text:
# A CONTINUOUS INJECTION PLASMA MODEL FOR THE X-RAY/RADIO KNOTS IN KPC-SCALE JETS OF AGN

## 1 Introduction

The detection of Kilo-parsec (kpc) scale jets with knots in several active galactic nuclei (AGN) by the Chandra observatory Chartas et al.  (2000); Tavecchio et al.  (2000); Sambruna et al.  (2002) has opened a new window on the nature of these phenomena. The X-ray emission from jets could be due to Comptonization of the optical/radio synchrotron photons i.e., synchrotron self-Compton (SSC), Comptonization of cosmic micro-wave background photons (IC/CMB), or an extension of the synchrotron radio/optical emission. Earlier observations by the Einstein and ROSAT satellites, having comparatively limited resolution and sensitivity, had not been generally able to differentiate amongst these mechanism (e.g. Biretta et al.  (1991); Harris & Stern (1987)). Based on the recent Chandra observation, it has been argued that the SSC interpretation would require large jet powers and magnetic fields much lower than the equipartition values Tavecchio et al.  (2000); Schwartz et al.  (2000). A plausible attractive alternative is to interpret the X-ray emission as being due to IC/CMB or direct synchrotron, in which case a significantly smaller jet power and near-equipartition magnetic fields are required Celotti et al.  (2001); Pesce et al.  (2001); Sambruna et al.  (2002). For knots where the X-ray flux is greater than the extrapolation of the radio/optical spectra to X-ray wavelengths, the emission cannot be due to synchrotron emission and hence, the IC/CMB model is favored. On the other hand, for those knots whose X-ray flux is lower than this extrapolation, it is also possible to interpret the emission as being due to synchrotron from a non-thermal electron distribution with a high energy cut off. In fact, it has been argued Pesce et al.  (2001) that for the knots of 3C271, this is a more plausible explanation, since the IC/CMB model requires for this source an exceptionally large Doppler factor. In low-power FRI jets also, synchrotron origin of X-rays is currently accepted Worrall et al.  (2001). However, for the gigahertz-peaked spectrum (GPS) radio source PKS 1127-145, which is suspected to be a young FRI radio galaxy, the X-ray emission is probably due to IC/CMB Siemiginowska et al.  (2002).

The interpretation of X-ray emission for some sources as being due to synchrotron emission is interesting, since in this case the X-rays are produced by particles having much higher energies (by a factor of $`10^4`$) than those emitting in the radio. The presence of high energy electrons puts constraints on the age of the knot: since these electrons cool efficiently, they are depleted in time unless they are replenished. The depletion leads to a time-dependent high energy cutoff in the non-thermal electron distribution which reflects as a high frequency exponential cutoff in the observed spectra. Since the observed -ray flux is less than the extrapolation of radio/optical flux in these sources, this exponential high frequency cutoff is constrained to be in the soft X-ray regime. This can be translated to a high energy cutoff in the electron distribution which in turn gives an estimate of the age of the knot. In this model, a knot is formed when a short duration acceleration process enhances the non-thermal electron density in a jet. These non-thermal electrons move with a bulk speed $`vc`$ along the jet. Thus, from the age of the knot, one can determine the location in the jet of the short acceleration process. The distance from the central object and the short duration ( $`<<`$ the age of the knot) naturally puts strong constraints on any models of the acceleration process.

The model outlined above, may be confirmed (or ruled out) by future long duration Chandra observations. The model predicts that the X-ray spectra of the knots should be exponential (i.e. steep). The photon spectral slope measured during preliminary short duration observations of 3C 371 Pesce et al.  (2001), is around $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1.7\pm 0.4`$, in apparent contradiction to this prediction. However, longer observations are required to confirm this result. Moreover, the model requires the coincidence that the age of the knot be equal to the time required for X-ray emitting electrons to cool. A larger survey of X-ray jets have to be sampled to confirm whether this is statistically plausible. In this model, it is assumed that the acceleration time-scale is short (i.e. $`t_{acc}<<10^{10}`$ sec) and the possible expansion of the plasma is not taken into account. The acceleration mechanism of these knots is largely unknown, but if the acceleration is due to internal shocks (e.g. Spada et al.  (2001)), then the acceleration time scale $`t_{acc}R_s/c`$, where $`R_s`$ is a typical shell size. If $`R_s`$ kpc, then $`t_{acc}`$ could be as large as $`10^{11}`$ secs.

In this work, we present an alternative model where the knot is assumed to be a uniform expanding sphere with continuous injection of non-thermal particles. The time-dependent electron distribution and the resultant spectra are computed taking into account synchrotron, IC/CMB and adiabatic cooling due to the expansion of the sphere. Since there is continuous injection of particles, there is no high energy cut-off but, instead, there is a time dependent break in the electron distribution where synchrotron/adiabatic cooling is important. Our motivation here is to show that this model also explains the observed spectra and can be distinguished from one time injection models, by future observational constrains on the X-ray spectral index.

In the next section, the model is described and the predicted spectral energy distributions are compared with observations. §3 summarizes and discusses the main results. Throughout this work, $`H_o=75`$ km s-1 Mpc-1 and $`q_0=0.5`$ are adopted.

## 2 Spherically expanding plasma model

We consider a plasma cloud moving relativistically along the jet with a bulk Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. In the rest frame, it is assumed that the plasma uniformly occupies an expanding sphere of radius $`R(t)=R_o+\beta _{exp}ct`$, where $`R_o`$ is the initial size of the sphere and $`\beta _{exp}<<1`$. At $`t=0`$, there are no non-thermal particles in the system. A continuous and constant particle injection rate \[ i.e. number of particles injected per unit time\] for $`t>0`$ is assumed, with a power-law distribution of energy,

$$Q(\gamma )d\gamma =K\gamma ^pd\gamma \text{for}\gamma >\gamma _{min}$$
(1)
where $`\gamma `$ is the Lorentz factor of the electrons. The kinetic equation describing the evolution of the total number of non-thermal particles in the system, $`N(\gamma ,t)`$, is

$$\frac{N(\gamma ,t)}{t}+\frac{}{\gamma }[P(\gamma ,t)N(\gamma ,t)]=Q(\gamma )$$
(2)
$`P(\gamma ,t)`$ is the cooling rate given by

$$P(\gamma ,t)=(\dot{\gamma }_S(t)+\dot{\gamma }_{IC}(t)+\dot{\gamma }_A(t))$$
(3)
where $`\dot{\gamma }_S(t),\dot{\gamma }_{IC}(t)`$ and $`\dot{\gamma }_A(t)`$, the cooling rates due to synchrotron, inverse Compton of the CMB and adiabatic cooling, respectively, are given by

$$\dot{\gamma }_S(t)=\frac{4}{3}\frac{\sigma _T}{m_ec}\frac{B^2(t)}{8\pi }\gamma ^2$$
(4)
$$\dot{\gamma }_{IC}(t)=\frac{16}{3}\frac{\sigma _T}{m_ec^2}\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\sigma T_{cmb}^4(z)\gamma ^2$$
(5)
$$\dot{\gamma }_A(t)=\frac{\beta _{exp}c\gamma }{R(t)}$$
(6)
Here, the evolving magnetic field is parameterized to be $`B(t)=B_0(R(t)/R_0)^m`$ and $`T_{cmb}(z)=2.73(1+z)`$ is the temperature of the CMB at the redshift $`z`$ of the source. Note that the time $`t`$ and other quantities in the above equations are in the rest frame of the plasma.

In this work, Eqn (2) has been solved numerically for $`N(\gamma ,t)`$ using the technique given by Chang & Cooper (1970) and the resultant synchrotron and inverse Compton spectra are computed at an observing time $`t=t_o`$. As shown by Dermer (1995), since the CMB radiation is not isotropic in the rest frame of the plasma, the inverse Compton spectrum is also beamed. Finally the flux at the earth is computed taking into account the Doppler boosting (e.g. Begelman & Blandford (1984)), characterized by the Doppler factor $`\delta [\mathrm{\Gamma }(1\beta \text{cos}\theta )]^1`$, where $`\beta c`$ is the bulk velocity and $`\theta `$ is the angle between the jet and the line of sight.

While the total non-thermal particle distribution has to be computed numerically, a qualitative description is possible by comparing cooling timescales with the observation time $`t_o`$. The cooling time-scale due to synchrotron and inverse Compton cooling at a given time $`t`$ and Lorentz factor $`\gamma `$, is $`t_c(t,\gamma )\gamma /(\dot{\gamma }_S+\dot{\gamma }_{IC})`$. Then, $`\gamma _c`$, defined as the $`\gamma `$ for which this cooling time scale is equal to the observation time, $`t_c(t_o,\gamma _c)t_o`$, becomes,

$$\gamma _c\frac{m_ec}{\sigma _T}\frac{t_o^1}{[\frac{B^2(t_o)}{8\pi }+\mathrm{\Gamma }^24c\sigma T_{cmb}^4(z)]}$$
(7)
The adiabatic cooling time-scale also turns out to be $`t_o`$, since $`t_aR(t)/\beta _{exp}ct_o`$ for $`R_o<<R(t_o)`$. Thus, the non-thermal particle distribution at time $`t=t_o`$ can be divided into three distinct regions:

(i) $`\gamma <<\gamma _c`$: In this regime, radiative cooling is not important and $`N(\gamma ,t_o)K\gamma ^pt_o`$. The corresponding spectral index for both synchrotron and inverse Compton is $`\alpha =(p1)/2`$.

(ii) $`\gamma >>\gamma _c`$: In this regime, either synchrotron or inverse Compton cooling is dominant and $`N(\gamma ,t_o)\gamma ^{(p+1)}`$. The corresponding spectral index for both synchrotron and inverse Compton is $`\alpha =p/2`$.

(iii) $`\gamma \gamma _c`$ In this regime, either synchrotron or inverse Compton cooling as well as adiabatic cooling are important, and the spectral slope is in the range $`(p1)/2>\alpha >p/2`$.

The computed spectra depend on the following ten parameters: the observation time $`t_o`$, the magnetic field at the time of observation $`B_f=B(t=t_o)`$, the magnetic field variation index $`m`$, the radius of the knot at the time of observation, $`R_f=R(t=t_o)`$, the index $`p`$, the minimum Lorentz factor $`\gamma _{min}`$, the Doppler factor $`\delta `$, the bulk Lorentz factor $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, expansion velocity $`\beta _{exp}`$ and the normalization of the injection rate $`K`$. On the other hand, there are only three observational points namely, the radio/optical and X-ray fluxes. Clearly the parameters are under-constrained and it is not possible to extract meaningful quantitative estimates. However, the motivation here is to show that this model can explain the observed data with reasonable values of the above parameters.

In Figure 1, the computed spectra are compared with the data for different knots for four sources. The values of the parameters used are tabulated in Table 1. The injected power in non-thermal particles in the rest frame is

$$P_{inj}=_{\gamma _{min}}^{\mathrm{}}(\gamma m_ec^2)Q(\gamma )𝑑\gamma =K\frac{m_ec^2}{p2}\gamma _{min}^{(p2)}$$
(8)
while the power in the jet can be approximated to be (e.g. Celotti et al.  (1997)),

$$P_{jet}=\pi R^2\mathrm{\Gamma }^2\beta c(U_p+U_e+U_B)$$
(9)
where $`U_p`$, $`U_e`$ and $`U_B`$ are the energy densities of the protons, electrons and the magnetic field, respectively. Here, it has been assumed that the protons are cold and the number of protons is equal to the number of electrons. The jet power ranges from $`10^{46}`$ to $`2\times 10^{48}`$ ergs sec-1, while the injected power is generally three orders of magnitude lower. This means that the non-thermal acceleration process is inefficient and most of the jet power is expected to be carried to the lobes. The magnetic field $`B_f`$ is nearly equal to the equipartition values.

