text:
# The First Deep ACS Ly𝛼 Images of Local Starburst Galaxies

## 1 Introduction

Ly$`\alpha `$ is now widely used as a tracer of galaxy formation and evolution in the high redshift universe. For several decades many observers have attempted to understand the conditions required to detect this line by focusing on nearby regions of rapid star formation. In a recent study, Kunth et al. (1998) discussed a set of eight nearby star-forming galaxies. They found four Ly$`\alpha `$ emitting galaxies with clear Ly$`\alpha `$ P-Cygni profiles indicating large-scale outflows of the interstellar medium (ISM). In contrast, the four remaining galaxies displayed damped Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption instead of emission, regardless of their dust content. Thuan & Izotov (1997) studied the unique starburst Tol1214-277 whose very strong and symmetric Ly$`\alpha `$ line shows no trace of blueshifted absorption.

The Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) on board HST was used to reobserve three of the galaxies discussed by Kunth et al. (1998): two with a Ly$`\alpha `$ P-Cygni profile and a third with only a broad Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption. 2-D analysis of these spectra clearly shows some partial decoupling of the UV continuum source and Ly$`\alpha `$ emission (Mas-Hesse et al. 2003). The spectra confirm the previous GHRS observations that favor a large Ly$`\alpha `$ escape probability when most of the neutral gas is velocity-shifted relative to the ionized regions and show that expanding shells of neutral gas can reach a few kpc wide.

These observational results are well reproduced by recent models of Tenorio-Tagle et al. (1999) for the evolution of a superbubble surrounding a starburst in a host galaxy. Whenever the neutral gas is outflowing, the Ly$`\alpha `$ photons redward of 1216 Å can escape. In contrast, no emission is detected if the ionized gas is shielded by a homogeneous slab of static neutral gas with column density above $`N10^{18}`$ cm-2. On the other hand, diffuse Ly$`\alpha `$ may still be present and leaking out of the HI cloud, even if the HI is homogeneous and static. Finally, if the starburst is very young or if the HI coverage is static but porous, Ly$`\alpha `$ emission may be seen directly from the HII region, but with an intensity weaker than the recombination value. These results highlight the additional importance of the ISM properties for the escape probability of Ly$`\alpha `$: The galaxies observed to date span a metallicity range of more than a factor of 10 but display no correlation between metal abundance and Ly$`\alpha `$ emission strength.

However additional parameters complicate the comparison between theory and observations: Ly$`\alpha `$ photons escape may critically depend on the column density and distribution of the neutral gas and dust, the morphology of the supershells, and probably on the luminosity of the burst and on the morphology of the host galaxy. In order to tackle these issues, a pilot Ly$`\alpha `$ imaging survey of nearby star-forming galaxies has been conducted using the Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) on board HST. An initial sample of six local starburst galaxies was chosen for Cycle 11, and here we report on initial results for the first two targets.

Throughout this paper we have assumed a value for the Hubble constant of $`H_0=75`$ km s-1

## 2 ACS observations and data reduction

30 orbits had been allocated to this program (GO-9470). Here we discuss the results for the first two galaxies ESO 350-IG038 and SBS 0335-052. Previous GHRS spectroscopy showed the first galaxy to be a Ly$`\alpha `$ emitter while the second exhibited a broad damped absorption. The observations were obtained with the Solar Blind Channel (SBC) of the ACS. Each galaxy was observed during five orbits in two adjacent filters. The F122M filter contains the Ly$`\alpha `$ emission, while the adjacent F140LP longpass does not transmit Ly$`\alpha `$ and was chosen for the continuum subtraction. The SBC uses a MAMA detector which is not subject to cosmic rays, and one single exposure per orbit was obtained in each filter. The F122M images were obtained during the “SHADOW” part of the orbit in order to lower the background from geocoronal Ly$`\alpha `$ while the F140LP ones were acquired during the rest of the orbit. The total integration times per galaxy in the F122M and F140LP filters were 9095 and 2700 s, respectively. As a result of the larger bandwidth, the F140LP observations have approximately twice the S/N of the F122M data. The images were dithered using 3 positions with offsets of $`10`$ pixels in between. The SBC utilizes a pixel scale of $`0.032`$″, and the effective field of view is $`31\mathrm{}\times 35`$″ (Pavlovsky et al. 2002).

The “drizzled” images produced by the standard pipeline for the two filters were combined after coalignment. From each combined image, the background was approximated by a surface (parameterized with a first-degree polynomial), and subtracted. Although weak in absolute terms in both filters, the background was significantly stronger in the F122M filter due to geocoronal emission. The images, calibrated in counts per second, were multiplied by the PHOTFLAM keyword from the image headers and converted to erg s-1 cm-2 Å-1 at the pivot wavelength of each filter (1274 and 1527 Å, respectively).

Our ACS images were taken with the goal of detecting Ly$`\alpha `$ emission from massive star-forming regions, and possible diffuse emission. In order to detect the excess emission within the F122M filter that would be produced by the Ly$`\alpha `$ photons, we need to completely remove the continuum contribution. The subtraction procedure depends on the slope of the continuum, which might be variable for different regions over the images. Therefore, different normalizations between both filters were required for different regions.

We express the continuum spectral energy distribution as a power law: $`f_\lambda \lambda ^\beta `$. For a flat continuum ($`\beta =0`$), the scaling factor between F122M and F140LP is 10.3, i.e., the ratio of the PHOTFLAM keywords. A redder SED with $`\beta =1`$ gives a scaling factor of 12.5, and a bluer SED with $`\beta =2`$ gives 7.2. We have used available spectroscopic UV data from GHRS (Thuan & Izotov 1997, Kunth et al. 1998) and IUE, as well as the optical to UV colors from HST photometry to estimate $`\beta `$ and aid us in the continuum subtraction.

We stress that the continuum subtraction procedure is affected by several parameters, most importantly the intrinsic continuum slope of the stellar population. Moreover, a Ly$`\alpha `$ P-Cygni profile as frequently observed in these objects tends to hide the Ly$`\alpha `$ emission when imaged through this filter (the emission and the absorption wings tend to cancel, at least partially). Therefore, our results should be regarded qualitatively only.

Our subtraction technique is supported by the comparison with previous GHRS data. As discussed below, we find excess emission within the F122M filter where GHRS shows a prominent Ly$`\alpha `$ emission line as well (ESO350-IG038), while we detect a relative deficit of photons around Ly$`\alpha `$ where a strong and broad absorption profile is present (SBS0335-052).

## 3 Results and discussion

### 3.1 ESO350-IG038 (Haro 11)

This galaxy has a radial velocity of 6175 km s-1 and a complex morphology. The optical and near-infrared (IR) properties have been discussed by Vader et al. (1993), Heisler & Vader (1994), Bergvall et al. (2000), and Bergvall & Östlin (2002). The nebular oxygen abundance is 12+log(O/H)=7.9 (Bergvall & Östlin 2002). Three bright condensations have been identified, all with strong H$`\alpha `$ emission. Following the nomenclature by Vader et. al. (1993), we denote these by A, B, and C (see Fig. 1). Knot A has the bluest optical and near-IR colors and small reddening, $`E(BV)=0.16`$, as derived from H$`\alpha `$/H$`\beta `$. In contrast, B and C have redder colors and larger internal extinction, $`E(BV)0.4`$. The galaxy has been imaged in the WFPC2/F606W filter in an HST snapshot program (Malkan et al. 1998) which has revealed numerous compact star clusters (Östlin 2000). A Ly$`\alpha `$ line exhibiting a P-Cygni profile was detected with HST/GHRS (Kunth et al. 1998).

Fig. 1 shows the F140LP, F122M, and continuum subtracted Ly$`\alpha `$ images. A relative scaling of 10.3 between F122M and F140LP was used, equivalent to $`\beta =0`$. In Fig. 2 we show an RGB composite of optical, F140LP, and continuum subtracted Ly$`\alpha `$ images.

Figures 1 and 2 show that knot A is resolved into several bright star clusters, whereas B is more diffuse and C is dominated by a single luminous source. Comparison of the F140LP and F606W images shows the regions around A and C to have very blue UV/optical colors: $`f_{\lambda ,F140LP}/f_{\lambda ,F606W}15`$, implying $`\beta =2`$, whereas in region B the average ratio is only 3, implying $`\beta =0.8`$. The region east of C is redder, $`f_{\lambda ,F140LP}/f_{\lambda ,F606W}1`$, as seen also from Fig. 2.

Ly$`\alpha `$ emission is detected from region C. It is more extended along the north-south direction than the continuum, indicating that the emission is not isotropic. Ly$`\alpha `$ is detected in region A as well. Faint Ly$`\alpha `$ emission is seen over a large fraction of the galaxy, with the exception of region B and its immediate surroundings showing clear absorption. The emission in regions A and C has absorption cores near the knots. However, the absorption cores are shifted slightly to the north with respect to the emission. We have confirmed that this is not due to a misalignment of the F122M and F140LP images. After integration, the emission outweighs the absorption. A faint Ly$`\alpha `$ blob (labeled ‘D’ in Fig. 1), undetected in the continuum, is seen south-east of C.

The results are sensitive to the scaling of the two filters F122M and F140LP when subtracting the continuum. If we use the $`f_{\lambda ,F140LP}/f_{\lambda ,F606W}`$ ratio and assume a power law spectral energy distribution (SED) we obtain $`\beta =2`$ to 0. Using this method to compute a spatially varying scaling factor between F122M and F140LP, the effect is that only C and D shows significant emission. However, the GHRS spectrum of Kunth et al. (1998) shows a continuum decrease from 1300 to 1200 Å, indicating that one power law SED is not a good approximation over the full spectral range. Adopting the GHRS slope still leads to absorption from region B. Using the slope derived from an IUE spectrum ($`\beta =1`$) gives a result similar to that presented in Fig 1; the emission close to A becomes weaker, but the diffuse emission remains. This illustrates the importance of determining the right continuum level. However, given the appearance of the continuum near Ly$`\alpha `$ from the GHRS spectra, it is clear that photometry always faces a potential risk of over- or underestimate the Ly$`\alpha `$ line strength.

The absorption in region B, and in the cores of the sources in A and C is too strong to be explainable by anything but a deep Ly$`\alpha `$ through. Note that B still has rather blue UV to optical colors, so the absorption cannot be a spurious effect of reddening or an underlying red stellar population.

