text:
# Angular distribution of photoluminescence as a probe of Bose Condensation of trapped excitons

## Abstract

Recent experiments on two-dimensional exciton systems have shown the excitons collect in shallow in-plane traps. We find that Bose condensation in a trap results in a dramatic change of the exciton photoluminescence (PL) angular distribution. The long-range coherence of the condensed state gives rise to a sharply focussed peak of radiation in the direction normal to the plane. By comparing the PL profile with and without Bose Condensation we provide a simple diagnostic for the existence of a Bose condensate. The PL peak has strong temperature dependence due to the thermal order parameter phase fluctuations across the system. The angular PL distribution can also be used for imaging vortices in the trapped condensate. Vortex phase spatial variation leads to destructive interference of PL radiation in certain directions, creating nodes in the PL distribution that imprint the vortex configuration.

The possibility of Bose condensation in two-dimensional exciton systems, such as coupled quantum wells, has been actively investigated recently . The interest in these systems is caused by relatively long recombination times that should make it possible to create a sufficiently cold system at high density, and thereby reach the condensation transition point. Further, their two dimensional nature leads to a repulsive interaction, disfavouring the formation of biexcitons. It was proposed that the condensation of excitons can be facilitated in the presence of in-plane traps . Since the temperature of the exciton gas depends on the intensity of the laser used to pump excitons, it is advantageous if the excitons can reach critical density at lower pumping power. By collecting excitons in a trap, a lower total flux of excitons and hence a lower pumping power is required. Small traps of micron size arising due to ambient disorder  (see also ), as well as more shallow traps ca. hundred microns wide created artificially by stress  have been considered.

The density distribution of excitons in such relatively shallow traps (of the order of $`1\mathrm{meV}/\mu \mathrm{m}`$) changes very little through the condensation transition. Thus, in contrast with the cold atom systems, the direct spatial imaging of density is not expected to provide dramatic evidence for condensation. The principal manifestations of Bose condensation discussed to date include changes in PL spectrum  and exciton recombination rate .

In this work, we demonstrate that PL angular distribution can be used as a sensitive probe of Bose condensation in a trap. For excitons confined to move in a plane, in recombination momentum conservation perpendicular to this plane is relaxed. The intensity of radiation at a particular angle is therefore controlled by the distribution of in plane momenta of the excitons. Bose condensation produces large occupation of the state with zero velocity, thereby creating a peak in the momentum distribution, which gives rise to a sharp peak in the PL angular profile. Well below the transition, once the long-range order in the condensate extends across the entire exciton cloud in trap, the phases of the condensate order parameter become correlated throughout the cloud. This makes the PL radiation from different parts of the cloud fully coherent, and thus focussed in a cone with opening angle ca. $`\lambda _{\mathrm{rad}}/L`$, with $`\lambda _{\mathrm{rad}}`$ the optical wavelength and $`L`$ the cloud size.

To extract the PL angular profile, we consider dipole radiation of excitons, with momentum conservation perpendicular to the plane relaxed ,

$`I(𝐤_{})N_{\mathrm{ex}}(𝐤_{})\rho _{\mathrm{ph}}(𝐤_{},k_0)\left|f\left|𝐤_{}.\widehat{𝐩}\right|i\right|^2`$ (1)
where $`k_0=2\pi /\lambda _{\mathrm{rad}}`$ is photon wavenumber, $`N_{\mathrm{ex}}(𝐤_{})`$ is the number of excitons with momentum $`𝐤_{}`$, $`\rho _{\mathrm{ph}}(𝐤_{},k_0)`$ the photon density of states, and $`|i`$ and $`|f`$ represent the initial and final electronic states. After $`|𝐤_{}|`$ is expressed in terms of the angle $`\theta `$ to the plane normal, $`|𝐤_{}|=k_0\mathrm{sin}\theta `$, the photon density of states and matrix element give a factor $`(1+\mathrm{cos}^2\theta )/\mathrm{cos}\theta `$.

The momentum distribution of excitons depends on the state of the Bose gas:

$$N_{\mathrm{ex}}(𝐤_{})=|\psi (𝐤_{})|^2=\underset{𝐫,𝐫^{}}{}\psi ^{}(𝐫)\psi (𝐫^{})e^{i𝐤_{}.(𝐫𝐫^{})}$$
(2)
We model the system as a gas of interacting bosons moving in an external trap potential $`V(r)`$,

$$H[\psi ]=\left[\psi ^{}\left(\frac{^2}{2m}+V(𝐫)\mu \right)\psi +\frac{\lambda }{2}\left|\psi \right|^4\right]d^2𝐫$$
(3)
where $`\lambda `$ is a momentum independent interaction.

In the Thomas-Fermi approximation , with the system energy being a functional of local density only, one can look for the minimum of the energy (3) with the gradient term omitted. For an harmonic trap $`V(𝐫)=\frac{1}{2}\alpha 𝐫^2`$ containing $`N`$ particles, this gives a parabolic distribution

$$\left|\psi (𝐫)\right|^2=\frac{2N}{\pi R^4}(R^2𝐫^2),R=\left(\frac{4\lambda N}{\pi \alpha }\right)^{1/4},$$
(4)
while $`\psi _{|𝐫|>R}=0`$. The momentum space profile is

$$N_{\mathrm{ex}}(𝐤)=8\pi R^2N\left(\frac{\mathrm{sin}kR}{(kR)^3}\frac{\mathrm{cos}kR}{(kR)^2}\right)^2$$
(5)
(for brevity, from here on we use $`𝐤𝐤_{}`$). Oscillations in the expression (5) result from the sharp edge of the Thomas-Fermi distribution (4).

The momentum distribution (5) will produce a sharp peak in the PL angular profile if $`R>\lambda _{\mathrm{rad}}`$. For the indirect exciton line $`\lambda _{\mathrm{rad}}800\mathrm{nm}`$ . By either considering the capacitance of such a device, or the momentum independent part of the Fourier transform of the interaction, we estimate that $`\lambda =e^2d/ϵ7.0\mathrm{nm}^2\mathrm{eV}`$ where $`d5\mathrm{nm}`$ is the inter-well spacing and $`ϵ`$ the dielectric constant in GaAs.

A characteristic scale for the trap potential is $`\alpha 10^{12}\mathrm{eV}\mathrm{nm}^2`$ (i.e. $`\mathrm{\Delta }V=0.1\mathrm{meV}`$ for $`\mathrm{\Delta }r=10\mu \mathrm{m}`$, ). With these values, since the Thomas-Fermi radius $`R1.5N^{1/4}\mu \mathrm{m}`$, a peak should be visible even for small particle numbers.

The PL radiation geometry schematic and the peak, along with its temperature dependence discussed below, are shown in Fig.1.

The Bose condensation temperature can be estimated from the noninteracting model , $`T_{\mathrm{BEC}}=\mathrm{}\sqrt{\alpha N/gm}`$, with $`g=4`$ the exciton degeneracy factor. Alternatively, since in a strongly interacting system the density change for $`T<T_{\mathrm{BEC}}`$ is small, $`T_{\mathrm{BEC}}`$ can be estimated from the degeneracy temperature at the density $`\rho _{\mathrm{max}}`$ of the centre of the Thomas-Fermi profile, giving

$$T_{\mathrm{BEC}}=\frac{2\pi \mathrm{}^2}{m}\sqrt{\frac{N\alpha }{\lambda }}0.02\sqrt{N}[\mathrm{K}]$$
(6)
(for exciton mass $`m=0.21m_e`$, the value $`m/2\pi \mathrm{}^2=0.438\mathrm{nm}^2\mathrm{eV}^1`$). The two figures for $`T_{\mathrm{BEC}}`$ only differ by about a factor of $`2`$, because $`\sqrt{\lambda m/2\pi \mathrm{}^2}2`$. With $`N=10^4`$ we obtain $`T_{\mathrm{BEC}}2\mathrm{K}`$. (This corresponds to an exciton density of $`10^4\mathrm{nm}^2`$, comfortably within the dilute limit.)

The angular PL profile of the condensate changes in an interesting way in the presence of vortices. Here we study the momentum distribution for a condensate with $`n`$ vortices, and show that the vortices are ‘imaged’ by the nodes in $`𝐤`$-space. Consider the condensate (4) containing $`n`$ vortices. Using the complex variable $`z=x+iy`$ in the plane to write the phase factors due to the vortices located at the points $`z_j`$, we have

$$\psi _n(𝐫)=\psi _0(𝐫)\mathrm{exp}\left(i\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}\mathrm{arg}(zz_j)\right)$$
(7)
with $`\psi _0`$ defined by (4). Vortices give rise to nodes in the Fourier transform of $`\psi _n(𝐫)`$ and thereby in the momentum distribution $`N_{\mathrm{ex}}(𝐤)`$ (2). There is a one-to-one relation between the configuration of the nodes in $`N_{\mathrm{ex}}(𝐤)`$ and the vortex positions. Before discussing the more complicated case of phase vortices (7), it is instructive to look at an example of a condensate function of the form

$$\psi _n(z)=A\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}(zz_j)\mathrm{exp}\left(\overline{z}z/2R^2\right)$$
(8)
describing $`n`$ ‘vortices’ with both the amplitude and phase varying in space. In this case the configuration of nodes in the momentum distribution is a very simple one. Evaluating the Fourier transform, we represent the polynomial $`_{j=1}^n(zz_j)`$ as a differential operator, and obtain

$`\psi _n(𝐤)`$ $`=`$ $`2\pi A{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(2i_{\overline{k}}z_j)\mathrm{exp}\left(R^2\overline{k}k/2\right)`$ (9)
$`=`$ $`2\pi A{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(iR^2kz_j)\mathrm{exp}\left(R^2\overline{k}k/2\right)`$ (10)
with the complex variable $`k=k_x+ik_y`$. This expression has $`n`$ nodes at the points

$$k_j=iz_j/R^2,j=1,\mathrm{},n,$$
(11)
arranged in exactly the same way as vortices in real space, albeit rotated by $`90^{}`$ in a clockwise direction.

Remarkably, the property that the pattern of the nodes in momentum distribution is a replica of the vortex arrangement, appears to be generic. Although the replica is exact only for ‘vortices’ of the form (8) and Gaussian density profiles, all the qualitative features hold also for the phase vortices (7). As an illustration, we consider a single phase vortex (7) located some distance $`x`$ away from trap center. As can be seen in Fig. 2, in this case there is exactly one node in momentum distribution, shifted off center by a distance that increases with $`x`$. The node displacement orientation is at a $`90^{}`$ angle relative to the vortex displacement. A similar observation can be made for two vortices (Fig. 3a).

Also, we consider the configuration of nodes in $`N_{\mathrm{ex}}(𝐤)`$ corresponding to a vortex array of the form (7). Approximately, the nodes in this case also form a $`90^{}`$-rotated array, with the distortion being a function of the inter-vortex spacing (Fig. 3b,c).

