text:
# Graphs that are not complete pluripolar

## 1. Introduction

Levenberg, Martin and Poletsky  have conjectured that if $`f`$ is a holomorphic function, which is defined on its maximal set of existence $`D`$, then the graph

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_f=\{(z,f(z)):zD\}$$

of $`f`$ over $`D`$ is a complete pluripolar subset of $`^2`$. I.e. there exists a plurisubharmonic function on $`^2`$ such that it equals $`\mathrm{}`$ precisely on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$ (see e.g. ). They gave support for this conjecture in the sense that they could prove it for some lacunary series. More support was provided by Levenberg and Poletsky  and by the second author . Nevertheless, in this paper we show that the conjecture is false.

In fact we have

###### Theorem 1.1.

Let $`D_1D_2`$ be domains in $``$. Assume that $`D_2D_1`$ has a density point in $`D_2`$. Then there exists a holomorphic function $`f`$ with domains of existence $`D_1`$ such that the graph $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$ of $`f`$ over $`D_1`$ is not complete pluripolar in $`D_2\times `$.

In case $`D_2D_1`$ has no density point in $`D_2`$, it is known that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$ is complete pluripolar in $`D_2\times `$ (see ). If we take in Theorem 1.1 for $`D_1`$ the unit disc $`𝔻`$ and for $`D_2`$ the whole plane $``$, we obtain the following corollary.

###### Corollary 1.2.

There exists a holomorphic function $`f`$ defined on $`𝔻`$, which does not extend holomorphically across $`𝔻`$, such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$ is not complete pluripolar in $`^2`$.

Theorem 3.2 then states that such a function can even be smooth up to the boundary of $`𝔻`$.

The first named author thanks Marek Jarnicki, Witold Jarnicki, and Peter Pflug for very helpful discussions.

## 2. Graphs with non-trivial pluripolar hull

The *pluripolar hull* of a pluripolar set $`K\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the set

$$K_\mathrm{\Omega }^{}=\{z\mathrm{\Omega }:u|_K=\mathrm{},u\mathrm{PSH}(\mathrm{\Omega })u(z)=\mathrm{}\}.$$

By $`\omega (z,E,D)`$ we denote as usual the harmonic measure of a subset $`E`$ of the boundary of a domain $`D`$ in $``$ at the point $`z`$ in $`D`$ (see e.g. ).

Let $`A=\{a_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be a countable dense subset of $`D_1`$. Under the assumptions of Theorem 1.1, there exists an $`a(D_1)D_2`$ such that $`a\overline{A\{a\}}`$. We may assume that $`aA`$. Our function $`f`$ will be of the form

(2.1)
$$f(z)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{c_j}{za_j}.$$

We will choose $`c_n`$ very rapidly decreasing to $`0`$. In particular,

(2.2)
$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}|c_j|<+\mathrm{},$$

so the limit in (2.1) exists and is a holomorphic function on $`D_1`$.

Moreover, we will choose $`c_n`$ such that $`_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{|c_j|}{|aa_j|}<+\mathrm{}`$. Hence, the series (2.1) will converge at $`z=a`$. We will denote its limit by $`f(a)`$. We will prove a version of Theorem 1.1 that elaborates on (2.1). However, no statement about extendibility is made at this point.

###### Theorem 2.1.

Let $`D_1D_2`$ be domains in $``$, such that $`D_2D_1`$ has a density point in $`D_2`$. There exists a sequence $`\{R_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ of positive numbers such that for any sequence of complex numbers $`\{c_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ with $`|c_n|R_n`$ we have $`(a,f(a))(\mathrm{\Gamma }_f)_{D_2\times }^{}`$, where $`f`$ is given by (2.1). Here $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$ is the graph of $`f`$ over $`D_1`$.

###### Proof.

We may assume that $`a=0`$. For $`b`$ and $`r>0`$ we set $`𝔻(b,r)=\{z:|zb|<r\}`$, $`𝔻_r=𝔻(0,r)`$ and $`𝔻=𝔻_1`$, the unit disc. Put

$$\pi _n^k(z)=e^{\frac{2\pi ki}{n}}z,z,k,n,$$

and

$$B=_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}_{k=1}^n\pi _n^k(A).$$

Note that $`0B`$ and that $`B`$ is also countable (and therefore thin at $`0`$). By Corollary 4.8.3 in , there exists an open set $`UB`$ such that $`U`$ is thin at $`0`$.

*Step 1.* We construct a sequence of radii $`\{\rho _n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ with special properties, the main one being that $`_n_{k=1}^n\pi _n^k(𝔻(a_n,\rho _n))`$ is thin at 0.

It is a corollary of Wiener’s criterion (see , Theorem 5.4.2) that there exists a sequence $`r_n0`$ such that

(2.3)
$$𝔻_{r_n}U=\mathrm{},n.$$

Since $`U`$ is thin at $`0`$, there exists a subharmonic function $`u`$ on $``$ such that

$$\underset{Uz0}{lim\; sup}u(z)=\mathrm{}<u(0)$$

(see e.g. Proposition 4.8.2 in ). Moreover, by scaling and adding a constant, we can assume that $`u(0)=\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`u<0`$ on $`𝔻`$. By (2.3) there exists a $`\rho >0`$ such that $`\overline{𝔻}_\rho D_2`$, $`𝔻_\rho D_1\mathrm{}`$, $`𝔻_\rho U=\mathrm{}`$, and $`u1`$ on $`U𝔻_\rho `$ (take $`\rho =r_n`$ with sufficiently big $`n`$).

