text:
# 𝑑-Dimensional Black Hole Entropy Spectrum from Quasi-normal Modes

## I Introduction

There is a fairly wide consensus that the mass/entropy spectrum of black holes is discrete rather than continuous. Two methods currently exist for deriving this spectrum. The more fundamental and difficult one is to count black hole states of a fixed energy within some microscopic theory of quantum gravity in order to compute the statistical mechanical entropy. This has been done with some success in string theorystring (for extremal and near extremal black holes), and in loop quantum gravityloop . The second method consists of quantizing (usually within a mini-superspace approach) certain dynamical modes of the classical theory and evaluating the quantum spectrum of the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, $`S_{BH}`$, which by definition is one quarter of the horizon area expressed in Planck units.

Bekenstein was the first to claim on heuristic grounds that black hole entropy is an adiabatic invariant with an equally spaced quantum spectrumbeken1 . Bekenstein and Mukhanovbeken2  argued that in order for this entropy to have a statistical mechanical interpretation, it must correspond to the logarithm of an integer: $`S_{BH}=k\mathrm{ln}(\mathrm{\Omega })`$, with $`\mathrm{\Omega }=2^n`$ being the most natural choice. There have been many attempts to derive this entropy spectrum directly from the dynamical modes of the classical theorykastrup ; louko ; barv1 ; barv2 ; other ; joey . Discrete spectra arise in quantum mechanics in the presence of a periodicity in the classical system which in turn leads to the existence of an adiabatic invariant or action variable. Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization implies that this adiabatic invariant has an equally spaced spectrum in the semi-classical limit. From this viewpoint, the main problem of black hole quantum mechanics has been to correctly identify the physically relevant period or vibrational frequency. For example, in barv1 , the period was taken to be proportional to the inverse Hawking temperature motivated by the corresponding periodicity in the Euclidean form of the black hole partition functionkastrup . As shown generically in barv2  this leads to the result that the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is indeed an adiabatic invariant with an equally spaced quantum spectrum.

To date there has been very little known about the direct physical connection between the classical dynamical quantities that give rise to the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy and the corresponding microscopic degrees of freedom of the quantum black hole. Recently tantalizing evidence for such a connection has emergedhod ; dreyer1  in the context of the quasi-normal modes of the classical theoryquasi . In particular Hodhod  assumed an equally spaced area spectrum and used the apparent existence of a unique quasi-normal mode frequency in the large damping limit to uniquely fix the spacing. Remarkably, the spacing was such as to allow a statistical mechanical interpretation for the resulting eigenvalues for the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy. Dreyerdreyer1  also used the large damping quasi-normal mode frequency to fix the value of the Immirzi parameter, $`\gamma `$, in loop quantum gravity. This value of $`\gamma `$ turned out to be precisely the one required to make the loop quantum gravity entropy prediction coincide with the classical Bekenstein-Hawking entropy.

In the present paper we will first use these observation about the quasi-normal mode frequency to derive the general form in the semi-classical limit of the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy spectrum for $`d`$-dimensional spherically symmetric black holes. Note that Hodhod  assumed an equally spaced area spectrum, whereas we will show how it arises as a consequence of taking the large damping quasi-normal mode frequency seriously in the context of black hole dynamics. Moreover, we argue that this analysis allows us to predict the $`d`$-dimensional large damping quasi-normal mode frequency up to a single arbitary integer. If this prediction is confirmed by numerical calculations, then the entropy spectrum could be used as a test for the viability of any proposed microscopic theory of quantum gravity.

We will first derive the entropy spectrum for $`4d`$ black holes in a way that is not tied to any particular microscopic theory of quantum gravity. In the next section we will examine the consequences of this interpretation for higher dimensional, spherically symmetric black holes. The final section contains conclusions.

## II 4-D Black Holes

We start from the observation that for a Schwarzschild black hole of mass $`M`$ and radius $`R_H(M)`$, the real part of the quasi-normal mode frequency approaches a fixed non-zero value in the large damping limit. This value is:

$$\omega _{QNM}(M)=\alpha ^{(4)}\left(\frac{c}{R_H(M)}\right)$$
(1)
The functional form $`(c/R_H)`$ is expected from dimensional arguments: it is just the inverse of the horizon light transit time. The coefficient $`\alpha ^{(4)}`$ has been determined numericallyquasi ,foot :

$$\alpha ^{(4)}=0.04371235\frac{\mathrm{ln}(3)}{4\pi }$$
(2)
Following hod ; dreyer1 , we assume that this classical frequency plays an important role in the dynamics of the black hole and is relevant to its quantum properties. In particular, we consider $`\omega _{QNM}(M)`$ to be a fundamental vibrational frequency for a black hole of energy $`E=Mc^2`$. Given a system with energy $`E`$ and vibrational frequency $`\omega (E)`$ it is a straightforward exercise to show that the quantity:

$$I=\frac{dE}{\omega (E)}$$
(3)
is an adiabatic invariant, which via Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization has an equally spaced spectrum in the semi-classical (large $`n`$) limit:

$$In\mathrm{}$$
(4)
By taking $`\omega _{QNM}`$ seriously in this context, we are lead to the adiabatic invariant:

$$I(E)=\frac{c^3}{2G\alpha ^{(4)}}𝑑EE=\frac{\mathrm{}}{4\pi \alpha ^{(4)}}S_{BH}(E)+constant$$
(5)
where we have used the fact that $`R_H=2GM/c^2=2GE/c^4`$ and the definition of the Bekenstein Hawking entropy $`S_{BH}=\pi R_H^2/(\mathrm{}G)`$. Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization then implies that the entropy spectrum is equally spaced, with coefficient determined by $`\alpha ^{(4)}`$:

$$S_{BH}=4\pi \alpha ^{(4)}n=\mathrm{ln}(3)n$$
(6)
The miracle is that the numerical value of $`\alpha ^{(4)}`$ allows a statistical mechanical interpretation for this entropy. That is, $`S_{BH}`$ is the logarithm of an integer, which can be interpreted as the degeneracy of quantum states:

$$\mathrm{\Omega }(E)=\mathrm{exp}(S_{BH})=3^n$$
(7)
It is important to note that this prediction for the degeneracy of states comes directly from the postulated physical interpretation of the quasi-normal mode $`\omega _{QNM}`$. There are no free parameters once $`\alpha `$ is “measured” numerically. It therefore provides in principle a constraint that any viable quantum theory of gravity must satisfy. Eq.(7) is similar in form to the degeneracy $`\mathrm{\Omega }=2^n`$ advocated by Bekenstein and Mukhanovbeken2 . Moreover, with suitable assumptions about the gauge group, loop quantum gravity is able to predict precisely this degeneracy of statesdreyer1 .

## III $`d`$-Dimensional Schwarzschild Solution

We now extend the above considerations to spherically symmetric black holes in $`d`$-dimensions (the so-called Schwarzschild-Tangherlini black holestangherlini ). The solution for the metric, expressed in terms of the ADM energy $`E`$ is:

$$ds^2=\left(1\frac{16\pi G^{(d)}E}{(d2)\mathrm{\Gamma }^{(d2)}c^4r^{d3}}\right)+\left(1\frac{16\pi G^{(d)}E}{(d2)\mathrm{\Gamma }^{(d2)}c^4r^{d3}}\right)^1dr^2+r^2d\mathrm{\Omega }^{(d2)}$$
(8)
where $`G^{(d)}`$ is the $`d`$-dimensional Newton constant, $`d\mathrm{\Omega }^{(d2)}`$ is the volume element on a unit $`(d2)`$-sphere and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }^{(d2)}`$ is the volume of the unit $`(d2)`$-sphere. The corresponding horizon radius is:

$$R_H(E)=\left(\frac{16\pi G^{(d)}E}{(d2)\mathrm{\Gamma }^{(d2)}c^4}\right)^{\frac{1}{d3}}$$
(9)
and the associated Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is:

$$S_{BH}(E)=\frac{1}{4}\left(\frac{c^3\mathrm{\Gamma }^{(d2)}R_H^{d2}(E)}{\mathrm{}G^{(d)}}\right)$$
(10)
By applying the first law of thermodynamics, $`dS=dE/T_{BH}`$ one can deduce the general expression for the Bekenstein-Hawking temperature:

$$T_{BH}(E)=\frac{\mathrm{}c(d3)}{4\pi R_H(E)}$$
(11)
We now assume that, as in 4-d, there is a unique quasinormal mode frequency in the large damping limit whose value on dimensional grounds takes the general form:

$$\omega _{QNM}(E)=\alpha ^{(d)}\frac{c}{R_H(E)}$$
(12)
Note that the existence of such a unique limit in dimensions other than 4 has not been established, so that the coefficient is as yet unkown. The same semi-classical argument as in the previous section suggests the existence of an adiabatic invariant associated with $`d`$-dimensional black holes:

$`I^{(d)}(E)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dE}{\omega _{QNM}(E)}}`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}(d3)}{4\pi \alpha ^{(d)}}}{\displaystyle \frac{dE}{T_{BH}(E)}}`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{}(d3)}{4\pi \alpha ^{(d)}}}S_{BH}(E)`$
where we have used (11) and (12) to replace $`\omega `$ in the denominator by the Bekenstein-Hawking temperature, and the first law to arrive at the final expression in terms of the entropy. Bohr-Sommerfeld quantization of the adiabatic invariant $`I=n\mathrm{}`$ thus gives rise to an equally spaced entropy spectrum in the semi-classical limit:

$$S_{BH}(E)=\frac{4\pi \alpha }{(d3)}n$$
(14)
It is important to remember that it is not merely a numerical coincidence that the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy emerges as the adiabatic invariant associated with the quasi-normal mode vibrational frequency. Dimensional arguments suggest that for Scharzschild black holes the frequency is proportional to $`c/R_H`$, which in turn is proportional to the Hawking temperature of the black hole (in any spacetime dimension). Thus the adiabatic invariant $`I`$ is generically:

$$I\frac{dE}{T_{BH}}$$
(15)
As first argued in barv2 , it is therefore a direct consequence of the first law of thermodynamics that the entropy is an adiabatic invariant with an equally spaced quantum spectrum. An interesting question is whether this relationship also holds for charged, or rotating black holes.

If one makes the additional assumption that the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is actually the statistical mechanical entropy of the black hole states associated with the microscopic quantum gravity theory, then the quantity $`\mathrm{\Omega }(E)=\mathrm{exp}(S_{BH})=:(m_0)^n`$ must be an integer. This in turn suggests the following form for the coefficient of the quasi-normal mode frequency:

$$\alpha ^{(d)}=\frac{(d3)}{4\pi }\mathrm{ln}(m_0)$$
(16)
where $`m_0`$ is an unspecified integer that depends on the microscopic theory.

## IV Conclusions

We have argued as in hod ; dreyer1 , that the unique large damping quasi-normal mode of spherically symmetric black holes is a fundamental frequency associated with the dynamical system that can be used to gain semi-classical information about the entropy spectrum of generic black holes. This conjecture leads directly to the result that Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is an adiabatic invariant with an equally spaced quantum spectrum, with uniquely fixed numerical coefficient. As shown by Dreyerdreyer1  the resulting spectrum is consistent with the predictions of loop quantum gravity in 4-$`d`$ providing the Immirzi parameter is chosen judiciously. Given our higher dimensional results, the validity of the underlying conjecture can be further tested in principle by calculating the coefficients, $`\alpha ^{(d)}`$, of the large damping quasi-normal modes in higher dimensions. This calculation is currently in progress.

Finally, we end with a speculation. One calculation that directly relates the classical dynamics of black holes to a statistical mechanical interpretation of the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy is due to Carlipcarlip . In this approach, the huge black hole entropy is associated with a degeneracy of states arising fromexistence of an asymptotic conformal symmetry at the horizon. The present work seems to suggest a possible connection classically between the unique quasi-normal mode frequency in the large damping limit, and this asymptotic conformal symmetry. In particular, the uniqueness of the quasi-normal mode frequencies in the large damping limit may somehow be related to the conformal symmetry near the horizon. The fact that these frequencies are directly connected to the statistical mechanical entropy seems adds weight to this conjecture.

