text:
# Early-type Galaxy Halo Dynamics inferred using the PN Spectrograph

## 1. Introduction

Although evidence for dark halos in spiral galaxies is well-founded on kinematic measurements, similar studies in elliptical galaxies have not been so conclusive. One difficulty has been the lack of a suitable kinematic tracer at radii beyond the point at which integrated stellar spectroscopy becomes impractical. In the late 1980s the situation improved when planetary nebulae (PNe) were recognised as a powerful diagnostic, and since 2001 our team has been operating an instrument, the Planetary Nebula Spectrograph, which is specially designed for these observations. This results in a leap forward in detection efficiency and makes possible a range of new projects.

## 2. The PN.Spectrograph

The PN.S incorporates two highly efficient slitless spectrographs back-to-back. Via a common \[OIII\] filter this results in simultaneous images of the field in which the PNe are easily distinguished from stars. Their velocities can be derived from the relative shifts in their positions in the two images. This “Counter-Dispersed Imaging” technique is described in Douglas et al. (2002), along with other details of the project. Its value lies in the high optical efficiencies attained, in the absence of any astrometric requirements, and in the fact that it is a single-step procedure.

Our first project, currently in progress, is to examine the dark matter halos of apparently round, moderate-luminosity elliptical galaxies, too small to have been easily addressed by X-ray or gravitational-lensing analysis. Like most ellipticals, they do not produce much emission in neutral hydrogen either. Finally, conventional stellar spectroscopy does not probe far enough out, where dark-matter is expected to dominate.

In the prevailing CDM model of galaxy formation the mass distribution is such that, over the region probed by our measurements, galaxies are expected to have a flat or slightly rising circular velocity profile (Navarro, Frenk, & White 1996). This is in agreement with the asymptotically flat rotation curves of spiral galaxies and has also been borne out for the larger ellipticals (Gerhard et al. 2001). However the first three objects in our sample, NGC 3379, NGC 821 and NGC 4494, yielded the surprising result (though seen earlier in the case of NGC 3379 by Ciardullo, Jacoby & Dejonghe 1993) that the velocity dispersion strongly declines with radius. With realistic assumptions about the isotropy of the velocity distribution this is indicative of a falling circular velocity profile and is almost consistent with there being no dark halo at all – see Romanowsky et al. elsewhere in these proceedings, and Romanowsky et al. (2003).

## References

Ciardullo, R., Jacoby G.H., Dejonghe H.B. 1993, ApJ Vol. 414, 454

Romanowsky, A.J., Douglas, N.G., Arnaboldi, M., Kuijken, K., Merrifield, M.R., Napolitano, N.R., Capaccioli, M., Freeman, K.C. 2003, Science Vol. 301, 1696

Douglas, N.G., Arnaboldi, M., Freeman, K.C., Kuijken, K., Merrifield, M.R., Romanowsky, A.J., Taylor, K., Capaccioli, M., Axelrod, T., Gilmozzi, R., Hart, J., Bloxham, G., Jones, D. 2002, PASP Vol. 114, 1234

Gerhard, O., Kronawitter, A., Saglia, R. P. & Bender, R. 2001, AJ Vol. 121, 1936

Navarro, J. F., Frenk, C. S. & White, S. D. M. 1996, ApJ Vol. 462, 563


format: text

text:
# From the production of primordial perturbations to the end of inflation

## I Introduction

With the increasing precision of cosmological observations, inflation has become the favored candidate for explaining the origin of perturbations in the Universe infrev . While some plausible scenarios have recently been introduced whereby adiabatic perturbations are generated after inflation from isocurvature perturbations laid down during inflation isoad , the generation of adiabatic density perturbations during inflation remains the simplest one. However, although inflationary models give an excellent fit to most recent data including that of the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (wmapwmap ; Petal , the perturbations are observable only over a fairly narrow range of scales, corresponding to about four orders of magnitude in wavenumber, thus allowing us to constrain only a small segment of the inflationary potential. Nevertheless, there is one further piece of information that can be brought into play infend , which is that we know that inflation must come to an end soon after the observable perturbations are generated.

The literature describes three ways in which inflation might end. In the simplest scenario, requiring just a single scalar field, the logarithm of the potential driving inflation becomes too steep to sustain inflation, leading to the end of the slow-roll regime and usually giving way to a series of oscillations about a minimum in the potential. A second popular possibility is an instability, associated with a second scalar field, which removes the potential energy driving inflation; this is the key idea of the hybrid inflation paradigm hyb , where inflation ends by a phase transition. Much less discussed is a third possibility, that at some energy scale the underlying equations of motion are modified, an example being the steep inflation model steep  where inflation is sustained only by corrections to the Friedman equation at high energies in a braneworld model, with inflation ending as the energy scale drops and these corrections become unimportant.

In the hybrid inflation case, the inflaton field is normally unaware of the existence of the instability until its onset, and the inflaton dynamics gives no clue as to when it might happen. In that case, we can expect no useful extra information from the need to end inflation. If the underlying equations can be modified, as in the steep inflation case, there are many ways in which this could happen and it is unlikely that any useful model-independent statements can be made. In this paper, we therefore restrict our attention to models with a single scalar field, in which inflation ends by breaking of the slow-roll condition. Our aim is to assess whether the requirement to end inflation imposes useful additional constraints on the inflaton potential, and to discover whether there are regions of parameter space permitted by the perturbation data which are ill-suited to a satisfactory end to inflation in this manner.

It was recently shown that there is a firm upper limit $`N_{\mathrm{max}}`$ to the number of $`e`$-foldings $`N_{\mathrm{inf}}`$ before the end of inflation at which observable perturbations were generated Ninf . In this work, we aim to use the value of $`N_{\mathrm{max}}`$ to set some conservative constraints on the first two derivatives of the inflaton potential in the context of single-field inflation, which can be compared to the region permitted by the observed perturbations. In other words we want to look at the generic predictions of single-field inflation by defining a region in the primordial power spectrum parameter space compatible with the paradigm. This goal is similar to that of analyses using the inflationary flow equations flow , such as Peiris et al. Petal  and Kinney et al. KKMR  which are based on the method of Easther and Kinney EK , but as we will discuss our approach is different in its physical content and makes more restrictive assumptions about the shape of the potential.

The paper is organized as follows: Section II is devoted to stating our assumptions and explaining our methodology, Section III gives the results and analysis, and Section IV is a general discussion on related issues. We assume $`m_{\mathrm{Pl}}=1`$ throughout.

## II Methodology

In this section we explain how we constrain the inflaton potential in the context of single-field inflation. The main idea is to test whether it is possible to build a reasonable model which takes into account the upper limit on the number of $`e`$-foldings $`N_{\mathrm{inf}}`$ before the end of inflation, given the shape of the potential in the range probed by observations.

Given an inflationary potential $`V(\varphi )`$ and an initial value of the field $`\varphi _{}`$ (corresponding to the horizon crossing of a pivot scale $`k_{}`$) we can compute a Taylor expansion of $`V(\varphi )`$ around $`\varphi _{}`$. In the context of slow-roll and in the face of the current observational data, one does not expect more than the first two or three derivatives to play an important role in the range of scales probed by cmb observations and galaxy distribution surveys. Before going into more details, it is useful to note that the evolution of the field as a function of the number of $`e`$-foldings does not depend on the normalization of the potential. Therefore, throughout the paper we use the parameters $`V^{}/V`$, $`V^{\prime \prime }/V`$, $`V^{\prime \prime \prime }/V`$, etc. which are evaluated at $`\varphi _{}`$. Also, by convention we take the first derivative to be negative.

Now, let us introduce the set of slow-roll parameters STEG ; LLMS

$`\epsilon _0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{H(0)}{H(N)}},`$ (1)
$`\epsilon _{n+1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{ln}\left|\epsilon _n\right|}{\mathrm{d}N}}\mathrm{for}n0,`$ (2)
where $`H`$ is the Hubble parameter and $`N`$ is the number of $`e`$-foldings since the crossing of the horizon by the pivot scale $`k_{}`$. This particular choice of definition is known as the horizon-flow parameters. We can compute (to first-order) $`V^{}/V`$ and $`V^{\prime \prime }/V`$ as functions of $`\epsilon _1`$ and $`\epsilon _2`$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{V^{}}{V}}`$ $``$ $`4\sqrt{\pi \epsilon _1},`$ (3)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{V^{\prime \prime }}{V}}`$ $``$ $`4\pi (4\epsilon _1\epsilon _2),`$ (4)
which relates the shape of the potential with the inflationary dynamics. Conversely, we can recover the slow-roll parameters from the derivatives of the potential

$`\epsilon _1`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi }}\left({\displaystyle \frac{V^{}}{V}}\right)^2,`$ (5)
$`\epsilon _2`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4\pi }}\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{V^{}}{V}}\right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{V^{\prime \prime }}{V}}\right].`$ (6)
These slow-roll parameters can then be related to primordial power spectrum parameters such as the scalar and tensor spectral indices $`n_\mathrm{S}12\epsilon _1\epsilon _2`$ and $`n_\mathrm{T}2\epsilon _1`$, the tensor to scalar ratio $`R16\epsilon _1`$, etc. Therefore, we will interchangeably use any independent pair of these parameters. Note that since the constraint on the running $`\alpha _\mathrm{S}2\epsilon _1\epsilon _2\epsilon _2\epsilon _3`$ is too weak at the moment (see Ref. LL03  for comments on this issue), we will assume some theoretical prior on this parameter. It is important to stress that in this work we do not want to constrain higher derivatives; rather, we are trying to find a region of the $`V^{}/V`$$`V^{\prime \prime }/V`$ space that is compatible with a large class of single-field inflation models.

