text:
# RPA-CPA theory for magnetism in disordered Heisenberg binary systems with long range exchange integrals.

## I Introduction.

The coherent potential approximation (CPA) is widely used to study the effect of disorder in crystals (for reviews see ). The CPA was initially developed independently by Soven  and Taylor  to study systems with only diagonal disorder. Using a $`2\times 2`$ formulation, a generalization to the presence of off-diagonal disorder was provided by Blackmann Esterling and Berck (BEB) . In these approaches the main idea is to replace the system by an effective medium which is determined by the condition that the averaged T-matrix of a single impurity immersed in the effective medium is zero. An alternative approach is based on cumulant expansion . This latter method has the advantage that it can handle the environmental disorder term which is characteristic of the Goldstone’s systems (phonons, magnons). The first proper treatment of the environmental disorder term, by using the cumulant expansion method is due to Lage and Stinchcombe  who studied the diluted Ising problem (S=1/2). Later, using the 2x2 matrix method of BEB, the method was extended by Whitelaw  to the phonon problem. In their calculations the coupling and locator are fixed quantities and restricted to nearest neighbor exchange couplings. It is well known that magnetism in clean ferromagnetic systems can be tackled with Green’s function formalism using Tyablicov decoupling procedure (RPA). This method goes beyond a simple mean field since it includes quantum fluctuations. Additionally, it fulfills the Goldstone and Mermin-Wagner theorems which is not the case of a mean field treatment. In the case of clean systems, combining first principle calculations to evaluate the exchange integrals and RPA method it was shown that one can provide satisfactory Curie temperature for Co and Fe . Whilst, a simple mean field calculation largely overestimate the Curie temperature. It is our objective to provide in this paper a generalization of the RPA method to the disordered systems. We show that by combining in a self-consistent manner the RPA method and the CPA treatment of the disorder we are able to calculate Curie temperature, magnetization of the different constituants, spectral weights…. The CPA treatment is done in a similar way as done by Lage and Stinchcombe and by Whitelaw. However, due to Tyablicov decoupling scheme for the disordered Green’s functions, the locators and the effective exchange integrals are temperature dependent and have to be determined self-consistently for a given temperature.

The paper is organized as follows. In the first section we derive after Tyablicov decoupling scheme the disordered binary alloy Green’s function which includes diagonal, off-diagonal and environmental disorder. In section II, we perform the calculation of the averaged Green’s functions for A (respectively B) atom. In section III, by generalizing Callen’s formula we derive the equations for the magnetizations $`m_A`$, $`m_B`$ and for the Curie Temperature. In section IV, we propose an alternative simplified treatment of the p,d,..scattering contribution to the self-energy to the case of system with long-range exchange coupling. Finally in section V we present some numerical results and proceed to a test of our approximation of the self-energy contribution of the higher scattering terms.

## II Disordered Green’s function and RPA decoupling scheme.

We study the magnetism in a binary alloy $`A_{1c}B_c`$, A and B can be either magnetic ions or paramagnetic. We denote their spin respectively $`S_A`$ and $`S_B`$. The total Hamiltonian reads,

$$\widehat{H}=\underset{ij}{}J_{ij}𝐒_i𝐒_j\underset{i}{}D_i(S_i^z)^2B\underset{i}{}g\mu _i(S_i^z)$$
(1)
where the $`J_{ij}`$ and $`D_i`$ are random variables:$`J_{ij}=J_{ij}^{\lambda \lambda ^{}}`$ with the probability $`P_i^\lambda P_j^\lambda ^{}`$ where $`P_i^\lambda `$ is the probability that the site i is occupied by a $`\lambda `$-atom. Similarly $`D_i=D_\lambda `$ with probaility $`P_i^\lambda `$. The exchange integrals are assumed to be long range, our study is not restricted to the nearest neighbor Heisenberg model. The second term which describes anisotropy is only relevant in the case of 2D systems to get a non zero Curie temperature $`T_c`$ (Mermin-Wagner theorem). However in the case of 3D systems the contribution of this term can be neglected. We also include the effect of an external magnetic field.

Let us consider the following retarded Green’s function,

$$G_{ij}^+(t)=i\theta (t)[S_i^+(t),S_j^{}(0)]$$
(2)
where $`..`$ denotes the statistical average at temperature T,

$$\widehat{O}=\frac{1}{Z}Tr(e^{\beta \widehat{H}}\widehat{O})$$
(3)
where $`Z=Tr(e^{\beta \widehat{H}})`$.

$`G_{ij}^+(t)`$’s Fourier transform in Energy space is,

$$S_i^+;S_j^{}=G_{ij}^+(\omega )=_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}G_{ij}^+(t)e^{i\omega t}dt$$
(4)
Its equation of motion reads,

$$\omega G_{ij}^+(\omega )=2m_i\delta _{ij}+[S_i^+,H];S_j^{}$$
(5)
where $`m_i=<S_i^z>`$, or $`m_i=m_A`$ (resp. $`m_B`$) if $`i=A`$ (resp. $`i=B`$).

After expanding the second term on the right side of the equality we obtain,

$`(\omega g\mu _iB)G_{ij}^+(\omega )=2m_i\delta _{ij}`$ (6)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{l}{}}J_{il}S_i^zS_l^+S_i^+S_l^z;S_j^{}`$ (7)
$`+D_iS_i^zS_i^++S_i^+S_i^z`$ (8)
The next step consists in decoupling the higher order Green’s function. For the second term we use the standard Tyablicov decoupling  (equivalent to RPA). The last term due to anisotropy is somehow more complicate since on-site correlation are involved. Following the approach discussed in Ref.  we adopt for this term the Anderson-Callen decoupling scheme :

$`D_iS_i^+S_i^z+S_i^zS_i^+=2D_i\gamma _im_i`$ (9)
where,

$$\gamma _i=1\frac{1}{2S^2}(S_i(S_i+1)<(S_i^z)^2>)$$
(10)
After simplification we find,

$$G_{ij}^+=g_i\delta _{ij}+g_i\underset{l}{}\mathrm{\Phi }_{il}G_{lj}^+ϵg_i(\underset{l}{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{il})G_{ij}^+$$
(11)
where $`\varphi _{il}=1/2J_{il}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{il}=1/2J_{il}\frac{m_l}{m_i}`$ and $`g_i`$ denotes the locator: $`g_i=g_A^0`$ (resp. $`g_B^0`$) if $`i=A`$ (resp. $`i=B`$).

$$g_\lambda ^0(E)=\frac{\frac{m_\lambda }{m}}{Eg\mu _\lambda B/2mD_\lambda \gamma _\lambda \frac{m_\lambda }{m}}$$
(12)
where $`\lambda =A`$ or B. For convenience, we have also introduced the reduced variable $`E=\frac{\omega }{2m}`$, m denotes the averaged magnetization: $`m=_\lambda c_\lambda m_\lambda `$. The term which is proportional to $`ϵ`$ comes from the environmental disorder term. This term is crucial to recover the Goldstone mode and requires to be treated very carefully. We have introduced the coefficient $`ϵ`$ which is in principle equal to 1, in order to follow the influence of the environmental disorder term during the calculations. Note also that this term appears because of RPA decoupling. If $`ϵ=0`$ Eq. 11 is analogous to the propagator of an electron in a disordered medium with on-site potential and random long-range hopping terms $`t_{il}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{il}`$ (off-diagonal disorder). In this case the problem can be solved just within the BEB formalism. However, one should stress that the BEB formalism does not apply when the environmental term is present. Note also that in our model the locator $`g_\lambda ^0`$, $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{il}`$ and $`\gamma _i`$ are all temperature dependent, thus CPA and RPA loops have to be treated simultaneously in a self-consistent manner. It is also interesting to note that $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{il}\mathrm{\Psi }_{li}`$ in the case where the sites i and l are occupied by different type of atoms.

## III Cumulant expansion method for the averaged Green’s functions.

As it is done in Ref. , the basic idea is to write Eq.11 as a locator expansion in BEB manner . We define the random variable $`p_i`$: $`p_i=1`$ if A is at site i or $`p_i=0`$ if i is occupied by a B ion. Therefore the locator reads,

$$g_i=p_ig_A^0+(1p_i)g_B^0=g_i^A+g_i^B$$
(13)
and,

$`\varphi _{il}=p_iJ_{il}^{AA}p_l+p_iJ_{il}^{AB}(1p_l)+`$ (14)
$`(1p_i)J_{il}^{AB}p_l+(1p_i)J_{il}^{BB}(1p_l)`$ (15)
similarly,

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{il}=p_iJ_{il}^{AA}p_l+p_iJ_{il}^{AB,1}(1p_l)+`$ (16)
$`(1p_i)J_{il}^{AB,2}p_l+(1p_i)J_{il}^{BB}(1p_l)`$ (17)
where $`J_{il}^{AB,1}=\frac{m_B}{m_A}J_{il}^{AB}`$ and $`J_{il}^{AB,2}=\frac{m_A}{m_B}J_{il}^{AB}`$.

The Green’s function are expressed in term of a 2x2 matrix and one gets for the equation of motion,

$`𝐆_{ij}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}g_i^A& 0\\ 0& g_i^B\end{array}\right)\delta _{ij}+\left(\begin{array}{cc}g_i^A& 0\\ 0& g_i^B\end{array}\right){\displaystyle \underset{m}{}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}J_{im}^{AA}& J_{im}^{AB}\\ J_{im}^{AB}& J_{im}^{BB}\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}G_{mj}^{AA}& G_{mj}^{AB}\\ G_{mj}^{BA}& G_{mj}^{BB}\end{array}\right)`$ (26)
$`ϵ\left(\begin{array}{cc}g_A^0& 0\\ 0& g_B^0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}J^{AB,1}+_l(J_{il}^{AA}J_{il}^{AB,1})p_l& 0\\ 0& J^{BB}+_l(J_{il}^{AB,2}J_{il}^{BB})p_l\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}G_{ij}^{AA}& G_{ij}^{AB}\\ G_{ij}^{BA}& G_{ij}^{BB}\end{array}\right)`$ (33)
We have defined the variables $`J^{AB,1}=_lJ_{il}^{AB,1}`$ and $`J^{BB}=_lJ_{il}^{BB}`$ .

The aim is to expand this expression into a product of the p factors, which can then be averaged over disorder by expanding into cumulants. For that purpose we separate out the factors and introduce a new variable $`\rho _i`$ by $`p_i=\rho _i+c`$ (where $`c_A=c`$) . The idea is to separate out the virtual crystal part.

$`𝐠_i=\rho _i\left(\begin{array}{cc}g_A^0& 0\\ 0& g_B^0\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}cg_A^0& 0\\ 0& (1c)g_B^0\end{array}\right)`$ (38)
There is still the environmental term which is more difficult to handle. As it was done by Lage and Stinchcombe , by converting into k-space the calculations become easier to perform.

We define the Fourier transform by,

$$𝐆_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}=\underset{ij}{}\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤𝐫_i)\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤^{}𝐫_j)𝐆_{ij}$$
(39)
After some manipulation one gets,

$`𝐆_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}=𝐆_𝐤^{vc}\rho _{𝐤𝐤^{}}+𝐆_𝐤^{vc}\left(\begin{array}{cc}c& 0\\ 0& c1\end{array}\right)\delta _{𝐤𝐤^{}}+𝐆_𝐤^{vc}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐪}{}}\rho _{𝐤𝐪}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}𝐆_{\mathrm{𝐪𝐤}^{}}`$ (42)
where the $`2\times 2`$ matrix $`𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}`$ is defined by:

$`𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}=\left(\begin{array}{cc}J_𝐪^{AA}ϵ(J_{𝐤𝐪}^{AA}J_{𝐤𝐪}^{AB,1})& J_𝐪^{AB}\\ J_𝐪^{AB}& J_𝐪^{BB}ϵ(J_{𝐤𝐪}^{BB}J_{𝐤𝐪}^{AB,2})\end{array}\right)`$ (45)
and the virtual-crystal Green’s function $`𝐆_𝐤^{vc}`$,

$`[𝐆_𝐤^{vc}]^1=𝐌_0c𝐌_1`$ (46)
where the matrices $`𝐌_0`$ and $`𝐌_1`$ are,

$`𝐌_0=\left(\begin{array}{cc}(g_A^0)^1& 0\\ 0& (g_B^0)^1\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{cc}ϵJ^{AB,1}& 0\\ J_𝐤^{AB}& J_𝐤^{BB}ϵJ^{BB}\end{array}\right)`$ (51)
and,

$`𝐌_1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}J_𝐤^{AA}ϵ(J^{AA}J^{AB,1})& J_𝐤^{AB}\\ J_𝐤^{AB}& J_𝐤^{BB}ϵ(J^{BB}J^{AB,2})\end{array}\right)`$ (54)
The equation (42) can be expanded into 2 sub-series.

