text:
# Preparation of multi-party entanglement of individual photons and atomic ensembles

## Abstract

An experimental feasible scheme is proposed to generate Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) type of maximal entanglement. Distinguishing from the previous schemes, this entanglement can be chosen between either atomic ensembles (stationary qubit) or individual photons (flying qubit), according to the difference applications we desire for it. The physical requirements of the scheme are moderate and well fit the present experimental techinque.

PACS number(s): 03.65.Ud, 03.67.-a, 42.50.Gy, 42.50.-p

Entanglement of many parties is of fundamental interest to test quantum mechanics against local hidden theory. Furthermore, it has many practical applications in various quantum information processing tasks such as quantum cryptography, computer, and teleportation. It is also believed that with more subsystems entangled, quantum non-locality becomes more striking, and quantum entanglement is more useful in actual applications. Great attention has been directed to get more and more subsystems entangled. In theory, numerous schemes have been proposed to generate multi-party entanglement with cavity, ion traps, spontaneous parametric down converter (SPDC), and indistinguishable atoms in Bose-Einstein condensates. In experiment, there are reports of demonstration of four-photon entanglement in SPDC and four-particle entanglement in ion traps.

Based on the stimulated Raman emission of atomic ensemble and the associated collective enhancement effect, atomic ensemble has been shown useful in long distance quantum communication. And there are also protocols to generate multi-party entanglement between atomic ensembles or to entangle atomic ensembles with Stokes photon. The inherent robust to realistic noise and imperfections of the collective states of the atomic ensembles enable them as a preferable choose for the stationary qubit of quantum computation and information. While the manipulation convenience with linear optics for the photon polarization states makes individual photon a suitable candidate for flying or transmitting qubit of the quantum computation and information.

Here we propose a scheme to generate GHZ type of maximal entanglement. Different from the previous multi-party entanglement preparation protocol with atomic ensembles, the entangled subsystems of the present scheme can be chosen as either atomic ensembles (stationary qubit) or individual photons (flying qubit), according to the difference application. However, due to the collective enhancement effect of the atomic ensemble Raman procession, the physical requirements of the present scheme are still moderate and well fit the current experimental technique.

As most works with atomic ensembles, the basic element of our scheme is also an ensemble of many identical atoms, whose experimental realization can be either a room-temperature atomic gas or a sample of cold trapped atoms. The relevant structure of the atom is shown in Fig. 1. From the three levels $`|g,|r,|l,`$ we can define two collective atomic operators $`s=(1/\sqrt{N^a})\underset{i=1}{\overset{N^a}{}}|g_is|`$ with $`s=r,l,`$ where $`N^a1`$ is the total atom number. Initially the atoms are optically pumped to the ground state $`|g,`$which is effectively a vacuum state $`|0`$ of the operators $`r,l.`$ A basis of the polarization qubits can be defined from the states $`|R=r^{}|0`$ and $`|L=l^{}|0`$, which both have an experimentally demonstrated long coherence time. In Raman processing, the atomic ensemble is transferred from the ground state $`|g`$ to the excited state $`|e`$ by a classical laser (the pump light) with Rabi frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }.`$ Shortly, this excited state will transit to the two metastable states $`|r`$ and $`|l`$ with equal probabilities. In these transitions $`|e|r`$ and $`|e|l`$, the atomic ensemble will respectively emit a Stokes photon, which is horizontally or vertically polarized. Due to the collective enhanced coherent interaction, these excitation modes $`r`$ and $`l`$ can be respectively transferred to optical excitation modes $`h`$ and $`v`$ with high precision. Then they can be detected by single-photon detectors, even for a free-space ensemble, which has been demonstrated in both in theory and in experiments.

As pointed out in the paper, EPR entangled state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^1=(r_a^{}h_p^{}+l_a^{}v_p^{})/\sqrt{2}|0_{ap}`$ between atomic ensemble and Stokes photon can be prepared with a short off-resonant laser pulse in this atomic ensemble system. This preparation succeeds with a small probability $`p`$ for each Raman drive pulse, which can be controlled by adjusting light-atom interaction time $`t_\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and pulse length. Generally, the atomic ensemble and the Stokes photons can be totally written in the state

$$|\mathrm{\Psi }_1=(I+p^{\frac{1}{2}}H+\underset{j=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(p^{\frac{1}{2}}H)^j}{j!})|0_{ap}_1,$$
(1)
where $`I`$ is the identity operator, $`H=`$ $`(r_a^{}h_p^{}+l_a^{}v_p^{})/\sqrt{2}`$, and $`|0_{ap}`$ is the vacuum state of the whole system. Here $`h^{}`$($`v^{}`$) represents horizontal (vertical) mode creation operator of Stokes photon. For convenience we leave this state unnormalized. It is obvious that the probability to produce $`m`$ Stokes photons from an atomic ensemble decays exponentially with the number $`m`$. The preparation for this state has inherent resistance to noise and is well based on the current technology of laser manipulation. Many applications, such as individual photons quantum memory, can be expected from this novel entanglement between atomic collective state (stationary qubit) and the individual photon polarization state (flying qubit).