Now, as explained above, our aim is to try to build a working single-field inflation model (i.e. an inflaton potential) by expanding the potential as a Taylor series, fixing the first two derivatives to reasonable values, and then varying the higher-order derivatives using a random process. We set the following rules to define a working model:

1. The shape of the potential should be consistent with the constraints on the primordial perturbation power spectrum, as well as with the prior on the running $`\alpha _\mathrm{S}`$.
2. The potential should either be convex ($`V^{\prime \prime }/V>0`$) throughout the evolution (large-field inflation) or at first concave ($`V^{\prime \prime }/V<0`$) and eventually convex (small-field inflation).
3. The number of $`e`$-foldings between the time the scale $`k_{}`$ leaves the horizon and the end of inflation ($`\epsilon _1=1`$) should be less than $`N_{\mathrm{max}}`$.

Concerning the first rule, we look at a region of the parameter space $`V^{}/V`$$`V^{\prime \prime }/V`$ approximately consistent with observations of $`n_\mathrm{S}1`$ and $`R`$ — we will later contrast our results with actual constraints from wmap and 2df. We initially impose the theoretical prior $`0.04<\alpha _\mathrm{S}<0.02`$. In anticipation that future observations will pin down the running more precisely, we then go on to examine successively the following subcases: (i) $`0.04<\alpha _\mathrm{S}<0.02`$, (ii) $`0.02<\alpha _\mathrm{S}<0`$, and (iii) $`0<\alpha _\mathrm{S}<0.02`$, so as to investigate how future constraints may affect the overall picture. As

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \frac{V^{\prime \prime \prime }}{V}& \sqrt{\frac{\pi }{\epsilon _1}}\left(24\epsilon _1^2+18\epsilon _1\epsilon _23\epsilon _2\epsilon _3\right)\hfill \\ & \sqrt{\frac{\pi }{\epsilon _1}}\left(24(\epsilon _1^2\epsilon _1\epsilon _2)+3\alpha _\mathrm{S}\right),\hfill \end{array}$$
(7)
these constraints on the running impose constraints on the third derivative of the potential. Then, we assume that higher derivatives are negligible in the range of values of the field corresponding to observed scales. Specifically, we impose

$$\left|\frac{1}{4!}\frac{V^{(4)}}{V}\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi ^4\right|<\left|\frac{1}{3!}\frac{V^{\prime \prime \prime }}{V}\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi ^3\right|,$$
(8)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi `$ is the distance run by the field when producing the observed perturbations (corresponding to roughly 7 $`e`$-foldings, 3.5 on each side of $`\varphi _{}`$). This means that the fourth-order term in the Taylor expansion is assumed not to overtake the third-order term until the field runs about twice the distance to the edge of the observed region. Note that as a result, the fourth derivative term cannot contribute significantly to the curvature of the potential inside the observed region. In addition, in order to find working models more easily, we use the practical recipe

$$\left|\frac{1}{5!}\frac{V^{(5)}}{V}\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _{3,4}^5\right|<\left|\frac{1}{4!}\frac{V^{(4)}}{V}\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _{3,4}^4\right|,$$
(9)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _{3,4}`$ is the value of the field for which the fourth order term equals the third order term in the Taylor expansion. Note that if $`V^{}/V`$ and $`V^{\prime \prime }/V`$ are fixed, the uncertainty on $`\alpha _\mathrm{S}`$ still allows $`V^{\prime \prime \prime }/V`$ to vary and therefore the possibility of having $`V^{\prime \prime \prime }/V0`$ (and hence Eqs. (8) and (9) being too strong constraints) is avoided.

The second rule is assumed in order to maintain the simplicity of the model, as this is the main reason for considering single-field inflation. Also, most models in the literature are of this form. We consider Taylor expansions of third, fourth and fifth order. It is important to note that our class of models is broader than a set of polynomial potentials, since the expansion need only approximate the true potential over a limited range, with the order of the expansion reflecting the number of degrees of freedom we have to shape the potential in order to fulfil our set of rules. We checked that a fifth degree polynomial can fit a wide range of potentials from $`\varphi _{}`$ to the value of the field corresponding to the end of inflation.

We also investigated the effect of imposing the constraint that $`V=0`$ at the minimum of the potential. However we found that this condition complicates the analysis without adding anything useful, since after inflation ends it is usually not hard for the potential to then shape itself to form a satisfactory minimum. In any case it is not our intention to address the post-inflationary dynamics.

Finally, concerning the third rule, inflation must end by breaking of the slow-roll condition ($`\epsilon _1=1`$) and this should happen within a certain number of $`e`$-foldings $`N_{\mathrm{inf}}<N_{\mathrm{max}}`$ after the scale $`k_{}`$ crosses the horizon. The uncertainty on $`N_{\mathrm{inf}}`$ comes mainly from the reheating process, which can be very brief or alternatively can last until nucleosynthesis. Assuming instantaneous reheating and with $`h0.72`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{m}0.27`$, the amplitude of scalar perturbations $`A_\mathrm{S}2.3\times 10^9`$ and the pivot scale $`k_{}0.01`$Mpc<sup>-1</sup> (see Ref. LL03 ) we have

$`N_{\mathrm{max}}`$ $``$ $`60+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{ln}(ϵ_1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}\mathrm{ln}(𝒟),`$ (10)
where $`𝒟`$ is the drop in the energy density between the time the scale $`k_{}`$ crosses the horizon and the time inflation ends. The discrepancy between this equation and the results given in Ref. Ninf  comes from choosing a different scale as a starting point.

Our procedure is as follows: We fix the pair $`V^{}/V`$ and $`V^{\prime \prime }/V`$, randomly choose the higher derivatives, and then test the resulting potential against our set of rules. We repeat this step until we find a working model. If we cannot build a potential fulfilling the three rules stated above after a certain number of tries $`n_{\mathrm{tries}}`$, then we say that this pair of parameters is not consistent with single-field inflation, and move onto the next values of $`V^{}/V`$ and $`V^{\prime \prime }/V`$. We took $`n_{\mathrm{tries}}=300^\nu `$, where $`\nu `$ is the number of degrees of freedom describing the potential after the first two derivatives have been chosen (i.e. $`\nu =1`$, $`2`$ or $`3`$), and tested other values to ensure that our results do not depend on this choice.

## III Results

In this section we present our results as boundaries between allowed and excluded regions in the $`V^{}/V`$$`V^{\prime \prime }/V`$ space and in the $`(n_\mathrm{S}1)`$$`R`$ space. In other words, we are seeking to make some falsifiable predictions for our class of single-field inflation models.

The main result is displayed in Fig. 1, for which we assume $`0.04<\alpha _\mathrm{S}<0.02`$. For each order in the expansion of the potential there is a line which represents the boundary between the region where it is possible to build a working model (shaded) and the region where single-field inflation is excluded. The dots are independent samples from the Monte-Carlo Markov chain used in Ref. LL03  to fit wmap and 2df, and thus represent models providing a good fit to the perturbation data. We also plot the line $`\epsilon _2=0`$ to compare with the naive expectation that only models with $`ϵ_2>0`$ are suitable candidates for violating slow-roll (since by definition $`\mathrm{d}\epsilon _1/\mathrm{d}N=\epsilon _1\epsilon _2`$).

In Fig. 2 we make more restrictive assumptions on the running, with the three graphs showing the cases (i), (ii) and (iii) as described in Section II. Figure 3 shows the same information but displayed in the space of observable parameters, that is $`n_\mathrm{S}1`$ and $`R`$. We comment on small-field and large-field inflation separately.