$`𝐆_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}=𝐆_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}^{(1)}+𝐆_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}^{(2)}`$ (55)
where the sub-series are respectively,

$`𝐆_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}^{(1)}=𝐆_𝐤^{vc}\rho _{𝐤𝐤^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐪}{}}𝐆_𝐤^{vc}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}𝐆_𝐪^{vc}\rho _{𝐤𝐪}\rho _{𝐪𝐤^{}}+\mathrm{}.`$ (56)
and,

$`𝐆_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}^{(2)}=\left(𝐆_𝐤^{vc}\delta _{𝐤𝐤^{}}+𝐆_𝐤^{vc}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}𝐆_𝐤^{}^{vc}\rho _{𝐤𝐤^{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{N}}{\displaystyle \underset{𝐪}{}}𝐆_𝐤^{vc}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}𝐆_𝐪^{vc}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐪𝐤}^{}}𝐆_𝐤^{}^{vc}\rho _{𝐤𝐪}\rho _{𝐪𝐤^{}}+\mathrm{}\right)\left(\begin{array}{cc}c& 0\\ 0& c1\end{array}\right)`$ (59)
The averaged Green’s function is obtained by averaging over products of $`\rho `$ by expanding into cumulants $`P_i(c)`$. For instance,

$$\rho _{𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}}\rho _{𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐}}=\frac{P_2(c)}{N}\delta (𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐})$$
(60)
$$\rho _{𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}}\rho _{𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐}}\rho _{𝐤_\mathrm{𝟑}}=\frac{P_3(c)}{N^2}\delta (𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟑})$$
(61)
and,

$`\rho _{𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}}\rho _{𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐}}\rho _{𝐤_\mathrm{𝟑}}\rho _{𝐤_\mathrm{𝟒}}={\displaystyle \frac{P_4(c)}{N^3}}\delta (𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟑})+({\displaystyle \frac{P_2(c)}{N}})^2[\delta (𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐})\delta (𝐤_\mathrm{𝟑}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟒})+`$ (62)
$`\delta (𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟑})\delta (𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟒})+\delta (𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟒})\delta (𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐}+𝐤_\mathrm{𝟑})]`$ (63)
The cumulants are systematically obtained the generating function,

$$g(x,c)=\text{ln}(1c+ce^x)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}P_i(c)\frac{x^i}{i!}$$
(64)
From this equation one gets $`P_1(c)=c`$, $`P_2(c)=c(1c)`$, $`P_3(c)=c(1c)(12c)`$….

In order to get a closed form for the series we have to make the usual CPA approximation which consists in keeping only the diagrams with no crossings of external lines. As it is was shown by Yonezawa et al. , the self-consistency requires a modification of the semi-invariants to be attributed to each vertex. In other words it means that the cumulants $`P_i(c)`$ have to be replaced by a new set of coefficients $`Q_i(c)`$ which satisfies the relation,

$$Q_1(c)+Q_2(c)x+Q_3(c)x^2\mathrm{}..=\sigma _c(x)=\frac{c}{1x(1\sigma _c(x))}$$
(65)
where the modified cumulants are,

$$Q_i(c)=\underset{m=1}{\overset{i}{}}[(1)^{m1}\frac{(i+m2)!}{m!(im)!(m1)!}]c^m$$
(66)
In the single site approximation, after averaging, one gets for the averaged $`2\times 2`$ Green’s function matrix,

$$\overline{𝐆}_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐤}^{}}=\overline{𝐆}_𝐤\delta _{𝐤𝐤^{}}=\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐤\left[\left(\begin{array}{cc}c& 0\\ 0& c1\end{array}\right)+𝚫_𝐤\right]$$
(67)
where,

$$\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐤=\left[(𝐆_𝐤^{vc})^1𝚺_𝐤\right]^1$$
(68)
$`𝚺_𝐤`$ denotes the self-energy, it is given by,

$$𝚺_𝐤=Q_2\frac{1}{N}\underset{𝐪}{}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐪𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐪𝐤}}+Q_3\frac{1}{N^2}\underset{𝐪,𝐭}{}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐪𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐪𝐭}}\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐭𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐭𝐤}}+\mathrm{}$$
(69)
and,

$$𝚫_𝐤=Q_2\frac{1}{N}\underset{𝐪}{}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐪+Q_3\frac{1}{N^2}\underset{𝐪,𝐭}{}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐪𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐪𝐭}}\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐭+\mathrm{}$$
(70)
The term $`𝚫_𝐤`$ which is very similar to the self-energy is called end correction . Note that, inside the CPA loop, Eq.(68) and Eq.(69) are the only 2 equations which have to be solved self-consistently. To summarize, in Fig. 1 we show a diagrammatic representation of the previous set of equations.

### A Evaluation of $`𝚫_𝐤`$.

It is convenient for the calculations to start by defining,

$$\gamma _i(𝐪)=\frac{1}{z_i}\underset{𝐫_l^i}{}\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐪𝐫}_l^i)$$
(71)
The sum, $`𝐫_l^i`$ runs over the i-th type of neighbors of the i-th shell from a given site 0 and $`z_i`$ is the total number of neighbors in the shell. Note that, from now $`_i`$ will correspond to a summation over the different shells. With this definition it follows immediately,

$$J^{AA}(𝐪)=\underset{i}{}J_i^{AA}z_i\gamma _i(𝐪)$$
(72)
We get similar expression for $`J^{BB}(𝐪)`$ and $`J^{AB}(𝐪)`$

It is convenient to decompose the matrix $`𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}`$ into two terms,

$$𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}=𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^{(1)}+𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^{(2)}$$
(73)
where

$$𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^{(1)}=\underset{i}{}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^{(1),i}=\underset{i}{}\left[𝐀_iϵ𝐃_i\gamma _i(𝐤)\right]\gamma _i(𝐪)$$
(74)
and,

$$𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^{(2)}=\underset{i}{}𝐕_{\mathrm{𝐤𝐪}}^{(2),i}=ϵ𝐃_i\left[\gamma _i(𝐤)\gamma _i(𝐪)\gamma _i(𝐤𝐪)\right]$$
(75)
$`𝐀_i`$ and $`𝐃_i`$ are the following 2x2 matrices:

$$𝐀_i=\left(\begin{array}{cc}J_i^{AA}& J_i^{AB}\\ J_i^{AB}& J_i^{BB}\end{array}\right)z_i$$
(76)
$$𝐃_i=\left(\begin{array}{cc}J_i^{AA}J_i^{AB,1}& 0\\ 0& J_i^{BB}J_i^{AB,2}\end{array}\right)z_i$$
(77)
By using the following very useful property : if $`f(r)`$ is a function which is equivaluated at each site $`r_i`$ of $`E_i`$ then,

$$\frac{1}{N}\underset{𝐪}{}\gamma _i(𝐤𝐪)f(𝐪)=\gamma _i(𝐤)\frac{1}{N}\underset{𝐪}{}\gamma _i(𝐪)f(𝐪)$$
(78)
By using Eq.(78), we find significant simplifications in the calculations. Indeed all the terms of the serie involving at least one factor $`𝐕^{(2)}`$ reduces to zero. Thus the end correction term does not explicitely depend on the environmental disorder term.

After calculation we finally get,

$$𝚫_𝐤=\underset{ij}{}𝐕_{𝐤,\mathrm{𝟎}}^{(1),i}[Q_2𝐈+Q_3𝐌+Q_4𝐌^2+\mathrm{}.]_{ij}𝐅^j$$
(79)
Like $`𝐕^{(1),i}`$, $`𝐅^j`$ is a $`2\times 2`$ matrix, and $`𝐌`$ a $`N_s\times N_s`$ matrix, where each matrix element $`𝐌_{ij}`$ is a $`2\times 2`$ matrix. $`N_s`$ denotes the number of considered shells. $`𝐕^{(1),i}`$ is given in Eq. (74) and $`𝐅^j`$ and $`𝐌_{ij}`$ are defined by

$$𝐅^i=\frac{1}{N}\underset{𝐪}{}\gamma _i(𝐪)\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐪$$
(80)
and,

$$𝐌_{ij}=\frac{1}{N}\underset{𝐪}{}\gamma _i(𝐪)\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_𝐪𝐕_{𝐪,\mathrm{𝟎}}^{(1),j}$$
(81)
The sum in Eq. 79 is obtained after diagonalization of the $`2N_s\times 2N_s`$ matrix $`𝐌=𝐏^1𝐌_{diag}𝐏`$,

$$Q_2𝐈+Q_3𝐌+Q_4𝐌^2+\mathrm{}.=𝐏^1[(\sigma _c(𝐌_{diag})Q_1𝐈)𝐌_{diag}^1]𝐏$$
(82)
The function $`\sigma _c`$ was previously defined in Eq. (65), and $`[\sigma _c(𝐌_{diag})]_{ij}=\sigma _c(\lambda _i)\delta _{ij}`$ where $`\lambda _i`$ are the eigenvalues of $`𝐌`$. Hence, we get for the end correction

$$𝚫_𝐤=\underset{ij}{}𝐕_{𝐤,\mathrm{𝟎}}^{(1),i}[𝐏^1[(\sigma _c(𝐌_{diag})Q_1𝐈)𝐌_{diag}^1]𝐏]_{ij}𝐅^j$$
(83)
Let us now proceed further and evaluate the self-energy $`𝚺_𝐤`$.

### B Evaluation of $`𝚺_𝐤`$.

Using the remarks made in the previous section, we find that the self-energy can be written,

$$𝚺_𝐤=𝚺_𝐤^{(1)}+𝚺_𝐤^{(2)}$$
(84)
where $`𝚺_𝐤^{(1)}`$ (resp.$`𝚺_𝐤^{(2)}`$) is obtained by replacing $`𝐕_{𝐤,𝐪}`$ by $`𝐕_{𝐤,𝐪}^{(1)}`$ (resp.$`𝐕_{𝐤,𝐪}^{(2)}`$). Indeed we find that each term of the serie containing both $`𝐕^{(1)}`$ and $`𝐕^{(2)}`$ reduces to zero. After simplifications we obtain for $`𝚺_𝐤^{(1)}`$,

$$𝚺^{(1)}(𝐤)=\underset{i,j}{}𝐕_{}^{i}{}_{𝐤,\mathrm{𝟎}}{}^{}[Q_1𝐈+Q_2𝐌+Q_3𝐌^2+\mathrm{}.]_{ij}𝚪^j(𝐤)$$
(85)
where $`𝚪^j(𝐤)=\gamma _j(𝐤)\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)`$.

As previously done for the end correction, using the function $`\sigma _c(z)`$ defined in Eq. 65 we obtain immediately,

$$Q_1𝐈+Q_2𝐌+Q_3𝐌^2+\mathrm{}.=𝐏^1[\sigma (𝐌_{diag})]𝐏$$
(86)
Note that, we have included in the sum the first order term depending on c ($`Q_1`$) which comes from the virtual crystal Green’s function $`𝐆_q^{vc}`$.

In general, the evaluation of the second term $`𝚺^{(2)}(𝐤)`$ is much more complicated. One can get an analytical form only for simple cases. For example if the exchange integrals are restricted to only nearest neighbor, the complete summation of the serie can be performed by using the space group symmetry of the lattice . In the case of nearest neighbor Heisenberg system one gets,

$$𝚺_𝐤^{(2)}(E)=𝐂_p(1\gamma (2𝐤))+𝐂_d(1+\gamma (2𝐤)2\gamma (𝐤)^2)$$
(87)
where,

$$𝐂_{p,d}=\frac{ϵ}{2}(Q_1𝐈+Q_2𝐌_{p,d}+Q_3𝐌_{p,d}^2+\mathrm{})𝐃_1$$
(88)
$`𝐂_{p,d}`$ are evaluated in the same way it was done for $`𝚺_𝐤^{(1)}(E)`$ and $`𝚫_𝐤(E)`$. The matrices $`𝐃_1`$, $`𝐌_p`$ and $`𝐌_d`$ are respectively,

$$𝐃_1=\left(\begin{array}{cc}J^{AA}J^{AB,1}& 0\\ 0& J^{BB}J^{AB,2}\end{array}\right)z$$
(89)
$$𝐌_p=\frac{ϵ}{6}𝐃_1\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_p$$
(90)
$$𝐌_d=\frac{ϵ}{4}𝐃_1\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_d$$
(91)
where $`\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_p=\frac{1}{N}_𝐪(1\gamma (2𝐪))\stackrel{~}{𝐆}(𝐪)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{𝐆}_d=\frac{1}{N}_𝐪(1+\gamma (2𝐪)2\gamma (𝐪)^2)\stackrel{~}{𝐆}(𝐪)`$.

