text:
# Aberration by gravitational lenses in motion

## 1 Introduction

On September 8, 2002, the close alignment of Jupiter with quasar J0842+1835 provided the opportunity for an extraordinary measurement that consisted of the delay between the observations of the quasar as recorded by two radio antennae. The observation was conducted by the National Radio Astronomical Observatory (USA) and the Max Planck Institute for Radio Astronomy. The time delay refers to the difference in arrival time of two lightrays leaving the quasar simultaneously at a single emission event. The observation (Fomalont & Kopeikin, 2003) verified the existence of a correction of order $`v/c`$ to the time delay of a gravitational lens in motion: the fact that the time delay of light signals by a point lens in motion carries a factor of $`(1+v/c)`$ with respect to the Shapiro time delay –which, in turn, represents the additional time imposed on a light signal due to the slow down by the gravitational field of a point mass at rest. Here $`v`$ is the component of the velocity of the deflector along the line of sight.

The $`v/c`$ correction of first order to the bending angle was predicted (to the best of my knowledge) by Pyne & Birkinshaw (1993), and subsequently confirmed by Kopeikin & Schäfer (1999), Frittelli et al (2002) and Frittelli (2003). The recent observational verification strongly suggests that such a correction needs to be incorporated into the fitting of gravitational lensing events. The size of the correction is extremely small and may be negligible at cosmological scales. Nevertheless, the effect may not only be important but even controllable in microlensing events such as nearby stars with high proper motions acting as lenses for distant stars in the Milky Way or in the Magellanic Clouds (Frittelli, 2003; Paczyński, 1996).

Here it is shown that the $`v/c`$ effect admits a natural interpretation in the standard framework of gravitational lensing. In this framework, the bending of light is interpreted in terms of light propagating within a medium with an effective index of refraction, rather than in terms of a metric field (Petters et al., 2001; Schneider et al, 1992). Formally, the bending is analogous to that induced by a piece of glass with a non-uniform index of refraction. The value of this interpretation resides in its potential to integrate the $`v/c`$ effect with other standard practices in gravitational lensing.

## 2 Aberration by gravitational lenses

It is well known (Bergmann, 1942) that the apparent angular position of distant stars wobbles as the Earth turns in its orbit around the Sun. The wobble is the aberration caused by the observation of a lightray in two different frames: the Sun’s rest frame, and the inertial frame instantaneously attached to the Earth at the moment of observation. In the Sun’s rest frame at the observation event, the direction of a lightray and the velocity of Earth define a plane where coordinates $`(x,y)`$ can be defined so that the incoming lightray makes an angle $`\theta `$ with the negative $`y`$axis, and so that the Earth’s 3-velocity has components $`\stackrel{}{v}=(v^x,v^y,0)`$. In the Earth’s frame the coordinates are $`(x^{},y^{},z^{},ct^{})`$ with

$`\stackrel{}{r}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{r}\stackrel{}{v}t+\stackrel{}{v}(\gamma 1)\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{v}\stackrel{}{r}}{v^2}}t\right)`$ (1)
$`t^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma \left(t{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{v}\stackrel{}{r}}{c^2}}\right)`$ (2)
where $`\gamma =(1(v/c)^2)^{1/2}`$. With the convention that $`ds^2=\eta _{ab}dx^adx^b=d(ct)^2+dx^2+dy^2+dz^2`$, the Lorentz transformation applied to the null vector $`k^a`$ in the Sun’s rest frame given by

$$k^a=(k^x,k^y,0,1)$$

where $`(k^x)^2+(k^y)^2=1`$ yields the null vector $`k^a=k^b_bx^a`$ as seen in the Earth’s frame of reference, the spatial part of which being

$$\stackrel{}{k}^{}=\stackrel{}{k}\frac{\stackrel{}{v}}{c}+(\gamma 1)\frac{\stackrel{}{v}}{c}\left(\frac{c\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{v}}{v^2}1\right).$$

The observed angle with the negative $`y`$axis on Earth is $`\mathrm{tan}\theta ^{}k^x/k^y`$. We are only interested in the leading correction of order $`v/c`$, so we may neglect the term proportional to $`(\gamma 1)`$ to get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{k^x}{k^y}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^xv^x/c}{k^yv^y/c}}+O((v/c)^2)`$ (3)
$`=`$ $`\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{v^y}{ck^y}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{k^x}{k^y}}{\displaystyle \frac{v^x}{ck^y}}+O((v/c)^2).`$ (4)
By definition we have $`k^x=\mathrm{sin}\theta `$ and $`k^y=\mathrm{cos}\theta `$ so this relationship reads

$$\mathrm{tan}\theta ^{}=\left(1\frac{v^y}{c\mathrm{cos}\theta }\right)\mathrm{tan}\theta \frac{v^x}{c\mathrm{cos}\theta },$$

that is: the standard aberration formula for angles $`\theta `$ of any size between $`0`$ and $`\pi /2`$, correct up to second order in $`v/c`$ (Bergmann, 1942). For small angles $`\theta `$ this simplifies to

$$\theta ^{}=\left(1\frac{v^y}{c}\right)\theta \frac{v^x}{c},$$
(5)
which shows that the two components of the Earth’s velocity have completely different aberration effects. The “longitudinal” component, $`v^y`$, which at this level of accuracy is indistinguishable from the component of the velocity along the line of sight, affects the apparent angle as a prefactor, whereas the “transverse” component $`v^x`$ simply adds a fixed shift to all small angles.

Next let’s consider gravitational lensing in its simplest form, that is: as the propagation of a lightray within an optically active medium of index of refraction $`n`$. The Newtonian potential $`U=GM/r`$ of a point mass at rest effectively slows down a lightray, inducing an effective index of refraction $`n=12U/c^2`$ (by Eq. (4.16) of Schneider et al (1992)). By Fermat’s principle, the path of the lightray follows the direction of the unit vector $`\widehat{k}`$ that minimizes the travel time (see, for instance, Rossi (1965)):

$$\frac{d\widehat{k}}{d\mathrm{}}=\widehat{k}\times \left[\frac{n}{n}\times \widehat{k}\right],$$
(6)
where $`d\mathrm{}`$ is the Euclidean element of length along the path. Since $`\widehat{k}\times (n\times \widehat{k})=n(\widehat{k}n)\widehat{k}`$, we have, equivalently,

$$\frac{d\widehat{k}}{d\mathrm{}}=\frac{_{}n}{n},$$
(7)
where the symbol $``$ indicates the local plane perpendicular to $`\widehat{k}`$. From emission to reception, the lightray changes direction by

$$\stackrel{}{\alpha }\widehat{k}_{in}\widehat{k}_{out},$$

where the sublabels indicate the directions in which the lightray effectively enters and leaves the gravitational field of the point mass. Since the path of the lightray stays on a plane, we can restrict attention to the magnitude of $`\stackrel{}{\alpha }`$ which thus represents the change between the angles that the incoming and exiting lightrays make with the negative $`y`$axis:

$$\alpha =\theta _{in}\theta _{out}.$$

In the case of a point mass at rest, the bending angle is

$$\alpha =\frac{4GM}{c^2\xi }$$
(8)
where $`\xi `$ is the distance of closest approach of the lightray to the point mass. This would be the bending of light that a deflector would induce on a lightray, in the deflector’s rest frame, since, during the fast transit of a lightray, the deflector is well approximated as an inertial frame. But since the deflector is in motion with velocity $`\stackrel{}{v}_d`$ relative to the observer, which is approximately constant for the duration of the transit of the lightray in its vicinity, then from the point of view of the observer both angles $`\theta _{in},\theta _{out}`$ –as well as the entire path during the transit– are aberrated according to (5) where $`\stackrel{}{v}=\stackrel{}{v}_d`$. In the rest frame of the observer we have

$`\alpha ^{}`$ $``$ $`\theta _{in}^{}\theta _{out}^{}`$ (9)
$`=`$ $`\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{v_d^y}{c}}\right)(\theta _{in}\theta _{out})`$
$`=`$ $`\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{v_d^y}{c}}\right)\alpha .`$
Therefore the bending angle by a deflector moving with speed $`v`$ along the line of sight carries a prefactor of $`(1+v/c)`$ with respect to the bending angle by the same deflector at rest. The component of the velocity of the deflector transverse to the line of sight does not affect the bending angle (it affects both the incoming and exiting directions by the same shift, hence not their difference).

Now let’s see what this implies for the time delay by a deflector in motion with respect to the same deflector at rest. By definition we have

$$\stackrel{}{\alpha }=\frac{d\widehat{k}}{d\mathrm{}}𝑑\mathrm{}$$

Since $`n`$ differs from 1 only in terms that are of the order of the Newtonian potential (the mass), then

$$\frac{d\widehat{k}}{d\mathrm{}}=_{}(n1)+O(U^2),$$

and

$$\frac{d\widehat{k}}{d\mathrm{}}𝑑\mathrm{}=_{}(n1)𝑑\mathrm{}=_{}(c\mathrm{\Delta }t),$$
(10)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ is the Shapiro time delay by the lens at rest:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t=\frac{4GM}{c^3}\mathrm{ln}\xi .$$
(11)
So the bending angle and the gravitational time delay are related by a gradient, that is, the time delay acts as a potential for the deflection:

$$\stackrel{}{\alpha }=_{}(c\mathrm{\Delta }t).$$
(12)
The same is true if the lens is moving so far as the motion of the lens is encoded in the corresponding index of refraction $`n^{}`$ resulting in a corresponding gravitational time delay $`\mathrm{\Delta }t^{}`$, that is:

$$\stackrel{}{\alpha }^{}=_{}(c\mathrm{\Delta }t^{})$$
(13)
It follows that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t^{}=\left(1+\frac{v^y}{c}\right)\mathrm{\Delta }t,$$
(14)
up to an additive constant. In this picture of gravitational lensing, the time delay by a deflector in motion with speed $`v`$ along the line of sight carries a prefactor of $`(1+v/c)`$ with respect to the standard Shapiro time delay, essentially due to the constancy of the speed of light.

