text:
# References

Comment on
‘Must a Hamiltonian be hermitian’

André van Hameren

Institute of Nuclear Physics, NCSR Demokritos, 15310 Athens, Greece

andrevh@inp.demokritos.gr

Abstract
A small comment on the paper with the mentioned title by Carl M. Bender, Dorje C. Brody and Hugh F. Jones.

As argued in , the eigenfunctions $`\varphi _n`$ of the Sturm-Liouville eigenvalue problem $`(8)`$ are fixed up to a constant phase factor. Instead of $`\varphi _n`$, one can also choose

$$\psi _n(x)=i^n\varphi _n(x),$$

to be the eigenfunctions under considerations, which satisfy

$$𝒫𝒯\psi _n(x)=\psi _n^{}(x)=(i)^n\varphi _n^{}(x)=(i)^n\varphi _n(x)=()^n\psi _n(x),$$

and

$$\delta (xy)=\underset{n}{}()^n\varphi _n(x)\varphi _n(y)=\underset{n}{}\psi _n(x)\psi _n(y).$$

This formula, then, looks more familiar than $`(6)`$. Only if the functions $`\psi _n`$ are non-real, one usually has a different formula: $`_n\psi _n^{}(x)\psi _n(y)=\delta (xy)`$. The operator $`𝒞`$ can be represented by

$$𝒞(x,y)=\underset{n}{}()^n\psi _n(x)\psi _n(y).$$

It acts on the functions $`\psi _n`$ as $`𝒞\psi _n=()^n\psi _n`$, so that they are invariant under $`𝒞𝒫𝒯`$:

$$𝒞𝒫𝒯\psi _n=\psi _n,$$

and are orthonormal under

$$\psi _n|\psi _m=[𝒞𝒫𝒯\psi _n(x)]\psi _m(x)𝑑x=\psi _n(x)\psi _m(x)𝑑x,$$

which looks like a real inner product111i.e. $`f|g=g|f`$ instead of $`f|g=g|f^{}`$. So we see that $`𝒞𝒫𝒯`$-invariance of a Hamiltonian, as introduced in , is equivalent with the existence of a set of eigenfunctions that are complete and orthonormal under a real inner product. The (complex) inner product in the whole Hilbert space can be defined by

$$f|g=\underset{n}{}f_n^{}g_n\text{with}f_n=\psi _n(x)f(x)𝑑x,g_n=\psi _n(x)g(x)𝑑x.$$


format: text

text:
# Quantum Seals

## 1 Introduction

Before the age of electronic transfer of information, important letters and documents were often closed using a wafer of molten wax into which was pressed the distinctive seal of the sender . This was meant to fulfill different purposes, namely the authentication of the sender, but it also enabled the receiver to verify that the letter or document had not been opened and read by a third party. This is refered to as a classical seal.

It is important to notice the following points. The sender is not committed to the content, since she can always change her mind, write a new letter and seal it. Moreover the receiver needs to have prior knowledge of the symbol of the seal in order to verify that it is actually authentic — but still it could be falsified and in principle the only person who can truly verify that the seal and the content is authentic is the sender. Even further, the seal can be broken by anyone who wishes to learn the content of the letter, by simply physically breaking the seal, and then open and read the letter.

In this paper the idea for making a Quantum Seal is presented. The protocol belongs to the same category as quantum cryptography , quantum bit commitment , quantum signature  and authentication of quantum messages  etc. For the quantum seal a classical message is encoded into quantum states, in such a way that the quantum seal can be broken by anyone and the message read error-free. However it is possible to verify if the message has been read by checking if the quantum seal has been broken. The first goal is that this verification can be performed by the sender. Ultimately the quantum seal will possess the same properties as the classical seal, which means that anyone with some prior knowledge about the quantum seal will be able to check if it has been broken.

A first implementation of the protocol for quantum seals will be presented. The encoding of the message is performed by using the simplest form of classical error correction codes . And the verification of the quantum seal is performed by using the so-called ’SWAP-test’ . Eventhough this implementation is only resistant to single qubit attacks (see section 5) it serves as a good illustration of the properties of quantum seals.

## 2 Encoding and verification by Alice

The first step in order to create the quantum seal is to find a way of encoding a classical message into quantum states so that the encoder, Alice, can always verify if the message has been read, i.e. she can check if the quantum seal has been broken. At the same time anyone can actually read the message. This can be achieved in a very simple way.

A classical message can be encoded into quantum states and read perfectly without errors by anyone if Alice writes the message using qubits states always prepared in the same basis and then announces which basis she used. For example, if she wants to write a string of bits, then she could use the states $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ and $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ corresponding to the $`z`$ (computational) basis to signify 0 and 1 respectively, and then announce the basis she used. This will allow anyone to measure the qubits in the correct basis and read the message. But in this way, naturally Alice have no way of checking if someone actually did read the message.

In order for Alice to be able to check if the message has been read, it is necessary to add states from a different basis, which if measured in the wrong basis will lead to errors — similarly to what is done in quantum cryptography. Still, since everybody should be able to read the message this has to be done in a clever way.

This can be done by encoding each classical bit into a block of three qubits in such a way that when measured in the basis announced by Alice, the encoding is self-correcting, which means that the bit can be learned without error. However, at the same time Alice can check that it has been read. This can be achieved in the following way: Two of the qubits will be prepared in the same state in the computational basis according to the bit value Alice wants to write, the third qubit is a control qubit which is prepared in a state from one of the mutually unbiased bases $`x`$ and $`y`$. In other words two of the qubits are prepared in the message reading-basis ($`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ and $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$), whereas one control qubit will be in one of the four states $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}_x`$, $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}_x`$, $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}_y`$ or $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}_y`$. The state and position of the control qubit is chosen at random by Alice — the choice is done independently for each block of qubits. This means that in each block of three qubits two qubits are in the correct state, for example if Alice wants to write bit value 0, two of the qubits will be in the state $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$, whereas the state of the last qubit will be chosen at random between the states from the other mutually unbiased bases.

Now suppose Alice wants to write the classical bit sequence $`0110\mathrm{}`$, then there are many ways for her to encode it, one way would be the following:

$`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}_y\mathrm{bit}\mathrm{number}1,\mathrm{value}=0`$
$`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}_x|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{bit}\mathrm{number}2,\mathrm{value}=1`$
$`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}_y|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\mathrm{bit}\mathrm{number}3,\mathrm{value}=1`$
$`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}_x|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}\mathrm{bit}\mathrm{number}4,\mathrm{value}=0`$
$`\mathrm{}`$
where each triplet of states corresponds to the encoding of one bit. Since Alice has announced in public which basis is the message reading-basis (here chosen to be the computational basis, i.e. $`z`$ basis), anyone can read it, but it will automatically introduce errors which can be identified by Alice. But since the encoding is self-correcting the message can nevertheless be read without errors.

To see this, assume that the reader is always measuring in the correct message reading-basis, then naturally all the states which are encoded in this basis will be read perfectly without error. But in each triplet there is one state which belongs to a basis which is mutually unbiased with the reading-basis, and for this state the bit value 0 or 1 is found with equal probability. For example $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}_y`$, when read in the computational basis, could result in either $`000`$ or $`001`$ — with equal probability. However, since in each triplet there is only one control qubit, there can be at maximum one error and hence the correct bit value can be obtained by a simple majority vote. Which means that the message can be read without error.

On the other hand since the control qubit now has been measured in the reading-basis, a subsequent measurement in the correct preparation basis (in this case the $`y`$-basis) will lead to an error, with probability $`1/2`$. This will allow Alice at any stage to check if the message has been read, because she can at any time measure each qubit in its preparation basis and if she finds errors she will conclude that the seal has been broken and the message read.

Notice an interesting thing, namely that it is only with probability $`1/2`$ that the reader will learn the position of the control qubit. In the example described above, with probability $`1/2`$, the reader will find $`000`$ from which the position of the control bit can not be identified, whereas with probability $`1/2`$ the result will be $`001`$, from which it is obvious that the last bit corresponds to the position of the control qubit — but, of course, the reader learns nothing of the original state of the control qubit.

This part of the protocol enables everyone to read the message written by Alice error free, but at the same time it enables Alice to check if the quantum seal has been broken, because the message can not be read without giving rise to errors.

## 3 Intended reader verification

At this point in the protocol, Alice has written and sealed (encoded) her message into triplets of qubit states and stored them in a quantum memory which is accessible by anyone. Which means that the sealed message is now located in a public area. Notice that the sealed message is just a big product state of $`N`$ qubits, $`|\varphi _1|\varphi _2|\varphi _2\mathrm{}|\varphi _N`$, where $`|\varphi _i`$ is the state of the $`i^{}th`$ qubit and where $`N=3\times (\mathrm{number}\mathrm{of}\mathrm{bits})`$.

In order to have complete correspondence with the classical seal, not only Alice should be able to verify that the seal has not been broken, but all intended readers should be able to verify that the quantum seal is still intact, without reading, nor disturbing the message written by Alice.