Note that the virtual crystal approximation for $`𝚺_𝐤^{(2)}(E)`$ consists in taking in Eq. (88) the first term only. Then it follows immediately,

$$C_p^{VCA}=C_d^{VCA}=\frac{ϵc}{2}𝐃_1$$
(92)
which substituted in Eq.(87) leads to,

$$𝚺_𝐤^{(2),VCA}(E)=ϵc𝐃_1(1\gamma (𝐤)^2)$$
(93)
Note that $`𝚺_𝐤^{(2),VCA}`$ is energy independent. It is also important to stress that at the lowest order the self-consistency for $`𝚺^{(2)}`$ is not required.

Most of the ferromagnetic materials are of itinerant type, which means that the exchange integrals between different localized magnetic ions are long range and driven by the polarization of the conduction electrons gas as it is for the RKKY mechanism . Analytically, the generalization of the previous calculations to the more interesting case where $`J_{ij}`$ are long ranged is not an easy task. However by truncating the serie, the summation can be performed numerically. It is important to note that $`𝚺^{(2)}(𝐤)`$ is (i) proportional to $`ϵ`$ which means that it originates only from the environmental disorder term and (ii) each term of the serie vanishes in the long wave length limit $`𝚺^{(2)}(𝐤=\mathrm{𝟎})=0`$. This implies that even after truncation of the serie at any order, the Goldstone theorem remains fulfilled. Thus the long wave length magnons are always treated properly. Furthermore, since $`𝚺^{(2)}(𝐤)`$ corresponds to higher order scattering terms (p,d,f,…) it is natural to expect that these terms should not affect the Curie temperature in a dramatic way. In other words we expect that a truncation of $`𝚺^{(2)}(𝐤)`$ serie to the first few term should already provide a good approximation of Curie temperature compared to the one one would get with the complete series. However, it is crucial to consider at least the lowest order term (the virtual crystal contribution) otherwise even in the clean limit one would not recover the correct result and the Goldstone’s theorem would be violated . If we consider the lower approximation $`𝚺^(2)𝚺^{(2)}_{VCA}`$, we get the expected results in the limit $`c=0`$ and $`c=1`$. It is not a priori clear whether such an approximation of $`𝚺^{(2)}(𝐤)`$ to the lowest order provides satisfying results for the Curie temperature at moderate impurity concentration. Such an approximation will be tested later on.

To conclude this section the complete averaged $`2\times 2`$ Green’s function is obtained after solving self-consistently the set of equations Eqs. (68) and (69) within the CPA loop and then using Eqs. 67 and 70 to get $`𝚫_𝐤`$ and $`\overline{𝐆}_𝐤`$. However, as was already mentioned in the introduction, the problem is not solved until we are able to calculate the locators $`g_\lambda ^0`$ and the exchanged integrals $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{il}`$ which depend on the averaged magnetization $`m_\lambda `$. The determination of $`m_\lambda `$ has to be done self-consistently in an additional external loop (RPA loop).

## IV Magnetization and Curie temperature.

We assume that the averaged $`2\times 2`$ Green’s function matrix $`\overline{𝐆}(𝐤,E)`$ is calculated according to the previous section within the CPA loop. We show how from $`\overline{G}_\lambda (𝐤,E)`$, $`\lambda =A`$ or B we can get the missing self-consistent equations (RPA loop) to get the temperature dependent locator $`g_\lambda ^0`$ and the exchange integrals $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{il}`$. This will allow us to calculate the element-resolved magnetizations $`m_\lambda =<S_\lambda ^z>`$ as function of temperature and the Curie temperature. It was shown by Callen, in the case of a clean system (pure A or B) that the magnetization can be expressed in the following way ,

$$m_\lambda =\frac{(S_\lambda \mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda )(1+\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda )^{2S_\lambda +1}+(S_\lambda +1+\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda )\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda ^{2S_\lambda +1}}{(1+\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda )^{2S_\lambda +1}\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda ^{2S_\lambda +1}}$$
(94)
where $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda =\frac{1}{N}_𝐪\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda (𝐪)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda (𝐪)`$ is defined as,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda (𝐪)=_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑E\frac{A_\lambda (𝐪,E)}{e^{2mE/kT}1}$$
(95)
where,

$$A_\lambda (𝐪,E)=\frac{1}{\pi }\text{Im}G_\lambda ^+(𝐪,E)$$
(96)
is the spectral function.

Note also that the Callen’s approach to get the magnetization allows to derive a lot of local spin-spin correlation, they are only expressed as a function of $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda `$. For instance,

$$(S_\lambda ^z)^2=S(S+1)m_\lambda (1+2\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda )$$
(97)
which is needed to determine the anisotropy parameters $`\gamma _\lambda `$ given in Eq. (10).

In the case of clean systems, the normalized spectral function $`A_\lambda (𝐪,E)`$ is given by

$$A_\lambda (𝐪,E)=\delta (EE(𝐪))$$
(98)
$`E(𝐪)=\omega (𝐪)/2m`$ and $`\omega (𝐪)`$ denotes the magnon dispersion.

In the case of a binary (or multi-component) alloy this formula can be generalized in the following way,

$$A_\lambda (𝐪,E)=\frac{1}{\pi }\frac{\text{Im}\overline{G}_\lambda ^+(𝐪,E)}{c_\lambda x_\lambda }$$
(99)
where $`c_\lambda `$ is the concentration of $`\lambda `$-ion and we have for convenience introduced a T-dependent reduced variable $`x_\lambda =\frac{m_\lambda }{m}`$.

Note that in the presence of impurities the spectral function is not anymore a $`\delta `$ function, but because of the finite imaginary part of the self-energy will consists of peaks of finite width with more or less a Lorentzian shape. In the case of binary alloy we expect for a given $`𝐪`$, 2 peaks, more generally n peaks for an n-component alloy.

For a given temperature the complete self-consistency is obtained by (i) providing good starting values for $`m_\lambda `$ then (ii) performing the CPA loop which provide $`\overline{𝐆}(𝐤,E)`$ and finally (ii) going into the RPA loop by using Eq. (94), (97) and (99) one gets the new values of $`m_\lambda `$ and $`(S_\lambda ^z)^2`$ which are re-injected in the locators $`g_\lambda ^0`$, the exchange integrals $`\mathrm{\Psi }_{il}`$ and $`\gamma _\lambda `$.

Let us now show how to get the Curie temperature of a disordered Heisenberg binary alloy. We start by expanding Eq. (95) in the limit $`TT_c`$ (i.e, $`m_\lambda 0`$). We immediately get,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda \frac{kT_c}{2m}F_\lambda $$
(100)
where,

$$F_\lambda =\frac{1}{N}\underset{𝐪}{}_{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}𝑑E\frac{A_\lambda (𝐪,E)}{E}$$
(101)
After expanding Eq. 94 as a function of $`\frac{1}{\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda }`$ one obtains,

$$m_\lambda =\frac{S_\lambda (S_\lambda +1)}{3}\frac{2m}{kT_c}\frac{1}{F_\lambda }$$
(102)
Since the averaged magnetization m is defined by, $`m=_\lambda c_\lambda m_\lambda `$, combining the two previous equations one finds for the Curie-Temperature,

$$k_BT_c=\frac{2}{3}\underset{\lambda }{}c_\lambda \frac{S_\lambda (S_\lambda +1)}{F_\lambda }$$
(103)
Eq. (103) is the RPA generalization of the Curie Temperature to a multi-component disordered alloy. The previous equation provides a direct measure of the weight $`w_\lambda =\frac{1}{k_BT_c}[c_\lambda \frac{S_\lambda (S_\lambda +1)}{F_\lambda }]`$ of each $`\lambda `$-element to the Curie Temperature.

## V Numerical results.

In this section we provide an illustration of the RPA-CPA theory and a test for the approximation suggested above for the higher order scattering contribution of the self-energy. For simplicity, we consider the case of a 3D disordered binary alloy on a simple cubic lattice. Additionally we restrict the exchange integrals to nearest neighbor only which allows us to test the validity of the approximation scheme suggested in Sec III Bfor estmating $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^2`$. For further simplifications of the calculations we consider the cas of a zero external field and neglect the anisotropy term which is reasonable for a 3D systems.

In Fig. 2, we have plotted the Curie Temperature as a function of $`c`$ obtained with the full CPA treatment, the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(2)}`$ part of the self-energy is calculated exactly (full summation of the serie). Note that pure A (resp. B) corresponds to $`c=1`$ (resp. $`c=0`$). Depending on the chosen set of parameters $`T_c`$ shows (i) a minimum ($`J_{AB}S_AS_B\text{min}(J_{AA}S_A^2,J_{BB}S_B^2)`$, (ii) a maximum ($`J_{AB}S_AS_B\text{max}(J_{AA}S_A^2,J_{BB}S_B^2)`$ or (iii) is monotonic ($`\text{min}(J_{AA}S_A^2,J_{BB}S_B^2)J_{AB}S_AS_B\text{max}(J_{AA}S_A^2,J_{BB}S_B^2)`$. These three different cases are shown in the figure.

As already mentioned in section III, it is difficult to perform the full summation of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(2)}`$ for the case of long-range exchange integrals which is the case of many realistic and interesting systems, for example permalloy. As it was discussed previously the simplest approximation consists in keeping only the lowest order term of the serie ( virtual crystal approximation). In the case of nearest neighbor Heisenberg system $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(2)}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{(2),VCA}`$ are respectively given in Eqs (87) and (93). In Fig. 3 we have plotted the Curie Temperature calculated with (i) a full CPA treatment, (ii) the one performed with the approximation discussed previously $`𝚺^{(2)}=𝚺_{VCA}^{(2)}`$ and (iii) the one obtained with virtual crystal approximation. In the case (iii), the averaged Green’s function is,

$$\overline{𝐆}_𝐤=𝐆_𝐤^{vc}\left(\begin{array}{cc}c& 0\\ 0& c1\end{array}\right)$$
(104)
since in VCA $`𝚫_𝐤=0`$.

The comparison between the full CPA and the virtual crystal approximation shows that the Curie temperature differs significantly. Even, very close to the clean limit the VCA appears to be inappropriate, for instance for $`c=0.1`$, we observe that $`T_c^{VCA}`$ is about $`35\%`$ larger than the full CPA calculated one. Note that the disagreement is even more pronounced in the vicinity of $`c=0`$ than $`c=1`$. This can be understood in the following way: since $`J_{AB}=3J_{BB}=1.5J_{AA}`$ and $`S_A=S_B`$ a substitutition of a B site by a A site (close to $`c=0`$) introduces a change of energy (with respect to the pure case) 2 times larger than a substitution of a B site by a A site near $`c=1`$. As discussed previously it is interesting to compare the Curie temperature where the VCA is only done on $`𝚺^{(2)}`$ ($`T_c^{2,VCA}`$). We observe a good agreement between the full CPA calculated $`T_c`$ and $`T_c^{2,VCA}`$, in the whole range of concentration, the agreement is even excellent for $`c0.6`$. A comparison between $`T_c^{VCA}`$ and $`T_c^{2,VCA}`$ in the vicinity of $`c=0`$ and $`c=1`$ shows that the reason why the VCA approximation breaks down is essentially because of the crude approximation of the s-part of the scattering. Thus this figure validates a simple treatment of $`𝚺^{(2)}`$. It is also expected that including only few additional terms of the serie will lead to an excellent agreement in the whole range of concentration. Additionally, the approximation $`𝚺^{(2)}𝚺^{(2),VCA}`$ will get better in the case of long range exchange integrals.

In Fig. 4 we show the temperature dependence of the element-resolved magnetizations. In order to demonstrate the versatility of our approach, we have chosen a set of parameters which mimics a ferrimagnetic behavior with compensation point. Additionally, the parameters are such that $`T_c^AT_c^B`$. While the temperature dependence of $`m_A`$ follows a standard behavior, $`m_B(T)`$ start to strongly decrease even at low temperature. For example at $`T2.5`$, $`m_A`$ has reduced by less that $`20\%`$ while $`m_B=0.5m_B(0)`$. As a result of our choice of the parameters we see that the averaged magnetization $`m_{av}=|c_Am_A+c_Bm_B|`$ is non monotonic and vanishes for an intermediate temperature value (compensation point). It is found that the function $`\frac{m_B}{m_A}(T)`$ decreases monotonically with temperature. As a result and since at $`T=0`$, $`\frac{mB}{m_A}=\frac{S_B}{S_A}`$, thus if $`\frac{S_B}{S_A}\frac{c_A}{c_B}`$ then $`m_{av}`$ will not have a compensation point . However, the condition that $`\frac{S_B}{S_A}\frac{c_A}{c_B}`$ is not sufficient to get one, it also required that $`\frac{m_B}{m_A}(T_c)\frac{c_A}{c_B}`$.