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to O. Dreyer for sharing with me his insights regarding quasi-normal modes. I also thank the Perimeter Institute for its hospitality and R. Epp and S. Das for helpful conversations. This work was supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.


format: text

text:
# Improved Bounds on Violation of the Strong Equivalence Principle

## 1. Introduction

PSR B0655+64, in a highly circular one-day orbit with a $`0.8`$ $`M_{}`$ white-dwarf companion, serves as a control experiment for measurements of orbital decay in the highly relativistic double-neutron-star binaries: General Relativity (GR) has predicted equally well the strong back-reaction to gravitational radiation for PSRs B1913+16 (Taylor 1993; see also Weisberg & Taylor, this volume) and B1534+12 (Stairs et al. 1998), and the absence of detectable orbital evolution for PSR B0655+64 over two decades. The long-term stability of the B0655+64 orbit sets unique bounds on departures from GR that give rise to dipolar gravitational radiation (Arzoumanian 1995, Goldman 1992), the existence of which would represent a violation of the Strong Equivalence Principle (SEP), one of the basic tenets of GR. Gérard & Wiaux (2002) examine the theoretical basis for dipolar gravitational radiation and suggest that bounds from binary pulsars may be competitive with future satellite experiments dedicated to probing SEP violation.

A definitive analysis of the available data for PSR B0655+64, and implications for a variety of alternative theories of gravitation, will be published separately (Arzoumanian et al. 2003, in preparation). Following recent observations to extend our long-term monitoring program, I present here preliminary results on the orbital evolution of PSR B0655+64.

### 1.1. Binary Pulsars and the Strong Equivalence Principle

The Strong Equivalence Principle posits that the response of a body to an external gravitational field is independent of the gravitational self-energy of the body; it would be violated if, for example, two objects with different gravitational binding energies were observed to fall at different rates. SEP is satisfied by postulate within GR; as a consequence, the lowest allowed multipole order of gravitational radiation is the “electric” quadrupole. If SEP does not hold, however, emission of dipolar gravitational radiation is allowed, and lends itself in principle to indirect detection through decay of a binary orbit at a rate inconsistent with the quadrupole-order prediction of GR. Because self-gravitational effects are important in neutron stars, SEP can be tested with pulsar systems.

The most thoroughly studied theory of gravitation that violates SEP, the so-called “Brans-Dicke” scalar-tensor theory (Brans & Dicke 1961), invokes the existence of a scalar gravitational field that couples to matter through a single dimensionless parameter, $`\omega _{BD}`$. The Brans-Dicke theory becomes indistinguishable from GR as $`\omega _{BD}`$ becomes arbitrarily large; solar-system experiments currently place a lower bound $`\omega _{BD}>500`$. Other alternatives to GR are also constrained by limits on dipolar gravitational radiation (see, e.g., Damour & Esposito-Farèse 1992): recent observations of distant type Ia supernovae suggesting that the expansion of the universe is accelerating have prompted renewed interest in theories involving scalar fields (e.g., “quintessence,” Caldwell et al. 1998) or long-range forces that may be responsible for the acceleration. Such fields would radiate predominantly at dipole order.

The various contributions to observed changes in the orbital period $`P_b`$ of a binary system (neglecting tidal and mass-transfer effects) can be expressed as

$$\left(\frac{\dot{P}_b}{P_b}\right)_{\mathrm{obs}}=\left(\frac{\dot{P}_b}{P_b}\right)_Q+\left(\frac{\dot{P}_b}{P_b}\right)_D+\left(\frac{\dot{P}_b}{P_b}\right)_{\dot{G}}+\left(\frac{\dot{P}_b}{P_b}\right)_𝐚,$$
(1)
where the subscripts $`Q`$, $`D`$, $`\dot{G}`$, and $`𝐚`$ denote the effects of quadrupolar and dipolar gravitational radiation, a change in the gravitational constant with time, and the varying Doppler shift from a relative acceleration of the solar system and pulsar binary111To correct for Galactic accelerations and the “Shklovskii” effect, I follow Damour & Taylor (1991), using a new proper-motion measurement for B0655+64: $`\mu =6.8\pm 1.1\mathrm{mas}\mathrm{yr}^1`$.. In a large class of metric theories of gravitation, the radiation terms for a circular orbit are given by (Eardley 1975, Will 1981, Goldman 1992)

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{P}_b}{P_b}}\right)_Q`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{96}{5}}𝒢^{4/3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{\kappa _1}{12}}\right)n^{8/3}m_1m_2M^{1/3}T_{}^{5/3}`$ (2)
$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\dot{P}_b}{P_b}}\right)_D`$ $`=`$ $`\kappa _D𝒢^2(s_1s_2)^2n^2{\displaystyle \frac{m_1m_2}{M}}T_{},`$ (3)
where $`n2\pi /P_b`$, $`m_1`$ and $`m_2`$ are the pulsar and companion masses in solar units, $`Mm_1+m_2`$, and $`T_{}`$ is the mass of the Sun in units of time. The dimensionless parameters $`\kappa _1`$, $`\kappa _D`$, and $`𝒢`$ describe the strength of quadrupolar and dipolar radiation and the effective gravitational constant in a given theory. In GR, $`\kappa _1=12`$, $`\kappa _D=0`$, and $`𝒢=1`$; in the Brans-Dicke theory, $`\kappa _D𝒢^2=2(2+\omega _{BD})^1`$. At the level of the current constraint on the dipole term $`D`$, the $`\dot{G}`$ contribution to $`\dot{P}_b`$ in Eq. 1 can be neglected (Arzoumanian 1995, Kaspi et al. 1994).

The quantities $`s_1`$ and $`s_2`$ in Eq. 3 represent the “sensitivities” of the orbiting objects, the fractional change in binding energy of each star with $`G`$,

$$s=\left(\frac{\mathrm{ln}m}{\mathrm{ln}G}\right)_N,$$
(4)
where $`N`$ is the total number of baryons. The sensitivity of white dwarfs is negligible; neutron stars are thought to have sensitivities in the range $`0.15<s<0.40`$ (Will & Zaglauer 1989), with larger values corresponding to “softer” equations of state. Results of X-ray burst oscillation modeling (e.g., Nath et al. 2002), and the recent detection of atmospheric absorption lines from a neutron star (Cottam et al. 2002), suggest that fairly stiff equations of state are appropriate. I therefore adopt a fiducial value $`s=0.2`$ below. It is worth noting that the difference $`(s_1s_2)^2`$ in Eq. 3 strongly suppresses dipolar radiation from NS-NS binaries like B1913+16, so that the celebrated agreement of the latter’s orbital decay rate with the GR prediction does not usefully constrain the existence of gravitational radiation at dipole order. In scalar-tensor theories, gravitational binding energy takes on the role of an effective gravitational “charge.” Neutron star-white dwarf (NS-WD) binaries can therefore be expected to copiously emit dipolar radiation, if such radiation exists, because of the large difference in gravitational self-energy between the component stars.

### 1.2. PSR B0655+64

PSR B0655+64 was discovered during a survey of the Northern sky made with the NRAO 300 Foot telescope (Damashek et al. 1982). Timing observations began soon thereafter, and the companion was optically identified as a massive white dwarf by Kulkarni (1986). If we assume pulsar and companion masses of 1.4 $`M_{}`$ and 0.8 $`M_{}`$, Eq. 2 predicts a rate of orbital decay within GR, $`\dot{P}_b^{\mathrm{GR}}=2\times 10^{14},`$ corresponding to a decay timescale for the orbit of $`\tau _Q150`$ Gyr.

## 2. Observations and Results

The current data span 20 years, including observations made with the NRAO Green Bank 300 Foot (Taylor & Dewey 1988), 140 Foot (Backus et al. 1982, Arzoumanian et al. 1994b), and GBT telescopes, as well as the NRAO VLA (Thorsett 1991) and Jodrell Bank Lovell (Jones & Lyne 1988) telescopes. We carried out intensive observing campaigns, to obtain good coverage of all orbital phases at a single epoch, every few years with the 140 Foot and recently with the GBT, and these data provide the interesting constraints on orbital evolution.

Pulse times-of-arrival (TOAs) were derived from observations following standard procedures and analyzed with the Tempo software package, using the ell1 binary timing formula (Lange et al. 2001). A least-squares fit of the entire dataset for rotational, astrometric, and orbital parameters produces residuals consistent with statistical fluctuations.

Orbital phase residual and period measurements over time are shown in Figure 1. The constancy of $`P_b`$ confirms the result of the global timing solution: the available data bound changes in orbital period at the level $`|\dot{P}_b|_{\mathrm{obs}}<1.5\times 10^{13}(1\sigma ),`$ a limit $`7`$ times the GR prediction. Accounting for a small correction for relative acceleration (Eq. 1), we then have a $`2\sigma `$ upper limit on orbital evolution,

$$\left|\frac{\dot{P}_b}{P_b}\right|_{\mathrm{obs}}<1.0\times 10^{10}\mathrm{yr}^1(2\sigma ).$$
(5)
The resulting constraints on $`\omega _{BD}`$ are summarized in Fig. 2. Horizontal lines depict the current $`1\sigma `$ and $`2\sigma `$ limits on orbital decay in the PSR B0655+64 system. The curving dashed and dotted lines are the expected orbital period changes due to emission of gravitational radiation through quadrupole order, Eqs. 23, for NS sensitivities from soft and stiff equations of state respectively. The three curves in each set represent the ($`m_1`$, $`m_2`$) pairs (1.30, 0.7), (1.35, 0.8), and (1.40, 0.9), so that total system mass increases to the upper left. Constraints on $`\omega _{BD}`$ then lie at the intersections of the dashed or dotted curves with the measured upper limits on $`\dot{P}_b`$. From Eqs. 2, 3, and 5, we have in general

$$\kappa _D𝒢^2<0.006\left(\frac{s}{0.2}\right)^2(2\sigma ),$$
(6)
and for the Brans-Dicke theory specifically, $`\omega _{BD}>320(s/0.2)^2(2\sigma ).`$

## 3. Discussion

Prospects for improving bounds on SEP violation and the existence of dipolar gravitational radiation are good. Damour & Taylor (1992) show that, for constant data quality, measurement uncertainty for $`\dot{P}_b`$ scales with data span $`T`$ as $`T^{5/2}`$; moreover, data quality typically improves with time through improved instrumentation. Also, pulsar surveys continue to discover NS-WD systems similar to B0655+64 but with shorter orbital periods and millisecond pulse periods. Their higher rates of gravitational energy release coupled with higher timing precision suggest that these systems will surpass B0655+64 as laboratories for testing theories of gravitation—Table 1 lists the current sample of relativistic NS-WD systems. While B0655+64 remains a valuable object of further study, a potential caveat applies to relativistic studies of all close NS-WD binaries: very small orbital separations can give rise to non-relativistic interactions. Heating of the companion star by irradiation from the pulsar is thought to power tides and mass loss in a handful of low-mass binaries. Outflows and tides cause significant orbital torques (e.g., Arzoumanian et al. 1994a), which would overwhelm any small secular trend due to gravitational radiation. If indeed the closest NS-WD binaries (e.g., PSR B0751+18; see Nice et al., this volume) are “clean” systems, significant new constraints on SEP violation will emerge in the coming years.

#### Acknowledgments.

I thank my collaborators, R. Dewey, A. G. Lyne, D. J. Nice, J. H. Taylor, and S. E. Thorsett, for their continued interest and participation in this project. The National Radio Astronomy Observatory is a facility of the National Science Foundation operated under cooperative agreement by Associated Universities, Inc.


text:
# The black hole mass of low redshift radiogalaxies

## 1 Introduction

There is a large consensus about the existence of super massive black holes (SBHs) at the center of nearby inactive galaxies as well as in the nuclei of active galaxies and quasars (see e.g. for a recent review Ferrarese (2002)). A large body of data, in particular based on high resolution HST observations, is now available (see e.g. Kormendy & Gebhardt (2001)) to support the presence of such massive black holes (BH) using different techniques.

It is believed that SBHs play an important role in the formation and evolution of massive galaxies and also to be a key component for the development of the nuclear activity. However in spite of this apparently ubiquitous presence of SBHs in galaxies, our understanding on how the galaxies and their central BHs are linked in the process of formation of the observed structures is still poor (see Silk & Rees (1998); Haehlnet & Kauffmann (2000); Adams et al. (2001)).

