text:
# Bosons and Environment 1footnote 11footnote 1Contributed Paper to Spin-Statistics Connection and Commutation Relations, R.C.Hilborn and G.M.Tino eds. (American Institute of Physics, New York, Sept. 2000)

## Introduction

Bosons are discussed in different areas of physics with the implicit assumption that none of their properties is related to the characteristics of the Fock space where their states are defined (continuum or discrete) or to the number of particles (finite or, essentially, infinite). We discuss here different physical paradigms, all in Fock space and with unlimited occupation numbers, showing that such assumption is incorrect: different environments are not equivalent and unexpected relations with the background can be found.

We introduce first the algebraic approach to quantum statistics recently developed, showing that an equivalent but more powerful definition of bosons can be stated in terms of coherent states of the non compact algebra $`su(1,1)`$ bos . In the necessary definition of consistent limit procedures for each physical problem, the analyticity properties imposed by group theory will be shown to play an essential role. The applications considered will deal with particle physics (PP), Bose gas, and Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC). In PP the interest is focused on canonical commutation relations (CCR), the energy spectrum is continuum and the number of particles is limited. The Bose gas is well exemplified by the blackbody radiation – once more with continuum spectrum but centered on Gibbs and Bose postulates and described in terms of finite density (and infinite number) of particles – and we consider it only to compare it with BEC where, together with the postulates, one has discrete spectrum and finite number of particles.

It will be shown that in PP bosons satisfy a Boltzmann-like statistics, and just because of that they are related to $`h(1)`$. There follows that they obey CCR, which are thus the correct commutation relations in this physical situation (even though, as we shall see, not in others). We shall then argue that the standard approach working for the blackbody, cannot be extended to BEC: in the latter for $`T<T_c`$, finite density approximation fails as the spectrum discreteness becomes relevant and a new physics emerges. In particular equipartition does not hold any longer and a new critical temperature is found, where the specific heat exhibits a spike.

## Algebras and Coherent States

A relation between each statistics and a well defined algebra, has been found in 1998 bos  in terms of coherent states Per . This has allowed us to select specific raising and lowering operators among those that one can arbitrarily introduce into Fock space. Bose-Einstein definition of bosons is indeed given by requiring the density matrix $`\rho `$ to be a multiple of the identity $`𝐈`$ on the Fock space $``$, with no need of referring to any specific operator. One is then free to consider the operators $`a^\pm `$ relating spaces with different number of particles – $`_n`$ and $`_{n+1}`$ – such that

$`a^+|n=f(n+1)|n+1,`$ (1)
where $`f(n)`$ is an arbitrary function. We can assume $`f(n)\sqrt{n}`$ but also e.g. $`n`$ or $`e^n`$. The choice of $`a^\pm `$ usually done – that derives from the Weyl-Heisenberg algebra $`h(1)`$ of position and momentum operators and implies CCR – is arbitrary or, more precisely, appears to be an independent postulate. In what follows such postulate will be shown, following bos , to be related to a specific quantum statistics even though, at first sight, an unsatisfactory one: only a careful discussion of the limit procedure (taking into account correctly the structure of the Fock space) clarifies that for bosons in the physical background of PP (and only in it) consistency holds.

We describe now briefly the procedure that leads from each algebra to its characteristic number of states of the system $`W\{\overline{n}\}`$; more details can be found in ref. bos . Let us start from $`h(1)`$ (often considered as ′′the algebra$`^{\prime \prime }`$ of bosons) and its coherent states. If we follow Condon-Shortley conventions, we have

$`a^+|n=\sqrt{n+1}|n+1,e^{a^+}|0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n!}}|n}.`$
If we disregard such conventions and do not fix any gauge, an arbitrary phase (possibly a function also of an external parameter $`t`$, that we may assume to describe time) must be considered in front of each addendum of the coherent state, and the coefficients in the sum are exactly those needed to describe the $`1`$-mode Boltzmann statistics (see e.g. Hua ). Analogously, $`2`$-modes are realized operating on the $`2`$-mode vacuum $`|0,0`$ with $`a_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}+a_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$:

$`e^{a_{1}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}+a_{2}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}}|0,0={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{e}^{i\varphi (n_1,n_2,t)}}{\sqrt{n_1!n_2!}}|n_1,n_2}.`$
In order to generalize to $`M`$-modes we have now only to consider the $`M`$-mode vacuum and the operator $`_{i=1}^Ma_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$ (in a more formal language, we operate on the highest weight of the direct product representation with the iterated coalgebra $`\mathrm{\Delta }^M(a^+)=a_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{+}`$ Abe ):

$`\mathrm{exp}\left[\mathrm{\Delta }^M\left(a^+\right)\right]|0,0,\mathrm{},0={\displaystyle \underset{\{\overline{n}\}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{e}^{i\varphi (\overline{n},t)}}{\sqrt{n_1!n_2!\mathrm{}n_M!}}}|n_1,n_2,\mathrm{},n_M.`$ (2)
This is equivalent to

$`W\{\overline{n}\}{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n_i!}},`$ (3)
i.e. to the definition of Boltzmann statistics Hua , that we thus obtain from the algebra $`h(1)`$ – which contains the canonical commutation relations $`[\psi (x),\psi ^{}(y)]=\delta (xy)`$ as the relations $`[a_j^{},a_{\mathrm{}}^+]=\delta _j\mathrm{}`$ written in configuration space. Vice versa eq.(3) i.e. Boltzmann statistics can be rewritten as eq.(2) and thus requires $`f(n)=\sqrt{n}`$ that implies $`h(1)`$ and its CCR.

We look now for an algebra, if any, related to Bose-Einstein statistics. It turns out to be sufficient selecting $`f(n)=n`$ to obtain

$`\mathrm{exp}\left[\mathrm{\Delta }^M\left(a^+\right)\right]|0,0,\mathrm{},0={\displaystyle \underset{\{\overline{n}\}}{}}\mathrm{e}^{i\varphi (\overline{n},t)}|n_1,n_2,\mathrm{},n_M.`$ (4)
Manifestly in this case all states in Fock space have equal probability of being occupied. Bose statistics appears thus to be related to $`f(n)=n`$. With this choice eq. (1) leads us to identifying $`a^+`$ with the raising operator of the representation $`𝒟_{1/2}^+`$ of $`su(1,1)`$. Eq.(4) describes thus the $`M`$-mode coherent states of the $`(𝒟_{1/2}^+)^M`$ representation of $`su(1,1)`$ (see bos ).

## Canonical Commutation Relations

The results discussed in the previous section – surprising as they may sound – relate on the one hand CCR to the Boltzmann statistics and on the other bosons to $`su(1,1)`$. This apparently uncertain description signals indeed a more subtle and complex situation: bosons behave differently in different physical contexts. To demonstrate such thesis, we start from eq.(4) and we follow Hua , collecting energy levels into cells, each containing $`g`$ levels. If cell $`k`$, of energy $`ϵ_k`$, contains $`N_k`$ particles, then the number of states corresponding to the collection of occupation numbers $`\{\overline{N}\}`$ is given by

$`W\{\overline{N}\}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N_k+g)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(g)\mathrm{\Gamma }(N_k+1)}}.`$ (5)
Eq.(5), that can be assumed as starting point of any bosons description in quantum statistics, is nothing but, as discussed in bos , the weight of the coherent state corresponding to the representation $`𝒟_{g/2}^+`$ of $`su(1,1)`$. By construction, such weight provides the statistics of a finite number of bosons in Fock space with discrete spectrum. However, physical situations encountered in experiments (except for magnetic traps where BEC is currently investigated) are typically different. Appropriate limit procedures must thus be considered for eq.(5); these procedures, peculiar of each problem, must be included in the consistent definition of what bosons are in each physical situation.

In PP the spectrum is continuum (e.g. in momentum space) while the number of particles remains finite: the correct limit procedure on eq.(5) is thus given by the limit for $`g\mathrm{}`$ at $`N_k`$ fixed Abr :

$`W\{\overline{N}\}\mathrm{lim}_g\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N_k+g)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(g)\mathrm{\Gamma }(N_k+1)}}={\displaystyle \underset{k}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{g^{N_k}}{N_k!}}.`$ (6)
Eq.(6) is exactly equivalent to eq.(3) (and to eq.(2)) from which it can be directly obtained with the same procedure of collecting elementary levels in cells that allows to obtain eq.(5) from eq.(4) Hua . This means that a finite number of bosons, in a continuum Fock space, satisfies Boltzmann’s statistics and, thus, CCR. This result, which appears to contradict common wisdom, is actually consistent with all properties of bosons: all statistics – Bose, Boltzmann and Fermi – give the same distribution in these conditions as, in the physics of the continuum, only states with occupation numbers limited to zero and one have probabilities different from zero. The only statistical property that survives the limit is indeed the symmetry of the wave functions and the related Bose-Einstein correlation Lor  ALE .

## Bose-Einstein Condensation

For the blackbody the limit is different: once more $`g\mathrm{}`$ (because the configuration space is continuum) but $`N_k\mathrm{}`$ as well (as blackbody is a theory of gases). Now the limit prescription is that the density remain finite: $`0<N_k/g\delta _k<\mathrm{}`$. In this way one recovers the usual formulas 222One should not forget that the usual formalism is affected by a small but conceptually relevant difficulty: as for large energy $`\delta 0`$, the limit prescriptions are not satisfied and a not zero probability is predicted for photons of energy greater than that of the entire blackbody..

Let us now compare it with Bose-Einstein condensation in harmonic traps. A detailed technical discussion can be found in ref. BEC ; we consider here only the aspects more closely related with statistics. As a finite fraction of particles migrate into the fundamental level, $`\delta _0\mathrm{}`$ and the blackbody prescriptions are badly violated. In the standard approach, an ad hoc delta function is introduced in the density of states to allow for a macroscopic occupation of the ground state: a procedure which is not adequate in that it does not determine the ground state occupation. The theory of BEC for $`T<T_c`$ should be constructed on a different basis, namely not in terms of density but of $`N`$ – the total number of particles – (finite) in a discrete spectrum. In particular the continuum approximation not only does not permit a rigorous treatment of the macroscopic single state occupation characteristic of BEC, but is far from the experimental situation, where typically $`h\nu /k_B10nK`$ whereas the estimated temperature $`T_c\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}10}^2nK`$.

The solution to the problem can be found coming back to eq.(5), without any limit. We can thus easily look for the most probable distribution, maximizing the logarithm of $`W\{\overline{N}\}`$ (constrained by the two conditions $`_iN_i=N`$ and $`_iϵ_iN_i=E`$) with respect to all $`N_i`$’s. One obtains in this way the exact equation for $`N_i`$ and $`g`$ finite:

$`\psi (N_i+g)\psi (N_i+1)=\alpha +\beta ϵ_ih_i,`$ (7)
where $`\alpha =\alpha (g)`$ and $`\beta =\beta (g)`$ are the two Lagrange multipliers, clearly depending on the value of $`g`$, while $`\psi `$ is the digamma function Abr .