One may question whether general relativity was used at all in this simplified scheme. The answer is yes, in two ways. First, the factor of $`2`$ in the effective index of refraction $`n=12U/c^2`$ is a direct effect of the notion that light travels along null geodesics of the metric $`ds^2=(1+2U/c^2)c^2dt^2+(12U/c^2)d\stackrel{}{x}d\stackrel{}{x}`$. In Newtonian fashion, on the contrary, conservation of energy (per unit mass) for an orbit with instantaneous speed $`u`$ that tends asymptotically to speed $`c`$ leads to $`c^2/2=u^2/2+U`$, which yields an effective index of refraction $`c/un_{Newt}=1U/c^2+O(U^2)`$. This difference in index of refraction leads to a difference of a factor of 2 in the bending angle, and, as is well known, constitutes the main and only difference between Newtonian and relativistic bending of light in the weak field regime of a point mass at rest, being the object of the classical test of 1919. This is discussed, for instance, in Section 1.1.1 of Schneider et al (1992).

But the second way in which general relativity is used in the present derivation of the $`v/c`$ effect is in the fact that the gravitational physics involved is Lorentz invariant. The physics resides in the index of refraction $`n`$. It is known that under a Lorentz transformation, the index of refraction of an optical medium transforms as $`n^1=n_s^1(v/c)(1n_s^2)`$ where $`n_s`$ is the index of refraction of the same medium at rest, as demonstrated by Fizeau in the classic experiment of light traversing a moving fluid in a pipe (Bergmann, 1942). In gravitational terms, where $`n_s=12U/c^2`$, this translates directly to $`n=12U/c^24(v/c)U/c^2`$. This index of refraction is entirely consistent with the metric $`ds^2=(1+2U/c^2)c^2dt^28(\stackrel{}{V}/c^2)d\stackrel{}{x}cdt+(12U/c^2)d\stackrel{}{x}d\stackrel{}{x}`$ with $`\stackrel{}{V}U\stackrel{}{v}/c`$ (Schneider et al, 1992), which is related by a Lorentz transformation to the metric $`ds_s^2=(1+2U/c^2)c^2dt^2+(12U/c^2)d\stackrel{}{x}d\stackrel{}{x}`$ of a body at rest. Because the linearized Einstein equations are wave equations, which are Lorentz invariant, both metrics are solutions (for exactly the same reason that the electric field of a uniformly moving charge coincides with the Lorentz-transformed field of a charge at rest). The verification of the $`v/c`$ effect is thus a direct check of the Lorentz invariance of the linearized Einstein equations, in a way that the Eddington solar eclipse expedition was not. The Jupiter experiment is, thus, nothing short of remarkable.

The significance of the Jupiter experiment has been overshadowed by a controversy as to whether or not the experiment directly measured the “speed of gravity” (hence beating the gravitational wave detectors in the race for the first direct detection of gravitational waves). Because the experiment actually found the field equations of general relativity to be Lorentz invariant in the weak limit, there is hardly any question that the experiment actually measured the speed of the characteristics of the field equations and found it consistent with the prediction: the speed of light. What this means is that, since the characteristics are lightlike, when gravitational waves occur, they must travel at the speed of light. This does provide a foundation to interpret $`c`$ in the prefactor of $`(1+v/c)`$ in the time delay as the “speed of gravity”. But this does not mean that gravitational waves emitted by Jupiter affected the measurement. The effect of gravitational waves in the experiment is practically negligible, as thoroughly demonstrated by Will (2003). The experiment did not directly measure the gravitational waves emitted by Jupiter. This is the foundation of Will’s technical claim that $`c`$ in the prefactor of $`(1+v/c)`$ is not the “speed of gravity” (Will, 2003). It would seem as if semantics had been playing a part in fueling up the controversy. It is to be hoped that the present interpretation of the effect by simple aberration will help settle the significance of the Jupiter experiment and provide a strong case for corrections to microlensing.

## acknowledgments

I am indebted to Patrick Riggs for calling my attention to the Jupiter experiment. This work was supported by the NSF under grant No. PHY-0070624 to Duquesne University.


format: text

text:
# A Geometric Jacquet Functor

## 1. Introduction

In the paper \[BB1\], Beilinson and Bernstein used the method of localisation to give a new proof and generalisation of Casselman’s subrepresentation theorem. The key point is to interpret $`𝔫`$-homology in geometric terms. The object of this note is to go one step further and describe the Jacquet module functor on Harish-Chandra modules via geometry.

Let $`G_{}`$ be a real reductive linear algebraic group, and let $`K_{}`$ be a maximal compact subgroup of $`G_{}`$. We use lower-case gothic letters to denote the corresponding Lie algebras, and omit the subscript “$``$” to denote complexifications. Thus $`(𝔤,K)`$ denotes the Harish-Chandra pair corresponding to $`G_{}`$.

Let $`𝔥`$ be the universal Cartan of $`𝔤`$, that is $`𝔥=𝔟/[𝔟,𝔟]`$ where $`𝔟`$ is any Borel of $`𝔤`$. We equip $`𝔥`$ with the usual choice of positive roots by declaring the roots of $`𝔟`$ to be negative. We write $`\rho 𝔥^{}`$ for half the sum of the positive roots. To any $`\lambda 𝔥^{}`$ we associate a character $`\chi _\lambda `$ of the centre $`Z(𝔤)`$ of the universal enveloping algebra $`U(𝔤)`$ via the Harish-Chandra homomorphism. Under this correspondence, the element $`\rho 𝔥^{}`$ corresponds to the trivial character $`\chi _\rho `$. For the rest of this paper, we work with $`\lambda 𝔥^{}`$ that is dominant, i.e. $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }(\lambda )\{1,2,\mathrm{}\}`$ for any positive coroot $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }`$.

A Harish-Chandra module with infinitesimal character $`\lambda `$ is, by definition, a $`(𝔤,K)`$-module which is finitely generated over $`U(𝔤)`$ and on which $`Z(𝔤)`$ acts via the character $`\chi _\lambda `$. We can also view Harish-Chandra modules with infinitesimal character $`\lambda `$ as modules over the ring $`U_\lambda `$ which is the quotient of $`U(𝔤)`$ by the two-sided ideal generated by $`\{z\chi _\lambda (z)zZ(𝔤)\}`$. In light of this, we will sometimes refer to such Harish-Chandra modules simply as $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-modules.

Let $`X`$ be the flag manifold of $`𝔤`$, and let $`𝒟_\lambda `$ be the sheaf of twisted differential operators with twist $`\lambda `$. By a $`(𝒟_\lambda ,K)`$-module we mean a coherent $`𝒟_\lambda `$-module which is $`K`$-equivariant. Such a $`𝒟_\lambda `$-module is, by necessity, regular holonomic since $`K`$ acts on $`X`$ with finitely many orbits. According to Beilinson-Bernstein \[BB2\], we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(X,𝒟_\lambda )=U_\lambda `$, and the global sections functor

(1.1)
$$\mathrm{\Gamma }:\{(𝒟_\lambda ,K)\text{-modules}\}\{(U_\lambda ,K)\text{-modules}\}$$

is exact and essentially surjective. A section of the functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is given by the localisation functor, which takes a $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-module $`M`$ to the $`(𝒟_\lambda ,K)`$-module $`𝒟_\lambda _{U_\lambda }M.`$ The localisation functor is an equivalence if $`\lambda `$ is regular.

Let $`P_{}`$ be a minimal parabolic subgroup of $`G_{}`$, let $`𝔫_{}`$ be the nilpotent radical of $`𝔭_{}`$, and let $`\overline{𝔫}_{}`$ be the nilpotent subalgebra of $`𝔤_{}`$ opposite to $`𝔫_{}`$. If $`A_{}`$ denotes the maximal split subtorus of the centre of a Levi factor of $`P_{}`$, then $`G_{}`$ admits the Iwasawa decomposition $`G_{}=K_{}A_{}N_{}.`$

Given a $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-module $`M`$, we define the Jacquet module of $`M`$ by the formula

(1.2)
$$J(M)=𝔫\text{-finite vectors in }\widehat{M}\text{,}$$

where $`\widehat{M}`$ is the $`\overline{𝔫}`$-adic completion $`\underset{}{\mathrm{lim}}M/\overline{𝔫}^kM`$ of $`M`$. We call the functor $`J`$ which takes $`M`$ to $`J(M)`$ the Jacquet functor. As we will explain in the next section, this functor, which is covariant and preserves the infinitesimal character, is dual to the usual Jacquet functor. The module $`J(M)`$ is a $`(U_\lambda ,N)`$-module (in the sense that it is a Harish-Chandra module for the pair $`(𝔤,N)`$ with infinitesimal character $`\lambda `$).

To define the geometric Jacquet functor, we proceed as follows. Let $`\nu :𝔾_mA`$ be a cocharacter of $`G`$ which is positive on the roots in $`𝔫`$. By composing $`\nu `$ with the left action of $`G`$ on $`X`$, we obtain an action of $`𝔾_m`$ on $`X`$ with action map

(1.3)
$$a:𝔾_m\times XX.$$

Consider the diagram

(1.4)
$$𝔾_m\times X\stackrel{𝑗}{}𝔸^1\times X\stackrel{𝑖}{}\{0\}\times X\stackrel{}{}X$$

where the maps $`j`$ and $`i`$ are the obvious inclusions. To a $`(𝒟_\lambda ,K)`$-module $``$, we associate a $`𝒟_\lambda `$-module $`\mathrm{\Psi }()`$ by taking the nearby cycles of $`j_{}a^{}`$ along $`\{0\}\times X\stackrel{}{}X.`$

Before stating our main theorem, let us note that the localisation theory discussed above for $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-modules applies equally well to $`(U_\lambda ,N)`$-modules.

###### 1.1 Theorem.

(i) The localisation functor $`M𝒟_\lambda _{U_\lambda }M`$ takes the Jacquet functor $`J`$ to the geometric Jacquet functor $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, i.e.,

$$𝒟_\lambda _{U_\lambda }J(M)=\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒟_\lambda _{U_\lambda }M).$$

(ii) The global sections functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ takes the geometric Jacquet functor $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ to the Jacquet functor $`J`$, i.e.,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Psi }())=J(\mathrm{\Gamma }()).$$

###### 1.2 Remark.

While the proof that we give of the main theorem is entirely algebraic, its motivation is quite geometric. Section 5 below provides a discussion of its geometric interpretation: via the deRham functor $`\mathrm{DR}`$ the category of $`(𝒟_\lambda ,K)`$-modules is equivalent to the category of $`\lambda `$-twisted $`K`$-equivariant perverse sheaves on $`X`$, and via this equivalence, $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ may be viewed as the operation of nearby cycles on these perverse sheaves. We also discuss explicitly the case of $`G_{}=\mathrm{SL}_2()`$.

