text:
# Wave Propagation in Generalized Gyrotropic Media†footnote ††footnote †It will be submitted nowhere else for the publication, just uploaded at the e-print archives.

## Abstract

Wave propagation inside generalized gyrotropic media is considered in the present Letter. It is shown that in this type of materials, the left- and right- handed circularly polarized light can be coupled to each other, which may possess some potential applications to quantum information.

Gyrotropic media whose electric permittivity and magnetic permeability are tensors has peculiar optical and electromagnetic properties. Recently we proposed an experimentally feasible scheme of testing the so-called quantum vacuum geometric phases of zero-point electromagnetic fields in the helically curved optical fibre by using the gyrotropic-medium fibre. In this Letter, we investigate the wave propagation in a generalized gyrotropic medium with the following permittivity and permeability

$$(ϵ)_{ik}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}a_\mathrm{e}+d_\mathrm{e}& b_\mathrm{e}ic_\mathrm{e}& 0& \\ b_\mathrm{e}+ic_\mathrm{e}& a_\mathrm{e}d_\mathrm{e}& 0& \\ 0& 0& ϵ_3& \end{array}\right),(\mu )_{ik}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}a_\mathrm{h}+d_\mathrm{h}& b_\mathrm{h}ic_\mathrm{h}& 0& \\ b_\mathrm{h}+ic_\mathrm{h}& a_\mathrm{h}d_\mathrm{h}& 0& \\ 0& 0& \mu _3& \end{array}\right).$$
(1)
This type of materials is a generalization of the ordinary gyrotropic medium with

$$(ϵ)_{ik}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}ϵ_1& iϵ_2& 0& \\ iϵ_2& ϵ_1& 0& \\ 0& 0& ϵ_3& \end{array}\right),(\mu )_{ik}=\left(\begin{array}{cccc}\mu _1& i\mu _2& 0& \\ i\mu _2& \mu _1& 0& \\ 0& 0& \mu _3& \end{array}\right)$$
(2)
and can encompass the electromagnetic parameters of $`ϵ_{ik}`$ and $`\mu _{ik}`$ in (1) material responses experimentally obtained.

Assume that the wave vector $`𝐤`$ of electromagnetic wave propagating inside this medium is parallel to the the third component of the Cartesian coordinate system. According to Maxwellian Equations, one can arrive at

$$^2E_1=\mu _0\left(\mu _{21}\frac{^2}{t^2}D_2\mu _{22}\frac{^2}{t^2}D_1\right),^2E_2=\mu _0\left(\mu _{11}\frac{^2}{t^2}D_2\mu _{12}\frac{^2}{t^2}D_1\right),$$
(3)
where the electric displacement vector $`D_1`$ and $`D_2`$ are of the form

$$D_1=ϵ_0\left(ϵ_{11}E_1+ϵ_{12}E_2\right),D_2=ϵ_0\left(ϵ_{21}E_1+ϵ_{22}E_2\right).$$
(4)
Due to the transverse nature of planar electromagnetic wave, the following acquirements are satisfied

$$E_3=0,H_3=0,𝐤𝐄=0,𝐤𝐇=0,𝐤𝐃=0,𝐤𝐁=0.$$
(5)
Thus with the help of above equations, it is verified that

$`^2E_1=ϵ_0\mu _0\left[\left(\mu _{21}ϵ_{21}\mu _{22}ϵ_{11}\right){\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}E_1+\left(\mu _{21}ϵ_{22}\mu _{22}ϵ_{12}\right){\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}E_2\right],`$ (6)
$`^2E_2=ϵ_0\mu _0\left[\left(\mu _{11}ϵ_{21}\mu _{12}ϵ_{11}\right){\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}E_1+\left(\mu _{11}ϵ_{22}\mu _{12}ϵ_{12}\right){\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}E_2\right].`$ (7)
So,

$`^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{E_1\pm iE_2}{\sqrt{2}}}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}ϵ_0\mu _0\left[\left(\mu _{22}ϵ_{11}\mu _{21}ϵ_{21}\right)\pm i\left(\mu _{11}ϵ_{21}\mu _{12}ϵ_{11}\right)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}E_1`$ (8)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}ϵ_0\mu _0\left[\left(\mu _{22}ϵ_{12}\mu _{21}ϵ_{22}\right)\pm i\left(\mu _{11}ϵ_{22}\mu _{12}ϵ_{12}\right)\right]{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}E_2.`$ (9)
It follows from (1) that

$`\left(\mu _{22}ϵ_{11}\mu _{21}ϵ_{21}\right)+i\left(\mu _{11}ϵ_{21}\mu _{12}ϵ_{11}\right)=A_++iB_+,`$ (10)
$`\left(\mu _{22}ϵ_{12}\mu _{21}ϵ_{22}\right)+i\left(\mu _{11}ϵ_{22}\mu _{12}ϵ_{12}\right)=iA_++B_+,`$ (11)
where

$`A_+=a_\mathrm{e}a_\mathrm{h}a_\mathrm{e}c_\mathrm{h}d_\mathrm{e}d_\mathrm{h}id_\mathrm{e}b_\mathrm{h}b_\mathrm{e}b_\mathrm{h}+ib_\mathrm{e}d_\mathrm{h}+c_\mathrm{e}c_\mathrm{h}c_\mathrm{e}a_\mathrm{h},`$ (12)
$`B_+=a_\mathrm{e}b_\mathrm{h}id_\mathrm{e}a_\mathrm{h}+id_\mathrm{e}c_\mathrm{h}b_\mathrm{e}c_\mathrm{h}+b_\mathrm{e}a_\mathrm{h}c_\mathrm{e}b_\mathrm{h}+ic_\mathrm{e}d_\mathrm{h}+ia_\mathrm{e}d_\mathrm{h}.`$ (13)
In the same fashion, one can arrive at

$`\left(\mu _{22}ϵ_{11}\mu _{21}ϵ_{21}\right)i\left(\mu _{11}ϵ_{21}\mu _{12}ϵ_{11}\right)=A_{}+iB_{},`$ (14)
$`\left(\mu _{22}ϵ_{12}\mu _{21}ϵ_{22}\right)i\left(\mu _{11}ϵ_{22}\mu _{12}ϵ_{12}\right)=iA_{}B_{},`$ (15)
where

$`A_{}=a_\mathrm{e}a_\mathrm{h}+a_\mathrm{e}c_\mathrm{h}d_\mathrm{e}d_\mathrm{h}+id_\mathrm{e}b_\mathrm{h}b_\mathrm{e}b_\mathrm{h}ib_\mathrm{e}d_\mathrm{h}+c_\mathrm{e}c_\mathrm{h}+c_\mathrm{e}a_\mathrm{h},`$ (16)
$`B_{}=a_\mathrm{e}b_\mathrm{h}id_\mathrm{e}a_\mathrm{h}id_\mathrm{e}c_\mathrm{h}b_\mathrm{e}c_\mathrm{h}b_\mathrm{e}a_\mathrm{h}c_\mathrm{e}b_\mathrm{h}ic_\mathrm{e}d_\mathrm{h}+ia_\mathrm{e}d_\mathrm{h}.`$ (17)
Hence, the wave equations of left- and right- handed circularly polarized lightFor simplicity, without loss of generality, it is assumed that the two mutually perpendicular real unit polarization vectors $`\stackrel{}{\epsilon }(k,1)`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\epsilon }(k,2)`$ can be taken to be as follows: $`\epsilon _1(k,1)=\epsilon _2(k,2)=1`$, $`\epsilon _1(k,2)=\epsilon _2(k,1)=0`$ and $`\epsilon _3(k,1)=\epsilon _3(k,2)=0`$. Thus by the aid of the formula $`𝐄=\frac{𝐀}{t}`$ for the electric field strength, in the second-quantization framework one can arrive at    $`E_R={\displaystyle \frac{E_1+iE_2}{\sqrt{2}}}=i{\displaystyle \mathrm{d}^3𝐤\sqrt{\frac{\omega }{2(2\pi )^3}}[a_L(k)\mathrm{exp}(ikx)a_R^{}(k)\mathrm{exp}(ikx)]},`$  (18)   $`E_L={\displaystyle \frac{E_1iE_2}{\sqrt{2}}}=i{\displaystyle \mathrm{d}^3𝐤\sqrt{\frac{\omega }{2(2\pi )^3}}[a_R(k)\mathrm{exp}(ikx)a_L^{}(k)\mathrm{exp}(ikx)]}.`$  (19)   is written

$`^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{E_1iE_2}{\sqrt{2}}}\right)=ϵ_0\mu _0A_{}{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{E_1iE_2}{\sqrt{2}}}\right)+iϵ_0\mu _0B_{}{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{E_1+iE_2}{\sqrt{2}}}\right),`$ (20)
$`^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{E_1+iE_2}{\sqrt{2}}}\right)=ϵ_0\mu _0A_+{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{E_1+iE_2}{\sqrt{2}}}\right)+iϵ_0\mu _0B_+{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{t^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{E_1iE_2}{\sqrt{2}}}\right).`$ (21)
It should be pointed out that the interaction between left- and right-handed polarized light arises in Eq.(21 ), which is analogous to the Josephson’s effect and may therefore be of physical interest.

The coupling of left-handed polarized light to the right-handed one can be characterized by the frequency shift $`\mathrm{\Omega }_L`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_R`$, namely, the amplitudes of left- and right- handed circularly polarized light propagating along the $`\widehat{z}`$-direction are written as follows

$$E_L\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{i}\left[\left(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega }_L\right)t\sqrt{A_{}}\frac{\omega }{c}z+\varphi _L\right]\right\},E_R\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{1}{i}\left[\left(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega }_R\right)t\sqrt{A_+}\frac{\omega }{c}z+\varphi _R\right]\right\}.$$
(22)
Insertion of Eq.(22) into Eq.(21) yields

$$A_{}\omega ^2E_L=A_{}\left(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega }_L\right)^2E_L+iB_{}\left(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega }_R\right)^2E_R,A_+\omega ^2E_R=A_+\left(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega }_R\right)^2E_R+iB_+\left(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega }_L\right)^2E_L,$$
(23)
and consequently

$$A_+A_{}\left(2\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_R+\mathrm{\Omega }_R^2\right)\left(2\omega \mathrm{\Omega }_L+\mathrm{\Omega }_L^2\right)+B_+B_{}\left(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega }_L\right)^2\left(\omega +\mathrm{\Omega }_R\right)^2=0,$$
(24)
which is a restricted condition regarding the frequency-shift relation between left- and right- handed circularly polarized light.

Note that in the case of conventional gyrotropic media characteristic of such permittivity and permeability tensors (2), where $`d_\mathrm{e}=b_\mathrm{e}=d_\mathrm{h}=b_\mathrm{h}=0`$, $`a_\mathrm{e}=ϵ_1`$, $`c_\mathrm{e}=ϵ_2`$, $`a_\mathrm{h}=\mu _1`$, $`c_\mathrm{h}=\mu _2`$, the optical refractive index squared is of the form

$$A_\pm =\left(ϵ_1\pm ϵ_2\right)\left(\mu _1\pm \mu _2\right),$$
(25)
and the coupling coefficients $`B_\pm `$ are vanishing.