Like the results obtained by Sambruna et al.  (2002) and Pesce et al.  (2001), the X-ray emission from the knots in 3C371 and Knot A of 1136-135 are identified as being due to synchrotron emission. However, in this case the predicted X-ray spectral index is $`\alpha _X=\alpha _R+1/2`$ instead of being exponential. Note that this relation between the spectral indicies is independent of the parameters used to fit the data. For the rest of the sources, like the earlier results Sambruna et al.  (2002), the X-ray emission is attributed to IC/CMB. However, for some of the sources the optical spectral index is now $`\alpha _O=\alpha _R+1/2`$, instead of being exponential.

## 3 Summary and Discussion

In this work, it is shown that the observed radio, optical and X-ray fluxes of knots in kpc scale jets in AGN, can be explained within a framework of a model where there is continuous injection of non-thermal particles into an expanding spherical plasma. This interpretation can be confirmed (or ruled out) vis-a-vis one-time injection models, by future measurements of the radio $`\alpha _R`$, optical $`\alpha _O`$ and X-ray $`\alpha _X`$ spectral indicies. In particular, the following cases are possible:

(i) $`\alpha _R\alpha _X`$: In this case, the X-ray emission is probably due to IC/CMB. Both the continuous injection and one-time injection models are equally viable.

(ii) $`\alpha _X\alpha _R+1/2`$ : In this case, the X-ray emission would be due to synchrotron emission from electrons in the cooling dominated region. The continuous injection scenario will be favored.

(iii) $`\alpha _X>\alpha _R+1/2`$ : In this case, when the X-ray emission is exponentially decreasing, it should be attributed to the high energy cutoff in the electron distribution. The one-time injection scenario will be favored.

(iv) $`\alpha _X<\alpha _R`$ : In this case, when the X-ray emission is exponentially increasing, it should be attributed to the low energy cutoff ($`\gamma _{min}`$) in the electron distribution and the X-ray emission should be due to IC/CMB. Both the continuous injection and one-time injection models are equally viable.

Similar arguments can be put forth for the optical spectral index $`\alpha _O`$ as compared to the radio. It should be noted that for some older systems the one time-injection would be the natural scenario, while for younger systems the continuous one would be more probable. The technique described above will be able to differentiate between the two and a generic constraint on the acceleration time-scales and typical age of the knots may be obtained. A generic model where the injection rate decays in time, may then be used to fit the observations. The measurement of spectral indicies at different wave-lengths will also reduce the number of unconstrained parameters in the model fitting, leading to reliable estimates of the system parameters.

Constraints on the acceleration time-scale and the age of the knots would be the first step toward understanding the driving mechanism active in these sources. It will then be possible to compare these time-scales with theoretical results from analytical or numerical computations, which may finally lead to an understanding of the origin and nature of jets in AGN.


format: text

text:
# Lower Bound on the Neutralino Mass from New Data on CMB and Implications for Relic Neutralinos

## I Introduction

In a previous paper light , we called the attention to relic neutralinos of light masses, i. e. with a mass $`m_\chi <45`$ GeV. Actually, most analyses on cosmological neutralinos employ a lower bound $`m_\chi >50`$ GeV, i. e. a bound which rests on the assumption that gaugino masses are unified at the grand unification (GUT) scale $`M_{GUT}10^{16}`$ GeV. However, this unification assumption might not be justified, as already discussed some time ago eent ; d . Furthermore, recent analyses of string models (see, for instance, Ref. munoz ) indicate that the initial scale for the running of the susy parameters by the renormalization group equations may be much lower than the standard GUT-scale, with the implication that at the electroweak (EW) scale the gaugino masses may be quite different from what expected in a standard SUGRA scheme with GUT-unification assumptions. Thus, for instance, the U(1) and SU(2) gaugino masses, $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$, may not be related by the standard formula $`M_1\frac{1}{2}M_2`$ at the EW scale.

It is then quite natural to discuss supersymmetric models where $`M_1`$ and $`M_2`$ are considered as independent parameters. Previous papers where schemes of this type are considered include the ones in Refs. eent ; d ; dt ; gr ; mny ; go ; bbd ; cn ; ads ; cerdeno ; bk ; bbb ; bno ; bhn ; boudjema ; hooper . In Ref. light  we evaluated the neutralino relic abundance $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$ and the neutralino-nucleon scalar cross-section $`\sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}`$ in an effective Minimal Supersymmetric extension of the Standard Model (effMSSM) where the gaugino-mass unification at GUT scale is not assumed. The analysis was performed in a scenario where the ratio $`RM_1/M_2`$ is smaller than the GUT-unification value $`R_{GUT}0.5`$, thus allowing the neutralino mass $`m_\chi `$ to be lighter than the commonly-used lower bound of about 50 GeV. We showed that, in the derivation of the lower limit on $`m_\chi `$, the upper bound on the relic abundance for cold dark matter (CDM), $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$, plays a crucial role. A lower limit of $`m_\chi >`$ 5 GeV was derived in Ref. light , by employing the upper bound $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2<0.3`$. It was also shown how this upper bound on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$ is instrumental in providing sizeable values for the neutralino-nucleon scalar cross-section at small $`m_\chi `$.

New data on the cosmic microwave background (CMB) wmap ; cbi ; acbar , also used in combination with other cosmological observations, are progressively narrowing down the ranges of the relic abundances for matter ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_mh^2`$) and for some of its constituents: neutrinos ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu h^2`$) and baryons ($`\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2`$). As a consequence also the range of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$ is reaching a unprecedented level of accuracy. The importance of an improvement in the determination of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$ for any cold relic particle is twofold. The upper bound $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}`$ obviously establishes a strict upper limit for any specific cold species. On the other side, the lower bound $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{min}`$ fixes the value of the average abundance below which the halo density of a specific cold constituent has to be rescaled as compared to the total CDM halo density. For the determination of the rescaling factor $`\xi \rho _\chi /\rho _0`$ (where $`\rho _\chi `$ and $`\rho _0`$ are the local neutralino density and the total local dark matter density, respectively), we use the standard rescaling recipe $`\xi =\mathrm{min}(1,\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2/(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{\mathrm{min}})`$. In Ref. wmap  ranges for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_mh^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2`$ are derived, by employing CMB data of Refs. wmap ; cbi ; acbar , 2dFGRS measurements 2dFGRS  and Lyman $`\alpha `$ forest data forest . From the values quoted in Ref. wmap  for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_mh^2`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_bh^2`$ and allowing for a $`2\sigma `$ range in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$, one obtains: $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{min}=0.095`$ and $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}=0.131`$. These are the values we will use here. However, one should cautiously still be open to some possible changes in these values as new cosmological observational data will accumulate in the future.

In the present paper we analyse the supersymmetric scenario of Ref. light  in light of these new determinations of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$. We first derive approximate analytic expressions which directly relate the lower bound on $`m_\chi `$ to the upper limit on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$ (R-parity conservation is assumed). This requires the evaluation of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$, which is in itself a very complicated function of the supersymmetric parameters. In order to extract the leading analytic terms at small values of $`m_\chi `$, we are guided by a detailed numerical analysis of the supersymmetric parameter space. This will allow us to present analytic expressions for the lower bounds on $`m_\chi `$ which display the link of these bounds to the relevant particle-physics and cosmological constraints, such as the lower bounds on sfermions and Higgs-bosons masses and the upper limit on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$. Furthermore, on the basis of these results, we show that light neutralinos, with masses $`m_\chi <`$ 45 GeV, may actually be probed by WIMP direct detection experiments with high sensitivities and low energy thresholds.

## II Lower bound on $`m_\chi `$

The supersymmetric scheme adopted here is the same as the one described in Ref. light : an effective MSSM scheme (effMSSM) at the electroweak scale, with the following independent parameters: $`M_2,\mu ,\mathrm{tan}\beta ,m_A,m_{\stackrel{~}{q}},m_{\stackrel{~}{l}},A`$ and $`RM_1/M_2`$. Notations are as follows: $`\mu `$ is the Higgs mixing mass parameter, $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ the ratio of the two Higgs v.e.v.’s, $`m_A`$ the mass of the CP-odd neutral Higgs boson, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$ is a quark soft–mass common to all squarks, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{l}}`$ is a slepton soft–mass common to all sleptons, $`A`$ is a common dimensionless trilinear parameter for the third family, $`A_{\stackrel{~}{b}}=A_{\stackrel{~}{t}}Am_{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$ and $`A_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}Am_{\stackrel{~}{l}}`$ (the trilinear parameters for the other families being set equal to zero).

The neutralino is defined as the lowest–mass linear superposition of bino $`\stackrel{~}{B}`$, wino $`\stackrel{~}{W}^{(3)}`$ and of the two higgsino states $`\stackrel{~}{H}_1^{}`$, $`\stackrel{~}{H}_2^{}`$:

$$\chi a_1\stackrel{~}{B}+a_2\stackrel{~}{W}^{(3)}+a_3\stackrel{~}{H}_1^{}+a_4\stackrel{~}{H}_2^{}.$$
(1)
Since we are here interested in light neutralinos, we consider values of $`R`$ lower than its GUT value: $`R_{GUT}0.5`$; for definiteness, we take $`R`$ in the range: 0.01 - 0.5.

We first outline the procedure for deriving analytical bounds on $`m_\chi `$ from the cosmological upper limit on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$. As mentioned in the previous section, the identification of the leading analytic contributions is guided by numerical analysis. This is based on a scanning of the supersymmetric parameter space, with the following ranges of the MSSM parameters: $`1\mathrm{tan}\beta 50`$, $`100\mathrm{GeV}|\mu |,M_2,m_{\stackrel{~}{q}},m_{\stackrel{~}{l}}1000\mathrm{GeV}`$, $`\mathrm{sign}(\mu )=1,1`$, $`90\mathrm{GeV}m_A1000\mathrm{GeV}`$, $`3A3`$. The following experimental constraints are imposed: accelerators data on supersymmetric and Higgs boson searches (CERN $`e^+e^{}`$ collider LEP2 LEPb  and Collider Detector CDF at Fermilab cdf ); measurements of the $`bs+\gamma `$ decay bsgamma ; measurements of the muon anomalous magnetic moment $`a_\mu (g_\mu 2)/2`$ amm  (the range $`160\mathrm{\Delta }a_\mu 10^{11}680`$ is used here for the deviation of the current experimental world average from the theoretical evaluation within the Standard Model; for the derivation see Ref. light ).

The neutralino relic abundance is given by

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2=\frac{x_f}{g_{}(x_f)^{1/2}}\frac{3.310^{38}\mathrm{cm}^2}{\stackrel{~}{<\sigma _{ann}v>}},$$
(2)
where $`\stackrel{~}{<\sigma _{ann}v>}x_f\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v_{\mathrm{int}}`$, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v_{\mathrm{int}}`$ being the integral from the present temperature up to the freeze-out temperature $`T_f`$ of the thermally averaged product of the annihilation cross-section times the relative velocity of a pair of neutralinos, $`x_f`$ is defined as $`x_f\frac{m_\chi }{T_f}`$ and $`g_{}(x_f)`$ denotes the relativistic degrees of freedom of the thermodynamic bath at $`x_f`$. For $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}`$ we will use the standard expansion in S and P waves: $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}\stackrel{~}{a}+\frac{1}{2x_f}\stackrel{~}{b}`$.

A lower bound on $`m_\chi `$ is now derived from Eq. (2), by requiring that

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}.$$
(3)
We first work out approximate analytic expressions for $`\stackrel{~}{<\sigma _{ann}v>}`$ in the regime of small $`m_\chi `$ ($`m_\chi <`$ 45 GeV). By diagonalizing the usual neutralino mass matrix in the approximation $`M_1<<M_2,\mu `$, it turns out that light neutralinos have a dominant bino component; a deviation from a pure bino composition is mainly due to a mixture with $`\stackrel{~}{H}_1^{}`$, i. e. $`|a_1|>>|a_3|>>|a_1|,|a_4|`$. For the ratio $`|a_3|/|a_1|`$ one finds

$$\frac{|a_3|}{|a_1|}\mathrm{sin}\theta _W\mathrm{sin}\beta \frac{m_Z}{\mu }<0.42\mathrm{sin}\beta ,$$
(4)
where in the last step we have taken into account the experimental lower bound $`\mu >`$ 100 GeV.

