text:
# Measurement of Cosmic Shear with the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph

## 1. Introduction

Weak gravitational lensing by large-scale structure has become an important tool in understanding the amount and distribution of dark matter (see Mellier et al. 2002 & Refregier 2003 for reviews). Most cosmic shear measurements have been performed using wide-field ground-based telescopes. However, the measurement of galaxy shapes from the ground is limited by atmospheric seeing, while the *Hubble Space Telescope (HST)* has a much smaller Point Spread Function (PSF) ($`<0.1^{\prime \prime }`$ as opposed to $`0.8^{\prime \prime }`$ for ground-based telescopes). Several groups have thus used *HST* images to study cosmic shear (Rhodes, Refregier & Groth 2000 \[RRGI\] and 2001 \[RRGII\]; Refregier, Rhodes & Groth 2002 \[RRGIII\]; Hämmerle et al. 2002). Recent measurements of cosmic shear from the ground (Bacon et al., 2002, Hoekstra et al. 2002, & van Waerbeke et al. 2002; Jarvis et al. 2003; Brown et al. 2003) and from space (RRGIII) have been used to derive an estimate of the normalization $`\sigma _8`$ of the matter power spectrum with an uncertainty comparable to that of more traditional methods such as the measurement of cluster abundances (see RRGIII for a discussion).

In this paper, we present the results of a weak lensing analysis of images taken with the Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) on *HST*. The STIS data we use have been described by Pirzkal et al. (2001). Hämmerle, et al. (2002) have presented an analysis of a subset (121 of 1292 fields) of these data, reporting a 4% RMS shear at the $`1.5\sigma `$ level. Because there are a number of different methods for measuring shear and correcting for systematic effects, it is beneficial to compare the results we present here to the results of other groups examining data using the same instrument.

This paper is organized as follows. In §2 we describe the STIS data used in this study. We detail the STIS parallel archive maintained by the STIS Investigation Definition Team (IDT) at Goddard Space Flight Center, including the methods used to reduce and catalog STIS images. §3 describes the procedure used to measure the weak lensing shear in the STIS data, including the method for removal of systematic effects. In §4.1, we present the results, including constraints on cosmological parameters. We draw our conclusions and briefly comment on the future of weak lensing measurements in §5.

## 2. Data

The STIS images used in this study were taken primarily in parallel mode, meaning that another instrument on *HST* was the prime observing instrument. Thus, the images are essentially randomly positioned on the sky, separated from the primary observation by 5 to 8 arcminutes depending on the primary instrument. This is ideal for a study of cosmic shear because many random pointings on the sky minimize the error due to cosmic variance.

There are four stages to the data reduction: (i) input image co-alignment for a particular field, (ii) preliminary image reduction that involves bias and dark subtraction, hot pixel correction, flat-field division and correction for geometric distortion, (iii) cosmic-ray (CR) removal and image combination, and (iv) object detection.

Step (i) involves determining the relative offsets using sources identified in dithered images. Copies of the input images are pre-cleaned to minimize the effect of CRs on the source identification step. Small clusters of pixels with high data values relative to surrounding pixels are first identified then corrected using interpolation. This pre-cleaning may modify or remove real sources, but these image copies are used only for the purpose of co-alignment. Source Extractor (SExtractor) (Bertin & Arnouts 1996) is used to identify sources in the pre-cleaned image copies. Those sources in common on all images are used to find individual image offsets. The average offset is subtracted from the individual offsets so that all images will be shifted to a common field center.

For step (ii), we used the Interactive Data Language (IDL) version of CALSTIS (Lindler 2003), which was developed by the STIS Instrument Definition Team (IDT). A one-dimensional fit is made to the CCD overscan region and subtracted from each column of the image array to account for temporal variations between the observation and the two-dimensional bias image. A two-dimensional bias frame is then subtracted from the science image. Next, the dark image subtraction is performed and hot pixels are corrected. The hot pixel tables from the Space Telescope Science Institute archive list new hot-pixels created by the constant on-orbit CR flux since the last dark image was obtained. For a given observation, the hot pixels corrected are those in common between the two lists made closest in time before and after the observation. Hot pixels with a dark rate greater than 0.02 counts/second were corrected by linear interpolation among the eight adjacent pixels. The resultant image is divided by two flat-field images: one that accounts for pixel-to-pixel variations, and another that corrects the low-frequency spatial variations across the field of view due to vignetting. A final hot-pixel correction is performed to pre-clean the data before cosmic-ray rejection. Using a separate IDL program, small clusters of pixels ($``$ 3-pixels wide) with high data values relative to surrounding pixels are first identified then corrected using interpolation. This procedure is especially useful in removing hot or bad pixels that would not otherwise be eliminated in the CR-rejection step when there is no dither. This is the same algorithm described in step (i) for removing cosmic-rays before running SExtractor, but in this case, the threshold for correction is set to a higher value so that valid source pixels are not modified. The correction for detector/optics induced shear (or geometric distortion) was performed with bi-linear interpolation using the values given by Malumuth and Bowers (1997). The distortion coefficients were derived using the astrometric shifts of stellar images. All images are then shifted to a common field center using bi-linear interpolation for the sub-pixel offsets derived in step (i).

Once the individual images have been co-aligned they are combined with the routine IDL cr\_reject.pro (step iii). This program emulates the STSDAS task
stsdas.hst\_calib.wfpc.crrej and is equipped to handle input images with different exposure times. The main difference between the two algorithms is in the initial step of sky background determination. The procedure stsdas.hst\_calib.wfpc.crrej uses the modal value of all of the image pixels, while cr\_reject.pro uses an estimate of modal value of a subset of image pixels. Using a subset of image pixels reduces the bias in the pixel distribution caused by foreground source flux. The estimate uses an algorithm from DAOPHOT I (Stetson, 1987). The average and standard deviation of the pixel-value distribution are computed, and outliers are removed using an iterative sigma-clipping method. If the distribution is Gaussian (uncontaminated by foreground sources) the mean, median and mode should be the same. If, after 20 iterations, the mean and median are the same, this value is taken as the sky for the image. If the mean of the distribution is larger than the median (a non-Gaussian distribution) the true sky is estimated as 3$`\times `$median - 2$`\times `$mean. The scalar background so derived is subtracted from each input image. Pixels are rejected as cosmic-rays if their value is greater than an input number of $`\sigma `$ from a reference value. The constant read noise, the statistical noise (square-root of the counts), and a noise proportional to the counts comprise the $`\sigma `$. This last noise component accounts for differing point-spread-functions (PSFs) or sub-pixel image shifts. It is expressed by the “mult\_noise” variable in cr\_reject.pro that we set to 0.03. If there are 7 or more input images, the first guess at a CR-free or reference image is the pixel-by-pixel median of all the input images, otherwise the minimum is used. The first pixel rejection pass cuts all pixels greater than 8$`\sigma `$ from this reference image. A second pass uses the mean of the cleaned images as the reference image and a rejection criterion of 6$`\sigma `$. The third and final pass uses a 4$`\sigma `$ rejection criterion on the mean of the cleaned images from the second pass. The sky values that were subtracted from each input image before CR-rejection are added back into the final set of cleaned images. The final image combination is the weighted average of the cleaned images. The weight parameters are the sky noise and the read noise. The final image pixels are in units of counts per second.

For step (iv) we use SExtractor (Bertin & Arnouts 1996) for object detection, photometry, star/galaxy separation and to compute positions for each detected object. SExtractor subtracts a smoothed two-dimensional background with a mesh size of 1$`\mathrm{}`$ (BACK\_SIZE$`=20`$) and filter size setting of BACK\_FILTERSIZE$`=3`$. The image is then convolved with a 1$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$25 x 1$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$25 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$5-FWHM Gaussian filter. The detection and analysis thresholds are both set to 0.7$`\sigma `$ above the measured sky noise. We require that 5 contiguous pixels meet this threshold criterion to be considered a valid source. In order to separate blended sources, we set the number of deblending sub-thresholds to 32, and the minimum contrast parameter for deblending to 0.005. The input stellar seeing disk FWHM, used for star-galaxy separation, is 0$`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{.}}`$07. The photometry reported is taken from the MAG\_AUTO column of the output catalog. MAG\_AUTO is the source magnitude measured inside a unique elliptical aperture for every object (Kron 1980). The two-element input parameter PHOT\_AUTOPARAMS controls the elliptical apertures. The first element is the k-factor described in Bertin & Arnouts (1996), and the second is the minimum possible radius (in pixels) for an elliptical, or Kron, aperture. We use the default values of 2.5 and 3.5, respectively, for the two elements. A 12-pixel annulus outside the elliptical aperture is used to determine the local sky background around each object.

We examined 2335 fields imaged in 21 *HST* programs (7781, 7782, 7783, 7908,7910, 7911, 8062, 8064, 8084, 8091, 8393, 8406, 8470, 8545, 8549, 8562, 8796, 8808, 8870, 8884, & 9248). Several of these programs are described elsewhere: the STIS Parallel Survey (SPS; Gardner et al 1998; Teplitz et al. 2003a & 2003b) obtained filterless imaging and slitless spectra of random fields on the sky and program 8562 (PI Schneider; continued as 9248) was conducted to gather data specifically to search for cosmic shear (Pirzkal et al. 2001). Of these fields, 1494 pass a visual inspection that indicates they are not contaminated by stars or large objects. In our measurement of cosmic shear, we use 1292 of these fields that pass several other cuts described below.

The selected fields were imaged between August 9, 1997 and May 15, 2001. We do not use more recent data because of possible changes in systematic effects that may have occurred when STIS was forced to go to backup electronics as a result of a malfunction in July 2001 (Brown 2001). Each field has between 2 and 86 individual exposures with total exposure times ranging from 265 to 34,200 seconds. The distribution of exposure times and number of exposures are shown in Figure 1.

