text:
# Measurement of Exclusive 𝐵 Decays to Final States Containing a Charmed Baryon

## Abstract

Using data collected by the CLEO detector in the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ region, we report new measurements of the exclusive decays of $`B`$ mesons into final states of the type $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}n(\pi )`$, where $`n=0,1,2,3`$. We find signals in modes with one, two and three pions and an upper limit for the two body decay $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}`$. We also make the first measurements of exclusive decays of $`B`$ mesons to $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c\overline{p}n(\pi )`$, where $`n=0,1,2`$. We find signals in modes with one and two pions and an upper limit for the two body decay $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c\overline{p}`$. Measurements of these modes shed light on the mechanisms involved in $`B`$ decays to baryons.

preprint:   CLNS 02/1793  CLEO 02-11

S.A. Dytman,1 J.A. Mueller,1 S. Nam,1 V. Savinov,1 S. Chen,2 J. W. Hinson,2 J. Lee,2 D. H. Miller,2 V. Pavlunin,2 E. I. Shibata,2 I. P. J. Shipsey,2 D. Cronin-Hennessy,3 A.L. Lyon,3 C. S. Park,3 W. Park,3 E. H. Thorndike,3 T. E. Coan,4 Y. S. Gao,4 F. Liu,4 Y. Maravin,4 R. Stroynowski,4 M. Artuso,5 C. Boulahouache,5 K. Bukin,5 E. Dambasuren,5 K. Khroustalev,5 R. Mountain,5 R. Nandakumar,5 T. Skwarnicki,5 S. Stone,5 J.C. Wang,5 A. H. Mahmood,6 S. E. Csorna,7 I. Danko,7 G. Bonvicini,8 D. Cinabro,8 M. Dubrovin,8 S. McGee,8 A. Bornheim,9 E. Lipeles,9 S. P. Pappas,9 A. Shapiro,9 W. M. Sun,9 A. J. Weinstein,9 R. Mahapatra,10 R. A. Briere,11 G. P. Chen,11 T. Ferguson,11 G. Tatishvili,11 H. Vogel,11 N. E. Adam,12 J. P. Alexander,12 K. Berkelman,12 V. Boisvert,12 D. G. Cassel,12 P. S. Drell,12 J. E. Duboscq,12 K. M. Ecklund,12 R. Ehrlich,12 L. Gibbons,12 B. Gittelman,12 S. W. Gray,12 D. L. Hartill,12 B. K. Heltsley,12 L. Hsu,12 C. D. Jones,12 J. Kandaswamy,12 D. L. Kreinick,12 A. Magerkurth,12 H. Mahlke-Krüger,12 T. O. Meyer,12 N. B. Mistry,12 E. Nordberg,12 J. R. Patterson,12 D. Peterson,12 J. Pivarski,12 D. Riley,12 A. J. Sadoff,12 H. Schwarthoff,12 M. R. Shepherd,12 J. G. Thayer,12 D. Urner,12 G. Viehhauser,12 A. Warburton,12 M. Weinberger,12 S. B. Athar,13 P. Avery,13 L. Breva-Newell,13 V. Potlia,13 H. Stoeck,13 J. Yelton,13 G. Brandenburg,14 D. Y.-J. Kim,14 R. Wilson,14 K. Benslama,15 B. I. Eisenstein,15 J. Ernst,15 G. D. Gollin,15 R. M. Hans,15 I. Karliner,15 N. Lowrey,15 C. Plager,15 C. Sedlack,15 M. Selen,15 J. J. Thaler,15 J. Williams,15 K. W. Edwards,16 R. Ammar,17 D. Besson,17 X. Zhao,17 S. Anderson,18 V. V. Frolov,18 Y. Kubota,18 S. J. Lee,18 S. Z. Li,18 R. Poling,18 A. Smith,18 C. J. Stepaniak,18 J. Urheim,18 Z. Metreveli,19 K.K. Seth,19 A. Tomaradze,19 P. Zweber,19 S. Ahmed,20 M. S. Alam,20 L. Jian,20 M. Saleem,20 F. Wappler,20 E. Eckhart,21 K. K. Gan,21 C. Gwon,21 T. Hart,21 K. Honscheid,21 D. Hufnagel,21 H. Kagan,21 R. Kass,21 T. K. Pedlar,21 J. B. Thayer,21 E. von Toerne,21 T. Wilksen,21 M. M. Zoeller,21 H. Muramatsu,22 S. J. Richichi,22 H. Severini,22 and P. Skubic22

1University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15260

2Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907

3University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627

4Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas 75275

5Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 13244

6University of Texas - Pan American, Edinburg, Texas 78539

7Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee 37235

8Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan 48202

9California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125

10University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106

11Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213

12Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853

13University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611

14Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

15University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois 61801

16Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1S 5B6

and the Institute of Particle Physics, Canada M5S 1A7

17University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas 66045

18University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455

19Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois 60208

20State University of New York at Albany, Albany, New York 12222

21Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210

22University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma 73019

A distinctive feature of the $`B`$ system is that the large mass of the $`b`$-quark allows weak decays of the $`B`$ mesons to proceed via the creation of a baryon anti-baryon pair. The mechanisms for baryon production have been the subject of several studies in the last decade. The dominant decay mechanism is expected to be $`bc\overline{u}d`$ transitions via internal or external $`W`$-decay. This can lead to final states including a charm meson as well as a baryon-antibaryon pair, as recently observed by CLEO and Belle. However, the simplest decay diagrams lead to states of the form $`\overline{B}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c\overline{N}X`$, where $`\overline{N}`$ represents an anti-nucleon. Charge-conjugate processes are implied throughout this paper. Inclusive studies of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ production from $`B`$ decays indicate a branching fraction of around 5%, and the soft $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ momentum spectrum indicates that multi-body decays dominate. In 1996, CLEO made the first exclusive measurements of decays of this type, and found $`(B^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{})=(0.62_{0.21}^{+0.23}\pm 0.11\pm 0.10)\times 10^3`$ and $`(\overline{B}^0\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^+\pi ^{})=(1.33_{0.42}^{+0.46}\pm 0.31\pm 0.21)\times 10^3`$. The analysis presented here uses a larger CLEO data sample and improved analysis techniques to make further measurements of this type, confirming the previous observations and measuring new modes $`B^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^{}`$ and $`B^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$. Furthermore, by investigation of the resonant substructure of these decays, the first exclusive decays of the form $`\overline{B}\mathrm{\Sigma }_c\overline{N}X`$ have been measured. Comparisons of the branching fractions of these modes gives information on the underlying mechanisms involved.

The data were collected with two detector configurations, CLEO II and CLEO II.V, at the Cornell Electron Storage Ring. The data comprise 9.17 $`\mathrm{fb}^1`$ taken at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ which corresponds to $`9.74\times 10^6B\overline{B}`$ pairs, together with 4.6 $`\mathrm{fb}^1`$ taken in the $`e^+e^{}`$ continuum below the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ that are used to evaluate possible backgrounds. We assume that the produced $`B^+B^{}`$ rate is the same as $`B^0\overline{B^0}`$ at the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$.

