text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

We study some aspects of non-commutative open string theories. These are open string theories on branes in the presence of a critical electric field. More precisely, they are defined through a scaling limit where the electric field is taken to its critical value  (for earlier work, see , and for other recent work ). The resulting open string theory is the same as the usual open string theory but with a new product which includes Moyal phases in the directions of the electric field, which we take to be the $`01`$ directions. The Moyal phase is determined in terms of the string scale $`\alpha _e^{}`$.

This open string field theory can be defined in various dimensionalities. We concentrate our discussion on the 1+1 dimensional case. In this case the theory on a D1 brane with $`N`$ units of electric flux is related to a $`U(N)`$ SYM theory in a sector with one unit of electric flux . $`N`$ is related to the open string coupling through the formula $`G_0^2=\frac{1}{N}`$. Thus, $`G_0^2`$ cannot exceed $`1`$ and at this maximum value the NCOS actually becomes free . To achieve weak string coupling, we need to take $`N`$ to be large. In this way, the $`1+1`$ dimensional NCOS provides a new connection between large $`N`$ gauge theory and weakly coupled strings. This duality has very interesting predictions for the open string field theory.

* The gauge theory dual to the NCOS has gauge group $`U(N)=U(1)\times SU(N)/Z_N`$ theory. This implies that we have a free $`U(1)`$ theory. We stress that it is free at all energies, not just low energies. The $`SU(N)/Z_N`$ theory with one unit of $`Z_N`$ flux has a mass gap . We show in this paper that the massless open strings in 1+1 dimensional NCOS decouple and give the free $`U(1)`$ predicted by the duality. All other open string modes are massive: they describe excitations in the $`SU(N)/Z_N`$ theory.
* The field theory has a Higgs branch which has a positive energy density. This implies that if we compactify the field theory on a circle then we should observe a continuum above a certain calculable threshold corresponding to breaking $`U(N)U(N1)\times U(1)`$ by a Higgs vev. The low energy excitations should now reflect the presence of massless $`U(1)`$ modes. We show that the NCOS theory couples to closed strings that wind around the circle with only one orientation. The spectrum of these closed strings is precisely as expected from the duality.
* Let us break $`U(N)U(NK)\times U(K)`$ by a Higgs vev, keeping the electric flux in the $`U(NK)`$ part. We expect that the low energy dynamics of $`U(K)`$, for a large Higgs vev, should be given by the Matrix strings , i.e. by an orbifold $`Sym(R^8)^K`$ perturbed by a dimension 3 operator which depends on the Yang Mills coupling but not on $`N`$ or $`K`$. We check that the low energy interactions of the closed string modes that couple to NCOS theory have precisely the correct coupling.
* We could consider the gauge theory with $`M`$ units of electric flux. This corresponds to having $`M`$ D-branes in NCOS theory. We check that the energetics are as expected.

After completing these checks of the duality, we make some remarks on the relation of this NCOS theory and the Matrix theory, where the $`U(1)`$ flux is related to D0 branes. In fact we show that NCOS theory in 1+1 dimensions is related to DLCQ of IIA string theory in the presence of D0 branes. We also make some remarks on the high-energy and finite temperature behaviors of the NCOS theory.

## 2 The duality

In this section we summarize some aspects of the duality between $`1+1`$ dimensional NCOS theory and the $`U(N)`$ SYM .

Non commutative open string theory (NCOS) is the theory that results from introducing a Moyal phase $`\theta =2\pi \alpha _e^{}`$ in the usual open string field theory with parameters $`\alpha _e^{},G_0^2`$ . It is useful to view this theory as arising from a decoupling limit of usual string theories. These decoupling limits always involve $`g_s\mathrm{}`$ so that to properly analyze them we should go to S-dual descriptions. From this dual description we find that in the 1+1 dimensional case the decoupling limit reduces to the usual decoupling limit for $`N`$ D-branes in the presence of a weak electric field  which gives a $`U(N)`$ super Yang Mills theory with one unit of electric flux. Here $`N`$ is the number of units of the electric flux on the D1 brane in the picture where we define the NCOS limit. The subscipt on $`\alpha _e^{}`$ is introduced to distinguish it from the $`\alpha ^{}`$ of the theory that has been used to define a decoupling limit: $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _e^{}(1F^2)`$, where $`F=F_{01}`$ is the electric field on the original D1-brane.

Now let us find the relation between the parameters $`\alpha _e^{},G_0^2`$ of the NCOS and the parameters $`N,g_{YM}^2`$ of the gauge theory. In order to do this it is convenient to go to a parent string theory where the $`N`$ D-branes live and take then the limit $`\alpha ^{}0`$. If we analize this limit in the S-dual theory we find the NCOS limit. In  this limit was discussed. We note here that we are interested in defining a decoupling limit of the theory of a D1 brane in the presence of $`N`$ units of $`U(1)`$ flux.

The relation between $`\alpha _e^{}`$ and the Yang-Mills coupling can be found following the steps in the duality to be (note that our convention for $`g_{YM}^2`$ differs by a factor of $`2\pi `$ from the standard one):

$$g_{YM}^2=\frac{N^2}{\alpha _e^{}}.$$
(1)
The square of the open string coupling becomes

$$G_0^2=\frac{1}{N}.$$
(2)
More generally we could consider $`M`$ coincident D-branes in NCOS theory. Now the relation between the electric field on $`M`$ D1-branes and the number $`N`$ of flux unit is modified compared to the $`M=1`$ case . The relation between parameters is found to be

$$g_{YM}^2=\frac{N^2}{M^2\alpha _e^{}},G_0^2=\frac{M}{N}.$$
(3)
where the dual theory is $`U(N)`$ SYM with $`M`$ units of flux. It is interesting that now $`G_0^2`$ may be an arbitrary fraction. Properties of the theory should depend sensitively on the value of the numerator and denominator: they should vary discontinuously as a function of $`G_0^2`$.

In the rest of the paper we check some of the predictions of this duality.

## 3  Free the U(1) !

The $`U(1)`$ modes of the gauge theory are dual to the massless modes in NCOS: the scalars in the vector representation of $`SO(8)`$ and their superpartners. One of the striking predictions of the duality is that the massless open string modes should decouple. This prediction is even more striking when we combine it with the statement that all the tree level amplitudes in the NCOS theory are the same as in the usual open string theory except for some Moyal phases. Thus, one might conclude that there must be a contradiction in the above statements since the tree level amplitudes involving massless string states are certainly non-vanishing in the usual string theory. What is important to realize, however, is that the statement about the Moyal phases is a statement about ordered correlation functions of vertex operators which correspond to specific Feynman diagrams. The complete amplitudes are given by suming over all orderings and thus the phases introduce the crucial difference.

Consider the simple case of a four point function. The relevant disk diagram decomposes into 6 possible orderings. There are 2 orderings for 3 of the vertex operators which are fixed at $`0,1,\mathrm{}`$ and the fourth can be integrated over $`(\mathrm{},0)`$, $`(0,1)`$ or $`(1,+\mathrm{})`$. These three integrals are nonzero individually but their sum turns out to vanish! We perform these calculations explicitly in Appendix A.

In the rest of this section we will present a general argument for why these amplitudes vanish. This is due to the precise value of the Moyal phase in NCOS and it would not be true away from the $`F=F_{cr}`$ limit. In this limit the correlation function of world sheet fields at the boundary is given by

$$X^+(t)X^{}(0)=4\alpha _e^{}(\mathrm{log}|t|+i\frac{\pi }{2}\mathrm{sign}(t))$$
(4)
where $`X^\pm =X^0\pm X^1`$. The crucial observation is that we can think of the right hand side of (4), up to an irrelevant constant, as $`\mathrm{log}(t)`$, where $`\mathrm{log}(t)`$ is a holomorphic function of $`t`$ such that when we go from $`t>0`$ to $`t<0`$ it produces the phase difference $`i\pi `$ that we see in (4). There is of course a question of branch cuts and we have to choose them in a definite way. Let us suppose that we are integrating a given massless vertex operator over the boundary of a disk. Since it is massless the on-shell condition implies $`p_+p_{}=0`$. Let us assume that $`p_{}=0`$. Then we choose all branch cuts in the log in (4) so that they are outside the disk. Then we can deform the contour of integration for $`t`$ from the boundary of the disk to the interior and make it disappear, so that the resulting amplitude is zero. Notice that we did not have to assume that other vertex operators were also massless: the only assumption was that at least one is massless and we integrate that one first. Notice that this implies that three point amplitudes are also zero once we add over all orderings since we can take one of the vertex operators and integrate it dividing by the volume of integration, which is finite if we integrate only one. Alternatively we can argue that massless 3-point functions vanish by factorizing the 4-point functions.

For higher loop diagrams it seems that one needs to sum over the insertion of the massless state on all boundaries of the diagram in order to show that the amplitudes vanish. It would be interesting to analyze it more precisely.

Just in case the reader fears that all amplitudes would be zero we compute a four tachyon amplitude in bosonic NCOS theory in Appendix A, and we show that it is non-vanishing. In general, purely massive correlators do not vanish, which agrees with the expectation that $`SU(N)/Z_N`$ gauge theory has non-trivial dynamics. However, as we show in Appendix A, all massive correlators fall off faster at high energies than in the commutative open string. The $`22`$ scattering cross-section depends on the energy as $`E^4`$ away from the poles. This is reminiscent of how it works in the gauge theory: $`\sigma g_{YM}^4/E^4`$.

It should be noted that our argument about the decoupling of massless modes may be extended to $`p+1`$ dimensional NCOS theory with $`p>1`$. The statement is that the $`U(1)`$ modes with momentum purely in the 1 direction (i.e. the direction of space-time non-commutativity) decouple from the theory. In the $`p=3`$ case, analyzed in , the NCOS is dual to a space-space non-commutative Yang-Mills theory with $`B_{23}0`$. In general, the $`U(1)`$ modes do not decouple in a non-commutative theory, but if we have a mode that does not depend on $`x^2`$ and $`x^3`$, then it does decouple because the $`U(1)`$ theory in the remaining directions is commutative. Therefore, our argument translates into non-trivial checks of other dualities in  as well.

