text:
# Kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect from galaxy cluster rotation

## 1 Introduction

Several effects lead to anisotropies of the cosmic microwave background (CMB): primary effects, imprinted on the surface of last scattering, and secondary effects, arising after hydrogen-recombination or after reionisation has taken place (for references see White & Cohn, 2002).

Among the secondary effects, the thermal Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect (th-SZE), which is due to inverse Compton scattering of the CMB photons off the hot intracluster medium (ICM) (Zeldovich & Sunyaev, 1969), and the kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect (k-SZE), which arises from the peculiar motion of the cluster in the rest frame of the CMB (Sunyaev & Zeldovich, 1980), are most important. The cosmological importance of the th-SZE is due to the fact that it is redshift independent. Therefore it can be used to detect clusters of galaxies at redshifts, where other observational methods fail (Korolev, Syunyaev & Yakubtsev, 1986; Kneissl et al., 2001), and to determine the Hubble constant (Birkinshaw, 1999; Reese et al., 2002). In principle the k-SZE can be used to determine both components of the peculiar velocity: the line of sight component via the relative change of intensity of the CMB and the velocity component in the celestial plane via the degree of linear polarisation of the CMB radiation. Measurements of the k-SZE are extremely difficult and will probably become feasible in the near future.

In this paper we address the k-SZE arising from bulk rotation of the ICM. In order to distinguish this effect from the k-SZE due to a bulk translatory motion of the cluster with respect to the CMB, we shall henceforth coin it the rotational kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect (rk-SZE). To our knowledge, the rk-SZE was previously only considered by Cooray & Chen (2002). In their work the rk-SZE was discussed for a gas density profile following from hydrostatic equilibrium of the gas in the Navarro-Frenk-White dark matter density field within a halo (Navarro, Frenk & White, 1996; Makino, Sasaki & Suto, 1998). Assuming isothermality this gas density profile is very well approximated by the commonly used isothermal $`\beta `$-model (Cavaliere & Fusco-Femiano, 1976), which is better applicable to analytical calculations. Here we focus on the contributions of the rk-SZE to the temperature fluctuations and the linear polarisation of the CMB for the isothermal $`\beta `$-model finding a new method to measure the rotational properties of a cluster by performing multifrequency measurements of the position of the peak of the temperature fluctuation.

The paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2 we state the model assumptions for the rotating cluster of galaxies and derive analytic formulae describing the rk-SZE. We also derive formulae describing combined thermal, kinetic and rotational kinetic SZE. In Sect. 3 we discuss our analytic results using recent observational data to estimate the effects for a set of 18 clusters in the redshift range from $`z0.14`$ to $`z0.78`$. Finally, we draw our conclusions in Sect. 4.

## 2 Calculations

### 2.1 General equations

#### Kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect

The relative change of intensity of the CMB due to the k-SZE of a small volume of electron gas with a line of sight optical depth $`d\tau =\sigma _\mathrm{T}n_\mathrm{e}dl`$, where $`\sigma _\mathrm{T}`$ is the Thomson cross section and $`n_\mathrm{e}`$ is the electron density, is given as (Sunyaev & Zeldovich, 1980)

$`d\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu }{I_\nu }}\right)=G_\nu \beta _{}d\tau .`$ (1)
Here $`\beta _{}`$ is the line of sight velocity in units of the speed of light $`c`$ and $`G_\nu =xe^x/(e^x1)`$ with the dimensionless frequency $`x=h\nu /k_\mathrm{B}T`$, where $`T`$ is the temperature of the photon field, $`h`$ is the Planck constant and $`k_\mathrm{B}`$ is the Boltzmann constant. $`\beta _{}`$ is defined to be positive if the cluster is approaching the observer. The degree of linear polarisation of the CMB due to the k-SZE can be written as (Sunyaev & Zeldovich, 1980)

$`dP={\displaystyle \frac{1}{10}}G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}\beta _{}^2d\tau ,`$ (2)
where now $`\beta _{}`$ is the velocity component perpendicular to the line of sight and $`G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}`$ is given as

$`G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}={\displaystyle \frac{e^x(e^x+1)}{2(e^x1)^2}}x^2.`$ (3)
The plane of polarisation lies perpendicular to the direction of $`\beta _{}`$. In the Rayleigh-Jeans part of the CMB spectrum $`G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}`$ approaches unity and it increases as $`x^2/2`$ in the Wien tail (Sunyaev & Zeldovich, 1980; Sazonov & Sunyaev, 1999; Audit & Simmons, 1999).

#### Thermal Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect

The relative change of intensity of the CMB due to the th-SZE of a cluster of galaxies is given as (Zeldovich & Sunyaev, 1969)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu }{I_\nu }}=F_\nu y_\mathrm{C},`$ (4)
where $`F_\nu `$ and the Compton parameter $`y_\mathrm{C}`$ are defined as

$`F_\nu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{xe^x}{e^x1}}\left[x{\displaystyle \frac{e^x+1}{e^x1}}4\right],`$ (5)
$`y_\mathrm{C}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \theta _\mathrm{e}\sigma _\mathrm{T}n_\mathrm{e}𝑑l}`$ (6)
with the dimensionless temperature of the electron gas, $`\theta _\mathrm{e}=k_\mathrm{B}T_\mathrm{e}/m_\mathrm{e}c^2`$, where $`m_\mathrm{e}`$ is the rest mass of an electron. The typical temperature $`T_\mathrm{e}`$ of the electron gas inside clusters is $`5\text{keV}`$. Relativistic corrections thus lead to small changes in the form of $`F_\nu `$ which are neglected in the following (for details see Itoh et al., 1998; Challinor & Lasenby, 1998; Enßlin & Kaiser, 2000). In the Rayleigh-Jeans part of the CMB spectrum $`F_\nu `$ approaches $`2`$ and it increases as $`x^2`$ in the Wien tail. At the crossover frequency $`x_{\mathrm{cr}}3.83`$ the th-SZE vanishes and the k-SZE reaches its maximum.

### 2.2 Model of a rotating cluster of galaxies

We describe the electron density profile of a rotating cluster of galaxies with an isothermal $`\beta `$-model (Cavaliere & Fusco-Femiano, 1976). In order to account for asphericities, we introduce the parameter $`\iota =r_\mathrm{c}/r_\mathrm{z}^{}`$, where $`r_\mathrm{c}`$ is the core radius of the cluster and $`r_\mathrm{z}^{}`$ is the distance in the direction $`z^{}`$, at which the electron density is equal to the density at the core radius in the spherical case. For $`\iota <1`$ the cluster is prolate, for $`\iota >1`$ it is oblate and spherical in the case $`\iota =1`$. The modified isothermal $`\beta `$-model then, in the main axis system $`S^{}`$, has the form

$`n_\mathrm{e}(𝒓)=n_{\mathrm{e0}}\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{x_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+y_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}+\iota ^2z_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}{r_\mathrm{c}^2}}\right)^\gamma ,`$ (7)
where $`n_{\mathrm{e0}}`$ is the central electron density and $`\gamma =3\beta /2`$, with a typical value $`\beta =2/3`$.

Very little, if anything, is known about the rotational properties of large-scale structures such as clusters of galaxies. But the existence of an angular momentum distribution in large scale structures is very likely: Self-gravitating flows generally produce rotating structures on small scales (e.g. spiral galaxies, stars), even if the progenitor structure has a vanishing net angular momentum. Flattened geometries of clusters of galaxies may be a hint, that an angular momentum profile exists on larger scales as well. Recent numerical simulation of off-center cluster mergers predict, that a significant angular momentum associated with velocities up to few $`10^3\text{km/s}`$ can be induced (Roettiger & Flores, 2000; Roettiger, Stone & Mushotzky, 1998). Also first observational evidence for an angular momentum distribution in clusters was found by measuring the Doppler shift of X-ray spectral lines (Dupke & Bregman, 2001). In recent simulations Bullock et al. (2001) found first evidence for an universal angular momentum profile in dark matter halos, which is consistent with solid body rotation with typical rotational velocity of $`5\%`$ of the circular velocity. Assuming that the gas follows the dark matter motion, we therefore use solid body rotation to describe the velocity field of the ICM (Further reasons are given in Cooray & Chen, 2002).

### 2.3 Kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect from cluster rotation

Equation (1) can be used to calculate the relative intensity change of the CMB due to the internal motion of the cluster medium. If we assume that the angular velocity vector $`𝝎`$ is anti-parallel to the $`z^{}`$-axis and we define the frame $`S`$ of an observer such that the $`z`$-axis lies along the line of sight and the $`x`$-axis lies along the projection of $`𝝎`$ onto the celestial plane, then the line of sight velocity is given as $`\beta _{}=\beta _\mathrm{c}y\mathrm{S}_i/r_\mathrm{c}`$, where $`\beta _\mathrm{c}=\omega r_\mathrm{c}/c`$ is the rotational velocity at the core radius and $`\mathrm{S}_i`$ denotes the sine of the inclination $`i`$ of the observer to the rotational axis. The derivation of the relative change of intensity for our simple model of a rotating cluster then reduces to the calculation of the optical depth as a function of $`x`$ and $`y`$, which is given in the appendix A. It follows

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu }{I_\nu }}\right)_{\mathrm{rot}}=G_\nu \beta _\mathrm{c}{\displaystyle \frac{y\mathrm{S}_i}{r_\mathrm{c}}}\tau (x,y,i,\gamma ),`$ (8)
where the definition of the optical depth $`\tau (x,y,i,\gamma )`$ is given in the appendix (Eq. 35). From Eq. (8) it is clear, that there is no effect for an inclination $`i=0`$ and it is maximal for $`i=\pi /2`$.

In Fig. 1 the relative change of intensity due to the rk-SZE is shown for an oblate cluster $`(\iota =1.1)`$ with a cutoff radius $`R=10r_\mathrm{c}`$, an inclination $`i=\pi /2`$ and $`\gamma =1.125`$. The distinct dipolar-like pattern arises from the fact that one part of the gas is moving towards and the other part is moving away from the observer. As can be seen in the overlayed plot, the peak value of the relative intensity change is about $`0.9\tau _\mathrm{c}\beta _\mathrm{c}G_\nu `$. For further discussion see Sect. 3.

### 2.4 Superposition of all the Sunyaev-Zeldovich contributions

In general the relative change of intensity of the CMB has contributions from the thermal, the kinetic and the rotational kinetic SZE. Assuming that the cluster of galaxies is moving with a line of sight velocity $`\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}`$ one finds with Eqns. (1), (4) and (8)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu }{I_\nu }}=\left(F_\nu \theta _\mathrm{e}+G_\nu \left[\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}+\beta _\mathrm{c}{\displaystyle \frac{y\mathrm{S}_i}{r_\mathrm{c}}}\right]\right)\tau (x,y,i,\gamma )`$ (9)
for our simple model of a rotating cluster as described above. Depending on the observed frequency $`\nu `$ the importance of the different contributions varies. The th-SZE dominates in the Rayleigh-Jeans and Wien part of the CMB spectrum, whereas the k-SZE and the rk-SZE dominate around the crossover frequency $`\nu _\mathrm{c}218\text{GHz}`$. If the cluster is not rotating, the absolute value of relative change of intensity reaches its maximum at the center of the cluster, where the line of sight optical depth is highest. If there is only a contribution of the rk-SZE the relative change of intensity has two distinct extrema symmetrically around the center of the cluster.

It is possible to find the positions of the extrema of the relative change of intensity analytically from Eq. (9), if one assumes $`R\mathrm{}`$ and $`\gamma >\frac{1}{2}`$. For $`\gamma \frac{1}{2}`$ the density profile decreases slower than $`1/r`$ and therefore leads to infinite optical depth for $`r\mathrm{}`$. Although $`R\mathrm{}`$ implies superluminal rotation speeds far away from the center of the cluster, these unphysical contributions to the rk-SZE are small for typical values of $`\gamma `$ due to the rapidly, radially decreasing density (see fig. 4 and the discussion).

