text:
# Scale-dependence of Elastic Constants in the Decoupled Lamellar Phase of Tethered, Crystalline Membranes

## Abstract

We analyse the effect of thermal fluctuations on the elastic constants of the decoupled lamellar phase of tethered, crystalline membranes. Using a momentum-shell renormalization group technique, we show that the smectic-A -like compressional elastic constant, the in-plane Lamé coefficients, and the cross-coupling elastic constant vanish as $`(\mathrm{ln}q)^a`$ whereas the bend elastic constant diverges as $`(\mathrm{ln}q)^b`$, with $`a,b>0`$, as the wavenumber $`q`$ tends to zero. The exponents $`a`$ and $`b`$ satisfy the relation $`a+3b=2`$.

In lamellar phases of tethered, crystalline membranes an equilibrium phase transition from a conventional three-dimensional solid to a decoupled phase has been predicted. For large enough mean separation between neighbouring membranes, the lamellar phase gets decoupled; the membranes can slide past each other and rotate relative to each other without any elastic energy cost . This phase differs from the sliding columnar phase  which is composed of two-dimensional smectic layers stacked one on top of other and has a rotation modulus for relative rotation of the layers. Lamellar phases of polymerized membranes are likely candidates to search for the phase transition from the uniaxial three dimensional solid phase to the decoupled phase. Since there is no first-order elastic coupling between successive membranes, translational order decays algebraically. The absence of the shear modulus and the rotational modulus described above has interesting consequences for sound propagation and damping in this phase .
In this paper we study the static elastic properties of the decoupled lamellar phase. Our principal result is that nonlinear strains demanded by rotational invariance lead to the renormalization of the elastic constants; thermal fluctuations do not destroy the decoupled lamellar phase. We find that in addition to the smectic-A -like compressional elastic constant $`B`$, and the bend elastic constant $`K`$, the in-plane Lamé coefficients $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$, and the cross-coupling elastic constant $`\gamma `$ become scale-dependent quantities because of thermal fluctuations. Asymptotically, $`B`$, $`\lambda `$, $`\mu `$ and $`\gamma `$ vanish as $`(\mathrm{ln}q)^a`$ whereas $`K`$ diverges as $`(\mathrm{ln}q)^b`$, $`a,b>0`$, for the wavenumber $`q0`$, with $`a+3b=2`$. Note that the in-plane Lamé coefficients vanish in a manner different from that for a single tethered, crystalline membrane . We also point out that the analysis of this problem in  is erroneous.

To derive these results, we begin by considering the nonlinear elasticity theory for the decoupled phase . We use Cartesian coordinates with the axis of the system along $`x`$. The elastic Hamiltonian is

$$H=d^3x\left[\frac{B}{2}E_{xx}^2+\frac{K}{2}(_{}^2u_x)^2+\frac{\lambda }{2}U_{ii}^2+\mu U_{ij}^2+\gamma E_{xx}U_{ii}+\mathrm{\Delta }_1E_{xx}+\mathrm{\Delta }_2U_{ii}\right],$$
(1)
where the terms with coefficients $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ are the counterterms discussed below. In (1),

$$U_{ij}=\frac{1}{2}\left(_i^{}u_j^{}+_j^{}u_i^{}_i^{}u_l_j^{}u_l\right),$$
(2)
and

$$E_{xx}=_xu_x\frac{1}{2}\left(u_x\right)^2$$
(3)
define the full Eulerian strain tensor, with the superscript $``$ representing components in the $`yz`$-plane.
We now adopt the methods of  to carry out the momentum-shell renormalization group analysis of (1). Power counting shows that the anharmonic terms in (1) are marginal. We confine the wavevectors of the Fourier transformed field variables to a cylindrical region, so that $`\mathrm{}q_x\mathrm{}`$ and $`0𝐪_{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is of order the inverse lattice constant in the membranes (i.e., in the $`yz`$-plane). We rescale the field variables anisotropically:

$`q_x`$ $``$ $`b^2q_x,`$ (4)
$`𝐪_{}`$ $``$ $`b𝐪_{},`$ (5)
$`u_x(q_x,𝐪_{})`$ $``$ $`Z_xu_x(b^2q_x,b𝐪_{}),`$ (6)
$`𝐮_{}(q_x,𝐪_{})`$ $``$ $`Z_{}𝐮_{}(b^2q_x,b𝐪_{}),`$ (7)
where $`b=e^{\delta l}`$. We integrate out the degrees of freedom in the thin momentum shell $`e^{\delta l}\mathrm{\Lambda }𝐪_{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ through a one-loop perturbative calculation described below.
From the elastic Hamiltonian (1), it is apparent that $`u_x`$ is coupled nonlinearly to $`𝐮_{}`$ as well as to itself. Also, the correlations in $`u_x`$ are more strongly singular than those in $`𝐮_{}`$. The effect of these singular correlations can be systematically taken into account by using standard graphical perturbation theory. Our first step is to identify the free propagator for the $`u_x`$ -field. This is easily done by integrating out the $`𝐮_{}`$ -field from the probability distribution for the harmonic theory:

$$H_{eff}[u_x]=k_BT\mathrm{ln}D𝐮_{}e^{\beta H_0[u_x,𝐮_{}]},$$
(8)
where $`H_0`$ is the harmonic part of $`H`$ in (1), $`k_B`$ is the Boltzmann constant, $`T`$ is the temperature, and $`\beta =1/k_BT`$. We thus obtain the free propagator

$$G_0^{(x)}(𝐤)=t/\left(k_x^2+\lambda _0^2k_{}^4\right),$$
(9)
where $`t=k_BT/B_{eff}`$, $`B_{eff}=B[\gamma ^2(\lambda +2\mu )/(\lambda +\mu )^2]`$, and the length $`\lambda _0=(K/B_{eff})^{1/2}`$. Notice that (8) has the same form as that of the elastic Hamiltonian for the smectic-A phase. Integrating out the $`u_x`$ -field from the probability distribution gives the free propagator

$$G_0^{()}(𝐤)=u_i^{}(𝐤)u_i^{}(𝐤)=\frac{1}{\beta }\left[\lambda +\mu \frac{\gamma ^2k_x^2}{(Bk_x^2+Kk_{}^4)k_{}^2}\right]$$
(10)
for the $`𝐮_{}`$ -field. Next, we identify the rescaling factors in (4) as $`Z_x=b^4`$, and $`Z_{}=b^4`$. The flow equations for this renormalization group are:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dB}{dl}}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{(B+\gamma )^2}{16\pi }}wt,`$ (11)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\lambda }{dl}}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{(\lambda +\mu +\gamma )^2}{16\pi }}wt,`$ (12)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\mu }{dl}}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{\mu ^2}{4\pi }}wt,`$ (13)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\gamma }{dl}}`$ $`=`$ $`\beta {\displaystyle \frac{(\lambda +\mu +\gamma )(B+\gamma )}{16\pi }}wt,`$ (14)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dK}{dl}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{wK}{32\pi }}+{\displaystyle \frac{Bt}{32\pi }}{\displaystyle \frac{(\lambda +\mu +\gamma )^2}{(\lambda +\mu )B\gamma ^2}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(\lambda _1^2\lambda _0^2)}{\lambda _0(\lambda _2^2\lambda _0^2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(\lambda _2^2\lambda _1^2)}{\lambda _2(\lambda _2^2\lambda _0^2)}}\right],`$ (15)
where $`w=t/\lambda _0^3`$, $`\lambda _1^2=K/B`$ and $`\lambda _2^2=(\lambda +\mu )K/[(\lambda +\mu )B\gamma ^2]`$. These flow equations simplify considerably if $`\gamma (l)0`$ (which we show below to be the case), so that $`\lambda _0=\lambda _1=\lambda _2`$. In particular, the flow equation for $`K`$ then reads

$$\frac{dK}{dl}=\frac{wK}{32\pi }\left[1+\frac{(\lambda +\mu )}{B}\right].$$
(16)
With the simplified flow equation (16), the coupled set of flow equations can be analyzed for the asymptotic $`(q0)`$ behaviour of the elastic constants, yielding the result

$$B,\lambda ,\mu ,\gamma (\mathrm{ln}q)^a,K(\mathrm{ln}q)^b,$$
(17)
where $`a,b>0`$, and $`a+3b=2`$. We note that $`\gamma `$ indeed vanishes as $`q0`$, which ensures the consistency of our calculations.
We choose the coefficients $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ by demanding that the averages $`_xu_x`$ and $`u_{ii}`$ be zero. From the graphical structure of the theory we see that this choice of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_2`$ also cancels terms proportional to $`q_{}^2`$ generated in the perturbative calculation .

Let us now look at the calculation of . In that work, the invariant

$$U_{xx}=_xu_x\frac{1}{2}(_xu_x)^2\frac{1}{2}(_xu_i^{})^2$$
(18)
is used instead of $`E_{xx}`$ in constructing (1). It then follows that the vertex $`(B/2)(_xu_x)(_xu_i^{})^2`$ gives a correction

$$\mathrm{\Delta }B𝑑q_xq_x^4d^2q_{}u^{}u^{}^2q_{}^2q_x$$
(19)
to $`B`$, since the correlation function $`u^{}u^{}q_{}^2q_x`$, as can be seen from (10). Moreover, the same vertex also generates a term of the form $`(_xu^{})^2`$, which drives the system into the three dimensional uniaxial solid phase, thus destroying the decoupled lamellar phase itself. This is because $`H`$ (with $`U_{xx}`$ replacing $`E_{xx}`$) does not respect the symmetry of the decoupled lamellar phase, in that it then includes an elastic energy cost (at the anharmonic level) for shearing the membranes past each other.

We thank Tom Lubensky and John Toner for useful discussions.


format: text

text:
# Commutation Relations in Mesoscopic Electric Circuits

## Introduction

The dramatic achievement in nanotechnology has aroused tremendous developments in experimental physics in mesoscopic scale. Miniaturization of integrated circuits is undoubtedly a persistent trend for electronic device community. A theory for mesoscopic circuits was proposed by Li and Chen, in which the charge discreteness is first introduced in the quantization of electric circuitsLiC . The possibility of space-time discreteness was early considered by SnyderSnyder  who indicated that the Lorentz invariance do not exclude quantized (discrete) space-time, it was also argued by LiLi95  from the finiteness of the observed universe. S. Mantecinos, I. Saavedra, and O. Kunstmann MSaavedra  discussed the commutation relations of Snyder  arguing that it may be related to physics in high energy scale ($`10^910^{12}`$eV). Numerous attempts to the argument of exiting minimal position uncertainty were made Garay  on the basis of various considerations in string theory as well as in quantum gravity. Actually, the approach of LiC  not only provides a concrete realization of mathematical models for exploring the space quantization in high energy physics and quantum gravity but also presents a sequence of applications in condensed matter physics from a different point of view. For example, the persistent current is solved by regarding the mesoscopic metal ring as the circuit of a pure L-design. Application of the theory to a pure C-design gives rise to the Coulomb blockade solutionLi97 .