Let us now turn to the discussion of finite temperature effects. At non-zero temperatures, in the presence of density and phase fluctuations, $`\psi =\sqrt{\rho +\pi }e^{i\phi }`$, we construct a perturbation theory in $`\pi `$, $`\phi `$. As discussed by Hohenberg and Fisher , who considered the perturbation expansion for weakly non-ideal Bose gas, this is only strictly valid at very low densities, $`\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{ln}(1/na^2))1`$. Their renormalisation group analysis however suggests that no other interactions are relevant.

There are three temperature regimes, a low temperature part dominated by phase fluctuations, a free particle like regime, and a vortex dominated regime near the transition temperature. We consider only the phase fluctuations: it will become clear in a moment that the temperature dependence of the PL peak is predominantly due to the phase fluctuation effects. In this case, equation (2) becomes:

$$N_{\mathrm{ex}}(𝐤)=\underset{𝐫,𝐫^{}}{}(\rho (𝐫)\rho (𝐫^{}))^{1/2}e^{\frac{1}{2}D_{𝐫,𝐫^{}}}e^{i𝐤(𝐫𝐫^{})}$$
(12)
with $`D_{𝐫,𝐫^{}}=\left(\phi (𝐫)\phi (𝐫^{})\right)^2`$. The phase fluctuations are determined by the energy functional

$$H[\phi ]=\frac{\rho (𝐫)}{2m}\left(\phi (𝐫)\right)^2d^2𝐫$$
(13)
so that the Green’s function $`G(𝐫,𝐫^{})=\phi (𝐫)\phi (𝐫^{})`$ obeys

$$\frac{\beta }{m}\left(\rho (𝐫)G(𝐫,𝐫^{})\right)=\delta (𝐫𝐫^{})$$
(14)
For a uniform density profile the solution is

$$\frac{1}{2}\left(\phi (𝐫)\phi (𝐫^{})\right)^2=\frac{m}{2\pi \beta \rho }\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{|𝐫𝐫^{}|}{\xi _T}\right)$$
(15)
with the thermal length $`\xi _T=(\lambda \rho /4m)^{1/2}/k_\mathrm{B}T`$ corresponding to the energy cutoff in the Planck distribution of phase fluctuations.

One can use this result to estimate the fluctuation effect for the trapped gas. It is convenient to rewrite the logarithm so as to identify a separation dependent and an equal point term,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(G(𝐫^{},𝐫^{})+G(𝐫,𝐫)2G(𝐫,𝐫^{})\right)=`$ (16)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{m}{2\pi \beta \rho }}\left(\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\xi _T}{R}}\right)\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{|𝐫𝐫^{}|}{R}}\right)\right)`$ (17)
We consider in particular the case where $`𝐫`$ and $`𝐫^{}`$ are well separated, so $`G(𝐫,𝐫^{})`$ is small compared to $`G(𝐫,𝐫)`$. (The typical separation $`𝐫𝐫^{}`$ in Eq.(12) is of the order of the cloud radius $`R`$.) In this case

$$N_{\mathrm{ex}}(𝐤)=\left|\sqrt{\rho (𝐫)}e^{\frac{1}{2}G(𝐫,𝐫)}e^{i𝐤.𝐫}d^2𝐫\right|^2$$
(18)
Physically, this result means that the phase fluctuations are dominated by the equal point contribution, which allows one to make a local density approximation in Eq.(16) and write $`G(𝐫,𝐫)=(m/2\pi \beta \rho (𝐫))\mathrm{ln}(R/\xi _T)`$.

Let us now discuss the phase fluctuations more systematically, and verify the local density approximation. We shall consider the condensate in an harmonic trap. Returning to (14), rescaling $`𝐫=R𝐭`$, and using $`𝐭`$ as a new variable, $`\rho (t)=\rho _0(1t^2)`$, we write the solution to (14) as a sum of angular modes,

$$G(𝐭,𝐭^{})=\frac{m}{\beta \rho _0}\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}g_l(t,t^{})e^{il(\theta \theta ^{})}$$
(19)
The equation for mode $`l`$ has the form:

$$t^2(1t^2)\frac{d^2g_l}{dt^2}+t(13t^2)\frac{dg_l}{dt}l^2(1t^2)g=t\delta (tt^{})$$

The substitutions $`g_l(t)=t^{\pm l}f(t)`$ and $`y=t^2`$ show this is the hypergeometric equation , the general solution is

$$g_l(t,t^{})=t_<^lh_{+l}(t_<)\left[t_>^lh_{+l}(t_>)t_>^lh_l(t_>)\right]$$
(20)
where $`h`$ is an hypergeometric function:

$$h_\pm (t)=F(a,b,c;t^2),a+b=c=1\pm l,ab=\pm l/2$$

and $`t_<`$($`t_>`$) correspond to the smaller(larger) of $`t,t^{}`$.

As $`tt^{}`$, the value of $`G`$ is dominated by the large $`l`$ terms, for which the functions $`h_\pm (t)`$ tend to $`1/\sqrt{2|l|(1t^2)}`$ and so we can consider the terms:

$$g_l(t+ϵ,tϵ)=\frac{1}{1t^2}\frac{1}{2l}\left[t^{2l}\left\{1+𝒪\left(ϵ^2\right)\right\}+\left(1\frac{2lϵ}{t}\right)\right]$$

The second of the terms in brackets gives a divergence as $`ϵ0`$, of the form

$`\underset{ϵ0}{lim}G(t+ϵ,tϵ)`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m}{\pi \beta \rho _0(1t^2)}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2l}}\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ}{t}}\right)^{2l}`$ (21)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m}{2\pi \beta \rho (t)}}\mathrm{ln}\left({\displaystyle \frac{2ϵ}{t}}\right)`$ (22)
This matches both the nature of the divergence, and the pre-factor ($`m/2\pi \beta \rho `$) seen in equation (16), and supports the local density approximation (18) for a finite system, with $`\rho `$ replaced by $`\rho (𝐫)`$.

From the asymptotes of the trapped gas Green’s functions (21), cutting the logarithmic divergence with the thermal length, the expression for momentum distribution due to far separated excitons (18) becomes:

$$N_{ex}(𝐤_{})=\left|\left(\frac{\lambda \rho (𝐫)}{mR^2T^2}\right)^{mT/2\pi \rho (𝐫)}\sqrt{\rho (𝐫)}e^{i\mathrm{𝐤𝐫}}d^2𝐫\right|^2$$
(23)
This expression has the form of replacing the condensate density with a “coherent particle density”,

$$\rho (𝐫)\rho (𝐫)\left(\frac{\rho (𝐫)}{\rho _B}\right)^{\rho _A/\rho (𝐫)}$$
(24)
For an harmonic trap, with the numbers discussed above,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _A}{\rho _0}}={\displaystyle \frac{mk_\mathrm{B}T}{8\pi \mathrm{}^2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \lambda }{2\alpha N}}}30\times {\displaystyle \frac{T[\mathrm{K}]}{\sqrt{N}}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _0}{\rho _B}}={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha 2\pi \mathrm{}^2}{m(k_\mathrm{B}T)^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{10^2}{T[\mathrm{K}]}}\right)^2`$
The temperature dependence of the PL peak is shown in Fig.1. Qualitatively, the peak is suppressed at

$$T>T_{}=T_{\mathrm{BEC}}/\mathrm{ln}(R/\xi _T)$$
(25)
i.e. well below the condensation transition.

In summary, we propose that the angular profile of PL can be used as a diagnostic of Bose condensation in 2D exciton traps. A peak in the emission in a direction normal to the 2D plane appears due to long-range phase coherence in the condensate, at temperatures for which the coherence length exceeds the wavelength of the emitted radiation. The distribution of PL radiation in the peak is sensitive to the presence of phase textures in the condensate. In particular, vortices are imaged by the nodes in the PL angular profile.

We are grateful to L.V. Butov and B.D. Simons for useful discussions, and also for support from the Cambridge-MIT institute and the EU network “Photon-Mediated phenomena in semiconductor nanostructures” HPRN-CT-2002-00298. The NHMFL is supported by the National Science Foundation, the state of Florida and the US Department of Energy.


format: text

text:
# Collisions between carbonaceous grains in the interstellar medium

## 1 Introduction

Strong collisions between IS (InterStellar) dust grains are commonly expected to alter significantly, if not outright determine, the grain size distribution, mainly by destroying big grains thereby creating small ones, but perhaps also by creating large grains through coagulation of smaller ones (see Wickramasinghe wic67 (1967), Bierman and Harwitt bier80 (1980), Spitzer spi78 (1978)). If grain destruction is predominant in the ISM (IS Medium), then, grains larger than 1000 Å are expected to be almost depleted; since they are observed to be quite abundant, the far-reaching conclusion may also be drawn, that grains must also be able to grow even in such a tenuous environment (see Boulanger and Cox bou98 (1998); Miville-Deschenes et al. miv02 (2002)). Also, if collisions induce vaporization, new molecules can be created, thus contributing to the rich population of observed molecules in the ISM. Finally, even if shattering does not occur upon collision, intense heating may cause structural changes in the grains. These expectations are significant enough to have triggered a lasting interest in grain collisions for at least half a century (see Salpeter sal74 (1974); Barlow and Silk bar77 (1977); Cowie cow78 (1978); Spitzer spi78 (1978) and Draine and Salpeter dra79 (1979)) and produced a large body of literature. Since grains of relevant size are very difficult to produce, handle and accelerate in the laboratory, it is not surprising that this literature is essentially theoretical in nature, although, of course, it does rely upon whatever experimental results are available.

Earlier treatments considered vaporization to be the dominant result of grain collisions, and to be complete beyond the relative velocity at which the projectile kinetic energy was equal to the total dissociation energy. Assuming the collision is totally inelastic and all the kinetic energy is available for dissociation, this velocity is independent of grain size and estimated at 3 km/s for icy dielectrics up to 8 km/s for iron particles (Spitzer spi78 (1978)). More recent papers on the subject have relied upon condensed-state shock theory in order to predict effects of grain collisions (see Borkowski and Dwek bor95 (1995), Tielens et al. tie94 (1994), Seab seab90 (1990)). This approach enhances shattering and fragmentation over vaporization, with a consequent lowering of grain destruction threshold down to relative grain velocities of about 1 km/s, and complete target disruption at 100 km/s. Admittedly, however, such treatments apply best to macroscopic bodies and are not easily extended to the grains of interest here. Moreover, little data is available on shocks in materials similar to those that are thought to be the constituents of IS grains.