In order to generate multi-party entanglement, we can first prepare $`n`$ pair of entanglement between atomic ensembles and Stokes photons. A simply way is to illuminate $`n`$ atomic ensembles in turn with a pump classical light. Thus the whole system of the atomic ensembles and Stokes photons can be prepared in the state (which is un-normalized)

$$|\mathrm{\Phi }^{ap}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}|\mathrm{\Psi }_i=\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}(I+p^{\frac{1}{2}}H+\underset{j=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(p^{\frac{1}{2}}H)^j}{j!})|0_{ap}_i,$$
(2)
where the subscript $`i`$ represents the $`i`$th atomic ensemble. In the expanding of this state, the terms involving $`n`$ photons all have a coefficient of $`p^{\frac{n}{2}}`$. With this state, we can thereby generate multi-particle entanglement of either $`n`$ atomic ensembles or $`n`$ photons.

In the following preparing procedure, we will employ a multi-photon GHZ states analyzer with linear optics as shown in Fig. 3. In this optical setup, the input photon in the mode $`h_{p_i}^{}`$ (or $`v_{p_i}^{}`$) can be transferred into mode $`(h_{D_h^i}^{}+`$ $`v_{D_v^i}^{})/\sqrt{2}`$ (or $`(h_{D_h^{i1}}^{}`$ $`v_{D_v^{i1}}^{})/\sqrt{2}`$) , where we have assumed the notation $`0n`$ for the detector’s subscript. Assume that there is only one photon in each input. When there are coincidence clicks between $`n`$ detectors of this $`n`$-photon GHZ analyzer, and there are even (or odd) number of $`D_V^i`$ among these $`n`$ click detectors, the $`n`$ photons are obviously measured in the state $`|M^+`$(or $`|M^{}`$), where $`|M^\pm =(1/\sqrt{2})(_{i=1}^nh_{p_i}^{}\pm _{i=1}^nv_{p_i}^{})|0^p`$. Here $`|0^p`$ represents the total vacuum state of the $`n`$ photons. Generally, this linear optics setup can distinguish the states $`|M^\pm `$ from the other states of the $`n`$-party GHZ states. When $`n=2`$, it becomes a Bell states analyzer which can divide the four Bell states into three classes: $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(h_{p_1}^{}h_{p_2}^{}+v_{p_1}^{}v_{p_2}^{})|0^p`$, $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(h_{p_1}^{}h_{p_2}^{}v_{p_1}^{}v_{p_2}^{})|0^p`$ and $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^\pm =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(h_{p_1}^{}v_{p_2}^{}\pm v_{p_1}^{}h_{p_2}^{})|0^p`$. Thereby this Bell states analyzer with linear optics can be straightforwardly applied in quantum information processing such as quantum teleportation. For the multi-photon case, much more applications can be expected for the $`n`$-photon GHZ states analyzer. In the following, we will show how to generate multi-atomic-ensemble or multi-photon entanglement, with the above $`n`$-photon GHZ states analyzer.

As the $`n`$ atomic ensembles and their emitting Stokes photons are totally in the state $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^{ap}`$, we respectively input those Stokes photons from the $`n`$ atomic ensembles into the above $`n`$-photon GHZ states analyzer as Fig. 3. When there are coincidence clicks between $`n`$ detectors of this $`n`$-photon GHZ analyzer and there are even (or odd) number of $`D_V^i`$ among these $`n`$ click detectors, the input Stokes photons are measured in the states$`|M^\pm `$ or $`|M^{}`$, where $`|M^{}`$ represents the states that there are more than one photon in some optics input but still has the same coincidence clicks as the case that there is one and only one Stokes photon in each input. With this measurement, the residual $`n`$ atomic ensembles of the state $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^{ap}`$ is projected into the states