Double velocity components in H$`\alpha `$ with a velocity difference of $`50`$ km s-1 are seen in regions A, C, as well as B (Östlin et al. 1999). Kunth et al. (1998) detected broad metallic absorption lines from neutral gas blue-shifted by 60 km s-1 with respect to Ly$`\alpha `$. At variance with SBS0335-052, no HI emission gas has been detected at a limit of $`10^8M_{}`$ (Bergvall et al. 2000), although Kunth et al. (1998) detected dense neutral gas in absorption. Hence the neutral gas distribution is likely to be clumpy, and any diffuse gas would be ionized, explaining why we detect Ly$`\alpha `$ in emission.

The small but systematic offset of Ly$`\alpha `$ to the south with respect to the continuum in regions A and C might be an indication of a velocity gradient in the neutral gas. This is consistent with the H$`\alpha `$ velocity field showing a global velocity gradient of the order of $`1015`$ km s-1 per arcsec, or $`2540`$ km s-1 kpc-1 (uncorrected for inclination) with a kinematical major axis in the south-eastern direction, causing a blueshift of the gas to the south of A and C with respect to these regions (Östlin et al. 1999). The redshifted regions to the north of A and C do not show Ly$`\alpha `$ but these photons may be absorbed by the same gas complex responsible for the absorption in the center (region B). As discussed in detail in Mas-Hesse et al. (2003), the visibility of the Ly$`\alpha `$ emission increases with the blueshift of the neutral gas. While we expect Ly$`\alpha `$ photons to be escaping from the regions where the neutral gas is blueshifted, we do not expect emission in the absence of a velocity offset between the neutral and ionized regions. The absence of emission from region B might therefore indicate static neutral gas along our sight line. This galaxy illustrates the importance of the kinematic structure of the region for the emission of Ly$`\alpha `$ photons. The resulting Ly$`\alpha `$ distribution will be non-isotropic and much more complex than the H$`\alpha `$ distribution.

As mentioned above, the Ly$`\alpha `$ emitting regions show absorption cores. We attribute this effect to the known P-Cygni properties of the Ly$`\alpha `$ profiles in this galaxy: the stronger the stellar continuum, the deeper will be the blueshifted absorption wing (see Mas-Hesse et al. 2003 for details). Therefore, the emission wing tends to cancel with the absorption where the continuum is higher.

### 3.2 SBS0335-052

SBS0335-052 has a nebular oxygen abundance (12 + log(O/H) = 7.3; Melnick et al. 1992). This value is almost as low as that of IZw18, triggering discussions whether SBS0335-052 is a truly young galaxy in its first burst of star formation (Thuan et al. 1997, cf. Östlin & Kunth 2001). The broad damped Ly$`\alpha `$ absorption reported by Thuan et al. (1997) from their GHRS spectra suggests a static HI reservoir surrounding the massive star condensations. The HI column density within the GHRS aperture amounts to $`7.0\times 10^{21}`$ cm-2. According to Mas-Hesse et al. (2003), the very young starburst episode would be starting to ionize the surrounding medium, but the mechanical energy released would still be insufficient to accelerate the large amount of HI gas in front of the region. The fits presented by these authors indicate that the intrinsic Ly$`\alpha `$ emission line could be very strong, with an equivalent width around 120 Å, as predicted by theoretical models. HST WFPC2 V and I images (Thuan, Izotov, & Lipovetsky 1997), UBVRI surface photometry by Papaderos et al. (1998), and near- and mid-IR imaging (Vanzi et al. 2000; Dale et al. 2001) have revealed several super star clusters (SSC). A comparison of the data of Thuan et al. with our ACS frames (Figs. 1 and 2) shows that the brightest star-forming knots in the visible and IR range (SSC1 and SSC2 in the notation of Thuan et al.) are not the brightest in the UV continuum. In contrast, SSC4 and SSC5 are much brighter in the UV than the other SSCs: $`f_{\lambda ,F140LP}/f_{\lambda ,F791W}100,100`$, and 35 for SSC4, SSC5, and SSC1, respectively. Our ACS images show that SSC3 is a well defined double system which is not resolved in the optical and near-IR.

A clear lack of photons within the Ly$`\alpha `$ filter is evident for the different SSCs on the image. This lack of photons is intrinsic, and is not related to any normalization effect. This is remarkable in view of the strong H$`\alpha `$ observed in this galaxy (e.g. Melnick et al. 1992) and the $`f_{\lambda ,F140LP}/f_{\lambda ,F791W}`$ colors. This absence is found both when the intrinsic slope of the UV continuum is used ($`\beta =2.5`$) and also when a flat continuum ($`\beta =0`$) is assumed. If $`\beta `$ is estimated from $`f_{\lambda ,F140LP}/f_{\lambda ,F791W}`$, it is found to vary between –3 and –1.8 over the starburst region. Nevertheless, a weak and extended diffuse Ly$`\alpha `$ emission is detected around SSC5 to the N-E, as shown in Fig. 1 (bottom right). This emission is very weak, and its reality is subject to the uncertainties in the continuum subtraction. Ly$`\alpha `$ photons could escape if they find a way: either through holes with lower HI column density, or regions where the neutral gas could be moving at some velocity with respect to the central HII region. Tenorio-Tagle et al. (1999) (see also Mas-Hesse et al. 2003) suggest that an ionized cone could develop through the surrounding neutral gas halo shortly after the ignition of a massive starburst. This cone would be oriented along the minor axis of the system. In this case, most of the gas towards the N-E of SSC5 could be already ionized, allowing some Ly$`\alpha `$ photons to escape. Thuan & Izotov (1997) found evidence for neutral gas flows, identifying two systems at $`500`$ and $`1500`$ km s-1 with respect to the galaxy redshift. As concluded for ESO 350-IG038, the kinematic structure of the neutral gas in these regions could favor the escape of some Ly$`\alpha `$ photons in specific areas. Long-slit high-resolution spectroscopy would be needed to identify the dominant mechanism leading to the detection of Ly$`\alpha `$ photons.

In any case, the absence of clear net Ly$`\alpha `$ emission from all observed knots confirms what has already been discussed (Thuan et al. 1997; Kunth et al. 1998), supporting again the lack of correlation between Ly$`\alpha `$ fluxes and metallicities (hence dust) found by Giavalisco et al. (1996). The large aperture of the IUE satellite limited Giavalisco et al. to size scales of order kpc. Our highly resolved ACS images allow us to push the 1-pixel resolution down to 5.7 and 8.9 pc for ESO350-38 and SBS0335-052, respectively. If dust affects the Ly$`\alpha `$ escape, it must do so at even smaller spatial scales. While some dust is clearly present in SBS0335-052, SSC1 does not suffer from severe extinction (Thuan et al. 1997), and the same must be true for SSCs 4 and 5 in view of their UV to optical colors. Even if the emission close to SSC5 is real, it is very weak and completely negligible on the whole. The HI cloud around SBS0335-052 is clearly very dense and apparently static (at least in front of the SSCs), hence favoring the multiple scattering mechanism responsible for the attenuation.

## 4 Conclusions and implications for high-redshift galaxies

Our first ACS images of two dwarf starburst galaxies give us a view at the Ly$`\alpha `$ emission that is complementary to that of spectroscopy. These images already confirm the existence of two markedly different types of starburst galaxies: some are Ly$`\alpha `$ emitters, while others show rather broad absorption profiles. Even galaxies displaying Ly$`\alpha `$ emission may do so in a complex pattern, as we have shown in ESO350-38: two bright H$`\alpha `$ regions show emission, while a third one shows strong absorption. At high redshift, this morphological resolution is not attainable.

In many respects, Ly$`\alpha `$ could be a fundamental probe of the young universe. It suffers from fewer luminosity biases than Lyman-break techniques so that Ly$`\alpha `$ surveys become a more efficient way to trace the fainter end of the luminosity function, i.e., it traces the building blocks of present-day galaxies in the hierarchical galaxy formation paradigm (Hu, Cowie, & McMahon 1998; Fynbo et al. 2001). Early results paint a complex picture. The equivalent widths of the sources are much larger than expected for ordinary stellar populations (Malhotra & Rhoads 2002). They could be explained by postulating an initial mass function (IMF) biased towards more massive stars, as predicted theoretically for a very metal-poor stellar population (Bromm, Coppi, & Larson 2001). The combined effect of low metallicity and flat IMF, however, can only partly explain the anomalous equivalent widths. Additional mechanisms must be at work. Could spatial offsets between the escaping Ly$`\alpha `$ and the stellar light, together with higher extinction of the dust shrouded stars be important? Our ACS imagery cautions against using the Ly$`\alpha `$ equivalent width as a star-formation indicator in the absence of spatial information.

The source numbers themselves are only about 10% of the numbers expected from an extrapolation of the Lyman-break luminosity function. Malhotra & Rhoads (2002) speculate if the youngest galaxies are preferentially selected, whereas older populations are excluded, the results are skewed towards large Ly$`\alpha `$ equivalent widths. Could dust formation after $`10^7`$ yr destroy the Ly$`\alpha `$ photons? The results in the low-redshift universe suggests otherwise. We find no support for dust playing a major role in destroying Ly$`\alpha `$ photons. Rather, the ACS images favor the highly irregular gas morphology as key to understanding the Ly$`\alpha `$ escape mechanism via kinematic effects.

Haiman & Spaans (1999) proposed Ly$`\alpha `$ galaxies as a direct and robust test of the reionization epoch. Prior to reionization, these galaxies are hidden by scattering of the neutral intergalactic medium (IGM). Therefore, a pronounced decrease in the number counts of galaxies should occur at the reionization redshift, independent of Gunn-Peterson trough observations using quasars. Ly$`\alpha `$ in galaxies would have the additional appeal of being sensitive at much higher IGM optical depths since its red wing coincides with the red damping wing of intergalactic Ly$`\alpha `$ only. While this idea is attractive in principle, our ACS imagery calls for caution. In practice, Ly$`\alpha `$ is a complex superposition of emission and absorption in the star-forming galaxy itself. The resulting Ly$`\alpha `$ profile will be strongly affected by absorption from the continuum. This becomes even more of a concern when imaging data are interpreted. When integrating over the filter bandpass, the emission part of the profile is partly compensated by the absorption. As a result, we measure significantly lower Ly$`\alpha `$ fluxes than with spectroscopic methods, and the escape fraction of Ly$`\alpha `$ photons is significantly underestimated. Finally it must be kept in mind that in absence of any prior spectroscopic information on the continuum distribution, the required continuum subtraction could be completely erroneous.

The Ly$`\alpha `$ line is a premier star-formation tracer, in particular at high $`z`$ where traditional methods, such as H$`\alpha `$ or the far-IR emission, become impractical. Radiative transfer effects in the surrounding interstellar gas make its interpretation in terms of star-formation rates less straightforward than often assumed. Clearly, a better understanding of the complex Ly$`\alpha `$ escape mechanisms, both empirically and theoretically, is required before we can attempt to interpret large-scale Ly$`\alpha `$ surveys.