The most important result obtained from the measured BH masses in nearby galaxies is the existence of a significant correlation between the black hole mass ($`_{BH}`$) and the mass of the bulge component ($`_{bulge}`$) of the host galaxy ($`_{bulge}`$). From the observational point of view this correlation is translated into relationships between $`_{BH}`$ and bulge luminosity $`L_{bulge}`$ (Magorrian et al. (1998), Kormendy & Gebhardt (2001)) and between $`_{BH}`$ and the stellar velocity dispersion $`\sigma `$ (Ferrarese & Merritt (2000); Gebhardt et al. (2000) ).

Although based on a small number ($``$30) of nearby galaxies for which direct dynamical measurements of $`_{BH}`$ have been secured, and in spite of their scatter \[$``$0.4 in $`Log(_{BH})`$\], these empirical relationships offer a new tool for evaluating $`_{BH}`$ in various types of AGN, provided that bulge luminosities and/or velocity dispersion be available (see also McLure & Dunlop (2002), Falomo et al. (2002)).

In this paper we make use of such relationships to investigate the BH mass distribution of two large and homogeneous datasets of low redshift radiogalaxies (RG) for which we have previously studied the morphological, structural, photometrical and kinematical properties (Fasano et al. (1996); Govoni et al. 2000a ,b; Bettoni et al. (2001)). The derived BH masses of radiogalaxies are then used to investigate the connections between $`_{BH}`$, the mass of the galaxy and the radio power.

To this aim we first describe our samples (Section 2) and revisit the relations $`_{BH}`$-$`L_{bulge}`$ and $`_{BH}`$-$`\sigma `$ for nearby early-type galaxies (Section 3). Then we use these relationships to evaluate $`_{BH}`$ of radio galaxies (Section 4) and to study the connections between $`_{BH}`$ and the mass of the bulge component of the host galaxy and between $`_{BH}`$ and the radio luminosity. A summary of the main conclusions of this study is reported in Section 5. In our analysis we assume H0=50 Km s-1 Mpc-1 and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_0`$=0.

## 2 The Samples

### 2.1 The sample of inactive nearby ellipticals

In order to investigate the relations $`_{BH}`$-$`L_{bulge}`$ and $`_{BH}`$-$`\sigma `$ of E-type galaxies we have considered a sample of 20 objects of E-type morphology (excluding lenticulars) in the Kormendy & Gebhardt (2001) galaxy list with measured BH masses. The Milky Way was therefore not considered. In Table 1 we report the relevant data for this sample: columns 1 and 2 give the name and the morphological type from RC3; columns 3 the distance, derived from Surface Brightness Fluctuations (SBF, Tonry et al. (2001)); columns 4, 5, 6, 7 report the adopted apparent total B magnitude corrected for extinction, the $`BR`$ color, the galactic extinction, derived from the Bell Laboratories Survey of neutral Hydrogen (Stark et al. (1992)) and the absolute B magnitude respectively. The $`B`$band bulge magnitudes were taken from Faber et al. (1997) for all the 20 objects but for NGC 5128, NGC 6251 and NGC 7052 we adopted the magnitudes given in RC3 (de Vaucouleurs et al. (1991)). Note that for this sample the bulge magnitude is coincident with the total magnitude of the galaxy since the galaxy luminosity profile is always well represented by an $`r^{1/4}`$ law. The adopted values for the velocity dispersion (from Ferrarese & Merritt (2000)), effective radius $`R_e`$ (from Faber et al. 1989 and using the distance in column 3) and $`_{BH}`$ are reported in columns 8, 9 and 10. The latter values are taken from Tremaine et al. (2002) that give the most recent revision of $`_{BH}`$ for this data set.

### 2.2 The radio-galaxies sample

We have considered the following two samples of radio galaxies:

* Sample A: this consists of 72 radio-galaxies at z$`<`$0.2 with available values of the absolute magnitude MR, the effective radius $`R_e`$ and the velocity dispersion $`\sigma `$. We used this data in a previous work (Bettoni et al. (2001)) to study the Fundamental Plane of RGs. In this sample 22 objects were observed by us, 22 galaxies were taken from Smith et al. (1990)(SHI90), 16 from Ledlow & Owen (1995), 7 from Gonzales-Serrano & Carballo (2000) and 5 from Faber et al. (1989)(FA89). In Table 2 we report the relevant data for the radio-galaxies in this sample: in columns 1, 2 we give the name and the redshift; in column 3 we list the absolute R (Cousins) magnitude to which we have also applied a correction to set the host galaxy luminosity to the present epoch assuming a passive stellar evolution for massive ellipticals (Bressan et al. 1994). Columns 4, 5, 6 and 7 report the Log($`\sigma `$), the total and core radio luminosity at 4800 MHz and the reference for these radio data. The velocity dispersion is normalized to a circular aperture of metric radius 1.19$`h^1`$ kpc (Jørgensen et al. (1996)). This normalization is practically equivalent to that adopted by Ferrarese & Merritt (2000), who consider $`\sigma `$ within an aperture radius of $`r_e`$/8. The average difference between the two normalizations for our objects is $``$5 km/sec.
* Sample B: this consists of 79 radiogalaxies at z$`<`$0.1 for which we secured homogeneous photometric and structural parameters (Fasano et al. (1996)Govoni et al. 2000a ,b). These radio galaxies are extracted from two complete surveys of radio sources (Wall & Peacock (1985): WP, Ekers et al. (1989): EK) according to the specifications given in Fasano et al. (1996), Sample B has in common 22 objects with Sample A. In Table 3 we report the relevant data for this sample. In columns 1, 2 we give the name and the redshift; in columns 3, 4, 5 and 6 we list the absolute R magnitude, the total and core radio luminosity at 4800 MHz and the reference for the radio data.

## 3 The $`_{BH}M_R`$(host) and $`_{BH}Log(\sigma )`$ relations for normal, nearby ellipticals

Using the dataset of nearby inactive ellipticals described in Section 2.1 we have derived the best fit of the relations Log($`_{BH}`$)-$`M_R`$(host) and Log($`_{BH}`$)-Log($`\sigma `$). In order to obtain a relationship between $`_{BH}`$ and MR usable for $`H_0`$=50 we need to apply a color correction (to convert the B magnitude into the R band) and a term that takes into account the consistency between the adopted distances of nearby galaxies (see Table 1) and the chosen value of $`H_0`$. The latter term can be written as 5Log($`H_0^{}`$/$`H_0`$), where $`H_0^{}`$=74 km/sec/Mpc (Tonry et al. 2001). The color correction was derived from LEDA with the exception of NGC 4291 and of the three galaxies for which the B magnitude has been obtained from RC3. For these objects a standard color ($`BR=1.60`$) was assumed (Fukugita et al. (1995)).

The data used to fit the two relations $`_{BH}`$-MR(host) and $`_{BH}Log(\sigma )`$ are shown in Figure 1. The best fit to the data was derived following the procedure outlined in Fasano & Vio (1988), which takes into account the individual measurement errors in both coordinates and allows us to estimate the residual scatter $`s_r`$.

The two fitted relations are:

$$Log(_{BH}/_{})=0.50(\pm 0.06)\times M_R3.00(\pm 1.35)$$
(1)
r.m.s.=0.39

$$Log(_{BH}/_{})=4.55(\pm 0.49)\times Log(\sigma )2.27(\pm 1.13)$$
(2)
r.m.s.=0.41

where $`M_R=M_B(BR)5Log(H_0^{}/H_0)`$. The residual scatters of the two relations are 0.14($`\pm `$0.05) and 0.35($`\pm `$0.22), respectively. In both cases they turn out to be consistent with zero (within $`3\sigma `$), implying that the observed scatter is almost entirely accounted for by the uncertainty of the measurements. Both relations are in good agreement with the last determinations by McLure and Dunlop (2002) and Ferrarese (2002), respectively, once the different cosmology is taken into account. However, at variance with previous findings (Ferrarese & Merritt (2000)Kormendy & Gebhardt (2001)), luminosity and central velocity dispersion appear to be almost equally correlated (very similar scatter) with the black-hole mass. A similar result was found by McLure & Dunlop (2002) using a slightly different sample of E-type objects. We note, however, that our scatter (0.39 dex) is larger than that (0.31 dex) found by McLure & Dunlop (2002). Since the data used by these authors are not published it is not possible to further investigate the origin of this difference.

## 4 Results

### 4.1 The BH mass of radio galaxies

Here we use the relationships Log$`_{BH}M_R`$(bulge) and Log$`_{BH}Log(\sigma )`$, derived in Section 3, (eq. 1 and eq. 2) to estimate the BH mass of the two samples (A and B) of radio galaxies defined in section 2.2. The BH masses derived from $`\sigma `$ and from the MR are reported in columns 8 and 9 of Table 2. The comparison of the two $`_{BH}`$ determinations for the Sample A is shown in Figure 2. We find that the mean values of $`Log(_{BH})`$ (8.66$`\pm `$0.44 from eq. 1 and 8.91$`\pm `$0.37 from eq. 2) are significantly different. This is mainly attributable to the systematically lower values of $`\sigma `$ for the 26 radio galaxies in the sub-samples of SHI90 and FA89 (see figure 2). To further emphasize this point we plot in Fig 3 the values of $`\sigma `$ versus MR (Faber-Jackson relation) for the RGs in Sample A and for normal ellipticals from Jørgensen et al. (1996, JFK96) sample.

It is clearly apparent that RGs belonging to the SHI90 and FA89 samples deviate systematically from the overall relation derived from fitting the data for the RGs in Sample A (excluding the SHI90 and FA89 galaxies) and for normal ellipticals from JFK96 (Log$`\sigma `$=-0.375-0.118$`\times `$MR). Note also that the galaxies in these datasets do not well agree with the other RGs of Sample A in the Fundamental Plane (Bettoni et al. 2001). Therefore, in the following analysis, we exclude the measurements of these 26 RGs. If we now consider the remaining 45 RGs in Sample 1 (hereafter reduced Sample 1) we obtain: $`<Log(_{BH})>_\sigma `$=8.81$`\pm `$0.41 and $`<Log_{BH}>_{M_R}`$=8.91$`\pm `$0.40. For Sample 2 $`_{BH}`$ was derived only from MR (eq 1). These values are given in Table 3. The mean value of $`_{BH}`$ $`<Log_{BH}>_{M_R}`$=8.94$`\pm `$0.34 is in good agreement with those obtained for the reduced Sample A. In Figure 4 the distributions of $`_{BH}`$ for both samples are compared.

### 4.2 The $`_{BH}_{bulge}`$ relation

McLure and Dunlop (2002) and Laor (2001) investigated the relation $`_{BH}_{bulge}^\eta `$ for Seyfert galaxies and powerful QSO in order to test its linearity (which means $`\eta `$=1). In both papers the above relation is derived from $`L_{bulge}`$ under the assumption of a mass-to-light ratio having the form $`/LL^\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ but they reached different conclusions. Laor (2001) claimed that the relation $`_{BH}_{bulge}`$ is not linear, while this was not confirmed by McLure and Dunlop (2002). However, the latter authors showed also that Laor data may be consistent with the linearity if one adopts $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$=0.31 (Jørgensen et al. 1996) instead of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$=0.18 (used by Laor).

Here we investigate the $`_{BH}_{bulge}^\eta `$ relation for our samples of RGs. We have computed the two involved quantities ($`_{BH}`$ and $`_{bulge}`$) from $`\sigma `$, MR and the effective radius of the galaxy ($`R_e`$) avoiding possible spurious effects introduced in the analysis by the use of the same variable to derive the two masses. We first derive $`_{BH}`$ from $`M_R`$ (eq. 1) and $`_{bulge}`$ from $`R_e`$ and $`\sigma `$ using the formula $`_{bulge}`$=$`5G^1\sigma ^2R_e`$, proposed by Bender et al. (1992). These two determinations are reported in columns 9 and 10 of Table 2. Figure 5 shows the linear fit to the $`_{BH}`$$`_{bulge}`$ relation for objects in the reduced Sample A and for normal ellipticals (JFK96), together with the data relative to the sample of inactive galaxies for comparison. We find:

$$Log(_{BH})=0.96(\pm 0.03)\times Log(_{bulge})2.56(\pm 0.34)$$
(3)
This relation has $`r.m.s.=0.14`$, while the residual scatter (i.e. the scatter not accounted for by the errors) is $`s_r`$=0.03$`\pm 0.012`$, which is consistent with zero. The slope ($`\eta `$=0.96) is practically coincident with an almost perfect linearity ($`\eta `$=1; see the dotted line in Figure 5). This suggests that a fundamental link is present in the combined formation of BHs and spheroids that holds for various types of active and inactive galaxies. We also note that, given the coefficients of the fundamental plane (FP), the linearity of the $`_{BH}`$-$`_{bulge}`$ relation turns out to be directly linked with the particular value of the slope (A) of the relation (Log$`_{BH}`$=A$`\times `$MR \+ B). In fact the exponent $`\eta `$ of the $`M_{BH}M_{bulge}`$ relation can be written in the form: $`\eta =A\alpha /2\beta `$, where $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$ are the coefficients of the FP. Using $`\alpha `$=1.242, $`\beta `$=0.33 (Bettoni et al. 2001) and A=-0.5 it follows that, $`\eta `$=0.94. Vice-versa, if perfect linearity is assumed using the same $`\alpha `$, $`\beta `$ one obtains A=-0.53.