The theoretical and experimental obstacles encountered in the field of small grain collisions, even outside the realm of astronomy, and the development of material and chemical computation software have prompted a flurry of numerical simulations which shed a striking new light on the subject (see Cleveland and Landeman cle92 (1992); Schulte schu95 (1995); Aoki et al. aok97 (1997)). Of course,because of limitations on available computer memory, this approach is best suited to relatively small systems, but these are precisely those we are interested in. Moreover, the composition and structure of the interacting systems may be tailored to suit the problem at hand. Also, various relevant microscopic phenomena can be followed quantitatively in time and space with exquisite detail: atomic adsorption, abstraction and implantation, molecule formation, grain cratering, shattering or vaporization, etc (see Davenas dav93 (1993)). Again, by contrast with shock theory, which subsumes thermal quasi-equilibrium, the time scales of computations can be short enough (10-16s) to accomodate the out-of-equilibrium phenomena that are expected to occur upon high-velocity impacts of small systems.

These potentialities are taken advantage of to revisit grain collisions in the present paper. The scope here is limited to carbonaceous material similar to the presently envisioned constituent of IS grains: partly aromatic (6- and 5-C rings), partly aliphatic (C-H chains) and more or less hydrogenated. Their sizes range from 1 to 60 atoms and their velocities from 1 to 300 km/s. The penetration range of *single* C and H atoms in this material is first determined as a function of impact velocity. This already gives some insight into the mechanism and extent of material destruction upon collision. More quantitatively, a cross-section for bond dissociation, and the corresponding threshold, are determined as a function of impact velocity.

Impacts of *clusters* of the same model material are then analyzed, which provides the average dissociation energy of the material, as well as rudimentary statistics of product sizes. These results are finally used to estimate the ranges of grain size and velocity in which strong size modifications are to be expected. Generally speaking, these estimates are less pessimistic than is usually the case for the survival of C-rich grains in the ISM. However, no discussion is offered here of the detailed effects of collisions on grain size distributions.

## 2 Designing the collision experiment

A description of the software package used for simulation can be found in Papoular (pap02 (2002)). The particular code used here is AM1 (Austin Model 1), as proposed by Dewar et al. (dew85 (1985)). This semi-empirical method combines a rigorous quantum-mechanical formalism with empirical parameters obtained from comparison with experimental results. It computes approximate solutions of Schroedinger’s equation, and uses experimental data only when the Q.M. calculations are too difficult or too lengthy. This makes it more accurate than poor ab initio methods, and faster than any of the latter.

First, a molecule of the desired composition, structural type and size is built on the computer screen by picking each atom in turn from a table of elements. The code is then used to optimize the molecular geometry, i.e. determine the nearest architecture which minimizes the total potential energy of the system. Here, the initial spatial distribution of atoms was chosen so that, upon optimization, the structure included short chains as well as 5- and 6-membered rings of carbon atoms. Hydrogen atoms were then added randomly to simulate partial hydrogenation. At the end of the process, the distances between atoms are indeed those expected for hydrocarbons. The process is repeated to form the second reactant cluster of the collision. The cluster sizes adopted here are a compromise between computational time and relevance to real IS dust.

Then, the reactants are set at an initial distance such that interaction between them is negligible: more than 3 Å. Finally, one of them, the projectile, is given, as a whole, the desired velocity towards the other, the target; the latter is given velocity 0 and the calculation is started. In the example of fig. 1, the target is a 60-atom cluster and the projectile, on its right side, is comprised of a single C atom.

The molecular dynamics relies on the Born-Oppenheimer approximation to determine the movements of atoms under nuclear and electronic forces due to their environment; the calculation is made by steps of 10-4 ps and 10-3 ps respectively for high and low relative velocies. At every step, all the system parameters are memorized as snapshots so that, after completion of the run, a movie of the collision can be viewed on the screen, and the trajectory of any atom followed all along. This makes for a better understanding of the details of destruction mechanisms and outcomes. Note that the dynamics of bond dissociations can only be simulated by using Unrestricted Hartree-Fock (UHF) wave functions in the Q.M. part of the calculation (see Szabo and Ostlund sza89 (1989)).

## 3 Atomic carbon projectile

A projectile made of a single C atom, as in fig.1, is a good start since it is easier to follow its trajectory and energy after it hits the target. Also, its behaviour already encapsulates the main features of grain collisions for, at the high velocities of interest here, the translational energy of a projectile atom is much larger than its binding energy, so that, even if it is part of a cluster, it behaves nearly independantly of its neighbours.

At the beginning of each numerical experiment in this series, the target will be set at rest and the projectile, a few angstroms away, will be given a velocity $`V_\mathrm{i}`$ towards the target. Since gaseous flows in the ISM usually enforce relative velocities between grains, $`V_\mathrm{i}`$ will be taken as the main control parameter rather than the kinetic energy. $`V_\mathrm{i}`$ will be expressed in units of Å/ps (0.1 km/s). It is found that, for $`V_\mathrm{i}`$ $``$100 Å/ps, the C atom most often simply sticks onto the nearest “acceptor” site in the target. This is a result of the strong reactivity of atomic carbon, which has four dangling (free) bonds, as well as of the reactivity of the target, whose carbon bonds are not all saturated with hydrogen. In such a sticking event, the target structure is hardly modified, except, perhaps, for the displacement of one of its hydrogen atoms. Incidentally, this sticking process is also an elementary step in the process of grain growth. Not being interested, at this time, in events of this type, we now focus on the velocity range beyond 100 Å/ps (10 km/s). Note that at this velocity a C atom carries a kinetic energy of 6.24 eV, somewhat higher than the bond energy in hydrocarbons. By way of comparison, Salpeter (sal74 (1974)) set the threshold velocity for *sputtering* by heavy atoms at $``$30 km/s.

Figure 2 applies to the case of $`V_0`$=1000 Å/ps (100 km/s). Plotted as a function of time are the kinetic energy of the projectile (a), that of the target (c), and the *variation* of the target potential energy (b), throughout the “reaction”. The interpretation of these curves is made easier if, after the computer run, the accelerated motion of the computation is replayed on the screen and snapshots of the system are taken at characteristic times along the x-axis of fig. 2. It is found that the projectile hits the target at t=0.0025 ps and leaves it at t=0.01 ps, after describing an irregular trajectory about 7 Å in length. Large path deviations occur at 0.0039 and 0.0085 ps, when the projectile experiences a close encounter with a C atom of the target. In such events, the projectile is strongly decelarated but soon recovers most of its velocity because, in the present range of velocities, the dominant interaction with the target atoms is a “quasi-elastic” recoil of nuclei (see Sigmund sig69 (1969)). Hence the dips in projectile K.E. (kinetic energy). Correspondingly, the target momentarily gains P.E. (potential energy): peaks of curves (a) and (b) are of opposite signs. However, all the while the projectile is inside the target, the general trend is a reduction of its velocity as it loses energy to bordering target atoms in the form of momentum. Hence the initial rise in target K.E. (curve c). Part of this gain is readily converted to target P.E, leading to a concomitant rise in curve (b). For impact parameters such that the energy transferred from projectile to target atom is larger than the bond energy, part of this energy goes into breaking a bond, and the rest into translational and rotational K.E., as well as internal energy (vibrational K.E. and P.E. and, possibly, deformation or restructuring energy) of the fragments produced. Hence the small bumps of opposite signs in curves (b) and (c), accompanying the large recoil peaks.

In the end, only about 30 % of the projectile energy was absorbed by the target. This is only due to the accidental early exit following a close encounter with a heavy target atom, and it will be shown below that the stopping range for this initial velocity is much larger than the present target thickness. In the case at hand, internal vibrations are only weakly excited in the fragments, as evidenced by the smoothness of the later parts of curves (b) and (c). However the final gain in potential energy is 50 eV. Most of this was used to dissociate the 6 observed fragments. The rest went into structural changes in the fragments as compared to the original material.

Note that the process of fragmentation and deformation occured in less than 0.04 ps, i.e. much less than the thermalization time (numerically determined for this type of material to be longer than 1 ps; see Papoular pap02 (2002)), and even shorter than the transit time of a shock wave through the target. It is clear, therefore, that thermodynamics cannot apply here; indeed, the sputtering phenomenon is usually treated at the microscopic level (see Sigmund sig69 (1969) and Schiott sch68 (1968)).

Experiments at lower initial projectile velocities show that, as $`V_i`$ decreases, the number of fragments produced and the residual projectile velocity when it leaves the target both decrease. When $`V_i`$300 Å/ps, the projectile stops within the target, at a depth which decreases with the initial velocity. Also, its trajectory inside the target becomes more and more wrinkled and ends up as a random walk until it finally settles in some available “acceptor” site (dangling bond or defect site). This, then, is a case of *atomic implantation*.

In order to quantify this behaviour, we proceed by analogy with the usual method, which assumes that the loss, $`dE`$, of projectile K.E. is proportional to the density of target nuclei and to the linear element, $`dx`$, of its trajectory: $`dE/E=n\sigma dx`$, where $`\sigma `$ is a cross-section describing the interaction. Here, we replace the denominator E by $`ϵ`$, a typical bond energy: this ensures that the dimension of $`\sigma `$ is still that of an area and, at the same time, clarifies the physics, since the left hand side now represents the energy loss normalized by a characteristic energy of the system. Then, if $`m`$ is the projectile mass, and $`V`$ its velocity

$$VdV=(nϵ/m)\sigma dx.$$
(1)
The target mass does not appear here because it is assumed to be much larger than that of the projectile. The results of the numerical simulations, as well as the physics of these experiments, are incompatible with a constant cross-section. But agreement is good enough if it is assumed that : $`\sigma =a+bV+cV^2`$. Clearly, the dimensions of $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ are, respectively, those of an area, an area per velocity and an area per velocity square. If not stated otherwise, the units of length, area and velocity will be, respectively, Å, Å2 and Å/ps. Then, the solution of eq. 1 is of the form

$$x_\mathrm{f}x_\mathrm{i}=\frac{nϵ\gamma }{m}[\alpha \mathrm{ln}(\frac{V_\mathrm{i}\alpha }{V_\mathrm{f}\alpha })+\beta \mathrm{ln}(\frac{V_\mathrm{f}\beta }{V_\mathrm{i}\beta })]$$
(2)
where i and f designate initial and final values, and $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ (in the same units as the velocity $`V`$) are functions of $`a,b`$ and $`c`$. We seek values of $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ so that eq. 2 is best satisfied by the triads, $`V_\mathrm{i}`$, $`V_\mathrm{f}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`x=x_\mathrm{f}x_\mathrm{i}`$, corresponding to this series of 7 numerical experiments at different $`V_\mathrm{i}`$’s: 150, 200, 300, 400, 500, 750 and 1000 Å/ps. We find: $`\alpha `$=1250 , $`\beta `$=-130 and $`\gamma =5.610^2`$ . Deriving $`a`$,$`b`$ and $`c`$ from these values of $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$, and substituting in the quadratic expression for $`\sigma `$, it is finally found that eq. 2 is satisfied to a standard deviation of 2 % if

$$\sigma =6.6+5.110^2V4.110^5V^2$$
(3)
where $`\sigma `$ is in Å2, $`V`$ in Å/ps, and we adopted $`n=10^{23}`$ cm-3, $`m`$=12 atomic units and $`ϵ`$=5 eV.

