text:
# The human family tree and the Neandertal branch

## Abstract

We consider a large population of asexually reproducing individuals in absence of selective pressure. The population size is maintained constant by the environment. We find out that distances between individuals (time from the last common ancestor) exhibit highly non trivial properties. In particular their distribution in a single population is random even in the thermodynamical limit. As a result, not only distances are different for different pairs of individuals but also the mean distance of the individuals of a given population is different at different times. All computed quantities are parameters free and only scale linearly with the population size. Results in this paper may have some relevance in the ’Out of Africa/ Multi-regional’ debate about the origin of modern man. In fact, the recovery of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from Neandertal fossils in three different loci: Feldhofer (Germany), Mezmaiskaya (Northern Caucaso), Vinjia (Croatia), permitted to compare Neandertal/Neandertal distances with Neandertal/modern and modern/modern ones.

In 1997 a team of researchers Krings1997 ; Krings2000  announced that mtDNA was extracted from the humerus of the first recognized Neandertal fossil, the individual found at the Feldhofer cave in the Neander Valley in Germany in 1856. In 1999 and 2000 mtDNA had been extracted from a second Neandertal, a 29,000 year-old fossil of a baby recently discovered in Mezmaiskaya cave in south-western Russia and from a third Neandertal specimen from a cave at Vindija, Croatia Krings2000 .

More recently, another team Adcock  extracted mtDNA from a 60,000 year-old fossil of an anatomically modern human discovered in the dry bed of Lake Mungo in New South Wales, Australia.

What makes mtDNA interestingly different from nuclear DNA is that it is inherited only from the mother. In principle, every lineage can be followed until the woman whose mtDNA is the common ancestor of the mtDNA of all living humans. This hypothetical woman is known as mitochondrial Eve.

More sketchy, we can say that mtDNA reproduces asexually since there is not recombination as for nuclear DNA. Therefore, assuming that the mtDNA mutates at a constant rate, the number of differences in mtDNA between two individuals is a measure of their distance, i.e. the number of generations from the common ancestor. This is particularly true for the previously mentioned studies, since the part of mtDNA concerned is the hypervariable region which seems to mutate in absence of selective pressure.

On the basis of the comparison with the mtDNA of living humans, it was argued that both Neandertals and Mungo man, should be eliminated from our ancestry. In fact, the distance of Neandertal from living humans was estimated to be more then three times the average difference between living Sapiens or between the three Neandertals. Moreover, Mungo man seems to carry a mtDNA which disappeared from modern humanity.

In order to decide if these conclusions are correct we have to understand if these differences have statistical relevance. We address here to this problem by means of a very general model without need to specify the details of the dynamics.

We assume that the population size is constantly of $`N`$ individuals due to ecological or environmental factors. At any generation we have $`N`$ new individuals which replace the $`N`$ individuals of previous generation. Since we deal with mtDNA, the reproduction is asexual and any individual of the new generation has a single parent in the previous one. Obviously, the average number of offsprings of an individual in the old generation is one, nevertheless, some of them will not have any offspring and others will have more than one.

We do not fix here the stochastic rule assigning the number of offsprings to any individual since results do not depend on the dynamics details. The only requirement is that the probability that two individuals in the new generation have the same parent is of the order of $`1/N`$ for large $`N`$. This is a very weak and reasonable assumption: just think at our life experience. To be more clear, we make two examples of stochastic rules which satisfy this requirement. The first rule is that at any generation one half of the individuals (chosen at random) has no offsprings and the remaining part has two (see Zhang ). With this choice the probability of having the same parent for two individuals is $`1/(N1)`$, which behaves as $`1/N`$ for large $`N`$. The second rule is that any individual in the new generation chooses one parent at random in the previous one, independently on the choice of the others (see Derrida ). In this case the probability of having the same parent for two individuals is exactly $`1/N`$.

The distance between two given individuals $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ in the same generation is, by definition, the number of generations from the common ancestor. Since typical distances are proportional to $`N`$, as we are going to show, it is useful to rescale them dividing by $`N`$. Let us call $`d(\alpha ,\beta )`$ these rescaled distances (obviously, $`d(\alpha ,\alpha )`$ vanishes).

For two distinct individuals $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ in the same generation one has

$$d(\alpha ,\beta )=d(g(\alpha ),g(\beta ))+1/N,$$
(1)
where $`g(\alpha )`$ and $`g(\beta )`$ are the two parent individuals. The above dynamics simply state that the rescaled distance in the new generation increases by $`1/N`$ with respect to the parents distance (the non rescaled distance would have increased by 1). The two parents coincide with probability $`1/N`$ and they are distinct individuals with probability $`(N1)/N`$.

By using equation (1) it is easy to show that, for $`\lambda <1`$, the average over the process gives $`<`$$`\mathrm{exp}(\lambda d(\alpha ,\beta ))`$$`>`$ =$`1/(1\lambda )`$. This result, which holds for large $`N`$, implies that the probability that $`d(\alpha ,\beta )=x`$ is simply $`\mathrm{exp}(x)`$. Notice that this is not the distribution of the distances inside a single large population but the average distribution sampled over many stochastically equivalent populations or, which is the same, sampled over the same population at many different times. Also notice that, according to this result, the typical non-rescaled distance is of order $`N`$ (see also Zhang ).

According to this distribution one has that the process averages $`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )`$$`>`$=1 and $`<`$$`d^2(\alpha ,\beta )`$$`>`$=2 which means that the distance between individuals may show huge differences for different pairs. But this is not the important point, in fact, there is another larger source of statistical dispersion for distances, as follows.

We can use again equation (1) in order to compute the quantities $`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )d(\beta ,\gamma )`$$`>`$ and $`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )d(\gamma ,\delta )`$$`>`$. To reach this goal one simply has to take into account that any of the pairs which can be formed by two of the four individuals $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$, $`\gamma `$ and $`\delta `$ may have coinciding parents with probability $`1/N`$. The probability that more then two parents coincide is of higher order. Taking the large $`N`$ limit one finds 3$`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )d(\beta ,\gamma )`$$`>`$=$`<`$$`d^2(\alpha ,\beta )`$$`>`$ +2$`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )`$$`>`$ and 6$`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )d(\gamma ,\delta )`$$`>`$= 4$`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )d(\beta ,\gamma )`$$`>`$\+ 2$`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )`$$`>`$.

Solving these simple equations one gets $`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )d(\beta ,\gamma )`$$`>`$=4/3 and $`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )d(\gamma ,\delta )`$$`>`$=11/18. In this form, this result only seems to state that there is a statistical correlation between distances corresponding to different pairs. But there is a much more interesting consequence. Let us introduce the mean distance of the individuals of a population as

$$d=\frac{2}{N(N1)}\underset{\alpha >\beta }{}d(\alpha ,\beta ),$$
(2)
this is simply the average on a single population (and at a given time) of the internal distances considering all the $`N(N1)/2`$ possible pairs. This quantity is random for finite $`N`$ but should reach deterministically its average value for large $`N`$.

On the contrary, while the process averages $`<`$$`d`$$`>`$ and $`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )`$$`>`$ equals 1, in the termodinamical ($`N\mathrm{}`$) limit $`<`$$`d^2`$$`>`$=$`<`$$`d(\alpha ,\beta )d(\gamma ,\delta )`$$`>`$=11/18. In other words, not only the distances are randomly distributed inside the population but their mean on all possible pairs is random even if $`N`$ is extremely large. We show these facts in fig. 1 where the time evolution of the mean distance of the population is shown for $`N=2000`$ which is sufficiently large to destroy all finite size effects. Looking at fig. 1, we notice that the mean distance is subject to abrupt negative variations due to the extinction of large subpopulations.

Notice that the typical size of living humanity, measured from nuclear genetic distance, corresponds to a population of 10000 individuals. Paleoanthropologists explain this fact by a recent demographic explosion which followed a bottleneck.

Since the mean distance is random, the distribution $`q(x)`$ of the distances in a single large population must also be random. For finite $`N`$ one has that $`q(x)dx`$ is simply the number of pairs in a given population whose distance lies in the interval $`[x,x+dx]`$ divided by the total number $`N(N1)/2`$ of possible pairs. Then, $`d`$ is simply the average on this distribution ($`d=q(x)x𝑑x`$) and since $`d`$ is random also $`q(x)`$ remains random when the infinite population limit is performed. The above definition implies $`<q(x)>=p(x)`$, i. e., the average of the $`q(x)`$ over many independent realizations of the process is $`\mathrm{exp}(x)`$.

The most important fact is that the distribution may be very different from the averaged one. This fact can be appreciated in fig. 2 were $`q(x)`$ (computed again from a population of 2000 individuals) does not show any resemblance with its average $`\mathrm{exp}(x)`$. From fig. 2 (which is a typical one) it is clear that individuals spontaneously cluster in groups. In fact, most of the distances assume a few of values corresponding to the distances between the major subpopulations.

These genetically isolated subpopulations are not different species or geographically isolated groups, but they can originate in perfectly inter-breeding and (nuclear DNA) homogeneous populations. In fact, sexually reproducing nuclear DNA has a completely different statistics. In large populations the distance for almost all pairs of individuals coincide with the average value 1 (see also Serva ).

It should also noticed that distance between two individuals is estimated from the number of differences in mtDNA due to mutation. The number of these differences is itself stochastic and only in average is proportional to the distance. Therefore, the possibility of having large mtDNA isolation of subpopulation is even larger one can estimate here.

Let us come back now to the problem which has inspired the present work in order to have a quantitative understanding of the phenomena.

In 1997, 1999 and 2000 a team of researchers Krings1997 ; Krings2000  extracted mtDNA from three different specimen of Neandertal and was able to amplify many short strands of the hyper-variable region (HVR1 and HVR2) using Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). In 1997 they compared the first specimen (Feldhofer) mtDNA sequence against a database of 994 different mtDNA sequences from modern humans. Modern humans differed from each other in 8.0 $`\pm `$3.1 positions, by contrast, the Neandertal genome had 27.0 $`\pm `$2.2 differences from modern humans. In 1999, the same people successfully extracted a second mtDNA sequence from the same Neandertal fossil. This study confirmed the results of the first one, modern humans differed from each other by 10.9 $`\pm `$5.1 (range 1-35), the Neandertal differed from humans by 35.3 $`\pm `$2.3 (range 29-43). In 1999, they successfully extracted a mtDNA sequence from a second Neandertal, a 29,000 year-old fossil (Mezmaiskaya). The distance between Mezmaiskaya and a particular modern human sequence, known as the reference sequence, was 22, compared to 27 for the first Neandertal while the two Neandertals differed from each other in 12 positions. In 2000, scientists announced the sequencing of a third Neandertal mtDNA specimen from a cave at Vindija, Croatia. The Neandertal differed from modern humans by 34.9 $`\pm `$ 2.4 positions.