More recently, one of the artificial composite metamaterials, the left-handed medium which has a frequency band (GHz) where the electric permittivity ($`ϵ`$) and the magnetic permeability ($`\mu `$) are simultaneously negative, has focused attention of many authors both experimentally and theoretically. In the left-handed medium, most phenomena as the Doppler effect, Vavilov-Cherenkov radiation and even Snell’s law are inverted. In 1964§§§Note that, in the literature, several authors mention the year when Veselago suggested the left-handed media by mistake. They claim that Veselago proposed the concept of left-handed media in 1968. On the contrary, the true fact is as follows: Veselago’s excellent paper was first published in July, 1964 \[Usp. Fiz. Nauk 92, 517-526 (1964)\]. In 1968, this original paper was translated into English by W. H. Furry and published again in the journal of Sov. Phys. Usp.., Veselago first considered many peculiar optical and electromagnetic properties, phenomena and effects in this medium and referred to such materials as left-handed media, since in this case the propagation vector k, electric field E and magnetic field H of light wave propagating inside it form a left-handed system. It follows from Maxwell’s curl equations that such media having negative simultaneously negative $`ϵ`$ and $`\mu `$ exhibit a negative index of refraction, i.e., $`n=\sqrt{ϵ\mu }`$. In experiments, the negative $`ϵ`$ and $`\mu `$ can be respectively realized by using a network (array) of thin (long) metal wires and a periodic arrangement of split ring resonators. A combination of the two structures yields a left-handed medium. Veselago’s original paper and most of the recent theoretical works discussed mainly the characteristics of electromagnetic wave propagation in isotropic left-handed media, but up to now, the left-handed media that have been prepared successfully experimentally are actually anisotropic in nature, and it may be very difficult to prepare an isotropic left-handed medium. Hu and Chui presented a detailed investigation on the characteristics of electromagnetic wave propagation in uniaxially anisotropic left-handed media. It is believed that the above-presented treatment of wave propagation in generalized gyrotropic media may be applicable to the uniaxially anisotropic left-handed materials.
Acknowledgements I thank S. L. He for his helpful suggestions about the wave propagation in left-handed media. This project is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under the project No. $`90101024`$.


format: text

text:
# A high-flux source of polarization-entangled photons from a periodically-poled KTP parametric downconverter

## I Introduction

Entanglement is the basis for fundamental demonstrations of quantum mechanics such as violation of Bell’s inequality and tests of local realism Bell ; CHSH . Moreover, it is essential to a wide variety of quantum communication applications, including teleportation Bennett ; ShapiroNJP  and quantum secret sharing Hillery , and it can be used for quantum key distribution Ekert . A high-flux source of polarization-entangled photons is therefore desirable for practical implementation of a variety of entanglement-based applications. Spontaneous parametric downconversion (SPDC) in a noncollinearly propagating, angle phase-matched crystal, such as beta barium borate (BBO), is often used to generate polarization entanglement Kwiat99 ; Weinfurter ; Kwiat95 . However, only a small segment of the output cone of the downconverted photons is collectible. Moreover, angle phase matching precludes the use of long crystals for more efficient generation or for narrowband generation in a cavity configuration.

We take a different, yet simple, approach to entanglement generation that is based on periodically-poled potassium titanyl phosphate (PPKTP) with collinear propagation of the pump, signal, and idler fields. A periodically-poled nonlinear crystal such as PPKTP, with an appropriate grating period, permits efficient three-wave mixing at user-selectable wavelengths within the crystal’s transparency window by the technique of quasi-phase matching (QPM). Under QPM one can choose to propagate along a principal axis of the crystal, thus avoiding undesirable angle walkoff and permitting collinear propagation in long crystals, which can be utilized in cavity configurations for enhancing downconversion efficiency and providing high-brightness narrowband outputs ShapiroWong . Furthermore, a single-beam configuration of co-propagating signal and idler photons simplifies the transport of entangled photon pairs. For the current work we report measurements of single-beam quantum interference with a visibility of up to 99% and Bell’s inequality violation from a continuous-wave (cw) PPKTP parametric downconverter.

## II Single-beam entanglement

Figure 1 shows the basic concept of our cw collinearly propagating single-beam SPDC for polarization entanglement. It consists of a length-$`L`$ type-II phase-matched PPKTP crystal followed by a length-$`L/2`$ KTP timing compensator. Consider the probability amplitudes of a single pair of downconverted signal and idler photons that originate, via quantum superposition, from two locations, $`A`$ and $`B`$, which are symmetrically displaced from the center of the periodically-poled crystal. Because of the crystal’s birefringence, the horizontally ($`H`$) polarized signal photon along the crystal’s $`y`$ axis always exits the crystal ahead of the conjugate idler photon, which is vertically ($`V`$) polarized along the crystal’s $`z`$ axis. The timing compensator in Fig. 1 is a KTP crystal that is oriented similar to the PPKTP crystal but with the $`y`$ and $`z`$ axes interchanged. Time-resolved signal and idler photon counting before the compensating crystal will collapse the quantum superposition. This will tag the location—$`A`$ or $`B`$—at which the pair was created by virtue of the time difference between the signal and idler counts. After the compensator, the signal and idler pair is at a quantum superposition of locations $`C`$ and $`D`$, with either $`H_A`$ leading $`V_A`$ or $`V_B`$ leading $`H_B`$ by the same time interval. The temporal information has been erased because the separation of the photon pair no longer reveals the source location in the PPKTP. Although the timing compensator has erased one feature that distinguishes the signal and idler photons, they are still distinguishable by virtue of their orthogonal polarizations. This polarization information can be erased, however, by rotating the output polarizations by $`\pi /4`$, before analysis along $`H`$ and $`V`$. The erasure of such identifying information is essential to all quantum interference experiments Rubin . Furthermore, it is also necessary to erase any frequency or spatial mode information, which might distinguish between photons in a detected pair, by collecting only collinear and degenerate pairs. Ignoring the vacuum and higher photon-number components, the state at the output of this polarization rotation is the biphoton,

$$|\psi =(|H_1|H_2|V_1|V_2)/\sqrt{2}.$$
(1)
The photons labeled 1 and 2 can be analyzed with a polarization beam splitter (PBS) and a null should occur in coincidence measurements. This coincidence null is equivalent to the coincidence dip in Hong-Ou-Mandel (HOM) interferometry Hong ; Rubin ; Kuklewicz .

It is possible to utilize the single-beam SPDC output of Fig. 1 to obtain polarization-entangled photons with a 50/50 beam splitter. Each photon of the orthogonally-polarized photon pair that is generated from the PPKTP is equally likely to be transmitted or reflected at the beam splitter. Hence half of the generated pairs yield one photon in the transmitted path and one in the reflected path. If we post-select only these events, the two photons in the two paths are in a polarization-entangled triplet state:

$$|\psi =(|H_T|V_R+|V_T|H_R)/\sqrt{2},$$
(2)
where the subscripts $`T`$ and $`R`$ refer to the transmitted and reflected paths of the 50/50 beam splitter, respectively. We note that post selection is not necessary if quantum memories that allow non-destructive loading verification are used Lloyd .

## III Single-beam quantum interference

We have implemented the single-beam downconversion scheme in the setup shown in Fig. 2. A 10-mm-long flux-grown PPKTP crystal with a grating period of 8.84 $`\mu `$m was used for frequency-degenerate type-II quasi-phase matched operation at a pump wavelength of 397 nm. The output wavelength at 795 nm was chosen to match the transition wavelength of the $`D_1`$ line of Rb, which has been proposed for use as a trapped-atom quantum memory for long-distance teleportation Lloyd . The 1-mm-thick PPKTP crystal was anti-reflection coated at 397 and 795 nm and was pumped with a 10-mW cw external-cavity ultraviolet (UV) diode laser that was weakly focused to a $``$200-$`\mu `$m beam waist in the crystal. The crystal was set up for collinear propagation along its $`x`$ axis and with its $`y`$ axis aligned with the pump’s horizontal polarization. For type-II phase matching, the nonlinear coefficient $`d_{24}`$ was utilized, and the signal and idler outputs were orthogonally polarized along the crystal’s $`y`$ and $`z`$ axes, respectively. The operating temperature of the PPKTP crystal was controlled with a thermoelectric cooler that allowed us to tune the crystal to exact frequency degeneracy and was typically set at 20C. After passing through the 5-mm-long KTP timing compensator to erase the timing information, the output beam was sent through an interference filter centered at 795 nm that had a 1-nm bandwidth and 80% in-band transmission. We have imaged the downconverted light through the 1-nm interference filter onto a high-sensitivity CCD camera, and found this light had a divergence full angle of $``$20 mrad, in good agreement with theoretical estimates of the external divergence angle for our PPKTP system. Due to our propagation along one of the principal axes in PPKTP, the observed divergence angle of 20-mrad/nm of bandwidth is more than an order of magnitude larger than that for the usual angle phase-matched configuration in BBO for a given crystal length and spectral bandwidth Weinfurter .

There were some UV-induced fluorescence photons from the flux-grown PPKTP crystal. These fluorescence photons, estimated to be $``$1000/s/mW of pump generated in a 1-nm bandwidth and collected through a small iris, increased the singles rates by $``$5%. Accidental coincidences caused by them were relatively insignificant in our experiments. We installed two dichroic mirrors that passed the 795-nm outputs but attenuated the UV pump by $``$40 dB to minimize additional fluorescence from the KTP timing compensator and other optical elements. An adjustable iris was used to control the effective divergence angle of the transmitted beam. A smaller iris increased the depth of field and reduced the spatial resolution of the output photons such that the photons generated from locations $`A`$ and $`B`$ in Fig. 1 would be spatially indistinguishable. The iris also served to block off-axis, nearly-degenerate photon pairs that would not contribute to either quantum interference or polarization entanglement.

For quantum-interference measurements, the 50/50 beam splitter in Fig. 2 was not necessary. Removing this beam splitter improves the conditional detection probability by a factor of two, and we have made measurements with and without it present. With the 50/50 beam splitter present, each output beam was sent through a half-wave plate (HWP), a PBS for polarization analysis, and a clean-up polarizer to eliminate the leakage of horizontally-polarized light into the vertically-polarized path. Also, prisms were used in the horizontally-polarized output paths to reduce accidental counts due to the UV pump. All four PBS outputs were focused on commercial Si single-photon counting detectors, whose detection quantum efficiencies are estimated to be 50-55% at 795 nm and whose dark count rates are less than 100/s. We then combined the $``$35-ns-long electrical pulses from detectors $`TT`$ and $`TR`$ with AND logic, and both the singles rates from the detector output pulses and the coincidence rate from the logic pulses were counted. The dead times of our single-photon counters (including the pulse width) were measured to be $``$50 ns, which is negligible at our operating count rates of 105/s or less. By blocking the pump and measuring the singles and coincidence rates due to different amounts of stray light for the four detectors, we were able to determine the effective coincidence window for each pair of detectors and calibrate the accidental coincidence rates, for removal in post-detection data analysis. Typical rates, with the 50/50 beam splitter in place, were $`12,000`$ singles/s, pair coincidences of 1,200/s in a $``$70-ns coincidence window, and accidental coincidences of $``$12/s for 10 mW of pump and 1-nm detection bandwidth. The main contribution to the accidental coincidences is the Poisson occurrence of a double pair within the coincidence window in which the signal of one pair and the idler of the other pair are detected. The reliability of the logical AND coincidence detection and the data analysis methodology was checked by comparing it to a high time-resolution (sub-ns) start-stop histogram obtained with a Picoquant TimeHarp 200.