In the case of the classical seal the receiver is familiar with the design of the symbol pressed into the wax, and uses this knowledge to identify the letter received as authentic. This means that prior knowledge is required in the classical case. For the quantum seal, this part of the protocol is obtained by Alice preparing additional qubits which she then distributes to the various intended readers, who can then use them to verify if the quantum seal is still intact.

The additional qubits prepared by Alice correspond to a subset of the message and control qubits. Alice does not reveal the state of any of the qubits, but merely informs the receiver which qubits they correspond to in the sealed message. For example Bob-1, gets copies111Alice can, of course, produce any number of copies of a given state, since she knows the state of any given qubit. So this does not go against the non-cloning theorem. of qubit state number 1, 7, 16, 30, etc. but he doesn’t know the state, nor does he know if a given qubit is a message qubit or a control qubit (this issue will be addressed further below). Similarly, all the other intended readers (Bob-2 to Bob-L) likewise receive a set of qubits corresponding to a subset of the message and control qubits.

The verification of the quantum seal as such is done by performing a so-called SWAP test. A SWAP test can be used to evaluate if two states are identical, without any knowledge of the states themselves. This means that Bob-1, for example, can use his subset to make a SWAP test with the corresponding qubits in the sealed message. If he finds complete agreement, i.e. if all his qubits pass the SWAP test, he will conclude that the quantum seal is still intact and the message has not been read. Whereas if he finds that just one of his qubits fail the SWAP test he will conclude that the seal has been broken and the message has been read.

The SWAP test works in the following way: Bob chooses the qubit he wants to test, $`|\varphi _{test}`$, and takes the corresponding qubit from the sealed message, $`|\varphi _{seal}`$, (remember Bob knows which number it corresponds to, for example, qubit number 1). Then he couples the two qubits with an additional qubit, an ancilla, in the state $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$, i.e. Bob now has the three qubit quantum state $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}|\varphi _{test}|\varphi _{seal}`$, and he performs the following operations one the full system

$`\left(\mathrm{H}\text{1}\text{1}\text{1}\text{1}\right)\left(\mathrm{c}\mathrm{SWAP}\right)\left(\mathrm{H}\text{1}\text{1}\text{1}\text{1}\right)|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}|\varphi _{test}|\varphi _{seal}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}\left(|\varphi _{test}|\varphi _{seal}+|\varphi _{seal}|\varphi _{test}\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}\left(|\varphi _{test}|\varphi _{seal}|\varphi _{seal}|\varphi _{test}\right)`$ (1)
where H is the Hadamard transformation, 11 the identity operator and SWAP is the transformation: $`|\varphi _{test}|\varphi _{seal}|\varphi _{seal}|\varphi _{test}`$ and c-SWAP means that it is a SWAP which is controlled by the ancilla (for a more detailed description of the SWAP test see ). These transformations are followed by a measurement of the ancilla in the $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$, $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ basis. The state $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$ is found with probability $`\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}|\varphi _{test}|\varphi _{seal}|^2`$, from which it is seen that if $`|\varphi _{test}=|\varphi _{seal}`$, the ancilla will never be found in the state $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$, but $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}0}`$ will always be obtained. In other words if Bob obtains $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}`$, he will conclude that the states were not identical, hence they did not pass the SWAP test.

If the sealed message has not been read, all of Bob’s qubits will pass the SWAP test, whereas if the message has been read some of Bob’s qubit will fail the SWAP test and he will consequently conclude that the quantum seal has been broken and assume that the message has been read.

Suppose that Bob’s test qubit is in one of the four states from the $`x`$ or the $`y`$ basis, which means that it is one of the control qubits; and assume that the message has been read in the $`z`$ basis (as announced by Alice) then the control qubit is no longer in its correct state, but in one of the states from the $`z`$ basis. If Bob performs a SWAP test, then, since all the involved states are mutually unbiased, the probability that the SWAP test will fail is $`\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}|\varphi _{test}|\varphi _{seal}|^2=\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}\frac{1}{2}=\frac{1}{4}`$. This means that if Alice supplies Bob with sufficiently many qubits, so that he can perform many SWAP tests, statistically Bob should obtain an error and conclude that the seal has been broken.

Notice one important point namely that the SWAP test does not give Bob any information about the state, nor will it destroy the seal if it is intact. Which exactly satisfies the intended reader verification requirements: the quantum seal can be verified without reading nor disturbing the sealed message.

## 4 Some security aspects

A fully detailed security analysis of the protocol for quantum seals is beyond the scope of the present paper. Indeed there may exist many different implementations of the idea and, most probably, each implementation must be analyzed independently. Here I mention a few security aspects related to the presented implementation of the protocol, which may also prove important to future implementations, and in the next section discuss the limitation of the proposed implementation.

The encoding: Someone may attempt to read the sealed message by reading only two out of three qubits in a triplet, hoping to obtain the same result twice and hence know the bit value without reading all three qubit states. The hope would be to avoid reading the control qubit and hence avoid making any errors. But if the sealed message is sufficiently long, errors should be guaranteed by statistics.

The distribution of subsets of qubits: If Alice provides the intended readers with the number of the qubits in public this could be exploited by others to avoid reading exactly those qubits. This means that each reader should know only his subset of qubits and not the subset of any other. However, this problem could easily be solved by Alice sending this information to each of the intended readers using quantum cryptography.

The nature of the subsets: In each subset some of the qubits should correspond to message qubits and some will correspond to control qubits. In principle the message qubits can not be used to check the quantum seal (they will always pass the SWAP test) only the control qubits can be used for that. However each intended reader receives both message qubits and control qubits to avoid that they can use the knowledge of the position of the control qubits to cheat. The number of qubits supplied to each reader, should be such that by simply reading the subset he has received he can not not learn the message, but at the same time he must possess enough qubits in order to actually check if the quantum seal is still intact (in terms of good statistics).

## 5 Limitations of the proposed implementation

Above it was shown how someone trying to read the sealed message by measuring each qubit independently will automatically introduce errors, hence break the quantum seal and unavoidedly be detected.

However, for the proposed implementation, it is possible to completely avoid detection by making collective measurement on each triplet of qubits, hence reading the sealed message bit by bit (remember that each bit is encoded into three qubits). This is due to the fact that the twelve different three qubit states which encode bit value 0 are orthogonal to the twelve three qubit states which encode bit value 1. Indeed all the 0-states lie in the subspace spanned by the following states (in the z-basis), $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}000}`$, $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}001}`$, $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}010}`$ and $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}100}`$, whereas the 1-states all lie in the orthogonal subspace spanned by $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}111}`$, $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}110}`$, $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}101}`$ and $`|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}011}`$. This means that a measurement of the corresponding projectors:

$`P_0=|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}000}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}000}|+|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}001}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}001}|+|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}010}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}010}|+|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}100}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}100}|`$
$`P_1=|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}111}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}111}|+|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}110}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}110}|+|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}101}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}101}|+|\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}011}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}011}|`$ (2)
will distingush perfectly between the 0 and 1-states without disturbing the states. Which means that this kind of collective measurement will allow someone to read the sealed message without introducing any errors and hence will avoid detection.

In other words the presented implementation of the protocol is not robust against collective measurements, but only against single qubit attacks. However the described implementation serves as a perfect example and illustration of the proporties of the protocol for quantum seals.

## 6 Concluding remarks

Quantum seals have been introduced, they can be used to verify if a classical message encoded into quantum states have been read. A first implementation of this idea in terms of classical error correcting codes and a so-called SWAP test has been presented. It has been shown that someone trying to read the sealed message by measuring each qubit independently will automatically introduce errors and hence break the quantum seal and be detected.

However, the proposed implementation is resistant only against single qubit attacks. Someone who is able to make a collective measurement on three qubits will be able to read the sealed message without making any errors. This means that it is an open problem to find an implementation of the protocol for quantum seals which offers protection against any kind of attack. A completely secure implementation of quantum seals may very well require different tools than the classical error correcting codes and the SWAP test which is used here, for example one could imagine the use of entanglement and Bell Inequalities.

It should be emphasized that Alice is not committed to the content of her message, as for the classical seal she is absolutely free to change her mind, write a new message and seal it. Moreover, one of the basic ideas is that anyone should be able to read the message written by Alice, which means that it is not the security of the content which has to be accounted for, but instead the guarantee that anyone reading the message will actually leave a trace, i.e. some errors.

Finally notice the following interesting points; The protocol for quantum seals require no classical communication between Alice and the intended readers contrary to most other protocols in the area of quantum cryptography. A priory it only requires that Alice is able to send quantum states and make public (classical) announcements. More, the classical seal is a physical object namely a wax wafer, whereas the quantum seal is somehow a way of encoding. I do not know of any protocol which can be implemented, for example, on a classical computer which works as a seal.

## Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Andrea Pasquinucci and Adrian Kent for many stimulating discussions. This work has been supported by the FET European Networks on Quantum Information and Communication Contract IST-2000-29681:ASESIT.


text:
# On the early evolution of the Galactic Halo

## 1 Introduction

The metallicity distribution (MD) of long-lived stars is one of the most powerful probes of galactic chemical evolution. The MD of the Galactic halo field stars (and globular clusters) is quite different from the one of the local disk. Its peak at a metallicity \[Fe/H\]$``$-1.6 (e.g. Ryan and Norris 1991) points to an effective yield $`y_{HALO}`$1/40 Z for Fe. This has to be compared to the true yield obtained in the solar neighborhood; in the framework of a specific infall model - evolution at constant gas amount, which is a satisfactory approximation to a more realistic treatment - it can be shown analytically that the local $`y_{DISK}`$0.9Z (e.g. Binney and Tremaine 1987). Taking into account that $``$2/3 of solar Fe are produced by SNIa and only $``$1/3 by SNII (e.g. Goswami and Prantzos 2000) it turns out that the true Fe yield of SNII during the local disk evolution was $``$1/3 Z and, consequently, the effective Fe yield of SNII during the halo phase (where they dominated Fe production) was $`y_{HALO}`$1/13 $`y_{DISK}`$.

The simplest interpretation of such a difference between the effective yields in the halo and the local disk remains still the one of Hartwick (1976), who suggested that outflow at a rate $`F=kSFR`$ (where $`SFR`$ stands for Star Formation Rate) occured during the halo formation. In the framework of the Simple model of galactic chemical evolution such outflow reduces the true yield $`y_{DISK}`$ to its effective value $`y_{HALO}=y_{DISK}(1R)/(1+kR)`$ (e.g. Pagel 1997) where $`R`$ is the Returned Mass Fraction ($`R`$0.33 for a Kroupa et al. (1993) stellar IMF between 0.1 and 100 M); the halo data suggest then that the outflow rate was $`k=(1R)(y_{DISK}/y_{HALO}1)`$8 times the SFR. \[Note: This high outflow rate could be interpreted either as gas expulsion after heating by supernova explosions, or as simple flowing of gas through the system, e.g. towards the Galaxy’s bulge\].

In this work we focus on the low metallicity tail of the halo MD, a fossile of the earliest phase of the halo’s evolution. First, we show that the predictions of the simple outflow model in the lowest metallicity range (\[Fe/H\]$`<`$-3) depend crucially on whether the Instantaneous Recycling Approximation is adopted or relaxed; to our knoweledge, it is the first time that this effect is shown to be important in the determination of the MD of a galactic system.

The simple outflow model (with or without IRA) explains readily the peak and the overall shape of the halo MD, but it fails to describe the lowest metallicity part of it, as revealed recently through the ongoing search of very low metallicity stars by the “Beers consortium” (Beers 1999, Norris 1999). The, still preliminary, data suggest that the number of stars is lower by factors of $``$5-10 than predicted by the simple outflow model at \[Fe/H\]$``$-4; the discrepancy is larger when the IRA is relaxed (as it should), as we explain in Sec. 2. This failure gave rise to interesting senarios concerning the physics of the early Galaxy, such as the effects of inhomogeneous early evolution (e.g. Tsujimoto et al. 1999, Oey 2002) or the - often invoked in the past - pre-enrichment by a putative population III of (super-)massive stars (e.g. Bond 1981, Norris 1999 and references therein).

In this work we suggest a minor - and physically plausible - modification to the simple outflow model: as in the solar neighborhood, the assumption of an early infall phase helps to alleviate the discrepancy between theory and observations concerning the very low metallicity tail of the MD. In Sec. 2 we discuss the currently available observational data, we explain the differences between IRA and non-IRA concerning the low metallicity tail of the MD, and we show how the simple outflow model fails in that metallicity range. We also present a composite model of early infall + outflow which provides a much better fit to the - still preliminary - data. In Sec. 3 we discuss the implications of such a senario for the chemical evolution of the halo concerning, in particular, the role of a putative Pop. III (super-)massive stars, the number of stars expected to be found at very low metallicities, the timescales of the halo evolution and the dispersion in element abundance ratios. The forthcoming results of the “HK survey” (see Sec. 2) concerning the low metallicity tail of the halo MD, will definitely allow to check the robustness of the proposed senario.

## 2  Construction of the MW halo by early infall

Two major surveys of the halo field star MD in the 90ies (Ryan and Norris 1991, Carney et al. 1996) concluded that i) the overall shape of the observed MD is consistent with the predictions of a simple outflow model a la Hartwick (1976) and ii) that down to the lowest metallicity limit of the surveys (\[Fe/H\]$``$-3) the observed number of metal-poor stars is still consistent with the predictions of that model; according to Carney et al. (1996): “… there is no need to invoke enrichment from Pop III stars”.

A much more systematic research of extremely metal poor stars is currently performed by T. Beers and collaborators in the framework of the “HK survey”, which concerns more than 10000 metal poor stars. Preliminary results, based on more than half of that sample have already been presented in Beers (1999) and Norris (1999). Various biases affect the results for \[Fe/H\]$`>`$-2, while the sample could be considered as representative below \[Fe/H\]=-2 (Beers 1999). In the left part of Fig. 1 the data of Ryan and Norris (1991) and of the “Beers consortium”, i.e. the differential MD f(Z)= dN/dlogZ (where dlogZ stands for d\[Fe/H\]) are displayed on a linear scale (upper panel) and on a logarithmic scale (middle panel). Since the “HK survey” data are unaffected by biases only below \[Fe/H\]=-2, we plot them only below that metallicity, assuming that at \[Fe/H\]=-2 they match the corresponding data of Ryan and Norris (1991).

Superimposed on the data are the results of three models of galactic chemical evolution. The dashed curves correspond to a pure outflow model with IRA and outflow rate equal to 8 times the SFR, for which an analytical solution can be obtained. The thin solid curves correspond to the same model with IRA relaxed (numerical solution). In both cases, the stellar initial mass function (IMF) is from Kroupa et al. (1993) between 0.1 M and 100 M, the massive star yields from Woosley and Weaver (1995) and the intermediate star yields from van den Hoek and Groenewegen (1997); both sets of yields are metallicity dependent. SNIa are included in the calculation, (see Goswami and Prantzos 2000) but their role is negligible in the very early halo phase. It can be seen that

i) The simple outflow model (with or without IRA) fits extremely well the overall shape of the MD down to \[Fe/H\]=-3 for the combined sample of Norris and Ryan (1991) and the “Beers consortium” (as noticed in many previous studies);

ii) An increasingly large discrepancy between the IRA and non-IRA cases arises below \[Fe/H\]=-3; this is clearly seen in the middle and bottom left panels of Fig. 1, where the differential and cumulative MDs are plotted, respectively, on logarithmic scales. This is one of the main results of this work. It can be easily understood as follows: When IRA is adopted, each stellar generation ejects instantaneously after its formation the totality of its Fe yield to enrich the intestellar medium. When IRA is relaxed, only part of that yield becomes available early on (i.e. the Fe ejected by the most massive and short-lived stars, say first above 50 M, then above 30 M, then above 20 M, etc); for a constant IMF, this implies that more stars (of all masses) have to be formed in that case in order to reach the same metallicity as in the case of IRA. Of course, after some time, all first generation massive stars have evolved and the yield reaches its final value; after that moment the two models converge. In Fig. 1 (left middle panel) that convergence occurs at \[Fe/H\]$``$-3.5. In the right bottom panel of Fig. 1 it can be seen that this metallicity is reached after $``$35 Myr, i.e. the lifetime of $``$8 M star, the less massive Fe producers among the massive stars. Obviously, it is the more “realistic” non-IRA case that should be compared to observations (but see Sec. 4 for a discussion of that point).

iii) An increasingly large discrepancy with the data appears below \[Fe/H\]=-3.5 in both IRA and non -IRA cases, but the discrepancy is even more important in the non-IRA case: It reaches a factor of $``$12 at the lowest metallicity values attained in the HK survey. That discrepancy gave rise to interesting discussions on the nature of the first stellar populations, as mentioned in Sec. 1.

Despite its spectacular success in the metallicity range -3 $`<`$ \[Fe/H\] $`<`$ -1 the pure outflow model is based on a physically implausible assumption (as is the closed box model), namely that the system “waited” until the total amount of gas became available, and only then started forming stars and expelling (part of) that gas. Instead, the idea that star formation started with a low initial amount of gas and the system continued accreting for some time appears much more plausible (see Sec. 3). One can see immediately that this idea helps to alleviate the observed paucity of low metallicity stars, exactly as it helps to cure the G-dwarf problem in the solar neighborhood.