The dominant terms in $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v_{\mathrm{int}}}`$ are the contributions due to Higgs-exchange in the $`s`$ channel and sfermion-exchange in the $`t,u`$ channels of the annihilation process $`\chi +\chi \overline{f}+f`$ (interference terms are neglected). We retain only the leading terms in each contribution. Thus, for the Higgs–exchange contribution, dominated by the S-wave annihilation into down-type fermions, we have, for any final state $`\overline{f}f`$,

$$\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{Higgs}\stackrel{~}{a}_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{Higgs}\frac{2\pi \alpha _{e.m.}^2c_f}{\mathrm{sin}^2\theta _W\mathrm{cos}^2\theta _W}a_1^2a_3^2\mathrm{tan}^2\beta (1+ϵ_f)^2\frac{\overline{m}_f^2}{m_W^2}\frac{m_\chi ^2[1m_f^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/2}}{[(2m_\chi )^2m_A^2]^2},$$
(5)
where $`c_f`$ is a standard color factor ($`c_f=3`$ for quarks, $`c_f=1`$ for leptons), $`\overline{m}_f`$ is the fermion running mass evaluated at the energy scale $`2m_\chi `$ and $`m_f`$ is the fermion pole mass. $`ϵ_f`$ is a quantity which enters in the relationship between the down–type fermion running mass and the corresponding Yukawa coupling (see Ref. higgs  and references quoted therein); in the following evaluations, $`ϵ_f`$ is negligible, except for the bottom quark, where $`ϵ_b0.2`$. One easily verifies that when $`m_\chi <m_b`$, $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{Higgs}`$ entails a relic abundance exceeding the cosmological bound.

Notice that $`\stackrel{~}{<\sigma _{ann}v>}`$ turns out to be an increasing function of $`m_\chi `$. Then, to obtain a conservative lower bound on $`m_\chi `$ from the condition of Eq. (3), we have first to evaluate an $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2)_{min}`$ which is obtained from Eq. (2), by replacing $`\stackrel{~}{<\sigma _{ann}v>}`$ with its maximal value $`(\stackrel{~}{<\sigma _{ann}v>})_{max}`$, at fixed $`m_\chi `$. In the case of Higgs-exchange contributions, this $`(\stackrel{~}{<\sigma _{ann}v>})_{max}`$ is obtained by inserting into Eq. (5) the maximal value of the product $`a_1^2a_3^2\mathrm{tan}^2\beta `$. Taking into account Eq. (4) and that, for $`m_A`$ 90 GeV, the upper bound of $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$ is 45 cdf , we obtain $`(a_1^2a_3^2\mathrm{tan}^2\beta )_{max}2.6\times 10^2`$, and in turn

$`(\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2)_{min}^{Higgs}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1.510^{10}}{\mathrm{GeV}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{x_f}{g_{}(x_f)^{1/2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_W^2}{m_\chi ^2}}[(2m_\chi )^2m_A^2]^2\left({\displaystyle \underset{f}{}}\overline{m}_f^2(1+ϵ_f)^2c_f[1m_f^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/2}\right)^1`$ (6)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{510^{11}}{\mathrm{GeV}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{x_f}{g_{}(x_f)^{1/2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{m_W^2}{\overline{m}_b^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(1+ϵ_b)^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{[(2m_\chi )^2m_A^2]^2}{m_\chi ^2[1m_b^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/2}}}.`$
In the last step of this equation we have retained only the dominant contribution due to the $`b\overline{b}`$ final state. As far as the value of $`g_{}(x_f)^{1/2}`$ is concerned, we notice that for these light neutralinos $`x_f2122`$, so that neutralinos with masses $`m_\chi `$ 6-7 GeV have a freeze-out temperature $`T_fT_{QCD}`$, where $`T_{QCD}`$ is the hadron-quark transition temperature of order 300 MeV. For definiteness, we describe here the hadron-quark transition by a step function: if $`T_{QCD}`$ is set equal to 300 MeV, then for $`m_\chi <`$ 6 GeV one has $`g_{}(x_f)^{1/2}4`$, while for heavier neutralinos $`g_{}(x_f)^{1/2}89`$.

The quantity $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2)_{min}^{Higgs}`$ as given by Eq. (6) is plotted in Fig.1 as a function of $`m_\chi `$, for the value $`m_A=`$ 90 GeV (current experimental lower bound). The solid curve refers to the case $`T_{QCD}=`$ 300 MeV; dashed and dot-dashed curves denote two different representative values of $`T_{QCD}`$: $`T_{QCD}=`$ 100 MeV and $`T_{QCD}=`$ 500 MeV, respectively. The two horizontal lines denote two representative values for the upper bound on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$: $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}=`$ 0.3 (short-dashed line) and $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}=`$ 0.131 (long-dashed line). Fig.1 displays how a lower bound on $`m_\chi `$ is derived from an upper limit on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$. In particular, using $`T_{QCD}=`$ 300 MeV, one obtains from $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}=`$ 0.3 the bound $`m_\chi >`$ 5.2 GeV, a value which increases to $`m_\chi >`$ 6.2 GeV, when the new value $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}=`$ 0.131 is employed. Also evident is the variation of the lower bound on $`m_\chi `$, when the value of $`T_{QCD}`$ is changed. Finally, to support the validity of the analytical approximations employed to derive Eq. (6), in Fig.1 we also display the scatter plot of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$, when a numerical scanning of the supersymmetric parameter space is performed.

We recall that the bound on $`m_\chi `$: $`m_\chi >`$ 6.2 GeV was derived using $`m_A=`$ 90 GeV (which is the present experimental lower bound on $`m_A`$). From our previous formulae one obtains that this bound on $`m_\chi `$ simply scales with $`m_A`$ as follows

$$m_\chi [1m_b^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/4}>5.3\mathrm{GeV}\left(\frac{m_A}{90\mathrm{GeV}}\right)^2$$
(7)
For the sfermion-exchange contribution, $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{sfermion}\stackrel{~}{a}_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{sfermion}+\frac{1}{2x_f}\stackrel{~}{b}_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{sfermion}`$, both S-wave and P-wave contributions have to be taken into account. In the regime we consider here, the leading terms due to the down-type fermions are

$$\stackrel{~}{a}_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{sfermion}\frac{\pi \alpha _{e.m.}^2}{8\mathrm{cos}^4\theta _W}a_1^4c_f\frac{m_f^2[1m_f^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/2}}{m_{\stackrel{~}{f},1}^4(2m_{\stackrel{~}{f},1}^2/m_{\stackrel{~}{f}}^2)^2}\left[(Y_{f,L}^2+Y_{f,R}^2)+2Y_{f,L}Y_{1,R}\frac{m_\chi }{m_f}\left(1\frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{f},1}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{f}}^2}\right)\right]^2$$
(8)
$$\stackrel{~}{b}_{f}^{}{}_{}{}^{sfermion}\frac{\pi \alpha _{e.m.}^2}{4\mathrm{cos}^4\theta _W}a_1^4c_f\frac{m_\chi ^2[1m_f^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/2}}{m_{\stackrel{~}{f},1}^4(2m_{\stackrel{~}{f},1}^2/m_{\stackrel{~}{f}}^2)^2}\left[2(Y_{f,L}^4+Y_{f,R}^4)+3Y_{f,L}^2Y_{f,R}^2\left(1\frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{f},1}^2}{m_{\stackrel{~}{f}}^2}\right)^2\right].$$
(9)
Notations are as follows: $`Y_{f,L}`$ and $`Y_{f,R}`$ are the weak hypercharges for left and right couplings, respectively. $`m_{\stackrel{~}{f}}`$ denotes either $`m_{\stackrel{~}{l}}`$ or $`m_{\stackrel{~}{q}}`$ depending on the nature of the fermion, $`m_{\stackrel{~}{f},1}`$ is the smallest mass eigenvalue for the sfermion $`\stackrel{~}{f}`$, once the mass matrix in the weak–interaction basis $`\stackrel{~}{f}_L,\stackrel{~}{f}_R`$ is diagonalized. A maximal mixing between the $`\stackrel{~}{f}_L,\stackrel{~}{f}_R`$ fields has been used in deriving Eqs. (8)–(9), since these equations are meant to provide a conservative lower bound on $`m_\chi `$. Notice that for $`l=e,\mu `$, the $`\stackrel{~}{f}_L\stackrel{~}{f}_R`$ mixing is negligible; this case is simply recovered from Eqs. (8)-(9) by setting $`m_{\stackrel{~}{f},1}=m_{\stackrel{~}{f}}`$.

With the aid of numerical evaluations, it is found that the leading contributions to $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}^{sfermion}_f\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}_f^{sfermion}`$ are provided by the term due to the $`\tau `$ lepton: $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}^{sfermion}\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}_\tau ^{sfermion}`$. This is in turn maximized by

$$(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}^{sfermion})_{max}\frac{\pi \alpha _{e.m.}^2}{8\mathrm{cos}^4\theta _W}\frac{m_\chi ^2[1m_\tau ^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/2}}{m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}^{}{}_{}{}^{4}}\left[\left(2+\frac{5}{2}\frac{m_\tau }{m_\chi }\right)^2+\frac{23}{2x_f}\right]$$
(10)
We denote by $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2)_{min}^{sfermion}`$ the value of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$ derived from Eq. (2) when $`\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}`$ is replaced by $`(\stackrel{~}{\sigma _{\mathrm{ann}}v}^{sfermion})_{max}`$ of Eq. (10). The quantity $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2)_{min}^{sfermion}`$ is plotted in Fig.2, for the value $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}=`$ 87 GeV (current experimental lower bound); also the scatter plot for the quantity $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$ is displayed, for $`m_A>`$300 GeV. From Fig.2 one finds for $`m_\chi `$ a lower bound $`m_\chi >14`$ GeV for $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}=0.3`$, and $`m_\chi >22`$ GeV for $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}=0.131`$. The scaling of this last bound with the stau mass is approximately given by

$$m_\chi [1m_\tau ^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/4}>22\mathrm{GeV}\left(\frac{m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}}{90\mathrm{GeV}}\right)^2.$$
(11)
In general, one has conservatively to retain as a lower bound to $`m_\chi `$ the smaller of the two lower limits given separately in Eq. (7) and in Eq. (11). From these equations one finds that the lower bound of Eq. (7) is less stringent than the one of Eq. (11) as long as $`m_A<2m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}`$. Due to the present experimental bounds on $`m_A`$ and $`m_{\stackrel{~}{\tau }}`$ the lower absolute bound is the one derived from Eq. (7), i. e. $`m_\chi >`$ 6.2 GeV. We parenthetically note that the lower limits $`m_\chi >(1518)`$ GeV found in Refs. boudjema hooper  are due to the assumption that $`m_A`$ is very large ($`m_A1`$ TeV).

A plot which shows the transition between the lower bounds established by considering Higgs-exchange contributions and sfermion-exchange contributions is reported in Fig.3. As was derived by use of the approximate expressions in Eqs. (7)-(11), the transition point is at $`m_A`$ 200-300 GeV.