Let $`J𝔻_\rho D_1`$ be a closed arc. We can assume that

$$J=\{e^{i\theta }\rho :\frac{2\pi k_0}{n_0}\theta \frac{2\pi (k_0+1)}{n_0}\}$$

for some $`k_0,n_0`$.

Now we choose a sequence of positive numbers $`\rho _n(0,1)`$, $`n`$, in the following way:

1. Let $`0<\rho _1<1`$ be such that

1. $`_{k=1}^{n_0}\pi _{n_0}^k\left(𝔻(a_1,\rho _1)\right)U`$;
    2. $`𝔻_\rho _{k=1}^{n_0}\pi _{n_0}^k\left(\overline{𝔻}(a_1,\frac{\rho _1}{2})\right)`$ is connected.
2. Assume that $`\rho _1,\mathrm{},\rho _{n1}`$ are chosen. Choose $`0<\rho _n<1`$ such that

1. $`_{k=1}^{n_0}\pi _{n_0}^k\left(𝔻(a_n,\rho _n)\right)U`$;
    2. $`𝔻_\rho _{j=1}^n_{k=1}^{n_0}\pi _{n_0}^k\left(\overline{𝔻}(a_j,\frac{\rho _j}{2})\right)`$ is connected.

Put $`Y_n=_{j=1}^n_{k=1}^{n_0}\pi _{n_0}^k\left(\overline{𝔻}(a_j,\frac{\rho _j}{2})\right)`$. So, $`Y_nU`$ is a closed set such that $`𝔻_\rho Y_n`$ is a domain and $`𝔻_\rho Y_n=\mathrm{}`$ for any $`n`$.

*Step 2.* We want to show that

(2.4)
$$\omega (0,𝔻_\rho ,𝔻_\rho Y_n)\frac{1}{2},n.$$

Fix $`n`$. Put $`v_n(z)=\omega (z,𝔻_\rho ,𝔻_\rho Y_n)+u(z)`$. It suffices to show that

(2.5)
$$v_n1\text{ on }𝔻_\rho Y_n.$$

Observe that $`\omega (,𝔻_\rho ,𝔻_\rho Y_n)0`$ and $`u()0`$ on $`𝔻_\rho Y_n`$. Moreover, we have $`lim\; sup_{z𝔻_\rho }\omega (z,𝔻_\rho ,𝔻_\rho Y_n)1`$ and $`lim\; sup_{zY_n}u(z)1`$. So, from the maximum principle for the subharmonic function $`v_n`$ we get (2.5) and, therefore, (2.4).

*Step 3.* Here we want show that

(2.6)
$$\omega (0,J,𝔻_\rho _{j=1}^n\overline{𝔻}(a_j,\frac{\rho _j}{2}))\frac{1}{2n_0},n.$$

Put

$$w_n(z)=\omega (z,𝔻_\rho ,𝔻_\rho Y_n)\underset{k=1}{\overset{n_0}{}}\omega (z,\pi _{n_0}^k(J),𝔻_\rho Y_n).$$

Note that $`_{k=1}^{n_0}\pi _{n_0}^k(J)=𝔻_\rho `$. Again from the maximum principle we obtain that $`w_n0`$ on $`𝔻_\rho Y_n`$, $`n`$.

Because $`\pi _{n_0}^k(𝔻_\rho Y_n)=𝔻_\rho Y_n`$, for any $`k,n`$, we find

$$\omega (0,\pi _{n_0}^k(J),𝔻_\rho Y_n)=\omega (0,J,𝔻_\rho Y_n),k.$$

Hence,

$$\omega (0,J,𝔻_\rho _{j=1}^n\overline{𝔻}(a_j,\frac{\rho _j}{2}))\omega (0,J,𝔻_\rho Y_n)\frac{1}{2n_0},n.$$

*Step 4.* Let $`\{R_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be a sequence of positive numbers such that $`C_1:=_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{R_n}{\rho _n}<+\mathrm{}`$ and, therefore, $`_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}R_n<C_1`$ (take e.g. $`R_n=\frac{\rho _n}{n^2}`$). Consider any sequence of complex numbers $`\{c_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ with $`|c_n|R_n`$ and let $`f`$ be defined by (2.1).

Put

$$f_n(z)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{c_j}{za_j}\underset{j=n+1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{c_j}{a_j},n.$$

Then $`|f_n(z)|2C_1`$ for every $`z𝔻_\rho _{j=1}^n\overline{𝔻}(a_j,\frac{\rho _j}{2})`$ and all $`n`$.

Let $`h\mathrm{PSH}(D_2\times )`$ have the property that $`h(z,f(z))=\mathrm{}`$, $`zD_1`$. The function $`s_n`$ defined on $`D_2\{a_1,\mathrm{},a_n\}`$ by $`s_n(z):=h(z,f_n(z))`$ is subharmonic. Let $`A_n:=sup_{zJ}s_n(z)`$ and let $`C_2:=sup_{z\overline{𝔻}_\rho ,|w|2C_1}h(z,w)`$. Then $`A_nsup_{zJ}h(z,f(z))=\mathrm{}`$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$.