For large argument $`\psi `$ coincides with the logarithm, thus for $`N_i1`$ and $`g1`$ it is easy to obtain the Bose-Einstein distribution we are well accustomed to:

$`\delta ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{e^h1}},`$ (8)
but these limit assumptions do not hold either in PP (where the $`N_i`$’s are finite) nor in harmonic traps (where both $`g`$ and the $`N_i`$’s are finite). As the digamma function has poles for negative integers only, eq.(7) is defined almost everywhere in the complex plane and one could conjecture that it provides the solution for BEC. Unfortunately it is not so: in the presence of a physical 3-dimensional harmonic confining potential, levels are not degenerate (as different frequencies cannot be exactly equal) i.e. $`g`$ should be set equal to 1, and this leads for eq.(7) to a perfectly acceptable but void equation (left hand side identically zero, implying $`\alpha (1)=\beta (1)=0`$). The way out is found in the analyticity of group theory representations: while in the combinatorial approach $`g`$ is a multiplicity and thus an integer, in theory of representations it is simply a parameter that can assume any strictly positive real value. We can thus find by analytical continuation for $`g1`$ the equation for not degenerate levels we need. $`N_i`$ results to be the solution of the implicit equation

$`\psi ^{}(N_i+1)=\alpha ^{}+\beta ^{}ϵ_ih_i^{},`$ (9)
where $`\alpha ^{}\underset{g1}{lim}\alpha (g)/(g1)`$ and $`\beta ^{}\underset{g1}{lim}\beta (g)/(g1)`$ are the new Lagrange multipliers to be determined by the constraints of fixed $`N`$ and $`E`$, and $`\psi ^{}`$ is the trigamma function Abr , derivative of $`\psi `$. Eq.(9) is one-to-one and can be inverted, giving us the correct formula for discrete spectrum, to be used instead of eq.(8):

$`N_i=[\psi ^{}]^1(h_i^{})1\mathrm{for}h_i^{}<\pi ^2/6\mathrm{and}N_i=0\mathrm{for}h_i^{}\pi ^2/6,`$ (10)
$`[\psi ^{}]^1`$ denoting the inverse function of $`\psi ^{}`$ and $`\pi ^2/6\psi ^{}(1)`$. The discrete description can now be implemented as follows: one assigns first the values of $`N`$ and $`E`$; from these the two Lagrange multipliers $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha ^{}(N,E)`$, $`\beta ^{}=\beta ^{}(N,E)`$ are then obtained imposing the constraints with $`N_i`$ given by the defining equation (10); finally, inserting $`\alpha ^{}(N,E)`$ and $`\beta ^{}(N,E)`$ in (10) itself, one gets $`N_iN_i(\alpha ^{},\beta ^{})=N_i(N,E)`$.

By inspection, the two formulas (8) and (10) exhibit a similar structure, because they have a pole with residue 1 for $`h=0`$ and they go to zero for large values of the argument. As condensation derives from such a behavior, combined with the feature that the number of states increases quadratically with energy, both descriptions are correct in predicting the collapse of the atoms in the fundamental level, also if the continuous approach is actually unable to describe what happens for $`T<T_c`$. The subtlety here is that the very concept of temperature, as defined in the theory of gases, cannot be straightforwardly extended to the condensate.

For $`E/N`$ large ($`T>T_c`$, classical region) continuum quantum statistics should predict indeed for the second Lagrange multiplier $`\beta ^{}\left(E/N\right)^1`$, while we find $`\beta ^{}\left(E/N\right)^4`$. Also for $`T`$ large the energy is therefore not proportional to the inverse Lagrange multiplier $`\beta _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}`$ but to the more complex expression $`(\pi ^2/6\alpha ^{})\beta _{}^{}{}_{}{}^{1}`$. Temperature can then no longer be obtained, as for a gas, by $`T=\left(k_B\beta ^{}\right)^1`$: the whole scheme (including the very definition of temperature and its relation with energy, i.e. equipartition) must be reconsidered.

In order to obtain the temperature we resort to the more basic notion of entropy, adopting its Shannon information theoretical definition:

$`S=k_B{\displaystyle p_i\mathrm{ln}p_i},`$
where the $`p_i`$’s are functions of $`N`$ and $`E`$: $`p_iN_i(N,E)/N`$. At fixed $`N`$ we thus straightforwardly obtain $`S=S(E)`$. Numerical elaborations finally give the temperature

$`TT(E)=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{S}{E}}\right]_N^1.`$
Once more this function is one-to-one, and from $`T=T(E)`$ we can obtain $`E=E(T)`$, whence the specific heat $`C{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{E}{T}}\right]_N`$ derives by (numerical) differentiation (see Fig. 1).

The result can be checked for $`T>T_c`$, where $`C`$ is found to be constant, equal to $`3k_B`$ (as it should, since the system does not condense and classical theory works). The physics is completely different for $`T<T_c`$: $`C`$ is almost zero (as entropy and energy decrease with quite different slopes because only a few atoms progressively migrate from the warmer tail of the spectrum into the fundamental level) for $`T_{1/2}<T<T_c`$, and it exhibits a peak for $`TT_{1/2}`$, where condensation becomes a global effect. Note that after the spike, below $`T_{1/2}`$, the specific heat goes to zero as $`T`$ goes to zero, as required by Nernst’s theorem. These results (as well as the complete description of the physics of BEC given in BEC ) are quantitatively correct up to the detailed structure of the ground state, and this approach can perhaps be the appropriate background in which to introduce a collective perturbation DGPS .

In conclusion, the relevance of the algebraic structure of quantum statistics has been stressed. An important ingredient of the latter is analyticity that has been explicitly introduced in the scheme. This leads to a unified vision of the problem of bosons. Thanks to such approach, apparent differences of bosons in various contexts (particle physics, non-interacting gas, condensate) have been shown to be related only to the role of the environment. The notion of boson acquires thus a primary fundamental role in a unified vision which encompasses different definitions and embraces different fields of physics.


format: text

text:
# Coherent quasiparticle weight and its connection to high-𝑇_𝑐 superconductivity from angle-resolved photoemission

In conventional superconductors, the pairing energy gap ($`\mathrm{\Delta }`$) and superconducting phase coherence go hand-in-hand. As the temperature is lowered, both the energy gap and phase coherence appear at the transition temperature $`T_c`$. In contrast, in underdoped high-$`T_c`$ superconductors (HTSCs), a pseudogap appears at a much higher temperature $`T^{}`$, smoothly evolving into the superconducting gap at $`T_c`$ . Phase coherence on the other hand is only established at $`T_c`$, signaled by the appearance of a sharp quasiparticle (QP) peak  in the excitation spectrum. Another important difference between the two types of superconductors is in the ratio of $`2\mathrm{\Delta }/T_cR`$. In BCS theory, $`R3.5`$, is constant. In the HTSCs this ratio varies widely, continuing to increase in the underdoped region, where the gap increases while $`T_c`$ decreases. Here we report that in HTSCs it is the ratio $`z_A\mathrm{\Delta }_m/T_c`$ which is approximately constant, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ is the maximum value of the $`d`$-wave gap, and $`z_A`$ is the weight of the coherent excitations in the spectral function. This is highly unusual, since in nearly all phase transitions, $`T_c`$ is determined by an energy scale alone. We further show that in the low-temperature limit, $`z_A`$ increases monotonically with increasing doping $`x`$. The growth is linear, i.e. $`z_A(x)x`$, in the underdoped to optimally doped regimes, and slows down in overdoped samples. The reduction of $`z_A`$ with increasing temperature resembles that of the $`c`$-axis superfluid density.

This brings us to the important question of the meaning of $`z_A`$ and its determination by angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy (ARPES). We have recently shown  that, although the ARPES spectral function is very broad in the normal state, indicating that there are no quasiparticles, in the superconducting state it separates into coherent and incoherent components everywhere along the Fermi surface. We call the coherent component the quasiparticle piece and its spectral weight (normalized energy integral), $`z_A`$. For a Fermi liquid, this is the quasiparticle residue $`z`$. The validity of a Fermi liquid picture in the superconducting state of HTSCs has not been established, but the restoration of electronic coherence below $`T_c`$ is demonstrated by a developing $`z_A`$ in ARPES spectra. In the highly anisotropic HTSCs one would expect $`z_A`$ to dependent significantly on the in-plane momentum. We focus our analysis on the coherent portion of the spectral weight in the vicinity of the $`(\pi ,0)`$ point of the Brillouin zone. The vicinity of $`(\pi ,0)`$ contributes most of the angle-integrated spectral weight. This assertion derives from a comparison of the density of states as measured by scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) and the ARPES spectral function at $`(\pi ,0)`$ on identical samples, shown in the inset of Fig. 1(b). Once the tunneling spectrum is modified by a Fermi function and convoluted with the ARPES energy resolution, we find a remarkable similarity between the two, including the details of the lineshape, giving us a good reason to believe that the spectral function in the vicinity of $`(\pi ,0)`$ dominates the total density of states. In addition, the $`d`$-wave gap, and therefore the pairing energy scale, is maximized at $`(\pi ,0)`$.

In Fig. 1a we show the ARPES spectra  at $`(\pi ,0)`$ for an optimally doped Bi2212 sample as a function of temperature. The evolution from a broad, incoherent spectral function at high temperature to one that has a sharp peak followed by a broad incoherent part at low temperatures can clearly be seen . Note that a spectral loss (dip) also develops on the high binding energy side of the QP in the SC state, as compared to the normal state spectrum . The dip separates the coherent QP from the incoherent part (hump). Most of the intensity associated with the incoherent hump is believed to be an intrinsic part of the single-particle spectral function, based on the observations that it has the same photoemission matrix element as the coherent QP  and its position scales with that of the QP . Note that although the QP peak appears at $`T_c`$ in optimally doped samples, it is not a direct consequence of the formation of a gap, but is instead related to the onset of phase coherence , in sharp contrast to a BCS superconductor.

We analyze the ARPES data in Fig. 1, by fitting a sharp Gaussian function to the coherent peak and a broad Lorentzian with an asymmetric cutoff to the hump. Both are multiplied by a Fermi function. Although one would expect the quasiparticle peak to have a Lorentzian lineshape, we find that a Gaussian best fits the actual lineshape at low temperature. This remains the case even for our high-resolution data (with a resolution (FWHM) as high as $`7`$ meV, not shown here), suggesting that the QP peak is not resolution limited – consistent with a previous report . A possible origin of such a lineshape is an averaging over a random distribution of a large number of sharper peaks arising from inhomogeneities observed in the tunneling data by STM on Bi2212  which shows a Gaussian-like gap distribution with a width of $`20`$ meV. It is reassuring that at higher temperatures the fit is consistent with a Lorentzian. The fit is insensitive to the form of the broad function describing the hump. Further fits to data over a wide range of doping values will be reported elsewhere .

