text:
# Roughness of a Tilted Anharmonic String at Depinning

## Abstract

We consider the discretized model of a driven string with an anharmonic elastic energy, in a two dimensional random potential, as introduced by Rosso and Krauth R1 . Using finite size scaling, we numerically compute the roughness of the string in a uniform applied force at the critical depinning threshold. By considering a string with a net average tilt, we demonstrate that the anharmonic elastic energy crosses the model over to the quenched KPZ universality class, in agreement with recent theoretical predictions.

Recently, Rosso and Krauth (RK) reported R1  new simulations of roughening at the depinning threshold of a driven one dimensional string in a two dimensional (2d) random potential. Introducing higher order anharmonic terms to a quadratic elastic energy for the string, RK found a value for the roughness exponent $`\zeta 0.63`$, in contrast to the values $`\zeta 1.2`$ found in earlier simulations X1 , and recently theoretically X2 , using a purely quadratic energy. RK noted that the value $`\zeta 0.63`$ had previously been found in some cellular automata models for depinning X3 .

In a subsequent work R2  RK (with Hartmann) noted that that when an average tilt is applied to the string, the anharmonic terms break the rotational invariance present in the quadratic model, thus suggesting that the anharmonic terms might cross the model into the quenched KPZ universality class, previously introduced by Kardar R3  to explain the anisotropic depinning observed in the automata models. Simulations R4  of a continuum model with the quenched KPZ term found $`\zeta 0.61\pm 0.06`$, consistent with the automata models and with the anharmonic model of RK. Most recently, a functional renormalization group calculation by Le Doussal and Wiese R5  argued that the quenched KPZ term can indeed be generated, not only by the anisotropic disorder considered by Kardar, but also by the anharmonic elastic energy terms introduced by RK.

A key prediction of Kardar’s for anisotropic depinning is that the roughness exponent for a tilted interface will differ from that of an untilted one; for a tilted string in 2d, he predicted the exact value of $`\zeta _{\mathrm{tilt}}=1/2`$. In this report, by computing the $`\zeta _{\mathrm{tilt}}`$ of RK’s model for the first time, we offer a direct numerical demonstration that their model does indeed belong in the quenched KPZ universality class.

Our model is the same as that of RK. We take for the energy of the string,

$$E[h_i]=\underset{i=0}{\overset{L1}{}}\left\{V(i,h_i)fh_i+E_{\mathrm{el}}(h_{i+1}h_i)\right\},$$
(1)
where $`h_i`$, is the integer height of the string at position $`i=0,\mathrm{}L`$ on a discretized lattice, $`V(i,j)`$ is an uncorrelated random Gaussian potential with zero average and unit variance, $`f`$ is a uniform external driving force, and $`E_{\mathrm{el}}`$ is the elastic energy of deforming the string. $`V(i,j)`$ is taken periodic on an $`L\times L`$ system size. In their work, RK used periodic boundary conditions. Here, to model a tilted interface with net slope $`s`$, we use boundary conditions $`h_L=h_0+sL`$. Defining the height relative to a uniformly tilted line, $`\delta h_ih_isi`$, so that $`\delta h_L=\delta h_0`$, we can rewrite Eq.(1) in terms of the $`\delta h_i`$ and recover the same model as RK except that the elastic term now has the form,

$$\underset{i=0}{\overset{L1}{}}E_{\mathrm{el}}(\delta h_{i+1}\delta h_i+s).$$
(2)
We now carry out simulations of Eq.(1), using the elastic term of Eq.(2). Using the same algorithm R6  as RK, we consider slopes $`s=0`$ and $`s=1`$ for one of the specific cases studied in R1 ,

$$E_{\mathrm{el}}(\mathrm{\Delta })=\mathrm{\Delta }^4/16.$$
(3)
We compute the interface roughness $`W`$ for a system of length $`L`$,

$$W^2\frac{1}{L}\underset{i=0}{\overset{L1}{}}\left[(\delta h_i^c\overline{\delta h^c})^2\right]L^{2\zeta },$$
(4)
where $`\delta h_i^c`$ is the relative height at site $`i`$ of the critical string at depinning, $`\overline{\delta h^c}`$ is the average relative height of the critical string, $`[\mathrm{}]`$ represents an average over many realizations of the random potential $`V(i,j)`$, and $`\zeta `$ is the roughness exponent. We also compute the disorder average of the critical force, $`f_c`$.

Our results for string roughness $`W^2`$ vs. $`L`$, averaged over $`500`$ disorder samples (for $`L=2048`$ we use only $`200`$ samples), are plotted in Fig. 1. For $`s=0`$, our numerical values agree with those in Ref.R1 . The straight lines on the log-log plot indicate the power law relation, $`W^2L^{2\zeta }`$, and the difference in slopes indicate clearly different roughness exponents for the tilted ($`s=1`$) and untilted ($`s=0`$) strings.

To determine the values of the exponent $`\zeta `$, we fit the data in Fig. 1 to $`W^2L^{2\zeta }`$, using system sizes from $`L_{\mathrm{min}}`$ to $`L=2048`$. We plot the resulting values of $`\zeta `$ vs. $`L_{\mathrm{min}}`$ in Fig. 2, for $`L_{\mathrm{min}}=4`$ to $`256`$. We see that as $`L_{\mathrm{min}}`$ increases, the values of $`\zeta `$ decrease and saturate to a constant value characterizing the roughness in the asymptotic large $`L`$ limit. Using the results from fitting with $`L_{\mathrm{min}}=128`$ we find for $`s=0`$ the value $`\zeta 0.63\pm 0.01`$. This value is used to plot the solid straight line in Fig. 1, and agrees with the value found by RK. For $`s=1`$, however, we find the value $`\zeta =0.52\pm 0.01`$. We use this value to plot the dashed line in Fig. 1. Given that $`\zeta `$ for $`s=1`$ still shows a small systematic decreases as $`L_{\mathrm{min}}`$ increases, we believe our value is in excellent agreement with the exact value of $`1/2`$ predicted by Kardar, and thus verifies that the anharmonic model of RK is in the quenched KPZ universality class.

Finally, in Fig. 3 we plot the critical force $`f_c`$ as a function of system size $`L`$ for the tilted and untilted strings. We see clearly that the critical forces approach different values as $`L`$ increases, another signature of anisotropic depinning.

We thank T. Nattermann and Y. Shapir for helpful discussions. This work has been supported by DOE grant DE-FG02-89ER14017 and NSF grant PHY-0242483.


format: text

text:
# The Opacity of Spiral Galaxies from Counts of Distant Background Galaxies

## 1. Introduction

The Synthetic Field Method (SFM) was developed by González et al. (1998) as a technique for determining the average opacity through the disk of a nearby spiral by counting more distant background galaxies. This number is compared with those of ”synthetic fields”, a known WFPc2 deep field, dimmed by a certain opacity, added to the foreground galaxy image.

González et al. (2003) examined the application of the method and concluded that the optimum results with HST/WFPc2 imaging would be obtained on Fornax and Virgo cluster galaxies, with the accuracy degrading for galaxies much closer or more distant.

Our sample was drawn from the HST archives, in part from the Cepheid Distance Scale HST Key project sample.

## 2. Results

We present preliminary results on NGC4535, NGC4725 and UGC2302. The numbers of real and simulated field galaxies were compared in annuli of deprojected radius.

### 2.1. NGC4535 and NGC4725

NGC4535 is a face-on SABc with a half-light radius of 5.1 kpc at a distance of 16 Mpc. Several spiral arms with bright HII regions are visible in the HST image. NGC4725 is a SABab ringed galaxy at 12 Mpc Its half-light radius is 5.4 kpc. The HST image shows much less structure. The radial opacity profiles of both however are similar (see Figure 1), showing 2.5 magnitudes of extinction in I at the half-light radius, dropping off to 0.5 magnitude.

### 2.2. UGC2302

UGC2302 is a LSB at 15 Mpc is a much more compact object. At comparable radii, it does not show as much absorption; less then a magnitude at 5 kpc from the center.

## 3. Conclusions

The uncertainties in these individual profiles are large due to low numbers of field galaxies and an added uncertainty due to their clustering. By averaging a number of fields we will improve on these uncertainties for an average radial opacity model of spiral galaxies. For different Hubble types, we intend to compare the radial dependence of opacity with the HI density profile to obtain cold dust-to-gas ratios.

## References

González, R. A., Allen, R. J., Dirsch, B., Ferguson, H. C., Calzetti, D., and Panagia, N. 1998, ApJ 506, 152

González, R. A., Loinard, L., Allen, R. J., and Muller, S. 2003, AJ 125, 1182

Holwerda, B. W., Allen, R. J., and van der Kruit, P. C.: 2002, ASP Conf. Ser. 273: 337


text:
# What do very nearly flat detectable cosmic topologies look like?

## Abstract

Recent studies of the detectability of cosmic topology of nearly flat universes have often concentrated on the range of values of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ given by current observations. Here we study the consequences of taking the bounds on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ given by inflationary models, i.e. $`|\mathrm{\Omega }_01|1`$. We show that in this limit, a generic detectable non-flat manifold is locally indistinguishable from either a cylindrical ($`^2\times 𝕊^1`$) or toroidal ($`\times 𝕋^2`$) manifold, irrespective of its global shape, with the former being more likely. Importantly this is compatible with some recent indications based on the analysis of high resolution CMB data. It also implies that in this limit an observer would not be able to distinguish topologically whether the universe is spherical, hyperbolic or flat. By severely restricting the expected topological signatures of detectable isometries, our results provide an effective theoretical framework for interpreting cosmological observations, and can be used to confine any parameter space which realistic search strategies, such as the ‘circles in the sky’ method, need to concentrate on. This is particularly important in the inflationary limit, where the precise nature of cosmic topology becomes undecidable.

Two fundamental questions regarding the nature of the universe concern its geometry and topology. Regarding geometry, recent high precision data by WMAP  have provided strong evidence suggesting that the universe is nearly flat, with the ratio of its total matter–energy density to the critical value, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$, very close to one. They, however, do not fix the sign of its curvature.111The most recent estimates of the density parameters specify this region to be $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0[0.99,1.05]`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }[0.69,0.79]`$ with a $`2\sigma `$ confidence, which still leaves open the sign of the curvature of the cosmic geometry. The near flatness of the universe is compatible with inflationary models which further predict this ratio to be extremely close to one. Regarding topology, most recent studies of the detectability of the cosmic topology have so far concentrated on the range of values of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$ given by current observations . These works have demonstrated that the likelihood of detectability of the cosmic topology depends crucially on the curvature radius.

Here we take the bounds predicted by inflationary models, where $`|\mathrm{\Omega }_01|`$ is orders of magnitude smaller than those indicated by current observations, and examine what would a detectable topology look like in such nearly flat universes. We study the local nature of detectable hyperbolic and spherical manifolds and discuss the significance of our results for search strategies for the detection of the topology of the universe.