Imaging is done using the 50CCD clear mode, a very wide bandpass sensitive to light in the wavelength range $`220<\lambda <1100`$nm and limited by the sensitivity of the CCD (Baum et al. 1996). We co-add exposures that are within 5 arcseconds of each other. Only exposures taken within 6 months of each other are co-added to produce the final image. This limit is chosen to avoid co-adding exposures with large differences in their calibration files.

Using the results of RRG III and the fact that $`MI+1`$ for typical galaxy colors where $`M`$ and $`I`$ are the STIS and WFPC2 magnitude respectively, we find that the median magnitude $`M_m`$ of the galaxies in each STIS field is related to their median redshift $`z_m`$ by

$$z_m0.72+0.15\times (M_m23.0)$$
(1)
We show a histogram of the median redshifts of the selected fields in Figure 2.

We visually examined 2335 fields in the STIS archive. Our selection criteria were: two or more exposures, unbinned pixels (to maintain the full STIS resolution), and imaging performed with the clear 50CCD filter. We discarded fields that have a very bright saturated star, fields that are crowded by stars (common for fields with galactic latitude $`|b|<20^{}`$), and fields with a large object that covered a substantial portion of the field. This left us with 1494 fields. Because of repeat visits by the *HST* separated by more than 6 months and visits to fields that are separated by only of order tens of arcseconds, some of these fields overlap. So as not to double count fields, we discarded one of any pair of fields that lie closer than $`1^{}`$ to each other (the STIS Field of view is $`50^{\prime \prime }\times 50^{\prime \prime }`$). When considering which field to discard, we kept the field with the greater total exposure time.

Due to several reasons including thermal effects, the *HST* undergoes jitter, or shaking (Nelan & Makidon 2002). This jitter tends to blur images and introduces changes into measured object shapes. The median root mean square (RMS) jitter in one direction is 3-4 mas, but the RMS jitter value can be greater than 100 mas. We thus discard fields in which any of the input exposures had an RMS jitter greater than 10 mas (0.2 STIS pixels) in either of two orthogonal directions, or for which no jitter information is available. After these cuts, we were left with 1292 fields.

## 3. Procedure

### 3.1. Shape Measurement

We follow the method described in RRGI to measure the object shapes and sizes and to correct for systematic effects. We measure the second $`I_{kl}`$ and fourth $`I_{klmn}`$ order moments for each object. These moments are defined as a sum over pixels $`p`$ given by, for example,

$$I_{kl}=\frac{_px_kx_lI(𝐱)w(𝐱)}{_pI(𝐱)w(𝐱)}$$
(2)
where $`I(𝐱)`$ is the intensity in a pixel with position $`𝐱=(x_1,x_2)=(x,y)`$ with respect to the centroid of the object and $`w(𝐱)`$ is a Gaussian weighting function. Similar equations hold for the remaining moments. The standard deviation of the weight function is chosen to be (in pixels)

$$\sigma _w=\text{max}[3,\sqrt{\frac{A}{\pi }}],$$
(3)
where the area $`A`$ is determined from the SExtractor measured semi-major($`a`$) and semi-minor($`b`$) axes as $`A=\pi (\frac{a+b}{2})^2`$. The minimum weight function size of 3 pixels (0.15 arcseconds) is the optimal weight function we found for point sources (stellar images). This is similar to the minimum weight function size of 2 pixels (0.2 arcseconds) found in RRGI for WFPC2.

These measured moments are used to compute the two component ellipticity of each galaxy given by

$$e_1=\frac{I_{11}I_{22}}{I_{11}+I_{22}},e_2=\frac{2I_{12}}{I_{11}+I_{22}}.$$
(4)
The first component of this ellipticity ($`e_1`$) indicates elongation along the x (positive $`e_1`$) and the y (negative $`e_1`$) axes. $`e_2`$ indicates elongation along axes $`45^{}`$ and $`45^{}`$ from the x axis. We also define the RMS size $`d`$ of the object as

$$d^2=\frac{1}{2}(I_{11}+I_{22}).$$
(5)
There are several systematic effects which affect the measured shapes of galaxies. The PSF of the telescope introduces smearing that can be deconvolved into an isotropic and an anisotropic component. The optics introduce an instrumental shear into the galaxies. Our method to correct for these effects is presented in RRGI. Here, we describe the particular steps taken for the STIS data set.

### 3.2. PSF Model

Ground-based surveys typically use stars in the survey fields to measure and correct for the PSF. Due to the small field of view of *HST*, space-based surveys do not have enough stars per field to do such a correction and have relied on separate observations of high signal-to-noise (S/N) stellar fields to measure the PSF (see e.g. RRGI; RRGIII; Hämmerle et al 2002). However, in examining the STIS PSF, we found that the PSF shape depends on the S/N. As shown in Figure 3, the average ellipticity ($`e_1`$) of stars in the survey fields changes from negative (elongation along the y axis) to positive (elongation along the x axis) as S/N increases. This result is consistent with a previously known charge transfer efficiency (CTE) effect in STIS (Kimble, Goudfrooij, & Gilliland 2000). Objects with few counts (due to short exposure times or low S/N) bleed in the $`y`$ direction causing an elongation of the object in that direction. This CTE effect has been shown to be worse in the ($`y<512`$)half (hereafter the “bottom half”) of the STIS CCD (Woodgate 2002). Figure 3 confirms that the elongation in the $`y`$ direction is indeed more pronounced in the bottom half of the STIS CCD, providing further evidence that the CTE is indeed the source of the S/N dependence of the PSF.

The CTE effect described above complicates the modelling of the PSF, and thus the correction of galaxy shapes for PSF smearing, for two reasons. The first is that we cannot simply measure high S/N stellar PSFs and use these to correct low S/N galaxies. The second is that we cannot use separate stellar fields to measure the PSF. Stars in stellar dominated fields (such as images of globular clusters) do not suffer the same CTE effects as stars in sparsely populated fields, even at low S/N. This is because the higher background levels in stellar fields fill in the charge traps causing the CTE effect. Thus, low S/N stars in high-background fields have a PSF similar to the PSF of high S/N stars regardless of background. Since the bulk of our galaxies are low S/N galaxies in low-background fields, that is the regime in which we must model the PSF.

For S/N$`>100`$ we see no evidence for an $`e_1`$ dependence on either S/N or $`y`$ position. Therefore, we consider the high S/N PSF to be the “true” STIS PSF and model the S/N and $`y`$ dependence of the PSF as perturbations about this true PSF. We select 534 high ($`>100`$) S/N stars from our survey and fit the 8 stellar moments from these stars to 5th order polynomials in $`x`$ and $`y`$ position as described in RRGI. Since we are attempting only a first order correction for the effects of S/N and $`y`$ position, we do not correct the fourth order moments for these effects. The low S/N moment at any position $`(x,y)`$ is given by the high $`S/N`$ moment at that position, as calculated from the 5th order polynomial fits, minus some correction factor. The correction factor is the difference between the average value of the moment at high S/N and the average value of the moment at low S/N at the $`y`$ position of the star on the chip. Thus,

$$I_{kk}^{low}(x,y)=I_{kk}^{high}(x,y)(\overline{I_{kk}^{high}}\overline{I_{kk}^{low}}(y,\text{S/N})),$$
(6)
for each diagonal component $`k=1,2`$.

We then write the moments as

$$I_{11}=(1+e_1)d^2,I_{22}=(1e_1)d^2$$
(7)
where the size $`d`$ is defined as in equation (5). This size is slightly dependent on S/N, but has no dependence on $`y`$ position. The size $`d^2`$ as a function of S/N is well fit by a linear equation given in Table 1. We fit $`e_1`$ to the S/N in two different bins of $`y`$ position, $`y<512`$ and $`y>512`$. We use linear fits for the range $`20<\text{S/N}<100`$ and quadratic fits for the range $`8<\text{S/N}<20`$. Table 1 gives the best fit functions, which are plotted on Figure 3. To calculate the average value of $`e_1`$ at a particular S/N and $`y`$, we perform a linear interpolation or extrapolation between the two $`y`$ fits at that S/N value assuming that the $`y<512`$ fit is valid for $`y=256`$ and the $`y>512`$ fit is valid for $`y=768`$. We find that there is no S/N or $`y`$ dependence for $`e_2`$, which is consistent with zero. Thus, no $`I_{12}`$ correction is necessary. These fits allow us to calculate the corrections to the high S/N stellar moments using Equation (6).

The average stellar ellipticity we measure at high S/N (S/N$`>100`$), 3-5%, is slightly higher than the 1-2% measured by Hämmerle et al (2002). We compare our measurement with theirs by obtaining one of the high S/N stellar fields (o48b41010\_3\_ass) in their publicly available catalog and performing our analysis on that image. This image is drizzled to increase resolution and thus has a linear pixel size of 0.025” (half of the intrinsic STIS pixel size). If we analyze this image using the method outlined above with a Gaussian weight function width $`\sigma =6`$ pixels (twice what we use in our non-drizzled images), we find an average stellar ellipticity $`e_1=45`$%. This is stable for larger weight function widths, but if we use a smaller weight function width ($`\sigma =3`$ drizzled pixels) we measure an average $`e_1=1.5`$%. Thus, we are able to recover the value measured by Hämmerle et al (2002) by using a sufficiently compact weight function. The weight function we use to measure stars represents a trade-off between the reduction of noise in moment measurements and the measurement of the full PSF anisotropy. As in RRGI, stellar moments are relatively stable for small perturbations in this weight function width.

### 3.3. Correction for the PSF

Using the stellar moments–corrected for weighting and detector shear as described in RRGI and fit to S/N and $`y`$ position as described above–we can correct the galaxy moments for the effects of PSF. The first step is a correction for the anisotropic smearing of the PSF and the second step is a correction for the isotropic portion of the PSF which increases the galaxy size slightly. This correction method was specifically tuned to *HST* images with small PSF and has produced excellent results in the correction of WFPC2 images for PSF effects (RRGII; RRGIII). The corrected galaxy moments are used to calculate the ellipticity of each galaxy, which allows the calculation of the overall shear in each field as described below.