## Basic definitions and commutation relations

Let $`\widehat{q}`$ denote for the charge operator, and $`\widehat{p}`$ for the canonical conjugation of the charge satisfying $`[\widehat{q},\widehat{p}]=i\mathrm{}`$. We call $`\widehat{p}`$ the canonical current operator since it is not only the canonical conjugation of charge but also the current operator in the quantization approachLouisell  where the charge was considered as a continuous variable. Taking into account of the discreteness of electronic charge in quantization procedure, we must impose that the eigenvalues of the self-adjoint operator $`\widehat{q}`$ take discrete valuesLiC , i.e. $`\widehat{q}|n=nq_e|n`$ where $`n𝖹𝖹`$ (set of integers) and $`q_e=1.602\times 10^{19}`$ coulomb, the elementary electric charge. We therefore introduce a minimum ‘shift operator’ $`\widehat{Q}:=e^{iq_e\widehat{p}/\mathrm{}}`$ in charge space, which satisfiesLiC

$$[\widehat{q},\widehat{Q}]=q_e\widehat{Q},\widehat{Q}^1=\widehat{Q}^{}.$$
(1)
These relations determine the structure of the whole Fock space, accordingly, $`\widehat{Q}^+|n=e^{i\alpha _{n+1}}|n+1`$, $`\widehat{Q}|n=e^{i\alpha _n}|n1`$ where $`\alpha _n`$’s being undetermined phases. The Fock space for the algebra (1) differs from the well known Fock space for the Heisenberg-Weyl algebra because the spectrum of the former is isomorphic to the set of integers $`𝖹𝖹`$ but that of the later is isomorphic to the set of non-negative integers $`𝖹𝖹^++\{0\}`$. Since $`\{|n|n𝖹𝖹\}`$ spans a Hilbert space and $`\widehat{q}`$ is self-adjoint, both the completeness $`_{n𝖹𝖹}|nn|=1`$ and the orthogonality $`n|m=\delta _{nm}`$ faithful.

The quasi-current $`\widehat{J}`$ for a mesoscopic circuit is defined by $`\widehat{J}=i\mathrm{}(\widehat{Q}^{1/2}\widehat{Q}^{1/2})/q_e`$ which reduces to the canonical current in the limit $`q_e0`$. The Hamiltonian of a mesoscopic LC-circuit is given byLiC

$$\widehat{H}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2L}\widehat{J}^2+\frac{1}{2C}\widehat{q}^2+\epsilon \widehat{q},$$
(2)
where $`\epsilon `$ stands for the voltage source, $`L`$ for inductance, and $`C`$ for capacity of the circuit. Using eq.(1) we easily obtain the new commutation relations for the quasi-current operator,

$$[\widehat{q},\widehat{J}]=i\frac{\mathrm{}}{2}\widehat{K},[\widehat{q},\widehat{K}]=i\frac{q_e^2}{2\mathrm{}}\widehat{J},$$
(3)
where an auxiliary operator $`\widehat{K}=\widehat{Q}^{1/2}+\widehat{Q}^{1/2}`$ is introduced. Obviously eq.(3) obeys the SU(2) algebra after rescaling the operators. In terms of $`\widehat{K}`$ and $`\widehat{J}`$ we can define a useful operator $`\widehat{P}=\widehat{J}\widehat{K}^1`$ which we call the pseudo-current operator. Obviously the pseudo-current also reduces to canonical current in the limit $`q_e0`$. With the help of (3), we obtain the following commutation relations,

$$[\widehat{q},\widehat{P}]=i\mathrm{}\left(1+(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}})^2\widehat{P}^2\right).$$
(4)
Similar kind of commutation relation was considered earlier in Snyder  in searching the possibility of space-time discreteness. From the commutation relation (4) one will have a uncertainty relation MSaavedra ; Kempf  for the charge and pseudo-currentLiC , which is different from the conventional Heisenberg uncertainty relation.

The definition of physical current $`\widehat{I}`$ arises from the Heisenberg equation $`\widehat{I}=d\widehat{q}/dt=(1/i\mathrm{})[\widehat{q},\widehat{H}]`$. For the $`LC`$-design circuit, one can immediately obtain Flores ,

$$\widehat{I}=i\frac{\mathrm{}}{2q_eL}(\widehat{Q}\widehat{Q}^{}).$$
(5)
## Pseudo-current representation

We consider the pseudo-current representation $`\widehat{P}|\eta =\eta |\eta `$. The differential realization of commutation relation (4) is given by Snyder

$$\widehat{P}=\eta ,\widehat{q}=i\mathrm{}\left(1+(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}}\eta )^2\right)\frac{}{\eta }.$$
(6)
Obviously, $`𝑑\eta \psi ^{}(\eta )\widehat{q}\varphi (\eta )`$ fails in guaranteeing the charge operator being self-adjoint. The factor $`(1+(\eta q_e/2\mathrm{})^2)^1`$ in the measure on the pseudo-current space is therefore required Kempf  to cancel the corresponding factor of $`\widehat{q}`$ in this representation. The inner product must be so defined,

$$\psi |\varphi =_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\eta }{1+(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}}\eta )^2}\psi ^{}(\eta )\varphi (\eta )$$
(7)
that both $`\widehat{q}`$ and $`\widehat{P}`$ could be self-adjoint.

The completeness is given by

$$_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\eta }{1+(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}}\eta )^2}|\eta \eta |=1.$$
(8)
Consequently, the inner product of two eigenstates of the pseudo-current operator yields

$$\eta ^{}|\eta =\left(1+(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}}\eta )^2\right)\delta (\eta \eta ^{}).$$
(9)
The eigen-equation of charge operator in this representation reads

$$i\mathrm{}\left(1+(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}}\eta )^2\right)\frac{}{\eta }\psi _q(\eta )=q\psi _q(\eta ),$$
(10)
where $`\psi _q(\eta ):=\eta |\psi _q`$. The deferential equation (10) is solved by

$$\psi _q(\eta )=(\frac{q_e}{2\pi \mathrm{}})^{1/2}\mathrm{exp}\left(iq\frac{2}{q_e}\mathrm{tan}^1(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}}\eta )\right),$$
(11)
which has been normalized. It is interesting to evaluate their inner product

$$\psi _q|\psi _q^{}=\frac{q_e}{(q^{}q)\pi }\mathrm{sin}(\frac{q^{}q}{q_e}\pi ).$$
(12)
This clearly brings about a orthogonal catastrophe because the eigenstate of a self-adjoint operator with different eigenvalues must be mutually orthogonal. Actually, it can be avoided provided that $`q^{}q=nq_e`$. We conclude that the electric charge must be quantized (other eigenvalues are not physically permitted).

A natural choice is $`q=nq_e`$, then the transformation from charge representation to pseudo-current representation is easily derived,

$`\eta |\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\eta |nn|\psi `$
$`=`$ $`({\displaystyle \frac{q_e}{2\pi \mathrm{}}})^{1/2}{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}n|\psi e^{in\mathrm{\Theta }(\eta )},`$ (13)
where $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)=2\mathrm{tan}^1(xq_e/2\mathrm{})`$. Multiplying (13) by $`e^{in^{}\mathrm{\Theta }(\eta )}/[1+(\eta q_e/2\mathrm{})^2]`$ and integrating with respect to $`\eta `$ give rise to the inverse transformation:

$$n|\psi =(\frac{q_e}{2\pi \mathrm{}})^{1/2}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\eta }{1+(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}}\eta )^2}e^{in\mathrm{\Theta }(\eta )}\eta |\psi .$$
(14)
## Canonical current representation

In the canonical current space $`\widehat{p}|p=p|p`$, the $`\widehat{q}`$ and $`\widehat{p}`$ are realized by $`\widehat{p}=p`$, $`\widehat{q}=i\mathrm{}/p`$. The eigen-equation of charge operator is,

$$i\mathrm{}\frac{}{p}\psi _q(p)=q\psi _q(p),$$

which is solved by plane waves $`\psi _q(p)=e^{iqp/\mathrm{}}`$. Obviously, the periodic condition in p-space, $`\psi _q(p+2\pi \mathrm{}/q_e)=\psi _q(p)`$ should be imposed so that the charge is quantized (discrete) $`q/q_e=n`$, consequently,

$$\psi _n(p)=p|n=e^{inpq_e/\mathrm{}}$$
(15)
The transformation from charge representation to canonical current representation is easily obtained,

$`p|\psi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}p|nn|\psi `$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}e^{inpq_e/\mathrm{}}n|\psi .`$ (16)
Multiplying eq.(16) with $`e^{in^{}pq_e/\mathrm{}}`$ and integrating with respect to $`p`$, we get the inverse transformation, canonical current representation to charge representation:

$$n|\psi =\frac{q_e}{2\pi \mathrm{}}_{\pi \mathrm{}/q_e}^{\pi \mathrm{}/q_e}𝑑pp|\psi e^{inpq_e/\mathrm{}}.$$
(17)
In the p-space, the Hamiltonian for a mesoscopic LC-design circuit becomes

$$\widehat{H}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{q_e^2L}\left[\mathrm{cos}(\frac{q_e}{\mathrm{}}p)1\right]\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2C}\left(\frac{}{p}+i\frac{C}{\mathrm{}}\epsilon \right)^2\frac{C}{2}\epsilon ^2.$$
(18)
The advantage of the canonical current representation is that the Schrödinger equation for the Hamiltonian (18) becomes the standard Mathieu equation after a unitary transformation. The wave function was solved in terms of periodic Mathieu functions, and the energy spectrum was expressed by the eigenvalues of Mathieu equation. The details can be find in LiC .