A.R.P.acknowledges the hospitality of the Space Telescope Science Institute during his stay as visiting scientist supported by the Director’s Discretionary Research Fund. This work was supported by HST grant GO-9470.01-A from the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555. JMMH has been partially supported by Spanish grant AYA2001-3939-C03-02. GÖ acknowledges support from the Swedish research council and the Swedish national space board.


format: text

text:
# Quantum Symmetrically-Private Information Retrieval

## 1 Introduction

### 1.1 Setting

The Private Information Retrieval problem was introduced by Chor et al. . A user wants to learn a bit $`x_i`$ from an $`n`$-bit database $`x=x_1\mathrm{}x_n`$, for some $`i[n]`$ of his choice. The privacy of the user requires that the database server learns nothing about $`i`$, in the information-theoretic sense, and general efficiency considerations require the communication between the user and the database to be limited. Clearly, PIR can be realized by making the server send the whole database to the user. This takes $`n`$ bits of communication and can be shown to be optimal. Better protocols exist if the database is replicated among some $`k2`$ different servers, who cannot communicate . Here we require that individual servers learn nothing about $`i`$. For $`k=2`$, the best known scheme uses $`O(n^{1/3})`$ bits of communication , and asymptotically the best known $`k`$-server uses $`n^{O(\mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}(k)/k\mathrm{log}(k))}`$ bits . For $`k2`$, no good lower bounds on the required communication are known for this setting.

In a recent paper, we showed how to obtain quantum PIR systems (QPIR, where the parties are quantum computers and the communication consists of qubits) that use slightly less communication than the best known classical schemes . In Table 1 we list the best known bounds on the communication complexity for small numbers of servers, in the classical as well as quantum case.

In its standard form, PIR just protects the privacy of the user: the individual servers learn nothing about $`i`$. But now suppose we also want to protect the privacy of the data. That is, we don’t want the user to learn anything about $`x`$ beyond the $`x_i`$ that he asks for. For example, because the user should pay a fee for every $`x_i`$ that he learns (pay-per-view), or because the database contains very sensitive information. This setting of Symmetrically-Private Information Retrieval (SPIR) was introduced by Gertner et al. . They showed that SPIR is impossible even if the user is honest (i.e., follows the protocol) and the servers can individually flip coins \[6, Appendix A\]. This no-go result holds no matter how many servers and how many bits and rounds of communication we allow. Therefore they extended the PIR model by allowing the servers to share a random string that is hidden from the user, and showed how to turn any PIR scheme into a SPIR scheme with shared randomness among the servers, at a small extra communication cost. The resulting schemes are information-theoretically secure even against dishonest users, and use a number of random bits that is of the same order as the communication.

The necessity of shared randomness for classical SPIR schemes is a significant drawback, since information-theoretic security requires new shared randomness for each application of the scheme. This either requires a lot of extra communication between the servers (if new shared randomness is generated for each new application) or much memory on the parts of the servers (if randomness is generated once for many applications, each server needs to store this).

### 1.2 Results

In this paper, we study the existence and efficiency of SPIR schemes in the quantum world, where user and servers have quantum computers and can communicate qubits. Here user privacy means that the states of individual servers should all be independent of $`i`$, and data privacy means that the concatenation of the various states of the user is independent of the bits $`x_j`$ for all $`ji`$. We can distinguish between honest-user and dishonest-user data privacy. In the first case, data privacy holds if the user is honest (follows the protocol). In the second case, data privacy should hold even if the user deviates from the protocol in any way.

Our main result is that honest-user quantum SPIR schemes exist even in the case where the servers do not share any randomness. As mentioned above, such honest-user SPIRs without shared randomness are impossible in the classical world. This gives another example of a cryptographic task that can be performed with information-theoretic security in the quantum world but that is impossible classically (key distribution  is the main example of this). The communication complexity of our $`k`$-server QSPIR schemes is of the same order as that of the best known classical $`k`$-server PIR schemes. At first sight, one might think this trivial: just take a classical scheme, ensure data privacy using shared randomness among the servers, and then get rid of the shared randomness by letting the user entangle the messages to the servers. However, this would violate data privacy, as the user would now have “access” to the servers’ shared randomness. In actuality we do something quite different, making use of the fact that the servers can add phases that multiply out to an overall phase. This phase allows the user to extract $`x_i`$, but nothing else. For $`k=2`$ we also give an alternative, less efficient scheme based on the properties of Bell states.

The notion of an honest user is somewhat delicate, because clearly users cannot be trusted to follow the protocol in all cases. Still, there are scenarios where the assumption of a honest user is not unreasonable, for example in pay-per-view systems where the user accesses the system via some box (attached to his TV) that is sealed or otherwise protected from tampering. In this case the user cannot deviate from the protocol, but he can still be curious, trying to observe what goes on inside of his box to try to extract more information about the database. Our honest-user QSPIRs are perfectly secure against such users.

It would be nice to have SPIR schemes that are secure even against dishonest users. However, we exhibit a large class of PIR schemes (quantum as well as classical) that can all be cheated by a dishonest quantum user. Our honest-user QSPIRs fall in this class and hence are not secure against dishonest users. Fortunately, if we are willing to allow shared randomness between the servers then the best classical SPIRs can easily be made secure against even dishonest quantum users: if the servers measure the communication in the computational basis, the scheme is equivalent to the classical scheme, even if the user is quantum.

Remarks:

(1) Often the PIR setting is generalized to $`t`$-secure PIR, where no colluding set of $`t`$ servers together have any information about $`i`$. We focus on the $`t=1`$ case here in order to simplify the presentation.

(2) Very efficient PIR and SPIR schemes are possible under computational assumptions, even for $`k=1`$ servers (see e.g. the references at ). In this paper we focus on information-theoretic security.

## 2 Definitions

We assume familiarity with the quantum model . The various variants of PIR are defined below.

###### Definition 1

A one-round, $`k`$-server private information retrieval (PIR) scheme with recovery probability $`1/2+\epsilon `$, query size $`t`$, and answer size $`a`$, consists of a randomized algorithm (the user), and $`k`$ randomized algorithms $`S_1,\mathrm{},S_k`$ (the servers), such that

1. On input $`i[n]`$, the user produces $`k`$ $`t`$-bit queries $`q_1,\mathrm{},q_k`$ and sends these to the respective servers. The $`j`$th server sends back an $`a`$-bit string $`a_j`$. The user outputs a bit $`b`$ depending on $`i,a_1,\mathrm{},a_k,`$ and his randomness.
2. Recovery: For all $`x`$ and $`i`$, the probability (over the user’s and servers’ randomness) that $`b=x_i`$ is at least $`1/2+\epsilon `$.
3. User privacy: For all $`j`$, the distribution of $`q_j`$ (over the user’s randomness) is independent of $`i`$.

The communication complexity of the scheme is the total length of the communication between the user and the servers, i.e. $`k(t+a)`$ bits.

All best known PIR schemes satisfy the above definitions with $`\epsilon =1/2`$ (i.e., no error probability), and we will hereafter take $`\epsilon =1/2`$ unless mentioned otherwise. It is open whether multiple-round schemes can be better than the one-round variety we defined here. For PIR schemes, we can assume without loss of generality that the servers are deterministic. However, we need randomized servers for the symmetrically-private variety:

###### Definition 2

A symmetrically-private information retrieval (SPIR) scheme is a PIR scheme with the additional property of data privacy: the user’s “view” (i.e. the concatenation of his various states during the protocol) does not depend on $`x_j`$, for all $`ji`$. We distinguish between private-randomness and shared-randomness SPIR schemes, depending on whether the servers individually flip coins or have a shared random coin (hidden from the user). We also distinguish between honest-user and dishonest-user SPIR, depending on whether data privacy should hold even when the user deviates from the protocol.

###### Definition 3

We define quantum versions QPIR and QSPIR of PIR and SPIR, respectively, in the obvious way: the user and the servers are quantum computers, and the communication uses quantum bits; user privacy means that the density matrix of each server is independent of $`i`$ at all points in the protocol; data privacy means that the concatenation of the density matrices that the user has at the various points of the protocol, is independent of $`x_j`$, for all $`ji`$. For QSPIR, we still have the distinctions of private/public-randomness and honest/dishonest-user.

As mentioned in the introduction, Gertner et al. \[6, Appendix A\] exhibited quite efficient shared-randomness SPIR schemes. One might think that these can be turned into SPIR schemes with deterministic servers as follows: the user picks a random string, sends it to each of the servers (along with the queries) to establish shared randomness between them, and then erases (or “forgets”) his copy of the random string. However, this erasing of the random string by the user is ruled out by the definition, since the user’s view includes the random string he drew. In fact, Gertner et al. \[6, Appendix A\] showed that shared randomness between the servers is necessary for the existence of classical SPIR (even for multi-round protocols):

###### Fact 1

For every $`k1`$, there is no $`k`$-server private-randomness SPIR scheme.

Intuitively, the reason is that since the servers have no knowledge of $`i`$ (by user privacy), their individual messages need to be independent of all bits of $`x`$, including $`x_i`$, to ensure data privacy. But since they cannot coordinate via shared randomness, their joint messages will be independent of the whole $`x`$ as well, so the user cannot learn $`x_i`$.

Below we show that this negative result does not apply to the quantum world: using coordination via quantum entanglement, we can get honest-user QSPIRs without any communication or shared randomness between the servers at any stage of the protocol.

## 3 Honest-user quantum SPIR schemes

### 3.1 Honest-user QSPIRs from PIRs

Our honest-user QSPIR schemes work on top of the PIR schemes recently developed by Beimel et al. . These, as well as all others known, work as follows: the user picks a random string $`r`$, and depending on $`i`$ and $`r`$, picks $`k`$ queries $`q_1,\mathrm{},q_k\{0,1\}^t`$. He sends these to the respective servers, who respond with answers $`a_1,\mathrm{},a_k\{0,1\}^a`$. The user then outputs

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{k}{}}a_jb_j=x_i,$$

where $`b_1,\mathrm{},b_k\{0,1\}^a`$ are determined by $`i`$ and $`r`$, and everything is modulo 2.

