text:
# Two-dimensional tunnel correlations with dissipation

## I  Introduction

Quantum tunneling dynamics of a particle interacting with a heat bath is one of the important problems of modern condensed matter physics. 1 ; 3 ; 4 ; 5 ; 6 ; 7 ; 8 ; 9 ; 10 ; 11 ; 12 ; 13 ; 14 ; 15 ; 16 ; 17 ; 18 ; 19 ; 20 ; 21 ; 22 ; 23 ; 24 ; 25 ; 26 ; 27 ; 28 ; 29 ; Ankerhold ; dos  The interest to this problem is related to studies in low-temperature superconductive tunnel junctions, 10 ; 11 ; 14  a dissipative quantum tunneling in crystals, 18  and low-temperature chemical reactions. 1 ; 3 ; 4 ; 5 ; 23 ; 24 ; dos ; 6  In low dimensional systems an effective mass approximation often fails. Thus, quantum tunneling with dissipation becomes an important tool in the description of electron transfer. 8 ; 18  In many physical processes tunneling of two particles occurs. For example, Semenov and Dakhnovskii 24 ; dos  found the bistability of the tunneling trajectories in a two-proton transfer. Later, Benderskii and co-workers extended their investigations to different two-dimensional potentials. 6  Some features of the two-dimensional tunneling dynamics were studied in interacting Josephson junctions. 11

Another example of two-particle tunneling is a two-proton transfer in porphyrin systems. 23 ; dos ; 24  Porphyrins are important molecules in Biology fr  and a new area of Electronics – molecular wires and devices. tag  There are experimental data 3 ; 4 ; 5 ; Mamaev  that clearly indicate that a tunneling instability occurs at some critical temperature. Such a behavior in the rate constant demonstrates the existence of bifurcations in two-dimensional underbarrier trajectories. Apparently, this effect requires a thorough investigation when the protons interact with a thermal bath.

In this paper, we continue to study bifurcation effects in two dimensional tunneling. In particular, we consider two-proton correlations of different types within the framework of dissipative quantum tunneling (instanton) approach. Moreover, we discuss a fine structure of bifurcations for systems with various potential energy surfaces. 23 ; 24 ; dos ; 6 ; Mamaev ; Geldart  In Section II, we introduce two-dimensional model potential energy surfaces for a pair of interacting particles. In Section III, we study the effect of temperature on the tunneling rate. In Sections IV and V, we calculate the rate for the parallel and antiparallel tunneling and provide the analysis of the origin of bifurcation. The effect of a promoting mode (an environment) is studied in Section VI.

## II Two-dimensional potential energy surfaces

Consider two charges that tunnel in two independent double-well potentials $`U(q_1)`$ and $`U(q_2)`$ presented as follows: 12 ; 23 ; 24 ; dos

$`\stackrel{~}{U}(q_i)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\omega ^2(q_i+a)^2\theta (q_i)`$
$`+\left[\mathrm{\Delta }I+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\omega ^2(q_ib)^2\right]\theta (q_i),i=1,2,`$ (1)
where the sum $`a+b`$ determines the length of a ”link” in the corresponding macrocluster fragment; $`\mathrm{\Delta }I=\omega ^2(b^2a^2)/2`$ is a bias (an asymmetry parameter of the potential); $`\theta (q_i)`$ is a step function, and $`\omega `$ is the frequency (see discussion in Ref. 23, ). The mass is absorbed into the definition of $`q`$.

The interaction between two charges, e.g., protons, is considered in a dipole-dipole approximation 24

$$V_{\mathrm{int}}(q_1,q_2)=\frac{\alpha }{2}(q_1q_2)^2,$$
(2)
where $`\alpha `$ is a positive constant. We use the same interaction potential as in Ref. 11, .

Thus, the total two-dimensional potential energy surface for parallel tunneling normalized by $`\omega ^2`$, is given by

$`U_\mathrm{p}(q_1,q_2)={\displaystyle \frac{2\stackrel{~}{U}_\mathrm{p}(q_1,q_2)}{\omega ^2}}=(q_1+a)^2\theta (q_1)`$
$`+\left[(b^2a^2)+(q_1b)^2\right]\theta (q_1)+(q_2+a)^2\theta (q_2)`$
$`+\left[(b^2a^2)+(q_2b)^2\right]\theta (q_2){\displaystyle \frac{\alpha ^{}}{2}}(q_1q_2)^2.`$ (3)
Here, $`\alpha ^{}=2\alpha /\omega ^2`$ is the dimensionless parameter, $`\alpha ^{}<1`$, $`\alpha e^2/(\epsilon R_0^3)`$, $`e`$ is the electron charge, $`R_0`$ is the separation distance between the reaction coordinates $`q_1`$ and $`q_2`$ of the tunneling particles; $`\epsilon `$ is the dielectric constant. The form of potential energy surface (3) is shown in Fig. 1.

For antiparallel transfer, the two-dimensional potential energy with the interaction term can be defined as

$`U_\mathrm{a}(q_1,q_2)={\displaystyle \frac{2\stackrel{~}{U}_\mathrm{a}(q_1,q_2)}{\omega ^2}}=(q_1+a)^2\theta (q_1)`$
$`+\left[(b^2a^2)+(q_1b)^2\right]\theta (q_1)+(q_2a)^2\theta (q_2)`$
$`+\left[(b^2a^2)+(q_2+b)^2\right]\theta (q_2){\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}{2}}(q_1q_2)^2,`$ (4)
where $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}=2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }/\omega ^2`$ is a dimensionless parameter, $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}<1`$. The potential (4) is depicted in Fig. 2. The main difference between the potential energy surfaces (3) and (4) is in the initial location of the second particle, $`\pm a`$.

The potential energy (3) can be referred to as ”parallel” while the potential energy (4) as ”antiparallel”. We also define a ”symmetric” potential energy as a particular case of the potential (4) under the condition $`a=b`$, i.e.,

$`U_\mathrm{s}(q_1,q_2)={\displaystyle \frac{2\stackrel{~}{U}_\mathrm{s}(q_1,q_2)}{\omega ^2}}=(q_1+a)^2\theta (q_1)`$
$`+(q_1a)^2\theta (q_1)+(q_2a)^2\theta (q_2)+(q_2+a)^2\theta (q_2)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}{2}}(q_1q_2)^2,`$ (5)
where the constant $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}<1`$. The potential energy (5) is presented in Fig. 3.

As shown in Refs. 24, ; dos, ; Mamaev, , such model potential energy surfaces well describe the dynamics in porphyrins.

In many practical cases, the effect of a bath on particles’ tunneling should be also included. In the next section we consider two particles embedded into a harmonic medium and linearly interacting with the bath modes.

## III  Two-particle transition probability

We assume that two particles independently interact with a harmonic bath. Such interaction is considered in a bilinear approximation. The dynamics of the environment is described by the oscillator Hamiltonian (we use $`\mathrm{}=1`$, $`k_B=1`$ units with the oscillators’ masses equal to one),

$$H_{\mathrm{ph}}=\frac{1}{2}\underset{i}{}\left(P_i^2+\omega _i^2Q_i^2\right).$$
(6)
Each of the tunneling particles (electrons or effective charges) interacts with the oscillator bath in the following way:

$$V_{\text{p-ph}}^{(1)}(q_1,Q_i)=q_1\underset{i}{}C_iQ_i,V_{\text{p-ph}}^{(2)}(q_2,Q_i)=q_2\underset{i}{}C_iQ_i,$$
(7)
As in Ref. 24, , we are interested in the transition probability per unit time or, more precisely, only in its exponential part which can be written in the Langer’s form,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=2T\frac{\mathrm{Im}Z}{\mathrm{Re}Z}.$$
(8)
In such a consideration, metastable levels can be presented as

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=2\mathrm{Im}E,E=E_0i\mathrm{\Gamma }/2.$$
(9)
It should be emphasized that Eq. (8) is valid only for temperatures below the crossover temperature while for higher temperatures a different prefactor is required. Ankerhold

Equation (8) is obtained by generalizing the expression (9) to nonzero temperatures 7 ; 8 ; 9 ; 10 ; 11 ; 12 ; 13 ; 14 ; 15 ; 16 ; 17 ; 18 ; 19 ; 20 ; 21 ; 22

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }=\frac{2e^{E_{0i}/T}\mathrm{Im}E_i}{e^{E_{0i}/T}}=\frac{2T\mathrm{Im}e^{E_i/T}}{\mathrm{Re}e^{E_i/T}}=\frac{2T\mathrm{Im}Z}{\mathrm{Re}Z}.$$
(10)
Here, $`i`$ labels the energy levels in the metastable state, $`Z`$ is the partition function of the system, and $`T`$ is the temperature.

To calculate $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, it is convenient to present $`Z`$ in the form of a path integral 7 ; 8 ; 9 ; 10 ; 11 ; 12 ; 13 ; 14 ; 15 ; 16 ; 17 ; 18 ; 19 ; 20 ; 21 ; 22

$$Z=\underset{i}{}Dq_1Dq_2DQ_i\mathrm{exp}[S\{q_1,q_2,Q_i\}].$$
(11)
Here, $`S`$ denotes an underbarrier action for the total system. The imaginary part $`\mathrm{Im}Z`$ is due to the decay of the energy states in the initial well. The validity of this approximation requires dissipation to be strong enough so that only an incoherent decay occurs. Ankerhold  The imaginary part in the partition function with a double well potential energy can be also explained due to the strong dissipation to the bath. Indeed, the particles do not come back to their initial state. Coherent oscillations can happen only if the interaction with bosons is weak enough 13  or the bath is in nonequilibrium state. d1 ; deb

The integral (11) can be performed over phonon coordinates 24  resulting in

$`S\{q_1,q_2\}={\displaystyle \underset{\beta /2}{\overset{\beta /2}{}}}d\tau [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{q}_1^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\dot{q}_2^2+V(q_1,q_2)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{\beta /2}{\overset{\beta /2}{}}}d\tau ^{}D(\tau \tau ^{})[q_1(\tau )+q_2(\tau )][q_1(\tau ^{})+q_2(\tau ^{})])],`$ (12)
where

$$D(\tau )=\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}D(\nu _n)e^{i\nu _n\tau },$$
(13)
$`\beta =\mathrm{}/(k_BT)`$ is an inverse temperature (below we assume that $`\mathrm{}=1`$ and $`k_B=1`$), $`\nu _n=2\pi n/\beta `$ is the Matsubara’s frequency, and

$$D(\nu _n)=\underset{i}{}\frac{C_i^2}{\omega _i^2+\nu _n^2}.$$
(14)
A trajectory that minimizes the Euclidean action $`S`$ can be found from the equations of motion. In particular, we embark on the antiparallel tunneling

$`\ddot{q}_1+\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2q_1+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1q_2+{\displaystyle \underset{\beta /2}{\overset{\beta /2}{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}K(\tau \tau ^{})[q_1(\tau ^{})+q_2(\tau ^{})]`$
$`+\omega ^2a\theta (q_1)\omega ^2b\theta (q_1)=0,`$ (15)
$`\ddot{q}_2+\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2q_2+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1q_2+{\displaystyle \underset{\beta /2}{\overset{\beta /2}{}}}𝑑\tau ^{}K(\tau \tau ^{})[q_1(\tau ^{})+q_2(\tau ^{})]`$
$`\omega ^2a\theta (q_2)+\omega ^2b\theta (q_2)=0.`$ (16)
In Eqs. (15) and (16) the kernel $`K`$ is defined by

$$K(\tau )=\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\xi _ne^{i\nu _n\tau }.$$
(17)
Here, $`\xi _n`$ is the Green’s function defined by Eq. (14) without the zero-frequency term,

$$D(\nu _n)=\underset{i}{}\frac{C_i^2}{\omega _i^2}+\xi _n.$$
(18)
Thus, we seek for solutions of Eqs. (15) and (16) by expanding the trajectories $`q_1(t)`$ and $`q_2(t)`$ into Fourier series,

$$q_1=\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}q_n^{(1)}e^{i\nu _n\tau },q_2=\frac{1}{\beta }\underset{n=\mathrm{}}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}q_n^{(2)}e^{i\nu _n\tau }.$$
(19)
Introducing the renormalized frequency and interaction constant,

$$\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2=\omega ^2\underset{i}{}\frac{C_i^2}{\omega _i^2}\stackrel{~}{\alpha },\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1=\stackrel{~}{\alpha }\underset{i}{}\frac{C_i^2}{\omega _i^2},$$
(20)
respectively, and substituting Eqs. (19) into Eqs. (15) and (16), we obtain that for $`n=0`$,

$`q_0^{(1)}+q_0^{(2)}={\displaystyle \frac{2\omega ^2(a+b)\epsilon }{\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1}},`$
$`q_0^{(1)}q_0^{(2)}={\displaystyle \frac{2\omega ^2a\beta }{\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1}}+{\displaystyle \frac{4\omega ^2(a+b)\tau _0}{\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1}},`$ (21)
and for $`n0`$,

$`q_n^{(1)}+q_n^{(2)}={\displaystyle \frac{2\omega ^2(a+b)(\mathrm{sin}\nu _n\tau _1\mathrm{sin}\nu _n\tau _2)}{\nu _n(\nu _n^2+\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1+2\xi _n)}},`$
$`q_n^{(1)}q_n^{(2)}={\displaystyle \frac{2\omega ^2(a+b)(\mathrm{sin}\nu _n\tau _1+\mathrm{sin}\nu _n\tau _2)}{\nu _n(\nu _n^2+\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1)}}.`$ (22)
Here, we have introduced the following notation:

$$\epsilon =\tau _1\tau _2,\tau _0=(\tau _1+\tau _2)/2.$$
(23)
The time instants $`\tau _1`$ and $`\tau _2`$, at which the particles pass the top points of the barrier, are determined from the following equations:

$$q_1(\tau _1)=0,q_2(\tau _2)=0.$$
(24)
Equations (24) allow us to change the argument of the $`\theta `$-function. Namely, instead of the $`q_1`$\- and $`q_2`$-dependencies, we can use a time-dependent $`\theta `$-function. This reduces Eqs. (15) and (16) to a linear form.