From the two-constant theorem (see e.g. , Theorem 4.3.7) we infer

$$\frac{C_2s_n(0)}{C_2A_n}\omega (0,J,𝔻_\rho _{j=1}^n\overline{𝔻}(a_j,\frac{\rho _j}{2}))\frac{1}{2n_0},n.$$

Letting $`n\mathrm{}`$, we conclude that $`h(0,f(0))=s_n(0)=\mathrm{}`$ and therefore $`(0,f(0))(\mathrm{\Gamma }_f)_{D_2\times }^{}`$. ∎

For the proof of Theorem 1.1 we need to know that the function defined by (2.1) is not extendible across the boundary of $`D_1`$. This will be done in the next section.

## 3. Non-extendible sums

Without additional conditions on $`a_n`$ and $`c_n`$ a function defined by (2.1) may well extend holomorphically beyond the boundary of $`D_1`$, think of Lambert-type series $`_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}c_n\frac{z^n}{1z^n}`$, cf. . It may even yield 0 on $`D_1`$, cf. . We will see that suitable choice of $`a_n`$ and $`c_n`$ prevents this from happening. We are grateful to Marek Jarnicki and Peter Pflug who suggested the idea of the proof of the next lemma.

###### Lemma 3.1.

Let $`D`$ be a domain in $``$. Then there exist a dense subset $`A=\{a_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ of $`D`$ and a sequence $`\{R_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ of positive numbers such that for any sequence of complex numbers $`\{c_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ with $`0<|c_n|R_n`$ the holomorphic function $`f`$ given by (2.1) is not holomorphically extendible across $`D`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`B=\{b_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ be a dense subset of $`D`$ (take e.g. $`U=D^2`$). For any $`b_nB`$ there exists a point $`aD`$ such that $`\mathrm{dist}(b_n,D)=|b_na|`$. We denote by $`a_n`$ one of them. Set $`A=\{a_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$. Note that $`A`$ is a dense subset of $`D`$. Taking subsequence of $`\{a_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ we may assume that $`a_ia_j`$, $`ij`$.

Fix $`n`$. Let $`B_n=\{zD:\mathrm{dist}(z,D)=|za_n|\}D`$. Note that $`B_n\{a_n\}`$ is a closed set on the plane and $`\stackrel{~}{B}=_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}B_n`$ is dense in $`D`$ (because $`\stackrel{~}{B}B`$). Moreover, if $`z_0B_n`$ then the open segment with the ends at the points $`z_0`$ and $`a_n`$ is contained in $`B_n`$.

For any $`j`$ we put $`ϵ_{nj}=\mathrm{dist}(a_j,B_n)`$. Since $`a_jB_n`$ for $`jn`$, we see that $`ϵ_{nj}>0`$ for $`jn`$.

Put

$$R_j=\frac{\mathrm{min}\{ϵ_{1j},\mathrm{},ϵ_{(j1)j}\}}{j^2},j.$$

For any $`n`$ and any $`j>n`$ we have $`R_j\frac{ϵ_{nj}}{j^2}`$ and therefore

$$\underset{jn}{}\frac{R_j}{|za_j|}\underset{jn}{}\frac{R_j}{ϵ_{nj}}<+\mathrm{},zB_n.$$

Take a sequence of complex numbers $`\{c_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ with $`0<|c_n|R_n`$. Then for a fixed $`n`$ we have

(3.1)
$$\begin{array}{c}\underset{B_nza_n}{lim\; inf}|(za_n)f(z)|\hfill \\ \hfill |c_n|\underset{B_nza_n}{lim}|za_n|\underset{B_nza_n}{lim\; sup}\underset{jn}{}\frac{|c_j|}{|za_j|}=|c_n|>0.\end{array}$$

Observe that for any $`n`$ the Taylor series at any point of $`z_0`$ $`B_n`$ has a radius of convergent equal to $`\mathrm{dist}(z_0,D)`$ (because of (3.1) and $`|z_0a_n|=\mathrm{dist}(z_0,D)`$). Hence, by Lemma 1.7.5 from  we see that $`D`$ is the domain of existence of $`f`$. ∎

###### Proof of Theorem 1.1.

If a set $`E\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is complete pluripolar in a domain $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$, then $`E_\mathrm{\Omega }^{}=E`$. By Lemma 3.1 and Theorem 2.1 there exists a holomorphic function $`f`$ on $`D_1`$ for which $`D_1`$ is a domain of existence and $`(\mathrm{\Gamma }_f)_{D_2\times }^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$. Hence, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$ is not complete pluripolar in $`D_2\times `$. ∎