$$\rho ^a=|\mathrm{\Phi }_\pm ^a\mathrm{\Phi }|+\rho _{vac}^a.$$
(3)
Here $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_\pm ^a=`$ $`(1/\sqrt{2})(_{i=1}^nr_{a_i}^{}\pm _{i=1}^nl_{a_i}^{})|0^a`$ is $`n`$-atomic-ensemble GHZ type maximal entangled state, which results from the case that the input Stokes photons are measured in the states$`|M^\pm `$. And $`\rho _{vac}^a`$ represents the $`n`$ atomic ensemble states when the Stokes photons are projected in the state $`|M^{}`$. This is the case that some ensembles have more than one excitation and some others have no excitation. It is easy to see that the effect of the detector inefficiencies and loss of excitation can be also combined into the term $`\rho _{vac}^a`$. Note that for any practical application of the multi-party entanglement, the state preparation should be succeeded by a measurement of the polarization of the excitation on each ensemble. There we only keep these results, for which excitation appears on each ensemble. Then the state $`\rho ^a`$ can effectively yield $`n`$-atomic-ensemble GHZ type maximal entanglement as the states $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_\pm ^a`$ in any application.

As we can respectively transfer the atomic ensembles excitation modes $`r`$ and $`l`$ to optical excitation modes $`h`$ and $`v`$, the entanglement between $`n`$ atomic ensembles can be directly transferred to $`n`$ photons. Then we can get $`n`$-photon GHZ entanglement state straightly from the state $`\rho ^a`$. Alternatively, we can measure the $`n`$ atomic ensembles of the state $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^{ap}`$in the basis $`|N^\pm =(_{i=1}^nr_{a_i}^{}\pm _{i=1}^nl_{a_i}^{})/\sqrt{2}|0^a`$ to project the corresponding Stoke photons into GHZ entanglement state. This measurement can be done when the excitations of the $`n`$ atomic ensembles of the state $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^{ap}`$ is transferred to $`n`$ optical excitations, and then measured with the same GHZ state analyzer. Similarly, those optical modes transferred from the atomic ensembles excitation modes can be measured in the state $`|M^\pm `$ with post-selection. This equals to measure the $`n`$ atomic ensembles in the basis $`|N^\pm `$. Thereby the remaining $`n`$ Stokes photons of the state $`|\mathrm{\Phi }^{ap}`$ are projected in an entangled state, which can effectively yield $`n`$-photon GHZ type maximal entanglement as the state $`|\mathrm{\Psi }^p=(1/\sqrt{2})(_{i=1}^nh_{p_i}^{}\pm _{i=1}^nv_{p_i}^{})|0^p=N^\pm |\mathrm{\Phi }^{ap}`$ in any application.

It has been shown that the inherent resilience to noise of the collective states of atomic ensemble can enable it as a well qualified candidate for stationary and register qubits of quantum information and computation. On the other hand, the light is an ideal carrier of quantum information, and the individual photon polarization modes can be conveniently manipulated. According to the different applications, the present scheme can elegantly prepare either $`n`$-atomic-ensemble or $`n`$-photon entanglement in one experimental setup. Although post-selection is still needed as in most of multi-party entanglement generation schemes such as SPDC scheme, these states can yield effectively GHZ entanglement whenever they are put into applications.

We now give a brief discussion on the efficiency and the practical implementation of this proposal. As shown in the paper, we can control the probability of getting a Stokes photon $`p`$ $`10^2`$ for a Raman driving pulse with a short light-atom interaction time $`t_\mathrm{\Delta }`$. Then the $`n`$ atomic ensembles has a probability of order of $`p^n`$ to produce $`n`$ Stokes photons. When we only post-select the case that every ensemble has one excitation, the probability to get $`n`$-party entanglement is $`p^n/2^{n1}`$ which equals $`10^6`$ in the case $`n=3`$. Thus with a typical repetition frequency $`f_p=10^7Hz`$ for the Raman pulses, we can get $`10`$ pairs of three-party GHZ entangled states per second. The ensembles should be prepared into ground state before each round of Raman processing. It is also noted that the present entangling scheme suffers from the fast exponential degradation of the efficiency as most protocols with post-selection.

As the unknown phase differences between the Stokes photons are fixed by the optics setup, we can effortlessly balance them with some phase plates. In the practical implementation, we can safely neglect the dark counts of the single-photon detectors in the coincidence detections. The transferring of the atomic ensemble excitation mode to the optical mode can be high efficient. As long as the preparing procedure is accomplished in a time no longer than the coherence times of the atomic collective states $`T_{pre}`$ $`ms`$, we can also safely neglect the noise of the non-stationary phase drift induced by the pumping lase or by the optical channel.

In conclusion, we have proposed an experimental feasible scheme to prepare multi-party GHZ type entanglement between either atomic ensembles (stationary qubit) or individual photons (flying qubit) with post-selection in one experiment setup. Due to the collective enhancement effect of the atomic ensemble Raman procession, the physical requirements of this scheme are moderate and well fit for the current experimental technique.

This work was funded by National Fundamental Research Program(2001CB309300), National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Innovation funds from Chinese Academy of Sciences, and also by the outstanding Ph. D thesis award and the CAS’s talented scientist award entitled to Luming Duan.

Figure 1: The relevant level structure with $`|g`$ the ground state, $`|e`$ the excited state, and $`|r`$ , $`|l`$ the two metastable state for storing a qubit. The transition $`|g|e`$ is coupled by a classical laser (the pump light) with Rabi frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega },`$ followed with two equal probability transitions $`|e|r`$ and $`|e|l,`$ where right-handed and left-handed rotation forward-scattered Stokes photons are emitted respectively. For convenience, we assume off-resonant coupling with a large detuning $`\mathrm{\Delta }.`$

Figure 2: Schematic drawing of the experimental setup for the generation of the entanglement state$`|\mathrm{\Phi }^{ap}`$. The frequency-selective filter separates the pump light from the Stokes photon. The ensembles are prepared in the ground state before each round of Raman procession.

Figure 3: Schematic of the experimental setup for the measurement $`|M^\pm =(1/\sqrt{2})(_{i=1}^nh_{p_i}^{}\pm _{i=1}^nv_{p_i}^{})|0^p`$of the $`n`$ Stokes photon in the state$`|\mathrm{\Phi }^{ap}`$. The polarizing beam splitters (PBS) reflect vertical photons and transmit horizontal photons. We can adjust the arrival time of the $`n`$ photons with the delay plates. The $`\lambda /2`$ plates are employed to rotate the polarization of the Stokes photon $`i`$ through $`45^0`$ to transfer the photon $`h^{}`$ mode into $`(h^{}+v^{})/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`v^{}`$ mode into $`(h^{}v^{})/\sqrt{2},`$ where $`\lambda `$ is the wavelength of those photons. This optical setup transfers the mode $`h_{p_i}^{}`$ into $`(h_{D_h^i}^{}+`$ $`v_{D_v^i}^{})/\sqrt{2}`$ and the mode $`v_{p_i}^{}`$into $`(h_{D_h^{i1}}^{}`$ $`v_{D_v^{i1}}^{})/\sqrt{2}`$, where we have assumed the notation $`0n`$ for the detector’s subscript. Then for the case that $`n`$ photon are detected and even (odd) number of detectors $`D_v^i`$ click, the $`n`$ photon are projected into state $`|M^+`$ (or $`|M^{}`$).


format: text

text:
# Natural Limits for Currents in Charge Separated Pulsar Magnetospheres

## 1 Introduction

All pulsar models require charges to be drawn from the pulsar surface, accelerated, and possibly multiplied by pair production, as being the medium that will be responsible for the great variety of observational features currently known from many pulsars. Common to all models is a rotating heavily magnetized ($`10^810^{12}`$G) neutron star. As early as 1955 it was recognized by A. Deutsch that a sufficiently strongly magnetized fast rotator in a vacuum would be surrounded by an envelope (magnetosphere) of charged particles. Because of their fundamental importance, the electrodynamical aspects of pulsar models have been of interest from the early days of pulsar research until now.

In all cases, the number density of particles available is the decisive factor for the self-consistency and hence viability of any pulsar model.

Starting from the surface of the neutron star, it is recognized that its very composition plays a crucial role in determining the number charges emitted (Usov & Melrose 1996). The controlling factor is the surface work function, representing the potential barrier to be overcome by the charges that are to be emitted from the pulsar surface. Usually, the work function is of the order of the Fermi-energy of the solid lattice, which in itself depends on the electron density. Using a Thomas-Fermi-Dirac-Weizsäcker approximation Abrahams & Shapiro (1992) calculated the cold $`(T=0)`$ surface density $`\rho _{Fe}`$ to be about $`2.910^6\mathrm{kgm}^3`$. That result enabled us (Jessner et. al. 2001) to estimate the Fermi energy at the surface as

$$E_F(\rho _{Fe})=\frac{2\pi ^4\mathrm{}^4c^2}{e^2B^2m_e}\left(\frac{\rho _{Fe}(282)}{56m_p}\right)^2$$
(1)
which amounts to $`E_F=4.1710^2\mathrm{eV}`$. For such a low work function, even field emission can supply enough charges to provide a relativistic flow of electrons at the co-rotation value given by the Goldreich-Julian-density (Jessner et. al. 2001). But the estimated value for $`E_F`$ should be taken as an upper limit, since the thermal X-ray emission indicates that pulsars have surface temperatures well above $`310^5`$K and are surrounded by a thin gaseous surface layer which would not entail any significant barrier for the extraction of electrons (Pavlov and Zavlin 1998). In that case the surface properties themselves will not influence the primary charge densities (free charge emission scenario).

Recently (Jessner et. al 2001), we proceeded to calculate the Lorentz factors and pair production rates of electrons accelerated along field lines of an aligned dipole taking due account of radiation losses due to inverse Compton scattering on thermal photons (as was proposed by Sturner 1995) and curvature radiation. This was done under the simplifying assumption of a relativistic flow which resulted in constant shielding of the accelerating field by the primary charges below the pair production region. In addition, the field and density enhancements described by Muslimov and Tsygan (1992) were also not implemented. To be complete we will now give an estimate of the initial (primary) current that can be drawn from a pulsar polar cap and on its stability by solving Poisson’s equation with constant current density, but with a velocity dependent charge density.

## 2 The Child-Langmuir Equation

Space charge limitations play an important role in the conduction of currents across otherwise empty space, their detailed study in first half of the $`20^{\mathrm{th}}`$ century provided the foundation of much of our electronic technology. In order to illustrate the principle, we will briefly review a simple classical 1-dimensional case: Take two large electrodes (Fig. 1) of equal area $`A_0`$ separated by a distance x, one at zero potential and the other at $`U=U_0`$.

We assume that we can supply an arbitrary amount of charge for the flow in the direction of x, so that the current will limit itself as soon as the potential at the lower surface vanishes. The velocity of an electron, accelerated by a potential U is given by

$$\beta (U)c=\frac{\sqrt{q_e^2U^2+2q_eUm_ec^2}}{q_eU+m_ec^2}$$
(2)
In the non-relativistic case ($`U<<511`$ kV) this simplifies to

$$v(U)=\sqrt{\frac{2q_eU}{m_e}}$$
(3)
If the potential $`U>0`$, then a current $`I`$ will flow from the lower to the upper electrode. This current is conserved along the upward (x) direction. Such a current moving in a vacuum obeys Poisson’s law:

$$\frac{d^2}{dx^2}U=\frac{I}{ϵ_0cA_0\beta (U)}$$
(4)
In the non-relativistic case we replace $`c\beta `$ with $`\sqrt{\frac{2q_eU}{m_e}}`$, integrate twice and solve for the current to obtain the canonical expressions for the maximum current $`I_0`$ and the internal resistance $`R_0=U/I_0`$ of a planar vacuum diode (Child, 1911, Langmuir 1913) that has a potential U w.r.t. the cathode.

$$I_0(U,x)=\frac{4\sqrt{2}}{3}\sqrt{\frac{q_e}{m_e}}ϵ_0A_0U^{3/2}x^2$$
(5)
The resistance follows as

$$R_0(U,x)=\frac{3}{4\sqrt{2}ϵ_0A_0\sqrt{\frac{m_e}{q_e}}}U^{1/2}x^2$$
(6)
Hence a very important, but often overlooked consequence of Poisson’s equation and the equation of motion is the fact, that a charged current requires a potential to flow through a vacuum. In the non-relativistic regime, the required potential increases as the $`4/3`$ power of the longitudinal distance and the $`2/3`$ power of the current.

The solution to the fully relativistic equation

$$\frac{d^2}{dx^2}U=\frac{I(q_eU+m_ec^2)}{ϵ_0cA_0\sqrt{q_e^2U^2+2q_eUm_ec^2}}$$
(7)
is slightly more complicated,

$`I(U,x)={\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_0cA_0}{q_ex^2}}(2\sqrt{q_e^2U^2+2q_eUm_ec^2}`$ (8)
$`+m_ec^2\left(2\mathrm{sin}^1({\displaystyle \frac{m_2c^2}{q_eU+m_ec^2}}\pi )\right))`$
but the general dependence of the space charge limited current on the inverse squared distance remains unchanged. In fig. 2 we give a quantitative example of the current that will flow between two electrodes of $`1\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}^2`$ crossection, spaced apart by one meter.

In the relativistic regime, the current rises linearly with the applied potential, hence the potential required to drive a particular current density over a distance $`x`$ now increases as $`x^2`$. Although this example appears to be somewhat remote from the expected conditions at a pulsar’s polar cap, one easily recognizes, that for a typical Pulsar ($`\mathrm{B}=10^{12}\mathrm{G},\mathrm{P}=0.5\mathrm{s})`$, the relativistic Goldreich-Julian current density approaches 111Here we used the general relativistic surface density $`n(r_{ns})`$ as defined in section 3 $`q_en(r_{ns})c=498\mathrm{Acm}^2`$. A potential of $`10^9\mathrm{V}`$ is required to drive such a current over the distance of 1 meter. For a height of i.e. $`h=100\mathrm{m}`$ we have exhausted the available potential difference ($`10^{13}\mathrm{V}`$) on the polar cap! The square law dependence of the required potential makes it impossible to have a far reaching charged current of appreciable density within the pulsar magnetosphere.

## 3 Space charge limits for an aligned relativistic pulsar magnetosphere

For reasons of simplicity we will now use the model of an aligned rotator as described by Goldreich and Julian (1969). Fig. 3 outlines the geometry of the rotating neutron star field.

Near the surface of the neutron star, the space-time metric is affected by the presence of the heavy compact rotator leading to the general relativistic effects of the Lense-Thirring dragging of field lines and a radial dependence of the volume elements. Muslimov and Tsygan (1992) introduced an auxiliary function to account for the general relativistic distortion of the field lines:

$`f(r)=3\left({\displaystyle \frac{r}{r_{ns}ϵ_{MT}}}\right)^3\left[\mathrm{ln}\right(1{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_{MT}r_{ns}}{r}})`$ (9)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_{MT}r_{ns}}{r}}(1+{\displaystyle \frac{ϵ_{MT}r_{ns}}{2r}})]`$
here we used the compactness $`ϵ_{MT}=\frac{2\mathrm{\Gamma }M_{ns}}{c^2r_{ns}}`$ where $`\frac{2\mathrm{\Gamma }M_{ns}}{c^2}=r_g`$ is the canonical Schwarzschild radius of the neutron star. A magnetic field line starting with a colateral angle $`\varphi _0`$ at the pulsar surface is given by

$$\mathrm{sin}(\varphi )=\sqrt{\frac{r}{r_{ns}}\frac{f(1)}{f\left(\frac{r}{r_{ns}}\right)}}\mathrm{sin}(\varphi _0)$$
(10)
As an example we use the well known pulsar PSR B2021+51 from the catalogue of Taylor, Manchester and Lyne (1995) with a period of $`P=0.529\mathrm{s}`$ and a surface magnetic field of $`B_0=10^{12.11}\mathrm{G}`$ which for simplicity we treat as if it were an aligned rotator. Then the colateral angle of the rim of the polar cap turns out to be $`\varphi _{crit}=\mathrm{sin}^1\left(\sqrt{\frac{2\pi r_{ns}\mathrm{sin}^2(\pi /2)}{Pcf(1)}}\right)=0.94^^o`$ and the area of the polar cap is $`A_{pole}=2\pi r_{ns}^2(1\mathrm{cos}(\varphi _{crit}))=8.510^4\mathrm{m}^2`$. The opening angle $`\varphi `$ and thus the surface area enclosed by the limiting field lines increases with increasing distance from the surface. Using the equation of field lines (10), we can subsequenty replace $`\mathrm{cos}(\varphi (r))`$ with

$$\zeta (r)=\sqrt{1\frac{r}{r_{ns}}\frac{f(1)}{f\left(\frac{r}{r_{ns}}\right)}\mathrm{sin}^2(\varphi _{crit})}$$
(11)
The Goldreich-Julian charge density compensates the induced electric field parallel to the magnetic field line and is classically given for the pole by $`n_0(r)=\frac{B_0\mathrm{\Omega }ϵ_0}{q_e}\left(\frac{r_{ns}}{r}\right)^3`$ yielding $`n_0(r_{ns})=8.510^{16}\mathrm{m}^3`$ on the surface of the centre of the polar cap. Following Beskin (1999) we can use

$$f_0(r)=\frac{1\left(\frac{r_g}{r}\right)^3}{\sqrt{1\frac{r_g}{r}}}$$
(12)
to describe the G.R. correction of the co-rotation density $`n`$ as a function of distance. Because of the higher electric field at the surface, the density has to increase by a factor of $`f_0(r_{ns})=1.21`$ to a value of $`n_0(r_{ns})f_0(r_{ns})=1.0310^{17}\mathrm{m}^3`$ . $`f_0(r)`$ decays quickly with $`r`$, i.e. to $`1.021`$ at $`r=10r_{ns}`$. Assuming relativistic velocities, the total polar cap current can roughly account for the observed spin-down energy loss of the pulsar:

$`I_{cap}=n(r_{ns})q_ecA_0{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\varphi _{crit}}}{\displaystyle _0^{\varphi _{crit}}}\left(3\mathrm{cos}^2(\theta )1\right)𝑑\theta `$ (13)
$`=1.0110^{12}\mathrm{A}`$
Together with the polar cap potential $`U_{cap}=\frac{B_0\mathrm{\Omega }r_{ns}^2}{2}\left(\mathrm{cos}^2(\varphi _{crit})1\right)=2.0710^{13}\mathrm{V}`$ we obtain an electrical power of $`I_{cap}U_{cap}=2.0910^{25}\mathrm{W}`$ which, for such a coarse model, agrees surprisingly well with the observed energy loss of $`10^{32.9}\frac{\mathrm{erg}}{\mathrm{s}}=7.910^{25}\mathrm{W}`$.

For a pulsar with an electron current flowing out of the polar cap, the radial part of Poisson’s equation can now be written in spherical polar coordinates:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}r^2{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}U={\displaystyle \frac{I}{ϵ_02\pi r_{ns}^2c\beta (u)(1\zeta (r))}}`$ (14)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{q_e}{ϵ_0}}n_0(r_{ns})f_0(r)\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_{ns}}{r}}\right)^3(3\zeta (r)^21)`$
The first term on the right hand side of the equation contains the charge density due to the current of electrons and the second term the equivalent co-rotation charge density. Here we have assumed a uniform current density across the cap and we neglect the transverse dependence of the potential (all other derivatives in Poission’s equation are assumed to vanish). But the divergence of field lines as a function of distance is accounted for by $`\zeta (r)`$. Furthermore, it is quite reasonable to assume that the electrons will leave the surface with thermal velocities. For $`T=310^5\mathrm{K}`$ their kinetic energy corresponds to an initial potential of $`U_0=\frac{kT}{q_e}=25.9\mathrm{V}`$, and a velocity of $`0.01c`$. Come what may, the boundary condition at the surface $`0<U<U_0`$ dictates that the flow starts in the non-relativistic regime. As current densities are conserved along the field lines, and charges are accelerated, the first (current) term in (14) will decrease on acceleration, leading to further increase of the accelerating potential (and vice versa). If we therefore have a space charge limited flow with full shielding at the surface ($`n=n(r_{ns})`$) and $`\beta =0.01`$, the charge density will decrease by a factor of $`\beta `$ along the field lines if relativistic potentials are encountered, a point already made by Fawley, Arons and Scharleman (1977).

## 4 Numerical Solutions of the Pulsar Poisson Equation

A Bulirsch-Stoer algorithm (provided by MATHCAD) was employed with typically 2048 steps to solve (14) for a range of up to 6m above the pulsar surface where the boundary conditions were set to $`U(r_{ns})=U_0`$ and $`\frac{dU}{dr}=0\mathrm{V}\mathrm{m}^1`$. The results were checked by increasing the resolution and sometimes with another algorithm (adaptable Runge-Kutta method).

### 4.1 Strict space charge limitation at the surface

With a constant current over the polar cap that is in equilibrium at the surface, fulfilling the above boundary conditions, we get a massive increase in particle energies with height (fig. 4).

But in the same vein, the charge density falls to about 1% of the surface value after about $`\frac{c}{\omega _{pl}}=c\sqrt{\frac{ϵ_0m_e}{q_e^2n_0}}=15\mathrm{m}\mathrm{m}`$ in agreement with Fawley, Arons and Scharleman (1977). In this and all following cases we neglected energy losses of particles by inverse Compton scattering and curvature radiation. These losses will start to limit the attainable particle energies in the surface layer as soon as Lorentz factors of about a few 1000 are attained (Jessner et.al. 2001).

### 4.2  Enforced current at about 0.8 times the relativistic co-rotational current

The extremely low relativistic charge densities of $`0.01n(r_{ns})`$ obtained from the steady-state solution make pulsar models unworkable, if they require a primary current of co-rotational density (Ruderman & Sutherland 1975) to supply the energy for the magnetospheric processes. Following the reasoning in section 3 we now find that $`\beta I_{cap}V_{cap}`$ is more than two orders of magnitude smaller than the observed energy loss. The high, unshielded $`E_{||}`$ may aid pair creation, but unless the secondary charges themselves are accelerated by an unshielded field, they will not contribute to the energy balance.

It is therefore of interest to see what happens when the strict boundary condition $`U(r_{ns})=U_0`$ is relaxed by forcing a charge overdensity to be drawn from the surface yielding a relativistic current density of the order of the co-rotation density. Fig. 5 shows the strongly fluctuating potential distribution that will be the result.

The current breaks into slabs of $`10\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}`$ thickness until the particles have obtained enough energy so that their charge density becomes low enough for the accelerating field to take over, in this case after $`5\mathrm{m}`$. Such oscillations are common in flows that exceed the space charge limit locally and the stationary solutions of similar cases have been described by Mestel et. al. (Mestel et. al. 1985) and Shibata (1997). Haeff noted the time variability of the instability in 1939, Pierce described it in 1949 and Eilek presented (this volume) a time dependent solution showing how the oscillatory patterns evolve and propagate with time. Schopper presented a 3-D PIC simulation (this volume) showing how an initially steady particle beam breaks into the noted charged slabs.

### 4.3  Enforced currents with an additional positively charged relativistic inflow

The local charge overdensity on the surface, required by strong relativistic currents, can be neutralized by an inflowing current of the same magnitude, but with opposite sign of the charges. The simplest case would be a highly relativistic current $`I_r`$ with $`\gamma m_ec^2>>q_eU`$. Then we can set $`\beta =1`$ for the return current and solve the following differential equation:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{r^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}r^2{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dr}}U={\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ_02\pi r_{ns}^2c(1\zeta (r))}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{I}{\beta (u)}}I_r\right)`$ (15)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{q_e}{ϵ_0}}n_0(r_{ns})f_0(r)\left({\displaystyle \frac{r_{ns}}{r}}\right)^3(3\zeta (r)^21)`$
The positively charged current will not neutralize the space charge in an extended region above the polar cap, leading to strong acceleration, similar to that shown in fig. 4. But, not unexpectedly, as soon as one relaxes the neutrality condition at the surface, density oscillations will appear. For closely matched inflowing and outflowing currents a second boundary with $`U=0`$ will exist higher up in the magnetosphere. Fig. 6 shows an example where the effects of a positively charged current of $`0.9I_0`$ and a negative thermal current of $`1.8I_0`$ are calculated.

Further simulations with different flowrates have shown that the location of the second boundary is very sensitive to the matching of the currents. A decrease of the outflow by one percent moves the second boundary outward by several hundred meters. Figs. 7 and 8 show the oscillations near the surface. Mildly relativistic potential fluctuations of a few $`10^6\mathrm{V}`$ are encountered with wavelengths of about $`40\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}`$ and the densities (Fig. 8)

show positive values with narrow gaps.

## 5 Conclusions

Charged currents cannot propagate in a vacuum without an outer potential, for a fixed current density the required potential increases as the square of the distance. In the case of pulsars, the available potential on the polar cap allows for a relativistic electron current of co-rotation density only up to a height of a few hundred metres.

Particles start from the neutron star with thermal velocities. An electron current, if limited by non-relativistic space charges at the surface, will encounter an outwardly increasing potential along the field lines. This accelerates the charges and decreases the available current density. Hence a thermal current of non-relativistic surface density cannot compensate the parallel electric field once it leaves the surface. In a steady-state regime, relativistic currents from the polar cap can only be a small fraction $`O(0.01)`$ of a co-rotational current. Standard pulsar models assume a relativistic current of co-rotational density and become unworkable when the primary currents are as low as shown. The available power in the magnetospheric current system is insufficient if the current is space charge limited. Due to the unshielded $`E_{||}`$ Lorentz factors would become too high for radio emission at the observed heights and if pair production were to take place, another boost of at least a hundred in the multiplicity factor would be required to reach the frequently assumed $`10^{34}n_0(r)`$. We take this as evidence against a steady state description of the pulsar mechanism and a large scale charged current flow out to i.e. the light cylinder.

Forcing  a current that locally exceeds the co-rotation charge density leads to strong Pierce type oscillations. The presence of a relativistic inflow of opposite charges does not alter the picture significantly, mainly the outflowing density can be increased by the inflowing amount. A second boundary with $`U=0`$ (inner gap) can be formed for particular combinations of inflow and outflow, where the outflow exceeds the inflow. In these cases the current and the potentials fluctuate with wavelengths of a few $`10\mathrm{c}\mathrm{m}`$ in a region of a few metres above the surface. The density is strongly modulated, showing narrow gaps in the flow. Such fluctuations are inevitable whenever the density exceeds the space charge limits. It may happen at a boundary as in our case, or whenever a relativistic current is strongly perturbed so that it may become non-relativistic in places and by that way exceed the space charge limit. Work by Eilek (this volume), Schopper (also this volume) , Shibata (this volume and 1995), Mestel et. al. (1985) does indicate that the Pierce instability is of importance in the pulsar magnetosphere.

###### Acknowledgements.

We like to thank J. Arons, V. Beskin and A. Tsygan for drawing our attention to the fact that shielding of $`E_{||}`$ cannot be uniform along the field lines. Valuable discussions with Y. Lyubarski, R. Schopper and the particular interest in the subject shown by D. Mitra and J. Eilek were inspiring and encouraging. We gratefully acknowledge the support by the Heraeus foundation.