text:
# Shake-up Processes in Intersubband Magneto-photoabsorption of a Two-Dimensional Electron Gas

## I  Introduction

Correlation effects in a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) in magnetic fields lead to a number of spectacular phenomena like the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect and Wigner crystallization. Photoluminescence (PL) spectroscopy of the 2DEG in a perpendicular magnetic field proved to be an effective tool for studying few- and many-body correlation effects. An interesting optical manifestation of many-body effects in an interacting 2DEG are shake-up processes in magneto-PL: After the recombination of the electron-hole ($`e`$-$`h`$) pair, one electron is excited to one of the higher Landau levels Fink96 . A closely related phenomenon, combined exciton-cyclotron resonance (ExCR), was also identified in low-density 2DEG systems: Here, an incident photon creates an electron-hole pair and simultaneously excites one electron to one of the higher Landau levels Yak97 ; Ossau2001 . ExCR may be considered to be a shake-up process in magneto-photoabsorption of the 2DEG or, a radiative Auger process as well. These phenomena and the relation between them remain only partially understood Fink96 ; Yak97 ; Ossau2001 ; PRB2001 .

In the extreme magnetic quantum limit, when electrons occupy the lowest spin-polarized zero Landau level with filling factor $`\nu _e=2\pi l_B^2n_e1`$, ExCR can be considered to be a three-particle resonance $`e_0^{}+\mathrm{photon}2e`$-$`h`$, involving a charged system of two electrons and one hole, $`2e`$-$`h`$, in the final state. In this limit, it turned out possible to develop a theory of ExCR with a consistent treatment of the Coulomb interparticle correlations PRB2001 . Also, general and exact ExCR selection rules, which follow from the existing symmetries, magnetic translations and rotations about the magnetic field axis, were found. This allows one to establish the characteristic features of the high-field ExCR; in particular, the double-peak structure of the transitions to the first electron Landau level was predicted. Some experimental indications of the double-peak structure of the ExCR line were reported recently Ossau2001 .

Magneto-PL spectroscopy proved very effective for conduction band electrons and is able to provide a detailed information about the rich spectrum of electron Landau levels (LL’s) and the various fine structures associated with electron correlation effects (see, e.g., Kukushkin  and more recent experimental work Yusa2001 ; Broocks2002a ; Broocks2002  and references therein). On the other hand, magneto-spectroscopy of valence band holes is less effective and magneto-PL spectra of quantum well (QW) samples containing a two-dimensional hole gas (2DHG) are often featureless and are characterized by broad lines, associated with the Zeeman split levels. This is mainly because of a large difference in electron and hole effective masses. For example, in GaAs QW’s the electron and hole cyclotron energies, are $`\mathrm{}\omega _{\mathrm{ce}}/B=1.7`$ meV/T and $`\mathrm{}\omega _{\mathrm{ch}}/B=0.2`$ meV/T, respectively, and differ by nearly an order of magnitude GlasbergPRB2001 . Recently, however, by examining the low energy tail of the magneto-PL spectrum of a low-density 2DHG Glasberg et al. GlasbergPRB2001  succeeded in resolving several groups of recombination lines, each consisting of several equidistant peaks directly related to the valence band LL’s (see also Butov94 ; Volkov97 ). In particular, the shake-up recombination lines of the positively charged exciton, $`X^+`$ were observed.

Recent progress in spectroscopy of valence band holes in quasi-2D QW’s makes it interesting to theoretically investigate correlation effects in states in which the valence band hole is present in higher hole LL’s. In this work, I study ExCR transitions in the 2DEG in which the hole – in the presence of excess electrons – are excited to higher hole LL’s. The theory predicts the shape and fine structure of the high-energy tail of the main magneto-absorption peak of the 2DEG.

## II  Theory

I study interband transitions in the 2DEG from spin-polarized zero electron LL $`n=0`$, $`e_0^{}+\mathrm{photon}2e`$-$`h`$ to the final three-particle $`2e`$-$`h`$ states that belong to the first hole LL, while electrons still reside in their zero LL’s; such transitions will be called hole-ExCR (ExCRh). The classification of states according to the electron and hole LL’s is valid in sufficiently strong magnetic fields $`B`$ such that

$$\mathrm{}\omega _{\mathrm{ce}},\mathrm{}\omega _{\mathrm{ch}}>E_0=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{2}}\frac{e^2}{ϵl_B}.$$
(1)
Here $`l_B=(\mathrm{}c/eB)^{1/2}`$ is the magnetic length and $`E_0`$ is the characteristic energy of the Coulomb interactions. The $`2e`$$`h`$ states can be obtained in this regime as an expansion in electron and hole LL’s. The heavy holes are described in this work in the effective mass approximation and the states of light holes are neglected. The unitary transformations that allow one to construct a complete orthonormal basis set of charged $`e`$-$`h`$ states in $`B`$ compatible with both axial and translational symmetries and the details of the matrix elements calculations have been described in detail elsewhere PRL2000 ; SSC ; PRB2002 . This procedure allows one to obtain the spectra of the $`2e`$-$`h`$ states in higher hole LL’s with a consistent treatment of the Coulomb interactions. Charged $`2e`$-$`h`$ states form families of degenerate states; each family is labeled by the index $`\nu `$ that plays a role of the principal quantum number and can be discrete (bound states) or continuous (unbound states forming a continuum) PRL2000 ; SSC . There is a macroscopic number of degenerate states in each family labeled by the discrete exact oscillator quantum number $`k=0,1,\mathrm{}`$. This quantum number is associated with magnetic translations PRL2000 ; SSC  and physically describes the position of the center of the “cyclotron” orbit of the composite charged complex in $`B`$. Each family starts with its Parent State $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_{k=0M_zS_eS_h\nu }`$ that has $`k=0`$ (rotates about the origin) and has the largest possible in the family value of the total angular momentum projection $`M_z`$; it is this value that enters into the optical selection rmrk1 . In addition, the three-particle states are characterized by the total spin of two electrons, either $`S_e=0`$ (electron spin-singlet states, $`s`$) or $`S_e=1`$ (electron spin-triplet states, $`t`$) and by the spin state of the heavy hole $`S_h=3/2`$, $`S_{hz}=\pm 3/2`$.