###### 1.3 Remark.

The functor $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ takes $`(𝒟_\lambda ,K)`$-modules to $`(𝒟_\lambda ,N)`$-modules. This follows immediately from the above theorem and the fact that by the translation principle we may assume that $`\lambda `$ is regular.

###### 1.4 Remark.

In this paper we could replace the “Iwasawa nilpotent subalgebra” $`𝔫`$ by any larger nilpotent subalgebra.

###### 1.5 Remark.

The problem of giving a geometric construction of the Jacquet functor was also considered by Casian and Collingwood. In their paper \[CC\], they describe a nearby cycles construction on Harish-Chandra sheaves (with dominant integral infinitesimal character); they refer to the induced functor on $`K`$-groups (taking into account weight filtrations) as a mixed Jacquet functor. They conjecture that this functor induces the usual Jacquet functor on Harish-Chandra modules.

The nearby cycles construction of \[CC\] coincides with the construction appearing in the definition of the functor $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. (Loosely, they pass to the limit with respect to one simple coroot at a time, while in the construction of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, we pass to the limit with respect to all simple coroots at once.) Thus, Theorem 1.1 establishes the conjecture of Casian and Collingwood.

## 2. Jacquet functors

In this section we recall some standard facts about the Jacquet functor as it is usually defined, and discuss the relation between this functor and the functor $`J`$ defined in the Introduction. As a general reference for basic facts, we use \[W\], Chapter 4.

If $`M`$ is a $`U_\lambda `$-module, then the Jacquet module of $`M`$ with respect to $`\overline{𝔫}`$ is defined by the formula

(2.1)
$$\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)=\overline{𝔫}\text{-finite vectors in }M^{},$$

where $`M^{}`$ is the algebraic dual of $`M`$. Of course, the infinitesimal character of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)`$ is $`\chi _\lambda =\chi _\lambda ^{}`$, where $`\lambda ^{}=\lambda +2\rho `$.

###### 2.1 Lemma.

The functor $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}`$ is an exact contravariant functor from $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-modules (or more generally, $`U_\lambda `$-modules that are finitely generated over $`U(\overline{𝔫})`$) to $`(U_\lambda ^{},\overline{N})`$-modules.

###### Proof.

The Lemma of Osborne guarantees that any $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-module is finitely generated over $`U(\overline{𝔫})`$. If $`M`$ is such a finitely generated module, then $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)`$ is finitely generated over $`U(𝔤)`$, and for any positive integer $`k`$, the space of $`\overline{𝔫}^k`$-torsion vectors in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)`$ is finite-dimensional. (It is dual to the finite-dimensional space $`M/\overline{𝔫}^kM`$.) Thus $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)`$ is a Harish-Chandra module for $`(𝔤,\overline{N})`$.

One may regard $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)`$ as the topological dual of the $`\overline{𝔫}`$-adic completion $`\widehat{M}`$ of $`M`$ (equipped with its $`\overline{𝔫}`$-adic topology). The exactness of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}`$ is thus implied by the exactness of forming $`\overline{𝔫}`$-adic completions. This in turn follows from the fact that since $`\overline{𝔫}`$ is nilpotent the usual Artin-Rees Lemma holds for the non-commutative ring $`U(\overline{𝔫})`$. ∎

Recall our definition of the Jacquet module $`J(M)`$ as $`𝔫`$-finite vectors in the $`\overline{𝔫}`$-adic completion $`\widehat{M}`$ of $`M`$.

###### 2.2 Lemma.

The functor $`J`$ is an exact covariant functor from $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-modules to $`(U_\lambda ,N)`$-modules.

###### Proof.

First note that one may view $`\widehat{M}`$ as the algebraic dual $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)^{}`$ of $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)`$. The decomposition $`𝔤=𝔫\overline{𝔭}`$ allows us to write $`U(𝔤)=U(𝔫)_{}U(\overline{𝔭})`$ as $``$-vector spaces. If $`M`$ is a $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-module then for a sufficiently large choice of $`k`$, $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)`$ is generated over $`U(𝔤)`$ by the space $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}[\overline{𝔫}^k]`$ of $`\overline{𝔫}^k`$-torsion elements in $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}`$. Since $`U(\overline{𝔭})`$ leaves $`\stackrel{ˇ}{M}[\overline{𝔫}^k]`$ invariant, we see that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{J}(M)`$ is finitely generated over $`U(𝔫)`$. The lemma is now a consequence of the preceding one (with $`𝔫`$ replaced by $`\overline{𝔫}`$). ∎

We will now give a more concrete description of $`J(M)`$ which will be useful for our purposes. Recall from the last section that we have a cocharacter $`\nu :𝔾_mG`$ which when paired with the roots of $`𝔤`$ is positive precisely on the roots in $`𝔫`$. Let us write $`h`$ for the semisimple element in $`𝔤`$ given by $`d\nu (t_t)`$. (For any coordinate $`t`$ on $`𝔾_m`$, the Euler vector field $`t_t`$ gives an element of the Lie algebra of $`𝔾_m`$ independent of the choice of coordinate.) Note that the centraliser of $`h`$ is precisely the Levi factor $`𝔩`$ of $`𝔭`$, and the weights of $`h`$ acting on $`𝔤`$ are integral.

For each natural number $`k`$, the quotient $`M/\overline{𝔫}^kM`$ is a finite-dimensional vector space on which $`h`$ acts, and so may be written as a direct sum of generalised $`h`$-eigenspaces. The surjection $`M/\overline{𝔫}^{k+1}MM/\overline{𝔫}^kM`$ is $`h`$-equivariant, and so induces surjections of the corresponding generalised $`h`$-eigenspaces.

As usual, we write $`\widehat{M}`$ for the $`\overline{𝔫}`$-adic completion $`\underset{}{\mathrm{lim}}M/\overline{𝔫}^kM`$ of $`M`$.

###### 2.3 Lemma.

If $`M`$ is a $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-module then the generalised $`h`$-eigenspaces of $`\widehat{M}`$ are finite dimensional. For any integer $`m`$ the sum of generalised $`h`$-eigenspaces with eigenvalue greater than $`m`$ is finite dimensional. Furthermore, $`\widehat{M}`$ is the direct product of its generalised $`h`$-eigenspaces.

###### Proof.

As the space $`M/\overline{𝔫}M`$ is finite dimensional, it gives rise to a finite set $`S`$ of generalised $`h`$-eigenvalues. The elements in $`\overline{𝔫}^kM/\overline{𝔫}^{k+1}M`$ can be obtained by multiplying $`M/\overline{𝔫}M`$ by $`\overline{𝔫}^k`$, and so each eigenvalue of $`h`$ on $`\overline{𝔫}^kM/\overline{𝔫}^{k+1}M`$ is a sum of an element of the set $`S`$ with an integer less than or equal to $`k`$. This gives our conclusion. ∎

###### 2.4 Proposition.

If $`M`$ is $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-module, then the $`(U_\lambda ,N)`$-module $`J(M)`$ is naturally isomorphic to the direct sum of the generalised $`h`$-eigenspaces in $`\widehat{M}`$.

###### Proof.

To prove the proposition, we must show that a vector in $`\widehat{M}`$ is $`𝔫`$-finite if and only if it is a sum of generalised $`h`$-eigenvectors. Clearly any $`𝔫`$-finite vector is such a sum since it lies in a finite-dimensional $`h`$-invariant subspace of $`\widehat{M}`$. Conversely, by the previous lemma, the generalised $`h`$-eigenvalues of $`\widehat{M}`$ are bounded above, and so any sum of generalised $`h`$-eigenvectors is $`𝔫`$-finite. ∎

For $`\alpha `$, let $`\widehat{M}_\alpha `$ denote the $`\alpha `$-generalised eigenspace of $`h`$ acting on $`\widehat{M}`$. We define an increasing $``$-filtration on $`\widehat{M}`$ by the formula

(2.2)
$$F_\alpha (\widehat{M})=\underset{\beta \alpha }{}\widehat{M}_\beta .$$

Here and in what follows, for $`\alpha ,\beta `$, we write $`\beta \alpha `$ to mean $`\alpha \beta `$ is a non-negative integer. Pulling back this filtration via the injection $`M\widehat{M},`$ we obtain a filtration on $`M`$. The induced map on associated graded modules

(2.3)
$$\mathrm{Gr}_{}^FM\mathrm{Gr}_{}^F\widehat{M}$$

is an isomorphism. Indeed the proof of Lemma 2.3 shows that the filtration just constructed is cofinal with the $`\overline{𝔫}`$-adic filtration on $`M`$, and thus that $`\widehat{M}`$ is the completion of $`M`$ with respect to this filtration.

Similarly, we grade $`\overline{𝔫},`$ and hence its enveloping algebra $`U(\overline{𝔫})`$, according to the eigenvalues of the adjoint action of $`h`$. Let $`U(\overline{𝔫})_\beta `$ denote the graded piece on which $`h`$ acts with eigenvalue $`\beta `$. Note that for $`U(\overline{𝔫})_\beta `$ to be non-zero, the eigenvalue $`\beta `$ must be a non-positive integer. We define a filtration on $`U(\overline{𝔫})`$ by the formula

(2.4)
$$F_k(U(\overline{𝔫}))=\underset{\beta k}{}U(\overline{𝔫})_\beta .$$

The $`U(\overline{𝔫})`$-module structure on $`M`$ is compatible with the filtrations on $`U(\overline{𝔫})`$ and $`M`$.

###### 2.5 Lemma.

Let $`\alpha `$ be a complex number.

(i) For any $`k0,`$ the quotient $`F_{\alpha k}(M)/(F_k(U(\overline{𝔫}))F_\alpha (M))`$ is finite-dimensional.

(ii) If $`\alpha `$ is sufficiently small, then for any integer $`k0`$, there is an equality $`F_{\alpha k}(M)=F_k(U(\overline{𝔫}))F_\alpha (M)`$ (and so the quotient considered in (i) actually vanishes).

###### Proof.

The Lemma of Osborne guarantees that $`M`$ is finitely generated over $`U(\overline{𝔫})`$. Also, the filtrations constructed on each of $`U(\overline{𝔫})`$ and $`M`$ are cofinal with the $`\overline{𝔫}`$-adic filtrations. Thus the lemma follows from an easy variant of the Artin-Rees Lemma (applied to the filtrations $`F_{}`$ rather than the $`\overline{𝔫}`$-adic filtrations). ∎

## 3. Nearby cycles, $`V`$-filtration, and the geometric Jacquet functor

In this section, we recall the formalism of the $`V`$-filtration and the way it is used to define the nearby cycles functor on $`𝒟`$-modules. For a reference, see \[K1\].