The signal $`B`$ meson candidates are fully reconstructed by combining detected photons, protons, and charged kaons and pions. The tracking system consisted of several concentric detectors operating inside a 1.5 T solenoid. For CLEO II, the tracking system consisted of a 6-layer straw tube chamber, a 10-layer precision drift chamber, and a 51-layer main drift chamber. The main drift chamber also provided a measurement of the specific ionization, $`dE/dx`$, used for particle identification. For CLEO II.V, the straw tube chamber was replaced by a 3-layer, double-sided silicon vertex detector, and the gas in the main drift chamber was changed from argon-ethane to helium-propane mixture. In both configurations, photons were detected by an electromagnetic calorimeter consisting of 7800 Thallium-doped CsI crystals.

$`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ candidates are reconstructed in the modes $`pK^{}\pi ^+,pK_S^0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\pi ^+`$, where $`K_S^0\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }p\pi ^{}`$. The $`K_S^0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ candidates are reconstructed from oppositely charged tracks which form a vertex well detached from the main event vertex in the plane transverse to the beam direction. The invariant mass of the $`K_S^0(\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ candidate is required to be within 8 (3.5) $`\mathrm{MeV}/c^2`$ of the known mass. Neutral pion candidates are formed from pairs of showers detected in the calorimeter which yield a $`\gamma \gamma `$ invariant mass within 2 standard deviations of the known $`\pi ^0`$ mass. The $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`K_S^0`$ and $`\pi ^0`$ candidates were then all kinematically constrained to their known masses.

Particle identification of $`p,K^{}`$, and $`\pi ^+`$ candidates was performed using specific ionization measurements in the drift chamber, and when present, time-of-flight measurements. For each mass hypothesis, a combined $`\chi ^2`$ probability $`P_i`$ was formed ($`i=\pi ,K,p`$). Using these $`P_i`$’s, a normalized probability ratio $`L_i`$ was evaluated, where $`L_i=P_i/(P_\pi +P_K+P_p)`$. Real protons have $`L_p`$ of close to 1.0, whereas tracks due to other particles are concentrated near $`L_p=0.0`$. For a track to be used as a proton daughter of a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+pK^{}\pi ^+`$ or $`pK_S^0`$ decay, we require it to have $`L_p>0.9`$, which eliminates much of the background but with considerable diminution of efficiency. For kaons we applied a slightly looser and more efficient requirement of $`L_K>0.7`$. We have chosen these selection criteria using a Monte Carlo simulation program to maximize the significance of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ signals. The candidate anti-proton which is the direct daughter of the $`B`$ meson has a looser requirement of $`L_p>0.1`$ as it has a higher momentum distribution and lower backgrounds than the decay daughter of the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$. The proton from the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }p\pi ^{}`$, and all the pion candidates, are required to have particle identification parameters consistent with their hypothesis. Tracks with no particle identification information are assumed to be due to pions.

To suppress continuum background, the normalized Fox-Wolfram second moment  is required to be less than 0.35. The number of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ candidates from the $`\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)`$ data, after the contribution from continuum events is accounted for by a subtraction of scaled continuum data, is $`7100\pm 350(12100\pm 450)`$ from the CLEO II (CLEO II.V) detector configurations.

To reconstruct exclusive $`B`$ decays we select $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ candidates whose mass is within 2$`\sigma `$ of the nominal mass. The mass resolution, $`\sigma `$, was calculated for each of the three decay modes and two detector configurations separately by use of a GEANT-based Monte Carlo simulation program. We constrain the mass of these $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ candidates to the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ peak value using a kinematic fitting program, and combine them with an anti-proton candidate and a number of pion candidates. We define the beam-constrained mass as $`M_B=\sqrt{E_{\mathrm{beam}}^2(\mathrm{\Sigma }_ip_i)^2}`$, where $`p_i`$ is the 3-momentum vector for the $`i^{th}`$ daughter of the $`B`$ candidate and $`E_{\mathrm{beam}}`$ is the beam energy. The resolution in $`M_B`$ is dominated by the spread in the CESR beam energy and is much better than the resolution in the invariant mass of the combination.

For each combination, we calculated the energy difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=E_{\mathrm{meas}}E_{\mathrm{beam}}`$, where $`E_{\mathrm{meas}}`$ is the measured energy of the combination. A correctly reconstructed $`B`$ meson has a $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ distribution with a maximum at $`0\mathrm{GeV}`$. The $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ resolution, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Delta }E}`$, was calculated for each mode and detector configuration separately using the Monte Carlo simulation program, and combinations were required to have $`|\mathrm{\Delta }E|<2\sigma _{\mathrm{\Delta }E}`$. A further reduction in background is achieved by cutting on $`\mathrm{\Theta }_B`$, the polar angle of the $`B`$ in the laboratory frame with respect to the $`e^+e^{}`$ axis. The distribution of $`\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }_B`$ is proportional to $`\mathrm{sin}^2\mathrm{\Theta }_B`$ for $`e^+e^{}\mathrm{{\rm Y}}(4S)B\overline{B}`$, whereas background events are distributed nearly isotropically. We require $`|\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }_B|<0.9`$. If there are multiple candidates in an event with $`M_B>5.2\mathrm{GeV}/c^2`$ for a given decay channel, the entry with the smallest absolute value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ is selected.

The $`M_B`$ distributions, after all selection criteria have been applied, are displayed in Fig. 1 for all modes investigated. Strong signals are found in the modes $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$, confirming the previous observation of these modes. Signals are also found in the new modes $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, which has a $`13.0\sigma `$ significance***We define our significance as the probability, expressed in normal distribution sigma, of our expected background to fluctuate to our signal’s central value. Poisson (Gaussian) statistics are used for expected backgrounds with less (greater) than 30 events., and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$, which has a $`8.2\sigma `$ significance. There is no statistically significant signal in the two-body decay $`\overline{B^0}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}`$. Each $`M_B`$ distribution is fit to a fixed width Gaussian signal function, and a background function of an exponential with phase-space threshold suppression. The signal yields from these fits are shown in Table I, where the uncertainties are statistical only. We have verified that similar distributions made with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ sidebands, $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ sidebands, or continuum data show no peaking in the $`B`$ mass region.

Knowledge of the substructure of the multi-particle final states is very important. From a purely practical point of view, the substructure changes the efficiency for detecting a final state. This is particularly true when the intermediate particles are $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{c1}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c`$ baryons which in turn decay strongly with low $`Q^2`$ decays to $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ baryons. Furthermore, knowledge of the substructure gives information on the underlying mechanisms involved.