We will now describe the quantum SPIR scheme. As before, the user picks $`r,q_1,\mathrm{},q_k`$. In addition, he picks $`k`$ random strings $`r_1,\mathrm{},r_k\{0,1\}^a`$. He defines $`r_j^{}=r_j+b_j`$ and sets up the following $`(k+1)`$-register state

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|0|q_1,r_1\mathrm{}|q_k,r_k+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|1|q_1,r_1^{}\mathrm{}|q_k,r_k^{}.$$

The user keeps the first 1-qubit register to himself, and sends the other $`k`$ registers to the respective servers. The $`j`$th server sees a random mixture of $`|q_j,r_j`$ and $`|q_j,r_j^{}`$. Since $`q_j`$ gives no information about $`i`$ (by the user privacy of the classical PIR scheme) and each of $`r_j`$ and $`r_j^{}`$ is individually random, the server learns nothing about $`i`$. The $`j`$th server performs the following unitary mapping

$$|q_j,r(1)^{a_jr}|q_j,r,$$

which he can do because $`a_j`$ only depends on $`q_j`$ and $`x`$. The servers then send everything back to the user; the overall communication is $`2k(t+a)`$ qubits, double that of the original scheme. The user now has the state

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|0(1)^{a_1r_1}|q_1,r_1\mathrm{}(1)^{a_kr_k}|q_k,r_k+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|1(1)^{a_1r_1^{}}|q_1,r_1^{}\mathrm{}(1)^{a_kr_k^{}}|q_k,r_k^{}.$$

Up to an insignificant global phase $`(1)^{_ja_jr_j}`$, this is equal to

$$\begin{array}{cc}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|0|q_1,r_1\mathrm{}|q_k,r_k+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|1(1)^{_{j=1}^ka_jb_j}|q_1,r_1^{}\mathrm{}|q_k,r_k^{}\hfill & =\hfill \\ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|0|q_1,r_1\mathrm{}|q_k,r_k+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|1(1)^{x_i}|q_1,r_1^{}\mathrm{}|q_k,r_k^{}.\hfill & \end{array}$$

The user can learn $`x_i`$ from this by returning everything except the first qubit to 0, and then applying the Hadamard transform to the first qubit, which maps $`\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}|0+\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(1)^{x_i}|1|x_i`$. On the other hand, he can learn nothing else, since the various states of the user during the protocol never depend on any other $`x_j`$. Accordingly, we have an honest-user QSPIR scheme with recovery probability 1. Note that nowhere in the protocol do the servers have shared randomness: they do not start with it, the random strings $`r_j`$, $`r_j^{}`$ are not correlated between servers, and the servers do not end with any shared randomness (in fact they end with nothing).

Plugging in the best known classical PIR schemes, due to , gives

###### Theorem 1

For every $`k2`$, there exists a honest-user QSPIR (without shared randomness) with communication complexity $`n^{O(\mathrm{log}\mathrm{log}(k)/k\mathrm{log}(k))}`$.

Slightly better complexities can be obtained for small $`k`$, as stated in the first column of Table 1 in the introduction. For $`k=1`$ our scheme communicates $`2n`$ qubits (just start from a 1-server scheme with query length 0, $`a_1=x`$ and $`b_1=e_i`$), for $`k=2`$ it uses $`O(n^{1/3})`$ qubits, for $`k=3`$ it uses $`O(n^{1/5.25})`$ qubits etc. Notice that we cannot use the (slightly better) $`k`$-server QPIR schemes from the second column of Table 1, since these reveal more than 1 bit about $`x`$.

### 3.2 Honest-user 2-server QSPIR with Bell states

The QSPIR scheme of the previous section requires communication $`O(n^{1/3})`$ for the case of two servers. Here we present a different scheme based on the Bell states. The scheme is suboptimal since it requires linear communication, but it makes use of some interesting properties of the Bell states and it could be easier to implement in the lab.

Our scheme works for even $`n=2m`$, but for odd $`n`$ we can just add a dummy bit to $`x`$ to make it even. It relies on three of the Bell states:

$$|B_{00}=\frac{|00+|11}{\sqrt{2}},|B_{01}=\frac{|01+|10}{\sqrt{2}},|B_{10}=\frac{|00|11}{\sqrt{2}}$$

and the four Pauli matrices

$$\begin{array}{cccccc}\sigma _{00}\hfill & =\hfill & \left(\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1\end{array}\right),\hfill & \sigma _{01}\hfill & =\hfill & \left(\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0\end{array}\right),\hfill \\ \sigma _{10}\hfill & =\hfill & \left(\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 1& \hfill 0\\ \hfill 0& \hfill 1\end{array}\right),\hfill & \sigma _{11}\hfill & =\hfill & \left(\begin{array}{cc}\hfill 0& \hfill 1\\ \hfill 1& \hfill 0\end{array}\right).\hfill \end{array}$$

We first describe our scheme for $`n=2`$. If the user wants to know $`x_1`$, he builds the following 3-qubit state

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0|B_{00}+|1|B_{01}\right),$$

and if he wants to know $`x_2`$ he builds

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0|B_{00}+|1|B_{10}\right).$$

He sends the second qubit to server 1 and the third to server 2, keeping the first qubit to himself. It is easy to see that each server always gets a completely mixed qubit, so the servers learn nothing about $`i`$. Both servers will now apply $`\sigma _{x_1x_2}`$ to the qubit they receive. That is, they will apply a phase flip if $`x_1=1`$ and a bit flip if $`x_2=1`$. The following properties are easily verified:

$$\begin{array}{ccc}\hfill (\sigma _x\sigma _x)|B_{00}& =& \hfill |B_{00}\\ \hfill (\sigma _x\sigma _x)|B_{01}& =& \hfill (1)^{x_1}|B_{01}\\ \hfill (\sigma _x\sigma _x)|B_{10}& =& \hfill (1)^{x_2}|B_{10}\end{array}$$

The servers then send their qubit back to the user. By the above properties, if the user wanted to know $`x_1`$, then he now has

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0|B_{00}+(1)^{x_1}|1|B_{01}\right),$$

and if he wanted $`x_2`$ he has

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0|B_{00}+(1)^{x_2}|1|B_{10}\right).$$

From this the user can extract the bit $`x_i`$ of his choice (with probability 1)—and nothing else. Thus we have an honest-user 2-server QSPIR for $`n=2`$ with $`4`$ qubits of communication.

To generalize to arbitrary $`n=2m`$, the user can employ a larger state that involves $`m`$ Bell states to extract $`x_i`$. Namely, if $`i=2j1`$ ($`1jm`$) then he uses

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0|B_{00}^m+|1|B_{00}^{j1}|B_{01}|B_{00}^{mj}\right),$$

and if $`i=2j`$ then he uses

$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(|0|B_{00}^m+|1|B_{00}^{j1}|B_{10}|B_{00}^{mj}\right).$$

The user sends the left qubit of each of the Bells states to server 1, the right qubit of each Bell state to server 2, and keeps the first qubit to himself. The servers then apply $`\sigma _{x_{2j1}x_{2j}}`$ to the $`j`$th qubit they receive (for all $`1jm`$) and send back the result. Using the same properties as before, it can easily be verified that we just get the appropriate phase-factor $`(1)^{x_i}`$ in the $`|1`$-part of the user’s total state and nothing else. Thus we have a scheme that works for all $`n`$ and that simultaneously hides $`i`$ from the servers and $`xx_i`$ from an honest user. In total, the scheme uses $`2n`$ qubits of communication: $`m=n/2`$ to each server, and $`m=n/2`$ back.

## 4 Dishonest-user quantum SPIR schemes

The assumption that the user is honest (i.e., follows the protocol) is somewhat painful, since the servers cannot rely on this. In particular, a dishonest quantum user can extract about $`\mathrm{log}n`$ bits of information about $`x`$ of any honest-user QSPIR where the user’s final state is pure, as follows. Consider such a pure QSPIR scheme, with as many servers and communication as you like. From the user’s high level perspective, this can be viewed as a unitary that maps

$$|i|0|i|x_i|\varphi _{i,x_i}.$$

Because of data privacy, the state $`|\varphi _{i,x_i}`$ only depends on $`i`$ and $`x_i`$. Therefore by one application of the QSPIR and some unitary post-processing, the user can erase $`|\varphi _{i,x_i}`$, mapping

$$|i|0|i|x_i,$$

for any $`i`$ or superposition of $`i`$s of his choice. That is, one run of the QSPIR can be used to make one query to $`x`$. Van Dam  has shown how one quantum query to $`x`$ can be used to obtain $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\mathrm{log}n)`$ bits of information about $`x`$ (in the information-theoretic sense that is, not necessarily $`\mathrm{log}n`$ specific database-bits $`x_j`$). Accordingly, any pure QSPIR that is secure against an honest user will leak at least $`\mathrm{\Omega }(\mathrm{log}n)`$ bits of information about $`x`$ to a cheating user. This includes our schemes from the previous section. Even worse, the servers cannot even detect whether the user cheats, because they will have the same state in the honest scheme as well as in the cheating scheme.

How to protect against dishonest quantum users? In fact we can just use a classical SPIR that is secure against dishonest users (of course, this will be a shared-randomness scheme again). If we require the servers to measure what they receive in the computational basis, then a dishonest quantum user cannot extract more information than a classical dishonest user—that is, nothing except one $`x_i`$.

## 5 Conclusion

We have shown that the best known PIR schemes can be turned into quantum PIR schemes that are symmetrically private with respect to a honest user, i.e., except for the bit $`x_i`$ that he asks for, the honest user receives no information whatsoever about the database $`x`$. Rather interestingly, the best known quantum PIR schemes use polynomially less communication than the best known classical schemes (Table 1), but our PIR-to-QSPIR reduction does not seem to work starting from a quantum PIR system. We leave it as an open question whether the communication complexity of QSPIR schemes can be significantly reduced, either based on the QPIR schemes of  or via some other method.


text:
# Pair production by a circularly polarized electromagnetic wave in plasma.

## I Introduction

Quantum Electrodynamics (QED) predicts the possibility of electron-positron pair production in a vacuum by strong electric field Schwinger . This nonlinear effect has attracted great attention due to the fact that it lays outside the scope of perturbation theory and sheds a light on the nonlinear quantum electrodynamics properties of the vacuum vacuum . As was shown in Refs. Schwinger ; el-pos  a planar electromagnetic wave of arbitrary intensity and spectral composition does not produce the electron-positron pairs in a vacuum because it has both the electromagnetic field invariants $`J_1=(𝐁^2𝐄^2)/2`$ and $`J_2=(𝐄𝐁)/2`$ equal to zero LandauLifshits-TF . Due to this reason the pair creation was first considered for a static electric field, which evidently has non-vanishing invariant $`J_1`$, then its theoretical description was extended on the time-varying electric-type electromagnetic field B-I . In this case the electromagnetic field invariants $`J_1`$ and $`J_2`$ obey conditions

$`J_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}F_{\mu \nu }F^{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(𝐁^2𝐄^2)<0,`$
$`J_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}F_{\mu \nu }\stackrel{~}{F}^{\mu \nu }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(𝐄𝐁)=0,`$ (1)
where $`F_{\mu \nu }`$ is the electromagnetic field tensor and $`\stackrel{~}{F}^{\mu \nu }=\epsilon ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }F_{\rho \sigma }`$, $`\epsilon ^{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }`$ is the totally antisymmetric tensor. In particular, the pair creation in a vacuum in a spatially homogeneous electric field

$$𝐄(t)=F\varphi (t)𝐞_z,𝐁(t)=0,$$
(2)
where $`\varphi (t)=\mathrm{cos}t`$ and $`𝐞_z`$ is a unit vector in the z-direction, was considered in Refs. B-I ; 3 ; 4 ; PopovMarinov ; NN ; 7 ; 8 ; 9 ; Ringwald .

