format: text

text:
# Complete Factorization of Equations of Motion in Supersymmetric Field Theories

## Abstract

We investigate bosonic sectors of supersymmetric field theories. We consider superpotentials described by one and by two real scalar fields, and we show how the equations of motion can be factorized into a family of first order Bogomol’nyi equations, so that all the topological defects are of the Bogomol’nyi-Prasad-Sommerfield type. We examine explicit models, that engender the $`Z_N`$ symmetry, and we identify all the topological sectors, illustrating their integrability.

PACS numbers: 11.27.+d, 11.30.Pb, 11.30.Er

Domain walls are defect structures that appear in diverse branches of physics. They usually live in three spatial dimensions as bidimensional objects that arise in systems described by potentials that contain at least two isolated degenerate minima. They involve energy scales as different as the ones that appear in Condensed Matter  and in Cosmology .

A lot of attention has been drawn recently to domain walls in field theories, in models that have been investigated under several distinct motivations . A very specific motivation concerns the presence of domain walls arising in between non zero vacuum expectation values of scalar fields in supergravity . Another line deals with the formation of defects inside domain walls . A great deal of attention has also been drawn to $`SU(N)`$ supersymmetric gluodynamics, where nonperturbative effects give rise to gluino condensates that may form according to a set of $`N`$ isolated degenerate chirally asymmetric vacua, from where domain walls spring interpolating between pairs of vacua .

The interest in domain walls in general widens because of the interplay between Field Theory and the low energy world volume dynamics of branes in String Theory . In the case of intersection of defects, in particular in Ref.  some aspects of wall junctions have been investigated when the discrete symmetry is the $`Z_N`$ symmetry, in systems described by a single complex field, with the superpotential

$$W(\phi )=\phi \frac{1}{N+1}\phi ^{(N+1)},N=2,3,\mathrm{}$$
(1)
The second work in Ref.  has shown that the tensions of the topological defects that appear in these systems can be cast to the form

$$t_{N,k}=\frac{2N}{(N+1)}\mathrm{sin}\left(\frac{k\pi }{N}\right),k=1,\mathrm{},\left[\frac{N}{2}\right]$$
(2)
where $`[N/2]`$ is the biggest integer not bigger than $`N/2`$ itself. In Ref.  the same result was obtained, in an investigation concerned with exact integrability, due to the presence of infinitely many conserved currents – see also Ref.  for other investigations, in particular on the explicit form of the BPS solutions at large N.

In the present work we examine the bosonic portion of supersymmetric theories, similar to the above models, that are of general interest to supersymmetry. Our investigations follow the lines of the former work , and bring new results on the presence of domain defects in models described by one and two real scalar fields. We start investigating systems with a single real scalar field. We write the Lagrangian density in the standard form

$$=\frac{1}{2}_\alpha \varphi ^\alpha \varphi \frac{1}{2}W_\varphi ^2$$
(3)
$`W=W(\varphi )`$ is the superpotential, and $`W_\varphi =dW/d\varphi `$. We search for defect structures, for static solutions of the equation of motion. We suppose the static solutions depend only on $`x`$, on a single spatial coordinate. The equation of motion becomes $`d^2\varphi /dx^2=W_\varphi W_{\varphi \varphi }`$. We examine the energy of the static configurations, and we associate with the second order ordinary differential equation of motion the two first order ordinary differential equations $`d\varphi /dx=\pm W_\varphi `$. These first order equations are Bogomol’nyi equations and their solutions are named BPS states, which saturate the lower bound in energy.

We see that solutions of the first order equations solve the second order equation of motion, and the proof follows by direct differentiation of the first order equations. We also see that one associates with the second order equation two first order equations. This fact suggests the possibility of factorizing the equation of motion into first order Bogomol’nyi equations. This is indeed the case, and we demonstrate this property by examining the ratio $`R(\varphi )=(d\varphi /dx)/(dW/d\varphi )`$. We use this expression to write

$$\frac{dR(\varphi )}{dx}=\left[W_\varphi ^2\left(\frac{d\varphi }{dx}\right)^2\right]\frac{W_{\varphi \varphi }}{W_\varphi ^2}$$
(4)
We notice that $`dW_\varphi ^2/dx=2(d\varphi /dx)W_\varphi W_{\varphi \varphi }`$ and that

$$\frac{d}{dx}\left(\frac{d\varphi }{dx}\right)^2=2\frac{d\varphi }{dx}W_\varphi W_{\varphi \varphi }$$
(5)
where we have used the equation of motion. These results show that the quantity $`S(\varphi )=W_\varphi ^2(d\varphi /dx)^2`$ does not depend on $`x`$ when $`\varphi (x)`$ solves the equation of motion. For those $`\varphi (x)`$ we have that $`lim_x\mathrm{}\varphi (x)v^k`$, with $`v^k`$ being a vacuum state, and $`lim_x\mathrm{}(d\varphi /dx)=0`$. Also, $`lim_x\mathrm{}W_\varphi =0`$, since the vacuum states are extrema of the superpotential. Thus we get that $`S(\varphi )`$ vanishes, and this allows writing $`R(\varphi )=\pm 1`$, which gives the first order Bogomol’nyi equations. This result shows that the second order equation of motion is completely equivalent to the two first order Bogomol’nyi equations. A direct consequence of this result is that in such models all the topological solutions are of the BPS type, that is, these models do not admit the presence of non-BPS states. The first order Bogomol’nyi equations can be readily integrated, so our result offers a new way of showing exact integrability.

We illustrate our result with some examples. There are several models of systems of a single real scalar field. We work with dimensionless quantities, and we consider the superpotential

$$W^n(\varphi )=\frac{1}{n+1}\varphi ^{n+1}\frac{1}{n+3}\varphi ^{n+3},n=0,1,\mathrm{}$$
(6)
Widely known examples are described by $`n=0,1`$, and identify the $`\varphi ^4`$ and the $`\varphi ^6`$ models, respectively. These models engender the $`Z_2`$ symmetry, and for $`n=0`$ there are two asymmetric vacua, $`v^1=1`$ and $`v^2=1`$. For $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$ there are three vacua, the former two and another one, symmetric, $`v_0=0`$, that appear with multiplicity $`n`$. For $`n=0`$ the first order equations give the standard defects, $`\varphi (x)=\pm \mathrm{tanh}(x)`$. These BPS solutions connect the two distinct asymmetric vacua. For $`n=1`$ the solutions are such that $`\varphi ^2(x)=(1/2)[1\pm \mathrm{tanh}(x)]`$. These BPS states connect the symmetric vacuum $`v_0=0`$ to the asymmetric ones, $`v^{1,2}=\pm 1`$. The models defined by the above superpotential are exactly solvable; the solutions can be known implicitly for $`n=2,3,\mathrm{}`$ The tensions are: for $`n=0`$, $`t^0=4/3`$, and for $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$, $`t^n=2/(n+1)(n+3)`$. They show that the width of the defect increases for increasing $`n`$.

The main difficulty to generalize the former result is that it is unclear how to write something like the ratio $`R(\varphi )`$ if we deal with two or more fields. However, we have found an interesting possibility, that appears in the case of two real scalar fields, when the superpotential is harmonic on the two fields. The issue here is that for $`W(\varphi ,\chi )`$ harmonic we can work with a complex superpotential, written as $`W(\phi )`$, in terms of the complex field $`\phi =\varphi +i\chi `$ – see Ref. . In this case the ratio $`R(\varphi )`$ generalizes to $`R(\phi )`$, in the form

$$R(\phi )=\frac{1}{\overline{W^{}(\phi )}}\frac{d\phi }{dx}$$
(7)
The superpotential $`W(\phi )`$ is holomorphic, and we consider systems that are described by the Lagrangian density

$$=\frac{1}{2}_\alpha \overline{\phi }^\alpha \phi \frac{1}{2}|W^{}(\phi )|^2$$
(8)
where $`W^{}(\phi )=W/\phi `$. The specific form of the potential shows that the critical values of the superpotential are minima of the potential. We search for defect structures, for static solutions of the equation of motion. We suppose the static solutions depend only on $`x`$, so the equation of motion becomes

$$\frac{d^2\phi }{dx^2}=W^{}(\phi )\overline{W^{\prime \prime }(\phi )}$$
(9)
We examine the energy of the static configurations to show that the second order ordinary differential equation is associated with a family of first order ordinary differential equations. They are

$$\frac{d\phi }{dx}=\overline{W^{}(\phi )}e^{i\xi }$$
(10)
where $`\xi `$ is some real constant. These first order equations are Bogomol’nyi equations. As usual, solutions of these first order equations also solve the second order equation of motion. The proof goes as follows: we differentiate the first order Eq. (10) to get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\phi }{dx^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx}}\overline{W^{}(\phi )}e^{i\xi }`$ (11)
$`=`$ $`\overline{W^{\prime \prime }(\phi )}{\displaystyle \frac{d\overline{\phi }}{dx}}e^{i\xi }=\overline{W^{\prime \prime }(\phi )}W^{}(\phi )`$ (12)
In the above equation, in the last equality we have used the first order Bogomol’nyi Eq. (10) once again.