Note that $`\sigma `$ is of the order of a few atomic radii squared, meaning that, in this range of velocities, the projectile hardly interacts with target atoms off its trajectory by more than 4 Å. Also, from eq. 2, an expression can be derived for the range of the projectile as a function of its initial velocity. Indeed, when the projectile’s trajectory ends within the target, its final velocity can be defined by the condition that it become random. In the present experiments, this is found empirically to be of order 50 Å/ps, which will be adopted for $`V_\mathrm{f}`$. The range, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`x`$ is obtained by inserting this value in eq. 2. While $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`x`$ is a length, experimental studies with different materials show that the energy loss is less intimately connected with the length of the particle trajectory in the target than with the mass of target material swept by the projectile along its path, which we will denote by R and is equal to $`\rho .\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`x`$, where $`\rho `$ is the density of the target material. If $`\rho `$=2 g/cm3 and R is in $`\mu `$g/cm2, then R=0.02 $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`x`$. This awkward dimension for R is universally used by experimentalists because it ensures that the corresponding numerical values can be handled more easily, as illustrated by fig. 3, which represents the present results in these units, and can therefore be compared directly with published experiments. The nearly linear functional form as well as the absolute values of this curve are in line with previous sputtering studies (see Schiott sch68 (1968) for instance) and numerical simulations (see Cleveland and Landeman cle92 (1992); Aoki et al. aok97 (1997)). The distances travelled by the projectile inside the target in the 7 simulations are also plotted as a scatter graph (E) in fig. 3. Beyond 400 Å/ps (K.E.$``$100 eV), the range according to eq. 2 is longer than the long dimension of the target (12 Å) but, of course, the ordinates of “experimental” points cannot reach much higher than this value, so they fall below the curve.

Because of the discrete nature of the target material structure, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$$`x`$ and $`V_\mathrm{f}`$ depend slightly (and randomly) on the exact direction of the initial projectile velocity, so that, even below 100 eV, there is some scattering of points E about curve R. Other illustrations of this scattering are provided by fig. 8 to 10. Such scattering is limited if the grain structure is not too anisotropic and if care is taken to avoid head-on atomic collisions and subsequent premature exit of the projectile from the finite target (cf fig. 2).

## 4 Atomic hydrogen projectiles

Several simulations were made with initial velocities from 25 to 3000 Å/ps (2.5 to 300 km/s) and various impact angles on targets of the same structure as above. In none of these cases did fragmentation occur. Below 30 Å/ps, the projectile simply *recoiled* from the target. Between 50 and 100 Å/ps, the privileged outcome was *abstraction* of a target H to form a hydrogen molecule; between 100 and 500 Å/ps, *chemisorption* on the target was preferred. Finally, at 1000 Å/ps and higher velocities, the projectile traversed part or all of the target, leaving only a small fraction of its energy in the form of target vibrations.

The maximum projectile energy in these simulations was about 500 eV. At this energy, the sputtering yield of H+ on graphite was measured to reach a maximum of only 0.1 (Vietzke and Philipps vie89 (1989)). Thus, H atoms are not expected to contribute significantly to the destruction of grains; the physical reason for this is that their mass is so low (Salpeter sal74 (1974)).

## 5 Cluster projectiles

Armed with an understanding of the behaviour of single-atom projectiles, we can now turn to projectile sizes of the same order as that of the target. Figure 4 shows a series of snapshots of target and projectile taken during their collision. Each is made of 24 C and 12 H atoms, forming a structure similar to that of fig. 1; the initial velocity of the projectile (right of fig. 4) is 1000 Å/ps towards the target (left), which is 11 Å away . At t=0.01 ps (fig. 5), the projectile is entirely inside the target, with no dramatic change observed in either structure. At this stage, momentum has been exchanged but relative atomic distances within each grain are still nearly unchanged. At t=0.02 Å (fig. 6), projectile and target are still recognizable but they have traded sides and each has “expanded”: dissociation has begun, but only after the projectile has made its way through, and out of, the target. This was to be expected from fig. 3, which indicates, for a carbon projectile of velocity 1000 Å/ps, a range of about 50 Å, much longer than the present target thickness (3.5 Å). As to the target, note that its center of mass has barely moved in the laboratory frame up to this time. Much later, at t=0.1 ps (fig. 7), projectile and target are shattered in 49 distinct fragments gathered in 2 clusters of nearly equal sizes, and whose centers of mass are separated by about 80 Å.

Before we discuss these fragments in detail, consider first the energetics of the collision. Throughout the process, and similar to fig. 2, total kinetic and potential energy vary in opposite directions and total energy is conserved to the accuracy of the calculation. At t=0, K.E.=15816 eV, entirely associated with the projectile. At t=0.01 ps, the clusters are spatially overlapping and the total gain in P.E. peaks at about 1400 eV, with a corresponding negative peak in K.E. (deceleration of projectile by the potential barrier of the target atoms). The full width of these peaks is 0.007 ps, which is the time spent by the projectile inside the target for this initial velocity. During this time, a fraction of the translational K.E. of the projectile is converted into internal K.E. in both clusters. This energy, in turn, is expended in bond dissociations and transformed in P.E. and K.E. of the fragments. At the end of the reaction, the two groups of fragments nearly equally share the total gain in P.E., which is $``$262 eV. For 49 products (fig. 7), this amounts to an average of 5.3 eV per dissociation. On the other hand, the final K.E.s of the remains of target and projectile are very different: the latter have retained $``$88$`\%`$ of the initial K.E. while the former have only gained 61 eV; and the velocity of the latter’s center of mass is still a full 940 Å/ps (in the initial direction), while the velocity of the former’s center of mass is only 60 Å/ps (nearly in the same direction).

Similar numerical simulations were performed for smaller and slower projectiles. Sizes of 40 (24 C and 16 H), 20 (12 C and 8 H), 10 (6 C and 4 H), 4 (2 C and 2 H) atoms as well as a single C atom (Sect. 3) were used. The corresponding set of results is represented in fig. 8, where the abscissa is the initial projectile velocity and the ordinate is the ratio of the number of atoms in fragments dissocited from target and projectile, to the total number of atoms in both clusters: this is taken as measure of the dissociation efficiency of a collision. The following can be noted:

* For all particle sizes, dissociation begins at $`V_\mathrm{i}`$$``$100 Å/ps (10 km/s), when each C atom of the projectiles carries $``$6 eV of energy, just enough to break a carbon bond.
* For all projectile sizes, a maximum number of dissociations is essentially achieved at $`V_\mathrm{i}`$$``$200 Å/ps, when according to fig. 3, the range of a C atom into the target is just about equal to the thickness of target or projectile in the present series of experiments (3.5 Å). Beyond this, unused energy is carried away by the remains of the projectile leaving the target.
* The maximum number of dissociations that is achieved increases with the transverse size (hight) of the projectile relative to that of the target, but not much beyond a size ratio of $``$0.5. In this series of simulations, this *ratio* corresponds to a *difference* of transverse sizes of only 10 Å, or about the cross-section diameter of a carbon atom suggested by the results of Sect. 3. Thus, it is likely that, for grain sizes much larger than those considered here, maximum dissociation efficiency would be reached only for nearly equal transverse sizes of projectile and target.
* Comparison of simulation results suggests that, as far as dissociation efficiency is concerned, the effect of a projectile can be considered as the sum of the effects of its individual carbon atom constituents. For instance, for given target size and initial projectile velocity, the final gain in total P.E. (which is proportional to the number of resulting dissociations) is nealy proportional to the number of C atoms in the projectile.

Drawing upon the same set of simulations, fig. 9 plots the number of products (= number of broken bonds) as a function of the final gain in total P.E. The average ratio of these quantities is found to be 5.6 eV per bond. On the other hand, the average bond energy of the model material may be estimated as the ratio of total initial P.E. (9227 kcal or 401 eV) to total number of atoms (80), giving 5 eV per atom, which is lower than the average dissociation energy just derived. The difference of 0.6 eV per dissociation indicates that the fragments also carry some vibrational energy, which amounts here to an average temperature of at most 4660 K divided by the number of atoms in a fragment. All this vibrational energy is but a tiny fraction of the initial projectile K.E.; it increases as the latter decreases towards the threshold ($`V_\mathrm{i}`$$``$100 Å/ps) but always remains small.

Other interesting results of these experiments involve the average and maximum sizes of the products of collisions (fig. 10). As the projectile initial velocity increases beyond threshold, it penetrates deeper into the target ( cf. fig. 5), dissociating more bonds and creating more fragments of decreasing size (number of atoms). This trend levels off, as expected, beyond the velocity which is required for the projectile to make its way throughout the target, i.e. about 200 Å/ps in the present instance. For a given initial velocity above this limit, the average and maximum sizes of products decrease as the transverse dimension of the projectile gets closer to that of the target. At equality, which is the case of fig. 10, the average size of products is then smaller than 2 atoms, meaning that, as observed, there are many free C and H atoms among the fragments; also, the maximum size of the latter is about 10 atoms, meaning that the fragments are molecular rather than granular. Within the limits of validity of the present treatment, there is no reason to believe that this result depends on the initial sizes of projectile and target. We are therefore led to surmise that, in most circumstances, *vaporization* is the main destruction process affecting the grain size distribution. The next section considers this issue in more detail.

## 6 Grain destruction by collision

From the previous sections, we can draw the following simplified picture. Consider a target grain of size D and a projectile of size d and initial velocity V towards the target. Let R(V) be the range of the projectile through the target material. Several generic cases must be considered for the outcome of the collision.

1. D=d

1. d$`<`$R: complete vaporization of both grains (cf fig. 7 and 8);
    2. d$`>`$R: part of the projectile (volume v=d2R) penetrates into an equal volume of the target and both volumes are vaporized; formation of a crater of depth R and transverse size d in both grains;
2. D$`>`$d

1. R$`<`$d$`<`$D: vaporized volume v= 2d2R; cratering in both grains;
    2. d$`<`$R$`<`$D: v=d2(R+d); cratering in target, and projectile entirely vaporized;
    3. d$`<`$D$`<`$R: v=d2(d+D); complete vaporization of projectile and of part of target (hole of diameter d).