In Fig. 2 we give an example of how our fits separate the sharp QP from the incoherent spectrum of a slightly overdoped Bi2212 sample. From the Gaussian fit, we obtain the QP weight $`z_A`$, the QP line-width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, and the QP peak position which gives the maximum gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$. We obtain $`z_A`$ from the ratio of the area under the fitted QP peak to the area of the total energy distribution curve (EDC) integrated over the range: \[$`E_{\mathrm{min}},+\mathrm{}`$\], where $`E_{\mathrm{min}}`$ is the minimum of the EDC (below the hump), in the vicinity of $`0.5`$ eV . The choice of integrating range is based on the assumption that $`E_{\mathrm{min}}`$ is where the conduction Cu-O band separates from other bands . Note that the overall amplitude of $`z_A`$ may be underestimated by this method because some of the extrinsic background (although small) is included in the denominator. However, we do not expect it to affect the doping and temperature dependence of $`z_A`$.

We first present our results at a fixed low temperature ($`14`$K). Fig. 3 shows $`z_A`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ v.s. the doping concentration $`x`$. From Fig. 3(a) we see that the QP weight grows linearly with $`x`$ in underdoped and optimally doped samples, and tapers off on the overdoped side. Together with the observation that the area enclosed by the normal state Fermi surface (obtained in ARPES as the locus of gapless excitations) scales as $`1x`$ , the finding of $`z_Ax`$ suggests that only $`x`$ number of coherent carriers are recovered in the SC state, consistent with the picture of doping a Mott insulator with $`x`$ holes. The maximum superconducting gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ at $`(\pi ,0)`$ is plotted in Fig. 3(b) as the QP peak position . This plot shows a trend that $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ increases linearly with decreasing doping in contrast to the behavior of $`T_c`$.

We next look at the reduction of the QP coherence upon heating, shown in Fig. 4, where we plot $`z_A(T)`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m(T)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(T)`$ for three typical samples in the underdoped, optimally doped, and overdoped regions. At optimal doping (Fig. 4(a)), $`z_A(T)`$ is only weakly $`T`$-dependent at low temperatures, but falls off dramatically as $`T`$ is increased towards $`T_c`$, which is consistent with the qualitative trend reported in previous ARPES studies . The overall temperature dependence of $`z_A(T)`$ remarkably resembles that of the $`c`$-axis superfluid density measured by Josephson plasma resonance in Bi2212 , penetration depth in YBCO , and ac susceptibility in LSCO . A possible explanation is that the interlayer tunneling matrix element is enhanced near the $`(\pi ,0)`$ point  such that the low-temperature QP weight near $`(\pi ,0)`$ contributes substantially to the $`c`$-axis superfluid density. An interesting recent theoretical work  within the stripe picture predicts a direct relation between the weight of the QP peak and the $`ab`$-plane superfluid density. However, the connection we find here is between the QP weight at $`(\pi ,0)`$ and the $`c`$-axis superfluid density which has a much weaker temperature dependence than the $`ab`$-plane superfluid density at low temperature. In Fig. 4(b) we compare the $`T`$-dependence of $`z_A(T)/z_A(0)`$ between an underdoped and an overdoped sample. The coherent weight drops faster in the overdoped sample at low temperatures, once again reminiscent of the $`c`$-axis superfluid density in overdoped LSCO and the trend that the $`c`$-axis superfluid density is depleted faster upon heating as doping is increased .

In all three cases, $`z_A`$ drops significantly as $`T`$ approaches $`T_c`$. However, the extracted value of $`z_A`$ is nonzero above, but close to $`T_c`$. We caution that the error bars increase significantly above $`T_c`$ where the overall contribution from the QP becomes very small and thus difficult to separate from the incoherent part of the spectrum. Taking a nonzero $`z_A`$ above $`T_c`$ at face value might suggest that the QP has already formed above $`T_c`$ for all doping values. However, a closer look at the temperature dependence of the QP position and line-width plotted in Fig. 4(c) shows that there are qualitative differences between the underdoped and overdoped regimes near $`T_c`$. In all cases the QP line-width saturates at low temperatures due to inhomogeneities described above. Thus the low-temperature line-width should not be regarded as the intrinsic QP scattering rate which might be much smaller. However, for the underdoped sample, the line-width increases quite rapidly with increasing temperature while the QP position remains roughly unchanged until the width crosses the position near $`T_c`$, and the QP loses its identity. The opposite trend is found for the overdoped sample. Here the width remains approximately independent of $`T`$ across $`T_c`$ while the position decreases. Thus, it is the loss of coherence near $`T_c`$ that destroys the QP on the underdoped side , but the closing of the energy gap near $`T_c`$ that weakens the QP signature above $`T_c`$ on the overdoped side.

A natural conclusion is that superconducting order is established through an emerging QP coherence $`z_A`$ in the underdoped regime (where $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m0`$ above $`T_c`$), while it is controlled by the development of the superconducting gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ on the overdoped side. This, on the gross level, is consistent with the original resonating valence bond picture  and its variants . Motivated by our results, we conjecture that a new quantity $`z_A(0)\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$, with the dimension of energy, possibly plays the role of the superconducting order parameter and determines $`T_c`$. In Fig. 5, we plot $`z_A(0)\mathrm{\Delta }_m`$ and $`T_c`$ vs $`x`$, which reveals a striking proportionality between the two quantities . We conclude that for Bi2212,

$$R=\frac{z_A(0)\mathrm{\Delta }_m}{k_BT_c}=\mathrm{constant},$$

as demonstrated in the inset of Fig. 5. This result differs from the BCS theory. It is known that the effect of $`z_A`$ typically does not enter this formula in the Fermi liquid approach. The experimental findings reported here strongly suggest that, unlike in conventional superconductors, single particle coherence plays an important role in high-$`T_c`$ superconductivity. It is interesting to note that the relation $`x\mathrm{\Delta }_m/k_BT_c3J/t`$ was derived recently in the underdoped regime in a gauge theory formulation of the $`tJ`$ model . This is consistent with our observations provided that $`z_Ax`$ holds in this theory.

We thank T. Yokoya, T. Takeuchi, A. Kaminski, T. Sato, H. Fretwell, J. Mesot, Y. DeWilde for their experimental help and M.R. Norman for theoretical discussion. We also thank S.H. Pan for providing us unpublished STM results. HD is supported by the Sloan Research fellowship. This work is supported by US NSF and DOE,the CREST of JST, and the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture of Japan. The Synchrotron Radiation Center is supported by the NSF.

Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to H. D. (e-mail: dingh@bc. edu)


text:
# Looking Back with Neutrinos11footnote 1Presented at the Carolina Symposium on Neutrino Physics, Columbia, March 2000.

## 1 Introduction

Neutrinos are everywhere and they’re getting into everything. Some have been in the newspapers and a number of them certainly penetrated the Pentagon and have gone through secrets at Los Alamos. Who knows what they won’t get into next?

In view of this interesting if perhaps a bit alarming situation, it shouldn’t come as a surprise that they’re also getting into history. We all know of course that they play a major role in the history of the universe. Here, however we want to talk about yet another role for them: not as players, but as reporters.

Back at the time of supernova 1987a and even long before, it was realized that if neutrinos had a small mass and if they traveled over astronomical distances the small deviation of their velocity from the speed of light could lead to possibly observable effects. It seems to have begun with Zatsepin , who in 1968 suggested if a neutrino burst from a supernova would be detected it could be used to limit the neutrino mass. He used the fact that a mass would mean that the velocity would be energy dependent. Thus a burst starting out a few seconds wide in time would, due to the range of energies contained in it, spread as it traveled to us to us, and this spreading would reflect on the mass. He concluded one could improve the then-existing laboratory mass limit of 200 eV to about 2 eV. Later, with the discovery of different neutrino types came the realization  of an even more obvious effect: given different neutrino types, each one should have a different mass and so a different velocity in a burst. In SN 1987a this lead to a limit  of around 10eV for $`\nu _e`$, unfortunately not very strong by present standards.

We see that a neutrino mass has two potentially observable consequences:

$``$ A burst spreads in time due to the dispersion of velocities.

$``$ Different mass states arrive at different times.

Note that one of the mass states could also correspond to photons emitted in the event, in which case $`m=0`$ and the first point doesn’t apply; or contrariwise one of the mass states could be an as yet undiscovered heavy particle (e.g. a WIMP) in which case the time-of-flight effects are magnified. Also note we should expect that the neutrino mass states are generally mixed flavor states, leading to a “flavor-echo”, as we discussed in ref .

Then in another vein, there is the possibility of some fundamental tests of relativity . The limiting velocity for all forms of radiation should be $`c`$, the speed of light. There is no reason to doubt this and many good reasons to believe it. Nevertheless, SN 1987a gave us a rare chance to test it in a novel way, and a rather strong confirmation it is, on the $`10^9`$ level.

## 2 Measuring the Universe with Neutrinos

Here I would like to report on a continuation of this story, which is again nothing but kinematics, but nevertheless with amusing consequences. Once again we are concerned with relativity and neutrino mass. But now it is general relativity and instead of learning about the properties of the neutrino we want to use them to determine the large scale geometry of the universe.

The main point is the following: Neutrinos with mass, when emitted from a distant source will travel somewhat slower than the speed of light. This deviation, however, will depend on the cosmological epoch, since as the universe expands the neutrinos slow down. When the neutrino finally reaches us, its total travel time represents in effect a record of the cosmological epochs it has passed through.

This is a simple idea and could easily have been calculated by the founders of general relativity and cosmology, if they had known about the existence of a very light particle which travels almost, but not quite at the speed of light. But they didn’t of course, and so they concentrated on “geometry” such as the measurement of angles subtended by “standard measuring rods” or the apparent brightness of “standard candles”. Thus it is only very recently, stimulated by the growing evidence for neutrino mass , that we realized  there is a “particle” as opposed to a “geometrical” way of surveying the universe.

Assuming that we know or will know the neutrino masses, it turns that neutrino bursts from sources with identified red shift can give us both the Hubble constant and the acceleration parameter of cosmology  $`q`$. No independent knowledge of the distance to the source is necessary, so difficulties involving the “cosmic distance ladder” are absent.

To see how this comes about, let us calculate the difference in arrival times for two mass states emitted in the same cosmic event. We take the standard FRW metric  $`ds^2=dt^2a^2(t)(d𝐱)^2`$, where we define $`a(t)`$ to be the expansion factor of the universe normalized to its present value: $`a(t)=R(t)/R(now)`$, so that $`a(now)=1`$. We proceed by finding an equation for the coordinate velocity $`dx^i/dt`$, where $`x^i`$ is along the particle’s flight direction. First we express $`dx^i/dt`$ in terms of $`P^i(t)`$, the spatial part of the contravariant four- momentum $`mdx^\mu /ds`$. From the definition of the metric we have $`a(t)dx^i/dt=[a(t)P^i(t)]/\sqrt{m^2+[a(t)P^i(t)]^2}`$.

