text:
# Fractal analysis on a closed classical hard-wall billiard using a simplified box-counting algorithm

## Abstract

We perform fractal analysis on a closed classical hard-wall billiard, the circular billiard with a straight cut, assuming there are two openings on the boundary. We use a two-dimensional set of initial conditions that produce all possible trajectories of a particle injected from one opening, and numerically compute the fractal dimension of singular points of a function that maps an initial condition to the number of collisions with the wall before the exit. We introduce a simplified box-counting algorithm, which uses points from a rectangular grid inside the two-dimensional set of the initial conditions, to simplify the calculation, and observe the classical chaotic properties while varying the parameters of the billiard.

Chaos, Billiard, Classical scattering, Fractal

Chaotic systems have recently attracted many researchers from various fields, partly because the fast development of computer hardwares has enabled us to solve equations almost insolvable in the pastOtt (1993); Reichl (1992). For physicists, the two-dimensional (2D) billiard system has been a popular subject for studying the dynamics of the Hamiltonian chaotic systems. Classically, the dynamics of the 2D billiard system shows three distinct types of behaviors. The system is either integrable (*regular* behavior) or non-integrable (either *soft chaos*, characterized by mixed phase spaces that have both regular and chaotic regions, or *hard chaos*, characterized by ergodicity and mixing)Gutzwiller (1990).

Here we use a closed 2D hard-wall billiard with two openings on the boundary, and perform fractal analysis using the classical dynamics while varying the shape of the bliiard and the size of the openings. To calculate the fractal dimension, we use a set of initial conditions that will produce trajectories of a particle injected from one opening, and calculate certain values for each trajectory, such as the *exit opening* (an opening from which the particle exits), the number of collisions with the wall before the exit, the dwell time, and so on. When the system is chaotic, singular points of this kind of response functions form a fractal setEckhardt (1987); Bleher et al. (1988); Ott and Tél (1993). In this Letter, we will calculate the fractal dimension of these singular points of the function that maps an initial condition to the number of collisions, by introducing a simplified box-counting algorithm.

The billiard we have chosen is the circular billiard with a straight cut, or the “cut-circle” billiard (see Fig. 1).

There are five parameters: (1) the width $`W`$ measured in the direction perpendicular to the cut, (2) the radius $`R`$, (3) the angular width $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of the openings, which represents the opening size, (4) the orientation angle $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of the cut relative to the first opening, and (5) the position of the second opening relative to the first opening as measured by the angle $`\gamma `$. We scale the width $`W`$ by $`R`$, so $`wW/R`$, thereby reducing the number of independent parameters to four: $`w`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, and $`\gamma `$. For all subsequent discussions, we set $`\mathrm{\Omega }=135^{}`$ and $`\gamma =270^{}`$. For the closed cut-circle billiard (when $`\mathrm{\Delta }=0`$), it has been proved in Ref. Bunimovich, 1979 that the phase space is mixed (soft chaos) when $`0<w<1`$, and that the phase space is fully chaotic (hard chaos) when $`1<w<2`$. And it is integrable when $`w=1`$ and 2. Consequently this billiard has a single shape parameter $`w`$ that makes the billiard exhibit all three types of chaotic behaviors.

In Ref. Ree, 2002, a one-dimensional (1D) set of initial conditions of the cut-circle billiard was used to calculate fractal dimensions while varying the opening size $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and the shape parameter $`w`$ \[see Fig. 1(b)\]. The particle is injected with an incident angle $`\varphi `$ ($`\pi /2<\varphi <\pi /2`$). In Ref. Legrand and Sornette, 1990, authors used a 1D set of initial conditions for the *stadium*, and calculated the recurrence time for each trajectory to obtain the fractal dimension. These 1D sets, however, are subsets of the set of all significant initial conditions that represent all possible trajectories; in our billiard, a 2D subspace in the four-dimensional (4D) phase space is a minimal set that will produce all possible trajectories originating from one opening \[see Fig. 1(c)\]. (A 2D set of initial conditions were also used in Ref. Bleher et al., 1988 for the Sinai billiard.) There are two reasons that make this reduction possible. First, the value of the energy does not change the trajectory of the particle. This is due to the flat potential inside the billiard with infinitely hard boundaries. Second, the distance from the center of the billiard to the initial location of the particle can be fixed at $`R`$.

With these two kinds of sets, we numerically find a function that maps an initial condition to the number of collisions before the exit. (In numerical computations, all possible initial conditions cannot be used; only a finite and discrete subset can be considered.) In Fig. 2, we show how the number of collisions changes for these sets of initial conditions when $`w=1.5`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=60^{}`$.

In Fig. 2(a), the graph of $`\varphi `$ vs the number of collisions is shown when the 1D subset of initial conditions as in Fig. 1(b) is used (see Ref. Ree, 2002 for more results). In Fig. 2(b), the graph shows the full 2D set of initial conditions, $`(\theta _{\mathrm{in}},P_{\theta \mathrm{in}})`$, bounded by two equations,

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2}\theta \mathrm{in}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{2},$$
(1)
$$\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{4}+\frac{\theta _{\mathrm{in}}}{2}\right)\frac{P_{\theta \mathrm{in}}}{\sqrt{2mE}R}\mathrm{cos}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{4}\frac{\theta _{\mathrm{in}}}{2}\right),$$
(2)
which are represented by the bold line. Instead of the number of collisions, the graph shows singular points that constitute singular boundaries at which the number of collisions changes. We can observe that singular points have infinitely fine structures. The number of collisions are shown only for five *geometrical channels*Roukes and Alerhand (1990); Luna-Acosta et al. (1996) in this example. The dotted line is the 1D subset used in Fig. 2(a).

Now we calculate the fractal dimension $`d_f`$ of a set of singular points in this 2D set using a simplified box-counting algorithm. As a generalization of the box-counting algorithm used in Ref. Ree, 2002 for the 1D set, we use a uniform 2D rectangular grid. Then there are uniform rectangular boxes, and each of them is represented by four points on the grid. For all of these uniformly distributed grid points inside the 2D set, we numerically find the number of collisions before the exit, and for each box, we compare the number of collisions at four corners. With an assumption that a box does not contain a singular point when four values are all equal, we can count the number of boxes containing singularities out of all boxes inside the 2D set. The number of all boxes inside the set is $`N_P`$, and the number of boxes that contain any singular point, based on the above assumption, is $`N_S`$. Then the fractal dimension $`d_f`$ is defined by

$$d_f\underset{N_P\mathrm{}}{lim}\frac{\mathrm{log}_{10}N_S}{\mathrm{log}_{10}N_{P}^{}{}_{}{}^{1/2}},$$
(3)
which is the slope of the graph of $`0.5\mathrm{log}_{10}N_P`$ vs $`\mathrm{log}_{10}N_S`$. In numerical calculations, we find $`N_S`$ for several $`N_P`$ values, and then use the ordinary least-square fit to find the slope using the points in the graph.

In Fig. 3(a), the log-log graph is shown for several $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ values when $`w=1.5`$. (For all calculations, $`N_P`$ up to $`10^8`$ will be used.)

Unlike the calculations using the 1D set, $`d_f`$ will be in the range of $`1d_f2`$. We can define $`\overline{d_f}`$, which better represents the fractality,

$$\overline{d_f}\{\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 2d_f& \text{(for the 2D set)}\hfill \\ \hfill 1d_f& \text{(for the 1D set)}\hfill \end{array}.$$
(4)
In Fig. 3(b), $`\overline{d_f}`$’s both for the 2D set and for the 1D set are compared for three different $`w`$ values while varying $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Like the curves for the 1D set, not all curves monotonically increase as $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ increases, even though it is not as significant. The reason for this phenomenon is that there are more possible trajectories when the opening gets bigger, and it also explains why curves don’t match very well for large $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$. We also observe that the cases with hard chaos ($`w=1.04`$, and 1.5) do not behave predictably for large $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, which will be more clearly seen in the following graph. When the original shape is changed sufficiently by the presence of the openings, the ergodicity of the billiard is no longer an important factor; the relative locations of the openings start to have more effect on the fractal dimension as in the cases of soft chaos.

In Fig. 4, we calculate $`\overline{d_f}`$ as the width $`w`$ varies from 0.5 to 2 with a step size of 0.02 for seven opening sizes ($`\mathrm{\Delta }=1^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=5^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=10^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=20^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=30^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=40^{}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=50^{}`$), using the 2D set.

We can compare graphs in two different regions (found in the closed cut-circle billiard): $`0<w<1`$ (soft chaos) and $`1<w<2`$ (hard chaos). We observed similar behaviors seen in results for the 1D set in Ref. Ree, 2002. However $`\overline{d_f}`$ does not reach one ($`\overline{d_f}=1`$ represents *non-chaos*), even when the billiard is integrable ($`w=1`$ or 2), and this is due to the fine structure near trajectories bouncing very close to the circular boundary. When the opening size $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is not big (see graphs for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=5^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=10^{}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=20^{}`$), we observe that the behavior in two regions is clearly distinct. In the region $`0<w<1`$, there are fluctuations, which comes from the mixed phase space structures of the billiard, and in the region $`1<w<2`$, graphs are smooth because the phase spaces of the billiard have no structure due to ergodicity. On the other hand, when the opening size gets bigger (see graphs for $`\mathrm{\Delta }=30^{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Delta }=40^{}`$, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }=50^{}`$), the distinction between two regions, observed in cases with smaller openings, disappears. There are fluctuations in both regions.