The distribution of the black-hole to bulge mass ratio is shown in Figure 6 (panel a). The average value of the mass ratio is $`<Log(_{BH}/_{bulge})>=3.11`$, with $`r.m.s.0.17`$. The dispersion expected from just the uncertainties on the measurements ($`0.26`$) is consistent with that observed, suggesting that the intrinsic variance of the ratio $`_{BH}/_{bulge}`$ is very small.

Alternatively we can derive the $`_{BH}/_{bulge}`$ ratio using $`_{BH}`$ derived from $`\sigma `$ and assuming $`_{bulge}`$=0.0021$`L^{1.30}`$ (the coefficients are derived by fitting the $``$-L relation, in the R band,for our RG data together with the ellipticals in JFK96). In this case we obtain $`<Log(_{BH}/_{bulge})>`$=-3.16 with a dispersion of 0.43 (see Figure 6b). These are in good agreement with those derived for the inactive galaxy sample: -3.07 ($`r.m.s.`$=0.19) and -3.05 ($`r.m.s.`$=0.50) for the two procedures respectively. They are also similar to previous determinations by Merritt and Ferrarese (2001) who found -2.90$`\pm `$0.45 using the Magorrian et al. (1998) galaxy sample and the $`_{BH}`$-$`\sigma `$ relation, and by McLure and Dunlop (2002) that report -2.87$`\pm `$0.47 from their study of the host galaxies of powerful quasars and use virial black-hole masses.

### 4.3 Relationship between $`_{BH}`$ and radio emission

Based on a small number of nearby galaxies with known BH masses it was suggested by Franceschini et al. (1998) that $`_{BH}`$ scales with the total radio luminosity $`L_{radio}`$ at 5 GHz ($`L_{radio}`$ $``$ $`_{BH}^{2.5}`$). This is what would be expected by Accretion-Dominated Accretion Flows (ADAF, see Abramowicz et al. (1995); Narayan & Yi (1996)) models. This correlation appears to hold over at least 3 order of magnitudes for $`_{BH}`$ and, given its steepness, it was proposed as a tool to predict $`_{BH}`$ from the simple observation of the radio flux. Additional support for a link between $`L_{radio}`$ and $`_{BH}`$ in various type of active galaxies was lead by Laor (2001) and Lacy et al. (2001).

However, a recent analysis by Ho (2002) of this relationship, for objects with a wide range of nuclear activity, argued that $`_{BH}`$ is only loosely related with the radio power (both total and core emission). The poor correlation observed between the two quantities could therefore arise from indirect relations between radio luminosity, bulge mass and $`_{BH}`$ and has no practical power to predict $`_{BH}`$ from the radio luminosity.

We have investigated this issue using our samples of radiogalaxies for which radio power ($`P_{tot}`$) at 5 GHz and $`_{BH}`$ are available (see Table 2). In figure 7 we show the data for our radio galaxies in the plane $`_{BH}`$-LogP5GHz(total). The two quantities are not correlated: Spearman correlation coefficient -0.174, with significance of nonzero correlation 0.038. The same result is found using the core radio power. Similarly, no significant correlation is found between the host galaxy mass $`_{bulge}`$ and the radio power, in agreement with the fact that $`_{BH}`$ is tightly related to $`_{bulge}`$.

In Figure 8 we compare the distribution of our RGs over the plane $`_{BH}`$ – radio power with that of other samples of galaxies at various levels of nuclear activity investigated by Ho (2002) and Oshlack et al. (2002). Note that the latter data refer to flat spectrum radio-sources whose flux is likely enhanced by Doppler boosting (beamed sources). Their observed luminosity therefore tends to occupy the higher region of the $`P_{tot}`$-$`_{BH}`$ plane (see also Jarvis & McLure 2002). Our data for RG are in agreement with the analysis by Ho (2002) and enforce his conclusion that radio power is poorly correlated with the mass of the central BH and therefore that the latter can not practically be predicted by the measurement of the radio flux. If instead of the total radio luminosity we use the radio power of the core this picture remains basically unchanged. All together the points in Figure 8 appear to follow the trend of increasing $`_{BH}`$ with higher radio luminosity. This behavior is consistent with the suggestion by Dunlop et al. (2002) that both active and inactive galaxies fall between two envelopes (following the $`P_{tot}`$ $`_{BH}^{2.5}`$ law) in the $`_{BH}`$-$`P_{tot}`$ plane. On the other hand the scatter of the points is rather large and do not produce a significant correlation of the two quantities. Our objects cover the top-right part of the diagram where more massive BH and powerful radio sources are expected. Most of our points and those of Ho (2002) lie above the relation proposed by Franceschini et al. (1998) by 2-3 order of magnitude. At low accretion rates ADAF models foresee that radio power depends on $`_{BH}`$ as $`P_r_{BH}^{2.5}`$. The location of points well above such relation may simply reflect the much higher level of activity (and likely of accretion).

## 5 Summary and Conclusions

We used of empirical relations between $`_{BH}`$ and either the velocity dispersion ($`\sigma `$) or the bulge luminosity MR(bulge) derived for nearby early type galaxies to infer the mass of the central BH of low redshift radio galaxies.

The main conclusions of this study are:

1) Using only nearby galaxies of E-type morphology, for which BH masses are available, the two relationships $`_{BH}`$ \- $`\sigma `$ and $`_{BH}`$ \- Mbulge exhibit a similar scatter ($``$0.4 in Log$`_{BH}`$) which is also consistent with that expected from the estimated errors on the involved parameters.

2) We showed that when the dependence on the adopted cosmology (for the $`_{BH}`$ \- Mbulge relation) is properly taken into account the two relations predict the same value of the central BH mass (within the expected uncertainties). This means that the BH mass can be reliably estimated from the observable parameter MR(bulge) which is more easily measurable than $`\sigma `$.

3) The inferred BH mass of low redshift radio galaxies is in the range 5$`\times 10^7`$ to 5$`\times 10^9`$ $`_{}`$.

4) We found that the central BH mass is linearly correlated with that of its host galaxy the average Black Hole to bulge mass ratio is $`<Log[_{BH}/_{bulge}]>`$ -3.1.

5) The total (or core) radio power at 5 GHz is not correlated neither with the mass of the central BH nor with that of the galaxy; the radio power is always in excess by 2-3 order of magnitude with respect to what would be expected from low accretion rate models (ADAF).

###### Acknowledgements.

We wish to acknowledge the anonymous referee for valuable comments which lead to the improvement of this paper. This work has received partial support under contracts COIN2001/028773-004, ASI-IR-35 and ASI-IR-73-01.


text:
# Gradual approximation of the domain of attraction by gradual extension of the ”embryo” of the transformed optimal Lyapunov function

## 1 Introduction

The domain of attraction ($`DA`$) of a steady state of a dynamical system is the set of initial states from which the system converges to the steady state itself. In order to guarantee stable behavior of a dynamical system in a region of the state parameters it is important to know the $`DA`$ .

Theoretical research shows that the $`DA`$ and its boundary are complicated sets , , , . In most cases, they do not admit an explicit elementary representation. For this reason, different procedures are used for the approximation of the $`DA`$ with domains having a simpler shape. This practice became fundamental in the last 20 years . The domain which approximates the $`DA`$ is defined by a Lyapunov function, generally quadratic. For a given Lyapunov function the computation of the optimal estimate of the $`DA`$ amounts to solving a non-convex distance problem , , , , , , .

In this paper we present a new technique for a gradual approximation of the $`DA`$ in the case of autonomous analytical systems of ordinary differential equations. More precisely for the gradual approximation of the $`DA`$ of an asymptotically stable steady state in which the matrix of the linearized system is diagonalizable. This technique is based on the theoretical results obtained in , ,  and in the following we present a summary of this theory.

## 2 Theoretical summary

We consider the system of differential equations

$$\dot{x}=f(x)$$
(1)
where $`f:^n^n`$ is an analytical function with the following properties:

* $`f(0)=0`$ (i.e. zero is a steady state of (1))
* the real parts of the eigenvalues of $`\frac{f}{x}(0)`$ are negative (i.e. $`x=0`$ is an asymptotically stable steady state)

The following theorem provides a tool of determining the $`DA`$ of the zero steady state of (1).

###### Theorem 1.

(see ) The $`DA`$ of the null solution of (1) coincides with the natural domain of analyticity of the unique solution V of the problem

$$\begin{array}{cc}\{\begin{array}{c}V,f=x^2\hfill \\ V(0)=0\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(2)
The function $`V`$ is positive on $`DA`$ and $`\underset{xx_0}{lim}V(x)=\mathrm{}`$ for any $`x_0DA`$.

Thus, the problem of finding the $`DA`$ is reduced to the determination of the natural domain of analyticity of the solution $`V`$ of (2). This function will be called in the followings the optimal Lyapunov function.

To determine the optimal Lyapunov function $`V`$ and its domain of analyticity is not easy, but, in the diagonalizable case, we can determine the coefficients of the expansion of $`W=VS`$ in $`0`$, where $`S`$ reduces $`\frac{f}{x}(0)`$ to the diagonal form. Then, using a Cauchy-Hadamard type theorem, we can obtain the domain of convergence $`D^0`$ of the series of $`W`$, and $`DA^0=S(D^0)`$ is a part of the domain of attraction.

### 2.1 The coefficients of the transformed optimal Lyapunov function in the diagonalizable case

For the system (1) the following theorem holds:

###### Theorem 2.

(see ) For each isomorphism $`S:^n^n`$ and $`g=S^1fS`$, the problem

$$\begin{array}{cc}\{\begin{array}{c}W,g=Sz^2\hfill \\ W(0)=0\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(3)
has a unique analytical solution, namely $`W=VS`$ where V is the optimal Lyapunov function for (1).

The function $`W`$ will be called the transformed optimal Lyapunov function.

In the followings, we will suppose that the matrix $`\frac{f}{x}(0)`$ is diagonalizable.

Let be $`S:^n^n`$ one isomorphism which reduces $`\frac{f}{x}(0)`$ to the diagonal form $`S^1\frac{f}{x}(0)S=diag(\lambda _1,\lambda _2\mathrm{}\lambda _n)`$ and $`g=S^1fS`$.

For this $`S`$, we consider the expansion of $`W`$ in $`0`$:

$$W(z_1,z_2,\mathrm{},z_n)=\underset{m=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{|j|=m}{}B_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}z_1^{j_1}z_2^{j_2}\mathrm{}z_n^{j_n}$$
(4)
and the expansions in $`0`$ of the scalar components $`g_i`$ of $`g`$:

$$g_i(z_1,z_2,\mathrm{},z_n)=\lambda _iy_i+\underset{m=2}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\underset{|j|=m}{}b_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}^iz_1^{j_1}z_2^{j_2}\mathrm{}z_n^{j_n}$$
(5)
###### Theorem 3.

(see ) The coefficients $`B_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}`$ of the development (4) are given by the following relations:

$$B_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}=\begin{array}{ccc}\{\begin{array}{c}\frac{1}{2\lambda _{i_0}}\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}s_{ii_0}^2\text{ if }|j|=j_{i_0}=2\hfill \\ \\ \frac{2}{\lambda _p+\lambda _q}\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}s_{ip}s_{iq}\text{ if }|j|=2\text{ and }j_p=j_q=1\hfill \\ \\ \frac{1}{\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}j_i\lambda _i}\underset{p=2}{\overset{|j|1}{}}\underset{|k|=p,k_ij_i}{}\underset{i=1}{\overset{n}{}}[(j_ik_i+1)\hfill \\ b_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}^iB_{j_1k_1\mathrm{}j_ik_i+1\mathrm{}j_nk_n}]\text{ if }|j|3\hfill \end{array}\hfill & & \end{array}$$
(6)
According to (6), the coefficients of the terms of degree $`m3`$ are obtained in function of the coefficients of the terms of degree smaller than $`m`$.

