text:
# A general mathematical structure for the time-reversal operator.

## I Introduction.

The dynamics and the thermodynamics of both, classical and quantum physical systems, are modelized by the mathematical theory of classical and abstract dynamical systems. It is obvious that the physical notion of “time-symmetric (or asymmetric) dynamical systems” requires the definition of a “time-reversal operator”, $`K`$ . In fact, every known model of a physical dynamical system has some $`K`$ operator. E.g., the dynamic of classical physical systems is described in the cotangent fiber bundle $`T^{}(N)`$ of its configuration manifold $`N`$, and therefore the action of $`K:T^{}(N)T^{}(N)`$ is defined as

$$p_qp_q$$
(1)
for any linear functional $`p`$ on $`qN,`$ or in coordinate’s language:

$$(q^i,p_i)(q^i,p_i)$$
(2)
in a particular $`(q^i,p_i)`$ coordinate system.

In Quantum Mechanics there is the well known Wigner antiunitary operator $`K`$ defined through the complex conjugation in the position (wave functions) representation:

$$\psi (x,t)\psi (x,t)^{}$$
(3)
In the last few years it was demonstrated that ordinary Quantum Mechanics (with no superselection sectors) can be naturally included in the Hamiltonian formalism of its real Kählerian differentiable manifold of quantum states   . The latter one is the real but infinite dimensional manifold of the associated projective space $`𝐏()`$ of its Hilbert states space $``$ ***We should remember the fact that ordinary pure quantum states are not vectors $`\psi `$ (normalized or not) of a Hilbert space $``$, but rays or projective equivalence classes of vectors $`[\psi ]𝐏()`$.. From this point of view, $`K:𝐏()𝐏()`$ acts as the cannonical projection to the quotient of (3)

$$[\psi (x,t)]\left[\psi (x,t)^{}\right]$$
(4)
Moreover, this result has been generalized to more general quantum systems through its characteristic C\*-algebra $`A`$, and its pure quantum states space $`K(A)`$ turns out to be a projective Kähler bundle over the spectrum $`\widehat{A},`$ whose fiber over the class of a state $`\psi ,`$ is isomorphic to $`𝐏(_\psi ),`$ being $`_\psi `$ its GNS (Gelfand-Naimark-Segall) representation’s space . More recently these authors have relaxed the Kählerian structure, showing ”minimal” mathematical structures involved in the quantum principles of superposition and uncertainty, with the aim of considering non linear extensions of quantum mechanics .

But, what happens in more general dynamical systems? Some of them -such as the Bernouilli systems and certain Kolmogorov-systems \- are purely mathematical. Nevertheless, the notion of time-symmetry seems to make sense also for them. So, it would be interesting to know what kind of mathematical structures are involved in these systems.

Our aim is to show that:

1.-The mere existence of the time reversal operator is a mathematical structure consisting of a non trivial involution $`K`$ of the states space of a general system (with holonomic constraints) $`M,`$ which splits into a $`K`$-invariant submanifold (coordinatized by $`q^i`$) and whose complementary set (the field of the effective action of $`K,`$ coordinatized by $`p_i`$) is a manifold with the same dimension of $`M.`$ This structure is logically independent of the symplectic one , which doesn’t require such a splitting at all. In fact, the essence of symplectic geometry, as its own etymology shows, is the ”common enveloping” of $`q`$ and $`p`$, loosing any ”privilege” between them. Actually, this $`K`$-structure is defined by the action of that part of the complete Galilei group -including the time-reversal- which is allowed to act on the phase space manifold $`M`$ by the constraints. In fact, only on the homogeneous Euclidean phase space $`M^{}=^{6n},`$ it is possible to have the transitive action  of the complete Galilei group.

2.-It is possible to define generalized and purely mathematical “time-reversals” allowing a generalization of the notion of “time-symmetry” for a wider class of dynamical systems, including all Bernouilli systems. In fact there are mathematical categories whose objects are the time-reversal (classical or abstract) systems $`(M,K)`$ and whose morphisms generalize the Wigner transformation .

3.-When the states space has additional structures, there is a possibility of getting a richer time-reversal compatible with these structures. For example, in Classical Mechanics the canonical $`K`$ is a symplectomorphism of phase space, and the Wigner quantum operator is compatible with the Kählerian structure of $`𝐏().`$ At first sight (2) is quite similar to (3) and it seems to be some kind of ”complex conjugation” (and the even dimensionality of phase space reinforces this idea). We will prove this fact, namely, the existence of an almost complex structure $`J`$ with respect to which $`K`$ is an almost complex time-reversal. This increases the analogy with Quantum Mechanics, where the strong version of the Heisemberg Uncertainty Principle,   is equivalent to the existence of a complex structure $`J,`$ by means of which the Wigner time-reversal is defined.

4.-It is possible to make a definition of time-reversal systems so general that it includes among its examples the real line, the Minkowski space-time, the cotangent fiber bundles, the quantum systems, the classical densities function space, the quantum densities operator space, the Bernouilli systems, etc.

The paper is organized as follows: In section 2, the general theory of reversals and time-reversal systems is developed. In section 3, the theory of abstract reversals and abstract time-reversal systems is given. In section 4, many important examples of time-reversal systems are given. In section 5, we give the abstract time-reversal of Bernouilli systems and we show explicitly the geometrical meaning of our definitions for the Baker’s transformation.

## II Reversals and time-reversal systems

Definition: Let $`M`$ be a real paracompact, connected, finite or infinite-dimensional differentiable manifold, and let $`K:MM`$ be a diffeomorphism. We will say that $`K`$ is a reversal on $`M,`$ and that $`(M,K)`$ is a reversal system if the following conditions are satisfied:

(r.1) $`K`$ is an involution, i.e. $`K^2=I_M`$

(r.2) The set $`N`$ of all fixed points of $`K`$ is an immersed submanifold of $`M,`$ such that $`MN`$ is a connected or disconnected submanifold of the same dimension of $`M`$. (In particular, this implies that $`M`$ is a non trivial involution, i.e. $`KI_M,`$ the identity function on $`M`$)

We will say that $`N`$ is the invariant submanifold of the reversal system.

Definition: Let $`(M,K)`$ be a reversal system. We will say that $`M`$ is $`K`$-orientable if $`MN`$ is composed of two diffeomorphic connected components $`M_+`$ y $`M_{}`$, and if

$$K(M_+)=M_{},\text{and }K(M_{})=M_+$$
(5)
$`M`$ is $`K`$-oriented when -conventionally or arbitrarily- one of these components is selected as “positively oriented”. In that case, $`K`$ changes the $`K`$-orientation of $`M.`$

If there is a complex (or almost complex) structure $`J`$ on $`M`$ (and therefore $`J^{}=J`$ is another one) and if, in addition, $`K`$ satisfies:

(c.r.) $`K`$ is complex (or almost complex) as a map from $`(M,J)`$ to $`(M,J^{})=(M,J)`$, i.e. :

$$K_{}J=JK_{}$$
(6)
we will say that $`K`$ is a complex (or almost complex) reversal, or a conjugation.

