text:
# Five-Dimensional Fission-Barrier Calculations from 70Se to 252Cf

## Abstract

We present fission-barrier-height calculations for nuclei throughout the Periodic Table based on a realistic macroscopic-microscopic model. Compared to other calculations: (1) we use a deformation space of a sufficiently high dimension, sampled densely enough to describe the relevant topography of the fission potential, (2) we unambiguously find the physically relevant saddle points in this space, and (3) we formulate our model so that we obtain continuity of the potential energy dat the division point between a single system and separated fission fragments or colliding nuclei, allowing us to (4) describe both fission-barrier heights and ground-state masses throughout the Periodic Table.

Nuclear fission, fission barrier, multi-mode fission

It has been notoriously difficult to calculate in a consistent theoretical model with microscopic content both fission barriers and ground-state masses for nuclei throughout the Periodic Table. So far this has only been possible in the framework of a macroscopic-microscopic model moller81:b ; moller95:b . However, developments in the area of nuclear fission show that these earlier studies can now be improved.

On the experimental side it became clear that the barrier data for the two lightest nuclei previously used in the determination of model constants are incorrect. In addition, a series of measurements of fission-barrier heights of nuclei with atomic numbers in the neighborhood of $`A=100`$ are now available mcmahan85:a ; delis91:a ; jing99:a . Barrier heights calculated for these light nuclei using the model from Ref. moller81:b  are from 1 to 5 MeV too low sierk85:a ; sierk86:b .

On the theoretical side we have recently shown that five-dimensional deformation spaces with the potential energy defined on millions of points are necessary to determine properly the details of the potential energy such as the locations and heights of the fission saddle points moller00:a ; moller01:a . This large deformation space is in stark contrast to one with three degrees of freedom and 175 deformation points previously used to determine the locations and heights of saddle points moller81:b ; moller95:b . Moreover, it has been clear for some time that the Wigner and $`A^0`$ macroscopic terms in these nuclear mass models must have a shape dependence myers77:a . This was ignored in previous global calculations moller81:b ; moller95:b ; sierk85:a ; sierk86:b  and only incorporated in some of our more limited fission-barrier studies, for example moller89:a .

In nuclear fission the nucleus evolves from a single ground-state shape into two separated fission fragments. During the shape and configuration changes that occur in this process the total energy of the system initially increases up to a maximum, the fission-barrier height, then decreases. Calculations of fission barriers involve the determination of the total nuclear potential energy for different nuclear shapes. Such a calculation defines an energy landscape as a function of a number of shape coordinates. The fission-barrier height is given by the energy relative to the ground state of the most favorable saddle point that has to be traversed when the shape evolves from a single shape to separated fragments. We use a technique borrowed from the area of geographical topography studies, namely immersion (“imaginary water flow”) luc91:a ; mamdouh98:a ; hayes00:a , to determine the structure of the high-dimensional fission potential-energy surfaces moller00:a ; moller01:a .

A number of models exist for the nuclear potential energy. At first sight, it would seem attractive to employ a self-consistent mean-field (SMF) model using effective forces, for example a Hartree-Fock (HF) or Hartree-Fock-Bogolyubov (HFB) model with Skyrme or Gogny effective interactions aberg90:a ; egido97:a ; berger89:a , or a relativistic Dirac-Hartree model with scalar and vector interactions nikolaus92:a . Global HF mass calculations have recently been presented goriely01:a ; goriely02:a . However, at least two major problems with such calculations remain unresolved. First, no effective force has been found which can describe both nuclear masses and fission barriers for nuclei of all mass numbers. Second, even if an appropriate effective interaction could be determined, it is extremely difficult, and in practice has so far proven impossible unambiguously to locate an actual saddle-point configuration in SMF models. There exists a common misconception that constrained self-consistent HF or HFB calculations with Skyrme or Gogny forces automatically take into account all non-constrained shape variables in a proper manner. In fact, the apparent saddle points that appear in constrained HF calculations in the general case have no relation to the true saddle points; we give an illustrative example below.

For calculating the fission potential-energy surface in this work, we adopt the macroscopic-microscopic finite-range liquid-drop model (FRLDM) moller95:b  generalized to account for all required shape-dependencies of its various macroscopic terms. In contrast the finite-range droplet model (FRDM) moller95:b  cannot be generalized in this way. In Fig. 1 we illustrate the large discontinuities that occur at the transition point between single and separated systems when the shape dependences of the Wigner and $`A^0`$ macroscopic energies are neglected, and the continuous behavior exhibited for the current formulation.

In the macroscopic-microscopic approach, it is important that the shape description be flexible enough to allow accessing those configurations which are physically important to the fission process. In addition to the commonly used elongation, necking and mass-asymmetry degrees of freedom, it is essential to include the deformations of the partially formed fragments. This is because the microscopic binding due to fragment shell structure, which is sensitive to the fragment deformations, can be as large as 5 MeV even for shapes with a fairly large neck radius. We use the three-quadratic-surface (3QS) shape parameterization moller01:a ; nix69:a  to describe shapes with these five degrees of freedom. By investigating the scale over which the microscopic energy varies significantly, we determine the coordinate mesh upon which we need to define the energy. We find that we get a reasonable coverage of the space by defining a grid of 15 points each in the neck diameter and left and right fragment deformations, 20 points in the mass asymmetry, and 41 points in the nuclear elongation. A few grid points do not refer to real shapes, so we are left with a grid of 2,610,885 points moller01:a .

In an unconstrained mean-field calculation, one starts with some initial density, usually defined in terms of trial wavefunctions, then determines new wavefunctions which are solutions of the potential derived from the density. By iterating to convergence one finds a local minimum: the nuclear ground state or possibly a fission-isomeric state. To try to find a fission barrier, some have chosen to solve a constrained problem, which leads to the minimum-energy state subject to the constraint, often taken to be the quadrupole moment. By applying a series of constraints with increasing deformation, a curve of energy as a function of constrained deformation is found. Such curves often exhibit discontinuities and may not pass through the real saddle point in multidimensional space as is discussed in more detail in Refs. moller00:a ; myers96:a .

In a macroscopic-microscopic calculation one should in principle be able to locate saddle points by solving for all shapes that have a zero derivative of the energy with respect to all the degrees of freedom. This method works for a purely macroscopic model sierk86:b , but macroscopic-microscopic models using the Strutinsky shell-correction technique strutinsky67:a ; strutinsky68:a , are subject to fluctuations when small shape changes are made, making it difficult to obtain accurate derivatives by numerical techniques. Even if all saddle points in a high-dimensional space could be found in this way, one must still understand the topography and deduce which saddle would correspond to the actual peak of the barrier. Before the breakthrough study in Ref. mamdouh98:a , what has usually been done in calculations involving more than two degrees of freedom is to first define a two-dimensional space of two primary shape coordinates. For each point in this two-dimensional space the energy is then minimized with respect to a set of additional shape degrees of freedom. It was incorrectly assumed that if no discontinuities occurred in this two-dimensional surface then its saddle points would be identical to the saddle-points in the full, higher-dimensional space. For all but the most structureless functions this procedure is incorrect and may actually result in more inaccurate saddle points than if only the original two-dimensional space is studied.

We illustrate in Fig. 2 some of the problems that one may encounter in either a constrained SMF calculation or in a macroscopic-microscopic model when attempting to reduce the dimensionality of a problem via minimization while preserving the essential features of the potential energy. We assume the $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ coordinate corresponds to the fission direction and $`\alpha `$ to all other degrees of freedom. Because of the multiple saddle points, it is not clear a priori which one would correspond to the fission threshold. We identify the point $`\mathrm{\Theta }=100`$, $`\alpha =6`$ as the ground state or fission-isomer state and proceed to find a “constrained” fission barrier. From the starting point we increase $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ by 40 (smaller steps will not alter the result) while keeping $`\alpha `$ fixed. From the new position we then minimize with respect to $`\alpha `$ and find ourselves at the first black dot. When we repeat this process we obtain the dot-dashed curve. The energy along this path is a continuous function and the white arrow would be identified as the fission saddle point. However, this saddle is higher than those shown by gray arrows, which can only be identified when the full space is explored. Of course in a constrained SMF calculation the convergence towards a solution is more complex than “sliding downhill”, since the wave functions and potential change during this process. However, solutions of constrained SMF equations do show similar behavior; often converging to a local minimum which depends on the starting configuration, a process similar to what is sketched in Fig. 2.

The fundamental point is that the fission saddle point can only be determined

from global properties of the multidimensional energy surface, not from local excursions from a specific starting point. We therefore implement the immersion method mentioned above and first identify all minima by locating the points which have a lower energy than all $`3^n1`$ neighboring points in n-dimensional coordinate space. We then progressively fill up the ground-state minimum with “water”, determining when a prespecified point in the fission valley becomes “wet”. By adjusting the increase in the water level carefully we are able unambiguously to identify the location and energy of the grid point nearest to the true saddle.

Because we are studying a higher dimensional deformation space with over 10000 times as many points as in previous calculations, we find that the saddles for a given nucleus are always lower than those found for the same model parameters in our earlier studies moller95:b ; moller00:a . This means we need to redetermine the parameters of our nuclear-structure model. Because new parameter sets may change the location of the saddle points and minima, an iterative procedure is in principle required. However these changes in deformation are small; here we do just the first iteration and vary six parameters of the macroscopic energy functional to optimize the reproduction of both ground-state binding energies and fission-barrier heights. This process is identical to the one followed in the creation of our 1995 mass table moller95:b . We show in Table 1 the constants from Ref. moller95:b  (determined in 1992) and those obtained in our readjustment taking into account the larger deformation space in locating the fission saddle points. We have made a number of tests which allow us to conclude that a self-consistent redetermination of the ground-state and saddle-point deformations would change our calculated energies by less than 0.1 MeV.

These constants (in particular $`a_0`$) differ slightly from the preliminary

set presented in Ref. moller02:b . Those constants were affected by an error in the expression for the $`a_0`$ energy term in the constant-adjustment program. However, none of the other previous results, conclusions or figures were affected significantly by this computer-program bug. Here we have checked the calculation of macroscopic-model saddle-point shapes and energies by the use of two independently written codes. The microscopic energy model is unchanged from moller95:b .

The 1992 calculation reproduced an experimental 1989 nuclear mass table audi89:a  with a model error of 0.779 MeV, and 28 barrier heights with model error of 1.4 MeV. The revised data set here delis91:a ; jing99:a ; madland01:a  incorporates seven new experimental barrier heights and removes four old ones. The fit to the revised table of 31 barriers has an rms error of 0.999 MeV, and the fit to the same 1989 mass table has a model error of 0.752 MeV using the parameters in the last column of Table I. We show the experimental and calculated barrier heights as well as remaining discrepancies in Table II and Fig. 3.

This work was supported by the U. S. DOE.


format: text

text:
# Experimental targeting and control of spatiotemporal chaos in nonlinear optics

## Abstract

We demonstrate targeting and control over spatiotemporal chaos in an optical feedback loop experiment. Different stationary target patterns are stabilized in real-time by means of a two dimensional space extended perturbation field driven by an interfaced computer and applied in real-space to a liquid crystal display device inserted within a control optical loop. The flexibility of the system in switching between different target patterns is also demonstrated.