### 2.2 The domain of convergence of the series of W

We define the domain of convergence of the series (4) as the set of those $`z^n`$ which have the property that the series (4) is absolutely convergent in a neighborhood of $`z`$ . We denote by $`D^0`$ this domain. Actually, the domain of convergence $`D^0`$ coincides with the interior of the set of all the points $`z^0`$ in which the series (4) is absolutely convergent (see ).

###### Theorem 4.

(Cauchy-Hadamard see ) A point $`z`$ belongs to $`D^0`$ if and only if

$$\overline{\underset{m}{lim}}\sqrt[m]{\underset{|j|=m}{}|B_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}z_1^{j_1}z_2^{j_2}\mathrm{}z_n^{j_n}|}<1$$
(7)
Using $`D^0`$ we can find a part of the $`DA`$.

###### Theorem 5.

(see ) If $`z`$ belongs to $`D^0`$ then the point $`x=Sz`$ is in the domain of attraction $`DA`$.

Actually, by the previous theorem, we obtain the subdomain $`S(D^0)DA`$, which has the property that $`S(D^0)DA\mathrm{}`$. We also observe that the subdomain $`S(D^0)`$ is symmetrical to the origin (actually, the domain of convergence $`D^0`$ is symmetrical to the origin and the axes of coordinates). This first approximation of the domain of attraction $`DA`$ will be denoted by $`DA^0=S(D^0)`$.

Condition (7) represents an algoritmizable criterion for determining the region of convergence $`D^0`$.

### 2.3 A method of extending the estimate of DA

In practice, we can compute the coefficients $`B_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}`$ up to a finite degree $`p`$. This degree $`p`$ has to be big enough for assuming that the domain $`D_p^0`$ given by

$$D_p^0=\{z^n/\sqrt[p]{\underset{|j|=p}{}|B_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}z_1^{j_1}z_2^{j_2}\mathrm{}z_n^{j_n}|}<1\}$$

approximates the region of convergence $`D^0`$ of the series of $`W`$. On this domain $`D_p^0`$ we approximate $`W`$ by the ”embryo”

$$W_p^0(z_1,z_2,\mathrm{},z_n)=\underset{m=2}{\overset{p}{}}\underset{|j|=m}{}B_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}z_1^{j_1}z_2^{j_2}\mathrm{}z_n^{j_n}$$
(8)
The first estimate of the region of attraction $`DA`$ will be $`DA_p^0=S(D_p^0)`$.

In order to extend the first estimate $`DA_p^0`$, we will expand $`W`$ in a point $`z^0`$ close to $`D_p^0`$ in which $`|W_p^0(z^0)|`$ is still small. That is because, according to Theorem 1, the points $`z`$ close to $`D_p^0`$ for which $`|W_p^0(z)|`$ is extremely high are close to $`S^1(DA)`$.

To find the expansion of $`W`$ in $`z^0`$ close to $`D_p^0`$, we will compute the expansion in $`z^0`$ of the ”embryo” $`W_p^0`$ of $`W`$. We obtain:

$`W_p^1(z_1,z_2,\mathrm{},z_n)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{p}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{|j|=m}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{^mW_p}{z_1^{j_1}z_2^{j_2}\mathrm{}z_n^{j_n}}}(z^0)(z_1z_1^0)^{j_1}(z_2z_2^0)^{j_2}\mathrm{}(z_nz_n^0)^{j_n}/m!=`$ (9)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{p}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{|j|=m}{}}B_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}^1(z_1z_1^0)^{j_1}(z_2z_2^0)^{j_2}\mathrm{}(z_nz_n^0)^{j_n}`$
We consider the set

$$D_p^1=\{z^n/\sqrt[p]{\underset{|j|=p}{}|B_{j_1j_2\mathrm{}j_n}(z_1z_1^0)^{j_1}(z_2z_2^0)^{j_2}\mathrm{}(z_nz_n^0)^{j_n}|}<1\}$$

which provides a new part $`DA_p^1=S(D_p^1)`$ of $`DA`$.

So, $`DA_p^0DA_p^1`$ gives a larger estimate of the $`DA`$. We can continue this procedure for a few steps, till the values $`|W_p^k|`$ become extremely large and we obtain the estimate $`DA_p^0DA_p^1\mathrm{}DA_p^k=S(D_p^0D_p^1\mathrm{}D_p^k)`$ of $`DA`$.

## 3 Numerical results

The computations were made using a program written in Mathematica 4, Wolfram Research. The data for the estimations (the degree up to which the approximation is made, the necessary timing for the estimations) are displayed in Table 1.

### 3.1 Systems with known domains of attraction

In this subsection, we will present some examples of systems of two or three differential equations, for which we can compute easily the $`DA`$. We will apply our technique to these examples, and we will show how the real domains of attraction are gradually approximated. These examples are meant to validate our procedure.

#### 3.1.1 Example 1

This is an example of a system for which the null solution has a bounded domain of attraction:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\{\begin{array}{c}\dot{x_1}=x_1[4(x_11)^2x_2^2]\hfill \\ \dot{x_2}=x_2[4(x_11)^2x_2^2]\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(10)
The domain of attraction of the null solution of this system is the interior of the circle of radius $`2`$ centered in $`(1,0)`$:

$$DA=\{(x_1,x_2)^2/(x_11)^2+x_2^2<4\}$$

After three steps, we obtain the estimate shown in Figure 1.

The thick black line represents the true boundary of the domain of attraction, the dark grey set denotes the first estimate $`DA_p^0`$ of $`DA`$ and the further estimates $`DA_p^k`$ of $`DA`$ with $`k1`$ are colored in light grey.

#### 3.1.2 Example 2

The following system of three differential equations is considered:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\{\begin{array}{c}\dot{x_1}=x_1(1x_1^2x_2^2+x_3^2)\hfill \\ \dot{x_2}=x_2(1x_1^2x_2^2+x_3^2)\hfill \\ \dot{x_3}=x_3(1x_1^2x_2^2+x_3^2)\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(11)
The boundary of the $`DA`$ of the null solution of this system is:

$$DA=\{(x_1,x_2,x_3)^3/1x_1^2x_2^2+x_3^2=0\}$$

The first estimate $`DA_p^0`$ is shown in Figure 2.1. After 2 steps, we obtain the estimate shown in Figure 2.2.

### 3.2 Systems for which we don’t know the DA

In this subsection, some systems of differential equations are presented for which we don’t know the $`DA`$. For these examples, we will apply the technique presented in Section 2, and we will show that the estimate obtained using this technique is better than the estimates obtained in .

#### 3.2.1 Example 3

In , the following example is considered:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\{\begin{array}{c}\dot{x_1}=x_2\hfill \\ \dot{x_2}=2x_13x_2+x_1^2x_2^2+x_1x_2\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(12)
In Figure 3.1, an estimate of the $`DA`$ is shown obtained after two steps for three different points close to the boundary of $`DA_p^0`$. We observe that this estimate covers the estimate presented in . Figure 3.2 presents the estimate of $`DA`$ obtained after four steps. The thick black lines plotted in the following figures represent a part of the approximated boundary of the $`DA`$. The black interrupted line represents the boundary of the estimate of the domain of attraction obtained in .

#### 3.2.2 Example 4

In , the following system of three equations is considered:

$$\begin{array}{cc}\{\begin{array}{c}\dot{x_1}=x_2\hfill \\ \dot{x_2}=x_3\hfill \\ \dot{x_3}=3x_13x_22x_3+x_1^3+x_2^3+x_3^3\hfill \end{array}\hfill & \end{array}$$
(13)
Figure 4.1 shows the estimate of $`DA`$ obtained after one step. The estimate of the $`DA`$ obtained after two steps is presented in Fig. 4.2.

Table 1. Numerical data

| example | order of approximation | timing for $`1^{st}`$ step | timing for $`2^{nd}`$ step |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 | 50 | 1.7 min | 34.7 min |
| 2 | 30 | 10.2 min | 14.7 h |
| 3 | 30 | 0.9 min | 9.9 min |
| 4 | 30 | 19.1 min | 16.2 h |


text:
# Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference

## Abstract

We consider multimode two-photon interference at a beam splitter by photons created by spontaneous parametric down-conversion. The resulting interference pattern is shown to depend upon the transverse spatial symmetry of the pump beam. In an experiment, we employ the first-order Hermite-Gaussian modes in order to show that, by manipulating the pump beam, one can control the resulting two-photon interference behavior. We expect these results to play an important role in the engineering of quantum states of light for use in quantum information processing and quantum imaging.

Entangled photons have proven to be a great tool in the study of quantum phenomena and promise to play an important role in quantum information processing Nielsen and Chuang (2000) as well as quantum imaging Abouraddy et al. (2001); Strekalov and Dowling (2002). The most common source of entangled photons is spontaneous parametric down-conversion (SPDC), in which the interaction of a pump photon with a birefringent nonlinear crystal creates two daughter photons. Under certain experimental conditions, the down-converted photons may be entangled in momentum Rarity and Tapster (1990), energy Tapster et al. (1994), polarization Kwiat et al. (1995, 1999) and/or angular momentum Mair et al. (2001).

Two-photon interference at a beam splitter was first demonstrated by Hong, Ou and Mandel (HOM) Hong et al. (1987). It has since been utilized in quantum tests of nonlocality Torgerson et al. (1995) as well as many optical implementations of quantum information protocol such as Bell-state measurements Mattle et al. (1996); Bouwmeester et al. (1997) and may be used to construct quantum optical logic gates Ralph et al. (2002); Pittman et al. (2002). To date, however, most experiments utilizing HOM-type interference consider an ideal monomode situation. In this paper, we consider multimode two-photon interference of photon pairs created by SPDC. We show how the transverse amplitude profile of the pump beam in SPDC determines whether the down-converted fields interfere constructively or destructively. We present our experiment and conclude by noting the relevance of these results to quantum optical information processing.

Consider the Hong-Ou-Mandel (HOM) interferometer shown in Fig. 1, in which two photons are generated by SPDC are reflected onto opposite sides of a beam splitter. We assume that paths $`s`$ and $`i`$ are equal. Here we will work in the monochromatic and paraxial approximations. This is justified by the use of narrow bandwidth interference filters (centered at $`2\lambda _p`$, where $`\lambda _p`$ is the pump field wavelength) and small collection apertures in the experimental setup. Following Hong and Mandel (1985); Monken et al. (1998a), the two-photon quantum state generated by noncolinear SPDC is then

$$|\psi _{SPDC}=C_1|\text{vac}+C_2|\psi $$
(1)
where

$$|\psi =\underset{\sigma _s,\sigma _i}{}C_{\sigma _s,\sigma _i}\underset{D}{}𝑑𝐪_s𝑑𝐪_i\mathrm{\Phi }(𝐪_s,𝐪_i)|𝐪_s,\sigma _s_s|𝐪_i,\sigma _i_i.$$
(2)
The coefficients $`C_1`$ and $`C_2`$ are such that $`|C_2||C_1|`$. $`C_2`$ depends on the crystal length, the nonlinearity coefficient and the magnitude of the pump field, among other factors. The kets $`|𝐪_j,\sigma _j`$ represent Fock states labeled by the transverse component $`𝐪_j`$ of the wave vector $`𝐤_j`$ and by the polarization $`\sigma _j`$ of the mode $`j=s`$ or $`i`$. The polarization state of the down-converted photon pair is defined by the coefficients $`C_{\sigma _s,\sigma _i}`$. The function $`\mathrm{\Phi }(𝐪_s,𝐪_i)`$, which can be regarded as the normalized angular spectrum of the two-photon field Monken et al. (1998a), is given by

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(𝐪_s,𝐪_i)=\frac{1}{\pi }\sqrt{\frac{L}{K}}v(𝐪_s+𝐪_i)\mathrm{sinc}\left(\frac{L|𝐪_s𝐪_i|^2}{4K}\right),$$
(3)
where $`v(𝐪)`$ is the normalized angular spectrum of the pump beam, $`L`$ is the length of the nonlinear crystal in the $`z`$-direction, and $`K`$ is the magnitude of the pump field wave vector. The integration domain $`D`$ is, in principle, defined by the conditions $`q_s^2k_s^2`$ and $`q_i^2k_i^2`$. However, in most experimental conditions, the domain in which $`\mathrm{\Phi }(𝐪_s,𝐪_i)`$ is appreciable is much smaller. Eqs. (2) and (3) include the wave vectors inside the nonlinear birefringent crystal, which, upon propagation through the crystal, may suffer transverse and longitudinal walk-off effects, as well as refraction at the exit surface. Walk-off effects can be corrected by compensating crystals Kwiat et al. (1995). In the monochromatic situation we are considering, Snell’s law gives equal exit angles for extraordinary and ordinary polarization. Under these conditions, effects due to the refractive indices and birefringence can be neglected. If the crystal is thin enough, the sinc function in (3) can be considered to be equal to unity Monken et al. (1998a).