### 3.4. Shear Measurement

We detected 63,895 objects in the 1292 fields we used. We discard stars and objects for which no jitter information is available or for which the jitter is very high. We further discard objects which have spurious ellipticities (non-physical post-correction ellipticities usually caused by poor background subtraction), leaving us with 49692 objects. We then discard objects that are too small to allow a shape measurement, i.e. with $`d<1.7`$ pixels (after corrections), leaving 35033 objects. In RRGII and RRGIII, a magnitude cut was made to discard galaxies too faint to allow for shape measurement. Here, we opt to use a *S/N* cut based on SExtractor values of flux and flux error. A cutoff value of $`S/N=10`$ left us with 26036 galaxies.

We thus obtain the corrected ellipticity $`e_i`$ of each selected galaxy that passed all the cuts mentioned above. We then calculate the shear estimator $`\gamma _i`$ for each galaxy using the equation

$$\gamma _i=\frac{e_i}{G}$$
(8)
where the shear susceptibility factor $`G1.4`$ is calculated according to Equation 28 of RRGI and averaged over all galaxies in our final sample.

## 4. Results

### 4.1. Shear Measurement and Cosmological Parameter Estimation

To quantify the cosmic shear statistics, we follow the procedure of RRG III. The cosmic shear variance $`\sigma _{\mathrm{lens}}^2`$ is obtained from a weighted sum of the estimators $`\sigma _{\mathrm{lens},f}^2`$ for each field $`f`$ as

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{lens}}^2=\underset{f}{}w_f\sigma _{\mathrm{lens},f}^2,$$
(9)
where the weights $`w_f\sigma _{\mathrm{noise},f}^4`$ are normalized so that $`_fw_f1`$. We define the noise variance $`\sigma _{\mathrm{noise},f}^2|\gamma _f^{noise}|^2`$, which is measured from the data by computing the error in the mean $`\gamma _{if}`$ from the distribution of galaxy shears in each field (RRGIII). This provides a nearly optimal weighting scheme which allows us to use all fields that are not contaminated by stars or bright objects. Fields with few objects that pass our selection criteria are appropriately down-weighted.

With our STIS data set, we find

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{lens}}^2=(5.43\pm 1.06\pm 1.74)\times 10^4,$$
(10)
where the first error corresponds to noise only, while the second includes noise, cosmic variance and systematics. Our detection of cosmic shear (first error) is thus significant at the $`5.1\sigma `$ level. The systematics error is dominated by the uncertainty in our PSF correction (see §3). To estimate it, we first noted that the uncertainty in our measurement of the PSF ellipticity $`e_{}`$ in figure 3 is $`\mathrm{\Delta }e_{}0.01`$. The resulting uncertainty in the galaxy shears is $`\mathrm{\Delta }\gamma G^1(d_{}/d)^2\mathrm{\Delta }e_{}1.0\times 10^3`$ (see RRG I, equation 58), where the average rms size (see Eq. ) of the PSF (with S/N=10, see table 1) and of galaxies (after our cuts) is $`d_{}1.2`$ pixels and $`d3.2`$ pixels, respectively.

Our measurement of the shear variance is shown in figure 4. Recent measurements from other surveys with similar galaxy redshifts ($`z_m0.8`$$`1`$) are also shown for comparison (RRGIII; van Waerbeke et al. 2002; Brown et al. 2003; Bacon et al. 2002) are also shown for comparison. The solid lines show the predictions for a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.3`$, $`\sigma _8=1`$, and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.21`$ and with the above range of galaxy median redshift $`z_m`$. Our variance measurement is consistent with these other measurements and with the $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM prediction. It also agrees with the measurement of Hämmerle et al. (2002) who found $`\sigma _{\mathrm{lens}}^2(15\pm 12)\times 10^4`$ (from their figure 15). Note that their error bar is considerably larger than ours, because their measurement is based on about $`1/10`$ of the fields we have used.

Our measurement allows us to set constraints on $`\sigma _8`$, the amplitude of matter fluctuations on $`8h^1`$ Mpc scales. In a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.21`$ the shear variance is given by

$$\sigma _{\mathrm{lens}}^25.17\times 10^4\left(\frac{\sigma _8}{1.0}\right)^{2.42}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Omega }_m}{0.3}\right)^{1.10}\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }}{0.21}\right)^{0.44}\left(\frac{z_m}{1.0}\right)^{1.85},$$
(11)
where $`z_m`$ is the median redshift of the galaxies, whose redshift distribution was assumed to be $`p(z)z^2e^{(z/z_0)^2}`$ with $`z_0=z_m/1.09`$. The scale $`0.51^{}`$ is the effective radius of a circular cell corresponding to the chip size ($`50^{\prime \prime }`$ on a side). The details of this calculation can be found in Bacon et al. (2000). Note however, that unlike these authors, we have used the more accurate fitting function of Smith et al. (2003) to compute the non-linear corrections to the power spectrum.

For our sample and weighting scheme, the effective median magnitude of the galaxies is $`M_m24.8`$. According to Equation 1, this corresponds to a median redshift of $`z_m=1.0\pm 0.1`$, where the $`1\sigma `$ error arises from the uncertainty in this equation. Our measurement of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{lens}}^2`$ thus yields

$$\sigma _8=(1.02\pm 0.16)\left(\frac{0.3}{\mathrm{\Omega }_m}\right)^{0.46}\left(\frac{0.21}{\mathrm{\Gamma }}\right)^{0.18}$$
(12)
where the error includes noise, cosmic variance, systematics, and the redshift uncertainty. This result is consistent at the $`1\sigma `$ level with some earlier cosmic shear surveys (Bacon et al. 2002; RRGIII; van Waerbeke et al. 2002) which derived values of $`\sigma _8`$ in the range 0.9–1.0 for $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.3`$ (see figure 9 and table 1 in Refregier 2003 for a summary of the latest cosmic shear results). It is also consistent, but only at the $`<2\sigma `$ level, with other cosmic shear surveys which found $`\sigma _8`$ in the range 0.7–0.8 for the same value of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ (Brown et al. 2003; Hamana et al. 2003; Jarvis et al. 2002; Hoekstra et al. 2002). The recent WMAP results (Spergel et al. 2003) yield $`\sigma _8=0.91\pm 0.21(0.3/\mathrm{\Omega }_m)^{0.6}`$ when taken alone (for their single power law model), and $`\sigma _8=0.78_{0.10}^{+0.08}(0.3/\mathrm{\Omega }_m)^{0.6}`$ when combined with other CMB and large-scale structure data (for their running power law index model). Our results are thus also consistent with these WMAP values at the $`<1.5\sigma `$ level.

### 4.2. Temporal Stability of the Shear Measurement

The CTE effect described in section §3.2 is growing worse as the STIS CCD ages (Goodfrooij & Kimble 2002). In order to test whether this degradation affects our results, we perform two tests. The first test involves stars and the second test involves examining our final result for temporal stability.

There are sufficient stars in the survey to perform the analysis described in §3.2 on two subsections of the data. We divide the data roughly in half by time, classifying data taken before mid 1999 as “early” and data taken after that time as “late.” We find that for S/N$`>20`$ there is little change to the fit to $`e_1`$ shown in Figure 3. However, for S/N$`<20`$ we find that the fits shown in Figure 3 do change slightly. The early data are fit by curves with $`e_1`$ slightly higher than those shown in Figure 3 and the late data show a slightly lower $`e_1`$. This is consistent with a CTE that is growing worse over time. In both cases, the departure from the curve shown in Figure 3 is about 1%. This average 1% systematic error in the correction of stellar ellipticities at low S/N is included in the error estimates for our values of $`\sigma _\gamma ^2`$ and $`\sigma _8`$ (see §4.1).

To perform the other test, we divide our galaxy data into nine equally spaced date bins. We then measure the RMS shear $`\sigma _\gamma ^2`$ in each bin. We show these measurements in Figure 5. This plot shows no trend over time as might be expected if the CTE effect was not being sufficiently corrected for. The shear signal is consistent throughout the time in which the data we use in this paper was taken. The only marginal outlier is the very first bin, which is $`1.7\sigma `$ from the value for the entire survey when statistical errors and cosmic variance are included. We have run several tests to determine why data taken during this period gives a higher shear signal than data taken during the rest of the survey but find nothing special about the data in this bin. Our results in this date range are consistent with those of Hämmerle et al. (2002) who found a high shear signal using STIS data from roughly the same period. Excluding the first bin (by only analyzing data taken after December 1997) only changes the measured $`\sigma _\gamma ^2`$ from $`5.43\pm 1.74\times 10^4`$ to $`4.76\pm 1.68\times 10^4`$. The effect on $`\sigma _8`$ is less pronounced; the removal of the first bin decreases $`\sigma _8`$ from $`1.02\pm 0.16`$ to $`0.97\pm 0.16`$.

## 5. Conclusions

We have measured the shapes of 26036 galaxies in 1292 STIS fields, corresponding to about 0.25 square degrees. We corrected for systematic effects as outlined in RRGI with the added step of correcting galaxy moments for a S/N dependent charge transfer efficiency. We have detected a cosmic shear signal using the STIS parallel archive at the $`5.1\sigma `$ level. After correcting the galaxy shapes for PSF distortions, detector shear and CTE effects, we measure a shear variance of $`\sigma _{\mathrm{lens}}=(5.43\pm 1.74)\times 10^4`$ on the STIS chip scale ($`50^{\prime \prime }`$ on a side), where the $`1\sigma `$ error includes noise, cosmic variance and systematics. This is consistent with the earlier and much noisier measurement of Hämmerle et al. (2002). For a $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$CDM model with $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m=0.3`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.21`$, this sets a constraint on the amplitude of the matter power spectrum given by $`\sigma _8=1.02\pm 0.16`$, where the $`1\sigma `$ error includes noise, cosmic variance, systematics and redshift error. This is consistent with earlier measurements of $`\sigma _8`$ from cosmic shear, but tends to favor those with higher values. It is also consistent with the recent determination of $`\sigma _8`$ (Spergel et al. 2003) from CMB anisotropies with the WMAP mission.

