text:
# On Elliptic Curves in 𝑆𝐿₂(ℂ)/Γ, Schanuel’s conjecture and geodesic lengths

## 1. Introduction

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a discrete cocompact subgroup of $`SL_2()`$. We are interested in closed complex analytic subspaces of the complex quotient manifold $`X=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. It is well-known that $`X`$ contains no hypersurfaces and it is easy to show that it contains no curves of genus $`0`$. The existence of curves of genus $`2`$ is an unsolved problem.

On the other hand, it is not hard to show that there do exist curves of genus one (elliptic curves). (For these assertions, see ,.)

Our goal is to investigate how many different curves of genus one can be embedded in one such quotient manifold. There are only countably many abelian varieties which can be embedded into a quotient manifold of a complex semisimple Lie group by a discrete cocompact subgroup (, Cor. 4.6.2). Thus the question is: Is the number of non-isomorphic elliptic curves in such a quotient $`SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ finite or countably infinite?

Under the additional assumption that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ is cocompact in $`SL_2()`$ we show that there are infinitely many isogeny classes of elliptic curves in $`X`$ (thm. 2). We will see that there do exist discrete cocompact subgroups in $`SL_2()`$ with this property (cor. 3). We conjecture that this additional assumption ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ being cocompact in $`SL_2()`$) is not needed and show that it can be dropped provided Schanuel’s conjecture is true (see cor. 2).

In order to show that there are infinitely many non-isogenous elliptic curves, one first has to construct elliptic curves and then one has to investigate under which conditions they are isogenous. There is a well-known way to construct elliptic curves in $`X=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, going back to ideas of Mostow (). In fact every elliptic curve in $`X`$ arises in this way (). This method works as follows: If $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a semisimple element of infinite order, then the centralizer $`C=\{gSL_2():g\gamma =\gamma g\}`$ is isomorphic to $`^{}`$ as a complex Lie group and $`C\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a discrete subgroup containing $`\gamma `$ and therefore commensurable with $`\{\gamma ^k:k\}`$. The quotient of $`^{}`$ by an infinite discrete subgroup is necessarily compact. Hence for every semisimple element $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of infinite order we obtain an elliptic curve $`EX=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which arises as orbit of the centralizer $`C`$. Moreover, this elliptic curve $`EC/(C\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is isogenous to $`C/\gamma `$ and therefore isogenous to $`^{}/\lambda `$ where $`\lambda `$ and $`\lambda ^1`$ are the eigenvalues of the matrix $`\gamma SL_2()`$.

Thus our problem is to investigate how many different eigenvalues occur and under which circumstances different eigenvalues lead to non-isogenous elliptic curves.

First we show that for every Zariski-dense subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ there are infinitely many pairwise multiplicatively independent complex numbers occuring as eigenvalues for elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ (thm. 1).

We conjecture that, if the eigenvalues are algebraic numbers (this is known to be the case if $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is cocompact), then multiplicatively independent eigenvalues always lead to non-isogenous elliptic curves. We can prove that this conjecture holds if Schanuel’s conjecture from transcendental number theory is true.

Even without assuming Schanuel’s conjecture to be true we can prove the existence of infinitely many non-isogenous elliptic curves in the case where the eigenvalues are real.

In this way we obtained the desired result in the special case where the intersection $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ is cocompact in $`SL_2()`$.

Using an arithmetic construction one can show that discrete cocompact subgroups $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for which $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ is cocompact in $`SL_2()`$ do indeed exist.

These results on elliptic curves in $`SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ can be related to questions on the length of closed geodesics on real hyperbolic manifolds of dimension $`2`$ or $`3`$. More precisely, let $`M`$ be a compact real Riemannian manifold (without boundary) of dimension $`2`$ or $`3`$ which carries a Riemannian metric of constant negative curvature. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be set of all positive real numbers occuring as length of a closed geodesic on $`M`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ contains infinitely many elements which are pairwise linearly independent over $``$ (thm. 3).

## 2. Multiplicatively independent eigenvalues

### 2.1. Announcement of theorem 1

###### Definition.

Two non-zero elements $`x,y`$ in a field $`k`$ are called multiplicatively dependent if there exists a pair $`(p,q)\times \{(0,0)\}`$ such that $`x^q=y^p`$.

They are called multiplicatively independent if they are not multiplicatively dependent.

By this definition a root of unity is multiplicatively dependent with every other element of $`k^{}`$. Thus, if $`x,yk^{}`$ are multiplicatively independent, this implies in particular that neither $`x`$ nor $`y`$ is a root of unity.

Note that being multiplicatively dependent is an equivalence relation on the set of all elements of $`k^{}`$ which are not roots of unity.

The purpose to of this section is to prove the following theorem:

###### Theorem 1.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a subgroup of $`SL_2()`$ which is dense in the algebraic Zariski topology.

Then there exists infinitely many pairwise multiplicatively independent complex numbers $`\lambda `$ which occur as eigenvalues for elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

### 2.2. A fact from Combinatorics

As a preparation for the proof of thm. 1 we need a combinatorial fact.

###### Lemma 1.

Let $`S`$ be a finite set, $`\varphi :S`$ a map.

Then there exists a natural number $`N\mathrm{\#}S`$ and an element $`sS`$ such that

$$A_{s,N}=\{x:\varphi (x)=s=\varphi (x+N)\}$$

is infinite.

###### Proof.

Assume the contrary. Then $`A_{s,N}`$ is a finite set for all $`sS`$, $`1N\mathrm{\#}S`$. Hence there is a number $`M`$ such that $`x<M`$ for all $`x_{sS}_{N\mathrm{\#}S}A_{s,N}`$.

But this implies that $`\varphi (M+i)\varphi (M+j)`$ for all $`0i<j\mathrm{\#}S`$, which is impossible by the pigeon-hole principle. ∎

### 2.3. Roots in finitely generated fields

We need the following well-known fact on finitely generated fields.

###### Lemma 2.

Let $`K`$ be a finitely generated field extension of $``$.

Then for every element $`xK`$ one of the properties hold:

* $`x=0`$,
* $`x`$ is an invertible algebraic integer (i.e. a unit) or
* there exists a discrete valuation $`v:K^{}`$ with $`v(x)0`$.

For the convenience of the reader we sketch a proof.

###### Proof.

Let $`K_0`$ denote the algebraic closure of $``$ in $`K`$. Then $`K_0`$ is a number field and $`K`$ can be regarded as function field of a projective variety $`V`$ defined over $`K_0`$. Let $`fK`$. If $`fK_0`$, then $`f`$ is a non-constant rational function and therefore there is a discrete valuation given by the pole/zero-order along a hypersurface which does not annihilate $`f`$. If $`fK_0`$, then either $`f=0`$, or $`f`$ is a unit, i.e. an invertible algebraic integer or an extension of a $`p`$-adic valuation is non-zero for $`f`$. ∎

Let $`K`$ be a field and $`W_K`$ the group of roots of unity contained in $`K`$. Let $`xK^{}`$. We want to measure up to which degree $`d`$ it is possible to find a $`d`$-th root of $`x`$ in $`K`$ (modulo $`W_K`$). For this purpose we define

$$\rho _K(x)=sup\{n:\alpha K:\alpha ^nx^1W_K\}\{\mathrm{}\}.$$

###### Lemma 3.

Let $`K`$ be a finitely generated field extension of $``$ and $`xK^{}`$. Then $`\rho _K(x)<\mathrm{}`$ unless $`x`$ is a root of unity.

###### Proof.

Let $`x`$ be an element of $`K^{}`$ which is not a root of unity. First we discuss the case in which there exists a discrete valuation $`v:K^{}`$ with $`v(x)0`$. In this case $`\alpha ^nx^1W_K`$ for $`\alpha K`$ implies $`v(\alpha )=\frac{1}{n}v(x)`$. Therefore $`\rho _K(x)|v(x)|`$ in this case.

Now let us discuss the case where every discrete valuation on $`K`$ annihilates $`x`$. By lemma 2, this implies that $`x`$ is contained in the algebraic closure $`K_0`$ of $``$ in $`K`$ and moreover that $`x𝒪_{K_0}^{}`$, i.e. $`x`$ is an invertible algebraic integer. Assume that there are elements $`\alpha K`$, $`wW_K`$ and $`n`$ such that $`\alpha ^n=xw`$. Then $`\alpha ^{nN}=x^N`$ for some $`N`$. As a consequence, $`\alpha `$ is integral over $`𝒪_{K_0}`$. Similarily, $`\alpha ^{nN}=x^N`$ implies that $`\alpha ^1`$ is integral over $`𝒪_{K_0}`$. Thus we obtain: If $`\alpha ^nx^1W_K`$ for some $`\alpha K`$ and $`n`$, then $`\alpha 𝒪_{K_0}^{}`$.

Therefore

$$\rho _K(x)=sup\{n:\alpha 𝒪_{K_0}^{}:\alpha ^nx^1W_K\}.$$

A theorem of Dirichlet states that $`𝒪_{K_0}^{}`$ is a finitely generated abelian group (with respect to multiplication). Thus $`𝒪_{K_0}^{}/W_K^d`$ for some $`d`$.111More precisely, the theorem of Dirichlet states $`d=r+s1`$ where $`r`$ is the number of real embeddings of $`K_0`$ and $`s`$ the number of pairs of conjugate complex embeddings. This implies $`\rho _K(x)<\mathrm{}`$. ∎

###### Lemma 4.

Let $`K`$ be a field, $`xK^{}`$ with $`\rho _K(x)<\mathrm{}`$. Assume that there are integers $`p`$, $`q\{0\}`$ and an element $`\beta K^{}`$ such that $`\beta ^qx^pW_K`$.

Then $`\frac{p}{q}\rho _K(x)`$.

###### Proof.

Let $`n=\rho _K(x)`$. Assume that $`\frac{p}{q}n`$ and let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ denote the additive subgroup of $``$ generated by $`\frac{1}{n}`$ and $`\frac{p}{q}`$. Now $`\frac{1}{n}\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, hence there is a natural number $`N>n`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{1}{N}`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is generated by $`1/n`$ and $`p/q`$, there are integers $`k,m`$ such that

$$k\frac{1}{n}+m\frac{p}{q}=\frac{kq+nmp}{nq}=\frac{1}{N}.$$

Since $`n=\rho _K(x)`$, there is an element $`\alpha K^{}`$ with $`\alpha ^nx^1W_K`$. Now we define

$$\gamma =\alpha ^k\beta ^m.$$

We claim that $`\gamma ^Nx^1W_K`$. Indeed, since $`\frac{1}{N}=nq/(kq+nmp)`$, this condition is equivalent to $`\gamma ^{nq}x^{kqnmp}W_K`$ which can be verified as follows:

$$\gamma ^{nq}x^{kqnmp}=\alpha ^{knq}\beta ^{mnq}x^{kqnmp}=\left(\alpha ^nx^1\right)^{kq}\left(\beta ^qx^p\right)^{nm}W_K.$$

But $`\gamma ^Nx^1W_K`$ implies $`\rho _K(x)N`$, contradicting $`N>n=\rho _K(x)`$.

Thus we see that $`\frac{p}{q}`$ must be contained in $`\frac{1}{n}`$. ∎

The statement of the lemma may be reformulated in the following way:

###### Corollary 1.

Let $`K`$ be a field, $`xK^{}`$ with $`\rho _K(x)<\mathrm{}`$. Let

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_{K,x}=\{\frac{p}{q}:\beta K^{}:\beta ^qx^pW_K\}.$$

Then $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{K,x}`$ is a discrete subgroup of $`(,+)`$, generated by $`\frac{1}{\rho _K(x)}`$.

Next we verify that the behaviour of $`\rho _K(x)`$ under finite field extensions is as to be expected.

###### Lemma 5.

Let $`L/K`$ be a finite field extension of degree $`d`$ and $`xK^{}`$ with $`\rho _K(x)<\mathrm{}`$.

Then there exists a natural number $`s`$ which divides $`d`$ such that $`\rho _L(x)=s\rho _K(x)`$.

###### Proof.

In the notation of cor. 1 $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{K,x}`$ is a subgroup of $`\mathrm{\Theta }_{L,x}`$.

On the other hand, if there is an element $`\beta (L)^{}`$ and a natural number $`n`$ such that $`\beta ^nx^1W_L`$, then

$$N_{L/K}(\beta ^nx^1)=\left(N_{L/K}(\beta )\right)^nx^dW_K$$

and consequently $`\frac{d}{n}\rho _K(x)`$ (lemma 4). Thus $`\frac{1}{n}\frac{1}{\rho _L(x)}`$ implies $`\frac{1}{n}\frac{1}{d\rho _K(x)}`$.