We assume that the universe can be locally modelled by a Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker (FLRW) metric and consider the possibility that the $`3`$-space may be a multiply connected manifold, $`M=\stackrel{~}{M}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`\stackrel{~}{M}=𝕊^3`$ or $`^3`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a fixed-point free and discrete group of isometries of $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$.

Since we study the topology of universes with curved spatial sections, we need to express the redshift–distance relation in units of the curvature radius, which depends on the matter–energy content of the universe as well as $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$. Even though current observations favor the content to be well approximated by dust plus a dark energy, its actual details do not affect our considerations below, and thus in this sense our results are robust. This is important since the precise nature of the dark energy is at present not known.

A natural way to study the detectability of topology is through the lengths of closed geodesics. For an isometry $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and a point $`xM`$, the length of the closed geodesic generated by $`g`$ is given by its distance function $`d(x,gx)`$, i.e. the distance between $`x`$ and its image $`gx`$. This readily allows the definition of the injectivity radius $`r_{inj}(x)`$ as half the length of the smallest closed geodesic passing through $`x`$. One can also define an injectivity radius for the whole manifold $`M`$ as $`r_{inj}=inf_{xM}r_{inj}(x)`$, which is the radius of the smallest sphere inscribable in $`M`$. A necessary condition for detectability of cosmic topology is then given by $`r_{inj}(x)<\chi _{obs}`$, where $`\chi _{obs}`$ is the redshift–distance relation evaluated at the maximum redshift ($`z=z_{max}`$) of the survey used. Similarly, a sufficient condition for detectability is $`r_{max}<\chi _{obs}`$, where $`r_{max}=sup_{xM}r_{inj}(x)`$ is the maximum injectivity radius.

To study the local shape of the detectable non–flat manifolds in the density limit suggested by inflationary models, $`|\mathrm{\Omega }_01|1`$, we make three physically motivated assumptions: (i) the observer is at a position $`x`$ where topology is detectable, (ii) the survey depth is very small in units of the curvature radius, and (iii) the topology is not excludable, i.e. it does not produce too many images so as to make it already observationally excludable.222 A sufficient condition for a topology to be excludable is $`r_{max}\chi _{obs}`$.  Therefore in the following our main physical assumption will be

$$r_{inj}(x)\chi _{obs}1.$$
(1)
An important class of isometries are the Clifford translations (CT), defined as those with constant distance functions. We shall encounter isometries whose distance functions do not vary appreciably inside the observable sphere of radius $`\chi _{obs}`$. This motivates the definition of an isometry $`g`$ as CT–like inside a given (here the observable) sphere if the difference between the maximum and minimum lengths of all closed geodesics generated by $`g`$ that lie within the sphere is sufficiently small ($`1`$). In the following we consider the hyperbolic and spherical spaces separately, and prove that in the limit (1) all isometries that generate observable images generically behave CT–like.

It is known that the set of compact orientable hyperbolic manifolds can be ordered in a sequence of sequences of manifolds. The manifolds in each individual sequence are ordered by increasing volume, with a cusped manifold as its limit. This implies that for a sufficiently large index $`i`$ a compact manifold $`M_i`$ looks like a cusped manifold, and we shall therefore refer to such manifolds as cusped–like. An important feature of such cusped and cusped-like manifolds is that they possess regions (namely the cusp regions) where $`r_{inj}(x)`$ takes small values (zero in the limiting case). Therefore for a given $`\chi _{obs}`$, in any sequence we can always choose $`i`$ such that for all $`j>i`$, the cusped–like regions of the manifolds $`M_j`$ satisfy (1). Thus the compact hyperbolic manifolds that have detectable topologies are the cusped-like ones in their cusp regions.

Such cusped–like regions are well approximated by pure cusp manifolds, whose covering group is generated by two parabolic isometries with the same fixed point at infinity. Since these isometries commute, the fundamental group of a pure cusp is $`\times `$, thus, topologically, a pure cusp is equivalent to $`\times 𝕋^2`$. In principle, the length scales of both generators are mutually independent, however if one of the length scales is larger than the diameter of the observable sphere, then the detectable part of the topology will be that of a horn, which is equivalent to $`^2\times 𝕊^1`$. Within all known cusped–like manifolds, pure cusps generically have one length scale much smaller than the other, which therefore makes the latter case more likely.

We can formulate the previous argument more precisely by studying the CT–like behavior of a parabolic isometry in the limit (1). A convenient model of a hyperbolic space for our analysis is the upper–half space model, $`^3=\{x=(x_1,x_2,x_3)^3:x_3>0\}`$. The distance between two points $`x,y^3`$ in this model is given by

$$\mathrm{cosh}(d(x,y))=1+\frac{|xy|^2}{2x_3y_3},$$
(2)
and a parabolic isometry can always be put in the form $`gx=(x_1+L,x_2,x_3)`$, with $`L>0`$, so that, under the condition (1), its distance function reduces to $`d(x,gx)=\frac{L}{x_3}`$.

We can obtain a bound on the variation of this distance function inside a detectable sphere of radius $`\chi _{obs}1`$ by computing the difference between the maximum and minimal lengths of closed geodesics associated with $`g`$ inside this sphere. Up to second order this gives

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }d}{d_0}<\frac{1}{2}\frac{d_{\mathrm{max}}d_{\mathrm{min}}}{d_0}\chi _{obs},$$
(3)
where $`d_0`$ is the distance function of $`g`$ evaluated at the center of the sphere, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }d=|d(x,g(x))d_0|`$. This demonstrates that under the condition (1), parabolic isometries behave CT–like inside the observable universe, thus an observer living in a horn or cusped region, may not distinguish, even topologically, her universe as being hyperbolic or flat.

We shall now consider the spherical spaces and recall that any spherical 3-manifold is a quotient $`𝕊^3/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a finite subgroup of $`SO(4)`$ acting freely on the $`3`$-sphere. The classification of spherical $`3`$-dimensional manifolds is well known . Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a finite group, any element $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is of finite order, thus $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ contains cyclic subgroups. Generically, the injectivity radius is determined by the cyclic subgroup of largest order of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ . We shall therefore initially consider the action of cyclic groups on $`𝕊^3`$.

A cyclic group $`_p`$ may act on $`𝕊^3`$ in different ways parametrized by an integer $`q`$ such that $`p`$ and $`q`$ are relatively prime, and $`1q<p/2`$. These actions give rise to the lens spaces $`L(p,q)`$, whose global injectivity radii depend only on $`p`$ and are given by $`r_{inj}=\frac{\pi }{p}`$. The lens spaces $`L(p,1)`$ are globally homogeneous, thus in the following we shall only consider inhomogeneous lens spaces ($`q2`$ and $`p5`$).

Representing the 3-sphere as the subset of pairs $`z=(z_1,z_2)`$ of complex numbers of unit length, $`|z|^2=|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2=1`$, let $`g_{(p,q)}`$ be the generator of the covering group of $`L(p,q)`$, and $`g^nz`$ the image of $`z`$ by its $`n`$-th iteration. The distance between $`z`$ and its $`n`$-th image is then given by

$$\mathrm{cos}(d(z,g^nz))=\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{2\pi n}{p}\right)|z_1|^2+\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{2\pi nq}{p}\right)|z_2|^2.$$
(4)
In order to determine the local nature of a lens space we shall require some results from number theory (see e.g. ).333 Any rational number $`\frac{q}{p}<1`$, with $`q`$ and $`p`$ relative primes, can be written as a continued fraction
$$\frac{q}{p}=\frac{1}{a_2+\frac{1}{a_3+F_4}},$$
with $`F_n<1`$, thus allowing the representation $`\frac{q}{p}[0,a_2,a_3,\mathrm{},a_k]`$ with $`a_i`$, which is unique if we demand $`a_k>1`$. The convergents are defined as $`c_i=\frac{q_i}{p_i}=[0,a_2,a_3,\mathrm{},a_i]`$ for $`ik`$, where $`q_i`$ and $`p_i`$ which are relative primes can be obtained recursively, the sequences $`\{q_i\}`$ and $`\{p_i\}`$ are strictly increasing and $`p_{k1}<\frac{p}{2}`$. It can further be shown that
$$\frac{q}{p}\frac{q_i}{p_i}=\frac{(1)^{i+1}}{p_i(p_{i+1}+p_iF_{i+2})}(1)^{i+1}\frac{G_i}{p_i}.$$
(5)   We start by computing the iterate of $`g_{(p,q)}`$ which generates the smallest geodesic at a given point $`z`$. For points on the great circle $`(z_1,0)`$ the smallest geodesic is the one corresponding to the generator (or its inverse). This, however, is not the case for points on the great circle $`(0,z_2)`$. In fact, in this case the $`n`$-th iteration of $`g_{(p,q)}`$ will generate the smallest geodesic if $`n`$ is chosen such that $`nq=\pm 1mod(p)`$. The existence of this integer is guaranteed by Euler’s theorem, according to which $`q^{\varphi (p)}=1mod(p)`$, where $`\varphi (p)`$ is the number of integers which are relative prime to and smaller than $`p`$. Thus, the smallest geodesic for any point on $`(0,z_2)`$ will be generated by the choice of $`n=\pm q^{\varphi (p)1}mod(p)`$. Moreover, the only points for which $`r_{inj}(z)=\pi /p`$ lie on the great circles given by $`(z_1,0)`$ and $`(0,z_2)`$. These circles are the equators of minimum injectivity radius, and will be important in the following considerations.

