text:
# Quasiperiodic Tip Splitting in Directional Solidification

\[()

We report experimental results on the tip splitting dynamics of seaweed growth in directional solidification of succinonitrile alloys with poly(ethylene oxide) or acetone as solutes. The seaweed or dense branching morphology was selected by solidifying grains which are oriented close to the $`\{`$111$`\}`$ plane. Despite the random appearance of the growth, a quasiperiodic tip splitting morphology was observed in which the tip alternately splits to the left and to the right. The tip splitting frequency $`f`$ was found to be related to the growth velocity $`V`$ as a power law $`fV^{1.5}`$. This finding is consistent with the predictions of a tip splitting model that is also presented. Small anisotropies are shown to lead to different kinds of seaweed morphologies.

\]

Directional solidification of binary alloys has received considerable attention over the last fifty years as an example of a non-equilibrium pattern forming system with technological importance. A breakthrough in understanding was gained when surface tension anisotropy was identified as a singular perturbation that selects stable dendrites . Many important experiments have been performed to understand the structure and dynamics of dendritic growth and great insights have been gained . However, when growing a cubic crystal close to the $`\{111\}`$ plane, the surface tension is nearly isotropic and it was shown  that the growth is irregular with constant tip splitting. This is called seaweed growth , or dense branching morphology , and is also observed in such different systems as viscous fingering , bacterial colonies , electrodeposition , annealing magnetic films , and drying water films .

In this Letter, we report experimental results on the dynamics of seaweed growth in the directional solidification of binary succinonitrile alloys. By using a grain oriented near the $`\{111\}`$ plane, we observe quasiperiodic alternating tip splitting . We find the tip splitting frequency to be related to the growth velocity by a power law with an exponent close to 1.5. We show that a simple model motivated by observations of the growth dynamics can explain this behavior and that a small misalignment of the crystal from the $`\{111\}`$ plane is necessary for quasiperiodic alternating tip splitting. To our knowledge, neither the scaling nor the regularly alternating splitting have been predicted theoretically. Our results show that different types of seaweed morphologies exist that at first sight would appear the same.

The surface tension anisotropy is based on the underlying cubic structure of the growing solid. Under typical conditions in low speed directional solidification, the orientation of the dendrites and sidebranches is determined by the crystalline structure, pulling direction, and imposed temperature gradient. Changing the angle between the crystalline axis and the pulling direction changes the degree and orientation of the effective anisotropy . Because of the cubic symmetry, growth in the $`\{111\}`$ plane has an effective surface tension that is close to isotropic. As shown in Fig. 1, under the same growth conditions, dendrites are observed for crystals growing in the $`\{100\}`$ direction and disordered seaweeds with continuous tip splitting are observed for crystals oriented in the $`\{111\}`$ plane.

The present experiment was performed with a directional solidification apparatus in which a thin sample $`(13`$cm x $`1.5`$cm x (5-50)$`\mu `$m) was moved through a linear temperature gradient at constant velocity . In these experiments, the gradient was maintained at about 18 K/cm with a stability of $`\pm 10`$ mK on each side. The two mixtures used were transparent alloys of 0.25$`\%`$ poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO)  and 1.5$`\%`$ acetone (ACE) in succinonitrile (SCN). The polymer has a very small partition coefficient and diffusivity ($`k0.01,D80\mu `$m$`{}_{}{}^{2}/`$s) while for the acetone sample they are larger $`(k0.33,D1300\mu `$m$`{}_{}{}^{2}/`$s) .

The solid-liquid interface is observed with phase contrast microscopy, and images are recorded using a CCD camera and time lapse video. To observe seaweed growth, the sample is melted and quenched, seeding numerous grains. One grain with the optimal orientation is selected and all the others are melted off. The chosen grain is then allowed to grow and fill the width of the cell.

For seaweed growth, we observe two types of tip splitting events: (i) The tip splits off-center such that the larger of the two remaining tips continues to grow as the other falls behind. This can lead to growth in which the tip alternately splits towards the left and right at regular intervals as a single main branch steadily grows forward. (ii) The tip splits near its center producing two tips of comparable size. These two new branches interact with each other until either one falls behind, or they spread apart and grow as main branches. In this Letter, we will focus on the dominant case (i) and specifically on quasiperiodic alternating tip splitting.

We characterized the tip splitting process by measuring the curvature at each point along an arc centered on the tip, which we defined as the furthest point along the growth direction on a particular branch. The segment used is typically 300 $`\mu `$m long as compared to the tip radii of (25-75)$`\mu `$m. Plotting the curvature versus the position along the arc and stacking the plots from successive times, we created curvature-time (CT) plots as shown in Fig. 2. There, the greyscale intensity corresponds to the absolute value of the curvature. The striking feature is that the curvatures at the tip oscillate. The CT plot shows how the tip flattens and splits on one side before it begins to flatten on the other side. The bright pairs of lines to the sides represent the large curvature at the deep groove formed when a tip splits. The tip splitting is not random as one might expect for noise-induced splitting; for most of the runs, the splitting alternates regularly for more than 85$`\%`$ of the time. It should be noted, however, that this behavior is quasiperiodic. The time between individual tip splittings fluctuates within 25$`\%`$ of the mean period and the tip occasionally splits multiple times on the same side.

The periodicity is also broken occasionally (typically after 10-20 cycles) when the tip splits nearly in the center, forming two symmetric main branches (case ii). These two “new” branches influence each other by initially suppressing the tip splitting on their adjacent sides, reminiscent of doublon growth . Once one branch falls behind or the tips are separated sufficiently, the tips resume the quasiperiodic alternating tip splitting.

The splitting frequency was measured at each velocity by following a single branch over long times. It was determined from the peak of the power spectrum of the CT plot, from the peak of the probability distribution of time intervals between splitting events, or simply by counting the number of times the tip splits and dividing by the total time of the run, all of which gave the same results within measurement errors. As shown in Fig. 3, the splitting frequency as a function of velocity follows the power law $`fV^{1.5}`$ for the two mixtures.