## Applications

In Coulomb blockade experiments, the mesoscopic capacity may be relatively very small (about $`10^8F`$) but the inductance of a macroscopic circuit connecting to a source is relatively large because it is proportional to the area which the circuit spans. We can neglect the term reversely proportional to $`L`$ in (2), and study the equation for a pure C-design. Because a mesoscopic metal ring can be regarded as a pure L-design, we can also study the persistent current on a mesoscopic ring.

### Coulomb blockade

The Schrödinger equation for a pure C-design reads

$$\left(\frac{1}{2C}\widehat{q}^2\epsilon \widehat{q}\right)|\psi =E|\psi ,$$
(19)
where $`\epsilon `$ is an adiabatic voltage source. The Hamiltonian and charge operator commute each other, so $`|n`$ is the eigenstate with energy $`E=(nq_eC\epsilon )^2/2CC\epsilon ^2/2`$, where both the charge quantum number and the voltage source are involved. The relation between charge $`q`$ and the voltage $`\epsilon `$ for the ground state is given by

$$q=\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left\{\theta [\epsilon (m+\frac{1}{2})\frac{q_e}{C}]\theta [\epsilon (m+\frac{1}{2})\frac{q_e}{C}]\right\}q_e$$
(20)
where $`\theta (x)`$ is the step function. The corresponding eigenstate is

$$|\psi (\epsilon )_{ground}=\underset{m=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left\{\theta [\epsilon (m\frac{1}{2})\frac{q_e}{C}]\theta [\epsilon (m+\frac{1}{2})\frac{q_e}{C}]\right\}|m.$$
(21)
The dependence of the current on time is obtained by taking derivative

$$\frac{dq}{dt}=\underset{m=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}q_e\left\{\delta [\epsilon (m+\frac{1}{2})\frac{q_e}{C}]+\delta [\epsilon +(m+\frac{1}{2})\frac{q_e}{C}]\right\}\frac{d\epsilon }{dt}.$$
(22)
Clearly, the current is of a form of sharp pulses which occurs periodically (with periodicity $`q_e/C`$) according to the changes of voltage.

### Persistent current

The Schrödinger equation for a pure L-design in the presence of magnetic flux is given by,

$$\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2q_e^2L}(e^{i\frac{q_e}{\mathrm{}}\varphi }\widehat{Q}+e^{i\frac{q_e}{\mathrm{}}\varphi }\widehat{Q}^+2)|\psi =E|\psi .$$
(23)
It is obtained on the basis of gauge covariance LiC . The eigenstates can be simultaneous eigenstates of $`\widehat{p}`$, eq.(23) is solved by the eigenstate $`|p=_{n𝖹𝖹}\kappa _ne^{inq_ep/\mathrm{}}|n`$ ($`\kappa _n:=\mathrm{exp}(i_{j=1}^n\alpha _j)`$) with the energy spectrum:

$$E(p,\varphi )=\frac{2\mathrm{}^2}{q_e^2L}\mathrm{sin}^2\left(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}}(p\varphi )\right).$$
(24)
It oscillates with respect to $`\varphi `$ or $`p`$. Differing from the usual classical pure L-design, the energy of a mesoscopic quantum pure L-design can not be large than $`2\mathrm{}^2/q_e^2L`$. Clearly, the lowest energy states are those states with $`p=\varphi +nh/q_e`$, the eigenvalues of the electric current $`\widehat{I}`$ of ground state can be obtained LiC . The electric current on a mesoscopic circuit of pure L-design is not null in the presence of a magnetic flux (except $`\varphi =nh/q_e`$). This is a quantum characteristic property. The persistent current in a mesoscopic L-design is an observable quantity periodically depending on the flux $`\varphi `$. In terms of the inductance of mesoscopic metal ring, $`L=8\pi r(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}\frac{8r}{a}1)`$ where $`r`$ is the radius of the ring and $`a`$ is the radius of the metal wire, the formula for persistent current on a mesoscopic ring is obtained

$$I(\varphi )=\frac{\mathrm{}}{8\pi r(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}\frac{8r}{a}1)q_e}\mathrm{sin}(\frac{q_e}{\mathrm{}}\varphi ).$$
(25)
Differing from the conventional formulation of the persistent current on the basis of quantum dynamics for electrons, This formulation presented a method from a new point of view. Formally, the $`I(\varphi )`$ is a sine function with periodicity of $`\varphi _0=h/q_e`$. But either the model that the electrons move freely in an ideal ring Cheung , or the model that the electrons have hard-core interactions between them LiMa2  can only give the sawtooth-type periodicity. Obviously, the sawtooth-type function is only the limit case for $`q_e/\mathrm{}0`$.

## Coupled circuits

The above discussions are based on a single mesoscopic circuit. Let us consider the case that several circuits coupled to each other by mutual inductances, associated capacities or any other kind of coupling. Because of quantum tunneling and quantum fluctuations, the charges in individual circuit is no longer precisely measurable. The charge on each circuit are not good quantum numbers, and therefore the charge operators $`\widehat{q_j}`$ are expected to be noncommutative. A natural generalization of the formulation for single circuit is easily carried out in the pseudo-current representation, namely,

$$\widehat{P}_j=\eta _j,\widehat{q_j}=i\mathrm{}\left(1+(\frac{q_e}{2\mathrm{}})^2\stackrel{}{\eta }^2\right)\frac{}{\eta _j}.$$
(26)
It is easily to obtain the following commutation relation,

$$[\widehat{q}_i,\widehat{q}_j]=i\frac{q_e^2}{2\mathrm{}}M_{ij},$$
(27)
where $`M_{ij}:=\widehat{P}_i\widehat{q}_j\widehat{P}_j\widehat{q_i}`$. The charge operators for individual circuit are generally noncommutative for the non-vanishing $`M_{ij}`$. This provides a concrete physical example of noncommutative geometry. Further studies are in progress.

## acknowledgment

The work is supported by AvH Stiftung, NSFC-19975040 and EYFC98. I would like to thank J.C. Flores for communication and reference. Interesting discussions with O.W. Greenburg, M.S. Plyushchay, A. Solomon, E.C.G. Sudarshan, A. Zee et.al. are also acknowledged.


text:
# REFERENCES

The random field critical concentration in dilute antiferromagnets

W. C. Barber and D. P. Belanger

Department of Physics, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064

## Abstract

Monte Carlo techniques are used to investigate the equilibrium threshold concentration, $`x_e`$, in the dilute anisotropic antiferromagnet $`Fe_xZn_{1x}F_2`$ in an applied magnetic field, considered to be an ideal random-field Ising model system. Above $`x_e`$ equilibrium behavior is observed whereas below $`x_e`$ metastability and domain formation dominate. Monte Carlo results agree very well with experimental data obtained using this system.

The dilute antiferromagnet (AF) $`Fe_xZn_{1x}F_2`$ in an applied field is a realization of the random-field Ising model (RFIM). Many studies have been done on this system for $`x<0.75`$. In such cases, metastability and domain formation mask the equilibrium critical behavior, particularly in scattering measurements that are by nature dominated by long-range antiferromagnetic correlations. The specific heat, $`C_m`$, on the other hand, is not as greatly affected by domain formation except very close to the transition, $`T_c(H)`$, since it is primarily sensitive to short range correlations. Only recently has it been discovered that equilibrium scattering behavior can be observed for $`x=0.93`$ with no evidence of domain formation. Domain walls form with little energy cost when vacancies are so numerous that magnetic bonds can be largely avoided. At high magnetic concentrations domain walls must cut a large number of magnetic bonds and long-range order (LRO) is stable, as in the Imry-Ma domain wall energy arguments. Hence, the RFIM can be studied in equilibrium for $`x=0.93`$ and a transition to LRO is observed, consistent with theory. The question remains as to the nature of the disappearance of the domain walls as the magnetic concentration increases. Do they disappear gradually or is there a critical concentration above which they do not form?

We have performed Monte Carlo (MC) simulations of the RFIM modeled as closely as possible after $`Fe_xZn_{1x}F_2`$. We provide evidence that there is a critical equilibrium threshold concentration, $`x_e`$, above which domain formation does not occur. We estimate this concentration to be $`0.75<x_e<0.80`$. The simulation results also shed light on the experimentally observed formation of domain walls upon approach to $`T_c(H)`$ for $`x<x_e`$ after cooling in zero field and subsequently heating in a field (ZFC). Finally we demonstrate that cooling in a field (FC) for $`x<x_e`$ results in a metastable state at low $`T`$.

The staggered magnetization ($`M_s`$) and correlation functions for the first three nearest-neighbor (NN) pairs have been calculated using MC simulations. The magnetic lattice corresponding to the body-centered-tetragonal $`Fe_{1x}Zn_xF_2`$ lattice is described as two cubic sub-lattices of size $`L\times L\times L`$ each, delineated as one dimensional arrays bit coded to accommodate large lattice sizes. Most of the results reported here were obtained with $`L=64`$, corresponding to more than $`5.2\times 10^5`$ sites magnetically occupied with probability $`x`$. Periodic boundary conditions are used. At each temperature magnetic sites are visited randomly with each site visited an average of once per MC step. Upon each visit, a spin is flipped with a probability given by the metropolis algorithm. The temperature was changed in steps of $`0.01`$ K after $`N`$ MC steps. $`N`$ was increased until the results of the simulation were largely independent of $`N`$ for $`H=0`$. Unless otherwise stated, we used $`N=500`$ for the results reported here. Using $`N=1000`$ gave essentially identical results for $`H=0`$. The temperature scanning procedures correspond to the experimental ones, i.e. cooling and heating for $`H=0`$, and FC and ZFC for $`H=13`$ T. $`Fe_{1x}Zn_xF_2`$ is well represented by the Hamiltonian

$$H=\underset{<ij>}{}J_{ij}\stackrel{}{S}_i\stackrel{}{S}_jD\underset{i}{}\stackrel{}{S}_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\stackrel{}{H}\underset{i}{}\stackrel{}{S}_i.$$
(1)
In the simulations we use the Hamiltonian

$$H=\underset{<ij>}{}J_{ij}S_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{z}S_{j}^{}{}_{}{}^{z}H\underset{i}{}S_{i}^{}{}_{}{}^{z},$$
(2)
which corresponds to the Ising limit $`D\mathrm{}`$. The first three NN exchange interaction strengths are taken from spin-wave dispersion measurements on $`FeF_2`$: $`J_1=0.069`$ K; $`J_2=5.278`$ K; and $`J_3=0.279`$ K. All other interactions are negligible and are not included in the simulations. The transition temperature increases with anisotropy in this system. Hence, the infinite anisotropy of the model results in a transition temperature much higher than in the real system. As is done elsewhere, the included interactions were all scaled by a factor $`2/3`$ to make the transition temperatures more closely correspond to the ones observed in $`Fe_{1x}Zn_xF_2`$.