In Fig. 5 we now show the magnon spectral density (MSD) $`\rho _\lambda (E)=\frac{\text{Im}G^\lambda (E)}{x_\lambda c_\lambda }`$ as a function of E. We consider 3 different cases: almost clean A and B ( (a) and (c)), and the intermediate situation $`c_A=c_B=0.5`$. In both, Fig. 5a and Fig. 5c we observe that the MSD is very similar to the clean case. This is clearer in case (c) than (a), it is easy to understand that when doping A with B the difference in energy with the undoped case is only of order $`10\%`$ ($`J_{AA}(S_A)^2=0.8`$ and $`J_{AB}S_AS_B=0.9`$) whilst doping B with A the change is more drastic (about $`100\%`$). To get a similar MSD to Fig.5c for a weakly doped B sample, one should take $`c0.005`$.

In Fig. 6 we show the spectral function $`S_\lambda (𝐪,E)`$ as afunction of energy for different values of the momentum $`𝐪`$. This quantity is more interesting that the integrated MSD since it provides direct information about the elementary excitation dispersions and their spectral weight. Additionally it is directly related to inelastic neutron scattering measurements. Let us now briefly discuss Fig. 6. At precisely $`𝐪=\mathrm{𝟎}`$ momentum, in both $`S_{\lambda =A,B}`$, we observe 2 peaks structure (i) a well defined peak  at $`E=0`$ as expected since our theory fulfills the Goldstone theorem and (ii) a very broad one at intermediate energy $`E1`$. For intermediate values of the momentum, it is difficult to separate the peak and one get a single broad peak. We see clearly that the peaks are crossing each other at $`𝐪\frac{\pi }{2}(1,1,1)`$. Note that due to (i) the different spectral weight of the peaks and to the closeness of their location, the single peak-structure which is observed at $`q=\frac{\pi }{2}`$ is located at different energy for A and B. From this figure we see also that the dispersion of the second peak is almost flat $`E_2(q)1`$, while the Goldstone mode $`E_1(𝐪)`$  goes from $`E=0`$ to $`E_{max}2`$ when moving in the $`(1,1,1)`$-direction.

## VI Conclusion.

In conclusion, we have presented in this paper a theory based on Green’s function formalism to study magnetism in disordered Heisenberg systems with long range exchange integrals. The disordered Green’s function are decoupled within Tyablicov procedure and the disorder (diagonal, off-diagonal and environmental) is treated with a $`2\times 2`$ modified cumulant CPA approach. The crucial point is that we are able to treat simultaneously and self-consistently the RPA and CPA loops. Our theory allows in particular to calculate Curie temperature, spectral functions and temperature dependence of the magnetization for each element as a function of concentration of impurity. Additionally, we have proposed a simplified treatment of the p,d,f .. contribution of the self-energy which is difficult to handle in the case of long range exchange integrals. The approximation was tested successfully on 3D disordered nearest-neighbor Heisenberg systems. Combined with first principle calculations which can provide the exchange integrals this method appears to be very promising to study magnetism in disordered systems.


format: text

text:
# XMM-Newton observation of the bursting pulsar GRO J1744-28 in quiescence

## 1 Introduction

The bursting pulsar GRO J1744-28 is a unique source that presents both the characteristics of a type II X-ray burster and a X-ray pulsar. It was discovered near the Galactic center by the Burst and Transient Source Experiment (BATSE) on board the Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory (CGRO) on 1995 December 2 (Fishman et al. 1995; Kouveliotou et al. 1996b), when it was experiencing a very active bursting phase with a rate of about 20 hard X-ray bursts per hour. After one day, the source entered a regime of hourly bursting which lasted until 1996 April 26. Many of these bursts were also detected by the Proportional Counter Array (PCA) instrument on board the Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE) (Swank 1996; Giles et al. 1996) and the Oriented Scintillation Spectrometer Experiment(OSSE) instrument on board CGRO (Strickman et al. 1996). Then the burst rate decreased rapidly and the bursting activity ceased for the next 7 months. On 1996 December 1, a second bursting phase started with a similar burst rate to that seen in the first outburst (Woods et al. 1999). It lasted until 1997 April 7. The source was no longer detected by BATSE or RXTE after this date. More than 5800 bursts were observed by BATSE in total.
During the first outburst, persistent hard X-ray emission from GRO J1744-28 was detected by BATSE and OSSE (Paciesas et al. 1996). Finger et al. (1996) measured that GRO J1744-28 is a 467 ms X-ray pulsar in a binary system of orbital period 11.8 days. The pulsar period determination was confirmed with ASCA (Dotani et al. 1996a, b). It has also been found that the X-ray bursts were showing pulsations with the same 467 ms period (Kouveliotou et al. 1996c) and had similar hard X-ray / soft gamma-ray spectra than the persistent emission (Briggs et al. 1996; Strickman et al. 1996), so that the association is firmly established.
The initial source localization was a $`6^{}`$ radius error circle (Fishman et al. 1995), which was rapidly refined to a 24’ wide annulus by the Interplanetary Network using time-delay measurements between CGRO and other satellites, mainly Ulysses (Hurley et al. 1995). Observations with ASCA provided a $`1^{}`$ error circle. ROSAT (Kouveliotou et al. 1996a; Augusteijn et al. 1997) improved the source localization to R.A. $`17^\mathrm{h}44^\mathrm{m}33^\mathrm{s}.1`$ and decl. $`28^{}44^{}29^{\prime \prime }`$ (J2000) with a $`10^{\prime \prime }`$ error circle. An optical / near-infrared variable object was observed in 1996 at the periphery of this ROSAT error circle (Augusteijn et al. 1997; Cole et al. 1997) and proposed as a possible counterpart. More recently, Hurley et al. (2000) derived a more precise IPN localization of GRO J1744-28 with a $`3\sigma `$ error ellipse of $`532\mathrm{arcsec}^2`$ fully contained in the ASCA error circle and partially overlapping with the ROSAT error circle. The optical / near-infrared variable source lies outside the new IPN $`3\sigma `$ ellipse, which makes it unlikely to be associated with GRO J1744-28.
Finger et al. (1996) determined the mass function of the binary system to be $`\mathrm{1.36\; 10}^4\mathrm{M}_{}`$. This supports that GRO J1744-28 is very likely a Low-Mass X-ray Binary (LMXB), where the central neutron star accretes matter through Roche lobe overflow from an evolved low-mass stellar companion (Daumerie et al. 1996; Sturner & Dermer 1996). This is however the only known example of such a system showing both the characteristics of a X-ray pulsar (the persistent pulsed emission) and of a type II X-ray burster. The relative fluences in the bursts and in the persistent emission probably rule out a thermonuclear origin of the bursts, which are more likely of type II. Such bursts are accretion powered and are possibly triggered by an instability in the accretion flow, the nature of which is not clearly identified (Kouveliotou et al. 1996c; Lewin et al. 1996; Cannizzo 1996). This is supported by several similarities between the bursts of GRO J1744-28 and those of the Rapid Burster MXB 1730-355 (Lewin et al. 1996), i.e the first and unique object where type II bursts were discovered.
In this paper, we report new observations of GRO J1744-28 in the X-ray band, made with XMM-Newton in April 2001 as it was in its quiescent state.

## 2 Observations and data analysis

GRO J1744-28 was observed with the European Photon Imaging Camera (EPIC), both with the MOS cameras (Turner et al. 2001) on 2001 April 4 at UT 13:14:27 and with the PN camera (Strüder et al. 2001) on the same day starting at UT 14:27:23. The MOS and PN cameras were operating in full window mode with the medium filter. Data reduction was performed using the XMM SAS (Science Analysis Software) and the standard XSPEC packages.
The time histogram of all events above 10 keV showed that the background has only small variations, without any very intense flare, even if the averaged flux is close to the alert level as defined in the standard SAS flare rejection procedure. For this reason we applied no time filtering so that the total duration has been kept to $`9199\mathrm{s}`$ for the MOS 1 & 2 cameras and $`4699\mathrm{s}`$ for the PN camera. A preliminary visual inspection of the MOS 1,2 and PN images showed that a faint source was present at the position of GRO J1744-28 (with no significant flux below 1 keV and above 6 keV). The absence of flux below 1 keV can be explained by the strong absorption towards the Galactic center. Therefore all the further analysis has been made in the 1-6 keV band. Also, it could be noticed that for some unidentified reasons, the background in the MOS2 image appears to be higher than in the MOS1 image.
In this energy band, we generated an image for each of the three EPIC instruments, keeping only the valid X-ray events using the canonical range of pattern specified by the SAS (0-12 for the MOS cameras and 0-4 for the PN camera). We applied to these three images the standard source detection procedure with the following SAS tasks : (i) eexpmap and emask to generate the exposure map and the detection mask for each image; (ii) eboxdetect (in local mode) to generate an input list of source positions; (iii) esplinemap to generate the corresponding background map; (iv) eboxdetect (in map mode) to generate a new list of sources with a better detection sensitivity using the background map; (v) emldetect to perform a maximum likelihood PSF fit to the count distribution of each source. This procedure was also applied to an image made of the sum of all X-ray events of the three instruments in the 1-6 keV band.

The standard SAS source detection procedure that we applied to the data found one weak source within the ROSAT $`10^{\prime \prime }`$ error circle of GRO J1744-28. This source was also present in the standard SAS pipeline output. As can be seen in Table 2, it is a detection at the $`4\sigma `$ level for the PN and MOS1 cameras and a detection at the $`2.5\sigma `$ level only for the MOS2 camera. The number of sources at the $`3\sigma `$ level in the total field of view of the MOS cameras (radius $`15^{}`$) is about 100 so that the probability to find such a source by chance in an area comparable with the ROSAT error box (radius $`10^{\prime \prime }`$) is about 1 % . Then we identify this weak source with GRO J1744-28.
The position error obtained with the standard SAS source detection procedure can be dominated by the errors of the absolute astrometry (maximum $`4^{\prime \prime }`$). To estimate these systematic errors, we proceeded to identify strong sources in our field of view. Unfortunately only one is strong enough to be used in this way. This bright source which was detected by each instrument has been identified – based on positional coincidence – as the star TYC 6840-38-1 in the Tycho-2 Catalogue (Hog et al. 2000) which contains the position, the proper motion and the two-colour photometric data for the 2.5 million brightest stars in the sky. Its catalogue position is R.A. $`17^h43^m51.^s3`$ and decl. $`28^{}46^{}38^{\prime \prime }`$ (with a negligible proper motion for our purpose). Table 1 shows the position of this star obtained with each instrument. They are all consistent with the catalogue position, taking into account the statistical error given by the emldetect procedure ($`0.7^{\prime \prime }`$) and the quoted accuracy of the XMM-Newton coordinates : the MOS1 and MOS2 positions are distant of $`1^{\prime \prime }`$ from each other whereas the PN position is shifted of $`3^{\prime \prime }`$ with respect to the MOS2 position. This is in agreement with the negligible offset found in the MOS 1&2 roll angle and the mean offset of $`0.30^{}`$ found in the PN roll angle (Tedds & Watson 2001). As the star is located at $`10^{}`$ of the center of the field of view, the expected shift in the PN position is indeed $`3^{\prime \prime }`$. However the same shift at the position of GRO J1744-28 is negligible because the source is at the center of the field of view. The nice agreement bewteen the position of the star obtained with the three EPIC instruments and the catalogue position shows that for our observation, the systematic error in the position is $`1^{\prime \prime }`$.
The position of GRO J1744-28 is the same in the three instruments taking into account the statistical error (see Table 2). The best accuracy is obtained when summing the events of the three instruments. The derived position is R.A. $`17^h44^m33^s.2`$ and decl. $`28^{}44^{}25^{\prime \prime }`$ with an error circle of about $`4^{\prime \prime }`$ at the $`3\sigma `$ level (summing in quadrature a statistical error of $`4^{\prime \prime }`$ and a systematic error $`1^{\prime \prime }`$). The closest other source is located at $`25^{\prime \prime }`$ of GRO J1744-28, well outside the ROSAT error circle, and therefore can be easily rejected.
To construct the spectral distribution of the photons, we have decided to sum the two MOS cameras events to increase the statistics, which is possible because the response matrix are similar. We extracted from the PN and MOS 1+2 images the X-ray events within a radius of $`15^{\prime \prime }`$ of the GRO J1744-28 position. We grouped the photons in 5 energy bands : $`12\mathrm{keV}`$, $`23\mathrm{keV}`$, $`34\mathrm{keV}`$, $`45\mathrm{keV}`$ and $`56\mathrm{keV}`$. Background was estimated using offset regions in the same central CCD. After substracting it, we obtained a detectable flux only in the $`15`$ keV band. The resulting spectrum was obtained with XSPEC and is plotted in Fig. 1. The source count rate in the 1-6 keV energy band is $`\left(4.75\pm 1.32\right)10^3\mathrm{counts}/\mathrm{s}`$ for the PN camera and $`\left(3.40\pm 0.76\right)10^4\mathrm{counts}/\mathrm{s}`$ for the MOS 1+2. Fixing the hydrogen column density to the value of $`5.1\times 10^{22}\mathrm{cm}^2`$ (Dotani et al. 1996a), we tried to fit the spectrum of GRO J1744-28 either with a power-law or with a blackbody distribution. We found that acceptable fits of the observed spectrum with a power-law could be obtained for a photon index in the range $`25`$. Acceptable fits with a blackbody distribution could be obtained as well for a temperature $`kT`$ in the range $`0.41.\mathrm{keV}`$. The corresponding unabsorbed energy flux in the $`15\mathrm{keV}`$ is about $`2\mathrm{5\; 10}^{13}\mathrm{erg}.\mathrm{cm}^2.\mathrm{s}^1`$ in the power-law case and about $`1\mathrm{2\; 10}^{13}\mathrm{erg}.\mathrm{cm}^2.\mathrm{s}^1`$ in the blackbody case.