## 4  Higgs branch and closed strings

In this section we analyze the second prediction of the duality: the existence of a Higgs branch with the right energetics. It is convenient for this discussion to compactify the Yang-Mills theory, and also the NCOS theory, on a circle. So we compactify the direction 1 on a circle of radius $`R`$. The $`SU(N)`$ with one unit of $`Z_N`$ flux may be Higgsed to an $`SU(NK)\times U(1)^K`$ with one unit of $`Z_{NK}`$ flux in the first factor. The energy cost for this can be calculated from the BPS mass formula for $`(p,q)`$ strings in the gauge theory limit. The relevant formula says that in a $`U(N)`$ theory with $`M`$ units of electric flux we have a ground state energy of the form

$$E(M,N)=2\pi R\frac{g_{YM}^2}{4\pi }\frac{M^2}{N}.$$
(5)
Notice that this gives the energy above the $`U(N)`$ Yang Mills ground state with no flux. The energy of the Higgs branch we considered above, for which $`M=1`$, is

$$E_K=E(1,NK)=\frac{Rg_{YM}^2}{2}\frac{1}{NK}\frac{Rg_{YM}^2}{2}\left(\frac{1}{N}+\frac{K}{N^2}+\frac{K^2}{N^3}+\mathrm{}\right).$$
(6)
On this Higgs branch we also expect to have a continuum of excitations, corresponding to configurations where the Higgs field has some momentum in the transverse directions. There are also massless excitations propagating along the $`U(1)`$s. Let us consider first the case of $`K=1`$: just a single $`U(1)`$. Then we expect to find an energy spectrum for this $`U(1)`$ which to leading order in $`N`$ would be

$$E_1=\frac{R}{2\alpha _e^{}}+\frac{1}{R}(N_L+N_R+\alpha _e^{}k^2/2)$$
(7)
where we have used the relation (1). Notice that the particular dependence of (7) on $`N_{R,L}`$ is just stating that we have massless free fields. There is also a level matching condition that $`N_LN_R`$ should be an integer. Notice that in (7) we have used only the second term in the expansion 6. The first term represents the mass of the electric flux line itself:

$$(2\pi R)\frac{N}{4\pi \alpha _e^{}}=(2\pi R)\frac{1}{4\pi \alpha _e^{}G_0^2}.$$
(8)
From the dependence of the tension on $`G_0^2`$ we conclude that the flux line is dual to a D-string in the NCOS (this is not surprising because this is precisely the S-duality relation). Note, however, that (8) is a factor of two smaller than the naive expectation for the D1-brane tension in NCOS. The naive expectation is what we get by just stating that the mass of brane is given by the lowest term of the non-commutative analog of the Born-Infeld action . On the other hand, if we just stick to the standard string field theory methods and we determine the mass of the brane in the the manner described below then we get the right value. In order to determine the mass of the brane, imagine that we do not take the complete decoupling limit but that we still keep the original $`\alpha ^{}`$ finite. Then one way of computing the mass of the brane would be to consider the string field $`\varphi `$ that parametrizes the position of the brane and to write its kinetic term as $`S=𝑑tC(\dot{\varphi })^2`$. Then we relate $`\varphi `$ to the physical displacement $`r`$ of the brane by considering a configuration with two D-branes and relating the mass of the open string computed in string field theory, which is linear in $`\varphi `$, to the mass we expect if we think we have a string stretching between the branes. Finally we write the action as $`S=𝑑tM\dot{r}^2/2`$ and we read off the mass. The only difference in this procedure between the usual case and the case with the Moyal phases is that the mass of the stretched string as a function of $`r`$ is different. In usual open string theory it is $`m=\frac{r}{2\pi \alpha ^{}}`$ while in this case it is $`m=\frac{r}{2\pi \alpha _{eff}^{}\sqrt{1F^2}}`$. Computing the mass using this method we get a mass that diverges since it represents the mass of the $`(N,1)`$ string in the parent string theory before taking the decoupling limit. If we subtract from this mass the mass of the $`N`$ D1 branes then we indeed get (8). It would be nice to derive the D-brane mass formula directly in the NCOS theory. We believe that the arguments relating the cubic string field theory action to the Born Infeld action should fail in the NCOS theory. In fact, we saw that the massless states are free, which is incompatible with a Born-Infeld action.

### 4.1 Closed Strings

The factor of 2 discussed above is not the only puzzling factor in (6). The tension of the Higgs branch excitation calculated in (7) is $`1/(4\pi \alpha _e^{})`$. Its scaling allows us to identify it with a closed string wound around the compact circle, except for a factor of 2. Thus, the duality predicts that, even though the masses of open strings are given by the usual formula, $`m^2=N/\alpha _e^{}`$ ($`N`$ is the integer oscillator level), the compactified NCOS theory contains wound closed strings of tension $`1/(4\pi \alpha _e^{})`$, instead of the usual closed strings of tension $`1/(2\pi \alpha _e^{})`$. In the following we confirm this prediction.

The presence of wound closed strings in NCOS is hardly a surprise: once we compactify NCOS then an open string can stretch around the circle and the two ends can join with a finite probability, since the open string coupling constant is finite. Therefore, the NCOS theory can emit wound closed strings into the bulk. Moreover the argument leading to (6) predicts that these strings can only wind with one orientation: the winding number $`K`$ cannot be negative. We also expect this from the NCOS theory since the energy necessary to stretch the string in one direction is finite while it is infinite in the other direction in the scaling limit of .

In order to show directly that these closed strings are produced we sketch the calculation of the non-planar one loop diagram. The compactness of the 1 direction introduces the crucial modification that allows closed string poles, and also explains why the tension is twice smaller than in the commutative case (in  it was shown that there are no closed string poles in the non-compact case).

We consider a one-loop diagram, which is a cylinder. We introduce some vertex operators on one boundary and some on the other boundary so that we have some net momentum $`p`$ flowing along the cylinder from one boundary to the other. As usual, $`p^1`$ is quantized: $`p^1=n/R`$. We are interested in poles arising from the large $`s`$ region, where $`s`$ is the proper time along the closed string channel. These poles must be associated with on-shell closed strings. In presence of the NS-NS field $`B_{01}`$, the on-shell condition for closed strings with $`n`$ units of momentum and $`m`$ units of winding can be derived with standard methods (see, for example, ):

$$\alpha ^{}(p_0)^22p_0B_{01}mR+\frac{(mR)^2}{\alpha ^{}}(1B_{01}^2)+\alpha ^{}(n/R)^2+2(N_L+N_R)+\alpha _e^{}k^2=0,$$
(9)
where $`k`$ is the transverse momentum. These strings do not acquire infinite energy in the scaling limit $`\alpha ^{}=\alpha _e^{}(1B_{01}^2)0`$ where $`\alpha _e^{}`$ is held fixed. Terms quadratic in $`p_0`$ and $`n/R`$ vanish, and we obtain a mass formula of non-relativistic type:

$$p_0=\frac{mR}{2\alpha _e^{}}+\frac{\alpha _e^{}}{2mR}k^2+\frac{N_L+N_R}{mR}$$
(10)
together with the standard level-matching condition $`N_LN_R=mn`$. This formula is in precise agreement with the prediction of the duality (7). Especially striking is the fact that that the tension of the wound strings is indeed $`1/(4\pi \alpha _e^{})`$. It is crucial that the quadratic dependence on $`p_0`$ cancels since it implies that $`m>0`$ for positive energy states, so that strings can wind only in one sense. Notice also the appearance of a continuum associated to the momentum $`k`$ in the transverse directions.

We can also see the existence of the closed string poles directly in the open string interpretation of this diagram, in the spirit of the explanation in . The idea is to think about the non-planar diagram in open string field theory where one would have to integrate over the momentum propagating along the loop (see Figure 1). Then the only difference between the NCOS diagram and the usual diagram is the presence of the phase $`e^{2ipq}`$ where $`pq=\pi \alpha _e^{}(p_0q_1p_1q_0)`$, $`p`$ is the momentum flowing through the closed string channel and $`q`$ is the momentum running along the loop. But now, since momenta are quantized we get that $`q_1=n/R`$. So we integrate over $`q_0`$ and sum over $`n`$. The rest of the diagram has the same value as in the usual case. For simplicity we set $`p_1=0`$. The propagators can be exponentiated and we have to compute something of the form

$$𝑑q_0\underset{n}{}e^{i2\pi \alpha _e^{}p_0n/R}e^{2\pi \alpha _e^{}(q_0^2+(n/R)^2)t+\beta p_0q_0}.$$
(11)
The integral over $`q_0`$ is of the usual form and will produce the usual $`\mathrm{exp}(+s\frac{\alpha _e^{}}{2}p_0^2)`$ in the closed string channel (after analytic continuation). The sum over $`n`$ is the interesting part. By Poisson resummation we will get

$$\underset{m}{}e^{s\frac{\alpha _e^{}}{2}|mR/\alpha _e^{}p_0|^2}.$$
(12)
We now have to multiply this times the result of the integral over $`q_0`$ times the rest of the string diagram which for small $`t`$ or large $`s`$ has the standard expansion in terms of closed strings coming from modular transforming the small $`t`$ diagram. Putting it all together we have

$$\underset{m}{}\mathrm{exp}\left\{s\left(\frac{\alpha _e^{}}{2}(|mR/\alpha _e^{}p_0|^2p_0^2+k^2)+2N\right)\right\}.$$
(13)
We see that the quadratic part in $`p_0`$ cancels and then there is a pole at

$$p_0=\frac{mR}{2\alpha _e^{}}+\frac{\alpha _e^{}}{2mR}k^2+\frac{2N}{mR}$$
(14)
where $`N=N_L=N_R`$ which are equal because we assumed $`p_1=0`$. In the case of non-vanishing $`p_1`$ the on-shell condition generalizes to (10).

It is interesting to consider the interaction of these closed strings. From the gauge theory we expect that their low energy interactions are described by a orbifold theory $`Sym(R^8)^K`$ deformed by a dimension 3 operator with a coefficient of the order of $`\frac{1}{g_{YM}}`$ . From the string theory description we expect the same but with a coefficient $`G_0^2\sqrt{\alpha _e^{}}`$. Fortunately, using (1), (2) we find that the two coincide.

Now let us turn to the interpretation of the third term in (6). The NCOS action will contain a term of the form

$$S=\frac{R}{\alpha _e^{}G_0^2}\frac{1}{2}(2\pi \alpha _e^{})^2\dot{A}_1^2.$$
(15)
For configurations where $`A_1A_1+1/R`$ depends only on time, the Moyal phases do not appear. As in the usual discussion, if we consider a configuration with $`K`$ units of momentum conjugate to $`A_1`$, then the energy, expanded to quadratic order, will be

$$E=\frac{R}{\alpha _e^{}}\frac{G_0^2K^2}{2}.$$
(16)
We see from (1), (2) that we reproduce the third term of (6). Since the total winding number for fundamental strings is being kept fixed we find that this $`A_1`$ field will have to carry momentum precisely equal to the number of strings that have been emitted into the bulk.