Expanding for the relativistic case $`Pm`$ we obtain $`a(t)dx^i/dt1\frac{1}{2}m^2/[a(t)P^i(t)]^2`$ To find $`P^i(t)`$, we now make use of the fact that the covariant or “canonical momentum” $`P_i`$ is constant (since nothing depends on the $`𝐱`$-coordinate and $`P_i_i`$ ). Furthermore, since the different kinds of momenta are related through the metric tensor, they all become equal at $`t(now)`$, where $`a=1`$. Hence we can identify the constant covariant momentum as $`P(now)`$, the momentum at the detector. Thus from $`P^i=g^{ij}P_j=1/(a^2)P_i`$, we obtain $`P^i=1/(a^2)P(now)`$ . Thus we finally have

$$\frac{dx}{dt}\frac{1}{a(t)}a(t)\frac{1}{2}\frac{m^2}{P^2(now)}.$$
(1)
The first term by itself will be recognized as just the equation for motion along the light cone, and then there is a small correction involving the mass.

Introducing $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ for the difference in the $`x`$ coordinate of two different particles of mass $`m_2`$ and $`m_1`$ emitted in the same event at the same time

$$\frac{d(\mathrm{\Delta }x)}{dt}a(t)\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{m_1^2}{P_1^2(now)}\frac{m_2^2}{P_2^2(now)}\right]$$
(2)
At the present epoch with $`a=1`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$ is just the spatial separation of the two particles. Integrating, we have for this separation, or in view of $`vc=1`$ for the time difference in arrival at a detector

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t\mathrm{\Delta }xa(t)𝑑t\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{m_1^2}{P_1^2(now)}\frac{m_2^2}{P_2^2(now)}\right].$$
(3)
It is thus $`a(t)𝑑t`$ which “records” the cosmological information. Observe $`a`$ is small at early times so that most of the effect comes near the present time, as expected since this is when the neutrinos are the “slowest”. The expressions in the brackets are the familiar factors giving the difference in velocity for highly relativistic particles.

It now only remains to get rid of the coordinate dependent $`a`$ and $`t`$ and to re-express things in terms of an observable, namely the red shift parameter $`z`$ for the event. With the expansion of $`a(t)`$ for recent epochs $`a(t)=1+H[tt(now)]\frac{1}{2}qH^2[tt(now)]^2+\mathrm{}`$, and the redshift parameter $`z=1/a1=H[tt(now)]+(1+q/2)H^2[tt(now)]^2+\mathrm{}`$, we find

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t\frac{z}{H}\left[1\frac{3+q}{2}z+\mathrm{}\right]\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{m_1^2}{P_1^2(now)}\frac{m_2^2}{P_2^2(now)}\right]$$
(4)
giving the result in terms of the directly observable $`z`$. We thus have the measured quantities for an event, $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ and $`z`$, given in terms of the present Hubble constant $`H`$ and the acceleration parameter $`q`$. Thus in principle two good events–assuming the neutrino masses well known by the time this all happens– fix these cosmological parameters.

This was for the time delay between two distinct mass states. However it may well be that the mass differences aren’t big enough to give cleanly separated pulses. In that case we can try using the pulse spreading effect. So consider the same mass but different momenta $`P`$ and $`P^{}`$. We then get a time delay between the two of

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t\frac{z}{H}\left[1\frac{3+q}{2}z+\mathrm{}\right]\frac{1}{2}m^2\left[(\frac{1}{P(now)})^2(\frac{1}{P^{}(now)})^2\right].$$
(5)
These formulas are low $`z`$ expansions, to order $`z^2`$.

The first term in $`z`$ in the expressions is just what we would get without general relativity; it says that $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ is simply the velocity difference times the distance (since $`z=Hd`$ is just the Hubble law, where $`d`$ is the distance). Even this is not entirely trivial, however, since it shows how with neutrinos one can find H without knowing the distance to the object. That traditional difficulty of observational cosmology, the “cosmological distance ladder”, is gone. It is of course replaced by the difficulty of detecting neutrino bursts at cosmological distances. If the neutrino observations are ever made it will certainly be interesting to compare the “neutrino H” found this way with the “photon H” found by astronomy.

## 3 Reality?

The realization of these proposals, attractive as they might be, does not seem immediate or certain. First of all, we need a class of cosmic events that emits bursts of neutrinos , or neutrinos and photons simultaneously and with great intensity. This does not seem impossible, and certainly hadronic mechanisms for phenomena like the gamma ray bursts would do this, giving neutrinos from charged pions and photons from neutral pions.

Then there is the question of detectability. With the bursts coming from cosmological distances, they will reach us substantially weakened. Here it seems we must rely on the development of the km scale detectors in the ocean and in the ice.

Assuming all this is accomplished we have the question of the good separation of the pulses. If our effects are too small compared to the duration of the original event itself, our time of flight effects will be lost or at least require an elaborate statistical analysis to be extracted.

To get some feeling for this we can evaluate the kinematic factor in front of the formulas in terms of an eV (mass)2 for the neutrinos and GeV for their energy:

$$\frac{(m/\mathrm{eV})^2}{2(P/\mathrm{GeV})^2}50\mu \mathrm{sec}/\mathrm{Mpc}.$$
(6)
It appears that even at a thousand Mpc, a substantial part of the way across the visible universe, we may only expect some $`\mathrm{msec}`$ delays. While $`\mathrm{msec}`$ or even $`\mu \mathrm{sec}`$ speed doesn’t seem very difficult for particle detectors, there is the problem of the intrinsic time scale of the burst itself. If we take supernovas or gamma-ray bursts as a guide, where the timescale is on the order of some seconds, then it seems that to have distinctly separated bursts we would need to have particles distinctly more massive than eV’s. One possibility might be the third neutrino mass eigenstate, another perhaps more interesting one would be not the neutrino itself, but a heavy neutral object like the WIMP we are looking for in our dark matter searches . If the objects do indeed exist they should be stable and if not overly massive, could be emitted in high energy bursts.

However, there is still the possibility of obtaining information even if the bursts don’t separate into clearly distinguishable pulses corresponding to the different masses. There is still the original Zatsepin effect of the spreading of the pulse, here represented by Eq , and involving the same cosmological information as the separation effect Eq . Note our distinction of the “separation” and “spreading” effects is for the purposes of a qualitative description and the two may well overlap, necessitating a detailed analysis including a modeling of the pulse shapes. Comparing the kinematic factors in Eq  and Eq  the condition that the mass separation $`\mathrm{\Delta }t`$ be distinctly greater than that of the pulse spreading is $`\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }m^2}{2m^2}>>\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }p}{p}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }p`$ is the energy spread of the burst.

## 4 Getting Into the Big Bang

Observational methods using the photon, be it the optical photon of classical astronomy, the microwave photon of the background radiation or those of radio astronomy, will never allow us to look further back than “recombination”, some 100,000 years after the Big Bang. One of the most intriguing potentialities of these neutrino or neutrino - like based observations is that these particles will come to us directly from a very early epoch. The “look-back time” is much deeper. Decoupling for the neutrino is in the first few minutes, so with neutrinos we can, in principle, go back to the first minutes and study the space-time geometry at that time.

Facing this exciting possibility of looking deep into the Big Bang are a few requirements and difficulties which are not exactly trivial. Again, some sort of phenomenon must exist around the epoch in question in which powerful high energy bursts of neutrinos are emitted. Perhaps collapse of overdense regions to black holes or annihilation of topological defects are a possibility. Then after being strongly redshifted and diluted by the expansion of the universe, the particles must be detected at the earth. Now we no longer have $`z𝒪(1)`$ but rather, if we go all the way back to neutrino decoupling $`z(1MeV/0.1meV)10^{10}`$, so that these redshifts and dilutions will be very great. Furthermore, since the time scale of the event is stretched by $`z`$, a millisecond event will last a year upon reaching us. On the other hand this suggests something interesting: our grandchildren when operating very big neutrino arrays and observing long-time secular variations in the counting rate, should consider if they are perhaps seeing a burst out of the early universe and not an instability of their apparatus.

Alas, in view of the detection difficulties, this way of doing cosmology will have to probably remain fantasy for quite a while, if not forever. On the other hand, it is hard to think of any other way of directly looking at the pre-recombination epoch.

In a final mad fantasy we can of course push things even further back. Imagine that there is the WIMP or some other neutral, very weakly interacting particle, then we go even further back into the “Bang”. Things like the formation of “Baby Universes”, or other Colossal Happenings, presumably involving some activity and excitations of the particle fields on a microscopic timescale, become directly “visible” via their bursts, and allow us to study the space-time structure of the epoch. While this is indeed very far-fetched, it is amusing that at least at the level of fantasy, there is potentially an observational correspondence to such happenings.

## References


text:
# Nonperturbative effects in deformation quantization

## Abstract

The Cattaneo-Felder path integral form of the perturbative Kontsevich deformation quantization formula is used to explicitly demonstrate the existence of nonperturbative corrections to naïve deformation quantization.

The physical context of the formal problem of deformation quantization is the original one set out by Dirac in making the substitution

$$\{f,g\}\frac{1}{i\mathrm{}}\left(\widehat{f}\widehat{g}\widehat{g}\widehat{f}\right)$$
(1)
the basis for relating classical mechanics on a phase space $`M`$ to quantum mechanics, with $`\widehat{f},\widehat{g}`$ operators acting on a Hilbert space of wavefunctions.

In mathematical terms given a Poisson structure on a manifold $`M,`$ the problem is to find an associative product $``$ on the space of formal power series in $`\mathrm{}`$ with coefficients in the space of smooth functions on $`M`$ such that

$$fg=fg+\frac{i\mathrm{}}{2}\{f,g\}+O(\mathrm{}^2)$$
(2)
where $`\{f,g\}`$ is the Poisson bracket on $`M.`$ Kontsevich gave a solution to this deformation problem in terms of a formal power series organized as a sum over graphs. The details of his construction will not be important for us.