The conclusion was that the Neandertals lie at a statistically large distance from modern humans. Results in this paper suggest this conclusion being incorrect, in fact, the situation is quantitatively the same of fig. 2, where there is a subpopulation whose distance from others is three or more times larger then the average distance and the most probable one.

Mungo Man, at variance with Neandertals, is an anatomically modern man. The fossil, 60,000 years-old, (older then the three Neandertal fossils) was discovered in 1974 in the dry bed of Lake Mungo in New South Wales, Australia. Recently Mungo Man has attracted attention due to the extraction of mtDNA from fragments of his skeleton Adcock . The authors identify differences between Mungo mtDNA and living aborigines mtDNA and conclude that Mungo man belongs to a lineage diverging before the most recent common ancestor of contemporary humans. Also in this case, the argument is doubtful, in fact, as already discussed the rapid extinctions of mtDNA subpopulations are well evident in fig. 2.

The conclusion (if any) of this work is that hardly mtDNA studies can be used to prove Krings1997 ; Krings2000  ’Out of Africa’ theory or disprove it Adcock . On the contrary, the study of DNA distribution in living population allows for much more reliable results, especially if the study is performed on nuclear DNA which encodes information about all our ancestry. Up to now, these studies mostly support ’Out of Africa’ theory in its original form or in a more recent and less extreme one Templeton .

I thank Antonella Di Mattia, Barbara Nelli and Michele Pasquini for many useful discussions and for a critical reading of the manuscript.


format: text

text:
# Rotational Broadening Measurement for the Neutron Star X-Ray Transient XTE J2123–058

## 1. Introduction

The X-ray transient XTE J2123–058, discovered in 1998 (Levine, Swank & Smith, 1998), is a neutron star low-mass X-ray binary (LMXB) with a 6 hr orbital period (Tomsick et al., 1999; Zurita et al., 2000). Although many of the properties of this system are rather typical of LMXBs such as type I X-ray bursts and high frequency quasi-periodic oscillations (QPOs), XTE J2123–058 distinguishes itself from other LMXBs by having high Galactic latitude ($`b=36^{}`$) and a high and relatively well-determined binary inclination ($`i=73^{}\pm 4^{}`$; Zurita et al. 2000). A main reason for the good inclination constraint is that partial eclipses are present in the outburst optical light curves (Tomsick et al., 1999; Zurita et al., 2000). For optical observations, the high Galactic latitude is advantageous since the extinction along the line-of-sight to the source is low. The high binary inclination is useful for measuring the rotational broadening because the widths of the companion’s absorption lines increase with inclination. The ultimate goal of this project is to obtain a precise measurement of the neutron star mass.

Such mass measurements are important for constraining neutron star equations of state (EOS) and for understanding the evolution of neutron star systems. Precise mass measurements have been made for millisecond radio pulsars (MSPs, Thorsett & Chakrabarty 1999), but these measurements are lacking for LMXBs. Since it is theoretically possible to spin-up neutron stars in LMXBs to millisecond periods via accretion, a link between LMXBs and MSPs has long been suspected (Alpar et al., 1982). Although there is substantial evidence to support this picture, the prediction that rapidly rotating neutron stars in LMXBs should be more massive by 0.1 to 0.5$`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$ (Bhattacharya 1995) than those that have not been spun-up has not been tested.

Previous work on optical observations of XTE J2123–058 in quiescence resulted in measurements of the semiamplitude of the companion’s radial velocity curve ($`K_2`$), the companion’s spectral type, the distance to the source and the systemic velocity (Tomsick et al., 2001; Casares et al., 2002). Casares et al. (2002) also obtained a measurement of the semiamplitude of the neutron star’s radial velocity curve ($`K_1`$) using the H$`\alpha `$ emission line that is present in the spectrum, giving a determination of the mass ratio ($`q=K_2/K_1=M_1/M_2`$). Although they considered their $`K_1`$ measurement to be tentative due to uncertainties concerning using the broad H$`\alpha `$ line to infer the radial velocity of the neutron star, they used their results to obtain a neutron star mass of $`1.55\pm 0.31`$ $`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$ (68% confidence errors).

Here, we use the observations of Tomsick et al. (2001) to determine the projected rotation rate of the companion ($`v\mathrm{sin}i`$) from a measurement of the rotational broadening (Marsh, Robinson & Wood, 1994). From this, we obtain a measurement of $`q`$ that relies only on measurements of the companion’s absorption lines and is independent of the Casares et al. (2002) mass ratio measurement. Although rotational broadening measurements have been used to obtain mass measurements for several black hole binaries, this has only been previously accomplished for three other neutron star LMXBs: Cyg X-2 (Casares, Charles & Kuulkers, 1998); Cen X-4 (Torres et al., 2002); and 2S 0921–630 (Shahbaz et al., 1999). A measurement of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ was also claimed for Aql X-1 (Shahbaz, Casares & Charles, 1997); however, the subsequent discovery of a field star within $`0^{\prime \prime }.46`$ of Aql X-1 (Welsh, Robinson & Young, 2000) is likely to have some impact on this measurement. Thus, XTE J2123–058 provides a relatively rare opportunity to obtain a rotational broadening measurement in a neutron star LMXB, which is an important step toward obtaining a precise neutron star mass measurement. This study also provides a valuable test of the method most commonly used to measure compact object masses since we expect to obtain a neutron star mass that is considerably less than the 5-15$`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$ compact object masses obtained for the black hole systems.

## 2. Observations

In 2000 August, we performed spectroscopy of XTE J2123–058 with the Echelle Spectrograph and Imager (ESI, Sheinis et al. 2000) on the 10 m Keck II telescope on Mauna Kea, Hawaii. These observations, as well as our data reduction techniques, are described in detail by Tomsick et al. (2001). We took eight exposures over two nights covering the 6 hr binary orbit, and an observation log is given in Table 1. The dispersion varies from 0.36 to 0.52Å per pixel (22.8 km s-1 pixel-1) over the 4700-6820Å band after on-chip binning by a factor of two in the dispersion direction. This is sufficient to over-sample the spectrograph resolution of 1.0 to 1.5Å FWHM, which is obtained using a $`1^{\prime \prime }`$ slit. Due to the faintness of the source ($`V`$$``$$`22.5`$), relatively long exposure times between 2340 and 2700 seconds were necessary. The effective seeing for these exposures varied from $`0^{\prime \prime }.67`$ to $`1^{\prime \prime }.23`$. We dereddened the XTE J2123–058 spectra using $`A_V=0.37`$ magnitudes (Hynes et al., 2001). We also obtained M, K and G dwarf comparison star spectra with ESI to determine the spectral type and to measure the radial velocity curve (Tomsick et al., 2001). In this work, we use K2 V, K4 V and K7 V comparison star spectra. We used the same instrumental setup to obtain these spectra as for XTE J2123–058 except that we did not perform on-chip binning for the K7 V comparison star. For these short exposures, we obtained seeing between $`0^{\prime \prime }.60`$ and $`0^{\prime \prime }.69`$, which is comparable to the seeing for the best XTE J2123–058 exposures. All three comparison star spectra have well-measured radial velocities, and we performed a velocity shift to produce spectra in the star’s rest frame.

## 3. Results

### 3.1. Rotational Broadening Measurement

The fact that stellar absorption lines are broadened due to rotation allows for a measurement of the stellar rotational velocity. Here, we used techniques similar to those described in Marsh, Robinson & Wood (1994). We carried out the measurement by comparing the average, Doppler-corrected spectrum of XTE J2123–058 in the rest frame of the companion (shown in Figure 1) to the comparison star spectra. Details concerning the production of the XTE J2123–058 spectrum are provided in Tomsick et al. (2001). Previous work (Tomsick et al., 2001; Casares et al., 2002) indicates that the spectral type of the XTE J2123–058 companion is between K5 V and K8 V555Tomsick et al. (2001) give the range of spectral types as K5 V-K9 V, but we have since learned that K9 V is not a valid subclass.. Although we use K2 V, K4 V and K7 V comparison star spectra in this work, we expect the K7 V star to provide the most reliable results. The measurement of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ is made by convolving the comparison star spectra with rotation profiles from Gray (1992) for different rotational velocities and determining which convolved spectrum provides the best match to the XTE J2123–058 spectrum.

There are two complications to this technique that must be taken into account. First, the source spectra are smeared since the observations each covered a significant fraction of the binary orbit. To account for this, we determined the smearing and the signal-to-noise for each of the eight XTE J2123–058 spectra (see Table 1) and produced eight comparison star spectra convolved with rectangular profiles with widths corresponding to the smearing velocities for the XTE J2123–058 exposures. We then calculated the average of the eight spectra weighted using the XTE J2123–058 signal-to-noise measurements and convolved this average spectrum with rotation profiles for comparison to the average XTE J2123–058 spectrum. The effective level of smearing prior to the convolution with the rotation profiles is 100 km s-1. The second complication is that a fraction of the light from the source comes from the accretion disk rather than the companion. To account for this, we multiplied the comparison star spectra by a constant ($`F`$) prior to minimizing the difference between the XTE J2123–058 spectrum and the comparison star spectra. As both spectra are normalized to 1.0 in the 5600-5700Å band prior to minimization, $`F`$ corresponds to the fraction of the light due to the companion in this band and is left as a second free parameter in the $`\chi ^2`$-minimization. It should be noted that this method implicitly assumes that the accretion disk contributes a normalized flux of $`1`$$``$$`F`$ at all wavelengths.

For the rotational broadening measurement, we used the regions from 4900-5850Å and 5950-6450Å, eliminating regions with Balmer series emission lines and also the region around the NaI doublet near 5900Å where bright night sky lines are present. We broadened the comparison spectra with rotation profiles with $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ from 5 km s-1 to 200 km s-1 in steps of 5 km s-1 and subtracted the broadened comparison spectra (multiplied by $`F`$) from the XTE J2123–058 spectrum. To remove any broadband features that are not relevant to the rotational broadening measurement, we divided the post-subtraction spectrum into ten wavelength bins, performed a cubic spline interpolation of the mean values in these bins and subtracted this smooth curve to obtain the residuals. For each velocity, we calculated residuals for values of $`F`$ from 0 to 1 in steps of 0.01, found the $`\chi ^2`$ deviation of the residuals from zero for the 4000 combinations of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ and $`F`$, and used the $`\chi ^2`$ values to determine the best fit parameter values.

