^{k_r})`$, $`x_i=\omega _it^\mathrm{}_i`$ where $`\mathrm{}_i:=_{j=1}^rk_je_{ji}0`$ when $`\omega _i=1`$, and, by choice of the sign, $`\mathrm{}_0>0`$. Now as $`t\mathrm{}`$, the right-hand side of (10) goes to infinity, so that the coset cannot be on $`h=0.`$

We now estimate the killer exponent $`K`$, valid for every maximal torsion coset on this hypersurface, defined over $`𝔾_m^{n+1}`$.

###### Lemma 11.

There is a killer exponent $`K`$ with $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}K<0.2+(3(n+1)/2)\mathrm{log}(n+3)`$ for the hypersurface $`h=0`$. Further, $`K`$ can be chosen with all its prime factors less than $`(n+3)^{3(n+1)/2}`$.

###### Proof.

The hypersurface has diameter $`D=\sqrt{n+4}`$, degree $`d=n+2`$, $`N=\mathrm{\#}𝒩(h=0)=32^n`$. Hence $`D^{2n+2}(n+1)^{(n+1)/2}<(n+3)^{3(n+1)/2}`$, and Corollary 9 gives $`K=P_N^{}\mathrm{lcm}(1,2,\mathrm{},D^{2n+2}(n+1)^{(n+1)/2})`$, with all prime factors of $`K`$ less than $`(n+3)^{3(n+1)/2}`$. Then, using standard bounds of Rosser and Schoenfeld  for the arithmetical functions $`\theta ,\psi `$ we obtain

$`\mathrm{log}K`$ $`<\theta (32^n)+\psi ((n+3)^{3(n+1)/2})`$
$`<1.0232^n+1.04(n+3)^{3(n+1)/2}`$
$`<1.2(n+3)^{3(n+1)/2},`$
giving the upper bound claimed. ∎

## 6. Proof of Theorem 1

The following lemma will complete the proof of Theorem 1.

###### Lemma 12.

For given even $`n`$ there are positive integers $`k_1,\mathrm{},k_n`$ such that

$$h(t,t^{k_1},\mathrm{},t^{k_n})=2(t1)^{n1}S(t),$$

where $`S(t)[t]`$ is monic irreducible and the minimal polynomial of a Salem number of trace $`T:=1n/2`$. Further, $`S`$ has degree less than $`\mathrm{exp}\mathrm{exp}(22+4T\mathrm{log}T)`$.

###### Proof.

For all maximal torsion cosets of $`h`$ with $`x_0`$ constant (ie all except the $`B_{ij}`$) we can suppose that the constant $`x_0`$-values are all $`K`$-th roots of unity, where furthermore $`K`$ has been chosen minimally. Note that $`K`$ is certainly even, because the point $`x_0=x_1=\mathrm{}=x_N=1`$ lies on $`h=0`$ and, as it is on no $`B_{ij}`$, must lie in one of the constant-$`x_0`$ maximal torsion cosets. Take $`k_1=K`$, and $`k_2,\mathrm{},k_n`$ as the smallest $`n1`$ primes not dividing $`K`$. Then all $`k_1,\mathrm{},k_n`$ are pairwise relatively prime. We now assert that for every root of unity $`\omega `$ and $`\omega ^𝐤=(\omega ,\omega ^{k_1},\mathrm{},\omega ^{k_n})`$ with $`h(\omega ^𝐤)=0`$, we have $`\omega =1`$.

For $`\omega ^𝐤`$ belongs to some maximal torsion coset. If $`\omega ^𝐤`$ has at least two components $`=1`$, then (by the extended euclidean algorithm) $`\omega =1`$. Alternatively, it belongs to no $`B_{ij}`$, and so to some maximal torsion coset with $`x_0`$ constant, $`x_0=\omega `$, and so $`\omega ^K=\omega ^{k_1}=1`$. This is impossible, as we cannot have just one $`x_i=1`$, as noted above. This proves the assertion.

It is easy to check that $`(d/dt)^nh(t,t^{k_1},\mathrm{},t^{k_n})`$ evaluated at $`t=1`$, is nonzero. Furthermore, $`h(t,t^{k_1},\mathrm{},t^{k_n})_{i=1}^n(x_i1)(2(t^21)tn)0(mod2)`$, so that all coefficients of $`h`$ are even. This gives the stated factorization $`2(t1)^{n1}S(t)`$ of $`h(t,t^{k_1},\mathrm{},t^{k_n})`$. Also, as all $`k_i2`$,

$$h(t,t^{k_1},\mathrm{},t^{k_n})=2t^{2+{\scriptscriptstyle k_i}}nt^{1+{\scriptscriptstyle k_i}}+\mathrm{}$$

showing that $`S(t)`$ has trace $`1n/2`$.