The process (called the Schwinger pair production mechanism) is of fundamental importance in QED and in quantum field theory in general. However, previous estimates 4 ; 25 ; 26  showed, that it hardly could be observed in the experiments using by that time available optical lasers whose power was far from the limit able to provide an intensity of the order of $`10^{29}`$W/cm2, which corresponds to the Schwinger critical electric field $`1.32\times 10^{16}`$ V/cm. As closer the electric field approaches the Schwinger limit as the sub-barrier tunneling results in more efficient electron-positron pair production. Therefore, the results of studies presented in Refs. Schwinger ; B-I ; 3 ; 4 ; PopovMarinov ; NN ; 7 ; 8  for a long time were generally believed to be of purely theoretical interest in QED.

Recently, fortunately, the situation has drastically changed, because the power of optical and infrared lasers rose by many orders of magnitude 27 . This opened several ways to approach critical QED intensity. One way was demonstrated in the SLAC experiments SLAC99 , where 46.6 GeV electron beam interacted with counterpropagating laser pulse, which intensity was 0.5$`10^{18}`$W/cm2. The incident radiation in its turn interacted with the similar laser pulse and several electron-positron pairs were detected. Then, the projects to build free-electron lasers at TESLA electron-positron collider in DESY and the corresponding facilities at SLAC, in which coherent laser beams with the photon energies of the order of several keV are supposed to be produced, are being designed 29  (see also Refs. Ringwald ; FEL ; Tajima ). Recently, an approach to the light intensification towards the Schwinger limit by using nonlinear interaction between the electromagnetic and the langmuir wave in plasmas has been formulated in Ref. sbul . In this scheme the QED critical field can be achieved with present day laser systems. Hence the theory of the Schwinger effect must be considered in more detail in view of the new experimental possibilities.

However, here arises a question, whether the model of pair creation by the time-varying electrical field (2) in a vacuum resembles well enough the experimental situation. Such a field can be generated in the antinodes of the standing light wave, which is realized in a superposition of two counter-propagating laser beams. In this case, the region where electric field is much larger than the magnetic field, is relatively small and the results obtained in Refs. B-I ; 3 ; 4 ; PopovMarinov ; NN ; 7 ; 8 ; 9 ; Ringwald ; Avetissian  describe just a small portion of the pairs that could be created by the electromagnetic wave. In the rest part, the pair creation will be affected by the presence of the time-varying magnetic field. This in its turn should lead to very complicated formulas for pair production probability.

To elucidate the role of the magnetic field component on the electron positron creation we consider below the planar circularly polarized electromagnetic wave propagating in the underdense collisionless plasma. Even in a very low density plasma the first electromagnetic invariant $`J_1`$ calculated for planar electromagnetic wave is not equal to zero. That is why in a plasma the electron-positron pairs can be created by the planar wave. In this case the usage of the Lorentz transformation into the reference frame moving with the wave group velocity leads to the electromagnetic wave field transformation to the purely electric field, that rotates with constant frequency, and with no magnetic field. Although this anzatz reduces the problem under consideration to the situation when the pairs are created by the time varying electric field, actually, the wave magnetic field effects are incorporated rigorously into our model. We notice that similar approach has been earlier used in Ref. Av . In the present paper we use the method of ”imaginary time”, simple and powerful mathematical technique for analytical continuation of the classical equations of motion postulated to apply inside the barrier, through the barrier where classical motion is not allowed to join up with the equations of motion for particles that have escaped through the barrier to the outside where classical motion is again allowed (see Refs. PTP ; Popov ). With the help of ”the imaginary time technique” we shall study in details the dependence of the pair creation probability on the frequency and the amplitude of the wave.

In addition to the pairs created by the electromagnetic wave via the Schwinger mechanism there is electron-positron pair creation due to the trident process trident  and bremsstrahlung photons. We shall show that the electron-positron pair produced via the Schwinger mechanism can be distinguished from the one appeared due to other mechanisms by the momentum filter, i. e. the momentum of the ”Schwinger” pair in the laboratory frame is larger.

The paper is organized as follows. In section 2 we discuss the properties of the relativistically strong electromagnetic wave in plasma. The probability of pair creation by such a wave is calculated in section 3. In section 4 the discussions of main results and conclusions are presented.

## II Relativistically Strong Electromagnetic Wave in Plasma

In this Section we recover well known properties of a relativistically strong electromagnetic wave in an underdense collisionless plasma needed for further formulation of the time varying electric field configuration. A discussion of the wave behavior is based on the results obtained by Akhiezer and Polovin in Ref. AP . We consider the circularly polarized electromagnetic wave, which is described by the transverse component of the vector potential:

$$𝐀_{}=A_0\left[𝐞_y\mathrm{sin}(\omega tkx)𝐞_zg\mathrm{cos}(\omega tkx)\right].$$
(3)
The wave propagates in the direction of the $`x`$ axis, its phase velocity equals $`\omega /k`$, $`g`$ represents right-handed ($`g=1`$) or left-handed ($`g=1`$) circular polarization, and $`A_0=cE_0/\omega `$ with $`E_0`$ being the amplitude of the electric field. The dependence of the wave frequency $`\omega `$ on the $`x`$-component of the wave-vector $`k`$ is given by the dispersion equation

$$\omega ^2=k^2c^2+\underset{\alpha }{}\frac{\omega _{p\alpha }^2}{\left[1+(Z_\alpha eA_0/m_\alpha c^2)^2\right]^{1/2}},$$
(4)
where $`\alpha =e,p,i,\mathrm{}`$ denotes species in the plasma with the electric charge $`Z_\alpha e`$ , mass $`m_\alpha `$, and density $`n_\alpha `$, $`\omega _{p\alpha }=\left(4\pi n_\alpha Z_\alpha ^2e^2/m_\alpha \right)^{1/2}`$, and $`c`$ is a speed of light in a vacuum. By virtue of the plasma electric neutrality condition we have $`\underset{\alpha }{}Z_\alpha n_\alpha =0`$. Introducing notation for the frequency $`\omega `$

$$\mathrm{\Omega }^2=\underset{\alpha }{}\frac{\omega _{p\alpha }^2}{\left[1+(Z_\alpha eA_0/m_\alpha c^2)^2\right]^{1/2}},$$
(5)
we rewrite the dispersion equation in the form $`\omega =(k^2c^2+\mathrm{\Omega }^2)^{1/2}`$.

The electric and the magnetic field are equal to

$$𝐄=\frac{1}{c}_t𝐀_{}=\frac{\omega }{c}A_0[𝐞_y\mathrm{cos}(\omega tkx)+𝐞_z\mathrm{sin}(\omega tkx)]$$
(6)
and

$$𝐁=\times 𝐀=kA_0[𝐞_y\mathrm{sin}(\omega tkx)+𝐞_z\mathrm{cos}(\omega tkx)],$$
(7)
respectively.

We see that in a plasma the first invariant of the electromagnetic field $`J_1`$ is not equal to zero:

$$J_1=\frac{1}{2}(B^2E^2)=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }^2}{2c^2}A_0^2\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\omega }\right)^2E_0^2.$$
(8)
It vanishes when the plasma density tends to zero, i. e. in a vacuum (or in the limit $`A_0\mathrm{}`$). It also vanishes when the charges of plasma species go to zero, because $`\mathrm{\Omega }\omega _{p\alpha }`$, which in its turn $`\omega _{p\alpha }Z_\alpha `$.

The nonlinear electromagnetic wave in plasmas is also characterized by the dependence of its phase and group velocity on the plasma parameters and on the wave amplitude. From equation (4) we find that the phase velocity $`v_{ph}=\omega /k`$ and the group velocity $`v_g=\omega /k`$, are related to each other via expression $`v_{ph}v_g=c^2`$.

Now we perform the Lorentz transformation to the reference frame moving with the group velocity along the direction of the wave propagation. The wave frequency and the $`x`$component of the wave vector change according to

$$\omega ^{}=\frac{\omega kv_g}{(1v_g^2/c^2)^{1/2}}\mathrm{and}k^{}=\frac{k\omega v_g/c^2}{(1v_g^2/c^2)^{1/2}}.$$
(9)
Using relationship $`v_g=c^2/v_{ph}=kc^2/\omega `$, we obtain that in the moving reference frame the wave frequency equals $`\omega ^{}=\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and its wave number vanishes: $`k^{}=0`$. Using the Lorentz invariance of the transverse component of the vector potential we find that in the moving reference frame the magnetic field in the circularly polarized electromagnetic wave vanishes and the electric field, rotating with the frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, is given by expression:

$$𝐄=\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{c}A_0\left(𝐞_y\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Omega }t^{}+g𝐞_z\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }t^{}\right).$$
(10)
Further we shall use a notation $`E=\left(\mathrm{\Omega }A_0/c\right)(\mathrm{\Omega }/\omega )E_0`$. See also Ref. Av , where the model case of linearly polarized wave has been considered. The finite amplitude linearly polarized wave propagating in plasmas has both transversal and longitudinal components, oscillating with different frequencies. That is why the problem of the pair production by this wave is technically more complicated, than the case of circularly polarized wave. It will be considered in our forthcoming publications.