## III Detectability of light neutralinos by WIMP direct measurements

Now we wish to show that a part of the neutralino population of small $`m_\chi `$ is indeed explorable with experiments of WIMP direct detection with current sensitivities. Let us start by giving an approximate relation between the scalar neutralino-nucleon cross-section and the neutralino relic abundance, valid when $`\sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}`$ is dominated by $`h`$-exchange in the $`t`$-channel and $`\sigma _{ann}`$ by $`A`$-exchange in the annihilation $`s`$-channel. From the approximate formulae given in Ref. light  for $`\sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2`$ we obtain

$$(\mathrm{\Omega }_\chi h^2)\sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}1.4\times 10^{40}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{T}\left(\frac{m_sN|\overline{s}s|N}{200\mathrm{MeV}}\right)^2\frac{\mathrm{GeV}^2}{m_\chi ^2[1m_b^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/2}}\left(\frac{m_A}{m_h}\right)^4,$$
(12)
where $`m_h`$ is the mass of the lightest CP-even neutral Higgs boson and $`T`$ is given by

$$T=\frac{(a_3\mathrm{sin}\alpha +a_4\mathrm{cos}\alpha )^2}{(a_4\mathrm{cos}\beta a_3\mathrm{sin}\beta )^2}\frac{(\mathrm{sin}\alpha +ϵ_scos(\alpha \beta )\mathrm{sin}\beta )^2}{\mathrm{sin}^2\beta (1+ϵ_b)^2}.$$
(13)
In Eqs. (12)-(13) $`N|\overline{s}s|N`$ is the $`s`$-quark density matrix element over the nucleonic state and $`\alpha `$ is the angle which rotates the Higgs fields $`H_1^{(0)}`$ and $`H_2^{(0)}`$ into the mass eigenstates $`h`$ and $`H`$. The approximations employed in deriving Eqs.(12)-(13) imply $`\alpha \frac{\pi }{2}`$, $`m_hm_A`$ 100 GeV, so that $`T`$ is of order one.

Thus, for neutralino configurations with $`m_\chi <`$ 20 GeV, $`\sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}`$ turns out to be bounded by

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}>\frac{10^{40}\mathrm{cm}^2}{(\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2)_{max}}\frac{\mathrm{GeV}^2}{m_\chi ^2[1m_b^2/m_\chi ^2]^{1/2}}.$$
(14)
In deriving Eq. (14), we have set $`m_sN|\overline{s}s|N=`$ 200 MeV size .

The results of a complete numerical evaluations of the quantity $`\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}`$, where all relevant diagrams for the neutralino-nucleon scalar cross-section and for the relic abundance are taken into account, are displayed in Fig.4. The peculiar funnel in the scatter plot for $`m_\chi <`$ 20 GeV is due to the bound of Eq. (14).

As was pointed out in Ref. light , the present upper limits to $`\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}`$ provided by WIMP direct detection experiments morales ; dama0 ; cdms ; edel  do not significantly constrain the supersymmetric configurations for the light neutralinos displayed in Fig.4. Instead, these configurations may be relevant for experiments of direct detection with a low energy threshold and a large exposure. An experiment with these features is the DAMA/NaI experiment, whose results, after a 4-years running with a total exposure of $``$ 58 000 kg $``$ day, show an annual-modulation effect at a $`4\sigma `$ C.L. which does not appear to be related to any possible source of systematics dama . The analysis carried out by the DAMA Collaboration to explain their modulation effect in terms of a WIMP with coherent elastic scattering was targeted to a neutralino in the frame of a usual supersymmetric scheme with gaugino-mass unification at GUT, with a consequent lower bound on the neutralino mass above 30 GeV. This interpretation was proved to be consistent with supersymmetric models with gaugino-unification at GUT altri .

Here we have considered a different supersymmetric scheme which includes significantly lower neutralino masses; thus, in order to establish the possible relevance of our low-mass neutralinos for an annual-modulation effect, we have to proceed to an extension of previous analyses. To put our arguments into a quantitative basis, we evaluate $`(\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})})_{min}`$, defined as the minimal value of $`\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}`$ which may produce an annual-modulation effect at $`n`$ standard deviations in a detector with a given exposure $`S`$, and for a given velocity distribution function $`f(\stackrel{}{v})`$ for relic neutralinos in our galaxy, i. e.

$$(\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})})_{min}=\frac{n^2}{S}\frac{I}{(\mathrm{\Delta }I)^2}.$$
(15)
In Eq. (15) $`I`$ is defined as the ratio of the expected direct detection rate, integrated over an energy range ($`E_1,E_2`$), to the neutralino-nucleon scalar cross-section $`\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}`$:

$$I=\frac{1}{\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}}_{E_1}^{E_2}\frac{dR(E)}{dE}𝑑E.$$
(16)
For a monoatomic material of nuclear mass number $`A`$, one has

$$I=N_T\rho _0\frac{m_N}{2m_\chi ^3}\left(1+\frac{m_\chi }{m_p}\right)^2A^2_{E_1}^{E_2}𝑑EF^2(E)_{v_{\mathrm{min}}(E)}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\stackrel{}{v}\frac{f(\stackrel{}{v})}{|\stackrel{}{v}|},$$
(17)
where $`N_T`$ is the number of the target nuclei per unit of mass, $`m_N`$ is the nuclear mass, $`F(E)`$ the nuclear form factor and $`v_{min}`$ is the minimal value of the neutralino velocity to produce an event above the detection threshold. Generalization of Eq. (17) to non-monoatomic materials is straightforward. In Eq. (15) $`\mathrm{\Delta }I`$ is defined as $`\mathrm{\Delta }I(I(\mathrm{June})I(\mathrm{December}))/2`$.

We emphasize that, by definition, the condition $`\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})}(\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})})_{min}`$ only establishes a minimal requirement for a neutralino of a given mass $`m_\chi `$ to be detected in a given experiment. It is obvious that the real detectability of the signal depends on the actual amount of the experimental background. For example, an equal amount of signal and background would double the value of $`(\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})})_{min}`$ as given in Eq. (15). Estimates of backgrounds are omitted here.

To establish whether our population of light neutralinos may be relevant for the effect measured by the DAMA experiment, we have evaluated $`(\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})})_{min}`$ as a function of $`m_\chi `$; the energy range of integration employed here is: $`E_1`$ = 2 keV, $`E_2`$ = 3 keV, and $`n`$ is set equal to 4. The nuclear form factors for $`Na`$ and $`I`$ are modelled in the Helm form helm , with the values of parameters given in Ref. exp . In Fig.4 we give the curves of $`(\xi \sigma _{\mathrm{scalar}}^{(\mathrm{nucleon})})_{min}`$ versus $`m_\chi `$ for a sample of different galactic distribution functions (DF), taken among those analysed in Ref. bcfs . The intermediate curve refers to an isothermal DF with $`v_0=220`$ km $``$ s<sup>-1</sup> and $`\rho _0=0.3`$ GeV $``$ cm<sup>-3</sup> ($`v_0`$ is the local rotational velocity). The upper curve refers to a spherical Evans’ power-law DF (denoted as A3 in Ref. bcfs ) with $`v_0=170`$ km $``$ s<sup>-1</sup> and $`\rho _0=0.17`$ GeV $``$ cm<sup>-3</sup>; the lower curve refers to an axially-symmetric Evans’ logarithmic DF with maximal flatness (denoted as C2 in Ref. bcfs ) with $`v_0=270`$ km $``$ s<sup>-1</sup> and $`\rho _0=1.7`$ GeV $``$ cm<sup>-3</sup>.

From the results displayed in Fig.4 one sees that indeed a part of our population of relic neutralinos of small $`m_\chi `$ may be relevant for the annual–modulation effect discussed above, especially in case of DF’s which entail higher velocities and /or higher densities as compared to the standard isothermal distribution. This is a new interesting option which adds to the other, still valid, possibility which we discussed in the papers of Ref. altri , on relic neutralinos with masses above 50 GeV.

## IV Conclusions

We have considered phenomenological properties of relic neutralinos in a range of low masses ($`m_\chi <`$ 45 GeV), which is allowed in a MSSM model without gaugino-mass unification at a grand unification scale. We have numerically evaluated the relevant relic abundance and the neutralino-nucleon cross-section, and discussed our numerical results in terms of analytic formulae, which display the connections among cosmological properties and particle-physics parameters.

Using the latest determinations of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$ and assuming R-parity conservation, we have shown that in a MSSM model without gaugino-mass unification the lower bound on the neutralino mass is $`m_\chi >6`$ GeV. We have shown analytically how this bound is linked to the cosmological upper bound on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{CDM}h^2`$ and to the lower limits on masses of Higgs bosons and sfermions.

The implications of light relic neutralinos with masses $`<`$ 45 GeV for WIMP direct searches have been analysed. It is found that these neutralinos are actually relevant for WIMP direct detection experiments of low energy threshold and large exposure. The present results extend to small masses our previous analyses about the effects of relic neutralinos with masses above 50 GeV altri .

###### Acknowledgements.

We acknowledge Research Grants funded jointly by Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca (MIUR), by Università di Torino and by Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare within the Astroparticle Physics Project.


text:
# A Field-Effect-Transistor from Graphite: No Effect of Low Gate Fields

11institutetext: Abteilung Supraleitung und Magnetismusthanks: e-mail: sum@physik.uni-leipzig.de, Universität Leipzig, Linnéstr. 5, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany (Received: date / Revised version: date)

## Abstract

Inspired by the striking similarities between the metal-insulator transitions in graphite and Si-MOSFET’s and the recent attention to charge doping in carbon-based materials, we have made attempts to fabricate a field-effect transistor based on graphite. A relatively thick layer of boron nitride turned out to be able to serve as a gate dielectric. This, however, limits the achievable electric gate field, which might be the reason for our observation of no charge-doping effect.

The striking similarities between Si-MOSFET’s and highly ordered graphite have been pointed out in a number of recent publications Kempa1 ; Kempa2 ; Kempa3 ; Kopelevich1 . Namely, the essentially two-dimensional character of the electron system and the basically equal charge carrier density manifest themselves in metal-insulator transitions in both systems with remarkable similar properties. The main difference remains that the transition in Si-MOSFET’s can be driven by the charge carrier density, which is tuned through charge doping in the field-effect transistor configuration Abrahams , while in graphite the transition is driven only by a magnetic field applied perpendicular to the graphite layers Kempa3 . In Si-MOSFET’s, however, it has been demonstrated that a parallel field can drive the transition Simonian .

Recent reports on charge-doping effects in carbon-based materials Schoen1 ; Schoen2  have attracted great attention but so far any attempts to reproduce the results failed (see e.g. Lee ), supporting the revelation that a major part of those results was pure invention Beasley . Nevertheless it has been pointed out, that it’s not unlikely to observe such effects and some ways have been proposed Ball .

Clearly, it is desirable to fabricate a field-effect transistor based on graphite, like any research that is potentially able to deepen the similarities between graphite and Si-MOSFET’s and thus shed light on both of the systems. In this letter we report on our attempts to do so.

Our sample is highly oriented pyrolytic graphite (HOPG) produced by the research institute ”Graphite” in Moscow with dimensions $`4.7\times 2.6\times 0.72\text{ mm}^3`$. X-ray diffraction measurements give the crystal lattice parameters $`a=2.48\text{ Å}`$ and $`c=6.71\text{ Å}`$, the density is $`2.26\text{ g}\text{cm}^3`$. The high degree of orientation of the crystallites’ hexagonal c-axes was confirmed by X-ray rocking curve FWHM of $`0.6^{}`$. Consequently, the anisotropy of the resistivity is large with a ratio of the resistivities measured along and normal to the c-axis of $`5\times 10^3`$ at room temperature.

On top of the surface normal to the c-axis of the graphite lattice four line contacts were made by sputtering of gold through a shadow mask with a thickness of 200 nm (see Fig. 1). They were used to determine the resistance of the sample in a four-point DC-measurement. The current has been inverted for each point and the average of the resulting two voltages has been taken to exclude thermoelectrical effects.

The main difficulty turned out to be the production of a thin but yet stable dielectric layer. Many materials including $`\text{Al}_2\text{O}_3`$ have been tested. Most of them did not meet the experimental requirements, mainly due to the roughness of the graphite surface and the poor adhesion between them an the sample surface, which caused the layers to be porous and easy to remove. A sprayed layer of boron nitride (BN) proofed to be stable enough both from a mechanical and electrical point of view. A solution of BN BfAM  received in a spray can was sprayed between the two center gold contacts through a shadow mask and then covered by silver paint as the gate electrode, because the dielectric does not withstand the process of gold sputtering. A tunable gate voltage $`U`$ between -100 V and +100 V was applied between this electrode and the negative current electrode (positive voltage corresponds to the negative pole connected to the negative current electrode, see Fig. 1). Additionally, we have applied magnetic fields normal to the sample surface.