Consider the case without the 50/50 beam splitter and with only the detectors labeled $`TT`$ and $`TR`$ in Fig. 2 in use. PBST in the transmitted path and the crystal’s $`y`$ and $`z`$ axes were aligned such that if the HWPT’s fast and slow axes were also aligned the same way, the signal and idler photons would be separately detected to yield the pair generation rate. When HWPT was set at $`\theta _T=0`$ to yield zero polarization rotation and the iris was open, we observed a coincidence rate as high as $`46,100`$/s, from which we infer a pair generation rate of $``$106/s using our 21% conditional detection efficiency. At $`\theta _T=\pi /8`$, the output beam underwent a $`\pi /4`$ polarization rotation, and each incident photon had a 50/50 chance of being transmitted or reflected at PBST. For photon pairs that were spectrally, spatially, and temporally indistinguishable, the state after HWPT was given by Eq. (1), and quantum interference between the signal and idler of a photon pair occurred, resulting in a reduction in the coincidence rate. When we made the photons distinguishable, by frequency detuning, no quantum interference occurred and a coincidence rate of 50% relative to the zero-rotation rate was observed. With the iris open and $`\theta _T=\pi /8`$, we observed a coincidence rate of 11,800/s, corresponding to a visibility $`V=[C(0)C(\pi /8)]/[C(0)+C(\pi /8)]`$ of 59%, where $`C(\theta _T)`$ is the coincidence rate at a HWPT angle setting of $`\theta _T`$. As we reduced the size of the iris, the effective divergence angle was reduced and the depth of field improved, leading to a reduction in the coincidence rates and an increase in the visibility. We have achieved $`V=97.7\%`$ with a 200-$`\mu `$m-diameter aperture, corresponding to a divergence full angle of $``$2 mrad, for the flux-grown PPKTP downconverter.

We have also made similar quantum interference measurements with a second PPKTP crystal, which was hydrothermally grown and had a grating period of 9.01 $`\mu `$m. This 10-mm-long crystal was pumped with the second harmonic of a Ti:sapphire laser centered at 397 nm with a maximum usable power of $``$30 mW. The tunable UV pump source and the temperature tuning of the PPKTP crystal permitted us to maintain the SPDC operating point at exact frequency degeneracy for the collinearly propagating portion of the output. Typical pump powers were 5 mW and the crystal temperature was usually set at 30C. We added a collimating lens for the output beam and an adjustable iris was used to control the depth of field. The conditional detection efficiency for the hydrothermally grown PPKTP setup was $``$25% for a 3-mm-diameter aperture and a 3-nm interference filter. Figure 3 shows the quantum-interference visibility as a function of the aperture size for four different interference-filter bandwidths. At the aperture size of 1 mm, which is equivalent to a divergence full angle of 5.4 mrad, we observed a visibility of $`99\pm 1`$% for the 1-nm filter. Figure 3 clearly shows that for larger aperture sizes, which correspond to shallower depths of field at the crystal, the visibility is reduced. This reduction occurred because spatial and spectral indistinguishability was no longer fully maintained. The inset in Fig. 3 shows the detected coincidence rate as a function of the aperture size for the case of the 1-nm filter. At the highest visibility level of 99%, obtained with a 1-mm aperture, the measured coincidence rate was $``$300/s/mW of pump power, which is one of the highest reported values at near-unity visibility level for an entanglement source Kwiat99 ; Weinfurter . Moreover, for an aperture size of 3 mm, with a corresponding divergence angle of 16 mrad, we measured a flux of over 5000/s/mW of pump while maintaining a visibility of 90%. We should note that the hydrothermally grown PPKTP crystal was found to be more efficient (with $`d_{\mathrm{eff}}1.60`$ pm/V) than the flux-grown PPKTP crystal ($`d_{\mathrm{eff}}0.74`$ pm/V). In addition, the UV-induced fluorescence of the hydrothermally grown PPKTP was about 25% of that for the flux-grown crystal.

## IV Polarization entanglement

One can easily obtain polarization-entangled photon pairs using the experimental setup in Fig. 2. Each member of an orthogonally-polarized photon pair that is generated in the PPKTP downconverter has a 50% chance of being transmitted or reflected by the 50/50 beam splitter. When one photon appears in the transmitted path and one in the reflected path—something that can be post-selected by monitoring for coincidences—the joint state of the beam splitter’s output is the polarization-entangled triplet given by Eq. (2).

The quality of the single-beam polarization entanglement can be evaluated by measuring the violation of the Clauser, Horne, Shimony, and Holt (CHSH) form of Bell’s inequality CHSH . We have made such Bell’s inequality measurements using the diode-pumped flux-grown PPKTP downconverter with a 1-nm interference filter and $``$10 mW of pump power. Referring to Fig. 2, the light in the transmitted path and in the reflected path of the 50/50 beam splitter were separately analyzed with a HWP and a PBS. Simultaneous coincidence measurements between detectors $`TT`$ and $`RT`$ ($`C_{TT,RT}`$), detectors $`TR`$ and $`RR`$ ($`C_{TR,RR}`$), and detectors $`TT`$ and $`TR`$ ($`C_{TT,TR}`$), as indicated in Fig. 2, were taken for two different $`\theta _T`$ settings of 0 and $`\pi /8`$ for the transmitted beam. The HWPT’s angle setting $`\theta _T`$ was ascertained by quantum-interference measurements in the transmitted path using $`C_{TT,TR}`$. At each $`\theta _T`$ angle, coincidence measurements $`C_{TT,RT}`$ and $`C_{TR,RR}`$ over a 10-s interval were taken at 32 different positions of the HWPR’s setting ($`\theta _R`$ at $``$$`\pi /16`$ intervals) in the reflected path of the 50/50 beam splitter. These coincidence measurements were used to calculate the value of the CHSH inequality. Figure 4 shows the coincidence counts $`C_{TT,RT}`$ for $`\theta _T=0`$ and for $`\theta _T=\pi /8`$ and their sinusoidal fits, showing visibilities of 98% and 93%, respectively.

The four coincidence-count data sets of $`C_{TT,RT}`$ and $`C_{TR,RR}`$ for $`\theta _T=0`$ and $`\theta _T=\pi /8`$ are fit to sinusoidal functions. Using these four fits (with their estimated errors) we construct the CHSH expectation $`E`$ functions and the $`S`$ parameter function Kwiat99 ; Kwiat95 . $`E`$ is defined by:

$$E(\theta _T,\theta _R)=\frac{C_{TT,RT}(\theta _T,\theta _R)+C_{TR,RR}(\theta _T,\theta _R)C_{TT,RR}(\theta _T,\theta _R)C_{TR,RT}(\theta _T,\theta _R)}{C_{TT,RT}(\theta _T,\theta _R)+C_{TR,RR}(\theta _T,\theta _R)+C_{TT,RR}(\theta _T,\theta _R)+C_{TR,RT}(\theta _T,\theta _R)}.$$
(3)
Note that $`E`$ depends on $`C_{TT,RR}`$ and $`C_{TR,RT}`$ which were not directly measured, so we derive their values from the fits of $`C_{TT,RT}`$ and $`C_{TR,RR}`$ with $`\theta _R\theta _R+\pi /4`$:

$`C_{TT,RR}(\theta _T,\theta _R)`$ $`=`$ $`C_{TT,RT}(\theta _T,\theta _R+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}),`$ (4)
$`C_{TR,RT}(\theta _T,\theta _R)`$ $`=`$ $`C_{TR,RR}(\theta _T,\theta _R+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{4}}).`$ (5)
The parameter $`S`$ is composed of $`E`$ functions for two values of $`\theta _R`$ and two values for $`\theta _T`$. In our case $`\theta _T=0,\pi /8`$ and $`\theta _R=\pi /16,3\pi /16`$. Thus our $`S`$ parameter is defined as:

$$S=\left|E(0,\frac{\pi }{16})E(\frac{\pi }{8},\frac{\pi }{16})+E(0,\frac{3\pi }{16})+E(\frac{\pi }{8},\frac{3\pi }{16})\right|.$$
(6)
Classical and hidden variable theories predict $`S2`$, while quantum mechanics permits $`S2\sqrt{2}2.828`$, with equality occurring for maximal polarization entanglement, i.e., a polarization Bell state such as the triplet from Eq. (2). We obtained an $`S`$ value of $`2.711\pm 0.017`$, which indicates good polarization entanglement of our PPKTP SPDC source.

## V Conclusion

In summary, we have demonstrated a cw high-flux source of polarization-entangled photons using a PPKTP parametric downconverter in a collinearly propagating configuration. The single-beam output is shown to allow easy control of its spatial and spectral contents and simplify the transport of the photon pairs. By using a circular aperture we were able to obtain a high visibility of 99% with a corresponding flux of $``$300/s/mW of pump power. Polarization entanglement was obtained from the cw single-beam PPKTP downconverter with a 50/50 beam splitter, and we measured Bell’s inequality violation with $`S=2.711\pm 0.017`$. We have found that the use of periodically-poled nonlinear material and the single-beam collinearly propagating configuration offer distinct advantages over the usual noncollinearly phase-matched BBO downconverter. Wavelength tunability of the paired photons with no change in the output beam angle can be easily accomplished with temperature tuning of the crystal and/or a change in the pump wavelength. Long crystals with collinear outputs can be used to allow more efficient generation and collection of entangled photons. We expect that future entanglement sources based on cavity-enhanced parametric downconversion in long crystals can significantly improve on its flux and also its spatial and spectral contents ShapiroWong .

## VI  Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the DoD Multidisciplinary University Research Initiative (MURI) program administered by the Army Research Office under Grant DAAD-19-00-1-0177, and by the National Reconnaissance Office.


text:
# The issue of aliasing in PSR B0943+10 II Signal processing arguments

## 1 Introduction

The rotation powered radio pulsar PSR B0943$`+`$10 exhibits sub pulses that are drifting systematically from period to period within the observable pulse window. This pulsar has a very narrow feature in the longitude resolved spectrum of intensity fluctuations; its $`Q`$, defined as its central frequency divided by its width, is relatively high (Taylor & Hueguenin 1971; Backer, Rankin & Campbell 1975; Sieber & Oster 1975). Recently Deshpande & Rankin (1999, 2001; henceforth DR1999 and DR2001) put its $`Q`$ at $``$ 500. It has been speculated that this very narrow spectral feature, occurring at 0.465 cycles per pulsar period \[cpp\], could be an alias of the actual value 0.535 \[cpp\] (Sieber & Oster 1975). Backer (1973) noted such a general possibility in radio pulsars and claimed, based on the phase information in the fluctuation spectrum, that PSR B2303+30 has an aliased spectral feature. This was contested by Sieber & Oster (1975), who state on their page 326 that “even a phase analysis, contrary to Backer’s statements (Backer 1973), is unable to decide between the two possibilities”, viz., whether the spectral feature is aliased or not. Indeed, in a later paper Backer did not repeat such a claim for PSR B0943$`+`$10, whose fluctuation spectrum is similar to that of PSR B2303+30 (Backer, Rankin & Campbell 1975); he quoted the the true value as 0.465 \[cpp\]. However, DR1999 and DR2001 recently claimed that the spectral feature is indeed an alias; that the actual value is 0.535 \[cpp\]. In their view Sieber & Oster (1975) “came to the wrong conclusion” (DR2001). They also claim that the weak, symmetrically spaced sidebands, at 0.027 \[cpp\] away from the above spectral feature “strongly suggest … a regular, highly periodic amplitude modulation of the … drifting sub pulse sequences”.