It can be shown that the following generalization holds: For any point in the lens space $`L(p,q)`$ there is a convergent $`\frac{q_j}{p_j}`$ such that the isometry that generates the smallest geodesic is $`g^{p_j}`$. An immediate consequence of this is that the number of candidate isometries that may generate the smallest geodesic is $`k`$. Furthermore, $`k\mathrm{log}_24q^2`$ and thus $`k`$ is small even for lens spaces with large $`p`$ and $`q`$. Therefore, this result provides an effective procedure for obtaining the length of the smallest geodesic at any point. Moreover, using Eq. (5) from the footnote, and recalling that for any integer $`m`$, $`\mathrm{cos}(2\pi m+s)=\mathrm{cos}(|s|)`$, we have

$$\mathrm{cos}\left(2\pi \frac{p_iq}{p}\right)=\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{2\pi }{p}\left|p_iqpq_i\right|\right)=\mathrm{cos}(2\pi G_i),$$
(6)
with $`i=1,\mathrm{},k`$. Thus, since $`G_k=1/p`$, for points on the equator $`(0,z_2)`$ the isometry which generates the smallest geodesics is $`g^{p_{k1}}`$, and therefore $`q^{\varphi (p)1}\pm p_{k1}\mathrm{mod}(p)`$. Now For any $`n=p_j`$, we can rewrite (4) as

$$\mathrm{cos}(d(z,g^{p_j}z))=\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{2\pi p_j}{p}\right)|z_1|^2+\mathrm{cos}(2\pi G_j)|z_2|^2.$$
(7)
Choosing $`j`$ from now on such that $`p_j\sqrt{p}p_{j+1}`$ we have $`\frac{2\pi p_j}{p}\frac{2\pi }{\sqrt{p}}`$ and $`2\pi G_j\frac{2\pi }{\sqrt{p}}`$. To obtain an upper bound on the length of the smallest closed geodesics at any point, we substitute these inequalities into (7) obtaining $`\mathrm{cos}(d(z,g^{p_j}z))\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{2\pi }{\sqrt{p}}\right)`$, for all $`z`$ in the 3-sphere. We then have

$$r_{\mathrm{max}}\frac{1}{2}\underset{zM}{sup}d(z,g^{p_j}z)\frac{\pi }{\sqrt{p}}=r_{inj}\sqrt{p}$$
(8)
since $`r_{\mathrm{max}}`$ is the supremum of the smallest geodesics. A similar bound can be obtained if we restrict our analysis to geodesics generated by $`g_{(p,q)}`$ (see ). The minimum length of such geodesics is $`\frac{2\pi q}{p}`$, and this can be viewed as an alternative upper bound on $`2r_{\mathrm{max}}`$. It is clear that $`r_{\mathrm{max}}\frac{\pi q}{p}`$ is a better bound than (8) if and only if $`q<\sqrt{p}`$. Moreover, in this case, since $`p_2=\mathrm{int}[\frac{p}{q}]`$, we have $`p_2>\sqrt{p}`$, thus $`p_j=p_1=1`$ and therefore the generator $`g_{(p,q)}`$ gives the smallest geodesic at least for $`|z_2||z_1|`$, which corresponds to half of the lens space.

In the above analysis no constraints were imposed on the lens spaces, i.e. the values of $`p`$ and $`q`$. We wish now to concentrate on values of these parameters which lead to observable isometries in the limit (1). In order to show that the isometry that generates the smallest geodesic behaves CT–like, it suffices to show that $`g^{p_j}`$ behaves CT–like in the observable universe. Recall that any detectable lens space will have $`p>\frac{\pi }{\chi _{obs}}`$ , thus from (8) we have that $`d(z,g^{p_j}z)`$ is small. Expanding (7) and using the fact that $`|z_1|^2+|z_2|^2=1`$ we obtain

$$d(z,g^{p_j}z)=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\pi \left[\left(\frac{p_j}{p}\right)^2+\left(G_j^2\left(\frac{p_j}{p}\right)^2\right)|z_2|^2\right]^{1/2},$$
(9)
thus we need to determine the variation of $`|z_2|`$ inside the sphere of radius $`\chi _{obs}`$ and centered at $`z`$.

Let an observer be located at $`z𝕊^3`$, and let $`w`$ be another point at a distance $`\chi _{obs}1`$, then we have $`\chi _{obs}>|\eta |`$, where $`\eta =zw`$. Denoting by $`\delta _1=||z_1||w_1||`$, and correspondingly for $`\delta _2`$, up to the first order in $`\chi _{obs}`$, one has $`|z_1|\delta _1+|z_2|\delta _2=0`$, which then gives $`\chi _{obs}^2>|\eta |^2\delta _1^2+\delta _2^2=\left(\frac{\delta _2}{\left|z_1\right|}\right)^2`$, where the equality is achieved whenever $`z_1`$ is parallel to $`w_1`$, and $`z_2`$ is parallel to $`w_2`$. Thus one has

$$\delta _2<|z_1|\chi _{obs}.$$
(10)
Now in order to analyze the behavior of the isometry $`g^{p_j}`$, we have to consider two different cases: (I) when the observer is not close to an equator of minimum injectivity radius, and (II) when she is. We consider each case separately.

Case I. $`|z_1|`$ and $`|z_2|\chi _{obs}`$.

The maximum and minimum lengths of the observable geodesics associated to $`g^{p_j}`$ are

$$d_{ext}=d_0\pm (2\pi )^2\left|G_j^2\left(\frac{p_j}{p}\right)^2\right|\frac{|z_2||z_1|}{d_0}\chi _{obs},$$
(11)
where the plus and the minus signs correspond to $`d_{\mathrm{max}}`$ and $`d_{\mathrm{min}}`$ respectively. We then have

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }d}{d_0}2\frac{1}{|z_2||z_1|}\chi _{obs}1.$$
(12)
This is a bound on the maximum variation of the lengths of the smallest geodesics in the observable universe, which means that $`g^{p_j}`$ behaves CT–like. In the special case $`q<\sqrt{p}`$, we have seen that $`p_j=1`$, thus eqs. (11) yield

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }d}{d_0}4r_{inj}^2\left(q^21\right)\frac{|z_2||z_1|}{d_0^2}\chi _{obs}.$$
(13)
For $`q=1`$ the global homogeneity is manifest from this expression.

Case II. $`|z_1|`$ or $`|z_2|\chi _{obs}`$.

If $`|z_1|`$ or $`|z_2|1`$, then as we have seen the shortest geodesics will be generated by either $`g_{(p,q)}`$ or $`g^{p_{k1}}`$ respectively. Both cases are very similar. Let $`z_l`$ be $`|z_1|`$ or $`|z_2|`$ respectively, we then have

$`d_0^2`$ $``$ $`4r_{inj}^2+2[1\mathrm{cos}(2\pi \mu )]z_l^2,`$
$`d_{ext}^2`$ $``$ $`4r_{inj}^2+2[1\mathrm{cos}(2\pi \mu )](z_l\pm \chi _{obs})^2,`$
where $`\mu `$ is respectively $`\frac{q}{p}`$ or $`\frac{p_{k1}}{p}`$. In these cases the isometries $`g_{(p,q)}`$ and $`g^{p_{k1}}`$ do not look like translations, unless $`\mu 1`$. Importantly, however, from an observational point of view, the set of observers which detect such non–CT–like isometries is small. This can be estimated by calculating the ratio of the volumes of the $`3`$-sphere, $`V_M`$, and the region where $`|z_l|\chi _{obs}`$, $`V_R`$, to give

$$\frac{V_R}{V_M}\frac{3}{2}\chi _{obs}^2,$$

which clearly is very small. In this way, the likelihood of an observer detecting a non–CT–like isometry is very small.

To summarize, we have shown that subject to condition (1), the detectable isometries of lens spaces behave CT–like for generic observers. Although our results were obtained for lens spaces, they are far more general and apply to generic spherical manifolds. This is because typically only the largest cyclic subgroup of the covering group is detectable, resulting in the universe ‘looking like a lens space’, no matter what its true topology may be .

We now briefly discuss the consequences of our results. Recent high resolution CMB observations are making it possible, for the first time, to seriously look for the possible signatures of a nontrivial cosmic topology . They have also produced strong support for the central predictions of inflationary cosmology, among them the near–flatness of the universe. Together, these provided the motivation for our study here.

Most detection methods rely on pattern repetition, and in this context detectable isometries are those which generate closed geodesics shorter than the maximum survey depth $`\chi _{obs}`$. So the subset of detectable isometries depend crucially on both $`\chi _{obs}`$ and the position of the observer. We have found that in the limit $`\chi _{obs}1`$, the subset of such isometries in hyperbolic and generic spherical spaces turn out to be CT–like for a typical observer. This has the important observational consequence that a detectable manifold is generically locally indistinguishable from cylindrical $`^2\times 𝕊^1`$ (or more rarely toroidal $`\times 𝕋^2`$) manifolds, irrespective of its global shape. We also note that importantly the topological signatures expected from our results are compatible with recent indications coming from the analyses of high resolution CMB data, such as the alignment of the quadrupole and octopole moments of CMB anisotropies , as well as the surprisinglylow amplitude of the CMB quadrupole .

Given the infinite number of possible candidate manifolds any realistic search strategy must rely on a theoretical framework which can radically restrict the expected possibilities. Our results provide precisely such a framework by severely restricting the detectable isometries, and thereby confining the expected topological signatures as well as any parameter space which realistic search strategies, such as the ‘circles in the sky’ method, need to concentrate on. This is particularly important in the inflationary limit, where the order of any detectable cyclic subgroup as well as the number of candidate isometries which generate small geodesics are extremely large. We have also obtained bounds on $`r_{max}`$ which can in principle observationally rule out a large quantity of spherical manifolds.

An important geometrical consequence of the bound $`\chi _{obs}1`$ is that curvature effects are undetectable in the observable universe, resulting in a geometrical degeneracy in this limit. Our results show that a parallel degeneracy exists with respect to the topological structure of the universe, in the sense that it is also impossible to distinguish topologically the universe as being hyperbolic, flat or spherical — in the inflationary limit the precise nature of cosmic topology becomes undecidable.

Our results regarding the minimal lengths of geodesics are quite general and apply to any cyclic subgroup. The extent to which detectable isometries are CT–like is on the other hand dependent on conditions imposed on $`\chi _{obs}`$. Although we have used the condition (1) as synonymous to the inflationary limit, this limit is sufficient but not necessary for (1) to hold. Even for far less restrictive conditions (such as observational bounds), these results still provide useful constraints on the nature of detectable isometries which are not necessarily CT–like. We note that the question of likelihood of detectability does not concern us here as we are dealing with the subset of topologies that are detectable.

Finally, our results could in principle provide a topological test for inflation, in the sense that if observations were to detect isometries with significant deviations from CT–likeness, they would set bounds on the amount of inflation the primordial universe would have undergone.

A more detailed account of the results reported in this letter, as well as further investigations of some of the questions raised here are in progress and will be presented elsewhere.

Acknowledgments: We thank CNPq, FAPERJ and FAPESP for the grants under which this work was carried out. We are also grateful to Jeff Weeks for his very kind and useful correspondence.


text:
# Large 𝑁 expansion for normal and complex matrix ensembles

## 1 Introduction

Ensembles of random matrices have numerous important applications in physics and mathematics ranging from energy levels of nuclei to number theory. An important information is encoded in the $`1/N`$ expansion ($`N`$ is the size of the matrix) of different expectation values in the ensemble. Many relevant references can be found in  .

In this paper we discuss $`1/N`$-expansion in statistical ensembles of normal and complex matrices. A matrix $`M`$ is called normal if it commutes with its Hermitian conjugate: $`[M,M^{}]=0`$, so both matrices can be diagonalized simultaneously. Eigenvalues of a normal matrix are complex numbers. The statistical weight

$$e^{\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{tr}W(M)}d\mu (M)$$

of the normal matrix ensemble is specified by a potential function $`W(M)`$ (which depends on both $`M`$ and $`M^{}`$). Here $`\mathrm{}`$ is a parameter, and the measure $`d\mu `$ of integration over normal matrices is induced from the flat metric on the space of all complex matrices.