Defining the parameter $`\eta `$ as

$`\eta ={\displaystyle \frac{2G_\nu \beta _\mathrm{c}}{F_\nu \theta _\mathrm{e}+\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}G_\nu }}`$ (10)
and using Eqns. (9) and (38) one finds the formal solution

$`y_{\mathrm{extr}}={\displaystyle \frac{r_\mathrm{c}(2\gamma 1)}{2\eta \mathrm{S}_i(\gamma 1)}}\left[1\pm \sqrt{1+{\displaystyle \frac{2\eta ^2\mathrm{S}_i^2(\gamma 1)}{(2\gamma 1)^2}}}\right]`$ (11)
for the positions of the extrema relative to the center. For $`\gamma 1`$ and $`\eta 2G_\nu \beta _\mathrm{c}`$ there is only one extremum at $`|y_{\mathrm{extr}}|=|\eta \mathrm{S}_i|r_\mathrm{c}/2`$. In the case $`\frac{1}{2}<\gamma <1`$ the value of $`\eta \mathrm{S}_i`$ is limited to the region $`|\eta \mathrm{S}_i|\zeta `$, where $`\zeta `$ is defined as

$`\zeta ={\displaystyle \frac{2\gamma 1}{\sqrt{2|\gamma 1|}}}.`$ (12)
For $`\gamma 1`$ the value of $`\eta \mathrm{S}_i`$ is arbitrary.

Equation (11) has the limiting forms ($`\gamma 1`$)

$`y_{\mathrm{extr}}{\displaystyle \frac{\eta \mathrm{S}_ir_\mathrm{c}}{2(2\gamma 1)}}\left[1+{\displaystyle \frac{(1\pm 1)(2\gamma 1)^2}{\eta ^2\mathrm{S}_i^2(\gamma 1)}}\right]`$ (13)
for $`\gamma >\frac{1}{2}`$ and $`|\eta \mathrm{S}_i|\zeta `$ and

$`y_{\mathrm{extr}}\pm {\displaystyle \frac{r_\mathrm{c}}{\sqrt{2(\gamma 1)}}}`$ (14)
for $`\gamma >1`$ and $`|\eta \mathrm{S}_i|\zeta `$. There are no extrema for $`\gamma 1`$ and $`|\eta \mathrm{S}_i|\zeta `$.

The first case, i.e. Eq. (13), corresponds to a small contribution of the rk-SZE to the relative change of intensity compared to the thermal and the kinetic SZE. In this case there is an extremum at $`y_{\mathrm{extr}}\eta \mathrm{S}_ir_\mathrm{c}/2(2\gamma 1)`$ near the center of the cluster and one far away from the center. The second case, i.e. Eq. (14), corresponds to a rk-SZE with negligible contributions of the thermal and the kinetic SZE. See Sect. 3 for further discussion.

### 2.5 Polarisation due to the rotational kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect

Polarized radiation can be described by the Stokes parameters $`I,Q,U,V`$. The $`Q`$ and $`U`$ parameters describe the degree of linear polarisation the $`V`$ parameter describes the degree of circular polarisation (for further details see Rybicki & Lightman., 1979). We assume that the incident CMB radiation is isotropic and unpolarized ($`Q=U=V=0`$) and that the scattering event can be treated as Thomson scattering (this means that the peculiar velocity $`\beta _\mathrm{p}`$ of the scattering electron obeys $`\beta _\mathrm{p}1`$ and $`h\nu m_\mathrm{e}c^2`$. The latter is valid for CMB photons). Since Thomson scattering does not produce circular polarisation we will drop the $`V`$-parameter in the following.

To calculate the contribution of the rk-SZE to the degree of linear polarisation we have to find the scattered Stokes parameters $`I^\mathrm{s},Q^\mathrm{s},U^\mathrm{s}`$ in the rest frame of the observer. The degree of linear polarisation is then given by

$`P={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{(Q^\mathrm{s})^2+(U^\mathrm{s})^2}}{I^{\mathrm{tot}}}},`$ (15)
where the total intensity $`I^{\mathrm{tot}}`$ is given as the sum of the incident intensity $`I_0`$, the scattered and the absorbed intensity: $`I^{\mathrm{tot}}=I_0(1\tau )+I^\mathrm{s}`$. The angle $`\varphi `$ between the $`x`$-axis and the plane of polarisation is given by

$`\mathrm{tan}2\varphi ={\displaystyle \frac{U^\mathrm{s}}{Q^\mathrm{s}}}.`$ (16)
Since the scattered Stokes parameters $`Q^\mathrm{s}`$ and $`U^\mathrm{s}`$ are proportional to $`\tau `$, consistent up to first order in $`\tau `$, the inverse of the total intensity in Eq. (15) can be approximated as $`1/I^{\mathrm{tot}}1/I_0`$.

Assuming that the incident intensity $`I_0`$ is isotropic, the scattered Stokes parameters $`dQ^\mathrm{s}`$ and $`dU^\mathrm{s}`$ in the observer frame for a small volume of electron gas with optical depth $`d\tau `$ and peculiar velocity $`\beta _\mathrm{p}`$ up to second order in $`\beta _\mathrm{p}`$ are given as (Sazonov & Sunyaev, 1999)

$`dQ^\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{10}}I_0G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}\beta _{,\mathrm{p}}^2\mathrm{cos}(2\chi )d\tau `$ (17a)
$`dU^\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{10}}I_0G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}\beta _{,\mathrm{p}}^2\mathrm{sin}(2\chi )d\tau ,`$ (17b)
where $`\beta _{,\mathrm{p}}`$ is the velocity component in the celestial plane and $`\chi `$ is the angle between $`\beta _{,\mathrm{p}}`$ and the $`x`$-axis of the observer.

For the model of a rotating cluster as described above the following relations can be found

$`\beta _{,\mathrm{r}}^2\mathrm{cos}(2\chi _\mathrm{r})`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _\mathrm{c}^2\left[\stackrel{~}{y}^2\mathrm{C}_i^2\left(\stackrel{~}{x}\mathrm{C}_i+\stackrel{~}{z}\mathrm{S}_i\right)^2\right]`$ (18a)
$`\beta _{,\mathrm{r}}^2\mathrm{sin}(2\chi _\mathrm{r})`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _\mathrm{c}^2\stackrel{~}{y}\mathrm{C}_i\left(\stackrel{~}{x}\mathrm{C}_i+\stackrel{~}{z}\mathrm{S}_i\right),`$ (18b)
where $`\beta _{,\mathrm{r}}`$ is the rotational velocity component in the celestial plane, $`\chi _\mathrm{r}`$ is the angle between $`\beta _{,\mathrm{r}}`$ and the $`x`$-axis and $`\stackrel{~}{x}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{y}`$ are the $`x,y`$-coordinates in units of the core radius $`r_\mathrm{c}`$. Inserting this into Eqns. (17a) and (17b) and integrating along the line of sight we find

$`Q_\mathrm{r}^\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa \beta _\mathrm{c}^2\left[\left(\stackrel{~}{y}^2\stackrel{~}{x}^2\right)\mathrm{C}_i^2\tau \mathrm{S}_i^2J2\stackrel{~}{x}\mathrm{C}_i\mathrm{S}_iH\right]`$ (19a)
$`U_\mathrm{r}^\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`2\kappa \beta _\mathrm{c}^2\stackrel{~}{y}\mathrm{C}_i\left[\stackrel{~}{x}\mathrm{C}_i\tau +\mathrm{S}_iH\right],`$ (19b)
where $`\kappa =\frac{1}{10}I_0G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}`$ and the optical depth $`\tau (x,y,i,\gamma )`$ and integrals $`J(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ and $`H(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ are defined in the appendix (Eq. 35, 40a and 40b). Now, with Eq. (15) the degree of linear polarisation due to the rk-SZE up to second order in $`\beta _{,\mathrm{r}}`$ follows as

$`P_\mathrm{r}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{10}}G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}\beta _\mathrm{c}^2[(\stackrel{~}{r}^2\mathrm{C}_i^2\tau +\mathrm{S}_i[\mathrm{S}_iJ+2\stackrel{~}{x}\mathrm{C}_iH])^2.`$ (20)
$`.+4\stackrel{~}{y}^2\mathrm{S}_i^2\mathrm{C}_i^2(H^2\tau J)]^{\frac{1}{2}}.`$
Here $`\stackrel{~}{r}`$ is the distance from the center of the cluster in units of the core radius $`r_\mathrm{c}`$. The direction of the planes of polarisation can be found with Eq. (16).

For an inclination $`i=0`$ with Eq. (20) one finds

$`P_{i=0,\mathrm{r}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{10}}G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}\beta _\mathrm{c}^2\stackrel{~}{r}^2\tau (x,y,0,\gamma )`$ (21)
for the degree of linear polarisation. The planes of polarisation lie along the radial vector. This can be also found by inserting $`\beta _{,i=0,\mathrm{r}}=\beta _\mathrm{c}\stackrel{~}{r}`$ into Eq. (2) and integrating along the line of sight.

The degree of linear polarisation due to the rk-SZE is shown in Fig. 2 for an oblate cluster $`(\iota =1.1)`$ with a cutoff radius $`R=10r_\mathrm{c}`$ and $`\gamma =1.125`$. The short lines indicate the direction of the planes of polarisation and their length the degree of polarisation. As can be seen in the overlayed plot, the degree of polarisation falls off steeply towards the edge of the cluster.

For an inclination $`i=\pi /2`$ again with Eq. (20) one finds

$`P_{i=\pi /2,\mathrm{r}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{10}}G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}\beta _\mathrm{c}^2J(x,y,\pi /2,\gamma )`$ (22)
for the degree of linear polarisation. The planes of polarisation lie along the $`x`$-axis. Alternatively this result can be found by inserting $`\beta _{,i=\pi /2,\mathrm{r}}=\beta _\mathrm{c}\stackrel{~}{z}`$ into Eq. (2) and integrating along the line of sight.

### 2.6 Polarisation due to combined kinetic and rotational kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect

If the cluster is rotating and in addition moving with the bulk translatory velocity $`\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}`$ in the celestial plane one can find the relations

$`\beta _{}^2\mathrm{cos}(2\chi )`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}^2\mathrm{cos}(2\alpha )+\beta _{,\mathrm{r}}^2\mathrm{cos}(2\chi _\mathrm{r})`$ (23a)
$`2\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}\beta _\mathrm{c}\left[\left(\stackrel{~}{y}\mathrm{C}_\alpha +\stackrel{~}{x}\mathrm{S}_\alpha \right)\mathrm{C}_i+\stackrel{~}{z}\mathrm{S}_\alpha \mathrm{S}_i\right]`$
$`\beta _{}^2\mathrm{sin}(2\chi )`$ $`=`$ $`\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}^2\mathrm{sin}(2\alpha )+\beta _{,\mathrm{r}}^2\mathrm{sin}(2\chi _\mathrm{r})`$ (23b)
$`2\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}\beta _\mathrm{c}\left[\left(\stackrel{~}{y}\mathrm{S}_\alpha \stackrel{~}{x}\mathrm{C}_\alpha \right)\mathrm{C}_i\stackrel{~}{z}\mathrm{C}_\alpha \mathrm{S}_i\right],`$
where $`\beta _{}`$ is the total velocity in the celestial plane, $`\chi `$ and $`\alpha `$ are the angles between the $`x`$-axis and $`\beta _{}`$ and $`\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}`$ respectively and the definitions (18) were used. Now with Eqns. (17a) and (17b) we find

$`Q^\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`Q_\mathrm{r}^\mathrm{s}+\kappa \beta _{,\mathrm{b}}^2\mathrm{cos}(2\alpha )\tau `$ (24a)
$`2\kappa \beta _{,\mathrm{b}}\beta _\mathrm{c}\left[\left(\stackrel{~}{y}\mathrm{C}_\alpha +\stackrel{~}{x}\mathrm{S}_\alpha \right)\mathrm{C}_i\tau +\mathrm{S}_\alpha \mathrm{S}_iH\right]`$
$`U^\mathrm{s}`$ $`=`$ $`U_\mathrm{r}^\mathrm{s}\kappa \beta _{,\mathrm{b}}^2\mathrm{sin}(2\alpha )\tau `$ (24b)
$`+2\kappa \beta _{,\mathrm{b}}\beta _\mathrm{c}\left[\left(\stackrel{~}{y}\mathrm{S}_\alpha \stackrel{~}{x}\mathrm{C}_\alpha \right)\mathrm{C}_i\tau \mathrm{C}_\alpha \mathrm{S}_iH\right].`$
To demonstrate the effects of the rk-SZE on the degree of linear polarisation of the CMB, we now consider the two special cases $`i=0`$ and $`i=\pi /2`$ with an additional bulk translatory motion of the cluster along the $`y`$-axis.

