text:
# A study of the stability regions in the planetary system HD 74156 – Can it host earthlike planets in habitable zones?

## 1 Introduction

Since the discovery of the first extrasolar planetary system about 10 years ago a major point of dynamical investigations is the determination of stable regions in extrasolar planetary systems where additional planets on stable orbits may exist. Today we have evidence for 101 planetary systems with 116 planets, where 13 systems have more than one planet. The existence of three (or more) massive bodies allows stability studies of the system itself; it is of special interest when a planet is part of a double star system like in $`\gamma `$ Cephei (Dvorak et al. 2003). In this investigation we are interested in a system with 2 planets which could permit other planets on stable orbits. Therefore we have undertaken a dynamical study with the aid of numerical experiments of the G0 star HD 74156 hosting two planets on very eccentric orbits (almost e=0.65 for the inner planet HD 74156b and e=0.4 for the outer planet HD 74156c)111we will use in the following the suffix b for the inner and c for the outer planet. As two recent publications show – Barnes & Raymond (2002) speak of “contain broad zones of stability” whereas Menou & Tabachnik (2003) found no surviving planets in this region – the problem of additional planets in HD74156 could not be answered satisfactory up to now. Our investigation unveils the complicated structure of this region containing stable and unstable orbits close to each other and show that regular, chaotic and also sticky orbits exist in this domain.

In the following we discuss the dynamical models used and the method of establishing dynamical stability via long-term numerical integrations and chaos-indicators. Then we discuss the specific rôle of resonances in the region between the two planets from 0.44 AU to 2.4 AU caused by the inner planet (up to 0.8 AU) and the outer planet (down to 1.3 AU). Next the domain between these resonances is studied and the results of the stability studies for possible orbits of massless planets are shown. We also placed massive planets between 0.8 AU and 1.3 AU (also on inclined orbits) to check their stability in this “habitable zone” (=HZ, Kasting 1993).

## 2 The dynamical model and the methods

The orbital parameters were taken from the Geneva group of observers222see http://obswww.unige.ch/$``$udry/planet/hd74156.html with $`a_\mathrm{b}=0.28`$ AU, $`e_\mathrm{b}=0.647`$, the mass $`M_\mathrm{b}=1.61M_{\mathrm{Jupiter}}`$ and $`a_\mathrm{c}=3.82`$ AU, $`e_\mathrm{c}=0.354`$, $`M_\mathrm{c}=8.21M_{\mathrm{Jupiter}}`$.

Because of the large eccentricities of the two planets an analytical method to solve this problem does not work; any perturbation approach will fail. The method widely used by different groups are numerical experiments in appropriate dynamical models. In our study we used the following four different models:

* the restricted 4-body problem consisting of the star, the two planets and – as test bodies – massless planets in the same plane (=Ia) and on inclined orbits (=Ib).
* the full 4 body-problem, where the additional planets had masses in the range between $`0.1M_{\mathrm{JUP}}`$ to $`1M_{\mathrm{JUP}}`$ on plane (=IIa) and on inclined orbits (=IIb)

The integration of the Newtonian equations of motion (the masses involved are point masses) was undertaken with the Lie-Integration method which was already extensively used by our group (e.g. Hanslmeier & Dvorak 1984; Lichtenegger 1984). It uses an automatic step-size and is – due to the recurrence of the Lie-terms – a very fast and precise integration method.

As second independent tool to check the domains in between the two existing planetary orbits we utilized the Fast Lyapunov Indicators (FLIs) developed by Froeschlé et al. (1997). This program uses a Bulirsch Stoer integration method and is especially adapted for distinguishing between chaotic and regular orbits via the FLIs.

The integration times were in some experiments extended up to $`10^8`$ years. Our escape (stability) criterion was such that no close encounters within the Hill’s sphere were allowed; such an orbit was classified as “unstable”. The criterion for the FLIs is somewhat different: the time evolution of the FLIs defines clearly the orbital behaviour. The two methods were used complementary and showed in most cases quite a good agreement of the results.

## 3 The main resonance regions

First of all we computed the domains in semimajor axes where the orbit of the inner (outer) planet does not allow stable orbits, because the respective aphelion (perihelion) distance would lead to close encounters. Thus the possible region for circular orbits without a crossing of the orbits shrinks to $`0.44`$ AU $`a1.81`$ AU. It is well known from the main belt of asteroids that the mean motion resonances are responsible for its structure with gaps and families. We therefore computed the main resonances up to the 1:5 mean motion resonance with the inner planet (=outer mean motion resonance - OMMR) and up to the 5:1 mean motion resonance with the outer planet (=inner mean motion resonance - IMMR). The main resonances which we have taken into account were the major ones known from the asteroid belt: 2:1, 5:2, 7:3, 3:1, 4:1, 5:1 for the OMMR and the respective resonances for the IMMR (1:5, etc.). For motions in resonances the initial starting position is quite important, because sometimes a protection mechanism avoids close approaches even for large eccentricities. We have checked the IMMR and the OMMR carefully and have chosen 12 starting positions for the fictitious planet in a certain resonance with the mean anomaly $`M=0^o,30^o,\mathrm{},360^o`$. The time of integration was $`10^6`$ years, but we emphasize that the extension from $`10^5`$ years to $`10^6`$ years changed the results only slightly; therefore we are convinced that the results are “realistic”.

For the IMMR in model Ia (Fig. 1) we can see that only a few orbits survive in the 5:1 resonance, all the others suffer from close encounters with the outer planet sooner or later. We then studied also the IMMR in model Ib for initial inclinations of the fictitious planet between $`10^oi50^o`$ with $`\mathrm{\Delta }i=10^o`$. Up to $`i=30^o`$ the stability behavior did not change significantly, for $`i=40^o`$ out of the 72 orbits in the IMMR only $`10\%`$ survived in the higher resonances 4:1 and 5:1.

For the OMMR in model Ia (Fig. 2) there are some orbits stable even in the 1:2 resonance which overlap – concerning the distance to the host star – with the aphelion distance of the inner planet. Their survival is due to the initial conditions chosen for some orbits and is a well known fact. The picture is different from the one for the IMMR where only resonances far away from the planet’s orbit survive; for the OMMR we can see stable orbits in all resonances with the exception of the 2:5 and the 1:4 resonance. In contrary to the IMMR the percentage of stable orbits in these resonances increases for larger initial inclinations; only for $`i=50^o`$ almost no orbit survives in this region.

As another check we started different fictitious massless planets in model Ia and Ib in between the resonances using the FLIs. As example we show the plot of an experiment where the test planet was started with a=0.7 AU close the 1:3 resonance (Fig. 4a); the starting positions of the two planets were chosen between $`0^o`$ and $`360^o`$ (model Ia). Only for a strip around $`M_\mathrm{b}=0`$, where M is the mean anomaly, the orbits turned out to be stable; these results coincide with the stability of the 1:3 resonance of Fig. 2 for M = 0. As second example we show the dependence on the initial conditions for a fictitious planet with an initial semimajor axis a = 1.3 AU (Fig. 4b), which is close to the 5:1 resonance. A broad strip of stable orbits is visible for certain combinations of the initial conditions, about 33$`\%`$ of the orbits are unstable; here the agreement with Fig. 1 (the orbits of the 5:1 resonance at a = 1.306 AU) is not so good; the ratio of stable orbits to unstable ones is almost vice-versa (4 out of 12 are stable). This fact shows the complicated structure of the phase space, where stable and unstable orbits are sometimes very close to each other according to high order resonances; they can be stable for quite long time on “sticky orbits” (e.g. Dvorak et al, 1998). Globally one can say that stable orbits in this domain of IMMR and the inner part of the OMMR are quite rare.

## 4 The region between the resonances

For the region in between 0.8 and 1.3 AU, the HZ, we wanted to check how the stability of the orbits there depends on the initial eccentricities of the two planets (we did not change their semimajor axes, which seem to be quite well determined through the radial velocity curves). Therefore we have undertaken straightforward integrations in model Ia for four fixed values $`e_\mathrm{c}=0.3,0.35,0.4`$ and $`0.45`$. For each diagram one parameter was the initial semimajor axis of the fictitious planet $`0.6`$ AU $`a1.4`$ AU, the other one was the eccentricity of the inner planet $`0.5e_\mathrm{b}0.7`$. The actual orbital parameters are quite well inside these ranges of eccentricities of the orbits of the two planets. Our criterion for the “grade of stability” was the eccentricity of the orbit of the fictitious planet staying within a certain range during the whole integration characterized with different grey tones (from dark to light grey), white stands for escaping orbits. The criterion for the darkest region with $`e<0.2`$ guarantees that the differences in distance to the host star and thus the temperature changes are relatively small and favor the development and stability of atmospheres (Lammer, 2003, private communication)

For $`e_\mathrm{c}=0.3`$ (Fig. 5a) – besides the “finger” around $`a=0.7`$ AU (1:4 resonance) – we see a broad stability region between 0.9 and 1.4 AU where the eccentricities are $`e<0.3`$; it becomes slightly smaller for larger $`e_\mathrm{b}`$. At $`a=1.25`$ AU, close to the 16:3 resonance, there exists a stable strip of orbits with small eccentricity variations ($`e<0.15`$). This strip is also visible in Fig. 5b ($`e_\mathrm{c}=0.35`$), where $`e_\mathrm{b}=0.649`$ is marked by a straight line. In the next 2 figures (Fig. 5c for $`e_\mathrm{c}=0.4`$ and Fig. 5d for $`e_\mathrm{c}=0.45`$) we see how the stability of the orbits weakens with increasing eccentricity of the outer planet. Whereas in Fig. 5c we still see a small finger of very stable orbits at $`a=1.25`$ AU, in Fig. 5d no orbits of the fictitious planets for $`a1.2`$ AU survive!

We also checked how secular resonances may act in this region between OMMR and IMMR333Secular resonances arise when the motion of the perihelion (Keplerian element $`\omega `$) or the motion of the longitude of the node (Keplerian element $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$) is in resonance with the respective motion of the regarded planet.. It turned out that both planets have periods in the order of some $`10^4`$ years while for planets in the HZ these frequencies are in the order of only some $`10^3`$ years. We conjecture that the reason for chaotic motions between the planets b and c are the recently discovered three-body-resonances (e.g. Morbidelli 2002) which are important for asteroids in the main belt – but this will be investigated in more detail in a future study.

## 5 Massive planets

Further computations have been undertaken in model IIa and IIb for the region between IMMR and OMMR for three different masses of the additional planet, namely 0.1, 0.3 and 1 $`M_{\mathrm{JUP}}`$. The orbital character of these planets was not very different from the ones of the non-massive fictitious planets: only very few orbits were found to be stable (especially around a = 1.1 AU), but most of them were unstable for larger inclinations. This is somewhat in contradiction to the paper already cited above (Barnes & Raymond 2002), where the authors claim that they have found “broad zones of stability”. Unfortunately it is not possible to compare the results directly because up to now only an abstract paper is available. We plan a complete study, where massive planets are involved, using the Lie-code in a parallel version (Stadel et al, 2003).