Finally, substituting the trajectory determined from Eqs. (19), (21) and (22) into Eq. (12), we arrive at the following expression for the instanton action:

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{4\omega ^4a(a+b)\tau _0}{\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1}}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^4(a+b)^2\epsilon ^2}{\beta (\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1)}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\omega ^4(a+b)^2\tau _0^2}{\beta (\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1)}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{8\omega ^4(a+b)^2}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}[{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2\nu _n\tau _0\mathrm{cos}^2(\nu _n\epsilon /2)}{(\nu _n^2+\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1)\nu _n^2}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}^2\nu _n\tau _0\mathrm{sin}^2(\nu _n\epsilon /2)}{(\nu _n^2+\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2+\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_1+2\xi _n)\nu _n^2}}].`$ (25)
## IV  Parallel particle tunneling

For the case of parallel particle tunneling, the Euclidean action $`S`$ can be determined similarly to antiparallel tunneling \[see Eqs. (15) and (16)\]. The trajectory minimizing the Euclidean action (instanton), can be determined from the equations of motion. As in the previous section, we seek for solutions of these equations in the form of the Fourier expansion (19). The time instants $`\tau _1`$ and $`\tau _2`$ are determined by Eqs. (24).

In the case of parallel tunneling particles \[the potential energy (3)\], the resulting Euclidean action is given as follows:

$`S=2a(a+b)(\tau _1+\tau _2)\omega ^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\beta }}\omega ^2(a+b)^2(\tau _1+\tau _2)^2`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^4(a+b)^2(\tau _1\tau _2)^2}{(\omega ^22\alpha )\beta }}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{2\omega ^4(a+b)^2}{\beta }}{\displaystyle \underset{n=1}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}[{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{sin}\nu _n\tau _1+\mathrm{sin}\nu _n\tau _2)^2}{\nu _n^2(\nu _n^2+\omega ^2+\xi _n)}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{sin}\nu _n\tau _1\mathrm{sin}\nu _n\tau _2)^2}{\nu _n^2(\nu _n^2+\omega ^22\alpha )}}],`$ (26)
where $`\xi _n`$ is defined by Eq. (18).

Below, we use the following notation:

$$\epsilon =\epsilon ^{}\omega =(\tau _1\tau _2)\omega ,$$

$$\tau =2\tau ^{}\omega =(\tau _1+\tau _2)\omega ,$$

$$\beta ^{}=\beta \omega /2,$$

$$\alpha ^{}=2\alpha /\omega ^2,$$

$$b^{}=b/a,$$

and assume that

$$ba.$$

In the absence of interaction with an oscillator bath, i.e., at $`\xi _n=0`$, the action (26) as a function of the parameters $`\epsilon `$ and $`\tau `$ yields

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{(a+b)^2\omega }{2}}\{{\displaystyle \frac{4a\tau }{a+b}}{\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{a+b}}(1+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(\tau |\epsilon |)\alpha ^{}}{1\alpha ^{}}}+\mathrm{coth}\beta ^{}\mathrm{sinh}^1\beta ^{}[\mathrm{cosh}(\beta ^{}\tau )\mathrm{cosh}\epsilon `$
$`+\mathrm{cosh}(\beta ^{}\tau )\mathrm{cosh}(\beta ^{}|\epsilon |)]`$
$`(1\alpha ^{})^{3/2}[\mathrm{coth}(\beta \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})`$
$`+\mathrm{sinh}^1(\beta \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})[\mathrm{cosh}((\beta ^{}\tau )\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})`$
$`\times (\mathrm{cosh}(\epsilon \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})1)+\mathrm{cosh}((\beta ^{}|\epsilon |)\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})]]\}.`$ (27)
As soon as the trajectory is found, Eqs. (24) can be presented in the following form:

$`\mathrm{sinh}\epsilon [\mathrm{cosh}\tau \mathrm{coth}\beta ^{}\mathrm{sinh}\tau \mathrm{coth}\beta ^{}]+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}}\mathrm{sinh}(\epsilon \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})[\mathrm{cosh}(\tau \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})\mathrm{coth}(\beta ^{}\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})`$
$`\mathrm{sinh}(\tau \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})+\mathrm{coth}(\beta ^{}\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})]=0,`$
$`3{\displaystyle \frac{4}{1+b^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}}+\mathrm{cosh}\epsilon [\mathrm{sinh}\tau \mathrm{coth}\beta ^{}\mathrm{cosh}\tau `$
$`1]+\mathrm{sinh}\tau \mathrm{coth}\beta ^{}\mathrm{cosh}\tau `$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}}\mathrm{cosh}(\epsilon \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})[\mathrm{sinh}(\tau \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})`$
$`\times \mathrm{coth}(\beta ^{}\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})\mathrm{cosh}(\tau \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})+1]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}}[\mathrm{sinh}(\tau \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})\mathrm{coth}(\beta ^{}\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})`$
$`\mathrm{cosh}(\tau \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})]=0.`$ (28)
Simple analytic solutions of Eqs. (28) are obtained in the particular case when

$`\epsilon =(\tau _1\tau _2)\omega =0,\beta ,\alpha <\omega ^2/2,`$
$`\tau _1=\tau _2={\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{2\omega }}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\omega }}\mathrm{arcosh}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1b^{}}{1+b^{}}}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \omega }{2}}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{4}}.`$ (29)
However, a complete analysis requires numerical studies.

At sufficiently low temperatures, $`\omega \beta 1`$, for $`1<b/a<3`$, and

$$\frac{ba}{2(b+a)}\frac{2\alpha }{\omega ^2}<\alpha _c^{}\frac{2(ba)}{3ba},$$

we finally obtain, with the exponential accuracy,

$`e^{\tau \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}}}[3{\displaystyle \frac{4}{1+b^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}}](1\alpha ^{})^{1/(1\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})}`$
$`\times \{1+(1\alpha ^{})^{1/(1\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}}+(3{\displaystyle \frac{4}{1+b^{}}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}})/(1\sqrt{1\alpha ^{}})]\}^1,`$
$`e^\epsilon [3{\displaystyle \frac{4}{1+b^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}}]e^{\tau \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\alpha ^{}}}.`$ (30)
The solution (30) is valid at

$$\beta >\beta _c\frac{\tau \sqrt{1\alpha ^{}}}{\omega }.$$
(31)
We point out that an approximate solution can be found for large values of the parameter $`b^{}`$ (and small $`\alpha ^{}`$). However, below we focus on the more important solution (30). The analysis indicates that there are no perturbative solutions of Eqs. (28) at low temperatures and small $`\epsilon `$.

For $`\epsilon =0`$ \[see Eq. (29)\], the action (27) results in

$`S_{\epsilon =0}=\omega (b^2a^2)\mathrm{arcosh}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{b^{}1}{b^{}+1}}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega \beta }{2}}\right]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\omega ^2(b^2a^2)\beta +\omega (b+a)^2[\mathrm{cosh}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega \beta }{2}}`$
$`(1+{\displaystyle \frac{(b^{}1)^2}{(b^{}+1)^2}}\mathrm{sinh}^2{\displaystyle \frac{\omega \beta }{2}})^{1/2}]\mathrm{sinh}^1{\displaystyle \frac{\omega \beta }{2}}.`$ (32)
The action (32) coincides (up to a factor of two) with that of calculated in Ref. 23, . Thus, we have calculated the two-particle Euclidean action for the case of synchronous parallel motion of the two interacting particles.

In the symmetric case ($`b^{}=1`$), the action (32) reduces to

$$S_{\begin{array}{c}\epsilon =0\\ a=b\end{array}}=4\omega ^2\mathrm{tanh}\frac{\omega \beta }{4}.$$
(33)
At $`b^{}>1`$, the character of the temperature dependence is almost the same.

At $`\epsilon 0`$, the corresponding action $`S`$ can be obtained by substituting Eq. (30) into Eq. (27) (for brevity, this cumbersome expression is omitted). A simple analysis shows that $`S_{\epsilon 0}<S_{\epsilon =0}`$. Moreover, it appears that the difference $`\mathrm{\Delta }S=S_{\epsilon 0}S_{\epsilon =0}`$ has a maximum at $`\omega \beta 1`$.

The tunneling paths (19) are presented by the solutions (29) and (30). At the critical point, $`\beta =\beta _c`$, defined by Eq. (31), a relatively abrupt change in the dynamics results in a splitting of the single trajectory ($`\epsilon =0`$) into two ($`\epsilon 0`$), as shown in Fig. 4.

At $`\beta >\beta _c`$, i.e., for temperatures below the critical temperature, $`T<T_c`$, only a split trajectory ($`\epsilon 0`$) occurs since $`S_{\epsilon 0}<S_{\epsilon =0}`$ (see Fig. 5).

When $`\beta <\beta _c`$, i.e., at $`T>T_c`$, and $`\alpha >\alpha _c`$ \[see Eq. (30)\], the solution is determined by a single trajectory. We have also found that the single trajectory solution holds in the whole temperature range for a symmetric potential energy ($`b^{}=1`$).

The above consideration is based on the analytic solutions (29) for $`\tau _{1,2}`$ near the critical point. A complete analysis of Eq. (28) requires more detail.

The numerical study of the set of transcendental equations (28) reveals remarkable features of two-dimensional tunneling. The value of the critical parameter $`\alpha _c`$ decreases with temperature as shown in Figs. 6, 7, and 8. The temperature dependence of $`\alpha _c`$ indicates to the existence of a finite low-temperature limit. It becomes clear that the weaker the interaction between the tunneling particle, the lower temperatures are required for the synchronous tunneling. Since the synchronous tunneling is valid only for $`T<T_c`$ \[see Eq. (31)\] the dependence of $`\beta _c`$ on the interaction parameter reveals that the minimum occurs at $`\alpha ^{}=0.2`$. The nonmonotonic behavior of $`\beta _c`$ as a function of $`\alpha ^{}`$ can be explained by the $`\alpha ^{}`$-dependence of $`\tau `$ as well.

Additionally, the curve in Fig. 8 exhibits an anomalous behavior (an increasing part of the curve) that can be explained in the following way: a two-dimensional potential energy for parallel tunneling is evidently deformed by an increase of the interaction constant. Indeed, the minima of the potential surface become lower and the distance between them is larger. Small deformations in the potential energy surface change the contribution produced by the temperature increase towards a synchronous character of the tunneling. However, for sufficiently large deformations of the potential, the situation is a quite opposite. The significant deformations are in favor of synchronous transfer. Thus, an increase in the interaction constant provides a similar effect when temperature increases. Such a behavior takes place up to the certain value of the interaction constant, beyond which the potential energy surface becomes strongly perturbed. Thus, Figs. 7 and 8 are complimentary to each other. Consequently, Fig. 8 can be viewed as a bifurcation diagram. Indeed, the region below the curve corresponds to the synchronous tunneling, while the region above the curve corresponds to the asynchronous one.

Fig. 6 demonstrates how the critical parameter $`\beta _c`$ changes from synchronous to asynchronous values with temperature. Figs. 6b and 6c reveal the existence of the additional points, referred to as the bifurcation points, corresponding to the change of tunneling regimes. For the two bifurcation points shown in Fig. 6c, only one is physical because it corresponds to the lower value of the action (the second point is metastable). However, for sufficiently small differences between the values of the action at these bifurcation points, both close points contribute, thus leading to corresponding ”fluctuations” in the system during the change of the regimes. For lower temperatures, such fluctuations become negligible because two bifurcation points contributes differently. Thus, a stable character of the asynchronous tunnel transfer is achieved due to a much lower value of the action at one of the bifurcation points.