###### Theorem 3.2.

There exists a sequence $`\{a_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}\overline{𝔻}`$ and a sequence $`\{c_n\}_{n=1}^{\mathrm{}}`$ such that the function $`f`$ defined by (2.1) is $`C^{\mathrm{}}`$ on $`\overline{𝔻}`$, is nowhere extendible over the boundary of $`𝔻`$, while $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f`$ is not complete pluripolar in $`^2`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`r_j=1+1/(j+1)`$. The sequence $`a_n`$ is formed by

$$a_{2^j+k}=r_je^{2\pi i\frac{k}{2^j}},k=0,\mathrm{}2^j1,j=0,1,\mathrm{}.$$

The proof of Theorem 2.1 provides us with a sequence $`\{R_n\}`$ such that for every sequence $`\{c_n\}`$ with $`|c_n|<R_n`$ the series (2.1) represents a function on $`𝔻`$, the graph of which is not complete pluripolar. Assembling all $`a_nC(0,r_j)`$ we find that there exists a sequence $`\{R_j^{}\}`$ such that for every choice of $`0<\epsilon _j<R_j`$ the function $`f_\epsilon `$ on $`𝔻`$ defined by

(3.2)
$$f_\epsilon (z)=\underset{j=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{\epsilon _j}{r_j^{2^j}z^{2^j}}$$

has a graph that is not complete pluripolar.

We observe that independently of the choice of $`\epsilon _j`$

$$\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}\frac{\epsilon _j}{r_j^{2^j}z^{2^j}}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d_{n,k}z^k$$

is holomorphic on $`𝔻_{r_n}`$ with singularities on the boundary. (The $`d_{n,k}`$ are defined by the equality.) Therefore we have $`lim\; sup_k\mathrm{}|d_{n,k}^{1/k}|=1/r_n`$. Hence there is a $`k_n`$ such that

(3.3)
$$|d_{n,k_n}|>r_{n+1}^{k_n}.$$

We will now make an appropriate choice for the $`\epsilon _j`$ to insure that $`f`$ cannot be extended over the boundary of $`𝔻`$. Along the way we will determine constants $`C_j`$ that are needed for smoothness at the boundary.

Choose $`\epsilon _0=R_0^{}`$. Then

$$f_{\epsilon _0}(z)=\frac{1}{r_0z}=\underset{k=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}d_{0,k}z^k$$

with $`lim\; sup_k\mathrm{}|d_{0,k}^{1/k}|=1/r_0`$; in particular there is a $`C_0`$ such that $`|d_{0,k}|<C_0`$.

Suppose $`\epsilon _0,\mathrm{},\epsilon _{n1}`$ and $`C_0,\mathrm{},C_{n1}`$ have been chosen in such a way that we have found $`k_0,\mathrm{},k_{n1}`$ with

(3.4)
$$|d_{l,k_j}|>r_{j+1}^{k_j}\text{for }j=0,\mathrm{},n1,l=j,\mathrm{}n1$$

and

(3.5)
$$|d_{j,k}|<\frac{C_l}{k^l}\text{for }l=0,\mathrm{},n1,j=0,\mathrm{},n1\text{and all }k.$$

Then choose

(3.6)
$$C_n>\underset{k}{sup}|d_{j,k}|k^nj=0,\mathrm{},n1.$$

This is finite because of (3.4). Next choose $`\epsilon _n<R_n^{}`$ so small that

1. The inequality (3.5) holds for $`l=0,\mathrm{},n`$ and $`j=0,\mathrm{},n`$. This is possible because of (3.4).
2. $$|d_{n,k_j}|>r_{j+1}^{k_j}\text{for }j=0,\mathrm{},n1,$$

which is again possible because of (3.4).

Having chosen $`\epsilon _n`$, we can by (3.3) choose $`k_n`$ so large that $`|d_{n,k_n}|>r_{n+1}^{k_n}`$.

Observe that the coefficients $`d_{n,k}`$ converge to the coefficients $`d_k`$ of the power series expansion of $`f_\epsilon `$ as $`n\mathrm{}`$. From (3.4) we see that $`|d_{k_j}|>r_{j+1}^{k_j}`$ so that the radius of convergence of the power series of $`f_\epsilon `$ is at most 1, and since $`f_\epsilon `$ is holomorphic on $`𝔻`$, it equals 1. So $`f_\epsilon `$ has a singular point $`b`$ on $`C(0,1)`$. We split $`f_\epsilon `$ as

$$f_\epsilon =f_1+f_2=\left(\underset{j=0}{\overset{n1}{}}+\underset{j=n}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\right)\frac{\epsilon _j}{r_j^{2^j}z^{2^j}}.$$

Then $`f_1`$ is holomorphic in a neighborhood of the closed unit disc and $`f_2`$ has at least one singular point on $`C(0,1)`$, but $`f_2`$ is invariant under rotation over a $`2^n`$-th root of unity, which implies that there is a singularity in each arc of length $`>2\pi /2^n`$. Therefore, $`f`$ can nowhere be extended analytically over $`C(0,1)`$.

Next we show that $`f`$ is smooth up to the boundary of $`𝔻`$. We have to show that there exist constants $`C_l>0`$ such that for every $`l`$

$$|d_k|\frac{C_l}{k^l},\text{for all }k,$$

but this follows from (3.5). ∎

###### Remark 3.3.

Let $`D`$ be a domain in $``$ and let $`A`$ be a closed polar subset of $`D`$. Using methods presented in this paper and in , the authors give in  a complete characterization of the holomorphic functions $`f`$ on $`DA`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_f=\{(z,f(z)):zDA\}`$ is complete pluripolar in $`D\times `$.


format: text

text: # 1 Astrometry and photometry𝑈𝐵𝑅𝐼 photometry from RGG study. for M31 spectroscopic targets and control sample


text:
# Polarized triplet production by circularly polarized photons

## Introduction

In this paper we consider the process $`\gamma (k)+e^{}(p)e^{}(q_{})+e^+(q_+)+e^{}(p^{^{}})`$ in the high-energy limit when polarization states of initial photon and production particles $`e^+,e^{}`$ are helical.