To model this behavior, we note that the tip flattens and widens before becoming unstable. One can expect that the wavelength $`\lambda _t`$ of this tip instability is related to the initial instability of the flat interface $`\lambda _f`$ under the same conditions. This is confirmed for both samples in Fig. 4 (inset). $`\lambda _t`$ is smaller than $`\lambda _f`$ since the expanding tip will split at the smallest wavelength that is unstable in this evolving state. Fig. 4 shows the wavelength $`\lambda _t`$ as a function of pulling speed for both samples and the solid line corresponds to $`\lambda V^{0.5}`$. The exponent of $`\frac{1}{2}`$ is the expected value for $`\lambda _f`$ based on linear stability analysis . In practice, $`\lambda _t`$ is more convenient to measure since it can be determined as an average over many events during the portion of the run being studied. From dimensional analysis, we now see that the frequency results from the pulling velocity $`V`$ divided by the length scale $`\lambda `$. That is, $`fV/\lambda V^{3/2}`$ appears to be satisfied.

Additional quantitative insight is gained by extracting the interface at subsequent times and superimposing the images to observe the growing solid (Fig. 5A). It is apparent that the flat region of the tip grows until it is wide enough to become unstable. We observe that the tip widens at a constant rate until it reaches the instability length of the initial flat interface. After splitting, the surviving tip widens in a similar way. As seen in Fig. 5B, we can view this process as a series of triangles formed by the flat regions. For SCN-PEO, we often observe a delay between consecutive splittings, which introduces a gap between the triangles in Fig. 5B. This may be explained by the fact that the tip is initially constrained by the presence of the neighboring tip and is inhibited from widening until the neighbor falls behind. The average period between splitting is $`\tau =1/f`$ and we assume the delay time is a fixed fraction of the average period, $`\tau _d=\alpha \tau `$, where $`\alpha `$ is constant for a given sample. If $`\alpha `$ is small, the angle $`\theta `$ at which the tip widens is predicted from Fig. 5C to be

$$\theta _{th}=2\mathrm{arctan}\left(\frac{\lambda _ff}{2V}\left(1+\alpha \right)\right).$$
(1)
All quantities on the right, other than the free parameter $`\alpha `$, have been measured, so a quantitative comparison can be made between the predicted value $`\theta _{th}`$ and $`\theta _{ex}`$ which was measured directly from the experimental pictures. Fig. 6 presents this data for the two mixtures considered. We observed excellent agreement between the model and the measurement. In addition, we observe the angle to be independent of velocity, which with Eq. 1 implies the above scaling relationship, $`fV/\lambda `$. It also suggests that $`\theta `$ depends only on a materials property, such as the surface tension of the growing solid. The fact that the two samples show similar angles may indicate that a similar surface tension profile exists in these particular grains. The drop off at low speeds for SCN-PEO reflects a change in morphology since when the speed was decreased the growth became increasingly cellular and the tip did not continually split. It is unclear why the SCN-ACE sample does not exhibit the delay seen in the SCN-PEO mixture.

The above observations suggest that the alternating tip splitting may be correlated with specific crystalline orientations near $`\{111\}`$ and not with the choice of solute or sample dimensions. In fact, Akamatsu et al. also noted a region of quasiperiodicity in a CBr4-C2Cl6 mixture which is similar to our observations . It is important to note that it is possible to seed other kinds of seaweeds in these samples which do not exhibit this striking periodicity. This confirms that the specific grain is important.

To support this conjecture, the temperature gradient was decreased in order to diminish the effect of the imposed growth direction. Fig. 7 compares a space-time plot (ST)  of a quasiperiodic tip splitting growth (Fig. 7A) with that for the same grain when the temperature gradient is decreased (Fig. 7B). The growth locks into two symmetric directions revealing the weak anisotropy. This accounts for the tendency of the tip to grow outward and flatten as growth along these directions is preferred. After converting time into distance, the angle between the two growth directions in Fig. 7B is $`40^{}`$, which should be an upper limit on the angle measured in Fig. 6. We conclude that a small amount of anisotropy has important consequences on the seaweed growth observed. It also confirms that seaweed growth is possible for weak anisotropy.

In conclusion, experimental studies of the low anisotropy seaweed growth morphology for certain grains show surprisingly regular tip splitting despite its generally disordered appearance. We find that the curvature of the tip oscillates, reflecting the cyclic changes in its shape which lead to alternating tip splitting. The tip splits quasiperiodically, with a frequency that is related to the growth velocity as $`fV^{3/2}`$. We present a simple model that assumes that the tip splits when the width of the flat region on the tip is sufficiently wide for the linear instability to occur. The angle at which the tip widens is independent of growth velocity explaining the observed scaling relation. We show evidence that a slight anisotropy in the surface tension causes the observed alternating tip splitting. It is interesting to ask whether the behavior observed here could also be found in other systems, such as Saffman-Taylor fingering where a weak anisotropy is imposed.

We thank Nigel Goldenfeld for valuable discussions. This work was supported by the Cornell Center for Materials Research (CCMR), a Materials Research Science and Engineering Center of the National Science Foundation (DMR-0079992).


format: text

text:
# Light Higgs Production at a Photon Collider

## 1 Introduction

The experimental discovery of the Higgs boson is crucial for understanding the mechanism of electroweak symmetry breaking. The search for Higgs particles is one of the main goals for LEP2 and the Tevatron and will be one of the major motivations for the future Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and Linear e+e- Collider (LC). Once the Higgs boson is discovered, it will be of primary importance to determine its tree-level and one-loop induced couplings, spin, parity, CP-nature, and its total width in a model independent way. In this respect, the $`\gamma \gamma `$ Compton Collider option of the LC offers a unique possibility to produce the Higgs boson as an $`s`$-channel resonance decaying into $`\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}`$, WW or ZZ and thereby to measure the two-photon Higgs width. This partial width is of special interest, since it first appears at the one-loop level so that all heavy charged particles which obtain their masses from electroweak symmetry breaking contribute to the loop. Moreover, the contributions of very heavy particles do not decouple. In addition, combined measurements of $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )`$ and $`\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )`$ at the LC provide a model independent measurement of the total Higgs width .