This paper argues that DR1999 and DR2001 are unjustified in drawing these two conclusions. The question, whether PSR B0943$`+`$10 has an aliased spectral feature or not, is still unresolved; and the latter observation is as likely, if not more likely, due to an additional phase modulation of the drifting sub pulses.

## 2 A review of the relevant signal processing

The signal from an ideal pulsar with drifting sub pulses falls under the topic “pulse position modulation” (PPM); it consists of periodically occurring narrow pulses whose positions are modulated by another periodicity. Its general principles can be found in books on electronic communication engineering (see Lathi 1998). The spectrum of a PPM signal when the position modulation is due to a pure “tone” (a single frequency) is given by Panter (1965) on his page 541 and by Schwartz, Bennett & Stein (1966; henceforth SBS1966) on their pages 252 – 253.

### 2.1 Frequency domain discussion

To begin with let us assume that the drifting sub pulse pattern is PPM due to a pure tone.

The abscissa in fig. 6-2-3 on page 251 of SBS1966 represents the phase of the sampling signal at which a pulse is observed; in our case the sampling signal has the pulsar period $`P`$ (sec), or frequency $`1/P`$ Hz or 1 \[cpp\]. The ordinate represents the corresponding phase of the modulating signal; in our case it has period $`P3`$ pulsar periods (frequency $`1/P3`$ \[cpp\]) which is the repetition time of the drifting sub pulse pattern. The motion in time of the drifting sub pulses in this figure is along a straight line of slope $`1/P3`$. In the last para on their page 254, SBS1966 state “the average pulse repetition frequency should be at least twice the highest signal frequency in order to obtain the minimum number of samples necessary for satisfactory signal recovery”; i.e., $`1>2/P3`$ ($`1/P3<0.5`$) to avoid aliasing. This can be verified by considering two straight lines of slopes $`<0.5`$ and $`>0.5`$ in fig. 6-2-3 of SBS1966.

Thus, the Nyquist sampling criterion is the same for a PPM signal and a canonical pulse amplitude modulation (PAM) signal (amplitude modulation of periodic pulses). DR2001 are wrong when they claim in their conclusion that “A harmonic resolved fluctuation spectrum uses the information within the finite width of the pulse to achieve a Nyquist frequency of 1 \[cpp\], showing clearly that the primary feature is aliased”. Their average pulse repetition frequency is obviously $`P`$ (sec); so their Nyquist frequency is only 0.5 \[cpp\]. Consequently, they are also wrong in concluding that “the primary feature is aliased” based merely upon the Fourier technique; they require additional and independent information, as discussed ahead.

Consider a PAM signal in which the amplitude modulation is due to a pure tone of frequency $`\nu `$ \[cpp\]. The amplitudes occur at frequencies $`\nu `$ \[cpp\], $`1\pm \nu `$ \[cpp\], $`2\pm \nu `$ \[cpp\], etc; and there is no difference in the amplitude spectra of the original ($`\nu <0.5`$) and the aliased ($`\nu >0.5`$) signal. However the phase spectra differ. Therefore one can distinguish between the original and aliased PAM signals only by using additional information such as the phase of the modulating signal. In the PPM case, the amplitudes in the spectra occur at frequencies $`\nu `$ \[cpp\], $`1\pm m\times \nu `$ \[cpp\], $`2\pm m\times \nu `$ \[cpp\], etc., where $`m=1,2,3,\mathrm{}`$ is the order of the harmonic (see eq. 6-2-13 on page 252 of SBS1966). Now, both amplitude and phase spectra differ for the original and aliased signals. Therefore once again, one can distinguish between the original and aliased PPM signals only by using additional information such as the exact shape of the two amplitude spectra. In practice it is impossible to predict this exactly in the current pulsar context.

Fig. 1 simulates the amplitude spectra of a pulsar signal showing the drifting sub pulse phenomenon, modeled as a PPM signal with a saw-tooth modulation in time, for both the original modulating frequency (top panel), and its alias but with the opposite drift direction (bottom panel). The pulsar parameters are taken from DR2001 for PSR B0943$`+`$10; however the figure is insensitive to small variations in these parameters. The algorithm was checked by reproducing the spectrum in eq. 6-2-13 of SBS1966. The difference between the two amplitude spectra in fig. 1 is generally $``$ 5% of the maximum amplitude of pulsar harmonics, upto a frequency of 100 \[cpp\], for the harmonics $`m=1`$ to $`3`$. For example, at $`59.93`$ \[cpp\], the second harmonics differ by $``$ 12.5% in the two panels; but their average amplitude is $`33`$% of the maximum amplitude. The third harmonics, aliased to $`59.605`$ \[cpp\], differ by $``$ 9%; but their average amplitude is only about 4.5% of the maximum amplitude. At $`110.395`$ \[cpp\], the harmonics differ by $``$ 20%; but their average amplitude is now about 37.5% of the peak amplitude of the pulsar harmonics; this is also insignificant.

Therefore at lower frequencies ($`<100`$ \[cpp\]; the range analyzed by DR2001) the spectra of the original and the aliased signals should be predicted to an accuracy of $``$ 5% to tell the difference. This is almost impossible, considering other factors ignored here: random variations in shape, size and intensity from pulse to pulse, lack of knowledge of the exact modulating function, the exact shape of the integrated profile, etc. Maybe there is some hope of making better prediction about the higher harmonics ($`m>3`$) at higher frequencies ($`>100`$ \[cpp\]), but DR2001 do not analyze these frequencies. The next section indicates why, if at all, the two spectra can probably be distinguished only at higher frequencies.

### 2.2 Time domain discussion

Let $`t_n`$ be the time of occurrence of the $`n^{\mathrm{th}}`$ pulse in a PPM signal that is modulated by a pure tone, of phase $`\varphi _m`$, and frequency $`1/P3`$ \[cpp\], implying angular frequency $`\omega _m=2\pi /(P3P)`$,

$$t_n+\tau \mathrm{sin}\left(\omega _mt_n+\varphi _m\right)=nP,$$
(1)
where $`\tau `$ is the maximum position departure (see eq. 6-2-2 of SBS1966). Let $`\mathrm{\Delta }t_n`$ be the difference between $`t_n`$ and $`nP`$, its time of occurrence in the un modulated case,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t_n=\tau \mathrm{sin}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_n+\omega _m\mathrm{\Delta }t_n\right),$$
(2)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n=2\pi n/P3+\varphi _m`$. In PSR B0943$`+`$10, $`\tau 0.021P`$, and the original $`P32.15`$, so the phase $`\omega _m\tau =2\pi \tau /(P3P)0.06`$, which is a small quantity. Furthermore, $`\mathrm{\Delta }t_n\tau `$; therefore,

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t_n\tau \mathrm{sin}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_n\right)\left[1\tau \left\{0.5\omega _c\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _m\right\}\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_n\right)\right]$$
(3)
where $`\omega _c=2\pi /P`$ is the sampling frequency (angular) and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _m=0.5\omega _c\omega _m`$. In PSR B0943$`+`$10, $`\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _m`$ ($`=2.8622.662=0.2`$) is much smaller than either $`0.5\omega _c`$ or $`\omega _m`$.

Now consider a PPM signal that is modulated by a pure tone, of phase $`\varphi _m^{}=\varphi _m`$, and a frequency that is the alias of the earlier one; i.e., of angular frequency $`\omega _m^{}=\omega _c\omega _m`$. Let it have the same magnitude of drift but opposite in direction, i.e., $`\tau ^{}=\tau `$; Then it can be shown that

$$\mathrm{\Delta }t_n^{}\tau \mathrm{sin}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_n\right)\left[1+\tau \left\{0.5\omega _c+\mathrm{\Delta }\omega _m\right\}\mathrm{cos}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }_n\right)\right],$$
(4)
for integer $`n`$. For non-integer $`n`$, which implies that the pulses start at some arbitrary phase within the period, a constant phase adds to $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n`$ in eq. (4).

Now, the observed time series corresponds to either eq. (3) or eq. (4). If one knows its absolute phase, then one directly compares the observation to those two equations, and thus determines if the observed frequency is original or aliased. However, this is rarely the case. So, one has to distinguish between the the time series $`\pm 0.25\omega _c\tau ^2\mathrm{sin}\left(2\mathrm{\Phi }_n\right)`$ of eq. (3) and eq. (4). This is possible only if the sampling interval used for the observations is much smaller than the quantity $`0.5\omega _c\times \tau ^2`$, which is $`1.52`$ ms in PSR B0943$`+`$10. However the sampling interval of DR2001 (1.006 ms) is barely smaller than this. Therefore it is probably impossible for DR1999 and DR2001 to distinguish between the original drift frequency and its alias with opposite drift direction. This argument also holds for saw-tooth modulation drifting pattern, which can be Fourier decomposed into harmonics of the fundamental modulating frequency $`\omega _m`$.

Now one can understand the result of the previous section - a time resolution $`<<1.52`$ ms implies a minimum Nyquist frequency of $`>>0.5/0.00152329`$ Hz or 361 \[cpp\]. Indeed, the spectra in fig. 1 differ most in the range 500 to 900 \[cpp\], mainly in the higher harmonics $`m>>3`$. For example, the 15th harmonics (aliased) at frequency $`679.975`$ \[cpp\] differ in amplitude by $``$ 107%; and their average amplitude is about 24% of the maximum amplitude of pulsar harmonics.

In summary, DR2001 can hope to distinguish between the original and aliased spectral feature in PSR B0943$`+`$10 by predicting the two amplitude spectra at frequencies much larger than 100 \[cpp\], particularly for the harmonics $`m3`$ to $`15`$, and comparing those with observations. This they have not done.

## 3 Aliasing claim by DR2001

This section discusses the three main arguments that DR2001 appear to offer (their sections 3 and 5) regarding the spectral feature in PSR B0943$`+`$10.

### 3.1 Amplitude spectrum argument

In the longitude resolved spectrum in fig. 1 of DR2001, the narrow spectral feature falls at frequency 0.465 \[cpp\]. The spectrum of such a signal will naturally have a Nyquist sampling limit of 0.5 \[cpp\], by definition. To test whether this feature is aliased or not, one needs data with much faster sampling. DR2001 achieve this by obtaining the spectrum of the original time series (including zero padding) which is sampled at $`1.006`$ (ms). The corresponding spectrum certainly shows that the spectral feature is much stronger at 0.535 \[cpp\] than at 0.465 \[cpp\] (their fig. 4).

Therefore they argue (on the right side of page 442) that “… the asymmetry between the 0.535 and 0.465 \[cpp\] features in fig. 4 is so great that we can regard them as a signature of an almost pure phase modulation”. This is justified, as seen in fig. 1 above. Then, after a short paragraph offering no new argument or evidence, they state that “We can now be certain that the principal feature in fig. 1 is the alias of a fluctuation the actual frequency which is greater than 0.5 \[cpp\] …”. This is unjustified.

It is purely fortuitous that the aliased feature is stronger than the original in their fig. 4. It depends upon the specific combination of true $`P3`$, true drift direction and the exact shape of the IP of PSR B0943$`+`$10. Fig. 2 verifies the above argument. It shows the amplitude spectra of PSR B0031$``$07, another drifting pulsar, observed using Ooty Radio Telescope (ORT). The top panel corresponds to fig. 3 of DR2001. In the bottom panel of fig. 2 the data is altered: the period sequence is retained, but within each period the time sequence is reversed. This could have occurred either due to (1) PSR B0031$``$07 having the aliased drift frequency but the same drift direction, or (2) it having the original drift frequency but opposite drift direction. The asymmetry has also got reversed in the bottom panel of fig. 2.