To search for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{++}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\pi ^+`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^0\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\pi ^{}`$, we require that the combination have a beam constrained mass within $`2\sigma _{M_B}`$ of the $`B`$ mass peak to select events in which a $`B`$ meson decays to a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$. We then combine this $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ with a charged pion daughter of the $`B`$ decay and plot the $`M(\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\pi )M(\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+)`$ mass difference (Fig. 2). We fit these distributions with a Breit-Wigner function of width defined by the CLEO measurements of the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c`$ widths , convoluted with a Gaussian resolution function obtained from Monte Carlo studies, together with a polynomial background function. We find good evidence for both $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{++}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^0`$ production in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^+\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$, and for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^0`$ in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^0\pi ^{}`$. All these signals have a statistical significance greater than $`5\sigma `$. Using analogous plots of those combinations in the $`M_B`$ distributions outside the $`B`$ mass peak, we find negligible background from true $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c`$ baryons that are not the daughters of the $`B`$ decay mode in question. For the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^0\overline{p}`$ mode there are two events in the signal region which would suggest a branching fraction of the order of $`0.25\times 10^4`$. Our expected background in this mode, which is 0.12 events, has a 0.6% chance of fluctuating to the observed events. We feel that this significance, is not sufficient to claim to have found a signal in this mode and we prefer to present a 90% confidence level upper limit. There are no events consistent with the production of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{c1}(2593)\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ or $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{c1}(2625)\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$ in these decays which allows us to calculate 90% confidence level upper limits on their production.

Table I shows the final results for the yields and branching fractions for all the modes. The efficiencies are calculated by our Monte Carlo simulation program. In this simulation, the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+`$ decays were generated only into the three decay modes reconstructed, using the measured branching ratios. To convert the quoted efficiencies to efficiencies which include the branching fractions of these modes, they need to be multiplied by the absolute branching fraction of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+pK^{}\pi ^+`$ of $`5.0\pm 1.3\%`$. The yield from the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c`$ decay modes has been subtracted from the non-resonant yields so that the resonant and non-resonant components can have different efficiency corrections applied.

Table I includes systematic uncertainties. Major contributors to these are uncertainties due to fitting techniques, and uncertainties due to the efficiency calculation. We take the fitting technique uncertainty as the maximum difference obtained from different fitting methods. These techniques included using a scaled $`M_B`$ distribution from $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ sidebands for the background function, and fitting the $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ distribution directly having first selected the $`B`$ mass in the $`M_B`$ distribution. The uncertainties from this source are 5-17%, dependent upon the mode. The uncertainty in the efficiency calculation is 5-8% due to uncertainties in the detection of the charged and neutral particles. In addition, there is a difference in efficiency due to possible substructure such as $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{},\rho `$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ intermediate states. These all give a slightly reduced efficiency and thus give an asymmetric systematic uncertainty. The systematic uncertainty due to the uncertainty in the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+pK^{}\pi ^+`$ branching fraction is expressed as a third uncertainty.

Our limit on the branching fraction of the two body decay $`\overline{B^0}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}`$ is $`0.9\times 10^4`$ at the 90% confidence level. This is tighter than the previous CLEO limit of $`2.0\times 10^4`$. A recent theoretical treatment by Cheng and Yang  using a bag model predicts a branching fraction of this order, whereas older theoretical predictions predicted larger numbers by a factor of at least 4 over our experimental limit. Our measurement of the three-body branching fraction $`B^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}`$ and $`\overline{B^0}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$ are both consistent with, and much more accurate than, the previously measured modes. The three three-body decays $`\overline{B^0}\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{++}\overline{p}\pi ^{}`$, $`\overline{B^0}\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^0\overline{p}\pi ^+`$ and $`\overline{B^{}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^0\overline{p}\pi ^0`$ have essentially identical phase-space, but only the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{++}`$ decay can proceed via both external and internal $`W`$ decay diagrams, whereas the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^0`$ decays can only proceed via an internal $`W`$. We find the rate of all three decays to be of the same order. This implies that the external $`W`$ decay diagram does not dominate over the internal $`W`$ decay diagram, although naively we would expect the latter to be color-suppressed.

In conclusion, we have measured branching fractions of $`B`$ mesons into the decay modes $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}\pi ^+`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}\pi ^+\pi ^{}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}\pi ^{}\pi ^0`$. The first two of these confirm, with greater accuracy, the previous measurements. The latter two are the first observations of these decay modes. We find a limit on the two body decay $`\overline{B^0}\mathrm{\Lambda }_c^+\overline{p}`$, which discriminates between theoretical models. We make the first measurements of exclusive states that include $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^{++}`$ or $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_c^0`$ baryons. Our measurements indicate that external $`W`$ diagram decays do not dominate over the competing internal $`W`$ diagram decays in Cabibbo-favored baryonic B decays.

We gratefully acknowledge the effort of the CESR staff in providing us with excellent luminosity and running conditions. M. Selen thanks the PFF program of the NSF and the Research Corporation, and A.H. Mahmood thanks the Texas Advanced Research Program. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Energy.


format: text

text:
# Intrinsic decoherence and classical-quantum correspondence in two coupled delta-kicked rotors

\[

## Abstract

We show that classical-quantum correspondence of center of mass motion in two coupled delta-kicked rotors can be obtained from intrinsic decoherence of the system itself which occurs due to the entanglement of the center of mass motion to the internal degree of freedom without coupling to external environment.

\]

Classical-quantum correspondence in a classically chaotic system has been one of the most interesting problem in physics for a long time . In quantum mechanics, the time evolution of a wave function follows a linear Schrödinger equation, and so there is no possibility of a sensitivity on the initial condition, a trademark of classical chaos. Also, chaotic diffusion is suppressed by quantum localization . It has been revealed that some crossover time $`t_r=\mathrm{log}(I/\mathrm{})/\lambda `$ ($`I`$ is a characteristic action and $`\lambda `$ is a Lyapunov exponent) exists so that classical-quantum correspondence breaks down for $`t>t_r`$ . As $`\mathrm{}0`$ the crossover time increases indefinitely and classicality is recovered. However, the problem is that $`\mathrm{}`$ is a nonzero constant and $`t_r`$ is not sufficiently large considering its logarithmic dependence of $`\mathrm{}`$ .

Recently, the relation between decoherence and the classical-quantum correspondence has been investigated extensively . Decoherence breaks the purity of initial superposition, which should be conserved in the absence of coupling to the environment, and thus only the partial fraction of whole Hilbert space, namely pointer states, are selected by the environment . The dynamics of the system coupled to the environment shows the unique characteristics of the system independent of the coupling strength as long as it is not too large or small . In other words, with appropriate coupling to environment, the Lyapunov exponent or entropy production rates, which are important physical quantities characterizing a chaotic system, can be reproduced quantum mechanically. However, there has been some debate on whether decoherence from environment is indispensable to obtain the classical-quantum correspondence for classically chaotic systems .

