text:
# Charge Ordering and Polaron Formation in the Magnetoresistive Oxide La0.7Ca0.3MnO3

\[

## Abstract

Neutron scattering has been used to study the nature of the ferromagnetic transition in a single crystal of the perovskite La0.7Ca0.3MnO3. Diffuse scattering from lattice polarons develops as the Curie temperature is approached from below, along with short range polaron correlations that are consistent with stripe formation. Both the scattering due to the polaron correlations and the anomalous quasielastic component in the magnetic fluctuation spectrum maximize very close to $`T_C`$, in a manner remarkably similar to the resistivity, indicating that they have a common origin.

. \]

One of the simplifying features of conventional isotropic ferromagnets such as Fe, Co, Ni, and EuO is the isolation of the spin system from the underlying lattice. This made these materials ideal candidates to investigate the low temperature magnetic excitations, critical dynamics, scaling behavior, and nature of second-order phase transitions. This situation contrasts dramatically with the colossal magnetoresistive (CMR) oxides, exemplified by the ferromagnetic doping regime of La1-xCaxMnO3 (0.15$`<`$$`x`$$`<`$0.5). The transport in these perovskites is directly connected to the magnetic system through the double exchange mechanism, while the Jahn-Teller distortion of the Mn3+O6 couples the magnetic and lattice systems, resulting in the electronic, lattice, and magnetic degrees of freedom being intimately intertwined . The ground state spin dynamics has a number of unusual properties such as large linewidths and anomalous dispersion , while the combined metal-insulator and ferromagnetic transition has been found to be quite different from conventional isotropic ferromagnets . In particular, the spin wave stiffness does not collapse as $`TT_C`$, but instead a quasielastic diffusive component develops in the excitation spectrum. Above $`T_C`$, the conductivity is characterized by hopping that is believed to be associated with polarons , and recently direct evidence for the formation of lattice polarons has been observed in single crystals of the layered manganite La1.2Sr1.8Mn2O7 , and in the cubic, half-doped (Nd0.12Sm0.88)0.52Sr0.48MnO3 material . However, the relationship between the ferromagnetic transition and the polaron formation associated with the metal-insulator transition has remained a mystery. In the present work we observe the formation of lattice polarons in an optimally-doped cubic CMR material, and find clear evidence for polaron ordering in the paramagnetic phase that is consistent with some models of stripe formation. More importantly, the temperature dependence of this polaron intensity develops simultaneously with the quasielastic spin fluctuation scattering, directly connecting these two phenomena with the resistivity.

The sample is a $`0.7`$ g single crystal grown by the floating zone technique , with a single-peaked mosaic less than 0.25. At this composition the crystal structure is orthorhombic, but the distortion is small and the domains are equally populated. Therefore for simplicity we will employ cubic notation ($`a=3.867`$ Å at room temperature), where nearest-neighbor manganese atoms are along the -type directions. Most measurements were taken in the $`(hk0)`$ plane on the BT-2 and BT-9 triple-axis spectrometers at NIST, using a variety of incident energies (13.7, 14.7, 30.5, and 50 meV) and collimations. For the unpolarized neutron measurements the monochromator and analyzer crystals were pyrolytic graphite (PG), while for polarized beam measurements Heusler alloy polarizers were employed. PG filters were used when appropriate to suppress higher-order wavelength contaminations. Statistical uncertainties quoted represent one standard deviation.

A typical example of the magnetic fluctuation spectrum observed below the Curie temperature ($`T_C=257`$ K) is shown in Fig. 1(a). A $`q`$-independent nuclear incoherent scattering of 2.6 cts/min and a flat background of 1.6 cts/min have been subtracted from these data. At this reduced wave vector of (0.09,0,0) well defined spin wave excitations are observed in neutron energy gain ($`E`$$`<`$0) and energy loss ($`E`$$`>`$0), and the solid curve is a least-squares fit of the spin wave cross section, along with the quasielastic component centered at $`E=0`$, convoluted with the instrumental resolution. Data taken at a series of $`q`$’s reveal that the spin waves obey the usual quadratic dispersion law $`E_{SW}=\mathrm{\Delta }+D(T)q^2`$, with a

negligible spin wave gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, indicative of an isotropic ferromagnet, as has been found for all these CMR ferromagnets . The temperature dependence of the spin stiffness coefficient $`D(T)`$ obtained from these fits is shown in Fig. 1(b), which can be compared with the magnetization determined from the (100) Bragg peak (inset). A well defined Curie temperature of $`T_C=257(1)`$ K is obtained, and there does not appear to be any significant distribution of $`T_C`$’s in the sample. The spin wave stiffness does not seem to collapse at $`T_C`$, but instead we see the development of the quasielastic component as shown in Fig. 1(a). The energy width of this scattering is quadratic in wave vector, with a spin diffusion constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=15(7)`$ meV-Å2 (in this symmetry direction). The temperature evolution of this component is shown in Fig. 1(c), where we see that it attains its maximum intensity close to $`T_C`$. The spin wave intensities, on the other hand, show a decrease as the central component develops, rather than the usual increase of the Bose-Einstein population factor. Finally, Fig. 1(d) shows the correlation length obtained from the $`q`$-dependence of the quasielastic scattering. Below $`T_C`$ the quasielastic scattering is well separated from the spin wave contribution with this relatively good energy resolution (0.15 meV FWHM), while above $`T_C`$ all the scattering is quasielastic. We find a length scale $`16`$ Å that is only weakly temperature dependent. This central peak, with the associated short length scale, has been interpreted as the spin component of polarons . All these detailed results obtained on this high quality single crystal are in good overall agreement with previous measurements on polycrystalline samples , as well as single crystal results on related $`x=1/3`$ doped compounds .

The scattering from a lattice polaron arises from the structural distortion that surrounds a carrier, and traps it. Individual polarons generate diffuse (Huang) scattering around the fundamental Bragg peaks, and we observe such diffuse scattering in the present La0.7Ca0.3MnO3 crystal, which is similar to the scattering from polaron distortions recently reported in the layered manganite La1.2Sr1.8Mn2O7 , and in the half-doped cubic (Nd0.12Sm0.88)0.52Sr0.48MnO3 material . The temperature dependence of this diffuse scattering is shown in Fig. 2 for a wave vector of $`(1.85,2,0)`$. The signal increases rapidly as the Curie temperature is approached from below as the polarons form, while above $`T_C`$ we observe only a weak temperature dependence. This suggests that the number of polarons increases rapidly as $`TT_C`$, while above $`T_C`$ the number is roughly constant.

In addition to the diffuse polaron scattering, we observe well-developed polaron-polaron correlations, which give rise to satellite peaks such as those shown in Fig. 3. This is a scan of the elastic scattering measured around the (4,0,0) nuclear Bragg peak. In the paramagnetic state (280 K) we see two satellite peaks, indicating an ordering wave vector $`(\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{4},0)`$ and equivalent directions. The background scattering at 220 K is also shown, and has a gentle variation which is due to the proximity of an aluminum powder diffraction line from the sample holder; the lower part of the figure shows the subtraction of the

two data sets to obtain the net scattering. These polaron peaks have also been observed around other Bragg peaks such as the (2,0,0), (3,0,0), (5,0,0), (3,1,0), (4,2,0), and (2,2,0), while the intensity around the (0,0,0), (1,0,0), (1,1,0), and (2,1,0) was below our detection limit. This trend for the intensity to increase with increasing $`Q`$ suggests that the dominant contribution to this scattering is from the lattice. This has been directly confirmed by polarized beam measurements, which show that the scattering in these peaks is dominated by the non-spin-flip (lattice) component.

A familiar model that can explain both the ordering wave vector of $`(\frac{1}{4},\frac{1}{4},0)`$ for the lattice polaron scattering as well as the overall behavior of the observed intensities of the short-range correlation peaks is the CE model  developed for the half-doped case. The CE model has an orbitally ordered Jahn-Teller lattice with charge stripes in the  direction, and an antiferromagnetic ground state. Such ordering has been observed for $`x\frac{1}{2}`$, with the lattice and antiferromagnetic ordering at low temperatures . This contrasts with the present ferromagnetic system, where the orbital/charge correlations are short range in nature, occur only above $`T_C`$, and are not accompanied by antiferromagnetic correlations. The lattice part of the CE model would of course need to be modified to accommodate the smaller doping level, but with the same wave vector; so far there is no apparent change in the ordering wave vector with doping. In particular, in the half-doped material the diffuse signal overwhelmed any peaks in the scattering, making it difficult to identify correlations , but the weak structure observed suggested correlations with a wave vector of magnitude $``$0.3-0.35 and in the  direction. In the $`x=0.4`$ bilayer system clear peaks were observed, but the wave vector is in the  direction, and of (incommensurate) magnitude 0.30 . One similarity, however, is that the charge peaks for La0.7Ca0.3MnO3 and the bilayer both have a substantial intrinsic width, indicating that the polaron ordering is short range in nature. The width of the peaks is only weakly temperature dependent, and yields a correlation length of $`10(2)`$ Å (Fig. 3), which is the same basic length scale observed for the quasielastic magnetic scattering \[Fig. 1(d)\]. The polaron peaks in both materials are also elastic, indicating that the polarons are static on a time scale of 1 ps. The polarons are surely hopping, though, and one of the interesting avenues to explore experimentally will be to investigate the nature of these peaks with much higher energy resolution, and in particular to determine if the observed $`q`$-widths are related to dynamics of the polarons instead of static short range order.

Stripe formation has been observed in the related cuprates and nickelates, but the intrinsic magnetism in those systems is always antiferromagnetic in nature. This gives rise to separate satellite peaks associated with the charge and spin order . We have found no evidence for separate magnetic satellites in La0.7Ca0.3MnO3, which is not surprising in this ferromagnetic system where the spin stripes (or spin polaron correlations) would be expected to give a contribution at the same satellite positions as the charge satellites. It might then seem surprising that we observe no significant magnetic component to the satellite peaks. However, the nature of the two types of scattering is quite different. The lattice scattering originates from well-formed (static, on this time scale) Jahn-Teller distorted MnO6 octahedra, which then have a correlation length of $`10`$ Å. The spin stripes would have the same short correlation length, but the magnetic scattering itself has a short correlation range of only $`15`$ Å \[Fig. 1(d)\]. Model calculations then show that the combination of the two short correlation ranges renders the spin stripe scattering too weak to be observed at any of the satellite positions. We conclude then that the scattering of the lattice component of the polarons occurs around the high-$`Q`$ fundamental Bragg peaks, along with the broad satellite peaks associated with polaron-polaron correlations, while the dominant magnetic contribution occurs around the low-$`Q`$ fundamental Bragg reflections, in the form of the quasielastic scattering as we now discuss.