As in fig. 8, let the *destruction efficiency* of the collision, f, be defined by the ratio of the vaporized volume v to the total grain volume d3+D3. The different generic cases can be synthesized as in fig. 11, where Vc1 and Vc2 are critical velocities respectively defined by the conditions R=d and R=D. Assume, for simplicity, that the range R is proportional to V. Then, f has simple expressions in the three intervals of interest (see fig. 11):

* 10 km/s$`<`$V$`<`$Vc1: f=2Rd2/(D3+d3)
* Vc1$`<`$V$`<`$Vc2: f=(R+d)d2/(D3+d3)
* Vc2$`<`$V: f=d2(1+d/D)/D2(1+d3/D3).

Hence the following cursory inferences:

* No destruction occurs for V$`<`$10 km/s.
* Sticking and aggregation (coalescence) of grains occur over a small range of velocities about 10 km/s. At lower velocities there is quasi-elastic recoil. The case of a single-atom projectile stands apart because of the strong chemical reactivity of single atoms.
* The collision destruction efficiency is highest for relative velocities higher than Vc2, and only reaches 1 for reactants of equal sizes.
* C-C and C-H bonds stand nearly equal chances of being broken.
* Whatever part of the grains is destroyed, is not fragmented into intermediate-size grains, but reduced to molecules of a few atoms (vaporized). This seems to question the role of collisions in producing the famous grain size distribution in r-3.5 (see also Thebault et al. the03 (2003)). If this is confirmed, then the origin of such a distribution must be sought elsewhere.
* For V=100 km/s (or 1000 Å/ps), R$``$80 Å and complete vaporization occurs only for equal grain sizes smaller than 80 Å.
* Equation 2 cannot be extrapolated to higher velocities because the present treatment does not include *electronic* interaction between projectile and target (see Sigmund sig69 (1969)). However, experimental and theoretical results indicate ranges increasing with projectile K.E. to powers of 0.5 to 0.75 up to hundreds of keVs (see Schiott sch68 (1968), Biersack and Haggmark hag80 (1980)). These results suggest that complete vaporization of the largest grains in the ISM ($`0.1\mu `$m) requires relative velocities of thousands of km/s.
* For high velocities and unequal grain sizes, part of the big grain and all of the small grain is vaporized into small molecules which carry, in the form of translational energy, most of the collisional energy that was not used for dissociation. The residual grain fragment(s) do(es) not reach temperatures high enough for it to suffer significant structural changes as compared with the initial material of the reactants. This conclusion is partly dependent on the microscopic, dynamic approach used here, as opposed to the more usual macroscopic, thermodynamic treatment. The former implicitely assumes that all translational energy carried by fly-away fragments is lost to further dissociation or heating, which is not the case in the latter. This must make a difference for the largest grains.

In conclusion, the present atomistic, non-equilibrium, dynamical approach sheds a different light on, and warrants some caution in, assessing the threshold for grain destruction and the impact of collisions on grain size distribution as well as on grain processing. This detracts nothing from the validity of the shock wave treatment in cases where most of the projectile energy is delivered in the bulk of the target by a wave travelling at a velocity of a few km/s. Such is the case when the projectile size and range in the target are much smaller than the size of the latter. Numerical simulation is also applicable in this situation, and can be very helpful in describing crater formation and temperature and pressure ditribution throughout the target as a function of time (see Cleveland and Landeman cle92 (1992); Aoki et al. aok97 (1997)).


text:
# Einstein metrics on rational homology spheres

## 1. Introduction

In this paper we prove the existence of Einstein metrics, actually Sasakian-Einstein metrics, on nontrivial rational homology spheres in all odd dimensions greater than $`3.`$ It appears as though little is known about the existence of Einstein metrics on rational homology spheres, and the known ones are typically homogeneous. The are two exception known to the authors. Both involve Sasakian geometry and both occur in dimension 7. In \[BGN02\] the two authors and M. Nakamaye gave a list of 184 rational homology 7-spheres with Sasakian-Einstein metrics. The result was based on a theorem of Johnson and Kollár proving the existance of Kähler-Einstein metric on cartain Fano 3-folds with orbifold singularities \[JK01\]. More recently, Grove, Wilking and Ziller constructed infinitely many rational homology 7-spheres with 3-Sasakian metrics of cohomogeneity one under an action of $`S^3\times S^3`$ \[Zil\]. Being 3-Sasakian these metrics are necessarily Sasakian-Einstein. Their construction involves orbifold self-dual Einstein metrics discovered by N. Hitchin \[Hit96\] a decade ago. Hitchin constructed a family of positive self-dual Einstein metrics, indexed by integers $`k4`$ which live on $`S^4^2`$. They are complete in the orbifold sense, i.e., they can be viewed as metrics defined on compact Riemannian orbifolds $`M_k^4`$ with a $`_k`$ quotient singularities along $`^2`$. Any positive self-dual Einstein orbifold $`𝒪`$ admits a compact 3-Sasakian orbifold $`V`$-bundle $`𝒮𝒪`$ over it \[BGM94\]. Grove, Wilking and Ziller showed that in the case of Hitchin’s metrics the bundle $`N_k^7M_k^4`$ is actually a smooth 7-manifold and, moreover, computed $`H^{}(N_k^7,)`$. When $`k=2m1`$ the manifold $`N_k^7`$ turns out to be a rational homology 7-sphere with $`H_3(N_k^7,)=_m`$.

In dimension 5, aside from the standard 5-sphere $`S^5`$ there is only one known case of an Einstein metric on a simply connected rational homology 5-sphere. It is the homogeneous space $`SU(3)/SO(3)`$ which is a simply connected non-spin manifold with $`H_2(SU(3)/SO(3),)=_2.`$ On the other hand the 5-manifolds $`M^5`$ considered in this paper are all spin, i.e. $`w_2(M)=0.`$ A well known theorem of Smale \[Sma62\] says that for any simply connected 5-manifold with spin, the torsion group in $`H_2`$ is of the form $`GG`$ for some Abelian group $`G.`$ Until recently \[BG02\] this was the only simply connected nontrivial rational homology sphere known to admit Riemannian metrics of positive Ricci curvature. In this note we go much further by proving the existence of Sasakian-Einstein metrics on infinitely many simply connected rational homology 5-spheres. Furthermore, the metrics typically depend on parameters, that is, there is non-trivial moduli.

We prove the following two theorems.

###### Theorem 1.

There exists continuous parameter families of Sasakian-Einstein metrics on infinitely many simply connected rational homology spheres in every odd dimension greater than 3. For some of these families the number of effective parameters grows exponentially with dimension.

Dimension $`5`$ is treated separately since there is a classification of simply connected $`5`$-manifolds due to Smale \[Sma62\] for spin manifolds and Barden \[Bar65\] more generally, and our results are somewhat sharper. It is the spin manifold case that is relevant here, as any simply connected Sasakian-Einstein manifold is necesarily spin. Our results cover all orders of the torsion group $`H_2(M_k,),`$ that is not $`4`$ nor divisible by $`6.`$ We have

###### Theorem 2.

For every integer $`k>2`$ that is either relatively prime to $`3`$ or $`2`$, there exist Sasakian-Einstein metrics, depending on two real parameters, on a simply connected rational homology 5-sphere $`M_k^5`$ with $`w_2(M_k^5)=0,`$ and $`H_2(M_k^5,)`$ having order $`k^2`$.

This result is probably not optimal. Furthermore, there are many more examples than those given in Section 4.

## 2. Branched Covers

Let $`f=f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)`$ be a quasi-smooth weighted homogeneous polynomial of degree $`d_f=w(f)`$ in $`m`$ complex variables, and let $`L_f`$ denote its link. Let $`𝐰_f=(w_1,\mathrm{},w_m)`$ be the corresponding weight vector, and for a given weight vector $`𝐰`$ we let $`|𝐰|=_{i=1}^mw_i`$ be its norm. We consider branched covers constructed as the link $`L_F`$ of the polynomial

$$F=z_0^k+f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m).$$

Then $`L_F`$ is a $`k`$-fold branched cover of $`S^{2m+1}`$ branched over the link $`L_f.`$ The degree of $`L_F`$ is $`d_F=\mathrm{lcm}(k,d_f),`$ and the weight vector is $`𝐰_F=(\frac{d_f}{\mathrm{gcd}(k,d_f)},\frac{k}{\mathrm{gcd}(k,d_f)}𝐰_f).`$ We shall always assume that $`k2`$, since the linear case $`k=1`$ is a hyperplane in a weighted projective space. The following is Theorem 7.1 of \[BGN03b\]:

###### Theorem 3.

Let $`f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)`$ be a weighted homogeneous polynomial of degree $`d`$ and weights $`𝐰=(w_1,\mathrm{},w_m)`$ in $`^m`$ with an isolated singularity at the origin. Let $`k^+`$ and consider the link $`L_g`$ of the equation

$$g=z_0^k+f(z_1,\mathrm{},z_m)=0.$$

Write the numbers $`\frac{d}{w_i}`$ in irreducible form $`\frac{u_i}{v_i},`$ and suppose that $`\mathrm{gcd}(k,u_i)=1`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},m.`$ Then the link $`L_g`$ has weights $`\frac{(d,k𝐰)}{\mathrm{gcd}(k,d)}`$ and degree $`\mathrm{lcm}(k,d).`$ Furthermore, $`L_g`$ is a rational homology sphere with the order $`|H_{m1}(L_g,)|=k^{b_{m2}(L_f)}`$ where $`b_{m2}(L_f)`$ is the $`(m2)`$-nd Betti number of $`L_f.`$

When considering rational homology spheres we can assume without loss of generality that $`\mathrm{gcd}(k,d)=1.`$ For if $`\mathrm{gcd}(k,d)>1`$ and $`\mathrm{gcd}(k,u_i)=1`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},m,`$ then any common factor of $`k`$ and $`d`$ must divide $`w_i`$ for each $`i`$, and so will be an overall common factor which gives an equivalent link. So hereafter we shall assume that $`\mathrm{gcd}(k,d)=1.`$

The formula for computing the $`(m2)`$-nd Betti number can be obtained from Milnor and Orlik \[MO70\], viz.

(1)
$$b_{m2}(L_f)=(1)^{ms}\frac{u_{i_1}\mathrm{}u_{i_s}}{v_{i_1}\mathrm{}v_{i_s}\mathrm{lcm}(u_{i_1},\mathrm{},u_{i_s})},$$

where the sum is taken over all the $`2^m`$ subsets $`\{i_1,\mathrm{},i_s\}`$ of $`\{1,\mathrm{},m\}.`$ This general form for $`b_{m2}`$ is suitable for computer computations.

