text:
# On Superfluidity and Suppressed Light Scattering in BECs

## Abstract

We show that the suppression of light scattering off a Bose Einstein Condensate is equivalent to the Landau argument for superfluidity and thus is a consequence of the Principle of Superfluidity. The superfluid ground state of a BEC contains nonseparable, nontrivial correlations between the bosons that make up the system, i. e., it is entangled. The correlations in the ground state entangle the bosons into a coherent state for the lowest energy state. The entanglement is so extreme that the bosons that make up the system cannot be excited at long wavenumbers. Their existence at low energies is impossible. Only quantum sound can be excited, i.e. the excitations are Bogolyubov quasiparticles which do not resemble free bosons whatsoever at low energies. This means that the system is superfluid by the Landau argument and the superfluidity is ultimately the reason for suppressed scattering at low wavelengths.

The advent of Bose Einstein Condensates (BECs) in 1995bec1 ; bec2 ; bec3  was followed by an explosion of experimental activity. Among the experimental efforts figure studies of spontaneous emission and light scattering of these superfluid systems by W. Ketterle and collaboratorskett1 . They found that light scattering off BECs is suppressed to negligible values at long wavelengths. This seems surprising at first since one can naively expect the typical $`n+1`$ bosonic enhancementkett2  as observed in their emission experimentskett1 . They have attributed the observed suppression of light scattering in BECs to destructive quantum interference effectskett2 . While their argument is certainly true, it is the purpose of this brief note to point out that the more universal reason that makes their argument, and hence their results, true is the Principle of Superfluidity.

BECs are systems of bosonic atoms with short range repulsive interactions among them, as all atoms will repel each other when placed close enough together. At low enough temperatures, more importantly than being Bose condensed, the repulsion correlates particles with momentum $`𝐤`$ and $`𝐤`$ into a coherent ground state. Such a repulsion endows the ground state with the necessary rigidity that makes superflow possible. Such a rigidity impedes the existence of soft quasiparticles excitations, allowing only quantum sound as a low energy excitation. Hence the event of light scattering and its concomitant excitations, which will necessarily disrupt the superfluid, will be suppressed by virtue of the Principle of Superfluidity.

An apt Hamiltonian that encapsulates the universal physics of Bose Einstein Condensates is the Bose Hubbard model.

$$\begin{array}{c}=\underset{𝐤}{}ϵ_𝐤a_𝐤^{}a_𝐤\mu \underset{𝐤}{}a_𝐤^{}a_𝐤\hfill \\ \hfill +\frac{U_0}{2}\underset{𝐤,𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐},𝐪}{}a_{𝐤+𝐪}^{}a_{𝐤_2𝐪}^{}a_𝐤a_{𝐤_2}\end{array}$$
(1)
where $`a_𝐤^{}`$ and $`a_𝐤`$ are bosonic creation and annihilation operators, $`ϵ_𝐤=\mathrm{}^2k^2/2m`$ is the kinetic energy or dispersion of the noninteracting bosons, $`\mu `$ is a chemical potential introduced to conserve particles when we make the Bogolyubov approximation, and U represents the interaction between bosons.

We consider first ground state properties. We suppose that the parameters of our Hamiltonian is such that the ground state of the system is a Bose superfluid and not any other competing phase such as a Mott insulator. A precondition on the superfluid system is for it to be a quantum fluid. That is, at low temperatures it is Bose condensed, with a macroscopic number of bosons occupying the zero momentum state. This is why He4 has the superfluid transition at the Bose condensation temperature. Under macroscopic occupation we can treat the operators $`a_0`$ and $`a_0^{}`$ as c numbers and replace them by $`\sqrt{N_0}`$, the square root of the total number of bosons in the condensate. We separate terms corresponding to the condensate from the interacting Hamiltonian. Higher order terms can be discarded because the correlations in the ground state dominate at low $`𝐤`$ and make those terms negligible. This leads us to a reduced Bogolyubov Hamiltonianbogo

$$\begin{array}{c}=\frac{1}{2}N_0^2U_0+\underset{𝐤0}{}\stackrel{~}{ϵ_𝐤}a_𝐤^{}a_𝐤\hfill \\ \hfill +U_0\frac{N_0}{2}\underset{𝐤0}{}(a_𝐤^{}a_𝐤^{}+a_𝐤a_𝐤)\end{array}$$
(2)
where

$$\stackrel{~}{ϵ_𝐤}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2k^2}{2m}+N_0U_0$$
(3)
and $`\mu `$ has been eliminated by a variational condition on the ground state energy with respect to number of condensate particles, $`N_0`$.

The Hamiltonian in equation (2) is diagonalized by a Bogolyubov transformation

$$b_𝐤=u_𝐤a_𝐤+v_𝐤a_𝐤^{}b_𝐤^{}=u_𝐤a_𝐤^{}+v_𝐤a_𝐤$$
(4)
by choosing

$$u_𝐤=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{\frac{\stackrel{~}{ϵ_𝐤}}{E_𝐤}+1}v_𝐤=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\sqrt{\frac{\stackrel{~}{ϵ_𝐤}}{E_𝐤}1}$$
(5)
$$E_𝐤=\sqrt{\stackrel{~}{ϵ_𝐤}^2N_0^2U_0^2}=|k|\sqrt{\frac{\mathrm{}^4k^2}{4m^2}+\frac{\mathrm{}^2N_0U_0}{m}}$$
(6)
where the Bogolyubov operators satisfy bosonic commutation relations. In the long wavelength limit ($`k0`$) we arrive at a quasiparticle excitation spectrum

$$E_𝐤\mathrm{}|k|\sqrt{\frac{N_0U_0}{m}}=p\sqrt{\frac{N_0U_0}{m}}$$
(7)
where $`p=\mathrm{}|k|`$. We see that the low energy excitations have sound dispersion $`E_𝐤=pc_s`$ with sound speed

$$c_s=\sqrt{\frac{N_0U_0}{m}}$$
(8)
This is a finite measurable quantitysound1  that indicates the presence of correlations among the constituents of the material since in the absence of repulsion the correlations, and with them the sound speed, will go to zero. Such correlations stabilize persistent currents and give rigidity to the ground state by making it energetically expensive to excite the fundamental bosons independently. Instead, the excitations are collective modes and the system superflowslandau . The ground state has acquired rigidity.

The absence of boson repulsion, and hence rigidity, would permit scattering processes to occur which impedes superfluidity through dissipation. This is equivalent to Landau’s argument for superfluidity, which we will briefly sketch. A Bose fluid at zero temperature moving with velocity $`𝐯`$ and interacting with an external agent can exchange energy and momentum with the agent. The fluid has initial energy $`Mv^2/2`$ with $`M`$ the total mass of the fluid. The interaction creates a quasiparticle with energy $`ϵ_𝐩`$ in the frame of the Bose fluid. In the lab frame the particle has energy

$$\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐩=ϵ_𝐩+𝐩𝐯$$
(9)
by Galilean invariancelandau . If the fluid can lower its energy by exciting quasiparticles it will do so no matter how mild the interaction is, and hence it will dissipate. The final fluid energy with a quasiparticle excited is

$$\frac{Mv^2}{2}+ϵ_𝐩+𝐩𝐯$$
(10)
The condition for dissipation is therefore $`ϵ_𝐩+𝐩𝐯<0`$. The easiest way to satisfy the condition is when $`𝐩`$ is antiparallel to $`𝐯`$. We then obtain dissipation for

$$v>\left(\frac{ϵ_𝐩}{p}\right)_{\text{min}}$$
(11)
For all dispersions softer than sound the minimum on the right hand side of the last equation is zero and there is dissipation for any velocity of the fluid. If the dispersion is at least as stiff as sound, for velocities smaller than some critical velocity there is no dissipation and hence superflow. We thus see that Bose condensation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the existence of superfluidity. One also needs the ground state rigidity provided by boson repulsion.

We will now move to study light scattering off the Bose Einstein Condensate. As we will show below and had been previously shown by Ketterle and collaboratorskett2  the suppresses ed scattering follows from destructive quantum interference that does not permit bosons to be excited out of the fluid. Such destructive interference will be absent if $`v_𝐤=0`$. We point out that the speed of sound, $`c_s`$, of the system will be zero if and only if $`v_𝐤=0`$. Therefore the suppressed scattering is a consequence of the system being a superfluid and hence equivalent to the Landau argument.

In order to study scattering off the superfluid we will need to calculate perturbation matrix elements of excited states with the ground state. The normalized BEC ground state wavefunction is

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=\underset{𝐤}{}\frac{1}{u_𝐤}e^{(v_𝐤/u_𝐤)a_𝐤^{}a_𝐤^{}}|0$$
(12)
In the absence of interactions, $`u_𝐤=1,v_𝐤=0`$ and we have a noncorrelated ground state. In this case, when we excite the system by scattering, we literally pull out one of the bosonic atoms constituting the condensate and give it nonzero momentum. In this noninteracting and hence nonsuperfluid case, scattering will have a typical bosonic enhancement. In the superfluid case, which corresponds to interacting bosons, atoms with momentum $`𝐤`$ and $`𝐤`$ are mixed so when an excitation with momentum $`𝐤`$ is created, another with momentum $`𝐤`$ is destroyed forming a coherent superposition.

In a scattering event, an incoming particle couples to the density of the system. The effective scattering Hamiltonian is

$$_I=d^3rV(𝐫,t)\rho (𝐫)+\text{H.C.}$$
(13)
or after Fourier transforming

$$_I=\underset{𝐤}{}V_𝐪e^{i\omega t}a_{𝐤+𝐪}^{}a_𝐤+\text{H.C.}$$
(14)
where the energy and momentum transfered in the scattering event are

$$𝐪=𝐪_f𝐪_i\text{and}\omega =\omega _i\omega _f$$
(15)
and where we have concentrated only on one $`𝐪`$. This is enough at first order where the amplitudes for the different momenta add.