The above models are somehow similar to the former models, described by a single real scalar field. Thus they may also lead to factorization of the equations of motion into first order Bogomol’nyi equations. We make this reasoning unambiguous by concentrating on the ratio $`R(\phi )`$ defined by Eq. (7). We can write

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dR(\phi )}{dx}}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{W^{}(\phi )}}}\right)^2\left[\overline{W^{}(\phi )}{\displaystyle \frac{d^2\phi }{dx^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\phi }{dx}}\overline{W^{\prime \prime }(\phi )}{\displaystyle \frac{d\overline{\phi }}{dx}}\right]`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\overline{W^{}(\phi )}}}\right)^2\left[\left|W^{}(\phi )\right|^2\left|{\displaystyle \frac{d\phi }{dx}}\right|^2\right]\overline{W^{\prime \prime }(\phi )}`$ (14)
We notice that

$$\frac{d}{dx}|W^{}(\phi )|^2=\overline{W^{}(\phi )}W^{\prime \prime }(\phi )\frac{d\phi }{dx}+W^{}(\phi )\overline{W^{\prime \prime }(\phi )}\frac{d\overline{\phi }}{dx}$$
(15)
We also notice that

$$\frac{d}{dx}\left|\frac{d\phi }{dx}\right|^2=W^{}(\phi )\overline{W^{\prime \prime }(\phi )}\frac{d\overline{\phi }}{dx}+\overline{W^{}(\phi )}W^{\prime \prime }(\phi )\frac{d\phi }{dx}$$
(16)
where we have used the equation of motion. We use the above Eqs. (15) and (16) to see that now the quantity $`S(\phi )=|W^{}(\phi )|^2|d\phi /dx|^2`$ is such that $`dS(\phi )/dx=0`$, that is, it does not depend on $`x`$ when $`\phi (x)`$ solves the equation of motion. For those $`\phi (x)`$ we have that $`lim_x\mathrm{}\phi (x)v^k`$, with $`v^k`$ a vacuum state, and $`lim_x\mathrm{}(d\phi /dx)=0`$. Also, $`lim_x\mathrm{}W^{}(\phi )=0`$, because the vacuum states are critical points of the superpotential. Thus we get that $`S(\phi )`$ vanishes, so that $`R(\phi )`$ does not depend on $`x`$. Also, $`|d\phi /dx|=|W^{}(\phi )|`$ and this allows writing $`|R(\phi )|=1`$. Thus we get that $`R(\phi )=e^{i\xi }`$ for some constant $`\xi `$, which leads to the first order Bogomol’nyi equations.

This result shows that the second order equation of motion is equivalent to the first order Bogomol’nyi equations. This is valid with the boundary conditions $`lim_x\mathrm{}\phi (x)v^k`$, $`lim_x\mathrm{}(d\phi /dx)=0`$, as required by the topological solutions. A direct consequence of this result is that in such models all the topological solutions are of the BPS type, that is, these models do not support non-BPS states. Furthermore, we recall that in systems of real scalar fields, one may occasionally run into solutions that engender no topological feature. They are named nontopological solutions, and have been found for instance in Ref. . We first notice that in systems of real scalar fields described by some superpotential, the nontopological solutions cannot appear as solutions of the first order Bogomol’nyi equations, because they should have zero energy, and this is the energy of the vacuum states. We add this to our former result to obtain another result, that in systems of two real scalar fields, when the superpotential is harmonic there is no room for non topological solutions.

To illustrate these results let us consider the superpotential

$$W_N^n(\phi )=\frac{1}{n+1}\phi ^{n+1}\frac{1}{N+n+1}\phi ^{N+n+1}$$
(17)
It is defined by $`N=2,3,\mathrm{}`$ and by $`n=0,1,\mathrm{}`$ The potential is given by

$$V=\frac{1}{2}(\overline{\phi }\phi )^n\left(1\overline{\phi }^N\right)\left(1\phi ^N\right)$$
(18)
The models engender the $`Z_N`$ symmetry, irrespective of the specific value of $`n`$, and the limit $`n0`$ leads us back to the model described by Eq. (2). Below we obtain the tension associated with every BPS solution in a closed form.

The critical values of $`W_N^n(\phi )`$ can be readily obtained. For $`n=0`$ they are $`v_N^k=\mathrm{exp}(i\xi _N^k)`$, where $`\xi _N^k=2\pi (k/N)`$ and $`k=1,2,\mathrm{},N`$. For $`n0`$, we have to add to this set of extrema the special value $`v_0=0`$, that appears with multiplicity $`n`$. Thus, while in the case $`n=0`$ we get $`N`$ asymmetric phases, degenerate, in the case $`n0`$ we have to include another phase, that breaks no symmetry of the original system. This includes the possibility of a chirally symmetric phase in $`SU(N)`$ supersymmetric gluodynamics.

We investigate the tension of the defect structures. Since the defects solve first order Bogomol’nyi equations, their tensions are obtained as: for $`n0`$, for solutions that connect the origin $`v_0`$ to any of the minima $`v_N^k`$ we can write $`t_{N,0}^n=|W_N^n(1)|`$, that define the radial sectors. The result is, for $`N`$ arbitrary, and for $`n=1,2,\mathrm{}`$

$$t_{N,0}^n=\frac{N}{(n+1)(N+n+1)}$$
(19)
We set $`N=2`$ to get $`t_{2,0}^n=2/(n+1)(n+3)`$, which reproduces former result, obtained below Eq. (6).

The other sectors represent defects that connect vacua in the unit circle. Here we have to calculate the quantity $`|W_N^n(v_N^N)W_N^n(v_N^k)|`$. The result can be cast to the form

$$t_{N,k}^n=2t_{N,0}^n\left|\mathrm{sin}\left[(n+1)\frac{k\pi }{N}\right]\right|$$
(20)
where $`k=1,2,\mathrm{},[N/2]`$ classifies the minima on the circle that the defect connects: $`k=1`$ for first neighbours, $`k=2`$ for second neighbours, and so forth. We set $`n=0`$ to get back to the former result, Eq. (2).

We use the superpotential (25) to write the family of Bogomol’nyi equations in the form, in terms of the real fields $`\varphi `$ and $`\chi `$,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\varphi }{dx}}`$ $`=`$ $`𝐏_N^n\mathrm{cos}\xi +𝐐_N^n\mathrm{sin}\xi `$ (21)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\chi }{dx}}`$ $`=`$ $`𝐐_N^n\mathrm{cos}\xi 𝐏_N^n\mathrm{sin}\xi `$ (22)
Here we have introduced the quantities

$$𝐏_N^n=P_n(1P_N)+Q_nQ_N$$
(23)
and

$$𝐐_N^n=Q_n(1P_N)P_nQ_N$$
(24)
which are defined in terms of the functions

$$P_k=e(\varphi i\chi )^k,Q_k=m(\varphi i\chi )^k$$
(25)
We illustrate the general situation considering particular values of $`N`$ and $`n`$. The case $`n=0`$ is special, because it does not admit the origin in configuration space as a vacuum state. We consider $`n=0`$ and $`N`$ even, $`N=2j,j=1,2,\mathrm{}`$. We examine the Bogomol’nyi equations for solutions that connect the vacua $`(\pm 1,0)`$, which are farthest neighbours in the set of $`N=2j`$ minima. In this case the equations demand that $`\chi =0`$, so there are only one-field solutions, obeying $`d\varphi /dx=\pm (1\varphi ^{2j})`$. In the case $`j=1`$ we get to the standard tanh defects that we have already described. For $`j=2,3,\mathrm{}`$ we have other solutions, that can be known implicitly. They behave as $`\varphi (x)=xx^{2j+1}/(2j+1)`$ in the limit $`x0`$. They are similar to the standard defect that we have already found. However, they are thinner and then more energetic as $`j`$ increases, as it can be readily verified. We use the tension result to get $`t_{2j,j}^0=4j/(2j+1)`$. This tension increases from $`4/3`$ for $`j=1`$ up to the finite value $`2`$ in the limit $`j\mathrm{}`$. There are other solutions, that connect other vacua in the unit circle.

In particular we consider the case $`N=2,n=0`$. The superpotential is $`\varphi \varphi ^3/3+\varphi \chi ^2`$. It is instructive to see this model with another superpotential, more general, $`W(\varphi ,\chi )=\varphi \varphi ^3/3r\varphi \chi ^2`$. The model with $`N=2,n=0`$ is obtained for $`r=1`$, the value that makes the superpotential harmonic. For $`r(0,1/2)`$, however, the more general model maps the anysotropic $`XY`$ model : there are one-field solutions describing Ising walls, and two-field solutions describing Bloch walls – see the last work in Ref. . For $`r=1`$, for non vanishing $`\chi `$ one must have $`\varphi ^2=1+\chi ^2/3`$, so there is no two-field solution connecting the minima $`(\pm 1,0)`$ for $`r=1`$. The lesson we learn here is that the condition $`W_{\varphi \varphi }+W_{\chi \chi }=0`$ certainly simplifies the model, favoring its integrability.