PACS: 05.45.Gg,05.45.Jn,42.65.Sf,47.54.+r

Control of complex dynamics refers to a process whereby the critical sensitivity of such dynamics to external disturbances is capitalized in order to select a proper tiny perturbation able to attain a desirable target behavior. In the last decade, a series of relevant issues such as stabilizing a given trajectory within an infinite set of unstable periodic orbits embedded within a chaotic attractor (control of chaos) or bringing a chaotic trajectory to a small neighborhood of some desired locations in phase space (targeting of chaos) have been addressed and solved in both low and high dimensional time-chaotic dynamics BocGreLaiManMaz00 .

More recently, the interest switched to implementing control strategies for the stabilization of space-time chaotic dynamics occurring in extended systems. In this latter framework, some theoretical attempts and numerical demonstrations have been offered for achieving control over one and two dimensional patterns aranson , coupled map lattices and arrays of oscillators parmananda , or relevant model equations describing universal features of systems closeby to space time bifurcations, such as the Complex Ginzburg Landau Equation montagne  and the complex Swift-Hohenberg Equation bleich .

Robust and reliable experimental control over space time chaos (STC) remains however an open problem. In the field of nonlinear optics, a few experimental demonstrations of pattern control and targeting have been offered, based on Fourier filtering techniques BenKreNeuTsc00 ; Mamaev . These methods provide a nice efficiency for the stabilization of stationary patterns with global symmetries, but their application to target patterns involving complex phase relationships among different Fourier components (such as localized patterns or selected snapshots of STC evolving patterns) is strongly limited by the practical difficulty of building suitable Fourier masks.

In this Letter we show the first experimental evidence of control of STC based upon a real-space real-time feedback technique, which is able to circumvent the above difficulties, thus allowing stabilization and targeting of two dimensional stationary patterns with arbitrary symmetries and shapes. This is realized by means of perturbing fields applied directly in the real-space and in times shorter than the characteristic time of the pattern dynamics, so that stationary non-homogeneous patterns of arbitrary complexity in space can be indifferently targeted and stabilized with good efficiency. We furthermore show that our control strategy offers dynamical flexibility in switching from one to another target pattern, without the need of removing optical components (as e.g. filters) in the control loop.

The experimental setup is sketched in Fig. 1a. It consists of a main optical feedback loop (MOFL) hosting a Liquid Crystal Light Valve (LCLV) AkhmanovNoiChaos , and of an additional electrooptic control loop. The latter is essentially constituted by a videocamera, a personal computer driving a liquid crystal display (LCD), and a laser beam which traverses the LCD before being injected into the MOFL. The LCLV operates as a Kerr-like medium, i.e., it induces on the reading light a phase delay proportional to the writing intensity, over a wide range of input intensities. This proportionality relation holds for the experimental parameters used in the present investigation. The LCD display, operating in transmission, encodes linearly the gray level images output by the PC, onto the laser beam traversing it.

When the control loop is open, a homogeneous wave is sent onto the front face of the LCLV, and is reflected acquiring a spatial phase modulation. The beam propagates within the MOFL from the front face of the LCLV to the input plane of a fiber bundle, experiencing diffraction, and thus converting phase into amplitude modulations. The fiber bundle FB just relays the intensity distribution from the input to the output plane, which is in contact with the LCLV rear face.

In these conditions, the dynamics within the MOFL is described by the equation Firth ; NeubeckerOppo :

$$\frac{\varphi }{t}=\frac{1}{\tau }(\varphi \varphi _0)+D^2\varphi +\alpha I_{fb},$$
(1)
where $`\varphi (x,y)`$ is the phase of the optical beam at the output of the valve, $`\tau `$ is a relaxation time, $`D`$ a diffusion coefficient, $`\alpha `$ the nonlinearity strength of the LCLV, $`\varphi _0`$ is the working reference phase, and $`I_{fb}(x,y)`$ is the feedback intensity impinging at the rear side of the valve.

The feedback intensity, which results from the propagation of the beam reflected by the front side of the valve trough the MOFL, is a nonlinear (and nonlocal) function of the phase $`\varphi `$ Firth ; NeubeckerOppo . On increase of the pump intensity $`I`$, the homogeneous solution destabilizes, resulting in hexagonal patterns close to threshold. If the pump is further increased, regular hexagons loose stability in favour of a space-time chaotic dynamics Firth ; NeubSTC . Together with the pump value, another parameter of the utmost importance is the spatial frequency bandwidth of the system Mamaev , controlled by the aperture $`A`$ in Fig. 1. Troughout the present paper, this bandwidth is kept fixed at $`1.3`$ times the diffractive wavenumber of the system, which gives the scale of the unstable structures.

In order to achieve control over the dynamics, a fraction of the beam traveling on the MOFL is extracted and detected by a videocamera, which is interfaced to the PC via a frame grabber. The computer processes the input image, and sends a suitable driving signal to the liquid crystal display device. The LCD transfer function $`T(x,y)`$ can be written as the contribution of a constant mean transfer coefficient $`T_0`$, plus a modulation signal $`s(x,y)`$. This modulation $`s`$ is chosen to be proportional to the error signal between the current pattern intensity $`I_{fb}`$ present in the system, and a target pattern $`I_T(x,y)`$:

$$s(x,y,t)=\beta \left(I_{fb}(x,y,t)I_T(x,y)\right).$$
(2)
The digital processing operations performed by the PC include the evaluation of the above error signal, and the calculation of the cross-correlation between pattern and target. The entire time series of pattern is also recorded on the hard disk for further off-line processing.

The resulting refreshing time for the above procedure is at most 200 ms, to be compared with the characteristic time of the pattern dynamics (computed from the decay of the autocorrelation function) which is of the order of the second.

The LCD is illuminated with a uniform intensity $`I_0`$, and the output beam is imaged onto the rear (writing) side of the valve. Following the above discussion, this beam will consist of a constant term $`T_0I_0`$ that acts in renormalizing the valve working point $`\varphi _0`$ to $`\varphi _{0}^{}{}_{}{}^{}`$, plus a modulated controlling beam $`sI_0`$.

The equation of motion when the control loop is closed is therefore:

$$\frac{\varphi }{t}=\frac{1}{\tau }(\varphi \varphi _0^{})+D\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi +\alpha \left(I_{fb}\gamma (I_{fb}I_T)\right).$$
(3)
where $`\gamma \beta I_0`$.

We initially set the light intensity at the input of the feedback loop to be $`I/I_c3.2`$, where $`I_c`$ is the critical value for pattern formation from the uniform state to hexagons. In these conditions, the uncontrolled evolution brings the system to display a time evolving, spatially disordered pattern, where many defects are continuously created and annihilated within an hexagonal-like pattern, thus generating STC NeubSTC . A typical snapshot of the uncontrolled dynamics is reported in Fig. 1b. Fig. 1c reports the space-time dynamical evolution of the central vertical line of pixels in Fig. 1b, showing how the uncontrolled dynamics evolves within STC, with a non stationary complex local dynamics and a decaying spatial correlation.

Starting from these conditions, three different target patterns are selected, namely perfect hexagons, squares and a particular snapshot of the uncontrolled dynamical evolution (shown in the top row of Fig. 2).

Perfect stationary hexagons are a stable solution close to the pattern formation threshold; they are destabilized when the pump is increased, resulting in the space-time chaotic dynamics here considered. Therefore, use of hexagons as a target tests the ability of the method to control an unstable solution.

On the other hand, using as target a snapshot of the uncontrolled dynamics assesses the robustness of the method to freeze a given natural state of the uncontrolled dynamics, in the very same spirit as the so called targeting of chaos BocGreLaiManMaz00 . Finally, squares are never spontaneously selected by the system without control, and therefore they serve us to assess the ability of the control strategy to force the appearance of an arbitrary symmetry. The results obtained for $`\gamma =0.4`$ in the three cases are reported in the center row of Fig.2, indicating that the control procedure is successful in all cases. The patterns are conveniently stabilized over a selected area of $`128\times 128`$ pixels (about 10 pattern wavelengths) in the system. The bottom row of Fig.2 shows the far field images of the controlled dynamics. While hexagonal and square patterns have a rather simple global symmetry (thus allowing for an easy implementation of Fourier filtering techniques, like the one of Ref. BenKreNeuTsc00 ), the target STC snapshot involves the presence of a complicate power spectrum. The fabrication of Fourier masks reproducing the amplitude and phase of these patterns appears extremely difficult in experiments.

Our control method circumvents such practical difficulties, and effectively stabilizes such complex Fourier patterns. Hence, it configures as the most reliable choice for the stabilization and targeting of two dimensional stationary structures with arbitrary symmetries and shapes.

To evaluate quantitatively the control ability of our method, we use the time dependent correlation function $`C(t)=<I_{fb}(\text{r},t)I_T(\text{r})>_\text{r}`$ between the instantaneous pattern and the target one ($`<\mathrm{}>_\text{r}`$ denotes a spatial average). We also measure the amount of power $`p(t)=\gamma [<(I_{fb}(\text{r},t)I_T(\text{r}))^2>_\text{r}]^{1/2}`$ injected within the control arm for controlling the target pattern.

The correlations $`vs`$ time are shown in Fig.3 for increasing values of $`\gamma `$ for the control task of a perfect hexagonal pattern (a), a snapshot of the uncontrolled dynamics (b), and a square pattern (c). At lower values of $`\gamma `$ ($`\gamma =0.1,0.2`$), there is already a partial control of the dynamics, though several deviations of the patterns around the target ones still remain. This is reflected by the rather large fluctuations of $`C(t)`$ visible in Fig. 3. The correlation value increases with $`\gamma `$ up to $`\gamma =0.4`$, when a high degree of control is achieved in all cases. As $`\gamma `$ increases, the transient time before reaching control over the target pattern decreases. On the opposite, when control is switched off, the relaxing time is determined by the characteristic time of the STC decorrelation, and is therefore independent of $`\gamma `$. The value of the control power $`p(t)`$ needed to achieve control is in the range $`0.10.2`$ for the data reported.

Notice that the maximum correlation is attained for the case of the STC snapshot. This is due to the fact that in this case the target pattern is a specific configuration of the natural evolution of the dynamics. In the cases of squares and hexagons, instead, the target patterns are are digitally generated trying to reproduce at best the natural profile of the spots present in the system; but this procedure is intrinsically imperfect, because the exact profile of the spots is unknown. The mismatch between the profiles of the targets and the patterns lowers the correlation levels, with respect to the values that would be obtainable in the ideal case, in which the profile of the solution is perfectly reproduced by the target image.

It is worth observing that the correlation when control is off in Fig. 3c does not decay to zero; this is due to the fact that our uncontrolled STC dynamics gives rise to a non zero mean field. This point can be qualitatively appreciated from inspection of Fig. 1c: the pattern has a certain degree of ”phase rigidity”, i.e., even if there are chaotic fluctuations, bright (dark) areas remain more or less bright (dark) for most of time. Similar properties have been observed experimentally and discussed in various other cases of space extended systems giving rise to STC dynamics vari .

Finally, we demonstrate that our control technique is greatly flexible in dynamically switching between different target patterns. For this purpose, we prepare a time-dependent target pattern formed by the ordered sequence of a snapshot of the uncontrolled dynamics, a square pattern and a hexagonal pattern, each one presented to the system for a time $`T=20`$ sec., and intermingled with periods of $`T=20`$ sec. of time in which the system is left uncontrolled to reset the original state of STC. The results are shown in Fig. 4, where one sees that the system is able to attain each one of the target pattern in the sequence for the same value of $`\gamma =0.4`$, as well as to switch between the different patterns. Notice that each target pattern in the sequence produces a different state in the correlation, depending upon its specific instability features within the uncontrolled STC regime. The maximal correlation is again obtained for the snapshot of the uncontrolled dynamics, since this pattern represents a specific state compatible with the uncontrolled dynamics.