In this letter, we show that decoherence can occur naturally in composed system even when we ignore the coupling to the outer environment. The initially pure center of mass states become dynamically entangled to the internal degrees of freedom, which effectively acts like the environment. Let us consider a classical object governed by a Hamiltonian $`H_0=P^2/2M+V(X)`$, where $`M`$ is the mass of the classical object. Since classical objects are composed of many particles, a complete Hamiltonian will be given by $`H=[p_i^2/2m_i+V_1(x_i)]+V_2(x_1,x_2,\mathrm{})`$, where $`p_i`$ and $`x_i`$ are momenta and coordinates of the constituents, respectively. We assume that the mass of each constituent $`m_i`$ is equal to $`m`$. If the force $`f_i=dV_1(x_i)/dx_i`$ is linear, we can ignore the motion of the individual constituent particles to describe the center of mass dynamics of the macroscopic classical object since $`M\ddot{X}`$=$`f_i=kx_i=NkX`$, where $`X`$, $`N`$, and $`k`$ are a position of center of mass, the number of constituents, and a constant characterizing the linear force, respectively. If the force $`f_i`$ is nonlinear, however, the description of the motion of the classical object by using only $`H_0`$ is not immediately clear. We already know from our experience, nevertheless, that the classical dynamics of the macroscopic object is well described by the Hamiltonian $`H_0`$. It means that $`f_i`$ should almost coincide with $`F(X)=dV(X)/dX`$ in values. Thus, we can ignore the difference between $`H`$ and $`H_0`$ to consider the motion of classical objects. However, the minor differences between $`H`$ and $`H_0`$ play an important role in quantum mechanics since the internal degree of freedom can induce decoherence on the center of mass motion. In this case, the correct classical-quantum correspondence of the center of mass motion will be obtained not from $`H_0`$ but from $`H`$.

Only due to computational difficulty, in this letter we consider a two particle system. Even with this simple model, we have observed some evidence of the intrinsic decoherence originating from the entanglement to internal dynamics. We will show the delocalization of wavefunctions in momentum space and the coincidence of classical and quantum entropy production rates. In the previous study of two coupled quantum kicked tops, the entanglement of two initially decoupled kicked tops increases linearly in time with a rate which is a linear function of the sum of the positive Lyapunov exponents . However, the classical limit has not been taken, and thus the classical-quantum correspondence has not been considered although signature of classical chaos has been observed for low quantum numbers. A model of two interacting spins was also studied to investigate the correspondence of classical and quantum Liouville dynamics. But, this correspondence was considered to have nothing to do with the decoherence effect.

The main purpose of this letter is to elucidate that the intrinsic decoherence due to the entanglement of subsystems plays an important role to understand the classical-quantum correspondence of composed systems. For this purpose, we consider the center of mass motion of the delta-kicked rotors composed of two particles of which a governing Hamiltonian is given by

$`H={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m}}(p_1^2+p_2^2)+U(r_1,r_2)`$ (2)
$`+k[\mathrm{cos}(r_1)+\mathrm{cos}(r_2)]{\displaystyle \underset{i}{}}\delta (tiT),`$
where $`r_1`$ and $`r_2`$ are angle variables with range $`2\pi `$ radians and $`U(r_1,r_2)`$ is the interaction potential which confines two particles within a distance $`w`$. If the confinement width $`w`$ goes to zero, then the system reduces to a usual delta-kicked rotor.

To investigate the center of mass motion, we introduce canonical transforms, $`R=(r_1+r_2)/2`$, $`r=r_1r_2`$, $`P=p_1+p_2`$, and $`p=(p_1p_2)/2`$. Then, we obtain the following Hamiltonian,

$$H=\frac{P^2}{2M}+\frac{p^2}{2\mu }+U(r)+K\mathrm{cos}(R)\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{r}{2}\right)\underset{i}{}\delta (tiT),$$
(3)
where $`M=2m`$, $`\mu =m/2`$, and $`K=2k`$. Here, $`U(r)`$ corresponds to the confining potential with impenetrable walls at $`r=\pm w`$. Delta-kicks described by the last term of Eq. (3) yield the interaction between the center of mass motion and the internal degree of freedom, i.e. the motion of the reduced mass $`\mu `$.

The time evolution of a wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,r,t)`$ is given by simple maps. Between each kick occurring at $`t=iT`$ ($`i`$ is an integer), the center of mass motion and the internal motion evolve independently, so that we obtain

$`\psi (R,r,NT+0^{})=\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle \frac{P^2}{2M}}{\displaystyle \frac{T}{\mathrm{}}}\right)`$ (5)
$`\mathrm{exp}\left\{i\left[{\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{2\mu }}+U(r)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{T}{\mathrm{}}}\right\}\mathrm{\Psi }(R,r,(N1)T+0^+).`$
The wave functions just before and after the delta-kick at $`t=NT`$ are related by the following mapping:

$`\psi (R,r,NT+0^+)=`$ (7)
$`\mathrm{exp}\left[iK\mathrm{cos}(R)\mathrm{cos}\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{2}}\right)\right]\mathrm{\Psi }(R,r,NT+0^{}).`$
Combining two maps given in Eq. (5) and (7), we numerically calculate the evolution of the wave function $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,r,t)`$ for various $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`w`$. For most cases, the number of basis states used for the motion of coordinate $`R`$ and $`r`$ are 16384 and 256 respectively, while 32768 and 512 basis are used respectively for small $`\mathrm{}`$. The initial condition is chosen to be the ground state $`\mathrm{\Psi }(R,r,0)=1/\sqrt{w}\mathrm{cos}(\pi r/2w)`$.

Classical evolution is obtained from a four dimensional map for $`R,P,r`$ and $`p`$ derived from Hamiltonian (3). We consider an ensemble of particles which are distributed from $`R=0`$ to $`R=2\pi `$ uniformly with $`P=0`$, and from $`r=w`$ to $`r=w`$ with a probability $`\mathrm{cos}^2(\pi r/2w)/w`$ with $`p=\pm p_0=\pm (\pi \mathrm{})/(2w)`$. From this initial condition, the classical evolution is simulated, and the ensemble average of the normalized variance of center of mass momentum, $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2=2\left(P^2P^2\right)/MK^2`$ is computed.

As a reference, let us mention the case with a single delta-kicked rotor governed by the Hamiltonian $`H=P^2/2M+K\mathrm{cos}(R)_i\delta (tiT)`$, which corresponds to the case with $`w=0`$. For $`K=5`$, the system is fully chaotic, and classical kinetic energy increases diffusively. But the diffusion is suppressed quantum mechanically, and the classical-quantum correspondence breaks down, which is the well-known dynamical localization .

Now, we consider two delta-kicked rotors. The inset in Fig. 1 shows the differences of classical momentum variances between single and two delta-kicked rotors for various $`w`$. As $`w`$ is decreased, the difference between them vanishes. Meanwhile, shown in Fig. 1 are the differences between the classical and the quantum variances for various $`w`$ with $`\mathrm{}=0.07`$. One clearly sees that the quantum localization breaks down when w is increased. The difference of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{cl}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{qm}`$ nearly disappears for large $`w`$, while deviations are observed for small $`w`$. The break-down of quantum localization, i.e., delocalization, is directly visible in the momentum distribution function in Fig. 2, where the probability distribution of the center of mass momentum $`P`$ are shown at $`n=500`$ for several $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`w`$. The exponential localization is changed into a rather broad Gaussian-like profile as we decrease $`\mathrm{}`$ or increase $`w`$. Let us note that the delocalization of wavefunctions alone is not enough to prove the occurrence of decoherence. In fact, the delocalization was also observed in the study of two interacting particles (TIP) in a random potential. However, it was not attributed to the decoherence.