## 6 Conclusions

In this study we checked how the motion in resonances destroys certain stability regions outside planet b (OMMR) and inside planet c in the extrasolar system HD 74156. Furthermore the small region between 0.8 AU and 1.3 AU was studied through numerical experiments using the orbits of thousands of fictitious planets there. The main result is that there can survive orbits for long time intervals, but they seem to be quite rare and depend on very special initial conditions. We found orbits surviving for more than $`10^7`$ years for different initial semimajor axes, but very close to these orbits others do not survive $`10^5`$ years. This typical behavior of stickiness is well known in regions were regular and chaotic motions are mixed. For initial conditions close to a=1.25 the orbits stay within the eccentricity range $`e0.12`$, thus well inside the HZ of HD 74156.

###### Acknowledgements.

E. Pilat-Lohinger wishes to acknowledge the support by the Austrian FWF (Hertha Firnberg Project T122). B. Funk and F. Freistetter wish to acknowledge the support by the Austrian FWF (Project P14375-TPH). Special thanks go to Markus Gyergyovits, who draw our attention to this problem and Ruth Grützbauch, who helped editing this article.


format: text

text:
# Quantum authentication scheme based on algebraic coding

## I Introduction

Authentication is a procedure to verify that a received message comes from a certain entity, and have not been altered. Classical cryptography describes several techniques to implement authentication. The Message Authentication Code (MAC) presumes the existence of a secret key shared among the two parts, A (Alice) and B (Bob). The coding algorithm generates a tag, known as a cryptographic checksum, which is a function of the message and the key. The tag is attached to the message. The recipient performs the same calculation on the received message, using the same secret key, to generate a new tag to be compared to the received tag. Identical tags indicate that the received message is authentic Stallings (1998).

The discovery and formalization of quantum mechanics during the last century motivated studies in the fields of computation and information theories Nielsen and Chuang (2000); Spiller (1996); Bennett and Shor (1998). Effects like entanglement and the discovery of EPR pairs made possible quantum states teleportation Bennett et al. (1993). Some problems computationally intractable in the classical world, as factorization, are solved using polynomial algorithms running on a quantum computer. The development of such technology would make unfeasible, for example, public key cryptographic systems, whose security is based on the inefficiency of classical factorization algorithms Stallings (1998). One of the most interesting applications of quantum information theory is quantum cryptography. In 1970, Wiesner showed that quantum mechanics properties could be used for such end, but his work was only published in 1983 Wiesner (1983). Later, Bennett and Brassard described a quantum key distribution protocol known as BB84 Bennett and Brassard (1984). There exist several proofs of unconditional security of BB84 Mayers ; Lo ; Shor and Preskill , even against any collectives attacks Biham et al. .

Until the last decade, the expression “quantum cryptography” referred basically to protocols for quantum key distribution (QKD). Recently, several researches have been made in the sense of applying quantum mechanics resources in the resolution of others problems related to the data security. The first works deals to the key verification Zeng and Zhang (2000) and user authentication Dusek et al. (1999); Zeng and Guo ; Jensen and Schack . Key verification consists of assuring the legitimacy of the two parts involved in a key distribution scheme, and that the established key is authentic. User authentication, also called user identification, allows a system to determine the users identity that wants to use it.

Curty and Santos Curty and Santos (2001) proposed a protocol to quantum authentication of unitary-length classical messages (bit). As for the secret key, they use a maximally entangled EPR pair previously shared between Alice and Bob. For each message, an EPR pair is used. Alice needs to generate, through a unitary operation, a quantum state, called quantum tag, which depends on the qubit that represents the classical bit and her part of the EPR pair. For the types of attacks discussed, the probability $`P_d`$ that Eve deceives Bob was $`0.5P_d<1`$, depending on the choice of the unitary operation. Later, the same authors proposed a protocol to quantum authentication of unitary-length quantum messages (qubit) Curty et al. (2002). The second protocol is a generalization of the first, where the quantum tag now belongs to a state space of dimension equal to or greater than the dimension of the message state space.

Recently, Barnum et al. Barnum et al.  described a protocol to authenticate quantum messages of length $`m`$. They propose a scheme that both enables Alice to encrypt and authenticate (with unconditional security) an $`m`$ qubit message by using a stabilizer code to encode the message into $`m+s`$ qubits, where the failure probability decreases exponentially in the security parameter $`s`$. Such scheme requires a private key of size $`2m+O(s)`$ to be shared between Alice and Bob. To archive this, the authors proposed a protocol for testing the purity of shared EPR pairs. This protocol needs quantum circuits for the coding and decoding operations.

In this paper we address the problem of authenticating classical messages of length $`m`$ transmitted over a noiseless quantum channel. We propose a non-interactive scheme that just requires preparation of quantum states into orthornormal bases, transmission and measurements of these states in the same bases. To reach a wished security level, the message should be coded using a classical linear algebraic code $`C[n,m,t]`$ Wicker (1995). After the coding operation, Alice creates $`n`$ qubits based on the chosen codeword and on a secret key of $`n`$ bits, $`x_{AB}`$, previously shared with Bob. The key indicates the bases used by Alice and Bob for the creation and measurement of the qubits. Bob assumes that no forgery has taken place and that the message is authentic if the result of the measurement is a codeword $`cC[n,m,t]`$. We consider two types of attacks, the no-message and intercept-resend attacks. We calculate the probability of a eavesdropping successfully forger a message to deceive Bob. As we will show, this probability depends on the parameters $`n`$ and $`t`$ of the code $`C[n,m,t]`$.

## II A Protocol to Quantum Authentication of $`m`$-Length Classical Messages

Suppose Alice wants to send Bob a $`m`$-bits certified message, $`k_i`$, chosen from a set $`K=\{k_i\}=\{0,1\}^m`$. Bob, when receiving the message, should be able to infer about its authenticity, i.e., if the message was sent by Alice or not. The protocol described in this section makes use of a classical linear algebraic code $`C[n,m,t]`$ with parity check matrix $`H`$, and a noiseless quantum channel for transmission of coded messages. For each message $`k_iK`$ we associate a codeword $`c_iC`$. Participants must share a classical secret key of $`n`$ bits, $`x_{AB}`$, chosen in a random and independent way.

The authentication procedure is described as follows. Initially, Alice and Bob define two orthonormal bases for the 2-dimension Hilbert space, $`𝒵=\{|0,|1\}`$ and $`𝒳=\{|+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0+|1),|=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0|1)\}`$. When Alice needs to send the message $`k_A`$, she computes the corresponding codeword $`c_A`$. For each bit of $`c_A`$, Alice prepares a quantum state $`|\psi _j`$ based on the corresponding key bit. Then, if the $`j`$-th bit of $`x_{AB}`$ is 0, Alice prepares $`|\psi _j`$ using $`𝒵`$ basis, such that

$$|\psi _j=\{\begin{array}{cc}|0\hfill & \text{ if the }j\text{-th bit of }c_A\text{ is }0\hfill \\ |1\hfill & \text{ if the }j\text{-th bit of }c_A\text{ is }1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(1)
Similarly, if the $`j`$-th bit of $`x_{AB}`$ is 1, Alice prepares $`|\psi _j`$ using $`𝒳`$ basis, such that

$$|\psi _j=\{\begin{array}{cc}|+\hfill & \text{ if the }j\text{-th bit of }c_A\text{ is }0\hfill \\ |\hfill & \text{ if the }j\text{-th bit of }c_A\text{ is }1.\hfill \end{array}$$
(2)
After the qubits generation, Alice sends the state $`|\psi _j^n`$ to Bob through the quantum channel.

At the reception, Bob makes measurements to obtain a sequence $`m_B`$ of $`n`$ bits. For the $`j`$-th received qubit, Bob measures it using the basis $`𝒵`$ or $`𝒳`$ depending on the $`j`$th bit of $`x_{AB}`$ is 0 or 1, respectively. Because the quantum channel is perfect, Bob recognizes that the message is authentic if $`m_B`$ is a codeword, i.e., $`m_BH^T=0`$. Then, Bob decodes $`m_B`$ to obtain the authentic message. Otherwise, Bob assumes that Eve tried to send him an unauthentic message. He then discards the received message. After each transmission, Alice and Bob discard the key $`x_{AB}`$.

## III Security Analysis

In this section we analyze the security of the proposed protocol, for the case of a noiseless quantum channel connecting Alice and Bob. Two types of attacks will be considered: the no-message attack and the intercept-resend attack. In the first one, Eve prepares a quantum state and sends it to Bob. In the second, Eve intercepts the qubits and performs measurements in attempting to obtain some information about the message sent by Alice. Then, Eve exploits the information gained to prepare possibly another message that she sends to Bob.

For the analysis, we consider that the linear code $`C`$ and the mapping $`k_ic_i`$ are publicly known, what is a realist assumption.

### III.1 No-Message Attack

We analyze here the case where Eve precedes Alice and sends Bob a quantum state $`|\psi _ϵ=|\psi _{ϵ_j}^n`$ trying to impersonate Alice. Let Eve choose a message $`k_E`$, with associated codeword $`c_E`$. Because Eve does not know anything about the key $`x_{AB}`$, she chooses a random sequence $`x_E`$ to indicate the bases used to create the qubits.

To calculate the protocols failure probability $`P_f`$, we define, for each message bit, three events: $`\epsilon _1=`$ Eve chooses the same basis than Bob; $`\epsilon _2=`$ Eve chooses a different basis from Bob; and $`\epsilon _3=`$ Bob obtain, after measurement, the same bit that Eve sent. The probability $`P_f`$ that Eve cheats Bob is therefore,

$$P_f=(P(\epsilon _3|\epsilon _1)P(\epsilon _1)+P(\epsilon _3|\epsilon _2)P(\epsilon _2))^n.$$
(3)
The first conditioned probability, $`P(\epsilon _3|\epsilon _1)`$, is equal to 1 due to the fact that, when Eve chooses the same basis that Bob uses to measure the qubit, Bob will always obtain by the measurement the same bit that Eve wished send to him. When Eve misses the basis, Bob measures the same bit sent by Eve with probability $`P(\epsilon _3|\epsilon _2)=1/2`$. Then,

$`P_f`$ $`=`$ $`(1\times {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\times {\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})^n`$ (4)
$`=`$ $`(3/4)^n.`$
### III.2 Intercept-Resend Attack

In this type of attack, Eve segments the quantum channel between Alice and Bob, intercepts and measures the quantum states that are being transmitted to Bob. Based on the gained information, Eve prepares another message of her interest and sends it to Bob.

Since Eve has no information about the secret key $`x_{AB}`$, she must initially choose her bases sequence, called here $`x_E`$, to measure the qubits. We investigate here an eavesdropper strategy where Eve attempts to decode correctly the $`n`$ bit string resulting from measurements, to obtain the codeword sent by Alice. If Eve makes this successfully, she can exploit the gained information to partially correct her key $`x_E`$, forge an authentic message and send it to Bob.