The exact optical selection rules for ExCR can be derived PRB2001  as follows: Interband transitions with $`e`$$`h`$ pair creation can be described by the luminescence operator $`\widehat{}_{\mathrm{PL}}=p_{\mathrm{cv}}𝑑𝒓\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_e^{}(𝒓)\widehat{\mathrm{\Psi }}_h^{}(𝒓)`$, where $`p_{\mathrm{cv}}`$ is the interband momentum matrix element. When an $`e`$$`h`$ pair is photocreated in the presence of the low-density 2DEG in the $`0`$-th LL, the dipole transition matrix element can be written as

$$D(\nu )=\mathrm{\Psi }_{M_zS_eS_h\nu }|\widehat{}_{\mathrm{PL}}|e_0^{},$$
(2)
where the final state three-particle correlations are only taken into account. The combination of the two exact dipole selection rules, (i) conservation of the oscillator quantum number $`\mathrm{\Delta }k=0`$ (the centers-of-rotation of charged complexes in the initial and final states is conserved) and (ii) no change in the total angular momentum $`\mathrm{\Delta }M_z=0`$ for the envelope functions, leads to a very simple but powerful result: $`D(\nu )\delta _{n=0,M_z}`$, where $`M_z`$ is the angular momentum projection of the Parent State in the $`\nu `$-th family. Therefore, in the ExCR processes involving electrons from the $`0`$-th LL, the achievable final $`2e`$$`h`$ states must have $`M_z=0`$ and may belong to different final LL’s. If the 2DEG is spin-up $``$ polarized, the photon of $`\sigma ^+`$ ($`\sigma ^{}`$) circular polarization produces the electron singlet (triplet) final states (see Fig. 1).

## III  Results and discussion

The considered ExCR absorption processes involve one conduction band electron $`e_0^{}`$ (the initial state) and charged three-particle $`2e`$ -$`h`$ final states $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_{M_zs(t)\nu }`$ in the electron (a) spin-singlet, $`s`$, and (b) spin-triplet, $`t`$, states (see Figs. 1, 2). In the states $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_{M_zs(t)\nu }`$ all three particles may be bound (thus forming charged excitons, or trions, $`X^{}`$) or may belong to the continuum (neutral exciton $`X`$ plus one electron in a scattering state). Here and in what follows the hole spin quantum numbers are suppressed for brevity.

The allowed ExCR transitions to the first hole LL and the calculated final singlet and triplet $`2e`$$`h`$ states are schematically shown in Fig. 2. The shaded areas of width $`0.57E_0`$ in Fig. 2 depict the three-particle continuum that corresponds to the motion of the bound neutral $`e`$-$`h`$ pair, a magnetoexciton $`X_{01}`$ formed by the electron $`e`$ in the zero LL and the hole $`h`$ in the first LL; the second electron is detached from $`X_{01}`$ (is in a scattering state in the zero LL). The lower continuum edge lies at the $`X_{01}`$ ground state energy $`0.574E_0`$, which, for the isolated neutral magnetoexciton, is achieved at a finite center-of-mass momentum $`𝐊`$ SSC ; PRB2001 . As a result, the density of $`X_{01}`$ states at this energy has the inverse square-root van Hove singularity typical for 2D excitations. This may lead to peculiarities in the $`e^{}`$ scattering on the neutral exciton $`X_{01}`$, in particular, one might expect formation of quasibound three-particle states (resonances). One such ExCR-active resonance (see below) lying within the three-particle continuum and denoted $`X_{s01}^{}`$ is shown in Fig. 2. Two other open dots below the lower continuum edge in Fig. 2 represent truly bound three-particle states, electron spin-triplet $`X_{t01}^{}`$ and electron spin-singlet trions $`X_{s01}^{}`$. The binding energies of the singlet $`X_{s01}^{}`$ and triplet $`X_{t01}^{}`$ states are, respectively, $`0.009E_0`$ and $`0.024E_0`$. Note that there are many other low-lying triplet $`X_{t01}^{}`$ and singlet $`X_{s01}^{}`$ bound states SSC  of negatively charged magnetoexcitons associated with the first hole LL (not shown). The states only depicted in Fig. 2 all have $`M_z=0`$ and, according to the ExCR selection rule $`D(\nu )\delta _{n=0,M_z}`$ PRB2001 , are ExCR-active (are the final states in the ExCR transitions). We conclude that the ExCR transitions in 2DEG to the first hole LL can terminate both in the bound states of charged magnetoexcitons, $`e_0^{}+\mathrm{photon}X_{s(t)01}^{}`$, and in the continuum. This is in contrast to the situation with transitions to the first electron LL, when transitions to the continuum are only allowed PRB2001 .