In conclusion we have demonstrated targeting and control over spatiotemporal chaos in an optical feedback loop experiment. Stationary target patterns with arbitrary symmetry and complexity are stabilized in real-time by means of a two dimensional space extended perturbation field at low cost in terms of the perturbation amplitude. The flexibility of the system in switching between different target patterns has also been demonstrated.

Work partly supported by EU Contract HPRN-CT-2000-00158, and MIUR-FIRB project n. RBNE01CW3M-001.


text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

Motivated by the problems with unstable D-branes, the $`c=1`$ matrix model  (for reviews see ) has recently attracted a lot of attention  as the simplest string theory from which we might learn something useful.

The $`c=1`$ matrix model is equivalent to a theory of free fermions $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ in 1+1 dimensional spacetime with the Hamiltonian 111 More precisely we should consider the field theory, and the Hamiltonian is $`𝑑x\mathrm{\Psi }^{}H\mathrm{\Psi }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Psi }(x)`$ is the 2nd quantized fermion field. We will use the notation of quantum mechanics although everything can be extended to the 2nd quantized theory.

$$H=\frac{1}{2}_x^2+V(x),V(x)=\frac{x^2}{2}.$$
(1)
It is dual to 2 dimensional bosonic string theory or type 0B theory  depending on whether we fill one side or both sides of the potential. By filling the Fermi sea differently and an orbifolding, the same model was also conjectured to be dual to type II B theory .

A slight deformation of the potential

$$V(x)=\frac{x^2}{2}+\frac{M}{2x^2}.$$
(2)
was conjectured  to lead to bosonic string theory in 2 dimensions in the background of a black hole of mass $`M`$. More recently it was also conjectured  to be dual to type 0A string theory in the linear dilaton background with RR electric field proportional to $`q`$, where

$$M=q^2\frac{1}{4}.$$
(3)
In the limit $`M\mathrm{}`$ (or $`x0`$), we can scale $`x`$ and ignore the quadratic term in the potential. Hence

$$V(x)=\frac{M}{2x^2}.$$
(4)
This model was conjectured  to be dual to type 0A string theory in the $`AdS_2`$ background. The isometry group $`SL(2,)`$ of $`AdS_2`$ is identified with a symmetry algebra of this matrix model. The generators are

$$H=\frac{1}{2}\left(p^2+\frac{M}{x^2}\right),K=\frac{1}{2}x^2,D=\frac{1}{4}\left(xp+px\right),$$
(5)
where $`p=i_x`$ is the conjugate momentum of $`x`$. They satisfy the $`SL(2,)`$ Lie algebra

$$[H,D]=iH,[K,D]=iK,[H,K]=2iD.$$
(6)
The ground states of matrix models are specified by a single parameter $`\mu `$ which is the energy at the surface of the Fermi sea. It is dual to the amplitude of a static tachyon background. In the $`AdS_2`$ model the potential (4) is bounded from below at zero, so $`\mu 0`$. The ground states with $`\mu >0`$ spontaneously break the $`SL(2,)`$ symmetry. Only the unique state with no fermion ($`\mu =0`$) preserves the isometry, and is matched to the invariant vacuum of $`AdS_2`$.

One might be puzzled by the fact that the $`SL(2,)`$ symmetry exists also for other matrix models as part of the $`W_{\mathrm{}}`$ algebra. But of course $`SL(2,)`$ can not be the isometry of the dual target spaces which are asymptotically flat. The resolution is that the $`SL(2,)`$ symmetry can be understood as the isometry of the matrix model in a way we will explain later, and the isometry is spontaneously broken by the ground state chosen for the other matrix models. Nevertheless, we will see that the $`SL(2,)`$ symmetry has important implications also for other matrix models.

Utilizing the $`SL(2,)`$ generators, the authors of  showed that all quantum theories with Hamiltonians of the form

$$H=\frac{p^2}{2}+V(x),V(x)=\frac{a}{2}x^2+\frac{M}{2x^2}$$
(7)
with the same parameter $`M`$, but arbitrary coefficient $`a`$, are related to one another by coordinate transformations. This has many striking implications. For $`M=0`$, the undeformed matrix model ($`a=1`$) is in some sense equivalent to the simple harmonic oscillator ($`a=1`$), and also to the theory without any potential ($`a=0`$). For $`M>0`$, the deformed matrix model ($`a=1`$) is in some way the same as type 0A theory in $`AdS_2`$ ($`a=0`$). Yet these theories have completely different asymptotic behaviors!

As the potentials in (2) and (4) can be viewed as the same theory written in two sets of coordinates, the $`\mu \mathrm{}`$ limit of type 0A matrix model can be identified with the vacuum of the $`AdS_2`$ matrix model. In other words, type 0A theory in $`AdS_2`$ background should be identified with the result of tachyon condensation from the linear dilaton background. 222As the closed string tachyons are massless in 2 dimensions, tachyon condensation might never happen. What we mean here is to tune the parameter $`\mu `$ of the tachyon field by hand to $`\mathrm{}`$. Due to the similarity between type 0A and 0B, we conjecture that the same is true for type 0B theory as well.

The coordinate transformations relating theories with different $`a`$ in (7) are not always bijective. Some coordinate systems only cover a small part of the spacetime defined by another set of coordinates. We will see that properties of coordinate transformations of the matrix model reflect those of the target space in string theory. It was proposed  that the Hamiltonian (7) with $`a=1`$ (i.e., $`H+K`$) is dual to $`AdS_2`$ in global coordinates, while (4) is dual to the Poincare patch, which only covers half of the former. Based on this proposal, we will show that the RR flux background $`q`$ needs to be quantized in order for the global time of $`AdS_2`$ to be compactified.

In addition, we will show that, by adding a suitable (time-dependent) Fermi surface, we can use the Hamiltonian (7) with any $`a`$ to describe string theory in the linear dilaton background. As the asymptotic behavior of particles for $`a>0,a=0`$ and $`a<0`$ are drastically different, the phenomenology of each model appears to be very different, although the encoded information is (almost) equivalent. This reflects the observer dependence familiar in the context of general relativity. By analogy with $`AdS_2`$, there should exist a coordinate transformation (possibly combined with field redefinitions) of string theory/supergravity in the linear dilaton background which extends the spacetime beyond the region manifest in the old description.

In the appendix A we prove that (7) exhausts all possibilities of nontrivial isometries for 1 dimensional quantum mechanics with the standard kinetic term. The proof that all theories defined by (7) with the same $`M`$ are equivalent at the quantum level are given in appendix B.

## 2 $`SL(2,)`$ Symmetry

The quantum mechanics defined by (4) was extensively studied  as an example of quantum mechanics with conformal symmetry. Assuming that the kinetic energy is standard $`\frac{1}{2}p^2`$, by simple dimensional analysis one can see that (4) is the only potential consistent with conformal symmetry. (Conformal quantum mechanics with more than one variables and general kinetic terms were discussed in .) The $`SL(2,)`$ symmetry (5) was found in  as the conformal symmetry.

In this section we will first review how the $`SL(2,)`$ symmetry is a symmetry of conformal transformations of the time variable together with a time-dependent scaling of the spatial coordinate for the matrix model . This could come as a bit of surprise for those who are not familiar with the results of , since the spacetime coordinates in the matrix model are nonlocally related to the coordinates of target space. (The nonlocal transformation are determined by the leg factors .)

Then we will use the Lie algebra generators, which are dual to Killing vectors in $`AdS_2`$, to define new time coordinates, and find that the new Hamiltonians are all of the form (7) with the same $`M`$.

### 2.1 Isometry of Quantum Mechanics

An infinitesimal general coordinate transformation is generated by a differential operator of the form

$$𝒟=iA_t+iB_x+C,$$
(8)
where $`A,B,C`$ are functions of $`x`$ and $`t`$. Classically $`C`$ can be dropped, and the infinitesimal coordinate transformation is

$$\delta t=ϵA,\delta x=ϵB.$$
(9)
The final result will justify why $`C`$ should be allowed for quantum mechanics. $`𝒟`$ generates a symmetry if

$$(\text{EOM})𝒟=𝒟^{}(\text{EOM})$$
(10)
for some well defined operator $`𝒟^{}`$ so that a solution of the Schrödinger equation is still a solution after the transformation defined by $`𝒟`$, i.e.,

$$(\text{EOM})\psi =0(\text{EOM})e^{iϵ𝒟}\psi =0.$$
(11)
Note that $`𝒟^{}`$ does not have to equal $`𝒟`$. The condition (10) is equivalent to

$$[(\text{EOM}),\widehat{𝒟}]=0,\widehat{𝒟}=AHBp+C,$$
(12)
where $`\widehat{𝒟}`$ is $`𝒟`$ with $`i_t`$ replaced by the Hamiltonian $`H`$. ($`𝒟`$ and $`\widehat{𝒟}`$ are equivalent when acting on solutions of the Schrödinger equation.) The generators (5) are to be identified with $`\widehat{𝒟}`$’s at $`t=0`$ for the matrix model.

We will refer to the coordinate transformations which preserve the Schrödinger equation as the quantum mechanics isometry. It is natural to ask when a quantum theory admits nontrivial isometry. Any time-independent Hamiltonian is an isometry generator of time translation. We prove in appendix A for with the standard kinetic energy $`\frac{1}{2}p^2`$ the only time-independent Hamiltonian with more than one isometry generators is of the form (7). There are 3 isometry generators $`H,K,D`$ (5) for a generic $`M`$. If $`M=0`$, there are 2 additional generators, which can be identified with the creation and annihilation operators of the simple harmonic oscillator when $`a>0`$.

In terms of the coordinates in the $`AdS_2`$ theory (4), the $`SL(2,)`$ isometry is represented as the projective transformation of time and a scaling of space

$$t\frac{\alpha t+\beta }{\gamma t+\delta },x\frac{1}{\gamma t+\delta }x.$$
(13)
### 2.2 Killing Operators and Coordinate Transformations

In analogy with Riemannian geometry, the symmetry generators preserving Schrödinger equations are reminiscent of Killing vectors, which preserve the metric, and it is natural to use them to define new time coordinates. Of course, one can always perform arbitrary general coordinate transformations or change of variables to rewrite a theory. The special features of the time coordinates chosen by Killing operators are that their conjugate Hamiltonians are time-independent and of the standard form $`\frac{1}{2}p^2+V(x)`$.

Take a generic $`SL(2,)`$ generator

$$G=\alpha H+\beta D+\gamma K,$$
(14)
and we would like to introduce a new coordinate $`\tau `$ such that the old and new Schrödinger equations are equivalent (up to unitary transformation)

$$i\frac{}{t}\mathrm{\Psi }=H\mathrm{\Psi }i\frac{}{\tau }\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=G\mathrm{\Psi }^{},\mathrm{\Psi }^{}=U\mathrm{\Psi }.$$
(15)
It turns out that, remarkably, $`\tau `$ is simply a function of $`t`$

$$d\tau =\frac{dt}{\alpha +\beta t+\gamma t^2}.$$
(16)
For the range of $`t`$ satisfying

$$f(t)=(\alpha +\beta t+\gamma t^2)>0,$$
(17)
$`\tau `$ is a legitimate reparametrization of time. Furthermore, after a simultaneous scaling of the spatial coordinate

$$\sigma =\frac{x}{(\alpha +\beta t+\gamma t^2)^{1/2}},$$
(18)
$`G`$ is again of the form (7)

$$G=\frac{p_\sigma ^2}{2}+V_G,V_G=\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{8}\sigma ^2+\frac{M}{2\sigma ^2},$$
(19)
where

$$\mathrm{\Delta }=\beta ^24\alpha \gamma .$$
(20)
The new coordinate system is as good as the old one as long as (17) is satisfied.