Finally, to show that $`S`$ is the minimal polynomial of a Salem number, observe that we have shown that none of its zeros are roots of unity. Now since $`t^k+1`$ and $`t^k1`$ satisfy the circular interlacing condition, so does the sum $`\frac{1}{2}_{i=1}^n\frac{t^{k_i}+1}{t^{k_i}1}`$, by Proposition 6, so we can write it as $`q(t)/p(t)`$, where $`p`$ and $`q`$ satisfy the circular interlacing condition. Furthermore, as $`n`$ is even, $`q`$ has integer coefficients, as does $`p=_i(t^{k_i}1)/(t1)^{n1}`$. Hence, as $`p(1)=0`$, the numerator $`S(t)=(t^21)p(t)tq(t)`$ of the right-hand side of (10) with $`x_0=t,x_i=t^{k_i}`$ is, by Proposition 5(a), the minimal polynomial of a Salem number of trace $`1n/2`$.

Now the degree of $`S`$ is $`2+_ik_i(n1)`$, and from Lemma 11 we can take $`k_2,\mathrm{},k_n`$ to be the smallest $`n1`$ primes greater than $`(n+3)^{3(n+1)/2}`$. By Bertrand’s Postulate (Chebyshev’s Theorem), this gives $`\mathrm{deg}S<K+(n1)2^{(n1)}(n+3)^{3(n+1)/2}<2K`$, and $`\mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}\mathrm{deg}S<\mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}K+\mathrm{log}2/\mathrm{log}K<0.2+(3(n+1)/2)\mathrm{log}(n+3)+0.1`$. For $`n=2T+2`$ one readily checks that this is less than $`22+4T\mathrm{log}T`$. ∎

###### Remark 13.

There are many maximal torsion cosets with $`x_0`$ constant, for instance $`x_0=1,x_1=x_2^1=t_1,\mathrm{},x_{n1}=x_n^1=t_{n/2}.`$ Also one can for instance construct some for $`x_0=1`$ using the identity $`3\mathrm{cot}\pi /3\mathrm{cot}\pi /6=0`$.

## 7. Proof of Theorem 2

###### Proof.

The proof is much easier for Pisot numbers, as there are no possible cyclotomic factors to dispose of. We replace the fraction $`(t^21)/t`$ in (10) by $`(t^2t1)/t`$, and then can simply choose the parameters $`k_i`$ to be the first $`n`$ primes. Thus, again putting $`\frac{1}{2}_{i=1}^n\frac{t^{k_i}+1}{t^{k_i}1}=q(t)/p(t)`$, the polynomial $`(z^2z1)p(z)zq(z)`$ will be the minimal polynomial of a Pisot number of trace $`2n/2`$. ∎

## 8. Computing Salem and Pisot numbers of negative trace.

Salem and Pisot numbers of negative trace can be produced using $`h(t,t^{k_1},\mathrm{},t^{k_n})`$, as in the previous sections. Thus, for the Pisot numbers of trace $`T`$, the first $`2T+4`$ primes are used for the $`k_i`$. For the Salem numbers of trace $`T`$, the first $`2T+2`$ primes are used for the $`k_i`$. In particular, $`k_1`$ is taken to be simply $`2`$, instead of the very large killer exponent $`K`$ used in the proof above. Computation using Maple shows that this produces a polynomial free of cyclotomic factors for $`T25`$, giving a Salem number of trace $`T`$ and degree equal to the sum of the first $`2T+2`$ primes minus $`2T1`$ (for instance degree $`5540`$ for trace $`25`$). However, we do not know whether this always happens. It would of course be nice if this could be proved, as we would then obtain a degree bound in Theorem 1 as good as that in Theorem 2.

Here is some pseudocode that gives the minimal polynomials. For a Salem number of trace $`T`$:

$`r=1;S=(z^21)(z1);Q=z;`$

for $`j=1,\mathrm{},T+1`$ do

$`q=\text{nextprime}(r);r=\text{nextprime}(q)`$;

$`S=\frac{z^q1}{z1}\frac{z^r1}{z1}S\frac{z^{q+r}1}{z1}Q;`$

$`Q=\frac{z^q1}{z1}\frac{z^r1}{z1}Q`$;

enddo

if $`\mathrm{gcd}(S(z),S(z)S(z^2)S(z^2))=1`$ then print$`(S)`$;

endif

The $`\mathrm{gcd}`$ condition tests for cyclotomic factors, and is based on the fact that a root of unity $`\omega `$ is conjugate to one of $`\omega `$, $`\omega ^2`$ or $`\omega ^2`$. See  for further developments of this idea. For instance, for $`T=2`$ we obtain the (reciprocal) Salem polynomial

$$\begin{array}{c}S_2\left(z\right)=z^{38}+2z^{37}2z^{36}19z^{35}57z^{34}123z^{33}222z^{32}357z^{31}527z^{30}727z^{29}950z^{28}1190z^{27}\hfill \\ \hfill 1440z^{26}1692z^{25}1936z^{24}2161z^{23}2355z^{22}2506z^{21}2602z^{20}2635z^{19}2602z^{18}\mathrm{}+1\end{array}$$

Note that the Salem polynomials $`S`$ produced by this method have $`|S(1)S(1)|`$ large. This is easily seen by putting $`z=\pm 1`$ in the pseudocode. An interesting question is whether there are Salem numbers with arbitrary trace and $`|S(1)S(1)|=1`$, the so-called unramified Salem numbers (see Gross and McMullen ).