The temperature dependence of the intensity of the satellite peak at (3.75,0.25,0) is shown in Fig. 4. We see that the scattering begins to develop in this sample $`30`$ K below $`T_C`$, rapidly develops as $`TT_C`$, and peaks just above the ordering temperature. This behavior is very similar to the temperature dependence of the resistivity, which is shown as the dashed curve in Fig. 4 (scaled to the peak in the scattering). The intensity of the quasielastic component of the spin fluctuation spectrum \[measured at (1.03,0,0)\] has been similarly scaled and is also shown in the figure. We see that the temperature dependence of the two types of scattering through the ferromagnetic phase transition is virtually identical to the resistivity, indicating that they all have a common origin.

The above experimental results reveal that both the spin and charge correlations associated with the polarons in La0.7Ca0.3MnO3 appear together, and have a very similar spatial and temperature dependence. The metal-insulator crossover in the conductivity also occurs close to $`T_C`$. This coincidence may explain the amplified magnetoresistive effects, as well as the absence of conventional magnetic critical behavior, both in the Ca-doped system as well as in other materials. This behavior is not universal, however. In the higher $`T_C`$ Sr and Ba systems, for example, the polaron formation and conductivity crossover can occur at temperatures substantially higher than the Curie point, reducing the magnetoresistive effects and rendering the spin dynamics more conventional. The physical quantities that control the characteristic temperature for polaron formation, including the role that metallurgical defects play in their formation, still remain to be elucidated.

The work at UM was supported by the NSF, DMR 97-01339, and NSF-MRSEC, DMR 00-80008. The work in Moscow was supported by ISTC grant #636.


format: text

text:
# Black Holes in Centers of Disk Galaxies — — Spectroscopy with a Wide Slit

## 1. Introduction

Motivated by STIS observations of more than 50 nearby galactic nuclei, we consider long-slit emission-line spectra when the slit is wider than the instrumental PSF. This practice is conventionally considered to enhance the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of the data at the price of what may be an insignificant loss in velocity resolution. However, when the target has arbitrarily large velocity gradients, the use of a wide slit can have more subtle effects, because the position and velocity information becomes entangled along the dispersion direction. Here we investigate these effects for emission-line spectra from gaseous disks around a central massive black hole (BH) in galaxies, but they are applicable to any objects with steep velocity gradients (e.g. shocks or contact discontinuities).

## 2. A slit wider than the PSF

For a disk in circular motion in an axisymmetric galactic potential including a massive BH, a wide slit samples off-center velocities, as well as the central rotation curve (dashed line in Fig.1, left). When the disk is observed in some emission line through a long-slit spectrograph, the pattern of intensity resembles the left panel of Fig.1, but it is modified by the geometry of spectrograph’s optics: the diffraction pattern produced by light that enters near one edge of the slit is displaced with respect to light of the same frequency that enters at the corresponding point on the other edge of the slit. Thus the difference in position across the slit is seen on the detector as an instrumental velocity offset. To reflect the light pattern on the detector, the left panel of Fig.1 has to be modified by shifting each sample line in the dispersion direction by a constant amount, different for each line. The result seen in the central panel of Fig.1 shows that in the presence of a velocity gradient across the slit, the instrumental velocity offset competes with the Doppler shifts: this offset wins at large radii, and at small radii the Doppler shifts take over. In between, both factors are of similar strength: light from all positions across the slit converges at one effective velocity, forming the caustic. At radii interior to the caustic, two maxima in the light distribution are present (Fig.1, right): one from the slit center (showing Keplerian rise), and one from the slit edges (passing through zero velocity at the nucleus). Thus we predict position-velocity diagrams for rotating disks to be rich in structure; the information contained in it is lost if one merely fits a Gaussian emission line profile at each radius (which is the traditional approach).

## 3. A new BH mass estimator

The position of the caustic can indicate the presence, and betray the mass $`M_{}`$ of the BH. A wide slit contains many narrow slits within it, and it can provide information that otherwise would need two off-set thin slits. If the caustic occurs at a position $`\alpha `$ down the $`2\delta `$-wide slit, then velocities at the slit center ($`v_c`$) and at the slit edge ($`v_e`$) are related by $`v_c(\alpha )=v_e(\alpha )+B\delta `$, where $`B`$ converts the plate scale in the dispersion direction to the spectrograph’s dispersion. This additional constraint allows us to recover the disk’s inclination angle $`i`$ and $`M_{}`$ independently, rather than $`M_{}\mathrm{sin}i`$. Moreover, this new method exploits an artifact at the outer edge of the BH’s sphere of influence, and therefore gives higher sensitivity to BH detection than traditional methods based on the Keplerian rise in velocity occurring inside the sphere of influence.

## 4. Confronting observations. Conclusions.

The most detailed long-slit spectrum of nuclear emission so far (M84, Bower et al. , 1998, ApJ, 492, L111) shows two light maxima at radii close to the nucleus. Although they were interpreted as coming from two physically distinct nuclear components, the observed light pattern has the same structure as our models in Fig.1, and is caused by a wide slit. We interpret the point where the track of maximum light splits into two as the caustic, from which we estimate the disk to be inclined at 74$`^{}`$, and the BH mass to be $`4\times 10^8`$ M$`_{}`$, smaller than that of Bower et al. by a factor of 4. BH masses derived by the traditional method may be overestimates (Maciejewski & Binney 2000, MNRAS submitted).

The finite width of the slit generates complex patterns in the spectra that can have considerable diagnostic power if they are modeled with adequate sophistication. They allowed us to develop a new method for estimating the BH mass that gives fuller information and higher sensitivity to BH detection than traditional methods.


text:
# Neutrino emission due to Cooper pairing of protons in cooling neutron stars: Collective effects

## Abstract

The process of neutrino-pair radiation due to formation and breaking of Cooper pairs of protons in superconducting cores of neutron stars is considered with taking into account of the electromagnetic coupling of protons to ambient electrons. It is shown that plasma polarization strongly modifies the effective vector weak current of protons. Collective response of ambient electrons to the proton quantum transition contributes coherently to the complete interaction with the neutrino field and enhances the rate of neutrino-pair production by two orders of magnitude.

Except for the early stages of evolution, temperatures inside neutron stars are lower than the critical temperatures for proton superconductivity $`T_{cp}`$ and/or neutron superfluidity $`T_{cn}`$. Conventionally, neutron superfluidity as well as proton superconductivity, exponentially reduce the heat capacity of neutron matter and the rates of neutrino production from nucleon reactions in the core of a neutron star ,  , , . When $`T<T_{cp},T_{cn}`$, nuclear matter in the stellar core consists of two components. One part of nucleons forms a condensate of Cooper pairs, the other one represents unpaired quasi-particles. Both processes, Cooper-pair formation and pair-breaking coexist in statistical equilibrium and result in additional neutrino-pair emission from the neutron star. This mechanism of energy loss from superfluid neutron stars was first proposed and evaluated for neutron singlet-state superfluidity by Flowers et al. , but it has been included into cooling simulations only recently ,  , . It was shown, that the phase transition of neutrons in a superfluid state does not decelerate the process of cooling, but, on the contrary, neutrino emission due to formation and breaking of Cooper pairs accelerates the neutron star cooling.

Cooper pairing of protons take place likely in $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ state . Since the total spin of the Cooper pair in the $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ state is zero, the axial-vector contribution of the weak neutral current vanishes. Contribution to $`\nu \overline{\nu }`$ emissivity comes only from the vector weak interaction. Therefore, neutrino emission produced by proton pairing is conventionally assumed to be strongly suppressed due to the numerical smallness of the weak vector coupling constant of protons . Such inference is made on the basis of calculations which ignored electromagnetic correlations among the charged particles in a QED plasma. Actually, protons in the plasma are coupled to ambient electrons via the electromagnetic field. By undergoing a quantum transition to the paired state, protons polarize the medium, thus inducing the motion of electrons inside the Debye sphere around them. The electron weak current associated to this motion generates neutrinos coherently with the weak current of protons, because the wavelength $`\lambda `$ of radiated neutrino pairs is much larger than the electron Debye screening distance $`D_e`$ (typically, $`D_e^2/\lambda ^210^2`$). In the present article we study an effective weak current of protons with taking into account the collective contribution of ambient electrons, and estimate the neutrino-pair emissivity due to formation and breaking of proton Cooper pairs.

In what follows we use the system of units $`\mathrm{}=c=1`$ and the Boltzmann constant $`k_B=1`$. The low-energy Lagrangian of proton interaction with the neutrino field in vacuum can be written in a point-like approach

$$_{vac}=\frac{G_F}{\sqrt{2}}\overline{\nu }\gamma _\mu \left(1\gamma _5\right)\nu j^\mu ,$$
(1)
where $`G_F`$ is the Fermi coupling constant, and the proton weak current is of the form

$$j^\mu =\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu (C_VC_A\gamma _5)\psi $$
(2)
Here $`\psi `$ stands for the proton field; $`C_V`$ and $`C_A`$ are the vector and axial-vector coupling constants of the proton, respectively. Reserving the capital letter notations $`C_V`$ and $`C_A`$ for proton coupling constants, we will use, at the same time, small letters, $`c_V,`$ for electron coupling constants with $`c_V=\frac{1}{2}+2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W0.96`$ for electron neutrinos, and $`c_V^{}=\frac{1}{2}+2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W0.04`$ for muon and tau neutrinos; $`\theta _W`$ is the Weinberg angle.

To describe the above-mentioned collective effects, one has to include in the matrix element of the reaction two Feynman diagrams shown in Fig. 1. The sum of these diagrams represents the effective weak coupling of in-medium protons with the neutrino field. The matrix element of this interaction should be calculated between exact initial and final states of two proton quasi-particles undergoing quantum transition to the paired state. The first diagram in Fig. 1 represents the proton weak interaction in vacuum, and the second one is the contribution of ambient electrons. Some explanations are necessary here. At the first sight, the second diagram contains additionally a small factor $`e^2=1/137`$. However, the fine structure constant enters the matrix element in a combination with the electron number density, known as the Debye screening distance. Therefore, the parameter of the problem is $`k^2D_e^2`$, where $`k`$ is the momentum carried out by the neutrino-pair. As will be shown, in the case $`k^2D_e^21`$ the second diagram gives an important contribution and should be necessarily included in the matrix element of the reaction.