Similarly, if a symplectic (or almost symplectic) 2-form $`\omega `$ is given on $`M`$ In the infinite-dimensional case we require $`\omega `$ to be strongly non-degenerate  in the sense that the map $`X\omega (X,.)`$ is a toplinear isomorphism. (and therefore $`\omega ^{}=\omega `$ is another one) and if, in addition to (r.1) y (r.2), $`K`$ satisfies:

(s.r.) $`K`$ is a symplectomorphism from $`(M,\omega )`$ to $`(M,\omega ^{})=(M,\omega )`$, i.e. :

$$K^{}\omega =\omega $$
(7)
we will say that $`K`$ is a symplectic (or almost symplectic) reversal. If we have a symplectic (or almost symplectic) reversal system $`(M,\omega ,K),`$ then for every

$`mM:K_{}:T_m(M)T_m(M)`$

is a (toplinear) isomorphism, and if

$`i:NM\text{ is the immersion}:i(q)=m`$

and $`i_{}(X_q)=X_{i(q)}`$ is the induced isomorphism, we can define an almost complex structure $`J`$:

$`J\left(X_{i(q)}\right)`$ $`:`$ $`=Y_m\omega (X_{i(q)},Y_m)=1`$ (8)
$`J\left(Y_m\right)`$ $`:`$ $`=X_{i(q)}`$ (9)
that is to say, by defining the pairs of “conjugate” vectors (and extending by linearity). Then

$`K_{}\left(X_{i(q)}\right)=X_{i(q)},K_{}\left(Y_m\right)=Y_m`$

When $`(M,\omega ,J,g)`$ is a Kähler (or almost Kähler) manifold, and $`K`$ satisfies the properties (r.1), (r.2), (c.r.) and (s.r.), we will say that $`K`$ is a Kählerian (or almost Kählerian) reversal. In that case, $`K`$ is also an isometry

$$K^{}g=g$$
(10)
with respect to the Kähler metric $`g`$ defined by:

$$g(X,Y)=\omega (X,JY)\text{ for all vector fields }X\text{ and }Y.$$
(11)
Definition: Let $`(M,K)`$ be a reversal system such that there is a class $``$ of flows $`\left(S_t\right)_t`$ or / and cascades $`\left(S_t=S^t\right)_t`$ on $`M`$ such that, for any $`mM,`$ and any $`t`$ in $``$ (or in $``$) satisfies:

$$(KS_tK)(m)=S_t(m)$$
(12)
Then we will say that $`K`$ is a time-reversal for $``$ on $`M.`$ (In Physics we can take $``$ as a class of physical interest. For example, in Classical Mechanics we can take the class of all Hamiltonian flows over a fixed phase space and in Quantum Mechanics the class of solutions of the Schrödinger equation in a fixed states space, etc.)

Only having a time-reversal on $`M,`$ time-symmetric (or asymmetric) dynamical systems $`\left(S_t\right)`$ (flows $`\left(S_t\right)_t`$ ; or cascades $`\left(S_t=S^t\right)_t`$ ) can be defined. In fact, $`\left(S_t\right)`$ will be considered as symmetric with respect to the time-reversal $`K`$, if it fulfills $`mM`$ the condition (12) (or asymmetric if it doesn’t).

When $`M`$ is orientable (oriented) with respect to a time-reversal $`K`$, we will say that it is time-orientable (oriented).

Definition: By a morphism of the reversal system $`(M,K)`$ into $`(M^{},K^{}),`$ we mean a differentiable map $`f`$ of $`M`$ into $`M^{}`$ such that

$$fK=K^{}f$$
(13)
As the composition of two morphisms is a morphism and the identity $`I_M`$ is a morphism, we get a category of reversal systems, whose objects are the reversal systems and whose morphisms are the morphisms of reversal systems. Also we have the subcategories of symplectic, almost complex, Kählerian, etc. reversal systems.

## III Abstract reversals and abstract time-reversal systems

Definition: Let $`(M,\mu )`$, be a measure space, and let $`K:MM`$ be an isomorphism (mod 0) . We will say that $`K`$ is an abstract reversal on $`(M,\mu )`$ and that $`(M,\mu ,K)`$ is an abstract reversal system if the following conditions are satisfied:

(a.r.1) $`K`$ is an involution, i.e. $`K^2=I_M`$ (mod 0)

(a.r.2) The set $`N`$ of all fixed points of $`K`$ is a measurable subset of null measure of $`M,`$ and so $`\mu [MN]=\mu [M]`$ (In particular, this implies that $`M`$ is a non trivial involution, i.e. $`KI_M,`$ the identity function on $`M`$)

We will say that $`N`$ is the invariant subset of the abstract reversal system.

Definition: Let $`(M,\mu ,K)`$ be an abstract reversal system such that there is a class $``$ of measure preserving flows $`\left(S_t\right)_t`$ or / and cascades $`\left(S_t=S^t\right)_t`$ on $`M`$ such that, for all $`mM,`$ and all $`t`$ in $``$ (or in $``$) it satisfies (12). Then, we will say that $`K`$ is a time reversal for $``$ on $`(M,\mu )`$.

Only having an abstract time-reversal on $`M,`$ time-symmetric (or asymmetric) abstract dynamical systems $`\left(S_t\right)`$ (flows $`\left(S_t\right)_t`$ ; or cascades $`\left(S_t=S^t\right)_t`$ ) can be defined. In fact, $`\left(S_t\right)`$ will be regarded as symmetric with respect to the time-reversal $`K`$, if it fulfills $`mM`$ the condition (12) (or asymmetric if it doesn’t)

Definition: By a morphism of the abstract reversal system $`(M,\mu ,K)`$ into $`(M^{},\mu ^{},K^{}),`$ we mean a measurable map $`f`$ of $`(M,\mu )`$ into $`(M^{},\mu ^{})`$ such that, $`A^{}M^{}`$ measurable:

$$\mu \left(f^1(A^{})\right)=\mu ^{}\left(A^{}\right)\text{ mod 0}$$
(14)
and

$$fK=K^{}f$$
(15)
As the composition of two morphisms is a morphism and the identity $`I_M`$ is a morphism, we get a category of abstract reversal systems, whose objects are the abstract reversal systems and whose morphisms are the morphisms of abstract reversal systems.

## IV Examples of time-reversal systems

We will see how the mathematical structure just described can be implemented in all the classical and quantum physical systems, and also generalized to more abstract purely mathematical dynamical systems, as the Bernouilli systems.