The result above is derived in appendix B. Here we verify it in the classical theory. The action for the potential (4) is

$$S=𝑑t\left(\frac{1}{2}\dot{x}^2\frac{M}{2x^2}\right).$$
(21)
From (16) and (18), it follows that

$$\frac{dx}{dt}=f^{1/2}(_\tau \sigma +\frac{1}{2}(_tf)\sigma ).$$
(22)
Plugging it in the action and integrating by parts, we find

$$S=\left[\frac{1}{2}(_tf)x^2\right]_{\tau _0}^{\tau _1}+𝑑\tau \left(\frac{1}{2}(_\tau \sigma )^2\frac{d}{8}\sigma ^2\frac{M}{2\sigma ^2}\right).$$
(23)
This is exactly the action for the Hamiltonian $`G`$ (19). Due to the boundary term in (23), a unitary transformation is involved in the quantum version.

It is a very intriguing fact that all Hamiltonians of the form (7) are different descriptions of essentially the same theory related by simple coordinate transformations (16) and (18).

### 2.3 Coordinate Patches: $`S_{}S_0S_+`$

A redefinition (scaling) of the coordinates ($`\sigma \lambda \sigma `$, $`\tau \lambda ^2\tau `$) has the effect of scaling the coefficient of the $`\sigma ^2`$ term by $`\lambda ^4`$. So essentially we have 3 classes of $`G`$ that are not related to each other in a trivial way. They are examplified by $`(\alpha =1,\beta =0,\gamma =1)`$, $`(\alpha =1,\beta =0,\gamma =0)`$ and $`(\alpha =1,\beta =0,\gamma =1)`$. For notation, we will equip variables with subscripts $`+,0,`$, according to the values of $`\gamma `$, and refer to the corresponding matrix models by $`S_+,S_0`$, and $`S_{}`$, respectively. The Killing operators associated to $`S_+,S_0,S_{}`$ are $`(H+K),H,(HK)`$. Their potentials are

$$S_+:V_+=\frac{1}{2}x_+^2+\frac{M}{2x_+^2},S_0:V_0=\frac{M}{2x_0^2},S_{}:V_{}=\frac{1}{2}x_{}^2+\frac{M}{2x_{}^2}.$$
(24)
The coordinate transformations are given by (16) and (18)

$`t_0=\mathrm{tan}(t_+)=\mathrm{tanh}(t_{}),x_0=\mathrm{sec}(t_+)x_+=\text{sech}(t_{})x_{}.`$ (25)
It follows that the momenta are related by

$$p_0=\mathrm{cos}(t_+)p_++\mathrm{sin}(t_+)x_+=\mathrm{cosh}(t_{})p_{}\mathrm{sinh}(t_{})x_{}.$$
(26)
From these expressions we can see that the origins of all time coordinates coincide. At $`t=0`$, the spatial coordinates and conjugate momenta also coincide.

For later use, we list here the solutions of the classical equations of motion

$`x_+`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{A_+^2\mathrm{cos}(2(t_+T_+))+\sqrt{A_+^4+M}},`$ (27)
$`x_0`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{2E_0(t_0T_0)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{M}{2E_0}}},`$ (28)
$`x_{}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{A_{}^2\mathrm{cosh}(2(t_{}T_{}))\pm \sqrt{A_{}^4M}},`$ (29)
where we assumed that $`M>0`$, and so the particle stays on the positive side of the real line. The parameters are related by

$`A_+^2=\sqrt{\left(E_0(T_0^21)+{\displaystyle \frac{M}{4E_0}}\right)^2+4E_0^2T_0^2},T_+=\mathrm{tan}^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{2E_0T_0}{E_0(T_0^21)+\frac{M}{4E_0}}}\right),`$ (30)
$`A_{}^2=\sqrt{\left(E_0(T_0^2+1)+{\displaystyle \frac{M}{4E_0}}\right)^24E_0^2T_0^2},T_{}=\mathrm{tanh}^1\left({\displaystyle \frac{2E_0T_0}{E_0(T_0^2+1)+\frac{M}{4E_0}}}\right).`$ (31)
For $`M=0`$, the solutions are

$`x_+`$ $`=`$ $`A(\mathrm{sin}(t_+)T_0\mathrm{cos}(t_+)),`$ (32)
$`x_0`$ $`=`$ $`A(t_0T_0),`$ (33)
$`x_{}`$ $`=`$ $`A(\mathrm{sinh}(t_{})T_0\mathrm{cosh}(t_{})).`$ (34)
These solutions are related to each other through (25). But they are not the $`M0`$ limit of (27-29), since the $`M=0`$ theory is not continuously connected to finite $`M`$ theories.

The coordinate transformations (25) are not 1-1 mappings. Roughly speaking, the coordinate systems $`S_{},S_0,S_+`$ forms a cascade of patches

$$S_{}S_0S_+.$$
(35)
The whole range $``$ of time for a smaller patch is mapped to a finite interval in a larger patch. More precisely,

$`\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{}<t_{}<\mathrm{}\hfill \\ |x_{}|<\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}1<t_0<1\hfill \\ |x_0|<\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\pi }{4}<t_+<\frac{\pi }{4}\hfill \\ |x_+|<\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}\right),`$ (42)
$`\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{}<t_0<\mathrm{}\hfill \\ |x_0|<\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}\frac{\pi }{2}<t_+<\frac{\pi }{2}\hfill \\ |x_+|<\mathrm{}\hfill \end{array}\right).`$ (47)
One can check that the condition (17) is satisfied and $`t_0,t_+`$, and $`t_{}`$ are legitimate time coordinates within the ranges shown above.

So far we have treated $`t_+`$ as a parameter of $``$. Later we will see that $`t_+`$ should be compactified on a unit circle. But the hierarchical relation (35) remains the same.

### 2.4 Matrix Model Isometry vs. Spacetime Isometry

Each of these coordinate systems in the matrix model is matched to a coordinate system in the dual theory of $`AdS_2`$ according to the associated Killing operators. The Killing vectors of $`AdS_2`$ are

$$H=i_t,D=i(t_t+\sigma _\sigma ),K=i((t^2+\sigma ^2)_t+2t\sigma _s),$$
(48)
where we used the same notation to identify $`SL(2,)`$ generators in $`AdS_2`$ and the matrix model. Here $`(t,\sigma )`$ are the coordinates of the Poincare patch. The generator $`(H+K)`$ can be written as $`i_\tau `$ where $`\tau `$ is time in the global coordinates $`(\tau ,\omega )`$

$$\tau \pm \omega =2\mathrm{tan}^1(t\pm \sigma ).$$
(49)
Similarly, defining another set of coordinates

$$\tau ^{}\pm \omega ^{}=2\mathrm{tanh}^1(t\pm \sigma ),$$
(50)
one finds $`HK=i_\tau ^{}`$. This Killing vector is time-like only in a small part of $`AdS_2`$ covered by the Poincare patch. We note that the relation (35) is mimicked by their $`AdS_2`$ cousins. Despite the duality which guarantees some sort of matching, this is nontrivial because the duality map is nonlocal.

## 3 Target Space Geometry

### 3.1 $`AdS_2`$ as Near Horizon Geometry

The supergravity solution of type 0A theory with background RR electric field proportional to $`q`$ is

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`(1+{\displaystyle \frac{q^2}{8}}(\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }_0{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}})e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }})(dt^2+d\sigma ^2),`$ (51)
$`\sigma (\mathrm{\Phi })`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}{\displaystyle ^\mathrm{\Phi }}{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Phi }^{}}{1+\frac{q^2}{8}(\mathrm{\Phi }^{}\mathrm{\Phi }_0\frac{1}{2})e^{2\mathrm{\Phi }^{}}}},`$ (52)
$`\mathrm{\Phi }_0`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{log}{\displaystyle \frac{q}{4}},`$ (53)
which is asymptotically flat in the $`\sigma \mathrm{}`$ limit. If we scale the spatial coordinate around the “near horizon” region $`\sigma \mathrm{}`$, we arrive at the $`AdS_2`$ geometry

$$ds^2=\frac{1}{4\sigma ^2}(dt^2+d\sigma ^2),\mathrm{\Phi }=\mathrm{\Phi }_0=\mathrm{log}\frac{q}{4}.$$
(54)
Correspondingly, the deformed matrix quantum mechanics dual to type 0A theory with RR flux $`q`$ is defined by (2). In terms of the generators defined in (5), the Hamiltonian is $`HK`$. If we scale $`x`$, $`H`$ and $`K`$ are scaled accordingly

$$x\lambda x,H\lambda ^2H,K\lambda ^2K.$$
(55)
Obviously, the Hamiltonian approaches to $`H`$ as we zoom in $`x`$. Essentially, this is simply saying that if we zoom in around the region very close to $`x=0`$, we can eventually ignore the $`x^2`$ term in the potential. Similarly, any Fermi surface with $`\mu 0`$ will eventually become out of sight as we zoom in around $`x=0`$. Hence the $`AdS_2`$ background corresponds to the vacuum without fermion in the matrix model.

### 3.2 Connections Among Matrix Models

According to Sec. 2, the $`AdS_2`$ matrix model (4), which is of the form of $`S_0`$, can also be written as $`S_+`$ or $`S_{}`$. The distinctive feature of the $`AdS_2`$ theory is that the ground state has no fermion. When the Fermi sea is filled to a finite energy $`\mu `$ in $`S_{}`$, the matrix model is dual to string theory in the linear dilaton background with a tachyon field proportional to $`\mu `$. This implies that the back-reaction of the tachyon field changes the target space geometry from an asymptotically flat space to $`AdS_2`$ in the limit of tachyon condensation $`\mu \mathrm{}`$. By tunning the tachyon amplitude, we can interpolate between Minskowski space ($`\mu =0`$) and $`AdS_2`$ ($`\mu =\mathrm{}`$). This gives an explicit example of how large fluctuations of the Fermi sea correspond to changes of the background geometry.

For bosonic or type 0B theory, there is no analogous scaling argument on the supergravity side for $`AdS_2`$ as in Sec. 3.1. However, for the undeformed matrix quantum mechanics, the vacuum with no fermion is still $`SL(2,)`$ invariant. Based on the similarity among type 0A, 0B and bosonic theories, we propose that $`AdS_2`$ is also the spacetime geometry for type 0B theory in the limit $`\mu \mathrm{}`$.

If the correspondence between $`S_+`$ and the global $`AdS_2`$ theory is correct, we would expect that a similar correspondence should persist when a Fermi sea is introduced. That is, there should exist an alternative description of 2 dimensional string theory with the linear dilaton background, which contains the old story as a partial description of the full theory. Since complicated field redefinition is involved in matching the matrix model with the spacetime physics, it is possible that the incompleteness of the usual description is not simply referring to the spacetime, but to the set of observables in string theory. Currently we do not have a candidate for this theory, we only know that it should be dual to $`S_+`$ with a time-dependent Fermi sea. (The Fermi sea in $`S_+`$ which corresponds to a ground state in $`S_{}`$ will be described in Sec. 4.)