The electron loop in the second diagram can be expressed in terms of polarization tensors of the electron gas, defined in the one-loop approximation

$$\mathrm{\Pi }^{\mu \rho }\left(K\right)=4\pi ie^2\mathrm{Tr}\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}\gamma ^\mu \widehat{G}(p)\gamma ^\rho \widehat{G}(p+K),$$
(3)
$$\mathrm{\Pi }_5^{\mu \rho }\left(K\right)=4\pi ie^2\mathrm{Tr}\frac{d^4p}{(2\pi )^4}\gamma ^\mu \widehat{G}(p)\gamma ^\rho \gamma _5\widehat{G}(p+K).$$
(4)
Here $`\widehat{G}(p)`$ is the in-medium electron Green’s function, and $`K=(\omega ,𝐤)`$ is the four-momentum transfer. Thus, the in-medium effective weak current of protons is of the following form

$$J^\mu =\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu (C_VC_A\gamma _5)\psi \frac{1}{4\pi }\left(\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\lambda \psi \right)D_{\lambda \rho }\left(c_V\mathrm{\Pi }^{\rho \mu }c_A\mathrm{\Pi }_5^{\rho \mu }\right),$$
(5)
where $`D_{\lambda \rho }\left(K\right)`$ is the photon propagator in the medium. An extra factor $`\left(4\pi \right)^1`$ appears here because the factor $`4\pi `$ is traditionally included in the definition of polarization tensors. The minus sign in front of this factor is due to the fact that the second diagram includes a proton charge $`e>0`$ in the left-hand electromagnetic vertex of the virtual photon, and an electron charge $`e`$ in the right-hand vertex. The corresponding $`e^2`$ factor which appears accordingly to the second diagram, is also included in the definition of polarization tensors.

To write the in-medium photon propagator one has to take into account that the superconducting electric current of protons and the normal electric current of electrons coexist, participating in electromagnetic oscillations of the medium. The total Lagrangian density of the complex field $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ of proton Cooper pairs, and electrons interacting with the electromagnetic field $`A_\mu `$ has the form

$$L=\left|\left(_\mu +2ieA_\mu \right)\mathrm{\Psi }\right|^2+M_{Cp}^2\left|\mathrm{\Psi }\right|^2\lambda \left|\mathrm{\Psi }\right|^4\frac{1}{16\pi }F_{\mu \nu }^2j_\mu ^eA^\mu +L_e^0$$
(6)
where $`\lambda `$is a constant for proton-proton interaction resulting in the proton pairing, and $`M_{Cp}2M_p^{}`$ is the mass of the Cooper pair consisting of two protons of effective mass $`M_p^{}`$; $`F_{\mu \nu }=_\mu A_\nu _\nu A_\mu `$ is the tensor of electromagnetic field; $`j_e^\mu `$ is the electron current, and $`L_e^0`$ is the Lagrangian density of free electrons. As a result of spontaneous breaking of the symmetry of the ground state of the system, the vacuum expectation value of the Cooper pair field is nonzero $`\left|\mathrm{\Psi }\right|^2`$ =$`\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2`$. Since the ground state of the system corresponds to zero spin and zero total momentum of the Cooper pair the vacuum expectation value is connected with the number density of Cooper pairs $`N_s`$ by the relation $`N_s=2E\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2`$, where $`E2M_p^{}`$ is the energy of the Cooper pair corresponding to zero total momentum, and $`N_s`$ is one-half the number density of paired protons $`N_p`$. Thus,

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2=\frac{N_p}{8M_p^{}}.$$
(7)
We represent the field of the Cooper condensate in the form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }=\mathrm{\Psi }_0\left(1+\rho \right)\mathrm{exp}\left(2ie\varphi \right)$$
(8)
where $`\rho `$ and $`\varphi `$ are arbitrary real functions of the coordinates and time, and subsitute in the Lagrangian density (6) for the fields $`\rho `$ and $`\varphi `$. Taking into account the following identity

$$\left|\left(_\mu +2ieA_\mu \right)\mathrm{\Psi }\right|^2=\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2\left(_\mu \rho \right)^2+4e^2\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2\left(A_\mu _\mu \varphi \right)^2\left(1+\rho \right)^2$$
(9)
we can make the gauge transformation $`A_\mu ^{}=A_\mu _\mu \varphi `$. Since the quantity $`F_{\mu \nu }=F_{\mu \nu }^{}=_\mu A_\nu ^{}_\nu A_\mu ^{}`$ as well as the electron current $`j_\mu ^e=j_\mu ^e`$ are gauge-invariant we obtain

$$L=\psi _0^2\left(_\mu \rho \right)^2+4e^2\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2A_\mu ^2\left(1+\rho \right)^2+M_{Cp}^2\left|\psi \right|^2\lambda \left|\psi \right|^4\frac{1}{16\pi }F_{\mu \nu }^2j_\mu ^eA^\mu +L_e^0$$
(10)
As a result, the Goldstone field $`\varphi `$ is absorbed by the gauge transformation. Considering this and taking variations of the Lagrangian with respect to the field $`A^\mu `$, in the linear approximation we obtain the equation

$$_\nu ^\nu A_\mu ^{}+32\pi e^2\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2A_\mu ^{}=4\pi j_\mu ^e,^\mu A_\mu ^{}=0$$
(11)
In the absence of the electron current $`\left(j_\mu ^e=0\right)`$, this equation would describe the eigen photon modes of mass $`m_\gamma =\sqrt{32\pi e^2\mathrm{\Psi }_0^2}=\sqrt{4\pi N_pe^2/M_p^{}}`$. This is the well-known Higgs effect. However, the induced electron current should also be taken into account. In the momentum representation $`4\pi j_\mu ^e=\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mu \nu }A^\nu `$, and the Eq.(11) takes the form

$$K^2A_\mu ^{}m_\gamma ^2A_\mu ^{}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\mu \nu }\left(K\right)A^\nu =0,K^\mu A_\mu ^{}=0$$
(12)
To specify the components of the polarization tensor, we select a basis constructed from the following orthogonal four-vectors $`h^\mu (\omega ,𝐤)/\sqrt{K^2},l^\mu (k,\omega 𝐧)/\sqrt{K^2},`$ where the space-like unit vector $`𝐧=𝐤/k`$ , $`k=|𝐤|`$ is directed along the electromagnetic wave vector $`𝐤`$. Thus, the longitudinal basis tensor can be chosen as $`L^{\rho \mu }l^\rho l^\mu `$. The transverse (with respect to $`𝐤`$) components of $`\mathrm{\Pi }^{\rho \mu }`$ have a tensor structure proportional to the tensor $`T^{\rho \mu }\left(g^{\rho \mu }h^\rho h^\mu +l^\rho l^\mu \right)`$ , where $`g^{\rho \mu }=\mathrm{diag}(1,1,1,1)`$ is the signature tensor. In this basis, the polarization tensor has the following form

$$\mathrm{\Pi }^{\rho \mu }\left(K\right)=\pi _l\left(K\right)L^{\rho \mu }+\pi _t\left(K\right)T^{\rho \mu },$$
(13)
In the case of a strongly degenerate ultrarelativistic electron plasma $`\left(v_F1\right)`$, the longitudinal and transverse polarization functions are Our Eq. (14) differs from Eq. (A39) of the Ref. by an extra factor $`\left(\omega ^2/k^21\right)`$ because our basis $`l^\mu `$, $`h^\mu `$ is different from that used by Braaten and Segel. All components of the complete tensor (13) identically coincide with that obtained in  for the degenerate ultrarelativistic case. :

$$\pi _l=\frac{1}{D_e^2}\left(1\frac{\omega ^2}{k^2}\right)\left(1\frac{\omega }{2k}\mathrm{ln}\frac{\omega +k}{\omega k}\right),$$
(14)
$$\pi _t=\frac{3}{2}\omega _{pe}^2\left(1+\left(\frac{\omega ^2}{k^2}1\right)\left(1\frac{\omega }{2k}\mathrm{ln}\frac{\omega +k}{\omega k}\right)\right).$$
(15)
The electron plasma frequency and the Debye screening distance are defined as

$$\omega _{pe}^2=\frac{4}{3\pi }e^2\mu _e^2=\frac{4\pi n_ee^2}{\mu _e},\frac{1}{D_e^2}=3\omega _{pe}^2,$$
(16)
with $`\mu _e`$ and $`n_e`$ being, respectively, the chemical potential and the number density of electrons. The axial polarization tensor is given by

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_5^{\rho \mu }\left(K\right)=\pi _A\left(K\right)ih_\lambda ϵ^{\rho \mu \lambda 0},\pi _A\left(K\right)=\frac{\sqrt{K^2}}{2\mu _e}\pi _l\left(K\right).$$
(17)
The total energy of neutrino-pairs is $`\omega \mathrm{\Delta }\mu _e`$. When $`\omega k`$, polarization functions differ in the order of magnitude, namely, $`\pi _A\pi _{l,t}\mathrm{\Delta }/\mu _e`$. Therefore, the axial polarization of the medium can be neglected.

In the absence of the electron current, the propagator of a massive photon is of the form

$$D_0^{\mu \nu }=\frac{4\pi }{K^2m_\gamma ^2}\left(g^{\mu \nu }\frac{K^\mu K^\nu }{m_\gamma ^2}\right)$$
(18)
The in-medium photon propagator, taking into account the induced electron current, can be found with the aid of the Dyson’s equation. The solution is:

$$D_{\lambda \rho }\left(K\right)=\frac{4\pi }{K^2m_\gamma ^2\pi _l}L_{\lambda \rho }+\frac{4\pi }{K^2m_\gamma ^2\pi _t}T_{\lambda \rho }\frac{4\pi }{m_\gamma ^2}h_\lambda h_\rho .$$
(19)
Due to conservation and gauge invariance of the electron current $`h_\lambda \mathrm{\Pi }^{\lambda \mu }=\mathrm{\Pi }^{\lambda \mu }h_\mu =0`$, the last term of Eq.( 19) does not contribute to the effective weak current of a proton in the medium.

Insertion of (13) and (19) into (5) with the above approximation yields the effective weak current of a proton in the medium.

$$J^\mu =\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu (C_VC_A\gamma _5)\psi c_V\left(\overline{\psi }\gamma _\lambda \psi \right)\left(\frac{\pi _lL^{\lambda \mu }}{\omega ^2k^2m_\gamma ^2\pi _l}+\frac{\pi _tT^{\lambda \mu }}{\omega ^2k^2m_\gamma ^2\pi _t}\right)$$
(20)
The poles of this expression give the eigen photon modes in the medium. In the case of $`K^2>0`$ the eigen mode frequency $`\omega \left(k\right)`$ is larger than the plasma frequency of electrons. At temperatures $`T<T_c\omega _{pe}`$, the number of such excited oscillations in the medium is exponentially suppressed, therefore contributions from the poles can be neglected.