In this Letter, we calculated the fractal dimension for the cut-circle billiard with two openings by introducing the simplified box-counting algorithm for the 2D set of initial conditions. The simplified box-counting algorithm introduced here is possible because the function used to find singularities is constant except singular points (i. e., the function is constant with different values in all regions surrounded by singular boundaries). With this method, some boxes containing singular points will be missed, but the number of missed boxes is negligible when we calculate the fractal dimension with big enough $`N_P`$ values. Results for the 2D set were close to those for the 1D set only when $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is small enough; hence using the 1D set in fractal analysis does not fully represent the chaoticity of the billiard for most cases. In conclusion, this kind of fractal analyses gives us one of the fundamental measures of the chaoticity of classical billiard systems, and finding the relations with the quantum and semiclassical dynamics of the same kind of billiards will be one of the interesting future works.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported by Kongju National University.


format: text

text:
# UV-IR Science Prospects with TES Imaging Arrays

## 1. Introduction and Present UV-IR TES performance

Cryogenic energy-resolving photon detectors show considerable promise for advanced instrumentation in several wavebands. In the near-IR through UV, these devices provide noise-free photon counting with $`\mu `$s time resolution at $`\delta E0.15`$eV energy resolution. Early work focused on superconducting tunnel junction devices (Perryman, Foden & Peacock 1993; Peacock, these proc.), but alternative cryogenic technologies show great promise. Our group has pursued the application of superconducting TES devices to this problem (Cabrera et al. 1998). Our detectors are pixel arrays of 40nm thick tungsten (W) films patterned on Si. When cooled below their $`100`$mK transition temperature and voltage biased to produce negative electro-thermal feedback (Irwin 1995), an absorbed photon decreases the Joule-heating current. This pulse signal is read out with a DC SQUID array (Welty & Martinis 1993). Bi-layer thin films, a variety of substrates, and multiplex schemes to read out larger arrays are also under development and TES array technology is finding interesting application from the sub-mm (SCUBA-2) to the X-ray (Con-X) regimes.

Miller et al. (2000) summarize performance of present W TES devices. We routinely achieve $`\delta E0.15`$eV at $`3`$eV, absolute GPS photon times to 300ns and single-pixel count rates of $`30`$kHz. Energy discrimination rejects all cosmic rays and allows no ‘dark current’ above the noise floor. The intrinsic bare W quantum efficiency is $`50`$% and in astronomical systems we have achieved efficiencies on the sky as high as $``$20%.

TES resolution is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{FWHM}=2.355[4k_BT^2C(n/2)^{1/2}/\alpha ]^{1/2}`$, where $`T`$ and $`C`$ are the temperature and heat capacity of the W $`e^{}`$ system, $`n=5`$ for electron-phonon conduction and $`\alpha =(d\mathrm{ln}R/d\mathrm{ln}T)_{V=const}`$. The pixel size sets $`C`$; the maximum (saturation) energy is $`E_{max}CT_c/\alpha `$ and therefore the optimum detector design gives $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{FWHM,min}=2.355[4k_BT(n/2)^{1/2}E_{max}]^{1/2}`$. Thus for our typical 20$`\mu `$m pixel and $`E_{max}=10`$eV we obtain $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{FWHM,min}0.05`$eV. Somewhat higher resolution can be obtained with lower $`E_{max}`$ by operating in the saturation regime, measuring pulse shape rather than peak height. In the present devices on Si, 58% of the photon energy is lost from the W $`e^{}`$ system to substrate phonons, giving an expected $`\mathrm{\Delta }E=`$0.088eV; for comparison the measured resolution is 0.12eV FHWM. Interestingly, although the physics is different, these sums predict $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{FWHM,min}`$ quite similar to theoretical limits and goal resolutions for existing STJ devices. The eventual choice of detector is probably best decided on the basis of achieved performance and ease of manufacture. At low $`E`$ the thermodynamic fluctuation noise floor allows detection to $`10\mu `$m. Of course, this full sensitivity range cannot be exploited from the ground, and we have employed a variety of filtering schemes to suppress unacceptably high thermal count rates beyond $`2\mu `$m.

To illustrate the astronomical utility of these detectors, we have packaged TES arrays into simple demonstration systems, based on a He dilution refrigerator used for device development, and performed some basic observations. To filter the IR background, we employ a $`3`$m length of high-OH optical fiber spooled at 4K in the dewar. The OH bands of this cold filter provided effective blocking at $`1.7\mu `$m, but allow transmission in the atmospheric windows. At the telescope, the atmosphere and optics limit us to $`3.5`$eV, but in the lab we detected $`E>7`$eV photons. With such systems we demonstrated the first astronomical spectra taken with a cryogenic optical detector and using small telescopes have made unique, scientifically valuable, measurements of the Crab pulsar and other astronomical objects (Romani et al. 1999, Romani et al. 2001), including photon counting spectro-photopolarimetry in the optical/IR.

On small telescopes these test set-ups have achieved good efficiency, although system efficiencies of $`10`$% are typical. As we are fiber-coupled we have to date only employed a small subset of the TES array (e.g. 2$`\times `$3 out of $`6\times 6`$ for the McDonald 2.7m Crab observations). Also, for ease of fabrication, the present TES arrays only employ a single lithographic layer of wiring; these wiring leads are responsive to photons, which complicates the energy PSF and spectral calibration. Finally, fiber coupled schemes, while attractive for test purposes, do not match well to the eventual (space platform) imaging applications for which these TES devices should have their largest impact.

## 2. Current Efforts

All of these factors can be mitigated with some simple design changes, and so we are assembling a first dedicated TES system for ground-based optical/UV astronomy. We are currently assembling an array in a compact, portable Adiabatic Demagnetization Refrigerator (ADR) with dewar windows allowing direct imaging on the focal plane array. This solution is suitable for Cassegrain or Nasmyth applications at moderate to large aperture ground-based telescopes. The system accepts a slow f/10-f/20 beam and focal reduces with a cryogenic all-reflective system to allow good coupling to the devices. At the focal plane we read out a 32 pixel array. The existing design may be run at up to $`8\times 8`$ format by adding more read channels; with modest changes to the device fabrication, arrays of 4-6$`\times `$ this area could be made. With a window solution, we employ heat-absorbing filters passing primarily in the optical/UV, so the system efficiency can be increased by appropriate AR coatings. Finally, to increase the fill factor and suppress energy PSF features from the wires and substrate, we will employ a focusing mask that collects the light to the $`20\times 20\mu `$ W TES pixels.

## 3. Future Potential from Space Platforms

As ground-based tests demonstrate, these cryogenic technologies most immediately impact faint source observations when broad features in the SED and rapid time variability encode the key physics. Compact object studies, especially spin-powered pulsars and accretion-powered CVs and black hole systems are thus the ‘killer-app’ for first generation TES systems. Some of this science can be done from the ground, but the broad (0.1-10eV) energy window accessed from space presents opportunities for uniquely powerful investigations.

The good QE and noise properties of these devices encourages application to a wider range of problems, especially in the UV. Clearly, the main driver here is array format. Imaging applications providing a low-resolution ultra-broad band spectrum of extragalactic sources (see Romani et al. 1999, Mazin & Brunner 2000) over a modest field are very appealing. However, these arrays may also be useful in different formats such as order-sorting detectors for echelle spectroscopy in the optical/UV. The ability to read out more than the modest $`10^2`$ simultaneous channels covered in existing cryogenic system designs is therefore quite important. One fundamental limit is the complexity and heat load of the wiring delivering the signals to room temperature. In the case of TES devices there is a demonstrated (Chervenak et al 1999) scheme for multiplex readout at moderate count rates of a number of TES pixels by a single SQUID channel. Multiplex technology development is also being driven by other TES applications and should certainly increase the useful arrays sizes by factors of $`3010^3`$. There are other schemes for allowing large cryogenic pixel count without a prohibitive number of wires to low temperature (e.g. ‘kinetic inductance’ coupling; Zmuidzinas et al. 2002).

What is needed to give TES imaging arrays (or comparable cryogenic technology) an exciting science role on a space-based platform? We envision three levels of capability. The first stage is a small $`8\times 816\times 16`$ pixel imaging array with low ($`0.1`$eV) energy resolution detecting the near IR-UV band with good QE. This already provides dramatic advance on time resolved studies of Galactic compact objects, with a roughly PSF-matched format and the option for local background subtraction, polarization and similar modes. This array could also perform areal spectroscopy of small extragalactic objects reaching remarkably faint magnitudes. It may be built as a fairly straightforward rescaling of present systems using today’s techniques. Such a (special purpose) system would enable very exciting science from a small aperture dedicated facility or a sub-orbital platform and in our opinion is should be pursued both for the science and for the demonstration of these detectors in a flight program.

A more capable facility would have 1-10 kpix format and would require some form of multiplex read-out. These read channels could be used both as an imaging array and in an elongated (order sorting) spectrographic format. It should be possible to have the same (expensive) read channels address several (cheap) array formats in a single dewar. This array appears to be a natural, near term ($`5`$y) extension of present programs. If such an array can be coupled with a reliable closed-cycle, space-qualified cryocooler+ADR system, a strong science case can be made for a dedicated small aperture system. Grid filtering and passive optics cooling in space could allow simultaneous access to $``$0.2-10eV and imaging and spectroscopic modes, as above.

The ultimate instrument would have $`10^5`$ pixels, which with the high QE, ultra-broad sensitivity range, noiseless detection and intrinsic energy resolution would exceed the capabilities of CCD/MAMA arrays for a variety of mainstream astrophysics and cosmology applications. Such an array might be dynamically addressed, reading out only an interesting pixel subset. Light travel time ensures that sub-$`\mu `$s timestamps are unlikely to be of interest over large areas, so cryogenic preprocessing to accumulate simple spectral images would also be desirable. Schemes to build such an array and to accomplish the required read-out and processing are presently at the cartoon stage; hence prognostication of a development time is rather pointless. However, intermediate steps are quite compelling so with sufficient resources, progress toward such ultimate astronomical detectors is likely to occur.