Combined, these facts yield

$$\frac{1}{\rho _K(x)}\frac{1}{\rho _L(x)}\frac{1}{d\rho _K(x)}.$$

This implies the statement of the lemma. ∎

### 2.4. An auxiliary proposition

###### Proposition 1.

Let $`K`$ be a finitely generated field extension of $``$, $`\overline{K}`$ an algebraic closure, $`S`$ a finite subset of $`K^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\overline{K}^{}`$ a subset such that the following properties are fulfilled:

1. $`\mathrm{deg}K(\lambda )/K2`$ for every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$,
2. for every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ there exists an element $`\mu S`$ and integers $`p,q\{0\}`$ such that $`\lambda ^p=\mu ^q`$.

Then there exists a finite subgroup $`W\overline{K}^{}`$ and a finite subset $`S^{}\overline{K}^{}`$ such that for every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ there exists an element $`\alpha S^{}`$, an integer $`N`$ and an element $`wW`$ such that $`\alpha ^Nw=\lambda `$.

Moreover, the set $`S^{}`$ can be chosen in such a way that none of its elements is a root of unity.

###### Proof.

For each element $`\mu S`$ which is not a root of unity we choose an element $`\alpha _\mu \overline{K}^{}`$ such that

$$(\alpha _\mu )^{2\rho _K(\mu )}=\mu .$$

Let $`S^{}`$ be the set of all these elements $`\alpha _\mu `$. Evidently none of these elements $`\alpha _\mu `$ is a root of unity. Let $`L`$ denote the field generated by $`K`$ and the elements of $`S^{}`$. Note that $`L`$ is a finitely generated field. Let $`L_0`$ denote the algebraic closure of $``$ in $`L`$. Then $`L_0`$ is a number field. Let $`d_0`$ denote its degree (over $``$). Recall that for any natural number, in particular for $`2d_0`$, there are only finitely many roots of unity of degree not greater than this number. Let $`W`$ be the set of all roots of unity $`w`$ in $`\overline{K}^{}`$ for which $`\mathrm{deg}(L(w)/L)2`$. Then $`\mathrm{deg}(w)2d_0`$ for every $`wW`$. Therefore $`W`$ is is a finite group. By construction it contains every root of unity which is in $`L(\lambda )`$ for some $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

Now choose an arbitrary element $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$. If $`\lambda `$ is a root of unity, it is contained in $`W`$ implying that $`\lambda =\alpha ^0w`$ for $`w=\lambda `$ and $`\alpha `$ arbitrary. Thus we may assume that $`\lambda `$ is not a root of unity. There are integers $`p,q\{0\}`$ and an element $`\mu S`$ such that $`\lambda ^p=\mu ^q`$. Since $`\lambda `$ is not a root of unity, this implies that neither $`\mu `$ can be a root of unity. Thus $`\rho _K(\mu )<\mathrm{}`$ (lemma 3) and there is an element $`\alpha _\mu S^{}`$ with $`\alpha _\mu ^{2\rho _K(\mu )}=\mu `$.

By lemma 4 the equality $`\mu ^q=\lambda ^p`$ implies

$$\frac{q}{p}\rho _{K(\lambda )}(\mu ).$$

Thanks to lemma 5 we know that either $`\rho _{K(\lambda )}(\mu )=\rho _K(\mu )`$ or $`\rho _{K(\lambda )}(\mu )=2\rho _K(\mu )`$. In both cases it follows that

$$2\frac{q}{p}\rho _K(\mu ).$$

In other words, there is an integer $`N`$ such that $`2q\rho _K(\mu )=pN`$. Therefore

$$(\alpha _\mu ^N)^p=\alpha _\mu ^{pN}=\alpha _\mu ^{2q\rho _K(\mu )}=\mu ^q=\lambda ^p.$$

Hence $`\left(\alpha _\mu ^N\lambda \right)^p=1`$. Let $`w=\alpha _\mu ^N\lambda `$. Then $`w`$ is a root of unity which is contained in the field $`L(\lambda )`$. It follows that $`wW`$. Thus we have verified that there exist elements $`\alpha S^{}`$, $`N`$ and $`wW`$ such that $`\alpha ^Nw=\lambda `$. ∎

### 2.5. Proof of theorem 1

###### Proof.

If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a Zariski-dense subgroup of $`SL_2()`$, then $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ contains a finitely generated torsion-free subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ which is still Zariski-dense (see , lemma 1.7.12 and Prop. 1.7.2). Fix a finite set $`E`$ of generators of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$. Let $`k`$ be the field generated by all the matrix coefficients of elements of $`E`$. Then $`k`$ is a finitely generated extension field of $``$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0SL_2(k)`$.

Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ be the set of all complex numbers other than $`1`$ and $`1`$ occuring as an eigenvalue for an element $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$. We observe that a number $`\lambda ^{}\{1,1\}`$ is contained in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ if and only if there exists an element $`A\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ such that $`Tr(A)=\lambda +\lambda ^1`$. Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ is Zariski dense, the set

$$\{Tr(A):A\mathrm{\Gamma }_0\}$$

is Zariski dense in $``$. It follows that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is an infinite set.

We claim that $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ contains no root of unity. Indeed, assume that a root of unity $`\omega `$ is contained in $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. Then $`\omega 1,1`$ and consequently $`\omega \omega ^1`$. Therefore every element $`ASL_2()`$ with $`\omega `$ as an eigenvalue is conjugate to

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\omega & \\ & \omega ^1\end{array}\right).$$

As a consequence, such a matrix $`A`$ is of finite order. This contradicts the assumption that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ is torsion-free. Thus $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can not contain any root of unity.

Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ denote the set of all complex numbers which are roots of unity. As remarked before, the notion of “multiplicative dependence” defines an equivalence relation on $`^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }`$.

Let us assume that the statement of the theorem fails. Since $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and since “multiplicative dependence” defines an equivalence relation on $`^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, it follows that there is a finite set $`S`$ and complex numbers $`(\mu _i)_{iS}^{}\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ such that for every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ there exists an index $`iS`$ and non-zero integers $`p,q\{0\}`$ with $`\lambda ^p=\mu _i^q`$.

Let $`K`$ denote the field generated by $`k`$ and all the elements $`\mu _i`$ ($`iS)`$. Recall that every element of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is an eigen value for a matrix in $`SL_2(k)SL_2(K)`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{deg}(K(\lambda )/K)2`$ for every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

We may now invoke proposition 1.

Thus we obtain the following statement: There are finitely many complex numbers $`(\alpha _i)_{iS}`$, none of which is a root of unity, and a finite subgroup $`W`$ of the multiplicative group $`^{}`$ such that for every $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ there are $`iS`$, $`n`$ and $`wW`$ such that $`\lambda =\alpha _i^nw`$.

By adjoining all the elements of $`W`$ to $`K`$, we also may deduce that in this case there exists a finitely generated field $`L`$ containing all the $`\alpha _i`$ ($`iS`$) and all $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`wW`$.

Let $`\lambda \mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\zeta S`$, $`q\{0\}`$ and $`w_0W`$ such that $`\lambda =w_0\alpha _\zeta ^q`$.

Then, after replacing $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ by $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }g^1`$ for an appropriately chosen $`gSL_2()`$, we obtain

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_0\gamma =\left(\begin{array}{cc}\lambda & \\ & \lambda ^1\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}w_0\alpha _\zeta ^q& \\ & w_0^1\alpha _\zeta ^q\end{array}\right).$$

By the assumption of Zariski density $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ must also contain an element $`\delta \mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ which does not commute with $`\gamma `$. Let

$$\delta =\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& c\\ b& d\end{array}\right)$$

be such an element. By the assumption of Zariski density of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ we may and do require that $`a,d0`$.

Let $`g_n=\gamma ^n\delta `$ for $`n`$.

Using lemma 1, we conclude that there exists a natural number $`N`$, an infinite subset $`A`$, an index $`\xi `$, an element $`\stackrel{~}{w}W`$ and sequences of non-zero integers $`m_k,m_k^{}\{0\}`$ such that $`\stackrel{~}{w}\alpha _\xi ^{m_k}`$ resp. $`\stackrel{~}{w}\alpha _\xi ^{m_k^{}}`$ is an eigenvalue of $`g_k`$ resp. $`g_{k+N}`$ for all $`kA`$. Moreover, we may assume that all the numbers $`m_k`$ and $`m_k^{}`$ have the same sign.

Since $`w_0`$ is a root of unity, we may invoke the pigeon-hole principle in order to deduce that (by replacing $`A`$ with an appropriate smaller set) we may assume that there is an element $`w_1W`$ such that $`w_0^k=w_1`$ for all $`kA`$. Let $`w_2=w_1w_0^N`$. Then $`w_2=w_0^{k+N}`$ for all $`k`$.

Now recall that for an element $`gSL_2()`$ with eigenvalues $`\lambda ,\lambda ^1`$ we have $`Tr(g)=\lambda +\lambda ^1`$.

It follows that

(1)
$$Tr(\gamma ^k\delta )=w_1\alpha _\zeta ^{qk}a+w_1^1\alpha _\zeta ^{qk}d=\stackrel{~}{w}\alpha _\xi ^{m_k}+\stackrel{~}{w}^1\alpha _\xi ^{m_k}$$

and

(2)
$$Tr(\gamma ^{k+N}\delta )=w_2\alpha _\zeta ^{q(k+N)}a+w_2^1\alpha _\zeta ^{q(k+N)}d=\stackrel{~}{w}\alpha _\xi ^{m_k^{}}+\stackrel{~}{w}^1\alpha _\xi ^{m_k^{}}$$

for all $`kA`$.

Recall that $`\alpha _\zeta `$ is contained in the finitely generated field $`L`$ and is not a root of unity. Therefore there exists an absolute value $`||`$ on $`L`$ such that $`|\alpha _\zeta |1`$. In what follows, $`||`$ always denotes this (possibly non-archimedean) absolute value on $`L`$.

Using $`|\alpha _\zeta |1`$ and $`a,d,q0`$ we obtain

$$\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}\left|w_1\alpha _\zeta ^{qk}a+w_1^1\alpha _\zeta ^{qk}d\right|=+\mathrm{}$$

Combined with eq. (1), this yields

$$\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}\left|\stackrel{~}{w}\alpha _\xi ^{m_k}+\stackrel{~}{w}^1\alpha _\xi ^{m_k}\right|=+\mathrm{}$$

This is only possible if $`|\alpha _\xi |1`$.

Without loss of generality we may assume that $`|\alpha _\zeta |,|\alpha _\xi |>1`$, $`q>0`$ and $`m_k,m_k^{}>0`$ for all $`kA`$.

Then

$$\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}\alpha _\zeta ^{qk}=0=\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}\alpha _\xi ^{m_k}=\underset{k\mathrm{}}{lim}\alpha _\xi ^{m_k^{}}.$$

It follows that the quotient of the respective left hand sides of the equations (2) and (1) converges to $`\alpha _\zeta ^{qN}\frac{w_2}{w_1}`$. Evidently the quotient of the respective right hand sides converges to the same value. Hence:

$$\alpha _\zeta ^{qN}\frac{w_2}{w_1}=\underset{k\mathrm{},kA}{lim}\alpha _\xi ^{m_k^{}m_k}$$

The set $`\{\alpha _\xi ^n:n\}`$ is discrete in $`L^{}`$, because $`|\alpha _\xi |1`$. Therefore

$$\alpha _\zeta ^{qN}\frac{w_2}{w_1}=\alpha _\xi ^{m_k^{}m_k}$$

for all sufficiently large $`k`$ in $`A`$.

Recall that $`q,N0`$ and $`w_1,w_2W`$. It follows that $`\alpha _\zeta `$ and $`\alpha _\xi `$ are multiplicatively dependent. But we assumed the numbers $`(\alpha _j)_{jS}`$ to be multiplicatively independent. Therefore $`\xi =\zeta `$.

By considering the quotient of the right hand side of eq. (1) and its left hand side, we obtain:

$$1=\underset{k\mathrm{},kA}{lim}\frac{\stackrel{~}{w}}{w_1a}\alpha _\xi ^{m_kqk}$$

Therefore:

(3)
$$a=\underset{k\mathrm{},kA}{lim}\frac{\stackrel{~}{w}}{w_1}\alpha _\xi ^{m_kqk}$$

and consequently

$$a=\frac{\stackrel{~}{w}}{w_1}\alpha _\xi ^{m_kqk}$$

for all sufficiently large $`k`$ in $`A`$.

Together with eq. (1) this implies that

$$w_1\alpha _\xi ^{qk}a=\stackrel{~}{w}\alpha _\xi ^{m_k}\text{ and }w_1^1\alpha _\xi ^{qk}d=\stackrel{~}{w}^1\alpha _\xi ^{m_k}$$

Combining these two equalities we obtain $`ad=1`$. Now recall that $`\delta `$ was an arbitrarily chosen element in the intersection of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ with the Zariski open subset

$$\mathrm{\Omega }=\{A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& c\\ b& d\end{array}\right)SL_2:a,d0,A\gamma \gamma A\}.$$

Note that the condition $`A\gamma =\gamma A`$ implies that $`A`$ is a diagonal matrix and therefore implies that $`ad=1`$.