The thick solid curves on the left panels of Fig. 1 present the results of a composite model, including early infall of primordial composition (lasting for about 0.2 Gyr) and outflow as in the simple model. The form of infall is gaussian (Fig. 1, middle right panel, dashed curves), with maximum at 0.1 Gyr and FWHM of 0.04 Gyr and is adopted only for illustration purposes. It can be seen that this composite model produces a much smaller number of stars than the simple outflow model (as expected): by a factor of $``$20 (10) at \[Fe/H\]=-4 and $``$100 (12) at \[Fe/H\]=-5, for non-IRA (IRA in parenthesis) models. Other forms of infall might lead to even larger differences with respect to the simple outflow model, but this one matches relatively well the currently available - and still preliminary - data. Gaussian infall has been adopted in the case of the solar neighborhood in Prantzos and Silk (1998), but despite its two degrees of freedom (maximum value and FWHM) it does not produce considerably better fits to the data than the simpler exponential infall model (e.g. Boissier and Prantzos 1999). When the final results of the HK survey will become available, it will be possible to determine the form of the infall rate in the very early Galaxy or, more precisely, the early star formation history of the halo; this will lead to much tighter constraints on future hydrodynamical models of the Milky Way halo formation (see Bekki and Chiba 2001 for a recent attempt).

Inserting the new ingredient of early infall in the old Outflow “paradigm” seems quite plausible on physical grounds. Indeed, in any system forming stars on a large scale (except, perhaps, in starbursts) an early phase of gas accretion onto a local gravitational potential well seems unavoidable and during that phase a small number of stars may be formed. Outflow due to stellar “feedback”, i.e. gas heated by kinetic energy of stellar winds and supernovae, should take place with some time delay, allowing for the collective effects of many of those stellar sources to operate. The model presented in Fig. 1 is meant to simulate just such a sequence of events.

At present, it is impossible to derive timescales for the duration of that sequence of events, based only on the observed MD. The situation is different in the solar neighborhood, where we know: 1) the age of the system to within $``$20% (the age of the local disk is evaluated to be 8-12 Gyr) and 2) that it reached solar metallicity 4.5 Gyr ago. Combined with the local MD, this information allows us to derive a long timescale of $``$7 Gyr for the formation of the local disk (e.g. Chiappini et al. 1997, Boissier and Prantzos 1999). Comparable information is not available for the halo, since the duration of its formation is known to less than a factor of two (between one Gyr and 2-3 Gyr).

## 3 Implications

The most important direct implication of the above analysis is that there is no need to invoke a Pop III of zero metal (super-)massive stars in order to explain the observed halo MD; in a similar way, the infall hypothesis makes obsolete the need of a local disk pre-enrichment by the halo stars in order to solve the G-dwarf problem. Of course, the second chemical observable of halo stars, namely abundance ratios with strange behaviour at the lowest metallicities (like Mn/Fe or Cr/Fe, e.g. McWilliam 1997), could still be invoked to justify the existence of Pop III stars (e.g. Umeda and Nomoto 2002). However, current uncertainties in the mecanism of core collapse supernova explosion (e.g. Janka et al. 2002) do not allow us to draw any firm conclusion on the expected yield ratios from those objects at any metallicity (see Chieffi and Limongi 2002 for a recent analysis of yields of stars of zero initial metallicity). Therefore, to the author’s opinion, there is currently no strong observational argument for the existence of (super-)massive Pop III stars (or of a very peculiar stellar IMF) preceding the formation of the galactic halo and affecting its early chemical evolution.

A second implication, closely related to the first one, concerns the number of stars expected to be detected at very low metallicities by current or future surveys. The early infall + outflow model presented in Fig. 1 has a fraction of 3 10-4 stars with \[Fe/H\] $`<`$-4 and 3 10-5 stars with \[Fe/H\] $`<`$-5 (Bottom left panel). These numbers suggest that the current record holder of low Z stars, namely the giant HE 0107-5240 of \[Fe/H\]=-5.2 (Christlieb et al. 2002) may well remain the only of its kind not only at the completion of the HK survey ($``$10 000 stars) but also in future surveys exploring samples ten times larger. The quest for objects with even lower metallicities will require million-object samples.

Taking into account that the mass of the halo is estimated to $``$109 M(Morrison 1993), that the Kroupa et al. (1993) IMF has $``$2 stars per unit mass below 0.8 M, and assuming that the aforementioned infall + outflow model applies to the halo as a whole, one sees that there must be about 5 105 stars with \[Fe/H\]$`<`$-4, 5 104 stars with \[Fe/H\]$`<`$-5, and even a few thousand stars with \[Fe/H\]$`<`$-6 (note that for a normal IMF extending down to 0.1 M, the vast majority of them are red dwarfs). Clearly, if (and that is a big if) the proposed modification to the simple outflow model describes satisfactorily the early halo evolution, there is a great potential for discoveries of large numbers of extremely low Z stars by future (very) large scale surveys, like the GAIA mission (see de Zeeuw 2002 for a summary of the perspectives of GAIA).

A third implication of the above results concerns the timescales of the early halo evolution. In Fig. 1 (Bottom right panel) it can be seen that in the case of the simple outflow model it takes only 35 Myr to reach \[Fe/H\]=-3, while it takes almost three times as long ($``$100 Myr) in the case of the infall + outflow model. In the former case, only massive stars have time to enrich the interstellar medium; in the latter, even stars with M$`>`$ 4 M have time to evolve up to the AGB phase and eject their products of shell He-burning (C and s-process elements) or of Hot Bottom Burning (HBB), i.e. primary nitrogen.

The answers on several important current problems of galactic chemical evolution may depend on those timescales. For instance, the N/Fe ratio in the Milky Way seems to be constant and $``$solar as a function of \[Fe/H\], from \[Fe/H\]$``$-3 up to \[Fe/H\]=0. This constancy suggests that N is produced as a primary element (i.e. with a yield independent on the initial metallicity of the star) quite early in the Milky Way. In the pure outflow model, only massive stars can be invoked for such an early production of primary nitrogen, but all current models of massive star nucleosynthesis produce only secondary N; even the recent massive star models including rotation (Meynet and Maeder 2002) produce insufficient amounts of primary N to explain the observations (Prantzos 2003). In the infall + outflow model, intermediate mass stars have time enough to evolve before the metallicity reaches \[Fe/H\]=-3 and could naturally produce the required primary nitrogen, either by HBB or by rotational mixing.

A fourth implication of the different timescales obtained in the simple and modified halo models concerns the dispersion in the elemental abundance ratios at low metallicities. From the theoretical point of view, it is expected that mixing of stellar ejecta with the ISM should have been incomplete in the early Galaxy, when the mixing timescale of a few Myr was comparable to the evolutionary timescale of the system and of the first stellar generation (Audouze and Silk 1995, Tsujimoto et al. 1999, Argast et al. 2000, Ishimaru et al. 2003). However, Carretta et al. (2002) find that, down to the lowest metallicity reached by current surveys (\[Fe/H\]$``$-3), dispersion in abundance ratios of intermediate mass elements is no larger than expected from observational uncertainties. The question “When was the metallicity \[Fe/H\]=-3 reached during the halo evolution?” becomes obviously important in that context and the answer may depend (also) on the modifications of the simple model discussed here. Note, however, that in the framework of inhomogeneous chemical evolution models Tsujimoto et al. (1999) and Argast et al. (2000) obtain “naturally” much larger timescales than in all the models discussed in Sec. 2.

## 4 Summary

In this work it is shown that the low metallicity tail of the MD predicted by simple Outflow models for the MW halo depends sensitively on whether IRA is adopted or relaxed. In both case, current - and still preliminary - data suggest a “G-dwarf problem” for the halo. We suggest that it can be solved by introducing a physically motivated early infall phase; we adopt here a gaussian infall rate, which turns out to fit the available data well, but determination of the precise form of the infall will have to wait for the results of complete surveys in the future. We point out several important implications of such a modification, concerning: the putative Pop. III (super)massive stars, the number of stars expected at very low metallicities, the questions of primary nitrogen and of the dispersion in abundance ratios of halo stars. The forthcoming results of the “HK survey” concerning the low metallicity tail of the halo MD, will definitely allow to check the robustness of the proposed senario.

The phenomenological analysis of this work does not take into account the modern framework of early galaxy formation in a cosmological context. First results of such studies have been recently presented (Bekki and Chiba 2001) and the issue of the halo MD has been successfully addressed, albeit without a clear physical explanation for that success.

###### Acknowledgements.

I am grateful to the referee, U. Fritze von Alvesloeben, for her constructive criticism.


text:
# First Principles Calculations of Ionic Vibrational Frequencies in PbMg_{1/3}Nb_{2/3}O₃

## Abstract

Lattice dynamics for several ordered supercells with composition $`\mathrm{PbMg}_{1/3}\mathrm{Nb}_{2/3}\mathrm{O}_3`$ (PMN) were calculated with first-principles frozen phonon methods. Nominal symmetries of the supercells studied are reduced by lattice instabilities. Lattice modes corresponding to these instabilities, equilibrium ionic positions, and infrared (IR) reflectivity spectra are reported.

There is ample evidence of 1:1 (NaCl-type; the “random layer model” Davies ) short-range order (SRO) in PMN Krause , but first principles (FP) calculations with sufficiently large supercells to realistically approximate a SRO-disordered PMN crystal are prohibitively time consuming. Relatively small supercells that might reasonably approximation include the $`[001]_{NCC^{}}`$ structure which was predicted to be the PMN cation-ordering ground state (GS) Burton02 .