Figure 1 and its inset show typical behavior for $`x=0.60<x_e`$ for three cases: $`H=0`$, which is free of hysteresis; FC with $`H=13`$ T; and ZFC with $`H=13`$ T. In the inset, the behavior of $`C_m=dE/dT`$ vs. $`T`$ is shown. For $`H=0`$ random-exchange behavior is observed with slight rounding from finite sample size effects. Taking the rounding into consideration, we estimate the transition temperature $`T_N45.0`$ K. For the ZFC and FC procedures, the specific heat is depressed in $`T`$ as expected. Away from the shifted transition, the two behaviors are essentially identical with a shape more symmetric than for $`H=0`$, as is observed in experiments. Since the ZFC and FC behaviors are the same outside the distorted regions, they clearly share the same $`T_c(H)`$. On a plot of the specific heat versus the logarithm of the reduced temperature, $`T_c(H)`$ appears close to the peak of the ZFC data, $`40.5`$ K. From the main figure, we see that for $`H=0`$, $`M_s`$ falls to zero very near the $`T_N`$ taken from $`C_m`$. Upon FC, however, $`M_s`$ remains unusually small quite far below the $`T_c(H)`$ determined from $`C_m`$. Upon further cooling, the system begins to rapidly evolve toward AF LRO with a curvature opposite to that for $`H=0`$. Finally, at a rather well defined temperature ($`T_1`$) the $`M_s`$ curve abruptly changes curvature. Upon further cooling, $`M_s`$ increases smoothly and slowly, much like the $`H=0`$ case but shifted to lower $`T`$. Upon ZFC, $`M_s`$ vs. T follows a much smoother evolution but nevertheless approaches $`T_c(H)`$ with a curvature opposite to the $`H=0`$ case. The unusually rapid disappearance of AF LRO well below $`T_c(H)`$ is attributed to the formation of domains and has been observed experimentally. The FC behavior in experimental systems, on the other hand, is quite different from that shown in Fig. 1. In the experiments, the domain formation prevents significant $`M_s`$ down to low $`T`$. Hence, we examined this behavior further using the MC techniques. We found that by slowing the temperature scans by using $`N=1000`$ with $`L=64`$, the domains that form for $`x<x_e`$ remain stable to much lower temperatures. We also did a simulation with $`L=128`$ and $`N=500`$ and again the domains were stable to lower temperatures. Extrapolating these two trends to the much larger experimental systems that are cooled much more slowly relative to the spin flipping time, it is not surprising that the experimental systems show metastable domains that are very stable at low temperatures.

Figure 2 shows the ZFC and FC behavior for $`x=0.60`$, $`0.70`$, $`0.80`$ and $`0.90`$ at $`H=13`$ T. It is clear that the hysteresis decreases as $`x`$ increases and is absent for the cases $`x0.80`$. It thus appears that the systems at larger $`x`$ are in equilibrium. To demonstrate that there is a critical threshold concentration above which equilibrium behavior, such as that observed for $`x0.80`$, prevails, we plot in Fig. 3 the temperature $`\mathrm{\Delta }T=T_2(H,x)T_1(H,x)`$, where $`T_2(H,x)`$ is the temperature at which the ZFC joins the FC one just below $`T_c(H)`$. Note that the ZFC and FC curves separate at $`T_1(H)<T_2(H)`$. It is clear that $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ becomes zero somewhat above $`x=0.70`$ and below $`x=0.80`$, strongly indicating a critical concentration $`0.75<x_e<0.80`$, which is much larger than the magnetic percolation threshold $`x_p=0.25`$. The field dependence of $`x_e`$ is weak. Within the accuracy of the present MC results, we find that for $`H=7`$ T and $`H=13`$ T, $`0.75<x_e<0.8`$. This suggests that the critical concentration is primarily geometric in origin. Domain formation in the ZFC procedure indicates that for $`H>0`$, the free energy must favor domain formation close to $`T_c(H)`$ for $`x<x_e`$. Such behavior is indicated in local-mean-field simulations. However, there is no evidence for a latent heat associated with the temperature at which the free energy difference for the domain state and AF state switches sign.

Finally, we demonstrate in the inset of Fig. 3 that the ZFC peak in $`d(M_{s}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})/dT`$ (the Bragg scattering) vs. $`T`$ for $`x=0.60`$ is at a lower temperature by more than $`1`$ K than $`T_c(H)`$ as determined from the $`C_m`$. This behavior is in agreement with neutron scattering results but in contradiction to the so-called ‘trompe l’oeil’ phenomenology.

In conclusion, we have presented MC evidence for the existence of a critical concentration $`x_e`$ above which equilibrium RFIM behavior prevails and below which domains form close to the transition. The numerous vacancies for $`x<x_e`$ allow domain formation without a great energy cost. We note that the vacancies themselves percolate at $`x=0.75`$ and surely $`x_e`$ is related to this percolation threshold, although this may not be the entire story. Domain walls take advantage of surfaces of vacancies, not just the filiamentary percolation threshold structures. Hence, it would not be surprising if $`x_e`$ were somewhat different from the vacancy percolation threshold. Further simulations are currently under way at $`L=128`$ and should help to determine $`x_e`$ more precisely as well as determine the influence of the finite sample size on the present results. Certainly, critical behavior studies should be performed in the real systems only for $`x>x_e`$.

We acknowledge David Stafford for discussions concerning fast algorithms for large lattice sizes. This work has been supported by DOE Grant No. DE-FG03-87ER45324.


text:
# Nucleation phenomena in a nonuniform atomic fluid in the electrical field

## Abstract

The density functional approach is used to study the gas–to–liquid and liquid–to–gas nucleation phenomena in a fluid of two–level atoms in an external electrical field. The influence of the field on the surface tension and nucleation and cavitation barriers is discussed.

Key words: gas–liquid phase transition, density functional approach, density profile, surface tension, nucleation barrier, cavitation barrier

PACS: 64.70.Fx, 82.65.Dp, 62.60Nh, 64.60.Qb

In recent years a significant progress has been made in the molecular theory of the gas–to–liquid and liquid–to–gas phase transitions. An important contribution in this field is that of D. W. Oxtoby with coworkers  who showed how the experimentally measured quantity, the nucleation rate, can be calculated starting from the interparticle interactions with the help of the density functional approach. The elaborated method seems to be valuable near the spinodal curve since it predicts a vanishing of the nucleation barriers (as it should be expected) in contrast to the well known classical nucleation theory which yields a finite value for the nucleation barriers. The results for the nucleation rate obtained within the framework of those theories differ near the binodal curve as well, however, a prediction of the classical nucleation theory in that case seems to be preferable. Both theories can be viewed as microscopic ones which are based on the density functional approach study of the planar interface (classical nucleation theory) or the spherical interface (nonclassical nucleation theory).

In the present paper we are following the influence of an external electrical field on the gas–to–liquid and liquid–to–gas nucleation phenomena. First we examine the changes in the interparticle interactions due to the field adopting for this purpose a simple model of two–level atoms. After deriving the equation of state we make a guess about the form of the grand thermodynamic potential density functional, which takes into account the external electrical field. Finally, we performed standard density functional theory calculations to obtain the surface tension and nucleation barriers and discuss the influence of the external electrical field on these quantities.

To study the effective (long–range) interparticle interaction in the presence of the external electrical field we introduce two–level atoms with the excitation energy $`E_1E_0`$ and the value of the dipole transition moment $`|𝐩|`$. Using the quantum mechanical perturbation theory one immediately finds the long–range interparticle interaction between two atoms being at the distance $`R_{12}`$

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha _{12}^2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _1^2+\gamma _2^2}{4}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{3\alpha _{12}^2}{2}}\right)\gamma _1\gamma _2\alpha _{12}\right)(E_1E_0)+\mathrm{}.`$ (1)
Here

$`\alpha _{ij}(E_1E_0)={\displaystyle \frac{|𝐩|^2}{R_{ij}^3}}\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij},\gamma _i(E_1E_0)=2|𝐩||𝐄|\chi _i,`$ (2)
and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{ij}`$ and $`\chi _i`$ are the known in the theory of dipole systems orientational functions depending on the orientations of dipole transition moments. The first term in (1) is the usual van der Waals interaction, all other terms depend on the strength of the electrical field $`|𝐄|`$. We do not discuss a change in the short–range interaction due to the field taking it into account by means of the “atomic radius” $`\sigma `$.

We calculate further the equation of state repeating a text–book derivation of the second virial coefficient for the case when the long–range interaction between two hard–sphere–like particles is given by Eq. (1). The only peculiarity is the additional average over the orientations of dipole transition moments which we perform by means of the cumulant expansion. Although the calculations are rather tedious the final result for the virial state equation is simple

$`{\displaystyle \frac{p}{kT}}=\rho +\rho ^2B_2+\mathrm{},`$ (3)
$`B_2=4v2\pi \sigma ^3{\displaystyle _{2\sigma }^{\mathrm{}}}\text{d}\rho \rho ^2\left(\mathrm{exp}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}^2}{3\tau }}\left(1+2\mathrm{}^2^2\right){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho ^6}}\right)1\right),`$
where $`v=\frac{4}{3}\pi \sigma ^3`$ and $`\tau =\frac{kT}{E_1E_0}`$ and $`=\frac{|𝐄|\sigma ^3}{|𝐩|}`$ are the dimensionless temperature and the dimensionless strength of the electrical field, respectively. Within the adopted approximations the particle is characterized only by the dimensionless parameter $`\mathrm{}=\frac{|𝐩|^2}{\sigma ^3\left(E_1E_0\right)}`$ In further computation we put for simplicity $`\mathrm{}=1`$. As can be seen from Eq. (3) the only result of the external electrical field is the increasing of the van der Waals constant by $`1+2\mathrm{}^2^2`$.