Table 2 shows the results of the rotational broadening analysis using the three comparison stars. In addition to the values of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ and $`F`$ obtained, the table includes the linear limb-darkening coefficient ($`ϵ`$) used in broadening the comparison spectra (discussed in more detail below) and the values of $`\chi ^2/\nu `$ for the fit. As expected, the K7 V comparison star provides the best match to the data, and we only include the results for the other two comparison stars to point out that the value of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ obtained does not depend on which comparison star we use. Figure 2 shows 68% and 90% confidence error contours for $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ and $`F`$ using the K7 V comparison star and $`ϵ=0.6`$. Although the contours show that the parameters are slightly correlated, the level of correlation is not extreme. The best fit parameter values are $`v\mathrm{sin}i=121_{17}^{+19}`$ km s-1 and $`F=0.66\pm 0.03`$ (68% confidence errors using $`\mathrm{\Delta }\chi ^2=2.3`$). When performing the $`\chi ^2`$-minimization, we find reduced-$`\chi ^2`$ values somewhat less than 1.0 because it is necessary to re-sample the XTE J2123–058 spectra when the Doppler corrections are applied. The interpolation associated with re-sampling means that adjacent wavelength bins are not completely independent. This reduces the rms noise of the spectrum, resulting in lower $`\chi ^2`$ values. The most conservative approach, which is the one we take, is to permit these low $`\chi ^2`$ values. Another approach would be to artificially reduce the size of the error bars on the spectrum to obtain a reduced-$`\chi ^2`$ of 1.0. However, this would lead to a decrease in the parameter error estimates.

In Figure 1, the spectrum for the K7 V comparison star (dotted line) is shown along with the XTE J2123–058 spectrum. The regions of the spectra shown in the figure correspond to the regions used in the rotational broadening analysis. The comparison star spectrum has been multiplied by $`F=0.66`$ and broadened by $`v\mathrm{sin}i=121`$ km s-1 so that it represents our best estimate of the portion of the XTE J2123–058 spectrum that comes from the companion. The figure also shows the difference between the spectra for XTE J2123–058 and the comparison star, and these residuals represent the emission from the accretion disk. The relative flux for the disk spectrum is near 0.3-0.4 at all wavelengths, and it should be noted that this occurs because we have assumed a flat disk spectrum. While our method gives a value for the companion fraction of $`F=0.66`$ in the 5600-5700Å band, Figure 1 indicates that $`F`$ varies with wavelength from about 0.5 below 5200Å to an average value of 0.69 in the 5950-6450Å band. Finally, the dips seen in the XTE J2123–058 spectrum and in the residuals at 6150Å and 6285Å are near the wavelengths of moderately bright night sky lines, and it is likely that these dips are due to imperfect background subtraction. We performed the rotational broadening analysis again after removing these regions of the spectrum and obtained the same values for $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ and $`F`$.

We considered possible sources of systematic error in our determination of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$. To test our correction for smearing, we performed the rotational broadening measurement using only exposures 4 and 8, which have the lowest levels of smearing. Although the signal-to-noise is lower, the effective level of smearing is only about 54 km s-1 compared to 100 km s-1 when all eight exposures are used. With exposures 4 and 8, we obtained $`v\mathrm{sin}i=118_{19}^{+21}`$ km s-1, which is consistent with the previously determined value. This provides evidence that the smearing correction does not introduce a systematic error significant relative to the statistical errors. We determined that there is no significant systematic error associated with dereddening the XTE J2123–058 spectra by re-measuring $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ with $`A_V=0.21`$ and 0.53, which correspond to the extremes of the error range for the visual extinction (Hynes et al., 2001).

It is possible that systematic error is introduced due to our approximation that the companion is spherical. Marsh, Robinson & Wood (1994) investigated this for the black hole system A 0620–00 by carrying out their analysis with the spherical assumption and also by accounting for the shape of the Roche lobe. They found that the spherical assumption introduces a systematic error in the measurement of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ below the 2% level even when uncertainties related to gravity darkening are considered. This effect is much smaller than our statistical errors and should be even smaller for XTE J2123–058 since the mass ratio is less extreme than for A 0620–00. However, a related concern is that $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ is dependent on orbital phase for a non-spherical companion. It is likely that this impacts our measurement of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ for XTE J2123–058 because our highest signal-to-noise spectra occur near the quadratures (see Table 1). Based on the orbital variations of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ for the cataclysmic variable AE Aqr (Casares et al., 1996), we estimate that our measurement of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ is not more than 5% higher than the phase-averaged value, and we include this in determining our final error.

Another significant systematic error comes from uncertainties in the limb-darkening coefficient ($`ϵ`$). The value of $`ϵ=0.6`$ used above is appropriate for a non-irradiated K7 V star based on the coefficients from Alencar & Vaz (1999), and the earliest possible spectral type for XTE J2123–058, K5 V, is expected to have $`ϵ=0.7`$. However, we cannot rule out the possibility that the correct coefficient values are lower. Alencar & Vaz (1999) find that irradiated stars can have significantly lower values of $`ϵ`$. In addition, $`ϵ`$ will not generally be the same for continuum and line wavelengths, and it is likely that the coefficient value will be lower in the lines (Collins & Truax, 1995). Thus, in determining the associated systematic error, we consider values of $`ϵ`$ between 0.0 (no limb-darkening) and 0.7. As shown in Table 2, $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ varies from 115 km s-1 to 123 km s-1 over this $`ϵ`$ range. Adding the systematic errors to the statistical error gives our final result of $`v\mathrm{sin}i=121_{29}^{+21}`$ km s-1.

We performed a final check on our results by carrying out the rotational broadening measurement using simulated spectra. We produced simulated spectra by convolving the K7 V comparison star spectrum with a 100 km s-1 rectangular profile (to simulate smearing) and a 120 km s-1 rotation profile. We also multiplied the normalized spectrum by 0.66 ($`F`$) and added a constant value of 0.34 ($`1`$$``$$`F`$) to reproduce the situation where not all the light comes from the companion star. Finally, we added noise to the spectrum to match the statistics of the XTE J2123–058 spectrum. Figure 3 compares the results of the $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ measurement for XTE J2123–058 to the results when the same measurement procedure is applied to simulated spectra. The points in the figure show the $`\chi ^2`$ values resulting when broadened comparison star spectra are used to measure $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ for XTE J2123–058. $`F`$ is left free to minimize $`\chi ^2`$ for each velocity. The solid line is a cubic spline interpolation through the points. The dashed line shows the result (only the interpolation is shown) when the same comparison spectra are used to measure $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ for the simulated spectra. The dashed line represents an average for 50 simulations. The agreement between the measurement for XTE J2123–058 and the simulations is excellent, giving us confidence that the statistical errors we find for XTE J2123–058 are reasonable.

### 3.2. Orbital Period

Here, we use the epoch of inferior conjunction derived from our radial velocity curve, HJD $`2451760.0462\pm 0.0013`$ days (Tomsick et al., 2001), and also from the Casares et al. (2002) radial velocity curve, HJD $`2451779.652\pm 0.001`$ days, to obtain the first precise spectroscopic determination of the orbital period ($`P_{orb}`$). As 79 binary orbits occurred between the two measurements, the value for $`P_{orb}`$ is $`21442.3\pm 1.8`$ seconds (68% confidence error), which is approximately 3-$`\sigma `$ from the value of $`21447.59\pm 0.15`$ seconds derived by Casares et al. (2002) from spectroscopic and photometric measurements. Although this could be a statistical outlier, Casares et al. (2002) derived $`P_{orb}`$ by assuming that 2969 binary orbits occurred between the photometric epoch of inferior conjunction reported in Zurita et al. (2000) and their spectroscopic epoch. Based on the errors on the epoch and $`P_{orb}`$ given in Zurita et al. (2000), the possibility that 2970 binary orbits occurred can only be ruled out at the 1.9-$`\sigma `$ level, and $`P_{orb}=21440.38\pm 0.15`$ seconds would be inferred, which is only different from the spectroscopic period at the 1.1-$`\sigma `$ level. We would conclude that this shorter orbital period is correct except for the fact that it is 2.2-$`\sigma `$ from the value of $`21445.5\pm 2.3`$ seconds obtained using photometry only (Tomsick et al., 1999; Zurita et al., 2000). A more accurate measurement of the spectroscopic orbital period is necessary to determine if either of the $`P_{orb}`$ values derived from spectroscopic and photometric measurements (21440.4 or 21447.6 seconds) is correct. A different value could have interesting implications for the interpretation of the outburst optical light curve or possibly the rate of change of the orbital period. It is desirable to obtain a radial velocity curve by mid-2003 to avoid losing the cycle count for the spectroscopic ephemeris.

## 4. Binary Parameters and the Neutron Star Mass

When combined with previous measurements from other work, our determination of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ allows us to calculate the parameters of the binary system, including the mass ratio, $`q=M_1/M_2`$, the mass of the neutron star ($`M_1`$) and the mass and radius of the companion. Assuming that the companion fills its Roche lobe and rotates synchronously with the binary orbit (Paczyński, 1971; Marsh, Robinson & Wood, 1994), we use $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ along with our previous determination of the companion’s velocity semiamplitude, $`K_2=299\pm 7`$ km s-1 (Tomsick et al., 2001), to obtain $`q=2.7_{0.9}^{+1.3}`$. Using these measurements, $`P_{orb}=21442.3\pm 1.8`$ seconds and the constraint on the binary inclination ($`i`$) from Zurita et al. (2000), we calculate the neutron star mass according to

$$M_1=\frac{P_{orb}}{2\pi G}\left(\frac{1+q}{q}\right)^2\frac{K_2^3}{\mathrm{sin}^3i},$$
(1)
where $`G`$ is the gravitational constant, leading to $`M_1=1.46_{0.39}^{+0.30}`$ $`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$ (68% confidence statistical errors and systematic errors). The companion’s mass can also be calculated using an expression similar to equation 1, and the result is $`M_2=0.53_{0.39}^{+0.28}`$ $`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$. While the mass determinations depend on the assumption that the companion fills its Roche lobe, $`R_2`$ can be derived from $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$, $`i`$ and $`P_{orb}`$ assuming only synchronous rotation, and we obtain $`R_2=0.62_{0.15}^{+0.11}`$ $`\mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{}}`$. This is the first measurement of the XTE J2123–058 companion’s radius, and the value is in-line with that expected for a late K-type star on or close to the main sequence. The radius measurement is also relevant to the mass determinations as it provides a check on the assumption of a Roche lobe filling companion. The effective Roche lobe radius depends on $`M_2`$ and $`P_{orb}`$ according to the expression given in Casares et al. (2002). Although $`M_2`$ is not well-constrained, the effective radius for a 0.5$`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$ companion in a binary with a 6 hr orbital period is 0.6$`\mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{}}`$, which agrees with the measured value of $`R_2`$.

Table 3 compares the parameter values we derive using the rotational broadening measurement to the values that Casares et al. (2002) previously obtained by using the H$`\alpha `$ emission line to measure the radial velocity semiamplitude of the neutron star ($`K_1`$). In every case where it is possible to compare the two measurements (for $`q`$, $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$), their best estimate is contained within our error range. To obtain a more direct comparison of the two methods, we recalculated the parameters using the Casares et al. (2002) measurement of $`K_2`$ ($`287\pm 12`$ km s-1). These values are given in Table 3 and are also consistent with the Casares et al. (2002) parameters. We conclude that the two measurement techniques give consistent results. This is significant for compact object mass measurements in general since it provides a test of the (independent) assumptions inherent in the two techniques. However, the comparison between the neutron star mass measurements for the two techniques is limited to a precision of 20-30% by the size of the errors.