The lower bound on $`m_\mathrm{h}`$ from direct searches at LEP is $`113.5`$ GeV at $`95\%`$ CL . A recent global analysis of precision electroweak data  suggests that the Higgs boson is light, yielding $`m_\mathrm{h}=62_{30}^{+53}`$ GeV. This fact is in remarkable agreement with the well known upper bound of $`130`$ GeV for the lightest Higgs boson mass in the minimal version of supersymmetric theories, the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model (MSSM) . For this case of a light Higgs boson the results of Monte Carlo simulations of Higgs production in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions with final decay to $`\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}`$ quark pairs will be presented here. Similar studies as presented here but without detector simulation can be found in  but without detector simulation and in  but without taking into account higher order double logarithmic corrections. Since the current upper bound on the Higgs mass from radiative corrections is $`m_\mathrm{h}<170`$ GeV at $`95\%`$ CL , one can still hope to measure the two-photon Higgs width at the 300-500 GeV LC for heavier Higgs masses by studying its production in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions and final decays into WW  or ZZ  states.

The accuracy of the $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )`$ measurements to be reached can be inferred from the results of the studies of the coupling of the lightest SUSY Higgs boson to two photons in the decoupling regime . It was shown that in the decoupling limit, where all other Higgs bosons are very heavy and no supersymmetric particle has been discovered at LHC or LC, chargino and top squark loops can generate a sizable difference between the standard and the SUSY two-photon Higgs couplings. Typical deviations are at the few percent level. Top squarks heavier than 250 GeV can induce deviations even larger than $`10\%`$ if their couplings to the Higgs boson are large.

## 2 Signal and background

The cross-section of resonant Higgs production at a $`\gamma \gamma `$ Collider is proportional to the product

$$\sigma (\gamma \gamma \mathrm{h}^0\mathrm{X})=\mathrm{z}\frac{\mathrm{dL}_{\gamma \gamma }}{\mathrm{dz}}\frac{4\pi ^2}{\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{h}^0}^3}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{h}^0\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}^0\mathrm{X})(1+\lambda _1\lambda _2)$$
(1)
Here the effective photon-photon luminosity $`L_{\gamma \gamma }`$ is introduced (see the next section). $`\lambda _{1,2}`$ are mean high energy photon helicities.

The Standard Model (SM) Higgs branching ratios and the Higgs total width are calculated with the help of the program HDECAY . The program includes the full massive NLO corrections for $`\mathrm{h}\overline{\text{q}}\text{q}`$ decays close to the thresholds as well as the massless $`𝒪(\alpha _\mathrm{s}^3)`$ corrections far above the thresholds. For the Higgs signal only two-particle final states are generated, since the Parton Shower (PS) algorithm of JETSET is used to simulate three and higher particle final states.

The main background to $`\mathrm{h}`$ production is the continuum production of $`\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}`$ and $`\overline{\text{c}}\text{c}`$ pairs. In this respect, the availability of high degree of photon beams circular polarization is crucial, since for the equal photon helicities $`(\pm \pm )`$ producing spin-zero resonant states, the $`\gamma \gamma \overline{\text{q}}\text{q}`$ QED Born cross-section is suppressed by the factor $`m_\mathrm{q}^2/s`$ :

$$\frac{d\sigma ^{\mathrm{Born}}(J_z=0)}{dt}=\frac{12\pi \alpha ^2Q_\mathrm{q}^4}{s^2}\frac{m_\mathrm{q}^2s^2(s2m_\mathrm{q}^2)}{t_1^2u_1^2}$$
(2)
and

$$\frac{d\sigma ^{\mathrm{Born}}(J_z=\pm 2)}{dt}=\frac{12\pi \alpha ^2Q_\mathrm{q}^4}{s^2}\frac{(t_1u_1m_\mathrm{q}^2s)(u_1^2+t_1^2+2m_\mathrm{q}^2s)}{t_1^2u_1^2}.$$
(3)
Here $`m_\mathrm{q}`$ is the quark mass, $`Q_\mathrm{q}`$ its charge, and $`t_1=tm_\mathrm{q}^2`$, $`u_1=um_\mathrm{q}^2`$.

Virtual one-loop QCD corrections for $`J_z=0`$ are found to be especially large due to the double-logarithmic enhancement factor, so that the corrections are comparable or even larger than the Born contribution for the two-jet final topologies . For small values of the cutoff $`y_{\mathrm{cut}}`$ separating two and three-jet events, the two-jet cross-section calculated to order $`\alpha _\mathrm{s}`$ becomes negative in the central region. Recently leading double-logarithmic QCD corrections for $`J_z=0`$ have been resummed to all orders . Taking into account non-Sudakov form factors to higher orders makes the cross-section well defined and positive definite in all regions of the phase space.