### 3.3 Topology of $`AdS_2`$ and Quantization of RR Charge

$`AdS_2`$ can be defined by its embedding in $`2+1`$ dimensions

$$X_0^2+X_1^2X_1^2=1.$$
(56)
The Poincare patch is related to Cartesian coordinates via the coordinate transformation

$$\sigma =(X_1X_1)^1,t=\sigma X_0.$$
(57)
It has the metric

$$ds^2=dX_0^2+dX_1^2dX_1^2=\frac{1}{\sigma ^2}(dt^2d\sigma ^2).$$
(58)
The global coordinates of $`AdS_2`$ is defined by (49), for which the metric is

$$ds^2=\frac{1}{4\mathrm{sin}^2(\omega )}(d\tau ^2d\omega ^2).$$
(59)
Translation in global time $`\tau `$ is generated by

$$L_0=i_\tau =H+K.$$
(60)
Hence $`AdS_2`$ in the Poincare patch is dual to $`S_0`$, and in global coordinates to $`S_+`$ .

According to the topology defined by (56), without extension to the covering space of $`AdS_2`$, $`\tau `$ is an angular variable, and so

$$e^{i2\pi L_0}=1,$$
(61)
which implies that the eigenvalues of $`L_0`$ have to be integers. $`L_0`$’s eigenfunctions can be solved exactly  and the eigenvalues of $`H+K`$ are

$$E_n=n+|q|,n=0,1,2,\mathrm{},$$
(62)
where $`q`$ is the RR charge of type 0A theory. The topological constraint (61) then requires that the RR charge $`q`$ is quantized.

With the spectrum given by integers, the time variable $`t_+`$ of $`S_+`$ can be naturally compactified on the unit circle with $`t_+(\pi ,\pi )`$. Recalling the image of $`t_0`$ in $`S_+`$ (47), we see that the spacetime of $`S_0`$ is half of the spacetime of $`S_+`$, in perfect agreement with the relation between the Poincare patch and global coordinates of $`AdS_2`$.

Since the matrix model for linear dilaton background is equivalent to adding a certain Fermi sea background in the $`AdS_2`$ matrix model, as we argued earlier, the quantization of $`q`$ for $`AdS_2`$ ensures the quantization of $`q`$ for other matrix models.

As a final remark on this issue, for $`M>0`$, the classical description of $`S_+`$ has a period of $`\pi `$ instead of $`2\pi `$ as shown by (27). 333 For $`M=0`$, the classical period of $`t_+`$ is already $`2\pi `$.  Hence the classical theory of $`S_+`$ is completely equivalent to that of $`S_0`$. We need to examine the wave functions of $`S_+`$ in order to see that the period of $`t_+`$ is actually $`2\pi `$. On the other hand, from the viewpoint of dual theories, it is a classical statement that the Poicare patch is half of the global $`AdS_2`$. This is hence an example of the fact that sometimes $`AdS/CFT`$ duality matches classical effects to quantum effects.

## 4 Fermi Sea

The ground state of a matrix model is a Fermi sea filled to an energy $`\mu `$. In another theory this state is mapped to a time-varying Fermi sea, which can not be viewed as a small fluctuation over a static Fermi sea in view of the new Hamiltonian. A configuration easy to discuss in one theory may be complicated for another.

A generic Fermi surface can be described by its boundary in the phase space $`f(x,p,t)=0`$. As every point on the boundary has to follow the trajectories determined by the equation of motion (27-29) and (32-34), one can always rewrite $`f(x,p,t)`$ as a function of two variables. The two variables can be any two constants of motion, such as $`(E_0,T_0)`$ in (28). Or instead we can use the coordinate and momentum at $`t=0`$. Whichever variables we choose, we can use (25) and (26) to switch the descriptions of a Fermi sea. The benefit of using the phase space variables at $`t=0`$ is that they are identical in all theories.

For $`M=0`$, the phase space evolution for $`S_+`$ is simply the circular periodic motion of the simple harmonic oscillator. (See Fig.2.) 444 The lengths of curves are different because they are particle trajectories for the same period of time, i.e., faster particles leave a longer curve. For $`M=0`$ the phase spaces have left-right symmetry and only the right half is plotted. For $`M>0`$ only $`x>0`$ is allowed.  It is a periodic motion along deformed circles if $`M>0`$. (See Fig.2.) Classically the period for $`M=0`$ is twice that for $`M>0`$.

The phase space evolution for $`S_0`$ is straight horizontal motion along the $`x_0`$ axis if $`M=0`$. (See Fig.4.) For $`M>0`$ a point in the phase space turns around at the infinite potential wall. The trajectories are asymptotically horizontal lines. (See Fig.4.)

For $`S_{}`$, a point in the phase space always moves along a hyperbolic curve. (See Fig.6 and Fig.6.)

It is then easy to visualize the Fermi surface in a different coordinate system. The phase space configuration of a Fermi surface at $`t=0`$ in one coordinate system is identical in another coordinate system. As long as we know how each point in the phase space evolves with time, we can easily figure out the evolution of the Fermi surface in any theory.

For example, the static Fermi sea in the matrix model for bosonic strings is bounded by a hyperbolic curve in the phase space. It is static for $`S_{}`$, and is rotating around the origin for $`S_+`$. In general a static Fermi sea is time-dependent in another coordinate system. The origin of the phase space for $`M=0`$ is the only case that is static in all theories.

In , interesting time-dependent solutions of the Fermi sea were found in the matrix model. Some of them describe tachyon condensation. For instance, the solution for light-like tachyon condensation,

$$(x+p+2\lambda e^t)(xp)=g_s^1$$
(63)
describes a Fermi sea which is at rest and filled up to the energy $`g_s^1`$ in the infinite past, but has all fermions removed to the infinities in the infinite future. However, in the $`S_+`$ theory all solutions are periodic. If tachyon condensation happens during half the cycle, the reverse process must take over the other half of the cycle. This is consistent with the fact that tachyons in 2 dimensions are not tachyonic.

## 5 Discussions

In this paper we clarified the meaning of the $`SL(2,)`$ symmetry as an isometry of the matrix model. We also used its Lie algebra generators, interpreted as Killing vectors of $`AdS_2`$ in the dual theory, to define new coordinate systems in which the matrix model takes different Hamiltonians. This reflects the different appearances of $`AdS_2`$ in different coordinate patches. It turns out that all matrix models (7) are in some sense equivalent, and a choice of the string theory background corresponds to a choice of the Fermi sea. The moduli space of string theory is mapped to the space of all Fermi sea configurations (including the time-dependent ones).

As a supportive evidence of our interpretation, we used $`AdS_2`$’s topological property to quantize the D0-brane charge $`q`$ for the type 0A matrix model. We also find that the relation between the Poincare patch and global coordinates of $`AdS_2`$ is faithfully inherited by the map between time coordinates of corresponding matrix models.

Finally, let us examine more carefully to what extent we can claim the quantum equivalence among $`S_+,S_0,S_{}`$. First, the Hilbert spaces, if defined as the spaces of normalizable wave functions, are identical even at the quantum level for all finite $`t`$ (whenever the coordinate transformation is not singular), although the energy eigenfunctions are of course different. Yet if we further restrict ourselves to states with finite energies, the Hilbert spaces are different among $`S_+,S_0,S_{}`$. For instance, according to (27) and (30),

$$E_+=E_0(T_0+1)^2+\frac{M}{4E_0},$$
(64)
so $`E_+`$ diverges whenever $`E_0=0`$ or $`T_0\pm \mathrm{}`$, which are finite energies in $`S_0`$. This is what one should expect as a generic phenomenon associated with spacetime coordinate transformations.

On the other hand, we see from our discussion in Sec.2.3 that it can not be a complete equivalence, since the coordinate transformations are not bijective. In fact we already have an example of inequivalence: the quantization of RR flux due to compactification of $`t_+`$ in $`S_+`$ can not be repeated in $`S_0`$ or $`S_{}`$ since the latter have no access to the full range of $`t_+`$. Similarly, we expect that $`S_+`$ will be superior to $`S_0`$ and $`S_{}`$ when we consider certain orbifolds of $`AdS_2`$, and that this conclusion can be carried over to the linear dilaton background when the appropriate Fermi sea is introduced.

## Acknowledgment

The author thanks Allan Adams, Joanna Karczmarek, Lubos Motl, Andy Strominger, Tadashi Takayanagi and John Wang for helpful discussions. This work is supported in part by the National Science Council, Taiwan, R.O.C. the Center for Theoretical Physics at National Taiwan University, and the CosPA project of the Ministry of Education, Taiwan, R.O.C.

## Appendix A Solutions to the Isometry Condition

The isometry condition (10) can be solved for any given Hamiltonian $`H`$. In fact it is possible to use the isometry condition to find all Hamiltonians with nontrivial isometries.

Following Sec. 2.1, if $`H`$ has a quadratic term in $`_x`$, we can compare the coefficients of $`_t`$ on both sides of (10). It implies that

$$𝒟^{}=𝒟+i\frac{}{t}A.$$
(65)
Then we compare the coefficient of $`_t_x`$, and see that we must have $`_xA=0`$, that is, $`A`$ is a function of $`t`$ only. Hamiltonians with only linear terms in $`_x`$ will not be considered in this paper. But we expect that similar approach will apply.

Matching the coefficients of $`_x^n`$ for each $`n`$ in the isometry condition (10) gives

$`_xB={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_tA,_xC=_tB,`$ (66)
$`i_t(C+AV)+iB_xV+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_x^2C=0.`$ (67)
The first two can be easily solved

$$B=\frac{1}{2}_tA(t)x+b(t),C=\frac{1}{4}_t^2A(t)x^2+_tb(t)x+c_0(t),$$
(68)
and after plugging these in (67) we get

$$_tA(V+\frac{1}{2}x_xV)+b_xV+\frac{1}{4}_t^3Ax^2+_t^2bx+_tc_0\frac{i}{4}_t^2A=0.$$
(69)
Now we should consider separately the cases $`_tA0`$ and $`_tA=0`$.