The results presented here represent a contribution to the first generation of space-based weak lensing results presented in RRGII, RRGIII, & Hämmerle et al. (2002). The next generation of space-based parallel observations optimized for weak lensing will be made with the Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) on the *HST*. A targeted ACS project, the COSMOS 2 square degree field (GO-9822) will provide strong constraints on cosmological parameters and allow for high resolution dark matter map. ACS surveys will benefit from the high resolution of ACS (0.05 arcsecond pixels like STIS) as well as its enlarged area (approximately 10 square arcminutes) and improved sensitivity (relative to WFPC2). New methods for the measurement of object shapes and the correction of systematic effects are being developed that will capitalize on the excellent resolution of this survey and future space-based surveys (Refregier & Bacon 2003; Bernstein & Jarvis 2002). Future generations of weak lensing surveys both from the ground (e.g., the Canada-France-Hawaii Legacy survey, Mellier et al. 2000; the Large-aperture Synoptic Survey Telescope; Tyson et al. 2003) and from space (e.g. the Supernova Acceleration Probe; Alcock et al. 2003; Rhodes et al. 2003, Massey et al. 2003; Refregier et al. 2003) will continue to utilize this unique method to measure cosmological parameters to unprecedented accuracy. These projects will survey large areas while obtaining images in multiple filters allowing for accurate photometric redshifts of the survey galaxies. SNAP, with its near-infrared capability, high resolution, and wide field of view, will be able to probe mass concentrations beyond $`z=1`$, thus allowing for redshift tomography and the study of the growth of structure. This will enable weak lensing to make a contribution to the study of dark matter and dark energy, and to set tight constraints on cosmological parameters.

We thank Richard Massey and Richard Ellis for useful discussions. We thank the referee Peter Schneider for useful comments and suggestions. AR was supported in Cambridge by an EEC fellowship from the TMR network on Gravitational Lensing and by a Wolfson College Research Fellowship. EJG was supported by NASA Grant NAG5-6279. JR was supported by an National Research Council-GSFC Research Associateship. We thank Bruce Woodgate, Elliot Malumuth, Randy Kimble, Ted Gull, Terry Beck, Keith Feggans and the rest of the STIS team at GSFC for their support in cataloging and understanding the STIS parallel images.


format: text

text:
# Towards a Noether–like conservation law theorem for one dimensional reversible cellular automata

## 1 Introduction

This paper outlines some investigations into the conservation rules of one dimensional reversible cellular automata (RCA). Using results from Takesue and Hattori, we obtained examples for all RCA of low order ($`9`$). Based upon these observations, we noted a strong connection with congruences, in particular maximal congruences. We propose a conjecture relating the two, akin to Noether’s result about conservation laws in continuous systems.

Conservation laws in physical systems are of great help in interpreting the properties of these systems. The investigation of conservation laws in models of physical systems, i.e. cellular automata, seems thus relevant. In particular, (microscopic) reversibility in physical systems is often of importance, leading us to investigate reversible cellular automata.

## 2 Reversible cellular automata

One dimensional reversible cellular automata (1DRCA or simply RCA) are invertible, continuous mappings of $`A^Z`$ to itself that commute with the shift operator. $`A`$ is a finite set of cell states. $`Z`$ can be either the integers or the integers modulo $`n`$ for some $`n`$. The metric measures the size of the matching middle, i.e. if $`a_i=b_i`$ for all $`|i|<k`$ and $`a_ib_i`$ for some $`|i|=k`$ then $`d(a,b)=\frac{1}{2^k}`$. The shift operator $`\sigma `$ is defined by $`\sigma (a)_i=a_{i+1}`$. CA can be defined by the set $`A`$ and the *local rule* $`f:A^nA`$ \[Ric72\]. Our CA are binary (radius one half), the local rule is a binary operation. If $`f`$ is the local rule, then $`F`$ the global mapping, is defined by $`F(a)_i=f(a_i,a_{i+1})`$.

We need only consider a class of $`(2,2)`$–algebras known as *semicentral bigroupoids* to investigate RCA \[Ped92, Boy03\]. These are defined as $`(A,,)`$ with the identities:

$`(ab)(bc)`$ $`=`$ $`b`$ (2.1)
$`(ab)(ba)`$ $`=`$ $`b`$ (2.2)
It is relatively easy to show that all semicentral bigroupoids are the composition of an idempotent semicentral bigroupoid and a permutation, that is $`ab=\rho (a\overline{}b)`$ where $`\overline{}`$ is an idempotent semicentral bigroupoid operation on $`A`$ and $`\rho `$ is a permutation of $`A`$. It turns out that $`\rho `$ is the square map of $``$, i.e. $`\rho a=aa`$.

In general we can combine any semicentral bigroupoid $`A`$ with a permutation $`\rho `$ in this way. We call the resulting semicentral bigroupoid the *lifting* of $`A`$ by $`\rho `$.

Examples of idempotent semicentral bigroupoids include rectangular bands, which are the only associative semicentral bigroupoids.

The following is an idempotent nonassociative semicentral bigroupoid of order six.

$`\begin{array}{ccccccc}& 1& 2& 3& 4& 5& 6\\ & & & & & & \\ 1& 1& 1& 3& 4& 4& 3\\ 2& 2& 2& 5& 6& 5& 6\\ 3& 1& 1& 3& 4& 4& 3\\ 4& 1& 1& 3& 4& 4& 3\\ 5& 2& 2& 5& 6& 5& 6\\ 6& 2& 2& 5& 6& 5& 6\end{array}`$  $`\begin{array}{ccccccc}& 1& 2& 3& 4& 5& 6\\ & & \multicolumn{-1}{c}{}& & & & \\ 1& 1& 2& 1& 1& 2& 2\\ 2& 1& 2& 1& 1& 2& 2\\ 3& 3& 6& 3& 3& 6& 6\\ 4& 4& 5& 4& 4& 5& 5\\ 5& 3& 5& 3& 3& 5& 5\\ 6& 4& 6& 4& 4& 6& 6\end{array}`$
We will often omit the $``$ symbol and use juxtaposition to denote the operation where it causes no confusion.

The semicentral bigroupoid axioms are symmetric in the two operations. Thus statements about $`(A,)`$ apply to $`(A,)`$ equally. There is no known equational definition of a semicentral bigroupoid using only one operation. There is a combinatorial description of semicentral bigroupoids which only requires us to investigate one of the operations. As is the case in lattices, if $`(A,,)`$ and $`(A,,)`$ are semicentral bigroupoids, then $`(A,)=(A,)`$ (not just isomorphic).

Semicentral bigroupoids are *rectangular*, $`ab=cdad=cb=ab`$. Thus for any element $`aA`$ we obtain sets $`L_a,R_aA`$ such that $`lL_a,rR_alr=a`$. For any $`a,bA`$, $`|L_a|=|L_b|,|R_a|=|R_b|`$ and $`|L_a||R_a|=|A|`$. This ordered pair $`(|L_a|,|R_a|)`$ is called the *format* of the semicentral bigroupoid$`A`$.

These pairs $`\{(L_a,R_a)|aA\}`$ form a combinatorial structure known as a *rectangular structure*.

###### Definition 1

A Rectangular Structure on a set $`S`$, called the base set, is a collection $``$ of ordered pairs of subsets, called rectangles, of $`S`$, such that

$`(s,t)S^2!R\text{ such that }(s,t)R`$ (2.4)
$`R,Q,|R_1Q_2|=1`$ (2.5)
where we identify $`R=(R_1,R_2)=R_1\times R_2`$.

There is a one–to–one correspondence between idempotent semicentral bigroupoids and rectangular structures.

There are some special classes of rectangular structures. Two partitions $`\mathrm{\Pi },\mathrm{\Theta }`$ of a set are called *orthogonal* if $`P\mathrm{\Pi },T\mathrm{\Theta }`$, $`|PT|=1`$.

###### Definition 2

A *partitioned rectangular structure* is defined by a set $`S`$, a partition $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ of $`S`$ called the *primary partition* and a collection $`\{\mathrm{\Theta }_\pi :\pi \mathrm{\Pi }\}`$ of partitions of $`S`$ that are orthogonal to $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$.

The rectangular structure is then defined as $`\{(\pi ,T):\pi \mathrm{\Pi },T\mathrm{\Theta }_\pi \}`$ for a *left–partitioned rectangular structure* and $`\{(T,\pi ):\pi \mathrm{\Pi },T\mathrm{\Theta }_\pi \}`$ for a *right–partitioned rectangular structure*.

It is simple to show that these satisfy the axioms (2.4) and (2.5). They have a simplified structure and special properties. The example of order 6 above is left–partitioned with primary partition $`134|256`$ and secondary partitions $`12|36|45`$ and $`12|35|46`$.

## 3 Conservation Laws

We are interested in conservation laws, which are numerical properties of states of the RCA that do not change over time, i.e. with applications of the global mapping.

An (additive) conservation law (*conslaw*) is a mapping $`\varphi `$ from $`A`$ to the reals such that, if we define $`\mathrm{\Phi }(a):=\varphi (a_i)`$ where this sum is defined, then $`\mathrm{\Phi }(a)=\mathrm{\Phi }(Fa)`$ where $`F`$ is the global mapping of the CA.