Thus we have deduced: Every element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ is contained in the algebraic subvariety

$$\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& c\\ b& d\end{array}\right)SL_2:ad=1\text{ or }ad=0\}.$$

But this contradicts the assumption that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_0`$ is Zariski-dense. ∎

### 2.6. On the absolute values of eigenvalues

For our main goal (i.e. studying elliptic curves in quotients of $`SL_2()`$) we need only to consider the eigenvalues. However, from the point of view of possible applications to the study of geodesic length spectra of real hyperbolic manifolds (see section 6 below) it might be interesting to deduce a similar result for the absolute values of the eigenvalues. This is the purpose of this subsection.

###### Proposition 2.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a subgroup of $`SL_2()`$ which is dense in the algebraic Zariski topology.

Then there exists infinitely many pairwise multiplicatively independent positive real numbers which occur as the absolute value of an eigenvalue for an element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Proof.

First we note that $`|z|=\sqrt{z\overline{z}}`$ for any complex number. Using this fact, it is clear that for every finitely generated subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of $`SL_2()`$ there is a finitely generated field $`k`$ such that every absolute value of an eigenvalue for an element of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is contained in a finite extension field of degree at most $`4`$ over $`k`$: We just have to take $`k`$ to be the extension field of $``$ generated by all the coefficients and their complex conjugates for all elements in some fixed finite set of generators for $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Thus the arguments in the proof of the preceding theorem can be applied to deduce the following conclusion:

Either the statement of the proposition holds,

or (after conjugation with an appropriate element of $`SL_2()`$) we have

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)SL_2():|ad|\{0,1\}\}.$$

The condition $`|ad|\{0,1\}`$ is equivalent to $`|ad|^2\{0,1\}`$ which is a real algebraic condition.

Hence we have to discuss the real algebraic Zariski topology. This is the topology whose closed sets are given as the zero sets of polynomials in the complex coordinates and their complex conjugates.

Since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is Zariski-dense, the real Zariski-closure $`S`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in $`SL_2()`$ is either the whole of $`SL_2()`$ or a real form of $`SL_2()`$. Now $`|ad|^2\{0,1\}`$ defines a real algebraic subset of $`SL_2()`$. Hence the real Zariski closure $`S`$ of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ cannot be the whole of $`SL_2()`$. Furthermore, since $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is discrete and infinite, $`S`$ cannot be compact. Thus $`S`$ must be conjugate to $`SL_2()`$. However, this leads to a contradiction thanks to the lemma below. ∎

###### Lemma 6.

There is no element $`ASL_2()`$ such that

$$ASL_2()A^1\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)SL_2():|ad|\{0,1\}\}$$

###### Proof.

Let $`\rho :SL_2()`$ denote the function given by

$$\rho \left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)=|ad|.$$

Now let us assume that the assertion of the lemma is wrong. In other words: we assume that there exists an element

$$A=\left(\begin{array}{cc}x& y\\ z& w\end{array}\right)SL_2()$$

such that $`\rho (g)\{0,1\}`$ for every $`gASL_2()A^1`$.

Since $`SL_2()`$ is connected, this implies that $`\rho `$ is constant, and its value either $`0`$ or $`1`$.

However, $`\rho `$ cannot be constantly zero, because $`|ad|=0`$ is equivalent to $`ad=0`$ and this is a complex algebraic condition. Thus $`\{gSL_2():\rho (g)=0\}`$ is a complex algebraic subvariety and therefore cannot contain the group $`ASL_2()A^1`$ which is dense in $`SL_2()`$ with respect to the complex Zariski topology.

This leaves the case where $`\rho `$ is constantly $`1`$.

Here explicit calculations show the following:

$$\rho \left(A\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& t\\ 0& 1\end{array}\right)A^1\right)=|1(txz)^2|,$$

and

$$\rho \left(A\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 0\\ t& 1\end{array}\right)A^1\right)=|1(tyw)^2|$$

Thus $`xz`$ and $`yw`$ are complex numbers with the property that

$$|1(txz)^2|=1=|1(tyw)^2|$$

for every real number $`t`$. This implies $`xz=yw=0`$. But now

$`\rho \left(A\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 0\end{array}\right)A^1\right)`$ $`=|(xwywxz)(yz+yw+xz)|`$
$`=|xwyz|=01`$
and we obtain a contradiction to the assumption that $`\rho (ABA^1)=1`$ for all $`BSL_2()`$. ∎

## 3. Equivalence of elliptic curves

### 3.1. Isogeny criteria

An elliptic curve is a one-dimensional abelian variety, or, equivalently a projective smooth algebraic curve of genus 1 (with a basepoint). There are two natural equivalence relations between elliptic curves: isomorphism (as algebraic variety) or isogeny. Two varieties $`V`$ and $`W`$ are isogenous if there exists a variety $`Z`$ and unramified coverings $`\pi :ZV`$, $`\rho :ZW`$.

Over the field of complex numbers, every elliptic curve can be realized as the complex quotient manifold $`/1,\tau _{}`$ where $`\tau H^+=\{z:\mathrm{}(z)>0\}`$. Two elements $`\tau ,\tau ^{}H^+`$ define isomorphic resp. isogenous elliptic curves if both are contained in the same $`SL_2()`$\- resp. $`GL_2^+()`$-orbit for the action on $`H^+`$ given by

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right):z\frac{az+b}{cz+d}.$$

Here $`GL_2^+()`$ denotes the subgroup of $`GL_2()`$ containing all elements with positive determinant.

We need some reformulations of these criteria.

###### Lemma 7.

Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be lattices in $``$, and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}=\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Consider the natural map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}_{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{}`$ induced by the inclusion maps $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

Then $`/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ are isogenous iff $`dim_{}\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Phi }>0`$.

###### Proof.

We may assume $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=1,\tau _{}`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1,\sigma _{}`$. The kernel $`\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is positive-dimensional iff there is a linear relation

$$a+b\tau +c\sigma +d\tau \sigma =0$$

with $`(a,b,c,d)^4\{(0,0,0,0)\}`$. Using $`\sigma ,\tau H^+`$, one verifies that

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)GL_2^+().$$

Thus

$$\sigma =\frac{a+b\tau }{c+d\tau }=\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right)(\tau ),$$

i.e. $`dim\mathrm{ker}\mathrm{\Phi }>0`$ iff $`\tau `$ and $`\sigma `$ are contained in the same $`GL_2^+()`$-orbit. ∎

###### Lemma 8.

For a lattice $`\alpha ,\beta _{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ let $`K_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ denote the subfield of $``$ given by $`K_\mathrm{\Lambda }=(\alpha /\beta )`$.

Then $`K_\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ depends only on $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and not of the choice of the basis $`(\alpha ,\beta )`$.

Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ be lattices in $``$.

If $`trdegK_\mathrm{\Lambda }/>0`$, then $`/\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and $`/\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}`$ are isogenous elliptic curves if and only if $`K_\mathrm{\Lambda }=K_{\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}}`$.

###### Proof.

The independence of the choice of the basis is easily verified.

Furthermore, without loss of generality we may assume $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=1,\tau `$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\mathrm{\Lambda }}=1,\sigma `$ for some $`\tau ,\sigma H^+`$. Now the statement follows from the fact that for transcendental complex numbers $`\tau ,\sigma `$ we have $`(\tau )=(\sigma )`$ iff there are rational numbers $`a,b,c,d`$ such that $`\tau =(a+b\sigma )/(c+d\sigma )`$.

Thus $`(\tau )=(\sigma )`$ iff $`\sigma `$ and $`\tau `$ are in the same $`GL_2^+()`$-orbit in $`H^+`$. ∎

### 3.2. Conjectures

We now formulate a conjecture about an isogeny criterion for certain elliptic curves:

###### Conjecture 1.

Let $`\alpha _1,\alpha _2`$ be algebraic numbers with $`|\alpha _i|>1`$. Let $`E_i`$ be the quotient manifold $`^{}/\{\alpha _i^k:k\}`$.

Then $`E_1`$ and $`E_2`$ are isogenous if and only if $`\alpha _1`$, $`\alpha _2`$ are multiplicatively dependent (in the sense of def. Definition).

Note that $`/1,\tau ^{}/e^{2\pi i\tau }`$ for $`\tau H^+`$. Thus for $`\sigma ,\tau H^+`$ the condition “$`e^{2\pi i\sigma }`$ and $`e^{2\pi i\tau }`$ are multiplicatively dependent” translates into: “There exists $`a^+`$, $`b`$ such that $`\sigma =a\tau +b`$”.

Therefore we can reformulate the above conjecture into terms of group actions on the upper half plane $`H^+`$.

###### Conjecture 2.

Let

$$B^+()=\{\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ 0& a^1\end{array}\right):a^+,b\}$$

and let $`\sigma ,\tau H^+`$ be contained in the same $`GL_2^+()`$-orbit.

Assume that both $`e^{2\pi i\sigma }`$ and $`e^{2\pi i\tau }`$ are algebraic. Then $`\sigma `$ and $`\tau `$ are already contained in the same $`B^+()`$-orbit.

Next we prove that these two equivalent conjectures of ours are true provided the famous Schanuels conjecture is right.

###### Proposition 3.

Conjecture 1 holds, if Schanuels conjecture is true.

Schanuels Conjecture is the far-reaching conjecture from transcendental number theory which encompasses many important conjecture in this area. It states the following:

###### Schanuel’s Conjecture.

If $`x_1,\mathrm{},x_n`$ are $``$-linearly independent complex numbers, then the transcendence degree of $`(x_1,\mathrm{},x_n,e^{x_1},\mathrm{},e^{x_n})`$ over $``$ is at least $`n`$.

Now we prove the proposition.

###### Proof.

Indeed, let $`x_1=2\pi i`$, $`x_2=\mathrm{log}\alpha _1`$, $`x_3=\mathrm{log}\alpha _2`$. Schanuels conjecture then implies that either

1. $`dim_{}2\pi i,\mathrm{log}\alpha _1,\mathrm{log}\alpha _22`$, or
2. $`2\pi i,\mathrm{log}\alpha _1,\mathrm{log}\alpha _2`$ are all three algebraically independent.

Since $`\mathrm{}\mathrm{log}\alpha _i=\mathrm{log}|\alpha _i|>0`$ (recall that we assumed $`|\alpha _i|>1`$) for $`i=1,2`$, in the first case there exist integers $`n,m\{0\}`$ such that $`\alpha _1^n=\alpha _2^m`$, i.e. $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$ are multiplicatively dependent.

In the second case we can conclude that $`\mathrm{log}\alpha _1/2\pi i`$ and $`\mathrm{log}\alpha _2/2\pi i`$ are both transcendental and $`(\mathrm{log}\alpha _1/2\pi i)(\mathrm{log}\alpha _2/2\pi i)`$. Hence $`^{}/\alpha _1`$ is not isogenous to $`^{}/\alpha _2`$ in this case.

Thus we have shown that either $`\alpha _1`$ and $`\alpha _2`$ are multiplicatively dependent, or $`^{}/\alpha _1`$ must be isogenous to $`^{}/\alpha _2`$. ∎

###### Remark.

Actually we do not use Schanuels conjecture in its full strength, but only a special case of it. However, even the special statement we need is not yet proven.

## 4. Elliptic Curves in $`SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a discrete cocompact subgroup of $`SL_2()`$ and $`X=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ the quotient manifold. We are interested in elliptic curves embedded into $`X`$. Every elliptic curve embedded into $`X`$ is an orbit of a reductive Lie subgroup $`H`$ of $`SL_2()`$ with $`H^{}`$ (see ). Conversely, if $`H`$ is a Lie subgroup of $`SL_2()`$ with $`H^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\#}\left(H\mathrm{\Gamma }\right)=\mathrm{}`$, then $`H/(H\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ is an elliptic curve embedded into $`X`$ as an $`H`$-orbit. If $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is an element of infinite order in a discrete cocompact subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, then $`\gamma `$ is a semisimple element of $`SL_2()`$, and the connected component of the centralizer

$$C(\gamma )=\{gSL_2():g\gamma =\gamma g\}$$

is such a Lie subgroup of $`SL_2()`$ which has an elliptic curve as a closed orbit in $`X`$. Moreover this elliptic curve is isogenous to the quotient manifold of $`^{}`$ by the infinite cyclic subgroup generated by $`\lambda `$ where $`\lambda `$ is an eigenvalue of $`\gamma SL_2()`$.

These facts (for which we refer to ) establish the relationship between isogeny classes of elliptic curves embedded in $`X`$ on one side and eigenvalues of elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ on the other side.

###### Proposition 4.

If conjecture 1 holds, then for every discrete cocompact subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ there exist infinitely many isogeny classes of elliptic curves embedded in $`X=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Proof.

If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is discrete and cocompact in $`SL_2()`$, then it must be Zariski-dense. Hence by thm. 1 there are infinitely many complex numbers $`\lambda _1,\lambda _2,\mathrm{}`$ which are pairwise multiplicatively independent and which occur as eigenvalue for elements $`\gamma _1,\gamma _2,\mathrm{}`$ in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Being multiplicatively independent implies in particular that none of these numbers $`\lambda _i`$ is a root of unity.