It is easy to construct the grand thermodynamic potential density functional  which yields for the uniform fluid of small density the virial state equation (3). Thus, we shall examine the atomic fluid in the external electrical field on the basis of the following grand thermodynamic potential density functional

$`\mathrm{\Omega }[\rho (𝐑)]`$ $`=`$ $`kT{\displaystyle \text{d}𝐑_1\rho (𝐑_1)\left(\mathrm{ln}\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }^3\rho (𝐑_1)\right)+\frac{1+6v\rho (𝐑_1)4v^2\rho ^2(𝐑_1)}{\left(1v\rho (𝐑_1)\right)^2}\right)}`$ (4)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{6\sigma ^3a}{\pi }}{\displaystyle _{|𝐑_1𝐑_2|2\sigma }}\text{d}𝐑_1\text{d}𝐑_2{\displaystyle \frac{\rho (𝐑_1)\rho (𝐑_2)}{|𝐑_1𝐑_2|^6}}\mu {\displaystyle \text{d}𝐑_1\rho (𝐑_1)},`$
where $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is the thermal wavelength, and the constant

$`a={\displaystyle \frac{1}{48}}v(E_1E_0)\mathrm{}^2(1+2\mathrm{}^2^2),`$ (5)
which controls the contribution of the long–range interaction to $`\mathrm{\Omega }[\rho (𝐑)]`$, depends on the strength of the field. The grand thermodynamic potential density functional (4) takes into account the short–range interaction within the (local) Carnahan–Starling approximation and the long–range interaction within the (nonlocal) mean–field approximation. We also consider a simplified version of (4) treating the long–range contribution within the local gradient approximation which is expected to yield a reasonable result for the temperatures only slightly lower than the critical temperature.

We proceed by applying to (4) the standard machinery of the density functional theory  (see also ) seeking for a solution of the equation for density $`\frac{\delta \mathrm{\Omega }[\rho (𝐫)]}{\delta \rho (𝐫)}=0`$ and evaluating the grand thermodynamic potential $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. We examine the uniform fluid establishing the gas–liquid phase diagram and the nonuniform fluid with planar and spherical interface calculating the surface tension and the nucleation barriers for the saturated vapour and the tensile liquid. Our findings are collected in Figures 1–4.

Let us discuss the obtained results. The phase diagram of the considered fluid is shown in Figure 1. The critical parameters are

$`\rho _cv=\eta _c0.13044,`$
$`\tau _c()0.00196518\mathrm{}^2(1+2\mathrm{}^2^2),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{p_c(|𝐄|)v}{E_1E_0}}=\pi _c()0.00009202\mathrm{}^2(1+2\mathrm{}^2^2).`$ (6)
The electric field increases the critical temperature and pressure as can be expected. From the temperature dependence of the surface tension shown in the left panel in Figure 2 one concludes that it increases with switching on the field. However, this change is conditioned only by the increase of the critical temperature (Nucleation phenomena in a nonuniform atomic fluid in the electrical field) and the dependence $`\gamma `$ vs. $`\frac{T}{T_c(|𝐄|)}`$ (as in the right panel in Figure 2) is field independent. The nucleation barriers $`A`$ calculated within the frames of the density functional theory (exploiting the nonlocal grand thermodynamic potential density functional or using the gradient approximation) as well as within the classical nucleation theory based on capillarity approximation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{A}{kT}}={\displaystyle \frac{16\pi }{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma (T)}{kT}}\right)^3{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _l^2(T)\mathrm{ln}^2s}}`$ (7)
(the supersaturation $`s=\frac{p}{p(T)}`$ characterizes the saturated vapour) are shown in Figures 3, 4. This quantity yields the nucleation rate $`J=J_0\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{A}{kT}\right)`$ which is measured in nucleation experiments in the cloud chamber or in the upward thermal diffusion cloud chamber. Similarly to the surface tension the nucleation barriers appear to be field independent for given values of $`\frac{T}{T_c(|𝐄|)}`$ and $`\frac{p}{p_c(|𝐄|)}`$.

The results of a study of the nonuniform properties of atomic fluid in the electrical field presented in this report have been obtained within the frames of the standard density functional approach. The new point is the suggested density functional of the grand thermodynamic potential (4), (5). The main results concern the influence of electric field on the phase diagram (Figure 1), surface tension (Figure 2), gas–to–liquid and liquid–to–gas nucleation barriers (Figures 3, 4). These results may be useful for analysis of the corresponding experimental data (for example, for fluids of noble atoms) on the nucleation phenomena in the presence of the electrical field. However, it should be stressed that the analysis of the influence of the electric field on the nucleation phenomena in the concrete experiment requires a separate consideration that is out of the scope of the present paper. The presented theory exhibits a kind of universality: if the temperature and the pressure are measured in units of their critical values for a given strength of the electric field the results for the surface tension and nucleation barriers are field independent.

A part of the paper was done in the Johannes Kepler Universität Linz. V. M. Myhal thanks the Österreich–Kooperation für Wissenschaft, Bildung und Kunst for the fellowship and H. Iro for the hospitality.


text:
# Strange Pathways for Black Hole Formation

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Many fundamental and intrinsic properties of neutrinos play a crucial role in astrophysical phenomena such as core-collapse supernovae. Neutrinos drive supernova dynamics from beginning to end: they become trapped within the star’s core early in the collapse, forming a vast energetic reservoir, and their eventual emission from the proto-neutron star is prodiguous enough—containing nearly all the energy ($`10^{53}`$ ergs) released in the explosion—to dramatically control subsequent events.

The large neutrino flux from a proto-neutron star (PNS) plays at least two potentially important roles in the supernova environment. First, the supernova explosion itself may depend on neutrino heating to propel a shock stalled by accretion. Second, the neutrino-driven wind off the PNS that develops after shock lift-off may be a suitable site for the synthesis of heavy elements produced by the rapid neutron capture, or r-process, whose production site remains obscure. Further progress in these issues will depend upon a thorough understanding of the PNS neutrino emission.

The neutrinos of all flavors ($`e,\mu ,\tau `$) emitted from newly formed neutron stars in supernova explosions are the only direct probe of the mechanism of supernovae and the structure of proto-neutron stars. The handful of neutrino events observed from SN 1987A  attest to this fact. More intriguingly, the three flavors of neutrino fluxes from a Galactic supernova could be distinguished by the new generation of neutrino detectors. The supernova neutrino signals would furnish an opportunity to probe the properties of neutrinos and dense matter in regions that are inaccessible to terrestrial experiments.

## 2 EVOLUTION OF PROTO-NEUTRON STARS

A proto-neutron star (PNS) forms in the aftermath of a successful supernova explosion as the stellar remnant becomes gravitationally decoupled from the expanding ejecta. The essential microphysical ingredients that govern the macrophysical evolution of the PNS in the so-called Kelvin-Helmholtz epoch, during which the remnant changes from a hot and lepton-rich PNS to a cold and deleptonized neutron star, are the equation of state (EOS) of dense matter and its associated neutrino opacity. Among the characteristics of matter that widely vary among EOS models are their relative compressibilities (important in determining the theoretical neutron star maximum mass), symmetry energies (important in determining the typical stellar radius and in the relative $`n,p,e`$, and $`\nu _e`$ abundances) and specific heats (important in determining the local temperatures). These characteristics play important roles in determining the matter’s composition, in particular the possible presence of strange components (such as hyperons, a kaon condensate, or quark matter) . These characteristics also significantly affect calculated neutrino opacities  and diffusion time scales.

The evolution of a PNS proceeds through several distinct stages  and with various outcomes. Immediately following core bounce and the passage of a shock through the outer PNS’s mantle, the star contains an unshocked, low entropy core of mass $`M_c0.7`$ M in which neutrinos are trapped. The core is surrounded by a low density, high entropy ($`s=510`$) mantle that is both accreting matter falling through the shock and rapidly losing energy due to beta decays and neutrino emission. The mantle extends to the shock, which is temporarily stationary at a radius of about 200 km prior to an eventual explosion.

After a few seconds, accretion becomes less important if the supernova is successful and the shock lifts off the stellar envelope. Extensive neutrino losses and deleptonization of the mantle will have led to loss of lepton pressure and collapse of the mantle. If enough accretion occurs, the star’s mass could exceed the maximum mass of the hot, lepton-rich matter and it collapses to form a black hole. In this event, neutrino emission is believed to quickly cease .

Neutrino diffusion deleptonizes and heats the core on time scales of 10–15 s. The core’s maximum entropy is reached at the end of deleptonization. Strangeness could now appear, in which case the maximum mass will decrease, leading to another possibility of black hole formation . If strangeness does not appear, the maximum mass instead increases during deleptonization and the appearance of a black hole would be less likely.

The PNS is now lepton-poor, but it is still hot. While the star has zero net neutrino number, thermally produced neutrino pairs of all flavors are abundant and dominate the emission. The star cools, the average neutrino energy decreases, and the neutrino mean free path increases. After approximately a few to 100 seconds (this time depends on the form in which strangeness appears), the star becomes transparent to neutrinos and finally achieves a cold, catalyzed configuration.

Neutrino observations from a galactic supernova will illuminate these stages. The observables will concern time scales for deleptonization and cooling and the star’s binding energy. Dimensionally, diffusion time scales are proportional to $`R^2(c\lambda )^1`$, where $`R`$ is the star’s radius and $`\lambda `$ is the effective neutrino mean free path. This generic relation illustrates how both the EOS and the composition, which determine both $`R`$ and $`\lambda `$, influence evolutionary time scales. Additional EOS dependence enters through the rate at which the lepton number is lost from the star. The total binding energy is a stellar mass indicator.

## 3 RESULTS OF SIMULATIONS

Detailed calculations of the evolution of PNSs, studying the sensitivity of the results to the initial model, the total mass, the underlying equation of state (EOS) and the possible presence of hyperons and kaons, have been performed . Pons, et al.  show that the major effect on the neutrino signal before the onset of any possible metastability is the PNS mass: larger masses give rise to larger luminosities and generally higher average emitted neutrino energies. In addition, it was found that mass windows for hyperonic metastable models could be as large as 0.3 M, ranging from baryon masses $`M_B=1.7`$ M to 2.0 M. The lifetimes of these stars decrease with stellar mass and range from a few to longer than 100 s. The detection of neutrinos from SN 1987A over a timescale of 10-15 s is thus consistent with either the formation of a stable PNS or a metastable PNS containing hyperons, as long as its mass was less than about 0.1 M below the maximum mass for cold, catalyzed hyperonic matter. Larger PNS masses would lead to a collapse to a black hole on a timescale shorter than that observed.