The contributions of longitudinal and transverse virtual photons to the effective weak current (20) are proportional to the following factors

$$F_l(k,\omega )\frac{\pi _l}{\omega ^2k^2m_\gamma ^2\pi _l}=\frac{\phi \left(x\right)}{D_e^2\omega ^2\left(1x^2\right)m_\gamma ^2D_e^2+\phi \left(x\right)}$$
(21)
$$F_t(k,\omega )\frac{\pi _t}{\omega ^2k^2m_\gamma ^2\pi _t}=\frac{1+\phi \left(x\right)}{2D_e^2\omega ^2\left(1x^2\right)m_\gamma ^2D_e^2\left(1+\phi \left(x\right)\right)}$$
(22)
with $`x=k/\omega `$ and

$$\phi \left(x\right)=x^2\left(1x^2\right)\left(1\frac{1}{2x}\mathrm{ln}\frac{1+x}{1x}\right),m_\gamma ^2D_e^2=\frac{\mu _e}{3M_p^{}}$$
(23)
The latter equality takes into account local neutrality $`N_p=n_e`$ of the medium Strictly speaking, this equality is valid only at zero temperature, when all protons are paired..

The neutrino wave-length is much larger than the Debye screening distance, therefore, $`D_e^2\omega ^2\left(1x^2\right)4\mathrm{\Delta }^2D_e^2\left(1x^2\right)\phi \left(x\right)`$. Neglecting this small term we obtain

$$F_l\left(x\right)=\frac{\phi \left(x\right)}{\phi \left(x\right)m_\gamma ^2D_e^2},F_t\left(x\right)=\frac{1+\phi \left(x\right)}{1+\phi \left(x\right)+m_\gamma ^2D_e^2}.$$
(24)
Due to the electron contribution the effective proton interaction with the neutrino field has a complicated form. According to Eq.(20), the vector part of the effective proton weak current is substantially modified by polarization of the medium. Assuming the proton effective mass to be $`M_p^{}0.8M_p`$, functions $`F_l\left(x\right)`$, $`F_t\left(x\right)`$ are plotted in the Fig. 2 for typical values of the electron chemical potential $`\mu _e100`$ MeV and $`\mu _e200`$ MeV.

For the moment, we shall estimate the contribution of the medium polarization to the neutrino emissivity caused by formation and breaking of proton Cooper pairs and leave the complete calculation for a future work. To roughly estimate the contribution of collective effects, we take advantage of the fact that $`F_l(x)`$ and $`F_t(x)`$ are slowly varying functions, and replace them in Eq.(20) by a constant value $`0.8`$. With this simplification we obtain

$$J^\mu \overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu (C_VC_A\gamma _5)\psi +0.8c_V\left(\overline{\psi }\gamma _\lambda \psi \right)\left(L^{\lambda \mu }+T^{\lambda \mu }\right).$$
(25)
Taking into account the identity $`L^{\lambda \mu }+T^{\lambda \mu }g^{\lambda \mu }h^\lambda h^\mu ,`$ and gauge invariance of the electromagnetic current of protons $`\left(\overline{\psi }\gamma _\lambda \psi \right)_{fi}K^\lambda =0,`$ we can reduce the effective proton weak current (25) as follows

$$J^\mu \overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu (C_V+0.8c_VC_A\gamma _5)\psi .$$
(26)
Thus, the effective vector weak coupling of in-medium protons is of the order of $`C_V+0.8c_V`$ , in contrast to $`C_V=\frac{1}{2}2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W0.04`$ for bare protons in vacuum. If protons interact with electron neutrinos then $`C_V+0.8c_V\mathrm{0.\hspace{0.17em}8}`$ , while for muon and tau neutrinos $`C_V+0.8c_V^{}0.008`$. The total spin of a Cooper pair in the $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}`$ state is zero therefore, the contribution to $`\nu \overline{\nu }`$ emissivity comes only from the vector weak interaction. In previous calculations ,  the $`\nu \overline{\nu }`$ emissivity was proportional to $`C_V^2`$. Taking into account the collective effects, one has to replace $`C_V`$ by $`C_V+0.8c_V`$ for electron neutrinos and by $`C_V+0.8c_V^{}`$ for muon and tau neutrinos. Thus, the $`\nu \overline{\nu }`$ emissivity is enhanced about two orders of magnitude:

$$\frac{Q}{Q_0}\frac{\left(C_V+0.8c_V\right)^2+2\left(C_V+0.8c_V^{}\right)^2}{3C_V^2}133.$$
(27)
This ratio demonstrates the large importance of collective processes in the core of a superconducting neutron star. As $`C_Vc_V`$, the leading contribution to $`Q`$ comes from the weak current of electrons which is electromagnetically induced by the quantum transition of the initial proton.

The neutrino emissivity due to Cooper pairing of protons, as well as that for neutron pairing is proportional to the Fermi momentum of the relevant particles, i.e. it only weakly $`\left(n_{p,n}^{1/3}\right)`$ depends explicitly on the partial number density. Besides that, both the superfluid and the superconducting energy gaps, calculated theoretically, sensitively depend on the model of strong interactions and vary in the range from ten keV to some MeV , ,, . Thus, though the number density of protons is much smaller than that of neutrons, their partial contribution to the total energy losses is very sensitive to the ratio between the energy gaps of neutrons and protons. It can be dominant at some cooling stage, depending on temperature, $`T_{cn}`$, $`T_{cp}`$ , and density. Therefore, the neutrino radiation, caused by a singlet-pairing of protons, should be taken into consideration in the scenario of cooling of superconducting neutron stars at the same level, as other basic processes of neutrino production.

We have shown in the present paper that the effective vector weak current of in-medium protons is strongly modified by ambient electrons. Their weak current, electromagnetically induced by the proton quantum transition, enhances neutrino production due to Cooper pairing of protons by two orders of magnitude. An analogous conclusion can be made about neutrino-pair production due to Cooper pairing of $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ hyperons. Though the vector constant of the weak coupling for $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ hyperons is small relatively to those for neutrons and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^\pm `$, the interaction of $`\mathrm{\Xi }^{}`$ with neutrinos is enhanced in the medium by ambient electrons.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported in part by Spanish Grant DGES PB97- 1432, and the Russian Foundation for Fundamental Research Grant 00-02-16271.

Fig 1. Feynman graphs contributing to the effective proton interaction with a neutrino field in the medium. The first diagram presents the vacuum-like weak interaction. The second diagram, with the electron loop, describes the interaction via an intermediate virtual photon, shown by the dashed line.

Fig 2. Functions $`F_l\left(x\right)`$, $`F_t\left(x\right)`$ are plotted for two cases of the electron chemical potential $`\mu _e100`$ MeV (deshed lines) and $`\mu _e200`$ MeV (solid lines). The proton effective mass $`M_p^{}=0.8M_p`$


text:
# Using the COBE/DMR data as a test-bed for normality assessments

## 1 Introduction

The COBE-DMR data (Smoot et al. 1992) give the distribution of temperature anisotropies of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) on most of the sky with a resolution of about $`10^{}`$. This data set was the first to put constraints on the spectral index and the amplitude of the initial power spectrum (Fixsen et al. 1996). Further analyses of the CMB anisotropies should also give hints on the dominant mechanism which generates the initial density perturbation. As a matter of fact, the simplest inflation models generally predict a normal (Gaussian) distribution of the perturbations whereas the topological defects generate a non-Gaussian distribution.

Many studies aimed at characterising the statistical properties of the COBE/DMR data (Amendola 1996; Kogut et al 1996; Ferreira et al. 1998; Heavens 1998; Pando et al. 1998b; Schmalzing & Gorski 1998; Bromley & Tegmark 1999; Magueijo 2000; Mukherjee et al. 2000). These investigations have relied on various statistical indicators both in the real space (e.g. high order moments of the temperature distribution, Minkowski functionals, genus analysis, …) and in the dual, Fourier or wavelet transformed, space (e.g. N-point correlation functions, cumulants and moments of coefficients, …). The COBE/DMR temperature fluctuations have long been considered Gaussian distributed. However more recently, their statistical nature has been very debated, as some of the groups mentioned above found a non-Gaussian signature in the COBE/DMR four year maps.

Regardless of the implications of such a signature, we use the COBE/DMR data as the only available test bench for applying, on real maps, a method proposed in Aghanim & Forni (1999) and Forni & Aghanim (1999), geared at detecting non-Gaussian features. This method is based on the statistical analysis of the wavelet coefficients obtained after a multi-scale decomposition of the signal. In fact, the non-Gaussian signatures are enhanced in the wavelet space, which makes an analysis in this space more sensitive to the statistical signatures. In this context, the major differences between the methods based on wavelets come from the choices of the decomposition scheme and the wavelet basis. We briefly describe these choices and the method in section 2. We present our results and discuss them in respectively section 3. and section 4. Finally, we give our main conclusions in section 4.

## 2 Data and analysis method

The COBE/DMR four year data was “cleaned” from the contribution of the Galactic foreground emissions using two methods. One is based on a combination technique (linear combination of the DMR maps) and results on what we refer to as the DCMB maps. The second technique is based on the subtraction of the Galaxy contribution and it gives the DSMB maps.

Wavelet analyses were shown to be very useful tools to detect non-Gaussian signatures on simulated CMB maps (Aghanim & Forni 1999; Hobson et al. 1999). They were applied on the COBE/DMR maps by Pando et al. (1998b) and more recently in an exhaustive study by Mukherjee et al. (2000). In this paper, we re-analyse both sets of COBE/DMR data (DCMB and DSMB) to study their statistical nature (Gaussian or non-Gaussian). In order for our conclusions to be the most independent possible of the cleaning method, we have analysed the less contaminated regions of the COBE/DMR sky namely: the northern and the southern poles. These regions are associated respectively with the faces #1 and #6 of the so-called COBE cube on which the data were projected.

Based on the method proposed in Forni & Aghanim (1999), we decompose the signal on the wavelet basis and compute the kurtosis which is the fourth order moment of the wavelet coefficient distribution. We thus derive the excess of kurtosis that is the deviation from the predicted value in a Gaussian distribution. The values obtained are compared with the excesses of kurtosis calculated using 2000 Gaussian realisations of the COBE/DMR maps. These Gaussian realisations have the same power spectra as the COBE/DMR maps with truly random phases, everything else (pixel sizes, coverage) being kept the same. Any statistical difference between the excess of kurtosis measured on COBE/DMR and those measured on the associated Gaussian realisations should thus be associated with the non-Gaussian character of the data.

The wavelet analysis consists in hierarchically decomposing an input signal into a series of successively lower resolution “reference” signals and their associated “detail” signals (Mallat 1989). At each decomposition level, L, the reference signal has a resolution reduced by a factor of $`2^\mathrm{L}`$ with respect to the input signal. Due to the orthogonality properties of the basis, a function can be completely characterised by the wavelet basis and the wavelet coefficients of the decomposition. We test the detection of non-gaussianity against the wavelet basis in the “dyadic” decomposition scheme. We will compare our results with a study based on an alternative decomposition scheme: the “pyramidal” decomposition (Mukherjee et al. 2000). The dyadic decomposition is a transform in which, at each level L, only the reference signal (low-pass part of the signal) is decomposed. At each decomposition level, the analysis is applied in both directions and the total number of sub-bands after L levels of decomposition is 3L+1. The pyramidal decomposition is similar to the previous decomposition in the sense that only the reference sub-band is decomposed at each level. However, it is performed here separately in the two directions of the image. The total number of sub-bands after L levels of decomposition is then $`(\mathrm{L}+1)^2`$.