### 3.2 Phase spectrum argument

DR2001 do not use the phase information corresponding to their fig. 4, but use that available in the longitude resolved spectrum (their fig. 1). They compare the rate of change of phase, with longitude, of the 0.465 \[cpp\] spectral feature, with that of two other much weaker spectral features occurring at 0.071 \[cpp\] and 0.607 \[cpp\], which are supposed to be the aliased first and second harmonics of the fundamental. They claim on page 443 that “the harmonicity of these phase rates argues strongly that the 0.071 \[cpp\] and 0.607 \[cpp\] features are indeed the aliases of the second and third harmonics of the primary feature …”, which is justified.

However, this will be true irrespective of whether the original frequency is 0.465 \[cpp\] or 0.535 \[cpp\]; this is obvious from Fourier theory. The only difference is the inverted phase relation between the fundamental and its (aliased) harmonics, about which one has no independent information anyway. This author is confused about what DR2001 intended in invoking this discussion. This author is most confused about a sentence in the last para of their section 3, the section that is supposed to justify their claim of aliasing. It goes “The ambiguity, however, between the remaining two possible combinations – namely, $`P3<2P`$ (thus implying negative drift) and $`P3>2P`$ (positive drift) can not be fully resolved through the above analysis, …”. Presumably this is what Sieber & Oster (1975) implied, with which DR2001 apparently disagreed earlier. It appears that either DR2001 are contradicting themselves, or this author has not understood what was it in PSR B0943$`+`$10 that was “otherwise multiply folded” which DR2001 have managed to “unfold” (last para of their section 3).

### 3.3 “Modulation on modulation” argument

DR1999 claim on their page 1010 that the symmetrical sidebands associated with the primary feature in the fluctuation spectrum represent “an amplitude modulation on the phase modulation”. These sidebands fall 0.027 \[cpp\] higher and lower than the primary feature. Since $`0.535/0.02720`$, an integer value, DR2001 claim in their conclusion that “it is at this point that we have conclusive evidence that the aliasing question is resolved …”.

Fig. 3 is similar to fig. 1 except that (1) 4 times fewer samples and 4 times larger sampling interval, and (2) the drifting $`P3=3`$ periods, for better visibility. However, in the top panel the pulsar signal is additionally amplitude modulated by a sinusoid of frequency 0.05 \[cpp\]; of relative magnitude of modulation of 50%, for the sidebands on the position modulating harmonics to show up significantly. The pulsar harmonics also have the symmetric sidebands, but of much larger amplitude. In the bottom panel of fig. 3 the above signal is instead additionally position modulated, by a sinusoid of the the same frequency, and a maximum time departure of 0.010 \[P\]. Now also the pulsar harmonics have the symmetric sidebands, but much smaller in amplitude.

From fig. 3 shows that both an additional amplitude modulation or an additional position modulation of the pulsar signal in fig. 1 gives rise to sidebands around the drifting harmonics. However, in the former case the side bands are much stronger around the pulsar harmonics (at 1 \[cpp\], 2 \[cpp\], etc.), and in the latter case they are much stronger around the drifting harmonics, which is what DR2001 observe. Therefore it is as likely, if not more likely, that DR2001 have noticed an additional position modulation over and above their drifting sub pulse pattern. DR2001 do not reason why they prefer the former over the latter.

The foundation of DR2001 vanishes if they are unable to justify the amplitude modulation of the drifting sub pulses.

## 4 Summary

DR2001’s claim of aliasing in PSR B0943$`+`$10 may rest purely upon an arbitrary assumption, that of a very steady “amplitude modulation on the phase modulation”. Recent claims (Edwards & Stappers 2002) to have independently verified the results of DR2001 are, in the opinion of this author, not relevant here because (1) they are model dependent, and (2) they work with the phase resolved spectrum, which is inadequate by definition to discuss the issue of aliasing.

This research has made use of NASA’s Astrophysics Data System (ADS) Bibliographic Services.


text:
# On some weak-gravitational effects

## I $`ntroduction`$

On the basis of the theoretical and experimental works concerning the spin-rotation coupling by Mashhoon et al., we investigate some relativistic quantum gravitational effects associated with gravitomagnetic fields: the geometric quantum phase factor of a spinning particle interacting with time-dependent gravitomagnetic fields and the non-inertial gravitational wave in time-dependent rotating reference frame. By means of neutron-gravity interferometry experiment, this geometric phase factor due to time-dependent spin-rotation coupling can be applied to obtaining information on small fluctuations of Earth’s rotating frequency. Mashhoon’s spin-rotation coupling is a static case, while the interaction of the intrinsic spin of a particle with the non-inertial gravitational wave is its mobile realization. With the improvements in precise-measuring instruments, particularly the laser-interference technology, it becomes possible for investigating quantum mechanics in weak-gravitational fields, which provides tests of Einstein theory of general relativity in quantum regime.

Both geometric phases of wave function in Quantum Mechanics and gravitomagnetic charge (topological dual charge of mass) in the general theory of relativity reveal Nature’s geometric or global properties. Differing from the dynamical phase, geometric phase depends only on the geometric nature of the pathway along which the quantum system evolves. Here we show the existence of the hyperbolical geometric quantum phase that is different from the ordinary trigonometric geometric quantum phase. Gravitomagnetic charge (dual mass) is the gravitational analogue of magnetic monopole in Electrodynamics; but, as we will show here, it possesses more interesting and significant features, e.g., it may constitute the dual matter that has different gravitational properties compared with mass. In order to describe the space-time curvature due to the topological dual mass, we construct a dual Einstein’s tensor. Further investigation shows that gravitomagnetic potentials caused by dual mass are respectively analogous to the trigonometric and hyperbolic geometric phase. The study of the geometric phase and dual mass provides a valuable insight into the time evolution of quantum systems and the topological properties in General Relativity.

## II $`𝒢ravitomagnetic`$ $`𝒻ields,`$ $`𝓈pinrotation`$ $`𝒸ouplings`$ $`𝒶nd`$ $`eometric`$ $`𝓅hases`$

According to the equivalence principle in general relativity, the nature of spin-rotation coupling is merely the interaction between the gravitational spin-magnetic moment and the gravitomagnetic field. By considering the Doppler effect of a light signal in the non-inertial reference frame rotating relative to the fixing reference frame, Mashhoon obtained the Hamiltonian of the spin-rotation coupling, which is of the form $`H=\stackrel{}{\omega }𝐒`$ with $`\stackrel{}{\omega }`$ and $`𝐒`$ respectively denoting the rotating frequency of the rotating frame and the intrinsic spin of a photon. In the framework of general relativity, however, we transformed the Kerr metric from the fixing reference frame to the rotating frame, and therefore obtained the exterior gravitomagnetic potential (one of the metric components $`g_{0\phi }`$) of the spherically symmetric rotating body as follows

$$g_{0\phi }\frac{2aGM\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{c^2r}+\frac{2\omega r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{c},$$
(1)
which is calculated by using the weak-field approximation, where $`c`$ and $`G`$ are the speed of light and the gravitational constant, respectively; $`a`$ is so defined that $`ac`$ represents the angular momentum per unit mass of this gravitating body, and $`(r,\theta ,\phi )`$ stands for the displacements of the spherical coordinate system fixed in the rotating reference frame. It follows that the first term on the right handed side in Eq.(1) is related to the gravitational constant $`G`$ and is vanishing when the radial coordinate $`r\mathrm{}`$, whereas the second term tends to infinity rather than vanishes since it arises from the coordinates transformation in terms of the equivalence principle. It is of interest that the second term in Eq.(1) also gives rise to a gravitomagnetic field whose strength is just the rotating frequency, $`\stackrel{}{\omega }`$, of the rotating frame with respect to the fixing reference system. It is well known that the magnetic field results in the Lorentz force acting on a charged particle, in the similar fashion, the non-inertial gravitomagnetic field $`\stackrel{}{\omega }`$ also yields a fictitious Coriolis force acting on a moving particle. In view of above discussion, one can also obtain the same Hamiltonian of spin-rotation coupling by using the Dirac equation with spin connection in curved spacetimes. Essentially, we can draw a conclusion that the interaction of the gravitational magnetic moment and the gravitomagnetic field involves spin-rotation coupling. The spin-rotation coupling leads to the inertial effects of the intrinsic spin of a particle, for instance, although the equivalence principle still holds, the universality of Galileo’s law of freely falling particles is violated, provided that the spin is polarized vertically up or down in the non-inertial frame.

Since there exists observational evidence for the coupling of spin-$`\frac{1}{2}`$ particle with the rotation of the Earth, we suggest a geometric effect in the coupling of the neutron spin with the time-dependent rotation of the Earth. Since the analogy can be drawn between gravity and electromagnetic force in some aspects, Aharonov and Carmi proposed the geometric effect of vector potentials of gravity, and Anandan, Dresden and Sakurai et al. proposed the quantum-interferometry effect associated with gravity. What they investigated is now termed the Aharonov-Carmi effect, which is the gravitational analogue to the Aharonov-Bohm effect in electrodynamics that appears as a geometric quantum phase factor (i.e., Berry’s phase factor) in the wave function of an electron moving along a closed path surrounding a magnetic flux. Although the spin-rotation coupling and Aharonov-Carmi effect have the same origin, namely, both arise from the presence of the Coriolis force (i.e., the interaction of the motion of the particle with the non-inertial gravitomagnetic field, $`\stackrel{}{\omega }`$), we argue that the Aharonov-Carmi effect mentioned above does not comprise the new geometric effect due to the time-dependent rotation of the non-inertial frame.

It is well known that the geometric phase factor appears in the quantum systems whose Hamiltonian explicitly depends on time or possesses evolution parameters. Differing from the dynamical phase which is related to the energy, frequency or velocity of a particle or a quantum system, geometric phase is dependent only on the geometric nature of the pathway along which the system evolves, which reflects the global and topological properties of evolution of the quantum systems. By making use of the Lewis-Riesenfeld invariant theory and the invariant-related unitary transformation formulation, we compute the geometric phase that results from the neutron spin-rotation coupling in which the rotating frequency is time-dependent. The result may be written as follows

$$\varphi _\pm =\pm \frac{1}{2}_0^t\frac{\mathrm{d}\phi (t^{})}{\mathrm{d}t^{}}\left[1\mathrm{cos}\theta \left(t^{}\right)\right]dt^{}$$
(2)
with $`(\theta ,\phi )`$ being the angle displacements over the parameters space of the conserved invariant, an operator whose eigenvalue is time-independent; $`\pm `$ corresponding to the neutron spin polarized vertically up and down. For the case of the adiabatic limit in which $`\theta `$ is constant, the geometric phase in one cycle over the parameter space is then $`\varphi _\pm =\pm \frac{1}{2}2\pi (1\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$, where $`2\pi (1\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$ is the expression for the solid angle which presents the geometric properties of time evolution of this spin-rotation system.