In order to insure adiabaticity in the interaction we introduce an extra term in the exponential of the interaction Hamiltonian. The interaction will be turned on at $`t=\mathrm{}`$ and left on until a time $`t`$. At the end of the calculations, we will take the limit $`\eta 0^+`$.

$$_I=\underset{𝐤}{}V_𝐪e^{i(\omega i\eta )t}a_{𝐤+𝐪}^{}a_𝐤+\text{H.C.}$$
(16)
Calculating the time evolution of the Bose system in the presence of the scattering particle by means of time dependent perturbation theory (with the ground state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_i=|\mathrm{\Psi }_o`$, $`E_i=0`$ as the initial state) we obtain for the amplitude, after separating the $`𝐤=0,𝐪`$ momentum states to account for the condensate

$$\begin{array}{c}c_m(t)=\frac{V_𝐪\sqrt{N_0}(\mathrm{\Psi }_m|a_𝐪^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0+\mathrm{\Psi }_m|a_𝐪|\mathrm{\Psi }_0)}{E_m+\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta }e^{i(E_m+\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta )t/\mathrm{}}\frac{V_𝐪\sqrt{N_0}(\mathrm{\Psi }_m|a_𝐪|\mathrm{\Psi }_0+\mathrm{\Psi }_m|a_𝐪^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0)}{E_m\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta }e^{i(E_m\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta )t/\mathrm{}}\hfill \\ \hfill \underset{𝐤0,𝐪}{}V_𝐪\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_m|a_{𝐤+𝐪}^{}a_𝐤|\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{E_m+\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta }e^{i(E_m+\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta )t/\mathrm{}}\underset{𝐤0,𝐪}{}V_𝐪\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_m|a_𝐤^{}a_{𝐤+𝐪}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0}{E_m\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta }e^{i(E_m\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta )t/\mathrm{}}\end{array}$$
(17)
Since the scattering particles couple to the density, the amount of scattering is proportional to the density component with momentum q, the so called density response function

$$\rho _𝐪=\underset{m}{}c_m\mathrm{\Psi }_0|\rho _𝐪|\mathrm{\Psi }_m+\underset{m}{}c_m^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_m|\rho _𝐪|\mathrm{\Psi }_0$$
(18)
Notice from (4) that

$$a_𝐪^{}=u_𝐪b_𝐪^{}v_𝐪b_𝐪a_𝐪=u_𝐪b_𝐪v_𝐪b_𝐪^{}$$
(19)
Using these relations together with the expression for the density $`\rho _𝐪=_𝐤a_{𝐤+𝐪}^{}a_𝐤`$ and equation (17) we find

$`\rho _𝐪`$ $`={\displaystyle \frac{V_𝐪N_0(u_𝐪v_𝐪)^2}{E_𝐪\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta }}e^{i(E_𝐪\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta )t/\mathrm{}}e^{iE_𝐪t/\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \frac{V_𝐪N_0(u_𝐪v_𝐪)^2}{E_𝐪+\mathrm{}\omega +i\mathrm{}\eta }}e^{i(E_𝐪+\mathrm{}\omega +i\mathrm{}\eta )t/\mathrm{}}e^{iE_𝐪t/\mathrm{}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤0,𝐪}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐥0,𝐪}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{u_𝐤u_𝐥v_{𝐤+𝐪}v_{𝐥+𝐪}V_𝐪}{E_{𝐤+𝐪}+E_𝐤\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta }}e^{i(E_{𝐤+𝐪}+E_𝐤\mathrm{}\omega i\mathrm{}\eta )t/\mathrm{}}e^{i(E_{𝐤+𝐪}+E_𝐤)t/\mathrm{}}`$ (20)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐤0,𝐪}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐥0,𝐪}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{v_𝐤v_𝐥u_{𝐤+𝐪}u_{𝐥+𝐪}V_𝐪}{E_{𝐤+𝐪}+E_𝐤+\mathrm{}\omega +i\mathrm{}\eta }}e^{i(E_{𝐤+𝐪}+E_𝐤+\mathrm{}\omega +i\mathrm{}\eta )t/\mathrm{}}e^{i(E_{𝐤+𝐪}+E_𝐤)t/\mathrm{}}`$
The higher momenta terms ($`𝐤0,𝐪`$) in the density response function represent processes that are forbidden by kinematics constraints, and hence they are dropped.

In particular, notice that for k = 0 in (17)

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_m|a_𝐪^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ $`=\mathrm{\Psi }_m|(u_𝐪b_𝐪^{}v_𝐪b_𝐪)|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$
$`=u_𝐪\mathrm{\Psi }_m|b_𝐪^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ (21)
with final state

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }_{m_0^{}}=b_𝐪^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0$$
(22)
and matrix element

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_m|a_𝐪^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0=u_𝐪$$
(23)
and for k = -q

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_m|a_𝐪|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ $`=\mathrm{\Psi }_m|(u_𝐪b_𝐪v_𝐪b_𝐪^{})|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$
$`=v_𝐪\mathrm{\Psi }_m|b_𝐪^{}|\mathrm{\Psi }_0`$ (24)
whose final state is the same state (22)

The expressions (On Superfluidity and Suppressed Light Scattering in BECs) and (On Superfluidity and Suppressed Light Scattering in BECs) make evident the meaning of the multiplicative factor $`(u_𝐪v_𝐪)^2=u_𝐪^2+v_𝐪^22u_𝐪v_𝐪`$ in (On Superfluidity and Suppressed Light Scattering in BECs). $`v_𝐪^2`$ represents the probability of knocking a boson with momentum $`𝐪`$ out of the correlated ground state, $`u_𝐪^2`$ represents the probability of knocking into the ground state one of the boson that are correlated with momentum $`𝐪`$, and $`u_𝐪v_𝐪`$ is the interference between the two processes. It is this interference factor which provides the suppression of light scatteringkett2  as a consequence of the rigidity intrinsic of a superfluid ground state ($`v_𝐪0`$). Using equations (3), (5), (6), and (8) we find, as $`𝐪0`$

$$\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪=N_0U_0(1+\frac{\mathrm{}^2q^2}{2m^2c_s^2}),E_𝐪\mathrm{}qc_s(1+\frac{\mathrm{}^2q^2}{8m^2c_s^2})$$
(25)
thus

$$\frac{\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪}{E_𝐪}\frac{mc_s}{\mathrm{}q}(1+\frac{3\mathrm{}^2q^2}{8m^2c_s^2})$$
(26)
Hence

$$u_𝐪^2+v_𝐪^2=\frac{\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪}{E_𝐪}\frac{mc_s}{\mathrm{}q}(1+\frac{3\mathrm{}^2q^2}{8m^2c_s^2})$$
(27)
$$u_𝐪v_𝐪=\frac{1}{2}\sqrt{\frac{\stackrel{~}{ϵ}_𝐪^2}{E_𝐪^2}1}\frac{mc_s}{2\mathrm{}q}(1\frac{\mathrm{}^2q^2}{8m^2c_s^2})$$
(28)
Putting everything together

$$u_𝐪^2+v_𝐪^22u_𝐪v_𝐪\frac{\mathrm{}q}{2mc_s}$$
(29)
This goes to zero linearly as $`𝐪0`$. The processes of knocking a particle with momentum $`𝐪`$ out of the correlated ground state and knocking a particle with momentum $`𝐪`$ into the ground state both lead to the same final state. That is, the two processes cannot be differentiated by the scattering process and thus will interfere quantum mechanically. This is so because neither of them is an elementary excitation of the system, but a coherent superposition of them makes a Bogolyubov quasiparticle, which is an eigenstate of the system. The interference is destructive at small wavevectors and scattering is suppressed.

We conclude by emphasizing that if there is no repulsion between the atoms, low energy excitations will not have a sound spectrum, $`v_𝐤=0,u_𝐤=1`$ leading to no superfluidity and no suppressed light scattering. We thus see that suppressed light scattering follows from the rigidity concomitant to the superfluid state, characterized by $`v_𝐤0`$, which is equivalent to a nonzero sound speed. This rigidity is ultimately due to repulsive interactions between the bosons. There is no scattering because the “Principle of Superfluidity” forbids it. These are universal properties valid for any superfluid state which will hold exactly at low enough energy scales.


format: text

text:
# Wave effect in gravitational lensing by a cosmic string

## I Introduction

The standard model of elementary particle theory involves the mechanism of spontaneous symmetry breaking, which predicts phase transitions in the early universe. In general, such phase transitions produce topological defects, depending on the symmetry spontaneously broken. The cosmic string is the topological defect produced when a $`U(1)`$ symmetry is broken KT . Historically, the cosmic strings were well investigated, motivated by a possible mechanism to explain the structure formation of the universe Stringformation . However, this possibility is severely limited or rejected by the observation of large scale structure of the galaxies and the measurements of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies WMAP ; 2dF . Thus the cosmic strings cannot play a central role in structure formation, which constrains the cosmic string energy density. But, we also note that a cosmological model with a non-negligible defect contribution has not been rejected completely. It is argued that the model with a mixture of inflation and topological defects can be compatible with a CMB anisotropy data BPRS .

On the other hand, other possible roles of the cosmic strings are considered. For example, Sazhin et al. have reported detection of the source which is naturally explained by lensing effect of a cosmic string Sazhin . The gravitational lensing effect due to the cosmic strings has been investigated by several authors Vilenkin ; Gott ; LV ; DEL ; BU . Actually the gravitational lensing phenomenon is known as a possible unique probe to detect the cosmic strings. The prospect to detect the cosmic string with wide field galaxy surveys is discussed HV ; Shirasaki . In the present paper, we investigate the wave effect in the gravitational lensing by the cosmic string. Recently wave effect in gravitational lensing has been investigated, motivated by the gravitational wave observation TN ; Seto ; PINQ ; BHN ; TTN . These works focus on wave effect by isolated lenses (see also SEF ; Deguchi ). However, the wave effect in the lensing by the cosmic string has not been investigated, as far as we know.

This paper is organized as follows: In Sec. 2 we present a solution of the wave equation on the background spacetime with a straight static cosmic string. Then we show the condition that the interference occurs as a wave effect. In Sec. 3, we demonstrate typical numbers of gravitational lensing by the cosmic string. We also discuss a possibility of detecting the interference in the lensing of gravitational waves from a compact binary in Sec. 4. Sec. 5 is devoted to conclusions. We use the convention $`G=c=1`$, otherwise we express them explicitly.

## II Wave Solution

The properties of a cosmic string in a vacuum spacetime was studied by Vilenkin VilenkinA . He showed that the local nature of the solution is same as that of the Minkowski spacetime, but the conical singularity arises around the cosmic string. This is the origin of the deficit angle $`\delta =8\pi \mu `$ of the spacetime, where $`\mu `$ is the energy (line) density of the cosmic string. The energy density $`\mu `$ depends on the individual model of the cosmic string, however, the constraint on $`\mu `$ from cosmological observations of the galaxy large scale structure and the cosmic microwave background anisotropies is $`\mu \stackrel{<}{}10^6`$ (HV  and references therein).