### III.1 Small-field inflation

First, let us consider potentials with a negative second derivative $`V^{\prime \prime }<0`$, which are found in the lower part of each of the panels in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, and at the left lower corner of the panels in Fig. 3. We can see in Fig. 1 that these models are currently not constrained by the upper bound $`N_{\mathrm{max}}`$. Indeed, it is always possible to build a working model even when considering only a third-order expansion. This is because as long as its slope is not bounded outside the region probed by observations, nothing prevents the potential from steepening enough in order to violate slow-roll before the number of $`e`$-foldings reaches $`N_{\mathrm{max}}`$.

Even when tightening our assumptions on the running (see Fig. 2), models which fit the perturbation data remain almost unconstrained as long as the running is negative. However if the running is positive, panel (iii), the third derivative prevents inflation from ending in time, and unless we use at least a fourth-order expansion, it is difficult to build a working model consistent with observations. Nevertheless, it is fair to say that so far small-field inflation is consistent with observations even when taking into account the constraint on $`N_{\mathrm{max}}`$.

### III.2 Large-field inflation

In the case of potentials with a positive curvature, the situation is very different. The modulus of the slope of the potential is bounded from above (because of the second rule) and the quickest, and therefore somewhat unrealistic, way to end inflation would be for the potential to become a linear potential as soon as the field leaves the observable region. We studied this kind of potential but it did not lead to any interesting constraint. Now, it is clear that the more derivatives we take into account, the more degrees of freedom we have available to shape the potential into a linear-like potential, and the extra degrees of freedom can conspire to build an extreme model in order to end inflation as quickly as possible. If such a model does not end inflation in time for given values of $`V^{}/V`$ and $`V^{\prime \prime }/V`$, then we can be sure that this pair of parameters is inconsistent with our class of single-field inflation models. Note that the allowed models lying close to the fifth-order boundary already require a certain amount of fine tuning between the different derivatives. One could of course expand the potential to sixth-order, but the resulting enlargement of the allowed region would be due to potentials that are even more linear-like and fine-tuned.

Figure 1 shows that a significant fraction (around 30%) of large-field models which fit the wmap and 2df data sets are excluded by the need to end inflation in time. This proportion increases even more (to around 60%) when considering only fourth-order expansion potentials and in the third-order case almost all of them (around 90%) are excluded. It is somewhat unfortunate that the constraints coming from observations and from the need to end inflation lie in the same direction, but it is fair to say that large-field inflation models are under pressure.

This becomes clearer when we consider tighter constraints on the running. We can see in Fig. 2 that a large negative running ($`\alpha _\mathrm{S}<0.02`$, panel (i)) is almost inconsistent with large-field inflation. This can be easily understood by looking at Eq. (7); rule 2 plays a major role by preventing the curvature of the potential from changing sign, and it will be difficult to build a working model unless $`\epsilon _1`$ is large ($`V^{}/V`$ very negative). In the case of a positive running the possibility of a third-order working model is excluded and fourth-order models are difficult to achieve.

On the other hand, panel (ii) in Fig. 2 ($`0.02<\alpha _\mathrm{S}<0`$) is exactly the same as Fig. 1. This means that it is much easier to end inflation if the running is between $`0.02`$ and $`0`$ than if it is positive or more negative. In other words, for large-field inflation models, the running is tightly constrained by the need to end inflation. As a result, forthcoming surveys may rule out this class of inflation models.

From an observational point of view, when looking at Fig. 3 we see that our conditions clearly favor models with $`n_\mathrm{S}<1`$, and in particular we find that even $`n_\mathrm{S}=1`$ is hard to achieve unless $`R`$ is large.

## IV Discussion

We have been motivated by the flow-equation formalism of Easther and Kinney EK  to study the idea of randomly generating a large class of slow-roll inflation models in order to make a comparison with the increasingly restrictive observational constraints. However, as explained in Ref. L03 , the flow equation formalism does not incorporate the underlying inflationary physics via the Euler-Lagrange equation. In our procedure this has been essential since we wanted to place a constraint on the qualitative shape of the inflation potential (via our rule 2).

Nevertheless, it is worth comparing with the results of Refs. Petal ; KKMR  which used the flow-equation formalism. First of all, both of those papers have included the running as a parameter when generating their observational constraints. As a result, the observationally favored region in the $`(n_\mathrm{S}1)`$$`R`$ plane is enlarged, giving the effect that the flow-equation formalism currently picks out a small preferred region. Compared with observational constraints with no running, the flow-equation formalism actually generates a large class of models covering almost all of the observably favored region. Our method has generated a more restricted ensemble of inflation models, and from this perspective it can be considered a small step forward. Moreover, we have not tried to display any distribution of models, but instead just defined regions compatible with our class of single-field inflation models, arguing that the models near the edges of these regions are in some sense already fine tuned. This presentation has also allowed us to clarify the effect of adding further derivatives to our expansion of the potential.

Broadly speaking, we found it very easy to construct working models with $`V^{\prime \prime }/V<0`$, whereas for models with $`V^{\prime \prime }/V>0`$ the situation is more complex. Specifically, we showed that a lower limit on the amplitude of the slope of the potential does persist in the region classified as large-field inflation, analogous to the lower limit recently used to put pressure on the $`\varphi ^\alpha `$ inflation models LL03 . This means that the upper limit on $`N_{\mathrm{inf}}`$ does exert some pressure on inflation model building efforts. In addition, we showed that our constraints have a strong dependence on the running of the spectral index as it determines the value of the third derivative. From an observational point of view, we found that single-field inflation models can give $`n_\mathrm{S}>1`$, but only with a large value of $`R`$, which is expected to be constrained by upcoming observations.

To summarize, while small-field models are poorly constrained by the maximum number of $`e`$-foldings, we can see a certain tension against our large-field models and forthcoming observations may actually rule them out. Obviously some fundamental theory could be responsible for a potential with an unexpected shape, but for studying phenomenological models our assumptions seem reasonable. Finally we must stress that $`N_{\mathrm{max}}`$ is an upper bound and knowing details about the reheating process may lower that bound and lead to even more constraining results.

###### Acknowledgements.

M.M. was supported by the Fondation Barbour, the Fondation Wilsdorf, the Janggen-Pöhn-Stiftung and the ors Awards Scheme, S.M.L. by the eu cmbnet network and A.R.L. in part by the Leverhulme Trust.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

In the last few years color superconductivity has received a lot of attention . The possibility of formation of diquark condensates was pointed out since the first days of QCD . Naively one would expects that, due to asymptotic freedom, quarks at very high density would form a Fermi sphere of almost free fermions. However, Bardeen, Cooper and Schrieffer  proved that the Fermi surface of free fermions is unstable in presence of an attractive, arbitrary small, interaction. Since in QCD the gluon exchange in the $`\overline{3}`$ channel is attractive one expects the formation of a coherent state of particle/hole pairs (Cooper pairs). An easy way to understand the origin of this instability is to remember that, for free fermions, the Fermi energy distribution at zero temperature is given by $`f(E)=\theta (\mu E)`$ and therefore the maximum value of the energy (Fermi energy) is $`E_F=\mu `$. Then consider the corresponding grand-potential, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=E\mu N`$, with $`\mu =E_F`$. Adding or subtracting a particle (or adding a hole) to the Fermi surface does not change $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, since $`\mathrm{\Omega }(E\pm E_F)\mu (N\pm 1)=\mathrm{\Omega }`$. We see that the Fermi sphere of free fermions is highly degenerate. This is the origin of the instability, because if we compare the grand-potential for adding two free particles or two particles bounded with a binding energy $`E_B`$, we find that the difference is given by $`\mathrm{\Omega }_B\mathrm{\Omega }=E_B<0`$. Since a bound state at the Fermi surface can be formed by an arbitrary small attractive interaction , it is energetically more favorable for fermions to pair and form condensates.

From the previous considerations it is easy to understand why to realize superconductivity in ordinary matter is a difficult job. In fact, one needs an attractive interaction to overcome the repulsive Coulomb interaction among electrons, as for instance the one originating from phonon exchange for electrons in metals. On the other hand the interaction among two quarks in the channel $`\overline{3}`$ is attractive, making color superconductivity a very robust phenomenon. Notice also that, once taken into account the condensation effects, in the limit of very high density one can use asymptotic freedom to get exact results. For instance, it is possible to get an analytical expression for the gap . In the asymptotic regime it is also possible to understand the structure of the condensate 333At non asymptotic densities other possible condensates might be formed, see . In fact, consider the matrix element

$$0|\psi _{ia}^\alpha \psi _{jb}^\beta |0$$
(1)
where $`\alpha ,\beta =1,2,3`$ are color indices, $`a,b=1,2`$ are spin indices and $`i,j=1,\mathrm{},N`$ are flavor indices. Its color, spin and flavor structure is completely fixed by the following considerations:

* antisymmetry in color indices $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$ in order to have attraction;
* antisymmetry in spin indices $`(a,b)`$ in order to get a spin zero condensate. The isotropic structure of the condensate is favored since it allows a better use of the Fermi surface;
* given the structure in color and spin, Pauli principles requires antisymmetry in flavor indices.

