text:
# Strongly Irreducible Surface Automorphisms

## 1. Introduction

A surface automorphism $`h:FF`$ is strongly irreducible if every essential simple closed curve $`\gamma F`$ has nontrivial geometric intersection with its image, $`h(\gamma )`$. This paper shows that a three-manifold admits only finitely many inequivalent surface bundle structures with strongly irreducible monodromy. This imposes a serious restriction; for example, any three-manifold which fibres over the circle and has $`b_2(M)2`$ admits infinitely many distinct surface bundle structures.

The main step is an elementary proof that all weakly acylindrical surfaces inside of an irreducible triangulated manifold are isotopic to fundamental normal surfaces. As weakly acylindrical surfaces are a larger class than the acylindrical surfaces this strengthens a result of Hass ; an irreducible three-manifold contains only finitely many acylindrical surfaces.

Section 2 gives necessary topological definitions, examples of strongly irreducible automorphisms, and precise statements of the theorems. The required tools of normal surface theory are presented in Section 3. Section 4 defines weakly acylindrical and proves that every such surface is isotopic to a fundamental surface. In the spirit of the Georgia Topology Conference the paper ends by listing several open questions.

Many of the ideas and terminology discussed come from the study of Heegaard splittings as in  and in my thesis . This paper, in particular Theorem 4.2, owes an obvious debt to  by Jaco and Oertel. I thank Ian Agol for simplifying my original proof of Proposition 2.3 and Dave Bachman for critiquing an early version of this paper.

## 2. Definitions and Examples

This section lays out the necessary definitions, states the main theorems precisely, and gives examples of families of strongly irreducible surface automorphisms.

Let $`F`$ be a closed, orientable, $`\mathrm{genus}(F)>1`$ surface. Let $`h:FF`$ be an automorphism of $`F`$. If $`\gamma _0`$ and $`\gamma _1`$ are simple closed curves in $`F`$ then the geometric intersection number, $`i(\gamma _0,\gamma _1)`$, is the minimum of $`|\gamma _0^{}\gamma _1^{}|`$ taken over all $`\gamma _i^{}`$ isotopic to $`\gamma _i`$.

###### Definition.

The map $`h`$ is strongly irreducible if $`i(h(\gamma ),\gamma )>0`$ for every essential simple closed curve $`\gamma F`$.

If $`h`$ is not strongly irreducible then $`h`$ is weakly reducible.

###### Remark 2.1.

A reducible surface automorphism is one which admits an invariant set of disjoint essential simple closed curves, up to isotopy. Thus reducible maps are also weakly reducible.

###### Remark 2.2.

There exist weakly reducible pseudo-Anosov maps with arbitrarily high stretch factor — the main ideas required for the construction may be found in .

###### Example.

Let $`P`$ be a regular $`4g`$-gon in the hyperbolic plane with angle at the vertices equal to $`2\pi /4g`$. Here $`g`$ is assumed to be two or larger. Glue opposite sides of $`P`$ by isometries to obtain $`F`$, an orientable surface of genus $`g`$. Let $`h:PP`$ be a counter-clockwise rotation of $`P`$ about its center, $`O`$, through an angle of $`2\pi /4g`$. Let $`h^{}`$ be the induced isometry of $`F`$.

###### Proposition 2.3.

The periodic map $`h^{}`$ is strongly irreducible.

All of the hyperbolic trigonometry needed in the proof may be found in Chapter 7 of .

###### Proof.

Suppose that $`R`$ is the distance between $`O`$ and $`V`$, where $`V`$ is a vertex of $`P`$. Then $`\mathrm{cosh}(R)=\mathrm{cot}^2(2\pi /8g)`$. Both $`O`$ and $`V`$ give fixed points, $`x_O,x_VF`$, of $`h^{}`$. Suppose that $`\gamma F`$ is a simple closed geodesic. There is a point of $`\gamma `$ which lies within $`R/2`$ of either $`x_O`$ or $`x_V`$. This last holds because the points of $`F`$ which are not this close to one of $`x_O`$ or $`x_V`$ form a disjoint union of disks.

Suppose there is a point of $`\gamma `$ within distance $`R/2`$ of the point $`x_O`$. (The other case is similar.) Pick $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }^2`$, a lift of $`\gamma `$, which lies within $`R/2`$ of $`O`$. Let $`L`$ be the distance between $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ and $`O`$. Let $`\theta `$ be the visual angle which $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ occupies, as viewed from $`O`$. (When $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ meets $`x_O`$ take $`\theta =\pi `$.) Then $`LR/2`$ and $`\mathrm{cosh}(L)=1/\mathrm{sin}(\theta /2).`$ Applying a “double-angle” formula to $`\mathrm{cosh}(R)`$ yields

$$\mathrm{cosh}(R/2)=1/\sqrt{2}\mathrm{sin}(2\pi /8g).$$

Hyperbolic cosine is an increasing function on the positive reals so

$$1/\mathrm{sin}(\theta /2)1/\sqrt{2}\mathrm{sin}(2\pi /8g).$$

As sine is increasing in the interval $`[0,\pi /2]`$ we deduce that $`\theta >2\pi /4g`$. Thus the visual angle of $`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }`$ is greater than $`2\pi /4g`$ and $`h(\stackrel{~}{\gamma })\stackrel{~}{\gamma }\mathrm{}`$. It follows that $`h^{}(\gamma )\gamma \mathrm{}`$. This gives the desired conclusion as the intersection and geometric intersection numbers agree for geodesics. ∎

###### Proposition 2.4.

If $`h`$ is a pseudo-Anosov map then there is an $`n`$ such that $`h^n`$ is strongly irreducible.

Here we only sketch a proof; the numbers in parentheses refer to theorems in Kapovich’s book  which we take as our reference for $`𝒫(F)`$, the space of projectively measured laminations of $`F`$. Recall that geometric intersection extends to a continuous function on $`\times `$ (11.26).

Let $`\lambda ^\pm `$ be the stable and unstable laminations for $`h`$. Let $`U,V`$ be small neighborhoods of $`\lambda ^\pm `$ (respectively) in $`𝒫(F)`$. Choose $`U`$ and $`V`$ so that all $`xU`$, $`yV`$ have $`i(x,y)>0`$. This is possible because the geometric intersection between $`\lambda ^+`$ and $`\lambda ^{}`$ is non-zero (11.49). In particular, $`UV=\mathrm{}`$.

There is an $`m`$ such that if $`x𝒫(F)V`$ then $`h^m(x)U`$ (11.47). Now, $`n=m+1`$ gives the desired conclusion. To see this, pick an essential simple closed curve $`yF`$. Denote the corresponding element of $`𝒫(F)`$ again by $`y`$. There is a integer $`k`$ such that $`h^k(y)V`$ but $`h^{k+1}(y)V`$. (Again, 11.47.) So $`i(y,h^n(y))=i(h^k(y),h^{k+1+m}(y))>0`$. This completes the proof sketch.

###### Remark 2.5.

The notions irreducible and strongly irreducible may be generalized by introducing the curve complex of $`F`$, $`𝒞(F)`$, and defining the translation distance, $`\tau (h)`$, of $`h`$’s action on $`𝒞(F)`$. The deep results of  give a positive integer $`n(g)`$ depending only on $`g=\mathrm{genus}(F)`$ such that: If $`h`$ is pseudo-Anosov then $`\tau (h^{n(g)})2`$ and so $`h^{n(g)}`$ is strongly irreducible. This greatly improves upon Proposition 2.4.

We now turn from examples to the main objects of interest: surface bundles over the circle.

###### Definition.

If $`h:FF`$ is a surface automorphism then let $`M_h`$ be the mapping torus of $`h`$. So

$$M_hF\times I/(x,1)(h(x),0).$$

The mapping torus admits a natural map to the circle, $`\pi _h:M_hS^1`$. The embedded surfaces $`F\times \{t\}M`$ are called the fibres of this map while $`h`$ is the monodromy and $`g(F)=\mathrm{genus}(F)2`$ is the genus of the bundle. As an example, if $`h`$ is a strongly irreducible periodic automorphism, then $`M_h`$ is an atoroidal Seifert fibred space.

Fix $`M`$, a closed orientable three-manifold.

###### Definition.

A surface bundle structure on $`M`$ is a pair $`(h,\varphi )`$, where $`h`$ is a surface automorphism and $`\varphi `$ is a homeomorphism from $`M_h`$ to $`M`$.

Let $`(h,\varphi )`$ and $`(h^{},\varphi ^{})`$ be two surface bundle structures on $`M`$. Suppose that $`\psi :M_hM_h^{}`$ is a homeomorphism such that $`\pi _h=\pi _h^{}\psi `$ and $`\varphi `$ is isotopic to $`\varphi ^{}\psi `$. Then the two bundle structures on $`M`$ are equivalent. Thus $`(h,\varphi )`$ is equivalent to $`(h^{},\varphi ^{})`$ if and only if $`h^{}`$ is conjugate to $`h`$ and the fibres of the two bundle structures are isotopic in $`M`$.

Here is a precise statement of the theorem alluded to in the introduction.

Theorem 4.3. Suppose that $`M`$ is a closed, orientable three-manifold. Then $`M`$ admits only finitely many inequivalent surface bundle structures with strongly irreducible monodromy.

Closely related is our:

Theorem 4.4. Suppose that $`M`$ is a closed, orientable three-manifold. There is a positive real number $`c(M)`$ such that if $`(h,\varphi )`$ is a surface bundle structure on $`M`$ with genus $`g>1`$ then $`h^i`$ is weakly reducible for all integers $`i`$ where $`1ic(M)(2g2)`$.

If $`c(M)(2g2)<1`$ then the theorem is vacuous as no such $`i`$ exists.

###### Remark 2.6.

If $`M`$ is atoroidal then $`M`$ has only finitely many inequivalent surface bundle structures in each genus. (This simply because there are only finitely many incompressible surfaces, up to isotopy, of each genus. See .) Thus, in the atoroidal case, Theorem 4.4 implies Theorem 4.3.

###### Remark 2.7.

Suppose $`M`$ is a closed, atoroidal three-manifold admitting infinitely many inequivalent surface bundle structures. Then this manifold and Theorem 4.4 provide another proof that the constant $`n(g)`$ of Remark 2.5 must tend to infinity as $`g`$ does.

###### Remark 2.8.

Again, consider the translation distance $`\tau (h)`$ where $`h`$ is an automorphism of the closed, orientable, genus at least two, surface $`F`$. One obtains an analogue of a theorem of Hartshorn  regarding Heegaard splittings: If $`(h,\varphi )`$ is a surface bundle structure on $`M`$ and $`G`$ is a two-sided incompressible surface in $`M`$ then either $`G`$ is isotopic to a fibre, $`G`$ is a torus (and $`h`$ is reducible), or $`\tau (h)\chi (G)`$.

As a corollary, deduce that if $`h`$ has translation distance greater than $`\chi (F)`$, where $`F`$ is the fibre, then $`F`$ is the unique minimal genus incompressible surface in $`M`$, up to isotopy. Weak conclusions about the shape of the Thurston norm ball and on the structure of $`M`$’s symmetry group follow.