The calculated dipole matrix elements and energies of transitions in two circular polarizations $`\sigma ^+`$ and $`\sigma ^{}`$ that terminate, respectively, in the final singlet $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_{M_z=0s\nu }^{(01)}`$ and triplet $`|\mathrm{\Psi }_{M_z=0t\nu }^{(01)}`$ states in the zero electron and first hole LL’s, $`(01)`$, are shown in Fig. 3. These hole-ExCR transitions require the extra photon energy $`\mathrm{}\omega _{\mathrm{ch}}`$ relative to the fundamental band-gap absorption $`E_{\mathrm{gap}}(B)`$ with final states in the lowest LL’s. Also, the corresponding Zeeman energies $`\mu _B(g_eS_{\mathrm{ez}}+g_hS_{\mathrm{hz}})BB`$ must be added to the Coulomb interaction energies $`B^{1/2}`$ that are only shown in Fig. 3. Because of the small binding energies of the trions $`X_{s01}^{}`$ and $`X_{t01}^{}`$ in the first hole LL, transitions to these states merge, in the presence of moderate broadening, with the strong transitions that terminate near the lower continuum edge (transitions 1 and 2 in Figs. 2 and 3); these transitions dominate the hole-ExCR spectra.

The present theory predicts in high fields another strong feature, the second higher-lying peak in the hole-ExCR that can only be observed in the $`\sigma ^+`$ polarization. This polarization dependence is due to different $`e`$$`e`$ correlations in the final singlet ($`\sigma ^+`$ polarization) and triplet ($`\sigma ^{}`$ polarization) $`2e`$$`h`$ states: the final singlet $`2e`$$`h`$ states are characterized by stronger $`e`$$`e`$ repulsion. The second ExCR peak may be associated with a formation of a quasi-bound three-particle electron singlet state (resonance) $`X_{s01}^{}`$ within the three-particle continuum. This is because the amplitude of finding all three particles in the same region of real space is large for a well-defined resonance, which may lead to large optical oscillator strengths. The existence of the $`2e`$$`h`$ resonances is physically plausible because of the 2D van Hove singularity in the $`X_{10}`$ density of states. Another well-developed Fano-resonances were revealed recently PRB2002  in the spectra of intraband internal $`X^{}`$ transitions and in interband ExCR transitions to the first electron LL PRB2001 .

The present theory shows that the main hole-ExCR peaks have intrinsic finite linewidths, in high fields $`0.1E_0`$ and have asymmetric lineshapes with high-energy tails. It should also be noted that all ExCR transitions in 2DEG are only because of electron LL mixing PRB2001  and, therefore, the hole-ExCR transitions are suppressed in strong fields as $`\nu _e|D|^2n_el_B^2(E_0/\mathrm{}\omega _{\mathrm{ce}})^2B^2`$. It is interesting to note here that very similar final states to those in interband hole-ExCR transitions in 2DEG to higher hole LL’s may also be reached by internal intraband excitations PRL2002  of negatively charged excitons $`X^{}`$ with transition terminating in the states belonging to higher hole LL’s.

It is important to note here also that while shake-up (ExCR) processes in magneto-photoabsorption of the low-density 2DEG are allowed, the exact selection rules PRL2000 ; PRB2001  prohibit shake-up processes in magneto-PL of isolated negative $`X^{}`$ and positive $`X^+`$ charged trions. Common experimental observations in the dilute limit of the shake-up processes Fink96 ; GlasbergPRB2001  and magneto-PL of the “dark” triplet $`X^{}`$ states (see Sanvitto  and references therein) may be interpreted as an indication toward the relevance of the scattering by disorder and/or the remaining 2DEG (for $`X^{}`$) or 2DHG ($`X^+`$).

## IV  Summary

I have theoretically considered combined hole-ExCR in a low-density 2DEG, a resonance in the 2DEG photoabsorption in which the hole is excited to higher hole Landau levels. This resonance may be observed in high magnetic fields as a fine structure in the high-energy tail of the main magnetoabsorption peak of the 2DEG. It has been shown, in particular, that the high-field hole-ExCR has different absorption patterns in two different circular polarizations $`\sigma ^\pm `$, which may be useful for magneto-optical studies of electron-hole correlations in quantum wells in strong magnetic fields.

###### Acknowledgements.

This work is supported in part by NSF grants DMR-0203560 and DMR-0224225 and by a research grant of CSUB.


format: text

text:
# Classroom computer animations of relativistic objects

(26-July-2003)

## Abstract

This is a short note to announce the availability of some movies that may be useful in classroom discussions on the photographic appearance of objects moving at relativistic speeds. The images are based on special relativity with no account taken of (other than to ignore) the effects of doppler shifts, intensity shifts or gravitational effects.

Motivation

First encounters with Special Relativity can be quite daunting for many students: time dilation, length contraction, twin paradoxes and the like all tend to send their minds into a state of neural meltdown. This is not a favorable outcome. But they do respond well to colour and movement – in particular to computer simulations of special relativistic effects such as the apparent change in shape, as revealed by a photograph, of an object moving close to the speed of light. I have made a series of movies for a number of common situations using a (slightly) modified version of the standard ray-tracing package, POV-Ray(tm) 3.5. Though there is nothing new in this, I have found it to be a useful teaching tool. I have put the movies and other material on the web at this address

http://www.maths.monash.edu.au/$``$leo/relativity/sr-photography

The first point that must be stressed before taking the students through these movies is that the process of taking a photograph in Special Relativity is fundamentally different from what we normally call making an observation. Photography entails the collection of photons by one person at one instant in time (in the camera’s frame) while an observation is the detection of a single event. Furthermore, an observer (or a frame) is the infinite arena in which all possible events can be detected.

I found the material in these movies sufficient to occupy approximately two one hour tutorials. The students can be asked to study the movies and then to explain, both in mathematical and descriptive terms, why the images are as they are. In doing so they will have to have a firm understanding of the principle of relativity and of relativistic aberration. My aim was to get the students to formulate a simple principle that would help them predict how an object’s shape might appear when photographed at relativistic speeds.