As the BN-layer is mechanically soft, the standard methods for determining the thickness fail. Therefore we estimated the thickness by weighting the sample before and after the deposition of the layer. The resulting thickness is $`d=(20\pm 10)\mu \text{m}`$. In the case of Si-MOSFET’s the dielectric layer is thinner by a factor of about 100, allowing the change of the charge carrier density within a factor of 2 or more Kravchenko .

Assuming a charge carrier density in graphite of $`2\times 10^{18}\text{cm}^3`$ Dresselhaus  and with the spacing of the graphite layers $`c/2=3.36\times 10^8\text{cm}`$ one gets the carrier density of a single layer $`n=6.72\times 10^{10}\text{cm}^2`$. In contrast, the effect of the gate field can be estimated by $`\mathrm{\Delta }nϵ_0U/d=2.8\times 10^{10}\text{cm}^2`$ at the maximum $`U`$. Taking into account that probably more than one layer is active, the carrier density changes by a factor below 0.4. Therefore the expected effect is very small, if at all observable by our means.

The dependence of the resistance on the gate voltage for two different currents at different magnetic fields and at a temperature of 2 K is shown in Fig. 2. Obviously there is no visible effect of the gate field for none of the currents. However, in the case of low current it could be masked by the large scattering of the data.

In Fig. 3 we present the temperature dependence of the resistance at different magnetic fields. The metal-insulator transition is clearly seen. The resistance remains independent on the gate field in all regimes.

By the arguments given above, the absence of an effect of the gate field does not imply that there is none. It is highly desirable to increase the range for changing the charge carrier density. A favorable way to do so is the fabrication of a thinner insulating layer serving as the gate dielectric in a field-effect transistor configuration based on graphite. This remains a challenge for the future.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank Y. Kopelevich for fruitful discussions and H. Hochmuth for technical support. This work is supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft under DFG ES 86/6-3.


text:
# Nonlinear elastodynamics and energy transport in biopolymers

## Abstract

We present an exact analysis of the intrinsic dynamics of two types of biopolymers, described by the wormlike chain (WLC) and the wormlike rod chain (WLRC) models, respectively. We map each model to a classical field theory for an appropriate unit vector field defined on the space curve formed by the axis of the biopolymer. Conformation dynamics and energy transport are shown to be described, respectively, by the soliton-bearing Landau-Lifshitz equation and the nonlinear Schrödinger equation. This enables us to identify the soliton representing the “conformon” hypothesized in biopolymers.

In the years since the discovery of biological polymers such as proteins and DNA, it has been recognizedvino  that the geometric shapes and topological properties of these long chain molecules play a significant role during processes such as replication and transcription. Experimental techniques capable of studying the conformation and elastic properties of a single polymer by bending or twisting it are also availablesmit . Semiflexible biopolymers such as actin have only a bending energy, and are described by the well-known wormlike chain (WLC) modelgoldstein  with a single elastic constant, the bending modulus. In contrast, DNA with its double-helix structure is described by the wormlike rod chain (WLRC) model fain  with an additional elastic constant, the twist rigidity. Although considerable work has been done on various equilibrium properties of both these elastic models, their intrinsic dynamical properties have not been studied so far. The latter play a crucial role in the mechanisms of energy and information propagation along a biopolymer, an issue of vital interest to biologists, chemists and physicists alike.

In this Letter we present, for the first time, a formalism to study the exact intrinsic dynamics of a polymer in the WLC and WLRC models. Several new results are obtained. By modeling the polymer as a slender elastic rod whose central axis is a space curve, the appropriate moving frame comprising the unit tangent, normal and binormal vectors is constructed for each model. We show that the WLC energy is a certain classical field theory Hamiltonian for the tangent vector, while the WLRC energy is an analogous Hamiltonian for the normal vector field. Using a variational principle for the Hamiltonian, and imposing the unit vector constraint, the equilibrium conformations of the polymer are first found. Next, by setting the time derivative of the Hamiltonian to zero, the time evolutions of the vector fields consistent with their corresponding equilibrium conformations are found for the two models. It turns out that the equation of motion of the relevant vector field in each model resembles that of the precession of a magnetic momentgold , i.e., a “spin”, in a self-induced “magnetic field”. We also show that the dynamical equation in each of the models can be derived as Hamilton’s equations from the respective elastic Hamiltonians, by using the $`z`$-component of the vector field and its azimuthal angle as the canonically conjugate variables. As is well known, these variables give rise to the correct Poisson brackets for the “spin” components. Remarkably enough, the time evolution equations for the tangent vector in the WLC model and the normal vector in the WLRC model have the same form as the well-known Landau-Lifshitz equation. The latter is completely integrable by the inverse scattering transform method. We show that the writhe and the twist of the vector field in each model are conserved quantities under time evolution. By White’s theoremwhit , this leads to the conservation of its linking number as well.

The non-extensibility of the polymer during time evolution entails compatibility conditions on the frame fields of the polymer. Imposing these leads to the completely integrable nonlinear Schrödinger equation (NLS) zakh  for the energy density in each model. This shows that energy can propagate along the polymer like a localized wave packet, in both types of biopolymers.

Using the one-soliton solution of the NLS equation, we are able to identify the curvature and torsion functions in the two models. From these expressions we find that, in the WLC model, the soliton corresponds to a localized “loop” propagating along the semiflexible polymer, while in the WLRC model (applicable to DNA), it is possible to have a localized “supercoiled” entity propagating along the polymer, for appropriate values of the width and velocity parameters of the soliton. We interpret our solutions as the explicit manifestation of the so-called “conformon”, an entity that has been hypothesized by various authors volk ; gree ; keme  to play an important role in biology – for example, these are localized packets of conformational strain on mitochondria.

In the context of an $`\alpha `$-helical protein, the NLS soliton first found by Davydovdavy  using a quantum mechanical lattice model is well studied. However, it has been notedscot  that the Davydov soliton is essentially a classical object. Our analysis leads directly to a classical soliton. It also enables us to suggest a mechanism for charge transport along the polymer, in the light of the results of Goldstone and Jaffegoldstone  on the curvature-induced localization of a quantum particle propagating in a thin curved tube.

The WLC model: A semiflexible biopolymer is represented as a slender elastic rod with a single elastic modulus characterizing the bending energy of the polymer goldstein . In general, the axis of the polymer is a space curve. The unit tangent $`𝐭`$, normal $`𝐧`$ and binormal $`𝐛=𝐭\times 𝐧`$ comprise a frame on the space curve. They satisfy the well known Frenet-Serret equationsvais  $`𝐭_s=\kappa 𝐧,𝐧_s=\kappa 𝐭+\tau 𝐛,𝐛_s=\tau 𝐧.`$ Here $`s`$ is the arclength and the subscript denotes the corresponding derivative. As usual, $`\kappa `$ is the curvature and $`\tau `$ the torsion of the curve. The Frenet-Serret equations can be written in the compact form $`𝐅_s=𝛀\times 𝐅`$ where $`𝐅`$ stands for $`𝐭`$, $`𝐧`$ or $`𝐛`$, and $`𝛀=\tau 𝐭+\kappa 𝐛`$. Thus, as one moves along the curve, the frame rotates with a “spatial angular velocity” $`𝛀`$.

Consider a polymer with a constant disc-shaped cross-section. We may imagine the polymer to be formed by the tumbling of this disc through space goldstone  without twisting about its axis, thereby implying that its angular velocity should always lie in the plane of the disc. This amounts to the Fermi-Walker parallel transport of the triad, as has been recognized in another contextdando . In order to satisfy this condition, we introduce new unit vectors $`𝐍=𝐧\mathrm{cos}\alpha (s)+𝐛\mathrm{sin}\alpha (s)`$ and $`𝐁=𝐧\mathrm{sin}\alpha (s)+𝐛\mathrm{cos}\alpha (s)`$, where $`\alpha (s)=_{\mathrm{}}^s\tau (s^{})𝑑s^{}.`$ Then the triad comprising $`(𝐭,𝐍,𝐁)`$ can be shown to satisfy the Fermi-Walker (FW) equations $`𝐭_s=\kappa (𝐍\mathrm{cos}\alpha 𝐁\mathrm{sin}\alpha ),𝐍_s=𝐭\kappa \mathrm{cos}\alpha `$, and $`𝐁_s=𝐭\kappa \mathrm{sin}\alpha `$. These equations lead to an angular velocity $`𝝎=\kappa (𝐍\mathrm{sin}\alpha +𝐁\mathrm{cos}\alpha )`$ for the triad. The corresponding Hamiltonian is therefore of the form

$$H=\frac{A}{2}\omega ^2𝑑s=\frac{A}{2}\kappa ^2𝑑s=\frac{A}{2}𝐭_s^2𝑑s,$$
(1)
where $`A`$ is a constant. This is precisely the expression written down for the elastic energy of the rod in the WLC model, with $`A`$ standing for the bending modulus.

We first obtain the minimum energy conformations of the WLC. We scale out $`A`$ and use the variational principle $`\delta H=0`$ on the Hamiltonian

$$H=\frac{1}{2}\{𝐭_{s}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}\beta (𝐭^21)\}𝑑s$$
(2)
where $`\beta `$ is the Lagrange multiplier corresponding to the unit vector field constraint $`𝐭^2=1`$. A short calculation yields

$$𝐭\times 𝐭_{ss}=0,$$
(3)
whose solutions represent the static conformations sought. To find the dynamics of the polymer, we set $`𝐭=𝐭(s,u)`$ in Eq. (1) where $`u`$ denotes the time. The energy conservation condition $`dH/du=0`$ then leads to $`𝐭_{su}𝐭_s𝑑s=0`$, which yields, on integrating by parts, $`𝐭_{ss}𝐭_u𝑑s=0`$. In turn, this gives $`𝐭_u=𝐕\times 𝐭_{ss}`$, where $`𝐕`$ is an arbitrary vector. The static solution of this equation is $`𝐕\times 𝐭_{ss}=0`$. A comparison of this with Eq.(3) immediately suggests the simplest possible choice, namely, $`𝐕=𝐭`$. The corresponding time evolution for $`𝐭`$ is then given by

$$𝐭_u=𝐭\times 𝐭_{ss}.$$
(4)
This equation resembles thatgold  for the precession of a magnetic moment or spin in a self-induced magnetic field. To make this connection more precise, we must ask whether Eq. (4) can be obtained directly from the WLC elastic Hamiltonian in Eq. (1). Now, the unit vector $`𝐭`$ may be parametrized as $`𝐭=(\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi ,\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi ,\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$. If $`𝐭`$ is to be a classical spin vector, its cartesian components must satisfy the standard Poisson bracket relations $`\{t^\alpha ,t^\beta \}=ϵ^{\alpha \beta \gamma }t^\gamma `$. (In turn, this is ensured if we have $`\{\varphi ,\mathrm{cos}\theta \}=1`$.) With this input for the canonical Poisson brackets, we can show that Eq. (4) can be obtained from the equation of motion $`t_u^\alpha =\{t^\alpha ,H\}`$ corresponding to the WLC elastic Hamiltonian. Further, the canonical Poisson bracket relations also enable us to show that the writhe of $`𝐭`$, defined by $`Wr=(2\pi )^1\varphi _s(1\mathrm{cos}\theta )𝑑s`$, is a conserved quantity, i.e., $`\{H,Wr\}=0`$. The writhe is a measure of the chirality of the curve.