The two-photon detection amplitude, which in the monochromatic case can be regarded as a photonic wavefunction Mandel and Wolf (1995), is

$$𝚿(𝐫_1,𝐫_2)=\text{vac}\left|𝐄_2^{(+)}(𝐫_2)𝐄_1^{(+)}(𝐫_1)\right|\psi ,$$
(4)
where $`𝐄_l^{(+)}(𝐫_l)`$ is the field operator for the mode $`l`$ and $`𝐫_l`$ is the detection position. In the paraxial approximation, $`𝐄_l^{(+)}(𝐫)`$ is

$$𝐄_l^{(+)}(𝐫)=e^{ikz}\underset{\sigma }{}𝑑𝐪𝗮_l(𝐪,\sigma )\mathit{ϵ}_\sigma e^{i(𝐪𝝆\frac{\mathrm{q}^2}{2\mathrm{k}}z)}$$
(5)
The operator $`𝗮_l(𝐪,\sigma )`$ annihilates a photon in mode $`l`$ with transverse wave vector $`𝐪`$ and polarization $`\sigma `$.

In the HOM interferometer, the state (2) is incident on a beam splitter. Using the reference frames illustrated in Fig. 1, the annihilation operators in modes $`1`$ and $`2`$ after the beam splitter can be expressed in terms of the operators in modes $`s`$ and $`i`$:

$`𝗮_1(𝐪,\sigma )`$ $`=t𝗮_s(q_x,q_y,\sigma )+ir𝗮_i(q_x,q_y,\sigma )`$ (6)
$`𝗮_2(\mathrm{q},\sigma )`$ $`=t𝗮_i(q_x,q_y,\sigma )+ir𝗮_s(q_x,q_y,\sigma ),`$ (7)
where $`t`$ and $`r`$ are the transmission and reflection coefficients of the beam splitter. We have assumed that the beam splitter is symmetric. A field reflected from the beam splitter undergoes a reflection in the horizontal ($`y`$) direction, while a transmitted field does not suffer any reflection, as illustrated in Fig. 1. The negative sign that appears in the $`q_y`$ components is due to this reflection. The two-photon wave function is split into four components, according to the four possibilities of transmission and reflection of the two photons, as shown in Fig. 2:

$$𝚿=𝚿_{tr}(𝐫_1,𝐫_1^{})+𝚿_{rt}(𝐫_2,𝐫_2^{})+𝚿_{tt}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2)+𝚿_{rr}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2).$$
(8)
For convenience, the four components of $`𝚿`$ are written in two different coordinate systems, $`𝐫_1=(x_1,y_1,z_1)`$ and $`𝐫_2=(x_2,y_2,z_2)`$, since we must work in the paraxial approximation around two different axes $`z_1`$ and $`z_2`$. To simplify things, we assume that $`t=r`$. Combining Eqs. (2) through (8), it is straightforward to show that, apart from a common multiplicative factor,

$`𝚿_{tr}(𝐫_1,𝐫_1^{})=`$ $`i\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{iK}{2Z}}[(x_1x_1^{})^2+(y_1+y_1^{})^2]\right\}\times `$
$`[𝒲({\displaystyle \frac{x_1+x_1^{}}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{y_1+y_1^{}}{2}},Z)𝚷(𝝈_1,𝝈_1^{})+`$
$`𝒲({\displaystyle \frac{x_1+x_1^{}}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{y_1y_1^{}}{2}},Z)𝚷(𝝈_1^{},𝝈_1)]`$ (9)
$`𝚿_{rt}(𝐫_2,𝐫_2^{})=`$ $`i\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{iK}{2Z}}[(x_2x_2^{})^2+(y_2+y_2^{})^2]\right\}\times `$
$`[𝒲({\displaystyle \frac{x_2+x_2^{}}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{y_2+y_2^{}}{2}},Z)𝚷(𝝈_2,𝝈_2^{})+`$
$`𝒲({\displaystyle \frac{x_2+x_2^{}}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{y_2y_2^{}}{2}},Z)𝚷(𝝈_2^{},𝝈_2)]`$ (10)
$`𝚿_{tt}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2)=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{iK}{2Z}}[(x_1x_2)^2+(y_1y_2)^2]\right\}\times `$
$`𝒲({\displaystyle \frac{x_1+x_2}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{y_1+y_2}{2}},Z)𝚷(𝝈_1,𝝈_2)`$ (11)
$`𝚿_{rr}(𝐫_1,𝐫_2)=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{iK}{2Z}}[(x_1x_2)^2+(y_1y_2)^2]\right\}\times `$
$`𝒲({\displaystyle \frac{x_1+x_2}{2}},{\displaystyle \frac{y_1y_2}{2}},Z)𝚷(𝝈_2,𝝈_1)`$ (12)
where $`K=k_1+k_2`$ and,for simplicity, we consider $`Z=z_1=z_2`$. $`𝚷(𝝈_1,𝝈_2)`$ describes the polarization state of the photon pair. $`𝒲(x,y,Z)`$ is the transverse field amplitude of the pump beam on the plane $`z=Z`$, which has been transferred to the two-photon wave function Monken et al. (1998a). It is obvious that only $`𝚿_{tt}`$ and $`𝚿_{rr}`$ can give rise to coincidence detection in $`D_1`$ and $`D_2`$, while $`𝚿_{tr}`$ and $`𝚿_{rt}`$ correspond to two photons in arm $`1`$ and $`2`$, respectively.

We now show how $`𝒲`$ and $`𝚷`$ affect the two-photon interference behavior. Suppose that the photon pair is prepared in a symmetric polarization state: $`𝚷(𝝈_1,𝝈_2)=𝚷(𝝈_2,𝝈_1)`$. If $`𝒲(x,y,Z)`$ is an even function with respect to the $`y`$-coordinate, that is, all the spatial components of $`𝚿`$ are symmetric wavefunctions, then Eqs. (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) and (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) cancel out and there can be no coincidence detections, as is well known Hong et al. (1987). However, if $`𝒲(x,y,Z)`$ is an odd function with respect to the $`y`$-coordinate, direct examination of (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) through (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) shows that (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) and (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) are zero, while (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) and (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) add constructively, resulting in an increase in coincidence counts. Now suppose that the photon pair is prepared in an antisymmetric polarization state: $`𝚷(𝝈_1,𝝈_2)=𝚷(𝝈_2,𝝈_1)`$. Then for a $`𝒲(x,y,Z)`$ that is an even function of $`y`$, clearly Eqs. (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) and (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) are zero, while (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) and (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) add constructively, giving an increase in the coincidence counts. For $`𝒲(x,y,Z)`$ that is an odd function of $`y`$, (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) and (Multimode Hong-Ou-Mandel interference) cancel, eliminating coincidence detections.

The behavior of the HOM interferometer for any combination of symmetric and antisymmetric spatial and polarization components of $`𝚿`$ can be inferred from the bosonic character of photons, that is $`𝚿`$ must be symmetric.

To our knowledge, all HOM-type experiments performed up until now have used a pump beam that is described by an even function of $`y`$. In order to demonstrate experimentally the possibilities of controlling the HOM interferometer with space and polarization variables, we performed a series of experiments in which coincidence counts were registered, combining symmetric and antisymmetric components of $`𝚿`$.

A a set of beams with well defined cartesian parity are the Hermite-Gaussian (HG) beams, given by Beijersbergen et al. (1993)

$`𝒲_{mn}(x,y,z)=`$ $`C_{mn}H_m(x\sqrt{2}/w)H_n(y\sqrt{2}/w)e^{(x^2+y^2)/w^2}`$
$`\times e^{ik(x^2+y^2)/2R}e^{i(m+n+1)\theta }`$
where $`C_{mn}`$ is a constant. The $`H_n(y)`$ are the Hermite polynomials, which are even or odd functions in the $`y`$-coordinate when the index $`n`$ is even or odd, respectively. $`w`$ is the beam waist, $`R(z)=(z^2+z_R^2)/z`$ and $`\theta (z)=\mathrm{arctan}(z/z_R)`$, where $`z_R`$ is the Rayleigh range.

Pumping the nonlinear crystal with different HG pump beams, we can control the behavior of the down-converted photons at the beam splitter.

The experimental setup is a typical HOM interferometer Hong et al. (1987), shown in Fig. 3. To generate HG modes we placed a $`25\mu `$m diameter wire inside the laser cavity, forcing the laser to operate in one of the HG modes with a nodal line at the position of the wire Beijersbergen et al. (1993). The wire is mounted on a rotational stage. We were able to generate first-order modes in any direction ($`x,y,\pm 45`$, etc.) with laser power $`30`$ mW. Symmetric and antisymmetric polarization states were used. The symmetric state chosen was $`|\mathrm{\Pi }^S=|H_1|H_2`$ and the antisymmetric state was $`|\mathrm{\Pi }^A=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|H_1|V_2|V_1|H_2)`$, where $`H`$ and $`V`$ stand for horizontal and vertical linear polarization, respectively. The state $`|\mathrm{\Pi }^S`$ was obtained from type II SPDC, by collecting one photon from the ordinary ($`H`$-polarized) light cone and the other photon from the extraordinary ($`V`$-polarized) light cone followed by a half-wave plate, which rotates its polarization to $`H`$. Realigning the crystal, the antisymmetric state $`|\mathrm{\Pi }^A`$ was obtained from the crossing of the ordinary and extraordinary light cones, followed by compensators, as described in Ref. Kwiat et al. (1995).

Experimental results are sumarized in Figs. 4, 5 and 6. The error bars represent statistical errors due to photon counting Mandel and Wolf (1995).

Fig. 4 shows the results for the symmetric polarization state $`|\mathrm{\Pi }^S`$ when the crystal is pumped by first-order HG beams $`𝒲_{10}`$ and $`𝒲_{01}`$. $`𝒲_{10}`$, as an even function in $`y`$, results in $`𝚿_{rr}=𝚿_{tt}`$, leading to an interference minimum. $`𝒲_{01}`$, as an odd function in $`y`$, results in $`𝚿_{rt}=𝚿_{tr}=0`$ and $`𝚿_{rr}=𝚿_{tt}`$, leading to an interference maximum. The curves have visibilities of $`0.90\pm 0.01`$ ($`𝒲_{10}`$) and $`0.85\pm 0.01`$ ($`𝒲_{01}`$).

Fig. 5 shows the results for the antisymmetric polarization state $`|\mathrm{\Pi }^A`$ under the same pump beam conditions. Now, the behavior of the interference is the opposite, that is, pumping with $`𝒲_{10}`$ produces an interference maximum, whereas pumping with $`𝒲_{01}`$ produces a minimum. Visibilities of $`0.70\pm 0.01`$ ($`𝒲_{10}`$) and $`0.77\pm 0.01`$ ($`𝒲_{01}`$) were achieved. Differences in the visibilites were due to the alignment of the interferometer as well as the wire in the laser cavity. We can create an equally weighted superposition of the modes $`𝒲_{01}`$ and $`𝒲_{10}`$ by placing the wire in the cavity at a $`45^{}`$ angle Beijersbergen et al. (1993). Such a superposition is neither symmetric nor antisymmetric. As to be expected, the coincidence count rate is constant, as shown in Fig. 6 for the symmetric polarization state.