I have not included the effects of redshift nor the changes in intensity. I was interested only in the apparent change in the shape rather than changes in colour and brightness (perhaps at later time, any volunteers?).

The changes to the POV-Ray(tm) package were quite simple. I added a few routines to allow Lorentz transformations between the camera and object frames. The camera was allowed to move relative to all other objects in the scene. All of the photons were created in the rest frame of the camera. These were then Lorentz transformed into the scene frame at which point the normal POV-Ray(tm) routines takeover. This idea has been used before (see for example the code by Andrew Howard andrbh@cs.mu.oz.au though I believe there are errors in his Lorentz routines).

I have included the movies and the modified POV-Ray(tm) source at the above website. Note, as part of the POV-Ray(tm) licence I am required to declare that my modifications do not form part of the official POV-Ray(tm) release and that I take full responsibility for all alterations. Furthermore, if you wish to use this version you must read and accept the legal conditions as set out in povlegal.doc (the latest version of which can be found at http://www.povray.org/povlegal.html)

Forward motion - The Triffid Nebula

Here are two (computer generated) images (Fig1a.jpg, Fig1b.jpg) of the Triffid Nebula. Both were taken with identical cameras. The only difference is that one of the images was taken in a frame moving at $`\beta =0.75`$ towards the Nebula. The images were taken at the instant the two cameras passed each other. Which image is which? Compare this with the familiar images from Startrek when the warp drive is engaged.

Figure 1a

Figure 1b

Forward motion - The TARDIS

Here are another two stills (Fig2a.jpg, Fig2b.jpg), this time of a cube (Dr Who’s *TARDIS = Time and Relative Dimensions in Space*) moving directly towards the observer. The cubes appear to bulge outwards. Why? They also appear to be smaller (or are they further away?). Why?

Figure 2a

Figure 2b

Transverse motion - The Albert Einstein Steam Railway

Here are two images of a train moving across the line of sight of a single observer. The top image (Fig3a.jpg) is of a train moving at $`\beta =0.05`$ while the lower (Fig3b.jpg) image has $`\beta =0.95`$.

The students should be able to explain why speed of the train appears to slow down as it moves from left to right. The train also appears to shorten in length as it moves left to right. Why? The train also appears to rotate, but that is harder to explain (bonus marks?)

Figure 3a

Figure 3b


text:
# Circular Polarization from Gamma-Ray Burst Afterglows

## 1 INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

Recently a very large linear polarization (LP), $`80\pm 20\%`$, in the prompt $`\gamma `$-ray emission of GRB 021206 was discovered (Coburn & Boggs 2003). The degree of LP was at the theoretical maximum of the synchrotron emission, which implies an uniform ordered magnetic field over the visible region (but see also Eichler & Levinson 2003 for the scattering origin of LP). Since the causally connected region is smaller than the visible one (Gruzinov & Waxman 1999), an ordered field could be advected from the central engine of the Gamma-Ray Burst (GRB) and even drive the GRB explosion (Coburn & Boggs 2003; Lyutikov, Pariev & Blandford 2003).

On the other hand, LP of $`10\%`$ (typically a few $`\%`$) has been detected in the GRB afterglows (Covino et al. 2003 and references there in), which is attributed to synchrotron emission behind a shock (e.g., M$`\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{e}}`$sz$`\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{a}}`$ros 2002). In most popular models (Gruzinov 1999; Ghisellini & Lazzati 1999; Sari 1999; Rossi et al. 2002), the magnetic field is generated at the shock front and completely tangled (Medvedev & Loeb 1999). LP arises due to the geometric asymmetry provided by the afterglow jet observed off-axis if the magnetic fields parallel and perpendicular to the jet have different strengths. The $`\gamma `$-ray LP mentioned above could be also explained in this model if the jet is very narrow (Waxman 2003; Nakar, Piran & Waxman 2003; but see also Granot 2003).

Thus the present issue is whether an ordered magnetic field exists or not. If an ordered field exists in afterglows, its fraction to a tangled field carries valuable information on the GRB central engine. In this Letter we show that observations of the circular polarization (CP) could be a useful probe of the ordered field. CP has been detected in AGN jets (Wardle et al. 1998; Homan & Wardle 1999; Bower et al. 2002) and X-ray binaries (Fender, et al. 2000, 2002) in recent years. Theoretically, these observations are explained by a plasma effect in synchrotron sources. We apply this theory to the GRBs for the first time.

There are two main mechanisms to generate CP: intrinsic CP of synchrotron emission and Faraday conversion (FC) in sources. FC is a plasma effect which converts LP into CP (e.g., Jones & O’Dell 1977a,b). These are treated all together by solving the transfer equation of polarized radiation in §2. Then, we show that the tangled field cannot generate CP in §3. Next we estimate CP from GRB afterglows in presence of an ordered field together with a tangled field in §4. We find that, if the ordered field is comparable to or more than the tangled one, the degree of CP is about $`1\%`$ at radio frequencies and $`0.01\%`$ at optical for the forward shock, and it reaches $`10`$-$`1\%`$ at radio and $`0.1`$-$`0.01\%`$ at optical for the (early) reverse shock. The radio CP of the reverse shock remains to be $`1\%`$ even if the ordered field is weak ($`1\%`$ of the tangled one). CP in reverse shock radio emission of GRB 990123 has an upper limit of $`37\%`$ at the $`99.9\%`$ confidence level (Kulkarni et al. 1999; see also Finkelstein, Ipatov & Gnedin 2002). Further observation of CP will be a diagnosis of the ordered field and bring clues to the nature of the GRBs.