## 3. Normal surfaces

This section presents the required bare minimum of normal surface theory. For a more complete treatment consult  or .

Fix a closed orientable three-manifold $`M`$ and choose $`T`$, a triangulation of $`M`$. Suppose $`FM`$ is a closed embedded surface. The weight of $`F`$, $`w(F)`$, is the number of intersections between $`F`$ and the one-skeleton of $`T`$. The surface $`F`$ is normal if $`F`$ intersects every tetrahedron of $`T`$ in a disjoint collection of normal triangles and quadrilaterals. See Figure 1. In each tetrahedron there are four types of normal triangle and three types of normal quad.

###### Lemma 3.1.

(Haken ) Suppose that $`(M,T)`$ is closed and irreducible. If $`FM`$ is embedded and incompressible then $`F`$ is isotopic to a normal surface $`F^{}`$ with $`w(F^{})w(F)`$.

A normal isotopy of $`M`$ fixes every simplex of $`T`$ setwise. Two normal surfaces, $`G`$ and $`H`$, are compatible if in each tetrahedron $`G`$ and $`H`$ have the same types of quad (or one or both have no quads.) In this situation we form the Haken sum $`F=G+H`$ as follows:

Normally isotope $`H`$ to make $`G`$ transverse to $`H`$, to make $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=GH`$ transverse to the skeleta of $`T`$, and to minimize the number of curves in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. The components of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are the exchange curves. For every such $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ let $`R(\gamma )`$ be the closure (taken in $`M`$) of $`\eta _M(\gamma )`$, an open regular neighborhood of $`\gamma `$. The set $`R(\gamma )`$ is a solid torus containing $`\gamma `$ as a core curve.

Then $`(R(\gamma ))(GH)`$ is a union of annuli. Taking closures divide these into two sets, the regular and irregular annuli, $`A_r(\gamma )`$ and $`A_i(\gamma )`$, as indicated by Figure 2. Finally, as in Figure 3, form the surface

$$F=\left((GH)\underset{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}\{\eta _M(\gamma )\}\right)\underset{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{}\{A_r(\gamma )\}.$$

Each connected component of $`(GH)_\mathrm{\Gamma }\{\eta _M(\gamma )\}`$ is a patch of the sum $`G+H`$ while each closed annulus $`A_r(\gamma )`$ is a seam. Note that $`F`$ is again a normal surface which, up to normal isotopy, does not depend on the choices made in the above construction.

A normal surface is fundamental if it admits no such decomposition. A fundamental result due to Haken is:

###### Lemma 3.2.

(See ) A closed orientable triangulated three-manifold $`(M^3,T)`$ contains only finitely many fundamental normal surfaces, up to normal isotopy.

###### Remark 3.3.

The proof of Lemma 3.2 requires only that the manifold $`M`$ admit a finite triangulation. We restrict ourselves to the closed and orientable case to avoid an unnecessarily technical discussion about normal surfaces.

Each “cut-and-paste” operation involved in the Haken sum $`F=G+H`$ may be recorded by an embedded exchange band $`(C(\gamma ),C(\gamma ))(N(\gamma ),A_r(\gamma ))`$. That is, the band is embedded in $`N(\gamma )`$ with boundary inside of $`A_r(\gamma )`$. See Figure 3. Each $`C(\gamma )`$ is either an annulus or a Mobius band. The exchange bands record enough information to reverse the sum. Note also that each seam is a regular neighborhood (in $`F`$) of a boundary component of some $`C(\gamma )`$.

A sum $`F=G+H`$ is reduced if $`F`$ cannot be realized as a sum $`G^{}+H^{}`$ where $`G^{}`$ and $`H^{}`$ are again normal, isotopic to $`G`$ and $`H`$ respectively, with $`|G^{}H^{}|<|GH|`$. Note that the isotopy between $`G`$ and $`G^{}`$ ($`H`$ and $`H^{}`$) need not be normal. Lemma 3.4 is a key technical result for  and our Theorem 4.2.

###### Lemma 3.4.

(Jaco and Oertel ) Suppose that $`(M^3,T)`$ is a closed, orientable, irreducible, triangulated three-manifold. Suppose that $`FM`$ is an incompressible normal surface which is least weight in its isotopy class. If the sum $`F=G+H`$ is reduced then no patch of $`G+H`$ is a disk.

## 4. Weakly acylindrical surfaces

Here the weakly acylindrical surfaces are defined. Equipped with this definition and Theorem 4.2 we will prove Theorem 4.3, the main goal of the paper.

Suppose now that $`N`$ is a compact, orientable three-manifold with non-empty boundary.

###### Definition.

An embedded annulus $`(A,A)(N,N)`$ is essential in $`N`$ if $`A`$ is incompressible and boundary-incompressible.

Now fix $`M`$, a closed orientable three-manifold. Let $`FM`$ be a closed, embedded, incompressible, two-sided surface with genus at least two.

###### Definition.

The surface $`F`$ is cylindrical if $`N=M\eta _M(F)`$ admits an essential annulus. If $`N`$ does not admit an essential annulus then $`F`$ is acylindrical.

###### Definition.

The surface $`F`$ is strongly cylindrical if there exists an embedded annulus $`(A,A)(M,F)`$ such that $`A\eta _M(F)`$ is essential in $`N=M\eta _M(F)`$. On the other hand, if no such annulus exists then $`F`$ is weakly acylindrical.

###### Remark 4.1.

If $`F`$ is acylindrical then $`F`$ is weakly acylindrical. Note that if $`F`$ is a fibre of a surface bundle then $`F`$ is never acylindrical, as the complement of $`F`$ is homeomorphic to $`F\times I`$. However, if the monodromy is strongly irreducible then $`F`$ is weakly acylindrical. For separating surfaces the notions acylindrical and weakly acylindrical coincide.

###### Theorem 4.2.

Suppose that $`(M,T)`$ is a closed, orientable, irreducible, triangulated three-manifold. Suppose $`FM`$ is weakly acylindrical. Then $`F`$ is isotopic to a fundamental normal surface.

Before proceeding with the proof of Theorem 4.2 we remark that the normal surface techniques used may easily be replaced by the methods of branched surface theory.

###### Proof of Theorem 4.2.

Fix $`FM`$ as in the hypothesis. Recall that weakly acylindrical includes the property of being incompressible. Applying Lemma 3.1 isotope $`F`$ to be normal and least weight in its isotopy class. Set $`N=M\eta _M(F)`$. Recall also that $`F`$ is two-sided, and has genus two or greater.

Suppose that $`F`$ is not fundamental. Pick a reduced decomposition $`F=G+H`$. This sum admits some exchange band $`A`$. Let $`A_N=AN`$. If $`A`$ is a Mobius band then $`A`$’s double, defined below, must be compressible or boundary-compressible in $`N=M\eta _M(F)`$. If $`A`$ is an annulus then $`A_N`$ is itself compressible or boundary-compressible in $`N`$. The proof deals with each of these possibilities in turn, showing that all lead to contradiction.

Suppose that $`A`$ is an exchange Mobius band. As $`M`$ is orientable, $`A`$ is one-sided. Let $`X`$ be a closed regular neighborhood of $`A_N`$, taken in $`N`$. Let $`B=XN`$. Then $`B`$ is an annulus on the boundary of the solid torus $`X`$. The double of $`A`$, $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$, is the closure of $`(X)B`$. Note that $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ is an embedded annulus with $`(\stackrel{~}{A},\stackrel{~}{A})(N,N)`$. As $`F`$ is weakly acylindrical $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ must compress or boundary-compress in $`N=M\eta _M(F)`$.

Suppose that $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ compresses along a disk $`E`$. Note that $`EX=E`$. Compress $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ along $`E`$ to obtain a pair of disks $`C`$ and $`D`$. Then $`S=BCD`$ is a two-sphere bounding $`\overline{^3𝔹^3}`$ on the side which meets $`A`$. Thus $`M^3`$, contradicting the fact that $`F`$ was two-sided and incompressible.

Suppose that $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ instead boundary-compresses along a disk $`E`$. Let $`Y`$ be the closure of $`\eta _{NX}(E)`$. Boundary-compressing $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ along $`E`$ gives a disk $`D`$. That is, $`D`$ is the closure of $`((XY))N`$. Since $`F`$ is incompressible and two-sided, $`D`$ bounds a disk $`D^{}N`$. Note that $`D^{}`$ meets $`XY`$ along $`D^{}`$ only, as $`N(XY)`$ is nonplanar. Now, as $`F`$ is incompressible, the two-sphere $`DD^{}`$ bounds a three-ball, $`Z`$, on the side not meeting $`A`$. It follows that $`XYZ`$ is a solid torus with boundary equal to a component of $`N`$. However this is impossible, as every component of $`N`$ has genus equal to that of $`F`$.

Thus the sum $`G+H`$ has no exchange Mobius bands. Instead, suppose that $`A`$ is an exchange annulus. As $`M`$ is orientable $`A`$ is two-sided. The weakly acylindrical hypothesis forces $`A_N`$ to be compressible or boundary-compressible in $`N=M\eta _M(F)`$.

Suppose that $`A_N`$ is compressible along a disk $`E`$. Compress $`A`$ along $`E`$ to obtain disks $`C`$ and $`D`$ with $`CD=A`$. As $`F`$ is incompressible $`C`$ bounds a disk, $`C^{}F`$. Now $`C=C^{}`$ is contained inside of a seam, say $`A_r(\gamma )`$. Thus $`C^{\prime \prime }`$, the closure of $`C^{}A_r(\gamma )`$, is a disk which is a union of patches and seams of $`G+H`$. An innermost disk in $`C^{\prime \prime }`$ must be a disk patch, contradicting Lemma 3.4.

Finally, suppose that $`A_N`$ is boundary-compressible along a disk $`E`$. Boundary-compress $`A_N`$ to obtain a disk $`D`$. By incompressibility $`DN`$ bounds a disk $`D^{}N`$. Let $`Z`$ be the three-ball with boundary $`DD^{}`$. If $`EZ`$ then $`A_N`$ is compressible (see Figure 4) yielding contradiction as in the proceeding paragraph.

If $`EZ=\mathrm{}`$ then the situation is more delicate. Let $`W`$ be the closure of the component of $`NA_N`$ containing $`E`$ and $`Z`$. Then $`W`$ is a solid torus having $`E`$ as a meridional disk. Note that $`A_NW`$.

Let $`X`$ be the closure of $`\eta _N(A_N)`$. Let $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ be the closure of $`XN`$. Take $`F^{}=(NX)\stackrel{~}{A}`$. Then $`F^{}=TF^{\prime \prime }`$ where $`T=\left(\overline{WX}\right)`$ is a torus and $`F`$ is isotopic to $`F^{\prime \prime }`$. (The surface $`F^{}`$ is obtained by performing an irregular exchange along the annulus $`A`$.) To check that $`F^{\prime \prime }`$ is indeed isotopic to $`F`$ recall that $`F`$ is two-sided and note that the annulus $`N(WX)`$ may be isotoped, relative to its boundary, across the solid torus $`WX`$. See Figure 5 for a schematic picture of the cross-section of $`W`$.