Next, we consider the reduced density matrix for the center of mass motion in order to show that the observed classical-quantum correspondence is ascribed to the intrinsic decoherence caused from the interaction with the internal degree of freedom. The reduced density matrix $`\rho _R(R_1,R_2)`$ is given by $`Tr_r(\rho )=_r\psi (R_1,r)\psi ^{}(R_2,r)`$. As a quantitative measure of decoherence, we calculate the linear entropy $`s_l=Tr(\rho _R\rho _R^2)`$ . Note that for a pure state $`s_l=0`$, while for a maximum decoherence $`s_l=1`$. Figure 3 shows that for large $`w`$ the entropy $`s_l`$ rapidly approaches 1, i.e., a maximum decoherence. As we decrease $`w`$, the entropy $`s_l`$ shows rather reduced values and slowly increases in time. In fact, an energy level spacing of the internal dynamics described by $`p^2/2\mu +U(r)`$ is proportional to $`1/w^2`$, which means the smaller $`w`$, the larger the level spacing. For a given perturbation determined by $`K`$ it is more difficult to excite the internal dynamics in the case of large spacing, which leads to effective decoupling between the center of mass motion and the internal degree of freedom, and eventually to the decrease of decoherence. This is consistent with the previous result that the break-down of the localization and the classical-quantum correspondence is easily obtained for large $`w`$, i.e., strong decoherence.

The $`\mathrm{cos}(r/2)`$ in the last term of Hamiltonian (3) can be regarded as an amplitude noise of the kick onto the center of mass motion. As $`w`$ decreases, the noise is reduced and so is the effect of decoherence. Ott at al. studied the effect of noise on the single delta-kicked rotor, which showed that, for moderate noise and $`\mathrm{}`$, the diffusion coefficient $`D_{qm}`$ is proportional to the square of the noise level, more precisely $`D_{qm}\nu ^2(K/\mathrm{})^4`$ ($`\nu `$ is a noise strength) . For very small $`\mathrm{}`$, it is obtained that $`D_{qm}D_{cl}`$ ($`D_{cl}`$ is a classical diffusion coefficient). If we directly apply this result to our case, we immediately obtain the scaling relation $`D_{qm}(wK/\mathrm{})^4`$ for moderate $`\mathrm{}`$ since we can approximately regard $`1\mathrm{cos}(r/2)`$ as a noise amplitude, and so $`\nu w^2`$. This scaling is confirmed by numerically calculating $`D_{qm}`$ as a function of $`(wK/\mathrm{})`$ in Fig. 4, where $`\mathrm{}=0.25`$, and $`K=5`$. These results also confirm the above proposition that the term $`\mathrm{cos}(r/2)`$ in the Hamiltonian (3) can be treated as noise and thus induces decoherence.

Finally, we consider the classical and the quantum entropy production rates of which coincidence has been the criteria for the classical-quantum correspondence of chaotic systems in studies of decoherence . Quantum mechanically, the von Neumann entropy is given by $`S_{vn}=Tr[\rho _R\mathrm{log}(\rho _R)]`$. Due to the difficulty of computing the eigenvalues of large matrix, we use a smaller number of basis states than that used in the previous simulation, 4096 for the motion of $`R`$, and 256 for $`r`$. We choose $`\mathrm{}=0.07`$ and can obtain the quantum evolution up to $`n=100`$ with this smaller number of basis. The time evolution of the von Neumann entropy consists of two different regimes  as shown in Fig. 5. After the initial transient, the von Neumann entropy increases logarithmically on time, which exactly corresponds to its classical counterpart . Let us consider the phase space $`(R,P)`$ for the center of mass motion. Classical distributions are uniform in $`R`$ and Gaussian in $`P`$. The variance of momentum increases diffusively. As a result, the classical entropy is given by $`S_{cl}0.5\mathrm{log}(n)`$. In Fig. 5, the quantum results (dots) show $`0.5\mathrm{log}(n)`$ dependence, consistent with the classical prediction.

In summary, we have studied the dynamics of the center of mass motion of two coupled delta-kicked rotors and examined its classical-quantum correspondence using the momentum distribution and the entropy production rate. We show that the correspondence is obtained through intrinsic decoherence which comes from the interaction between the center of mass motion and the internal degree of freedom. Neither external noise nor an external environment are assumed, here the decoherence results from the internal dynamics of the system itself. This decoherence effect should also be observed in systems composed of many particles. Although our study is motivated by the dynamics of the classical object composed of many constituents, it might also be relevant for molecules composed of two or many atoms. We hope that similar results would be observed in experiments using molecules when they are subjected to an external nonlinear force depending on the position of the constituent atoms.


text:
# Untitled Document

hep-th/0208191

Vortices

under S-duality

John H. Brodie

Perimeter Institute

Waterloo, ON

jbrodie@perimeterinstitute.ca

Abstract

We investigate a system of 1,3, and 7-branes in type IIB string theory. We identify the 1-brane with the vortex of the Abelian Higgs model. We claim that in the S-dual, the theory on the 3-brane confines electric flux which we identify with the fundamental string and that the dual photon has a mass . We then investigate ways of breaking supersymmetry in the brane set up.

August 2002

1. Introduction.

Confinement in QCD is a mysterious phenomenon. Despite years of effort analytically and on the lattice there is still no proof that QCD confines. There are many heuristic arguments that QCD aw well as pure Yang-Mills theory do confine. One argument is that at large N the Wilson loop becomes a string world sheet . Another argument relies on analogies with superconductivity. There the electric photon gets a mass confining magnetic charge. In QCD the dual photon or gluons supposedly gets a mass confining electric charge. Although the duality works for abelian theories generalizing it to non-Abelian theories has been difficult. In 1994 Seiberg and Witten  showed that certain supersymmetric theories confine in the IR. The point of this paper is to consider a D-brane construction whose low energy limit is the Abelian-Higgs model. By turning on a FI-term, we can have vortex solitons. D1-branes play the role of the magnetic vortices. Since the brane set-up is in type IIB we can S-dualize the brane configuration. D1-strings become F1-strings. The dual theory is electrically confining and posses electric vortices, the F1-strings.

2. Abelian Higgs model

Consider the Abelian Higgs model. This is a $`U(1)`$ gauge theory coupled to a charged scalar field. In supersymmetric language the Abelian gauge field gets a mass by eating the hypermultiplet. The hypers get a vev from a D-term. In superspace notation the action is

$$L=d^2\theta \frac{1}{g^2}W_\alpha ^2+d^4\theta Q^{\mathrm{}}e^VQ+\stackrel{~}{Q}^{\mathrm{}}e^V\stackrel{~}{Q}\xi V$$

In components the bosonic part of this action is

$$L=\frac{1}{g^2}F^2+D_\mu q^{}D^\mu q+(|q|^2|\stackrel{~}{q}|^2\xi )^2$$

This model has BPS vortex solutions. The mass of a vortex in three dimension or the tension of a string in four dimensions goes as the Higgs vacuum expectation value $`\xi `$ divided by the gauge theory coupling constant.

$$M_v^2=\xi /g^2$$

Supersymmetry breaking can be achieved by giving a mass to the gauginos at tree level. This mass can be made of order the mass of the Higgs field without destabilizing the Higgs potential. In this way the problem of stability is similar to that of the standard model with supersymmetry being the cure.