The set of conslaws for a given CA rule is a vector space over the reals. Thus the problem is to find a basis for the vector space of conslaws for a given rule. The mapping $`\varphi _r:ar`$ taking all elements of $`A`$ to a given real $`r`$ is a trivial conservation law. Thus we can force one element $`oA`$ to have $`\varphi (o)=0`$: if $`\overline{\varphi }`$ is a conslaw, then $`\varphi (a)=\overline{\varphi }(a)\overline{\varphi }(o)`$ is a conslaw with this property.

Let us consider a CA with only two cells. The conslaw requirement then states that

$`\varphi a+\varphi b=\varphi (ab)+\varphi (ba)a,bA`$ (3.1)
We call this the *two–cell requirement*.

Hattori and Takesue \[HT91\] have demonstrated that the conslaws must satisfy a simple equation for all $`x,yA`$:

$`\varphi (x)\varphi (ox)+\varphi (oy)\varphi (xy)=0`$ (3.2)
###### Lemma 3

Let $`\varphi `$ be a conslaw for a nonidempotent semicentral bigroupoid $`(A,)`$ with square map $`\rho `$. Then $`\varphi `$ will be constant on all orbits of $`\rho `$ and $`\varphi `$ will be a conslaw on the idempotent lifting of $`A`$. Conversely, if $`\varphi `$ is a conslaw of an idempotent semicentral bigroupoid $`(A,)`$ and $`\varphi `$ is constant on the orbits of the permutation $`\rho `$, then $`\varphi `$ is a conslaw on the lifting of $`A`$ by $`\rho `$.

Proof:For the first statement, take $`aA`$, then $`\varphi a=\varphi \rho a`$ by (3.1). So $`\varphi `$ is constant on $`\rho `$–orbits.

Let $`\varphi `$ satisfy (3.2) on $`(A,)`$ and be constant on orbits of the permutation $`\rho `$. Then $`\varphi (ab)=\varphi \rho ^1(ab)=\varphi (ab)`$ so $`\varphi `$ satisfies (3.2) on $`(A,)`$ and is a conslaw.

Thus the rest of the forward argument and the converse statement can be seen to be true. $`\mathrm{}`$

Thus we need only concern ourselves with idempotent semicentral bigroupoids for the rest of this paper.

The equations (3.2) can be formulated as a linear algebra problem. We label the elements of $`A`$ as $`\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$, then a matrix $`M`$ is defined so that if $`Mv=0`$ then $`\varphi (i)=v_i`$ is a conslaw. The columns are indexed by the elements of $`A`$, the rows correspond to the pairs $`(x,y)A^2`$ that give us the equation.

###### Lemma 4

The entries of the matrix $`M`$ are $`1,0,1`$. The row and column sums are equal to $`0`$.

Proof:For an entry of $`M`$ to be $`2`$, we require $`x=oy`$. Thus $`xx=oy`$ so by the rectangular property, $`xx=xy=ox=oy`$ and (3.2) becomes $`0=0`$. Similarly if an entry of $`M`$ is to be $`2`$, we require $`ox=xy`$. By the rectangular property, $`ox=oy=xx=xy`$ so (3.2) reduces to $`0=0`$.

The rows of the matrix thus consist of either all $`0`$s, or exactly one $`1`$ and one $`1`$ or exactly two $`1`$s and two $`1`$s. The row sum is always equal to $`0`$.

In order to calculate the column sum, we count the occurrences of a given element $`z`$ in pairs $`x,y`$. We see that $`z`$ occurs equally often as $`ox`$ and $`oy`$ by symmetry, and equally often ($`|A|`$ times) as $`x`$ (the pairs $`(z,y)`$) and as $`xy`$ (the rectangle of pairs $`(x,y)`$ such that $`xy=z`$). Thus the sum is zero. $`\mathrm{}`$

With these results it has been possible to calculate the space of conslaws for all 1DRCA with $`A`$ up to order 9, using the exhaustive generation results explained in \[Boy03\]. Tests have been performed with randomly generated examples of orders 12 and 16. We will return to the results of these tests later.

## 4 Morphisms and congruences

If $`\psi :AB`$ is a semicentral bigroupoid morphism, and $`\varphi `$ is a conslaw for $`B`$, then $`\varphi \psi `$ is a conslaw for $`A`$. We call these *pullbacks* of conservation laws.

Define $`K(A)`$ as follows: if $`A`$ is simple, then $`K(A)`$ is the set of conservation laws of $`A`$, otherwise, it is the set of pullbacks of $`K(\overline{A})`$ for each homomorphic image $`\overline{A}`$ of $`A`$. We obtain the following.

###### Lemma 5

$`K(A)`$ is defined by the maximal congruences, i.e. the simple images of $`A`$ only.

Thus, given an arbitrary RCA, we can obtain a class of conservation laws by looking only at the factors modulo the maximal congruences, i.e. the simple images of the algebra.

The question arises as to simple semicentral bigroupoids. The known examples are the left and right constant semicentral bigroupoids of order 2 and two examples of order 9. There is no reason to believe that there are not more. However, the following results show that they do not have a particularly simple structure.

###### Definition 6

A rectangular structure $``$ on a set $`A`$ is *left (right) partitionable* if there exists a nontrivial partition $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ of $`A`$ such that $`R,aR_1:R_1[a]_\mathrm{\Pi }`$ ($`R,aR_2:R_2[a]_\mathrm{\Pi }`$).

###### Lemma 7

Let $``$ be a rectangular structure on the set $`A`$. If $``$ is left (right) partitionable then $`/\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is a rectangular structure on $`A/\mathrm{\Pi }`$ with format $`1\times |\mathrm{\Pi }|`$ $`(|\mathrm{\Pi }|\times 1)`$.

Proof:We concentrate on the left partitionable case. Fix $`R`$. It is clear that $`|R_1/\mathrm{\Pi }|=1`$. For all $`aA`$ s.t. $`[a]R_2/\mathrm{\Pi },Q`$ such that $`aQ_1`$. Then $`R_2Q_1\mathrm{}[a]R_2/\mathrm{\Pi }`$, i.e. $`R_2/\mathrm{\Pi }=A/\mathrm{\Pi }`$. Thus we have a $`1\times |\mathrm{\Pi }|`$ rectangular structure. A similar argument demonstrates the result for right partitionable rectangular structures. $`\mathrm{}`$

Define a rectangular structure to be *simple* if the corresponding semicentral bigroupoid is simple.

###### Corollary 8

Partitioned semicentral bigroupoids are simple iff of order 2.

This follows as partitioned implies partitionable.

###### Corollary 9

A semicentral bigroupoid of format $`2\times n`$ or $`n\times 2`$ is simple iff $`n=1`$.

Proof:Without loss of generality we consider format $`2\times n`$. Suppose $`n1`$. The left side of a $`2\times n`$ rectangle is a pair. We have $`2n`$ pairs on $`2n`$ points in which every point appears in exactly two pairs. Thus we have a graph which is a union of cycles. This is partitionable (and thus not simple) unless there is a unique cycle covering all $`2n`$ points.

We label the elements of $`A=\{1,2,\mathrm{},2n\}`$, in order along this cycle. Take some rectangle $`R`$. If the unique $`aR_1R_2`$ is even, then $`R_2`$ consists of only even elements, as it must contain $`n`$ elements and no two may be adjacent on the cycle by the unique intersection property. Similarly if $`a`$ is odd, then $`R_2`$ consists only of odd elements. Thus the rectangular structure is right partitioned, and not simple. $`\mathrm{}`$

Thus a simple idempotent semicentral bigroupoid of order higher than 2 must have order at least $`3^2`$, and it turns out that there are precisely two such simple semicentral bigroupoids by investigating the exhaustive lists generated in \[Boy03\].

The simple semicentral bigroupoids of order 2 have the conslaw that maps one element to 0, the other to 1. The simple examples of order 9 have no nontrivial conslaws.

###### Lemma 10

A rectangular structure is partitionable iff the idempotent semicentral bigroupoid can be mapped to a semicentral bigroupoid of order 2.

Proof:The forward direction is clear, as the partition forms a congruence in the semicentral bigroupoid. We can collapse any partition into a two–class partition to obtain a two element image.

For the reverse direction we use the partition generated by the congruence classes of the homomorphism. Since the image has two elements, wlog the corresponding rectangular structure is of format $`1\times 2`$. Thus $`R_1`$ lies within one class of the partition for all rectangles $`R`$. Thus the rectangular structure is partitionable. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 5 0,1 conslaws

All calculated examples to date have a conslaw basis with $`\{0,1\}`$–vectors, that is, the vectors contain only entries from the set $`\{0,1\}`$. The following results show that this means that all known conslaws are $`K(A)`$ type.

###### Lemma 11

Let $`\varphi :A\{0,1\}`$ be a conslaw. If $`\varphi a=0,\varphi b=1`$ and $`\varphi (ab)=0`$ then $`\varphi (ac)=0`$ and $`\varphi (bc)=1`$ for all $`cA`$.

Proof:By the Hattori–Takesue equation with $`o=a,x=b,y=c`$ we have

$`0`$ $`=`$ $`\varphi b\varphi (ab)+\varphi (ac)\varphi (bc)`$ (5.1)
$`\varphi (bc)\varphi (ac)`$ $`=`$ $`1`$ (5.2)
$`\varphi (bc)=1`$ and $`\varphi (ac)=0`$ (5.3)
$`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 12

Let $`\varphi :A\{0,1\}`$ be a conslaw. If $`\varphi a=0,\varphi b=1`$ and $`\varphi (ab)=1`$ then $`\varphi (ca)=0`$ and $`\varphi (cb)=1`$ for all $`cA`$.