If $`_tA0`$, we can shift $`x`$ by $`xx\frac{2b}{_tA}`$ to absord $`b`$. Hence we can assume $`b(t)=0`$ without loss of generality. We will still use $`x`$ to stand for the shifted coordinate. The equations (68-69) are simplified to

$`B={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}_tA(t)x,C={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}_t^2A(t)x^2+c_0(t),`$ (70)
$`_tA(V+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}x_xV)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}_t^3Ax^2+_tc_0{\displaystyle \frac{i}{4}}_t^2A=0.`$ (71)
Eq. (71) is a statement about the linear dependence of $`(V+\frac{x}{2}_xV),x^2,x,1`$ as functions of $`x`$. Yet since the coefficients of them are functions of $`t`$, the only chance for it to hold for all $`t`$ and $`x`$ is that all coefficients are the same function of $`t`$ up to overall constant factors. That is

$$\frac{_t^3A}{_tA}=8v_2,\frac{_tc_0+\frac{i}{4}_t^2A}{_tA}=v_0,$$
(72)
for some constants $`v_2,v_0`$. The potential $`V`$ can then be easily solved from (71)

$$V=v_0+v_2x^2+\frac{M}{2x^2}.$$
(73)
The isometry generators $`𝒟`$ are defined by $`A`$, $`B`$ and $`C`$, which are determined by (70) and (72). For the potential (73) with $`v_20`$, the result is that $`𝒟`$ is in general a linear combination of the following 3 generators

$`=i_tv_0,`$ (74)
$`_+=e^{\sqrt{8v_2}t}\left(i_t+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\sqrt{8v_2}x_x2v_2x^2(v_0{\displaystyle \frac{i}{4}}\sqrt{8v_2})\right),`$ (75)
$`_{}=e^{\sqrt{8v_2}t}\left(i_t{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}\sqrt{8v_2}x_x2v_2x^2(v_0+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{4}}\sqrt{8v_2})\right).`$ (76)
They satisfy the $`SL(2,)`$ Lie algebra

$$[,_\pm ]=\pm i\sqrt{8v_2}_\pm ,[_+,_{}]=2i\sqrt{8v_2}.$$
(77)
For the potential (73) with $`v_2=0`$, i.e.,

$$V=v_0+\frac{M}{2x^2},$$
(78)
they are

$`=i_tv_0,`$ (79)
$`_1=it_t+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}x_xv_0t+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{4}},`$ (80)
$`_2={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}t^2_t+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}tx_x+{\displaystyle \frac{x^2}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{v_0}{2}}t^2+{\displaystyle \frac{i}{4}}t.`$ (81)
They realize a different set of generators of the same algebra

$$[,_1]=i,[,_2]=i_1,[_1,_2]=i_2.$$
(82)
If on the other hand $`_tA=0`$, then $`A`$ is a constant, and $`b`$ has to be nonzero for the existence of any additional isometry generator in addition to $``$. Due to $`_tA=0`$, (69) becomes

$$b_xV+_t^2bx+_tc=0.$$
(83)
Again this implies that $`b,_t^2b`$ and $`_tc`$ can only differ by constant factors. Thus $`V`$ has to be of the form

$$V=v_2x^2+v_0,$$
(84)
and the symmetry generators are

$$_\pm =e^{\pm \sqrt{2v_2}t}\left(i_x\pm \sqrt{2v_2}x\right),$$
(85)
in addition to $`=i_t`$. $`_\pm `$ are space-like Killing operators. They satisfy the algebra

$$[,_\pm ]=\pm i\sqrt{2v_2}_\pm ,[_+,_{}]=2i\sqrt{2v_2}.$$
(86)
The generators $`_\pm `$ (75, 76) can still be defined when $`v_2=0`$. Their commutation relations with $`_\pm `$ are

$$[_\pm ,_\pm ]=0,[_\pm ,_{}]=2i\sqrt{2v_2}_\pm .$$
(87)
To summarize, for $`M=0`$ in (7), there are a total of 5 isometry generators $`,_\pm `$ and $`_\pm `$. The two new generators $`_\pm `$ are in fact simply the creation and annihilation operators of the simple harmonic oscillator when $`v_2>0`$. (When $`M0`$, the $`SL(2,)`$ algebra is also very useful for studying the spectrum .) When $`v_2<0`$, they can be used to construct the discrete spectrum of imaginary energies in the matrix model.

If $`v_2=0`$, the new generators (85) reduce to

$$_1=i_x,_2=it_x+x.$$
(88)
The algebra is defined by (82) and

$`[,_1]=0,[,_2]=i_1,[_1,_2]=i,`$ (89)
$`[_1,_1]={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}_1,[_1,_2]={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}_2,`$ (90)
$`[_2,_1]={\displaystyle \frac{i}{2}}_2,[_2,_2]=0.`$ (91)
Using the fact that all Hamiltonians with potentials of the form (73) with the same $`M`$ are related to each other by coordinate transformations  (see next section), the generators (74), (75), (76) are related to the generators (79), (80), (81) by coordinate transformations. By unitary transformations of $`e^{iv_0t}`$, we can always set $`v_0=0`$. Then we see that the generators in (79-81) are related to $`H,K,D`$ in (5) as

$$(,_1,2_2)(H,D,K),$$
(92)
respectively, by setting $`t=0`$ and replacing $`i_t`$ by $`H`$.

## Appendix B Killing Operator as Hamiltonian

By suitably choosing a new time coordinate $`\tau `$, we can rewrite the isometry generator $`𝒟`$

$$𝒟=\alpha +\beta _1+2\gamma _2=if(t)_t+\frac{1}{2}(_tf(t))x_x+\frac{i}{4}(_tf(t)i2\gamma x^2)$$
(93)
as

$$i_\tau ,$$
(94)
where

$$f(t)=\alpha +\beta t+\gamma t^2$$
(95)
for some constants $`\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma `$, up to unitary transformations, so that $`\tau `$ is the coordinate translated by $`𝒟`$. Apparently, for the new Schrödinger equation

$$(i_\tau H_\tau )\psi =0$$
(96)
to be equivalent to the old one, $`H_\tau `$ should be equivalent to $`\widehat{𝒟}`$, which is $`𝒟`$ with $`i_t`$ replaced by $`H`$.

Comparing (93) with (94), we demand that

$$\frac{t}{\tau }=f(t),\frac{x}{\tau }=\frac{1}{2}_tf.$$
(97)
They are solved by (16) and (18), or more explicitly

$$\tau =\tau (t)=\frac{2}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }}}\mathrm{tan}^1\left(\frac{f^{}(t)}{\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }}}\right),\sigma =f^{1/2}x,,$$
(98)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=4\alpha \gamma \beta ^2`$. Here $`\sigma `$ is the new spatial coordinate. Obviously there is a freedom to shift $`\tau `$ by a constant.

For (98) to make sense we need to assume $`\gamma 0`$. But they are still valid even if $`\mathrm{\Delta }<0`$, using $`\mathrm{tan}(i\theta )=i\mathrm{tanh}(\theta )`$. In terms of the new variables, the equation of motion becomes

$$(\text{EOM})=f^1\left(i_\tau +\frac{i}{4}(_tf)+\frac{1}{2}(_\sigma \frac{i}{2}(_tf)\sigma )^2+\frac{1}{8}(_tf)^2\sigma ^2\frac{v_2}{\sigma ^2}\right)=f^1(\text{EOM})^{}.$$
(99)
One can find the new Hamiltonian by reading it off from the new equation of motion. This expression can be simplified by a unitary transformation

$$\psi =U\widehat{\psi },U=e^{\frac{i}{4}(_tf)\sigma ^2},$$
(100)
and a rescaling of the wave function to absorb the time dependent measure

$$\widehat{\psi }=f^{1/4}\stackrel{~}{\psi },\frac{dx}{d\sigma }=f^{1/2}.$$
(101)
Let the new Hamiltonian be defined through

$$i_\tau H_\tau =f^{1/4}U^{}\left(f(\text{EOM})\right)Uf^{1/4},$$
(102)
We find

$$H_\tau =\frac{1}{2}_\sigma ^2+\frac{M}{2\sigma ^2}+\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }}{8}\sigma ^2.$$
(103)
Finally, one can check that

$$U^{}𝒟U=i_\tau ,$$
(104)
as we aimed at in the beginning. Compared with Sec. 2.2, $`H_\tau `$ (103) was denoted $`G`$ in (19).

In the derivation above we see that, in addition to the coordinate transformation, a unitary transformation by $`U`$ and a scaling by $`f^{1/4}`$ is needed for the wave function to satisfy Schrödinger equation in the new coordinate system.


text:
# DISCOVERY OF AN ULTRACOOL WHITE DWARF COMPANION

## 1 INTRODUCTION

White dwarfs are evolved, degenerate stars which have exhausted their nuclear fuel and are supported by electron degeneracy pressure. They are destined to cool to ever lower temperatures over billions of years as the end product of most stars in the Galaxy, main sequence stars with $`M8M_{}`$. Next to low mass stars, they are the most common stellar objects in the Milky Way, providing a window into the history of stellar evolution and star formation in the Galaxy.

Ultracool white dwarfs ($`T_{\mathrm{eff}}<4000`$ K) have been of much interest to researchers in recent years for several reasons. First, it remains an unanswered question as to whether cool white dwarfs are a significant component of Galactic halo dark matter (Hansen & Liebert, 2003). Second, the ages and compositions of cool white dwarfs have obvious implications for the age and evolution of the disk, bulge and halo components of the Galaxy. Finally, the distribution and origins of atmospheric and core compositions of the coolest white dwarfs is still not well understood.

In this paper the discovery of GD392B, a common proper motion companion to the helium white dwarf GD392 (WD2058+342, $`21^\mathrm{h}00^\mathrm{m}21.5^\mathrm{s},+34\mathrm{°}26^{}20^{\prime \prime }`$ J2000), is discussed. The spectral energy distribution (SED) of GD392B strongly suggests flux deficiency redward of $`1\mu `$m, a $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}<4000`$ K, and possibly a helium component in its atmosphere as well (Bergeron & Leggett, 2002). Tentative stellar parameters are derived for GD392B based on the data and different assumptions about the mass of the primary. Possible implications based on the model fit parameters and similarities to known ultracool white dwarfs are then discussed.

## 2 OBSERVATIONS & DATA REDUCTION

### 2.1 Photometry

Near infrared data on the GD392 system were obtained at Lick Observatory in June & August 2003. $`JHK^{^{}}`$ images were acquired using the Gemini camera (McLean et al., 1993) on the 3 meter Shane telescope. Total observation time was 7.5 minutes at each filter, consisting of 15 second exposures in a repeated five point dither pattern. Multiple infrared photometric standard stars from Hunt et al. (1998) & Hawarden et al. (2001) were observed twice during the night. The conditions in August were very good with clear skies and average seeing of $`1.3^{\prime \prime }`$. In June the weather was good but the average seeing was $`1.8^{\prime \prime }`$. A few $`K`$ band images were taken at Mauna Kea in July 2003 using the Near Infrared Camera (NIRC) (Matthews & Soifer, 1994) on the 10 meter Keck I telescope. Images consisted of 10 second exposures for the primary and 50 seconds for the secondary. Observing conditions were poor with considerable cloud cover and seeing of $`0.6^{\prime \prime }`$. Optical data were obtained at Lick Observatory in July & September 2003. $`BVRI`$ images were acquired with the CCD camera on the 1 meter Nickel telescope. Total exposure time was 5 minutes at each filter and photometric standard stars from Landolt (1983) were observed immediately prior to the GD392 system. Conditions in August were excellent with clear skies and seeing of $`0.9^{\prime \prime }`$. In July, the sky was clear but the average seeing was $`1.2^{\prime \prime }`$

Images were reduced using standard programs in the IRAF environment. Optical images were filtered clean of bad pixels and cosmic rays in the area of interest, then flat fielded with a normalized dome flat. Near infrared images were sky subtracted, flat fielded, registered and averaged into a single image at each wavelength.

Straightforward aperture photometry was used, including airmass/extinction corrections, for $`BVRIJHK`$ measurements of the primary. Using a circular aperture centered on the target star and an annulus on the surrounding sky, both the flux and signal to noise ratio (SNR) was calculated for a range of apertures from one to four full widths. The target flux was measured at or near the aperture size which produced the largest SNR. In this way the flux of all targets was measured, including standard stars. A large aperture ($`d6^{\prime \prime }`$) was used for all calibrators, and flux measurements for science targets were corrected to this standard aperture to account for the smaller percentage of the total flux contained within apertures smaller than the standard.