We consider the simple configuration (see Fig. 1): A straight string is located parallel to the $`z`$ axis. The source is located on the coordinate $`A=(L\mathrm{cos}[\delta /2],L\mathrm{sin}[\delta /2],0)`$ and $`B=(L\mathrm{cos}[\delta /2],L\mathrm{sin}[\delta /2],0)`$, where both $`A`$ and $`B`$ are identical because this spacetime has the conical singularity. Denoting the coordinate of an observer $`(x,y,z)`$, the distance between $`A(B)`$ and the observer is

$`r_1=\sqrt{\left(x+L\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{2}}\right)^2+\left(yL\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{2}}\right)^2+z^2},`$ (1)
$`r_2=\sqrt{\left(x+L\mathrm{cos}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{2}}\right)^2+\left(y+L\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{2}}\right)^2+z^2},`$ (2)
respectively. We assume that the amplitude of the wave field is expressed as

$``$ $`=`$ $`A_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}(\omega tkr_1)}{r_1}}\mathrm{\Theta }(y+x\mathrm{tan}\delta /2)+A_0{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}(\omega tkr_2)}{r_2}}\mathrm{\Theta }(yx\mathrm{tan}\delta /2),`$ (3)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }(X)`$ is the Heaviside function and $`A_0`$ is a constant. The interference occurs in the region $`yx\mathrm{tan}\delta /2`$ and $`yx\mathrm{tan}\delta /2`$. Within this region we have

$``$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2A_0}{r}}\mathrm{cos}\left[\left(\omega tk{\displaystyle \frac{r_1+r_2}{2}}\right)\right]\mathrm{cos}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{k(r_1r_2)}{2}}\right]`$ (4)
with $`r=\sqrt{(x+L)^2+z^2}`$. Thus the amplitude of the wave is determined by the phase $`k(r_1r_2)/2`$ because of the interference. Using eqs. (1) and (2), the path difference is

$`r_1r_2`$ $``$ $`2y\mathrm{sin}[\delta /2]{\displaystyle \frac{L}{\sqrt{(x+L)^2+z^2}}}=2y\mathrm{sin}[\delta /2]{\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}},`$ (5)
where we assumed $`yz,x,L`$, in the last equality, we used $`\theta `$ to denote the angle between the string direction and the line of sight, and $`D_{\mathrm{LS}}`$ and $`D_{\mathrm{OS}}`$ to denote angular diameter distances from observer to source and string to source, respectively. The condition that the wave amplitude has a maximum is

$`k(r_1r_2)/2=n\pi `$ (6)
with integer $`n=0,\pm 1,\pm 2,\mathrm{}\pm n_{\mathrm{max}}`$, where $`n_{\mathrm{max}}`$ is the largest integer satisfying

$`\pi |n|kx\mathrm{sin}^2[\delta /2]{\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}}.`$ (7)
## III Typical numbers

In this section we estimate quantitatively physical numbers of the gravitational lensing system by the cosmic string. It is well known that the angular separation of two images is

$`\mathrm{\Delta }\alpha =2\mathrm{sin}[\delta /2]{\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}}2^{\prime \prime }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{10^5}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}}\right).`$ (8)
The path difference causes time delay, defined by $`T_{dl}=|r_1r_2|/c`$. To estimate its typical number, we set $`y=(1+z_L)D_{\mathrm{LO}}\mathrm{sin}[\delta /2]/2`$ as a typical value in eq. (5), where $`D_{\mathrm{LO}}`$ is the angular diameter distance between the string and observer. Then, we have

$`T_{dl}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(1+z_L)\mathrm{sin}^2[\delta /2]D_{\mathrm{LO}}}{c}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}}\right)`$ (9)
$``$ $`10^7(1+z_L)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{10^5}}\right)^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LO}}}{cH_0^1}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}}\right)\mathrm{sec}`$
with the Hubble constant $`H_0=70\mathrm{km}/\mathrm{s}/\mathrm{Mpc}`$.

On the other hand, eq. (6) is the condition for the maximum peak of the wave. Therefore the wave effect is characterized by the length between two neighboring peaks,

$`\mathrm{\Delta }y={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{k\mathrm{sin}[\delta /2]}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }}\right)3\times 10^{15}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1\mathrm{H}\mathrm{z}}{\nu }}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^5}{\delta }}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }}\right)\mathrm{cm},`$ (10)
where $`\nu `$ is the frequency of the wave. Thus $`\mathrm{\Delta }y`$ can be an astronomical distance and the observed amplitude of the wave changes in this periodic interval due to the wave effect. If the string moves in a direction perpendicular to the line of sight direction, the amplitude of the wave will modulate periodically. Assuming that the cosmic string moves in the direction of $`y`$ axis with a speed near the velocity of light, the typical period of the modulation is roughly estimated as

$`𝒯_v={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }y}{c}}10^7\left({\displaystyle \frac{0.01\mathrm{Hz}}{\nu }}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^5}{\delta }}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }}\right)\mathrm{sec}.`$ (11)
The statistical probability of the gravitational lensing by a cosmic string can be estimated as follows: The probability for lensing for a single source at the redshift $`z_S`$ due to infinitely long cosmic string located at the redshift $`z_L`$ is HV

$`P(z_S,z_L){\displaystyle \frac{2\delta }{\pi ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LS}}}{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}}2\times 10^6\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{10^5}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LS}}}{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}}\right).`$ (12)
Thus the probability for a cosmic string is very small. However, numerical simulations of string networks show the possibility that more strings can exist within the horizon effectively DEL ; BB .

## IV Wave effect in gravitational waves

Now let us consider a gravitational wave from a massive binary with an equal mass $`M`$ as a source. We assume that the binary angular frequency $`\overline{\omega }`$ corresponds to the frequency of the gravitational wave $`\nu `$ of an observer by $`\overline{\omega }=2\pi \nu (1+z_S)`$. The lifetime of the binary system $`T_{lf}`$ must be longer than the time delay $`T_{dl}`$ so that the interference occurs. The binary lifetime is estimated Schutz

$`T_{lf}0.02M^{5/3}\overline{\omega }^{8/3}{\displaystyle \frac{1.3\times 10^5}{(1+z_S)^{8/3}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M}{M_{}}}\right)^{5/3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{\mathrm{Hz}}}\right)^{8/3}\mathrm{sec}.`$ (13)
Then, the condition $`T_{lf}>T_{dl}`$ yields

$`M`$ $`<`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{120}{(1+z_L)^{3/5}(1+z_S)^{8/5}}}`$ (14)
$`\times \left({\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{0.01\mathrm{Hz}}}\right)^{8/5}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{10^5}}\right)^{6/5}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LO}}}{cH_0^1}}\right)^{3/5}\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}}\right)^{3/5}M_{}.`$
The DECIGO planed as a future gravitational wave observatory has an excellent sensitivity around $`\nu =0.1\mathrm{Hz}`$ SKN . For $`\nu =0.01\mathrm{Hz}`$ and $`\delta =10^5`$, eq. (14) yields the maximum mass of the binary larger than $`1M_{}`$. Thus the neutron stars (NS-NS) binary can be the source for the wave effect.

Due to emission of the gravitational waves, the binary orbit changes, then the angular frequency of the wave changes. Namely, waves with different angular frequencies interfere because of the time delay effect. This causes another modulation of the wave amplitude as a wave effect, whose period is approximately written as

$`𝒯_p`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\pi }{(r_1r_2)d\omega /dt}}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1.5\times 10^6}{(1+z_L)(1+z_S)^{5/3}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\nu }{0.01\mathrm{Hz}}}\right)^{11/3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{M}{M_{}}}\right)^{5/3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^5}{\delta }}\right)^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{cH_0^1}{D_{\mathrm{LO}}}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \frac{D_{\mathrm{OS}}}{D_{\mathrm{LS}}\mathrm{sin}\theta }}\right)\mathrm{sec}.`$
For $`\nu \stackrel{>}{}0.01\mathrm{Hz}`$ and $`MM_{}`$, $`𝒯_p`$ is shorter than the period of the modulation due to the string motion $`𝒯_v`$.

## V Conclusion

In this work we have investigated wave effect in gravitational lensing by a cosmic string. Our investigation is limited to the simplest case of the static and straight cosmic string. In this case the interference of the wave field is expressed in a very simple form eq. (5). The condition that the interference occurs is eq. (6). When the string moves in the direction perpendicular to the line of sight direction, the wave amplitude for an observer will modulate by a wave effect in gravitational lensing. A chirp gravitational wave from a compact binary at a cosmological distance is a possible source in which we might detect the wave effect. However, concerning this source, the change of orbit due to gravitational wave emission causes another modulation of the wave amplitude. These modulations can be a unique signature of the cosmic string when a detector with sufficient angular resolution and sensitivity is assumed. Due to the same mechanism, a similar modulation can appear in a chirp gravitational wave by the gravitational lensing by a galaxy halo Yamamoto . However, in this case, the flux ratio of two waves must be almost $`1`$ for the clear modulation. Namely, a configuration of a lensing system near the Einstein ring must be required. This means that the lensing probability is relatively small and the flux is amplified by the magnification effect. Thus, in principle, it can be discriminated whether the lens causing the modulating signal is a cosmic string or a galaxy halo.

In the present work, we have considered an idealized situation. We have assumed a point source, neglecting the finite size effect of the source. For the gravitational wave from a compact binary, however, the assumption will be plausible. We have considered the interference of two waves with the same amplitude. The change of the orbit of compact binary results in a difference between the two wave amplitudes due to the time delay effect. However, it can be negligible for a low frequency binary $`\nu 0.01\mathrm{Hz}`$ with $`MM_{}`$.

Various sources of gravitational waves and their detectability have been considered (e.g., Hughes  for a recent review). Binaries of massive objects will be the most stable source of a periodic wave, and NS-NS binary is the most promising source. The ground based detectors, such as LIGO and VIRGO, have the sensitivity in the high frequency band, $`1`$Hz$`\stackrel{<}{}f\stackrel{<}{}10^4`$Hz, which corresponds to that of gravitational waves from the NS-NS binary at final coalescing stage. On the other hand, the gravitational wave observatories in space, such as LISA and DECIGO, will detect gravitational waves in the low frequency band, $`10^4`$Hz$`\stackrel{<}{}f\stackrel{<}{}1`$Hz. The modulation will not be observed by the facility with the high frequency band because it appears in stable and periodic gravitational waves. However, the facility with the low frequency band might have a chance to observe the modulation, if the sensitivity was sufficient. The detectability of a signal depends on the distance of a source and a method of data analysis, therefore more details are needed for the definite conclusion. Actually, when the angular resolution is not sufficient, modulations of gravitational waves can appear due to superposition of waves from different individual binary sources.

Acknowledgments The authors thank Y. Kojima for reading the manuscript and useful discussions and comments. K.Y. thanks T. Hayashino for useful communication. This work is supported in part by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific research of Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Grant No.15740155.


text:
# MKPH-T-03-14 Final state interaction effects in 𝜂 photoproduction on two- and three-body nuclei

## 1 Incoherent $`\eta `$ photoproduction on a deuteron

Photoproduction of $`\eta `$ mesons on the deuteron near threshold is strongly influenced by final state interaction (FSI). The main reason for the importance of FSI is a strong mismatch between a large momentum transfer and a minimal kinetic energy in the final $`\eta NN`$ system, which on the other hand can effectively be balanced by the interaction between the final particles. Furthermore, an appreciable attraction in the $`\eta NN`$ system generates a virtual pole in the three-body scattering amplitude , which in turn leads to a strong rise of the cross section just above threshold in agreement with experimental results .