The choice of the wavelet basis is critical to test for non-gaussianity. We expect that the non-Gaussian features are due to point sources or sharp gradients in the signal. The detection of non-gaussianity is based on the search of these gradients. We therefore choose to use anti-symmetric wavelets which are proportional to, or almost proportional to, a first derivative operator and thus particularly sensitive to gradients. In practice, we choose the 6/10 tap filter (filter #3) of Villasenor et al. (1995) mainly used in data compression. It has, in fact, a very good impulse response and a low shift variance which better preserve the amplitude and the location of the details. We have also used the commonly used Haar wavelet which is also an anti-symmetric function.

In the dyadic wavelet decomposition and using the anti-symmetric wavelet basis, we can discriminate between the coefficients associated with vertical, horizontal and diagonal gradients. They are analogous to the partial derivatives, respectively $`/x`$, $`/y`$ and $`^2/xy`$ of the signal.

The maps we analyse have $`32\times 32`$ pixels, with a pixel of $`2.8^{}`$ aside. Due to this reduced number, we restrict to a three level decomposition. The three decomposition scales (hereafter I, II and III) correspond respectively to an angular scale $`\theta =5.6^{}`$ (that is a multipole order $`\mathrm{}=35.7`$), $`\theta =11.2^{}`$ ($`\mathrm{}=17.8`$), and $`\theta =22.4^{}`$ ($`\mathrm{}=8.9`$).

## 3 Results

### 3.1 North galactic pole

We test for the detection of a non-Gaussian signature in the COBE/DMR, DCMB map, of the north galactic pole against 2000 Gaussian realisations of this map. First using the Haar wavelet basis in a three level decomposition, we compute the excesses of kurtosis of the coefficients associated with the details for the COBE map ($`k_{COBE}^1`$, see Table 1), and the Gaussian realisations. We give, in this case, the mean excess of kurtosis $`\overline{k}`$ and the standard deviations $`\sigma _{}`$ and $`\sigma _+`$ with respect to this mean for the quantities that are respectively smaller and larger than $`\overline{k}`$. Finally, we compare the obtained results and quantify the probability P that the measured excess of kurtosis on the COBE map ($`k_{COBE}^1`$) indicates a non-Gaussian process. This probability is computed by integrating the excess of kurtosis distribution for the Gaussian realisations, one example of which is shown in Figure 1. It ranges between about 50 and 99% depending on the decomposition scale and on the type of details we study. We note that the non-Gaussian signature is detected at all scales with at least a probability larger than 68%. However, the most significant detections at about the 98 and 99% confidence levels are obtained respectively at the second and third scales where the beam and noise effects are expected to be less dominant. In the case of the Villasenor et al. wavelet basis, the probability of detecting a non-Gaussian signature in the DCMB COBE/DMR #1 map lies between about 67 and 98% (see Table 2). Again this detection is made at all scales.

We perform the same analysis using the two wavelet basis on the COBE map obtained with the second subtraction technique (DSMB maps). In Table 5, we give the probability for the excess of kurtosis, measured on the COBE/DMR map, to be associated with the detection of a non-Gaussian signal. We note again that the probabilities indicate a non-Gaussian process at all scales. The Haar basis seems however to give smaller (less discriminating) values than the Villasenor et al. basis.

### 3.2 South galactic pole

Using the power spectrum of the COBE/DMR #6 map (DCMB) of the south galactic pole, we again simulate 2000 Gaussian realisations of this map. We perform the wavelet decomposition using the Haar and the Villasenor et al. bases, and analyse the statistical properties of each type of details. As for the north pole, we compute the excess of kurtosis in the COBE/DMR map ($`k_{COBE}^6`$) and the probability, P, that it belongs to the distribution of the excesses of kurtosis of the Gaussian realisations. The latter is characterised by its mean $`\overline{k}`$ and standard deviations $`\sigma _{}`$ and $`\sigma _+`$ of respectively smaller and larger values with respect to the mean. The results are summarized in Tables 3 and 4.

At first sight, these results suggest that the southern hemisphere distribution is more Gaussian than its northern hemisphere counterpart. As a matter of fact, the probability that the excess of kurtosis $`k_{COBE}^6`$ measured on the COBE DCMB map indicates a non-Gaussian process lies between 53 and 92% for the Haar wavelet basis and between 47 and 87% for the Villasenor et al. wavelet. At all scales, we measure a probability larger than 68% for at least one type of details. However, these values are always smaller than those obtained for the northern hemisphere.

When we analyse the DSMB map of the southern hemisphere (Table 5), we note the same behaviour: the non-Gaussian signature is weaker in the south than in the north. The probabilities lie between 44 and 87% for the Haar wavelet basis, and between 45 and 98% for the Villasenor et al. basis. The highest probabilities, in this case, are obtained at the second decomposition scale.

### 3.3 Scale-scale correlation spectra

Another method to detect a non-Gaussian signature consists in using the scale-scale correlations as proposed by Pando et al. (1998a), Pando et al. (1998b) and Mukherjee et al. (2000). The correlations between structures at adjacent decomposition scales are quantified. They can be computed using the expression given in Mukherjee et al. (2000):

$$C_{j_1,j_2}=$$

$$\frac{2^{k_1+k_2}_{l_1=0}^{2^{k_1}1}_{l_2=0}^{2^{k_2}1}<b_{j_1,j_2,\frac{l_1}{2},\frac{l_2}{2}}^2b_{k_1,k_2,l_1,l_2}^2>}{_{l_1=0}^{2^{k_1}1}_{l_2=0}^{2^{k_2}1}b_{j_1,j_2,\frac{l_1}{2},\frac{l_2}{2}}^2_{l_1=0}^{2^{k_1}1}_{l_2=0}^{2^{k_2}1}b_{k_1,k_2,l_1,l_2}^2}.$$
(1)
In this expression, the $`b_{j_1,j_2,l_1,l_2}`$ represent the coefficients in the wavelet decomposition. $`C_{j_1,j_2}`$ gives the correlation factor between the coefficients in the domain ($`j_1,j_2`$) and its adjacent scale ($`k_1,k_2`$), where $`k_1=j_1+1`$ and $`k_2=j_2+1`$, for a Gaussian signal $`C_{j_1,j_2}=1`$. In order to assess the gain brought by this further step of analysis, we proceed as previously. We first compute the scale-scale correlation coefficients for our 2000 Gaussian realisations of the COBE/DMR maps after decomposing them on three scales with the Haar and Villasenor et al. bases. We then compute the scale-scale correlations for the “real” COBE maps and finally compute the probability that the measured numbers indicate a non-Gaussian signature by using the distribution of correlations for the Gaussian maps.

The results are summarized in Table 6. They basically agree with those obtained by Mukherjee et al. (2000) when the comparison can be made, that is for the diagonal details. The probabilities for the correlations between scales I and II in the north galactic pole lie between 64 and 76%, with the Haar basis, and between 62 and 99% with the Villasenor et al. basis. When we correlate scales II and III, we find a probability of 69 to 96%, with Haar; whereas it is of 61 to 88% with the Villasenor et al. basis. In the south galactic pole, the probability for the correlation coefficients between scales I and II to be associated with a non-Gaussian signal ranges between 60 and 94% with the Haar basis, and between 63 and 98% with the Villasenor et al. basis. Correlating scale II and scale III, the probabilities are between 44 and 87% with Haar and between 50 and 97% with Villasenor et al. The results obtained with the correlation coefficients agree with the direct analysis of the wavelet coefficients. However, they seem to give larger non-Gaussian signatures for the south pole than the direct analysis.

## 4 Discussion and conclusions

At each decomposition scale, we detected a non-Gaussian signature using three different criteria related to the horizontal, vertical and diagonal details of the image. We tested and compared the sensitivity to non-Gaussian features of the south and north pole maps obtained after subtracting the Galaxy with two techniques. We thus analysed this four map set with two wavelet bases used in a three level dyadic decomposition. All the results are summarized in Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

This rather exhaustive study leads to two main conclusions. One is that the analysis of the COBE maps is rather sensitive to the choice of the wavelet basis when the same decomposition scheme is used. The second conclusion is that the non-Gaussian signature is detected with a probability of 99%. At the first and second decomposition scales, the high probalities are very likely associated with some instrumental effects, such as pixel to pixel correlations or Poisson noise, or systematic effects (Banday et al. 2000). At the third decomposition scale (which is less affected by the instrumental effects), we detect a non-Gaussian signature with a probability $`<`$ 95% in the southern hemisphere, whereas in the northern hemisphere, it is detected with a probability close to 99%. We have compared our results to those obtained by Mukherjee et al. (2000). Namely, we compare the results they obtain for what they note $`k=32`$, 16 and 8, which correspond exactly to what we refer to as the diagonal details for respectively the first, second and third decomposition scales. We used the dyadic decomposition advocated by Aghanim et al. (1998); Forni & Aghanim (1999); Aghanim & Forni (1999) rather than the pyramidal decomposition used in Hobson et al. (1999) and in Mukherjee et al. (2000). This choice is motivated by the fact that this particular decomposition scheme gives the correlations between the two directions of the map at each scale. It is not the case with the pyramidal decomposition which treats both directions as if they were independent. Another advantage of the dyadic decomposition is that, for each decomposition scale, the analysis bears upon the maximum number of coefficients possible. This is crucial for statistics in general and for the small COBE maps (#1 and 6) in particular.

The comparison between our results, obtained with the Villasenor et al. wavelet basis, and those of Mukherjee et al. (2000) shows that our non-gaussianity detection technique gives every time higher confidence levels except for two cases which are the first decomposition scale of the southern hemisphere (DCMB and DSMB maps). When we use the Haar wavelet basis, our confidence levels are higher than, or similar to, those quoted in Mukherjee et al. (2000) except for two cases that are the third decomposition scale of the northern and southern hemisphere of the DSMB map. Of course in addition to the diagonal details, we have two other criteria to detect the non-Gaussian signature (vertical and horizontal details). In particular, for the cases where the probability is smaller than in Mukherjee et al. (2000) we find a non-Gaussian signature based on the vertical or/and the horizontal details.

In our study, we find that the Villasenor et al. wavelet basis combined with a dyadic decomposition gives higher probabilities than the pyramidal decomposition. This basis is also more sensitive than the Haar basis. The better performances in detecting gradients come from the larger size of its kernel (Villasenor et al. 1995). However, this could become a weakness when a small number of pixels is available (small maps or high decomposition levels). In this case, the Haar wavelet basis could be more adapted due to the smaller size of its kernel.