For this work and also in Casares et al. (2002), the neutron star and companion mass measurements depend on the determination of the binary inclination ($`i`$) made by Zurita et al. (2000). The inclination measurement comes from modeling the outburst optical light curves, and it is important to note that the modeling depends on $`q`$ as well as $`i`$. For two different light curves, Zurita et al. (2000) find values for the mass ratio between 3 and 5. While our mass ratio is consistent with the lower part of this range, the Casares et al. (2002) value of $`q=2.1\pm 0.4`$ lies somewhat (about 2.3-$`\sigma `$) below this range. A mass ratio as low as the Casares et al. (2002) value would likely have implications for the validity of the inclination measurement. Thus, it is important to obtain an independent inclination measurement, and this should be possible through observations of the ellipsoidal modulations (Wilson & Devinney, 1971) in quiescence.

One reason we chose XTE J2123–058 for this study is that the presence of high frequency QPO pairs in the outburst X-ray emission suggests that the neutron star has been spun up to millisecond rotation periods (Homan et al., 1999; Tomsick et al., 1999). If neutron stars must accrete significant mass to reach these rapid rotation rates, this presents the possibility that an massive neutron star might be present that would provide a constraint on the neutron star equation of state (EOS). However, our measurement of the neutron star mass is consistent with the Chandrasekhar limit of 1.4$`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$, and does not, by itself, constrain the EOS. This work and the work of Casares et al. (2002) indicate that it is unlikely that the neutron star mass in this system is greater than 1.8-1.9$`\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$. The precision of the mass measurement from this work is limited by statistical errors on the measurement of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ (although systematic errors are not negligible), indicating that obtaining spectra with better signal-to-noise would lead to a tighter mass constraint, which could have interesting implications for the amount of mass that must be accreted to spin up a neutron star and the long-term accretion rate onto the neutron star. Although XTE J2123–058 is faint, it has the advantage of a rotational broadening signal that is considerably larger than for the three other neutron star sources where the values of $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ are between 34 and 65 km s-1. The larger value is likely due to the combination of the relatively high binary inclination and the fact that the XTE J2123–058 orbital period is the shortest of the group.

## 5. Summary and Conclusions

We used moderate resolution optical spectra from Keck Observatory to carry out a rotational broadening measurement for the XTE J2123–058 companion. After a detailed analysis where we account for possible sources of systematic error, we obtained $`v\mathrm{sin}i=121_{29}^{+21}`$ km s-1 for the companion’s projected rotational velocity. Using this result, our determination of the spectroscopic orbital period and previous measurements of $`K_2`$ (Tomsick et al., 2001) and $`i`$ (Zurita et al., 2000), we calculated the values of the binary parameters, including $`q=2.7_{0.9}^{+1.3}`$, $`M_1=1.46_{0.39}^{+0.30}`$ and $`M_2=0.53_{0.39}^{+0.28}`$, assuming a Roche lobe filling companion synchronously rotating with the binary orbit. Assuming only synchronous rotation, we also obtained the first measurement of the XTE J2123–058 companion’s radius, $`R_2=0.62_{0.15}^{+0.11}`$ $`\mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{}}`$, which is in-line with that expected for a late K-type star on or close to the main sequence.

One of the most significant results of this work is that our measurements of the binary parameters using the rotational broadening method are consistent with the values found by Casares et al. (2002) by using the H$`\alpha `$ emission line to determine $`K_1`$. Although the comparison of the two techniques for obtaining compact object masses is limited to a precision of 20-30% by the errors on $`M_1`$, this provides an important test of the methods currently used to measure compact object masses. However, there is some indication that $`q`$ is underestimated by the H$`\alpha `$ emission line method from the fact that Zurita et al. (2000) obtain values of $`q`$ between 3 and 5 when modeling the XTE J2123–058 outburst light curves to find the binary inclination. While our measurement of $`q`$ is consistent with this range, Casares et al. (2002) find a lower value of $`q=2.1\pm 0.4`$. This issue could be explored further by measuring the ellipsoidal modulations for XTE J2123–058 in X-ray quiescence. Also, the error on $`v\mathrm{sin}i`$ in this work is dominated by statistical errors and could be reduced through further spectroscopic observations.

We wish to thank Jeffrey McClintock, John O’Meara and Dawn Gelino for useful suggestions and discussions. We acknowledge Bob Goodrich for his help with ESI. We thank Gary Puniwai for assistance. We acknowledge the referee for finding a calculation error in the first version of this paper and for other useful comments. Data for this work were obtained at the W.M. Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership among the University of California, Caltech and NASA.


text:
# Untitled Document

BUNCH COHERENCE IN PARAMETRIC X-RAY RADIATION 111Contribution à : NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Electron-Photon Interaction in Dense Media”, (Nor Hamberd, Arménie, 25-29 Juin 2001)

X.Artru (a) and K.A.Ispirian (b)
(a) Institut de Physique Nucléaire de Lyon, IN2P3-CNRS and Université Claude Bernard, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France,
(b) Yerevan Physics Institute, Brothers Alikhanian 2, Yerevan, 375036, Armenia

Abstract

The amplitude of Parametric X-ray radiation emitted coherently by a bunch of electrons crossing a crystal (CPXR) is calculated. When the bunch density is modulated with a longitudinal period close to the X-ray wavelenght, constructive many-electron interferences enhance the intensity by $`N_b\times |F(𝐊)|^2`$, where $`N_b`$ is the number of electrons in the bunch, $`F(𝐊)`$ the bunch form factor and $`𝐊`$ a specified wave vector. CPXR can be used to test the microbunching in a X-ray free-electron laser.

1. Introduction

In radiation source using bunches of relativistic electrons, strong enhancement by a many-electron coherence effect occurs if the bunch is shorter than the emitted wavelength or if it is modulated with a period close to this wavelength. In the first case, the radiation intensity is proportional to the square of the number $`N_b`$ of electrons in the bunch, instead of being linear in $`N_b`$. Thus we have enhancement by a factor $`N_b`$. In the second case, one may consider that the “macro” bunch is made of $`M_b`$ micro-bunches, each having $`n_b`$ electrons ($`N_b=M_bn_b`$). If the microbunches are shorter than the wavelength and longitudinally separated by $`\lambda /v`$ ($`v`$ is the beam velocity in units $`c=1`$), we expect an enhancement factor $`n_b`$ for each microbunch, times an enhancement factor $`M_b`$ coming the interference between all the microbunches, thus an overall enhancement factor $`N_b`$ again. In the general case, the amplitude per bunch is proportional to the Fourier transform of the spatial charge distribution of the bunch. Thus microbunching (MB) is a way of obtaining more radiation from a given beam current. It is a basic ingredient of free-electron lasers (FEL) at optical wavelenght and ”stimulated amplification of spontaneous emission” (SASE) in the X-ray domain (see  and refs therein). Other potential applications are coherent transition radiation (CTR) in the microwave \[3-5\] and X-ray (CXTR)  regions, and possibly coherent radiation of particles channeled in crystalline and nanotube undulators \[8-11\].

Alternatively, coherent radiations of various types (transition radiation, undulator radiation, etc) can be used for the measurement of the beam longitudinal structure with a spatial resolution of the order of $`\lambda `$ (see ref.). In the last years microwave CTR has been used for the measurement of the MB parameters \[3-5\]. At future SASE X-ray FELs , it would be interesting to have a direct and independent diagnostic of the MB process. For this purpose, coherent X-ray transition radiation (CXTR) has been proposed . In the present paper we discuss an alternative scheme based on coherent parametric X-ray radiation (CPXR).

2. Recall about PXR

Parametric X-radiation (PXR) occurs when a charged particle propagates in a crystal. This radiation is generated by Bragg diffraction of the virtual photons composing the Coulomb field of the particle . It is quasi-monochromatic and peaked in a small angular cone about the specular direction (obtained from the electron direction by symmetry with respect to the atomic planes). This direction is at large angle from the electron beam, thus eliminating the bremsstrahlung background. PXR does not come alone, but is accompanied by Diffracted Transition Radiation (DTR) \[14-16\] : transition radiation produced at the entrance surface of the crystal also undergoes Bragg diffraction. PXR and DTR are have similar shapes and usually interfere.

The spectral-angular photon distribution of PXR + DTR having momentum $`𝐤`$ and polarization vector $`\widehat{𝐞}`$ is

$$I\omega \frac{dN_{\widehat{𝐞}}}{d^3𝐤}=\frac{\alpha }{4\pi ^2}|A|^2.$$
$`(1)`$
Using the reciprocity theorem, one can write the amplitude $`A`$ as \[15-17\]

$$A=_{\mathrm{traj}.}𝑑𝐫𝐄_{𝐪,\widehat{𝐞}^{}}(𝐫)e^{i\omega t},$$
$`(2)`$
where $`𝐄_{𝐪,\widehat{𝐞}^{}}(𝐫)e^{i\omega t}`$ describes a plane wave coming from the detector with momentum $`𝐪=𝐤`$ and polarization $`\widehat{𝐞}^{}`$, plus its scattered wave. Thus the calculation of the radiation amplitude reduces to an ordinary wave scattering problem. In the kinematical approximation, the total scattering wave can be decomposed in 5 plane waves :

\- $`|𝐪_0,\widehat{𝐞}>`$ (using Dirac’s ket notation) incoming in vacuum from the detector,

\- $`|𝐪,\widehat{𝐞}>`$, inside the crystal, obtained from the latter by refraction at the surface of the crystal,

\- $`|𝐪^{},\widehat{𝐞}^{}>`$, inside the crystal, obtained from the latter by reflection about an atomic plane,

\- $`|𝐪_𝐠,\widehat{𝐞}^{}>`$, inside the crystal, defined by $`𝐪_𝐠𝐪+𝐠`$, where $`𝐠`$ is a reciprocal lattice vector.

\- $`|𝐪_0^{},\widehat{𝐞}^{}>`$, in vacuum, obtained from $`|𝐪^{},\widehat{𝐞}^{}>`$ by refraction at the surface of the crystal.

The first two waves give negligible contributions to (2). The last three momenta, $`𝐪^{}`$, $`𝐪_𝐠`$ and $`𝐪_0^{}`$ make small angles with $`𝐯`$ and give large contributions. It is not obvious a priori which one of these momenta, if any, is involved in the bunch form factor. This question will be the main one tackled in this paper.