### 4.2 Finite Temperature

Instead of compactifying the $`x^1`$ direction we could consider the Euclidean theory and compactify $`x^0`$ on a circle of radius $`R`$. This describes NCOS at temperature $`1/(2\pi R)`$. Considering closed strings wound around the Euclidean time direction, we find the dispersion relation

$$\alpha ^{}(p_1)^2+2ip_1B_{01}mR+\frac{(mR)^2}{\alpha ^{}}(1B_{01}^2)+\alpha ^{}(n/R)^2+2(N_L+N_R1)+\alpha _e^{}k^2=0.$$
(17)
Notice the tachyonic shift now present in the oscillator energies . In the scaling limit we have

$$ip_1=\frac{mR}{2\alpha _e^{}}+\frac{\alpha _e^{}}{2mR}k^2+\frac{N_L+N_R1}{mR}.$$
(18)
As the temperature is increased, a massless closed string state appears at $`T=1/(\pi \sqrt{8\alpha _e^{}})`$. This is precisely the Hagedorn temperature expected from studying the open string density of states. It would be interesting to study the connection between the closed strings and the NCOS Hagedorn transition in more detail.

### 4.3 Coincident D-branes

Here we consider the case of $`M`$ coincident D-branes in NCOS theory. The $`U(1)`$ part of the massless degrees of freedom is free as before. On the other hand we have other nearly massless excitations. These excitations might not be truly massless once we include the effects of the interactions. This should be dual to $`U(N)`$ Yang-Mills theory with $`M`$ units of flux. In the Yang Mills theory we expect the energy of this configuration to be proportional to

$$Rg_{YM}^2\frac{M^2}{2N}.$$
(19)
Using (3) we find that this agrees with the expected mass of $`M`$ D-branes in NCOS theory, up to a factor of two mentioned earlier.

A simple observation is that the energy cost to separate them in NCOS theory is zero to leading order in $`M/N=G_0^2`$. If $`N`$ and $`M`$ are coprime we expect that this marginal direction should be completely lifted. In this case we expect from the field theory that the energy cost to separate them is of order $`1/N^3G_0^2/\alpha _e^{}`$ (up to factors of order $`M`$). This is an effect that should arise at one loop. Naively the one loop diagram in NCOS is the same as in the usual string theory, so this effect would vanish. What should probably happen is that the mechanism that ensures that $`G_0^2`$ is quantized will in this case produce a $`F`$ flux on the branes that would give rise to the energy difference. It would be interesting to understand the physics quantizing the coupling.

## 5 Conclusions

In this paper we have carried out some consistency checks on the duality conjectures involving non-commutative open string theory (NCOS). We have mainly focused on the 1+1 dimensional case which is the only one where the non-commutativity is consistent with the Lorentz invariance (although the parity invariance is obviously broken). In this case the NCOS is obtained in the limit of critical electric field along a D-string, and it is believed to be dual to the maximally supersymmetric 1+1 dimensional $`U(N)`$ gauge theory with a single flux quantum. Thus, 1+1 dimensional NCOS is a new example of gauge field/string duality .

In the SYM theory the $`SU(N)/Z_N`$ dynamics has a mass gap while the $`U(1)`$ part decouples at all energy scales. Perhaps our most striking result is that the dual NCOS respects this decoupling through the vanishing of all amplitudes involving massless particles.

We have also considered the NCOS with a compact spatial dimension along the electric field, and showed that in this case open strings couple to winding modes of the closed string sector. The mass formula for such closed strings is in accord with the energetics on the Higgs branch of the gauge theory: the bulk closed strings are dual to individual D-strings which have become liberated from the $`(1,N)`$ bound state.

After some number of such closed strings have been liberated, their assembly gives rise to a Matrix string theory set-up . Indeed, 1+1 dimensional maximally supersymmetric SYM theory appeared in the Matrix description of type IIA string theory . It was observed there that one unit of flux in the Yang Mills theory corresponded to a D0 brane of type IIA in the infinite momentum frame. The large $`N`$ simplifications that we are seeing both in the open string theory and closed string theory are the simplifications that happen for the DLCQ limit of string theory. In particular we are analyzing a D0 brane moving at almost the speed of light. Indeed after T-dualizing along 1 direction, critical electric field becomes the velocity equal to the speed of light .

It is also interesting to notice an analogy between NCOS and the SL(2,R) WZW model. In the SL(2,R) WZW model, one has short strings and long strings . The short strings are analogous to the open strings of NCOS and the long strings, which can wind only in one direction, are analogous to the closed strings in NCOS. In both cases the coupling constant is quantized, at least in the supersymmetric context. This is not a coincidence since both theories are describing strings in critical electric fields or $`H`$ fields.

It would be interesting to consider unstable branes in the presence of electric fields. There is an important difference between magnetic field and electric fields on brane-antibrane pair. In the case of magnetic fields the induced $`D(p2)`$ charge in the anti-Dp brane is the opposite to that of the $`Dp`$ brane. So the statement that the tachyon condensation is the same in the open string theory with Moyal phases as defined in  as in the usual string theory is just a manifestation of Sen’s argument  that brane antibrane anihillation is universal. In the case that we have a constant electric field on the brane the system has a net fundamental string charge. This implies that after tachyon condensation we should be left with closed strings . It is interesting to notice that we can define the NCOS limit also for unstable branes like Dp-antiDp branes in string theory, or D-branes in bosonic string theory. This will give us an NCOS string theory which has a tachyon. Tachyon condensation in NCOS theory is the same as in the usual string theory since the tachyon condensate is constant. In particular we could consider the case of a D1-anti-D1 pair in the NCOS limit. This theory is dual to a $`U(N)`$ theory broken to $`U(N/2)\times U(N/2)`$ with opposite $`U(1)`$ fluxes in each factor. Then we have a relation between parameters as in (3) with $`M=2`$. If we naively compute the action at the minimum it seems to be off by a factor of two from the expected answer. This factor of two is related to the factor of two present before in the mass of the D-brane. It would be nice to understand this more precisely.

## Acknowledgments

We are grateful to C. Callan, A. Hashimoto, C. Herzog, N. Itzhaki, S. Minwalla, A. Polyakov, A. Strominger, L. Susskind and N. Toumbas for useful discussions. The research of I.R.K. was supported in part by the NSF grant PHY-9802484, and the James S. McDonnell Foundation grant No. 91-48. The research of J.M. was supported in part by DOE grant DE-FGO2-91ER40654, NSF grant PHY-9513835, the Sloan Foundation and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

## 6 Appendix A

In this appendix we compute some scattering amplitudes on D1-branes in the presence of electric fields, following . We compute them for a general non-commutativity parameter $`\theta `$ and then we set $`\theta =2\pi \alpha _e^{}`$ which corresponds to the NCOS limit.

The simplest nontrivial scattering calculation is the four-point amplitude for massless NS open strings :

$`A_4(\xi _1,p_1;\xi _2,p_2;\xi _3,p_3;\xi _4,p_4){\displaystyle \{d\sigma _1d\sigma _2d\sigma _3d\sigma _4\}}`$
$`\xi _1V_0(p_1,\sigma _1)\xi _2V_0(p_2,\sigma _2)\xi _3V_1(p_3,\sigma _3)\xi _4V_1(p_4,\sigma _4)`$
The subindex indicates the picture. The vertex operators for scalar particles (the massless transverse modes of the string) have the form:

$`V_1^j(p_1,z)=e^{\varphi (z)}\psi ^j(z)e^{ip_1X(z)}`$ (20)
$`V_0^j(p_2,z)=\left(X^j(z)+ip_2\psi (z)\psi ^j(z)\right)e^{ip_2X(z)}`$
where $`j=2,\mathrm{},9`$, while the momenta $`p^\alpha `$ are longitudinal, $`\alpha =0,1`$. $`z`$ must lie on the real axis.

The Green function on the boundary:

$$X^\alpha (\sigma _1)X^\beta (\sigma _2)=2\alpha _e^{}\eta ^{\alpha \beta }\mathrm{ln}|\sigma _1\sigma _2|+i\frac{\theta }{2}\epsilon ^{\alpha \beta }\mathrm{sign}(\sigma _1\sigma _2).$$
(21)
The second term gives rise to phases that depend on the ordering of the operators.

The $`1+1`$ dimensional massless kinematics is very restrictive. In the center of mass frame the momenta are

$`p_1^\alpha =\left(\begin{array}{c}p\\ p\end{array}\right),p_2^\alpha =\left(\begin{array}{c}p\\ p\end{array}\right),p_3^\alpha =\left(\begin{array}{c}p\\ p\end{array}\right),p_4^\alpha =\left(\begin{array}{c}p\\ p\end{array}\right).`$
Let us position $`V_2`$ and $`V_4`$ at 0 and 1, $`V_3`$ at $`\mathrm{}`$, and integrate over the position of $`V_1`$ from 0 to 1. This gives the s-channel contribution to the amplitude that was calculated in :

$$A^s=\frac{G_0^2}{\alpha _e^{}}\delta ^2(\underset{i}{}p_i)\pi s\frac{\mathrm{cos}(s\frac{\theta }{2\alpha _e^{}})}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi s)}\xi _1\xi _3\xi _2\xi _4$$
(22)
with $`s`$ given by (this corrects a numerical factor in (18) of )

$$s=t=4p^2\alpha _e^{}$$
(23)
So far we have examined the s-channel amplitude, but it turns out that the other channels give comparable contributions. They are not affected by the phases, and their form is

$`A^{t,u}s^2\xi _1\xi _3\xi _2\xi _4\mathrm{\Gamma }(u)\left[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(s)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+t)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(t)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+s)}}\right]`$ (24)
In computing this amplitude we imagine that we artificially add some momentum in the transverse directions as if we were on a higher dimensional brane, so that $`u0`$ and then we take the $`u0`$ limit. The poles in $`u`$ cancel and we obtain

$`A^{t,u}={\displaystyle \frac{G_0^2}{\alpha _e^{}}}\delta ^2({\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}p_i)\pi s{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}(\pi s)}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi s)}}\xi _1\xi _3\xi _2\xi _4`$ (25)
Adding this to the s-channel, we have the complete 4-point amplitude

$`A^4={\displaystyle \frac{G_0^2}{\alpha _e^{}}}\delta ^2({\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}p_i)\pi s{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}(\pi s)\mathrm{cos}(s\frac{\theta }{2\alpha _e^{}})}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi s)}}\xi _1\xi _3\xi _2\xi _4`$ (26)
For $`\theta =0`$ this has the correct pole structure, with the $`t`$ and $`u`$ channels canceling half of the poles in the s-channel amplitude: they cancel the poles with the residue of the unphysical sign. Remarkably, for $`\theta =2\pi \alpha _e^{}`$, the amplitude vanishes identically!