### A The real line

Let us consider in the real line $``$, the mapping $`K:`$ defined by:

$$K(t)=t$$
(16)
Clearly, $``$ is $`K`$-orientable, because if $`N=\{0\},`$ then $`\{0\}=_+_{},`$ and $`K`$ is a canonical time-reversal for the family of translations: for $`a`$ fixed, and $`t`$,

$$\text{ }S_t^a(x):=x+ta$$
(17)
### B The Minkowski space-time

Let $`(^4,\eta )`$ be the Minkowski space-time, with $`\eta =`$ diag $`(1,1,1,1)`$. The invariant submanifold is the spacelike hyperplane

$`N=\{(0,x,y,z):x,y,z\}`$

Clearly, fixing $`M_+`$ as the halfspace containing the ”forward” light cone

$`\{(ct,x,y,z):c^2t^2x^2y^2z^2>0\text{ and }t>0\}`$

and $`M_{}`$ as the halfspace containing the ”backward” light cone

$`\{(ct,x,y,z):c^2t^2x^2y^2z^2>0\text{ and }t<0\}`$

and defining $`K:^4^4`$ by:

$$K(ct,x,y,z)=(ct,x,y,z)$$
(18)
we get a canonical $`K`$-orientation, equivalent to the ussual time-orientation. $`K`$ is a time-reversal with respect to the temporal translations

$$S_t^A(X):=X+tA=(x^0+ta^0,x^1,x^2,x^3)$$
(19)
for $`A=(a^0,0,0,0)^4:a^00`$ fixed, and $`t`$.

Remark: As an effect of curvature, not every general 4-dimensional Lorentzian manifold $`(M,g),`$ will be time-orientable . Nevertheless, a time-orientable general space-time is necessary if we are searching for a model of a universe with an arrow of time  . In fact, if our universe were represented by a non-time-orientable manifold, it would be impossible to define past and future in a global sense, in contradiction with all our present cosmological observations. Precisely, we know that there are no parts of the universe where the local arrow of time points differently from our own arrow.

### C The cotangent fiber bundle. Classical Mechanics.

A general cotangent fiber bundle needs not to be $`K`$-orientable. Nevertheless, we have the following result:

Theorem: The cotangent fiber bundle (of a finite dimensional differentiable manifold) $`(T^{}(N),\pi ,N)`$  has a canonical almost Kählerian time-reversal (for the Hamiltonians flows on it).

Proof: Let $`M`$ be the cotangent fiber bundle $`T^{}(N)`$ of a real n-dimensional manifold $`N.`$ In this case $`N`$ is an embedded submanifold of $`M`$, being the embedding $`i:NT^{}(N)`$ such that:

$`i(q)=0_q\text{ (the null functional at }q\text{)}`$

Let’s define

$`K`$ $`:`$ $`T^{}(N)T^{}(N)`$ (20)
$`p_q`$ $``$ $`T_q^{}(N):K(p_q)=p_q`$ (21)
Because of its definition, this map is obviously an involution, and by its linearity is differentiable and its differential or tangent map

$`K_{}:T\left(T^{}(N)\right)T\left(T^{}(N)\right)`$

verifies:

$$K_{}(X_{p_q})=\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{X_{p_q}\text{ if }X_{p_q}i_{}\left(T_q(N)\right)}{X_{p_q}\text{ if }X_{p_q}T_{p_q}\left(\pi ^1(q)\right)}$$
(22)
$`X_{p_q}T_{p_q}\left(\pi ^1(q)\right)`$ means that it is “vertical” or tangent to the point $`p_q`$ of the fibre in $`q`$. It must be taken into account that by joining a vertical base with the image of a base in $`N`$ by the isomorphism $`i_{}`$ , we get a base of $`T_{p_q}\left(T^{}(N)\right).`$

Let $`\omega `$ be the canonical symplectic 2-form of the cotangent fiber bundle. As $`\omega `$ is antisymmetric, in order to evaluate $`K^{}\omega ,`$ it is sufficient to consider only three possibilities:

$`1)(X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})`$ $`:`$ $`X_{p_q},Y_{p_q}i_{}\left(T_q(N)\right)`$
$`2)(X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})`$ $`:`$ $`X_{p_q},Y_{p_q}T_{p_q}\left(\pi ^1(q)\right)`$
$`3)(X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})`$ $`:`$ $`X_{p_q}i_{}\left(T_q(N)\right)\text{ but }Y_{p_q}T_{p_q}\left(\pi ^1(q)\right)`$
In case 1)

$$\omega (K_{}(X_{p_q}),K_{}(Y_{p_q}))=\omega (X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})=0$$
(23)
In case 2)

$$\omega (K_{}(X_{p_q}),K_{}(Y_{p_q}))=\omega (X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})=\omega (X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})=0$$
(24)
In case 3)

$`\omega (K_{}(X_{p_q}),K_{}(Y_{p_q}))`$ $`=`$ $`\omega (X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})`$ (25)
$`=`$ $`\omega (X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})`$ (26)
Thus, in any case

$$\left(K^{}\omega \right)(X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})=\omega (K_{}(X_{p_q}),K_{}(Y_{p_q}))=\omega (X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})$$
(27)
which proves that $`K^{}\omega =\omega ,`$ the (s.r.) property.

Now, let us define

$`J`$ $`:`$ $`T\left(T^{}(N)\right)T\left(T^{}(N)\right)`$ (28)
$`J(X_{p_q})`$ $`=`$ $`Y_{p_q}\omega (X_{p_q},Y_{p_q})=1`$ (29)
that is to say, $`J(X_{p_q})`$ is the canonical conjugate of $`X_{p_q}.`$

Then, by the antisymmetry of $`\omega ,`$ clearly $`J^2=I.`$ In addition

$`\left(K_{}J\right)(X_{p_q})`$ $`=`$ $`K_{}\left(J(X_{p_q})\right)=J\left(X_{p_q}\right)`$ (30)
$`=`$ $`J\left(K_{}\left(X_{p_q}\right)\right)`$ (31)
$`=`$ $`\left(JK_{}\right)(X_{p_q})`$ (32)
if $`X_{p_q}i_{}\left(T_q(N)\right)`$ and

$`\left(K_{}J\right)(X_{p_q})`$ $`=`$ $`K_{}\left(J(X_{p_q})\right)=J(X_{p_q})`$ (33)
$`=`$ $`J\left(K_{}\left(X_{p_q}\right)\right)`$ (34)
$`=`$ $`\left(JK_{}\right)(X_{p_q})`$ (35)
if $`X_{p_q}T_{p_q}\left(\pi ^1(q)\right).`$ So, $`K`$ preserves both $`\omega `$ and $`J`$, and therefore is almost Kählerian. $`\mathrm{}`$

As it is well known, the phase space $`M`$ of a classical system with a finite number ($`n`$) of degrees of freedom and holonomic constraints has the particular form $`T^{}(N),`$ where $`N`$ denotes the configuration space of the system. This implies the existence of a privileged submanifold $`N`$ of $`M`$. We may enquire: why is this so? The answer is: because every law of Classical Mechanics is invariant with respect to the Galilei group which contains all the spatial translations (and it is itself a contraction of the inhomogeneous Lorentz group ). This forces the configuration space to be a submanifold of some homogeneuos $`^d`$ space. Now, in this submanifold we also have a privileged system of coordinates: the spatial position coordinates $`q_1=x_1,\mathrm{},q_d=x_d`$, with respect to which the action of the Galilei group has its simplest affine expression. Nevertheless, in general this action will take us away from the configuration manifold $`N,`$ because it doesn’t fit with the constraints (think for example in the configuration space of a double pendulum -with two united threads- which is a 2-torus, contained in $`^3`$).