Since the momenta in a Cooper pair are opposite, as the spins of the quarks (the condensate has spin 0), it follows that the left(right)-handed quarks can pair only with left(right)-handed quarks. In the case of 3 flavors the favored condensate is

$$0|\psi _{iL}^\alpha \psi _{jL}^\beta |0=0|\psi _{iR}^\alpha \psi _{jR}^\beta |0=\mathrm{\Delta }\underset{C=1}{\overset{3}{}}ϵ^{\alpha \beta C}ϵ_{ijC}$$
(2)
This gives rise to the so-called color–flavor–locked (CFL) phase . The reason for the name is that simultaneous transformations in color and in flavor leave the condensate invariant. In fact, the symmetry breaking pattern turns out to be

$$SU(3)_cSU(3)_LSU(3)_RU(1)_BSU(3)_{c+L+R}$$

where $`SU(3)_{c+L+R}`$ is the diagonal subgroup of the three $`SU(3)`$ groups. This is the typical situation when the chemical potential is much bigger than the quark masses $`m_u`$, $`m_d`$ and $`m_s`$ (here the masses to be considered are in principle density depending). However we may ask what happens decreasing the chemical potential. At intermediate densities we have no more the support of asymptotic freedom, but all the model calculations show that one still has a sizeable color condensation. In particular if the chemical potential $`\mu `$ is much less than the strange quark mass one expects that the strange quark decouples, and the corresponding condensate should be

$$0|\psi _{iL}^\alpha \psi _{jL}^\beta |0=\mathrm{\Delta }ϵ^{\alpha \beta 3}ϵ_{ij}$$
(3)
In fact, due to the antisymmetry in color the condensate must necessarily choose a direction in color space. Notice that now the symmetry breaking pattern is completely different from the three-flavor case. In fact, we have

$$SU(3)_cSU(2)_LSU(2)_RU(1)_B$$

$$SU(2)_cSU(2)_LSU(2)_RU(1)_B$$

It is natural to ask what happens in the intermediate region of $`\mu `$. It turns out that the interesting case is for $`\mu M_s^2/\mathrm{\Delta }`$. To understand this point let us consider the case of two fermions: one massive, $`m_1=M_s`$ and the other one massless, $`m_2=0`$, at the same chemical potential $`\mu `$. The Fermi momenta are of course different

$$p_{F_1}=\sqrt{\mu ^2M_s^2},p_{F_2}=\mu $$
(4)
The grand potential for the two unpaired fermions is (the factor 2 comes from the spin degree of freedom)

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{unpair}.}`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle _0^{p_{F_1}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}}\left(\sqrt{\stackrel{}{p}^2+M_s^2}\mu \right)`$ (5)
$`+`$ $`2{\displaystyle _0^{p_{F_2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}}\left(|\stackrel{}{p}|\mu \right)`$
In order to pair the two fermions must reach some common momentum $`p_{\mathrm{comm}}^F`$, and the corresponding grand potential is

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{pair}.}`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle _0^{p_{\mathrm{comm}}^F}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}}\left(\sqrt{\stackrel{}{p}^2+M_s^2}\mu \right)`$ (6)
$`+`$ $`2{\displaystyle _0^{p_{\mathrm{comm}}^F}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}}\left(|\stackrel{}{p}|\mu \right){\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}{4\pi ^2}}`$
where the last term is the energy necessary for the condensation of a fermion pair . The common momentum $`p_{\mathrm{comm}}^F`$ can be determined by minimizing $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{pair}.}`$ with respect to $`p_{\mathrm{comm}}^F`$, with the result

$$p_{\mathrm{comm}}^F=\mu \frac{M_s^2}{4\mu }$$
(7)
It is now easy to evaluate the difference $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{unpair}.}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{pair}.}`$ at the order $`M_s^4`$, with the result

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{unpair}.}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{pair}.}\frac{1}{16\pi ^2}\left(M_s^44\mathrm{\Delta }^2\mu ^2\right)$$
(8)
We see that in order to have condensation the condition

$$\mu >\frac{M_s^2}{2\mathrm{\Delta }}$$
(9)
must be realized. The problem of one massless and one massive flavor has been studied in ref. . However, one can simulate this situation by taking two massless quarks with different chemical potentials, which is equivalent to have two different Fermi spheres. The big advantage here is that one can use a study made by Larkin and Ovchinnikov  and Fulde and Ferrel . These authors studied the case of a ferromagnetic alloy with paramagnetic impurities. The impurities produce a magnetic field which, acting upon the electron spins, gives rise to a different chemical potential for the two populations of electrons. It turns out that it might be energetically favorable to pair fermions which are close to their respective Fermi surface (LOFF phase). However, since the Fermi momenta are different, the Cooper pair cannot have zero momentum and there is a breaking of translational and rotational invariance. Therefore, a crystalline phase can be formed. The previous situation is very difficult to be realized experimentally, but there have been claims of observation of this phase in heavy-fermion superconductors  and in quasi-two dimensional layered organic superconductors . The authors of ref.  have extended the calculation of ref.  to the case of two-flavor QCD and we will review here their results. Also, since the LOFF phase can give rise to crystalline structures, phonons are expected. We will also discuss the effective lagrangians for the phonons in different crystalline phases and show how to evaluate the parameters characterizing them, as the velocity of propagation. Finally we will consider an astrophysical application.

## 2 The LOFF phase

According to the authors of refs.  when fermions belong to two different Fermi spheres, they may prefer to pair staying as much as possible close to their own Fermi surface. When they are sitting exactly at the surface, the pairing is as shown in Fig. 1.

We see that the total momentum of the pair is $`\stackrel{}{p}_1+\stackrel{}{p}_2=2\stackrel{}{q}`$ and, as we shall show, $`|\stackrel{}{q}|`$ is fixed variationally whereas the direction of $`\stackrel{}{q}`$ is chosen spontaneously. Since the total momentum of the pair is not zero the condensate breaks rotational and translational invariance. The simplest form of the condensate compatible with this breaking is just a simple plane wave (more complicated functions will be considered later)

$$\psi (x)\psi (x)\mathrm{\Delta }e^{2i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{x}}$$
(10)
It should also be noticed that the pairs use much less of the Fermi surface than they do in the BCS case. In fact, in the case considered in Fig. 1 the fermions can pair only if they belong to the circles in the figure. More generally there is a quite large region in momentum space (the so called blocking region) which is excluded from the pairing. This leads to a condensate smaller than the BCS one.

Before discussing the LOFF case let us review the gap equation for the BCS condensate. We have said that the condensation phenomenon is the key feature of a degenerate Fermi gas with attractive interactions. Once one takes into account the condensation the physics can be described using the Landau’s idea of quasi-particles. In this context quasi-particles are nothing but fermionic excitations around the Fermi surface described by the following dispersion relation

$$ϵ(\stackrel{}{p},\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS})=\sqrt{\xi ^2+\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}^2}$$
(11)
with

$$\xi =E(\stackrel{}{p})\mu \frac{E(\stackrel{}{p})}{\stackrel{}{p}}|_{\stackrel{}{p}=\stackrel{}{p}_F}(\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{p}_F)=\stackrel{}{v}_F(\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{p}_F)$$
(12)
The quantities $`\stackrel{}{v}_F`$ and $`(\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{p}_F)`$ are called the Fermi velocity and the residual momentum respectively. A easy way to understand how the concept of quasi-particles comes about in this context is to study the gap equation at finite temperature. For simplicity let us consider the case of a four-fermi interaction. The euclidean gap equation is given by

$$1=g\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}\frac{1}{p_4^2+|\stackrel{}{p}|^2+\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}^2}$$
(13)
From this expression it is easy to get the gap equation at finite temperature. We need only to convert the integral over $`p_4`$ into a sum over the Matsubara frequencies

$$1=gT\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{1}{((2n+1)\pi T)^2+ϵ^2(\stackrel{}{p},\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS})}$$
(14)
Performing the sum we get

$$1=\frac{g}{2}\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1n_un_d}{ϵ(\stackrel{}{p},\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS})}$$
(15)
Here $`n_u`$ and $`n_d`$ are the finite-temperature distribution functions for the excitations (quasi-particles) corresponding to the original pairing fermions

$$n_u=n_d=\frac{1}{e^{ϵ(\stackrel{}{p},\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS})/T}+1}$$
(16)
At zero temperature ($`n_u=n_d0`$) we find (restricting the integration to a shell around the Fermi surface)