Similar behavior is also present in the case $`N=2`$, for $`n`$ arbitrary. Here all the vacuum states are in the $`\varphi `$ axis. The first order Bogomol’nyi equations only support topological solutions for $`\chi =0`$, irrespective of the value of $`n`$. The Bogomol’nyi equations effectively reduce to the form

$$\frac{d\varphi }{dx}=\pm \varphi ^n\left(1\varphi ^2\right)$$
(26)
which supports no nontrivial two-field solutions. They are the first order equations that appear in the superpotential of Eq. (6). The result is that for $`N=2`$ and $`n`$ arbitrary the systems reduce to systems of just one field. The tensions of the defects for $`N=2`$ are: for $`n=0`$, $`t_{2,1}^0=4/3`$, and for $`n0`$, $`t_{2,0}^n=2/(n+1)(n+3)`$, as noted below Eq.(19).

We examine $`t_{N,k}^n`$ to see that it vanishes for some values of $`N,n`$, and $`k`$. The condition $`n=N1`$ is special, because now the models only support $`N`$ radial sectors, that describe solutions connecting $`(0,0)`$ to any of the $`N`$ vacua in the unit circle. For $`n=N1`$ the BPS sectors effectively reduce to the sector described by just one field, and the Bogomol’nyi equations become

$$\frac{d\varphi }{dx}=\pm \varphi ^{N1}(1\varphi ^N)$$
(27)
The corresponding tensions are $`t_{N,0}^{N1}=1/2N`$. The case $`N=2`$ reproduces the case $`n=1`$ of the superpotential in Eq. (6). Other values of $`N`$ and $`n`$ give rise to radial sectors, and to sectors that connect vacua in the unit circle. An example of this is given by $`N=6`$ and $`n=2`$. This model supports six radial sectors, with tension $`t_{6,0}^2=2/9`$ and six other sectors, connecting first neighbours in the unit circle, with tension $`t_{6,1}^2=4/9`$, twice the tension of the radial solutions.

Evidently, the new idea of factorizing equations of motion into first order Bogomol’nyi equations is of direct interest to supersymmetry. It can be used in diverse applications, in particular to investigate the presence of BPS walls interpolating between distinct pairs of vacua, and exact integrability. The complete factorization of equations of motion in systems described by $`W(\varphi ,\chi )`$ harmonic, or by $`W(\phi )`$ holomorphic, ensures BPS feature to domain walls that spring in such systems. Because of the associated BPS character, these domain walls partially preserve the supersymmetry.

The superpotential $`W(\varphi ,\chi )`$ in general depends on a set of parameters, and these parameters can be adjusted to make $`W(\varphi ,\chi )`$ harmonic or not. An example of this can be found for instance in the second paragraph below Eq. (25), in the model used to map the anisotropic $`XY`$ model, which supports Ising and Bloch walls – in the case $`r=1`$ the superpotential there considered becomes harmonic, but the model does not support Bloch wall anymore. On the other hand, harmonic and non-harmonic superpotetials of the form $`W(\varphi ,\chi )`$ may be used to distinguish two types of supersymmetry, one with $`𝒩=1`$ and the other, enhanced to the case $`𝒩=2`$. This behavior has been examined for instance in Ref. . In that work, we can also find Wess-Zumino models with two complex fields, and there it was shown that the system supports topological sectors of the non-BPS type. Thus, the non-BPS solutions can be used as examples that show that our result does not hold in Wess-Zumino models with two or more complex fields.

We thank F.A. Brito, J.R. Morris, J.R.S. Nascimento, and R.F. Ribeiro for discussions, and CAPES, CNPq, PROCAD and PRONEX for partial support.


text:
# Mesoscopic Casimir forces from effects of discrete particle number in the quantum vacuum.

## 1 Introduction.

The attractive force between two parallel metallic plates in vacuum induced by the vacuum fluctuations of the electromagnetic field has been predicted by Casimir in 1948 . The calculation of the vacuum presure is based on the regularization schemes, which allows to separate the effect of the low-energy modes of the vacuum from the huge diverging contribution of the high-energy degrees of the freedom. There are different regularization schemes: Riemann’s zeta-function regularization; introduction of the exponential cutoff; dimensional regularization, etc. People are happy when different regularization schemes give the same results. But this is not always so (see e.g. , and in particular the divergencies occurring for spherical geometry in odd spatial dimension are not cancelled ). This raises some criticism against the regularization methods  or even some doubts concerning the existence and the magnitude of the Casimir effect.

The same type of the Casimir effect arises in condensed matter, due to thermal (see review paper ) or/and quantum fluctuations. When consindering the analog of the Casimir effect in condensed matter, the following correspondence must be taken into account. The ground state of quantum liquid corresponds to the vacuum of quantum field theory. The low-energy bosonic and fermionic quasiparticles in quantum liquid correspond to matter. The low energy modes with linear spectrum $`\omega =c_sp`$ can be described by the relativistic-type effective theory. The speed of sound $`c_s`$ or of other collective modes (spin waves, etc.) plays the role of the speed of light. This “speed of light” is the “fundamental constant” which enters the effective theory (quantum hydrodynamics in quantum liquids, or electromagnetic theory in real vacuum). The fundamental constants of the effective theory can be in principle calculated using the microscopic physics, an analog of the transPlanckian physics. The effective theory is valid only at low energy, which is much smaller than the “Planck cutoff”. In quantum liquids the analog of the Planck energy scale $`E_{\mathrm{Planck}}`$ is determined either by the mass $`m`$ of the atom of the liquid, $`E_{\mathrm{Planck}}mc_s^2`$, or by the Debye energy, $`E_{\mathrm{Planck}}\mathrm{}c_s/a_{\mathrm{Planck}}`$, where $`a_{\mathrm{Planck}}`$ is the interatomic distance which plays the role of the Planck length .

In some cases the analogy between effective theories in quantum vacuum and in quantum liquids becomes exact. For example, the low-energy fermionic and bosonic collective modes can correspond to the chiral fermions, and gravitational and gauge fields. This allows to simulate in condensed matter such phenomena as chiral anomaly, event horizon, etc., (see review ).

The advantage of the quantum liquid is that the structure of the quantum vacuum is known at least in principle. That is why one can calculate everything starting from the first principle microscopic theory. For example, one can calculate the vacuum energy under different external conditions, without invoking any cut-off or regularization scheme. Then one can compare the results with what can be obtained within the effective theory which deals only with the low-energy phenomena. The latter requires the regularization scheme in order to cancel the ultraviolet divergency, and thus one can judge whether and which of regularization schemes are physically relevant.

The traditional Casimir effects deals with the low energy massless modes. The typical massless modes in quantum liquid are sound waves. The acoustic field is desribed by the effective theory and corresponds to the massless scalar field. The walls provide the boundary conditions for the sound wave mode, usually these are the Neumann boundary conditions. Because of the quantum hydrodynamic fluctuations there must be the Casimir force between two parallel plates immersed in the quantum liquid. Within the effective theory the Casimir force is given by the same equation as the Casimir force acting between the conducting walls due to quantum electromagnetic fluctuations. The only modifications are: (i) the speed of light must be substututed by the spin of sound $`c_s`$; (ii) the factor $`1/2`$ must be added, since we have the scalar field of the longitudinal sound wave instead of two polarizations of light. If $`a`$ is the distance between the plates and $`A`$ is their area, then the $`a`$-dependent contribution to the ground state energy of the quantum liquid at $`T=0`$ which follows from the effective theory must be

$$E_C=\frac{\mathrm{}c_s\pi ^2A}{1440a^3}$$
(1)
Such microscopic quantities of the quantum liquid as the mass of the atom $`m`$ and interatomic space $`a_{\mathrm{Planck}}`$ do not enter explicitly the Eq.(1): the traditional Casimir force is completely determined by the “fundamental” parameter $`c_s`$ of the effective scalar field theory.

However, we shall show that the Eq.(1) is not always true. We shall give here an example, where the effective theory is not able to predict the Casimir force, since the microscopic high-energy degrees of freedom become important. In other words the “transPlanckian physics” shows up and the “Planck” energy scale explicitly enters the result. In this situation the Planck scale is physical and cannot be removed by any regularization.

The Eq.(1) gives a finite-size contribution to the energy of quantum liquid. It is inversly proportional to the linear dimension of the sistem, $`E_C1/L`$. However, for us it is important that it is not only the finite-size effect, but also the finite-$`N`$ effect, $`E_CN^{1/3}`$, where $`N`$ is the number of atoms in the liquid in the slab, which is a discrete quantity. Since the main contribution to the vacuum energy is $`L^3N`$, the relative correction of order $`N^{4/3}`$ means that the Casimir force is the mesoscopic effect. We shall show that in quantum liquids, the essentially larger mesoscopic effects, of the relative order $`N^1`$, can be more pronounced. Such a finite-$`N`$ effect cannot be described by the effective theory dealing with the continuous medium, even if the theory includes the real boundary conditions with the frequency dependence of dielectic permeability.