Proof:First note that by the hypothesis, $`\varphi (ba)=0`$ using the two–cell requirement (3.1). Assume $`\varphi (ca)=1`$. Then by the two–cell requirement,

$$\varphi a+\varphi c=\varphi c=\varphi (ca)+\varphi (ac)1\varphi c=1$$

Furthermore

$$2=\varphi b+\varphi c=\varphi (bc)+\varphi (cb)\varphi (bc)=\varphi (cb)=1$$

Then by Hattori and Takesue we obtain

$$0=\varphi c\varphi (bc)+\varphi (ba)\varphi (ca)=11+01$$

which is a contradiction, thus $`\varphi (ca)=0`$. From the two–cell requirement

$$\varphi a+\varphi c=\varphi c=\varphi (ac)+\varphi (ca)=\varphi (ac)$$

so the Hattori–Takesue equation

$$\varphi c\varphi (ac)+\varphi (ab)\varphi (cb)=\varphi (ab)\varphi (cb)=0$$

implies that $`\varphi (cb)=\varphi (ab)=1`$ and we are done. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Theorem 13

If $`\varphi :A\{0,1\}`$ is a conslaw, then $`\varphi `$ is a morphism of $`A`$ onto a semicentral bigroupoid of order 2.

Proof:Fix some $`a,bA`$ such that $`\varphi a=0`$ and $`\varphi b=1`$. Define an operation $``$ on $`\{0,1\}`$ by

$`\begin{array}{ccc}& 0& 1\\ & & \\ 0& 0& \varphi (ab)\\ 1& \varphi (ba)& 1\end{array}`$
We claim that $`\varphi :(A,)(\{0,1\},)`$ is a morphism. By the two–cell requirement, exactly one of $`\varphi (ab)`$ and $`\varphi (ba)`$ is $`0`$ and the other is $`1`$.

Case 1: $`\varphi (ab)=0`$. In this case $`xy=x`$. By Lemma 11 we know that $`\varphi (ac)=0`$ and $`\varphi (bc)=1`$ for all $`cA`$. If $`\varphi c=1`$ then replacing $`a,b,c`$ with $`a,c,d`$ in the same Lemma, we see that $`\varphi (cd)=1`$ for all $`dA`$, so $`\varphi (cd)=\varphi (c)\varphi (d)`$ and $`\varphi `$ is a morphism. If $`\varphi c=0`$ then by the two–cell requirement $`\varphi b+\varphi c=1=\varphi (bc)+\varphi (cb)\varphi (cb)=0`$. Replacing $`a,b,c`$ with $`c,b,d`$ in Lemma 11 we obtain $`\varphi (cd)=0`$ so $`\varphi (cd)=\varphi c\varphi d`$ and $`\varphi `$ is a morphism.

Case 2: $`\varphi (ab)=1`$. In this case $`xy=y`$. By Lemma 12 we know that $`\varphi (ca)=0`$ and $`\varphi (cb)=1`$ for all $`cA`$. If $`\varphi c=1`$, then $`\varphi (ac)=\varphi a+\varphi c\varphi (ca)=1`$ so replacing $`a,b,c`$ with $`a,c,d`$ in Lemma 12 implies $`\varphi (dc)=1=\varphi d\varphi c`$, so $`\varphi `$ is a morphism. If $`\varphi c=0`$ then replacing $`a,b,c`$ with $`c,b,d`$ in Lemma 12 gives us $`\varphi (dc)=0=\varphi d\varphi c`$ and $`\varphi `$ is a morphism. $`\mathrm{}`$

Thus if we can find a conslaw space with no $`\{0,1\}`$–basis, then we have something special. Otherwise we find:

###### Conjecture 14

There is a one-to-one correspondence between the basis of the space of nontrivial conservation laws of a CA rule and the maximal congruences of $`A`$ with factor of size 2.

This result is similar to the result from classical continuous dynamical systems that connects the space of automorphisms of the system with its conserved quantities. Note that examples show that a similar result doesn’t apply for the group of automorphisms of the algebra. This was my starting point and it doesn’t work except in the trivial cases.

Note that if this conjecture is true, we obtain that the following concepts are equivalent:

* Additive conservation laws in one dimensional reversible cellular automata
* Maximal congruences on semicentral bigroupoids with two element factors
* Partitionability of rectangular structures.

This three–way connection seems a little strange. It would imply that the dimension of the conslaw vector space is constant, independent of which field we take for it.

## 6 Conclusion

We investigated the properties of additive conservation laws in one dimensional reversible cellular automata with a binary local rule. We have shown that a class of such conservation laws exist, determined by the maximal congruences of index two in the groupoid defined by the local rule. Exhaustive testing of examples has shown that only such laws exist. We demonstrated that these conservation laws correspond exactly to those with a 0,1 basis.

We conjecture that this holds in general. Two results would be of interest. Showing that no nontrivial conservation laws exist on simple semicentral bigroupoids of order greater than two would strengthen but not prove the conjecture. More important would be to determine that all nullspaces of the conservation law defining matrix have a 0,1 basis. In fact, limited experiments in general binary local rule cellular automata indicate that this might be a general result: all conservation laws lie in a space with a basis determined by the maximal congruences of order two in the groupoid.

## 7 Acknowledgments

The work here started during a visit to Cris Moore at the Sante Fe institute. After working with him for some time, we realised that Hattori and Takesue had obtained all our results years before!


text:
# Weak localization and antilocalization in semiconducting polymer sandwich devices

## I Introduction

The combination of quantum coherence and spin rotation can produce a number of interesting transport properties. In addition, numerous proposals for potentially revolutionary devices that use spin and spin-orbit (SO) coupling have appeared in recent years, including gate-controlled spin rotators Datta and Das (1990) as well as sources and detectors of spin-polarized currents Keppeler and Winkler (2002). Organic conjugated materials have been used to manufacture promising devices such as organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs) Friend et al. (1999), photovoltaic cells Brabec et al. (2001) and field-effect transistors Dimitrakopoulos and Malenfant (2002). Recently there has been growing interest in spin Wohlgenannt et al. (2001); Segal et al. (2003) and coherent quantum mechanical effects in these materials in order to assess the possibility of using them in spintronics and quantum information applications.

It is usually assumed that charge transport in polymeric semiconductor films occurs in the form of hopping transport of polarons and that the quantum mechanical phase varies randomly between sites. This is true for the strongly localized regime whose boundary is determined by the Ioffe-Regel criterion. In disordered inorganic conductors, however one often encounters weak localization (WL): coherent backscattering and the resulting interference of the quantum mechanical wavefunction of time-reversed trajectories leads to a conductance minimum. Strictly speaking this is only true in the spin-invariant case and a conductance maximum (weak antilocalization, WAL) occurs in the case of strong SO coupling Hikami et al. (1980); Altshuler et al. (1981). It is well-known from the study of diffusive transport in (inorganic) metals Bergmann (1984), semiconductor devices Papadakis et al. (2002) and quantum dots Zumbühl et al. (2002) that phase-breaking and SO interaction times can be extracted from the WL and WAL traces, respectively, in magnetoresistance (MR) experiments. In fact MR and WL experiments have also been used to study organic materials such as carbon nanotubes Langer et al. (1996), nanotubules Song et al. (1994) as well as heavily doped polymers Ahlskog and Menon (1998).

MR studies in heavily doped polymers found that WL can occur in stretch oriented high quality samples, but the measurements had to be performed at low temperature (below 4K) and in high magnetic fields (several Tesla). We have performed MR experiments in sandwich devices comprised of an undoped polymeric semiconductor, namely polyfluorene (PFO). We obtain several remarkable and unexpected results: we observe weak-field MR effects with a shape characteristic for WL and WAL effects *even at room temperature*. In inorganic semiconductors such effects occur only at low temperatures (typically 4K and below). The measured WL cones are relatively narrow (in the mT range) indicative of relatively long phase-breaking times. At high applied electric fields, the WL cones change sign indicative of WAL and the importance of SO coupling.

Pi-conjugated polymer sandwich devices have been used extensively for OLEDs, photovoltaic cells and in transport studies, and we expect that the first organic spintronic devices will be of this structure. We have therefore studied WL and WAL in sandwich devices.

## II Experimental

Our thin film devices consist of the polymer PFO (poly(9,9-dioctylfluorenyl-2,7-diyl) end capped with N,N-Bis(4-methylphenyl)-4-aniline, see Fig. 1 inset) sandwiched between a top and bottom electrode. The polymer was purchased from American Dye Source, Inc. PFO was selected because of its common use in high quality OLEDs. The polymeric film was fabricated by spin-coating from toluene solution at 2000 rpm and baking at 90C overnight. For varying the film thickness, different concentrations were used, namely 7 to 30 mg/ml. The bottom electrode consisted of either ITO (indium-tin-oxide) covered glass or Au evaporated onto a glass slide. The top contact, either Al or Ca (covered by a capping layer of Al), was evaporated through a shadow mask at a base pressure of $`10^6`$ mbar. The reported effects were observed in devices made from 2 different batches of PFO polymer. All manufacturing steps were performed inside a nitrogen glove-box.

The MR measurements were performed with the sample mounted on the cold finger of a closed-cycle He cryostat located between the poles of an electromagnet (GMW 3470). The temperature range between 10 K and 300 K was studied and the measurements were performed spanning the magnetic field range between $`100mT<B<100mT`$, measured using a digital teslameter (3-DTM-133). The MR was determined by measuring the current at a constant voltage as a function of the applied field. The current-voltage characteristics were measured using a Keithley 6517A.

## III Experimental results and discussion

Fig. 1 shows typical examples of the measured MR traces in our PFO sandwich devices. The figure is a collection of data measured at 200 K in a variety of different devices at different voltages. It is shown in Fig. 1 that both positive and negative MR is observed, dependent on operation conditions to be discussed later. *Importantly, the observed MR traces closely resemble MR traces due to weak localization (WL, negative MR) and weak antilocalization (WAL, positive MR) well known from the study of diffusive transport in metals and semiconductors* Bergmann (1984); Papadakis et al. (2002); Zumbühl et al. (2002). This suggests analyzing the MR data using the theory of weak localization. In the following we present strong evidence in support of this interpretation. We note that in principle there are several mechanisms yielding positive MR, such as Lorentz force, hopping magnetoresistance Efros and Shklovskii (1984) and electron-electron interaction Menon (2003), but we are unaware of another mechanism, other than WL, that gives weak-field negative MR.