One objective of this study is to compute the relaxed GS for different small supercells consisting of 15 and 30 ions, to compare their energies, to compute the relaxed coordinates, dynamical charges, vibrational frequencies, and infrared (IR) reflection spectra for the GS. These results are important to understand possible contribution of the ordered structures to IR reflection and Raman spectra.

A second objective is understanding the nature of the soft vibrational modes in the ordered structures of PMN. It has been reported that relaxors exhibit both ferroelectric (FE) and antiferroelectric (AFE) characteristics, Egami  and that competition between FE and AFE fluctuations are the cause of glass-type properties in PMN.

All FP calculations were done with the Vienna ab initio simulation package (VASP) Kresse1 . Several supercells of PMN composition were considered (Fig. 1). Our FP computations show that all these structures are dynamically unstable when the ions are placed on ideal perovskite positions, and full relaxation often leads to suprisingly low symmetry. For example, the FP GS of the $`[001]_{NNM}`$ structure (an $`[001]_{2:1}`$ superlattice) is monoclinic with the Pb close to Mg displaced in the (0.18Å,0.05Å,-0.05Å) and (0.18Å,0.05Å,0.05Å) directions. The Pb ions which are between the Nb planes are mostly displaced in the $`x`$ direction by 0.27 Å).

Tetragonal $`[001]_{NCC^{}}`$ PMN is also dynamically unstable, and has has a wide spectrum of instabilities that are associated with FE, AFE, octahedral tilting and other modes. We relaxed the $`[001]_{NCC^{}}`$ structure after a random initial perturbation of the ions. Relaxed coordinates are listed in Table 1. The basis vectors are: (4.00, -4.00, 0.00), (4.01,4.01,0.01), (0.00,-0.01,3$``$4.07) relative to cubic perovskite. Relaxations of ionic coordinates are a complex mixture of octahedral deformations around Mg-ions (with rather large frozen angles) plus AFE, and FE, Pb-displacements in opposition to neighboring O-ions. The $`x`$-direction displacements differ from $`y`$-direction displacements. Pb-ions have either two, or four, Mg nearest neighbors (nn): Pb-ions with two Mg nn are displaced, by 0.25 Å, towards the centroid of the nearest Mg-Mg second-nn pair. Pb-ions with four Mg-nn are not displaced. Although we can not prove that the structure in Table 1 is the PMN $`[001]_{NCC^{}}`$ GS (further relaxations may still reduce its energy in the case), it is dynamically stable and has lower energy than PMN $`[001]_{NCC^{}}`$ that is relaxed with only FE displacements, or only octahedral tilting.

Dynamical charges $`Z^{}`$ for the tetragonal $`_{NCC^{}}`$ structure are listed in Table 2. Nb ions that have Nb nn in the $`\pm \alpha `$ directions have particularly large $`Z_{\alpha \alpha }^{}`$. Dynamical charges for Pb also exhibit significant anisotropy, and environment dependence.

According to Ghosez Ghosez , dynamical (Born) charges $`Z^{}`$ are associated with the average field $`E_{av}`$ but not with the local field $`E_l`$, as the Szigeti charge $`Z`$ is Szigeti . However the product of the Born charge with the average field $`Z^{}E_{av}`$ must equal the product of the Szigeti charge with the local field, $`ZE_l`$ Ghosez . It follows that

$$Z_i^{}=\frac{Z_iE_i}{E_{av}}$$
(1)
Consider the average field in a stack of $`xy`$-layers with different dielectric permittivities $`\epsilon _1`$ and $`\epsilon _2`$:

$$E_{av}=DL\left(\frac{d_1}{\epsilon _1}+\frac{d_2}{\epsilon _2}\right)$$
(2)
where $`D`$ is an external field, $`L`$ is sample length parallel to the field, $`d_1`$ and $`d_2`$ are the lengths of stacked layers. The local field in a uniform dielectric is

$$E_i=\frac{D}{\epsilon _i}$$
(3)
Substituting these expressions into the initial one yields:

$$Z_i^{}=\frac{Z_i}{\epsilon _i}\left[\frac{d_1}{\epsilon _1}+\frac{d_2}{\epsilon _2}\right]$$
(4)
It follows that, with two layers, one with low and the other with high electronic dielectric permittivity, $`Z_i^{}`$ in the more polarizable layer decreases, and $`Z_i^{}`$ in the less polarizable layer increases. The FP calculations follow this trend: $`Z_{Mg}^{}`$, which is less polarizable, increases while $`Z_{Nb}^{}`$, which is more polarizable, decreases. Within the Nb plane, one calculates more normal values for $`Z_{Nb}^{}`$.

For the 30-ion $`[001]_{NCC^{}}`$ structure, computed diagonal frequencies of the dynamical matrix are listed in Table 3. The frequencies of Nb-, Mg- and bending O-vibrations are all between (200 to 350) cm-1. The O-vibrations along Mg-O and Nb-O bonds range from (520 to 735) cm-1. The Pb diagonal frequencies are in the range (67 to 108) cm-1.

As in experiment Reaney , computed IR reflection spectra (Fig. 2) consist of three main reststrahlen bands of the vibrational modes that are typical of perovskites: the first group is below 120 cm-1; the second spreads from 150 cm-1 to 400 cm-1; and the third is from 500 cm-1 to 800 cm-1. The two lower bands split into two subbands each. Assignments of these bands can be made on the basis of the diagonal frequencies shown in Table 3. In experimental data Reaney , these groups of lines are rather compact as in the computed $`_{NCC^{}}`$ and MNN structures. However the experimentally determined magnitude of the reflectivity in the interval from 500 cm-1 to 800 cm-1 is lower than in the computation. This could be connected with an overestimation of the oxygen dynamical charge and/or with large damping for some frequencies in this interval (an estimated damping constant of 60 cm-1 was used for all frequencies), or it could be that the systems studied here are not sufficiently representative of SRO-disordered PMN.

The lowest calculated optical frequency in the equilibrium 30-ion $`_{NCC^{}}`$ structure is 24 cm-1. It is lower than the lowest Pb diagonal frequency (60 cm-1) shown in Table 3 because of the interaction among the ionic vibrations. This mode is a mixture of opposite but not fully compensated Pb-displacements. Other Pb-related modes are spread over the interval (24 to 129) cm-1. Ferroelectric Pb displacements are at (40 and 60 to 90) cm-1 although some contribution to $`\epsilon `$ exists in the whole interval from 24 cm-1 to 129 cm-1. Some modes in this interval have large Pb components for definite sites that implies that these modes are quasilocal. The same can be said of some modes in the frequency interval from 500 cm-1 to 800 cm-1: some of these modes have a very large components corresponding to oxygen vibrations along Nb-O-Mg bonds.

Raman spectra show broad lines with gradual temperature dependence in a wide temperature interval Yuzuk ; Husson . The presence of these lines would be forbidden if the ions were in symmetric environments. Ionic displacements due to disorder and symmetry breaking can explain the existence of these Raman lines. A possible measure of the intensities of these lines is the square of the projection of the ionic displacements, from symmetric positions, onto the vibrational modes: $`S_i=\left|𝐯_d|𝐯_i\right|^2`$, where $`𝐯_d`$ is the vector of the frozen displacements, and $`𝐯_i`$ is the vector of the $`i`$-th vibration in the displacements’ representation.

Low-frequency Raman lines (about 50 cm-1 may be related to the quasilocal Pb-O vibrations Husson . Note that as is typical of Pb-based perovskites that also have large B-cations, such as Mg, that Pb-vibrational branches have relatively small dispersion and are unstable across most of the Brillouin zone. The particular instabilities that freeze in depend sensitively on the local electric fields produced by the Nb-Sc configuration. Freezing of lattice instabilities creates low-symmetry Pb-sites, and also allows AFE Pb-vibrations to couple with FE vibrations.

Calculated structural instabilities in the various supercells imply reductions in their formation energies relative to the values reported in Burton and Cockayne Burton02 , but the hierarchy of formation energies and predicted GS, $`[001]_{NCC^{}}`$, are the same. Column one in Table 4 corresponds to the structures with symmetry restrictions imposed (for instance, tetrgonal symmetry was imposed for MNN and $`_{NCC^{}}`$). Column two includes relaxation energy, to the GS for each structure.

There are many possible ordered derivatives of the random layer modelDavies  that have (111) Nb-layers which alternate with (111) (Nb1/3Mg2/3)-layers in which Nb and Mg are ordered; e.g. Fig. 1d. Some mixed layers in this structure are ordered in stripes and others in an Nb-honeycomb pattern with Mg’s at hexagon centers. This structure has a large formation energy relative to the others in Figs. 1. Apparently intralayer cation ordering increases the total energy relative to a disordered configuration. This is consistent with the conclusion of Hoatson et al.Hoatson  who obtained an improved inverse Monte Carlo fit to NMR data with the assumption of Mg-Mg and Nb-Nb clustering within mixed layers. The structure shown in Fig. 1e also has higher energy than $`[001]_{NCC^{}}`$.