This work was supported in part by NASA grant NAG5-3775 and made use of the Stanford Nanofabrication Users Network funded by NSF award ECS-9731294.

## References

Cabrera, B., et al. 1998, Appl Phys. Lett., 73, 735

Chervenak, J.A. et al. 1999, Appl Phys. Lett., 74, 4043

Irwin, K. 1995, Apply. Phys. Lett. 66, 1998

Mazin, B.A & Brunner, R.J. 2000, AJ, 120, 2721

Miller, A.J. et al. 2000, Nucl. Inst. Meth, A444, 445

Perryman, M.A.C, Foden, C.L. & Peacock, A. 1993, Nucl. Inst. Meth, A325, 319

Romani, R.W. et al. 1999, ApJ, 521, L153

Romani, R.W. et al. 2001, ApJ, 563, 221

Welty, R. & Martinis, J. 1993, IEEE Trans, Apll. Superc., 3, 2605

Zmuidzinas, J., Mazin, B., Vayonakis, A., Day, P. & Leduc, H.G 2002, in Monterey Workshop Proceedings, in press


text:
# Proof.

On a Linear Property of Bilinearly Defined Sets in $`^n`$

Leo Liberti111E-mail: l.liberti@ic.ac.uk.

Centre for Process Systems Engineering
Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine
London SW7 2BY
United Kingdom

9 July 2002

## Abstract

Certain types of bilinearly defined sets in $`^n`$ exhibit a higher degree of linearity than what is apparent by inspection.

Let $`n,m`$ such that $`n<m`$; $`w,x^n`$; $`y`$; $`J`$ be an index set of size $`nm`$ such that for all $`jJ`$ we have $`jn`$; $`A=(a_{ij})`$ an $`m\times n`$ matrix having rank $`m`$; $`b^m`$;

$`C`$ $`=`$ $`\{(x,w,y)|Ax=bjn(w_j=x_jy)\};`$ (1)
$`R_J`$ $`=`$ $`\{(x,w,y)|Ax=bAwby=0jJ(w_j=x_jy)\}.`$ (2)
Note that since $`y`$, the product $`by`$ is simply $`(b_1y,\mathrm{},b_my)^T`$. We shall show that there is at least a $`J`$ such that $`C=R_J`$. This in effect means that $`m`$ of the $`n`$ bilinear terms that define the set $`C`$ can be replaced by the linear system $`Awby=0`$. Thus the set $`C`$ has a higher degree of linearity than what is apparent by inspection of eqn. (1).

Theorem
$`J(C=R_J)`$.

###### Proof.

If $`(x,w,y)C`$, then by definition it satisfies $`Ax=b`$; multiplying this system by $`y`$ we obtain $`yAxby=0`$, and since $`w_j=x_jy`$ for all $`jn`$ we have $`Awby=0`$. Hence $`(x,w,y)R_J`$ for all $`J`$. Now because $`\text{rk}(A)=m`$, by applying Gaussian elimination we can find a permutation $`\pi S_n`$ (the symmetric group of order $`n`$), a vector $`b^{}^m`$ and a matrix $`A^{}=(A_0^{}|A_1^{})`$, where:

$`A_0^{}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}a_{11}^{}& a_{12}^{}& \mathrm{}& a_{1m}^{}\\ 0& a_{22}^{}& \mathrm{}& a_{2m}^{}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& \mathrm{}& 0& a_{mm}^{}\end{array}\right)`$ , $`A_1^{}=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}a_{1,m+1}^{}& \mathrm{}& a_{1n}^{}\\ a_{2,m+1}^{}& \mathrm{}& a_{2n}^{}\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ a_{m,m+1}^{}& \mathrm{}& a_{mn}^{}\end{array}\right),`$
$`A_0^{}`$ being an $`m\times m`$ square matrix of rank $`m`$, such that $`A^{}\pi (x)=b^{}`$. Let $`J^{}=\{m+1,\mathrm{},n\}`$, $`J=\pi ^1(J^{})`$, and $`(x,w,y)R_J`$. Since $`b=Ax`$ we can substitute it into the system $`Awby=0`$ to get $`AwyAx=0`$, i.e. $`A(wxy)=0`$. This is an underdetermined linear system with $`m`$ equations and $`n`$ variables

$$im\left(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}a_{ij}(w_jx_jy)=0\right),$$

which (by Gaussian elimination) has the same solution space as the system $`A^{}\pi (wxy)=0`$. Since for all $`jJ`$ we have, by definition of $`R_J`$, $`w_j=x_jy`$, this is in turn equivalent to

$$A_0^{}\overline{\pi }(wxy)=0$$
(4)
where $`\overline{\pi }`$ is a restriction of $`\pi `$ to $`\{1,\mathrm{},n\}\backslash J`$ (so that $`\overline{\pi }(j)=\pi (j)`$ only if $`jJ`$). The system (4) is square with full rank $`m`$ and thus has a unique solution $`\overline{\pi }(wxy)=0`$, i.e.

$$jJ(w_j=x_jy).$$

Hence $`(x,w,y)`$ satisfies the definition of $`C`$, i.e. $`R_JC`$. ∎

The geometrical implications of this theorem are that the intersection in $`^n`$ of a set of bilinear terms like those described above is a hypersurface containing a degree of linearity. By exploiting this linearity we are able to replace some of the bilinear terms with linear terms. This fact is useful in a number of applications, e.g. linearly constrained bilinear programming.


text:
# Probing Dark Energy with Supernovae: Exploiting Complementarity with the Cosmic Microwave Background

## I Introduction

Recent observations of Type Ia supernovae (SNe) have provided direct evidence that the Universe is accelerating perl99 ; riess98 , indicating the existence of a nearly uniform dark-energy component with negative effective pressure, $`wp/\rho <1/3`$. Further evidence for dark energy comes from recent cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropy measurements pointing to a spatially flat, critical density Universe, with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0=1`$ CMB , combined with a number of indications that the matter density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M0.3`$ omega\_m ; the ‘missing energy’ must also have sufficiently negative pressure in order to allow time for large-scale structure to form turner\_white . Together, these two lines of evidence indicate that dark energy composes 70% of the energy density of the Universe and has equation-of-state parameter $`w<(0.50.6)`$ w\_constraints . Determining the nature of dark energy, in particular its equation-of-state, is a critical challenge for physics and cosmology.

At present, particle physics theory provides little to no guidance about the nature of dark energy. A cosmological constant—the energy associated with the vacuum—is the simplest but not the only possibility; in this case, $`w=1`$ and is time independent, and the dark energy density is spatially constant. Unfortunately, theory has yet to provide a consistent description of the vacuum: the energy density of the vacuum, at most $`10^{10}\mathrm{eV}^4`$, is at least 57 orders of magnitude smaller than what one expects from particle physics—the cosmological constant problem weinberg . In recent years, a number of other dark energy models have been explored, from slowly rolling, ultra-light scalar fields to frustrated topological defects demodels . These models predict that $`w1`$, that $`w`$ may evolve in time, and that there may be small spatial variations in the dark energy density (of less than a part in $`10^5`$ on scales $`H_0^1`$ perturbations ). In all models proposed thus far dark energy can be characterized by its equation-of-state $`w`$. Measuring the present value of $`w`$ and its time variation will provide crucial clues to the underlying physics of dark energy.

As far as we know, dark energy can only be probed directly by cosmological measurements, although it is possible that laboratory experiments could detect other physical effects associated with dark energy, e.g., a new long-range force arising from an ultra-light scalar field longrange . Dark energy affects the expansion rate of the Universe and thereby influences cosmological observables such as the distance vs. redshift, the linear growth of density perturbations, and the cosmological volume element (see, e.g., HT ). Standard candles such as Type Ia supernovae offer a direct means of mapping out distance vs. redshift (see, e.g., WA2002 ), while the CMB anisotropy can be used to accurately determine the distance to one redshift, the last scattering epoch ($`z_{LS}1100`$). Because they measure distances at such different redshifts, the SNe and CMB measurements have complementary degeneracies in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$$`w`$ planes HT ; WA2002 ; CMB+SN . More recently, Spergel & Starkman SS  have suggested that this complementarity argues for using supernovae at relatively low redshift, $`z0.4`$, to most efficiently probe dark energy. In so doing, they used a highly simplified model which did not consider a spread of SNe in redshift, systematic error, possible evolution of $`w`$, or the finite precision with which planned CMB missions can actually constrain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`w`$.

By including these “real-world” effects, this paper clarifies the complementarity of the CMB and SNe and explores strategies for best utilizing it in SNe surveys to probe the properties of dark energy. We show that dark energy-motivated supernova surveys should target SNe over a broad range of redshifts out to $`z2`$, and that CMB/SNe complementarity in fact strengthens the case for deep SNe surveys.

## II How Supernovae and the CMB Probe Dark Energy

Supernovae and the CMB anisotropy probe dark energy in different ways and at different epochs. However, both do so through the effect of dark energy on the comoving distance vs. redshift relation, $`r(z)`$. For a spatially flat Universe and constant $`w`$:

$`H_0r(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^z}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{H(z)/H_0}}`$
$`(H/H_0)^2`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M(1+z)^3+(1\mathrm{\Omega }_M)(1+z)^{3(1+w)}`$
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ is the present fraction of the energy density contributed by non-relativistic matter. This relation is easily generalized to non-constant $`w`$ and a curved Universe HT ; for notational simplicity we write this and succeeding formulae in terms of constant $`w`$, though we generalize them to the evolving case in our analysis. It is because $`H_0r(z)`$ depends upon only two quantities, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`w`$, that prior information about $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ (or two independent combinations of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`w`$) has such potential to improve the efficacy of a cosmological probe of dark energy based upon $`H_0r(z)`$.