We consider the case of Laue geometry, for ultrarelativistic electrons ($`\gamma 1`$). In the kinematical approximation the amplitude is

$$A^{(\mathrm{Laue})}=i𝐯\widehat{𝐞}^{}\frac{\delta _𝐠}{h^{}h_𝐠}\times B\times e^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_l},$$
$`(3)`$
with

$$B=\left(1e^{ih_𝐠T}\right)\left(\frac{1}{h_𝐠}\frac{1}{h_0}\right)\mathrm{idem}\{h_𝐠h^{}\}.$$
$`(4)`$
In the above formulas, $`T`$ is the travelling time of the electron in the crystal,

$$h_0\omega +𝐯𝐪_0^{}\omega (\gamma ^2+\theta ^2)/2,$$
$`(5)`$
$$h^{}\omega +𝐯𝐪^{}\omega (\gamma ^2+\theta ^2\chi _0)/2,$$
$`(6)`$
$$h_𝐠\omega +𝐯𝐪_𝐠h_0+g[\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta }g/(2\omega )]+\omega (\widehat{𝐧}𝐯/\widehat{𝐧}\widehat{𝐪}_0)\chi _0/2,$$
$`(7)`$
$`\theta \gamma ^1`$ is the angle between $`𝐤`$ and the direction specular to $`𝐯`$, $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ the angle between $`𝐪_0`$ (not $`𝐪`$) and the atomic planes and $`\widehat{𝐧}`$ the unit vector normal to the surface. $`\chi _0\epsilon 1=\omega _\mathrm{P}^2/\omega ^2`$ is the average dielectric susceptibility, $`\chi _𝐠`$ the Fourier coefficient of the local dielectric susceptibility $`\chi (𝐫)`$, and finally

$$\delta _𝐠\frac{1}{2}(\widehat{𝐞}\widehat{𝐞}^{})\chi _𝐠\omega .$$
$`(8)`$
Standard PXR consists in retaining only the $`1/h_𝐠`$ term, which gives a photon yield linear in $`T`$, due to the fact that $`h_𝐠`$ can vanish. Integrating over $`\omega `$, one obtains the well-known formula ,

$$\left(\frac{dN}{d\mathrm{\Omega }}\right)_{\mathrm{PXR}}T\frac{\alpha }{4\pi }\frac{\omega _\mathrm{B}}{\mathrm{sin}^2\mathrm{\Theta }}|\chi _𝐠|^2\frac{\theta _{}^2+\mathrm{cos}^2(2\mathrm{\Theta })\theta _{}^2}{|\gamma ^2+\theta ^2\chi _0|^2},$$
$`(9)`$
in which $`\theta _{}`$ and $`\theta _{}`$ are defined relative to the ($`𝐠,𝐯`$) plane and $`\omega _\mathrm{B}=g/(2\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Theta })`$ is the mean frequency. One should be aware, however, that for thin or mosaic crystals the other terms can be equally important .

For the Bragg geometry, we have $`A^{(\mathrm{Bragg})}=\mathrm{exp}(ih_𝐠T)A^{(\mathrm{Laue})}`$. In the dynamical theory for the Laue case, one has just to replace in (3) and (4) $`h_g`$ by $`h_1`$ and $`h^{}`$ by $`h_2`$ with

$$h_{1,2}=\frac{1}{2}\left\{h^{}+h_𝐠\sqrt{(h^{}h_𝐠)^2+4(\widehat{𝐧}𝐪^{}/\widehat{𝐧}𝐪)\delta _𝐠\delta _𝐠}\right\}.$$
$`(10)`$
For the Bragg geometry the modification is somewhat different .

3. The bunch coherence effect

The phase factor $`e^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_l}`$ is specific of the $`l^{th}`$ electron of the bunch. Calling $`t_l`$ and $`𝐫_l`$ the entrance (resp. exit) time and position for the Bragg (resp. Laue) geometry, we have the three equivalent expressions

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_l=\omega t_l+𝐪_𝐠𝐫_l=\omega t_l+𝐪^{}𝐫_l=\omega t_l+𝐪_0^{}𝐫_l$$
$`(11)`$
($`𝐫=0`$ is taken on the entrance (resp. exit) surface). Writing the electron trajectory as

$$𝐫(t)=𝐯t+𝐬_l$$

where $`𝐬_l`$ is the relative position of the electron inside the bunch, we have $`t_l=(\widehat{𝐧}𝐬_l)/(\widehat{𝐧}𝐯)`$ wherefrom

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_l=𝐊𝐬_l$$
$`(12)`$
with the three equivalent expressions

$$𝐊=𝐪_𝐠+\frac{h_𝐠}{\widehat{𝐧}𝐯}\widehat{𝐧}=𝐪^{}+\frac{h^{}}{\widehat{𝐧}𝐯}\widehat{𝐧}=𝐪_0^{}+\frac{h_0}{\widehat{𝐧}𝐯}\widehat{𝐧}.$$
$`(13)`$
This momentum $`𝐊`$ is the one which enters in the bunch form factor. Assuming that all the electrons of the bunch have the same velocity $`𝐯`$ and neglecting possible two-body correlations between them, the bunch coherent intensity is given by

$$I_{bunch}=I_{oneel.}\times \left[N_b+N_b(N_b1)|F(𝐊)|^2\right]$$
$`(14)`$
with

$$F(𝐊)=d^3𝐬\rho (𝐬)e^{i𝐊𝐬},$$
$`(15)`$
$`\rho (𝐬)`$ being the electron probability distribution normalized to unity ($`F(0)=1`$).

4. Approximations for $`𝐊`$

In the pure PXR limit, $`h_g=0`$, then $`𝐊=𝐪_𝐠`$. One can interpret $`𝐪_𝐠`$ as the momentum of a virtual photon of the electron Coulomb field, which, after Bragg diffraction, becomes the real photon $`𝐪`$ going toward the detector. The strongest amplification occurs when all the electrons emit this virtual photon with the same phase factor $`e^{i𝐪_𝐠𝐬_l}`$, i.e., the electrons lies on the planes $`𝐪_𝐠𝐬_l=2n\pi `$ \+ constant. For a more general bunch modulation it is natural to get the form factor $`F(𝐪)`$.

For thin or strongly absorbing crystal, the PXR peak at Re$`(h_g)=0`$ becomes broad and less dominant. At large enough $`\gamma `$ a DTR peak coming from the $`1/h_0`$ term becomes dominant, although $`h_0`$ cannot strictly vanish. Then one may neglect $`h_0`$ in (13) and take $`𝐊𝐪_0^{}`$.

At very large $`\gamma `$, we have $`h_0/\omega `$, $`h^{}/\omega `$ and $`h_𝐠/\omega 1`$ and we may use equally well $`𝐪_𝐠`$, $`𝐪^{}`$ or $`𝐪_0^{}`$ as argument of the form factor.

Note that in backward coherent transition radiation the argument of the bunch form factor is also $`𝐊=𝐪_0^{}+h_0/(\widehat{𝐧}𝐯)\widehat{𝐧}`$, where $`𝐪_0^{}`$ is the momentum of a photon coming from the detector after reflection by the surface.

5. Discussion

We have shown that, in principle, bunch coherence can be obtained in PXR (+ DTR) as well as, for instance, in transition radiation, and have specified the relevant bunch form factor. This phenomenon can be applied to the diagnostic of micro-bunching or to the enhancement of a PXR source. This is different from the (much more ambitious) goal of building a PXR Free Electron Lasers , which should operate with long pulses of extremely high densities ($`10^810^9A/cm^2`$).

The advantages of PXR-DTR are (i) there is no need for a monochromator (ii) photons are emitted at large angle from the beam. These make the device more compact. Two difficulties might be encountered :

\- in MB diagnostics, the bunch may be accompanied by X-rays coming from the undulator which makes the micro-bunching. These X-rays will be Bragg-reflected by the PXR radiator and can make a large background. It may possible to eliminate these X-rays by a magnetic chicane or using their linear polarization : if the Bragg angle is 45 degrees and the atomic planes perpendicular to the undulator plane, the reflection coefficient for the undulator X-rays vanishes.

\- $`𝐊`$ makes the angle $`\theta \gamma ^1`$ with the beam. If the bunch is modulated only in the longitudinal coordinate and has a transverse size $`r_T`$ larger than $`\lambda /\theta `$, then its form factor is strongly reduced. If one lowers $`\theta `$ too much, the $`PXR+DTR`$ intensity vanishes like $`\theta ^2`$ (the same problem occurs with bunch-coherent transition radiation). It should be however possible to avoid this damping by making the spatial modulation of the bunch oblique, the planes of maximum density being orthogonal to $`𝐊`$ and not to the velocity. The necessary tilt of these planes could be obtained by deflecting the beam at the angle $`\theta `$ using an upstream magnet.

This work has been supported by INTAS contract 97-30392.

6. References

1. Conceptual Design of a 500 GeV Linear Collider with Integrated X- Ray Laser Facility, Eds. R.Brinkman et al, DESY 1997-048/ECFA 1997- 182,1997.

2. J.Arthur et al, LCLS.,Design Study Report, SLAC-R-521, UC-414, 1998.

3. J.Rosenzweig, G.Travish and A.Tremaine, Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 365 (1995) 255.

4. Y.Liu et al, Phys. Rev. Lett., 80 (1998), LL18.

5. A.Tremaine et al, Phys. Rev. Lett, 81 (1998) 5816.

6. E.G.Gazazian, K.Ispirian, R.K.Ispirian and M.I.Ivanian, Pisma v Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz., 70, 664, 1999.

7. E.G.Gazazian, K.Ispirian, R.K.Ispirian and M.I.Ivanian, Nucl Instr and Meth. B173 (2001) 160

8. A.V.Korol, A.V.Solovyov and W.Greiner, J.Phys. G.: Nucl. Part. Phys. 24, L45, 1998.

9. R.O.Avakian, L.A.Gevorgian, K.A.Ispirian and R.K.Ispirian, Pisma Zh. Esp.i Teor Fiz, 68, 437, 1998.

10. A.V.Korol et al, Intern. J. Mod. Phys E, 8, 49,1999.

11. R.O.Avakian, L.A.Gevorgian, K.A.Ispirian and R.K.Ispirian, Nucl Instr and Meth. B173 (2001) 112.

12. Proc. 3rd European Workshop on Beam Diagnostics and Instrumentation for Particle Accelerators, DIPAC 97, Frascati, 1997, LNF-97/048(IR), p.195- 251.

13. G.M. Garibian and C. Yang, Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 61 (1971) 930 \[Sov. Phys. JETP 34 (1972) 495\] ; V.G. Baryshevsky and I.D. Feranchuk, J. Physique 44 (1983) 913 .

14. A. Caticha, Phys. rev. A40 (1989) 4322 ; A.P. Potylitsin and V.A. Verzilov, Phys. Lett. A209 (1995) 380.

15. P. Rullhusen, X. Artru and P. Dhez, Novel Radiation Sources Using Relativistic Electrons, World Scientific, Singapore, 1998.