Finally, our FP computations have shown that the relaxation of the ionic coordinated in the small supercells of PMN does not change the hierarchy of the energy of these structures: $`_{NCC^{}}`$ remains to be the GS among the small supercells considered. The low frequency vibrations in this structure is connected with AFE Pb vibrations and with Pb-O stretching mode. The computed IR reflection spectrum, qualitatively, corresponds to experimental data Reaney  although there are some discrepancies in the line magnitudes at high frequencies.

S.A.P. appreciates discussions with Toulouse, Svitelskiy, Petzelt, Kamba and Yuzuk.


text:
# Diffraction to De-Diffraction

## I Introduction

The minimization of diffraction effects from wave fields in the focal plane has been proposed for microwaves by Schelkunoff ref1  and for light by Toraldo di Francia ref2  but with little practical advantage, since the non-diffracting portion of the field was very faint, surrounded by giant side lobes, apart from the enormous practical difficulties of creating the phase and amplitude changes in the aperture plane ref3 . More recently Durnin ref4  has demonstrated that a $`J_0`$ field will have a non-diffracting component, but again the beam, originally emitted by an annular aperture, is faint and of limited extension, with most of the radiation dissipated in the side lobes. Tamari ref5 ; ref6  has qualitatively described a method to totally cancel diffraction effects (de-diffraction, or DD) from any wave field utilizing the radiation from the full aperture which can be focused to a sharp point, or non-diverging beam. In this paper DD will be derived from first principles in terms of the wave equation and the concept of the reversal of the field.

While DD fields are of most interest in electromagnetic or acoustic applications such as in super-resolving imaging or in non-divergent beams, the method is quite general and can be adopted to any flow-field whether it is a wave field or not, and even to electrostatic and gravitational potential fields if the concept of streamline concentration is used instead of DD. However, for the purposes or this paper the language of monochromatic electromagnetic fields will be used, since it is in such cases that diffraction effects have been studied most thoroughly in optical and microwave applications.

In section II, DD fields will be defined and shown to be theoretically possible solutions to the differential wave equation. Although it is possible to proceed directly to de-diffraction theory by field reversal in section V, the related concepts of streamlined flow and vorticity will be used in section III to describe the transformation of a geometrical field to a diffracted field, illustrated by Kirchhoff’s derivation of the diffraction integral. In section IV a ‘bow wavelet’ or dipole model will be examined, supplanting that of the Fresnel-Huygens wavelet, the better to describe the field in the immediate vicinity of the aperture, the crucial area where the diffraction process is both initiated and from which it could be cancelled. Some DD experimental results will be described in section VI and practical applications of the method discussed in section VII. The surprising implications of DD theory as far as both quantum and general relativity theories are concerned will be discussed in section VIII and the paper is summarized in section IX.

## II DD: Truncated Geometrical Fields

Let S be the propagation (velocity, or Poynting) vectors of $`G(x,y,z,t)`$, a general solution to the wave equation

$$^2G=\frac{1}{v^2}\frac{^2G}{t^2}$$
(1)
In an infinite homogeneous medium free from obstacles or current sources,

$$\text{curl }\text{S}=0$$
(2)
and hence the energy streamline $`S`$ (found by solving the differential equation $`G_y/G_x=y/x`$) and which are the loci of S , will be straight lines. The field is said to have normal rectilinear congruence and for our purposes here such a field can be termed a geometrical ref7  field but without the usual restriction that the wavelength $`\lambda =0`$, usually understood by the term. This duplication of terms has been made on purpose since apart from the wavelength the fields above obey all the laws of optics and are infinite waves which fill all of space. Current flows in open water are examples of such smooth fields. If the field’s intensity varies in time, some examples would be an infinite acoustic or electromagnetic plane wave or a spherical wave emitted by a point source $`P_0`$ when the fields are characterized by an even intensity function across equipotential surfaces (the wavefronts) to which $`S`$ are always normal.

Referring to Fig. 1, a geometrical wave $`G(x,y,z,t)`$ is truncated according to conditions:

$`G`$ $`=`$ $`G\text{on}\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$
$`G`$ $`=`$ $`0\text{on}\mathrm{\Sigma }_0`$ (3)
Where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ is any limited and well-defined region of space bounded by a ‘wall’ of $`S`$, and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_O`$ is its complementary region, filling the rest of space outside. Such a wave is, theoretically also a solution because in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_O`$ the wave $`G(x,y,z,t)=0`$ is also a solution of Eq. 1. This trivial mathematical truth will have great significance when translated to DD physics. In this field, $`S`$ are straight lines and so within $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ , $`G(x,y,z,t)`$ constitutes a well-defined geometrical wave. Since energy, by definition, does not cross streamlines, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ constitutes a ‘flux tube’ ref8  carrying the field’s total energy without any loss whatsoever. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ is a non-diffracting field. It is important to stress that the border between $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_O`$ does not form a physical barrier to restrain or reflect the waves, such as the walls of a waveguide ref20  nor is there any discontinuity in the medium between $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_O`$ such as a change in the index of refraction: quite simply the amplitude of the waves just drops to zero in certain regions $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_O`$ .

Although mathematically possible, such truncated non-diffracting fields do not ordinarily exist in nature ref9 : the moment any attempt is made to truncate an infinite field by placing in its path an opaque screen with an open aperture forming a cross-section of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ , the field streamlines $`S`$ automatically swerve behind the screen, slow down near the edge and cause interference effects with regions of zero and maximum intensities, and transform the whole field topologically in a typical diffraction pattern. The field now spreads to fill all of space anew, but now no longer as a geometrical field. Similarly, if the field is emitted from an infinite number of point sources arrayed in an aperture $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ , it diffracts as if a plane wave had passed normally through an open aperture $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ .

Were truncated geometrical fields to exist, they would be very useful indeed. As shown in Fig. 2(a) if a field is passed through a focusing system whose every aperture and field stop is larger than $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ and so does not disturb the edges of the field, it continues to act as a geometrical field and can be theoretically focused to a point with infinite intensity and resolution in imaging systems. Similarly, when the $`S`$ are parallel, the conceptual flux tube carries a beam of infinite length and uniform cross-section $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ with no loss of intensity. The “diffraction limits” now used as a measure of quality in focusing instruments and beams, and which depend on the wavelength, and inversely on the aperture diameter, would cease to have any significance.

## III Geometrical Fields Diffract

In hydrodynamics,

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\text{curl }\text{S}$$
(4)
is known as the vorticity of the field: it is the measure of how much the field curves around during its flow. When $`\mathrm{\Omega }=0`$ as in Eq. 2, the field is then said to be irrotational ref10  and the vorticity is the same on all of $`S`$. When such geometrical fields are interrupted or disturbed by a physical obstacle, however, the field acquires vorticity around the edges of the aperture, with $`S`$ curving into the shadow regions. This is easy to understand by considering sound waves ‘turning’ and being heard behind the corner of a building. Similarly, in hydro- and aerodynamics, obstacles such as the aperture edge can create wakes, vortices and other deviations from geometrical flow ref11 . In wave fields where $`\lambda 0`$ it is more common to describe these changes as diffraction effects, but in fact I have attempted to show that the two classes of phenomena are closely linked ref5 ; ref6 . An extensive description of the electromagnetic field’s angular momentum, using hydrodynamical concepts has been made by D. Ximing ref12 .

Why do these transformations occur? There is always matter at the edge of a source or an obstacle, where diffraction starts forming. As shown in Fig. 4, the angle $`\varphi `$ which S makes with the normal (the original direction of propagation rotates by $`\pi /2`$ or more at the edge. Adjoining S follow suit in a domino effect of decreasing $`\varphi `$ until the mainstream $`S`$ at the center of a symmetrical aperture is reached, where $`\varphi =0`$. This curvature of $`S`$ around an edge is clearly illustrated by plots of the streamlines and the ellipsoidal wavefronts normal to them, made by Braunbeck and Laukienref13  based on Sommerfeld’s ref14  rigorous solution of the infinite half-plane diffraction problem. This solution also provides another way of visualizing vorticity around the aperture edge: the concept of a cylindrical wave ’emitted’ by the edge, and interfering with the geometrical field to create the diffracted field.

This analysis alternatively gives the diffracted field as an integration of an infinite spectrum of plane waves emitted from the aperture at angles $`\varphi `$ rotating through $`\pi `$ ref15 . This lends itself naturally to the following physical interpretation: an infinite number of streamlines normal to the aperture make up the original zero-order geometrical field approaching from the $`z`$ region. Diffraction bends these $`S`$ into an infinite number of streamlines each at a different $`\varphi `$, to make up the Fourier orders ($`\pi \varphi \pi `$) of the field in the $`+z`$ region ref16 .