#### Case $`i=0`$ and $`\alpha =\pi /2`$

With Eqns. (24) one finds in this case

$`P_{i=0}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{10}}G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}\beta _{}^2\tau (x,y,0,\gamma )`$ (25)
with $`\beta _{}^2=\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}^2+\beta _\mathrm{c}^2\stackrel{~}{r}^2+2\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}\beta _\mathrm{c}\stackrel{~}{x}`$. The planes of polarisation lie in the direction

$`𝒆_P={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta _{}}}\left(\begin{array}{c}\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}+\beta _\mathrm{c}\stackrel{~}{x}\\ \beta _\mathrm{c}\stackrel{~}{y}\end{array}\right).`$ (28)
If the ICM is not rotating, the planes of polarisation lie along the $`x`$-axis. With an additional rotation the planes are tilted by an angle

$`\mathrm{cos}\phi `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}+\beta _\mathrm{c}\stackrel{~}{x}}{\beta _{}}}`$ (29)
which can be approximated by

$`\mathrm{cos}\phi `$ $``$ $`1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{y}^2\delta ^2+\stackrel{~}{x}\stackrel{~}{y}^2\delta ^3`$ (30)
for small ratios $`\delta =\beta _\mathrm{c}/\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}`$. This can be seen in Fig. 3.

#### Case $`i=\pi /2`$ and $`\alpha =\pi /2`$

The total degree of linear polarisation in this case is the sum of the contributions due to the rotation and due to the bulk translatory motion

$`P_{i=\pi /2}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{10}}G_{\nu ,\mathrm{pol}}\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}^2\tau (x,y,\pi /2,\gamma )`$
$`\left(1+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta _\mathrm{c}^2}{\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{J(x,y,\pi /2,\gamma )}{\tau (x,y,\pi /2,\gamma )}}\right).`$
Assuming $`\gamma =1`$ the relative contribution due to the rk-SZE to the central degree of polarisation is given as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{P_{i=\pi /2,\mathrm{r}}}{P_{i=\pi /2,\mathrm{b}}}}=\left[{\displaystyle \frac{R}{\mathrm{arctan}R}}1\right]\delta ^2,`$ (32)
where $`R`$ is the cutoff radius of the cluster. For further discussion see the following Sect.

## 3 Discussion

#### Kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect from cluster rotation

In Fig. 1 the relative change of intensity of the CMB due to the rk-SZE is shown for an edge on ($`i=\pi /2`$) view of an oblate cluster $`(\iota =1.1)`$ with a cutoff radius $`R=10r_\mathrm{c}`$ and $`\gamma =1.125`$ corresponding to $`\beta =3/4`$. As mentioned before the distinct dipolar-like pattern arises from the fact that one part of the gas is moving towards and the other part is moving away from the observer. If the cluster is viewed face on ($`i=0`$) the effect is vanishing, since in that case there are no line of sight velocity components.

Figure 4 shows the dependence of the maximal relative change of intensity of the CMB due to the rk-SZE of $`\gamma `$ for different inclinations $`i`$. For increasing $`\gamma `$ the maximum value decreases. This is due to the fact that with the increasing steepness of the electron density profile the main contributions to the intensity change come from more inner regions of the cluster, which have smaller velocities. In the case $`R\mathrm{}`$ the relative change of intensity is slightly bigger than for $`R=10r_\mathrm{c}`$. This shows that the contributions of superluminal velocities far away from the center are negligible. There is no maximum for $`\gamma 1`$ and $`R\mathrm{}`$. Figure 4 also shows the dependence of the position $`y_{\mathrm{max}}`$ of the maximal relative change of intensity of $`\gamma `$. For $`R=10r_\mathrm{c}`$ it was found numerically with Eq. (8). In the case $`R\mathrm{}`$ we used $`y_{\mathrm{max}}=\eta \mathrm{S}_ir_\mathrm{c}/2(2\gamma 1)`$ from Eq. (13). For increasing $`\gamma `$ the position of the maximum moves towards the center of the cluster. This is again due to the increasing steepness of the electron density profile. The position of the maximum does not depend on the inclination $`i`$.

#### Estimates from observational data

In a recent paper of Reese et al. (2002) the th-SZE at a frequency of $`\nu 30\text{GHz}`$ for a sample of 18 clusters in the redshift range from $`z0.14`$ to $`z0.78`$ was examined. If we assume that all the clusters in the sample are rotating and they are all observed edge-on we can estimate the position of the maximal change of intensity due to the rk-SZE relative to the center of the cluster with the results for $`\beta `$ and $`r_\mathrm{c}`$ given in Reese et al. (2002) . The estimates are given in Table 1. In the analysis of Reese et al. (2002) the usual assumption of an infinite cluster $`R\mathrm{}`$ was made. In this case, with our model of a rotating cluster there are no distinct extrema for $`\gamma 1`$ (see (14)). The estimates for the case $`R=10r_\mathrm{c}`$ correspond to the assumption of an infinite cluster but a finite region of rotation. A typical value for the position of the maximal relative change of intensity relative to the center of the cluster for this sample is $`y_{\mathrm{max}}2.6r_\mathrm{c}`$.

With the results of Reese et al. (2002) it is also possible to estimate the central optical depth $`\tau _\mathrm{c}`$. As mentioned in their paper, relativistic corrections to the th-SZE for their set of clusters are typically of the order of a few $`\%`$ in the observed frequency band. Neglecting these corrections we can make use of Eq. (5) and (6). Assuming an infinite isothermal $`\beta `$-model (Cavaliere & Fusco-Femiano, 1976) for the electron density one finds

$`\tau _\mathrm{c}={\displaystyle \frac{2\mathrm{\Gamma }(\gamma )}{\sqrt{\pi }\mathrm{\Gamma }(\gamma \frac{1}{2})}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{F_\nu \theta _\mathrm{e}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Delta }T_0}{T_{\mathrm{CMB}}}}`$ (33)
for the central optical depth, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(x)`$ is the Gamma-function and $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_0/T_{\mathrm{CMB}}`$ is the central temperature decrement due to the th-SZE relative to the CMB temperature $`T_{\mathrm{CMB}}=2.728\text{K}`$ (Fixsen et al., 1996). The typical central optical depth for the sample of clusters of Reese et al. (2002) is $`\tau _\mathrm{c}10^310^2`$. With the estimates of the optical depth for each cluster it is possible to calculate the value of the maximal relative change of intensity due to the rk-SZE. The results are given in Table 1. As mentioned before, the results for $`R\mathrm{}`$ and $`R=10r_\mathrm{c}`$ agree well with each other. For the maximum of $`(\mathrm{\Delta }I_\nu /I_\nu )_{\mathrm{rot}}`$ we find a typical value of $`1.4G_\nu \beta _\mathrm{c}\tau _\mathrm{c}`$.

Cooray & Chen (2002) argue that the velocity at the core radius can be of the order of a few up to a few ten km/s, that is $`\beta _\mathrm{c}10^510^4`$, if there was a recent merger maybe even $`\beta _\mathrm{c}510^4`$ (Roettiger & Flores, 2000; Roettiger, Stone & Mushotzky, 1998). For an observation near the crossover frequency, $`\nu _\mathrm{c}217\text{GHz}`$, where the kinetic and the rotational kinetic SZE reach their maximum, the relative change of intensity of the CMB due to the rk-SZE should lead to a temperature change of the order of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{rot}}10^110\mu `$K, for a recent merger even up to $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{rot}}100\mu `$K. For the sample of clusters from Reese et al. (2002) the expected temperature change at the crossover frequency is given in Table 1 assuming $`\beta _\mathrm{c}10^4`$. It ranges from $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{rot}}3.5\mu `$K for $`\beta _\mathrm{c}10^4`$ up to $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{rot}}146\mu `$K for a recent merger. Our results lie in the range predicted by Cooray & Chen (2002).

#### Superposition of all the Sunyaev-Zeldovich contributions

If the SZE of a rotating cluster is observed, there are in general contributions of all the different SZEs. The thermal and the kinetic SZE both peak in the center of the cluster, while the rk-SZE has a maximum and a minimum displaced symmetrically around the center. We have shown that the absolute value of relative change of intensity for the superposition of all the different SZEs has a maximum near the center. For an infinite cluster its position is approximately at $`y_{\mathrm{max}}=\eta \mathrm{S}_ir_\mathrm{c}/2(2\gamma 1)`$ for small $`\eta `$, where $`\eta `$ gives the relative contribution of the rk-SZE to the sum of the thermal and the kinetic SZE and is strongly dependent on the frequency (see Eq.(10)).

Observing a cluster at the crossover frequency the parameter $`\eta `$ becomes equal to $`2\beta _\mathrm{c}/\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}`$ and is therefore for typical bulk translatory velocities $`\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}10^410^3`$ of the order $`\eta 210^2210^1`$. Assuming an inclination $`i=\pi /2`$ the displacement of the maximal relative change of intensity is a few $`\%`$ of the core radius of the cluster. For a typical core radius of a few ten arcsec this means a displacement up to a few arcsec. The displacement is maximal at the crossover frequency and is negligible in the Rayleigh-Jeans part of the CMB spectrum. Since the main contribution to the peak value of the relative change of intensity in the considered case comes from the k-SZE, one can in principle use this effect to measure the rotational velocity component of clusters by measuring the frequency dependent displacement.

#### Polarisation due to the kinetic Sunyaev-Zeldovich effect from cluster rotation

The degree of linear polarisation of the CMB radiation due to the rk-SZE for arbitrary inclination of the observer to the rotation axis can be described with Eq. (20). For the case $`i=0`$ we showed, that the planes of polarisation for a superposed kinetic and rotational kinetic SZE are tilted by a angle given by Eq. (29). If we assume that the bulk translatory velocity $`\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}`$ is 10 to 100 times larger than the rotational velocity at the core radius $`\beta _\mathrm{c}`$, then the planes of polarisation at the cluster core radius are tilted by an angle of the order of $`0.6^{}`$ to $`6^{}`$ (see Eq. (30)). This tilt is frequency independent and can therefore be distinguished from other effects leading to rotation of the planes of polarisation, like Faraday rotation due to intracluster magnetic fields.

For a rotating cluster with cutoff radius $`R=10r_\mathrm{c}`$ and $`\gamma =1`$, which is in addition moving with a bulk translatory velocity $`\beta _{,\mathrm{b}}=10\beta _\mathrm{c}`$, the contribution of the rk-SZE to the central degree of polarisation is of the order of $`6\%`$ for an edge-on observation (see Eq. (32)). This is equivalent to a temperature change of the order of $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{r}10^4\mu `$K and therefore still a challenge for the future. For high precision measurement of the transversal peculiar velocity component $`\beta _{,\mathrm{pec}}`$ of clusters the rk-SZE has to be taken into account.