## III Pair Production by Circularly Polarized Wave

We consider the problem of pair production in the circularly polarized electric field, using the approach formulated in Ref. PopovMarinov . The wave function of the electron in the electromagnetic field has the form

$$\psi _f(𝐩,t)=d^3rd^3r_0e^{ipr}G(r,t;r_0,0)\psi _i(r_0,0).$$
(11)
The Green function, according to Feynman, in the coordinate representation has the following asymptotic behavior

$$G(r,t;r_0,0)(2\pi it)^{3/2}\mathrm{exp}[iS(r,t;r_0,0)],$$
(12)
where $`S`$ is the action for the electron. For the motion in the in the homogeneous field $`\psi _i\mathrm{exp}(i𝐩_0𝐫_0)`$. Integration of Eq. (11) with the use of saddle point method yields the following equations for saddle point coordinates (see Ref. PopovMarinov ):

$$\frac{dS}{dr}p=0,\frac{dS}{dr_0}+p_0=0.$$
(13)
As it is known in the classical mechanics these equations determine the extremal trajectory, which satisfies the Lagrange equations. Therefore with the accuracy up to the preexponential factor we get

$$\psi _f\mathrm{exp}\left(i\widehat{S}\right)$$
(14)
with

$$\widehat{S}=\underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}𝑑t𝐩𝐫+𝐩_0𝐫_0,$$
(15)
where $`\widehat{S}`$ is the reduced action PopovMarinov , $`𝐫`$ is the coordinate of the particle, and $`𝐫_0`$ is the initial coordinate and the Lagrangian (see Ref. LandauLifshits-TF ) is given by expression

$$=m_ec^2\left(1|𝐯|^2/c^2\right)^{1/2}+e𝐀𝐯e\phi ,$$
(16)
which depends on the vector $`𝐀`$ and the scalar $`\phi `$ potential of the electromagnetic field and on the charged particle velocity $`𝐯=c𝐩/(m_e^2c^2+|𝐩|^2)^{1/2}`$. Here $`|𝐩|^2=p_x^2+p_y^2+p_z^2`$. In particular case, when the charged particle interacts with the electromagnetic wave, the integrand in the action functional (15) can be expressed via the particle energy $`=\left(m_e^2c^4+|𝐩|^2c^2\right)^{1/2}`$ as

$$\widehat{S}=\underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}𝑑t.$$
(17)
An expression for the action remains unchanged in a plasma, if we assume that $`𝐀`$ and $`\phi `$ are the vector and scalar potentials of net electromagnetic field acting on the electron or positron. The representation of the electromagnetic wave field in the form (10) with the frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ given by Eq. (5) implies the use of the macroscopic description of the wave. The analysis of the microscopic structure of the electron-positron pair production in plasmas is beyond the scope of the present publication. However, since similar technique of the Lorentz transformation into the reference frame, moving with the wave group velocity, can be used to simplify the analysis of electron-positron pair production inside the hollow waveguide and in the focus region focus , we think that the main results obtained below in the longwave approximation ($`\left(2\pi c/\omega \right)^3n1`$) will not change drastically.

The probability of pair creation depends on the imaginary part of the action as

$$dw_p\mathrm{exp}\left\{2\text{Im}\left[\widehat{S}(p)\right]\right\}d^3p.$$
(18)
To calculate the pair creation probability we need to find the extremal trajectory for the sub-barrier motion of the particle, which minimizes the action. The action functional variation is

$`\delta \widehat{S}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}}𝑑t\left({\displaystyle \frac{}{p_i}}\delta p_i+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2}{p_ip_j}}\delta p_i\delta p_j+\mathrm{}\right)`$ (19)
$`=`$ $`a_i\delta p_i+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}b_{ij}\delta p_i\delta p_j`$
with the functions

$$a_i=\underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}𝑑t\frac{p_i}{}=\rho _i;b_{ij}=\underset{0}{\overset{t}{}}\frac{dt}{}\left(\delta _{ij}\frac{p_ip_j}{}\right).$$
(20)
Here $`\rho =𝐫(t)𝐫_0`$ is the particle displacement during its sub-barrier motion. The requirement of $`\text{Im}[\widehat{S}]`$ being minimal leads to the condition $`\text{Im}[\rho ]=0`$, which determines the extremal trajectory. We introduce a notation $`𝐪_0`$ for characteristic momentum, which corresponds to the extremal trajectory. In the case, when the quasiclassical approximation is valid, the momentum spectrum of emerging from under the barrier particles has a sharp peak near $`𝐩=𝐪_0`$ PopovMarinov . However the discussion of the exact form of the spectrum of the produced electrons and positrons is beyond the scope of the present paper and it will be carried out elsewhere. The sub-barrier motion is determined by the classical equations:

$$\dot{𝐩}=e𝐄,$$
(21)
$$\dot{𝐫}=c\frac{𝐩}{(m_e^2c^2+|𝐩|^2)^{1/2}},$$
(22)
We should add to these equations of sub-barrier motion the requirement of trajectory to be the extremal one, i.e. $`\text{Im}[\rho ]=0`$, then for the circularly polarized electric field of the form

$$E_x=0,E_y=E\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Omega }t,E_z=E\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }t,$$
(23)
we find

$$p_y=q_y+P\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }t,p_z=q_zP\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Omega }t,p_x=q_x,$$
(24)
$$\text{Im}[\rho ]=\frac{2}{\mathrm{\Omega }}\text{Re}\left[\underset{0}{\overset{\tau _0}{}}\frac{𝐩}{(m_e^2c^2+|𝐩|^2)^{1/2}}𝑑\tau \right]=0,$$
(25)
where $`\tau =i\mathrm{\Omega }t`$ and $`P=eE/\mathrm{\Omega }`$. From condition $`\text{Im}[\rho ]=0`$ we obtain $`q_y=q_x=0`$. As we see, when the particle emerges from under the barrier ($`t=0`$) its momentum is perpendicular to the instantaneous direction of the electric field. Here we encounter the drastic difference of the two dimensional case of the particle motion (it was first pointed out in PopovMarinov ), which is realized in the circularly polarized wave, from the one dimensional motion considered in Refs. 4 ; Ringwald ; Popov . In the former case the point of particle emerging from under the barrier is the turning point of the trajectory and therefore the particle momentum should be here equal to zero. In the two dimensional case the component of particle momentum along the instantaneous direction of the electric field is zero. It is due to the fact that under the barrier this component is purely imaginary. The perpendicular component of the particle momentum can be complex. We use a notation $`q_z=Ps`$ and rewrite the equations for $`\tau _0`$ and $`s`$ in the following form, which corresponds to the equations of Ref. PopovMarinov  with ellipticity equal to one:

$$\mathrm{sinh}^2\tau _0(s\mathrm{cosh}\tau _0)^2=\gamma ^2,$$
(26)
$$\underset{0}{\overset{\tau _0}{}}\frac{s\mathrm{cosh}\tau }{\left[\gamma ^2+(s\mathrm{cosh}\tau )^2\mathrm{sinh}^2\tau \right]^{1/2}}𝑑\tau =0,$$
(27)
where $`\tau _0`$ is the singular point of $`W(t)`$ with $`W(t)`$ being the action for the article moving along extremal trajectory. $`\tau _0`$ has a meaning of sub-barrier motion time and $`m_ec/P=\gamma `$. The parameter $`\gamma `$ was introduced in Refs. B-I ; 3 , and plays a role of the adiabaticity parameter, as is easily inferred from the function $`g(\gamma )`$, defined below, which enters the principal exponential factor in the pair production probability. Indeed, as long as $`\gamma 1`$, i. e. in the high-field, low-frequency limit the result obtained in the framework of the imaginary method agrees with the nonperturbative result of Ref. Schwinger  for a static, spatially uniform field. Note that $`\gamma `$ characterizes the dynamics of particle tunneling through a time varying barrier and is similar to the well-known Keldysh parameter in the theory of the multiphoton ionization of atoms and ions by laser radiation keldysh . Due to the fact that in the present paper we do not use Lorentz factor, the notation $`\gamma `$ for the adiabaticity parameter should not cause any ambiguity. The sub-barrier motion time $`\tau _0`$ is determined by condition $`=(m_e^2c^4+|𝐩|^2c^2)^{1/2}=0`$, which leads to equation (26). Equation (27) follows from a condition $`\text{Im}\left[\rho _z\right]=0`$. The behaviour of the functions $`s`$ and $`\tau _0`$ is presented in Figs. 1 a) and b).

Using $`\tau _0`$ and $`s`$ from Eqs. (26) and (27) we can calculate the differential probability of the pair creation. It reads (see Refs. prob1 ; prob2 )

$$dw_p=e^{\left\{\frac{\pi }{\epsilon }\left[g(\gamma )+c_x\frac{p_x^2}{m_e^2}+c_{}\frac{(qp_{})^2}{m_e^2}\right]\right\}}d^3p,$$
(28)
where $`\epsilon =E/E_{cr}`$ is the normalized amplitude of the electromagnetic wave in the moving reference frame, $`p_{}`$ is the momentum of the pair in the plane perpendicular to the direction of wave propagation. $`E_{cr}=2m_e^2c^3/e\mathrm{}`$ is the Schwinger field, and the functions $`g(\gamma )`$, $`c_x(\gamma )`$, $`c_y(\gamma )`$, and $`c_z(\gamma )`$ are given by expressions PopovMarinov :

$$g(\gamma )=\frac{4}{\pi \gamma }\underset{0}{\overset{\tau _0}{}}K^{1/2}𝑑\tau ,$$
(29)
$$c_x(\gamma )=g(\gamma )+\frac{\gamma }{2}\frac{dg(\gamma )}{d\gamma },$$
(30)
$$c_{}(\gamma )=\gamma \frac{dc_x(\gamma )}{d\gamma },$$
(31)
where $`K=1\left[\mathrm{sinh}^2\tau (s\mathrm{cosh}\tau )^2\right]/\gamma ^2`$. According to Ref. Popov  the function $`g(\gamma )`$ demonstrates typical behavior of the pair creation in the linearly polarized electric field. The function $`g(\gamma )`$ is presented in Fig. 2 along with two typical examples from Ref. Popov .

The total probability of pair creation can be represented as a sum of probabilities of many-photon processes

$$W=\underset{n}{}w_n,$$
(32)
where $`w_n`$ is $`dw_p`$ integrated over $`d^3p`$ with energy conservation in the multiphoton process taken into account (see Refs. 3 ; 4 ). In the limit of small adiabaticity parameter ($`\gamma 1`$), typical for nowadays lasers, Popov , we get for the total probability of pair creation per unit volume per second

$$W\frac{c}{4\pi ^3\lambda _e^4}\epsilon ^2\mathrm{exp}\left[\frac{\pi }{\epsilon }g(\gamma )\right].$$
(33)
We should note, that unlike the case of linear polarization here there is no additional factor $`\sqrt{\epsilon }`$ (see Popov  for details) compared to a constant field. It is due to the fact, that in the limit $`\omega 0`$ the circularly polarized field becomes constant one.