## 2 TRANSFER EQUATION

We first consider the evolution of the Stokes parameters, $`I,Q,U,V`$, (in units of erg s-1 cm-2 sr-1 Hz-1) in a homogeneous plasma with a weakly anisotropic dielectric tensor (Sazonov & Tsytovich 1968; Sazonov 1969a,b; Jones & O’Dell 1977a; Melrose 1980). It is described by the transfer equation of the polarized radiation,

$`\left(\begin{array}{cccc}d/ds+\kappa _I& \kappa _Q\mathrm{cos}2\varphi & \kappa _Q\mathrm{sin}2\varphi & \kappa _V\\ \kappa _Q\mathrm{cos}2\varphi & d/ds+\kappa _I& \kappa _V^{}& \kappa _Q^{}\mathrm{sin}2\varphi \\ \kappa _Q\mathrm{sin}2\varphi & \kappa _V^{}& d/ds+\kappa _I& \kappa _Q^{}\mathrm{cos}2\varphi \\ \kappa _V& \kappa _Q^{}\mathrm{sin}2\varphi & \kappa _Q^{}\mathrm{cos}2\varphi & d/ds+\kappa _I\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}I\\ Q\\ U\\ V\end{array}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{c}\eta _I\\ \eta _Q\mathrm{cos}2\varphi \\ \eta _Q\mathrm{sin}2\varphi \\ \eta _V\end{array}\right),`$ (13)
where $`\varphi `$ is the azimuthal projection angle of the magnetic field on the plane perpendicular to the line of sight (see Figure 1), $`\kappa _{(I,Q,U,V)}`$ are the absorptivity, $`\eta _{(I,Q,U,V)}`$ are the emissivity, and $`\kappa _Q^{}`$ and $`\kappa _V^{}`$ are rotativity and convertibility, respectively. These coefficients for a relativistic plasma with a power-law energy distribution have been derived by Sazonov (1969a,b) for a particular frequency region, $`\nu _{min}\nu `$. We have extended the frequency region to $`\nu \nu _{min}`$, and both cases are summarized in Appendix A. For the emissivity $`\eta _{(I,Q,U,V)}`$, we consider only the synchrotron emission.

There are mainly two ways to generate the circularity $`V`$ from synchrotron sources. The first one is intrinsic emission due to the emissivity $`\eta _V`$ (Legg & Westfold 1968). The second is FC (e.g., Jones & O’Dell 1977a), which is the conversion of $`Q`$ and $`U`$ into $`V`$ by means of $`\kappa _Q^{}`$ in equation (13). If the natural modes of a plasma are nearly circular, the LP vector of propagating radiation rotates since the left- and right-circular modes have different phase velocities due to birefringence. This effect is well known as Faraday Rotation (FR) (Rybicki & Lightman 1979). FC is a similar phenomenon caused by birefringence of a medium. If the natural modes are linearly or elliptically polarized, the difference in the phase velocities leads to the cyclic conversion between CP and LP. FC becomes effective around the self-absorption frequency since $`|\kappa _Q^{}/\kappa _I|1`$ for $`p2`$ from equations (A1) and (A3). Note that, if the magnetic field is uniform, the synchrotron emission does not generate $`U`$ in the coordinate system with $`\varphi =0`$. Therefore FC does not occur without the rotation of $`Q`$ into $`U`$ by $`\kappa _V^{}`$.

When we consider the tangled magnetic fields later, the coefficients in equation (13) are averaged with respect to the distribution of the magnetic field. This is justified when the typical scale over which the Stokes parameters change is much larger than that of the field orientation and hence the correlations between the Stokes parameters and the transfer coefficients tend to zero (Ruszkowski & Begelman 2002). 111 In this Letter we also neglect the coupling of the natural modes in an inhomogeneous medium (Jones & O’Dell 1977b; for its validity see Ruszkowski & Begelman 2002).

## 3 MAGNETIC FIELD CONFIGURATION

Since we know very little about the magnetic field configuration in the afterglows of the GRB’s, we here consider two components, i.e., the ordered field and the axisymmetric tangled field. There is a preferred direction in which the fluid moves. Therefore, the assumption of the axisymmetry of the tangled field is quite natural. The ordered field is expected in the patchy model (Gruzinov & Waxman 1999), or if the magnetic field advected from the central engine prevails or an ordered magnetic field exists in the medium into which the shock propagates (Granot & K$`\ddot{\mathrm{o}}`$nigl 2003). The tangled field could be produced by the Weibel instability (Medvedev & Loeb 1999) or the turbulence behind the shock.

We set a coordinate system in the shocked fluid frame as shown in Figure 1. The z-axis is the radial direction, in which the fluid moves. The ordered field is characterized by the strength $`B_{ord}`$ and the direction $`(\vartheta _{ord},\phi _{ord})`$. The axisymmetric tangled field is described by the field strength as a function of $`\vartheta _{tan}`$, $`B_{tan}(\vartheta _{tan})`$, and the probability per unit solid angle $`f(\vartheta _{tan})`$. According to Sari (1999), we adopt $`B_{tan}(\vartheta _{tan})(\xi ^2\mathrm{sin}^2\vartheta _{tan}+\mathrm{cos}^2\vartheta _{tan})^{1/2}`$ and $`f(\vartheta _{tan})B_{tan}^3(\vartheta _{tan})`$. If $`\xi 1`$, $`B_{}^2B_{}^2`$, and vice versa, where $`B_{}`$ and $`B_{}`$ are the tangled magnetic field components parallel and perpendicular to the z-axis, respectively. We parametrize the ratio of the ordered field to the tangled one by $`\zeta =B_{ord}^2/(B_{}^2+B_{}^2)`$. The total strength $`B^2=B_{ord}^2+B_{}^2+B_{}^2`$ is determined by the afterglow model in the next section.