We have also calculated some bosonic string 4-point functions involving the massless scalar particles. The amplitude for 4 massless scalars turns out to have exactly the same form as (26). For the forward scattering of a scalar off a tachyon, we find that the complete amplitude is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{G_0^2}{\alpha _e^{}}}\delta ^2({\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}p_i)\pi (s+1){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}[\pi (s+1)]\mathrm{cos}[(s+1)\frac{\theta }{2\alpha _e^{}}]}{\mathrm{sin}[\pi (s+1)]}}\xi _1\xi _2,`$ (27)
which again vanishes in the NCOS limit, $`\theta =2\pi \alpha _e^{}`$.

If all operators are massive, then the amplitude no longer vanishes in general. To check this we have calculated the complete 4-tachyon amplitude on the bosonic D1-brane:

$`A={\displaystyle \frac{G_0^2}{\alpha _e^{}}}\delta ^2({\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}p_i)\pi (s+2){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}(\frac{\theta }{2\alpha _e^{}}\sqrt{s(s+4)})\mathrm{cos}(\pi s)}{\mathrm{sin}(\pi s)}}`$ (28)
Obviously, this no longer vanishes for $`\theta =2\pi \alpha _e^{}`$. However, in the NCOS limit the amplitude has much softer $`UV`$ behavior than the $`\theta =0`$ amplitude. Indeed, for large $`s`$ we may approximate

$$\mathrm{cos}(\pi \sqrt{s(s+4)})\mathrm{cos}[\pi (s+2)2\pi /(s+2)].$$

Therefore, for large $`s`$,

$$A\frac{G_0^2}{\alpha _e^{}}\delta ^2(\underset{i}{}p_i)\frac{\mathrm{sin}[\pi s\pi /(s+2)]}{\mathrm{sin}[\pi s]},$$

which implies that the residues of the poles at $`s=n`$ fall off as $`1/(n+2)`$ for large $`n`$. Away from the poles, however, the amplitude is energy independent at high energies. This should be contrasted with the commutative open string where this amplitude grows as $`E^2`$.

This softened UV behavior of NCOS massive amplitudes is general. If we consider 4 particles of mass $`m`$, then the amplitude has a factor

$$\mathrm{cos}(\pi \sqrt{s(s4m^2\alpha _e^{})})\mathrm{cos}(\pi s),$$

which leads to a cancellation for large $`s`$.

It is interesting that this behavior of 4-point amplitudes is similar to the energy dependence in the perturbative Yang-Mills theory in 1+1 dimensions. Away from the poles the NCOS amplitude is of order $`\frac{G_0^2}{\alpha _e^{}}`$ in the high-energy limit, so that the $`22`$ scattering cross-section is

$$\sigma \frac{G_0^4}{(\alpha _e^{}E^2)^2}.$$
(29)
The perturbative amplitude for 4 W-bosons is energy-independent and of order $`g_{YM}^2`$, so that the scattering cross-section is $`(g_{YM}/E)^4`$.


format: text

text:
# Experimental observation of nonclassical effects on single-photon detection rates

## Abstract

It is often asserted that quantum effects can be observed in coincidence detection rates or other correlations, but never in the rate of single-photon detection. We observe nonclassical interference in a singles rate, thanks to the intrinsic nonlinearity of photon counters. This is due to a dependence of the effective detection efficiency on the quantum statistics of the light beam. Such measurements of detector response to photon pairs promise to shed light on the microscopic aspects of silicon photodetectors, and on general issues of quantum measurement and decoherence.

Although quantum electrodynamics is one of the most well-established and most accurately tested of physical theories, the vast majority of optical physics still relies on the classical theory of the electromagnetic field. This is because, as was recognized early in the development of quantum optics, classical and quantum theories of light yield precisely the same predictions for a wide variety of phenomena. In particular, the two theories are equivalent for all calculations of intensities (i.e., mean photon number) and effects linear in the intensity; only by studying higher-order correlations (e.g., Hanbury-Brown-Twiss-style coincidence measurements) can one identify clear signatures of nonclassical effects. Over the past 20 years or so, many experiments have applied coincidence-counting and autocorrelation techniques to access these higher-order correlation functions and demonstrate a variety of fascinating quantum effects. Since quantum and classical theories predict identical intensity measurement outcomes, such papers often begin by contrasting the featureless rate of single-photon detection with the quantum phenomena observable only in coincidence rates. Here, we show experimentally that even the rate of photodection at a single detector can in fact be sensitive to quantum-statistical effects, due to the frequently overlooked nonlinearity of typical photon counters such as avalanche photodiodes.

The standard model of photodetection used in quantum optics dates back to Glauber, and is appropriate for a low-efficiency detector whose photocurrent is, in the classical limit, proportional to the incident intensity, or the photon number. Real photon counters rely on extremely nonlinear processes such as electron-hole-pair avalanches to amplify the signal from a single photon to a detectable current. As a result, nearly all such devices (a rare exception, still not in widespread use, is the Rockwell SSPM ) are incapable of distinguishing between a single photon and two or more photons within a certain (device-dependent) “dead time”. For an ideal, 100%-efficient detector this would imply, within the dead time, a photocount rate proportional not to $`na^{}a`$, but rather to the step function $`\mathrm{\Theta }(n0.5)`$, which is equal to 1 for any photon number $`n1`$. The violently nonlinear character of this response implies that even a single avalanche photodiode is sensitive not only to the mean photon number, but also to higher-order terms. If one restricts oneself to considering photon numbers no higher than 2, for example, the response function may be Taylor expanded as $`\frac{3}{2}n\frac{1}{2}n^2`$. (This expansion can be extended to include orders up to $`n^j`$ where $`j`$ is the maximum number of photons considered in the subspace). For a real detector with a finite quantum efficiency, this model can be generalized. However, no precise theoretical model for such a detector exists, nor has the effect been experimentally studied prior to now. Our naïve model suggests that if the single-photon detection efficiency is $`\eta `$, the probability of a detection event in the presence of two photons should be $`\eta +(1\eta )\eta =2\eta \eta ^2`$. This classical-minded model neglects the possibility of any cooperative effects between the photons, along with the possibility of stimulated-emission processes in the detector. Thus, measurements of the “two-photon detection probability” should help one construct accurate microscopic models of photon counters. In particular, it may be possible to probe issues in quantum measurement theory in this way. At very early times, the detection event is dominated by coherent processes such as electron-hole pair-production. As the avalanche process amplifies this first pair, the system is coupled to a large number of degrees of freedom and effective decoherence occurs. Once coherence is lost, our model should correctly describe the effect of additional photons impinging on the detector. If, however, a second photon arrives during the coherent phase of the detection process, it is reasonable to expect a deviation from this prediction.

This experiment relies on a polarization-based version  of the two-photon interferometer orignally devised by Hong, Ou, and Mandel . Our experimental setup is shown in figure 1. Light from a mode–locked 800nm titanium:sapphire laser is frequency doubled in a 0.2mm $`\beta `$–barium borate (BBO) crystal. We separate the fundamental beam from the second harmonic with coloured glass filters (BG 39). The second harmonic serves as the pump laser for the production of type-II degenerate down-conversion in a second, 0.1mm, BBO crystal. The down-converted photon pairs exit the nonlinear crystal collinear with each other and the pump laser, and have orthogonal polarizations – one photon’s polarization is horizontal (H), and the other is vertical (V). Due to BBO’s birefringence, the V photon trails the H photon by an average of 7 fs. The pump laser is separated from the downconverted photons by using a fused-silica prism. A 9mm thick quartz plate and a pair of translatable birefringent quartz prisms are used to delay the photons relative to one another inside the interferometer. The photon–pair polarization is rotated $`45^{}`$ by a half–wave plate and the pair goes through a cube polarizing beamsplitter (PBS). The output beams of the PBS travel through adjustable irises and are focused onto 180$`\mu `$m avalanche photodiodes (APDs): (EG&G model SPCM–AQR–13). In this way, each photon has a 50% chance of reaching each detector; see figure 1.

When the birefringent delay is set so that the photon wavepackets arrive at the PBS simultaneously, there is a drop in the coincidence rate. The half–wave plate and the PBS serve to measure the photons in the $`|\pm 45^{}`$ basis. There are two possible Feynman paths that lead to a coincidence event: photon 1 can be transmitted at the PBS and photon 2 reflected, or vice versa. The amplitudes for these two processes interfere destructively due to the different relative phases of $`|H`$ and $`|V`$ in the states $`|\pm 45^{}=(|H\pm |V)/\sqrt{2}`$, leading to a coincidence null provided the photons arrive at the beamsplitter within their coherence length. This interference has no effect on the intensity of the light at either detector. If the photons arrive at the beamsplitter outside each other’s coherence length, then they are distinguishable, in principle, based on their arrival time at the detectors. In this case no interference is observed.

Theoretically, this coincidence dip can obtain a visibility of 100%. However, for the purpose of this experiment, we obtained a higher photon collection efficiency and higher photon counting rates by opening the irises in front of the detectors at the cost of lowering the coincidence interference visibility. In addition to using large irises, we employed a slightly imbalanced 1:1 telescope in the pump laser beam to again increase the collection efficiency .

To our knowledge, there is no microscopic physical model for the response of a APD when hit by two photons at the same time. In order to give a physically intuitive explanation for the origin and magnitude of an effect on the singles rate, we analyze the Hong-Ou-Mandel interferometer using our naïve model of detection. This model neglects the specifics of silicon APDs, and coherent effects between the multiple electron-hole excitation pathways. When the HOM interferometer is not balanced and there is no interference, each photon-pair entering the device will lead to 0, 1, or 2 photons reaching a given detector – with probabilities 0.25, 0.5, and 0.25 respectively. When interference is occurring, half of the photon-pairs entering the device will impinge, as a pair, on the detector and the other half will leave through the other exit port (for the ideal case of 100% coincidence visibility).

Thus for $`\eta =1`$, the singles-counting rate drops from 75% of the pair-production rate to 50%, a dip with 33% visibility. For a detector with $`\eta <1`$ which obeys our model, the rate drops from $`[\eta /2+(2\eta \eta ^2)/4]`$ to $`[(2\eta \eta ^2)/2]`$, for a visibility $`V_s=\eta /(4\eta )`$. For a realistic coincidence visibility less than 100%, we expect the singles visibility to fall off linearly with the coincidence visibility, $`V_c`$: $`V_s=V_c\eta /(4\eta )`$.