We have theoretically and experimentally investigated mulitmode HOM interference using photons generated by SPDC. The resulting interference pattern is seen to depend upon both the transverse amplitude profile of the pump laser and the polarization state of the photon pair. We used first-order Hermite-Gaussian beams to demonstrate that by manipulating the pump beam, one can control the two-photon interference. To our knowledge, this is the first time that two-photon HOM interference has been studied using a spatially antisymmetric wave function.

A possible application of these results is Bell-state analysis without the need for detectors sensitive to photon number 111Such an experiment is currently underway in our laboratory.. We expect these interference effects to be important in the construction of quantum-optical logic gates Knill et al. (2001); Ralph et al. (2002); Pittman et al. (2002), as well as the codification of information in the transverse spatial properties of the photon Leach et al. (2002). In addition, there is the possibility of using these results to create non-classical states of light with spatial properties that could be useful for quantum imaging.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors thank the Brazilian funding agencies CNPq and CAPES.


text:
# Analysis of the freeze-out parameters for RHIC, SPS and AGS based on {𝑑𝐸_𝑇/𝑑𝜂}/{𝑑𝑁_{𝑐ℎ}/𝑑𝜂} ratio measurements

## Abstract

The ratio $`\frac{dE_T}{d\eta }/\frac{dN_{ch}}{d\eta }`$ is analyzed in the framework of a single-freeze-out thermal hadron gas model. Decays of hadron resonances are taken into account in evaluations of this ratio. The predictions of the model at the freeze-out parameters, established previously from observed particle yields, agree very well with the ratio measured at RHIC, SPS and AGS.

PACS: 25.75.Dw, 24.10.Pa, 24.10.Jv

In this paper, a statistical model is tested in recovering values of the ratio $`\frac{dE_T}{d\eta }_{mid}/\frac{dN_{ch}}{d\eta }_{mid}`$ measured at RHIC , SPS  and AGS  (mid means the midrapidity region). For RHIC and SPS the ratio equals about $`0.8`$ GeV, but for AGS it is $`0.72`$ GeV. So far, the model has been applied successfully in explanation of particle ratios and distributions observed in heavy-ion collisions . Since the transverse energy measurement is independent and easier (no particle identification is necessary), it gives an unique opportunity to verify the concept of the appearance of a thermal system during such collisions.

The statistical model with single freeze-out is used . The model reproduces very well ratios and $`p_T`$ spectra of particles observed at RHIC . The main assumption of the model is the simultaneous occurrence of chemical and thermal freeze-outs. The new data on $`K^{}(892)^0`$ production revealed by the STAR Collaboration  support strongly this assumption. Since $`\frac{dE_T}{d\eta }_{mid}/\frac{dN_{ch}}{d\eta }_{mid}`$ measurements have been done at midrapidity, the presented analysis is valid in the Central Rapidity Region (CRR) of considered collisions.

Therefore, it is assumed that a noninteracting gas of stable hadrons and resonances at chemical and thermal equilibrium is present at the CRR. For consistency with previous works , where freeze-out parameters were found out from particle ratio measurements for a static fireball, this is also the case considered here. Then the distributions of various species of primordial particles are given by the usual ideal-gas formulae. Only baryon number $`\mu _B`$ and strangeness $`\mu _S`$ chemical potentials are taken into account here. The isospin chemical potential $`\mu _{I_3}`$ has very low value in analyzed cases  and therefore can be neglected. For given $`T`$ and $`\mu _B`$, $`\mu _S`$ is determined from the requirement that the overall strangeness of the gas equals zero. In this way, the temperature $`T`$ and the baryon chemical potential $`\mu _B`$ are the only independent parameters of the model.

Theoretically, the transverse energy is defined as the sum of transverse masses of all $`L`$ interacting and produced particles ,

$$E_T^{th}=\underset{i=1}{\overset{L}{}}\sqrt{m_i^2+(p_T^i)^2},$$
(1)
where $`m_i`$ and $`p_T^i`$ are the mass and transverse momentum, respectively. But experimentally, the measured quantity is

$$E_T=\underset{i=1}{\overset{L}{}}E_i\mathrm{sin}\theta _i,$$
(2)
where $`\theta _i`$ is the polar angel and $`E_i`$ denotes the total energy. Precisely, what is measured in a calorimeter is the kinetic energy for nucleons and the total energy for all other particles .

If one deals with the thermal system, definitions (1) and (2) should be generalized appropriately. The transverse energy density $`ϵ_T^i`$ of the particles of species $`i`$ can be defined at the temperature $`T`$ and the baryon chemical potential $`\mu _B`$ as ($`\mathrm{}=c=1`$ always)

$$ϵ_T^i=(2s_i+1)d^3\stackrel{}{p}e_T^i(\stackrel{}{p})f_i(p;T,\mu _B),$$
(3)
where $`e_T^i(\stackrel{}{p})`$ is the suitable expression for the transverse energy of the particle and $`m_i`$, $`s_i`$ and $`f_i(p;T,\mu _B)`$ are its mass, spin and momentum distribution (which is isotropic here), respectively. Since the theoretical estimates should correspond to what is actually measured, $`e_T^i`$ takes the form

$$e_T^i(\stackrel{}{p})=E_i\mathrm{sin}\theta =E_i\frac{p_T}{p}$$
(4)
in the analyzed model.

The thermal system ceases at the freeze-out and there are only free escaping particles instead of the fireball. The measured $`\frac{dE_T}{d\eta }_{mid}`$ is fed from two sources: (a) stable hadrons which survived until catching in a detector, (b) secondaries produced by decays and sequential decays of primordial resonances after the freeze-out. Therefore, if the contribution to the transverse energy from particles (a) is described, the distribution $`f_i`$ in (3) is either a Bose-Einstein or a Fermi-Dirac distribution at the freeze-out. But if the contribution from particles (b) is considered, the distribution $`f_i`$ is the spectrum of the finally detected secondaries and can be obtained from the elementary kinematics of a many-body decay or from the superposition of two or more such decays (for details, see ; also  can be very useful). In fact, if one considers detected species $`i`$, then $`f_i`$ is the sum of final $`i`$’s spectra resulting from a single decay or a cascade. The sum is taken over all such decays and cascades of resonances in which at least one of the final secondaries is of the $`i`$ kind.

Since $`\frac{dN_{ch}}{d\eta }_{mid}`$ has also its origin in the above-mentioned sources (a) and (b), to define properly the density of charged particles, decays should be also taken into account. Thus the density of the measured charged particles of species $`j`$ reads

$$n^j=n_{primordial}^j+\underset{i}{}\alpha (j,i)n_{primordial}^i,$$
(5)
where $`n_{primordial}^i`$ is the density of the $`i`$th particle species at the freeze-out and $`\alpha (j,i)`$ is the final number of particles of species $`j`$ which can be received from all possible simple or sequential decays of particle $`i`$. The density $`n_{primordial}^i`$ is given by the usual integral of either a Bose-Einstein or a Fermi-Dirac distribution. Now, in the midrapidity region, the theoretical equivalent of $`\frac{dE_T}{d\eta }_{mid}/\frac{dN_{ch}}{d\eta }_{mid}`$ can be postulated as

$$\frac{\frac{dE_T}{d\eta }_{mid}}{\frac{dN_{ch}}{d\eta }_{mid}}\frac{ϵ_T}{n_{ch}},$$
(6)
where the transverse energy density $`ϵ_T`$ and the density of charged particles $`n_{ch}`$ are given by the expressions

$$ϵ_T=\underset{iA}{}ϵ_T^i,$$
(7)
$$n_{ch}=\underset{jB}{}n^j.$$
(8)
Note that there are two different sets of final particles, $`A`$ and $`B`$ ($`BA`$). $`B`$ denotes final charged particles and these are $`\pi ^+,\pi ^{},K^+,K^{},p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$, whereas $`A`$ also includes photons, $`K_L^0,n`$ and $`\overline{n}`$ .

To proceed further, some simplifications are necessary. This is because the complete treatment of resonance decays in $`ϵ_T`$ is complex and therefore it consumes a lot of computer working time in numerical calculations. So the initial set of resonances should be as small as possible. The lifetime of at least $`10`$ fm is chosen as the necessary condition, with the exception of $`K^{}(892)`$ mesons, since one of them is measured at RHIC . This reduces constituents of the hadron gas to $`40`$ species, but note that all particles listed in  are included. Of course, this condition is arbitrary but it makes sense because most neglected resonances have the lifetime of the order of a few fm, so one may assume they decay already at the pre-equilibrium stage. Anyway, on the basis of the analysis with decays not included in $`ϵ_T`$, it has been found that the ratio (6) changes slowly with the number of species of the hadron gas in the considered region of $`T`$ and $`\mu _B`$.

In the following, a point-like gas is assumed. It has been checked that for the excluded volume hadron gas model  the results are exactly the same. There are two reasons for that: the first, the volume corrections placed in denominators of expressions for various densities cancel with each other in a ratio; the second, the eigenvolume of a hadron and the pressure in the considered region of $`T`$ and $`\mu _B`$ are so small that their product correction to the chemical potential is negligible.

As it has been already mentioned, the main difficulty in complete treatment of decays in numerical evaluations of $`ϵ_T`$ is their complexity. Therefore some further simplifications should be done. First of all, some decays and cascades are neglected: (i) four-body decays, (ii) superpositions of two three-body decays, (iii) superpositions of two three-body and one two-body decays, (iv) superpositions of four two-body decays, (v) some decays of heavy resonances with very small branching ratios. Their maximal contribution to $`ϵ_T`$ has been evaluated as $`2\%`$. Thus, the real $`ϵ_T`$ can be at most $`2\%`$ higher than its evaluation. It should be stressed that the above-mentioned simplifications are done only in calculations of $`ϵ_T`$, whereas $`n_{ch}`$ given by (5) and (8) includes all possible decays and cascades. This means that the presented values of the ratio (6) (and (15)) can be also at most $`2\%`$ higher.

In application to heavy-ion collisions, it is assumed that the rest frame of the hadron gas is the c.m.s of two colliding ions. But RHIC is the opposite beam experiment, whereas SPS and AGS are the fixed target ones. So, the laboratory frame is the c.m.s only in the RHIC case. Since the measurement is done in the laboratory frame, to treat SPS and AGS cases properly, it is assumed that there is the overall uniform flow (of the gas) with constant velocity $`v`$ equal to the velocity $`v_{c.m.s}`$ of the c.m.s relative to the target. The $`v_{c.m.s}`$ is calculated for $`158A`$ GeV Pb-Pb collisions at SPS (this results in $`v_{c.m.s}=0.994`$) and for $`11A`$ GeV Au-Au collisions at AGS ($`v_{c.m.s}=0.918`$).