## 3 Results and discussion

### 3.1 Source position

Fig. 2 shows the XMM-Newton error circle we have derived in the last section. It is entirely included in the intersection of the ROSAT error circle (Augusteijn et al. 1997) and the IPN error ellipse (Hurley et al. 2000). This strengthens the identification of the source observed by XMM-Newton with GRO J1744-28, despite the fact that this source is too weak to allow the search for pulsations (such pulsations were also impossible to study with the ROSAT observation). The association of the proposed optical / near-infrared counterpart (Augusteijn et al. 1997; Cole et al. 1997) with GRO J1744-28 is rejected without any ambiguity with the more precise XMM-Newton error circle we have obtained in the previous section. It is then important to carry out deeper searches for the real IR counterpart of GRO J1744-28 using the better determined XMM-Newton position.

### 3.2 Source luminosity in quiescence

Despite a very low statistics, we tried in the last section to estimate the spectrum of GRO J1744-28 in quiescence. This spectrum appears to decrease very fast at high energy, as it is indicated by the photon index found when fitting with a power-law. The unabsorbed luminosity in the 1-5 keV band is

$$L\left(16\right)10^{33}d_{10}^2\mathrm{erg}/\mathrm{s}$$
(1)
where $`d_{10}`$ is the distance of the source in unit of 10 kpc. The quiescent luminosity is then about five orders of magnitude smaller than the outburst luminosity

$$L10^{38}d_{10}^2\mathrm{erg}/\mathrm{s}$$
(2)
and is compatible with the typical quiescent luminosity of a neutron star transient (Asai et al. 1998). On the other hand, if we assume a blackbody distribution, the range in temperature we obtain (0.4-1. keV) is slightly outside the typical range of neutron star transients in quiescence ($`kT0.20.3`$ keV; Asai et al. (1998)). The temperature we find corresponds to an emitting area

$$A=\frac{L}{\sigma T^4}\left(10^910^{11}\right)d_{10}^2\mathrm{cm}^2.$$
(3)
Such an area corresponds to a sphere of radius $`10^410^5\mathrm{cm}`$ which is well below the size of a neutron star. Then the observed luminosity cannot be associated with the thermal emission of the total surface of a non accreting neutron star. Many other origins can be proposed, such as the emission due to the accretion on the magnetic poles or the emission from the accretion onto the neutron star magnetosphere (Campana et al. 1998). However the large uncertainty we get on the spectral distribution of the X-ray photons makes very difficult any detailed comparison with a particular model.

###### Acknowledgements.

F.D. acknowledges financial support from a postdoctoral fellowship from the French Spatial Agency (CNES).


text:
# References

On the $`L^2`$-norm of periodizations of functions

Oleg Kovrijkine

School of Mathematics

Institute for Advanced Study

Princeton, NJ 08540, USA

E-mail address: olegk@ias.edu

To the memory of Tom Wolff

## Abstract

We prove that the $`L^2([0,1]^d\times SO(d))`$-norm of periodizations of a function from $`L^1(^d)`$ is equivalent to the $`L^2(^d)`$-norm of the function itself in higher dimensions. We generalize the statement for functions from $`L^p(^d)`$ where $`1p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$ in the spirit of the Stein-Tomas theorem.

0. Introduction.

Let $`f`$ be a function from $`L^1(^d)`$. Define a family of its periodizations with respect to a rotated integer lattice:

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$ (1)
for all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$. The main object of our study is $`G`$, the $`L^2([0,1]^d\times SO(d))`$-norm of the family of periodizations,

$`G^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{[0,1]^d}{}}|g_\rho (x)|^2𝑑x𝑑\rho `$ (2)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}g_\rho _2^2𝑑\rho .`$
The purpose of this work is to show how $`G`$ can give an estimate of the $`L^2(^d)`$-norm of a function from $`L^1(^d)`$ in higher dimensions. Some results on the Steinhaus tiling problem are related to Theorem 1 since periodizations naturally appear in the problem of Steinhaus. M. Kolountzakis () proves that if a function $`fL^1(^2)`$ and $`|x|^\alpha fL^1(^2)`$, where $`\alpha >\frac{10}{3}`$ and its periodizations are constants, then the function is continuous. Another result is obtained by M. Kolountzakis and T. Wolff (, Theorem 1). It says that if periodizations of a function from $`L^1(^d)`$ are constants then the function is continuous provided that the dimension d is at least three.

The main theorems are the following.

Theorem 1: let $`d4`$ and let $`fL^1(^d)`$. If periodizations of f

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$
are in $`L^2([0,1]^d)`$ for almost all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$ and

$`G^2={\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}g_\rho _2^2𝑑\rho <\mathrm{}`$
then $`fL^2(^d)`$:

$$f_2C(G+f_1),$$

where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$.

We also obtain the following inverse theorem.

Theorem 1: let $`d5`$, let $`fL^1(^d)L^2(^d)`$, and let $`g_\rho `$ be periodizations of f

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$
then $`g_\rho L^2([0,1]^d)`$ for almost all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$ and

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}g_\rho _2^2𝑑\rho C(f_2+f_1)^2,`$ (3)
where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$.

We will generalize Theorems 1 and 1 in the spirit of the Stein-Tomas Theorem (, Chapter 6.5).

Theorem 2: let $`d4`$, let $`1p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$, and let $`fL^1(^d)L^p(^d)`$. If periodizations of f

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$
are in $`L^2([0,1]^d)`$ for almost all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$ and

$`G^2={\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}g_\rho _2^2𝑑\rho <\mathrm{}`$
then $`fL^2(^d)`$:

$`f_2C(G+f_p),`$ (4)
where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$ and $`p`$.

We also obtain the following inverse theorem.

Theorem 2: let $`d5`$, let $`1p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$, and let $`fL^1(^d)L^2(^d)`$, and let $`g_\rho `$ be periodizations of f

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$
then $`g_\rho L^2([0,1]^d)`$ for almost all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$ and

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}g_\rho \widehat{g}_\rho (0)_2^2𝑑\rho C(f_2+f_p)^2,`$ (5)
where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$ and $`p`$.

The rest of the paper is concerned with the proofs of the theorems stated above.

1. Case $`p=1`$.

Note that the constant $`C`$ below is not fixed and varies appropriately from one equality or inequality to another although such variations are not noted.

Proof of Theorem 1:

We will denote $`\stackrel{~}{f}(x)=\overline{f}(x)`$ and $`F(x)=f\stackrel{~}{f}(x)`$. Then $`FL^1(^d)`$ and

$`F_1f_1^2.`$ (6)
We will define the following functions $`h,h_1,h_2:^+`$

$`h(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle |\widehat{f}(\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma _t(\xi )}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _^d}f\stackrel{~}{f}(x)\widehat{d\sigma _t}(x)𝑑x`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _^d}F(x)\widehat{d\sigma _t}(x)𝑑x,`$ (8)
$`h_1(t)={\displaystyle _{|x|1}}F(x)\widehat{d\sigma _t}(x)𝑑x,`$ (9)
$`h_2(t)={\displaystyle _{|x|>1}}F(x)\widehat{d\sigma _t}(x)𝑑x.`$ (10)
Clearly $`h=h_1+h_2`$.

Lemma 1 Let $`q:`$ be a Schwartz function supported in $`[\frac{1}{2},2]`$, and let $`b[0,1)`$. Define $`H_1:`$

$`H_1(t)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{t+b}}}h_1(\sqrt{t+b})q({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{t+b}}{N}}).`$
Then for large enough $`N`$ we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|\widehat{H}_1(\nu )|{\displaystyle \frac{CF_1}{N}}`$ (11)
where $`C`$ depends only on $`q`$ and $`d`$.

Proof of Lemma 1:

First we will estimate derivatives of $`h_1(t)`$

$`|h_1^{(k)}(t)|Ct^{d1}F_1`$ (12)
where $`t1`$ and $`C`$ depends only on $`k`$ and $`d`$. This follows from (9) by differentiating the last equality $`k`$ times:

$`h_1(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _{|x|1}}F(x)\widehat{d\sigma _t}(x)𝑑x`$
$`=`$ $`t^{d1}{\displaystyle _{|x|1}}F(x){\displaystyle _{|\xi |=1}}e^{i2\pi tx\xi }𝑑\sigma (\xi )𝑑x.`$
We can easily prove by induction that

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d^k}{dt^k}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{h_1(\sqrt{t+b})}{\sqrt{t+b}}}\right)={\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{k}{}}}C_{i,k}{\displaystyle \frac{h_1^{(i)}(\sqrt{t+b})}{(\sqrt{t+b})^{2k+1i}}}.`$ (13)
It follows from (13) and (12) that when $`tN^2`$ we have

$`\left|{\displaystyle \frac{d^k}{dt^k}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{h_1(\sqrt{t+b})}{\sqrt{t+b}}}\right)\right|CN^{dk2}F_1`$ (14)
with $`C`$ depending only on $`k`$ and $`d`$.

Since $`q(\frac{(\sqrt{t+b})}{N})=q(\sqrt{t^{}+b^{}})=\stackrel{~}{q}(t^{})`$ with $`t^{}=\frac{t}{N^2}`$ and $`b^{}=\frac{b}{N^2}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{q}(t^{})`$ is a Schwartz function supported in $`t^{}1`$, we have

$`\left|{\displaystyle \frac{d^k}{dt^k}}q({\displaystyle \frac{(\sqrt{t+b})}{N}})\right|`$ $`=`$ $`N^{2k}|{\displaystyle \frac{d^k}{dt_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{k}}}\stackrel{~}{q}(t^{})|`$ (15)
$``$ $`CN^{2k}`$
with $`C`$ depending only on $`k`$ and $`q`$.

Since $`q(\frac{(\sqrt{t+b})}{N})`$ is supported in $`tN^2`$ it follows from (14) and (15) that

$`\left|{\displaystyle \frac{d^k}{dt^k}}H_1(t)\right|`$ $`=`$ $`\left|{\displaystyle \frac{d^k}{dt^k}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{h_1(\sqrt{t+b})}{\sqrt{t+b}}}q({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{t+b}}{N}})\right)\right|`$ (16)
$``$ $`CN^{d2k}F_1`$
with $`C`$ depending only on $`k`$, $`d`$ and $`q`$. Since $`H_1(t)`$ is also supported in $`tN^2`$ we have

$$H_1^{(k)}_1CN^{dk}F_1.$$

Therefore

$`|\widehat{H}_1(\nu )|`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{C}{|\nu |^k}}H_1^{(k)}_1`$ (17)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{CN^{dk}F_1}{|\nu |^k}}`$
for every $`\nu 0`$.

Summing (17) over all $`\nu 0`$ and putting $`k=d+1`$ we get our desired result

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|\widehat{H}_1(\nu )|{\displaystyle \frac{CF_1}{N}}`$ (18)
where $`C`$ depends only on $`q`$ and $`d`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

In the next lemma we will use an approach related to (, Lemma 1.1).
Lemma 2 Let $`q:`$ be a Schwartz function supported in $`[\frac{1}{2},2]`$, and let $`b[0,1)`$. Define $`H_2:`$

$`H_2(t)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{t+b}}}h_2(\sqrt{t+b})q({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{t+b}}{N}}).`$
Then for large enough $`N`$ we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|\widehat{H}_2(\nu )|{\displaystyle \underset{|x|1}{}}|F(x)||D_N(x)|`$ (19)
where $`D_N:^d`$

$`|D_N(x)|C\{\begin{array}{cc}(\frac{N}{|x|})^{\frac{d2}{2}}\hfill & \text{if }|x|\frac{N}{2}\hfill \\ \frac{1}{N}\hfill & \text{if }1|x|\frac{N}{2}\text{,}\hfill \end{array}`$ (20)
with $`C`$ depending only on $`q`$ and $`d`$.