The differential cross-section of electron-positron pair photoproduction on a free electron in the Born approximation is described by eight Feynman diagrams (FD)  which shown in Fig.1,left. In the high-energy limit (for photon energy $`54`$ MeV at Lab system) only subset of two Bethe-Heitler (BH) diagrams (see Fig.1,left) are relevant at the level of accuracy at $`\frac{m^2}{s}10^2`$, $`m`$ is electron mass and $`s`$ is $`s=2kp=2m\omega `$, where $`\omega `$ is the photon energy at the laboratory frame, whereas the contributions we examine is order of $`\frac{s}{m^2}2001`$. Non-logarithmic terms we also don’t consider because of their smallness $`10^1`$ in comparison with logarithmic terms $`2\mathrm{ln}\frac{s}{m^2}10`$. Further calculations will be performed in Weizaecker-Williams (WW) approximation .

The differential cross-section of triplet photoproduction in the Born approximation for the unpolarized case was calculated numerically in  by using Monte Carlo simulation of all 8 FD contribution. The closed analytical expression is very cumbersome and was first obtained in a complete form in works . A detailed analysis of the expressions of Haug’s work reveals that the interference terms of the BH matrix elements with the other three gauge-invariant subsets (which take into account the bremsstrahlung mechanism of pair creation and Fermi statistics for fermions) turn out to be of the order of some percent for $`s>5060m^2`$.

The differential cross-section for electron-positron pair production by linearly polarized photons was derived in a series of papers  (see also  and references therein). In Ref.  was performed a Monte Carlo simulation of the process under consideration, in which all eight lowest order diagrams can be numerically treated without approximation. There it was shown that one might consider only the two leading graphs in a wide range of photon energies from $`50`$ to $`550`$ MeV. Note that this observation was made earlier for the unpolarized case in works of Kopylov et al.  and Haug  (who presented his results in explicit analytical form).

The process of the polarized pair production by a polarized photon in the screened Coulomb field of nucleus have been considered in the high energy limit in the works . Here the degree of longitudinal polarization of electron has been calculated.

From the paper  it follows that: 1. the contribution of FD (see Fig.1,right) as well as interference it’s amplitude with amplitude of (see Fig.1,left) can be neglected within accuracy $`3\%`$ compared with contribution of (see Fig.1,left) already starting from photon energies $`\omega >30`$ MeV in laboratory frame; 2. One can use the asymptotic formulae at very high photon energies of contribution of Bethe- Haitler FD (see Fig.1,left) within accuracy $`5\%`$ starting from energies of order $`\omega >100`$ MeV. Taking into account that unpolarized cross-section dominates the ones depending on particle polarization we estimate accuracy of WW (logarithmical approximation) on the level of $`10\%`$.

Our paper organized as follows. Using the Sudakov technique we calculate the differential cross-section and the degree of longitudinal polarization of electron and positron in the process of pair production by circularly polarized photon on electron. In conclusion we discuss the different schemes of production of longitudinally polarized positrons in experimental set-ups. The method described here is one of the most perspective one. It’s our motivation for investigation. In Appendix we give in Born approximation the differential cross-section of triplet production process for the case when polarization states of all particles are helical by using of crossing-transformation of corresponding differential cross-section for Möller bremsstrahlung process in the ultrarelativistic (massless) limit. Corresponding formulae for the degree of longitudinal polarization of positron in terms of kinematical invariant and helicity of initial photon is given for a case of high energy large angle scattering.

## The cross-section of the process

The cross-section of the process is proved in the next form:

$`\text{d}\sigma ={\displaystyle \frac{(4\pi \alpha )^3}{4(2\pi )^5s}}\mathrm{\Sigma }M^2{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}^3q_{}}{2\epsilon _{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}^3q_+}{2\epsilon _+}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}^3p^{^{}}}{2\epsilon ^{^{}}}}\times \delta ^4(p+kq_+q_{}p^{^{}}),`$ (1)
where $`p^{^{}},\epsilon ^{^{}}`$ is four-momentum and energy of scattered electron; $`q_\pm `$ and $`\epsilon _\pm `$ are four-momentum and energy of electron and positron correspondingly. We accept here the Sudakov picture  of the peripherical process. Let us determine the basic vectors in Sudakov representation of kinematics: vector of momentum transfer $`q=pp^{^{}}`$ and the light-like vector $`\stackrel{~}{p}=pk\frac{m^2}{s},\stackrel{~}{p}^2=0`$ ($`k`$ is 4-momentum of impact photon). The Sudakov representation of four-momenta are the next:

$`q=\alpha \stackrel{~}{p}+\beta k+q_{},q_\pm =\alpha _\pm \stackrel{~}{p}+\beta _\pm k+q_\pm ,a_{}k=a_{}\stackrel{~}{p}=0.`$
The quantities $`\beta _\pm `$ can be interpreted as the energy fraction of pair components of photon energy, $`\beta _++\beta _{}=1`$. The conservation law of transversal momenta is $`q_{}=q_++q_{}`$. Momentum components along $`\stackrel{~}{p}`$ is small. Using the mass-shell conditions of pair components and the scattered electron leads to:

$`s\alpha _\pm ={\displaystyle \frac{\rho _\pm }{\beta _\pm }},s\beta (1\alpha )=𝒒^2m^2\alpha ,\rho _\pm =𝒒_\pm ^2+m^2,`$ (2)
where we use the two-dimensional Euclidean vectors $`q_{}^2=𝒒^2,q_\pm ^2=𝒒_\pm ^2`$. The Sudakov parameter $`\alpha `$ can be related with the invariant mass of created pair

$`s_1=(q_++q_{})^2,s\alpha =s_1+𝒒^2.`$ (3)
Using conditions of mass-shell and smallness of Sudakov parameter $`\alpha `$ the momentum transfer to the target square can be written in the next form:

$`q^2=𝒒^2m^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{s_1}{s}}\right)^2.`$ (4)
We see that $`q^2<0`$, is negative and has non-zero magnitude. Using the Sudakov representation of momentum phase volume of the particle

$`\text{d}^4q={\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}\text{d}\alpha \text{d}\beta \text{d}^2q_{}`$ (5)
we perform the phase volume of the final state:

$`\text{d}\mathrm{\Gamma }={\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}^3q_{}}{2\epsilon _{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}^3q_+}{2\epsilon _+}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}^3p^{^{}}}{2\epsilon ^{^{}}}}\delta ^4(p+kq_+q_{}p^{^{}})={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2s}}{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}\beta _{}}{\beta _{}\beta _+}}\text{d}^2q_{}\text{d}^2q.`$ (6)
Let us now consider the matrix element:

$`M=\overline{u}(p^{^{}})\gamma ^\mu u(p){\displaystyle \frac{1}{q^2}}e_\rho (k)\overline{u}(q_{})O^{\rho \nu }v(q_+)g_{\mu \nu }.`$
By using the Gribov’s decomposition of metric tensor and omitting the terms of order $`m^2/s`$ compared of the terms of order of unity

$`g_{\mu \nu }=g_{\mu \nu }^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{s}}\left(\stackrel{~}{p}_\mu k_\nu +\stackrel{~}{p}_\nu k_\mu \right){\displaystyle \frac{2}{s}}\stackrel{~}{p}_\nu k_\mu ,`$ (7)
one can obtain the matrix element in the next form:

$`M={\displaystyle \frac{2sN_p}{𝒒^2+m^2(\frac{s_1}{s})^2}}e_\rho (k)\overline{u}(q_{})V^\rho v(q_+),`$ (8)
$`V^\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{s}}O^{\rho \nu }\stackrel{~}{p}_\nu ,N_p={\displaystyle \frac{1}{s}}\overline{u}(p^{^{}})\widehat{k}u(p),|N_p|=1.`$
Using the mass-shell conditions we can express the matrix four-vector $`V_\rho `$ as:

$`V_\rho =\beta _+\beta _{}\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho _+}}\right)\gamma _\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _+}{\rho _+}}\widehat{\stackrel{~}{p}}\widehat{q}\gamma _\rho {\displaystyle \frac{\beta _{}}{\rho _{}}}\gamma _\rho \widehat{q}\widehat{\stackrel{~}{p}}.`$ (9)
One can see that the quantity $`V_\rho `$ is proportional to $`|q_{}|`$ at small $`|q_{}|`$. Weizaecker-Williams approximation corresponds to the logarithmical enhancement factor:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}𝒒^2𝒒^2}{(𝒒^2+m^2\left(\frac{s_1}{s}\right)^2)^2}}2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{s_1}}.`$ (10)
The polarization matrix of density $`\tau _\pm ^{\delta _\pm }`$ for $`e^\pm `$ particles have the next form:

$`\tau _\pm ^{\delta _\pm }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\widehat{q}_\pm m)(1\delta _\pm \gamma ^5\widehat{s}_\pm ),\gamma ^5\widehat{s}_\pm \tau _\pm ^{\delta _\pm }=\delta _\pm \tau _\pm ^{\delta _\pm }.`$ (11)
We will express the particle spin vectors $`s_\pm `$ in terms of the 4-momenta $`q_\pm `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{p}`$,

$`s_\pm ={\displaystyle \frac{q_\pm }{m}}\pm {\displaystyle \frac{2m\stackrel{~}{p}}{s\beta _\pm }},s_\pm q_\pm =0,s_\pm ^2=1.`$ (12)
The circular-polarization vector $`e^\lambda `$ of a photon with 4-momentum $`k`$ is conveniently defined by using the 4-vectors $`q_+,q_{}`$ and $`k`$ :

$`e_\mu ^\lambda ={\displaystyle \frac{(q_{}k)(q_+)_\mu (q_+k)(q_{})_\mu +i\lambda \epsilon _{\mu \nu \rho \sigma }q_+^\nu q_{}^\rho k^\sigma }{\sqrt{2z}}},`$
$`z=((q_{}k)q_+(q_+k)q_{})^2={\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^2(\rho m^2)}{4\beta _+^2\beta _{}^2}}.`$
Performing the angular averaging on $`\text{d}^2q`$ and extracting the WW-factor we write down the differential cross-sections in the form (in WW-approximation we can put $`\rho _+=\rho _{}=\rho `$):