Given a magnetic field geometry and the plasma parameters from the afterglow model, we can take an angular average of the coefficients and solve the transfer equation (13) to obtain the Stokes parameters. Although the shock structure may be important (e.g., Ioka 2003), we neglect it as a first step. We define the observed frequency as the frequency in the fluid frame multiplied by the Lorentz factor of the fluid in the lab frame $`\gamma `$, whereas ratios of the Stokes parameters are Lorentz invariant.

If $`\zeta =0`$ (no ordered field), we can immediately find that $`\eta _Q\mathrm{sin}2\varphi `$, $`\eta _V`$, $`\kappa _Q\mathrm{sin}2\varphi `$, $`\kappa _Q^{}\mathrm{sin}2\varphi `$, $`\kappa _V`$ and $`\kappa _V^{}`$ vanish as a result of the axisymmetry and reflection symmetry about the $`xy`$ plane. Therefore the tangled field alone cannot generate CP. Intuitively this is because there is always an oppositely directed pair of magnetic fields, so that no handedness exists.

## 4 APPLICATIONS TO GRB AFTERGLOWS

First we consider the forward external shock with energy $`E`$ propagating into a constant surrounding density $`n`$. According to the standard afterglow model (Sari, Piran & Narayan 1998), the Lorentz factor of the shocked fluid and the radius of the shock evolve as $`\gamma =(17E/1024\pi nm_pc^5t^3)^{1/8}`$ and $`R=(17Et/4\pi m_pnc)^{1/4}`$, respectively, where $`t`$ is the observer time. The shell thickness in the shocked fluid frame can be estimated by $`R/\gamma `$, which we use as the path length of the transfer equation (13). We assume that electrons are accelerated in the shock to a power law distribution of Lorentz factor $`\gamma _e`$, $`N(\gamma _e)d\gamma _e\gamma _e^pd\gamma _e`$ for $`\gamma _e>\gamma _{min}`$, where $`N_e=_{\gamma _{min}}N(\gamma _e)𝑑\gamma _e=4\gamma n`$ is the electron number density in the shocked fluid frame and $`p>2`$. The minimum electron energy and the magnetic field strength in the shocked fluid frame are given by $`\gamma _{min}=ϵ_e\left[(p2)/(p1)\right](m_p/m_e)\gamma `$ and $`B=(32\pi m_pϵ_Bn)^{1/2}\gamma c`$, respectively, where the parameters $`ϵ_e`$ and $`ϵ_B`$ are fractions of shock energy that go into the electrons and the magnetic energy, respectively. Thus we can calculate $`\gamma `$, $`\gamma _{min}`$, $`B`$, $`R/\gamma `$ and $`N_e`$ as a function of $`t`$ for given $`E`$, $`n`$, $`p`$, $`ϵ_e`$ and $`ϵ_B`$. We adopt $`E=10^{52}`$ erg, $`n=1`$ proton cm-3, $`p=2.2`$, $`ϵ_e=0.1`$ and $`ϵ_B=0.01`$ (Panaitescu & Kumar 2002). For simplicity, we temporarily neglect the jet effects.

The typical synchrotron frequency is $`\nu _m=eB\gamma _{min}^2\gamma /2\pi m_ec=145ϵ_{e,1}^2ϵ_{B,2}^{1/2}E_{52}^{1/2}t_{1\mathrm{d}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{y}}^{3/2}`$ GHz where the convention $`Q=10^xQ_x`$ is used except for $`t_{1\mathrm{d}\mathrm{a}\mathrm{y}}=t/1`$ day. For $`\nu >\nu _m`$ and $`\nu <\nu _m`$, we use equations (A1) and (A3), respectively. By using equation (A3), we can estimate the self-absorption frequency from $`\kappa _IR/\gamma =1`$ as $`\nu _a=41ϵ_{e,1}^1ϵ_{B,2}^{1/5}E_{52}^{1/5}n^{3/5}`$ GHz, where we put $`\mathrm{sin}\theta =1`$. The flux is given by $`F_\nu t^{1/2}\nu ^\beta `$ with $`\beta =2`$ and $`1/3`$ for $`\nu <\nu _a`$ and $`\nu _a<\nu <\nu _m`$, respectively (Sari, Piran & Narayan 1998). We can neglect the electron cooling for our interests.

Figure 2 illustrates CP from a forward shock. The degree of CP is about 1% at the self-absorption frequency $`\nu _a`$ and $`0.01\%`$ at optical for $`\zeta 1`$. We have found that the dependence of CP on $`t`$ and $`\xi `$ is weak, and the dependence on $`\zeta `$, $`\vartheta _{ord}`$, $`\phi _{ord}`$ and $`\chi `$ is roughly $`\sqrt{\zeta /(1+\zeta )}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ord}`$ (see Figure 1 for the relation between $`\theta _{ord}`$, $`\vartheta _{ord}`$, $`\phi _{ord}`$ and $`\chi `$). The CP is mainly due to intrinsic emission.

