text:
# Gamma-Ray Bursts from Extragalactic Magnetar Flares

## Introduction

The short-duration, hard-spectrum gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) in the BATSE catalog, often called Class II bursts, have no detected afterglows. As a consequence, they have not yet been subject to scrutiny for absorption lines, and the distance from Earth at which these bursts originate is uncertain. Here we will explore the possibility of a relatively nearby extragalactic origin, $`z\stackrel{<}{}0.1`$, for (at least) some Class II GRBs.

Kouveliotou et al. first showed that the GRB population is bimodal kou93 . More recently, Murkherjee et al. found evidence that there exist three classes of BATSE GRBs mur98 . But Hakkilla et al. (ref. hak99 ) argued that Class III properties can be produced from Class I by a combination of measurement error, hardness-intensity correlation, and a newly-identified BATSE bias, the fluence duration bias. Class II GRBs, which are short-duration, low-fluence, hard-spectrum events, do not seem to be related to Class I/III. It is Class II GRBs, or some subset of Class II, that we suggest are MFs.

Class II GRBs have many features in common with the hard spikes of MFs. About $`40\%`$ of Class II bursts are single-peaked bha99 . Most peaks exhibit a fast rise and slower decline, with hard-to-soft spectral evolution bha99 . These properties are shared by the hard spikes of the March 5th and August 27th events maz79 ; maz99 ; fer00 , which also had similar spectral hardness fen96 ; fkl96 . Class II GRBs that are sufficiently bright to study with fine time resolution often show substructure down to time scales of $`10`$ ms and less mee94 ; mee96 , as did the 1979 March 5 event bar83 .

## BATSE detection of MF’s

Consider a beamed source of gamma-rays, emitting uniformly into a beaming fraction $`f=\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Omega }/4\pi ,`$ of the unit sphere, with peak beam luminosity $`L_{\mathrm{bm}}`$. For a BATSE peak-flux detection threshold $`F_B`$, the sampling depth of BATSE is

$$D=\left(\frac{L_{\mathrm{bm}}}{4\pi fF_B}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(1)
If $`D`$ is small enough that source density evolution and departures from Euclidean geometry are negligible, then BATSE’s rate of event detection is

$$\dot{N}_B=\frac{4\pi }{3}D^3n_{}f\mathrm{\Gamma }.$$
(2)
Here $`n_{}`$ is the density of $`L_{}`$ galaxies (with luminosities comparable to that of the Milky Way) and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the rate of MFs within each $`L_{}`$ galaxy. Thus the (full-sky) BATSE detection rate is

$$\dot{N}_B=\frac{n_{}\mathrm{\Gamma }}{6(\pi f)^{1/2}}\left(\frac{L_{\mathrm{bm}}}{F_B}\right)^{3/2}.$$
(3)
We evaluate this using known parameter values. In particular, $`F_B10^7`$ erg cm-2 s-1 (ref. mee94 ) and $`n_{}=0.01h^3`$ Mpc-3 from the local normalization of the Schechter luminosity function (e.g., ref. pee93 ). We will adopt a Hubble constant of $`H_o=65h_{65}`$ km s-1 Mpc-1, thus $`n_{}=2.8\times 10^3h_{65}^3\text{Mpc}^3.`$

Given 2 MFs in our Galaxy (or in nearby dwarf satellite galaxies) in the past $`t_o20`$ years of effective full sky coverage during which have had capability for detecting them (Hurley 1999, private communication), the MF rate per $`L_{}`$ galaxy is roughly

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=0.1\mathrm{\Gamma }_{0.1}\text{yr}^1.$$
(4)
The simplest idealization is that the gamma-rays in MF hard spikes are emitted isotropically, $`f1`$. Since the long, soft, oscillating tails of MFs have never been observed without hard spikes at their onsets, we infer that many or most MFs begin with a spike of quasi-isotropic emissions. (This is in addition to a possible high-intensity, beamed component. We have no direct evidence for beamed emission; however, with only 2 detected MFs, we would not expect to have observed any beams with $`f1`$.)

Setting $`f=1`$ in the above formulae, we find a BATSE sampling depth for the isotropic component of MFs of

$$D=13(L_{45}/2)^{1/2}\text{Mpc},$$
(5)
where we have scaled to the value of peak luminosity found for the 1979 March 5 event by Fenimore fen96 . This falls just short of the Virgo cluster at $`D[\mathrm{Virgo}]18h_{65}^1`$ Mpc. The full-sky BATSE detection rate is

$$\dot{N}_B=2.6(L_{45}/2)^{3/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{10}h_{65}^3\text{yr}^1$$
(6)
Since BATSE operated for 9.5 years, corresponding to 4.75 yrs of full-sky coverage, there should be

$$𝒩12(L_{45}/2)^{3/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{0.1}h_{65}^3$$
(7)
extragalactic MFs in the BATSE catalog, detected via their quasi-isotropic hard spike emissions.

The most uncertain parameter in this estimate is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the galactic rate of MFs. The Bayesian probability distribution for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`𝒫dP/d\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, is

$$𝒫(\mathrm{\Gamma })=\frac{P(2|\mathrm{\Gamma })𝒫_{prior}(\mathrm{\Gamma })}{_0^{\mathrm{}}𝑑\mathrm{\Gamma }P(2|\mathrm{\Gamma })𝒫_{prior}(\mathrm{\Gamma })},$$
(8)
where the probability for observing 2 MFs in time $`t_o20`$ yr, given $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, is $`P(2|\mathrm{\Gamma })=\frac{1}{2}(\mathrm{\Gamma }t_o)^2\text{exp}(\mathrm{\Gamma }t_o)`$ since this is a Poisson process. The appropriate prior distribution, when we don’t know the order of magnitude of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ a priori, is $`(dP_{prior}/d\text{log}\mathrm{\Gamma })=\text{constant}`$, or $`𝒫_{prior}\mathrm{\Gamma }^1`$. Thus

$$𝒫(\mathrm{\Gamma })=\mathrm{\Gamma }t_o^2\text{exp}(\mathrm{\Gamma }t_o),$$
(9)
with a mean value $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2t_o^1=0.1`$ yr-1 as noted above \[eq. (4)\]. The probability for the galactic flare rate to exceed a cutoff value, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }>\mathrm{\Gamma }_x`$, is thus $`P(\mathrm{\Gamma }>\mathrm{\Gamma }_x)=\text{exp}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_xt_o)(1+\mathrm{\Gamma }_xt_o)`$. If other sources of uncertainty can be neglected, then there is a $`99\%`$ probability for at least one isotropic MF in the BATSE catalog, $`𝒩>1`$. The probability is $`80\%`$ for $`𝒩>5`$; $`52\%`$ for $`𝒩>10`$; $`16\%`$ for $`𝒩>20`$; and $`4.5\%`$ for $`𝒩>30`$.

## Could all Class II GRB’s be MF’s?

Suppose that there also exists a beamed component in the intial hard spikes of MFs, with a full opening angle $`\psi `$. The beaming fraction is $`f=[1\mathrm{cos}(\psi /2)]`$ assuming two beams, one at each magnetic pole. This is $`f\psi ^2/8`$ for $`\psi 1`$, or $`f=2\times 10^3\psi _8^2`$, where $`\psi _8(\psi /8^{})`$. From eqs. (1)–(3), the BATSE sampling depth for beamed MFs is

$$D=350\psi _8^1\left(\frac{L_{\mathrm{bm}}}{3\times 10^{45}\text{erg s}^1}\right)^{1/2}\text{Mpc},$$
(10)
and the (full-sky) rate of detection is

$$\dot{N}_B=100\mathrm{\Gamma }_{0.1}h_{65}^3\psi _8^1\left(\frac{L_{\mathrm{bm}}}{3\times 10^{45}\text{erg s}^1}\right)^{3/2}\text{yr}^1$$
(11)
This is plausibly in agreement with the rate of detection of Class II bursts by BATSE. Out of 796 bursts classified by Murkherjee et al., about 185 were Class II, or $`23\%`$. Since BATSE detects about 300 GRB per year with half-sky coverage (due to the fact that the Compton Observatory is in low Earth orbit), the full-sky detection rate of Class II bursts is roughly $`\dot{N}_B(\text{Class II})140\text{yr}^1.`$

However, there is no compelling reason to expect such a beamed emission component based upon the magnetar modeldt92 ; td95 ; td01 ; fer00 .

Moreover, the number-intensity or $`V/V_{\mathrm{max}}`$ distribution of Class II GRBs seems to give evidence against a local extragalactic origin for these events. This is a serious concern; however, note that the evidence for $`V/V_{max}<0.5`$ in Class II bursts is much less compelling than in Class I/III. It is possible that selection effects cause a paucity of BATSE events just above threshold for peak flux on 256 and 64-ms time scales. (Flux averaged over 1.024 s does not give a good brightness measure for these short bursts.) Faint and poorly-measured bursts are systematically removed because of insufficient information to make class identifications (e.g., only 778 out of 1122 catalogued bursts were classified in ref. hak99 ); and the class identifications themselves are least reliable near threshold where measurements are most statistically dubious. It is also possible that the bright Class II bursts include a contamination of physically-distinct, non-Euclidean (low $`V/V_{max}`$) events; e.g., a tail of Class I bursts extending to short durations, or a subclass of short bursts from galactic SGRs or AXPs like the bright, hard-spectrum events with $`T_{90}1`$ s already identified from SGR 1900+14 woo99 . Note that Tavani tav98  found $`V/V_{max}=0.458\pm 0.044`$ for short duration, soft spectrum bursts in the BATSE catalog (66 events with $`T_{90}<2.5`$ s and $`H_{32}^e<3`$), and Cline, Matthey & Otwinowski cli99  found $`V/V_{max}=0.52\pm 0.06`$ for all BATSE bursts with $`T_{90}<0.1`$ s.

## Conclusions: Observational Tests

Under the idealization that MF hard spikes are emitted quasi-isotropically, we find that the BATSE catalog contains $`12`$ extragalactic MFs \[eq. (7)\]. These events are expected to be fast-rising ($`t_{rise}\stackrel{<}{}1`$ ms), short-duration bursts, correlated in position with galaxies at $`D_{gal}<20`$ Mpc. Insofar as the quasi-isotropic component of MF hard spikes have uniform peak luminosities, there will be a diminishment of the peak flux with $`D_{gal}`$ according to $`F_{peak}L_{\mathrm{iso}}/(4\pi D_{gal}^2)`$, affording a possible auxiliary check on associations. As a group, these “isotropic MFs” should tend to concentrate toward the supergalactic plane deV53 . Hartmann, Briggs & Mannheim (ref. har96 ) found no significant supergalactic anisotropy in the BATSE catalog, but their statistics were dominated by Class I bursts. At distances less than $`D_{\mathrm{vir}}18h_{65}^1\text{Mpc}`$ the distribution of candidate MFs may show a significant Virgocentric dipole moment (e.g., Fig. 3.3 in ref. pee93 ); and a correlation with Virgo’s discrete position on the sky if the sampling depth (eq. ) extends as far as $`D_{\mathrm{vir}}`$.