A similar situation could be encountered if the EOS allowed the presence of other forms of “exotic” matter, manifested in the form of a Bose condensate (of pions or kaons) or quarks . Recently Pons, et al.  have studied the effect of kaon condensation on PNS evolution, by employing an EOS which includes the effects of finite temperature and neutrino trapping . The phase transition from pure nucleonic matter to the kaon condensate phase was described by means of Gibbs’ rules for phase equilibrium, which permit a mixed phase. In the models explored there, the central densities were not large enough to allow a pure condensed phase to exist.

Pons, et al.  classify stars of different masses in three main groups: i) stars in which the central density does not exceed the critical value for kaon condensation, ii) stars that can form a mixed phase core at the end of the Kelvin-Helmholtz epoch but remain stable, and, iii) kaon condensed metastable stars that become unstable and collapse to a black hole at the end of the Kelvin-Helmholtz epoch. For stars in which the effects of kaon condensation are small (this could be either because the star’s mass is low enough to permit only a very small region of the mixed phase or because condensation occurs as a weak second order phase transition), the differences of the predicted neutrino signal compared to PNSs composed of pure nucleonic matter are very small.

In Fig. 1, the evolution of stable (1.7 M) and metastable stars are compared. Both the central baryon number densities and kaon fractions $`Y_K`$ are displayed. In each case, the time at which kaon condensation occurs is indicated by a diamond. Asterisks mark the times at which the evolution of metastable stars could not be further followed in our simulations, i.e., when a configuration in hydrostatic equilibrium could not be found. At this time, the PNS is unstable to gravitational collapse into a black hole. For the stable star, kaons appear after about 40 s. Thereafter, the star’s central density increases in a short interval, about 5 s, until a new stationary state with a mixed phase is reached. The evolution of the metastable stars is qualitatively different, inasmuch as the central density increases monotonically from the time the condensate appears to the time of gravitational collapse. It is interesting that the lifetimes in all cases shown lie in the narrow range 40–70 s (see Fig. 1). They decrease mildly with increasing $`M_B`$.

In Fig. 2 the lifetimes versus $`M_B`$ for stars containing hyperons ($`npH`$) and $`npK`$ stars are compared. In both cases, the larger the mass, the shorter the lifetime. For kaon-rich PNSs, however, the collapse is delayed until the final stage of the Kelvin-Helmholtz epoch, while this is not necessarily the case for hyperon-rich stars.

## 4 SIGNALS IN DETECTORS

In Fig. 3 the evolution of the total neutrino energy luminosity is shown for different models. Notice that the drop in the luminosity for the stable star (solid line), associated with the end of the Kelvin-Helmholtz epoch, occurs at approximately the same time as for the metastable stars with somewhat higher masses. In all cases, the total luminosity at the end of the simulations is below $`10^{51}`$ erg/s. The two upper shaded bands correspond to SN 1987A detection limits with KII and IMB, and the lower bands correspond to detection limits in SNO and SuperK for a future galactic supernova at a distance of 8.5 kpc. The times when these limits intersect the model luminosities indicate the approximate times at which the count rate drops below the background rate $`(dN/dt)_{BG}=0.2`$ Hz.

The poor statistics in the case of SN 1987A precluded a precise estimate of the PNS mass. Nevertheless, had a collapse to a black hole occurred in this case, it must have happened after the detection of neutrinos ended. Thus the SN 1987A signal is compatible with a late kaonization-induced collapse, as well as a collapse due to hyperonization or to the formation of a quark core. More information would be extracted from the detection of a galactic SN with the new generation of neutrino detectors.

In SNO, about 400 counts are expected for electron antineutrinos from a supernova located at 8.5 kpc. The statistics would therefore be improved significantly compared to the observations of SN 1987A. A sufficiently massive PNS with a kaon condensate becomes metastable, and the neutrino signal terminates, before the signal decreases below the assumed background. In SuperK, however, up to 6000 events are expected for the same conditions (because of the larger fiducial mass) and the effects of metastability due to condensate formation in lower mass stars would be observable.

## 5 WHAT CAN WE LEARN?

The calculations of Pons, et al.  show that the variations in the neutrino light curves caused by the appearance of a kaon condensate in a stable star are small, and are apparently insensitive to large variations in the opacities assumed for them. Relative to a star containing only nucleons, the expected signal differs by an amount that is easily masked by an assumed PNS mass difference of $`0.010.02`$ M. This is in spite of the fact that, in some cases, a first order phase transition appears at the star’s center. The manifestations of this phase transition are minimized because of the long neutrino diffusion times in the star’s core and the Gibbs’ character of the transition. Both act in tandem to prevent either a “core-quake” or a secondary neutrino burst from occurring during the Kelvin-Helmholtz epoch.

Observable signals of kaon condensation occur only in the case of metastable stars that collapse to a black hole. In this case, the neutrino signal for a star closer than about 10 kpc is expected to suddenly stop at a level well above that of the background in a sufficiently massive detector with a low energy threshold such as SuperK. This is in contrast to the signal for a normal star of similar mass for which the signal continues to fall until it is obscured by the background. The lifetime of kaon-condensed metastable stars has a relatively small range, of order 50–70 s for the models studied here, which is in sharp contrast to the case of hyperon-rich metastable stars for which a significantly larger variation in the lifetime (a few to over 100 s) was found. This feature of kaon condensation suggests that stars that destabilize rapidly cannot do so because of kaons.

Pons, et al.  determined the minimum lifetime for metastable stars with kaons to be about 40 s by examining the most favorable case for kaon condensation, which is obtained by maximizing the magnitude of the optical potential. The maximum optical potential is limited by the binary pulsar mass constraint, which limits the star’s maximum gravitational mass to a minimum value of 1.44 M. Therefore, should the neutrino signal from a future supernova abruptly terminate sooner than 40 s after the birth of the PNS, it would be more consistent with a hyperon- or quark-induced instability than one due to kaon condensation.

It is important to note that the collapse to a black hole in the case of kaon condensation is delayed until the final stages of the Kelvin-Helmholtz epoch, due to the large neutrino diffusion time in the inner core. Consequently, to distinguish between stable and metastable kaon-rich stars through observations of a cessation of a neutrino signal from a galactic supernovae is only possible using sufficiently massive neutrino detectors with low energy thresholds and low backgrounds, such as the current SNO and SuperK, and future planned (Super-DuperK) detectors.

## 6 MATTER WITH QUARKS

Strangeness appearing in the form of a mixed phase of strange quark matter also leads to metastability. Although quark matter is also suppressed by trapped neutrinos , the transition to quark matter can occur at lower densities than the most optimistic kaon case, and the dependence of the threshold density on $`Y_L`$ is less steep than that for kaons. Thus, it is an expectation that metastability due to the appearance of quarks, as for the case of hyperons, might be able to occur relatively quickly.

Steiner, et al.  have demonstrated that the temperature along adiabats in the quark-hadron mixed phase is much smaller than what is found for the kaon condensate-hadron mixed phase. This could lead to core temperatures which are significantly lower in stars containing quarks than in those not containing quarks. The temperature as a function of baryon density for fixed entropy and net lepton concentration is presented in Fig. 4, which compares the cases ($`s=1,Y_{L_e}=0.4`$) and ($`s=2,Y_{\nu _e}=0`$) both including and ignoring quarks. The introduction of hyperons or quarks lowers the Fermi energies of the nucleons and simultaneously increases the specific heat of the matter, simply because there are more components. In the case of quarks, a further increase, which is just as significant, occurs due to the fact that quarks are rather more relativistic than hadrons. The combined effects for quarks are so large that, in some cases, an actual reduction of temperature with increasing density occurs along an adiabat. This effect indicates that the temperature will be smaller in a PNS containing quarks than in stars without quarks.

The large reduction in temperature might also influence neutrino opacities, which are generally proportional to $`T^2`$. However, the presence of droplet-like structures in the mixed phase , not considered here, will modify the specific heat. In addition, these structures may dominate the opacity in the mixed phase . However, a PNS simulation is necessary to consistently evaluate the thermal evolution, since the smaller pressure of quark-containing matter would tend to increase the star’s density and would oppose this effect. Calculations of PNS evolution with a mixed phase of quark matter, including the possible effects of quark matter superfluidity  are currently in progress and will be reported separately.

## 7 OUTLOOK

### 7.1  Neutrino Interferometry

A titillating possibility would be a Hanbury-Brown Twiss interferometric analysis using the neutrinos detected on earth to determine the radial extent of the neutrinosphere. For this purpose, sufficient statistics and both accurate time and energy resolutions in the detectors would be needed.

### 7.2 $`\pi ^{}`$ and $`K^{}`$ Dispersion Relations Through $`\nu `$-Nucleus Reactions

The experimental program that would do the most to illuminate theoretical issues permeating neutrino interactions in dense matter would be studies of neutrino reactions on heavy nuclei, the only direct way of probing the matrix elements of the axial current in nuclear matter. Pioneering suggestions in this regard have been put forth by Sawyer & Soni , Ericson , and Sawyer . The basic idea is to detect positively charged leptons ($`\mu ^+ore^+`$) produced in inclusive experiments

$`\overline{\nu }+X`$ $``$ $`\mu ^+(\mathrm{or}\mathrm{e}^+)+\pi ^{}(\mathrm{or}\mathrm{K}^{})+\mathrm{X}`$ (1)
which is kinematically made possible when the in-medium $`\pi ^{}`$ or $`K^{}`$ dispersion relation finds support in space-like regions. The sharp peaks at forward angles in the differential cross section versus lepton momentum survive the 100-200 MeV width in the incoming GeV or so neutrinos from accelerator experiments. Calculations of the background from quasi-elastic reactions indicate that the signal would be easily detectable.

It is a pleasure to thank James Lattimer, Jose Pons, and Andrew Steiner, with whom the work reported here was performed.


text:
# Turning Insulators into Superconductors

In the opening scene of Mike Nichols’ 1968 film “The Graduate,” Mr. McQuire advises Benjamin Braddock emphatically that “Plastics” is the one word that holds the key to his future. While Benjamin ultimately ignores this directive choosing instead Elaine, this advise has been prophetic as applications of plastics have now become commonplace. A surprising arena into which plastics have ventured is the electronics industry. The key finding in the late 1970’s that certain types of polymeric materials can conduct electricity almost as efficiently as copper wire paved the way for light-emmiting diodes (LED), electrical sensors, and even rechargable batteries made entirely from plastics. This astounding success has sparked general interest in the electronic properties of organic materials. One of the key endeavors has been the search for organic superconductors. In a superconductor, electrons bind together to form Cooper pairs. At a sufficiently low temperature, the pairs form a coherent state which conducts electricity without resistive loss. On page 702 of this issue, a team of scientists from Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies led by Bertram Batlogg has taken a rather novel approach to the problem of engineering superconductivity in an organic material: they have made a transistor from anthracene, tetracene, and pentacene. Under normal conditions, these simple organic materials are insulators, but they can be converted into superconductors by the simple method of injecting them with charge and lowering the temperature.