For chemical reactions mentioned in Introduction, the effect of the change in the tunneling regimes reveals as a cleavage in the experimental temperature dependence of the tunneling constant. Fine details of this instability have not been studied yet. Nevertheless, the very existence of instability at the edge of the bifurcation can be explained as the result of specific fluctuations. A numerical analysis of the bifurcations in antiparallel tunneling is given in the next section.

## V  Two-dimensional antiparallel tunneling

For antiparallel tunneling of two particles \[see the potential energy (4)\], the instanton action as a function of the parameters $`\epsilon `$ and $`\tau `$ is determined by Eq. (25). For $`\xi _n=0`$, we obtain

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{\omega \tau (b^2a^2)}{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega (a+b)^2}{2}}\{|\epsilon |(1{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}})`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sinh}(|\epsilon |\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})}{(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^{3/2}}}\mathrm{sinh}|\epsilon |+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cosh}(\epsilon \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})+1}{(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^{3/2}}}`$
$`\times [\mathrm{sinh}(\beta ^{}\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})]^1[\mathrm{cosh}((\beta ^{}\tau )\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})`$
$`\mathrm{cosh}(\beta ^{}\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cosh}\epsilon 1}{\mathrm{sinh}\beta ^{}}}[\mathrm{cosh}(\beta ^{}\tau )+\mathrm{cosh}\beta ^{}]\}.`$ (34)
The parameters $`\epsilon `$ and $`\tau `$ are found from the following set of equations \[see Eq. (24)\]:

$`\mathrm{sinh}\epsilon [\mathrm{coth}\beta ^{}+\mathrm{cosh}\tau \mathrm{coth}\beta ^{}\mathrm{sinh}\tau ]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}\mathrm{sinh}(\epsilon \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})[\mathrm{coth}(\beta ^{}\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})`$
$`\mathrm{cosh}(\tau \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})\mathrm{coth}(\beta ^{}\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})`$
$`+\mathrm{sinh}(\tau \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})]=0,`$
$`1{\displaystyle \frac{4}{(1+b^{})(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}`$
$`+(\mathrm{cosh}\epsilon 1)(\mathrm{sinh}\tau \mathrm{coth}\beta ^{}\mathrm{cosh}\tau )`$
$`+\mathrm{cosh}\epsilon +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}\{[\mathrm{cosh}(\epsilon \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})+1]`$
$`\times [\mathrm{sinh}(\tau \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})\mathrm{coth}(\beta ^{}\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})`$
$`\mathrm{cosh}(\tau \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})]\mathrm{cosh}(\epsilon \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})\}=0.`$ (35)
Simple analytic solutions of Eqs. (35) can be obtained in the following form:

$`\epsilon =(\tau _1\tau _2)\omega =0,\beta ,\stackrel{~}{\alpha }<\omega ^2/2,`$
$`\tau _1=\tau _2={\displaystyle \frac{\tau }{2\omega }}`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\omega \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}}\mathrm{arcosh}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1b^{}}{1+b^{}}}\mathrm{sinh}({\displaystyle \frac{\beta \omega }{2}}\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{4}}.`$ (36)
Similarly to the case of parallel tunneling, we obtain that at low temperatures, $`\omega \beta 1`$, with the exponential accuracy,

$`e^{\tau \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{A(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^{1/\gamma }}{1(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^{1/\gamma }(A/\gamma (1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^1)}},`$
$`e^\epsilon Ae^{\tau \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}.`$ (37)
Here,

$$A=1\frac{4}{(1+b^{})(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})}+\frac{3}{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}},\gamma =1\sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}},$$

while $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}`$, $`b^{}`$, $`\epsilon `$, and $`\tau `$ are determined as for the parallel transfer.

The solution (37) is valid at $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{c1}^{}<\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}<\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{c2}^{}`$ , where the lower and upper bounds $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{c1}^{}`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{c2}^{}`$ are derived from a cumbersome transcendental equation (for brevity it is not presented here). Particularly, in the symmetric case, $`b^{}=1`$, we obtain the condition in a simple analytic form, $`1/4<2\stackrel{~}{\alpha }/\omega ^2<1`$.

Furthermore, an approximate solution can be found for large values of the parameter $`b^{}=b/a`$ (and small $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}`$). However, we restrict our analysis to the more important physical solution (37).

The $`\beta `$-dependent solution (37) is valid for $`\beta >\stackrel{~}{\beta }_c`$, where

$`\stackrel{~}{\beta }_c{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\omega \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}}\mathrm{ln}{\displaystyle \frac{A(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^{1/\gamma }}{1(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^{1/\gamma }(\frac{A}{\gamma }\frac{1}{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}})}}.`$ (38)
At $`\omega \beta 1`$, the solutions of Eqs. (35) can be found perturbatively (for small $`\epsilon `$) with given values of the parameters $`(ba)/(b+a)`$ and $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}`$. At $`\epsilon =0`$ \[the solution (36)\], the action (34) yields:

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{\omega (b^2a^2)}{(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^{3/2}}}\mathrm{arcosh}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{ba}{b+a}}\mathrm{sinh}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega \beta \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}{2}}\right]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2\beta (b^2a^2)}{2(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega (b+a)^2}{(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^{3/2}}}[\mathrm{coth}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega \beta \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}{2}}`$
$`(\mathrm{sinh}^2{\displaystyle \frac{\omega \beta \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(ba)^2}{(b+a)^2}})^{1/2}].`$ (39)
For the symmetric potential ($`a=b`$) and $`\epsilon =0`$, we obtain that (see Fig. 7)

$$S=\frac{4\omega a^2}{(1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{})^{3/2}}\mathrm{tanh}\frac{\omega \beta \sqrt{1\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}}}{4}.$$
(40)
We do not present here a cumbersome expression for $`S_{\epsilon 0}`$ which one can obtain by substituting the solutions $`\tau `$ and $`\epsilon `$ into Eq. (34). A simple analysis reveals that $`S_{\epsilon 0}>S_{\epsilon =0}`$ for $`\beta >\stackrel{~}{\beta }_c`$ and for relevant $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}`$. Similarly to parallel transfer, the tunnel paths can be found from Eqs. (36) and (37). These trajectories on the $`(q_1,q_2)`$-plane are shown in Fig. 9.

As for parallel tunneling and at $`\beta >\stackrel{~}{\beta }_c`$, the pair-tunneling changes from a single to double trajectory regime. In contrast to the parallel tunneling, such a splitting occurs at any values of the parameters of the potential. At $`\beta >\stackrel{~}{\beta }_c`$, we have $`S_{\epsilon 0}>S_{\epsilon =0}`$ and, therefore, $`S_{\epsilon =0}`$ determines the tunneling rate. At $`\beta <\stackrel{~}{\beta }_c`$, the two degenerated trajectories are transformed into a single trajectory, $`q_1=q_2`$, corresponding to synchronous antiparallel transfer.

For single particle tunneling, there is only a single tunneling path (instanton) minimizing the action. Hence, there are two different types of trajectories for the pair of interacting particles. Namely, the main contribution to the instanton action is determined either by the single or by the double-degenerated paths depending on the value of $`\beta `$. We also point out that in the case of the parallel tunneling, the particles do not simultaneously pass the top points of the barrier, $`\tau _1\tau _2`$. This means that the tunneling transfer is asynchronous.

At small values of the interaction parameter $`\alpha ^{}`$ \[see Eq. (30)\] and at temperatures such that $`\beta <\beta _c`$ \[see Eq. (31)\], there is no splitting of a single path ($`q_1=q_2`$). Therefore, the particles pass the top of the barriers at the same instants ($`\tau _1=\tau _2`$). Consequently, the transfer of the particles is synchronous. The temperature dependence for the antiparallel transfer action is plotted in Fig. 10 at various $`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }^{}`$.

The type of the interaction given by Eqs. (2)-(5) is such that it does not affect the motion along the ”center of mass” coordinate, $`q_1=q_2`$. For this reason, the Euclidean action is independent of the interaction parameter as for parallel transfer. Since the state of the interacting system characterized by a maximal value of the relative coordinate, $`q_1=q_2`$, is preferable (as it provides the lower action), it becomes clear that the instanton action decreases with the interaction parameter in the parallel transfer along the degenerated tunnel trajectories, and increases with the interaction parameter for the antiparallel tunneling.

For antiparallel tunneling, synchronous transfer ($`\tau _1=\tau _2`$) takes place, while asynchronous transfer is forbidden due to the greater contribution to the Euclidean action (see Fig. 10).

The validity condition for weakly interacting instanton-antiinstanton pairs, in the adiabatic approximation, was discussed in Ref. 23, .

The numerical analysis of transcendental equation (35) reveals interesting features for a transition region between the tunneling regimes, i.e., a fine structure near the first bifurcation point for the antiparallel transfer. The numerical results are presented in Fig. 11. We found that, in addition to the first bifurcation point characterized by the two solutions (Fig. 11a), there exist additional bifurcation points at lower temperatures, i.e., the four pairs (Fig. 11b), the six pairs (Fig. 11c), and there are even twelve pairs of additional solutions at $`\beta ^{}=19.2009`$ $`(\alpha ^{}=0.05)`$, etc. We refer to this phenomenon as multiplication of bifurcations or a cascade of bifurcations. Such an effect resembles a scenario of transition to chaos.

Although the synchronous regime is preferred due to the minimal instanton action, in a certain temperature range its value is comparable with those of corresponding to the cascade solutions. As a result, quantum fluctuations of a nonregular character occur in contrast to the parallel transfer. The antiparallel tunneling is, thus, characterized by the instability of the transition due to the synchronous to asynchronous behavior. Such instabilities are similar to continuous second-order phase transition, while the parallel tunneling is viewed as a step process similar to phase transition of a first order (see Fig. 6). The dependencies shown in Figs. 7 and 8, $`\beta _c(\alpha )`$ and $`\alpha _c(\beta )`$, for the antiparallel transfer are found to be of the same character as those of the parallel transfer.

In summary, our investigation reveals a quite complicated fine structure of the transition for parallel and antiparallel tunneling of two particles with different degenerate trajectories leading to the bifurcation cascade.

## VI  Effect of a promoting mode

In this section, we study the effect of a heat bath on tunneling transition of two interacting particles. In many tunneling reactions, interaction with a vibrational subsystem can often be approximated by interaction with a single vibrational mode (a so-called promoting mode). As it follows from Eq. (12), a heat bath affects only the dynamics of the center of mass ($`q_1=q_2`$). Therefore, in the case of an antiparallel motion, the medium does not affect the rate constant, while for parallel tunneling it essentially contributes to the transfer rate. For both parallel and antiparallel transfer, bilinear interaction of the particles with a single oscillator can make a qualitative change in the character of tunneling.

At small values of the interaction parameter between the two tunneling particles dissipative effects become important. 23  In two dimensions the dissipative effects are more pronounced for parallel rather than antiparallel tunneling. The latter increases with temperature with a considerable contribution to the prefactor. In the present work, we are interested in the tunneling rate assuming only exponential evolution of the transition probability. However, nonexponential evolution can occur in an nonequilibrium environment. d1 ; d2 ; deb ; dlw  Such a case is not discussed here. Accordingly, a reservoir is assumed to be in thermodynamic equilibrium, i.e., the tunneling transition is rather slow compared to the thermodynamic relaxation. Thus, we assume that dissipation affects the value of instanton action only.