Here we want to note that the most important contribution to the polarisation ($`0.1(\tau /0.02)\mu `$K) arises from the quadrupole component of the CMB anisotropy (Sazonov & Sunyaev, 1999). Another important contribution to the polarisation ($`0.01\theta _\mathrm{e}\tau ^2`$), which can overcome the k-SZE and the rk-SZE at high frequencies, comes from multiple scattering inside rich clusters (for a detailed overview see Sazonov & Sunyaev, 1999). Since the frequency dependence of all these effects is different they can be separated by multifrequency measurements.

## 4 Conclusions

We have derived analytic formulae describing the relative change of intensity and the degree of linear polarisation of the CMB radiation due to the kinetic SZE of a rotating cluster of galaxies (Eq. (8) and (20)). We also have found analytic formulae for the superposition of all possible SZE contributions (Eq. (9) and (24)). We have estimated the possible amplitude of the relative change of intensity due to the rk-SZE for a sample of 18 clusters of galaxies in a redshift range from $`z0.14`$ to $`z0.78`$ (see Table 1). Our results show, that the contribution of the rk-SZE to the peak temperature change for this sample can be expected to range from $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{rot}}3.5\mu `$K for $`\beta _\mathrm{c}10^4`$ up to $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_{\mathrm{rot}}146\mu `$K for a recent merger ($`\beta _\mathrm{c}510^4`$) of rich clusters. This agrees with the range predicted by Cooray & Chen (2002).

We have also shown that due to the superposition of the thermal, the kinetic and the rotational kinetic SZE there is a frequency dependent displacement (Eq. (11)) of the peak value of the relative intensity change, which in principle can be used to examine the properties of the rotational velocity component of the ICM. Ground based interferometric telescopes should be able to detect this effect in the near future. Since the angular momentum distribution is not easily measurable with other observational techniques, this aspect of the rk-SZE might provide a new possibility of getting insights into the internal dynamics of clusters of galaxies.

In the future polarisation measurements of the CMB radiation may become feasible. In this work we have shown that the polarisation map following from the k-SZE can alter significantly due to the rk-SZE. Although the contribution of the rk-SZE to the degree of polarisation relative to the k-SZE is only of the order of a few $`\%`$ (quantitatively $`\mathrm{\Delta }T_\mathrm{r}10^4\mu `$K), the directions of planes of polarisation can be tilted by an angle, which is of the order of a few degrees (Eq. (30)). Since this tilt is frequency independent it can be easily separated from other effects, for example Faraday rotation. In the Wien region of the CMB spectrum the degree of polarisation due to the kinetic and the rotational kinetic SZE increases by a factor of $`10100`$. Therefore measurements of the CMB polarisation should be performed in this frequency range.

###### Acknowledgements.

We acknowledge hospitality at the Universitäts-Sternwarte Göttingen, where most of this work was done in the summer of 2001 as part of the diploma thesis of J.C. We also want to thank S.Y. Sazonov and T.A. Enßlin for valuable discussions which helped improving the paper.

## Appendix A Derivation of the optical depth

The optical depth is defined as the line of sight integral $`\tau =\sigma _\mathrm{T}n_\mathrm{e}𝑑z`$ over the electron density. Transforming the electron density profile (7) into the frame of the observer and defining the following abbreviations

$`\xi `$ $`=`$ $`bz{\displaystyle \frac{d}{b}}`$ (34a)
$`A`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{1+a^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{d}{b}}\right)^2}`$ (34b)
$`a^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{C}_i^2+\iota ^2\mathrm{S}_i^2)x^2+y^2}{r_\mathrm{c}^2}}`$ (34c)
$`b^2`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{S}_i^2+\iota ^2\mathrm{C}_i^2`$ (34d)
$`d`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{C}_i\mathrm{S}_i(\iota ^21)x}{r_\mathrm{c}}},`$ (34e)
where we used $`\mathrm{S}_i=\mathrm{sin}i`$ and $`\mathrm{C}_i=\mathrm{cos}i`$, the optical depth as a function of $`x`$ and $`y`$ is given as

$`\tau (x,y,i,\gamma )={\displaystyle \frac{\tau _\mathrm{c}}{\sqrt{\mathrm{S}_i^2+\iota ^2\mathrm{C}_i^2}}}I(x,y,i,\gamma ).`$ (35)
Here we defined

$`\tau _\mathrm{c}`$ $`=`$ $`2\sigma _\mathrm{T}n_{\mathrm{e0}}r_\mathrm{c}`$ (36a)
$`I(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle _0^{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}}}\left(A^2+\xi ^2\right)^\gamma 𝑑\xi `$ (36b)
$`\xi _{\mathrm{max}}`$ $`=`$ $`\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{R^2}{r_\mathrm{c}^2}}+1A^2}.`$ (36c)
The upper limit $`\xi _{\mathrm{max}}`$ results from the boundary of the cluster, which is parametrized by $`R`$ assuming an ellipsoidal boundary surface. The integral (36b) can be evaluated analytically and is given as

$`I(x,y,i,\gamma )={\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}}{A^{2\gamma }}}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},\gamma ;{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}};{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}^2}{A^2}}),`$ (37)
where we made use of the hypergeometric function $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;z)`$ (see Abramovitz & Stegun, 1965).

In the case when $`R\mathrm{}`$ and for $`\gamma >1/2`$ the integral $`I(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ reduces to

$`I_{\mathrm{}}(x,y,i,\gamma )={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{\pi }}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left(\gamma \frac{1}{2}\right)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\gamma )}}\left(A^2\right)^{\frac{1}{2}\gamma },`$ (38)
where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(z)=_0^{\mathrm{}}t^{z1}e^t𝑑t`$ is the Gamma-function.

In the case of $`\gamma =1`$ the integral $`I(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ reduces to

$`I(x,y,i,1)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{A}}\mathrm{arctan}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}}{A}}\right)`$ (39)
and has the limiting form $`I_{\mathrm{}}(x,y,i,1)=\pi /2A`$ for $`R\mathrm{}`$.

## Appendix B Definition of the integrals $`J(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ and $`H(x,y,i,\gamma )`$

In the derivation of the degree of linear polarisation due to the rotation of the cluster medium the integrals

$`J(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\tau _\mathrm{c}}{b^3}}I_2(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ (40a)
$`H(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\tau _\mathrm{c}}{b^2}}I_1(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ (40b)
arise, where we used the abbreviations of appendix A and defined the integral $`I_n`$ as

$`I_n(x,y,i,\gamma )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle _{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}}^{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}}}\left(\xi +{\displaystyle \frac{d}{b}}\right)^n\left(A^2+\xi ^2\right)^\gamma 𝑑\xi .`$ (41)
In the limit $`R\mathrm{}`$ the integral $`I_n(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ diverges for the combinations $`n=2,\gamma 3/2`$ and $`n=1,\gamma 1`$. For finite $`R`$ the solutions

$`I_1(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{t\xi _{\mathrm{max}}}{A^{2\gamma }}}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},\gamma ;{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}};{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}^2}{A^2}})`$ (42a)
$`I_2(x,y,i,\gamma )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}^3}{A^{2\gamma }}}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}({\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}},\gamma ;{\displaystyle \frac{5}{2}};{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}^2}{A^2}})`$ (42b)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{t^2\xi _{\mathrm{max}}}{A^{2\gamma }}}{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}},\gamma ;{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}};{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}^2}{A^2}})`$
can be found, where we defined $`t=d/b`$ and made use of the hypergeometric function $`{}_{2}{}^{}F_{1}^{}(a,b;c;z)`$ (see Abramovitz & Stegun, 1965). For $`\gamma =1`$ and finite $`R`$ one finds the solutions

$`I_1(x,y,i,1)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{t}{A}}\mathrm{arctan}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}}{A}}\right)`$ (43a)
$`I_2(x,y,i,1)`$ $`=`$ $`\xi _{\mathrm{max}}{\displaystyle \frac{A^2t^2}{A}}\mathrm{arctan}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\xi _{\mathrm{max}}}{A}}\right).`$ (43b)


format: text

text:
# A Hamiltonian Formulation for Long Internal Waves

## 1 Introduction

The term ocean waves typically evokes images of surface waves shaking ships during storms in the open ocean, or breaking rhythmically near the shore. Yet much of the ocean wave action takes place underneath the surface, and consists of modulations not of the air-water interface, but of invisible surfaces of constant density. These internal waves are ubiquitous in the ocean, contain a large amount of energy, and affect significantly the processes involved in water mixing and transport.

Our knowledge of the typical scales and energy content of oceanic internal waves advanced significantly through improved and more widespread observations in the last few decades. In particular, an empirically based formula that Munk and Garrett developed in the seventies (now called the Garrett Munk spectra of internal waves) synthesizes magnificently a seemingly universal distribution of energy among scales . Description of modern observational work can be found in . In particular, in  the deviation from the Garrett-Munk spectra are documented, and in  the dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy is measured. On the theoretical side, this distribution has been generally understood as due to the effects of nonlinear interaction among waves, amenable to a description based on kinetic equations analogous to the ones of statistical mechanics. Probably the first kinetic equation for internal waves was written in , though not within the frame of a Hamiltonian formalism.

A comprehensive review of a significant line of work developed in the seventies and eighties is provided in  and references therein. Some important references not cited there are . More recent work includes, for example,  where a thorough perturbative Eulerian–Boussinesq approach in a nonrotating environment is developed. See  for a detailed discussion of the relation between the spectral tails of Lagrangian and Eulerian flow descriptions. One can also use ray theory to study internal wave scattering, as in , where the Doppler-spreading of short internal wave packets in the atmosphere and the ocean is studied or, as in , where the refraction of short oceanic internal waves by a spectrum of large amplitude inertia waves is considered.

Our work differs from the line reviewed in  in various ways. In  the wave dynamics is formulated in a fully Lagrangian framework, while our isopycnal formulation is Eulerian in the horizontal coordinates and Lagrangian in the vertical. To write down the equations of motion in the Lagrangian framework, the system’s Lagrangian is expanded in powers of the assumed small displacement of the fluid parcels. This description is therefore approximate even at the level of the dynamic equations of motion. Such a description fails to adequately describe the advection of small scale waves by larger scale flows, as well as the interaction of waves with the vortical part of motion. This is acknowledged in , which proposes as a challenge the rederivation of the kinetic equation in an Eulerian framework. In the present article, we fulfill this program, and use therefore as a small parameter not the small displacement of fluid parcels, but the weakness of the nonlinear interaction among waves.

A fundamental question posed in the eighties is whether the GM spectra is close to the statistical steady state solution of the kinetic equation. The discussion in  indicates that GM is not inconsistent with the kinetic equation proposed, and may be close to being a steady state solution. Recently, the authors have put forward a study showing that power law spectra which, in the high frequency limit, are very close to GM, constitute exact analytical steady state solutions of a kinetic equation for hydrostatic flows described in isopycnal coordinates . The present article extends those early results, by starting to build a theory that includes frequencies comparable to the rate of rotation of the Earth, and that accounts for the existence of large–scale horizontal eddies and vertical shear in the ocean, over which the internal waves are superimposed.

The main contribution of this paper is the development of a novel Hamiltonian formalism for the description of internal waves. Our approach is general enough to include the effects of the Earth’s rotation, of large–scale eddies and of vertical shear on the waves, yet exclusive enough in its assumptions to yield a relatively simple, manageable model. The main assumption is that the waves are long enough to be in hydrostatic balance, yet they live in horizontal scales shorter than those characterizing the underlying eddies. This allows us to consider as unperturbed flow an arbitrary layered distribution of potential vorticity and vertical shear –that is, potential vorticity and horizontal velocity profiles which adopt independent, horizontally uniform values at each depth. Such hydrostatically balanced, horizontally uniform, vertically varying profiles are quite representative of long waves in the real ocean; they arise due to the highly anisotropic nature of the ocean’s eddie diffusivity, which tends to homogenize the flow along isopycnal surfaces.