Our choice of wavelet basis and decomposition scheme confirms that a non-Gaussian signature can be detected either in the south or the north galactic pole. It seems however that the statistical signature is less significant in the southern pole. In this case, the largest probability, $`>95`$%, is obtained only at the second decomposition scale for the DSMB COBE/DMR #6 map. The non-Gaussian signature is more significant for the north galactic pole as the probability is often $`95`$% and can even reach 99%. The scale-scale correlations represent a step further in the statistical analysis of the signal. However in our case, it does not make a significant improvement in the results. The non-Gaussian signature is indeed detected with a probability of 99% at most, such as in the direct analysis.

The large size of the beam and pixels (respectively 7 and 2.8) results in a rather small number of wavelet coefficients. This, together with the low signal to noise ratio of the COBE/DMR data, represent very limiting factors which prevent us from drawing any hasty conclusion from the rather marginal detections of the non-Gaussian signatures. This kind of statistical analyses will soon demonstrate all their performances when applied to the new generation of CMB data sets of higher sensitivity and resolution (Boomerang (De Bernardis et al. 2000) and Maxima (Hanany et al. 2000)). We thus expect that these studies will then put constraints on the primordial non-Gaussian contributions such as the topological defects suggested for example in Bouchet et al. (2000).

###### Acknowledgements.

This work is dedicated to the memory of our colleague Richard Gispert. We wish to thank G. Lagache for her help with the COBE data and E. Martinez-Gonzales for fruitful discussions. We also thank an anonymous referee for his helpful comments and suggestions.


text:
# Universal amplitude ratios in finite-size scaling: three-dimensional Ising model

## 1 INTRODUCTION

Divergent correlation lengths of a statistical system approaching a critical point establish the symmetry of scale invariance on which finite-size scaling theory is based. In a continuum critical theory, however, there are additional symmetries present, namely translational, rotational and inversion invariance. The implications of the group of these symmetries, as explored in conformal field theory , go far beyond simple scaling theory, especially for two-dimensional systems, where the whole content of scaling operators as well as for example higher correlation functions can be generically extracted from this symmetry.

As for a prominent result, conformal invariance suffices to determine the critical two-point function in the plane. Using a conformal (logarithmic) transformation that wraps the plane around an infinite-length cylinder one thus arrives at an expression for the correlation function of a primary (conformally covariant) operator on the cylinder , a geometry one generically considers in transfer matrix calculations. The fact that this transformation does only affect the radial but not the angular part of the coordinates led Cardy  to a generalization for the higher-dimensional geometries $`S^{d1}\times \mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}`$. Thus, exactly as in two dimensions, the large distance exponential decay of correlations is determined by a correlation length that is given by the inverse of the scaling dimension $`x`$ of the operator under consideration,

$$\xi =\frac{R}{x},$$
(1)
where $`R`$ is the radius of $`S^{d1}`$. It has to be noted, however, that the meaning of a primary operator is a priori not well defined in three dimensions111For an ansatz for its definition see  and references therein. so that this result has to be considered a conjecture and a numerical analysis is more than an exercise in this case.

A first attempt to establish such evidence using the Hamiltonian formulation of the Ising model and Platonic solids as discretization of the sphere $`S^2`$ was inconclusive due to the restricted number and size of regular polyhedra . Using approximate quadrangulations we are able to check Cardy’s conjecture for systems sufficiently large to carry out a proper finite-size scaling (FSS) analysis.

## 2 LATTICE DISCRETIZATION

There are several straightforward choices for model lattices with spherical topology ; the more natural are variants of a rectangular mesh on a cube. Different refinements can be applied to reduce the concentration of the curvature around the corners of the cube such as filling in triangles instead of the cube corners or projecting the cube on the sphere by varying the link lengths, i.e., applying an appropriate site-dependent weight function to the action. For those cube-like lattices, however, differences in the scaling behavior of bulk quantities are found to be quite small . As for our observables, there is some evidence to believe that ratios of correlation lengths of primary operators are universal , so that we can expect good agreement regardless of the lattice used if Cardy’s conjecture holds. For the amplitudes themselves one might find effects of the non-uniformity of the lattice, but would not expect them to become visible until a very high level of precision is reached. We thus here use the simple cubic approximation to the sphere by six $`L\times L`$ square lattices with suitably chosen boundary conditions; effects of the discretization will be considered elsewhere .

Having chosen a lattice approximation to the sphere one has to fix a definition of the radius $`R`$ of the sphere the cube with edge length $`L`$ should correspond to. As is easily checked the three possibilities of assigning a unit area to each lattice site, each pair of bonds, or each lattice square, respectively, lead to total lattice areas of

$$A=\{\begin{array}{ccc}6L& (L2)+8\hfill & \mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}\mathrm{sites}\mathrm{"},\hfill \\ 6L& (L2)+6\hfill & \mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}\mathrm{bonds}\mathrm{"},\mathrm{`}\mathrm{`}\mathrm{squares}\mathrm{"},\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
and generate via the relation $`R=\sqrt{A/4\pi }`$ two different sorts of pseudo radii, which only differ by a constant shift, thus leading to slightly different approaches to the leading FSS amplitude.

## 3 SIMULATIONAL DETAILS

We consider a classical, ferromagnetic, nearest-neighbor Ising model with Hamiltonian

$$=J\underset{i,j}{}s_is_j,s_i=\pm 1$$
(3)
on lattices compound of the above described cubic discretizations of the sphere times a linear direction of length $`L_z`$, modelling the $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}`$-direction. In order to minimize the effect of a finite $`L_z`$ it was (self-consistently) chosen so that $`L_z/\xi 15`$ and periodic boundary conditions in $`z`$-direction were applied. Simulations were done using the Wolff single-cluster update algorithm at an inverse temperature $`\beta =\mathrm{0.221\hspace{0.17em}654\hspace{0.17em}4}(3)`$ , checking for the influence of a temperature shift off the critical point by reweighting. To enable a proper FSS analysis system sizes ranging from $`L=4`$ to $`L=12`$ were used, corresponding to radii from about $`2`$ to $`8`$ and overall lattice volumes of $`\mathrm{6\hspace{0.17em}000}`$ to $`\mathrm{300\hspace{0.17em}000}`$ spins.

Since the densities of energy and magnetization are (the only) primary operators in the two-dimensional Ising model and the lowest lying states of the two sectors, we here consider the amplitudes of the corresponding (exponential) correlation lengths $`A_{\sigma /ϵ}=\xi _{\sigma /ϵ}/R`$ and their ratio. Simulational measurements were done for the (connected) correlation functions $`G^c(z)`$ of these operators using a zero mode projection. Estimators for the correlation lengths that eliminate additive and multiplicative constants in the exponential decay are then given by

$$\xi (z)=\mathrm{\Delta }\left[\mathrm{ln}\frac{G^c(z)G^c(z\mathrm{\Delta })}{G^c(z+\mathrm{\Delta })G^c(z)}\right]^1,$$
(4)
with $`\mathrm{\Delta }=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$, from which overall estimates $`\xi (R)`$ are formed by averaging. A jackknife technique was used to reduce estimator bias and for the error analysis; for details see .

## 4 NUMERICAL RESULTS

Using the above described procedures one ends up with scaling plots for the correlation lengths as shown in Fig. 1(a) for the magnetization density that show an almost perfect linear behavior and invisible differences between the different radii definitions according to Eq. (2). Plotting the amplitudes $`\xi /R`$ (Fig. 1(b)), however, reveals the presence of corrections to scaling that enforce the use of nonlinear fits of the form

$$\xi (R)=AR+BR^\alpha ,$$
(5)
with a free parameter $`\alpha `$ that introduces a systematic error to the final amplitudes $`A_{\sigma /ϵ}`$ due to higher order corrections. A combination of the fits for the two sorts of radii gives the amplitudes

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill A_\sigma & =& 1.996(20),\hfill \\ \hfill A_ϵ& =& 0.710(38),\hfill \end{array}$$
(6)
which agree well with the conjectured amplitudes

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}\hfill A_\sigma ^{\mathrm{conj}}& =& 1/x_\sigma & =& 1.9324(19),\hfill \\ \hfill A_ϵ^{\mathrm{conj}}& =& 1/x_ϵ& =& 0.70711(35),\hfill \end{array}$$
(7)
taking into account the systematic error due to the different radii definitions that is of the same order of magnitude as the statistical error. The amplitude ratios compare as:

$$\begin{array}{ccccc}A_\sigma /A_ϵ& =& & & 2.81(15),\hfill \\ A_\sigma ^{\mathrm{conj}}/A_ϵ^{\mathrm{conj}}& =& x_ϵ/x_\sigma & =& 2.7326(16).\hfill \end{array}$$
(8)
## 5 CONCLUSIONS

The presumably universal ratio of the amplitudes of the spin and energy correlation lengths of the Ising model on a cubic model of $`S^2\times \mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}`$ agrees with the inverse ratio of the scaling dimensions as conjectured by Cardy for the continuum case. Moreover, corrections to scaling due to the non-uniform distribution of curvature over the lattice that might influence the amplitudes themselves seem not to be very important at the given level of accuracy; only the slightly shifted result for the spin amplitude $`A_\sigma `$ might indicate the onset of such effects. In connection with the results for systems with toroidal cross section  this seems to indicate a deeper analogy between the 2D and 3D situations. In this latter case, however, the system is not conformally related to a flat space which renders impossible an analytical treatment of Cardy’s kind. In the spherical case, on the other hand, conformal flatness is fulfilled, but the algebraic meaning of the primarity of an operator remains unclear. Thus our result shows that spin and energy densities of the 3D Ising model are primary operators, taking Eq. (1) as a definition of primarity in three dimensions.

MW thanks the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft for support through the Graduiertenkolleg “Quantum Field Theory”.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

CP violation was first measured in  long ago, in the mixing of the neutral kaons, the so called indirect CP violation, whereas it was not until recently that direct violation, in the decay amplitudes to two pions, was experimentally established (see  and references therein). There are at present a few dedicated experiments in project to make precision measurements of the CP breaking parameters. The analysis of their data may require to take properly into account the effects of decoherence due to entanglement of the neutral kaon system with the environment in which it evolves, which entails a pure kaon state to evolve into a mixed one. We consider the evolution of neutral kaons in the presence of matter, in an environment that is not the perfect vacuum, which generates departures from hamiltonian dynamics in the kaon sub-system. These are effects that exist in addition to the weak interactions and are dominated by the strong interactions of the kaons and the environment: they lead to and effective breaking of charge conjugation, because the environment is made of matter, not of anti-matter; and to an effective breaking of time-reversal invariance associated to the large number of degrees of freedom in the environment that leads to irreversibility.

Similar analysis can be found in the literature , , . There, the motivation is to study decoherence effects that come from quantum gravity. Ours is the interaction with the environment that is not the vacuum.