Next we consider the reverse shock propagating the ejected shell itself (M$`\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{e}}`$sz$`\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{a}}`$ros & Rees 1997; Sari & Piran 1999a). Let $`\gamma _0`$ and $`T`$ be an initial Lorentz factor of the shell and the burst duration, respectively. Then the Lorentz factor at the shock crossing time is given by $`\gamma _\times =\mathrm{min}(\gamma _0,\gamma _c)`$, where $`\gamma _c(3E/32\pi nm_pc^5T^3)^{1/8}`$ is a critical Lorentz factor (Kobayashi 2000; Kobayashi & Zhang 2003; Zhang, Kobayashi & M$`\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{e}}`$sz$`\stackrel{´}{\mathrm{a}}`$ros 2003; Sari & Piran 1999a,b). The shock crossing time is given by $`t_\times =(\gamma _0/\gamma _\times )^{8/3}T`$. At $`t=t_\times `$ the minimum electron energy, the magnetic field strength and the electron number density in the shocked fluid frame are given by $`\gamma _{min}=ϵ_e\left[(p2)/(p1)\right](m_p/m_e)\gamma _0/\gamma _\times `$, $`B=(32\pi m_pϵ_Bn)^{1/2}\gamma _\times c`$ and $`N_e=4\gamma _\times ^3n/\gamma _0`$, respectively. After the shock crossing, these quantities approximately evolve as $`\gamma t^{7/16}`$, $`\gamma _{min}t^{13/48}`$, $`Bt^{13/24}`$ and $`N_et^{13/16}`$, respectively (Kobayashi 2000; Kobayashi & Sari 2000). The shell thickness in the shocked fluid frame is $`R/\gamma `$ where $`R=(17Et/4\pi m_pnc)^{1/4}`$. We adopt $`\gamma _0=100`$ and $`T=100`$ s.

The typical synchrotron frequency is $`\nu _m=0.035`$ $`ϵ_{e,1}^2`$ $`ϵ_{B,2}^{1/2}n^{1/2}`$ $`t_{1day}^{73/48}`$ $`T_2^{73/48}`$ $`\gamma _{0,2}^2`$ $`\mathrm{max}[1,(\gamma _0/\gamma _c)^{73/18}]`$ GHz. Using equation (A1) we can estimate the self-absorption frequency from $`\kappa _IR/\gamma =1`$ as $`\nu _a=20ϵ_{e,1}^{2(p1)/(p+4)}`$ $`ϵ_{B,2}^{(p+2)/2(p+4)}`$ $`n^{(p+5)/2(p+4)}`$ $`t_{1day}^{(73p+122)/48(p+4)}`$ $`T_2^{(73p+146)/48(p+4)}`$ $`\gamma _{0,2}^2`$ $`E_{52}^{1/2(p+4)}`$ $`\mathrm{max}[1,(\gamma _0/\gamma _c)^{(73p70)/18(p+4)}]`$ GHz, where we put $`\mathrm{sin}\theta =1`$. The flux peaks at $`\nu \nu _a`$. We can neglect the electron cooling for our interests.

Figure 3 shows CP from a reverse shock. For $`\zeta 1`$, the degree of CP reaches $`10`$-$`1`$% at radio frequencies, and $`0.1`$-$`0.01`$% at optical. Even if $`\zeta 10^4`$, CP remains to be $``$ 1% at the self-absorption frequency $`\nu _a`$. This is because of the FC. The intrinsic CP decreases as $`\zeta `$ decreases, but $`V`$ is generated from $`Q`$ and $`U`$ due to the FC. The dependence of CP on $`\xi `$ is weak. If FC is not effective, the dependence on $`\zeta `$, $`\vartheta _{ord}`$, $`\phi _{ord}`$ and $`\chi `$ is roughly $`\sqrt{\zeta /(1+\zeta )}\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ord}`$, while if FC is effective, it is not so simple.

So far we have calculated CP at one point on the afterglow image on the sky. The integration over the entire emitting region may suppress the observed CP as in the case of LP (Sari 1999; Ghisellini & Lazzati 1999). Let us estimate the suppression factor when we observe a jet with an opening angle $`\mathrm{\Theta }_0`$ from a viewing angle $`\mathrm{\Theta }_v`$. We consider the ordered magnetic field defined by $`(\vartheta _{ord},\phi _{ord})`$ in the coordinate with $`x`$-axis being the direction from the jet center to the line of sight on the sky and with $`z`$-axis being the direction in which the ejecta moves (see Figure 1). We assume that the viewable region is a uniform disk of angular extent $`1/\gamma `$ centered around the line of sight to the observer, since the afterglow image is rather homogeneous for $`\nu \nu _m`$ (Granot, Piran & Sari 1999a,b) or after the jet break (Ioka & Nakamura 2001). Then, if we assume $`V/I\mathrm{cos}\theta _{ord}`$ and take the coordinate origin at the line of sight on the sky, the suppression factor is given by $`𝑑\mathrm{\Theta }𝑑\mathrm{\Phi }\left[\mathrm{cos}\vartheta _{ord}\mathrm{cos}\chi _\mathrm{\Theta }+\mathrm{sin}\chi _\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{sin}\vartheta _{ord}\mathrm{cos}(\phi _{ord}\mathrm{\Phi })\right]/𝑑\mathrm{\Theta }𝑑\mathrm{\Phi }`$, where $`\mathrm{sin}\chi _\mathrm{\Theta }=2\gamma \mathrm{\Theta }/(1+\gamma ^2\mathrm{\Theta }^2)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Theta }_v^2+2\mathrm{\Theta }_v\mathrm{\Theta }\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Phi }+\mathrm{\Theta }^2<\mathrm{\Theta }_0^2`$. Interestingly, no cancellation takes place when $`\vartheta _{ord}=0`$ or $`\pi `$. Even when the cancellation occurs, e.g, in the case of $`\vartheta _{ord}=\pi /2`$, some amount of CP remains if the visible region has an asymmetry due to the jet geometry as in the case of LP.

We are grateful F. Takahara for useful comments. This work was supported in part by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research of the Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, No.00660 (KI).