This prediction of “isotropic MFs” in the BATSE catalog is based upon direct, reliable extrapolation from observations of the 1979 March 5 and 1998 August 27 events. More speculatively, in any model of MFs, a full-sky BATSE rate $`\dot{N}_B`$ is possible if there exists a beamed emission component with full opening angle

$$\psi =8^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{0.1}h_{65}^3\left(\frac{L_{\mathrm{bm}}}{3\times 10^{45}\text{erg s}^1}\right)^{3/2}\left(\frac{\dot{N}_B}{100\text{yr}^1}\right)^1,$$
(12)
where $`L_{\mathrm{bm}}`$ is the total beam peak power. This equation assumes two polar beams; for a single beam, $`\psi `$ goes up by $`\sqrt{2}`$.

If such beamed MFs accounted for many or all Class II GRBs, then the events would have positions correlated with galaxies and galaxy clusters within the BATSE sampling depth at redshift

$$z_\mathrm{B}=0.076\psi _8^1h_{65}\left(\frac{L_{\mathrm{bm}}}{3\times 10^{45}\text{erg s}^1}\right)^{1/2}.$$
(13)
Several studies have found correlations of GRB positions with galaxy clusters in the Abell, Corwin & Olowin (hereafter ACO) catalog abe89 , but only at a statistically marginal level mar97 ; kol96 ; hur97 . These studies have focused primarily on bursts with small positional error boxes, which are mostly bright Class I events. Note that the MFs come from young neutron stars in star-forming regions. Such sources are not expected to concentrate strongly within rich galaxy clusters, which contain mostly early-type (gas-stripped) galaxies.

The positional correlations expected for MFs are difficult to study using BATSE data. Class II GRBs, with short durations and relatively low fluences, tend to have poorly-determined positions, often with BATSE error boxes of size $`10^{}`$. Future experiments will localize short-duration GRBs well enough to test for correlations with nearby galaxies and galaxy clusters, hopefully making the identification of extragalactic MFs possible.

###### Acknowledgements.

We thank R. Knill-Dgani for discussions. This work was supported by NASA grant NAG5-8381; by the Texas Advanced Research Program grant ARP-028.


format: text

text:
# Effects of Flow on Measurements of Interactions in Colloidal Suspensions

## 1 Introduction

The motivation for this work comes from the experiments conducted by David Grier at al.  as well as by other groups , which show unexplained attraction between colloidal particles in suspension. As most other polymer aggregates do, the particles used in the experiments dissociate in the solvent with charges of one sign remaining on the surface of the particles and charges of the other sign going to the solvent. According to the prevailing model for electrostatic interactions of such particles (DLVO ), these particles of same-sign charge should repel via a screened Coulomb potential. Several other theories for electrostatic interaction mechanisms have been suggested to explain the attraction observed , but none of them stood the experimental tests. Non-electrostatic models have not succeeded in providing concrete reasons for the observed behavior either. However, the first hydrodynamic attempt to account for the attraction in the recent work of Squires and Brenner  appears quite successful.

Here we explore another hydrodynamic effect that complements the effect described by Squires and Brenner. The nature of attractive force is essentially the same (a non-equilibrium hydrodynamic effect based on the method of image forces by Blake ), but the mechanism explored here does not require any charges on the surface of the walls and colloidal particles, while the mechanism of Squires and Brenner does. While we do not intend to dismiss their mechanism and we agree that it quantitatively captures essential features of the experimentally observed attraction, we would like to offer a complimentary effect that might be responsible for attraction in the cases when the explanation of Squires and Brenner does not apply. Examples of such systems are suspensions and meta-stable crystallites, where particles are essentially fixed in space (i.e. fluctuate around their equilibrium position). This limits the mobility of particles, which decreases applicability of the mechanism of Squires and Brenner, but increases applicability of ours (as being “fixed in space” is an essential condition for our mechanism). While quantitative description of suspensions and meta-stable crystallites requires further work, we feel that the mechanism described below is potentially important in accounting for colloidal interactions and complements the picture drawn by Squires and Brenner. It also demonstrates a subtlety produced by undetectable hydrodynamic flows that is relevant for colloidal measurements. However, this mechanism appears too weak to account for the experiments that motivated its development as we currently understand them.

In this note we first consider physical ideas and assumptions behind this mechanism, and then we theoretically investigate two hydrodynamic effects resulting from these assumptions. In the discussion section that follows, we estimate orders of magnitude of these effects and conclude that the mechanism explored is probably too weak in the particular conditions of the experiments of Grier at al. Later we discuss possible other implications and experimental tests.

## 2 Physical assumptions and geometry

The experiments of Crocker and Grier were conducted on the samples of colloidal suspension confined between a microscope slide and a cover slip. Each experimental run consisted of a series of recordings of Brownian motion of two colloidal particles (sufficiently remote from the other particles in the suspension) and subsequent analysis of these recordings, which allowed one to infer the pair interaction potential . Before each recording the particles were caught in the focal plane of the digital video microscopy setup by optical tweezers, which are essentially a potential well of the electromagnetic origin , then they were released, and their Brownian motion was recorded in several $`1/30`$-of-a-second periods. Subsequently the particles were trapped by the tweezers again (in order to be returned to the recording area of the sample) and a new cycle began.

Here we consider the possible effects of background flow in the apparatus. Our motivation originated from the thorough flushes of the solvent carried out with the purpose of removing impurities from the solution before each experimental run. However, the flow induced by these flushes decays exponentially with characteristic time of the order of $`d^2/8\nu `$, where $`d`$ is the distance between the slide and the cover slip and $`\nu `$ is the kinematic viscosity of the liquid. Hence the flushes cannot be a source of sustained flow: the typical value of this time in the experimental conditions is of the order of $`10^4`$$`10^3`$ s. At the same time there is another effect capable of inducing some flows that are both small enough to be experimentally undetectable and large enough to produce the desirable attractive effect during the entire experiment (the required magnitude of flow velocity will be shown to be of the order of $`0.1\text{ }\mu \text{m}/\text{s}`$). This effect is related to a slight misbalance in pressure in a vacuum system connected to the experimental cell. Each cell was connected to the colloid suspension supply via two openings in the microscope slide. Colloid refill, ion removal and all other auxiliary operations were conducted via this system. When measurements of the attractive potential were performed, some negative pressure was applied inside the cell to make the cover slip bow inwards, lowing wall separation $`d`$ from about 50 $`\mu `$m to about 5 $`\mu `$m. While the pressure inside the vacuum system was of the order of 15 Torr or 2000 Pa, we estimate111The only non-trivial component of the Navier-Stokes equation reads $`\frac{p}{x}=\eta \frac{^2u}{z^2}`$, with $`\widehat{x}`$ being along the flow and $`\widehat{z}`$ being normal to the walls ($`\eta `$ is dynamic viscosity). Since pressure $`p`$ does not depend on $`z`$, the standard solution is the parabolic profile for velocity $`u=\gamma z(dz)/d`$, with $`d`$ being the distance between the parallel walls. This yields $`|\mathrm{\Delta }p|=2\eta \gamma |\mathrm{\Delta }x|/d`$ for pressure difference between the openings separated by $`\mathrm{\Delta }x`$. Typical values $`\mathrm{\Delta }x=2\text{ cm}`$, $`\eta =1\text{ mPa}\text{s}`$, and $`d=5\text{ }\mu \text{m}`$ give a result $`|\mathrm{\Delta }p|=0.8\text{ Pa}`$ for $`\gamma =0.1\text{ s}^1`$. that the difference in pressure between the two parts of the vacuum system had to be only 0.8 Pa in order to produce the required magnitude of flow. Thus, 0.04% pressure difference, which is definitely beyond the experimental control and can exist unnoticeably in the conditions of the experiment , could cause the background flow inside the cell. In general, since the required flows are very small, other subtle effects can also contribute to their existence. All the subsequent treatment is based on the assumption of existence of small constant flows in the experimental cell. One of the purposes of this paper is to show that these undetectable flows can lead to quite detectable effects as long as additional conditions outlined below are fulfilled.

In conjunction with this assumption one can be tempted to require that the particles be carried along by the flow. Then there would be no hydrodynamic interactions whatsoever since particles would not exert any force on the fluid. In contrast, we assume that the particles are held in space (by optical tweezers, by inhomogeneities of the wall, by interactions with other particles in suspensions or meta-stable crystallites or by some other mechanism) while the fluid is flowing by and exerting a Stokes force on them. The mechanism of such confinement and its limitations will be discussed in the discussion section.

Another condition heavily employed below also originates from the experimental procedure. All measurements were conducted on colloidal suspensions enclosed between two microscope slides separated by a small gap (of the width of a few microns) so that the particles were confined in the vicinity of at least one of the slides. Moreover, the strongest attraction was observed when particles were located sufficiently close to one of the slides. Therefore, we consider particle interactions near a plane wall. As it will be shown, both effects described below are absent in the infinite space.

The last assumption used will be the absence of inertial effects or their negligible contribution, which is a reasonable approximation for the case of small Reynolds numbers (the numbers involved are of the order of $`10^5`$$`10^6`$). Gravity is also unimportant due to roughly equal densities of the material of the particles and the fluid, and so the only forces acting on the particles are of the hydrodynamic origin. Thus, we consider the hydrodynamic interactions of spatially fixed particles subject to slow flows (with small Reynolds numbers) in the semi-infinite space.

In particular, consider particles 1 and 2 in the flow field above a plane wall. Let particle 1 be at height $`h_1`$ above the plane and particle 2 be at $`h_2`$, and let the full (three-dimensional) distance between the particles be $`b`$ (Fig. 1). In agreement with the experimental conditions, we picture both particles as spheres; let their radius be $`a`$. We do not assume any relation between $`h`$ and $`b`$, in particular they can be comparable or one of them can be much larger than the other. However, we do assume that the size of the particles $`a`$ is much smaller than any other distance scale ($`h`$ or $`b`$), so that the particles can be thought of as point-like. This last assumption is not strictly obeyed in the experiments (although particles are smaller than the separations between the objects), but it greatly simplifies the consideration and presumably does not change the qualitative character of the interaction potential.