3. brane set up

Fig. 1: We consider the T-dual of this system. Here we see a D6-brane tilted with a D4-brane splitting on it. The horizontal direction is compact. The thick line is the D2-brane that connects the two ends of D4-brane. The D2-brane has the interpretation as a vortex in 3+1 dimensions.

The Abelian Higgs model can be realized in string theory as a 3-brane in directions 123 parallel to a 7brane in directions 1234567. The FI term is proportional to NS-NS B field in the 4567 direction. A 1brane can then be bound to the 3 brane if a B field is turned on in the 2345. This is easiest to understand in a T-dual picture of 4-branes and 6branes perpendicular . The B-field in the 67 direction along the D7-brane under T-duality becomes proportional to the angle of rotation of the D6-brane . The B-field in the 45 direction becomes rotation of the 4-brane after it splits on the 6-brane. Now there is in the T-dual picture a 2-brane which is parallel to the 4-brane. However, the 4-brane has now rotated and split on the rotated 6-brane to decrease its length. The 2-brane can now split on the 4-brane in the same way that the 4-brane split on the 6-brane. In the 4+1 theory the 2-brane is a magnetic string dipole. As for magnetic particle dipoles the region between the positive and negative monopoles is a solenoid. The effect is the same here but in one dimension higher. The interpretation of the splitting of the 2brane on the 4-brane for the 1+1 theory living on the compactified 2-brane world volume is the same as it was for the splitting of the D4-branes on the D6-brane: the Abelian gauge field in 1+1 has Higgsed. The tilt of the 2-brane now in the 67-plane corresponds under T-duality to 3-brane charge in 0167. This can be interpreted as B field in the 2345 direction.

The system of 1-3-7 branes in IIB is S dual to a 3brane bound to a non perturbative 7brane with RR B field turned on. This theory is the magnetic dual of the Abelian Higgs model. In this theory the magnetic photon gets a mass proportional to the Higgs vev divided by the gauge theory coupling constant, confining electric charge. The electric confinement produces electric vortices. Indeed the D1brane under S duality becomes a fundamental string with tension proportional to the Higgs vev. These fundamental strings do not spread out in the 3brane but remain confined strings of electric flux. This should be of no surprise since this brane configuration corresponds to the low energy limit of $`N=2`$ $`Sp(1)`$ theory . The O7-plane splits up into two non-perturbative D7-branes corresponding to the monopole point and the dyon point of . Here we are considering Higgsing along the monopole point.

Supersymmetry breaking can be implemented in the S dual picture by a fractional brane orbifold . As was said the supersymmetry breaking scale cannot be much greater than the higgs mass. In this case the dual photon mass is much higher than the Higgs mass since its mass comes with a gauge coupling constant squared in its denominator. However, the string tension is proportional to the Higgs mass and not the dual photon mass. Therefore the supersymmetry breaking scale cannot be much larger than the confinement scale.

4. 2+1 vortices with less supersymmetry

One can also consider D7-branes along directions 1234568, D5-branes along 12347, D3’s along 127, and D1-branes along the 7-direction. By rotating the D7-brane the D5 splits on the D7brane, then the D3-brane splits on the D5, while the D1-brane splits on the D3-brane. Now T-dual this configuration. The D7-brane becomes an 8-brane with flux turned on $`B_{78}`$. The D5-brane becomes a D4-brane in 1234 with flux turned on in 56. The flux $`B_{78}B_{56}`$ corresponds to the D-term in the field theory. Then T-dual of the 3-brane becomes a 2-brane 12 with flux turned on in 3456. The 1-brane then becomes a 0-brane with flux turned on in 123456. The low energy effective theory now is a 2+1 gauge theory with vortices.

5. Acknowledgements

We would like to thank E. Poppitz, M. Strassler, and D. Tong for helpful discussions.

References

relax G. ’t Hooft, Nucl. Phys. B75461(1974) relax N. Seiberg and E. Witten, “Electric - magnetic duality, monopole condensation, and confinement in N=2 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 426, 19 (1994) \[Erratum-ibid. B 430, 485 (1994)\] \[arXiv:hep-th/9407087\]. relax A. Giveon and D. Kutasov, “Brane dynamics and gauge theory,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 71, 983 (1999) \[arXiv:hep-th/9802067\]. relax J. H. Brodie, arXiv:hep-th/0101115. relax A. Karch, D. Lust and D. J. Smith, “Equivalence of geometric engineering and Hanany-Witten via fractional branes,” Nucl. Phys. B 533, 348 (1998) \[arXiv:hep-th/9803232\].


text:
# Evaporation of a packet of quantized vorticity

## Abstract

A recent experiment has confirmed the existence of quantized turbulence in superfluid 3He-B and suggested that turbulence is inhomogenous and spreads away from the region around the vibrating wire where it is created. To interpret the experiment we study numerically the diffusion of a packet of quantized vortex lines which is initially confined inside a small region of space. We find that reconnections fragment the packet into a gas of small vortex loops which fly away. We determine the time scale of the process and find that it is in order of magnitude agreement with the experiment.

PACS 67.40.Vs, 47.37.+q

The decay of superfluid turbulence at very low temperatures raises the fundamental question of the existence near absolute zero of an energy cascade from large to small scales. In the case of ordinary turbulence, the nonlinear terms of the Navier - Stokes equation distribute the energy over various scales without changing the total energy. The process leads to Richardson’s cascade of bigger eddies breaking up into smaller eddies, until the wavenumber is large enough that kinetic energy is dissipated by viscous forces. In the case of superfluid turbulence, recent work indicates that generation of sound plays the role of ’sink’ of kinetic energy. Furthermore it appears that the generation of small scales occurs via creation of helical waves of higher and higher wavenumbers on the quantized vortex filaments (Kelvin waves), and via creation of small vortex loops. The nonlinear mechanism behind both processes is vortex reconnection, either indirectly (reconnections create cusps which relax into large amplitude Kelvin waves) or directly (reconnections create small vortex loops).

The aim of this Letter is to show that the formation of small vortex loops is particularly important if the turbulence is not homogeneous, a case which is less investigated than homogeneous turbulence but is relevant to experiments performed at the lowest temperatures. In the case of 4He many experiments have been performed above $`1.3\mathrm{K}`$ but much less is known about lower temperatures. In the most relevant study turbulence was produced by oscillating a grid at temperatures as low as $`20\mathrm{m}\mathrm{K}`$ ($`0.01T_c`$ where $`T_c`$ is the critical temperature). Although there is no direct evidence, it is reasonable to expect that the vortex tangle was localized in the region of the grid. The detection was based on trapping ions on the quantized vortices, and measurements of the collected charge indicated that the total amount of turbulence in the cell decayed in time. In the case of 3He-B, direct studies of vortices are typically done in a rotating cryostat, and an indirect observation of turbulence has been confirmed only recently. In this experiment turbulence was created by vibrating a small wire shaped like a half-circle at temperatures around $`0.11T_c`$. Again, we expect that turbulence was localized in the region of the vibrating wire. Additional wires were used to detect the Andreev reflection of quasi-particles from the turbulent superfluid velocity field. The experimental set-up could not tell unambiguously whether the growth time of the screening reflects the intrisic temporal decay of the vorticity or the spatial evolution of the vortex tangle away from the region in which it was created. Nevertheless, the authors argued from the temperature dependence of the effect that it is more likely that a spatial evolution of the vortex tangle took place; typically, the spatial and temporal scales were $`1\mathrm{mm}`$ and $`1\mathrm{sec}`$ respectively.