In order to investigate the singles effect and its dependence on the collection efficiency, four runs were performed: three with different neutral density (ND) filters in front of one detector (Bob), and one with no ND filter. By lowering the transmission of the ND filters, the overall collection efficiency can be lowered. The 3 ND filters allowed for 80%, 57%, and 27% transmission of light to give us a broad range of efficiencies. The irises in front of the detectors had 8mm diameters. The data were accumulated by scanning the quartz delay over the interference dip many times. An individual scan counted singles and coincidences at 280 evenly spaced delay settings for 1 second per point. Typically 100 such 5-minute scans were repeated for up to 20 hours, in alternating directions to accumulate good statistics and minimize systematic errors due to laser drift. Over the 15 hours of data taking for the experiment with no ND, Alice and Bob’s singles rates dropped by 10%.

For the experiment with no ND filter and with 8mm irises, the singles rates for Alice and Bob were 13600/s and 13800/s respectively; the coincidence rate was 510/s. By removing the downconversion crystal, the backgrounds at Alice and Bob were measured to be 1415/s and 2006/s respectively. Not including potential background from the crystal itself, these background measurements are an overestimate. The crystal has imperfect transmission and will attenuate both the pump laser and the on-axis background. The systematic error introduced by performing the measurement in this way could be as large as 20%, which is much higher than the Poissonian counting statistical error. Based on the singles rates at the beginning of the data collection, the background level was measured to be 9% for Alice and 12% for Bob.

The coincidence and singles counts were binned and summed based on their delay position to create the raw experimental data. The raw data contained fringes at the period of 800nm light which are due to a classical interference effect and have a visibility of approximately 1%. These fringes are caused when the optic axis of the downconversion crystal is not in the same plane as the optic axis in the quartz delay. Since the period of these fringes is faster than the timescale for the HOM dip (2.6fs versus 20fs), these effects can be easily distinguished. The fringes were removed by averaging pairs of data points separated by half the classical fringe period. We fit the data to a Gaussian plus a straight line, to account for residual effects of drift or nonuniform transmission through the quartz prisms.

Prior to the data accumulation, the efficiency of detection was measured. This efficiency is the product of the actual intrinsic quantum efficiency of the photodetector and the path efficiency of the interferometer. The path efficiency includes losses due to finite sized irises, imperfect transmission through optics, and the ND filters, but not the effect of the PBS. In order to determine the efficiency, $`\eta _A`$, of one detector, the iris in front of the other detector is closed to 1-2mm . The efficiency is then $`\eta _A=2C_{AB}/(S_BB_B)`$, where $`C_{AB}`$ is the coincidence rate between Alice and Bob, $`S_B`$ is the singles rate at Bob, $`B_B`$ is the background rate at Bob, and the factor of 2 compensates for the PBS.

Coincidence and singles rates are shown in figures 2 and 3 as a function of the relative time delay, for the data run with no ND filters. The data have been binned and summed according to the relative time delay, and the fringes have been removed by the averaging method previously mentioned. The coincidence visibility is $`(39.39\pm 0.05)\%`$, and the raw singles visibility at Alice is $`(0.816\pm 0.009)\%`$, where the errors reflect only the statistical fitting uncertainties. Correcting for the $`(9.4\pm 1.9)\%`$ background that we measured at Alice the corrected visibility is $`(0.90\pm 0.01)\%`$. The efficiency was measured to be $`(8.4\pm 1.1\%)`$, the large uncertainty being due to the sensitivity to background when small irises are used. Our model predicts a visibility of $`(0.85\pm 0.11)\%`$ based on the uncertainty in the efficiency measurement. The centres and widths of the coincidence dip and Alice’s singles rate dip agree to within just over one standard deviation.

Since the expected singles visibility scales linearly with the coincidence visibility, figure 4 shows their ratio versus efficiency. Both the singles visibility and the efficiency are corrected for background. There are two sets of error bars plotted on each data point. The smaller set of error bars represents the statistical errors only. The larger set of error bars includes the systematic error due to the uncertainty in the background. The singles visibility at Bob is linearly proportional to the efficiency. The four data points for Bob fall on a straight line (dashed line) with a zero y-intercept with a $`\chi ^2`$ of 5.6 based solely on the statistical errors. The slope differs from that of our theoretical curve (solid line), but by an amount attributable to systematic uncertainty in background. We have made preliminary measurements that suggest that we are missing much of the background contribution to the singles rates at both of our detectors. This is due to fluorescence background which is created in the downconversion crystal or in its anti–reflection coatings, and is difficult to to isolate from the signal itself. Refinement of background measurement techniques are an important subject for future work. It should also be mentioned that since the background measurement is incorporated into the values for the efficiency and for the singles visibility, a higher background will increase both values, but by different amounts.

We have demonstrated for the first time a quantum effect on the counting rate of a single-photon counter, showing that its effective efficiency is a function of the quantum statistics of the incident beam. A simple model for this effect is roughly consistent with the data; however, it will be necessary to refine our estimates of various background sources in order to further pursue quantitative tests of this model.

By adjusting the correlation properties of the incident beam, we are able to probe the response of Silicon avalanche photodiodes to photon pairs (as compared with single photons) on timescales of the order of 5 fs, and for delays up to 60 fs. Since energy and momentum relaxation timescales in Silicon are on the order of 100 fs, and the incident photons may be prepared in identical quantum states (with focal spots on the order of 180$`\mu `$m), a quantum-mechanical description of the microscopic detection process might be expected to be necessary in this regime. At present, the dependence of this effect on detector efficiency agrees qualitatively with a simple classical model, and the agreement can be made quantitative when a 20% systematic uncertainty in background is included. For pairs of photons separated by delays ranging from 20 fs to 60 fs, well outside the interference region, no systematic variation in the counting rate was observed at the 0.1% level. Over the 10-fs width of the quantum interference pattern, the shapes of the singles and coincidence pattern are the same to within 2.5%. Thus, quantum corrections to our model of the detector response to photon pairs appear to be quite small in the regime probed so far. By better characterizing the backgrounds and by extending these studies to other temporal or spatial scales or other detectors, the type of system presented here should provide a novel tool for studying decoherence and the measurement problem at ultrafast timescales in a variety of physical systems.

We would like to thank Magali Davenet and Chris Dimas for their assistance with this experiment, and Sasha Sergienko, John Sipe, and Henry van Driel for extremely valuable discussions. We would also like to acknowledge NSERC, Photonics Research Ontario (PRO), the Canadian Foundation for Innovation and the Walter C. Sumner foundation for financial support.

Figure 1: Experimental setup for polarization-based two-photon interferometer: BG 39, colour glass filter; $`\frac{\lambda }{2}`$, half-wave plate; PBS, polarizing beamsplitter; Alice/Bob, single photon counting modules. Different transmission ND filters were used for each data acccumulation run.

Figure 2: Typical plot of coincidence rates versus the relative time delay. The Gaussian fit yields a visibility of $`(39.39\pm 0.05)\%`$.

Figure 3: Typical plot of the singles rate versus the relative time delay. The gaussian fit yields a visibility of $`(0.816\pm 0.009)\%`$. When background is included, the visibility becomes $`(0.90\pm 0.01)\%`$, based on statistical errors only. With the measured efficiency for Alice of $`(8.4\pm 1.1)\%`$, including the systematic error, our model predicts a visibility of $`(0.84\pm 0.11)\%`$.

Figure 4: Plot of the ratio of singles visibility to coincidence visibility versus the collection efficiency. The solid square is a data point from Alice’s singles visibility, and the open circles are from Bob’s singles visibility. The solid line is the prediction of our naïve model. The dashed line is a linear fit with a zero y-intercept to the data for Bob based on statistical errors only. The data are shown with two sets of error bars. The smaller error bars represent statistical uncertainties only, and the larger set include both the statistical and the systematic errors.


text:
# ON THE RANGE OF VALIDITY OF THE QCD-IMPROVED PARTON MODEL

## References


text:
# Reply to the comment of Chudnovsky&Garanin on ”Spin relaxation in Mn12-acetate”

Angular momentum conservation is a physical law that must be obeyed in any closed system. However, it is well known from standard textbooks that in the case of interactions with phonons a part of the total momentum and of the total angular momentum can be absorbed by the whole crystal and is then no longer considered (cf. e.g. the Mössbauer effect and the Umklapp process). Therefore, there is no such general reason why the spin-phonon couplings

$$g_1(ϵ_{xx}ϵ_{yy})(S_x^2S_y^2)+\frac{1}{2}g_2ϵ_{xy}\{S_x,S_y\}$$
(1)
must vanish in the spin-phonon Hamiltonian $`_{\mathrm{sp}}`$ (see Eq. (6) in Ref. ) due to angular momentum conservation as incorrectly claimed in Ref. . Both terms in Eq. (1) were used e.g. in Refs. , , , and  to describe phonon-assisted tunneling in Mn12. Furthermore, such terms were derived in Refs.  and  many years ago by means of perturbation theory: These authors combined two spin-orbit interactions $`_{\mathrm{SO}}=\lambda 𝐋𝐒`$ with one orbit-lattice interaction $`_{\mathrm{OL}}`$, which yields a third-order term of the form

$$\underset{j,k}{}\frac{_{ij}_{jk}_{ki^{}}}{\epsilon _{ij}\epsilon _{ik}},$$
(2)
where $`\epsilon _{ij}=\epsilon _i\epsilon _j`$ are differences between the eigenenergies of the unperturbed Hamiltonian $`_\mathrm{O}+_\mathrm{L}`$. $`_\mathrm{O}`$ is the Hamiltonian of the free ion, and $`_\mathrm{L}`$ the Hamiltonian of the lattice. Note that the orbit-lattice interaction

$$_{\mathrm{OL}}=\underset{f}{}\frac{V}{Q_f}Q_f+\frac{1}{2}\underset{ff^{}}{}\frac{^2V}{Q_fQ_f^{}}Q_fQ_f^{}+\mathrm{},$$
(3)
where $`V`$ is the energy due to the crystalline electric field, includes terms that are linear in normal displacements $`Q_f`$, which arise from the Jahn-Teller effect. As a matter of fact, the Jahn-Teller effect is very strong in Mn12. In order to provide the connection between Eq. (3) and Eq. (1), we note that the strain components $`ϵ_{\alpha \beta }`$, $`\alpha ,\beta =x,y,z`$, are proportional to the Fourier transforms $`u_𝐪`$ of the displacements $`Q_f`$, which can be represented by phonon creation and annihilation operators with wave vectors $`𝐪`$, i.e. $`u_𝐪(a_𝐪+a_𝐪^{})`$. Obviously, Eqs. (2) and (3) imply Eq. (1) and that part of the angular momentum is absorbed by the whole lattice, which is as usual assumed to be infinitely heavy and of infinite moment of inertia.