Kirchhoff’s theory of diffraction ref17 , although less rigorous than that of Sommerfeld ref14  provides the perfect theoretical framework for demonstrating the transformation of a geometrical field into a diffracted one and then, as shown below, back to a de-diffracted field. A point source $`P_0`$ on the $`z`$ axis in Fig. 4 emits a geometrical spherical wave ref18  whose $`S`$ coincide with the radii centered on $`P_0`$. This wave then passes through an aperture $`\overline{AA}`$ in an infinite opaque screen and centered on the $`xy`$ plane, and spreads throughout the $`+z`$ portion of space, creating the typical maxima and minima observed on a screen $`M`$ placed normal to the $`z`$-axis at some distance from the aperture. Kirchhoff’s method is based on potential theory and is both inaccurate in the vicinity of the edges $`A`$ and noncommittal on the path the field’s energy takes from $`P_0`$ to $`M`$. However, the bending of the streamlines into the shadow regions and the transformation of the geometrical wavefront $`D_A`$ into the elliptical wavefronts $`D_1,D_2,\mathrm{}`$ is also quite clear in the rigorous solutions mentioned above ref13 .

A typical flux tube $`C`$ carries energy from $`P_0`$ to $`P_A`$ in the aperture plane along a straight line. But in the $`+z`$ region it curves towards the shadow regions behind the obstacle, crossing a typical wavefront $`D_3`$ at $`P_3`$ and creating point $`P_M`$ in the diffraction pattern on $`M`$. $`C`$ acts like a channel of a given capacity ref19 , carrying energy from $`\overline{P_0P_A}`$ to $`P_M`$ . This idea is confirmed by Helmholtz’ reciprocity (or reversion) theorem ref20  whereby “a point source at $`P_0`$ will produce at $`P_M`$ the same effect as a point source of equal intensity placed at $`P_M`$ will produce at $`P_0`$”. When $`P_0`$ is moved down on the axis to $`z=\mathrm{}`$ the geometrical field in the $`z`$ regions becomes an infinite plane wave arriving normally at $`\overline{AA}`$. The aspect of Kirchhoff’s integral that is of interest here is that the diffracted field reduces to an integration of Huygens-Fresnel (HF) ref21  wavelets emitted by point sources on $`\overline{AA}`$. It will be axiomatic to extend this idea to say that a ray from $`P_0`$ reaches the aperture plane at a point $`O`$ (a source anywhere on the aperture) and is transformed into the ‘exploding’ diffracted pattern of the HF wavelet of Fig. 3 with its inclination factor adjusting the amplitude by $`X=(1+\mathrm{cos}\varphi )/2`$; but this is known to be only an approximation.

Since the precise determination of the wavefronts near the aperture is an essential first step in the implementation of DD theory, an attempt will now be made to examine the wavelet more closely.

## IV The Bow Wavelet

A pebble is dropped in a pond and a circular ripple results. But when an atom emits a photon, or when a point element of a field is examined, there is radial momentum but no backward momentum such as in the HF wavelet. Recently Miller ref22  starting out with the wave equation derived a “spatio-temporal dipole” field for the fundamental electromagnetic wavelet. This confirmed my independent intuitive derivation ref23  adapting the model of a bow wave such as that made by a boat ref24 : a stationary atom releases a photon having both radial and foreword velocities $`r`$ and $`f`$ and the bow wave or dipole pattern of Fig. 3 emerges. That some such process is at work is suggested by the case of Cerenkov radiation, where a fast-moving electron in glass creates a V-shaped wake of light ref25 . In free space, however, since $`r=f=c/2`$ the center $`W`$ of the bow waves’ circular wavefronts $`D`$, travels up the $`+z`$ axis at the same rate as the radius $`\overline{WP}`$ expands, and the V-shaped ‘shock-wave’ now opens up to become a straight line along the $`x`$-axis. This pattern is also confirmed in the literature, where the streamlines of a dipole ref26  are similar to such circles centered along the $`x`$-axis. But on this axis, apart from the origin, the field is zero since the contributing wavefronts there would have an infinite radius. The circular streamlines of the bow wavelet provide a natural explanation for the vorticity of the field at the edge of the aperture. In addition the bow wave’s wavelength $`\lambda (\varphi )`$ is $`\lambda _0`$ only in the propagation direction (unlike the HF wavelet which has only amplitude changes with $`\varphi `$. $`\lambda (\varphi )`$ explains the very rapid fluctuations of the diffracted field very near the edge ref13 . This discussion of the primary wavelets of a field is to establish a method to derive the mathematically exact form of the extended wavefronts near the aperture, in order to make DD precise. In section VI experiments will be described that show that the bow wave and the ray that creates it can also have a real physical existence of their own.

## V DD: Reversal of the Diffracted Field

It has been long known that electromagnetic fields are time invariant ref27 : any solution $`G(x,y,z,+t)`$ of Maxwell’s equations will have an equivalent solution $`G(x,y,z,t)`$ since replacing $`t`$ with $`t`$, and hence $`v`$ with $`v`$ will lead to the same wave equation Eq. 1. Examples of this are spherical waves and plane waves whose complete solutions show identical waves travelling with opposite velocities $`\pm v`$, for example the plane wave $`G(x,y,z,t)=m(wx+vt)+n(wxvt)`$ ref28 . Time invariance here need not involve any philosophical considerations of the arrow of time, merely that the field retains all its point values when the velocity direction is reversed by rotating all its S by $`\pi `$. The principle of reversibility along rays has also been derived from Fermat’s principle ref29 .

In optics this principle of reversibility is implicit in any imaging situation where a point object and its image can be interchanged, and in the theory of holography ref30 . With this in mind consider two typical situations where diffraction occurs: First the isolated bow wavelet of Fig. 3. A straight ray is scattered at a point $`O`$ and then branches into streamlines, creating any of the diffracted wave fronts $`D_1,D_2,D_3,\mathrm{}`$ Now imagine that a curved mirror shaped as one of the wavefronts say $`D_2`$, is placed to overlap that wavefront exactly. Since all the diffracted streamlines are then normal to the mirror the S vectors are reflected back on themselves, and since amplitude and phase are preserved (phase changes upon reflection will be uniform across $`D`$) then the field will reverse itself along the same streamlines, and passing point $`O`$ on the return trip, ends up as a single ray in the $`z`$ direction (but without the original source of the ray there) . Alternately, instead of a mirror think that $`D_2`$ now consists of an infinite array of point sources with an identical amplitude function to that of the original diffracted pattern on $`D_2`$. In the $`+z`$ direction the field will continue to diffract exactly as before. But below $`D_2`$ in the $`z`$ direction the sources on $`D_2`$ will recombine to create a reversing ray. The second case is that of an extended field passing through an aperture, for example the diffraction situation of Fig. 5.

Here again any one of the wavefronts $`D`$ of Fig. 4 can serve as a source for the reverse DD field, or to reflect an already diffracted field. As a result of these procedures, the curved streamlines $`1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$ of the reversing field emerge from the aperture $`\overline{AA}`$ normally as a part of a dediffracted truncated geometrical field. If diffraction is to be likened to a topological distortion of an ordinary field, the reverse process can be said to start with a purposely distorted field to produce an ordinary one. It might be argued that the presence of an opaque screen $`\overline{BA},\overline{AB}`$ reflecting or absorbing portions of the original $`z`$ field will necessitate the placement of a similar screen when DD is attempted. Such a screen is not needed for DD however, because the diffracted field immediately touching the screen from the $`+z`$ side will be negligible or zero; indeed that the field is zero on the screen is one of the boundary conditions in Kirchhoff’s derivation ref17 . Moreover, when the original source is an infinite array of point sources along $`\overline{AA}`$, no screen $`\overline{BA},\overline{AB}`$ need be present in the diffracting field, and none will be needed in the reversing field, only the conceptual removal of the original sources on $`\overline{AA}`$ to allow the DD field to emerge.

Choosing the wavefronts as the source for a DD field insures that the phase is the same there, simplifying the design of the lenses or antennas to be used to create a DD field. However in principle any linear (or surface in the 3D case) array $`M`$ of sources spanning the diffracted field and mimicking its local phase and amplitude can be used to create the DD field. For example an infinite array of sources having the ring-shaped phase and amplitude pattern of the electric field of the Airy function ref31 , and placed in the focal plane of a lens will cause a reverse DD field to emerge from the lens. This method greatly resembles the zone-plate-type filter described by Toraldo di Francia to achieve superresolution ref2 ; ref3 . Of course, in any practical application, such a filter will have a limited size, and the imitation of the whole diffracted field, and hence of DD, will fail. A more practical filtering DD method would be to wrap a rigid curved holographic film to roughly encircle an aperture, and illuminate both its $`z`$ sides, in the presence of the aperture, with coherent plane waves. The developed illuminated plate will then recreate the DD field when illuminated from the $`+z`$ side.