Either $`w(F^{\prime \prime })<w(F)`$ or $`F^{\prime \prime }`$ is not normal. (Again, see Figure 2.) In the latter case there is an isotopy of $`F^{\prime \prime }`$ to $`F^{\prime \prime \prime }`$, supported in a small neighborhood of some face in the two-skeleton, which reduces weight by two. See Figure 6. Both possibilities contradict Lemma 3.1 because $`F`$ is least weight in its isotopy class. ∎

We now deduce our main theorem as a corollary of Theorem 4.2:

###### Theorem 4.3.

Suppose that $`M`$ is a closed, orientable three-manifold. Then $`M`$ admits only finitely many inequivalent surface bundle structures with strongly irreducible monodromy.

###### Proof.

It follows from Theorem 4.2 and Lemma 3.2 that there are finitely many isotopy classes of weakly acylindrical surfaces in $`M`$. As in Remark 4.1, any bundle with strongly irreducible monodromy has a weakly acylindrical fibre. Finally, a given closed embedded surface in $`M`$ is isotopic to the fibre of at most two bundle structures, up to equivalence. This gives the desired conclusion. ∎

Now suppose that $`M`$ is a closed, orientable three-manifold with triangulation $`T`$. Let $`\{F_i\}`$ be the fundamental normal surfaces in $`T`$ with negative Euler characteristic while $`\{T_i\}`$ and $`\{P_i\}`$ are those fundamental surfaces of Euler characteristic zero and positive, respectively. By Lemma 3.2 each of these collections is finite. Let $`K=|\{F_i\}|`$ be the number of fundamental surfaces with negative Euler characteristic. Let $`P=\mathrm{max}\{\chi (F_i)\}`$.

We end this section by sketching a proof of:

###### Theorem 4.4.

If $`(h,\varphi )`$ is a surface bundle structure on $`M`$ with genus $`g>1`$ then $`h^i`$ is weakly reducible for all integers $`i`$ where $`1ic(M,T)(2g2)`$ and $`c(M,T)=1/(3KP)`$.

###### Proof.

Suppose that $`FM`$ is a fibre of a surface bundle structure with monodromy $`h`$. Isotope $`F`$ to be normal with respect to the triangulation $`T`$ and the least weight such. Suppose that $`F`$ decomposes as a Haken sum. Then, by Theorem 2.2 of , $`F=n_iF_i+m_iT_i`$ where the summands with nonzero coefficient are fundamental, incompressible normal surfaces. (Note that no fundamental surface with positive Euler characteristic appears as a summand; this follows directly from Lemma 3.4.)

Recall that $`g(F)=\mathrm{genus}(F)2`$. Thus some of the $`n_i`$ are nonzero. Reindex to obtain $`n_1n_i`$ for all $`i`$. If $`F_1`$ is two-sided then rewrite the Haken sum as $`F=nG+H`$, with $`n=n_1`$, $`G=F_1`$, and $`H`$ equal to the sum of the remaining terms. If $`F_1`$ is one-sided then take $`F=nG+H`$ where $`n`$ is the integer part of $`n_1/2`$, $`G=2F_1`$ is the double of $`F_1`$, and $`H`$ is the sum of the remaining terms.

Recall that Euler characteristic is additive under Haken sum. Now, if $`n=0`$ then $`n_i=0`$ or $`1`$ for all $`i`$. It follows that $`\chi (F)KP`$ and thus $`\chi (F)c(M,T)<1`$. In this case the theorem is trivially satisfied.

Assume from now on that $`n`$ is positive. An easy estimate shows that $`n\chi (F)/(3KP)`$. Make $`F=nG+H`$ a reduced sum by isotoping $`G`$ and $`H`$ if necessary. The surface $`nG`$ is $`n`$ normally parallel copies of $`G`$. Label these, in order, $`G_1,G_2,\mathrm{},G_n`$. The surface $`H`$ is nonempty and intersects $`G`$ because $`F`$ is connected. So $`HnG`$ decomposes into parallel (in $`H`$) families of curves, each family of size $`n`$. Let $`\{\gamma _i\}_{i=1}^n`$ be one such family. Each $`\gamma _iG_i`$ yields an exchange annulus for the sum $`F=nG+H`$. An argument identical to the proof of Theorem 4.3 shows these annuli to be essential.

Pick $`mn`$. The exchange annuli will lift to the $`m^{\mathrm{th}}`$ cyclic cover of the surface bundle. Thus $`h^m`$ is not strongly irreducible. ∎

## 5. Questions

Here are several questions, not all of which are necessarily difficult:

* Can a periodic surface automorphism be irreducible but not strongly irreducible?
* Are weakly acylindrical surfaces vertex surfaces? (See  for the definition of a vertex surface.)
* Give an algorithm to recognize strongly irreducible surface automorphisms or, more generally, compute translation distance.
* How are the strongly irreducible bundle structures on $`M`$ distributed among the fibred faces of the Thurston norm ball?
* Is there a meaningful stabilization theory for surface bundle structures on $`M`$?
* Suppose that $`h`$ is pseudo-Anosov. What does the translation distance of $`h`$ imply about the hyperbolic geometry of the mapping torus $`M_h`$?
* Can the function $`n(g)`$, as in Remark 2.5, be given more explicitly? Remark 2.7 only suggests a lower bound.


format: text

text:
# A Determination of 𝐻₀ with the CLASS Gravitational Lens B1608+656: III. A Significant Improvement in the Precision of the Time Delay Measurements

## 1 Introduction

Gravitational lenses provide excellent tools for the study of cosmology. In particular, the method developed by Refsdal (1964) can be used to determine the Hubble Constant at cosmological distances. This method requires a lens system for which both lens and source redshifts have been measured, for which a well-constrained model of the gravitational potential of the lensing mass distribution has been determined, and for which the time delays between the lensed images have been measured. To date, measurements of time delays have been reported in the literature for 11 lens systems: 0957+561 (Kundić et al., 1995, 1997c), PG 1115+080 (Schechter et al., 1997; Barkana, 1997), JVAS B0218+357 (Biggs et al., 1999; Cohen et al., 2000), PKS 1830-211 (Lovell et al., 1998; Wiklind & Combes, 2001), CLASS B1608+656 (Fassnacht et al., 1999, hereafter Paper I), CLASS B1600+434 (Koopmans et al., 2000; Burud et al., 2000), JVAS B1422+231 (Patnaik & Narasimha, 2001), HE 1104-1805 (Gil-Merino, Wisotzki, & Wambsganss, 2002, see, however, Pelt, Refsdal, & Stabell 2002), HE 2149-2745 (Burud et al., 2002a), RX J0911.4+0551 (Hjorth et al., 2002), and SBS 1520+530 (Burud et al., 2002b). Of these lens systems, CLASS B1608+656 is the only four-image system for which all three independent time delays have been unambiguously measured.

The CLASS B1608+656 lens system consists of the core of a radio-loud poststarburst galaxy at a redshift of $`z=1.394`$ (Fassnacht et al., 1996) being lensed by a $`z=0.630`$ pair of galaxies (Myers et al., 1995). Radio maps of the system show four images of the background source arranged in a typical lens geometry (Figure 1). Models of the lens system predict that, if the background source is variable, image B should show the variation first, followed by components A, C, and D in turn (Myers et al., 1995; Koopmans & Fassnacht, 1999, hereafter Paper II). The time delays determined in Paper I were based on radio-wavelength light curves obtained with the Very Large Array (VLA111The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is a facility of the National Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc.) between 1996 October and 1997 May. During that time, the background source 8.5 GHz flux density varied by $``$5%. Although the measured time delays were robust, the small level of variability meant that the uncertainties on the delays were large. The estimated uncertainties from the Paper I data ranged from $``$12% for the B$``$D time delay ($`\tau _{BD}`$) to $``$20% for the other two measured delays (95% CL). These uncertainties translated to uncertainties on the derived value of the Hubble Constant of $``$15% (Paper I). In addition, the lens modeling contributes an uncertainty of $``$30% to the derived $`H_0`$, with the largest contribution coming from the uncertainty in the radial profile of the mass distribution in the lensing galaxies (Paper II). In order to achieve a more precise determination of $`H_0`$ from this lens system, the uncertainties on both the time delays and the modeling need to be significantly reduced. This paper addresses the first of those issues.

## 2 Observations

In VLA test observations conducted before the start of the first monitoring program, the flux density of the B1608+656 components had varied by up to 20% on time scales of months. If detected during a monitoring program, variations on this scale would allow a significant reduction in the time delay uncertainties. Thus, we continued our monitoring program with the VLA. Our observations were conducted at 8.5 GHz. The angular resolution required to separate properly the individual images of the background source limited the observations to the times in which the VLA was in its most extended configurations, the A, BnA, and B arrays. Thus, we have light curves covering the approximately eight months out of every 16-month cycle, during which the VLA was in the proper configurations. We have denoted these eight-month blocks as observing “seasons,” with season 1 being 1996 November to 1997 May, which was discussed in Paper I.

In this paper, we present results from seasons 2 and 3. Table 1 summarizes the observations that were conducted. Each observing epoch contained observations of CLASS B1608+656; the phase calibrator, 1642+689; the primary flux calibrator, 3C 343 (1634+628); and secondary flux calibrators. The phase center for the observations of B1608+656 was chosen to be the approximate center of the system at RA: 16h09m13$`\stackrel{\mathrm{s}}{\mathrm{.}}`$953 and Dec: +65°32′28$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$00 (J2000). Our primary flux calibrator is not a standard VLA flux calibrator. However, it is much closer in the sky to our lens system than the usual flux density calibrators, 3C 286 and 3C 48, and our season 1 observations showed that its flux density is stable (Paper I). Any errors in the absolute flux-density calibration due to either variability in this source or secondary instrumental effects could be corrected through the use of the secondary flux calibrators. These secondary calibrators are steep-spectrum radio sources and, as such, should not be highly variable. In particular, if the light curves of the secondary flux calibrators show variations that are correlated, it is almost certain that these variations are produced by flux calibration errors rather than being intrinsic. Thus, the information obtained from correlated variability of the secondary calibrators can be used to correct the light curves of the lensed images (see Paper I; also §3.4). Compact symmetric objects (CSOs) have been shown to be especially stable secondary calibrators at 8.5 GHz (Fassnacht & Taylor, 2001, hereafter FT01). The season 2 secondary flux calibrators were 1633+741, which was used in the Paper I analysis, and two CSOs: J1400+6210 and J1944+5448. The integration times on the various sources were typically one minute on the phase calibrator and the CSOs, two minutes on 1633+741, and approximately five minutes on the lens system. Neither CSO was observed for the full length of season 2; J1944+5448 was observed from 1998 February 13 to 1998 June 01 while J1400+6210 was observed from 1998 May 12 to 1998 October 19. The observations for season 3 were similar to those of season 2, but with a different set of secondary flux calibrators. We dropped 1633+741 and J1944+5448 and added six CSOs to the two used in the season 2 observations. The increase in the number of good secondary flux calibrators provided a better estimate of the errors in the absolute flux density calibration. The additional CSOs used were: J1035+5628, J1148+5924, J1244+4048, J1545+4751, J1823+7938, and J1945+7055. Because there were more sources observed per epoch than in the first two seasons, the average integration time per source dropped slightly. The phase calibrator and CSOs typically were observed for 45-60 sec and B1608+656 was observed for a few minutes.