For a Pisot number of trace $`T`$:

$`r=1;P=z^2z1;Q=z;`$

for $`j=1,\mathrm{},T+2`$ do

$`q=\text{nextprime}(r);r=\text{nextprime}(q)`$;

$`P=(z^q1)(z^r1)P(z^{q+r}1)Q;`$

$`Q=(z^q1)(z^r1)Q`$;

enddo

print$`(P)`$;

Finally, we justify the statements in the Introduction. We note that there are Salem numbers of every nonnegative trace: for $`n>0`$ the polynomial $`z^4nz^3(2n+1)z^2nz+1=z^2((z+1/z)^2n(z+1/z)(2n+3))`$ is easily seen to be the minimal polynomial of a Salem number of trace $`n`$. This follows from the fact that $`x^2nx(2n+3)`$ has one zero in $`(2,2)`$ and the other zero greater than $`2`$. Also, $`z^6z^42z^3z^2+1=z^3((z+1/z)^34(z+1/z)2)`$ is the minimal polynomial of a Salem number of zero trace.

The lower bound $`1d/9`$ for the trace of a degree $`d10`$ Salem number follows from the fact that the trace of a totally positive algebraic integer of degree $`n5`$ is greater than $`16n/9`$ () on noting that for a Salem number $`\tau `$ of degree $`d`$ and trace $`T`$, the number $`\tau +1/\tau +2`$ is totally positive of degree $`d/2`$ and trace $`dT`$. Thus (turning the inequality around) for $`T2`$ every Salem number of trace $`T`$ has degree at least

$$2\frac{9T}{2}+2=\{\begin{array}{cc}18k+2\text{ for }T=2k\hfill & \\ 18k+10\text{ for }T=(2k+1).\hfill & \end{array}$$

This inequality is sharp for $`T=2`$ (). The only Salem number of degree less than $`10`$ having negative trace is the one with minimal polynomial $`z^8+z^7z^64z^55z^44z^3z^2+z+1`$ ().

Acknowledgment. We are grateful to the London Mathematical Society for their financial support for this work through a Collaborative Small Grant. We also thank the referee for helpful comments.


format: text

text:
# Optical Refractive Index of Massive Particles and Physical Meanings of Left-handed Media

## Abstract

In this Letter the expression for the refractive index of de Broglie wave in the presence of a potential field is obtained and based on this, the physical meanings of negative index of refraction is revealed. We demonstrate that the electromagnetic wave propagation in a left-handed medium with negative refractive index behaves just like that of antiphotons, which is required of the complex vector field theory. It is believed that the complex vector field theory is helpful in considering the wave propagation and photonic band gap structure in the left-handed medium photonic crystals with a periodicity in negative and positive index of refraction.
PACS: 78.20.Ci; 42.70.-a; 03.50.-z; 42.25.-p
Keywords: Negative refractive index; Left-handed media; Complex vector field theory

More recently, a kind of artificial composite metamaterials (the so-called left-handed media) having a frequency band where the effective permittivity and the effective permeability are simultaneously negative attracts considerable attention of many authors both experimentally and theoretically. In 1967Note that, in the literature, some authors mentioned the wrong year when Veselago suggested the left-handed media. They claimed that Veselago proposed or introduced the concept of left-handed media in 1968 or 1964. On the contrary, the true history is as follows: Veselago’s excellent paper was first published in Russian in July, 1967 \[Usp. Fiz. Nauk 92, 517-526 (1967)\]. This original paper was translated into English by W.H. Furry and published again in 1968 in the journal of Sov. Phys. Usp.. Unfortunately, Furry stated erroneously in his English translation that the original version of Veselago’ work was first published in 1964., Veselago first considered this peculiar medium and showed from Maxwellian equations that such media having negative simultaneously negative $`ϵ`$ and $`\mu `$ exhibit a negative index of refraction, i.e., $`n=\sqrt{ϵ\mu }`$. It follows from the Maxwell’s curl equations that the phase velocity of light wave propagating inside this medium is pointed opposite to the direction of energy flow, that is, the Poynting vector and wave vector of electromagnetic wave would be antiparallel, i.e., the vector k, the electric field E and the magnetic field H form a left-handed system; thus Veselago referred to such materials as “left-handed” media, and correspondingly, the ordinary medium in which k, E and H form a right-handed system may be termed the “right-handed” one. Other authors call this class of materials “negative-index media (NIM)”, “backward media (BWM)”, “double negative media (DNM)” and Veselago’s media. There exist a number of peculiar electromagnetic and optical properties, for instance, many dramatically different propagation characteristics stem from the sign change of the optical refractive index and phase velocity, including reversal of both the Doppler shift and Cherenkov radiation, anomalous refraction, amplification of evanescent waves, unusual photon tunneling, modified spontaneous emission rates and even reversals of radiation pressure to radiation tension. In experiments, this artificial negative electric permittivity media may be obtained by using the array of long metallic wires (ALMWs), which simulates the plasma behavior at microwave frequencies, and the artificial negative magnetic permeability media may be built up by using small resonant metallic particles, e.g., the split ring resonators (SRRs), with very high magnetic polarizability. A combination of the two structures yields a left-handed medium. Recently, Shelby et al. reported their first experimental realization of this artificial composite medium, the permittivity and permeability of which have negative real parts. One of the potential applications of negative refractive index materials is to fabricate the so-called “superlenses” (perfect lenses): specifically, a slab of such materials may has the power to focus all Fourier components of a 2D image, even those that do not propagate in a radiative manner.