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}\sigma }{\text{d}𝒒_{}^2\text{d}\beta _{}}}={\displaystyle \frac{2\alpha ^3}{\rho ^2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m^2}}[12\beta _+\beta _{}+{\displaystyle \frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}}(\rho m^2)\beta _+\beta _{}`$
$`+\lambda \delta _+(\beta _+\beta _{}+{\displaystyle \frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}}(\rho m^2)\beta _{})+\lambda \delta _{}(\beta _+\beta _{}{\displaystyle \frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}}(\rho m^2)\beta _+)`$
$`+\delta _+\delta _{}(6\beta _+\beta _{}+{\displaystyle \frac{\rho m^2}{m^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}}(\rho m^2)(13\beta _+\beta _{}))].`$
In the case when initial electron is being polarized formulae given above isn’t changed. The corresponding effects are of order $`m^2/s`$. Performing the summation over the polarization of electron in (The cross-section of the process) we will get the differential cross-sections for creating polarized positron:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}\sigma ^+}{\text{d}𝒒_{}^2\text{d}\beta _{}}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha ^3}{\rho ^2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m^2}}[12\beta _+\beta _{}+{\displaystyle \frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}}(\rho m^2)\beta _+\beta _{}`$ (13)
$`+`$ $`\lambda \delta _+(\beta _+\beta _{}+{\displaystyle \frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}}(\rho m^2)\beta _{})].`$
and analogously expression for cross-section of creating polarized electron:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}\sigma ^{}}{\text{d}𝒒_{}^2\text{d}\beta _{}}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{4\alpha ^3}{\rho ^2}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m^2}}[12\beta _+\beta _{}+{\displaystyle \frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}}(\rho m^2)\beta _+\beta _{}`$ (14)
$`+`$ $`\lambda \delta _{}(\beta _+\beta _{}{\displaystyle \frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}}(\rho m^2)\beta _+)].`$
¿From expressions (13) and (14) we will have the degree of longitudinal polarization of electron (positron) when polarization of positron (electron) no registered:

$`\delta _\pm ^f=\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{\beta _+\beta _{}\pm \frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}(\rho m^2)\beta _{}}{12\beta _+\beta _{}+\frac{4m^2}{\rho ^2}(\rho m^2)\beta _+\beta _{}}}.`$ (15)
The result (15) is in agreement with one given in more general form in  (see formulae (19.8)). Performing the integration over transversal momenta of pair we obtain for the spectral distribution:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\text{d}\sigma ^+}{\text{d}\beta _{}}}=4\alpha r_0^2\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{s}{m^2}}\left[1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\beta _+\beta _{}+\lambda \delta _+\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}\beta _{}\right)\right].`$ (16)
Here we use in WW-approximation $`|𝒒_\mathbf{+}|=|𝒒_{\mathbf{}}|,\rho =\rho _+=\rho _{}=𝒒_{\mathbf{}}^\mathrm{𝟐}+m^2`$, $`\lambda `$ is the degree of circular polarization if the initial photon. The degree of longitudinal polarization of created $`e^\pm `$ particles have a form:

$`\delta _\pm ^f=\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{1\frac{4}{3}\beta _{}}{1\frac{4}{3}\beta _+\beta _{}}}.`$ (17)
We see from (17) that in the limit $`\beta _+1(\beta _{}1)`$ the degree of longitudinal polarization of positron (electron) equal to degree of circularly polarization of initial photon.

Let’s compare the result obtained with calculations of longitudinal positron polarization from pair production process in the screened Coulomb field of a nucleus  with the same accuracy as before we may write (see ):

$`\delta _+^f{\displaystyle \frac{\frac{4}{3}\beta _+\frac{1}{3}}{(\beta _+^2+\beta _{}^2)+\frac{2}{3}\beta _+\beta _{}}}\lambda .`$ (18)
Having in mind that $`\beta _{}=1\beta _+`$, one may obtain from (17) the same result.

## Conclusions

A few schemes to create polarized positrons for electron-positron colliders were proposed . Longitudinally polarized positrons are produced in the pair production process by circularly polarized photon with energy $`>`$ 10 MeV. A circularly polarized $`\gamma `$-beam is formed due to undulator radiation of electrons with energy $`E10^2`$ GeV in a helical undulator  or due to Compton backscattering process of the circularly polarized laser photons on the electron beam with energy $`>`$ 1 GeV . In both cases there was considered the process of pair production in the screened coulomb field of nucleus only as a source of polarized positrons. The process of triplet production was considering as background process . The obtained results allow to develop a correct Monte Carlo code in order to receive the positron polarization for the real experimental situation taking into account both processes of pair production in amorphous target .

In the recent experiment  authors measured the circular polarization of $`\gamma `$-quanta with energy $`>`$ 20 MeV using the magnetized iron polarimeter. The thickness of iron substance was too big (7 cm), so the correct estimation of the analyzing power may be done by a Monte-Carlo technique. In this case the polarization characteristics of all reaction particles should be took into account and our results cover the existing lack.