### D Classical Statistical Mechanics

Let us consider the phase space of a classical system $`(T^{}(N),\omega )`$ and take the real Banach space $`V=L_{}^1(T^{}(N),\sigma )`$ containing the probability densities over the phase space, where $`\sigma =\omega \mathrm{}\omega `$ ($`n`$ times) is the Liouville measure. $`V`$ is a real infinite dimensional differentiable manifold modelled by itself. Then, the above defined almost Kählerian time-reversal $`K`$ on $`T^{}(N)`$ induces $`\stackrel{~}{K}:VV`$ by:

$$\rho \stackrel{~}{K}(\rho ):\left(\stackrel{~}{K}(\rho )\right)(m):=\rho \left(K(m)\right)$$
(36)
Clearly, $`\stackrel{~}{K}`$ is a toplinear involution. Now, let us consider the set $`P`$ of all (“almost everywhere” equivalent classes of) “$`\stackrel{~}{K}`$-even” integrable functions

$$P=\{\rho V:\rho \left(K(m)\right)=\rho (m)\}$$
(37)
and the set $`I`$ of all (“almost everywhere” equivalent classes of) the “$`\stackrel{~}{K}`$-odd” integrable functions

$$I=\{\rho V:\rho \left(K(m)\right)=\rho (m)\}$$
(38)
Trivially, $`V=PI`$ , and there are two toplinear projectors mapping any $`\rho V`$ into its “$`\stackrel{~}{K}`$-even” and “$`\stackrel{~}{K}`$-odd” parts. $`P`$ is the invariant subspace of $`\stackrel{~}{K}.`$ Its complement is the (infinite dimensional) open submanifold of (“almost everywhere” equivalent classes of) integrable functions whose “$`\stackrel{~}{K}`$-odd” projection doesn’t vanish.

Now, every dynamical system $`(S_t)`$ (in particular those of the class $``$ of $`K`$) on $`T^{}(N)`$ induces another dynamical system $`(U_t)`$ on $`V:`$

$$\left(U_t(\rho )\right)(m):=\rho \left(S_t(m)\right)$$
(39)
Considering the class $`\stackrel{~}{},`$ induced by $`,`$ we conclude that $`\stackrel{~}{K}`$ is a time-reversal.

So we have another example lacking time orientability but having a time-reversal structure .

### E Complex Banach spaces

A complex structure on a real finite (or infinite) Banach space $`V`$ is a linear (toplinear) transformation $`J`$ of $`V`$ such that $`J^2=I`$ , where $`I`$ stands for the identity transformation of $`V`$.

In the case of a complex Banach space $`V_{}`$ , we can consider the associated real vector space (its “realification”) $`V=V_{}`$ composed of the same set of vectors, but with $``$ instead of $``$, as the field of its scalars. Then, $`J=iI`$ is the canonical complex structure of $`V_{}.`$

If $`J`$ is a complex structure on a finite dimensional real vector space, its dimension must be even. In any case, there exist elements $`X_1`$, $`X_2`$,…, $`X_n,\mathrm{}`$ of $`V`$ such that

$`\{X_1,\mathrm{},X_n,\mathrm{},JX_1,\mathrm{}JX_n,\mathrm{}\}`$

is a basis for $`V`$ .

Let us define $`K:VV`$ as the “conjugation”, i.e. extending by linearity the assignment

$$i=1,2,\mathrm{}:K(X_i)=X_i;K(JX_i)=JX_i$$
(40)
Then the real subspace generated by $`\{X_1,X_2,\mathrm{}\},`$ is the subspace of fixed points of $`K,`$ $`N`$. So, $`(V,J,K)`$ is a complex time-reversal system for the class of ”non real translations” $`\left(S_t^A\right)_t`$ ($`A`$ being a linear combination of $`JX_1,\mathrm{}JX_n,\mathrm{})`$:

$$S_t^A(X)=X+tA,t$$
(41)
In fact,

$`\left(KS_t^AK\right)(X)`$ $`=`$ $`K\left(K(X)+tA\right)=XtA`$ (42)
$`=`$ $`S_t^A(X)`$ (43)
### F Ordinary quantum mechanical systems

As a particular case of the previous example, let us consider a classical system whose phase space is $`^{6n},`$ and take $`V==L^2(^{3n},\sigma )`$ (actually, its realification). This choice is motivated by the fact that we want to have a Galilei-invariant Quantum Mechanics, and so we must quantify the spatial position coordinates. There is no cannonical or symplectic symmetry here. Only acting on the wave functions of the position coordinates the Wigner time-reversal operator will be expressed as the complex conjugation. So, we get a complex time-reversal structure.

Now, following , let us consider the real but infinite dimensional Kählerian manifold $`(𝐏(),\stackrel{~}{J},\stackrel{~}{\omega },g)`$ of the associated projective space $`𝐏()`$ of the Hilbert states space $``$ of an ordinary quantum mechanical system. $`J`$ is the complex structure of $``$, and it is the local expresion of

$`\stackrel{~}{J}:T\left(𝐏()\right)T\left(𝐏()\right)`$

$`(𝐏(),\stackrel{~}{J},\stackrel{~}{\omega },g)`$ has a canonical Kählerian time-reversal structure. In fact, we define $`K:`$ as in the previous example, and take:

$`\stackrel{~}{K}:𝐏()𝐏()\text{ by: }\stackrel{~}{K}\left[\psi \right]=\left[K(\psi )\right]`$

then, all the desired properties follows easily.

### G Quantum Statistical Mechanics

Let $`V=L^1()`$ denote the complex Banach space generated by all nuclear operators on $``$ with the trace norm. This set contains the density operators of Quantum Statistical Mechanics. $`V`$ is a real infinite dimensional differentiable manifold modelled by itself. Then, the above defined complex time-reversal $`K`$ on $``$ induces $`\widehat{K}:VV`$ by:

$$\widehat{\rho }\widehat{K}(\widehat{\rho }):\left(\widehat{K}(\widehat{\rho })\right)(\psi ):=\widehat{\rho }\left(K(\psi )\right)$$
(44)
Clearly, $`\widehat{K}`$ is a toplinear involution. Now, let us consider the set $`R`$ of all “$`\widehat{K}`$-real” densities

$$R=\{\widehat{\rho }V:\widehat{\rho }\left(K(\psi )\right)=\widehat{\rho }(\psi )\}$$
(45)
and the set $`I`$ of all the “$`\widehat{K}`$-imaginary” densities

$$I=\{\widehat{\rho }V:\widehat{\rho }\left(K(\psi )\right)=\widehat{\rho }(\psi )\}$$
(46)
Trivially, $`V=RI`$ , and there are two toplinear projectors mapping any $`\rho V`$ into its “$`\widehat{K}`$-real” and “$`\widehat{K}`$-imaginary” parts. $`R`$ is the invariant subspace of $`\widehat{K}.`$ Its complement is the (infinite dimensional) open submanifold of (“almost everywhere” equivalent classes of) integrable functions whose “$`\widehat{K}`$-imaginary” projection is not null.