A number of novel electromagnetic and optical properties in left-handed media result from the negative index of refraction. But what is its physical meanings? Although in the literature many researchers have investigated the negative refractive index of left-handed media by a variety of means of applied electromagnetism, classical optics, materials science as well as condensed matter physics, less attention than it deserves is paid to the physical meanings of negative refractive index. In this Letter we will study this fundamental problem from the purely physical point of view.

Before we consider the negative refractive index of left-handed media, we first deal with the “optical refractive index” problem of de Broglie wave, the results of which will be helpful in discussing the former problem.

For the case of de Broglie particle moving in a force field, we can also consider its “optical refractive index” $`n`$. According to the Einstein- de Broglie relation, the dispersion relation of the de Broglie particle with rest mass $`m_0`$ in a scalar potential field $`V\left(𝐱\right)`$ agrees with

$$\left(\omega \varphi \right)^2=k^2c^2+\frac{m_0^2c^4}{\mathrm{}^2},$$
(1)
where $`\varphi `$ is defined to be $`\varphi =\frac{V}{\mathrm{}}`$, and $`k`$, $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`c`$ stand for the wave vector, Plank constant and speed of light in a vacuum, respectively. It follows from Eq.(1) that

$$\omega ^2\left[1\frac{m_0^2c^4}{\mathrm{}^2\omega ^2}2\frac{\varphi }{\omega }+\left(\frac{\varphi }{\omega }\right)^2\right]=k^2c^2,$$
(2)
which yields

$$\frac{\omega ^2}{k^2}=\frac{c^2}{1\frac{m_0^2c^4}{\mathrm{}^2\omega ^2}2\frac{\varphi }{\omega }+\left(\frac{\varphi }{\omega }\right)^2}.$$
(3)
Compared Eq.(3) with the dispersion relation $`\frac{\omega ^2}{k^2}=\frac{c^2}{n^2}`$, one can arrive at

$$n^2=1\frac{m_0^2c^4}{\mathrm{}^2\omega ^2}2\frac{\varphi }{\omega }+\left(\frac{\varphi }{\omega }\right)^2,$$
(4)
which is the square of “optical refractive index” of de Broglie wave in the presence of a potential field $`\varphi `$.

It is of physical interest to discuss the Fermat’s principle of de Broglie wave in a potential field $`V`$. One can readily verify that the variation $`\delta cn^2dt=0`$ can serve as the mathematical expression for the Fermat’s principle of de Broglie particle (for the derivation of this expression, the readers may be referred to the Appendix). If, for example, by using the weak-field and low-motion approximation where $`\left|\frac{\varphi }{\omega }\right|1`$, $`\frac{v^2}{c^2}1`$ and $`\left(\frac{\varphi }{\omega }\right)^2`$ in Eq.(4) can therefore be ignored, $`1\frac{m_0^2c^4}{\mathrm{}^2\omega ^2}\frac{v^2}{c^2}`$, then $`n^2`$ is approximately equal to

$$n^2\frac{2}{mc^2}\left(\frac{1}{2}mv^2V\right).$$
(5)
Thus in the non-relativistic case, Fermat’s principle, $`\delta cn^2dt=0`$, is equivalent to the following well-known action principle $`\delta L(𝐱,𝐯)dt=0`$ (differing only by a constant coefficient $`\frac{2}{mc^2}`$), where the function $`L(𝐱,𝐯)=\frac{1}{2}mv^2V(𝐱)`$ denotes the Lagrangian of massive particle in a potential field $`V(𝐱)`$. Hence the above formulation for the “optical refractive index” of the de Broglie particle inside a potential field is said to be self-consistent.

According to Eq.(4), there are two square roots (i.e., positive and negative roots, $`n_+`$, $`n_{}`$) for the refractive index of de Broglie wave. Indeed, it is verified that the particle and its antiparticle possess these two square roots, respectively. If the refractive index of particle is positive, then that of its antiparticle will acquire a minus sign, which may be seen by utilizing the charge conjugation transformation: $`\omega \omega `$, $`\varphi \varphi `$. If, for example, we consider the refractive index of electron and positron by regarding the positron as the negative energy solution to Dirac’s equation, then we can classify the solutions of Dirac’s equation into the following four cases:

(i) $`E=E_+`$, $`h=\mathrm{}k`$, $`n=n_+`$;

(ii) $`E=E_+`$, $`h=\mathrm{}k`$, $`n=n_+`$;

(iii) $`E=E_{}`$, $`h=\mathrm{}k`$, $`n=n_{}`$;

(iv) $`E=E_{}`$, $`h=\mathrm{}k`$, $`n=n_{}`$,
where $`h`$, $`E_+`$ and $`E_{}`$ respectively represent the helicity, positive and negative energy corresponding to the electron and positron. It is apparent that the relationship between the cases (i) and (iv) is just the charge conjugation transformation. This transformation also relates the case (ii) to (iii).