16. X. Artru, P. Rullhusen, Nucl. Inst. Meth. B145 (1998) 1 ; ibid B173 (2001) 16.

17. V.G. Baryshevsky, I.D. Feranchuk, A.O. Grubich and A.V. Ivashin, Nucl. Inst. Meth. A249 (1986) 306.

18. I.D. Feranchuk and A.V. Ivashin, J. Physique 46 (1985) 1981 ; H. Nitta, Nucl. Inst. Meth. B115 (1996) 401.

19. V.G.Barishevsky, K.C.Batrakov and I.Ya.Dubovskaya, J. Phys. D 24, 1250,1991 ; Nucl. Instr. and Meth., A375, 295, 1996.


text:
# Linking Ultracold Polar Molecules

## Abstract

We predict that pairs of polar molecules can be weakly bound together in an ultracold environment, provided that a dc electric field is present. The field that links the molecules together also strongly influences the basic properties of the resulting dimer, such as its binding energy and predissociation lifetime. Because of their long-range character these dimers will be useful in disentangling cold collision dynamics of polar molecules. As an example, we estimate the microwave photoassociation yield for OH-OH cold collisions.

A recurring theme that has emerged in the study of ultracold matter has been one of control over interparticle interactions. Most notably, magnetic fields  and resonant laser light  have been employed to alter atomic scattering lengths, influencing in turn the behavior of Bose-Einstein condensates. Perhaps even more intriguing is the ability, using the same tools, to catalyze the production of diatomic molecules . When the initial atomic sample is Bose condensed, there can result coherent superpositions of atoms and molecules  in a process dubbed “superchemistry” . More broadly, external fields may be expected to guide chemical reactions. Chemical processes involving atom exchange have been considered at ultralow temperatures , and have been observed so far experimentally in the context of three-body recombination  and vibrational quenching .

A prerequisite to effective control over atoms or molecules is a clear understanding of their interactions at ultralow temperatures. Even for alkali atoms, ab initio potentials have insufficient accuracy to predict scattering lengths; this statement is even more true for molecules. Investigators must therefore rely on key experimental data that will unravel threshold scattering properties of molecules in the most straightforward way. For the alkali atoms, an efficient tool for extracting scattering lengths has been optical photoassociation (PA) to weakly-bound states of alkali dimers. The states in question are generated by spin-orbit couplings that lead to avoided crossings in potential curves at large values $`R`$ of interatomic separation (typically tens of Bohr radii) . Because of their long-range character, they are insensitive to details of the small-$`R`$ potentials that are poorly characterized. Free-to-bound optical spectra of these states therefore contain, in a reasonably accessible form, important information on scattering phase shifts .

More recently, even more exotic molecular states have been predicted to exist in ultracold environments. Greene and collaborators have predicted Rydberg states of diatomic molecules with elaborate electronic wave functions, whose density plots resemble trilobites  or butterflies . In addition, Côté, Kharchenko, and Lukin have identified possible molecules composed of hundreds of neutral atoms clinging to a single impurity ion in a Bose-Einstein condensate .

In this Letter we introduce another set of unusual molecular states. These are composed of two ground-state polar molecules held at large intermolecular separation under the joint influence of electric dipole forces and an external electric field. The properties of these metastable dimers, such as binding energy, intermolecular separation, and predissociation lifetime, depend strongly on the value of the field, leading to new types of control over intermolecular interactions. These states may be populated by rapid electric field ramps, or else by the analog of photoassociation spectroscopy in the microwave regime. Below we describe the origin and properties of these states, and estimate the trap loss rates associated with their formation and subsequent dissociation in microwave PA experiments. In this way we sketch a general strategy for understanding and manipulating cold collisions of polar molecules produced by either Stark deceleration  or buffer-gas cooling .

For concreteness we will consider dimers of two OH molecules, to be denoted \[OH\]$`{}_{}{}^{}{}_{2}{}^{}`$, although the phenomenon should apply quite generally to polar molecules, for example NH3 , that suffer a linear Stark effect at experimentally realizable fields. We have previously described a model for the OH-OH interaction Hamiltonian, including the parity, spin, and nuclear spin degrees of freedom that are most relevant at ultralow temperatures . The OH ground state has spin $`j=3/2`$, which, coupled to the nuclear spin $`i=1/2`$ of the proton, gives total spin $`f=2`$ in the molecular states we consider. For clarity, we restrict the present model to molecules that are spin polarized with $`m_f=f=2`$, and neglect couplings to different values of $`m_f`$. Further, we incorporate only the partial waves $`L=0,2`$. These restrictions do not change the qualitative behavior of the model , but they do render its structure more tractable.

The scattering thresholds in this model are set by the Stark splitting $`\mathrm{\Lambda }()`$ of the molecular levels. At the relatively low fields of interest here, rotational states are not substantially mixed by the field, but the opposite parity states of the molecule’s Lambda doublet are mixed. Thus there is a weak tendency for the field to align the dipole moments, along the field when $`\omega <0`$, and against the field when $`\omega >0`$, where $`\omega `$ is the projection of $`j`$ along the body axis of the molecule (these alignments are reversed when the laboratory projection $`m_j<0`$) . For convenience we refer to these alignments, valid at infinitely large intermolecular separation, as $``$ and $``$, respectively. A set of adiabatic potential energy curves for our model is shown in Figure 1(a), where the dc electric field strength is taken to be $`=10^4`$ V/cm.

When the separation between the molecules is not infinite, the partial wave $`L`$ is no longer a good quantum number, different values being mixed by strong anisotropies of the dipole-dipole interaction. The adiabatic channels shown therefore represent different orientations of the intermolecular axis relative to the laboratory-fixed electric field axis, as indicated schematically by the diagrams within ellipses. For example, consider the highest threshold where both molecules point against the field. The attractive adiabatic potential corresponds to a combination of $`L=0`$ and $`2`$ partial waves that places the dipoles end-to-end on average, whereas the repulsive curve places the dipoles side-by-side on average.

When the molecules approach still closer to one another, there is an inevitable curve crossing between the repulsive potential correlating to the $`|+`$ $`|`$ threshold and the attractive potential correlating to the $`|+`$ $`|`$ threshold. These channels are dipole-coupled, leading to an avoided curve crossing at $`R=60`$ a.u. in the figure. The resulting potential curve, labeled $`V_b`$ in Figure 1(a), is deep enough to hold a set of quasi-bound states of the \[OH\]$`{}_{}{}^{}{}_{2}{}^{}`$ dimer. (Note that this curve was denoted “$`U_0`$” in Ref. . Here we label it more consistently with the theory of photoassociation, to which we refer below.)

The potential $`V_b`$, and its bound states, are strongly subject to the strength of the applied electric field $``$. First, changes in $``$ shift the relative thresholds, changing the location of the crossing point. Second, the coupling matrix element between the channels that cross to form $`V_b`$ varies with field as $`k/(1+k^2)`$, where $`k=2\mu /\mathrm{\Lambda }(0)`$, and $`\mu `$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }(0)`$ are the molecule’s dipole moment and zero-field Lambda-doublet splitting, respectively . This means that in low field the crossing is purely diabatic, to lowest order, and the molecules can approach to small values of $`R`$ where hydrogen bonding and chemical forces can act.

That the field controls these states is illustrated in Figure 2. Here the binding energies of potential $`V_b`$ are plotted as a function of electric field $``$, from zero to $`10^4`$ V/cm. The solid lines refer to a close-coupling calculation in the six-channel model, whereas the dashed lines give the bound state energies of the adiabatic potential $`V_b`$. Similar results are obtained in the more complete calculation described in Ref. . A striking feature of this figure is that for fields below $`1000`$ V/cm there are no bound states at all, because the potential becomes too shallow. Because of the essential role the field plays in creating these states, we refer to them as “field linked” states.

The field-linked (FL) states remain coupled to channels with lower-energy thresholds, and can therefore predissociate to these channels. For several selected field values the energy widths for predissociation, computed from the eigenphase sums in the close-coupling calculation, are indicated by error bars on the energies. Two general trends are readily apparent: first, the widths as a whole become exponentially narrower as the binding energy approaches threshold; second, there is an additional field-dependent modulation in the widths, governed by the varying overlap integrals between the resonant states and the continua into which they decay.

The dominance of the electric field over the FL states implies that ultracold molecular collisions can be manipulated. For example, resonant control over scattering lengths in $`|+`$ $`|`$ collisions is possible by tuning bound states of $`V_b`$ through the scattering threshold . A similar tuning was noted for alkali atoms in extremely strong electric fields , but without making the explicit connection to bound states.

The FL states also imply a degree of control over chemical reactions. For example, placing two OH molecules in a FL state holds them at a “safe” distance where the reaction cannot occur (assuming for example that the exoergic reaction OH + OH $``$ H2O + O actually occurs at ultralow temperatures). The reaction can then be activated at will by switching off the field, which could be done at any desired rate simply by varying the field strength.

FL states can presumably be created from a gas of $`|`$ molecules by quickly ramping the electric field, just as bound states of Rb2 have been created in magnetic field ramps . Setting the field to an appropriate value will guarantee that the state created will be long-lived against predissociation. It is also possible that they have been produced already by collisions in the supersonic expansion that feeds the Stark slowing process , although they have not yet been sought in this environment.

As a practical issue, a gas of molecules in the weak-electric-field-seeking $`|`$ state is subject to large collisional losses in an electric field and is therefore not suitable for evaporative cooling . The $`|`$ state, on the other hand, is collisionally stable, being the lowest energy state of the OH molecule, and it can be trapped in either a magnetostatic or an off-resonant optical dipole trap. Adiabatic curves correlating to the $`|+`$ $`|`$ threshold do not experience a curve crossing at large $`R`$, and allow the molecules to approach to small values of $`R`$ (see Fig. 1). The cold collision parameters, for instance the scattering length, will then have to be measured in a suitable experiment.

We are therefore led to consider photoassociation (PA) spectroscopy of the molecular pair. This will be PA at microwave, rather than optical, wavelengths, appropriate to the energies of the FL states. We follow here the discussion of Ref. , and consider single-channel processes only. This will enable order-of magnitude estimates of the multichannel response. The PA process may be viewed as a scattering event, where two molecules incident in channel $`V_0`$ with relative energy $`E`$ are promoted by a microwave photon of detuning $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ to a FL state in potential $`V_b`$. This state can then predissociate, typically releasing a large fraction of the photon’s energy and leading to trap loss in the exit channel. The rate constant for collisional trap loss via a bound state in potential $`V_b`$ is given by

$$K_{\mathrm{loss}}=\frac{\pi v}{k^2}\frac{\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }}{(E\mathrm{\Delta })^2+((\gamma +\mathrm{\Gamma })/2)^2},$$
(1)
where $`v`$ and $`k`$ are the relative incident velocity and wave number, $`\gamma `$ is the predissociation width, and the stimulated width $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is given by the Fermi’s Golden Rule expression

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=2\pi |f_0|V_{\mathrm{rad}}|\varphi _b|^2.$$
(2)
Here $`V_{\mathrm{rad}}=<\stackrel{}{\mu }\stackrel{}{}_{ac}>`$ is the $`R`$-dependent dipole matrix element for the transition, averaged over all coordinates except $`R`$ . $`_{ac}`$ is the amplitude of the ac electric field of the applied microwaves, which we assume are polarized parallel to the dc field. The width (1) also depends on $`f_0(R)`$, the energy-normalized incident wave function, and $`\varphi _b(R)`$, the unit-normalized bound state wave function in potential $`V_b`$. On resonance, and in the typical case $`\mathrm{\Gamma }\gamma `$ the rate is approximately

$$K_{\mathrm{loss}}\frac{4\pi v}{k^2}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{\gamma },$$
(3)
hence is proportional to the microwave intensity.