What is more relevant for physics is the reformulation of his construction found by Cattaneo and Felder, who gave a path integral form of the Kontsevich formula. Recall now the Cattaneo-Felder construction: Let $`M`$ be a Poisson manifold with a Poisson bracket given locally by

$$\{f,g\}=\underset{i,j=1}{\overset{d}{}}\alpha ^{ij}_if_jg$$
(3)
with $`\alpha `$ a section of $`^2T_{}M`$ satisfying the Jacobi identity

$$\alpha ^{il}_l\alpha ^{jk}+\text{cyclic}=0.$$
(4)
Let $`X`$ be a map from the unit disk $`D^2M`$ and let $`\eta `$ be a section of $`X^{}T^{}MT^{}D^2.`$ Then the action

$$S_{D^2}\eta _i\text{d}X^i+\frac{1}{2}\alpha ^{ij}\eta _i\eta _j$$
(5)
can be used to define a functional integral such that

$$fg(x)=_{X(1)=x}\text{D}X\text{D}\eta \mathrm{exp}(iS/\mathrm{})f(X(1))g(X(i))$$
(6)
where the integral is over all maps $`X:D^2M`$ such that $`X(1)=x.`$

When the Poisson structure is associated with a symplectic form $`\omega `$ the Cattaneo-Felder formula simplifies considerably. The field $`\eta `$ can be integrated out and one is left with

$$fg(x)=_{X(1)=x}\text{D}X\mathrm{exp}\left(i_{X(D^2)}\text{d}^1\omega /\mathrm{}\right)f(X(1))g(X(i))$$
(7)
where the path integral is now over maps from the circle $`S^1`$ regarded as the boundary of the disk $`D^2`$ to the symplectic manifold $`M.`$ Since $`\omega `$ is closed by definition, it can be represented locally as a one-form denoted symbolically as $`\text{d}^1\omega .`$ In local Darboux coordinates the integral over the boundary is $`S=p\text{d}q,`$ therefore the equations of motion imply that the boundary value is locally constant. In other words, the classical equation of motion maps the boundary of $`D^2`$ to a point in $`M.`$ This fact will be important for us in the following.

As in any aspect of quantum physics, the path integral is more fundamental than its perturbative saddle-point evaluation, so it is appropriate to investigate the Cattaneo-Felder path integral in detail to understand its physical content. I aim to demonstrate here that there are nonperturbative contributions to the Cattaneo-Felder path integral. These come from topologically nontrivial configurations, and hence have coefficients of the form $`\mathrm{exp}(ic/\mathrm{}).`$ Since these contributions appear as essential singularities in a formal expansion in powers of $`\mathrm{},`$ the nonperturbative deformation is still a solution to the formal deformation problem in eq. 2.

When will there be nontrivial solutions to the classical equations of motion? We wish to evaluate a sum over maps from the disk $`D^2`$ to the symplectic manifold $`M`$ such that the boundary of the disk $`S^1`$ is mapped to the point $`x`$ in $`M.`$ In general, homotopy classes of maps from the $`n`$-disk $`D^n`$ to a manifold $`M`$ relative to a submanifold $`N`$ of $`M`$ which map the boundary of $`D^n`$ to $`N`$ are elements in the relative homotopy group $`\pi _n(M,N).`$ (Relative and absolute homotopy groups are defined with a choice of basepoint, but we have not made this dependence explicit in our notation.) In our case, we evidently need to consider $`\pi _2(M,N\{x\}),`$ but this is isomorphic to the absolute homotopy group $`\pi _2(M).`$

We expect then that we will get nonperturbative contributions to the path integral in cases where $`M`$ has non-vanishing $`\pi _2.`$ For example, $`\pi _2(S^2)=𝐙`$ and $`\pi _2(T^{2n})=0`$ so there should be such contributions for $`S^2`$ and no such contributions for $`T^{2n}.`$

In the simplest case $`M=S^2,`$ the homotopy classes of maps are just classified by the degree of the map. It is then easy to evaluate the action for degree $`n`$ solutions to the classical equations of motion $`X_n`$ since

$$\text{deg}(X_n)_{S^2}\omega =_{D^2}X_n^{}\omega S$$
(8)
and $`V_{S^2}\omega `$ is just the symplectic volume of $`S^2.`$ Notice that the value of the action of $`X_n`$ does not depend on the detailed form of $`X_n,`$ just on the topological class given by the degree $`n.`$

Thus the Cattaneo-Felder path integral evaluated semiclassically for $`M=S^2`$ is

$$\underset{n𝐙}{}\mathrm{exp}(inV/\mathrm{})f(X_n+\xi (1))g(X_n+\xi (i))_n$$
(9)
where $`\mathrm{}_n`$ denotes the expectation value in the path integral evaluated perturbatively about $`X_n,`$ with $`\xi `$ the fluctuation. Thus we see contributions with essential singularities as functions of the deformation parameter $`\mathrm{}`$ from topologically nontrivial sectors of the path integral.

I should add a few words on the perturbative evaluation of the path integral about these solutions. The analysis here is restricted to symplectic manifolds and one does not need all the sophistication necessary for the general case. The gauge symmetry of the model in this case is diffeomorphism invariance since the action does not depend on any metric on the disk. If we consider Kähler manifolds, then a natural gauge fixing would be to localize on holomorphic representatives in each topological sector. This can be done in a straightforward fashion with a small modification of Witten’s work on topological sigma models. The standard formal path integral argument for associativity of the product is unchanged of course.

I want to emphasize that there is no shortcoming from a mathematical point of view in the work of Kontsevich. His formula is perfectly adequate as a formal deformation quantization, but the importance of nonperturbative contributions cannot be over-emphasized from the physical perspective. Indeed, sums over such topologically nontrivial configurations are crucial for the appearance of mirror symmetry for example. There is no obvious duality symmetry that one expects in the simple example of $`M=S^2`$ considered here, but in general any $`T`$-duality like symmetry would require inclusion of such topologically non-trivial configurations in the path integral. $`\pi _2`$ is nontrivial for any simply connected Calabi-Yau manifold, for example.

I do not see immediately how to carry out this argument in the general case of a Poisson manifold (eq. 6) since the local constancy of the boundary classical configuration was crucial in identifying nontrivial configurations with elements in the homotopy group. The Seiberg-Witten limit presumably requires the general case.

Acknowledgements: I thank M. Berkooz, D. Gross, G. Lifschytz, D. Morrison, R. Schimmrigk, P. Schupp and E. Verlinde for helpful discussions. This work was supported in part by NSF grant PHY98-02484.


text:
# Comment on ”Critical currents in ballistic two-dimensional InAs-based superconducting weak links”

## Abstract

In ballistic Josephson junctions the experimentally observed iv-characteristics deviate from the theoretically predicted behaviour. Recently, Heida et al. Phys. Rev. B 60, 13135 (1999) discussed this problem and offered an explanation for the discrepancy. Considering this explanation, several contradictions to the authors’ data as well as to other publications are shown.

In a recent paper, J. P. Heida et al.  report on the iv-characteristics of four ballistic superconductor-semiconductor-superconductor samples and focus on possible mechanisms for their observed low characteristic voltage (the $`I_C\times R_N`$ product). As many groups struggle with slow progress to fabricate optimized samples, where this parameter gets close to the theoretically predicted maximum value, any explanation why it may not be possible to reach this goal would be highly welcome. However, the explanation offered rises many questions, that need to be answered before concluding, that partly diffusive InAs layers are the key to explain the experimental findings.

The proper treatment of the InAs layers before the deposition of the Nb layers has been reported by many groups to be the most delicate fabrication step in order to achieve low interface barriers ( and Refs. 12-20). Using too weak Ar sputter cleaning, not all of the oxides on the surface are removed, while too strong cleaning may result in degradation of the mobility of the sample. Taking a not perfect interface into account , however, the reduction of the critical current has been theoretically explained by many authors (e.g. Refs. 10 and 11).

The first arising question is therefore related to the claim of perfect interfaces. Evidence for this could be established by analysis of subgap structures in the iv-characteristics or the excess current (e.g. using the OBTK-Model as an approximation). Without such evidence, a reduced critical current in fact is not a surprise and can be well explained by the established theories. To show measurements of the characteristics up to voltages of $`2\mathrm{\Delta }/e`$ might be also helpful in order to extract the real normal resistance, which for a proper comparison cannot be approximated by the subgap resistance at low voltages. Especially the rather low critical temperature of the deposited Nb films for a thickness of 70 nm seems to indicate the opposite, namely that some kind of contamination occurred, which most likely makes it difficult to obtain a high quality interface.

As for the values for the critical current $`I_C`$ measured for four different samples, I would appreciate to see this behaviour in a greater variety of samples before concluding that $`I_C`$ is ”independent of the junction length”. There seems to be too large parameter spread to support such conclusion, especially when taking into account more data previously published by the same authors, that were measured at very similar samples . According to the authors’ explanation, any parameter spread (in particular true for sample ”B” or ”4”) must be due to local differences in the properties of the diffusive InAs layer, as all interfaces are assumed to be ideal. Therefore the authors should (first) explain this unexpected high parameter spread. Taking into account the proper effective masses at the carrier concentration used , the coherence length is found to be about 250 nm and not 500 nm as claimed by the authors. Therefore none of the samples belongs to the short junction regime contrary to the authors’ claim. This again shows the contradiction between the claimed result, that all samples are short junctions and might need to be further discussed.

The most important question, however, concerns the mechanism for the reduction of the critical current due to scattering events at the damaged InAs underneath the Nb layers. About 30 modes are assumed to be formed within the width of 700 nm and scattering between the modes is claimed to reduce the critical current. The scattering events however are not necessarily phase destructive, which is the mechanism to destroy Andreev bound states and to reduce the critical current. In order to support the authors’ idea, a comparison of samples with different width W and correspondingly different number of modes would be helpful to check the proposed $`1/N`$ behaviour. Samples studied by other groups ( and references 12-20) with much larger widths show in contradiction to the authors’ explanation higher characteristic voltages in spite of the much larger number of modes. In addition, the authors only give an explanation for a reduced critical current and not for a reduced characteristic voltage.

Finally, the authors make one claim, which is not in accordance with recent publications. The authors should state their arguments: To my knowledge, it has never been shown, that the pairing interaction inside the normal conducting layer is (always) absent. As explained in the very first publications about this kind of Josephson junctions (e.g. Ref. 2), this is only a simplified assumption, used in most theoretical descriptions (except e.g. ). On the contrary, many experimental results indicate the opposite ( and Ref. 20), as the phonon-mediated interaction might not end abruptly at any interface.

In conclusion, more data are needed and obvious contradictions have to be discussed to find a correct description for this kind of ballistic Josephson junctions.


text:
# Barnett-Pegg formalism of angle operators, revivals, and flux lines

## Abstract

We use the Barnett-Pegg formalism of angle operators to study a rotating particle with and without a flux line. Requiring a finite dimensional version of the Wigner function to be well defined we find a natural time quantization that leads to classical maps from which the arithmetical basis of quantum revivals is seen. The flux line, that fundamentally alters the quantum statistics, forces this time quantum to be increased by a factor of a winding number and determines the homotopy class of the path. The value of the flux is restricted to the rational numbers, a feature that persists in the infinite dimensional limit.