Along the standard procedure of integration over angle variables , one passes to the joint probability distribution of eigenvalues $`z_1,\mathrm{},z_N`$. The partition function is then given by the integral

$$Z_N=\frac{1}{(2\pi ^3\mathrm{})^{N/2}N!}|\mathrm{\Delta }_N(z_i)|^2\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}e^{\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}W(z_j)}d^2z_j$$
(1)
Here $`\mathrm{\Delta }_N(z_i)=_{i>j}^N(z_iz_j)`$ is the Vandermonde determinant and $`d^2zdxdy`$ for $`z=x+iy`$. The $`N`$-dependent normalization factor is put here for further convenience.

The model of normal matrices was introduced in . This model is the particular $`\beta =1`$ case of a more general one, referred to as 2D Coulomb gas with the joint probability distribution $`|\mathrm{\Delta }_N(z_i)|^{2\beta }_{j=1}^Ne^{\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}W(z_j)}d^2z_j`$.

For the potential of the form

$$W(z)=z\overline{z}+V(z)+\overline{V(z)}$$
(2)
where $`V(z)`$ is an analytic function in some region of the complex plane (say, a polynomial), the normal matrix model is equivalent to the ensemble of all complex matrices with the same potential. It generalizes the gaussian Ginibre-Girko ensemble . When passing to the integral over eigenvalues, the partition function for complex matrices differs from the one for normal matrices by a normalization factor only . Both models are then reduced to the 2D Coulomb gas (with $`\beta =1`$) in the external potential. Note also a formal similarity with the model of two Hermitian matrices. Its partition function is given by the same formula (1), with the potential (2), but $`z_i`$ and $`\overline{z}_i`$ are to be regarded as two independent real integration variables, with $`d^2z_i`$ being understood as $`dz_id\overline{z}_i`$.

It appears that the potential of the form (2) is most important for applications . In the main part of the paper, we concentrate on this case, so one may, in this context, ignore the difference between the normal and complex ensembles, taking the 2D Coulomb gas partition function as a starting point. Physical applications of this model include the quantum Hall effect, the Saffman-Taylor viscous fingering and, conjecturally, more general growth problems which are mathematically described as a random evolution in the moduli space of complex curves. Recently, the normal matrix model was shown  to be closely related to the matrix quantum mechanics, and, therefore, to the $`c=1`$ string theory.

In addition to this it appears that the large $`N`$ limit of the normal or complex random matrices admits a natural geometric interpretation relevant to the 2D inverse potential problem, the Dirichlet boundary problem and to spectral geometry of planar domains. In this paper we concentrate on calculation of the $`1/N`$ expansion of the free energy, $`F\mathrm{log}Z_N`$, and on its algebro-geometric meaning, leaving physical aspects for future publications.

The large $`N`$ limit also implies the limit $`\mathrm{}0`$, so that $`\mathrm{}N`$ is finite and fixed. We prefer to work with the equivalent $`\mathrm{}`$-expansion, rather than with the $`1/N`$ expansion, thus emphasizing its semiclassical nature. The free energy of the Hermitian, two-Hermitian, normal and complex matrix ensembles with the potential (2) has an $`\mathrm{}`$-expansion of the form $`\mathrm{log}Z_N=_{g0}\mathrm{}^{2g2}F_g`$, where $`g`$-th term is associated with the contribution of diagrams with Euler characteristics $`22g`$, in the perturbative expansion of the free energy. Here we discuss the first two terms, $`F_0`$ and $`F_1`$:

$$F=\mathrm{}^2\mathrm{log}Z_N=F_0+\mathrm{}^2F_1+O(\mathrm{}^4)$$
(3)
The leading term, $`F_0`$, is the contribution of planar diagrams, and $`F_1`$ is commonly refered to as genus 1 correction.

When $`N`$ becomes large new macroscopic structures emerge. Invoking a physical analogy, one may say that the gas of eigenvalues segregates into “phases” with zero and non-zero density separated by a very narrow interface. The domain $`𝖣`$ in the complex plane where the density is non-zero is called the support of eigenvalues (it may consist of several disconnected domains). The density at any point outside it is exponentially small as $`N\mathrm{}`$.

The leading contribution to the free energy, the $`F_0`$ term in (3), is basically the Coulomb energy of particles confined in the domain $`𝖣`$. For the potential of the form (2) it is the tau-function of curves introduced in . It encodes solutions to archetypal problems of complex analysis and potential theory in planar domains.

Here we review these results and also compute the genus-1 correction to the free energy. The latter is identified with the free energy of a free bosonic field in the domain $`𝖣^𝖼`$ which is complementary to the support of eigenvalues, i.e., in the domain where the mean density vanishes:

$$F_1=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}det(\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝖣^𝖼})$$
(4)
Here $`det(\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝖣^𝖼})`$ is a properly regularized determinant of the Laplace operator in $`𝖣^𝖼`$ with Dirichlet boundary conditions. This suggests interesting links to spectral geometry of planar domains.

The genus expansion in the Hermitian random matrix model beyond the leading order has been obtained in the seminal paper . In , the genus-1 correction was interpreted in terms of bosonic field theory on a hyperelliptic Riemann surface. The genus 1 correction to free energy of the model of two Hermitian matrices with polynomial potential was found only recently .

## 2 The planar large $`N`$ limit

In this section we briefly recall the large $`N`$ limit technique. This material is standard since early days of random matrix models (see., e.g., ). An appealing feature of the model of normal or complex matrices is a nice geometric interpretation and a direct relation to the inverse potential problem in two dimensions.

As was already mentioned, the parameter $`\mathrm{}`$ tends to zero simultaneously with $`N\mathrm{}`$ in such a way that $`t_0=N\mathrm{}`$ is kept finite and fixed. Using the Coulomb gas analogy, one may say that the leading contribution to the free energy is equal to the extremal value of the energy

$$=\underset{ij}{}\mathrm{log}|z_iz_j|+\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}\underset{i}{}W(z_i)$$
(5)
Equilibrium positions of charges are given by the extremum of the plasma energy: $`_{z_i}=_{\overline{z}_i}=0`$.

Consider the 2D Coulomb potential $`\mathrm{\Phi }(z)=\mathrm{}_i\mathrm{log}|zz_i|^2`$ created by the charges. Writing it as

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(z)=\mathrm{log}|z\zeta |^2\rho (z)d^2z$$

where

$$\rho (z)=\frac{1}{4\pi }\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }(z)=\mathrm{}\underset{i}{}\delta ^{(2)}(zz_i)$$
(6)
is the microscopic density of eigenvalues (a sum of two-dimensional delta-functions), we assume that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in the limit can be treated as a continuous function. It is normalized as $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }(z)d^2z=4\pi t_0`$. Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ be this function for the equilibrium configuration of charges, then

$$_z(\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z)W(z))=_{\overline{z}}(\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z)W(z))=0$$
(7)
with the understanding that this equation holds only for $`z`$ belonging to a domain (or domains) where the density is nonzero. Applying $`_{\overline{z}}`$ to the both sides, we see that the equilibrium density, $`\rho _0(z)`$, is equal to $`\frac{1}{4\pi }\mathrm{\Delta }W(z)`$ in some domain $`𝖣`$ (the support of eigenvalues) and zero otherwise:

$$\rho _0(z)=\{\begin{array}{cc}\sigma \hfill & z𝖣\hfill \\ 0\hfill & z𝖣^𝖼\hfill \end{array}\text{and}\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z)=_𝖣\mathrm{log}|z\zeta |^2\sigma d^2\zeta $$

Here $`𝖣^𝖼=𝐂𝖣`$ is the domain complimentary to the support of eigenvalues and

$$\sigma =\frac{1}{4\pi }\mathrm{\Delta }W(z,\overline{z})$$
(8)
In this and in the next section we assume the special form of the potential (2). Then $`\rho _0=1/\pi `$ in the domain $`𝖣`$.

The shape of $`𝖣`$ is determined by the function $`V(z)`$. Let us assume, without loss of generality, that $`0𝖣`$ and parametrize $`V(z)`$ by Taylor coefficients at the origin:

$$V(z)=\underset{k1}{}t_kz^k$$
(9)
The parameters $`t_k`$ (coupling constants of the matrix model) are in general complex numbers. Multiplying (7) by $`z^k`$ and integrating over the boundary of $`𝖣`$, we conclude that the domain $`𝖣`$ is such that $`\pi kt_k`$’s are moments of its complement, $`𝖣^𝖼`$, with respect to the functions $`z^k`$:

$$t_k=\frac{1}{\pi k}_{𝖣^𝖼}z^kd^2z=\frac{1}{2\pi ik}_𝖣z^k\overline{z}𝑑z$$
(10)
Besides, from the normalization condition we know that the area of $`𝖣`$ is equal to $`\pi t_0`$. To find the shape of the domain from its moments and area is the subject of the inverse potential problem. These data determine it uniquely, at least locally.

Here we assume that $`𝖣`$ is a connected domain. For example, in the potential $`W=z\overline{z}`$ the eigenvalues uniformly fill the disk of radius $`\sqrt{\mathrm{}N}`$. Small perturbations of the potential slightly disturb the circular shape.

In what follows, we need some functions associated with the domain $`𝖣`$, or rather with its complement, $`𝖣^𝖼`$. The basic one is a univalent conformal map from the exterior of the unit disk onto the domain $`𝖣^𝖼`$. Such a map exists by virtue of the Riemann mapping theorem. Let $`𝖴`$ be the unit disk and $`𝖴^𝖼`$ its complement, i.e., the exterior of the unit disk. Consider the conformal map $`z(w)`$ from $`𝖴^𝖼`$ onto $`𝖣^𝖼`$ normalized so that $`z(\mathrm{})=\mathrm{}`$ and $`r=lim_w\mathrm{}z(w)/w`$ is real, then the map is unique. In general, the Laurent expansion of the function $`z(w)`$ around infinity is

$$z(w)=rw+\underset{k0}{}u_kw^k$$
(11)
The real number $`r`$ is called the (external) conformal radius of $`𝖣`$. Since the map is conformal, all zeros and poles of the derivative $`z^{}(w)_wz(w)`$ are inside the unit circle. We also need the function $`\overline{z}(w)`$ given by the Laurent series (11) with complex conjugate coefficients and the Green function of the Dirichlet boundary problem in $`𝖣^𝖼`$. In terms of the conformal map, the latter is given by the explicit formula

$$G(z,z^{})=\mathrm{log}\left|\frac{w(z)w(z^{})}{w(z)\overline{w(z^{})}1}\right|$$
(12)
Here $`w(z)`$ is the conformal map from $`𝖣^𝖼`$ onto $`𝖴^𝖼`$ inverse to the $`z(w)`$.