## 3. Sasakian-Einstein links and Kähler-Einstein orbifolds

Let $`X=X_{k,d,𝐰}`$ denote the quotient orbifold by the natural $`S^1`$ action. By now it is well understood that a Sasakian-Einstein metric on the link $`L_F`$ is equivalent to a Kähler-Einstein metric of positive scalar curvature on $`X=X_{k,d,𝐰}.`$ See \[BG01\] for details. It is easy to see that $`X_{k,d,𝐰}`$ is Fano if and only if

(2)
$$k(|𝐰_f|d_f)+d_f>0.$$

In particular, if $`|𝐰_f|d_f0,`$ then $`X_{k,d_f,𝐰}`$ is Fano for all positive integers $`k.`$ There are three cases to consider. The case when the smaller link $`L_f`$ is itself Fano, i.e. $`|𝐰_f|d_f>0,`$. This will be ruled out by Proposition 4 below. The case when $`L_f`$ is Calabi-Yau, i.e. $`|𝐰_f|d_f=0.`$ This case is interesting since we have good solutions for infinitely many $`k.`$ Finally, there is the “canonical” case when $`|𝐰_f|d_f<0,`$ for which the link $`L_F`$ is Fano for only finitely many $`k.`$ Nevertheless, there could be infinitely many good solutions in this case by taking arbitrarily large degrees $`d_f.`$

A sufficient condition for the existence of a Kähler-Einstein metric on the orbifold $`X=X_{k,d_f,𝐰}`$ is that for every effective $``$-divisor $`D`$ that is numerically equivalent to $`K_X^1,`$ the pair $`(X,\frac{m1+ϵ}{m}D)`$ is Kawamata log terminal or klt for some $`ϵ>0.`$ For a precise definition see \[KM98\], and for a more complete discussion in the present context see \[DK01, BGN03a, BGK03\]. In particular, this implies the condition

(3)
$$k(|𝐰_f|d_f)+d_f<\frac{m}{m1}\mathrm{min}\{d_f,kw_i|i=1,\mathrm{}m\}.$$

This condition is necessary to satisfy the klt condition defined above, but it is far from sufficient, and we use it only to eliminate some cases. It can also be reiterated that while the klt condition on the pair $`(X,\frac{m1+ϵ}{m}D)`$ is sufficient to guarentee the existence of a Kähler-Einstein metric, it is far from necessary.

###### Proposition 4.

If $`𝐰_fd>0`$ then $`X_{k,d,𝐰}`$ does not satisfy the klt condition 3.

###### Proof.

If $`𝐰_fd>0`$ then the left hand side of 3 is at least $`k+d.`$ So for 3 to hold we must have

$$(m1)k<d,\text{and}(m1)d<k.$$

This gives a contradiction. ∎

Next we look at the case $`𝐰_fd=0.`$ Then the klt condition 3 becomes

(4)
$$(m1)d<mk\mathrm{min}\{w_i\}.$$

This is clearly satisfied for $`k`$ large enough, namely for $`k>\frac{m1}{m}d\mathrm{max}\frac{1}{w_i}.`$

We are particularly interested in the case of perturbations of Brieskorn-Pham (BP) singularities. In \[BGK03\] János Kollár and the authors gave sufficient conditions for the existence of Kähler-Einstein metrics on Fano orbifolds arising as perturbations of BP singularities. However, these conditions, although better than 3 above, are still not optimal. We consider weighted homogeneous polynomials of the form

$$P(z_0,\mathrm{},z_m)=\underset{i=0}{\overset{m}{}}z_i^{a_i}+tp(z_0,\mathrm{},z_m),$$

where $`t,`$ and $`w(p)=\mathrm{lcm}(a_0,\mathrm{},a_m)`$ which is the degree of the polynomial. We impose a conditon on the zero set $`Y(𝐚,p):=P^1(0),`$ namely the genericity condition, which is always satisfied by $`p0`$,

1. The intersections of $`Y(𝐚,p)`$ with any number of hyperplanes $`(z_i=0)`$
are all smooth outside the origin.

Any polynomial or singularity satisfying condition GC is referred to as a (weighted homogeneous) perturbation of a Brieskorn-Pham polynomial or singularity. Furthermore, we define

$$C^j=\mathrm{lcm}(a_i:ij),b_j=\mathrm{gcd}(a_j,C^j).$$

The theorem proved in \[BGK03\] is;

###### Theorem 5.

The orbifold $`Y(𝐚,p)/^{}`$ is Fano and has a Kähler-Einstein metric if it satisfies condition (GC) and

$$1<\underset{i=0}{\overset{m}{}}\frac{1}{a_i}<1+\frac{m}{m1}\underset{i,j}{\mathrm{min}}\{\frac{1}{a_i},\frac{1}{b_ib_j}\}.$$

## 4. Rational Homology 5-Spheres

We now specialize to the case of dimension 5, i.e. $`m=3.`$ Our 5-manifolds are constructed as $`k`$-fold branched covers of $`S^5`$ branched over certain Seifert manifolds that are in turn $`S^1`$ orbifold V-bundles over a compact Riemann surface of genus $`g.`$ Our construction is similar to that in \[Sav79\]. Let $`f_3(z_1,z_2,z_3)`$ be a weighted homogeneous polynomial of an isolated hypersurface singularity in $`^3`$ with weights $`𝐰=(w_1,w_2,w_3)`$ and degree $`d.`$ The link $`L_𝐰`$ defined by $`L_𝐰=\{f_3=0\}S^5`$ is a Seifert fibration over an algebraic curve $`C_𝐰`$ in the weighted projective space $`(𝐰).`$ Let $`g=g(𝐰)`$ denote the genus of the curve $`C_𝐰.`$ In the case of rational homology 5-spheres, Theorem 3 specializes to $`|H_2(L_f,)|=k^{2g},`$ while the Betti number formula 1 specializes to the genus formula of Orlik and Weigreich \[OW71\]

$$g(C_𝐰)=\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{d^2}{w_1w_2w_3}d\underset{i<j}{}\frac{\mathrm{gcd}(w_i,w_j)}{w_iw_j}+\underset{i}{}\frac{\mathrm{gcd}(d,w_i)}{w_i}1\right).$$

The following lemma whose proof is clear from the genus formula will prove to be useful.

###### Lemma 6.

If $`|𝐰|=d,\mathrm{gcd}(w_i,d)=w_i,`$ and $`\mathrm{gcd}(w_i,w_j)=1`$ for all $`ij,`$ then $`g=1.`$

In view of Proposition 4 we restrict ourselves to the case $`𝐰_fd0.`$ In the case of Brieskorn 3-manifolds $`L_f`$ Milnor \[Mil75\] refers to the cases $`𝐰_fd>0,𝐰_fd=0,`$ and $`𝐰_fd<0`$ as spherical, Euclidean, and hyperbolic, respectively. In \[OW71\] (with an erratum in \[OW77\]) Orlik and Wagreich give a classification of all weighted homogeneous polynomials with only an isolated singularity at the origin up to $`^{}`$-equivariant diffeomorphism. They gave a list of six classes, but there was an error and two more were reported in \[OW77\] which completes their classification. Here we analyze the possible $`k`$-fold branched covers when the Siefert manifold is Euclidean, i.e. $`𝐰_f=d,`$ which is straightforward. It turns out that the singularities arising here are precisely the unimodal parabolic singularities of \[AGnZV85\]. In any case it is easy to prove:

###### Proposition 7.

Let $`L_f`$ be the link of a weighted homogeneous polynomial $`f=f(z_1,z_2,z_3)`$ of degree $`d`$ in three complex variables. Suppose further that $`|𝐰|=d.`$ Then $`f`$ is a weighted homogeneous polynomial with weight vector $`𝐰,`$ degree $`d`$, and number of monomials $`n`$ of degree $`d`$ given by one of the three cases:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}& & \\ 𝐰& d\hfill & n\hfill \\ & & \\ & & \\ (1,2,3)& 6\hfill & 7\hfill \\ & & \\ (1,1,2)& 4\hfill & 9\hfill \\ & & \\ (1,1,1)& 3\hfill & 10\hfill \end{array}$$

Let $`L_F`$ be a $`k`$-fold branched cover of a 3-dimensional Euclidean link, then by Proposition 7 $`L_F`$ is the link of an isolated hypersurface singularity of the form

$$z_0^k+f_d(z_1,z_2,z_3)=0$$

with weights $`(d,k𝐰_f)`$ where $`d`$ and $`𝐰_f`$ are given in the table above, and $`f_d`$ is an arbitrary polynomial polynomial of the given weights subject to the condition that the singularitiy is isolated. There is a dense open subset of the parameter space where this is a perturbation of a Brieskorn-Pham singularity. It is easy to see that the bounds given in Theorem 5 are satisfied if we choose $`k3`$ in the $`d=4`$ and $`d=3`$ cases, and $`k5`$ in the $`d=6`$ cases. Hence, in these cases we get Sasakian-Einstein metrics on the links $`L_F.`$ Furthermore, in the $`d=3`$ and $`d=6`$ cases there is a two real parameter family of solutions. This proves Theorem 2. ∎

Proposition 7 gives a classification of all the possible Euclidean cases. We can also consider hyperbolic cases. Since the weights are unrestricted there are many, so we only mention one which is a special case of Example 9 below. We consider links associated to perturbations of the BP singularity

$$z_0^k+z_1^l+z_2^l+z_3^l=0.$$

The Betti number formula 7 below simplifies to $`b_1=(l2)(l1).`$ Thus, by Theorem 3 we get rational homology 5-spheres $`M_{k,l}^5`$ with $`H_2(M_{k,l}^5,)`$ of order $`k^{(l2)(l1)}.`$ From equation 6 below we see that $`l`$ must be either $`4`$ or $`5.`$ The Fano condition and klt inequalities of Theorem 5 are satisfied only when $`k=3`$ and $`l=4.`$ By Equation 9 the number of effective real parameters is $`12.`$ Thus, there is a rational homology 5-sphere $`M_{3,4}^5`$ with $`|H_2(M_{3,4}^5,)|=3^6`$ that admits a Sasakian-Einstein metric depending on $`12`$ real parameters.