## 3 Data Reduction

### 3.1 Calibration

The data were calibrated using customized procedures that acted as an interface to tasks in the NRAO data reduction package, AIPS. For consistency, the data from all three observing seasons were calibrated in the same way. Therefore, the season 1 data were recalibrated. The overall flux density calibration was tied to 3C 343. As discussed in FT01, 3C 343 is not an ideal calibrator due to some low surface-brightness emission surrounding the central component. However, it was possible to correct for the changes in the total measured flux density of 3C 343 as the VLA configuration changed (see §3.4).

The calibration procedure for each epoch of observation began with careful data editing. Bad integrations on the calibrators, indicated by discrepant amplitudes or phases, were deleted. Any antenna which exhibited a large number of bad integrations during an epoch was flagged for the entire epoch. The antenna system temperatures were also used as a diagnostic to discover bad integrations, which were then flagged. One antenna in particular (antenna 3) had system temperatures that were, on average, a factor of three higher than those of the other antennas. Because this behavior was seen during all three seasons of observations, we flagged antenna 3 before doing any calibration. After the bad data had been flagged, the antenna gain phases and amplitudes were determined through self-calibration on the bright, compact calibrator sources. For all of the CSOs and the phase calibrator, we used a point source model to do the self calibration. The emission from two of the CSOs, J1035+5628 and J1400+6210, is slightly resolved so, for those sources, we imposed a maximum baseline length of 400 k$`\lambda `$ in the calculation of the gain solutions. The more complicated morphology of the flux calibrator required a simple model as the input to the self-calibration. Otherwise, the processing for the flux calibrator was the same as that used for the phase calibrator and CSOs. The self-calibration was conducted in two steps. In the first step, solutions were calculated for the gain phases only, with a solution interval of 10 sec. Those solutions were applied to the data and then the second calibration was performed. This time, both phase and amplitude solutions were calculated, with a solution interval of 30 sec. The flux-density scale was then transferred to the CSOs and phase calibrators through the GETJY task. Finally, the gain solutions from the phase calibrators were interpolated and applied to the data on B1608+656 and, for seasons 1 and 2, 1633+741.

### 3.2 Mapping and Initial Light Curves

The flux densities for the B1608+656 components, the CSOs, and 1633+741 were obtained through the use of the model-fitting procedures in the DIFMAP software package (Shepherd, 1997). The process used to derive the flux densities for the CSOs was described in FT01. The flux densities for B1608+656 and 1633+741 were measured using methods similar to those described in Paper I, but with small variations. For 1633+741 the only change in the processing was to limit the $`(u,v)`$ range used for the model-fitting procedure to include only baselines with lengths less than 400 k$`\lambda `$. This change de-emphasized the contribution of small-scale structure in the source, namely the emission associated with the probable core component. The data on the source suggested that the core of 1633+741 was variable during the observations. By minimizing the contribution of the core in the model-fitting, we obtained light curves which had less intrinsic scatter, especially in the A-configuration data, and which were much more consistent with the CSO light curves.

For B1608+656, we investigated the effect of letting the component positions vary during the model fitting. We ran the DIFMAP scripts twice, once with variable positions and once with the positions fixed at the values given in Table 2. For the case in which we let the positions vary, the best-fit positions returned by the model-fitting were very close to those in the fixed-position models. For all components the mean offsets from the fixed positions were 1 milliarcsecond (mas) or less. The RMS scatter about the mean ranged from 1 to 4 mas, with the largest RMS offsets being those associated with component D in seasons 2 and 3, when the component was faintest. The offsets are in all cases small compared to the VLA beam sizes of 250 to 700 mas. As expected for such small positional differences, there were no significant differences in the flux densities obtained via the two fitting procedures. Thus, we chose to use only the results obtained by holding the positions fixed.

### 3.3 Light Curve Editing

During the course of the observations, there were some data sets obtained under less-than-ideal conditions. Although VLA observations at 8.5 GHz are relatively unaffected by poor weather, extreme weather conditions such as thunderstorms or very high winds can produce data which can not be properly calibrated given the observing strategy that we had used. Based on our evaluation of the success of the calibration procedure, we chose to delete a small number of epochs from the light curves. Paper I describes the reasons for flagging two bad epochs in season 1. In seasons 2 and 3 we flagged a total of 4 epochs due to bad weather conditions. We also flagged 3 points obtained at the very beginning of the seasons during which the VLA was in a mixed configuration while the antennas were being moved from their D-array positions to their A-array positions. For these epochs, the absolute flux density calibration was not correct. The number of epochs remaining after flagging the data from each season is listed in the $`N_{\mathrm{good}}`$ column of Table 1.

### 3.4 Correction of Systematic Errors and Final Light Curves

Paper I and FT01 describe a method that uses the light curves of steep-spectrum radio sources to correct for systematic errors in the absolute flux density calibration. We have followed the same method in this paper to correct the light curves of the lensed images. The results presented in FT01 showed that CSOs are excellent flux density calibrators at the frequencies used for our monitoring observations. As discussed in FT01, the light curves of J1823+7938 and J1945+7055 showed evidence of additional systematic effects not seen in the light curves of the other CSOs. Thus, those two sources were not included in the construction of the season 3 correction curve. Additionally, the season 2 data show that 1633+741, although relatively stable, has noisier light curves than those of the CSOs. This is probably due to the significant extended emission and complicated morphology of 1633+741. Our snapshot observations did not cover the $`(u,v)`$ plane well enough to accurately model the complex emission of the source. Thus, we dropped 1633+741 as a secondary flux density calibrator.

There were two details to consider in constructing the correction curves. The first was that the primary flux calibrator, 3C 343 has some extended emission. The B-configuration observations are more sensitive to lower surface brightness emission than are the A-configuration observations. Thus, the total flux density observed for 3C 343 will increase whenever the VLA enters the B configuration. The observations of the secondary flux calibrators were used to examine the size of this effect. The effect only appeared to be significant during season 3, perhaps because the brightness of the central component had decreased slightly and the extended emission thus contributed a larger percentage to the total B-configuration flux density. To ensure that the correction curves did not include any step function introduced by the changing flux density of 3C 343, we computed for each season the mean flux densities of the CSOs in the A, BnA, and B configurations separately and used those values to normalize the light curves. This procedure also corrected for any step functions caused by the presence of low-level extended emission in the secondary flux calibrators themselves. The second detail to consider was that, by dropping 1633+741, we had no secondary flux density calibrators for the recalibrated season 1 data. However, our analysis of the light curves and the time delay results showed that the inclusion of the 1633+741 data introduced more scatter than it took out. Thus, we believe that our decision to drop the 1633+741 data was the proper one.

The final corrected light curves for the four components in B1608+656 are shown in Figure 2. The errors on the points are a combination in quadrature of (1) the RMS noise in the residual map from the DIFMAP processing, typically $``$0.1 mJy beam-1, and (2) a 0.6% fractional uncertainty arising from errors in the absolute flux density calibration. We have estimated the fractional uncertainty from the season 3 CSO light curves. All of the light curves have been normalized by their mean flux densities over the entire three seasons of observations. Thus, the plot in Figure 2 represents the fractional variations in flux density, which allows for direct comparison of the component light curves. The figures show that the background source varied significantly in both season 2 and season 3. The variations in each of these seasons are on the order of 25–30%, in contrast to the $``$5% variations seen in season 1. Unfortunately, the season 2 light curves have nearly a constant slope, which made it difficult to determine unambiguously the time delays and magnifications needed to align the component light curves. However, the season 3 light curves have both a large amount of variation and clear changes in slope, making them excellent inputs for determining time delays.

## 4 Determination of Time Delays

### 4.1 Dispersion Method

In Paper I we used several statistical methods to determine the delays between the light curves. In this paper, with obvious source variability and $``$250 points in the light curves of each component, we have used only the dispersion method described by Pelt et al. (1994, 1996). This method has the clear advantage of not requiring any interpolation of the input light curves. As we did in Paper I, we used the $`D_2^2`$ and $`D_{4,2}^2`$ methods (as defined in Pelt et al., 1996) to compare the three independent pairs of light curves. In these methods, one of the input light curves is shifted in time by a delay ($`\tau `$), scaled in flux by a relative magnification ($`\mu `$), and combined with the second curve to create a composite light curve. The internal dispersion in the composite curve is then calculated by computing the weighted sum of the squared flux difference between pairs of points in the curve. For the $`D_2^2`$ method, only adjacent pairs of points are considered, while, for the $`D_{4,2}^2`$ method, additional pairs of points are considered. In the $`D_{4,2}^2`$ calculations, all pairs separated by fewer than $`\delta `$ days contribute to the final dispersion, but with an additional weighting such that the pairs with the smallest separation in time have the highest weights. By including more pairs, the $`D_{4,2}^2`$ statistic is less likely to be affected by individual discrepant points.

We searched a range of delays and relative magnifications to determine the values that, when applied to one of the input curves, produced the best alignment between the two curves (i.e., the lowest internal dispersion in the composite curve). The $`(\mu ,\tau )`$ pairs used for the search formed regular grids. The $`\tau `$ values were separated by 0.5 d in the range $`\tau _0\pm 30\mathrm{d}`$. The values of $`\tau _0`$ were those derived in Paper I, namely 31, 36, and 76 d. The range of relative magnifications searched was $`0.95\mu _0`$ to $`1.05\mu _0`$, with steps of size $`\mathrm{\Delta }\mu =0.001\mu _0`$. The values of $`\mu _0`$ were also chosen to match the best-fit values obtained from the season 1 data: 2.042, 1.038, and 0.351 for $`\mu _{AB}`$, $`\mu _{CB}`$, and $`\mu _{DB}`$, respectively. Here, we have defined $`\mu _{AB}`$ as the relative magnification of component A with respect to component B, and so forth. These relative magnifications express the ratios of the component flux densities, once the light curves have been properly corrected for the time delays.