We shall start with the simplest quantum “liquid” – the one-dimensional Fermi gas – where the mesoscopic Casimir forces can be calculated exactly without invoking any regularization procedure.

## 2 Vacuum energy and cosmological constant.

### 2.1 Vacuum energy from microscopic theory

We consider the system of $`N`$ one-dimensional massless fermions, whose continuous energy spectrum is $`\omega (p)=cp`$, with $`c`$ playing the role of speed of light. Let us start with the microscopic theory, which is extremely simple: at $`T=0`$ the fermions simply occupy all the energy levels below the chemical potential $`\mu `$. In the continuous limit the total number of particles $`N`$ and the total energy in the one-dimensional “cavity” of size $`a`$ are expressed in terms of the Fermi momentum $`p_F=\mu /c`$ in the following way

$`N=na=a{\displaystyle _{p_F}^{p_F}}{\displaystyle \frac{dp}{2\pi \mathrm{}}}={\displaystyle \frac{ap_F}{\pi \mathrm{}}},`$ (2)
$`E=ϵ(n)a=a{\displaystyle _{p_F}^{p_F}}{\displaystyle \frac{dp}{2\pi \mathrm{}}}cp={\displaystyle \frac{acp_F^2}{2\pi \mathrm{}}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}\mathrm{}can^2.`$ (3)
Here $`n`$ is the particle density. The vacuum energy density of this condensed matter as a function of $`n`$ is $`ϵ(n)=(\pi \mathrm{}c/2)n^2`$. The equation of state comes from the thermodynamic identity relating the pressure $`P`$ and the energy:

$$P=\mu nϵ,$$
(4)
where $`\mu =dϵ/dn`$ $`=cp_F`$ is the chemical potential. In our case $`\mu =cp_F`$ and and obtains the equation of state for our vacuum

$$P=ϵ$$
(5)
which is conventional for the system of 1+1 relativistic fermions.

### 2.2 Vacuum energy in effective theory

As distinct from the microscopic theory, which deals with bare particles, the effective theory deals with the quasiparticles – fermions living at the level of the chemical potential $`\mu =cp_F`$. There are 4 different quasiparticles: (i) quasiparticles and quasiholes living in the vicinity of the Fermi point $`p_z=+p_F`$ have spectrum $`\omega _{qp}(p_+)=|\omega (p)\mu |=c|p_+|`$, where $`p_+=p_zp_F`$; (ii) quasiparticles and quasiholes living in the vicinity of the other Fermi point at $`p_z=p_F`$ have the spectrum $`\omega _{qp}(p_{})=|\omega (p)\mu |=c|p_{}|`$, where $`p_{}=p_z+p_F`$. In the effective theory the energy of the system is the energy of the Dirac vacuum $`E=_{p_+}c|p_+|_p_{}c|p_{}|`$. This energy is divergent and requires the cut-off, which is provided by the Fermi-momentum playing the role of the cut-off Planck momentum: $`p_Fp_{\mathrm{Planck}}`$. Note that even with this cut-off the energy obtained within the effective theory has a wrong sign, compared with correct microscopic result in Eq.(3).

The difference between the energies obtained in the microscopic and the effective theory approaches becomes important if the gravity is involved, since the energy is the source of the gravitational field. What kind of the vacuum energy is gravitating is the essence of the cosmological constant problem.

### 2.3 Relevant vacuum energy and cosmological constant

Inspection of those condensed matter systems, in which an effective gravity arises as a low energy phenomenon, suggests the possible answer: the vacuum energy density responsible for the cosmological constant is $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}=ϵ\mu n`$ . This follows from the microscopic physics: the conservation of the particle number $`N`$ requires that the quantum field theoretical description of the $`N`$-body system is given by $`\mu 𝒩`$, where $``$ and $`𝒩`$ are Hamiltonian and particle number operators in the second quantized form. The energy $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}`$ does not depend on the choice of the zero energy level: the shift $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of the zero energy level for one particle leads to the shift of the chemical potential $`\mu \mu +\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and of the total energy $`EE+N\mathrm{\Delta }`$, while $`\stackrel{~}{E}=E\mu N`$ remains invariant. In terms of $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}`$ the equation of state of the quantum vacuum is always

$$P=\stackrel{~}{ϵ}.$$
(6)
Though this is obtained using the microscopic theory ($`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}`$ is not determined within the effective theory), the result does not depend on details of the quantum liquid: it follows from the thermodynamic identity in Eq.(4).

The Eq.(6) is the same as the equation of state of the vacuum in quantum field theory, which follows from the Einstein cosmological term. Thus $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}`$ serves as the cosmological constant in the effective gravitational theory. For our vacuum represented by the Fermi gas, this cosmological constant is big, being determined by the “Planck” energy scale, $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}cp_{\mathrm{Planck}}^2`$. The minus sign is in agreement with the negative energy of the Dirac vacuum in effective theory, and, according to Eq.(6), this corresponds to the positive vacuum pressure: Fermi gas (and the Dirac vacuum too) can can be in equilibrium only in the presence of positive external pressure $`P`$.

There are, however, quantum liquids which can exist without an external pressure. Liquid 3He and liquid 4He at $`T=0`$ are examples. In both of these liquids there is some analog of gravity which arises in the low energy corner. Let us consider the ground state of such quantum liquid, if there is no contact with the environment. In a complete equilibrium the pressure $`P`$ in the liquid must be zero, since there is no external forces acting on the liquid. Then from the Eq.(6) one automatically obtains that for such equilibrium vacuum at $`T=0`$ the cosmological constant in the effective gravity is identically zero, $`\stackrel{~}{ϵ}0`$, without any fine tuning. This means that according to the quantum liquid analogy the stationary equilibrium vacuum is not gravitating (see more details in ).

## 3 Mesoscopic Casimir force.

### 3.1 Leakage of vacuum through the wall.

Now let us discuss the Casimir effect – the change of the vacuum pressure caused by the finite size effects in the vacuum. We must take into account the discreteness of the spectrum of bare particles or quasiparticles (depending on which theory we use, microscopic or effective) in the slab. Let us start with the microscopic description in terms of bare particles (atoms). We can use two different boundary conditions for particles, which give two kinds of discrete spectrum

$`\omega _k=k{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{a}}.`$ (7)
$`\omega _k=\left(k+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{a}}.`$ (8)
Eq.(7) corresponds to the “classical spinless” fermions with Dirichlet boundary conditions. The Eq.(8) is for the 1+1 Dirac fermions with no particle current through the wall; this case with the generalization to the $`d+1`$ fermions has been discussed in .

The vacuum is again represented by the ground state of the collection of the $`N`$ noninteracting particles. We know the structure of the “vacuum” completely and thus the “vacuum energy” in the slab is well defined: it is the energy of $`N`$ fermions in 1D box of size $`a`$

$`E(N,a)={\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\omega _k={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{2a}}N(N+1),\mathrm{for}\omega _k=k{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{a}},`$ (9)
$`E(N,a)={\displaystyle \underset{k=0}{\overset{N1}{}}}\omega _k={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{2a}}N^2,\mathrm{for}\omega _k=\left(k+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{a}}.`$ (10)
To calculate the Casimir force acting on the wall, we must introduce the vacuum on both sides of the wall. Thus let us consider three walls: at $`z=0`$, $`z=a_1<a`$ and $`z=a`$. Then we have two slabs with sizes $`a_1`$ and $`a_2=aa_1`$, and we can find the force acting on the wall between the two slabs, i.e. at $`z=a_1`$. We assume the same Neumann boundary conditions at all the walls. But we must allow the particles to transfer between the slabs, otherwise the main force acting on the wall between the slabs will be due to the different bulk pressure in the two slabs. This can be done due to, say, a very small holes (tunnel junctions) in the wall, which do not violate the boundary conditions and do not disturb the particle energy levels, but still allow the particle exchange between the two vacua.

This situation can be compared with the traditional Casimir effect. The force between the conducting plates arises because the electromagnetic fluctuations of the vacuum in the slab are modified due to boundary conditions imposed on electric and magnetic fields. In reality these boundary conditions are applicable only in the low-frequency limit, while the wall is transparent for the high-frequency electromagnetic modes, as well as for the other degrees of freedom of real vacuum (fermionic and bosonic), that can easily penetrate through the conducting wall. In the traditional approach it is assumed that these degrees of freedom, which produce the divergent terms in the vacuum energy, must be cancelled by the proper regularization scheme. That is why, though the dispersion of dielectic permeability does weaken the real Casimir force, nevertheless in the limit of large distances, $`a_1c/\omega _0`$, where $`\omega _0`$ is the characteristic frequency at which the dispersion becomes important, the Casimir force does not depend on how easily the high-energy vacuum leaks through the conducting wall.