Proof of Lemma 2:

We have

$`\widehat{H}_2(\nu )`$ (21)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle H_2(t)e^{i2\pi \nu t}𝑑t}`$
$`=`$ $`2e^{i2\pi \nu b}{\displaystyle Nq(t)h_2(tN)e^{i2\pi \nu (Nt)^2}𝑑t}`$
$`=`$ $`2e^{i2\pi \nu b}{\displaystyle Nq(t)e^{i2\pi \nu (Nt)^2}_{|x|>1}F(x)\widehat{d\sigma _{Nt}}(x)𝑑x𝑑t}`$
$`=`$ $`2e^{i2\pi \nu b}{\displaystyle _{|x|>1}}F(x){\displaystyle Nq(t)e^{i2\pi \nu (Nt)^2}(Nt)^{d1}\widehat{d\sigma }(Ntx)𝑑t𝑑x}.`$
We will use a well-known fact that $`\widehat{d\sigma }(x)=Re(B(|x|))`$ with $`B(r)=a(r)e^{i2\pi r}`$ and $`a(r)`$ satisfying estimates

$`|a^k(r)|{\displaystyle \frac{C}{r^{\frac{d1}{2}+k}}}`$ (22)
with $`C`$ depending only on $`k`$ and $`d`$. Now we will need to estimate the inner integral in (21) with $`B(|x|)`$ instead of $`\widehat{d\sigma }(x)`$

$`{\displaystyle Nq(t)e^{i2\pi \nu (Nt)^2}(Nt)^{d1}a(N|x|t)e^{i2\pi N|x|t}𝑑t}`$ (23)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}{|x|^{\frac{d1}{2}}}}{\displaystyle q(t)e^{i2\pi \nu (Nt)^2}t^{d1}a(N|x|t)(N|x|)^{\frac{d1}{2}}e^{i2\pi N|x|t}𝑑t}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}{|x|^{\frac{d1}{2}}}}e^{i2\pi \frac{|x|^2}{4\nu }}{\displaystyle q(t)a(N|x|t)(N|x|)^{\frac{d1}{2}}t^{d1}e^{i2\pi \nu N^2(t\frac{|x|}{2\nu N})^2}𝑑t}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}{|x|^{\frac{d1}{2}}}}e^{i2\pi \frac{|x|^2}{4\nu }}{\displaystyle \varphi (t)e^{i2\pi \nu N^2(t\frac{|x|}{2\nu N})^2}𝑑t}`$
where $`\varphi (t)=q(t)a(N|x|t)(N|x|)^{\frac{d1}{2}}t^{d1}`$ is a Schwartz function supported in $`[\frac{1}{2},2]`$ whose derivatives and the function itself are bounded uniformly in $`t`$, $`x`$ and $`N`$ because of (22). Note that we used here the fact that $`N|x|1`$. We can say even more. Note that in fact $`\varphi (t)=\varphi (t,|x|)`$. Let $`|x|=cr`$ where $`c2`$ and $`r\frac{1}{2}`$. Then all partial derivatives of $`\varphi (t,cr)`$ with respect to $`t`$ and $`r`$ are also bounded uniformly in $`t`$, $`r`$, $`c`$ and $`N`$. The only place, where we will use that $`\varphi (t)`$ also depends on $`x`$, is formula (65) from the proof of Lemma 4. Therefore, we will keep writing just $`\varphi (t)`$ until formula (65).

From the method of stationary phase (, Theorem 7.7.3) it follows that if $`k1`$ then

$`|{\displaystyle \varphi (t)e^{i2\pi \nu N^2(t\frac{|x|}{2\nu N})^2}𝑑t}{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}}c_j(\nu N^2)^{j\frac{1}{2}}\varphi ^{(2j)}({\displaystyle \frac{|x|}{2\nu N}})|c_k(\nu N^2)^{k\frac{1}{2}}`$ (24)
where $`c_j`$ are some constants.

Since $`\varphi `$ is supported in $`[\frac{1}{2},2]`$ we conclude from (24) that

$`|{\displaystyle \varphi (t)e^{i2\pi \nu N^2(t\frac{|x|}{2\nu N})^2}𝑑t}|\{\begin{array}{cc}C(\nu N^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}\hfill & \text{if }\nu [\frac{|x|}{4N},\frac{|x|}{N}]\hfill \\ C_k(\nu N^2)^{k\frac{1}{2}}\hfill & \text{if }\nu [\frac{|x|}{4N},\frac{|x|}{N}]\hfill \end{array}.`$ (25)
If $`\frac{|x|}{N}\frac{1}{2}`$, then there are no $`\nu `$ in $`[\frac{|x|}{4N},\frac{|x|}{N}]`$ and therefore if we sum (25) over all $`\nu 0`$ we will get

$`|{\displaystyle \varphi (t)e^{i2\pi \nu N^2(t\frac{|x|}{2\nu N})^2}𝑑t}|C_kN^{2k1}.`$ (26)
If $`\frac{|x|}{N}\frac{1}{2}`$ then the number of $`\nu `$ in $`[\frac{|x|}{4N},\frac{|x|}{N}]`$ is bounded by $`\frac{|x|}{N}`$ and therefore if we sum (25) over all $`\nu 0`$ we will get

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|{\displaystyle \varphi (t)e^{i2\pi \nu N^2(t\frac{|x|}{2\nu N})^2}𝑑t}|`$ $``$ $`C{\displaystyle \frac{|x|}{N}}(|x|N)^{\frac{1}{2}}+C_kN^{2k1}`$ (27)
$``$ $`C_k{\displaystyle \frac{|x|^{\frac{1}{2}}}{N^{\frac{3}{2}}}}.`$
Summing (23) over all $`\nu 0`$ and applying (26) or (27) we conclude

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|{\displaystyle Nq(t)e^{i2\pi \nu (Nt)^2}(Nt)^{d1}B(N|x|t)𝑑t}|\{\begin{array}{cc}C_k(\frac{N}{|x|})^{\frac{d2}{2}}\hfill & \text{if }\frac{|x|}{N}\frac{1}{2}\hfill \\ C_k\frac{N^{\frac{d+1}{2}2k1}}{|x|^{\frac{d1}{2}}}\hfill & \text{if }\frac{|x|}{N}\frac{1}{2}\hfill \end{array}.`$ (28)
Replacing in (21) $`\widehat{d\sigma }(x)`$ with $`\frac{B(|x|)+\overline{B}(|x|)}{2}`$, summing over all $`\nu 0`$ and applying (28) with $`k\frac{d+1}{4}`$ we get the desired result

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|\widehat{H}_2(\nu )|{\displaystyle \underset{|x|1}{}}|F(x)||D_N(x)|`$ (29)
where $`D_N:^d`$

$`|D_N(x)|C\{\begin{array}{cc}(\frac{N}{|x|})^{\frac{d2}{2}}\hfill & \text{if }|x|\frac{N}{2}\hfill \\ \frac{1}{N}\hfill & \text{if }1|x|\frac{N}{2}\hfill \end{array}`$ (30)
with $`C`$ depending only on $`q`$ and $`d`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Now we are in a position to proceed with the proof of Theorem 1. From (1) it follows that

$`\widehat{g}_\rho (m)=\widehat{f}(\rho m)`$ (31)
for every $`m^d`$. By scaling we can assume that

$`\widehat{g}_\rho (m)=\widehat{f}({\displaystyle \frac{\rho m}{\sqrt{2}}})`$ (32)
for every $`m^d`$. It follows that

$`g_\rho _2^2={\displaystyle \underset{m^d}{}}|\widehat{g}_\rho (m)|^2={\displaystyle \underset{m^d}{}}|\widehat{f}({\displaystyle \frac{\rho m}{\sqrt{2}}})|^2.`$ (33)
Let $`r_d(n)`$ denote the number of representations of an integer $`n`$ as sums of $`d`$ squares. It is a well-known fact from Number Theory that if $`d5`$ then

$`r_d(n)Cn^{\frac{d2}{2}}`$ (34)
and if $`d=4`$ and $`n`$ is odd then

$`r_4(n)Cn`$ (35)
where $`C>0`$ depends only on $`d`$. See for example (, p.30, p.155, p.160).

Integrating (33) with respect to the Haar measure $`d\rho `$ and applying (2) we have

$`G^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m^d}{}}|\widehat{f}({\displaystyle \frac{\rho m}{\sqrt{2}}})|^2d\rho `$ (36)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{|\xi |=1}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m^d}{}}|\widehat{f}({\displaystyle \frac{|m|}{\sqrt{2}}}\xi )|^2d\sigma (\xi )`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{|m|^2=n}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{|\xi |=1}{}}|\widehat{f}({\displaystyle \frac{|m|}{\sqrt{2}}}\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma (\xi )`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{|m|^2=2n+1}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{|\xi |=1}{}}|\widehat{f}({\displaystyle \frac{|m|}{\sqrt{2}}}\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma (\xi )`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}r_d(2n+1){\displaystyle \underset{|\xi |=1}{}}|\widehat{f}(\sqrt{n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}}\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma (\xi )`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_d(2n+1)}{(n+\frac{1}{2})^{\frac{d1}{2}}}}{\displaystyle |\widehat{f}(\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma _{\sqrt{n+\frac{1}{2}}}(\xi )}.`$
Using (S0.Ex9) and (34) or (35) we conclude from (36) that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n+\frac{1}{2}}}}h(\sqrt{n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}})CG^2.`$ (37)
Let $`q:`$ be a fixed non-negative Schwartz function supported in $`[\frac{1}{2},2]`$ such that

$$q(x)+q(x/2)=1$$

when $`x[1,2]`$. It follows that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j0}{}}q({\displaystyle \frac{x}{2^j}})=1`$ (38)
when $`x1`$.

Applying the Poisson summation formula to

$`H(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{t+\frac{1}{2}}}}h(\sqrt{t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}})q({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{t+\frac{1}{2}}}{N}})`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{t+\frac{1}{2}}}}h_1(\sqrt{t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}})q({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{t+\frac{1}{2}}}{N}})+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{t+\frac{1}{2}}}}h_2(\sqrt{t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}})q({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{t+\frac{1}{2}}}{N}})`$
$`=`$ $`H_1(t)+H_2(t)`$
we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}H(n)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu }{}}\widehat{H}(\nu )`$ (39)
$`=`$ $`\widehat{H}(0)+{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}\widehat{H}_1(\nu )+{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}\widehat{H}_2(\nu ).`$
Note that

$`\widehat{H}(0)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{t+\frac{1}{2}}}h(\sqrt{t+\frac{1}{2}})q(\frac{\sqrt{t+\frac{1}{2}}}{N})𝑑t}`$ (40)
$`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle h(t)q(\frac{t}{N})𝑑t}.`$
Substituting (40) into (39) we get that

$`2{\displaystyle h(t)q(\frac{t}{N})𝑑t}`$ $``$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n}{}}H(n)+{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|\widehat{H}_1(\nu )|+{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|\widehat{H}_2(\nu )|`$ $``$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n+\frac{1}{2}}}}h(\sqrt{n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}})q({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{n+\frac{1}{2}}}{N}})+{\displaystyle \frac{CF_1}{N}}+{\displaystyle \underset{|x|1}{}}|F(x)D_N(x)|𝑑x`$ (41)
where the last inequality follows from Lemma 1 and Lemma 2.

From the definition of $`D_N(x)`$ in (20), it follows that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{j0}{}}|D_{2^j}(x)|`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{2^j2|x|}{}}|D_{2^j}(x)|+{\displaystyle \underset{2^j>2|x|}{}}|D_{2^j}(x)|`$ (42)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{2^j2|x|}{}}C({\displaystyle \frac{2^j}{|x|}})^{\frac{d2}{2}}+{\displaystyle \underset{2^j>2|x|}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{C}{2^j}}C`$
for every $`|x|1`$.