However the parameter $`\gamma `$ is not convenient for studying the probability of pair creation, because the probability depends on $`\epsilon `$ and $`\gamma `$, which are not independent. These parameters are related as

$$\gamma =\frac{m_ec}{P}=\frac{m_ec\omega }{eE}=\frac{2\pi \lambda _e}{\lambda \epsilon },$$
(34)
where $`\lambda _e=3.86\times 10^{11}`$ cm is the electron Compton length. Therefore it is more convenient to study the probability dependence on the electromagnetic wave wavelength, $`\lambda `$, and on the parameter $`\epsilon `$. In addition, the electromagnetic wave is described in terms of amplitude ($`\epsilon `$), wavelength ($`\lambda `$) and its shape, which determines function $`g(\gamma )`$.

In order to understand at what wavelength the shape of the pulse begins to play an important role, we present the dependence of $`g(\epsilon )`$ on parameter $`\epsilon `$ in Fig. 3a for different values of $`\lambda `$. It can be seen form this figure that for $`\lambda <10^7`$ cm the dependence of $`g(\epsilon )`$ on $`\epsilon `$ should be taken into account. However all the nowaday lasers are far from this limit (see Ref. Popov ). This effect can manifest itself only in future X-ray lasers. Moreover there is another problem with detecting this effect. One should has rather small $`\epsilon `$ (see Fig. 3a), at which the pairs are produced at very small rate. As it can be seen from Fig. 3b, where the dependence of pair creation probability on $`\epsilon `$ for different values of $`\lambda `$ is shown, for $`\lambda =10^7`$ cm one pair is created at $`\epsilon 0.08`$ in the volume $`(10^6\text{cm})^3`$ and in 500 fms. To elucidate this point we present Figs. 3c and 3d, where the dependence of $`g`$ and $`W`$ on $`\lambda `$ for $`\epsilon =0.08`$ are shown respectively.

We should notice that the initial parameters of the electromagnetic wave in vacuum enter the expression for pair creation probability through parameters $`\gamma `$ and $`\epsilon `$:

$$\gamma =\frac{m_ec}{P}\frac{\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}\text{and}\epsilon =\frac{E}{E_{cr}}=\frac{E_0}{E_{cr}}\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }}{\omega },$$
(35)
where $`E_0`$ is the amplitude of the electric field in the laboratory reference frame. So the electric field amplitude effectively decreases in plasma and $`\gamma `$ increases.

In the reference frame moving with the wave group velocity using expression (10) we find that the electron momentum is equal to

$$𝐩^{}=P\left[𝐞_y(s\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Omega }t^{})𝐞_z\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }t^{}\right].$$
(36)
The electron energy is

$$^{}=\left\{m_e^2c^4+2P^2[1+\frac{s^2}{2}s\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Omega }t^{}]\right\}^{1/2}.$$
(37)
Performing the Lorentz transformation to the laboratory frame we obtain the electron energy

$$=\frac{\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}\left[m_e^2c^4+2P^2\left(1+\frac{s^2}{2}s\mathrm{cos}\chi \right)\right]^{1/2}$$
(38)
with $`\chi =\omega tkx`$ and its longitudinal momentum

$$p_x=\left\{\left[\left(\frac{\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}\right)^21\right]\left[m_e^2c^4+2P^2\left(1+\frac{s^2}{2}s\mathrm{cos}\chi \right)\right]\right\}^{1/2}.$$
(39)
The transverse momentum is given by

$$𝐩=\frac{P}{c}\{𝐞_y[s\mathrm{cos}\chi ]𝐞_z\mathrm{sin}\chi \}.$$
(40)
In Fig. 4 we present averaged energy and longitudinal momentum versus $`\gamma `$. The averaging was performed on the phase of the pair creation, i.e. by calculating integral

$$<\mathrm{}>=\frac{\omega }{2\mathrm{\Omega }\pi }\underset{0}{\overset{2\pi }{}}(\mathrm{})𝑑\chi .$$
(41)
We see that in the limit of large $`P`$ and $`\omega /\mathrm{\Omega }`$ the energy and the longitudinal component of the particle are proportional to $`m_ec^2(\omega P/\mathrm{\Omega })`$ and $`m_ec(\omega P/\mathrm{\Omega })`$.

In addition to the pairs created by the electromagnetic wave via the Schwinger mechanism there is electron-positron pair creation due the trident process (see Ref. trident ). The electron (positron) is created by the trident process in the laboratory reference frame with the negligible small transverse momentum and then it gains the transverse momentum equal to

$$𝐩^{}=\frac{P}{c}\left[𝐞_y(\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Omega }t^{}\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Omega }t_0^{})𝐞_z(\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }t^{}\mathrm{sin}\mathrm{\Omega }t_0^{})\right].$$
(42)
Contrary to the particles created via the Schwinger mechanism these electrons (positrons) have in the moving reference frame non-zero longitudinal momentum. It is equal to

$$p_x^{}=\frac{m_ev_g}{\left(1v_g^2/c^2\right)^{1/2}}=m_ec\left[\left(\frac{\omega }{\mathrm{\Omega }}\right)^21\right]^{1/2}.$$
(43)
In Fig. 4b we present the dependence of the longitudinal momenta in the laboratory frame of trident electrons (lower curve) and ”Schwinger” electrons on parameter $`\gamma `$. It is obvious that these two mechanisms of pair production can easily be distinguished, because the longitudinal momentum of ”Schwinger” electrons is larger. The same analysis can also be applied to the electron-positron pairs produced by the bremsstrahlung photons QED , interacting with plasma particles.

We should note that one of the possible explanations of this phenomenon is that ”Schwinger” pairs are produced on vacuum, while in all other mechanisms the pairs are produced on moving plasma particles.

## IV Conclusions

In the present paper we considered the problem of the electron-positron pair creation by the circularly polarized laser pulse in a plasma via the Schwinger mechanism. The representation of the electromagnetic wave field in the form (10) with the frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ given by Eq. (5) corresponds to the use of the macroscopic description of the electromagnetic wave. The analysis of the microscopic structure of the electron-positron pair production in plasmas is beyond the scope of the present publication. However, since similar technique of the Lorentz transformation into the reference frame, moving with the wave group velocity, can be used to simplify the analysis of electron-positron pair production inside the hollow waveguide and in the focus region focus , we think that the main results obtained above in the longwave approximation ($`\left(2\pi c/\omega \right)^3n1`$) will not change substantially. On the other hand the elaboration of the microscopic description will particularly determine the applicability of the approximation used.

Using the properties of the dispersion equation for the electromagnetic wave in plasma, we carried out the calculation of the probability in the reference frame moving with the group velocity of the wave. The great simplification of the problem has been achieved owing to the fact that in this reference frame the magnetic field of the wave vanishes and the problem has been reduced to the problem of the pair creation in rotating electric field.

In the present paper we used ”the imaginary time method” to calculate the probability of pair creation by the circularly polarized electric field. There arises a problem of validity of the quasi-classical tunneling time and ”the imaginary time method”. The calculations of the pair production by the time-varying electric field carried out within the frameworks of ”the imaginary time method” 3  and Dirac theory NN  agree to each other up to the preexponential factor accuracy. It is also well known that ”the imaginary time” technique has been widely used in the problem of the atom ionization by strong electromagnetic wave. Theoretical and experimental results relevant to the ionization problem can be found in Refs. delone ; delone1  and in cited literature therein. See also Ref. popov\_ufn .

We noticed that there is a drastic difference between the one dimensional and the two dimensional cases of particle motion below the energy barrier, i. e. in the one dimensional case the particle emerges from under the barrier with zero momentum. In two dimensional case the particle is produced with nonzero momentum perpendicular to the instantaneous direction of the electric field, which was first pointed out in Ref. PopovMarinov .

In the moving reference frame we calculated the probability of the pair creation. We found that one pair is produced in $`(10^6\text{cm})^3`$ volume in 500 fms when the field amplitude reaches a value about 0.08 of the critical QED field for lasers with the wavelength $`\lambda =10^4÷10^8`$ cm. This value of the field amplitude in plasma in the moving frame corresponds to initial field amplitude in vacuum $`E_0=E\omega /\mathrm{\Omega }`$. We also studied the dependence of pair creation probability on the wavelength of the electromagnetic wave.

We notice that the electron-positron pairs created via the Schwinger mechanism can be distinguished from the pairs created in the trident reaction during interaction of the plasma electrons with nuclei as well as from the pairs produced by bremsstrahlung photons. The electron-positron pairs created via the Schwinger mechanism in the laboratory reference frame have the longitudinal momentum larger than the pairs appeared due to the trident reaction and bremsstrahlung induced pair production.

## Acknowledgements

The author would like to acknowledge many fruitful discussions with V. S. Popov and to thank V. D. Mur, L. B. Okun, N. B. Narozhny and M. I. Vysotsky for valuable remarks. This work was accomplished in the framework of the Federal Program of the Russian Ministry of Industry, Science and Technology N 40.052.1.1.1112. It was also partially supported by RFBR (grant N 00-15-96562).

## Figure Captions

Fig.1 a) The dependence of the initial electron (positron) momentum normalized on the amplitude of vector potential s on the parameter $`\gamma `$; b) The dependence of the electron sub-barrier motion time $`\tau _0`$ on the parameter $`\gamma `$.

Fig.2 $`g(\gamma )`$ versus $`\gamma `$. The upper curve corresponds to the circularly polarized electromagnetic wave, which coincides with the result of Ref. PopovMarinov , next one corresponds to the linearly polarized electromagnetic wave $`\mathrm{cos}\omega t`$, the last one also to the linearly polarized wave, but with $`1/\mathrm{cosh}\omega t`$ time dependence.

Fig.3 a) The dependence of $`g`$ on $`\epsilon `$ for different values of $`\lambda `$: $`10^{10}`$ cm, $`10^9`$ cm, $`5\times 10^9`$ cm, $`10^8`$ cm, $`10^7`$ cm, and $`10^6`$ cm, from bottom to top; b) The dependence of $`\mathrm{log}_{10}W`$ in the volume $`(10^6\text{cm})^3`$ and in 500 fms on $`\epsilon `$ for different values of $`\lambda `$: $`10^9`$ cm, $`5\times 10^9`$ cm, $`10^8`$ cm, and $`10^7`$ cm from top to bottom; c) The dependence of $`g`$ on $`\lambda `$ for $`\epsilon =0.08`$; d) The dependence of $`\mathrm{log}_{10}W`$ in the volume $`(10^6\text{cm})^3`$ and in 500 fms on $`\lambda `$ for $`\epsilon =0.08`$.