For the case of the antiparallel tunnel transfer, the action (25) can be calculated with the following vibronic Green’s function:

$$D(\nu _n)=\frac{C^2}{\nu _n^2+\omega _L^2},$$
(41)
where $`\omega _L`$ is the frequency of the vibrational mode. After some tedious calculations, one obtains the following expression for the instanton action (25):

$`S={\displaystyle \frac{2\omega ^4(a^2b^2)\tau _0}{\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{2\omega ^4(a+b)^2}{\beta }}`$
$`\times \{{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_0(\beta /2\tau _0))\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_0\tau _0)}{2\mathrm{\Omega }_0^3\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_0\beta /2)}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta (\mathrm{\Omega }_i^2\omega _L^2)\mathrm{cosh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_i(\beta /2\tau _0))\mathrm{cosh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_i\tau _0)}{(1)^i2\mathrm{\Omega }_i^3(\mathrm{\Omega }_1^2\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2)\mathrm{sinh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_i\beta /2)}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \epsilon }{4(\omega ^22C^2/\omega _L^2)}}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \epsilon }{4\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \mathrm{sinh}(\epsilon \mathrm{\Omega }_0)}{4\mathrm{\Omega }_0^3}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta (\mathrm{\Omega }_i^2\omega _L^2)\mathrm{sinh}(\epsilon \mathrm{\Omega }_i)}{(1)^i4\mathrm{\Omega }_i^3(\mathrm{\Omega }_1^2\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2)}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\beta \mathrm{cosh}(\epsilon \mathrm{\Omega }_0)}{4\mathrm{\Omega }_0^3\mathrm{sinh}(\beta \mathrm{\Omega }_0/2)}}`$
$`\times [\mathrm{cosh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_0(\beta /22\tau _0))\mathrm{cosh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_0\beta /2)]`$
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\beta (\mathrm{\Omega }_i^2\omega _L^2)\mathrm{cosh}(\epsilon \mathrm{\Omega }_i)}{(1)^i4\mathrm{\Omega }_i^3(\mathrm{\Omega }_1^2\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2)\mathrm{sinh}(\beta \mathrm{\Omega }_i/2)}}`$
$`\times [\mathrm{cosh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_i(\beta /22\tau _0))+\mathrm{cosh}(\mathrm{\Omega }_i\beta /2)]\}.`$ (42)
Here, we have introduced the following notation:

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_0^2=\omega ^2\alpha ^2,\mathrm{\Omega }_1^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\omega ^2+\omega _L^2+\sqrt{(\omega ^2\omega _L^2)^2+8C^2}),`$
$`\mathrm{\Omega }_2^2={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\omega ^2+\omega _L^2\sqrt{(\omega ^2\omega _L^2)^2+8C^2}).`$
For the parallel tunneling transition, a corresponding action can be found in a similar way. The action (27) as a function of the parameters $`\epsilon ^{}=\tau _1\tau _2`$ and $`\tau ^{}=(\tau _1+\tau _2)/2`$, with the vibronic frequency $`\omega _L`$ and coupling constant $`C`$, yields (see also Ref. 23, ):

$`S=(a+b)(3ab)\omega ^2\tau ^{}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^4(a+b)^2\epsilon ^{}}{2(\omega ^22\alpha )}}{\displaystyle \frac{4\omega ^2(a+b)^2\tau ^2}{\beta }}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{4\omega ^4(a+b)^2\epsilon ^2}{(\omega ^22\alpha )\beta }}{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^2(a+b)^2}{2\stackrel{~}{\gamma }}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{2}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^i(\omega ^2x_{3i})}{\sqrt{x_i}}}`$
$`\times [\mathrm{coth}({\displaystyle \frac{\beta \sqrt{x_i}}{2}})\mathrm{sinh}^1({\displaystyle \frac{\beta \sqrt{x_i}}{2}})(\mathrm{cosh}[({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}2\tau ^{})\sqrt{x_i}]`$
$`\mathrm{cosh}[({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}\epsilon ^{})\sqrt{x_i}]+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{cosh}[({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}2\tau ^{}\epsilon ^{})\sqrt{x_i}]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{cosh}[({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}2\tau ^{}+\epsilon ^{})\sqrt{x_i}])]+{\displaystyle \frac{\omega ^4(a+b)^2}{2(\omega ^22\alpha )^{3/2}}}`$
$`\times [\mathrm{coth}({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}\sqrt{\omega ^22\alpha })+\mathrm{sinh}^1({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}\sqrt{\omega ^22\alpha })`$
$`(\mathrm{cosh}[({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}2\tau ^{})\sqrt{\omega ^22\alpha }]+\mathrm{cosh}[({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}\epsilon ^{})\sqrt{\omega ^22\alpha }]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{cosh}[({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}2\tau ^{}\epsilon ^{})\sqrt{\omega ^22\alpha }]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\mathrm{cosh}[({\displaystyle \frac{\beta }{2}}2\tau ^{}+\epsilon ^{})\sqrt{\omega ^22\alpha }])].`$ (43)
Here, we have denoted

$`x_{1,2}={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\omega ^2+\omega _L^2+{\displaystyle \frac{C^2}{\omega _L^2}}){\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\stackrel{~}{\gamma },`$
$`\stackrel{~}{\gamma }=\sqrt{(\omega ^2+\omega _L^2+{\displaystyle \frac{C^2}{\omega _L^2}})^24\omega ^2\omega _L^2}.`$
For particular values of the interaction constant $`\alpha `$ and in the absence of interaction with the oscillator bath, the critical temperature $`T_c`$ (at which the synchronous and asynchronous tunnel regimes interchange) is found from Eqs. (31) and (38). These equations can be generalized to non-zero interaction with the promoting mode. Typically, the critical temperature is found to be in the range from 10 K to 400 K. In glasses, $`T_c`$ can be very small while for chemical reactions it can be rather large. Additionally, $`T_c`$ depends on the mean distance between the particles and, therefore, on their concentration.

Quantum tunneling is important 24  when $`k_BT_c/(\mathrm{}\omega )1`$. Therefore, the symmetry breaking effects can take place at relatively high temperatures depending on the ”frequency” of a barrier. For example, for porphyrins the critical temperature $`T_c`$ is estimated to be about 200 K.

## VII  Conclusions

In the single instanton approximation, we have calculated the Euclidean action (12) for the models characterized by the different adiabatic potential energy surfaces, (3), (4) and (5), and made a detailed comparative analysis of the tunneling rate for two interacting particles moving in parallel or antiparallel within a dissipative environment. We have also assumed exponential evolution of the transition probability. 23 ; d1 ; d2 ; deb ; dlw

We have shown that the change in a tunneling regime from synchronous to asynchronous transfer for parallel transition occurs as a step process, similar to phase transition of a first order, while for the antiparallel transfer it resembles second order phase transition.

We have explained the effect of a cleavage in the experimentally observed 3 ; 4 ; 5 ; Mamaev  temperature dependence of the reaction rate for two tunneling particles. It has been shown that the effect of symmetry breaking is stable for the parallel and unstable for the antiparallel transfer, as it is observed experimentally for some porphyrin systems. 3 ; 4 ; 5 ; Mamaev  We have found a complicated fine structure in the bifurcation region due to the quantum fluctuations for the parallel two-dimensional tunneling. For the antiparallel tunneling, the contribution of four, six, twelve, etc., pairs of trajectory becomes important resembling the transition to chaos.

Additionally, we have studied interaction of two particles with phonons. Such coupling essentially modifies the antiparallel and parallel transitions in different ways. As it follows from Eq. (12), the interaction with the reservoir does not change the dynamics of the center of mass for the antiparallel motion, while it makes a significant contribution to the transfer rate for the parallel transfer. Finally, Eq. (31) determines the validity condition for temperatures beyond of which stable two-dimensional synchronous tunneling correlations of all the kinds occur.

###### Acknowledgements.

The authors would like to thank A. I. Larkin and B. I. Ivlev for the stimulating interest in this work.


format: text

text:
# Injection of a cold atomic beam into a magnetic guide

## I  The injecting MOT

The injecting MOT has been described in detail elsewhere Cren  and we only recall its main features. It is based upon a four-beam laser configuration similar to the one used for the study of optical lattices described in Grynberg93 , superimposed with a magnetic two-dimensional quadrupole field (see fig. 1).

The field vanishes along the $`z`$ axis and the transverse gradient is typically $`b^{}=0.1`$ T/m. The optical arrangement consists of four laser beams in a tetrahedral configuration. Each beam has a power of 25 mW and a waist of 12 mm. Two laser beams with frequency $`\omega `$ propagate in the $`yz`$ plane along the directions $`(\mathrm{cos}\alpha 𝐮_z\pm \mathrm{sin}\alpha 𝐮_y)`$ with a positive helicity. The two other beams with frequency $`\omega ^{}`$ propagate in the $`xz`$ plane along the directions $`(\mathrm{cos}\alpha 𝐮_z\pm \mathrm{sin}\alpha 𝐮_x)`$ with a negative helicity. The four beams are red-detuned with respect to the atomic transition $`|5S_{1/2},F=2|5P_{3/2},F=3`$, whose frequency is called $`\omega _a`$. The average detuning $`\delta =\overline{\omega }\omega _a`$, with $`\overline{\omega }=(\omega +\omega ^{})/2`$, is typically $`3\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }=2\pi \times 5.9`$ MHz denotes the natural width of the excited level of the transition. By properly choosing $`(\omega \omega ^{})`$, one can adjust the mean velocity $`\overline{v}`$ from 0 to $`3`$ m/s.

The injecting MOT is set up in a rectangular glass cell (130 mm $`\times `$ 50 mm $`\times `$ 50 mm). For most of the experimental results presented here, the atoms are captured from the low-pressure background gas (setup A). The partial pressure $`P_{87}`$ for 87Rb is measured by the absorption of a resonant beam. It can be varied from $`10^9`$ mbar up to the saturated vapor pressure at room temperature ($`3\times 10^7`$ mbar) by controlling the temperature of the Rb-reservoir or the aperture of the intermediate valve. We find that the steady state flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is independent of the average velocity of the beam. This flux is proportional to $`P_{87}`$ in the range $`10^9`$ mbar $`<P_{87}<10^8`$ mbar, and we obtain:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }=10^9\text{ atoms/s for }P_{87}=10^8\text{ mbar.}$$

We have just completed the construction of a new apparatus (setup B, see fig. 2(a)) which has some advantages over this original system. This apparatus is based on the same principle as setup A, but it uses two separate magneto-optical traps. The first one is a two-dimensional magneto-optical trap (MOT) Dieckmann98 ; Pfau02  located in a chamber which has a relatively high pressure of rubidium vapor ($`P10^7`$ mbar). The second MOT (the injecting one) is in a differentially pumped chamber where the pressure is very low ($`P10^9`$ mbar). The first MOT generates a beam of cold atoms with an average velocity $`40`$m/s; a significant fraction of this beam is captured by the injecting MOT and is subsequently slowed down and cooled. This allows us to limit the loss of atoms caused by collisions with background gas atoms while they propagate from the output of the injecting MOT to the entrance of the magnetic guide.

## II  The magnetic guide

The magnetic guide has a total length of 230 cm. It is made out of four copper tubes (Ø$`{}_{\mathrm{ext}}{}^{}=6`$ mm and Ø$`{}_{\mathrm{int}}{}^{}=4`$ mm) placed in a quadrupole configuration (see fig. 3). The tubes are located in the domain $`z>0`$ and they are joined in $`z=0`$ by a hollow metal cylinder, which allows for the circulation of current and cooling water from tube to tube. The axes of the copper tubes are placed at coordinates $`x=\pm a;y=\pm a`$, with $`a=7`$ mm. A current $`I=400`$ A is sent through the tubes, which provides, far from the entrance of the guide (*i.e.* $`za`$), a magnetic gradient $`b^{}=3.2`$ T/m in the $`xy`$ plane. The transverse magnetic gradient at the edge of the magnetic guide decreases quite fast (typical length scale $`a`$), so it does not affect the operation of the injecting MOT.

A narrow glass tube ensures differential pumping between the cell of the injecting MOT and the chamber of the magnetic guide, where the residual pressure has to be minimized to avoid losses due to collisions with the background gas. We estimate that the pressure in this chamber is $`4\times 10^{10}`$ mbar, which corresponds to a lifetime $`20`$ s for the magnetically guided atoms.

## III  Transfer from the injecting MOT to the magnetic guide

We now present the various schemes that we have investigated to transfer the cold atomic beam generated by the injecting MOT into the magnetic guide. Eq. (1) shows that we need a guided beam as intense and cold as possible (a large collision rate $`\gamma `$) and at the same time a very low mean velocity $`\overline{v}`$. We note that, due to the presence of the metal cylinder located at the entrance of the magnetic guide (see fig. 3), the shortest distance between the output of the injecting MOT and the entrance of the magnetic guide is $`D25`$ mm. In other words, the injecting MOT is located in the region $`45`$ mm $`<z<25`$ mm and the atoms have to travel over a distance of $`25`$ mm before being captured by the magnetic guide provided that they are in a magnetic sublevel corresponding to a low-field seeking state.

### III.1  Free-flight transfer

The simplest way to load atoms from the injecting MOT into the guide consists in letting the atoms propagate freely between the two. In this purpose, we place a laser tuned to the $`|5S_{1/2},F=2|5P_{3/2},F=2`$ transition in the region $`25`$ mm $`<z<0`$. The repumping laser is blocked in this transfer region, so that the extra “depumping” laser beam optically pumps the atoms in the $`F=1`$ ground state. Therefore, provided that the three magnetic levels $`m=0,\pm 1`$ of the $`|5S_{1/2},F=1`$ are equally populated, we expect that one third of the atoms (state $`m=1`$) emerging from the injecting MOT can be captured by the magnetic guide.