The simulation program includes exact one-loop QCD corrections to heavy quark production in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions  and the non-Sudakov form factor in the double-logarithmic approximation through four loops :

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\sigma _{\mathrm{virt}}^{\mathrm{DL}}}{\sigma _{\mathrm{Born}}}}1+6+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\left(56+2{\displaystyle \frac{C_A}{C_F}}\right)^2+`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{90}}\left(94+90{\displaystyle \frac{C_A}{C_F}}+2{\displaystyle \frac{C_A^2}{C_F^2}}\right)^3+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2520}}\left(418+140{\displaystyle \frac{C_A}{C_F}}+238{\displaystyle \frac{C_A^2}{C_F^2}}+3{\displaystyle \frac{C_A^3}{C_F^3}}\right)^4`$
where $`=C_F\frac{\alpha _\mathrm{s}}{4\pi }\mathrm{log}^2\frac{m_\mathrm{q}^2}{s}`$ is the one-loop hard form factor. Since it is a non-trivial task to write down an event generator including both NLO corrections and the Parton Shower algorithm, we do not use any Parton Shower for background $`\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}`$ and $`\overline{\text{c}}\text{c}`$ production. So the experimental value of the $`y_{\mathrm{cut}}`$ parameter should not be chosen too small, otherwise resummed Sudakov corrections are needed. Two-parton ($`\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}`$, $`\overline{\text{c}}\text{c}`$, and $`\overline{\text{b}}\text{bg}`$, $`\overline{\text{c}}\text{cg}`$ with $`y_{\mathrm{cut}}<0.01`$) and three-parton ($`\overline{\text{b}}\text{bg}`$, $`\overline{\text{c}}\text{cg}`$ with $`y_{\mathrm{cut}}>0.01`$) final states are generated separately and the JETSET  string fragmentation algorithm is applied afterwards. The event generator both for the Higgs signal and heavy quark background is implemented using the programs BASES/SPRING .

## 3 $`𝜸𝜸`$ luminosity

The original polarized photon energy spectra  are used assuming $`100\%`$ laser and $`85\%`$ electron beam polarizations with $`2\lambda _e^{1,2}\lambda _\gamma ^{1,2}=0.85`$. The Parameter $`x=\frac{4E_e\omega _0}{m_e^2}`$ is taken to be 4.8. Assuming that the Higgs boson will already have been discovered at LEP, the LHC and/or the LC and that its mass will be known, we tune the ee collision energy $`\sqrt{s}_{\mathrm{ee}}`$ to be $`\sqrt{s}_{\mathrm{ee}}=m_\mathrm{h}/0.8`$ so that the Higgs mass corresponds to the peak of the photon-photon luminosity spectrum $`z\frac{dL_{\gamma \gamma }}{dz}`$, $`z=0.8`$, where

$$z=\frac{W_{\gamma \gamma }}{2E_e},z_{\mathrm{max}}=\frac{x}{x+1}=0.83.$$

We assume a total integrated $`\gamma \gamma `$ luminosity of $`L_{\gamma \gamma }(0<z<z_{\mathrm{max}})=150`$ fb-1 with idealized Compton spectra . Realistic simulations of the $`\gamma \gamma `$ luminosity  taking into account beamstrahlung, coherent pair creation and interaction between charged particles show that idealized spectra  will be strongly distorted in the low energy part of the spectrum. However, in the hard part of the spectrum which is relevant for our simulation, the idealized spectra represent a very good approximation . The luminosity in the hard part of the spectrum is $`L_{\gamma \gamma }(0.65<z<z_{\mathrm{max}})=43`$ fb-1 which corresponds to the integrated geometric luminosity of e-e- collisions of $`L_{\mathrm{ee}}400`$ fb-1 111According to the present understanding  $`L_{\mathrm{ee}}`$ at TESLA in the Higgs region can be about $`L_{\mathrm{e}^+\mathrm{e}^{}}(500\text{GeV})`$, where ”nominal” $`L_{\mathrm{e}^+\mathrm{e}^{}}(500\text{GeV})=3\times 10^{34}`$ cm-2s-1..

## 4 Cross-sections

In Table 1 the cross-sections for the Higgs signal and for the background calculated without detector simulation are given. Both quark jets are assumed to satisfy a $`|\mathrm{cos}\theta |<0.9`$ cut. The resolved photon contribution to the $`\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}`$ background is found to be negligible. It is therefore not included in the subsequent detector simulation analysis.

## 5 Results of the Monte Carlo simulation

The Monte Carlo simulation of the fragmentation is done with JETSET . Signal and background are studied using the fast detector simulation program SIMDET  for a typical TESLA detector. Jets are reconstructed using the Durham algorithm with $`y_{\mathrm{cut}}=0.02`$. b tagging is not simulated and b tagging efficiencies of $`70\%`$ for $`\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}`$ events and $`3.5\%`$ for $`\overline{\text{c}}\text{c}`$ events are used instead . These efficiencies are based on double-tagging of b jets to suppress $`\overline{\text{c}}\text{c}`$ events by a factor of 20 which is large enough to overcome the enhancement factor of approximately 16 due to the larger c quark charge. The c rejection and the b tagging efficiency depend very much on the inner radius of the tracking detector .

The jet multiplicities for a Higgs signal with $`m_\mathrm{h}=120`$ GeV and for the heavy quark background at the detector level are shown in Fig. 1. The three-jet rates are comparable for signal and background. Applying a jet multiplicity cut ($`n_{\mathrm{jet}}=2`$) will therefore not improve significantly the signal to background ratio for the chosen $`y_{\mathrm{cut}}`$ value. Another advantage of not applying a jet multiplicity cut is due to the fact that no resummation of Sudakov logarithms was done for the heavy quark background. If no jet multiplicity cut is used, Sudakov logarithms are not present.

The t-channel background processes are forward peaked and the NLO order corrections even increase this effect, whereas the s-channel signal process has an isotropic angular distribution. The following cuts are therefore used to suppress background:

(i) Events where quark jets are scattered at a small angle are rejected by requiring for the thrust angle $`|\mathrm{cos}\theta _\mathrm{T}|<0.7`$ (see Fig. 2).

(ii) Since the Higgs boson is produced at the peak of the photon-photon luminosity spectrum almost at rest, a cut on the longitudinal momentum component of the event divided by the ee centre-of-mass energy, $`|p_\mathrm{z}|/\sqrt{s}_{\mathrm{ee}}<0.1`$, further reduces the background.

(iii) Most background events are produced at the lower energy tail of the photon-photon luminosity distribution. A cut on the total visible energy, $`E_{\mathrm{vis}}/\sqrt{s}_{\mathrm{ee}}>0.6`$, eliminates most soft background events.