Suppose Alice generates the quantum state $`|\psi _j^n`$ based on the codeword $`c_A`$, corresponding to the message $`k_A`$, and the classical secret key $`x_{AB}`$ shared with Bob. Initially, we calculate the probability $`P_{\text{dec}}`$ of Eve decodes successfully the bit string resulting from measurements to obtain $`c_A`$. To perform this, we employ the error correction properties of the code $`C`$ together with our strategy to create the quantum states. Let $`m_E`$ the $`n`$-bits sequence resulting of Eves measurements using her key $`x_E`$ randomly generated. Define the random variable $`X=`$ number of bits of Eves key $`x_E`$, that coincides with the bits of Alice and Bobs key $`x_{AB}`$. If $`e=m_E+c_A`$ is the error vector when Eve measures $`|\psi _j^n`$, then

$`P_{\text{dec}}`$ $`=`$ $`P(w(e)t)`$ (5)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{nt1}{}}}P(X=i)P(w(e)t|X=i)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=nt}{\overset{n}{}}}P(X=i),`$
where $`w(e)`$ stands for error vector Hamming weight Wicker (1995). Because if Eves bases sequence $`x_E`$ matches $`x_{AB}`$ in $`nt1`$ or more positions, then the error vector weight is always less than or equal to $`t`$, i.e., $`P(w(e)t|X=i)=1`$ since $`int`$.

It is straightforward to see that $`X`$ has a binomial distribution with $`p=1/2`$,

$`P(X=i)`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}}\right)(1/2)^i(1/2)^{ni}`$ (6)
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}}\right)2^n.`$
Thus, for any realization of $`X`$, $`X=i`$, Eve knows with probability one that $`i`$ bits of $`m_E`$ are correct bits. Among $`ni`$ remaining bits of $`m_E`$, Eve should measure correctly at least $`nit`$ bits to be able to correct the word. But, if Eve misses the basis, she has probability $`p=1/2`$ of still obtain the correct bit. So, for $`0int1`$

$`P(w(e)t|X=i)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{t}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{ni}{nih}}\right)(1/2)^{nih}(1/2)^h`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{t}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{ni}{nih}}\right)2^{(ni)}.`$
The probability $`P_{\text{dec}}`$ is then

$`P_{\text{dec}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{nt1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{t}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{ni}{nih}}\right)2^{(2ni)}`$ (8)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=nt}{\overset{n}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}}\right)2^n.`$
The decoding probability found above depends on the parameters $`n`$ and $`t`$ of the chosen code. Once Eve decodes successfully the codeword sent by Alice, there is an increase on the failure probability of the system. This is because Eve gains information from Alice and Bob’s secret key, allowing Eve partially corrects its key $`x_E`$. To achieve this, she compares the bits of $`m_E`$ with the bits of $`c_A`$. Eve concludes that chose wrong bases in the positions where $`m_E`$ differ with $`c_A`$. She then flips the incorrect bits of $`x_E`$ to obtain a new key $`x_E^{}`$.

For the scenario described above, it is possible to calculate the systems failure probability. Assume that when Eve decodes a message correctly, she corrects $`t`$ positions of $`x_E`$. Define the events: $`\epsilon _i=`$ Eve guesses $`i`$ positions of $`x_{AB}`$ and decodes $`m_E`$ correctly; $`\epsilon =`$ Bob accepts the received message as authentic. If Eve chooses a message to transmit and creates the quantum state $`|\psi _E^n`$ based on the corresponding codeword and the corrected key $`x_E`$, the protocols failure probability $`P_f^{}`$ can be written as

$$P_f^{}=\underset{i=0}{\overset{nt1}{}}P(\epsilon |\epsilon _i)P(\epsilon _i)+\underset{i=nt}{\overset{n}{}}P(\epsilon _i).$$
(9)
When Eve guesses more than $`nt1`$ bases, she decodes the message correctly, and she can correct entirely its key to obtain $`x_E^{}=x_{AB}`$. Therefore, Eve always deceives Bob, i.e., $`P(\epsilon |\epsilon _i)=1`$ for $`ntin`$.

To calculate the conditioned probability $`P(\epsilon |\epsilon _i)`$, it is enough to notice that $`i`$ bits of $`x_{AB}`$ were initially correct and $`t`$ bits were corrected. Therefore, there exists $`w(x_{AB}+x_E)=nti`$ incorrect bits in $`x_E`$. Although Eve misses the basis, there is a probability equals to $`1/2`$ of Bob measures the same bit sent by Eve, so that

$$P(\epsilon |\epsilon _i)=2^{(nti)}.$$
(10)
The probability $`P(\epsilon _i)`$ it was previously discussed \[Eqs. (7) and (8)\]. For $`0int1`$,

$$P(\epsilon _i)=\underset{h=0}{\overset{t}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}\right)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{ni}{nih}\right)2^{(2ni)},$$
(11)
and for $`int`$,

$$P(\epsilon _i)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}\right)2^n,$$
(12)
so that the probability $`P_f^{}`$ is

$`P_f^{}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{nt1}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{h=0}{\overset{t}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}}\right)\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{ni}{nih}}\right)2^{(3n2it)}`$ (13)
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=nt}{\overset{n}{}}}\left({\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{n}{i}}\right)2^n.`$
## IV Protocol Summary

Considering that Alice and Bob share a random secret key $`x_{AB}`$ and they agree on a linear algebraic code $`C[n,m,t]`$, the proposed protocol for quantum authentication of classical messages can be summarized as follows:

Alice chooses $`c_AC`$ corresponding to $`k_A`$.     Alice creates $`n`$ qubits in the bases $`𝒵`$ or $`𝒳`$, depending on $`x_{AB}`$. She sends the qubits through the quantum channel.     Bob chooses the bases used in the measurements according with $`x_{AB}`$. The measurement results is a $`n`$-bits sequence $`m_B`$.     Bob performs a parity test on $`m_B`$. Case $`m_BH^T0`$, the message is discarded (Eve interfered in the channel). If $`m_B`$ passes the parity test ($`m_BH^T=0`$), Bob obtains the message $`k_A`$ decoding $`m_B=c_A`$.

## V Discussion

According with the analyses presented in the section III, the security of our protocol depends on the parameters $`n`$ and $`t`$ of the linear algebraic code $`C[n,m,t]`$ chosen. Moreover, the failure probabilities can be made as small as wished. To have an idea of such security, we calculated the probabilities discussed for several binary BCH codes of lengths $`n=63`$ and $`n=127`$ Wicker (1995) (Table 1).

When the message to be send is a random sequence of bits, the classical message authentication codes (MAC) presents only a computational security, even when a larger key is used to produce the authentication block Stallings (1998). The class of protocols described here presents an information theoretic security, rather than based on computational assumptions.

The size of the used secret key is another important aspect. In general, if $`R=m/n`$ is the rate of the linear code $`C[n,m,t]`$, the length of the key will be $`1/R`$ times the length of the message. For example, for the code $`C[127,120,1]`$, it is only necessary a key whose length is $`(127/120)1,06`$ times the length of the message to guarantee, in the worst case, a failure probability of $`1.4\times 10^{16}`$.

Moreover, there exists a possibility of reusing the secret key for Alice and Bob, since in quantum systems it is possible to identify an attempt to perturbing the states transmitted through the channel. If the quantum channel can be considered perfect and Bob receives an authentic message, he can conclude that no eavesdropper was present. Then, the secret key can be reused without compromise the security of the protocol.

Comparatively to others quantum schemes to authenticate classical messages present in the literature, the protocol described here has advantages in terms of simplicity and use of quantum resources. The Curty and Santos’s protocol needs a quantum operation to generate a quantum tag to be send attached to the message. Moreover, the security of such protocol depends on the choice of the unitary operation. However, the authors did not show the existence of a optimum unitary operation that minimize the failure probability Curty and Santos (2001).

A disadvantage of our scheme is the use of a classical secret key. This means that it is possible to read or copy the key by a third part during storage process, without being detected. This problem will only be solved with the improvement of equipments to storage quantum states.

## VI Conclusions

In this work we presented a simple, but efficient non-interactive scheme for quantum authentication of $`m`$-length classical messages. The described protocol make uses of a linear algebraic code $`C[n,m,t]`$ to encode the message and a classical secret key of $`n`$ bits. The quantum states are created based on the codeword, where the key bits are used to choose the bases. Then, the qubits are transmitted through a quantum channel.

According with quantum mechanics theory and considering the systematic adopted in the quantum states creation, the protocols failure probabilities were calculated. In general, these probabilities depend on the choice of the parameters $`n`$ and $`t`$ of the code, and we can make them as small as desired. The security of the proposed protocol does not depend, therefore, on computational assumptions.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors trank the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) for support (CT-INFO Quanta, under grants 552254/02-9).


text:
# Untitled Document

KUNS-1849 hep-ph/0307361

Proposal for Generic Size of Large Extra Dimensions

Satoshi Matsuda matsuda@phys.h.kyoto-u.ac.jp

Department of Physics, Graduate School of Science, Kyoto University

Yoshida-Nihonmatsu, Sakyo, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan

and

Shigenori Seki seki@postman.riken.go.jp

Theoretical Physics Laboratory

The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research (RIKEN)

2-1 Hirosawa, Wako 351-0198, Japan

Abstract

In order to resolve the hierarchy problem, large extra dimensions have been introduced, and it has been suggested that the size of extra dimensions is sub-millimeter. On the other hand, we assume in this paper that the cosmological constant comes from the Casimir energy of extra dimensions and estimate the size of extra dimensions in terms of the value of the cosmological constant discovered by the recent WMAP observations. We demonstrate that this size is consistent with the one derived from the hierarchy problem and propose that there may be a generic size of large extra dimensions when the number of extra dimensions is equal to two.

July 2003

1. Introduction

Large extra dimensions have been introduced in Refs.\[1,,2\] in order to resolve the hierarchy problem. The interesting possibility of their existence has stimulated much theoretical \[35\] and experimental research \[68\].

On the other hand, the origin of the cosmological constant has not been made clear so far. This is one of the most important problems in physics. Recently the WMAP project  has determined accurately several parameters of our universe, for example, the age of universe, the density of dark matter and so on.

In section 2 of this paper we calculate the Casimir energy derived from extra dimensions. In section 3 we assume that the Casimir energy can be identified with the cosmological constant, and estimate the size of extra dimensions by the use of the observed value of the cosmological constant. Section 4 is devoted to the conclusions, where we compare the size of extra dimensions corresponding to the cosmological constant problem with the one corresponding to the hierarchy problem.