We choose the origin of the system of coordinates at the location of particle 1. Axis $`z`$ is directed away from the wall, so that the wall is defined by the equation $`z=h_1`$. Axis $`x`$ is directed along the velocity of the flow $`𝐮`$ (parallel to the wall). Particle 2 has spherical coordinates $`(b,\theta ,\varphi )`$ or Cartesian coordinates $`(b\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{cos}\varphi ,b\mathrm{sin}\theta \mathrm{sin}\varphi ,b\mathrm{cos}\theta )`$ with the standard choice of angles $`\theta `$ and $`\varphi `$. Then $`h_2=h_1+b\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. (See Fig. 1 for geometry.)

## 3 The shear flow effect

The simplest effect in the system described above comes from the flow gradient near a plane wall (see e.g. Landau ). Sufficiently close to the wall the flow speed $`𝐮`$ must grow linearly with the distance to the wall: $`𝐮=\gamma h\widehat{x}`$, where $`\gamma `$ is the shear modulus. Then the original flow field at the location of particle 1 creates a Stokes force on that particle $`𝐅_1=6\pi \eta a\gamma h_1\widehat{x}`$, while at the location of particle 2 this force is $`𝐅_2=6\pi \eta a\gamma h_2\widehat{x}`$, where $`\eta `$ is the fluid viscosity. Obviously, the higher particle experiences a higher force from the fluid flowing by. Now, if we define the apparent interaction force between the particles as the difference between the radial components of forces acting on each particle: $`F_r=𝐅_2\widehat{r}𝐅_1\widehat{r}`$ (so that the positive force corresponds to repulsion and the negative one corresponds to attraction), then the difference in forces exerted on the particles can be interpreted as either repulsion (if particle 2 is in the 1st or the 3rd quadrant of the $`xz`$-plane with respect to particle 1) or attraction (if particle 2 is in the 2nd or the 4th quadrant). The exact result for the defined above interaction force is

$$F_r=6\pi \eta \gamma ab\mathrm{cos}\varphi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta .$$
(1)
Of course, the interpretation of this force as repulsion or attraction does not mean that one of the particles acts on the other, but in the conditions of the experiment (where the potential is inferred from the measurements of Brownian motion for a fraction of a second) there is no simple way to distinguish whether particles interact directly or just move under the two external forces as if they interact.

If the two particles are at the same height above the wall, then no apparent interaction force is present. This can be seen both from expression (1) and from the fact that the Stokes forces exerted on both particles are exactly the same. It can also be shown that there is no torque or force making particles leave the original height.

Expression (1) allows one to estimate the minimal value of the flow velocity necessary to produce the observed magnitude of the interaction force. The maximum of the absolute value of angular dependence of the force is reached at $`\theta =\pi /4\text{ or }3\pi /4`$ and $`\varphi =0\text{ or }\pi `$; at this configuration $`|\mathrm{cos}\varphi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta |=1/2`$. Taking the typical values $`F_r=10^{15}\text{ N}`$, $`a=0.5\times 10^6\text{ m}`$, $`b=2\times 10^6\text{ m}`$, $`\eta =10^3\text{ Pa}\text{s}`$ , one can easily obtain:

$$\gamma 0.1\text{ s}^1.$$
(2)
Thus, flows as low as $`0.1\text{ }\mu \text{m}/\text{s}`$ (at height of $`1\text{ }\mu \text{m}`$ above the wall) can produce the observed magnitude of interactions. These values of the velocity are below the experimentally detectable level, and such flows can exist in the system .

Now, if there are two alternatives (attraction in 2nd and 4th quadrants and repulsion in 1st and 3rd quadrants), why would only attraction be observed? A possible explanation will be deferred until the next section.

## 4 Force propagation via viscous fluid

Apart from the trivial effect described above, there is a more elaborate mechanism of particle interactions via viscous force propagating through the solvent. If a point force $`𝐅`$ (“stokeslet”) is applied at point $`𝐱`$, then the velocity field perturbation $`𝐯`$ at point $`𝐲`$ is linearly related to the stokeslet magnitude: $`v_i(𝐲)=H_{ij}(𝐲𝐱)F_j(𝐱)`$, where $`H_{ij}`$ is known as the Oseen tensor (in the case of an extended source of force an integration over coordinates is required, so that the Oseen tensor is just a Green function for the velocity field). The force exerted on a spherical particle at point $`𝐲`$ is then a Stokes force created by the velocity perturbation $`𝐯`$: $`𝐟=6\pi a\eta 𝐯`$. In the case of two particles in viscous fluid the Stokes force $`𝐅_1`$ exerted by the original flow on particle 1 (given in the previous section, but taken with a minus sign, since now the particle, being held in place, acts on the fluid) will be the source of the perturbation of the velocity field $`𝐯_2`$ at the location of particle 2 and hence the source of the perturbation force $`𝐟_2`$ acting on particle 2, and vice versa. Thus, the interaction force between the particles can again be defined as the difference between the radial components of forces acting on each particle: $`f_r=𝐟_2\widehat{r}𝐟_1\widehat{r}`$, but now this will be the true interaction force, the one propagating through the fluid.

Expression for the Oseen tensor $`H_{ij}`$ in the infinite space is well known (see e.g. Happel and Brenner ) and leads to the identical zero for the radial interaction force (the flow is uniform). Thus, no hydrodynamic interactions are possible in the infinite space. The Green function $`H_{ij}`$ for the semi-infinite space was constructed by Blake , although it can be alternatively derived by the method of Lorentz . Calculation of the interaction force $`f_r`$ based on his result leads to the following expression:

$$f_r=9\pi \eta \gamma a^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta \left[1\frac{1+4t_1t_2+6t_1t_2(t_1+t_2)^2}{(1+4t_1t_2)^{5/2}}\right],$$
(3)
where $`t_1h_1/b`$ and $`t_2h_2/b=t_1+\mathrm{cos}\theta `$. The asymptotics of the above result are:

$$f_r=54\pi \eta \gamma a^2\frac{h_1}{b}\mathrm{cos}\varphi \mathrm{cos}^2\theta \mathrm{sin}^3\theta \text{ if }h_1b$$
(4)
and

$$f_r=9\pi \eta \gamma a^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi \mathrm{cos}\theta \mathrm{sin}\theta \left(1\frac{3b}{4h}\right)\text{ if }hb,$$
(5)
where in the last line $`h`$ can be either $`h_1`$ or $`h_2`$. Typical behavior of $`f_r`$ as a function of $`1/t_1=b/h_1`$ for $`\theta =\pi /4`$ and $`\varphi =0`$ is shown on Fig. 2.

Inspection of the result (3) indicates that the coefficient preceding this force is $`a^2`$, in contrast to the factor $`ab`$ in eq. (1). However, far from the wall the angular dependences of the kinetic force (1) and the real force (3) are identical. Thus, no new effect is present here: although the force magnitude is different, the signage is the same — attraction in 2nd and 4th quadrants and repulsion in 1st and 3rd quadrants. So, expression (3) serves just as a correction to the main result (1) (since, by assumption, $`ab`$). It also gives the same order of magnitude for $`\gamma `$ as estimate (2) does.

Note also that $`f_r`$ of eq. (3) reinforces $`F_r`$ of eq. (1). This is easy to understand from the fact that the perturbation velocity $`𝐯`$ (and hence the perturbation force $`𝐟`$) is in general oppositely directed with respect to the original Stokes force $`𝐅`$ acting from the fluid on the particle, or similarly directed with respect to the force $`𝐅`$ from the particle on the fluid (see Fig. 3 for the infinite space), and is linearly proportional to the magnitude of the force $`𝐅`$. Thus, for instance, if the radial projection $`𝐅_1\widehat{r}`$ is greater than $`𝐅_2\widehat{r}`$, then the negative radial projection $`𝐟_2\widehat{r}`$ should in general be greater than $`𝐟_1\widehat{r}`$, leading to the same signage of the above defined $`F_r`$ and $`f_r`$.

While the direct effect of the true hydrodynamic forces is relatively weak comparing to the kinetic effects of the previous section, they have an indirect effect that may explain the tendency towards observable attraction. In particular, if the two particles are at the same height above the wall, then there is a force in vertical direction pushing each of the particles into the 2nd or the 4th quadrant with respect to the other particle:

$$f_z=54\pi \eta \gamma a^2\mathrm{cos}\varphi \frac{t^4}{(1+4t^2)^{5/2}},$$
(6)
where $`t=h/b`$ and $`h=h_1=h_2`$. For $`h=b`$, $`\varphi =0`$, $`\gamma =\gamma _{min}=0.1\text{ s}^1`$ and the same typical values of $`a`$ and $`\eta `$ as in estimate (2) the absolute value of this force is $`7.6\times 10^{17}\text{ N}`$, which is about 8% of the typical value of $`F_r`$. In general, for arbitrary $`h_1`$ and $`h_2`$, this effect can be described by the torque acting in the $`\theta `$-direction, which does not vanish at $`\theta =\pi /2`$ (unlike in the effect of the previous section). This torque is defined as $`T=(𝐟_2\widehat{\theta }𝐟_1\widehat{\theta })b/2`$, and a general expression for $`T`$ can be obtained on the same grounds as result (3):

$$T=\frac{9\pi }{4}\eta \gamma a^2b\mathrm{cos}\varphi \left[\mathrm{cos}^2\theta \frac{(1+4t_1t_2)\mathrm{cos}^2\theta +6t_1t_2(t_1+t_2)^2\mathrm{cos}2\theta }{(1+4t_1t_2)^{5/2}}\right].$$
(7)
Thus, this torque indeed favors the attraction geometries by pushing particles into the configurations where attraction is created by the shear flow effect of the previous section. Therefore, attraction indeed should be observed more often than repulsion if particles are positioned at the same height above the wall at the beginning of each experimental run.

## 5 Discussion

While the mechanism described in the previous section seems to lead to the correct results and be a feasible explanation to the observed attraction, there remains one question: What holds the particles fixed in space? As we mentioned earlier, the difference in fluid and particle velocities is the necessary condition for the existence of the Stokes forces producing all the above effects. On the other hand, even if a particle is initially set at rest in the flow, while not being held by some external force, it acquires the velocity of the flow for relaxation time $`\tau `$ (defined by $`𝐯_0(t)=𝐮\left(1\mathrm{exp}(t/\tau )\right)`$) much shorter than the duration of each recording period ($`1/30`$ s), and hence it does not exert any force on the fluid for most of the recording time. For instance, for a spherical particle of radius $`a=0.5\times 10^6\text{ m}`$ and of density of the water ($`\rho =10^3\text{ kg/m}^3`$) in a fluid of viscosity of the water ($`\eta =10^3\text{ Pa}\text{s}`$) this relaxation time is

$$\tau =\frac{2}{9}\frac{\rho a^2}{\eta }56\text{ ns}.$$
(8)
Thus, the described effects require an external force that holds the particles at a non-zero velocity with respect to the flow.