#### III.1.1  Constraints for free-flight transfer

Due to our experimental geometry, there are two issues that limit the use of a free flight transfer:

* It is restricted to relatively large velocities $`\overline{v}>1.5`$ m/s. Otherwise the free-fall due to gravity, $`gD^2/(2\overline{v}^2)`$, is so large that the coupling to the guide becomes velocity-dependent.
* During the free flight, the atom jet spreads transversally, which leads to a strong increase of the transverse temperature $`T_{}`$ in the guide, as compared with the temperature in the injecting MOT. Consider for instance a beam emerging from the injecting MOT with $`\overline{v}=2`$ m/s and $`T_{}=100\mu `$K. At the entrance of the magnetic guide, the radius of the beam is $`R(D/\overline{v})\sqrt{k_BT_{}/M}1.2`$ mm ($`M`$ is the atomic mass). The corresponding magnetic energy is

$$E_{\mathrm{mag}}\mu b^{}R(D\mu b^{}/\overline{v})\sqrt{k_BT_{}/M}.$$
(2)
This gives $`E_{\mathrm{mag}}/k_B1`$ mK in the present case.

#### III.1.2  Pulsed versus continuous mode

The operation of the injecting MOT in a continuous mode imposes to search for a compromise between two different requirements. For an efficient loading one has to take a relatively small detuning ($`\delta 3\mathrm{\Gamma }`$), so that the trapping force is large. On the contrary, in order to minimize the temperature of the outgoing atomic beam, a much larger detuning $`(\delta 7\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ for our laser intensity) is preferable.

A pulsed operation of the injecting MOT may provide, for a given application, an output beam with better characteristics than this compromise. First, one loads the injecting MOT with the detuning which maximizes the capture rate $`R`$ and with a zero launch velocity ($`\omega =\omega ^{}`$). During this phase of duration $`t_1`$, the number of trapped atoms varies according to $`N(t)=(R/\gamma )(1e^{\gamma t})`$, where $`\gamma ^1`$ is the mean escape time. One then switches the detuning of the trapping lasers to a much larger value, with $`\omega \omega ^{}`$ set to provide the required velocity $`\overline{v}`$. This launching phase must last a time $`t_2`$ so that all trapped atoms can leave the injecting MOT and reach the magnetic guide. For a trap of length $`L`$ and a distance $`D`$ between the trap exit and the guide, one has $`t_2=(L+D)/\overline{v}`$. The optimization of $`t_1`$ depends on the values of $`\gamma `$ and the launching time $`t_2`$. For a low Rb vapor pressure (small $`R`$ and small $`\gamma `$), the largest flux corresponds to

$$\gamma t_21:\mathrm{\Phi }R\text{for}t_1=\sqrt{2t_2/\gamma }.$$
(3)
In this case, the flux $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ in the guide is equal to the capture rate of the injecting MOT and the operation in pulsed mode does not lead to a loss in efficiency. If we increase the Rb vapor pressure in the cell and thus the rate $`R`$ so that $`\gamma t_2^1`$, the optimum operation of the pulsed mode corresponds to

$$\gamma t_21:\mathrm{\Phi }0.3R\text{for}t_1t_2\gamma ^1.$$
(4)
This pulsed mode also makes the extraction of atoms from the injecting MOT much easier. Indeed, the optical pumping of the atoms to the hyperfine level $`F=1`$ is not total, because of the stray light present at the repumping frequency $`|5S_{1/2},F=1|5P_{3/2},F=2`$. Therefore, after leaving the injecting MOT, the atoms may still be deflected by the residual radiation pressure force resulting from an imbalance between the intensities of the various laser beams. This spurious effect is strongly decreased if the detuning of these lasers is increased to a value $`\delta 7\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ while the atoms travel in the “dangerous” region.

Finally, we note that, although the atomic beam is pulsed at the entrance of the guide, the pulses broaden as they propagate because of the longitudinal velocity dispersion $`\mathrm{\Delta }v`$. This entails that a quasi-continuous beam is obtained after a distance $`L\overline{v}/\mathrm{\Delta }v`$ if one chooses $`t_1t_2`$.

### III.2  Use of an auxiliary MOT

Some of the difficulties associated with the free-flight transfer can also be circumvented if we place an auxiliary guiding trap in the region $`25`$ mm $`<z<0`$. This trap is a pure 2D MOT, whose beams are orthogonal to the $`z`$ axis and illuminate points up to 4 mm from the entrance of the magnetic guide (see fig. 4). The transverse extension of the atomic beam at the entrance of the magnetic guide is then drastically reduced. As for the free flight transfer, we place a depumping laser at the entrance of the guide. The atoms are then trapped in the magnetic sublevel $`F=1,m=1`$.

The disadvantage of this auxiliary trap concerns the broadening of the longitudinal velocity distribution, due to the random recoils associated with the spontaneous emission of photons as the atoms cross the auxiliary trap. The longitudinal heating remains relatively weak for high atomic velocities and large detunings $`\delta _2`$ of the auxiliary MOT. An upper limit for $`|\delta _2|`$ is given only by the condition that the radiative force of the auxiliary MOT has to overcome the spurious radiation pressure imbalance which exists in the wings of the injecting MOT’s laser beams, as discussed above.

### III.3 Experimental results

We now present the experimental results that we have obtained concerning the characteristics of the guided atomic beam, in terms of temperature and flux. All these measurements have been performed using the setup A, i.e. with a vapor-loaded injecting MOT.

#### III.3.1  Longitudinal velocity distribution

The measurement of the longitudinal velocity distribution is quite straightforward if we operate the injecting MOT in pulsed mode, since we can derive the longitudinal temperature directly from the temporal width of the absorption signal when a given atom pulse passes through the probe beam. This beam is located downstream, at a distance of either 40 cm or 200 cm from the entrance of the magnetic guide.

When operating in pulsed mode, we measure a longitudinal temperature in the range 50-100 $`\mu `$K. The lowest temperatures are obtained for large velocities ($`\overline{v}=2.6`$ m/s). This effect is probably due to the heating of the atoms by the stray light of the various trapping beams, when they travel over the distance $`D`$ between the injecting MOT and the guide. This heating is larger if the atoms spend more time in this region, *i.e.* if they are slow. The presence of the auxiliary MOT causes some additional heating of the atomic beam, proportional to the time spent by the atoms in the laser beams. For $`\delta _2=6.5\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, the increase of the longitudinal temperature of the beam is at most $`30`$%, while, as we shall see, the transverse temperature decreases by an order of magnitude, thanks to the auxiliary MOT.

When the injecting MOT is operated in continuous mode, we found much larger longitudinal temperatures, in the range of 0.5–1 mK. We think that this is due to the acceleration and heating of the atoms when they travel between the injecting MOT and the guide, the heating being much more dramatic than in the pulsed mode, since the frequencies of the trapping beams are closer to resonance.

#### III.3.2  Transverse temperature

We have measured the transverse temperature in the guide in two ways, which give consistent results. First, we have scanned transversally the position of the probe laser beam and reconstructed the transverse profile of the atomic beam. Alternatively, we have used radio-frequency evaporation to selectively remove a fraction of the atomic distribution. From the variation of the fraction of remaining atoms as a function of the radio-frequency, we infer the transverse temperature of the atomic beam (see Appendix).

Using the auxiliary MOT, we find a temperature ranging from 100 $`\mu `$K to $`200\mu `$K. We have obtained similar results for the continuous and pulsed regimes. The variation of the transverse temperature with the magnetic gradient $`b^{}`$ and the longitudinal velocity is in good agreement with the estimate (2), where $`D`$ should be replaced by the distance $`D^{}4`$ mm between the exit of the auxiliary MOT and the entrance of the magnetic guide.

In absence of the auxiliary MOT, we have measured much larger transverse temperatures inside the guide, in the range of 1-2 mK. This is a consequence of the increase of the beam’s transverse size at the magnetic guide entrance, after free propagation over the distance $`D`$. The variation of the transverse temperature with $`b^{}`$ and $`\overline{v}`$ is also in good agreement with the prediction (2).

#### III.3.3  Flux

The flux of atoms in the magnetic guide is not significantly modified by the presence of the auxiliary MOT. Operating in continuous mode at a pressure $`P_{87}=10^8`$ mbar, we find that this flux varies between $`1.5\times 10^8`$ and $`3\times 10^8`$ atoms/s, when $`\overline{v}`$ varies between $`1.5`$ m/s and $`3`$ m/s. This corresponds to a transfer efficiency between 15% and 30%. Similar values are achieved in pulsed mode if we optimize the loading time $`t_1`$ according to (3).

For velocities smaller than 1.5 m/s, we did not find that a significant fraction of the atoms emitted by the injecting MOT could be transferred to the magnetic guide. We attribute this fact to the depletion of the slow atomic beam by collisions with atoms from the rubidium vapor in the cell. The slow atoms have to travel over a distance $`10`$ cm through the cell and the tube ensuring the differential pumping, before they arrive in the ultra-high vacuum region of the magnetic guide. For $`P_{87}=10^8`$ mbar (i.e. a total rubidium pressure $`4\times 10^8`$ mbar) and $`\overline{v}=1.5`$ m/s, we estimate the atomic flux to be reduced by 40 % over this distance. This limitation should be overcome with our new apparatus (setup B) as discussed at the end of § I.

### III.4  Miniature guide

At low atomic velocities, the auxiliary MOT does not provide efficient coupling of atoms into the guide due to strong recoil heating in the longitudinal direction. For this reason, we have developed a miniature magnetic guide (MMG) on a conical supporting structure. The shape has been chosen in order to keep a good optical access for the injecting MOT’s beams. The MMG is added at the entrance of the magnetic guide as depicted in fig. 2(b).

The MMG generates a two-dimensional magnetic quadrupole field by means of four elliptical Kapton-coated copper wires with a 1 mm2 cross section. The wires are placed at coordinates $`x=\pm b,y=\pm b`$, with $`b=1.3`$ mm. They provide a transverse confinement over a distance of 40 mm up to a point at which the confining force of the long magnetic guide has risen to its asymptotic value. The inner supporting structure of the wires is a tube with a diameter $`d=3`$ mm, which also ensures differential pumping between the injecting MOT’s chamber and the section of magnetic guide.

The recombination of the current between the wires of the MMG is done in a way as to minimize the free flight distance. Consequently, the transverse free expansion remains small. The longitudinal temperature is not affected in this case since no spontaneous emission processes occur. The wires emerge from the supporting structure before being folded back outwards and attached to the conical structure. The currents recombine in the metallic supporting structure to which the non-isolated wire ends are screwed (see fig. 2(b)). In this way the laser beams of the injecting MOT are not interrupted by the MMG’s wires. The MMG allows to reduce the distance over which the atoms expand freely to less than 3 mm. The magnetic gradient is typically 1 T/m (0.22 T m-1A-1). The current running in the MMG has to be chosen in the same sense as the one in the guide. The wires of the MMG are kept cooled by thermal contact with the water-cooled magnetic guide. With a current of 5 A running through the wires of the MMG, we find an increase of resistivity that corresponds to a temperature rise of 5 K assuming an homogeneous temperature change of the wires.

In order to measure the mean velocity of the atoms along the longitudinal axis, we use as before a time-of-flight technique. We operate the injecting MOT in a pulsed mode. At time $`t=0`$, we launch a bunch of atoms which propagates in the magnetic guide, and we monitor the time-dependent absorption signal of a probe beam located further downstream. The MMG allows for the production of a very low velocity beam in the magnetic guide. We have recently observed atoms in the magnetic guide with a mean velocity of the order of 70 cm/s. For the production of such a low-velocity atomic beam, two requirements have to be met. The injecting MOT’s beam profiles have to be balanced over the whole free-flight distance (otherwise the atoms are accelerated while passing through the wings of the laser beams). Furthermore, care has to be taken that the atoms are not pumped out of the $`|F=1,m_f=1`$ level by stray light while propagating in the magnetic guide. For that purpose, we detune the frequency of the repumping light by several line widths. Actually, we do not detect any atoms in the guide when the repumping laser is on resonance.

In conclusion, we have reported the continuous and pulsed loading of a slow and cold atomic beam into a magnetic guide. In order to optimize the transfer into the guide, we have investigated various coupling schemes. The first one is based on an auxiliary two-dimensional MOT that confines the atoms transversally before they enter the guide. However, for low atomic velocities, the atoms are strongly heated in the longitudinal direction. This limitation does not occur in another coupling method which relies on magnetic confinement in the transfer zone. For this purpose, we have constructed a miniature magnetic guide located between the injecting MOT and the long magnetic guide. The latter scheme allows to inject atoms with velocities down to 70 cm/s into the guide, a result which we hope to further improve in future experiments.

## acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Bureau National de la Métrologie, the Délégation Générale de l’Armement, the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique and the Région Ile de France. C. F. Roos acknowledges support from the European Union (contract HPMFCT-2000-00478).