## 3 The leading term of the free energy

The leading contribution to the free energy is the value of the Coulomb energy (5) (multiplied by $`\mathrm{}^2`$) for the extremal configuration of charges:

$$F_0=_𝖣_𝖣\mathrm{log}\left|zz^{}\right|\sigma (z)\sigma (z^{})d^2zd^2z^{}+_𝖣W(z,\overline{z})\sigma d^2z$$

The integrated version of the extremum condition (7) tells us that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z)W(z)=\text{const}`$ for any $`z𝖣`$. The constant can be found from the same equality at $`z=0`$, and we obtain $`F_0`$ as an explicit functional of the domain $`𝖣`$:

$$F_0=_𝖣_𝖣\mathrm{log}\left|\frac{1}{z}\frac{1}{z^{}}\right|\sigma (z)\sigma (z^{})d^2zd^2z^{}$$
(13)
For the special potential of the form (2), when $`\sigma =1`$, the free energy is to be regarded as a function of $`t_0`$ and the coupling constants $`t_k`$.

Properties of $`F_0`$ immediately follow from known correlation functions of the model in the planar large $`N`$ limit. See  for normal and complex matrices and  for similar results in the context of the Hermitian 2-matrix model. Some of these correlation functions previously appeared in studies of thermal fluctuations in classical confined Coulomb plasma . Integrable structures associated with $`F_0`$ were studied in . Here is the list of main properties of $`F_0`$ for the most important case $`\sigma =1/\pi `$.

* 1-st order derivatives:

$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{F_0}{t_k}=\frac{1}{\pi }_𝖣z^kd^2z,k1,\hfill \\ \\ \frac{F_0}{t_0}=\frac{1}{\pi }_𝖣\mathrm{log}|z|^2d^2z\hfill \end{array}$$
(14)
can be combined in the generating formula

$$𝒟(z)F_0=\frac{1}{\pi }_𝖣\mathrm{log}|z^1\zeta ^1|^2d^2\zeta ,z𝖣^𝖼,$$
(15)
where

$$𝒟(z)=\frac{}{t_0}+\underset{k1}{}\frac{1}{k}\left(z^k\frac{}{t_k}+\overline{z}^k\frac{}{\overline{t}_k}\right)$$
(16)
Since the derivatives of $`F_0`$ with respect to the moments $`t_k`$ are moments of the complimentary domain, this function formally solves the 2D inverse potential problem.
* 2-nd order derivatives: for $`z,z^{}𝖣^𝖼`$ we have

$$𝒟(z)𝒟(z^{})F_0=2G(z,z^{})\mathrm{log}\left|\frac{1}{z}\frac{1}{z^{}}\right|^2$$
(17)
where $`G(z,z^{})`$ is the Green function of the Dirichlet boundary problem in $`𝖣^𝖼`$ (12). Note that the logarithmic singularity of the Green function at $`z=z^{}`$ cancels by the second term in the right hand side. In a particular case when both $`z,z^{}`$ tend to infinity, we get a simple formula for the conformal radius:

$$_{t_0}^2F_0=2\mathrm{log}r$$
(18)
* 3-d order derivatives.  The generating formula reads :

$$𝒟(a)𝒟(b)𝒟(c)F_0=\frac{1}{2\pi }_𝖣_nG(a,\xi )_nG(b,\xi )_nG(c,\xi )|d\xi |$$
(19)
An important corollary of this formula and eq. (17) is the complete symmetry of the expression $`𝒟(a)G(b,c)`$ with respect to all permutations of the points $`a,b,c`$. Another corollary of (19) is the following residue formula valid for $`j,k,l0`$ :

$$\frac{^3F_0}{t_jt_kt_l}=\frac{1}{2\pi i}_{|w|=1}\frac{h_j(w)h_k(w)h_l(w)}{z^{}(w)\overline{z}^{}(w^1)}\frac{dw}{w}$$
(20)
Here $`h_j(w)`$ are polynomials in $`w`$ of degree $`j`$:

$$h_j(w)=w\frac{d}{dw}\left[(z^j(w))_+\right]\text{for }j1\text{ and}h_0(w)=1,$$

where $`(\mathrm{})_+`$ is the positive degree part of the Laurent series. The notation $`\overline{z}^{}(w^1)`$ means the derivative $`d\overline{z}(u)/du`$ taken at the point $`u=w^1`$. This formula is especially useful when $`z^{}(w)`$ is a rational function, then the integral is reduced to a finite sum of residues. We use this below.
* Dispersionless Hirota equations. The function $`F_0`$ obeys an infinite number of non-linear differential equations which are combined into the integrable hierarchy of dispersionless Hirota’s equations. See  for details.
* WDVV equations. Suppose $`V(z)`$ is a polynomial of $`m`$-th degree, i.e., $`t_k=0`$ for all $`k>m`$. On this subspace of parameters, $`F_0`$ obeys the system of Witten-Dijkgraaf-Verlinde-Verlinde (WDVV) equations

$$𝖥_i𝖥_j^1𝖥_k=𝖥_k𝖥_j^1𝖥_i\text{for all }0i,j,km1$$
(21)
where $`𝖥_i`$ is the $`m`$ by $`m`$ matrix with matrix elements $`(𝖥_i)_{jk}=\frac{^3F_0}{t_it_jt_k}`$. See  for details.

To conclude: $`F_0`$ is a “master function” which generates objects of complex analysis in planar simply-connected domains. The full free energy of the matrix ensemble, $`F`$, may be regarded as its “quantization”.

## 4 The genus 1 correction to the free energy

### 4.1 The result for $`F_1`$

We now describe the result for the genus-1 correction $`F_1`$. We start with the special potential (2). Then $`F_1`$ is expressed entirely in terms of the metric on the $`𝖴^𝖼`$ induced from the standard flat metric on the $`z`$-plane by the conformal map: $`dzd\overline{z}=e^{2\varphi (w)}dwd\overline{w}`$. Here

$$\varphi (w)=\mathrm{log}|z^{}(w)|$$
(22)
and $`z(w)`$ is the conformal map $`𝖴^𝖼𝖣^𝖼`$ (11). The derivation of this formula and its extension to a general potential is outlined in Section 5.

We found that

$$F_1=\frac{1}{24\pi }_{|w|=1}(\varphi _n\varphi +2\varphi )|dw|$$
(23)
Here $`_n`$ is the normal derivative, with the normal vector pointing outside the unit circle. The derivation of this formula is outlined, for a more general model, in Section 5.

Since $`\varphi (w)`$ is harmonic in $`𝖴^𝖼`$, we may rewrite the r.h.s. of (23) as

$$F_1=\frac{1}{24\pi }_{|w|>1}|\varphi |^2d^2w\frac{1}{12\pi }_{|w|=1}\varphi |dw|$$

Here we recognize the formula for the regularized determinant of the Laplace operator $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝖣^𝖼}=4_z_{\overline{z}}`$ in $`𝖣^𝖼`$ with Dirichlet conditions on the boundary. The first term is the bulk contribution first found by Polyakov  (for a metric induced by a conformal map it reduces to a boundary integral), while the second term, computed in , is a net boundary term (see also Section 1 of ):

$$F_1=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}det\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝖣^𝖼}\right)$$
(24)
In the particular case $`W(z)=z\overline{z}`$ we get $`F_1=\frac{1}{12}\mathrm{log}t_0`$ that coincides with the result of  obtained by a direct calculation.

The appearence of elements of quantum field theory in a curved space is not accidental. A field-theoretical derivation of this result will be given elsewhere.

### 4.2 Rational case

Before explaining the origin of the explicit formula for $`F_1`$ we write it in yet another suggestive form. Consider a domain such that $`z^{}(w)`$ is a rational function:

$$z^{}(w)=r\underset{i=0}{\overset{m1}{}}\frac{wa_i}{wb_i}$$

All the points $`a_i`$ and $`b_i`$ must be inside the unit circle, otherwise the map $`z(w)`$ is not conformal. On the unit circle we have $`|dw|=\frac{dw}{iw}`$ and $`\varphi (w)=\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{log}z^{}(w)+\mathrm{log}\overline{z}^{}(w^1))`$, where the first and the second term (the Schwarz reflection) are analytic outside and inside it, respectively. (Recall that our notation $`\overline{z}^{}(w^1)`$ means $`d\overline{z}(u)/du`$ at the point $`u=w^1`$.) Plugging this into (23), we get:

$$\begin{array}{cc}F_1=\hfill & \frac{1}{24\pi i}_{|w|=1}\mathrm{log}z^{}(w)\left[\frac{1}{2}_w\mathrm{log}z^{}(w)+\frac{1}{w}\right]𝑑w\hfill \\ & \\ & \frac{1}{24\pi i}_{|w|=1}\mathrm{log}\overline{z}^{}(w^1)\frac{dw}{w}\frac{1}{48\pi i}_{|w|=1}\mathrm{log}\overline{z}^{}(w^1)\frac{z^{\prime \prime }(w)}{z^{}(w)}𝑑w\hfill \end{array}$$

The integrals can be calculated by taking residues either outside or inside the unit circle. The poles are at $`\mathrm{}`$, at $`0`$, and at the points $`a_i`$ and $`b_i`$. The result is

$$F_1=\frac{1}{24}\left(\mathrm{log}r^4+\underset{z^{}(a_i)=0}{}\mathrm{log}\overline{z}^{}(a_i^1)\underset{z^{}(b_i)=\mathrm{}}{}\mathrm{log}\overline{z}^{}(b_i^1)\right)$$
(25)
If the potential $`V(z)`$ is polynomial, $`V(z)=_{k=1}^mt_kz^k`$, i.e., $`t_k=0`$ as $`k>m`$ for some $`m>0`$, then the series for the conformal map $`z(w)`$ truncates: $`z(w)=rw+_{l=0}^{m1}u_lw^l`$ and

$$z^{}(w)=r\underset{i=0}{\overset{m1}{}}(1a_iw^1)$$

is a polynomial in $`w^1`$ (all poles $`b_i`$ of $`z^{}(w)`$ merge at the origin). Then the last sum in (25) becomes $`m\mathrm{log}r`$ and the formula (25) gives

$$F_1=\frac{1}{24}\mathrm{log}\left(r^4\underset{z^{}(a_j)=0}{}\frac{\overline{z}^{}(a_j^1)}{r}\right)=\frac{1}{24}\mathrm{log}\left(r^4\underset{i,j=0}{\overset{m1}{}}(1\overline{a}_ia_j)\right)$$
(26)
This formula is essentually identical to the genus-1 correction to the free energy of the Hermitian 2-matrix model with a polynomial potential recently computed by Eynard .

### 4.3 Determinant representation of $`F_1`$ for polynomial potentials

For polynomial potentials the genus-1 correction enjoys an interesting determinant representation.