As before, we write $`X`$ for the flag manifold of $`𝔤`$, and $`𝒟_\lambda `$ for the sheaf of twisted differential operators with twist $`\lambda `$. We denote by $`t`$ a coordinate on $`𝔸^1`$, and consider the variety $`𝔸^1\times X`$ and its subvariety $`\{0\}\times XX`$. We write $`\stackrel{~}{𝒟}_\lambda `$ for the sheaf of $`\lambda `$-twisted differential operators on $`𝔸^1\times X`$. (Of course, the twisting only occurs along the $`X`$-factor.) The $`V`$-filtration on $`\stackrel{~}{𝒟}_\lambda `$ is the filtration where we declare that the variable $`t`$ is of degree one, $`_t`$ is of degree $`1`$, and everything in $`𝒟_\lambda `$ is of degree zero.

For a regular holonomic $`\stackrel{~}{𝒟}_\lambda `$-module $``$ on $`𝔸^1\times X`$, the $`V`$-filtration $`V^\alpha `$ is a decreasing filtration on $``$, indexed by $`\alpha `$, compatible with the $`V`$-filtration on $`\stackrel{~}{𝒟}_\lambda `$. The V-filtration on $``$ is uniquely determined by the following properties:

(3.1)
$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \text{there exist elements }& u_1,\mathrm{},u_k\text{ and }\mu _1,\mathrm{},\mu _k\text{ such that}\hfill \\ & V^\alpha ()=\underset{\alpha m_i+\mu _i}{}V^{m_i}(\stackrel{~}{𝒟}_\lambda )u_i,\hfill \end{array}$$

and

(3.2) $`\mathrm{Gr}_V^\alpha `$ is a generalised eigenspace of $`t_t`$ of eigenvalue $`\alpha `$.
Here for $`\alpha `$, we have written $`\mathrm{Gr}_V^\alpha `$ for the quotient $`V^\alpha ()/V^{>\alpha }().`$

The nearby cycles of $``$ along $`\{0\}\times XX`$ are given by

(3.3)
$$\psi ()=\mathrm{Gr}_V^0\underset{\begin{array}{c}\alpha /\\ \alpha \end{array}}{}\mathrm{Gr}_V^\alpha .$$

We are now ready to define the geometric Jacquet functor. Recall from the first section that via the cocharacter $`\nu :𝔾_mG`$, we have defined a $`𝔾_m`$-action on $`X`$. This gives us the diagram

(3.4)
$$X\stackrel{𝑎}{}𝔾_m\times X\stackrel{𝑗}{}𝔸^1\times X\stackrel{𝑖}{}\{0\}\times X\stackrel{}{}X$$

where $`a`$ is the action map, and the maps $`j`$ and $`i`$ are the obvious inclusions. We define the geometric Jacquet functor $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ by the formula

(3.5)
$$\mathrm{\Psi }()=\psi (j_{}a^{}),\text{for a }(𝒟_\lambda ,K)\text{-module }.$$

## 4. Proof of the main theorem

In this section, we give a proof of Theorem 1.1. To begin with, suppose that $``$ is a $`(𝒟_\lambda ,K)`$-module arising as the localisation of a $`(U_\lambda ,K)`$-module $`M`$, so that $`=𝒟_\lambda _{U_\lambda }M.`$ Our aim is to explicitly write down the $`V`$-filtration on $`j_{}a^{}`$ on the level of its global sections $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$. We will make use of the diagram

(4.1)
$$𝔾_m\times X\stackrel{\stackrel{~}{a}}{}𝔾_m\times X\stackrel{𝑝}{}X,$$

where $`p`$ is the projection, and the map $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ is given by $`\stackrel{~}{a}(g,x)=(g,gx)`$ so that $`a=\stackrel{~}{a}p`$.

To describe $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ as a vector space, we use the coordinates in the middle copy of $`𝔾_m\times X`$ in diagram (4.1), that is we take the global sections of $`p^{}`$. This gives us

(4.2)
$$\stackrel{~}{M}=\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔸^1\times X,j_{}a^{})=[t,t^1]_{}M.$$

To describe the action of

(4.3)
$$\stackrel{~}{U}_\lambda =\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝔾_m\times X,\stackrel{~}{𝒟}_\lambda )=[t,t^1,t_t]_{}U_\lambda ,$$

we use the coordinates in the first copy of $`𝔾_m\times X`$ in diagram (4.1). It suffices to write down the action of the global vector field $`t_t`$ and the global vector fields given by elements of $`𝔤`$. To this end, let us recall some of our previous notation: we have the cocharacter $`\nu :𝔾_mG`$, and we write $`h`$ for the semisimple element in $`𝔤`$ given by $`d\nu (t_t)`$. First, under the map $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ the global vector field $`(t_t,0)`$ is mapped to the global vector field $`(t_t,h)`$. Hence,

(4.4)
$$t_t(f(t)m)=(t_tf(t))m+f(t)(hm).$$

Second, under the map $`\stackrel{~}{a}`$ the global vector field $`(0,v)`$ given by an element $`v𝔤`$ is mapped to the global vector field $`(0,\mathrm{Ad}_{\nu ^1(t)}v)`$. Hence,

(4.5)
$$v(f(t)m)=f(t)((\mathrm{Ad}_{\nu ^1(t)}v)m).$$

In particular, if $`v`$ is in the $`\beta `$ root space $`𝔤_\beta `$, then

(4.6)
$$vm=t^{<\nu ,\beta >}vm.$$

(The inverse of the adjoint action arises for the following reason. For a vector $`v𝔤`$ thought of as a vector field on $`X`$, the bracket $`[h,v]`$ may be calculated by pulling back $`v`$ along the integral curves given by the action of $`\nu (t)`$. Thus the derivative of the pushforward of $`v`$ under the action of $`\nu (t)`$ is the negative of $`[h,v]`$.)

To write down the $`V`$-filtration on $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$, let us recall the discussion of Section 2. There we constructed an increasing $``$-filtration $`F_{}(M)`$ on $`M`$. We now argue that the $`V`$-filtration on $`\stackrel{~}{M}`$ may be written in terms of this filtration as follows

(4.7)
$$V^\alpha (\stackrel{~}{M})=\underset{k}{}t^kF_{\alpha +k}(M)\underset{k}{}t^kM=\stackrel{~}{M}.$$

To show that this is the $`V`$-filtration we must verify conditions (3.1) and (3.2). The fact that (3.2) holds is clear from the construction (taking into account equation 4.4). To show that (3.1) holds, we show that

(4.8)
$$V^{\alpha +m}(\stackrel{~}{M})=V^m(\stackrel{~}{U}_\lambda )V^\alpha (\stackrel{~}{M}),\text{for all }\alpha \text{ and }m,$$

and that

(4.9)
$$\text{each }V^\alpha (\stackrel{~}{M})\text{ is finitely generated over }V^0(\stackrel{~}{U}_\lambda ).$$

The first statement (4.8) is clear since multiplication by $`t`$ clearly induces an isomorphism between $`V^\alpha (\stackrel{~}{M})`$ and $`V^{\alpha +1}(\stackrel{~}{M})`$. Therefore it remains to argue (4.9). We will in fact show that $`V^\alpha (\stackrel{~}{M})`$ is finitely generated over $`[t]_{}U(\overline{𝔫})`$. By Lemmas 2.3 and 2.5, we have

(4.10)
$$\text{ }F_{\alpha +k}(M)=M\text{, for sufficiently large }k,$$

(4.11)
$$\text{ }F_{\alpha k}(M)/(F_k(U(\overline{𝔫}))F_\alpha (M))\text{ is finite-dimensional, for all }k0,$$

and

(4.12)
$$\text{ }F_{\alpha kl}(M)=F_l(U(\overline{𝔫}))F_{\alpha k}(M)\text{, for sufficiently large }k\text{ and all }l0.$$

These three statements together (taking into account equation 4.6) imply that $`V^\alpha (\stackrel{~}{M})`$ is finitely generated over $`[t]_{}U(\overline{𝔫})`$, and hence that it is finitely generated over $`V^0(\stackrel{~}{U}_\lambda )=[t,t_t]_{}U_\lambda `$.

Now by Section 3, we have

(4.13)
$$\mathrm{\Psi }(M)=\text{direct sum of generalised }h\text{-eigenspaces in }\widehat{M}.$$

Part (i) of Theorem 1.1 thus follows from Proposition 2.4.

We turn to proving part (ii) of the theorem. Thus we suppose that $``$ is an arbitrary $`(𝒟_\lambda ,K)`$-module. If we write $`M=\mathrm{\Gamma }(),`$ then there is a canonical map $`𝒟_\lambda _{U_\lambda }M,`$ whose kernel and cokernel are both taken to zero by the exact functor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Taking into account the fact that the passage to nearby cycles is exact, as well as part (i) of the theorem, we see that part (ii) follows from the next statement:

(4.14)
$$\text{if }\mathrm{\Gamma }()=0,\text{ then }\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Psi }())=0.$$

To prove (4.14), we will argue as follows. First, it suffices to prove it in the case when $``$ is irreducible. Then, we will appeal to the results of \[K2\], §8. The final remark of \[K2\], p. 103, shows that we may find a Weyl group element $`w`$ so that $`w(\lambda )`$ is anti-dominant, and satisfies condition (8.3.2). Applying the intertwining functor $`I_w`$ induces an equivalence of categories between the category of $`(𝒟_\lambda ,K)`$-modules and the category of $`(𝒟_{w(\lambda )},K)`$-modules, which is easily verified to be compatible with the functor $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ on each of these categories. Thus in verifying 4.14 we may replace $`\lambda `$ by $`w(\lambda )`$. The remark preceding the statement of \[K2\], Prop. 8.2.1 shows that we may also replace $`G`$ by its simply-connected cover, and thus assume that the sheaf $`𝒪(\rho )`$ is a $`G`$-equivariant line-bundle on $`X`$. Proposition 8.2.1 and Theorem 8.3.1 of \[K2\] now show there exists a simple root $`\alpha `$ such that $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }(\lambda )=0`$ and $`=𝒪(\rho )p^{}^{}`$, where $`p:XX_\alpha `$ is the projection from the full flag manifold $`X`$ to the partial flag manifold $`X_\alpha `$ of parabolics of the type associated to the simple root $`\alpha `$, and $`^{}`$ is a $`𝒟_{\lambda +\rho }`$-module on $`X_\alpha `$. The functor $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ has its analogue $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha `$ defined on $`𝒟_{\lambda +\rho }`$-modules on $`X_\alpha `$, compatible with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$. Thus we conclude

(4.15)
$$\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Psi }())=\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{\Psi }(𝒪(\rho )p^{}^{}))=\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝒪(\rho )\mathrm{\Psi }(p^{}^{}))\hfill \\ \hfill =\mathrm{\Gamma }(𝒪(\rho )p^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha (^{}))=\mathrm{\Gamma }(p_{}(𝒪(\rho )p^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha (^{})))=0;\end{array}$$

here the second equality follows from the evident compatibility of the functor $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ with twisting by $`G`$-equivariant line-bundles, the third equality follows from the compatibility of $`p^{}`$ with $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_\alpha `$, and the the last equality holds because, by \[K2\], Prop. 8.2.1, we see that $`p_{}(𝒪(\rho )p^{}(^{}))`$ is zero for any $`𝒟_\lambda `$-module $`^{}`$ on $`X_\alpha `$, when $`\stackrel{ˇ}{\alpha }(\lambda )=0`$.