Measurements of optical PA spectra have proven useful in assessing the scattering lengths of alkali atoms , largely because the overlap integral in (2) is sensitive to the amplitude of the wave function $`f_0`$ at the intermolecular distance $`R_c`$ where the transition occurs. In fact, this circumstance enables PA rates to be estimated using a “reflection approximation” that focuses on the wave functions at $`R=R_c`$ alone . The FL states should exhibit a similar sensitivity to scattering length, although now the $`R`$-dependence of the dipole coupling $`V_{\mathrm{rad}}`$ cannot be neglected, as seen in Figure 1(b). In the limit of large $`R`$, $`V_{\mathrm{rad}}`$ tends to zero, owing to the inability of a single photon to drive a transition of both molecules at once. At smaller values of $`R`$, where the avoided crossing occurs that creates $`V_b`$, the radiative coupling attains a nonzero value.

To illustrate the feasibility of PA experiments in this system, and to emphasize the strong sensitivity of the spectra to electric field and scattering length, we estimate rate constants for several different circumstances. These results are summarized in Table I. In all cases we have assumed that the ac microwave field has a field strength of $`_{ac}=15`$ V/cm, which can be reasonably achieved in the laboratory . We have computed the resonant PA rate according to Eqn. (1), assuming two different short-range potentials that produce the scattering lengths $`a=69`$ a.u. and $`a=400`$ a.u. in the incident $`V_0`$ ground channel, in zero electric field. The collision energy is 100 $`\mu `$K in the results shown here.

The Tables show, for several values of the dc electric field $``$, the binding energy of several states; their predissociation widths $`\gamma `$; their stimulated widths $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for each of the scattering lengths; and the resonant loss rate $`K_{\mathrm{loss}}`$, again for both scattering lengths. The table illustrates that a fairly small field change, on the order of 1 kV/cm, can completely alter the loss rates. Moreover, the rates are different for different scattering lengths, implying sensitivity to details of the short-range part of $`V_0`$. A complete map of loss versus field ought therefore to contain a wealth of information about cold collisions of OH molecules. Equally importantly, the absolute magnitudes of the loss rates can be quite large, as high as several $`10^{11}`$ cm3/sec, which should be easily measurable if densities are high enough for molecular collisions to be observed at all.

In summary, we have introduced a set of weakly-bound “field-linked” states of ultracold polar molecules that exist only in the presence of an electric field. The sensitivity of these states to electric field suggests an unprecedented level of control over intermolecular forces, since the very shape of the interaction potential can be manipulated. In addition, their purely long-range character makes them invaluable tools for approaching the difficult problem of deciphering ultracold molecular collisions.

This work was supported by the NSF. We acknowledge useful discussions with J. Hutson and J. Ye.


text:
# Unconditional Continuous Variable Dense Coding.

## I Introduction

The classical channel capacity of a quantum channel can be enhanced if the sender and recipient of the information, Alice and Bob repectively, share an entangled state. This effect is known as quantum dense coding  and can be thought of as the converse problem to quantum teleportation  where, effectively, the quantum capacity of a classical channel is enhanced by the use of entanglement.

Dense coding was originally introduced for discrete variables and an experimental demonstration of the effect has been made using photonic polarization entanglement . One drawback of this demonstration was, due to the low efficiency of entanglement production and detection, the demonstration was conditional on Bob detecting a pair of photons, a rare event. In contrast a dense coding scheme based on continuous variables, such as the quadrature amplitudes of a light field, which has recently been proposed, would in principle demonstrate an unconditional improvement in classical channel capacity . Ultimately this scheme can beat, under certain conditions, the maximum channel capacity given by Fock state encoding. However the conditions for this strong violation found in  required unrealistic levels of squeezing.

A number of groups have taken steps towards the experimental implementation of this scheme . In these experiments increased signal to noise was demonstrated with the addition of entanglement and conclusions were drawn about the violation of coherent state classical capacity, based on the results of Ref . However unit entanglement state purity and detection efficiency were assumed in , which is unlikely to have been the case experimentally. Also no attempt was made to experimentally quantify the number of quanta used in the communication channel. There is thus a need for a more detailed analysis.

In this paper we make such an investigation. We come to the rather surprizing conclusion that in fact the conditions required for a strong demonstration of the effect, i.e. beating the ultimate channel capacity given by Fock state encoding, are not as stringent as previously thought, even taking into account lack of state purity and non-unit detection efficiency.

## II Ideal Channel Capacities

We begin by rederiving the channel capacities of Gaussian quantum channels and continuous variable dense coding using quadrature spectral variances. Such variances are directly measureable in an experiment. The Shannon capacity  of a communication channel with Gaussian noise of power (variance) $`N`$ and Gaussian distributed signal power $`S`$ operating at the bandwidth limit is

$$C=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{log}_2[1+\frac{S}{N}]$$
(1)
Eq.1 can be used to calculate the channel capacities of quantum states with Gaussian probability distributions such as coherent states and squeezed states . Consider first a signal composed of a Gaussian distribution of coherent state amplitudes all with the same quadrature angle (see Fig.1 (a)). The signal power $`V_s`$ is given by the variance of the distribution. The noise is given by the intrinsic quantum noise of the coherent states and is defined to be $`V_n=1`$. Because the quadrature angle of the signal is known, homodyne detection can in principle detect the the signal without further penalty thus the measured signal to noise is $`S/N=V_s/V_n=V_s`$.

In general the average photon number per bandwidth per second of a light beam is given by

$$\overline{n}=\frac{1}{4}(V^++V^{})\frac{1}{2}$$
(2)
where $`V^+`$ ($`V^{}`$) are the variances of the maximum (minimum) quadrature projections of the noise ellipse of the state. These projections are orthogonal quadratures, such as amplitude and phase, and obey the uncertainty principle $`V^+V^{}1`$. In the above example one quadrature is made up of signal plus quantum noise such that $`V^+=V_s+1`$ whilst the orthogonal quadrature is just quantum noise so $`V^{}=1`$. Hence $`\overline{n}=1/4V_s`$ and so the channel capacity of a coherent state with single quadrature encoding and homodyne detection is

$$C_c=\mathrm{log}_2[\sqrt{1+4\overline{n}}]$$
(3)
Establishing in an experiment that a particular optical mode has this capacity would involve: (i) measuring the quadrature amplitude variances of the beam, $`V^+`$ and $`V^{}`$, (ii) calibrating Alice’s signal variance and (iii) measuring Bob’s signal to noise. If these measurments agreed with the theoretical conditions above then Shannons theorem tells us that an encoding scheme exists which could realize the channel capacity of Eq.3. An example of such an encoding is given in .

For photon numbers $`\overline{n}>2`$ improved channel capacity can be obtained by encoding symmetrically on both quadratures and detecting both quadratures simultaneously using heterodyne detection or dual homodyne detection (see Fig.1(b)). Because of the non-commutation of orthogonal quaratures there is a penalty for their simultaneous detection which reduces the signal to noise of each quadrature to $`S/N=1/2V_s`$. Also because there is signal on both quadratures the average photon number of the beam is now $`\overline{n}=1/2V_s`$. On the other hand the total channel capacity will now be the sum of the two independent channels carried by the two quadratures. Thus the channel capacity for a coherent state with dual quadrature encoding and heterodyne detection is

$`C_{ch}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{log}_2[1+{\displaystyle \frac{S}{N}}^+]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{log}_2[1+{\displaystyle \frac{S}{N}}^{}]`$ (4)
$`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}_2[1+\overline{n}]`$ (5)
which exceeds that of the homodyne technique (Eq.3) for $`\overline{n}>2`$.

The above channel capacities are the best achievable if we restrict ourselves to a semi-classical treatment of light. However the channel capacity of the homodyne technique (Fig.1(a)) can be improved by the use of non-classical, squeezed light. With squeezed light the noise variance of the encoded quadrature can be reduced such that $`V_{ne}<1`$, whilst the noise of the unencoded quadrature is increased such that $`V_{nu}1/V_{ne}`$. As a result the signal to noise is improved to $`S/N=V_s/V_{ne}`$ whilst the photon number is now given by Eq.2 but with $`V^+=V_s+V_{ne}`$ and $`V^{}=1/V_{ne}`$ where a pure (i.e. minimum uncertainty) squeezed state has been assumed. Maximizing the signal to noise for fixed $`\overline{n}`$ leads to $`S/N=4(\overline{n}+\overline{n}^2)`$ for a squeezed quadrature variance of $`V_{ne,opt}=1/(1+2\overline{n})`$. Hence the channel capacity for a squeezed beam with homodyne detection is

$$C_{sh}=\mathrm{log}_2[1+2\overline{n}]$$
(6)
which exceeds both coherent homodyne and heterodyne for all values of $`\overline{n}`$.

A final improvement in channel capacity can be obtained by allowing non-Gaussian states. The absolute maximum channel capacity for a single mode is given by the Holevo bound and can be realized by encoding in a maximum entropy ensemble of Fock states and using photon number detection . This ultimate channel capacity is

$$C_{Fock}=(1+\overline{n})\mathrm{log}_2[(1+\overline{n})]\overline{n}\mathrm{log}_2[\overline{n}]$$
(7)
which is the maximal channel capacity at all values of $`\overline{n}`$.