Set

$$D_m:=det\left(\frac{^3F_0}{t_0t_jt_k}\right)_{0j,km1}$$

Using the residue formula (20) we compute:

$$D_m=\frac{1}{(2\pi i)^m}_{|w_0|=1}\frac{dw_0}{w_0}\mathrm{}_{|w_{m1}|=1}\frac{dw_{m1}}{w_{m1}}\frac{\text{det}\left[h_j(w_j)h_k(w_j)\right]}{_{l=0}^{m1}z^{}(w_l)\overline{z}^{}(w_l^1)}$$
(27)
Clearly, the determinant in the numerator can be substituted by $`\frac{1}{m}det^2(h_j(w_k))`$ and $`\text{det}\left[h_j(w_k)\right]=(m1)!r^{\frac{1}{2}m(m1)}\mathrm{\Delta }_m(w_i)`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m(w_i)`$ is the Vandermonde determinant. Each integral in (27) is given by the sum of residues at the points $`a_i`$ inside the unit circle (the residues at $`w_i=0`$ vanish). Computing the residues and summing over all permutations of the points $`a_i`$, we get:

$$D_m=(1)^{\frac{1}{2}m(m1)}((m1)!)^2r^{m(m3)}\frac{_ja_j^{m1}}{_{i,j}(1a_j\overline{a}_i)}$$
(28)
As is seen from (10), the last non-zero coefficient of $`V(z)`$ equals $`t_m=\frac{\overline{u}_{m1}}{mr^{m1}}`$. (We regard it as a fixed parameter.) Therefore, $`_{i=1}^ma_i=(1)^mm(m1)r^{m2}\overline{t}_m`$, and we represent $`F_1`$ (26) in the form

$$F_1=\frac{1}{24}\mathrm{log}D_m\frac{1}{12}(m^23m+3)\mathrm{log}r\frac{1}{24}(m1)\mathrm{log}\overline{t}_m+\text{const}$$
(29)
where const is a numerical constant. Recalling (18), we see that $`F_1`$, for models with polynomial potentials of degree $`m`$, is expressed through derivatives of $`F_0`$:

$$F_1=\frac{1}{24}\mathrm{log}\underset{m\times m}{det}\left(\frac{^3F_0}{t_0t_jt_k}\right)\frac{1}{24}(m^23m+3)\frac{^2F_0}{t_0^2}\frac{1}{24}(m1)\mathrm{log}\overline{t}_m+\text{const}$$
(30)
where $`j,k`$ run from $`0`$ to $`m1`$.

Similar determinant formulas are known for genus-1 corrections to free energy in topological field theories .

## 5 $`F_1`$ from loop equation

The standard (and powerful) method to obtain $`1/N`$-expansions in matrix models is to use invariance of the partition function under changes of matrix integration variables. In the 2D Coulomb gas formalism, this reduces to invariance of the partition function (1) under diffeomorphisms

$$z_iz_i+ϵ(z_i,\overline{z}_i),\overline{z}_iz_i+\overline{ϵ}(z_i,\overline{z}_i)$$

The invariance of the partition function in the first order in $`ϵ`$ results in the identity

$$\underset{i}{}_{z_i}\left(ϵ(z_i,\overline{z}_i)e^{}\right)\underset{j}{}d^2z_j=0$$
(31)
for any function $`ϵ(z,\overline{z})`$. One may read it as Ward identitiy obeyed by correlation functions of the model. For historical reasons, it is called the loop equation. Since correlation functions are variational derivatives of the free energy with respect to the potential, the loop equation is an implicit functional relation for the free energy.

### 5.1 Loop equation in general normal matrix model

A closed loop equation does not emerge for the special potential (2). It can be written only for the ensemble of normal matrices with a general potential $`W`$ in (1). Let it be of the form

$$W(z)=z\overline{z}+V(z)+\overline{V(z)}+U(z)$$

where $`U`$ is only assumed to have a regular Taylor expansion around the origin starting from cubic terms.

Choosing $`ϵ(z_i,\overline{z}_i)=(zz_i)^1`$ and plugging it into (31) with $``$ given in (5), one is able to rewrite (31) as a relation between correlation functions of the field

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(z)=\mathrm{}\text{tr}\mathrm{log}\left[(zM)(\overline{z}M^{})\right]=\mathrm{}\underset{i}{}\mathrm{log}|zz_i|^2$$

or $`\mathrm{\Phi }(z)=\mathrm{}\text{tr}(zM)^1`$ (here and below $`_z`$). Note that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(z)`$ is trace of the resolvent of the matrix $`M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }(z)=4\pi \rho (z)`$, where $`\rho `$ is the density of eigenvalues. After some simple rearrangings, the loop equation following from (31) acquires the form

$$\frac{1}{2\pi }\frac{W(\zeta )\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }(\zeta )}{z\zeta }d^2\zeta =<(\mathrm{\Phi }(z))^2>+\mathrm{}<^2\mathrm{\Phi }(z)>$$
(32)
(For any symmetric function $`f(\{z_i\})`$, the correlation function $`<f>`$ is defined as the integral $`f(\{z_i\})|\mathrm{\Delta }_N(z_i)|^2_je^{\frac{1}{\mathrm{}}W(z_j)}d^2z_j`$ with a normalization factor such that $`<1>=1`$.) This relation is exact for any finite $`N`$. Supplemented by the relation

$$<\mathrm{\Phi }(z)>=\frac{t_0}{z}+_z𝒟(z)F$$
(33)
(also exact) which directly follows from the definitions of the free energy and the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$, the loop equation allows one to find the $`\mathrm{}`$-expansion of the free energy.

### 5.2 Expanding the loop equation

The $`\mathrm{}`$-expansion of the free energy for the general normal matrix model is more complicated than the one discussed in the previous sections. It contains all powers of $`\mathrm{}`$, not only even:

$$\mathrm{}^2\mathrm{log}Z_N=F_0+\mathrm{}F_{1/2}+\mathrm{}^2F_1+O(\mathrm{}^3)$$
(34)
so it hardly has a direct topological interpretation. Accordingly, $`\mathrm{}`$-expansions of mean values and other correlation functions are expansions in $`\mathrm{}`$ rather than $`\mathrm{}^2`$. In particular,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(z)=\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z)+\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/2}(z)+\mathrm{}^2\mathrm{\Phi }_1(z)+O(\mathrm{}^3)$$
(35)
We proceed by expanding the loop equation in powers of $`\mathrm{}`$. In the leading order, the second term in the r.h.s. vanishes, and $`\overline{z}`$-derivative of the both sides gives:

$$(W(z)\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z))\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z)=0$$
(36)
This just means that for $`z𝖣`$ the extremum condition (7) is satisfied and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z)=0`$ otherwise. Inside $`𝖣`$, the leading term of the mean density, $`\rho _0(z)`$, is given by $`\rho _0(z)=\sigma (z)`$, where $`\sigma (z)`$ is defined in (8). (Note that the function $`\sigma `$ is defined by this formula everywhere in the complex plane, and does not depend on the shape of $`𝖣`$, while $`\rho _0`$ coincides with $`\sigma `$ in $`𝖣`$ and equals $`0`$ in $`𝖣^𝖼`$.) For potentials of the form (2), $`\sigma (z)=1/\pi `$.

Being developed into a series in $`\mathrm{}`$, the loop equation gives an iterative procedure to find the coefficients $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i(z)`$. We need the following results on the correlation functions for the general normal matrix ensemble (see ):

$$<\mathrm{\Phi }(z)>=_𝖣\frac{\sigma (\zeta )d^2\zeta }{\zeta z}+O(\mathrm{})$$
(37)
$$<\mathrm{\Phi }(z_1)\mathrm{\Phi }(z_2)>_{\mathrm{conn}}=2\mathrm{}^2\left(G(z_1,z_2)G(z_1,\mathrm{})G(\mathrm{},z_2)\mathrm{log}\frac{|z_1z_2|}{r}\right)+O(\mathrm{}^3)$$
(38)
where the connected correlation function is defined as $`<fg>_{\mathrm{conn}}=<fg><f><g>`$. Note that the function (38) has no singularity at coinciding points $`z_1,z_2𝖣^𝖼`$. Merging the points, we get:

$$<(\mathrm{\Phi }(z))^2>_{\mathrm{conn}}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{6}\{w;z\}+O(\mathrm{}^3)$$
(39)
where

$$\{w;z\}=\frac{w^{\prime \prime \prime }(z)}{w^{}(z)}\frac{3}{2}\left(\frac{w^{\prime \prime }(z)}{w^{}(z)}\right)^2$$

is the Schwarzian derivative of the conformal map $`w(z)`$.

After these preparations, further steps are straightforward. Terms of order $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`\mathrm{}^2`$ of the loop equation give:

$$\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2\pi }L(z,\zeta )\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/2}(\zeta )d^2\zeta =^2\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z)\hfill \\ \\ \frac{1}{2\pi }L(z,\zeta )\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }_1(\zeta )d^2\zeta =\left[\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/2}(z)\right)^2+^2\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/2}(z)\right]\frac{1}{6}\{w;z\}\hfill \end{array}$$
(40)
where the kernel of the integral operator in the l.h.s. is

$$L(z,\zeta )=\frac{W(\zeta )\mathrm{\Phi }_0(z)}{\zeta z}$$
(41)
It should be noted that the $`\mathrm{}`$-expansion of the loop equation may break down for $`z𝖣`$. This is mainly because the correlator $`<\mathrm{\Phi }(z)\mathrm{\Phi }(z^{})>`$, when the two points are close to each other and belong to the support of eigenvalues, is not given by eq. (38). At the same time, for our purpose we need this correlator just on very small distances, when the two points merge. Naively, for $`z,z^{}𝖣`$ the correlator diverges as $`z^{}z`$. This means that its short-distance behaviour is in fact of a different order in $`\mathrm{}`$ and must be calculated separately. Fortunately, this problem can be avoided by restricting the equations to $`𝖣^𝖼`$, where no divergency emerges on any scale and one may think that the short-distance behaviour of correlation functions is still given by eq. (38). (However, we understand that this argument is not rigorous and need to be justified by an actual calculation of correlation functions at small scales.) Hereafter, $`z`$ in (40) is assumed to be outside the support of eigenvalues, i.e., the equations should be solved for $`z𝖣^𝖼`$. In this region the functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }_k(z)`$ are harmonic.

From (33) we see that

$$_z𝒟(z)F_{1/2}=_z\mathrm{\Phi }_{1/2}(z),_z𝒟(z)F_1=_z\mathrm{\Phi }_1(z)$$
(42)
The strategy is to find $`\mathrm{\Phi }_k`$’s from (40) and then “to integrate” them to get $`F_k`$’s, i.e., to find a functional $`F_k`$ such that it obeys (42). A general method to find the “derivative” $`𝒟(z)`$ of any proper functional of the domain $`𝖣^𝖼`$ is proposed in .

An important remark is in order. Suppose we restrict ourselves to the class of models with potentials of the form (2) (i.e., with $`\sigma (z)=1/\pi `$), like in previous sections. Applying $`_z𝒟(z)`$ to the functional (23), that is $`F_1`$ in this case, we obtain a wrong answer for $`_z\mathrm{\Phi }_1(z)`$, which does not obey the loop equation (40)! This seemingly contradicts eqs. (42) and so explains why one has to deal with the arbitrary potential. The matter is simply that there are functionals such that they vanish for potentials with $`\sigma (z)=1/\pi `$ but their “derivatives”, $`_z𝒟(z)`$, do not. They do contribute to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_1`$ and restore the right answer.