Furthermore, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is conjugate to a subgroup of $`SL_2(k)`$ for some number field $`k`$ (see , Thm. 7.67), hence all the numbers $`\lambda _i`$ are algebraic numbers.

Let $`H_i`$ be the centralizer of $`\gamma _i`$ in $`SL_2()`$. An element of $`SL_2()`$ with an eigenvalue different from $`1`$ and $`1`$ is semisimple. Hence $`H_i^{}`$. Now $`H_i\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is discrete and contains the element $`\gamma _i`$. Because $`\lambda _i`$ is not a root of unity, $`\gamma _i`$ is of infinite order. It follows that $`\gamma _i`$ and that $`H_i/(\mathrm{\Gamma }H_i)`$ is an elliptic curve which is isogenous to $`^{}/\lambda _i`$.

Thus the quotients $`H_i/(\mathrm{\Gamma }H_i)`$ are elliptic curves embedded in $`X=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and, provided conj. 1 holds, these elliptic curves are pairwise non-isogenous since the $`\lambda _i`$ are pairwise multiplicatively independent. ∎

In particular:

###### Corollary 2.

If Schanuel’s conjecture holds, then for every discrete cocompact subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ there exists infinitely many isogeny classes of elliptic curves embedded in $`X=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

### 4.1. The case where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ is Zariski dense

###### Theorem 2.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a discrete subgroup of $`SL_2()`$ and assume that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ is Zariski-dense in $`SL_2`$.

Then there exists infinitely many isogeny classes of elliptic curves embedded in $`X=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

###### Proof.

By thm. 1 there are infinitely many pairwise multiplicatively independent complex numbers $`\lambda _i`$ occuring as eigenvalues for elements $`\gamma \mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$. None of these $`\lambda _i`$ is a root of unity.

If $`\lambda `$ is an eigenvalue for a matrix $`SL_2()`$, then either $`\lambda `$ is real or $`|\lambda |=1`$. If $`\lambda `$ is an eigenvalue for an element of a discrete subgroup of $`SL_2()`$ with $`|\lambda |=1`$, then $`\lambda `$ must be a root of unity.

Since none of the $`\lambda _i`$ is a root of unity, it follows that all the numbers $`\lambda _i`$ are real.

Thus there are infinitely many elliptic curves $`E_i`$ in $`X=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which are isogenous to $`^{}/\lambda _i`$ where the numbers $`\lambda _i`$ are all real and pairwise multiplicatively independent.

We claim that at most two of these $`E_i`$ can be isogenous. Assume the converse, i.e., let $`\lambda _i`$, $`\lambda _j`$ and $`\lambda _k`$ be pairwise multiplicatively independent real numbers larger than $`1`$ such that the three elliptic curves $`E_i`$, $`E_j`$ and $`E_k`$ are all isogenous.

Note that $`E_i=/2\pi i,\mathrm{log}\lambda _i`$ and similarily for $`E_j`$ and $`E_k`$. Isogeny of $`E_i`$ and $`E_j`$ implies that there is a $``$-linear relation between $`4\pi ^2`$, $`\mathrm{log}\lambda _i\mathrm{log}\lambda _j`$, $`2\pi i\mathrm{log}\lambda _i`$ and $`2\pi i\mathrm{log}\lambda _j`$ (see lemma 7). Now $`4\pi ^2`$ and $`\mathrm{log}\lambda _i\mathrm{log}\lambda _j`$, while $`2\pi i\mathrm{log}\lambda _i`$ and $`2\pi i\mathrm{log}\lambda _j`$ are $``$-linearly independent elements of $`i`$. Therefore a $``$-linear relation can only exists if $`4\pi ^2/(\mathrm{log}\lambda _i\mathrm{log}\lambda _j)`$.

Similarily the existence of an isogeny of between $`E_j`$ and $`E_k`$ implies $`4\pi ^2/(\mathrm{log}\lambda _j\mathrm{log}\lambda _k)`$.

Combined, this yields $`(\mathrm{log}\lambda _i\mathrm{log}\lambda _j)/(\mathrm{log}\lambda _j\mathrm{log}\lambda _k)=\mathrm{log}\lambda _i/\mathrm{log}\lambda _k`$ which contradicts the assumption of $`\lambda _i`$ and $`\lambda _k`$ being multiplicatively independent.

This proves the claim.

Thus we obtain an infinite family of elliptic curves in $`SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ such that for each of these curves there is at most one other curve in this family to which it is isogenous. It follows that there are infinitely many isogeny classes. ∎

## 5. Existence of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for which $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ is cocompact in $`SL_2()`$

From a differential geometric point of view the torsion-free discrete cocompact subgroups of $`SL_2()`$ are precisely those groups which occur as fundamental group of compact real hyperbolic threefolds $`M`$. The condition that $`\mathrm{\Gamma }SL_2()`$ is cocompact in $`SL_2()`$ translates into the condition that there is a real hyperbolic surface geodesically embedded into $`M`$.

However, we use a different point of view to show the existence of such $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. There is an arithmetic way to produce discrete cocompact subgroups in $`SL_2()`$ which we employ.

This arithmetic construction (see e.g.) is the following: Let $`K`$ be either $``$ or a totally imaginary quadratic extension of $``$, $`\overline{K}`$ the unique archimedean completion of $`K`$, $`L/K`$ a quadratic extension, $`\lambda K^{}`$ such that $`\lambda N_{L/K}(L^{})`$. Then a central simple $`K`$-algebra can be defined by $`A=\{a+bt:a,bL\}`$ with multiplication given by $`at=ta^\sigma `$ (for $`Gal(L/K)=\{id,\sigma \}`$) and $`t^2=\lambda `$. The elements of norm one constitute a $`K`$-anisotropic simple $`K`$-group $`S`$. Now $`S(𝒪_K)`$ becomes a discrete cocompact subgroup of $`S(\overline{K})`$. If $`\overline{K}=`$, then $`S(\overline{K})=SL_2()`$ if $`AMat(2,)`$ and $`S(\overline{K})=SU(2)`$ if $`A`$ is isomorphic to the algebra of quaternions.

We use this in the following way: Let $`F_1=[\sqrt{2}]`$, $`F_2=[i]`$, $`F_3=[i,\sqrt{2}]`$ and $`p=5`$. We observe that the prime ideal $`(5)`$ splits in $`F_2`$: $`5=(2+i)(2i)`$. Now $`(2+i)`$ is prime in $`[i]`$ and both residue class fields for $`5`$ in $``$ resp. $`2+i`$ (or $`2i`$) in $`[i]`$ are isomorphic to the finite field $`𝔽_5=/5`$. Note that $`2`$ is not a square in $`𝔽_5`$. As a consequence the prime ideals $`(5)`$ and $`(2+i)`$ (and similarily for $`(2i)`$) are totally inert with respect to the the field extensions $`[\sqrt{2}]/`$ resp. $`[i,\sqrt{2}]/[i]`$. It follows that $`5`$ is not contained in the image of the norm for either the field extension $`[i,\sqrt{2}]/[i]`$ or the field extension $`[\sqrt{2}]/`$.

Thus we may use the above construction with

$$(K,L,\lambda )=([i],[i,\sqrt{2}],5)$$

resp. $`=(,[\sqrt{2}],5)`$ to obtain a discrete cocompact subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ resp. $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1`$ in $`S()SL_2()`$ resp. $`S()`$. Evidently $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_1=\mathrm{\Gamma }S()`$. Now observe that $`[\sqrt{2}]`$ implies $`AMat(2,)`$. Thus $`S()SL_2()`$.

We have thus established:

###### Proposition 5.

There exists a discrete subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in $`SL_2()`$ such that both $`SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ and $`SL_2()/(SL_2()\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ are compact.

In combination with thm. 2 this implies the following:

###### Corollary 3.

There exists a discrete cocompact subgroup $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ in $`SL_2()`$ such that the complex quotient manifold $`X=SL_2()/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ contains infinitely many pairwise non-isogenous elliptic curves.

## 6. Geodesic length spectra for hyperbolic manifolds

Here we want to relate our results on eigenvalues of elements of discrete groups to the study of closed geodesics on real hyperbolic manifolds (As standard references for hyperbolic manifolds, see ,).

A real hyperbolic manifold is a complete Riemannian manifold with constant curvature $`1`$. In each dimension $`n`$ there is a unique simply-connected real hyperbolic manifold $`H^n`$.

Let $`=\{z+wj:z,w\}`$ denote the division algebra of quaternions, i.e., the algebra given by $`j^2=1`$ and $`zj=j\overline{z}`$ for all $`z`$.

Now $`H^2`$ can be realized as $`H^2\{z+tj:z,t^+\}`$ and $`H^3`$ as $`H^3\{z+tj,z,t^+\}`$. In both cases the hyperbolic metric is obtained from the euclidean metric by multiplication with $`1/t`$. Let $`\rho `$ denote the induced distance function.

The isometry group $`G`$ of $`H^2`$ resp. $`H^3`$ is $`PSL_2()`$ resp. $`PSL_2()`$ with the action given by

$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}a& b\\ c& d\end{array}\right):\zeta (a\zeta +b)(c\zeta +d)^1$$

where the calculations take place in the algebra of quaternions.

Explicit calculations show that for any $`AG`$ we have

$$\underset{xH}{inf}\rho (x,Ax)=\mathrm{log}(\mathrm{max}\{|\lambda |^2,|\lambda ^2|\})$$

where the infimum is taken over all points of $`H^2`$ resp. $`H^3`$ and $`(\lambda ,\lambda ^1)`$ are the roots of the characteristic polynomial of $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ where $`\stackrel{~}{A}`$ is an element of $`SL_2()`$ which projects onto $`AGPSL_2()=SL_2()/\{I,I\}`$.

For a complete Riemannian manifold with strictly negative curvature there is a unique closed geodesic for every element of the fundamental group.

Therefore: If $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a torsion-free discrete subgroup of $`G`$ then the set of lengths of closed geodesics of $`H/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ coincides with the set of logarithms of absolute values of squares of eigenvalues of elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$.

Moreover, if $`H=H^3`$, one can show that the logarithm of the eigenvalue of an element $`g\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the “complex length” of the corresponding closed geodesic in the following sense: Let $`\gamma `$ be a closed geodesic in a compact hyperbolic $`3`$-fold $`M`$. Let $`s`$ be the length of $`\gamma `$ in the usual sense. If we fix a point $`p\gamma `$, then the holonomy along $`\gamma `$ defines an orthogonal transformation of the normal space $`T_p(M)/T_p(\gamma )`$. This normal space is isomorphic to $`^2`$, thus an orthogonal transformation is simply a rotation by an angle $`\theta `$. Now the “complex length” of $`\gamma `$ is defined to be $`s+i\theta `$ ().

The set of all real resp. complex numbers occuring as (complex) length for a closed geodesic is denoted as (complex) geodesic length spectrum. (In the literature, usually multiplicities are taken into account, and sometimes only simple closed geodesics are considered. For our point of interest (the $``$-linear independence of geodesic lengths) these distinctions are of no relevance.)

Therefore we obtain:

###### Proposition 6.

Assume that $`M`$ is a compact real hyperbolic $`3`$-manifold. Then there exist infinitely many closed geodesics on $`M`$ such that their complex lengths are pairwise $``$-linearly independent.

Using the results of §2.4. on the absolute values of the eigenvalues we also obtain:

###### Theorem 3.

Let $`M`$ be a compact real hyperbolic manifold of dimension two or three and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ its geodesic length spectrum.

Then $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ contains infinitely many pairwise $``$-linearly independent elements.

Another consequence is the following:

###### Corollary 4.

Let $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ be a Zariski-dense subgroup in $`SL_2()`$.

Then there exist two elements $`\gamma _1,\gamma _2\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with respective eigenvalues $`\lambda _1,\lambda _2`$ such that the numbers $`|\mathrm{log}\lambda _1|,|\mathrm{log}\lambda _2|`$ generate a dense subgroup of the additive group $`(,+)`$.

There is a related a result of Benoist () which implies that the subgroup of $`(,+)`$ generated by all the logarithms of the absolute values of eigenvalues of elements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is dense. Thus, for $`SL_2()`$ and $`SL_2()`$ we can improve this result of Benoist. However, Benoist’s work applies to other semisimple Lie groups as well, where our results concern only $`SL_2()`$ and $`SL_2()`$.


format: text

text:
# What is entanglement?

## 1 What states of light are real?

I shall begin with the following

###### Conjecture 1

Real states of light have a positive Wigner function.

Probably the reader does not believe that this conjecture may be true. Therefore I shall rewrite it in a more acceptable form:

###### Conjecture 2

In all experiments where the conventional quantum interpretation involves states of light with negative Wigner functions, the interpretation would require only positive Wigner functions if all sources of noise, and other nonidealities, are taken into account.