We now turn to dense coding. At low average photon numbers the single channel capacities are always best. However, we will find that for sufficiently high average photon numbers dense coding can give superior capacities. The set-up is depicted in Fig.1(c). Entanglement is generated in the standard way by mixing two squeezed states, with their squeezing ellipses orthogonal,on a 50:50 beamsplitter . One half of the entangled pair is sent to Alice who encodes on both quadratures in the manner of coherent heterodyne. She sends the beam on to Bob who has also received the other half of the entangled pair. He uses a dual homodyne technique to measure both quadratures of the beam from Alice but injects his entangled beam into the empty port of the dual homodyne beamsplitter. The resulting signal to noise for the two quadrature channels is $`S/N=1/2(V_s/V_{ne})`$, where now $`V_{ne}`$ is the variance of the squeezed quadrature of the beams used to create the entanglement. The photon number is just that of the beam carrying the signal (the cost of distributing the entanglement is not taken into account) and so is given by Eq.2 with $`V^+=1/2V_s+1/4V_{ne}`$ and $`V^{}=1/V_{ne}`$. Once again pure squeezed states are assumed. Maximizing the signal to noise for fixed $`\overline{n}`$ gives $`S/N=\overline{n}+\overline{n}^2`$ for a squeezed quadrature variance of $`V_{ne,opt}=1/(1+2\overline{n})`$. So the optimum channel capacity for dense coding is

$$C_{dc}^{opt}=\mathrm{log}_2[1+\overline{n}+\overline{n}^2]$$
(8)
which exceeds the coherent state homodyne for $`\overline{n}>0.478`$, which can be achieved with $`V_{ne}0.5`$ (about 50% squeezing), and always exceeds the coherent state heterodyne channel capacity. Dense coding beats the squeezed state channel capacity with $`\overline{n}>1`$ (achieved with $`V_{ne}0.33`$ or about 67% squeezing) and beats Fock state encoding when $`\overline{n}>1.88`$ (achieved with $`V_{ne}0.2`$ or squeezing of about 80%).

Some comments are in order concerning the analysis to date. Firstly notice the boundaries of the previous analysis were for pure squeezed states which saturate the uncertainty inequality. In contrast the states produced in experiments are rarely pure, sometimes because of technical noise , sometimes due to the type of squeezing mechanism , and sometimes simply due to loss in the non-linear crystal . Loss in the optical elements used to produce the entanglement from the squeezing will also reduce the purity (as well as the effective entanglement). Therefore, in an experiment we will have that $`V_{nu}=1/V_{ne}+b`$, where $`b`$ represents excess noise. This means that a particular level of entanglement is accompanied by more photons than in the pure case. Hence channel capacities will be lowered***For example, the optimum signal to noise ratio of the dense coding scheme when considering entanglement impurity is $`S/N=\overline{n}+\overline{n}^2b(0.25+0.5\overline{n})+0.0625b^2`$. At the optimum squeezed quadrature variance of $`V_{ne,opt}=2/(4\overline{n}+2b)`$ (with $`b<4\overline{n}+2`$) the new, more general expression for the optimum dense coding capacity is $`C_{dci}^{opt}=\mathrm{log}_2[1+\overline{n}+\overline{n}^2b(0.25+0.5\overline{n})+0.0625b^2]`$ which will be less than $`C_{dc}^{opt}`$ for any amount of excess noise.. Further, unit detection efficiency was assumed. Again, this is unlikely in an experiment. As a result Bob’s detected variances will be given by $`V_{det}=\eta V+1\eta `$, where $`\eta `$ is the detection efficiency. Non-unit detection efficiency will lower signal to noise and once again decrease the effective channel capacity. Propagation loss (assumed equal in the two channels) has the same effect as detection efficiency and so can be rolled into the value of $`\eta `$.

To achieve unconditional dense coding we require that even in the presence of these kinds of imperfections, the dense coding channel capacity exceeds that of the ideal single channel capacities. The levels of squeezing apparently required in the ideal case are already at the boundary of what is currently achievable experimentally - experiments regularly achieve squeezing greater than 3dB (50%)  but stable measured squeezing of approximately 5dB ( 68%) has only been reported recently . Imperfections appear to only further increase the stringent experimental requirements and it would seem that an experimental demonstration of unconditional dense coding is beyond current technology. However, in the following section we will show that this is not the case and that a demonstration is within the reach of current continuous variable technology.

## III Demonstrating Unconditional Dense Coding

Notice that the preceeding analysis and that of Ref  asked the question: “what is the minimum photon number for which we can demonstrate dense coding”. We will now show that a different answer is obtained if we ask the question: “what is the minimum squeezing required to demonstrate dense coding”. Rather than maximizing the signal to noise ratio for a fixed $`\overline{n}`$ we now allow an arbitrary relationship between the squeezed quadrature variance, average photon number and excess noise. The detected dense coding signal to noise ratio may then be explicitly written as $`(\eta (4\overline{n}V_{ne}1/V_{ne}b+2))/(4\eta V_{ne}+44\eta )`$. Hence a more general expression for the dense coding capacity is

$$C_{dc}=\mathrm{log}_2\left[1+\frac{\eta (4\overline{n}V_{ne}1/V_{ne}b+2)}{4(\eta V_{ne}+1\eta )}\right]$$
(9)
Fig.2 shows the channel capacity of the dense coding scheme, $`C_{dc}`$ as a function of the squeezed quadrature variance at an average photon number of $`\overline{n}=5`$. For the moment, focus on the topmost curve (labelled “$`C_{dc}`$ $`(b=0,\eta =1)`$”) which represents the channel capacity in the absence of excess noise and for perfect detection efficiency. This curve represents the best possible scenario for that photon number. Also shown in this Figure are the ideal maximum channel capacities for the squeezed state scheme, $`C_{sh}`$ and the Fock state scheme $`C_{Fock}`$ for this photon number. As illustrated in Fig.2 and indicated by Equation 8, at $`\overline{n}=5`$ the optimum dense coding capacity exceeds the capacity of the squeezed or Fock state schemes. However, Fig.2 illustrates a point that is not clear from Equation 8 \- the dense coding channel capacity exceeds that of $`C_{sh}`$ or $`C_{Fock}`$ for a number of values of $`V_{ne}`$, not just the optimum.

Most significantly, Fig.2 shows that it is possible to demonstrate unconditional dense coding with a relatively modest amount of squeezing. For example, it is seen from Fig.2 that unconditional dense coding may be demonstrated with respect to the squeezed state system for $`V_{ne}0.48`$ and it may be demonstrated with respect to the Fock state scheme for $`V_{ne}0.33`$. These levels of squeezing are far more experimentally feasible than those found by simply considering the optimum. Even more heartening from an experimental perspective is that the levels of squeezing required may be reduced by increasing $`\overline{n}`$. Experimentally, given a minimum amount of squeezing, this amounts to simply increasing the signal strength.

Denoting the maximum squeezed quadrature variances at which unconditional dense coding may be demonstrated with respect to $`C_{sh}`$ and $`C_{Fock}`$ as $`V_{max,s}`$ and $`V_{max,F}`$ respectively, Fig.3 shows $`V_{max,s}`$ and $`V_{max,F}`$ as a function of the photon number. Again, focussing for the moment on the curves for pure entanglement and perfect detection efficiency (labelled “($`b=0,\eta =1`$)”, it is seen that $`V_{max,s}`$ and $`V_{max,F}`$ asymptote to values of $`1/2`$ and $`1/e`$ respectively. This is quite a surprizing result. This Figure shows that, in a perfect experiment, it is possible to demonstrate unconditional dense coding with 50 % squeezing with respect to the the squeezed state channel capacity and 63 % squeezing with respect to the Fock state scheme.

Turning now to experimental issues such as excess noise or imperfect detection efficiency, Fig.2 also shows curves representing the dense coding channel capacity, $`C_{dc}`$ when excess noise, labelled “($`b=2,\eta =1`$)” and imperfect detection efficiency, labelled “($`b=0,\eta =0.9`$)”, are considered. First note that Fig.2 shows that both excess noise and imperfect detection efficiency decrease the effective channel capacity of the dense coding scheme. Indeed, sufficient amounts of either of these imperfections will render a demonstration of unconditional dense coding impossible for low photon numbers. However, given a minimum level of squeezing, this may be solved by increasing the photon number, i.e. by increasing the signal strength. The minimum level of squeezing required for each photon number depends quite strongly on the entanglement impurity and detection efficiency. This effect is shown in Fig.3 where $`V_{max,F}`$ and $`V_{max,s}`$ are plotted as a function of the photon number for a number of values of excess noise in part (a) and a number of values of detection efficiency in part (b).

Fig.3 shows that, for a given photon number, either of these imperfections will mean that more squeezing is required than for the best possible scenario. Alternatively, for a given level of squeezing, entanglement impurity or imperfect detection efficiency will require that more photons must be used to demonstrate unconditional dense coding.

Perhaps more importantly, Fig.3 shows that the experimental issue of greatest concern is that of imperfect detection efficiency. Excess noise will certainly have an effect on the performance of the dense coding scheme for small photon numbers. However the asymptotes of $`V_{max,F}`$ and $`V_{max,s}`$ do not depend on the entanglement purity. By contrast, the asymptotes of $`V_{max,F}`$ and $`V_{max,s}`$ depend very strongly on the detection efficiency. In practical terms, this means that much greater levels of squeezing will be required to demonstrate unconditional dense coding when the detection efficiency is poor. Indeed the amount of squeezing required increases exponentially around a characteristic value of detection efficiency. This suggests that practical systems must exceed a minimum detection efficiency in order to demonstrate unconditional dense coding. When comparing the dense coding channel capacity to the squeezed state system, the minimum detection efficiency required is $`\eta _{min,s}=2/3`$. The minimum detection efficiency increases to $`\eta _{min,F}=e/(1+e)`$ in order to demonstrate unconditional dense coding with respect to the Fock state system.

Taking these effects into account, it appears that an experimental demonstration of unconditional dense coding with respect to the squeezed state system is currently feasible. For example, with experimentally realistic detection efficiencies of 85-95 % the maximum squeezing required would be approximately 68-55 % respectively. These levels of squeezing are now quite commonly achieved . On the other hand, an experimental demonstration of unconditional dense coding with respect to the Fock scheme is a rather more ambitious, but not unattainable, goal. With experimentally realistic detection efficiencies of 85-95 % the maximum squeezing required would be approximately 81-68 % respectively. Ref.  reported measured squeezing of 5dB with a detection efficiency of approximately 87 %. Assuming a dense coding scheme with approximately the same detection efficiency as quoted in reference , we conclude that this would have been just sufficient to demonstrate unconditional dense coding with respect to the Fock state scheme. Thus the levels of squeezing required for a strong demonstration of unconditional dense coding are within the boundaries of current technology.

## IV Conclusion

We have shown that by working in the large signal regime a demonstration of unconditional dense coding appears possible with present technology. We believe that such a demonstration would represent a bench-mark experiment in continuous variable quantum information technology. It is interesting to note relationships between the entanglement requirements of dense coding and teleportation. Beating the coherent state channel capacity with dense coding can be achieved with any level of squeezing in the entanglement. Similarly an improvement over the classical fidelity limit for teleportation of coherent states is achieved with any finite level of squeezing. However the preservation of non-classical properties of the state like squeezing requires greater than 50% squeezing in teleportation, corresponding to the requirement of 50% squeezing to beat the squeezed state channel capacity in dense coding. It is interesting to muse as to whether the $`1/e`$ entanglement requirement for unconditional dense coding corresponds to the passing of some other tangible limit in teleportation.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank C.Savage and W.Bowen for useful comments. This work was supported by the Australian Research Council.