The MR due to quantum interference depends on three characteristic field values

$$B_{tr}=\frac{\mathrm{}}{4eD\tau },B_\phi =\frac{\mathrm{}}{4eD\tau _\phi },B_{SO}=\frac{\mathrm{}}{4eD\tau _{SO}}$$
(1)
where D is the diffusion constant, $`\tau `$, $`\tau _\phi `$ and $`\tau _{SO}`$ are the elastic scattering time, the phase-breaking time and the SO relaxation time, respectively. Additional spin-depending scattering mechanisms may also contribute, but they will be omitted here for simplicity. Quantum interference occurs when $`B_{tr}B_\phi `$. The MR will be negative (WL) when $`B_\phi B_{SO}`$, and positive (WAL) in the opposite case. In the regime $`B_\phi B_{SO}`$ the MR can change sign as function of B. Fig. 2 shows the measured MR traces in the transition region between WL and WAL. We note that very similar transition region traces are also found in (inorganic) metals and semiconductors Bergmann (1984); Papadakis et al. (2002); Zumbühl et al. (2002).

The exact formula describing the MR in the quantum interference regime depends on the dimensionality of the system. We find that we are dealing with three-dimensional quantum interference. In two-dimensional systems only in-plane looped paths are possible, and therefore only a transverse magnetic field results in enclosed magnetic flux and hence phase difference. We find, however that the MR traces are independent of the angle between film plane and applied field. All measurements shown in the figures were performed with an in-plane magnetic field.

According to Al’tshuler et al. Altshuler et al. (1981) the MR of a three-dimensional metallic system with SO interaction is given by:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }R}{R^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\rho }{\rho ^2}}={\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{2\pi ^2\mathrm{}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{eB}{\mathrm{}}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}f_3\left({\displaystyle \frac{B}{B_\phi }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}f_3\left({\displaystyle \frac{B}{B_2}}\right)\right)`$ (2)
$`B_2=B_\phi +{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}B_{SO}`$ (3)
The function $`f_3`$ is given in Ref. Altshuler et al. (1981). In fitting our experimental data we have instead used an approximate expression for $`f_3`$ given by Baxter et al. Baxter et al. (1989), which has been shown to be accurate to better than 0.1% for all arguments.

$`f_3(z)2\left[\left(2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{z}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right]`$ (4)
$`\left[\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}+\left({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z}}\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{48}}\left(2.03+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{z}}\right)^{\frac{3}{2}}`$
We succeeded to fit both the WL and WAL traces shown in Fig. 1 with (equ. 2) using a common $`B_\phi =1mT`$, but with different values for $`B_{SO}`$. $`B_\phi =1mT`$ translates into a phase-breaking length, $`l_\phi =\sqrt{D\tau _\phi }400nm`$. Examples of the resulting fits are shown as the dotted curves in Fig. 1, inset yielding $`B_{SO}=0`$ and 15 mT for WL and WAL, respectively. We chose to fit the MR data plotted as a function of $`B^{1/2}`$ as it is commonly done in the literature because it results in a more reliable fitting procedure. The quality of the fits are satisfactory although significant deviations between fit and experimental data occur in the high field region. We note, however, that similar deviations are commonly found in WL and WAL studies in the literature Papadakis et al. (2002); Zumbühl et al. (2002). We may therefore conclude that *both* WL and WAL traces can be understood using weak localization theory.

We generally found the observed MR effect to be much smaller in magnitude than that predicted by (equ. 2). However, this discrepancy is not surprising since our devices show strongly non-linear IV characteristics (see Fig. 3, inset) - as is generally the case in organic sandwich devices - whereas (equ. 2) is derived for ohmic resistors. In addition, $`\mathrm{\Delta }R/RR`$ should hold true according to (equ. 2), but we find that the resistance of our devices decreases much faster with increasing voltage than does the magnitude of the MR effect. Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }R/RR`$, negative MR effects larger than 100% would be predicted for the very large R’s of our devices (typically $`100k\mathrm{\Omega }`$). The observed saturation in $`\mathrm{\Delta }R/R`$ must obviously occur. The most striking discrepancy between the prediction of (equ. 2) and our experimental data occurs in the transition region data shown in Fig. 2. (Equ. 2) predicts that the MR trace makes the transition from WL to WAL first at small fields (solid line in Fig. 2 a) with $`B_\phi =1mT`$ and $`B_{SO}=7mT`$) whereas the experimental curve makes the transition first at large fields. We presently do not understand the reason for this discrepancy.

Fig. 3 shows the dependence of the magnitude of the MR effect at 100 mT and 200 K on the device voltage in a variety of devices with different polymer film thickness and electrode materials (details are given in the caption of Fig. 3). ITO and Ca are commonly used in OLEDs since they result in relatively small barriers for hole and electron injection, respectively. Au often gives ohmic contacts for hole injection and Al is another commonly used top-electrode material. The current-voltage (IV) characteristics of the measured devices are shown as an inset to Fig. 3 in a linear-linear plot. We found that the linear-linear IV plot is determined mostly by the PFO film thickness, and that IV and MR curves do not critically depend on the electrode materials used. Fig. 3 is in essence a plot of the magnitude of the backscattering cone as a function of the device voltage, and therefore - knowing the devices’ IV characteristics - the device resistance. It is seen that $`\mathrm{\Delta }R/R`$ increases in magnitude with increasing device resistance - i.e. decreasing voltage - in qualitative agreement with (equ. 2). The most striking result shown in Fig. 3 is that the transition between WL and WAL is apparently driven by the applied electric field. We note that the applied electric fields are very large in polymer sandwich devices (typically $`10^6V/cm`$). In agreement with our finding, electric fields are known to cause the WAL effect D’yakonov and Perel’ (1971); Bergmann (1982a, b); Dresselhaus et al (1992); Chen et al. (1993). A similar cross-over from WL to WAL has been observed in inorganic metal thin films when covering the film with increasing amounts of Au, known to be an efficient SO coupler Bergmann (1984) and as a function of gate voltage in inorganic devices Zumbühl et al. (2002).

Fig. 4 shows measured WAL cones as a function of temperature, similar results were obtained for WL traces. It is seen that the MR effect is clearly observed at all temperatures spanning the range between 10K and 300K. We find that the magnitude and width of the backscattering cones are relatively insensitive to temperature. This is surprising, since WL has previously only been observed at low temperatures, and because D and $`\tau _\phi `$ are expected to be strong functions of temperature. However, D is expected to increase with temperature whereas $`\tau _\phi `$ is expected to decrease, their temperature dependencies may therefore partially cancel. In addition we note that the device’s IV characteristics (see Fig. 4, inset) is also only weakly temperature dependent. We find that the device resistance even slightly decreases with decreasing temperature, in stark contrast to the expectation for hopping transport. We take this as a sign of the devices’ high quality. We find that $`B_\phi `$ in Fig. 4 increases from about 1 mT ($`l_\phi 400nm`$) at 10K to about 5 mT ($`l_\phi 150nm`$) at 300K. The decrease in magnitude of $`\mathrm{\Delta }R/R`$ between 200K and 300K also indicates a decline in $`l_\phi `$ between these two temperatures. Finally we note that since D is known to be relatively small in pi-conjugated polymers, $`\tau _\phi `$ may be very long in these materials, possibly in the ns range; and that backscattering effects may be enhanced in semiconducting polymer films because polymer chains are often coiled up.

In summary, we found strong evidence for the occurrence of quantum interference corrections to the charge carrier transport in polymeric sandwich devices. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first observation of this kind. Quantum interference corrections occur only at low temperatures (typically 1 K or even below) in (inorganic) metals Bergmann (1984), high-mobility semiconductor heterojunction devices Papadakis et al. (2002) and quantum dot devices Zumbühl et al. (2002). In stark contrast we found WL traces even at room temperature, with virtually undiminished magnitude and width. Our discovery indicates that the quantum mechanical phase may remain highly correlated over many hops in high-quality polymer sandwich devices, even at room-temperature. In addition we found that the SO interaction strength is a function of the electric field and this finding may have important implications to the currently developing field of organic spintronics.


text:
# References

## Figure Captions

Amphoteric refraction of light beam observed for calcite crystals in air (not to scale). The light source is the He-Cd laser with wavelength 441.6 nm. The refraction indices along the two principal axes of the crystals at this wavelength are 1.6741 and 1.4937 respectively (www.casix.com.)

The mechanism for amphoteric refraction by anisotropic media. The Poynting and wave vectors are denoted by $`\widehat{S}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{k}`$; the $`k_y`$ components should be continuous across the interface. When the incidence is towards right, there is a minimum angle $`\varphi _{min}`$. When the incident angle is greater than $`\varphi _{min}`$, the refraction will be positive (indicated by $`\widehat{S}_1^{}`$, relative to the incidence $`\widehat{S}_1`$); otherwise the refraction is negative (indicated by $`\widehat{S}_3^{}`$ with respect to the incidence $`\widehat{S}_3`$). When the incidence is towards left, only positive refraction is possible, referring to $`\widehat{S}_4^{}`$ and $`\widehat{S}_4`$.


text:
# Magnetic field generation in relativistic shocks

## 1 Introduction

The fireball model for Gamma-ray Bursts (GRBs) explains GRB afterglows as synchrotron radiation coming from the external shocks that are formed when a relativistically expanding fireball (or jet) interacts with surrounding gas Rees and Mészáros (1992). The spectra and luminosity of the observed afterglows indicate a magnetic field strength in the radiating material of about 10% of the equipartition field strength Gruzinov and Waxman (1999): $`B^2/8\pi \epsilon `$ with $`\epsilon `$ the total post-shock energy density. Such a magnetic field is much stronger than what is expected from simple shock physics: for instance, passive compression of a dynamically unimportant magnetic field in a relativistic shock yields a post-shock field satisfying (for example, see Kennel and Coroniti (1984)) $`B^2/8\pi \epsilon (v_\mathrm{A}/c)^2`$, with $`v_\mathrm{A}`$ the Alfvén speed ahead of the shock, which usually satisfies $`v_\mathrm{A}c`$.