## 5. Examples in Dimension $`2m1`$

###### Example 8.

\[Branched Covers of Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces\] First we consider $`k`$-fold branched covers of Fermat-Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces

(5)
$$z_0^k+z_1^m+\mathrm{}z_m^m=0$$

with $`\mathrm{gcd}(k,m)=1.`$ For $`m3`$ the link $`M_k^{2m1}`$ is a simply connected nontrivial rational homology sphere. The $`(m2)`$-nd Betti number of the Calabi-Yau link is

$$b_{m2}=(1)^m\left(1+\frac{(1m)^m1}{m}\right).$$

So by Theorem 3 $`|H_{m1}(M_k^{2m1},)|=k^{b_{m2}}.`$ For example, in dimension $`7`$ ($`m=4`$) we get $`|H_2(M_k^7,)|=k^{21}`$ whereas, in dimension $`9`$ we have $`|H_2(M_k^9,)|=k^{204}.`$

It is easy to see that the klt condition in Theorem 3 is satisfied if $`k>m(m1)`$ in which case the rational homology spheres $`M_k^{2m1}`$ admits a family of Sasakian-Einstein metrics. The number of effective complex parameters $`\mu `$ is determined by (cf. \[BGK03\])

$$\mu =h^0((𝐰),𝒪(d))\underset{i}{}h^0((𝐰),𝒪(w_i))$$

where $`𝐰=(m,k,\mathrm{},k)`$ and $`d=mk.`$ Thus, we find

$$\mu =\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2m1}{m}\right)m^2.$$

By Sterling’s formula one sees that $`\mu `$ grows exponentially with $`m.`$ In dimension $`7`$ we get $`38`$ real parameters, while in dimension $`9`$ we have $`202`$ effective real parameters. This example is enough to prove Theorem 1. ∎

In the orbifold category there are many Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces in weighted projective spaces $`(𝐰).`$ For example, for general $`m`$, one can consider $`𝐰=(1,\mathrm{},1,m1)`$ of degree $`d=2(m1),`$ or $`𝐰=(1,\mathrm{},1,m2,m2)`$ of degree $`d=3(m2),`$ etc. For rational homology spheres of dimension 7, we obtain examples from branched covers of Reid’s list (cf. \[IF00\]) of 95 log K3 surfaces, and in dimension 9 from branched covers of the over 6000 Calabi-Yau orbifolds in complex dimension 3 \[CLS90\].

###### Example 9 (Branched Covers in the Canonical Case).

We consider links $`L_F`$ of branched covers of a canonical Fermat hypersurface of the form

$$F=z_0^k+z_1^l+\mathrm{}+z_m^l=0$$

with $`lm+1`$ and $`\mathrm{gcd}(k,l)=1.`$ Here the quotient $`X`$ will be Fano if and only if

$$k<\frac{l}{lm}.$$

Also for any branched cover we are only interested in $`k2.`$ Combining this with the Fano condition gives an upper bound on $`l`$ for fixed $`m,`$ namely $`l<2m.`$ Thus, we get the range for $`l`$

(6)
$$m+1l2m1.$$

The link $`L_F=M_k^{2m1}`$ is a rational homology sphere with $`|H_{m1}(M_k^{2m1},)|=k^{b_{m2}}`$ where

(7)
$$b_{m2}=(1)^m\left(1+\frac{(1l)^m1}{l}\right).$$

We now look at the klt condition, that is, the right hand inequality of Theorem 5. We see that $`L_F`$ will have Sasakian-Einstein metrics if we choose $`k`$ to satisfy

(8)
$$\frac{(m1)l^2}{(m1)l(lm)+m}<k<\frac{l}{lm}.$$

As above we can compute the number of effective complex parameters $`\mu `$ to be

(9)
$$\mu =\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{m+l1}{l}\right)m^2.$$

As a special case we consider $`l=m+1`$. In this case the only solution to the inequality 8 is $`k=m.`$ This gives Sasakian-Einstein metrics on rational homology spheres depending on $`2(\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{2m}{m+1}\right)m^2)`$ effective real parameters.

Other solutions can be worked out, for example, the singularity

$$z_0^k+z_1^{2m}+\mathrm{}+z_{m1}^{2m}+z_m^2=0.$$

This satisfies the inequalities of Theorem 5 if we choose $`k=2m1.`$

###### Acknowledgments .

We would like to thank János Kollár for helpful discussions concerning this paper. The authors were partially supported by the NSF under grant number DMS-0203219.


text:
# Acknowledgments

## Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the U.S. DOE under Contract No. DE-FG02-91ER40626.


text:
# Experimental test of the Gallavotti-Cohen fluctuation theorem in turbulent flows

## I Introduction

The fluctuations of global quantities in out-of-equilibrium systems is a subject of current interest which presents many unsolved problems. One of these problems is the prediction of the shape of the probability density function (PDF) of the variable under study; the PDF is of course not necessarily Gaussian Holdsworth . Among several approaches used to study these problems, the theory of Gallavotti and Cohen galla1 ; galla2 ; galla3 ; Kurchan ; Ramses , based on a chaotic hypothesis, leads to interesting predictions. The main prediction of the Gallavotti- Cohen fluctuation theorem (FT) galla1  concerns the probability density function of a variable related to the phase space contraction rate of the nonequilibrium system under study, this variable being a current $`j`$ such as the flux of heat, or of momentum, or energy, etc. The mean of $`j`$ on a time interval $`\tau `$ is defined as

$$J_\tau =\frac{1}{\tau }_t^{t+\tau }j(t^{})𝑑t^{}.$$
(1)
One is then interested in the the probability distribution $`\pi _\tau (Y)`$ of the variable $`Y=J_\tau /J_{\mathrm{}}`$, where $`J_{\mathrm{}}=lim_\tau \mathrm{}J_\tau `$ is the stationary average current studied in the system. If $`\tau `$ is larger than a characteristic time of the system, then the chaotic hypothesis galla1  predicts that $`\pi _\tau (Y)`$ verifies

$$\mathrm{ln}\frac{\pi _\tau (Y)}{\pi _\tau (Y)}=\tau \sigma Y$$
(2)
where $`\sigma `$ is proportional to the phase space contraction rate. It is important to stress that the above equation is valid for all values of $`Y`$. A related expression for the probability density $`\pi _\tau (Y)`$ has been established by Sinai under quite general assumptions: $`\pi _\tau (Y)=A_\tau e^{\zeta (Y)\tau }`$. In this formulation the function $`\zeta (Y)`$ is a limiting function, for $`\tau \mathrm{}`$,

$$\zeta (Y)=\frac{\mathrm{ln}[\pi _\tau (Y)]\mathrm{ln}[A_\tau ]}{\tau },$$
(3)
independent of $`\tau `$ Sinai . However, the FT (with the addition of the chaotic hypothesis) is giving more information: the function $`(\zeta (Y)\zeta (Y))`$ is linear in $`Y`$ and its derivative is related to the contraction rate in phase space. In this sense, the FT takes into account the underlying dynamics taking place in the system.

However, in the original derivation of the fluctuation theorem, the proof requires several very restrictive hypothesis, among which the time reversibility of the system. Therefore it is important to check the symmetry predicted by eq.2 in more realistic systems in order to probe the universality and applicability in practical cases. Eq.2 has been tested with success on a numerical simulation of a rather artificial system galla4 , and it is also quite well verified for the heat flux in a chain of coupled non-linear oscillators Livi ; Aumaitre  and in the energy dissipation rate in the shell model of turbulence Aumaitre .

The situation is less clear for local variables. Gallavotti galla3  suggested that the predictions of the FT could be extended to “the average of local observables”. This has prompted us to check this hypothesis using local measurements in a turbulent flow. We started with preliminary tests using the data of turbulent Rayleigh-Benard convection Cili1 . These tests did show that the fluctuations of a quantity proportional to the heat flux verify both eq.2 and eq.3. In this article we consider the case of the pressure fluctuations in a turbulent wind. Specifically, we consider the statistics of the force applied on an object. We find that its fluctuations verify the Gallavotti-Cohen predictions.

## II  Experimental apparatus

The experimental set-up which is shown in fig.1 consists of two coaxial, counter rotating disks. This experimental set-up, known as the von Kármán geometry, produces an intense turbulence in a compact region of space. It has been previously used to study the fluctuations of the power injected to maintain the turbulent flow at a fixed integral Reynolds number — more details on the experimental apparatus can be found in ref.PintonI .

The distance between the disks is 20 cm. As illustrated in fig.1 a square plate, of side 4 cm and 1 mm thick, is inserted between the two disks at a distance of 6 cm from one of the two disks, with its center at 6 cm from the disks rotation axis. The plate is mounted on an extreme of a 10 cm long lever. The other extreme of the lever is fixed on a strain gage (ENTRAN ELFS-T3M-10N force transducer). The lever axis, which is at distance of 1 cm from the strain gage, is mounted on very precise ball bearings in order to reduce friction. With this system the minimum detectable force exerted on the plate is 1 mN, with a response time of $`10^2`$ s.

The quantity under measurement is the integral of the pressure over the area $`S`$ of the object:

$$𝐅(t)=_S𝑑sp(𝐫,t).$$
(4)
The pressure itself $`p(𝐫,t)`$ is the solution of the Poisson equation

$$\mathrm{\Delta }p(𝐫,t)=2\rho _iu_j(𝐫,t)_ju_i(𝐫,t),$$
(5)
where $`\rho `$ is the fluid density and $`_iu_j`$ the velocity gradient tensor. It thus instantaneoulsy relates to the strain and vorticity fluctuations in the flow. Note that the presence of the object introduces a no-slip condition on its surface which changes the velocity distribution; the fluctuations of force on the objet are related — but not strictly equal — to the flux of momentum in the undisturbed flow in the absence of the obstacle. The mean value $`F_0`$ of the force on the object is set by the pressure head ($`p\rho U^2`$), where $`U`$ is the mean velocity at the location of the object. The time fluctuations of the force are related to the small scale turbulent fluctuations, as indicated by equation (5) and shown in several studies on the fluctuations of the local pressure FauvePression ; CadotPression .

We analyze a set of data recorded at a disk rotation frequency of 40 Hz, corresponding to a Reynolds number of about $`Re=\mathrm{2\; 10}^5`$. The signal of the instantaneous force $`F(t)`$ is filtered at 70 Hz and sampled at 160 Hz with 21bits resolution Agilent 1430 digitizer ($`\tau _0=1/160=6.25`$ ms is the sampling time). The signal is recorded for about $`\mathrm{2\; 10}^4`$ integral times. In these conditions the mean force $`F_0`$ on the plate is $`0.12`$ N.

The variable of interest is $`y=F(t)/F_0`$. Its typical time evolution is plotted in fig.2; in (a) is shown the ‘standard’ fluctuations of the signal in a large time-window while in (b) we have selected a time interval during which a negative fluctuation of large amplitude occurs. One observes that $`y=F(t)/F_0`$ fluctuates mainly about the mean value $`1`$, but also that there are strong negative events: sometimes the plate is pushed in the opposite direction of the mean wind velocity. The spectrum, plotted in fig.2(c), is very broad. The thin peak at 40 Hz corresponds to the disk rotation frequency. The cut-off at 70 Hz is imposed by the filter of the digitizer. Note on the spectrum that the change of slope near 35 Hz is at a frequency of the order of $`U/L`$ where $`U`$ is the mean velocity at the plate location and $`L`$ is the plate size.