The materials in this series are composed of stacks of chains containing three (anthracene) to five (pentacene) benzene rings. Between $`T=24`$K, the resistivity was observed to drop to zero. In addition expulsion of a magnetic field below a well-defined upper critical field was also observed. Zero resistance and expulsion of magnetic fields are intrinsic facts about a true superconducting state.

Given the high superconducting transition temperatures ($`T_c=135K`$) that have been observed in the copper-oxide materials, the question arises: Why should we care about a relatively low $`T_c`$ in an organic transistor? The answer is quite simple–these materials are far from ordinary and are likely to constitute a fertile playground for the study of the fundamental properties of correlated electrons. Three key features set apart the experimental observations reported here: 1) dimensionality, 2) doping process, and 3) no superconducting compounds of anthracene, tetracene, and pentacene are known to exist. Regarding the first, superconductivity is generally associated with a bulk material. However, in these experiments, electrons are confined to move at the surface of an organic. As Fig. 1 of the Bell labs paper illustrates, two-dimensional confinement is accomplished by first coating a pure single polyacene crystal with an insulator, typically aluminum oxide and second by creating a field-effect-transistor geomery with source and drain electrodes on the organic crystal and a gate electrode atop the gate oxide.

Doping carriers into the interface is mediated by simply changing the voltage at the electrical gate. A positive (negative) bias voltage on the gate attracts electrons (holes) from the plastic to the interface with the insulator. Doping via gating has the advantage over traditional chemical doping methods in that the physical attributes (such as the lattice constant) of the nascent material remain unchanged. As electrons cannot penetrate the insulator, the charges are confined to move solely at the planar interfacial region. The resistivity is measured by source and drain electrodes attached to opposite sides of the crystal. Such a device is a field-effect transistor (FET) and is identical electrically to those made from semiconductors, such as Si and GaAs. In fact, at low temperatures (1-2 K), the mobility reaches $`10^4cm^2/Vs`$ and hence is on par with most semiconductor devices. The key surprise here is that we no longer need to overcome the engineering hurdles that accompany Si and GaAs technology to create a two-dimensional electron gas. This is significant because in the last 20 years, the two dimensional electron gas has dominated solid state physics, resulting in Nobel prizes in 1985 and 1998. Exotic phases such as a highly correlated electron liquid state with fractionally-charged excitations, Cu-O layers in copper-oxide superconductors, and more recently the transition to a new conducting state in the dilute limit are the primary reasons why the physics of correlated 2D electrons continues dominate solid state physics. Many of these exotic states can now be studied in an organic FET. In fact, Batlogg’s group has already observed the fractional quantum-Hall effect in pentacene.

As with all discoveries of superconductivity, the key question that must be resolved is what is the physical mechanism responsible for electron pairing. This question is particularly germane in the case of the polyacene transistors because no doped form of polyacenes has ever been observed to superconduct. In this respect, the observation of superconductivity in the polyacenes is quite distinct from the similar result reported recently in a $`C_{60}`$ transistor, at a density corresponding to three electrons per buckyball, because $`M_3C_{60}`$ is known to superconduct. Further, it is relatively well established that $`M_3C_{60}`$ conforms to the standard paradigm in which collective crystal vibrations, phonons, provide a dynamical glue that binds electrons in pairs. In the context of the polyacenes, the electron-phonon coupling constant has also been calculated. As shown in Fig. 1, the electron-phonon coupling constant falls off inversely with the number of $`\pi `$-electrons for a series of organic compounds including polyacenes and $`C_{60}`$.

Hence, based on this trend, one expects anthracene to have the highest transition temperature within the polyacene series studied by the Bell labs group. Indeed, this is seen experimentally. However, also based on the inverse relationship between the electron-phonon coupling constant and the number of $`\pi `$-electrons, one expects doped $`C_{60}`$ to have the lowest transition temperature. In actuality, it has a transition temperature of $`33`$K, considerably higher than the 2-4K in the polyacenes. What might save us here is the density of electronic states and the degeneracy of the partially-filled molecular level that releases electrons to the interface. It is the product of the density of states and the electron-phonon coupling constant that determines, to a large extent, the superconducting transition temperature (at least within traditional mechanisms). However, an independent measure of the density of states at the Fermi level is difficult to achieve experimentally unless thermodynamic measurements are made. Such measurements might be particularly difficult in the polyacene crystals because the electron gas is sandwiched between two insulators. A possible, though challenging, route to measuring the density of states is by the construction of a gated multilayer pentacene structure.

An additional experiment that would be of utmost importance in determining the mechanism of pairing would be to probe the properties of a pentacene transistor at low temperatures and low densities. Varying the electron density changes the strength of the Coulomb repulsion relative to the kinetic energy of the electrons. Because the Coulomb repulsion falls off inversely with distance, whereas the kinetic energy decays as the inverse square of the distance, the Coulomb repulsion dominates in the low density regime. Consequently, it is the low density limit that constitutes the strongly-correlated regime. While at sufficiently low density the electrons form a rigid crystalline array, at intermediate densities there is no consensus as to the precise nature of the ground state of the electron gas. This debate has received renewed fuel recently as a result of the observation of an unexpected conducting state in the dilute regime of a two-dimensional electron gas in gated Si and GaAs transistors. There is currently no consensus as to the origin of this state or even if the new conducting state is genuine. Because the density can be tuned continuously by simply changing the gate voltage, the same density regime can be examined in a pentacene transistor.

If superconductivity persists in the pentacene systems at low densities, then this will be truly spectacular but at the same time problematic. In the low density regime in which the Coulomb repulsion greatly exceeds the Fermi energy, the largest kinetic energy in the system, phonons are too weak to overcome the repulsive interaction between electrons. In the dilute regime then, the observation of superconductivity implies that pairing occurs entirely from repulsive interactions. That is, pairing is a general organizing principle (or quantum protectorate to use the language of Laughlin and Pines) of a dilute two-dimensional electon gas as has been proposed. Other more specialized mechanisms involving disorder and time-reversal broken states have also been discussed. The Bell labs group is poised to settle this issue definitively. The problem raised by a positive answer will be, why hasn’t a vanishing resistivity been observed in Si and GaAs? Afterall, if the physics is intrinsic to the electron gas in the dilute regime, then it should not matter out of what material the transistor is made. In light of the growing evidence that Cooper pairs might possibly exist in a metallic rather than a true superconducting state at zero temperature in thin films, resolution of these issues is not likely to be easy. Nonetheless, the Bell labs innovation offers yet another vehichle for exploring and hopefully settling some of the unanswered questions surrounding the correlated states that arise when electrons are confined to move in a plane.


text:
# Like-sign dimuon charge asymmetry in the decay of 𝐵𝐵̄ pairs

## 1 Introduction

We discuss the inclusive CP-violating dimuon charge asymmetry $`A(N_{++}N_{})/(N_{++}+N_{})`$ in the Standard Model of events $`p\overline{p}B\overline{B}X\mu ^\pm \mu ^\pm X`$ where the $`B\overline{B}`$ pair is either $`B_d\overline{B}_d`$ or $`B_s\overline{B}_s`$. $`N_{++}`$ is the number of events $`p\overline{p}B\overline{B}X\mu ^+\mu ^+X`$. In particular we consider “indirect CP violation (or CP violation in the mixing)” due to complex effects in $`B\overline{B}`$ mixing and decay.

## 2 Indirect CP violation

Let us review the standard formalism of indirect CP violation but without making the usual approximations valid when CP violation is “small”. We take the hamiltonian in the $`B_d^0\overline{B}_d^0`$ (or $`B_s^0\overline{B}_s^0`$, $`D^0\overline{D}^0`$, or $`K^0\overline{K}^0`$) basis as

$$HM\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left[\begin{array}{cc}m& M_{12}\\ M_{12}^{}& m\end{array}\right]\frac{i}{2}\left[\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{\Gamma }& \mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}\\ \mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^{}& \mathrm{\Gamma }\end{array}\right],$$
(1)
where the matrices $`M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are hermitian. The hamiltonian $`H`$ itself is not hermitian since the $`B`$ mesons do decay. The matrix elements of the hamiltonian are obtained from second order perturbation theory:

$`M_{\alpha \beta }`$ $`=m\delta _{\alpha \beta }+\alpha H_{SW}\beta P{\displaystyle \underset{\xi 1,2}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha H_W\xi \xi H_W\beta }{E_\xi m}},`$ (2)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\alpha \beta }`$ $`=2\pi {\displaystyle \underset{\xi 1,2}{}}\alpha H_W\xi \xi H_W\beta \delta (E_\xi m),`$ (3)
where $`H_W`$ is the Standard Model weak interaction, $`H_{SW}`$ is a superweak interaction (which we consider no further), and $`P`$ denotes “principal part”.