$$1=\frac{g}{2}\frac{d\mathrm{\Omega }_pp_F^2d\xi }{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1}{\sqrt{\xi ^2+\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}^2}}$$
(17)
In the limit of weak coupling we get

$$\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}2\overline{\xi }e^{2/(g\rho )}$$
(18)
where $`\overline{\xi }`$ is a cutoff and

$$\rho =\frac{p_F^2}{\pi ^2v_F}$$
(19)
is the density of states at the Fermi surface. This shows that decreasing the density of the states the condensate decreases exponentially. From a phenomenological point of view, one determines the coupling $`g`$ requiring that the same four-fermi interaction at zero temperature and density, gives rise to a constituent mass of the order of $`400MeV`$. From this requirement, using values for $`\mu 400÷500MeV`$ (interesting for the physics of compact stellar objects), one obtains values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ in the range $`20÷100MeV`$. Since at very high density it is possible to use perturbative QCD one can evaluate the gap from first principles . The result is

$$\mathrm{\Delta }b\mu g_s^5e^{3\pi ^2/\sqrt{2}g_s}$$
(20)
It is interesting to notice that from Nambu-Jona Lasinio type of models one would expect a behavior of the type $`\mathrm{exp}(c/g^2)`$ rather than $`\mathrm{exp}(c/g)`$. This is due to an extra infrared singularity from the gluon propagator. Although this result is strictly valid only at extremely high densities, if extrapolated down to densities corresponding to $`\mu 400÷500MeV`$, one finds again $`\mathrm{\Delta }20÷100MeV`$.

Let us now consider the LOFF case. For two fermions at different densities we have an extra term in the hamiltonian which can be written as

$$H_I=\delta \mu \sigma _3$$
(21)
where, in the original LOFF papers  $`\delta \mu `$ is proportional to the magnetic field due to the impurities, whereas in the actual case $`\delta \mu =(\mu _1\mu _2)/2`$ and $`\sigma _3`$ is a Pauli matrix acting on the two fermion space. According to refs.  this favors the formation of pairs with momenta

$$\stackrel{}{p}_1=\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q},\stackrel{}{p}_2=\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}$$
(22)
We will discuss in detail the case of a single plane wave (see eq. (10)). The interaction term of eq. (21) gives rise to a shift in $`\xi `$ (see eq. (12)) due both to the non-zero momentum of the pair and to the different chemical potential

$$\xi =E(\stackrel{}{p})\mu E(\pm \stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q})\mu \delta \mu \xi \overline{\mu }$$
(23)
with

$$\overline{\mu }=\delta \mu \stackrel{}{v}_F\stackrel{}{q}$$
(24)
Here we have assumed $`\delta \mu \mu `$ (with $`\mu =(\mu _1+\mu _2)/2`$) allowing us to expand $`E`$ at the first order in $`\stackrel{}{q}`$ (see Fig. 1). The gap equation has the same formal expression as in eq. (15) for the BCS case

$$1=\frac{g}{2}\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1n_un_d}{ϵ(\stackrel{}{p},\mathrm{\Delta })}$$
(25)
but now $`n_un_d`$

$$n_{u,d}=\frac{1}{e^{(ϵ(\stackrel{}{p},\mathrm{\Delta })\pm \overline{\mu })/T}+1}$$
(26)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the LOFF gap. In the limit of zero temperature we obtain

$$1=\frac{g}{2}\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1}{ϵ(\stackrel{}{p},\mathrm{\Delta })}\left(1\theta (ϵ\overline{\mu })\theta (ϵ+\overline{\mu })\right)$$
(27)
The two step functions can be interpreted saying that at zero temperature there is no pairing when $`ϵ(\stackrel{}{p},\mathrm{\Delta })<|\overline{\mu }|`$. This inequality defines the so called blocking region. The effect is to inhibit part of the Fermi surface to the pairing giving rise a to a smaller condensate with respect to the BCS case where all the surface is used.

We are now in the position to show that increasing $`\delta \mu `$ from zero we have first the BCS phase. Then at $`\delta \mu =\delta \mu _1`$ there is a first order transition to the LOFF phase , and at $`\delta \mu =\delta \mu _2>\delta \mu _1`$ there is a second order phase transition to the normal phase (with zero gap) . We start comparing the grand potential in the BCS phase to the one in the normal phase. Their difference is given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{BCS}}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{normal}}=\frac{p_F^2}{4\pi ^2v_F}\left(\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}^22\delta \mu ^2\right)$$
(28)
where the first term comes from the energy necessary to the BCS condensation (compare with eq. (6)), whereas the last term arises from the grand potential of two free fermions with different chemical potential. We recall also that for massless fermions $`p_F=\mu `$ and $`v_F=1`$. We have again assumed $`\delta \mu \mu `$. This implies that there should be a first order phase transition from the BCS to the normal phase at $`\delta \mu =\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}/\sqrt{2}`$ , since the BCS gap does not depend on $`\delta \mu `$. The situation is represented in Fig. 2.

In order to compare with the LOFF phase we will now expand the gap equation around the point $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$ (Ginzburg-Landau expansion) in order to explore the possibility of a second order phase transition. Using the gap equation for the BCS phase in the first term on the right-hand side of eq. (27) and integrating the other two terms in $`\xi `$ we get

$$\frac{gp_F^2}{2\pi ^2v_F}\mathrm{log}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}}{\mathrm{\Delta }}=\frac{gp_F^2}{2\pi ^2v_F}\frac{d\mathrm{\Omega }}{4\pi }\mathrm{arcsinh}\frac{C(\theta )}{\mathrm{\Delta }}$$
(29)
where

$$C(\theta )=\sqrt{(\delta \mu qv_F\mathrm{cos}\theta )^2\mathrm{\Delta }^2}$$
(30)
For $`\mathrm{\Delta }0`$ we get easily

$$\mathrm{log}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}}{2\delta \mu }=\frac{1}{2}_1^{+1}\mathrm{log}\left(1\frac{u}{z}\right),z=\frac{\delta \mu }{qv_F}$$
(31)
This expression is valid for $`\delta \mu `$ smaller than the value $`\delta \mu _2`$ at which $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$. Therefore the right-hand side must reach a minimum at $`\delta \mu =\delta \mu _2`$. The minimum is fixed by the condition

$$\frac{1}{z}\mathrm{tanh}\frac{1}{z}=1$$
(32)
implying

$$qv_F1.2\delta \mu $$
(33)
Putting this value back in eq. (31) we obtain

$$\delta \mu _20.754\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}$$
(34)
From the expansion of the gap equation around $`\delta \mu _2`$ it is easy to obtain

$$\mathrm{\Delta }^21.76\delta \mu _2(\delta \mu _2\delta \mu )$$
(35)
According to ref.  the difference between the grand potential in the superconducting state and in the normal state is given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{LOFF}}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{normal}}=_0^g\frac{dg}{g^2}\mathrm{\Delta }^2$$
(36)
Using eq. (18) and eq.(34) we can write

$$\frac{dg}{g^2}=\frac{\rho }{2}\frac{d\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}}{\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}}=\frac{\rho }{2}\frac{d\delta \mu _2}{\delta \mu _2}$$
(37)
Noticing that $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is zero for $`\delta \mu _2=\delta \mu `$ we are now able to perform the integral (36) obtaining

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{LOFF}}\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{normal}}0.44\rho (\delta \mu \delta \mu _2)^2$$
(38)
We see that in the window between the intersection of the BCS curve and the LOFF curve in Fig. 2 and $`\delta \mu _2`$ the LOFF phase is favored. Furthermore at the intersection there is a first order transition between the LOFF and the BCS phase. Notice that since $`\delta \mu _2`$ is very close to $`\delta \mu _1`$ the intersection point is practically given by $`\delta \mu _1`$. In Fig. 2 we show also the behaviour of the condensates. Altough the window $`(\delta \mu _1,\delta \mu _2)(0.707,0.754)\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}`$ is rather narrow, there are indications that considering the realistic case of QCD  the windows may open up. Also, for different structures than the single plane wave there is the possibility that the windows opens up .