In both experiments, the lack of flow visualization makes the interpretation of the data difficult, so numerical simulations can give insight into the problem. Thus motivated, the simple question which we address is: what is the fate of a tangle of quantized vortex loops initially confined in a small region? Can any physical processes cause the packet of quantized vorticity to diffuse out and spread in space?

In a classical Navier - Stokes fluid, diffusion of vorticity is caused by viscous forces. In the absence of viscosity (a perfect Euler fluid) vortex reconnections are not possible and the initial topology is frozen into the fluid; vortex loops distort but remain linked to each other, so conservation of helicity prevents the packet from spreading. In a superfluid, vortex reconnections are possible, so the question which we ask is whether the packet of quantized vorticity remains localized in the initial region or not, and if not, how fast it diffuses away. Additional motivation arises from the recent result that a vortex tangle’s geometrical and topological complexity (the amount of twists and links of the turbulent structure) seems to be related to its ability to diffuse in the time scale under consideration.

We represent a quantized vortex filament as a space curve $`𝐬=𝐬(\xi ,t)`$ where $`\xi `$ is arclength and $`t`$ is time. In the absence of friction the velocity $`d𝐬/dt`$ of the filament at the point $`𝐬`$ is given by

$$\frac{d𝐬}{dt}=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{4\pi }\frac{(𝐫𝐬)\times \mathrm{𝐝𝐫}}{|𝐫𝐬|^3},$$
(1)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the quantum of circulation and the Biot - Savart integral extends over all vortex filaments present in the flow (we do not apply the local induction approximation). By changing the discretization along the filaments we tested that the results do not depend on the reconnection procedure (details of the algorithm are in reference). Since our model is incompressible, we have no transformation of kinetic energy (length of vortex line) into sound, an effect which can be studied using the Gross - Pitaevski model. A small loss of vortex length occurs due to the numerical reconnection procedure but does not affect our results.

Using the above model, we have performed numerical experiments to determine the spatial - temporal evolution of localized packets of vorticity. Although we used 4He’s parameter values, the results can be reinterpreted for 3He by rescaling the units of time and length according to the different values of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The vortex filament method, originally developed for 4He, is equally valid for 3He-B despite the much larger vortex core size than 4He, because the length scales of the calculation (eg distance between discretization points on the same filament and distance between filaments) are still much bigger than the vortex core. Typically our initial condition consists of a given number $`N_0`$ of circular vortex rings, whose centres and orientations are randomly generated, initially confined in a sphere of radius $`S_0`$. Other kinds of initial conditions have been discussed in the related literature, notably that of random vortex network, but there is no reason to believe that they apply to our case and we know too little of the details of how a vibrating wire or grid generates quantized vorticity to be more realistic. Fortunately it is known that any simple configuration which is almost isotropic quickly evolves in an turbulent tangle independent of the initial state, and by numerically experimenting we found that our results do not depend on how we start the calculation. For example we tried replacing many small circular rings with few longer Fourier knots (trefoil-like curves which wrap around themselves few times before closing). This changed drastically the initial topology, but the same results were found as for rings. Unlike previous numerical simulations of superfluid turbulence (performed either with periodic boundary conditions or in channels with rigid walls), our calculations are carried out in an infinite volume. At each time, quantities which are useful to describe the vortex packet are: the total length $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, the number of loops $`N`$, the radius of the confining sphere $`S`$, the vortex line density $`L=3\mathrm{\Lambda }/4\pi S^3`$, the average inter-vortex distance $`\delta =L^{1/2}`$, and the average vortex loop length in the packet $`D`$. These quantities depend on $`t`$ and we use the subscript zero to denote initial values.

The time evolution of the small vortex packet shown in Figure 1 is typical. The initial vortex rings (here $`N_0=20`$) interact, become distorted and reconnect. The evolution of the vortex packet is determined by the balance between self-reconnections and reconnections between different loops. During the initial coalescence phase the reconnections between different loops dominate and the number of separate loops decreases ($`N(0.34)=12`$ in Figure 1). Following this comes an evaporation phase, when self-reconnections dominate. In this phase occasionally a self-reconnection generates a small vortex loop smaller than the average separation between the vortices. Because of its small size, the loop moves relatively fast, and, if created near the surface of the packet and oriented in the correct direction, it escapes from the packet, flying to infinity without further reconnections. Since each loop which escapes decreases the total vortex length in the packet, the average distance between vortices increases, thus increasing the probability that another loop escapes. The evaporation and escape phases distinguish homogeneous from inhomogeneous turbulence. In the former self-reconnections and reconnections between different loops come to a balance, and a steady state tangle forms. In the latter, vortex loops can quickly move out of the vortex packet and then never reconnect with other loops. A key ingredient of the effect is therefore the counter-intuitive dispersion relation of vortex loops: unlike particles, the less energetic (smaller) they are, the faster they move. At this point of the evolution the number of vortex loops become constant (for example $`N(2.2)=N(3.48)=37`$ in Figure 1). Self-reconnections come to dominate the isolated vortex packet and the evaporation phase persists until the packet has expanded away. The speed of an escaping loop can be estimated from the well known formula for a classical vortex rings of radius $`R`$

$$v_R=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{4\pi R}[\mathrm{ln}(8R/a)1/2],$$
(2)
where $`a`$ is the vortex core radius. In the actual experiments of course the volume is not infinite and the motion of isolated loops which escape from the packet terminates at the walls.

The interesting question is what determines the characteristic timescale for the vortex packet to evaporate. Since one important parameter of the problem is certainly the quantum of circulation, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, to obtain a time scale $`\mathrm{}^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ we must identify the relevant length scale $`\mathrm{}`$. There are only two length scales in the problem: the size of the packet, $`S`$, and the average distance between the vortices, $`\delta `$, which both change with time. For the sake of simplicity, hereafter we refer to the initial values $`S_0`$ and $`\delta _0`$. The reason is that the definitions of $`S`$ and $`\delta `$ at later times are somewhat arbitrary, as they are sensitive to the presence of small (fast) loops in a particular numerical calculation. The use of the initial values simplifies the analysis and lets us concentrate on the simple issue of whether we can predict the evolution of the packet given initial length $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_0`$ and size $`S_0`$.