### 1.1 The quantum states of light and their Wigner representation

The ”states” which form the basis for the quantum optical description of the light field are the Fock states, which are generated by applying the creation operators $`\widehat{a}_{𝐤,\lambda }^{}`$ to the hilbert-space vector

$$|0=\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}|0_{𝐤,\lambda },$$
(1)
which represents the vacuum. The whole Fock space is then spanned by the set of vectors

$$|\{n_{𝐤,\lambda }\}=\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}|n_{𝐤,\lambda }=\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}\frac{1}{\sqrt{n_{𝐤,\lambda }!}}(\widehat{a}_{𝐤,\lambda }^{})^{n_{𝐤,\lambda }}|0_{𝐤,\lambda },$$
(2)
which represents a state having $`n_{𝐤,\lambda }`$ photons of wave number k and polarization $`\lambda `$. The latter index takes either the value 1 or 2. The most general pure state is a superposition of these, that is

$$|\mathrm{\Phi }=\varphi (\{n_{𝐤,\lambda }\})|\{n_{𝐤,\lambda }\},|\varphi |^2=1.$$
(3)
The full set of quantum states is obtained by extending the set $`|\mathrm{\Phi }`$ to mixtures of the form

$$\widehat{\rho }=|\mathrm{\Phi }P_\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Phi }|,\mathrm{\hspace{0.33em}0}P_\mathrm{\Phi }1,P_\mathrm{\Phi }=1.$$

The Wigner function of this state is defined as

$$W_\rho (\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})=Tr\left[\widehat{\rho }\widehat{W}(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})\right],$$
(4)
where $`\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\}`$ are a set of complex variables, representing the amplitudes of the radiation modes, and

$$\widehat{W}(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})=\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}\frac{1}{\pi ^2}\mathrm{exp}\left[\xi _{𝐤,\lambda }(\widehat{a}_{𝐤,\lambda }^{}\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }^{})\xi _{𝐤,\lambda }^{}(\widehat{a}_{𝐤,\lambda }\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda })\right]d^2\xi _{𝐤,\lambda }.$$

(The integration should be performed with respect to the real and imaginary parts of every complex variable.) For instance, the Wigner function of the vacuum is

$$𝒲_0(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})=\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}(2/\pi )\mathrm{exp}\left(2|\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }|^2\right).$$
(5)
In the hilbert-space representation the electric and magnetic fields of the radiation are usually expanded in normal modes, the coefficients of the expansion being the creation, $`\widehat{a}_{𝐤,\lambda }^{},`$ and annihilation, $`\widehat{a}_{𝐤,\lambda },`$ operators of photons. In the Wigner representation these operators become the amplitudes of the modes, which are random variables with a distribution given by the Wigner function (assumed positive). For instance the expansion of the electric field in free space is

$$𝐄(𝐫,t)=\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}\sqrt{\frac{2\mathrm{}\omega }{L^3}}\mathrm{R}e\left[\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }𝐞_{𝐤,\lambda }\mathrm{exp}(i𝐤.𝐫i\omega t)\right],\omega c|𝐤|,$$
(6)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ is Planck’s constant, $`𝐞_{𝐤,\lambda }`$ the polarization vector and $`L^3`$ the normalization volume.

The Wigner function in nonrelativistic quantum mechanics  plays the role of a pseudoprobability distribution; its marginals with respect to position and momentum separately give the quantum probabilities for each of these variables, but the function itself is not positive definite. There are great difficulties in interpreting the Wigner function as a true probability distribution in quantum mechanics. Nevertheless I propose that for the light field the Wigner function may be assumed positive for all physically realizable states. This assumption will not put too big difficulties for the interpretation of actual experiments, as is argued in the next subsection.

### 1.2 When is the Wigner function positive ?

The Fock states $`\left(\text{2}\right)`$ form a basis appropriate for the solution of the Maxwell equations fulfilled by the electromagnetic field. They play the same role as, for instance, the functions $`\left\{sin(nx)\right\}`$ in the solution of the diffusion equation in one dimension,

$$\frac{f}{t}=\frac{^2f}{x^2},$$

$`f(x,t)`$ being the density of the diffusing matter. With boundary conditions $`f(0,t)=f(\pi ,t)`$ $`=0,`$ the solution is

$$f(x,t)=c_nsin(nx)\mathrm{exp}(n^2t),$$
(7)
where the coefficients cn may be obtained from the initial condition $`f(x,0)`$. We need the whole set of functions $`\left\{sin(nx)\right\}`$ with integer $`n`$ in order to be able to express the solution of the problem as a Fourier series (this requirement is called completeness of the basis), but it is obvious that not all series of the form $`\left(\text{7}\right)`$ may represent real physical states. In particular the functions $`\left\{sin(nx)\right\}`$ themselves are not positive definite (except for $`n=1`$) and cannot represent densities. Similarly we may assume that the ”Fock states” do not correspond to physically realizable states (except $`\left(\text{1}\right))`$ although all of them are necessary in order to represent every possible physical state of the radiation field.

Our assumption contrasts with the frequent interpretation of experiments in terms of one-photon states. The one-photon state $`|1`$ has the Wigner function

$$W_1(\alpha )=(4|\alpha |^21)W_0(\alpha ),$$

where $`W_0(\alpha )`$ is the vacuum Wigner function for a single mode $`\left(\text{5}\right).`$ Taking into account the complete set of modes, including the “unoccupied” ones, the Wigner function may be written as

$$𝒲_1(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})=(4|\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }|^21)𝒲_0(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\}).$$

Of course this is not always positive.

Actually the experimental situations  in which something like a one-photon state has been reported, must necessarily involve the observations of wave packets rather than single-mode signals. Indeed, the latter, which fill the whole of space and time, are not at all physical objects. A wave packet has the hilbert-space representation

$$|\zeta (𝐱)=\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}\zeta _{𝐤,\lambda }e^{i𝐤.𝐱}a_{𝐤,\lambda }^{}|0,$$
(8)
where $`\{\zeta _{𝐤,\lambda }\}`$ are a set of random, but not independent variables satisfying

$$\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}|\zeta _{𝐤,\lambda }|^2=1,$$

and which, furthermore, are nonzero only for a set of vectors k falling within a small ellipsoidal region centred at $`𝐤^{}`$.

The Wigner function of $`\left(\text{8}\right)`$ is not positive. However, it is necessary to bear in mind that there is no way of controlling the moment at which such a packet is emitted, in the atomic-cascade situation used for such experiments, and this may be taken into account by forming an appropriate mixture of such wave-packet states. We have been able to show that the one-photon state becomes a mixture having a positive Wigner function . The proof will not be reproduced here, but a hint may be got by realizing that the mixed state with density operator

$$\widehat{\rho }=\frac{1}{2}|11|+\frac{1}{2}|00|$$

has a positive Wigner function, namely

$$𝒲_1(\{\alpha _{𝐤^{},\lambda ^{}}\})=2|\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }|^2𝒲_0(\{\alpha _{𝐤^{},\lambda ^{}}\}).$$

Incidentally, with our approach it is possible to explain, in terms of pure waves, one of the most tramatic instances of ”corpuscular behaviour” of light, the anticorrelation after a beam splitter -. But the wave-particle duality of light will not be treated further in this article.

In summary I challenge the current, although rarely explicit, assumption that all density operators represent physically realizable states. In contrast I propose that only those states having a positive Wigner function may be realizable. On the other hand one may ask whether there are real states such that their (positive) probability distribution, $`W`$, is not a Wigner function, that is no density operator $`\widehat{\rho }`$ exists leading to $`W`$ via eq.$`\left(\text{4}\right).`$ Such states might violate the Heisenberg uncertainty inequalities which, in our approach, derive from the existence of a minimal noise which may be controlled in experiments. Thus I think that the answer is in the negative, in the sense that the amount of noise in the preparation procedure cannot be reduced below the Heisenberg inequalities limit. Indeed, it will be usually well above that limit. In any case the question will not be studied here further .

### 1.3 Quantum pure states which are real

Pure states, of the form $`\left(\text{3}\right),`$ rarely have a positive Wigner function. Indeed it is known that if the Wigner function is positive, it is gaussian. The proof was given in  for a single mode and generalized to many modes in . In contrast, no general rule is known in the case of quantum mixed states.

In the rest of this article we shall treat only the restricted, but important, kind of real states having a gaussian Wigner function. For simplicity we shall consider the ideal (i. e. unphysical) situation where only a single mode of the field contains photons, so that the set $`\{n_{𝐤,\lambda }\}`$ contains a single member, and the number states are designated simply $`|0,|1,|2\mathrm{}`$. The full Wigner function will be given by the product of the single-mode function with $`W_0(\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda })`$ for each of the “unoccupied” modes. The generalization to many modes should not be difficult.

The most general single-mode gaussian Wigner function may be written in terms of two real parameters, A and B, and a complex one, a, as follows

$$W(\alpha )=\frac{\sqrt{AB}}{\pi }\mathrm{exp}\left\{A\left(\mathrm{R}e\alpha \mathrm{R}ea\right)^2B\left(\mathrm{I}m\alpha \mathrm{I}ma\right)^2\right\}.$$
(9)
If $`AB=4`$, $`W`$($`\alpha )`$ corresponds to a quantum pure state and if $`AB>4`$ to a mixed state. Values such that $`AB<4`$ do not provide a Wigner function, that is no density operator exists whence $`W`$($`\alpha )`$ may obtained via $`\left(\text{4}\right)`$.

Among pure states the case $`A=B`$, that is

$$W_a(\alpha )=(2/\pi )\mathrm{exp}\left(2|\alpha a|^2\right),$$
(10)
is called coherent state, which is an idealized form of the continuous-wave laser if $`a=0`$ (and represents the vacuum $`\left(\text{5}\right)`$ if $`a0)`$. The case $`A`$ $`B`$, that is

$$W_{a,s}(\alpha )=(2/\pi )\mathrm{exp}[2e^{2s}(\mathrm{R}e\alpha \mathrm{R}ea)^22e^{2s}(\mathrm{I}m\alpha \mathrm{I}ma)^2],$$

with $`s`$ real is called squeezed state. The hilbert-space representations of these two states are, respectively,

$$|a=\mathrm{exp}(a\widehat{a}^{}a{}_{}{}^{}\widehat{a})|0=\underset{n}{}\frac{a^n}{\sqrt{n!}}\mathrm{exp}(|a{}_{}{}^{2}|/2)|n,$$
(11)
and

$$|a,s=\mathrm{exp}\left(s(\widehat{a}^2\widehat{a}^2)\right)|a.$$
(12)
States $`\left(\text{11}\right)`$ and $`\left(\text{12}\right)`$ are the only single-mode quantum pure states which are real according to our criterion.

### 1.4 Stochastic optics

If all real states of light have a positive Wigner function, we may interpret that function as an actual probability distribution of the amplitudes of the radiation modes. Thus quantum optics becomes a disguised stochastic theory, where the states of light are probability distributions defined on the set of possible realizations of the electromagnetic field. We propose the name stochastic optics  for the stochastic interpretation of quantum optics derived from the Wigner function. From another point of view, the stochastic interpretation provides an explicit hidden variables theory where *the amplitudes of the electromagnetic field are the ”hidden” variables!.*

The most dramatic consequence of stochastic optics is that the vacuum is no longer empty, but filled with a random electromagnetic radiation having an energy $`\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{}\omega `$ per radiation mode, on the average, as is shown in eq.$`\left(\text{5}\right)`$. That radiation corresponds precisely to the additional term introduced by Max Planck in his second radiation law (see e.g.  ). The picture that emerges is that space contains a random background of electromagnetic waves providing what we shall call a zeropoint field (ZPF).

The question whether that theory should be named *classical* is a matter of taste. It might be said classical in the sense that it is a pure wave theory, essentially the same developed during the XIX Century. Photons are just wavepackets, usually localized in the form of needles of radiation (see eq.$`\left(\text{8}\right)`$), superimposed to the ZPF. Nevertheless the theory departs from classical optics in the assumption that there exists a fundamental noise, the ZPF, which cannot be eliminated even at zero Kelvin. I prefer to remain closer to the current nomenclature and say that *stochastic optics is not a classical theory*.

## 2 What states of light are classical?

### 2.1 Zeropoint field and detection theory

The ZPF is usually not directly observable, although indirectly it may produce observable effects, as explained below. Observable signals consist of additional radiation on top of the ”sea” of ZPF. Crucial for the stochastic interpretation is the assumption that the ZPF has precisely the same nature as signals. Therefore explaining why the ZPF is not directly observable, e. g. by firing photon detectors, is a non-trivial problem which will not be studied here (see, e. g.,  ). In the following we state the problem more precisely.