We consider here just the opposite limit, when (almost) all the bare particles are totally reflected. This corresponds to the case when the penetration of the high-energy modes of the vacuum through the conducting wall is highly suppressed, and thus one must certainly have the traditional Casimir force. Nevertheless, we shall show that due to the mesoscopic finite-$`N`$ effects the contribution of the diverging terms to the Casimir effect becomes dominating. They produce highly oscillating vacuum pressure in condensed matter. The amplitude of the mesoscopic fluctuations of the vacuum pressure in this limit exceeds by factor $`p_{\mathrm{Planck}}a/\mathrm{}`$ the value of the conventional Casimir pressure. For their description the continuous effective low-energy theories are not applicable.

### 3.2 Mesoscopic Casimir force in 1d Fermi gas

The total vacuum energy in two slabs is

$`E(N,a_1,a_2)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{N_1(N_1+1)}{a_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{N_2(N_2+1)}{a_2}}\right),\omega _k=k{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{a}}`$ (11)
$`E(N,a_1,a_2)={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{N_1^2}{a_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{N_2^2}{a_2}}\right),\omega _k=\left(k+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\right){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi }{a}}.`$ (12)
$$N_1+N_2=N,a_1+a_2=a$$
(13)
Since particles can transfer between the slabs, the global vacuum state in this geometry is obtained by minimization over the discrete particle number $`N_1`$ at fixed total number $`N`$ of particles in the vacuum. If the mesoscopic $`1/N`$ corrections are ignored, one obtains $`N_1(a_1/a)N`$ and $`N_2(a_2/a)N`$, and the force acting on the wall between the two vacua is zero.

However, $`N_1`$ and $`N_2`$ are integer valued, and this leads to mesoscopic fluctuations of the Casimir force. Within a certain range of parameter $`a_1`$ there is a global minimum characterized by integers ($`N_1`$, $`N_2`$). In the neighboring intervals of parameters $`a_1`$, one has either ($`N_1+1`$, $`N_21`$) or ($`N_11`$, $`N_2+1`$). The force acting on the wall in the state ($`N_1`$, $`N_2`$) is obtained by variation of $`E(N_1,N_2,a_1,aa_1)`$ over $`a_1`$ at fixed $`N_1`$ and $`N_2`$:

$$F(N_1,N_2,a_1,a_2)=\frac{dE(N_1,N_2,a_1,a_2)}{da_1}+\frac{dE(N_1,N_2,a_1,a_2)}{da_2}.$$
(14)
When $`a_1`$ increases then at some critical value of $`a_1`$, where $`E(N_1,N_2,a_1,a_2)=E(N_1+1,N_21,a_1,a_2)`$, one particle must cross the wall from the right to the left. At this critical value the force acting on the wall changes abruptly (we do not discuss here an interesting physics arising just at the critical values of $`a_1`$, where the degeneracy occurs between the states ($`N_1,N_2`$) and ($`N_1+1,N_21`$); at these positions of the wall (or membrane) the particle numbers $`N_1`$ and $`N_2`$ are undetermined and are actually fractional due to the quantum tunneling between the slabs ). Using for example the spectrum in Eq.(12) one obtains for the jump of the Casimir force:

$$F(N_1\pm 1,N_21)F(N_1,N_2)=\mathrm{}c\pi \left(\frac{\pm 2N_1+1}{2a_1^2}+\frac{\pm 2N_21}{2a_2^2}\right)\pm \frac{\mathrm{}c\pi N}{a_1a_2}.$$
(15)
The same result for the amplitude of the mesoscopic fluctuations is obtained if one uses the spectrum in Eq.(11).

In the limit $`a_1a`$ the amplitude of the mesoscopic Casimir force

$$|\mathrm{\Delta }F_{\mathrm{meso}}|=\frac{\mathrm{}c\pi n}{a_1}=\frac{\mathrm{}c\pi n^2}{N_1}\frac{cp_{Planck}}{a_1}.$$
(16)
It is by factor $`1/N_1=(\pi \mathrm{}/a_1p_F)^3(\pi \mathrm{}/a_1p_{Planck})^3`$ smaller than the vacuum energy density in Eq.(3). On the other hand it is by the factor $`p_Fa_1p_{Planck}a_1`$ larger than the traditional Casimir pressure, which in one-dimensional case is $`P_C\mathrm{}c/a_1^2`$. The divergent term which linearly depends on the Planck momentum cutoff $`p_{Planck}`$ as in Eq.(16) has been revealed in many different calculations (see e.g. ), and attempts have made to invent the regularization scheme which would cancel the divergent contribution.

### 3.3 Mesoscopic Casimir forces in a general condensed matter system.

The equation (16) for the amplitude of the mesoscopic fluctuations of the vacuum pressure can be immediately generalized for the $`d`$-dimensional space. The mesoscopic random pressure comes from the discrete nature of the underlying quantum lquid, which represents the quantum vacuum. When the volume $`V_1`$ of the vessel changes continuously, the equilibium number $`N_1`$ of particles changes in step-wise manner. This results in abrupt changes of pressure at some critical values of the volume:

$$P_{\mathrm{meso}}P(N_1\pm 1)P(N_1)=\pm \frac{dP}{dN_1}=\pm \frac{mc_s^2}{V_1}\pm \frac{cp_{Planck}}{V_1},$$
(17)
where again $`c_s`$ is the speed of sound, which plays the role of the speed of light; $`m`$ is mass of atom of the underlying liquid which plays the role of the Planck mass. The mesoscopic pressure is determined by microscopic “transPlanckian” physics, and thus such microscopic quantity as the mass of the atom, the “Planck mass”, enters this force.

For the pair correlated systems, such as Fermi superfluids with finite gap in the energy spectrum, the amplitude must be twice larger. This is because the jumps in pressure occurs when two particles (the Cooper pair) tunnel through the junction, $`\mathrm{\Delta }N=\pm 2`$. The transition with $`\mathrm{\Delta }N=\pm 1`$ requires breaking of the Cooper pair and costs energy equal to the gap.

For the spherical shell of radius $`a`$ immersed in the quantum liquid the mesoscopic pressure is

$$P_{\mathrm{meso}}\pm \frac{3mc_s^2}{4\pi a^3}\pm \frac{3p_{\mathrm{Planck}}c}{4\pi a^3},$$
(18)
## 4 Discussion.

Let us compare the mesoscopic vacuum pressure in Eq.(18) arising due to the finite-$`N`$ effects, with the traditional Casimir pressure obtained within the effective theories for the same spherical shell geometry. In case of the original Casimir effect the effective theory is quantum electrodynamics. In superfluid 4He this is the low-frequency quantum hydrodynamics, which is equivalent to the relativistic scalar field theory. In other superfluids, in addition to phonons the other low-energy modes are possible, the massless fermions and the sound-like collective modes such as spin waves. The modes with linear (“relativistic”) spectrum in quantum liquids play the role of the relativistic massless scalar fields and chiral fermions. The boundary conditions for the scalar fields are typicallythe Neumann boundary conditions, corresponding to the (almost) vanishing mass or spin current through the wall (let us recall that there must be some leakage through the shell to provide the equal bulk pressure on both sides of the shell).

If we believe in the traditional regularization schemes which cancel out the ultraviolet divergence, then from the effective scalar field theory one must obtain the Casimir pressure $`P_C=dE_C/dV=K\mathrm{}c_s/8\pi a^4`$, where $`K=0.4439`$ for the Neumann boundary conditions; $`K=0.005639`$ for the Dirichlet boundary conditions . The traditional Casimir pressure is completely determined by the effective low-energy theory, it does not depend on the microscopic structure of the liquid: only the “speed of light” $`c_s`$ enters this force. The same pressure will be obtained in case of the pair-correlated fermionic superflids, if the fermionic quasiparticles are gapped and their contribution to the Casimir pressure is exponentially small compared to the contribution of the massless bosonic collective modes.

However, at least in our case, the result obtained within the effective theory is not correct: the real Casimir pressure in Eq.(18) is produced by the finite-$`N`$ mesoscopic effect. It essentially depends on the Planck cut-off parameter, i.e. it cannot be determined by the effective theory; it is much bigger, by the factor $`p_{\mathrm{Planck}}a/\mathrm{}`$, than the traditional Casimir pressure; and it is highly oscillating. The regularization of these oscillations by, say, averaging over many measurements; by noise; or due to quantum or thermal fluctuations of the shell; etc., depend on the concrete physical conditions of the experiment.

This shows that in some cases the Casimir vacuum pressure is not within the responsibility of the effective theory, and the microscopic (transPlanckian) physics must be evoked. If two systems have the same low-energy behavior and are described by the same effective theory, this does not mean that they necessarily experience the same Casimir effect. The result depends on many factors, such as the discrete nature of the quantum vacuum, the ability of the vacuum to penetrate through the boundaries, dispersion relation at high frequency, etc. It is not excluded that even the traditional Casimir effect which comes from the vacuum fluctuations of the electromagnetic field is renormalized by the high-energy degrees of freedom

Of course, the extreme limit of almost impenetrable wall, which we considered, is not applicable to the original (electromagnetic) Casimir effect, where the overwhelming part of the fermionic and bosonic vacua easily penetrates the conducting walls, and where the mesoscopic fluctuations must be small. But are they negligibly small? In any case our example shows that the cut-off problem is not the mathematical, but the physical one, and the physics dictates the proper regularization scheme or the proper choice of the cut-off parameters.