## 5. A geometric interpretation

As mentioned in the introduction, the arguments which go into the proof of our main theorem are primarily algebraic. In this section, we informally describe the geometry those arguments formalise and also discuss explicitly the example $`G_{}=\mathrm{SL}_2()`$. The discussion is in the language of $`\lambda `$-twisted perverse sheaves rather than holonomic $`𝒟_\lambda `$-modules.

To review our notation, $`𝔭_{}`$ is a minimal parabolic subalgebra of $`𝔤_{}`$ with complexification $`𝔭`$; $`𝔫`$ is the nilpotent radical of $`𝔭`$; $`P`$ is the parabolic subgroup with Lie algebra $`𝔭`$; $`\overline{P}`$ is the parabolic subgroup opposite to $`P`$; $`L`$ is the Levi subgroup $`P\overline{P}`$; and $`X`$ is the flag manifold of $`𝔤`$.

The basic ingredient in defining the geometric Jacquet functor is the action

(5.1)
$$a:𝔾_m\times XX$$

defined as the composition of the action of $`G`$ on $`X`$ with a cocharacter $`\nu :𝔾_mG`$. Recall that we choose $`\nu `$ such that when paired with the roots of $`G`$ it is positive precisely on the roots in $`𝔫`$.

The action $`a`$ defines two Morse stratifications of $`X`$, one by ascending manifolds, one by descending manifolds, which have the same critical manifolds. The ascending manifolds are the $`P`$-orbits, the descending manifolds are the $`\overline{P}`$-orbits, and the critical manifolds are the $`L`$-orbits. Indeed, each connected component $`X^\alpha `$ of the fixed points of $`a`$ is a single $`L`$-orbit, the $`P`$-orbit $`X_P^\alpha `$ through $`X^\alpha `$ satisfies

(5.2)
$$X_P^\alpha =\{xX|\underset{z0}{lim}a(z)xX^\alpha \},$$

and the $`\overline{P}`$-orbit $`X_{\overline{P}}^\alpha `$ through $`X^\alpha `$ satisfies

(5.3)
$$X_{\overline{P}}^\alpha =\{xX|\underset{z\mathrm{}}{lim}a(z)xX^\alpha \}.$$

Given a $`\lambda `$-twisted $`K`$-equivariant perverse sheaf $``$ on $`X`$ we think of its geometric Jacquet module $`\mathrm{\Psi }()`$ as the result of ”flowing” $``$ along the trajectories of the action $`a`$ and ”passing to the limit”. The limit $`\mathrm{\Psi }()`$ is constructible with respect to the stratification by the ascending manifolds $`\{X_P^\alpha \}`$, and an ascending manifold $`X_P^\alpha `$ is in the support of $`\mathrm{\Psi }()`$ exactly when the corresponding descending manifold $`X_{\overline{P}}^\alpha `$ intersects the support of $``$. The restriction of $`\mathrm{\Psi }()`$ to a critical manifold $`X^\alpha `$ may be calculated as the integral of $``$ over the fibers of the corresponding descending manifold $`X_{\overline{P}}^\alpha `$.

To see this in a concrete example, consider the real group $`\mathrm{SL}_2()`$, with maximal compact subgroup $`\mathrm{SO}_2()`$, and the corresponding Harish-Chandra pair $`(𝔰𝔩_2(),\mathrm{SO}_2())`$. We may identify the flag manifold of $`𝔰𝔩_2()`$ with the complex projective line $`^1=\{\mathrm{}\}`$ so that (i) the $`\mathrm{SO}_2()`$-orbits are the points $`i`$ and $`i`$, and their complement $`^1\{i,i\}`$, and (ii) the point $`0`$ represents a Borel subalgebra $`𝔟𝔰𝔩_2()`$ which is the complexification of a minimal parabolic subalgebra of $`𝔭_{}𝔰𝔩_2()`$.

Fix a character $`\lambda :𝔟/[𝔟,𝔟]`$. Let $`\delta _0`$ be the irreducible $`\lambda `$-twisted perverse sheaf on $`^1`$ supported at the point $`0`$, and let $`𝒩`$ be the middle-extension to $`^1`$ of the irreducible $`\lambda `$-twisted local system on $`^1\{0\}`$. For $`\lambda `$ non-integral, there are two irreducible $`\lambda `$-twisted $`\mathrm{SO}_2()`$-equivariant perverse sheaves on $`^1`$: the middle-extensions $`_1`$ and $`_1`$ of the irreducible trivial and twisted $`\mathrm{SO}_2()`$-equivariant local systems on the complement $`^1\{i,i\}`$. For $`\lambda `$ integral, there are in addition two other irreducible $`\lambda `$-twisted $`\mathrm{SO}_2()`$-equivariant perverse sheaves on $`^1`$: the irreducible $`\mathrm{SO}_2()`$-equivariant perverse sheaves $`\delta _i`$ and $`\delta _i`$ supported at the points $`i`$ and $`i`$.

Choose the cocharacter $`\nu :^\times \mathrm{SL}_2()`$ so that the induced action $`a:^\times \times ^1^1`$ is the standard multiplication $`a(z)p=z^2p`$. Note that in the limit $`z\mathrm{}`$, the points $`i`$ and $`i`$ flow to $`0`$, and this completely describes what happens to the $`\mathrm{SO}_2()`$-orbits. With this picture in mind, we calculate the geometric Jacquet module of the irreducible $`\lambda `$-twisted $`\mathrm{SO}_2()`$-equivariant perverse sheaves on $`^1`$. For $`\lambda `$ integral, we have

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(\delta _i)=\mathrm{\Psi }(\delta _i)=\delta _0\mathrm{\Psi }(_1)=𝒩\mathrm{\Psi }(_1)=$$

where $``$ is the unique non-semisimple self-dual perverse sheaf with three-step filtration $`_0_1`$ satisfying

$$_0=\delta _0_1/_0=𝒩/_1=\delta _0.$$

For $`\lambda `$ non-integral, we have

$$\mathrm{\Psi }(_1)=\mathrm{\Psi }(_1)=𝒩\delta _0\delta _0.$$

To help explain why the result for $`_1`$ and $`\lambda `$ integral has different simple constituents from the other perverse sheaves supported on the open orbit, note that only for $`_1`$ and $`\lambda `$ integral is the characteristic variety of such a perverse sheaf the zero section alone.


text:
# Cracks in rubber under tension exceed the shear wave speed

## Abstract

The shear wave speed is an upper limit for the speed of cracks loaded in tension in linear elastic solids. We have discovered that in a non-linear material, cracks in tension (Mode I) exceed this sound speed, and travel in an intersonic range between shear and longitudinal wave speeds. The experiments are conducted in highly stretched sheets of rubber; intersonic cracks can be produced simply by popping a balloon.

Cracks advance by consuming the potential energy stored in the surrounding elastic fields and, thus, one expects that they should travel no faster than the speed of sound. While this intuition is indeed correct, solids support longitudinal, shear, and surface (Rayleigh) waves, with distinct speeds $`c_L>c_s>c_R`$, respectively Achenbach (1973), and determining which of these is the upper limit for crack speeds is a subtle problem.

In the case of linear elastic solids, Stroh was first to argue that cracks loaded in tension (Mode I) could not exceed the Rayleigh wave speed $`c_R`$ Stroh (1957). The mathematical analysis of Freund and others Freund (1990); Broberg (1999) showed that the energy consumed by a crack diverges as its speed approaches $`c_R`$, suggesting that cracks cannot travel faster than this speed. However, geological field measurements of fault motion Heaton (1990), computer simulations Andrews (1976); Gao et al. (2001), and laboratory experiments Rosakis (2002) have established that cracks loaded in shear (Mode II) can exceed $`c_s`$ (and hence $`c_R`$) and reach speeds close to $`c_L`$. Dynamic fracture theory was extended to include these “intersonic” cracks Burridge et al. (1979); Broberg (1999); Ranjith and Rice (2001). However, even when revisited in light of the arguments that allowed intersonic cracks in shear-loaded samples, linear elastic fracture mechanics forbids intersonic cracks loaded in tension Broberg (1999).

In the case of elastic materials subjected to large deformations, it is natural to assume that the crack speed is bounded above by the shear wave speed. Recent numerical simulations have found mode I cracks running faster than this wave speed Buehler et al. (2003). Here we present experimental results which show crack speeds faster than the shear wave speed occur in popping rubber.

*Experiment.* Our experiments are conducted with sheets of natural latex rubber 0.15 mm thick purchased from McMaster-Carr, stretched biaxially in a tensile testing machine, and punctured by pricking the sheet with a needle. The samples are rectangular, 12.7 cm wide and 27.9 - 34.3 cm long, depending on the expected maximum extension, and their perimeter is divided into tabs 3.0 cm wide that serve as gripping points for the testing apparatus. A square grid is drawn on the sample to monitor the magnitude and homogeneity of extension as the sample is stretched.

The apparatus consists of two fixed and two mobile linear guide rails (see Fig. 1(a)). The mobile rails move independently and orthogonally. Multiple sliding clamps that grip individual tabs on the sample are mounted on each rail. The sheet was attached to these clamps and stretched to an extension state ($`\lambda _x`$,$`\lambda _y`$) such that $`\lambda _y>\lambda _x`$, where $`\lambda _i`$ is the ratio of the stretched to original length along the $`i`$ direction, and $`x`$ and $`y`$ are the long and short directions, respectively. As the rails are moved apart, the sheet expands and the clamps separate by sliding along the rail, yet remain equidistant due to the elastic coupling to each other through the sheet.