Compare the case of wave propagation in left-handed media with the results presented above, we can conclude that the negative optical refractive index in left-handed media corresponds to the antiparticles of photons (the so-called antiphotons). However, as is well known, there exist no antiphotons in free space. The theoretical reason for this is that the four-dimensional vector potentials $`A_\mu `$ with $`\mu =0,1,2,3`$ are always taking the real numbers. But in a dispersive and absorptive medium, as an effective medium theory, the vector potentials $`A_\mu `$ of which may probably take the complex numbers. Such complex vector field theory has been considered previously. Here the Lagrangian density is written $`=\frac{1}{2}F_{\mu \nu }^{}F_{\mu \nu }`$, where the electromagnetic field tensors $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu `$, $`F_{\mu \nu }^{}=_\mu A_\nu ^{}_\nu A_\mu ^{}`$ with $`A_\mu ^{}`$ being the complex conjugation of $`A_\mu `$. The complex four-dimensional vector potentials $`A_\mu `$ and $`A_\mu ^{}`$ describe the propagating behavior of both photons and antiphotons.

Now a problem left to us is that does the complex vector field theory apply well in investigating the light propagation inside the negative refractive index medium. Detailed analysis will show that this theory is truly applicable to the consideration of optical index of refraction and wave propagation in left-handed media. This will be proved in what follows by using another mathematical form

$$\frac{i}{c_n}\frac{}{t}𝐌=\times 𝐌,𝐌=0$$
(6)
for the Maxwellian equations, where $`𝐌=\sqrt{ϵ}𝐄+i\sqrt{\mu }𝐇`$, $`c_n=1/\sqrt{ϵ\mu }`$, $`ϵ`$ and $`\mu `$ are absolute dielectric constant and magnetic conductivity of the medium, respectively. It can be easily verified that the Maxwellian equations can be rewritten as Eq.(6).

If $`ϵ>0`$ and $`\mu >0`$ are assumed, then the light propagation inside the isotropic linear right-handed medium (regular medium) is governed by Eq.(6). For the time-harmonic electromagnetic wave in the right-handed medium, Eq.(6) can be rewritten

$$i\frac{\omega }{c_n}𝐌=𝐤\times 𝐌$$
(7)
with $`\omega `$ being the frequency of electromagnetic wave.

Now let us take the complex conjugation of the two sides of Eq.(7), and the result is of the form

$$i\frac{\omega }{c_n}𝐌^{}=𝐤\times 𝐌^{},$$
(8)
where the field $`𝐌^{}`$ is expressed in terms of both electric and magnetic fields, $`𝐄^{}`$ and $`𝐇^{}`$, i.e., $`𝐌^{}=\sqrt{ϵ}𝐄^{}i\sqrt{\mu }𝐇^{}`$. Thus, we have

$$i\frac{\omega }{c_n}[\sqrt{ϵ}𝐄^{}i\sqrt{\mu }𝐇^{}]=𝐤\times [\sqrt{ϵ}𝐄^{}i\sqrt{\mu }𝐇^{}].$$
(9)
Multiplying the two sides of Eq.(9) by the imaginary unit $`i`$, one can arrive at

$$i\frac{\omega }{c_n}[\sqrt{ϵ}𝐄^{}i\sqrt{\mu }𝐇^{}]=𝐤\times [\sqrt{ϵ}𝐄^{}i\sqrt{\mu }𝐇^{}],$$
(10)
where the magnitude of $`c_n`$ (i.e., $`1/\sqrt{ϵ\mu }`$) does not change but it can be rewritten as a new form $`c_n=1/\sqrt{(ϵ)(\mu )}`$. According to Eq.(10), one can obtain the following relations

$$𝐤\times 𝐄^{}=\omega (\mu )𝐇^{},𝐤\times 𝐇^{}=\omega (ϵ)𝐄^{}.$$
(11)
Note that here $`ϵ>0`$, $`\mu >0`$. Thus it follows from Eq.(11) that the wave vector $`𝐤`$, the electric field $`𝐄^{}`$ and the magnetic field $`𝐇^{}`$ of the electromagnetic wave in this medium, through which the fields $`𝐄^{}`$ and $`𝐇^{}`$ propagate, form a left-handed system. This, therefore, means that here the Poynting vector $`𝐒`$ is pointed opposite to the direction of the wave vector of electromagnetic wave. For this reason, it is expected that the reversal of wave vector, instantaneous helicity inversion and anomalous refraction will take place when an incident lightwave from the right-handed medium travels to the interfaces between left- and right- handed media. Since the direction of phase velocity and energy flow of lightwave propagating in the left-handed medium would be antiparallel, the change of wave vector $`𝐤`$ will truly occur during the light propagation through the interfaces. The inversion of $`𝐤`$ means that its magnitude acquires a minus sign, namely, the optical index of refraction $`n`$ becomes negative since the magnitude of $`𝐤`$ is defined to be $`k=n\omega /c`$. In view of the above discussion, it is concluded that Eq.(10) governs the propagation of time-harmonic planar electromagnetic wave, where the electromagnetic fields are described by $`𝐄^{}`$ and $`𝐇^{}`$.