The most probable candidate for this role could be a pair of optical tweezers used to trap the particles before each recording run. One scenario is straightforward to consider. While being held by the tweezers before each recording of their Brownian motion, particles are positioned to an attractive configuration by means of the torque described in the previous section. After the holding potential of the tweezers is removed and the recording starts, the dominant shear flow effect influences the Brownian motion of the particles, and an attractive “potential” is registered. Note that this does not even require any Stokes forces to be present — just a drift in the flow with different velocities (so that the further from the wall particle moves faster) influences the Brownian motion in essentially the same manner. Since the initial alignment was practically always chosen in the focal plane (so that both particles were at the same height above the wall) and along the longest dimension of the slides (so that one of the particles was always down the flow with respect to the other) , one might speculate that the hydrodynamic effects proposed above had to produce apparent attraction in practically all the conducted experiments.

However, in spite of general feasibility of such a mechanism, its estimated magnitude is discouraging. In the particular conditions of the experiment the force gradient in the optical tweezers is of the order of $`1\text{ pN/}\mu \text{m}=10^6\text{ N/m}`$ , which leads to the forces of 3 or 4 orders of magnitude higher than force (6). Thus, particles are not easily displaceable by the hydrodynamic forces while being held by optical tweezers, and therefore the hydrodynamic mechanism appears too weak if the tweezers work as it is commonly understood. (Note, however, that the estimate for the force (6) was made for the minimal predicted value of the shear modulus; higher flows lead to stronger hydrodynamic interaction.) Therefore, optical tweezers, in spite of being a promising candidate, most likely cannot perform the role of the required external force.

Other candidates to this role might also be possible (e.g. forces due to the charges on the wall, due to inhomogeneities of the wall, or concerted mean-field-like forces at high-concentration systems like suspensions and meta-stable crystallites); however, we were not able to find a feasible scenario of how exactly these forces would keep the particles fixed (or at least at non-zero relative velocity with respect to the flow). Thus, while the hydrodynamic mechanism certainly exists when such forces are present, the main difficulty in possible accounting for the attraction observed in the experiments like those of Grier at al. comes from identifying these forces. At the same time, in the situations where there are such forces, the hydrodynamic mechanism considered here is always at work (and this should be kept in mind while conducting high-sensitivity force measurements in colloidal systems). One example where the required forces exist can be the systems of meta-stable crystallites . A self-sustaining mechanism can be employed here: The attractive force holds particles together, creating thereby the necessary condition for the described effect (flow past fixed particles — assuming some flow is present), which in its turn leads to the existence of attraction. Further work would be required to account in detail for such a self-sustaining mechanism. Here we only notice that while the concerted forces acting on a particular particle can be mean-field-like, the whole system of particles cannot be held at rest by only the interaction forces between the particles in that system, as in this case the whole system would be carried along by the flow. Therefore, there should be some external forces different from interactions with the neighboring particles and acting at least on the boundary layer of the crystallite system.

As it is also apparent from our consideration, flow is not the only possible source of the described effect. What is necessary is the force exerted by the particles onto the fluid. This can be achieved not only by making a fluid flow by the fixed particles but also by making particles move in the stationary fluid. Thus, for instance, particles can be dragged by some external force in such a way that the further from the wall particle experiences higher force; this should lead to effectively the same result for the interaction potential. Essentially, this has a lot in common with the mechanism of Squires and Brenner , where particles are dragged away from the wall by the electromagnetic repulsive force.

Note that presence of a second wall, positioned symmetrically with respect to the interacting particles, leads to canceling of all considered effects (both force and torque). Therefore, another restriction on the possible experimental geometries where this hydrodynamic mechanism could be responsible for interactions is that the particles must be located away from the center plane of the suspension sample confined by the microscope slides. In practice, however, this restriction is easily avoided due to a slight difference in particle and fluid densities, so that the particles are pulled closer to the lower wall by the gravity (if their density is higher) or pushed closer to the upper wall by the Archimedes force (if their density is lower).

The proposed mechanism immediately suggests several possible experimental tests on the presented effects of flow. Most of these tests originate from the following list of the predicted properties:

1. The simplest hydrodynamic effect originates from the velocity gradient near a surface and can lead to the apparent attraction or repulsion (although no direct interaction exists). Both outcomes are equally probable with randomly chosen initial geometries.
2. The true hydrodynamic interactions propagating through the viscous fluid do exist, but they lead to the same qualitative dependence on the geometry — attraction in 2nd and 4th quadrants and repulsion in 1st and 3rd quadrants. Nevertheless, there exists a mechanism favoring attraction geometries.
3. The flows necessary to produce any hydrodynamic effects can be as low as $`0.1\text{ }\mu \text{m}/\text{s}`$ (more generally, $`\gamma 0.1\text{ s}^1`$).

Different initial geometries fixed by optical tweezers can be tried to check if the interaction strength changes depending on the position of the particles. This requires only relocation of principal potential minima of the tweezers, which can be relatively easily achieved by refocusing or rotating them. If both attractive and repulsive results are recorded (or if a stronger interaction produced by some other mechanism gets modified accordingly), then the effect is at work.

One can also look explicitly for the flow. This flow should be easily detectable if particles are allowed to drift freely for a sufficient interval of time. The flow could also be deliberately induced at higher levels to increase the magnitude of the hydrodynamic force and check that the mechanism works as predicted.

The mechanism discussed here and the method to estimate its magnitude were proposed by T.A. Witten, who also provided ongoing advice during this work. D.G. Grier as well as other people of his group (especially J. Plewa and S. Behrens) supplied essential experimental input and a number of ideas about the proposed mechanism and its feasibility. This work was supported in part by the MRSEC Program of the National Science Foundation under Award Number DMR-9808595.


text:
# Variable Interstellar Absorption toward the Halo Star HD 219188 — Implications for Small-Scale Interstellar Structure 1footnote 11footnote 1Based in part on observations with the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope, obtained from the data Archive at the Space Telescope Science Institute, which is operated by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy, Inc., under NASA contract NAS5-26555.

## 1 Introduction

Interstellar absorption lines were first recognized as interstellar by virtue of their invariance amidst the shifting stellar lines in the $`\delta `$ Ori A spectroscopic binary system (Hartmann 1904). Recently, however, it has become evident that some clearly interstellar lines do vary in strength and/or velocity. Variations in Na I and/or Ca II have been observed toward several stars in the direction of the Vela supernova remnant (Hobbs et al. 1991; Danks & Sembach 1995; Cha & Sembach 2000) — presumably due to cloud motions in that energetic environment. High $`N`$(Ca II)/$`N`$(Na I) ratios suggest significant shock processing of the interstellar dust grains in some of those clouds. In several other cases, however, the narrow Na I line widths ($`b`$ $``$ 0.3–0.5 km s-1) and/or low $`N`$(Ca II)/$`N`$(Na I) ratios characterizing the variable components suggest that the gas is relatively cool and quiescent (Blades et al. 1997; Price et al. 2000; Crawford et al. 2000; Lauroesch, Meyer, & Blades 2000). Detailed information regarding the physical conditions in these varying components is generally not available, however.

These indications of temporal variability may be related to recent results on small scale spatial structure in the ISM. Observations of H I 21cm absorption toward high-velocity pulsars have revealed structure on scales of 5–100 AU (Frail et al. 1994). Observations of absorption due to the trace ions Na I and/or K I toward globular clusters have found significant differences on scales of 103–106 AU (Langer, Prosser, & Sneden 1990; Kemp, Bates, & Lyons 1993; Meyer & Lauroesch 1999). Differences in Na I and/or K I absorption toward the individual members of binary or multiple stellar systems are commonplace, suggesting ubiquitous structure on intermediate scales of 102–104 AU (Watson & Meyer 1996; Lauroesch & Meyer 1999). If these differences are due to variations in overall hydrogen column density \[assuming “typical” $`N`$(Na I)/$`N`$(H) ratios\], the high implied densities (generally several thousand cm-3) are difficult to reconcile with clouds in thermal pressure equilibrium at typical interstellar pressures of order 3000 cm-3K. The differences may reflect a population of cold, dense filaments or sheets, embedded in warmer, less dense neutral gas and containing 10–30% of the total column density of cold, neutral gas (Heiles 1997). Alternatively, the differences in the trace ions might be due to variations in density and/or ionization on those small scales (e.g., Lauroesch et al. 1998). Differences in ionization would not explain the variations seen in H I, however.

HD 219188 is an early B supergiant located about 2800 pc from the sun at ($`l`$,$`b`$) $``$ (83°,$``$50°). Because of its location and brightness ($`V`$ $``$ 6.9), it has been observed in a number of studies investigating the interstellar clouds in the lower Galactic halo (Münch & Zirin 1961; Albert 1983; Danly 1989; Sembach, Danks, & Savage 1993). Strong, multi-component absorption from Na I and Ca II is apparent for $``$17 km s-1 $``$ $`v_{\mathrm{}}`$ $``$ +5 km s-1; weaker Ca II absorption extends to about $``$35 km s-1. High resolution Na I spectra obtained in 1997, however, revealed a new, relatively strong, narrow component at $`v`$ $``$ $``$38 km s-1. This component is also present in Ca II and in several species in UV (GHRS echelle) spectra obtained in 1994–1995. Subsequent monitoring of the line of sight shows that the column densities of both Na I and Ca II have increased by additional factors of 2–3 since 1997. In the following sections, we discuss the recent optical and UV spectra of HD 219188 and the inferred properties of the newly-revealed intermediate-velocity cloud along that line of sight.

## 2 Optical Data

The initial Na I and Ca II spectra of HD 219188 were obtained with the coudé feed and coudé spectrograph at the Kitt Peak National Observatory, as part of a program to acquire high resolution (FWHM $``$ 1.5 km s-1) optical spectra of halo stars previously observed at slightly lower resolution in the UV with the HST GHRS (see Fitzpatrick & Spitzer 1997). After the 1997 Na I spectrum of HD 219188 revealed the new intermediate-velocity (IV) component at $``$38 km s-1, additional spectra were obtained during various runs at Kitt Peak, the Anglo-Australian Observatory, and the European Southern Observatory in order to monitor possible further variations (Table 1).

The spectra were processed and extracted using standard procedures within IRAF, then normalized via polynomial fits to continuum regions adjacent to the absorption lines. The resulting line profiles were fitted with multiple Voigt profile components, yielding column densities, line widths, and heliocentric velocities for the individual components (e.g., Welty, Morton, & Hobbs 1996). Some of the Na I and Ca II profiles are shown in Figure 1, with the earlier profiles described by Albert (1983) and Sembach et al. (1993) at the top for comparison.