CMB experiments can determine the positions and heights of the acoustic peaks in the temperature anisotropy angular power spectrum to high accuracy. The positions of the acoustic peaks in angular multipole space depend upon the physical baryon and matter densities $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Mh^2`$, on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$, $`w`$, and to a lesser extent other cosmological parameters (e.g., HT ; husug ). Anisotropy measurements from the Planck Planck  mission, planned for launch later in the decade, should determine the positions of the peaks to better than 0.1%; the heights of the peaks will determine $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Mh^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^2`$ (and other cosmological parameters) to roughly percent precision EHT . Together, these measurements should constrain a combination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`w`$ alone (e.g., HT ; SS ) to about 10% precision. In particular, in the vicinity of the fiducial values $`w_0=1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{M0}=0.3`$, the combination

$`𝒟`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M0.94\mathrm{\Omega }_{M0}(ww_0)`$
$``$ $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M0.28(1+w)=0.3`$
will be determined to about $`\sigma _𝒟\pm 0.03(\mathrm{\Omega }_{M0}/0.3)`$ (this result follows directly from Eq. 18 of Ref. HT  by setting $`\mathrm{\Delta }l/l=\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Omega }_0/\mathrm{\Omega }_0=0`$). The resulting 68% CL error ellipse in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$$`w`$ plane predicted for Planck is shown in Fig. 1. Polarization information could in principle improve the precision with which $`𝒟`$ is determined by about 50% HETW , absent problems with foregrounds or the polarization measurements themselves.

The MAP CMB mission MAP  currently underway should determine $`𝒟`$ to a precision that is about 10 times worse than Planck, assuming temperature anisotropy information alone. This constraint is too weak to usefully complement the SNe measurements. However, if MAP polarization measurements are successful, this constraint could be improved by about a factor of two HETW ; we discuss the potential impact of MAP further in Sec. IV.1.3.

As an aside, we note that the physical baryon and matter densities do not directly impact the determination of the properties of dark energy. Rather, together with other cosmological measurements, they can be used to determine $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. In the following Sections we illustrate how independent knowledge of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ can improve the determination of $`w`$.

Measurements of the energy fluxes and redshifts of Type Ia supernovae provide an estimate of the luminosity distance as a function of redshift, $`d_L(1+z)r(z)`$. As an example of a supernova survey, the Supernova/Acceleration Probe (SNAP) SNAP  is a proposed space-based telescope to observe $`3000`$ SNe Ia out to redshift $`z1.7`$, specifically designed to probe dark energy. To illustrate the essential principles for such a survey, though not all the details, we make the simplifying assumption that SNe Ia are nearly standard candles (after correction for the observed correlation between light-curve decline rate and peak luminosity phillips ). With this assumption, the mean peak energy flux from a supernova at redshift $`z`$ is:

$`F(z)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒞10^{0.4M}}{4\pi d_L^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{(10^{10}𝒞/4\pi )10^{0.4}}{H_0^2d_L^2}}=`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(10^{10}𝒞/4\pi )10^{0.4}}{(1+z)^2\left[{\displaystyle _0^z}{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Omega }_M(1+z)^3+(1\mathrm{\Omega }_M)(1+z)^{3(1+w)}}}}\right]^2}}`$
where $`𝒞=3.02\times 10^{35}\mathrm{erg}\mathrm{sec}^1`$ is an unimportant constant, $`M`$ is the mean absolute peak magnitude of a Type Ia supernova, and $`=M5\mathrm{log}(H_0)+25`$, with distances measured in Mpc.

It is important to note several things from Eq. (3). First the energy flux at fixed $`H_0d_L`$ depends only upon the combination $``$ and not upon $`M`$ and $`H_0`$ separately. Thus, the cosmological parameters $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`w`$ can be determined by measuring ratios of fluxes at different redshifts, which are independent of $``$, and so $``$ is sometimes referred to as a nuisance parameter and can be easily marginalized over. Second, since $`H_0d_Lz`$ for $`z0`$, low-redshift supernovae can be used to determine $``$,

$$z^2F(z)(10^{10}𝒞/4\pi )10^{0.4}\mathrm{as}z0.$$
(4)
For example, a sample of 300 low-redshift supernovae (e.g., as will be targeted by the Nearby SN Factory SN\_Factory ) could be used to pin down $``$ to a precision of $`\pm (0.010.02)`$. Finally, an absolute calibration of nearby SNe Ia luminosities by another reliable distance indicator (e.g., using Cepheid variables to determine distances to galaxies that host SNe Ia freedman ) can determine $`M`$; together, $`M`$ and $``$ then fix the Hubble constant, but we emphasize that this is not needed to probe dark energy.

For a survey of SNe Ia, the likelihood function for the three parameters the supernova energy flux depends upon is given by

$$_{\mathrm{SNe}}(\mathrm{\Omega }_M,w,)\mathrm{\Pi }_i\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{[F_iF(z_i)]^2}{2\sigma _i^2}\right)$$
(5)
where $`z_i`$ are the redshifts of the supernovae, $`F_i`$ are their measured fluxes, and $`\sigma _i`$ are their measurement uncertainties (which also includes any random intrinsic spread in peak SNe Ia luminosities).

Unlike the CMB, which probes the angular diameter distance at a single, fixed redshift $`z_{LS}`$, the efficacy of SNe for determining $`w`$ depends upon the redshift distribution of the supernovae. As a first example, Fig. 1 shows how well 3000 supernovae at a single redshift could constrain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`w`$, assuming a random flux error of 0.15 mag per supernova. Because the sensitivity of the comoving distance $`r(z)`$ to the dark energy equation-of-state (e.g., as measured by $`dr/dw`$) increases with redshift, the ellipse shrinks for SNe at higher redshift HT .

While Fig. 1 displays important trends, we note that a realistic survey would not target SNe all at one redshift. Such a delta-function redshift distribution is very much less than optimal for constraining $`w`$ (as we show in Sec. IV.1) and would be very inefficient, since large numbers of discovered SNe would have to be discarded. More importantly, a broad distribution of SNe redshifts is crucial for addressing systematic/evolutionary trends in the SNe population, which must be under control if SNe (or anything else) are to be valid probes of dark energy.

In addition, there is much more to studying dark energy than determining the average value of $`w`$ in the most efficient manner. Constraining the time variation of the equation-of-state is critical for understanding the nature of dark energy. The CMB has no sensitivity to evolution of $`w`$; SNe can probe time variation of $`w`$, and a broad distribution of SNe redshifts (out to $`z2`$) is required to achieve it, as we show below. In Sec. IV we discuss strategies for the distribution of SNe redshifts and results for some plausible examples. Finally, determining cosmological parameters (here $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`w`$) by two very different techniques has the virtue of providing consistency checks on the framework of dark energy as well as the Friedmann-Robertson-Walker cosmology Li02 ; Max .

## III CMB/SNe Complementarity

Some trends in the CMB/SNe complementarity are illustrated in Fig. 1. For the fiducial model ($`w_0=1`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{M0}=0.3`$), the Planck error ellipse in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$$`w`$ plane is approximately oriented along the line $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M0.3+0.28(1+w)`$, as indicated by Eq. (2). By contrast, the error ellipse for 3000 SNe at fixed redshift has negative slope in this plane; with increasing redshift it rotates toward $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M=\mathrm{const}`$, and its width narrows. The reason for the rotation is simple: at high redshift, matter becomes more dynamically important than dark energy, and the SNe are therefore probing the matter density. While the width of the SNe ellipse shrinks with increasing redshift, it becomes less complementary with the CMB ellipse. Fig. 1 also makes it clear why CMB anisotropy is more complementary than the matter density information: the matter density prior, which corresponds to a vertical stripe, is less orthogonal to the SNe ellipse.

To be quantitative, it is useful to write down the joint likelihood function:

$$_{\mathrm{joint}}=_{\mathrm{SNe}}\times _{\mathrm{CMB}}\times _{\mathrm{other}}.$$
(6)
The CMB likelihood function can be approximated as

$`_{\mathrm{CMB}}`$ $`=`$ $`_{\mathrm{CMB},0}(\mathrm{\Omega }_M,w)\times \mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(\rho _B\rho _{B0})^2}{2\sigma _{\rho _B}^2}}\right]`$
$`\times `$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{(\rho _M\rho _{M0})^2}{2\sigma _{\rho _M}^2}}\right]`$
where

$$_{\mathrm{CMB},0}\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{(𝒟𝒟_0)^2}{2\sigma _𝒟^2}\right],$$
(8)
$`𝒟=\mathrm{\Omega }_M0.28(1+w)`$, $`𝒟_00.3`$ is the fiducial value of $`𝒟`$, $`\sigma _𝒟0.1𝒟_0`$ is the projected accuracy for Planck111Note that this is merely illustrative. In fact we treat $`𝒟`$ by the exact expression for the distance to the last scattering surface, i.e., Eq. (1) generalized to evolving $`w(z)`$., $`\rho _B=1.88\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^2\times 10^{29}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3`$, $`\rho _M=1.88\mathrm{\Omega }_Mh^2\times 10^{29}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{cm}^3`$, $`\rho _{B0}`$ is the fiducial value of the baryon density, and $`\rho _{M0}`$ is the fiducial value of the matter density.