The neutral kaon evolution in the vacuum is analyzed with the Schrödinger equation

$$i\dot{\rho }(t)=H\rho (t)\rho (t)H^{},$$
(1)
where $`H`$ is the LOY  effective hamiltonian $`H=_{I=S,L}\lambda _I|K\stackrel{~}{K}_I|`$, which is not hermitean and its eigenstates $`\lambda _I=m_I\frac{i}{2}\gamma _I`$ possess a non-vanishing imaginary part of their decay rates. $`S,L`$ stand for the short and long components, and $`|\stackrel{~}{K}_I`$ are such that $`\stackrel{~}{K}_I|K_J=\delta _{IJ}`$. Recall that $`m_Sm_L500MeV`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }m=m_Lm_S=3.5\times 10^{12}MeV`$, $`\gamma _S=7.3\times 10^{12}MeV`$ and $`\gamma _S=1.3\times 10^{14}MeV`$.

The $`|K_I`$ have diagonal evolution $`|K_I(t)=e^{i\lambda _It}|K_I(0)`$. In terms of the CP eigenstates

$$|K_S=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+|ϵ_S|^2}}\left(|K_1+ϵ_S|K_2\right),|K_L=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+|ϵ_L|^2}}\left(|K_2+ϵ_L|K_1\right);$$
(2)
they reduce to $`|K_1`$, $`|K_2`$, respectively, i.e., to the CP eigenstates $`\frac{1}{2}\left(|K^0\pm |\overline{K}^0\right)`$ if CP is conserved.

At this point we recall that CPT conservation requires $`ϵ_S=ϵ_L`$; T invariance, $`ϵ_S+ϵ_L=0`$; and CP, $`ϵ_S=ϵ_L=0`$.

Indirect CP violation has been measured

$$ϵ2.3\times 10^3e^{i\pi /4},$$
(3)
(CPT conservation is assumed, $`ϵ_S=ϵ_Lϵ`$.) Direct CP violation has also been measured

$$ϵ^{}/ϵ2\times 10^3,$$
(4)
where

$$\frac{A(K_L\pi ^+\pi ^{})}{A(K_S\pi ^+\pi ^{})}ϵ+ϵ^{},\frac{A(K_L\pi ^0\pi ^0)}{A(K_S\pi ^0\pi ^0)}ϵ2ϵ^{}.$$

## 2 Interaction with the environment

The evolution of the total system \[Kaon + (Large) Environment\] is unitary, with the time evolution operator given by $`U(t)=\mathrm{exp}(iH_{Total}t)`$; whereas the dynamics of the kaon sub-system alone is obtained by tracing out the environment degrees of freedom:

$$\rho _K(t)=Tr_{ENV}\left(U(t)\rho _{K+ENV}(0)U^{}(t)\right).$$
(5)
This gives a complicated evolution for $`\rho _K`$, even if the initial conditions are a direct product $`\rho _{K+ENV}(0)=\rho _K(0)\rho _{ENV}(0)`$. However, when the interaction is tiny (e.g., as in the case of a diluted environment) the dynamics of $`\rho _K`$ becomes approximately free from memory effects (Markovian), and it is dictated by a Lindblad master equation of the form

$$\dot{\rho }=i\left(H_{eff}\rho (t)\rho (t)H_{eff}^{}\right)+\underset{n}{}\left(A_n\rho A_n^{}\frac{1}{2}\rho A_n^{}A_n\frac{1}{2}A_n^{}A_n\rho \right),$$
(6)
(henceforth $`\rho `$ stands for $`\rho _K`$). Memory effects are being neglected. Notice that the new piece is linear in $`\rho `$ but quadratic in the unspecified operators $`A_n`$: the Lindblad equation encodes a new dynamics that is not purely hamiltonian. The new term entails decoherence, it makes pure states evolve into mixed states. Since the opposite process does not occur, i.e, no mixed state evolves to a pure one, we demand that the von Neumann entropy $`\rho \mathrm{log}\rho `$ should not increase, under evolution with the new piece only.

The operators $`A_n`$ are governed by the strong interactions and the properties of the medium. Since strong interactions conserve strangeness, which in the absence of the weak interactions would become a superselection quantum number, we further demand that any density matrix, at large times, should end up as a mixture of $`|K^0`$ and $`|\overline{K}^0`$.

The most general parametrization that satisfies the above considerations leads, for the two state neutral kaon system, to a non-hamiltonian contribution in (6)

$$\left(\begin{array}{cccc}0& 0& 0& 0\\ 0& s_1& 0& 0\\ 0& 0& s_{22}& s_{23}\\ 0& 0& s_{23}& s_{33}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\rho ^0\\ \rho ^1\\ \rho ^2\\ \rho ^3\end{array}\right).$$
(7)
where in the CP eigenbasis $`\rho \frac{1}{2}(\rho ^0I+\stackrel{}{\rho }\stackrel{}{\sigma })`$.

The matrix $`s_{ij}`$ is symmetric, $`s_1,s_{22},s_{33}>0`$, it has positive eigenvalues the smallest of which is $`s_1`$. They also verify the relations

$$s_1s_{22}+s_{33},s_{33}^2(s_1s_{22})^2,$$

$$s_{22}s_1+s_{33},s_{22}^2(s_1s_{33})^2,$$

$$s_{33}s_1+s_{22},s_1^2(s_{22}s_{33})^2.$$

The hamiltonian part gets a contribution $`H_l`$ that is of the order $`o(s_{ij})`$.

For example, in an environment of infinitely heavy particles which act as scattering centers, since no entaglement is generated $`s_{ij}=0`$ and $`H_l`$ adopts the Kabir-Good form

$$(H_l)_{KabirGood}=\frac{2\pi n}{m_K}\left(f_{K^0}(0)|K^0K^0|+f_{\overline{K}^0}(0)|\overline{K}^0\overline{K}^0|\right);$$
(8)
$`f(0)`$ is the forward scattering amplitude of the kaon with one center and $`n`$ stands for the density of scatterers.

## 3 Estimates

Can these effects be detected? How large do we expect them be? In order to work out the time evolution of the density matrix from equation (6) we assume $`\frac{s_{ij}}{\mathrm{\Delta }m}`$ of the order of the smallest observed effect $`ϵ^{}10^6`$. With the hierarchy

$$\gamma _L/\gamma _S,ϵ10^3>>\delta _K,\frac{s_{ij}}{\mathrm{\Delta }m},ϵ^{},ϵ^210^6,$$

we calculate the evolution up to $`o(\frac{s_{ij}}{\mathrm{\Delta }m})`$. Here, $`\delta _K=\frac{ϵ_Lϵ_S}{2}|_{eff}`$ ammounts to effective CPT breaking, coming from the hamiltonian part of the new piece in (reflindblad). On dimensional grounds we take $`s\sigma n`$, and $`\frac{s}{\mathrm{\Delta }m}\frac{\sigma n}{\mathrm{\Delta }m}o(ϵ^{})10^6`$ can be achieved with $`n10^{20}/cm^3[N_{Avogadro}/cm^3]/1000`$, where $`\sigma 1fm^2`$.

In the basis $`|K_S,|K_L`$ the hamiltonian part of the evolution is straightforwardly obtained, to all orders in $`ϵ_S,ϵ_L`$, if needed. With the notation

$$\overline{\gamma }_L=\gamma _L+\frac{s_{33}}{2},\overline{\gamma }_S=\gamma _S+\frac{s_{33}}{2},\gamma =\gamma _S+\gamma _L+s_1+s_{22};$$

$$x_{33}=\frac{s_{33}}{2\gamma _S},x_{23}=\frac{s_{23}}{2|\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda |},x=\frac{s_{22}s_1}{2\mathrm{\Delta }m},\varphi =\mathrm{Arg}\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda .$$

.

$$\mathrm{\Delta }\lambda \lambda _L\lambda _S=(m_Lm_S)+\frac{i}{2}(\gamma _S\gamma _L),$$

the time evolution of an initial $`|K^0`$ reads, tto first order in perturbation theory,

$$\rho _{SS}(t)=\frac{x_{33}}{2}e^{\overline{\gamma }_Lt}x_{23}\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Delta }mt+\varphi )e^{\frac{1}{2}\gamma t}+\left(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{Re}ϵ_L+2(\mathrm{Re}ϵ)^2\frac{x_{33}}{2}+x_{23}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)e^{\overline{\gamma }_St}$$

$$\rho _{LL}(t)=\left(\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{Re}ϵ_S+2(\mathrm{Re}ϵ)^2+\frac{x_{33}}{2}x_{23}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \right)e^{\overline{\gamma }_Lt}+x_{23}\mathrm{cos}(\mathrm{\Delta }mt\varphi )e^{\frac{1}{2}\gamma t}\frac{x_{33}}{2}e^{\overline{\gamma }_St}$$

$`\rho _{SL}(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{x_{23}}{2}}e^{i\varphi }e^{\overline{\gamma }_Lt}+\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{1(ϵ_S^{}+ϵ_L)+4(\mathrm{Re}ϵ)^2}{2}}+ix_{23}\mathrm{sin}\varphi \right)e^{i\mathrm{\Delta }mt}+{\displaystyle \frac{x}{2}}\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Delta }mt)\right]e^{\frac{1}{2}\gamma t}`$ (9)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{x_{23}}{2}}e^{i\varphi }e^{\overline{\gamma }_St}`$
and similarly for the $`|\overline{K}^0`$.

## 4 How can the new effects be uncovered?

The new effects cannot be completely absorbed by redefinitions of the parameters in the effective hamiltonian. Except for $`ϵ^{}/ϵ`$, in all the other CP violating asymmetries that have been measured so far associated with the decays into $`2\pi `$ and semileptonic into $`\pi ^\pm l\nu `$, they give subleading contributions and are thus expected to bear little influence in the analysis.

Furthermore, in the experiments that have been performed, all the measured observables correspond either to detection of decay rates at large times, when only the $`K_L`$ component survives, or to integrated rates. The exception is CPLEAR where the time evolution can be traced in the interval $`\tau _S<t<20\tau _S`$. We find that a better determined time evolution could help in measuring the new parameters of the experiment. It is also found that it is rather the symmetric combinations of rates that single out the new coefficients. For example, at large times

$$P(K^0\pi \pi ;t)\stackrel{\gamma _St1}{}\frac{1}{2}(x_{33}+|ϵ|^2)e^{\overline{\gamma _L}t},$$

with an independent measure of $`ϵ`$ the parameter $`x_{33}=\frac{s_{33}}{2\gamma _S}`$ could be determined -the normalization can be obtained from small t. It also appears as subleading in

$$P(K^0\overline{K}^0)+P(\overline{K}^0K^0)\stackrel{\gamma _St1}{}\left(\frac{1}{2}+4(Reϵ)^2+x_{33}\right)e^{\overline{\gamma _L}t},$$

from which only an extremely precise experiment could determine it.