## 3 Crystalline structures

The ground state in the LOFF phase is a superposition of states with different occupation numbers ($`N`$ even)

$$|0_{LOFF}=\underset{N}{}c_N|N$$
(39)
Therefore the general structure of the condensate in the LOFF ground state will be

$`\psi (x)\psi (x)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{N}{}}c_N^{}c_{N+2}e^{2i\stackrel{}{q}_N\stackrel{}{x}}N|\psi (x)\psi (x)|N+2`$ (40)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{N}{}}\mathrm{\Delta }_Ne^{2i\stackrel{}{q}_N\stackrel{}{x}}`$
The case considered previously corresponds to all the Cooper pairs having the same total momentum $`2\stackrel{}{q}`$. A more general situation, although not the most general, is when the vectors $`\stackrel{}{q}_N`$ reduce to a set $`\stackrel{}{q}_i`$ defining a regular crystalline structure. The corresponding coefficients $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{\stackrel{}{q}_i}`$ (linear combinations of subsets of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }_N`$’s) do not depend on the vectors $`\stackrel{}{q}_i`$ since all the vectors belong to the same orbit of the group. Furthermore all the vectors $`\stackrel{}{q}_i`$ have the same lenght  given by eq. (33). In this case

$$0|\psi (x)\psi (x)|0=\mathrm{\Delta }_q\underset{i}{}e^{2i\stackrel{}{q}_i\stackrel{}{x}}$$
(41)
This more general case has been considered in  by evaluating the grand-potential of various crystalline structures through a Ginzburg-Landau expansion, up to sixth order in the gap

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }^2+\frac{\beta }{2}\mathrm{\Delta }^4+\frac{\gamma }{3}\mathrm{\Delta }^6$$
(42)
These coefficients can be evaluated microscopically for each given crystalline structure. The procedure that the authors of ref.  have followed is to start from the gap equation represented graphically in Fig. 3.

Then, they expand the exact propagator in a series of the gap insertions as given in Fig. 4.

Inserting this expression back into the gap equation one gets the expansion illustrated in Fig. 5.

On the other hand the gap equation is obtained minimizing the grand-potential (42), i.e.

$$\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }+\beta \mathrm{\Delta }^3+\gamma \mathrm{\Delta }^5+\mathrm{}=0$$
(43)
Comparing this expression with the result of Fig. 5 one is able to derive the coefficients $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$.

In ref.  more than 20 crystalline structures have been considered, evaluating for each of them the coefficients of Eq. (42). The result of this analysis is that the face-centered cube appears to be the favored structure among the ones considered (for more details see ref. ). However it should be noticed that this result can be trusted only at $`T=0`$. In fact one knows that in the $`(\delta \mu ,T)`$ phase space, the LOFF phase has a tricritical point and that around this point the favored crystalline phase corresponds to two antipodal waves (for reviews see ). Therefore there could be various phase transitions going down in temperature as it happens in the two-dimensional case .

## 4 Phonons

QCD at high density is conveniently studied through a hierarchy of effective field theories. The starting point is the fundamental QCD lagrangian. The way of obtaining a lower energy effective lagrangian is to integrate out high-energy degrees of freedom. Polchinski  has shown that the physics is particularly simple for energies close to the Fermi energy. In particular he has shown that all the interactions are irrelevant except for a four-fermi interaction coupling pair of fermions with opposite momenta. This is nothing but the interaction giving rise to the BCS condensation. This physics can be described using the High Density Effective Theory (HDET) . In this theory the condensation effects are taken into account through the introduction of a Majorana mass term. The degrees of freedom are quasi-particles (dressed fermions), holes and gauge fields. This description is supposed to hold inside a shell around the Fermi surface of thickness $`2\delta `$ with the cutoff $`\delta `$ smaller than the Fermi energy but bigger than the condensation energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\delta E_F`$. Going at energies (measured with respect to the Fermi energy) much smaller than the gap energy $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, all the gapped particles decouple and one is left with the low energy modes as Goldstone bosons, ungapped fermions and holes and massless gauged fields according to the breaking scheme. The corresponding effective theory in the Goldstone sector can be easily formulated using standard techniques. In the case of CFL and 2SC such effective lagrangians have been given in refs.  and . The parameters of the effective lagrangian can be evaluated at each step of the hierarchy by matching the Greens functions with the ones evaluated at the upper level. The same technique will be applied in this Section to evaluate the propagation parameters of the Goldstone bosons (phonons) associated to the breaking of translational and rotational symmetries in the LOFF phase. The number and the features of the phonons depend on the particular crystalline structure. We will consider here the case of the single plane-wave  and of the face-centered cube . We will introduce the phonons as it is usual for NG bosons , that is as the phases of the condensate. Considering the case of a single plane-wave we introduce a scalar field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ through the replacement

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(\stackrel{}{x})=\mathrm{exp}^{2i\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{x}}\mathrm{\Delta }e^{i\mathrm{\Phi }(x)}\mathrm{\Delta }$$
(44)
We require that the scalar field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ acquires the following expectation value in the ground state

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(x)=2\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{x}$$
(45)
The phonon field is defined as

$$\frac{1}{f}\varphi (x)=\mathrm{\Phi }(x)2\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{x}$$
(46)
Notice that the phonon field transforms nontrivially under rotations and translations. From this it follows that non derivative terms for $`\varphi (x)`$ are not allowed. One starts with the most general invariant lagrangian for the field $`\mathrm{\Phi }(x)`$ in the low-energy limit. This cuts the expansion of $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ to the second order in the time derivative. However one may have an arbitrary number of space derivative, since from eq. (45) it follows that the space derivatives do not need to be small. Therefore

$$L_{\mathrm{phonon}}=\frac{f^2}{2}\left(\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^2+\underset{k}{}c_k\mathrm{\Phi }(\stackrel{}{}^2)^k\mathrm{\Phi }\right)$$
(47)
Using the definition (46) and keeping the space derivative up to the second order (we can make this assumption for the phonon field) we find

$$L_{\mathrm{phonon}}=\frac{1}{2}\left(\dot{\varphi }^2v_{}^2\stackrel{}{}_{}\varphi \stackrel{}{}_{}\varphi v_{}^2\stackrel{}{}_{}\varphi \stackrel{}{}_{}\varphi \right)$$
(48)
where

$$\stackrel{}{}_{}=\stackrel{}{n}(\stackrel{}{n}\stackrel{}{}),\stackrel{}{}_{}=\stackrel{}{}\stackrel{}{}_{},\stackrel{}{n}=\frac{\stackrel{}{q}}{|\stackrel{}{q}|}$$
(49)
We see that the propagation of the phonon in the crystalline medium is anisotropic.

The same kind of considerations can be made in the case of the cube. The cube is defined by 8 vectors $`\stackrel{}{q}_i`$ pointing from the origin of the coordinates to the vertices of the cube parameterized as in Fig. 6.

The condensate is given by

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(x)=\mathrm{\Delta }\underset{k=1}{\overset{8}{}}e^{2i\stackrel{}{q}_k\stackrel{}{x}}=\mathrm{\Delta }\underset{i=1,(ϵ_i=\pm )}{\overset{3}{}}e^{2i|\stackrel{}{q}|ϵ_ix_i}$$
(50)
We introduce now three scalar fields such that

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^{(i)}(x)=2|\stackrel{}{q}|x_i$$
(51)
through the substitution

$$\mathrm{\Delta }(x)\mathrm{\Delta }\underset{i=1,(ϵ_i=\pm )}{\overset{3}{}}e^{iϵ_i\mathrm{\Phi }^{(i)}(x)}$$
(52)
and the phonon fields

$$\frac{1}{f}\varphi ^{(i)}(x)=\mathrm{\Phi }^{(i)}(x)2|\stackrel{}{q}|x_i$$
(53)
Notice that the expression (52) is invariant under the symmetry group of the cube acting upon the scalar fields $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{(i)}(x)`$. This group has three invariants for the vector representation

$`I_2(\stackrel{}{X})=|\stackrel{}{X}|^2,I_4(\stackrel{}{X})=X_1^2X_2^2+X_2^2X_3^3+X_3^2X_1^2,`$
$`I_6(\stackrel{}{X})=X_1^2X_2^2X_3^2`$ (54)
Therefore the most general invariant lagrangian under rotations, translations and the symmetry group of the cube, at the lowest order in the time derivative, is

$`L_{\mathrm{phonon}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,2,3}{}}(\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^{(i)})^2`$ (55)
$`+`$ $`L_\mathrm{s}(I_2(\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Phi }^{(i)}),I_4(\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Phi }^{(i)}),I_6(\stackrel{}{}\mathrm{\Phi }^{(i)}))`$
Expanding this expression at the lowest order in the space derivatives of the phonon fields one finds