Moreover, it was shown generally in Ref.  that the spin-phonon coupling constants corresponding to our $`g_i`$, $`i=1,2,3,4`$, are all of the same order of magnitude. This result was also obtained by Van Vleck for Cr3+.

We agree with Ref.  that the $`g_1`$ spin-phonon coupling term given in Eq. (3) of Ref.  and in Eq. (6) of Ref.  is not due to rigid rotations only, as first pointed out to us by J. Villain. However, we know that $`g_4=2A`$, from which we obtain that $`g_1A`$. Thus, terms of the form (1) do exist in Mn12 in contrast to the incorrect claim made in Ref. .

Finally we conclude with the following erratum to Refs.  and : The equation $`g_1=A`$ (see Ref.  and Eq. (19) in Ref. ) must be changed to

$$g_1A.$$
(4)
Our fits shown in Refs.  and , which are in good agreement with experimental data, confirm Eq. (4). We emphasize that all our conclusions presented in Refs.  and  remain unaffected by this change.


text:
# Enrichment of the Intergalactic Medium by Radiation Pressure Driven Dust Efflux

## 1. Introduction

Several independent sets of observations indicate that galaxies must lose a substantial fraction of the metals they produce during their lifetimes. First, metal lines in hot X-ray emitting gas in clusters and groups indicate that as much metal lies outside of galaxies in these objects as inside them (e.g., Mushotsky et al. 1996; Renzini 1997; Davis, Mulchaey & Mushotsky 1999; Buote 2000). Second, quasar absorption line studies imply that the intergalactic medium (IGM) at $`z3`$ is enriched to metallicity $`Z10^{2.5}Z_{}`$ (e.g., Songaila & Cowie 1996; Cowie & Songaila 1998; Ellison et al. 2000; Penton, Sticke & Schull 2000). Cosmological simulations indicate that this seems to require at least $`10\%`$ of galactic metals to be ejected (Aguirre et al. 2001a,b). Third, the strong positive correlation between galaxies’ masses and metallicities (e.g., Zaritsky, Kennicutt & Huchra 1994) is naturally explained by the efficient escape of metals from low-mass galaxies (Dekel & Silk 1986; Lynden-Bell 1992).

Most theoretical studies addressing this ubiquitous presence of intergalactic metals have focused on the removal of metal enriched gas from galaxies; the gas may be removed by ram-pressure stripping, during dynamical encounters between galaxies, or as an outflow driven by supernovae and stellar winds. While dynamical removal undoubtedly occurs at some level (especially in rich clusters), it is not clear that it can account for the level of metallicity in the $`z=3`$ IGM or the mass-metallicity (M-Z) relation of galaxies (Aguirre et al. 2001a; but see Gnedin 1998). Metal ejection by galactic winds can explain the M-Z relation (winds escape low-mass galaxies more easily) and may account for the observed level of IG enrichment (e.g., Cen & Ostriker 1999; Aguirre et al. 2001b), but it is unclear whether they can do this without overly disturbing the thermal or structural properties of the high-$`z`$ IGM.

A third metal removal mechanism, which has not previously been treated in a cosmological context, is the ejection of dust grains by radiation pressure. As first pointed out by Pecker (1972) and Chiao & Wickramasinghe (1972), bright galaxies can exert a radiation pressure force on nearby grains that exceeds their gravitational attraction, forcing the grains into the galaxies’ halos or beyond. Subsequent studies involving realistic model galaxies have confirmed this idea, showing also that gas drag is insufficient to confine grains unless they start at small galactic scale-height (e.g., Ferrara et al. 1990; Shustov & Vibe 1995; Davies et al. 1998; Simonsen & Hannestad 1999).

All of these studies support the idea that much of a galaxy’s dust may be ejected during its lifetime, so it is interesting to assess the possible IG enrichment that would ensue. Unlike winds, enrichment by dust (partially destroyed in transit or by the IGM) would not impact the thermal/structural properties of the IGM or galaxies. In this Letter, we assess the amount and distribution of metals transferred to the IGM as dust driven by radiation pressure, using two smoothed-particle hydrodynamics (SPH) simulations. The first has $`128^3`$ dark matter particles and $`128^3`$ SPH particles in a $`(17\mathrm{Mpc})^3`$ box, and ends at $`z=3`$. The second, ending at $`z=0`$, has $`2\times 144^3`$ particles in a $`(77\mathrm{Mpc})^3`$ box. Both assume $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }=0.6`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_b=0.047`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.4`$, $`h=0.65`$ and $`\sigma _8=0.8`$. The simulations are described in more detail in Aguirre et al. (2001a) and in Weinberg et al. (1999). Section 2 describes the method of adding metals and dust to the already completed simulations. Section 3 gives results pertaining to the enrichment of the $`z=3`$ IGM and the $`z=0`$ intracluster medium, in several representative models. We discuss these results and their implications in § 4.

## 2. Method

The method by which we calculate IGM enrichment is discussed in detail in Aguirre et al. (2001a). Briefly, our method post-processes a limited number of outputs from already completed SPH cosmological simulations that include star formation. We assume that each unit of forming stellar mass instantaneously generates $`y_{}`$ units of metal mass. We then deposit this metal mass in gas particles near the forming star particle as follows:

1. A fraction $`(1Y_{\mathrm{ej}})`$ of the metal is distributed in the nearest 32 gas particles, using the SPH smoothing kernel (see Hernquist & Katz 1989). Half of the locally-distributed metal is added in the form of dust, the other half as gaseous metal.
2. The remaining mass is tallied for a given galaxy,111By ‘galaxy’ we mean a group of bound particles found using the SKID package, publicly available at http://www-hpcc.astro.washington.edu/tools. for which we also compute the mean metallicity $`Z_{\mathrm{gal}}`$ and the UV-optical-NIR luminosity, using the models of Bruzual and Charlot222The models are available via anonymous FTP from ftp.noao.edu. and a Scalo or Salpeter initial mass function (IMF).
3. Using $`Z_{\mathrm{gal}}`$ we apply a dust correction to the luminosity from Heckman et al. (1998; see Aguirre et al. 2001a), normalized to give the observed ratio at $`z=0`$ in the cosmic UV-optical-NIR and FIR backgrounds (which are also output by the simulations).
4. We assume a grain size distribution (GSD) in mass $`dm(a)/da`$ and opacity (per unit mass) law from Kim, Martin & Hendry (1994) and Laor & Draine (1993), respectively, for either graphite or silicate grains.
5. The fraction $`Y_{\mathrm{ej}}`$ of metal formed in a galaxy is distributed as dust spherically about the center of star formation. A dust mass proportional to $`dm(a)/da`$ is placed in a shell where the radiation pressure on a grain of radius $`a`$ balances the galaxy’s gravitation.

The process is repeated for each galaxy at each time step. New stars are formed with the metallicity (including dust) of the gas from which they form. Each gas particle has an accumulated mass of gaseous metals and dust, and we track the GSD for each particle using a 9-point piecewise power law fit (see Aguirre et al. 2001a for details). The GSD is modified as the dust is converted to metals by

thermal sputtering by the IGM (using the yields of Jones et al. 1994), or as new (unsputtered) dust is added to the particle.

## 3. Results

Our basic model assumes graphite grains, a 1:1 ratio between the cosmic UV-optical-NIR and FIR backgrounds at $`z=0`$ (c.f. Madau & Pozzetti 2000), a Scalo IMF with cutoffs at $`0.1\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and $`100\mathrm{M}_{}`$, $`y_{}=Z_{}`$, and $`Y_{\mathrm{ej}}=0.5`$. The last assumption is maximal, as only $`1/2`$ of a typical

galaxy’s metals are in dust. We also give corresponding results for silicate grains.

Figure 2 shows the key results at $`z=3`$, using the $`128^3`$ simulation. The top two panels give a sparse sampling of individual particle metallicities, versus the gas overdensity $`\delta `$. The stellar yield $`y_{}`$ is uncertain by perhaps a factor of two, and all of the curves could be scaled vertically for a higher assumed value. The metallicity at $`\delta 10^4`$ could also be (roughly) scaled by $`Y_{\mathrm{ej}}`$ for lower assumed values. The bar at the bottom of each panel shows the zero metallicity particles and indicates that the distribution is rather inhomogeneous, especially for silicate grains (Panel B). This can also be seen by comparing panels C and D, which show the median and mean metallicity vs. $`\delta `$. The latter shows that dust ejection can provide enough metals to account for the Ly$`\alpha `$ observations (indicated by the hatched rectangle), though the enrichment may not, in these models, be uniform enough. It is important to note, however, that (assuming grains decouple from the galactic gas) our method always underestimates the radius to which the grains can escape, because they would inevitably reach the force balance radius with some velocity and overshoot it. Thus the distribution should probably be more uniform than shown here. (The ejection radius should also be limited by the average dust velocity $`\overline{v}_d`$ times the available time, but introducing this limit does not change the fiducial model results unless $`\overline{v}_d100\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$, slow compared to velocities seen in more detailed studies of dust ejection.)

Figure 2 gives results for both the total metal enrichment (dashed and solid lines), and for the gas-phase enrichment (single- and triple-dot-dashed lines), where grains have been converted to gas by thermal sputtering only. Because destruction by both thermal and nonthermal sputtering during grain ejection would destroy more dust, true gas-phase abundances should lie above the latter two curves (although if grains are destroyed very efficiently at small radii they will not survive to pollute the low-density regions).

The models with different dust corrections (e.g. changing the 1:1 ratio in cosmic backgrounds to 1:2 or 3:1) give differences in $`z=3`$ enrichment comparable to the

differences between the silicate and graphite models (which differ in dust opacity by a factor of a few). Similar changes are induced by different assumed IMFs (see Aguirre et al. 2001a).

Quantities pertaining to the galaxies ejecting dust at $`z=3`$ are shown in Fig. 3. The left panel, giving the maximal dust ejection radius vs. the galaxy (baryon) mass, shows that ejection is most effective from the larger galaxies. This, and a correlation between mass and metallicity (resulting from more efficient star formation in larger galaxies), largely washes out the anti-correlation between ejection radius and metallicity one would expect from the metallicity-dependent dust correction (as shown in the right panel). At low redshift, the balance reverses, and high mass galaxies eject metals slightly less efficiently due to their large dust corrections.

The $`144^3`$ simulation (which runs to $`z=0`$) allows us to assess the enrichment of the low-$`z`$ IGM by dust ejection. This simulation only resolves galaxies of baryon mass $`10^{10.7}\mathrm{M}_{}`$, but these galaxies dominate the observed $`z=0`$ mass function, and the more efficient ejection of grains from large galaxies at high-$`z`$ (when small galaxies contribute relatively more mass), so we capture the bulk of the metal enrichment. In the fiducial model described above, the ICM of the most massive groups/clusters is enriched to $`1/5Z_{}`$.