Thus by making use of the complex vector field theory we obtain a formulation which can treat the wave propagation in both right- and left- handed media. One of the advantages of the present formulation is that the minus sign of negative refractive index can be placed into the theoretical calculations by using the above unified approach rather than by hand. Such unified approach will be useful in dealing with the electromagnetic wave propagation and photonic band gap structures in the so-called left-handed medium photonic crystals, which are artificial materials patterned with a periodicity in negative and positive index of refraction.

To summarize, we study the “optical refractive index” of de Broglie wave and reveal the physical meanings of negative refractive index in left-handed media. It is shown that the electromagnetic wave propagation in negative refractive index media behaves like that of antiphotons, which requires that we should take into account the complex vector field theory. This will provide us with a unified formulation to treat the wave propagation in both left- and right- handed media.
Acknowledgements This project was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under the project No. $`90101024`$. The author is grateful to S.L. He for useful discussion on the wave propagation in left-handed media.
Appendix

In this Appendix, we will discuss the Fermat’s principle of de Broglie wave. First we consider the relativistic free-particle case where the Einstein-de Broglie relation $`(\mathrm{}k)^2c^2=(\mathrm{}\omega )^2m_0^2c^4`$ is utilized. By applying the dispersion relation $`\frac{\omega ^2}{k^2}=\frac{c^2}{n^2}`$ to the Einstein-de Broglie relation, one can arrive at

$$\frac{m_0^2c^4}{\mathrm{}^2}=\left(1n^2\right)\omega ^2.$$
(12)
and consequently derive

$$\mathrm{}\omega =\frac{m_0c^2}{\sqrt{1n^2}}.$$
(13)
Compared Eq.(13) with the relativistic energy-velocity formula (with $`v`$ being the particle velocity)

$$\mathrm{}\omega =\frac{m_0c^2}{\sqrt{1(\frac{v}{c})^2}},$$
(14)
we obtain $`n=\frac{v}{c}`$. According to the original expression for the Fermat’s principle, i.e., $`\delta ndl=0`$, where $`n\mathrm{d}l`$ is the “optical” path element with $`\mathrm{d}l=v\mathrm{d}t=nc\mathrm{d}t`$, the Fermat’s principle for the de Broglie particle can be rewritten

$$\delta \frac{v}{c}vdt=0\mathrm{or}\delta cn^2dt=0.$$
(15)
In order to consider the wave propagation of the Broglie particle in a potential field, we assume that the latter formula (i.e., $`\delta cn^2dt=0`$) in Eq.(15) is still valid and would also apply very well in this case. It follows from Eq.(5)that this assumption truly holds at least for the non-relativistic case.


text:
# Optimization of Bell’s Inequality Violation For Continuous Variable Systems

## Acknowledgment

We thank R. Teshima for his help. G.G. research is supported by the Killam Trust; F.K. research is supported by NSERC.


text:
# Heavy-quark recombination in 𝑍⁰ decay

## Abstract

We briefly review the recent advances of heavy-quark recombination mechanism. This mechanism predicts a class of power-suppressed 3-jet events in $`Z^0`$ decay, such as $`b\overline{b}q`$ and $`b\overline{b}\overline{q}`$. Furthermore, heavy quark fragmentation function also receives a contribution from this mechanism. Some light can be shed on the scaling of the maximum of the fragmentation function for S-wave heavy hadrons. We finally comment on a new variant of this mechanism which has important impact on the precision electroweak physics.

Heavy flavor production serves as an excellent testing ground for perturbative QCD Frixione:1997ma . So far, the heavy quark cross sections in all different processes have been computed to at least the next-to-leading order. However, in order to compare with experimental data, a sound understanding of how a heavy quark turns into a heavy hadron is crucial. The standard strategy is to implement the heavy quark fragmentation as the sole hadronization mechanism.

Inspired by the Non-relativistic QCD factorization for the formation of heavy quarkonium Bodwin:1994jh , a new hadronization mechanism, dubbed heavy-quark recombination (HQR) was recently developed Braaten:2001bf . It was initially motivated as a “higher twist” mechanism, to supplement the usual fragmentation. The central picture of this mechanism is quite simple: after a hard scattering, a heavy quark may capture a nearby light parton which emerges from the hard scattering and happens to carry soft momentum in the heavy quark rest frame. Subsequently they can materialize into a heavy hadron, plus additional soft hadrons. A typical HQR process in hadron collision at $`O(\alpha _s^3)`$ is $`\overline{q}g\overline{B}+\overline{b}+X`$, where $`\overline{B}`$ is produced from the $`b\overline{q}`$ recombination. Similarly, $`cq`$ recombination has later been introduced to account for $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c`$ production Braaten:2003vy .