### 4.2 Delays from Combined Analysis

As a first step in the determination of the delays, we analyzed the results from each season individually. The results from season 2 were not conclusive due to the degeneracy between the relative magnification and the time delay. However, the season 1 and season 3 light curves gave robust determinations of the time delays and relative magnifications between the curves. The delays determined from the two seasons were consistent, but the magnifications were discrepant. It is possible that the absolute flux density scale might change from season to season. However, such a change would manifest itself as a constant scaling applied to each of the component flux densities equally, leaving the relative magnifications unaffected. We thus concluded that some slow process had affected the measured flux density of at least one of the images (see §6.1). As a result, our approach to the combined analysis of the data from all three seasons changed. Instead of finding a set of best-fit global magnifications, we let the relative magnifications vary from season to season. Because the determination of the dispersion is an additive process, the implementation of this change was straightforward. Consider the comparison of two light curves, $`Q_i`$ and $`R_j`$, which are sampled only during the three seasons defined by the ranges $`[t_{1,0},t_{1,f}]`$, $`[t_{2,0},t_{2,f}]`$, and $`[t_{3,0},t_{3,f}]`$. The composite curve $`T_k(t_k)`$ was constructed from the input curves, with the second curve shifted in time by a delay $`\tau `$ and scaled by season-dependent relative magnifications $`\mu _n`$, such that

$$T_k=\{\begin{array}{cc}Q_i,\hfill & \text{if }t_k=t_i\hfill \\ R_j/\mu _1,\hfill & \text{if }t_k=(t_j\tau )\text{ and }t_{1,0}t_jt_{1,f}\hfill \\ R_j/\mu _2,\hfill & \text{if }t_k=(t_j\tau )\text{ and }t_{2,0}t_jt_{2,f}\hfill \\ R_j/\mu _3,\hfill & \text{if }t_k=(t_j\tau )\text{ and }t_{3,0}t_jt_{3,f}\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
The internal dispersion in the composite curve was then calculated in the standard fashion described above.

For each pair of curves, we searched a grid of $`(\mu _1,\mu _2,\mu _3,\tau )`$ values to find the combination which gave the lowest dispersion. In order to ascertain the robustness of the derived time delays, we repeated the $`D_{4,2}^2`$ method with a range of values for $`\delta `$ and compared the results (Table 3). Figure 3 shows typical output curves from the dispersion analysis. We show for comparison the equivalent curves from the Paper I analysis as dashed lines on the plots. Although both sets of curves give nearly the same time delays, the curves associated with the combined data sets show much clearer minima.

We have taken the median values of the columns in Table 3 to be the best-fit time delays and relative magnifications as determined from the data. These values are given in Table 4. The median time delays are $`\tau _{BA}=31.5`$ d, $`\tau _{BC}=36.0`$ d, and $`\tau _{BD}=77.0`$ d. The time delay ratios are $`(\tau _{BD}/\tau _{BA})=2.44`$ and $`(\tau _{BD}/\tau _{BC})=2.14`$. These agree well with the values obtained in Paper I.

We performed several consistency checks on the derived delays. First, we computed all possible delays between a leading component and a trailing component, using the dispersion methods listed in Table 3. The median values obtained for these delays were $`\tau _{AC}=2.5`$ d, $`\tau _{AD}=45.5`$ d, and $`\tau _{CD}=44.0`$ d. These delays are consistent within the uncertainties (§5) with the three delays calculated above. Secondly, we computed the delays between component B and the other three components using the $`\chi ^2`$-minimization technique described in Paper I, which requires that the input light curves be interpolated onto a regularly-spaced grid. The $`\chi ^2`$-minimization results were consistent with the dispersion method values, but had more scatter about the median values. The increased scatter is probably due to small biases introduced by the various methods of interpolating the input light curves. The final check was to combine the input light curves by shifting the A, C, and D curves by the appropriate time delays and magnifications and then combining them with the unshifted B light curve. The resulting composite curves are shown in Figures 46. The composite curves show that the major features, and many of the minor features, in each of the individual light curves are reproduced in the other light curves at the proper times, giving additional confidence that the measured delays are the correct ones.

## 5 Uncertainties on Measured Delays

We have estimated the uncertainties on the time delays and relative magnifications through Monte Carlo simulations. This is the same method that was used in Paper I. To summarize, we smoothed each of the composite curves (Figures 46) to create the input “true” light curves for the simulations. One “true” light curve was generated for each season, using the best-fit relative magnifications appropriate for that season. The delays used for each season were the global time delays derived from the combined analysis (see Table 4 for the input delays and relative magnifications). The smoothing method used to generate the “true” curves from the composites was the variable-width boxcar technique described in Paper I, with five points in the smoothing window. The simulated light curves were created by adding a Gaussian-distributed random noise term to the points on the “true” curves. The widths of the Gaussian distributions, $`\sigma `$, were determined from the offsets between the measured composite curves and their smoothed counterparts. The values of $`\sigma `$ used ranged from 1.4% to 1.9% of the mean flux densities of the lensed images. We generated 1000 Monte Carlo realizations of the data associated with each season.

The simulated light curves were analyzed with the same code used for the real light curves, using the $`D_{4,2}^2`$ method. The analysis was repeated using several different values of $`\delta `$, with no significant difference in the results. The results in Table 5 were obtained for $`\delta =4.5`$d. One advantage of the method used to analyze the monitoring data is that it yielded not only the time delays derived from the entire combined data set, but also the delays derived from each season individually. Thus, the effectiveness of the combined analysis can be evaluated. The distributions of time delays recovered from the simulations is shown in Figure 7, where the first three figures show the analyses of the individual seasons and the fourth shows the results from the combined data sets. The figures show that the distributions are non-Gaussian and that the season 2 data set does not constrain the time delays well. The latter result was expected given the nature of the light curves from that season. However, the analysis of the combined data set yields tight limits on the time delays, which are approximately a factor of two improvement on the limits derived from the season 1 data alone. All of the delays are now determined to $`\pm `$3 d or better (95% CL). The uncertainties on the delays and magnifications, as well as those on derived quantities, are given in Table 5.

## 6 Discussion

### 6.1 Evidence for Microlensing and Lens Substructure

As discussed in §4.2, the component relative magnifications were not constant from seasons 1 to 3. In particular, $`\mu _{AB}`$ and $`\mu _{DB}`$ decreased by 2% or more during the course of the observations (Figure 8). Although not large, these changes exceed the 95% confidence limits on the relative magnifications derived from the Monte Carlo simulations (Table 5), and thus appear to be real. Similar or more extreme changes in flux ratios are seen in optical monitoring of lens systems (e.g., Woźniak et al., 2000; Burud et al., 2000). These changes are attributed to microlensing events, where stars or other massive compact objects in the lensing galaxy change the magnifications of the lensed images as they move through the galaxy. For many years, it was thought that radio observations of gravitational lens systems should be unaffected by microlensing because the angular sizes of compact radio cores, typically on the order of a milliarcsecond, are much larger than the microarcsecond lensing cross sections of stars. However, radio monitoring of the lens CLASS B1600+434 has revealed changes in the component flux ratio that has been attributed to microlensing (Koopmans & de Bruyn, 2000). In the case of B1600+434 the unexpected microlensing was interpreted as being due to the superluminal motion of a microarcsecond-sized component in the jet of the background quasar across the complex caustic structure produced by compact objects in the lens galaxy halo (Koopmans & de Bruyn, 2000). The lensed source in the B1608+656 system is the core of a classical radio double source (Snellen et al., 1995). Thus, it is certainly possible that there are extremely compact jet components associated with B1608+656 as well. On the other hand, the changes in the flux density ratios may have other explanations, such as scintillation. However, because we have monitored the system at only one frequency, we do not have the clear discriminant between microlensing and scintillation that multifrequency monitoring provides (Koopmans & de Bruyn, 2000). With properly designed future observations, it may be possible to determine the cause of the changing flux density ratios in this system.

We note that, whatever the cause of the variability in the relative magnifications, it may also be necessary to invoke the presence of substructure in the B1608+656 lensing galaxies to explain the observed flux densities of the images. Simple, or even fairly complex, lens models of the B1608+656 system have not been able to properly reproduce all of the observed flux density ratios (Paper II; Myers et al., 1995). As we noted in Paper II, this discrepant magnification could be produced by perturbations to the smooth mass distributions assumed for the lensing galaxies. The presence of such substructure has been invoked to explain similarly discrepant flux ratios in other four-image lenses, although in those cases the incongruous ratios were those between bright merging images. In some cases, the substructure has been interpreted as globular clusters or plane density waves (Mao & Schneider, 1998). Recently, several papers have suggested that the substructure is due to the small dark matter satellite halos expected from CDM structure-formation models (e.g., Metcalf & Madau, 2001; Chiba, 2002; Dalal & Kochanek, 2002).

### 6.2 Determination of $`H_0`$ with B1608+656

To determine $`H_0`$ from a lens system, the measured time delays are combined with those predicted by the model. The predicted delays depend on the values of the fundamental cosmological parameters, so one must assume a cosmological model. Specifically, the model delays are proportional to $`(D_{\mathrm{}}D_s)/D_\mathrm{}s`$ where $`D_{\mathrm{}}`$, $`D_s`$, and $`D_\mathrm{}s`$ are the angular diameter distances from the observer to the lens, from the observer to the source, and from the lens to the source, respectively. The angular diameter distances are functions of $`H_0`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, as well as the redshifts of the lens and the background source. We assume $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ = (0.3,0.7) for the rest of this paper. In comparison to this assumed cosmology, the value of $`H_0`$ derived from this lens system will change by no more than $``$6% in both flat and open cosmological models with $`0.1<\mathrm{\Omega }_M<1.0`$. As specific examples, the values of $`H_0`$ discussed below should be scaled by a factor of 1.02 if $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda })=(0.3,0.0)`$ and a factor of 0.94 if $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda })=(1.0,0.0)`$.

The considerable improvement in the accuracy of the measured time delays between the three image pairs in B1608+656 warrants an update of the lens model of this system, first presented in Paper II. Multiple time delays in a single lens system add additional constraints on the lens model, and an improvement in their accuracy could therefore lead to a change of the lens model and a change of the inferred Hubble Constant. Our models are based on the lensmodel package developed by Keeton (2001), but the results are consistent with those based on the code used in Paper II. We emphasize that the models presented here are only an update of the isothermal lens mass models in Paper II and that a much more detailed mass model will be presented in a forthcoming publication, where we fully exploit additional data on the system (see §7).

For the lens modeling in this paper, we use the same constraints as in Paper II. We use the VLBI image positions with formal 1$`\sigma `$ errors listed in Paper II. Because the flux density ratios appear to slowly change in time (§4.2), even after the time-delay correction of the light curves, we widen the error bars to 20% on the flux density ratios to err on the side of caution. We use the improved time delays presented in this paper with 1.5 d errors (68% CL). We use singular isothermal ellipsoid (SIE) mass models for both lens galaxies (G1 and G2; see Paper II for details) and center them on the galaxy centroids measured from Hubble Space Telescope (HST) images obtained with the F555W, F814W, and F160W filters. The three centroids differ by amounts that are significant, which could be due to the presence of dust extinction and/or PSF problems. In addition, it is possible that the two merging lens galaxies are contained within a common dark matter halo and, thus, that the luminous material may not provide an accurate representation of the shape and centroid(s) of the mass distribution. These issues will be examined in more detail in the forthcoming publication. Here, we present models for the centroids from the F814W and F160W images; we reject the model based on the F555W centroids because it produces an extra image of the background source that is not seen in the data. As already shown in Paper II, the differences in the centroids do not strongly affect the inferred value of $`H_0`$, although the cause of the wavelength-dependent shifts in position is something that requires further study.