The invariant mass distributions for the combined $`\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}(\text{g})`$ and $`\overline{\text{c}}\text{c}(\text{g})`$ background, and for the Higgs signal are shown in Fig. 3 after applying these cuts. The relative statistical error is calculated using

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )}=\frac{\sqrt{N_{\mathrm{obs}}}}{N_{\mathrm{obs}}N_{\mathrm{BG}}},$$

where $`N_{\mathrm{obs}}`$ is the sum of the signal and background events and $`N_{\mathrm{BG}}`$ the number of background events. It lies in the range

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }[\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\overline{\text{b}}\text{b})]}{[\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\overline{\text{b}}\text{b})]}210\%$$

in the Higgs mass range between 120 and 160 GeV.

Systematic errors would include the modelling of the b-tagging and the precise determination of the background shape. The background shape could be studied without relying on the theoretical predictions by running the collider at an energy below the Higgs production threshold, since the light Higgs boson is expected to be very narrow.

Assuming that at the e+e- linear collider (or at a high luminosity $`\gamma \gamma `$ collider) the $`\mathrm{h}\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}`$ and $`\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma `$ branching ratios can be measured with an accuracy of

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\overline{\text{b}}\text{b})}{\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\overline{\text{b}}\text{b})}=23\%\text{ and }\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )}{\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )}=1015\%$$

the total width of the Higgs boson can be calculated using

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_\mathrm{h}=\frac{[\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\overline{\text{b}}\text{b})]}{[\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )][\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\overline{\text{b}}\text{b})]}$$

to an accuracy dominated by the expected error on $`\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )`$.

The influence of the values of the b tag efficiencies for $`\overline{\text{b}}\text{b}`$ and $`\overline{\text{c}}\text{c}`$ events on the accuracy of two-photon Higgs width was also studied. b and c tag efficiencies were taken from a parametrisation by Battaglia . In the region of b tag efficiencies from 50% to 90% the relative error on $`\mathrm{\Gamma }(\mathrm{h}\gamma \gamma )\mathrm{BR}(\mathrm{h}\overline{\text{b}}\text{b})`$ is quite stable.

## 6 Conclusions

Our preliminary results show that the two-photon width of the Higgs boson can be measured at the photon-photon collider with high statistical accuracy of about 2-9% for the Higgs mass range between 120 GeV and 160 GeV. At such an accuracy one can discriminate between the SM Higgs particle and the lightest scalar Higgs boson of the MSSM in the decoupling limit, where all other Higgs bosons are very heavy and no supersymmetric particle has been discovered at the e+e- LC. Due to the large charm production cross-section in $`\gamma \gamma `$ collisions, excellent b tagging is required.


text:
# Phase Transitions for Flat adS Black Holes

## Abstract

We reexamine the thermodynamics of adS black holes with Ricci flat horizons using the adS soliton as the thermal background. We find that there is a phase transition which is dependent not only on the temperature, but also on the black hole area, which is an independent parameter. As in the spherical adS black hole, this phase transition is related via the adS/CFT correspondence to a confinement-deconfinement transition in the large $`N`$ gauge theory on the conformal boundary at infinity.

Black hole thermodynamics in anti-de Sitter (adS) spacetimes is of current interest through its connection to large N gauge theories. A study of the thermodynamics of spherically symmetric adS black holes by Hawking and Page  showed that there is a phase transition: high temperature black holes are stable while low temperature black holes are unstable and decay to the global adS spacetime. Using the adS/CFT correspondence , it was shown by Witten  that in the large N limit of an $`𝒩=4`$ SU(N) gauge theory on the conformal boundary, this phase transition corresponds to a deconfinement-confinement transition. Whether or not such transitions occur for black holes with horizons of more complicated topology is therefore of interest since it can provide insights into the large N limit of gauge theories on different topologies.

Topological black holes in asymptotically adS spacetimes were first found by  in three and four spacetime dimensions (see also ). These solutions have been generalised to arbitrary dimensions in  where the black hole horizons are Einstein spaces of positive, negative or zero curvature. Being static, they lend themselves to the standard equilibrium thermodynamics analysis . It was shown in  that there are no phase transitions for adS black holes with Ricci flat horizons when the zero mass black hole is taken as the thermal background.

We show that the choice of background is crucial: using the adS soliton of Horowitz and Myers  as the thermal background instead, we find that there is indeed a phase transition for adS black holes with Ricci flat horizons. This choice is a natural one, as the adS soliton is conjectured to be the lowest energy solution for spacetimes which, like adS black holes with Ricci flat horizons, asymptotically approach the adS soliton sufficiently rapidly . We show that, in 4 or more dimensions, there are two independent parameters that determine this phase transition: the temperature and the black hole area. This behavior differs from that of the spherical adS black holes in 4 or more dimensions for which the phase transition depends only on the temperature. (In 3 dimensions, the phase transition is identical to the spherical case, since the adS black hole with Ricci flat horizon is the same as the spherical adS black hole, and the adS soliton is diffeomorphic to global adS.) Following  we argue that the deconfinement phase corresponds to a large, cold black hole, while the confinement phase corresponds to a small, hot adS soliton. As in the spherical case, the deconfinement-confinement transition can be seen to occur only for anti-periodic spinors.