The dependence of the magnitude of a low-energy effects on the physics beyond the effective theory was discussed also in connection with the Chern-Simons term in relativistic quantum field theories with violated Lorentz and CPT symmetries . Quantum liquids provide an example of the finite high-energy system where the “transPlanckian” microscopic physics determines the coefficient in front of the Chern-Simons term , which remains ambiguous within the effective theory.

I thank A.Yu. Kamenshchik for fruitful discussion. This work was supported in part by the Russian Foundation for Fundamental Research and by European Science Foundation.


text:
# The QCD Mixed Phase: Shaken, not Stirred

## Abstract

Baryon fluctuations exceeding Poisson expectations can signal a nearly first order phase transition at RHIC. We show how these fluctuations can be measured, and apply a dissipative-hydrodynamic formulation used in condensed matter physics to simulate their evolution.

If the phase transition from quark matter to hadron gas is first order, matter at the appropriate temperatures and densities can exist as a mixed phase consisting of plasma droplets in equilibrium with a surrounding hadronic fluid. If formed in ion collisions, this mixed phase can produce large event-by-event fluctuations as the system hadronizes. Extraordinary baryon fluctuations  can accompany a first order transition at high baryon density  and, possibly, a near transition at zero baryon density , . In ref. , we argued that baryon number conservation and rapid longitudinal expansion limits the extent to which post-hadronization interactions can erode fluctuations in a rapidity interval. Here, we further explore the rise and fall of these fluctuations using real-time lattice simulations .

At high baryon density, QCD with two massless flavors can exhibit a first order transition whose coexistance curve culminates in a tricritical point at temperature $`T_c`$ and baryon chemical potential $`\mu _c`$ . For $`T>T_c`$ and $`\mu <\mu _c`$, a second order phase transition breaks/restores chiral symmetry. If the quark masses are sufficiently large, the second order transition is replaced by a smooth transformation (chiral symmetry is explicitly broken). The first order line remains, however, with the tricritical point replaced by a critical point in the same universality class as a liquid–gas transition.

At RHIC, baryon density may also serve as an approximate order parameter for the nearly first order transition at small net baryon density. Lattice simulations  and general arguments  show that the baryon susceptibility $`\chi `$ at $`\mu =0`$ can increase suddenly as temperature is increased near $`T_h150`$ MeV, where the chiral order parameter and the energy density change sharply. Jumps in the susceptibility commonly accompany first order transitions. For a liquid-gas transition, $`\chi =\rho /\mu `$ is proportional to the compressibility: steam is much more compressible than water.

Large fluctuations in baryon number occur during phase separation in a first order transition. Figure 1 (left) shows the phase diagram in the $`T\rho `$ plane, where $`\rho `$ is the baryon density. A uniform system quenched into the outer parabolic region below $`T_c`$ will separate into droplets at high baryon density $`\rho _q`$ surrounded by matter at density $`\rho _h`$. The net baryon number $`N_B`$ in a sub-volume of the system varies depending on the number of droplets in the sub-volume. The variance of the baryon number $`V=N_B^2N_B^2`$ can exceed the equilibrium expectation by an amount

$$\mathrm{\Delta }Vf\left(1f\right)\left(\mathrm{\Delta }N_B\right)^2,$$
(1)
where $`f`$ is the fraction of the high density phase in the sub-volume $`V`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }N_B=(\rho _q\rho _h)V`$. We will argue that nonequilibrium evolution in ion collisions can allow these fluctuations to survive post-hadronization evolution.

We stress that a super-poissonian variance such as (1) is straightforward to test experimentally by measuring

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_p=\left(V_pN_p\right)/N_p^2,$$
(2)
where $`N_p`$ is the number of protons in a rapidity interval and $`V_p`$ is its variance. This quantity vanishes in equilibrium and is related to the more familiar scaled variance $`\omega _p=N_p(1+\mathrm{\Omega }_p)`$. Significantly, we find that $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$ equals the total $`\mathrm{\Omega }_B`$ – which includes unseen neutrons – for a range of thermal and Glauber models that respect isospin symmetry. Specifically, $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p=\mathrm{\Omega }_B`$ because the probability of $`N_p`$ satisfies $`p(N_p)=_{N_B}p(N_B)p(N_B|N_p)`$ with a binomial distribution $`p(N_B|N_p)`$ for $`N_p`$ at fixed baryon number $`N_B`$. Isospin fluctuations can alter $`p(N_B|N_p)`$ near the tricritical point or in the presence of a disoriented chiral condensate, but that will be evident from pion measurements.

To describe the evolution of the inhomogeneous mixed phase, we follow the standard condensed matter practice and write a Ginzburg-Landau free energy:

$$f=\kappa \left(\rho \right)^2/2+f_0,f_0=m^2\left(\rho \rho _c\right)^2/2+\lambda \left(\rho \rho _c\right)^4/4$$
(3)
where $`f_0(\rho )`$ describes the excursions of the baryon density $`\rho `$ from its equilibrium value in the uniform matter. The $`\kappa `$ term describes the droplet surface tension, $`\sigma \kappa ^{1/2}`$. For $`m^2T_cT`$ we find the correct liquid-gas critical exponents. The values $`\rho _h`$ and $`\rho _q`$ in fig. 1 (right) correspond to the equilibrium densities at $`T<T_c`$. To describe the dynamics of the system, we must account for the fact that baryon number is conserved. Furthermore, it is crucial to include dissipation to describe this strongly fluctuating system. The simplest equations that meet these criteria are:

$$\rho /t=M^2\mu ,\mu =f_0^{}\kappa ^2\rho ;$$
(4)
model B in . We identify $`D=2m^2M`$ as the baryon diffusion coefficient by linearizing (4) about $`\rho _h`$.

To describe nuclear collisions, we extend (4) to include drift due to Bjorken longitudinal flow:

$$\rho /\tau +\rho /\tau =M^2\mu ,$$
(5)
where $`\tau `$ is the proper time and $`\mu `$ is given by (3, 4). The new term forces the average density to decrease as $`\rho \tau ^1`$, driving the system through the phase coexistence region. Fluctuations grow when densities are near $`\rho _c`$ (c.f. fig. 1).

Phase separation is most dramatic if the rapid expansion drives the system into the unstable region; i.e., the inner parabolic region in fig. 1 (left), corresponding to $`f_0^{\prime \prime }(\rho )<0`$. Droplets form from runaway density fluctuations in a process known as spinodal decomposition. Linearizing near $`\rho _c`$, we estimate the time scale for this process to be $`\tau _R=8\xi ^2/D`$, where $`\xi =\kappa ^{1/2}/m`$ is the correlation length. For times $`t\tau _R`$ the system undergoes a nonlinear evolution in which droplets merge, reducing their surface energy.

Figure 2 compares 2+1 dimensional numerical simulations of (4) and (5) for $`\psi =(\rho \rho _c)/\rho _c`$ in the transverse plane. We take $`\tau _R`$ and $`\xi `$ to each be 1 fm as motivated in . ($`D8`$ fm is consistent with calculations in ). The expanding system reaches $`\rho _c`$ at $`\tau _0=5`$ fm. Expansion shown in fig. 2b prevents droplets from merging as in fig. 2a. Because this is a dissipative system, we must apply thermal noise at each lattice site at $`\tau _0`$ to seed phase separation. The memory of the initial conditions is essentially lost for $`\tau \tau _0>\tau _R`$.

Figure 3 shows the computed variance for two different initial times and for two rapidity intervals. The variance is computed from a sample of 5000 simulated events, each unique due to the thermal noise. We see that the super-poissonian fluctuations grow appreciably by $`\tau 2\tau _0`$. This variance drops as the rapidity interval is increased. We find that variance is governed by the ratio $`\tau _0/\tau _R`$, which compares the expansion and droplet-growth time scales.

We emphasize that these calculations include diffusion, which dampens the fluctuations once the system becomes stable. For (3) with $`\rho \tau ^1`$, the system is unstable only for $`\tau <2.3\tau _0`$. We extend the calculations to much longer times to demonstrate that the fluctuations in rapidity survive well past the freezout time, of order 10–30 fm, in accord with . We comment that convection, viscosity and collision-geometry effects can reduce $`\mathrm{\Omega }_p`$ compared to fig. 3. Moreover, our phase transition effect may be compensated to some extent by the effect discussed by Koch and Asakawa in these proceedings, which owes to the difference between fluctuations in a plasma compared to a hadron gas. Nevertheless, the strength of the signal in our exploratory calculations invites further work.

We thank R. Bellwied, P. Braun Munzinger, K. Elder, M. Grant, J. Kapusta, G. Kunde, P. Keyes, B. Müller, I. Mishustin, C. Pruneau and S. Voloshin.


text:
# Cosmic Ray Spectrum “Knee”: A Herald of New Physics?