Extracting all photometry for GD392B was complicated by the presence of a nearby background star (Figure 1). In a single subtraction $`J`$ band image, the separation between GD392B and background star was measured to be $`1.8\pm 0.1^{\prime \prime }`$ at a PA of $`196\pm 3\mathrm{°}`$. Since even small aperture flux measurements of GD392B would be contaminated by light from the background star, the IRAF package DAOPHOT was employed to fit the PSF of both stars simultaneously and extract their magnitudes. Since DAOPHOT is sensitive to the separation and brightness ratio of two sources with overlapping PSFs, the optical and infrared data were broken into two sets; primary data for which the full widths at half maximum in the reduced images were less than $`1.8^{\prime \prime }`$, and secondary data for which they were greater than or equal to $`1.8^{\prime \prime }`$. This is an especially important consideration in the infrared where the brightness ratio of GD392B and background star is far from unity. All photometric data are listed in Table 1 and the adopted values used for the analysis are listed in Table 2. The secondary data were not included in the analysis due to the uncertainty in PSF fitting for sources separated by less than one full width at half maximum – the data are consistent with the adopted values to within $`12\sigma `$ and are included for completeness. Conversions between near infrared filter sets were not performed for three reasons: 1) the corrections are typically very small (Leggett, 1992; Carpenter, 2001); 2) the colors of GD392B are drastically different from the colors of standard stars used to derive the transformations; 3) the near infrared photometry errors in Table 1 are likely to be several times larger than any corrections.

Due to the poor weather conditions, there was only a single NIRC frame acquired with GD392B on the chip, three frames containing GD392A, and several sky frames. Since the common proper motion system is separated by more than the $`39^{\prime \prime }`$ field of view, the binary pair could not be observed simultaneously. The reduced images of the primary and secondary contained three field stars in common. Aperture photometry was performed on these stars twice; once with GD392A as a calibrator, and again using the three field stars as calibrators for GD392B and the background star. These intermediate calibrator stars had a standard deviation of only a few percent in their measured relative fluxes between the two reduced images. GD392B and the background star were spatially resolved from each other in this observation.

The SNR in the primary data set was greater than 30 for both stars in the reduced images at all wavelengths with the exception of the following. In the Gemini images, the SNR was calculated to be 8.6 at $`H`$, 3.7 at $`K^{^{}}`$ for GD392B (from the extracted DAOPHOT data). In the Nickel data, the SNR at $`B`$ was 11.4 for GD392B and 15.1 for the background star. In the single subtraction, flat fielded NIRC $`K`$ frame, the SNR for GD392B was 5.8.

### 2.2 Spectroscopy

A $`0.381.0\mu `$m spectrum was obtained using the Low Resolution Imaging Spectrograph (LRIS) (Oke et al., 1995) in October 2003 at Mauna Kea on Keck I by C. Steidel, D. Erb & N. Reddy. The setup consisted of the 300/5000 Å grism on the blue side and the 400/8500 Å grating on the red side, separated at 6650 Å by a dichroic beamsplitter. The spectra of both stars were spatially resolved from each other in the observation. The spectral images were cleaned of bad pixels and cosmic rays, then flat fielded using an internal halogen lamp. A spectrum of the sky was extracted at two positions for each wavelength region, averaged, and then subtracted from the spectrum of each star. Standard programs in IRAF were used to extract the spectra of both GD392B and the background star.

The lamp used to flat field the spectral images is itself spectrally nonuniform and has a strong rise from $`45007500`$ Å.111http://www2.keck.hawaii.edu/realpublic/inst/lris/flats.html. Hence, the instrument and chip response were removed by flat fielding but the remaining shape was a convolution of the stellar spectra and the “flat” lamp. The background star appears to be a K dwarf whose exact spectral type cannnot be established from photometry because its reddening is unknown and the low resolution spectrum precludes the line measurements necessary for a determination. Spectra extracted without flat fielding confirm that the flux of both GD392B and K star rises toward the dichroic cutoff near 6600 Å (a fact corroborated by the photometry). Attempting to reconstruct the true shape of the continuua, the reduced spectra were multiplied by a blackbody with a temperature similar to that of the halogen flat lamp. This information was obtained from the manufacturer.222http://www.oriel.com/tech/curves.htm. The resultant spectra are shown in Figures 2 and 3

## 3 PROPER MOTION OF GD392A & B

A wide field, infrared proper motion survey for low mass stellar and substellar companions to nearby white dwarfs is being completed (Farihi, Becklin & Zuckerman, 2003). Because the observations are being conducted primarily at $`J`$ band ($`1.25\mu `$m), the survey is particularly sensitive to cool objects such as late M, L and early T type dwarfs. A near infrared search is also sensitive to cool white dwarfs. This survey’s sensitivity is slightly less for cool degenerates which suffer collision induced absorption (CIA) opacity at this wavelength relative to those which do not. In general, common proper motion companions brighter than $`J=19`$ mag can be detected.

To measure proper motions and detect companions, GEOMAP is used. This is a standard program in the IRAF environment, which generates a transformation between two sets of coordinates corresponding to sources in the same field at two different epochs. In this way proper motion stars can be identified and their motions measured against the near zero motion of background stars and galaxies, which provide a measure of the standard error.

The common proper motion companion to GD392 (WD2058+342, Greenstein 1984; Greenstein & Liebert 1990, Wesemael et al. 1993) was detected in a routine examination of the digitized POSS I & II plates for confirming identity, proper motion and coordinates of the primary for a finder chart prior to an observing run. A simple blinking of POSS I and POSS II frames reveals the comoving companion at a separation of $`46.2^{\prime \prime }`$ and a PA of $`102.5^{}`$ (Figure 1). Measurement of proper motion between POSS epochs reveals that both GD392A and B have the same proper motion over a 41 year baseline, namely $`\mu =0.17\pm 0.01^{\prime \prime }`$ $`\mathrm{yr}^1`$ at $`\theta =44\pm 5^{}`$. Furthermore, astrometric analysis of 2003 infrared images confirms that the separation and PA between primary and secondary have remained constant since 1951. The USNO B1.0 catalog (Monet et al., 2003) gives a proper motion of $`\mu =0.168\pm 0.002^{\prime \prime }`$ $`\mathrm{yr}^1`$ at $`\theta =42.6\pm 0.7^{}`$ for GD392 and no value is given for the companion. Giclas, Burnham & Thomas (1965) published a detected proper motion of $`0.1^{\prime \prime }\mu 0.2^{\prime \prime }`$ $`\mathrm{yr}^1`$ at $`45^{}`$ for the primary. Both of these measurements are consistent with the value presented in this paper. Figure 4 shows the unchanging position angle of the pair over several epochs.

At a nominal distance of 50 pc (see §4.2), the proper motion of the pair gives $`v_{\mathrm{tan}}=40`$ km $`\mathrm{s}^1`$ and thus there is no reason to suspect this system is not a member of the local disk population.

## 4 RESULTS

### 4.1 Spectral Energy Distribution & Temperature of GD392B

Despite some relatively low SNR photometry on GD392B in the near infrared, there are seven independent measurements at these longer wavelengths, three of these at $`2.2\mu `$m (Table 1). In stark contrast with the similar optical magnitudes and colors, GD392B appears roughly 1.0 magnitude fainter than the nearby background K star at $`1.2\mu `$m, 2.0 magnitudes fainter at $`1.6\mu `$m, and 2.5 magnitudes fainter at $`2.2\mu `$m in all the measurements.

The optical and infrared colors of GD392B point strongly towards an ultracool white dwarf with strong CIA longward of $`1\mu `$m. No other stellar object could be so red in $`VI`$ and yet blue in $`IK`$ (Bergeron, Saumon & Wesemael, 1995; Hansen, 1998; Harris et al., 1999; Saumon & Jacobson, 1999; Hodgkin et al., 2000; Oppenheimer et al., 2001). The optical spectrum confirms that GD392B is a featureless DC star (Figure 2). Hence GD392B must be a very cool white dwarf.

Plotting GD392B on a $`VI`$ vs. $`VH`$ color-color diagram, one sees that it is located beyond the turnoff for log $`g=8.0`$ pure hydrogen atmosphere white dwarfs, which corresponds to $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}4000`$ K (Figure 5). There are only three other ultracool white dwarfs in the literature for which infrared photometry is available, WD0346+246, LHS3250 and SDSS1337+00 (Harris et al., 1999, 2001; Hodgkin et al., 2000; Bergeron & Leggett, 2002). GD392B’s optical colors are strikingly similar to those of WD0346+246 (Oppenheimer et al., 2001). Although they have almost identical optical colors, GD392B appears to have more flux in the near infrared than does WD0346+246. From recent model atmosphere analyses of the three aforementioned stars, it is possible that GD392B is warmer, has different gravity, and/or contains a different ratio of hydrogen to helium in its atmosphere than does WD0346+246 (Bergeron, 2001; Bergeron & Leggett, 2002).

The best way to estimate the temperature of GD392B is to fit models to the $`BVRIJHK`$ photometry. To evaluate its SED, the magnitudes were converted into isophotal or average fluxes, following the method of Bergeron, Ruiz & Leggett (1997). Different fits to the data were tried using the pure hydrogen and mixed H/He atmosphere model grids of P. Bergeron (2003, private communication). As in the case of WD0346+246 (Bergeron, 2001; Oppenheimer et al., 2001), pure hydrogen and mixed atmosphere models fail to reproduce the SED of GD392B in detail. And like Oppenheimer et al. (2001), a low gravity solution appears to provide a decent fit to the data. In fact, every solution at log $`g>7.0`$ seems to provide optical colors that are too blue (too much CIA), or infrared colors that are too red (too little CIA). As shown in Figure 6, a decent fit is acheived at log $`g=7.0`$, $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=3500`$ K, and $`N_\mathrm{H}/N_{\mathrm{He}}=10`$. Also shown in Figure 6 is a blackbody of the same temperature scaled to the peak flux of GD392B – relative to the blackbody, the SED of GD392B appears suppressed at wavelengths longer than 8000 Å and enhanced at shorter wavelengths.

Because GD392B is a companion to a previously studied white dwarf, it should be possible to deduce the distance to this system and use it to constrain stellar radius $`R`$ and $`M_V`$. One must keep in mind that the model predicted temperature of GD392B will depend on its mass and atmospheric composition and thus cannot be known exactly at present. In §4.2 a range of possibilities is explored.

### 4.2 Stellar Masses of the GD392 System

Using basic relations between luminosity and flux, one can calculate a radius for GD392B if its distance and $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ are known. To obtain a distance, the $`BVRIJHK`$ photometry of the primary (Table 1), GD392, was fitted with pure helium model grids (P. Bergeron 2002, private communication) and its measured SED was integrated directly. The model fit provides a $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, and integrating the SED of GD392 yields a total flux. A radius must be specified in order to calculate a distance to the primary. The model fit to the SED of GD392 does not provide a radius determination because the colors of a DB star are largely unaffected by gravity. Hence one is forced to make various assumptions for log $`g`$. Table 3 lists stellar parameters for GD392 with various gravities, and thus distances. In the literature, GD392 has been noted as a DB5 (Greenstein, 1984), DBA?4 (Greenstein & Liebert, 1990) and finally a DB5 again while explicitly stating “revised from Greenstein & Liebert (1990)(Wesemael et al., 1993). The optical and infrared photometric data presented here are more consistent with a DB4 than a DB5. Good agreement between model and measured colors is acheived at $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=11,625`$ K (regardless of log $`g`$), which actually corresponds to DB4.5. This is the temperature used in all calculations for the parameters of GD392. For each distance estimate to the GD392 system, there is an analytic constraint on $`RT_{\mathrm{eff}}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ for GD392B. It is also critical that the model predicted parameters, such as $`M_V`$, optical and infrared colors corresponding to each combination of $`R`$ and $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$, fit the photometric data on GD392B.