We note that Eq. (4), which is called the Landau-Lifshitz (LL) equation in the spin context, is satisfied by the tangent $`𝐭`$ along the axis of the polymer in the WLC model. The LL equation appears as a spin evolution equation in the dynamics of a continuum Heisenberg ferromagnetic chain. It is a completely integrable equation with strict soliton solutionstakh  and an infinite number of constants of motion. Next, we use the FW equations for $`(𝐭,𝐍,𝐁)`$ in Eq. (4), and impose the compatibility conditions $`𝐭_{su}=𝐭_{us},𝐁_{su}=𝐁_{us}`$. After some algebra, we get $`\kappa _u=(\kappa \tau )_s\kappa _s\tau `$ and $`\tau _u=(\kappa ^2/2+\kappa _{ss}/\kappa \tau ^2)_s`$. These equations are just the imaginary and real partslaks  of the nonlinear Schrödinger equation (NLS)

$$i\psi _u+\psi _{ss}+\frac{1}{2}|\psi |^2\psi =0,$$
(5)
when $`\psi =\kappa \mathrm{exp}(i\tau 𝑑s)`$ is the well-known Hasimoto functionhasi . (In the present context, the compatibility conditions represent the physical property of non-extensibility of the polymer.) Thus $`|\psi |^2=\kappa ^2`$, the energy density of the polymer. From the equation for $`\tau _u`$, we can easily show that the polymer evolves in such a way as to conserve its total twist, namely, $`Tw=\tau 𝑑s`$. Since we have already shown that the writhe $`Wr`$ is conserved, it follows from White’s theorem whit  $`Tw+Wr=Lk`$, that the linking number $`Lk`$ of the WLC polymer is also conserved.

The one-soliton solution of Eq. (5) is given by

$$\psi (s,u)=p_1\mathrm{sech}\xi _1\mathrm{exp}(i\xi _2),$$
(6)
with $`\xi _1=p_1(sv_1u)`$ and $`\xi _2=\frac{1}{2}v_1s\frac{1}{4}(v_1^2p_1^2)u`$, where the amplitude $`p_1`$ and the velocity $`v_1`$ of the envelope of the solution are independent parameters. The energy density is $`|\psi |^2=p_1^2\mathrm{sech}^2\xi _1`$. This represents an energy lump propagating with velocity $`v_1`$ along the polymer. For this solution the curvature $`\kappa =p_1\mathrm{sech}\xi _1`$ and the torsion $`\tau =\frac{1}{2}v_1`$. It is clear from these expressions that this solitonic excitation represents a localized deformation of the curvature, with localization length $`p_1^1`$, that moves along a helical polymer with a constant pitch $`\frac{1}{2}v_1`$. We believe that the foregoing provides a precise and quantitative dynamical underpinning for the conformon concept put forward by Green and Ji and by othersgree .

We can go even further. Let us first consider the special case of a planar polymer, by setting $`\tau 0`$ in the FW equations. We get $`𝐭_s=\kappa 𝐍,𝐍_s=\kappa 𝐭`$, and $`𝐁=𝐁_c`$, a constant vector. Then, using the LL equation, a bit of algebra gives $`𝐭_u=\kappa _s𝐁_c`$ and $`𝐍_u=(\kappa _{ss}/\kappa )𝐁_c`$. The non-extensibility condition $`𝐭_{su}=𝐭_{us}`$ yields $`\kappa _u=0`$, implying that $`\kappa =\kappa (s)`$. The compatibility condition $`𝐍_{su}=𝐍_{us}`$ gives, after the rescaling $`s2^{1/2}s`$, the equation $`\kappa _{ss}+\frac{1}{4}\kappa ^3=E\kappa `$ where $`E`$ is an arbitrary constant. But this equation is just the time-independent counterpart of the time-dependent Schrödinger equation $`i\psi _u+\psi _{ss}V\psi =0`$ for a particle with wave function $`\psi =\kappa \mathrm{exp}(iEu)`$, in the “potential” $`V=\frac{1}{4}\kappa ^2(s)`$. Interestingly, it has been shown by Goldstone and Jaffegoldstone  that the one-dimensional Schrödinger equation for a free particle in a thin tube whose axis follows a space curve of curvature $`\kappa `$ acquires an effective attractive potential $`\frac{1}{4}\kappa ^2(s)`$ (for small $`\kappa `$). In our formalism, this has emerged naturally as the elastic energy of the WLC. The time-independent Schrödinger equation above has a (static) soliton solution $`\kappa =p\mathrm{sech}ps`$ where $`p=E^{1/2}`$. Combining these results, we have $`V=\frac{1}{4}p^2\mathrm{sech}^2ps`$, and a corresponding localized wave function $`\psi =p\mathrm{sech}(ps)\mathrm{exp}(iEu)`$. Applying this result to an electronic wave function on a polymer, this suggests the possibility that a soliton, i.e., a nonlinear excitation of the elastic polymer, can lead to electron localization. In the non-planar case ($`\tau 0`$), the effective potential continues to be $`V=\frac{1}{4}\kappa ^2`$, but now $`\kappa =\kappa (s,u)`$. In particular, we can now interpret the wave function $`\psi `$ as the one-soliton solution in the time-dependent potential $`V=\frac{1}{4}p_1^2\mathrm{sech}^2\xi _1`$. In the context of electron localization, the electron gets trapped in a moving potential well that travels along the polymer. This ties in with the conformon concept as suggested by Volkensteinvolk  and by Kemeny and Goklanykeme . We conjecture that this moving soliton plays a role in the unexpectedly high electrical conductivity found in biological membranes.

The WLRC model: Here a polymer such as DNA is represented as a slender twisted elastic rod with two elastic constants that characterize the bending energy and the twisting energy, respectivelyfain . The state of the polymer is specified by the configuration of the ribbon formed by a longitudinal cross-section of the rod containing its central axis. The ribbon has a uniform twist angle $`\omega _0`$ per unit length around the central axis, to take into account the double helical structure of DNA. In general, the central axis of the ribbon is a space curve. Let $`𝐭`$ be the unit tangent to this axis at any point, and $`𝐍_0`$ the unit normal to the surface of the ribbon at that point. Defining $`𝐁_0=𝐭\times 𝐍_0`$, the axis becomes a framed space curve on the surface of the ribbon. It is obviously convenient to work with a “co-twisted” frame $`(𝐭,𝐍,𝐁)`$ where $`𝐍=𝐍_0\mathrm{cos}\omega _0s+𝐁_0\mathrm{sin}\omega _0s`$ and $`𝐁=𝐍_0\mathrm{sin}\omega _0s+𝐁_0\mathrm{cos}\omega _0s.`$ In this frame the axis of the polymer is a space curve on the surface of the ribbon, and hence is described by the Darboux-Ribaucour (DR) equationsvais  $`𝐭_s=\kappa _N𝐍+\kappa _g𝐁,𝐍_s=\kappa _N𝐭+\tau _g𝐁,𝐁_s=\kappa _g𝐭\tau _g𝐍`$. Here $`\kappa _N`$ and $`\kappa _g`$ represent, respectively, the normal and the geodesic curvatures, and $`\tau _g`$ is the geodesic torsion. As the width of the ribbon goes to zero, the geodesic curvature of any continuous curve on its surface tends to zero. The only curve which survives is the axis of the ribbon, with curvature $`\kappa _N`$ and torsion $`\tau _g`$. The DR equations reduce to

$$𝐭_s=\kappa _N𝐍,𝐍_s=\kappa _N𝐭+\tau _g𝐁,\mathrm{and}𝐁_s=\tau _g𝐍,$$
(7)
where $`𝐍`$ and $`𝐁`$ now denote the normal and binormal to the curve. Once again, as described earlier in the case of the WLC model, the frame $`(𝐭,𝐍,𝐁)`$ can therefore be regarded as rotating with a “spatial angular velocity” $`\stackrel{~}{𝛀}=\tau _g𝐭+\kappa _N𝐁`$. Hence the corresponding Hamiltonian is of the form

$$H=\frac{1}{2}(A\kappa _N^2+C\tau _g^2)𝑑s=\frac{1}{2}(A𝐭_{s}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+C𝐁_{s}^{}{}_{}{}^{2})𝑑s,$$
(8)
where $`A`$ and $`C`$ are constants. But this expression is precisely the elastic energy of a twisted polymer in the WLRC modelfain ; fn1 , where $`A`$ is the bending modulus as before, and $`C`$ is the twist modulus.

We first discuss the symmetric case $`A=C`$. Using Eq. (7) the (scaled) energy can be written as $`H=\frac{1}{2}𝐍_s^2𝑑s`$. We proceed as in the case of the WLC model. The constraint in this case is $`𝐍^2=1`$. We finally obtain

$$𝐍_u=𝐍\times 𝐍_{ss}$$
(9)
as the counterpart of Eq. (4). The discussion following the latter equation applies to the present case, with $`𝐍`$ replacing $`𝐭`$. Thus it is now $`𝐍`$ that behaves like a spin vector field.

We drop the subscripts in $`\kappa _N`$ and $`\tau _g`$ hereafter, to simplify the notation. Equations (7) and (9) give $`𝐍_u=\tau _s𝐭+\kappa _s𝐁`$. This, along with the conditions $`𝐍𝐭=0,𝐍𝐁=0`$ and $`𝐭_{su}=𝐭_{us}`$, yields $`𝐭_u=\tau _s𝐍+\frac{1}{2}(\kappa ^2+\tau ^2)𝐁`$ and $`𝐁_u=\frac{1}{2}(\kappa ^2+\tau ^2)𝐭\kappa _s𝐍.`$ The compatibility condition $`𝐍_{su}=𝐍_{us}`$ then leads toradha

$$\kappa _u+\tau _{ss}+\frac{\tau }{2}(\kappa ^2+\tau ^2)=0,\tau _u\kappa _{ss}\frac{\kappa }{2}(\kappa ^2+\tau ^2)=0.$$
(10)
A short calculation shows that Eqs. (10) represent respectively, the real and imaginary parts of the NLS, Eq. (5), if we set $`\psi =\kappa +i\tau `$. In the WLC model, in contrast, it is the function $`\kappa \mathrm{exp}(i\tau 𝑑s)`$ that satisfies the NLS.

For the one-soliton solution of the NLS in Eq. (6), the energy density in WLRC model once again has the form $`|\psi |^2=p_1^2\mathrm{sech}^2\xi _1`$, representing an energy lump propagating with velocity $`v_1`$. However, the curvature and torsion differ from those in the WLC model. They are now given by $`\kappa =p_1\mathrm{sech}\xi _1\mathrm{cos}\xi _2`$ and $`\tau =p_1\mathrm{sech}\xi _1\mathrm{sin}\xi _2`$. In contrast to the WLC model, the curvature and torsion are both localized functions, with an additional spatial periodicity $`\lambda =4\pi v_1^1.`$ This is the signature of a propagating localized “supercoiled” excitation (a conformon) in DNA.

Finally, we consider the general case $`AC`$, for which the scaled Hamiltonian is $`H=\frac{1}{2}(\kappa ^2+\stackrel{~}{\tau }^2)𝑑s`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{\tau }=C\tau /A.`$ The NLS is now satisfied by the function $`\stackrel{~}{\psi }=\kappa +i\stackrel{~}{\tau }.`$ The results for the one-soliton solution described in the preceding paragraph continue to apply. The only difference is that the torsion of the polymer is now scaled by a factor $`A/C`$.

To conclude, we have provided an exact analysis of the nonlinear dynamics of elastic polymers in the WLC and WLRC models using a geometric formulation, and obtained several new results. Although we have considered only open polymers, our analysis can be extended to closed polymers as well. As a consequence of the periodic boundary conditions in this case, the solutions of the NLS now turn out to be elliptic functions.