The changes in the strength of the $``$38 km s-1 component — over the past 20 years and over intervals as short as 6 months — are quite evident and striking (Fig. 1; Table 1). While weak Na I absorption at $`v`$ $``$ $``$38 km s-1 appears to have been present in 1991 (Sembach et al. 1993), none was detected in 1980 (Albert 1983). By 1997, the Na I column density was roughly a factor of 10 higher than the limit in Albert (1983), and it has increased by a further factor of 2 since then. As corresponding IV Ca II absorption may be present in the profiles from both earlier studies (Fig. 1), we have fitted those profiles using the component velocity structure derived from our higher resolution spectra to estimate $`N`$(Ca II) in the IV cloud at those earlier epochs. While our Ca II column densities in 1995 and 1997 may be consistent with the (uncertain) value reported by Albert (1983), $`N`$(Ca II) has increased by a factor of 2–3 since then. Over the past 3–5 years, the $`N`$(Na I)/$`N`$(Ca II) ratio thus appears to have remained roughly constant (though significantly higher than previous values or limits) (Table 1).

In contrast to the changes in column density, neither the velocity of the IV component nor the Na I line width has changed significantly since 1995. The width of the Na I line, $`b`$ $``$ 0.55–0.60 km s-1 implies a maximum temperature for the cloud of 490 K and a maximum 3-dimensional internal turbulent velocity (31/2)$`v_t`$ = 0.73 km s-1 (comparable to the sound speed for $`T`$ $``$ 80–100 K).

## 3 UV Data

HD 219188 was observed with the HST GHRS on 1994 June 6 and 1995 May 16–17, at resolutions of about 3.5 km s-1, under GTO program 5093. Twelve wavelength settings were obtained, using the FP-SPLIT procedure to enable the identification and elimination of detector fixed-pattern features. The individual sub-exposures for each wavelength setting were combined using the POFFSETS and SPECALIGN routines within the STSDAS package. The summed spectra were normalized via polynomial fits to continuum regions adjacent to the absorption lines; the empirical S/Ns range from 30–50. The interstellar absorption line profiles were then fitted using the component structures obtained from the higher resolution spectra of Na I and Ca II (Fitzpatrick & Spitzer 1997; Welty et al. 1999).

The $`38`$ km s-1 component is detected in the ground state lines of C I, C II, O I, Si II, S II, and Fe II and in the excited fine-structure lines of C I\*, C I\**, and C II\* (Table 2, Fig. 2). If sulfur is undepleted, then $`N`$(S II) suggests a total IV hydrogen column density $`N`$(Htot) = $`N`$(H I) + $`N`$(H II) $``$ 4.8 $`\times `$ 1017 cm-2. The IV column density estimated for O I (which should track H I) is consistent with that $`N`$(Htot) and the typical interstellar oxygen abundance \[O/H\] $``$ $``$0.4 dex (Meyer, Jura, & Cardelli 1998) — which suggests that the IV gas is largely neutral. The C II $`\lambda `$1334 line is saturated, but we may use $`N`$(S II) to estimate the total IV carbon abundance \[$`N`$(C I) + $`N`$(C II)\] $``$ 6.8$`\pm `$2.1 $`\times `$ 1013 cm-2, as \[C/S\] $``$ $``$0.4$`\pm `$0.1 dex in diffuse Galactic clouds. The column densities for Fe II and Si II yield depletions similar to those found for clouds in the Galactic halo (Welty et al. 1999, and references therein).

Analysis of the C I fine-structure excitation equilibrium enables estimates for the thermal pressure and local density in the IV gas (Jenkins & Shaya 1979). The observed $`N`$(C I\*)/$`N`$(C I) = 0.17$`\pm `$0.03 and $`N`$(C I\**)/$`N`$(C I) = 0.06$`\pm `$0.02 yield $`n_\mathrm{H}T`$ $``$ 2500 cm-3K and $`n_\mathrm{H}`$ $``$ 25 cm-3 for $`T`$ = 100 K. The thickness of the region probed, $`N`$(H)/$`n_\mathrm{H}`$, would thus be $``$ 0.006 pc, or about 1300 AU. Because $`n_\mathrm{H}T`$ and $`n_\mathrm{H}`$ depend on the assumed $`T`$, we have listed values for several temperatures consistent with the limit from $`b`$(Na I) in Table 3.

Estimates for the electron density in the IV gas may be derived both from considerations of photoionization equilibrium and from C II excitation equilibrium. If photoionization equilibrium is assumed for carbon \[with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$/$`\alpha `$ = 24 for the WJ1 interstellar radiation field and $`T`$ = 100 K (Péquignot & Aldrovandi 1986) and with $`N`$(C II) as estimated above\], then $`N`$(C I)/$`N`$(C II) = $`n_e`$ ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$/$`\alpha `$)-1 yields $`n_e`$(C I) $``$ 6.2$`\pm `$2.4 cm-3. Analysis of the C II fine-structure excitation (Fitzpatrick & Spitzer 1997; Welty et al. 1999) for $`T`$ = 100 K, however, yields $`n_e`$(C II) $``$ 0.85$`{}_{0.46}{}^{}{}_{}{}^{+0.52}`$ cm-3 — about a factor of 7 smaller. While the uncertainties in both $`n_e`$ estimates are dominated by the almost 50% uncertainty in $`N`$(C II), the ratio of the two estimates is not very sensitive to $`N`$(C II).

Similar discrepancies between $`n_e`$(C I) and $`n_e`$(C II) have been noted for other lines of sight (Fitzpatrick & Spitzer 1997; Welty et al. 1999). While C I might be concentrated in a smaller, denser region than C II, $`n_e`$(C I) for that smaller region would be even larger than the average value derived above, and would imply a fractional ionization $`n_e`$/$`n_\mathrm{H}`$ greater than 25%. The $`n_e`$(C I) would be reduced, however, if the radiation field were weaker or if $`T`$ were lower than assumed above. Alternatively, the large $`n_e`$ (relative to the assumed WJ1 radiation field) suggests that enough negatively charged large molecules (e.g., PAH’s) could be present for charge exchange reactions (X+ \+ LM- $`>`$ X0 \+ LM0) to significantly enhance the column densities of the trace neutral species — in which case $`n_e`$(C I) would be too high (Lepp & Dalgarno 1988; Lepp et al. 1988; Welty & Hobbs 2001). Even if that is the case, however, $`n_e`$(C II) still yields $`n_e`$/$`n_\mathrm{H}`$ $``$ 0.034 — more than a factor 240 greater than the value 1.4 $`\times `$ 10-4 that would be due to photoionization of carbon (usually assumed to be the primary source of electrons). Hydrogen therefore appears to be partially ($``$ 3.4%) ionized in the $``$38 km s-1 cloud. It is not clear how such a high fractional ionization could be maintained.

## 4 Discussion

The Leiden-Dwingeloo H I maps (Hartmann & Burton 1997) suggest that the line of sight to HD 219188 lies near the inner edge of a shell of IV gas, seen over the range $`30`$ to $``$60 km s-1 ($`v_{\mathrm{}}`$). Despite its possible association with an expanding and/or compressed shell, the cloud’s fairly low $`T`$, fairly high $`N`$(Na I)/$`N`$(Ca II) ratio, moderate pressure, and stable velocity suggest that it is relatively quiescent. The variations in absorption may instead be due to the relatively high proper motion of HD 219188 — about 13.4 mas/year (ESA 1997) — which corresponds to a transverse velocity of about 180 km s-1, or about 38 AU per year, at 2800 pc. The steadily increasing column densities of Na I and Ca II and the high fractional ionization suggest that the line of sight is moving into/through the partially ionized edge of the IV cloud due to the motion of the background star.

Unfortunately, the distance to this IV cloud is not well constrained. A lower limit of 150 pc is provided by the lack of IV absorption toward $`\beta `$ Psc ($`<`$2°away, but toward detectable IV H I emission); the upper limit (2800 pc) is set by HD 219188 itself. The length scale in the IV cloud probed by the stellar proper motion is thus between 2 and 38 AU/year — considerably smaller than the 102–104 AU scales sampled by the binary star studies. The cloud distance (and thus the length scale) could be better constrained by obtaining Na I spectra of other stars in this region (at various distances).

While we do not have a spectrum of Na I from 1994–1995, when the UV spectra were obtained, estimates based on the C I and Ca II observed then suggest that $`N`$(Na I) could have been $``$ 2 $`\times `$ 1011 cm-2. The ratio $`N`$(Na I)/$`N`$(H) $``$ 4.2 $`\times `$ 10-7 would thus have been much higher than is typically observed for diffuse clouds with $`N`$(H) $``$ 1019 cm-2 (Welty & Hobbs 2001) — presumably due to the high fractional ionization. Furthermore, if Na is depleted by a factor 4 in the IV gas (Welty & Hobbs 2001), then Na I would have been the dominant form of Na.

If such high $`N`$(Na I)/$`N`$(H) ratios and fractional ionizations are representative of other sightlines where differences in Na I have been observed over small transverse scales, then the corresponding differences in $`N`$(H) — and the resulting inferred pressures and densities — would not be as large as previously estimated. Lauroesch et al. (2000) have estimated $`n_e`$/$`n_\mathrm{H}`$ $``$ 0.008 for the variable component at $`v`$ $``$ 9 km s-1 toward HD 32040, and $`N`$(Na I)/$`N`$(H) is likely high \[for $`N`$(H) $``$ 6 $`\times `$ 1018 cm-2\] in the $``$8.6 km s-1 component toward $`\mu ^1`$ Cru (Meyer & Blades 1996). The high $`N`$(Na I)/$`N`$(H) ratios found for a sample of high- and intermediate-velocity clouds with $`N`$(H) $``$ 1019 cm-2 (Wakker & Mathis 2000) may also generally be due to partial ionization of the hydrogen. These lower $`N`$(H) clouds may thus represent a different regime from the more familiar diffuse neutral clouds with $`N`$(H) $``$ 1019 cm-2.

Lauroesch et al. (1998) have conjectured that some of the small-scale structure observed in Na I may be due to fluctuations in ionization \[rather than in overall $`N`$(H)\] for cases where corresponding differences are not seen for Zn II \[which should track $`N`$(H)\]. The low overall column densities, moderate local densities, and high fractional ionization found for the IV cloud toward HD 219188 suggest that some of the small-scale structure seen in Na I and K I may be due to partially ionized, relatively low-density cloud edges and/or fragments — rather than dense, neutral clumps. Further monitoring of the HD 219188 line of sight over the next several years — particularly in the UV with HST/STIS — should provide interesting information on the variations of density, temperature, and depletions with depth in the IV cloud.