The calculation was performed using a separable representation of the driving $`\eta N`$ and $`NN`$ scattering amplitudes as described in detail in . For the $`\eta N`$ interaction an isobar ansatz of  was used with inclusion of $`S_{11}(1535)`$ only. The corresponding parameters were adjusted such that the $`\eta N`$ scattering length $`a_{\eta N}=(0.5+i0.32)`$ fm, which we consider as an approximate average of the scattering lengths provided by modern $`\eta N`$ analyses, is reproduced and that at the same time a good description is provided of the processes $`\pi N\pi N`$, $`\pi ^{}p\eta n`$, and $`\pi N\pi \pi N`$. The $`NN`$-interaction was considered only in the dominant $`s`$ wave scattering states. We have used the version BEST3 for $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ and correspondingly BEST4 for the triplet states. The separable representation allows one to reduce the three-body problem to a set of integral equation in one variable only, whose structure is analogous to the usual Lippmann-Schwinger equation for two coupled channels $`(\eta +d)`$ and $`(N+N^{})`$.

The resulting inclusive cross section for $`\gamma d\eta X`$ ($`X=\{np,d\}`$) is shown by the solid curve in Fig. 1. As one can see, although the three-body calculation leads to a sizeable improvement as compared to the impulse approximation (dashed line), a quantitative agreement with the data is not yet achieved.

A possible reason for this disagreement could be the neglect of $`\pi NN`$ configurations in the calculation. The contribution of the intermediate pions depends strongly on the role of large momentum transfers in the reaction, since it is associated with a large intermediate momentum and consequently is effective only at short distances. For example, inclusion of $`\pi NN`$ configurations provides only a small fraction of the $`\eta d`$ scattering cross section . At the same time they contribute rather sizeably to coherent $`\eta `$ photoproduction on the deuteron , where the large transferred momenta emphasize naturally the short distances in the target. In view of the systematic deviation between theory and the data, the role of intermediate pions in the incoherent channel $`\gamma d\eta np`$ must be considered in greater detail.

## 2 Coherent $`\eta `$ photoproduction on 3He

The study of $`\eta ^3`$He elastic scattering, based on four-body Faddeev-Yakubovsky theory , shows that there is a virtual state in this system, which in turn strongly influences low-energy $`\eta `$ production on three-body nuclei. This feature is demonstrated in Fig. 3, where one can see a very rapid rise of the total cross section 3He$`(\gamma ,\eta )^3`$He, in contrast to a much flatter form predicted by the plane wave approximation (dashed line).

Comparing our results with the not yet published TAPS data  we find a strong discrepancy. It is rather surprising that even the form of the experimental cross section is not reproduced. According to the Migdal-Watson theory  the energy dependence of the cross section very close to threshold is determined primarily by the low-energy parameters of $`\eta ^3`$He scattering and is therefore more or less universal for different entrance channels. For instance, as is demonstrated in Fig. 3, the energy dependence of the squared amplitude calculated for the reaction 3He$`(\gamma ,\eta )^3`$He section agrees quite well with the one extracted from the data of $`d(p,\eta )^3`$He . From this viewpoint the TAPS data could be explained only by assuming another long-range mechanism of $`\eta `$ production which does not contribute to the reaction $`d(p,\eta )^3`$He.

In summary, the three-body aspects of FSI are very important for $`\eta `$ production on light nuclei near threshold. The results of an exact three-body treatment exhibit a systematic deviation from the data. We suspect that a possible reason of this disagreement might be a pion rescattering mechanism, whose role up to now has not been investigated in detail. In the coherent reaction on 3He the FSI effect is also of fundamental importance. The energy dependence of the cross section, which is determined by the low-energy parameters of $`\eta ^3`$He elastic scattering agrees reasonably well with that observed in the $`pd`$ collision. On the other hand the very strong energy dependence of the experimental cross section for 3He$`(\gamma ,\eta )^3`$He is not explained. We think, that this disagreement requires further investigations on the theoretical as well as on the experimental side.


text:
# The Great Observatories Origins Deep Survey: Initial Results From Optical and Near-Infrared Imaging Based on observations obtained with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope obtained at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc. (AURA) under NASA contract NAS 5-26555; observations collected at the European Southern Observatory, Chile (ESO Programmes 168.A-0845, 64.O-0643, 66.A-0572, 68.A-0544, 164-O-0561, 169.A-0725, 267.A-5729, 66.A-0451, 68.A-0375, 168.A-0485, 164.O-0561, 267.A-5729, 169.A-0725, 64.O-0621, 170.A-0788); observations collected at the Kitt Peak National Observatory, National Optical Astronomical Observatories, which is operated by AURA under cooperative agreement with the National Science Fundation.

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Observations of representative fields at high galactic latitude have long been an important tool in our quest to understand the distant universe. The Hubble Deep Field project (Williams et al. 1996; 2000) demonstrated the value of deep, multicolor HST imaging for studies of galaxy evolution, and the extraordinary multiplier of this value gained by rapid public dissemination of the data and coordination of the best observations at all wavelengths on common survey fields (see Ferguson, Dickinson & Williams 2000 for a review). The Great Observatories Origins Deep Survey is the next generation of such deep surveys, uniting some of the deepest observations from space and ground-based facilities on common areas of the sky. The two GOODS fields, the Hubble Deep Field North (HDF-N) and the Chandra Deep Field South (CDF-S), are the most data-rich deep survey areas on the sky. The deepest X–ray observations from the CXO and XMM–Newton telescopes have been obtained at these locations, and deep radio maps are available or are now being collected. Observations with SIRTF were selected as one of the Legacy projects to be executed during the first year of the mission. The SIRTF Legacy project includes major commitments of observing time from the National Optical Astronomical Observatories (NOAO) and from the European Southern Observatory to provide spectroscopy (redshifts) for sources in the fields to the practical limits of existing instruments and to provide complementary imaging at near ultraviolet ($`U`$–band) and near infrared wavelengths. The GOODS project was subsequently awarded 398 orbits of time to observe the two fields with HST and ACS.

The GOODS project has been designed from the outset as a resource for the entire astronomical community. Data from the HST observations are available from the archive within a few days of the observations. Reduced data, with successive degrees of refinement, are available within a few months of the observations. A similar strategy is followed for the ESO observations, and will be followed for SIRTF. The publicly released HST images have already been exploited by Stanway et al. (2003) and Bunker et al. (2003) to study galaxies at $`z>5`$, and by Dawson et al. (2002) to study a hard X-ray emitting spiral galaxy. The ESO near-infrared images have been used by Roche et al. (2003) and Yan et al. (2003).

The GOODS field centers (J2000.0) are $`12^\mathrm{h}36^\mathrm{m}55^\mathrm{s},`$ $`+62^{}14^\mathrm{m}15^\mathrm{s},`$ for the HDF-N, and $`3^\mathrm{h}32^\mathrm{m}30^\mathrm{s},`$ $`27^{}48^\mathrm{m}20^\mathrm{s},`$ for the CDF-S. Each field provides an area of approximately $`10\mathrm{}\times 16\mathrm{}`$ that will be in common to all the imaging observations. As of May 2003 the CXO data are all reduced and available, all of the HST data have been obtained and are available, including a best–effort version of the reduced data, while the recalibrated, mosaiced stacks of the ACS images will be released at the end of August. Much of the planned optical imaging data from KPNO and ESO have been obtained and are available. Deep near-IR imaging campaigns with the ESO Very Large Telescope (VLT) ISAAC camera and the KPNO FLAMINGOs camera are partially complete, but will require one or two more observing seasons for complete field coverage. Reduced data from first season (2001) of ISAAC observing are available. The planned spectroscopic campaign from ESO was begun in the Fall of 2002 with Focal Reducer/low-dispersion spectrograph (FORS2) observations of preferrentially red objects. Observations with the VIMOS spectrograph are planned for the 2003-2004 CDF-S observing season. The HDF-N already benefits from deep spectroscopic observations from Cohen et al. 2000. Several teams are carrying out spectroscopic observations of the HDF-N from the W.M. Keck Observatory in early 2003, and public releases from a few of these teams are planned for the second half of this year.

The GOODS ACS observations were spaced in time to permit a search for type Ia supernovae at redshifts $`z1.4`$, and a total of 43 supernovae have been detected in eight GOODS search epochs. In their letter, Riess et al. provide details of how the type Ia candidates at $`z>1`$ are selected for followup observations from among these sources. The other accompanying letters papers in this issue present initial findings on galaxies and AGN at moderate to very high redshifts from the analysis of the available GOODS data. A letter by Somerville et al. presents computations of the expected “cosmic variance” for various source populations based on halo statistics in Cold-Dark Matter models consistent with the Wilkinson Microwave Anistropy Probe (WMAP) cosmological parameters (Spergel et al. 2003).

## 2 The Data Set

The data set discussed here includes ACS images, deep optical and near–infrared imaging from KPNO and ESO, and the CXO images. The main features of each data set are summarized in Table 1, while Table 2 lists the sensitivity achieved in each wavelength band. Figures 1 and 2 show the exposure maps of the three space–based data sets overlaid on top of each other to illustrate the extent of the area in common. Figure 3 shows a schematic of the layout of the existing imaging coverage in the CDF–S.

## 3 The HST ACS Data

The GOODS/ACS observations consist of imaging in the F435W, F606W, F775W and F850LP passbands, hereafter referred to as $`B_{435}`$, $`V_{606}`$, $`i_{775}`$ and $`z_{850}`$. While the $`B_{435}`$–band images were all acquired at the beginning of the survey, the $`V_{606}`$, $`i_{775}`$, and $`z_{850}`$–band images have been carried out in five epochs, separated by 40 to 50 days to optimize the search for high-redshift supernovae. Only 60% of the total exposure time in each field (3 epochs out of 5) in the $`V_{606}`$, $`i_{775}`$, and $`z_{850}`$are presented here, since the remainder of the data were not available at the time these papers were being prepared. In the odd–numbered epochs each $`10\mathrm{}\times 16\mathrm{}`$ field is tiled by a grid of $`3\times 5`$ individual ACS pointings, including some area of tile overlapping to check photometric and astrometric consistency. In even-numbered epochs, due to HST pointing constraints, the field is rotated by $`45^{}`$ and a different overlapping tiling pattern is used, consisting of 16 separate pointings (see Figures 1 and 2). The complete set of $`B_{435}`$ observations were obtained in the first epoch alone, using the $`3\times 5`$ grid, with six exposures per position.