Based on our results we note the following similarities between our soliton and the “conformon” conjectured in molecular biologygree ; scot : (i) It is an energy packet associated with a conformational strain localized in a region much shorter than the length of the molecule; (ii) it needs a “rigid framework” (i.e., a structure with finite bend/twist moduli) for its formation; and (iii) its properties appear to depend on the coupling between adjacent bonds, e.g., in a polypeptide chain. The compatibility of our results with (i) and (ii) is obvious. As for (iii), we note that in both the WLC and WLRC models, the Hamiltonian density involves spatial derivatives of unit vector fields of the form $`𝐰_s^2`$. But this is just the continuum limit of the nearest-neighbor interaction $`𝐰_i𝐰_{i+1}`$ where $`i`$ is the site index on a discrete chain. Further, as we have seen, $`𝐰(s)`$ acts like a spin vector field. Thus the dynamical evolution of the polymer is governed by the nearest-neighbour (i.e., adjacent) coupling of an effective “spin vector” $`𝐰_i`$ at each site on the chain. As is well known, there are several mechanisms in condensed matter physics which can lead to such effective spin Hamiltonians. A secondary effect can also occur, as we have discussed. As our soliton (localized curvature) moves on the polymer, it can trap an electron and drag it along. This is in accordance with the conformon concept of Volkensteinvolk  and of Kemeny and Goklanykeme . This mechanism may be important in the understanding of charge transport in biological molecules, where curvatures abound. As we have demonstrated, curved geometry and nonlinearity are intimately related, and we believe that our results are also of significance in other kinds of transport phenomena in molecular biology.


text:
# Drift Lagrangian for relativistic particle in intense laser field

## Abstract

The Lagrangian and Hamiltonian functions describing average motion of a relativistic particle under the action of a slightly inhomogeneous intense laser field are obtained. In weak low-frequency background fields, such a particle on average drifts with an effective, relativistically invariant mass, which depends on the laser intensity. The essence of the proposed ponderomotive formulation is presented in a physically intuitive and mathematically simple form, yet represents a powerful tool for studying various nonlinear phenomena caused by interaction of currently available smooth ultra-intense laser pulses with plasmas.
PACS numbers: 52.35.Mw, 52.20.Dq, 52.27.Ny, 45.20.Jj

The latest advances in high-power laser technology have resulted in the development of laser systems capable of delivering superstrong electromagnetic pulses, which can be focused to intensities as high as $`10^{21}`$ W/cm2 RefPerry , with even more powerful systems coming up in the near future RefMalkin . The currently obtainable laser fields can accelerate electrons up to ultra-relativistic oscillatory velocities, previously unachievable in experiments on laser-matter interaction. This revolutionary progress is now giving a new life to theoretical studies on particle behavior under the action of intense electromagnetic radiation. The conventional models describing various nonlinear phenomena in plasmas illuminated by high-frequency radiation nowadays need to be revised, as new, ultra-powerful laser systems are becoming available for laboratory experiments. To explain the already observed phenomena and predict new effects taken place under the action of intense laser drive, adequate description of single-particle motion under relativistically strong radiation must be developed first.

Currently, particle motion is well-understood when the only forces present are those from the wave of uniform intensity RefLandau2 . However, to study the guiding center dynamics in inhomogeneous laser radiation or drifts determined by the presence of low-frequency background fields, additional analysis is needed. Expanding the conventional understanding to this area would result in a substantial progress in studying a number of plasma physics problems, such as, e. g., Coulomb collisions and energetic particle production in strong laser fields. Moreover, the hydrodynamics and the electrodynamics of laser-illuminated plasmas would readily be available for general revision.

Often, the dynamics of a particle moving in a high-frequency field is described in terms of the ponderomotive approach. In nonrelativistic ponderomotive description, the effect of high-frequency electromagnetic forces on a particle is replaced by particle interaction with an average potential, linear on the intensity of laser radiation RefMiller2 . When ultra-intense lasers are employed, this conventional description needs to be generalized to relativistic motion. Contrary to the degenerate case of a circularly polarized field, in which high-frequency variations of the relativistic mass can be neglected RefLitvak , the problem of particle motion in the case of a linear or elliptic polarization represents a certain challenge, but still can be studied analytically.

To describe the drift particle dynamics in such fields, recently, multiple studies were performed. Under various approximations, it was shown that the oscillating particle guiding center drifts in a smooth laser field with an effective mass, which depends on the electromagnetic field intensity RefMora ; RefKibble ; RefMoore ; RefBauer . (In strongly nonuniform laser fields though, the particle dynamics is more complicated RefMora ; RefNonad .) The Hamiltonian treatment of the relativistic drift under intense laser drive has been proposed in Ref. RefTokman , though the problem of interaction with low-frequency background fields has not been studied. The first steps towards developing the general formalism with such interaction were made in Ref. RefMoore . However, only smooth (compared to the amplitude of oscillations) low-frequency background fields were taken into consideration and the relativistic drift motion equations were induced without proper justification.

These shortcomings are overcome in our paper, which major emphasis is twofold. First, we propose a general, fully relativistic Lagrangian formulation of ponderomotive description of particle motion under the action of a quasi-monochromatic slightly inhomogeneous laser field. The proposed approach is physically intuitive yet more systematic and simple in comparison with those discussed previously. After natural generalization, it allows including particle interaction with weak background forces, additional to those from the laser field. The discussion on that aspect of the guiding center motion constitutes the second emphasis of our work. We show the effective mass concept to be applicable to ponderomotive description of relativistic particle motion in low-frequency background fields, including even ones of small spatial scale compared to the amplitude of oscillations. In the end, we discuss the most promising applications of the proposed formulation and summarize our main ideas. To start, consider particle motion under the action of a plane laser wave propagating in vacuum, with vector potential given by

$`𝑨(𝒓,t)=(mc^2/e)𝒂(\eta ),`$ (1)
where $`\eta =\omega t𝒌𝒓`$ stands for the phase of the wave, $`\omega `$ is the wave frequency, and $`𝒌=𝒛^0\omega /c`$ represents the wavevector. The polarization of the wave will be assumed fixed though arbitrary. The magnitude of $`𝒂`$, $`a=eE/mc\omega `$ (where $`E`$ is the laser electric field), can be understood as the ratio of the momentum imparted by the wave field in a single oscillation to $`mc`$, meaning that relativistic effects become important at $`a1`$. (For the wavelength $`\lambda =2\pi c/\omega =1\mu `$m, the intensity corresponding to $`a1`$ for electrons is about $`10^{18}`$ W/cm2.)

In a certain, unique, frame of reference, in such a field the particle undergoes stationary oscillatory “figure-eight” motion in a linearly polarized wave or circular motion in a wave with circular polarization RefLandau2 . Averaging over the oscillations, one comes to the concept of the guiding center motion, which we study below. First, let us consider the variational principle that states the minimum value of the action

$$S=_{t_1}^{t_2}L𝑑t,$$
(2)
where $`L`$ is the Lagrangian function of the particle motion to be realized on the true trajectory. On time scales $`t_2t_1`$ large compared to the oscillation period, the major contribution to the action $`S`$ (linear on $`t_2t_1`$) is provided by the time-averaged part of the Lagrangian, $`L`$, while the contribution of the oscillatory Lagrangian into the integral (2) remains small. Thus, the action $`S`$ is approximately given by $`S=_{t_1}^{t_2}L𝑑t`$, from where it follows that $`L`$ can be treated as the Lagrangian of the average, guiding center motion.

To obtain the form of the drift Lagrangian $`L_0L`$, let us consider the latter in the frame of reference where the guiding center rests. In the new frame, the guiding center Lagrangian $`_0`$ can be nothing but a constant, which we put in the form

$$_0=m_{\mathrm{eff}}c^2,$$
(3)
in analogy with the Lagrangian of a true particle with zero velocity. The formally introduced quantity $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ playing a role of a new, effective mass is yet to be defined. The action (2) is relativistically invariant and can be written as $`S=_{\tau _1}^{\tau _2}_0𝑑\tau `$, where the time $`\tau `$ represents the proper time of the guiding center. Since $`d\tau `$ is invariant by definition (and thus, so is the Lagrangian $`_0`$), the quantity $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ must also be relativistically invariant. Using

$$d\tau =dt\sqrt{1\upsilon _0^2/c^2},_0d\tau =L_0dt,$$
(4)
where $`𝝊_0`$ is the velocity of the guiding center in the original frame of reference, one gets the Lagrangian of the guiding center motion

$$L_0=m_{\mathrm{eff}}c^2\sqrt{1\upsilon _0^2/c^2},$$
(5)
which formally coincides with the Lagrangian of a relativistic particle with mass $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ moving with velocity $`𝝊_0`$. Since the original frame was chosen arbitrarily, the above expression represents the general form of $`L_0`$, where $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is left to be expressed in terms of the parameters of the laser field.

Let us calculate $`L_0`$ in a laboratory frame of reference where the particle has a nonzero average velocity $`𝝊_0`$. Instructive by itself, the derivation to follow will also provide us with a number of useful relations connecting the parameters of the particle drift and those related to the actual motion. To proceed, consider the Lagrangian of the particle true motion given by

$$L=mc^2\sqrt{1\frac{\upsilon ^2}{c^2}}+\frac{e}{c}\left(𝝊𝑨(\eta )\right),$$
(6)
which is a known periodic function of the phase $`\eta `$ rather than time $`t`$. Thus, in order to average $`L`$ over time, one needs to derive a relation connecting time averaged and phase averaged quantities. For an arbitrary quantity $`f`$, its time and phase averaged values given by

$$f=\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Delta }}\underset{t}{\overset{t+\mathrm{\Delta }}{}}f𝑑t^{},\overline{f}=\frac{1}{2\pi }\underset{\eta }{\overset{\eta +2\pi }{}}f𝑑\eta ^{},$$
(7)
where the limits of integration over the phase correspond to the limits of integration over the time (i. e. $`\eta =\eta (t)`$), and the time interval $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is defined as one on which the total phase change equals $`2\pi `$:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\underset{\eta }{\overset{\eta +2\pi }{}}\frac{dt}{d\eta }𝑑\eta .$$
(8)
The time interval $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ coincides with the wave period $`2\pi /\omega `$ only if particle motion is nonrelativistic. However, generally, the phase time-derivative is given by

$$\frac{d\eta }{dt}=\omega \left(1\frac{\upsilon _z}{c}\right)=\omega \left(\frac{\gamma p_z/mc}{\gamma }\right),$$
(9)
where $`\gamma =\left(1\upsilon ^2/c^2\right)^{1/2}`$ is the normalized relativistic energy ($`=m\gamma c^2`$) and $`𝒑=m\gamma 𝝊`$ it the particle kinetic momentum.

Since the original Lagrangian depends on $`\eta `$ (that is, on the combination $`zct`$, rather than $`z`$ and $`t`$ separately), there exists an invariant of motion given by

$$u\gamma p_z/mc=\mathrm{const}.$$
(10)
Substituting the above expressions into Eq. (7), one gets

$$f=\overline{\gamma f}/\overline{\gamma }.$$
(11)
Note that the obtained formula is valid only in case when the electromagnetic wave (1) is propagating in vacuum. If the refraction index of the medium differs from unit, Eqs. (9) and (10) need to be modified, and the relation between time- and phase-averaged quantities becomes more complicated RefTokman .

From Eqs. (10) and (11), it follows that

$$\overline{\gamma }=\sqrt{1+(\overline{p}/mc)^2+\overline{a^2}},\overline{\gamma }=\gamma _0\sqrt{1+\overline{a^2}},$$
(12)
where $`\gamma _0=(1\upsilon _0^2/c^2)^{1/2}`$, and

$$𝝊_0𝝊=\overline{𝒑}/m\overline{\gamma }$$
(13)
is the drift velocity of the particle (compare with the inexact expression given in Ref. RefMora ). Thus, $`L_0`$ can be put in the form (5) with $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ given by

$$m_{\mathrm{eff}}=m\sqrt{1+e^2\overline{A^2}/m^2c^4}.$$
(14)
The guiding-center Lagrangian (5) with the expression (14) for the effective mass was also obtained in Ref. RefBauer  by a somewhat similar yet a complicated and not a straightforward procedure. In the cited work, Eq. (14) was supposed valid only in the frame of reference where $`𝝊_0=0`$. In fact, as shown above, it remains applicable for arbitrary $`𝝊_0`$, and, more than that, the actual value of $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ must be relativistically invariant. To express the effective mass in the invariant form, let us notice that, in the laboratory frame where we chose the electric potential $`\varphi =0`$ (see Eq. (6)), $`\sqrt{A^2}`$ coincides with the norm of the 4-vector potential $`\sqrt{A_\alpha A^\alpha }`$, $`A^\alpha =(\varphi ,𝑨)`$. The latter is Lorentz-invariant RefLandau2 , and remains such after being averaged over relativistically invariant phase $`\eta `$. Thus, the expression for $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, invariant to relativistic transformations, can be put in the following form:

$$m_{\mathrm{eff}}=m\sqrt{1+\frac{e^2}{m^2c^4}\overline{(A_\alpha A^\alpha )}}.$$
(15)
Eq. (15) was also given in Refs. RefMoore  where the average particle motion was studied otherwise.