2. Casimir energy and cosmological constant

We consider the $`d`$ dimensional compact extra space which is the product of $`d`$ spheres, $`(S^1)^d`$. We set that the size of every $`S^1`$ is $`R`$. The Kaluza-Klein modes of gravitons are generated from this space and contribute to the vacuum energy in our four dimensional space-time. The vacuum energy is obtained as the Casimir energy derived from the extra space, and is given by

$$E=\left[\frac{(2+d)(3+d)}{2}1\right]\frac{1}{2}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\sqrt{𝐤^2+M^2},$$

where $`M^24\pi ^2_{i=1}^dn_i^2/R^2`$ and the factor in front, $`(2+d)(3+d)/21`$, represents the number of polarization degrees of freedom for a graviton in $`4+d`$ dimensions . Since this integration is generally divergent, we use dimensional regularization and Eq.(2.1) becomes

$$E=\frac{1}{64\pi ^2}\left[\frac{(2+d)(3+d)}{2}1\right]\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)M^4\left[\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{\lambda ^2}{M^2}\right)+\frac{3}{2}\right].$$

$`\lambda `$ is a parameter with mass dimension. We calculate the following infinite summations,

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}n_i^2\right)^2& =d\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)n_1^4+d(d1)\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)n_1^2n_2^2\hfill & \\ & =2d\zeta (0)^{d1}\zeta (4)+4d(d1)\zeta (0)^{d2}\zeta (2)^2\hfill & \\ & =0,\hfill & (2.1)\hfill \end{array}$$

where we have used the zeta function equalities $`\zeta (4)=\zeta (2)=0`$. Using Eq.(2.1), the vacuum energy (2.1) is reduced to

$$E=\frac{\pi ^2}{2R^4}\left[\frac{(2+d)(3+d)}{2}1\right]\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)\frac{d}{dx}N^x|_{x=4},$$

where $`N\sqrt{_{i=1}^dn_i^2}`$. In order to take care of a divergence of the right hand side of Eq.(2.2), we have to regularize it. Since it is difficult to calculate it analytically,**In the special cases of $`d`$, we can obtain exact results in terms of Epstein zeta functions . let us consider a numerical method. In terms of the Fourier transformation , $`N^x`$ is described as

$$N^x=\frac{2^x\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi x}{2}}{\pi ^{\frac{d}{2}+1}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+\frac{x}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{x+d}{2}\right)q^{xd}e^{i𝐍𝐪}𝑑𝐪,$$

where $`𝐍(n_1,\mathrm{},n_d)`$, $`𝐪(q_1,\mathrm{},q_d)`$ and $`q|𝐪|`$, while the infinite summation of $`\mathrm{exp}(i𝐍𝐪)`$ is expressed by

$$\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)e^{i𝐍𝐪}=(2\pi )^d\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\left[\underset{m_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\delta (q_i2\pi m_i)\right].$$

From Eqs.(2.2) and (2.2), we obtain

$$\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)N^x=\frac{\mathrm{sin}\frac{\pi x}{2}}{\pi ^{1+x+\frac{d}{2}}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(1+\frac{x}{2}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\frac{x+d}{2}\right)\left(\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i=1}{𝐦\mathrm{𝟎}}}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{m_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)\left(\underset{i=0}{\overset{d}{}}m_i^2\right)^{\frac{x+d}{2}},$$

where $`𝐦(m_1,\mathrm{},m_d)`$. Using this equation, the vacuum energy (2.2) becomes

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill E& =\frac{1}{2\pi ^{2+\frac{d}{2}}R^4}\left[\frac{(2+d)(3+d)}{2}1\right]\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(2+\frac{d}{2}\right)_d,\hfill & (2.2)\hfill \\ & _d\left(\underset{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{i=1}{𝐦\mathrm{𝟎}}}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{m_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)\left(\underset{i=0}{\overset{d}{}}m_i^2\right)^{2\frac{d}{2}}.\hfill & (2.3)\hfill \end{array}$$

The divergence coming from the infinite summations in Eq.(2.2) is thus resolved and Eq.(2.2) converges. Calculating Eq.(2.3) numerically, we obtain

$$_11.03693,_24.6589,_37.46706.$$

Substituting (2.4) into Eq.(2.2), the vacuum energies for $`d=1,2,3`$ become

$$E\frac{1}{R^4}\{\begin{array}{cc}0.196993,\hfill & \text{ }d=1\text{,}\hfill \\ 1.35231,\hfill & \text{ }d=2\text{,}\hfill \\ 3.16082,\hfill & \text{ }d=3\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

Note that the vacuum energies corresponding to the higher dimensions are similarly calculable. The result for every dimension turns out to be negative.

In the following sections we will suggest that the vacuum energies correspond to the cosmological constant. Since the energies in (2.4) are negative, we can not adopt such identification. So far we have considered the extra space which is $`(S^1)^d`$, that is, the $`d`$ dimensional compact space with a periodic boundary condition. On the other hand, if the extra space has a Dirichlet boundary condition, the vacuum energies may become positive. Let us consider the $`d`$ dimensional compact extra space with the Dirichlet boundary condition in the rest of this section.

Since the wave function becomes a sine function on account of the Dirichlet boundary condition, the vacuum energy is modified from Eq.(2.1) to the form

$$E=\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{(2+d)(3+d)}{2}1\right]\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\underset{n_i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\sqrt{𝐤^2+M^2}.$$

We rewrite this equation as

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill E& =\frac{1}{2}\left[\frac{(2+d)(3+d)}{2}1\right]\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{1}{}}+\underset{n_i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)\right]\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\sqrt{𝐤^2+M^2}\hfill \\ & =\frac{1}{22^d}\left[\frac{(2+d)(3+d)}{2}1\right]\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\left[\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1\delta _{n_i0})\right]\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\sqrt{𝐤^2+M^2}\hfill \\ & =\frac{\pi ^2}{2^{d+1}R^4}\left[\frac{(2+d)(3+d)}{2}1\right]\underset{i=1}{\overset{d}{}}\left[\underset{n_i=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}(1\delta _{n_i0})\right]\frac{d}{dx}N^x|_{x=4}.\hfill \end{array}$$

After numerical calculations, we obtain

$$E\frac{1}{R^4}\{\begin{array}{cc}0.196993,\hfill & \text{ }d=1\text{,}\hfill \\ 0.0165101,\hfill & \text{ }d=2\text{,}\hfill \\ 0.0199402,\hfill & \text{ }d=3\text{,}\hfill \\ 0.00149895,\hfill & \text{ }d=4\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

In the results (2.4), when the numbers of extra dimensions are even, the vacuum energies become positive.

3. The cosmological constant and the size of extra dimensions

Recently the WMAP project has determined the several parameters of our universe . Let us consider the cosmological constant by using the data given by WMAP. Since the Hubble constant is

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill H_0& =h\times 100[\mathrm{km}\mathrm{sec}^1\mathrm{Mpc}^1]\hfill & \\ & =0.7675\times 10^{28}[\mathrm{cm}^1],\hfill & (3.1)\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`h=0.71`$ (according to the WMAP observation), the critical density of universe becomes

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \rho _c& =\frac{3H_0^2}{8\pi G}\hfill & \\ & =5.313\times 10^3[\mathrm{eV}\mathrm{cm}^3],\hfill & (3.2)\hfill \end{array}$$

where $`G`$ is the gravitation constant. WMAP gives for the total density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{tot}}`$ and the dark energy density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$,

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill \mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{tot}}& =1.02\pm 0.02,\hfill \\ \hfill \mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }& =0.73\pm 0.04.\hfill \end{array}$$

Note that the dark energy is the same as the cosmological constant. In terms of the data (3.2) and (3.3), we calculate the cosmological constant to be

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill \mathrm{\Lambda }& =\rho _c\mathrm{\Omega }_{\mathrm{tot}}\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda }\hfill & \\ & =3.956\times 10^3[\mathrm{eV}\mathrm{cm}^3].\hfill & (3.3)\hfill \end{array}$$

We suggest that the cosmological constant is identified with the vacuum energy derived from the extra dimensions.

In the previous section, we have obtained the vacuum energy with the positive values when the number of extra dimensions is even and the extra spaces have the Dirichlet boundary conditions. Let us transform the canonical values (2.4) of the vacuum energy in units of $`\mathrm{}c=1.973269\times 10^5[\mathrm{eV}\mathrm{cm}]`$ to the physical values. Then the vacuum energy is calculated to be

$$E[\mathrm{eV}\mathrm{cm}^3]=\frac{1}{R^4}\{\begin{array}{cc}3.25787\times 10^7,\hfill & d=2\text{,}\hfill \\ 2.95782\times 10^8,\hfill & d=4\text{,}\hfill \end{array}$$

where the unit of $`R`$ is centimeter. If we identify the cosmological constant (3.3) with the vacuum energy (3.4), the size $`R`$ of extra dimensions then becomes

$$R[\mathrm{cm}]=\{\begin{array}{cc}0.003012,\hfill & d=2\text{,}\hfill \\ 0.001654,\hfill & d=4\text{.}\hfill \end{array}$$

4. Conclusions

In Ref., the scale of extra dimensions is discussed from the viewpoint of the hierarchy problem. The four dimensional Planck scale $`M_{\mathrm{pl}}`$ is related to the $`4+d`$ dimensional one $`M_{\mathrm{pl}(4+d)}`$by $`M_{\mathrm{pl}}^2M_{\mathrm{pl}(4+d)}^{2+d}R^d`$. If we put $`M_{\mathrm{pl}(4+d)}m_{\mathrm{EW}}1[\mathrm{TeV}]`$, where $`m_{\mathrm{EW}}`$ is an electro-weak scale, the size of extra dimensions then becomes

$$R10^{\frac{30}{d}17}[\mathrm{cm}].$$

So $`R`$ has a sub-millimeter size of $`10^2[\mathrm{cm}]`$ when the number $`d`$ of extra dimensions is equal to two. If $`d=4`$, $`R`$ has a size of $`10^{10}[\mathrm{cm}]`$.

On the other hand, we have adopted the suggestion that the cosmological constant can be identified with the vacuum energy which is the Casimir energy coming from the space of extra dimensions. By this identification we have calculated the sizes of extra dimensions. We have used the recent results given by the WMAP project. In (3.4), when the number $`d`$ of extra dimensions equals two, the size $`R`$ of extra space becomes $`3.012\times 10^3[\mathrm{cm}]`$. When $`d=4`$, the size $`R`$ is $`1.654\times 10^3[\mathrm{cm}]`$.

Comparing these sizes of extra dimensions obtained from the two independent points of view, that is, the hierarchy problem and the cosmological constant, the two sizes for $`d=2`$ turn out to be almost consistent. So we propose that there may be the generic size of large extra dimensions for $`d=2`$, which is in the range of $`10^2`$$`10^3[\mathrm{cm}]`$.

Finally let us conclude with a brief comment that our proposal also resolves the critical issue often raised where the enormous gap of energy scale in the hierarchy problem is just transmuted into an arbitrarily chosen size of large extra dimensions.

Acknowledgement

S. M. thanks Theoretical Physics Group of RIKEN for providing a pleasant stay for him to finish this paper. S. S. is grateful to M. Sakamoto for useful lectures on WMAP.

References

relax I. Antoniadis, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos and G. Dvali, “New Dimensions at a Millimeter to a Fermi and Superstrings at a TeV,” Phys. Lett. B436 (1998) 257, hep-ph/9804398. relax N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos and G. Dvali, “The Hierarchy Problem and New Dimensions at a Millimeter,” Phys. Lett. B429 (1998) 263, hep-ph/9803315. relax A.C.Melissinos, “Vacuum Energy and the Cosmological Constant,” hep-ph/0112266. relax K. A. Milton, “Dark Energy as Evidence for Extra Dimensions,” hep-ph/0210170. relax A. Gupta, “Contribution of Kaluza-Klein Modes to Vacuum Energy in Models with Large Extra Dimensions & the Cosmological Constant,” hep-th/0210069. relax J. C. Long, H. W. Chan, A. B. Churnside, E. A. Gulbis, M. C. M. Varney and J. C. Price, “New Experimental Limits on Macroscopic Forces Below 100 Microns,” letter version published in Nature 421 (2003) 922, hep-ph/0210004. relax N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dimopoulos and G. Dvali, “Large Extra Dimensions: A New Arena for Particle Physics,” Physics Today 55 (2002) 35. relax E. G. Adelberger for the Eöt-Wash Group, “Sub-mm Tests of the Gravitational Inverse-square Law,” hep-ex/0202008. relax C. L. Bennett et al., “First Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Observations: Preliminary Maps and Basic Results,” astro-ph/0302207; see also the Web page, http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/. relax T. Han, J. D. Lykken and R.-J. Zhang, “Kaluza-Klein States from Large Extra Dimensions,” Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 105006, hep-ph/9811350. relax J. Ambjørn and S. Wolfram, “Properties of the Vacuum 1. Mechanical and Thermodynamic,” Annals Phys. 147 (1983) 1; “Properties of the Vacuum 2. Electrodynamic,” Annals Phys. 147 (1983) 33. relax I. M. Gel’fand and G. E. Shilov, “Generalized Functions,” Volume 1 (Academic Press, 1964).


text:
# Surface impedance of superconductive thin films as a function of frequency in microwave range

## I Introduction

The microwave response of superconductors is of great interest in several temperature and magnetic field regions, since it carries information about both macroscopic and microscopic quantities, such as resistivity or electromagnetic penetration depth.