At present, investigation of geometric phase factor is an important direction in atomic and molecular physics, quantum optics, condensed matter physics and molecular reaction chemistry as well. Geometric phase factor has many applications in various branches of physics, say, in the case of this spin-rotation coupling, a potential application can be suggested. Since this geometric phase reveals the time evolution of $`\stackrel{}{\omega }(t)`$, information on the Earth’s variations of rotation will be obtained by measuring the geometric phase of the oppositely polarized neutrons through the neutron interferometry experiment.

## III $`𝒩oninertial`$ $`ravitational`$ $`𝓌ave`$ $`𝒾n`$ $`𝓇otating`$ $`𝓇eference`$ $`f`$ $`𝒻rame`$

Note that Mashhoon’s spin-rotation or spin-gravity coupling is only confined within the static case in which the rotating frequency is independent of time. Here we propose another interaction where the intrinsic spin of a particle is coupled to a propagating gravitomagnetic field. Einstein theory of General Relativity predicts that the accelerated mass produces the propagation of the space-time curvature which is termed the gravitational wave. Detecting and investigating these space-time ripples is one of the leading areas in astrophysics and cosmology. Because of the weakness of the gravitational radiation, gravitational wave has not been detected up to now even by means of both resonant-mass detectors and laser-interferometric detectors. In this paper, however, we suggest the concept of non-inertial gravitational wave, which does not relate to the smallness of the gravitational constant. Further detailed reasons are illustrated in the following. It follows from Eq.(1) that, in the rotating reference frame, the rotation yields additional space-time curvature (expressed by $`\frac{2\omega r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta }{c}`$) which is independent of the gravitational constant, $`G`$. If, therefore, the rotating frequency $`\stackrel{}{\omega }`$ varies with time, the variation of the space-time curvature (the disturbance of the gravitational field) in the rotating reference frame propagates outwards in the form of wave motion. Such a propagating disturbance is referred to as a non-inertial gravitational wave (NGW). By ignoring some negligible and higher-order terms, the wave equation of motion involving source terms is readily obtained

$$\left(\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{^2}{t^2}^2\right)h_{mn}+\frac{16\pi G}{c^4}S_{mn}=\eta _{ik}\frac{^2}{t^2}\left(a_m^ia_n^k\right),$$
(3)
where $`h_{mn}`$ and $`\eta _{ik}`$ denote the amplitudes of gravitational wave and the metric tensor of the flat Minkowski spacetime, respectively; $`a_m^i`$ and $`a_n^k`$ are the matrix elements of coordinate transformation from the fixing frame to the rotating frame; $`S_{mn}=T_{mn}\frac{1}{2}\eta _{mn}T`$ with $`T_{mn}`$ being the energy-momentum tensor of matter and $`T=\eta ^{mn}T_{mn}`$. By using the low-motion weak-field approximation, further analysis shows that there exist only two kinds of amplitudes of NGW, i.e., $`h_{00}`$ and $`h_{0\phi }`$ in the time-dependent rotating reference frame, and the expressions of the source term on the right handed side of Eq.(3) are respectively of the form $`r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \frac{^2}{t^2}\left(\frac{\omega ^2}{c^2}\right)`$ and $`r^2\mathrm{sin}^2\theta \frac{^2}{t^2}\left(\frac{\omega }{c}\right)`$. Note, however, that this NGW depends on the non-inertial reference frame and differs from the standard gravitational wave predicted by Einstein.

Experimental evidence for spin-rotation coupling exists in the microwave and optical regimes via the phenomenon of frequency shift of polarized radiation. It is believed that with the foreseeable improvements in detecting technology, the interaction between the intrinsic spin of fundamental particles and NGW can also be detected. Since the existence of spin-rotation coupling can be observed only from the non-inertial frame, NGW is thus defined to be such space-time ripples associated with the non-inertial reference frame. It is therefore apparent that investigation of NGW is of much physical interest since its intensity is no longer dependent on the gravitational wave.

Although it possesses the non-inertial properties, this NGW can be coupled to matter. It is shown in what follows that the coupling coefficient depends on the gravitational constant, $`G`$.

In London’s electrodynamics of superconductivity, the velocity $`𝐯`$ of the superconducting electrons and the magnetic potentials $`𝐀`$ satisfies $`\frac{}{t}𝐯=\frac{e}{m_\mathrm{e}}\frac{}{t}𝐀`$ which leads to the self-induced charge current and thus provides photons field with an effective mass term in field equation or Lagrangian of electrodynamics. This procedure is equivalent to the mechanism of spontaneously symmetrical breaking. In the theory of gravity, the similar phenomenon exists since the momentum density $`\rho _\mathrm{m}𝐯`$ is conserved before and after the particles scattering, which is in analogy with the case in the superconductor where the electric current density is also conserved as the scattering is inhibited for Cooper pairs. Note that the Einstein’s equation of gravitational field under the low-motion weak-field approximation is formally analogous to the Maxwell equation of electromagnetic field, then in the case of gravitating matter, one can arrive at the similar relation $`\frac{}{t}𝐯=c\frac{}{t}𝐡`$ between the velocity of particles and the gravitomagnetic vector potentials $`𝐡`$, where $`𝐡=(g^{01},g^{02},g^{03})`$. From the point of view of the low-motion weak-field approximation, the self-induced mass current results from this coupling of gravity to matter and then enables the gravitational field to possess an effective rest mass squared, $`m_\mathrm{g}^2=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{c^4}(8\pi G\rho _\mathrm{m})`$, where $`\mathrm{}`$ and $`\rho _\mathrm{m}`$ denote the Planck constant and the mass density of matter, respectively. Apparently, the NGW is not merely the non-inertial effect, for the effective mass of NGW is related to the gravitational constant, $`G`$.

## IV $`yperbolical`$ $`eometric`$ $`𝓆uantum`$ $`𝓅hases`$ $`𝒶nd`$ $`𝓉opological`$ $`𝒹ual`$ $`𝓂ass`$

Geometric phase exists in time-dependent quantum systems or systems whose Hamiltonian possesses evolution parameters. As is well known, the dynamical phase of wave function in Quantum Mechanics is dependent on dynamical quantities such as energy, frequency, coupling coefficients and velocity of a particle or a quantum system, while the geometric phase is immediately independent of these physical quantities. When Berry found that the wave function would give rise to a non-integral phase (Berry’s phase) in quantum adiabatic process, geometric phase attracts attention of many physicists in various fields such as gravity theory, differential geometry, atomic and molecular physics, nuclear physics, quantum optics, condensed matter physics and molecular-reaction chemistry as well. In many simple quantum systems such as an electron possessing intrinsic magnetic moment interacting with a time-dependent magnetic field (or a neutron spin interacting with the Earth’s rotation), a photon propagating inside the curved optical fiber, and the time-dependent Jaynes-Cummings model describing the interaction of the two-level atom with a radiation field, geometric phase is often proportional to $`2\pi (1\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$, which equals the solid angle subtended by a curve with respect to the origin of parameter space***The solid angle subtended by the curve trace on the cone, at the center, shows the topological meanings of geometric phase. Geometric phase is absent in the quantum system when its Hamiltonian is independent of time. Geometric phase of many simple physical systems in the adiabatic process can be expressed in terms of the solid angle over the parameter space, e.g., the wave function of a photon propagating inside the non-coplanar curved optical fiber obtains this topological phase, where the parameter space is just the momentum (i.e., velocity) space of the photon.. This, therefore, implies that geometric phase differs from dynamical phase and it involves global and topological information on the time evolution of quantum systems. In addition to this trigonometric geometric phase, there exists the so-called hyperbolical geometric phase that is expressed by $`2\pi (1\mathrm{cosh}\theta )`$ with the hyperbolical cosine $`\mathrm{cosh}\theta =\frac{1}{2}[\mathrm{exp}(\theta )+\mathrm{exp}(\theta )]`$ in some time-dependent quantum systems, e.g., the two-level atomic system with electric dipole-dipole interaction and the harmonic-oscillator system. It is verified that the generators of the Hamiltonians of these quantum systems form the $`SU(1,1)`$ Lie algebra. Further analysis indicates that quantum systems, which possess the non-compact Lie algebraic structure (whose group parameters can be taken to be infinity) will present the hyperbolical geometric phase, while quantum systems with compact Lie algebraic structure will give rise to the trigonometric geometric phase.

Since Lorentz group (describing the boosts of reference frames in the space direction) in the special theory of relativity is also a non-compact group, this leads us to consider the topological properties associated with space-time. We take into account the gravitational analogue to the magnetic charge, i.e., gravitomagnetic charge that is the source of gravitomagnetic field just as the case that mass (gravitoelectric charge) is the source of gravitoelectric field (i.e., Newtonian gravitational field in the sense of weak-approximation). In this sense, gravitomagnetic charge is also termed the dual mass. It should be noted that the concept of the ordinary mass is of no physical significance for the gravitomagnetic charge; it is of interest to investigate the relativistic dynamics and gravitational effects as well as geometric properties of this topological dual mass (should such exist). From the point of view of differential geometry, matter may be classified into two categories: gravitoelectric matter and gravitomagnetic matter. The former category possesses mass and constitutes the familiar physical world, while the latter possesses dual mass that would cause the non-analytical property of space-time metric. Einstein’s field equation of gravitation in general theory of relativity governs the couplings of gravitoelectric matter (which possesses mass) to gravity (space-time); accordingly, we should have a field equation governing the interaction of dual matter with gravity. By making use of the variational principle, the gravitational field equation of gravitomagnetic matter can be obtained where the dual Einstein’s tensor is denoted by $`ϵ^{\alpha \lambda \sigma \tau }R_{\lambda \sigma \tau }^\beta ϵ^{\beta \lambda \sigma \tau }R_{\lambda \sigma \tau }^\alpha `$ with $`ϵ^{\alpha \lambda \sigma \tau }`$ and $`R_{\lambda \sigma \tau }^\beta `$ being the four-dimensional Levi-Civita completely antisymmetric tensor and the Riemann curvature tensor that describes the space-time curvature, respectively. By exactly solving this field equation, one can show that the topological property of the solution $`g_{t\phi }(r,\theta )`$ can be illustrated as follows: solid angle subtended by the curve shows the topological property of the gravitomagnetic vector potential of a static gravitomagnetic charge at the origin of the spherical coordinate system. Take the gravitomagnetic vector potentials $`𝐠=(0,0,\frac{2\mu }{4\pi }\frac{(1\mathrm{cos}\theta )}{r\mathrm{sin}\theta })`$ in spherical coordinate system, then the loop integral, $`_{\mathrm{curve}}𝐠d𝐥=\mu (1\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$, is proportional to the solid angle subtended by the curve with respect to the origin. The same situations arise in the adiabatic quantum geometric phase (Berry’s quantum phase), which reflects the global or topological properties of time evolution (or parameters evolution) of quantum systems.. Such property is in analogy with that of the geometric quantum phase in the time-dependent spin-gravity coupling (i.e., the interaction between a spinning particle with gravitomagnetic field) and other quantum adiabatic processes. The topological properties of gravitomagnetic charge (dual mass) may be shown in terms of the global features of geometric quantum phaseAnalogy between topological dual mass and geometric quantum phase are as follows: the dynamical correspondences to both of them are respectively the mass and the dynamical phase; gravitomagnetic moment results from the mass current, which is also the dynamical physical quantity; both reveal the global properties of physical systems. Comparison between gravitomagnetic charge and geometric phase enables to show the topological properties of the former. The reason why the topological property is important lies in that the global description of the physical phenomena is essential to understand the world. It is of interest that dual matter may constitute a dual world where dual mass abides by their own dynamical and gravitational laws, which is somewhat different from the laws in our world; for example, dual mass is acted upon by a gravitomagnetic Lorentz force in Newton’s gravitational (gravitoelectric) field, and the static dual mass produces the gravitomagnetic field rather than the Newton’s gravitoelectric field. . It follows that the expression of gravitomagnetic potential, $`g_{t\phi }(r,\theta )`$, due to dual mass is exactly analogous to that of the trigonometric geometric phase. In the similar fashion, it is readily verified that the gravitomagnetic potential, $`g_{\theta \phi }(r,t)`$, is similar to that of the hyperbolical geometric phase. This feature originates from the fact that the Lorentz group is a non-compact group.