Dust is destroyed efficiently in the hot ICM, but enough remains that some extinction can occur. Figure 3 shows the optical depth through a simulation group/cluster of baryonic mass $`2\times 10^{13}\mathrm{M}_{}`$ in the fiducial graphite model, assuming a dust visual opacity of $`\kappa _V=4\times 10^4\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{g}^1`$ (reasonable for a more realistic silicate-graphite mixture). Except along paths through galaxies, the cluster optical depth is typically $`0.2`$mag; the central region has $`A_V0.5`$ mag. Poorer groups show less opacity. We note also that the same model predicts a general ‘diffuse’ extinction to $`z=0.5`$ of $`0.050.1(\kappa _V/4\times 10^4\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{g}^1)`$ mag, which is comparable to the difference between Hubble diagrams for different cosmological models at $`z=0.5`$ (Aguirre 1999) and could potentially be important in observational cosmology.333The far-infrared emission from such dust would not violate constraints from the observed far-infrared or microwave backgrounds; see Aguirre & Haiman (1999).

## 4. Discussion and Implications

In § 1 we argued that dust ejection is an interesting alternative to dynamical or wind enrichment of the IGM because it may be efficient, yet not disturb the IGM or galaxies in a way incompatible with observations. Our simulations, which produce reasonable predictions for the masses, luminosities, and spatial distribution of galaxies, support this possibility by indicating that most galaxies at high $`z`$ have properties that would tend to repel dust grains, out to a radius large enough that the low-density IGM can be significantly polluted. The chief uncertainties in our calculation are not the detailed choices of dust opacity, IMF, dust correction, cosmological parameters, etc. (all of which are probably uncertain only at a level which does not significantly affect our results), but rather in the physics of dust ejection itself. We assume that most dust reaches the point of equilibrium between radiation pressure and graviational forces, but realistically dust might be destroyed in transit, or confined to galaxies by other forces. Gas drag can confine grains at small galactic scale-heights, but this still allows a large dust outflow when the circulation of gas in the galaxy is considered (Shustov & Vibe 1995). But magnetic fields (not included in our treatment) might be extremely important, since charged grains in a microgauss field would oscillate about field lines with a Larmor radius significantly smaller than the galaxy scale. To escape, dust may diffuse along a vertical component of the magnetic field (Shustov & Vibe 1995), perhaps enhanced by low-level winds or by Parker instabilities (Chiao & Wickramasinghe 1972; Ferrara et al. 1991). Magnetic fields may also be much weaker at high-z if they have been amplified by a dynamo since then.

If dust can escape magnetic fields, our calculations show that it could significantly pollute the IGM. A unique signature of enrichment by dust is that while dynamics or winds would pollute the IGM with chemical abundances similar to those of the galaxies, dust ejection can only enrich the IGM with elements such as C, Si, and Mg, which solidify as grains. Elements such as N, Zn, and the noble gases, which are very lightly depleted onto grains, should only be ejected in trace amounts. Thus by measuring the relative ratio of N to C or Si in Ly$`\alpha `$ lines, one could constrain the pollution by dust. Presently N is detected only in absorbers of fairly high ($`N(HI)10^{16}\mathrm{cm}^2`$) column density (Songaila & Cowie 1996), but pushing these observations to lower H I columns could give strong constraints on (or evidence for) dust enrichment.444Unfortunately (for this application), N might also be lacking if it is underproduced in the massive (perhaps low-metallicity) stars responsible for the enrichment at high-$`z`$; see Arnett (1995). At low redshifts the significant abundances of Ne and Ar in cluster gas (e.g., Mushotsky et al. 1996) indicates that dust cannot be the sole pollutant of the ICM and that some enrichment by other mechanisms must occur. Higher quality data from Chandra should allow a much more interesting test of the importance of dust ejection.

Our calculations also give a fairly accurate assessment of the expected opacity of rich clusters if about half of the observed enrichment were due to dust ejection (unless the grain opacities are significantly higher than we have assumed). Our estimate of $`0.20.5`$ mag in the central few hundred kpc of clusters is roughly comparable to both claimed detections of cluster dust using extinction of background quasars (e.g., Boyle et al. 1988; Romani & Maoz 1992) or IR emission (Stickel et al. 1998), and to upper limits based on reddening (e.g. Maoz 1995).555The conclusions of reddening studies are vulnerable to changes in the dust grain-size distribution by dust destruction; see Aguirre (1999). This indicates that the general picture of substantial dust ejection from galaxies might provide an interesting level of extinction through the IGM, but would not violate any current constraints on cluster dust density.

The primary difficulty with dust ejection as an explanation for the Si and C enrichment of the low-density IGM is that it is not at all clear – theoretically or observationally – that dust really can decouple from galactic gas; but if it can, there appears to be no reason why it would not escape to large radii. Galactic winds, on the other hand, are clearly observed both locally and at high-$`z`$, and they should certainly be able to pollute (at least) the halos of their progenitor galaxies. But spreading the metals to large distances may disrupt the IGM more than observations allow (e.g., Theuns, Mo & Schaye 2000; Aguirre et al. 2001b). This suggests a possible ‘hybrid’ scenario in which gas and dust are expelled into a diffuse mixture in the halos of galaxies. But while gas remains there, the dust could continue, driven by radiation pressure, to large distances.

For example, imagine a representative $`z=5`$ galaxy of baryonic mass $`5\times 10^9\mathrm{M}_{}`$ and UV-optical-NIR luminosity $`2.5\times 10^{10}L_{}`$ driving a wind of velocity $`v=200\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ at small radii. Such a galaxy could reasonably drive a wind to $`1100`$kpc (using the results discussed in Aguirre et al. 2001b), but our calculations show that radiation pressure could exceed gravitational attraction out to 100-200 kpc. If $`0.1\mu \mathrm{m}`$ graphite grains were to decouple from the gas near the disk (say at $`10`$ kpc), they could reach $`(100200)\mathrm{kpc}`$ after $`(0.20.4)`$Gyr, with velocity $`470500\mathrm{km}\mathrm{s}^1`$ (in calculating this we assume here that the enclosed mass is proportional to the radius). After $`1`$ Gyr (i.e. at $`z=3`$) the grains could reach up to $`420\mathrm{kpc}`$; silicate grains could reach up to $`280`$kpc during the same time. This is an upper limit since we have neglected gas drag; adding gas drag appropriate for $`\delta =100(10)`$ gas reduces the graphite distance to 250(385) kpc and the silicate distance to 220(270) kpc.666For this estimate we use a drag force $`\sigma \rho v^2`$ where $`\sigma `$ and $`v`$ are the dust geometrical cross section and velocity, and $`\rho `$ is the density of the medium. This neglects Coulomb drag and is good in the limit of highly supersonic grains.  but indicates that radiation pressure can quite plausibly eject dust far enough to pollute the IGM quite uniformly while disturbing the IGM only near the galaxy.

In summary, our calculations indicate that galaxies at high redshift tend to repel rather than attract dust grains. If a substantial fraction of dust can reach at least the equilibrium radius between gravitational and radiation pressure forces, then the ensuing enrichment can account for the mean level of C and Si observed in the IGM at $`z3`$. Dust ejection would also enrich groups and clusters substantially, though radiation pressure cannot account for all of the metals observed. The resulting dust extinction would be $`0.5`$ mag through the cores of rich clusters. Dust ejection and the ejection of metals by winds are, in some sense, complementary. Winds almost certainly drive gas into the halos of galaxies, but may overly-disturb the IGM if the gas travels to very large radii. Dust may be confined to galaxies by magnetic fields or gas drag but should leave unimpeded if first moved into the halo. Radiation pressure acting on dust can therefore help enrich the IGM more uniformly than winds alone. Because only certain elements form dust, the possibility of intergalactic enrichment by dust can be robustly tested – in principle – by measuring ratios between refractory and non-refractory elements in the IGM.

This work was supported by NASA Astrophysical Theory Grants NAG5-3922, NAG5-3820, and NAG5-3111, by NASA Long-Term Space Astrophysics Grant NAG5-3525, and by the NSF under grants ASC93-18185, ACI96-19019, and AST-9802568. JG was supported by NASA Grant NGT5-50078 for the duration of this work, and AA was supported in part by the National Science Foundation grant no. PHY-9507695 and by a grant in aid from the W.M. Keck Foundation. The simulations were performed at the San Diego Supercomputer Center.


text:
# Source depth for solar p-modes

## 1 Introduction

During the last ten years there has been increasing evidence that solar p-modes are excited as a result of sound generated by turbulent convection (e.g., Goldreich et al. 1994; Georgobiani et al. 2000). Acoustic oscillations with frequency above $``$5.5 mHz, the acoustic cutoff frequency in the solar atmosphere, provide good support for the general validity of this mechanism (Kumar 1994). The observed asymmetry of p-mode line profiles and the opposite sense of asymmetry in the velocity and the intensity power spectra have also been successfully modeled within the frame work of the stochastic excitation theory (Abrams & Kumar 1996; Roxburgh & Vorontsov 1997; Nigam et al. 1998; Kumar & Basu 1999a).

Mode excitation appears to be concentrated very close to the top of the convection zone (cf. Kumar 1994, Kumar & Basu 1999b), which is consistent with the theory of convective excitation. According to the mixing length theory of convection the location for the excitation of higher frequency acoustic waves should be a little higher up in the convection zone than lower frequency oscillations since the convective frequency increases with radius.

The theoretical modeling of line-asymmetry of low frequency p-modes provides a means to determine the depth at which these oscillations are excited. The source depth for high frequency oscillations ( $`\nu >5.5`$ mHz, the acoustic cutoff in the solar atmosphere) can be obtained from the frequency separation between adjacent peaks in the power spectrum. The purpose of this paper is to determine the source depth for both high and low frequency acoustic oscillations and to compare it with the depth expected from convective theory. This, we hope, will teach us about convective velocity etc. in the top few scale heights of the convection zone where the mixing length formalism is known to be very inaccurate.

## 2 Theoretical calculation of spectrum

The calculation of power spectra is carried out using the method described in Abrams & Kumar (1996) and Kumar (1994). Briefly, a coupled set of linearized mass, momentum and entropy equations, with a source term, is solved using the Green’s function method. The source is parameterized by two numbers – the depth where the source peaks and the radial extent (the radial profile is taken to be a Gaussian function). We calculate power spectra for dipole and quadrupole sources using

$$P(\omega )=\left|𝑑rS(r,\omega )\frac{d^nG_\omega }{dr^n}\right|^2,$$
(1)
where $`n=0`$ for dipole and $`1`$ for quadrupole sources, and $`G_\omega `$ is the Green’s function for the linearized set of non-adiabatic wave equations. Physically, dipole sources produce acoustic waves by applying a time dependent force on the fluid. Only fluctuating internal stresses are associated with quadrupole sources which have no associated net momentum flux.