The hilbert-space formalism of detection is based on normal ordering, that is putting creation operators to the left and annihilation operators to the right. Let us begin with the ideal case where the radiation field is represented by a single mode with amplitude $`\alpha `$. Then the detection probability per unit time is

$`P^q`$ $``$ $`Tr\left[\widehat{\rho }\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}\right]={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}Tr\left[\widehat{\rho }\left\{\widehat{a}^{}\widehat{a}+\widehat{a}\widehat{a}^{}1\right\}\right]`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }W(\{\alpha )[|\alpha |^2\frac{1}{2}]d^2\alpha |\alpha |^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}__W=n`$
where $`\widehat{\rho }`$ is the state of the radiation, $`W(\alpha )`$ the corresponding Wigner function, and $`n`$ is the ”mean number of photons” in the state. The first equality derives from the use of the commutation relations and the second is the passage to the Wigner representation. The symbol $`__W`$ means the average of the quantity inside weighted with the Wigner function of the state.

In the general case of many modes and working in the Heisenberg picture, it is straightforward to get, for a point-like detector ,

$$P^q(𝐫,t)W(\{\alpha _𝐤\})\left[(𝐫,t;\{\alpha _k\})I_0\right]d^{2N}\alpha _𝐤=I_0,$$
(14)
where

$$(𝐫,t;\{\alpha _𝐤\})=cϵ_0\left|𝐄(𝐫,t;\{\alpha _𝐤\})\right|^2$$
(15)
is the intensity for a realization of the field at the position and time $`(𝐫,t)`$. $`W(\{\alpha _𝐤\})`$ is the Wigner function of the initial state, $`N`$ is the number of modes (we should take the limit $`N\mathrm{}`$ at some appropriate moment) and $`I_0`$ is the mean intensity of the ZPF. (We use the ”caligraphic” $``$ for the (random variable) intensity in order to distinguish it from the (nonrandom) average $`I_0.)`$ Writing the electric field, E, in terms of the initial amplitudes of the normal modes, $`\{\alpha _𝐤\}`$, is usually straightforward although lengthy. It should be made for every particular experiment (almost all performed experiments with light produced by parametric down conversion have been studied with the Wigner function formalism in the series of articles -).

Eq.$`\left(\text{14}\right)`$ may be interpreted as stating that the detector has a threshold so that it only detects the part of the field which is above the average ZPF, that is the detector removes the ZPF. The quantum rule $`\left(\text{14}\right)`$ is just to subtract the mean, a formal procedure which cannot be physical because it gives rise to “negative probabilities”. The problem is not the huge value of the zeropoint energy (the ZPF intensity is about 105w/cm2 in the visible range), because the threshold intensity $`I_0`$ cancels precisely that intensity. The problem lies in the fluctuations of the intensity. For the weak light signals of typical quantum-optical experiments the fluctuations of $``$ may be such that $`<I_0`$. This problem may be solved as discussed elsewhere , but it will not be considered here further.

### 2.2 Classical and nonclassical states of light

The fact that nonclassicality derives from the existence of the ZPF provides a criterion to classify the states of the radiation field. We shall call classical (nonclassical) those states where the ZPF is irrelevant (relevant). More specifically we will consider a state as classical if the total field $`𝐄(𝐫,t)`$ can be decomposed into two independent parts, $`𝐄_\mathrm{𝟎}(𝐫,t)`$ and $`𝐄_\mathrm{𝟏}(𝐫,t)`$ representing ZPF and signal respectively . When this is the case, all optical phenomena are associated with the signal alone, and the ZPF may be ignored altogether, as is the situation in classical optics. In particular detectors remove precisely the ZPF, see $`\left(\text{14}\right)`$. The independence of the fields implies that the corresponding amplitudes, $`\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }^0\}`$ and $`\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }^1\},`$ are independent random variables. If the probability densities of these are $`W_0(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }^0\})`$ and $`W_1(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }^1\})`$, then the density of the total field will be their convolution, that is

$$W(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})=W_1(\{\beta _{𝐤,\lambda }\})W_0(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\beta _{𝐤,\lambda }\})d^{2N}\beta .$$

It is well known that the Wigner function of a state of light may be obtained by means of the convolution of the (Glauber) P-function and the Wigner function of the vacuum state when the former exists, that is

$$W(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})=P(\{\beta _{𝐤,\lambda }\})W_0(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\beta _{𝐤,\lambda }\})d^{2N}\beta .$$
(16)
If we identify $`W_1(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})`$ with $`P(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})`$ it is clear that the decomposition of the stochastic field $`𝐄(𝐫,t)`$ into two independent parts requires that a P-function exists which is positive definite. So, to summarize, the existence of a positive P-function is a necessary and sufficient condition for being able to decompose the field into independent signal and ZPF parts. This is our criterion for a state of light to be classical and it agrees precisely with the standard quantum-optical definition of classical state.

There is only one classical ”pure” state, namely the coherent state (the vacuum state being a particular case). In the ideal situation of a single mode its P-function is

$$P(\alpha )=\delta ^2\left(\alpha a\right),$$

$`\delta ^2`$ being the two-dimensional Dirac’s delta. This leads to the interpretation that the coherent state represents a deterministic (non-random) signal superimposed to the ZPF. The Wigner function of the state is given in eq.$`\left(\text{10}\right).`$

An important kind of classical ”mixed” state is chaotic light, whose P-function is

$$P(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})=\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}\frac{1}{\pi n_{𝐤,\lambda }}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{|\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }|^2}{n_{𝐤,\lambda }}\right),$$
(17)
and the Wigner function

$$P(\{\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }\})=\underset{𝐤,\lambda }{}\frac{2}{\pi \left(2n_{𝐤,\lambda }+1\right)}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2|\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }|^2}{2n_{𝐤,\lambda }+1}\right).$$
(18)
The quantity $`n_{𝐤,\lambda }`$ is, in quantum language, the mean number of photons in the mode $`𝐤,\lambda ,`$ as may be easily proved from the final equality in $`\left(\text{13}\right).`$ A particular case of chaotic is thermal light, where the dependence of $`n`$ on the frequency $`\omega =\left|𝐤c\right|`$ is given by Planck´s law.

## 3 Entanglement is correlation between quantum fluctuations

We are in a position to justify the essential conclusion of the present paper, stated in the title of this section. But I shall not attempt here a general characterization of entangled states in the Wigner function formalism, which is a rather formidable problem. It is closely related to that of determining what density operators correspond to entangled states, a still open problem actively investigated in the last few years by workers in quantum information. As said above I shall restrict attention to gaussian Wigner functions.

### 3.1 Gaussian Wigner functions involving two radiation modes

We are interested in studying a real state of light consisting of radiation in two separated regions of space (see section 1 for the meaning of real). Light in every region will contain many modes but, for the sake of clarity, we shall study an example involving only two modes with amplitudes labelled $`\alpha _{𝐤,\lambda }`$ and $`\beta _{𝐤^{},\lambda ^{}}`$, assuming that in all other modes we have just ZPF. A more physical state would correspond to having two wave packets, the first (second) containing many modes with wavevectors close to $`𝐤`$ $`(𝐤^{})`$. For simplicity we will remove the subindices and label the amplitudes $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ in the following.

We shall consider a classical two-modes state whose marginal for every mode corresponds to chaotic light $`\left(\text{17}\right)`$. Its P-function is gaussian

$$P_{12}(\alpha ,\beta )=\frac{abc^2}{\pi ^2}\mathrm{exp}\left\{a\left|\alpha \right|^2b\left|\beta \right|^2+c\left(\alpha \beta ^{}+\beta \alpha ^{}\right)\right\},$$
(19)
$`a,b`$ and $`c`$ being three real numbers fulfilling $`a,b>0,c^2<ab`$. The latter condition guarantees that P goes to zero at infinite, a necessary condition for normalizability. In order to simplify the argument I will consider a slightly less general state by assuming $`a=b`$, although the generalization to $`a`$ $`b`$ is trivial. The intensity of the radiation, above the ZPF, is measured by the integral ( see $`\left(\text{13}\right))`$

$$2n=P_{12}(\alpha ,\beta )\left(\left|\alpha \right|^2+\left|\beta \right|^2\right)d^2\alpha d^2\beta =\frac{2a}{a^2c^2},$$
(20)
where $`n`$ represents the mean number of photons per mode.

The Wigner function of this state is given by the convolution with the vacuum Wigner function ( see $`\left(\text{16}\right)`$.) We shall write it in terms of $`n`$ and a correlation parameter, $`x,`$ defined by

$$x=\frac{2c}{2a+a^2c^2}.$$
(21)
We get

$$W_{12}(\alpha ,\beta )=\frac{1x^2}{\pi ^2A^2}\mathrm{exp}\left\{A\left[\left|\alpha \right|^2+\left|\beta \right|^2x\left(\alpha \beta ^{}+\beta \alpha ^{}\right)\right]\right\},A\frac{2}{\left(2n+1\right)\left(1x^2\right)}$$
(22)
This Wigner function represents a classical state if $`\left|c\right|<a,`$ which implies a restriction on the range of values of x. In fact, from $`\left(\text{20}\right)`$ and $`\left(\text{21}\right)`$ we obtain

$$a=\frac{4n}{4n^2x^2\left(2n+1\right)^2}.$$

The condition $`a>0`$ leads to

$$classical:n0,\left|x\right|<\frac{2n}{2n+1}.$$
(23)
A transparent interpretation of these results emerges in our approach. Remembering eq.$`\left(\text{16}\right),`$ we see that $`\left(\text{22}\right)`$ is the probability distribution of the sum of two random variables representing the signal and the ZPF, respectively. In the signal, whose distribution is $`\left(\text{19}\right),`$ there is correlation between the two modes. In contrast in the ZPF, whose distribution is $`\left(\text{5}\right),`$ all modes are uncorrelated (the distribution is a product of single-mode terms). In summary, we have  *a correlation involving the signal but not the ZPF.* This should be called a *classical correlation.*

The constraints for the state $`\left(\text{22}\right)`$ to be real are weaker than $`\left(\text{23}\right)`$, namely

$$\mathrm{𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑙}:n0,\left|x\right|<1.$$

(Another condition for the state to be real is that $`W`$ may be obtained from a density operator via $`\left(\text{4}\right)`$, which is true in this case but will not be proved here). On the other hand the marginal of $`\left(\text{22}\right)`$,

$$W_1(\alpha )=\frac{2}{\pi \left(2n+1\right)}\mathrm{exp}\left\{\frac{2\left|\alpha \right|^2}{\left(2n+1\right)}\right\},$$

represents a classical state. I shall call *entangled* any state of two modes which is not classical but has classical marginals, that is

$$entangled:n0,\frac{2n}{2n+1}<\left|x\right|<1.$$
(24)
(I propose this as a sufficient condition, not excluding the possibility of entangled states with nonclassical marginals). We see that such states involve a correlation between the two modes which is larger than the correlation of any classical state (given by $`\left(\text{23}\right)).`$ This is because not only the signal but also the ZPF or ”quantum vacuum fluctuations” are correlated in the entangled state.

Two-photon entanglement” similar to this one (although involving many modes) occurs in the process of parametric down conversion . In fact, light produced in that way consists of two separated beams whose Wigner functions are gaussian but the full state is not classical. That is, every beam alone consists of chaotic light of the type $`\left(\text{18}\right)`$, but the two beams are entangled -.

The reader may realize that entanglement becomes less relevant when the intensity $`n`$ (the mean number of photons) is large because the interval of $`x`$ in $`\left(\text{24}\right)`$ becomes narrow. The opposite is true if $`n`$ is small. This is to be expected because large $`n`$ corresponds to the classical limit.

### 3.2 Entanglement and Bell’s inequalities

There is no agreement about the definition of entanglement for mixed quantum states. A fashionable criterion is the violation of a Bell inequality. In actual experiments the inequalities tested have never been genuine Bell inequalities, derived using only general properties of local hidden variables, but inequalities involving auxiliary assumptions. The violation of one of such inequalities does not imply the refutation of local realism , a fact qualified as ”existence of loopholes”. Nevertheless we may consider the experiments as valid tests of entanglement. In practice any test involves measuring a coincidence detection rate as a function of some controllable angular parameter, $`\varphi .`$ The inequalities are violated if the measured coincidence rate, $`R_{12}`$, is of the form

$$R_{12}=const.\times (1+V\mathrm{cos}\varphi ),$$
(25)
with the visibility or contrast, $`V,`$ greater than some limit, usually 0.71.