$`L_{\mathrm{phonos}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,2,3}{}}(\dot{\varphi }^{(i)})^2{\displaystyle \frac{a}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,2,3}{}}|\stackrel{}{}\varphi ^{(i)}|^2`$ (56)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,2,3}{}}(_i\varphi ^{(i)})^2c{\displaystyle \underset{i<j=1,2,3}{}}_i\varphi ^{(i)}_j\varphi ^{(j)}`$
The parameters appearing in the phonon lagrangian can be evaluated following the strategy outlined in . One starts from the QCD lagrangian and derives an effective lagrangian describing fermions close to the Fermi surface, that is at momenta such that $`pp_F`$ but $`pp_F\mathrm{\Delta }`$. The relevant degrees of freedom are the fermions dressed by the interaction, the so-called quasi-particles . Going closer to the Fermi surface the gapped quasi-particles decouple and one is left with the light modes as NG bosons, phonons and un-gapped fermions. It is possible to derive the parameters of the last description by the one in terms of quasi-particles evaluating the self-energy of the phonons (or the NG bosons) through one-loop diagrams due to fermion pairs. The couplings of the phonons to the fermions are obtained noticing that the gap acts as a Majorana mass for the quasi-particles. Therefore the couplings originate from the substitutions (44) and (52). In this way one finds the following results: for the single plane-wave

$$v_{}^2=\frac{1}{2}\left(1\left(\frac{\delta \mu }{|\stackrel{}{q}|}\right)^2\right),v_{}^2=\left(\frac{\delta \mu }{|\stackrel{}{q}|}\right)^2$$
(57)
and for the cube

$$a=\frac{1}{12},b=0,c=\frac{1}{12}\left(3\left(\frac{\delta \mu }{|\stackrel{}{q}|}\right)^21\right)$$
(58)
## 5 Astrophysical consequences

A typical phenomenon of the pulsars are the glitches (for a review see ), that is sudden jumps in the period of the star. If pulsars are neutron stars with a dense metallic crust, the effect is explained assuming that some angular momentum is stored in the vortices present in the inner neutron superfluid. When the period of the star slows down , the vortices, which are pinned to the crystalline crust, do not participate in the slowing-down until they become unstable releasing suddenly the angular momentum. Since the density in the inner of a star is a function of the radius, it results that one has a sort of laboratory to study the phase diagram of QCD at zero temperature, at least in the corresponding range of densities. A possibility is that one has a CFL state as a core of the star, then a shell in the LOFF state and eventually the exterior part made up of neutrons. Since in the CFL state the baryonic number is broken there is superfluidity. Therefore the same mechanism explained above might work with vortices in the CFL state pinned to the LOFF crystal. This could reinforce the ideas about the existence of strange stars (made of up, down and strange quarks). Considering the very narrow range of values for $`\delta \mu `$ in order to be in the LOFF phase one can ask if the previous possibility has some chance to be realized. Notice that using the typical LOFF value $`\delta \mu .75\mathrm{\Delta }_{BCS}`$ one would need values of $`\delta \mu `$ around $`15÷70MeV`$. Let us consider a very crude model of three free quarks with $`M_u=M_d=0`$, $`M_s0`$. Assuming at the core of the star a density around $`10^{15}`$ g/cm3, that is from 5 to 6 times the saturation nuclear density $`0.15\times 10^{15}`$ g/cm3, one finds for $`M_s`$ ranging between 200 and 300 $`MeV`$ corresponding values of $`\delta \mu `$ between 25 and 50 $`MeV`$. We see that these values are just in the right range for being within the LOFF window.

## Acknowledgments

I am grateful to R. Gatto, M. Mannarelli and G. Nardulli for the very pleasant scientific collaboration on the subjects discussed in this talk.


text:
# Microwave radiation induced magneto-oscillations in the longitudinal and transverse resistance of a two dimensional electron gas

## .1 Introduction

The new physics that results from subjecting a high mobility two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) to magnetic fields continues to provide new and fascinating phenomena. Among them is the recently reported observation of oscillations in the longitudinal magneto-resistance ($`\rho _{xx}`$) of a 2DEG irradiated by microwaves with frequencies in the range 5 - 100 GHz ZudovMani . These oscillations have been observed in samples with very high mobility, at moderately low temperatures $`T1K`$, and at low magnetic fields ($`\mathrm{}\omega _c\mathrm{}\omega `$). The periodicity of these oscillations is determined by the ratio of $`\mathrm{}\omega /\mathrm{}\omega _c`$, in contrast to the well established case of Shubnikow-de Haas (SdH) oscillations which they are determined by the ratio $`E_F/\mathrm{}\omega _c`$. Here, as usual: $`\mathrm{}\omega _c=\mathrm{}eB/m^{}`$ is the electron cyclotron energy, with $`m^{}`$ the electron effective mass and $`E_F`$ denotes the Fermi energy. Under strong microwave irradiation and with samples that have a sufficiently high mobility, the minima in $`\rho _{xx}`$ become transformed into “zero resistance states ” ManiZudov .

It has been proposed Ryzhii ; Durst ; Shi  that these microwave induced resistance oscillations (MIROs) can be understood in terms of an additional, microwave-induced current which flows with or against the direction of the applied electric field, depending on whether $`n1/2\omega /\omega _c<n`$ or $`n<\omega /\mathrm{}\omega _cn+1/2`$, with $`n=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$ integers. It has further been suggested that zero resistance states appear because of domain formation when the absolute conductivity becomes negative Andreev . Alternatively, this effect may reflect even more elaborate physics ManiZudov . A characteristic of the theoretical treatments is that no microwave induced changes to $`\rho _{xx}`$ are expected for $`\omega /\omega _c`$ exactly equal to 1,2,3,… Ryzhii ; Durst ; Shi . Conventional cyclotron resonance absorption, which involves direct excitations and conservation of the motion of the centre of the electron cyclotron orbit, does not result in any additional current (i.e. does not change the conductivity). The additional current appears as a result of indirect (off-diagonal) electron excitations and involves other factors, such as impurities or phonons Ryzhii ; Durst ; Shi . Therefore MIROs are not necessarily triggered by a resonant absorption process, but more likely result from non-resonant microwave-induced excitations of the 2DEG, with the modulation of $`\rho _{xx}`$ being a consequence of periodically conditions for the additional current to flow preferentially with or against the applied electric field.

Diagrammatic calculations of the changes in the conductivity tensor induced by the microwave-excited disorder-scattered electrons reproduce the main experimental trends, in particular the observed period and the phase Durst . Nevertheless, other experimental features such as the exact shape of the oscillations as a function of magnetic field EP2DSNara  and the temperature dependence of the MIROs amplitudes are not as well understood. Another puzzle is that while the theory Durst  invokes an impurity-disorder mechanism to explain the MIROs, it is found experimentally that the oscillations become more clearly pronounced as the mobility is increased and the disorder is reduced.

In this paper we address another relevant issue, whether MIROs are a unique property of the longitudinal resistance (or alternatively $`\sigma _{xx}`$) or whether they also appear in the transverse resistance $`\rho _{xy}`$. So far, MIROs have been reported exclusively in measurements of $`\rho _{xx}`$ or $`\sigma _{xx}`$ corbino . It is sometimes argued that the absence of microwave induced features in $`\rho _{xy}`$ implies that MIROs have a classical origin rather than being a many-body effect. Theoretically, it has been predicted that both $`\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\rho _{xy}`$ should be influenced by microwave irradiation and that the resistance changes $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$, at least under some approximations, should be comparable in magnitude Durst . Results are presented here that show, for the first time, that microwave induced changes, of a similar magnitude, can be observed in measurements of both $`\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\rho _{xy}`$ . It is shown that the observed oscillations in $`\rho _{xy}`$ cannot be attributed to more trivial effects, such as an admixture of $`\rho _{xy}`$ and $`\rho _{xx}`$ but rather must be associated with microwave induced oscillations in both the longitudinal conductivity $`\sigma _{xx}`$ and the transverse conductivity $`\sigma _{xy}`$. Possible consequences of our experimental findings are discussed.

## .2 Experimental

The measurements have been performed at He4 bath temperatures ($`T=1.44.2K`$), on a GaAs/AlGaAs heterojunction (grown at NRC) that had a 2DEG mobility of $`\mu =4.0\times 10^6cm^2/Vs`$ and density of $`n=1.9\times 10^{11}cm^2`$ after a brief illumination using a red LED. The sample was cleaved into a rectangular shape to form a 8x2 mm2 Hall bar and contacted at the edges using small In dots. The length-to-width ratio between potential and Hall contacts was 1.3/2.

An Anritsu 69377B Signal Generator (operating at 0.01-50 GHz, with typical output power of a few mW) was used as the source of microwaves(MWs). They were delivered into the cryostat through a semirigid 0.085 inch coaxial cable which had a typical attenuation factor of 6-10dB near 50GHz. The cable was terminated with a small antenna used to irradiate the sample which was mounted a few millimeters away. A small cylindrical cavity of MW absorbing material was constructed around the sample to suppress any cavity modes produced by metallic components of the cryostat. The (perpendicular) magnetic fields produced by the superconducting magnet were carefully calibrated using NMR and Hall effect probes and were checked by measuring the EPR signal of DPPH powder mounted on a thermoresistor. Longitudinal and transverse resistances of the 2DEG were measured using standard AC techniques, (at 15Hz and with measuring currents $`1\mu A`$). The data presented is the difference, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho `$, between resistivities measured for two identical field sweeps with and without the application of MWs.