After reaching the desired extension state, the sheet is clamped between two steel rectangular frames (10.2 cm $`\times `$ 66 cm)(Fig. 1(b)). Then the extension state of the sheet is fixed and determined exclusively by these clamping frames. The frames fix the total energy available to the crack, and since the aspect ratio is small, the crack will consume equal amounts of energy per crack length Rice (1967).

A crack is initiated by pricking the sheet with a pin at the point marked ’$`\times `$’ in Fig. 1(b) and the velocity is determined photographically. Along the expected crack path we position an optical sensor that triggers a strobing flash when the crack parts the rubber blocking the beam path of the sensor. A CCD camera captures multiple images from each flash pulse on a single frame producing an image as shown in Fig. 2. As reported in Deegan et al. (2002), the crack can run straight or wavy depending on the extension state; irrespective of the crack path, the velocity of the crack, $`v_c`$, is calculated by the distance between successive crack tip positions and the time interval between flashes. Cracks are wavy for $`\lambda _x>2.2`$. These measurements are reproducible within 5% from trial to trial.

*Longitudinal wave speed.* We also measure the longitudinal speed for infinitesimal amplitude waves along the $`x`$ direction in rubber as a function of $`\lambda _x`$ and $`\lambda _y`$. In rubber, sound speeds vary strongly with the degree of extension due to nonlinear strain-extension relation and large deformations. In particular, when $`\lambda _x\lambda _y`$, the sound speed depends on the direction. We use a time-of-flight method because standard ultrasonic techniques for measuring sound speeds are difficult to implement. The sheet is first stretched to an extension state $`\lambda _y>\lambda _x`$. Two record needles (marked by ’+’ in Fig. 3(a)) are placed in contact with the sheet about 5 cm apart along the $`x`$ direction. A bar is attached across the $`y`$ direction of the sheet about 5 cm from the first needle. The bar is attached to a speaker and an in-plane, $`x`$–directed perturbation is applied to the sheet by pulsing the speaker. The signals from the record needles are recorded with a digitizing oscilloscope, and the longitudinal speed in the $`x`$ direction is calculated from the time lag between the separate signals and the known distance between the needles. Note that the speed is that of a linear wave moving on the stretched material; i.e., we are measuring the propagation speed of small distortions around the stretched state.

We have been unable to measure the shear wave speed directly due to the thinness of the material, which makes it difficult to excite shear waves. Instead we measure the appropriate force-extension curve and calculated the velocity from it. As a proof-of-principle, we have calculated in this manner the longitudinal wave speed. We measure the force vs. displacement curve for the configurations depicted in Fig. 3(b). The material is stretched to the state ($`\lambda _x`$,$`\lambda _y`$), a long but narrow portion is gripped along the long edges, and one of the grips is oscillated sinusoidally at $`f=25`$ Hz in the $`x`$ direction while the other was fixed. A load cell and accelerometer attached to the driven clamp measures the applied force $`F`$ and acceleration $`a`$. The displacement $`\delta x=a/(2\pi f)^2`$ follows by integration.

Since the measurement is in a strip narrow compared to its length, departures of the strain in the $`y`$ direction from the *stretched* state $`ϵ_{yy}`$ is zero almost everywhere. This state of strain corresponds to the state excited by a longitudinal wave in a thin sheet: only $`ϵ_{xx}`$ and $`ϵ_{zz}`$ are nonzero. Therefore, the force and displacement measurements in this configuration yield the modulus needed to calculate $`c_L`$: $`Y=FW/(\delta xLd)`$ where $`W`$ is the distance between the grips, $`L`$ is the length of the grips, $`d`$ is the thickness of the material in the stretched state, and the longitudinal wave speed along the $`x`$ direction is $`c_L=\sqrt{Y/\rho }`$, where $`\rho =944`$ kg/m3 is the mass density of the sheet.

The ratio of the measured to calculated wave speed is plotted in Fig. 4 for $`\lambda _y=3.2`$ and $`\lambda _x`$ varying between 2 and 3.2. For perfect agreement this ratio should be 1. The data points lie within experimental error of this value, validating the procedure for calculating the wave speed from the force-displacement relationship.

*Shear wave speed.* The configuration in Fig. 3(c) is used to measure the shear modulus, $`G=FW/(4Lt\delta x)`$, from which we calculate the shear wave speed in the $`x`$ direction, $`c_S=\sqrt{G/\rho }`$. A rubber sheet is stretched to $`\lambda _y>\lambda _x`$, and a long narrow rubber strip is gripped on opposite edges, as shown. A thin bar down is glued to the center line of the strip and oscillated in the $`y`$-direction. The result for $`G`$ obtained from the force and acceleration measurements then yields $`c_s`$.

*Material frame.* It is interesting to examine our data in the material (Lagrangean) frame rather than the lab (Eulerian) frame because, as we show below, in the material frame the shear wave speeds are completely isotropic. In the material frame, length is measured in units of a coordinate system that deforms with the material: for biaxial deformation $`(\lambda _x,\lambda _y)`$, the relation between velocity in the material frame $`𝐜^{(m)}`$ and the stretched (or lab) frame $`𝐜^{(s)}`$ is $`𝐜^{(m)}=(c_x^{(m)},c_y^{(m)})=(c_x^{(s)}/\lambda _x,c_y^{(s)}/\lambda _y)`$.

*Results.* In Figure 5 we compare crack speeds with wave speeds as a function of $`\lambda _x`$ for $`\lambda _y=3.2`$. The data indicate cracks travel 10-20% faster than the shear wave speed, but slower than the longitudinal sound speed. We adopt here the descriptor “intersonic” used in studies of shear loaded cracks, for cracks that travel at speeds between the longitudinal and shear wave speeds.

*Discussion* There are some natural questions to ask concerning choices made in Fig. 5. (1) When rubber is stretched the wave speed is anisotropic. Why did we choose just to plot the wave speeds in the $`x`$ direction? (2) Large amplitude deformations typically travel at speeds different from those of infinitesimal amplitude waves. Why can we use small amplitude speeds as a basis for comparison?

The answers to these question stem from the fact that our rubber samples are described accurately by the Mooney-Rivlin theory, which we now summarize. Any continuum theory of deformation that depends upon relative motion of neighboring mass points can only involve particle displacements $`𝐱(𝐗)`$ through the strain tensor $`E_{\alpha \beta }=(1/2)[_\gamma (x_\gamma /X_\alpha x_\gamma /X_\beta )\delta _{\alpha \beta }]`$. Here $`𝐱(𝐗)`$ describes the location in space of a mass point originally at $`𝐗`$. A two–dimensional isotropic theory can only depend upon the strain tensor through the two invariant quantities $`I_1=E_{xx}+E_{yy}`$ and $`I_2=E_{xx}E_{yy}E_{xy}^2`$. Under biaxial strain $`E_{ii}=(\lambda _i^21)/2`$. In the Mooney-Rivlin Theory Mooney (1940); Rivlin (1948); Klingbeil and Shield (1966), the strain energy density of a thin sheet of rubber is given by

$$W=a\left(I_1+bI_2\right)$$
(1)
In the material or Lagrangean frame a calculation of the longitudinal and shear wave speeds yields:

$`\rho c_{xl}^{(m)2}=a[1+{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}}(\lambda _y^21)]`$ (2)
$`\rho c_{yl}^{(m)2}=a[1+{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}}(\lambda _x^21)]`$ (3)
$`\rho c_{xs}^{(m)2}=a(1{\displaystyle \frac{b}{2}})`$ (4)
To recover the speed in the lab or Eulerian frame $`𝐜^{(s)}=(c_x^{(s)},c_y^{(s)})=(\lambda _xc_x^{(m)},\lambda _yc_y^{(m)})`$. From these equations we see that the longitudinal and shear wave speeds in the $`x`$ direction are independent of $`\lambda _x`$ and that the $`y`$ direction longitudinal wave speed increases monotonically with increasing $`\lambda _x`$, both of which we observe. More importantly, $`c_s^{(m)}`$ is independent of direction. With the value of $`a=501`$ (m/s)2 and $`b=0.106`$, all our sound speed data are well characterized by these equations, as is shown by the dashed lines in Fig. 5.

Furthermore, in Mooney-Rivlin materials, speeds of infinitesimal longitudinal and shear waves are exactly equal to the finite amplitude plane wave speeds. Therefore, although we are measuring small amplitude wave speeds, these speeds bound the speed of any finite amplitude plane wave deformation. Thus, it is appropriate to compare the wave speeds we measured to crack speeds.

Lastly, we note that when a moving object travels in an elastic medium faster than the wave speed, it creates a shock wave in the form of a Mach cone. The wedge-like crack opening typical of cracks in rubber (shown in Fig. 2) is strikingly similar to the Mach cone, suggesting that rubber cracks are shock-like, exceeding some response speed of the medium. Shock waves are known to form when finite tensile pulses travel in pre-stretched rubber strips Kolsky (1969).

*Conclusion.* In earlier work we found that cracks in rubber follow oscillating paths when the horizontal extension exceeds a critical value. We still have no good explanation for this dynamical transition. However, knowing that the fractures travel above the shear wave speed will be important in resolving this question.

###### Acknowledgements.

*Acknowledgements—*We thank James Rice for encouraging further investigation of the Mooney-Rivlin theory and Stephan Bless for lending us the stroboscopic flash used in imaging the moving crack. We are grateful for financial support from the National Science Foundation (DMR-9877044 and DMR-0101030).


text:
# To appear in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, the 2003-December-20th issue On Titanium Carbide Nanoparticles as the Origin of the 21 Micron Emission Feature in Post-Asymptotic Giant Branch Stars

## 1 Introduction

A prominent broad (with a FWHM of $``$2$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$) emission feature at about 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$111 High resolution spectra obtained with the Short-Wavelength Spectrometer (SWS) instrument (with a resolution of $`\lambda /\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda 2000`$) on board the Infrared Space Observatory show that this feature actually peaks at $``$20.1$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ (Volk, Kwok, & Hrivnak 1999). But for historical reasons, this feature continues to be referred to as the “21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature”.  was discovered by Kwok, Volk, & Hrivnak (1989) in an analysis of the Infrared Astronomical Satellite (IRAS) Low Resolution Spectrometer (LRS) spectra of four carbon-rich post-asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars, and subsequently confirmed by both ground-based and airborne Kuiper Airborne Observatory and ISO observations (see Kwok, Volk, & Hrivnak 1999 and references therein). So far, this feature has been detected in twelve post-AGB stars (commonly termed as the “21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ sources”; Kwok et al. 1999)222A weak 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature was recently reported for three planetary nebulae (PNs; Hony, Waters, & Tielens 2001; K. Volk 2003, in preparation). , with little shape variation found between different sources. These stars have quite uniform properties: they are mostly metal-poor carbon-rich F and G supergiants with strong infrared (IR) excesses and overabundant $`s`$-process elements (see Kwok et al. 1999).