The most frequent tests involve polarization correlation. In order to study polarization we need to take $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ as (complex) two-dimensional vectors or, what is equivalent, to double the number of modes. Introducing the polarization vectors, $`𝐞_{𝐤,\lambda },`$ see $`\left(\text{6}\right),`$ the vector amplitude $`\alpha `$ might be written

$$\alpha =\alpha _x𝐞_{𝐤,1}+\alpha _y𝐞_{𝐤,2},\left|\alpha \right|^2=\left|\alpha _x\right|^2+\left|\alpha _y\right|^2,$$

and similar for $`\beta .`$ The Wigner function will be, instead of $`\left(\text{22}\right),`$

$`W_{12}(\alpha ,\beta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(1x^2\right)^2A^4}{\pi ^4}}\mathrm{exp}\left\{A\left[\left|\alpha \right|^2+\left|\beta \right|^2x\left(\alpha \beta ^{}+\beta \alpha ^{}\right)\right]\right\},`$
$`A`$ $``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\left(2n+1\right)\left(1x^2\right)}}.`$ (26)
We shall consider that the amplitudes $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ correspond to two polarized light beams arriving at two polarization analizers at angles $`\varphi _1`$ and $`\varphi _2`$, respectively. In what follows we may ignore the ZPF in all modes except those included in $`\left(\text{26}\right).`$ Consequently we assume that the amplitudes emerging from the polarizers are given by Malus law, that is

$$\lambda =\left(\alpha 𝐮_1\right),\mu =\left(\beta 𝐮_2\right),$$

the vector $`𝐮_1`$ having components ($`\mathrm{cos}\varphi _1`$, $`\mathrm{sin}\varphi _1`$) and similar for u$`_2.`$ Note that the scalar amplitudes $`\lambda `$ and $`\mu `$ correspond to modes with polarization in the directions of $`𝐮_1`$ and $`𝐮_2`$, respectively. As said above we ignore the modes with polarization perpendicular to $`𝐮_1`$ or $`𝐮_2,`$ which contain just ZPF.

The coincidence detection rate in two detectors placed after the polarizers may be calculated by a straightforward generalization of $`\left(\text{13}\right),`$ namely

$$R_{12}W_{12}(\alpha ,\beta )\left(\left|\lambda \right|^2\frac{1}{2}\right)\left(\left|\mu \right|^2\frac{1}{2}\right)\text{ }d^2\alpha _xd^2\alpha _yd^2\beta _xd^2\beta _y\text{.}$$

The integration is trivial using eq.$`\left(\text{26}\right)`$ and we get

$$R_{12}n^2+\frac{1}{2}\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)^2x^2\left[1+\mathrm{cos}\left(2\varphi _12\varphi _2\right)\right].$$

The visibility is

$$V=\frac{\frac{1}{2}\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)^2x^2}{n^2+\frac{1}{2}\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)^2x^2},$$

which is greater than $`\frac{1}{3}`$ for entangled states, fulfilling condition $`\left(\text{24}\right),`$ but it is smaller than $`\frac{1}{3}`$ for classical states, where condition $`\left(\text{23}\right)`$ holds true. In particular, the limit $`V=0.71`$ may be surpassed if $`n`$ $`<`$ 0.42 ( but this is specific for the gaussian Wigner functions studied in this paper.)

We see that high visibility is only possible with weak signals. I conjecture that the signal weakness, combined with the necessity of removing efficiently the ZPF, gives rise to the difficulties for performing ”loophole-free” tests of Bell’s inequalities. This problem will be studied elsewhere.

Acknowledgement. I acknowledge financial support from DGICYT, Project No. PB-98-0191 (Spain).


text:
# Superconducting Single-Electron Transistor in a Locally Tunable Electromagnetic Environment: Dissipation and Charge Fluctuations

Current address: \]Cielo Communications, Inc., 325 Interlocken Parkway, Broomfield, CO 80021.

## Abstract

We have developed a novel system consisting of a superconducting single-electron transistor (S-SET) coupled to a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG), for which the dissipation can be tuned in the immediate vicinity of the S-SET. Within linear response, the S-SET conductance varies nonmonotonically with increasing 2DEG impedance. We find good agreement between our experimental results and a model incorporating electromagnetic fluctuations in both the S-SET leads and the 2DEG, as well as low-frequency switching of the S-SET offset charge.

Electrical transport in nanoscale devices is strongly affected by the electromagnetic properties of their environment. This is particularly true for superconducting systems, and has been a topic of considerable interest lately: dissipation can drive a superconductor-insulator quantum phase transition Rimberg et al. (1997); Mason and Kapitulnik (1999); Penttilä et al. (1999), and is also expected to affect the coherence time of qubits such as the charge-based single Cooper pair box Bouchiat et al. (1998); Nakamura et al. (1999); Makhlin et al. (1999). Maintaining quantum coherence in such devices long enough to allow many operations is prerequisite for their use in quantum computation. In this regard, the closely related superconducting single electron transistor (S-SET) is an excellent system for attaining a better understanding of the effects of the electromagnetic environment on quantum coherence.

This approach was followed by the Berkeley group Kycia et al. (2001), who fabricated an S-SET above a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) in a GaAs/AlxGa1-xAs heterostructure. Using a back gate to vary the 2DEG sheet resistance $`R_{sq}`$ they measured changes in the S-SET conductance $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ as the dissipation was varied. Building on earlier theoretical work Devoret et al. (1990); Ingold and Nazarov (1992); Grabert et al. (1998); Dittrich et al. (1998); Ingold and Grabert (1999), Wilhelm, et al. predicted Wilhelm et al. (2001) that within linear response $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ would scale with the ground plane conductance $`G_{\text{2D}}=1/R_{sq}`$ and temperature T as $`G_{\text{2D}}^\beta /T^\alpha `$ and that the S-SET current $`I`$ at fixed bias voltage $`V`$ would vary nonmonotonically with $`G_{\text{2D}}`$, while switching from the non-linear to linear regime. These predictions were made within two models: in one the environment was treated as a ground plane, while in the other it was treated as an infinite $`RC`$ transmission line provided by the SET leads. While the Berkeley group did observe power law behavior, their measured exponents were not in quantitative agreement with theory. Furthermore, the measured $`\beta `$ depended on $`T`$ and $`\alpha `$ on $`G_{\text{2D}}`$, calling the scaling form into question.

In this Letter, we report measurements on samples similar to those studied by the Berkeley group; in our samples, however, we can modify $`G_{\text{2D}}`$ in the immediate vicinity of the S-SET while leaving the 2DEG beneath the leads largely untouched. In contrast to the predictions of Wilhelm, et al. we observe a nonmonotonic dependence of $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ on $`G_{\text{2D}}`$ entirely within the linear regime. We propose a model for the environmental impedance of S-SET/2DEG systems that includes electromagnetic fluctuations in both the 2DEG and leads, while treating the latter as finite $`RC`$ transmission lines. We also allow for relatively low-frequency switching of the charge state of the SET islandEiles and Martinis (1994), which can affect the measured current. Within this model, we find good agreement between our calculated and measured results.

An electron micrograph of a typical sample is shown in Fig. 1(a). We begin with an GaAs/AlxGa1-xAs heterostructure grown on a GaAs substrate using molecular beam epitaxy, consisting of the following layers: $`1000\mathrm{nm}`$ of GaAs, $`47\mathrm{nm}`$ of Al0.3Ga0.7As and $`5\mathrm{nm}`$ of GaAs. The Al0.3Ga0.7As is delta-doped with Si $`22\mathrm{nm}`$ from the lower GaAs/Al0.3Ga0.7As interface, at which forms a two-dimensional electron gas (2DEG) with $`R_{sq}=20\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and sheet density $`n_s=3.6\times 10^{11}\mathrm{cm}^2`$. On the sample surface we use electron-beam lithography and shadow evaporation to fabricate an $`\mathrm{Al}/\mathrm{AlO}_x`$ S-SET surrounded by six Au gates Lu et al. (2000). When no gate voltage is applied and the 2DEG is unconfined, the measured $`I`$-$`V`$ characteristics are linear over several microvolts, as shown in Fig. 1(b). We can also apply a single gate voltage $`V_g`$ to any combination of Au gates, excluding the 2DEG beneath them. We focus on two geometries: the “pool,” in which all six gates are energized, and the “stripe” in which only the four exterior gates are. In both cases, electrons immediately beneath the SET are coupled to ground by quantum point contacts (QPCs) with conductances $`1/R_{\text{QPC}}`$ (assumed equal) as low as 3 conductance quanta $`G_0=e^2/h`$. In the stripe geometry, the electrons can also move vertically through a resistance $`R_{\text{str}}`$ to a large 2DEG reservoir that is coupled to ground through a capacitance $`C_{\text{str}}`$. As illustrated in Fig. 1(c), electromagnetic fluctuations in the environment can couple to the tunneling electrons in two ways: through the leads, which act as $`RC`$ transmission lines with impedance $`Z_{\mathrm{}}`$ for the relevant frequency range Kycia et al. (2001); Wilhelm et al. (2001), and through the capacitance $`C_{\text{2D}}`$ to the 2DEG with impedance $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$, which is related to $`R_{\text{QPC}}`$ and (for the stripe) $`R_{\text{str}}`$. The model has been studied previously Odintsov et al. (1991); Ingold et al. (1991) without considering particular forms for $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$ and $`Z_{\mathrm{}}`$.

Measurements were performed on two separate samples (S1 and S2) in a dilution refrigerator in a four-probe voltage biased configuration; the estimated electron temperature was $`100\mathrm{mK}`$. High frequency noise was excluded using standard techniques. A small capacitance $`C_g20.3\mathrm{aF}`$ (not shown in Fig. 1(c)) couples the six Au gates to the S-SET. The other sample parameters such as the junction resistances $`R_{1,2}`$ and capacitances $`C_{1,2}`$, the coupling capacitance $`C_{\text{2D}}`$ and superconducting gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ are given elsewhere Lu et al. (2002). The charging energy $`E_c=e^2/2C_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ for sample S1 (S2) is $`118(77)\mu \mathrm{eV}`$ while the Josephson energy $`E_{J_j}=\frac{R_Q}{2R_j}\mathrm{\Delta }`$ averaged for the two junctions is $`4.7(21.8)\mu \mathrm{eV}`$. Here $`R_Q=\frac{h}{4e^2}`$ is the superconducting resistance quantum and $`C_\mathrm{\Sigma }=C_1+C_2+C_{\text{2D}}+C_g`$. We use standard lock-in techniques and voltage biases of 3 and $`5\mu \mathrm{V}\mathrm{rms}`$ respectively to measure $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ and the conductance $`G_{\text{2D}}`$ across the series combination of the QPCs versus $`V_g`$ in the pool and stripe geometries. The results for S2 are shown in Fig. 2.

From Fig. 2(b), we see that for the pool $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ rises by nearly a factor of 2 as $`V_g`$ becomes more negative, before dropping rapidly. Although $`G_{\text{2D}}`$ vs. $`V_g`$ is nearly identical in both cases, $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ for the stripe rises only by $``$50% and does not decrease, even for the most negative $`V_g`$. In both plots, $`e`$-periodic Coulomb blockade oscillations are seen as the S-SET offset charge varies. We fit a smoothly varying function to the measured $`G_{\text{2D}}`$ versus $`V_g`$ (inset, Fig. 2(a)) which we use to plot the maxima of $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ versus $`G_{\text{2D}}`$ in Fig. 2(a). The knee in $`G_{\text{2D}}`$ at $`V_g0.38\mathrm{V}`$ corresponds to the appearance of quantized plateaux in the individual QPC conductances.

To understand these results and the $`I`$-$`V`$ curve in Fig. 1 (b), we begin with the rate of sequential Cooper pair tunneling Averin et al. (1990) through junction $`j`$, valid for $`E_JE_c`$

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }(\delta f^{(j)})=(\pi /2\mathrm{})E_{J_j}^2P(\delta f^{(j)})$$
(1)
where $`\delta f^{(j)}=f_ff_i=(1)^j4E_c(2Nn_g+1)2\alpha _jeV`$ is the free energy difference for changing the number of Cooper pairs $`N`$ by 1, $`\alpha _j=\frac{1}{2}+(1)^j(C_1C_2)/2C_\mathrm{\Sigma }`$, and $`n_g=C_gV_g/e`$. Here P(E) is the probability of exchanging energy $`E`$ with the environment and can be expressed in terms of a correlation function $`K(t)=R_Q^1_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\omega }{\omega }\text{Re}[Z_t(\omega )]\{\mathrm{coth}(\frac{\mathrm{}\omega }{2k_BT})[\mathrm{cos}(\omega t)1]i\mathrm{sin}(\omega t)\}`$ via $`P(E)=\frac{1}{2\pi \mathrm{}}_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑t\mathrm{exp}[K(t)+i\frac{Et}{\mathrm{}}]`$ where $`Z_t(\omega )`$ is the total impedance seen by tunneling electrons.

