text:
# Rotation in liquid 4He: Lessons from a toy model

## I The toy model

We will consider a highly abstracted model for rotation of a molecule in liquid helium. The molecule will be treated as a rigid, planar rotor with moment of inertia $`I_1`$. The orientation of the molecule is given by $`\theta _1`$ The liquid helium is treated as a ring of $`N`$ helium atoms that forms another rigid, planar rotor with moment of inertia $`I_2`$ and with orientation given by $`\theta _2`$. Because of the Bose symmetry of the helium, he helium rotor can only be excited to states with $`N\mathrm{}`$ units of angular momentum. The lowest order symmetry allowed coupling between the molecule and the helium ring is given by a potential $`V\mathrm{cos}\left[N(\theta _1\theta _2)\right]`$. Any coupling spectral components that are not multiples of $`N`$ will lead to mixing of states that are not allowed by Bose symmetry, which is forbidden in quantum mechanics. The Hamiltonian is given by:

$$H=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2I_1}\frac{^2}{\theta _1^2}\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2I_2}\frac{^2}{\theta _2^2}+V\mathrm{cos}N(\theta _1\theta _2)$$
(1)
We define $`B_{1,2}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2I_{1,2}}`$, the rotational constants for the uncoupled rotors. We can separate the above $`H`$ by introducing the two new coordinates:

$$\overline{\theta }=\frac{I_1\theta _1+I_2\theta _2}{I_1+I_2}\theta =\theta _1\theta _2$$
(2)
in which we have:

$$H=H_\mathrm{r}+H_\mathrm{v}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2(I_1+I_2)}\frac{^2}{\overline{\theta _1}^2}+\left[\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2}\left(\frac{1}{I_1}+\frac{1}{I_2}\right)\frac{^2}{\theta ^2}+V\mathrm{cos}(N\theta )\right]$$
(3)
$`\overline{\theta }`$ is the variable conjugate to the total angular momentum; $`\theta `$ is a vibrational coordinate. We define $`B_{\mathrm{rigid}}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2(I_1+I_2)}`$ and $`B_{\mathrm{rel}}=\frac{\mathrm{}^2}{2}\left(\frac{1}{I_1}+\frac{1}{I_2}\right)`$. The eigenstates of $`H`$ separate into a product:

$$\psi (\overline{\theta },\theta )=e^{iJ\overline{\theta }}\psi _\mathrm{v}(\theta )$$
(4)
$`J`$ is the quantum number for total angular momentum. It would appear from the separable $`H`$ that the energy could be written as an uncoupled sum of a rigid rotor energy, $`B_{\mathrm{rigid}}J^2`$ ( not $`J(J+1)`$ because we have a planar rotor), and a ‘vibrational’ energy that is independent of $`J`$. However, the energies are not simply additive, due to the fact that the boundary condition for $`\theta `$ is $`J`$-dependent. When $`\theta _2`$ alone is changed by any multiple of $`2\pi /N`$, $`\psi `$ must be unchanged. However, a change of $`2\pi /N`$ in $`\theta _2`$ results in a change of $`(2\pi /N)(I_2/(I_1+I_2)`$ in $`\overline{\theta }`$ and $`+2\pi /N`$ in $`\theta `$. Thus, the Bose symmetry of the helium ring is satisfied by taking as the boundary condition for $`\psi _\mathrm{v}`$:

$$\psi _\mathrm{v}\left(\theta +\frac{2\pi }{N}\right)=\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{2\pi i}{N}\frac{I_2}{I_1+I_2}J\right)\psi _\mathrm{v}(\theta )$$
(5)
As a result, the ‘vibrational energies’ and eigenfunctions are a function of the total angular momentum quantum number, $`J`$. Note that the boundary condition is periodic in $`J`$, with period given by $`N(I_1+I_2)/I_2`$.

The $`J`$ dependence of the boundary condition of the vibrational function is rather unfamiliar in molecular physics. This dependence can be removed by a Unitary transformation of the wavefunction:

$$\psi _\mathrm{v}^{}(\theta )=\mathrm{exp}\left(i\frac{I_2J}{I_1+I_2}\theta \right)\psi _\mathrm{v}(\theta )$$
(6)
The boundary condition on the transformed function is $`\psi _{rmv}^{}\left(\theta +\frac{2\pi }{N}\right)=\psi _{rmv}^{}\left(\theta \right)`$. The transformed hamiltonian, $`H^{}`$, is given by:

$$H^{}=\frac{1}{2I_1}\left(JL\right)^2+\frac{1}{2I_2}L^2+V\mathrm{cos}\left(N\theta \right)$$
(7)
where $`J=i\mathrm{}\frac{}{\overline{\theta }}`$ is the operator for total angular momentum, and $`L=i\mathrm{}\frac{}{\theta }`$ is the angular momentum of the helium ring relative to a frame moving with the rotor. This form of the Hamiltonian closely resembles those widely used in treatment of weakly bound complexes . Expansion of the $`\left(JL\right)^2`$ gives a Coriolis term that couples the overall rotation to the vibrational motion, which makes the nonseperability of these motions evident. This form, however, hides the periodicity in $`J`$ of this the coupling.

We will now consider the two limiting cases. The first to consider is that where $`|V|N^2B_{\mathrm{rel}}`$. In this case, the potential can be considered harmonic around $`\theta =2\pi k/N,k=0\mathrm{}N1`$ when $`V`$ is negative (and shifted by $`\pi /N`$ for $`V`$ positive) with harmonic frequency $`\nu =\frac{1}{2\pi }\sqrt{2N^2|V|\left(\frac{1}{I_1}+\frac{1}{I_2}\right)}`$. The wavefunction will decay to nearly zero at the maxima of the potential, and changes in the phase of the periodic boundary condition at this point (which happens with changes in $`J`$) will not significantly affect the energy. In this limit, the total energy is $`E(J,\mathrm{v})=B_{\mathrm{rigid}}J^2+h\nu (\mathrm{v}+1/2)`$, and we have a rigid rotor spectrum with effective moment of inertia $`I_1+I_2`$. While there are $`N`$ equivalent minima, Bose symmetry assures that only one linear combination of the states localized in each well (the totally symmetric combination for $`J=0`$) is allowed, and thus there are no small tunneling splittings, even in the high barrier limit. The total angular momentum is partitioned between the two rotors in proportion to their moments of inertia, i.e. $`<J_1>=\mathrm{}JI_1/(I_1+I_2)`$ and $`<J_2>=\mathrm{}JI_2/(I_1+I_2)`$.

We will now consider the opposite, or uncoupled rotor, limit. The eigenenergies in this case are trivially $`E(m_1,m_2)=B_1m_1^2+B_2m_2^2`$ with eigenfunctions $`\psi =\mathrm{exp}\left(im_1\theta _1+im_2\theta _2\right)`$. $`m_1`$ can be any integer, while $`m_2=Nk`$, where $`k`$ is any integer. Introducing the total angular momentum quantum number $`J=m_1+m_2`$, we have $`E(J,m_2)=B_1(Jm_2)^2+B_2m_2^2`$. The lowest state for each $`J`$ has quantum numbers $`m_1=JNk`$ and $`m_2=Nk`$, where $`k`$ is the nearest integer to $`B_1J/N(B_1+B_2)`$. Treating the quantum numbers as continuous, we have $`E=B_{\mathrm{rigid}}J^2`$, e.g., the same as for rigid rotation of the rotors. However when we restrict $`J`$ to integer values, for $`JN(B_1+B_2)/(2B_1)`$, the energy spacing will be exactly that of a rigid rotor with rotational constant $`B_1`$. In general, as a function of $`J`$, the uncoupled ground state solutions follow the rigid rotor spectrum in $`B_1`$, but with a series of equally spaced curve crossings when the lowest energy $`m_2`$ value increases by $`N`$ as $`J`$ is increased by one quantum. These crossings allow the total energy to oscillate around that predicted for a rigid rotor with moment of inertia $`I_1+I_2`$.

## II Numerical Results

Having handled the limiting cases, we can now turn our attention to the far more interesting question, which is how does the energy and eigenstate properties change as $`V`$ is continuously varied between these limits. We note that changing the sign of $`V`$ is equivalent to translation of the solution by $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta =\pi `$, and thus we will only consider positive values of $`V`$ explicitly. We also note that the eigenstates are not changed, and the eigenenergies scale linearly if $`B_1,B_2`$, and $`V`$ are multiplied by a constant factor. As a result, we will take $`B_2=1`$ to normalize the energy scale. The solutions for finite values of $`V`$ were calculated using the uncoupled basis and the form of $`H`$ given in Eq. 1 with fixed values of $`m_1+m_2=J`$ and $`m_2=Nk`$. For each value of $`J`$, the matrix representation for $`H`$ is a tridiagonal matrix, with diagonal elements given by the energies for the uncoupled limit, and with off-diagonal elements given by $`V/2`$. Numerical calculations were done using a finite basis with $`k=15,14,\mathrm{}15`$.

Using $`B_1=B_2`$ and $`N=8`$, we have calculated the lowest eigenvalues of $`H`$ for $`J=0,1,2`$ and used these, by fitting to the expression $`E(\mathrm{v},J)=E_0(\mathrm{v})+B_{\mathrm{eff}}J^2D_{\mathrm{eff}}J^4`$, to determine $`B_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`D_{\mathrm{eff}}`$. Figure 1 shows the value of $`B_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ as a function of $`V`$ (both in units of $`B_2`$). It can be seen that $`B_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ varies smoothly from $`B_1`$ to $`B_{\mathrm{rigid}}`$ with increasing $`V`$, and is reaches a value half way between these limits for $`VN^2B_2`$.

In order to rationalize this observation, we will now consider a Quantum Hydrodynamic treatment for the rotation . Let the ground state density be $`\rho (\theta )=|\psi _\mathrm{v}(\theta )|^2`$. Now let the molecule classically rotate with angular velocity $`\omega `$. To first order in $`\omega `$, $`\rho `$ will not change (i.e. we will have adiabatic following of the helium density for classical infinitesimal rotation of the molecule). However, the vibrational wavefunction, $`\psi _\mathrm{v}`$ will no longer be real, but instead will have an angle-dependent phase factor whose gradient will give a hydrodynamic velocity. Solving the equation of continuity:

$$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}\theta }\left(\rho v\right)=\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho }{\mathrm{d}t}=\omega r\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho }{\mathrm{d}\theta }$$
(8)
where $`r`$ is the radius of the helium ring, gives solutions of the form:

$$v(\theta )=\omega r\left(1\frac{C}{\rho (\theta )}\right)$$
(9)
where $`C`$ is an integration constant. We determine $`C`$ by minimizing the kinetic energy averaged over $`\theta `$. This gives:

$$C=\frac{2\pi }{_0^{2\pi }\rho ^1}$$
(10)
and a kinetic energy:

$$\mathrm{\Delta }E_k=\frac{1}{2}I_2\omega ^2\left(1\frac{4\pi ^2}{_0^{2\pi }\rho ^1d\theta }\right)$$
(11)
In the case of a uniform density, $`\rho =(2\pi )^1`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_k=0`$. As the density gets more anisotropic, the integral becomes larger and $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_k`$ becomes larger, approaching the value for rigid rotation of the helium ring when $`\rho `$ has a node in its angular range. We define the hydrodynamic contribution to the increase in the moment of inertia of the heavy rotor due to partial rotation of the light rotor by $`\mathrm{\Delta }E_k=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{h}\omega ^2`$. It is interesting to note that for the above lowest energy value of $`C`$, we have $`_0^{2\pi }v(\theta )d\theta =0.`$ (i.e. that the solution is ‘irrotational’) and that the net angular momentum induced in the helium is $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{h}\omega `$. The lowest energy solution of the three dimensional Quantum hydrodynamic model satifies these conditions as well .

The hydrodynamic model can be tested against the exact quantum solutions. Define $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ as the effective moment of inertia for rotation (as calculated from $`B_{\mathrm{eff}}`$) minus the moment of inertia for the molecular rotor. $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ will grow from $`0`$ for uncoupled rotors to $`I_2`$ as the coupling approachs the rigid coupling limit of high $`V`$. In the hydrodynamic model, $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{eff}}=\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{h}`$. Figure 2 shows a plot that compares $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{h}`$ as a function of $`V`$. Each has been normalized by $`I_2`$. They are found to be in qualitative agreement for the full range of $`V`$, though the exact quantum solution is systematically below the hydrodynamic prediction. We note, however, that for the assumed parameters, the speed of the molecular rotor is equal to that of the helium rotor, while the hydrodynamic treatment assumed a classical, infinitesimal rotation of the molecular rotor.

The size of $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is determined by the degree of anisotropy of the ground state density in the vibrational displacement coordinate $`\theta `$. If $`I_1`$ is decreased at fixed $`I_2`$ and $`V`$, the effective mass for $`\theta `$, which is $`(I_1^1+I_2^1)^1`$ will also decrease, which will decrease the anisotropy produced by $`V`$. Fig 3 shows how the normalized $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{h}`$ vary as the molecular rotational constant, $`B_1`$, changes from $`0`$ to $`2B_2`$. This calculation was done for $`V=100`$, close to the value corresponding to maximum difference of $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_\mathrm{h}`$ for $`B_1=B_2`$. This plot demonstrates that the hydrodynamic prediction becomes exact in the limit that $`B_10`$, i.e., in the case that the assumption of infinitesimal rotational velocity of the molecule holds. However, it substantially overestimates the increase effective moment of inertia when $`B_1B_2`$. This decrease in the increase moment of inertia with increasing rotational constant of the heavy rotor is the effect previously interpreted as the breakdown of adiabatic following in the literature on the rotational spectrum of molecules in liquid Helium .

Figure 4 shows a plot of $`D_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ as a function of $`V`$ for $`B_1=B_2=1`$. $`D_{\mathrm{eff}}=0`$ is zero in both limits, and has a maximum value near the value of $`V`$ at which $`B_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ is changing most rapidly. It is interesting to explicitly point out that this $`D_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ value arises entirely from changes in the angular anisotropy of the helium density with $`J`$, as the model does not allow for an increase in the radial distance of the helium, which has previously been considered . Further, the peak value of $`D_{\mathrm{eff}}1.810^3B_1`$ is in remarkably good agreement with the ratio of $`D_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ to the gas phase molecular rotational constant observed for a number of molecules in liquid helium. For example, for OCS this ratio is found to be $`210^3`$ , while for HCCCN, the same ratio was found to be $`110^3`$ .

We can gain further insight by examining the rotational energy systematically as a function of $`J`$. Figure 5 shows the rotational excitation energy ($`E(0,J)E(0,0)`$) divided by $`J^2`$ as a function of $`J`$. The calculations were done with $`V=100`$. The rotational excitation energy approaches that of the $`B_{\mathrm{rigid}}J^2`$ for high $`J`$. Further, it reaches this value for $`J`$ equal to multiples of $`N(I_1+I_2)/I_2`$, which matches the periodicity of the boundary conditions for $`\psi _\mathrm{v}`$. $`J`$ values that lead to the same boundary conditions for $`\psi _\mathrm{v}`$ will differ in energy only by the eigenvalues of $`H_\mathrm{r}`$, and thus it follows from Eq. 2, that of a rigid rotor with rotational constant $`B_{\mathrm{rigid}}`$. For the first half of each period in $`J`$, $`\psi _\mathrm{v}`$ is found to increase in its anisotropy, and therefore the energy increases, as $`J`$ is increased (See Fig. 6). This can be understood when one considers the fact that for $`J=N(I_1+I_2)/(2I_2)`$, the boundary condition is that $`\psi _\mathrm{v}(2\pi /N)=\psi _\mathrm{v}(0)`$, i.e. the wavefunction will be real but have $`N`$ nodes in the interval $`[0,2\pi ]`$.

Classically, the molecular rotor is characterized by its rotational angular velocity, $`\omega =2B_1J`$. However, we see that the quantum treatment of the two coupled rotors gives opposite results when $`\omega `$ is increased by increasing either $`B_1`$ or $`J`$. For increases in $`B_1`$, the ‘degree of following’ of the light rotor decreases for fixed potential coupling, as seems intuitively reasonable. However, for increases in $`J`$, the anisotropy of the potential and thus the ‘degree of following’ initially increases, and thus so does the effective moment of inertia of the coupled system. This behavior continues until one passes through a resonance condition where the helium can be excited by transfer of $`N`$ quantum of angular momentum from molecular rotor to the helium. This resonance condition is missing from the classical treatment of the coupling between the rotors, where the angular velocity of the molecular rotor is treated as a fixed quantity, $`\omega `$, which is one of the parameters of the problem.

## III Nodal Properties of Solutions

It is possible to calculate the rotational excitation energies of clusters of helium around a molecule by use of the Fixed Frame Diffusion Monte Carlo (FFDMC) method . As in most DMC methods, this method should yield (except for statistical fluctuations) a upper bound on the true energy, finding the optimal wavefunction consistent with the nodal properties that are imposed on the wavefunction by construction. In the case of FFDMC, the nodal planes are determined by the free rotor rotational wavefunction for the molecule alone, i.e. that the sign of the wavefunction (which is taken to be real) for any point in configuration space is the same as that of the rotor wavefunction at the same Euler angles.

We can examine the exact solutions of our toy problem to gain insight into the accuracy of the nodal planes assumed in FFDMC. The wavefunctions we have considered up to now are complex, but because of time reversal symmetry, the solutions with $`J`$ and $`J`$ rotational quantum numbers must be degenerate. Symmetric combination of these solutions just gives the Real part of $`J`$ solution, and the antisymmetric combination the Imaginary part. The real part is given by:

$$\psi _J^\mathrm{R}(\theta _1,\theta _2)=\mathrm{cos}(J\theta _1)Re(\psi ^{}(\theta _2\theta _1))\mathrm{sin}(J\theta _2)Im(\psi ^{}(\theta _2\theta _1))$$
(12)
where

$$\psi ^{}(\mathrm{\Delta }\theta )=\underset{k}{}c_k^J\mathrm{exp}(ikN\mathrm{\Delta }\theta )$$
(13)
and $`c_k^J`$ are the eigenvector coefficients obtained from diagonalization of the real Hamiltonian matrix in the uncoupled basis. Examination of the numerical solutions reveals that for $`J<N`$, $`Re(\psi ^{})`$ has no nodes, while $`Im(\psi ^{})`$ has nodes at $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta `$ equal to integer multiples of $`\pi /N`$. Thus, if $`Im(\psi ^{})=0`$, then the solution would satisfy the FFDMC nodal properties exactly. However, for finite $`Im(\psi ^{})`$, the nodal surfaces, rather than being on the planes $`\theta _1=`$ constant, are modulated N times per cycle along the $`\theta _1=`$ constant line. For $`V=80`$ and $`B_1=B_2=1`$, the maximum value of $`Im(\psi ^{})`$ is about $`4\%`$ of $`Re(\psi ^{})`$, and growing approximately linearly for low $`J`$.

In order to test the quantiative implications of this error in the nodal properties, importance sampled DMC calculations have been done for the present two rotor problem. The explicit DMC algorithm given by Reynolds et al.  was used with minor change . The guiding function, $`\psi _\mathrm{T}`$, which determines the nodes, was selected as $`\mathrm{cos}(J\theta _1)\psi _\mathrm{v}^0(\theta _1\theta _2)`$, where $`\psi _\mathrm{v}^0`$ is the real, positive definite eigenstate for the $`J=0`$ problem. The rotational constant, $`B_{\mathrm{DMC}}`$ is defined as the DMC estimated energy for $`J=1`$ less the exact ground state eigenenergy for $`J=0`$, and will be (except for sampling and finite time step bias) an upper bound on the true $`B`$ value calculated earlier. The points plotted in figure 1 are the calculated values of $`B_{\mathrm{DMC}}`$ with the estimated $`2\sigma `$ error estimates. It is seen that the fixed node DMC estimates of $`B_{\mathrm{eff}}`$ are excellent for low values of $`V`$, but underestimate the contribution of the Helium ring to the effective moment of inertia as it is coupled more strongly to the rotor.

## IV Relationship with a more Realistic Model

In a series of insightful lectures, Anthony Leggett analyzed the properties of the ground state of $`N`$ Helium atoms confined to an annulus of radius $`R`$ and spacing $`dR`$ . The walls of the annulus are allowed to classically rotate with angular velocity $`\omega `$. While not stated explicitly, the walls of the annulus couple to the helium via a time dependent potential, which is static in the rotating frame. As such, our rotating diatomic molecule can be considered as a special case of the problem treated by Leggett. If one transforms to the rotating frame, the quantum hamiltonian is the same as for the static ($`\omega =0`$) problem. However, the boundary condition for the wavefunction in this frame is given by \[Eq. (2.10)\]:

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_0^{}(\theta _1,\theta _2\mathrm{}\theta _j+2\pi \mathrm{}\theta _N)=\mathrm{exp}\left(2\pi imR^2\omega /\mathrm{}\right)\mathrm{\Psi }_0^{}(\theta _1,\theta _2\mathrm{}\theta _j\mathrm{}\theta _N)$$
(14)
In making a comparison to the results of the toy model, we note that for this system $`I_2=NmR^2`$ (the classical moment of inertia for the helium) and $`J=\omega (I_1+I_2)/\mathrm{}`$. Substitution shows that the phase factor in Eq. 14 is identical to that derived above for Eq. 5. Note, however, that Eq. 14 refers to moving one helium atom by $`2\pi `$, while Eq. 5 refers to motion of all $`N`$ helium atoms by $`2\pi /N`$. Motion of all $`N`$ helium atoms by $`2\pi `$ will result in a phase factor of $`2\pi iNmR^2\omega /\mathrm{}=2\pi iI_2J/(I_1+I_2)`$ in both treatments.

Leggett considered the change in helium energy produced by rotation of the walls. Let $`E_0`$ be the ground state energy for the static problem, and $`E_0^{}(\omega )`$ the ground state energy in the rotating frame. The ground state energy in the laboratory frame is given by \[Eq. (2.12)\]:

$$E_{\mathrm{lab}}=E_0+\frac{1}{2}I_2\omega ^2\left[E_0^{}(\omega )E_0\right]$$
(15)
For the ground state of Bosons, we further have that $`E_0^{}(\omega )E_0`$, with equality only when $`\omega `$ equals integer multiples of $`\omega _0=\mathrm{}/mR^2`$ since the nodeless state has the lowest possible energy. At $`\omega =k\omega _0`$, the helium rigidly rotates with the walls. This agrees exactly with the numerical results of the toy model, as shown in Figure 5. In making comparisons with this model, one should remember that $`E_{\mathrm{lab}}`$ does not include the kinetic energy of the walls (rotor). Thus the more general treatment of Leggett supports one of the central insights of the toy model, that the large effective distortion constants for molecular rotors in helium is a consequence of an increased helium following of the rotor with increasing angular velocity, which in turn is a direct consequence of the $`\omega `$ dependence of the single-valuedness boundary condition in the rotating frame.

The moment of inertia for the ground state of the helium can be defined by:

$$I=\left(\frac{d^2E_{\mathrm{lab}}}{d\omega ^2}\right)_{\omega 0}=I_2\left(\frac{d^2E_0^{}(\omega )}{d\omega ^2}\right)_{\omega 0}$$
(16)
Leggett defined the “normal fraction” of the helium by the ratio $`I/I_2`$, which is equal to unity if $`E_0^{}(\omega )`$ is independent of $`\omega `$ as $`\omega 0`$. This will occur if the wavefunction has ‘nontrivial’ nodal planes, since the phase of the wavefunction can be changed discontinuously at a node without cost of energy. Nodal plans associated with overlap of particles, however, are ‘trivial’ in that the phase relationship on each side of the node is determined by the exchange symmetry of the wavefunction, and thus cannot be used to match the boundary conditions without extra cost of energy. In our toy problem, when $`V`$ is very large, the vibrational wavefunction becomes localized, introducing near nodes at the maxima of the potential, and as a result the ground state is described by a near unity normal fraction; we have what Leggett refers to as a ‘normal solid’. Conversely, as the uncoupled limit is approached, the helium ring does not contribute to the kinetic energy of the lowest rotational states and we have $`I0`$, and we have zero normal fraction (i.e. the helium has unity superfluid fraction). Following Leggett’s definition, one finds that the normal fraction is given by $`\mathrm{\Delta }I_{\mathrm{eff}}/I_2`$. Thus, Figure 2 can thus be interpreted as the normal fluid fraction for the ground state as a function of the strength of the potential coupling. Leggett’s analysis is based upon a classical treatment of the motion of the walls, which implies $`I_1I_2`$, in which limit the hydrodynamic model exactly predicts the normal fluid fraction.

## V Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation and the Air Force Office of Scientific Research.


format: text

text:
# Measuring Fractional Charge in Carbon Nanotubes

## Abstract

The Luttinger model of the one-dimensional Fermi gas is the cornerstone of modern understanding of interacting electrons in one dimension. In fact, the enormous class of systems whose universal behavior is adiabatically connected to it are now deemed Luttinger liquids. Recently, it has been shown that metallic single-walled carbon nanotubes are almost perfectly described by the Luttinger Hamiltonian. Indeed, strongly non-Fermi liquid behavior has been observed in a variety of DC transport experiments, in very good agreement with theoretical predictions. Here, we describe how fractional quasiparticle charge, a fundamental property of Luttinger liquids, can be observed in impurity-induced shot noise.

*I. Introduction -* The study of interacting electrons in one dimension has opened a panoply of surprises which often seem counter-intuitive from the perspective of higher dimensions. The generic behavior of one-dimensional metals is that of the Luttinger liquid. In a Luttinger liquid, interactions conspire to host bizarre phenomena such as the separation of spin and charge, as well as anomalous power-law dependences in the resistivity and density of states. Perhaps the most fundamental difference between the Luttinger liquid and higher-dimensional metals lies in the nature of its quasiparticles. The Luttinger quasiparticles are “fractionalized”, and indeed the elementary charged quasiparticle carries not the quantum of charge ’$`e`$’ of the electron, but instead, a fraction ’$`ge`$’.

While the exploration of Luttinger liquid physics began more than half a century ago, it has only found its way into the experimental realm in the past decade. The quantum Hall system with its chiral edge states has championed displaying Luttinger liquid features . In particular, it has provided the definitive confirmation of the existence of fractional charge through shot noise measurements. However, the challenge of finding a truly one-dimensional (1D) system of interacting electrons has persisted. A variety of transport experiments now convincingly demonstrate that single-walled carbon nanotubes(SWNTs) behave as Luttinger liquids, as predicted theoretically.

Here, we show that even the simple set-up of a clean armchair nanotube with a single weak impurity is capable of flaunting a hallmark of Luttinger liquids, namely charge fractionalization. To understand the physical meaning of charge fractionalization, consider a simple thought experiment in which electrons are sequentially transferred from a metallic electrode onto the end of a nanotube through a large contact barrier. With a sufficiently high barrier, the rate of charge addition can be made very low, so that each incident electron can be considered individually. Immediately after the addition event, the added charge $`e`$ travels as a solitonic pulse away from end of the nanotube (incidentally, the added spin $`\mathrm{}/2`$ travels as a separate slower soliton behind the charge). This charge $`e`$ soliton may be regarded as the remnant of the electron in the nanotube. Upon reaching an impurity, however, the true nature of the charge excitations of the Luttinger liquid becomes evident. In a non-interacting system, an incident particle either transmits (with probability $`T`$) or reflects (with probability $`R=1T`$). In the nanotube, the charge $`e`$ soliton can still transmit (with probability $`T`$), but the alternative possibility (which is the leading-order scattering process occurring with probability $`1T`$ for a weak impurity) is to ’splinter’ into two solitons: a backscattered piece of charge $`ge`$ and a transmitted piece of charge $`(1g)e`$. The dimensionless “Luttinger parameter” $`g`$ ($`g<1`$ for repulsively interacting Fermi systems) depends on the nature of the interactions in the system. In carbon nanotubes, theoretical estimates give $`g0.2`$ , in good agreement with transport measurements.

Unfortunately, the difficulty of the necessary time-resolved measurements makes the above thought experiment impractical. Nevertheless, as shown in the next section, the mathematics of Luttinger liquid theory leaves no room to doubt that such strange scattering events indeed occur. In this paper, we determine the consequences of these processes for shot noise. Strikingly, we find that at low enough temperatures, fluctuations in the net current incident on the weak barrier have the shot noise form appropriate for Poisson distributed scattering events of particles of charge $`ge`$. Measurements of such shot noise are more tractable, and can provide definitive proof of charge fractionalization.

As elucidated in what follows, to experimentally observe the described shot noise, we propose a four terminal set-up capable of measuring correlations in current $`C_I`$, and the voltage drop $`V`$ across an impurity placed along the nanotube. In the limit of zero temperature, we derive the relationship $`C_I=4g^2\frac{e^3}{h}V`$; $`C_I`$ is related to the backscattered current $`I_B`$ via $`C_I=geI_B`$, while $`I_B`$ is given by $`I_B=4g\frac{e^2}{h}V`$. Thus one can extract the charge fraction $`g`$. The SWNT, with its estimated value $`g0.2`$ far from unity, makes for an exquisite playground to test the predicted Luttinger liquid physics, specifically, the fractionalization of charge.

*II. Formalism -* To extract the non-equilibrium physics of the set-up described above, we formulate an effective time-dependent theory for the bulk of the nanotube and for the impurity site. The effective theory of the clean single-walled nanotube in consideration may be described by the low energy physics of the $`(N,N)`$ armchair tube. In the absence of interactions, this involves two gapless one-dimensional metallic bands modeled by free fermions with linear dispersion:

$$H_0=\underset{i,\alpha }{}𝑑xv_F[\psi _{Ri\alpha }^{}i_x\psi _{Ri\alpha }^{}\psi _{Li\alpha }^{}i_x\psi _{Li\alpha }^{}],$$
(1)
where $`v_F`$ is the Fermi velocity, $`R`$ and $`L`$ label the right and left movers respectively, $`i=1,2`$ label the bands, and $`\alpha =,`$ the electronic spin. In this section, we set $`\mathrm{}=e=1`$.

The bosonized version of the fermionic operators has the form $`\psi _{R/Li\alpha }e^{i(\varphi _{i\alpha }\pm \theta _{i\alpha })}`$. A more convenient basis, which we employ extensively, involves a spin and channel decomposition for $`\theta `$: $`\theta _{i,\rho /\sigma }=(\theta _i\pm \theta _i)/\sqrt{2}`$ and $`\theta _{\mu \pm }=(\theta _{1\mu }\pm \theta _{2\mu })/\sqrt{2}`$ with $`\mu =\rho ,\sigma `$, and a similar one for $`\varphi `$. The new fields obey the canonical commutation rules $`[\varphi _a(x),\theta _b(y)]=i\pi \delta _{ab}\mathrm{\Theta }(xy)`$, with $`a,b=(\rho +,\rho ,\sigma +,\sigma )`$. As discussed in Ref., interactions effectively involve just the charge density, $`\rho =\frac{2}{\pi }_x\theta _{\rho +}`$. The entire Hamiltonian density ($`H=𝑑x`$), with interactions taken into account, then has the bosonized form:

$$=\underset{a}{}\frac{v_a}{2\pi }[g_a^1(_x\theta _a)^2+g_a(_x\varphi _a)^2],$$
(2)
with $`g_{\rho +}g=v_F/v_{\rho +}<1`$, and $`g_a=1`$, $`v_a=v_F`$ for $`a\rho +`$. In terms of the right- and left-moving chiral modes $`\mathrm{\Phi }_a^{R/L}=g_a\varphi _a\pm \theta _a`$, one has associated densities $`n_a^{R/L}=\pm \frac{1}{\pi }_x\mathrm{\Phi }_a^{R/L}`$. The above Hamiltonian density now takes the diagonal form:

$$=\underset{a}{}\left\{\frac{\pi v_a}{4g_a}\left[(n_a^R)^2+(n_a^L)^2\right]\right\},$$
(3)
with corresponding equations of motion

$$(_t\pm v_a_x)n_a^{R/L}=0.$$
(4)
Thus, the density propagates as a one-dimensional acoustic plasmon with renormalized velocity $`v_{\rho +}`$. The parameter $`g`$ depends on the ratio of the Coulomb energy between particles and the Fermi energy, and in a SWNT has the approximate value of $`0.2`$.

We now consider the effect of a single weak impurity at the origin ($`x=0`$). In this limit, a small portion of quasiparticles backscatter, and the role of fractional charge is most transparent. In the generic case involving no spin polarization or spin flip, local weak backscattering processes may be described by:

$`H_{imp}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{\alpha }{}}\{{\displaystyle \underset{i=1,2}{}}u_i[\psi _{Ri\alpha }^{}(0)\psi _{Li\alpha }^{}(0)+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.]`$ (7)
$`+u_3[\psi _{R1\alpha }^{}(0)\psi _{L2\alpha }^{}(0)+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.]`$
$`+u_4[\psi _{R2\alpha }^{}(0)\psi _{L1\alpha }^{}(0)+\mathrm{h}.\mathrm{c}.]\}`$
where $`\alpha =,`$, ’h.c.’ denotes Hermitian conjugation, $`u_1`$ and $`u_2`$ are weak intra-subband scattering potentials, and $`u_3`$ and $`u_4`$ describe the inter-subband scattering. Processes associated with $`u_1`$ and $`u_2`$ conserve all particle numbers while the $`u_3`$ and $`u_4`$ scattering terms do not conserve $`\rho `$ and $`\sigma `$ particle numbers (these arise physically for impurities which break the sublattice-reflection symmetry of the graphene lattice).

We note that the bosonized version of Eq.(7) may be expressed in terms of right and left moving creation and annihilation operators $`e^{\pm i\mathrm{\Phi }_a^{R/L}}`$ that describe the freely propagating chiral excitations of the system; the impurity site can create, destroy, or backscatter these excitations. Most importantly, every scattering process possesses a term of the form $`e^{\pm i\mathrm{\Phi }_{\rho +}^R}e^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_{\rho +}^L}`$, reflecting the fact that a quasiparticle characterized by the creation operator $`e^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_{\rho +}^{R/L}}`$ is always backscattered. As detailed in Ref., the operator $`e^{i\mathrm{\Phi }_{\rho +}^{R/L}}`$ creates a kink of magnitude $`\pi g`$ in $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{\rho +}^R`$ at $`x=0`$, or equivalently, a peak in $`n_{\rho +}^R`$ of magnitude $`g`$. Therefore, the magnitude of the fractional charge associated with the impurity backscattering is ’$`ge`$’.

Finally we consider the real time, finite temperature action applicable at the impurity site. The manner in which we employ it parallels the treatment in Ref.. We integrate out the $`\varphi _a`$ variables from the bulk Hamiltonian (though, where appropriate, we integrate out $`\theta _a`$ variables instead), and then integrate out fluctuations away from the impurity as in Ref.. Using the Keldysh approach , we write the partition function in terms of time dependent backward and forward paths $`\theta ^\pm \theta \pm \frac{1}{2}\stackrel{~}{\theta }`$:

$$𝒵=\underset{a}{}𝒟\theta _a^+𝒟\theta _a^{}e^S,$$
(8)
with $`a=(\rho +,\rho ,\sigma +,\sigma )`$. The action $`S=S_0+S_1+S_2`$ is given by

$`S_0`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{a}{}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\pi g_a}}{\displaystyle }d\omega \omega \mathrm{coth}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\omega }{2kT}}\right)|\stackrel{~}{\theta }_a(\omega )|^2+`$ (10)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2i}{\pi g_a}}{\displaystyle }dt\stackrel{~}{\theta _a}(t)\dot{\theta }_a(t)],`$
$`S_1`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \underset{js}{}}{\displaystyle 𝑑t[f(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{js}^+(t))f(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{js}^{}(t))]},`$ (11)
$`S_2`$ $`=`$ $`i{\displaystyle \frac{2}{\pi }}{\displaystyle 𝑑t[A(t)\dot{\stackrel{~}{\theta }}_{\rho +}(t)+\eta (t)\dot{\theta }_{\rho +}(t)]}.`$ (12)
Here, $`S_0`$ describes the unperturbed system. $`S_1`$ is derived from the impurity Hamiltonian of Eq.(7). The $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{js}^\pm `$ operators are defined for $`j=1\mathrm{}4`$ and $`s=\pm 1`$:

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{1s}=`$ $`\theta _{\rho +}+s\theta _{\sigma +}+\theta _\rho +s\theta _\sigma ,`$ (13)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2s}=`$ $`\theta _{\rho +}+s\theta _{\sigma +}\theta _\rho s\theta _\sigma ,`$ (14)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{3s}=`$ $`\theta _{\rho +}+s\theta _{\sigma +}+\varphi _\rho +s\varphi _\sigma ,`$ (15)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{4s}=`$ $`\theta _{\rho +}+s\theta _{\sigma +}\varphi _\rho s\varphi _\sigma ,`$ (16)
where the $`\pm `$ superscripts which denote backward and forward paths are suppressed for all variables. $`S_2`$ originates from coupling the physical current to an external source of voltage $`\dot{A}`$.

*III. Physical Properties -*

An analysis of the nanotube with a single impurity, schematically shown in Fig.1, serves to bring out striking Luttinger liquid features. However, in the absence of the impurity, the conductance measured across the external contacts $`A`$ and $`B`$, which we assume to be adiabatic, is $`G=4\frac{e^2}{h}`$, appropriate for a non-interacting one-dimensional system with four channels for conductance. Effectively, this is due to the fact that though an isolated nanotube would have an associated conductance $`4g\frac{e^2}{h}`$, the external metallic contacts are three-dimensional Fermi liquids, and the observed conductance involves electrons backscattering at the interface.

Weak backscattering in the presence of the impurity causes a reduction in the conductance. For a temperature $`kT\frac{\mathrm{}v_F}{\mathrm{}}`$ ($`k`$ is Boltzmann’s constant), where $`\mathrm{}`$ is the distance from the impurity to the nearest contact ($`A`$ or $`B`$), the reduction has the form $`\delta G(T)u^2T^{2\mathrm{\Delta }2}`$, where $`\mathrm{\Delta }=\frac{1}{4}(g+3)`$, and ‘$`u`$’ is the impurity strength. Given the estimate $`g=0.2`$ for the nanotube, $`\delta G(T)T^{0.4}`$ ought to be observable across a wide temperature range. Similar considerations for the limit of large tunneling barrier, where only few electrons tunnel through, show that an infinite wire reflects electrons completely at $`T=0`$. However, at finite temperature it exhibits the temperature dependence $`GT^{2\lambda 2}`$, where $`\lambda =\frac{1}{4}(\frac{1}{g}+3)`$.

As seen in Fig.1, the current contributing to the conductance involves right moving quasiparticles emerging from the left lead, and left movers from the right lead. As emphasized by the chiral decomposition of the previous section, the quasiparticles carry fractional charge $`ge`$, and a portion of them is backscattered into the lead from which they emerge. In the presence of an externally applied potential, the right and left moving chiral modes maintain a difference in chemical potential, $`V_1V_2V`$. The potential difference $`V_{12}=V_1V_2`$ between the chiral modes arises in the presence of an external bias voltage. In the absence of the impurity, the current $`I_0`$ flowing across the wire is given by $`I_0=4g\frac{e^2}{h}V_{12}`$. Unfortunately, unlike in the quantum Hall case, where the right- and left-movers are spatially separated, and $`V_{12}`$ is measurable, here the leads couple to both modes. Thus, $`V_{12}`$ cannot be measured, and the ideal conductance $`4g\frac{e^2}{h}`$ cannot be extracted.

The voltage drop $`V`$ is caused by the backscattering of quasiparticles. The net current traversing the wire in the presence of the impurity is given by

$`I`$ $`=`$ $`I_0I_B`$ (17)
$`=`$ $`4g{\displaystyle \frac{e^2}{h}}(V_{12}V),`$ (18)
where $`V`$ is the voltage drop across the impurity, and $`I_B=4g\frac{e^2}{h}V`$ is the backscattered current. Also, as we work in the weak backscattering limit, we have $`I_BI_0`$. Equation (18) can be either derived from the action of Eq.(12) by calculating the average current $`I=<\frac{2e\dot{\theta }}{\pi }>`$ as the functional derivative $`i\frac{\delta Z}{\delta \eta }`$, or by simple consideration of chiral mode properties, as in the case of spinless fermions. In our set-up, we find that $`V_{12}=\frac{\mathrm{}}{e}\dot{A}`$, and $`V`$ is the expectation value of the voltage operator given by

$`\widehat{V}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{h}{e}}{\displaystyle \underset{js}{}}u_j\mathrm{sin}(\mathrm{\Gamma }_{js}+gA),`$ (19)
with $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$’s defined in Eq.(16).

The role of fractional charge is made manifest in the shot noise generated by the quasiparticles striking the impurity. To derive the general behavior of $`C_I`$ at finite temperature, we define the correlation function $`C_𝒪`$ in the quantity ’$`𝒪`$’,

$$C_𝒪(\omega )=\frac{1}{2}𝑑te^{i\omega t}<\{𝒪(t),𝒪(0)\}>,$$
(20)
and use Eq.(12) as in Ref. to obtain a relation between current and voltage fluctuations, $`C_I`$ and $`C_V`$ respectively. At low temperature, and in the limit of zero frequency, this becomes

$`C_I=\left({\displaystyle \frac{4ge^2}{h}}\right)^2C_V(\omega )+2kT{\displaystyle \frac{dI}{dV_{12}}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4ge^2}{h}}\right)2kT{\displaystyle \frac{dV}{dV_{12}}}.`$ (21)
We then perturbatively calculate the voltage correlations to lowest non-vanishing order in the impurity scattering potential to obtain

$$C_V(\omega 0)=\frac{h}{4e}\mathrm{coth}\left(\frac{geV_{12}}{2kT}\right)<\widehat{V}>.$$
(22)
We observe that the noise due to voltage fluctuations is partitioned between four channels. Putting together Eq.(18),(21) and (22), we obtain the desired form of $`C_I`$:

$`C_I\left(\omega 0\right)=`$ $`ge\mathrm{coth}\left({\displaystyle \frac{geV_{12}}{2kT}}\right)I_B+2kT{\displaystyle \frac{dI}{dV_{12}}}`$ (24)
$`2kT{\displaystyle \frac{dI_B}{dV_{12}}}.`$
Setting $`T=0`$, we see that $`C_I`$ has the celebrated shot noise form $`geI_B`$. It exhibits crossover from shot noise to thermal noise when the condition $`geV_{12}2kT`$ is satisfied. Eq.(24) offers a tractable starting point for experimental data analysis.

*IV. Experiment -*

A possible experimental configuration which realizes Fig.1 is shown in the four-probe geometry of Fig.2. As elucidated in what follows, two sets of measurements, one in the absence of the impurity and one in its presence, enable one to extract the shot noise $`C_I`$ of Eq.(21), and the voltage $`V`$ of Eq.(18) generated across the impurity. These two quantities in turn suffice to extract the charge fraction ’$`g`$’. In the proposed set-up, an external supply maintains a voltage bias between the ends of the nanotube and drives the current through it, while an ammeter measures this net current $`I`$. A voltmeter across $`LR`$ measures the difference in potential $`V_{LR}=V_LV_R`$ (see Fig.2). As measurements involve both the absence and the presence of the impurity, this impurity would have to be created in a controlled way such as by means of an STM tip.

The conditions in which the experiment ought to be performed are rather specific, but feasible. We assume that the probes $`L`$ and $`R`$ are non-invasive in their contribution to voltage drops, and that backscattering at all leads is small. The small backscattering condition is equivalent to the requirement that the two-terminal resistance of the entire wire is close to the ideal value of $`\frac{\mathrm{}}{4e^2}6.25k\mathrm{\Omega }`$. We also require the further condition $`eV_{12},kT\frac{\mathrm{}v_{\rho +}}{\mathrm{}}`$. This ensures that the one-dimensional physics of the tube is probed as opposed to that of the three-dimensional external contacts, in essence that quasiparticle propagation is not coherent across the entire system. Finally, we make the reasonable assumption that heat generated in the external circuit is removed by phonons, hence maintaining steady temperature $`T`$, and that the noise in it has the current-independent Johnson-Nyquist form $`C_{ext}\frac{kT}{R_{ext}}`$, where $`R_{ext}`$ is the resistance of the external circuit.

Determining $`C_I`$, the noise across the impurity, proves a tricky task due to multiple noise sources, and particularly due to possible correlations with scattering at the leads. But taking into account the conditions assumed above for $`\mathrm{}`$ and for the transmission at the leads, as well as the fact that the weak impurity also has large transmission, we find the noise to be additive. In other words, one can measure the current noise in the circuit in the presence and absence of the impurity, $`C_I^{imp}`$ and $`C_I^0`$ respectively, keeping the mean current in the circuit fixed. Then, the shot noise across the impurity would just be their difference; $`C_I=C_I^{imp}C_I^0`$.

One could determine the voltage $`V`$ generated across the impurity by merely measuring the voltage $`V_{LR}`$ of Fig.2 across it if the leads $`L`$ and $`R`$ coupled to right- and left-movers (see Fig.1) symmetrically. However, as shown below, even if this coupling is asymmetric, for fixed current $`I`$, the voltage $`V`$ is simply the difference between the voltages $`V_{LR}`$ and $`V_{LR}^0`$ measured across $`LR`$ in the presence and in the absence of the impurity, respectively. To see this, let $`a_R`$ and $`1a_R`$ be the fractions with which the right lead couples to the right- and left- movers respectively, and similarly for the left lead. We assume $`a_R`$ and $`a_L`$ are voltage-independent, a reasonable assumption given the extremely large ($`𝒪(eV)`$) electronic energy scales involved in the microscopic matrix elements which determine this coupling. With reference to the voltages shown in Fig.1, we then have

$`V_R=a_R(V_1V)+(1a_R)V_2,`$ (25)
$`V_L=a_LV_1+(1a_L)(V_2+V),`$ (26)
$`V_{LR}=V+(a_La_R)(V_1V_2V),`$ (27)
with the total current in the circuit given by

$$I=4g\frac{e^2}{h}(V_1V_2V).$$
(28)
In the absence of the impurity, setting $`V=0`$, we have

$$V_{LR}^0=(a_La_R)(V_1^0V_2^0),$$
(29)
and the corresponding current

$$I_0=4g\frac{e^2}{h}(V_1^0V_2^0).$$
(30)
Finally, for fixed current $`I=I_0`$, Eqs.(27-30) give the required form for $`V`$,

$$V=V_{LR}V_{LR}^0.$$
(31)
Now, in the limit $`kTV_{12}`$ (which is of comparable magnitude to the actual applied voltage), Eq.(24) takes the form $`C_I=geI_B`$. Since $`I_B=\frac{4ge^2}{h}V`$, we have

$$C_I=4g^2\frac{e^3}{h}V.$$
(32)
Eq. (32) enables an experimental determination of ’$`g`$’, given the measured quantities $`C_I`$ and $`V`$. We emphasize that the physical appearance of ’$`g^2`$’ in Eq. (32) has two distinct physical origins. As seen from the relation $`I_B=\frac{4ge^2}{h}V`$, one factor of $`g`$ simply reflects the reduced intrinsic conductance of the Luttinger liquid. The second factor of $`g`$ (in $`C_I=geI_B`$) directly follows from the fractional charge $`ge`$ of the current-carrying solitons. It is in this sense that Eq. (32) is a direct measure of fractional quasiparticle charge.

In the quantum Hall system, determining fractional charge and observing crossover from shot noise to thermal noise were performed in a clear-cut fashion through finite temperature measurements that conformed to the noise described by the analog of Eq.(24). Here, precise quantities cannot be extracted due to the facts that $`a_R`$ and $`a_L`$ of Eq.’s (27) and (29) are unknown, and that $`V_{12}`$ cannot be measured. However, measurements at different values of the average current $`I`$, and less easily at different temperatures $`T`$, would not only probe quasiparticle charge, they would also display the clear dependence of noise on thermal effects. Also, while a gate voltage across the Hall bar allowed one to tune the backscattering strength elegantly, here one could change the barrier strength described in Eq.(7) in a less straightforward way by studying different impurities.

*VI. Conclusion -* The single-walled armchair nanotube hosts a fine arena for observing many of the intriguing features of a four channel Luttinger liquid. Its contrast with Fermi liquids becomes strikingly apparent when its transport properties in the presence of an impurity are compared with Landauer transport theory . Non-equilibrium measurements serve to bring out the fractional nature of the charge carried by the quasiparticle excitations in the nanotube.

Rapid progress in experimental techniques offers scope for studying interacting one-dimensional systems in interesting geometries. For instance, a finite length tube would exhibit resonances in spectral features. A nanotube bearing two (or more) impurities could display resonant tunneling and plateaus in conductance, as observed in thin wires. Fabrication of nanotubes with crossed geometries allows for observing quantum statistics of the constituent particles via the Hanbury Brown-Twiss effect as was studied in the quantum Hall system by Henny et. al., who used a four terminal geometry to measure shot noise and demonstrate the fluctuation-dissipation relation.

Thanks to C. Dekker for inspiring this study.

This research was supported by NSF grants DMR-9985255, DMR-97-04005, DMR95-28578, PHY94-07194 and by Broida Excellence Fellowship, Fernando-Fithian Fellowship and Parsons Foundation Fellowship.


text:
# Powerful jets from black hole X-ray binaries in Low/Hard X-ray states

## 1 Introduction

Radio emission is often observed from X-ray binaries, particularly transient systems, and especially the black hole candidates. It is increasingly accepted that this radio emission is the radiative signature of jet-like outflows, some or all of which may possess relativistic bulk motions. Recent reviews may be found in Hjellming & Han (1995); Mirabel & Rodríguez (1999) and Fender (2000).

### 1.1 Black Hole X-ray states

The ‘Low/Hard’ X-ray state is one of five ‘canonical’ X-ray states, characterised by both spectral and timing behaviour at X-ray energies, observed from black hole X-ray binaries in our Galaxy (e.g. Tanaka & Lewin 1995; Nowak 1995; Mendez, Belloni & van der Klis 1998; Grove et al. 1998; Poutanen 1998). As discussed in Fender (2000), the relation of black hole X-ray state to radio emission can be summarised as in Table 1. In addition, transitions between states appear to produce discrete ejection events in both persistent and transient (where rapid state changes are observed as outbursts) systems (Hjellming & Han 1995; Kuulkers et al. 1999; Fender et al. 1999a,b, Fender & Kuulkers 2001).

The X-ray spectrum in the Low/Hard state is dominated by a power-law component which extends to $`100`$ keV (Poutanen 1998 and references therein; but see also McConnell et al. 2000); any thermal (accretion disc) component contributes $`20`$% in the soft X-ray band ($`10`$ keV) and not at all in hard ($`10`$ keV) X-rays. Modelling of the Low/Hard state favours an accretion disc which is truncated at some distance (typically inferred to be of order 100 Schwarzschild radii) from the central black hole, around which exists a Comptonising corona (Poutanen 1998). ‘Seed’ photons Compton-upscattered by the corona produce the observed power-law spectral component; the apparent cut-off in the power-law component at $`100`$ keV is generally interpreted as evidence for a thermal distribution of hot electrons in the corona. The flow from the inner edge of the accretion disc appears to be radiatively inefficient and has been modelled as a two-temperature advection dominated accretion flow (ADAF; Narayan, Mahadevan & Quataert 1998 and references therein).

## 2 Persistent X-ray binaries in the Low/Hard state

The persistent black hole X-ray binaries displaying the Low/Hard X-ray state are Cyg X-1, GX 339-4 and probably the Galactic Centre hard-X-ray sources 1E1740.7-2942 & GRS 1758-258 (e.g. Tanaka & Lewin 1995). LMC X-3 may also make transient, quasi-periodic excursions from the High/Soft to the Low/Hard X-ray state (Wilms et al. 2001), but is too distant for current radio telescopes to observe easily. We describe below the radio properties of these four sources; radio spectra and images are presented in Figs 1 & 2, additional information on the radio spectrum, optical flux and distance and presented in table 2.

Note that throughout this paper we refer to the spectral index, defined as $`\alpha =\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{log}S_\nu /\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{log}\nu `$, i.e. $`S_\nu \nu ^\alpha `$. Sources with $`\alpha 0`$ will be refer to as ‘flat spectrum’, those with $`\alpha >0`$ as having ‘inverted’ spectra. Optically thin emission typically has $`1\alpha 0.5`$.

### 2.1 Cyg X-1

The radio flux from Cyg X-1 has been established to show a moderate degree of variability, with a mean flux density of $`15`$ mJy at cm wavelengths (Brocksopp et al. 1999 and references therein). The radio spectrum extends to mm wavelengths with a spectral index $`\alpha 0`$ (Fender et al. 2000a). The radio emission is also modulated with a semi-amplitude of around 20%, at the 5.6-day orbital period (Pooley, Fender & Brocksopp 1999), probably as a result of free-free absorption in the dense stellar wind of the OB-type companion star (Brocksopp et al. 1999). On longer (weeks to months) timescales the radio emission is correlated with soft- and hard-X-ray emission when the source is in the Low/Hard state (Brocksopp et al. 1999). There is strong but inconclusive evidence that during transitions to softer X-ray states the radio emission is suppressed, and flaring may occur around the time of state transition (Brocksopp et al. 1999 and references therein). Cyg X-1 probably lies at a distance of 2–3 kpc (Fender & Hendry 2000 and references therein). Fig 1(a) displays the mean radio–mm spectrum of Cyg X-1. Stirling et al. (1998, 2001) present evidence for an extended and collimated radio structure from Cyg X-1 on milliarcsecond scales, which is almost certainly a compact jet.

### 2.2 GX 339-4

GX 339-4 displays a slightly inverted ($`\alpha +0.1`$) radio spectrum when in the Low/Hard (and maybe also ‘Off’) X-ray state (Corbel et al. 2000 and references therein), which may extend to near-infrared wavelengths (Corbel & Fender 2000). As in Cyg X-1, the radio emission is correlated with the soft- and hard-X-ray emission when in the Low/Hard X-ray state (Hannikainen et al. 1998b; Corbel et al. 2000) and probably also in the ‘Off’ state (Corbel et al. 2000). In the High/Soft X-ray state both the hard X-ray and radio emission from GX 339-4 are strongly suppressed; the source was undetectable at radio wavelengths throughout 1998 whilst in this state (Fender et al. 1999b). GX 339-4 probably lies at a distance of 2–4 kpc (Fender & Hendry 2000 and references therein). Fig 1(b) displays a typical radio spectrum for GX 339-4.

### 2.3 1E 1740.7-2942

The radio counterpart to the galactic centre hard X-ray source 1E 1740.7-2942 (Tanaka & Lewin 1995; also known as the ‘Great Annihilator’) consists of a compact core at the centre of extended double-sided jets (Mirabel et al. 1992; Mirabel 1994). The core radio emission appears to be correlated with X-ray emission (Mirabel et al. 1992, 1993). A small number of reported radio observations (e.g. Mirabel et al. 1992, 1993; Gray, Cram & Ekers 1992; Anantharamaiah et al. 1993; Martí 1993) repeatedly detect the core at 5 GHz, but a good multiple-frequency spectrum has yet to be reported. Several observations report two-point spectral indices, for example Mirabel et al. (1992, 1993) report 20–6 cm spectral indices of $`\alpha >0.2`$ in 1989 March, and $`\alpha =0.4\pm 0.1`$ in 1991 October. Gray et al. (1992) similarly conclude that the 20–6 cm spectral index of the core component (their source ‘A’) must be flatter than -0.36, based on VLA and ATCA observations in 1989–1991. Heindl, Prince & Grunsfeld (1994) further report that in 1989 March while the source was $`0.4`$ mJy at 5 GHz it was ‘undetected’ at 1.5 GHz, again implying a fairly flat or inverted spectrum. However, it is clear that for this source a well determined multi-frequency radio spectrum is desirable and, at present, lacking. In Fig 1(c) we indicate the mean 5 GHz flux density and the possible range of 1–9 GHz spectral indices inferred from the literature. Certainly the core does not have the steep, optically thin spectral index of $`0.8\pm 0.1`$ observed from the jet lobes/hotspots (Mirabel et al. 1992). Fig 2 shows a deep radio image of the core + jets radio structure of the system (from Mirabel & Rodríguez 1999). 1E 1740.7-2942 is assumed to lie at a distance of $`8.5`$ kpc, in the region of the galactic centre (e.g. Tanaka & Lewin 1995).

### 2.4 GRS 1758-258

GRS 1758-258 is another galactic centre hard X-ray source with very similar X-ray properties to 1E 1740.7-2942 (Tanaka & Lewin 1995; Lin et al. 2000). The radio counterpart is also a compact core with extended jet-like structures (Mirabel 1994). The compact core has a flat radio spectrum at cm wavelengths (Lin et al. 2000). Fig 1(d) shows a typical radio spectrum of the source; Fig 2 shows a deep radio image of the core + jets radio structure of GRS 1758-258 (from Martí et al. 1998). Like 1E 1740.7-2942, GRS 1758-258 is also assumed to lie in the galactic centre region (e.g. Tanaka & Lewin 1995) and so we assume a distance of $`8.5`$ kpc.

## 3 X-ray transients in the Low/Hard state

Only three X-ray transients have been observed to spend an extended period in the Low/Hard X-ray state during which time there was good coverage at radio wavelengths. Some systems, such as GRO J1716-249 (‘Nova Oph 1993’), were observed at radio wavelengths during (probable) excursions in the Low/Hard state, but in these cases the state changes were so rapid and frequent that the radio emission was dominated by the major, discrete ejections and the presence (or not) of an underlying flat spectral component could not be tested. Distance estimates for these three systems are from Chen et al. (1997).

### 3.1 GS 2023+338 (V404 Cyg)

GS 2023+338 was first detected by the Ginga X-ray satellite in 1989 May (Makino 1989), and was a bright and unusual X-ray transient. Oosterbroek et al. (1997), in a study of the X-ray spectral and timing properties of this system, conclude that it stayed in the Low/Hard X-ray state throughout the outburst (see also Zycki, Done & Smith 1999a,b). The radio emission from this system was also unusual – a bright optically thin outburst (presumably associated with the rapid state transition at the start of the outburst) was followed by the emergence of ‘second stage’ emission with a flat/inverted radio spectrum (Han & Hjellming 1992; see Figs 3 and 5).

Han & Hjellming (1992) also report (amongst other things) rapid variability, possibly quasi-periodic, which appears, in hindsight, to be very much like the ‘radio QPO’ observed from GRS 1915+105 (Pooley & Fender 1997). Furthermore, the extremely well correlated radio : optical light curve (Han & Hjellming 1992) may be indicating the extension of the flat spectral component to optical wavelengths (just as the flat spectral component in GRS 1915+105 extends to at least near-infrared wavelengths; Fender & Pooley 1998, 2000 and references therein). Radio spectra of GS 2023+338 during the Low/Hard state is shown in Fig 3(a).

### 3.2 GRO J0422+32

GRO J0422+32 was discovered as a new, bright hard X-ray source by BATSE onboard CGRO in 1992 (Paciesas et al. 1992). According to Esin et al. (1998) GRO J0422+32 was at all times during its outburst in the low/hard X-ray state. Shrader et al. (1994) present the UV, optical and radio outburst data on this source. The radio observations reveal a flat radio spectrum which becomes more inverted as the outburst progresses. Shrader et al. (1994) and Hjellming & Han (1995) refer to this flat/inverted radio spectral component as ‘second stage’ radio emission, and note its similarity to that of GS 2023+338 (see above). Radio spectra of GRO J0422+32 in the Low/Hard X-ray state is presented in Fig 3(b).

### 3.3 GS 1354-64

This (recurrent) X-ray transient was discovered by Ginga in 1987 February (Makino 1987). However, it was the 1997 outburst which had the best coverage, and established that the system remained in the Low/Hard X-ray state (Revnivtsev et al. 2000; Brocksopp et al. 2001). During this outburst a radio counterpart to the system was detected for the first time (Fender et al. 1997c; Brocksopp et al. 2001). The radio spectrum of this system was observed to invert (ie. $`\alpha >0`$) within 30 days of the initial detection, as the source persisted in the Low/Hard X-ray state (Fig 3(c); Brocksopp et al. 2001).

### 3.4 Transients in the Low/Hard state without good radio coverage

Miyamoto et al. (1993) show that during the decay phase of its outburst, the transient GS 1124-683 (‘Nova Mus 1991’) began a transition from the high/soft to low/hard X-ray states commencing around 1991 April 19 (MJD 48365) and being complete by 1991 June 13 (MJD 48420). Unfortunately there appear to be no radio observations during the Low/Hard state. For a discussion of the optically thin radio outbursts associated with the very high X-ray state in this source (Miyamoto et al. 1993), see Ball et al. (1995) and Kuulkers et al. (1999).

Esin et al. (1998) suggest that the transient GRO J1716-249 was in the low/hard X-ray state when bright in hard X-rays (as observed with BATSE - Hjellming et al. 1996). However, the relatively sparse radio coverage and rapid, repeated state changes (Hjellming et al. 1996), each one presumably leading to a discrete ejection which evolved to an optically thin radio state, preclude us from looking for a flat spectral component associated with the low/hard X-ray state.

Mendez et al. (1998) show that GRO J1655-40 passed through the Low/Hard X-ray state on its way to ‘quiescence’ ($``$ the ‘Off’ state ?) at the end of its 1997 outburst. However, as this outburst had not shown the spectacular radio flaring associated with the 1994/1995 outburst(s), there was no radio coverage being undertaken at this time. Note that in a detailed study of the radio emission from GRO J1655-40 during the earlier outburst, Hannikainen et al. (2000) discern the presence of underlying flat-spectrum ‘core’ emission which is not highly polarised.

## 4 Other X-ray transients

Generally speaking, most X-ray transients do not spend any extended period in the Low/Hard state during outburst, often transitting from quiescence/Off state to the High/Soft or Very High states and then fading rapidly away. Reviews of X-ray transient observational properties can be found in e.g. Tanaka & Lewin (1995) and Chen, Shrader & Livio (1997). Of the 26 transients discussed in Chen et al. (1997), probably only GRS 2023+338 and GRO J0422+32 remained in the Low/Hard state through (most of) their outbursts. Esin et al. (2000) discuss the ‘typical’ outbursts of the bright transients GRS 1124-683 and A0620-00, illustrating the rapid transition to the Very High state and then the decline through the High, Intermediate and Low/Hard states back to quiescence ($``$ ‘Off’ state). The jet source GRO J1655-40 was similarly observed to pass through the ‘canonical’ X-ray states during the decline from outburst peak (Mendez et al. 1998). In such cases of outbursts dominated by soft X-ray states, the radio emission is often dominated by one or more discrete ejection events, associated with the state transition and/or the Very High state. A detailed study of three systems is presented in Kuulkers et al. (1999 – note that the data in that paper on GS 1124-683 correspond to epochs before the Low/Hard state was entered); see also Hjellming & Han (1995). The radio spectra of these systems, dominated as it is by one or more discrete ejections, is typically optically thin (i.e. $`\alpha 0.5`$) within a few days of the peak of the emission, sometimes temporarily inverting as a new component (which is initially optically thick) is ejected (e.g. Kuulkers et al. 1999). This is as a result of expansion of the ejecta to the point where self-absorption is no longer important (note that some transients show an optically thin rise also – see e.g. Hjellming et al. 1999 and references therein). These transient, optically thin outbursts are often much brighter at radio wavelengths than the flat spectral components under discussion here, but little is known about any high-frequency component.

It should be noted that the radio spectra of more unusual radio-bright X-ray sources such as Cyg X-3 and GRS 1915+105 also evolve towards an optically thin state following major outbursts (e.g. Hjellming & Han 1995; Fender et al. 1997a; Fender et al. 1999a), again presumably as the (discrete) ejecta expand sufficiently for internal self-absorption to become unimportant.

Fig 4 compares a sample of optically thin radio spectra from five X-ray transients (for further references see e.g. Hjellming & Han 1995, Fender & Kuulkers 2001) plus the unusual radio-jet X-ray binaries SS 433 and Cyg X-3 (data from Fender et al. 2000b and Fender et al. 1997b respectively for these two systems) with the seven flat-spectrum sources presented in Figs 1 and 4. Outburst dates, distance estimates and associated references are given in table 3; for XTE J1748-288 we assume a distance of 8.5 kpc given its proximity to the galactic centre.

While this is not a completely comprehensive sample of data for optically thin events, it is probably representative of the range of luminosities observed in optically thin events (Cyg X-3 being the brightest radio source associated with an X-ray binary – see e.g. Fender & Kuulkers 2001).

Two things are immediately apparent :

1. Spectra : the Low/Hard state sources all have flat or inverted radio(–mm) spectra, whereas the soft transients have optically thin spectra, most obviously at high frequencies
2. Radio luminosity : the optically thin sources span a much larger range in radio luminosities than the Low/Hard state sources

## 5 Discussion : observational characteristics

It has been shown that, as well as the persistent systems Cyg X-1 and GX 339-4, and also probably 1E 1740.7-2942 and GRS 1758-258, X-ray transient black hole candidates also show a low-level, flat/inverted spectral component at radio wavelengths when in the Low/Hard X-ray state for any length of time. In this section we discuss the spectral form and extent, polarisation properties and degree of variability of the flat/inverted spectral components.

### 5.1 Spectral extent and evolution

As discussed in Fender et al. (2000) for the case of Cyg X-1, as yet no-one has found either high- or low-frequency cutoffs to the flat spectral component and as a result the energy associated with it is essentially unconstrained. However in Cyg X-1 the flat spectral component is overwhelmed by thermal emission from the OB-type companion star at wavelengths $`\lambda 30\mu `$m (Fender et al. 2000). In the case of GRS 1915+105 (Fender & Pooley 1998,2000 and references therein), and possibly Cyg X-3 (Fender et al. 1996) and GX 339-4 (Corbel & Fender 2000) there is strong evidence that the flat spectral component extends to the near-infrared (K-band, $`2.2\mu `$m), and hence has a much larger radiative luminosity ($`10^{36}`$ erg s<sup>-1</sup> for GRS 1915+105) than could be anticipated from radio observations only. However, only one of these systems (GX 339-4) is in the canonical ‘Low/Hard’ X-ray state (the X-ray states of Cyg X-3 and GRS 1915+105 evade simple classification, although GRS 1915+105 may spend much of its time in something like the Very High State – Belloni 1998). Do the flat spectral components associated with the transients in the Low/Hard state also extend to the near-infrared or beyond ?

Han & Hjellming (1992) report a very clear correlation between X-ray, optical and radio fluxes from GS 2023+38 during the decay following the outburst. The spectral evolution from radio–optical is illustrated in Fig 5. We assume an extinction in the optical R-band of 2.3 magnitudes (based on $`A_\mathrm{V}=3`$ mag – Shahbaz et al. 1994; Rieke & Lebofsky 1985). The radio–optical spectrum can be fitted by a single power–law shortly after the emergence of the flat spectral component around MJD 47685. After that the radio spectrum inverts while the highest frequency (usually 14.9 GHz) radio flux densities closely track the dereddened optical flux. Such a strong correlation implies a common emission mechanism, and we suggest that in this case the optical flux during this phase of the decay was dominated by high-frequency synchrotron emission.

Why the radio spectrum should invert, without affecting the optical flux, if it is also synchrotron, may be due to free-free absorption from debris local to the system following the outburst (Zycki, Done & Smith 1999a,b do report a large and variable absorption component present in X-ray spectra following the outburst). In Appendix A it is shown that a simple model in which the intrinsic jet emission suffers foreground free-free absorption can be used to fit the data, but this is certainly an oversimplification of the true picture. Importantly, we cannot rule out varying internal synchrotron self-absorption, but evaluation of its significance would require modelling of the jet, which is beyond the scope of this work.

The radio spectra of GRO J0422+32 and GS 1354-64 are also observed to invert as the outburst declines (Fig 3), in a manner consistent with increasing low-frequency absorption. There is also evidence in both cases for an extension of the flat spectral component to the optical bands. Van Paradijs et al. (1994) discuss a flat spectral component from $`10\mu `$m through to the optical band from GRO J0422+32, which they attribute to free-free emission, most probably from a disc-wind. Shrader et al. (1994) also note that the dereddened optical continuum of GRO J0422+32 rapidly evolves to a flat spectrum ($`\alpha 0`$) during the decay phase of the outburst. Finally, Brocksopp et al. (2001) also report evidence for correlated radio : optical emission from GS 1354-64.

In all three sources the spectrum from the highest radio frequency to the optical band is approximately flat (table 2). There seems to be no a priori reason why flux densities at radio and optical wavelengths should be comparable in the Low/Hard state, so there appears to be either a physical coupling, or coincidence.

Very few low-frequency ($`\nu <1`$ GHz) observations have been made of these systems, although in the case of GS 1354-64 the spectrum extends at least as low as 843 MHz (Brocksopp et al. 2001), as it does in GX 339-4 (Corbel et al. 2000 and references therein).

### 5.2 Polarisation

While there have been no reported measurements of linear polarisation from Cyg X-1, Corbel et al. (2000) report a low level of linear polarisation, of order 2%, from GX 339-4 in the Low/Hard X-ray state. The polarisation angle in this system has remained approximately constant (to within uncertainties of order 10) over a period of $`2`$ yr, implying a fixed orientation of the magnetic field in this system (whether parallel or perpendicular to the jet axis is at present uncertain). Presumably this fixed axis corresponds to the rotation axis of the black hole and/or inner accretion disc (the latter is in fact probably slaved to the former). Han & Hjellming (1992) report a comparable level of linear polarisation from GS 2023+338 with a constant position angle over a period of $`2`$ months, again implying a relatively stable and fixed-orientation magnetic field structure within the jet.

### 5.3 Variability timescales

Rapid variability has been observed from the flat spectral component in Cyg X-1 (Brocksopp et al. 1999), GX 339-4 (Corbel et al. 2000), GS 2023+338 (Han & Hjellming 1992) and GRO J0422+32 (Shrader et al. 1994). Furthermore, there was a clear correlation between X-ray and radio emission in GS 2023+338 at least, implying an ongoing coupling between the accreting and outflowing matter. In this source the significant variability was observed on timescales of minutes, implying size scales of order $`10^{12}`$ cm ($`<10^6`$ Schwarzschild radii for a $`10`$M black hole).

In contrast some of the optically thin outbursts of other sources can be almost perfectly described by smooth power-law decays and show little rapid variability. Hjellming & Han (1995) show six examples of fits to optically thin events with simple ‘synchrotron bubble’ models. In such cases the decay of the radio emission arises due to adiabatic expansion losses, and so weaker radio emission is associated with increasingly large physical structures which display less and less variability on short timescales. Such events are also physically decoupled and observationally uncorrelated with the accretion disc emission following the dramatic events of the outburst. For example, 10 days after ejection, material travelling at $`0.9c`$ will be $`>10^{16}`$ cm ($`1500`$ A.U. $`10^{10}`$ Schwarzschild radii) from the central black hole. The picture is not quite so simple however, as several transients whose radio emission is dominated by optically thin ejections sometimes briefly display inverted spectra (Kuulkers et al. 1999). This is interpreted as the ejection of new components which are initially optically thick at radio wavelengths, but which rapidly become optically thin. Such multiple ejections of discrete blobs has been directly observed in e.g. GRS 1915+105 (Mirabel & Rodríguez 1994; Fender et al. 1999a).

## 6 The nature of the flat spectral component

It has long been accepted that radio emission from X-ray binaries is synchrotron emission from material ejected from the system (Hjellming & Han 1995 and references therein). Such ejections, at relativistic bulk velocities, have been directly observed in several cases (Hjellming & Han 1995; Mirabel & Rodríguez 1999; Fender 2000 and references therein). However, a simple homogenous synchrotron–emitting source should exhibit a two component spectrum with a spectral index of +2.5 below some frequency at which self-absorption becomes significant, and $`\alpha `$ above this frequency (with a turnover within one decade in frequency). For a power-law distribution of electrons of the form $`N(E)dEE^pdE`$, this optically thin spectral index is $`\alpha =(1p)/2`$. Observed optically thin spectral indices are typically in the range $`1\alpha 0.5`$, corresponding to electron energy indices of $`2p3`$. This range is approximately consistent with both simple theories of particle acceleration and the observed cosmic-ray energy index (Blandford & Eichler 1987).

The radio spectra observed from these black hole systems in the Low/Hard state is however quite different, showing a flat spectrum which probably extends to very high frequencies. Blandford & Königl (1979) showed, in a model developed for AGN, that a simple ‘isothermal’ conical jet can produce a flat spectrum even with an electron distribution $`N(E)dEE^2dE`$. Reynolds (1982) explored in more detail the observed spectra from winds and jets with a variety of geometries, magnetic fields and energetics (see also Cawthorne 1991 for a review). Hjellming & Johnston (1988) and Falcke & Biermann (1996, 1999) have discussed the application of such models to X-ray binaries. Given that we recover the negative spectral index during major optically thin outbursts, some form of the partially self-absorbed conical jet model does seem the most likely origin of the flat spectral component in X-ray binaries also. In the simplest case, a flat spectrum implies a characteristic size scale at any frequency which is proportional to $`\nu ^1`$. Thus if the flat spectra extend from radio to near-infrared or optical frequencies, this implies that the jet must be self-similar over the same range in physical size, ie. $`5`$ orders of magnitude. In Fender et al. (2000) it was noted that the flat spectral component observed from Cyg X-1 was much flatter than that observed from ‘flat spectrum’ AGN. This is primarily due to the high-frequency turnover, which occurs around the millimetre band for AGN (Bloom et al. 1994), not being observed for Cyg X-1 (or any other X-ray binary to date). As the highest-frequency emission will arise from the smallest physical scales for a conical jet or similar model, this lack of observed turnover in X-ray binaries is probably due to higher densities and/or magnetic fields in the accretion flow around a $`10`$M black hole as compared to the $`10^6`$M black holes in AGN. If the turnover for the X-ray binaries transpires to be around the optical or near-infrared bands, this would imply an approximate empirical scaling of the high frequency cut-off, $`\nu _{\mathrm{HIGH}}M_{\mathrm{BH}}^{1/2}`$.

Earlier interpretations of the flat radio spectra were very closely related to these conical jet models. The flat spectral components observed from GS 2023+338 and GRO J0422+32 have been referred to as ‘second stage’ radio emission (Hjellming & Han 1995), and it was suggested that they originate in a wind from the accretion disc through which the observer sees to different depths as a function of frequency (Hjellming & Han 1995). Furthermore it was suggested that the slowly–decreasing flux density was as a result of a decreasing physical size scale. Both a spherical wind and conical jet will have an electron density which falls as $`r^2`$ (for no pair processes), and will produce analogous spectra (Reynolds 1982). However, the direct observations of apparently collimated jets from Cyg X-1, 1E 1740.7-2942 and GRS 1758-258 provide strong evidence for a collimated geometry. Furthermore, the observed linear polarisation would not arise in a spherically symmetric source.

## 7 Jet Power

The radiative luminosity is the only quantity we can directly measure from the flat spectral component. As non-radiative (i.e. adiabatic expansion) losses are likely to dominate, this will be a very conservative lower limit on the power into the jet. The observed radiative luminosity of Cyg X-1 is $`2\times 10^{30}`$ erg s<sup>-1</sup> when observed up to 15 GHz in the radio band (for a distance of $`2`$ kpc). However, as argued above, there is evidence that the flat spectral component extends across the millimetre and infrared bands to the near infrared or even optical bands. The same flat spectral component extending to the optical V-band will have a radiative luminosity of $`7\times 10^{34}`$ erg s<sup>-1</sup>.

The ratio of observed (radiative) power, $`\eta `$, to total internal jet power is likely to be $`5`$%, a figure based both on theory (Blandford & Königl 1979) and on observations of GRS 1915+105 (Fender & Pooley 2000). This is because the electrons lose energy primarily as a result of adiabatic expansion, and not via synchrotron or inverse Compton processes (although above some cut-off frequency these radiative losses will dominate).

The power in such a jet can be estimated as

$$L_{\mathrm{jet}}10^{36}\left(\frac{d}{2\mathrm{k}\mathrm{p}\mathrm{c}}\right)^2\left(\frac{\nu _{\mathrm{HIGH}}}{10^{14}\mathrm{Hz}}\right)\left(\frac{S_\nu }{15\mathrm{m}\mathrm{J}\mathrm{y}}\right)\left(\frac{\eta }{0.05}\right)^1F(\mathrm{\Gamma },i)$$

erg s<sup>-1</sup> where $`\nu `$ is the high-frequency cut-off to the flat spectral component, $`S_\nu `$ is the flux density (dereddened, if necessary) measured at that frequency, and $`F`$($`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, i) is an approximate correction factor for relativistic bulk motion (see below). The parameters have been scaled for Cyg X-1, with a high-frequency cut off around 3$`\mu `$m.

The observed X-ray luminosity of Cyg X-1 in the Low/Hard state is $`3\times 10^{37}`$ erg s<sup>-1</sup> (Nowak et al. 1999; di Salvo et al. 2001). So, based on only the following assumptions:

1. The flat spectral component extends to near-infrared / optical bands
2. The radiative efficiency of the jet is $`5`$%
3. Relativistic beaming of the radio emission is not significant

it is concluded that the power in the jet, in the Low/Hard X-ray state, is $`5`$% of the total accretion luminosity as observed in X-rays.

However, the third assumption is certainly worth considering more carefully, since observations of other X-ray binaries certainly have revealed evidence for outflows at relativistic velocities. The luminosity based on the above inequality can be significantly affected by bulk relativistic motions which will (a) Doppler shift the observed frequencies, (b) ‘Doppler boost’ the observed flux densities (aberration), and (c) add a significant amount of bulk kinetic energy to the power requirements.

For a flat ($`\alpha =0`$) spectral component of flux density $`S_\nu `$ extending to frequency $`\nu `$, $`L\nu S_\nu `$. For bulk motion at velocity $`\beta c`$, the Lorentz factor is $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=(1\beta ^2)^{1/2}`$ and corresponding relativistic Doppler factor $`\delta =[\gamma (1\beta \mathrm{cos}\theta )]^1`$. The transformation from the comoving to observer’s frames is $`\nu _{\mathrm{obs}}=\delta \nu _0`$ and $`S_{\nu \mathrm{obs}}=\delta ^{k\alpha }S_0`$, where $`k=3`$ for a single discrete component, and $`k=2`$ for a simple jet emitting isotropically in its rest frame (Rybicki & Lightman 1979; Cawthorne 1991); therefore $`L_{\mathrm{obs}}=L_0\delta ^{1+k\alpha }`$. Assuming $`\alpha =0`$ and $`k=2`$ (observationally $`k`$ is found to be nearer to 2 than 3 for GRS 1915+105 – Mirabel & Rodríguez 1994; Fender et al. 1999a), $`L_0=L_{\mathrm{obs}}\delta ^3`$. In addition, taking into account bulk relativistic motion, the total jet power must be multliplied by $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. So, compensating for both Doppler shifts and kinetic energy, the relativistic ‘correction factor’ $`F(\mathrm{\Gamma },i)=\mathrm{\Gamma }\delta ^3`$. This function is plotted for a range of velocities, at all inclinations, in Fig 6. Note most importantly that as the effect becomes more significant, ie. for the highest velocities, the chances of overestimating the jet power from observations (ie. when $`F(i)<1`$) decrease rapidly; for a random sample of inclination angles the total jet power is more likely to be underestimated if relativistic bulk motion is neglected. This is because to first order the radiation will be beamed within an angle $`1/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ of the forward direction of motion of the ejecta. In the case of Cyg X-1, best estimates of $`i`$ (presumed to be equal to the orbital inclination) are around 30; inspection of Fig 6 shows that at this inclination the above method will not overestimate the total jet power by more than a factor of 3, and for high velocities (e.g. $`v=0.98c`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=5`$) we may be underestimating the jet power by up to a factor of 5. For example, for Cyg X-1, assuming $`\nu _{\mathrm{HIGH}}=10^{14}`$ Hz, $`\eta =0.05`$, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=5`$ and $`i=30^{}`$, $`L_{\mathrm{jet}}/L_\mathrm{X}0.2`$.

Furthermore, Brocksopp et al. (1999) and Corbel et al. (2000) report approximately linear relations between the X-ray and radio fluxes of Cyg X-1 and GX 339-4 when these sources are in the Low/Hard X-ray state, a trend also observed in GS 2023+338 (Han & Hjellming 1992). If this relation holds for all sources in the Low/Hard X-ray state then we can estimate the radio flux density based on X-ray observations, and vice-versa. Empirically, the relation is

$$S_{\nu ,\mathrm{cm}}75\left(\frac{S_X}{\mathrm{Crab}}\right)\mathrm{mJy}$$

Note that since there is evidence for inversion of the spectrum as the source weakens, this correlation will be strongest for higher radio frequencies. Note also that this relation is approximately equivalent to 1 mJy of radio flux density for 1 RXTE ASM ct/sec; the quantitative nature of this relation will be explored elsewhere. This approximately linear relation indicates that whatever the previous accretion and ejection history, when in the Low/Hard X-ray state, black hole X-ray binaries produce a jet whose power is an approximately fixed, and probably large, fraction of the accretion luminosity. Furthermore, the comparable radio luminosity of the four persistent Low/Hard state sources (Fig 5; see also Fender & Hendry 2000) agrees with this interpretation as long as the X-ray luminosities of the four sources are within an order of magnitude of each other, which seems to be the case.

## 8 Low/Hard states in GRS 1915+105

GRS 1915+105 is a very luminous X-ray binary black hole candidate and the first Galactic source of superluminal radio jets (Mirabel & Rodríguez 1994; Fender et al. 1999a; Belloni et al. 2000). Its relevance to this discussion is twofold :

1. It was the first X-ray binary source for which there was firm evidence for an extension of a flat-spectrum synchrotron component extending through the millimetre (Ogley et al. 2000, Fender & Pooley 2000) to the near-infrared (Fender et al. 1997b; Mirabel et al. 1998; Fender & Pooley 1998, 2000) bands. Most of this evidence is in the form of oscillation events, associated with repeated accretion cycles, which are identical at radio, mm and near-infrared wavelengths.
2. The source occasionally displays ‘plateau’ X-ray states, which are reminiscent of the canonical Low/Hard state, but more luminous (Belloni et al. 2000). Associated with these states is a steady, flat-spectrum synchrotron component in the radio band (Fender et al. 1999a).

The plateau states (class $`\chi `$, state C of Belloni et al. 2000) are dominated by a power-law component, with little or no disc contribution in the X-ray band (Belloni et al. 2000). In this sense they are similar to the Low/Hard X-ray state. Fig 7 illustrates the radio – infrared spectrum of the source during one such state, in 1996 August. Other examples of the plateau also show a flat spectrum in the range 1–15 GHz (Hannikainen et al. 1998a; Fender et al. 1999a), but the 1996 August event appears to be the only plateau with simultaneous infrared observations (Bandyopadhyay et al. 1998). So again, in circumstances which are rather different (a more luminous, exotic source) from the ‘quiet’ Low/Hard state of e.g. Cyg X-1, we again find a flat-spectrum, with evidence for absorption at low radio frequencies and a high-frequency extension to the near-infrared. The reader is reminded that the synchrotron oscillation events in GRS 1915+105 are also associated with brief excursions (or ‘dips’) to the same state which characterises the ‘plateaux’ and, in these cases there is little doubt that the synchrotron spectrum does extend to the near-infrared (Fender et al. 1997c; Pooley & Fender 1997; Eikenberry et al. 1998, 2000; Mirabel et al. 1998; Fender & Pooley 1998). Very recently Dhawan, Mirabel & Rodríguez (2000) have confirmed that the plateau state in GRS 1915+105 is associated with a compact jet.

## 9 Conclusions

There are four persistently accreting black hole candidates in our Galaxy which spend most of their time in the power-law-dominated Low/Hard X-ray state. These are Cyg X-1, GX 339-4, 1E1740.7-2942 and GRS 1758-258. It is shown that all four sources have comparable radio spectra, namely weak emission with a flat/inverted ($`0\alpha 0.5`$) spectrum. Furthermore in two, probably three, of the four systems, jets have been directly imaged at radio wavelengths.

It is unusual for transient black hole X-ray sources to spend an extended period in the Low/Hard X-ray state, but this was the case for at least three systems, GS 2023+338, GRO J0422+32 and GS 1354-64, during periods of extensive radio coverage. All three systems were found to have radio spectra which, after initial optically thin events associated with the state transition, were very similar to those of the persistent sources in the Low/Hard state, and very different from the bright, optically thin outbursts seen from most other transients (Fig 4). As previously suspected (Fender 2000), all black hole X-ray binaries, whether persistent or transient, display a flat radio spectrum when in the Low/Hard X-ray state. For further comparison of the observational properties of Low/Hard state transients, see Brocksopp et al. (2001).

The flat radio spectra observed from these sources do not show high-frequency cut-offs, but on the contrary show evidence for extension into the millimetre, infrared and maybe even optical bands. All three transient sources show some correlated radio : optical behaviour, and have approximately flat spectra from the radio through to the optical bands. All three systems also show evidence for absorption at lower frequencies as the flux levels decline, possibly (although certainly not conclusively) evidence for increasing free-free absorption as the jet shrinks back towards the core of the system. A similar radio–millimetre–infrared spectrum is observed from the jet source GRS 1915+105 when in a spectrally similar (ie. dominated by a power-law), but more luminous hard X-ray state (Fig 7).

In the case that the flat spectral component does extend to the optical or near-infrared bands, and the jet has a low ($`5`$%) radiative efficiency, then the luminosity of the jet is likely to exceed 5% of the observed X-ray luminosity, and is furthermore likely to scale linearly with the X-ray flux. All this evidence supports a jet–disc ‘symbiosis’ model (Falcke & Biermann 1996, 1999) in which the jet luminosity is some fixed, and probably large, fraction of the accretion luminosity. The observed comparable correlation between the radio (jet) and hard X-ray (Comptonised) emission in different systems implies that these two components do not have very different beaming; this in turn implies that unless the hard X-ray emission is strongly beamed (possibly via synchrotron self-Compton in the jet) then the jet in the Low/Hard state is unlikely to have a very large Lorentz factor ($`\mathrm{\Gamma }5`$ or so).

Further observations to determine the high-frequency extent of the flat spectral component are of great importance. Confirmation of a high fraction of the accretion luminosity being diverted into the jet during hard, power-law-dominated X-ray spectral states will have great significance for our understanding of the accretion flow near a black hole, not least for models of advection-dominated accretion.

## Acknowledgements

I would like to thank many people including Stephane Corbel, Chris Done, Heino Falcke, Bob Hjellming, Kinwah Wu, Catherine Brocksopp, Mariano Mendez, Chris Shrader and Michiel van der Klis for useful discussions and information. In addition I would like to thank Luis Rodríguez and Felix Mirabel for supplying the maps presented in Fig 2. Finally I would like to thank the referee, Ralph Spencer, for many in-depth comments which helped to improve the paper. This research has made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France. RPF was supported during the initial period of this research by EC Marie Curie Fellowship ERBFMBICT 972436.

## Appendix A Foreground free-free absorption of a compact jet

In order to see if the radio–optical spectra can be fit by a single power-law which is absorbed by free-free emission at longer radio wavelengths, the four spectra in Fig 5 have been fit by the following simple model

$$S_\nu =S_0\nu ^\alpha e^{\tau _1\nu ^{2.1}}$$

where $`S_0`$ is the amplitude of the power law, $`\alpha `$ is the unabsorbed spectral index and $`\tau _1`$ is the optical depth at 1 GHz (free-free optical depth $`\nu ^{2.1}`$ at radio wavelengths, e.g. Gordon 1988). The fits are illustrated in Fig 5 and tabulated in Table A1. It is interesting that the fits give an unabsorbed spectral index which is approximately constant at a slightly inverted value. The amplitude decreases and the optical depth to free-free absorption increases for the first three epochs, then decreases again for the final epoch. If this is a correct modelling of the data, then two possibilities suggest themselves – either a cloud of ejecta from the outburst slowly moved outward and enveloped the jet and then eventually dispersed, or as the jet weakened its characteristic size scale decreased and it withdrew back within a shroud of material still enveloping the system post-outburst. Note that in the very inner regions of the SS 433 jet the radio spectrum becomes inverted, probably due to free-free absorption (Paragi et al. 1999).

Could the low-frequency inversion be due instead to synchrotron self-absorption ? This seems hard to reconcile with the observations since, if the emission does arise in a conical jet, then the lowest frequencies, which we observe to be increasingly suppressed, should arise on the largest scales. Thus in order for synchrotron self-absorption to affect lowest frequencies, it would appear that we would require some enhancement of magnetic field and/or particle number density to occur towards the end of the jet. Perhaps as the stratified jet recedes towards its base this could happen; without entering into modelling of the jet itself this is unclear. Further detailed low-frequency observations of the jet spectrum are desirable to investigate this.