Now, every dynamical system $`(S_t)`$ (in particular those of the class $``$ of $`K`$) on $``$ induces another dynamical system $`(U_t)`$ on $`V`$ by setting$`:`$

$$\left(U_t(\widehat{\rho })\right)(\psi ):=\widehat{\rho }\left(S_t(\psi )\right)$$
(47)
Considering the class $`\widehat{},`$ induced by $`,`$ we conclude that $`\widehat{K}`$ is a complex time-reversal. So we have another example lacking time orientability but having a time-reversal structure.

In both Classical and Quantum Statistical Mechanics, we have used the same criterium to choose $`N`$ and $``$ respectively. The densities of the two theories are related by the Wigner integral $`W`$, which is an essential ingredient in the theory of the classical limit . In the one dimensional case, it is the mapping $`\widehat{\rho }\rho =W\left(\widehat{\rho }\right)`$ given by:

$$\rho (q,p)=\frac{1}{\pi }\underset{\mathrm{}}{\overset{+\mathrm{}}{}}\widehat{\rho }(q\lambda ,q+\lambda )e^{2ip\lambda }𝑑\lambda $$
(48)
where $`q`$ is the spatial position coordinate We want to emphasize the necessity of having an homogeneous configuration space ($``$ in the one dimensional case) in order to have the translations $`qq\pm \lambda `$ in $`W`$ integral., $`p`$ its conjugate momentum, $`\rho (q,p)`$ a classical density function, and

$`\widehat{\rho }(x,x^{})`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\rho _j\overline{\psi _j}\psi _j\right)(x,x^{})`$ (49)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}\rho _j\overline{\psi _j}(x)\psi _j(x^{})`$ (50)
is a generic matrix element of a quantum density, being $`\left\{\psi _j\right\}_{j=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ an orthonormal base of $``$, $`\rho _j0`$ and $`\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\rho _j=1`$.

As it is obvious by a simple change of variables,

$$W\left[\widehat{K}\left(\widehat{\rho }\right)\right](q,p)=\rho (q,p)=\rho \left(K(q,p)\right)=\stackrel{~}{K}\left[W\left(\widehat{\rho }\right)\right](q,p)$$
(51)
and therefore, $`W`$ is a morphism between $`(L^1(),\widehat{K})`$ and $`(L_{}^1\left(T^{}(N)\right),\stackrel{~}{K}).`$

### H Koopman treatment of Kolmogorov-Systems

With the definition of time-reversal in the physical examples above, we now face the same definition in purely mathematical dynamical systems.

Let $`(M,\mu ,S_t)`$ be a Kolmogorov system (cascade or flow). As it is well known, this implies that the induced unitary evolution $`U_t`$ in $`=[1]^{}`$ the orthogonal complement of the one dimensional subspace of the classes a. e. of the constant functions in the Hilbert space $`L^2(M,\mu ),`$ has uniform Lebesgue spectrum of numerable constant multiplicity. This, in turn, implies the existence of a system of imprimitivity $`(E_s)_{s𝔾}`$ based on $`𝔾`$ for the group $`(U_t)_{t𝔾}`$ , where $`𝔾`$ is $``$ or $``$:

$$E_{s+t}=U_tE_sU_t^1$$
(52)
Following Misra , we define the “Aging” operator

$$T=\underset{𝔾}{}s𝑑E_s=\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\underset{}{}s𝑑E_s\text{ for fluxes}}{\underset{s}{}sE_s\text{ for cascades}}$$
(53)
Then

$$U_tTU_t=T+t$$
(54)
$`T`$ is selfadjoint in the discrete case, and essentially selfadjoint in the continuous case, and there are eigenvectors in the discrete case, and generalized eigenvectors (antifunctionals) in certain riggings of $``$ by a nuclear space $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ ($`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }^\times `$) in the continuous case, $`\left(|\tau ,n\right)_{\tau 𝔾}`$ , such that:

$`T|\tau ,n`$ $`=`$ $`\tau |\tau ,n`$ (55)
$`U_t|\tau ,n`$ $`=`$ $`(\tau +t)|\tau ,n`$ (56)
Defining

$$K|\tau ,n=|\tau ,n$$
(57)
It follows easilly that $`K`$ restricted to $``$ is a time-reversal for $`=\{(U_t)\}`$ with respect to which $`U_t`$ is symmetric.

## V Examples of abstract time-reversals

### A Bernouilli schemes

Let $`M`$ be the set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ of all bilateral sequences (of “bets”)

$$m=(a_j)_j=(\mathrm{}a_2,a_1,a_0,a_1,a_2,\mathrm{})$$
(58)
on a finite set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ with $`n`$ elements (a “dice” with $`n`$ faces). Let $`𝔛`$ be the $`\sigma `$-algebra on $`M`$ generated by all the subset of the form

$$A_j^s=\{m:a_j=s\mathrm{\Sigma }\}$$
(59)
Clearly,

$$M=\underset{s\mathrm{\Sigma }}{}A_j^s=\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}A_j^{s_k}$$
(60)
Let’s define a normalized measure $`\mu `$ on $`M`$ by choosing $`n`$ ordered positive real numbers $`p_1,\mathrm{},p_n`$ whose sum is equal to one ($`p_k`$ is the “probability” of getting $`s_k`$ when the “dice” is thrown), and setting:

$$k:k=1,\mathrm{},n:p_k=\mu (A_j^{s_k})$$
(61)
$$\mu \left(A_{j_1}^{s_1}\mathrm{}A_{j_k}^{s_k}\right)=\mu (A_{j_1}^{s_1})\mathrm{}\mu (A_{j_k}^{s_k})$$
(62)
where $`j_1,\mathrm{},j_k`$ are all different.

Let the dynamical authomorphism $`S`$ be the shift to the right:

$`S\left((a_j)_j\right)`$ $`=`$ $`(a_j^{})_j`$ (63)
where: $`a_j^{}:=a_{j1}`$ (64)
The shift preserves $`\mu `$ because

$$\mu \left(S(A_j^{s_k})\right)=\mu (A_{j+1}^{s_k})=p_k$$
(65)
The above abstract dynamical scheme is called a Bernouilli scheme and denoted $`B(p_1,\mathrm{},p_n).`$

Let’s define a “cannonical” abstract reversal by:

$`K\left((a_j)_j\right)`$ $`=`$ $`(a_j^{})_j`$ (66)
$`a_j^{}`$ $`=`$ $`a_{j+1}`$ (67)
Clearly, $`K`$ is an isomorphism, and its invariant set

$$N=\underset{j}{}\left\{\underset{s\mathrm{\Sigma }}{}\left(A_j^sA_j^s\right)\right\}$$
(68)
has $`\mu `$-measure $`0.`$ In addition $`K`$ is a time-reversal for the class $``$ of all Bernouilli schemes, because

$$KSK=S^1$$
(69)
being $`S^1`$ the shift to the left.