Putting $`N=2^j`$ in (41), summing over all $`j0`$ and applying (38) we get by Lebesgue Monotone Convergence Theorem

$`2{\displaystyle \underset{1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}h(t)𝑑t`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{n0}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n+\frac{1}{2}}}}h(\sqrt{n+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}})+CF_1+C{\displaystyle \underset{|x|1}{}}|F(x)|𝑑x`$ (43)
$``$ $`C(G^2+F_1)`$
where the last inequality follows from (37). From the definition of $`h(t)`$ (S0.Ex9) it follows that

$`h(t)Cf_1^2`$ (44)
for $`t1`$. Therefore we have

$`{\displaystyle |\widehat{f}(x)|^2𝑑x}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}|\widehat{f}(\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma _t(\xi )𝑑t`$ (45)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}h(t)𝑑t`$
$``$ $`C(G^2+f_1^2)`$
where the last inequality is obtained from (43), (44) and (6). From (45) it follows that $`fL^2`$ and

$$f_2C(G+f_1)$$

with $`C`$ depending only on $`d`$.
$`\mathrm{}`$

If $`d5`$ then

$`r_d(n)Cn^{\frac{d2}{2}}`$ (46)
where $`C>0`$ depends only on $`d`$. See for example (, p.155, p.160). An argument similar to one used to get (36), but without scaling, shows that

$`G^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}{\displaystyle \underset{m^d}{}}|\widehat{f}(\rho m)|^2d\rho `$ (47)
$`=`$ $`|\widehat{f}(0)|^2+{\displaystyle \underset{n1}{}}r_d(n){\displaystyle \underset{|\xi |=1}{}}|\widehat{f}(\sqrt{n}\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma (\xi )`$
$`=`$ $`|\widehat{f}(0)|^2+{\displaystyle \underset{n1}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{r_d(n)}{n^{\frac{d1}{2}}}}{\displaystyle |\widehat{f}(\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma _\sqrt{n}(\xi )}.`$
Using (S0.Ex9) and (46) we conclude from (47) that

$`G^2f_1^2+C{\displaystyle \underset{n1}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}}h(\sqrt{n}).`$ (48)
Repeating arguments which we used to obtain (43) we get

$`{\displaystyle \underset{n1}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{n}}}h(\sqrt{n})`$ $``$ $`2{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}h(t)𝑑t+CF_1`$ (49)
$``$ $`C(\widehat{f}_2^2+f_1^2).`$
Hence we can formulate an inverse theorem to Theorem 1:

Theorem 1: let $`d5`$ and let $`fL^1(^d)L^2(^d)`$ and let $`g_\rho `$ be periodizations of f

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$ (50)
then $`g_\rho L^2([0,1]^d)`$ for almost all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$ and

$$\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}g_\rho _2^2𝑑\rho C(f_2+f_1)^2$$

where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$.

Corollary: complex interpolation between the trivial $`p=1`$ and $`p=2`$ gives us the following result for $`1<p<2`$: let $`d5`$ and let $`fL^{\frac{p}{2}}(^d)L^p(^d)`$ and let $`g_\rho `$ be periodizations of f

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$
then $`g_\rho L^p([0,1]^d)`$ for almost all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$ and

$$\left(\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}g_\rho _p^p^{}𝑑\rho \right)^{1/p^{}}Cf_p^{2p}(f_p+f_{\frac{p}{2}})^{p1}=Cf_p(1+\frac{f_{\frac{p}{2}}}{f_p})^{p1}$$

where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$.

If $`p^{}`$ is an even integer then $`|\widehat{f}|^p^{}=\widehat{F}`$ where $`F_1f_1^p^{}`$. Using the same proof as for $`p^{}=2`$ we get for $`d4`$

$$\widehat{f}_p^{}^p^{}C(\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}\widehat{g}_\rho _p^{}^p^{}𝑑\rho +f_1^p^{})$$

and for $`d5`$

$$\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}\widehat{g}_\rho _p^{}^p^{}𝑑\rho C(\widehat{f}_p^{}^p^{}+f_1^p^{}).$$

2. Case $`1p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$.

We will generalize Theorems 1 and 1 in the spirit of the Stein-Tomas Theorem (, Chapter 6.5).

Theorem 2: let $`d4`$ and let $`fL^1(^d)L^p(^d)`$ where $`1p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$. If periodizations of f

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$
are in $`L^2([0,1]^d)`$ for almost all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$ and

$`G^2={\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}g_\rho _2^2𝑑\rho <\mathrm{}`$
then $`fL^2(^d)`$:

$`f_2C(G+f_p)`$ (51)
where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$ and $`p`$.

It will follow from the proof (see (36)) that we can replace $`\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}g_\rho _2^2𝑑\rho `$ with $`\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}g_\rho \widehat{g}(0)_2^2𝑑\rho `$ in Theorem 2, which is the norm of $`g`$ in the quotient space $`L^2([0,1]^d\times SO(d))`$ modulo constants. We will also obtain an inverse theorem.

Theorem 2: let $`d5`$ and let $`fL^1(^d)L^2(^d)`$ and $`1p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$ and let $`g_\rho `$ be periodizations of f

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$
then $`g_\rho L^2([0,1]^d)`$ for almost all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$ and

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}g_\rho \widehat{g}_\rho (0)_2^2𝑑\rho C(f_2+f_p)^2`$ (52)
where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$ and $`p`$.

Since Schwartz functions are dense in $`L^p(^d)L^2(^d)`$ it follows from Theorem 2 that we can define periodizations $`g_\rho `$ of $`fL^p(^d)L^2(^d)`$ where $`1p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$ for a.e. $`\rho SO(d)`$ as elements of the quotient space of $`L^2([0,1]^d)`$ modulo constants.

We say that $`fL^p(^d)`$ has periodizations $`g`$ in the quotient space $`L^2([0,1]^d\times SO(d))`$ modulo constants if there exists a sequence of Shwartz functions $`f_k`$ converging to $`f`$ in $`L^p(^d)`$ and such that $`g_kg`$ in the quotient space $`L^2([0,1]^d\times SO(d))`$ modulo constants. From Theorem 2 we conclude that $`fL^2(^d)`$ and $`f_kf`$ in $`L^2(^d)`$. It follows from Theorem 2 that $`g`$ is a well-defined element of the quotient space $`L^2([0,1]^d\times SO(d))`$ modulo constants.

Remarks: 1. As the following example shows, we can not replace $`\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}g_\rho \widehat{g}(0)_2^2𝑑\rho `$ with $`\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}g_\rho _2^2𝑑\rho `$ in Theorem 2 when $`p>1`$. Let $`\varphi :^d`$ be a Schwartz function supported in $`B(0,1)`$ such that $`\varphi (0)=1`$. Put $`\widehat{f}(x)=\varphi (\frac{x}{ϵ})`$. Then

$$g_\rho =\widehat{f}(0)=1$$

but

$$f_p=ϵ^{\frac{d}{p^{}}}\stackrel{ˇ}{\varphi }_p.$$

2. The next example from (, Chapter 6.3) shows that $`p`$ can not be greater than $`\frac{2d+2}{d+3}`$ in Theorem 2. Put

$`\widehat{f}(x_1,\mathrm{},x_d)=\varphi ({\displaystyle \frac{x_11}{ϵ^2}},{\displaystyle \frac{x_2}{ϵ}},\mathrm{},{\displaystyle \frac{x_d}{ϵ}})`$ (53)
where $`\varphi :^d`$ is a Schwartz function supported in $`B(0,2)`$ such that $`\varphi =1`$ in $`B(0,1)`$. Then

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\rho SO(d)}{}}g_\rho \widehat{g}(0)_2^2𝑑\rho `$ $`=`$ $`2d{\displaystyle _{|\xi |=1}}|\widehat{f}(\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma (\xi )`$
$``$ $`Cϵ^{d1}`$
but

$$f_p^2=ϵ^{\frac{2d+2}{p^{}}}\stackrel{ˇ}{\varphi }_p.$$

It is an open question whether Theorems 2 and 2 are valid when $`\frac{2d}{d+2}p<\frac{2d+2}{d+3}`$. We discuss this further in Remark 2 at the end of the paper.

Proof of Theorem 2:
The proof is quite similarly to that of Theorem 1. We will replace Lemma 1 with

Lemma 3 Let $`q:`$ be a Schwartz function supported in $`[\frac{1}{2},2]`$, let $`fL^p(^d)`$ where $`1p2`$ and let $`b[0,1)`$. Define $`H_1:`$

$`H_1(t)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{t+b}}}h_1(\sqrt{t+b})q({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{t+b}}{N}}).`$
Then for large enough $`N`$ we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|\widehat{H}_1(\nu )|{\displaystyle \frac{Cf_p^2}{N}}`$ (54)
where $`C`$ depends only on $`q`$ and $`d`$.

Proof of Lemma 3:

The only difference in the proof is how to obtain an inequality analogous to (12). Using Young’s inequality we have $`f\stackrel{~}{f}_qf_p^2`$ where $`1+\frac{1}{q}=\frac{2}{p}`$. Therefore $`|(f\stackrel{~}{f})(x)w(x)𝑑x|f_p^2w_q^{}`$. Substituting derivatives of $`\widehat{d\sigma _t}(x)\chi _{\{|x|1\}}`$ with respect to $`t`$ instead of $`w`$, we get the desired inequality

$`|h_1^{(k)}(t)|Ct^{d1}f_p^2`$ (55)
where $`t1`$ and $`C`$ depends only on $`k`$ and $`d`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

The main difficulty is to prove a lemma analogous to Lemma 2:

Lemma 4 Let $`q:`$ be a Schwartz function supported in $`[\frac{1}{2},2]`$, let $`fL^p(^d)`$ where $`1p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$ and let $`b[0,1)`$. Define $`H_{2,N}:`$

$`H_{2,N}(t)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{t+b}}}h_2(\sqrt{t+b})q({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{t+b}}{N}}).`$
Then we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|{\displaystyle \underset{j0}{}}\widehat{H}_{2,2^j}(\nu )|Cf_p^2`$ (56)
with $`C`$ depending only on $`p`$, $`q`$ and $`d`$.

Proof of Lemma 4:

Recall from (21) that

$`\widehat{H}_{2,N}(\nu )=2{\displaystyle (f\stackrel{~}{f})(x)D_{N,\nu }(x)𝑑x}`$
where

$`D_{N,\nu }(x)=\chi _{\{|x|>1\}}e^{i2\pi \nu b}{\displaystyle Nq(t)e^{i2\pi \nu (Nt)^2}(Nt)^{d1}\widehat{d\sigma }(Ntx)𝑑t}.`$ (57)
Denote by

$`K_\nu (x)={\displaystyle \underset{l0}{}}D_{2^l,\nu }(x).`$ (58)
Then

$`|{\displaystyle \underset{l0}{}}\widehat{H}_{2,2^l}(\nu )|`$ $`=`$ $`2|{\displaystyle (f\stackrel{~}{f})(x)\underset{l0}{}D_{2^l,\nu }(x)dx}|`$ (59)
$`=`$ $`2|{\displaystyle \stackrel{~}{f}(x)(K_\nu f)(x)𝑑x}|`$
$``$ $`2f_pK_\nu f_p^{}.`$
If $`p^{}=\mathrm{}`$ or $`p^{}=2`$ we have

$`K_\nu f_{\mathrm{}}K_\nu _{\mathrm{}}f_1`$
$`K_\nu f_2\widehat{K}_\nu _{\mathrm{}}f_2.`$
First we will show that

$`K_\nu _{\mathrm{}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{l0}{}}|D_{2^l,\nu }|(x)_{\mathrm{}}`$ (60)
$``$ $`C\nu ^{\frac{d}{2}}.`$
It follows from (25) that

$`|D_{N,\nu }(x)|{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}{|x|^{\frac{d1}{2}}}}\{\begin{array}{cc}C(\nu N^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}\hfill & \text{if }N[\frac{|x|}{4\nu },\frac{|x|}{\nu }]\hfill \\ C_k(\nu N^2)^{k\frac{1}{2}}\hfill & \text{if }N[\frac{|x|}{4\nu },\frac{|x|}{\nu }]\hfill \end{array}.`$ (61)
If $`\nu >0`$ then the number of diadic $`N[\frac{|x|}{4\nu },\frac{|x|}{\nu }]`$ is at most $`3`$. If $`\nu <0`$ then there are no $`N`$ in $`[\frac{|x|}{4\nu },\frac{|x|}{\nu }]`$. Therefore choosing $`k\frac{d1}{2}`$ and summing (61) over all diadic $`N`$ we have

$`{\displaystyle \underset{l0}{}}|D_{2^l,\nu }(x)|C|\nu |^{\frac{d}{2}}`$
with $`C`$ depending only on $`d`$ and $`q`$.