The exposure times at each epoch are typically 1050, 1050 and 2100 seconds in the $`V_{606}`$, $`i_{775}`$ and $`z_{850}`$ bands, respectively. These are subdivided into 2 exposures in each of the $`V_{606}`$ and $`i_{775}`$ bands, and into 4 exposures in the $`z_{850}`$ band. This strategy ensures good rejection of cosmic ray events in the single–epoch $`z_{850}`$ bands, which is where the detection of transients is carried out. Some cosmic rays remain in the $`V_{606}`$ and $`i_{775}`$ single–epoch images, which can nevertheless generally provide colors of the transients. In each case, the telescope field of view is shifted (“dithered”) by a small amount between individual exposures to allow optimal sampling of the point–spread function and to remove detector gaps and artifacts. The multiple epochs are later combined into a single mosaic, allowing cosmic ray rejection from at least six images per band. Except for the $`B_{435}`$ band, the mosaics used for the current papers were constructed from only three epochs of observations, and the total exposure times are approximately 7200, 3040, 3040, and 6280 seconds in the $`B_{435}`$, $`V_{606}`$, $`i_{775}`$, and $`z_{850}`$ bands, respectively.

Basic reduction of the raw data is carried out through calacs, the ACS calibration pipeline, which applies the basic calibration steps of bias subtraction, gain correction, and flat-fielding (Pavlovsky et al. 2002). The data received from the HST pipeline are then further processed by the GOODS pipeline using the multidrizzle script (Koekemoer et al. 2003), to create a set of geometrically rectified, cosmic-ray cleaned images (within a given epoch). These processed “tiles” are released as the “best-effort” GOODS public release v0.5 via the Multimission Archive at Space Telescope (MAST).

The early version of the geometric distortion model used in the basic processing described above proved to have significant problems matching sources in overlapping tiles. To rectify this, we derived an astrometric solution for each tile and each epoch based on sources matched in GOODS groundbased images. The reference for the CDF-S image was the $`R`$–band image of the field obtained as part of the ESO Imaging Survey (EIS) with the Wide Field Imager (WFI), which in turn was astrometrically calibrated to the Guide Star Catalog 2 (GSC-2) and put on the ICRS reference frame. For HDF–N, the reference image was an $`R`$-band Subaru image of the field (Capak et al. 2003).

The astrometric solution for the $`z`$-band mosaics has been derived by a least-squares optimization of the position, orientation, x and y pixel scales, and axis skew of each tile and epoch, minimizing the inter-epoch variations of the estimated position for $`2000`$ sources. The estimated rms in the source position, internal to the solution, is about 0.1 to 0.2 WFC pixels. For the other ACS bands, the astrometric solution is based on a tile-by-tile match to $`z`$-band source positions. These solutions had a residual rms of about 0.3 pixels, with larger deviations in some local regions across the field. All the exposures were then drizzled (Fruchter & Hook 2002) onto a series of images with a common pixel grid, in order to create a clean median image, which was subsequently used to create a cosmic ray mask for each exposure. Finally, the individual exposures were drizzled, using the new masks, onto a final single mosaic for each band, measuring 18000 by 24000 pixels with a scale of 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$05/pixel.

For the purposes of the current papers the astrometric solution appears to be acceptable, although its deficiencies become apparent for bright stars, where the cosmic ray rejection algorithm rejects some good pixels due to the slight misregistrations. This can bias fluxes (faintward) for the brighter point sources in the $`V_{606}`$ and $`i_{775}`$ images (only). We have verified that there is little or no photometric effect for even slightly extended sources. A photometric comparison of the $`V_{606}`$ magnitudes (SExtractor `MAG_AUTO` values) in the original WFPC-2 HDF-N and the current mosaic reveals systematic biases of less than 0.01 magnitudes for galaxies in the range $`23<`$$`V_{606}`$$`<26`$, with an rms scatter less than 0.2 mag.

The resulting mosaics have a few remaining blemishes and some misregistrations between bands at the level of a fraction of a pixel. Slight sky level variations are also apparent. The masking of satellite trails, and reflection ghosts is not yet perfect, with residuals apparent in few places. The samples of galaxies used for the papers in this volume have all been individually inspected to remove objects that are thought to be artifacts. For most samples such contamination is negligible, but the contamination is significant for the single-band detections used to search for galaxies at $`z6`$, as discussed in detail by Dickinson et al. (2003).

## 4 The CXO Data

Chandra data in the GOODS fields were taken before the GOODS project began and are available from the CXO archive (Giacconi et al. 2002; Alexander et al. 2003). The integration times of the Chandra CDF–S and HDF–N observations total roughly 1 and 2 Msec, respectively. The GOODS SIRTF field layout was designed in part to maximize the coverage of the X–ray area. Subsequently, the ACS fields were designed to optimally cover both the SIRTF and Chandra fields. The CXO data for both fields have been re–analyzed in a self–consistent way, and new catalogs have been published by Alexander et al. (2003). Finally, these X–ray catalogs have been matched to the ACS catalogs by Koekemoer et al. (in preparation) for CDF–S and by Bauer et al. (in preparation) for HDF–N. Over 90% of the area covered by the GOODS ACS observations, the $`S/N10`$ point source sensitivity limits in the 0.5–2.0 keV and 2-8 keV bands, respectively, are $`3.3`$ and $`24\times 10^{16}`$ erg s-1 cm-2 for the HDF–N and $`4.3`$ and $`30\times 10^{16}`$ erg s-1 cm-2 for the CDF–S. The sensitivities at the CXO aim point, where the exposure time and image quality are maximized, are as much as a factor of $`2`$ and $`4`$ fainter for the CDF-S and HDF-N, respectively.

## 5 Ground–based Near–UV, Optical, and Near–IR Imaging

Ground–based imaging spanning a wide wavelength baseline is an important component of GOODS, and here, we describe the data that have been used for projects presented in this Special Issue. The CDF–S imaging consists of a complex arrangement of data sets covering different areas, often using multiple instrument pointings, as illustrated in Figure 3. These data sets were all placed on a common astrometric grid tied to the GSC2. The PSFs were matched by Gaussian convolution to a common FWHM of 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$9. The WFI $`U^{}UBV`$ images and a few of the images obtained with the New Technology Telescope (NTT) and the Superb–Seeing Imager (SOFI) have slightly poorer seeing, 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$9–1$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$05, but most projects use colors measured through $`3\mathrm{}`$ apertures, so this small mismatch should have little effect. The PSF–matched images were mosaiced onto a common $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}3`$ pixel grid with the SWarp software (Bertin 2002). Noise maps were constructed for use in object detection and cataloging, carefully accounting for the effects of interpixel correlations. High–resolution ($`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}15`$/pixel) ISAAC mosaics were also made without degrading their excellent image quality. We have used the colors of stars to check the photometric zeropoints of the CDF–S data, as described below. Where possible, these were identified using the ACS imaging, using criteria for star–galaxy separation based on a diagram of peak surface brightness vs. isophotal magnitude. The same method was used on the ground–based data to extend the stellar sample to areas beyond the ACS coverage.

### 5.1 KPNO 4m + MOSAIC $`U`$–band imaging

Deep $`U`$–band images of the GOODS HDF–N field were obtained using the prime focus MOSAIC camera on the KPNO Mayall 4–m telescope in March 2002. A total of 27.5 hours of exposure time were obtained in photometric conditions with mean seeing FWHM $`=1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}15`$. We reduced the data using the IRAF mscred package, which carries out bias subtraction, flat–fielding, correction for geometric distortion, removal of amplifier cross–talk, subtraction of an additive “pupil ghost”, image registration, and combination.

### 5.2 ESO–MPI 2.2–m + WFI imaging

An area of $`0.4`$ sq. degree around the CDF-S was surveyed with WFI on the ESO–MPI 2.2–m telescope using the $`U^{}UBVRI`$ passbands. Much of these data were obtained as part of the EIS, and are described in Arnouts et al. 2001. Additional $`BVR`$ images were obtained for the GOODS program and in the course of the COMBO–17 project (Wolf et al. 2001). The EIS, GOODS, and COMBO data were reduced in a uniform fashion using the GaBoDs WFI reduction pipeline (Schirmer et al. 2003). We carefully checked the accuracy of the photometric calibration using the color loci of stars. These were compared to synthetic color-color diagrams generated using the Gunn & Stryker (1983) spectrophotometric library, convolved with the instrumental passbands. Zeropoints were adjusted as necessary, and are accurate to $`<0.1`$ mag.

### 5.3 ESO VLT + FORS1 imaging

Additional, deep $`R`$ and $`I`$-band images were obtained with the ANTU telescope (UT1) at the VLT, using the FORS1 instrument. The data and their reduction are described in Tozzi et al. (2001). The FORS1 images cover only a portion of the GOODS CDF–S field using several pointings with variable exposure time. A portion of the field is covered by relatively short $`R`$–band exposures. The core region ($`13\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}6\times 13\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}6`$) is quite deep, however, and in particular is much deeper than the WFI imaging in the $`I`$–band. The photometric zeropoints were checked and adjusted by comparing photometry for stars and galaxies in the WFI and FORS1 images, accounting for the passband differences, and agree on average to $`<0.05`$ mag.

### 5.4 ESO NTT + SOFI imaging

Near–infrared data in the $`J`$ and $`K_s`$ bands for the CDF–S were obtained with SOFI on the NTT as part of the EIS. The observations and reductions are described in Vandame et al. 2001. They consist of a 4$`\times `$4 grid of pointings covering 0.1 sq. deg. SOFI $`H`$-band data were obtained and reduced by Moy et al. 2002, and cover a larger area. Photometric zero-points were checked by comparing photometry of stars to measurements from the Two-Micron All-Sky Survey (2MASS).

### 5.5 ESO VLT + ISAAC imaging

The GOODS program is gathering a mosaic of very deep $`JHK_s`$ images with ISAAC on the VLT as part of an ESO Large Programme. Ultimately, 32 pointings will be used to cover the GOODS CDF–S field. Data for 8 fields were obtained in 2001–2 and combined with ISAAC data from an ESO visitor program, kindly provided by E. Giallongo. These images cover only $`50`$ arcmin2, but are much deeper than the SOFI data, with excellent image quality (mean FWHM $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}45`$). They were reduced with the EIS pipeline. Their photometric zeropoints were adjusted to a common scale by comparison to objects in the SOFI images, and agree within 0.07 mag.

## 6 Source Catalogs

Several different source catalogs for the ACS and ground–based images are used in the accompanying papers. In all cases, source identification and photometry were performed using SExtractor (Bertin & Arnouts 1996). Simulations were used to guide the choice of detection thresholds and the size and shape of the convolution kernel to optimize the detection of faint galaxies while keeping spurious sources to a minimum. Photometric uncertainties within any aperture are computed using the normalized noise maps that were produced as part of the data reduction process. However, some projects use detailed simulations with artificial sources to assess the true photometric errors.