### B The Baker’s transformation

We will show the geometrical meaning of the last two time-reversals for the Baker’s transformation.

The measure space is the torus

$`M=[0,1]\times [0,1]/=\{(x,y)mod1=[x,y]:x,y[0,1]\}`$

that is to say, $``$ is the equivalence relation that identifies the following boundary points:

$`(0,x)(1,x)\text{and}(x,0)(x,1)`$

with its Lebesgue measure. The automorphism $`S`$ acts as follows:

$$S(x,y)=\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{(2x,\frac{1}{2}y)if\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}x\frac{1}{2},\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}y1}{(2x1,\frac{1}{2}y+\frac{1}{2})if\frac{1}{2}x1,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}y1}$$
(70)
It’s clear that $`S`$ is a non-continuous but measure preserving transformation which involves a contraction in the $`y`$ direction and a dilatation in the $`x`$ direction: the contracting and dilating directions at every point $`mM`$ (that is, the vertical and the horizontal lines through each $`m`$).

The torus is a compact, connected Lie group and we can define an involutive automorphism $`K`$ on $`M`$ by putting:

$$K[x,y]=[y,x];x,yI=[0,1]$$
(71)
The fixed points of $`K`$ constitute a submanifold of the torus: the projection of the diagonal $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ of the unit square $`I\times I`$

$`N=\mathrm{\Delta }/=\{[x,x]:xI\}`$

Then:

$$KS^tK=S^t,t$$
(72)
In fact, the first application of $`K`$ to the generating partition of $`S`$, rotates the unit square, interchanging the $`x`$ fibers with the $`y`$ ones. Then by applicating $`S^t`$ (that is $`t`$ times $`S`$) we get a striped pattern of horizontal lines, which is rotated and yields a striped pattern of vertical lines when $`K`$ is applicated again. The same pattern would be obtained if $`S^t`$ was used.

As it is well known , the Baker transformation is isomorphic to $`B(\frac{1}{2},\frac{1}{2})`$. In fact, the map

$$(x,y)m=(a_j)_jx=\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{a_j}{2^{j+1}}\text{and }y=\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{a_j}{2^j}$$
(73)
is an isomorphism (mod 0). Moreover it is an isomorphism of abstract time-reversal systems, because it sends the time-reversal of (71) in the time-reversal of (67). In particular, this implies that the Baker’s map is a Kolmogorov system, and therefore having the corresponding time-reversal for its Koopman treatment. These three reversals are related.

Let $`\{A,B\}`$ be the partition of the unit square into its left and right halves. As it is well known this partition is both independent and generating for the Baker’s map. Let’s define

$$\theta _0=1\chi _A=\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\text{ }1\text{ in }A}{1\text{ in }B}$$
(74)
where $`\chi _A`$ is the characteristic function of the set $`A,`$ as well as

$$\theta _n=U^n(\theta _0)=\theta _0S^n=\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{\text{ }1\text{ in }S^n(A)}{1\text{ in }S^n(B)}$$
(75)
and for any finite set $`F=\{n_1,\mathrm{},n_F\}`$, put

$$\theta _F=\theta _{n_1}\mathrm{}\theta _{n_F}\text{(ordinary product of functions)}$$
(76)
Then, all the eigenvectors of the Aging operator $`T`$ of $`U`$ are of the form :

$$T\theta _F=n_m\theta _F$$
(77)
where $`n_m=\mathrm{max}F.`$ Geometrically speaking, $`\rho =\theta _0`$ -that we can identify with $`\{A,B\}`$\- is an eigenvector of age $`0,`$ and if $`U`$ acts $`n`$ times on it we get an eigenvector of age $`n`$: $`\theta _n`$ -which can be identified with a set of horizontal fringes-. On the other hand if $`U^1`$ acts $`n`$ times on it we get an eigenvector of age $`n`$: $`\theta _n`$ -which can be identified with a set of vertical fringes-. As expected, the induced action of $`K`$ sends the “future” horizontal eigenstates of $`T`$ to the “past” vertical ones, and reciprocally.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The authors wish to express their gratitude to Dr. Sebastiano Sonego for providing an initial and fruitful discussion on the subject of this paper. This work was partially supported by grant PIP 4410 of CONICET (Argentine National Research Council)


format: text

text:
# Thermal magnetization fluctuations in thin films and a new physical form for magnetization damping

## Abstract

The effect of thermal fluctuations on a thin film magnetoresistive element has been calculated. The technique involves adding to the basic spin dynamics a general form of interaction with a thermal bath. For a general anisotropic magnetic system the resulting equation can be written as a Langevin equation for a harmonic oscillator. Our approach predicts two times smaller noise power at low frequencies than the conventional stochastic Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert equation. It is shown that equivalent results can be obtained by introducing a tensor phenomenological damping term to the gyromagnetic dynamics driven by a thermal fluctuating field.

Recently Smith and Arnett  have reported that thermal magnetization noise may be a serious problem for giant magnetoresistive spin-valve heads designed for high areal storage density. Using the phenomenological Landau-Lifshitz-Gilbert (LLG) equation with random fields and the fluctuation-dissipation theorem, they obtained an estimate for the low-frequency noise intensity. They considered the GMR head as a single-domain anisotropic magnetic particle.

The goal of this Note is to show that the analysis in the framework of conventional stochastic LLG equation gives an overstated noise level due to inconsistency of isotropic phenomenological damping with basic dynamic equations for anisotropic magnetic system. Using normal mode approach, we derive a formula for the noise power spectrum, which at low frequencies is two times smaller than theoretical estimate of Ref.. We also show that this result may be obtained in the framework of stochastic gyromagnetic equation with tensor phenomenological damping.

Thermal noise is a phenomenon that is a result of microscopic spin fluctuations due to interactions with a thermal bath. It has been customary to include thermal fluctuations by simply adding random fields to dynamic equations with phenomenological damping, such as the LLG equation . However the gyromagnetic term describes an averaged precession of a large number of spins. A direct connection with microscopic physics must be found for the phenomenological damping term.

Lax  has shown that independent of the specific coupling to the heat bath, the resulting dynamic equation in the vicinity of equilibrium has the form of a damped harmonic oscillator driven by a fluctuating force. Here we show that for small fluctuations, an anisotropic magnetic dynamic system can be transformed into the general form analyzed by Lax. We do this by a series of coordinate transformations from the original magnetic variables to a harmonic oscillator. By back transformation we have found a tensor form of the phenomenological damping for the magnetization dynamic equation. With this new form random fields may now be added to this dynamic equation, while properly characterizing the physics of interaction with a thermal bath.