The mass distributions of G1 and G2 are allowed to have a free mass scale (i.e., velocity dispersion), position angle, and ellipticity. At this point no external shear is allowed. Both lens galaxies are assumed to be at the same redshift. The results of the updated lens models and inferred values of $`H_0`$ are listed in Table 6. We note that these models are equivalent to models I and II in Table 3 of Paper II, in spite of using completely independent modeling codes in the two papers. We also note that, in order to compare the models produced by the two codes, it is important to understand how the mass scales in the models depend on the projected axial ratio of the lensing galaxies, $`q`$. We find that the relation between the quantities representing the lens strengths, $`\sigma `$ in Paper II and $`b^{}`$ in Table 6, is given by $`b^{}\sqrt{1+q^2}\sqrt{q}\sigma ^2`$. Using this relation, we find that the mass scales presented in Paper II and in Table 6 are also equivalent and that the mass ratio between galaxies G1 and G2 is $`(M_1/M_2)(b_1^{}/b_2^{})^23`$. This large mass ratio avoids the creation of additional images between galaxies G1 and G2.

We have also modeled the system with an allowance for an external shear ($`\gamma _{\mathrm{ext}}`$). The addition of shear to the models in Table 6 leads to a considerable decrease in the value of $`\chi ^2`$, for $`\gamma _{\mathrm{ext}}0.1`$. However, the number of free parameters in the models increases to 11 (including $`H_0`$), and the models are less well constrained than the models with no shear. Additionally, although there are several small galaxies in the field around B1608+656, there is no evidence for a more massive group or cluster that could yield a 10% external shear, as for example in the case of PG1115+080 (Kundić et al., 1997a; Tonry, 1998). Thus, we think that the true external shear (i.e., a constant shear not due to the lens galaxies themselves) is unlikely to be as high as 10% and that a revision of the galaxy mass models is more likely required.

The formal statistical errors on $`H_0`$ in the models are $`\pm `$1 km s-1 Mpc-1 and $`\pm `$2 km s-1 Mpc-1 for the 1$`\sigma `$ and 2$`\sigma `$ confidence limits, respectively. In Paper II we estimated that the range of reasonable variations in the shapes of the mass profiles of the lens galaxies contributed an additional uncertainty of 30% to the determination of $`H_0`$ from this system. This estimate may be overly conservative, given the small scatter in mass profile slopes seen in other lens galaxies (§6.3). However, given the complex nature of the lens system and the uncertain positions of the lensing galaxies, we will use this estimate of the systematic modeling uncertainties in this paper. In §7, we discuss methods by which the modeling uncertainties for this system may be reduced.

We note that an alternative and independent approach to lens modeling, namely the non-parametric method developed by Williams & Saha (2000), produces estimates of $`H_0`$ and its systematic uncertainties that are similar to those determined in this paper. In comparison to the more frequently used analytic modeling approaches, the non-parametric method has the advantage of making fewer assumptions about the form of the mass distribution in the lensing galaxy or galaxies. Thus, it is possible to explore a larger region of the model space than is usually done with single analytic models and, as a consequence, to obtain a perhaps more realistic estimate of the uncertainties due to modeling. On the other hand, given the additional freedom in model parameters, the non-parametric approach may produce some descriptions of the lensing galaxy that do not have a physical meaning, in spite of the constraints introduced to produce realistic galaxy models. Therefore, a straightforward interpretation of the results may be difficult. Williams & Saha (2000) applied their approach to the B1608+656 system, using the image positions and time delays as constraints. The time delays used by Williams & Saha (2000) were from an early analysis of the Season 1 data and differ slightly from those found in this paper. However, these small differences should not significantly affect the resulting values of $`H_0`$. Williams & Saha (2000) found that $``$90% of their model reconstructions produced values of $`H_0`$ between 50 and 100 km s-1 Mpc-1. They also applied their non-parametric method to PG1115+080 and the results were combined with the B1608+656 results to produce $`H_0=61\pm 11(\pm 18)`$ km s-1 Mpc-1at 68% (90%) confidence, for $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda })=(1.0,0.0)`$. For the cosmological model adopted in this paper, their value of $`H_0`$ would change to 65 km s-1 Mpc-1, consistent with our results.

### 6.3 Comparison to Determinations of $`H_0`$ with Other Lens Systems

Time delays have been measured in 11 lens systems, with the B1608+656 delays being among those with the smallest uncertainties. Unfortunately, the determination of $`H_0`$ from lenses is not as clean as one might have hoped. For nearly every lens with a measured time delay, more than one model has been used to fit the data. Often the resulting values of $`H_0`$ are quoted with small formal errors that, when taken at face value, make different determinations of $`H_0`$ with the same lens system mutually exclusive at high levels of significance. These discrepant values of $`H_0`$ arise because observations of most lens systems do not tightly constrain the mass distribution of the lens, and there is a degeneracy between the steepness of the lens mass profile and the derived value of $`H_0`$ (e.g., Paper II; Williams & Saha, 2000; Witt, Mao, & Keeton, 2000).

Although it may not be possible to determine the radial mass profile in many individual lens systems, there are indications that lensing galaxies may follow a nearly universal mass profile. It is, for example, possible to assume that all lenses must give consistent determinations of $`H_0`$ and then use the time-delay measurements to obtain information about the mass distribution in the lenses. Kochanek (2002b) has performed this experiment on a sample of five lens systems with measured delays. He finds that, in order to produce the same value of $`H_0`$, the mass surface density properties of the lensing galaxies must differ by only very small amounts. Furthermore, several independent lines of investigation indicate that not only are the mass distributions in many lenses similar, but that the mass profiles are close to isothermal. These approaches have used models that incorporate more data than the standard two or four image positions and fluxes. The additional inputs make it possible to place tight limits on the slope of the mass distribution. The additional constraints may come from full or partial Einstein rings (e.g., Kochanek, 1995; Keeton et al., 2000; Kochanek et al., 2001), complex structure in the background source that in lensed into a ring-like configuration (Cohn et al., 2001), stellar dynamics (Treu & Koopmans, 2002; Koopmans & Treu, 2002), or the orientations of mas-scale jets seen in very high angular resolution radio maps (Rusin et al., 2002). Although it should not be concluded that all lens galaxies have nearly isothermal mass distributions, it may be that the range of mass profile slopes present in lensing galaxies is significantly smaller than what is allowed by the constraints in most individual lens systems with time delay measurements. If further observations strengthen these conclusions, then the contribution of a major source of systematic error in lens-derived measurements of $`H_0`$ may be significantly decreased.

The mass profile of the main lensing galaxy is not the only source of uncertainty in the determination of $`H_0`$ from a lens system. Another factor enters if there is a cluster or massive group associated with the primary lensing galaxy. The inclusion of the effects of the cluster can vastly complicate the lens model. The case of the first lens to be discovered, Q0957+561, is instructive. Despite many years of intensive observational and modeling efforts, no definitive model has been developed. For an excellent discussion of the wealth of historical models of this system, see Keeton et al. (2000). Clusters have also been discovered in association with RX J0911.4+0551 (Kneib, Cohen, & Hjorth, 2000; Morgan et al., 2001) and possibly SBS 1520+530 (Faure et al., 2002). In addition, compact groups of galaxies have been discovered in association with several lens systems (e.g., Kundić et al., 1997a, b; Tonry, 1998; Tonry & Kochanek, 1999, 2000; Fassnacht & Lubin, 2002; Rusin et al., 2001), although their effects on the lensing properties of the systems are much smaller than those of clusters. Still another problem in the determination of $`H_0`$ from gravitational lens systems arises if the location of the lensing galaxy is not known, as is the case in B0218+357 (Lehár et al., 2000).

In spite of the possible problems mentioned above, the gravitational lens method is attractive because many of the systematic errors affecting the determination of $`H_0`$ with one lens system are different from those affecting other systems. Thus, it should be possible to obtain a global measurement of $`H_0`$ with small uncertainties by averaging the measurements from many lens systems. This is in contrast to the distance-ladder techniques in which many of the systematic uncertainties affect all distance determinations in the same sense. The major problem with the gravitational-lens method is that the number of lens systems with measured time delays is still small. Even though the number of systems for which delays have been measured has increased substantially over the last few years, some of the delays are not measured to high precision. In addition, lens models for some systems are viewed with suspicion due to problems such as those mentioned in the previous paragraph. Thus, efforts to determine a global value of $`H_0`$ often exclude a significant fraction of systems with time-delay measurements. Recent attempts have been limited to samples consisting of five or fewer lenses, and have obtained global values of $`H_0`$ ranging from $``$50 to $``$75 km s-1 Mpc-1 (e.g., Paper II; Schechter, 2000; Kochanek, 2002a). With such small sample sizes, the mean $`H_0`$ obtained can easily be biased by unknown factors affecting one or two of the lens systems. It is thus crucial to measure time delays in more lens systems in order to obtain a robust global determination of $`H_0`$ from lenses.

### 6.4 Comparison to Determinations of $`H_0`$ with Other Methods

There are, of course, methods for measuring $`H_0`$ that are completely independent of the lens-derived values. These include the traditional distance-ladder methods in which Cepheid-based distances are used to calibrate secondary distance indicators. The HST Key Project combined several secondary distance measurement methods to obtain a final value of $`H_0=72\pm 3(1\sigma )\pm 7`$ (sys) km s-1 Mpc-1 (Freedman et al., 2001). Using an analysis of Cepheid-calibrated distances to Type Ia supernovae, Parodi et al. (2000) derived $`H_0=59\pm 6`$km s-1 Mpc-1 ($`2\sigma `$ random errors combined with estimated systematic effects). The use of the Sunyaev-Zeldovich (SZ) effect is another approach that, like the gravitational lens method, is independent of the distance-ladder approach. In recent work by Mason, Myers, & Readhead (2001), the average measurement obtained from a flux-limited sample of clusters was $`H_0=66_{11}^{+14}(1\sigma )\pm 14`$ (sys) km s-1 Mpc-1. The global values of $`H_0`$ determined from lenses, the SZ effect, and traditional distance-ladder methods are broadly consistent with each other and with the $`H_0`$ determined from B1608+656. The sources of systematic error in each of these methods are different. Therefore, if the methods all produced values of $`H_0`$ that were in good, rather than broad, agreement, the confidence that the correct value had been measured would be increased. It is important that steps be taken to understand the systematic errors affecting each method and to attempt to reduce those errors. The systematic errors associated with the gravitational lens method may be reduced if time delays can be measured and mass profiles can be determined in significantly larger samples of lens systems.