For the ACS catalog, sources were detected in the $`z_{850}`$ mosaic, and photometry was carried out through matched apertures in the other ACS bands. Several different ground–based catalogs were generated for the CDF–S, with detections based on the WFI $`R`$–band, SOFI $`K`$–band, and ISAAC $`K`$ and $`J`$–bands. In each case, matched aperture photometry was measured for all of the other CDF–S ground–based images. A wide–field HDF–N catalog, based on Subaru $`BVRIz`$ imaging and the GOODS KPNO $`U`$ data, is presented by Capak et al. 2003, but is not used in the present set of Letters. Where needed, ACS–to–ground–based colors were measured using images degraded to match the ground–based PSFs. These provide optical–IR colors of ACS sources, as well as $`UB_{435}`$ colors for Lyman break color selection.

Photometric redshifts for galaxies in the CDF–S (Mobasher et al. 2003) were estimated using all of the available photometry ($`U`$ through $`K_s`$ bands) and the BPZ software of Benítez (2000). They were tested against spectroscopic redshifts from the K20 survey (Cimatti et al. 2002), kindly provided by A. Cimatti, and also against redshifts measured with VLT+FORS2 for the GOODS program.

## 7 Sensitivity

The sensitivity of the images depends on the sizes and shapes of the objects of interest. To guide the readers of these Letters, Table 2 provides two sensitivity estimates (point source flux and limiting surface brightness) for each of the GOODS space– and ground–based imaging data sets. These should be taken as representative values only, since the actual depths of the imaging data sets vary over the field of view, and depend on the details of source size, PSF shape, crowding, etc.

Many of the papers in this issue rely on SExtractor detections in the ACS $`z_{850}`$-band image. To assess the completeness limits for this catalog, we have iteratively inserted sources into the image and re-run SExtractor. This is the standard procedure used for point-source photometry to assess completeness and photometric errors in color-magnitude diagrams. The problem has more dimensions for galaxy photometry because the detectability of a galaxy depends on the size and surface brightness profile. Our simulations uniformly populate the magnitude range $`20<z_{850}<28`$ and the range of galaxy half-light radii $`0\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}01<r<1\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}5`$. The input galaxies are a 50/50 mix of spheroids — galaxies with $`r^{1/4}`$-law surface-brightness profiles — and disks with exponential surface-brightness profiles. The spheroids are assumed to be oblate and optically thin with an intrinsic axial ratio distribution that is uniform in the range $`0.3<b/a<0.9`$. The disks are modeled as optically-thin oblate spheroids with a (very flat) intrinsic axial ratio of $`b/a=0.05`$. Galaxies are viewed from random inclinations. The simulated galaxies are convolved with the PSF and inserted into the $`z`$-band image without additional Poisson noise. For bright sources, the noise is thus slightly underestimated, but for faint sources, the sky background completely dominates anyway so this shortcut does not affect the results. The resulting completeness limits in a plane of magnitude and half-light radius are shown in Fig. 4.

## 8 Summary

The intent of this paper has been to provide a brief overview of the GOODS project and to describe the data used to derive the scientific results discussed elsewhere in this issue. The GOODS web site, which can be accessed from http://www.stsci.edu/ftp/science/goods/, provides further details of the project and access to the GOODS data.

Support for the GOODS HST Treasury program was provided by NASA through grants HST-GO09425.01-A and HST-GO-09583.01. Additional support for this work, which is also part of the Space Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF) Legacy Science Program, was provided by NASA through Contract Number 1224666 issued by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology under NASA contract 1407. PM acknowledges support by NASA through grant NAG5-11513. A project of the scale and scope of GOODS could not succeed without the dedicated efforts of a large number of people. We wish to thank Beth Perriello, Bill Workman, Ian Jordan, Denise Taylor and David Soderblom for their efforts in planning and scheduling the GOODS ACS observations. Guido De Marchi provided expert assistance on ACS issues. Dorothy Fraquelli and the OPUS group at STScI were instrumental in enabling the rapid turnaround of the data for the supernova search. Mark Calvin, Matt Divens, and the computer support group went well beyond the call of duty in their support of the data-reduction computers, on several occasions rescuing the supernova searches from impending disaster. We acknowledge the contributions of Len Cowie to the GOODS project, and thank Peter Capak for providing the Subaru optical catalog in advance of publication and helping to support the HDF–N supernova searches. We thank Emmanuel Moy, Dimitra Rigopoulou and Pauline Barmby for providing the SOFI $`H`$-images prior to publication, Emanuele Giallongo for contributing his ISAAC imaging of the CDF–S to the GOODS public–release data set, and Andrea Cimatti and the K20 team for providing spectroscopic redshifts that were used to validate our photometric redshift estimates.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Raise the temperature and lower the pressure sufficiently, and virtually any solid material shall begin to evaporate. Condense the directional vapor on a substrate at a temperature less than about a third of its melting point, and you will obtain a columnar thin film with column diameters on the order of tens of nanometers. The technology of columnar thin films (CTFs) was born in 1885, when Kundt collected the vapor from a solid on a substrate held at an oblique angle to the incident, directed vapor flux . Even before the commercial advent of transmission electron microscopes (TEM) in the 1950 s and scanning electron microscopes (SEM) in the 1960 s, it was known from optical experiments that such films are anisotropic  — not unlike crystals. However, unlike the anisotropy of crystal structures, the anisotropy of CTFs is morphological: Self–shadowing at the atomic level  leads to parallel columns growing towards the obliquely incident vapor flux, albeit at an angle to the average direction . TEMs and SEMs eventually provided visual evidence of the nm–scale morphology of CTFs grown by oblique–angle deposition , thereby confirming the optical analogy with crystals.

Also unlike crystals, the separated and slanted nanocolumns (currently termed nanowires) can be shaped during growth by substrate motion . Elementary experiments were reported by (i) Young and Kowal in 1959  who rotated the substrate about an axis passing normally through it, and (ii) Nieuwenhuizen and Haanstra in 1966  who altered the substrate tilt with respect to the average direction of the incident vapor flux once during deposition. The products of these experiments were the precursors of sculptured thin films (STFs) developed during the last decade , chiefly for optical but also other applications .

STFs are assemblies of parallel, shaped nanowires that can be fabricated by design using physical vapor deposition techniques, such as thermal and arc evaporation, sputtering, and pulsed laser ablation . As the nanostructure comprises multimolecular clusters of 3–5 nm diameter, rapid changes in the average direction of the incident vapor flux relative to the substrate lead to the growth of parallel nanowires of curvilinear shapes. At infrared, visible and lower ultraviolet wavelengths, the assembly of nanowires can be effectively considered as a continuous anisotropic medium whose electromagnetic response properties are inhomogeneous normal to the substrate  — which allows the exploitation of commonplace design techniques for devices such as optical polarizers, filters and sensors .

The STFs fabricated thus far possess, for the most part, simple transverse architectures, as the constituent nanowires are randomly nucleated on the substrate. The film growth rates can also be low, depending on the deposition method employed, due to the large oblique angles during deposition. Furthermore, the transverse area rarely exceeds 1 cm $`\times `$ 1 cm without significant loss of transverse uniformity. These three factors have stymied the economic exploitation of STFs, despite the theoretical design and experimental realization of many STF–based optical devices . Fabrication of complex STFs of large transverse area and at high deposition rates would increase the economic attraction of STFs.

We present here a newly realized technique to economically grow thick, uniform, large–area STFs with transverse architectures that blend the nanoscale and the microscale. Our work goes beyond initial work on patterned growth in thin films  in that we examine different microscale architectures employing a range of feature sizes and shapes with controlled depth and shape of topography, and have achieved this over relatively large ($`75`$ mm dia) areas.

We have chosen to illustrate the growth of sculptured nanowire assemblies by examining the deposition of SiOx, a dielectric substance, on substrates photolithographically patterned with posts, holes, and various densities of lines and spaces that were generated using a deep ultraviolet (DUV) stepper. Although we have examined the deposition of several materials (such as SnO2, Mo, Cr and Al) in addition to SiOx, for the sake of brevity we only show examples of SiOx films deposited at a single angle of vapor–flux incidence. We continue to investigate STFs grown at various oblique angles of vapor–flux incidence, deposition rates, and substrate rotational velocities in order to better understand how the initial topography of the substrate affects the growth and expansion of nanowires.

## 2 Experimental

A 10–kW dual electron–gun evaporator was used to obliquely deposit material on either fixed or rotating substrates, as shown schematically in Fig. 1a and b. The system was cryopumped to a base pressure of $`5\times 10^7`$ Torr. A 100–cc, 50–mm diameter crucible was charged with pellets of SiO2 before each deposition. Deposition rates were measured using a quartz crystal monitor (QCM) held perpendicular to the vapor flux. The measured deposition rate depends on the mass density of the vapor flux, and is quite different from the film growth rate defined as the rate of increase of film thickness. Deposition rates from 54 to 480 nm/min were measured, while the film growth rates varied between 100 and 1000 nm/min. Nanowire shapes were controlled via computer, and substrate rotational velocities ranged from 0.5 to 36 rpm.

The throw distance to the center of the rotating substrate was 250 mm, and the center of the wafer was nominally positioned directly above the center of the crucible; see Fig. 1a. Unlike previous work, the electron beam in our system was rastered over a large portion of the crucible, and the flux produced more closely resembles a uniform flat source, analogous to a plane wave in electromagnetics textbooks , than a point source. Furthermore, the mean free path during deposition was much greater than the source–to–substrate distance, leading to line–of–sight deposition. Thus, the arriving vapor flux is highly directed, thereby eliminating the need for collimation. For example, we observed uniformity of thickness and morphology of complex sculptured nanowires across the diameter of a 75 mm substrate. However, highly directed vapor flux leads to significant local nonuniformity due to shadowing effects for oblique incidence on non–planar (i.e., patterned) substrates.

The substrates upon which the sculptured nanowire assemblies were deposited consisted of a 1 cm $`\times `$ 1 cm die of a silicon wafer patterned with a photoresist stack placed on top of and near the outer edge of a 75 mm silicon wafer, as shown schematically in Fig. 1b. The substrates were clipped into place on a rotating substrate holder driven by an external stepper motor via a rotary vacuum feed–through. For all films presented in this paper, the vapor flux was directed at an angle $`\chi _v=15^{}`$ to the substrate plane.

The photoresist features shown throughout this paper were generated using a resolution test mask and a DUV (248 nm) stepper. A Shipley UV5 photoresist was applied to a 150 mm silicon wafer coated with a Shipley lift–off photoresist (LOR) layer. The two–layer photoresist stack — used to facilitate selective removal of a deposited film — was then exposed, baked after exposure, and then developed to yield a wide variety of 1–D and 2–D features from 0.4 $`\mu `$m to hundreds of microns wide and 0.8 $`\mu `$m high with nearly vertical sidewalls. After deposition, the films were cleaved into smaller pieces and were analyzed in cross–section using a LEO 1530 field emission SEM (FESEM), usually at voltages between 2 and 5 kV to minimize charging of the dielectric nanowires.