A useful form of the $`n`$ dimensional adS soliton of  for negative cosmological constant $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ is

$$ds_s^2=r^2dt_s^2+\frac{dr^2}{V_s(r)}+V_s(r)d\varphi _s^2+r^2h_{ij}(\mathrm{\Theta })d\theta _id\theta _j$$
(1)
where

$$V_s(r)=\left(\frac{r^2}{l^2}\frac{𝐤_s^{n1}}{r^{n3}}\right),\mathrm{\Lambda }=\frac{(n1)(n2)}{2l^2}.$$
(2)
Here, $`h_{ij}(\mathrm{\Theta })`$ is a Ricci flat metric on the quotient manifold $`R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a finite discrete group and the $`\mathrm{\Theta }=\{\theta _i\}`$ are coordinates on this manifold. A simple example of such an $`R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the torus $`T^{n3}`$. Regularity requires $`r𝐫_{s+}`$, where $`V_s(𝐫_{s+})=0`$, and $`\varphi _s`$ to be identified with period $`\beta _s=\frac{4\pi l^2}{(n1)𝐫_{s+}}`$. The adS soliton has a flat conformal boundary $`_s`$ of topology $`R\times S^1\times R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, as opposed to global adS which has a positive curvature $``$ of topology $`R\times S^{n2}`$.

Horowitz and Myers conjectured that in five dimensions any spacetime which asymptotically approaches the soliton metric $`\overline{g}_{\mu \nu }`$, i.e., $`g_{\mu \nu }=\overline{g}_{\mu \nu }+h_{\mu \nu }`$, such that $`h_{\gamma \rho }=O(r^2),h_{\gamma r}=O(r^4)`$ and $`h_{rr}=O(r^6)`$, for $`\gamma ,\rho r`$, must have energy $`E0`$ with respect to the soliton, the equality being satisfied only by the soliton itself. This conjecture is therefore restricted to those spacetimes whose $``$ and asymptotics both match that of the soliton.

The metric of adS black holes with Ricci flat horizons (henceforth called flat adS black holes) can be written

$$ds_{bh}^2=V_b(r)dt_b^2+\frac{dr^2}{V_b(r)}+r^2d\varphi _b^2+r^2h_{ij}(\mathrm{\Theta })d\theta _id\theta _j$$
(3)
where $`V_b(r)`$ is the function (2) with the parameter $`𝐤_b`$ replacing $`𝐤_s`$. When $`\varphi _b`$ is identified with period $`\eta _b`$, this solution has a conformal boundary $`_bR\times S^1\times R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ which is diffeomorphic to that of the soliton, $`_s`$. Note that the horizon is at $`V_b(𝐫_{b+})=0`$, and has the same topology as $`_b`$. The zeros of $`V_\alpha (r)`$ are given by $`𝐫_{\alpha +}^{n1}=𝐤_\alpha ^{n1}l^2`$, where we have introduced the label $`\alpha \{b,s\}`$ for convenience. The area of the black hole horizon for $`R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ compact is,

$$A_b=\mathrm{vol}(R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma })\eta _b𝐫_{b+}^{n2}.$$
(4)
The black hole metric (3) asymptotically approaches the adS soliton with the required $`n`$-dimensional generalisation of the fall off conditions of , so that the soliton can indeed be taken as the background. We note that for $`n=3`$, the flat adS black hole and the spherical adS black hole are the same and that the $`n=3`$ soliton is in fact just global adS. Since the spherical case is well understood, we will restrict our analysis to $`n>3`$.

We now calculate the energy of the black hole with respect to the soliton background using the standard regularisation scheme, in which we match the two solutions at some finite cut off radius $`R`$, calculate the energy as a function of $`R`$, then take the limit, $`R\mathrm{}`$. The matching condition at finite $`R`$ is,

$$\beta _b\sqrt{V_b(R)}=R\eta _s,$$
(5)
along with the requirement that the metrics on $`R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ match for both solutions. In the special case $`R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }\mathrm{T}^{n3}`$, this means that the periodicities of the $`\theta _i`$ are the same for the soliton and the black hole. The regulated energy of the black hole is,

$$(R)=\frac{1}{8\pi G}𝑑\mu N_b(K_bK_s),$$
(6)
where $`N_b`$ is the lapse for the black hole, the $`K_\alpha `$ are extrinsic curvatures of the “matching” boundary at $`R`$ for the two solutions and $`d\mu `$ is the volume element of the surface at $`R`$. Using (5) and taking $`R\mathrm{}`$, we get

$$=\frac{\mathrm{vol}(R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma })}{4G}\frac{l}{(n1)𝐫_{s+}}[(n2)𝐤_b^{n1}+𝐤_s^{n1}],$$
(7)
which is always positive with respect to the soliton, in keeping with the Horowitz-Myers conjecture.

In order to study the thermodynamics of the black hole in the semiclassical limit, we go to the Euclidean sector by a Wick rotation $`t_\alpha i\tau _\alpha `$,

$$ds_b^2=V_b(r)d\tau _b^2+\frac{dr^2}{V_b(r)}+r^2d\varphi _b^2+r^2h_{ij}(\mathrm{\Theta })d\theta _id\theta _j,$$
(8)
where regularity demands that $`\tau _b`$ be identified with period, $`\beta _b=\frac{4\pi l^2}{(n1)𝐫_{b+}}`$. The Euclideanised soliton is,

$$ds_s^2=r^2d\tau _s^2+\frac{dr^2}{V_s(r)}+V_s(r)d\varphi _s^2+r^2h_{ij}(\mathrm{\Theta })d\theta _id\theta _j,$$
(9)
where $`\tau _s`$ can have an arbitrary periodicity $`\eta _s`$.

Next, we calculate the action of the black hole (8) of mass parameter $`𝐤_b`$ in the background of a soliton (9) of mass parameter $`𝐤_s`$. Again, as the actions are infinite, we employ the regularisation procedure used to calculate the energy (7). The matching conditions include

$$\beta _b\sqrt{V_b(R)}=R\eta _s,\beta _s\sqrt{V_s(R)}=R\eta _b,$$
(10)
and the matching of metrics on $`R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. Although (10) depends on $`R`$, the relations between the periodicities is only meaningful in the limit $`R\mathrm{}`$ in which $`\beta _b=\eta _sl,\beta _s=\eta _bl`$, and are independent of $`R`$. It is clear that (10) can be satisfied in this limit even when $`𝐤_b𝐤_s`$.

The Euclidean action for a vacuum solution of Einstein’s equations with cosmological constant on a manifold $``$ with boundary $``$ is,

$`\stackrel{~}{I}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{16\pi G}}{\displaystyle _{}}d^nx\sqrt{g}(R2\mathrm{\Lambda }){\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi G}}{\displaystyle _{}}d^{n1}x\sqrt{h}K`$ (11)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(n1)}{8\pi Gl^2}}{\displaystyle _{}}d^nx\sqrt{g}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{8\pi G}}{\displaystyle _{}}d^{n1}x\sqrt{h}K.`$ (12)
In terms of the cut-off radius $`R`$, the regularised black hole action is,

$`I(R)`$ $`=`$ $`\stackrel{~}{I}_b(R)\stackrel{~}{I}_s(R)={\displaystyle \frac{(n1)\mathrm{vol}(R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma })}{8\pi Gl^2}}\times `$ (14)
$`\left[\beta _b\eta _b{\displaystyle _{𝐫_{b+}}^R}r^{n2}𝑑r\beta _s\eta _s{\displaystyle _{𝐫_{s+}}^R}r^{n2}𝑑r\right],`$
where we have ignored the difference in boundary terms, since this vanishes in the large $`R`$ limit. Using the matching conditions (10) and taking the regulator to infinity we get,

$`I=\underset{R\mathrm{}}{lim}I(R)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{vol}(R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma })}{16\pi Gl^3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi l^2}{n1}}\right)^{n1}\times `$ (16)
$`\beta _b\beta _s[\beta _s^{1n}\beta _b^{1n}].`$
We see that the action and hence the free energy $`F=\beta _b^1I`$, is less than zero when $`𝐤_b>𝐤_s`$ and is greater than zero for $`𝐤_b<𝐤_s`$, signalling a phase transition. Since the soliton is the conjectured lowest energy state, we take its free energy to be identically zero.

This phase transition might appear to be exactly analogous to the Hawking-Page transition for spherical adS black holes , which has a phase structure dependent only on temperature: high temperature black holes are stable while low temperature black holes decay to the global adS spacetime. However, there are important distinctions, which can be traced partly to the fact that the area and the temperature of the flat adS black holes are independent quantities, while they are not for the spherical adS black hole.

Writing the area of the black hole (4) in terms of the $`\beta _\alpha `$’s,

$$A_b=\kappa \beta _b^{(2n)}\beta _s,\kappa =\frac{\mathrm{vol}(R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma })}{l}\left(\frac{4\pi l^2}{n1}\right)^{n2}$$
(17)
we find that the ratio,

$$\frac{A_b}{\beta _b^{3n}}=\kappa \frac{𝐤_b}{𝐤_s},$$
(18)
helps us characterise the phase transition. For $`n>3`$, if we normalise $`\mathrm{vol}(R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma })`$ so that $`\kappa =1`$, we see that small, hot black holes, i.e., $`A_b<<\beta _b^{3n}`$ or $`𝐤_b<<𝐤_s`$, are unstable and decay to small, hot solitons. On the other hand, large, cold black holes, i.e., $`A_b>>\beta _b^{3n}`$ or $`𝐤_b>>𝐤_s`$ are stable. Black holes with $`A_b\beta _b^{3n}`$ are thus in equilibrium with the soliton and include the cases when they are large and hot or cold and small. Thus, the stability of the flat black hole is not merely dependent on the temperature of the black hole but also on its size.

Now, if we had taken $`𝐤_b=𝐤_s`$, and matched the periodicities of $`\tau _\alpha `$ and $`\varphi _\alpha `$ appropriately, we would have found the two instantons to be identical and consequently there would be no phase transition at all. However, constraining ourselves to this special case obviously trivialises the thermodynamics of the black hole in the background of the soliton, since it represents only the critical point in the phase diagram.

Note that the thermodynamics of the spherical adS black hole is substantially different from that of the asymptotically flat case, namely the Schwarzschild solution, as was first pointed out in . In particular, while Schwarzschild black holes have negative specific heat, sufficiently massive spherical adS black hole have positive specific heat. This makes the canonical ensemble for the adS black holes perfectly valid and does not require the use of an artificial box to ensure equilibrium conditions. However, the specific heat does have a first order pole at a critical mass, below which it is negative and hence unstable.

The flat adS black hole in the background of a soliton is quite different in this respect. The thermodynamic energy, $`E=\frac{I}{\beta _b}`$,

$`E`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{vol}(R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma })}{16\pi Gl^3}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{4\pi l^2}{n1}}\right)^{n1}\beta _s[(n2)\beta _b^{1n}+\beta _s^{1n}]`$ (19)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{vol}(R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma })}{16\pi Gl}}\beta _s[(n2)𝐤_b^{n1}+𝐤_s^{n1}],`$ (20)
matches the energy calculated in (7) and increases monotonically with the temperature of the black hole. But, $`\frac{E}{A_b}<0`$ which implies that as the area of the horizon increases, the energy decreases.

The specific heat is,

$$C=\frac{E}{T_b}=\frac{(n2)}{4G}A_b,$$
(21)
which, being proportional to the area is always positive. It is, moreover, independent of the temperature of the black hole: larger black holes take more energy to heat up irrespective of what temperature they are at, in comparison with smaller black holes. We note that in  the calculation of the specific heat using the zero mass black hole as background also gives a positive specific heat.

Finally, a calculation of the entropy yields,

$$S=\beta _b\frac{I}{\beta _b}=\frac{A_b}{4G},$$
(22)
as expected.

A version of the adS/CFT correspondence tells us that the partition function for a conformal field theory on a manifold $``$ is equivalent to the sum of partition functions of string theory over all manifolds $``$ with conformal boundary $`=`$ , which further satisfy certain boundary conditions on the fields. For example for $`n=5`$, the appropriate boundary conformal field theory is $`𝒩=4`$ SU(N) gauge theory.