### 5.3 Free energy of the general model

Skipping further details, we present the results for the general model of normal matrices.

The answer for $`F_0`$ is familiar . It is given by (13). The first correction, $`F_{1/2}`$, is

$$F_{1/2}=_𝖣\sigma (z)\mathrm{log}\sqrt{\pi \sigma (z)}d^2z$$
(43)
To write down the full answer for $`F_1`$ in a compact form, we need to introduce, along with the $`\varphi (w)`$ (22), another function,

$$\chi (z)=\mathrm{log}\sqrt{\pi \sigma (z)}$$
(44)
and the function $`\chi ^H(z)`$ defined in the domain $`𝖣^𝖼`$. It is a harmonic function in $`𝖣^𝖼`$ with the boundary value $`\chi (z)`$. The function $`\chi ^H`$ is the solution to the Dirichlet boundary problem: $`\chi ^H(z)=\frac{1}{2\pi }_𝖣_nG(z,\xi )\chi (\xi )|d\xi |`$. The explicit formula for $`F_1`$ reads:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}F_1\hfill & =\hfill & \frac{1}{24\pi }\left[_{|w|>1}|(\varphi +\chi )|^2d^2w2_{|w|=1}(\varphi +\chi )|dw|_𝐂|\chi |^2d^2w\right]+\hfill \\ & & \\ & & +\frac{1}{8\pi }\left[_𝖣|\chi |^2d^2z_𝖣\chi _n\chi ^H|dz|\frac{1}{2}_𝖣\mathrm{\Delta }\chi d^2z\right]\hfill \end{array}$$
(45)
where $`\chi `$ in the first three integrals is treated as a function of $`w`$ through $`\chi =\chi (z(w))`$.

The r.h.s. of this formula is naturally decomposed into two parts having completely different nature, the “quantum” and “classical” parts: $`F_1=F_1^{(\mathrm{q})}+F_1^{(\mathrm{cl})}`$. The (most interesting) quantum part can be again represented through the regularized determinant of the Laplace operator in $`𝖣^𝖼`$ with Dirichlet boundary conditions. However, now the Laplacian should be taken in conformal metric with the conformal factor $`e^{2\chi (z)}`$. Equivalently, on the exterior of the unit circle the Laplacian should be taken in the metric with the conformal factor $`e^{2\varphi (w)+2\chi (z(w))}`$; we see that $`\varphi `$ and $`\chi `$ do enter as the sum $`\varphi +\chi `$ in the first line. More precisely, the formula for regularized determinants of Laplace operators in domains with boundary known in the literature (eq. (4.42) in ) allows us to identify

$$F_1^{(\mathrm{q})}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}\frac{det\left(e^{2\chi }\mathrm{\Delta }_𝐂\right)}{det\left(e^{2\chi }\mathrm{\Delta }_{𝖣^𝖼}\right)}$$
(46)
The classical part comes from “classical” (though of order $`\mathrm{}`$) corrections to the shape of the support of eigenvalues, which always exist unless $`\sigma (z)`$ is a constant (see below). It is essentially given by $`F_1^{(\mathrm{cl})}=lim_\mathrm{}0\left(\frac{1}{2\mathrm{}^2}<(\text{tr}\chi (M))^2>_{\mathrm{conn}}\right)`$.

Different terms of the $`\mathrm{}`$-expansion gain a clear interpretation in terms of the collective field theory of the normal matrix model, in the spirit of . In this context, it is natural to start with the general Coulomb gas model with arbitrary $`\beta `$. The generalized loop equation

$$\frac{1}{2\pi }\frac{W(\zeta )\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Phi }(\zeta )}{z\zeta }d^2\zeta =\beta <(\mathrm{\Phi }(z))^2>+(2\beta )\mathrm{}<^2\mathrm{\Phi }(z)>$$
(47)
can be understood as the conformal Ward identity for the collective theory. This allows one to find the effective action in the form

$$\begin{array}{c}S=S_0+S_1\hfill \\ \\ S_0=\beta \rho (z)\mathrm{log}|z\zeta |\rho (\zeta )d^2zd^2\zeta +W(z)\rho (z)d^2z\hfill \\ \\ S_1=\left(1\frac{\beta }{2}\right)\mathrm{}\rho (z)\mathrm{log}\rho (z)d^2z\hfill \end{array}$$
(48)
The second term, $`S_2`$, is a combination of the short range part $`\frac{\beta }{2}\rho \mathrm{log}\rho `$ and the entropy $`\rho \mathrm{log}\rho `$. (See , where similar actions for unitary and Hermitian matrix ensembles were discussed.)

This action suggests to rearrange the $`\mathrm{}`$-expansion of the free energy (34) and write it in the “topological” form $`F=_{g0}\mathrm{}^{2g}F_g`$, where each term has its own expansion

$$F_g=F_g^{(0)}+\underset{n1}{}\mathrm{}_\beta ^nF_g^{(n)}$$
(49)
Here $`\mathrm{}_\beta (2\beta )\mathrm{}`$ is regarded as an independent parameter. The equilibrium density of charges, $`\rho _0`$, is determined by $`\delta S/\delta \rho =0`$ which leads to the Liouville-like equation

$$\frac{\mathrm{}_\beta }{8\pi }\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{log}\rho _0(z)+\beta \rho _0(z)=\sigma (z)$$
(50)
in the bulk. For $`\beta 2`$ the first term generates corrections to the shape of the support of eigenvalues. The classical free energy is $`F_0=F_0^{(0)}+\mathrm{}_\beta F_0^{(1)}+\mathrm{}_\beta ^2F_0^{(2)}+O(\mathrm{}_\beta ^3)`$. In particular we see that $`F_{1/2}`$ given in (43) is in fact $`F_0^{(1)}`$ while the “classical” part $`F_1^{(\mathrm{cl})}`$ of (45) is $`F_0^{(2)}`$. The “quantum” part is then $`F_1^{(\mathrm{q})}=F_1^{(0)}`$.

The collective field theory approach to the normal and complex matrix ensembles will be presented elsewhere.

## Acknowledgments

We thank A.Cappelli, L.Chekhov, B.Dubrovin, V.Kazakov, I.Kostov, Yu.Makeenko, A.Marshakov, M.Mineev-Weinstein and R.Theodorescu for useful discussions. P.W. would like to thank INFN and the University of Florence, Italy, for hospitality. A.Z. is grateful to B.Julia for opportunity to present these results at the Les Houches Spring School in March 2003. P. W. was supported by the NSF MRSEC Program under DMR-0213745, NSF DMR-0220198 and Humboldt foundation. The work of A.Z. was supported in part by RFBR grant 03-02-17373, by grant for support of scientific schools NSh-1999.2003.2 and by Federal Program of the Russian ministry of industry, science and technology 40.052.1.1.1112. The work of both authors was partially supported by the NATO grant PST.CLG.978817.


text:
# Thin Disk Models of Anomalous X-ray Pulsars

## 1 Introduction

The models for explaining the X-ray energy output of Anomalous X-ray Pulsars (AXPs, see  for a review) can be classified in two groups. Magnetar models  assign the persistent emission and bursts  to the extra-ordinary magnetic field of the neutron star while accretion models  employ neutron stars with intrinsic properties similar to other neutron stars and try to explain the X-ray emission and spin properties by the way matter is supplied. AXPs are very similar to Soft Gamma Ray Repeaters (SGRs)  and probably have the same nature.

Magnetar model is successful in modelling the SGR/AXP bursts and spin-down rates but can not explain the period clustering  except in one set of field decay models under special conditions . Interaction of the neutron star with a fall-back disk towards equilibrium can naturally account for the period clustering.

Mereghetti & Stella (1995) proposed that AXPs were accreting from a very low mass companion. There are severe upper limits for the mass of such a companion and no orbital motion signatures have been detected. Van Paradijs et al. (1995)  proposed a fossil disk model in which the disk results from the final spiral-in destruction of the binary. Such a model addresses the absence of the binary companion but can not account for the young ages of AXPs indicated by the supernova remnant (SNR) associations . Fall-back disk models  can address the young ages of AXPs and the absence of a mass donor companion. In all fall-back disk models the spin down of the neutron star is achieved by the propeller effect  in which the rapid rotation of the neutron star prevents inflowing matter from accreting onto the surface of the star. Even when the star is slow enough that accretion can commence, it can continue to spin-down until torque equilibrium. AXPs must be those spinning-down accreting systems near torque equilibrium.

Recent detections in the infrared (and optical) support the existence of a disk . The magnetar models do not have a prediction for infrared emission. Fall-back disks are not necessarily geometrically thin but, as the only models available for calculation, they warrant a careful study to decide whether interaction with a fall-back disk can produce neutron stars with AXP properties at the ages indicated by SNR-AXP associations. In this work we discuss the options of the fall-back disk model in view of the recent disk solution employed by Ekşi & Alpar (2003).

## 2 Fall-back Disk Models

Alpar (2001)  proposed a classification of young neutron stars in terms of the absence or presence and properties of a fall-back disk. According to this model AXPs, SGRs and Dim Thermal Neutron Stars (DTNs) have similar periods because they are in an asymptotic spin-down phase in interaction with a fall-back disk. The different classes represent alternative pathways of neutron stars. Radio pulsars have no disks or encounter very low mass inflow rates while Radio Quiet Neutron Stars (RQNS) have such high mass inflow rates that their pulse periods are obscured by the dense medium around. This model employs constant mass inflow rate corresponding to a constant equilibrium period. As a fall-back disk is not replenished, the mass inflow rate of the disk should decline while the disk diminishes. The mass flow rates characterizing different evolutionary paths given in this model are then representative values and are to be replaced by the initial mass of the disk in a time-dependent model.

Chatterjee et al. (2000) (CHN ) employed a time-dependent thin disk model  in which the angular momentum of the disk is constant and the mass of the disk declines with a power-law. Accordingly, the mass inflow rate also declines as a power-law

$$\dot{M}=\dot{M}_0\left(\frac{t}{T_0}\right)^\alpha $$
(1)
where $`\dot{M}_0`$ is the initial inflow rate and $`T_0`$ is taken to be the dynamical time scale, $`T_d\mathrm{\Omega }_K^1`$ at the initial inner radius of the disk. The power-law index $`\alpha `$ depends on the opacity regime. For opacities of the form $`\kappa =\kappa _0\rho ^aT^b`$, thin disk equations  can be solved to obtain

$$\alpha =\frac{18a4b+38}{17a2b+32}.$$
(2)
This yields, $`\alpha =19/16`$ for electron scattering opacity ($`a=b=0`$), and $`\alpha =5/4`$ for bound-free opacity ($`a=1`$ and $`b=7/2`$). CHN assumed electron scattering to be dominating, but employed $`\alpha =7/6`$ for analytical convenience. As the mass inflow rate declines, the equilibrium period increases and the system can never reach a true equilibrium. AXPs are those systems accreting from a diminishing disk while spinning down towards an ever receding equilibrium (quasi-equilibrium stage).