## Appendix A Temperature measurements by evaporation in the collisionless regime

The appendix is devoted to the determination of the transverse temperature from the fraction of remaining atoms when a radio frequency wave is applied. We restrict the analysis to the case of a collisionless gas. The atoms propagate freely along the guide axis ($`z`$) and they are confined in the transverse $`xy`$ plane by an isotropic harmonic potential with frequency $`\omega `$. The transverse and longitudinal motions are decoupled from each other and the total Hamiltonian then reads:

$$H(𝐫,𝐩)=H_{}(𝐫_{},𝐩_{})+\frac{p_z^2}{2m},$$

where the Hamiltonian for the transverse motion is:

$$H_{}(𝐫_{},𝐩_{})=\frac{p^2}{2m}+\frac{1}{2}m\omega ^2r^2$$

with $`p^2=p_x^2+p_y^2`$, $`r^2=x^2+y^2`$. Another dynamical quantity of interest for the study of the transverse motion is the $`z`$-component of the angular momentum

$$(𝐫_{},𝐩_{})=xp_yyp_x.$$

The trajectory of an atom is characterized by three constants of motion: the velocity $`v`$ along the guide axis, the total (kinetic+potential) transverse energy $`E=H_{}(𝐫_{},𝐩_{})`$, and the $`z`$-component of the angular momentum $`L=(𝐫_{},𝐩_{})`$. One readily establishes a relation between the two quantities $`E`$ and $`L`$ characterizing the transverse motion: $`E|L|\omega `$. For a given $`(E,L)`$, the trajectory is confined in the region of space $`r_{\mathrm{min}}rr_{\mathrm{max}}`$ with:

$$r_{\mathrm{min}}^2=\frac{E\sqrt{E^2L^2\omega ^2}}{m\omega ^2}r_{\mathrm{max}}^2=\frac{E+\sqrt{E^2L^2\omega ^2}}{m\omega ^2}.$$

The evaporation is performed by inducing spin flips with a radiofrequency field of frequency $`\nu `$ on a surface defined by: $`\mu |B(𝐫_{\mathrm{evap}})|=h\nu `$. Note that it does not mean a priori that atoms with an energy higher than $`h\nu `$ are evaporated. It depends actually on the total energy of the particle and on its angular momentum. Evaporation occurs only if $`r_{\mathrm{min}}r_{\mathrm{evap}}r_{\mathrm{max}}`$, which means that the trajectory goes through the surface of evaporation. In the following, we note $`E_0=m\omega ^2r_{\mathrm{evap}}^2`$.

In order to determine the fraction $`f`$ of atoms which is not affected by the evaporation, one needs to derive the density probability $`P(E,L)`$ for a given atom to have an energy $`E`$ and an angular momentum $`L`$. By definition,

$$P(E,L)d^2rd^2pe^{\beta H_{}}\delta (L)\delta (EH_{}),$$
(5)
where $`\beta =1/(k_BT)`$. One readily obtains rq1 :

$$P(E,L)e^{\beta E}\mathrm{\Theta }(E|L|\omega ),$$

where $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ is the Heaviside step function. We distinguish two categories of atoms that are not affected by the radio-frequency wave:

* atoms such that $`r_{\mathrm{min}}>r_{\mathrm{evap}}`$, the corresponding range of values for $`E`$ and $`L`$ is denoted $`𝒟_1`$;
* atoms such that $`r_{\mathrm{max}}<r_{\mathrm{evap}}`$, the corresponding range of values for $`E`$ and $`L`$ is denoted $`𝒟_2`$.

The fraction $`f`$ of non-evaporated atoms is obtained after a simple calculation and it reads:

$$f=\underset{𝒟_1𝒟_2}{}P(E,L)𝑑E𝑑L=1\sqrt{\frac{\pi \beta E_0}{2}}e^{\beta E_0/2}.$$
(6)
The temperature is obtained by fitting the experimental data to the function (A3). This fraction has a minimum for $`r_{\mathrm{evap}}=(\beta m\omega ^2)^{1/2}`$ equal to $`f_{\mathrm{min}}0.2398\mathrm{}`$. Without elastic collisions, it is impossible to evaporate all atoms. On the other hand, since collisions allow the redistribution of angular momentum and energy, the observation of a fraction of non-evaporated atoms lower than $`f_{\mathrm{min}}`$ is a signature of the presence of elastic collisions in the sample when crossing the region where evaporation is applied. We emphasize that this treatment is valid only if the magnetic potential is close to a harmonic potential: $`k_BT\mu B_0`$, where $`T`$ is the temperature, $`\mu `$ the magnetic moment and $`B_0`$ the longitudinal bias field applied in the evaporation region. When this criterium is not fulfilled, we have to use a numerical model based on a Monte-Carlo sampling of the atomic distribution rather than the analytical expression (6).

Unité de Recherche de l’Ecole normale supérieure et de l’Université Pierre et Marie Curie, associée au CNRS.


text:
# References

Quotient Equations and Integrals of Motion for Vector Massless Field

S.S. Moskaliuk

Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics

Metrolohichna Str., 14-b, Kyiv-143, Ukraine, UA-03143

e-mail: mss@bitp.kiev.ua

Abstract

In this article a group-theoretical aspect of the method of dimensional reduction is presented. Then, on the base of symmetry analysis of an anisotropic space geometrical description of dimensional reduction of equations for vector massless field is given. Formula for calculating components of the energy-momentum tensor from the variables of the field factor-equations is derived.

The covariant equations for massless vector field in the absence of sources are of the form

$$_\mu F^{\mu \nu }=0,_\mu (F)^{\mu \nu }=0,$$
(1)
where $`F^{\mu \nu }`$ is tensor of vector field, $`(F)^{\mu \nu }`$ is conjugate magnitude defined by the equation

$`(F)^{\alpha \beta }={\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\sqrt{g}}}[\alpha \beta \gamma \eta ]F_{\gamma \eta };`$
$`[\alpha \beta \gamma \eta ]`$ is completely antisymmetric tensor with =1.

Because metric tensor ($`g_{\mu \nu }`$) does not depend on space coordinates, the theory under consideration is invariant under space translations, and consequently, the space transformation of Fourier-components of tensor is rendered possible:

$`F^{\mu \nu }(t,𝐱)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3k\mathrm{exp}(i,𝐤,𝐱)f^{\mu \nu }(t,𝐤)},`$
$`(F)^{\mu \nu }(t,𝐱)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^3k\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})(f)^{\mu \nu }(t,𝐤).`$ (2)
Substituting (2) in (1), one comes to the equation for $`f^{\mu \nu }(t,𝐤)`$:

$`ik_jf^{0j}=0,`$
$`\left[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}}_0\left(\sqrt{g}f^{j0}\right)+ik_jf^{ji}\right]=0.`$ (3)
Because $`f^{ji}=[jri]𝒜_r^2(f)^{r0}/\sqrt{g}`$, the previous equation takes the form

$$\frac{d}{dt}\left(\sqrt{g}f^{0j}\right)=i[jml]k_l𝒜_m^2(t)(f)^{m0}.$$
(4)
Similarly, for the conjugate magnitude we have

$`k_j(f)^{j0}=0,`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\left(\sqrt{g}(f)^{j0}\right)=i[jml]k_l𝒜_m^2(t)f^{0m}.`$ (5)
To simplify the set of equations (3)–(5), we introduce the new variables

$$S_j^\pm =\sqrt{g}[f^{0j}\pm i(+f)^{j0}].$$
(6)
This enables us to separate the equations (3)–(5) for $`S_j^+`$ and $`S_j^{}`$:

$$k_jS_j^\pm =0,\frac{d}{dt}S_j^\pm =\frac{[jml]}{\sqrt{g}}k_l𝒜_m^2S_m^\pm .$$
(7)
The further simplification consists of the introduction spherical coordinates in momentum space according to the relation

$$(k_1,k_2,k_3)=k(\mathrm{sin}(\delta )\mathrm{cos}(\xi ),\mathrm{sin}(\delta )\mathrm{sin}(\xi ),\mathrm{cos}(\delta )).$$
(8)
The equation (7) can be automatically satisfied going from (6) to the magnitudes

$`S_\delta ^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}(\delta )\mathrm{cos}(\xi )S_1^\pm +\mathrm{cos}(\delta )\mathrm{sin}(\xi )S_2^\pm \mathrm{sin}(\delta )S_3^\pm ,`$
$`S_\xi ^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}(\xi )S_1^\pm +\mathrm{cos}(\xi )S_2^\pm .`$ (9)
¿From the equation (7), rewritten as

$`\mathrm{sin}(\delta )\left(\mathrm{cos}(\xi )S_1^\pm +\mathrm{sin}(\xi )S_2^\pm \right)+\mathrm{cos}(\delta )S_3^\pm =0,`$
and definition of $`S_\delta ^\pm `$ it is possible to derive the relations

$`S_\delta ^\pm ={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{cos}(\delta )}}\left(\mathrm{cos}(\xi )S_1^\pm +\mathrm{sin}(\xi )S_2^\pm \right),S_3^\pm =S_\delta ^\pm \mathrm{sin}(\delta ).`$
Considering the previous relations and the definition $`S_\xi ^\pm `$ as a set of equations, we obtain for $`S_1^\pm `$ and $`S_2^\pm `$ the following coupling relations

$`S_1^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`S_\delta ^\pm \mathrm{cos}(\xi )\mathrm{cos}(\delta )S_\xi ^+\mathrm{sin}\xi ,`$
$`S_2^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`S_\delta ^\pm \mathrm{sin}(\xi )\mathrm{cos}(\delta )+S_\xi ^\pm \mathrm{cos}(\xi ),`$
$`S_3^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`S_\delta ^\pm \mathrm{sin}(\delta ).`$ (10)
To derive the equations for $`S_\delta ^\pm `$ and $`S_\xi ^\pm `$, let us differentiate the amgnitude (9) by $`t`$:

$`\dot{S}_\xi ^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}(\delta )\mathrm{cos}(\xi )\dot{S}_1^\pm +\mathrm{cos}(\delta )\mathrm{sin}(\xi )\dot{S}_2^\pm \mathrm{sin}(\delta )\dot{S}_3^\pm ,`$
$`\dot{S}_\xi ^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}(\xi )\dot{S}_1^\pm +\mathrm{cos}(\xi )\dot{S}_2^\pm .`$ (11)
Further we use the equations (7)

$`\pm \dot{S}_1^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k}{\sqrt{g}}}\left(\mathrm{cos}(\delta )𝒜_2^2S_2^\pm \mathrm{sin}(\delta )\mathrm{sin}(\xi )𝒜_3^2S_3^\pm \right),`$
$`\pm \dot{S}_2^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`+{\displaystyle \frac{k}{\sqrt{g}}}\left(\mathrm{cos}(\delta )𝒜_1^2S_1^\pm \mathrm{sin}(\delta )\mathrm{cos}(\xi )𝒜_3^2S_3^\pm \right),`$
$`\pm \dot{S}_3^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k}{\sqrt{g}}}\left(\mathrm{sin}(\delta )\mathrm{sin}(\xi )𝒜_1^2S_1^\pm \mathrm{sin}(\delta )\mathrm{cos}(\xi )𝒜_2^2S_2^\pm \right),`$
and then (10) with the result that for $`S_\delta ^\pm `$ and $`S_\xi ^\pm `$ we obtain the equations

$`\pm \dot{S}_\delta ^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`kaS_\delta ^\pm kbS_\xi ^\pm ,`$
$`\pm \dot{S}_\xi ^\pm `$ $`=`$ $`+kcS_\delta ^\pm +kaS_\xi ^\pm .`$ (12)
The parameters $`a`$, $`b`$ and $`c`$ can be presented as follows

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}(\delta )\mathrm{cos}(\xi )\mathrm{sin}(\xi )}{\sqrt{g}}}\left(𝒜_2^2(t)𝒜_1^2(t)\right),`$
$`b`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}}\left(𝒜_2^2(t)\mathrm{cos}^2(\xi )+𝒜_1^2(t)\mathrm{sin}^2(\xi )\right),`$
$`c`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{g}}}\left(𝒜_1^2(t)\mathrm{cos}^2(\delta )\mathrm{cos}^2(\xi )+𝒜_2^2(t)\mathrm{cos}^2(\delta )\mathrm{sin}^2(\xi )+𝒜_3^2(t)\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta )\right).`$ (13)
To continue the analysis, it is necessary to discuss the dependence of basis vectors of space on time. The metric $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ defines the natural covariant ”unit” vector $`𝐞_\mu `$ with covariant components $`e_\mu ^\alpha =\delta _\mu ^\alpha `$ and the natural contravariant vector $`𝐞^\mu `$ with contravariant components $`e_\alpha ^\mu =\delta _\alpha ^\mu `$ with $`(𝐞_\mu 𝐞_\nu )=g_{\mu \nu }`$. The absence of the off-diagonal terms from metric means that the basis consisting of the vectors $`𝐞_\mu `$ is orthogonal, but the length of space basis vectors varies with time according to the relation

$`\left(𝐞_i𝐞_i\right)=𝒜_i^2(t).`$
Hence it follows that the components of various tensors calculated in this basis do not carry complete information on the corresponding fields. The difficulty mentioned above can be easily avoided by introduction of tetrade basis vectors according to the relations $`𝐞_{(0)}=𝐞_0`$, $`𝐞_{(i)}=𝐞_i/𝒜_i(t)`$. It turns out that, doing so, we obtain $`(𝐞_{(\mu )}𝐞_{(\nu )})=\eta _{\mu \nu }`$.