Most of available experimental data are restricted to fixed frequencies (resonant cavity techniques), whereas a study over a continuous frequency spectrum would allow for a deeper investigation of the dynamical behaviour of the system. An experimental technique which makes it possible to evaluate the complex surface impedance $`Z_s=R_s+iX_s`$ of a superconducting film as a function of frequency has been proposed in the past by some groups anlage toso1 . The technique is based on the measurement of the reflection coefficients at the input of a coaxial line terminated by the film (Corbino disk).

Extracting the contribution of the sample from the measured data is a critical step during data analisys: in fact, the contribution of the coaxial line is in general of the same order of magnitude of that of the sample. The main purpose of this paper is to present the most recent results on this experimental procedure, as obtained in our laboratory.

## II Experimental setup

The electromagnetic field is generated and analized by a Vector Network Analizer (VNA), connected to the sample by a commercial coaxial cable (cutoff frequency: 60 GHz), about 3.5 meters long (1 meter inside the cryostat and 2.5 meters outside). Such a large distance is needed since the experimental setup has been studied for high magnetic field measurements and the VNA needs to be placed as far as possible from the magnet. On the other hand such a high length results in a heavy attenuation of the signal, especially at higher frequencies, which prevented us to perform measurements above 35 GHz and resulted in highly noisy measurements above 20 GHz.

The sample surface impedance is probed as a function of frequency through a Corbino disk geometry, in which the sample shortcircuits the above mentioned cable. Temperature is varied employing a helium flow cryostat. The connection between the cable and the sample is realized through a double spring method, extensively described in toso1 . With respect to previous realizations, a thin indium ring has been placed between the sample and the outer connector of the cable, to reduce the possible damage of the sample. However this was not sufficient to suppress a detectable contact capacitance. The capacitance effect results to be smaller for the $`MgB_2`$ film than for the $`YBCO`$ film, suggesting that the sample surface plays a relevant role in the overall contact realization. As a result of this spurious capacitance, data on $`YBCO`$ are not reliable below 6 GHz, while in the case of $`MgB_2`$ the capacitance masks data only below 0.5 GHz, so that the actual frequency range over which measurements will be presented in the following of the paper is limited to $`6÷20`$ GHz for $`YBCO`$ and $`0.5÷20`$ GHz for $`MgB_2`$.

The samples here considered are a thin (2200Å), square (l = 10 mm) $`YBCO`$ film, grown by planar high oxygen pressure d.c, sputtering on a $`LaAlO_3`$ substrate crescitaYBCO , and a thin (1500Å), square (l= 5 mm) $`MgB_2`$ film, grown by pulsed laser deposition with a conventional two step technique on a sapphire substrate crescitaMgB2 .

## III Measurement technique

### III.1 Equations and approximations

As discussed in the introduction, the problem issued in this paper is how to extract the surface impedance $`Z_s`$ of the sample from the reflection coefficients $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m(\nu ,T)`$ measured at the beginning of the coaxial cable. $`Z_s`$ is defined as the ratio between transverse electric and magnetic field components at the sample surface. It is possible to demonstrate toso1 ,anlage  that $`Z_s(\nu ,T)`$ is related to the reflection coefficient at the sample surface $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T)`$ through the relation

$$Z_s(\nu ,T)=Z_0\frac{1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T)}{1\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T)}$$
(1)
where $`Z_0`$ is the characteristic impedance of the dielectric filling the cable. We estimate it in $`377\mathrm{\Omega }`$ (vacuum impedance) being the last section of the cable is not filled with the dielectric. Due to the very small thickness of the samples, the thin film approximation is always valid silva  and one has $`Z_s\rho /d`$, where $`\rho `$ is the complex resistivity of the sample.

In principle, the values of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T)`$ can be extracted from the measured reflection coefficient at the VNA input $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m(\nu ,T)`$ through the standard relation Collin

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_m=E_d+\frac{E_r\mathrm{\Gamma }_0}{1E_s\mathrm{\Gamma }_0}$$
(2)
where $`E_r`$, $`E_s`$ and $`E_d`$ are complex parameters taking into account cable effects. They depend on frequency and on the temperature of the whole cable. These three cable coefficients can be determined by measuring the response of three known loads replacing the sample (line calibration) but in our case the experimental setup doesn’t allow for a full calibration of the cable during measuring sessions since the measurement cell is inaccessible and calibration standards are not available at the temperatures of interest in this work. However, we performed daily calibration of the section of the cable external to the cryostat, hence from here on we will no further consider it, as if the VNA were directly connected to the internal, one-meter long, cable. This means that the cable coefficients and reflection coefficients dealt with in the following are only relative to the internal cable.

Before the beginning of the measuring session we measure and store the coefficients of the internal cable at room temperature $`T_r`$. We then define $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T)`$ as:

$$\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T)=\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_m(\nu ,T)E_d(\nu ,T_r)}{E_r(\nu ,T_r)+E_s(\nu ,T_r)\left(\mathrm{\Gamma }_m(\nu ,T)E_d(\nu ,T_r)\right)}$$
(3)
As can be seen inverting equation 2 at $`T=T_r`$ we have $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_r)=\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_r)`$. To find a relation between $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T)`$ at $`T<T_r`$, we put $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_m(\nu ,T)`$ as obtained from equation 2 into equation 3 (we will omit in the following the explicit frequency dependence for the sake of compactness):

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_0=\frac{E_d(T_r)E_d(T)+\frac{E_r(T_r)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m}{1E_s(T_r)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m}}{E_r(T)+E_s(T)\left[E_d(T_r)E_d(T)+\frac{E_r(T_r)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m}{1E_s(T_r)\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m}\right]}$$
(4)
We expect cable coefficients not to change by more than 10% for any variation of the temperature profile in the cable. Moreover, during the room temperature calibrations, we found $`|E_d|`$ and $`|E_s|`$ to be quite generally no more than 10% of $`|E_r|`$, which is instead of the same order of $`|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m|1`$. This means that $`|E_d(T_r)E_d(T)|10^2|E_r\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m|`$ and we can neglect it in equation 4, obtaining after some algebra

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_0\frac{\frac{E_r(T_r)}{E_r(T)}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m}{1+\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_mE_s(T)\left[\mathrm{\Delta }E_s\mathrm{\Delta }E_r\right]}$$
(5)
Where $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{s,r}=(E_{s,r}(T)E_{s,r}(T_r))/E_{s,r}(T)`$. Again $`E_s\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m0.1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_{s,r}0.1`$ so that one gets, to within a few percent of precision,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_0\frac{E_r(T_r)}{E_r(T)}\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m\frac{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m}{\alpha (T)}$$
(6)
We want here to stress that this just defined coefficient $`\alpha (\nu ,T)`$ depends in a non-trivial way upon the whole temperature profile of the cable so that no practical measurement of it is possible. Nevertheless, when performing measurements at low T $`(T100K)`$, it is reasonable to expect that it is almost constant when varying the temperature of the sample of a few tens of Kelvin; the cable is in fact thermally constrained at room temperature at the entrance of the cryostat so that the temperature profile of the cable only slightly changes for such variations of the temperature of the sample. We can also roughly estimate the frequency dependence of $`\alpha (\nu ,T)`$ considering that it is the ratio between two transmission coefficients at different temperatures. Since $`E_r(\nu ,T)`$ takes into account the attenuation of the field due to losses through the dielectric and on the cable conductors, it decreases with increasing frequency and temperature. We can then expect that, if $`T<T_r`$, $`\alpha (\nu ,T)>1`$ and, as can be seen in figure 1, it will increase with frequency.

Let’s now consider the difference between two determinations of $`Z_s(\nu ,T)`$ with respect to two different values of the temperature, say $`T_1`$ and $`T_2`$. Making use of equation 1 , we can write

$`\mathrm{\Delta }Z_s(\nu ,T)Z_1(\nu ,T_1)Z_2(\nu ,T_2)`$ $`=`$ $`Z_0\left({\displaystyle \frac{1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{1\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}}{\displaystyle \frac{1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}{1\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}}\right)`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`Z_0\left({\displaystyle \frac{1\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}}{1+\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}\frac{(1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1))(1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2))}{2\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}}}\right)`$
$``$ $`Z_0{\displaystyle \frac{1\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)/\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}{1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)/\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}}`$
where the approximation involved in the last equivalence is possible if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)1`$ (see below). Writing as usual $`Z_sR_s+iX_s`$ we have

$$\mathrm{\Delta }R_s(\nu ,T)Z_0\frac{1|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}|^2}{1+|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}|^2+2Re[\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}]}$$
(8)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }X_s(\nu ,T)2Z_0\frac{Im[\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}]}{1+|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}|^2+2Re[\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}]}$$
(9)
If the phase variation $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _0=\varphi [\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(T_1)]\varphi [\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(T_2)]`$ between the two determinations of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ is small, we have $`Re[\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}]\left|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}\right|`$ and equations 8 and 9 can be approximated as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }R_s(\nu ,T)Z_0\frac{1|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}|}{1+|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}|}Z_0\frac{1\frac{|\alpha (\nu ,T_2)|}{|\alpha (\nu ,T_1)|}\frac{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_2)|}}{1+\frac{|\alpha (\nu ,T_2)|}{|\alpha (\nu ,T_1)|}\frac{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_2)|}}$$
(10)
$$\mathrm{\Delta }X_s(\nu ,T)2Z_0\frac{|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}|}{(1+|\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)}|)^2}\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _02Z_0\frac{\frac{|\alpha (\nu ,T_2)|}{|\alpha (\nu ,T_1)|}\frac{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_2)|}}{(1+\frac{|\alpha (\nu ,T_2)|}{|\alpha (\nu ,T_1)|}\frac{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_2)|})^2}(\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _m\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _\alpha )$$
(11)
where we used the result stated in equation 6 into the last approximations. If we have $`|\alpha (\nu ,T_1)||\alpha (\nu ,T_2)|`$, so that $`\frac{|\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T_2)|}\frac{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_2)|}`$, equation 10 can finally be rewritten as

$$\mathrm{\Delta }R_s(\nu ,T)Z_0\frac{1\frac{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_2)|}}{1+\frac{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_2)|}}$$
(12)
If we also have $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _0`$, so that $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _0\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _m`$, then equation 11 can be approximated with

$$\mathrm{\Delta }X_s(\nu ,T)2Z_0\frac{\frac{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_2)|}}{(1+\frac{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_1)|}{|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T_2)|})^2}\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _m$$
(13)
Formulae 12 and 13 are the main result of this paper. They relate the variation of impedance between two different temperatures to the measured quantities. This means that, if a reference temperature $`T_{ref}`$ exists for which $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_01`$, we can extract from $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m`$ the variations of the curves $`Z_s(\nu ,T)`$ with respect to $`Z_s(\nu ,T_{ref})`$. Moreover, once all the $`\mathrm{\Delta }Z`$ are known, if a temperature $`T^{}`$ exist for which the curve $`Z_s(\nu ,T^{})`$ is known, we can get absolute values for $`Z_s(\nu ,T)`$. Finally, we have found two different formulae for the real and imaginary part of the impedance, so that we can handle them separately.