We thank D. Willmarth (KPNO), S. Ryan (AAO), and M. Kuerster (ESO) for their help in setting up the spectrographs, Lew Hobbs for pointing out the large proper motion of HD 219188, and Bart Wakker for providing a map of the 21 cm emission (and individual spectra) near HD 219188. DEW acknowledges support from NASA LTSA grant NAGW-4445.


text:
# From Quark Stars to Hybrid Stars

## Abstract

We show the possible existence of compact stars having a surface composed of a mixed phase of quarks and hadrons. This scenario can be realized both for self-bound stars, satisfying the so-called Witten-Bodmer hypothesis, and for gravitationally bound stars. This class of solutions of the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equation can be obtained in all the models we discuss, within a physically acceptable range of values of the model parameters.

PACS: 26.60.+c, 12.38.Mh, 97.60.Jd
Keywords: Neutron stars; Quark matter; Phase transition

Recently several analysis of observational data have emphasized the possible existence of compact stars having very small radii, of the order of 9 kilometers or less . To account theoretically for the existence of such a star, one would need to use of very soft Equations of State (EOSs), that can be obtained, in principle, introducing kaon condensation , or hyperonic degrees of freedom . Another possibility is to consider quark stars, where the density of the surface is above nuclear matter saturation density. These objects have been obtained till now assuming the validity of the hypothesis introduced independently by Bodmer  and Witten , which states that the true and absolute ground state of the strong interaction is a state of deconfined quark matter. The latter consists of an approximately equal number of up, down and strange quarks having energy per baryon $`E/A`$ smaller than that of iron ($`E_{Fe}930`$ MeV), at zero temperature and pressure . Stars entirely composed of matter in such ultra-stable state are self-bound  and could rotate with a period well below one millisecond .

A possible problem in interpreting neutron stars as strange quark stars is the difficulty of having glitches in the latter, since the most widely accepted model for the glitches require the existence of a crystallized phase trapping magnetic flux tubes. It is not clear whether such a structure can be obtained in quark stars, although the presence of a color superconductive phase could open this possibility .

The aim of this letter is to show that it is possible to find a minimum of the energy per baryon number at finite density, in the mixed quark-hadron phase. This minimum corresponds to an energy which can be either above or below $`E_{Fe}`$. Stars builded using this EOS will be gravitationally bound, if the minimum is above $`E_{Fe}`$, or self-bound stars if the minimum is below $`E_{Fe}`$. In both cases the surface of the star is made of mixed quark-hadron phase. To our knowledge, this possibility has never been investigated, because in general the so-called quarks stars have been studied using the quark EOS alone, without matching it with the hadronic EOS. In this paper, on the contrary, we will study in detail the transition from a low density EOS (hadrons) to a high density one (quarks), using the Gibbs conditions.

The EOS appropriate to the description of a compact star has to satisfy $`\beta `$-stability conditions. This implies the existence of two conserved charges, the baryonic charge and the electric charge. When the Gibbs conditions are applied in presence of more than a single conserved charge, the technique developed by Glendenning has to be adopted . Using that technique, the pressure need not to be constant in the mixed phase, what will be crucial in our investigation.

The conservation of the baryon (B) and the electric (C) charge can be written as follows:

$`\rho _B`$ $`=`$ $`(1\chi )\rho _B^h+\chi \rho _B^q`$ (1)
$`\rho _C`$ $`=`$ $`(1\chi )\rho _C^h+\chi \rho _C^q+\rho _e+\rho _\mu =0.`$
Here $`\chi `$ is the fraction of matter in the quark phase. The superscripts $`h`$ and $`q`$ label the density in the hadronic and in the quark phase, respectively. The electron ($`\rho _e`$) and the muon ($`\rho _\mu `$) charge densities contribute to make the total electric charge equal to zero.

The equations of chemical equilibrium under $`\beta `$-decay and deconfinement are the following:

$`\mu _n\mu _p=\mu _e`$ , $`\mu _n\mu _p=\mu _\mu `$
$`2\mu _d+\mu _u=\mu _n`$ , $`\mu _u\mu _d=\mu _p\mu _n`$
$`\mu _s`$ $`=`$ $`\mu _d.`$ (2)
The usual condition for mechanical equilibrium, i.e. the equality of the pressure in the two phases, reads:

$$P^h=P^q.$$
(3)
The previous equations have to be solved together with the field’s equations for the adopted hadronic and quark models. Concerning the hadronic phase, we have used the relativistic non-linear Walecka-type models of Glendenning-Moszkowsky (GM1, GM2, GM3)  and Bodmer (B91) . For the quark phase we have considered the MIT bag model at first order in the strong coupling constant $`\alpha _s`$  and the Color Dielectric Model (CDM) . In the latter, quarks develop a density dependent constituent mass through their interaction with a scalar field $`\kappa `$ representing a multi-gluon state. The Lagrangian of the CDM reads:

$`L`$ $`=`$ $`i\overline{\psi }\gamma ^\mu _\mu \psi +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(_\mu \sigma \right)^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(_\mu \stackrel{}{\pi }\right)^2U(\sigma ,\stackrel{}{\pi })`$ (4)
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{f=u,d}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{g_f}{f_\pi \kappa }}\overline{\psi }_f\left(\sigma +i\gamma _5\stackrel{}{\tau }\stackrel{}{\pi }\right)\psi _f+{\displaystyle \frac{g_s}{\kappa }}\overline{\psi }_s\psi _s`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(_\mu \kappa \right)^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}M^2\kappa ^2`$
where $`U(\sigma ,\stackrel{}{\pi })`$ is the “mexican-hat” potential, as in Ref. .

The coupling constants are given by $`g_{u,d}=g(f_\pi \pm \xi _3)`$ and $`g_s=g(2f_Kf_\pi )`$, where $`f_\pi =93`$ MeV and $`f_K=113`$ MeV are the pion and the kaon decay constants, respectively, and $`\xi _3=f_{K^\pm }f_{K^0}=0.75`$ MeV. These coupling constants depend on a single parameter $`g`$. Confinement is obtained via the effective quark masses $`m_{u,d}=g_{u,d}\overline{\sigma }/(\overline{\kappa }f_\pi )`$ and $`m_s=g_s/\overline{\kappa }`$, which diverge outside the nucleon. Working at mean-field level, the only free parameter is actually the product $`G=\sqrt{gM}`$. In this model the last term of the lagrangian plays a role similar to the vacuum pressure constant $`B`$ of the MIT bag model. At variance with the latter, in the CDM the vacuum pressure is density dependent.

Let us discuss our results about the EOS in the mixed hadron-quark phase applying the above discussed Gibbs conditions. In Fig. 1, we report the pressure as a function of the baryon density for different values of the MIT-bag constant $`B^{1/4}`$ \[MeV\], with $`\alpha _s=0`$, $`m_u=m_d=0`$, $`m_s=100`$ MeV and the GM3 hadronic model . The figure shows that decreasing the bag constant from the value $`B^{1/4}=170`$ MeV, corresponding to a typical hybrid star EOS (composed by a central quark phase, an intermediate mixed phase and an hadronic crust at low density), to the value $`B^{1/4}=158`$ MeV, corresponding to a pure quark star (with a nonzero density at the surface), we have a region where the pressure decreases by increasing the baryon density (instability condition) and, for some values of $`B^{1/4}`$, we have an EOS which exhibits a double zero of the pressure. In particular, in the curve with $`B^{1/4}=160`$ MeV, the second zero of the pressure corresponds to a second minimum of the energy per baryon number at finite baryon density ($`\rho =0.274`$ fm-3) in the quark-hadron mixed phase ($`\chi =0.55`$).111For consistency, we have checked that for all the hadron/quark models we have considered, the phase transition from the hadronic matter to the hadron-quark mixed phase in (non-strange) symmetric nuclear matter occurs at baryon densities much larger than the ordinary nuclear matter density. There is therefore a range of quark model parameters for which it is possible to realize stable hybrid stars with a sharp surface composed by hadrons and quarks.

The previous analysis is based on the use of Gibbs conditions, which for $`\beta `$-stable matter are not equivalent to the so-called Maxwell construction. The latter would actually not be possible when the minimum of the quark EOS corresponds to an energy per baryon number smaller than the nucleon mass. Gibbs construction is at the contrary still possible, and reduces the energy of the system in the mixed phase.

It is interesting to note that a very similar behavior of EOS has been recently obtained in Ref.  studying phase transition to hyperonic matter in neutron stars. Increasing the strengths of the hyperon-hyperon interactions, the authors find a second minimum of the energy per baryon (i.e. a second zero of the pressure) at a large strangeness fraction. Such minimum can be deeper than ordinary matter (absolutely stable strange hadronic matter and, consequently, self-bound neutron stars) or not (gravitationally bound stars). Analogous results are obtained by us in the context of the quark-hadron phase transition.

To understand better our results, we show in Fig. 2: (a) the values of the second minimum of the energy per baryon number $`E/N`$; (b) the corresponding baryon density $`\overline{\rho }`$ and (c) the associate fraction of quark matter $`\chi `$, for different $`K_iB_i^{1/4}`$ \[MeV\]. In Fig. 2a and 2b the thin line represents the results obtained using a pure quark EOS (MIT model, with $`\alpha _s=0`$, $`m_u=m_d=0`$, $`m_s=100`$ MeV, the dependence of our results on $`\alpha _s`$ and $`m_s`$ will be discussed below) while the thick line corresponds to matching the quark and the hadronic EOS using the Gibbs conditions. For values of the bag constant smaller than $`K_W`$, we have self-bound purely quark stars: the second minimum of the energy per baryon number lies in the pure quark phase. By increasing $`K`$, we have stars with an increasing fraction of hadronic matter at the surface ($`\chi <1`$). In the range between $`K_W`$ and $`K_C`$ the energy per particle is less then $`930`$ MeV and the Bodmer-Witten condition is satisfied: we have therefore self-bound stars with a surface composed by a quark-hadron mixed phase. For values $`K_C<K<K_H`$, we have gravitationally bound stars with a sharp edge, while, for $`K>K_H`$, we obtain hybrid stars with a density profile vanishing to zero.

Since we have introduced in the previous paragraph a class of not self-bound stars, it is natural to address the question of their stability. In particular it is important to check that low-mass stars are stable against “evaporation” into iron nuclei. A sufficient condition is the following:

$$\frac{M}{N}<E_{Fe},$$
(5)
where $`M`$ is the gravitational mass of the star and $`N`$ is the baryon number. We have checked numerically that, in all models we have considered, stars having a radius larger than $`4`$ km (or equivalently $`M0.1M_{}`$) are stable. Stars for which observational constraints on the $`M`$$`R`$ relation has been discussed in the literature should have a mass larger than $`1M_{}`$. Therefore we will not discuss in detail the low mass region.