Figure 2 shows how a typical distribution of loop lengths changes with time. At $`t=0`$ the distribution is on the $`11^{th}`$ bin (all $`N=30`$ loops have the same length $`d=0.067\mathrm{cm}`$ by construction). As time proceeds the distribution moves to the $`3^{rd}`$ bin (centred at $`d0.013\mathrm{cm}`$). Note the direct cascade from the initial peak at the right to the final peak at the left without creation of intermediate length scales. The position and height of the initial peak depends on the initial configuration (if we have few longer Fourier knots at the place of many small circular loops, the initial peak is smaller and more to the right). What is universal is the creation of the final left peak, which happens in all our simulations.

Now we analyze how the average loop length, $`D=<d>`$, depends on $`t`$. For the sake of clarity, we normalize $`D`$ using the maximum value $`D_{max}`$ achieved in each particular run. If we plot $`D/D_{max}`$ versus $`t`$ we note an initial increase (coalescence) followed by a decrease (evaporation) which eventually remains constant as separate loops fly away in all directions (escape). The time scale for the packet to evaporate ranges in the interval $`0.05\mathrm{sec}<\mathrm{t}<2\mathrm{s}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}`$, depending on the particular run. In Figure 3 we plot $`D/D_{max}`$ versus the scaled time $`t/\tau `$ where

$$\tau =\frac{\delta _0^2}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}.$$
(3)
It is apparent that curves corresponding to the evolution of different vortex packets now overlap, and evaporation takes place within the shorter interval $`1.5<t/\tau <2`$. If we plotted the same graph by scaling $`t`$ with $`S_0`$ rather than $`\delta _0`$ the curves would be very separate. Figure 3 therefore suggests that the characteristic time scale of evaporation is of the order of $`\delta _0^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Physically, $`\tau `$ represents the time scale of reconnections. In fact, from the quantization of vorticity $`𝐯_s\mathrm{𝐝𝐥}=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, we estimate that the typical speed inside the packet is of the order of $`v_s\mathrm{\Gamma }/\delta `$ hence the typical reconnection time is of the order of $`\delta /v_s=\delta ^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }=\tau `$. Note that, since the distribution of values of $`\delta `$ is large, some filaments reconnect earlier, which is evident in Figure 1 at the beginning of the run. The insert in Figure 3 shows the evolution in space and time of different vortex packets. Because of the above mentioned difficulty with the definition of $`S`$, we use the more robust quantity $`S^{}`$, defined as the radius of the sphere which contains half the total vortex length. After the evaporation, the packet becomes a gas of loops which fly to infinity, so we expect $`S^{}vt`$ where $`v`$ is the speed of the typical loop. From (2) we have, for $`t>\tau `$,

$$\frac{S^{}}{\delta _0}\left(\frac{}{4\pi }\right)\left(\frac{t}{\tau }\right),$$
(4)
where $``$ is a term with a weak logarithmic dependence on $`\delta _0`$. The insert of Figure 3 confirms that $`S^{}/\delta _0`$ and $`t/\tau `$ are proportional. The evolution of all packets are similar and collapse onto the same curve, as shown by the solid line which represents Eq. (4).

We can now interpret the 3He-B turbulence experiments. In 3He we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=h/2m_3=6.6\times 10^4\mathrm{cm}^2/\mathrm{sec}`$ and $`a10^6\mathrm{cm}`$. The tangle is created by a vibrating NbTi filament bent into an approximately semicircular shape with diameter $`0.3\mathrm{cm}`$, so we assume that the initial vortex packet has dimension $`S_00.1\mathrm{cm}`$. We note that the time scale $`S_0^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }15\mathrm{s}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}`$ is far too large to have relevance to what is observed. The number of vortices required to produce the observed barrier to the quasi - particles is estimated by the authors to correspond to a flow of order $`v_s0.1\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{sec}`$, hence, from $`v_s=\mathrm{\Gamma }/2\pi \delta _0`$, we estimate $`\delta _010^3\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{sec}`$, and we conclude that the vortex line density must be of the order of $`L_010^6\mathrm{cm}^2`$. The characteristic time scale for the vortex packet to evaporate in a gas of small rings is therefore of the order of $`\tau =\delta _0^2/\mathrm{\Gamma }1.5\times 10^3\mathrm{sec}`$. The small loops fly away with speed $`v_R0.4\mathrm{cm}/\mathrm{sec}`$ estimated from equation (2) since we know that $`R10^3\mathrm{cm}`$. This result, that the velocity of expansion of the quantized vorticity is of the order of $`1\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m}/\mathrm{sec}`$, is consistent with the observation that the vortex tangle spreads over the distance of $`1\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m}`$ in the time of approximately $`1\mathrm{s}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{c}`$.

In conclusion, we have shown that a packet of quantized vorticity, initially localized in a small region of space, evaporates and diffuses away as a gas of small vortex loops on the time scale of order $`\tau =1/L\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Application of this scenario to the recent turbulent 3He-B experiment yields order of magnitude agreement with the observed spatio - temporal evolution. This cascade to small loops is similar to an idea originally proposed by Feynman. To pursue this study in the context of 4He it would be interesting to use the Gross - Pitaevskii model to determine whether small vortex loops radiate phonons.

Finally, our results should be of interest in fluid dynamics. Firstly, we have found a peculiar form of diffusion in what is actually an inviscid fluid. Secondly, we have found a mechanism to transfer energy to small scales. Thirdly, we have shown that, as far as helicity is concerned, the superfluid represents a different, third benchmark to study, besides the traditional Navier - Stokes and Euler fluids.

We thank S.N. Fisher and D.I. Bradley for discussions.

Figure 1:

Evolution of a small vortex packet of quantized vorticity (data corresponding to the crosses in Figure 3).

Figure 2:

Number $`N`$ of vortex loop of given length at different times corresponding to the upward triangles in Figure 3. Note the direct cascade from the right peak to the left one (the small peak in the middle is due to some larger loops left at the centre of the evaporated packet).

Figure 3:

Normalized average loop length $`D/D_{max}`$ vs $`t/\tau `$. The values of $`N_0`$, $`S_0`$ ($`cm`$), $`L_0`$ ($`cm^2`$) and $`D_{max}`$ ($`cm`$) for each run are: Stars: $`30`$, $`0.090`$, $`1252`$ and $`0.38`$; Crosses: $`20`$, $`0.090`$, $`835`$ and $`0.22`$; White circles: $`30`$, $`0.018`$, $`31296`$ and $`0.059`$; Upward triangles: $`30`$, $`0.045`$, $`5007`$ and $`0.139`$; Black squares: $`25`$, $`0.018`$, $`26080`$ and $`0.042`$; Downward triangles: $`25`$, $`0.027`$, $`11590`$ and $`0.081`$; White squares: $`60`$, $`0.090`$, $`2504`$ and $`=0.339`$. Black circles: $`4`$, $`0.018`$, $`31460`$ and $`0.194`$ (in this case the initial condition consists of few long Fourier knots, so, unlike the other runs, reconnections immediately increase the number of separate loops and $`D`$ is maximum at $`t=0`$).

The insert ($`S^{}/\delta _0`$ vs $`t/\tau `$) shows how the evolution of different packets scale together. The solid line shows Eq. (4).