The power spectrum of p-modes below the acoustic cut-off frequency of $`5.5`$mHz is distinctly asymmetric and the magnitude of asymmetry is a function of source depth which has been used by Abrams & Kumar (1996) and Kumar & Basu (1999b) to determine the source depth for low frequency modes. The frequency spacing between adjacent peaks above the acoustic cutoff frequency can be used to determine the source depth for high frequency waves (Kumar, 1994). These works provided preliminary evidence for frequency dependence of source depth. In this paper we carry out the fit to the best available observed low and high frequency solar spectra using an up to date. solar model, to refine the source depth determination as a function of wave frequency.

We use two solar models to calculate the theoretical power spectrum. One (“the standard model”) is a standard model of the present Sun. It is constructed with OPAL opacities (Iglesias & Rogers 1996) supplemented by low temperature opacities of Kurucz(1991), and the OPAL equation of state (Rogers, Swenson & Iglesias 1996). Convective flux is calculated using the formulation of Canuto & Mazzitelli (1991), and the photospheric structure is calculated using the empirical $`T\tau `$ relation of Vernazza et al. (1981). To check dependencies on different ways of calculating convective transport we have also used a similar model which uses the standard mixing length formalism to calculate convective flux. The second model (“the old model”) is the old Christensen-Dalsgaard model used in Kumar (1994) to determine source depth for high frequency oscillation, and we use this model to determine the error in source depth resulting from the use of different solar models.

The observed power spectra used for the low frequency modes are the 360 day data from the Michelson Doppler Imager (MDI) on board SoHO (Solar and Heliospheric Observatory); low frequency modes have small line-width and require long time series to resolve their line profile. For the high frequency waves we used data from GONG obtained during months 10 to 22 of its operation. This period corresponds to a rough minimum in solar activity. The monthly spectra were averaged together to reduce noise.

## 3 The fitting process

The fit to the high-frequency part of the power spectra contains four parameters: the source depth, a constant background, an over all amplitude normalization factor (we normalize the amplitudes to 1 at 6.5 mHz) and a uniform linear frequency shift of the power spectra which is needed because the solar model we use is not perfect i.e., there is a frequency difference between the solar model and the Sun. Figure 1 illustrates the frequency difference between the standard model and the Sun. Since the source depth determines the inter-peak frequency spacings rather than the absolute frequency position of the peaks, this shift should not affect the source depth determination. The theoretically calculated power-spectra include the effect of $`\mathrm{}`$–leakage and Nyquist folding (the Nyquist frequency for GONG data set is 8.333 mHz) before comparison with the observed spectra is made.

At low frequencies, we have the same number of free-parameters as Kumar & Basu (1999b), i.e. the peak amplitude (which is normalized to unity), the line width, and the background (which is taken to be constant over the frequency range of the spectrum we model). Unlike Kumar & Basu (1999b), we take into account possible distortions of the power-spectra due to m-leakage. This is clearly seen in very low frequency modes which have line-widths of the order of the spacing between modes of $`\delta m=\pm 1`$. The $`\mathrm{}`$-leakage is also important and is included in our theoretically calculated spectra. The $`\mathrm{}`$-leakage is estimated from the ratio of different $`\mathrm{}`$-peaks at low frequencies of the observed spectrum; modes of degree $`\mathrm{}\pm 2`$ contribute about 15% of their power to the spectra for modes of degree $`\mathrm{}`$ whereas the leakage from $`\mathrm{}\pm 1`$ is $`50`$%.

The best-fit source depth is determined by minimizing the merit function (cf. Anderson, Duvall & Jeffries 1990)

$$F_m=\frac{1}{N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\left(\frac{O_iM_i}{M_i}\right)^2$$
(2)
where, the summation is over all $`N`$ data points, $`O_i`$ is the observed power and $`M_i`$ the theoretically calculated power.

## 4 Results

A summary of the source-depths obtained with the standard solar model for different cases is shown in Table 1.

Figure 2 shows the quadrupole and dipole fits to the high frequency spectrum. The dipole sources seem to provide as good a fit to the observed spectrum, however they have a serious drawback described below.

In order to fit the observed spectrum, the theoretical power spectrum for the dipole sources, placed at a depth of 30–130 km for the best fit, has to be shifted by $`61\mu `$Hz. The spectrum calculated with quadrupole sources is shifted by a lower amount of $`24\mu `$Hz in order to match the observed high frequency peaks. The theoretically expected shift is about $`11`$ $`\mu `$Hz at 4.3 mHz due to the inaccuracy of the solar model we use. The difference between the theoretical and the observed p-mode frequencies increases rapidly with frequency (see fig. 1) and a shift of $`20\mu `$Hz at about 6 mHz is perhaps not unreasonable. However, a shift of 61$`\mu `$Hz, needed for dipole excitation, is about half the frequency spacing between peaks, and is much larger than can be accounted for as resulting from solar model error. No location for dipole sources provides an acceptable fit to the high frequency spectrum without a large frequency shift of the power spectrum and we therefore conclude that the wave excitation for high frequency waves in the Sun is quadrupolar.

The quadrupole excitation requires a source depth of between 60–250 km (the uncertainty being mainly a result of error in estimating the $`\mathrm{}`$-leakage and background removal); the depth is measured from the top of the convection zone. The old model gives similar source depths, between 50 to 300 km for quadrupole source and 10 to 80 km for dipole sources. The use of different convective theories to calculate the mean solar model, such as the mixing length theory and the model of Canuto & Mazzitelli (1991), makes almost no difference to the determination of source depth given the uncertainty in the $`\mathrm{}`$-leakage.

The source-depth for the high-frequency waves is smaller than what Kumar & Basu (1999b) found for low frequency p-modes of $`\mathrm{}=35`$ using the line asymmetry. We repeat their work for low frequency p-modes of $`\mathrm{}=`$55 & 60.

Figure 3 shows the theoretical power spectra for quadrupole and dipole sources superposed on the observed spectrum of a mode with $`\mathrm{}=60`$, radial order $`n=4`$, and frequency $`\nu =2.01`$mHz. The figure of merit per degree of freedom for the best fit is 0.085 for quadrupolar as well as dipole sources. Unlike the high frequency case, the source depth required is quite different for the two source types. The quadrupole sources have to be at depths of 700—1000 km to match the observed line asymmetry, while the dipole sources have to be placed at a depth of 120—350 km. These results are consistent with those found by Kumar and Basu (1999) for modes of $`\mathrm{}=35`$. The results for $`\mathrm{}=55`$ & 60 are identical. The standard model indicates that the depth at which a 2 mHz mode starts to propagate is $`1500`$ km. Therefore, the excitation of the mode is taking place in the evanescent region.

The main result of this work is that the source depth for low frequency p-modes (2 mHz) is much larger than the source location for acoustic waves of frequency larger than $`5.5`$ mHz.

## 5 Discussion

The depth dependence of energy input rate to a p-mode due to quadrupole excitation is given by (Goldreich et al. 1994)

$$\frac{d\dot{E}}{dr}\frac{2\pi \omega _\alpha ^2}{5}r^2\rho ^2v_\mathrm{\Lambda }^3\left|\frac{\xi _\alpha ^r}{r}\right|^2\frac{\mathrm{\Lambda }^4\left(^2+1\right)𝒮^2}{1+(\omega _\alpha \tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }/\eta )^{15/2}},$$
$`(3)`$
where $`\omega _\alpha `$ is mode frequency, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is vertical coherence length of largest eddies which in the mixing length theory is a constant multiple of pressure scale height, $`v_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the convective velocity, $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{\Lambda }/v_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the eddy turnover time, $`\xi _\alpha ^r`$ is the normalized radial displacement eigenfunction for the mode, $`\eta `$ is a constant factor of order $`\pi /2`$, $``$ is the dimensionless compressibility of the mode which is close to unity for high order p-modes, and $`𝒮`$ is the horizontal coherence length of eddies and is taken to be same for all inertial range eddies.

Figure 4 shows this function for modes of frequency 1.7, 2.1 and 5 mHz for a standard solar model and the mixing length theory of convection. Note that the depth for 1.7 mHz mode is about 400 km below the photosphere whereas the peak excitation depth for 5 mHz waves is $`50`$ km. Moreover, these depths are much smaller than what we obtained in the last section for the preferred quadrupole sources by the modeling of line asymmetry for low frequency modes and the frequency spacing between adjacent peaks in power spectra at high frequencies. This indicates some error in the mixing length model of convective in the top few scale heights.

A possible ad hock modification of the convective profile to yield larger source depth is to decrease the convective timescale $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ in the top few scale heights of the convection zone. Since $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ enters as a very high power in equation (3) most of the excitation is concentrated at the resonance layer, i.e. where $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }\omega _\alpha ^1`$, and a modest decrease in $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is sufficient to reconcile the “observed” and the theoretical source depths. For instance to shift the quadrupolar excitation depth for 1.7mHz mode to 1000 km below the photosphere we need to decrease $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ by a factor of about 2 in the top 1000 km of the convection zone; this shifts the peak excitation depth for 2.0 mHz mode to 900 km and the high frequency acoustic waves to $`150`$ km. A decrease in $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ by a factor of 1.5 causes most of the excitation for 2.0 mHz mode to occur at a depth of $``$ 700 km. A decrease in $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ could be caused by an increase in the convective velocity or a decrease in the radial coherence length for turbulent eddies or a combination of the two. The numerical simulation of solar convection (Abbett et al. 1997) indicates that the convective velocity in the top 2000 km is larger than expected from MLT by a factor of $`1.5`$. We should not expect a modification to $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ to be a constant factor independent of $`r`$. In fact the ”observed” depth for low and high frequency waves does not seem to be compatible with a constant, depth independent, decrease to $`\tau _\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, but instead suggests that the modification factor is larger at smaller depths.

We expect realistic numerical simulations of the solar convection zone, such as those carried out by groups in Copenhagen, Michigan and Yale, to provide a deeper understanding for the deficiencies in the convective modeling of the superadiabatic layer near the top of the solar convection zone and shed light on the underlying physical cause for the greater source depth that we find.

This work utilizes data obtained by the Global Oscillation Network Group (GONG) project, managed by the National Solar Observatory. This work also utilizes data from the Solar Oscillations Investigation / Michelson Doppler Imager (SOI/MDI) on the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO). SOHO is a project of international cooperation between ESA and NASA. This work is supported by a NASA grant NAG 5-8328.