## III Data analysis

The data analysis of the fluctuations of the normalized force $`y=F/F_0`$ has been performed in the following way. We first compute the integrated quantity:

$$Y(t,\tau )=\frac{1}{\tau }_t^{t+\tau }y(t^{})𝑑t^{},$$
(6)
then we calculate the histograms of the $`Y(t,\tau )`$ values in order to obtain the probability density functions $`\pi _\tau (Y)`$ for each value of the coarse graining time $`\tau `$. The logarithm of the functions $`\pi _\tau (Y)`$ are plotted in fig.3 as a function of $`Y`$ for $`\tau =3\tau _0,10\tau _0`$ and $`20\tau _0`$. One clearly sees that the PDFs change with the integration time $`\tau `$. For all values of $`\tau `$, they are non-Gaussian eventhough the force results from a spatial integration of the pressure fluctuations. The central limit theorem does not necessarily apply here BHP  because the pressure fluctuations can be correlated over the plate size: they are caused by turbulent structures of sizes ranging from the integral to the dissipative Kolmogorov scale. In addition, one observes the occurence of negative fluctuations, as shown in fig.2.

From the PDF $`\pi _\tau (Y)`$, we construct the function $`G_\tau (Y)=\mathrm{ln}(\frac{\pi _\tau (Y)}{\pi _\tau (Y)})`$ for $`0Y0.5`$. This small interval around zero allows us to study the symmetry of $`G_\tau (Y)`$ even for the largest integration times, e.g. $`\tau =20\tau _0`$. The function $`G_\tau (Y)`$ is plotted as a function of $`Y`$ in fig.4(a) for $`\tau =3\tau _0,5\tau _0`$ and $`10\tau _0`$. We find that $`G_\tau (Y)`$ is very much linear in $`Y`$, as predicted by eq.1 with a slope $`\alpha (\tau )`$ which increases with $`\tau `$.

We thus turn to the study of the slope $`\alpha (\tau )`$ as a function of $`\tau `$. If eq.1 is correct $`\alpha (\tau )`$ should be a linear function of $`\tau `$. The slopes $`\alpha (\tau )\mathrm{vs}.\tau `$ are plotted in fig.4(b). We see that for $`\tau /\tau _0>4`$, the dependence of $`\alpha (\tau )`$ is linear in $`\tau `$. It is a quite noteworthy feature that $`\tau /\tau _0=4`$ is very close to the rotation period of the disks (this also corresponds to the correlation time of the von Karman flow BHP ). Indeed, fig.4(b) shows that the linear behaviour of $`\alpha (\tau )`$, predicted by eq.1, is obtained only for $`\tau `$ larger than the mean integral time of the system. This observation will be discussed in more details in the next sections.

Here we want to stress another aspect of the measurement, namely the importance of considering the points around $`Y=0`$ for the study of the Fluctuation Theorem. As a test, we have computed the evolution $`\alpha (\tau )`$ obtained by the same analysis of the symmetries of the PDF around the point $`Y=2`$ instead of the point $`Y=0`$. Corresponding results are plotted with $``$ symbols in fig.4(b). We observe that in such a case $`\alpha (\tau )`$ is not linear in $`\tau `$. We thus find that the point $`Y=0`$ has some special property; this is in agreement with the FT prediction.

Summarizing we find that for $`\tau /\tau _0>4`$ $`\alpha (\tau )`$ is linear, and we can write $`\alpha (\tau )=A\tau +B`$. Thus

$$\mathrm{ln}\frac{\pi _\tau (Y)}{\pi _\tau (Y)}=(A\tau +B)Y$$
(7)
We stress that this expression is not in contradiction with eq.1 which has been derived for $`\tau \tau _0`$; rather eq.7 should be considered as a non- asymptotic version of eq.1.

Finally, we check the existence, for the variable of our experiment, of a function independent of $`\tau `$ similar to the one defined in eq.3. In order to do this test, we write the PDF as $`\pi _\tau (Y)=A_\tau e^{\zeta (Y)\alpha (\tau )}`$. Here we use the previously determined function $`\alpha (\tau )`$ instead of $`\tau `$, because, as discussed for eq.2, we are not in the asymptotic regime for all values of $`\tau `$. If the prediction of ref.Sinai  can be applied in this case, then $`\zeta (Y)=\mathrm{ln}[P(Y)/A_\tau ]/\alpha (\tau )`$ has to be independent of $`\tau `$. The functions obtained from the PDFs $`\pi _\tau (Y)`$ of fig.3 is plotted in fig.5. We clearly see that the rescaling is very good. In particular we note that the positive part of $`\pi _\tau (Y)`$, which is strongly non-Gaussian, also scales perfectly. Thus the $`\alpha (\tau )`$ determined using eq.3 allows us to rescale the PDF of $`Y`$ for any $`\tau `$. It is important to stress that the rescaling is not possible if $`\tau `$, instead of $`\alpha (\tau )`$, is used. Furthermore it is obvious that no scaling can be observed using the $`\alpha (\tau )`$ obtained by performing the analysis around the point $`Y=2`$.

In order to check the Sinai scaling function we have performed a different data analysis as suggested in ref. Evans . This analysis, which we will not describe here, yields results in close agreement with those plotted in fig.5.

## IV  A wind tunnel experiment

In the previous section we have shown that the PDF of the fluctuations of force on a small surface satisfies the symmetries imposed by FT and that they can be rescaled using eq.3. These two properties were also observed on the PDFs of the local heat flux fluctuations in a turbulent thermal convection experiment Cili1 . It is important to recall that eq.2 has been proved for global observables and the fact that the symmetry imposed by eq.2 can be observed on a local measurement is not obvious. In addition, the counter rotating disks experiment and the thermal convection experiment are spatially bounded flows. Indeed, in the von Kármán experiment, one observes that, eventhough the fluid is not confined within walls, the turbulence remains bounded in a volume whose lateral extent is roughly equal to twice the diameter of the driving disks. In such situations, one can argue that a local measurement is indicative of the global behavior of the system.

The question thus arises naturally as whether the same observations can be made in truly open systems, where velocity fluctuations are advected outside the observation zone. For this reason, we have repeated the experiment on the wind pressure fluctuations inserting the measuring surface in the turbulent region of a jet developing inside a wind tunnel. The jet is formed by a 5.2 cm nozzle. The obstacle is located 35 diameters downstream of the nozzle where the turbulence is fully developed, at distance of 4 diameters off the axis of the jet. At the measurement location, the mean wind speed is 1 m/s and the Reynolds number based on the jet size is $`Re=45000`$. The force of the wind on the obstacle is measured as the bending of the shaft that holds the plate, as detected from the deviation of a laser beam. The sampling frequency is $`1/\tau _0=100`$ Hz, and $`\mathrm{3.6\; 10}^6`$ data points are accumulated, with a 16 bit resolution.

The force fluctuation spectrum is plotted in fig.6(b). The spectrum is very broad and presents no resonance (the peak at 30Hz is due to the wind tunnel driving fan). As in sec.3 we define the normalized variable $`y=F(t)/F_0`$, and the coarse-grained variable $`Y`$ after integration over a time interval $`\tau `$. The PDFs of $`Y`$ are plotted in fig.7. The curves are extremely non-Gaussian, with the development of an exponential tail at large values of the force, but also important negative excursion on the left-hand side.

In order to analyze them, we repeat on the PDFs of the wind pressure in the wind tunnel the analysis developed in section 3. Specifically we verify that the previously defined function $`G_\tau (Y)`$ is linear in $`Y`$ for $`0.5<Y<0.5`$. In fig.8(a) we plot the measured slope $`\alpha (\tau )`$ as a function of $`\tau `$. We find that the affine behavior previously observed, $`\alpha (\tau )=A\tau +B`$, is again verified here even for small values of $`\tau `$. It means that the PDFs of the wind tunnel measurements do verify the functional form of the fluctuation theorem (eq.2), in an interval close to $`Y=0`$.

However we find that for small $`\tau `$ values, it is not possible to derive a unique function $`\zeta (Y)`$ independent of $`\tau `$ which would yield a complete rescaling of the PDFs. This is evidenced in fig.8(b) where it can be observed that some rescaling property begins to form at the larges values of $`\tau `$, e.g. for $`\tau >20\tau _0`$. It is very interesting to note that this time corresponds to the time of flight of the wind from the jet outlet to the measuring point; for times longer than this time of flight, the fluctuations can be associated to global variations of the turbulent field impacting the obstacle, as a block. This point deserves more investigations, some currently under progress.

## V Concluding remarks

In this paper we have described two experiments in which we have measured the pressure fluctuations of the wind on a small surface. One of the two experiments, the counter rotating disks, is a spatially correlated flow BHP  and the other, the wind tunnel, is an open flow. The main results of this investigation are that in the spatially correlated flow the PDFs of the fluctuations of force on an obstacle, which are strongly non Gaussian, verify the symmetry imposed by the Gallavotti-Cohen fluctuation theorem, and in addition can be rescaled according to the Sinai theory. More precisely in order to rescale the PDF one has to use the measured $`\alpha (\tau )`$ and not simply $`\tau `$ as indicated in eq.3. The linear function $`\alpha (\tau )`$ may be seen as a finite time correction of eq.3, which is valid only for $`\tau \mathrm{}`$. The existence of a scaling function $`\zeta (Y)`$ independent of $`\tau `$ is very important because it strengthen the check of the FT. Indeed a strict test of the FT using eq.2 can only be done for values of $`Y`$ close to zero, and one always observe that the probability of getting negative fluctuations in an actual system is actually very small. However our measurements show that using the value of $`\alpha (\tau )`$ estimated for $`Y`$ close to zero, it is possible to scale all the PDFs onto a single function $`\zeta (Y)`$ for all $`Y`$. This is a non trivial property which was already observed in the heat fluctuations in turbulent thermal convection Cili1 . This property is not observed, at least for short times, in the jet data described in sec.4 of this paper. The main difference between the jet experiment, the thermal convection and counter rotating disk experiments is that the the first behaves as a spatially uncorrelated flow because perturbations are always advected downstream of the nozzle. As we have already mentioned this difference is an important one. Indeed eq.2 has been proved only for global observables, therefore one can picture that if the turbulence is strong enough, a quasi local measurement can provide a significant measurement of all of the flow, if the later is spatially correlated. This is not necessary true in a open flow where the recurrence time can be very long. This claim is of course preliminary and it merits to be studied in more details.

Another important point which deserves a study is the prefactor in eq.2 which in the standard derivation is the phase space contraction rate. In our experiments we have to study how this prefactor changes as a function of the Reynolds number. This is needed in order to have a more quantitative comparison between theory and experiment.

Finally we have to stress that the study of the probability of extreme negative fluctuations can be very useful in many applications. If one could prove the universality of eq.2 in various geometries, then one would readily use it to compute the probability of the rare, extremely negative, events.

Acknowledgements We acknowledge useful discussions with E. Cohen, G. Gallavotti and L. Rondoni.