Although there is no evidence for the existence of this topological dual mass at present, it is still essential to consider this topological or global phenomenon in General Relativity. It is believed that there would exist formation (or creation) mechanism of gravitomagnetic charge in the gravitational interaction, just as some prevalent theories provide the theoretical mechanism of existence of magnetic monopole in various gauge interactions. Magnetic monopole in electrodynamics and gauge field theory has been discussed and sought after for decades, and the existence of the ’t Hooft-Polyakov monopole solution has spurred new interest of both theorists and experimentalists. As the topological gravitomagnetic charge in the curved space-time, dual mass is believed to give rise to such interesting situation similar to that of magnetic monopole. If it is indeed present in universe, dual mass will also lead to significant consequences in astrophysics and cosmology. We emphasize that although the gravitomagnetic vector potential produced by the gravitomagnetic charge is the classical solution to the field equation, this kind of topological gravitomagnetic monopoles may arise not as fundamental entities in gravity theory, e.g., it will behave like a topological soliton.

Gravitomagnetic charge has some interesting relativistic quantum gravitational effects, e.g., the gravitational anti-Meissner effect, which may serve as an interpretation of the smallness of the observed cosmological constant. In accordance with quantum field theory, vacuum possesses infinite zero-point energy density due to the vacuum quantum fluctuations; whereas according to Einstein’s theory of general relativity, infinite vacuum energy density yields the divergent curvature of space-time, namely, the space-time of vacuum is extremely curved. Apparently it is in contradiction with the practical fact, since it follows from experimental observations that the space-time of vacuum is asymptotically flat. In the context of quantum field theory a cosmological constant corresponds to the energy density associated with the vacuum and then the divergent cosmological constant may result from the infinite energy density of vacuum quantum fluctuations. However, a diverse set of observations suggests that the universe possesses a nonzero but very small cosmological constant. How can we give a natural interpretation for the above paradox? Here, provided that vacuum matter is perfect fluid, which leads to the formal similarities between the weak-gravity equation in perfect fluid and the London’s electrodynamics of superconductivity, we suggest a potential explanation by using the cancelling mechanism via gravitational anti-Meissner effectNote that in London’s electrodynamics for superconductivity, the equation governing the magnetic fields in superconductors is of the type: $`^2𝐁=\lambda ^2𝐁`$ with $`\lambda `$ being a real number. In cosmological perfect fluid, however, the equation governing the gravitomagnetic fields in fluid is of the type: $`^2𝐁_\mathrm{g}=\lambda _\mathrm{g}^2𝐁_\mathrm{g}`$, which means the absence of the gravitational analogue to the superconducting Meissner’s effect. We can refer to this phenomenon as the gravitational (gravitomagnetic) anti-Meissner effect due to the minus sign on the right-handed side of the latter equation.: the gravitoelectric field (Newtonian field of gravity) produced by the gravitoelectric charge (mass) of the vacuum quantum fluctuations is exactly cancelled by the gravitoelectric field due to the induced current of the gravitomagnetic charge of the vacuum quantum fluctuations; the gravitomagnetic field produced by the gravitomagnetic charge (dual mass) of the vacuum quantum fluctuations is exactly cancelled by the gravitomagnetic field due to the induced current of the gravitoelectric charge (mass current) of the vacuum quantum fluctuations. Thus, at least in the framework of weak-field approximation, the extreme space-time curvature of vacuum caused by the large amount of the vacuum energy does not arise, and the gravitational effects of cosmological constant is eliminated by the contributions of the gravitomagnetic charge (dual mass). If gravitational Meissneranti-Meissner effect is of really physical significance, then it is necessary to apply this effect to the early universe where quantum and inflationary cosmologies dominate the evolution of the Universe.

## V $`𝒞oncluding`$ $`𝓇emarks`$

For the present, it is possible to investigate quantum mechanics in weak-gravitational fields, with the development of detecting and measuring technology such as laser-interferometer technology and so on. These investigations enable physicists to test validity or universality of fundamental laws and principles of General Relativity in, for instance, the microscopic quantum regimes. The above-mentioned effects associated gravitomagnetic fields reflect the relativistic quantum gravitational properties of matter-gravity couplings in weak-gravitational fields. It is believed that these effects will give rise to further interest of investigation, since there exist many physically potential applications of these relativistic quantum gravitational effects in quantum optics, gravity theory, quantum theory, cosmology, applied physics and other related areas as well.

Study of the geometric property in quantum regimes is an interesting and valuable direction. Since it reveals the global and topological properties of evolution of quantum systems, geometric phase has many applications in various branches of physics, say, in the coupling of neutron spin to the Earth’s rotation, a potential application may be suggested where the information on the Earth’s variations of rotating frequency will be obtained by measuring the geometric phase of the oppositely polarized neutrons through the neutron-gravity interferometer experiment. The topological charge in curved space-time also deserves further investigation, since it reflects plentiful global or geometric properties hidden in the gravity theory. It is believed that both theoretical and experimental interest in this direction may enables people to understand the global phenomena of the physical world better.


text:
# Scalings of domain wall energies in two dimensional Ising spin glasses

## The model, its properties and our methods —

The model consists of $`N=L^2`$ Ising spins $`S_i=\pm 1`$ on a simple square lattice with periodic boundary conditions. The Hamiltonian is

$$H\underset{ij}{}S_iJ_{ij}S_j,$$
(1)
where the sum runs over all pairs of nearest neighbors $`ij`$ and the $`J_{ij}`$ are the quenched random spin-spin couplings. We shall consider different distributions of these couplings, all of which are symmetrical about $`J=0`$. We begin with continuous distributions; most common is the one where the $`J_{ij}`$ are Gaussian random variables with zero mean and unit variance. After that we investigate discrete distributions; the most common distribution of this type has $`J_{ij}=\pm 1`$ with equal probability.

An important feature of spin glass ordering is the spin glass stiffness; the corresponding exponent $`\theta `$ describes how excitation free energies scale with the associated length scale. The standard way to measure this exponent is via the change in the system’s free energy when going from periodic to anti-periodic boundary conditions. At $`T=0`$ this reduces to measuring the difference

$$\delta E=E_0^{(P)}E_0^{(AP)},$$
(2)
where $`E_0^{(P)}`$ and $`E_0^{(AP)}`$ are the ground state energies for the system with respectively periodic and anti-periodic boundary conditions say in the $`x`$ direction. We are interested in the probability distribution of $`\delta E`$ when considering an ensemble of $`J_{ij}`$ and in the scaling law of its standard deviation $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E\underset{L\mathrm{}}{}L^\theta .$$
(3)
Measurements of $`\theta `$ in two dimensional spin glasses (see for instance Bray and Moore (1986)) give $`\theta 0.28`$. However, for the $`J_{ij}=\pm 1`$ distribution, Hartmann and Young Hartmann and Young (2001) recently showed that $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ remains of $`O(1)`$ for increasing $`L`$, implying that in this case $`\theta 0`$. In dimension $`d`$ above the lower critical dimension $`d_l^c`$ we have $`\theta >0`$ and spin glass ordering is stable against thermal fluctuations. On the contrary, when $`\theta <0`$, thermal fluctuations prevent spin glass ordering. Because of this, the authors of Hartmann and Young (2001) conjectured that $`d_l^c=2`$ for the $`J_{ij}=\pm 1`$ model. We shall see that $`d_l^c`$ should be identified with the highest value of $`d`$ where $`\theta 0`$, and so in fact $`d_l^c2.5`$ as believed before the study in Hartmann and Young (2001).

In this work we address these questions by first determining numerically the properties of $`P(\delta E)`$ and then by using the real space renormalization group picture. For the first part, we compute the ground states of our systems using a heuristic algorithm Houdayer and Martin (2001). In practice, when the lattice is not too large ($`L80`$), the algorithm returns the ground state with a high level of confidence for all of the distributions we shall consider in this work. The problem is to reduce enough the statistical errors; in practice we used a few tens of thousands of samples at a few values of $`L`$ for each case.

## Class 1: “continuous” distributions —

We first focus on distributions $`P(J)`$ that include a continuous part (we shall see later that this class includes certain discrete distributions also). When $`L`$ is sufficiently large, $`\delta E`$ can then take on arbitrary values. The value of $`\theta `$ for continuous distributions is well known only for Gaussian $`J_{ij}`$; in fact we are aware of no tests of universality in $`d=2`$, though the standard lore is that both $`\theta `$ and the shape of $`P(\delta E)`$ are universal Bray and Moore (1986).

In a first series of runs we obtained $`P(\delta E)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ for the model with Gaussian couplings. Then we moved on to a continuous yet singular probability density $`P(J_{ij})`$: $`P(J_{ij}=J)`$ $`=`$ $`fP_1(J)+(1f)P_2(J)`$, where $`P_1(J)`$ $`[e^{\frac{(J1)^2}{2}}+e^{\frac{(J+1)^2}{2}}]/\sqrt{8\pi }`$, $`P_2(J)`$ $`[\delta (J1)+\delta (J+1)]/2`$, and $`f`$ is a measure of the height of the distribution at $`J0`$. We refer to this $`P(J_{ij})`$ as the broadened bimodal (BB) distribution since it reduces to the $`J_{ij}=\pm 1`$ distribution when $`f=0`$.

In Fig. 1 we show $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ as a function of $`L`$ when $`P(J_{ij})`$ is: (1) a Gaussian of zero mean and unit variance ($`GAUSS`$ data); (2) the BB distribution, with $`f=0.1`$ ($`BB`$ $`0.1`$ data); (3) as in (2) but with $`f=0.2`$ ($`BB`$ $`0.2`$ data); (4) Gaussian but with the part in the interval $`[0.5,0.5]`$ forced to be $`0`$ ($`HOLE`$ data). Note that this last distribution has a large gap around $`J_{ij}=0`$.

In the Gaussian case the power law scaling of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ can be determined with good accuracy already from quite small lattices; fits to these data lead to $`\theta =0.282\pm 0.004`$, in agreement with previous work. The distributions (2), (3) and (4) give rise to a similar scaling albeit only at larger $`L`$ values. We have also considered other distributions such as $`P(J_{ij})`$ uniform in $`[1.5,0.5][0.5,1.5]`$ (notice that this distribution also has a gap around $`J=0`$), obtaining similar results. It thus seems very reasonable to expect that all distributions with a continuous part will lead to the same exponent, $`\theta 0.28`$.

A second universality issue concerns the shape of $`P(\delta E)`$. In the inset of Fig. 1 we show the probability density $`P(|\delta E|/\mathrm{\Delta }E)`$ when $`L=60`$ for the $`BB`$ $`0.1`$, $`BB`$ $`0.2`$, and $`GAUSS`$ data: the different data sets basically coincide within statistical errors, strengthening the claim that in this class the distribution of domain wall energies is universal (the curve displayed is just to guide the eye).