## Appendix A Transfer coefficients

We summarize the transfer coefficients in equation (13) at an angle $`\theta `$ to the magnetic field $`B`$ (Sazonov 1969a,b; Sazonov & Tsytovich 1968; Melrose 1980). In this section we measure all quantities in the shocked fluid frame. We assume that the electron number density in the interval of the Lorentz factor $`d\gamma _e`$ is power-law $`dN_e=N(\gamma _e)d\gamma _e=\stackrel{~}{N}_e\gamma _e^pd\gamma _e`$ for $`\gamma _{min}\gamma _e`$ with $`p>2`$. Then, at frequencies $`\nu _{min}\gamma _{min}^2\nu _{}\nu `$ the coefficients are given by

$`\eta _I`$ $`=`$ $`\eta _\alpha \eta _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^\alpha ,\eta _Q=\eta _\alpha ^Q\eta _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^\alpha ,\eta _V=\eta _\alpha ^V\eta _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^{\alpha 1/2}\mathrm{cot}\theta ,`$
$`\kappa _I`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _\alpha \kappa _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^{\alpha 5/2},\kappa _Q=\kappa _\alpha ^Q\kappa _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^{\alpha 5/2},\kappa _V=\kappa _\alpha ^V\kappa _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^{\alpha 3}\mathrm{cot}\theta ,`$
$`\kappa _Q^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _\alpha ^Q\kappa _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^3\gamma _{min}^{2\alpha +1}\{1(\nu /\nu _{min})^{\alpha +1/2}\},`$
$`\kappa _V^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _\alpha ^V\kappa _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^2(\mathrm{ln}\gamma _{min})\gamma _{min}^{2(\alpha +1)}\mathrm{cot}\theta ,`$ (A1)
where $`\nu _{}|e|B\mathrm{sin}\theta /2\pi m_ec`$, $`\eta _{}(e^2/c)\stackrel{~}{N}_e\nu _{}`$, $`\kappa _{}(e^2/m_ec)\stackrel{~}{N}_e/\nu _{}`$, $`\alpha (p1)/2`$, and

$`\eta _\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3^{\alpha +1/2}}{4(\alpha +1)}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{11}{6}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\right),\eta _\alpha ^Q={\displaystyle \frac{3^{\alpha +1/2}}{4(\alpha +5/3)}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{11}{6}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\right),`$
$`\eta _\alpha ^V`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3^\alpha (\alpha +3/2)}{2(\alpha +1/2)}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{11}{12}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{12}}\right),\kappa _\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{3^{\alpha +1}}{4}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{25}{12}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{12}}\right),`$
$`\kappa _\alpha ^Q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3^{\alpha +1}}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha +3/2}{\alpha +13/6}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{25}{12}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{12}}\right),`$
$`\kappa _\alpha ^V`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3^{\alpha +1/2}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha +2}{\alpha +1}}\left(\alpha +{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{6}}\right)\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{\alpha }{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{6}}\right),`$
$`\kappa _\alpha ^Q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha +3/2}{4(\alpha 1/2)}},\kappa _\alpha ^V=2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha +3/2}{\alpha +1}}.`$ (A2)
The above notations are the same as Jones & O’Dell (1977a; But $`\kappa _\alpha ^Q`$ is different. The appropriate integration of equation (9) in Sazonov (1969a) gives the above value). For the frequency region, $`\nu \nu _{min}`$, the analogous representations have not been derived yet. Such a frequency region becomes important in the application to the forward shock of GRB afterglow. In this case, we obtain the following expressions:

$`\eta _I`$ $`=`$ $`\eta _\alpha \eta _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^{1/3}\gamma _{min}^{2\alpha 2/3},\eta _Q={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\eta _I,\eta _V=\eta _\alpha ^V\eta _{}\gamma _{min}^{2\alpha 1}\mathrm{cot}\theta ,`$
$`\kappa _I`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _\alpha \kappa _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^{5/3}\gamma _{min}^{2\alpha 5/3},\kappa _Q={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\kappa _I,\kappa _V=\kappa _\alpha ^V\kappa _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^2\gamma _{min}^{2(\alpha +1)}\mathrm{cot}\theta ,`$
$`\kappa _Q^{}`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _\alpha ^Q\kappa _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^{5/3}\gamma _{min}^{2\alpha 5/3},\kappa _V^{}=\kappa _\alpha ^V\kappa _{}(\nu /\nu _{})^2(\mathrm{ln}\gamma _{min})\gamma _{min}^{2(\alpha +1)}\mathrm{cot}\theta ,`$ (A3)
where

$`\eta _\alpha `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3^{1/6}}{2(\alpha +1/3)}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\right),\eta _\alpha ^V={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{3(\alpha +1/2)}},\kappa _\alpha ={\displaystyle \frac{3^{1/6}}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha +3/2}{\alpha +5/6}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\right),`$
$`\kappa _\alpha ^V`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\pi (\alpha +3/2)}{3(\alpha +1)}},\kappa _\alpha ^Q={\displaystyle \frac{3^{1/3}}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha +3/2}{\alpha +5/6}}\mathrm{\Gamma }\left({\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\right),\kappa _\alpha ^V=2{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha +3/2}{\alpha +1}}.`$ (A4)
Note that the intrinsic LP ($`\eta _Q/\eta _I`$) in this frequency region is not $`(p+1)/(p+7/3)70\%`$ but $`50\%`$. In GRB 021206, considerable photons are below the break energy, i.e., $`\nu \nu _{min}`$ (Coburn & Boggs 2003), so that even an ordered field might not explain the observed LP $`80\pm 20\%`$.