The multi-valued nature of angle has rendered subtle a quantum mechanical formulation of angle operators that are conjugate to angular momentum. A related problem has been the phase operator of a single mode of an electromagnetic field, conjugate to the number operator. We study the effect of one approach on an important model in physics, namely that of a charged particle rotating around a magnetic flux tube that does not penetrate the particle path and which was shown to be an anyon . It is appropriate that such an attempt be made as at the heart of this system is also the multi-valued nature of a gauge field.

The treatment of the angle operators is within the framework proposed by Barnett and Pegg (BP) . This relies on the construction of a finite dimensional Hilbert space in which physical expectation values are calculated and subsequently the limit of infinite dimensionality is taken. The periodic boundary condition on the angular momentum states, however, results in a global or topological effect that is reflected as flux quantization.

The BP approach is not without its own issues although it has been applied in various situations. For instance one apparent difficulty that has been resolved only recently is the definition of an angular velocity operator . The discussion below is not so much on the correctness of the methodology but rather observes the restrictions that are imposed due to the structure of the Hilbert space in the BP formalism and the way these are transcended in the infinite dimensional limit. For instance the angular momenta associated with the composite can take on only rational values while time takes on a dense set of real values.

We argue this, quite simply, by constructing a Wigner function in the finite Hilbert space and requiring this construct to be valid for all time. Wigner functions for finite quantum mechanics has also been constructed earlier in  while Wigner functions for photon number and phase have been studied by several authors . Our following arguments are closely related to, and informed by, the allowed boundary conditions of quantized torus maps for which a recent treatment is found in , and the Wigner function we use has been used in this context previously. Maps are discrete time (in this context canonical as well) transformations, while time is continuous for the charged particle rotating the flux line. However in the BP formalism the finite dimensionality of the Hilbert space imposes a natural quantization of time.

Both the classical and the quantum dynamics of a rotating particle is essentially an unperturbed twist map, quantization restricting the dynamics to rational sub-lattices. Phenomena peculiar to the quantum dynamics of the rotator such as revivals and fractional revivals due to constructive interference  are present almost identically in the corresponding classical arithmetical dynamics. This is an exact mathematical rendering of the periodic bunching of (classical) athletes observed on the racing tracks and used previously as a pedagogic device for quantum revivals .

We first consider a bare rotating particle with no threading magnetic flux. We briefly recapitulate the BP formalism. A finite dimensional Hilbert space $`H^{2l+1}`$ is obtained on imposing a maximum (minimum) angular momentum quantum number $`l(l)`$. The angle states are the following superposition of the angular momentum states $`|m,m=l,\mathrm{},l`$, which are eigenstates of $`\widehat{L}_z`$ with eigenvalues $`m\mathrm{}`$:

$$|\theta _n=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2l+1}}\underset{m=l}{\overset{l}{}}\mathrm{exp}(im\theta _n)|m,$$
(1)
the angle eigenvalues are

$$\theta _n=\frac{2\pi n}{2l+1}(n=0,1,\mathrm{},2l).$$
(2)
The state $`|m=l`$ is “shifted” by the exponential of the angle operator, defined from the angle states, to $`|m=l`$. Similarly the angle state $`|n=2l`$ is shifted to the zero angle state; thus the essential Hilbert space structure is that of a quantized torus phase space. The limiting process is $`l\mathrm{}`$, $`\mathrm{}`$ fixed and leads to the cylindrical phase space of a rotator. The BP formalism is in many ways similar to that developed by Schwinger  with different motivations. The usual limit of quantum maps on the torus connects $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`l`$ and is the classical limit that leads to a toral phase space. However for any finite value of $`l`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ the Hilbert space structures are identical and we now use this.

Hannay and Berry  while studying chaotic Anasov mappings of the torus onto itself used Wigner functions that are “Dirac delta brushes” to describe the effects of the quantum map. Following them, we may define a Wigner function for the states in $`H^{2l+1}`$ as

$$W(\psi ,s,r)=\frac{1}{2(2l+1)}\underset{k=l}{\overset{l}{}}c_k^{}c_{rk}\mathrm{exp}\left[i\pi s(r2k)/(2l+1)\right].$$
(3)
Here $`2lr\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}l+1`$ and $`0s\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}4}l+1`$ are integers and $`c_k=k|\psi `$ is the momentum representation of the wavefunction. It is known that there is a price to pay for the definition of the Wigner function in finite dimensional Hilbert spaces. If $`N`$ is the dimension of the space the Wigner function is defined on an $`(2N)^2`$ grid rather than a $`N^2`$ grid, although there are only $`N^2`$ independent components, sets of fours being related to each other. If $`N`$ is odd, as in the case of the rotator, one representative point may be chosen of the four and the Wigner function can be displayed on an $`N^2`$ grid.

Thus in the BP formalism the Wigner function is defined over $`\{2(2l+1)\}^2`$ points. The angle is related to $`s`$, while the angular momentum to $`r`$. For instance the angle corresponding to $`s`$ is $`\theta =2\pi s/(2(2l+1))`$. As usual a sum over $`s`$ gives the probability $`c_{r/2}^{}c_{r/2}`$ if $`r`$ is even and zero otherwise; and a sum over $`r`$ gives the probability density in the position basis only for the even lattice points and is zero otherwise. For this property to hold under time evolution the representative $`N^2`$ grid must map onto itself.

Now the Hamiltonian for a particle of mass $`M`$ on a ring of radius $`R`$ is

$$\widehat{H}=\frac{\widehat{L}_z^2}{2MR^2}$$
(4)
Therefore the time evolution is simply specified by a phase change in the momentum basis:

$$c_k(t)=\mathrm{exp}(i\tau k^2)c_k(0),$$
(5)
where $`\tau =\mathrm{}t/(2MR^2)`$ is dimensionless time. We have implicitly assumed that the Hamiltonian generates time evolution in the usual manner. The Wigner function evolution is then straightforward:

$`W(\psi (t),s,r)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(2l+1)}}{\displaystyle \underset{k=l}{\overset{l}{}}}\mathrm{exp}(i\tau k^2)c_k^{}(0)`$ (6)
$`\times \mathrm{exp}(i\tau (rk)^2)c_{rk}(0)\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{i\pi s(r2k)}{(2l+1)}}\right].`$ (7)
Simplifying which we get

$$W(\psi (t),s,r)=W(\psi (0),s\frac{r(2l+1)\tau }{\pi },r).$$
(8)
In the context of linear torus maps such a relationship has been known for sometime . However note that we have not used any discrete mapping as yet: time has been a continuous variable. We are now forced to “quantize” time due to the finite dimensionality of the Hilbert space. Indeed we will have to require that $`(2l+1)\tau /\pi =`$ integer (say $`2j`$, $`j`$ integer) for the Wigner function above to be even defined. This implies that $`t=jT_0`$, where

$$T_0=\frac{4\pi MR^2}{(2l+1)\mathrm{}}$$
(9)
is the time unit chosen (and not half this). One reason is that $`T_0`$ will then correspond to the period of rotation with the highest allowed angular momentum ($`l\mathrm{}`$) in the large $`l`$ limit, a natural time scale in finite dimensional spaces. The other has to do with the representative grid mapping onto itself so that the Wigner function retains its properties which disallows $`T_0/2`$ as the fundamental unit of time.

However, there does not seem to be any a-priori reason why other integer multiples of $`T_0`$ should not be the time quantum. The fundamental path corresponding to $`T_0`$ is a single encircling, while topologically distinct paths on the circle, members of the homotopy group $`\pi _1`$ with higher winding numbers, correspond to these other times. In fact this ambiguity is essential for the existence of anyonic behaviour in the flux-tube-charge-particle system. If we were to restrict, for some reason, the time quantum to $`T_0`$ even with the flux, we would end by restricting the composite to be either bosons or fermions but nothing “in between”. This is discussed further below.

We show now how this time quantization reveals the simple arithmetical basis for quantum revivals in the rotator while becoming irrelevant in the large $`l`$ limit. If at time $`t=jT_0`$ the arguments of the Wigner function are $`s_j`$ and $`r_j`$ then at time $`(j+1)T_0`$ they are $`s_j2r_j`$ and $`r_j`$. Making the identification $`y_j=r_j/(2(2l+1))`$ and $`x_j=\theta _j/(2\pi )=s_j/(2(2l+1))`$ we then get the map

$$\begin{array}{ccc}x_{j+1}& =& x_j2y_j(\text{mod}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1})\hfill \\ y_{j+1}& =& y_j.\hfill \end{array}$$
(10)
This simple unperturbed twist map is an example of a parabolic cat map and the associated linear transformation $`((1,2),(0,1))`$ is of the quantizable checker-board form of alternating odd and even integer entries .

It is easy to see that this simple classical arithmetical map shows revivals and fractional revivals on rational sub-lattices and that the time for the full revival $`t_{\text{rev}}`$ then simply corresponds to $`j=N/2=(2l+1)`$. Thus $`t_{\text{rev}}=jT_0=4\pi MR^2/\mathrm{}`$; while at $`t_{\text{rev}}/2`$ there is a fractional revival into two subsidiary “wavepackets”. These of course coincide with the usual revival times of a quantum rotator. In the final analysis the finite dimensionality $`l`$ plays no part, as it has no physical basis; and neither does the choice of $`T_0`$ over its integer multiples for the time quantum. We must note that the classical fractional revivals are generally not perfect as this depends on the divisibility properties of $`N`$, the imperfections disappearing in the $`N\mathrm{}`$ limit.

The effects of a magnetic flux line on a rotating charged particle forms the bound Aharanov-Bohm (AB) effect and the composite system is a model of an anyon . As such there are no restrictions on the flux line threading the particle path. We may either think of the charged particle as having a new energy spectrum and single-valued wavefunctions or having the same energy but multi-valued wavefunctions that acquire a phase as we complete a loop. The differences between the two and their physical content has been discussed before, for example in . However if we apply the BP formalism to a particle with a flux line and demand that the Wigner function remain defined at all instances of time, we would end in restricting the phase acquired to either $`0`$ (periodic) or $`\pi `$ (anti-periodic), unless the time quantum is suitably dilated.

The usual minimal substitution leads to the Hamiltonian:

$$\widehat{H}=\frac{(\widehat{L}_zq\mathrm{\Phi }/2\pi c)^2}{2MR^2},$$
(11)
the charge being $`q`$ and the speed of light is $`c`$ while $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is the threading magnetic flux. We adopt the first viewpoint and consider single-valued momentum eigenstates and an altered energy spectrum. Then

$$c_k(t)=\mathrm{exp}(i\tau (k\alpha )^2)c_k(0),$$
(12)
where $`\alpha =q\mathrm{\Phi }/2\pi \mathrm{}c=\mathrm{\Phi }/\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$. We then derive that

$$W(\psi (t),s,r)=W(\psi (0),s\frac{(r2\alpha )(2l+1)\tau }{\pi },r).$$
(13)
We again require that the Wigner function be defined for all time. If the time is still quantized as before in Eq. (9) then we must require that $`4\alpha `$ be an integer. It must be noted that this quantization of the flux is independent of the finite dimensionality $`l`$ and therefore survives the limit $`l\mathrm{}`$. This is unlike the quantization of time which takes on a dense set of real values and transcends to a certain extent the limitations of a finite Hilbert space. The allowed values of $`\alpha `$ are then 1 (or 0) and $`1/2`$. The values $`1/4`$ and $`3/4`$ are ruled out as the representative Wigner lattice is not left invariant for these choices and time evolution will result in non-zero probabilities at points off the lattice. Thus the phase acquired by a $`2\pi `$ rotation must either be $`0`$ or $`\pi `$ and the composite is no more a model of an anyon, as it can have only either bosonic or fermionic character.