## Abstract

We argue that the knee in the cosmic ray spectrum at energies $`E\stackrel{>}{}10^{15.5}`$ eV is due to “new physics”, namely to a channel in the high energy ($`\stackrel{>}{}`$ TeV in the CM) proton interactions hitherto unaccounted for in estimating the energies of the air shower cosmic rays. The new interaction transfers part of the primary particle’s energy to modes which do not trigger the experimental arragement (neutrinos, lightest supersymmetric particle, gravitons ) thus underestimating its true energy. We show that this underestimate leads naturally to the observed break (the “knee”) in the inferred cosmic ray spectrum. The suggestion we advance fits nicely to current theoretical extensions of the Standard Model (supersymmetry, technicolor, low scale gravity) where new physics at the TeV scale manifests with the distinct signature of missing energy. We present a simple model where the new physics proceeds via gluon fusion and assuming a single power law for the galactic ($`E\stackrel{<}{}10^{18.5}`$ eV) cosmic ray spectrum, we produce a good fit to the data in the $`10^{14}10^{18.5}`$ eV range. Our proposal should be testable in laboratory experiments (LHC) in the near future and, should it be proven correct, it would signal besides the presence of new physics in high energy interactions, a drastically different interpretation of the sources and acceleration of cosmic rays.

The origin of cosmic rays is a subject which, despite the observational and theoretical progress made since their discovery has not been settled as yet. The reason can be traced to the breadth of their spectrum which extends over 11 orders of magnitude to $`\stackrel{>}{}10^{20}`$ eV (see e.g.  for a recent review) and the fact that by virtue of their diffusion through the galaxy most information concerning their sources is practically lost. Thus, to zeroth order, especially at higher energies ($`>10^{12}`$ eV) at which cosmic ray composition measurements are difficult, the sole source of clues about the cosmic ray origin and acceleration is their over all spectrum.

The cosmic ray spectrum consists, roughly speaking, of three distinct sections, each of power law form, $`E^\gamma `$ in the particle energy $`E`$, but with different values for the index $`\gamma `$: In the range $`10^910^{15.5}`$ eV the index $`\gamma 2.75`$. Above this energy (the “knee”), the spectrum steepens to a power law of $`\gamma 3`$ which extends to $`10^{18}`$ eV, with some evidence for a further steepening in the spectrum indicating a possible cut-off at $`E10^{18.5}`$ eV . This steepening is reversed at slightly larger energies (at the “ankle”) with the spectrum flattening to $`\gamma 22.5`$ and extending to $`E10^{20.5}`$ eV, at which point the existing statistics are too poor to provide a well defined flux measurement.

Considering that cosmic rays propagate in the galaxy by diffusion through the tangled interstellar magnetic field, one can argue convincingly that particles with gyroradii larger than the galactic scale height ($`1`$ kpc) ought to be extragalactic. Given that the gyroradius of a proton of energy $`E(eV)`$ is $`R_g1\mathrm{k}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}E_{18}/B_6`$ (where $`E_{18}=E(\mathrm{eV})/10^{18}`$ and $`B_6`$ is the galactic magnetic field in $`\mu G`$), it is expected that protons of energy $`E\stackrel{>}{}10^{18.5}`$ would escape freely from the galaxy. This notion is in agreement with the indication of an additional steepening or a potential cut-off in the spectrum at $`E\stackrel{>}{}10^{18}`$ eV, with the subsequent flattening at higher energies being naturally interpreted as due to a “harder” extragalactic component.

This latter extragalactic component, which includes several events above $`10^{20}`$ eV, has caught recently the attention of the community: It is well known  that protons of energies $`\stackrel{>}{}10^{19.5}`$ eV suffer catastrophic photopion production losses on the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB). If this extragalactic component permeates uniformly all space, as it was thought to be the case, this process should then lead to a cut-off (the so-called GZK cut-off) rather than an excess flux above this energy. The potential identification of the source of this component with either gamma ray bursts within 100 Mpc , a novel, neutral hadron immune to the photopion losses , or the decay of heavier Big–Bang relics  has provided the impetus for a recent flare of activity regarding the origin of this specific part of the cosmic ray spectrum (see  for a review).

However, it is not only this highest energy regime which defies our understanding of the cosmic ray spectrum origin. The spectrum at energies $`E\stackrel{<}{}10^{18.5}`$ eV, thought to be galactic (see however ) and presumably easier to comprehend, challenges on its own right our understanding of its origin, arguably more severely than the extragalactic component, at least from the purely “fitting the curve” point of view.

This last statement, while counter intuitive at first glance, it is nonetheless true, as shown by the following simple argument (see also ): It is easy to obtain a “flattening” of the (any) spectrum by combining two independent components, since the harder one will always dominate at sufficiently high energies. This appears to be the case with the cosmic ray spectrum at $`E\stackrel{>}{}10^{18.5}`$ eV. On the other hand, producing a continuous spectrum with a steepening break similar to that observed at the cosmic ray spectrum “knee” is much harder: It demands the presence of two distinct acceleration mechanisms, one of which carries the particles to the “knee” with spectrum $`E^{2.75}`$ and a second one which takes practically all the particles that reach the “knee” via the first mechanism and only these, to a thousandfold higher energy with spectrum $`E^3`$. If this second acceleration mechanism accelerated only a fraction of the particles that reach the “knee” (a perfectly “reasonable” assumption for most acceleration processes), it would lead to a (not observed) discontinuity in the spectrum at this energy.

To complicate matters further, the most promising acceleration mechanism of galactic cosmic rays, namely supernova shocks, can barely produce (even theoretically) particles of energies as high as $`E_MZ10^{14}`$ eV  (the nuclear charge $`Z`$ appears because of the dependence of the gyroradius on it), even with the diffusion coefficient at the Bohm value . Energies as high as that of the “knee” can be achieved only by assuming that the cosmic ray composition at this point consists mainly of Fe nuclei. There exists no known (to the authors) mechanism which would carry even a fraction of the (diffusing through interstellar space) particles of the “knee” to the energy of the “ankle”, in a way that produces the observed spectrum. Furthermore, it is hard to argue that the transition between the two power laws at the “knee” could be due to some unknown transport effect of the cosmic rays in the galaxy, because it appears to be much too sharp for such an interpretation.

Motivated by the above considerations we are led to propose that the break at the “knee” of the cosmic ray spectrum is indicative, not of a distinct acceleration mechanism, but of the emergence of “new physics” in the high energy proton interactions, namely of a new channel beyond those considered in the models employed to infer the primary particle energy in the air shower arrays. We argue that if a fraction of the energy associated with this new channel is in a form that does not trigger these detectors, it will result to an underestimate of the primary particle’s energy (a similar suggestion was made in , based on the interpretation of certain peculiarities in the Extensive Air Shower (EAS) data as a sharp change in inelasticity with energy). For a cosmic ray spectrum which is a single power law in energy, this underestimate will then manifest as an increase in its slope (a “knee”) at the energy at which this new channel turns-on, with the spectrum reverting to its original slope when it eventually saturates. Furthermore, to account for the break observed at the “knee” of the cosmic ray spectrum, this new channel should “turn-on” at an energy $``$ TeV at the center of mass, a scale tantalizingly close to that at which the emergence of “new physics” is anticipated on the basis of rather general considerations .

As candidates of such new physics we cite supersymmetry (SUSY), a symmetry that interrelates bosons and fermions , technicolor, the postulate that the Higgs boson is composite made of “techni-fermions” much the way that the proton is made of quarks , or the postulate that the observed Planck scale $`M_P10^{19}`$ GeV is a $`4`$dimensional epiphenomenon of the “true” scale of gravity which is of order of 1 TeV, “living” in a higher dimensional world of $`D=n+4`$ dimensions . According to this last proposal, the gravitational interaction would acquire the strength of the rest interactions at the characteristic scale of $`1`$ TeV, with prolific graviton production (which of course do not register in the EAS detectors) in particle interactions above this energy. Interestingly, energy which does not register in the EAS detectors (needed to account for the break at the “knee”) is predicted also by the other two proposals: In SUSY this is the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP). In techni-color models, $`pp`$ collisions at energies $`\stackrel{>}{}1`$ TeV produce techni-hadrons (hadrons carrying techni-color besides the ordinary color); techni-hadron decay leads to $`W^{}`$s of which a significant fraction decays in neutrinos that also do not trigger the EAS detectors.

One should note from the outset that EAS experiments, by observing the results of reprocessing high energy interactions of a largely unknown composition through 1000 gm cm<sup>-2</sup> of atmosphere, can provide but the most general characteristics of these events and as such are not a substitute for the more detailed accelerator experiments. However, some of the general properties of these interaction can be deduced in these experiments. Such an example is the logarithmic increase of the strong interaction cross section with energy, which was first inferred from the energy dependence of the height of maximum development of cosmic ray showers. The arguments on the nature of the break at the “knee” (i.e. that it is convex rather than concave) are of this general character and their interpretation should be viewed in the same spirit.