## 7 Summary and Future Work

In this paper we have presented data obtained during three seasons of monitoring of the B1608+656 gravitational lens system. An analysis of the combined data sets from the three seasons has led to an improvement of factors of two to three in the precision of the three time delays measured. In addition, there is evidence that the relative magnifications of the lensed images are changing. Because these relative magnifications should be independent of the absolute flux density calibration, the observed changes may imply that at least one of the images is being affected by microlensing. If this is the case, B1608+656 would be only the second lens system in which radio microlensing has been detected. A combination of the time delays with revised lens models yields $`H_0=`$ 61–65 km s-1 Mpc-1, depending on the positions used for the lensing galaxies, for ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) = (0.3,0.7). These values decrease by 6% for ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$) = (1.0,0.0). The uncertainties on $`H_0`$ due to the time delay measurements are $`\pm 1`$ ($`\pm 2`$) km s-1 Mpc-1 for the 1$`\sigma `$ (2$`\sigma `$) confidence intervals. Now that the time delays have been determined to 4–10% (95% CL), the dominant source of error in the determination of $`H_0`$ with the B1608+656 system comes from the lens model. The model uncertainties are on the order of $`\pm 15`$ km s-1 Mpc-1.

There are two lensing galaxies within the ring of images in the B1608+656 system, which presents a challenge to the modeling process. Because of the disturbed nature of the system, discussions of general time delay properties and the derivation of $`H_0`$ from lenses have tended to discard B1608+656 from the samples being considered (e.g., Witt, Mao, & Keeton, 2000; Kochanek, 2002a). However, the B1608+656 system does have the advantage of having a nearly complete Einstein ring that is seen in optical and infrared HST images (Jackson et al., 1997; Surpi & Blandford, 2002). It thus may be possible to use the ring data to constrain the mass profile slopes of the lensing galaxies. Techniques to incorporate the Einstein ring data into the B1608+656 model have been described by Blandford, Surpi, & Kundić (2001) and Kochanek et al. (2001). The observed ring is faintest between components B and D, and is not detected at high significance in this region in the available HST images (Kochanek et al., 2001; Surpi & Blandford, 2002). In order to fully exploit the ring modeling techniques, it is critical to obtain deeper HST images of the system so that the ring emission can be more clearly separated from the noise. The availability of the new Advanced Camera for Surveys, with improved sensitivity and a finer pixel scale compared to the Wide Field Planetary Camera 2, and the revived Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer will greatly aid in the effort to get such images. In addition to the analysis of Einstein ring emission, information about the stellar dynamics of lensing galaxies can place strong constraints on the mass distribution of the lens (Treu & Koopmans, 2002; Koopmans & Treu, 2002). We have obtained high resolution spectra of the B1608+656 system with the Echelle Spectrograph and Imager on the Keck II telescope with which we will investigate the dynamics of the lensing galaxies. A full analysis of the Einstein ring structure, the environment surrounding the lens system, and the stellar kinematics should help to break the remaining degeneracies in the model (e.g., precise galaxy positions, external shear, radial mass profile, etc.) and, thus, significantly reduce the uncertainties on $`H_0`$ due to the lens model.

An observing program of this complexity could not have been completed without the assistance of the NRAO staff. Their efforts in keeping the VLA running smoothly and their advice on the structure of the observing program were invaluable. We especially thank Meri Stanley, Jason Wurnig, and Ken Hartley for making sure that all epochs had been properly scheduled. We are also grateful to the VLA operators for implementing the observing program. For useful discussions and comments on the paper, we thank Ingunn Burud, Stefano Casertano, Tim Pearson, Lori Lubin, Steve Myers, Frazer Owen, Rick Perley, Ken Sowinski, and Greg Taylor. We thank the anonymous referee for suggestions that improved the paper.


text:
# Convective and absolute Eckhaus instability leading to modulated waves in a finite box

## Setup.

Our physical results concern the secondary bifurcation of a wave pattern. We treat this system as a nonlinear wave model: this approach does not require any connection with the underlying physics of the convective flow. The experimental setup, its basic flow and the nature of the primary bifurcation producing the underlying wave-pattern have been described in detail Garnier:01 . It consists of a thermocapillary convective flow in a long narrow channel where an external parameter —the horizontal temperature difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$— drives an instability toward propagating hydrothermal waves Garnier:01 ; davvin93 ; burmuk01 . The length of the channel is $`L=180`$mm. It is occasionally compared to an equivalent annular channel Muko:98  of perimeter $`P=503`$mm, i.e., a periodic boundary condition system. The aspect ratios ensure one-dimensional patterns.

We have shown Garnier:01  this primary bifurcation to be well described by the convective/absolute transition: a global mode is the first structure observed when the control parameter $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ is increased above the absolute threshold $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{a}=3.66`$K. In the periodic channel, waves appear at the convective threshold $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}=3.1`$K which can be used to build a dimensionless control parameter $`ϵ=\mathrm{\Delta }T/\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{c}1`$. Above complex competition regimes between right- and left-traveling waves (e.g. blinking states), we have shown a single wave train to become almost uniform in the cell for $`\mathrm{\Delta }T4.5`$K (Fig. 1). This state constitutes the basic state for the present study: we will now focus on the secondary instability of this single wave train.

When $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ is increased far enough from the primary onset, a modulational instability occurs. As the group velocity is finite, the modulational perturbations are advected. The present paper focuses on the distinction between the convective and the absolute modulational instability regimes and the relevance of a new object: a front of dislocations or modulations. In periodic conditions, this modulational instability occurs at the lowest possible wavenumber $`K_{\mathrm{mod}}=2\pi /P`$ Muko:98 : it is strictly an Eckhaus Eck:65  instability. In the linear channel, for simplicity, we will also refer to Eckhaus instability, although the wavenumber of the modulational instability modes are somehow larger: typically $`K_{\mathrm{mod}}4(2\pi /L)`$.

## Absolute instability.

Figs 2 and 3 present the three states which support our discussion. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }T>\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{a}}=(5.56\pm 0.03)`$K, the observed pattern (Fig. 2b) can be described as a wave composed of two wave trains of mean wavenumbers $`k_\mathrm{u}`$ and $`k_\mathrm{d}`$. The wavenumber, frequency and amplitude of both wave trains are modulated in space and time. The wavenumber $`K_{\mathrm{mod}}`$ of the modulation is of order of $`|k_\mathrm{u}k_\mathrm{d}|`$. Waves are emitted from one end of the cell with wavenumber $`k_\mathrm{u}21(2\pi /L)`$ and propagate along the cell at the phase velocity. The phase modulation of this wave train, traveling at the group velocity, is spatially growing. On Fig. 2c, we clearly see the exponential growth of the local-wavenumber modulation amplitude $`A_{\mathrm{mod}}`$ along $`x`$. At a fixed, finite distance $`x_F`$ from the source-boundary, the wavenumber modulation is so large that it allows the wavenumber to change from $`k_\mathrm{u}`$ to $`k_\mathrm{d}`$ by time-periodic phase slips. For $`x>x_F`$, the mean wavenumber is $`k_\mathrm{d}17(2\pi /L)`$. In this second region, the modulation is damped (Fig. 2b,c): we conclude that $`k_\mathrm{u}`$ (resp. $`k_\mathrm{d}`$) waves are unstable (resp. stable) with respect to modulations.

We call dislocation front the set of spatio-temporal loci where spatio-temporal dislocations occur. For $`\mathrm{\Delta }T>\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{a}}`$, the position $`x_F`$ of this object is stationary; Fig. 4 shows the relation between the control parameter and the front position which remains located in the first half of the cell whatever the value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$. Steady dislocation fronts have been observed for traveling waves in a Taylor-Dean experiment bot . In general, hysteresis has not been investigated protocol . From the modulation amplitude profiles $`A_{\mathrm{mod}}(x)`$ (Fig. 2c), we also extract the spatial growth rate of the modulations: it is finite and positive (squares on Fig. 5a).

We claim that those stationary states to be the global modes for the modulational (Eckhaus) instability. The structure of these global modes is very peculiar: nothing seems to saturate the modulations except the breakup of the underlying wave-pattern, i.e., the abrupt change of the mean-wavenumber downstream the dislocations. Similar patterns have been numerically observed in semi-infinite Couairon:99  and closed cells tobpro98 . Like Couairon and Chomaz Couairon:99  we observe the nonlinear global threshold and the absolute instability threshold to be identical.

## Convective instability.

For $`\mathrm{\Delta }T<\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{a}}`$, dislocation fronts are not observed on asymptotic states. The asymptotic regime (Fig. 2a) is an homogeneous wave of uniform wavenumber $`k_\mathrm{u}21(2\pi /L)`$. However, transients obtained after control parameter changes show traveling dislocation fronts slowly advected out of the channel (Fig. 3): those states are convectively unstable states with respect to the modulational (Eckhaus) instability. They are observed in the small gap between $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}=5.45`$K and $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{a}}=5.56`$K.

For $`\mathrm{\Delta }T<\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$, asymptotic states are uniform and dislocation fronts do not exist. Close to $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$ very long transients are often observed. These transient patterns (not shown) are also slightly modulated; the modulations do not reach the critical amplitude producing dislocations; the modulation amplitude profiles generally decrease (negative spatial growth rate) along the downstream direction and slowly travel toward the upstream direction. So, the uniform wave looks stable. The transients may last much longer than the experimental running time, and those results have to be considered with care.

Using a second Hilbert transform of phase-gradient data (as Fig. 2c), we measured spatial and temporal growth rates of the modulation. We present these data for the unstable upstream wave train. The temporal growth rate for modulations in the laboratory frame is negative below $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{a}}`$ and positive above. It is also close to zero around the convective transition where very long transients are observed. The spatial growth rate of the upstream $`k_\mathrm{u}`$ wave train for all three regimes is presented on Fig. 5a. It is positive for both unstable regimes but the slope is seemingly different in the convective and absolute cases. It is negative below $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$.

## Perturbed states.

In order to test the above description, we perturbed the uniform states either by plunging a thin needle in the convective layer or by dropping a cold or hot droplet of fluid. The frequency content of those perturbations differs from the above reported transients: the modulation wave trains contain only a few wavelengths and appear to be advected downstream at roughly the group velocity. All observed perturbations show positive spatial growth rate and negative temporal growth rate in the laboratory frame. The spatial growth rates are presented on Fig. 5b. In the convective regime, the growth rate appears to be selected at the same value as in spontaneous transients. In the stable regime, however, the data are very dispersed but remain positive.

## Discussion.

Let us start our discussion by two important remarks:

(i) The modulation amplitude $`A_{\mathrm{mod}}`$ never saturates: All observed $`A_{\mathrm{mod}}`$ profiles appear locally exponential along $`x`$. No nonlinear saturation effect is thus observed. The occurrence of dislocations (for $`A_{\mathrm{mod}}|k_\mathrm{u}k_\mathrm{d}|`$) is the only limit to exponential growth. This is a strong argument for the Eckhaus instability to behave subcritically in this closed cell. Remember it is supercritical in the annular cell Muko:98 . This difference is due to the mean wavenumber of the carrier-wave pattern. It will be discussed elsewhere.

(ii) Reflections : The modulation wave system is a perfect single wave system: the reflections of the modulations at the boundaries are irrelevant since there is no possibility for reflected information to travel back to the source.