In Table 1, we report the results for different hadronic  and quark models, like the MIT-bag model ($`K_iB_i^{1/4}`$ \[MeV\]) and CDM model ($`K_ig_i`$ \[MeV\] and $`M=1.7`$ GeV). $`K_{Min}`$ is the minimum $`K`$ for which non-strange quark matter is unbound (the energy per baryon of non-strange quark matter must exceed the lowest energy per baryon in nuclei, i.e., about $`930`$ MeV for iron). We observe, from the third column of the table ($`K_W`$ and $`E/N`$), that only for specific values of quark model parameters it is possible to realize absolutely stable self-bound matter in mixed phase ($`E/N930`$ MeV). For large values of $`\alpha _s`$ and $`m_s`$ the Bodmer-Witten hypothesis is satisfied only in pure quark matter (in other words: $`K_C<K_W`$). Let us note that the values of the quark model parameters used in the present calculation are close to the values adopted in hadronic calculations (for example, the coupling $`g22`$ MeV in the CDM is very near to the value $`g=23`$ MeV used to reproduce the experimental mass and radius of the nucleon ).

The stable solutions of the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equation are shown in Figs. 3 (mass-radius relation) and 4 (energy density profile at fixed gravitational mass $`M=1.4M_{}`$). In both figures the curve labeled with GM3 corresponds to the solution obtained using the hadronic EOS alone (no phase transition), while the others are labeled with the adopted value of $`B^{1/4}`$ \[MeV\] of the MIT-bag model ($`\alpha _s=0`$, $`m_s=100`$ MeV). The curves GM3 and $`B^{1/4}=170`$ MeV are ordinary neutron stars with hadronic density vanishing at the surface (for subnuclear densities we have employed the Baym-Pethick-Sutherland EOS , which describes the crust of the neutron star). The other two curves are crustless stars with a non-zero density at the surface. The solution with $`B^{1/4}=155`$ MeV corresponds to pure quark stars while the one with $`B^{1/4}=162`$ MeV represents hybrid stars with a central quark matter core and a surface composed of mixed phase ($`\chi =0.23`$). Similar behaviors are obtained by using the CDM.

In the present letter, we have not considered the possibility of having a thin crust of nuclear material, suspended from contact with the high density mixed phase by an electric dipole field . The introduction of this thin crust would modify significantly the $`M`$$`R`$ relationship only for extremely small values of the mass ($`M0.1M_{}`$) . As discussed above, we are not interested in this range of low mass stars.

The main result of our work is the indication of the possibility to have stars whose surface is composed of a mixed phase of quarks and hadrons. For certain ranges of model parameters, these solutions of the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equation can be obtained without the need to satisfy the Bodmer-Witten hypothesis and corresponds to gravitationally bound stars. In other parameter ranges, it is possible to satisfy Bodmer-Witten hypothesis in mixed phase and self bound stars are obtained. We stress again that the present analysis could not be done using the Maxwell construction instead of Gibbs conditions, since no Maxwell construction would be possible for a quarks’ EOS having a minimum of the energy per baryon number below the mass of the nucleon.

The existence of mixed phase at the surface of a compact star could be crucial in the explanation of the glitches, since in the mixed phase a crystalline structure can develop once the surface tension is taken into account. Moreover a large fraction of hadronic matter in the surface of the star seems to be needed at the light of recent works on r-mode instability  and on the cooling of quark stars .

It is a pleasure to thank V. Barone for a careful reading of the manuscript. This work is supported in part by MURST.


text:
# Fluctuation Dominated Josephson Tunneling with a Scanning Tunneling Microscope

## Abstract

We demonstrate Josephson tunneling in vacuum tunnel junctions formed between a superconducting scanning tunneling microscope tip and a Pb film, for junction resistances in the range 50-300 k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. We show that the superconducting phase dynamics is dominated by thermal fluctuations, and that the Josephson current appears as a peak centered at small finite voltage. In the presence of microwave fields ($`f=15.0`$ GHz) the peak decreases in magnitude and shifts to higher voltages with increasing rf power, in agreement with theory.

Scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) has been extensively used in the study of high-Tc superconductors (HTSC), providing a spectroscopic tool with unparalleled energy and spatial resolution. Yet, while superconducting tips have been demonstrated in the past  all STM studies so far have been performed using normal-metal tips, thus probing only the single-particle excitation spectrum, the gap structure which is a consequence of superconductivity, but not the superconducting (SC) ground state itself. Results from STM measurements of HTSC show excitation gaps in situations where superconductivity is believed to be absent (pseudo-gap), such as in vortex cores  and above Tc in underdoped samples , as well as inhomogenieties in the gap structure in reportedly high quality BiSrCaCuO crystals . These results, due to the nature of the measurements, do not remove the ambiguity with respect to the existence of a finite SC pair amplitude in the situations studied. In light of this out standing problem, it seems desirable to have a way to directly probe the SC pair amplitude with high spatial resolutions on the order of $`\xi `$, the coherence length. This can be achieved by performing STM experiments with SC tips , measuring the contribution from Josephson pair tunneling to the total tunneling current. In this Letter we report on the observation of fluctuation-dominated Josephson tunneling in vacuum tunnel junctions formed between a SC tip and a conventional SC Pb film at T$``$2 K.

The present authors have recently developed a method for the reproducible fabrication of SC STM tips . Tips made by deposition of Ag(30 Å)/Pb(5000 Å) proximity bilayer onto conventional Pt0.8Ir0.2 STM tips exhibit a well developed BCS gap at low temperatures. From $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$(T) measurements, $`\mathrm{\Delta }_0`$ and Tc were estimated to be 1.33 meV and 6.8 K respectively . Here we use these tips to form superconductor/insulator/superconductor (S/I/S) vacuum tunnel junctions against a Pb film (Fig. 1) grown in situ on a graphite substrate.

For this configuration we observe typical quasiparticle tunneling conductance spectra for S/I/S junctions with normal state resistance $`R_N=100`$ M$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ as shown in Figure 2. Note the vanishingly small conductance for $`eV<2\mathrm{\Delta }`$ at low temperatures, which confirms that tunneling is the dominant charge transfer mechanism. At higher temperatures, thermal excitations of quasiparticles across the gap give rise to a conductance peak at $`\pm (\mathrm{\Delta }_{Pb}\mathrm{\Delta }_{tip})0`$ meV. At high junction resistances one can expect the SC phases of the two superconductors comprising the junction to be completely decoupled, as their coupling, described by the Josephson binding energy

$$E_J=\frac{\pi \mathrm{}}{4e^2}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(T)}{R_N}\mathrm{tanh}\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }(T)}{2k{}_{B}{}^{}T}$$
(1)
is vanishingly small compared to $`k_BT`$. For example, for a typical junction of 100 M$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`E_J/k_B`$0.5 mK. Here $`T`$ is the temperature, $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is the SC gap, $`R_N`$ is the junction resistance, and all other symbols have their usual meaning.

As the junction resistance is decreased, $`E_J`$ increases. When $`E_J`$ becomes larger than $`k_BT`$,

a supercurrent of magnitude $`I=I_{c,0}\mathrm{sin}\varphi `$ can flow across the junction at zero voltage ; here $`I_{c,0}=2eE_J/\mathrm{}`$ and $`\varphi `$ is the relative phase. When a finite voltage $`V`$ is applied across the junction, $`\varphi `$ oscillates according to $`\dot{\varphi }=2eV/\mathrm{}`$. These are the well known Josephson equations and the Josephson effect in low resistance junctions with macroscopically sized electrodes is well understood and well studied .

The present situation is different- we note that the tip electrode area is at most 1-2 nm2, thus the very small junction capacitance $`C`$ leads to large charging energies of the junction, $`E_C=e^2/2C`$. In addition, the junction resistance cannot be made arbitrarily small and there are two factors limiting the range of this parameter. First, because of the small junction area, the current densities are high and a rough estimate suggest that junction resistances below few tens of k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ will result in current densities sufficient to destroy the superconductivity in the tip. A second limit on the resistance is the transition from vacuum tunneling to a point contact regime which was observed to occur around $`R_N10`$ k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ . Experimentally we have been able to achieve resistances as low as 40 k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$.

Figure 3 shows typical data from measurements of the current-voltage characteristics at our base temperature 2.0 K for various junction resistances.

Note that the data is drawn for voltages below the sum of the energy gaps on a magnified current scale. The full $`IV`$ curves show a well-defined gap feature at $`\pm (\mathrm{\Delta }_{tip}+\mathrm{\Delta }_{Pb})=2.6`$ meV. The location of the gap feature does not change with decreasing resistance, and the high bias part of the curves falls on the same line when the curves are scaled by $`R_N`$. The low bias part of these curves, however, does not reduce to the same line upon scaling. We observe a current peak centered at finite voltage near zero bias, the height of which grows when $`R_N`$ is decreased. Since the SC gap is temperature dependent, the fact that the gap-edge feature appears at the same voltage regardless of the junction resistance is an indication that there is no self heating of the junction (see also Ref. ). The current peak observed in Fig. 3 cannot, therefore, be attributed to enhanced quasiparticle thermal excitations across the gap, and must be a signature of pair tunneling.

One can model the dynamics of the phase $`\varphi `$ in such a loosely coupled Josephson junction by a point particle moving in a periodic washboard-like potential landscape $`U(\varphi )=E_J(1\mathrm{cos}\varphi )`$ , and subject to a stochastic force due to thermal noise . For very high junction resistances (very shallow potential) the motion of the phase is completely randomized by thermal fluctuations as $`k_BTE_J`$. But as the resistance decreases the phase spends on average more and more time near the minima of $`U(\varphi )`$. We note that even at the lowest resistance achieved in this work $`E_J/k_B1`$ K, thus $`E_J`$ is comparable to, but still smaller than the thermal energy in the system. In this case the phase motion can be viewed as diffusive, and the $`IV`$ characteristics of such a junction have been calculated using this approach by Ivanchenko and Zil’berman  and Harada et al.  (and also by Ingold et al.  using a perturbative approach) to have the form

$$I(V)=\frac{I_{c,0}^2Z_{env}}{2}\frac{V}{V^2+V_p^2},$$
(2)
where $`V_p=(2e/\mathrm{})Z_{env}k_BT_n`$, considering the thermal fluctuations as Johnson noise generated by a resistor $`Z_{env}`$ at temperature $`T_n`$. The solid lines in Fig. 3 represent fits of our data to Eq. (2) with $`V_p`$ and $`AI_{c,0}^2Z_{env}/2`$ the only fitting parameters. Using Eqs. (2) and (1), a plot of $`\sqrt{(4e/\mathrm{})A/V_p}`$ vs. $`G_N=1/R_N`$ (Fig. 3 inset) is expected to be linear with zero intercept and slope $`\pi \mathrm{\Delta }/2e\sqrt{k_BT_n}`$. We obtain from a linear fit $`T_n=5.8\pm 0.6`$ K, and $`Z_{env}=1.5\pm 0.2`$ k$`\mathrm{\Omega }`$. The value of $`Z_{env}`$ is consistent with our experimental setup. The value of the noise temperature $`T_n`$ is higher than the actual temperature of the junction, which is not surprising as the isolation of the junction from room temperature circuitry is not perfect. It is also consistent with values reported from similar measurements on ultra-small, high resistance planar junctions .