## Appendix

Differential cross section for triplet production process one can easily get with help of crossing transformation of expression for square amplitudes of Möller bremsstrahlung process

$`e^{}(p_1)+e^{}(p_2)e^{}(p_3)+e^{}(p_4)+\gamma (k),`$ (19)
which corresponds eight Feynman diagrams. In papers  was calculated the differential cross section for this reaction in the case when all fermions were massless ($`p_i^2=0`$, where $`i=1,2,3,4`$) with taking into account polarization of initial electrons and emitted photon. Let us introduce invariant variables :

$`s_1=(p_1+p_2)^2,t_1=(p_1p_3)^2,u_1=(p_1p_4)^2,`$ (20)
$`s_2=(p_3+p_4)^2,t_2=(p_2p_4)^2,u_2=(p_2p_3)^2,`$
and helicities $`\delta _1`$ and $`\delta _2`$ for initial electrons with momentum $`p_1`$ and $`p_2`$ respectively, $`\lambda `$ for helicity of emitted photon. The differential cross section of reaction (19) in the case of helically polarized initial electrons and photon has the next form :

$`d\sigma _M={\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^3}{2\pi ^2s}}A_MW_Md\mathrm{\Gamma }_M,A_M={\displaystyle \frac{A_{MB}}{t_1t_2u_1u_2}},`$ (21)
$`d\mathrm{\Gamma }_M={\displaystyle \frac{d^3𝒑_3}{2p_{30}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3𝒑_4}{2p_{40}}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3𝒌}{2\omega }}\delta ^4(p_1+p_2p_3p_4k).`$
Expressions for $`A_{MB}`$ and $`W_M`$ have forms :

$`A_{MB}`$ $`=`$ $`(1+\delta _1\delta _2)[(1+\delta _1\lambda )s_1s_2s_2^2+(1\delta _1\lambda )s_1s_2s_1^2]+`$ (22)
$`+`$ $`(1\delta _1\delta _2)[(1+\delta _2\lambda )(t_1t_2t_1^2+u_1u_2u_1^2)+`$
$`+`$ $`(1\delta _2\lambda )(t_1t_2t_2^2+u_1u_2u_2^2)],`$
$`W_M`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{p_1}{p_1k}}+{\displaystyle \frac{p_2}{p_2k}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_3}{p_3k}}{\displaystyle \frac{p_4}{p_4k}}\right)^2.`$ (23)
Photoproduction diagrams of triplet

$`\gamma (k)+e^{}(p)e^{}(q_{})+e^+(q_+)+e^{}(p^{^{}})`$ (24)
are different from ones for Möller bremsstrahlung process (19) with exchange

$`p_1p,p_2q_+,p_3p^{^{}},p_4q_{},`$ (25)
$`kk,\lambda \lambda ,\delta _1\delta _1,\delta _2\delta _+.`$
Both processes (19) and (24) are two crossing canals with the same (generalized) reaction. After the replacement (25) of invariant variables (Appendix) they takes the next form:

$`s_1=(pq_+)^2,t_1=(pp{}_{}{}^{})^2,u_1=(pq_{})^2,`$ (26)
$`s_2=(p^{^{}}+q_{})^2,t_2=(q_++q_{})^2,u_2=(p^{^{}}+q_+)^2.`$
Since square amplitude for process (24) after replacement of variables (25) is like to one for process (19), then one can obtain after initial electron polarization summing in the reaction (24) from (21) the next formulae for triplet production with taking into account polarization of initial photon and scattered positron:

$`d\sigma _{tr}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^3}{2\pi ^2s}}A_{tr}W_{tr}d\mathrm{\Gamma },`$ (27)
$`A_{tr}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{A_{MB}^{tr}}{t_1t_2u_1u_2}},A_{MB}^{tr}=A_{tr}^0+\delta _+\lambda A_{tr}^1,`$
$`A_{tr}^0`$ $`=`$ $`s_1s_2(s_1^2+s_2^2)+t_1t_2(t_1^2+t_2^2)+u_1u_2(u_1^2+u_2^2),`$
$`A_{tr}^1`$ $`=`$ $`s_1s_2(s_1^2s_2^2)+t_1t_2(t_1^2t_2^2)+u_1u_2(u_1^2u_2^2),`$
$`W_{tr}`$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{p}{pk}}+{\displaystyle \frac{q_+}{q_+k}}{\displaystyle \frac{p^{^{}}}{p^{^{}}k}}{\displaystyle \frac{q_{}}{q_{}k}}\right)^2,`$ (28)
were $`s=(p+k)^2`$ and $`d\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are defined by expression (6). Then for the degree of longitudinal polarization of produced positron $`\delta _+^f=A_{tr}^1/A_{tr}^0`$ we will have expression:

$`\delta _+^f=\lambda {\displaystyle \frac{s_1s_2(s_1^2s_2^2)+t_1t_2(t_1^2t_2^2)+u_1u_2(u_1^2u_2^2)}{s_1s_2(s_1^2+s_2^2)+t_1t_2(t_1^2+t_2^2)+u_1u_2(u_1^2+u_2^2)}}.`$
This formulae is valid only in the case when invariant mass square of any particle pair is large with comparison to electron mass square.