In practice a DD field can be accomplished by any one of five general procedures: 1) An array of sources mimicking the local phase and amplitude values along an entire continuous random cross-section $`M`$ of the original field. 2) By reflecting a diffracted field normally upon itself. 3) The creation of the wavefronts $`D`$ by suitably focusing a plane or spherical wave. 4) Holographic methods or 5) A filter illuminated normally by a plane wave (hence the phase is uniform on the filter) having only amplitude changes. Finally, it must be cautioned that when performing DD field calculations, using elementary wavelets, or the Kirchhoff integral, these must be used in the correct orientation. The wavelets always ’point’ from the geometrical rays 5,6,7 of Fig. 5 to the circular diffracted patterns. An integration of bow wavelets on $`\overline{AA}`$ will give $`D`$, but integrating wavelets on $`D`$ will not give the field on $`\overline{AA}`$ or the DD field in $`z`$, since on $`D`$ the field is already diffracted. A rule of thumb is that the Kirchhoff integral should not be used to evaluate the field of wavefronts such as $`D`$, whose normals S rotate rapidly through $`\pi /2`$ at the aperture edge.

## VI De-Diffraction Experiments

Simple experiments to prove the DD methods outlined in this paper were performed as follows, but a more sophisticated experimental verification of DD using electromagnetic radiation is still needed.

DD OF ULTRASOUND WAVES: The field of a 40 kHz ultrasound source as reflected from a plane antenna and one with curved edges were compared as in Fig. 6. The curved edges, roughly approximating the curvature of a DD wavefront, concentrated the field appreciably.

WATER RIPPLES: Water ripple experiments are shown in Fig. 7: a) a vibrating flat plate produced ripples of a wavelength one third its width spreading out in the typical oval diffracted wavefronts (b) roughly curving the edges through a quarter-circular arc of about one $`\lambda `$ radius produced a dramatic concentration of the waves mainly in the forward direction. Note the absence of waves from either side of the axis in (b): the waves in the bottom right of (b) are spurious, since they are emitted from the back of the plate.

GRAVITATIONAL MODEL. It is known that a thin flexible rubber sheet stretched over a solid two dimensional horizontal model of a certain function $`G(x,y)`$ satisfies Laplace’s equation of $`G`$: Freezing a wave in time reduces the right hand term of Eq. 1 to zero, and the wave equation becomes $`^2G=0`$. The surface of the sheet represents both the gravitational and electrostatic potentials of this Laplacian ref32 . For our purposes, the potential of the fields we are studying was represented by a flat model $`G(x,z)`$ of the wavefront in question. The model was lifted a distance $`G_{max}`$ representing the initial potential of the wave and the sheet stretched over the model as in Fig. 8.

The gravity-wave-potential equivalence mentioned above (and which might not be coincidental, as discussed below) allows a study of the streamlines $`S`$ of the field since they will be the path taken by a marble rolling down the sheet’s surface. The equipotential horizontal contours of the sheet’s surface ($`G_1,G_2,G_3,\mathrm{}`$ the ‘elevation’) are then the wavefronts. $`G_{max}`$ is proportional to the energy of the source (inversely proportional to the wavelength) and it is interesting to see how increasing the height of the model reduces the diffraction spreading, according to theory. This method though not too quantitatively exact if the membrane slope is larger than around $`18^{}`$, gives an excellent idea of the physical situation. As shown in the streamline sketches of Fig. 8, such a gravitational model was used to prove that DD proceeds exactly as theoretically predicted for a diffracted and de-diffracted plane (a,b) and focused (c,d) waves. The concentration of the streamlines at a single point-focus in case (d) was a dramatic demonstration of superresolution. The bow wavelet pattern both in the emission (f) and the DD reversing (a) modes (a lone ray) was also verified. In the case of the point source (f) the sheet was also clamped down ($`G=0`$) along $`x`$ except for a spike at the origin, because the source was assumed to be located on a flat non-conducting plane. The paths of the rolling marble in (f) were very similar to the streamlines of the bow-wavelet $`S`$ of Fig. 3.

## VII Practical Applications of DD

The cancellation of diffraction improves the performance of a wide range of instruments in many fields. These can be roughly categorized according to whether the truncated field is to be focused or allowed to propagate as a beam. And also according to the type of field such as optical, microwave, acoustic etc. Examples are too numerous to list, but focused field applications include cameras, telescopes (optical and radio) microscopes (optical and electron), imaging radar, and sonar. Beam applications include lasers and tele-communication parabolic antennas. In the case of imaging radar, for example, DD methods ref5 ; ref6 , applied through refocusing the field by reshaping the antenna by curving its rim, will allow fine resolution even with a large wavelength and a small antenna, since a truncated geometrical field can be focused to a point regardless of the field’s wavelength or the aperture size. An optical laser passing through a DD lens with curved edges pointed towards the moon should proceed with no divergence (apart from atmospheric degradation), reaching its target with its original profile relatively intact. Normally diffraction would spread a 10 cm. diameter laser beam to some two kilometers in diameter by the time it arrives there.

## VIII Diffraction, Quantum and relativistic Fields

Diffraction has been cited by Heisenberg himself (33) as an example of uncertainty relations. The product of a photon’s momentum and position cannot be less than Planck’s constant $`h`$. The question now arises: are uncertainty and hence quantum effects cancelled together with the cancellation of diffraction? The inescapable conclusion is that they are, since both momentum and position would be uniquely known in a DD geometrical field. The vectors S of a plane DD field all point in the same direction, and the position is always known within $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_D`$ especially in the case of a single ray. In the bow wavelet itself the change from a ray (position and momentum precisely known) to the spread-out diffracted wavelet, with its momentum vectors fanning out at all angles is a model of this transformation from a classical field (the ray) to a quantum field (the fan) and vice versa. Are elementary particles emitting bow wavelets the physical machinery ref34  behind quantum effects? Two particles $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ emit bow waves which meet at a random angle $`(\varphi _1\varphi _2)`$ and the resulting interference pattern is taken for that of quantum probability functions. Here then is the physical ‘cause’ of quantum effects: it is the variable energy content transmitted by streamlines or flux tubes from $`P_1`$ and $`P_2`$ to a nearby point $`T`$, which can be considered as the probability amplitudes ref35  $`<P_1|T>`$ and $`<T|P_2>`$.

Fig. 9 shows the similarity between a Gaussian probability function ref36  and the normal of the electric field of a bow wavelet around the propagation axis. Discussions following Toraldo di Francia’s paper on super-resolving filters ref2  also raised the question of quantum uncertainty in diffracted fields, and included this remark: “the only correct quantum electrodynamical version of Heisenberg’s principle imposes no relevant restrictions on resolving power to begin with.” One can speculate even further. The emerging circular streamlines of the bow wavelet first propagate foreword and then ‘fall’ towards the source like a fountain, as if attracted towards the origin. Can the streamlines and equipotential surfaces of the primary wavelet then be interpreted as curved Gaussian coordinates (S being the geodesics ref37 ) of a relativistic gravitational distortion of the field surrounding the atom emitting the photons? This would be a miniature version of Einstein’s results concerning the bending of light in the vicinity of a massive star ref38 . Considering the proportionally smaller atomic masses and distances involved, this might not be too improbable. The distortion of space in the vicinity of an obstacle can be easily observed by moving a pinhole or slit with an aperture of about 1 mm in front of the eye. The aperture seems to act like a concave lens distorting the view, according to the divergence of the diffracted streamlines ref39 . Thomas Young had also combined gravitational and optical concepts to explain diffraction. He hypothesized that the rays refract through a lens-like, increasingly dense ethereal fluid surrounding the obstacle, “attracted to particles of gross matter” ref40 . In view of the preceding analysis, the intriguing possibility exists that sub-atomic bow waves propagated into space can be considered the source of a unified field combining quantum, relativistic-gravitational and electromagnetic effects. In that case field reversal methods such as DD can provide a way to transform quantum-relativistic fields in space into classical ones, and vice versa, as in Fig. 10. But all such speculation must first await acceptance and further experimental proof of DD.

## IX Summary and Conclusion

A method was presented, starting from the wave equation, and a truncated version of a geometrical field, and the principle of reversal of wave fields, whereby de-diffracted geometrical wave fields can be created. To clarify the process, the conversion of a ray into the diffracted primary wavelet and back to a ray was studied as a model of such a DD transformation. DD methods allow superresolution in imaging instruments and for infinite beams with no divergence. The simple experiments performed to prove DD could be repeated and refined. Rigorous computer simulation of the field can find the precise waves D for a given device and thus provide the exact design of a DD lens, antenna or other instrument. The similarity of the field equations of flow fields, gravity and electrostatics suggest that methods equivalent to DD might also be used to modify those fields too. For example a boomerang-shaped object would have its gravitational field lines ’focused’ on the concave side. Finally it was speculated whether diffraction could be just one manifestation of a united quantum-relativistic field surrounding an atom, and conversely whether DD means that it is possible to create classical-field regions of space free from such effects.

###### Acknowledgements.

Thanks are due to Prof. C. Shepherd, Dr. D.A.B. Miller, and Mr. V. Alexander for correspondence clarifying some questions. And to Capt. N. Kobori for building the ultrasound equipment used for the DD experiments and to Mrs. K. Tamari for help in the design and performance of the gravity field experiments.