These severe restrictions on the phase are linked then to the choice of $`T_0`$ as the time quantum. However if $`\alpha =m/n`$, $`m`$ and $`n`$ being co-prime integers, we may dilate $`T_0`$ to $`nT_0`$ and the restrictions on the flux are lifted and anyonic behaviour is recovered. Thus for any dimensionality rational flux lines will be supported. In the infinite dimensional limit, as time acquires a dense set of values, the flux line is still restricted to the rational numbers. The time $`nT_0`$ corresponds to $`n`$ rotations at the highest allowed angular momentum and appears as the time quantum that is linked to the flux. Thus the fundamental motion is not a single encircling of the flux line, but a path with a winding number $`n`$. Thus the homotopy class of the particle path is determined by the flux.

We could have adopted the other viewpoint of multi-valued momentum eigenfunctions and unchanged energy eigenvalues. Then the Dirac delta brush on which the Wigner function exits will be supported at points shifted away from the integers by $`\alpha `$ and once again will result in identical restrictions. Thus if the BP formalism of angle operators is combined with the Wigner function evolution AB magnetic flux lines in flux-tube-charge-particle composites are restricted to the rationals and can be interpreted as corresponding to homotopically distinct paths.

I wish to thank Prof. J. P. Keating for sending me the work in . I have also profited from discussions with Prof. G. S. Agarwal and Dr. J. Banerji


text:
# Physical Conditions and Spatial Structure in the Molecular Interstellar Medium of M33

## 1 Introduction

Although M33 is substantially smaller than M31, the total H$`\alpha `$ luminosities and hence global star formation rates of the two galaxies are quite similar. This higher star formation rate per unit area, along with the presence of very luminous $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ regions such as NGC 604 and NGC 595, makes M33 an interesting target for studying its molecular interstellar medium. The first observations of CO emission in M33 (Young and Scoville 1982; Blitz 1985) suggested that the molecular gas content of this galaxy was relatively low. However, a complete map of the inner kiloparsec of M33 revealed significant CO emission (Wilson and Scoville 1989) corresponding to $`3\times 10^7`$ M of molecular gas. Interferometric observations (Wilson et al. 1988; Wilson and Scoville 1990, 1992; Viallefond et al. 1992) have revealed a population of giant molecular clouds with sizes, line widths, and masses that are very similar to molecular clouds in the Milky Way. A recent reanalysis of the M33 data along with similar data sets for M31 and the Milky Way by Sheth et al. (these proceedings) uses several different techniques for identifying and analyzing the molecular clouds. The results of that study show that the properties of molecular clouds in these three galaxies are very similar when the clouds are all analyzed in a self-consistent way.

Although there have been major campaigns over the last 10 years to map the total molecular disk of M31 (Dame et al. 1993; Neininger et al. 1998; Loinard et al. 1999; Guélin, these proceedings), we still do not have a complete map of the CO emission in M33. Therefore, instead of discussing the global properties of the molecular interstellar medium in M33, I will focus on recent detailed analyses of specific regions in M33. These studies use observations of the higher rotational transitions of 12CO, the rarer isotopomer 13CO, and the fine structure line of atomic carbon to study the physical conditions and structure of the molecular interstellar medium in M33. In Section 2, I discuss how observations of multiple rotational transitions of 12CO and 13CO can be used to constrain the density and temperature of the molecular gas, and how these properties relate to the local star formation environment. In Section 3, I review the evidence for a component of molecular gas at low column densities from observations of 13CO in M33 and in molecular clouds in the Milky Way. In Section 4, I summarize recent observations of atomic carbon in several molecular clouds in M33 and, in particular, a map of the \[CI\] emission from a molecular cloud in the giant $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region NGC 604. I conclude with some suggestions for future work on the molecular interstellar medium in M33.

## 2 Physical Properties of Molecular Clouds and the Link to Star Formation

It seems reasonable to expect that the star formation properties of a molecular cloud may be affected by the physical conditions in the cloud. For example, it is sometimes suggested that the types of stars that form may be affected by the temperature of the cloud (Turner 1984), while the total star formation efficiency of a cloud may be tied to the mass fraction of the cloud in dense cores (i.e. Lada et al. 1991). However, studying the link between star formation and molecular cloud properties is complicated by the fact that star formation can in turn alter the physical conditions in the molecular cloud by heating, compressing, or photodissociating the molecular gas. The key question here is which process is dominant: are differences in the star formation properties among clouds due to the current physical conditions of the clouds, or do those physical conditions instead reflect primarily post-star formation processing of the molecular gas? M33 offers an excellent opportunity to try to disentangle these effects, since we can study individual molecular clouds in a variety of star formation environments all at a common distance.

Measuring the density and temperature of extragalactic molecular clouds is made more difficult by the sizes and internal structure of the clouds themselves. Molecular clouds are clumpy, which means that the typical density of the material producing the CO emission does not equal the volume-averaged density ($`\overline{\rho }=M/V`$). In addition, single molecular clouds are not large enough to fill the beam of even large single radio telescopes, which means that the kinetic temperature of the cloud is not equal to the observed antenna temperature. The solution to these problems is to combine observations of several rotational transitions of 12CO and 13CO with radiative transfer models to constrain the density and temperature of the molecular gas. Wilson, Walker, and Thornley (1997) combined observations of three lines of 12CO and two lines of 13CO with a large velocity gradient analysis to obtain individual estimates of the density and temperature for seven giant molecular clouds in M33. Figure 1 shows some of the lines observed for three of the clouds; note in particular how the strength of the 12CO J=3-2 line increases relative to the 12CO J=2-1 line as we move from a cloud without an optical $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region (MC32), to a cloud with a normal $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region (MC20), to a cloud located very near a giant $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region (NGC 604-2). Although the 12CO/13CO J=1-0 and J=2-1 line ratios are observed to be very uniform throughout the cloud sample, the 12CO J=3-2/2-1 line ratios increase by a factor of almost two in the cloud near the giant $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region compared to clouds without optically visible star formation.

The density and temperature of the molecular gas derived from the large velocity gradient models also show significant changes that are correlated with the star formation intensity (Table 1). In particular, the molecular gas located near the giant $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region NGC 604 is both hotter and less dense than the molecular gas in more quiescent regions. In addition, the volume filling factor of the dense gas (which is equal to the ratio of the volume-averaged density to the density derived from the radiative transfer model) is highest near the giant HII region and decreases towards more quiescent regions. Are the unusual physical conditions seen in this cloud likely to be the reason why this region has formed a giant $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region, or do the physical conditions instead reflect the local star formation environment? The intense ultraviolet radiation field produced by the massive stars is likely to increase the kinetic temperature of the molecular gas. The expected effect of star formation on density is a little less clear; density could be increased through shocks and increases in the ambient pressure, but might be decreased through photo-dissociation of the molecules and through conversion of the densest regions into young stars. However, given that a continuous range of all physical conditions (temperature, density, and filling factor) is observed as we move from clouds without optical $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ regions to clouds with normal $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ regions to a cloud in a giant $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region, it seems more likely that the different physical conditions in these clouds are due to post-star formation changes in the molecular gas, rather than the intrinsic conditions of the pre-star formation molecular cloud.

## 3 The Structure of the Molecular Interstellar Medium

Comparing observations of molecular emission lines in galaxies like M33 with similar data for molecular clouds in the Milky Way can provide information on the large-scale structure of the molecular interstellar medium. For example, early observations of the 13CO emission from external galaxies revealed that the 12CO/13CO line ratio is significantly larger in the disks of spiral galaxies than it is in giant molecular clouds in our own Galaxy (Encrenaz et al. 1979), a difference which has persisted as the galaxy sample has grown. Possible explanations for this difference include a different filling factor in the two lines in the large extragalactic beams (Encrenaz et al. 1979), different \[12CO\]/\[13CO\] abundance ratios from one galaxy to another (Casoli, Dupraz, and Combes 1992), and a mixture of giant molecular clouds and low column density (or “diffuse”) molecular material in galactic disks (Polk et al. 1988). M33 presents us with a unique opportunity to test these different scenarios, since we can observe both individual molecular clouds using millimeter interferometers, and larger areas of the disk using single dish telescopes.

Wilson and Walker (1994) detected 13CO J=1-0 emission towards eight giant molecular clouds in M33 using the NRAO 12 m telescope. The average 12CO/13CO intensity ratio measured in the 55′′ beam is $`10.0\pm 0.09`$, which is roughly a factor of two larger than the value observed in the Milky Way. This sample shows no significant variation in the line ratio over regions that vary in metallicity by a factor of three, which rules out metallicity as a factor in the different line ratios, at least for M33. They also mapped a single molecular cloud interferometrically in the 13CO line using the Caltech Millimeter Array. The molecular cloud has the same filling factor in both 12CO and 13CO (Figure 2), and thus different filling factors in the different molecules do not seem to be an important factor in this region. The intensity ratio obtained from the interferometer map is $`7.5\pm 2.1`$, which is consistent (within the rather large error bars) with the values of 3-6 obtained in the Milky Way. Thus, the high line ratio observed over 200 pc regions of the disk of M33 seems most likely to be produced by a mixture of low and high column density gas within the radio beam. Wilson and Walker (1994) estimate that between 30% and 60% of the 12CO intensity in these regions originates in gas with a lower average column density. A significant contribution from low column density gas would affect estimates of the total mass of molecular gas in these regions, since using the standard CO-to-H2 conversion factor for this material would produce an overestimate of the total gas mass.

These conclusions are supported by recent studies of giant molecular clouds in the Milky Way. Carpenter, Snell, and Schloerb (1995) mapped a 200x200 pc region of the Gem OB1 molecular complex in both 12CO and 13CO with the FCRAO 14 m telescope. They found that the 12CO/13CO intensity ratio is smallest in regions with strong 12CO emission (2-5), higher in low intensity regions (10-15), and highest in regions where only 12CO emission is detected ($`47\pm 8`$). Roughly 50% of the 12CO luminosity originates in regions without detectable 13CO emission. Calculating the gas mass from the optically thin 13CO line where it is detected, and the 12CO line plus an assumed optical depth at other locations, the authors estimate that the 50% of the 12CO luminosity from low brightness regions accounts for only 19% of the total mass. Most of the molecular gas in the cloud complex lies in relatively low column density regions ($`<10^{22}`$ cm-2).