The carrier of this mysterious 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature remains unidentified, although many candidate materials have been proposed including iron oxides Fe2O3 or Fe3O4, hydrogenated amorphous carbon, hydrogenated fullerenes, hydrogenated nanodiamond, amides (thiourea or urea $`\mathrm{OC}\left[\mathrm{NH}_2\right]_2`$), SiS2, oxygen-bearing side groups in coal (see Kwok et al. 1999 and references therein), and more recently titanium carbide (TiC) nanoclusters (von Helden et al. 2000), SiC (Speck & Hofmeister 2003), and stochastically-heated silicon core-SiO2 mantle nanograins (Smith & Witt 2002; Li & Draine 2002).

The nano-TiC model seems attractive. While bulk TiC does not show any noticeable feature near 20.1$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ (Henning & Mutschke 2000), laboratory absorption spectra of TiC nanocrystals containing 27–125 atoms exhibit a distinct feature at $``$20.1$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$, closely resembling the astronomical 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ emission feature both in peak position, width, and in spectral details (von Helden et al. 2000). This model further gains its strength from the identification of presolar TiC grains (with radii $``$100$`\mathrm{\AA }`$) in primitive meteorites as inclusions embedded in micrometer-sized presolar graphite grains (Bernatowicz et al. 1996).

Since Ti is a rare element, it is important to know whether the amount of TiC dust required to account for the observed 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature is a reasonable quantity. Since the optical properties of nano TiC in the ultraviolet (UV)/visible wavelength range are unknown, one has to rely on those of bulk TiC as a starting point. Such an attempt has recently been made for the post-AGB star $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ by Hony et al. (2003). They found that to explain the observed 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature, the TiC model requires a much higher UV/visible absorptivity than that of bulk TiC (by a factor of $``$20). However, we will demonstrate in this Letter how the TiC absorption integrated over a finite wavelength range places a lower limit on the TiC dust mass through the Kramers-Kronig dispersion relations. For $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$, this Kramers-Kronig lower limit exceeds the maximum available TiC mass by a factor of $``$50, independent of the absolute value of the UV/visible absorptivity. Therefore, increasing the UV/visible absorptivity is unable to avoid the TiC abundance problem.

## 2 HD 56126: A Test Case

$`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$, a bright (visual magnitude $``$8.3) post-AGB star with a spectral type of F0-5I, is one of the four 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ sources originally discovered by Kwok et al. (1989). Mid-IR imaging of this object at 11.9$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ shows that its circumstellar dust is confined to an area of 1.2′′–2.6′′ from the star (Hony et al. 2003). Detailed modeling of its dust IR spectral energy distribution suggested a $`dn(r)/dr1/r`$ dust spatial distribution at $`r_{\mathrm{min}}rr_{\mathrm{max}}`$, where $`r`$ is the distance from the star, $`r_{\mathrm{min}}`$ and $`r_{\mathrm{max}}`$ are respectively the inner and outer edge of the $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ dusty envelope (Hony et al. 2003). If TiC nanograins are indeed present in $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ and follow the distribution of the bulk (hydrogenated) amorphous carbon dust, the total power absorbed by the TiC dust would be333The circumstellar envelope around $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ is assumed to be optically thin. If there actually exists appreciable extinction (e.g., Hony et al.  found an average visual extinction of $``$1.1$`\mathrm{mag}`$), the conclusion of this Letter would be strengthened since when exposed to an attenuated stellar radiation field, the TiC model would require more TiC dust to account for the same 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature strength.

$$E_{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{tot}}\left(\mathrm{TiC}\right)=m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{tot}}\frac{r_{}^2}{2}\frac{\mathrm{ln}\left(r_{\mathrm{max}}/r_{\mathrm{min}}\right)}{r_{\mathrm{max}}^2r_{\mathrm{min}}^2}_{912\mathrm{\AA }}^{\mathrm{}}\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(a,\lambda )F_\lambda ^{}𝑑\lambda ,$$
(1)
where $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{tot}}`$ is the total mass of the TiC nanoparticle component, $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(a,\lambda )`$ is the mass absorption coefficient ($`\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{g}^1`$) for nano TiC grains of size $`a`$ at wavelength $`\lambda `$, $`r_{}`$ is the stellar radius, $`F_\lambda ^{}`$ is the flux per unit wavelength ($`\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{cm}^2\mu \mathrm{m}^1`$) at the top of the illuminating star’s atmosphere. In the nanometer size domain, TiC grains are in the Rayleigh limit and hence $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )`$ is independent of size $`a`$ in the wavelength range where the stellar radiation peaks. Following Hony et al. (2003), we will adopt a distance of $`d2.4\mathrm{kpc}`$ to the star (and therefore $`r_{\mathrm{min}}4.3\times 10^{16}\mathrm{cm}`$, $`r_{\mathrm{max}}9.3\times 10^{16}\mathrm{cm}`$), a stellar radius of $`r_{}49.2r_{}`$ ($`r_{}`$ is the solar radius), a stellar luminosity of $`L_{}6054L_{}`$ ($`L_{}`$ is the solar luminosity), and approximate the $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ stellar radiation by the Kurucz (1979) model atmospheric spectrum with $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=7250\mathrm{K}`$ and $`\mathrm{log}g=1.0`$.

The total power emitted in the 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature of $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ was estimated to be $`E_{\mathrm{em}}^{\mathrm{tot}}\left(21\mu \mathrm{m}\right)1.0\times 10^{36}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (Hony et al. 2003). A lower limit on the total mass of the TiC dust required to account for the observed 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature can be obtained by assuming that all the energy absorbed by the TiC dust would be emitted solely in this feature:

$$m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{min}}=E_{\mathrm{em}}^{\mathrm{tot}}\left(21\mu \mathrm{m}\right)\frac{2}{r_{}^2}\frac{r_{\mathrm{max}}^2r_{\mathrm{min}}^2}{\mathrm{ln}\left(r_{\mathrm{max}}/r_{\mathrm{min}}\right)}/_{912\mathrm{\AA }}^{\mathrm{}}\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda ,a)F_\lambda ^{}𝑑\lambda .$$
(2)
Apparently, the required TiC dust mass $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{min}}`$ is sensitive to the material’s UV/visible absorptivity.

On the other hand, an upper limit on the total mass of the TiC dust which could be present in the circumstellar envelope around $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ can be estimated from its photospheric Ti abundance $`\mathrm{Ti}/\mathrm{H}1.3\times 10^8`$ (van Winckel & Reyniers 2000) and the envelope mass (including both gas and dust) $`0.16m_{\mathrm{env}}0.44m_{}`$ (Hony et al. 2003): $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{max}}2.5\times 10^7m_{}`$.

## 3 Ultraviolet/Visible Absorption Properties of TiC Nanograins

Since the UV/visible absorption properties of nano TiC are unknown, we will first represent them by those of bulk TiC. Using Mie theory and the optical constants measured for bulk TiC samples (Koide et al. 1993), we calculate the UV/visible absorption efficiency $`Q_{\mathrm{abs}}`$ of spherical TiC nanograins. For illustration, we plot in Figure 1 the mass absorption coefficients ($`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}=3Q_{\mathrm{abs}}/\left[4a\rho _{\mathrm{TiC}}\right]`$ where $`\rho _{\mathrm{TiC}}4.92\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3`$ is the TiC mass density) of TiC spheres of radii $`a`$=10$`\mathrm{\AA }`$ calculated from the optical constants of bulk TiC. Using these $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}`$ values, we derive a lower limit of $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{min}}9.3\times 10^5m_{}`$ on the TiC dust mass from Eq.(2). Apparently, if nano TiC grains do not have a much higher UV/visible absorptivity than their bulk counterparts, they can not be the 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature carrier since the minimum required TiC dust mass is larger than the maximum available TiC mass ($`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{max}}2.5\times 10^7m_{}`$; see §2) by over two orders of magnitude!

Hony et al. (2003) assumed a hypothetical absorption efficiency for TiC nanograins

$$\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )=\{\begin{array}{cc}\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}},912\mathrm{\AA }\lambda 1\mu \mathrm{m};\hfill & \\ \kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}\left(2\lambda \right),1\mu \mathrm{m}<\lambda 2\mu \mathrm{m};\hfill & \\ 0,\lambda >2\mu \mathrm{m};\hfill & \end{array}$$
(3)
where $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}`$ is the “constant level” UV/visible mass absorption coefficient. They concluded that the astronomical 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature could only be accounted for by the TiC model with a reasonable amount of TiC dust mass if nano TiC grains have an UV/visible absorption efficiency as high as $`Q_{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}8`$ where $`Q_{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}=\left(4/3\right)a\rho _{\mathrm{TiC}}\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}`$.

In Figure 1 we also plot the Hony et al. (2003) hypothetical mass absorption coefficient with $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}=5.6\times 10^6\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{g}^1`$ . In comparison with the $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )`$ values calculated from the optical constants of bulk TiC, the Hony et al. (2003) formula greatly enhances the ability of TiC dust in absorbing the $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ stellar radiation which peaks at $`\lambda `$$``$$`0.45\mu \mathrm{m}`$. In Figure 2 we show the minimum TiC dust mass $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{min}}`$ required to account for the observed 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature as a function of $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}`$. It can be seen that if $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}5.6\times 10^6\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{g}^1`$, the minimum required TiC dust mass could be smaller than the maximum available TiC mass, implying that the TiC model may be tenable.