Consider thermal fluctuations in a single-domain magnetic particle with the following energy density:

$$/V_0=K_{}(M_z/M_\mathrm{s})^2+K_{}(M_x/M_\mathrm{s})^2M_zH_0.$$
(1)
Here $`V_0`$ is the particle volume, $`K_{}`$ and $`K_{}`$ are the easy ($`z`$) and hard ($`x`$) axis anisotropy constants, respectively, $`𝐌=(M_x,M_y,M_z)`$ is the magnetization $`(|𝐌|=M_\mathrm{s})`$ and $`H_0`$ is the external magnetic field oriented along the easy axis. For a thin film $`y`$ and $`z`$ are in the plane.

For convenience of calculations we introduce the classical spin $`𝐒=𝐌V_0/\mathrm{}\gamma `$, where $`\gamma `$ is the gyromagnetic ratio. Planck’s constant $`\mathrm{}`$ is used as a dimensional parameter (it could be another parameter of the same dimensionality, e.g., $`M_\mathrm{s}V_0/\gamma `$). All our analysis is pure classical and final result does not contain $`\mathrm{}`$. We shall describe small oscillations of the magnetization in terms of complex variables$`a^{},a`$, which are classical analogs of creation and annihilation operators of a harmonic oscillator. This technique is used for a description of spin waves (see, e.g., ). Complex variables can be introduced by an expanded Holstein-Primakoff transformation :

$$\frac{S_x}{\sqrt{S/2}}\frac{aa^{}}{i},\frac{S_y}{\sqrt{S/2}}a+a^{},S_z=a^{}aS.$$
(2)
The quadratic part of the energy (1) can be written as

$$^{(2)}/\mathrm{}=Aa^{}a+(B/2)(aa+a^{}a^{}),$$
(3)
where $`A=\gamma (H_\mathrm{K}^{()}+H_0+H_\mathrm{K}^{()}/2)`$, $`B=\gamma H_\mathrm{K}^{()}/2`$, $`H_\mathrm{K}^{()}2K_{}/M_\mathrm{s}`$ and $`H_\mathrm{K}^{()}2K_{}/M_\mathrm{s}`$. To eliminate the nondiagonal terms from (3) we shall use the linear canonical transformation:

$`a=uc+vc^{},`$ $`a^{}=uc^{}+vc,`$ (4)
$`u=\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{A+\omega _0}{2\omega _0}}},`$ $`v={\displaystyle \frac{B}{|B|}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{A\omega _0}{2\omega _0}}},`$ (5)
where $`\omega _0=\sqrt{A^2B^2}`$. Thus, we find the normal mode of the system and the energy of an harmonic oscillator

$`^{(2)}/\mathrm{}`$ $`=`$ $`\omega _0c^{}c,`$ (6)
$`\omega _0`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma \sqrt{(H_\mathrm{K}^{()}+H_0+H_\mathrm{K}^{()})(H_\mathrm{K}^{()}+H_0)},`$ (7)
where $`\omega _0`$ is the ferromagnetic resonance frequency.

Using the energy (6), the dynamic equation for the complex amplitude $`c(t)`$ is:

$$dc/dt=i\omega _0c$$
(8)
and is of a form that corresponds exactly to small amplitude gyromagnetic rotation. Now we consider the interaction of this harmonic oscillator with a reservoir (thermal bath)

$$^{(int)}/\mathrm{}=c\underset{k}{}g_k^{}+c^{}\underset{k}{}g_k,$$
(9)
which will introduce two related effects: damping and fluctuations. Here $`g_k,g_k^{}`$ are the reservoir variables and incorporate specific physical processes. Such interaction could have been added to the energy in the $`a,`$ $`a^{}`$ variables. However the linear transformation (4) does not alter this general form. Following ,, the oscillator dynamics for this general form (9) can be represented by the following Langevin equation:

$$dc/dt=(i\omega _0+\eta )c+f(t),$$
(10)
where $`\eta `$ is defined by reservoir parameters and $`f(t)`$ is the random force related to $`\eta `$. It should be noted that Eq.(10) is an exact classical analog of a corresponding quantum mechanical equation . Note also that phenomenological introduction of dissipation by assigning an imaginary part to the resonant frequency $`\omega _0\pm i\eta `$ is a common procedure in the theory of spin-wave instabilities .

We can start with Eq.(10) and rewrite it as a stochastic differential equation with a damping parameter $`\eta `$ and a thermodynamically consistent random field with diffusion coefficient $`D=(\eta /\omega _0)k_\mathrm{B}T/\mathrm{}`$ ,:

$$dc=(i\omega _0+\eta )cdt+\sqrt{D}[dW_1(t)+idW_2(t)].$$
(11)
Here $`T`$ is the temperature and $`W_1(t)`$ and $`W_2(t)`$ are two independent Wiener processes. The solution of (11) is

$$\frac{c(t)}{\sqrt{D}}=_{\mathrm{}}^te^{(i\omega _0+\eta )(tt_1)}[dW_1(t_1)+idW_2(t_1)].$$
(12)
Taking into account the rule of Ito’s calculus (see, e.g., ) $`dW_m(t_1)dW_n(t_2)=\delta _{mn}\mathrm{\Delta }(t_1t_2)dt_1`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }(t)`$ is the Kronecker delta function, we can obtain the correlation function with thermal averaging $`\mathrm{}`$:

$$c^{}(t)c(0)=(D/\eta )\mathrm{exp}(i\omega _0t\eta t),$$
(13)
where $`c^{}(t)`$ is the complex conjugate of $`c(t)`$.

The power spectral density of the complex amplitude fluctuations is defined by

$$S_{c^{}c}(\omega )=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}c^{}(t)c(0)e^{i\omega t}𝑑t.$$
(14)
Substituting (13) into (14) and including the correct meaning of a damping process for both negative and positive time, one obtains

$`S_{c^{}c}(\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k_\mathrm{B}T}{\mathrm{}\omega _0}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}e^{i(\omega _0\omega )t\eta t\mathrm{sign}(t)}𝑑t`$ (15)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2(\eta /\omega _0)k_\mathrm{B}T/\mathrm{}}{(\omega _0\omega )^2+\eta ^2}}.`$ (16)
Let us consider now an application of our analysis to a magnetoresistive head. We shall follow the model  of a GMR head as a thin film of the volume $`V_0`$, uniformly magnetized along the $`z`$ axis of uniaxial anisotropy. The transverse anisotropy is defined by shape demagnetization: $`K_{}2\pi M_\mathrm{s}^2`$. The power spectral density of random fluctuations in the voltage $`\delta V(t)`$ is defined by

$$S_{VV}(\omega )=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\delta V(t)\delta V(0)e^{i\omega t}𝑑t.$$
(17)
The voltage deviation for a GMR head is $`\delta V(t)=I_{\mathrm{bias}}\delta R(t)`$, which can be expressed in terms of the in-plane transverse magnetization fluctuation

$$\delta V(t)=C_V\delta m_x(t),C_V=I_{\mathrm{bias}}\frac{R}{H_{\mathrm{ext}}}\frac{H_{\mathrm{ext}}}{m_x}.$$
(18)
Thus, Eq.(17) can be rewritten as

$$S_{VV}(\omega )=C_V^2S_{m_ym_y}(\omega ),$$
(19)
where

$$S_{m_ym_y}(\omega )=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\delta m_y(t)\delta m_y(0)e^{i\omega t}𝑑t$$
(20)
defines the magnetization noise.