Since our data agrees very well with theory, and it is extremely difficult to explain our results using a quasiparticle-only picture, especially once self-heating is ruled out , we are led to the conclusion that this is a fluctuation dominated dc Josephson effect. This effect was previously observed in ultra-small planar junctions and is well documented . Furthermore, we confirm that this effect stems from Josephson tunneling by measuring the response of the junction in the presence of microwave fields with frequency $`f=15.0`$ GHz, fed into a cylindrical cavity containing the STM by a semi-rigid coaxial cable antenna .

In the absence of fluctuations, when $`E_Jk_BT,E_C`$, a voltage source driven Josephson junction exhibits phase locked Shapiro current spikes at voltages corresponding to integral multiples of $`\mathrm{}\omega /2e`$, where $`\omega =2\pi f`$ is the angular frequency of the rf field , and the height of the k-th order spike $`I_k`$ at voltage $`V_k`$ is proportional to the Bessel function of order k of the reduced ac voltage induced on the junction. When strong thermal fluctuations dominate the phase dynamics, and especially in our case where the typical frequency of phase-slip events $`f_Tk_BT_n/h1.2\times 10^{11}`$ Hz is much greater than the frequency of the applied microwave field $`f=1.5\times 10^{10}`$ Hz, phase locking cannot be achieved and the $`IV`$ characteristics will exhibit a broad peak instead of discrete spikes.

This has been formally calculated by Falci et al.  who obtain the following expression for the pair tunneling current:

$$I(V)=\underset{k=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}J_k^2\left(\frac{2eV_{ac}}{\mathrm{}\omega }\right)\times I_{dc}\left(V\frac{k\mathrm{}\omega }{2e}\right)$$
(3)
where $`J_k`$ is the k-th order Bessel function, $`V_{ac}`$ is the induced ac voltage on the junction,and $`I_{dc}`$ is the dc characteristics of the junction. Numerical evaluation of Eq. (3) shows a broad current peak that diminishes in magnitude and moves away from zero bias as the intensity of the radiation is increased, and the center of mass of the Shapiro spikes shifts to higher voltages. In Figure 4 we present (a) a calculation of the differential conductance $`dI/dV`$ due to pair tunneling according to Eq. (3), and (b) our numerically differentiated data, which is in very good agreement with the calculation. Note that the calculation does not account for the quasiparticle tunneling current background. The observed conductance peaks shift linearly to higher bias voltages with increased ac voltage as predicted by Eq. (3). At higher bias voltages (not shown) we observe the expected quasiparticle tunneling current with a gap edge that smears, due to photon assisted tunneling, with increasing microwave power.

To summarize, we have demonstrated an STM based Josephson probe. We have shown that the tunneling characteristics obtained in this experiment are in good agreement with the model of fluctuation-dominated Josephson tunneling. While the fluctuation-dominated dc Josephson effect has been observed previously in ultra-small planar junctions , this is to our knowledge the first observation of the corresponding ac effect in the presence of microwave fields. We expect that a Josephson STM will prove useful as a probe of the SC pair amplitude on length scales of the order of the coherence length in high-Tc materials. In addition, the ease with which the junction resistance in an STM configuration can be controlled, makes this system favorable for studying the effects of thermal fluctuations and the Coulomb blockade (at low enough temperatures)  on the Josephson phase dynamics.

The authors would like to thank A. D. Truscott, O. Bourgeois, A. S. Katz, and S. Cybart. Special thanks to S. Nemat-Nasser for assistance with microwave techniques and equipment. This work was supported by DOE Grant No. DE-FG03-00ER45853, and by NSF Grant No. DMR9705180.


text:
# Observables in Relativistic Quantum Mechanics

## Abstract

We propose a quantum clock synchronization protocol in which Bob makes a remote measurement on Alice’s quantum clock via a third qubit acting as its proxy. It is shown that the resulting correlations are dependent on the choice of the hypersurface along which Bob’s measurement of the proxy is deemed to collapse the entangled state vector. A proper characterization of observables in relativistic quantum mechanics is therefore constrained by relativistic covariance as well as causality.

Whereas the unitary evolution of states in quantum mechanics (QM) is given by covariant equations of motion , the collapse of the state vector is manifestly not. Traditionally, the observable is a Hermitian operator defined on an equal-time hypersurface in the inertial reference frame of the observer. This hypersurface corresponds to the simultaneous state-vector collapse of the observed state. Although this does not necessarily violate causality, it is problematic from the viewpoint of special relativity since simultaneity is not Lorentz invariant . Covariant formalisms to describe state vector reduction have been discussed in Refs. . The problem of how operations in QM are constrained by causality has been considered by a number of authors . Issues pertaining to the causality and localizability of superoperators on bipartite systems have been dealt with by Beckman et al.  and Eggeling et al. .

The process of narrowing down of the probability distribution of the measured observable that accompanies a measurement is called reduction . Whether reduction reflects only a change in our knowledge of the system, or an objective alteration of the system such as in the manner described in Refs. , or an abrupt nonlocal collapse of the wavefunction precipitated by a classical observer, are important and difficult questions of physical and interpretational interest that lie beyond the scope of the present work. We are concerned only with the effective picture of how the quantum description of a system should change in response to measurements in a special relativistic setting.

To this end, we consider two (for simplicity:) stationary observers, Alice (located at $`x=a`$) and Bob (at $`x=b`$), sharing pairs of entangled qubits. Alice’s qubit (“$`A`$”) is a quantum clock, i.e., it has nondegenerate eigenstates, governed by the Hamiltonian $`H=\omega (|00||11|)`$ with energy eigenvalues $`\pm \omega `$ (setting $`\mathrm{}=1`$). The set-up is similar to the quantum clock synchronization protocol , except (for one) that Bob’s qubit (“$`B`$”) states remain degenerate.

At time $`t=0`$, Alice and Bob share the singlet state

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }(0)_{AB}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|01|10).$$
(1)
After lapse of time $`t`$ (which is also proper time in Alice’s rest-frame), the above state has evolved to:

$`|\mathrm{\Psi }(t)_{AB}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}}(e^{i\omega t}|01e^{i\omega t}|10)`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`|+|\psi ^+(t)||\psi ^{}(t),`$ (3)
where $`|\pm (1/\sqrt{2})(|0\pm |1)`$ and $`|\psi ^\pm (t)\pm i\mathrm{sin}\omega t|\pm \mathrm{cos}\omega t|`$. Suppose Alice measures in the $`+/`$ basis at time $`t_a`$. Thereby she prepares Bob’s qubit in one of the states $`|\psi ^\pm `$ instantaneously as seen from her frame. Subsequently, Bob measures qubit $`B`$ in the $`+/`$ basis. Alice classically communicates her result to Bob. Working on a large number of pairs of qubits, Bob expects to verify the joint $`CB`$ (and hence $`AB`$) measurement probabilities

$`P(+,+)`$ $`=`$ $`P(,)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{sin}^2\omega t_a,`$ (4)
$`P(+,)`$ $`=`$ $`P(,+)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{cos}^2\omega t_a.`$ (5)
We note that the correlations in Eq. (4) depend only on time $`t_a`$ of Alice’s measurement and are independent of the choice of the collapse hypersurface. Therefore, as such QCS is unsuitable to test for possible dependence of correlations on the reduction hypersurface.

Alternatively, Bob can make a remote measurement on Alice’s qubit via a proxy. By prior arrangement, Alice uses a third particle, a degenerate qubit denoted $`C`$. This qubit is made to locally interact with $`A`$, the outcome of which is represented by the unitary operation $`U`$ given by:

$$(\alpha |++\beta |)_C|\pm _A\stackrel{U}{}(\alpha |\pm +\beta |)_C|\pm _A,$$
(6)
where $`|\alpha |^2+|\beta |^2=1`$. Per the protocol, Alice begins with $`C`$ in the state $`|+`$. After the interaction, she classically sends Bob the proxy qubit $`C`$. The state of the 3-qubit system now is:

$$|\mathrm{{\rm Y}}_{CAB}=|+|+|\psi ^+(t)|||\psi ^{}(t),$$
(7)
in place of Eq. (2). Now Bob first measures $`C`$ at time $`t_1`$ in the $`+/`$ basis. Thereby he disentangles all three qubits and instantaneously knows whether Alice’s qubit is left in the state $`|+`$ or $`|`$ without Alice’s classical communication.

In traditional parlance, Bob’s measurement on $`C`$ collapses (or “decoheres”/“reduces”) the $`CAB`$ system along his equal-time hypersurface. In Figure 1, this is the surface 1, which intercepts $`A`$’s worldline at $`t_a=t_1`$, i.e., at event $`(a,t_1)`$. For each shared pair of qubits, if he finds $`C`$ (and hence, $`A`$) in the state $`|\pm `$, he concludes that $`B`$ is left in the state $`|\psi ^\pm `$. After performing a second measurement, on $`B`$, he expects to find the correlations in Eq. (4) with $`t_a=t_1`$. On the other hand, a third observer, whose equal-time hypersurface passing through event $`(b,t_1)`$ is given by surface 2 in Figure 1, would expect that Alice’s qubit disentangles at event $`(a,t_2)`$ and that Bob would find correlations given by Eq. (4) with $`t_a=t_2`$, rather than $`t_a=t_1`$. Similarly, correlations with $`t_a=t_3`$ in Eq. (4) are predicted to be found by an observer whose equal-time hypersurface is given by surface 3 in Figure 1, and so on. This implies that in order to ensure the Lorentz invariance of Eq. (4), a unique hypersurface should correspond to Bob’s measurement, which can inferred by Bob from the observed correlations. Tests of this kind can be implemented at present, e.g., using rapidly moving detectors (cf. Refs. ).

We wish to stress that the preceding result does not violate causality, since no classical signal is transferred along the hypersurface. Only correlations are affected. Indeed, in one sense the dependence of correlations on the choice of hypersurface, and thence the need for a covariant description of observables based on a singled out hypersurface, brings quantum measurement closer to the spirit of Special Relativity. A more detailed discussion of the above experiment and repercussions of our result for the epistemology and models of quantum measurement and for quantum information and relativistic quantum mechanics will be dealt with in future works.

I thank Mr. B. Sahoo and Dr. D. Chakalov for discussions and suggestions.