Now one applies the general description founded in  and developed in  for the case with decays taken into account. The invariant distribution of the measured particles of species $`j`$ has the form

$$E_j\frac{dN_j}{d^3\stackrel{}{p}}=p^\mu 𝑑\sigma _\mu f_j(pu),$$
(9)
where $`d\sigma _\mu `$ is the normal vector on a freeze-out hypersurface, $`pu=p^\mu u_\mu `$ , $`u`$ is the appropriate four-velocity and $`f_j`$ is the final momentum distribution of the particle in question. The final means here that $`f_j`$ is the sum of primordial and decay contributions to the particle distribution. For the static (homogeneous) fireball, the freeze-out hypersurface is simply a volume $`V^{}`$ at a freeze-out time $`t_{f.o.}^{}`$ (stars denote quantities in the comoving frame, which is the local rest frame of the gas and also the c.m.s here). The spatial coordinates $`x^1,x^2,x^3`$ are the parameters of the hypersurface in this case. Thus the normal vector reads $`d\sigma _\mu ^{}=(d^3\stackrel{}{x}^{},0,0,0)`$. In the laboratory frame $`d\sigma _\mu =(\gamma d^3\stackrel{}{x}^{},0,0,\gamma vd^3\stackrel{}{x}^{})`$, $`\gamma =(1v^2)^{1/2}`$, and since $`u_\mu =\gamma (1,0,0,v)`$ in the considered case, the normal vector is proportional to the four-velocity, $`d\sigma _\mu =u_\mu d^3\stackrel{}{x}^{}`$. This is the necessary condition for the invariant distribution expression of particles $`j`$ to have the form (9), where $`f_j`$ is calculated in the local rest frame of the gas (for more details, see ). Note also that since $`u^\mu u_\mu =1`$, the normal vector is time-like, so the hypersurface consists only of a space-like part. Thus the conceptual problems with time-like parts of a hypersurface are avoided (for discussion of the subject, see e.g.  and references therein). Now the invariant distribution of the particles of species $`j`$ reads

$$E_j\frac{dN_j}{d^3\stackrel{}{p}}=_V^{}d^3\stackrel{}{x}^{}(pu)f_j(pu)=V^{}(pu)f_j(pu),$$
(10)
where $`pu=\gamma (E_jp_zv)=E_j^{}`$ is the energy in the comoving frame. From (10) the multiplicity of the $`j`$-th particles can be obtained as

$$N_j=V^{}\frac{d^3\stackrel{}{p}}{E_j}(pu)f_j(pu)=V^{}d^3\stackrel{}{p}^{}f_j(E_j^{})=V^{}n^j,$$
(11)
where the last equality holds because distributions of particles depend here only on the magnitude of the three-momentum, so $`f_j(E_j^{})=f_j(p^{})`$. Similarly, the final transverse energy carried by the particles of species $`j`$ is calculated as

$$E_T^j=V^{}\frac{d^3\stackrel{}{p}}{E_j}E_j\frac{p_T}{p}(pu)f_j(pu)=V^{}d^3\stackrel{}{p}^{}E_j\frac{p_T}{p}f_j(p^{}),$$
(12)
where $`E_j=\gamma (E_j^{}+p_z^{}v)`$, $`p_T=p_T^{}`$ and $`p=\sqrt{E_j^2m_j^2}`$. And finally, the transverse energy, the multiplicity of charged particles and the ratio (6) are given by the expressions

$$E_T=\underset{jA}{}E_T^j,$$
(13)
$$N_{ch}=\underset{jB}{}N_j,$$
(14)
$$\frac{\frac{dE_T}{d\eta }_{mid}}{\frac{dN_{ch}}{d\eta }_{mid}}\frac{E_T}{N_{ch}},$$
(15)
respectively. Note that the dependence on the volume $`V^{}`$ has disappeared in the ratio (15) and for $`v=0`$ the formula (6) has been recovered.

|  | $`E_T/N_{ch}`$ \[GeV\] | |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | ($`v_{c.m.s}`$ appropriate) | | $`\frac{dE_T}{d\eta }/\frac{dN_{ch}}{d\eta }`$ |
|  |  | $`EEm_n`$ |  |
|  |  | for nucleons | \[GeV\] |
| $`T=175`$ MeV |  |  |  |
| $`\mu _B=51`$ MeV | 0.88 | 0.80 | $`0.8_{0.06}^{+0.08}`$  |
| RHIC  |  |  |  |
| $`T=165`$ MeV |  |  |  |
| $`\mu _B=41`$ MeV | 0.84 | 0.77 | $`0.8_{0.06}^{+0.08}`$  |
| RHIC  |  |  |  |
| $`T=168`$ MeV |  |  |  |
| $`\mu _B=266`$ MeV | 0.76 | 0.75 | $`0.8\pm 0.2`$  |
| SPS  |  |  |  |
| $`T=164`$ MeV |  |  |  |
| $`\mu _B=234`$ MeV | 0.74 | 0.73 | $`0.8\pm 0.2`$  |
| SPS  |  |  |  |
| $`T=130`$ MeV |  |  |  |
| $`\mu _B=540`$ MeV | 0.81 | 0.66 | $`0.72\pm 0.08`$  |
| AGS  |  |  |  |
| $`T=110`$ MeV |  |  |  |
| $`\mu _B=540`$ MeV | 0.70 | 0.57 | $`0.72\pm 0.08`$  |
| AGS  |  |  |  |

The final results of calculations following from the formula (15) are presented in TABLE I. In the first column estimates of freeze-out parameters obtained from the analysis of particle ratios  are listed. In the second column corresponding values of $`\frac{E_T}{N_{ch}}`$ calculated with the use of (4) are placed. In the third column of TABLE I, the most realistic results are presented, namely the fact that for nucleons only the kinetic energy is measured  is taken into account. The appropriate $`v_{c.m.s}`$ is put for each collider. For clearness, these results have been also depicted together with the data in Fig. 1.

Generally, very good agreement of the obtained predictions with the data has been reached. One can notice that the accuracy of theoretical evaluations rises with the collision energy. For AGS, the ratio $`E_T/N_{ch}`$ is within error bars of the experimental point only for the higher temperature freeze-out, whereas for RHIC both estimates fit very well. This could mean that AGS energy is the low limit of applicability of a statistical model. Alternatively, one could call the application of the same gas for both RHIC and AGS in question. This is because of a different baryon content of each case. The AGS gas should be much more rich with baryons than the RHIC one. If one considers contributions to primordial $`E_T`$ (i.e. decays are not included in calculation of $`E_T`$) from constituents of the gas assumed here, nucleons weight most for AGS, but pions are the biggest fraction in the RHIC case. So, probably additional baryon resonances should be included in a gas in the AGS case. In fact, some preliminary estimates of primordial $`E_T`$ indicate that by adding more species into the gas one could increase the $`E_T/N_{ch}`$ ratio at the AGS freeze-out. Also if one takes the expansion of the gas into account one might improve the results for the AGS case. Roughly speaking, the expansion produces additional energy, so it could increase $`E_T`$. These problems need much more detailed analysis and will be under further investigation.

To conclude, a statistical model has been used to reproduce the ratio $`\frac{dE_T}{d\eta }/\frac{dN_{ch}}{d\eta }`$ measured at RHIC, SPS and AGS. The importance of presented analysis lies in the fact that the ratio is an independent observable, so it can be used as a new tool to verify the consistence of predictions of a statistical model for all colliders simultaneously. The point-like non-interacting hadron gas with $`40`$ species has been used in final calculations. Decays and sequential decays of constituents of the gas have been taken into account. In spite of the simplicity of the model, theoretical predictions for $`E_T/N_{ch}`$ agree very well with the data for the wide range of collision energies starting from AGS up to RHIC. The predictions have been made at the previous estimates of freeze-out parameters obtained from the analysis of measured particle ratios for RHIC , SPS  and AGS . This means that the applicability of a statistical model to heavy-ion collisions has been confirmed strongly in an independent way.

The author acknowledges very stimulating discussions with Peter Braun-Munzinger and Ludwik Turko. This work was supported in part by the Polish Committee for Scientific Research under Contract No. KBN - 2 P03B 030 18.


text:
# Positron Fraction in the CMSSM11footnote 1 Preprint:IEKP-KA/2002-16

## 1 Introduction

The cosmic ray positron fraction at momenta above 7 GeV is difficult to describe by the background only hypothesis. A contribution from the annihilation of neutralinos, which are the leading candidates to explain the cold dark matter in the universe, can improve the fits considerably. The neutralinos are the Lightest Supersymmetric Particles (LSP) in supersymmetric extensions of the Standard Model, which are stable, if R-parity is conserved. This new multiplicative quantum number for the supersymmetric partners of the Standard Model (SM) particles is needed to prevent proton decay and simultaneously prevents the LSP a) to decay into the lighter SM particles and b) can only interact with normal matter by producing additional supersymmetric particles. The cross sections for the latter are typically of the order of the weak cross sections, so the LSP is “neutrinolike”, i.e. it would form halos around the galaxies and consequently, it is an excellent candidate for dark matter.

In addition to being of interest for cosmology, supersymmetry solves also many outstanding problems in particle physics, among them: 1) it provides a unification of the strong and electroweak forces, thus being a prototype theory for a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) 2) it predicts spontaneous electroweak symmetry breaking (EWSB) by radiative corrections through the heavy top quark, thus providing a relation between the GUT scale, the electroweak scale and the top mass, which is perfectly fullfilled 3) it includes gravity 4) it cancels the quadratic divergencies in the Higgs mass in the SM 5) the lightest Higgs mass can be calculated to be below 125 GeV in perfect agreement with electroweak precision data, which prefer indeed a light Higgs mass. Therefore it is interesting to study the positron fraction from neutralino annihilation in the reduced region of SUSY parameter space, where these constraints are satisfied and compare it with data, as will be done in the next section. It should be noted that the positrons from the annihilation of heavy particles leads to a much harder energy spectrum than the positrons expected from nuclear interactions, thus leading to a significant change in the shape of the spectrum. In addition, in the positron fraction, defined as $`e^+/(e^{}+e^+)`$, many systematic uncertainties related to fluctuations in the nuclear densities and propagation in the universe, cancel.

## 2 Neutralino Annihilation in the CMSSM

In the Constrained Minimal Supersymmetric Model (CMSSM) with supergravity mediated breaking terms all sparticle masses are related by the usual GUT scale boundary conditions of a common mass $`m_0`$ for the squarks and sleptons and a common mass $`m_{1/2}`$ for the gauginos. The parameter space, where all low energy constraints are satisfied, is most easily determined by a global statistical analysis, in which the GUT scale parameters are constrained to the low energy data by a $`\chi ^2`$ minimization. For details we refer to previous publications. The l.h.s. of Fig. 1 shows a typical running from the common masses at the GUT scale to low energies. The squarks and gluinos get a higher mass than the sleptons due to the gluonic contributions from the strong interactions. If $`m_{1/2}`$ is not strongly above $`m_0`$, the lightest mass is the supersymmetric partner of U(1) gauge boson, the bino, which mixes with the $`W^3`$ boson and spin 1/2 higgsinos to neutralinos. The low energy value of the LSP is roughly 0.4 times its starting value at the GUT scale, i.e. 0.4$`m_{1/2}`$. The gaugino fraction of the LSP is defined as $`(N_{i,1}^2+N_{i,2}^2)`$, where the coefficients determine the neutralino mixing $`\stackrel{~}{\chi }_i^0=N_{i,1}\stackrel{~}{B}+N_{i,2}\stackrel{~}{W}^3+N_{i,3}\stackrel{~}{H}_1^0+N_{i,4}\stackrel{~}{H}_2^0`$. As shown on the r.h.s of Fig. 1 the gaugino fraction is close to one for LSP masses above 100 GeV, i.e. $`m_{1/2}>250`$ GeV. The gaugino fraction is important, since the neutralino properties are quite different for a pure gaugino or pure Higgsino.

Neutralino annihilation can occur through Z- and Higgs exchanges in the s-channel and sfermion exchange in the t-channel. This annihilation in the halo of the galaxies will produce antimatter at high momenta, thus anomalies in the spectra of positrons and antiprotons provide an excellent signal for dark matter annihilation. The neutralino is a spin 1/2 Majorano particle, so it obeys the Pauli principle, which implies an asymmetric wave function or spins antiparallel for annihilation at rest. Final states couple most strongly with total spin 1, so light particles are “helicity-suppressed”. The cross section for $`b\overline{b}`$ grows quickly with $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$and dominates for large $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$, as shown in Fig. 2.

Fig. 3 shows the fit to the data for different regions of parameter space with different main annihilation channels. The fits were done with DarkSusy and follow the same principle as the ones from Ref. , i.e. the background is left free within a normalization error of about 20% and the signal can be enhanced by a boost factor, which takes into account the uncertainty of the relic density in our galaxy due to possible clumpiness of the dark matter.

It should be noted, that the fits with $`W^+W^{}`$ and $`t\overline{t}`$ final states are excluded by the present electroweak data, which requires $`\mathrm{tan}\beta `$above 5, in which case the $`b\overline{b}`$ final state dominates. Unfortunately the data are not precise enough to prefer a certain value of the LSP mass. However, the present balloon experiments correspond to only a few days of data taking. With future experiments, like PAMELA on a russian satellite or AMS-02 on the ISS (International Space Station), one will take data for several years, thus being able to decide if the shape of the positron fraction originates from two components: a hard component from neutralino annihilation and a softer component from nuclear interactions. Taking the $`\chi ^2`$ difference between the fit with a single component and two components as indication of neutralino annihilation, one can predict what the data after one year of data taking with AMS-02 with an acceptance of more than $`0.04m^2sr`$ will look like. This is indicated by the points in Fig. 4. Here we assumed a boost factor of 90 as given by the fit to the present data. Clearly, the positron spectra can provide strong evidence for neutralino annihilation and the data will be accurate enough to precisely determine the neutralino mass, as shown by the r.h.s. of Fig. 4. We like to thank Drs. L. Bergström, J. Edsjö and P. Ullio for helpful discussions.