The correspondence tells us that the large $`N`$ limit of the field theory is equivalent to the semiclassical limit of the string theory. In this limit, the string partition function becomes simply a sum over all negative curvature Einstein manifolds with boundary $``$, so that,

$$\underset{N\mathrm{}}{lim}Z_{CFT}()=\underset{\stackrel{}{=}}{}\mathrm{exp}^{I()}.$$
(23)
Thus the semiclassical black hole phase transition must correspond to a phase transition in the large $`N`$ limit of the gauge theory . For the spherical adS black hole the Hawking-Page phase transition was interpreted by  to correspond to a deconfinement-confinement transition in the gauge theory using an essentially topological argument. We see here that these arguments can be trivially extended to the flat adS black holes as well.

As we have seen, for a conformal boundary $`S^1\times S^1\times R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, there are contributions to the partition function from both the flat adS black hole and the adS soliton, so that the string partition function includes in the sum these two Einstein manifolds.

Both the black hole and the soliton have topology $`B^2\times S^1\times R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }`$. What distinguishes the two phases in the gauge theory, however, is the fact that the expectation value of the temporal Wilson loop operator $`W(C)`$ is distinct in each case. Now, $`<W(C)>`$ is an order parameter for the spontaneous symmetry breaking of a subgroup of the center of the gauge group corresponding to the deconfinement phase. In the large $`N`$ limit, $`<W(C)>`$ is essentially proportional to $`\mathrm{exp}^{𝒜(D)}`$, where $`D`$ is the string world sheet with boundary $`C`$ which has the smallest regularised world volume, $`𝒜(D)`$. For the soliton, the temporal loop $`C`$ must lie along the $`S^1`$ factor which is non-contractible. Since there can be no world sheet $`D`$ with boundary $`D=C`$, $`<W(C)>`$ must vanish. For the black hole, the temporal loop $`C`$ must lie in the $`B^2`$ factor and is thus just the boundary of the disc $`D=B^2`$, which implies that $`<W(C)>`$ is non-zero. The stable black hole phase $`𝐤_b>𝐤_s`$ therefore corresponds to deconfinement whereas the stable soliton phase $`𝐤_b<𝐤_s`$ corresponds to confinement. The so called “singular” points of the gauge theory correspond to the case $`𝐤_1𝐤_2`$. Note that  obtained this point for boundary topologies which include an $`S^1\times S^1`$ factor, using qualitative arguments on the form of the gauge theory partition function. However, our identification of the adS soliton as the background allows us to calculate this explicitly.

For the spherical adS black hole, it was argued in  that a phase transition can only occur for the anti-periodic partition function, $`\mathrm{Tr}\mathrm{exp}^{\beta H}`$. This argument, which depends on the spin structure in the temporal direction alone, has a trivial extension to the flat adS black hole: while the soliton has a temporal $`S^1`$ which is non-contractible and can support both anti-periodic and periodic spinors, the temporal $`S^1`$ of the flat adS black hole is contractible and can support only anti-periodic spinors. Thus, although both the soliton and the black hole have the same topology, the confinement-deconfinement phase transition can occur only for the anti-periodic case.

From the gravity point of view, the deconfinement phase for the flat case differs from that of the spherically symmetric one. In the latter, this phase is represented by a black hole at high temperature which could be either very small or very large. This is because the black hole radius is double valued with respect to the temperature. On the other hand, for the $`n>3`$ flat adS black hole, the deconfinement phase is represented by a black hole whose area is much greater than its temperature, i.e. by large cold black holes. If we fix the size of the black hole, we see that the deconfinement phase occurs at low temperatures instead of high temperatures.

As pointed out in , it is the ratio of the inverse temperature to the “size” of the spatial section on the conformal boundary which is relevant for the field theory. Of particular interest is the “infinite volume” limit where the temperature is kept fixed while the spatial volume is taken to infinity. What is meant by this is a “limit” in which the spatial geometry approaches that of a flat $`R^{n2}`$. For the spherical case, there is only one free parameter, the temperature, and hence it is not apriori clear what one is varying in taking the limit. As we have seen, for the flat case there are two parameters: the temperature and the periodicity $`\eta _b`$ of the spatial $`S^1`$ factor, so that this limit appears more natural. Specifically, for the case of a black hole spacetime with trivial $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, i.e., $`R^{n3}/\mathrm{\Gamma }=R^{n3}`$, one takes $`\eta _b\mathrm{}`$, so that the geometry of the spatial section on the conformal boundary approaches flat $`R^{n2}`$. In this limit, $`𝐤_b>>𝐤_s`$ and so there is only one phase, the deconfining phase, as expected from the analysis in .

Finally, in the absence of a proof of the Horowitz-Myers conjecture, the choice of the adS soliton as the preferred thermal background is conjectural; it is possible that a spacetime of lower mass than the soliton exists. However, it is clear from our results that some phase transition must exist. This is clearly linked to the larger problem of whether or not there is a positive energy theorem for asymptotically adS spacetimes which yields nonsingular minimum energy backgrounds for any given topology of $``$. In the special case when $``$ has topology $`S^{n2}\times R`$, arguments for the boundedness of mass  indicate that a zero energy solution is the appropriate background. Thus the choice of global adS seems physically reasonable, putting the Hawking Page transition on firm footing. We note that no candidate non-singular background analogous to the adS soliton seems to exist for the hyperbolic black holes, which leaves their semiclassical thermodynamics relative to such a background still unexplored.

After this work was completed, we were informed that the possibility that such phase transitions might occur for toroidal boundaries was suggested in a footnote in . We thank R. Myers and G. Horowitz for useful comments on the first version of the paper. S.S. would like to thank E. Woolgar and K. Zarembo for extensive discussions. S.S. and K.S. acknowledge support from National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada. S.S. also thanks the Pacific Institute for the Mathematical Sciences for support.