The accuracy of the CMB constraint in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$-$`w`$ plane depends on three factors: the experiment (and whether polarization information is included), the parameter set considered, and the presence and nature of foregrounds. For comparison with SNe without systematics, we consider the CMB without foregrounds and assuming a moderate set of eight cosmological parameters and adopt the CMB constraint from ref. Hu\_synergy . Under these assumptions, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Mh^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^2`$ are determined to 1.6% and 0.8% respectively for Planck with temperature information only. Comparison with SNe with systematics requires the inclusion of foregrounds, and is obviously model-dependent. Tegmark et al. CMB\_sys  have shown that the accuracy in all cosmological parameters of our interest degrades only slightly even in the presence of a fairly generous foreground model (their MID model). Nevertheless, the presence of foregrounds is expected to degrade the optimistic uncertainties computed without the systematics (e.g. Knox ). To account for that, we follow ref. HETW , where a more generous set of ten parameters is considered, but without such ”luxury parameters” such as running of the spectral tilt and neutrino mass which were assumed in ref. CMB\_sys . As a result, our model of the CMB with systematics constrains the quantity $`𝒟`$ 30-40% worse than the CMB without systematics.

As noted in Sec. II, the CMB determination of the baryon and matter densities is not directly useful for constraining dark energy: when the joint likelihood function is marginalized over the matter and baryon densities to obtain the one-dimensional probability distribution for $`w`$, the integrations over $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Bh^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Mh^2`$ are trivial. On the other hand, if we can obtain information about $`M`$ (from non-SNe distance measurements) and $``$ (from low-redshift SNe) and thereby (or otherwise) constrain $`H_0`$, then the CMB determination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_Mh^2`$ constrains $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ as well, which would directly impact the joint determination of $`w`$. Of course, any other external determination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ would have the same effect; later, we will discuss how various $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ priors affect the determination of $`w`$.

Assuming no information about $`M`$ (or equivalently $`H_0`$), the joint likelihood function becomes

$$_{\mathrm{joint}}(\mathrm{\Omega }_M,w)=_{\mathrm{CMB},0}\times _{\mathrm{SNe}}$$
(9)
From this function, we obtain one-dimensional probability distributions for $`w`$ by marginalizing over $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. As a first case, we again assume a baseline sample of 3000 SNe all at one redshift, with a random flux error of 0.15 mag per supernova. In Fig. 2, we show the effect of including CMB or $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ information in the determination of the dark energy equation-of-state, assuming $`w=\mathrm{const}`$. If the CMB measurement of $`𝒟`$ is assumed to be “perfect” ($`\sigma _𝒟=0`$) as was done in Ref. SS , the predicted $`\sigma _w`$ drops significantly with increasing redshift and continues to do so out to $`z1.5`$. The effect of a “perfect” matter density prior ($`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}=0`$) is similar. This qualitative behavior can be understood by referring to Fig. 1 and considering the intersection of the CMB line (now an infinitely thin ellipse) with the SNe ellipses or of a vertical line (fixed $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$) with the SNe ellipses. The decreasing width of the SNe ellipses wins out over the decreasing complementarity at higher redshift.

The qualitative behavior changes, however, when finite precision for the CMB and matter density measurements is taken into account; as examples, for the CMB we use the projected Planck accuracy discussed above, and for the matter density we assume $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}=0.03`$. Not only is the uncertainty $`\sigma _w`$ larger in these cases, but it now reaches a minimum at $`z0.2`$ and rises slightly at higher redshift. For finite widths of the matter density or CMB priors, the decreasing complementarity now wins out over the decreasing width of the SNe ellipse with increasing redshift.

Thus far, we have not allowed for systematic error in measuring the supernova flux at a given redshift. This means that by measuring a large number of supernovae at a given redshift, the flux and thereby $`r(z)`$ can be determined to arbitrarily high accuracy. In reality, the presence of residual systematic uncertainty is likely to impose a floor to improvement. As a simple model for irreducible systematic error in the SNe measurements, we assume the flux error in a specified redshift interval is given by $`\sqrt{(0.02)^2+(0.15)^2/N_i}`$ mag, where 0.15 mag is the assumed statistical error per SN, 0.02 mag is the irreducible error,222In practice, the level of the residual systematic error depends on survey design, e.g., telescope aperture and stability, wavelength coverage, observing cadence, point spread function, seeing, sky background, etc. The systematic error quoted here is based on the fact that SNAP is specifically designed to achieve 0.02 mag systematic error in redshift bins of width $`\mathrm{\Delta }z=0.1`$. and $`N_i`$ is the number of supernovae observed in that redshift interval. This model penalizes observing large numbers of SNe at the same redshift since the irreducible error adds to the Poisson error: one reaches diminishing returns for $`N_i100`$, at which point the error is only $`20`$% larger than its asymptotic value. While this model is certainly simplistic, it captures in a straightforward way the essential point: increasing the number of SNe cannot decrease the measured error in $`H_0r(z_i)`$ to arbitrarily small values basa .

Figure 2 illustrates the effect of systematic error. At redshifts less than about $`z0.5`$, systematic error increases $`\sigma _w`$ significantly: without the irreducible flux error, the estimate for $`\sigma _w`$ was optimistically small because the flux error was allowed to decrease to a tiny value ($`0.003`$ mag). With systematic flux error included, the predicted error in $`w`$ from a combined Planck CMB measurement and a hypothetical sample of 3000 SNe (all at redshift $`z`$) flattens at $`z1`$, with an asymptotic amplitude $`\sigma _w0.05`$.

As noted in Sec. II, realistic survey would not target supernovae all at a single redshift, as assumed up to now. Moreover, since the orientation of the SN error ellipse in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$$`w`$ plane rotates with $`z`$ (see Fig. 1), a spread of SNe redshifts helps break the degeneracy between $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`w`$. In the next Section, we consider more realistic strategies for the supernova redshift distribution to optimally probe dark energy.

## IV Strategies for CMB/SNe Complementarity

### IV.1 Optimal

The issue of optimal strategies for determining dark energy properties using SNe in a realistic experiment has been addressed in Refs. HT ; HL . Here, we extend these results to incorporate CMB anisotropy and other measurements.

#### IV.1.1 No systematic error

The optimization problem can be stated as follows: we have three cosmological parameters ($``$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$, and $`w`$; later we will add a fourth, $`dw/dz`$); we have “prior information” (from the CMB anisotropy and/or an independent determination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$); and we wish to determine the redshift distribution of the SNe which minimizes the error on $`w`$, with the constraint that they are confined to the interval $`[0,z_{\mathrm{max}}]`$. For now, we assume that the total number of observed SNe is held fixed, and we do not include systematic error in the SNe measurements. Later we will relax both of these assumptions.

Huterer & Turner HT  showed that for the $`N`$-parameter problem with no priors, the optimal redshift distribution comprises $`N`$ delta functions, with one at $`z=0`$, one at $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$, and the others in between. The amplitudes of the delta functions and their positions relative to $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ vary little with the value of $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$.333The optimization can be done with respect to the errors of the individual parameters or the determinant of the Fisher matrix (“area of error ellipse” for the two-parameter problem). The results in the two cases are similar. We will minimize $`\sigma _w`$ unless otherwise noted. Adding a “strong” prior on one, or a combination, of the three parameters reduces the number of delta functions by one, adding two “strong” priors reduces the number of delta functions by two, and so on. A “strong” prior is one that constrains one, or a combination, of the three parameters better than the SNe measurements alone would. In actuality, this is a continuous process, with the amplitude of one of the delta functions going to zero as the quality of the prior improves. Further, for smaller $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ it is easier to have a “strong” prior, since the SNe constrain the parameters less well.

For illustration we consider a survey of about 3000 SNe with survey depth $`z_{\mathrm{max}}=1.7`$. These choices are motivated by the proposed SNAP survey SNAP  and thus provide a useful benchmark (SNAP should obtain 3000 Type Ia SNe in about two years of observations). Figure 3 shows the optimal SNe redshift distribution with no CMB prior, a perfect CMB prior ($`\sigma _𝒟=0`$), and the Planck prior (see Sec. III). For comparison, we also show one of the redshift distributions currently proposed for SNAP (2812 SNe in the redshift interval $`0.11.7`$) combined with that for the Nearby SN Factory (300 SNe at $`z<0.1`$). We see that a “perfect” CMB prior is a “strong” prior: the optimal SNe distribution in this case becomes two delta functions, one at $`z=0`$ and one at $`z=z_{\mathrm{max}}`$. The Planck prior is not strong: in this case, three delta functions remain, at $`z=0,0.5`$, and 1.7. Figure 4 shows the optimal SNe redshift distribution using $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ instead of CMB priors, with $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}=0.005,0.01,`$ and 0.03. The $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ prior is only “strong” for $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}0.005`$.

In Figs. 3 and 4, the $`z0`$ peaks in the optimal distributions serve mainly to determine $``$. Indeed, the Nearby SN Factory redshift distribution is strongly peaked at $`z0.05`$, in part for this reason.444The SN Factory has another important purpose: the systematic study of Type Ia SNe to better establish their efficacy as standardizable candles. We could have simply imposed a prior on $``$ instead of including this portion of the redshift distribution.

Finally, it is important to consider how much improvement the optimal redshift distribution actually provides compared to a uniform distribution or the SNAP+SN Factory distribution: for the cases shown in Figs. 3 and 4, $`\sigma _w`$ is typically 20% to 30% smaller for the optimal distribution.