It may be possible that much stronger magnetic fields are generated in the shock transition itself through a Weibel-like instability. This low-frequency electromagnetic beam-instability can develop at the point where the shocked and unshocked plasma penetrate each other. It converts the kinetic energy of the penetrating particle beams into thermal motions and unordered magnetic fields Yang et al. (1994). For external shocks propagating into a hydrogen plasma incoming protons carry most of the kinetic energy in the shock frame. The instability must convert a significant fraction of this energy into magnetic energy in order to reach the required field strength Medvedev and Loeb (1999). Here we investigate if this is indeed possible.

## 2 Simple collisionless shock model

Within the shock transition, where the fireball material encounters the surrounding plasma, the mixing of the shocked (relativistically hot) and the unshocked (cold) plasma produces a plasma with a very anisotropic velocity distribution. As in non-relativistic collisionless shocks, it is quite likely that a significant fraction of the incoming ions is reflected at the shock transition by a large-scale electrostatic or magnetic field. The resulting situation is known to be unstable Yang et al. (1994): in the so-called Weibel instability the penetrating and reflected particles will bunch together, causing electric currents that induce a magnetic field in the plasma, which in turn causes the particles to bunch even more. If the generated magnetic fields become sufficiently strong they will trap the beam particles, eventually saturating the instability.

Recent numerical simulations Fonseca et al. (2003), Frederiksen et al. (2003)Haruki and Sakai (2003) show that the electric currents generated by the Weibel instability merge with each other in the wake of the unstable region. This separate process has a longer time-scale, and forms structures on a larger length-scale than the Weibel instability, which occurs mostly on a scale of the order of the plasma skin depth $`c/\omega _{\mathrm{pe}}`$, with $`\omega _{\mathrm{pe}}`$ the electron plasma frequency (see below).

In this paper we will concentrate on the proton-driven Weibel instability.

## 3 The Weibel Instability and its saturation

Because of the small electron mass, the electron-driven Weibel instability evolves very rapidly Medvedev and Loeb (1999), with the magnetic field strength growing as $`e^{\sigma t}`$ with $`\sigma \omega _{\mathrm{pb}}`$ where $`\omega _{\mathrm{pb}}=\sqrt{4\pi e^2n_{0\mathrm{b}}/m_\mathrm{e}}`$ is the beam particle plasma frequency based on the proper beam density $`n_{0\mathrm{b}}`$. When the electron-instability has saturated, the electron velocity distribution will be close to isotropic. The electrons then form a relativistically hot background plasma in which the much slower proton-driven Weibel instability develops because the proton velocity distribution is still very anisotropic (see, for example, figure 6 of Frederiksen et al. (2003)). We will investigate the behavior of the protons in this situation.

The main features of the resulting instability can be reproduced by investigating a water-bag proton velocity distribution. We assume two counter-streaming proton beams moving along the $`x`$-direction, with a small velocity spread in the $`z`$-direction to model thermal motions. The proton momentum $`\stackrel{}{p}`$ is then distributed as:

$$F(\stackrel{}{p})=\frac{n_\mathrm{p}}{4p_{z0}}[\delta (p_xp_{x0})+\delta (p_x+p_{x0})]\delta (p_y)[\mathrm{\Theta }(p_zp_{z0})\mathrm{\Theta }(p_z+p_{z0})],$$
(1)
where $`n_\mathrm{p}`$ is the total proton density, $`p_{x0}`$ is the beam momentum, $`p_{z0}`$ is the maximum momentum in the perpendicular direction, $`\delta (x)`$ is the Dirac delta function and $`\mathrm{\Theta }(x)`$ is the unit step function. We consider the evolution of a wave perturbation with wave vector $`\stackrel{}{k}=k\stackrel{}{e}_z`$ and frequency $`\omega `$. The growth rate of the proton instability is calculated in the usual manner by looking for wave solutions of the linearized equations of motion and Maxwell’s equations (for example Silva et al. (2002)). The resulting dispersion relation links the complex wave frequency $`\omega `$ to the wave number $`k`$. The Weibel instability obeys a dispersion equation of the form (using the notation of Silva et al. (2002)):

$$\omega ^2k^2c^2+C_{xxz}=0,$$
(2)
where $`C_{xxz}`$ contains contributions from both the electrons and the protons. Since the electrons are relativistically hot, their contribution is $`C_{xxz,\mathrm{e}}=\omega _{\mathrm{pe}}^2`$, with $`\omega _{\mathrm{pe}}`$ the effective electron plasma frequency which equals

$$\omega _{\mathrm{pe}}=\sqrt{4\pi e^2n_\mathrm{e}/m_\mathrm{e}h},$$
(3)
where $`h(\epsilon +P)_\mathrm{e}/n_\mathrm{e}m_\mathrm{e}c^2`$ is the electron enthalpy divided by the rest mass energy density, which parameterizes the relativistic mass correction in a relativistically hot plasma.

The proton contribution is Silva et al. (2002):

$$C_{xxz,\mathrm{p}}=\omega _{\mathrm{pi}}^2\left\{\left(\overline{\frac{1}{\gamma _b}}\right)+\frac{1}{\gamma _{b0}}\frac{u_{x0}^2}{1+u_{x0}^2}\frac{1}{\gamma _{b0}}\frac{k^2v_{x0}^2}{\omega ^2k^2v_{z0}^2}\right\},$$
(4)
where $`\omega _{\mathrm{pi}}=\sqrt{4\pi e^2n_\mathrm{p}/m_\mathrm{p}}`$ is the (non-relativistic) proton plasma frequency based on the lab-frame beam density, $`m_\mathrm{p}`$ is the proton rest mass, $`u_i=p_i/(m_\mathrm{p}c)`$, $`\gamma _{b0}=(1+u_{x0}^2+u_{z0}^2)^{1/2}`$, $`v_i=u_ic/\gamma _{b0}`$ and

$$\left(\overline{\frac{1}{\gamma _b}}\right)=d\stackrel{}{p}\frac{F(\stackrel{}{p})}{\gamma }=\frac{1}{2u_{z0}}\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{1+v_{z0}/c}{1v_{z0}/c}\right).$$
(5)
With these results the dispersion equation (2) becomes a biquadratic equation for $`\omega `$ that has one positive imaginary solution giving the growth rate $`\sigma =\mathrm{Im}(\omega )`$ of the unstable mode (figure 1, left).

One expects the instability to saturate when the quiver motion of the beam particles in the wave reaches an amplitude $`\mathrm{\Delta }z`$ such that $`k\mathrm{\Delta }z1`$. An expression for the corresponding magnetic field strength is derived in Yang et al. (1994) and reads in our notation:

$$B_{\mathrm{sat}}=\frac{\gamma _{b0}m_\mathrm{p}}{v_{x0}e}\frac{\sigma ^2}{k}.$$
(6)
Using the dispersion relation between $`\sigma `$ and $`k`$ we can then find $`B_{\mathrm{sat}}`$ as a function of $`k`$ (figure 1, right).

A straightforward calculation shows that for small $`v_{z0}`$ the peak of $`B_{\mathrm{sat}}`$ lies at wave number $`k_{\mathrm{peak}}`$ given by

$$k_{\mathrm{peak}}^2c^2\omega _{\mathrm{pe}}^2+\omega _{\mathrm{pi}}^2/\gamma _{b0}^3,$$
(7)
with a corresponding growth rate

$$\sigma (k_{\mathrm{peak}})\frac{\omega _{\mathrm{pi}}}{\sqrt{2\gamma _{b0}}}\left(\frac{v_{x0}}{c}\right).$$
(8)
The proton-driven Weibel instability occurs for a relatively small range in wavelength compared to the electron-positron case (figure 1): modes with wavelength longer than the electron skin depth ($`k<c/\omega _{\mathrm{pe}}`$) are inhibited by the response of the background electrons to the proton perturbations. The location where the growth rate levels off corresponds with the location where the saturation magnetic field peaks ($`k=k_{\mathrm{peak}}`$). If the background electrons had not been as responsive, this location might have been at much lower wave number, and since the wave number is in the denominator of expression (6) for $`B_{\mathrm{sat}}`$, this would have resulted in a much higher magnetic field. However, we find that the electrons set the location of the peak ($`k_{\mathrm{peak}}\omega _{\mathrm{pe}}/c`$) and that the proton Weibel instability can only produce slightly stronger magnetic fields than the electron instability (figure 1, right), despite the larger kinetic energy of the protons.

## 4 Conclusion

The Weibel instability as it was modeled here is not efficient at converting the kinetic energy of the protons into magnetic fields. However, numerical simulations of collisionless shocks in electron-proton plasmas (Fonseca et al. (2003), Frederiksen et al. (2003)Haruki and Sakai (2003)) do show efficient production of magnetic fields. This can probably be attributed to merging of the electric currents produced by the Weibel instability, after the instability that was considered here has stopped. To verify this, the current merging processes will need to be investigated further.

The properties of the magnetic fields generated by these processes will be important for determining the radiation that may be produced in these shocks and that we see in the form of gamma-ray burst afterglows.

Acknowledgment: this research is supported by the Netherlands Research School for Astronomy (NOVA).

Copyright 2003 American Institute of Physics. This article may be downloaded for personal use only. Any other use requires prior permission of the author and the American Institute of Physics.