### III.2 Check of the validity of the approximations

To employ equations 12 and 13 we must check that the approximations underlying them are all valid. For the sake of simplicity we analyze the specific case of $`MgB_2`$, being the procedure for $`YBCO`$ exactly the same. First of all we will deal with the approximations on the temperature behaviour of $`\alpha (\nu ,T)`$. In figure 2 we show a typical curve at fixed frequency of the modulus and phase of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(T)`$. In order to estimate the contribution to these curves due to $`\alpha (\nu ,T)`$ we have to roughly guess the behaviour of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T)`$, being from equation 6 $`|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T)|=|\alpha (\nu ,T)||\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T)|`$ and $`\varphi (\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m)=\varphi (\mathrm{\Gamma }_0)+\varphi (\alpha )`$. To do this, first we recall that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T)`$ is linked to $`Z_s(\nu ,T)`$ by relation 1, that can be inverted to

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_0=\frac{Z_sZ_0}{Z_s+Z_0}$$
(14)
Above $`T_c`$ the resistivity is real, and so are the impedance and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$. Being $`Z_s<Z_0`$ we have $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0<0`$ so that its phase is $`\pi `$. Moreover above $`T_c`$ the resistivity is independent from frequency and we can compare microwave with DC measurements, finding that the resistivity is almost constant with temperature, so that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T>T_c)`$ is also nearly constant. Below the transition temperature the real part of the impedance attains a value much lower than the normal state one, so that we expect $`R_s(\nu ,T<T_c)0`$, which, according to equation 14 implies $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T<T_c)|1`$. As regarding the phase of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T<T_c)`$, using the two fluids model one can predict a peak near the transition temperature and a plateau sufficiently below it, whose value is very close to $`\pi `$.

We note in figure 2 that $`|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T)|`$ is almost constant sufficiently above and below the transition temperature. Since $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }_0|`$ is constant in these regions of temperature, we conclude that the small variations observed in $`|\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(\nu ,T)|`$ are due to $`|\alpha (\nu ,T)|`$. We can then state that $`|\alpha (\nu ,T)|`$ does not appreciably vary across the whole curve so that we can neglect its variations with respect to those of $`|\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(\nu ,T)|`$ and apply equation 12.

As regards the phase of $`\alpha (T)`$, it is evident from figure 2 that the phase of $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m(T)`$ shows a peak at the transition temperature that can be ascribed to $`\varphi (\mathrm{\Gamma }_0)`$, but it is as much evident that $`\varphi (\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}_m)`$ has not the same value above and below $`T_c`$. This means that the condition $`\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _0`$ doesn’t hold and we can’t make use of equation 13 to get sample reactance. Nevertheless we can estimate from this graphic the maximum variation of $`\varphi (\mathrm{\Gamma }_0)`$ in about 10 degrees, so that the approximation $`|\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi _0|0`$ is well justified.

The last condition to be examined is the one employed in equation 7: we need a reference temperature for which we are confident that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0(T_{ref})1`$. From the above discussion on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ and from figure 2 we can state that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_01`$ for $`T20K`$. We choose $`T_{ref}=4K`$ for $`MgB_2`$ and, for analogous reasons, $`T_{ref}=70K`$ for $`YBCO`$.

## IV Results

The result of this procedure for the real part of $`Z_s(T)`$ is shown for the MgB2 film in fig.3, where resistive transitions at different frequencies are plotted. The transition widens with increasing frequency, being nearly frequency independent up to $``$ 2 GHz and then widening as the frequency is further increased. To have a more quantitative description of the widening, one can define $`T_{mp}(\nu )`$ as the temperature where the resistivity, at the given frequency $`\nu `$, reaches one half of the value in the normal state, and $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_c(\nu )=T_{mp}(\nu )T_{mp}(\nu _{min})`$. The behaviour of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_c(\nu )`$, normalized to the value of $`T_c`$ at $`\nu _{min}=0.5`$ GHz is reported in fig. 5 (filled circles).

The same analysis is presented in fig.4, for $`YBCO`$ where curves of $`R_s/R_s(100K)`$ are presented as a function of $`T`$ at various frequencies. The real part of the resistivity remains almost zero up to $`88K`$, then grows at $`T_c`$ rapidly reaching the normal state value. As in the case of $`MgB_2`$, the transition widens as the frequency is increased. However, the widening is relatively small compared to $`MgB_2`$ and the upper part of the transition is almost unaffected by the variation of the frequency, being only the very last part of it severely dependent on frequency. The values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_c/T_c`$ (with $`\nu _{min}=6`$ GHz) are reported in fig. 5 for a quantitative comparison with the values obtained for $`MgB_2`$.

## V Conclusions

We collected reflection coefficient measurements of superconductive thin films as a function of frequency through a Corbino disk technique. We developed a measurement technique by which we were able to obtain the resistivity from the reflection coefficients once that some conditions are verified. We extensively discuss these conditions and how we can conclude which of them are verified. We found that not all of them are accomplished and we were only able to extract the real part of resistivity. The relative curves at fixed frequency are shown, together with a brief discussion of the data.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

There is a growing interest recently \[1-11\] in the possibility that some novel quantum properties of spacetime may have important implications for the analysis of Lorentz transformations. Some approaches to the quantum-gravity problem attribute to the Planck scale $`E_p`$ ($`E_p10^{28}eV`$) the status of an intrinsic characteristic of space-time structure. For example $`E_p`$ can have a role in spacetime discretization or in the commutation relations between spacetime observables. It is very hard  (perhaps even impossible) to construct discretized versions or non-commutative versions of Minkowski space-time which enjoy ordinary Lorentz symmetry. Pedagogical illustrative examples of this observation have been discussed, e.g., in Ref. for the case of discretization and in Refs. for the case of non-commutativity. The action of ordinary (classical) boosts on discretization length scales (or non-commutativity length scales) will naturally be such that different inertial observers would attribute different values to these lengths scales, just as one would expect from the mechanism of FitzGerald-Lorentz contraction.

Models based on an approximate Lorentz symmetry, with Planck-scale-dependent departures from exact Lorentz symmetry, have been recently considered in most quantum-gravity research lines, including models based on “spacetime foam” pictures , “loop quantum gravity” models , certain “string theory” scenarios , and “noncommutative geometry .

Interest in tests of modifications of Lorentz symmetry has also increased recently as a result of the realization  that these modifications of Lorentz symmetry provide one of the possible solutions of the so-called “cosmic-ray paradox”. The spectrum of observed cosmic rays was expected to be affected by a cutoff at the scale $`E_{\mathrm{GZK}}510^{19}\text{eV}`$. Cosmic rays emitted with energy higher than $`E_{\mathrm{GZK}}`$ should interact with photons in the cosmic microwave background and lose energy by pion emission, so that their energy should have been reduced to the $`E_{\mathrm{GZK}}`$ level by the time they reach our Earth observatories. However, the AGASA observatory has reported  several observations of cosmic rays with energies exceeding the $`E_{\mathrm{GZK}}`$ limit  by nearly an order of magnitude. As other experiments do not see an excess of particles above the GZK limit, this experimental puzzle will only be established when confirmed by larger observatories, such as Auger . Furthermore, numerous other solutions have been discussed in the literature. Still, it is noteworthy that Planck-scale modifications of Lorentz symmetry can raise  the threshold energy for pion production in collisions between cosmic rays and microwave photons, and the increase is sufficient to explain away the puzzle associated with the mentioned ultra-high-energy cosmic-ray observations.

Bahcall-Waxman  have shown that the same particles which we observe as high-energy cosmic rays should also lead to neutrino production at the source. Using the observed cosmic ray fluxes they derive a bound (the Bahcall-Waxman bound) on the flux of high-energy neutrinos that can be revealed in astrophysics observatories. We show here that the same Lorentz-symmetry violations that can extend the cosmic-ray spectrum also affect the chain of particle-physics processes that arise in the neutrino production and hence in establishing the Bahcall-Waxman bound . Thus, the departures from Lorentz symmetry that are capable of explaining the “cosmic-ray paradox” inevitably lead to modification of this limit.

Since a relatively large variety of quantum-gravity pictures is being considered in the analysis of the cosmic-ray paradox, in this first study we only intend to illustrate our point within a simple phenomenological model, leaving for future studies the task of more precise analysis of specific quantum-gravity models. For similar reasons we only focus on one of the chains of processes that are relevant for the Bahcall-Waxman bound: the case in which a proton at the source undergoes photo-pion interactions of the type $`p+\gamma X+\pi ^+`$ before escaping the source, then giving rise to neutrino production through the decays $`\pi ^+\mu ^++\nu _\mu `$ and $`\mu ^+e^++\nu _e+\overline{\nu }_\mu `$.

The phenomenological model on which we focus is the simplest one in the literature, which evolved primarily through the studies reported in Refs. . This is a kinematic in which the Planck-scale $`E_p`$ enters the energy/momentum dispersion relation

$$m^2=E^2\stackrel{}{p}^2+f(E,\stackrel{}{p};E_p)E^2\stackrel{}{p}^2+\eta \stackrel{}{p}^2\left(\frac{E}{E_p}\right)^n$$
(1)
while the laws of energy-momentum conservation remain unaffected111Our analysis based on (1) and standard energy-momentum conservation should be applicable (up to small numerical modifications) to a large class of quantum-gravity models which are being considered as possible solutions of the cosmic-ray paradox. One exception is the “doubly-special relativity” framework , in which one could adopt a dispersion relation of type (1) but it would then be necessary to introduce a corresponding modification of the laws of energy-momentum conservation (in order to avoid the emergence of a preferred class of inertial observers ). Our conclusions are not applicable to that scheme. by the Planck scale. $`\eta `$ is a dimensionless coefficient which one expects to be roughly of order $`1`$ (but cannot be reliably predicted at the present preliminary level of development of the relevant quantum-gravity models). The power $`n`$, which should also be treated as a phenomenological parameter, is a key element of this phenomelogical scenario, since it characterizes the first nonvanishing contribution in a (inverse-)Planck-scale power series of the quantum-gravity-induced correction $`f(E,\stackrel{}{p};E_p)`$. It is usually expected that $`n=1`$ and $`n=2`$ are most likely.

In Section 2 we revisit the analysis of the emergence of “threshold anomalies” due to (1) in the study of particle production in collision processes. For positive $`\eta `$ ($`\eta 1`$) and $`n2`$, according to the Planck-scale effect (1) one expects  an increase in the threshold energy for pion production in collisions between cosmic rays and microwave photons, and the increase is sufficient to explain away the GZK puzzle raised by the AGASA observations. We also comment on another potentially observable threshold anomaly that concerns electron-positron pair production in photon-photon collisions. Throughout Section 2 we also emphasize the differences between the case of positive $`\eta `$ and the case of negative $`\eta `$.