#### IV.1.2 Inclusion of systematic error and evolution of $`w`$

Now we consider the effect of systematic flux error on the optimal SNe redshift distribution. As before, we use the simple model of an irreducible flux error of 0.02 mag in each redshift interval of width $`\mathrm{\Delta }z=0.1`$. We should expect that this will broaden the optimal distribution, since it is more expedient to spread the remaining SNe to other redshift bins once the error in a given bin becomes comparable to the irreducible error. Figs. 5 and 6 show the optimal SNe redshift distributions, with and without CMB and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ priors, in the presence of systematic errors. Figs. 5a and 6a show results for the $`w=\mathrm{const}`$ case as before, while Figs. 5b and 6b allow for evolution of the equation-of-state, $`w(z)=w_0+w_1z`$, with $`w_1=dw/dz|_{z=0}`$. Comparison of Figs. 5a and 6a with Figs. 3 and 4 shows that inclusion of systematic error indeed changes the optimal distribution significantly, broadening it to become more uniform.

For the case of constant $`w`$ (Figs. 5a and 6a), the gain in performance for the optimal SNe distribution vs. a uniform or SNAP+SN Factory distribution is reduced to only $`35`$% when systematic errors are included. We find that a number of qualitatively different redshift distributions yield essentially the same value of $`\sigma _w`$. In particular, in this case $`\sigma _w`$ is relatively insensitive to $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$: there exist distributions with no SNe at $`z>1`$ which yield $`\sigma _w`$ only 3% larger than the optimal value (see also Fig. 7 below).

The situation is markedly different if we allow for time variation in the equation-of-state. In Figs. 5b and 6b, we show the distributions that minimize $`\sigma _{w_1}`$ (the results are almost identical if $`\sigma _{w_0}`$ is minimized instead). In the presence of CMB or matter density priors, the optimal distributions now include larger numbers of SNe at high redshift. Furthermore, SNe in the high-redshift range $`1<z<1.7`$ are crucial for precision constraints to $`w_1`$, even in the presence of a strong prior. For example, as $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ increases from 1 to 1.7, $`\sigma _{w_1}`$ decreases by more than a factor of two, cf. Fig. 9.

#### IV.1.3 Gains from complementarity

The preceding analysis shows that, for fixed $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$, the error on $`w`$ is only weakly dependent on the SNe redshift distribution: in the presence of systematic error, distributions which are broadly spread over the range $`0<z<z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ differ only slightly in their performance. Therefore the chief determinant of the error is $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ itself, and we now address how the efficacy of SNe with complementary information depends on this maximum redshift. In Fig. 7, we show the effect of various CMB and matter density priors on the predicted value of $`\sigma _w`$ vs. $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$, assuming $`w=\mathrm{const}`$, with systematic error modeled as before and assuming a scaled version of the SNAP + SN Factory distribution of redshifts.555When varying $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ from its fiducial value of 1.7, we truncate the fiducial SNAP distribution at the new $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ and scale it to preserve the total of 2812 SNe. The SN Factory distribution is then added unchanged – 300 SNe in the lowest redshift bin. (As noted above, the optimal redshift distribution with the same value of $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ would yield only slightly smaller $`\sigma _w`$.) Figure 7 also includes the error on $`w`$ for the case of no CMB prior or knowledge of the matter density (black curve).

The primary effect of incorporating additional information, from either the CMB or the matter density, is to dramatically decrease $`\sigma _w`$ at redshifts less than one and thereby lessen the dependence of $`\sigma _w`$ on $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$. With SNe only, $`\sigma _w`$ decreases from 0.8 to 0.15 as $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ is increased from 0.5 to 1.5. With the Planck or matter density prior, $`\sigma _w`$ decreases less rapidly and levels off at $`z1`$. Note that the Planck prior is more effective than either matter density prior shown. Even combining a $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}=0.01`$ prior with Planck provides little improvement over the Planck prior alone. Although an independent determination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ to $`\pm 0.03`$ can substantially improve the precision with which $`w`$ can be determined if $`z_{\mathrm{max}}1.5`$ HT , the Planck CMB prior by itself does better by a factor of two.

As mentioned at the end of Sec. II, time variation in the equation-of-state is generically expected and is a potentially important discriminator between dark energy models. Allowing for evolution, with $`w(z)=w_0+w_1z`$,666As discussed in Ref. HT , the exact form chosen for the parameterization is not essential. there are now four parameters to determine: $`,\mathrm{\Omega }_M,w_0,`$, and $`w_1`$. As Figs. 8 and 9 illustrate, without an additional prior, SNe have little leverage on $`w_0`$ and $`w_1`$ HT ; Maoretal . An independent determination of the matter density to $`\pm 0.03`$ – not much more stringent than already achieved: 0.04 omega\_m  – would allow $`w_0`$ and $`w_1`$ to be determined to precision of about $`\pm 0.1`$ and $`\pm 0.35`$ for $`z_{\mathrm{max}}1.7`$ HT . The Planck prior is just as good as a $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}=0.03`$ matter density prior for $`w_0`$ (if $`z_{\mathrm{max}}1`$) and better for $`w_1`$. Note that the improvement with survey depth in $`\sigma _{w_1}`$ (and to a lesser extent $`\sigma _{w_0}`$) continues out to $`z_{\mathrm{max}}=2`$ in all cases. That is, even in the presence of complementary information from the CMB or the matter density, a SNe survey aimed at detecting and constraining the evolution of the dark energy equation-of-state should extend out to high redshift, $`z_{\mathrm{max}}1.52`$.

Thus far, our discussion of CMB anisotropy has been confined to the Planck mission. It is also worth considering what can be learned from the ongoing MAP experiment. As noted in Sec. II, with temperature anisotropy measurements alone, MAP can determine $`𝒟`$ about 10 times less accurately than Planck, $`\sigma _𝒟0.3`$. In this case, MAP provides a far less useful prior than the matter density prior $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}=0.03`$ (about a factor of two worse for $`\sigma _w`$), cf. Fig. 7. Even if MAP can achieve its full polarization capability (a factor of two improvement in $`\sigma _𝒟`$ HETW ), a MAP prior is still not as good as the matter density prior $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}=0.03`$. Moreover, mapping the polarization anisotropy on large angular scales — where it helps determine $`w`$ indirectly, by imposing an upper limit to the ionization optical depth $`\tau `$ — will be difficult in the presence of polarized synchrotron radiation from the Galaxy. Finally, we mention that while polarization measurements also have the potential to improve the Planck determination of $`𝒟`$ (by about 50%), this only improves the joint SNe/CMB determination of $`w`$ by about 15%. The reason is simple: it is the width of the SNe error ellipse that controls $`\sigma _w`$.

### IV.2 Resource limited

In the analysis so far, we have assumed a fixed total number of observed supernovae, $`N_{SN}=3112`$. However, the resources required to discover and follow up a supernova depend in general upon its redshift. Thus, an important but more complicated problem involves the optimization of the determination of dark energy parameters with fixed total resources. Actually determining what these fixed resources are (e.g., discovery time, follow-up time, spectroscopy time) and how much each supernova ‘costs’ is beyond the scope of this paper (relevant ongoing studies can be found at SNAP ). We note that these costs will depend in detail upon a variety of technical factors: telescope aperture, pixel size and number, CCD quantum efficiency, sky brightness, atmospheric seeing (for ground-based observations), required signal to noise, etc.

As a highly simplified model, let the normalized cost of each supernova observed at redshift $`z`$ be $`(1+z)^m`$, so that the total cost of a survey that follows up $`N`$ supernovae is $`_{i=1}^N(1+z_i)^m`$. The problem is to find the optimal SNe redshift distribution for fixed total resources (total cost) $`R`$. For SNAP, the observing time cost for spectroscopy or photometry per supernova is estimated to scale as $`(1+z)^6`$ for fixed signal to noise SNAP . In the case of wide field, multiplexing photometry that SNAP is designed for, simultaneously discovering and following up supernovae by repeatedly sweeping the same field could reduce this by a large factor. To span the plausible range of cost functions, we show results for $`m=0,3`$, and 6.

To fix the total resources $`R`$, we assume that there are sufficient resources to carry out a survey of 3112 SNe with the fiducial SNAP + SN Factory redshift distribution shown, e.g., in Fig. 3. That is, for a given value of $`m`$, we fix $`R`$ by computing the total cost of the fiducial SNAP + SN Factory redshift distribution. Then we find the SN redshift distribution that minimizes $`\sigma _w`$ within the resource constraint, i.e., for the same value of $`R`$. If we place no upper bound on the number of SNe per redshift bin, the number of SNe at low redshifts would be driven to huge values as $`m`$ is increased. Clearly a distribution with many thousands of SNe in any redshift bin is not experimentally realistic, and the systematic error makes this an unwise choice: the gains in terms of reduced $`\sigma _w`$ are negligible once the number of SNe per bin goes much above 100. We therefore impose the further constraint that the number of SNe per redshift bin of width 0.25 not exceed (a very generous) 1000.

The results for $`m=0,3`$, and 6 are shown in Figs. 10 and 11, again for $`z_{\mathrm{max}}=1.7`$, the same model for irreducible systematic error as above, and either no prior from the CMB (Figs. 10a, 11a) or the Planck prior (Figs. 10b, 11b). In Fig. 10, we assume constant $`w`$, while in Fig. 11 $`w`$ can evolve. We note that the performance of the optimal distribution in minimizing $`\sigma _w`$ (or $`\sigma _{w_1}`$) is only 2 to 10% better than the SNAP + SN Factory distribution in all cases.

Consider first the constant $`w`$ case. Figure 10 shows that, as $`m`$ increases, SNe start filling up the lower redshift bins to the maximum allowed number; this continues until the resource limit is reached. While this is strictly true for the Planck prior, with no prior a significant fraction of SNe remain in the highest redshift bin. This behavior can be understood simply: without any priors, the high redshift SNe are crucial for breaking the degeneracy between $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$ and $`w`$ (see Fig. 7); the addition of the Planck prior partially breaks this degeneracy, and the number of SNe in the highest redshift bin therefore decreases.