The observation facts described above are coherent with the interpretation in terms of convective and absolute instability. The striking point is the positive spatial growth rates for perturbations in the seemingly stable regime below $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$. As for spontaneously modulated patterns, we would expect those modulation wave-packets to decrease in space exactly as the stable $`k_\mathrm{d}`$ wave trains do in the absolute regime (Fig. 2c).

Suppose that the convective instability is subcritical as suggested in remark (i). Then, above $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$, the transient evolves on an unstable branch (Fig. 3) close to the absolute branch (Fig. 2b). However, below $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$, a second unstable branch co-exists, which can be reached only by perturbing the flow: this description can be supported by the schematic Fig. 6 inspired by zero group velocity instabilities. These branches present very different patterns: The upper branch exhibits extended modulations over the whole cell, with slow evolution and, for high enough amplitudes —the generally observed case above $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$—, dislocation fronts. The lower branch exhibits fast-traveling narrow modulation wave trains and cannot be reached spontaneously by varying $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$. This hypothesis can explain the very different aspect of spontaneous and induced transients in the stable regime below $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$. It is also known that the shape of induced nonlinear patterns below subcritical instabilities depends of the forcing amplitude botcha98 , so the dispersion in Fig. 5b may be due to both the effect of amplitude and the presence of the two branches.

Another observation of the convective branch is intriguing. We record the asymptotic velocity of the dislocation fronts between $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{a}}`$, i.e., the tangent to the space-time trajectory when the front leaves the cell (Fig. 7). The observation is surprising: the closer we are to the absolute instability onset, the faster the front moves! Then its velocity jumps below zero above $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{a}}`$. A contrario, around $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$, the front velocity is zero, leading to infinitely long transients, i.e., temporal marginality. This quantifies the experimental complexity of carrying out the experiment around this point. What is the meaning of the velocity jump at $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{a}}`$? Is the convective/absolute transition also subcritical? It is probably: while our protocol protocol  did not allow to explore all branches by varying $`\mathrm{\Delta }T`$ up and down from one state to another, a test has been made to transit directly from an absolute state to a stable state just below $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{m},\mathrm{c}}`$: the absolute modulation profile remains fixed in the cell. This can be due either to hysteresis, or to the vanishing front velocity… which makes the system marginal in this region. This point would need to be addressed with an improved experimental device.

Finally, in some regimes to be presented elsewhere garchi02 , the front position $`x_F(t)`$ exhibits chaotic behaviors (period doubling or quasiperiodicity): it can thus be viewed as the order parameter for the modulational instability up to the transition to spatio-temporal chaos.

To conclude, we claim to have observed both convective and absolute transitions for a modulational or Eckhaus instability in a long bounded channel. The subcritical convective transition is characterized by zero spatial growth rate and zero advection velocity for the modulated wave pattern, which can be viewed as spatial and temporal marginality. The absolute transition is characterized by the dynamics of dislocation fronts. The front velocity data suggest the transition to be subcritical as well. This question deserves a theoretical support which remains, to our knowledge, unexplored.

We thank A. Casner and C. Gasquet who participated to the data collection and J.M. Chomaz, J.M. Flesselles and P. Manneville for fruitful discussions.


text:
# BI-TP 2002/19, DESY 02-108 A Study of Charmonium Systems across the Deconfinement Transition This work was partially supported by DFG grant FOR 339/1-2, and by GSI under the project BI-KAR.

## Abstract

We present results from lattice studies of charmonium systems near the deconfinement transition temperature. On quenched isotropic lattices with lattice spacings between 0.02 and 0.05 fm, $`\overline{q}q`$ systems with quark masses close to the charm mass and with different spin-parity quantum numbers are studied in the temperature range $`0.9T_c3T_c`$. Results for temporal correlators of local operators, and the spectral functions constructed from them, are discussed. For the pseudoscalar and vector channels, the correlators are observed to change very little across the deconfinement transition, unlike in the case of the light quarks.

The behavior of charmonia across the deconfinement transition has been a subject of considerable interest ever since the breakthrough paper of Matsui and Satz . Unlike light mesons, charmonia may exist as bound states even after the deconfinement transition. However, based on nonrelativistic arguments, Matsui and Satz predicted that already at temperatures close to transition, binding between quarks is reduced enough to dissolve $`J/\psi `$, and proposed its suppression as a signal of deconfinement. Several later studies, based on potential model calculations, predicted a pattern of dissolution, with the higher excitations dissolving earlier, and $`J/\psi `$ dissolving at a temperature $``$ 1.1 $`T_c`$ .

A more direct and reliable way to study the in-medium modifications of charmonia is to study on lattice the finite temperature imaginary time correlators

$$G_H(\tau ,\stackrel{}{p},T)=J_H(\tau ,\stackrel{}{p})J_H^{}(0,\stackrel{}{p})_T$$
(1)
where $`J_H`$ is the suitable mesonic operator, projected on the state with spatial momentum $`\stackrel{}{p}`$. For zero temperature studies, one often uses smeared operators to get a good overlap with the ground state. However, since we are interested in studying whether the bound states exist or not, using smeared operators is not a good idea since it can mimick bound states . We therefore use point-to-point correlators, and study the temporal correlators, Eq. (1), with $`J_H=\overline{c}c,\overline{c}\gamma _5c,\overline{c}\gamma _\mu c`$ and $`\overline{c}\gamma _\mu \gamma _5c`$ to explore the $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{0}^{}(\chi _{c0})`$, $`{}_{}{}^{1}S_{0}^{}(\eta _c)`$, $`{}_{}{}^{3}S_{1}^{}(J/\psi )`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{3}P_{1}^{}(\chi _{c1})`$ channels, respectively. For this study we use only quenched lattices, and used the nonperturbatively improved  clover action for the quarks. Our lattice parameters are given in Table 1. The lattice operators are connected to the continuum operators as $`J_H^{\mathrm{Cont}}=Z_Hf_\kappa ^2J_H^{\mathrm{Lat}}a^3`$, where $`f_\kappa =\sqrt{2\kappa (1+\stackrel{~}{am_0})}`$ is the quark renormalization factor for massive quark with tadpole improved bare quark mass $`\stackrel{~}{am_0}=(1/2\kappa 1/2\kappa _c)/u_0`$. $`Z_H`$ is obtained from tadpole improved perturbation theory in the massless limit .

For our coarsest lattices, we have three temperatures at the same lattice spacing. We use two $`\kappa `$ values, 0.1300 and 0.1234, which bracket the charm quark mass. We estimate the zero temperature masses of the corresponding mesons from the spatial correlators at $`0.93T_c`$. This is permissible since the spatial correlators correspond to zero-temperature correlators for a lattice with an extent of $``$ 0.9 fm in one of the spatial directions, which is much larger than the typical size of a charmonium. (In fact, even for the much larger light mesons, the spatial correlators at this temperature have been found to reproduce the zero temperature masses quite well .) The masses we get are given in Table 2. By linear interpolation, we estimate that $`\kappa _{\mathrm{charm}}0.1280`$ for this lattice.

Fig. 1 shows the temporal correlators for the different channels, for $`\kappa =0.1300`$. To highlight the difference from free quark propagation, we have divided the correlators by the corresponding free correlators, with same bare quark mass (in lattice units) as the tadpole improved bare quark mass of the interacting case. Fig. 1 shows that the scalar and axial vector channels are considerably modified on crossing $`T_c`$. In the pseudoscalar and vector channels, on the other hand, there is very little change between 0.93 $`T_c`$ and 1.5 $`T_c`$.

Further insight can be obtained from looking at the spectral function at each temperature. The spectral function $`\sigma (\omega )`$ is connected to the imaginary time correlator $`G(\tau )`$ by the integral equation

$$G(\tau )=_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\omega \sigma (\omega )\frac{\mathrm{cosh}(\omega (\tau 1/2T))}{\mathrm{sinh}(\omega /2T)}.$$
(2)
(Here we consider only states projected to zero spatial momentum.) The severely underconstrained problem of reconstruction of the spectral function from the information of the correlator at finite number of points can be handled using the maximum entropy method. At zero temperature this method has been successfully applied . At finite temperature, this method was also applied in the light quark sector . We follow here the methods of Ref. . The spectral functions for the pseudoscalar and axial vector channels are shown in Fig. 2. While the axial vector peak below $`T_c`$ in Fig. 2 has completely disappeared above $`T_c`$, the pseudoscalar bound state peak persists at 1.25 $`T_c`$, with an essentially unchanged position, though somewhat broadened. The vector channel shows very similar behavior to the pseudoscalar one, with the peak persisting at 1.25 $`T_c`$, while the scalar channel behavior is very similar to the axial vector one. The pseudoscalar and vector peaks also seem to survive at 1.5 $`T_c`$, though finer lattices are needed at these and higher temperatures to have a reasonably large number of points in the temporal direction. The behavior of the different channels is very similar in the $`\kappa =0.1234`$ case, the scalar and axial vector channel peaks disappearing already at 1.25 $`T_c`$ while the pseudoscalar and vector peaks surviving beyond this temperature. Since these two values of $`\kappa `$ bracket the charm, we conclude that for physical charm, while the 1P states $`\chi _{c0}`$ and $`\chi _{c1}`$ are dissolved, the 1S states $`J/\psi `$ and $`\eta _c`$ survive as bound states at temperatures up to 1.5 $`T_c`$.

At the finer lattices listed in Table 1, we at present have only one temperature at each lattice spacing. So we need to estimate $`\kappa `$ for each case. We choose the $`\kappa `$ to give the same (tadpole-improved) bare quark mass, in physical units, as the $`\kappa _{\mathrm{charm}}`$ obtained at $`\beta =6.499`$. This way, we estimate $`\kappa `$ = 0.1290 at $`\beta =6.64`$ (for our 1.5 $`T_c`$ run) and $`\kappa =0.13114`$ at $`\beta =7.192`$ (the 3 $`T_c`$ run). The data at 1.5 $`T_c`$ supports the results of the coarser lattice at the same temperature. However, since we can not estimate the systematic error involved in our estimate of $`\kappa `$, more precise conclusion cannot be attained at present. We are now generating results at 1.1 $`T_c`$ for $`\beta =6.64`$ and at 1.5 $`T_c`$ at $`\beta =7.192`$. This will enable us to do a more detailed analysis of the results at these finer lattices.

To summarize, we conduct a study of the behavior of $`\overline{c}c`$ bound states across the deconfinement transition by looking at the suitable correlators and the spectral functions reconstructed from them. Our studies support the sequential pattern for charmonium dissolution obtained from potential model studies, where the broader bound states (the scalar and axial vector channels) dissolve before the pseudoscalar and vector channels. The pseudoscalar and vector channels are seen to survive as bound states still at 1.25 $`T_c`$, and probably dissolve after 1.5 $`T_c`$. Results of direct lattice studies of charmonia systems have also been presented by M. Asakawa and K. Nomura in this conference . Our conclusions are consistent with theirs.