## Class 2: quantized energies —

At variance with the former distributions, the $`J_{ij}=\pm 1`$ model leads to $`\theta 0`$ Hartmann and Young (2001). We show in Fig. 2 that in this model $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ saturates quickly as $`L`$ grows. Is the $`J_{ij}=\pm 1`$ model a special case, a class on its own? The crucial point is that the possible $`\delta E`$ values are quantized: $`\delta E`$ is always a multiple of a quantum $`Q`$, here $`Q=4`$. This led us to consider distributions other than the $`\pm 1`$ one with this same quantization property. We begin by “diluting” the $`J_{ij}=\pm 1`$ model, setting $`J_{ij}=0`$ with probability $`0.2`$. The main effect of this is to reduce the quantum from $`4`$ to $`2`$; indeed, the local fields now can take the value 0,1,2,3,4 instead of 0,2,4. In Fig. 2 we see that for this model ($`DIL`$ data) $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ seems to saturate, so again $`\theta =0`$. However the convergence is slow. In any renormalization group picture this convergence is governed by a “correction to scaling” exponent $`\omega `$. We assume $`\theta =0`$ and that the asymptotic value of $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ is a non-zero constant given by the $`J=\pm 1`$ data; then we fit the diluted (DIL) model to the form:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E(L)\mathrm{\Delta }E(L=\mathrm{})+AL^\omega .$$
(4)
with $`A`$ and $`\omega `$ adjustable parameters. We have also considered distributions where $`J_{ij}=\pm J_1`$ or $`\pm J_2`$ with equal probability (we have studied the cases $`J_2/J_1=1.5`$, $`2`$ and $`3`$.). Again we find the convergence to be slow but fits as in (4) work well; furthermore, all the estimates of $`\omega `$ are similar, being in the $`[0.4:0.6]`$ interval. All these facts justify the claim that $`\theta =0`$ whenever $`\delta E`$ is quantized.

Just as in the continuous case, to analyze the shape of the distribution of $`\delta E`$ we must choose a scale; the correct choice is to compare the histograms after measuring all energies in units of the basic quantum $`Q`$. To test whether the histograms for the different $`J_{ij}`$ distributions become identical in the large $`L`$ limit we plot in Fig. 2 (lower panel) the probability $`P(\delta E=0)`$ to find a zero energy domain wall. The data suggest that the histograms become identical in the large $`L`$ limit, i.e., they support universality. (Following Eq. (4), we fix the asymptotic value of $`P(\delta E=0)`$ to be that given by the $`J=\pm 1`$ model, and then we determine $`\omega `$; in the plot we show these fits; they are all good and the values of $`\omega `$ are close to $`0.5`$.) We have checked in detail that this claim applies to the quantized distributions mentioned before and to the $`DIL`$ model with $`10\%`$ dilution.

## Class 3: quantized energies revisited —

So far we have only considered situations with even values of $`L`$. If $`L`$ is odd (and the $`J_{ij}=\pm 1`$), the possible values of $`\delta E/J`$ are $`\pm 2,\pm 6,\pm 10`$, …The quantum $`Q`$ is still the separation between the energy values, but the positions of the histogram entries are different (in particular, $`\delta E=0`$ is not allowed). A somewhat trivial consequence of this is that necessarily $`\theta 0`$ as $`\mathrm{\Delta }E/Q`$ is greater or equal to $`1/2`$ for all $`L`$. Consider now the question of the universality of the histograms. We have checked within our error bars that the large $`L`$ limit of $`P(\delta E/Q)`$ for the $`J_{ij}=\pm 1`$ model is the same as that obtained using the $`J_2/J_1=3`$ model (still with $`L`$ odd of course). This kind of quantization thus gives rise to a third class, again with $`\theta =0`$.

Could there be further classes with quantized energies? Since we have imposed reflection symmetry of the distribution of the $`J_{ij}`$ the only possible histograms are the two we discussed: $`\delta E`$ is a multiple of the quantum $`Q`$ or of the form $`(n+1/2)Q`$, where $`n`$ is integer. If the universality class depends only on the possible histogram types, then no other classes arise.

## Discrete does not mean quantized —

Let us also consider the case where the couplings are discrete but where there is no quantization. We consider the distribution $`P(J)=\frac{1}{4}[\delta (J\pm J_1)+\delta (J\pm J_2)]`$ (IRR for “irrational” hereafter), where $`J_1=1`$ and $`J_2=\frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2}1.618`$ is the golden mean. Clearly we have $`\delta E=2(nJ_1+mJ_2)`$ where $`n`$ and $`m`$ are integers. Since $`J_2/J_1`$ is irrational, the set of possible $`\delta E`$ values becomes dense when $`L\mathrm{}`$ and so it is natural to conjecture that this $`P(J_{ij})`$ leads to domain wall energies in class 1. Our findings are that $`\mathrm{\Delta }E`$ decreases with $`L`$ and shows no sign of saturation, and a power law fit gives $`\theta =0.29\pm 0.01`$, the value associated with class 1. Our conjecture is thus substantiated by these findings.

The convergence of $`P(\delta E/\mathrm{\Delta }E)`$ to its limit is more problematic: for finite $`L`$, the distribution is the sum of a finite number of delta functions: we can only hope to have a “weak convergence” to the $`P`$ obtained with the Gaussian couplings. In these conditions it is appropriate to consider the integrated probability distribution $`\mathrm{\Pi }_<(X)_{\mathrm{}}^XP\left(\frac{\delta E}{\mathrm{\Delta }E}\right)d\left(\frac{\delta E}{\mathrm{\Delta }E}\right)`$. In Fig. 3 we plot $`\mathrm{\Pi }_<`$ for the irrational and for some continuous cases. The plots are very similar, supporting the claim that the discrete distribution IRR leads to domain wall energies in class 1. We have also included $`P(\delta E/\mathrm{\Delta }E)`$ as an inset into Fig. 3: we have used a small bin size that allows one to observe the complex structure.

## The case of hierarchical lattices

— The effect of having quantized $`\delta E`$ can also be studied on hierarchical lattices. One advantage is that one can study very large sizes, a second is that one can access a continuous range of dimensions. We have focused on Migdal-Kadanoff lattices Southern and Young (1977); these are obtained by recursively “expanding” graphs. Starting with one edge connecting two sites, one replaces it by $`b`$ paths in parallel, each composed of $`s`$ edges in series, leading to $`bs`$ new edges. This procedure is repeated hierarchically; after $`G`$ “generations” the distance between the outer-most spins is $`L=s^G`$, while the number of edges of the lattice is $`(bs)^G`$. The dimension of these lattices is $`d=1+\mathrm{ln}(b)/\mathrm{ln}(s)`$. One puts an Ising spin on each site and a coupling $`J_{ij}`$ on each edge. Periodic boundary conditions simply imply that the two end spins must have the same value, and from this we define $`\delta E`$. The probability distribution of $`\delta E`$ can be followed from $`G`$ to $`G+1`$. The recursion equations for $`P(\delta E)`$ make sense for any $`s`$ Curado and Meunier (1988): $`s`$ can be an integer but it can also be any positive real value! One may then compute $`\theta `$ for an interval of dimensions, using either continuous $`J_{ij}`$ (for instance to check universality Nogueira et al. (1998); Boettcher ) or quantized $`J_{ij}`$ couplings (our focus here).

In Fig. 4 we show $`\theta `$ as a function of dimension $`d`$ ($`s`$ is variable, $`b`$ is fixed and set to $`3`$). We show the values for continuous distributions and for when the quantization is of the form of class $`3`$. As expected, if in one class $`\theta >0`$, all classes lead to the same value of $`\theta `$, i.e., quantization is irrelevant when the energy scale diverges. However, as soon as $`\theta <0`$ in the continuous case, quantization gives rise to a histogram fixed point distribution in which the $`|\delta E|`$ are concentrated on the few lowest values and $`\theta =0`$.

Similar results are obtained for class 2 quantization but there is an interesting difference. Indeed, since $`\delta E`$ can be zero in this class, one sees two further fixed points. An obvious one is associated with having $`P(\delta E=0)=1`$, i.e,. all domain wall energies vanish. It is easy to see that this fixed point is stable and has $`\theta =\mathrm{}`$; there is no spin glass stiffness, and the system is paramagnetic even at zero temperature. The other fixed point is unstable and has $`\theta =0`$. What is the interpretation of these two extra fixed points? To allow $`\delta E`$ to be zero, one can think of the diluted model where some of the bonds have $`J_{ij}=0`$. Clearly when the dilution is strong enough, the non-zero bonds will no longer percolate and we are in a strongly paramagnetic phase; the renormalization group (RG) flow in this phase takes one to the $`P(\delta E=0)=1`$ fixed point. On the contrary, at low dilution, we are in a spin glass phase and the RG flows are towards the other stable fixed point. On the boundary of these two phases, the RG flows takes one to another fixed point which is unstable: it is associated with the paramagnetic to spin glass transition as dilution is decreased. Such considerations have previously been developed for $`d=3`$ Migdal-Kadanoff lattices Bray and Feng (1987).

Finally, we see that it is appropriate to define the lower critical dimension $`d_l^c`$ from the end point of the $`\theta =0`$ curve; $`\theta =0`$ on its own does not signal $`d=d_l^c`$.

## Discussion —

Our numerical evidence of universality (both for $`\theta `$ and $`P(\delta E/\mathrm{\Delta }E)`$) is very strong for continuous and related distributions (see figures 1 and 3). But we also find universality classes when $`\delta E`$ is quantized. This classification is substantiated by the behavior of $`\theta `$ and of the fixed point distributions of domain wall energies in Migdal-Kadanoff lattices. It is appropriate however to be cautious and to remark that the correction to scaling exponent $`\omega `$ we measure (see equation 4) is small, $`\omega 0.5`$. Because of that we are not able to completely exclude the Bray and Moore expectation that $`\mathrm{\Delta }E(L=\mathrm{})=0`$ Bray and Moore (1987). Our most extensive data are for the model DIL with $`f=0.2`$. Here our fits give $`\mathrm{\Delta }E(L=\mathrm{})/Q=0.49(1)`$ while if we force $`\mathrm{\Delta }E(L=\mathrm{})=0`$, the $`\chi ^2`$ of the fit increases by $`2.3`$; thus $`\mathrm{\Delta }E(L=\mathrm{})=0`$ is not excluded by our data though it appears as much less likely.

What is the source of the universality we observe? In the Migdal-Kadanoff lattices, the renormalization group transformation is clear and so the different classes are very natural. For the Euclidean lattices the existence of a renormalization group transformation for $`\delta E`$ has not been established, but since our data point to universality, it should be possible to define such a transformation. Note that its fixed point (and thus $`P(\delta E/\mathrm{\Delta }E)`$) will depend on the aspect ratio and on the fact that we use periodic boundary conditions. Our $`P(\delta E)`$ are thus a priori not comparable to those of Hartmann and Young (2001) where one of the directions had free boundary conditions.

We acknowledge important conversations with Giorgio Parisi that led us to this study, and we thank J.-P. Bouchaud for his comments. AP acknowledges the financial support provided through the European Community’s Human Potential Programme under contract HPRN-CT-2002-00307, DYGLAGEMEM.