In Section 3 we show that (1) also affects significantly the at-the-source processes of the type $`p+\gamma X+\pi ^+`$ that are relevant for the Bahcall-Waxman analysis. If $`\eta 1`$ and $`n2`$ (i.e. for the same departures from Lorentz symmetry that would explain the cosmic-ray paradox) (1) leads to the prediction of a strongly reduced probability for the process $`p+\gamma X+\pi ^+`$ to occur before the proton escapes the source. Correspondingly one expects sharply reduced neutrino production, and as a result the “quantum-gravity-modified Bahcall-Waxman bound” should be expected to be many orders of magnitude lower than the standard Bahcall-Waxman bound. The opposite effect is found for negative $`\eta `$ ($`\eta 1`$): in that case one would expect the standard Bahcall-Waxman bound to be violated, i.e. for negative $`\eta `$ one could find a neutrino flux that exceeds the standard Bahcall-Waxman bound.

In Section 4 we show that also the decays $`\pi ^+\mu ^++\nu _\mu `$ and $`\mu ^+e^++\nu _e+\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ are significantly affected by the Planck-scale effect (1). Again the effect goes in the direction of reducing neutrino production for positive $`\eta `$. However we also observe that the dominant quantum-gravity modification of the Bahcall-Waxman bound comes at the level of analysis of processes of the type $`p+\gamma X+\pi ^+`$, where a several-order-of-magnitude modification would be expected, whereas the additional modification encountered at the level of the processes $`\pi ^+\mu ^++\nu _\mu `$ and $`\mu ^+e^++\nu _e+\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ is not as significant. Section 5 is devoted to our closing remarks.

## 2 Previous results on Planck-scale-induced threshold anomalies and the sign of $`\eta `$

We begin by considering the implications of Eq. (1) for the analysis of processes of the type $`1+\gamma 2+3`$. The key point for us is that, for a given energy $`E_1`$ of the particle that collides with the photon, there is of course a minimal energy $`ϵ_{min}`$ of the photon ($`\gamma `$) in order for the process to be kinematically allowed, and therefore achieve production of the particles $`2`$ and $`3`$. One finds that if $`\eta `$ is positive the value of $`ϵ_{min}`$ predicted according to the Planck-scale effect (1) is higher than the corresponding value obtained using ordinary Lorentz symmetry.

In the applications that are of interest here the particle that collides with the photon has a very high energy, $`E_1p_1m_1`$, and its energy is also much larger than the energy of the photon with which it collides $`E_1ϵ`$. This will allow some useful simplifications in the analysis.

Let us start by briefly summarizing the familiar derivation of $`ϵ_{min}`$ in the ordinary Lorentz-invariant case. At the threshold (no momenta in the CM frame after the collision) energy conservation and momentum conservation become one dimensional:

$$E_1+ϵ=E_2+E_3,$$
(2)
$$p_1q=p_2+p_3,$$
(3)
where $`q`$ is the photon’s momentum. The ordinary Lorentz-invariant relations are

$$q=ϵ,E_i=\sqrt{p_i^2+m_i^2}p_i+\frac{m_i^2}{2p_i},$$
(4)
where we have assumed that, since $`E_1`$ is large as mentioned, $`E_2`$ and $`E_3`$ are also large ($`E_{2,3}p_{2,3}m_{2,3}`$).

The threshold conditions are usually identified by transforming these laboratory-frame relations into center-of-mass-frame relations and imposing that the center-of-mass energy be equal to $`m_2+m_3`$. However, in preparation for the discussion of deformations of Lorentz invariance it is useful to work fully in the context of the laboratory frame. There the threshold condition that characterizes $`ϵ_{min}`$ can be identified with the requirement that the solutions for $`E_2`$ and $`E_3`$ as functions of $`ϵ`$ (with a given value of $`E_1`$) that follow from Eqs. (2), (3) and (4) should be imaginary for $`ϵ<ϵ_{min}`$ and should be real for $`ϵϵ_{min}`$. This straightforwardly leads to

$$ϵϵ_{min}\frac{(m_2+m_3)^2m_1^2}{4E_1}.$$
(5)
This standard Lorentz-invariant analysis is modified  by the deformations codified in (1). The key point is that Eq. (4) is replaced by

$$ϵ=q\eta \frac{q^{n+1}}{2E_p^n},E_ip_i+\frac{m_i^2}{2p_i}\eta \frac{p_i^{n+1}}{2E_p^n}.$$
(6)
Combining (2), (3) and (6) one obtains a modified kinematical requirement

$$ϵϵ_{min}\frac{(m_2+m_3)^2m_1^2}{4E_1}+\eta \frac{E_1^{n+1}}{4E_p^n}\left(1\frac{m_2^{n+1}+m_3^{n+1}}{(m_2+m_3)^{n+1}}\right).$$
(7)
where we have included only the leading corrections (terms suppressed by both the smallness of $`E_p^1`$ and the smallness of $`ϵ`$ or $`m`$ were neglected).

The Planck-scale “threshold anomaly”  described by Eq. (7) is relevant for the analysis of the GZK limit in cosmic-ray physics. In fact, the GZK limit essentially corresponds to the maximum energy allowed of a proton in order to travel in the CMBR without undergoing processes of the type $`p+\gamma p+\pi `$. For a proton of energy $`E_1510^{19}eV`$ the value of $`ϵ_{min}`$ obtained from the undeformed equation (5) is such that CMBR photons can effectively act as targets for photopion production. But, for $`\eta 1`$ and $`n2`$, the value of $`ϵ_{min}`$ obtained from the Planck-scale deformed equation (7) places CMBR photons below threshold for photopion production by protons with energies as high as $`E_110^{21}eV`$, and would explain  observations of cosmic rays above the GZK limit. For negative $`\eta 1`$ one obtains the opposite result: photopion production should be even more efficient than in the standard case. Therefore negative $`\eta `$ is disfavoured by the observations reported by various UHECR observations.

There has also been some interest  in the implications of Eq. (7) for electron-positron pair production in collisions between astrophysical high-energy photons and the photons of the Far Infrared Background. Electron-positron pair production should start to be significant when the high-energy photon has energies of about 10 or 20 TeV. The Planck-scale correction in Eq. (7) would be significant, though not dominant, at those energies. Observations of TeV photons are becoming more abundant, but the field is still relatively young. Moreover, our knowledge of the Far Infrared Background is presently not as good as our knowledge of the CMBR. Therefore observations of TeV photons do not yet provide a significant insight on the Planck scale physics of interest here. Consistency with those observations only imposes a constraint  of the type $`|\eta |<100`$, which (since the quantum-gravity intuition favours $`|\eta |1`$) is not yet significant from a quantum-gravity perspective.

A similar upper limit ($`|\eta |<100`$) is obtained by considering the implications  of the deformed dispersion relation for the arrival times of photons with different energies emitted (nearly-)simultaneously from cosmological sources.

In summary, the present situation justifies some interest for the case of positive $`\eta `$, particularly as a possible description of cosmic rays above the GZK limit. The case of negative $`\eta `$ is disfavored by various UHECR observations. Additional phenomenological reasons to disfavour negative $`\eta `$ have been found in analyses of photon stability (see, e.g., Ref. ), which is instead not relevant for the positive $`\eta `$ case. Moreover, the case of negative $`\eta `$ appears to be also troublesome conceptually since it leads to superluminal velocities in a framework, such as the one adopted here, in which the new effects are simply motivated by the idea of a quantum-spacetime medium222A deformed dispersion relation is generically expected in a special relativistic theory when a medium is present. The presence of the medium does not alter the principles of special relativity, and superluminal velocities should not be allowed. The situation is different in the context of the approach proposed in Ref. , in which the deformed dispersion relation is not motivated by the presence of a quantum-spacetime medium but rather by a role for the Planck scale in the relativity principles. In the framework of Ref.  superluminal velocities would not lead to paradoxical results., and therefore do not naturally lead to the expectation of superluminal velocities. Still, as a contribution to this evolving understanding, we will consider the Bahcall-Waxman bound both for positive and negative $`\eta `$.

## 3 Planck-scale-induced threshold anomalies and the neutrino bound

A key observation for our analysis comes from the fact that the Planck-scale threshold anomaly described by Eq. (7) is significant for the Bahcall-Waxman bound for the same reasons that render it significant for the GZK limit in cosmic-ray physics. In fact, both the Bahcall-Waxman bound and the GZK limit involve the analysis of processes of the type $`p+\gamma X+\pi `$ in which a high-energy proton collides with a softer photon. In the case of the Bahcall-Waxman bound one finds that for a proton of energy $`E_110^{19}eV`$ which is emerging from a source (e.g. an AGN), according to the standard kinematical requirement (5) the photons in the environment that are eligible for production of charged pions $`\pi ^+`$ are all the photons with energy $`ϵϵ_{min}0.01eV`$. But, for the Planck-scale scenario of (7) with $`\eta 1`$ and $`n=1`$ far fewer photons in the environment, viz. only photons with energy $`ϵϵ_{min}10^9eV`$, are kinematically eligible for production of charged pions. In a typical source the abundance of photons with $`ϵ10^9eV`$ is much smaller, by several orders of magnitude, than the abundance of photons with $`ϵ0.01eV`$. Correspondingly the Planck-scale effect predicts a huge reduction in the probability that a charged pion be produced before the proton escapes the source, and in turn this leads (for $`\eta >0`$ and $`n=1`$) to a decrease in the expected high-energy neutrinos flux by many orders of magnitude below the level set by the Bahcall-Waxman bound.

The same qualitative picture applies to the case $`\eta 1`$, $`n=2`$, although the effect is somewhat less dramatic because of the large suppression of the effect that is due to the extra power of the Planck scale. In fact, for $`\eta 1`$, $`n=2`$ one finds that the photons in the environment that are energetically enough for the production of charged pions must have energy $`ϵϵ_{min}1eV`$.

Whereas for positive $`\eta `$ the Planck-scale effect leads to a lower neutrino bound the reverse is true for negative $`\eta `$. In particular, for $`\eta 1`$, $`n2`$ from (7) it follows that photons in the source with energies even below333Formally in this case Eq. (7) even admits photon targets with “negative energies”. But, of course, considering the approximations we implemented, one can only robustly infer that photons with very low energies can lead to pion production. $`0.01eV`$ are viable targets for the production of charged pions by protons with energy $`E_110^{19}eV`$. Correspondingly, the Bahcall-Waxman bound would be weakened.

## 4 Implications of the Planck-scale for particle decays and the neutrino bound

In the previous Section we have shown that the Planck-scale effects considered here would affect the production of charged pions before the ultra-high-energy cosmic-ray proton escapes the source. In this Section we analyze the implications of the same effects for the decay processes $`\pi ^+\mu ^++\nu _\mu `$ and $`\mu ^+e^++\nu _e+\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ which are also relevant for the Bahcall-Waxman bound.

Since we are interested in both a two-body decay, $`\pi ^+\mu ^++\nu _\mu `$, and a three-body decay, $`\mu ^+e^++\nu _e+\overline{\nu }_\mu `$ it is convenient for us to obtain a general result for $`N`$-body decays. This will also be a technical contribution to the study of the kinematics governed by (1). In fact, the implications of (1) for two-body decays have been previously analyzed , but for decays in three or more particles there are no previous results in the literature.