Hamiltonian structures for stratified incompressible flows have been a subject of active research over the last few decades. Though a complete review of the subject is outside the scope of this paper, we list here some of the most important results. The first paper to derive a Hamiltonian structure for stratified internal waves is probably , where a representation is proposed based on Clebsh-like variables. The resulting Hamiltonian is an explicit infinite power series of canonically conjugated variables. In , a Hamiltonian formalism for internal waves in isopycnal coordinates is developed. No hydrostatic approximation is invoked, and thus the resulting Hamiltonian is expressed as an explicit power-series in the powers of the assumed small nonlinearity. Potential problems in using Clebsh variables for stratified flows have been addressed in . Problems of describing the Hamiltonian structures to describe interaction of wave and vortex mode is addressed in . In addition to the references above, a noncanonical Hamiltonian structure based on a Lie-Poisson framework has been developed in . More recently, two broad reviews on Hamiltonian structures for fluids have been published .

We choose to describe the flow in isopycnal coordinates, replacing the depth $`z`$ by the density $`\rho `$ as the independent vertical coordinate. The advantage of such semi–Lagrangian description is manifold. First, it eliminates the need to handle the vertical velocity explicitly, which renders the equations much more tractable. At a deeper level, it greatly simplifies the description of the interaction between waves and vorticity, since potential vorticity is preserved along particle trajectories, and these remain on isopycnals in the absence of mixing. In particular, if the potential vorticity is uniform throughout an isopycnal surface, it remains so forever. This is the situations we choose to describe: a profile of vorticity which varies across surfaces of constant density, but is homogeneous along them. Such “pancake–like” profiles are quite representative of the intermediate scales in the ocean, smaller than the dominant eddies, but still containing a significant wealth of internal waves. Modeling this scenario constitutes an intermediate step between considering irrotational frameworks, and studying the fully turbulent interaction between arbitrary profiles of vorticity and waves.

Finally, the equations in isopycnal coordinates are highly reminiscent of the equations for a shallow single layer of homogeneous fluid. We exploit this formal analogy to develop a Hamiltonian formalism for internal waves which extends naturally similar formalisms for shallow waters.

The plan of this paper is the following. In section (2), we develop a hierarchy of Hamiltonian descriptions for long waves. Our goal here is to develop a general Hamiltonian formalism for nonlinear internal waves in a rotating environment, superimposed on a background of layered potential vorticity and horizontally uniform shear. However, we choose to do so in stages, starting in the simple context of linear, irrotational shallow water equations, and adding progressively nonlinearity, stratification, the Coriolis effect, and nontrivial potential vorticity. This not only clarifies the logic and essential simplicity of the structure of the final Hamiltonian, but also yields along the way a series of Hamiltonian structures for problems of intermediate simplicity. In section (3), we derive kinetic equations for the time evolution of the energy spectrum of internal waves, based on the Hamiltonian description developed in the previous section. For this, we constrain ourselves to consider a neutral background with neither shear nor vorticity. However, we still include the Coriolis effect. Then, in section (4), we find approximate stationary solutions to the kinetic equations corresponding to a direct cascade of energy toward the finest scales, in the high–frequency limit, where the effects of the Earth’s rotation are negligible. This was the situation considered in . Finally, in section (5), we provide some concluding remarks, and discuss open problems for further research.

## 2 Hamiltonian formalism for long internal waves

In this section we develop a Hamiltonian formalism for long internal waves in a rotating environment. We choose to do so progressing through a hierarchy of models, which starts with linear, irrotational shallow water waves in a non–rotating environment, and ends up with fully nonlinear internal waves in a stratified and rotating environment, superimposed on an arbitrary layered distribution of potential vorticity.

### 2.1 Linear, Non-Rotating Shallow Waters

In non–dimensional form, the shallow–water equations take the form

$`h_t+(h\stackrel{}{u})`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (1)
$`\stackrel{}{u}_t+(\stackrel{}{u})\stackrel{}{u}+h`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (2)
Here $`h`$ represents the height of the free–surface, and $`\stackrel{}{u}`$ the horizontal velocity field. The height $`h`$ has been normalized by its mean value $`H`$, the velocity field $`u`$ by the characteristic speed $`c=\sqrt{gh}`$ (here $`g`$ is the gravity constant), the horizontal coordinates by a typical wavelength $`L`$, and time by $`L/c`$. Writing

$$h=1+\eta ,$$

and assuming that $`\eta `$ and $`|u|`$ are much smaller than one, one obtains to leading order the linearized equations

$`\eta _t+\stackrel{}{u}`$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (3)
$`\stackrel{}{u}_t+\eta `$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (4)
At this linear level, the dynamics of waves and vorticity decouple, with the former satisfying the wave equation, and the latter remaining constant in time. In particular, if the flow is initially irrotational (i.e., $`\times \stackrel{}{u}=0`$), it will remain so forever. Hence we may restrict our attention here to irrotational flows. These may be described by a scalar potential $`\varphi `$, such that

$$\stackrel{}{u}=\varphi .$$

For such flows, the system in (3, 4) reduces to

$`\eta _t+\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\varphi _t+\eta `$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
This system is Hamiltonian, with

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left(\eta ^2+|\varphi |^2\right)𝑑x.$$
(5)
The Hamiltonian form of the equations is

$`\eta _t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \varphi }},`$ (6)
$`\varphi _t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \eta }}.`$ (7)
Notice that the Hamiltonian in (5) is the sum of the potential and kinetic energy of the system. The former is actually given by $`\frac{1}{2}(1+\eta )^2`$, but the difference can be absorbed by a gauge transformation of the potential $`\varphi `$. Our goal is to preserve the essential simplicity of this formulation when we add nonlinearity, ambient rotation and stratification.

### 2.2 Nonlinear, Non-Rotating Shallow Waters

For the fully nonlinear shallow–water equations in (1, 2), waves and vorticity no longer decouple (in fact, the nonlinear interaction of waves and vorticity is among the main theoretical obstacles to a full description of turbulence.) However, it is still true that a flow which starts irrotational stays so forever. Hence we may restrict ourselves to considering this scenario, introduce again the scalar potential $`\varphi `$, and rewrite (1, 2) in the form

$`h_t+(h\varphi )`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\varphi _t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\varphi |^2+h`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
This system is also Hamiltonian, with

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left(h^2+h|\varphi |^2\right)𝑑x,$$
(9)
and canonical equations

$`h_t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \varphi }},`$
$`\varphi _t`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta h}}.`$
In this case, the Hamiltonian is the sum of the potential and kinetic energy, without qualifications.

### 2.3 Nonlinear, Non-Rotating, Internal Waves

The non–dimensional equations of motion for long internal waves in an incompressible, stratified fluid with hydrostatic balance, are given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{u}}{dt}}+{\displaystyle \frac{P}{\rho }}=0,`$ $`P_z+\rho =0,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\rho }{dt}}=0,`$ $`\stackrel{}{u}+w_z=0,`$
where $`\stackrel{}{u}`$ and $`w`$ are the horizontal and vertical components of the velocity respectively, $`P`$ is the pressure, $`\rho `$ the density, $`=(_x,_y)`$ the horizontal gradient operator, and

$$\frac{d}{dt}=\frac{}{t}+\stackrel{}{u}+w\frac{}{z}$$

is the Lagrangian derivative following a particle.

Changing to isopycnal coordinates ($`x,y,\rho ,t`$) , where the roles of the vertical coordinate $`z`$ and the density $`\rho `$ as independent and dependent variables are reversed, the equations become:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{D\stackrel{}{u}}{Dt}}+{\displaystyle \frac{M}{\rho }}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`M_\rho `$ $`=`$ $`z,`$
$`z_{\rho ,t}+\left(z_\rho \stackrel{}{u}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
Here $`\stackrel{}{u}=(u,v)`$ is the horizontal component of the velocity field, $`=(_x,_y)`$ is the gradient operator along isopycnals, $`\frac{D}{Dt}=_t+\stackrel{}{u}`$, and $`M`$ is the Montgomery potential ,

$$M=P+\rho z.$$

For flows which are irrotational along isopycnal surfaces, we introduce the velocity potential

$$\stackrel{}{u}=\varphi .$$

Such a substitution allows us to integrate (LABEL:IsopycnalInternalWaveEqn) once and illuminate $`z`$, after which these equations reduce to the pair

$`\varphi _t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\varphi |^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}{\displaystyle ^\rho }{\displaystyle ^{\rho _2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }}{\rho _1}}𝑑\rho _1𝑑\rho _2`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_t+\left(\mathrm{\Pi }\varphi \right)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
where we have introduced the variable

$$\mathrm{\Pi }=\rho M_{\rho \rho }=\rho z_\rho .$$

This variable $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ has at least two physical interpretations. One is that of density in isopycnal coordinates, since

$$\mathrm{\Pi }d\rho =\rho dz.$$

The other is that of a measure of the stratification, namely the relative distance between neighboring isopycnal surfaces, since this distance $`dz`$ is given by

$$dz=\mathrm{\Pi }\frac{d\rho }{\rho }.$$

Notice the similarity between (LABEL:PRLeqOfmotion) and the equations (LABEL:NonlinearShallowWater) for nonlinear shallow water. Internal wave equations could be viewed as a system of infinitely many, coupled shallow water equations. This analogy allows us to identify a natural Hamiltonian structure for internal waves.

The variable $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ is also the canonical conjugate of $`\varphi `$,

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_t=\frac{\delta }{\delta \varphi },\varphi _t=\frac{\delta }{\delta \mathrm{\Pi }},$$
(12)
under the Hamiltonian flow given by

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left(\mathrm{\Pi }|\varphi |^2\left|^\rho \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }}{\rho _1}𝑑\rho _1\right|^2\right)𝑑𝐫𝑑\rho .$$
(13)
The first term in this Hamiltonian clearly corresponds to the kinetic energy of the flow; that the second term is in fact the potential energy follows from the simple calculation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left|{\displaystyle ^\rho }{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }}{\rho _1}}𝑑\rho _1\right|^2d\rho ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left|{\displaystyle ^z}𝑑z\right|^2d\rho =`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}z^2d\rho =\rho zdz+d\left({\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\rho z^2\right)`$ $`,`$
so

$$_{\rho (z_t)}^{\rho (z_b)}\frac{1}{2}\left|^\rho \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }}{\rho _1}𝑑\rho _1\right|^2𝑑\rho =_{z_b}^{z_t}\rho z𝑑z\frac{1}{2}\rho z^2|_{z_b}^{z_t},$$

where $`b`$ and $`t`$ stand for bottom and top respectively, and the boundary conditions are usually such that the integrated term at the end is a constant.

### 2.4 Linear Shallow Waters in a Rotating Environment

In a rotating environment, the linearized shallow–water equations are

$`\eta _t+\stackrel{}{u}`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\stackrel{}{u}_t+\eta +\stackrel{}{u}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
Here

$$\stackrel{}{u}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill u\\ \hfill v\end{array}\right)$$

is the velocity field, and

$$\stackrel{}{u}^{}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill v\\ \hfill u\end{array}\right).$$

The Coriolis parameter $`f`$ has been absorbed in the nondimensionalization of time, so it is effectively equal to one.