In the case under consideration, because $`g_{\mu \nu }`$ does not depend on space coordinates, the tetrade basis can be introduced for all points of space at any given instant of time.

The vectors of electric and magnetic field strength can be written in tetrade basis as follows

$`𝐄(t,𝐱)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3k\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})\underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}𝒜_i(t)f^{0i}(t,𝐤)𝐞_{(i)}},`$
$`𝐇(t,𝐱)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle }d^3k\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱}){\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}𝒜_i(t)(f)^{0i}(t,𝐤)𝐞_{(i)}.`$ (14)
The spectral components $`𝐄`$ and $`𝐇`$, calculated in tetrade basis, are orthogonal to the direction, varying with time, which is determined by vector $`k_i=k_i/𝒜_i(t)`$. In this connection it is convenient to introduce the unit vectors varying with time

$`𝐞_k`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}(\theta )\mathrm{cos}(\phi )𝐞_{(1)}+\mathrm{sin}(\theta )\mathrm{sin}(\phi )𝐞_{(2)}+\mathrm{cos}(\theta )𝐞_{(3)},`$
$`𝐞_\theta `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{cos}(\theta )\mathrm{cos}(\phi )𝐞_{(1)}+\mathrm{cos}(\theta )\mathrm{sin}(\phi )𝐞_{(2)}\mathrm{sin}(\theta )𝐞_{(3)},`$
$`𝐞_\phi `$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{sin}(\phi )𝐞_{(1)}+\mathrm{cos}(\phi )𝐞_{(2)},`$ (15)
where the angles $`\theta `$ and $`\phi `$ are defined by the relation

$`(\mathrm{sin}(\theta )\mathrm{cos}(\phi ),\mathrm{sin}(\theta )\mathrm{sin}(\phi ),\mathrm{cos}(\theta ))=`$ (16)
$`=`$ $`\mu ^1({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}(\delta )\mathrm{cos}(\xi )}{𝒜_1}},{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}(\delta )\mathrm{sin}(\xi )}{𝒜_2}},{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}(\delta )}{𝒜_3}}),`$
$`\mu `$ $`=`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta )\mathrm{cos}^2(\xi )}{𝒜_1^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2(\delta )\mathrm{sin}^2(\xi )}{𝒜_2^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}^2(\delta )}{𝒜_3^2}}\right)^{1/2}.`$
Let us transform the expression (14), using the functions $`S_\delta ^\pm `$, $`S_\xi ^\pm `$, introduced earlier. We shall do this for magnetic field $`𝐇`$. Using (16), let us present $`𝐇`$ in the form

$`𝐇(t,𝐱)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle d^3k\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}\frac{1}{2i\sqrt{g}}\left(S_l^+S_l^{}\right)𝒜_l(t)𝐞_{(l)}}=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2i\sqrt{g}}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}{\displaystyle d^3k\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})r\underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}S_l^r𝒜_l(t)𝐞_{(l)}}.`$
In the last relation we went from the notation $`S_l^\pm `$ to the notation $`S_l^r`$, where $`r=\pm 1`$. Let us consider the internal sum. The change $`S_l^\pm S_\delta ^r`$ and $`S_\xi ^r`$ according to (10) brings it to the form

$`{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}}S_l^r𝒜_l(t)𝐞_{(l)}=S_\xi ^r\left[\mathrm{sin}(\xi )𝒜_1𝐞_{(1)}+\mathrm{cos}(\xi )𝒜_2𝐞_{(2)}\right]+`$
$`+`$ $`S_\delta ^r\left[\mathrm{cos}(\xi )\mathrm{cos}(\delta )𝒜_1𝐞_{(1)}+\mathrm{sin}(\xi )\mathrm{cos}(\delta )𝒜_2𝐞_{(2)}\mathrm{sin}(\delta )𝒜_3𝐞_{(3)}\right].`$
Let us go from the angles $`\xi `$, $`\delta `$ to the angles $`\phi `$, $`\theta `$. To this end we shall use the following transition formulas, which can be derived from (16):

$`\mathrm{sin}(\phi )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_1}{(g)^{1/4}b^{1/2}}}\mathrm{sin}(\xi ),\mathrm{cos}(\phi )={\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_2}{(g)^{1/4}b^{1/2}}}\mathrm{cos}(\xi ),`$
$`\mathrm{sin}(\theta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_3b^{1/2}}{\mu (g)^{1/4}}}\mathrm{sin}(\delta ),\mathrm{cos}(\theta )={\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mu ^1𝒜_3}}\mathrm{cos}(\delta ).`$ (17)
As a result, taking into account the definition $`𝐞_\phi `$, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}}S_l^r𝒜_l(t)𝐞_{(l)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(g)^{1/4}}{b^{1/2}}}[S_\delta ^r\mu ({\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_1𝒜_3}{𝒜_2}}b\mathrm{cos}(\phi )\mathrm{cos}(\theta )𝐞_{(1)}+`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_2𝒜_3}{𝒜_1}}b\mathrm{sin}(\phi )\mathrm{cos}(\theta )𝐞_{(2)}\mathrm{sin}(\theta )𝐞_{(3)})+S_\xi ^rb𝐞_{(\phi )}].`$
It is easy to verify that the following eqution is satisfied

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_1𝒜_3}{𝒜_2}}b1\right)\mathrm{cos}(\phi )\mathrm{cos}(\theta )𝐞_{(1)}+`$
$`+`$ $`\left({\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_2𝒜_3}{𝒜_1}}b1\right)\mathrm{sin}(\phi )\mathrm{cos}(\theta )𝐞_{(2)}={\displaystyle \frac{a}{\mu }}𝐞_\phi .`$
This can be done, using the relation

$`\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{g}b}{𝒜_1^2}}1\right)={\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_1^2𝒜_2^2}{𝒜_2^2}}\mathrm{sin}^2(\xi ),\left({\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{g}b}{𝒜_2^2}}1\right)={\displaystyle \frac{𝒜_2^2𝒜_1^2}{𝒜_1^2}}\mathrm{cos}^2(\xi )`$
and the connection formulas (17).

Then the next result is

$`{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{3}{}}}S_l^r𝒜_l(t)𝐞_{(l)}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(g)^{1/4}}{b^{1/2}}}\left[S_\delta ^r\left(\mu 𝐞_\theta +a𝐞_\phi \right)+S_\xi ^rb𝐞_\phi \right]=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(g)^{1/4}}{b^{1/2}}}\left[S_\delta ^r\mu 𝐞_\theta {\displaystyle \frac{r}{k}}\dot{S}_\delta ^r𝐞_\phi \right].`$
The magnetic field strentgth can be written now as follows:

$$𝐇=\frac{1}{2i(g)^{1/4}}\underset{r=\pm 1}{}d^3k\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})rb^{1/2}\left[S_\delta ^r\mu 𝐞_\theta \frac{r}{k}\dot{S}_\delta ^r𝐞_\phi \right].$$
(18)
For the vector of elctric field strength the calculations are carried out in analogous way and give the following result:

$$𝐄=\frac{4}{2i(g)^{1/4}}\underset{r=\pm 1}{}d^3k\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})rb^{1/2}\left[S_\delta ^r\mu 𝐞_\theta \frac{r}{k}\dot{S}_\delta ^r𝐞_\phi \right].$$
(19)
The formulas (18) and (19) bring out that the electric and magnetic fields are completely described by the function $`S_\delta ^r`$. That is why it is convenient to go from (12) to the equation of the second order for $`S_\delta ^r`$. To this end let us differentiate the first equation (12) by $`t`$, substitute the second equation and eliminate the rest terms, using again the first equation. As a result, we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt}}\dot{S}_\delta ^r={\displaystyle \frac{\dot{b}}{b}}\dot{S}_\delta ^r+S_\delta ^r\left(kr\dot{a}+k^2(a^2bc)+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{b}}{b}}ka\right).`$
Using the fact that $`a^2bc=\mu ^2`$, we come to

$$\ddot{S}_\delta ^r\frac{\dot{b}}{b}\dot{S}_\delta ^r+\left(k^2\mu ^2+k\mathrm{\Lambda }^r\right)S_\delta ^r=0,$$
(20)
with $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^r=r(\dot{a}\frac{\dot{b}}{b}a)`$.

Let us find out the restrictions on the functions $`S_\delta ^r`$, following from the real valuedness of the fields $`𝐄`$ and $`𝐇`$. It stems from the conditions

$`F^{\alpha \beta }(t,𝐱)=\stackrel{}{F^{\alpha \beta }}(t,𝐱),(F)^{\alpha \beta }(t,𝐱)=(\stackrel{}{F})^{\alpha \beta }(t,𝐱)`$
immediately the requirement that $`f^{\alpha \beta }(t,𝐤)=\stackrel{}{f^{\alpha \beta }}(t,𝐤)`$, $`(f)^{\alpha \beta }(t,𝐤)==(\stackrel{}{f})^{\alpha \beta }(t,𝐤)`$. Then it follows from definition (6) straightforwardly that

$$S_j^+(t,𝐤)=\stackrel{}{S_j^{}}(t,𝐤),S_j^r(t,𝐤)=\stackrel{}{S_j^r}(t,𝐤).$$
(21)
Because the reflection in the momentum space corresponds to the change

$`\delta ^{}=\pi \delta ,\xi ^{}=\pi +\xi ,\mathrm{cos}(\delta ^{})=\mathrm{cos}(\delta ),\mathrm{sin}(\delta ^{})=\mathrm{sin}(\delta ),`$
$`\mathrm{cos}(\xi ^{})=\mathrm{cos}(\xi ),\mathrm{sin}(\xi ^{})=\mathrm{sin}(\xi ),`$
we obtain that

$`S_\delta ^r(t,𝐤)=\stackrel{}{S_\delta ^r}(t,𝐤)`$
(vectors $`𝐞_\theta `$ and $`𝐞_\phi `$ under the change $`𝐤`$ for $`𝐤`$ transform themselves in the same way).

Let us present $`S_\delta ^r`$ as

$$S_\delta ^r=C_1^r(𝐤)𝒴^r(t,𝐤)+C_2^r(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝒴^r}(t,𝐤).$$
(22)
This representation corresponds to the fact that $`S_\delta ^r`$ satisfies the equation of the second order (20).

The magnitudes $`C_{1,2}^r(𝐤)`$ are coefficients which depend on momentum $`𝐤`$, and the functions $`𝒴^r(t,𝐤)`$ carry the information about the dependence on time $`t`$.

Let us find out the properties of $`C_{1,2}^r(𝐤)`$ and $`𝒴^r(t,𝐤)`$. First of all it is necessary to establish the connection between $`C_1^r`$ and $`C_2^r`$. To this end we shall consider the isotropic case $`𝒜_1=𝒜_2=`$ $`=𝒜_3=R`$. It is easy to verify that $`a=0`$, $`b=1/R`$, $`\mu =1/R`$. Substituting these values in (20), we bring this equation to the form

$`\ddot{S}_\delta ^r+{\displaystyle \frac{\dot{R}}{R}}\dot{S}_\delta ^r+{\displaystyle \frac{k^2}{R^2}}S_\delta ^r=0.`$
It is easy to check up that the general solution of the latter is of the form $`S_\delta ^r=C_1^r(𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(ik\eta )+C_2^r(𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(ik\eta )`$ with $`\eta =𝑑t/R(t)`$.

Then the equation (21) can be rewritten as

$`\stackrel{}{S_\delta ^+}(𝐤)`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{}{C_1^+}(𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(ik\eta )+\stackrel{}{C_2^+}(𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(ik\eta ),`$
$`\stackrel{}{S_\delta ^{}}(𝐤)`$ $`=`$ $`C_1^{}(𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(ik\eta )+C_2^{}(𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(ik\eta ),`$
hence, $`\stackrel{}{C_1^+}(𝐤)=C_2^{}(𝐤)`$, $`\stackrel{}{C_2^+}(𝐤)=C_1^{}(𝐤)`$.