## .3 Results and discussion

Representative experimental traces of the longitudinal magnetoresistance under microwave radiation are shown in Fig.1a for different powers, Fig.1b for different frequencies, and Fig.1c for different temperatures. The data in Fig.1 is very similar that previously reported for other MIROs ZudovMani ; ManiZudov  (although the mobility of the sample used here was too low to achieve “zero resistance” states), and confirms again that phenomena is universal, independent of the source of the sample. Each $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ trace is plotted against the dimensionless parameter $`\omega /\omega _c`$, i.e., the ratio of microwave to cyclotron frequency, assuming the cyclotron mass, $`m^{}=0.067m_e`$. In agreement with previous observations ZudovMani ; ManiZudov , $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ is found to be an oscillatory function of the inverse magnetic field, with the fundamental period $`\mathrm{\Delta }(1/B)=(1/B)(\omega _c/\omega )`$. It is apparent from Fig. 1 that the oscillations are damped by increasing temperature and by decreasing magnetic field, microwave power or microwave frequency. The dependence of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ on the magnetic field can be roughly described as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}=A\mathrm{exp}(D_M/\mathrm{}\omega _c)\mathrm{sin}(2\pi \omega /\omega _c)$$
(1)
with a phase corresponding to a positive coefficient A. The damping parameter $`D_M`$ is relatively insensitive to microwave power or frequency. We find that $`D_M`$ 0.3meV at $`T=1.64K`$ and increases somewhat at higher temperatures. While Eq.(1) provides a good description of the higher order oscillations there are deviations around the fundamental cyclotron resonance (n=1); the exact positions of the maxima and minima in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ become sensitive to the experimental parameters such as microwave power and temperature. This may be associated with the effect of the cyclotron resonance which can produce significant changes in the dielectric function of the 2DEG. The most robust and well defined feature of the MIROs are the positions of the zeros in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ that occur when $`\omega /\omega _c=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$. This is in agreement with theoretical predictions Ryzhii ; Durst ; Shi .

The standard expression for the amplitude of the SdH oscillations is Coleridge :

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}=4\rho _0D_{th}(X_T)\mathrm{exp}(\pi /\omega _c\tau _q)$$
(2)
where the thermal damping factor, $`D_{th}`$, is given by $`X_T/\mathrm{sinh}(X_T)`$ with $`X_T=2\pi ^2kT/\mathrm{}\omega _c`$ and where $`\tau _q`$ is the quantum lifetime.

If the SdH oscillations in $`\rho _{xx}`$ (see for example figure 2) are analysed using this expression the damping is dominated by $`D_{th}`$ and no oscillations are visible in the low field region when the MIROs appear. However, measurements at lower temperatures (below 100mK) in another sample cut from the same wafer, show SdH oscillations to below .05 T which can be used to extract a value for $`\tau _q`$ of approximately 10ps. This corresponds to a damping coefficient $`\pi \mathrm{}/\tau _q`$ of 0.27 meV, essentially identical to the coefficient $`D_M`$ obtained above for the MIROs.

At 0.1 tesla, $`\tau _q`$ = 10ps corresponds to a (Gaussian) Landau level broadening parameter of order 0.04 meV compared with the cyclotron spacing of 0.17 meV footnote2 . Therefore, despite the fact that thermal blurring of the distribution function suppresses the observation of the SdH oscillations at higher temperatures a well-defined Landau level structure still exists in the density of states. Furthermore, the damping of the MIROs appears to be the same as the disorder broadening of the Landau levels. This explains why MIROs can only be observed in very high mobility 2DEG samples where a well defined Landau level structure persists in the very low fields corresponding to $`\omega _c/\omega 1`$.

For conventional SdH oscillations convolution of the Fermi function with the density of states produces a strong thermal degradation of the oscillations but this appears not to be the case for MIRO’s. One explanation for this might be that the normal role of the Fermi function in producing a thermal smearing is masked by a stronger perturbation of the distribution function induced by the microwave radiation. It is only at higher temperatures (above about 1.5K) that the Fermi function can cause additional thermal smearing and give rise to a temperature dependent $`D_M`$.

In the following section we show that MIROs are not only evident in the longitudinal resistance but can be also observed in the Hall (transverse) resistance $`\rho _{xy}`$. This can be seen in Fig. 2, which illustrates the result of simultaneous measurements of $`\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\rho _{xy}`$ (right scale) and the MW induced deviations $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$ (left axis). Despite the noise in the $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$ trace it is clear that microwaves affect both resistances, and that the amplitudes of the two sets of oscillations are very similar. The noise is relatively large because the high mobility of the sample means $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}/\rho _{xy}`$ is of order 100 times smaller than $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}/\rho _{xx}`$ when MIROs are observed so the inevitable errors associated with taking differences between large numbers become much more important for $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$.

Note that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$, like $`\rho _{xy}`$, changes sign in reversed magnetic fields. This means the observation of MIROs in $`\rho _{xy}`$ cannot be attributed to a trivial admixture of $`\rho _{xx}`$ into the $`\rho _{xy}`$ signal, due for example to misaligned contacts. The absolute sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$ depends on a sign convention but the fact that the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}/\rho _{xy}`$ is the opposite to the sign of $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ is an unambiguous experimental observation that can be tested against theory.

Simple quantitative arguments can also to made to confirm that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$ do not just reflect changes in $`\sigma _{xx}`$ exclusively. If the standard expressions are used for inverting the conductivities (viz. $`\rho _{xx}=\sigma _{xx}/(\sigma _{xx}^2+\sigma _{xy}^2)`$ and $`\rho _{xy}=\sigma _{xy}/(\sigma _{xx}^2+\sigma _{xy}^2)`$) then it is straightforward to show that a small change in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\sigma _{xx}`$ will produce changes in $`\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\rho _{xy}`$ related by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}=\frac{2K}{1K^2}\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ where K = $`\rho _{xx}/\rho _{xy}`$. While this gives the correct (observed) phase relationship between the two terms K is typically 0.02 so under the actual experimental conditions $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$ is predicted 20 times smaller than $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$, in sharp contrast to the experimental results which show the ratio is actually about 2. An equivalent calculation shows, likewise, that the observed oscillations in $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$ cannot result from changes in $`\sigma _{xy}`$ alone. We therefore conclude that both $`\sigma _{xx}`$ and $`\sigma _{xy}`$ are independently influenced by microwaves. The results in Fig.2 showing $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$ oscillating in anti-phase correspond, for example, to an increase (decrease) in effective electron concentration when the longitudinal conductivity ,$`\sigma _{xx}`$, increases (decreases). A theoretical determination of the phase relationship between $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$ has not yet been addressed directly Durst .

## .4 Conclusions

In conclusion, we have confirmed the observation of microwave induced magneto-oscillations (MIROs) in the longitudinal resistance of a 2DEG with a periodicity defined by the ratio of microwave to cyclotron frequencies ZudovMani ; ManiZudov .

Our results indicate that a necessary condition for the observation of these oscillations is a pronounced modulation of the electronic density of states (Landau levels), in general agreement with predictions of existing theoretical models Ryzhii ; Durst ; Shi .

The temperature dependent damping of MIROs is very different from the thermal damping of the Shubnikov-de Haas oscillations. It is not clear whether this is related to a temperature dependence of the Landau level broadening or some other mechanism. Experiments to address this issue are in progress.

If MIROs are due to the scattering by impurities of microwave-excited electrons but at the same time require a pronounced modulation in the density of states, a subtle criteria would exist for optimum sample quality. It would be interesting to check this if even higher mobility samples become available. However, phonon-assisted processes may also play a role EP2DSNara  and effects resulting from the interplay between one-particle and collective excitations in the 2DEG Raman  should also not be neglected. More experiments, and in particular complementary microwave absorption measurements, are needed to achieve a better understanding of this fascinating phenomena.

The major new result reported here is that MIROs are not only present in the longitudinal resistance but can also be observed in the transverse component of the magneto-resistance. This is a non-trivial effect and requires that $`\sigma _{xx}`$ and $`\sigma _{xy}`$ both oscillate independently. The relative phase of the $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xx}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\rho _{xy}`$ oscillations experiment remains to be compared to theoretical predictions.

## .5 Acknowledgements

S.A.S and A.S. acknowledge support of The Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIAR).