text:
# A new aspects of physics of a photon gas

## I Introduction

An immense amount of research has been carried out on propagation of relativistically intense electromagnetic (EM) waves into an isotropic plasma demonstrating that the relativistic oscillatory motion of electrons causes a whole set of interesting and salient phenomena -, relevant to the study of laser accelerators of electrons, ions and photons, laser fusion, nonlinear optics, etc. Some of them have already been confirmed by experiments due to the recent progress in compact, high-power, short pulse laser technology. In our previous paper  we have suggested a new mechanism for ultrahigh gradient electron and ion acceleration. In addition we have shown over $`10^7G`$ generated magnetic fields by the nonpotential ponderomotive force.

The above treatments were restricted to the case of monochromatic EM waves. However, the interaction of relativistically intense radiation with a plasma leads to several kinds of instabilities and the initially coherent spectrum may eventually broaden, and naturally for ultrashort pulses the initial bandwidth is increasingly broad. Moreover, in astronomical plasmas there are a variety of sources of radiation, and in this case we speak about the average density of radiation from all the sources and their spectral distribution. Hence, the natural state of the strong radiation of EM field is with a broad spectrum. In order to study the interaction of spectrally broad and relativistically intense EM waves with a plasma, it was necessary to derive a general equation for the EM spectral intensity. Such an investigation was reported recently , , where the authors derived a general kinetic equation for the photons in a plasma.

It should be emphasized that the radiation can be in two distinct states. Namely, one is when the total number of photons is not conserved. A good example is a black-body radiation. Another situation is when the total number of photons is conserved. Both these states have been studied in several aspects, mostly for the weak radiation.

It is well known that the nature of EM waves in a vacuum is quit different from the one in a medium. In the vacuum EM wave exists only in motion, however the light can be stopped (wavevector $`\stackrel{}{k}=0,\omega =\omega (0)0`$) in different mediums and wave-guides. As was shown in Ref. the photons acquire the rest mass and become one of the Bosons in plasmas and posses all characteristics of nonzero rest mass, i.e., we may say that the photon is the elementary particle of the optical field.

Besides, a several reviews and books have been published on theory of Bose-Einstein condensation (BEC) in a quantum Bose liquid  and in trapped gases ,. Kompaneets  has shown that the establishment of equilibrium between the photons and the electrons is possible through the Compton effect. In his consideration, since the free electron does not absorb and emit, but only scatters the photon, the total number of photons is conserved. Using the kinetic equation of Kompaneets, Zel’dovich and Levich  have shown that in the absence of absorption the photons undergo BEC. Such a possibility of the BEC occurs in the case, when the processes of change of energy and momentum in scattering dominates over the processes involving change of the photon number in their emission and absorption.

Very recently it was shown that exists an another new mechanism of the creation of equilibrium state and Bose-Einstein condensation in a nonideal dense photon gas . More importantly a new effect was predicted in the same paper, namely that the inhomogeneous dense photon gas can be found in the intermediate state.

In the present paper, we consider the BEC and evaporation of the transverse photons (photons) from the Bose condensate. In our study we assume that the intensity of radiation (strong and super-strong laser pulse, non-thermal equilibrium cosmic field radiation, etc.) is sufficiently large, so that the photon-photon interaction can become more likely than the photon-electron interaction. We will show that for certain conditions the variation of the plasma density can be neglected in comparison with the variation of the photon density. In such case the elementary excitations represent the longitudinal photons (photonikos), for which we will derive the well known Bogoliubov’s energy spectrum.

The paper is organized as follows. First in Sec.II a basic equations, describing the relativistic photon-plasma interactions, is presented. The problem of stability of the photon flow is discussed in Sec.III. The derivation of the Bogoliubov energy spectrum for the photonikos is given in the same section. Then in Sec.IV, we derive the Pauli kinetic equation from the Wigner-Moyal equation. Section V is devoted to BEC. The Fokker-Planck equation for photonikos, by which we discuss the possibility of the creation of Bose-Einstein condensate and evaporation of the photons from the condensate, is obtained in the same section. Finally, a brief summary and discussion of our results are given in the last section.

## II Basic Equations

If the intensity of photons is sufficiently large, then the photon-photon interaction can become more likely than the photon-plasma particle interaction. Under these conditions, which we shall assume to be realized, we may consider the medium to consist of two weakly interacting subsystems: the photon gas and the plasma, which slowly exchange energy between each other. In other words, relaxation in a photon-plasma system is then a two-stage process: firstly, the statistical equilibrium is established in each subsystem independently, with some average energies $`E_\gamma =K_BT_\gamma `$ and $`E_p=K_BT_p`$, where $`K_B`$ is the Boltzmann constant, $`T_\gamma `$ is the characteristic ”temperature” associated with the average kinetic energy of the photon, and $`T_p`$ is the plasma temperature. The photon effective ”temperature”,in general, will differ from the plasma temperature. Slower processes of the equalization of the photon and the plasma temperatures will take place afterwards.

In the following we will show that under some conditions the photon-photon interactions dominate the photon-particle interactions. When the photon-photon interaction takes place, the phases of the waves are, in general, random functions of time. We need therefore not be interested in the phases and can average over them. In such a situation the perturbation state of the photon gas can be described in terms of the occupation number $`N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)`$ of photons, and one can study how these numbers change due to the processes of interaction of the photons with each other, or with plasma electrons. Note that $`N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)`$ is the slowly varying function in space and time.

Recently, a new version of kinetic equation for the occupation number $`N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)`$ of photons, for modes propagating with the wavevector $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ and the frequency $`\omega `$, at the position $`\stackrel{}{r}`$ and time t, was derived in Refs.,,. It should be emphasized that the previous derivations of kinetic equation were based on envelope equations, were restricted to nonrelativistic plasmas and neglected the time variation of the photon (or the wavepacket) mean frequency. In contrast, our derivation avoids the envelope approximation, is valid for a fully relativistic plasma, and includes space and time correlations. Since this equation has appeared previously in the literature ,,, it is presented here without derivation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)+{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{\omega }}(\stackrel{}{k})N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)\omega _p^2sin{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(_\stackrel{}{r}_\stackrel{}{k}{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\omega }}\right)\rho {\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)}{\omega }}=0,`$ (1)
where $`\omega _p=\sqrt{\frac{4\pi e^2n_{0e}}{m_{0e}}}`$, $`\rho =\frac{n_e}{n_{0e}}\frac{1}{\gamma }`$, $`m_{0e}`$ is the electron rest mass, $`n_e`$ and $`n_{0e}`$ are the non-equilibrium and equilibrium densities of the electrons, respectively, and $`\gamma `$ is the relativistic gamma factor of the electrons, which can be expressed as

$`\gamma =\sqrt{1+Q}=\sqrt{1+\beta {\displaystyle \frac{d\stackrel{}{k}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }\frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)}{\omega }}},`$ (2)
where $`\beta =\frac{2\mathrm{}\omega _p^2}{m_{0e}n_{0e}c^2}`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ is the Planck constant divided by $`2\pi `$.

Equation (1) is the generalization of the Wigner-Moyal equation for the classical electromagnetic (EM) field. We specifically note that from this equation follows conservation of the total number of photons, but not the momentum and energy of photons, i.e.,

$`N=2{\displaystyle 𝑑\stackrel{}{r}\frac{d\stackrel{}{k}}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)}=const.,`$ (3)
where coefficient 2 denotes two possible polarization of the photons. Hence, the chemical potential, $`\mu _\gamma `$, of the photon gas is not zero.

If the local frequency $`\omega `$ and wavevector $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ are related by the dispersion equation, $`\omega =\omega (k)`$, then the occupation number is represented as $`N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)=2\pi N(\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{r},t)\delta (\omega \omega (k))`$ and Eq.(1) reduces to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}N(\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{r},t)+c^2\stackrel{}{k}{\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{r},t)}{\omega }}\omega _p^2sin{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(_\stackrel{}{r}_\stackrel{}{k})\rho {\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{r},t)}{\omega }}=0.`$ (4)
In the geometric optics approximation ($`sinxx`$), Eq.(1) reduces to the one-particle Liouville-Vlasov equation with an additional term

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)+{\displaystyle \frac{c^2}{\omega }}(\stackrel{}{k})N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t){\displaystyle \frac{\omega _p^2}{2}}\left(_\stackrel{}{r}\rho _\stackrel{}{k}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{t}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\omega }}\right){\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)}{\omega }}=0.`$ (5)
From this kinetic equation we can obtain a set of fluid equations. To this end, we introduce the definitions of mean values of the density, velocity and $`Q=\gamma ^21`$ of photons:

$`n_\gamma (\stackrel{}{r},t)=2{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)}.`$ (6)
The photon mean velocity is defined by

$`\stackrel{}{u}_\gamma (\stackrel{}{r},t)={\displaystyle \frac{2}{n_\gamma }}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }\frac{\stackrel{}{k}c^2}{\omega }N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)},`$ (7)
and

$`Q={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\omega _p}{m_{0e}n_{0e}c^2}}2\omega _p{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }\frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)}{\omega }}.`$ (8)
Having these definitions, we shall construct the transport equations by the usual way. Namely, multiplying Eq.(5) by 1, $`\frac{\stackrel{}{k}c^2}{\omega }`$, $`\frac{\mathrm{}}{\omega }`$ and integrating over the entire spectral range, in $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ and $`\omega `$, we obtain equations of continuity, motion and $`Q`$ of the photon gas:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_\gamma }{t}}+divn_\gamma \stackrel{}{u}_\gamma =0,`$ (9)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{u}_\gamma }{t}}+(\stackrel{}{u}_\gamma \stackrel{}{})\stackrel{}{u}_\gamma ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{n_\gamma }}P_\gamma {\displaystyle \frac{U}{2n_\gamma }}\left(\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{u}}{c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{t}}\right),`$ (10)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{t}}+divQu_\gamma =G{\displaystyle \frac{\rho }{t}},`$ (11)
where we have introduced the following notations in dimensional units

$`U=\omega _p^2c^22{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }\frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)}{\omega ^2}},`$ (12)
$`P_\gamma ={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }\left(\frac{\stackrel{}{k}c^2}{\omega }\stackrel{}{u}_\gamma \right)^2N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)}=n_\gamma T_\gamma .`$ (13)
Obviously, $`P_\gamma `$ is the pressure of the photon gas in unit mass. For G we have the following expression

$`G={\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\omega _p}{m_{0e}c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _p^2}{n_{0e}}}2{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\omega }{2\pi }\frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)}{\omega ^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\omega _p}{m_{0e}c^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _p^3}{<\omega ^3>}}{\displaystyle \frac{n_\gamma }{n_{0e}}}.`$ (14)
From Eq.(11) follows that the term on the right-hand side (RHS) is much less than the first term on the left-hand side (LFS), if $`G/\gamma ^31`$. This inequality allows us to neglect the term on RHS in Eq.(11). With this assumption from Eqs.(9) and (11) follows the frozen-in condition

$`{\displaystyle \frac{Q}{n_\gamma }}=const.`$ (15)
It is important to emphasize that in Eqs.(1), (4), (5) and (10) there are two forces of distinct nature, which can change the occupation number of photons. One force appears due to the redistribution of electrons in space, $`n_e`$, and time, $`\frac{n_e}{t}`$. The other force arises by the variation of the shape of wavepacket. In other words, this force originates from the alteration of the average kinetic energy of the electron oscillating in a rapidly varying field of the EM waves, and is proportional to $`\stackrel{}{}\gamma `$ and $`\frac{}{t}\frac{1}{\gamma }`$.

## III Stability of the photon flow

In order to study the problem of stability of a photon flow, we consider the propagation of small perturbations in a homogeneous photon flux-plasma medium. First, we will derive a relation between the variation of photon and plasma densities, from which we will establish the condition that allows us to neglect the variation of the plasma density in comparison with the variation of the photon density.

To show this, we suppose the temperature of electrons to be nonrelativistic, i.e., $`T_em_{0e}c^2\gamma `$. In this case, the equations describing a state of the electrons are as follows

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_e}{t}}+(\stackrel{}{v}_e\stackrel{}{})\stackrel{}{p}_e=e\stackrel{}{E}m_{0e}c^2\gamma ,`$ (16)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_e}{t}}+div{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{p}_e}{m_{0e}\gamma }}n_e=0.`$ (17)
We linearize Eqs.(16) and (17) with respect to perturbations, which are represented as $`\stackrel{}{p}_e=\delta \stackrel{}{p}_e`$, $`n_e=n_{0e}+\delta n_e`$ and $`\gamma =\gamma _0+\delta \gamma =\gamma _0+\frac{\delta Q}{2\gamma _0}`$, where the suffix $`0`$ denotes the constant equilibrium value, and $`\delta \stackrel{}{p}_e`$, $`\delta n_e`$, and $`\delta Q`$ are small variations in the wave. Taking into account the frozen-in condition (15), $`\delta Q`$ can be expressed by the variation of the photon density as $`\delta Q=Q_0\frac{\delta n_\gamma }{n_{0\gamma }}=\frac{\gamma _0^21}{n_{0\gamma }}\delta n_\gamma `$. After linearization, we will seek plane wave solutions proportional to $`expi(\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{r}\mathrm{\Omega }t)`$.

Here we consider the range of low frequencies for which the inequalities $`\mathrm{\Omega }<qc<\omega _{pe}`$ are fulfilled. In this case the photon flow can no longer excite the Langmiur plasma waves, and the contribution of perturbation of the electron density is rather small in comparison to perturbation of the photon density as

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\delta n_e}{n_{0e}}}={\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0^21}{2\gamma _0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{c^2q^2}{\omega _{pe}^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\delta n_\gamma }{n_{0\gamma }}}.`$ (18)
Therefore, in our consideration the density of the plasma particles remain constant. In this case Eqs. (1) and (4) contain the variation of the relativistic $`\gamma `$ factor alone.

In the following we shall demonstrate a new phenomena in the photon gas, which originates from the variation of shape of the wavepacket. Obviously, any waves, which can arise in the photon gas-plasma medium in this case, are the proper waves with the weak decrement of the photon gas. It means that these waves are associated with the photon gas, but not with the plasma.

To this end, we linearize Eq.(4) with respect to the perturbation, which is represented as

$`N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega (\stackrel{}{k}),\stackrel{}{r},t)=N_0(\stackrel{}{k},\omega (\stackrel{}{k}))+\delta N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega (\stackrel{}{k}),\stackrel{}{r},t).`$ (19)
The result is

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{k}c^2}{\omega }}\mathrm{\Omega }\right)\delta N=\omega _p^2{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \gamma }{\gamma _0^2}}{\displaystyle \underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{q}_\stackrel{}{k})^{2l+1}}{(2l+1)!2^{2l+1}}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_0(\stackrel{}{k},\omega (k))}{\omega (k)}},`$ (20)
or after summation we obtain

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{k}c^2}{\omega }}\mathrm{\Omega }\right)\delta N=\omega _p^2{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \gamma }{\gamma _0^2}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{N_0^+(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_0^{}(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}/2)}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}/2)}}\right\},`$ (21)
where $`\delta \gamma =\frac{1}{2\gamma _0}\delta Q=\frac{\beta }{2\gamma _0}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\delta N(k,\omega ,q,\mathrm{\Omega })}{\omega (k)}.`$

After integration over all wavevectors $`\stackrel{}{k}`$, from Eq.(21) we get the dispersion relation due to the relativistic selfmodulation

$`1+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _p^2}{2\gamma _0^3}}\beta {\displaystyle d^3k\left\{\frac{N_0^+(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}\frac{N_0^{}(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}/2)}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}/2)}\right\}/\omega (k)\left(\frac{\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{k}c^2}{\omega (k)}\mathrm{\Omega }\right)}=0,`$ (22)
which has, in general, complex roots.

This equation has been derived and predicted by us first for the monochromatic wave in Ref., and then for the broad spectrum in Ref..

In Eq.(22) $`N_0(k)`$ is the occupation number in the equilibrium state and is represented as

$`N_0(k)=n_{0\gamma }(2\pi \sigma _k^2)^{3/2}exp\left({\displaystyle \frac{(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{k}_0)^2}{2\sigma _k^2}}\right).`$ (23)
This is a spectral Gaussian distribution, with the average wavevector $`\stackrel{}{k}_0`$ and the spectral width $`\sigma _k`$.

We can rewrite Eq.(22) in another form, taking into account a pole in the integral

$`\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}=0,`$ (24)
where $`\stackrel{}{u}=\frac{\stackrel{}{k}c^2}{\omega (k)}<c`$.

Using the well known relation

$`\underset{\epsilon 0}{lim}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{x+ı\epsilon }}=\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{x}}ı\pi \delta (x),`$ (25)
where $`\mathrm{}`$ denotes the prescription that at the singularity $`x=0`$ the principal value is to be taken, Eq.(22) is rewritten in the form

$`1+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _p^2\beta }{2\gamma _0^3}}\mathrm{}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{\omega (k)}\left\{\frac{N_0^+(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}\frac{N_0^{}(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}/2)}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}/2)}\right\}/(\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}\mathrm{\Omega })}`$ (26)
$`+ı{\displaystyle \frac{\pi \omega _p^2\beta }{2\gamma _0^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{\omega (k)}\left\{\frac{N_0^+(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}\frac{N_0^{}(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}/2)}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}/2)}\right\}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u})}=0.`$ (27)
In the first and the third integrals we now replace the wavevector $`\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2`$ by $`\stackrel{}{k}`$, and in the second and the forth integrals $`\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}/2\stackrel{}{k}`$. Assuming that $`\stackrel{}{k}=\stackrel{}{k}_0+\stackrel{}{\chi }`$, $`q,`$ $`\stackrel{}{\chi }\stackrel{}{k}_0`$, after integration we obtain the dispersion relation

$`1+{\displaystyle \frac{q^2V_E^2}{(\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}_g)^2q^2V_s^2\alpha ^2q^4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{ı\pi \omega _p^2\beta }{2\gamma _0^3c^2\omega (k_0)}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{N_0(\chi _z)}{\chi _z}}\right)_{\chi _z=\frac{\omega (k_0)}{qc^2}(\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}_g)}=0,`$ (28)
where $`\stackrel{}{u}_g=\frac{\stackrel{}{k}_0c^2}{\omega (k_0)}`$, $`\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}_g=qu_g\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }`$, $`N_0(\chi _z)=𝑑\chi _x𝑑\chi _yN_0(\chi ),`$ $`V_E=c\frac{\omega _p}{\omega (k_0)}\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\gamma _0}}\sqrt{\frac{\gamma _0^21}{\gamma _0^2}}`$, $`\alpha =\frac{c^2}{2\omega (k_0)}`$, and the velocity $`V_s=c\sqrt{3}\sqrt{\frac{\gamma _0^21}{\gamma _0^2}}\frac{\sigma _kc}{\omega (k_0)}`$ can be treated as the sound velocity of longitudinal photons, similar to phonons in the quantum liquid at almost zero temperature .

We now first neglect the small imaginary term in Eq.(28), and examine in great detail the following equation

$`(\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}_g)^2=q^2\left\{V_s^2+\alpha ^2q^2V_E^2\right\}.`$ (29)
This equation has a complex solutions, when the inequality

$`V_E^2>V_s^2+\alpha ^2q^2,`$ (30)
for $`q<\frac{2\omega (k)}{c^2}\sqrt{V_E^2V_s^2}`$, holds. The unstable solution can be written as $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }+ı\mathrm{\Omega }`$, where

$`\mathrm{\Omega }=qu_g\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }`$ (31)
and the growth rate for the unstable modes with $`q<\frac{2\omega (k)}{c^2}\sqrt{V_E^2V_s^2}`$ is

$`\mathrm{\Omega }=q\sqrt{V_E^2V_s^2\alpha ^2q^2}.`$ (32)
This instability for the monochromatic relativistic EM waves was predicted in Ref., and for the broad spectrum at $`V_s=\alpha =0`$ was disclosed in Ref..

If $`\mathrm{\Omega }>\mathrm{\Omega }`$, then the solution (31) clearly describes the emission of the longitudinal photons (photonikos) by the bunch of the transverse photons (photons) inside a resonance cone $`(\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }=\mathrm{\Omega }/qu_g)`$, similar to the well-known Cherenkov emission of EM waves by a charged particles moving in uniform medium with a velocity larger than the phase velocities of emitted waves. Also, here is an analogy with the Landau criterion about the creation of elementary excitations.

From Eq.(32) follows that there exists two range of values of the wavevector q. Namely, for all q less than $`\frac{2\omega }{c^2}\sqrt{V_E^2V_s^2}`$, the Cherenkov type mechanism leads to the excitation of photonikos (large scale waves). For the other, q more than $`\frac{2\omega }{c^2}\sqrt{V_E^2V_s^2}`$, the frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }+ı\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is real.

We now consider the case, when $`V_s^2>V_E^2`$ or $`\omega _p^2<\gamma _0\sigma _k^2c^2`$. If we write Eq.(29) in the moving frame ($`\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}\mathrm{\Omega }`$), and multiply the both sides by the Planck constant $`\mathrm{}`$, then we obtain the well known Bogoliubov energy spectrum

$`\epsilon (p)=\sqrt{V^2p^2+\left({\displaystyle \frac{p^2}{2m_{eff}}}\right)^2},`$ (33)
where $`\epsilon =\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }`$, $`p=\mathrm{}q`$, and $`m_{eff}=\mathrm{}\omega /c^2`$.

Equation (33) has the same form as the energy of the elementary excitations in the quantum liquid at zero temperature, which was derived first by Bogoliubov.

For small momentum $`(p<m_{eff}V=m_{eff}\sqrt{V_s^2V_E^2})`$ from Eq.(33) follows $`\epsilon =pVV_sp.`$ This expression show us that the coefficient V is the velocity of ”sound” in the photon gas, similar to phonons in the quantum medium. For the large momentum ($`pm_{eff}V`$), the photoniko energy (33) tends to $`p^2/2m_{eff}`$, i.e., the kinetic energy of an individual photoniko.

Thus, we may conclude that the elementary excitations in our case correspond to photonikos.

The decrement, $`Im\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }`$, of photoniko is derived from Eq.(28), and the result is

$`Im\mathrm{\Omega }={\displaystyle \frac{\omega _p}{\gamma _0^4}}F\left({\displaystyle \frac{\gamma _0^21}{\gamma _0^2}}\right)^2exp\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u})^2}{2q^2v_0^2}}\right\},`$ (34)
where $`v_0^2=c^2\frac{\sigma _k^2c^2}{\omega ^2(k_0)}`$, $`F=\sqrt{\frac{\pi }{32}}\left(\frac{\omega _p}{\omega (k_0)}\right)\left(\frac{\omega _p}{\sigma _kc}\right)^2\frac{q}{\sigma _k}.`$

Clearly the expression (34) is valid for the weakly damped oscillations, that is $`Re\mathrm{\Omega }Im\mathrm{\Omega }`$. We note that the decrement has a maximum near the frequency of the Cherenkov resonance $`\mathrm{\Omega }qu\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }`$.

## IV Pauli equation for the photon gas

In the previous section we have derived the condition (18) allowing the situation, in which the density of plasma almost does not change, to exist. In this case from Eq.(1) follows that photons with different frequencies and wavevectors scatter on the photon bunch (wavepacket), and the equilibrium state may be established. This is a new phenomena of the ”Compton” scattering type, i.e., the statistical equilibrium between the photons and the photon bunch will establish itself as a result of the scattering processes.

In order to better exhibit this, we shall derive the Pauli equation in the wavevector representation. Note that the Wigner-Moyal-Tsintsadze equation (1) is convenient for a study of non-linear processes in the photon gas in the case of so-called weak turbulence states. Such states of the photon gas-plasma means that the energy of the quasi-particle (photoniko) is small compared to the photon energies.

Usually the weak-turbulence states arise in a medium, when a small perturbation grows with the growth rate smaller than the frequency, $`Im\mathrm{\Omega }Re\mathrm{\Omega }`$. In this case we can use a series expansions in powers of amplitude of the perturbations.

In the case of weak-turbulence, we can define the distribution function $`N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)`$ in any approximation for the amplitude of perturbation by iterating the Wigner-Moyal equation. From Eq.(1), we now derive an equation in wavevector space in the limit of the spatial homogeneity, which may be identified with the Pauli equation. To this end, we take the Fourier transform of Eq.(1) to obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega },t)ı\left(\mathrm{\Omega }{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{k}c^2}{\omega }}\right)N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega },t)`$ (35)
$`=\omega _p^2{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Omega }}{2\pi }}\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega })\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{ı}{2}}(\stackrel{}{q}_\stackrel{}{k}+\mathrm{\Omega }{\displaystyle \frac{}{\omega }}){\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega },t)}{\omega }},`$ (36)
where $`N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega },t)=𝑑\stackrel{}{r}𝑑tN(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{r},t)exp\left(ı(\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{r}\mathrm{\Omega }t)\right),`$ and $`\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega },t)=𝑑\stackrel{}{r}𝑑t\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{r},t)exp\left(ı(\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{r}\mathrm{\Omega }t)\right)`$ are the slowly varying functions in time.

Let us consider two cases. First, in the case of $`\stackrel{}{q}=0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }=0`$, after changing variables $`\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{q}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }`$, we rewrite Eq.(36) in the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,t)}{t}}=\omega _p^2{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\mathrm{\Omega }}{2\pi }\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega },t)\widehat{L}\frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega },t)}{\omega (k)}}.`$ (37)
Here we have used the identity

$`\mathrm{sin}{\displaystyle \frac{ı}{2}}\left(\stackrel{}{q}_\stackrel{}{k}+\mathrm{\Omega }{\displaystyle \frac{}{\omega }}\right)=ı\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\stackrel{}{q}_\stackrel{}{k}+\mathrm{\Omega }{\displaystyle \frac{}{\omega }}\right)=ı\widehat{L}.`$ (38)
For the second case, when $`\stackrel{}{q}0`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }0`$ (in this case $`\mathrm{ln}N/t\mathrm{\Omega }`$), Eq.(36) can be written as

$`(\mathrm{\Omega }{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{k}c^2}{\omega }})N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega })=\omega _p^2{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d\mathrm{\Omega }}{2\pi }}\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega })\widehat{L}{\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega })}{\omega }}.`$ (39)
By iterating this equation in the case of weak-turbulence we can write an equation for the occupation number N in any approximation in the amplitude of perturbations. Expanding the integrand about $`\stackrel{}{q}=\stackrel{}{q}`$, $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }`$ and keeping the first term with $`N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega })=(2\pi )^4\delta (\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{q})\delta (\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega })N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ),`$ we obtain

$`N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega ,\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega })=\omega _p^2{\displaystyle \frac{\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega })\widehat{L}\frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega )}{\omega }}{\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}}}.`$ (40)
Substituting Eq.(40) into Eq.(37) we get

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega )}{t}}=ı\omega _p^4{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{d\mathrm{\Omega }}{2\pi }\widehat{L}\frac{\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega })^2}{\omega (\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u})}\widehat{L}\frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega )}{\omega }}.`$ (41)
Since we are considering the weak-turbulence, for the perturbation the dispersion relation $`\mathrm{\Omega }=\mathrm{\Omega }(q)`$ is valid, i.e.,

$`\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega })=2\pi \delta (\mathrm{\Omega }\mathrm{\Omega }(q))\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{q}).`$ (42)
Noting the relation

$`\mathrm{sinh}(y{\displaystyle \frac{}{x}})f(x)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left\{f(x+y)f(xy)\right\}`$ (43)
and $`\delta \rho (\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega })=\delta \rho ^{}(\stackrel{}{q},\mathrm{\Omega })`$ (where the asterisk  depicts the Hermitian conjugate), we obtain from Eq.(41)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega )}{t}}=ı{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _p^4}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\delta \rho (q)^2}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}\left\{\frac{N(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q},\omega +\mathrm{\Omega })}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q})}\frac{N(\stackrel{}{k},\omega )}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k})}\right\}}`$ (44)
$`\times \left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\Omega }+\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}}}\right],`$ (45)
where $`\stackrel{}{u}=\frac{(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)c^2}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)}`$, and use was made of dispersion relation $`\omega =\omega (k)`$.

Use of Eq.(25) in Eq.(45) yields the following relation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N(\stackrel{}{k})}{t}}={\displaystyle \underset{\pm }{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\left[W_\pm (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q},\stackrel{}{k})N(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q})W_\pm (\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q})N(\stackrel{}{k})\right]}.`$ (46)
Here we have introduced the scattering rate

$`W_\pm ={\displaystyle \frac{\pi }{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega _p^4\delta \rho (q)^2}{\omega (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}/2)\omega (k)}}\delta (\mathrm{\Omega }\pm \stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{u}).`$ (47)
Equation (46) describes the three wave interaction, as illustrated in Fig.1. First (a) diagram exhibits the absorption of the photoniko by the photon, whereas the second (b) diagram shows the emission of the photoniko by the photon. In other words, the photon passing through the photon bunch (wavepacket) absorbs and emits photonikos, with frequencies $`\mathrm{\Omega }=(\omega \omega )`$ and wavevectors $`\stackrel{}{q}=(\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{k})`$.

Integral in Eq.(46) is the elastic collision integral and describes the photon scattering process on the variation of shape of the photon bunch.

It should be emphasized that the kinetic equation (46) is a new version of the Pauli equation in the wavevector representation . Note that the equation type of (46) has been obtained by Pauli for a quantum system, whereas Eq.(46), derived for the dense photon gas, is pure classical. This equation indicates that the equilibrium of the photon gas is triggered by the perturbation $`\delta \rho =\delta (n_/n_o\gamma )`$, in particular by the perturbation in the wavepacket.

## V Bose-Einstein condensation in the photon gas

As we have mentioned in the Introduction, Zel’dovich and Levich have shown that the usual Compton scattering leads to the BEC in the nonrelativistic photon gas-plasma medium.

In this section, we will show that exists an another new mechanism of BEC in a non-ideal dense photon gas. As was mentioned above, if the intensity of radiation is sufficiently large, then the photon-photon interaction can become more likely than the photon-electron interaction.

It is well known from plasma physics that the transverse photon can decay into the transverse photon and a plasmon (electron Langmuir and ion sound plasmons). For this process to take place it is necessary to have a fluctuation of the plasma density.

In our consideration, as was shown in Sec.III, the density of plasma remains constant. So that only one mechanism (relativistic effect), which can cause BEC, is the decay of the transverse photon into the transverse and the longitudinal (photoniko) photons. That is, in the weak-turbulence limit this mechanism is realized by three wave interaction, as we have discussed in Sec.IV. Namely, the photon ($`\omega ,\stackrel{}{k})`$ generates photoniko and scatters on latter, with the frequency $`\omega `$ and the wavevector $`\stackrel{}{k}`$. In this case, the wave number and frequency matching conditions are satisfied, i.e., $`\stackrel{}{k}=\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}`$, and $`\omega =\omega +\mathrm{\Omega }`$. These processes continue as a cascade $`(\omega =\omega +\mathrm{\Omega },\stackrel{}{k}=\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}`$, etc.) till the wavevector of the photon becomes zero and the frequency $`\omega =\omega _p/\gamma ^{1/2}`$. This cascade leads to the BEC of the photons and the creation of the photoniko gas. When the density of latter is sufficiently small, the photonikos may be regarded as non-interacting with each other, however they can exchange energies and momentum with a bunch of the photons by scattering mechanism, and finally such process can lead to the equilibrium state of the photoniko gas, with the Bose distribution

$`n_L={\displaystyle \frac{1}{exp\left\{\frac{\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Omega }\stackrel{}{p}\stackrel{}{u}}{T_\gamma }\right\}1}},`$ (48)
where $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is the Bogoliubov spectrum (33).

We note here that since the total number of photonikos does not conserve, the chemical potential of this gas is zero.

The result of BEC is that the ground state is filled by photons with the total rest energy $`E_0=N_0\frac{\mathrm{}\omega _p}{\gamma ^{1/2}}`$, where $`N_0`$ is the total number of photons in the ground state.

We now express explicitly the energy of the ground state, $`E_0`$, through the total number, $`N_0`$, and the volume of the photon gas in two limits. First, we consider ultrarelativistic case, when $`\gamma =\sqrt{1+Q}Q^{1/2}=(\mathrm{}\overline{\omega _p}/m_0c^2)^{2/3}(N_0/N_{0e})^{2/3}(1/V^{1/3})`$, where $`\overline{\omega _p}=(4\pi e^2N_{0e}/m_{0e})^{1/2}`$, $`N_{0e}`$ is the total number of electrons.

The chemical potential of the photon gas is

$`\mu ={\displaystyle \frac{E_0}{N_0}}={\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{N_{0e}}{N_0}}\right)^{1/3}(\mathrm{}\omega _p)^{2/3}(m_0c^2)^{1/3}.`$ (49)
Note that in quantum Bose liquid at $`T=0`$, the chemical potential increases with increase of $`N_0`$, whereas in the present case $`\mu `$ decreases as shows Eq.(49).

We now find the pressure in the condensate, $`P_c`$, as $`P_c=E_0/V`$, and write the equation of state for given $`N_0`$, the result is

$`P_cV^{4/3}=const.`$ (50)
Next in the nonrelativistic limit, we have $`\gamma 1+(1/2)(\mathrm{}\overline{\omega _p}/m_0c^2)(N_0/N_{0e})(1/V^{1/2})`$. Then for the equation of state and the chemical potential we get the following expressions

$`P_cV^{3/2}=const`$ (51)
and

$`\mu =\mathrm{}\omega _p\left(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{N_0}{N_{0e}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}\omega _p}{m_0c^2}}\right).`$ (52)
The second term in Eq.(52) is always less than one.

We note that when the conditions for the formation of BEC arise, then the photon gas in plasmas can be far from the equilibrium. The kinetics of this phenomena is a very important issue not only in the study of the contemporary problems of short pulse laser-matter interaction, but also for understanding of the processes, which take place on cosmic objects in the presence of strong radiation of EM field.

The kinetic equation (46) is the simplest nonequilibrium model in which we can expect BEC. To show this, we introduce the number density of the photons in the condensate as $`n_0=lim_V\mathrm{}\frac{N_0}{V}`$. Then we can write $`N(\stackrel{}{k},t)=4\pi ^3\delta (\stackrel{}{k})n_0(t)`$, which means that the photons with a zero wavevector are in the condensate.

We next discuss an another situation in which the photon with the wavevector $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ is collided with the photoniko with $`\stackrel{}{q}`$. For such processes exists the probability of the condition $`\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}=0`$ to be satisfied for the photon and photoniko. Thus the photons absorbing the photoniko will pass to the ground state. Therefore, the occupation number $`N(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q})`$, which is under integral in Eq.(46), can be written as

$`N(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q})=4\pi ^3\delta (\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q})n_1(t)+N(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q})_{\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}},`$ (53)
where $`n_1(t)`$ is the density of pairs, for which the equality $`\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}=0`$ holds.

Substituting Eq.(53) into Eq.(46), for the Bose-Einstein condensate density $`n_0(t)`$ we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{n_0(t)}{t}}={\displaystyle \frac{n_1(t)n_0(t)}{\tau _0}}+2{\displaystyle _{\stackrel{}{k}0}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle }{\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}}N(k,t)W(\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q}),`$ (54)
where $`\tau _0^1=\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}W(q)=\frac{\pi }{2}\omega _p^4\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{\delta \rho (q)^2}{\omega (q)\omega (q/2)}\delta \left(\mathrm{\Omega }\frac{q^2c^2}{2\omega _p}\gamma ^{1/2}\right),`$ and in the last term we have replaced $`\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q}\stackrel{}{k}`$.

We specifically note here that the first and the third terms in Eq.(54) are the sources of production of the Bose-Einstein condensate, whereas the second term describes the evaporation of photons from the ground state.

As we can see from Eq.(54), the stationary solution may exist, and it is

$`n_0=n_1+{\displaystyle \frac{\tau _0}{<\tau >}}n_2,`$ (55)
where $`<\tau >^1=\frac{2}{n_2}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{N(k)}{\tau (k)},`$ with $`\tau (k)^1=\frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}W(\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{k}\stackrel{}{q})`$.

Equation (55) has an obvious physical meaning, which is the following: the departure of photons from the Bose-Einstein condensate should, under steady-state conditions, be completely balanced by their arrival from other modes.

The problem of BEC and evaporation of the Bose-Einstein condensate we can investigate by Fokker-Planck equation, which we shall derive from the Pauli equation. Here we suppose that the wavevector $`\stackrel{}{q}`$ and the frequency $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ of photonikos are small in comparison with the $`\stackrel{}{k}`$ and $`\omega `$. This allows us to use the following expansion in the integrand

$`W(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q},\stackrel{}{k})N(\stackrel{}{k}+\stackrel{}{q})W(k)N(k)+\stackrel{}{q}{\displaystyle \frac{}{\stackrel{}{k}}}(WN)_{q=0}+{\displaystyle \frac{q_ıq_ȷ}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{^2WN}{k_ık_ȷ}}_{q=0}+\mathrm{}.`$ (56)
Substituting this expression into Eq.(46), we obtain the Fokker-Planck equation for photons, which describes the slow change of the occupation number in the wavevector space

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N(k)}{t}}={\displaystyle \frac{}{k_ı}}\left\{A_ıN(k)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{k_ȷ}}(D_{ıȷ}N(k))\right\},`$ (57)
where

$`A_ı={\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}q_ıW(q,k)},`$ (58)
$`D_{ıȷ}={\displaystyle \frac{d^3q}{(2\pi )^3}q_ıq_ȷW(q,k)}.`$ (59)
The quantity $`A_ı`$ is the dynamic friction coefficient, whereas $`D_{ıȷ}`$ is the diffusion tensor in the wavevector space.

Introducing the following definition $`B_ı=A_ı+\frac{D_{ıȷ}}{2k_ȷ}`$, and noting that the expression on RHS in Eq.(57) is divergent in wavevector space, Eq.(57) can be rewritten in the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N}{t}}+{\displaystyle \frac{}{k_ı}}ȷ_ı=0,`$ (60)
where $`ȷ_ı=B_ıN\frac{D_{ıȷ}}{2}\frac{N}{k_ȷ}`$ is the photon flux density in wavevector space. The fact that the flux should be zero allowed us to express $`B_ı`$ and $`D_{ıȷ}`$ in terms of one another.

The equilibrium distribution function we choose to be Gaussian

$`N(k)=conste^{\frac{k^2}{2\sigma _k^2}}.`$ (61)
Substituting expression (61) into the equation $`\stackrel{}{ȷ}=0`$, we obtain

$`B_ı\sigma _k^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}k_ȷD_{ıȷ}.`$ (62)
Finally the transport equation of the photon gas takes the form

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N}{t}}={\displaystyle \frac{}{k_ı}}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{D_{ıȷ}}{2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{k_ȷN}{\sigma _k^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{N}{k_ȷ}}\right)\right\}.`$ (63)
In order to solve Eq.(63), we consider a simple model representing the diffusion tensor as $`D_{ıȷ}=D_0\delta _{ıȷ}`$, with $`D_0=const`$. Such situation is realized when $`u\mathrm{cos}\mathrm{\Theta }qc^2/\omega `$. With this assumption Eq.(63) reduces to

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N}{t}}=a{\displaystyle \frac{}{\stackrel{}{k}}}(\stackrel{}{k}N)+{\displaystyle \frac{D_0}{2}}_\stackrel{}{k}^2N,`$ (64)
where $`a=\frac{D_0}{2\sigma _k^2}`$.

To discover the physical meaning of terms on RHS of Eq.(64), we consider them separately. First we neglect the diffusion term in Eq.(64), and assuming $`\stackrel{}{k}(0,0,k)`$, we get for the new function $`f=kN`$

$`{\displaystyle \frac{f}{t}}ak{\displaystyle \frac{f}{k}}=0.`$ (65)
The general solution of this equation is an arbitrary function of $`k_0=ke^{at}`$ (where $`k_0`$ is the initial value of the wavevector), i.e., $`f(k_0)=f(ke^{at})`$. This function is constant on the curves $`k_0=ke^{at}`$, while at $`t\mathrm{}`$ the wavevector goes to zero $`(k0)`$. The meaning of this is that the occupation number would tend to peak toward the origin as

$`N(k,t)={\displaystyle \frac{f}{k}}=conste^{at}.`$ (66)
Thus we conclude that the friction effect leads to BEC of the photon gas.

It should be emphasized that the exponential decay of the wavevector $`k=k_0e^{at}`$ is due to the linearity of the Fokker-Planck equation. Note that we have neglected all nonlinear terms in deriving the Pauli equation. The presence of nonlinearity could saturate the exponential growth of $`N(k,t)`$. In the above approximation (66) the condensate formation time, $`t_c`$, is defined by the relation $`at_c1`$.

Second, we suppose that $`W(\stackrel{}{q},\stackrel{}{k})`$ is the even function with respect to $`\stackrel{}{q}`$. In this case $`A=0`$, and we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{N}{t}}={\displaystyle \frac{D_0}{2}}_k^2N.`$ (67)
Assuming that initially all photons are in the ground state with $`k=0`$, and the occupation number of the photons is $`N=4\pi ^3n_0\delta (\stackrel{}{k})`$, then the solution of Eq.(67) reads

$`N(k,t)=n_0e^{\frac{k^2}{2D_0t}}/(2\pi D_0t)^{1/2}.`$ (68)
In the course of time, the number of photons with $`k=0`$ decreases as $`t^{1/2}`$. The number of photons in the surrounding wavevector space rises correspondingly, and initially peaked at the origin is to be flatten out. Let us determine the mean square wavevector from origin at time t. From expression (68) we have

$`<k^2>=D_0t.`$ (69)
Thus, $`\sqrt{<k^2>}`$ increases as the square root of time.

Eqs. (68) and (69) manifest that the evaporation of the photons from the condensate takes place.

We now derive a relation between the diffusion time, $`t_D`$, and the time of the condensation. From Eqs.(66) and (68) we obtain

$`t_c{\displaystyle \frac{2\sigma _k^2}{D_0}}andt_D{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{2D_0}},`$
where $`\sigma _k=\frac{1}{2r_0}`$, as follows from the Wigner function $`N(\stackrel{}{k},\stackrel{}{r})=N_0exp\left(\frac{r^2}{2r_0^2}\frac{k^2}{2\sigma _k^2}\right)`$. Note that $`r_0`$ is the initial cross size of the photon bunch.

Finally, we arrive at the desired relation

$`{\displaystyle \frac{t_D}{t_c}}=k^2r_0^2.`$ (70)
From here it is evident that for the condensation and evaporation of photons, it is necessary that the following inequality $`t_Dt_c`$ is satisfied. This is to be expected, as in realistic astrophysical objects with a strong radiation, as well as in laboratory experiments with a laser radiation, the following condition $`k^2r_0^21`$ is valid.

## VI SUMMARY AND DISCUSSIONS

We have investigated a class of problems involving the interaction of spectrally broad and relativistically intense EM radiation with a plasma in the case when the photon-photon interaction dominates the photon-particle interactions. We have presented a new concept of the establishment of equilibrium between the photon and the wavepacket of EM field (the dense photon bunch). This is a fully relativistic effect due to the strong EM radiation. We have established the condition under which the variation of the plasma density can be neglected in comparison with the variation of the photon density. In such case the elementary excitations represent the photonikos, for which we have derived the well known Bogoliubov energy spectrum. We have studied the BEC and evaporation of the photons from the Bose condensate in the case when the density of plasma does not change. To this end, from the Wigner-Moyal-Tsintsadze equation ,, we have derived a new version of the Pauli kinetic equation for the photon gas. For the case, when the wavevector and frequency of the photoniko is small in comparison with the wavevector and frequency of the photon, we have derived the Fokker-Planck equation for photonikos. We have presented a simple model, which exhibits the possibility of the creation of Bose-Einstein condensate and evaporation of photons from the condensate. We think that these processes can be detectable in next generation experiments with appropriate instrumentation. In fact, a number of experiments have been carried out in which plasmas are irradiated by laser beams with intensities up to $`310^{20}W/cm^2`$. At such intensities the photon density is of the order of $`n_\gamma 10^{29}cm^3.`$ For the plasma densities up to $`n_e10^{19}`$, we should expect that the Bose-Einstein condensate becomes observable. The theory developed in this paper should also be the case for astrophysical objects, such as a black hole. In this connection we speculate that the recently observed radiation from the black hole may be attributed to the evaporated photons from the Bose condensate. That is initially all photons fall into Bose-Einstein condensate, and then after a certain time, as discussed in this paper, some photons undergo evaporation from the condensate. These processes may also explain the observable variation in radiation intensity, from being undetectable to one of the brightest sources on the sky. Note that these sources can turn off for decades, and new ones are always being found. In addition Universe is filled with a gas of photonikos. This gas may play the decisive role in the expansion of the Universe. Moreover, it may also be useful for explaining certain processes in supernovae explosion. Finally, the present theory may also find a valuable application in the future space technology, as well as in nonlinear optics.


format: text

text:
# Searching for 𝑧≃6 Objects with the 𝐻𝑆𝑇 Advanced Camera for Surveys: Preliminary Analysis of a Deep Parallel Field

## 1 Introduction

In the last couple of years, great progress has been made in answering the grand cosmological question of when reionization of the universe began. It is now generally believed that we have seen the end of the reionization at around $`z=6`$. Fan et al. (2002) provided a detailed analysis of the spectra of the SDSS $`z6`$ quasars, and argued that the epoch of reionization could not be at a redshift much higher than 6. This is also consistent with the most recent numerical simulations of cosmological reionization (e.g., Cen & McDonald 2002), where it is suggested that the IGM is likely neutral at $`z>6.5`$. On the other hand, Hu et al. (2002) reported their discovery of a $`z=6.56`$ $`Ly\alpha `$ emitter and therefore suggested that the reionization lies beyond $`z=6.6`$. Nevertheless, the detectability of $`Ly\alpha `$ emission line $`prior`$ to the reionization was investigated by Haiman (2002), who pointed out that such a line, if broad enough, could still be observable, and thus the $`Ly\alpha `$ emitter of Hu et al. (2002) might actually lie $`beyond`$ the epoch of the reionization. Very recently, Cen (2002) proposed a scenario that the Universe was actually reionized twice, which could also explain the seemingly-paradoxical detection of this $`z=6.56`$ $`Ly\alpha `$ emitter.

The kinds of sources responsible for the reionization is one other question that remains open. While the strong UV spectrum of a quasar is capable of ionizing surrounding IGM out to Mpc scales, the paucity of quasars makes them unlikely the major contributors to the reionizing background. Based on the stringent constraint they obtained for the bright-end slope of quasar luminosity function at $`z6`$, Fan et al. (2002) pointed out that luminous quasars could not provide sufficient photons to keep the universe ionized at this redshift. However, there is still room for lower luminosity AGNs ($`M_B>23`$ mag) being important reionizing sources. Alternatively, the reionizing photons could also come from star-forming galaxies, provided that a sufficient amount of Lyman continuum emission could escape from the galaxies. While the escape fraction ($`f_{esc}`$) of such emission is found to be extremely small in the local universe (Leitherer et al. 1995; Hurwitz et al. 1997), Steidel et al. (2001) derived $`f_{esc}`$ 65% from the composite spectrum of a sample of 29 $`z3.4`$ Lyman-break galaxies. Although such a high $`f_{esc}`$ value is still under debate (see Giallongo et al. 2002), star-forming galaxies cannot be ruled out as important contributors to the reionizing background. An extreme scenario has been proposed by Ricotti (2002), who suggested that globular clusters, which can be formed outside of galaxy disks or bulges and thus have $`f_{esc}`$ close to unity, were responsible for the reionization.

Obviously, we will have to first acquire a large sample of $`z6`$ objects before we can settle all these issues. The Wide Field Camera (WFC) of the Advanced Camera for Surveys (ACS) on-board the HST provides an unique opportunity to discover a large number of $`z6`$ objects and probe the faint end of the luminosity function (LF). To maximize its scientific return, a default pure parallel observation mode has been implemented for the WFC (Sparks et al. 2001). This mode utilizes four filters, namely F775W (SDSS-$`i`$), F850LP (SDSS-$`z`$), F475W (SDSS-$`g`$), and F625W (SDSS-$`r`$), in order of preference. Whenever there is at least one orbit of time available for parallel observation, this mode always takes images in the F775W and F850LP bands. Given the high throughput and the wide field-of-view (FOV) of the WFC, such a strategy makes its parallel data extremely useful for selecting objects at $`z6`$ by using the drop-out technique.

In this letter, we present our preliminary analysis of a field that is the deepest ACS/WFC parallel observation to date. We describe the data reduction in §2, followed by the $`z6`$ candidate selection in §3. The comparison between the result of this study and the prediction of Yan et al. (2002) is made in §4. We conclude with a brief summary in §5. Throughout the paper, we use the AB magnitude system, and adopt a cosmological model with $`(\mathrm{\Omega }_M,\mathrm{\Omega }_\mathrm{\Lambda },H_0)=(0.3,0.7,65)`$.

## 2 Data and Photometry

The center of this field is $`RA=12^h43^m32^s`$, $`Dec=11^o40^{}32^{\prime \prime }`$ (J2000), and it is at a galactic latitude of $`|b|=74.4^o`$. The primary observation of the visits is the WFPC2 imaging of NGC4647, which has a size of 2.9$`{}_{}{}^{^{}}\times 2.3^{^{}}`$ and the V-band total magnitude of 11.3 mag. As the border of the WFC is about $`5^{^{}}`$ away from that of the WFPC2, the parallel field is not contaminated by the light from either this galaxy or its close neighbor, M60. The observations spanned from April 28 to June 19, 2002. Only the F775W and F850LP filters were used for the parallel imaging. In total, 15 images were taken in the F850LP-band and 27 images were taken in the F775W-band. The total exposure time in these two bands is 2.65 hours and 4.28 hours, respectively.

After combining the individual images into final stacks, we used $`SExtractor`$ of Bertin & Arnouts (1996) to perform matched-aperture photometry by invoking its double-input mode. The F850LP stack was used for extracting sources and defining apertures, and the magnitude of each detected source was measured on the F850LP stack and the F775W stack independently, but with a same aperture. For source detection, we used a $`5\times 5`$ Gaussian smoothing kernel with the FWHM of 2.0 pixels, which is approximately the same as the FWHM of a point source PSF on both stacks. The detection threshold was set to 1.8 $`\sigma `$, and at least 4 connected pixels above this threshold were required for a source to be included. We used total magnitude (corresponding to the mag-auto option in SExtractor) for the photometry. The two catalogs were then merged into a master catalog, which we shall refer to as the “matched catalog”. We adopted the zeropoints used by the Great Observatories Origins Deep Survey (Dickinson & Giavalisco 2002) team for their HST Treasury program utilizing the same instrument, where they have derived the zeropoints as one electron corresponding to $`m_{775W}=25.656`$ mag and $`m_{850LP}=24.916`$ mag.

We assessed the F850LP-band survey limit as the following. The representative error ($`\mathrm{\Delta }m`$) reported by $`SExtractor`$ was used to calculate the S/N of each extracted source, using the simple relation of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m=1.0857/(S/N)`$. Only the sources with $`S/N5`$ were included in the assessment. From the source count histogram, we estimated that the survey was 100% complete to $`m_{850LP}28.0`$ mag. To estimate the faintest level that the F775W-band achieved, we ran $`SExtractor`$ independently on the F775W stack with the detection threshold lowered to 1 $`\sigma `$. We counted the number of detected objects regardless of their $`S/N`$, and found that the number count histogram reaches its peak value at 30.0 mag. Thus, for an object that is not detected in the F775W-band, it must be fainter than 30 mag in this band. We will use this result in §3.2 below.

## 3 Selecting $`z6`$ Objects

We selected $`z6`$ objects via the drop-out technique (e.g., Steidel et al. 1995) that identifies the Lyman-break signature their spectral energy distributions (SED’s). At $`z4`$, this signature, which is mainly due to the cosmic intervening H I absorption (Madau 1995), occurs at rest-frame wavelength of 1216 Å. At $`z6`$, this signature moves out of the F775W-band and into the F850LP-band. As the area enclosed by the F850LP-band system response curve drops to half of the total value at around 9200 Å, this passband losses its efficiency at this wavelength. Therefore, the combination of these two filters is effective in identifying the Lyman-break in the redshift range of $`6.0z6.5`$.

### 3.1 Drop-out Selection

We define an object as a “F775W drop-out” if it is significantly detected in the F850LP-band but is not visible in the F775W-band. To be specific, such a source should be flagged as not detected in the F775W-band in the matched catalog, and it should have reported photometric error smaller than 0.15 mag, or equivalently, have S/N larger than 7.2, in the F850LP-band. The later constraint was rather conservative, and it was applied because at this stage we were more concerned with the reliability of the selection than its completeness at the low brightness level. At this S/N level, the survey in the F850LP-band is 100% complete to 27.5 mag.

Such criteria resulted in a candidate list of 114 objects. All these sources were then visually examined in both bands to make sure that 1) it was a real detection in the F850LP-band and 2) it was not seen in the F775W-band. This refining procedure rejected 84 objects from the list and only 30 plausible candidates remained. We found that there were a variety of reasons that gave rise to false candidates. Besides those causes commonly seen in CCD imaging (e.g., background anomaly close to the field edges due to dithering), one other important cause is the correlated background noise that is due to the geometric correction, which accounts for about 40% of the 84 false candidates.

While it maps the off-axis ACS images back to the proper geometry, the geometric correction makes the mapped pixels non-independent. As a result, the background noise in the mapped pixels is spatially correlated, and such a correlation shows up as weak, web-like structures in the background (visible in Fig. 1). The effect of these structures is two-fold. When the object search is pushed to very faint threshold in the F850LP-band, some of these structures could be picked up as local maximum and result in false detections in this band. On the other hand, if a faint but real object is too close to such structures in the F775W-band, it could be missed by the source detection algorithm. The source detection parameters that we used to generate the matched catalog were optimized to make the detection as complete as possible while keeping the number of false objects manageable. The visual examination serves as a second safeguard procedure to keep the candidate list clean.

To independently check the reliability of these 30 candidates, we performed a simulation to test whether these objects could be recovered if they were at different places on the F850LP stack. For a given candidate, a $`13\times 13`$ pixel image stamp centered on it was copied from the F850LP stack. After subtracting a constant sky background, the stamp was put at 1,000 random positions on the F850LP stack, and thus generated 1,000 artificial objects that have the same photometric properties of their prototype. $`SExtractor`$ was then run with the same parameter setting and the number of recovered artificial objects was counted. The simulation was done for each of the 30 candidates, and we found that the median recovering rate was 88%. The recovering rate essentially remains at this level for the objects that are brighter than 28.0 mag, and drops slightly to 79% beyond this limit. Thus our candidates are deemed reliable.

Fig. 1 shows the F775W and the F850LP images of six candidates that are randomly chosen from the 30 sources. The images have been smoothed by a $`5\times 5`$ boxcar to enhance the detected sources. The F850LP-band magnitude of the 30 sources ranges from 26.8 to 28.3 mag, and only three of these sources are fainter than 28.0 mag. The median magnitude of these candidates is 27.4 mag.

### 3.2 Possible Sources of Contamination

We visually examined the locations of these 30 candidates on each of the 15 individual F850LP-band images, and found no transient event on these locations. Therefore, any possible source of contamination must be of non-transient nature. There are three types of sources whose SED could mimic the Lyman-break signature at $`z6`$, namely, strong emission-line galaxies at low redshift, elliptical galaxies, and cool dwarfs in our Galaxy. Given the sharp cut-off of the F775W-band in the red and our stringent selection criteria, we argue that none of these sources is likely to seriously contaminate our candidates:

1. Low-z emission-line galaxies — Such galaxies should have very strong emission lines in the F850LP-band to be included by our selection criteria. The observed equivalent width $`W_{obs}`$ of such an emission line can be estimated by using $`W_{obs}(\stackrel{~}{F_\nu }/f_{\nu c})D`$, where $`D`$ is the width of the F850LP passband, $`\stackrel{~}{F_\nu }`$ is the average flux measured in the F850LP-band, and $`f_{\nu c}`$ is the continuum flux estimated from the F775W-band. Since $`D`$ is about 1390 Å and a conservative lower limit of $`\stackrel{~}{F_\nu }/f_{\nu c}`$ is 4, we get $`W_{obs}>5000`$ Å. Considering that the system response of the F850LP-band drops to half of its peak value at around 8300 Å and 9700 Å in the blue and the red, respectively, the emission lines that are possible to produce the detected flux are $`H\alpha `$(6563 Å) at $`0.26z0.48`$, $`[OIII]`$(5007 Å) at $`0.66z0.94`$ and $`[OII]`$(3727 Å) at $`1.23z1.60`$. Therefore, the smallest possible rest-frame equivalent width is still enormously high, $`W=W_{obs}/(1+1.60)>2200`$ Å. Such emission-line galaxies should be very rare, if there is reason to believe that they exist at all. Hence, it is very unlikely that emission-line galaxies would contaminate our candidates.

2. Elliptical galaxies — Although the 4000 Å break in the SED of an elliptical galaxy at $`1.0z1.5`$ occurs in between the F775W and the F850LP bands, this break is not as steep as the Lyman-break at $`z6`$. The sharp cut-off of the F775W system response in the red further helps to discriminate between these two features. Convolving a typical SED of E/S0 galaxies (e.g., Coleman et al. 1984) at $`1.0z1.5`$ with the WFC system responses gives $`m_{775W}m_{850LP}1.0`$ mag, while the same synthesis for a model $`z6`$ galaxy gives $`m_{775W}m_{850LP}2.0`$ mag. Given that any object with $`m_{775W}<30.0`$ mag should be detected in the F775W-band (see §2), all of our candidates have $`m_{775W}m_{850LP}>1.5`$ mag, among which 27 objects have $`m_{775W}m_{850LP}>2.0`$ mag. Therefore, we argue that the possible contamination rate due to elliptical galaxies is three objects at most.

3. Cool dwarfs — L and T type dwarfs are known to create large color discrepancy in the passbands similar to those used in this study, and it is very difficult to distinguish them without IR photometry (e.g. Fan et al. 2000). Unfortunately, we do not have any knowledge about their spatial distribution, and we have to heavily rely on very rough assumptions to estimate their contamination to our sample. Given the faintness of our candidates, it is implausible for luminous dwarfs to enter our selection, as that would put their distances far beyond the thickness of the Galaxy. The least luminous L dwarfs currently detected have absolute magnitudes at $`M_I20`$ mag level (e.g. Dobbie et al. 2002). For such objects to remain undetected in the F775W-band, they would have to be at a distance of 0.6 $`kpc`$ or further. Assuming an outer bound of 1.5 $`kpc`$ from the Sun, the volume that our field-of-view samples is approximately 880 $`pc^3`$. If we assume an IMF of the form $`dN/dMm^\alpha `$ with $`\alpha 1`$ and use the model of Haywood & Jordi (2002), the local number density of dwarfs is approximately of $`0.04pc^3`$. Using a scale height of 0.3 $`kpc`$ for the Galaxy (e.g. Liu et al. 2002), the number density extrapolated to a distance of 0.6 $`kpc`$ and beyond will drop by at least a factor of ten. Thus we estimate that the contamination due to cool dwarfs is about 3–4 objects at most.

## 4 Comparison to Prediction

Among the 30 plausible candidates, 27 have $`m_{850LP}<28.0`$ mag. The remaining three objects fall in the 28.0–28.5 mag bin where the survey begins to be severely affected by incompleteness, and, as discussed above, they are also the only three objects that could possibly be elliptical galaxies (see §3.2). These three objects are not included in the discussion below.

Taking into account that we discarded the field edges and the gap between the two CCD chips, the effective survey area is approximately 10 arcmin2. If we assume that cool Galactic dwarfs contribute 4 contaminators (§3.2), the number density at $`6.0z6.5`$ is 2.3 arcmin-2. This result indicates that $`L<L^{}`$ galaxies do exist in large number at $`z6`$ as expected. We have predicted the number density of galaxies at $`5.5z6.5`$ in Yan et al. (2002) by extrapolating the LF measured at $`z3`$ to $`z6`$ and using the observational limits in the HDF-N as the normalization. The high-normalization case of our prediction gives a cumulative number density of 3.67 arcmin-2 to 28.0 mag. The co-moving volume at $`6.0z6.5`$ is about 48.7% of that at $`5.5z6.5`$ in our adopted model cosmology. Therefore, the number density that Yan et al. (2002) would predict for the $`6.0z6.5`$ range is 1.8 arcmin-2. Fig. 2 shows the cumulative number density prediction adapted from Yan et al. (2002), with the result from this study added. Note that the observed number density inferred from our candidates is slightly higher than the predicted value. While the survey in the F850LP-band is complete to 28.0 mag in the matched catalog, the candidate selection is done at a much higher brightness level ($`S/N7.2`$) and is complete to 27.5 mag. That means the true number density at 28.0 mag could be even larger.

This discrepancy could be due to the possibility that we underestimated the contamination rate of cool dwarfs. However, the higher number density could also be real. If this is the case, it implies that the actual LF is slightly different from that in Yan et al. (2002). Indeed, if we increase the normalization in Yan et al. (2002) by 50%, this higher value can be explained without violating any other existing constraints to the LF. Or alternatively, if we change the assumed faint-end slope from $`\alpha =1.6`$ to $`2`$, this higher value can also be explained. The later possibility is of particular interest, as a steeper faint-end slope in the LF is what expected from the reionizing photon budget argument if star-forming galaxies are indeed the major sources of the reionizing photons (Silk 2002, private communication).

## 5 Summary

The ACS/WFC provides an unprecedented opportunity to probe the LF of $`z6`$ galaxies at its faint end. The two red filters that it has, the F775W and the F850LP, are ideal for selecting such objects by identifying the Lyman-break signature at $`6.0z6.5`$. We present our preliminary analysis on a deep ACS/WFC parallel field. We discovered a total of 30 plausible candidates to a limit of 28.3 mag in the F850LP-band, 27 of which are to a limit of 28.0 mag. All these candidates were detected at $`S/N7.2`$ in the F850LP-band.

The contamination to our sample due to either emission-line galaxies or elliptical galaxies is likely negligible. The major contaminator would be cool Galactic dwarfs, whose effect is hard to quantify as their spatial distribution is not well known. To the best of our knowledge, we estimate that they could contribute at most 4 objects to the candidate list.

We derive a galaxy cumulative number density at $`6.0z6.5`$ as 2.3 arcmin-2 to a limit of 28.0 mag, which is slightly higher than our earlier prediction (Yan et al. 2002). While this higher observed value could be an illusion due to an underestimated contamination of cool Galactic dwarfs, it could also be real. If the later is the case, one possible explanation is that the faint-end slope of the actual LF at $`z6`$ may be as steep as $`\alpha =2`$. Given the faintness of these candidates, spectroscopic identification is extremely difficult with existing instruments. However, deep IR imaging data now feasible with the revived NICMOS will enable us to distinguish these two possibilities. At the very least, the number of plausible candidates strongly suggests that galaxies with $`L<L^{}`$ do exist in large number at $`z6`$, and that they are important contributors to the reionizing background. Future IR surveys with the JWST will allow us to map the LF beyond $`z6`$ and to even fainter fluxes.

The authors would like to thank the anonymous referee for the helpful comments. We thank Dr. H. J. A. Röttgering for carefully reading the manuscript. We acknowledge funding from NASA/JWST Grant NAG5-12460.