Fig.4 a) The energy and the momentum of produced pairs in the laboratory frame, averaged over time, versus parameter $`\gamma `$ for $`\omega /\omega _p=5`$; b) The momenta of ”Schwinger” pairs (upper curve) and ”trident” pairs in the laboratory frame, averaged over time, versus parameter $`\gamma `$.


text:
# Direct observation of non-classical photon statistics in parametric downconversion

## .0.1 Test for non-classical statistics

With an ideal (i.e., perfect efficiency) photon number detector, direct observation of PDC output is predicted to exhibit photon number oscillations Sch01 . For example, with $`P_n`$ the probability of observing $`n`$ photons, an ideal detector should yield $`P_1=P_3=0`$ and $`P_2>0`$. However, an imperfect detector described by a linear loss model may not directly observe photon number oscillations, and thus we must establish a criteria for photon number statistics to be non-classical. Define $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as the ratio

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{P_2}{P_1+P_2+P_3}.$$
(1)
For a perfect detector measuring PDC output, we predict $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1`$; detector inefficiencies will lead to a reduced value of this ratio.

We now prove that any semi-classical theory of light which is constrained to distributions of Poissonian photon statistics cannot yield states with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ greater than a maximum classical bound $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{classical}}`$. For a Poisson photon number distribution given by $`P_n(\overline{n})=\mathrm{e}^{\overline{n}}\frac{\overline{n}^n}{n!}`$, this ratio has a maximum value $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{classical}}=3/(3+2\sqrt{6})0.379`$, saturated by the Poisson distribution with average photon number $`\overline{n}=\sqrt{6}`$. However, one can show that this optimal value holds not only for a Poisson distribution, but for any weighted sum of Poisson distributions. Consider a weighted sum $`P_n=\alpha P_n^{\mathrm{max}}+(1\alpha )P_n^{}`$ of two Poisson distributions $`P_n^{\mathrm{max}}`$ and $`P_n^{}`$, where $`P_n^{\mathrm{max}}`$ has average photon number $`\overline{n}=\sqrt{6}`$, and $`P_n^{}`$ is any other Poisson distribution. The ratio $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for this weighted sum is

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{\alpha P_2^{\mathrm{max}}+(1\alpha )P_2^{}}{\alpha (P_1^{\mathrm{max}}+P_2^{\mathrm{max}}+P_3^{\mathrm{max}})+(1\alpha )(P_1^{}+P_2^{}+P_3^{})}.$$
(2)
Because $`P_n^{\mathrm{max}}`$ maximizes $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for any single Poisson distribution, the mathematical relation

$$\frac{x^{}}{y^{}}<\frac{x}{y}\frac{\alpha x+(1\alpha )x^{}}{\alpha y+(1\alpha )y^{}}<\frac{x}{y},\alpha <1,$$
(3)
proves that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }3/(3+2\sqrt{6})`$. Thus, no sum of Poisson distributions can give rise to a distribution with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }>\mathrm{\Gamma }_{\mathrm{classical}}`$

All classical light fields will lead to statistics that can be expressed as weighted sums of Poisson photon number states. Thus, the classical theory of light predicts that the inequality

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }\frac{3}{3+3\sqrt{6}},$$
(4)
cannot be violated. In contrast, one expects that light from PDC will lead to a violation of this condition, which can be demonstrated by simply measuring $`P_1`$, $`P_2`$, and $`P_3`$.

In the presence of imperfect detection efficiency, loss may serve to degrade this ratio and a violation of the classical criterion may not be observed. Consider a PDC experiment in which the pump is sufficiently weak that the probability of generating more than one photon pair is very small. In this case the ratio in Eq. (1) is given by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\eta /(2\eta )`$, where $`\eta `$ is the detection efficiency. A violation of the inequality is not predicted unless $`\eta 3/(3+\sqrt{6})0.55`$.

Fortunately, the Visible Light Photon Counter (VLPC) has the capability to detect photon number states with high quantum efficiency Kim99 ; Tak99 . The VLPC has been shown to have quantum efficiencies approaching $`90\%`$. Furthermore, if more than one photon is incident on the detector surface, the height of the output electrical pulse is proportional to the number of incident photons. This gives us information about the number of photons that have been detected.

## .0.2 Observation of non-classical statistics

The experimental setup is shown in Fig. 1. We use the fourth harmonic (266nm) of a Q-Switched ND:YAG laser as a pump source. The pulse duration of the laser is 20ns. Using a pulsed pump allows us to eliminate the detector dark counts ($`20,000s^1`$) by temporal gating. The laser pumps a BBO crystal set for collinear degenerate Type I phase matching (optic axis 47.6 degrees from the pump). In this configuration, the down-converted photons have half the energy of the pump (532nm), and travel in the same direction. The pump is removed by a prism, while the down-conversion is focused by a 250mm lens onto the detector surface. We also have the option of directly illuminating the detector with second harmonic light (532nm) from the laser, which is a classical light source. The detector output is amplified, and then sent to a gated boxcar integrator, which is triggered by the laser. The boxcar integrates the pulse over a 20ns window, and the output is sent to an Analog-to-Digital converter and stored on a computer.

The output of the detector illuminated by light from the second harmonic of the laser is shown in Fig. 2. The pulse area spectrum features a series of peaks representing the different photon number state detections. In the inset we show the probability distribution, which is calculated by fitting each peak to a Gaussian function. The area under each Gaussian curve gives the number of events representing that photon number. The area of each peak can be normalized by the total area to give the probability distribution, which is a Poisson distribution as expected.

Fig. 3(a) shows the pulse area histogram when the detector is illuminated by parametric down-conversion, using a pump power of $`1\mu W`$. At this weak pump intensity, a single pump pulse will usually generate zero photons, while a photon pair is generated with a small probability. The probability of generating more than one photon pair is very small. The figure focusses on the 1, 2, and 3 photon detection peaks, which we will use to verify non-classical statistics. The photon number probability distribution is calculated by fitting each peak to a Gaussian function. These areas are normalized by the total area of all the peaks. The calculated probability distribution is shown in the inset. One can see that the probability of 1 and 2 photon detection is nearly equal, but the probability of 3 photon detection is nearly zero. These probabilities are $`P_1=0.0818`$, $`P_2=0.0696`$, and $`P_3=0.0061`$, which yields $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.442`$, representing a 40 standard deviation violation of the classical limit.

The large 1 photon probability is due to losses from the detector and collection optics. In the limit of low excitation, the 1 photon and 2 photon probability can be used to calculate the detection efficiency, given by

$$\eta =\frac{2\frac{P_2}{P_1}}{1+2\frac{P_2}{P_1}}.$$
(5)
From the measurements, it is calculated that the detection efficiency is 0.67. Using the measured VLPC quantum efficiency of $`0.85`$, the photon collection efficiency is calculated to be $`0.79`$.

Fig. 3(b) shows the measured value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ as a function of pumping intensity. The black line represents the classical limit, which is violated for a large range of pumping intensities. At high pumping intensities $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ begins to drop. This drop is due to an increase in the two pair creation probability, which, in the presence of losses, will enhance the 3 photon detection probability. The parameter $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ also drops at low pumping intensities. This drop is attributed to the dark counts of the VLPC. At low pumping intensities the relative fraction of detection events originating from dark counts becomes large. This enhances the 1 photon probability, which reduces the value of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

## .0.3 Reconstruction of even-odd oscillations

With high detector efficiency, the emitted output of PDC is predicted to feature even-odd photon number oscillations due to the two photon nature of the process. These oscillations lead to the non-classical statistics discussed in the previous section. Direct observation of these oscillations using the photon counting capability of the VLPC would be a remarkable achievement; unfortunately, direct observation of these oscillations requires extremely high quantum efficiencies. Even the relatively high detection efficiencies of $`0.67`$ in our experiment are not predicted to observe this oscillatory behavior. The requirement of very high quantum efficiency makes direct observation of the photon number oscillation extremely difficult in practice. However, one can make an accurate independent measurement of the photon detection efficiency, and correct for this effect in the photon number distribution. This allows the reconstruction of the original even-odd oscillations of the field.

The detection efficiency can be corrected for as follows. Define $`p_i`$ as the probability that the photon field contained $`i`$ photons, and $`f_i`$ as the probability that $`i`$ photons are detected. In the presence of losses, these two distributions are related by

$$f_i=\underset{j=i}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\left(\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{j}{i}\right)\eta ^i\left(1\eta \right)^{ji}p_i.$$
(6)
In order to calculate $`p_i`$ from $`f_i`$, the above transformation must be inverted. To perform this inversion, we truncate the photon number distribution at some photon number $`n`$, which is sufficiently large such that $`p_{n+1}0`$ is a good approximation. Under this approximation, the initial and final probability distributions are simply related by a matrix, whose coefficients are given by Eq. (6). The dark counts of the VLPC can also be accounted for by this matrix, which can then be inverted to calculate the photon number distribution of the field. It is important to emphasize that there are no fitting parameters in this model. The only two parameters, the quantum efficiency and dark counts of the VLPC, are both independently measured. Once they are known there is a one-to-one relationship between the actual and measured photon number distribution.

Fig. 4 shows the result of the photon number reconstruction. Three different pumping intensities are shown. For each pump intensity, the left panel shows the pulse area histogram, and the inset to the panel shows the calculated photon probability distribution. The right panel shows the reconstructed photon number distribution using the measured quantum efficiency and backgrounds. The photon number distribution is truncated at 10 photons. The reconstructed probabilities demonstrate very clear even-odd oscillations as predicted from PDC.

At higher photon numbers, it can be seen that the reconstructed distribution becomes slightly negative. This erroneous effect is caused by truncation error. As the pumping intensity is increased, the approximation that the photon distribution can be truncated after 10 photons becomes less accurate. This error manifests itself in the probabilities becoming slightly negative for the 9 and 7 photon probability. This error is worst at the largest pumping intensity of 8$`\mu W`$, where the truncation approximation is least accurate. One could suppress this error by truncating at a higher photon number. Unfortunately, because of the limited range of the amplifiers and A2D converters, it is difficult to measure these higher order photon numbers in practice. This puts a limit on the pumping power one can use and still get a good reconstruction. It is possible that an improved numerical algorithm over simply putting a cutoff in the number distribution may overcome some of these practical difficulties.

## .0.4 Conclusion

In conclusion, we have directly observed non-classical photon counting statistics from PDC. We have shown theoretically that the photon counting statistics for all classical fields must satisfy the inequality given in Eq. (4). Using the high quantum efficiency and photon number detection capability of the VLPC we have experimentally demonstrated violations of this inequality by light emitted from PDC. By correcting for the quantum efficiency and dark counts of the VLPC, we have also succeeded in reconstruction the even-odd oscillation in the photon number distribution of light generated by the down-conversion field.