Since $`m_y(t)=0`$, the deviation $`\delta m_y(t)=m_y(t)`$. Taking into account Eqs. (2) and (4), one obtains

$$m_y=S_y/S(u+v)(c^{}+c)/\sqrt{2S}.$$
(21)
Thus

$`S_{m_ym_y}(\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(u+v)^2}{2S}}[{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}c(t)c^{}(0)e^{i\omega t}dt`$
$`+{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}}c^{}(t)c(0)e^{i\omega t}dt].`$
Utilizing (14) and (16), we have

$`S_{m_ym_y}(\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\gamma k_\mathrm{B}T}{M_\mathrm{s}V_0}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{H_\mathrm{K}+4\pi M_\mathrm{s}+H_0}{H_\mathrm{K}+H_0}}\right)^{1/2}{\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{\omega _0}}F(\omega ),`$ (22)
$`F(\omega )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\omega _0\omega )^2+\eta ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{(\omega _0+\omega )^2+\eta ^2}}.`$ (23)
Examination of (22) indicates that the damping parameter $`\eta `$ affects linearly the low frequency noise $`(\omega `$ $`\omega _0)`$ and broadens the resonance peak. However the total power is independent of $`\eta `$.

In the case of small frequencies $`\omega `$ $`\omega _0\gamma \sqrt{4\pi M_\mathrm{s}H_\mathrm{K}}`$ for $`H_0=0`$ and $`4\pi M_\mathrm{s}H_\mathrm{K}`$. From (22) we obtain the noise power (as measured for positive frequencies):

$$NP2S_{m_ym_y}(0)\eta k_\mathrm{B}T/[\pi (\gamma H_\mathrm{K}M_\mathrm{s})^2V_0].$$
(24)
The corresponding noise power of  (in our notation) is

$$NP^{(\mathrm{SA})}4\alpha k_\mathrm{B}T/[\gamma (H_\mathrm{K})^2M_\mathrm{s}V_0],$$
(25)
where $`\alpha `$ is the Gilbert damping parameter. To compare (24) and (25) we need to find a relation between $`\eta `$ and $`\alpha `$. This can be done by comparing the dynamic equation for the transverse magnetization given in Ref. and the corresponding transverse magnetization equation in our approach. From  we have

$$d^2m_y/dt^2+\alpha 4\pi \gamma M_\mathrm{s}dm_y/dt+\omega _0^2m_y=h(t),$$
(26)
where $`h(t)`$ is a random “force”. Corresponding to (11) dynamic equation is:

$$d^2m_y/dt^2+2\eta dm_y/dt+\omega _0^2m_y=h(t).$$
(27)
From (26) and (27), we obtain the following relation:

$$\alpha =\eta /2\pi \gamma M_\mathrm{s}.$$
(28)
Substituting (28) into (25), one can see that at low frequencies our theory (24) predicts 2 times smaller (3 dB smaller) noise power than the result of : $`NP/NP^{(\mathrm{SA})}=1/2`$. It should be also noted that the conventional approach with stochastic LLG equation gives different noise frequency dependence than our result (22).

Now we demonstrate the inconsistency of the conventional phenomenological damping term with basic equations for a harmonic oscillator and show how this isotropic damping can be replaced by a tensor damping term to obtain the above results.

From the LLG equation

$$\frac{d𝐌}{dt}=\gamma 𝐌\times 𝐇_{\mathrm{eff}}\frac{\alpha \gamma }{M_\mathrm{s}}𝐌\times (𝐌\times 𝐇_{\mathrm{eff}})$$
(29)
one can derive the following linearized equations:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\begin{array}{c}m_x\\ m_y\end{array}\right)`$ (32)
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\alpha \gamma (H_\mathrm{K}+4\pi M_\mathrm{s}+H_0)& \gamma (H_\mathrm{K}+H_0)\\ \gamma (H_\mathrm{K}+4\pi M_\mathrm{s}+H_0)& \alpha \gamma (H_\mathrm{K}+H_0)\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}m_x\\ m_y\end{array}\right),`$ (37)
On the other hand, we can obtain the linearized equation for $`m_x`$ and $`m_y`$ from the normal mode equations (Eq.(11) without the thermal term)

$$(d/dt+\eta )c=i\omega _0c,(d/dt+\eta )c^{}=i\omega _0c^{}.$$
(38)
Substituting $`c=uava^{},c^{}=ua^{}va`$ into (38) and taking into account (2) and $`𝐦=𝐒/S`$, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\begin{array}{c}m_x\\ m_y\end{array}\right)`$ (41)
$`=`$ $`\left(\begin{array}{cc}\eta & \gamma (H_\mathrm{K}+H_0)\\ \gamma (H_\mathrm{K}+4\pi M_\mathrm{s}+H_0)& \eta \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}m_x\\ m_y\end{array}\right).`$ (46)
By comparison with (32) we see that the nondiagonal terms coincide. The diagonal terms in (32) and (41), responsible for relaxation, differ from each other.

In order to have the magnetization equations (41), one should start with the magnetization equation containing a tensor damping of the form:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d𝐌}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`\gamma 𝐌\times 𝐇_{\mathrm{eff}}\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{𝐌}{M_\mathrm{s}}}\times [\stackrel{}{\alpha }(𝐌\times 𝐇_{\mathrm{eff}})],`$ (47)
$`\stackrel{}{\alpha }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\eta \gamma }{\omega _0^2}}\left(\begin{array}{ccc}H_\mathrm{K}^{()}+H_0+H_\mathrm{K}^{()}& 0& 0\\ 0& H_\mathrm{K}^{()}+H_0& 0\\ 0& 0& H_0\end{array}\right).`$ (51)
For small oscillations about equilibrium, the $`\alpha _{zz}`$ component does not enter into the equations. The conventional LLG equation can be used only for a uniaxial system, where $`H_\mathrm{K}^{()}=0`$ and the tensor is effectively a scalar.

We thank H. Suhl, C. E. Patton and N. Smith for valuable discussions, and X. Wang for his help with the analysis of paper . This work was partly supported by matching funds from the Center for Magnetic Recording Research at the University of California - San Diego and CMRR incorporated sponsor accounts.