The diagonal elements of $`H`$ are assumed equal due to CPT invariance. The argument goes as follows: $`M_{11}`$ is the amplitude for a $`B^0`$ to remain a $`B^0`$. Applying CPT we obtain the amplitude for a $`\overline{B}^0`$ to remain a $`\overline{B}^0`$, i.e. $`M_{22}`$. So, if CPT invariance holds, we obtain $`M_{11}=M_{22}m`$. Likewise, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}`$ is the probability per unit time for the decay $`B^0\xi `$. Applying CPT we obtain the probability per unit time for $`\overline{\xi }\overline{B}^0`$. From Equation (3) for this process, and changing the order of the two brackets, we obtain the probability per unit time for $`\overline{B}^0\overline{\xi }`$, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{22}`$. So, if CPT invariance holds, we obtain $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}=\mathrm{\Gamma }_{22}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

The solution to the equation $`i\psi /t=H\psi `$ with $`\psi ^T(B^0(t),\overline{B}^0(t))`$ is

$`B^0(t)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{s_+(t)+s_{}(t)\right\}B^0(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1\epsilon }{1+\epsilon }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{s_+(t)s_{}(t)\right\}\overline{B}^0(0),`$
$`\overline{B}^0(t)={\displaystyle \frac{1+\epsilon }{1\epsilon }}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{s_+(t)s_{}(t)\right\}B^0(0)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{s_+(t)+s_{}(t)\right\}\overline{B}^0(0),`$ (4)
where

$`s_{}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(imt)\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Gamma }t/2)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{\Delta }Mt/2)\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }t/4),`$
$`s_+(t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(imt)\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Gamma }t/2)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{\Delta }Mt/2)\mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }t/4),`$ (5)
$$\frac{1\epsilon }{1+\epsilon }\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }M\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2\left(M_{12}^{}\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}^{}\right)}=\frac{2\left(M_{12}\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}\right)}{\mathrm{\Delta }M\frac{i}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }}.$$
(6)
The phase of $`(1\epsilon )/(1+\epsilon )`$ is arbitrary: it can be changed by redefining the phase of $`\overline{B}^0(0)`$. Observables depend on the absolute value of $`(1\epsilon )/(1+\epsilon )`$, or equivalently on

$$\alpha \frac{Re(\epsilon )}{1+\left|\epsilon \right|^2}.$$
(7)
For the same reason, we can multiply $`M_{12}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ by a common phase-factor. Only the relative phase is observable:

$$\mathrm{}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}}{M_{12}}\phi .$$
(8)
We introduce the notation

$$x\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }M}{\mathrm{\Gamma }};y\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }}.$$
(9)
Then the probability that a $`\overline{B}^0`$ decays as a $`B^0`$ is

$`\chi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_0^{\mathrm{}}\left|\frac{1\epsilon }{1+\epsilon }\right|^2\frac{1}{4}\left|s_+s_{}\right|^2𝑑t}{_0^{\mathrm{}}\left|\frac{1\epsilon }{1+\epsilon }\right|^2\frac{1}{4}\left|s_+s_{}\right|^2𝑑t+_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{1}{4}\left|s_++s_{}\right|^2𝑑t}}`$ (10)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(x^2+y^2\right)\left(\frac{1}{2}\alpha \right)}{1+x^2+2\alpha \left(1y^2\right)}}.`$
Similarly, the probability that a $`B^0`$ decays as a $`\overline{B}^0`$ is

$$\overline{\chi }=\frac{\left(x^2+y^2\right)\left(\frac{1}{2}+\alpha \right)}{1+x^22\alpha \left(1y^2\right)}.$$
(11)
Finally, let us relate $`M_{12}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }M`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }`$:

$$\frac{\alpha }{1+4\alpha ^2}=\frac{Im\left\{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}/M_{12}\right\}}{4+|\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}/M_{12}|^2},$$
(12)
$$Im\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}}{M_{12}}\right)=4\alpha \frac{1+\left(\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }/(2\mathrm{\Delta }M)\right)^2}{1+\left(\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }/\mathrm{\Delta }M\right)^2},$$
(13)
$$\mathrm{tan}(\phi )=\frac{\alpha }{14\alpha ^2}\frac{4\mathrm{\Delta }M^2+\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }^2}{\mathrm{\Delta }M\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }},$$
(14)
$$\left|M_{12}\right|^2=\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{14\alpha ^2}\mathrm{\Delta }M^2+\frac{1}{4}\frac{\alpha ^2}{14\alpha ^2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }^2,$$
(15)
$$\left|\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}\right|^2=\frac{4\alpha ^2}{14\alpha ^2}\mathrm{\Delta }M^2+\frac{1}{4}\frac{1}{14\alpha ^2}\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }^2.$$
(16)
These equations are exact for the $`(B_d^0,\overline{B}_d^0)`$ and $`(B_s^0,\overline{B}_s^0)`$ systems separately. As a cross check, for $`|\alpha |1`$ we recover the well known results $`\mathrm{\Delta }M2|M_{12}|`$ and $`A4\alpha Im\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}/M_{12}\right)`$.

## 3 $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}`$ and $`M_{12}`$ in the Standard Model

From the box diagrams of $`B^0\overline{B}^0`$ mixing and Equation (2) for the Standard Model, we obtain

$$x_q\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }M}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\frac{2|M_{12}|}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\frac{\eta ^{}f_B^2G_F^2m_W^2m_B}{8\pi ^2\mathrm{\Gamma }}|V_{tq}^{}|^2\alpha \left(m_t^2/m_W^2\right)$$
(17)
where

$$\alpha \left(x_t\right)\frac{x_t^311x_t^2+4x_t}{4\left(1x_t\right)^2}\frac{3x_t^3\mathrm{ln}\left(x_t\right)}{2\left(1x_t\right)^3}.$$
(18)
Let us now consider the absorptive matrix elements given by Equation (3). For $`\alpha =\beta `$ Equation (3) is “Fermi’s golden rule”. The tree level Feynman diagrams are shown in Figures 1 and 2.

We arrive at three different predictions for the CP-violating asymmetries $`A_d`$ and $`A_s`$ in the Standard Model:

1. If we require that intermediate quark spins and momenta match in the diagrams of Figure 2, then we obtain negligible asymmetries as discussed by J. Hagelin. This result would be correct if quarks were observable.

2. However quarks are not observable. Hadrons are observable. Due to hadronization, i.e. due to gluons, the momenta need not match at the quark level and we obtain the approximate results shown in Table 1. (All input numerical data for these calculations not specified in the Tables were obtained from .) A similar point was emphasized by T. Altomari, L. Wolfenstein, and J.D. Bjorken so that their “conclusion is that a reasonable estimate of the asymmetry lies between $`10^3`$ and $`10^2`$ but that neither the sign nor the magnitude can be reliably calculated”. That conclusion is in agreement with Table 1.

3. If, due to gluon exchange in the hadronization process, it were a good approximation to neglect both the requirements of spin and momentum match, then we obtain approximately the results shown in Table 2. As an example, suppose that the c-quark in the left hand diagram of Figure 2 has “spin up”, and the c-quark in the right hand diagram has “spin down”. This miss-match of spins of the quarks need not imply a miss-match at the hadron level, as can be seen, for example, in the case in which both quarks hadronize into a scalar meson.

Which of the three predictions, if any, is correct?

## 4 Discussion

Consider diagrams of the form shown in Figure 1. Requiring match of spins of the quarks (and weighting hadronic modes by a factor 3 for color) we obtain an inclusive branching fraction $`B(b\mu X)=0.16`$ to be compared with the experimental value $`B(b\mu X)=0.103\pm 0.005`$. This is the well known “baffling semi-leptonic branching fraction of B mesons”. But quark spins are not observable. Only hadrons are observable. So the hadronization process, i.e. gluons, enhance the decay rate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{11}`$ by a factor $`2`$ to account for the observed drop in semi-leptonic branching fraction.

Let us now consider the momentum miss-match of the spectator quarks in the diagrams of Figure 2. To obtain matching of momenta we need at least one gluon as shown in Figure 3.

The amplitude of the diagram of Figure 3 is “enhanced” with respect to the amplitude of the diagram of Figure 2 by a factor of order

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}(3)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}(2)}\frac{A_x(3)}{A_x(2)}\frac{\alpha _sm_Bf_B^2}{8}P_xP_g.$$
(19)
The numbers in parenthesis refer to the Figures, and $`xs`$ or $`d`$ for the $`B_s^0`$ or $`B_d^0`$ systems respectively. The factor $`m_Bf_B^2`$ was introduced (somewhat arbitrarily) on dimensional grounds. The gluon propagator is $`P_g1/(2m_x|\stackrel{}{p}_2|)`$. We take $`|\stackrel{}{p}_2|`$ to be of order $`m_B/3`$ (see definition of $`\stackrel{}{p}_2`$ and $`x`$ in Figure 3). If the outgoing quarks were free, the quark propagator $`P_x`$ would be on-shell and would diverge. Since the outgoing quarks are confined to dimensions of order $`1`$ Fermi, we replace the quark propagator by $`P_x1/m_\pi `$. Then the order of magnitude estimate of the “enhancement factor” (19) is

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}(3)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_{12}(2)}\frac{A_x(3)}{A_x(2)}\frac{3\alpha _sf_B^2}{16m_\pi m_x}$$
(20)
which is $`0.08`$ for the $`B_s^0`$ system, and $`1.6`$ for the $`B_d^0`$ system.

So, which of the three predictions, if any, is correct? Prediction 1 by Hagelin includes a restriction on $`|\stackrel{}{p}_2|`$ due to a miss-match of momenta of the spectator quark, and also requires matching spins. We have seen that this momentum miss-match can be “fixed” by gluons (at no cost for the $`B_d^0`$ system). Therefore we arrive at Prediction 2 given in Table 1 which does not require momenta to match but still requires matching spins. We have seen that hadronization relaxes the need to match spins (as required by the semi-leptonic branching fraction of $`B`$ mesons). Then we arrive at Prediction 3 given in Table 2. Since $`x_d=0.723\pm 0.032`$ we obtain from Table 2, $`A_d1\%`$ to $`3\%`$ for the allowed range of $`V_{ub}`$. But for the $`B_d^0`$ system the gluon in the diagram of Figure 3 can even enhance the asymmetry above the prediction given in Table 2. Note that relaxing the requirement of matching spins we obtain a large $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }_s/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as predicted in , leading to interesting experimental consequences.

## 5 The Two Higgs Doublet Model

We have repeated the calculations using the Two Higgs Doublet Model (Model II). The results are shown in Table 3 (which requires matching intermediate quark spins but not momenta). Comparing with Table 1 we note that the predictions for the asymmetry $`A_d`$ are not significantly changed by this extension of the Standard Model.

## 6 Conclusions

Our conclusion is that the inclusive CP-violating like-sign dimuon charge asymmetry in the Standard Model is larger than previously expected. For the $`(B_d^0,\overline{B}_d^0)`$ system the asymmetry is probably between $`1\%`$ and $`3\%`$, and may even be enhanced by gluons above this value. Such a large asymmetry would be within the reach of the next run of the D$`\mathrm{}`$ and CDF experiments at the FERMILAB Tevatron collider.


text:
# Sound emission due to superfluid vortex reconnections

## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank would to thank the Newton Institute, Cambridge University, where part of this work was completed. Financial support was provided by the EPSRC.