Francischelli & Wijers (2002) criticized the CHN model, noting that whether the disk model can produce AXPs or not is sensitively dependent on the value of the power-law index $`\alpha `$. They showed that after $`20`$ years, the disk is bound-free opacity dominated and for the corresponding $`\alpha `$, the model did not produce AXPs with the nominal disk mass employed by CHN ($`M_0=0.006M_{}`$). They also criticized the torque model employed in the CHN model, arguing that it is too efficient and showed that less efficient torque models can not produce AXPs (see also ).

While Fracischelli & Wijers (2002)  is right in arguing that $`\alpha `$ is critical in determining the period evolution for a single initial disk mass, it is not possible to reject the fall-back disk model on this ground. For every $`\alpha `$, one can find an appropriate initial mass flow rate $`\dot{M}_0`$ (corresponding to an initial disk mass $`M_0`$) that leads to a period evolution in which the system enters the quasi-equilibrium stage at $`P5`$ s, producing an AXP. The time at which the transition to the quasi-equilibrium stage occurs, $`T_{tr}`$, and the mass flow rate at this moment, $`\dot{M}_{tr}`$, remains nearly the same for each $`\alpha `$ and its corresponding $`\dot{M}_0`$. One can obtain AXPs with the CHN model by employing $`\alpha =5/4`$ corresponding to bound-free opacity as long as one assumes an initial disk mass of $`M_00.069M_{}`$. This larger initial disk mass does not lead to higher luminosity at the accretion stage because the disk decays more rapidly with the corresponding $`\alpha `$.

Ekşi & Alpar (2003) (EA03 ) employed another time-dependent thin disk solution  for the evolution of the disk during the propeller stage. In this solution mass of the disk is constant while the angular momentum of the disk increases due to the torque

$$\dot{J}=\dot{J}_0\left(\frac{t}{T_0}\right)^\beta $$
(3)
at the inner boundary of the disk where

$$\beta =\frac{14a+22}{15a2b+28}.$$
(4)
For electron scattering opacity $`\beta =11/14`$ and for bound-free opacity dominated disks $`\beta =18/25`$. In this solution mass flows outwards, but Pringle (1991) numerically shows solutions in which the mass flows inwards, and a torque as given in Eq. (3) is necessary to stop accretion at the inner boundary. Pringle (1981)  mentioned that “such a solution might represent a disc around a magnetized star which is rotating sufficiently rapidly that its angular velocity exceeds the Keplerian velocity at the magnetosphere” - i.e. a propeller. Assuming the inner radius $`R_m`$ scales with the Alfvén radius $`R_A\dot{M}^{2/7}`$ and referring $`\dot{J}\sqrt{GMR_m}\dot{M}\dot{M}^{6/7}`$, one can calculate an effective $`\alpha `$ for the propeller regime. For electron-scattering opacity one obtains $`\alpha _p=11/12`$ and for bound-free opacity $`\alpha _p=21/25`$. EA03 used another scaling for determining the inner radius in the propeller regime $`R_m\dot{M}^{1/5}`$ . This implementation for the inner radius yields $`\dot{J}\dot{M}^{9/10}`$ and one obtains $`\alpha _p=55/63`$ for the electron scattering opacity and $`\alpha _p=4/5`$ for the bound-free opacity.

For the sake of consistency with the constant disk mass solution, EA03 assumed that the inflowing matter flung away by the magnetosphere of the neutron star returns back to the disk somewhere away from the inner boundary of the disk. The mass flow rate in the propeller type of solution declines with a softer power-law index than it does in the accretion type of solution because in the former case matter cannot accrete and the decrease in the flow rate is only by the viscous spreading of the disk. Conservation of the mass of the disk during the propeller stage makes it possible to obtain AXPs with a 50 times smaller initial disk masses than required by the CHN model. Again, this does not mean that mass flow rate during the accretion stage will be smaller by this order of magnitude.

The luminosities of AXPs being less than $`L_X7\times 10^{35}`$ erg s-1 imply that less than $`\dot{M}_X4\times 10^{15}`$ g s-1 of matter is accreting onto these objects. As Menou et al. (2001)  have shown, fall-back disks with $`\dot{M}10^{16}`$ g s-1 are neutralized and can not be accreting. This means that AXPs must have mass flow rates in excess of $`10^{16}`$ g s-1 and only a fraction $`\eta `$ of the inflowing matter should accrete onto the neutron star. In CHN model $`\dot{M}_{tr}10^{16}`$ g s-1 and one needs to assume that a fraction $`\eta 0.1`$ of the inflowing mass accretes onto the neutron star, in order to explain the observed luminosities of $`L_X10^{36}`$ erg s-1. In EA03 model one needs to assume $`\eta 0.01`$ in order to explain the luminosities because the system reaches the quasi-equilibrium stage rather rapidly, at an epoch during which the mass flow rate is still high. The difference is due to the different formulations employed for the magnetic radius of the disk during the propeller stage which in turn effects the magnitude of the torque and the time the system reaches the quasi-equilibrium stage.

## 3 The Model Equations

For finding the inner radius, we follow the EA03 model . The system initially is in the super-critical propeller regime and the inner radius of the disk is determined by

$`R_m`$ $`=`$ $`(\mu ^2\kappa _{es}/8\pi \sqrt{2}c\mathrm{\Omega }_{})^{1/6}`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`31R_{}\mu _{30}^{1/3}(P_0/15\text{ms})^{1/6}`$
while the corotation radius is $`R_c10R_{}(P/15\text{ms})^{2/3}`$. The dynamical time scale $`T_d1/\mathrm{\Omega }_K(R_m)`$ correspondingly is $`T_d=1.23\times 10^2\mu _{30}^{1/6}(P_0/15\text{ms})^{1/4}`$ which is one order of magnitude greater than that employed by CHN. Greater $`T_0`$ makes it possible to obtain the same mass flow history (and same $`\dot{M}_{tr}`$) starting with a smaller $`\dot{M}_0`$ by (and smaller $`M_0`$). The calculations of Pringle (1991) show that the power-law evolution starts after a viscous time scale rather than the dynamical time-scale employed in early models. Considering the ambiguity in $`T_0`$, one should not attempt to be very definite on the initial mass of the disk in models employing the power-law evolution.

We model the disk torque as

$$\dot{J}_{}=\sqrt{GMR_m}\dot{M}(1\omega _{}/\omega _{eq})$$
(6)
where $`\omega _{eq}`$ is the equilibrium fastness parameter which we take to be $`0.85`$ in this work. As noted by  and , this is a very efficient propeller torque model compared to some other available propeller torques obtained through simple energy or angular momentum arguments . Recently Ikhsanov  revived the propeller model of Davies & Pringle (1981)  which incorporates $`\dot{J}_{}\omega _{}`$. This model agrees with Eq. (6) in the large $`\omega _{}`$ limit. In the form we adopt, the torque entails asymptotic approach to rotational equilibrium which is necessary for addressing the period clustering of AXPs. The recent numerical work  also indicate an efficient propeller torque ($`\dot{J}_{}\mathrm{\Omega }_{}^{4/3}`$).

Being aware that modifications in $`\alpha `$ can be compensated by modifying the initial inflow rate which in turn depends on the uncertain value of the dynamical time scale, we simplify the EA03 model as follows:

$$\alpha =\{\begin{array}{cc}5/4\hfill & \text{if }\omega _{}<1\text{;}\hfill \\ 4/5\hfill & \text{if }\omega _{}>1\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(7)
The value 5/4 is motivated by the accretor type of solution and the value 4/5 is motivated by the propeller type of solution. Both values correspond to the bound free opacity regime. The electron scattering opacity prevails only in the $`20`$ years and does not effect the period evolution significantly.

## 4 Results and Discussion

We have followed the evolution of the star-disk system for $`10^5`$ years, solving the torque equation (6) numerically with the adaptive step-size Runge-Kutta method .

In Figure (1) we show five evolutionary tracks on the $`P\dot{P}`$ diagram that can cover seven AXP/SGRs for which period derivatives are available. Figure (2) shows the corresponding period evolutions for each of the tracks in Figure (1), tracks with the same numbers having the same parameters. We assumed the radius and mass of the neutron star to be $`R_{}=10^6`$ cm and $`M_{}=1.4M_{}`$, respectively. Initial period is $`P_0=15`$ ms and we have assumed that the disk neutralizes when the mass flow rate drops below $`10^{16}`$ g s-1 .

Extending the analysis to disk evolution in the propeller regime provides favorable effective power-law indices $`\alpha _{\text{eff}}<1`$. However, in the availability of choosing a larger initial disk mass one can always obtain AXPs even if the disk looses mass with $`\alpha =5/4`$.

Considering the effect of the radiation pressure on the inner radius indicates a larger dynamical time scale, $`T_0`$. With a larger $`T_0`$, one can produce the same mass flow history with a smaller initial mass inflow rate corresponding to a smaller initial disk mass. The numerical calculations (see ) indicate that the power-law evolution corresponding to the self-similar solutions start in a viscous time-scale which is still larger than the dynamical time scale. Given the ambiguity in $`T_0`$, estimations of initial disk mass from power-law models discussed above, should not be taken very seriously.

Modifications in $`\alpha `$ and $`T_0`$ can always be compensated in the sense that one can obtain the same period evolution by tuning the initial mass flow rate. Such modifications then lead to the same mass flow rate at the quasi-equilibrium stage at which the system is observed as an AXP.

The part of the model that is critical in determining whether fall-back disks can produce AXPs or not is the propeller torque as first shown by . If the torque model is inefficient, one must then employ a high mass flow history to spin-down the neutron star to AXP periods which in turn results with very high luminosities in the quasi-equilibrium stage. As the torque is dependent on the inner radius of the disk, the results are effected by the uncertain factors ($`\xi =R_m/R_A`$) in determining the inner radius.

It is possible that a fall-back disk loses mass also in the propeller regime because of the propeller effect itself, depending on the fastness parameter. The simple power-law models for the flow rate are working models which do not take into account the coupling of the star to the structure of the disk. A more realistic treatment of fall-back disks would consider the effects of the magnetic field on disk evolution, realistic opacities, including the iron line opacity  for the fall-back disk which is rich in heavy elements, and the dependence of the accretion rate itself on the motion of the inner radius $`\dot{M}=2\pi R_m\mathrm{\Sigma }(R_m)[\dot{R}_mv_r(R_m)]`$ (see ). All of these effects would result in time evolution of the disk that cannot be described by simple power laws. Taking account of the complexities of the real problem is not likely to produce qualitative disagreement with the evolutionary timescales as long as the torque is efficient.