The case of evolving $`w`$ is qualitatively similar, with one important difference: the high-$`z`$ subsample of SNe is always present in the optimal distribution, regardless of the prior or the value of $`m`$. As Fig. 11 shows, the highest redshift bin always has a significant number of SNe ($`500`$), even for $`m=6`$, when their cost is large.

Although the exact optimal distribution for a given value of $`m`$, and the corresponding values of $`\sigma _w`$ and $`\sigma _{w_1}`$, will depend in practice on details of the optimization — the number of redshift bins and the maximum number of SNe allowed per bin — some clear trends emerge from this analysis. While the lower redshift bins become relatively more populated in the optimal distributions (reflecting the lower cost of low-redshift SNe), the importance of high redshift supernovae remains: in all cases, at least 800 SNe are at redshifts $`z>1`$. For the constant $`w`$ case with no Planck prior, or for evolving $`w`$ regardless of prior, these high-redshift SNe are crucial to making the error on $`w`$ small enough to be useful.

Clearly we have just scratched the surface with regard to resource-limited optimization; to proceed further, one would need a much more quantitative description of the resources available and the systematics.

## V Summary and Conclusions

Unraveling the nature of dark energy is one of the outstanding challenges in physics and astronomy. Determining its properties is critical to understanding the Universe and its destiny and may shed light on the fundamental nature of the quantum vacuum and perhaps even of space-time. Type Ia supernovae and CMB anisotropy can both probe the dark energy equation-of-state $`w`$, and we have explored in detail the synergy between the two. With the MAP mission in progress, the Planck mission slated for launch in 2007, and the design of dedicated SN surveys now underway, such a study is very timely.

CMB anisotropy alone cannot tightly constrain the properties of dark energy because of a strong degeneracy between the average equation-of-state and the matter density. SNe can probe $`w`$ with a precision that improves significantly with knowledge of the matter density, because $`H_0r(z)`$ depends only upon $`w`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$. A key result of this paper is that CMB anisotropy measurements by the upcoming Planck mission have even more potential for improving the ability of SNe to probe dark energy. The reason is simple: in the $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$$`w`$ plane (Fig. 1), the CMB constraint is more complementary to the SNe constraint than is determination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_M`$.

Compared to the matter density prior $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}=0.03`$, Planck CMB data reduce the predicted error $`\sigma _w`$ (under the assumption of constant $`w`$) by about a factor of two (Fig. 7). In probing possible variation of $`w`$ with redshift, the Planck prior is also significantly better than the same matter density prior (Fig. 9). Given the concern expressed by some (e.g., Maoretal ) that a precise measurement of the matter density independent of dark energy properties may be difficult, this is good news. On the other hand, we find that even if MAP can successfully measure polarization on large scales, its potential for complementarity with SNe falls short of that for Planck and is not as good as the $`\sigma _{\mathrm{\Omega }_M}=0.03`$ matter density prior.

We have also explored how the SNe determination of the dark energy equation-of-state, with or without prior information from the CMB or the matter density, depends upon the redshift distribution of the survey, including the effects of systematic error and a realistic spread of SNe redshifts. For either constant or evolving $`w`$, the optimal strategy calls for significant numbers of SNe above redshift $`z1`$. For the constant $`w`$ case with no Planck prior, or for evolving $`w`$ regardless of prior, these high-redshift SNe are necessary for achieving $`\sigma _w<0.1`$. Observing substantial numbers of SNe at these high redshifts also provides the only hope of probing time evolution of the equation-of-state with reasonable precision. Moreover, the improvement in $`\sigma _{dw/dz}`$ continues to high redshift: $`\sigma _{dw/dz}`$ falls by more than a factor of two when $`z_{\mathrm{max}}`$ increases from $`1`$ to $`2`$ (Fig. 9). Since we currently have no prior information about (or consensus physical models which significantly constrain) the time variation of $`w`$, the design of a SNe survey aimed at probing dark energy should take into account the possibility that $`w`$ evolves. These conclusions about the need for high-redshift supernovae do not change significantly if we consider a hypothetical survey for which resources are constrained and a redshift-dependent cost is assigned to each supernova.

Ref. SS  raised the question whether a shallow SNe survey is better than a deep one in determining the dark energy equation-of-state, given prior knowledge from the CMB. Our results indicate that it is not, once the SNe and CMB experiments are realistically modelled. On the contrary, CMB/SNe complementarity strengthens the case for a deep SNe survey that extends to redshift $`z2`$.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work was supported by the DoE (at Chicago, Fermilab, LBL, and CWRU), NASA (at Fermilab by grant NAG 5-7092), and the NSF Center for Cosmological Physics at Chicago. EL would like to thank Ramon Miquel and Nick Mostek for their help with computations. DH thanks Wayne Hu for conversations regarding the MAP and Planck CMB missions.


text:
# Imaging the structure of the domain wall between symmetries interconnected by a discontinuous transition

## I Acknowledgments

We acknowledge A. A. Aligia, J. Lorenzana, C. Balseiro, E. Jagla, P. Cornaglia and F. Laguna for valuable discussions and E. Martinez for careful reading of the manuscript. This work was partially supported by Agencia Nacional de Promoci n Cient fica y Tecnol gica, by Fundaci n Antorchas and by Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cientificas y T cnicas, Argentina.


text:
# On generating functions in the AKNS hierarchy

## Acknowledgements

AMK is grateful to J.F. Gomes and A.H. Zimerman for interesting discussions of negative flows in the AKNS hierarchy. This work was partially supported by RFBR (grants 00–01–00210, 00–01–00366, 01–01–00696).


text:
# High frequency acoustic modes in liquid gallium at the melting point.

(August 14, 2002)

## Abstract

The microscopic dynamics in liquid gallium (l-Ga) at melting (T=315 K) has been studied by inelastic x-ray scattering. We demonstrate the existence of collective acoustic-like modes up to wave-vectors above one half of the first maximum of the static structure factor, at variance with earlier results from inelastic neutron scattering data \[F.J. Bermejo et al. Phys. Rev. E 49, 3133 (1994)\]. Despite the structural (an extremely rich polymorphism and rather complex phase diagram) and electronic (mixed valence) peculiarity of l-Ga, its collective dynamics is strikingly similar to the one of Van der Walls and alkali metals liquids. This result speaks in favor of the universality of the short time dynamics in monatomic liquids rather than of system-specific dynamics.

The nature of the microscopic dynamics in simple fluids is nowadays one of the most lively debated topics in the condensed matter field. The provocative evidence of well defined collective excitations outside the truly hydrodynamic region has attracted many experimentalists in the last three decades. In particular, several studies performed through Inelastic Neutron Scattering (INS) revealed the presence of a Brillouin triplet in the dynamic structure factor of many monatomic liquids neu . Together with numerical studies num  these experiments provided us some pictures of the high frequency dynamics, although a deep comprehension of the ultimate nature of these excitations is still missing books ; teo . More recently, the advent of the new radiation sources has allowed the full development of the Inelastic X-ray Scattering (IXS) ixs . This technique, being sensitive to the coherent dynamics only and allowing to investigate the low exchanged momentum ($`Q`$) region inaccessible to INS, renewed the interest and the efforts in the field giving rise to a number of experiments ixsexp . More specifically, some light has been shed on the mesoscopic dynamics of different monatomic systems as Van der Walls fluids (He, Ne), liquid alkali metals (Li, Na), and more complex liquid metals (Al). In particular, using the generalized Langevin equation formalism, the presence of two viscous relaxation processes has been experimentally proven in all these systems, and the relevant parameters have been quantitatively determined scopixs .

Among the elemental liquid metals, Ga exhibits peculiar structural and electronic properties. In addition to the low melting point ($`T_m=303`$ K), it presents an extended solid phase polimorphism with complex crystal structures where a competition between metallic and covalent bonding character takes place tos . Although the electronic DOS in l-Ga is nearly free electron it still shows anomalies associated with some covalency residue. Moreover, the first peak of the $`S(q)`$ presents a hump characteristics of non close-packed liquid structures bf . The existence of common features in the high frequency dynamics of all the monatomic liquids seems to be challenged by liquid Gallium. In fact, earlier studies performed by INS showed somehow contradictory results. At room temperature, although no collective modes were visible in the experimental data, the spectra were described by a damped harmonic oscillator model, and the excitation frequencies were found to lie above the hydrodynamic values. This effect was ascribed to the presence of high frequency optical modes that were supposed to contribute to the spectra. In these studies, the absence of acoustic excitations was explained with a high value of the longitudinal viscosity, despite on the basis of hydrodynamic arguments collective modes should have been expected ber1 . Few years later, a new INS experiment was performed at higher temperature (T=973 K), and collective modes were detected. In particular, at low wavevectors an acoustic mode was found, while at high wave-vectors the dispersion curve split in two branches that according to the authors should be associated to acoustic and optic excitations respectively ber2 . This picture (absence of acoustic-like excitations just above melting) -if verified- would stress the anomalous dynamical behaviour of Gallium, and would falsify the idea of a common high frequency dynamics of monatomic systems.

In this paper we report on an inelastic x-ray scattering study of the microscopic dynamics in liquid gallium just above the melting point. The sensitivity of this technique to the purely collective motion only and the extended accessible cinematic region, allowed an accurate determination of the coherent dynamic structure factor. We find clear indication of acoustic-like excitations, whose properties parallel those of all the other investigated monatomic liquids. Moreover, the value of the transport coefficients derived by a generalized Langevin equation description of the spectra, quantitatively agrees with the hydrodynamic expectations. The obtained results indicate that -despite its structural and electronic anomalies- liquid Gallium shares with the other simple liquids (metals and non-metals) the same features of the high frequency atomic dynamics.