We start our analysis of the decay $`A1+2+\mathrm{}+N`$ ($`A`$ is the generic particle that decays into particles $`1,2,\mathrm{}N`$) with the energy-momentum conservation laws:

$$E_A=E_1+E_2+\mathrm{}+E_N$$
(8)
$$\stackrel{}{p}_A=\stackrel{}{p}_1+\stackrel{}{p}_2+\mathrm{}+\stackrel{}{p}_N$$
(9)
Denoting with $`\theta _{ij}`$ the angle between the linear momentum of particle $`i`$ and that of particle $`j`$, and denoting with $`p`$ the modulus of the 3-vector $`\stackrel{}{p}`$, we can use (9) to obtain ($`i,j=1,2,\mathrm{}N`$)

$$p_A^2=\underset{i}{}p_i^2+\underset{ij}{}p_ip_j\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij}$$
(10)
and (8) to get

$$E_A^2=\underset{i}{}E_i^2+\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j.$$
(11)
From (10) and (11) it follows that

$$E_A^2p_A^2=\underset{i}{}(E_i^2p_i^2)+\underset{ij}{}(E_iE_jp_ip_j\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij}).$$
(12)
Next we use the deformed dispersion relation (1), $`E^2p^2=m^2\eta E^np^2/E_p^n`$, to obtain

$$m_A^2\eta E_A^2p_A^2/E_p^2=\underset{i}{}(m_i^2\eta E_i^np_i^2/E_p^n)+\underset{ij}{}(E_iE_jp_ip_j\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij})$$
(13)
For simplicity let us consider separately the cases $`n=1`$ and $`n=2`$, starting with $`n=1`$. It is convenient to rewrite the kinematical condition (13), for $`n=1`$, in the following way

$$\underset{i}{}m_i^2m_A^2+\underset{ij}{}\left(p_ip_j+p_i\frac{m_j^2}{p_j}\right)+\frac{\eta }{E_p}\left(E_A^3\underset{i}{}E_i^3\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j^2\right)=\underset{ij}{}p_ip_j\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij}$$
(14)
where we used again the deformed dispersion relation,

$$E=(p^2+m^2\frac{\eta }{E_p}Ep^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}p\frac{\eta }{2E_p}p^2+\frac{m^2}{2p}.$$
(15)
We are neglecting terms of order $`E_p^2`$ and higher, which are clearly subleading, and we are also neglecting terms of order $`E_p^1m^2`$ which are negligible compared to terms of order $`E_p^1E^2`$ since all particles involved in the processes of interest to us have very high momentum.

Using the fact that $`\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij}1`$ for every $`\theta _{ij}`$, it follows from (14) that for the decay to be kinematically allowed a necessary condition is

$$\underset{i}{}m_i^2m_A^2+\underset{ij}{}\left(p_ip_j+p_i\frac{m_j^2}{p_j}\right)+\frac{\eta }{E_p}\left(E_A^3\underset{i}{}E_i^3\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j^2\right)\underset{ij}{}p_ip_j$$
(16)
or equivalently

$$\underset{i}{}m_i^2m_A^2+\underset{ij}{}p_i\frac{m_j^2}{p_j}+\frac{\eta }{E_p}\left(E_A^3\underset{i}{}E_i^3\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j^2\right)0$$
(17)
In the analysis of particle-decay processes relations of the type (17) impose constraints on the available phase space. For positive $`\eta `$ the quantum-gravity effect clearly goes in the direction of reducing the available phase space; in fact, it is easily seen that

$$\left(E_A^3\underset{i}{}E_i^3\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j^2\right)=\left((\underset{i}{}E_i)^3\underset{i}{}E_i^3\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j^2\right)>0.$$
(18)
The correction is completely negligible as long as $`m_A^2E_A^3/E_p`$, but for $`m_A^2E_A^3/E_p`$ there is clearly a portion of phase space in which, for positive $`\eta `$, condition (17) is not satisfied. (Think for example of the case $`E_1E_2\mathrm{}E_NE_A/N`$.) Starting at $`E_A(m_A^2E_p)^{1/3}`$ the phase space available for the decay of particle $`A`$ is gradually reduced as $`E_A`$ increases. The difference between the standard Lorentz-symmetry prediction for the lifetime and the quantum-gravity-corrected prediction becomes more and more significant as the energy of the decaying particle is increased, and goes in the direction of rendering the particle more stable, i.e., rendering the decay more unlikely. For the relevant decays of pions and muons we expect that the quantum-gravity effect starts being important at pion/muon energies of order $`(m_\pi ^2E_p)^{1/3}(m_\mu ^2E_p)^{1/3}10^{15}eV`$.

For positive $`\eta `$ it is inevitable that at some energy a significant suppression of the decay probability kicks in, while for negative $`\eta `$ it is easy to see that there is no effect on the size of the phase space available for the decays. The change in the sign of $`\eta `$ turns as usual into a change of sign of the effect, which would go in the direction of extending the phase space available for the decay, but the relevant portion of parameter space (some neighborhood of $`E_1E_2\mathrm{}E_NE_A/N`$) is already allowed even without the Planck scale effect, so for negative-$`\eta `$ effect is not significant.

Completely analogous considerations apply to the case $`n=2`$. From (13), for $`n=2`$, one obtains

$$\underset{i}{}m_i^2m_A^2+\underset{ij}{}\left(p_ip_j+p_i\frac{m_j^2}{p_j}\right)+\frac{\eta }{E_p^2}\left(E_A^4\underset{i}{}E_i^4\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j^3\right)=\underset{ij}{}p_ip_j\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ij},$$
(19)
and then, just following the same line of analysis we already adopted for the case $`n=1`$, for $`n=2`$ one finds that the decay is only allowed if

$$\underset{i}{}m_i^2m_A^2+\underset{ij}{}p_i\frac{m_j^2}{p_j}+\frac{\eta }{E_p^2}\left(E_A^4\underset{i}{}E_i^4\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j^3\right)0.$$
(20)
Since

$$\left(E_A^4\underset{i}{}E_i^4\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j^3\right)=\left((\underset{i}{}E_i)^4\underset{i}{}E_i^4\underset{ij}{}E_iE_j^3\right)>0,$$
(21)
we find again that for positive $`\eta `$ the quantum-gravity correction inevitably goes in the direction of reducing the available phase space and therefore rendering the decay more unlikely. In this $`n=2`$ case we expect that the quantum-gravity suppression of the decay probability starts being important at pion/muon energies of order $`(m_\pi E_p)^{1/2}(m_\mu E_p)^{1/2}10^{18}eV`$.

Of course also for $`n=2`$ one finds that the case of negative $`\eta `$ does not have significant implications, for exactly the same reasons discussed above in considering the $`n=1`$ case.

## 5 Closing remarks

We found that Planck-scale effects can have important implications for the neutrino-producing chain of processes $`p+\gamma X+\pi ^+`$, $`\pi ^+\mu ^++\nu _\mu `$, $`\mu ^+e^++\nu _e+\overline{\nu }_\mu `$, which are relevant for the Bahcall-Waxman bound. We focused on a single simple example of Planck-scale kinematics. Since this analysis led to encouraging conclusions (significant implications for the Bahcall-Waxman bound) it should provide motivation for more detailed studies in more structured quantum-gravity models. Because of the simple kinematical origin of our argument it is reasonable to expect that these more detailed studies will confirm that, for positive $`\eta `$, the quantum-gravity effect leads to a neutrino flux that is many orders of magnitude below the level allowed by the Bahcall-Waxman bound. We have shown here that this is due primarily to a strong suppression of the production of high-energy charged pions by protons at the source. If future observations give us a neutrino flux which is close to the level allowed by the Bahcall-Waxman bound, the type of quantum-gravity physics considered here would be excluded (for positive $`\eta `$). On the other hand, a low neutrino flux will be harder to interpret as, a priori, it is not clear that the Bahcall-Waxman bound should be saturated.

The suppression present for positive $`\eta `$ already found full support at the first step in the chain of processes, in the collisions $`p+\gamma X+\pi ^+`$. We felt however that it was appropriate to consider also the processes further down in the chain, in the decays of $`\pi ^+\mu ^++\nu _\mu `$, $`\mu ^+e^++\nu _e+\overline{\nu }_\mu `$. In fact, it was conceivable that perhaps at that level the production of neutrinos might receive a compensating boost form the quantum-gravity effect which, for positive $`\eta `$, suppresses the likelihood of the process $`p+\gamma X+\pi ^+`$. This turned out not to be the case: for positive $`\eta `$ one actually expects a further suppression of neutrino production, since the quantum-gravity effect renders ultrahigh-energy pions and muons more stable. This part of our analysis also provided a technical contribution to the study of the kinematics governed by (1), since previously the implications of (1) were only known for two-body decays, while here we obtained a generalization to $`N`$-body decays for arbitrary $`N`$.

As discussed in Section 2, the case of negative $`\eta `$ is disfavoured conceptually and starts to be strongly constrained by preliminary observations in astrophysics. We found that it would have striking consequences for the Bahcall-Waxman bound: in the case of negative $`\eta `$ the modification of the Bahcall-Waxman bound would amount to violating (raising) the Bahcall-Waxman bound by several orders of magnitude.

Our analysis contributes to ongoing work aimed at establishing a web of consequences of the type of Planck-scale kinematics considered here. It is not hard to find several different solutions to a single anomaly in ultrahigh-energy astrophysics, e.g. the cosmic-ray paradox, if confirmed by other observatories. However for the type of Planck-scale kinematics considered here, there are several correlated predictions and these together can be used to favor or rule out the scenario. In particular, evidence supporting both a cosmic-ray paradox and an unexpectedly low ultrahigh-energy neutrino flux would fit naturally within the Planck-scale-kinematics scenario (with positive $`\eta `$). More precisely, evidence supporting both a cosmic-ray paradox and an unexpectedly low ultrahigh-energy neutrino flux would favor solutions of the cosmic-ray paradox based on violations of Lorentz symmetry with respect to other proposed solutions of the cosmic-ray paradox. In fact, the correlation we have exposed here between a cosmic-ray paradox and a lowered Bahcall-Waxman bound is a characteristic models in which the kinematics of the processes $`p+\gamma X+\pi `$ is modified by a violation of Lorentz symmetry. In fact, the processes $`p+\gamma X+\pi ^{\pm ,0}`$ dominate the GZK threshold and the Bahcall-Waxman limit. An increase in the GZK limit and a lowered Bahcall-Waxman bound are found whenever the violation of Lorentz symmetry causes an increased energy-threshold condition for the processes $`p+\gamma X+\pi `$. Therefore it can distinguish between models with and without this Lorentz-violation effect, but it cannot establish whether the origin of the Lorentz violation is connected with quantum gravity. In particular, it is interesting to consider the suggestion of Coleman and Glashow  concerning a specific Lorentz-violation solution of the GZK paradox, which is not motivated by quantum gravity. Coleman and Glashow  consider a scheme in which different particles have a different “maximum attainable speed” (essentially a different “speed-of-light constant” for different particles). This can be cast into our formalism with a particle-dependent $`\eta `$ and with $`n=0`$. It follows from our analysis that any model that resolves the UHECR GZK paradox using the Coleman-Glashow scheme will also lead to a stronger Bahcall-Waxman neutrino bound.

## Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by the US Department of Energy and the Bahnson Fund of the University of North Carolina.