## 3 Results

Figures 2a and b are cross–sectional SEM micrographs of a two–section STF comprising helical (chiral) nanowires and chevronic (nematic) nanowires grown sequentially, without stopping the evaporation process. A flat silicon wafer with no photoresist pattern was used. The substrate revolution rate for the chiral section (with 3–D morphology) of the STF was 4 rpm. The nematic section (with 2–D morphology) of the STF went through nine rapid changes of the substrate tilt ($`+75^{}`$ to $`75^{}`$ with respect to the normal to the substrate), one change every 30 s. The deposition rate was fixed at 120 nm/min. The total height (i.e., thickness) of the film, as measured using the SEM micrographs, is approximately 4 $`\mu `$m. The total deposition time was 10 min, yielding an average growth rate of 400 nm/min. Fig. 2a shows a total cross–section of the film, whereas Fig. 2b shows a high magnification of the region where the film abruptly, yet continuously, transitions from the chiral section to the nematic section.

Figures 3a and b are cross–sectional SEM micrographs of a two–section STF taken at the center and edge, respectively, of a 75 mm substrate cleaved along its diameter. This 2–section chiral STF was grown by varying the deposition rate while holding the substrate rotational velocity fixed at approximately 2 rpm. The deposition rate was set at 54 nm/min for the first section, and increased to about 300 nm/min for the second section. The structure and density of the nanowires are very similar in both micrographs, even though the center of the substrate must receive a relatively constant vapor flux during an entire revolution while the edge must experience some variation. In our deposition chamber, if there was a large variation in deposition rate either from the bottom to the top of the substrate or from the left to the right of the substrate (see Fig. 1a), a significant variation in the chiral morphology of the nanowires should be expected. However, at least at the nanoscale, we see very little difference in the nanowire assemblies deposited at the edge of a 75 mm rotating substrate with those grown at its center, which is consistent with our assumption that the wide melt pool in the crucible is acting more like a planar deposition source than a point source.

Figures 4a and b are cross–sectional SEM micrographs of a yet another different STF taken at the center and an edge, respectively, of a 75 mm dia silicon substrate. This 2–section film was grown by fixing the deposition rate at 120 nm/min and abruptly changing the substrate rotation velocity from 1 to 36 rpm. Notice again the similarity in morphology in the two different cross–sections, confirming the high degree of uniformity of deposition across large areas. Also notice that, as the substrate rotational velocity is increased, the helical shape of the individual nanowires is lost and larger diameter nanocylinders grow orthogonal to the substrate surface.

Figure 5 is a cross–sectional SEM micrograph of a STF grown simultaneously with the two–section STF of Fig. 2, except that the former was deposited on a photoresist–patterned substrate. The micrograph in Fig. 5 shows the growth behavior at a single 1–D topographical step. The nanowire assembly in the left portion of Fig. 5 grew on top of the 0.8–$`\mu `$m high photoresist and is morphologically similar to the STF of Fig. 2. Likewise, the morphology of the nanowire assembly on the far right of Fig. 5, well away from the step, is essentially the same. In all these cases there is no shadowing due to the substrate; only self–shadowing occurs at the atomic level that leads to the growth of individual nanowires. The film that grows on the side of the photoresist step appears much denser and devoid of distinct nanowires. However, zone 1 (see Fig. 5) shows indications of layered, shadowed–growth during the 3–D chiral–section growth, and zone 4 displays oblique columnar shadowed-growth related to the 2–D nematic section. Zones 2 and 3, farther away from the shadowing ledge, have the appearance of chiral section. The shadowing distance of a 0.8–$`\mu `$m high step is about 3 $`\mu `$m to the right of the step (zone 2), followed by about a 1 $`\mu `$m transition region (zone 3) to the un-shadowed region on the right of the micrograph.

The STF of Fig. 3 was also grown on a patterned–die substrate with 1.5–$`\mu `$m–wide and 0.8–$`\mu `$m–high photoresist lines. Figures 6a and b provide cross–sectional SEM micrographs of this film. In Fig. 6a, we have focused on the morphology developed over a single line. Shadowing by the 1–D topography is evident on both sides of the line. To the left of the line, the shadowed–morphology zones are similar to those in Fig. 5. At a distance far enough to the left of the line such that no shadowing occurs, the morphology and thickness of the STF on the flat Si substrate are the same as that grown on top of the photoresist line. In the center of the micrograph, but still to the left of photoresist line, the film is noticeably thinner due to shadowing by the line, but it exhibits a similar chiral morphology. Near the line, the shadow–related morphology can be divided into several zones. Zone 1 is related to shadowed–growth on the line s sidewall, while zone 2 is shadowed–growth emanating from the Si substrate. The boundary between these two zones appears to follow a power–law growth evolution that results from competition between growths on the sidewall and the bottom surface . The boundary between zone 2 and the transition zone 3 (at about 4 $`\mu `$m from the left sidewall of the line) is less abrupt than in Fig. 5 (where the upper section is of the nematic type in which the shadowing effects are more significant, as discussed in the next section). The unshadowed–growth at the left is almost 5.5 $`\mu `$m from the left sidewall of the line.

The very thin layer at the far right of the micrograph in Fig. 6a is shadow–related growth onto an adjacent space between two photoresist lines with sidewall separation of 1.5 $`\mu `$m; see Fig. 6b. A thin but visible coating grew on the sidewalls and the bottom of both 1.5–$`\mu `$m–wide spaces between adjacent photoresist lines. A lower magnification, edge–on view of this film is provided in Fig. 7a.

Figures 7a–c are additional cross–sectional SEM micrographs of the same sample as shown in Fig. 6, but taken edge–on at different locations along a 1–D array of photoresist lines. Fig. 7a focuses on growth on two sets of three lines. The lines and the spaces between them are 1.5 $`\mu `$m in the left set, and 1.4 $`\mu `$m in the right set. A 3–$`\mu `$m–separation between the two sets allows for shadow–growth comparisons for systematically varied shadow geometries. The lower growth between the lines in a particular set is in contrast to the higher growth between the two sets. Sets of lines with decreasing linewidths and spacewidths are seen in Figs. 7b and c: going from left to right, the widths decrease from 0.8 to 0.6 $`\mu `$m in Fig. 7b, and from 0.6 to 0.4 $`\mu `$m in Fig. 7. There is no observable growth in the spaces of smaller widths, and very little growth on the sidewalls.

Larger separations of 3.5 $`\mu `$m (Fig. 7c) and 4.5 $`\mu `$m (Fig. 7b) can be seen between adjacent sets of lines. In these regions, growth on the bottom and on the sidewalls increases in direct proportion to the sidewall–to–sidewall separation. Nanowire arrays on the middle line of each set undergo an initial stage of lateral expansion, originating at the photoresist corners and sidewalls, followed by a steady–state vertical growth. The nanowire arrays on the middle lines maintain a nearly constant separation from the respective outer lines for most of the 3.2–$`\mu `$m thickness of the film, with only slight rounding at the top edges. Also notice how this separation distance decreases with the spacing between the photoresist lines.

Figures 8a–c are cross–sectional SEM micrographs of increasing magnification, showing the same two–section film described in Figs. 3, 6, and 7, except that this portion of the film was grown on a checkerboard pattern (2–D array) of photoresist. The checkerboard dimensions are 1.5 $`\mu `$$`\times `$ 1.5 $`\mu `$m steps and wells. The chiral nanowires are selectively deposited on top of the topographic features with no deposition occurring between the features, which is evident from Fig. 8c. Thus, 2–D arrays of nanowire assemblies can be deposited over large areas (Fig. 8a), with good uniformity (Fig. 8b), and with nearly vertical sidewalls (Fig. 8c).

## 4 Discussion

The combination of large thickness ($`>3`$ $`\mu `$m), large–area uniformity (75 mm diameter), high growth rate (up to 0.4 $`\mu `$m/min) STFs with complex nanowire shapes (Figs. 2–4) on lithographically defined patterns (Figs. 5–8) has been achieved for the first time. Atomic self–shadowing due to oblique–angle deposition (at $`75^{}`$ from the substrate normal, $`\chi _v=15^{}`$) enables the nanowires to grow continuously, to change direction abruptly, and to maintain constant cross–section, as seen in Fig. 2. By controlling the longer–range–shadowing of the collimated, directed vapor flux by the photoresist pattern geometries, it has become possible to grow STFs selectively on the top surfaces of both 1–D lines (Figs. 6 and 7) and 2–D checkerboard arrays (Fig. 8). The selectivity, as indicated by growth on the sidewalls of the photoresist features and the bare bottom surfaces, is directly related to the feature spacing which, in turn, is related to the geometrical shadowing distances.

The various morphological features of the STFs emanating from the photoresist sidewalls and the bottom (silicon) surfaces, as noted and described in the last section, can be understood in terms of simple geometrical shadowing. The shadowing distance $`w_s`$ of a surface feature of sidewall height $`h_{sw}`$ due to an oblique angle flux, as shown in Fig. 9, is given by

$$w_s=\gamma _sh_{sw},$$
(1)
where $`\gamma _s=1/\mathrm{tan}\chi _v`$ is a geometrical factor and $`\chi _v`$ is the angle between the average direction of the vapor flux and the substrate plane. This equation has been applied to atomic–level self–shadowing  and applies equally well to the sculptured nanowire assemblies presented here. As $`\chi _v=15^{}`$ and $`h_{sw}=0.8`$ $`\mu `$m for all films in Figs. 2–8, $`\gamma _s=3.73`$. Therefore, the shadowing distance when the vapor direction is perpendicular to the feature (e.g., photoresist line) is $`w_s=2.99`$ $`\mu `$m. This only describes shadowing of the bottom surface perpendicularly adjacent to the sidewall of a $`0.8`$ $`\mu `$m–high feature, as in the case of 2–D nematic growth. If the separation of the features is less than $`w_s`$, the growth on the sidewall of an adjacent feature (see Fig. 9) will coat only a fraction $`\delta _{sw}`$ of the sidewall from the top down; accordingly,

$$\delta _{sw}=\frac{w_f}{w_s},$$
(2)
where $`w_f`$ is the distance between the feature ledges. For small feature separations, as studied here (see Figs. 7 and 8), $`\delta _{sw}`$ is much smaller than unity.

With this simplistic model of shadowing behavior, it is possible to understand the morphologies obtained in this study. In Fig. 5, for a single step where shadowing occurs only from one direction, the width of zone 2 (deposition on the bottom surface) is about 3 $`\mu `$m which is close to the shadowing distance. The morphology at the bottom on the left shows columns slanted upward to the right in the direction where the vapor is arriving unshadowed. On the right side of zone 2, the columns becomes more vertical, likely the result of shadowing from the faster growing film on the far right that is growing un-shadowed in all directions. The transition zone 3 appears to be related to the dynamic shadowing effects coupled with the change of deposition from multidirectional (chiral) to bidirectional (chevronic) at which point the shadowing geometry is that shown in Fig. 9. Similar arguments can be made for understanding the morphology in Fig. 6a, though the transition from the shadowed to unshadowed zones is more gradual, likely due to the multidirectional growth during the complete film deposition.