Reverting to the formula for the drift Lagrangian (5) with the effective mass given by (14), the canonical momentum of the guiding center motion $`𝑷_0`$ equals the phase-averaged kinetic momentum $`\overline{𝒑}=m_{\mathrm{eff}}\gamma _0𝝊_0`$, and thus the Hamiltonian function of the guiding center motion can be put in the form

$$H_0=\sqrt{m_{\mathrm{eff}}^2c^4+P_0^2c^2}.$$
(16)
Here $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ may smoothly depend on the guiding center location $`𝑹_0`$ and time $`t`$ if the wave envelope is slightly nonuniform or time-dependent. Precisely, that means that the laser intensity “seen” by the particle changes insignificantly on one period of particle oscillations, so that the averaging (7) still makes sense, i .e.

$$lr_{},T\mathrm{\Delta },l/\upsilon _0\mathrm{\Delta },$$
(17)
where $`l`$ and $`T`$ are the spatial and the temporal scales of the wave envelope (for detailed analysis, see Refs. RefMora ; RefNonad ; RefDodin ).

An alternative derivation of Eq. (16) can be found in Ref. RefTokman , where a sequence of canonical transformations of the original motion equations was shown to lead to a similar result. In the present paper, we showed this tedious procedure to be unnecessary for obtaining the expression for the drift Hamiltonian. Comparing to the cited work, the distinguishing advantage of the formulation proposed in the present paper is that, because of its apparent mathematical simplicity, this formulation allows easy generalization of the drift Lagrangian and Hamiltonian formalism on the case when the oscillating particles undergo weak acceleration by large-scale low-frequency forces satisfying (17). Interaction with these forces enters the expression for $`L_0`$ additively and, what is most important, can still be considered in the framework of the effective mass concept.

To show this, consider an oscillating relativistic particle interacting with a field governed by the 4-vector potential $`A_{\mathrm{bg}}^\alpha =(\varphi _{\mathrm{bg}},𝑨_{\mathrm{bg}})`$, where the subindex “bg” stands for a background field, additional to the one of the laser wave. Assume that the field is weak:

$$eE_{\mathrm{bg}}/\gamma _0m_{\mathrm{eff}}c\omega ,eB_{\mathrm{bg}}/\gamma _0m_{\mathrm{eff}}c\omega ,$$
(18)
where $`𝑬_{\mathrm{bg}}`$ and $`𝑩_{\mathrm{bg}}`$ are the corresponding electric and magnetic fields. In this case, the background fields do not impact the oscillatory motion significantly. Thus, averaging of the kinetic term $`mc^2/\gamma `$ in the Lagrangian leads to the same expression as in Eq. (5) with $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ given by Eq. (15). In the zeroth-order approximation with respect to the small parameters (18), the average part of the Lagrangian corresponding to particle interaction with the background field can be expressed in terms of the quantity $`A_0^\alpha =(\varphi _0,𝑨_0)`$ given by

$$A_0^\alpha =A_{\mathrm{bg}}^\alpha \left(𝑹_0+𝒓_{}\right).$$
(19)
The time-averaging procedure is invariant with respect to changing the drift frame of reference, i. e. does not alter the Lorentz transformation properties of the quantity being averaged. Thus, $`A_0^\alpha `$ represents a true 4-vector and can be considered as a new, effective electromagnetic field. In terms of this field’s potentials, the drift Lagrangian can be put in the following form:

$$L_0=m_{\mathrm{eff}}c^2\sqrt{1\frac{\upsilon _0^2}{c^2}}+\frac{e}{c}\left(𝝊_0𝑨_0\right)e\varphi _0.$$
(20)
In certain applications, it is of interest to consider particle interaction with background fields having spatial scale $`l_{\mathrm{bg}}r_{}`$. If the drift velocity is small, so that the drift displacement on a single period $`\upsilon _0\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is small compared to $`l_{\mathrm{bg}}`$, the ponderomotive description still can be applied. However, in this case the difference between the time-averaged potential $`A_0^\alpha `$ and the true potential $`A_{\mathrm{bg}}^\alpha `$ taken at the location of the guiding center $`𝑹_0`$, is crucial. For example, this situation is realized at Coulomb scattering in intense laser fields when $`r_{}`$ exceeds the radius of effective interaction RefMittleman . Note that, as follows from the above analysis, the characteristic amplitude of the effective potential remains unchanged as one generalizes the expression for $`\varphi _0`$ to the case of relativistic particle motion. In this case, the only difference in calculating $`\varphi _0`$ is provided through the change in the oscillatory trajectory $`𝒓_{}(t)`$ to be averaged over.

In the context of the Coulomb scattering problem, the considered Lagrangian approach represents a unique tool for studying ponderomotive and even stochastic behavior of particles being scattered. This problem deserves detailed consideration and will be discussed in future works, though, briefly, the extension of the proposed formulation can be explained as follows. Stochastic behavior of a dynamical system with periodic coefficients is often convenient to describe in terms of mapping of the dynamical trajectory onto a subspace of the system phase space (for review, see Ref. RefLichtenberg ). For the Hamiltonian mapping $`(𝑹_0,𝑷_0)(\overline{𝑹}_0,\overline{𝑷}_0)`$ connecting the particle locations and momenta before and after the time interval equal to the period of the laser field, the generating function is given by the action (2) with $`t_1=t`$ and $`t_2=t+2\pi /\omega `$ RefLichtenberg . Since the obtained drift Lagrangian is approximately proportional to $`S`$, it can readily be used for constructing the actual form of this mapping. As will be shown in our future publications, when studying the statistical properties of particle stochastic dynamics (rather than single particle motion) by means of such a mapping, the conditions (17) can be significantly relaxed, which substantially broadens the proposed Lagrangian approach applicability. That also allows a significant progress in studying the problem of energetic particle production in strong laser fields RefEnergetic .

Since, in the case of relativistic drift, $`𝒓_{}`$ depends on $`𝝊_0`$, the expression for the canonical momentum $`𝑷_0=L_0/𝝊_0`$ the drift motion equations become complicated. However, in two special cases of interest, those can be simplified. In a large-scale background field satisfying the conditions (17), locally, $`A_{\mathrm{bg}}^\alpha `$ can be treated as a linear function of $`𝒓`$. Therefore, the velocity-dependent part averages out when calculating the potential $`A_0^\alpha `$, and one gets $`A_0^\alpha A_{\mathrm{bg}}^\alpha `$. Thus, the drift canonical momentum equals $`𝑷_0=m_{\mathrm{eff}}\gamma _0𝝊_0+(e/c)𝑨_{\mathrm{bg}}`$, and the Hamiltonian function is given by

$$H_0=\sqrt{m_{\mathrm{eff}}^2c^4+\left(𝑷_0\frac{e}{c}𝑨_{\mathrm{bg}}\right)^2c^2}+e\varphi _{\mathrm{bg}},$$
(21)
where the potentials are assumed to be slow functions of $`𝑹_0`$ and $`t`$. The guiding center motion equations can be put in the covariant form

$$\frac{dR_0^\alpha }{d\tau }=\frac{p_0^\alpha }{m_{\mathrm{eff}}},\frac{dp_0^\alpha }{d\tau }=\frac{e}{c}F_{\mathrm{bg}}^{\alpha \beta }U_\beta c^2\frac{m_{\mathrm{eff}}}{R_0^\alpha },$$
(22)
where $`R_0^\alpha =(ct,𝑹_0)`$ is the 4-coordinate of the guiding center, $`p_0^\alpha =(_0/c,m_{\mathrm{eff}}\gamma _0𝝊_0)`$ is the drift kinetic 4-momentum, $`_0=m_{\mathrm{eff}}\gamma _0c^2`$ is the energy of the guiding center motion, $`F_{\mathrm{bg}}^{\alpha \beta }`$ is the electromagnetic field tensor corresponding to the potential $`A_{\mathrm{bg}}^\alpha `$ RefLandau2 , and $`U^\alpha =\gamma _0(c,𝝊_0)`$ is the guiding center 4-velocity. Covariant Eqs. (22) were also given in Ref. RefMoore , though no strict derivation of those was proposed. Another expression for the relativistic ponderomotive force is given in Ref. RefBauer .

From Eq. (21), it follows that, in low-frequency large-scale background field, the guiding center of a relativistic particle moving under the action of intense laser radiation behaves as a particle with the effective mass $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ drifting in the same background field. For example (and in coincidence with the results obtained in Ref. RefMoore ), in static magnetic field $`𝑩_{\mathrm{bg}}`$, the guiding center undergoes Larmor motion with the cyclotron frequency $`\omega _B=eB_{\mathrm{bg}}/\gamma _0m_{\mathrm{eff}}c`$. Conventional expression for the drift velocity in nonuniform magnetic field RefLandau2  also readily applies to the average motion if the particle true mass is replaced with the one given by Eq. (15).

In addition to the case of large-scale background fields, the guiding center motion equations can also be put in a simple, physically intuitive form in the case of nonrelativistic drift motion. Since the drift velocity enters the expression for $`A_0^\alpha `$ only through relativistic dependence of $`𝒓_{}`$ on $`𝝊_0/c`$, then, in the case $`𝝊_0c`$, $`A_0^\alpha /𝝊_0`$ can be neglected. In this case, the drift canonical momentum is given by $`𝑷_0=m_{\mathrm{eff}}𝝊_0+(e/c)𝑨_0`$, and the Hamiltonian can be put in the form

$`H_0={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m_{\mathrm{eff}}}}\left(𝑷_0{\displaystyle \frac{e}{c}}𝑨_0\right)^2+m_{\mathrm{eff}}c^2+e\varphi _0,`$ (23)
where the effective mass $`m_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and the potential energy $`\psi _{\mathrm{eff}}=m_{\mathrm{eff}}c^2+e\varphi _0`$ may slowly depend on the guiding center location $`𝑹_0`$ and time $`t`$. Note that even in uniform laser field, $`\psi _{\mathrm{eff}}`$ may differ significantly from $`e\varphi _{\mathrm{bg}}`$ when the amplitude of particle oscillations $`r_{}`$ exceeds the spatial scale of the background field $`l`$ RefMittleman . The regime of slow drift motion superimposed on relativistic oscillations is the one, which is actually realized in many current experiments on intensive laser pulses interaction with rare plasmas. (Under rare plasmas we assume those having a refraction index close to unity, as assumed for all the results obtained in the present paper.) This fact makes the above analysis especially useful from the practical point of view, as it represent a simple tool for studying the actual experimental data. Finally, the well-known nonrelativistic ponderomotive potential RefMiller2  can be readily derived from Eq. (23) by keeping the correction to the effective mass, linear with respect to the wave intensity (see also Ref. RefBauer ).

In summary, we showed that, in weak low-frequency background fields, relativistic particle moving under the action of intense laser radiation drifts like a quasi-particle with an effective mass, which depends on the intensity of the laser field. The intuitive expectation that, by the order of magnitude, the drift motion equations must coincide with those without the laser field if the appropriate relativistic correction of particle mass is introduced, can now be considered proven for various types of background fields. The proposed formulation can be useful for studying numerous phenomena resulting from intense laser-plasma interaction, such as, e. g., the energetic particle production and Coulomb scattering in strong laser fields. Moreover, the mathematical simplicity of the proposed approach allows easy generalization of the rare plasma hydrodynamics and electrodynamics to the case of plasmas illuminated by ultra-intense laser radiation. Replacing the electron mass with the effective mass (15), one can readily derive the generalized dispersion relations for various linear waves in plasmas, as well as revise the nonlinear plasma dynamics.

The work was supported by the US DOE, under contract DE-AC02-76 CHO3073, and Russian Foundation for Basic Research, grants 02-02-17277, 02-02-17275.