These equations do not preserve vorticity, so irrotationality cannot be assumed. However, they preserve the potential vorticity

$$q=v_xu_y\eta .$$
(14)
The assumption corresponding to irrotationality in the non-rotating case is therefore that of zero potential vorticity, i.e. $`q=0`$. We can in fact generalize this hypothesis, and consider an arbitrary, though constant, potential vorticity. We shall employ such generalization when we consider internal waves in a rotating environment. In order to exploit this assumption, it is convenient to decompose the flow into a potential and a divergence-free part:

$$\stackrel{}{u}=\varphi +^{}\psi ,$$
(15)
where

$$^{}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\hfill _y\\ \hfill _x\end{array}\right).$$
(16)
In terms of $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$, the equations take the form

$`\eta _t+\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\varphi _t+\eta \psi `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\psi _t+\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (17)
The condition of zero potential vorticity takes the form

$$q=v_xu_y\eta =\mathrm{\Delta }\psi \eta =0,$$
(18)
so the system above reduces to

$`\eta _t+\mathrm{\Delta }\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`0`$ (19)
$`\varphi _t+\eta \mathrm{\Delta }^1\eta `$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (20)
This system is Hamiltonian, with canonical variables $`\varphi `$ and $`\eta `$, and Hamiltonian

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left(\left|\varphi +\mathrm{\Delta }^1\eta \right|^2+\eta ^2\right)𝑑x.$$
(21)
Again, the Hamiltonian agrees with the total energy of the system.

### 2.5 Rotating Nonlinear Shallow Waters

The fully nonlinear equations for shallow waters in a rotating environment are

$`h_t+(h\stackrel{}{u})`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$ (22)
$`\stackrel{}{u}_t+(\stackrel{}{u})\stackrel{}{u}+h+\stackrel{}{u}^{}`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$ (23)
The statement of conservation of potential vorticity now takes the form (Sec 12-2 in )

$$\frac{D}{Dt}\left(\frac{1+v_xu_y}{h}\right)=0$$
(24)
(That is: the total vorticity of a vertical column of water divided by its height remains constant as the column moves.) The unperturbed state has

$$q=\frac{1+v_xu_y}{h}=q_0,$$

where $`q_0`$ is an arbitrary (prescribed) potential vorticity, so this is the hypothesis to make for the analogue of irrotational flows:

$$q_0h=1+v_xu_y.$$
(25)
We introduce the potentials $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$ as in (15), and use the fact that

$$(\stackrel{}{u})\stackrel{}{u}=\frac{1}{2}|\varphi +^{}\psi |^2+\mathrm{\Delta }\psi \left(^{}\varphi \psi \right),$$

to rewrite (23) as

$$\varphi _t+^{}\psi _t+\frac{1}{2}|\varphi +^{}\psi |^2+\mathrm{\Delta }\psi \left(^{}\varphi \psi \right)+h+^{}\varphi \psi =0.$$

Taking the divergence and the two–dimensional curl $`^{}`$ of the above equations, we obtain the following pair:

$`\varphi _t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\varphi +^{}\psi |^2+\mathrm{\Delta }^1\left[\mathrm{\Delta }\psi (^{}\varphi \psi )\right]+h\psi `$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\psi _t+\mathrm{\Delta }^1^{}\left[\mathrm{\Delta }\psi (^{}\varphi \psi )\right]+\varphi `$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
By noticing that

$`\psi =\mathrm{\Delta }^1(^{}\varphi \psi ),`$
$`\varphi =\mathrm{\Delta }^1^{}(^{}\varphi \psi ),`$
we can rewrite these equations, together with (22) in the form

$`h_t+(h(\varphi +^{}\psi ))`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\varphi _t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}|\varphi +^{}\psi |^2+\mathrm{\Delta }^1\left[(1+\mathrm{\Delta }\psi )(^{}\varphi \psi )\right]+h`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\psi _t+\mathrm{\Delta }^1^{}\left[(1+\mathrm{\Delta }\psi )(^{}\varphi \psi )\right]`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
The constraint (25) on the potential vorticity takes the form

$$1+\mathrm{\Delta }\psi =q_0h,$$
(26)
under which the equations above reduce to the pair

$`h_t+(h(\varphi +^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1(q_0h1)))`$ $`=`$ $`0`$
$`\varphi _t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\varphi +^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1(q_0h1))^2+`$
$`q_0\mathrm{\Delta }^1\left[h(^{}\varphi \mathrm{\Delta }^1(q_0h1))\right]+h`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
These equations are Hamiltonian, with conjugate variables $`\varphi `$ and $`h`$, and Hamiltonian

$$=\frac{1}{2}\left(h\left|\varphi +^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1(q_0h1)\right|^2+h^2\right)𝑑𝐫,$$
(27)
representing again the sum of kinetic and potential energies.

### 2.6 Nonlinear Internal Waves in a Rotating Environment

The equations for long internal waves in a rotating environment are particularly simple when written in the isopycnal coordinates $`(x,y,\rho ,t)`$; they take the form in (LABEL:PRLeqOfmotion) with an extra term $`\stackrel{}{u}^{}`$ due to the Coriolis force:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{D\stackrel{}{u}}{Dt}}+\stackrel{}{u}^{}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}{\displaystyle ^\rho }{\displaystyle ^{\rho _2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }_0}{\rho _1}}𝑑\rho _1𝑑\rho _2`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_t+\left(\mathrm{\Pi }\stackrel{}{u}\right)`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
where

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_0=\mathrm{\Pi }_0(\rho )$$

is a reference stratification profile, that we introduce here for future convenience.

The expression for the potential vorticity in these coordinates is

$$q=\frac{1+v_xu_y}{\mathrm{\Pi }},$$
(29)
and it satisfies

$$\frac{Dq}{Dt}=0.$$
(30)
Notice that the advection of potential vorticity in (30) takes place exclusively along isopycnal surfaces. Therefore, an initial distribution of potential vorticity which is constant on isopycnals, though varying across them, will never change. Hence we shall propose that

$$q=q_0(\rho ),$$
(31)
where $`q_0(\rho )`$ is an arbitrary function; i.e., one may assign any constant potential vorticity to each isopycnal surface. This is a highly nontrivial extension of the irrotational waves of the previous sections. Extending our description further to include general distributions of potential vorticity, varying even within surfaces of constant density, would necessarily complicate its Hamiltonian formulation, making it loose its natural simplicity. In fact, the problem of interaction between vorticity and waves is that of fully developed turbulence, which escapes the scope of our description. However, the “pancake–like” distributions of potential vorticity that we propose are common in stratified fluids, particularly the ocean and the atmosphere. They arise due to the sharp contrast between the magnitudes of the turbulent diffusion along and across isopycnals. Thus potential vorticity is much more rapidly homogenized along isopycnals than throughout the fluid, yielding the “pancakes”. As we show below, even waves super–imposed on such a general and realistic distribution of potential vorticity admit a rather simple Hamiltonian description.

In order to isolate the wave dynamics satisfying the constraint (31), we decompose the flow into a potential and a divergence-free part as in (15). In terms of the potentials $`\varphi `$ and $`\psi `$, (31) and (30) yield

$$1+\mathrm{\Delta }\psi =q_0\mathrm{\Pi },$$

and, repeating the same steps as in nonlinear rotating shallow waters, the equations in (LABEL:LIW) reduce to the pair

$`\mathrm{\Pi }_t+\left(\mathrm{\Pi }\left(\varphi +^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1\left(q_0\mathrm{\Pi }1\right)\right)\right)`$ $`=`$ $`0,`$
$`\varphi _t+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left|\varphi +^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1\left(q_0\mathrm{\Pi }1\right)\right|^2`$
$`+\mathrm{\Delta }^1\left[q_0\mathrm{\Pi }\left(^{}\varphi \mathrm{\Delta }^1\left(q_0\mathrm{\Pi }1\right)\right)\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\rho }}{\displaystyle ^\rho }{\displaystyle ^{\rho _2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }_0}{\rho _1}}𝑑\rho _1𝑑\rho _2`$ $`=`$ $`0.`$
This pair is Hamiltonian, with conjugated variables $`\varphi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$, i.e. it can be written as

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_t=\frac{\delta }{\delta \varphi },\varphi _t=\frac{\delta }{\delta \mathrm{\Pi }}.$$

where the Hamiltonian is given by

$$=\left[\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Pi }\left|\varphi +^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1\left(q_0\mathrm{\Pi }1\right)\right|^2\frac{1}{2}\left|^\rho \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }_0}{\rho _1}𝑑\rho _1\right|^2\right]𝑑\rho 𝑑\stackrel{}{r}.$$
(33)
Again, this Hamiltonian represents the sum of the kinetic and potential energy of the flow.

Notice the similarity of our description of internal waves with the Hamiltonian formulation for free–surface waves introduced in . There, it was shown that the free–surface displacement and the three–dimensional velocity potential evaluated at the free surface are canonical conjugate variables. In our case, the canonical conjugate variables are also a displacement and a velocity potential, though the velocity potential in (33) is for the two–dimensional flow along isopycnal surfaces, and the displacement is the relative distance between neighboring isopycnal surfaces, as described above.

Looking back, we could have included some vorticity from early on; there was no need to take it equal to zero, as the last section shows. In shallow waters, it could have been any constant; in internal waves, any function of the density. It is clear though that, if one wanted to include arbitrary vorticity distributions, one would need to go fully Lagrangian, to exploit the fact that vorticity is preserved along particle paths. This would make the Hamiltonian structure less appealingly simple.

The key steps taken here for finding a simple Hamiltonian structure for internal waves, could be summarized as follows:

1. To consider long waves in hydrostatic balance. This, together with the choice of isopycnal coordinates, leads to a system of equations formally equivalent to an infinite collection of coupled shallow–water systems. This analogy allows us to generalize the relatively simple Hamiltonian structure of irrotational shallow–waters to the richer domain of internal waves.
2. To decouple waves from vorticity, by assuming the latter to be either zero, constant or uniform along isopycnal surfaces, with an arbitrary dependence on depth. This is facilitated by the choice of a flow description in isopycnal coordinates.
3. To realize that the potential $`\varphi `$ is a good candidate canonical variable, and that its conjugate is the height $`h`$ for shallow waters, and the surrogate $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ for density in the isopycnal formulation of internal waves.
4. To introduce nonlocal operators into the Hamiltonian. These arise naturally from the “elliptic” constraints of hydrostatic balance and layered potential vorticity. Despite its unusual look, the Hamiltonian is invariably just the sum of the standard kinetic and potential energies, integrated over the domain.

The assumptions of hydrostatic balance and horizontally uniform background vorticity and shear, which simplify notoriously the description of the flows, are quite realistic for a wide range of ocean waves.

## 3 Weak turbulence theory

In this section, we apply the formalism of wave turbulence theory to derive a kinetic equation, describing the time evolution of the energy spectrum of internal waves. In order to do this, we need to assume that the waves are weakly nonlinear perturbations of a background state. In principle, we could adopt for this state an arbitrary background distribution of (layered) potential vorticity, vertical shear and stratification. To make the derivation clear, however, we focus here on the case with zero shear and zero potential vorticity, and a stratification profile with constant buoyancy frequency. Even though the mechanics for deriving the kinetic equation in the more general setting are entirely similar (though more cumbersome), the tools at our disposal for finding relevant exact solutions to these equations, which we actually use in section 4, are only applicable to the case with the simplest background.

To leading order in the perturbation, we obtain linear waves, with amplitudes modulated by the nonlinear interactions. These linear waves have, in general, a complex vertical structure (they are eigenfunctions of a differential eigenvalue problem), but reduce, in our case, to sines and cosines .

Let us now take (33) and rewrite it in dimensional form:

$$=\left[\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Pi }\left|\varphi +^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1\left(q_0\mathrm{\Pi }f\right)\right|^2\frac{g}{2}\left|^\rho \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }_0}{\rho _1}𝑑\rho _1\right|^2\right].$$
(34)
Here $`f`$ is the Coriolis parameter, $`g`$ is the acceleration due to gravity. Note that

$$[\mathrm{\Pi }]=\mathrm{Length},[\varphi ]=\frac{\mathrm{Length}^2}{Time}.$$

The potential vorticity is, in dimensional form,

$$q=\frac{f+v_xu_y}{\mathrm{\Pi }}.$$

In the calculations that follow, we shall consider flows which are perturbations of a state at rest, stratified but without vorticity. When this is the case, $`v_xu_y`$ is zero to leading order, and we have the following relation between the potential vorticity profile $`q_0`$ and the stratification profile $`\mathrm{\Pi }_0`$:

$$q_0(\rho )=\frac{f}{\mathrm{\Pi }_0(\rho )}.$$
(35)
Moreover, the definition of $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ implies that

$$\mathrm{\Pi }_0=\frac{g}{N^2},$$
(36)
where $`N(\rho )`$ is the buoyancy frequency, which we shall consider here to be a constant.

For the subsequent calculations it will be convenient to decompose the potential $`\mathrm{\Pi }`$ into its equilibrium value and its deviation from it. Therefore let us redefine

$$\mathrm{\Pi }\mathrm{\Pi }_0+\mathrm{\Pi }.$$

Then the Hamiltonian takes the following form:

$$=𝑑\stackrel{}{r}𝑑\rho \left[\frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{g}{N^2}+\mathrm{\Pi }\right)\left|\varphi \frac{fN^2}{g}^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1\mathrm{\Pi }\right|^2\frac{g}{2}\left|^\rho \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }}{\rho _1}𝑑\rho _1\right|^2\right].$$
(37)
It can be represented as a sum of a quadratic and a cubic part:

$`=_{\mathrm{linear}}+_{\mathrm{nonlinear}},`$
$`_{\mathrm{linear}}={\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{r}𝑑\rho \left[\frac{g}{2N^2}\left|\varphi \frac{N^2f}{g}^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1\mathrm{\Pi }\right|^2\frac{g}{2}\left|^\rho \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }}{\rho _1}𝑑\rho _1\right|^2\right]},`$
$`_{\mathrm{nonlinear}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{r}𝑑\rho \mathrm{\Pi }\left|\varphi \frac{N^2f}{g}^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1\mathrm{\Pi }\right|^2}`$ (38)
Let us use the Fourier transformation:

$`\mathrm{\Pi }(\stackrel{}{r},\rho )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^{3/2}}}{\displaystyle \mathrm{\Pi }_\stackrel{}{p}e^{i\stackrel{}{R}\stackrel{}{p}}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}},`$
$`\varphi (\stackrel{}{r},\rho )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\pi )^{3/2}}}{\displaystyle \varphi _\stackrel{}{p}e^{i\stackrel{}{R}\stackrel{}{p}}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}},`$
$`\stackrel{}{p}=(\stackrel{}{k},m),\stackrel{}{R}=(\stackrel{}{r},\rho ).`$
Note that the operator $`^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1`$ has a simple representation in Fourier space:

$$^{}\mathrm{\Delta }^1\mathrm{\Pi }(\stackrel{}{R})=\frac{i}{(2\pi )^{3/2}}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}\frac{\stackrel{}{k}^{}}{k^2}e^{i\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{R}}\mathrm{\Pi }_\stackrel{}{p},\stackrel{}{k}^{}=(k_y,k_x).$$

Since in the ocean, $`\rho `$ deviates from its equilibrium value $`\rho _0`$ by no more then 3%, it is natural to make the Boussinesq approximation, replacing the density by a reference value $`\rho _0`$:

$$\frac{g}{2}\left|^\rho \frac{\mathrm{\Pi }}{\rho _1}𝑑\rho \right|\frac{g}{2\rho _0}\left|^\rho \mathrm{\Pi }𝑑\rho \right|.$$

Then

$`_{\mathrm{linear}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{p}\left(\frac{g}{N^2}k^2|\varphi _\stackrel{}{p}|^2+\left(\frac{N^2f^2}{gk^2}+\frac{g}{\rho _0^2m^2}\right)|\mathrm{\Pi }_\stackrel{}{p}|^2\right)},`$
$`_{\mathrm{nonlinear}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }d\stackrel{}{p}_1d\stackrel{}{p}_2d\stackrel{}{p}_3\delta (\stackrel{}{p}_1+\stackrel{}{p}_2+\stackrel{}{p}_3)(\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3\mathrm{\Pi }_{\stackrel{}{p}_1}\varphi _{\stackrel{}{p}_2}\varphi _{\stackrel{}{p}_3}{\displaystyle \frac{N^4f^2}{g^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3}{k_2^2k_3^2}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\stackrel{}{p}_1}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\stackrel{}{p}_2}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\stackrel{}{p}_3}`$
$`2{\displaystyle \frac{N^2f}{g}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3^{}}{k_3^2}}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\stackrel{}{p}_1}\mathrm{\Phi }_{\stackrel{}{p}_2}\mathrm{\Pi }_{\stackrel{}{p}_3}).`$
(39)
From now on it will be convenient to use the following short–hand notation:

1. $`d123`$ instead of $`d\stackrel{}{p}_1d\stackrel{}{p}_2d\stackrel{}{p}_3`$,
2. $`\delta _{1+2+3}`$ instead of $`\delta (\stackrel{}{p}_1+\stackrel{}{p}_2+\stackrel{}{p}_3)`$,
3. $`\mathrm{\Pi }_i`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_i`$ instead of $`\mathrm{\Pi }_{𝐩_𝐢}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{𝐩_𝐢}`$.

Then the last formula can be written in a more compact form:

$`_{\mathrm{nonlinear}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle }d123\delta _{1+2+3}(\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3\mathrm{\Pi }_1\varphi _2\varphi _3{\displaystyle \frac{N^4f^2}{g^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3}{k_2^2k_3^2}}\mathrm{\Pi }_1\mathrm{\Pi }_2\mathrm{\Pi }_3`$
$`2{\displaystyle \frac{N^2f}{g}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3^{}}{k_3^2}}\mathrm{\Pi }_1\mathrm{\Phi }_2\mathrm{\Pi }_3)`$
(40)
The canonical equations of motions (12) form a pair of real equations. Their Fourier transformation gives a pair of two complex equations, yet not independent. To reduce this pair to one complex equation, one performs the transformation

$`\varphi _\stackrel{}{p}={\displaystyle \frac{i}{\sqrt{2}\sqrt{f_\stackrel{}{p}}}}\left(a_\stackrel{}{p}a_\stackrel{}{p}^{}\right),`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\stackrel{}{p}={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{f_\stackrel{}{p}}}{\sqrt{2}}}\left(a_\stackrel{}{p}+a_\stackrel{}{p}^{}\right).`$
(41)
Here $`f_\stackrel{}{p}`$ is a real, positive and even, otherwise arbitrary function.

This transformation turns the pair of canonical equation of motion (12) into a single equation for the complex variable $`a_\stackrel{}{p}`$:

$$i\frac{}{t}a_𝐩=\frac{}{a_𝐩^{}}.$$
(42)
The following choice of $`f_\stackrel{}{p}`$

$$f_\stackrel{}{p}=\sqrt{\frac{gk^2}{N^2}\left(\frac{N^2f^2}{gk^2}+\frac{g}{\rho _0^2m^2}\right)^1}$$

diagonalizes the quadratic part of a Hamiltonian, bringing it to the following form:

$$_{linear}=\omega _\stackrel{}{p}|a_\stackrel{}{p}|^2𝑑\stackrel{}{p},$$

where $`\omega _\stackrel{}{p}`$ is the dispersion relation for linear internal waves in isopycnal coordinates:

$$\omega _\stackrel{}{p}=\sqrt{f^2+\frac{g^2k^2}{\rho _0^2m^2N^2}}.$$
(43)
(In the more familiar Eulerian framework, the dispersion relation transforms into

$$\omega _\stackrel{}{p}=\sqrt{f^2+\frac{N^2k^2}{m_{}^{}{}_{}{}^{2}}},$$

where $`m_{}`$, the vertical wavenumber in $`z`$ coordinates, is given by $`m_{}=\frac{g}{\rho _0N^2}m`$ .)

With such a choice of $`f_p`$ the transformations (41) take the following form:

$`\varphi _\stackrel{}{p}={\displaystyle \frac{iN\sqrt{\omega _\stackrel{}{p}}}{\sqrt{2g}k}}\left(a_\stackrel{}{p}a_\stackrel{}{p}^{}\right),`$
$`\mathrm{\Pi }_\stackrel{}{p}={\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{g}k}{\sqrt{2\omega _\stackrel{}{p}}N}}\left(a_\stackrel{}{p}+a_\stackrel{}{p}^{}\right).`$
(44)
In terms of $`a_\stackrel{}{k}`$, the Hamiltonian (39) reads

$`={\displaystyle \omega _p|a_\stackrel{}{p}|^2𝑑\stackrel{}{p}}+`$
$`{\displaystyle V_{\stackrel{}{p}_1\stackrel{}{p}_2\stackrel{}{p}_3}\left(a_{\stackrel{}{p}_1}^{}a_{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}}^{}a_{\stackrel{}{p}_3}+a_{\stackrel{}{p}_1}a_{\stackrel{}{p}_2}^{}a_{\stackrel{}{p}_3}^{}\right)\delta _{\stackrel{}{p}_1\stackrel{}{p}_2\stackrel{}{p}_3}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}_{123}}+`$
$`{\displaystyle U_{\stackrel{}{p}_1\stackrel{}{p}_2\stackrel{}{p}_3}\left(a_{\stackrel{}{p}_1}^{}a_{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}}^{}a_{\stackrel{}{p}_3}^{}+a_{\stackrel{}{p}_1}a_{\stackrel{}{p}_2}a_{\stackrel{}{p}_3}\right)\delta _{\stackrel{}{p}_1+\stackrel{}{p}_2+\stackrel{}{p}_3}𝑑\stackrel{}{p}_{123}}.`$
(45)
This is a standard three-wave Hamiltonian of wave turbulence theory. The calculation of the interaction coefficients is a straightforward task, yielding

$`V_{23}^1`$ $`=`$ $`I_{23}^1+J_{23}^1+K_{23}^1,`$
$`I_{23}^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N}{4\sqrt{2g}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3}{k_2k_3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _2\omega _3}{\omega _1}}}k_1+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{k}_3}{k_1k_3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _1\omega _3}{\omega _2}}}k_2+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{k}_2}{k_1k_2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _1\omega _2}{\omega _3}}}k_3\right),`$
$`J_{23}^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{Nf^2}{4\sqrt{2g\omega _1\omega _2\omega _3}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3}{k_2k_3}}k_1{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{k}_3}{k_1k_3}}k_2{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_1\stackrel{}{k}_2}{k_1k_2}}k_3\right),`$
$`K_{23}^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{ifN}{\sqrt{2g}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{k}_2\stackrel{}{k}_3^{}}{k_1k_2k_3}}\left(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _2}{\omega _1\omega _3}}}(k_1^2k_3^2)+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _1}{\omega _2\omega _3}}}(k_2^2k_3^2)+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _3}{\omega _1\omega _2}}}(k_2^2k_1^2)\right),`$
where we have used the fact that $`\stackrel{}{k_1}=\stackrel{}{k_2}+\stackrel{}{k_3}`$.