## 4 Constraints from the Kramers-Kronig Relations

Let $`C_{\mathrm{ext}}^{\mathrm{tot}}(\lambda )`$ be the total extinction cross sections of TiC dust at wavelength $`\lambda `$, and $`_0^{\mathrm{}}C_{\mathrm{ext}}^{\mathrm{tot}}(\lambda )𝑑\lambda `$ be the extinction integrated over the entire wavelength range from 0 to $`\mathrm{}`$. As shown by Purcell (1969), the Kramers-Kronig (KK) dispersion relations can be used to relate $`_0^{\mathrm{}}C_{\mathrm{ext}}^{\mathrm{tot}}(\lambda )𝑑\lambda `$ to the total grain volume $`V_{\mathrm{tot}}`$ through

$$_0^{\mathrm{}}C_{\mathrm{ext}}^{\mathrm{tot}}(\lambda )𝑑\lambda =3\pi ^2V_{\mathrm{tot}}F(ϵ_0;\mathrm{shape}),$$
(4)
where $`F`$ is the orientationally-averaged polarizability relative to the polarizability of an equal-volume conducting sphere (Purcell 1969; Draine 2003).

We can apply Eq.(4) to the $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ circumstellar envelope to obtain a lower bound on the TiC dust mass $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}`$, taking the envelope to be a vacuum sparsely populated by spheroidal TiC grains.444 This is justified since the total volume of the TiC grains ($``$$`9.0\times 10^{27}\mathrm{cm}^3`$ for a total mass of $`2.2\times 10^5m_{}`$) is negligible compared to the total volume of the dusty circumstellar envelope around $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ ($``$$`3.1\times 10^{51}\mathrm{cm}^3`$). Apparently, the envelope also satisfies the prerequisite $`|ϵ1|1`$ for the KK relations to be applicable (where $`ϵ`$ is not the dielectric constant of TiC, but of the envelope itself).  Since $`C_{\mathrm{ext}}^{\mathrm{tot}}=\left(C_{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{tot}}+C_{\mathrm{sca}}^{\mathrm{tot}}\right)>C_{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{tot}}>0`$ (where $`C_{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{tot}}`$ and $`C_{\mathrm{sca}}^{\mathrm{tot}}`$ are the total absorption and scattering cross sections, respectively), the integration of $`C_{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{tot}}`$ over a finite wavelength range represents a lower limit to $`_0^{\mathrm{}}C_{\mathrm{ext}}^{\mathrm{tot}}(\lambda )𝑑\lambda `$, and implies a lower limit to the volume of space which must be filled by TiC grains and hence a lower limit to the total TiC dust mass

$`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\rho _{\mathrm{TiC}}}{3\pi ^2F(ϵ_0;\mathrm{shape})}}{\displaystyle _{912\mathrm{\AA }}^{\mathrm{}}}C_{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{tot}}(\lambda )𝑑\lambda `$ (5)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{min}}\rho _{\mathrm{TiC}}}{3\pi ^2F}}{\displaystyle _{912\mathrm{\AA }}^{\mathrm{}}}\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )𝑑\lambda `$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2\rho _{\mathrm{TiC}}E_{\mathrm{em}}^{\mathrm{tot}}\left(21\mu \mathrm{m}\right)\left(r_{\mathrm{max}}^2r_{\mathrm{min}}^2\right)}{3\pi ^2r_{}^2\mathrm{ln}\left(r_{\mathrm{max}}/r_{\mathrm{min}}\right)}}{\displaystyle \frac{_{912\mathrm{\AA }}^{\mathrm{}}\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )𝑑\lambda }{F_{912\mathrm{\AA }}^{\mathrm{}}\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )F_\lambda ^{}𝑑\lambda }}.`$
The dimensionless factor $`F`$ depends only upon the grain shape and the static (zero-frequency) dielectric constant $`ϵ_0`$ of the grain material (Purcell 1969; Draine 2003). Since TiC is a metallic material, we calculate the $`F`$ factors expected for highly conducting materials (i.e., $`ϵ_0\mathrm{}`$) as a function of the axial ratio $`a/b`$ (where $`a`$ and $`b`$ are the semiaxis along and perpendicular to the symmetry axis of the spheroid, respectively). As shown in Figure 3, $`F`$ would not appreciably exceed unity unless the highly conducting grains are highly elongated (for prolates) or flattened (for oblates). If they are just modestly elongated ot flattened like interstellar grains ($`a/b`$3 \[Greenberg & Li 1996\] or $`b/a`$2 \[Lee & Draine 1985\]), we would expect $`F1.5`$. Therefore, it is reasonable to adopt $`F=1.5`$ in the following discussions.

It is immediately seen in Eq.(5) that one cannot relax the TiC mass requirement just by increasing the UV/visible absorption level; instead, the Kramers-Kronig lower limit to the total TiC dust mass $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}`$ is independent of the absolute level of $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}`$. As discussed in §3, the nano-TiC model appears to be tenable if one adopts the Hony et al. (2003) $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )`$ formula with $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}5.6\times 10^6\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{g}^1`$. However, the KK relations (see Eq.) results in a lower bound of $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}2.2\times 10^5m_{}`$ to the total TiC dust mass, exceeding the maximum available TiC mass of $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{max}}2.5\times 10^7m_{}`$ (see §2)555 To be really generous, we can obtain an upper limit of $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{max}}6.1\times 10^7m_{}`$ by assuming that all Ti elements in $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ (with a zero-age main-sequence mass of $``$1.1$`m_{}`$) have condensed in the form of TiC. The TiC model with $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}2.3\times 10^6\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{g}^1`$ (see §3 and Eq.) would then appear tenable since $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{min}}m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{max}}`$. But the KK lower limit on the TiC mass $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}2.2\times 10^5m_{}`$ is far in excess of $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{max}}`$ unless the TiC nanograins are extremely elongated ($`a/b25`$) or flattened ($`b/a80`$) so that $`F24`$.  by a factor of $``$90. Therefore, it appears that the nano-TiC model encounters great difficulty in meeting the TiC abundance constraint.666 In order for the TiC dust mass $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}`$ derived from the KK relations not to exceed the maximum available TiC mass $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{max}}`$, the TiC nanograins should be extremely elongated ($`a/b44`$) for prolates or flattened ($`b/a220`$) for oblates so that $`F59`$. But it is hard to imagine how such extremely-shaped TiC nanograins could form and survive in circumstellar environments.

One may argue that the Hony et al. (2003) formula (Eq.) does not make economical use of the TiC absorption. A fine tuning on the spectral dependence of $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )`$ might be able to enhance the grain’s “ability” to absorb stellar radiation, resulting in an increase in $`_{912\mathrm{\AA }}^{\mathrm{}}\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )F_\lambda ^{}𝑑\lambda `$ and a decrease in $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}`$ (see Eq.). We have tried models with a Drude profile-like UV/visible absorption spectrum777Spheroidal metallic nanograins are expected to have a Drude-profile like resonance if it is mainly due to free electrons (Bohren & Huffman 1983).  $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )=\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}^{\mathrm{UV}}\left(\gamma \lambda \right)^2/\left[\left(\lambda ^2\lambda _0^2\right)^2+\left(\gamma \lambda \right)^2\right]`$ with $`\lambda _0=0.44\mu \mathrm{m}`$ and $`\gamma =0.35\mu \mathrm{m}`$ (see Fig. 1) “tailored” to optimize the “ability” of TiC nanograins to absorb the $`\mathrm{HD}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}56126}`$ stellar radiation. But it is found that models using this $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}`$ functional form require a Kramers-Kronig lower limit of $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}1.2\times 10^5m_{}`$, still $``$50 times larger than the maximum available TiC mass.888A narrower $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )`$ profile leads to a smaller $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}`$, provided its peak is fixed at $`\lambda _00.44\mu \mathrm{m}`$. However, even if we adopt an unphysical $`\delta `$-function for $`\kappa _{\mathrm{abs}}(\lambda )`$, the corresponding KK lower limit $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{KK}}6.8\times 10^6m_{}`$ still exceeds $`m_{\mathrm{TiC}}^{\mathrm{max}}`$ by a factor of $``$27. We note that the grain surface scattering of electrons alone would result in a plasma resonance width of $``$0.1$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ for a 10$`\mathrm{\AA }`$ grain a typical Fermi velocity $`v_F=10^8\mathrm{cm}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (see Li 2004).

## 5 Discussion

In this Letter we have assumed that the TiC dust follows the spatial distribution of the bulk carbon dust (see §2). But this is not critical. Even if we assume that all the TiC dust accumulates at the inner edge of the envelope, to explain the observed 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature, one still needs $``$42% of the total TiC mass derived in §§3,4, since for the latter the average starlight intensity to which the dust is exposed is just $``$42% higher. Therefore, local density enhancement of TiC would not overcome the TiC abundance problem. High-resolution (FWHM 0.4′′) imaging at 20.8$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ revealed two bright blobs at $``$1′′ from the star, but their surface brightness is at most two times higher than the average (Kwok, Volk, & Hrivnak 2002), suggesting the insignificance of local density enhancement of the 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature carrier.

Von Helden etal. (2000) postulated that TiC nanograins could have formed during the extreme conditions (i.e., high density and high pressure) associated with the short, high mass-loss superwind phase where AGB stars lose the remaining stellar envelope, terminating their life on the AGB and starting the transition to the PN phase. However, Kwok et al. (2002) argued that there is no evidence that the 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ emission is created by a sudden ejection at the end of the AGB, implying that the necessary physical conditions required to form TiC in the ejecta of carbon-rich evolved stars may not be met.

In summary, although we are lack of experimental knowledge of the UV/visible absorption properties of nano TiC, a physical argument based on the Kramers-Kronig dispersion relations implies that the nano-TiC model requires too much Ti to reconcile with the observed photospheric Ti abundance.999If these grains are coated by a mantle of graphite (see Chigai et al. 2003), the situation would be even worse since the large IR emissivity of graphite together with the fact that the increase in grain size may prohibit them from single-photon heating would jointly suppress emission in the 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ feature.  Recently, the nano-TiC model was also challenged by Chigai et al. (2003), who found that the abundance ratio of Ti to Si needed to reproduce the observed flux ratios of the 11.3$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ SiC feature to the 21$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$ TiC feature of post-AGB stars must be at least 5 times larger than the solar abundance ratio. Finally, we should note that laboratory absorption spectra of TiC nanoclusters also show prominent features at other wavelengths which are not seen in post-AGB stars (e.g. Ti14C13 also has a strong band at $``$16$`\mu \mathrm{m}`$; van Heijnsbergen et al. 1999).

I thank D. Arnett, A. Burrows, A.G.W. Cameron, S. Hony, D.S. Lauretta and K. Volk for helpful discussions/comments, T. Koide and D.W. Lynch for providing me with their optical constants of bulk TiC. I also thank the University of Arizona for the “Arizona Prize Postdoctoral Fellowship in Theoretical Astrophysics”.