However, for many envisioned applications deposition will be desired only on the top surface of a lithographically defined pattern. This means that no vapor arrives at the bottom surface, as in the case of nematic growth in the top section of the film in Fig. 5, as well as for chiral growth on submicron–wide 1–D line arrays (Figs. 7b and 7c) and 1.5 $`\mu `$$`\times `$ 1.5 $`\mu `$m 2–D checkerboard arrays (Fig. 8). In general, the selectivity of growth on the top surface versus growth on the sidewalls or bottom surfaces for different pattern geometries and deposition sequences can be predicted. For instance, if $`w_f`$ is increased or $`h_{sw}`$ is decreased, a decrease in $`\chi _v`$ could be calculated for compensation.

The shadowing geometry gets more complicated when the vapor flux is not temporally unidirectional (inherent in the piecewise bidirectionality needed for growing chevronic nanowires), but multidirectional (as for growing chiral nanowires). In the latter case as the substrate rotates relative to the average direction of the incident vapor flux, growth will occur down the spaces between adjacent photoresist lines casting an incident vapor flux that varies in angle and in position on the side–wall and bottom surface. For substrate rotation at a constant angular velocity, as we undertook, the morphology of the deposited film will vary. More detailed mathematical descriptions and/or simulations of this complex growth will be needed if deposition in the channels between features is important. Furthermore, such a quantitative description will have to incorporate the dynamic effects of the advancing film growth–front in all directions.

The experimental evidence in Fig. 7 shows that the growth at the bottom surfaces between various 1–D arrays of photoresist lines (spaced 4.5, 3.5, 1.5, 1.4, 0.8, 0.6, 0.5, and 0.4 $`\mu `$m apart) decreased from about 25$`\%`$ of the unshadowed thickness of the 4.5–$`\mu `$m–spacing (Fig. 7b), to about 12$`\%`$ for the 1.5–$`\mu `$m–spacing (Fig. 7a), and to essentially zero thickness for sidewall–to–sidewall separations of 0.8 $`\mu `$m and less (Figs. 7b and 7c). For the 2–D checkerboard array with 1.5 $`\mu `$$`\times `$ 1.5 $`\mu `$$`\times `$ 0.8 $`\mu `$m shadowed wells (Fig. 8), there is no visible growth on the bottom surface, since the largest value of $`w_s`$ is $`1.5\sqrt{2}`$ $`\mu `$m along the checkerboard diagonal direction, which leads to $`\delta _{sw}=0.71`$. Thus, the growth will be just $`71\%`$ of the sidewall growth in the worst case, with no growth predicted on the bottom surface. The sidewall growth leads to initial expansion of the nanowire assemblies (see Fig. 8c), followed by parallel, vertical growth, once the separation is about 1 $`\mu `$m. As the separation changes, so does the shadowing geometry. Therefore, the selectivity of growth on the pattern’s top surface will improve as $`w_f`$ is reduced and/or $`\chi _v`$ is decreased.

## 5 Concluding Remarks

We have reported the fabrication of films comprising assemblies of sculptured SiOx nanowires grown on lithographically patterned substrates, thereby incorporating transverse architectures uniformly over large–area substrates in STF technology. The density and morphology of the nanowire assemblies is dependent on the direction of the vapor flux and the local self–shadowing environment, according to straightforward geometrical considerations. We have shown that chiral nanowires can be selectively grown on patterned substrates. The spacing of the array where selective growth is achievable is determined by the direction of the vapor flux angle and the height of the initial (i.e., substrate) topography. The ability to sculpture the nanowires out of any material which can easily be deposited by a physical vapor deposition technique — coupled with micro-and macroscale 1– and 2–dimensional topographic substrates — opens a whole new realm of photonic, fluidic and sensor devices . Such applications include nanowire assemblies for bionanotechnology , as well as for photonic bandgap engineering .

Acknowledgement This work was supported in part by the Penn State Materials Research Science and Engineering Center.


text:
# ASTROD, ASTROD I and their gravitational-wave sensitivities

## 1 Introduction

A standard implementation of ASTROD is to have two spacecraft in separate solar orbit carrying a payload of a proof mass, two telescopes, two 1-2 W lasers, a clock and a drag-free system, together with a similar L1/L2 spacecraft (Fig. 1). The three spacecraft range coherently with one another using lasers. Simulation with timing error 50 ps and accelerometer error $`10^{13}`$ m/s2(Hz)1/2 at frequency $`f`$ $``$ 100$`\mu `$Hz for 1050 days gives the uncertainties of determining relativistic parameters $`\gamma `$ and $`\beta `$ to be $`4.6\times 10^7`$ and $`4.0\times 10^7`$, respectively, and that for solar quadrupole parameter $`J_2`$ to be 1.2$`\times 10^8`$ . At present, satellite laser-ranging timing error has reached 5 ps. LISA’s launching goal in 2012 for accelerometer noise requires 3 $`\times `$ $`10^{15}`$ m/s2(Hz)1/2 at $`f`$ $``$ 100 $`\mu `$Hz . Since ASTROD will be after 2012, a factor of 3 improvement on LISA goal will make 2 orders of magnitude improvement for acceleration noise in the simulation. These will put the uncertainties of measuring $`\gamma `$ and $`\beta `$ in the 10-9 to 10-8 range, and that of $`J_2`$ in the 10-10 to 10-9 range. This demands post-post-Newtonian ephemeris framework to be established for the analysis and simulation of data. Efforts have been started in this direction by colleagues \[5-7\].

ASTROD I with one spacecraft interferometric ranging and pulse ranging with ground stations is the first step for a full ASTROD mission . The goals are testing relativity with gamma measured to 10-7, measuring solar-system parameters more precisely and improving the sensitivity for gravitational wave detection using radio Doppler tracking . The spacecraft is to be launched to encounter Venus twice to achieve a shorter period for a sooner measurement of Shapiro time delay (Fig. 2).

## 2 ASTROD sensitivity

The algorisms for unequal arm noise cancellation of Armstrong, Estabrook & Tinto , and of Dhurandhar, Nayak & Vinet  can readily be applied to ASTROD. For the 3-spacecraft configuration as in LISA and as in Fig. 1, they have demonstrated that one can combine the six measured time series of Doppler shifts of the one-way laser beams between spacecraft pairs, and the six measured shifts between adjacent optical benches on each spacecraft, with suitable time delays, to cancel the laser frequency fluctuations, and opical-bench vibration noise. The achievable strain sensitivity for these combinations is set by the drag-free proof-mass accelerations inside optical benches, and by the shot noise at photodetectors. The implementation of these alogarisms for ASTROD requires the armlengths known accurately to about 100 m and the synchronization good to about 300 ns. Since ASTROD is an astrometry mission, the armlengths and synchronizations will be measured and implemented to better than 10 ps accuracy. Therefore, ASTROD can easily accommodate the noise cancellation algorisms even when shot noise and acceleration noise are improved significantly.

For 1-2 W laser emitting power, the shot noise sensitivity floor in the strain is $`10^{21}`$/(Hz)1/2 independent of armlength. With the same power, the ASTROD sensitivity would be shifted to lower frequency by a factor up to 60 (30 in average) if other frequency-dependent requirements can be met. The antenna response will be shifted correspondingly. If the accelerometer noise response can be shifted, i.e., the low-frequency response becomes better, we may have the ASTROD (2) sensitivity curve of Fig. 1 as given in . ASTROD has varying armlength and the sensitivity should be in a band and integration should be performed. If the LISA accelerometer noise goal is taken, the sensitivity at low frequency is about 30 times better than LISA as indicated in ASTROD (1) in Fig. 1, as given by R$`\ddot{\text{u}}`$diger . Since ASTROD is in a time frame later than LISA, if the absolute metrological accelerometer / inertial sensor can be developed, there is a potential to reach ASTROD (3) sensitivity curve. With a better lower-frequency resolution, the confusion limit for LISA should be lower for ASTROD. The modulations of signals due to orbit motions of ASTROD spacecraft, especially the radial motions, will help to distinguish gravity-gradient signals due to solar oscillation from gravitational-wave signals from outside the solar system .

## 3 ASTROD I payload, requirement and sensitivity

A schematic payload configuration of ASTROD I is as in Fig. 2 . The cylindrical spacecraft with diameter 2.5 m and height 2 m has its surface covered with solar panels. In orbit, the cylindrical axis is perpendicular to the orbit plane with the telescope pointing toward the ground laser station. The effective area to receive sunlight is about 5 m2 and can generate over 500 W of power. The total mass of spacecraft is 300-350 kg. That of payload is 100-120 kg with science data rate 500 bps. The crucial technologies include (i) 100 fW weaklight phase locking ; (ii) design and development of sunlight shield ; (iii) design and development of drag-free system. The requirements for the drag-free system are less stringent than LISA. In Table 1 we provide a summary of the parameter values that meet the accelerometer requirements for ASTROD I, in comparison with LISA. We use the notations and the LISA values of Schumaker . The listed values are for the frequency at 0.1 mHz. The parameter values are largely relaxed for ASTROD I. The same values satisfy requirements for higher-frequency range, where frequency-dependent contributions to the acceleration noise become smaller.

A typical design orbit for August 4, 2010 launch is shown on the left of Fig 2: two encounters with Venus to swing the spacecraft to the other side of the Sun to conduct Shapiro time delay measurement and to measure Venus multipole moments . Assuming a 10 ps timing accuracy and $`10^{13}`$ m/s2(Hz)1/2 (at $`f`$ $`100\mu `$Hz) inertial sensor/accelerometer noise, our simulation of the accuracy for determining the relativistic parameters $`\gamma `$ and $`\beta `$, and the solar quadrupole parameter J2 gives 10-7, 10-7 and 10-8, respectivly, for their uncertainties .

Like the radio Doppler tracking of spacecraft , ASTROD I also has sensitivity to low-frequency gravitational-wave. Clock noise and the propagation noise are the dominant noise sources. Clock noise is the dominant instrumental noise. As clock stability improves, this noise becomes smaller. The propagation noise is due to fluctuations in the index of refraction of the troposphere, ionosphere and the interplanetary solar plasma. The fluctuations due to ionosphere and interplanetary plasma are not important for laser ranging. Tropospherical effect can be substracted to a large extent by 2-color (2-wavelength) laser ranging or by using artificial stars. The ASTROD I spacecraft noise is very small and negligible. With these improvements, ASTROD I will have a couple of times to several times better sensitivity to gravitational-wave for the same spacecraft-Earth configuration. Detailed analysis will be presented in a forthcoming publication.

We thank Foundation of Minor Planets of Purple Mountain Observatory and National Science Council \[Grant no. NSC 92-2112-M-007-042\] for financial supports.

## References