HQR is drastically distinct from the other “higher-twist” mechanisms – conventional recombination model Das:1977cp , intrinsic charm model Vogt:1995fs , and so on. In all these cases, the beam remnants participate in the dynamics of forming a heavy hadron. In contrast, the beam remnants play no role in HQR processes, which leads to great simplifications. In fact, HQR respects a simple factorization formula. Namely, inclusive production of heavy hadron in HQR can be expressed as a product of hard-scattering parton cross section, which is calculable in perturbative QCD, and a nonperturbative parameter (recombination factor), which characterizes the probability for the heavy quark and the light parton to evolve into a state containing the heavy hadron Braaten:2001bf .

One important achievement of HQR is that it can explain the charm meson and baryon production asymmetries observed in a number of fixed-target experiments, in a simpler, more coherent and controlled fashion than those aforementioned models Braaten:2001uu ; Braaten:2003vy . The charm asymmetry is simply attributed to the asymmetry between the densities of light quark and anti-quark in the beam and target hadron.

Although this success constitutes a strong evidence for HQR, the complicated hadronic environment in fixed-target experiments prevents us from excluding other hadronization models. Most probably, the asymmetries arise from the interplay of several different mechanisms, one of which is HQR. A curious question thereby is, is there a cleaner playground where HQR can be unambiguously singled out?

The answer is yes, because the physical idea of HQR is quite general, so its applications are not only confined in the hadroproduction of heavy hadron. In fact, heavy flavor production in $`e^+e^{}`$ annihilation is an ideal place to test HQR Jia:2003ct ; Jia:2003jk . In particular, we will be interested in $`B`$ production on the $`Z^0`$-pole, thanks to the huge statistics of $`Z^0`$ samples. Clearly, those “higher-twist” mechanisms which rely on the beam remnants in hadron collision, are simply absent here.

Let us consider $`B`$ production at $`O(\alpha _s^2)`$ through $`Z^0b\overline{b}q\overline{q}`$. If each quark independently fragments, then it represents a regular 4-jet event. Nonetheless, in a small corner of phase space where $`\overline{q}`$ is soft in the $`b`$ rest frame, they can form a composite $`b\overline{q}`$ state with definite color and angular momentum. Subsequently this state hadronizes into a $`\overline{B}`$ meson plus soft hadrons. We thereby end up with a jet containing $`\overline{B}`$ from the recombination, the recoiling $`\overline{b}`$ jet and a light quark jet Jia:2003ct . The corresponding Feynman diagrams are shown in Fig. 1. The inclusive $`\overline{B}`$ production rate from HQR can be written

$`d\mathrm{\Gamma }[\overline{B}]={\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}d\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}[Z^0b\overline{q}(n)+\overline{b}+q]\rho [b\overline{q}(n)\overline{B}].`$ (1)
where $`d\widehat{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_n`$ are the perturbatively calculable parton cross sections, and $`\rho _n`$ are the recombination factors, and $`n`$ denotes the color and angular momentum quantum numbers of $`b\overline{q}`$. These $`\rho _n`$ parameters have recently been defined in terms of nonperturbative QCD matrix elements Chang:2003ag . An important property of these parameters is that they scale as $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/m_b`$. While $`\overline{B}`$ can be produced in four different recombination channels, the color-singlet, spin-matching channel is expected to dominate. Adopting the fitted value of $`\rho _1^c`$ from Ref. Braaten:2001uu ; Braaten:2003vy , and using its scaling property, we can obtain $`\rho _1^b=0.1`$.

A striking signal of these novel 3-jets is that the third jet is initiated by a light quark, instead of by a gluon. However, distinguishing quark and gluon jets experimentally requires a large statistics. OPAL collaboration has selected 3,000 symmetric 3-jet events at the $`Z`$ resonance, in which the most energetic jet is tagged to contain $`b`$, and the angle between this $`b`$-jet and each of the two low energy jets is roughly $`150^{}`$ Alexander:1995bk . These samples were assumed to all be the $`b\overline{b}g`$ events. However now we know there must be a small fraction of them are actually made of HQR 3-jets. Simple dimensional argument suggests these 3-jets are suppressed by a factor of $`\alpha _s(M_Z)\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}m_b/M_Z^210^5`$ relative to $`b\overline{b}g`$. However, a more quantitative study indicates that the ratio of the yield for HQR 3-jet events to that for the $`b\overline{b}g`$ in such a topology is roughly $`0.012`$. So there are about 36 new events out of 3,000 OPAL samples, seemingly not statistically important. We hope that prospective Giga-Z experiments with a much larger number of $`Z^0`$ samples will confirm the existences of these 3-jet events definitely. If true, it should be viewed as a decisive triumph of the HQR mechanism.