To avoid making a specific choice from the list of available alternatives at this early stage of our investigation, we model the process simply as the production and decay of a system of total invariant mass $`M_0=2`$ TeV and we parameterize the entire process by two parameters: the fraction $`y`$ of the primary particle’s energy that registers in the cosmic ray detectors and the asymptotic (i.e. at energies much higher than the production threshold) ratio $`\alpha `$ of the cross section associated with this new channel to that of the standard interactions.

On dimensional grounds, the cross section of the new channel is assumed to be of the form

$$\sigma _n(E)=\frac{B}{s}g(\tau )$$
(1)
where $`B`$ is a dimensionless constant (related to $`\alpha `$), $`s=2m_pE`$ and $`g(\tau )`$ is a function of the dimensionless ratio $`\tau =M_0^2/s`$. At high energies we expect the $`pp`$ interactions to be dominated by gluon scattering and accordingly

$$g(\tau )=_\tau ^1f(x)f(\tau /x)𝑑x$$
(2)
where $`f(x)`$ is the gluon distribution within the proton, which we parameterize as

$$f(x)=\frac{1}{2}(N+1)\frac{(1x)^N}{x},\mathrm{with}N=6$$
(3)
For the conventional $`pp`$ interactions the cross section rises slowly with energy and for our purposes we consider it to be a constant $`\sigma _o(E)80`$ mbarn. At energies above the new physics threshold the cosmic ray interactions will proceed either through the standard channels with probability $`P_o(E)=\sigma _o(E)/[\sigma _o(E)+\sigma _n(E)]`$ or through the new channel with probability $`P_n(E)=\sigma _n(E)/[\sigma _o(E)+\sigma _n(E)]`$; given that $`\tau g(\tau )1/C_6=`$ constant for $`\tau 0`$, setting $`B=M_0^2C_6\sigma _o\alpha `$ we get $`\sigma _n(E)/\sigma _o(E)\alpha `$ for $`EM_0^2/2m_p`$ as desired.

Whenever high energy cosmic ray particles interact through the new channel, events of total energy $`E^{}`$ will register at the detector an energy $`E=yE^{}(y<1)`$. Therefore, if the cosmic ray intensity is $`I(E)`$, for particles interacting through this new channel, the inferred intensity will be of the form

$$I(E^{})P_n(E^{})\delta (EyE^{})𝑑E^{}=\frac{1}{y}I\left(\frac{E}{y}\right)P_n\left(\frac{E}{y}\right)$$
(4)
while for events interacting through the conventional channel the resulting intensity will have a similar form but with $`y=1`$ and $`P_o(E)`$ in place of $`P_n(E/y)`$.

Assuming the incident galactic cosmic ray spectrum to be of the form $`I_{IG}(E)=E^\gamma exp(E/E_0)`$ with $`\gamma 2.75`$ and $`E_010^{18.5}`$ eV, a value consistent with the earlier argument on the cosmic ray gyroradii at $`EE_0`$, the observed cosmic ray flux at an energy $`E`$ will be

$$I_O(E)=E^\gamma e^{E/E_0}\left[\frac{1}{1+C_6\alpha \tau g(\tau )}+\frac{\alpha y^{\gamma 1}e^{E/yE_0+E/E_0}}{1/[C_6(\tau y)g(\tau y)]+\alpha }\right]$$
(5)
The first term in the square brackets in Eq. (5) represents the contribution to the spectrum from interactions through the conventional channels while the second that due to the new one. The presence of the exponential cut-off broadens and deepens the effects of the presence of the new channel. Their combined effect is necessary for a good fit to the data.

In addition to the galactic cosmic ray component, whose contribution is expected to be unimportant beyond $`E_010^{18}\mathrm{eV}`$, there exists also an extragalactic component, whose reprocessing in the atmosphere should also result in a modification of its spectrum according to the prescription of Eq. (5). The precise form of this component is of course unknown since it is dominated at lower energies by the galactic component. Following  we assume its spectrum to be of the form $`I_{EG}(E)E^qexp(E/E_1)`$ with $`q2.22.6`$ and $`E_110^{20}10^{20.3}`$ eV. In Figure 1 we present the entire (galactic + extragalactic) cosmic ray spectrum from $`10^{14}10^{21}`$ eV, with $`\gamma =2.75,q=2.2,E_0=\mathrm{2\hspace{0.33em}10}^{18}\mathrm{eV},E_1=10^{20.3}\mathrm{eV}`$ by applying the effects of the new postulated channel in the interaction to both components with $`y=1/2,\alpha =2`$. We also plot the relevant data from two different experiments in each of the $`10^{14}10^{16}`$ eV (Tibet , CASA-BLANCA ) and $`10^{18}10^{20}`$ eV (Fly’s Eye Stereo , AGASA ) energy ranges. We expect that these should bracket the true values of the corresponding parameters and should serve as a gauge of the systematic errors involved in computing the cosmic ray spectra in each range.

While it is very difficult to draw immediate conclusions favoring specific models from the existing data our general considerations appear to be on the correct footing: Our proposal produces a break in a single power law cosmic ray spectrum of the correct character (an increase in the slope) over a very limited range in energy (half a decade), as demanded by the data. As noted earlier, both these features are very hard to produce with more conventional approaches. Our proposal is further supported by the more detailed analysis of EAS data: the apparent very sharp change in cosmic ray composition to almost exclusively Fe, inferred from the abrupt change in the depth of the maximum in the shower development around $`10^{16}`$ eV (fig.5 of ), is qualitatively of the form expected by a sharp increase in the interaction cross section, such as we propose, and an ensuing dispersion of the available energy to a large number of secondary particles. Such an abrupt change in composition is very hard to understand (let alone model) within the realm of conventional models.

Considering the fit of our figure at energies higher than the “knee”, one notes that the assumption of a cut-off in the galactic component at $`19^{18.5}`$ eV is necessary for a good fit, but it is also reasonable, supported both theoretically (the gyroradii arguments above) and experimentally (as discussed in ) by the observed increase in the cosmic ray anisotropy at this energy . Given the simplicity of our assumptions we think that this fit is particularly good. One could think of several ways of improving it, if necessary, at the expense of introducing additional parameters in modeling the physics of the high energy interactions. We think that the present quality of the data does not warrant at this point such an extension of the assumptions used. The presence of the extragalactic component does affect the values of the fitting parameters since this component does make some contributions at lower energies too (the values of $`q`$ and $`E_0`$ are thus closely related). However, this seems to affect little the values of $`y`$ and $`\alpha `$ which determine primarily the fit of the spectrum at the “knee”.

Where all these leave us? Our interpretation carries with it a number of consequences: (a) To start with, it implies the presence of “new” structure in the high energy physics interactions at energies consistent with those suspected on the basis of generic theoretical considerations. The new physics is slightly beyond the reach of the Fermilab Tevatron, but it will be preeminently present at LHC. Their “benchmark” signature, based on our interpretation of the “knee”, should be a new channel with strong interaction cross section and missing energy. We have computed the cross-section of the new channel at Tevatron energies using the formalism presented above and it was found to be a small fraction of the total cross section. At this point we would like to refrain from more specific predictions given the simplicity of our model and the quality of the cosmic ray data; however, the above requirements are quite strong and may already be in disagreement with some of the above proposed alternatives. (b) On the cosmic ray physics side, the demand for a break at the “knee” much sharper than allowed by cosmic ray transport coupled with our proposal and fits, lead to the radical suggestion that the cosmic ray sources must, by and large, produce spectra extending to the “ankle” (rather than the “knee”). This then leads to the unsettling conclusion that supernovae should not be the dominant contributor to the cosmic ray spectrum at least at energies greater than $`10^{14}10^{15}`$ eV. Leaving for the moment the issue of cosmic ray composition aside, our interpretation of the cosmic ray spectrum at the “knee”, implies the presence of an alternate source of cosmic rays capable of accelerating particles to the energies of the “ankle”. It is interesting to note that independent considerations recently pointed to similar conclusions . Hints to the nature of these sources may in fact be provided by the observed anisotropy at $`E10^{18}`$ eV toward the galactic center . We plan to revisit both these issues in a future publication.

While this paper was being written, the potential effects of physics beyond the Standard Model were announced (deviation of the muon $`g2`$ value from that of the standard model ). This effect was interpreted as requiring the presence of new physics at $``$ TeV scales, similar to that involved in our considerations.

DK would like to thank Frank Jones, John Krizmanic and Bob Streitmatter for a number of discussions, comments, criticism and encouragement, as well as Greg Thornton and Francis Halzen for very useful correspondence and constructive criticism in relation to specific issues of the paper. AN would like to acknowledge useful discussions with participants of the Erice meeting “Phase Transitions in the Early Universe” in particular Floyd Stecker and Peter Biermann and thank the organizers for an interesting and stimulating meeting. AN was partially supported by the EU TMR programme, contract FMRX-CT98-0194.