Wilson, Howe, and Balogh (1999) have carried these studies to higher rotational transitions with a 10x20 pc map of the M17 molecular cloud. They also see larger 12CO/13CO line ratios in the J=2-1 and J=3-2 transitions in regions with lower 13CO peak temperatures, which correspond to regions with lower column densities (Figure 3). The overall trend seen in Figure 3 is primarily due to variations in the gas column density from point to point in M17. The 12CO/13CO line ratios averaged over the whole cloud are $`4.5\pm 0.7`$ for the J=2-1 lines and $`3.7\pm 0.9`$ for the J=3-2 lines. These line ratios are significantly smaller than typical extragalactic ratios of 7-13 and 5-17, respectively, and show that the trend of increasing 12CO/13CO line ratios on larger spatial scales is present for all three of the lowest rotational transitions. Again, the most likely explanation for the higher line ratios in other galaxies is a substantial contribution to the 12CO emission lines from low column density molecular gas.

## 4 Atomic Carbon Emission in M33

Atomic and ionized carbon provide important probes into the physical and chemical structure of giant molecular clouds. Because the photodissociation energy of CO and the ionization energy of C are very similar, atomic carbon was originally expected to exist in only a thin layer sandwiched between molecular and ionized regions. However, where \[CI\] has been searched for over large enough areas, it is generally found to be much more extended than expected (Keene et al. 1985; Plume, Jaffe and Keene 1994; Plume et al. 1999). Since atomic carbon can be produced by photodissociation of CO by ultraviolet radiation, the primary interpretation of this large extent is that the molecular clouds are sufficiently clumpy to allow radiation to penetrate deep into the cloud. However, the large extent of the \[CI\] emission also raises the question of whether nearby massive star formation is required to produce atomic carbon, or whether it can be produced by the general interstellar radiation field, perhaps via ultraviolet photons from field OB stars or leaking from $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ regions (see also Hoopes and Walterbos, these proceedings). In addition, cosmic rays and chemical processes involving H+ may also be able to produce significant amounts of atomic carbon (Pineau des Forêts, Roueff, and Flower 1992).

Mapping large regions of Galactic molecular clouds in \[CI\] emission is time consuming even with specialized single-dish telescopes (i.e. Sekimoto et al. 1999) or from space (i.e. Howe et al. 2000, and other papers in the SWAS special issue). Nearby galaxies like M33 offer us the opportunity to measure the total \[CI\] emission of individual molecular clouds in just a few pointings. Wilson (1997) obtained the first \[CI\] detections of four molecular clouds in M33 in single pointings centered on the CO peak for each cloud. Atomic carbon was detected in all four clouds, even in one cloud without an optical $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region. The presence of \[CI\] emission in this cloud suggests that a nearby region of massive star formation is not required to produced atomic carbon. The \[CI\] to CO integrated intensity ratio for the four clouds shows significant variation, ranging from 0.04 to 0.18, with the two clouds near optical $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ regions showing the largest values.

One unusual result from the Wilson (1997) study is the relatively weak \[CI\] emission from the molecular cloud NGC 604-2. Since this cloud is located on the edge of the giant $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region NGC 604 and, in addition, has below-solar metallicity, simple arguments suggested that atomic carbon should be especially enhanced in this cloud. Taylor and Wilson (2000) obtained a small \[CI\] map of this cloud to determine the full extent of the atomic carbon emission. Figure 4 shows the \[CI\] spectra overlaid on a greyscale image of the CO J=1-0 emission obtained with the Caltech Millimeter Array, while Figure 5 shows the \[CI\] emission compared to an H$`\alpha `$ image. In addition to the \[CI\] line detected towards the peak of the CO emission, there is an even stronger line located north-west of the CO peak in the direction of the $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region. The offset in the \[CI\] emission towards the $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{II}`$ region suggests that atomic carbon is created primarily by ultraviolet radiation from the nearby massive stars. However, the presence of \[CI\] emission towards the center of the cloud indicates a significant ionization fraction in the cloud’s interior. However, \[CI\] emission is not detected towards the south-east side of the cloud, even though the CO intensity is comparable to that of the north-west position where strong \[CI\] emission is seen. Overall, the asymmetry in the \[CI\] emission suggests that the interior ionization is most likely produced by penetration of the clumpy interior of the cloud by ultraviolet radiation from the massive stars, rather than by chemical processes or cosmic rays.

## 5 Future Work

With an impressive CO survey of the inner disk of M31 now completed (Guélin, these proceedings), the lack of a similar survey for M33 now stands out as an important gap in the high-quality data sets on the interstellar medium that are available for M31 and M33. The large interferometric survey of the M33 disk currently underway should result in a large increase in the number of molecular clouds identified in this galaxy (Engargiola, Plambeck, and Blitz, these proceedings). However, depending on how the sensitivity and filtering imposed by the interferometric observations matches the mass and structural scale of the molecular interstellar medium, this survey may not give us an accurate measure of the total molecular gas content of M33. The only substantial extension to the early single dish work of Wilson and Scoville (1989) is the recent major axis strip map of Corbelli (these proceedings), which reveals substantial CO emission at several locations beyond the inner 1-2 kpc. The new high-resolution $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{I}`$ survey of M33 (Thilker, these proceedings) offers the opportunity to carry out an unbiased search for CO emission associated with $`\mathrm{H}\mathrm{I}`$ clouds. Such a survey would likely identify molecular clouds across the entire disk, including clouds in low-metallicity regions and regions with unusually low or high star formation activity, and could be the starting point for future detailed studies of the effect of metallicity and star formation on the molecular interstellar medium. However, even such a targeted survey would not give us a complete measure of the molecular gas content of M33. A complete CO survey of the optical disk of M33 using FCRAO or an even larger telescope is urgently needed.

Another interesting area for future studies concerns the low mass end of the cloud mass spectrum. The 13CO observations of M33 discussed in Section 3 provide evidence for molecular gas at relatively low column densities. This low column density material could exist in low mass clouds, in more extended filamentary structures, or might even be simply the outer regions of the more massive molecular clouds. Deep interferometric observations should be able to detect individual molecular clouds as small as $`10^4`$ M, which may be the lower mass limit for gravitationally bound clouds (Heyer, Carpenter, and Snell 2000; Heyer, these proceedings). Identifying a population of low mass molecular clouds would have important implications for understanding massive star formation in M33. For example, Hoopes and Walterbos (these proceedings) have identified a population of “field” O stars, i.e. O stars outside large OB associations, which are responsible for 40% of the ionization of the diffuse interstellar gas. Where are the clouds that could form these field O stars? A likely candidate would be a population of $`15\times 10^4`$ M molecular clouds, which would be too faint to have been detected in the existing interferometric surveys.

In the broader picture, M33’s proximity makes it an important testing ground for the various proposed star formation laws (i.e. Kennicutt 1989) and for testing models of molecular cloud formation and destruction. It is interesting to see how clearly the two main spiral arms in M33 stand out in the ISO 170 $`\mu `$m map (Hippelein, these proceedings); being able to identify clearly arm and interarm regions is important for testing many cloud formation scenarios. The relatively steep metallicity gradient in M33 allows us to study the impact of metallicity on the molecular interstellar medium, from practical items such as the effect on the CO-to-H2 conversion factor to more detailed physical properties such as the distribution of carbon between the molecular, atomic, and ionized phases. An important goal for the next decade is to understand in detail the molecular interstellar medium in M33 and M31, both the properties of the molecular gas itself and its relationship to other phases of the interstellar medium and to star formation. This understanding will provide important background to similar studies of more distant galaxies with a wider range of physical and dynamical properties that will be possible with the Atacama Large Millimeter Array.

## References

Blitz L. (1985) Astrophys. J. 296, 481.

Carpenter J.M., Snell R.L., Schloerb F.P. (1995) Astrophys. J. 445, 246.

Casoli F., Dupraz C., Combes F. (1992) Astron. Astrophys. 264, 55.

Dame T.M., Koper E., Israel F.P., Thaddeus P. (1993) Astrophys. J. 418, 730.

Encrenaz P.J., Stark A.A., Combes F., Wilson R.W. (1979) Astron. Astrophys. 78, 1.

Heyer M.H., Carpenter J.M., Snell R.L. (2000) Astrophys. J. , in preparation.

Howe J.E. et al. (2000) Astrophys. J., Lett. , in press.

Keene J., Blake G.A., Phillips T.G., Huggins P.J., Beichman C.A. (1985) Astrophys. J. 299, 967.

Kennicutt R.C. (1989) Astrophys. J. 344, 685.

Lada E.A., DePoy D., Evans N.J., Gatley I. (1991) Astrophys. J. 371, 171.

Loinard L., Dame T.M., Heyer M.H., Lequeux J., Thaddeus P. (1993) Astron. Astrophys. 351, 1087.

Neininger N., Guélin M., Ungerechts H., Lucas R., Wielebinski R. (1998) Nature 395, 871.

Pineau des Forêts G., Roueff E., Flower D.R. (1992) Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 258, P45.

Plume R., Jaffe D.T., Keene J. (1994) Astrophys. J., Lett. 425, 49.

Plume R., Jaffe D.T., Tatematsu K., Evans N.J., Keene J. (1999) Astrophys. J. 512, 768.

Polk K.S., Knapp G.R., Stark A.A, Wilson R.W. (1988) Astrophys. J. 332, 432.

Sekimoto Y. et al. (1999) in Proceedings of Star Formation 1999, ed. T. Nakamoto, Nobeyama Radio Observatory, p. 86.

Taylor C.L., Wilson C.D. (2000) Astrophys. J. , in press.

Turner B.E. (1984) Vistas Astron. 27, 303.

Viallefond F., Boulanger F., Cox P., Lequeux J., Pérault M., Vogel S.N. (1992) Astron. Astrophys. 265, 437.

Wilson C.D. (1997) Astrophys. J., Lett. 487, 49.

Wilson C.D., Howe J.E., Balogh M.L. (1999) Astrophys. J. 517, 174.

Wilson C.D., Scoville N. (1989) Astrophys. J. 347, 743.

Wilson C.D., Scoville N. (1990) Astrophys. J. 363, 435.

Wilson C.D., Scoville N. (1992) Astrophys. J. 385, 512.

Wilson C.D., Scoville N.Z., Freedman W.L., Madore B.F., Sanders D.B. (1988) Astrophys. J. 333, 611.

Wilson C.D., Walker C.E. (1994) Astrophys. J. 432, 148.

Wilson C.D., Walker C.E., Thornley M.D. (1997) Astrophys. J. 483, 210.

Young J.S., Scoville N. (1982) Astrophys. J., Lett. 260, 11.