Though the HQR cross section is highly suppressed for 3-jet, its magnitude becomes much larger when $`\overline{B}`$ and $`q`$ lie in the fragmentation region, i.e., with a small invariant mass, because the virtuality of the internal gluon that splits into $`q\overline{q}`$ (see Fig. 1) becomes much smaller in this region. This motivates us to examine if this $`b\overline{q}`$ recombination process also contributes to the $`b`$ fragmentation function.

Fragmentation functions are nonperturbative objects and usually defy a tackle from perturbation theory. This is true for $`q`$, $`g`$ to fragment into $`\pi `$, $`K`$. However, the fact that $`b`$ is heavy ($`m_b\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$) may allow us to proceed further. Armed with knowing how a heavy quark hadronizes in the recombination picture encoded in Eq. (1), we can readily derive the HQR contribution to $`b`$ fragmentation function by integrating the inclusive $`\overline{B}`$ differential cross sections over some appropriate kinematic variables. For example, the HQR contribution to $`b`$ fragmentation into $`\overline{B}^{}`$ turns out to be

$`D_{b\overline{B}^{}}^{\mathrm{HQR}}(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{32\rho _1^b\alpha _s^2(m_b)}{81}}{\displaystyle \frac{z(22z+3z^2)}{(1z)^2}},`$ (2)
where $`z`$ is the energy fraction carried by $`\overline{B}^{}`$ relative to $`b`$. This HQR fragmentation function is not away from zero until $`z`$ becomes large, and finally diverges quadratically as $`z1`$. This divergence is a symptom that perturbative calculation in the endpoint region becomes invalid. Yet, one can show that Eq. (2) is still valid as long as $`1z\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$. The $`z`$ distribution in Eq. (2) is much harder than the widely-used Peterson fragmentation function Peterson:1983ak . This may suggest that $`b`$ hadronizing via picking up a $`\overline{q}`$ from vacuum is still non-negligible, even at relatively small $`z`$. However, some model-independent extraction of the nonperturbative part of $`b`$ fragmentation function shows also a harder spectrum than Peterson parameterization Ben-Haim:2003yu .

Insight may be gained if we assume that $`z1\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$ is where the peak of fragmentation function is located. While a perturbative QCD treatment from HQR is ceasing to work when close to the endpoint region, $`D_{b\overline{B}^{}}^{\mathrm{HQR}}(1\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/m_b)`$ may still betray the correct order of magnitude of the maximum of the “true” fragmentation function. If this is true, then the fragmentation function of $`b`$ to $`B^{}`$ is expected to peak around $`z=0.93`$, with a height roughly $`\frac{32}{27}\rho _1^b\alpha _s^2(m_b)(m_b/\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}})^21.5`$. If we approximate the “true” $`B^{}`$ fragmentation function by Peterson function $`D(z;ϵ_b)`$ with $`ϵ_b=0.006`$, and take the fragmentation probability $`f_{bB^{}}0.3`$, the “true” peak is also around $`z0.93`$ with a height about 1.7, in good agreement with our naive estimate. Since $`\rho _1^b\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/m_b`$, we thereby propose the maxima of the fragmentation functions for S-wave heavy hadrons scale as $`\alpha _s^2(m)m/\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}`$. For charmed hadrons, this scaling law doesn’t hold so well, but still conveys the correct order of magnitude.

A comprehensive understanding of $`Z^0`$ decay to heavy flavor is important to precision electroweak physics Hagiwara:fs . If we were able to extract the finite power correction from the linearly divergent total HQR cross section, it would represent an $`O(\alpha _s^2\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}m_b/M_Z^2)10^6`$ correction to the partial width of $`Z^0`$ to $`b\overline{b}`$. The $`Z^0`$ width has been measured to per mille accuracy, thus the contribution associated with Fig. 1 can be neglected.

However, there is a new HQR process, as depicted in Fig. 2, occurring at order $`\alpha _s`$ only, with a genuine “higher twist” contribution of order $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mathrm{QCD}}/m_b`$ Jia:2003jk . To accomplish this, $`bg`$ recombination needs to be invoked. The net contribution of this new mechanism to the partial width of $`Z^0`$ to $`b\overline{b}`$ turns out to be $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }[b\overline{b}]=32\pi \alpha _s(M_Z)\xi _3^b/9\mathrm{\Gamma }_0[b\overline{b}]`$, where $`\xi _3^b`$ is an unknown color-triplet recombination factor. Both $`\xi _3^b`$ and $`\xi _3^c`$ may be fitted from the global electroweak analysis, and consequently the Standard Model predictions of various electroweak observables will be updated.

All the three HQR mechanisms, $`b\overline{q}`$, $`bq`$ and $`bg`$ recombination have now been fulfilled.

I thank E. Braaten and T. Mehen for the collaboration on laying down the foundation of heavy-quark recombination mechanism. This work is supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. PHY-0100677.