If GD392 is an average mass white dwarf (log $`g=8.0`$), a solution is found almost identical to the preliminary fit in Figure 6. That is, at 57.8 pc GD392B must have a temperature near 3500 K and a very large radius – either an unresolved binary or a low mass white dwarf. This model fit is consistent with the measured colors (excepting $`BV`$, see §4.3) and matches the absolute magnitude of the secondary at this distance; in fact, only a low gravity solution appears to provide such agreement between measured and predicted fluxes. In Figure 7, four fits are shown satisfying the $`M_V`$ constraint at 57.8 pc for a range of gravities. It is clear that only the log $`g=7.0`$ fit comes near to matching the photometry. Although these fits have all been scaled to match the flux at $`0.55\mu `$m, the obvious discrepancies of the higher gravity solutions occur at any scaling; they predict too little flux in the optical or too much flux in the near infrared. In addition, the log $`g7.5`$ fits do not satisfy the $`RT_{\mathrm{eff}}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ constraint at this distance. This scenario is instructive for two reasons. One is that there is no independent reason to suspect that GD392 is anything but an average mass white dwarf. In fact, the spectroscopic mass distribution of DB stars peaks at $`0.59M_{}`$, with a very small dispersion of $`0.06M_{}`$ (Beauchamp et al., 1996). The other reason is the failure of the higher gravity fits to match the data persists for any reasonable distance estimate.

Assuming the primary is a higher than average mass white dwarf (log $`g8.5`$) results in serious discrepancies between model predicted and measured colors for GD392B. This disagreement appears to be insensitive to the type of atmosphere in the models. Shown in Figure 8 is a model fit for GD392B at 40.4 pc. Higher gravity solutions at this distance or closer are worse and are not shown for the sake of brevity. Problems arise as well if one assumes the primary is a lower than average mass white dwarf (log $`g7.5`$). This leads to extreme low gravity solutions for GD392B and the models used here do not include gravities below log $`g=7.0`$. Table 4 lists all resulting fits for GD392B.

While the possibility exists that GD392B is an unresolved binary or helium core white dwarf, this is uncertain until the distance to the system is known with sufficient precision and a good model fit to its SED is achieved. It seems very unlikely that GD392B could have a such an unusually low mass as $`0.15M_{}`$, but it cannot be ruled out either. It is conceivable that a good model fit with a much higher $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ (hence predicting a smaller radius and a larger mass) could show good agreement with the measured colors of GD392B. All models used here do not give such agreement. A parallax measurement of the primary is currently in progress (H. Harris 2003, private communication).

### 4.3 Atmospheric Composition of GD392B

All attempts to fit the SED of GD392B with mixed H/He atmosphere models having $`N_\mathrm{H}/N_{\mathrm{He}}<10`$ are problematic. In fact, for all temperatures and gravities, the same problem mentioned previously occurs; colors too blue in the optical and/or too red in the infrared to fit the measured photometry, given the absolute magnitude constraint. The only possible exception being the pure hydrogen models at log $`g=7.0`$. Shown in Figure 9 are several model fits with varying ratios of H/He for the lowest gravity case. Only the pure hydrogen and the $`N_\mathrm{H}/N_{\mathrm{He}}=10`$ models provide any kind of decent fit to the data. However, the pure hydrogen fit has one minor fault when compared to the mixed atmosphere fit – it predicts an $`M_V`$ corresponding to 57.8 pc but does not precisely fit the $`RT_{\mathrm{eff}}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}`$ constraint. The $`N_\mathrm{H}/N_{\mathrm{He}}=10`$, $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=3509`$ K solution comes very close to hitting all the data points except $`B`$ and satisfies all constraints surprisingly well at 57.8 pc. There currently exists a discrepancy between model predicted and measured $`B`$ band fluxes – this wavelength is excluded from fits to the energy distributions of very cool hydrogen atmosphere white dwarfs (Bergeron, Ruiz & Leggett, 1997; Bergeron, 2001, 2003). It is noteworthy that GD392B appears to be the first ultracool white dwarf for which a pure hydrogen atmosphere is not inconsistent with the data.

At present there remains a general failure by model predictions to fit the photometric observations of ultracool white dwarfs in detail (Bergeron, 2001; Bergeron & Leggett, 2002) – a fact exemplified by GD392B. Another case in point is the SED of WD0346+246, where both Oppenheimer et al. (2001) and Bergeron (2001) found that a mixed atmosphere model with an extremely low value of $`N_\mathrm{H}/N_{\mathrm{He}}10^610^9`$ provides a good fit to the data. But because of the unlikelihood and volatility of such a solution, Bergeron (2001) introduced a pseudocontinuum opacity characterized by an ad hoc damping function. Although a good fit with $`N_\mathrm{H}/N_{\mathrm{He}}=0.77`$ was achieved when the opacity was added to the models, it is unclear whether this pseudocontinuum source plays a significant physical role in the atmospheres of ultracool white dwarfs. Therefore, it is not yet possible to determine the atmospheric parameters of the coolest degenerates with confidence.

It should be mentioned that with the possible exception of the ultracool white dwarfs in Figure 5, all suspected or confirmed low mass white dwarfs have hydrogen rich atmospheres (Bergeron, Saffer & Liebert, 1992; Bergeron et al., 2001; Bergeron & Leggett, 2002). Hence a model fit to the photometry of GD392B with low mass and a mixed H/He atmosphere is inconsistent with these findings.

## 5 DISCUSSION

GD392B is not the first or even the second ultracool white dwarf for which an apparent large radius is possible or likely. LHS3250, WD0346+246 and SDSS1337+00 all appear to be potentially overluminous (Harris et al., 1999, 2001; Oppenheimer et al., 2001). In fact, the best fits acheived by Oppenheimer et al. (2001) to WD0346+246 and F351-50 were with log $`g=6.5`$, although for pure hydrogen atmospheres. These solutions are problematic because they predict temperatures below 3000 K and such extreme low gravities. Although unlikely, the present possibility that these ultracool degenerate stars have anomalously low mass cannot be ruled out. White dwarfs with $`M<0.45M_{}`$ have relatively large radii and are understood to be the product of close binary evolution; their post main sequence lifetimes cut short before helium burning begins (Bergeron, Saffer & Liebert, 1992; Marsh, Dhillon & Duck, 1995; Hansen & Phinney, 1998). On the other hand, the potential overluminosity of these stars can be explained equally well by binary membership with a white dwarf companion of comparable luminosity. If this is correct, the GD392 system would then be the second known triple degenerate. In either case, binarity is a strong possibility for most if not all four objects in Figure 5, if the models are correct.

Is it possible that the discovery of these stars represents a luminosity detection bias? This would imply all known ultracool degenerates were detected because they are relatively bright compared to normal to high gravity single white dwarfs with comparable temperatures. In fact, the faintest white dwarf known, ESO439-26 (Ruiz et al., 1995), has an extremely high mass (log $`g=9.0`$), a temperature around 4500 K, and $`V=20.5`$ – just above the detection limit of very large sky surveys like the SERC/ESO survey in the southern hemisphere and the Palomar survey (POSS II) in the north (Reid et al., 1991). What if ESO439-26 had $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=3500`$ K instead of $`4500`$ K? Would it have still been detected? Almost certainly not, since models predict it would have been too faint at $`V=22.5`$ and $`BV=1.0`$. A similar calculation was performed for GD392B, assuming it is a 3500 K mixed H/He atmosphere degenerate with log $`g=7.0`$ at 57.8 pc. Would it still have been detected were it a higher mass white dwarf with log $`g=8.5`$? Likely not at $`V=21.0`$ and $`BV1.2`$ which is just beyond the POSS II red plate limit and right at the blue plate limit. It probably would not have been detected in the infrared at $`J=19.2`$. Similar conclusions can be drawn for WD0346+246 at $`V=19.1`$, but possibly not LHS 3250 at $`V=18.0`$. If we similarly push back the magnitude of SDSS1337+00 to $`V=20.8`$ it would still be detectable in the Sloan survey but not on the POSS II plates.

The claim that all known ultracool white dwarfs are overluminous is not being made here. It is simply being stated that if the majority of them are indeed brighter than expected due to low gravity or binarity, then all surveys with the exception of Sloan have been biased against detecting average to higher mass single white dwarfs at the very bottom of the disk cooling sequence. In fact, one should expect that the oldest white dwarfs – those which spent very little time on the main sequence – would have come from fairly massive progentiors. Furthermore, the initial mass to final mass relation for white dwarfs indicates that higher mass main sequence stars tend to form higher mass degenerates (Weidemann, 1987, 1990, 2000; Bragaglia, Renzini & Bergeron, 1995). This implies that the oldest and least luminous white dwarfs should have high masses, small radii, and be up to 2.4 magnitudes fainter than a low mass white dwarf with the same temperature. Hence there is a possibility that the lowest luminosity disk white dwarfs have yet to be detected.

Of course the other possibility (and, according to Occam’s razor, the most likely) is simply a failure of the current models to explain the photometric observations. Also, in this case, the data do not constrain the mass of GD392 and therefore we do not know distance to the system. Despite the fact that the model predictions fail to reproduce the colors of GD392B in all but the log $`g=7.0`$ case, it is certainly possible that it has a higher mass. This cannot be ruled out and future improvements in models may result in the disappearance of the overluminosity issue.

## 6 CONCLUSION

Spectroscopy and photometry confirm a cool DC white dwarf common proper motion companion to GD392. It is the first ultracool white dwarf ($`T_{\mathrm{eff}}<4000`$ K) to be discovered as a companion to another star. Although the primary is a well studied DB white dwarf, GD392 does not have a mass estimate, nor any kind of reliable parallax. In fact, its helium lines are very weak (Wesemael et al., 1993) and therefore it is not possible to spectroscopically determine its mass. Neither is it possible to photometrically determine its mass because the optical and infrared colors of relatively hot helium atmosphere white dwarfs are insensitive to gravity. Therefore the distance to the GD392 system is not well constrained and the parameters we derive for GD392B must come from a range of assumed values for the mass of the primary.

Despite this difficulty, it appears that all model fits fail to reproduce the SED of GD392B with the exception of a solution with log $`g=7.0`$, $`T_{\mathrm{eff}}=3509`$ K, and $`N_\mathrm{H}/N_{\mathrm{He}}=10`$ (or similar values with pure hydrogen). It is the only set of parameters for which the model predicted fluxes fall within $`11.5\sigma `$ of all but one photometric data point and which satisfies all constraints. However, the model fit alone is not sufficient to conclude that GD392B is overluminous. It is possible that current models simply cannot reproduce the observed spectral energy distribution of GD392B with a normal to higher surface gravity, but perhaps ongoing and future improvements will. Based on the data and the models used here, along with the published analyses of similar objects, GD392B may be an unresolved binary with a companion of comparable luminosity or is itself a low mass white dwarf. Albeit unlikely, this could also be the case for other known ultracool degenerates. If correct, this may hold interesting consequences for the population of stars at the faint end of the local disk white dwarf luminosity function.

Some of the data presented herein were obtained at the Keck Observatory, which is operated as a scientific partnership among the California Institute of Technology, the University of California and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The author would like to extend his sincere gratitude to C. Steidel, D. Erb and N. Reddy for obtaining the optical spectrum of GD392B and to E. E. Becklin & I. Song for making the NIRC observations. Acknowledgement goes to E. E. Becklin & B. Zuckerman for careful readings of the manuscript and to B. Hansen for many helpful conversations. P. Bergeron kindly provided his models for use in this work. Thanks to the referee N. Hambly for very helpful suggestions and comments. A special thanks goes to C. McCarthy for donating his time and computing skills much to the author’s benefit. The digitized version of the POSS I & II plates were provided as a service by the Space Telescope Science Insititute. This research has been supported in part by grants from NASA to UCLA.