The general result for $`Z_t(\omega )`$ within the model of Fig. 1(c) is quite complex Ingold et al. (1991). In our case, however, $`Z_{\mathrm{}}`$ ($`Z_{\text{2D}}`$) dominates at low (high) frequencies and to an excellent approximation

$$\text{Re}[Z_t(\omega )]=\kappa _1\text{Re}[Z_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )]+\frac{\kappa _2Z_{\text{2D}}}{1+[\omega C_{\text{eff}}\kappa _2Z_{\text{2D}}]^2}$$
(2)
where for junction 1(2) $`\kappa _1=\frac{(C_{2(1)}+C_{\text{2D}})^2+C_{2(1)}^2}{C_\mathrm{\Sigma }^2}`$, $`\kappa _2=(\frac{C_{\text{2D}}}{C_\mathrm{\Sigma }})^2`$, $`C_{\text{eff}}=\frac{(C_1+C_2)C_\mathrm{\Sigma }}{C_{\text{2D}}}`$ and we treat $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$ as a resistance. For $`Z_{\mathrm{}}`$ we begin with the impedance of a finite $`RC`$ line $`Z_{RC}(\omega )=\sqrt{\frac{r_{\mathrm{}}}{i\omega c_{\mathrm{}}}}\mathrm{tanh}(\sqrt{i\omega r_{\mathrm{}}c_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}^2})`$ where $`r_{\mathrm{}}`$ and $`c_{\mathrm{}}`$ are the resistance and capacitance per unit length and $`\mathrm{}`$ is the total line length. We are interested in the long-time limit of $`K(t)`$ which is dominated by the low-frequency part of $`Z_t(\omega )`$. In that limit, $`Z_{RC}(\omega )\frac{r_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}}{1+(\omega r_{\mathrm{}}c_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}^2/\sqrt{6})^2}`$, which we use for $`Z_{\mathrm{}}`$ in Eq. 2.

A detailed analysis of $`K(t)`$ will be given elsewhere. Here we note that both parts of $`Z_t(\omega )`$ in Eq. 2 have the same form. For $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$, the corner frequency $`\omega _c=1/(C_{\text{eff}}\kappa _2Z_{\text{2D}})`$ satisfies $`\mathrm{}\omega _ck_BT`$ and we may use the kernel of Ref. Wilhelm et al., 2001, while for $`Z_{RC}`$ we find that $`\omega _c=\sqrt{6}/r_{\mathrm{}}c_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}^2`$ usually satisfies $`\mathrm{}\omega _ck_BT`$ and requires different treatment. Since $`K(t)`$ is linear in $`\text{Re}[Z_t(\omega )]`$, we may calculate $`K(t)`$ and $`P(E)`$ separately for $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$ and $`Z_{\mathrm{}}`$ and find the total $`P_{\text{tot}}(E)`$ as a convolution. For $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$, then, we have $`P_{2D}(E)=\frac{(2\pi \kappa _2C_{\text{eff}}Z_{\text{2D}}k_BT/\mathrm{})^{2\kappa _2/g}}{2\pi ^2k_BT}\text{Re}[e^{i\pi \kappa _2/g}B(\frac{\kappa _2}{g}\frac{iE}{2\pi k_BT},1\frac{2\kappa _2}{g})]`$ where $`g=R_Q/Z_{\text{2D}}`$ and $`B(x,y)`$ is the beta function Wilhelm et al. (2001). For $`Z_{RC}`$, we find that

$`K_{RC}(t)={\displaystyle \frac{2\kappa _1}{g_{rc}}}\{\pi k_BT|t|/\mathrm{}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}[\mathrm{cot}({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}g_{rc}}{2k_BT\tau }})`$
$`i\text{sign}(t)](e^{|t|/\tau }1)\}`$ (3)
is valid for $`\frac{\mathrm{}g_{rc}}{2k_BT\tau }\pi /2`$, where $`g_{rc}=R_Q/(r_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{})`$ and $`\tau =R_Qc_{\mathrm{}}\mathrm{}/\sqrt{6}`$. From this we calculate

$`P_{RC}(E)={\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{\pi g_{rc}\mathrm{}}}e^{\gamma _3(g_{rc})}\text{Re}[e^{i\frac{\kappa _1\pi }{g_{rc}}}\gamma _2(g_{rc})^{\gamma _1(g_{rc})}`$
$`\times \{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left[\gamma _1(g_{rc})\right]\mathrm{\Gamma }[\gamma _1(g_{rc}),\gamma _2(g_{rc})]\}]`$ (4)
where $`\gamma _1(g)=\frac{2\pi \kappa _1k_BT\tau }{\mathrm{}g^2}iE\tau /\mathrm{}g`$, $`\gamma _2(g)=\gamma _3(g)i\pi \kappa _1/g`$, $`\gamma _3(g)=\frac{\kappa _1\pi }{g}\mathrm{cot}\left(\frac{\mathrm{}g}{2k_BT\tau }\right)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(x,y)`$ is the incomplete gamma function.

To proceed we need an accurate model of $`Z_t(\omega )`$. For the $`V_g=0`$ $`I`$-$`V`$ curve to be linear at $`V8\mu \mathrm{V}`$, $`Z_t/R_Q`$ must be nonnegligible at frequencies of order $`eV/h2\mathrm{GHz}`$. Since then $`Z_{\text{2D}}R_{sq}=20\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`Z_{\mathrm{}}`$ must dominate $`Z_t`$ for small $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$. We therefore consider the structure of our leads, which vary in width $`w`$ from $`100\mathrm{nm}`$ to $`20\mu \mathrm{m}`$. The $`100\mathrm{nm}`$ section has length $`\mathrm{}=1\mu \mathrm{m}`$, contributes only $`50\mathrm{\Omega }`$ to $`Z_{\mathrm{}}(0)`$, and is not considered further. For the remaining sections with $`w=`$ 0.4, 1.0, 10 and $`20\mu \mathrm{m}`$, and $`\mathrm{}=`$ 9, 57, 253 and $`375\mu \mathrm{m}`$ we use $`r_{\mathrm{}}R_{sq}/(w+5.8h)`$ and $`c_{\mathrm{}}\epsilon \epsilon _0(w/h+1.393)`$ where $`h=50\mathrm{nm}`$ is the 2DEG depth and $`\epsilon =13`$ the dielectric constant of GaAs to calculate $`r_{\mathrm{}}=`$ 29, 16, 1.9 and $`1.0\mathrm{M}\mathrm{\Omega }/\mathrm{m}`$ and $`c_{\mathrm{}}=`$ 1.1, 2.5, 23 and $`46\mathrm{nF}/\mathrm{m}`$. These four sections form a cascaded $`RC`$ line which determines $`Z_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$. The total $`Z_t(\omega )`$ calculated from Eq. 2 is shown for different values of $`Z_{\text{2D}}=1/(4G_{\text{2D}})`$ for the pool geometry in Fig. 3. The cascaded form for $`Z_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )`$ is quite complex. For our calculations we take $`\text{Re}[Z_{\mathrm{}}(\omega )]=_i\text{Re}[Z_{RC}^{(i)}]`$ where the $`Z_{RC}^{(i)}`$ are the impedances of the individual sections, a very good approximation to the more exact result, as shown. Note that this model predicts a significant $`Z_t`$ at $`2\mathrm{GHz}`$ dominated by $`Z_{\mathrm{}}`$ ($`Z_{\text{2D}}`$) for small (large) $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$. For the stripe, $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$ approaches $`R_{\text{QPC}}/2`$ at zero frequency and the much lower stripe resistance $`R_{\text{str}}200\mathrm{\Omega }`$ at frequencies above $`1/R_{\text{QPC}}C_{\text{str}}`$ where $`C_{\text{str}}0.3\mathrm{pF}`$ is its capacitance to ground. At high frequencies, then, $`Z_t`$ in the stripe is always dominated by $`Z_{\mathrm{}}`$, even for large negative $`V_g`$. We have also shown the impedance for $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$ alone, and for an infinite $`RC`$ line with $`w=10\mu \mathrm{m}`$ and $`r_{\mathrm{}}`$ chosen to give the correct $`Z_{\mathrm{}}(0)`$ if the line were finite. The latter two models give a small $`Z_t`$ for small $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$ at the relevant frequencies, and cannot explain the linear region in our $`V_g=0`$ $`I`$-$`V`$ characteristics.

Using $`P_{2D}(E)`$ and $`P_{RC}(E)`$ above, we numerically convolve the $`P_i^{(j)}(E)`$ for junction $`j`$ and section $`i`$ to find $`P_{\mathrm{}}^{(j)}(E)=P_1^{(j)}(E)P_2^{(j)}(E)P_3^{(j)}(E)P_4^{(j)}(E)`$. We then calculate $`P_{\text{tot}}^{(j)}(E)=P_{\mathrm{}}^{(j)}(E)P_{2D}(E)`$ for different $`G_{\text{2D}}`$ and set up a master equation using the rates in Eq. 1 to calculate the S-SET current and conductance $`G_{\text{SET}}^c`$. The results for $`G_{\text{SET}}^c`$ in the pool geometry are shown as the solid line in Fig. 2(a); we scale $`G_{\text{SET}}^c`$ to match the maximum measured value $`G_{\text{SET}}^{\text{max}}0.34G_0`$ at $`G_{\text{2D}}^{\text{max}}6.5G_0`$ but use no other variable parameters. $`G_{\text{SET}}^c`$ agrees reasonably well with $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ for $`G_{\text{2D}}<G_{\text{2D}}^{\text{max}}`$ although it rises less steeply with $`G_{\text{2D}}`$. In this regime $`P_{2D}(E)`$ is broad and inelastic transitions suppress the coherent supercurrent. For $`G_{\text{2D}}>G_{\text{2D}}^{\text{max}}`$, $`G_{\text{SET}}^c`$ gradually saturates at $`0.47G_0`$. For $`G_{\text{2D}}G_{\text{2D}}^{\text{max}}`$, $`P_{2D}(E)\delta (E)`$ (i. e., only elastic transitions are likely) and $`P_{\mathrm{}}(E)`$ dominates the $`I`$-$`V`$ characteristic. No nonmonotonic behavior occurs in $`G_{\text{SET}}^c`$, in agreement with Wilhelm et al. The drop in $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ for $`G_{\text{2D}}>G_{\text{2D}}^{\text{max}}`$ must arise from other physics.

We can model the drop by assuming that the measured $`I`$ and $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ are actually averaged over charge states close to $`n_g`$, due to charge motion in the substrate Eiles and Martinis (1994). We expect charge averaging to be most pronounced when the 2DEG is unconfined, and least for small $`G_{\text{2D}}`$. Assuming a Gaussian distribution of charge states with mean $`n_g`$ and variance $`\sigma _{ch}`$, we calculate the average $`G_{\text{SET}}^c`$. We do not know the absolute size of $`\sigma _{ch}`$, so we assume for the pool that $`\sigma _{ch}=0`$ for $`G_{\text{2D}}<G_{\text{2D}}^{\text{max}}`$. For $`G_{\text{2D}}>G_{\text{2D}}^{\text{max}}`$ we find the values of $`\sigma _{ch}`$ which give $`G_{\text{SET}}^c=G_{\text{SET}}`$ for the pool and stripe and plot the results in the inset to Fig. 2(a). In both cases $`\sigma _{ch}`$ is just below $`0.04e`$ near $`V_g=0\mathrm{V}`$ and drops near $`V_g=0.28\mathrm{V}`$. For the stripe, $`\sigma _{ch}`$ saturates at just above $`0.02e`$, about half the drop for the pool. The model seems reasonable given the small $`\sigma _{ch}`$ required to explain the discrepancies with the environmental theory.

We gain further confidence in the model by comparing measured and calculated $`I`$-$`V`$ characteristics for the pool, as shown in Fig. 4 for S1. For increasing confinement $`I`$ first rises at all voltages, with little or no broadening of the linear region ($`V_g=0`$ and $`0.3\mathrm{V}`$ and $`Z_{\text{2D}}=1613\mathrm{\Omega }`$). This corresponds to a reduction in $`\sigma _{ch}`$ with little change in $`P_{\text{tot}}(E)`$; inelastic transitions in the leads dominate the energy exchange. Eventually, $`\sigma _{ch}=0`$ and $`Z_{\text{2D}}`$ is large enough to affect $`P_{\text{tot}}(E)`$, causing $`I`$ to decrease (especially at low bias) and the linear region to broaden. The level of agreement between the shape and evolution of the measured and calculated curves is surprisingly good, given the uncertainties involved. While the calculated current is much larger than is measured, such discrepancies are common in small tunnel junction systems Eiles and Martinis (1994).

In conclusion, we have measured the effects of dissipation on transport in an S-SET for which the environment can be varied locally. We find good agreement with a model in which fluctuations in the leads and low-frequency switching between charge states dominate for low confinement (large $`G_{\text{2D}}`$), while for strong confinement (small $`G_{\text{2D}}`$) fluctuations coupled via the capacitance $`C_{\text{2D}}`$ dominate. The model accounts well for the evolution of $`G_{\text{SET}}`$ and the $`I`$-$`V`$ curves as $`G_{\text{2D}}`$ is varied. We believe a convolved $`P_{\text{tot}}=P_{\mathrm{}}P_{2D}`$ is likely required to interpret the results of the Berkeley group, which may explain the discrepancies between their results and the scaling theory of Wilhelm, et al.

This research was supported at Rice by the NSF under Grant No. DMR-9974365 and by the Robert A. Welch foundation, and at UCSB by the QUEST NSF Science and Technology Center. One of us (A. J. R.) acknowledges support from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. We thank A. C. Gossard for providing the 2DEG material.