The experiment has been performed at the ID28 beam-line of the ESRF at fixed exchanged wave-vector over a $`Q`$ region below the position of the main diffraction peak ($`Q_M25`$ nm-1). A typical energy scan ($`50<E<50`$ meV) took about 300 minutes, and was repeated for a total integration time of about 300 seconds/point. A five analyzers bench allowed us to collect simultaneously spectra at five different values of the exchanged wave-vector $`Q`$ for each single scan. The sample consisted of a gallium molten droplet kept in sandwich between two sapphire windows (thickness 0.25 mm). The sample thickness, ($`100\mu m`$), was chosen in order to match the absorption length at the incident energy of 17794 eV, corresponding to the (9 9 9) reflection from the silicon analyzers that we utilized ($`\delta E3.0`$ meV) ixs .

In Fig. 1 we report the measured IXS intensity for each investigated (fixed) $`Q`$-value. The presence of an acoustic propagating mode clearly appears from the raw data. These modes were not observed in Ref. ber1 , probably due to the limited accessible cinematic region and to the incoherent scattering contribution to the spectra. The spurious signal coming from the longitudinal and transverse phonons of the sapphire windows, due to the high value of their speed of sound, does not significantly overlap with the Gallium spectra. In order to extract quantitative information on the reported excitations, a data analysis has been performed following a memory function approach that has been shown to be well footed on several simple fluids books ; scopixs . Within the generalized Langevin equation formalism, it is possible to express the classical dynamic structure factor in terms of a complex memory function, $`M(Q,t)`$, related to the interaction details. In particular, in terms of the real and imaginary part of the Fourier-Laplace transform of $`M(Q,t)`$, it holds books :

$`S(Q,\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{S(Q)\pi ^1\omega _0^2(Q)\stackrel{~}{M}^{}(Q,\omega )}{\left[\omega ^2\omega _0^2(Q)+\omega \stackrel{~}{M}^{\prime \prime }(Q,\omega )\right]^2+\left[\omega \stackrel{~}{M}^{}(Q,\omega )\right]^2}}.`$
Here the quantity $`\omega _0^2(Q)=KTQ^2/mS(Q)`$ is related to the generalized isothermal sound speed through the relation $`c_t(Q)=\omega _0(Q)/Q`$, and can be calculated from the liquid structure once $`S(Q)`$ is known. In order to be used as a test function to fit the experimental data, the above expression has to be modified to satisfy the detailed balance condition and must be convoluted with the instrumental resolution function $`R(\omega )`$:

$`I_N^{th}(Q,\omega )={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\omega ^{}/KT}{1e^{\mathrm{}\omega ^{}/KT}}S(Q,\omega ^{})R(\omega \omega ^{})𝑑\omega ^{}}.`$
Taking advantage of the results obtained in several other liquid metals (Li, Al, Na) scopixs ; scopsim  and fluids (noble gases) har ; He ; Ne , we utilized a memory function composed by two relevant time-scales associated to two processes of viscous origin, plus an exponential contribution that accounts for the thermal relaxation process. For the two viscous terms we adopted a simple Debye law (exponential decay) to account for the structural relaxation and an instantaneous approximation (delta-function) for the faster, microscopic contribution. Consequently, the total memory function reads

$`M(Q,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\gamma 1\right)\omega _0^2(Q)e^{D_TQ^2t}`$
$`+`$ $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha ^2(Q)e^{t/\tau _\alpha (Q)}+2\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu (Q)\delta (t).`$
Thus the free fitting parameters are $`\tau _\alpha `$ (the structural relaxation time), $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha (Q)`$ (the structural relaxation strength) and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ (associate to the microscopic relaxation, and representing the Brillouin line-width in the fully relaxed limit). The value of $`\omega _0(Q)`$ has been calculated using the $`S(Q)`$ data reported in bf , while the specific heat ratio $`\gamma `$ and thermal diffusivity $`D_T`$ are deduced by macroscopic data (their $`Q`$-dependence have been neglected). The outcome of the fitting procedure for selected $`Q`$-values, i.e. a comparison between the best fitting line-shape and the experimental spectra, is reported in Fig. 2. Intensities have been normalized using the $`S(Q)`$ values of Ref. bf .

In Fig. 3 we report the apparent sound velocity nota  (full dots). At the lower accessible wavevectors, the measured sound velocity ($``$3000 m/s) still exceed the isothermal value ($``$2800 m/s) as deduced by ultrasounds measurement ultrasound , a behaviour (the so called positive dispersion of the sound velocity) that is common with many other simple fluids. In the same figure we report the generalized (Q-dependent) isothermal sound velocity ($`\omega _0(Q)/Q`$ as deduced by the $`S(Q)`$ bf ) (open triangles) that constitutes the low frequency limit of the sound speed, as well as the high frequency limit, $`c_{\mathrm{}}(Q)`$ (full line) numerically estimated through the structural data (pair distribution function, interaction potential) ber1 . The full triangles come from the best fitted values of $`\omega _0(Q)`$ that -in a separate check fitting session- has been left as free parameters. The coincidence of the fitting-derived $`\omega _0(Q)`$ values with those derived from the $`S(Q)`$ data indicates the robustness of the fitting model. In the inset the $`Q`$-dependence of the structural relaxation time as derived by the fit is reported. Apart from the very high value found at the lower $`Q`$ point, mainly because the width of the central line becomes comparable to the instrument resolution, we find a slightly decreasing value in the range $`0.25>\tau _\alpha >0.17`$. It is worth to point out that the relation $`\omega (Q)\tau _\alpha (Q)>1`$ holds in the whole explored $`Q`$ range, i.e. the structural relaxation is frozen over the probed timescale. Therefore, the apparent sound speed coincides with the $`c_\mathrm{}\alpha (Q)=\sqrt{\omega _0^2(Q)+\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha ^2}/Q`$ (dotted line in Fig. 3). The gap observed at low $`Q`$ between the apparent speed of sound and the total $`c_{\mathrm{}}(Q)`$ is due to the non-negligible strength of the microscopic process, whose time-scale is much shorter than the inverse of the current correlation maxima $`\omega _l(Q)`$, a condition that prevents the system from reaching the fully unrelaxed regime.

A further relevant quantity that can be extracted from the fitting parameters is the generalized ($`Q`$-dependent) longitudinal viscosity $`\eta _L(Q)`$, i.e., in the Langevin equation formalism, the total area of the memory function : $`\eta _L(Q)=\rho (\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha ^2\tau _\alpha +\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mu (Q))/Q^2`$, reported in Fig. 4. In the upper inset we show the two individual contributions $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(Q)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }_\alpha ^2(Q)\tau _\alpha (Q)`$: the viscosity associated with the structural rearrangement turns out to be dominant all over the entire explored $`Q`$ range; the contribution coming from the microscopic process (the only one affecting the Brillouin line-width in the present regime) follows -at low $`Q`$\- a $`Q^2`$ behavior as already reported in other liquids and glasses scopixs ; scopsim ; har . Apart from a low $`Q`$ increase, an artifact due to the finite resolution effect and already observed in other systems scopixs , the total $`\eta _L(Q)`$ follows an exponential $`Q`$-dependence, whose origin deserves further investigations. However, the low $`Q`$ limit of $`\eta _L(Q)`$ can be obtained by extrapolation, and turns out to be in very good agreement with the value $`\eta =11.4`$ cP, determined from the experimental value of the shear viscosity and from the shear-to-bulk viscosity ratio deduced by structural parameters ber1 . In the same figure is also reported the $`\eta _L(Q)`$ for liquid aluminum at $`T_m`$ as obtained from previous experiments scopixs , which shows a behaviour similar to that of Gallium. To further emphasize the similarity of these different systems, we report in the lower inset a direct spectral comparison at $`Q`$9.5 nm-1 (the position of the main peak of the static structure factor is almost the same for Al and Ga). As the absolute temperatures and the instrumental resolutions are different in the two cases, we present the best fitted line-shape according to the model previously discussed. The energy axes has been arbitrary shrunk to wipe out the effect of the different sound speed values. Beside obvious quantitative differences associated -for example- with the different atomic masses and interactions, the two systems at the melting point present very close line-shape. This furtherly confirms the similarity of the high frequency dynamics of liquid Gallium with that of other simple liquids.

In conclusion, we presented an experimental study of the collective high frequency dynamics in liquid gallium at the melting temperature. Evidence for collective acoustic modes has been found in a $`Q`$ region extending beyond the hydrodynamic regime up to one half of the structure factor main peak. A generalized hydrodynamic analysis allows a quantitative determination of relevant parameters such as the structural relaxation time and the generalized viscosities. More importantly, it reveals how the main features of the collective dynamics in this system are very similar to the ones reported in different elements such as Li, Na, Al scopixs  and noble fluids He ; Ne . This is an important indication of how -beside quantitative differences- the high frequency dynamics in simple fluids exhibit universal features which go beyond system dependent details such as the electronic structure, bond nature, atomic interaction and structural properties. Since on the observed time-scale the structure of the liquid is frozen ($`\omega _l(Q)\tau _\alpha (Q)>>1`$), one can think of the high frequency dynamics as that of a system with well defined equilibrium position (”glass”). Therefore, the details of the dynamics (microscopic relaxation times, residual viscosity) are fully determined by the vibrations of the disordered structure, explaining the observed universality scopsim ; har . Finally, although we did not find any evidence for additional modes in the explored $`Q`$ range, on the basis of the findings of Ref. ber2  we believe that further investigations should be devoted to the higher $`Q`$ region.

We are thankful to the ESRF staff for the assistance during the experiment. T.S. gratefully acknowledge M.C. Bellissent Funel for providing S(Q) data.