Furthermore, mathematically, at short times

$$P(K^0\overline{K}^0)P(\overline{K}^0K^0)\stackrel{\gamma _St1}{}\frac{1}{2}s_1t.$$

## 5 $`ϵ^{}/ϵ`$ in two-pion decays

Recently the double ratio

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(K_L\pi ^+\pi ^{})/\mathrm{\Gamma }(K_S\pi ^+\pi ^{})}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(K_L\pi ^0\pi ^0)/\mathrm{\Gamma }(K_S\pi ^0\pi ^0)}$$

has been measured. In a perfect vacuum this is

$$\frac{|ϵ+ϵ|^2}{|ϵ2ϵ|^2}1+6Re\left(\frac{ϵ^{}}{ϵ}\right).$$

However, in matter the result is

$$1+6Re\left(\frac{ϵ^{}}{ϵ_L}\right)\frac{|ϵ_L|^2}{|ϵ_L|^2+x_{33}}.$$

Since $`x_{33}`$ is positive, the effect of entanglement with the environment would decrease the signal, i.e., it would be bigger than measured. Here $`ϵ_L`$ comes from the hamiltonian part of the evolution.

We believe that a measurement of these parameters in each experiment of precision would be interesting on its own, in addition to being necessary for properly subtract them. In this way one would uncover the effects of entanglement with the environment of the neutral kaons, that certaintly, unavoidably exist.

## 6 Conclusions

We draw the attention to effects of interaction with the environment in neutral kaon envolution, that maybe of relevance in the analysis of the CP breaking parameters, made from more complete and precise data that will be available soon, in the future (e.g., KLOE in Eurodafne). The Lindblad master equation provides a universal form that incorporates the tiny corrections of non-hamiltonian evolution. The effects are expected to be more important in B physics for although the B’s decay faster than the kaons, their entanglement with the environment will be more efficient, given the B meson mass of about 5 $`GeV`$, a factor of ten larger than that of kaons.

## 7 Acknowledgments

This work was done in a most enjoyable and fruitful collaboration with Alexander Andrianov and Rolf Tarrach. The author thanks the organizers of Quarks2000 for such a profitable conference. Financial support from CICYT, contract AEN95-0590, and from CIRIT, contract GRQ93-1047 are acknowledged


text:
# Approximation properties of basis functions in variational tree body problem11footnote 1Talk given at the International Conference ”Quantization, Gauge Theory, and Strings” dedicated to the memory of Professor Efim Fradkin. Moscow. 5 – 10 May 2000. To be published in the Conference Proceedings.

## 1 Introduction

In variational methods the required energy eigenvalue is obtained by averaging the Hamiltonian, or, in other terms, by averaging the local energy, defined by action of the Hamiltonian operator on a trial wave function. The very variability of the local energy is a direct consequence of unavoidable approximate character of any chosen variational wave function. As a result, the global (averaged) quantities are much better reproduced in variational calculations than the local ones. Moreover, in practical calculations, the local reliability may be sacrificed in favour of faster convergence to the global values sought for. The known notion of the effective charge $`Z^{}=Z5/16`$ in a two-electron atom (ion) is a good example of such sacrifice, since the local behaviour of an exact wave function in the Coulomb centre is determined by $`Z`$ unscreened but not by $`Z^{}`$.

The good local approximation quality of a variational wave function is a highly desirable goal since the problem onset (Criteria of goodness for approximate wave functions ) up until the present (Quality of variational trial states ). For any Coulomb system this quality is extremely vulnerable at the Coulomb singularity points. Without special care the local energy infinities take place at the Coulomb singularities, destroying the desired picture of the uniform approximation . Luckily, the average Hamiltonian values are rather insensitive to these local infinities due to: (1) much higher degree of smallness of the neighbouring integrated volume ($`r^3`$) in comparison with the degree of the Coulomb singularity ($`r^1`$) and (2) neutralizing of contributions with different signs at different points, as in customary cases of an effective charge or scale factor introduction.

In spite of great achievements of modern variational calculations in finding high precision energy values , the problem of the reliable local approximation of the wave functions persists. From now onwards, for brevity, the attribute “local” will be related only to the Coulomb centres vicinities. The Kato cusp conditions  can be imposed as a supplementary condition for mean energy minimum, thus introducing conditional extremum technique, usually more laborious. The method not affecting variational freedom and, nevertheless, avoiding local energy infinities was proposed earlier in . The development of this method, presented below, adds the possibility to reproduce both local and asymptotic properties of an exact solution in the basis functions, thus striving for better uniformity of the wave function approximation.

## 2  Coulomb Variational Basis with Both
Local and Asymptotic Proper Behaviour

The mentioned local behaviour of a many-body wave function is, in essence, that of some superposition of Coulomb solutions for the corresponding pair of particles. In the case of an isolated Coulomb pair, the wave function is a well-known product of a normalization factor, radial, and angular functions:

$`\psi =NR(\rho )Y(𝐧);\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{Z_1Z_2e^2m_1m_2}{\mathrm{}^2(m_1+m_2)}}|𝐫_1𝐫_2|,𝐧={\displaystyle \frac{𝐫_1𝐫_2}{|𝐫_1𝐫_2|}},`$
$`R(\rho )=\mathrm{exp}(\rho /n)\rho ^l\mathrm{\Phi }(1+ln,\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}+2l;\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\rho /n).`$ (1)
The standard angular functions $`Y(𝐧)`$ can be equivalently represented as symmetric irreducible tensors of the rank $`l`$, composed from the Cartesian projections of the unit vector $`𝐧`$ and Kronecker,s deltas:

$`l=0,Y=1;l=1,Y_i=n_i;l=2,Y_{ij}=3n_in_j\delta _{ij};`$
$`l=3,Y_{ijk}=5n_in_jn_k\delta _{ij}n_k\delta _{ik}n_j\delta _{jk}n_i;\mathrm{}`$ (2)
The written Coulomb solution will be used not only for attracting pairs, when it leads to the discrete spectrum of bound states, but also for repulsing pairs. In the latter case the sequence of integral principal quantum numbers $`n`$ gives the corresponding sequence of the Hamiltonian discrete ”eigenvalues”. They are not physically meaningful for isolated pairs: the ”eigenfunctions” grow exponentionally and are not normalizable. For repulsive pairs, which are embedded in a bound system, the negative Hamiltonian ”eigenvalues” aquire the meaning of their local energies near the Coulomb centre, as the exponentional growth of the ”eigenfunctions” will be damped by the environment.

All products of the Coulomb wave functions of all pairs, attracting and repulsing as well, can constitute the variational basis . A necessary contraction on dumb indices and selection of admissible asymptotics are implied. The permutation symmetry of identical particles should be imposed on the final form of the basis.

Such a basis, put in order by integer principal and orbital quantum numbers of different pairs, is full enough to approximate any analytical many-body wave function. The Kato cusp conditions are rigorously satisfied by the basis functions themselves. We stress the point that any approximate fulfillment of the Kato cusp conditions leaves the difficulty of local energy infinities unsettled, no matter what precision of averaged quantities has been achieved.

For any pair of particles from a many-body system only a density matrix can be attributed and not a wave function. In the density matrix, unlike in the wave function of an isolated pair, the local and asymptotic parameters cannot remain identical. In order to reproduce in the basis functions this density matrix property we modify the Coulomb radial functions so as to allow independent adjustment of local and asymptotic variational parameters. The modified radial function $`R(a,\rho )`$ is defined as the product of the exponential factor $`\mathrm{exp}(a\rho )`$ and a finite segment of the Maclaurin expansion of the ratio of the unmodified function $`R(\rho )`$ to the same exponential factor. The modified function has two adjustable parameters: $`a`$ for the asymptotic behaviour, and $`n`$, real or imaginary, for the local behaviour near the Coulomb centre. This local behaviour is not affected by the performed soft introduction of the independent asymptotic behaviour, which is not connected with that of a confluent hypergeometric function. The Maclaurin series of $`\mathrm{exp}(a\rho )R(\rho )`$ up to $`\rho ^{1+l+2k}`$ appears to be the Laurent series in inverse even powers of $`n`$ up to $`n^{2k}`$. Just so the modified function has also the rearranged form:

$$R(a,\rho )=\underset{k=0}{\overset{k_{max}}{}}\frac{c_k(a,\rho )}{n^{2k}}.$$
(3)
The Laurent coefficients $`c_k(a,\rho )`$ are proposed as the new two-body constituents of the many-body variational basis. They are independent of $`n`$ polynomials in both $`\rho `$ and $`a`$ with the common exponential factor $`\mathrm{exp}(a\rho )`$. Along with stretching the basis set, the usage of $`c_k(a,\rho )`$ instead of $`R(a,\rho )`$ will absorb the nonlinear parameters $`n`$ in easily obtainable coefficients of a linear superposition. The proposed basis has inseparable cluster structure and the variational wave function should terminate only at the end of a cluster. In case of three-body Coulomb systems both the Hamiltonian and unity matrix elements can be computed analytically up to rational functions of all asymptotic parameters $`a`$.

The squares of effective principal quantum numbers of all attractive and repulsive Coulomb pairs, being included in the superposition coefficients, are tuned automatically with the latters. So the proposed basis produces the multiple output: not only the lowest root of the secular equation has the physical meaning, but some higher roots are also meaningful. Still a majority of higher roots remains a mathematical artefact, hence, from the physical point of view, the Hamiltonian diagonalizes only partially.

## 3 Computer Algebra Feasibility of the New Method

The pilot computation confirms the possibility of cooperative treatment of several lowest states. With a relatively short wave function containing 54 terms (49 terms in the antisymmetric case) the helium para-S and ortho-S energy levels have been calculated in one run as:
para-S levels: -2.902900, -2.145871, -2.055637;
ortho-S levels: -2.175026, -2.068634, -2.036463,
while the results of high precision calculations given in  are:
para-S levels: -2.903724377033982, -2.145974046054634, -2.06127198974091;
ortho-S levels: -2.175229378237014, -2.068689067472468, -2.03651208309830.
Though these pilot numerical results are far from the record accuracy, they have definitely established the negative sign of the electron pair local energy in the Helium atom. This phenomenon can be tested experimentally in, e. g., the Helium double ionization. The universal Mathematica program vSlevels is available upon request from the author.

In our approach interparticle (Hylleraas) variables are used for the basis formation, that is natural for elimination of the local energy infinities, and perimetric (Heron) variables — on the stage of analytical evaluation of integrals, that simplifies calculations. In hyperspherical variables the local energy infinities, problem appears more intricate. It has been solved principally through frame transformations in the recent work .

## Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank V. B. Belyaev, B. V. Geshkenbein,
L. B. Okun,, V. S. Popov, and Yu. A. Simonov for constructive discussions and valuable comments.