Following wave turbulence theory, one proposes a perturbation expansion in the amplitude of the nonlinearity. This expansion gives to leading order, linear waves. Then one allows the amplitude of the waves to be slowly modulated by resonant nonlinear interactions. This modulation is described by an approximate kinetic equation  for the “number of waves” or wave-action $`n_𝐩`$, defined by

$$n_𝐩\delta (𝐩𝐩^{})=a_𝐩^{}a_𝐩^{}.$$

This kinetic equation is the classical analog of the Boltzmann collision integral. The basic ideas for writing down the kinetic equation to describe how weakly interacting waves share their energies go back to Peierls. The modern theory has its origin in the works of Hasselmann , Benney and Saffmann , Kadomtsev , Zakharov , and Benney and Newell . The derivation of kinetic equations using the wave turbulence formalism can be found, for instance, in . For the three-wave Hamiltonian (45), the kinetic equation reads:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dn_𝐩}{dt}}=\pi {\displaystyle |V_{pp_1p_2}|^2f_{p12}\delta _{𝐩𝐩_\mathrm{𝟏}𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}}\delta _{\omega _𝐩\omega _{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟏}}\omega _{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}}}𝑑𝐩_{12}},`$
$`2\pi {\displaystyle }|V_{p_1pp_2}|^2f_{1p2}\delta _{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟏}𝐩𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}}\delta _{\omega _{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟏}}\omega _𝐩\omega _{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}}})d𝐩_{12},`$ (47)
where $`f_{p12}=n_{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟏}}n_{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}}n_𝐩(n_{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟏}}+n_{𝐩_\mathrm{𝟐}}).`$

Assuming horizontal isotropy, one can average (47) over all horizontal angles, obtaining

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dn_p}{dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}{\displaystyle \left(R_{12}^kR_{k2}^1R_{1k}^2\right)𝑑k_1𝑑k_2𝑑m_1𝑑m_2},`$
$`R_{12}^k=\mathrm{\Delta }_{k12}^1\delta (\omega _p\omega _{p_1}\omega _{p_2})f_{12}^k|V_{12}^k|^2\delta _{mm_1m_2}kk_1k_2,`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{k12}^1=\delta (𝐤𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐}){\displaystyle \delta (𝐤𝐤_\mathrm{𝟏}𝐤_\mathrm{𝟐})𝑑\theta _1𝑑\theta _2},`$
$`\mathrm{\Delta }_{k12}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\sqrt{2\left((kk_1)^2+(kk_2)^2+(k_1k_2)^2\right)k^4k_1^4k_2^4}.`$ (48)
## 4 Kolmogorov Spectra in the High Frequency Limit

Once the kinetic equation is derived, it is natural to search for its stationary solutions. Typically, kinetic equations admit two classes of exact stationary solutions: thermodynamic equilibrium and Kolmogorov flux solutions, with the latter corresponding to a direct cascade of energy –or other conserved quantities– toward the higher modes. The fact that the thermodynamic equilibrium –or equipartition of energy– $`n_𝐩=1/\omega _𝐩`$ is a stationary solution of (3) can be seen by inspection. On the other hand, the solutions, corresponding to pure Kolmogorov spectra are much more subtle and only emerge after one has exploited scaling symmetries of the dispersion relation and the coupling coefficient via what is now called the Zakharov transformation .

In this section, we carry out such procedure in the high–frequency limit, where the effects of the Earth’s rotation are negligible. The spectrum that we find, expanding on previous work described in , is not far from the classical empirical formula of Garrett and Munk.

Since the system under consideration has cylindrical, rather then spherical symmetry, stationary solutions of the kinetic equation should also have cylindrical symmetry. Things are further complicated by the fact that our dispersion law (43) is not scale invariant, and neither is the interaction matrix element (LABEL:MatrixElement). However, in the high frequency limit $`\omega f`$, (43) becomes

$$\omega _𝐩\omega _{𝐤,m}\frac{g}{N\rho _0}\frac{k}{|m|},$$

Furthermore, in this limit, the matrix element (LABEL:MatrixElement) retains only it first term, $`I_{23}^1`$. This is due to the fact that the second $`J_{23}^1`$ and third $`K_{23}^1`$ terms are proportional to $`f^2`$ and $`f`$ respectively, and $`f`$ is negligible in the high frequency limit.

Indeed if one changes variables in (LABEL:MatrixElement) so that

$$\omega _i=N\xi _i,$$

rescaling the frequencies in terms of the buoyancy frequency $`N`$, and similarly one introduces

$$\stackrel{}{k}_i=\stackrel{}{\kappa }_i/L,$$

i.e. nondimensionalizing the horizontal wavevectors in terms of some distance $`L`$ to be determined, then

$`V_{23}^1`$ $`=`$ $`I_{23}^1+J_{23}^1+K_{23}^1`$
$`I_{23}^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N^{\frac{3}{2}}}{4\sqrt{2g}L}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_3}{\kappa _2\kappa _3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _2\xi _3}{\xi _1}}}\kappa _1+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_1\stackrel{}{\kappa }_3}{\kappa _1\kappa _3}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _1\xi _3}{\xi _2}}}\kappa _2+{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_1\stackrel{}{\kappa }_2}{\kappa _1\kappa _2}}\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _1\xi _2}{\xi _3}}}\kappa _3\right)`$
$`J_{23}^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{N^{3/2}}{4L\sqrt{2g}}}{\displaystyle \frac{f^2}{N^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{2g\xi _1\xi _2\xi _3}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_3}{\kappa _2\kappa _3}}\kappa _1{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_1\stackrel{}{\kappa }_3}{\kappa _1\kappa _3}}\kappa _2{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_1\stackrel{}{\kappa }_2}{\kappa _1\kappa _2}}\kappa _3\right)`$
$`K_{23}^1`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{N^{3/2}}{L\sqrt{2g}}}{\displaystyle \frac{f}{N}}{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{\kappa }_2\stackrel{}{\kappa }_3^{}}{\kappa _1\kappa _2\kappa _3}}\left(\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _2}{\xi _1\xi _3}}}(\kappa _1^2\kappa _3^2)+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _1}{\xi _2\xi _3}}}(\kappa _2^2\kappa _3^2)+\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{\xi _3}{\xi _1\xi _2}}}(\kappa _2^2\kappa _1^2)\right)`$
Note that $`K_{23}^1`$ is proportional to $`(f/N)`$ and $`J_{23}^1`$ is proportional to $`(f/N)^2`$. Taking into account that, in the real ocean, $`f/N1/100`$ we see that the $`K_{23}^1`$ and $`J_{23}^1`$ terms could safely be neglected from the matrix element in the high frequency limit.

We reproduce here for completeness the derivation of the Kolmogorov solution found in . Let us assume that $`n_𝐩`$ is given by the power-law anisotropic distribution

$$n_{𝐤,m}=k^x|m|^y.$$
(49)
To find the values of the exponents $`x`$ and $`y`$ we will require that (49) is a stationary solution to (3) in the high frequency limit. We shall use a version of Zakharov’s transformation  introduced for cylindrically symmetrical systems by Kuznetsov in . Namely, let us subject the integration variables in the second term $`R_{k2}^1`$ in (3) to the following transformation:

$`k_1=k^2/k_1^{},m_1=m^2/m_1^{},k_2=kk_2^{}/k_1^{},m_2=mm_2^{}/m_1^{}.`$
Then $`R_{k2}^1`$ becomes $`R_{12}^k`$ multiplied by a factor

$$\left(\frac{k_1}{k}\right)^{62x}\left(\frac{m}{m_1}\right)^{2+2y}.$$

Furthermore, let us subject the third term $`R_{1k}^2`$ in (3) to the similar conformal transformation:

$`k_1=kk_1^{}/k_2^{},m_1=mm_1^{}/m_2^{},k_2=k^2/k_2^{},m_2=m^2/m_2^{}.`$
Then $`R_{1k}^2`$ becomes $`R_{12}^k`$ multiplied by a factor

$$\left(\frac{k_2}{k}\right)^{62x}\left(\frac{m}{m_2}\right)^{2+2y}.$$

Therefore (3) can be written as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dn_𝐩}{dt}}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{k}}{\displaystyle }R_{12}^k(1\left({\displaystyle \frac{k_1}{k}}\right)^{62x}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{m_1}}\right)^{2+2y}`$
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{k_2}{k}}\right)^{62x}\left({\displaystyle \frac{m}{m_2}}\right)^{2+2y})dk_1dk_2dm_1dm_2.`$ (50)
We see that the particular choice $`62x=2+2y=1,`$ which gives $`x=7/2,y=1/2,`$ makes the right-hand side of (3) vanish due to the delta function in the frequencies, corresponding to energy conservation. The resulting wave action and spectral energy distributions are given by

$`n_{𝐤,m}=|𝐤|^{7/2}|m|^{1/2},`$ (51)
$`E_{𝐤,m}=k\omega _{𝐤,m}n_{𝐤,m}=|𝐤|^{3/2}|m|^{3/2},`$
This solution corresponds to the flux of energy from the large to the small scales. Direct calculations show that this solution is local, i.e. collision integral converges on this solution.

We shall next compare the spectrum just derived with the classic formula by Garrett and Munk , which synthesizes in compact form many measurements of oceanic internal wave turbulence.

To this end, let us first write the total energy of the system as the integral of a spectral energy density:

$`E={\displaystyle E(𝐤,m)𝑑k𝑑m}.`$ (52)
Note that $`E(𝐤,m)`$ is integrated over scalars $`k`$ and $`m`$. Garrett and Munk proposed the following empirical expression for $`E(k,m)`$:

$`E(k,m)={\displaystyle \frac{3fNEm/m^{}}{\pi \left(1+\frac{m}{m^{}}\right)^{5/2}\left(N^2k^2+f^2m^2\right)}}.`$ (53)
Here $`E`$ is a constant, quantifying the total energy content of the internal wave spectrum, $`k=|𝐤|`$, and $`m^{}`$ is a reference vertical wavenumber determined from observations. Using the dispersion relation for internal waves, the GM spectrum can be transformed from wave-number space $`(k,m)`$ into frequency-horizontal wavenumber space $`(k,\omega )`$. The integral of $`E(k,\omega )`$ over $`k`$ yields the moored spectrum

$$E(\omega )=2fE\left(\pi \left(1(f/\omega )^2\right)^{1/2}\omega ^2\right)^1,$$
(54)
with an $`1/\omega ^2`$ dependence away from the inertial frequency that appears prominently in moored observations.

For $`|m|>>m^{}`$ and $`|\omega |>>f`$, the Garrett-Munk spectrum (53) becomes

$$E(k,m)\left(k^2m^{3/2}\right)^1.$$
(55)
By contrast, the spectrum that we obtained above using the Wave Turbulence formalism is

$$E(k,m)\left(k^{3/2}m^{3/2}\right)^1.$$
(56)
The small difference between the two spectra may be due to a variety of reasons. Two possibilities that we find highly plausible are the neglected effects of the Earth’s rotation, and those of breaking waves. An exploration of these possibilities, however, lies outside the scope of the present article.

## 5 Conclusions

We have developed a quite general, natural Hamiltonian formalism for internal waves in a stratified, rotating environment. Our formulation gains much in simplicity, by restricting consideration to flows in hydrostatic balance, superimposed on a vertically arbitrary, but horizontally uniform shear and vorticity fields. The resulting Hamiltonian inherits much of the structure of the shallow–water equations, though with one extra vertical dimension. The use of isopycnal coordinates, whereby the depth $`z`$ is replaced by the density $`\rho `$ as the independent vertical coordinate, allows for a straightforward separation of the dynamics of waves and vorticity, by assuming the latter to be uniform on surfaces of constant density.

This Hamiltonian formulation allows us to derive a kinetic equation for the time evolution of the spectral energy density. In the limit of high frequencies, when the effects of the rotation of the Earth loose significance, an exact steady solution to this kinetic equation can be found, corresponding to the direct cascade of energy toward the short scales. This Kolmogorov–like spectrum is surprisingly close to the empirically based prediction of Garrett and Munk.

Further challenges suggested by the work reported here, include extending the Kolmogorov solutions found in the high-frequency limit, to cover the full range of frequencies of internal waves, including those comparable to the inertial frequency $`f`$. Also, the effects of breaking waves on the energy spectrum needs to be addressed; it could potentially help explain the difference between the exponent of the spectrum found here and that of Garrett and Munk.