Now we will show that

$`\widehat{K}_\nu _{\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \underset{l0}{}}|\widehat{D}_{2^l,\nu }|(y)_{\mathrm{}}C.`$ (62)
Since supp $`\varphi [\frac{1}{2},2]`$ we can re-write (24) for a stronger version of the method of stationary phase (, Theorems 7.6.4, 7.6.5, 7.7.3)

$`|{\displaystyle \varphi (t)e^{i2\pi \nu N^2(t\frac{|x|}{2\nu N})^2}𝑑t}{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}}c_j(\nu N^2)^{j\frac{1}{2}}\varphi ^{(2j)}({\displaystyle \frac{|x|}{2\nu N}})|{\displaystyle \frac{c_k(\nu N^2)^{k\frac{1}{2}}}{max(1,\frac{|x|}{8N\nu })^k}}`$
where $`c_j`$ are some constants. Therefore

$`D_{N,\nu }(x)=\chi _{\{|x|>1\}}{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}{|x|^{\frac{d1}{2}}}}e^{i2\pi \frac{|x|^2}{4\nu }}{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k1}{}}}c_j(\nu N^2)^{j\frac{1}{2}}\varphi ^{(2j)}({\displaystyle \frac{|x|}{2\nu N}})+\varphi _k(x)`$ (63)
where $`|\varphi _k(x)|\chi _{\{|x|>1\}}\frac{N^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}{|x|^{\frac{d1}{2}}}\frac{c_k(\nu N^2)^{k\frac{1}{2}}}{max(1,\frac{|x|}{8N\nu })^k}`$. Choosing $`k\frac{d+2}{2}`$ we have

$`\widehat{\varphi }_k_{\mathrm{}}`$ $``$ $`\varphi _k_1`$ (64)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{|x|8\nu N}{}}|\varphi _k|𝑑x+{\displaystyle \underset{|x|>8\nu N}{}}|\varphi _k|𝑑x`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{C}{N}}`$
where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$ and $`q`$. We can assume that $`\nu >0`$ since $`D_{N,\nu }(x)=\varphi _k(x)`$ for $`\nu <0`$. We can also ignore $`\chi _{\{|x|>1\}}`$ in front of the sum in (63) because if $`\frac{|x|}{2\nu N}[\frac{1}{2},2]`$, then $`|x|\nu N1`$. We will consider only the zero term in the sum. The other terms can be treated similarly. The Fourier transform of

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}{|x|^{\frac{d1}{2}}}}e^{i2\pi \frac{|x|^2}{4\nu }}(\nu N^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}\varphi ({\displaystyle \frac{|x|}{2\nu N}})`$
at point $`y`$ is equal to

$`N^{\frac{d+1}{2}}(2\nu N)^{\frac{d+1}{2}}(\nu N^2)^{\frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _^d}\psi (|x|)e^{i2\pi \nu N^2|x|^2}e^{i2\pi 2\nu Nxy}𝑑x=`$
$`C(\nu N^2)^{\frac{d}{2}}e^{i2\pi \nu |y|^2}{\displaystyle _^d}\psi (|x|)e^{i2\pi \nu N^2|x\frac{y}{N}|^2}𝑑x`$ (65)
where $`\psi (t)=\varphi (t,2\nu Nt)t^{\frac{d1}{2}}`$ is a Schwartz function supported in $`[\frac{1}{2},2]`$ whose derivatives and the function itself are bounded uniformly in $`t`$, $`\nu `$ and $`N`$ (see the remarks after (23)). The same is true about partial derivatives of $`\psi (|x|)`$. Applying the stationary phase method for $`^d`$ (, Theorem 7.7.3) we get

$`|{\displaystyle _^d}\psi (|x|)e^{i2\pi \nu N^2|x\frac{y}{N}|^2}𝑑x|\{\begin{array}{cc}C(\nu N^2)^{\frac{d}{2}}\hfill & \text{if }N[\frac{|y|}{2},2|y|]\hfill \\ C_k(\nu N^2)^{k\frac{d}{2}}\hfill & \text{if }N[\frac{|y|}{2},2|y|]\hfill \end{array}.`$ (66)
Therefore the absolute value of (65) can be bounded from above by:

$`\{\begin{array}{cc}C\hfill & \text{if }N[\frac{|y|}{2},2|y|]\hfill \\ C_k(\nu N^2)^k\hfill & \text{if }N[\frac{|y|}{2},2|y|]\hfill \end{array}.`$ (67)
Similar inequalities hold for Fourier transforms for the rest of the terms in the sum in (63). The number of diadic $`N[\frac{|y|}{2},2|y|]`$ is bounded by $`3`$. Using (64), choosing $`k1`$ in (67) and summing over all diadic $`N`$ we get

$`{\displaystyle \underset{l0}{}}|\widehat{D}_{2^l,\nu }(y)|C`$ (68)
with $`C`$ depending only on $`d`$ and $`q`$. Using (60) and (62) and interpolating between $`p=1`$ and $`p=2`$, we obtain

$`K_\nu f_p^{}C\nu ^{\alpha _p}f_p`$
where $`\alpha _p=\frac{d}{2}\frac{2p}{p}`$. We have $`\alpha _p>1`$ if $`p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$. Summing (59) over all $`\nu 0`$, we get the desired inequality

$`{\displaystyle \underset{\nu 0}{}}|{\displaystyle \underset{j0}{}}\widehat{H}_{2,2^j}(\nu )|Cf_p^2.`$
$`\mathrm{}`$

Now we are in a position to proceed with the proof of Theorem 2. The proof is almost the same as the one of Theorem 1. We also need to replace inequality (44) with the inequality

$`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{1}{}}}h(t)𝑑t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{|y|1}{}}|\widehat{f}(y)|^2𝑑y`$
$``$ $`C\widehat{f}_p^{}^2`$
$``$ $`Cf_p^2`$
where $`p2`$ and $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$. An argument similar to the one used to get (41), (43) and (45) yields the desired inequality

$`{\displaystyle |\widehat{f}(x)|^2𝑑x}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}|\widehat{f}(\xi )|^2𝑑\sigma _t(\xi )𝑑t`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}h(t)𝑑t`$
$``$ $`C(G^2+f_p^2)`$
with $`C`$ depending on $`d`$ and $`p`$. Note that the interchange of summation by $`\nu `$ and $`N`$ is not a problem. $`\mathrm{}`$

The proof of Theorem 2 is the same (see the argument before Theorem 1). The important thing is that now we exclude $`\widehat{g}_\rho (0)=\widehat{f}(0)`$ in (47) now.

Final remarks: 1. We can further generalize Theorem 2. Fix some $`q[1,\frac{2d}{d+2})`$. Applying complex interpolation between the trivial $`p=1`$ and $`p=2`$, we obtain the following result for $`1<p<2`$: let $`d5`$ and let $`fL^{\frac{qp}{2}}(^d)L^p(^d)`$ and let $`g_\rho `$ be periodizations of f

$`g_\rho (x)={\displaystyle \underset{\nu ^d}{}}f(\rho (x\nu ))`$ (69)
then $`g_\rho L^p([0,1]^d)`$ for almost all rotations $`\rho SO(d)`$ and

$$\left(\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}g_\rho \widehat{g}_\rho (0)_p^p^{}𝑑\rho \right)^{\frac{1}{p^{}}}Cf_p^{2p}(f_p+f_{\frac{qp}{2}})^{p1}$$

where $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$ and $`q`$. Choosing $`q=\frac{2}{p}`$ in the above inequality we obtain the following generalization of Theorem 1: if $`\frac{d+2}{d}<p2`$ and $`d5`$ then

$$\left(\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}g_\rho _p^p^{}𝑑\rho \right)^{\frac{1}{p^{}}}C_p(f_p+f_1).$$

If $`p^{}`$ is an even integer then $`|\widehat{f}|^p^{}=\widehat{F\stackrel{~}{F}}`$ where $`F_rf_q^{\frac{p^{}}{2}}`$ with $`\frac{p^{}}{2}1+\frac{1}{r}=\frac{p^{}/2}{q}`$. Repeating the same arguments as for $`p^{}=2`$ we obtain for $`d4`$

$$\widehat{f}_p^{}^p^{}C(f_q^p^{}+\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}\widehat{g}_\rho _p^{}^p^{}𝑑\rho )$$

and for $`d5`$

$$\underset{\rho SO(d)}{}\widehat{g}_\rho \widehat{g}_\rho (0)_p^{}^p^{}𝑑\rho C(f_q^p^{}+\widehat{f}_p^{}^p^{})$$

where $`1q<\frac{\frac{p^{}}{2}}{\frac{p^{}}{2}1+\frac{d+2}{2d}}`$ and $`C`$ depends only on $`d`$ and $`q`$.

2. Conditionally on the exponent pair conjecture (, Chapter 4, Conjecture 2) we can clarify what happens when $`\frac{2d}{d+2}p<\frac{2d+2}{d+3}`$. In our case the conjecture says that

$`|{\displaystyle \underset{n\nu m}{}}e^{i\frac{|x|^2}{\nu }}|C_ϵ|x|^ϵn^{\frac{1}{2}}`$ (70)
where $`m2n`$ and $`|x|n`$. Let $`\beta (x)=\mathrm{max}(1,|x|)`$.

Proposition 1. Theorems 2 and 2 hold if we replace $`f_p`$ with $`\beta ^ϵf_p`$ and if $`p<\frac{2d+2}{d+3}`$, provided the conjecture (70) is valid.

Using the example (53) we can show that the Proposition 1 is sharp up to $`ϵ`$ in the range of $`p`$ for the estimate (52).

Proof of Proposition 1:
The main issue is to improve the result of Lemma 4. Denote by

$`L_j(x)={\displaystyle \underset{2^j\nu 2^{j+1}}{}}K_\nu (x).`$ (71)
Using summation by parts we obtain from (63), (58) and (70) that

$`|L_j(x)|`$ $`=`$ $`|{\displaystyle \underset{2^j\nu 2^{j+1}}{}}K_\nu (x)|`$
$``$ $`C_ϵ|x|^ϵ2^{\frac{d1}{2}j}.`$
We will deal with the following expression instead of (59)

$`|{\displaystyle \stackrel{~}{f}(x)(L_jf)(x)𝑑x}|`$ $`=`$ $`|{\displaystyle \stackrel{~}{f}(x)\beta ^ϵ\frac{(L_jf)(x)}{\beta ^ϵ}𝑑x}|`$
$``$ $`\beta ^ϵf(x)_p{\displaystyle \frac{(L_jf)}{\beta ^ϵ}}_p^{}.`$
If $`p^{}=\mathrm{}`$ or $`p^{}=2`$ we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{(L_jf)}{\beta ^ϵ}}_{\mathrm{}}`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{_{|y||x|}|L_j(xy)||f(y)|𝑑y+_{|y||x|}|L_j(xy)||f(y)|𝑑y}{\beta ^ϵ(x)}}_{\mathrm{}}`$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{L_j}{\beta ^ϵ}}_{\mathrm{}}\beta ^ϵf_1`$
$``$ $`C_ϵ2^{\frac{d1}{2}j}\beta ^ϵf_1,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{(L_jf)}{\beta ^ϵ}}_2`$ $``$ $`L_jf_2`$
$``$ $`\widehat{L}_j_{\mathrm{}}f_2`$
$``$ $`C2^jf_2.`$
Interpolating between $`p=1`$ and $`p=2`$, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{(L_jf)}{\beta ^ϵ}}_p^{}C_ϵ2^{j\alpha _p}\beta ^ϵf_p`$
where $`\alpha _p=\frac{d+1}{p}\frac{d+3}{2}`$. We have $`\alpha _p>0`$ if $`p<\frac{2d+2}{d+3}`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

3. Concerning the lower dimensional cases we can use the following results from the Number Theory:

$$r_3(n)Cn^{\frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{ln}n\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}n,$$

$$r_4(n)Cn\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}n.$$

See for example (). There is an infinite arithmetic progression, e.g. $`n=8k+1`$, such that

$$r_3(n)C_ϵn^{\frac{1}{2}ϵ}.$$

See for example (). Then Theorem 2 holds when $`d=3`$ and Theorem 2 holds when $`d=3`$ or $`d=4`$ if we replace

$$g_\rho _2^2=\underset{m^d}{}|\widehat{g}_\rho (m)|_2^2$$

with

$$\underset{m^d}{}|m|^ϵ|\widehat{g}_\rho (m)|_2^2,$$

$$\underset{m^d,|m|>3}{}\frac{|\widehat{g}_\rho (m)|_2^2}{\mathrm{ln}|m|\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}|m|}$$

or

$$\underset{m^d,|m|>3}{}\frac{|\widehat{g}_\rho (m)|_2^2}{\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{ln}|m|}$$

correspondingly.
Using a technique similar to the one in the proof of Proposition 1, second remark we also obtain the following results in lower dimensions:

$$\beta \widehat{f}_2f_p+g_2\text{ when }d=3\text{ and }\beta (x)=\mathrm{min}(1,\frac{1}{|x|^ϵ}),$$

$$g\widehat{g}(0)_2\beta f_p+\beta \widehat{f}_2\text{ when }d=3\text{ and }\beta (x)=\mathrm{max}(1,\mathrm{ln}_+|x|\mathrm{ln}_+(\mathrm{ln}_+|x|)),$$

$$g\widehat{g}(0)_2\beta f_p+\beta \widehat{f}_2\text{ when }d=4\text{ and }\beta (x)=\mathrm{max}(1,\mathrm{ln}_+(\mathrm{ln}_+|x|)),$$

and $`1p<\frac{2d}{d+2}`$ in all three cases.

Acknowledgements

This work was inspired by useful discussions with Thomas Wolff.