In general case of anisotropic metric the equation (21) is of the form

$`\stackrel{}{C_1^+}(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝒴^+}(𝐤)+\stackrel{}{C_2^+}(𝐤)𝒴^+(𝐤)=`$
$`=`$ $`C_1^{}(𝐤)𝒴^{}(𝐤)+C_2^{}(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝒴^{}}(𝐤),`$
or

$`C_2^{}(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝒴^+}(𝐤)+C_1^{}(𝐤)𝒴^+(𝐤)=C_1^{}(𝐤)𝒴^{}(𝐤)+C_2^{}(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝒴^{}}(𝐤).`$
The last equation can be easily satisfied by putting $`𝒴^+(𝐤)=𝒴^{}(𝐤)`$. In the isotropic case $`𝒴^\pm (𝐤)=C_0\mathrm{exp}(ik\eta )`$, i.e. the last equation is satisfied trivially.

Let us substitute (22) in (19). It is easy to verify that

$`{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}\left[S_\delta ^r\mu 𝐞_\theta {\displaystyle \frac{r}{k}}\dot{S}_\delta ^r𝐞_\phi \right]={\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}\left[C_1^r(𝐤)𝐔_0^r(t,𝐤)+C_2^r(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝐔_0^r}(t,𝐤)\right]`$
with

$`𝐔_0^r(t,𝐤)=\mu 𝒴^r𝐞_\theta {\displaystyle \frac{r}{k}}\dot{𝒴}^r𝐞_\phi .`$
Then $`𝐄`$ equires the form

$`𝐄`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(g)^{1/4}}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}{\displaystyle }d^3k\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})b^{1/2}[C_1^r(𝐤)𝐔_0^r(t,𝐤)+`$
$`+`$ $`C_2^r(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝐔_0^r}(t,𝐤)].`$
The expression for $`𝐄`$ contains two integrals. Let us change in the second integral the integration variable $`𝐤`$ for $`𝐤`$ and consider the relation

$`{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}C_2^r(𝐤)𝐔_0^r(t,𝐤)=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}C_2^r(𝐤)\left(\mu (𝐤)𝒴^r(t,𝐤)𝐞_\theta (𝐤){\displaystyle \frac{r}{k}}\dot{𝒴}^r(t,𝐤)𝐞_\phi (𝐤)\right)=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}C_1^r(𝐤)\left(\mu (𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝒴^r}(t,𝐤)𝐞_\theta (𝐤)+{\displaystyle \frac{r}{k}}\stackrel{}{\dot{𝒴}^r}(t,𝐤)𝐞_\phi (𝐤)\right)=`$
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}\stackrel{}{C_1^r}(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝐔_0^r}(t,𝐤).`$
After doing so, the expression for $`𝐄`$ acquires the form

$`𝐄`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2(g)^{1/4}}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}{\displaystyle }d^3kb^{1/2}[C_1^r(𝐤)𝐔_0^r(t,𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})+`$ (23)
$`+`$ $`\stackrel{}{C_1^r}(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝐔_0^r}(t,𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱}).`$
Let us present $`𝐄`$ as expansion in respect to complete system of eigenfunctions of the corresponding equation with amplitudes $`C_1^r(𝐤)`$ (the index 1 shall be further omitted).

The vectors $`𝐔_0^r(t,𝐤)`$, involved in the expansion (23), in the case of anisotropic space are analogues of the vectors determining a certain state of circular polarization (in quantum language – determining the states of particles with a certain projection of spin on the direction of movement).

The expansion for magnetic field $`𝐇`$ similar to (23) is of the form

$`𝐇`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2i(g)^{1/4}}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}{\displaystyle }d^3krb^{1/2}[C^r(𝐤)𝐔_0^r(t,𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})+`$ (24)
$`+`$ $`\stackrel{}{C^r}(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝐔_0^r}(t,𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})].`$
Further we shall modify (23) and (24), introducing in the definition of the vectors $`𝐔_0^r(t,𝐤)`$ all functions of time:

$`𝐔^r(t,𝐤)={\displaystyle \frac{1}{(g)^{1/4}b^{1/2}}}\left(\mu 𝒴^r𝐞_\theta {\displaystyle \frac{r}{k}}\dot{𝒴}𝐞_\phi \right).`$
The ultimate expansion for electric and magnetic fields (EMF) is as follows:

$`𝐄`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}{\displaystyle }d^3k[C^r(𝐤)𝐔^r(t,𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})+`$
$`+`$ $`\stackrel{}{C^{+(r)}}(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝐔^r}(t,𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})],`$
$`𝐇`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=\pm 1}{}}{\displaystyle }d^3kr[C^r(𝐤)𝐔^r(t,𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})+`$ (25)
$`+`$ $`\stackrel{}{C^{+(r)}}(𝐤)\stackrel{}{𝐔^r}(t,𝐤)\mathrm{exp}(i\mathrm{𝐤𝐱})].`$
The main characteristic of quantum effects of EMF in anisotropic space are vacuum averages of the operators of symmterized energy-momentum tensor (EMT) of EMF

$`T_{\alpha \mu }(t)`$ $`=`$ $`0|N_t\widehat{T}_{\alpha \mu }(t,x)|0,`$
$`N_t\widehat{T}_{\alpha \mu }`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{T}_{\alpha \mu }0_t|\widehat{T}_{\alpha \mu }|0_t,`$
$`\widehat{T}_{\alpha \mu }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{g^{\nu \rho }}{2}}\{\widehat{F}_{\mu \rho },\widehat{F}_{\alpha \nu }\}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8}}g_{\alpha \mu }\{\widehat{F}^{\beta \nu },\widehat{F}_{\beta \nu }\},`$
$`\{\widehat{A},\widehat{B}\}`$ $`=`$ $`\widehat{A}\widehat{B}\widehat{B}\widehat{A}.`$
In particular, $`T_0^0(t)=\frac{1}{𝒱}0|N_t\widehat{𝐇}(t)|0`$. Similarly to the fact that the solution of Maxwell equations can be presented as superposition of plane waves with wave vector $`𝐤`$, EMT can be expanded as follows:

$$T_\nu ^\mu =𝑑\xi 𝑑\delta \mathrm{sin}(\delta )𝑑K_0(t,k,\delta ,\xi )\stackrel{~}{T}_\nu ^\mu (t,k,\delta ,\xi ),$$
(26)
where $`K_0(t,k,\delta ,\xi )=k\mu (t,\delta ,\xi )`$ is photon physical frequency.

The nonzero spectral components of (26) are

$`\stackrel{~}{T}_0^0={\displaystyle \frac{k^3}{𝒱}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{2}{}}}2S^r,`$
$`\stackrel{~}{T}_1^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^3}{𝒱}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\left[\mathrm{cos}(2\phi )X^r+\mathrm{sin}(2\phi )Y^r{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2(\theta )}{2}}\left(2S^r+U^r\right)\right],`$
$`\stackrel{~}{T}_2^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^3}{𝒱}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\left[\mathrm{cos}(2\phi )X^r\mathrm{sin}(2\phi )Y^r{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}^2(\theta )}{2}}\left(2S^r+U^r\right)\right],`$
$`\stackrel{~}{T}_3^3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^3}{𝒱}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\left[\mathrm{cos}(\theta )2S^r+\mathrm{sin}^2(\theta )U^r\right],`$
$`\stackrel{~}{T}^{12}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^3}{A_1A_2𝒱}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\left[\mathrm{sin}(2\phi )X^r+\mathrm{cos}(2\phi )Y^r\right],`$
$`\stackrel{~}{T}^{13}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^3}{A_1A_3𝒱}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\left[\mathrm{cos}(\phi ){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}(2\theta )}{2}}\left(2S^r+U^r\right)+\mathrm{sin}(\phi )\mathrm{tg}(\theta )Y^r\right],`$
$`\stackrel{~}{T}^{23}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{k^3}{A_2A_3𝒱}}{\displaystyle \underset{r=1}{\overset{2}{}}}\left[\mathrm{sin}(\phi ){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{sin}(2\theta )}{2}}\left(2S^r+U^r\right)\mathrm{cos}(\phi )\mathrm{tg}(\theta )Y^r\right].`$ (27)
The components $`T^{0i}`$ vanish due to spaceous homogeneity of metric. The trace $`\stackrel{~}{T}_\mu ^\mu `$ of (27) vanishes, because the field is massless. The condition of conservativeness $`_\mu T^{\mu 0}=0`$ is satisfied, which in the chosen metric is substantial only for diagonal components of EMT.

In contrast to the case of isotropic space, where EMT is diagonal for all types of fields, EMT in anisotropic space is nondiagonal in respect to space indices. This is related with nonorthogonality of polarization vectors $`𝐔^{(_1)}(t,𝐤)`$ and $`𝐔^{(1)}(t,𝐤)`$:

$`(𝐔^{(+1)}(t,𝐤),\stackrel{}{𝐔^{(1)}}(t,𝐤))=b^1(t)(g(t))^{1/2}(\mu ^2(t,𝐤)𝒴^{+1}(t,𝐤)\times `$
$`\times \stackrel{}{𝒴^1}(t,𝐤){\displaystyle \frac{1}{k^2}}\dot{𝒴}^{+1}(t,𝐤)\stackrel{}{\dot{𝒴}^1}(t,𝐤)).`$
(At $`t=t_0`$, according to initial conditions, $`(𝐔^{(+1)},\stackrel{}{𝐔^{(1)}})=0`$.) For this reason it is impossible to rotate the orthogonal axes, in which a given components of EMT is evaluated under fixed $`𝐤`$ to make them coinciding with the direction of vectors $`𝐔^r(t,𝐤)`$.

In formulas (27) for spectral components of EMT the following notation is introduced:

$`X^r=2S^r\left(2S^r+U^r\right){\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{cos}^2(\theta )+1}{2}},Y^r=r\mathrm{cos}(\theta )V^r.`$
The introducing of the functions $`S^r`$, $`U^r`$ and $`V^r`$ is carried out in two steps. First we introduce the functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }^r`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^r`$ according to formulas

$`𝒴^r=\left({\displaystyle \frac{kb}{\mu }}\right)^{1/2}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^re_++\mathrm{\Psi }^re_{}\right),\dot{𝒴}^r=iK_0\left({\displaystyle \frac{kb}{\mu }}\right)^{1/2}\left(\mathrm{\Phi }^re_+\mathrm{\Psi }^re_{}\right).`$
The functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }^r`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^r`$ satisfy the set of equations

$`\dot{\mathrm{\Psi }}^r`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Phi }^re_+^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{W}{2}}+ir{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{W}}{2}}\right)ir{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{W}}{2}}\mathrm{\Psi }^r,`$
$`\dot{\mathrm{\Phi }}^r`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{\Psi }^re_{}^2\left({\displaystyle \frac{W}{2}}+ir{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{W}}{2}}\right)+ir{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{W}}{2}}\mathrm{\Phi }^r,`$ (28)
where $`W`$ and $`\overline{W}`$ are defined by the relations

$`W=\dot{\mu }/\mu \dot{b}/b,\overline{W}=\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }H}/\mu ,H_i𝒜_i^1\dot{𝒜}_1,\overline{\mathrm{\Delta }H}=H_3H_1.`$
Let us define the functions $`S^r`$, $`U^r`$ and $`V^r`$ as

$`S^r=|\mathrm{\Psi }^r|^2,U^r=2\mathrm{R}\mathrm{e}\left(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Psi }^r}\mathrm{\Phi }^re_+^2\right),V^r=2\mathrm{I}\mathrm{m}\left(\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Psi }^r}\mathrm{\Phi }^re_+^2\right).`$
Differentiating these expressions by $`t`$ and taking into account (28), we obtain a set of equations, satisfied by the functions $`S^r`$, $`U^r`$, $`V^r`$:

$`\dot{S}^r`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{W}{2}}U^r+r{\displaystyle \frac{\overline{W}}{2}}V^r,`$
$`\dot{U}^r`$ $`=`$ $`W(2S^r+1)(r\overline{W}+2K_0)V^r,`$
$`\dot{V}^r`$ $`=`$ $`r\overline{W}(2S^r+1)+(r\overline{W}+2K_0)U^r`$ (29)
with initial conditions $`S^r=U^r=V^r=0`$ at $`t=t_0`$. Moreover, there is connection formula

$`(U^r)^2+(V^r)^2=4S^r(S^r+1).`$
Comparing the results for all types of fields, we get the conclusion that the set of equations for functions $`S^r`$, $`U^r`$, $`V^r`$ can be written in general form as

$$\frac{d}{dt}\left(\begin{array}{c}S^r\\ U^r\\ V^r\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{ccc}0& \frac{W}{2}& r\frac{\overline{W}}{2}\\ 2W& 0& (r\overline{W}+2K_0)\\ 2rW& rW+2K_0& 0\end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{c}S^r\\ U^r\\ V^r\end{array}\right)+\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\ W\\ r\overline{W}\end{array}\right).$$
(30)
As it can be seen, the structure of the set of equations (30) is similar to that of the set of equations derived for scalar field and massive spinor field .

The author is grateful to Yu.A. Danilov, A.V. Nesteruk, and S.A. Pritomanov for helpful discussions.